The Western English Channel observatory: Optical characteristics of station L4
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Steve Groom ; Victor Martinez-Vicente ; James Fishwick ; Gavin Tilstone ; Gerald Moore ; Tim Smyth ; Derek Harbour
- 关键词：Coastal oceanography ; Monitoring systems ; Optical properties ; Absorption spectra ; Chlorophyll-a ; CDOM ; TSM ; Western English Channel ; Remote sensing ; SeaWiFS ; MODIS ; Sustained observations
- 刊名：Journal of Marine Systems
- 出版年：2009
- 出版时间：May 2009
- 年：2009
- 卷：77
- 期：3
- 页码：278-295
- 全文大小：1124 K
文摘
This paper presents an optical classification of station L4 south of Plymouth in the western English Channel based on satellite and in situ observations. Weekly-sampled in situ data from 2003 and 2004 are presented on temperature and salinity with depth, together with surface measurements of absorption by phytoplankton, coloured dissolved organic matter (CDOM) and non-algal particles (NAP), phytoplankton counts, HPLC chl-a concentrations and suspended particulates. Measured absorption values are compared with a published optical model used to estimate the magnitude and natural variability of absorption by in-water optically active constituents in case 1 waters. Satellite retrievals of remote sensing reflectance, Rrs, are compared with model-based limits. L4 is found to be classed as turbid for ~ 35 % of the year (in winter) related to the vertical stability and suspended particulate matter. In situ absorption data reveal an excess of CDOM absorption over that expected in modelled case 1 waters, while phytoplankton and NAP absorption are more consistent with case 1. Time series of satellite and in situ surface chl-a and vertical diffuse attenuation coefficient at 490 nm agree well statistically, probably as a result of the range of chl-a encountered and the use of Rrs ratio based satellite algorithms. There was no evidence of coastal adjacency effects upon the chl-a retrievals. L4 can be considered as case 1 or case 2 depending upon the time period, the optical parameter or even the wavelength. This suggests that simple labelling of the site as case 1 or 2 is misleading and instead the station should be characterised in terms of the individual inherent optical property of interest.