Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 371

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How well do global ocean biogeochemistry models simulate dissolved iron distributions?

Open access
Tagliabue, Alessandro, Aumont, Olivier, DeAth, Ros, Dunne, John P., Dutkiewicz, Stephanie, Galbraith, Eric, Misumi, Kazuhiro, Moore, J. Keith, Ridgwell, Andy, Sherman, Elliot, Stock, Charles, Vichi, Marcello, Völker, Christoph, Yool, Andrew·2016·Global Biogeochemical Cycles

Abstract

Numerical models of ocean biogeochemistry are relied upon to make projections about the impact of climate change on marine resources and test hypotheses regarding the drivers of past changes in climate and ecosystems. In large areas of the ocean, iron availability regulates the functioning of marine ecosystems and hence the ocean carbon cycle. Accordingly, our ability to quantify the drivers and impacts of fluctuations in ocean ecosystems and carbon cycling in space and time relies on first achieving an appropriate representation of the modern marine iron cycle in models. When the iron distributions from 13 global ocean biogeochemistry models are compared against the latest oceanic sections from the GEOTRACES program, we find that all models struggle to reproduce many aspects of the observed spatial patterns. Models that reflect the emerging evidence for multiple iron sources or subtleties of its internal cycling perform much better in capturing observed features than their simpler contemporaries, particularly in the ocean interior. We show that the substantial uncertainty in the input fluxes of iron results in a very wide range of residence times across models, which has implications for the response of ecosystems and global carbon cycling to perturbations. Given this large uncertainty, iron fertilization experiments based on any single current generation model should be interpreted with caution. Improvements to how such models represent iron scavenging and also biological cycling are needed to raise confidence in their projections of global biogeochemical change in the ocean.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/2015gb005289

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 80 references

Cited by

See all 371

Metadata

Authors
Tagliabue, A., Aumont, O., DeAth, R., Dunne, J. P., Dutkiewicz, S., Galbraith, E., Misumi, K., Moore, J. K., Ridgwell, A., Sherman, E., Stock, C., Vichi, M., Völker, C., & Yool, A.
Venue
Global Biogeochemical Cycles
Published
2016-02
Volume
30
Issue
2
Pages
149-174
ISSN
  • 0886-6236 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-9224
OpenAlex
W2228781294
Cited by
371
References
80
FWCI
19.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How well do global ocean biogeochemistry models simulate dissolved iron distributions? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/2015gb005289
The paper
Tagliabue, A., Aumont, O., DeAth, R., Dunne, J. P., Dutkiewicz, S., Galbraith, E., Misumi, K., Moore, J. K., Ridgwell, A., Sherman, E., Stock, C., Vichi, M., Völker, C., & Yool, A. (2016). How well do global ocean biogeochemistry models simulate dissolved iron distributions? Global Biogeochemical Cycles. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015gb005289

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.