The Particulate Organic Carbon-to-Nitrogen Ratio Varies With Ocean Currents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ocean currents could adjust ocean carbon and nitrogen composition which are an important part of the global carbon and nitrogen cycle. We procured global concentrations of particulate carbon and nitrogen in different depths, classified them according to ocean currents (upper 300 m), and analyzed POC-to-PON ratio (particulate organic carbon-to-nitrogen ratio) variations. We found that the regions with currents have a higher ratio than those without currents in the northern hemisphere, except in 50°–60°N (median ratio without currents is 8.38). Warm currents (median ratio ranges from 5.96 to 8.44) have a higher ratio than cold currents (6.19–8.89), except for the East Greenland Current (reach to 8.44) and Labrador Current (reach to 8.89). Meanwhile, we also analyzed the effects of ocean currents’ flowing and found that the distributions of the POC-to-PON ratio vary in different current types (e.g., cause of formation and distance from the shore). Generally speaking, the POC-to-PON ratio of the eolian currents and near-ocean currents change fiercer than that of compensation currents and near-coast currents. Ocean currents also have a buffering effect in the variation between surface and deep water, which prevents the severe change of the POC-to-PON ratio. The high-value anomaly of POC-to-PON caused by the confluence of warm and cold currents was also analyzed. It can be deduced that the high ratio in the high-latitude region was mainly caused by the terrigenous organic matter (especially carbon) and low nitrogen.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".