Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 228

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Future Arctic Ocean primary productivity from CMIP5 simulations: Uncertain outcome, but consistent mechanisms

Open access
Vancoppenolle, Martin, Bopp, Laurent, Madec, Gurvan, Dunne, John, Ilyina, Tatiana, Halloran, Paul R., Steiner, Nadja·2013·Global Biogeochemical Cycles

Abstract

Net Arctic Ocean primary production (PP) is expected to increase over this century, due to less perennial sea ice and more available light, but could decrease depending on changes in nitrate (NO 3) supply. Here Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 simulations performed with 11 Earth System Models are analyzed in terms of PP, surface NO 3, and sea ice coverage over 1900–2100. Whereas the mean model simulates reasonably well Arctic‐integrated PP (511 TgC/yr, 1998–2005) and projects a mild 58 TgC/yr increase by 2080–2099 for the strongest climate change scenario, models do not agree on the sign of future PP change. However, similar mechanisms operate in all models. The perennial ice loss‐driven increase in PP is in most models NO 3‐limited. The Arctic surface NO 3 is decreasing over the 21st century (−2.3 ± 1 mmol/m 3), associated with shoaling mixed layer and with decreasing NO 3 in the nearby North Atlantic and Pacific waters. However, the intermodel spread in the degree of NO 3 limitation is initially high, resulting from >1000 year spin‐up simulations. This initial NO 3 spread, combined with the trend, causes a large variation in the timing of oligotrophy onset—which directly controls the sign of future PP change. Virtually all models agree in the open ocean zones on more spatially integrated PP and less PP per unit area. The source of model uncertainty is located in the sea ice zone, where a subtle balance between light and nutrient limitations determines the PP change. Hence, it is argued that reducing uncertainty on present Arctic NO 3 in the sea ice zone would render Arctic PP projections much more consistent.

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/gbc.20055

Cites

2 of 2 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

Cited by

See all 228

Metadata

Authors
Vancoppenolle, M., Bopp, L., Madec, G., Dunne, J., Ilyina, T., Halloran, P. R., & Steiner, N.
Venue
Global Biogeochemical Cycles
Published
2013-07
Volume
27
Issue
3
Pages
605-619
ISSN
  • 0886-6236 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-9224
OpenAlex
W1855007063
Cited by
228
References
2
FWCI
9.38
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

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.