the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Anthropogenic CO2, air-sea CO2 fluxes and acidification in the Southern Ocean: results from a time-series analysis at station OISO-KERFIX (51°S-68°E)
Abstract. The temporal variation of the carbonate system, air-sea CO2 fluxes and pH is analyzed in the Southern Indian Ocean, south of the Polar Front, based on in-situ data obtained from 1985 to 2021 at a fixed station (50°40’S–68°25’E) and results from a neural network model that reconstructs the fugacity of CO2 (fCO2) and fluxes at monthly scale. Anthropogenic CO2 (Cant) was estimated in the water column and detected down to the bottom (1600 m) in 1985 resulting in an aragonite saturation horizon at 600 m that migrated up to 400 m in 2021 due to the accumulation of Cant. In subsurface, the trend of Cant is estimated at +0.53 (±0.01) µmol.kg-1.yr-1 with a detectable increase in recent years. At the surface during austral winter the oceanic fCO2 increased at a rate close or slightly lower than in the atmosphere. To the contrary, in summer, we observed contrasting fCO2 and dissolved inorganic carbon (CT) trends depending on the decade and emphasizing the role of biological drivers on air-sea CO2 fluxes and pH inter-annual variability. The region moved from an annual source of 0.8 molC.m-2.yr-1 in 1985 to a sink of -0.5 molC.m-2.yr-1 in 2020. In 1985–2020, the annual pH trend in surface of -0.0165 (± 0.0040).decade-1 was mainly controlled by anthropogenic CO2 but the trend was modulated by natural processes. Using historical data from November 1962 we estimated the long-term trend for fCO2, CT and pH confirming that the progressive acidification was driven by atmospheric CO2 increase. In 59 years this leads to a diminution of 11 % for both aragonite and calcite saturation state. As atmospheric CO2 will desperately continue rising in the future, the pH and carbonate saturation state will decrease at a faster rate than observed in recent years. A projection of future CT concentrations for a high emission scenario (SSP5-8.5) indicates that the surface pH in 2100 would decrease to 7.32 in winter. This is up to -0.86 lower than pre-industrial pH and -0.71 lower than pH observed in 2020. The aragonite under-saturation in surface waters would be reached as soon as 2050 (scenario SSP5-8.5) and 20 years later for a stabilization scenario (SSP2-4.5) with potential impacts on phytoplankton species and higher trophic levels in the rich ecosystems of the Kerguelen Island area.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(2598 KB)
-
Supplement
(2366 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(2598 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(2366 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on Metzl et al.', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Dec 2023
Nicolas Metzl et al. present 36 years of measurements of carbonate system properties in the Indian Southern Ocean, an area important for oceanic CO2 uptake. They investigate multi-decadal trends and their causes. Among other results, they find the accumulation of anthropogenic CO2 to be the dominant control on carbon and acidification trends in their study area, modulated by natural decadal variability. Metzl et al. use the observed trends to extrapolate into the future, including estimates of the time of crossing undersaturation thresholds important for marine life. The findings are presented clearly and convincingly. I certainly recommend to publish this work. I would like to add that the sustained efforts to maintain high-quality oceanic measurements over such a long time frame already represent a great value for the research community in itself, far beyond what can be discussed in a single paper.
Minor comments meant to further improve clarity:
Title: consider mentioning "Kerguelen" as a more easily recognizable geographic term
Line 59: Rödenbeck et al (2022) note that interannual variability before the 1990s may be underestimated because there are hardly any pCO2 data to add variations not captured by the extrapolation based on relationships to predictor variables
Lines 252-253: Why would the lower salinity speak against being representative?
Line 258: Just to clarify: Will the data not be present in any upcoming GLODAPv2.20xx release?
Line 433: The seasonal cycle is actually difficult to see from Fig 2a
Line 435: Somewhat unclear: do you mean the annual CO2 flux 1985-1998, or the winter one?
Line 494: It sounds as if this rate has been calculated from just the difference of 2 values. If so, why not from a linear fit?
Fig 5: I was wondering whether the break point between the 2 trends (orange) wasn't mainly induced by the large values in 1998 and 2000? Visually, the dip in 2008-2010 actually seems to be in the range of the general variability since 2002. Is is really justified to suggest a break in trends?
Lines 682-683: The change is termed "very small", but isn’t it actually outside the given uncertainty range?
Line 694: can you briefly indicate why lower O2 explains lower Cant?
Line 716: Maybe replace "filtered" by “excluded” or "discarded"
Line 764: missing "uatm"
Line 765: If I understand correctly, a correlation between Chl-a and fCO2 is built into FFNN. Is such a correlation also seen directly in the data? I'm asking because if not, how do you know it is a real feature and not an extrapolation artifact?
Lines 965-981: It took me quite a while to understand how to read Fig 12, though in the end everything makes good sense. Maybe there is a way to further help readers? I cannot offer a good suggestion either, unfortunately.
Line 1066: Consider writing "CT(1962)+Cant(t)" in both caption and figure legends, because otherwise the sum "CT+Cant" is quite confusing
Line 1096-1097: Couldn’t this hypothesis be checked by the FFNN, by calculating the FFNN response to a counterfactually constant SST predictor?
Line 1110: "undersaturation"?
Line 1312: "BGC-Argo"
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2537-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Nicolas METZL, 27 Feb 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-2537/egusphere-2023-2537-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Nicolas METZL, 27 Feb 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2537', Anonymous Referee #2, 25 Jan 2024
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Nicolas METZL, 27 Feb 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-2537/egusphere-2023-2537-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Nicolas METZL, 27 Feb 2024
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on Metzl et al.', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Dec 2023
Nicolas Metzl et al. present 36 years of measurements of carbonate system properties in the Indian Southern Ocean, an area important for oceanic CO2 uptake. They investigate multi-decadal trends and their causes. Among other results, they find the accumulation of anthropogenic CO2 to be the dominant control on carbon and acidification trends in their study area, modulated by natural decadal variability. Metzl et al. use the observed trends to extrapolate into the future, including estimates of the time of crossing undersaturation thresholds important for marine life. The findings are presented clearly and convincingly. I certainly recommend to publish this work. I would like to add that the sustained efforts to maintain high-quality oceanic measurements over such a long time frame already represent a great value for the research community in itself, far beyond what can be discussed in a single paper.
Minor comments meant to further improve clarity:
Title: consider mentioning "Kerguelen" as a more easily recognizable geographic term
Line 59: Rödenbeck et al (2022) note that interannual variability before the 1990s may be underestimated because there are hardly any pCO2 data to add variations not captured by the extrapolation based on relationships to predictor variables
Lines 252-253: Why would the lower salinity speak against being representative?
Line 258: Just to clarify: Will the data not be present in any upcoming GLODAPv2.20xx release?
Line 433: The seasonal cycle is actually difficult to see from Fig 2a
Line 435: Somewhat unclear: do you mean the annual CO2 flux 1985-1998, or the winter one?
Line 494: It sounds as if this rate has been calculated from just the difference of 2 values. If so, why not from a linear fit?
Fig 5: I was wondering whether the break point between the 2 trends (orange) wasn't mainly induced by the large values in 1998 and 2000? Visually, the dip in 2008-2010 actually seems to be in the range of the general variability since 2002. Is is really justified to suggest a break in trends?
Lines 682-683: The change is termed "very small", but isn’t it actually outside the given uncertainty range?
Line 694: can you briefly indicate why lower O2 explains lower Cant?
Line 716: Maybe replace "filtered" by “excluded” or "discarded"
Line 764: missing "uatm"
Line 765: If I understand correctly, a correlation between Chl-a and fCO2 is built into FFNN. Is such a correlation also seen directly in the data? I'm asking because if not, how do you know it is a real feature and not an extrapolation artifact?
Lines 965-981: It took me quite a while to understand how to read Fig 12, though in the end everything makes good sense. Maybe there is a way to further help readers? I cannot offer a good suggestion either, unfortunately.
Line 1066: Consider writing "CT(1962)+Cant(t)" in both caption and figure legends, because otherwise the sum "CT+Cant" is quite confusing
Line 1096-1097: Couldn’t this hypothesis be checked by the FFNN, by calculating the FFNN response to a counterfactually constant SST predictor?
Line 1110: "undersaturation"?
Line 1312: "BGC-Argo"
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2537-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Nicolas METZL, 27 Feb 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-2537/egusphere-2023-2537-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Nicolas METZL, 27 Feb 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2537', Anonymous Referee #2, 25 Jan 2024
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Nicolas METZL, 27 Feb 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-2537/egusphere-2023-2537-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Nicolas METZL, 27 Feb 2024
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
289 | 101 | 27 | 417 | 38 | 20 | 19 |
- HTML: 289
- PDF: 101
- XML: 27
- Total: 417
- Supplement: 38
- BibTeX: 20
- EndNote: 19
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Nicolas Metzl
Claire Lo Monaco
Coraline Leseurre
Céline Ridame
Gilles Reverdin
Thi Tuyet Trang Chau
Frédéric Chevallier
Marion Gehlen
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(2598 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(2366 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper