Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-l4t7p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T08:09:13.174Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An improved estimate of microbially mediated carbon fluxes from the Greenland ice sheet

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2017

J.M. Cook
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. E-mail: ggp08jmc@sheffield.ac.uk
A.J. Hodson
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. E-mail: ggp08jmc@sheffield.ac.uk Department of Arctic Geology, The University Centre in Svalbard, Longyearbyen, Norway
A.M. Anesio
Affiliation:
Bristol Glaciology Centre, School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
E. Hanna
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. E-mail: ggp08jmc@sheffield.ac.uk
M. Yallop
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
M. Stibal
Affiliation:
Bristol Glaciology Centre, School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
J. Telling
Affiliation:
Bristol Glaciology Centre, School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
P. Huybrechts
Affiliation:
Earth System Sciences & Departement Geografie, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Microbially mediated carbon fluxes on the surface of the Greenland ice sheet (GrIS) were recently quantified by Hodson and others (2010) using measurements of the surface coverage of debris (cryoconite) and rates of biological production associated with debris near the ice-sheet margin. We present updated models that do not assume the same spatial uniformity in key parameters employed by Hodson and others (2010) because they make use of biomass distribution and biological production data from a 79 km transect of the GrIS. Further, the models presented here also include for the first time biomass associated with both cryoconite holes and surficial algae. The predicted annual carbon flux for a small (1600 km2) section of ice surrounding the field transect is about four times that estimated using spatially uniform biomass and production in this area. When surficial algae are included, the model predicts about 11 times more carbon fixation via photosynthesis per year than the cryoconite-only models. We therefore suggest that supraglacial carbon fluxes from the GrIS have previously been underestimated by more than an order of magnitude and that the hitherto overlooked surficial algal ecosystem can be the most crucial contributor. The GrIS is shown to be in a relatively stable state of net autotrophy according to our model and so a strong link between bare-ice area and total carbon fluxes is evident. The implication is a biomass feedback to surface albedo and enhanced ablation as a result. Climate predictions for the year 2100 show that greater carbon fixation could also result from climate warming.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 2012
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Map showing the locations of the sampling points along the 79 km transect. The inset depicts the location of the transect within Greenland. Adapted from Telling and others (2011).

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Relationship between areal coverage and dry mass for calibration quadrats. Note that calibration quadrats refer to 10cm x 10 cm quadrats emplaced at the 2 km site for which the mass of cryoconite present was measured, not the 81 test quadrats emplaced along the transect.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. (a) Percentage of ice surface covered by cryoconite with distance from ice margin (linear fit shown); (b) mass of cryoconite per square centimetre with distance from ice margin (linear fit shown); (c) respiration rates for cryoconite with distance from ice margin (third-order polynomial fit shown); (d) rate of primary production for cryoconite with distance from ice margin (no error bars because PP was calculated directly from NEP and R; third-order polynomial fit shown); (e) percentage cover of ice surface by surficial algae with distance from ice margin (logarithmic fit shown); (f) mass of algae per square metre with distance from ice margin (logarithmic fit shown); (g) primary production of surface algae against distance from ice margin (third-order polynomial fit shown); (h) respiration rate for surface algae against distance from ice margin (no error bars as this was assumed to be a constant proportion of algal PP; third-order polynomial fit shown)

Figure 3

Table 1. Summary of the properties of models 1–4

Figure 4

Fig. 4. (a) CPice, (b) CRsnow and (c) CRice as predicted by model 1 and Hodson and others (2010). Negative fluxes indicate carbon fixation by autotrophs.

Figure 5

Table 2. NEP as predicted by each of the carbon flux models

Figure 6

Fig. 5. NEPas predicted by model 3 and by Hodson and others (2010).

Figure 7

Fig. 6. (a) Carbon flux resulting from cryoconite community autotrophy as predicted by model 3 and Hodson and others (2010); (b) carbon flux resulting from cryoconite community respiration as predicted by model 3 and Hodson and others (2010).

Figure 8

Fig. 7. Carbon flux contributions from algae and cryoconite between 2000 and 2010 predicted using model 4.

Figure 9

Fig. 8. Bare-ice areas as predicted by the warm GrIS, cool GrIS and present-day simulations.

Figure 10

Fig. 9. Net carbon flux as simulated by the present-day, warm GrIS and cool GrIS scenarios.