Sea-ice and water dynamics and moonlight impact the acoustic backscatter diurnal signal over the eastern Beaufort Sea continental slope

• Published in: Ocean Science
• Main Authors: Dmitrenko, Igor A., Petrusevich, Vladislav, Darnis, Gérald, Kirillov, Sergei A., Komarov, Alexander S., Ehn, Jens K., Forest, Alexandre, Fortier, Louis, Rysgaard, Søren, Barber, David G.
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Copernicus Publications 2020
• Subjects: article; Verlagsveröffentlichung; Beaufort Sea; Sea ice; midnight sun
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.5194/os-16-1261-2020; https://noa.gwlb.de/receive/cop_mods_00054436; https://noa.gwlb.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/cop_derivate_00054087/os-16-1261-2020.pdf; https://os.copernicus.org/articles/16/1261/2020/os-16-1261-2020.pdf

A 2-year-long time series of currents and acoustic backscatter from an acoustic Doppler current profiler, moored over the eastern Beaufort Sea continental slope from October 2003 to September 2005, were used to assess the dynamics and variability of the sound-scattering layer. It has been shown that acoustic backscatter is dominated by a synchronized diel vertical migration (DVM) of zooplankton. Our results show that DVM timings (i) were synchronous with sunlight and (ii) were modified by moonlight and sea ice, which attenuates light transmission to the water column. Moreover, DVM is modified or completely disrupted during highly energetic current events. Thicker ice observed during winter–spring 2005 lowered the backscatter values but favored extending DVM toward the midnight sun. In contrast to many previous studies, DVM occurred through the intermediate water layer during the ice-free season of the midnight sun in 2004. In 2005, the midnight-sun DVM was likely impacted by a high acoustic scattering generated by suspended particles. During full moon at low cloud cover, the nighttime moonlight illuminance led to zooplankton avoidance of the subsurface layer, disrupting DVM. Moreover, DVM was disrupted by upwelling, downwelling, and eddy passing. We suggest that these deviations are consistent with DVM adjusting to avoid enhanced water dynamics. For upwelling and downwelling, zooplankton likely respond to the along-slope water dynamics dominated by surface- and depth-intensified flow, respectively. This drives zooplankton to adjust DVM by aggregating in the low or upper intermediate water layer for upwelling and downwelling, respectively. The baroclinic eddy reversed DVM below the eddy core.