Planktic foraminiferal production stimulated by chlorophyll redistribution and entrainment of nutrients

Schiebel, Ralf; Waniek, Joanna J; Bork, Matthias; Hemleben, Christoph

doi:10.1016/s0967-0637(00)00065-0

Cited by 193 publications

(158 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

136

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Jonkers and Kučera (2015) have analyzed the phenology of foraminifer export fluxes at global scale and demonstrated that a group composed of temperate and cold water species (comprising N. pachyderma, N. incompta and T. quinqueloba) displayed two export peaks in spring and summer. Our results are highly consistent with this general scheme and support the close link between primary production (assessed from surface chlorophyll a) and foraminifer production (Hemleben et al, 1989;Klaas, 2001;Schiebel et al, 2001;Kuroyanagi and Kawahata, 2004;Lombard et al, 2011) and subsequent export (Schiebel, 2002). At Crozet (M5 and M10 sites in PFZ) foraminifer test export occurred in one continuous event in summer from January to March (Salter et al, 2014) when SST was generally highest ( 48°C) and chlorophyll a concentration was low (0.5 mg L À 1 , Salter et al, 2012).…”

Section: Foraminifer Test Flux Amplitude and Seasonalitysupporting

confidence: 87%

Planktic foraminifer and coccolith contribution to carbonate export fluxes over the central Kerguelen Plateau

Rembauville

Meilland

Ziveri

et al. 2016

Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tWe report the contribution of planktic foraminifers and coccoliths to the particulate inorganic carbon (PIC) export fluxes collected over an annual cycle (October 2011/September 2012) on the central Kerguelen Plateau in the Antarctic Zone (AAZ) south of the Polar Front (PF). The seasonality of PIC flux was decoupled from surface chlorophyll a concentration and particulate organic carbon (POC) fluxes and was characterized by a late summer (February) maximum. This peak was concomitant with the highest satellite-derived sea surface PIC and corresponded to a Emiliania huxleyi coccoliths export event that accounted for 85% of the annual PIC export. The foraminifer contribution to the annual PIC flux was much lower (15%) and dominated by Turborotalita quinqueloba and Neogloboquadrina pachyderma. Foraminifer export fluxes were closely related to the surface chlorophyll a concentration, suggesting food availability as an important factor regulating the foraminifer's biomass. We compared size-normalized test weight (SNW) of the foraminifers with previously published SNW from the Crozet Islands using the same methodology and found no significant difference in SNW between sites for a given species. However, the SNW was significantly species-specific with a threefold increase from T. quinqueloba to Globigerina bulloides. The annual PIC:POC molar ratio of 0.07 was close to the mean ratio for the global ocean and lead to a low carbonate counter pump effect ( $ 5%) compared to a previous study north of the PF (6-32%). We suggest that lowers counter pump effect south of the PF despite similar productivity levels is due to a dominance of coccoliths in the PIC fluxes and a difference in the foraminifers species assemblage with a predominance of polar species with lower SNW.

show abstract

Section: Foraminifer Test Flux Amplitude and Seasonalitysupporting

confidence: 87%

Planktic foraminifer and coccolith contribution to carbonate export fluxes over the central Kerguelen Plateau

Rembauville

Meilland

Ziveri

et al. 2016

Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…POC, PON, Chl a and nitrate data were provided by the German JGOFS data management (http://www.ifm.uni-kiel.de/jgofs/dm/parametr.htm). Further information on Chl a and nitrate data from the M36/5 are given by Schiebel et al (2001), and on POC, PON, Chl a and nitrate data during M36/2 by K. ahler and Koeve (2001).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distribution of transparent exopolymer particles (TEP) in the northeast Atlantic Ocean and their potential significance for aggregation processes

Engel

2004

Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers

129

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The abundance of transparent exopolymer particles (TEP) was determined in the northeast Atlantic Ocean (40-55 N, B20 W) during several cruises from June to November 1996. An accumulation of TEP in the water column was observed at bloom and post-bloom sites along a 20 W transect in June/July (maximum concentration: 124 mg Gum Xanthan equivalents (Xeq.) l À1 ), but concentrations were uniformly low (mean concentration: 28.5710.2 mg Xeq. l À1 ) during autumn at the BIOTRANS site (47 N, 20 W). TEP concentrations in the open northeast Atlantic were considerably lower than previously published values from coastal sites. However, during June/July TEP:Chl a (weight/ weight) ratios were comparable to values at coastal seas. It is suggested that phytoplankton production modulates TEP concentration in the open ocean as it does in coastal systems. TEP contributed significantly to the organic carbon pool as derived from the ratio TEP-C:POC, in summer (mean percentage: 1777.5; w/w), as well as in autumn (mean percentage: 18711, w/w). The potential influence of TEP on particle coagulation rates in the northeast Atlantic was assessed from estimates of their influence on particle stickiness and on particle volume concentrations. This indicated that TEP may be essential for initiating particle aggregation at low biomass concentrations, typical for open ocean sites. r

show abstract

“…Numerous studies revealed that productivity often being linked to the nutrient content is a significant factor influencing planktic foraminiferal fluxes and assemblage compositions (e.g. Bé and Hutson, 1977;Ortiz et al, 1995;Watkins et al, 1996;Eguchi et al, 1999;Schiebel et al, 2001;Morey et al, 2005). In this context it would also be reasonable not to correlate species fluxes exclusively to conditions at the sea surface but to consider different water depths as well to include the occurrence of deep chlorophyll maxima that some foraminifera like N. pachyderma or N. dutertrei have often been associated with at least for part of their life cycles (e.g.…”

Section: Pitfalls and Potential Of The Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bijma et al, 1990b;Ortiz et al, 1995;Watkins et al, 1996;Watkins and Mix, 1998;Eguchi et al, 1999;Schiebel et al, 2001;King and Howard, 2003a;Morey et al, 2005;Žarić et al, 2005, and references in Table 1).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global prediction of planktic foraminiferal fluxes from hydrographic and productivity data

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Understanding and quantifying the seasonal and spatial distribution of planktic foraminiferal fluxes reflected in sedimentary assemblages is key to interpret foraminiferabased proxies in paleoceanography. Towards this goal we present an empirical model to predict foraminiferal fluxes on a global scale.A compilation of planktic foraminiferal flux and export production data from globally distributed sediment traps together with environmental data of sea-surface temperature and mixed-layer depth from online databases is used to calibrate the model that calculates monthly foraminiferal fluxes for the 18 most common species. The calibrated model is then forced with a global data set of hydrographic and productivity data to predict monthly foraminiferal fluxes worldwide. The predictive skills of the model are assessed by comparing the model output with planktic foraminiferal assemblages from globally distributed surface sediments as well as with measured foraminiferal fluxes of sediment traps not included in the calibration data set.Many general distribution patterns of foraminiferal species recognized from the model output compare favorably with observations from coretops or sediment traps, even though the model still produces problematic results in some places. Among others, meridional gradients in species richness and diversity, increased relative abundances of Neogloboquadrina pachyderma (dex.) in upwelling areas, and peak abundances of Globigerinella siphonifera in oligotrophic subtropical gyres show good agreement between model and coretops. Absolute foraminiferal fluxes are significantly underestimated in most cases, while seasonal variations can be reproduced for some species. Interannual differences in foraminiferal fluxes are not reflected by the model which might partly be due to a lack of actual environmental data for the calibration and model experiments.Correspondence to: S.Žarić (zaric@uni-bremen.de)The limited predictive skills of the model suggest that additional parameters should be considered. Export production should probably be replaced by a more realistic representation of food availability for planktic foraminifera. This could be achieved by adding a dynamic component to the model and linking it to an ecosystem model.

show abstract

Planktic foraminiferal production stimulated by chlorophyll redistribution and entrainment of nutrients

Cited by 193 publications

References 23 publications

Planktic foraminifer and coccolith contribution to carbonate export fluxes over the central Kerguelen Plateau

Planktic foraminifer and coccolith contribution to carbonate export fluxes over the central Kerguelen Plateau

Distribution of transparent exopolymer particles (TEP) in the northeast Atlantic Ocean and their potential significance for aggregation processes

Global prediction of planktic foraminiferal fluxes from hydrographic and productivity data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About