Temporal and fine-scale variation in the biogeochemistry of Jervis Bay
Temporal and fine-scale variation in the biogeochemistry of Jervis Bay
Temporal and fine-scale variation in the biogeochemistry of Jervis Bay
- No tags were found...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
CERF Mar<strong>in</strong>e Biodiversity Hub <strong>Jervis</strong> <strong>Bay</strong> Survey Report, February 2009-35.095-35.1Bottom sal<strong>in</strong>ity35.8535.835.75-35.10535.7Latitude-35.11-35.11535.6535.6-35.1235.5535.5-35.12535.45150.72 150.73 150.74 150.75 150.76LongitudeFigure 11: Contour plot <strong>of</strong> bottom sal<strong>in</strong>ity measured on 12 <strong>and</strong> 13 February, 2009.Vertical diffuse attenuation coefficients (Kd), an estimate <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> amount <strong>of</strong> lightattenuated by water per metre depth <strong>of</strong> water, were calculated from <strong>the</strong> surface <strong>and</strong>bottom water PAR measurements (Kd (m -1 ) = ln(Io/Iz)/z)) <strong>and</strong> are presented <strong>in</strong> Figure 12<strong>and</strong> 13. The pattern <strong>of</strong> measurements observed <strong>in</strong> February appeared to be more r<strong>and</strong>omthan that observed <strong>in</strong> August. This is potentially due to variable cloud cover betweensurface <strong>and</strong> bottom read<strong>in</strong>gs, because <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> generally overcast conditions experienced <strong>in</strong>February. However, Kd values were generally lower <strong>in</strong> February (0.11 ± 0.03) than <strong>in</strong>August (0.14 ± 0.03) <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g that more visible light was reach<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> benthos <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>summer months, as expected.15
Change language