Marine Aerosol and Gas Exchange and Global Atmospheric Effects

  • Barry J. Huebert
  • Timothy S. Bates
  • Neil W. Tindale
Part of the Environmental Science Research book series (ESRH, volume 48)

Abstract

It is becoming clear that the global climate system is controlled by numerous links between the biosphere and the atmosphere. The objective of IGAC’s Marine Aerosol and Gas Exchange: Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate (MAGE) Activity is to quantify those links through interdisciplinary multinational research on air/sea exchange and its biological controls and impacts. We seek to bring together scientists from a variety of disciplines to study the interfaces between them. Wherever possible, we encourage collaborative work between marine scientists who look up at the interface from the water column and atmospheric chemists, whose work in the atmosphere has frequently treated the ocean’s surface as a featureless source or sink.

Several problems require this interdisciplinary approach. Marine biological productivity in some areas is controlled by the supply of nutrients from the atmosphere. In certain nitrogen-rich regions, for instance, the supply of iron from atmospheric aerosols may limit productivity. In other areas, the wet and dry deposition of atmospheric nitrate and ammonium may be a significant source of fixed nitrogen to biological communities. MAGE helped to organize an international group of scientists who studied the effect of atmospheric iron on biological productivity, phytoplankton speciation, and DMS production as a part of the Equatorial Pacific JGOFS (Joint Global Ocean Flux Study) experiment in the spring of 1992. A second MAGE/JGOFS cruise studied the fluxes of biogenic gases through the air/sea interface in the same region.

To quantitate the impact of marine biota on atmospheric aerosols, cloud properties, and climate, one must precisely measure (and then parameterize for use in models) the emission of trace gases from the ocean’s surface. MAGE is seeking to develop new strategies for measuring some of these elusive fluxes. During the Atlantic Stratocumulus Transition Experiment (ASTEX) in June of 1992, MAGE organized scientists from five countries to study air/sea fluxes, their biological forcing, and their atmospheric effects. Three aircraft, two ships, two islands, and a dozen constant-density balloons were used to test a Lagrangian strategy for studying two airmasses. By repeatedly sampling the same air, we hoped to reduce the perennial problem of deconvoluting transport and chemistry so that we can clearly understand processes and fluxes. In this way we will improve our understanding of the marine nitrogen budget (including both ammonia emissions and nitrate deposition), as well as the climatically-important sulfur cycle and DMS emissions.

Keywords

Biomass Peroxide Chlorophyll DMSO Cobalt 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Albrecht, B.A., 1989, Aerosols, cloud microphysics, and fractional cloudiness, Science, 245:1227–1230.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andreae, M.O., 1986, The ocean as a source of atmospheric sulfur compounds, in: “The Role of Air-Sea Exchange in Geochemical Cycling,” P. Buat-Menard (ed.), D. Reidel, Hingham, MA, U.S., pgs. 331–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bates, T.S. and J.D. Cline, 1985, The role of the ocean in a regional sulfur cycle, J. Geophys. Res., 90:9168–9172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bates, T.S., R.P. Kiene, G.V. Wolfe, P.A. Matrai, F.P. Chavez, K.R. Buck, B.W. Blomquistand R.L. Cuhel, 1993, The cycling of sulfur in surface seawater of the northeast Pacific, J. Geophys. Res., in press.Google Scholar
  5. Charlson, R.J., J.E. Lovelock, M.O. Andreae and S.G. Warren, 1987, Oceanic phytoplankton, atmospheric sulfur, cloud albedo, and climate, Nature, 326:655–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Duce, R.A., 1986, The impact of atmospheric nitrogen, phosphorus, and iron species on marine biological productivity, in: “The Role of Air-Sea Exchange in Geochemical Cycling,” P. Buat-Menard (ed.), pgs. 497–529, D. Reidel, Hingham, MA, U.S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Greene, R.M., Z.S. Kolber, D.S. Swift, N.W. Tindale and P.G. Falkowski, 1993, Physiological limitation of phytoplankton photosynthesis in the eastern equatorial Pacific determined from natural variability in the quantum yield of fluorescence, Limnol. Oceanogr., in press.Google Scholar
  8. Hanson, A.K., N.W. Tindale, M.A.R. Abdel-Moati, J.E. Prentice, D.W. O’Sullivan, 1993, Influence of a rain event on iron, peroxide, and phytoplankton in the surface waters of the equatorial Pacific ocean, in preparation.Google Scholar
  9. Huebert, B.J., T.S. Bates, A. Bandy, S. Larsen and R.A. Duce, 1990, IGAC/MAGE: International Planning for Air/Sea Exchange Research, EOS, 71(35).Google Scholar
  10. Huebert, B.J., S.G. Howell, P. Laj, J.E. Johnson, T.S. Bates, P.K. Quinn, S.A. Yvon, E.S. Saltzman, V. Yegorov, A.D. Clarke and J.N. Porter, 1993, Observations of the atmospheric sulfur cycle on SAGA-3, J. Geophys. Res., 98:16,985–16,996.Google Scholar
  11. Johnson, K.S., K.H. Coale, V.A. Elrod and N.W. Tindale, 1993, Iron photochemistry and bioavailability in equatorial Pacific waters, Marine Chem., in press.Google Scholar
  12. Kawa, S.R. and R. Pearson, Jr., 1989, Ozone budgets from the dynamics and chemistry of marine stratocumulus experiment, J. Geophys. Res., 94:9809–9817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Langner, J., T.S. Bates, R.J. Charlson, A.D. Clarke, P.A. Durkee, J. Gras, J. Heintzenberg, DJ. Hoffman, B. Huebert, C. Leck, J. Lelieveld, J.A. Ogren, J. Prospero, P.K. Quinn, H. Rodhe and A.G. Ryaboshapko, 1993, “The global atmospheric sulfur cycle: An evaluation of model predictions and observations,” Report No. CM-81, ISSN 0280-445X, Dept. of Meteorology, Stockholm Univ.Google Scholar
  14. Liss, P.S., J.N. Galloway, 1993, Air-Sea exchange of sulphur and nitrogen and their interaction in the marine atmosphere, in: “Interactions of C, N, P and S Biogeochemical Cycles and Global Change,” R. Wollast, F. T. Mackenzie and L. Chou (eds.), Springer-Verlag, pgs. 259-281.Google Scholar
  15. Lenschow, D.H., R.J. Pearson and B.B. Stankov, 1981, Estimating the ozone budget in the boundary layer by use of aircraft measurements of ozone eddy flux and mean concentration, J. Geophys. Res., 86:7291–7297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Martin, J.H., R.M. Gordon, and S.E. Fitzwater, 1991, The case for iron, Limnol. Oceanogr., 36:1793–1802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Yin, F., D. Grosjean and J.H. Seinfeld, 1990, Photooxidation of DMS and DMDS. I: Mechanism development, J. Atmos. Chem., 11:309–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Young, R.W., K.L. Carder, P.R. Betzer, D.K. Costello, R.A. Duce, G.R. Ditullio, N.W. Tindale, E.A. Laws, M. Uematsu, J.T. Merrill and R.A. Feely, 1991, Atmospheric iron inputs, primary productivity, and phytoplankton responses in the north Pacific, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 5:119–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barry J. Huebert
    • 1
  • Timothy S. Bates
    • 2
  • Neil W. Tindale
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of OceanographyUniversity of HawaiiHonoluluUSA
  2. 2.NOAA/PMELSeattleUSA
  3. 3.Departments of Meteorology and OceanographyTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA

Personalised recommendations