2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsr2.2013.02.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Changes in partitioning of carbon amongst photosynthetic pico- and nano-plankton groups in the Sargasso Sea in response to changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

11
74
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 73 publications
(85 citation statements)
references
References 94 publications
11
74
0
Order By: Relevance
“…and 1319 fgC cell −1 for picoeukaryotic phytoplankton. These values of ε(i) are comparable to values from the Bermuda Atlantic Timeseries Study (BATS) (Casey et al, 2013), for Prochlorococcus spp. and Synechococcus spp., whereas picoeukaryotic phytoplankton ε(i) values are lower than in BATS.…”
Section: In Situ Datasetsupporting
confidence: 68%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…and 1319 fgC cell −1 for picoeukaryotic phytoplankton. These values of ε(i) are comparable to values from the Bermuda Atlantic Timeseries Study (BATS) (Casey et al, 2013), for Prochlorococcus spp. and Synechococcus spp., whereas picoeukaryotic phytoplankton ε(i) values are lower than in BATS.…”
Section: In Situ Datasetsupporting
confidence: 68%
“…Subsequently, the carbon concentration is inferred from measurements of the proxy, which would typically be easier to measure than the carbon concentration itself. The proxies include adenosine triphosphate (ATP) (Sinclair et al, 1979); the refractive index of phytoplankton cells (Stramski, 1999); and the forward light scatter by phytoplankton cells in a flow cytometer (Casey et al, 2013). Redalje and Laws (1981) used chlorophyll-a labeling and showed that the specific activity of carbon in chlorophylla became equivalent to that of total phytoplankton carbon in incubations of 6-12 h, and so chlorophyll-a labeling could be used to infer phytoplankton carbon and growth rates.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…POC : PON : POP ratios in Prochlorococcus, Synechococcus and picoeukaryote are 234 : 33 : 1, 181 : 33 : 1 and 118 : 15 : 1, respectively, at the BATS site (Martiny et al, 2013, and Lomas et al, unpublished data), which clearly suggests imprints of a mixture of Prochlorococcus and Synechococcus on the observed POM stoichiometry presented in Table 1. The biomass of Prochlorococcus, Synechococcus and picoeukaryotes together contributes ∼ 40 % to the POC pool (Casey et al, 2013) and ∼ 75 % to the PON pool (Fawcett et al, 2011), with major contributions from each group varying seasonally. Hence, variability in biological parameters could potentially explain a significant fraction of the variability in the POM and TOM ratios but not all of it.…”
Section: Linkages Of Concentrations and Ratios Of Pom And Tom To Chlomentioning
confidence: 99%