Progress in Oceanography Progress in Oceanography 71 (2006) 182–231 www.elsevier.com/locate/pocean
Physical and biological characteristics of the pelagic system across Fram Strait to Kongsfjorden
Haakon Hop a,*, Stig Falk-Petersen a, Harald Svendsen a,b, Slawek Kwasniewski c, Vladimir Pavlov a, Olga Pavlova a, Janne E. Søreide d
a Norwegian Polar Institute, N-9296 Tromsø, Norway b Geophysical Institute, University of Bergen, Allegt. 70, N-5007 Bergen, Norway c Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Powstancow Warszawy St. 55, 81-712 Sopot, Poland d Akvaplan-niva, N-9296 Tromsø, Norway
Abstract
The Fram Strait is very important with regard to heat and mass exchange in the Arctic Ocean, and the large quantities of heat carried north by the West Spitsbergen Current (WSC) influence the climate in the Arctic region as a whole. A large volume of water and ice is transported through Fram Strait, with net water transport of 1.7–3.2 Sv southward in the East Greenland Current and a volume ice flux in the range of 0.06–0.11 Sv. The mean annual ice flux is about 866,000 km2 yr 1. The Kongsfjorden–Krossfjorden fjord system on the coast of Spitsbergen, or at the eastern extreme of Fram Strait, is mainly affected by the northbound transport of water in the WSC. Mixing processes on the shelf result in Transformed Atlantic Water in the fjords, and the advection of Atlantic water also carries boreal fauna into the fjords. The phytoplank- ton production is about 80 g C m 2 yr 1 in Fram Strait, and has been estimated both below and above this for Kongs- fjorden. The zooplankton fauna is diverse, but dominated in terms of biomass by calanoid copepods, particularly Calanus glacialis and C. finmarchicus. Other important copepods include C. hyperboreus, Metridia longa and the smaller, more numerous Pseudocalanus (P. minutus and P. acuspes), Microcalanus (M. pusillus and M. pygmaeus) and Oithona similis. The most important species of other taxa appear to be the amphipods Themisto libellula and T. abyssorum, the euphausiids Thysanoessa inermis and T. longicaudata and the chaetognaths Sagitta elegans and Eukrohnia hamata. A comparison between the open ocean of Fram Strait and the restricted fjord system of Kongsfjorden–Krossfjorden can be made within limitations. The same species tend to dominate, but the Fram Strait zooplankton fauna differs by the presence of meso- and bathypelagic copepods. The seasonal and inter-annual variation in zooplankton is described for Kongsfjorden based on the record during July 1996–2002. The ice macrofauna is much less diverse, consisting of a handful of amphipod species and the polar cod. The ice-associated biomass transport of ice-amphipods was calculated, based on the ice area transport, at about 3.55 · 106 ton wet weight per year or about 4.2 · 105 tCyr 1. This represents a large energy input to the Green- land Sea, but also a drain on the core population residing in the multi-year pack ice (MYI) in the Arctic Ocean. A con- tinuous habitat loss of MYI due to climate warming will likely reduce dramatically the sympagic food source. The pelagic and sympagic food web structures were revealed by stable isotopes. The carbon sources of particulate organic matter (POM), being Ice-POM and Pelagic-POM, revealed different isotopic signals in the organisms of the food web, and also provided information about the sympagic–pelagic and pelagic–benthic couplings. The marine food web and energy path- ways were further determined by fatty acid trophic markers, which to a large extent supported the stable isotope picture of
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +47 77 75 05 22; fax: +47 77 75 05 01. E-mail address: [email protected] (H. Hop).
0079-6611/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.pocean.2006.09.007 H. Hop et al. / Progress in Oceanography 71 (2006) 182–231 183 the marine food web, although some discrepancies were noted, particularly with regard to predator–prey relationships of ctenophores and pteropods. 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Oceanographic conditions; Sea ice flux; Pelagic food web; Ice biota; Stable isotopes; Lipids
1. Introduction
The Fram Strait, between Greenland and Svalbard, represents the only deep connection to the Arctic Ocean (Fig. 1). The Svalbard archipelago consists of many islands, with Spitsbergen being the largest one facing Fram Strait to the west. The exchange of water masses between the north Atlantic and the Arctic Ocean takes place in two opposing current systems: the West Spitsbergen Current (WSC) heading north along the shelf slope on eastern part of the region and the East Greenland Current (EGC) heading south- ward along Greenland. The Fram Strait is very important with regard to heat and mass exchange in the Arctic Ocean, and the large quantities of heat carried north by the WSC influence the climate in the Arctic region as a whole. The inflow of Atlantic water into the Arctic Ocean through Fram Strait and the Barents Sea is about 5–10 times larger than the inflow of Pacific water through the Bering Strait (Haugan, 1999; Rudels et al., 1999; Schauer et al., 2002). The export of cold polar surface water and ice by the EGC is even larger, with a net transport southwards for the Fram Strait system. The heat balance is further com- plicated by deep-water formation in the Greenland Sea (>3500 m deep) and associated deep currents (Aag- aard et al., 1985). The extent of the ice cover in the Nordic Seas in spring has decreased since 1860 due to the net thermal effect of the northbound currents (Vinje, 2001). A continuation of this trend is predicted by global circula- tion models (GCMs; IPCC, 2000). If these predictions are correct, a permanent warming of the climate of the Arctic and a further decrease of the sea ice extent and thickness in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean will occur. Since the first evidence of warming in the Atlantic Water (AW) was found in the Nansen Basin in 1990 (Quadfasel et al., 1991), both observations (Woodgate et al., 2001) and modelling indicate a variable nature of AW flow, with abrupt cooling/warming events. There is general agreement that the Arctic Ocean at present is in a transition towards a new, warmer state (e.g. Polyakov et al., 2005). The cause of these variations are not well understood, but variations in the inflow of AW and outflow of Polar Water (PW) masses and sea ice are shown to be related to the Arctic Oscillation (AO; Rigor et al., 2002; Zhang et al., 2003) and the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO; Dickson et al., 2000) on inter-annual and decadal scales. These pressure systems are strongly linked to the atmospheric heat balance. Climate changes may thus alter the strength of the large-scale ocean circulation in the region. This would change the relative amount of source waters (PW and AW) that are mixed and subsequently result in modification of the water masses created on the shelf off West-Spitsbergen. The mixing of AW with the coastal Arctic Water (ArW) from the South Cape Current results in Transformed Atlantic Water (TAW). This water mass is advected across the shelf towards the coast (Saloranta and Svendsen, 2001) and subsequently into the fjords on Spits- bergen (Svendsen et al., 2002; Cottier et al., 2005). The advected water masses carry associated Arctic and Atlantic fauna into the fjords (Basedow et al., 2004; Willis et al., 2006). The magnitude of the advection into the fjords varies both seasonally and annually depending on the strength of a geostrophic control mecha- nism in the fjord mouth. Climate change affecting water mass distribution and sea ice conditions is expected to have large effects on ecosystem functions on different scales. The Kongsfjorden–Krossfjorden fjord system is particularly suitable for studies of effects of climate changes on ecosystems because it lies adjacent to both Arctic and Atlantic water masses (Fig. 1). In addition, a substantial amount of observations is available from this area (reviews, Hop et al., 2002b; Svendsen et al., 2002). The inclusion of these observations and existing time-series for this area is imperative for the detection of changes. In particular, we have a relatively long (10 yrs, since 1996) time series of zooplankton composition for this area. Changes in abundance, size and energy content of zooplankton prey influence the energy flux through the pelagic food web and cascade into ecological consequences for growth and survival of seabirds and marine mammals (Falk-Petersen et al., 1990, 2006; Dahl et al., 2000, 2003). 184 H. Hop et al. / Progress in Oceanography 71 (2006) 182–231
Fig. 1. The Fram Strait region, showing stations sampled for food web structures: Northeast Water Polynya in June/July 1993 (Hobson et al., 1995), Stns. 882 (September 1999), 890 (October 1999) and 1003 (September 2000) from Søreide et al. (in press), and stations south and west of Svalbard (white circles) in January 1999 (Sasaki et al., 2001; Sato et al., 2002). The underlying map was obtained from NOAA (www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/bathymetry/arctic/currentmap.html). Kongsfjorden and Krossfjorden on Spitsbergen (lower panel), the largest island in the Svalbard archipelago, with transect stations for CTD and zooplankton sampling with MPS and WP3 nets (modified from Svendsen et al., 2002).
The ecosystem components considered here constitute the pelagic and sympagic (ice-associated) systems, which are influenced by different water masses and ice conditions. The physical part focuses on the physical oceanographic conditions and sea ice conditions, whereas the biological parts focus on the lower trophic levels H. Hop et al. / Progress in Oceanography 71 (2006) 182–231 185 of the marine pelagic food web and its energy pathways to middle-to-upper levels. A comparison between the open ocean of Fram Strait and the restricted fjord system of Kongsfjorden–Krossfjorden is performed within limitations. The main problems relate to the lack of data on marine organisms collected simultaneously or semi-simultaneously from each environment during the same season, and the lack of data collected by anal- ogous sampling gear from comparable environments (e.g. equivalent water layers). Both areas generally lack systematic faunistic surveys, even though the record for Kongsfjorden is quite extensive (Hop et al., 2002b). This is particularly surprising in the case of Fram Strait, taking into account its role in the exchange of bio- mass and energy between the Nordic Seas and the Arctic Ocean. It has often been suggested, however, that the zooplankton faunistic information from these areas can be supplemented by the available information on fauna of the adjacent waters of the Nordic Seas or the Arctic Mediterranean (Smith, 1988; Longhurst, 1998). The main pelagic predators in the system include fishes, marine mammals and seabirds, some of which are associated with ice (e.g. seals and walruses). Their predatory impact on the lower trophic levels has been estimated for the Kongsfjorden system (Hop et al., 2002b). The population numbers of predators in Fram Strait are only known for some species, such as harp seals (ICES, 2004). Consumption by predators in the system has not been estimated, but some indications can be obtained from estimates for the neighbouring Barents Sea (Sakshaug et al., 1994; Wassmann et al., 2006) and the Norwegian Sea (Skjoldal et al., 2004). The ecosystem structure and function in the area of Fram Strait–Kongsfjorden are here revealed by means of stable isotopes of carbon and nitrogen as well as fatty acid trophic markers.
2. Oceanographic conditions of Fram Strait
Numerous studies based on direct observations and modelling of the currents have provided relatively large differences in estimates of southward and northward water volume transport through Fram Strait, ranging from 2.1–13.7 Sv to 1.0–9.5 Sv, respectively (Table 1). However, the net transport estimated though Fram Strait is relatively similar and varying from 1.7 to 4.2 Sv, with the exception of one low estimate by Zhang et al. (2000). The most realistic estimates of the volume transport through Fram Strait have probably been suggested by Fahrbach et al. (2001) based on high-density observations from 14 current meter moorings deployed in Fram Strait from September 1997 to September 1999. Their values for the northward (9.5 Sv), southward (13.7 Sv) and net (4.2 Sv) transports are higher than previous estimates, but are in good agreement with the most recent modelling results (Maslowski et al., 2004). The variations in temperature and current velocities (1997–1998) have a pronounced annual cycle in Fram Strait, except in the southward flow in the western part of the strait where the velocity has no clear annual cycle (Fig. 2). Maximum velocities and relatively high temperatures are observed in the WSC in the eastern part of Fram Strait, whereas maximum velocities in the southward flow and associated low temperatures are observed in the upper layer of the EGC in the western part of Fram Strait.
Table 1 Estimates of volume transport (Sv) through Fram Strait Method Northward transport Southward transport Net transport Author(s) Modelling 1.0 2.7 1.7 Holland et al. (1996) Modelling 3.2 6.4 3.2 Gerdes and Schauer (1997) Modelling 2.4–2.6 2.1–2.4 0–0.5 Zhang et al. (2000) Modelling 1.5 3.4 1.9 Karcher and Oberhuber (2002) Modelling 6.4 8.7 2.3 Maslowski et al. (2004) Observation 8.0 – – Aagaard et al. (1973) Observation 7.0 – – Greisman (1976) Observation 5.6 – – Hanzlick (1983) Observation – 3.0 – Foldvik et al. (1988) Observation 3.0 – – Jonsson (1989) Observation 9.5 13.7 4.2 Fahrbach et al. (2001) 186 H. Hop et al. / Progress in Oceanography 71 (2006) 182–231
Fig. 2. Vertical transects of the potential temperature (left panels) and meridional current velocities (right panels) across Fram Strait. The monthly mean values of temperature and currents were calculated based on records from 14 moorings in Fram Strait during the period September 1997 to August 1998 (data of VEINS Project ‘‘Variability of Exchange in Northern Seas’’). Mooring positions and instrument depths are detailed in Fig. 2 of Fahrbach et al. (2001).
The maximum velocities in the EGC are observed in the upper layer between 2 W and 6 W, and these are less than velocities in the core of the WSC. Arctic Water, with temperature about 1.3 to 1.75 C, is present near the surface layer of the EGC. The temperature increases relatively fast with depth due to recirculation of AW from the WSC and reaches 1.0–1.3 C during all seasons at 200–300 m. Below 1000 m, the water temper- ature is negative with a minimum in the bottom layer ( 0.90 to 0.95 C). The current velocities in the north- H. Hop et al. / Progress in Oceanography 71 (2006) 182–231 187 ward-directed WSC reach 40–50 cm s 1 during January–March. From May to July, the currents are signifi- cantly weaker, while in August–September, the current velocities have a second maximum (about 20 cm s 1), again in northward direction. The annual cycle of both currents and water temperature in the WSC is more pronounced in the upper layer than in the core itself (Fig. 3a). The northward current velocity decreases slightly with depth, and can attain the opposite direction at depths >1500 m (Fig. 2). There is also a sharp decrease of the northward velocity component of the WSC from east to west. The boundary between the northward and southward flow generally occurs at 4–6 E in the upper layer, while in the deeper layers, the position of the boundary between the flows varies between months, from 5 E to 2–3 W. In the upper layer, the monthly mean water temperature in the eastern part of Fram Strait reaches a maximum of 4.5–5.5 C in August–October and a minimum at the beginning of winter. The oceanographic structure of the currents in the deeper layer is generally similar to that in the upper layer, but the maximum temperatures are shifted to winter (Fig. 3b). Between the two major currents on each side of Fram Strait the circulation is characterised by a mesoscale eddy field. Instabilities in the WSC likely contribute to this eddy field (Johannessen et al., 1987), but to what extent is not known. Gascard et al. (1988) suggest that eddies are advected from the east with the recirculation in the strait and that the EGC is dynamically stable and unable to generate eddies, despite the outer fringe of the EGC being dominated by shifts in the position of the East Greenland Front (Holfort and Hansen, 2005). Thus, the baroclinic instability in the polar front, which marks the eastern edge of the EGC, is not a major contributor to the mesoscale eddy field (Foldvik et al., 1988). In the eastern part of Fram Strait, near Spitsbergen, the WSC follows the shelf slope (Hanzlick, 1983; Jons- son et al., 1992; Woodgate et al., 1998; Saloranta and Haugan, 2001) due to conservation of potential vortic- ity. However, because there is no density front (only a temperature and salinity front) between the warm and saline AW in the WSC and the cold and fresher Arctic-type Water on the West-Spitsbergen shelf, barotropic instabilities in the geostrophically constrained WSC along the slope cause significant onshore exchange (Salo- ranta and Svendsen, 2001). This is not in agreement with Hanzlick (1983) who found that baroclinic instability provides a possible cause of the flow variability. The exchanged water is manifested as numerous remnants of mixed AW and ArW on the shelf and in the fjords on West-Spitsbergen (Saloranta and Svendsen, 2001; Svendsen et al., 2002; Cottier et al., 2005). Related to these remnants, is heat transport from the WSC. The combined effects of topographically trapped vorticity waves along the West Spitsbergen shelf slope and iso- pycnal eddy diffusion are the main mechanisms causing the heat loss from the core of the WSC, both on-shelf and off-shelf (F. Nilsen, unpubl.). This heat flux is in the order of 1000 W m 2 throughout the year, except for the summer months June–July. This is in good agreement with earlier diagnostic estimates by Saloranta and Haugan (2001), who found that the warm core of the WSC loses approximately 1000 W m 2 during winter and 300 W m 2 during summer. Already at the turn of the last century it was established that a warm subsurface layer of AW was present in the Arctic Ocean (Nansen, 1902). However, even today there is uncertainty about the transport tracks of AW into the Arctic Ocean. Lagrangian float trajectories indicate that the eddy-dominated western part of the WSC recirculates, joining the EGC (Bourke et al., 1988; Gascard et al., 1995; Saloranta and Haugan, 2001). Thus, the major fraction of AW in the Arctic Ocean is likely supplied by the slope-confined eastern part of the WSC (Aagaard et al., 1987; Bourke et al., 1988). The AW is cooled and freshened on its transfer through the Arctic Ocean and is named Modified Atlantic Water (MAW) when returning toward Fram Strait from both the Eur- asian Basin (relatively warm water) and the Canadian Basin (cold water that has been cooled on the long path around the Canadian Basin). The annual variability of the northward volume transport through Fram Strait corresponds to the seasonal changes of sea level in the eastern part of the strait (Fig. 4). The volume transport has two maxima, in Feb- ruary and August, and two minima, in January and June. The similar variability of the sea level from records at the Barentsburg station on West-Spitsbergen (Fig. 4) confirms the conclusions of Morison (1991) and Fahr- bach et al. (2001) about a strong barotropic transport contribution from the WSC. The possible role of the wind field in driving the mesoscale eddy velocity field, as suggested by Manley et al. (1987), was investigated by Jonsson et al. (1992). They analysed current time series observed during the last 50 years and argued that, in at least the central and eastern Fram Strait, most of the observed eddy kinetic energy is generated by wind fluctuations. The mesoscale eddy scales were assumed to be the internal Rossby radius and estimated using hydrographic data to be about 20 km, which is in agreement with the estimates by 188 H. Hop et al. / Progress in Oceanography 71 (2006) 182–231
b
Fig. 3. Seasonal variability of the potential temperature ( C) and currents (cm s 1) in (a) the upper layer (41–101 m depth), and (b) the core layer of the West Spitsbergen Current. Graphs are based on temperature and current records from VEINS 14 moorings during September 1997 and August 1998. The upper layer is based on mooring data from 41 to 101 m depth, whereas the deeper layer range is 217–288 m. Red dots on x-axes of a, b are the longitude positions of mooring stations, which are also shown on the map (upper panel). Mooring positions and depths are further detailed in Fahrbach et al. (2001).
Hanzlick (1983). The wind driven circulation on the shelf area off West-Spitsbergen (Fig. 5) indicates little wind effect along the shelf slope, where topographic steering dominates, but strong wind effect over the shelf, especially around the tip of West-Spitsbergen, in trenches and over banks. Simulations with both tide and H. Hop et al. / Progress in Oceanography 71 (2006) 182–231 189
Fig. 4. Seasonal variability (September 1997–August 1998) of the northward monthly mean volume transport (solid line) and sea level at Barentsburg, Svalbard (dashed line). Volume transport was calculated based on VEINS data for the period September 1997–August 1998. Monthly mean sea level data in Barentsburg for the same period was obtained from Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSML: http:// www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/).
Fig. 5. Simulated surface circulation pattern (without tides) for the eastern Fram Strait, including the shelf and coast of West-Spitsbergen, based on two different wind patterns: northerly 15 m s 1 winds (left), and southerly 15 m s 1 winds (right). The SINMOD model is used in the simulations (Slagstad, 1987). The numbers on the axes indicate gridpoints, with spacing of 4 km. wind show that the effect of wind dominates completely over the shelf area during windy periods (Ø. Knutsen, H. Svendsen and F. Nilsen, unpubl.). The direct contribution by tides to volume/heat/salt flux through Fram Strait is assumed to be negligible, since their average net energy flux over a tidal period is close to zero (Kasajima and Svendsen, 2002). How- ever, the dynamic response when tides interact with variable topography may influence phenomena on larger scales in the area, and may for instance generate shelf-edge upwelling on the East Greenland shelf (Kasajima and Svendsen, 2002). 190 H. Hop et al. / Progress in Oceanography 71 (2006) 182–231
Fig. 6. Potential temperature in the West Spitsbergen Current, as mean annually values for 1960–2000, in the neighbourhood of 80 N, 9 E (modified from Pavlov and O’Dwyer, 2000).
Changes in the water mass properties can also be obtained from historical hydrographic data, at least in the WSC. Pavlov and O’Dwyer (2000) and Falk-Petersen et al. (2006) discussed the inter-annual changes of tem- perature and salinity in the core of the WSC during the last four decades. The maximum water temperature in summer (>5 C) was observed at a depth of 75 m in the 1960s, and decreased in the 1970s and 1980s (Fig. 6). A sharp increase of water temperature in the surface layer of Fram Strait started at the beginning of the 1990s, and the temperature reached 5.5–6.0 C by the end of the decade. The variability of the maximum water temperature in Fram Strait depends on the intensity of the WSC, which is mainly determined by barotropic factors (Fahrbach et al., 2001) connected to reorganisation of the atmospheric circulation. Dickson et al. (2000) reported that the inflow of the AW increases during the peri-
Fig. 7. Maximum temperature (red line) in Fram Strait, 1960–2000, and the NAO winter index (blue line) (Hurrell, 1995). H. Hop et al. / Progress in Oceanography 71 (2006) 182–231 191 ods of strong, positive NAO; this is also confirmed by Schlichtholz and Goszczko (2006). Minimum or max- imum values of the NAO winter index (Hurrell, 1995) generally correspond to respective minimum or max- imum values of temperature in Fram Strait (Fig. 7). In 1990, when the NAO index reached its highest value, the temperature continued to rise towards its maximum values (in 1998). Apart from meteorological reasons, a northward shift of the recirculation in the Greenland Sea (Fahrbach et al., 2001) can be one reason for this sharp increase of water temperatures in Fram Strait at the end of the 1990s.
3. Oceanographic conditions in Kongsfjorden
Kongsfjorden and Krossfjorden in West-Spitsbergen are open fjords, without sills, and therefore largely influenced by the processes on the adjacent shelf. The fjords share a common mouth to the adjacent shelf, where the water mass is a mixture of onshore transported warm and saline AW, the colder and fresher Arc- tic-type water on the shelf and freshwater (glacier melt, calving, precipitation). In Svendsen et al. (2002) the mixing product is named Transformed Atlantic Water (TAW), whereas the four other water masses repre- sented in Kongsfjorden are Surface Water (SW), Intermediate Water (IW), Local Water (LW) and Winter Cooled Water (WCW) (Table 2, Fig. 8). The strength of the mechanisms behind the three main sources shifts seasonally, and accordingly also there are changes in the characteristics of shelf and fjord water. Changes are between a state of Atlantic dominance (warm and saline) and one of Arctic dominance (cold and fresh). In years with weak influence of Atlantic origin water (Fig. 8a) the zooplankton community is represented with
Table 2 Characteristics of water masses identified in Kongsfjorden (Svendsen et al., 2002) Water mass Acronym Salinity (psu) Temperature ( C) Surface Water SW 28.0–34.4 Variable Intermediate Water IW 33.0–34.7 Variable Transformed Atlantic Water TAW >34.7 >1.0 Local Water LW >34.4 <1.0 Winter Cooled Water WCW >34.4 <