Ecosystem functioning in the German Bight under continental nutrient inputs by rivers

The functioning of the German Bight ecosystem is determined largely by nutrient fluxes in and out of the system, namely by the advection of nutrients from the central and southern North Sea, including the influence of the Rhine River; by nutrient inputs through direct continental river runoff into the German Bight (Elbe, Weser, and Ems rivers); and by atmospheric nutrient inputs originating from land. The nutrient situation in the German Bight and the entire North Sea is assessed by estimating these fluxes from available nutrient data. The advective inflowes are based also on simulated water transports. The circulation system in the North Sea is divided into a northern and a southern cell, with only little net water exchange. The nutrient inflow into the southern North Sea from the north is also small, with no effect on the continental coastal areas. For the entire North Sea, the total input of phosphorus increased by 7.7% an nitrogen by about 11.4% from 1950 to 1980. The percentage of Atlantic input of phosphorus into the entire North Sea decreased from 91% to 85%, while river input increased from 2% to 13%. In the continental coastal strip the total inputs increased by 80%. The share of river input increased to 52%, both for phosphorus (1950: 14%) and nitrogen (1950: 20%). Of the winter nutrient content of the upper 30 m of the entire North Sea 33.5% of phosphate and 16.1% of nitrate are taken up by algae until summer. About 50% of total new production is generated in the coastal areas, with 32.8% of the volume and 34.4% of the area of the North Sea. The ratio of new to regenerated production ranges from 2.8 to 12, depending on the method of derivation. In the German Bight, phosphate and nitrate concentrations increased during the last four decades. At Helgoland the five-year-medians of phosphate and nitrate increased by a factor of 1.7 and 2.5, respectively. As the nutrient inputs by river discharges are only slightly larger than advective contributions, the nutrient concentrations rose comparatively slowly. Diatoms stagnated, while flagellates increased 10-fold. Common winter values in the early 1980s resemble those during summer blooms in the early 1960’s. The German Bight ecosystem has changed drastically on all time scales under the anthropogenic nutrient inputs during the last 40 years; the plankton system is no longer in an annual quasiperiodic state.     

On the effects of vertical eddy viscosity on rossby and eady waves in the ocean

The effects of vertical eddy viscosity on simple mesoscale waves in the ocean are studied. The decay of Rossby waves is investigated by one-dimensional depth-dependent linear stability problems which are derived for the interior non-viscous or viscous quasigeostrophic flow using parameterizations of the top and bottom boundary layers corresponding to Ekman suction, no-stress and bottom-stress boundary conditions.The non-slip condition at the bottom yielding an O(E_v^1/2)-Ekman layer causes very short damping times for the 0th Rossby mode. This suggests that this boundary condition is not suitable for mesoscale wave studies, because a Rossby wave fit for the MODE eddy can be done satisfactorily without any damping. Reasonable results for damping times of Rossby waves are obtained by prescribing the bottom stress, resulting from the constant-stress layer at the bottom, and the free-slip condition at the surface. The growth rates of Eady waves are reexamined using this bottom-stress condition.Vertical viscosity in the interior of the ocean, e.g. internal wave induced viscosity, may have a significant influence on the dynamics of the mesoscale motions, comparable to that of the boundary layers in some cases. The results are compatible with the sparse observations available.     

Advective contributions to the heat balance of the german bight (LV Elbe 1) and the central north sea (OWS Famita)

Summary The mean annual cycle of the net energy flux through the sea surface and of the heat storage are investigated in detail using observations of the Light Vessel LV Elbe 1 for the period 1962-1986 in the German Bight and at Ocean Weather Ship OWS Famita for the period 1965-1978 in the central North Sea. The investigation confirms the general geographical picture of the heat budget of the German Bight that shows a net loss to the atmosphere by a long-term mean of -15 W m^-2. The radiative surface input of 113 W m^-2 is balanced by -62 W m^-2 net back radiation, -51 W m^-2 of latent heat flux and -15 W m^-2 of sensible heat flux. The heat advection calculated as the residual of the heat storage rate and surface energy balance is 16 W m^-2. The mean annual cycles of heat storage and surface energy balance are nearly equal, and the temperature variations are mainly driven by local heat input. The small differences build up the annual advection cycle. Warm water advection occurs from October to April and cold water advection in summer from May to September. The seasonal advection variability is extreme in winter and summer, and the ranges slow down in spring and autumn, when the sign of the heat balance changes. The OWS Famita is situated also in an area of net energy loss to the atmosphere, showing a long-term annual mean loss of -16 W m^-2. The surface radiation input of 105 W m^-2 is mainly balanced by outgoing long wave back radiation of -60 W m^-2 and a latent heat flux of -49 W m^-2. A minor contribution to the heat balance is the sensible heat flux of -12 W m^-2. Warm water advection occurs in winter and spring. Variability is greater than at LV Elbe 1. Calculated monthly fluxes show the dominance of the energy gain of incoming solar radiation. Net long-wave radiation is nearly constant with time. The sensible heat flux serves as a heat source only at LV Elbe 1 from May to June. The latent heat flux is a loss term all the year. The heat storage cycle is nearly equal to the surface energy balance at LV Elbe 1 ; the differences are more irregular at OWS Famita. The temperature variations are mainly driven by local heat input. The simplified one-dimensional balance holds generally for the heating period in both regions, although for some months the magnitude of the advection is up to a third of the net surface fluxes or the storage rate. At LV Elbe 1 from April to December, the heat budget is dominated by local dynamics. At OWS Famita the advective contribution is less than 30% of net surface heat input from May to October. The dominance of solar radiation in determining the surface heat fluxes, and the annual cycles of the storage rate in phase justify the use of one-dimensional models as a first approximation of the temperature dynamics in these regions. Comparisons of simulations of the temperature cycle at both sites with observations give sufficient precision during most parts of the seasonal cycle. Suitable data sets to drive and validate these models are now available and different models should be tested.

---

Advektive beitr?ge zur w?rmebilanz der deutschen bucht (feuerschiff elbe 1) und zur w?rmebilanz der zentralen nordsee (Wetterschiff Famita)

Zusammenfassung Untersucht wurde der mittlere Jahresgang vom W?rmeeintrag durch die Meeresoberfl?che und vom W?rmeinhalt der Wassers?ule. Dazu wurden Messungen aus der Deutschen Bucht vom Feuerschiff Elbe 1 für die Jahre 1962-1986 und Messungen in der zentralen Nordsee vom Wetterschiff Famita für die Jahre 1965-1978 verwendet. Die Untersuchung best?tigt das generelle Bild einer W?rmeabgabe an die Atmosph?re von -15 W m^-2 im langj?hrigen Mittel für die Deutsche Bucht. Die kurzwellige Einstrahlung von 113 W^-2 wird durch -62 W m^-2 langwellige Ausstrahlung, -51 W m^-2 latenten W?rmefluβ und -15 W m^-2 sensiblen W?rmefluβ nahezu balanciert. Die berechnete W?rmeadvektion als Residuum aus W?rmeinhalt und Nettow?rmefluβ an der Meeresoberfl?che betr?gt 16 W m^-2 Der Jahresgang des W?rmeinhaltes und der Jahresgang des Nettow?rmeflusses an der Oberfl?che sind fast gleich, so daβ der Temperaturjahresgang haupts?chlich durch den lokalen W?rmeeintrag gesteuert wird. Kleine Abweichungen hiervon bestimmen den Jahresgang der W?rmeadvektion. Warmwasseradvektion tritt von Oktober bis April auf. Kaltwasseradvektion liegt im Sommer von Mai bis September vor. Die Variabilit?t der W?rmeadvektion ist im Winter und Sommer am gr?βten, w?hrend die Variabilit?t im Frühjahr und Herbst geringer ist, wenn sich das Vorzeichen der W?rmebilanz ?ndert. Das Wetterschiff Famita befindet sich ebenfalls in einer Region, in der W?rme an die Atmosph?re abgegeben wird. Die W?rmeabgabe betr?gt -16 W m^-2 im langzeitlichen Mittel. Die kurzwellige Einstrahlung von 105 W m^-2 wird haupts?chlich durch -60 W m^-2 langwellige Ausstrahlung, -49 W m^-2 latenten W?rmefluβ und -12 W m^-2 sensiblen W?rmefluβ balanciert. Warmwasseradvektion tritt im Winter und Frühjahr auf. Die Variabilit?t der W?rmeadvektion ist gr?βer als bei Feuerschiff Elbe 1. Die berechneten monatlichen Energieflüsse zeigen, daβ die solare Einstrahlung den Jahresgang der W?rmebilanz dominiert. Die effektive Ausstrahlung ist nahezu konstant. Die sensible W?rme wirkt nur bei Feuerschiff Elbe 1 von Mai bis Juni als W?rmequelle. Der latente W?rmefluβ ist w?hrend des gesamten Jahres negativ. Für Feuerschiff Elbe 1 ist der W?rmeinhalt der Wassers?ule mit dem Energieeintrag an der Oberfl?che in Phase, w?hrend bei Wetterschiff Famita Differenzen auftreten. Die Temperaturvariationen sind haupts?chlich durch den lokalen W?rmeeintrag bestimmt. Diese vereinfachten Verh?ltnisse gelten für beide Regionen, obwohl für einige Monate die W?rmeadvektion bis zu einem Drittel des Nettow?rmeflusses an der Oberfl?che betragen kann. Bei Feuerschiff Elbe 1 wird die W?rmebilanz von April bis Dezember durch die lokale Dynamik bestimmt. Bei Wetterschiff Famita ist die W?rmeadvektion von Mai bis Oktober kleiner als 30% vom Oberfl?cheneintrag. Die Dominanz der solaren Einstrahlung für die W?rmebilanz an der Oberfl?che und der phasengleiche Jahresgang des W?rmeinhaltes rechtfertigen es, eindimensionale Wassers?ulenmodelle für die Region zu verwenden, um die Dynamik der Temperatur zu berechnen. So zeigt der Vergleich von simulierten und gemessenen Temperaturjahresg?ngen an beiden Positionen eine ausreichende Genauigkeit über weite Teile des Jahres. Damit stehen neben der gezeigten W?rmebilanzabsch?tzung zwei Datens?tze zur Verfügung, um Modelle zu betreiben, zu validieren und verschiedenartige Modelle zu vergleichen.