4.3 Article

The Middle Atlantic Bight Cold Pool is warming and shrinking: Indices from in situ autumn seafloor temperatures

期刊

FISHERIES OCEANOGRAPHY
卷 31, 期 2, 页码 217-223

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/fog.12573

关键词

climate change; Cold Pool; ecosystem; regime shift; temperature

资金

  1. USDA ARS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study describes changes in the extent and thermal properties of the Cold Pool in the Middle Atlantic Bight (MAB). Observations and models indicate a significant warming trend and reduced spatial extent of the Cold Pool during the study period. These changes are likely to have implications for the distribution of boreal species and overall ecosystem productivity.
The Cold Pool feature of the Middle Atlantic Bight (MAB) is a body of cold bottom water that develops in the spring and persists through the summer-autumn months. It is maintained by northerly currents and can be traced back to Arctic water masses. The Cold Pool provides habitat for many boreal species at latitudes far south of their normal range and plays an important role in the population dynamics of lower and upper trophic level organisms. Here, we describe changes in the extent and thermal properties of the Cold Pool using both observations and models. Two indices are developed based on a gridded, interpolated bottom temperature dataset; the first is a mean temperature indicator, and the second is a spatial extent indicator. The temperature indicator showed a significant increasing trend over the study period 1968-2019 and a single change point in 2008. Similarly, the area indicator declined significantly, also displaying a change point in 2008. Cold Pool maximum temperature and minimum size were observed in 2017, which is also known as a heatwave year in the MAB. The indices presented here support the view of a rapidly warming Cold Pool that is being limited in its spatial extent. Changes in Cold Pool hydrography will likely affect boreal species distributions and total ecosystem productivity.

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

4.3
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