Notes
Outline



Perspectives on modeling and prediction

by
John Dunne
History of coupled biological-physical model development
The Fasham model
"Phytoplankton functional groups:"
Phytoplankton functional groups:
Size partitioning
Variable stoichiometry
Mesoscale nutrient supply
Physical and temporal patchiness
Twilight zone
CaCO3 cycling
Mineral ballasting
Complex role of iron as a limiting nutrient
Transport of organic matter
What have we done about it?
Increased sophistication of satellite algorithms
Addition of phytoplankton functional groups
Addition of elements
Increased realism of physical models
Spatial resolution (mesoscale eddies)
Temporal variability (El Nino; NAO; PDO)
Better physics (Gent-McWilliams; KPP)
Distinguishing regions of nitrogen, phosphorus, silicon and iron limitation
Global Modeling of functional Groups
Role of Ballast
Excess density required to sink (Smayda, 1970)
Diatoms sink readily (compared to picoplankton)
Recently, that CaCO3 is necessary to sink deeply
Sinking SiO2 carries 2.6 % by weight Org. C. while CaCO3 carries 7 % (Klaas and Archer, in prep.)
SiO2 sinks more slowly than CaCO3 (Berelson)
SiO2 remineralizes more shallowly than CaCO3
(ZSiO2 ~1000 m vs. ZCaCO3 ~2500 m)
Provinces of Nutrient Limitation
Temporal Variability
Role of Mesoscale physics
Biological Feedbacks on Circulation
Q1:  What has been the major contribution of JGOFS to ocean biogeochemical modeling?
Q2:  What has been the major change in thought since the SMP Implementation Plan?
Q3:  What is the most pressing uncertainty in biogeochemical modeling?