4.3 Article

Modeled biogeochemical responses to mesoscale eddies in the South China Sea

Journal

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-OCEANS
Volume 116, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2010JC006800

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. CNES
  2. NASA [NNG04GM64G]
  3. NSF [OCE-0961345]
  4. NSFC [90711006]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mesoscale eddies are observed each year in the South China Sea (SCS); however, their contributions to the biogeochemical cycles have never been systematically quantified. Here, we use a coupled three-dimensional physical-biogeochemical model to evaluate the eddy impact. We first track the modeled mesoscale eddies in the SCS and then analyze the biogeochemical responses to these eddies individually. Compared with the SCS basin mean, modeled depth-integrated (0-125 m) chlorophyll, zooplankton, new production, and silicate uptake are significantly enhanced in the cyclonic eddies and reduced in the anticyclonic eddies. Following the movements of the eddy center, temporal variations of phytoplankton community structure suggest that diatoms respond to cyclonic eddies strongly first and the responses last longer; then picoplankton grow after the diatoms. In the cyclonic eddies, modeled new production is 1.87 +/- 0.37 mmol N m(-2) d(-1), which is 28% higher than the SCS basin-averaged value, while in the anticyclonic eddies, modeled new production is about 32% lower than the SCS basin mean. As a consequence, modeled detrital nitrogen export for cyclonic eddies is 41% higher than the SCS basin mean, and that for anticyclonic eddies is 31% lower than the SCS basin mean. These values experience strong interannual variations with anomalously low magnitudes found during El Nino conditions for both of the eddies and the SCS basin mean. Our results indicate that cyclonic eddies in the SCS are important sources of nutrients to the euphotic zone and therefore play a significant role in regulating biological productivity and the carbon cycle.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available