Spatiotemporal Variability in Modeled Bottom Ice and Sea Surface Dimethylsulfide Concentrations and Fluxes in the Arctic During 1979–2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Field observations suggest that oceanic emissions of dimethylsulfide (DMS) may play a dominant role in the production of Arctic aerosols and clouds and therefore modulate the surface irradiance, during spring and summer. DMS is produced not only in the water column but also in various sea ice habitats. The ongoing recession of Arctic sea ice is expected to enhance DMS emissions, but the magnitude of this increase is highly uncertain. Here we investigate the spatiotemporal variability in bottom ice and sea surface DMS concentrations and fluxes using a regional sea ice‐ocean physical‐biogeochemical model. Model results indicate that the observed accelerated decline of Arctic sea ice extent since the beginning of the 21st century is associated with upward trends in May–August pan‐Arctic‐averaged sea surface DMS concentration and sea‐to‐air DMS flux. On the other hand, strong interannual variability and statistically insignificant trends are found for bottom ice DMS concentration and ice‐to‐sea DMS flux, owing to the counteracting effects of the shrinking horizontal extent and the vertical thinning of sea ice on ice algal production. The pan‐Arctic DMS climatology products based on model simulation and satellite algorithms provide dynamically based spatial details that are absent in the in situ measurement‐based climatology due to limited spatiotemporal data coverage and inevitable extrapolation bias. Lastly, model results indicate that the bottom ice DMS and its precursor dimethylsulfoniopropionate production can be the only local source of oceanic DMS emissions into the atmosphere during May prior to pelagic blooms, suggesting that it may be a key component of the biological control on Arctic climate at that time.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".