No Correlation Between Atmospheric Dust and Surface Ocean Chlorophyll‐a in the Oligotrophic Gulf of Aqaba, Northern Red Sea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract High‐resolution records of daily surface chlorophyll‐a (chl‐a) concentrations and hourly atmospheric dust concentrations in the Gulf of Aqaba, northern Red Sea, are compared between 2012 and 2016 in order to examine the interplay between atmospheric dust input and surface productivity in this subtropic, nutrient‐poor marine ecosystem. Given that lags of days to weeks may occur between the dust input and phytoplankton response, and because of potential biases associated with differences in the sampling resolution, temporal offsets of 1–10 days between the dust and chl‐a are examined using smoothing windows between 3 and 31 days. The results suggest that there is no significant positive (or negative) correlation between dust and chl‐a surface concentrations, even when allowing for temporal offsets between the two records. This observation pertains to the seasonal as well as the daily time scale (i.e., abrupt dust storms). It is concluded that the role of atmospheric dust as a control on productivity in the Gulf of Aqaba and possibly other oligotrophic regions may have been previously overestimated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".