The biogeochemical cycling of dissolved zinc (dZn) was investigated in the Western Arctic along the U.S. GEOTRACES GN01 section. Vertical profiles of dZn in the Arctic are strikingly different than the classic “nutrient‐type” profile commonly seen in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, instead exhibiting higher surface concentrations (~1.1 nmol/kg), a shallow subsurface absolute maximum (~4–6 nmol/kg) at 200 m coincident with a macronutrient maximum, and low deep water concentrations (~1.3 nmol/kg) that are homogeneous (sp.) with depth. In contrast to other ocean basins, typical inputs such as rivers, atmospheric inputs, and especially deep remineralization are insignificant in the Arctic. Instead, we demonstrate that dZn distributions in the Arctic are controlled primarily by (1) shelf fluxes following the sediment remineralization of high Zn:C and Zn:Si cells and the seaward advection of those fluxes and (2) mixing of dZn from source waters such as the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans rather than vertical biological regeneration of dZn. This results in both the unique profile shapes and the largely decoupled relationship between dZn and Si found in the Arctic. We found a weak dZn:Si regression in the full water column (0.077 nmol/μmol,
- Award ID(s):
- 2034886
- PAR ID:
- 10415449
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- International Journal of Circumpolar Health
- Volume:
- 81
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 2242-3982
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
Abstract r 2 = 0.58) that is higher than the global slope (0.059 nmol/μmol,r 2 = 0.94) because of the shelf‐derived halocline dZn enrichments. We hypothesize that the decoupling of Zn:Si in Western Arctic deep waters results primarily from a past ventilation event with unique preformed Zn:Si stoichiometries. -
Abstract Marine Isotope Stage 11 from ~424 to 374 ka experienced peak interglacial warmth and highest global sea level ~410–400 ka. MIS 11 has received extensive study on the causes of its long duration and warmer than Holocene climate, which is anomalous in the last half million years. However, a major geographic gap in MIS 11 proxy records exists in the Arctic Ocean where fragmentary evidence exists for a seasonally sea ice‐free summers and high sea‐surface temperatures (SST; ~8–10 °C near the Mendeleev Ridge). We investigated MIS 11 in the western and central Arctic Ocean using 12 piston cores and several shorter cores using proxies for surface productivity (microfossil density), bottom water temperature (magnesium/calcium ratios), the proportion of Arctic Ocean Deep Water versus Arctic Intermediate Water (key ostracode species), sea ice (epipelagic sea ice dwelling ostracode abundance), and SST (planktic foraminifers). We produced a new benthic foraminiferal δ18O curve, which signifies changes in global ice volume, Arctic Ocean bottom temperature, and perhaps local oceanographic changes. Results indicate that peak warmth occurred in the Amerasian Basin during the middle of MIS 11 roughly from 410 to 400 ka. SST were as high as 8–10 °C for peak interglacial warmth, and sea ice was absent in summers. Evidence also exists for abrupt suborbital events punctuating the MIS 12‐MIS 11‐MIS 10 interval. These fluctuations in productivity, bottom water temperature, and deep and intermediate water masses (Arctic Ocean Deep Water and Arctic Intermediate Water) may represent Heinrich‐like events possibly involving extensive ice shelves extending off Laurentide and Fennoscandian Ice Sheets bordering the Arctic.
-
null (Ed.)Abstract At the Arctic Council’s Ministerial Meeting in Reykjavik on 20 May 2021, Russia assumed the chairmanship of the council for the second time since its establishment in 1996. Though some Russian analysts and practitioners were skeptical about the usefulness of such a mechanism during the 1980s and 1990s, Russia has become an active contributor to the progress of the Arctic Council (AC). Russia’s first term as chair during 2004–2006 led to the creation of the Arctic Contaminants Action Program as an Arctic Council Working Group. Since then, Russia has served as co-lead of the Task Forces developing the terms of the 2011 agreement on search and rescue, the 2013 agreement on marine oil spill preparedness and response, and the 2017 agreement on enhancing international scientific cooperation. Russia also has participated actively in the creation of related bodies including the Arctic Coast Guard Forum and the Arctic Economic Council whose chairmanships rotate together with the chairmanship of the AC. Now, far-reaching changes in the broader setting are posing growing challenges to the effectiveness of these institutional arrangements. The impacts of climate change in the high latitudes have increased dramatically; the pace of the extraction and shipment of Arctic natural resources has accelerated sharply; great-power politics have returned to the Arctic foregrounding concerns regarding military security. Together, these developments make it clear that a policy of business as usual will not suffice to ensure that the AC remains an important high-level forum for addressing Arctic issues in a global context. The programme Russia has developed for its 2021–2023 chairmanship of the council is ambitious; it proposes a sizeable suite of constructive activities. In this article, however, we go a step further to explore opportunities to adapt the Arctic governance system to the conditions prevailing in the 2020s. We focus on options relating to (i) the AC’s constitutive arrangements, (ii) links between the council and related governance mechanisms, (iii) the role of science diplomacy, and (iv) the treatment of issues involving military security. We conclude with a discussion of the prospect of organising a heads of state/government meeting during the Russian chairmanship as a means of setting the Arctic governance system on a constructive path for the 2020s.more » « less