4.7 Article

The supply of excess phosphate across the Gulf Stream and the maintenance of subtropical nitrogen fixation

期刊

GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES
卷 25, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2010GB003955

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. National Science Foundation
  2. National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  3. NERC [NE/D011108/1]
  4. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/F002408/1, NE/D011108/1, NE/G018782/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. NERC [NE/G018782/1, NE/D011108/1, NE/F002408/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The subtropical North Atlantic is considered a hot spot for biological nitrogen fixation, with estimated rates between 1 and 20 x 10(11) mol nitrogen fixed annually. However, the region's nutrient reservoir beneath the euphotic zone is so enriched in nitrate relative to phosphate that it is perplexing how fixation might be sustained there. Here, we investigate whether the physical transport of excess phosphate into the subtropical gyre is sufficient to sustain nitrogen fixation in the gyre. Specifically, we assess the Ekman advection and isopycnal mixing of excess phosphate to the subtropical North Atlantic, using detailed hydrographic and nutrient sections occupied across the Gulf Stream combined with satellite wind data. Ekman advection and along-isopycnal mixing provide a source of approximately 2 x 10(10) mol yr(-1) of excess phosphate in the northwestern subtropics, a physical mechanism that has the potential to support more than 3 x 10(11) mol yr(-1) of biological nitrogen fixation, after accounting for alternative sinks of excess phosphate. This excess phosphate supply across the gyre's northern boundary and high nitrogen fixation there offers a mechanism that can explain both the maintenance of subtropical North Atlantic nitrogen fixation in a phosphate-poor environment and help account for the weak gradients in the proxies of fixation observed along interior circulation pathways of the gyre.

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