Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 382

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Global ocean carbon uptake: magnitude, variability and trends

Open access
Wanninkhof, R., Park, G. -H., Takahashi, T., Sweeney, C., Feely, R., Nojiri, Y., Gruber, N., Doney, S. C., McKinley, G. A., Lenton, A., Le Quéré, C., Heinze, C., Schwinger, J., Graven, H., Khatiwala, S.·2013·Biogeosciences

Abstract

Abstract. The globally integrated sea–air anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) flux from 1990 to 2009 is determined from models and data-based approaches as part of the Regional Carbon Cycle Assessment and Processes (RECCAP) project. Numerical methods include ocean inverse models, atmospheric inverse models, and ocean general circulation models with parameterized biogeochemistry (OBGCMs). The median value of different approaches shows good agreement in average uptake. The best estimate of anthropogenic CO2 uptake for the time period based on a compilation of approaches is −2.0 Pg C yr−1. The interannual variability in the sea–air flux is largely driven by large-scale climate re-organizations and is estimated at 0.2 Pg C yr−1 for the two decades with some systematic differences between approaches. The largest differences between approaches are seen in the decadal trends. The trends range from −0.13 (Pg C yr−1) decade−1 to −0.50 (Pg C yr−1) decade−1 for the two decades under investigation. The OBGCMs and the data-based sea–air CO2 flux estimates show appreciably smaller decadal trends than estimates based on changes in carbon inventory suggesting that methods capable of resolving shorter timescales are showing a slowing of the rate of ocean CO2 uptake. RECCAP model outputs for five decades show similar differences in trends between approaches.

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 · 10.5194/bg-10-1983-2013

Cites

71 of 71 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 71 references

Cited by

See all 382

Metadata

Authors
Wanninkhof, R., Park, G. H., Takahashi, T., Sweeney, C., Feely, R., Nojiri, Y., Gruber, N., Doney, S. C., McKinley, G. A., Lenton, A., Le Quéré, C., Heinze, C., Schwinger, J., Graven, H., & Khatiwala, S.
Venue
Biogeosciences
Published
2013-03-22
Volume
10
Issue
3
Pages
1983-2000
ISSN
  • 1726-4170 (ISSN-L)
  • 1726-4189
OpenAlex
W2166828134
Cited by
382
References
71
FWCI
25.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Global ocean carbon uptake: magnitude, variability and trends. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/bg-10-1983-2013
The paper
Wanninkhof, R., Park, G. H., Takahashi, T., Sweeney, C., Feely, R., Nojiri, Y., Gruber, N., Doney, S. C., McKinley, G. A., Lenton, A., Le Quéré, C., Heinze, C., Schwinger, J., Graven, H., & Khatiwala, S. (2013). Global ocean carbon uptake: magnitude, variability and trends. Biogeosciences. https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-1983-2013

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.