Impact of surface and subsurface-intensified eddies on sea surface temperature and chlorophyll a in the northern Indian Ocean utilizing deep learning
-
Published:2023-11-16
Issue:6
Volume:19
Page:1579-1593
-
ISSN:1812-0792
-
Container-title:Ocean Science
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Ocean Sci.
Author:
Liu YingjieORCID, Li Xiaofeng
Abstract
Abstract. Mesoscale eddies, including surface-intensified eddies (SEs) and subsurface-intensified eddies (SSEs), significantly influence phytoplankton distribution in the ocean. Nevertheless, due to the sparse in situ data, understanding of the characteristics of SSEs and their influence on chlorophyll a (Chl a) concentration is still unclear. Consequently, the study utilized a deep learning model to extract SEs and SSEs in the northern Indian Ocean (NIO) from 2000 to 2015, using satellite-derived sea surface height (SSH) and sea surface temperature (SST) data. The analysis revealed that SSEs accounted for 39 % of the total eddies in the NIO, and their SST signatures exhibited opposite behaviour compared to SEs. Furthermore, by integrating ocean colour remote-sensing data, the study investigated the contrasting impacts of SEs and SSEs on Chl a concentration in two basins of the NIO, the Arabian Sea (AS) and the Bay of Bengal (BoB), known for their disparate biological productivity. In the AS, SEs induced Chl a anomalies that were 2 to 3 times higher than those caused by SSEs. Notably, there were no significant differences in Chl a anomalies induced by the same type of eddies between summer and winter. In contrast, the BoB exhibited distinct seasonal variations, where SEs induced slightly higher Chl a anomalies than SSEs during the summer, while substantial differences were observed during the winter. Specifically, subsurface-intensified anticyclonic eddies (SSAEs) led to positive Chl a anomalies, contrasting the negative anomalies induced by surface-intensified anticyclonic eddies (SAEs) with comparable magnitudes. Moreover, while both subsurface-intensified cyclonic eddies (SSCEs) and surface-intensified cyclonic eddies (SCEs) resulted in positive Chl a anomalies during winter in the BoB, the magnitude of SSCEs was only one-third of that induced by SCEs. Besides, subsurface Chl a induced by SSAEs (SSCEs) is ∼0.1 mg m−3 greater (less) than that caused by SAEs (SCEs) in the upper 30 (50) m using Biogeochemical Argo profiles. The distinct Chl a between SEs and SSEs can be attributed to their contrasting subsurface structures revealed by Argo profiles. Compared to SAEs (SCEs), SSAEs (SSCEs) enhance (decrease) production via the convex (concave) of the isopycnals that occur around the mixed layer. The study provides a valuable approach to investigating subsurface eddies and contributes to a comprehensive understanding of their influence on chlorophyll concentration.
Funder
Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology National Natural Science Foundation of China
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
Cell Biology,Developmental Biology,Embryology,Anatomy
Reference74 articles.
1. Assassi, C., Morel, Y., Vandermeirsch, F., Chaigneau, A., Pegliasco, C., Morrow, R., Colas, F., Fleury, S., Carton, X., and Klein, P.: An index to distinguish surface- and subsurface-intensified vortices from surface observations, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 46, 2529–2552, https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-15-0122.1, 2016. 2. Babu, M. T., Kumar, S. P., and Rao, D. P.: A subsurface cyclonic eddy in the Bay of Bengal, J. Mar. Res., 49, 403–410, 1991. 3. Badin, G., Tandon, A., and Mahadevan, A.: Lateral mixing in the pycnocline by baroclinic mixed layer eddies, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 41, 2080–2101, https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-11-05.1, 2011. 4. Banse, K. and English, D.: Geographical differences in seasonality of CZCS-derived phytoplankton pigment in the Arabian Sea for 1978–1986, Deep-Sea Res. Pt. II, 47, 1623–1677, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-0645(99)00157-5, 2000. 5. Bartier, P. M. and Keller, C. P.: Multivariate interpolation to incorporate thematic surface data using inverse distance weighting (IDW), Comput. Geosci., 22, 795–799, https://doi.org/10.1016/0098-3004(96)00021-0, 1996.
|
|