# Difference between revisions of "Nitrogen-phosphorus model worksheet"

From JModels

(create page) |
(→Worksheet: tweak) |
||

Line 9: | Line 9: | ||

# Try starting the model at steady state except for ten-fold less PO<sub>4</sub> in the deep box. Try the same run in the [[Phosphorus model|P-only model]]. Is the behaviour the same in both models? In terms of surface and deep P concentrations, do the two types of model converge to the same sorts of P concentrations? | # Try starting the model at steady state except for ten-fold less PO<sub>4</sub> in the deep box. Try the same run in the [[Phosphorus model|P-only model]]. Is the behaviour the same in both models? In terms of surface and deep P concentrations, do the two types of model converge to the same sorts of P concentrations? | ||

# Run the model in steady-state and examine the fluxes. Now run the model again and examine the fluxes shortly after: (a) doubling the deep nitrate concentration, and (b) after halving it. Which fluxes have changed between the three runs? Are the changes in the right direction to restore the N:P ratio to its steady-state value? [to calculate this, use the facility to "save data" and then examine it in Excel or Matlab] | # Run the model in steady-state and examine the fluxes. Now run the model again and examine the fluxes shortly after: (a) doubling the deep nitrate concentration, and (b) after halving it. Which fluxes have changed between the three runs? Are the changes in the right direction to restore the N:P ratio to its steady-state value? [to calculate this, use the facility to "save data" and then examine it in Excel or Matlab] | ||

− | # Try quadrupling the denitrification rate (the fraction of organic biomass that is remineralised via denitrification) in the standard model and examine the new steady-state that the model converges to. The denitrification flux should now equal ~488 Tg N y-1. Assuming other fluxes are as in the first figure overleaf, how large would the N<sub>2</sub>-fixation flux need to be in order to create a balance between inputs and outputs? Is it that size? | + | # Try quadrupling the denitrification rate (the fraction of organic biomass that is remineralised via denitrification) in the standard model and examine the new steady-state that the model converges to. The denitrification flux should now equal ~488 Tg N y<sup>-1</sup>. Assuming other fluxes are as in the first figure overleaf, how large would the N<sub>2</sub>-fixation flux need to be in order to create a balance between inputs and outputs? Is it that size? |

# Similarly with the atmospheric input of nitrogen, what effect does a 25% reduction in AN have on steady-state fluxes? | # Similarly with the atmospheric input of nitrogen, what effect does a 25% reduction in AN have on steady-state fluxes? | ||

# From the steady-state, try increasing RP (river delivery of phosphate) by 25%. What effect does this have on TPP? Reset the model parameters to their default values, run to steady-state again, then try increasing RN (river delivery of nitrate) by 25%. What effect does this have on TPP? | # From the steady-state, try increasing RP (river delivery of phosphate) by 25%. What effect does this have on TPP? Reset the model parameters to their default values, run to steady-state again, then try increasing RN (river delivery of nitrate) by 25%. What effect does this have on TPP? |

## Revision as of 15:02, 8 April 2008

The aim of this **nitrogen-phosphorus model worksheet** is to analyse some of the properties of the nitrogen-phosphorus model, as well as helping users to become familiar with running the JModels.

## Worksheet

Activate the nitrogen-phosphorus model by clicking on **this link**.

- Try some different types of initial conditions: e.g. (a) low nitrate (N), all else the same; (b) high N; (c) low P; (d) high P. Does the model always converge to a steady state?
- Is it always the same steady state?
- Try starting the model at steady state except for ten-fold less PO
_{4}in the deep box. Try the same run in the P-only model. Is the behaviour the same in both models? In terms of surface and deep P concentrations, do the two types of model converge to the same sorts of P concentrations? - Run the model in steady-state and examine the fluxes. Now run the model again and examine the fluxes shortly after: (a) doubling the deep nitrate concentration, and (b) after halving it. Which fluxes have changed between the three runs? Are the changes in the right direction to restore the N:P ratio to its steady-state value? [to calculate this, use the facility to "save data" and then examine it in Excel or Matlab]
- Try quadrupling the denitrification rate (the fraction of organic biomass that is remineralised via denitrification) in the standard model and examine the new steady-state that the model converges to. The denitrification flux should now equal ~488 Tg N y
^{-1}. Assuming other fluxes are as in the first figure overleaf, how large would the N_{2}-fixation flux need to be in order to create a balance between inputs and outputs? Is it that size? - Similarly with the atmospheric input of nitrogen, what effect does a 25% reduction in AN have on steady-state fluxes?
- From the steady-state, try increasing RP (river delivery of phosphate) by 25%. What effect does this have on TPP? Reset the model parameters to their default values, run to steady-state again, then try increasing RN (river delivery of nitrate) by 25%. What effect does this have on TPP?
- Look at the figures from the increased RN run. Why does increasing RP have an effect on TPP, but increasing RN have none? How is this possible when surface nitrate is more limiting to the ‘other’ phytoplankton?

Once you have completed these questions, follow this link for the answers.

## Further information

- Nitrogen-phosphorus model overview
- Nitrogen-phosphorus model details
- Nitrogen-phosphorus model pros
- Nitrogen-phosphorus model cons

## Reference

- Tyrrell, T. (1999). The relative influences of nitrogen and phosphorus on oceanic primary production.
*Nature***400**, 525–531.