<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">TC</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>The Cryosphere</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">TC</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">The Cryosphere</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1994-0424</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/tc-14-1795-2020</article-id><title-group><article-title>New observations of the distribution, morphology and dissolution dynamics of cryogenic gypsum in the Arctic Ocean</article-title><alt-title>New observations of the distribution, morphology and dissolution dynamics</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{New observations of the distribution, morphology and dissolution dynamics}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{J.~E. Wollenburg et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Wollenburg</surname><given-names>Jutta E.</given-names></name>
          <email>jutta.wollenburg@awi.de</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Iversen</surname><given-names>Morten</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5287-1110</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Katlein</surname><given-names>Christian</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2422-0414</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Krumpen</surname><given-names>Thomas</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6234-8756</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Nicolaus</surname><given-names>Marcel</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Castellani</surname><given-names>Giulia</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Peeken</surname><given-names>Ilka</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1531-1664</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Flores</surname><given-names>Hauke</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Alfred-Wegener-Institut Helmholtz-Zentrum für
Polar- und Meeresforschung, 27570 Bremerhaven, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>MARUM – Zentrum für Marine Umweltwissenschaften der Universität Bremen, University of Bremen, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>27359 Bremen, Germany</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Jutta E. Wollenburg (jutta.wollenburg@awi.de)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>4</day><month>June</month><year>2020</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>14</volume>
      <issue>6</issue>
      <fpage>1795</fpage><lpage>1808</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>28</day><month>September</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>3</day><month>December</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>3</day><month>April</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>7</day><month>April</month><year>2020</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2020 Jutta E. Wollenburg et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2020</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/1795/2020/tc-14-1795-2020.html">This article is available from https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/1795/2020/tc-14-1795-2020.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/1795/2020/tc-14-1795-2020.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/1795/2020/tc-14-1795-2020.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e152">To date, observations on a single location indicate that cryogenic gypsum
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ca</mml:mi><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>]</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal" class="Radical">⚫</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) may constitute an efficient but hitherto
overlooked ballasting mineral enhancing the efficiency of the biological
carbon pump in the Arctic Ocean. In June–July 2017 we sampled cryogenic
gypsum under pack ice in the Nansen Basin north of Svalbard using a plankton
net mounted on a remotely operated vehicle (ROVnet). Cryogenic gypsum
crystals were present at all sampled stations, which suggested a persisting
cryogenic gypsum release from melting sea ice throughout the investigated
area. This was supported by a sea ice backtracking model, indicating that
gypsum release was not related to a specific region of sea ice formation.
The observed cryogenic gypsum crystals exhibited a large variability in
morphology and size, with the largest crystals exceeding a length of 1 cm.
Preservation, temperature and pressure laboratory studies revealed that
gypsum dissolution rates accelerated with increasing temperature and
pressure, ranging from 6 % d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> by mass in polar surface water (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C) to 81 % d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> by mass in Atlantic Water (2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C at 65 bar). When testing the preservation of gypsum in formaldehyde-fixed
samples, we observed immediate dissolution. Dissolution at warmer
temperatures and through inappropriate preservation media may thus explain
why cryogenic gypsum was not observed in scientific samples previously.
Direct measurements of gypsum crystal sinking velocities ranged between 200
and 7000 m d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, suggesting that gypsum-loaded marine aggregates could
rapidly sink from the surface to abyssal depths, supporting the hypothesized
potential of gypsum as a ballasting mineral in the Arctic Ocean.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e257">Climate change in the Arctic Ocean has led to a drastic reduction in the extent of summer
sea ice as well as to a significant thinning of the sea ice (Kwok,
2018; Kwok and Rothrock, 2009). Sea ice strength has reduced, and increased
deformation and fractionation result in a progressively increasing sea ice
drift speed (Docquier et al., 2017) and sea ice export.
Over the past decades, the ice export via the Fram Strait alone has increased
by 11 % per decade during the productive spring and summer periods
(Smedsrud et al., 2017). An increasing amount of sea ice
produced in the East Siberian and Laptev seas melts over the adjacent
continental slopes or in the central Arctic Ocean (Krumpen et al.,
2019). Overall, the Arctic Ocean sea ice cover has shifted to a
predominantly seasonal ice cover. However, although the majority of sea ice
diminishes during late summer, the amount of sea ice produced in autumn and
winter progressively increases (Kwok, 2018).</p>
      <p id="d1e260">Large-scale transformations in the seasonal sea ice cover impact the
physical, chemical and biological dynamics of the sea ice–ocean system.
However, especially the interactions of physical–chemical processes within
the sea ice and pelagic to benthic biological processes have only received a
little attention. Of particular importance are poorly soluble minerals
precipitated within the brine channels of sea ice, which, once released, may
ballast organic material sinking to the seafloor.
The changing Arctic sea ice becomes progressively thinner, develops more leads, allows increasing light penetration into the under-ice surface water (Katlein et al., 2015; Nicolaus et<?pagebreak page1796?> al., 2013, 2012) and supports fast-growing and often massive under-ice phytoplankton blooms (Arrigo et al., 2012, 2014; Assmy et al., 2017). A recent study reported on the sudden
export event of an under-ice bloom of the “unsinkable alga” <italic>Phaeocystis</italic>, caused by the
ballasting effect of cryogenic gypsum released from melting sea ice
(Wollenburg et al., 2018a). This single event was
the first and only report of cryogenic gypsum release in the Arctic Ocean.
Moreover, this sea ice precipitation of cryogenic gypsum has never been
recorded in Arctic sediments, sediment traps or other field studies.</p>
      <p id="d1e266">When sea ice forms, the concentrations of dissolved ions in brine increase,
and, depending on the temperature of sea ice, a series of minerals (ikaite,
mirabilite, hydrohalite, gypsum, hydrohalite, sylvite, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MgCl</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
Antarcticite) precipitates (Butler, 2016; Butler and Kennedy, 2015;
Geilfus et al., 2013; Golden et al., 1998; Wollenburg et al., 2018a). Once
released into the ocean, gypsum is considered to be the most stable of the
cryogenic precipitates (Butler et al., 2017; Strunz and
Nickel, 2001). Sea-ice-derived cryogenic gypsum was first described by
Geilfus et al. (2013) in a comprehensive work on the
chemical, physical and mineralogical aspects of its precipitation in
experimental and natural sea ice off Greenland. According to FREZCHEM, a
chemical–thermodynamic model that was developed to quantify aqueous
electrolyte properties at sub-zero temperatures, cryogenic gypsum can
precipitate at temperatures below <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>18 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C and within a small
temperature window between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>6.5 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>8.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (Geilfus et
al., 2013; Marion et al., 2010; Wollenburg et al., 2018a). However,
measurements on the stoichiometric solubility products showed that gypsum
dynamics in ice–brine equilibrium systems strongly depend on the solubility
and precipitation of hydrohalite and mirabilite (Butler, 2016;
Butler et al., 2017). So far gypsum precipitation in experimental setups
was only observed at temperatures between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, and
not in the lower temperature range (Butler, 2016; Butler et
al., 2017). Moreover, as Arctic sea ice rarely reaches temperatures lower
than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, cryogenic gypsum is more likely precipitated within
the higher temperature window in the Arctic Ocean (Wollenburg et al., 2018a).</p>
      <p id="d1e368">A model applied to understand the gypsum release event of 2015 showed that
the ice floe was too warm when it started to form and identified December to
February as the most likely time span for gypsum precipitation (Wollenburg et al., 2018a). Due to the absence of a
downward brine flux in this advanced phase of sea ice formation, gypsum
crystals likely remain trapped in the ice until spring. In the absence of
sufficient field observations, gypsum release from sea ice is expected to
peak at the beginning of the melting season, when sea ice warms to
temperatures above <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C. This temperature marks the transition
in the fluid transport capacities of sea ice, allowing brine water and
included crystals to be released into the water column (Golden et al., 1998). However, due to a lack of any extensive,
year-round field studies, our knowledge depends on models, kinetics and two
single field observations (Geilfus et al., 2013; Wollenburg et al.,
2018a). There are no studies on sea-ice-derived cryogenic gypsum crystal
morphologies and its stability in seawater. It is unclear whether gypsum
just precipitates during the assumed peak from December to February or whether
it continues to grow in remaining brine during sea ice drift.</p>
      <p id="d1e391">In this study, we systematically investigated the occurrence of cryogenic
gypsum release from sea ice in spring 2017 with special emphasis on the
morphological properties of the crystals. Varieties of cryogenic gypsum
crystal morphologies are described and illustrated. The sampled gypsum
crystals were further subjected to various laboratory experiments. Hereby,
we investigated the dissolution behaviour over typical depth and
temperature ranges of the Arctic water column and in formaldehyde solution
typically used for biological sampling preservation. We also made direct
measurements of the size-specific sinking velocities of individual gypsum
crystals. These experiments were conducted to answer the following question: why has cryogenic gypsum not previously been observed in field studies and does it qualify as a ballast mineral?</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Material and methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Gypsum sampling with the ROVnet and on-board treatment</title>
      <p id="d1e409">RV <italic>Polarstern</italic> expedition PS 106 (June–July 2017) in the early melting season gave the
opportunity to systematically study the occurrence of cryogenic gypsum
release and the morphological properties of gypsum crystals in the area
north of Svalbard and on the Barents Sea shelf (Fig. 1a; Table 1).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e418">Properties of sea ice stations and characteristics of ROVnet
profiles (NA: not available).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.92}[.92]?><oasis:tgroup cols="10">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Latitude</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Longitude</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Ocean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Sampling</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Water temp.</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Mean ice</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">Filtered water</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Cruise site</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Date</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">depth (m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">depth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Salinity</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">thickness (m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">volume (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.1 Stat. 32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">15 Jun 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">81.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">10.86</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1608</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">under-ice</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">34.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">2.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">NA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">NA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.2 Stat. 45</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">25 Jun 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">78.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">30.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">233</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">under-ice</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">33.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">2.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.47</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">34.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">4.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">34.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">2.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.2 Stat. 66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2 Jul 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">81.66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">32.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1506</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">under-ice</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">33.18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">5 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">33.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">2.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">33.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">3.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.2 Stat. 80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">12 Jul 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">81.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">17.13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1010</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">32.87</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">1.80</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">1.7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e887">Study area with sample locations. <bold>(a)</bold> Sea ice coverage at the station
and time of sampling in %. <bold>(b)</bold> Trajectories of the sea ice from which the
cryogenic gypsum was released. Each trajectory starts where sea ice formed
(black circles) and shows its drift until the time and place of sampling
(white circles). The colour scale of the drift trajectories indicates the
month in which the backtracked sea ice was at any given position.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/1795/2020/tc-14-1795-2020-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e903">Cryogenic gypsum was sampled from the upper 10 m of the under-ice water at
four stations distributed throughout the expedition area (Fig. 1a; Table 1).
The first part of the expedition (PS106/1) consisted of a drift study
north of Svalbard, during which the vessel was anchored to an ice floe
(station 32). This ice floe was revisited 6 weeks later at the end of the
expedition (PS106/2) (station 80). During the second part of the expedition
(PS106/2), cryogenic gypsum was collected over the western Barents Sea
(station 45) and in the Nansen Basin to the north-east of Svalbard (station 66).</p>
      <p id="d1e906">Gypsum crystals were sampled with a plankton net mounted on a remotely
operated vehicle (ROVnet, Fig. S1). The ROVnet consists of a polycarbonate
frame with an opening of 40 cm by 60 cm, to which a zooplankton net with a
mesh size of 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m was attached (Flores et al.,
2018). For gypsum sampling, a handmade nylon net with an opening of 10 cm by
15 cm and a mesh size of 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m was mounted in the zooplankton net
opening. The concentrated particulate material of the small nylon net was
collected in a 2 L polyethylene bottle attached to the cod end of the net. A
gauze-covered window in the cod-end bottle allowed seawater to drain<?pagebreak page1797?> out.
Both nets were mounted on the aft end of a M500 (Ocean Modules, Sweden)
observation class ROV carrying an extensive sensor suite described in
Katlein et al. (2017). After each ROVnet deployment, the nets
were rinsed with ambient seawater to concentrate the sample in the cod end
of the net. The ROVnet sampled horizontal profiles in the water directly
below the sea ice. Standard ROVnet profiles were conducted at the ice–water
interface at 5 m and 10 m depths. The distance covered by each profile
ranged between 300 and 600 m. At station 32, the 10 m profile was aborted
due to technical failure. At station 80 no 5 m profile was sampled due
to time constraints, and the sub-surface sample was discarded due to handling
failure (Table 1).</p>
      <p id="d1e925">The concentrated particulate material collected in the cod-end bottle of the
gypsum sampling net was mixed with a sample-equivalent volume of 98 %
ethanol and stored at 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C until further analyses (Wollenburg et al., 2018a).</p>
      <p id="d1e937">At ROVnet sampling stations, ice thickness was estimated through thickness
drill holes with a tape measure. To characterize the properties of the ice
floes sampled on the floe-wide scale, ice thickness surveys were conducted
at each sampling station with a GEM-2 (Geophex) electromagnetic induction
ice-thickness sensor (Katlein et al., 2018).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e943">Size measurements and percentage of mass contribution of gypsum
crystals from the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction and the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="9">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col5" align="center" colsep="1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m fraction </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col6" nameend="col9" align="center"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m fraction </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Cruise, site, mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Length <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Length <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">water depth of catch</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">length</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">width</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">width</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">length</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">width</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">width</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">ratio</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">weight %</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">ratio</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">weight %</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.1, Stat. 32, 0 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">68.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">44.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.55</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">43.70</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">50.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">35.74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">56.30</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.1, Stat. 32, 5 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">63.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">35.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.77</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">33.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">49.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">35.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">66.28</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.1, Stat. 32, mean (0–5 m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">65.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">40.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.65</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">38.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">50.28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">35.30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">61.29</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.2, Stat. 45, 0 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">114.18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">65.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">79.90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">58.74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">42.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">20.10</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.2, Stat. 45, 5 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">110.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">64.84</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">73.39</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">56.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">38.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">26.61</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.2, Stat. 45, 10 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">92.83</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">46.81</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">66.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">50.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">29.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">33.86</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.2, Stat. 45, mean (0–10 m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">106.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">44.45</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">73.14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">55.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">37.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">1.48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">26.86</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.2, Stat. 66, 0 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1355.38</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">415.10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.27</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">99.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">56.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">25.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.21</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">0.75</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.2, Stat. 66, 5 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">411.42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">73.45</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">75.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">62.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">12.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">5.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">24.77</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.2, Stat. 66, 10 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">101.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">23.19</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.37</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">61.18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">39.31</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">5.79</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">6.79</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">38.82</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.2, Stat. 66, mean (0–10 m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">622.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">164.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">58.16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">52.67</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">12.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">4.18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">41.84</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PS106.2, Stat. 80, 10 m</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3078.44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1830.00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">89.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">71.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">30.76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">2.33</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">10.95</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Initial analyses of ROVnet samples</title>
      <?pagebreak page1798?><p id="d1e1574">In the home laboratory the samples were rinsed onto a 32 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m mesh
using fresh water. The samples were then oven-dried at 50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C for
20 h. The remaining crystals were transferred into pre-weighed
micropalaeontological slides, and their weight was determined with a
high-precision Sartorius SE2 ultra-microbalance. Under a Zeiss Axio Zoom V16
microscope, pictures were taken with an Axiocam 506 colour camera. We made
both overview images of the whole sample and detailed images of individual
crystals. From all samples and crystal morphologies, individual crystals
were analysed using Raman microscopy, which confirmed that the crystals were
gypsum (Wollenburg et al., 2018a). As in some
samples both very large and very small crystals (Figs. S3–S4) were
observed; the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 32 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m samples were dry-sieved over a 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m analysis sieve. The length and width of the cryogenic gypsum
crystals in the size fractions <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">32</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m were determined with the software application
ImageJ for 50 crystals in each sample and size fraction
(Schneider et al., 2012) (Table 2).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Initial analyses of ice cores</title>
      <p id="d1e1655">At all ice stations, sea ice cores for archive purposes and for further
measurement of bottom communities were drilled with a 9 cm diameter ice
corer (Kovacs Enterprise) and stored at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C
(Peeken et al., 2018b). One ice core from station 80 and four
bottom slices (10 cm) of ice cores from station 45 were studied to
investigate the gypsum crystal morphologies within sea ice. Each section was
transferred into a measuring jug with lukewarm tap water for approximately 2 s, and then the jug was emptied over a 32 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m analysis sieve
and repeatedly refilled. This process was continued until all ice was
melted. With the aid of a hand shower and a wash bottle the residue on the
sieve was rinsed and transferred into a 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m mesh-covered funnel,
dried and transferred into a micropalaeontological picking tray for
inspection and documentation. For storage, the residue was transferred onto
pre-weighed, labelled micropalaeontological slides.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>Dissolution experiments</title>
      <p id="d1e1701">The aim of our dissolution experiments was to investigate the persistence of
gypsum crystals against dissolution in the Arctic water column (water mass
trials) and under common biological sample treatment (formaldehyde trial).<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?></p>
      <p id="d1e1705">Dissolution experiments were carried out on individual gypsum crystals
collected from ROVnet samples. Hereby, five cryogenic gypsum crystals with
different crystal morphologies and from both size fractions were used in
each reaction chamber. Before the start and after the termination of each
experiment, pictures of the cryogenic gypsum crystals used were taken with
an Axiocam 506 colour camera under a Zeiss Axio Zoom V16 microscope. The
weight of the crystals before and after each treatment was determined with a
high-precision Sartorius SE2 ultra-microbalance after they had been
transferred into a pre-weighed silver boat. The experimental running time
of each experiment was 24 h.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4.SSS1">
  <label>2.4.1</label><title>Water mass trials</title>
      <p id="d1e1715">The experiments to simulate dissolution within the different water masses
and hydrostatic pressure regimes of the Arctic Ocean were carried out with
high-pressure chambers installed in a cooling table
(Wollenburg et al., 2018b). With a high-pressure pump
(ProStar218 Agilent Technologies), peak tubing and multiple titanium valves,
a continuous isobaric and isocratic one-way seawater flow of 0.3 mL min<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> was
directed through a set of four serially arranged high-pressure chambers each
with an internal volume of 0.258 mL (Wollenburg et al.,
2018b). This setup allowed for dissolution experiments at defined pressures
and temperatures (Wollenburg et al., 2018b). For the
experiments, we used sterile-filtered (0.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m mesh) North Sea water
that was adjusted to a salinity of 34.98 by the addition of 1 g Instant
Ocean<sup>®</sup> sea salt per litre and psu offset. The natural pH of 8.1
after equilibration to the refrigerator's atmosphere (at 2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C
and at atmospheric pressure) lowers to pH 8.05 at 2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C at 150 bar (Culberson and Pytkowicx, 1968). Five experiments<?pagebreak page1799?> with
four high-pressure chambers were carried out. The polar surface water (PSW)
experimental trial was running at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C and 3 bar, the experimental Atlantic Water (AW) trial was running at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C and
65 bar, and three experimental deep water trials were conducted at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C and 100, 120 and 150 bar.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4.SSS2">
  <label>2.4.2</label><title>Formaldehyde trial</title>
      <p id="d1e1822">To study the effect of formaldehyde treatment on cryogenic gypsum, the
crystals were subjected to a formaldehyde solution of 4 % in seawater,
which is commonly used to preserve biological samples. The stock solution
consisted of 500 mL formaldehyde at a concentration of 40 %, 500 mL aqua deionized water and 100 g hexamethylenetetramine, adjusted to a pH of 7.3–7.9. Aliquots of
the 20 % stock solution were added to the 4-fold volume of artificial
Arctic Ocean seawater to obtain a final concentration of 4 %.</p>
      <p id="d1e1825">The gypsum crystals were transferred into Falcon tubes, and the 4 %
formaldehyde solution was added. The Falcon tubes were then either stored at
3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C or at room temperature. After the experiments, the gypsum
crystal–formaldehyde suspension was washed with deionized water over a 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m mesh using a wash bottle and dried on gauze. As in all
formaldehyde trials all gypsum dissolved, and no post-experimental weight was
determined.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5">
  <label>2.5</label><title>Size-specific settling velocities of gypsum</title>
      <p id="d1e1855">The size-specific sinking velocity of cryogenic gypsum was measured in a
settling cylinder (Ploug et al., 2008). The cylinder (30 cm
high and 5 cm in diameter) was filled with filtered seawater (salinity 32)
and surrounded by a water jacket for thermal stabilization at 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C. The settling cylinder was closed at both ends, only allowing the insertion of
a wide-bore pipette at the top. Immediately before measurement, the gypsum
was submerged into seawater with a salinity of 32 and a temperature of 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, and then transferred to the settling cylinder with a
wide-bore pipette. The gypsum crystals were allowed to sink out of the
wide-bore pipette, which was centred in the cylinder. The descent of the
crystals was recorded by a Basler 4 MP Ethernet camera equipped with a
25 mm fixed focal lens (Edmund Optics). The settling column was illuminated
from the sides by a custom-made LED light source. The camera recorded seven
images per second as the gypsum crystals sank through the settling column.
The measurements were only done with one camera, so a two-dimensional view.
We measured over a distance of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5 cm after the crystals had
reached terminal settling velocity and at stable and constant temperature
and salinity. The technical uncertainties of the setup were smaller than the
uncertainties between two similar-sized gypsum crystals, which had up to
1000 m d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> uncertainties (see Fig. 6, with equivalent spherical diameters of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1 mm). The setup was calibrated by recording a length scale
before sinking velocity measurements. The size and settling of the
individual gypsum crystals was determined with the image analysis software
ImageJ. This was done by using the projected area of the crystals to
calculate the equivalent spherical diameter and the distance travelled
between the subsequent images to determine the sinking velocity of the
individual crystals (Iversen et al., 2010)</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS6">
  <label>2.6</label><title>Backtracking the sampled ice floes under which cryogenic gypsum was sampled</title>
      <p id="d1e1910">To determine sea ice drift trajectories of sampled sea ice, we used a
Lagrangian approach (ICETrack) that traces sea ice backward or forward in
time using a combination of satellite-derived, low-resolution drift products.
So far, ICETrack has been used in a number of publications to examine sea
ice sources, pathways, thickness changes and atmospheric processes acting on
the ice cover (Damm et al., 2018; Krumpen et al., 2016; Peeken et al.,
2018a). A detailed description is provided in Krumpen et al. (2019).</p>
      <p id="d1e1913">Sea ice motion information was provided by different institutions and obtained
from different sensors and for different time intervals. In this study we
applied a combination of three different products: (i) motion estimates
based on a combination of scatterometer and radiometer data provided by the
Center for Satellite Exploitation and Research (CERSAT; Girard-Ardhuin
and Ezraty, 2012); (ii) the OSI-405-c motion product from the Ocean and Sea
Ice Satellite Application Facility (OSI SAF; Lavergne, 2016); and
(iii) polar pathfinder daily motion vectors from the National Snow and Ice
Data Center (NSIDC; Tschudi et al., 2016).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1918">Cryogenic gypsum crystals collected during <italic>Polarstern</italic> expedition
PS106/1 from the upper water column. <bold>(a)</bold> Crystals collected from station 66
at 5 m water depth. <bold>(b)</bold> Crystals collected from station 66 at 0 m water
depth. <bold>(c)</bold> Crystals collected from station 45 at 10 m water depth. <bold>(d)</bold> Crystals collected from station 45 at 10 m water depth entangled in an
algae filament.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/1795/2020/tc-14-1795-2020-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e1945">Proportional mass (%) of cryogenic gypsum for the size fractions
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m for all
ROV samples.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/1795/2020/tc-14-1795-2020-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1986">The tracking approach works as follows: an ice parcel is traced backward or
forward in time on a daily basis. Tracking is stopped if (a) ice hits the
coastline or fast ice edge or (b) ice concentration at a specific location
drops below 50 %, at which point we assume the ice to be formed or melted. The applied
sea ice concentration product was provided by CERSAT and was based on 85 GHz
SSM/I brightness temperatures, using the ARTIST Sea Ice (ASI) algorithm.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Presence and distribution of cryogenic gypsum under the investigated ice floes</title>
      <p id="d1e2005">Based on backtracking (Krumpen, 2018) and sea ice observations, the
sampled ice floes had an age of 1 to 3 years (Fig. 1b), were originating
in the Siberian Sea (station 32/80) and the Laptev Sea (station 45), and were
more locally grown in the Nansen Basin (station 66). Whereas the mean sea
ice thickness at the ROV survey stations ranged between 94 and 156 cm, the
mean sea ice thickness of the investigated ice floes, estimated by
ice-thickness sensor surveys (Katlein et al., 2018), was 1.90 m for station 32, 1.00 m for station 45 and 1.80 m for stations 66 and 80
(Fig. 1a, Table 1).<?pagebreak page1800?> Despite the different origins and thicknesses of sea
ice, cryogenic gypsum crystals were found at all stations and at all depth
layers sampled with the ROVnet (Fig. 1a, b, Table 1). At all stations and
sampling depths, the samples were dominated by cryogenic gypsum with a
proportional dry weight of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 96.5 % in the 5 m sample at
station 32 and of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 99 % in all other samples (Figs. 2,
S2–S5). Other lithogenic particles, as are often found in sea ice
(Nürnberg et al., 1994), were essentially absent.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e2024">Comparison of cryogenic gypsum crystals collected from the water
column at station PS45 (10 m water depth) <bold>(a, b)</bold> with crystals retrieved from
an ice core collected above the ROVnet sampling area <bold>(c, d)</bold>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/1795/2020/tc-14-1795-2020-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>The morphology of cryogenic gypsum</title>
      <p id="d1e2047">The samples collected at station 32 were dominated by solid, rounded, matt
cryogenic gypsum crystals with a mean length–width ratio of 1.40–1.76 (Tables 2, S2). The proportional mass contribution of the smaller-sized crystals of
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction increased with depth
and outweighed the contribution of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size
fraction with 56.30 % and 66.28 % for the 0 and 5 m water depth samples,
respectively (Fig. 3). At 0 m, the mean length of the crystals was 68.46 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction and 50.64 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m
in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m fraction. At 5 m depth, crystal
dimensions were similar with mean crystal lengths ranging from  63.28 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m
in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m fraction to 49.91 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction.</p>
      <p id="d1e2198">At station 45, the crystals were mostly solid and for the most part hyaline
rather than matt crystals as at station 32 (Figs. 2c, d, 6, S3). With
decreasing weight proportion, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size clearly
dominated the 0, 5 and 10 m samples with 79.90 %, 73.39 % and 66.14 %,
respectively. In the 0 m layer samples, mean crystal lengths were 114.18 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction and 58.74 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m
in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction (Table 2). At 5 m
depth, we observed mean crystal lengths of 111 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction and 56.73 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m fraction. The mean crystal lengths in the 10 m
samples were 92.83 and 50.32 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m for the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fractions, respectively. At
station 45 the crystal length–width ratio varied between 1.37 and 1.98,
measured in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction of the
surface sample and in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction of the 10 m
sample. The cryogenic gypsum crystals retrieved from the melted ice core
drilled at this station were solid and hyaline. In size and shape they
resembled the crystals of the 10 m layer at this station with a mean
crystal length of 114.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m, mean width of 57.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m and a
length–width ratio of 2 (Fig. 4).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e2418">Comparison of cryogenic gypsum crystals collected from the water
column at station PS80-2 (10 m water depth) <bold>(a, b)</bold> with crystals retrieved
from an ice core collected above the ROVnet sampling area <bold>(c, d)</bold>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/1795/2020/tc-14-1795-2020-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2434">At station 66, the crystals from 0 m water depth were dominated by large, solid, pencil-like, hyaline crystals with a mean crystal length of 1355 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m and mean width of 415 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in the dominating <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m fraction (99.25 % mass) (Figs. 2b, S4, Table 2). These crystals
with an average length–width ratio of 3.27 were found as isolated crystals
but very often also as intergrown crystal rosettes with 2 to more than 10
individual crystals involved (Fig. S4, Table 2). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction (0.75 % mass) was dominated by rounded, whitish, matt gypsum particles and tiny gypsum needles with a mean crystal length
of 56.67 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m (Fig. S4, Table 2). As at the other stations, the weight
proportion of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction significantly
decreased from 99.25 in the 0 m, to 75.23 at 5 m and to 61.18 % in the 10 m
sample (Fig. 2). The size of cryogenic gypsum crystals collected from the 5
and 10 m layers was significantly smaller and predominantly composed of
isolated small hyaline and euhedral gypsum needles. The length–width ratio
ranged between 5.60 (5 m) and 4.37 (10 m) (Figs. 2a, S4, Table 2). In the 5 m layer sample, the mean crystal length was 411.42 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction and 62.03 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction. The 10 m samples showed
a mean crystal length of 101.40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 and 30.71 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction (Table 2).</p>
      <p id="d1e2614">In the 10 m layer sample of station 80, large tabular gypsum crystals
measuring up to 1 cm in length (mean length: 3078 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m, mean width:
1830 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) dominated the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction.
Their average length–width ratio was 1.7. This size fraction contributed
89.1 % of the gypsum mass (Figs. 5, S5, Table 2). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size fraction was composed of fragments of these
large crystals and a few small gypsum needles. These often intergrown columnar
crystals looked bladed and for the most part also dented and with numerous cracks.
Their mean length was 71.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m. The ice core retrieved from this
station was very porous and broke into pieces of 9 to 11 cm. Cryogenic
gypsum was retrieved from all these ice core sections and revealed a
dominance of extraordinary large crystals (Figs. 5, S5), which resembled<?pagebreak page1801?> the
ROVnet samples from this station. The largest cryogenic gypsum crystals
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6000 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m (mean crystal length: 2821 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m, mean
width: 1689 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m) were retrieved from the topmost 8 cm of the ice core section,
whereas the maximum crystal size gradually decreased downcore (Fig. S5).
The crystals themselves lacked sharp corners, and the large crystals had
cavities inside, indicating an advanced stage of dissolution (Figs. 5c, d,
S5).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Dissolution experiments</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS1">
  <label>3.3.1</label><title>Experiments to simulate cryogenic gypsum dissolution within the Arctic water column</title>
      <p id="d1e2725">Our study area was characterized by the presence of three main water masses (Nikolopoulos et al., 2018; Rudels, 2015): (1) the polar surface water
(PSW), including the halocline, with a variable mean salinity of 32 and a
temperature range of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to 0.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, extending from the surface to
maximum 100 m water depth (Nikolopoulos et al., 2018); (2) the
Atlantic Water (AW) with a mean salinity of 34.4 to 34.7 and variable
temperature of 0.0 to 4.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C in the study area, extending from
below the PSW to 600–800 m water depth (Nikolopoulos et al.,
2018); and (3) the Eurasian Arctic deep water (EADW), which fills the deep Eurasian
Basin below the AW with a temperature range of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.94 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C and a salinity of about 34.9 (Nikolopoulos et
al., 2018).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e2783">Dissolution experiments on cryogenic gypsum crystals. “Water mass”
simulating experiments with 34.9 ‰ sterile filtered
seawater. Each experiment was conducted in parallel in 3–4 separate pressure
chambers.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col6" align="center">Dissolution in weight % </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Chamber (no.)/</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">PSW</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">AW</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">EADW (1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">EADW (2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">EADW (3)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">water mass</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">11.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">76.22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">47.52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">57.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">74.92</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.33</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">86.23</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">26.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">71.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">53.77</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">82.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">47.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">57.43</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">78.57</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">10.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">58.56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">80.77</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">26.39</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">58.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">62.04</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2967">The dissolution experiments carried out to simulate dissolution in the PSW
were set to 3 bar and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C. Over the 24 h
PSW-simulating dissolution experiment, about 6 % of the gypsum dissolved
(Figs. 6, S6a, Table 3). In the AW experiment, the combination of positive
temperatures (2.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C) and a pressure of 65 bar impacted the
dissolution of the cryogenic gypsum crystals more than in any other seawater
trial. More than 80 % of the cryogenic gypsum crystals dissolved during
the 24 h experiment (Figs. 6, S6b, Table 3). The EADW-simulating
dissolution experiments, set to a temperature of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, showed a
progressive cryogenic gypsum dissolution of 26 %, 58 % and 62 % with
increasing pressure for the 100, 120 and 150 bar experiments, respectively
(Figs. 6, S7, Table 3). Moreover, as dissolution mainly affects the crystal's
surface, smaller gypsum crystals and those with increased surface roughness
(Fig. S8c, d) were preferentially impacted by dissolution, whereas larger and
solid crystals with smooth surfaces showed the lowest dissolution (Fig. S8a, b).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3.SSS2">
  <label>3.3.2</label><title>Experiments to simulate cryogenic gypsum dissolution within
formaldehyde-treated biological samples</title>
      <?pagebreak page1802?><p id="d1e3025">In the formaldehyde experiments we exposed our set of cryogenic gypsum
crystals to a formaldehyde solution of 4 %, which is commonly used to
store pelagic samples from the polar oceans (Edler, 1979).
Irrespective of the temperature at which the sample was stored, all gypsum
dissolved within 24 h.<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?></p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Sinking velocities of gypsum crystals</title>
      <p id="d1e3038">The sinking velocity (SV) of the gypsum crystals increased with crystal size
(Fig. 7). Small crystals with an equivalent spherical diameter (ESD) of 200 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m sank with 300 m d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> velocities, while large gypsum crystals with ESDs of
2000 to 2500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m sank with velocities of 5000 to 7000 m d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.
The size to settling relationship was best described by a power function (SV <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4239.9 ESD<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.839</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.84</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e3115">Results from cryogenic gypsum dissolution experiments. <bold>(a)</bold> Graph
showing the position of the simulated Arctic water masses in respect to
pressure and temperature and how much gypsum (%) was dissolved on average
over a 24 h exposure to such pressure and temperature
conditions. Grey dots indicate the values from each aquarium and black dots the
mean per experiment. <bold>(b-1)</bold> Cryogenic gypsum crystal of the 120 bar experiment
before exposure. <bold>(b-2)</bold> The same cryogenic gypsum crystal of the 120
bar experiment after 24 h.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/1795/2020/tc-14-1795-2020-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Distribution and morphology of cryogenic gypsum crystals</title>
      <p id="d1e3149">This study shows for the first time the widespread presence of cryogenic
gypsum under melting Arctic sea ice of different origins. At all stations,
cryogenic gypsum dominated the sample fraction of particles <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m in Eurasian Basin<?pagebreak page1803?> surface waters, indicating a continuous
cryogenic gypsum flux from melting sea ice over a period of 6 weeks.</p>
      <p id="d1e3167">When designing the ROVnet for cryogenic gypsum sampling, we opted for the
coarser <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m mesh to prohibit an overflow of the
sampling container when running into a phytoplankton bloom. However, as
Geilfus et al. (2013) have observed gypsum
crystals as small as 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m, we probably lost an unknown proportion of
smaller gypsum crystals by the chosen sampling strategy. The gypsum crystals
described from sea ice so far retrieved from only 3-day-old experimental
and 30 cm thick natural sea ice off Greenland were small (crystal length
max. 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m). They are planar idiomorphic gypsum crystals often intergrown at large angles or occurring as
rosettes (Geilfus et al., 2013). Similar but larger
(crystal length up to 1 mm) gypsum crystals were observed within
<italic>Phaeocystis</italic> aggregates collected in the region of the present study (Wollenburg et al., 2018a). However, here we show
that gypsum crystals exhibit a strong variability in size and morphology.
Particularly large crystals were characterized by more complex shapes (Figs. 2, 5, S3–4) and increased surface roughness (Fig. S8c, d), compared to the
small planar euhedral (Fig. 2a) and more spherical crystals (Fig. S8a, b).
Euhedral crystal needles larger but otherwise similar to those described by
Geilfus et al. (2013) and Wollenburg et al. (2018a) dominated the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 63 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m
fraction collected at 5 and 10 m depths at station 66, and smaller crystals
contributed especially to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">63</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m size
fraction of the station's sub-surface samples.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e3244">Sinking velocity of cryogenic gypsum crystals plotted against
equivalent spherical diameter (ESD).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/1795/2020/tc-14-1795-2020-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3254">As cryogenic gypsum forms in sea ice brine pockets or channels, the size and
morphology especially of large crystals is likely determined by sea ice
texture and porosity during gypsum precipitation. Pursuing this hypothesis,
the large and intergrown crystals collected from the 0 m layer at station
66 and the 10 m layer and ice core at station 80 formed in highly branched
granular sea ice (Lieb-Lappen et al., 2017; Weissenberger et al., 1992).
In contrast, the small cryogenic gypsum needles reported by Geilfus et al. (2013) and Wollenburg et al. (2018a) may have preferentially formed in columnar sea ice. Even sampling
the same ice floe (station 32 and 80), the appearance of the crystals
changed. Possibly, a widening of the brine channels during the elapsed time
(6 weeks) allowed a release of larger crystals at station 80<?pagebreak page1804?> when compared
to station 32. However, crystal growth during this elapsed period or lateral
advection of large crystals cannot be excluded. Thus, detailed texture
analyses of sea ice cores prior to sampling are needed to validate or reject
hypotheses on a link between sea ice porosity and cryogenic gypsum crystal
size and morphology, which should be considered in future studies.</p>
      <p id="d1e3257">The sea ice microstructure dictating the formation of gypsum crystals in the
brine matrix likely varied among ice floes due to different ages, origins
and drift trajectories (Fig. 1b). For example, station 66 was the only
station where the sea ice likely formed over the central Nansen Basin only
months before our study (Fig. 1b). The surface sample of station 66 had
large star-shaped intergrown hyaline gypsum crystals that were observed at
no other station. They also showed a considerably higher length–width ratio
than crystals from second-year ice of stations 32/80 and 45 (Figs. 1b and 2). Accordingly, a close relationship between local sea ice properties and
gypsum crystal morphology in the underlying water was evident from the
comparison of gypsum crystals collected with the ROVnet with those retrieved
from ice cores collected at two stations. The ice core samples revealed
cryogenic gypsum crystals that basically resembled the crystal morphologies
collected from the water column at the same stations, indicating that the
gypsum morphologies observed in the water column likely reflect the gypsum
precipitation conditions and brine-channel structure of local ice floes. The
current understanding of mineral precipitation in supersaturated brine
relies on ice core analyses, sea ice brine, experimental studies and the
mathematical modelling of the temperature window in which each mineral is
likely to form (Butler et al., 2017; Marion et al., 2010). There are
still many uncertainties regarding the precipitation and dissolution of
gypsum within natural sea ice and during ice core storage. Although the
FREZCHEM model and Gitterman pathway predict gypsum precipitation under
defined conditions, only Geilfus et al. (2013) and Butler et al. (2017) succeeded in
retrieving gypsum under such conditions, whereas others failed (Butler
and Kennedy, 2015). According to the FREZCHEM model, cryogenic gypsum
precipitates at temperatures of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C and at
temperatures <inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (Geilfus et al., 2013;
Wollenburg et al., 2018a). Accordingly, a storage temperature of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C would allow the post-coring precipitation of gypsum from
contained brine. However, in field and experimental studies, cryogenic
gypsum was so far only observed to precipitate in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C temperature window, even when treatments were conducted below
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (Butler et al., 2017; Geilfus et al., 2013).
Furthermore, the observed signs of dissolution on the large cryogenic gypsum
crystals from the ice core when compared to the sharp-edged crystals
retrieved from the water column at station 80 indicate that significant new
precipitation of gypsum during storage did not occur but rather the opposite.</p>
      <p id="d1e3379">Apart from the growing conditions of gypsum crystals within sea ice, the
size spectrum of crystals retrieved from different depths in the water
column was likely essentially altered by the size-dependent sinking velocity
of the crystals. Because the sinking velocity of large cryogenic gypsum
crystals is high, the chance to catch large crystals with horizontal
transects directly under the ice should be lower compared to small crystals
(Fig. 7a). Accordingly, significant amounts of large cryogenic gypsum
crystals were mainly sampled from the 0 m layer where they could be scraped
off the underside of the ice (see station 66, Table 2). In contrast, smaller
cryogenic gypsum crystals sink at lower velocities (Fig. 7a). Hence, the
large quantity of small-sized crystals retrieved in the deeper layers of
station 66 and all layers of station 32 and 45 were likely influenced by
the accumulated gypsum release in this size fraction, whereas the rarer
large crystals indicated<?pagebreak page1805?> the momentary release at these stations. The
extremely large crystals sampled at station 80 at 10 m depth probably
indicated an ongoing flux event during rapid melting. According to our
dissolution experiments, gypsum dissolution within Arctic surface waters
should only have a minor impact on the size distribution of cryogenic gypsum
crystals within the surface water. Besides vertical flux, the advection of
gypsum crystals with surface currents may also have influenced the
size distribution of gypsum crystals sampled in the water column.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Reasons why cryogenic gypsum was rarely observed in past studies</title>
      <p id="d1e3390">The small temperature range of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C window, which
is also the only gypsum precipitation temperature spectrum applicable in the
Arctic Ocean, has been considered one reason why gypsum was not detected in
other studies (Butler and Kennedy, 2015; Wollenburg et al., 2018a).
Furthermore, the kinetics of gypsum precipitation was considered too slow
for detection during experimental studies, and the amount of gypsum was considered hard to verify versus other sea ice precipitates that are quantitatively much more
abundant, leading the focus towards other sea ice precipitates (Butler
and Kennedy, 2015; Geilfus et al., 2013). Although cryogenic mirabilite and
hydrohalite are 3 and 22 times more abundant than gypsum,
respectively (Butler and Kennedy, 2015), gypsum is the only sea ice
precipitate that survives for one to several days within the Arctic water
column. Cryogenic gypsum dissolution increases with increasing hydrostatic
pressure and increasing temperatures (Fig. 6). However, well-preserved
cryogenic gypsum crystals were retrieved from algae aggregates collected
from 2146 m water depth, suggesting that either the transport from the
surface to this depth was very rapid or that dissolution was decreased
and/or prevented once gypsum crystals were included within the matrix of
organosulfur compound-rich aggregates (Wollenburg
et al., 2018a). Yet, as seawater is usually undersaturated with respect to
gypsum (Briskin and Schreiber, 1978) and as shown by our dissolution experiments, the disaggregation of
organic aggregates would expose the gypsum to the seawater and dissolve any
crystals, suggesting that the gypsum crystals sank rapidly to the seafloor within the organic aggregates. The same dissolution would occur within the sampling cups of sediment traps,
explaining why gypsum has not been observed in those types of samples.</p>
      <p id="d1e3422">Our dissolution experiments showed that cryogenic gypsum can persist long
enough in the cold polar surface water to be collected in measurable
concentrations. The missing evidence of gypsum from past studies was likely
due to the quick dissolution of gypsum crystals at higher temperatures and
the pressure dependence of dissolution kinetics, impeding the discovery of
gypsum in sediment trap samples and on the seafloor. In addition,
formaldehyde preservation leads to the immediate dissolution of gypsum,
destroying any evidence of cryogenic gypsum in all biological
samples that are fixed with formaldehyde, including water column and net samples.</p>
      <p id="d1e3425">Based on our experience with the PS106 expedition samples and the
experiments presented here, we propose a standardized procedure for gypsum
sampling in the field. This procedure is part of the standard operating
protocol for gypsum sampling on the MOSAiC expedition (Fig. S9).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e3431">(<bold>a</bold>) Living <italic>Melosira arctica</italic> curtains hanging from ice floes during the PS106 expedition
(photo taken by Marcel Nicolaus and Christian Katlein). <bold>(b)</bold> Cryogenic gypsum isolated from
<italic>Melosira arctica</italic> (PS106/1, station 21; Peeken at al., 2018b).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/1795/2020/tc-14-1795-2020-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <label>4.3</label><title>Potential of cryogenic gypsum as a ballast of algae blooms</title>
      <p id="d1e3460">We found less than 6 % dissolution of individual crystals in polar surface
water per day. Thus, at depths immediately below the fluorescence
maximum where a significant part of<?pagebreak page1806?> organic aggregates are formed (Iversen
et al., 2010), the gypsum scavenging and ballasting of aggregates (Turner, 2015) is little affected by gypsum dissolution (Olli et al., 2007) (Fig. 6, Table 3). The incorporation of dense
minerals into settling organic aggregates will increase their density and,
therefore, the size-specific sinking velocities of the aggregates (Iversen and Ploug, 2010; Iversen and Robert, 2015; van der Jagt et al.,
2018). The high sinking velocity of large gypsum crystals <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1 mm
(5000–7000 m d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; Fig. 7a) could create strong hydrodynamic shear
that might cause disaggregation of fragile algae aggregates (Olli
et al., 2007). However, smaller gypsum crystals have been observed inside
<italic>Phaeocystis</italic> aggregates collected at depths below 2000 m (Wollenburg et al., 2018a). This
shows that cryogenic gypsum is incorporated into organic aggregates and
supports the hypothesis that gypsum can be an important ballast mineral of organic
aggregates.</p>
      <p id="d1e3485">As chlorophyll concentrations in the surface water were mostly low
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1 mg m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>; Hauke Flores, unpublished data), a massive gypsum-mediated
export of phytoplankton was unlikely during expedition PS106. However,
especially at the ice floe of station 32/80, we observed a high coverage of
the ice underside by the filamentous algae <italic>Melosira arctica</italic>, and gypsum crystals were found
in <italic>M. arctica</italic> filaments collected nearby (Fig. 8), as well as at station 45 (Fig. 2d).
This indicates a potential for rapid <italic>M. arctica</italic> sedimentation mediated by cryogenic gypsum,
as soon as the algal filaments were released from the melting sea ice.
Hence, ballasting by cryogenic gypsum may also have contributed to the mass
export of <italic>Melosira arctica</italic> aggregates observed in 2012 (Boetius et al., 2013).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e3530">This study shows for the first time that gypsum released into the water at the
onset of melt season in the Arctic Ocean causes a constant flux of gypsum
over widespread areas and over a long period of time (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6 weeks). The morphological diversity of gypsum crystals retrieved from Arctic
surface waters and ice cores indicated a complex variety of precipitation
and release processes, as well as modifications during sea ice formation, the
melt phase and in the water column. In the fresh and cold polar surface
water, gypsum crystals persist long enough to act as an effective ballast on
organic matter, such as phytoplankton filaments and marine snow.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e3544">Cryogenic gypsum collected during PS106 is available at  <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.916035" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1594/PANGAEA.916035</ext-link> (Wollenburg and Iversen, 2020).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e3550">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-1795-2020-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-14-1795-2020-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.<?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?></p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e3560">JW, HF and MI designed this study. JW led the writing of this
paper and performed gypsum sample preparation and analysis. HF, IP,
CK, GC and MN acquired ROVnet and ice samples in the field. MI measured
crystal settling velocities. TK performed the backtracking analysis. All
authors contributed to the writing and editing of the paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e3566">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e3572">We thank Gernot Nehrke for performing Raman spectroscopy on crystals from
all catches. Christoph Vogt and Dieter Wolf-Gladrow made valuable comments
on the paper. We thank the captain and crew of RV <italic>Polarstern</italic> expedition
PS106 for their support at sea. This study was funded by the PACES (Polar
Regions and Coasts in a Changing Earth System) programme of the Helmholtz
Association and the Helmholtz infrastructure fund “Frontiers in Arctic Marine
Monitoring (FRAM)”. This study used samples and data provided by the
Alfred-Wegener-Institut Helmholtz-Zentrum für Polar- und
Meeresforschung in Bremerhaven from <italic>Polarstern</italic> expedition PS106 (grant no.
AWI-PS106_00).</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e3583">The article processing charges for this<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> open-access publication were covered by a Research <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Centre of the Helmholtz Association.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e3593">This paper was edited by Florent Dominé and reviewed by Griet Neukermans and one anonymous referee.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Arrigo, K. R., Perovich, D. K., Pickart, R. S., Brown, Z. W., van Dijken,
G. L., Lowry, K. E., Mills, M. M., Palmer, M. A., Balch, W. M., Bahr, F.,
Bates, N. R., Benitez-Nelson, C., Bowler, B., Brownlee, E., Ehn, J. K.,
Frey, K. E., Garley, R., Laney, S. R., Lubelczyk, L., Mathis, J., Matsuoka,
A., Mitchell, B. G., Moore, G. W. K., Ortega-Retuerta, E., Pal, S.,
Polashenski, C. M., Reynolds, R. A., Schieber, B., Sosik, H. M., Stephens,
M., and Swift, J. H.: Massive Phytoplankton Blooms Under Arctic Sea Ice,
Science, 336, 1408, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1215065" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1215065</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Arrigo, K. R., Perovich, D. K., Pickart, R. S., Brown, Z. W., van Dijken, G.
L., Lowry, K. E., Mills, M. M., Palmer, M. A., Balch, W. M., Bates, N. R.,
Benitez-Nelson, C. R., Brownlee, E., Frey, K. E., Laney, S. R., Mathis, J.,
Matsuoka, A., Greg Mitchell, B., Moore, G. W. K., Reynolds, R. A., Sosik, H.
M., and Swift, J. H.: Phytoplankton blooms beneath the sea ice in the
Chukchi sea, Deep-Sea Res. Pt. II,
105, 1–16, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Assmy, P., Fernández-Méndez, M., Duarte, P., Meyer, A., Randelhoff,
A., Mundy, C. J., Olsen, L. M., Kauko, H. M., Bailey, A., Chierici, M.,
Cohen, L., Doulgeris, A. P., Ehn, J. K., Fransson, A., Gerland, S., Hop, H.,
Hudson, S. R., Hughes, N., Itkin, P.<?pagebreak page1807?>, Johnsen, G., King, J. A., Koch, B. P.,
Koenig, Z., Kwasniewski, S., Laney, S. R., Nicolaus, M., Pavlov, A. K.,
Polashenski, C. M., Provost, C., Rösel, A., Sandbu, M., Spreen, G.,
Smedsrud, L. H., Sundfjord, A., Taskjelle, T., Tatarek, A., Wiktor, J.,
Wagner, P. M., Wold, A., Steen, H., and Granskog, M. A.: Leads in Arctic
pack ice enable early phytoplankton blooms below snow-covered sea ice,
Sci. Rep., 7, 40850, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/srep40850" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/srep40850</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Boetius, A., Albrecht, S., Bakker, K., Bienhold, C., Felden, J., Fernandez-Mendez, M., Hendricks, S., Katlein, C., Lalande, C., Krumpen, T., Nicolaus, M., Peeken, I., Rabe, B., Rogacheva, A., Rybakova, E., Somavilla, R., Wenzhöfer, F., and R. V. <italic>Polarstern</italic> ARK27-3-Shipboard Science Crew: Export of Algal Biomass from the Melting Arctic Sea Ice, Science, 339, 1430–1432, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Briskin, M. and Schreiber, B. C.: Authigenic gypsum in marine sediments,
Mar. Geol., 28, 37–49, 1978.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Butler, B.: Mineral dynamics in sea ice brines, PhD, Bangor, 184 pp., 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Butler, B. M. and Kennedy, H.: An investigation of mineral dynamics in
frozen seawater brines by direct measurement with synchrotron X-ray powder
diffraction, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 120, 5686–5697, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Butler, B. M., Papadimitriou, S., Day, S. J., and Kennedy, H.: Gypsum and
hydrohalite dynamics in sea ice brines, Geochim. Cosmochim. Ac.,
213, 17–34, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Culberson, C. and Pytkowicx, R. M.: Effect of pressure on carbonic acid,
boric acid, and the pH in seawater, Limnol. Oceanogr., 13, 403–417,
1968.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Damm, E., Bauch, D., Krumpen, T., Rabe, B., Korhonen, M., Vinogradova, E.,
and Uhlig, C.: The Transpolar Drift conveys methane from the Siberian Shelf
to the central Arctic Ocean, Sci. Rep., 8, 4515, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-22801-z" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41598-018-22801-z</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Docquier, D., Massonnet, F., Barthélemy, A., Tandon, N. F., Lecomte, O., and Fichefet, T.: Relationships between Arctic sea ice drift and strength modelled by NEMO-LIM3.6, The Cryosphere, 11, 2829–2846, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-2829-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-11-2829-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Edler, L.: Recommendations on Methods for Marine Biological Studies in the
Baltic Sea: Phytoplankton and chlorophyll, Department of Marine Botany,
University of Lund, 1979.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Flores, H., Ehrlich, J., Lange, B. A., Kohlbach, D., Graeve, M., Orlov, A., Sulanke, E., Niehoff, B., Hildebrandt, N., Doble, M., Schaafsma, F. L., Meijboom, A., Fey, B., Kuehn, S., Bravo Rebolledo, Elisa, van Dorssen, M., van Franeker, J. A., Burggraaf, D., Couperus, A. S., Gradinger, R., Bluhm, B., Hassett, B., and Kunisch, E.:
Under-ice fauna, zooplankton and endotherms, in: The Expeditions PS106/1 and
2 of the Research Vessel <italic>Polarstern</italic> to the Arctic Ocean in 2017, edited by: Knust, R., Macke, A., and Flores, H., Reports on polar and marine research, 34–37, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Geilfus, N. X., Galley, R. J., Cooper, M., Halden, N., Hare, A., Wang, F.,
Søgaard, D. H., and Rysgaard, S.: Gypsum crystals observed in
experimental and natural sea ice, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40,
6362–6367, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Girard-Ardhuin, F. and Ezraty, R.: Enhanced Arctic Sea Ice Drift Estimation
Merging Radiometer and Scatterometer Data, IEEE T. Geosci.
Remote, 50, 2639–2648, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Golden, K. M., Ackley, S. F., and Lytle, V. I.: The Percolation Phase
Transition in Sea Ice, Science, 282, 2238–2241, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Iversen, M., Nowald, N., Ploug, H., A. Jackson, G., and Fischer, G.: High
resolution profiles of vertical particulate organic matter export off Cape
Blanc, Mauritania: Degradation processes and ballasting effects, Deep-Sea Res. Pt. I, 57, 771–784, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Iversen, M. H. and Ploug, H.: Ballast minerals and the sinking carbon flux in the ocean: carbon-specific respiration rates and sinking velocity of marine snow aggregates, Biogeosciences, 7, 2613–2624, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-2613-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-7-2613-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Iversen, M. H. and Robert, M. L.: Ballasting effects of smectite on
aggregate formation and export from a natural plankton community, Mar.
Chem., 175, 18–27, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Katlein, C., Arndt, S., Nicolaus, M., Perovich, D. K., Jakuba, M. V., Suman,
S., Elliott, S., Whitcomb, L. L., McFarland, C. J., Gerdes, R., Boetius, A.,
and German, C. R.: Influence of ice thickness and surface properties on
light transmission through Arctic sea ice, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 120, 5932–5944, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Katlein, C., Schiller, M., Belter, H. J., Coppolaro, V., Wenslandt, D., and
Nicolaus, M.: A New Remotely Operated Sensor Platform for Interdisciplinary
Observations under Sea Ice, Front. Mar. Sci., 4, 281, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2017.00281" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3389/fmars.2017.00281</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Katlein, C., Nicolaus, M., Sommerfeld, A., Copalorado, V., Tiemann, L.,
Zanatta, M., Schulz, H., and Lange, B.: Sea Ice Physics, in: The Expeditions
PS106/1 and 2 of the research vessel <italic>Polarstern</italic> in the Arctic Ocean in 2017,
edited by: Macke, A. and Flores, H., Berichte zur Polarforschung Bremerhaven, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Krumpen, T.: AWI ICETrack – Antarctic and Arctic Sea Ice Monitoring and
Tracking Tool Alfred-Wegener-Institut Hemholtz-Zentrum für Polar- und
Meeresforschung, Bremerhaven, Germany, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Krumpen, T., Gerdes, R., Haas, C., Hendricks, S., Herber, A., Selyuzhenok, V., Smedsrud, L., and Spreen, G.: Recent summer sea ice thickness surveys in Fram Strait and associated ice volume fluxes, The Cryosphere, 10, 523–534, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-523-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-10-523-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Krumpen, T., Belter, H. J., Boetius, A., Damm, E., Haas, C., Hendricks, S.,
Nicolaus, M., Nöthig, E.-M., Paul, S., Peeken, I., Ricker, R., and
Stein, R.: Arctic warming interrupts the Transpolar Drift and affects
long-range transport of sea ice and ice-rafted matter, Sci. Rep.,
9, 5459, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41456-y" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41598-019-41456-y</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kwok, R.: Arctic sea ice thickness, volume, and multiyear ice coverage:
losses and coupled variability (1958–2018), Environ. Res. Lett.,
13, 105005, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aae3ec" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/aae3ec</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kwok, R. and Rothrock, D. A.: Decline in Arctic sea ice thickness from
submarine and ICESat records: 1958–2008, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 36, L15501, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039035" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009GL039035</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lavergne, T.: Validation and Monitoring of the OSI SAF Low Resolution Sea
Ice Drift Product (v5), Ocean &amp; Sea Ice SAF, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lieb-Lappen, R. M., Golden, E. J., and Obbard, R. W.: Metrics for
interpreting the microstructure of sea ice using X-ray micro-computed
tomography, Cold Reg. Sci. Technol., 138, 24–35, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Marion, G. M., Mironenko, M. V., and Roberts, M. W.: FREZCHEM: A geochemical
model for cold aqueous solutions, Comput. Geosci., 36, 10–15,
2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page1808?><ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Nicolaus, M., Katlein, C., Maslanik, J., and Hendricks, S.: Changes in
Arctic sea ice result in increasing light transmittance and absorption,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L24501, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL053738" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012GL053738</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Nicolaus, M., Arndt, S., Katlein, C., Maslanik, J., and Hendricks, S.:
Correction to “Changes in Arctic sea ice result in increasing light
transmittance and absorption”, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 2699–2700,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Nikolopoulos, A., Heuzé, C., Linders, T., Andrée, E., and Sahlin,
S.: Physical Oceanography, in: The Expeditions PS106/1 and 2 of the Research
Vessel POLARSTERN to the Arctic Ocean in 2017, edited by: Macke, A. and Flores, H., Reports on Polar and Marine Research, Alfred-Wegener Institute
Helmholtz Centre for Polar and marine research, Bremerhaven, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Nürnberg, D., Wollenburg, I., Dethleff, D., Eicken, H., Kassens, H.,
Letzig, T., Reimnitz, E., and Thiede, J.: Sediments in Arctic sea ice:
Implications for entrainment, transport and release, Mar. Geol., 119,
185–214, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Olli, K., Wassmann, P., Reigstad, M., Ratkova, T. N., Arashkevich, E.,
Pasternak, A., Matrai, P. A., Knulst, J., Tranvik, L., Klais, R., and
Jacobsen, A.: The fate of production in the central Arctic Ocean – top-down
regulation by zooplankton expatriates?, Prog. Oceanogr., 72,
84–113, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Peeken, I., Primpke, S., Beyer, B., Gütermann, J., Katlein, C., Krumpen,
T., Bergmann, M., Hehemann, L., and Gerdts, G.: Arctic sea ice is an
important temporal sink and means of transport for microplastic, Nat.
Commun., 9, 1505, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03825-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-018-03825-5</ext-link>, 2018a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Peeken, I., Castellani, G., Flores, H., Ehrlich, J., Lange, B., Schaafsma, F. L., Gradinger, R., Hassett, B., Kunisch, E., Damm, E., Verdugo, J., Kohlbach, D., Graeve, M., and Blum, B.: Sea ice biology and biogeochemistry, in: The
Expeditions PS106/1 and 2 of the Research Vessel <italic>Polarstern</italic> to the Arctic
Ocean in 2017, edited by: Macke, A. and Flores, H., vol. 719, Reports of polar and marine
research, 2018b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ploug, H., Iversen, M. H., Koski, M., and Buitenhuis, E. T.: Production,
oxygen respiration rates, and sinking velocity of copepod fecal pellets:
Direct measurements of ballasting by opal and calcite, Limnol. Oceanogr., 53, 469–476, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rudels, B.: Arctic Ocean circulation, processes and water masses: A
description of observations and ideas with focus on the period prior to the
International Polar Year 2007–2009, Prog. Oceanogr., 132, 22–67,
2015.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Schneider, C. A., Rasband, W. S., and Eliceiri, K. W.: NIH Image to ImageJ:
25 years of image analysis, Nat. Meth., 9, 671–675, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Smedsrud, L. H., Halvorsen, M. H., Stroeve, J. C., Zhang, R., and Kloster, K.: Fram Strait sea ice export variability and September Arctic sea ice extent over the last 80 years, The Cryosphere, 11, 65–79, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-65-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/tc-11-65-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Strunz, H. and Nickel, E. H.: Strunz Mineralogical Tables.
Chemical-structural Mineral Classification System, Schweizerbart'sche
Verlagsbuchhandlung, Nägele u. Obermiller, Stuttgart, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Tschudi, S., Fowler, C., Maslanik, J., Stewart, J., and Stewart, W.: Polar
Pathfinder Daily 25 km EASE-Grid Sea Ice Motion Vectors, Technical
report, NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive
Center, Boulder, CO, USA, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Turner, J. T.: Zooplankton fecal pellets, marine snow, phytodetritus and the
ocean's biological pump, Prog. Oceanogr., 130, 205–248, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
van der Jagt, H., Friese, C., Stuut, J.-B. W., Fischer, G., and Iversen, M.
H.: The ballasting effect of Saharan dust deposition on aggregate dynamics
and carbon export: Aggregation, settling, and scavenging potential of marine
snow, Limnol. Oceanogr., 63, 1386–1394, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Weissenberger, J., Dieckmann, G., Gradinger, R., and Spindler, M.: Sea ice:
A cast technique to examine and analyze brine pockets and channel structure,
Limnol. Oceanogr., 37, 179–183, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wollenburg, J. E. and Iversen, M. H.: Cryogenic gypsum collected during PS106-1/2 in 2017, PANGAEA, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.916035" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1594/PANGAEA.916035</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wollenburg, J. E., Katlein, C., Nehrke, G., Nöthig, E. M., Matthiessen,
J., Wolf-Gladrow, D. A., Nikolopoulos, A., Gázquez-Sanchez, F.,
Rossmann, L., Assmy, P., Babin, M., Bruyant, F., Beaulieu, M., Dybwad, C.,
and Peeken, I.: Ballasting by cryogenic gypsum enhances carbon export in a
Phaeocystis under-ice bloom, Sci. Rep., 8, 7703, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26016-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41598-018-26016-0</ext-link>, 2018a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Wollenburg, J. E., Zittier, Z. M. C., and Bijma, J.: Insight into deep-sea
life – Cibicidoides pachyderma substrate and pH-dependent behaviour
following disturbance, Deep-Sea Res. Pt. I, 138, 34–45, 2018b.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>New observations of the distribution, morphology and dissolution dynamics of cryogenic gypsum in the Arctic Ocean</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>To date, observations on a single location indicate that cryogenic gypsum
(Ca[SO<sub>4</sub>]⚫2H<sub>2</sub>O) may constitute an efficient but hitherto
overlooked ballasting mineral enhancing the efficiency of the biological
carbon pump in the Arctic Ocean. In June–July 2017 we sampled cryogenic
gypsum under pack ice in the Nansen Basin north of Svalbard using a plankton
net mounted on a remotely operated vehicle (ROVnet). Cryogenic gypsum
crystals were present at all sampled stations, which suggested a persisting
cryogenic gypsum release from melting sea ice throughout the investigated
area. This was supported by a sea ice backtracking model, indicating that
gypsum release was not related to a specific region of sea ice formation.
The observed cryogenic gypsum crystals exhibited a large variability in
morphology and size, with the largest crystals exceeding a length of 1&thinsp;cm.
Preservation, temperature and pressure laboratory studies revealed that
gypsum dissolution rates accelerated with increasing temperature and
pressure, ranging from 6&thinsp;%&thinsp;d<sup>−1</sup> by mass in polar surface water (−0.5&thinsp;°C) to 81&thinsp;%&thinsp;d<sup>−1</sup> by mass in Atlantic Water (2.5&thinsp;°C at 65&thinsp;bar). When testing the preservation of gypsum in formaldehyde-fixed
samples, we observed immediate dissolution. Dissolution at warmer
temperatures and through inappropriate preservation media may thus explain
why cryogenic gypsum was not observed in scientific samples previously.
Direct measurements of gypsum crystal sinking velocities ranged between 200
and 7000&thinsp;m&thinsp;d<sup>−1</sup>, suggesting that gypsum-loaded marine aggregates could
rapidly sink from the surface to abyssal depths, supporting the hypothesized
potential of gypsum as a ballasting mineral in the Arctic Ocean.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Arrigo, K. R., Perovich, D. K., Pickart, R. S., Brown, Z. W., van Dijken,
G. L., Lowry, K. E., Mills, M. M., Palmer, M. A., Balch, W. M., Bahr, F.,
Bates, N. R., Benitez-Nelson, C., Bowler, B., Brownlee, E., Ehn, J. K.,
Frey, K. E., Garley, R., Laney, S. R., Lubelczyk, L., Mathis, J., Matsuoka,
A., Mitchell, B. G., Moore, G. W. K., Ortega-Retuerta, E., Pal, S.,
Polashenski, C. M., Reynolds, R. A., Schieber, B., Sosik, H. M., Stephens,
M., and Swift, J. H.: Massive Phytoplankton Blooms Under Arctic Sea Ice,
Science, 336, 1408, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1215065" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1215065</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Arrigo, K. R., Perovich, D. K., Pickart, R. S., Brown, Z. W., van Dijken, G.
L., Lowry, K. E., Mills, M. M., Palmer, M. A., Balch, W. M., Bates, N. R.,
Benitez-Nelson, C. R., Brownlee, E., Frey, K. E., Laney, S. R., Mathis, J.,
Matsuoka, A., Greg Mitchell, B., Moore, G. W. K., Reynolds, R. A., Sosik, H.
M., and Swift, J. H.: Phytoplankton blooms beneath the sea ice in the
Chukchi sea, Deep-Sea Res. Pt. II,
105, 1–16, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Assmy, P., Fernández-Méndez, M., Duarte, P., Meyer, A., Randelhoff,
A., Mundy, C. J., Olsen, L. M., Kauko, H. M., Bailey, A., Chierici, M.,
Cohen, L., Doulgeris, A. P., Ehn, J. K., Fransson, A., Gerland, S., Hop, H.,
Hudson, S. R., Hughes, N., Itkin, P., Johnsen, G., King, J. A., Koch, B. P.,
Koenig, Z., Kwasniewski, S., Laney, S. R., Nicolaus, M., Pavlov, A. K.,
Polashenski, C. M., Provost, C., Rösel, A., Sandbu, M., Spreen, G.,
Smedsrud, L. H., Sundfjord, A., Taskjelle, T., Tatarek, A., Wiktor, J.,
Wagner, P. M., Wold, A., Steen, H., and Granskog, M. A.: Leads in Arctic
pack ice enable early phytoplankton blooms below snow-covered sea ice,
Sci. Rep., 7, 40850, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/srep40850" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/srep40850</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Boetius, A., Albrecht, S., Bakker, K., Bienhold, C., Felden, J., Fernandez-Mendez, M., Hendricks, S., Katlein, C., Lalande, C., Krumpen, T., Nicolaus, M., Peeken, I., Rabe, B., Rogacheva, A., Rybakova, E., Somavilla, R., Wenzhöfer, F., and R. V. <i>Polarstern</i> ARK27-3-Shipboard Science Crew: Export of Algal Biomass from the Melting Arctic Sea Ice, Science, 339, 1430–1432, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Briskin, M. and Schreiber, B. C.: Authigenic gypsum in marine sediments,
Mar. Geol., 28, 37–49, 1978.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Butler, B.: Mineral dynamics in sea ice brines, PhD, Bangor, 184 pp., 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Butler, B. M. and Kennedy, H.: An investigation of mineral dynamics in
frozen seawater brines by direct measurement with synchrotron X-ray powder
diffraction, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 120, 5686–5697, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Butler, B. M., Papadimitriou, S., Day, S. J., and Kennedy, H.: Gypsum and
hydrohalite dynamics in sea ice brines, Geochim. Cosmochim. Ac.,
213, 17–34, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Culberson, C. and Pytkowicx, R. M.: Effect of pressure on carbonic acid,
boric acid, and the pH in seawater, Limnol. Oceanogr., 13, 403–417,
1968.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Damm, E., Bauch, D., Krumpen, T., Rabe, B., Korhonen, M., Vinogradova, E.,
and Uhlig, C.: The Transpolar Drift conveys methane from the Siberian Shelf
to the central Arctic Ocean, Sci. Rep., 8, 4515, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-22801-z" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-22801-z</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Docquier, D., Massonnet, F., Barthélemy, A., Tandon, N. F., Lecomte, O., and Fichefet, T.: Relationships between Arctic sea ice drift and strength modelled by NEMO-LIM3.6, The Cryosphere, 11, 2829–2846, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-2829-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-2829-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Edler, L.: Recommendations on Methods for Marine Biological Studies in the
Baltic Sea: Phytoplankton and chlorophyll, Department of Marine Botany,
University of Lund, 1979.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Flores, H., Ehrlich, J., Lange, B. A., Kohlbach, D., Graeve, M., Orlov, A., Sulanke, E., Niehoff, B., Hildebrandt, N., Doble, M., Schaafsma, F. L., Meijboom, A., Fey, B., Kuehn, S., Bravo Rebolledo, Elisa, van Dorssen, M., van Franeker, J. A., Burggraaf, D., Couperus, A. S., Gradinger, R., Bluhm, B., Hassett, B., and Kunisch, E.:
Under-ice fauna, zooplankton and endotherms, in: The Expeditions PS106/1 and
2 of the Research Vessel <i>Polarstern</i> to the Arctic Ocean in 2017, edited by: Knust, R., Macke, A., and Flores, H., Reports on polar and marine research, 34–37, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Geilfus, N. X., Galley, R. J., Cooper, M., Halden, N., Hare, A., Wang, F.,
Søgaard, D. H., and Rysgaard, S.: Gypsum crystals observed in
experimental and natural sea ice, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40,
6362–6367, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Girard-Ardhuin, F. and Ezraty, R.: Enhanced Arctic Sea Ice Drift Estimation
Merging Radiometer and Scatterometer Data, IEEE T. Geosci.
Remote, 50, 2639–2648, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Golden, K. M., Ackley, S. F., and Lytle, V. I.: The Percolation Phase
Transition in Sea Ice, Science, 282, 2238–2241, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Iversen, M., Nowald, N., Ploug, H., A. Jackson, G., and Fischer, G.: High
resolution profiles of vertical particulate organic matter export off Cape
Blanc, Mauritania: Degradation processes and ballasting effects, Deep-Sea Res. Pt. I, 57, 771–784, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Iversen, M. H. and Ploug, H.: Ballast minerals and the sinking carbon flux in the ocean: carbon-specific respiration rates and sinking velocity of marine snow aggregates, Biogeosciences, 7, 2613–2624, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-2613-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-2613-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Iversen, M. H. and Robert, M. L.: Ballasting effects of smectite on
aggregate formation and export from a natural plankton community, Mar.
Chem., 175, 18–27, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Katlein, C., Arndt, S., Nicolaus, M., Perovich, D. K., Jakuba, M. V., Suman,
S., Elliott, S., Whitcomb, L. L., McFarland, C. J., Gerdes, R., Boetius, A.,
and German, C. R.: Influence of ice thickness and surface properties on
light transmission through Arctic sea ice, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 120, 5932–5944, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Katlein, C., Schiller, M., Belter, H. J., Coppolaro, V., Wenslandt, D., and
Nicolaus, M.: A New Remotely Operated Sensor Platform for Interdisciplinary
Observations under Sea Ice, Front. Mar. Sci., 4, 281, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2017.00281" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2017.00281</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Katlein, C., Nicolaus, M., Sommerfeld, A., Copalorado, V., Tiemann, L.,
Zanatta, M., Schulz, H., and Lange, B.: Sea Ice Physics, in: The Expeditions
PS106/1 and 2 of the research vessel <i>Polarstern</i> in the Arctic Ocean in 2017,
edited by: Macke, A. and Flores, H., Berichte zur Polarforschung Bremerhaven, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Krumpen, T.: AWI ICETrack – Antarctic and Arctic Sea Ice Monitoring and
Tracking Tool Alfred-Wegener-Institut Hemholtz-Zentrum für Polar- und
Meeresforschung, Bremerhaven, Germany, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Krumpen, T., Gerdes, R., Haas, C., Hendricks, S., Herber, A., Selyuzhenok, V., Smedsrud, L., and Spreen, G.: Recent summer sea ice thickness surveys in Fram Strait and associated ice volume fluxes, The Cryosphere, 10, 523–534, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-523-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-523-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Krumpen, T., Belter, H. J., Boetius, A., Damm, E., Haas, C., Hendricks, S.,
Nicolaus, M., Nöthig, E.-M., Paul, S., Peeken, I., Ricker, R., and
Stein, R.: Arctic warming interrupts the Transpolar Drift and affects
long-range transport of sea ice and ice-rafted matter, Sci. Rep.,
9, 5459, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41456-y" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41456-y</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Kwok, R.: Arctic sea ice thickness, volume, and multiyear ice coverage:
losses and coupled variability (1958–2018), Environ. Res. Lett.,
13, 105005, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aae3ec" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aae3ec</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Kwok, R. and Rothrock, D. A.: Decline in Arctic sea ice thickness from
submarine and ICESat records: 1958–2008, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 36, L15501, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039035" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039035</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Lavergne, T.: Validation and Monitoring of the OSI SAF Low Resolution Sea
Ice Drift Product (v5), Ocean &amp; Sea Ice SAF, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Lieb-Lappen, R. M., Golden, E. J., and Obbard, R. W.: Metrics for
interpreting the microstructure of sea ice using X-ray micro-computed
tomography, Cold Reg. Sci. Technol., 138, 24–35, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Marion, G. M., Mironenko, M. V., and Roberts, M. W.: FREZCHEM: A geochemical
model for cold aqueous solutions, Comput. Geosci., 36, 10–15,
2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Nicolaus, M., Katlein, C., Maslanik, J., and Hendricks, S.: Changes in
Arctic sea ice result in increasing light transmittance and absorption,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L24501, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL053738" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL053738</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Nicolaus, M., Arndt, S., Katlein, C., Maslanik, J., and Hendricks, S.:
Correction to “Changes in Arctic sea ice result in increasing light
transmittance and absorption”, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 2699–2700,
2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Nikolopoulos, A., Heuzé, C., Linders, T., Andrée, E., and Sahlin,
S.: Physical Oceanography, in: The Expeditions PS106/1 and 2 of the Research
Vessel POLARSTERN to the Arctic Ocean in 2017, edited by: Macke, A. and Flores, H., Reports on Polar and Marine Research, Alfred-Wegener Institute
Helmholtz Centre for Polar and marine research, Bremerhaven, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Nürnberg, D., Wollenburg, I., Dethleff, D., Eicken, H., Kassens, H.,
Letzig, T., Reimnitz, E., and Thiede, J.: Sediments in Arctic sea ice:
Implications for entrainment, transport and release, Mar. Geol., 119,
185–214, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Olli, K., Wassmann, P., Reigstad, M., Ratkova, T. N., Arashkevich, E.,
Pasternak, A., Matrai, P. A., Knulst, J., Tranvik, L., Klais, R., and
Jacobsen, A.: The fate of production in the central Arctic Ocean – top-down
regulation by zooplankton expatriates?, Prog. Oceanogr., 72,
84–113, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Peeken, I., Primpke, S., Beyer, B., Gütermann, J., Katlein, C., Krumpen,
T., Bergmann, M., Hehemann, L., and Gerdts, G.: Arctic sea ice is an
important temporal sink and means of transport for microplastic, Nat.
Commun., 9, 1505, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03825-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03825-5</a>, 2018a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Peeken, I., Castellani, G., Flores, H., Ehrlich, J., Lange, B., Schaafsma, F. L., Gradinger, R., Hassett, B., Kunisch, E., Damm, E., Verdugo, J., Kohlbach, D., Graeve, M., and Blum, B.: Sea ice biology and biogeochemistry, in: The
Expeditions PS106/1 and 2 of the Research Vessel <i>Polarstern</i> to the Arctic
Ocean in 2017, edited by: Macke, A. and Flores, H., vol. 719, Reports of polar and marine
research, 2018b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Ploug, H., Iversen, M. H., Koski, M., and Buitenhuis, E. T.: Production,
oxygen respiration rates, and sinking velocity of copepod fecal pellets:
Direct measurements of ballasting by opal and calcite, Limnol. Oceanogr., 53, 469–476, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Rudels, B.: Arctic Ocean circulation, processes and water masses: A
description of observations and ideas with focus on the period prior to the
International Polar Year 2007–2009, Prog. Oceanogr., 132, 22–67,
2015.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Schneider, C. A., Rasband, W. S., and Eliceiri, K. W.: NIH Image to ImageJ:
25 years of image analysis, Nat. Meth., 9, 671–675, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Smedsrud, L. H., Halvorsen, M. H., Stroeve, J. C., Zhang, R., and Kloster, K.: Fram Strait sea ice export variability and September Arctic sea ice extent over the last 80 years, The Cryosphere, 11, 65–79, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-65-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-11-65-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Strunz, H. and Nickel, E. H.: Strunz Mineralogical Tables.
Chemical-structural Mineral Classification System, Schweizerbart'sche
Verlagsbuchhandlung, Nägele u. Obermiller, Stuttgart, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Tschudi, S., Fowler, C., Maslanik, J., Stewart, J., and Stewart, W.: Polar
Pathfinder Daily 25&thinsp;km EASE-Grid Sea Ice Motion Vectors, Technical
report, NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive
Center, Boulder, CO, USA, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Turner, J. T.: Zooplankton fecal pellets, marine snow, phytodetritus and the
ocean's biological pump, Prog. Oceanogr., 130, 205–248, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
van der Jagt, H., Friese, C., Stuut, J.-B. W., Fischer, G., and Iversen, M.
H.: The ballasting effect of Saharan dust deposition on aggregate dynamics
and carbon export: Aggregation, settling, and scavenging potential of marine
snow, Limnol. Oceanogr., 63, 1386–1394, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Weissenberger, J., Dieckmann, G., Gradinger, R., and Spindler, M.: Sea ice:
A cast technique to examine and analyze brine pockets and channel structure,
Limnol. Oceanogr., 37, 179–183, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Wollenburg, J. E. and Iversen, M. H.: Cryogenic gypsum collected during PS106-1/2 in 2017, PANGAEA, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.916035" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.916035</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Wollenburg, J. E., Katlein, C., Nehrke, G., Nöthig, E. M., Matthiessen,
J., Wolf-Gladrow, D. A., Nikolopoulos, A., Gázquez-Sanchez, F.,
Rossmann, L., Assmy, P., Babin, M., Bruyant, F., Beaulieu, M., Dybwad, C.,
and Peeken, I.: Ballasting by cryogenic gypsum enhances carbon export in a
Phaeocystis under-ice bloom, Sci. Rep., 8, 7703, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26016-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26016-0</a>, 2018a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Wollenburg, J. E., Zittier, Z. M. C., and Bijma, J.: Insight into deep-sea
life – Cibicidoides pachyderma substrate and pH-dependent behaviour
following disturbance, Deep-Sea Res. Pt. I, 138, 34–45, 2018b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
