1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0924-7963(99)00054-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of nutrients and mixing on the primary production and community respiration in the Gulf of Riga

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is in contrast to other coastal regions subjected to high river discharges that are only autotrophic over the period of the spring bloom, e.g. the upper Chesapeake Bay (Smith and Kemp 1995) and the Gulf of Riga (Olesen et al 1999). Alternation between periods dominated by autotrophy and periods dominated by heterotrophy over the summer months has been documented in the Scheldt estuarine plume in the Belgian coastal zone (Borges et al 2008).…”
Section: Metabolic Balance In Rofi and Non-rofi Regionsmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…This is in contrast to other coastal regions subjected to high river discharges that are only autotrophic over the period of the spring bloom, e.g. the upper Chesapeake Bay (Smith and Kemp 1995) and the Gulf of Riga (Olesen et al 1999). Alternation between periods dominated by autotrophy and periods dominated by heterotrophy over the summer months has been documented in the Scheldt estuarine plume in the Belgian coastal zone (Borges et al 2008).…”
Section: Metabolic Balance In Rofi and Non-rofi Regionsmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…The coefficient of determination are comparably high based on the untransformed values for GPP alone (r 2 = 0.63, n=2), representing estuarine environments. One report of a significant relationship with phytoplankton biomass (i.e., chlorophyll-a) from the Gulf of Riga had the highest r 2 value reported for a predictor but re-analysis resulted in a lower value (r 2 = 0.65, year 1995 data) (Olesen et al, 1999). This value was close to one case of a high explanation for chlorophyll-a based on untransformed values reported from the Chesapeake Bay (r 2 = 0.70) (Smith and Kemp, 2001).…”
Section: Explanatory Power Of Predictorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The coefficient of determination are comparably high based on the untransformed values for GPP alone (r 2 = 0.63, n=2), representing estuarine environments. One report of a significant relationship with phytoplankton biomass (i.e., chlorophyll-a) from the Gulf of Riga had the highest r 2 value reported for a predictor but re-analysis resulted in a lower value (r 2 = 0.65, year 1995 data) (Olesen et al, 1999). This value was close to one case of a high explanation for chlorophyll-a based on untransformed values reported from the Chesapeake Bay (r 2 = 0.70) (Smith and Kemp, 2001).…”
Section: Explanatory Power Of Predictorsmentioning
confidence: 99%