Cargando…
Comparing benthic biogeochemistry at a sandy and a muddy site in the Celtic Sea using a model and observations
Results from a 1D setup of the European Regional Seas Ecosystem Model (ERSEM) biogeochemical model were compared with new observations collected under the UK Shelf Seas Biogeochemistry (SSB) programme to assess model performance and clarify elements of shelf-sea benthic biogeochemistry and carbon cy...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6961523/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32009696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10533-017-0367-0 |
_version_ | 1783488012484608000 |
---|---|
author | Aldridge, J. N. Lessin, G. Amoudry, L. O. Hicks, N. Hull, T. Klar, J. K. Kitidis, V. McNeill, C. L. Ingels, J. Parker, E. R. Silburn, B. Silva, T. Sivyer, D. B. Smith, H. E. K. Widdicombe, S. Woodward, E. M. S. van der Molen, J. Garcia, L. Kröger, S. |
author_facet | Aldridge, J. N. Lessin, G. Amoudry, L. O. Hicks, N. Hull, T. Klar, J. K. Kitidis, V. McNeill, C. L. Ingels, J. Parker, E. R. Silburn, B. Silva, T. Sivyer, D. B. Smith, H. E. K. Widdicombe, S. Woodward, E. M. S. van der Molen, J. Garcia, L. Kröger, S. |
author_sort | Aldridge, J. N. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Results from a 1D setup of the European Regional Seas Ecosystem Model (ERSEM) biogeochemical model were compared with new observations collected under the UK Shelf Seas Biogeochemistry (SSB) programme to assess model performance and clarify elements of shelf-sea benthic biogeochemistry and carbon cycling. Observations from two contrasting sites (muddy and sandy) in the Celtic Sea in otherwise comparable hydrographic conditions were considered, with the focus on the benthic system. A standard model parameterisation with site-specific light and nutrient adjustments was used, along with modifications to the within-seabed diffusivity to accommodate the modelling of permeable (sandy) sediments. Differences between modelled and observed quantities of organic carbon in the bed were interpreted to suggest that a large part (>90%) of the observed benthic organic carbon is biologically relatively inactive. Evidence on the rate at which this inactive fraction is produced will constitute important information to quantify offshore carbon sequestration. Total oxygen uptake and oxic layer depths were within the range of the measured values. Modelled depth average pore water concentrations of ammonium, phosphate and silicate were typically 5–20% of observed values at the muddy site due to an underestimate of concentrations associated with the deeper sediment layers. Model agreement for these nutrients was better at the sandy site, which had lower pore water concentrations, especially deeper in the sediment. Comparison of pore water nitrate with observations had added uncertainty, as the results from process studies at the sites indicated the dominance of the anammox pathway for nitrogen removal; a pathway that is not included in the model. Macrofaunal biomasses were overestimated, although a model run with increased macrofaunal background mortality rates decreased macrofaunal biomass and improved agreement with observations. The decrease in macrofaunal biomass was compensated by an increase in meiofaunal biomass such that total oxygen demand remained within the observed range. The permeable sediment modification reproduced some of the observed behaviour of oxygen penetration depth at the sandy site. It is suggested that future development in ERSEM benthic modelling should focus on: (1) mixing and degradation rates of benthic organic matter, (2) validation of benthic faunal biomass against large scale spatial datasets, (3) incorporation of anammox in the benthic nitrogen cycle, and (4) further developments to represent permeable sediment processes. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10533-017-0367-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6961523 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69615232020-01-29 Comparing benthic biogeochemistry at a sandy and a muddy site in the Celtic Sea using a model and observations Aldridge, J. N. Lessin, G. Amoudry, L. O. Hicks, N. Hull, T. Klar, J. K. Kitidis, V. McNeill, C. L. Ingels, J. Parker, E. R. Silburn, B. Silva, T. Sivyer, D. B. Smith, H. E. K. Widdicombe, S. Woodward, E. M. S. van der Molen, J. Garcia, L. Kröger, S. Biogeochemistry Article Results from a 1D setup of the European Regional Seas Ecosystem Model (ERSEM) biogeochemical model were compared with new observations collected under the UK Shelf Seas Biogeochemistry (SSB) programme to assess model performance and clarify elements of shelf-sea benthic biogeochemistry and carbon cycling. Observations from two contrasting sites (muddy and sandy) in the Celtic Sea in otherwise comparable hydrographic conditions were considered, with the focus on the benthic system. A standard model parameterisation with site-specific light and nutrient adjustments was used, along with modifications to the within-seabed diffusivity to accommodate the modelling of permeable (sandy) sediments. Differences between modelled and observed quantities of organic carbon in the bed were interpreted to suggest that a large part (>90%) of the observed benthic organic carbon is biologically relatively inactive. Evidence on the rate at which this inactive fraction is produced will constitute important information to quantify offshore carbon sequestration. Total oxygen uptake and oxic layer depths were within the range of the measured values. Modelled depth average pore water concentrations of ammonium, phosphate and silicate were typically 5–20% of observed values at the muddy site due to an underestimate of concentrations associated with the deeper sediment layers. Model agreement for these nutrients was better at the sandy site, which had lower pore water concentrations, especially deeper in the sediment. Comparison of pore water nitrate with observations had added uncertainty, as the results from process studies at the sites indicated the dominance of the anammox pathway for nitrogen removal; a pathway that is not included in the model. Macrofaunal biomasses were overestimated, although a model run with increased macrofaunal background mortality rates decreased macrofaunal biomass and improved agreement with observations. The decrease in macrofaunal biomass was compensated by an increase in meiofaunal biomass such that total oxygen demand remained within the observed range. The permeable sediment modification reproduced some of the observed behaviour of oxygen penetration depth at the sandy site. It is suggested that future development in ERSEM benthic modelling should focus on: (1) mixing and degradation rates of benthic organic matter, (2) validation of benthic faunal biomass against large scale spatial datasets, (3) incorporation of anammox in the benthic nitrogen cycle, and (4) further developments to represent permeable sediment processes. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10533-017-0367-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2017-09-07 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC6961523/ /pubmed/32009696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10533-017-0367-0 Text en © Springer International Publishing AG 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Article Aldridge, J. N. Lessin, G. Amoudry, L. O. Hicks, N. Hull, T. Klar, J. K. Kitidis, V. McNeill, C. L. Ingels, J. Parker, E. R. Silburn, B. Silva, T. Sivyer, D. B. Smith, H. E. K. Widdicombe, S. Woodward, E. M. S. van der Molen, J. Garcia, L. Kröger, S. Comparing benthic biogeochemistry at a sandy and a muddy site in the Celtic Sea using a model and observations |
title | Comparing benthic biogeochemistry at a sandy and a muddy site in the Celtic Sea using a model and observations |
title_full | Comparing benthic biogeochemistry at a sandy and a muddy site in the Celtic Sea using a model and observations |
title_fullStr | Comparing benthic biogeochemistry at a sandy and a muddy site in the Celtic Sea using a model and observations |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparing benthic biogeochemistry at a sandy and a muddy site in the Celtic Sea using a model and observations |
title_short | Comparing benthic biogeochemistry at a sandy and a muddy site in the Celtic Sea using a model and observations |
title_sort | comparing benthic biogeochemistry at a sandy and a muddy site in the celtic sea using a model and observations |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6961523/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32009696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10533-017-0367-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT aldridgejn comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT lessing comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT amoudrylo comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT hicksn comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT hullt comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT klarjk comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT kitidisv comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT mcneillcl comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT ingelsj comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT parkerer comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT silburnb comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT silvat comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT sivyerdb comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT smithhek comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT widdicombes comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT woodwardems comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT vandermolenj comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT garcial comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations AT krogers comparingbenthicbiogeochemistryatasandyandamuddysiteinthecelticseausingamodelandobservations |