4.7 Article

Reconciling tracer and float observations of the export pathways of Labrador Sea Water

Journal

GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS
Volume 39, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2012GL053978

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. US National Science Foundation
  2. German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

For more than fifty years, it has been generally accepted by oceanographers that the Deep Western Boundary Current (DWBC) is the principal conduit of recently-convected Labrador Sea Water (LSW) exported from the high-latitude North Atlantic to the equator. Supporting this supposition is observational evidence that the waters of the DWBC have consistently greater equatorward velocities, higher concentrations of passive tracers, and younger ages compared to ocean interior waters. However, recent observations and simulations of floats launched in the DWBC in the Labrador Sea show that most water parcels are quickly ejected from the DWBC and follow instead interior pathways to the subtropics. Here, we show that tracer observations from the last three decades are compatible with the existence of both DWBC and basininterior export pathways. From analyses of observational data and model output, we find that equatorward transport in the basin interior is consistent with the large-scale vorticity balance at mid-depth. Furthermore, from the modeling analysis we show that despite higher, localized concentrations of tracer and particles in the DWBC, only 5% of particles released in the Labrador Sea are transported from the sub-polar to subtropical gyre via a continuous DWBC pathway. Thus, the interior pathway is a significant contributor to LSW export. Citation: Gary, S. F., M. S. Lozier, A. Biastoch, and C. W. Boning (2012), Reconciling tracer and float observations of the export pathways of Labrador Sea Water, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L24606, doi: 10.1029/2012GL053978.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available