DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix. Conversion Factors

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix. Conversion Factors Appendix. Conversion Factors The symbols and units of measure that we use to describe and to study ecology change and seem to expand on virtually a daily basis. The follow­ ing appendix of information is provided as an aid in translating these symbols and units. The first section provides a summary of the Systeme Internationale and those prefixes used, as well as a condensed conversion table of the most commonly used units. The second section provides a fairly comprehensive conversion table, including both common and some obscure units. The third section provides a metric conversion table pertain­ ing most specifically to the dispersion of various forms of air pollutants but which is also useful in other areas, including the even distribution of a substance over a surface. Section One General SI (Systeme Internationale) Conversion Tables SI Base Units Name of Unit Quantity unit symbol Length metre m Mass kilogram kg Time second s Name of Unit Quantity unit symbol Electric current Ampere A Thermodynamic Kelvin K temperature Luminous intensity candela cd Amount of mole mol 190 Appendix. Conversion Factors Approved Numerical Prefixes Exponential expression Decimal equivalent Prefix Phonic Symbol 1012 1 000 000 000 000 tera ter' a T 10' 1000000000 giga ji' ga G 106 1 000000 mega meg' a M' 103 1000 kilo kil' 0 k' 102 100 hecto hek' to n 10 10 deka dek' a da 10-1 0.1 deci des'i d 10-2 0.01 centi sen'ti c' 10-3 0.001 milli mil'i m' 10-6 0.000001 micro mi' kro JJ-' 10-' 0.000 000 001 nano nan' 0 n 10-12 0.000 000 000 001 pico pe' ko p 10-15 0.000 000 000 000 001 femto fem' to f 10-18 0.000000000000000001 atto at' to a 'Most commonly used units. Length Units Symbol Meters Angstrom A 1 x 10-10 Millimicron mJJ- 1 x 10-' Micron JJ- .000001 Millimeter mm .001 Centimeter cm .01 Decimeter dm .10 Meter m to Dekameter dkm 10 Hectometer hm 100 Kilometer km 1000 Weight Units Symbol Grams Microgram JJ-g .000001 Milligram mg .001 Centigram cg .01 Decigram dg .10 Gram g to Dekagram dkg 10 Hectogram hg 100 Kilogram kg 1000 Appendix. Conversion Factors 191 Volume Units Symbol Liters Microliter ~I .000001 Milliliter ml .001 Centiliter cl .01 Deciliter dl .10 Liter I 1.0 Dekaliter dkl 10.0 Hectoliter hi 100.0 Kiloliter kl 1000.0 Conversion Tables Length Unit Centimeters Meters Kilometers Inches Feet Centimeter 1.00 0.01 0.00001 0.39370 0.032808 Meter 100.00 1.00 0.001 39.370 3.2808 Kilometer 100000. 1000.00 1.00 39370.0 3280.8 Inch 2.54 0.02540 0.000025 1.00 0.08333 Foot 30.4801 0.304801 0.000305 12.00 1.00 1 angstrom = 0.0001 microns = 1 x 10-8 centimeters = 3.937 x 10-9 inches 1 micron = 1 x 10" angstroms = 1 x 10-4 centimeters = 3.397 x 10-5 inches 1 kilometer = 0.62137 mile 1 mile (U.S.) = 1.60935 kilometers Mass and Weight Grains Drams Ounces Ounces Unit Grams avoir. avoir. avoir. Troy Milligram 0.001 0.015432 0.000564 0.0000353 0.0000322 Gram 1.00 15.43236 0.564383 0.0352740 0.0321507 Kilogram 1000.0 15432.36 564.383 35.2740 32.1507 Dram (Av.) 1.771845 27.34375 1.00 0.0625 0.056966 Ounce (Av). 28.3495 437.5 16.00 1.00 0.911458 Pound (Av.) 453.5924 7000.0 256.00 16.00 14.5833 Ounce (Tr.) 31.1035 480.00 17.55428 1.09714 1.00 1 cu. ft water at 60°F = 62.37 Ibs avo 1 gal (U.S.) water at 62°F = 8.337 Ibs avo 192 Appendix. Conversion Factors Volume and Capacity FLounce Liq.pints Cubic Cubic Unit Liters (U.S.) (U.S.) centimeters inches Milliliter 0.001 0.0338147 0.002113 1.00003 0.061025 Liter 1.00 33.8147 2.1134 1000.03 61.025 Cu. cm (cc) 0.001 0.0338147 0.002113 1.00 0.061023 Cu. inch 0.0163867 0.554113 0.034632 16.3872 1.00 Flo dram (U.S.) 0.003696 0.125 0.007813 3.6967 0.225586 Flo oz (U.S.) 0.0295729 1.00 0.0625 29.5737 1.80469 Liq. pint (U.S.) 0.473167 16.00 1.00 473.179 28.875 Liq. gal (U.S.) 3.7853 128.00 8.00 3785.43 231.00 1 gal (U.S.) = 0.83268 gals (British) 1 gal (British) = 1.20094 gals (U.S.) 1 minim = 0.0020833 Oz (U.S. fl.) = 0.016667 dram (U.S. fl.) = 0.061610 ml = 0.061612 cc Area Square Square Units centimeters inches Sq. Cm. 1.00 .1550 Sq. Meter 10000.00 1550.00 Sq. Inch 6.451626 1.00 Sq. Foot 929.0341 144.00 Pressure 1 atmosphere = 14.696 Ibs/sq. in. 1 atmosphere = 1.01325 x 106 dynes/sq. cm 1 atmosphere = 760.00 mm of mercury at O°C 1 cm of mercury at O°C = 0.013158 atmospheres Section Two To convert: Into: Multiply by: A Abcoulomb statcou lombs 2.998 X 10'0 Acre (U.S.) sq. chain (Gunters) 10.0 Acre rods2 160.0 Acre square links (Gunters) 1 x 105 Acre hectare or sq. hectometer 0.4047 Acres sq. feet 43,560.0 Acres sq. meters 4047.0 Acres sq. miles 1.5625 x 10-3 Acres sq. yards 4840.0 Acres cuerdas 1.0303 Acre-feet cu. feet 43,560.0 Appendix. Conversion Factors 193 To convert: Into: Multiply by: Acre-feet gallons 3.259 x 10' Amperes/sq. cm. amps/sq. in. 6.452 Amperes/sq. cm. amps/sq. meter 10' Amperes/sq. in. amps/sq. cm 0.1550 Amperes/sq. in. amps/sq. meter 1550.0 Amperes/sq. meter amps/sq. cm 10' Amperes/sq. meter amps/sq. in. 6.452 x 10' Ampere -hr coulombs 3600.0 Ampere - hr faradays 0.03731 Ampere/tu rns gilberts 1.257 Ampere-turns/cm amp-turns/in. 2.540 Ampere-tu rns/cm amp-tu rns/meter 100.0 Ampere-turns/cm gilberts/in 1.257 Ampere-turns/in amp-tu rns/cm 0.3937 Ampere-turns/in. amp-tu rns/meter 39.37 Ampere-turns/in. gi Iberts/cm 0.4950 Ampere-tu rns/meter amp-tu rns/cm 0.01 Ampere-tu rns/meter amp-turns/in. 0.0254 Ampere-turns/meter gilberts/cm 0.01257 Angstrom unit inch 3937 x 10-" Angstrom unit meter 1 x 10-10 Angstrom unit Micron (or IL) 1 x 10-' Anker (beer) gallons 10.0 Are acre (US) 0.02471 Ares sq. yards 119.60 Ares acres (British) 0.02471 Ares sq. meters 100.0 Astronomical unit kilometers 1.495 x 108 Atmospheres ton sq. inch 0.007348 Atmospheres cm mercury 76.0 Atmospheres ft water (at 4°C) 33.90 Atmospheres in. mercury (at O°C) 29.92 Atmospheres kg/sq. cm 1.0333 Atmospheres kg/sp. meter 10,332 Atmospheres pounds/sq. in. 14.70 Atmospheres tons/sq ft 1.058 B Bag (British) Bushels 3 Barrels (U.S. dry) cu. inches 7056.0 Barrels (U.S. dry) quarts (dry) 105.0 Barrels (U.S. liquid) gallons 31.5 Barrels (oil) gallons (oil) 42.0 Bars atmospheres 0.9869 Bars dynes/sq. cm 10· Bars kg/sq. meter 1.020 x 10' Bars pounds/sq. ft 2089.0 Bars pounds/sq. in. 14.50 Baryl dyne/sq. cm 1.000 Bolt (U.S. cloth) meters 36.576 BTU liter-atmosphere 10.409 BTU ergs 1.0550 x 10'0 194 Appendix. Conversion Factors To convert: Into: Multiply by: BTU foot-Ibs 7.97 BTU gram-calories 252.0 BTU horsepower-hr 3.929 x 10-' BTU joules 1054.8 BTU kilogram-calories 0.2520 BTU kilogram-meters 107.56 BTU kilowatt-hr 2.928 x 10-' BTU/hr foot-pou nds/s 0.2162 BTU/hr gram-cal/s 0.0700 BTU/hr horsepower-hr 3.929 x 10-' BTU-hr watts 0.2931 BTU/min foot-Ibs/s 12.96 BTU/min horsepower 0.02358 BTU/min kilowatts 0.01757 BTU/min watts 17.58 BTU/sq. ft/min watts/sq. in. 0.1221 Bucket (British dry) cubic cm 1.818 x 10' Bushels (U.S. dry) cu. ft 1.2444 Bushels cu. in 2150.4 Bushels cu. meters 0.03524 Bushels liters 35.24 Bushels pecks 4.0 Bushels pints (dry) 64.0 Bushels quarts (dry) 32.0 Butt (British, dry) gallons 126 C Calories, gram (mean) BTU (mean) 3.9685 x 10-3 Candle/sq cm Lamberts 3.142 Candle/sq in Lamberts 0.4870 Carat (metric) milligrams 200.0 Centares (centiares) sq. meters 1.0 Centigrade Fahrenheit CC x 9/5) + 32 Centigrams grams 0.01 Centiliter ounce fluid (US) 0.3382 Centiliter cubic inch 0.6103 Centiliter drams 2.705 Centiliters liters 0.01 Centi meters feet 3.281 x 10-2 Centimeters inches 0.3937 Centimeters kilometers 10-5 Centimeters meters 0.01 Centimeters miles 6.214 x 10-6 Centi meters millimeters 10.0 Centimeters mils 393.7 Centimeters yards 1.094 x 10-2 Centimeter-dynes cm-grams 1.020 x 10-3 Cental pounds 100 Cental kilograms 45.359 Centimeter-dynes meter-kg 1.020 x 10-6 Centi meter-dynes pound-feet 7.376 x 10-6 Centi meter-g rams cm-dynes 980.7 Appendix. Conversion Factors 195 To convert: Into: Multiply by: Centimeter-grams meter-kg 10-3 Centi meter-grams pound-feet 7.233 x 10-3 Centimeters of mercury atmospheres 0.01316 Centimeters of mercury feet of water 0.4460 Centimers of mercury kg/sq.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Methane Cold Seeps As Biological Oases in the High‐
    LIMNOLOGY and Limnol. Oceanogr. 00, 2017, 00–00 VC 2017 The Authors Limnology and Oceanography published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. OCEANOGRAPHY on behalf of Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography doi: 10.1002/lno.10732 Methane cold seeps as biological oases in the high-Arctic deep sea Emmelie K. L. A˚ strom€ ,1* Michael L. Carroll,1,2 William G. Ambrose, Jr.,1,2,3,4 Arunima Sen,1 Anna Silyakova,1 JoLynn Carroll1,2 1CAGE - Centre for Arctic Gas Hydrate, Environment and Climate, Department of Geosciences, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway 2Akvaplan-niva, FRAM – High North Research Centre for Climate and the Environment, Tromsø, Norway 3Division of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, Arlington, Virginia 4Department of Biology, Bates College, Lewiston, Maine Abstract Cold seeps can support unique faunal communities via chemosynthetic interactions fueled by seabed emissions of hydrocarbons. Additionally, cold seeps can enhance habitat complexity at the deep seafloor through the accretion of methane derived authigenic carbonates (MDAC). We examined infaunal and mega- faunal community structure at high-Arctic cold seeps through analyses of benthic samples and seafloor pho- tographs from pockmarks exhibiting highly elevated methane concentrations in sediments and the water column at Vestnesa Ridge (VR), Svalbard (798 N). Infaunal biomass and abundance were five times higher, species richness was 2.5 times higher and diversity was 1.5 times higher at methane-rich Vestnesa compared to a nearby control region. Seabed photos reveal different faunal associations inside, at the edge, and outside Vestnesa pockmarks. Brittle stars were the most common megafauna occurring on the soft bottom plains out- side pockmarks.
    [Show full text]
  • 8.4 the Significance of Ocean Deoxygenation for Continental Margin Mesopelagic Communities J
    8.4 The significance of ocean deoxygenation for continental margin mesopelagic communities J. Anthony Koslow 8.4 The significance of ocean deoxygenation for continental margin mesopelagic communities J. Anthony Koslow Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia and Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, SD, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA. Email: [email protected] Summary • Global climate models predict global warming will lead to declines in midwater oxygen concentrations, with greatest impact in regions of oxygen minimum zones (OMZ) along continental margins. Time series from these regions indicate that there have been significant changes in oxygen concentration, with evidence of both decadal variability and a secular declining trend in recent decades. The areal extent and volume of hypoxic and suboxic waters have increased substantially in recent decades with significant shoaling of hypoxic boundary layers along continental margins. • The mesopelagic communities in OMZ regions are unique, with the fauna noted for their adaptations to hypoxic and suboxic environments. However, mesopelagic faunas differ considerably, such that deoxygenation and warming could lead to the increased dominance of subtropical and tropical faunas most highly adapted to OMZ conditions. • Denitrifying bacteria within the suboxic zones of the ocean’s OMZs account for about a third of the ocean’s loss of fixed nitrogen. Denitrification in the eastern tropical Pacific has varied by about a factor of 4 over the past 50 years, about half due to variation in the volume of suboxic waters in the Pacific. Continued long- term deoxygenation could lead to decreased nutrient content and hence decreased ocean productivity and decreased ocean uptake of carbon dioxide (CO2).
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (2012)
    FGDC-STD-018-2012 Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard Marine and Coastal Spatial Data Subcommittee Federal Geographic Data Committee June, 2012 Federal Geographic Data Committee FGDC-STD-018-2012 Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard, June 2012 ______________________________________________________________________________________ CONTENTS PAGE 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Objectives ................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Need ......................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Scope ........................................................................................................................ 2 1.4 Application ............................................................................................................... 3 1.5 Relationship to Previous FGDC Standards .............................................................. 4 1.6 Development Procedures ......................................................................................... 5 1.7 Guiding Principles ................................................................................................... 7 1.7.1 Build a Scientifically Sound Ecological Classification .................................... 7 1.7.2 Meet the Needs of a Wide Range of Users ......................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Respiration in the Mesopelagic and Bathypelagic Zones of the Oceans
    CHAPTER 10 Respiration in the mesopelagic and bathypelagic zones of the oceans Javier Arístegui1, Susana Agustí2, Jack J. Middelburg3, and Carlos M. Duarte2 1 Facultad de Ciencias del Mar, Universidad de las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain 2 IMEDEA (CSIC–UIB), Spain 3 Netherlands Institute of Ecology, The Netherlands Outline In this chapter the mechanisms of transport and remineralization of organic matter in the dark water-column and sediments of the oceans are reviewed. We compare the different approaches to estimate respiration rates, and discuss the discrepancies obtained by the different methodologies. Finally, a respiratory carbon budget is produced for the dark ocean, which includes vertical and lateral fluxes of organic matter. In spite of the uncertainties inherent in the different approaches to estimate carbon fluxes and oxygen consumption in the dark ocean, estimates vary only by a factor of 1.5. Overall, direct measurements of respiration, as well as − indirect approaches, converge to suggest a total dark ocean respiration of 1.5–1.7 Pmol C a 1. Carbon mass − balances in the dark ocean suggest that the dark ocean receives 1.5–1.6 Pmol C a 1, similar to the estimated respiration, of which >70% is in the form of sinking particles. Almost all the organic matter (∼92%) is remineralized in the water column, the burial in sediments accounts for <1%. Mesopelagic (150–1000 m) − − respiration accounts for ∼70% of dark ocean respiration, with average integrated rates of 3–4 mol C m 2 a 1, − − 6–8 times greater than in the bathypelagic zone (∼0.5 mol C m 2 a 1).
    [Show full text]
  • MARINE ENVIRONMENTS Teaching Module for Grades 6-12
    MARINE ENVIRONMENTS Teaching Module for Grades 6-12 Dear Educator, We are pleased to present you with the first in a series of teaching and learning modules developed by the DEEPEND (Deep-Pelagic Nekton Dynamics) consortium and their consultants. DEEPEND is a research network focusing primarily on the pelagic zone of the Gulf of Mexico, therefore the majority of the lessons will be based around this topic. Whenever possible, the lessons will focus specifically on events of the Gulf of Mexico or work from the DEEPEND scientists. All modules in this series aim to engage students in grades 6 through 12 in STEM disciplines, while promoting student learning of the marine environment. We hope these lessons enable teachers to address student misconceptions and apprehensions regarding the unique organisms and properties of marine ecosystems. We intend for these modules to be a guide for teaching. Teachers are welcome to use the lessons in any order they wish, use just portions of lessons, and may modify the lessons as they wish. Furthermore, educators may share these lessons with other school districts and teachers; however, please do not receive monetary gain for lessons in any of the modules. Moreover, please provide credit to photographers and authors whenever possible. This first module focuses on the marine environment in general including biological, chemical, and physical properties of the water column. We have provided a variety of activities and extensions within this module such that lessons can easily be adapted for various grade and proficiency levels. Given that education reform strives to incorporate authentic science experiences, many of these lessons encourage exploration and experimentation to encourage students to think and act like a scientist.
    [Show full text]
  • Ocean Depths: the Mesopelagic and Implications for Global Warming
    Current Biology Dispatches Ocean Depths: The Mesopelagic and Implications for Global Warming Mark J. Costello1,* and Sean Breyer2 1Institute of Marine Science, University of Auckland, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand 2ESRI, Redlands, CA 92373, USA *Correspondence: [email protected] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.11.042 The mesopelagic or ‘twilight zone’ of the oceans occurs too deep for photosynthesis, but is a major part of the world’s carbon cycle. Depth boundaries for the mesopelagic have now been shown on a global scale using the distribution of pelagic animals detected by compiling echo-soundings from ships around the world, and been used to predict the effect of global warming on regional fish production. Depth Zonation Analyses were at 5 m depth intervals to However, it remains to be clearly shown The classical concepts for depth zonation 1,000 m deep, and a spatial resolution of whether the abyssal zone is ecologically [1] in the ocean begin at the seashore 300 km2. distinct from the bathyal. (Table 1). Distinct communities are visible The environment changes less as we The data shown in Figure 1 are global on the rocky seashore, and reflect the go deeper (Figure 1), so we expect the averages, and local exceptions will occur, adaptations of their animals and plants vertical extent of ecological zones to particularly in more enclosed waters such to exposure to air and wave action, increase with depth. While the rocky as the Mediterranean and Black Seas [6]. as well as the effects of grazing and seashore may have distinct habitats only The seabed-resident fauna (benthos) will predation [2].
    [Show full text]
  • Trophic Diversity of Plankton in the Epipelagic and Mesopelagic Layers of the Tropical and Equatorial Atlantic Determined with Stable Isotopes
    diversity Article Trophic Diversity of Plankton in the Epipelagic and Mesopelagic Layers of the Tropical and Equatorial Atlantic Determined with Stable Isotopes Antonio Bode 1,* ID and Santiago Hernández-León 2 1 Instituto Español de Oceanografía, Centro Oceanográfico de A Coruña, Apdo 130, 15080 A Coruña, Spain 2 Instituto de Oceanografía y Cambio Global (IOCAG), Universidad de las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Campus de Taliarte, Telde, Gran Canaria, 35214 Islas Canarias, Spain; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +34-981205362 Received: 30 April 2018; Accepted: 12 June 2018; Published: 13 June 2018 Abstract: Plankton living in the deep ocean either migrate to the surface to feed or feed in situ on other organisms and detritus. Planktonic communities in the upper 800 m of the tropical and equatorial Atlantic were studied using the natural abundance of stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes to identify their food sources and trophic diversity. Seston and zooplankton (>200 µm) samples were collected with Niskin bottles and MOCNESS nets, respectively, in the epipelagic (0–200 m), upper mesopelagic (200–500 m), and lower mesopelagic layers (500–800 m) at 11 stations. Food sources for plankton in the productive zone influenced by the NW African upwelling and the Canary Current were different from those in the oligotrophic tropical and equatorial zones. In the latter, zooplankton collected during the night in the mesopelagic layers was enriched in heavy nitrogen isotopes relative to day samples, supporting the active migration of organisms from deep layers. Isotopic niches showed also zonal differences in size (largest in the north), mean trophic diversity (largest in the tropical zone), food sources, and the number of trophic levels (largest in the equatorial zone).
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Describe the Principal Oceans of Earth, Including the Following: A
    Chapter 1: Upon completion of this chapter, the student should be able to: 1. Describe the principal oceans of Earth, including the following: A. location B. relative size C. land forms that border the ocean 2. Name the deepest ocean trench and describe its exploration by humans. 3. Discuss early ocean exploration and include the contributions of: A. early Pacific islanders (4000 BC– 900 AD) B. the Kon Tiki voyage C. Phoenicians D. Greeks E. Romans 4. Describe the contributions to oceanic exploration during the Middle Ages and the Ming Dynasty, including the: A. Arabs B. Vikings Ming Dynasty (1405–1433) 5. Elaborate on the contributions to oceanic exploration made by European explorers during the Renaissance (Age of Discovery), including: A. Prince Henry the Navigator B. Vasco da Gama C. Christopher Columbus D. John Cabot E. Vasco Nùñez de Balboa F. Ferdinand Magellan G. Juan Sebastian del Caño 6. Discuss the contributions of James Cook to early ocean science. 7. List and describe the systematic steps of the scientific method. 8. Distinguish between a hypothesis and a theory. 9. Describe the formation of the solar system as outlined by the nebular hypothesis. 10. Compare and contrast Protoearth and modern Earth. 11. Describe density stratification in Earth and the resultant chemical structure, including the: A. crust B. mantle C. core 12. Describe the physical structure of Earth, including the: A. inner core B. outer core C. mesosphere D. asthenosphere E. lithosphere 13. Distinguish between continental crust and oceanic crust, including location, chemical, and physical properties of the crust. 14. Differentiate between isostatic adjustment and isostatic rebound.
    [Show full text]
  • How Did the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Impact Deep-Sea Ecosystems? Charles R
    Nova Southeastern University NSUWorks Marine & Environmental Sciences Faculty Articles Department of Marine and Environmental Sciences 9-1-2016 How Did the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Impact Deep-Sea Ecosystems? Charles R. Fisher Pennsylvania State University - Main Campus Paul A. Montagna Texas A & M University - Corpus Christi Tracey Sutton Nova Southeastern University, [email protected] Find out more information about Nova Southeastern University and the Halmos College of Natural Sciences and Oceanography. Follow this and additional works at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/occ_facarticles Part of the Marine Biology Commons, and the Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons NSUWorks Citation Charles R. Fisher, Paul A. Montagna, and Tracey Sutton. 2016. How Did the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Impact Deep-Sea Ecosystems? .Oceanography , (3) : 182 -195. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/occ_facarticles/784. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Marine and Environmental Sciences at NSUWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Marine & Environmental Sciences Faculty Articles by an authorized administrator of NSUWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OceTHE OFFICIALa MAGAZINEn ogOF THE OCEANOGRAPHYra SOCIETYphy CITATION Fisher, C.R., P.A. Montagna, and T.T. Sutton. 2016. How did the Deepwater Horizon oil spill impact deep-sea ecosystems? Oceanography 29(3):182–195, http://dx.doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2016.82. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2016.82 COPYRIGHT This article has been published in Oceanography, Volume 29, Number 3, a quarterly journal of The Oceanography Society. Copyright 2016 by The Oceanography Society. All rights reserved. USAGE Permission is granted to copy this article for use in teaching and research.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Ocean/Sea Subsurface Water Temperature Studies from Remote Sensing and Non-Remote Sensing Methods
    water Review A Review of Ocean/Sea Subsurface Water Temperature Studies from Remote Sensing and Non-Remote Sensing Methods Elahe Akbari 1,2, Seyed Kazem Alavipanah 1,*, Mehrdad Jeihouni 1, Mohammad Hajeb 1,3, Dagmar Haase 4,5 and Sadroddin Alavipanah 4 1 Department of Remote Sensing and GIS, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran 1417853933, Iran; [email protected] (E.A.); [email protected] (M.J.); [email protected] (M.H.) 2 Department of Climatology and Geomorphology, Faculty of Geography and Environmental Sciences, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar 9617976487, Iran 3 Department of Remote Sensing and GIS, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran 1983963113, Iran 4 Department of Geography, Humboldt University of Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany; [email protected] (D.H.); [email protected] (S.A.) 5 Department of Computational Landscape Ecology, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research UFZ, 04318 Leipzig, Germany * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +98-21-6111-3536 Received: 3 October 2017; Accepted: 16 November 2017; Published: 14 December 2017 Abstract: Oceans/Seas are important components of Earth that are affected by global warming and climate change. Recent studies have indicated that the deeper oceans are responsible for climate variability by changing the Earth’s ecosystem; therefore, assessing them has become more important. Remote sensing can provide sea surface data at high spatial/temporal resolution and with large spatial coverage, which allows for remarkable discoveries in the ocean sciences. The deep layers of the ocean/sea, however, cannot be directly detected by satellite remote sensors.
    [Show full text]
  • 8.1 the Significance of Ocean Deoxygenation for Mesopelagic Communities Brad A
    8.1 The significance of ocean deoxygenation for mesopelagic communities Brad A. Seibel and Karen F. Wishner 8.1 The significance of ocean deoxygenation for mesopelagic communities Brad A. Seibel1 and Karen F. Wishner2 1College of Marine Science, University of South Florida, Florida, USA. Email: [email protected] 2Graduate School of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, Rhode island, USA. Email: [email protected] Summary • Mesopelagic community structure is directly dependent on the availability of oxygen for aerobic metabolism. Diversity, abundance, distribution and composition of mesopelagic species are all influenced by variations in oxygen at both large and small scales. • Ocean deoxygenation will decrease the minimum oxygen content in the mesopelagic zone and cause oxyclines to shift vertically (i.e. expansion of the oxygen minimum zone (OMZ) core) in the water column. • A species’ ability to extract oxygen from sea water has evolved to meet specific oxygen demand. As a result, species do not have excess capacity, nor do they live in environments with excess oxygen relative to their evolved capacity; thus, they are susceptible to reductions in oxygen partial pressure and increasing temperature (which elevates metabolic demand). • Changes in temperature and oxygen profiles within the water column may therefore decouple or enhance competition among different mesopelagic zooplankton species and the larger predators that forage on them at depth by changing zooplankton abundances, distributions, and the depth of layers, and altering species composition and diversity. The biogeochemical cycles (i.e. the biological pump and microbial assemblages) that rely on the mesopelagic zooplankton community will be substantially altered. SECTION 8.1 SECTION Ocean deoxygenation: Everyone’s problem 265 8.1 The significance of ocean deoxygenation for mesopelagic communities Ocean hypoxia effect Potential consequences Decreasing oxygen partial pressure (PO2) in any • Reduced capacity for prey capture and predator habitat will reduce aerobic metabolic performance evasion.
    [Show full text]
  • Trophic Structure of Midwater Fishes Over Cold Seeps in the North Central Gulf of Mexico
    TROPHIC STRUCTURE OF MIDWATER FISHES OVER COLD SEEPS IN THE NORTH CENTRAL GULF OF MEXICO Jennifer P. McClain-Counts A Thesis Submitted to the University of North Carolina Wilmington in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Center for Marine Science University of North Carolina Wilmington 2010 Approved by Advisory Committee Steve W. Ross Lawrence B. Cahoon Chair Joan W. Willey Accepted by Dean, Graduate School TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................. vi DEDICATION.................................................................................................................. vii LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................... viii LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... xi INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 METHODS ..........................................................................................................................4 Study Area................................................................................................................4 Sample Collection ....................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]