Role of surface CO2 sources and wind transport on atmospheric CO2 variability over the Bay of Bengal during Southwest Monsoon - using mixing ratio, carbon isotope ratio and model simulated wind field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The present study examines the role of surface-CO2 sources and wind transport on atmospheric CO2 observations over the Bay of Bengal. The ship-based observations of mixing ratio and stable carbon isotope ratio (δ13C) of air CO2 was carried out at coastal and open ocean location during 17 July 2009 until 18 August 2009, covering the peak months of the Southwest Monsoon season. The average mixing ratio was higher for the coastal sites (407 ± 17 µmol mol− 1) than the open ocean sites (394 ± 9 µmol mol− 1), whereas the average δ13C value was lower (more depleted in 13C) (-8.75 ± 0.53‰) for the coastal sites than the open ocean sites (-8.48 ± 0.04‰). The observations were further used to identify the isotopic ratio of the source CO2 using the Keeling and the Miller-Tans plot. The presence of two different sources were confirmed from the observations. The coastal observations were affected by continental sources of CO2 (-19.95 ± 1.7‰), whereas for open ocean sites, oceanic sources (-10.31 ± 0.15‰) played a major role. Although there was a transport of continental air to open ocean, as observed from the WRF model simulated wind, the land-ocean contrast was maintained. It was evident from the Carbon Tracker simulation during the study period. Despite continental air transport, the open ocean observation was influenced by oceanic sources of CO2. To explore the reason, the predominant wind pattern for the sampling sites were determined from the WRF model simulated winds. A k-means clustering technique was used on the WRF model simulated hourly wind to understand the different atmospheric transport patterns during different days of sampling in July and August. Most of the sampling sites were resided within the clusters whose mean wind direction indicates south-westerly/southerly wind. Thus, irrespective of continental transport, the sampling sites were influenced by oceanic wind during July and August. The influence of oceanic wind allowed the identification of oceanic source CO2 over the open ocean sites despite the transport from the continent.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".