4.5 Article

Downward particle fluxes within different productivity regimes off the Mauritanian upwelling zone (EUMELI program)

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0967-0637(01)00010-3

关键词

particulate flux; sediment traps; particulate organic carbon; particle settling; current meter data; coastal upwelling; North Atlantic Ocean; eastern subtropical; off Mauritania

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A 2-yr record of downward particle flux was obtained with moored sediment traps at several depths of the water column in two regions characterized by different primary production levels (mesotrophic and oligotrophic) of the eastern subtropical North Atlantic Ocean. Particle fluxes, of similar to 71-78% biogenic origin (i.e. consisting Of CaCO3, organic matter and opal) on average, decrease about six-fold from the mesotrophic site (highest fluxes in the North Atlantic) nearer the Mauritanian margin (18 degrees 30'N, 21 degrees 00'W) to the remote, open-ocean, oligotrophic site (21 degrees 00'N, 31 degrees 00'W). This decrease largely reflects the difference in total primary production between the two sites, from similar to 260 to similar to 110 g organic C m(-2) yr(-1). At both sites, temporal variability of the downward particle flux seems to be linked to westward surface currents, which are likely to transport seaward biomass-rich water masses from regions nearer the coast. The influence of coastal upwelling is marked at the mesotrophic site. The large differences between the 1991 and 1992 records at that site, where carbon export is large, underscore the interest of long-term studies for export budget estimates. The different productivity regimes at the two sites seem to induce contrasting downward modes of transport of the particulate matter, as shown in particular by the faster settling rates and the higher E ratio (particulate organic carbon export versus total primary production) estimated at the mesotrophic site. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science 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