4.2 Article

Planktonic carbon budget in the eastern subtropical North Atlantic

期刊

AQUATIC MICROBIAL ECOLOGY
卷 48, 期 3, 页码 261-275

出版社

INTER-RESEARCH
DOI: 10.3354/ame048261

关键词

plankton; primary production; bacterial production; respiration; grazing; subtropical NE Atlantic; Atlantic meridional transect

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We used data collected at > 60 stations over a 10 yr period to build the carbon budget of the plankton community in the euphotic layer of the Eastern North Atlantic Subtropical Gyre (NASE). Autotrophic biomass exceeded microbial heterotrophic biomass by a factor of 1.7. Mean ( SE), integrated chlorophyll a concentration and net particulate primary production (PP) were 17 +/- 1 Mg m(2) and 271 +/- 29 mg C m(-2) d(-1), respectively. Protist grazing on phytoplankton represented > 90% of PP. Bacterial production (BP) was 17 +/- 3 mg C m(-2) d(-1). In vitro O-2-evolution experiments indicated that net community production was -65 +/- 16 mmolO(2) m(-2) d(-1), while community respiration (CR) averaged 124 +/- 13 mmolO(2) m(-2) d-1, equivalent to 1324 +/- 142 mg C m(-2) d(-1). However, the sum of the respiration rates by each microbial group, estimated from their biomass and metabolic rates, ranged from 402 to 848 Mg C m(-2) d-1. Therefore, CR could not be reconciled with the respiratory fluxes sustained by each microbial group. Comparison between estimated gross photosynthesis by phytoplankton (481 to 616 mg C m(-2) d-1) and the sum of respiration by each group suggests that the microbial community in the NASE province is close to metabolic balance, which would agree with the observed O-2 supersaturation in the euphotic layer. Taking into account the mean open-ocean values for PP, BP, CR and bacterial growth efficiency, we show that bacteria account for approximately 20% of CR. Our results suggest that the view that bacteria dominate carbon cycling in the unproductive ocean must be reconsidered, or else that in vitro incubations misrepresent the real metabolic rates of one or several microbial groups.

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

4.2
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