Increasing Arctic River Discharge and Its Role for the Phytoplankton Responses in the Present-day and Future Climate Simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the unprecedented rate of Arctic warming in recent decades, the hydrological cycle over high-latitude landmass began to accelerate, which would lead to increased river discharge into the Arctic Ocean. However, the recent climate models that participated in Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6 (CMIP6) tend to underestimate Arctic river discharge. This study elucidates the role of overlooked Arctic river discharge for the phytoplankton responses in present-day and future climate simulations. In the present-day climate simulation, the run with additional river discharge simulates the decrease in the spring phytoplankton. Freshening of Arctic seawater leads to high freezing point that increases sea ice concentration in the spring, eventually decreasing phytoplankton due to the less light availability. On the other hand, in the summer, phytoplankton increases due to the surplus of surface nitrate and the increase in the vertical mixing induced by the reduced summer sea ice melting water. In the future climate, the role played by additional input of freshwater is similar to the present-day climate. However, the major phytoplankton responses are shifted from the Eurasian Basin to the Canadian Basin and the East-Siberian Sea. This is mainly due to the shift of the marginal sea ice zone from the Barents-Kara Sea to the East Siberian-Chukchi Sea in the future.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".