4.5 Article

Lunar cycles and seasonal variations in deposition fluxes of planktic foraminiferal shell carbonate to the deep South Atlantic (central Walvis Ridge)

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsr.2005.02.003

关键词

planktic foraminifera; lunar reproduction; carbonate flux; Hastigerina pelagica

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Several authors have argued that lunar reproductive cycling controls the shell fluxes of planktic foraminifera, one of the major carbonate-producing groups in the global pelagic ocean. A time-series sediment trap at 2700m depth on the central Walvis Ridge below the South Atlantic central gyre demonstrate for the first time that shell deposition fluxes of Hastigerina pelagica are synchronous with lunar periodicity. Spectral analysis of the 6-month time-series with 8-day resolution showed a strong 30-day cyclicity in the flux maxima of H. pelagiea arriving at the ocean floor on average 12.5 days after each full moon. Given a shell settling velocity of about 400 m day(-1) which implies about 7 days for settling, this coincides with the pronounced endogenous reproduction rhythm of 5 +/- 2 days after full moon as originally observed in laboratory-cultured isolates from off Bermuda in the North Atlantic. By contrast, no endogenous or exogenous lunar periodicity was observed in the deposition flux or size distribution of any of the 27 other shell species from austral winter (August 2000) to austral summer (February 2001). Instead, the deposition fluxes of shell species, the bulk carbonate and the total mass were dominated by a seasonal maximum during austral spring, without any periodicity in the 16-90-day domain of this study. Since H. pelagica exhibits low fluxes with a low burial efficiency, and continuous (re)production is shown by the deposition fluxes of other species, lunar reproductive cycling appears not to affect pelagic carbonate productivity and deep ocean sedimentation fluxes. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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