MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220713260 · doi:10.3389/fmars.2022.812912

Exploring Five Methods for Estimating Net Community Production on the Siberian Continental Shelf and Slope of the Arctic Ocean

2022· article· en· W4220713260 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew B. Alkire, Igor V. Polyakov, Robie W. Macdonald

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Marine Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsArcticContinental shelfEnvironmental scienceTransectOceanographyNitrateSalinityStratification (seeds)BloomNutrientNew productionClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesGeologyPhytoplanktonEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The loss of sea ice and changes to vertical stratification in the Arctic Ocean are altering the availability of light and nutrients, with significant consequences for net community production (NCP) and carbon export. However, a general lack of quality data, particular during winter months, inhibits our ability to quantify such change. As a result, two parameters necessary for calculating annual NCP, integration depth (Zint) and pre-bloom nitrate concentration (Npre), are often either assigned or estimated from summer measurements. Vertical profiles of temperature, salinity, nitrate, and dissolved oxygen were collected during three cruises conducted between August and October of 2013, 2015, and 2018 in a data-sparse region of the Arctic Ocean along the Siberian continental slope. Estimates of NCP were calculated from these data using five different methods that either assigned constant values for Zint and/or Npre or estimated these parameters from summer observations. The five methods returned similar mean values of Zint (44–54 m), Npre (5.4–5.7 mmol m–3), and NCP (12–16 g C m–2) across the study region; however, there was considerable variability among stations/profiles. It was determined that the NCP calculations were particularly sensitive to Npre. Despite this sensitivity, mean NCP estimates calculated along four transects re-occupied during the three cruises generally agreed across the five methods with two important exceptions. First, methods with pre-assigned Zint and/or Npre underestimated the NCP when the nitracline shoaled in the Laptev Sea and when high-nutrient shelf waters were advected northward from the East Siberian Sea shelf in 2015. In contrast, the methods that directly estimated both Zint and Npre did not suffer from this bias. These results suggest that assignment of Npre and/or Zint provides reasonable estimates of NCP, particularly averaged over larger spatial scales and/or longer time scales, but these approaches are not suitable for evaluating interannual variability in NCP, particularly in dynamic regions. Combining all methods across the three cruise years indicates NCP in the Laptev Sea and Lomonosov Ridge areas (10–11 g C m–2) was slightly lower than that north of Severnaya Zemlya (13 g C m–2) and in the East Siberian Sea (16 g C m–2).

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Marine ScienceSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207