2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecss.2009.03.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Turbidity limits gas exchange in a large macrotidal estuary

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
80
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 77 publications
(81 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
1
80
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Wanninkhof 1992), noble gas based estimates are sensitive to site specific conditions, including the effects of precipitation, surfactant films, and bottom-generated turbulence Harrison et al 2012). Sampling does not alter turbulence at the air-water interface, a drawback of measurements from floating dome studies, and tracer dispersal does not limit sampling period or location as with deliberate tracer releases (Abril et al 2009;. The noble gas method has drawbacks as well, including uncertainty in the solubility of Kr and Xe and potentially large sampling errors caused by small bubbles or air leaks in the samples.…”
Section: Noble Gas Concentrations As Tracers Of Gas Exchange Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Wanninkhof 1992), noble gas based estimates are sensitive to site specific conditions, including the effects of precipitation, surfactant films, and bottom-generated turbulence Harrison et al 2012). Sampling does not alter turbulence at the air-water interface, a drawback of measurements from floating dome studies, and tracer dispersal does not limit sampling period or location as with deliberate tracer releases (Abril et al 2009;. The noble gas method has drawbacks as well, including uncertainty in the solubility of Kr and Xe and potentially large sampling errors caused by small bubbles or air leaks in the samples.…”
Section: Noble Gas Concentrations As Tracers Of Gas Exchange Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Due to a lack of appropriate equipment, the piston velocity was estimated from wind speed instead of measured directly. There has been much discussion of the best method to estimate the piston velocity of CO 2 in estuaries, which is heavily dependent upon wind, but may also be affected by wave slope, surface films, rain, bottom-generated turbulence, surface turbulence, turbidity, and fetch limitation (Raymond and Cole 2001;Zappa et al 2007;Borges et al 2004a;Abril et al 2009). A paper by Ho et al (2011) examined the estimation of air-water gas exchange in the Hudson River, another northeastern USA estuary.…”
Section: −1mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Raymond and Cole (2001) (RC01) equation is based on the compilation of gas transfer velocities derived from tracers applied to nine rivers and estuaries, using only wind speed as an entry parameter. The Abril et al (2009) (A09) relationship is based on chamber flux measurements in seven estuaries, and uses wind speed, estuarine surface area, and water current velocity as entry parameters. We also calculated the fluxes with the parameterization of Wanninkhof (1992) (W92), which was initially developed for open ocean waters.…”
Section: Calculationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used the k wind parameterizations of Raymond and Cole (2001) and Abril et al (2009), which are gas exchange coefficients specific for estuarine waters. The Raymond and Cole (2001) (RC01) equation is based on the compilation of gas transfer velocities derived from tracers applied to nine rivers and estuaries, using only wind speed as an entry parameter.…”
Section: Calculationsmentioning
confidence: 99%