MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912238246 · doi:10.1029/2018jc014777

Photoacclimation State of an Arctic Underice Phytoplankton Bloom

2019· article· en· W2912238246 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hanna M. Kauko, Alexey K. Pavlov, Geir Johnsen, Mats A. Granskog, Ilka Peeken, Philipp Assmy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Oceans · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Space AgencyHelmholtz AssociationNorges ForskningsrådNational Science Council
KeywordsPhytoplanktonArcticBloomOceanographyEnvironmental scienceChlorophyll aSea iceOcean colorAlgal bloomAbsorption (acoustics)EcologyBiologyGeologyPhysicsNutrientBotanySatellite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent reports on Arctic underice phytoplankton blooms have directed attention to primary production below the sea ice cover. Such underice blooms cannot be detected from space; thus, methods for autonomous underice measurements are critically needed to extend observations beyond ship‐based surveys. One central aspect of the ecology of these blooms is whether they were advected from open‐water areas or were able to develop below the ice cover under typically low light conditions. The photoacclimation state of the bloom can provide clues about the growth conditions and therefore its origin. Here we investigate the photoacclimation state of a Phaeocystis pouchetii‐dominated underice bloom in the Arctic Ocean using ratios of photoprotective carotenoids (PPC) to photosynthetic carotenoids (PSC) and chlorophyll a. The pigment proxies indicate local growth under the ice pack. Furthermore, a method using in situ light absorption measurements to estimate the PPC:PSC ratio was in agreement with the pigment data. The slope of in situ phytoplankton absorption between 488 and 532 nm, affected by both PPC and PSC, had a significant linear relationship to the PPC:PSC ratio, indicating that prediction of photoacclimation state can be obtained from absorption profiles. We also review, with regard to the pigment function, different ways of grouping pigments into PPC or PSC applied in previous studies. Although more validation data sets are needed to assess the impact of pigment packaging on the relationship between PPC:PSC and absorption measurement slopes, our study shows the potential for using in situ absorption measurements to collect information about phytoplankton physiology below sea ice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research OceansSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207