Nitrous oxide distribution and its origin in the central and eastern South Pacific Subtropical Gyre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The biogeochemical mechanism of bacterial N2O production in the ocean has been the subject of many discussions in recent years. New isotopomeric tools can help further knowledge on N2O sources in natural environments. This research shows and compares hydrographic, nitrous oxide concentration, and N2O isotopic and isotopomeric data from three stations across the South Pacific Ocean, from the center of the subtropical oligotrophic gyre (~26° S; 114° W) to the upwelling zone along the central Chilean coast (~34° S). Althought AOU/N2O and NO3− trends support the idea that most of N2O source (mainly from intermediate water (200–1000 m)) come from nitrification, N2O isotopomeric composition (intramolecular distribution of 15N isotopes in N2O) reveals an abrupt change in the mechanism of nitrous oxide production, always observed through lower SP (site preference of 15N), at a high – stability layer, where particles could act as microsites and N2O would be produced by nitrifier denitrification (reduction of nitrite to nitrous oxide mediated by primary nitrifiers). There, nitrifier denitrification can account for 40% and 50% (center and east border of the gyre, respectively) of the nitrous oxide produced in this specific layer. This process could be associated with the deceleration of sinking organic particles in highly stable layers of the water column. In constrast, coastal upwelling system is characterized by oxygen deficient condition and some N deficit in a eutrophic system. Here, nitrous oxide accumulates up to 480% saturation, and isotopic and isotopomer signal show highly complex nitrous oxide production processes, which presumably reflect both the effect of nitrification and denitrification at low oxygen levels on N2O production, but non N2O consumption by denitrification was observed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".