2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.marchem.2013.01.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Loss rates of acetone in filtered and unfiltered coastal seawater

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
12
2

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
12
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The biological lifetime of acetone at U1 is >80 days in surface waters and~20 days at 200 m, where in situ acetone concentrations were relatively low at 9 and 1 nM, respectively ( Table 1). The microbial acetone loss rates reported in this study are substantially lower than those of a coastal station in the Pacific Ocean, where biotic losses were estimated at 2.7 d À1 [de Bruyn et al, 2013], which if multiplied by our in situ acetone concentrations (Table 1) suggest biologically driven loss rates between 2.7 and 24 nmol L À1 d À1 . This large difference could represent differences in location.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 58%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The biological lifetime of acetone at U1 is >80 days in surface waters and~20 days at 200 m, where in situ acetone concentrations were relatively low at 9 and 1 nM, respectively ( Table 1). The microbial acetone loss rates reported in this study are substantially lower than those of a coastal station in the Pacific Ocean, where biotic losses were estimated at 2.7 d À1 [de Bruyn et al, 2013], which if multiplied by our in situ acetone concentrations (Table 1) suggest biologically driven loss rates between 2.7 and 24 nmol L À1 d À1 . This large difference could represent differences in location.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 58%
“…This large difference could represent differences in location. Alternatively, the large spike of fully deuterated (d-6) acetone (4-26 nM or 44-288% of our in situ acetone surface concentrations determined at station 1, Table 1) used by de Bruyn et al [2013] may overestimate losses of acetone at in situ concentrations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Given the relatively high microbial acetone oxidation rates found during January/February 2011 (in this study and in de Bruyn et al, 2013), with turnover times estimated at 1.4–3.2 days, it is not presently understood what process maintains acetone levels during winter months, when average acetone concentrations are 3.4 ± 1.1 nM. Typically, during winter at L4, UV levels and phytoplankton biomass are relatively low (e.g., Smyth et al, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…In comparison, the removal time due to microbial oxidation in the surface open ocean is on the order of 1–10 days for methanol [ Dixon et al ., ] and 5–55 days for acetone [ Dixon et al ., ]. Faster microbial acetone oxidations have been reported in winter (turnover time from <1 to 3 days) than in summer based on studies near the coast [ de Bruyn et al ., ; Dixon et al ., ]. Thus, atmospheric input alone was probably not enough to account for the mixed layer OVOC stocks during HiWinGS.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%