期刊文献+

River Flow Control on the Phytoplankton Dynamics of Chesapeake Bay 被引量:1

River Flow Control on the Phytoplankton Dynamics of Chesapeake Bay
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 Recent observations support an emerging paradigm that climate variability dominates nutrient enrichment in costal eco-systems, which can explain seasonal and inter-annual variability of phytoplankton community composition, biomass (Chl-a), and primary production (PP). In this paper, we combined observation and modeling to investigate the regulation of phytoplankton dynamics in Chesapeake Bay. The year we chose is 1996 that has high river runoff and is usually called a 'wet year'. A 3-D physical-biogeochemical model based on ROMS was developed to simulate the seasonal cycle and the regional distributions of phytoplankton biomass and primary production in Chesapeake Bay. Based on the model results, NO3 presents a strong contrast to the river nitrate load during spring and the highest concentration in the bay reaches around 80 mmol Nm-3 . Compared with the normal year, phytoplankton bloom in spring of 1996 appears in lower latitudes with a higher concentration. Quantitative comparison between the modeled and observed seasonal averaged dissolved inorganic nitrogen concentrations shows that the model produces reliable results. The correlation coefficient r2 for all quantities exceeds 0.95, and the skill parameter for the four seasons is all above 0.95. Recent observations support an emerging paradigm that climate variability dominates nutrient enrichment in costal ecosystems, which can explain seasonal and inter-annual variability of phytoplankton community composition, biomass (Chl-a), and primary production (PP). In this paper, we combined observation and modeling to investigate the regulation of phytoplankton dynamics in Chesapeake Bay. The year we chose is 1996 that has high river runoff and is usually called a 'wet year'. A 3-D physical-biogeochemical model based on ROMS was developed to simulate the seasonal cycle and the regional distributions of phytoplankton biomass and primary production in Chesapeake Bay. Based on the model results, NO3 presents a strong contrast to the river nitrate load during spring and the highest concentration in the bay reaches around 80mmol N m^-3. Compared with the normal year, phytoplankton bloom in spring of 1996 appears in lower latitudes with a higher concentration. Quantitative comparison between the modeled and observed seasonal averaged dissolved inorganic nitrogen concentrations shows that the model produces reliable results. The correlation coefficient r^2 for all quantities exceeds 0.95, and the skill parameter for the four seasons is all above 0.95.
出处 《Journal of Ocean University of China》 SCIE CAS 2013年第1期103-114,共12页 中国海洋大学学报(英文版)
基金 supported by the National Science Foundation project of M. Li (OCE-082543)
关键词 river flow phytoplankton dynamics BLOOM light limitation Chesapeake Bay 浮游植物生物量 切萨皮克湾 动力学 流量控制 模型模拟 沿海生态系统 生物地球化学 初级生产
  • 相关文献

参考文献49

  • 1Boicourt, W. C., 1992. Influences of circulation processes on dissolved oxygen in the Chesapeake Bay. In: Oxygen Dy- namics in Chesapeake Bay: A Synthesis of Research. Smith, D., et al., eds., University of Maryland Sea Grant College, College Park, MD, 7-59.
  • 2Boynton, W. R., Kemp, W. M., and Keefe, C. W., 1982. A com- parative analysis of nutrients and other factors influencing estuarine phytoplankton production. In: Estuarine Compari- sons. Kennedy, V. S., ed., Academic Press, New York, 69-90.
  • 3Boynton, W. R., Garber, J. H., Summers, R., and Kemp, W. M., 1995. Inputs, transformations, and transport of nitrogen and phosphorus in Chesapeake Bay and selected tributaries. Es- tuaries, 18:285-314.
  • 4Eppley, R. W., 1972. Temperature and phytoplankton growth in the sea. Fishery Bulletin, 70: 1063-1085.
  • 5Fasham, M. J. R' Ducklow, H. W., and McKelvie, S. M., 1990. A nitrogen-based model of plankton dynamics in the oceanic mixed layer. Journal of Marine Research, 48 (3): 591-639.
  • 6Fisher, T. P., Harding Jr. L. W., Stanley, D.'W., and Ward, L. G., 1988. Phytoplankton, nutrients and turbidity in the Chesa- peake, Delaware and Hudson estuaries. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science, 27: 61-93.
  • 7Fisher, T. R., Peele, E. R., Ammerman, J. W., and Harding Jr., L. W., 1992. Nutrient limitation of phytoplankton in Chesapeake Bay. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 82:51-63.
  • 8Fisher, T. R., Carlson, P. R., and Barber, R. T., 1982. Carbon and nitrogen productivity in three North Carolina estuaries. Es- tuarine Coastal and Shelf Science, 15: 621-644.
  • 9Fisher, T. R., Gustafson A. B., Radcliffe, G. M., Sundberg, K. L., and Stevenson, J. C., 2003. A long-term record of photosyn- thetically available radiation (PAR) and total solar energy at 38.6N, 78.2W. Estuaries, 26: 1450-1460.
  • 10Haidvogel, D. B., Arango, H., Budgell, W. E, Comuelle, B. D., Curchitser, E., Di Lorenzo, E., Fennel, K., Geyer, W. R., Hermann, A. J., Lanerolle, L., Levin, J., McWilliams, J. C., Miller, A. J., Moore, A. M., Powell, T. M., Shchepetkin, A. F., Sherwood, C. R., Signell, R. P., Warner, J. C., and Wilkin, J., 2008. Ocean forecasting in terrain-following coordinates: for- mulation and skill assessment of the regional ocean modeling system. Journal of Computational Physics, 227: 3595-3624.

同被引文献9

引证文献1

二级引证文献9

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部