4.7 Article

The relative contribution of fast and slow sinking particles to ocean carbon export

期刊

GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES
卷 26, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2011GB004085

关键词

-

资金

  1. NERC [NE/F012462/1]
  2. NERC [noc010009, noc010002] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Natural Environment Research Council [noc010002, noc010009] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Particulate organic carbon (POC) generated by primary production and exported to depth, is an important pathway for carbon transfer to the abyss, where it is stored over climatically significant timescales. These processes constitute the biological carbon pump. A spectrum of particulate sinking velocities exists throughout the water column, however numerical models often simplify this spectrum into suspended, fast and slow sinking particles. Observational studies suggest the spectrum of sinking speeds in the ocean is strongly bimodal with >85% POC flux contained within two pools with sinking speeds of <10 m day(-1) and >350 m day(-1). We deployed a Marine Snow Catcher (MSC) to estimate the magnitudes of the suspended, fast and slow sinking pools and their fluxes at the Porcupine Abyssal Plain site (48 degrees N, 16.5 degrees W) in summer 2009. The POC concentrations and fluxes determined were 0.2 mu g C L-1 and 54 mg C m(-2) day(-1) for fast sinking particles, 5 mu g C L-1 and 92 mg C m(-2) day(-1) for slow sinking particles and 97 mu g C L-1 for suspended particles. Our flux estimates were comparable with radiochemical tracer methods and neutrally buoyant sediment traps. Our observations imply: (1) biomineralising protists, on occasion, act as nucleation points for aggregate formation and accelerate particle sinking; (2) fast sinking particles alone were sufficient to explain the abyssal POC flux; and (3) there is no evidence for ballasting of the slow sinking flux and the slow sinking particles were probably entirely remineralised in the twilight zone.

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