Do Strong Winds Impact Water Mass, Nutrient, and Phytoplankton Distributions in the Ice‐Free Canada Basin in the Fall?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In general, strong wind events can enhance ocean turbulent mixing, followed by episodic nutrient supply to the euphotic zone and phytoplankton blooms. However, it is unclear whether such responses to strong winds occur in the ice‐free Canada Basin, where the seasonal pycnocline is strong and the nutricline is deep. In the present study, we monitored a fixed‐point observation (FPO) station in the Canada Basin for about 3 weeks in the fall of 2014 to examine the oceanic and biological responses to strong winds. At the FPO site, oceanic microstructure measurements, hydrographic surveys, and water sampling were performed with high temporal resolution, recording internal wave propagation, eddy passage, and water mass changes. Strong winds and internal wave propagation significantly enhanced the mixing above and at the seasonal pycnocline, but their effects were diminished at the nutricline, which was much deeper than the seasonal pycnocline. Therefore, wind‐induced mixing did not increase the upward nutrient supply from the nutricline and did not impact phytoplankton (chlorophyll a) distribution in the surface layer of the FPO site. The temporal evolution of the chlorophyll a concentration was most closely related to water mass changes. We also observed prominent subsurface chlorophyll a maxima with abundant large‐sized phytoplankton that were likely carried by warm‐core eddies to the FPO site. Phytoplankton biomass may have been sustained by the high concentration of ammonium within the eddy and ammonium regeneration at the seasonal pycnocline, where particulate organic matter likely accumulated.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".