Potential roles of dimethysulfoxide in regional sulfur cycling and phytoplankton physiological ecology in the <scp>NE</scp> Subarctic Pacific
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We measured the concentration and turnover rates of dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) across the northeast Subarctic Pacific (NESAP) to better understand the role of this compound in regional sulfur cycling and phytoplankton physiological ecology. Using ship‐track observations and Lagrangian drifter surveys, we examined the spatial and temporal components of DMS and DMSO variability, comparing rates of DMSO reduction with simultaneous measurements of dimethylsulfide (DMS) oxidation and dimethylsulfoniopropionate (DMSP) cleavage. Our results show high concentrations and rapid turnover of DMSO across much of our NESAP survey region. DMS and DMSO concentrations ranged from < 1 nM to maxima of 26 nM and 183 nM, respectively, and exhibited a nonlinear positive relationship. Rate constants for DMSO reduction to DMS ranged from < 1 to 6.5 d−1 and were correlated to bacterial production and phytoplankton taxonomic composition. DMSO reduction rates exceeded dissolved DMSP cleavage at nearly all stations, and exceeded DMS oxidation rates at four stations where DMSO reduction and DMS oxidation were measured simultaneously. At these stations, net DMS production from DMSO ranged from 0.50 to 7.18 nM d−1. During our Lagrangian survey, DMSO concentrations decreased during periods of peak mid‐day irradiance. A strong correlation between DMSO concentrations, non‐photochemical quenching and photochemical efficiency of photosystem II (Fv/Fm) suggest a potential role for DMSO in photo‐protection, supporting previous suggestions of an anti‐oxidant function for this molecule. Our findings highlight the potential contribution of DMSO to net DMS production in the NESAP, and suggest a role for this compound in phytoplankton physiological ecology.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".