4.3 Article

Air-sea exchange of dimethylsulfide in the Southern Ocean: Measurements from SO GasEx compared to temperate and tropical regions

Journal

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-OCEANS
Volume 116, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2010JC006526

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NA07OAR4310084]
  2. National Science Foundation [ATM-0241611, ATM-0526341]
  3. U.K. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/F010656/1]
  4. NERC [pml010007, pml010002, NE/F010656/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Natural Environment Research Council [pml010007, NE/F010656/1, NE/C001702/1, pml010002] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the Southern Ocean Gas Exchange Experiment (SO GasEx), we measured an atmospheric dimethylsulfide (DMS) concentration of 118 +/- 54 pptv (1 sigma), a DMS sea-to-air flux of 2.9 +/- 2.1 mu mol m(-2) d(-1) by eddy covariance, and a seawater DMS concentration of 1.6 +/- 0.7 nM. Dividing flux by the concurrent air-sea concentration difference yields the transfer velocity of DMS (k(DMS)). The k(DMS) in the Southern Ocean was significantly lower than previous measurements in the equatorial east Pacific, Sargasso Sea, northeast Atlantic, and southeast Pacific. Normalizing k(DMS) for the temperature dependence in waterside diffusivity and solubility results in better agreement among various field studies and suggests that the low k(DMS) in the Southern Ocean is primarily due to colder temperatures. The higher solubility of DMS at a lower temperature results in greater airside control and less transfer of the gas by bubbles formed from breaking waves. The final normalized DMS transfer velocity is similar to k of less soluble gases such as carbon dioxide in low-to-moderate winds; in high winds, DMS transfer velocity is significantly lower because of the reduced bubble-mediated transfer.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available