Archive for ocean observatories – Page 4

Shelf-wide pCO2 increase across the South Atlantic Bight

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Thursday, August 2nd, 2018 

Relative to their surface area, coastal regions represent some of the largest carbon fluxes in the global ocean, driven by numerous physical, chemical and biological processes. Coastal systems also experience human impacts that affect carbon cycling, which has large socioeconomic implications. The highly dynamic nature of these systems necessitates observing approaches and numerical methods that can both capture high-frequency variability and delineate long-term trends.

Figure 1: The South Atlantic Bight (SAB) was divided into four sections using isobaths: the coastal zone (0 to 15 m), the inner shelf (15 to 30 m), the middle shelf (30 to 60 m), and the outer shelf (60 m and beyond). The X’s indicate the locations of the Gray’s Reef mooring (southern X) and the Edisto mooring (northern X).

In two recent studies using mooring- and ship-based ocean CO2 system data, authors observed that pCO2 is increasing from the coastal zone to the outer shelf of the South Atlantic Bight at rates greater than the global average oceanic and atmospheric increase (~1.8 µatm y-1). In recent publications in Continental Shelf Research and JGR-Oceans, the authors analyzed pCO2 data from 46 cruises (1991-2016) using a novel linear regression technique to remove the seasonal signal, revealing an increase in pCO2 of 3.0-3.7 µatm y-1 on the outer and inner shelf, respectively. Using a Generalized Additive Mixed Model (GAMM) approach for trend analysis, authors observed that the rates of increase were slightly higher than the deseasonalization technique, yielding pCO2 increases of 3.3 to 4.5 µatm y-1 on the outer and inner shelf, respectively. The reported pCO2 increases result in potential pH decreases of -0.003 to -0.004 units y-1.

Figure 2: The time series of fCO2 in the four regions of the SAB (cruise observations) and from the Gray’s Reef mooring on the inner shelf indicate an increase across the shelf. These data are the observed values, however, the trend lines for each time series are calculated using deseasonalized values using the reference year method.

Analysis of the pCO2 time-series from the Gray’s Reef mooring (using a NOAA Moored Autonomous pCO2 system from July 2006 -July 2015) yielded a rate of increase (3.5 ± 0.9 µatm y-1) that was comparable to the cruise data on the inner shelf (3.7 ± 2.2 and 4.5 ± 0.6 µatm y-1, linear and GAMM methods, respectively). Validation data collected at the mooring suggest that underway data from cruises and the moored data are comparable. Neither thermal processes nor atmospheric dissolution (the primary driver of oceanic acidification) can explain the observed pCO2 increase and concurrent pH decrease across the shelf. Unlike the middle and outer shelves, where an increase in SST could account for up to 1.1 µatm y-1 of the observed pCO2 trend, there is no thermal influence in the coastal zone and inner shelf. While 1.8 µatm y-1 could be attributed to the global average atmospheric increase, the remainder is likely due to transport from coastal marshes and in situ biological processes.  As the authors have shown, the increasing coastal and oceanic trend in pCO2 can lead to a decrease in pH, especially if there is no increase in buffering capacity.  More acidic waters can have a long term affect on coastal ecosystem services and biota.

Also see Eos Editor’s Vox on this research by Peter Brewer https://eos.org/editors-vox/coastal-ocean-warming-adds-to-co2-burden

Authors:

Multidecadal fCO2 Increase Along the United States Southeast Coastal Margin (JGR-Oceans)
Janet J. Reimer (University of Delaware)
Hongjie Wang (Texas A &M University – Corpus Christi)
Rodrigo Vargas (University of Delaware)
Wei-Jun Cai (University of Delaware)

And

Time series pCO2 at a coastal mooring: Internal consistency, seasonal cycles, and interannual variability (Continental Shelf Research)
Janet J. Reimer (University of Delaware)
Wei-Jun Cai (University of Delaware; University of Georgia)
Liang Xue (University of Delaware; First Institute of Oceanography, China)
Rodrigo Vargas (University of Delaware)
Scott Noakes (University of Georgia)
Xinping Hu (Texas A &M University – Corpus Christi)
Sergio R. Signorini (Science Applications International Corporation)
Jeremy T. Mathis (NOAA Arctic Research Program)
Richard A. Feely (NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory)
Adrienne J. Sutton (NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory; University of Washington)
Christopher Sabine (University of Hawaii Manoa)
Sylvia Musielewicz (NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory; University of Washington)
Baoshan Chen (University of Delaware; University of Georgia)
Rik Wanninkhof (NOAA Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory)

Marine Snowfall at the Equator

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Thursday, July 19th, 2018 

The continual flow of organic particles such as dead organisms and fecal material towards the deep sea is called “marine snow,” and it plays an important role in the ocean carbon cycle and climate-related processes. This snowfall is most intense where high primary production can be observed near the surface. This is the case along the equator in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. However, it is not well known how particles are distributed at depth and which processes influence this distribution. A recent study published in Nature Geoscience involved the use of high-resolution particle density data using the Underwater Vision Profiler (UVP) from the equatorial Atlantic and Pacific Oceans down to a depth of 5,000 meters, revealing that several previously accepted ideas on the downward flux of particles into the deep sea should be revisited.

Figure 1. The Underwater Vision Profiler (UVP) during a trial in the Kiel Fjord. The UVP provided crucial data for the new study. Photo: Rainer Kiko, GEOMAR

 

It is typically assumed that the largest particle density can be found close to the surface and that density attenuates continuously with depth. However, high-resolution particle data show that density increases again in the 300-600-meter depth range. The authors attribute this observation to the daily migratory behavior of organisms such as zooplankton that retreat to these depths during the day, contributing to the particle load via defecation and mortality.

Another surprising result is the observation of many small particles below 1,000 meters depth that contribute a large fraction of the bathypelagic particle flux. This observation counters the general assumption, especially in many biogeochemical models, that particle flux at depth comprises fast sinking particles such as fecal pellets. Diminished remineralization rates of small particles or increased disaggregation of larger particles may contribute to the elevated small particle fluxes at this depth.

Figure 2. Zonal current velocity and Particulate Organic Carbon (POC) content across the equatorial Atlantic at 23˚W as observed in November 2012. From left to right: Zonal current velocity, POC content in small particle fraction and POC content in large particle fraction (adapted from Kiko et al. 2017).

 

This study highlights the importance of coupled biological and physical processes in understanding and quantifying the biological carbon pump. Further work on this important topic can now also be submitted to the new Frontiers in Marine Science research topic “Zooplankton and Nekton: Gatekeepers of the Biological Pump” (https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/8114/zooplankton-and-nekton-gatekeepers-of-the-biological-pump; Co-editors R. Kiko, M. Iversen, A. Maas, H. Hauss and D. Bianchi). The research topic welcomes a broad range of contributions, from individual-based process studies, to local and global field observations, to modeling approaches to better characterize the role of zooplankton and nekton for the biological pump.

 

Authors:
R. Kiko (GEOMAR)
A. Biastoch (GEOMAR)
P. Brandt (GEOMAR, University of Kiel)
S. Cravatte (LEGOS, University of Toulouse)
H. Hauss (GEOMAR)
R. Hummels (GEOMAR)
I. Kriest (GEOMAR)
F. Marin (LEGOS, University of Toulouse)
A. M. P. McDonnell (University of Alaska Fairbanks)
A. Oschlies (GEOMAR)
M. Picheral (Laboratoire d’Océanographie de Villefranche-sur-Mer, Observatoire Océanologique)
F. U. Schwarzkopf (GEOMAR)
A. M. Thurnherr (Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory,)
L. Stemmann (Sorbonne Universités, Observatoire Océanologique)

Building ocean biogeochemistry observing capacity, one float at a time: An update on the Biogeochemical-Argo Program

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Thursday, July 5th, 2018 

By Ken Johnson (MBARI)

The Biogeochemical-Argo (BGC-Argo) Program is an international effort to develop a global network of biogeochemical sensors on Argo profiling floats that has emerged from over a decade of community discussion and planning. While there is no formal funding for this global program, it is being implemented via a series of international research projects that harness the unique capabilities provided by BGC profiling floats. The U.S. Ocean Carbon and Biogeochemistry (OCB) Program maintains and supports a U.S. BGC-Argo subcommittee as a focal point for U.S. community input on the implementation of the global biogeochemical float array and associated science program development.

Figure 1. Steve Riser deploying a SOCCOM float from the R/V Palmer

About BGC-Argo Floats
BGC-Argo floats can carry a suite of chemical and bio-optical sensors (Figure 1 – Float Schematic).  They have enough energy to make about 250 to 300 vertical profiles from 2000 m to the surface.  At a cycle time of 10 days, that corresponds to a lifetime near 7 years.  The long endurance allows the floats to resolve seasonal to interannual variations in carbon and nutrient cycling throughout the water column.  These time scales are difficult to study from ships and ocean interior processes are hard to resolve from satellites.  BGC profiling floats extend the capabilities of these traditional observing systems in significant ways.

Figure 2. Images of Navis and APEX floats used in the SOCCOM program. These floats carry oxygen, nitrate, pH, and bio-optical (chlorophyll fluorescence and backscatter) sensors.

All of the data from profiling floats operating as part of the Argo program must be available in real-time with no restrictions on access.  The Argo Global Data Assembly centers in France and the USA both provide complete listings of all BGC profiles (argo_bio-profile_index.txt) and access to the data.  Extensive documentation of the data processing protocols is available from the Argo Data Management Team.  Individual research programs, such as SOCCOM (see below), may also provide direct data access to the observed data along with value added products such as best estimates of pCO2 derived from pH sensor data.

Regional Deployments
In 2018, it is projected that 127 profiling floats with biogeochemical sensors are will be deployed, including ~40 floats by U.S. projects. Most of the U.S. deployments (30+) will be carried out by the Southern Ocean Carbon and Climate Observations and Modeling (SOCCOM) project (Figure 2 – Float Deployment). These floats will carry oxygen, nitrate, pH, chlorophyll fluorescence, and backscatter sensors. As part of the NOAA Tropical Pacific Observing System (TPOS) program, Steve Riser’s group (Univ. Washington) will deploy 3 BGC-Argo floats per year in the equatorial Pacific over the next 4 years. These floats will be equipped with oxygen, pH, bio-optical sensors and Passive Acoustic Listener (PAL) sensors, which provide wind speed estimates at 15-minute intervals while the floats are parked at 1000 m.  Wind speed is derived from the noise spectrum of breaking waves. Steve Emerson (Univ. Washington), with NSF support, is also deploying floats equipped with oxygen, nitrate and pH sensors in the equatorial Pacific. With funding from NSF, Andrea Fassbender (MBARI) will deploy two floats at Ocean Station Papa in the northeast Pacific in collaboration with the EXPORTS program. These floats will also carry oxygen, nitrate, pH, and bio-optical sensors.

Nearly 90 BGC floats will be deployed in 2018 by other nations in multiple ocean basins.  Much of this effort will focus on the North Pacific and North Atlantic.  The sensor load on these floats is somewhat variable. Some will be deployed with only oxygen sensors or bio-optical sensors for chlorophyll fluorescence and particle abundance. Others will carry the full suite of six sensors (oxygen, nitrate, pH, chlorophyll fluorescence, backscatter, and irradiance) that are outlined in the BGC-Argo Implementation Plan (BGC-Argo, 2016). These floats will contribute to the existing array of 305 biogeochemical floats (Figure 3 BGC Argo Map).

Community Activities
In response to the tremendous interest in the scientific community in the capabilities of profiling floats, OCB is sponsoring a Biogeochemical Float Workshop at the University of Washington in Seattle from July 9-13, 2018 to begin the process of transferring this expertise to the broader oceanographic community, bringing together potential users of this technology to discuss biogeochemical profiling float technology, sensors, and data management and begin the process of the intelligent design of future scientific experiments. The workshop will provide participating scientists direct access to the facilities of the Float Laboratory operated by Riser. This workshop builds on a previous OCB workshop Observing Biogeochemical Cycles at Global Scales with Profiling Floats and Gliders (Johnson et al., 2009). BGC-Argo will also have a prominent presence at the 6th Argo Science Workshop (October 22-24, 2018, Tokyo, Japan) and OceanObs19 (September 16-20, 2019, Honolulu, HI).

Figure 3. May 2018 map of the location of BGC-Argo floats that have reported in the previous month and sensor types on these floats. From jcommops.org.

BGC-Argo Publications
Several resources now highlight the capabilities of profiling floats to accomplish scientific observing goals. A web-based bibliography of biogeochemical float papers hosted on the Biogeochemical-Argo website currently includes >100 publications and continues to grow. A special issue of Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans focused on the SOCCOM program is in progress with 11 papers now available and a dozen more forthcoming. These papers include summaries of the technical capabilities of floats and the biogeochemical sensors, comparisons of float bio-optical data with satellite remote sensing observations, seasonal and interannual assessments of air-sea oxygen flux, under-ice biogeochemistry, carbon export, comparisons of pCO2 estimated from floats with pH vs. time-series data, and net community production. The connection of float observations with numerical models is a special focus of the program and this is highlighted in several papers, including a description of the Biogeochemical Southern Ocean State Estimate (SOSE), which is a data assimilating BGC model. Results from Observing System Simulation Experiments (OSSEs) used to assess the number of floats needed for large-scale observations are also reported. The BGC-Argo steering committee is developing a community white paper for the OceanObs19 conference in September 2019. BGC-Argo also develops and distributes a community newsletter.

For more information, visit the BGC-Argo website or reach out to the U.S. BGC-Argo Subcommittee.

 

 

 

 

Hotspots of biological production: Submesoscale changes in respiration and production

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Thursday, April 26th, 2018 

The biological pump is complex and variable. To better understand it, scientists have often focused on variations in biological parameters such as fluorescence and community structure, and have less often observed variations in rates of production. Production rates can be estimated using oxygen as a tracer, since photosynthesis produces oxygen and respiration consumes it. In a recent article in Deep Sea Research Part I, the authors presented high-resolution maps of oxygen in the upper 140 m of the ocean in the subtropical and tropical Atlantic, produced from a towed undulating instrument. This provides a synoptic, high-resolution view of oxygen anomalies in the surface ocean. These data reveal remarkable hotspots of biological production and respiration co-located with areas of elevated fluorescence. These hotspots are often several kilometers wide (horizontal) and ~10 m long (vertical). They are preferentially associated with edges of eddies, but not all edges sampled contained hotspots. Although this study captures only two-dimensional glimpses of these hotspots, precluding formal calculations of production rates, likely estimates of source water suggest that many of these hotspots may actually be areas of enhanced respiration rather than enhanced photosynthesis. The paper describes a conceptual model of nutrients, new production, respiration, fluorescence, and oxygen during the formation and decline of these hotspots. These data raise intriguing questions–if the hotspots do indeed have substantially different rates of production and respiration than surrounding waters, then they could lead to significant changes in estimates of production in the upper ocean. Additionally, understanding the mechanisms that produce these hotspots could be critical for predicting the effects of climate change on the magnitude of the biological pump.

(a) Oxygen concentrations and (b) fluorescence at ~1 km resolution over 300 km from 15.13°N, 57.47°W to 12.30°N, 56.42° W, as measured by sensors attached to the (c) Video Plankton Recorder II. Note that no contouring was used for this plot – every pixel represents an actual data point. Figure modified from Stanley et al., 2017. VPR image photograph by Phil Alatalo.

Authors:
Rachel H. R. Stanley (Wellesley College)
Dennis J. McGillicuddy Jr. (WHOI)
Zoe O. Sandwith (WHOI)
Haley Pleskow (Wellesley College)

NASA Arctic-COLORS scoping study report

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Monday, March 5th, 2018 

Arctic-COLORS (Arctic-COastal Land Ocean inteRactionS): A Science Plan for a NASA Field Campaign in the Coastal Arctic

View or download the PDF

Executive Summary
Over the past century, average Arctic surface air temperatures have increased at almost twice the global average rate and this rapid warming trend is expected to continue over the next century. Consequently, Arctic ecosystems have become an area of intense research focus, with specific emphasis on identifying compounding and exacerbating factors that can be critically important to our understanding and modeling of key biogeochemical processes. Short-term climate forcings and feedbacks that potentially accelerate local warming and environmental change in the Arctic are also increasingly affecting society in a variety of ways: from erosion of Arctic coastlines, to modifications of wildlife habitat and ecosystems that affect subsistence opportunities, to changes in transportation infrastructure, mineral development, and other ecological, socio-cultural, and economic uses of coastal ecosystem services. Arctic climate change has global implications, contributing to global sea level rise and affecting heat-flux changes, atmospheric circulation, and ocean circulation and dynamics beyond the Arctic region. The realization that changes within the Arctic have profound impacts on ecosystems and human populations across the globe has motivated greater attention by researchers, funding agencies, governmental policy makers, and non-governmental organizations. Recognizing the challenges associated with climate change and the emergence of a new Arctic environment, the White House released The National Strategy for the Arctic Region in May 2013. Included among the main principles highlighted in this strategy is: “Making decisions using the best available information by promptly sharing – nationally and internationally – the most current understanding and forecasts based on up-to-date science and traditional knowledge”. Yet major gaps remain in our understanding of the feedbacks, response, and resilience of coastal Arctic ecosystems, communities, and natural resources to current and future pressures. The biogeochemistry of the Arctic nearshore coastal zone, a vulnerable and complex contiguous landscape of lakes, streams, wetlands, permafrost, rivers, lagoons, estuaries and coastal seas, all modified by snow and ice, remains poorly understood.

To improve our mechanistic understanding and prediction capabilities of land-ocean interactions in the rapidly changing Arctic coastal zone, our team proposed a Field Campaign Scoping Study called Arctic-COLORS (Arctic-COastal Land Ocean inteRactionS) to NASA’s Ocean Biology and Biogeochemistry (OBB) Program. The goal of the project was to develop a scoping study report for NASA that describes and justifies the science imperative and design of an integrative, interdisciplinary oceanographic field campaign program that addresses high priority science questions related to land-ocean interactions in the Arctic. During the preparation of the scoping study report, our team consulted with the community to refine the high priority science questions for Arctic-COLORS, determine the study domain and research phases for the field campaign, and explore opportunities for linking to other field activities in the Arctic. Addressing the campaign’s objectives will require multidisciplinary expertise, a coordinated engagement of regional authorities and local communities, and a combination of field studies, remotely sensed observations from various platforms (shipboard, buoys, gliders, ground-based, airborne, satellite, for example), process studies, and numerical modeling. This scoping study report does not describe a comprehensive field campaign activity in detail, but rather sketches out key aspects of a field campaign program including the study region, sampling approaches, critical measurements, remote sensing assets, and modeling activities necessary to address the science objectives.

What is Arctic-COLORS? Arctic-COLORS is a proposed NASA-funded field campaign designed to quantify the response of the Arctic coastal environment to global change and anthropogenic disturbances – an imperative for developing mitigation and adaptation strategies for the region. The Arctic-COLORS field campaign is unprecedented, as it represents the first attempt to study the nearshore coastal Arctic (from riverine deltas and estuaries out to the coastal sea) as an integrated land-ocean-atmosphere-biosphere system.

The overarching objective of Arctic-COLORS is to determine present and future impacts of terrigenous, atmospheric, and oceanic fluxes on the biogeochemistry, ecology and ecosystem services of the Arctic coastal zone in the context of environmental (short-term) and climate (long-term) change. This focus on land-ocean interactions in the nearshore coastal zone is a unique contribution of Arctic-COLORS compared to other NASA field campaigns in polar regions. The science of our field campaign will focus on five key science questions:

1. How and where are materials from the land, atmosphere, and ocean transformed within the land-ocean continuum of the Arctic coastal zone?
2. How does thawing of Arctic permafrost—either directly through coastal erosion or indirectly through changing freshwater loads from upstream thaw—translate to changes in coastal ecology and biogeochemistry?
3. How do changes in snow/ice conditions and coastal circulation influence Arctic coastal ecology and biogeochemistry?
4. How do changes in fluxes of materials, heat, and buoyancy from the land, atmosphere, and ocean influence Arctic coastal ecology and biogeochemistry?
5. How do changing environmental (short-term) and climate (long-term) conditions alter the Arctic coastal zone’s availability and use of ecosystem services?

 

Scoping Study Principal Investigators and Primary Authors (alphabetical order):
Antonio Mannino, Carlos Del Castillo, Marjorie Friedrichs, Peter Hernes, Patricia Matrai, Joseph Salisbury, Maria Tzortziou

Collaborators and Co-Authors:
Matthew Alkire, Marcel Babin, Simon Bélanger, Emmanuel Boss, Eddy Carmack, Lee Cooper, Susanne Craig, Jerome Fiechter, Joaquim Goes, Peter Griffith,
Dan Hodkinson, Christopher Hostetler, David Kirchman, Diane Lavoie, Bonnie Light, James McClelland, Donald McLennan, Irina Overeem, Christopher Polashenski, Michael Rawlins, Rick Reynolds, Rachael Sipler, Michael Steele, Robert Striegl, James Syvitski, Suzanne Tank, Muyin Wang, Tom Weingartner

Updates and Plans for the First EXPORTS Field Campaign

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Thursday, February 1st, 2018 

Contacts: David Siegel (UCSB; EXPORTS Science Lead) & Ivona Cetinić (NASA GSFC/USRA; EXPORTS Project Scientist)

 

EXPORTS in a Nutshell

Ocean ecosystems constitute a significant fraction of the world’s primary production, fixing CO2 and creating oxygen while playing critical roles in sequestering CO2 from the atmosphere. An improved understanding of the cycling and fate of oceanic organic carbon will not only allow for better prediction of how these processes may change in the future, but it will help underpin the societal value of these ocean ecosystem services. The EXport Processes in the Ocean from RemoTe Sensing (EXPORTS) field campaign aims to provide answers to these questions.

The goal of EXPORTS is to develop a predictive understanding of the export and fate of global ocean net primary production (NPP) and its implications for the Earth’s carbon cycle in present and future climates (oceanexports.org). To develop this quantitative understanding, EXPORTS will measure and model the export pathways that remove fixed organic carbon from the upper ocean and drive the attenuation of these vertical fluxes within the ocean interior. EXPORTS datasets will be used to develop and test numerical predictive and satellite-data diagnostic models of NPP fates and their carbon cycle impacts. EXPORTS builds on decades of NASA-funded research on developing and validating satellite data-driven models of regional to global NPP and hence, EXPORTS will contribute to NASA’s upcoming Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud and ocean Ecosystem (PACE) mission.

 

A Brief History of EXPORTS

The NASA EXPORTS field campaign is the result of an initial open competition in 2012 by the NASA Ocean Biology and Biogeochemistry (OBB) Program to identify scoping workshops for future field campaigns. This was followed by many years of committee-based planning, community vetting of science and implementation plans, and final peer review.  The NASA EXPORTS Science and Implementation Plans were made publicly available by the NASA OBB program. In February 2016, the National Science Foundation held the Biology of the Biological Pump (BoBP) workshop aimed in part to leverage NASA’s planned investment in the EXPORTS field program. In August 2016, NASA announced it would support data mining and observational system simulation experiment (OSSE) projects to help with planning the NASA EXPORTS field campaign and five projects were funded under this pre-EXPORTS call.

In early 2017, NASA released a call for proposals for the EXPORTS field program and the competition for inclusion on the NASA EXPORTS Science Team and its leadership. The call also included the implementation approach for the EXPORTS field program, with two major cruises to collect in situ data, followed by a synthesis and analysis phase to be competed in the future. At the same time, NSF released a Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) stating they would consider proposals that leveraged the NASA investment with objectives that supported the BoBP plan. From the NASA competition, 11 projects were selected for support (Table 1). Three NSF proposals have been recommended for support (at the time of this writing, the awarding of these grants is not yet official), bringing the count to a total of 41 PIs and co-PIs that are supported by NASA and NSF on EXPORTS/BoBP. This level of investment likely makes EXPORTS the largest coordinated U.S.-funded biogeochemical field program since the Joint Global Ocean Flux Study (JGOFS) nearly 2 decades ago. Table 1 lists the funded projects, PI, and co-PIs, project titles, and links to two page descriptions for each project.

Any implementation of the EXPORTS field program must result in the quantification of the major export pathways that remove fixed organic carbon from the upper ocean and sequester it at depth. NASA is uniquely poised, given the global vantage point of space-based observations, to use Earth observing satellite data to meet this objective, while also understanding observational requirements for future advanced Earth Observing missions.  Quantification of major carbon export pathways requires the simultaneous measurement of 1) sinking particle fluxes (and their composition), 2) the export of organic carbon to depth via vertically migrating zooplankton, and 3) the vertical transport of dissolved and suspended particulate organic carbon to depth, where it is remineralized by different microbial communities. To develop predictive links to satellite ocean color-retrievable parameters, the quantification of export pathways must be augmented by research programs focused on, but not limited to, the elucidation of plankton community structure, rates of NPP and grazing, and optical oceanography. Complicating this further is the stochastic nature of export flux determinations that necessitates a fully four-dimensional sampling design while maintaining a long-term perspective. This reasoning led to the Agency selection of projects listed in Table 1.

The planning of the EXPORTS field campaign is well underway. The first field deployment is planned to take place in the summer of 2018 in the Northeast Pacific, while the tentative second cruise will be in the North Atlantic Ocean in the spring of 2020. NASA has formed a project office staffed of Agency and EXPORTS PIs to direct EXPORTS’ progress. The EXPORTS Science Team, which comprises the funded PIs, is participating on near-weekly teleconferences, and co-chief scientists have been selected. An initial EXPORTS kickoff meeting was held in September 2017 in the Washington, DC area. There, the PIs organized themselves into working groups focused on creating short methodological descriptions for each measurement to be made. This documentation will be critical for the metadata, the project data management, and for ensuring legacy of the program through a set of NASA Technical Memoranda. This has also proven to be an excellent way to foster cross-project collaborations. A second PI meeting is scheduled for mid-February 2018, leveraging the upcoming Ocean Sciences Meeting.

 

EXPORTS First Field Deployment

The first EXPORTS field deployment will be to the Northeast Pacific Ocean in late summer 2018. Two ships, the R/V Roger Revelle and the R/V Sally Ride, will be deployed for 27 days of coordinated sampling around Station P (50°N 145°W), while EXPORTS’ autonomous component will ensure a longer-term presence. The choice of Station P as an anchor point for the field campaign was made based on results from the data mining and OSSE projects and the availability of a long-term data set for this site, as well as the many sampling partnerships afforded by ongoing programs. Canada’s Line P long-term hydrographic/biogeochemistry program has been running since 1949, and they currently conduct three annual transect cruises from British Columbia to Station P. Other useful partnerships include NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory’s (PMEL) air-sea interaction buoy and the NSF’s Ocean Observatories Initiative’s (OOI) global node at Station P.

 

Figure 1: Cartoon depicting many of the individual elements to be deployed during the 2018 EXPORTS sampling program in the North Pacific.

The EXPORTS 2018 field deployment will comprise four basic components (depicted in Figure 1 above). First, several autonomous vehicles will be deployed before the ship observations. An instrumented Lagrangian float will be deployed at depth and used to set the spatial center of the sampling program, while an instrumented Seaglider will be used to provide vertical and some horizontal spatial information around the Lagrangian float’s drift. In addition, and if approved by the OOI Facility Board, instrumented gliders deployed at the Station P OOI global node will be used to supplement the autonomous vehicle data streams.

Second, the R/V Roger Revelle will be the Process Ship, and will follow the Lagrangian float. The Process Ship will focus on rates (NPP, sinking particle fluxes, grazing, net community production, zooplankton respiration and fecal particle production, aggregate formation, etc.) and vertical information (microbial community structure and particle size spectra) in the water mass surrounding the float. Rate measurements will be made using water sampled with a trace metal-clean rosette system, and sinking particle fluxes from neutrally buoyant sediment traps (NBSTs) and sediment trap array. In particular, microbial community structure will be measured using a variety of techniques, including high-throughput microscopic imaging systems, meta-community genomic sequencing, isolation and experimentation on individual marine snow aggregates, and gel trap-collected sinking particles. The Process Ship will also conduct a complete optical oceanographic sampling program ensuring links to remotely sensed parameters. Drs. Deborah Steinberg (VIMS) and Jason Graff (OSU) have volunteered to be co-chief scientists for the R/V Revelle.

Third, the R/V Sally Ride will be the Survey Ship making spatial patterns about the Process Ship on scales from roughly 1 km to nearly 100 km. The focus of the Survey Ship will be collecting horizontal spatial information on particle export (234Th disequilibrium), net community production (O2/Ar), organic carbon stocks, phytoplankton composition, and inherent and apparent optical properties. The Survey Ship will also deploy a suite of instrumentation to characterize the particle size spectrum from 20 nm to nearly a cm. It will also be responsible for validating the calibration of the autonomous vehicles’ bio-optical instrumentation and the development of the biogeochemical proxies. Norm Nelson (UCSB) and Mary Jane Perry (self-affiliated) have agreed to be the co-chief scientists on the R/V Sally Ride.

Last, EXPORTS needs a long-term sampling presence to tie the ship-based observations to climatically relevant time and space scales. The Lagrangian float and Seaglider will sample for ~6 months, bracketing EXPORTS’ intensive ship observations, and thus providing some long-term perspectives to the ship sampling. Partnering programs like Line P and the OOI Global Node will allow for some additional in situ sampling opportunities and broader temporal context. Further, the PMEL mooring and a profiling float project recommended for funding by NSF will extend the long-term biogeochemical observations.

The integration of the observations will generate a data set that will not only be invaluable for building new algorithms for retrievals of new and refined data products from NASA’s current fleet of Earth Observing Satellites, but also will be critical in the development of new sets of requirements for future satellite observations of our Earth system. As described in the EXPORTS Implementation Plan, the likelihood of the EXPORTS achieving its predictive goals will increase as the number and variety of observations available to develop and test novel algorithms increases. Hence, the EXPORTS program is particularly motivated to collaborate with international partners who would be interested to share their data sets to address these important issues.

 

An Amazing Opportunity for Ocean Science

EXPORTS is the first large-scale, coordinated opportunity aimed at understanding the ocean’s biological pump since the JGOFS program. Hence, the EXPORTS team is planning to create a long-term legacy for these one-of-a-kind datasets. NASA is supporting a full-time data manager to make sure that all of the information collected is easily accessible to all; as per NASA policies, all data will be freely available. Efforts are being made to ensure the intercalibration and interoperability of measurements made across different platforms, thus ensuring continuity of the datasets. EXPORTS also plans to over-collect whole water, filtered particulate, and trap-collected samples that can be used for many purposes, both now by collaborators, and in the future as analytical methodologies become more powerful.

The timing for EXPORTS could not be better. Our understanding of the biological pump and in particular, the fate of ocean NPP has rapidly advanced over the past decade. We now know that the biological pump is four-dimensional, which complicates our observational approaches, and that food web and aggregate dynamics, microbial community composition and function, individual organism physiology and behavior, and submesoscale turbulent transport are all components that need to be quantified. Further, our observing tools and capabilities have witnessed giant leaps over just the past couple of years. Novel imaging instruments can now measure particle and aggregate size distributions and identify and quantify plankton abundances. Genomic approaches enable the characterization of plankton communities and their physiology. Novel hyperspectral optical measurements of ocean reflectance as well as component inherent optical properties provide strong links to present and future satellite ocean color missions. High-resolution numerical models now enable the elucidation of submesoscale (100s m to ~10 km) processes that include food webs and biogeochemistry, while autonomous vehicles provide persistent and spatially distributed observations that complement the shipboard sampling. It seems the time for EXPORTS is now.

Click for PDF of article and table

Table 1: EXPORTS Science Team

Lead PI Co-PIs Project Title
Michael Behrenfeld
(OSU) – NASA		 Emmanuel Boss (UMaine), Jason Graff (OSU), Lionel Guidi (LOV), Kim Halsey (OSU), & Lee Karp-Boss (UMaine) First Step – Linking Remotely-Detectable Optical Signals, Photic Layer Plankton Properties, and Export Flux  
Ken Buesseler
(WHOI) – NASA		 Claudia Benitez-Nelson (USC) & Laure Resplandy (Princeton) Elucidating Spatial and Temporal Variability in the Export and Attenuation of Ocean Primary Production using Thorium-234 
Craig Carlson
(UCSB) – NASA		 Dennis Hansell (RSMAS) Evaluating the Controls of Dissolved Organic Matter Accumulation, its Availability to Bacterioplankton, its Subsequent Diagenetic Alteration and Contribution to Export Flux
Meg Estapa
(Skidmore) -NASA		 Ken Buesseler
(WHOI), Colleen Durkin (MLML) & Melissa Omand (URI)		 Linking Sinking Particle Chemistry and Biology with Changes in the Magnitude and Efficiency of Carbon Export into the Deep Ocean 
Craig Lee
(UW) – NASA		 Eric D’Asaro (UW), David Nicholson (WHOI), Melissa Omand (URI), Mary Jane Perry (self-affiliated) & Andrew Thompson (CalTech) Autonomous Investigation of Export Pathways from Hours to Seasons
Adrian Marchetti (UNC) – NASA Nicolas Cassar (Duke) & Scott Gifford (UNC) Quantifying the Carbon Export Potential of the Marine Microbial Community: Coupling of Biogenic Rates and Fluxes with Genomics at the Ocean Surface
Susanne Menden-Deuer
(URI) – NASA		 Tatiana Rynearson (URI) Quantifying Plankton Predation Rates, and Effects on Primary Production, Phytoplankton Community Composition, Size Spectra and Potential for Export 
Collin Roesler (Bowdoin) – NASA Heidi Sosik (WHOI) Phytoplankton community structure, carbon stock, carbon export and carbon flux: What role do diatoms play in the North Pacific and North Atlantic Oceans? 
David Siegel
(UCSB) – NASA		 Adrian Burd (UGA), Andrew McDonnell (UAF), Norm Nelson (UCSB) & Uta Passow (UCSB) Synthesizing Optically and Carbon Export-Relevant Particle Size Distributions for the EXPORTS Field Campaign
Deborah Steinberg (VIMS) – NASA Amy Maas (BIOS) Zooplankton-Mediated Export Pathways: Quantifying Fecal Pellet Export and Active Transport by Diel and Ontogenetic Vertical Migration in the North Pacific and Atlantic Oceans 
Xiaodong Zhang (UND) – NASA Deric Gray (NRL), Lionel Guidi (LOV) & Yannick Huot (Sherbrooke) Optically Resolving Size and Composition Distributions of Particles in the Dissolved-Particulate Continuum from 20 nm to 20 mm to Improve the Estimate of Carbon Flux
Bethany Jenkins (URI) – NSF* Mark Brzezinski (UCSB) & Kristen Buck (USF) Collaborative Research: Diatoms, Food Webs and Carbon Export – Leveraging NASA EXPORTS to Test the Role of Diatom Physiology in the Biological Carbon Pump
Ben Van Mooy (WHOI) -NSF* Environmental Lipidomics of Suspended and Sinking Particles in the Upper Ocean
Andrea Fassbender (MBARI) – NSF* Constraining Upper-Ocean Carbon Export with Biogeochemical Profiling Floats

*Project recommended for funding by NSF, but not officially funded as of this publication.

WBC Series: Observing air-sea interaction in the western boundary currents and their extension regions: Considerations for OceanObs 2019

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Friday, November 10th, 2017 

Dongxiao Zhang1,2, Meghan F. Cronin2, Xiaopei Lin3, Ryuichiro Inoue4, Andrea J. Fassbender5, Stuart P. Bishop6, Adrienne Sutton2

1. University of Washington
2. NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory
3. Ocean University of China, China
4. Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, Japan
5. Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
6. North Carolina State University

 

Western boundary currents (WBCs) and their extensions (WBCE) are characterized by intense air-sea heat, momentum, buoyancy, and carbon dioxide (CO2) fluxes (Figure 1a). These large ocean-atmosphere exchanges contribute to the global balance of physical and biogeochemical ocean properties. Excess heat absorbed by the ocean in the tropics is transported poleward, mainly by WBCs (Trenberth and Solomon 1994; Fillenbaum et al. 1997; Zhang et al. 2001; Johns et al. 2011), and then released back to the atmosphere along the WBCs and their extensions in subtropical mid-latitudes at the subtropical and subarctic ocean boundaries (Figure 1a). For this reason, WBC regions are referred to as climatic “hot spots” (Nakamura et al. 2015). Likewise, WBC regions are ocean carbon hot spots, areas of large CO2 uptake that counterbalance the large CO2 outgassing in the tropics (Figure 1b). For OceanObs’09, Cronin et al. (2010) made strong recommendations to include multidisciplinary observations in WBC regional observing systems. The present need for such a system is more urgent than ever. While many open questions remain regarding the role of eddies in ventilation and mode water formation events and their interaction with the biological pump, new technologies are making multidisciplinary observations at these scales more feasible than ever. Use of these new tools during process studies could help to address many of the remaining open questions in WBC regions. OceanObs’19 is two years away, making it timely to review the present observing system for WBC regions and begin strategizing the necessary improvements for the next decade.

Figure 1. Annual mean air-sea net surface heat flux into the ocean from objectively analyzed flux (OAFlux; Yu and Weller 2007) and sea-to-air surface CO2 flux from Takahashi et al. (2009). White contours are the mean dynamic sea level (Rio and Hernandez 2004); star is the NOAA/PMEL KEO location. The WBC regions in the boxes are the Kuroshio-Oyashio Extension (KOE), Gulf Stream (GS), Brazil and Malvinas Currents (BMC), East Australian Current (EAC), and Agulhas Return Current (ARC). Figure adapted from Cronin et al. (2010).

 

The following sections briefly describe requirements of the ocean observing system in WBC regions, and how the current or planned observing system is meeting these requirements, such as international partnerships and collaborations. We also briefly discuss some underway process studies and raise some questions that still need to be addressed, by using the Kuroshio Extension observing system as an example that is applicable to other WBC regions. The goal of this article is to motivate discussion for developing future WBC regional observing systems in preparation for OceanObs’19.

Multiscale multidisciplinary air-sea interaction in WBC regions

Following the principles of the Framework for Ocean Observing (Lindstrom et al. 2012), the first step in developing an “observing system that is fit for purpose” is to define the observational requirements of the system, keeping in mind that these can only be fulfilled by an integrated system that spans multiple time and space scales.

A key characteristic of WBC regions is that their intense air-sea fluxes are associated with strong fronts and energized mesoscale and submesoscale eddies. Strong air-sea heat fluxes effectively project the SST front into the atmosphere, potentially affecting storm tracks and mid-latitude weather (Minobe et al. 2008; Small et al. 2008; Kwon et al. 2010). Carbon uptake in the WBCs is largely controlled by physical processes associated with wintertime heat loss that decreases both SST and surface water pCO2 and increases the ocean’s thermodynamic drive to absorb atmospheric CO2. Furthermore, winter heat loss in WBC regions leads to subduction and the formation of mode waters (Qiu et al. 2006; Cronin et al. 2013; Oka et al. 2015) that transport the absorbed CO2 to the ocean interior and act as an important anthropogenic CO2 sink pathway (Sabine et al. 2004). However, the biological pump also plays an important role in determining the magnitude of natural carbon uptake in the transition region between subtropical and subarctic waters (Takahashi et al. 2009; Fassbender et al. 2017; Wakita et al., 2016). Primary production and ecosystem structure and function are strongly regulated by the energetic fronts and (sub)mesoscale eddies associated with WBCs that supply nutrients to the euphotic zone via upwelling (McGillicuddy 2016; Mahadevan 2016; and the references therein) and cross-frontal exchange between high-nutrient, cold subarctic waters and low-nutrient, warm subtropical waters in the upper ocean (Ayers and Lozier 2012; Nagano et al. 2016; Nagai and Clayton 2017). Questions remain about the importance of these biological processes in local anthropogenic carbon uptake relative to other large-scale chemical and physical processes, such as changes in the seawater buffer capacity and mode and intermediate water formation rates. Within the ocean and atmosphere physics communities, it is becoming clear that to properly represent the energy balance of the climate system in a WBC region, it is necessary to resolve the multi-scale ocean and atmosphere interactions, from large-scale to frontal scale to mesoscale, and potentially even submesoscale. As discussed at the recent joint US CLIVAR and Ocean Carbon and Biogeochemistry (OCB) Ocean Carbon Hot Spots workshop, this is less clear for the biogeochemical system. While biological production is clearly sensitive to fronts and eddies – and recent data from the Kuroshio Extension Observatory (KEO) sediment trap show an accumulation peak that can be traced back to a cold-core eddy (M. Honda, pers. comm. 2017) – physical controls of solubility and buffer capacity may be more important for the carbon cycle. Participants of the Ocean Carbon Hot Spots workshop discussed the challenge of quantifying CO2 uptake and understanding air-sea exchange processes in WBC regions in the face of an incomplete observing system and lack of coverage across the fronts and eddies in these systems. Process studies will enable us to examine the complex relationships between air-sea fluxes, eddy activity, mode water formation, physical and biogeochemical properties of mode waters, and primary production. An improved understanding of these physical-chemical-biological interactions can reveal important information about the underlying mechanisms driving low-frequency decadal variations and gyre-scale circulation in WBC regions. These multi-scale, coupled interactions must be considered in the development of a more comprehensive “fit for purpose” WBC regional observing system.

Observing systems of WBC regions

Satellites represent a critical component of all observing systems, delivering global coverage. Because WBC regional fronts are often associated with clouds and rain that can disrupt satellite remote sensing, some remotely sensed fields could have systematic biases in frontal regions. Thus, the WBC regional observing system plan must include efforts to avoid biases and aliasing from improperly resolved fronts and eddies.

Strong currents, winter storms, and warm season typhoons and hurricanes can also make WBC regions challenging for in situ observations. Of all the WBC regions, the Kuroshio Extension currently has the most complete observing system, so we focus on this system as a potential roadmap for other systems.

Kuroshio Extension Observatory: NOAA surface mooring and JAMSTEC sediment trap

One of the most important observing system components in the Kuroshio Extension is NOAA’s long-term climate reference station, KEO. KEO is strategically located in the Kuroshio Extension recirculation gyre at 32.3°N, 144.5°E (star in Figure 1) on the warm side of the Kuroshio front, an ideal region for monitoring the air-sea interactions that result in mode water formation through winter and spring. Additionally, the site is frequently visited by typhoons during summer and early fall, providing case studies of air-sea interactions between warm water and strong storms. Since 2004, NOAA/PMEL’s Ocean Climate Stations group has maintained a surface mooring at KEO. The NOAA surface mooring measures the meteorological, biogeochemical, and physical ocean variables for estimating air-sea exchanges of heat, moisture, momentum, and carbon dioxide; ocean acidification; and upper ocean variability associated with air-sea interaction. Data are freely available in real time (Figure 2) and are available on GTS (Global Telecommunication System) for improving numerical weather prediction and ocean-atmosphere reanalysis.

Since 2014, Honda et al. (JAMSTEC) have maintained a sediment trap mooring at KEO (Honda pers. comm. 2017). Prior to this, the sediment trap had been deployed at the Japanese S1 mooring, located southeast of KEO at 30°N, 145°E (Honda et al. 2017). The deep sediment trap at 5000 m (800 m above sea floor) positioned next to the KEO surface mooring provides crucial information about the processes affecting nutrient supply that supports ocean productivity and biological carbon export in this subtropical oligotrophic region.

Figure 2. An example of KEO surface observations from real-time data display and delivery web pages.

 

Japanese-funded process studies JKEO, Hot-Spot, and INBOX

Over the past 13 years, there have been a number of process studies in the Kuroshio Extension region. Most notably, the US-funded Kuroshio Extension System Study (KESS) focused on the dynamics of the mesoscale meanders on the Kuroshio Extension and their interaction with the recirculation gyres north and south of the jet (Jayne et al. 2009; Donohue et al. 2008). This was followed by a study of the effect of the Kuroshio Extension front on the air-sea fluxes and interactions, through deployment of a JAMSTEC-KEO (JKEO) surface mooring north of the Kuroshio Extension front paired with the NOAA KEO mooring south of the front (Konda et al. 2010). Then from 2010 to 2015, the extremely successful Japanese process study, “Multi-Scale Air-Sea Interaction under the East-Asian Monsoon: A ‘Hot Spot’ in the Climate System” (Hot-Spot), led to a large field experiment in the region that included a surface flux mooring K-TRITON buoy deployed closer to the center of the Kuroshio Extension jet, which captured the unusual mesoscale exchanges of water mass properties across the Kuroshio Extension front (Nagano et al. 2016). Another Hot-Spot study with three research vessels, each occupying a half-degree latitude between 35°N-37°N along 143°E and transiting back and forth across the Kuroshio Extension SST front (Kawai et al. 2015), showed unprecedented details of dramatic surface latent and sensible heat flux changes and the response of the deep atmospheric boundary layer across the SST front.

While the Japanese Hot-Spot experiment focused on the physical air-sea interactions, the Japanese Western North Pacific Integrated Physical-Biogeochemical Ocean Observation Experiment (INBOX) (Inoue et al. 2016a) focused on biophysical interactions. In 2011, centered around the S1 mooring in a 150-km box, 18 Argo floats equipped with dissolved oxygen sensors were deployed. In addition, a four-month Seaglider survey was conducted between S1 and KEO in 2014. Results showed a strong association between dissolved oxygen patchiness and mesoscale and submesoscale eddies. With proper coordination through CLIVAR, leveraging international research funding could expand these Japanese-funded experiments.

 

Chinese KEO buoy

Motivated by recent exciting findings from ultra-high-resolution coupled model simulations showing the importance of latent and sensible heat release from warm ocean eddies in forcing the atmosphere (Ma et al. 2015) and regulating the Kuroshio Extension jet (Ma et al. 2016), the Ocean University of China has successfully deployed an air-sea flux buoy, the Chinese KEO (C-KEO), north of Kuroshio Extension axis at 39ºN, 149.25ºE in October 2017. Similar to KEO, both subsurface and surface measurements at C-KEO will be transmitted and made available to the scientific community in real time when it reaches stable state. In addition, the Ocean University of China has deployed three subsurface moorings (M1: 32.4ºN, 146.2ºE; M2: 39ºN, 150ºE; and M3: 35ºN, 147.6ºE) equipped with ADCP, CTD, a current meter, and McLane Moored Profiler (M1) to monitor the subsurface eddy structure and variability. Over the past three years, they have deployed 19 Argo floats in the Kuroshio Extension region, with a cluster of floats deployed in an anticyclone eddy, providing the detailed eddy contribution to the subduction and mode water formation (Xu et al. 2016). The Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology, as part of its ‘Transparent Ocean’ project, support all of these observing activities.

 

Challenges and emerging technologies

Characterized by strong winds, high seas, and fast and deep currents, WBC regions are some of the most challenging environments to observe with moored surface buoys. KEO’s long history of success demonstrates that with careful planning, dedication, and international collaborations, sustained moored buoys can be maintained in WBC regions to provide long time series of high-frequency and high-quality simultaneous measurements of subsurface and surface variables. However, due to increased risk of breaking mooring lines in strong, deep jet streams, it is recommended that these long-term reference sites be placed outside of the strongest jet and in the recirculation gyre or northern flank of the jet, like KEO, or the former J-KEO and new C-KEO moorings.

Lagrangian floats have proven to be ideal for studying small-scale fronts and eddies (Shcherbina et al. 2014; Thomas et al. 2017; Inoue et al. 2016b; Xu et al. 2016). Newly available Biogeochemical (BGC)-Argo floats (Johnson and Claustre 2016) may be especially useful for monitoring ocean carbon hot spots to gain a more complete understanding of physical and biogeochemical processes in WBC regions. However, for sustained monitoring and quantifying heat or carbon uptake in eddy-rich WBC regions, a Lagrangian float array would have difficulty to maintain position in strong jets and is susceptible to sampling biases due to the tendency of the floats to be more likely trapped in cyclonic eddies (Rainville et al. 2014; Legg and McWilliams 2002). Controlled surveys by self-propelled autonomous underwater gliders will therefore be necessary to measure moving fronts and eddies and augment moored and Lagrangian components of the observing system.

In situ air-sea flux measurements across fronts and eddies have traditionally required research vessels or voluntary observing ships restricted to limited transit tracks (Fairall et al. 2003; Smith et al. 2016; Palevsky et al. 2016). However, new unmanned surface vehicles (USV) such as Wavegliders (Thompson and Girton 2017) and Saildrones (Meinig et al. 2015; Mordy et al. 2017) are now also being used for air-sea flux measurements of this nature. The Saildrone is especially well suited for collecting observations in the challenging sea conditions of WBC regions. Powered by wind and solar energy with average speed of 3-5 knots (depending on wind, with maximum speed of 7-8 knot), the Saildrone is two times faster than other USVs and has completed a voyage at sea lasting 12 months and covering 16,000 nautical miles. To make the Saildrone capable of observing air-sea exchange processes, NOAA/PMEL, the University of Washington, and Saildrone, Inc. have collaborated to successfully install sensors with equivalent or better quality than those currently used on tropical atmosphere and ocean (TAO) buoys for air-sea flux measurements, as well as a 300 kHz acoustic doppler current profiler (ADCP) for upper ocean current measurements. The standard Saildrone sensor suite also includes: the new PMEL autonomous surface vehicle CO2 system for air-sea CO2 flux measurements; sea surface dissolved oxygen, pH, and chlorophyll sensors; and subsurface backscatter sensing capability from the ADCP, making it a truly interdisciplinary observing platform (Figure 3). Most importantly, Saildrone deployments, measurements, and platform recoveries require no ship time. For example, two Saildrones were recently launched from San Francisco, CA with missions to the eastern tropical Pacific as part of the Tropical Pacific Observing System 2020 project (TPOS2020) and to participate in the field campaign of the NASA Salinity Processes in the Upper Ocean Regional Study (SPURS-2).

Figure 3. Physical and biogeochemical variables measured by Saildrone.

 

Conceptual WBC regional observing system for Ocean Obs’19

With uninterrupted satellite measurements of winds, sea surface height, SST, sea surface salinity, precipitation, and ocean color providing a large-scale context of in situ observations, a sustained WBC regional observing system should have the following components to observe multi-scale multidisciplinary processes:

  1. Long-term moored climate reference buoys in the upper ocean equipped with air-sea flux, physical, and biogeochemical sensors and sediment traps, preferably at the opposite flanks of the WBC extension jets
  2. An array of Lagrangian floats, especially BGC-Argo floats, equipped with standard biogeochemical sensors
  3. Underwater gliders for controlled observations of the subsurface ocean and across fronts and eddies
  4. Unmanned surface vehicle sections crossing WBC regional fronts and eddies around and between reference buoys
  5. Underway shipboard measurements including launch of weather balloons when crossing fronts and eddies during float deployments and glider operations

 

Before such an observing system can be fully developed, process studies are recommended to better understand key physical and biogeochemical processes operating in WBC regions and their associated temporal and spatial scales of variability. Process studies will also inform and optimize the use of newer technologies such as self-navigating platforms together with Lagrangian and Eulerian observations in WBC regions.

 

Acknowledgements

This is a NOAA PMEL contribution number 4725 and is partially funded by the Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean (JISAO) under NOAA Cooperative Agreement and NA15OAR4320063, Contribution No. 2017-0118.

 

References

Ayers, J. M., and M. S. Lozier, 2012: Unraveling dynamical controls on the North Pacific carbon sink. J. Geophys. Res., 117, doi:10.1029/2011JC007368.

Cronin, M. F., and Coauthors, 2010: Monitoring ocean-atmosphere interactions in western boundary current extensions. In Proceedings of the “OceanObs’09: Sustained Ocean Observations and Information for Society” Conference (Vol. 2), Venice, Italy, 21-25 September 2009, J. Hall, D. E.  Harrison, and D. Stammer, Eds., ESA Publication WPP-306, doi:10.5270/OceanObs09.cwp.20.

Cronin, M. F., N. A. Bond, J. T. Farrar, H. Ichikawa, S. R. Jayne, Y. Kawai, M. Konda, B. Qiu, L. Rainville, and H. Tomita, 2013: Formation and erosion of the seasonal thermocline in the Kuroshio Extension recirculation gyre. Deep-Sea Res. II, 85, 62-74, doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2012.07.018.

Donohue, K. A., and Coauthors, 2008: Program studies the Kuroshio Extension. Eos, 89, 161-162, doi: 10.1029/2008EO170002.

Fairall, C. W., E. F. Bradley, J. E. Hare, A. A. Grachev and J. B. Edson, 2003: Bulk parameterization of air–sea fluxes: Updates and verification for the COARE algorithm. J. Climate, 16, 571-591, doi: 10.1175/1520-0442(2003)016<0571:BPOASF>2.0.CO;2.

Fassbender, A. J., C. L. Sabine, M. F. Cronin, and A. J. Sutton, 2017: Mixed-layer carbon cycling at the Kuroshio Extension Observatory. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles, 31, doi:10.1002/2016GB005547.

Fillenbaum, E. R., T. N. Lee, W. E. Johns, and R. Zantopp, 1997: Meridional heat transport variability at 26.5°N in the North Atlantic. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 27, 153–174, doi:10.1175/1520-0485(1997)027<0153:MHTVAN>2.0.CO;2.

Honda, M. C., and Coauthors, 2017a: Comparison of carbon cycle between the western Pacific subarctic and subtropical time-series stations: highlights of the K2S1 project. J. Oceanogr., 73, 647-667, doi:10.1007/s10872-017-0423-3.

Inoue, R., and Coauthors, 2016a: Western North Pacific Integrated Physical-Biogeochemical Ocean Observation Experiment (INBOX): Part 1. Specifications and chronology of the S1-INBOX floats. J. Mar. Res., 74, 43–69, doi:10.1357/002224016819257344.

Inoue, R., V. Faure, and S. Kouketsu, 2016b: Float observations of an anticyclonic eddy off Hokkaido. J. Geophys. Res: Oceans, 121, 6103–6120, doi:10.1002/2016JC011698.

Jayne, S. R., and Coauthors, 2009: The Kuroshio Extension and its recirculation gyres. Deep-Sea Res. I, 56, 2088-2099, doi:10.1016/j.dsr.2009.08.006.

Johns, W. E., and Coauthors, 2011: Continuous, array-based estimates of Atlantic Ocean heat transport at 26.5°N. J. Climate, 24, 2429-2449, doi:10.1175/2010JCLI3997.1.

Johnson, K., and H. Claustre 2016: Bringing biogeochemistry into the Argo age. Eos, 97, doi:10.1029/2016EO062427

Kawai, Y., T. Miyama, S. Iizuka, A. Manda, M. K. Yoshioka, S. Katagiri, Y. Tachibana, and H. Nakamura, 2015: Marine atmospheric boundary layer and low-level cloud responses to the Kuroshio Extension front in the early summer of 2012: three-vessel simultaneous observations and numerical simulations. J. Oceanogr., 71, 511–526, doi:10.1007/s10872-014-0266-0.

Konda, M., H. Ichikawa, H. Tomita, and M. F. Cronin, 2010: Surface heat flux variations across the Kuroshio Extension as observed by surface flux buoys. J. Climate, 23, 5206–5221, doi:10.1175/2010JCLI3391.1.

Kwon, Y.-O., M. A. Alexander, N. A. Bond, C. Frankignoul, H. Nakamura, B. Qiu, L. A. Thompson 2010: Role of the Gulf Stream and Kuroshio–Oyashio Systems in large-scale atmosphere–ocean interaction: A review, J. Climate, 23, 3249-3281, doi: 10.1175/2010JCLI3343.1.

Legg, S., and J. C. McWilliams, 2002: Sampling characteristics from isobaric floats in a convective eddy field. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 32, 527–534, doi:10.1175/1520-0485.

Lindstrom, E. and Coauthors, 2012: A framework for ocean observing. UNESCO, IOC-INF-1284, doi:10.5270/OceanObs09-FOO

Ma, X., P. Chang, R. Saravanan, R. Montuoro, J.-S. Hsieh, D. Wu, X. Lin, L. Wu, and Z. Jing, 2015: Distant influence of Kuroshio Eddies on North Pacific weather patterns? Scient. Rep., 5,  doi:10.1038/srep17785

Ma, X., and Coauthors, 2016: Western boundary currents regulated by interaction between ocean eddies and the atmosphere. Nature, 535, 533–537. doi:10.1038/nature18640

Mahadevan, A. 2016: The impact of submesoscale physics on primary productivity of plankton. Ann. Rev. Mar. Sci., 8, 161-184, doi: 10.1146/annurev-marine-010814-015912.

McGillicuddy, D. J. 2016: Mechanisms of physical-biological-biogeochemical interaction at the oceanic mesoscale. Ann. Rev. Mar. Sci., 8, 125-159, doi: 10.1146/annurev-marine-010814-015606.

Meinig, C., N. Lawrence-Slavas, R. Jenkins, and H.M. Tabisola. 2015: The use of Saildrones to examine spring conditions in the Bering Sea: Vehicle specification and mission performance. OCEANS 2015 – MTS/IEEE Washington. October 19–22, 2015, Washington, DC, 1-6, doi: 10.23919/OCEANS.2015.7404348.

Minobe, S., A. Kuwano-Yoshida, N. Komori, S. P. Xie, and J. R.  Small, 2008: Influence of the Gulf Stream on the troposphere. Nature, 452, 206–209, doi:10.1038/nature06690.

Mordy, C. W., and Coauthors, 2017: Advances in ecosystem research: Saildrone surveys of oceanography, fish, and marine mammals in the Bering Sea. Oceanogr., 30, 113–115, doi: 10.5670/oceanog.2017.230.

Nagai, T., and S. Clayton, 2017: Nutrient interleaving below the mixed layer of the Kuroshio Extension Front. Ocean Dyn., 67, 1027-1046, doi:10.1007/s10236-017-1070-3.

Nagano, A., T. Suga, Y. Kawai, M. Wakita, K. Uehara, and K. Taniguchi, 2016: Ventilation revealed by the observation of dissolved oxygen concentration south of the Kuroshio Extension during 2012–2013. J. Oceanogr., 72, 837–850, doi:10.1007/s10872-016-0386-9.

Nakamura, H., A. Isobe, S. Minobe, H. Mitsudera, M. Nonaka, and T. Suga, 2015: “Hot Spots” in the climate system—new developments in the extratropical ocean–atmosphere interaction research: a short review and an introduction. J. Oceanogr., 71, 463–467, doi:10.1007/s10872-015-0321-5.

Oka, E., B. Qiu, Y. Takatani, K. Enyo, D. Sasano, N. Kosugi, M. Ishii, T. Nakano, and T. Suga, 2015: Decadal variability of subtropical mode water subduction and its impact on biogeochemistry. J. Oceanogr., 71, 389-400, doi: 10.1007/s10872-015-0300-x.

Palevsky, H. I., Quay, P. D., Lockwood, D. E., & Nicholson, D. P. 2016: The annual cycle of gross primary production, net community production, and export efficiency across the North Pacific Ocean. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles, 30, doi:10.1002/2015GB005318

Qiu, B., P. Hacker, S. Chen, K. A. Donohue, D. R. Watts, H. Mitsudera, N. G. Hogg and S. R. Jayne, 2006: Observations of the subtropical mode water evolution from the Kuroshio Extension System Study. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 36, 457-473, doi:10.1175/JPO2849.1.

Rainville, L., S. R. Jayne, and M. F. Cronin, 2014: Variations of the North Pacific subtropical mode water from direct observations. J. Climate, 27, 2842-2860, doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00227.1.

Rio, M.-H., and F. Hernandez, 2004: A mean dynamic topography computed over the World Ocean from altimetry, in situ measurements, and a geoid model. J. Geophys. Res., 109,  doi:10.1029/2003JC002226.

Sabine, C. L., Feely, R. A., Gruber, N., Key, R. M., Lee, K., Bullister, J. L., Wanninkhof, R., Wong, C., Wallace, D. W. R., Rilbrook, B., Millero, F. J., Peng, T.-H., Kozyr, A., Ono, T., and Rios, A. F., 2004. The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO2. Science, 305, 367–371, doi:10.1126/science.1097403.

Shcherbina, A. Y., and Coauthors, 2014: The LatMix Summer Campaign: Submesoscale stirring in the upper ocean. Bull. Amer. Meteorol. Soc., 96, 1257–1279, doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00015.1

Small, R. J., S. P. deSzoeke, S. P., Xie, L. O’Neill, H. Seo, Q. Song, Q., P. Cornillon, M. Spall, and S. Minobe, 2008: Air-sea interaction over ocean fronts and eddies. Dyn. Atmos. Oceans, 45, 274–319, doi:10.1016/j.dynatmoce.2008.01.001.

Smith, S. R., N. Lopez, and M. A. Bourassa, 2016: SAMOS air-sea fluxes: 2005–2014. Geosci. Data J., 3, 9-19, doi: 10.1002/gdj3.34.

Takahashi, T., and Coauthors, 2009: Climatological mean and decadal change in surface ocean pCO2, and net sea–air CO2 flux over the global oceans. Deep-Sea Res. Part II: Top. Stud. Oceanogr., 56, 554–577, doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2008.12.009.

Trenberth, K. E., and A. Solomon 1994: The global heat balance: Heat transports in the atmosphere and ocean, Climate Dyn., 10, 107–134, doi: 10.1007/BF00210625.

Thomas, L. N., J. R. Taylor, E. D’Asaro, C. M. Lee, J. M. Klymak, and A. Shcherbina, 2015: Symmetric instability, inertial oscillations, and turbulence at the Gulf Stream front. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 46, 197–217, doi:10.1175/JPO-D-15-0008.1.

Thomson, J., and J. Girton, 2017: Sustained measurements of Southern Ocean air-sea coupling from a Wave Glider autonomous surface vehicle. Oceanogr., 30, 104–109, doi: 10.5670/oceanog.2017.228.

Wakita, M., and Coauthors, 2016: Biological organic carbon export estimated from the annual carbon budget observed in the surface waters of the western subarctic and subtropical North Pacific Ocean from 2004 to 2013. J. Oceanogr, 72, 1–21. doi:10.1007/s10872-016-0379-8.

Xu, L., P. Li, S.-P. Xie, Q. Liu, Q., C. Liu, and W. Gao, 2016: Observing mesoscale eddy effects on mode-water subduction and transport in the North Pacific. Nature Comm., 7, doi:10.1038/ncomms10505.

Yu, L. and R. A. Weller, 2007: Objectively analyzed air-sea heat fluxes for the global ice-free oceans (1981–2005). Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 88, 527–539, doi: 10.1175/BAMS-88-4-527.

Zhang, D., W. E. Johns, and T. N. Lee 2002: The seasonal cycle of meridional heat transport at 24°N in the North Pacific and in the global ocean. J. Geophys. Res.: Oceans, 107, 1-24, doi:10.1029/2001JC001011

 

WBC Series: Fine-scale biophysical controls on nutrient supply, phytoplankton community structure, and carbon export in western boundary current regions

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Friday, November 10th, 2017 

Sophie Clayton1, Peter Gaube1, Takeyoshi Nagai2, Melissa M. Omand3, Makio Honda4

1. University of Washington
2. Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology, Japan
3. University of Rhode Island
4. Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, Japan

Western boundary current (WBC) regions are largely thought to be hotspots of productivity, biodiversity, and carbon export. The distinct biogeographical characteristics of the biomes bordering WBC fronts change abruptly from stable, subtropical waters to highly seasonal subpolar gyres. The large-scale convergence of these distinct water masses brings different ecosystems into close proximity allowing for cross-frontal exchange. Although the strong horizontal density gradient maintains environmental gradients, instabilities lead to the formation of meanders, filaments, and rings that mediate the exchange of physical, chemical, and ecological properties across the front. WBC systems also act as large-scale conduits, transporting tracers over thousands of kilometers. The combination of these local perturbations and the short advective timescale for water parcels passing through the system is likely the driver of the enhanced local productivity, biodiversity, and carbon export observed in these regions. Our understanding of biophysical interactions in the WBCs, however, is limited by the paucity of in situ observations, which concurrently resolve chemical, biological, and physical properties at fine spatial and temporal scales (1-10 km, days). Here, we review the current state of knowledge of fine-scale biophysical interactions in WBC systems, focusing on their impacts on nutrient supply, phytoplankton community structure, and carbon export. We identify knowledge gaps and discuss how advances in observational platforms, sensors, and models will help to improve our understanding of physical-biological-ecological interactions across scales in WBCs.

Mechanisms of nutrient supply

Nutrient supply to the euphotic zone occurs over a range of scales in WBC systems. The Gulf Stream and the Kuroshio have been shown to act as large-scale subsurface nutrient streams, supporting large lateral transports of nutrients within the upper thermocline (Pelegrí and Csanady 1991; Pelegrí et al. 1996; Guo et al. 2012; Guo et al. 2013). The WBCs are effective in transporting nutrients in part because of their strong volume transports, but also because they support anomalously high subsurface nutrient concentrations compared to adjacent waters along the same isopycnals (Pelegrí and Csanady 1991; Nagai and Clayton 2017; Komatsu and Hiroe pers. comm.). It is likely that the Gulf Stream and Kuroshio nutrient streams originate near the southern boundary of the subtropical gyres (Nagai et al. 2015a). Recent studies have suggested that nutrients in the Gulf Stream originate even farther south in the Southern Ocean (Williams et al. 2006; Sarmiento et al. 2004). These subsurface nutrients can then be supplied to the surface through a range of vertical supply mechanisms, fueling productivity in the WBC regions.

We currently lack a mechanistic understanding of how elevated nutrient levels in these “nutrient streams” are maintained, since mesoscale stirring should act to homogenize them. While it is well understood that the deepening of the mixed layer toward subpolar regions (along nutrient stream pathways) can drive a large-scale induction of nutrients to the surface layer (Williams et al., 2006), the detailed mechanisms driving the vertical supply of these nutrients to the surface layer at synoptic time and space scales remain unclear. Recent studies focusing on the oceanic (sub)mesoscale (spatial scales of 1-100 km) are starting to reveal mechanisms driving intermittent vertical exchange of nutrients and organisms in and out of the euphotic zone.

Recent surveys that resolved micro-scale mixing processes in the Kuroshio Extension and the Gulf Stream have reported elevated turbulence in the thermocline, likely a result of near-inertial internal waves (Nagai et al. 2009, 2012, 2015b; Kaneko et al. 2012, Inoue et al. 2010). In the Tokara Strait, upstream of the Kuroshio Extension, where the geostrophic flow passes shallow topography, pronounced turbulent mixing oriented along coherent banded layers below the thermocline was observed and linked to high-vertical wavenumber near-inertial internal waves (Nagai et al. 2017; Tsutsumi et al. 2017). Within the Kuroshio Extension, measurements made by autonomous microstructure floats have revealed vigorous microscale temperature dissipation within and below the Kuroshio thermocline over at least 300 km following the main stream, which was attributed to active double-diffusive convection (Nagai et al. 2015c). Within the surface mixed layer, recent studies have shown that downfront winds over the Kuroshio Extension generate strong turbulent mixing (D’Asaro et al. 2011; Nagai et al. 2012). The influence of fine-scale vertical mixing on nutrient supply was observed during a high-spatial resolution biogeochemical survey across the Kuroshio Extension front, revealing fine-scale “tongues” of elevated nitrate arranged along isopycnals (Figure 1, Clayton et al. 2014). Subsequent modeling work has shown that these nutrient tongues are ubiquitous features along the southern flank of the Kuroshio Extension front, formed by submesoscale surface mixed layer fronts (Nagai and Clayton 2017).

Microscale turbulence, double-diffusive convection, and submesoscale stirring are all processes associated with meso- and submesoscale fronts. The results from the studies mentioned above support the hypothesis that WBCs are an efficient conduit for transporting nutrients, not only over large scales but also more locally on fine scales, as isopycnal transporters, lateral stirrers, and diapycnal suppliers. It is the sum of these transport processes that ultimately fuels the elevated primary production observed in these regions.

Figure 1. Vertical sections of nitrate (μM) observed across the Kuroshio Extension in October 2009. The panels are organized such that they line up with respect to the density structure of the Kuroshio Extension Front. Cyan contour lines show the mixed layer depth (taken from Nagai and Clayton 2017).

Phytoplankton biomass, community structure, and dynamics

WBCs separate regions with markedly different biogeochemical and ecological characteristics. Subpolar gyres are productive, highly seasonal, tend to support ecosystems with higher phytoplankton biomass, and can be dominated by large phytoplankton and zooplankton taxa. Conversely, subtropical gyres are mostly oligotrophic, support lower photoautotrophic biomass, and are not characterized by a strong seasonal cycle. In turn, these subtropical regions tend to support ecosystems that comprise smaller cells and a tightly coupled microbial loop. As boundaries to these diverse regions, WBCs are the main conduit linking the equatorial and polar oceans and their resident plankton communities. Within the frontal zones, mesoscale dynamics act to stir water masses together and can transport ecosystems across the WBC into regions of markedly different physical and biological characteristics. Furthermore, mesoscale eddies can modulate vertical fluxes via the displacement of ispycnals during eddy intensification or eddy-induced Ekman pumping, or generating submesoscale patches of vertical exchange. At these smaller scales, vigorous vertical circulations ¾ with magnitudes reaching 100 m/day ¾ can fertilize the euphotic zone or transport phytoplankton out of the surface layer.

Numerous studies have hypothesized that the combination of large-scale transport, mesoscale stirring and transport, and submesoscale nutrient input leads to both high biodiversity and high population densities. Using remote sensing data, D’Ovidio et al. (2010) showed that mesoscale stirring in the Brazil-Malvinas Confluence Zone brings together communities from very different source regions, driving locally enhanced biodiversity. In a numerical model, in which physical and biological processes can be explicitly separated and quantified, Clayton et al. (2013) showed that high modeled biodiversity in the WBCs was due to a combination of transport and local nutrient enhancements. And finally, in situ taxonomic surveys crossing the Brazil-Malvinas Confluence (Cermeno et al. 2008) and the Kuroshio Extension (Honjo and Okada 1974; Clayton et al, 2017) showed both enhanced biomass and biodiversity associated with the WBC fronts. Beyond these local enhancements, WBCs might play a larger role in setting regional biogeography. Sugie and Suzuki (2017) found a mixture of temperate and subpolar diatom species in the Kuroshio Extension, suggesting that the boundary current might play a key role in setting downstream diatom diversity.

However tantalizing these results are, they remain relatively inconclusive, in part because of their relatively small temporal and spatial scales. Extending existing approaches for assessing phytoplankton community structure, leveraging emerging ‘omics and continuous sampling techniques, larger regions might be surveyed at high taxonomic and spatial resolution. Combining genomic and transcriptomic observations would provide measures of both organism abundance and activity (Hunt et al. 2013), as well as the potential to better define the relative roles of growth and loss processes. With genetically resolved data and appropriate survey strategies, it will be possible to conclusively determine the presence of these biodiversity hotspots. A better characterization and deeper understanding of these regions will provide insight into the long-term and large-scale biodiversity, stability, and function of the global planktonic ecosystem.

Organic carbon export via physical and biological processes

Export, the removal of fixed carbon from the surface ocean, is driven by gravitational particle sinking, active transport, and (sub)mesoscale processes such as eddy-driven subduction. While evidence suggests that WBCs are likely hot spots of biological (Siegel et al. 2014; Honda et al. 2017a) and physical (Omand et al. 2015) export fluxes out of the euphotic zone, only a small handful of studies have explored this. Recent results from sediment trap studies at the Kuroshio Extension Observatory (KEO) mooring, located just south of the Kuroshio Extension, suggest that there is a link between the passage of mesoscale eddies and carbon export (Honda et al. 2017b). They observed that high export events at 5000 m lagged behind the passage of negative (cyclonic) sea surface height anomalies (SSHA) at the mooring by one to two months (Figure 2). In other regions, underway measurements (Stanley et al. 2010) and optical sensors on autonomous platforms (Briggs et al. 2011; Estapa et al. 2013; Estapa et al. 2015; Bishop et al. 2016) have revealed large episodicity in export proxies over timescales of hours to days and spatial scales of 1-10 km.

Figure 2. Time series of ocean temperature in the upper ~550 m (less than 550 dbar) at station KEO between July 2014 and June 2016. The daily data shown in the figure are available on the KEO database. White contour lines show the temporal variability in the daily satellite-based sea surface height anomaly (SSHA). White open bars show the total mass flux (TMF) observed by the time series sediment trap at 5000 m (based on a figure in Honda et al. 2017b).

Another avenue of carbon export from the surface ocean results from grazing and vertical migration. Vertically migrating zooplankton feed near the surface in the dark and evade predation at depth during the day. Fronts generated by WBCs produce gradients in zooplankton communities, both in terms of grazer biomass and species compositions (e.g., Wiebe and Flierl, 1983), and influence the extent and magnitude of diel vertical migrations. Submesoscale variability in zooplankton abundance can be observed readily in echograms collected by active acoustic sensors, but submesoscale variability in zooplankton community structure and dynamics remains difficult to measure. Thus, the nature of this variability remains largely unknown.

Future research directions

Building a better understanding of how physical and biogeochemical dynamics in WBC regions interact relies on observing these systems at the appropriate scales. This is particularly challenging because of the range of scales at play in these systems and the limitation of existing in situ and remote observing platforms and techniques. As has been outlined above, the ecological and biogeochemical environment of WBCs is the result of long range transport from the flanking subtropical and subpolar gyres, as well as local modification by meso- and submesocale physical dynamics in these frontal systems.

Another challenge in disentangling the relationships between physical and biogeochemical processes in WBCs is the difficulty in measuring rates rather than standing stocks. In such dynamic systems, lags in biological responses mean that the changes in standing stocks may not be collocated with the physical process forcing them. Small-scale lateral stirring spatially and temporally decouples net community production and export while secondary circulations contribute to vertical transport. As much as possible, future process studies should include approaches that can explicitly quantify biological rates and physical transport pathways. New platforms are beginning to fill these observational gaps: BGC-Argo floats, autonomous platforms (e.g., Saildrone), high-frequency underway measurements, and continuous cytometers (including imaging cytometers) are all capable of generating high-spatial resolution datasets of biological and chemical properties over large regions. Gliders and profiling platforms (e.g., WireWalker) are making it possible to measure vertical profiles of biogeochemical properties at high frequency. Operating within a Lagrangian framework, while resolving lateral gradients of physical and biogeochemical tracers with ships or autonomous vehicles, may someday allow us to quantitatively partition the observed small-scale variability in biogeochemical tracers between that attributable to biological or physical processes.

 

 

 

References

Bishop, J. K. B., M. B. Fong, and T. J. Wood, 2016: Robotic observations of high wintertime carbon export in California coastal waters. Biogeosci., 13, 3109-3129, doi:10.5194/bg-13-3109- 2016.

Briggs, N., M. J. Petty, I. Cetinic, I., C. Lee, E. A. Dasaro, A. M. Gray, and E. Rehm, 2011: High-resolution observations of aggregate flux during a subpolar North Atlantic spring bloom. Deep-Sea Res. I, 58, 10311039, doi:10.1016/j.dsr.2011.07.007.

Cermeno, P., S. Dutkiewicz, R. P. Harris, M. Follows, O. Schofield, and P. G. Falkowski, 2008: The role of nutricline depth in regulating the ocean carbon cycle. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 105, 20344-20349. doi:10.1073/pnas.0811302106.

Clayton, S., S. Dutkiewicz, O. Jahn, and M. J. Follows, 2013: Dispersal, eddies, and the diversity of marine phytoplankton. Limn. Ocean. Fluids  Env., 3, 182-197. doi:10.1215/21573689-2373515.

Clayton, S., T. Nagai, and M. J. Follows, 2014: Fine scale phytoplankton community structure across the Kuroshio Front. J. Plankton Res., 36, 1017-1030. doi:10.1093/plankt/fbu020.

Clayton, S., Y.-C. Lin, M. J. Follows, and A. Z. Worden, 2017: Co-existence of distinct Ostreococcus ecotypes at an oceanic front. Limn. Ocean.. 62, 75-88, doi:10.1002/lno.10373.

D’Asaro, E., C. Lee, L. Rainville, L. Harcourt, and L. Thomas, 2011: Enhanced turbulence and energy dissipation at ocean fronts. Science, 332, 318–322, doi: 10.1126/science.1201515.

Estapa, M. L., K. Buesseler, E. Boss, and G. Gerbi, 2013: Autonomous, high-resolution observations of particle flux in the oligotrophic ocean. Biogeosci., 10, 5517-5531, doi: 10.5194/bg-10-5517-2013.

Estapa, M. L., D. A. Siegel, K. O. Buesseler, R. H. R. Stanley, M. W. Lomas, and N. B. Nelson, 2015: Decoupling of net community and export production on submesoscales in the Sargasso Sea. Glob. Biogeochem. Cyc., 29, 12661282, doi:10.1002/2014GB004913.

Guo, X., X.-H. Zhu, Q.-S. Wu, and D. Huang, 2012: The Kuroshio nutrient stream and its temporal variation in the East China Sea. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 117, doi:10.1029/2011jc007292.

Guo, X. Y., X. H. Zhu, Y. Long, and D. J. Huang, 2013: Spatial variations in the Kuroshio nutrient transport from the East China Sea to south of Japan. Biogeosci., 10, 6403-6417, doi:10.5194/bg-10-6403-2013.

Honda, M. C., and Coauthors, 2017a: Comparison of carbon cycle between the western Pacific subarctic and subtropical time-series stations: highlights of the K2S1 project. J. Oceanogr., 73, 647-667, doi:10.1007/s10872-017-0423-3.

Honda, M.C., Y. Sasai, E. Siswanto, A. Kuwano-Yoshida, and M. F. Cronin, 2017b: Impact of cyclonic eddies on biogeochemistry in the oligotrophic ocean based on biogeochemical /physical/meteorological time-series at station KEO. Prog. Earth Planet. Sci., submitted.

Honjo, S., and H. Okada, 1974: Community structure of coccolithophores in the photic layer of the mid-Pacific. Micropaleo., 20, 209-230, doi:10.2307/1485061.

Hunt, D. E., Y. Lin, M. J. Church, D. M. Karl, S. G. Tringe, L. K. Izzo, and Z. I. Johnson, 2013: Relationship between abundance and specific activity of bacterioplankton in open ocean surface waters. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 79, 177-184, doi:10.1128/AEM.02155-12.

Inoue, R., M. C. Gregg, and R. R. Harcourt, 2010: Mixing rates across the Gulf Stream, Part 1: On the formation of Eighteen Degree Water. J. Mar. Res. 68, 643–671.

Kaneko, H., I. Yasuda, K. Komatsu, and S. Itoh, 2012: Observations of the structure of turbulent mixing across the Kuroshio. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, doi:10.1029/2012GL052419.

Nagai, T., A. Tandon, H. Yamazaki, and M. J. Doubell, 2009: Evidence of enhanced turbulent dissipation in the frontogenetic Kuroshio Front thermocline. Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, doi:10.1029/2009GL038832.

Nagai, T., A. Tandon, H. Yamazaki, M. J. Doubell, and S. Gallager, 2012: Direct observations of microscale turbulence and thermohaline structure in the Kuroshio Front. J. Geophys. Res., 117, doi:10.1029/2011JC007228.

Nagai, T., M. Aiba, and S. Clayton, 2015a: Multiscale route to supply nutrients in the Kuroshio. Kaiyo-to-Seibutsu (In Japanese), 37, 469-477.

Nagai, T., A. Tandon, E. Kunze, and A. Mahadevan, 2015b: Spontaneous generation of near-inertial waves by the Kuroshio Front. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 45, 2381-2406, doi:10.1175/JPO-D-14-0086.1.

Nagai, T., R. Inoue, A. Tandon, and H. Yamazaki, 2015c: Evidence of enhanced double-diffusive convection below the main stream of the Kuroshio Extension.  J. Geophys. Res.,120, 8402-8421, doi: 10.1002/2015JC011288.

Nagai, T., and S. Clayton, 2017: Nutrient interleaving below the mixed layer of the Kuroshio Extension Front. Ocean Dyn., 67, 1027-1046, doi:10.1007/s10236-017-1070-3.

Omand, M. M., M. J. Perry, E. D’Asaro, C. Lee, N. A. Briggs, I. Cetinic, and A. Mahadevan, 2015: Eddy-driven subduction exports particulate organic carbon from the spring bloom. Science, 348, 222–225, doi:10.1126/science.1260062.

d’Ovidio, F., S. De Monte, S. Alvain, Y. Dandonneau, and M. Lévy, 2010: Fluid dynamical niches of phytoplankton types. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 107, 18366-18370. doi:10.1073/pnas.1004620107

Pelegrí, J. L., and G. T. Csanady, 1991: Nutrient transport and mixing in the Gulf Stream. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 96, 2577-2583, doi:10.1029/90JC02535.

Pelegrí, J. L., G. T. Csanady, and A. Martins, 1996: The North Atlantic nutrient stream. J. Oceanogr., 52, 275-299, doi: 10.1007/BF02235924.

Sarmiento, J. Á., N. Gruber, M. A. Brzezinski, and J. P. Dunne, 2004: High-latitude controls of thermocline nutrients and low latitude biological productivity. Nature, 427, 56-60, doi:10.1038/nature02127.

Siegel, D. A., K. O. Buesseler, S. C. Doney, S. F. Sailley, M. J. Behrenfeld, and P. W. Boyd, 2014: Global assessment of ocean carbon export by combining satellite observations and food‐web models. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles, 28, 181-196, doi: 10.1002/2013GB004743.

Stanley, R. H. R., J. B. Kirkpatrick, N. Cassar, B. A. Barnett, and M. L. Bender, 2010: Net community production and gross primary production rates in the western equatorial Pacific: Western equatorial Pacific production. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles, 24, doi:10.1029/ 2009GB003651.

Sugie, K., and K. Suzuki, 2017: Characterization of the synoptic-scale diversity, biogeography, and size distribution of diatoms in the North Pacific. Limnol. Oceanogr., 62, 884-897, doi:10.1002/lno.10473.

Tsutsumi, E., T. Matsuno, R. C. Lien, H. Nakamura, T. Senjyu, and X. Guo, 2017: Turbulent mixing within the Kuroshio in the Tokara Strait. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 122, 7082-7094, doi:10.1002/2017JC013049.

Wiebe, P., and G. Flierl, 1983: Euphausiid invasion/dispersal in Gulf Stream cold-core rings. Mar. Fresh. Res., 34, 625–652, doi: 10.1071/MF9830625.

Williams, R. G., V. Roussenov, and M. J. Follows, 2006: Nutrient streams and their induction into the mixed layer. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles, 20, doi:10.1029/2005gb002586.

 

                       

 

 

Phytoplankton increase projected for the Ross Sea in response to climate change

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Thursday, October 26th, 2017 

How will phytoplankton respond to climate changes over the next century in the Ross Sea, the most productive coastal waters of Antarctica? Model projections of physical conditions suggest substantial environmental changes in this region, but associated impacts on Ross Sea biology, specifically phytoplankton, remain unclear.

In a recent study, Kaufman et al (2017) generated and analyzed model scenarios for the mid- and late-21st century using a combination of a biogeochemical model, hydrodynamic simulations forced by a global climate projection, and new data from autonomous gliders. These scenarios indicate increases in the production of phytoplankton in the Ross Sea and increases in the downward flux of carbon in response to environmental changes over the next century. Modeled responses of the different phytoplankton groups to shoaling mixed layer depths shift the biomass composition more towards diatoms by the mid 21st century. While diatom biomass remains relatively constant in the second half of the 21st century, the haptophyte Phaeocystis antarctica biomass increases as a result of earlier seasonal sea ice melt, allowing earlier availability of low light, in which P. antarctica thrive.

 

Modeled climate scenarios for the 21st century project phytoplankton composition changes and increases in primary production and carbon export flux, primarily as a result of shoaling mixed layer depths and earlier available low light.

The projected responses of phytoplankton composition, production, and carbon export to climate-related changes can have broad impacts on food web functioning and nutrient cycling, with wide-ranging potential effects as local deep waters are transported out from the Ross Sea continental shelf. Future changes to this ecosystem have taken on a new relevance as the Ross Sea became home this year to the world’s largest Marine Protected Area, designed to protect critical habitat for highly valued species that rely on the Ross Sea food web. Continued coordination between modeling and autonomous observing efforts is needed to provide vital data for global ocean assessments and to improve our understanding of ecosystem dynamics and climate change impacts in this sensitive and important region.

 

For other relevant work on observing phytoplankton characteristics in the Ross Sea using gliders, please see: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2014.06.011.

And for assimilation of bio-optical glider data in the Ross Sea please see: https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2017-258.

 

Authors:
Daniel E. Kaufman (VIMS, College of William and Mary)
Marjorie A. M. Friedrichs (VIMS, College of William and Mary)
Walker O. Smith Jr. (VIMS, College of William and Mary)
Eileen E. Hofmann (CCPO, Old Dominion University)
Michael S. Dinniman (CCPO, Old Dominion University)
John C. P. Hemmings (Wessex Environmental Associates; now at the UK Met Office)

 

The changing ocean carbon cycle

Posted by mmaheigan 
· Thursday, July 6th, 2017 

Since preindustrial times, the ocean has removed from the atmosphere 41% of the carbon emitted by human industrial activities (Figure 1). The globally integrated rate of ocean carbon uptake is increasing in response to rising atmospheric CO2 levels and is expected to continue this trend for the foreseeable future. However, the inherent uncertainties in ocean surface and interior data associated with ocean carbon uptake processes make it difficult to predict future changes in the ocean carbon sink. In a recent paper, McKinley et al. (2017), review the mechanisms of ocean carbon uptake and its spatiotemporal variability in recent decades. Looking forward, the potential for direct detection of change in the ocean carbon sink, as distinct from interannual variability, is assessed using a climate model large ensemble, a novel approach to studying climate processes with an earth systems model, the “large ensemble.” In a large ensemble, many runs of the same model are done so as to directly distinguish natural variability from long-term trends.


This analysis illustrates that variability in CO2 flux is large enough to prevent detection of anthropogenic trends in ocean carbon uptake on at least decadal to multi-decadal timescales, depending on location. Earliest detection of trends is most attainable in regions where trends are expected to be largest, such as the Southern Ocean and parts of the North Atlantic and North Pacific. Detection will require sustained observations over many decades, underscoring the importance of traditional ship-based approaches and integration of new autonomous observing platforms as part of a global ocean carbon observing system.

Please see a relevant OCB outreach tool on ocean carbon uptake developed by McKinley and colleagues:
OCB teaching/outreach slide deck Temporal and Spatial Perspectives on the Fate of Anthropogenic Carbon: A Carbon Cycle Slide Deck for Broad Audiences  – also download explanatory notes

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Filter by Keyword

abundance acidification additionality advection africa air-sea air-sea interactions algae alkalinity allometry ammonium AMO AMOC anoxic Antarctic Antarctica anthro impacts anthropogenic carbon anthropogenic impacts appendicularia aquaculture aquatic continuum aragonite saturation arctic Argo argon arsenic artificial seawater Atlantic atmospheric CO2 atmospheric nitrogen deposition authigenic carbonates autonomous platforms bacteria bathypelagic BATS BCG Argo benthic bgc argo bio-go-ship bio-optical bioavailability biogeochemical cycles biogeochemical models biogeochemistry Biological Essential Ocean Variables biological pump biophysics bloom blue carbon bottom water boundary layer buffer capacity C14 CaCO3 calcification calcite carbon carbon-climate feedback carbon-sulfur coupling carbonate carbonate system carbon budget carbon cycle carbon dioxide carbon export carbon fluxes carbon sequestration carbon storage Caribbean CCA CCS changing marine chemistry changing marine ecosystems changing marine environments changing ocean chemistry chemical oceanographic data chemical speciation chemoautotroph chesapeake bay chl a chlorophyll circulation climate change climate changes climate variability CO2 coastal and estuarine coastal darkening coastal ocean cobalt Coccolithophores commercial community composition conservation cooling effect copepod copepods coral reefs CTD currents cyclone daily cycles data data access data assimilation database data management data product Data standards DCM dead zone decadal trends decomposers decomposition deep convection deep ocean deep sea coral deoxygenation depth diatoms DIC diel migration diffusion dimethylsulfide dinoflagellate dinoflagellates discrete measurements distribution DOC DOM domoic acid DOP dust DVM ecology economics ecosystem management ecosystems eddy Education EEZ Ekman transport emissions ENSO enzyme equatorial current equatorial regions ESM estuarine and coastal carbon fluxes estuary euphotic zone eutrophication evolution export export fluxes export production EXPORTS extreme events faecal pellets fecal pellets filter feeders filtration rates fire fish Fish carbon fisheries fishing floats fluid dynamics fluorescence food webs forage fish forams freshening freshwater frontal zone functional role future oceans gelatinous zooplankton geochemistry geoengineering geologic time GEOTRACES glaciers gliders global carbon budget global ocean global warming go-ship grazing greenhouse gas Greenland ground truthing groundwater Gulf of Maine Gulf of Mexico Gulf Stream gyre harmful algal bloom high latitude human food human impact human well-being hurricane hydrogen hydrothermal hypoxia ice age ice cores ice cover industrial onset inland waters in situ inverse circulation ions iron iron fertilization isotopes jellies katabatic winds kelvin waves krill kuroshio lab vs field land-ocean continuum larvaceans lateral transport LGM lidar ligands light light attenuation lipids machine learning mangroves marine carbon cycle marine heatwave marine particles marine snowfall marshes mCDR Mediterranean meltwater mesopelagic mesoscale mesoscale processes metagenome metals methane methods microbes microlayer microorganisms microplankton microscale microzooplankton midwater mitigation mixed layer mixed layers mixing mixotrophs mixotrophy model modeling model validation mode water molecular diffusion MPT MRV multi-decade n2o NAAMES NASA NCP nearshore net community production net primary productivity new ocean state new technology Niskin bottle nitrate nitrogen nitrogen cycle nitrogen fixation nitrous oxide north atlantic north pacific nuclear war nutricline nutrient budget nutrient cycles nutrient cycling nutrient limitation nutrients OA ocean-atmosphere ocean acidification ocean acidification data ocean alkalinity enhancement ocean carbon storage and uptake ocean carbon uptake and storage ocean color ocean modeling ocean observatories ocean warming ODZ oligotrophic omics OMZ open ocean optics organic particles oscillation outwelling overturning circulation oxygen pacific paleoceanography PAR parameter optimization parasite particle flux particles partnerships pCO2 PDO peat pelagic PETM pH phenology phosphate phosphorus photosynthesis physical processes physiology phytoplankton PIC piezophilic piezotolerant plankton POC polar polar regions policy pollutants precipitation predation predator-prey prediction pressure primary productivity Prochlorococcus prokaryotes proteins pteropods pycnocline radioisotopes remineralization remote sensing repeat hydrography residence time resource management respiration resuspension rivers rocky shore Rossby waves Ross Sea ROV salinity salt marsh satellite scale seafloor seagrass sea ice sea level rise seasonal seasonality seasonal patterns seasonal trends sea spray seawater collection seaweed secchi sediments sensors sequestration shelf ocean shelf system shells ship-based observations shorelines silica silicate silicon cycle sinking sinking particles size SOCCOM soil carbon southern ocean south pacific spatial covariations speciation SST state estimation stoichiometry subduction submesoscale subpolar subtropical sulfate surf surface surface ocean Synechococcus technology teleconnections temperate temperature temporal covariations thermocline thermodynamics thermohaline thorium tidal time-series time of emergence titration top predators total alkalinity trace elements trace metals trait-based transfer efficiency transient features Tris trophic transfer tropical turbulence twilight zone upper ocean upper water column upwelling US CLIVAR validation velocity gradient ventilation vertical flux vertical migration vertical transport volcano warming water clarity water mass water quality waves weathering western boundary currents wetlands winter mixing zooplankton

Copyright © 2024 - OCB Project Office, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, 266 Woods Hole Rd, MS #25, Woods Hole, MA 02543 USA Phone: 508-289-2838  •  Fax: 508-457-2193  •  Email: ocb_news@us-ocb.org

link to nsflink to noaalink to WHOI

Funding for the Ocean Carbon & Biogeochemistry Project Office is provided by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The OCB Project Office is housed at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.