Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-175
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-175
27 Feb 2024
 | 27 Feb 2024
Status: this preprint is open for discussion.

Dimethyl sulfide (DMS) climatologies, fluxes, and trends – Part B: Sea-air fluxes

Sankirna D. Joge, Anoop Sharad Mahajan, Shrivardhan Hulswar, Christa Marandino, Marti Gali, Thomas Bell, Mingxi Yang, and Rafel Simo

Abstract. Dimethyl sulfide (DMS) significantly contributes to cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) formation in the marine environment. DMS is ventilated from the ocean to the atmosphere, and in most models, this flux is calculated using seawater DMS concentrations and a sea-air flux parameterization. Here, climatological seawater DMS concentrations from interpolation and parameterization techniques are passed through seven flux parametrizations to estimate the DMS flux. The seasonal means of calculated fluxes are compared to identify differences in absolute values and spatial distribution, which show large differences depending on the flux parameterization used. In situ flux observations were used to validate the estimated fluxes from all seven parameterizations. Even though we see a correlation between the estimated and observed values, all methods underestimate the fluxes in the higher range (>20 µmol m-2 d-1) and overestimate the fluxes in the lower range (< 20 µmol m-2 d-1). The estimated uncertainty in DMS fluxes is driven by the uncertainty in seawater DMS concentrations in some regions but by the choice of flux parameterization in others. We show that the resultant flux is hence highly sensitive to both and suggest that there needs to be an improvement in the estimation methods of global seawater DMS concentration and sea-air fluxes for accurately modeling the effect of DMS on the atmosphere.

Sankirna D. Joge, Anoop Sharad Mahajan, Shrivardhan Hulswar, Christa Marandino, Marti Gali, Thomas Bell, Mingxi Yang, and Rafel Simo

Status: open (until 03 May 2024)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-175', Nadja Steiner, 04 Apr 2024 reply
  • RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-175', Anonymous Referee #2, 12 Apr 2024 reply
Sankirna D. Joge, Anoop Sharad Mahajan, Shrivardhan Hulswar, Christa Marandino, Marti Gali, Thomas Bell, Mingxi Yang, and Rafel Simo
Sankirna D. Joge, Anoop Sharad Mahajan, Shrivardhan Hulswar, Christa Marandino, Marti Gali, Thomas Bell, Mingxi Yang, and Rafel Simo

Viewed

Total article views: 227 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
184 35 8 227 12 4 6
  • HTML: 184
  • PDF: 35
  • XML: 8
  • Total: 227
  • Supplement: 12
  • BibTeX: 4
  • EndNote: 6
Views and downloads (calculated since 27 Feb 2024)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 27 Feb 2024)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 222 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 222 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 13 Apr 2024
Download
Short summary
Dimethyl sulfide (DMS) is the largest natural source of sulfur into the atmosphere and leads to the formation of CCN. DMS emissions, and hence the quantification of its impacts, have large uncertainties, but a detailed study on the range of emissions and drivers of their uncertainty is missing to date. The emissions are usually calculated from the seawater DMS concentrations and a flux parameterization. Here we quantify the differences in the effect of flux parameterisations used in models.