MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Role of Bubbles in Air-Sea Gas Exchange: A Critical Review

2025· article· en· W4413495367 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuanxu Dong, Bernd Jähne, David Woolf, Kerstin E. Krall, Mingxi Yang, Helen Czerski, Jun‐Hong Liang, Ian M. Brooks, Craig McNeil, Rik Wanninkhof, David T. Ho, Dariia Atamanchuk, Christa Marandino

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftUniversity of East AngliaEuropean Space AgencyDalhousie UniversityAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Air‐sea gas exchange regulates the exchange of climatically important gases between the ocean and the atmosphere, shaping both climate and ocean biogeochemistry. Bubbles beneath the sea surface enhance this exchange by introducing an additional transfer pathway in parallel to the interfacial transfer route. Although the role of bubbles in gas flux has been debated since the 1980s, recent advances in laboratory experiments, field observations, and modeling have provided new insights. Bubble‐mediated gas transfer differs from interfacial transfer in three key ways: (a) it shows strong nonlinearity with wind speed due to its link with wave breaking; (b) it depends on gas solubility because of the finite volume and short lifetime of bubbles; and (c) it shifts the equilibrium toward slight oversaturation through the overpressure of submerged bubbles. These characteristics make bubble‐mediated gas transfer complicated to quantify, and existing observations and models indicate a wide range of bubble contributions to air‐sea carbon dioxide and oxygen exchange. Three critical knowledge gaps are identified: (a) limited understanding of near‐surface (0–1 m) bubble dynamics, including volume flux, size distribution, and evolution, which directly control the solubility and diffusivity dependence of bubble‐mediated gas exchange; (b) the absence of consistent field constraints spanning the full range of gas solubilities; and (c) the lack of knowledge to scale laboratory results to oceanic conditions. Addressing these gaps will require integrated efforts combining near‐surface bubble measurements and simulations, field observations of gas transfer across diverse solubilities using complementary techniques, and improved modeling frameworks.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes→French-language works237,207→