4.7 Article

Theoretical Considerations on Factors Confounding the Interpretation of the Oceanic Carbon Export Ratio

期刊

GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES
卷 32, 期 11, 页码 1644-1658

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2018GB006003

关键词

oceanic carbon export ratio; net community production; export production; net primary production

资金

  1. NASA Earth and Space Science Fellowship [NNX13AN85H]
  2. Postdoctoral Scholarship Program at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
  3. NASA [5109296]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The fraction of primary production exported out of the surface ocean, known as the export ratio (ef ratio), is often used to assess how various factors, including temperature, primary production, phytoplankton size, and community structure, affect the export efficiency of an ecosystem. To investigate possible causes for reported discrepancies in the dominant factors influencing the export efficiency, we develop a metabolism-based mechanistic model of the ef ratio. Consistent with earlier studies, we find based on theoretical considerations that the ef ratio is a negative function of temperature. We show that the ef ratio depends on the optical depth, defined as the physical depth times the light attenuation coefficient. As a result, varying light attenuation may confound the interpretation of ef ratio when measured at a fixed depth (e.g., 100 m) or at the base of the mixed layer. Finally, we decompose the contribution of individual factors on the seasonality of the ef ratio. Our results show that at high latitudes, the ef ratio at the base of mixed layer is strongly influenced by mixed layer depth and surface irradiation on seasonal time scales. Future studies should report the ef ratio at the base of the euphotic layer or account for the effect of varying light attenuation if measured at a different depth. Overall, our modeling study highlights the large number of factors confounding the interpretation of field observations of the ef ratio.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据