Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-dqfph Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-12T22:54:06.884Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Physical and biological properties of early winter Antarctic sea ice in the Ross Sea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2020

Jean-Louis Tison*
Affiliation:
PROPICE Unit, Laboratoire de Glaciologie, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
Ted Maksym
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Ocean Physics and Engineering, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, USA
Alexander D. Fraser
Affiliation:
Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Matthew Corkill
Affiliation:
Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Noriaki Kimura
Affiliation:
Atmosphere and Ocean Research Institute, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Yuichi Nosaka
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, Tokai University, Tokyo, Japan
Daiki Nomura
Affiliation:
Faculty of Fisheries Sciences, Hokkaido University, Hakodate, Japan Arctic Research Center, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan Global Station for Arctic Research, Global Institution for Collaborative Research and Education, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
Martin Vancoppenolle
Affiliation:
Laboratoire d'Océanographie et du Climat, Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace, Paris, France
Steve Ackley
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, USA
Sharon Stammerjohn
Affiliation:
Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado, Boulder, USA
Sarah Wauthy
Affiliation:
PROPICE Unit, Laboratoire de Glaciologie, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
Fanny Van der Linden
Affiliation:
PROPICE Unit, Laboratoire de Glaciologie, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium Unité d'Océanographie Chimique, Freshwater and Oceanic sCience Unit reSearch (FOCUS), Université de Liège, Liège, Belgium
Gauthier Carnat
Affiliation:
PROPICE Unit, Laboratoire de Glaciologie, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
Célia Sapart
Affiliation:
PROPICE Unit, Laboratoire de Glaciologie, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
Jeroen de Jong
Affiliation:
PROPICE Unit, Laboratoire de Glaciologie, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
François Fripiat
Affiliation:
PROPICE Unit, Laboratoire de Glaciologie, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
Bruno Delille
Affiliation:
Unité d'Océanographie Chimique, Freshwater and Oceanic sCience Unit reSearch (FOCUS), Université de Liège, Liège, Belgium
*
Author for correspondence: Jean-Louis Tison, E-mail: Jean-Louis.Tison@ulb.be
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This work presents the results of physical and biological investigations at 27 biogeochemical stations of early winter sea ice in the Ross Sea during the 2017 PIPERS cruise. Only two similar cruises occurred in the past, in 1995 and 1998. The year 2017 was a specific year, in that ice growth in the Central Ross Sea was considerably delayed, compared to previous years. These conditions resulted in lower ice thicknesses and Chl-a burdens, as compared to those observed during the previous cruises. It also resulted in a different structure of the sympagic algal community, unusually dominated by Phaeocystis rather than diatoms. Compared to autumn-winter sea ice in the Weddell Sea (AWECS cruise), the 2017 Ross Sea pack ice displayed similar thickness distribution, but much lower snow cover and therefore nearly no flooding conditions. It is shown that contrasted dynamics of autumnal-winter sea-ice growth between the Weddell Sea and the Ross Sea impacted the development of the sympagic community. Mean/median ice Chl-a concentrations were 3–5 times lower at PIPERS, and the community status there appeared to be more mature (decaying?), based on Phaeopigments/Chl-a ratios. These contrasts are discussed in the light of temporal and spatial differences between the two cruises.

Information

Type
Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - SA
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the same Creative Commons licence is included and the original work is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Location of the 27 PIPERS biogeochemical stations, and mean ice (black) and snow (grey) thicknesses for the major groups of stations. The global area of investigations is shown as a red rectangle on the Antarctic map of the lower-right insert. The Terra Nova Bay area is enlarged at the black arrow.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Textural properties (ice types) at the 27 PIPERS biogeochemical stations, shown as vertical thin sections visualized under crossed polarizers. Surface properties of ‘dragon skin’, mainly seen at stations 5 and 6, are illustrated. Grey and red numbers on top of each core section are mean snow thickness (ten measurements) and freeboard in centimeters, respectively. Ice core numbering corresponds to the station numbering.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. (a) Reconstructed sea-ice margin at various dates in 2017 (red: 8 March; orange: 11 March; green: 20 March; blue: 29 March; black: 8 April and grey: 19 April), from high-resolution AMSR2 satellite imagery (Beitsch and others, 2014; Bremen, 2018); (b) arrows show fields of sea-ice movement for April–March 1995 from Arrigo and others (2003).

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Calculated back trajectories (blue) and observed buoy trajectories (‘Forward’, green) for some of the 27 PIPERS stations (red dots). Back trajectories are shown with convergent (light blue) and divergent (dark blue) status. Each blue or green dot corresponds to a daily position, allowing semi-quantitative visual reconstruction of the velocity. Red crosses indicate the origin of the ice sampled at a given station (station number recalled in white in Central Ross Sea). Black dots indicate days where there was not enough data to calculate an 11 d-centered moving average for divergence/convergence due to low ice concentrations – ‘*’ in the left table indicate stations for which back trajectories could not be fully reconstructed due to the proximity of the coast at early stages of growth (coastal contamination of the sea-ice velocity dataset). Light and dark green are used to decipher overlapping buoys trajectories. Some of the buoys were laid on the sea-ice cover at the biogeochemistry stations, others at locations nearby. Ice shelves are overlaid on the coastline in cyan (Rignot and others, 2013; Greene and others, 2017; Mouginot and others, 2017). Periodic sea-ice extents are indicated by filled greyscale contours (Spreen and others, 2008).

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Close up of textural properties of PIPERS Terra Nova Bay polynya biogeochemical stations 6–16. All pictures are illustrative vertical thin sections viewed under crossed polarizers, at the same scale. Numbers in the top left corner of each picture are respectively ‘mean grain diameter’ (top) and ‘equivalent disk area’. The ‘mean grain diameter’ is obtained by the ‘linear intercept method’ and the ‘equivalent disk surface’ is the surface of a circular grain of equivalent diameter (see methods). Red stars are locations of biogeochemical stations and green stars are locations of complementary physics stations. No data are available for station 12. Satellite image is Terra SAR-X from DLR (German Aerospace Centre).

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Schematic showing the proposed mechanism generating crystal size and textural banding in the Terra Nova Bay polynya, as a result of the alternation of periods of high katabatic winds and quieter conditions.

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Temperature profiles at the 27 PIPERS biogeochemical stations. Profiles for all cores are shown in each panel as thin black lines. Profiles for the cores within each indicated group are shown as color dots.

Figure 7

Fig. 8. Bulk ice salinity profiles at the 27 PIPERS biogeochemical stations. Profiles for all cores are shown in each panel as thin black lines. Profiles for the cores within each indicated group are shown as color dots.

Figure 8

Fig. 9. Brine volume fraction profiles at the 27 PIPERS biogeochemical stations. Profiles for all cores are shown in each panel as thin black lines. Profiles for the cores within each indicated group are shown as color dots.

Figure 9

Fig. 10. Rayleigh number profiles at the 27 PIPERS biogeochemical stations. Profiles for all cores are shown in each panel as thin black lines. Profiles for the cores within each indicated group are shown as color dots. Red line shows conservative Ra threshold=10.

Figure 10

Fig. 11. Brine upward velocity profiles at the 27 PIPERS biogeochemical stations. Profiles for all cores are shown in each panel as thin black lines. Profiles for the cores within each indicated group are shown as color dots.

Figure 11

Fig. 12. Upwards brine velocities (w) vs (a) bulk ice salinity (S), (b) bulk ice temperature (T) and (c) bulk ice Rayleigh number (Ra) for all 27 PIPERS stations. Each data point is a mean vertical value for the considered variables for a given ice core, at a given location.

Figure 12

Fig. 13. Chl-a and Phaeopigments profiles at the 27 PIPERS biogeochemical stations. Chl-a is shown in green, with light green for the small algae (0.8–10 μm) and dark green for the large algae (>10 μm). The Phaeopigments/Chl-a ratios are shown in red. Sea-water values (sw), when available, are also indicated at the bottom of each graph.

Figure 13

Table 1. Cell abundance (cells mL−1) for selected PIPERS stations

Figure 14

Fig. 14. Profiles of cell abundance for selected PIPERS stations. Diatoms have been grouped for clarity. Full dataset is presented in Table 1. Only bottom sample was available at station 3.

Figure 15

Fig. 15. Compared Chl-a burden (mg m−2) between the PIPERS 2017 cruise (red dots) and the NBP 98-3 cruise (green dots) as a function of position. The two cruises occurred at a similar period (April–June), but the PIPERS cruise spent more time in the Terra Nova Bay polynya, therefore under-sampling the Ross Sea Polynya.

Figure 16

Fig. 16. Comparison of physical and biological properties during winter cruises AWECS (Weddell Sea, June–August 2013, blue symbols, A) and PIPERS (Ross Sea, April–June 2017, red symbols, P): ice thickness at physics transects (a) and BGC stations (b); snow thickness at physics transects (c) and BGC stations (d); freeboard at physics transects (e); temperature (f), salinity (g), relative brine volume (h) and Rayleigh number (i) at BGC stations; ice Chl-a (k) and Phaeopigments/Chl-a (l) at BGC stations; water Chl-a (m) and Phaeopigments/Chl-a (n) at BGC stations. Map of physics transects (green dots) and BGC locations (red stars) (o). Relationship between Chl-a burden and ice thickness at BGC stations (j). See text for details.