Water Mass Structure and Mixing Fractions in the Deepwater Region of the Gulf of Mexico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Here, we estimate water mass fractions in the deepwater region of the southern Gulf of Mexico from samples collected during June 2016. Past water mass characterizations have relied mainly on temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen concentrations, although the degree of mixing and the effects on the distribution of nutrients and other dissolved constituents remain uncertain. Based on nine water types defined in the eastern Caribbean Sea and North Atlantic and excluding surface waters, five dominant water masses with contributions between 50% and 93% in their cores were identified. North Atlantic Subtropical Underwater contributed 42% ± 9% between 49 and 105 m. Modal water with origins in the northern subtropical gyre (Eighteen Degree Water) were ubiquitous in the gulf, with average contributions of 62% ± 25% between 110 and 153 m and 51% ± 12% between 248 and 306 m, while the core of Tropical Atlantic Central Water (TACW; 70% ± 5%) dominated between 355 and 510 m. Water at the nitrate maximum consisted of TACW (48% ± 13%) and Antarctic Intermediate Water (AAIW; 32 ± 14%), with the local remineralization of organic matter adding ∼10% to the nitrate pool. Below ∼800 m, water transitioned from AAIW to a domain of two components of Labrador Seawater. Mesoscale eddies controlled the observed depth variability of the water masses from the surface down to ∼1,000 m. This study provides a quantitative approximation to evaluate the addition of nutrients to the different water masses by biogeochemical processes driven by an epipelagic ecosystem generally considered to be oligotrophic.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".