<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/nlm-dtd/publishing/3.0/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" article-type="research-article">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">OS</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Ocean Science</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">OS</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Ocean Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1812-0792</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/os-22-443-2026</article-id><title-group><article-title>Monsoons, plumes, and blooms: intraseasonal variability  of subsurface primary productivity in the Bay of Bengal</article-title><alt-title>Monsoons, plumes, and blooms</alt-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Schlosser</surname><given-names>Tamara L.</given-names></name>
          <email>tamara.schlosser@utas.edu.au</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7779-7255</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Lucas</surname><given-names>Andrew J.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Omand</surname><given-names>Melissa</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Farrar</surname><given-names>J. Thomas</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Graduate School of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, RI 02882, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Department of Physical Oceanography, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 02543, USA</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Tamara L. Schlosser (tamara.schlosser@utas.edu.au)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>9</day><month>February</month><year>2026</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>22</volume>
      <issue>1</issue>
      <fpage>443</fpage><lpage>458</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>28</day><month>August</month><year>2025</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>2</day><month>September</month><year>2025</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>22</day><month>December</month><year>2025</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>28</day><month>December</month><year>2025</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2026 Tamara L. Schlosser et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2026</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://os.copernicus.org/articles/22/443/2026/os-22-443-2026.html">This article is available from https://os.copernicus.org/articles/22/443/2026/os-22-443-2026.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/22/443/2026/os-22-443-2026.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://os.copernicus.org/articles/22/443/2026/os-22-443-2026.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d2e130">During the southwest monsoon, seasonal storms bring torrential rainfall to the South Asian subcontinent and the northern Indian Ocean. Dense cloud cover limits the amount of sunlight that reaches the ocean surface, and sediment-laden river runoff limits the depths to which light can penetrate. Changing light availability should affect phytoplankton primary productivity and its dependent biogeochemical processes, yet little is known about how subtropical weather is linked to ecosystem processes below the ocean’s surface. Here, using novel physical and bio-optical measurements from an array of free-drifting, autonomous systems in the Bay of Bengal, we show that the onset of cloudy conditions associated with “active” monsoon conditions led to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % reduction in gross chlorophyll productivity (GCP) near the subsurface chlorophyll maximum (SCM) relative to sunny “break” conditions. Optical backscatter measurements confirm chlorophyll fluorescence fluctuations correspond to biomass variability of a similar scale. Simultaneous bioacoustic measurements collected onboard the autonomous platforms suggest this intraseasonal variability in SCM chlorophyll and biomass generated a response in higher trophic levels. Long-term measurements from biogeochemical (BGC) Argo floats in the bay confirm the presence of intraseasonal oscillations in chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration with days-to-weeks variability in magnitude similar to the regional annual cycle in the region. Our findings demonstrate that intraseasonal subtropical air-sea variability modulates important regional biogeochemical ocean processes in the Northern Indian Ocean with implications for the Indian Ocean carbon cycle.</p>
  </abstract>
    
<funding-group>
<award-group id="gs1">
<funding-source>Office of Naval Research</funding-source>
<award-id>N00014-17-1-2391</award-id>
<award-id>N00014-17-1-2987</award-id>
<award-id>AWD05945</award-id>
<award-id>MISO-BOB</award-id>
</award-group>
<award-group id="gs2">
<funding-source>National Science Foundation</funding-source>
<award-id>NSF 2048491</award-id>
</award-group>
</funding-group>
</article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

      
<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d2e161">The ocean contributes roughly 50 % of total global autotrophic carbon fixation, with more than 40 % of ocean primary productivity occurring in vast but relatively low biomass oligotrophic seas <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="paren.1"/>. Our current understanding is that net primary productivity in the subtropical oligotrophic ocean is limited by nutrient supply and not light availability <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="paren.2"/>, but recently developed autonomous long-duration measurements of subsurface processes allow a more comprehensive analysis of the subsurface variability than has previously been possible <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="paren.3"/>. Less is known about how subtropical primary productivity varies on small time- and space-scales, or its response to the rapidly changing subtropical weather patterns.</p>
      <p id="d2e173">Current generation coupled atmosphere-ocean numerical models lack fidelity on 10–90 d timescales in the tropics and subtropics <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11 bib1.bibx26 bib1.bibx45" id="paren.4"/>. This so-called intraseasonal variability is a major component of global weather and is fundamental to predicting climate phenomena like the South Asian monsoon <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx45" id="paren.5"/>. How intraseasonal fluctuations impact biogeochemical processes in the subtropical ocean is poorly understood <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx16" id="paren.6"/>. Since coupled ocean-atmosphere models struggle to accurately represent the magnitude or the timing of intraseasonal fluctuations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11 bib1.bibx26 bib1.bibx45" id="paren.7"/>, these fluctuations must also be inaccurately represented in coupled biogeochemical models. Intraseasonal oscillations like the Madden-Julian Oscillation or the Monsoon Intraseasonal Oscillation impact much of the subtropical ocean, so the potential impact on biogeochemical processes may be significant.</p>
      <p id="d2e188">Satellite observations reveal the decrease in surface productivity during the southwest monsoon (approximately June to September) in the Bay of Bengal due to the impact of monsoon weather on light availability at monthly scales <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21 bib1.bibx22" id="paren.8"/>. Light availability at the surface decreases via a reduction in shortwave radiation during the southwest monsoon <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx49" id="paren.9"/>, which oscillates at 10–90 d timescales, categorized as the sunny “break” period and rainy and cloudy “active” periods of the monsoon <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx45" id="paren.10"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>. Subsurface light availability additionally decreases due to the increasing diffuse attenuation following river run-off, where monsoon rain events inject high concentrations of sediments into the bay, even <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="script">O</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>(100 km) from the coastline <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="paren.11"/>. The weather systems that reduce shortwave radiation also impact ocean color satellite measurements, so satellite measurements cannot observe biogeochemical processes over the entire intraseasonal oscillation. The subsurface impacts of intraseasonal varying light availability are generally unknown, contributing to the uncertainty in our understanding of the Indian Ocean carbon cycle. In particular, stratification, vertical salinity gradients and barrier layers have a dominating influence on subsurface biomass in the Bay of Bengal <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="paren.12"/>.</p>
      <p id="d2e216">Autonomous technology to measure biogeochemical variability in the ocean – such as the BGC-Argo float program <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.13"/> – has provided new opportunities to quantify the variability of the ocean carbon system <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28 bib1.bibx18" id="paren.14"/>. These platforms provide information about biogeochemical transformations below the ocean's surface that are largely invisible to satellite remote sensing <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="paren.15"/>. Although only recently deployed at scale, autonomous biogeochemical measurements have demonstrated that our capacity to make future predictions of the state of the climate depends sensitively on constraining biogeochemical ocean processes <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15 bib1.bibx18" id="paren.16"/>.</p>
      <p id="d2e232">The BGC-Argo float program typically samples at weekly time scales, which is sufficient to describe the intraseasonal biogeochemical variability but not diel processes, such as nonphotochemical quenching (NPQ) and the diel cycle in phytoplankton biomass. Near the surface, NPQ results in a non-biomass-related diel reduction in chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (Chl) fluorescence under high light conditions <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx31" id="paren.17"/>. In contrast, the diel cycle is distinct from NPQ in that concentrations of Chl <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27 bib1.bibx38" id="paren.18"/>, dissolved oxygen <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx35 bib1.bibx3" id="paren.19"/>, and particulate carbon <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx50" id="paren.20"/> increase with increasing irradiance. The diel cycle results from the competing processes of day-time gross primary production (GPP) and day- and night-time respiration and grazing losses <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27" id="paren.21"/>. The tight coupling between the diel cycle and the solar cycle (i.e., sunrise and sunset) has allowed the development of robust methodologies for estimating GPP and loss rate for a range of biological variables <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27 bib1.bibx35" id="paren.22"/>. Although the diel cycle directly results from the diel variability in subsurface irradiance, the sensitivity of the diel cycle to the short-term cloud- or turbidity-driven changes in irradiance remains under-explored.</p>
      <p id="d2e261">An improved understanding of the Indian Ocean carbon cycle and its sensitivity to intraseasonal oscillations not only requires a better understanding of primary productivity but also the effect on higher trophic levels. Currently, most autonomous platforms like BGC-Argo deployed long-term do not observe grazers due to the difficulty in making accurate observations, either directly or indirectly. Acoustic backscatter measurements at high frequencies (i.e., 1 MHz) are sensitive to smaller zooplankton species, including grazers, as compared to lower frequency measurements of acoustic backscatter traditionally used to identify fish and larger marine organisms <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23 bib1.bibx36 bib1.bibx12" id="paren.23"/>. However, without confirming net or video observations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23" id="paren.24"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>, these bioacoustic or high-frequency acoustic backscatter observations (as we present here) remain a relatively uncertain representation of grazer variability.</p>
      <p id="d2e272">Here we report on physical, bio-optical, and bio-acoustic measurements gathered in the Bay of Bengal during the 2019 monsoon season, described in the next section. We then quantify the impact of ocean clarity and passing monsoon storms on subsurface irradiance, and we statistically relate fluctuations in gross production to the subsurface irradiance. We contextualized our observations with an analysis of longer-term BGC-Argo measurements. Finally, we conclude by discussing some of the wider implications of our results, including regional patterns in subsurface productivity we may infer from our results, and evidence of higher trophic level variability. Taken together, our results demonstrate the variability in biogeochemical quantities on intraseasonal time scales, and show how increased autonomous observational capacity can contribute to our understanding of the processes that shape the ocean climate system.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Materials and methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Field campaign</title>
      <p id="d2e290">As part of a campaign to study intraseasonal oscillations in monsoon weather, we deployed an array of three densely instrumented buoys and ocean-wave-powered Wirewalker profiling vehicles <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx37" id="paren.25"/> that gathered physical, bio-optical, and irradiance measurements in July 2019 in the Bay of Bengal. Each Drogued Buoy Air-Sea Interaction System (DBASIS) was deployed for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">19</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> d (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1"/>): M1 on 9 July, M2 on 10 July, and M3 on 11 July, generally following the mesoscale flow. Each profiler had a metocean buoy on the surface, a vertically profiling Wirewalker over the upper 100 m <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx37" id="paren.26"/>, and six X-wings (1 m<sup>2</sup> drag elements) over 200 to 210 m depth so that the system drifted with the subsurface currents at 200 m. They collected approximately 200 profiles per day spanning the upper 100 m of the water column with sub-meter vertical resolution.</p>

      <fig id="F1" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d2e322">Overview of observations. <bold>(a)</bold> Bay of Bengal with the study region (red square), location of analyzed biogeochemical (BGC) Argo profilers deployed from 2013 to 2018 (yellow, WMO ID: 2902086, 2902087, 2902114, 2902158, 2902160, 2902161, 2902189, 2902196, 2902217, 2902264), with a further analyzed 2016 profile highlighted <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.27"><named-content content-type="pre">pink, WMO ID: 2902193;</named-content></xref>, location of DBASIS profilers (purple), 5 d averaged (10–15 July 2019) satellite chlorophyll <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx40 bib1.bibx41" id="paren.28"><named-content content-type="pre">Chl, background color;</named-content></xref>, and gray contours of the EU Copernicus Marine Service global ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>° sea surface height (SSH, 4 July 2019; <uri>https://doi.org/10.48670/moi-00021</uri>). <bold>(b)</bold> Position and date for the three high-resolution DBASIS floats: M1 (dark blue), M2 (light blue), and M3 (green), with the depth-maximum chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> fluorescence (ChlF) shown for M3 at noon each day. Gray contours show SSH (m). DBASIS floats were located in depths <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2600</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m deep and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">400</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km southeast of the nearest coastline.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/22/443/2026/os-22-443-2026-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e390">The buoy's meteorological package measured wind (2.9 m a.m.s.l. – above mean sea level), air temperature (2.6 m a.m.s.l.), humidity (2.6 m a.m.s.l.), precipitation (2.9 m a.m.s.l.), barometric pressure (2.3 m a.m.s.l.), sea surface temperature (0.3 and 1.5 m b.m.s.l. – below mean sea level), and downwelling solar and infrared radiation (3.2 m a.m.s.l.). The metocean buoys were equipped with Kipp and Zonen SMP21 shortwave radiation sensors that measure downwelling radiation over wavelengths of 285 to 2800 nm (50 % points). These measurements were used to estimate the surface photosynthetically available radiation (PAR).</p>
      <p id="d2e394">We equipped the Wirewalker profilers with RBR Inc. conductivity, temperature, and depth (CTD) sensors augmented by SBE Wetlabs Ecopucks measuring Chl fluorescence (ChlF, a proxy for Chl biomass), optical backscatter at 532 nm, and chromophoric dissolved organic material (CDOM; not used in the analysis presented here). We measured subsurface downwelling irradiance onboard the Wirewalkers using a Satlantic OCR-504 multi-spectral radiometer at four bands, 380, 412, 490, and 532 nm. All parameters were collected continuously at 6 Hz and telemetered at that resolution in real-time via RUDICS Iridium modems on the surface buoy. Using the factory calibration, we convert the optical backscatter to Nephelometric Turbidity Unit, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (NTU). The median time between profiles was 10 min at M2 and M3 and 20 min at M1. For all quantities, we only use measurements during the smooth upward ascent of the profiler.</p>
      <p id="d2e404">To estimate the diffuse attenuation averaged by depth, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (m<sup>−1</sup>), the raw measurements of downward irradiance were grouped in time and depth into 3 h and 4 m bins, respectively, and then least-squares fitted to an exponential curve. Irradiance was then interpolated back to the original <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="script">O</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>(10 min) time resolution (see Supplement for further details).</p>
      <p id="d2e437">We also equipped the profilers with a downward-looking Nortek Signature with a frequency of 1 MHz, from which we show only the acoustic backscatter <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx52" id="paren.29"/>. For each profiler's upcast, we averaged the acoustic amplitudes of each of the four beams over the first 20 bins (2.5 m depth range) closest to the transducer. We then interpolated range-averaged beam amplitudes onto a 0.25 m uniform depth grid before averaging all four beams. The 1 MHz backscatter was similar to the R/V <italic>Sally Ride</italic> acoustic backscatter that had a frequency of 150 kHz, with differences between frequencies as expected from literature <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23 bib1.bibx36 bib1.bibx12" id="paren.30"/>.</p>
      <p id="d2e449">All three DBASIS floats had the same bio-optical instrumentation and generally collected comparable measurements. We present time series from only M3 here, which collected continuous (unlike M1) and high resolution (10 min) data, and show M1 and M2 observations in the Supplement. Our key results and findings were similar for all floats.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> fluorescence</title>
      <p id="d2e468">The primary objective of the field campaign was to investigate air-sea interactions and the underlying physical variability in the BoB. As such, while biogeochemical observations were collected autonomously, we did not sample water in order to field calibrate the chlorophyll sensors. Instead, using laboratory calibration carried out just prior to the experiment, we converted the observed ChlF in relative fluorescence units (RFU) to real units (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g L<sup>−1</sup>) via <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ChlF</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.012</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RFU</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This conversion has an unknown uncertainty that linearly scales for all values (i.e., percentage error). For context, the observed surface ChlF from the drifting systems and MODIS-Aqua surface Chl from July 2019 were 0.17 and 0.33 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g L<sup>−1</sup>, respectively, with these points located an average of 54 km apart. The focus of our work is not on the absolute quantities of ChlF but rather on their response to surface and penetrative solar radiation, so we focus on the robust trends in co-variability rather than absolute values.</p>
      <p id="d2e535">Chlorophyll pigment concentration, ChlF, and phytoplankton biomass (i.e., carbon content) are highly variable under changing light conditions as phytoplankton adapt to changing light environments by adjusting their light-harvesting pigments <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6 bib1.bibx7" id="paren.31"/>. Due to this, estimates of biomass from backscatter observations are typically a more robust estimate of carbon biomass than ChlF. However, in the situation encountered here, non-algal sources of backscatter at-times confounded measure of algal concentrations, for example in the high-sediment coastal waters we observed at M3 before 15 July (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2"/>d). Focusing only on times when the backscatter signal was due to algal diel variability, ChlF and backscatter variability was similar. This analysis showed that ChlF was a good proxy for phytoplankton biomass at the depth of the subsurface chlorophyll maximum (SCM), which we discuss throughout the manuscript.</p>

      <fig id="F2" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d2e545">Observations at M3. <bold>(a)</bold> The net heat flux (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), <bold>(b)</bold> wind speed (blue left <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and precipitation rate (orange right <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), <bold>(c)</bold> photosynthetically available radiation (PAR), <bold>(d)</bold> ChlF, and <bold>(e)</bold> turbidity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>). In <bold>(c)</bold> to <bold>(e)</bold>, two isopycnals (1021.5 and 1023 kg m<sup>−3</sup>) are contoured (black), and in <bold>(d)</bold> the depth of the isothermal layer (ITL, pink) and mixed layer depth (MLD, yellow) are shown.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/22/443/2026/os-22-443-2026-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e643">Near the surface, non-photochemical quenching (NPQ) results in a non-biomass-related diel reduction in fluorescence under high light conditions <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx31" id="paren.32"/>. To correct for NPQ in the ChlF measurements, we follow methods established for other rapidly profiling platforms <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8 bib1.bibx47 bib1.bibx43" id="paren.33"/>. We least-squares fit irradiance at 490 nm to ChlF over the upper 20 m over 1 d windows, stepping in time every 0.1 d and averaging overlapping time steps. We set a maximum correlation coefficient of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, ensuring we only modify ChlF if ChlF decreased when irradiance increased. Although we used only ChlF over the upper 20 m for the least-squares fitting, we corrected ChlF for all depths with non-zero irradiance. The NPQ correction to ChlF was small, with a 95th percentile of 0.016 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g L<sup>−1</sup>. Further details are available in the Supplement.</p>
      <p id="d2e682">At all profilers, the depth of maximum ChlF was identified within a narrow density range. Excluding the initial 2 d observed at M1 (see Supplement), the SCM and the 1021.5 kg m<sup>−3</sup> isopycnal were significantly correlated (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" 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">0.85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) with a mean absolute error of 1.65 m. By defining the SCM as the depth of the 1021.5 kg m<sup>−3</sup> isopycnal <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m, the SCM can be matched to an along-isopycnal reference frame. Given the internal wave fluctuations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m) observed during the campaign, employing an along-isopycnal reference frame was convenient for isolating the impact of changing surface irradiance and diffuse attenuation on ChlF at the SCM (denoted ChlF<sub>SCM</sub>). The 1021.5 kg m<sup>−3</sup> isopycnal had an average depth of 39 m at M3 (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2"/>) that deepened to 50 m at M1.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Diel cycle method</title>
      <p id="d2e789">ChlF and integrated ChlF reflects the standing stock of chlorophyll, and therefore integrates pigment concentration over days to weeks. To understand the rate at which ChlF is produced and lost due to the local conditions at the SCM, we applied the diel cycle method <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx35 bib1.bibx3" id="paren.34"/>. We identify the rate of gross ChlF production (GCP<sub>SCM</sub>) and ChlF loss (code available at <uri>https://github.com/duebi/dielFit</uri>, last access: February 2020) to the NPQ corrected ChlF<sub>SCM</sub>. This loss term describes all processes resulting in a reduction of ChlF<sub>SCM</sub>, including grazing, mortality, and downward export.</p>
      <p id="d2e825">The diel cycle method linearly fits three terms via ordinary least-squares fitting to ChlF<sub>SCM</sub>. This allows us to directly evaluate the response of SCM production to intraseasonally modulated PAR, rather than relying on changes in the accumulated concentration. We note that when deciding the depth region to vertically average ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> over (2 m), averaging a larger depth range decreased the effectiveness of the diel cycle fit (i.e., the correlation coefficient decreased and mean absolute error increased). The three fitted terms in the diel cycle method included a constant, a constant loss rate for both day and night, and a variable in time GCP<sub>SCM</sub> rate similar to the clear-skies PAR, with day-time growth maximum at noon and a zero rate of change at night.</p>
      <p id="d2e855">Since we collected radiation measurements, we did not need to simulate the solar cycle. We modified the code to optionally include the observed PAR at the SCM (denoted PAR<sub>SCM</sub>) to model growth (henceforward referred to as the PAR<sub>SCM</sub> method). The PAR<sub>SCM</sub> method is similar to the sinusoidal growth model but accounts for the impact of cloudiness, changes in diffuse attenuation, or perturbations of the SCM depth on growth. Before fitting to ChlF<sub>SCM</sub>, we integrated each growth scheme in time. For all three profilers and days sampled, we fit each 26 h period (starting at 23:00 LT), overlapping each day by 1 h. We additionally modified the diel cycle methodology so that the fitted GCP<sub>SCM</sub> and loss is always positive.</p>
      <p id="d2e903">The performance of the fit was assessed by estimating the correlation coefficient and the mean absolute error, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MAE</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ChlF</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SCM</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ChlF</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">fit</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ChlF</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SCM</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the observed ChlF at the SCM, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ChlF</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">fit</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the diel cycle fit, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number of samples. Of the tested linear, sinusoidal, and PAR<sub>SCM</sub> schemes for GCP<sub>SCM</sub>, the PAR<sub>SCM</sub> method consistently returned the smallest MAE and better predicted the timing of the observed ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> maxima by 45 min on average across all floats (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1"/>). The sinusoid method also returned a good fit, with a larger MAE, but the linear method was relatively poor in describing the observed ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> variability. The fitted mean absolute error doubled when fitting ChlF at a constant depth rather than along-isopycnal due to the vertical heaving of the SCM by passing internal waves (i.e., ChlF<sub>SCM</sub>; Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1"/>). The fitting routine was also effective at M1 and M2. At M1, the timing of peak afternoon ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> was more variable, particularly when large-amplitude internal waves deepened the SCM during the day (see Supplement). We also applied the above diel cycle fitting methodology to turbidity to estimate gross turbidity production (GTP<sub>SCM</sub>) and turbidity loss. We computed the confidence intervals of the model by bootstrapping the residuals with 200 iterations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx35 bib1.bibx3" id="paren.35"/>.</p>

<table-wrap id="T1"><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d2e1059">The performance of the diel cycle fit averaged over all three profilers and days fitted. We tested three methods of estimating the gross chlorophyll production (GCP) along an isopycnal (1021.5 kg m<sup>−3</sup>) estimated as the subsurface chlorophyll maximum (SCM): linear, sinusoidal and from the observed PAR<sub>SCM</sub>. We also applied this method at a fixed depth corresponding to the average depth of the SCM at each profiler, labeled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PAR</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SCM</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula> where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> indicates an average in time. We show the estimated correlation coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and mean absolute error (MAE) from fitting ChlF, and we estimate the MAE in the timing of maximum ChlF (MAE<sub><italic>t</italic></sub>).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="center"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Method</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">MAE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">MAE<sub><italic>t</italic></sub></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g L<sup>−1</sup>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(h)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Linear</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.69 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.042</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Sinusoidal</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.78 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.032</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.1</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">PAR<sub>SCM</sub></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.81 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.7</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.029</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PAR</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SCM</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.49 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.0</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.060</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>BGC-Argo analysis</title>
      <p id="d2e1386">To contextualize our observations and investigate the frequency of light-limited productivity at the SCM in the bay, we analyzed 12 BGC-Argo floats deployed in the BoB, obtained via the OneArgo-Mat routine <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10" id="paren.36"/>. These floats were equipped with a CTD and bio-optical sensors <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="paren.37"><named-content content-type="pre">WET Labs ECO-FLBB AP2 or MCOMS, see </named-content></xref> measuring temperature, salinity, pressure, chlorophyll fluorescence (ChlF), optical backscatter coefficient at 700 nm (at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">124</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>°), as well as other sensors not used here. The data were quality controlled using standard Argo protocols <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx51" id="paren.38"/> and processed following <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx48" id="text.39"/>. Quality-controlled data was used when available (quality flags 1, 2, 5 or 8), else visual inspection and simple outlier removal was performed (quality flags 0 or 3).</p>
      <p id="d2e1413">The raw signals were converted to ChlF (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g L<sup>−1</sup>) and particulate backscattering coefficient (m<sup>−1</sup>) following BGC-Argo procedures <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx44" id="paren.40"/>. To account for variations between sensors, we standardized the minimum ChlF and backscatter value by removing the median “dark” or background value at pressure <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 600 dbar for each float <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx48" id="paren.41"/>. BGC-Argo floats vary in their temporal and vertical sampling frequencies, so following <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx48" id="text.42"/> we interpolated the quality-controlled float data onto uniform temporal grids with time steps equal to the minimum temporal sampling rate, which is 10 d for most floats. We standardized the vertical grid from 4 to 1000 m. It had 2 m resolution in the upper 300 and 10 m resolution below that. This interpolation was performed using a hermite polynomial scheme (pchip in Matlab), but depths outside the observed range were excluded (i.e., no extrapolation). We applied a 3-point moving-median in the vertical to remove measurement noise and aggregates.</p>
      <p id="d2e1466">The BGC-Argo subsurface ChlF was also maximum near a consistent isopycnal, like the DBASIS observations, except ChlF was maximum  near the 1022 kg m<sup>−3</sup> isopycnal, so we defined this isopycnal as the SCM depth. Individual months could have enhanced ChlF near a slightly different isopycnal, like the 1021.5 kg m<sup>−3</sup> isopycnal used when analyzing the DBASIS floats, but we simply use the same isopycnal year-round. To estimate the ChlF<sub>SCM</sub>, we averaged ChlF over the 10 m above and below this depth. Since the floats profile once every 10 d, and there are too few floats to apply more advanced statistical techniques <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="paren.43"/>, we cannot estimate GCP<sub>SCM</sub> from diel cycles for the BGC-Argo data. Instead, we examined the floats for any evidence of a correlation between ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> and PAR at the surface and SCM (described below). We note the diel cycle in ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> is prevalent in the Bay of Bengal <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24" id="paren.44"/> and has the potential to alias multi-day trends in ChlF if measurements of ChlF are taken at different local times, as is the case for BGC-Argo measurements. To avoid this aliasing, in regions with diel cycles, ChlF and other biological or bio-optical variables should be measured at similar times of the day.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5">
  <label>2.5</label><title>Satellite and reanalysis data</title>
      <p id="d2e1545">To understand the co-variance of light and BGC-Argo observed ChlF, we considered both MODIS Aqua PAR <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx32" id="paren.45"/> and the atmospheric reanalysis ECMWF Reanalysis v5 (ERA5) product <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx17" id="paren.46"/>. On average, the PAR estimated at M3 was less than the satellite derived estimate but similar to the ERA5 estimate. We thereby estimated surface PAR from the ERA5 shortwave radiation, by dividing shortwave radiation by 2.114 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx4" id="paren.47"/>. Then, to estimate PAR at the SCM, we utilized the 490 nm diffuse attenuation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">490</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) from the monthly averaged MODIS-Aqua <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx14" id="paren.48"/> and converted to a PAR equivalent using the relation in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx30" id="text.49"/>. If this data was missing due to cloud cover, we took the monthly climatology value instead. For a short-term estimate of 490 nm diffuse attenuation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">490</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) at the start of our DBASIS time series,  we analyzed the Ocean Color CCI (OC-CCI) merged satellite product, which had a spatial resolution of 4 km and was averaged over the 5 d period of 10 to 15 July 2019 <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx40 bib1.bibx41" id="paren.50"/>.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Southwest monsoon campaign</title>
      <p id="d2e1611">The 2019 field campaign enabled a detailed investigation of the co-variability of subsurface physical and bio-optical properties on an hour-by-hour basis over a nearly 3-week deployment (Figs. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1"/> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2"/>). Conditions at deployment were consistent with the southwest monsoon “break” period with weak winds (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m s<sup>−1</sup>), large net heat fluxes into the ocean (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, daily average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of 180 W m<sup>−2</sup>), and no precipitation (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2"/>).</p>
      <p id="d2e1677">The DBASIS array was deployed at the intersection of two eddies, as inferred from sea surface height (SSH, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1"/>). Low-SSH (SSH <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.5 m) and high-SSH (SSH <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.5 m) eddies were present to the northwest and southwest, respectively. Between these two eddies, a plume of elevated surface chlorophyll was advected more than 400 km from the coast toward the DBASIS array (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1"/>a). This coastal plume exhibited elevated turbidity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and surface chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> fluorescence (ChlF), both of which reduced light penetration into the upper ocean (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2"/>). Similar coastal plumes have been observed elsewhere at the intersection of cyclonic and anticyclonic eddies <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx25" id="paren.51"><named-content content-type="pre">i.e., eddy dipole,</named-content></xref>.</p>

      <fig id="F3" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d2e1722">Co-varying light and chlorophyll. At M3, <bold>(a)</bold> on isopycnal ChlF, with depth representing the 48 h low-pass filtered isopycnal depth (white contour, right <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis) and the SCM depth labeled (black contour). <bold>(b)</bold> PAR at the surface (purple, PAR<sub>0</sub>) and subsurface chlorophyll maximum (SCM, teal, PAR<sub>SCM</sub>) multiplied by 10. <bold>(c)</bold> ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> (purple) and the diel cycle fit (black, see “Methods”). <bold>(d)</bold> Rate of gross ChlF production (GCP<sub>SCM</sub>, green) and loss (grey) at the SCM, with the 95 % confidence interval labeled (error bars). <bold>(e)</bold> Similar to panel <bold>(b)</bold> but daily averaged (denoted by the over-bar). Note 0<sup>+</sup> and 0<sup>−</sup> m indicate surface measurements in air and water, respectively, and we denote a conversion from shortwave radiation to PAR with (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/22/443/2026/os-22-443-2026-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e1826">Over the 19 d deployment, the array drifted southeastward and sampled two distinct regimes – one influenced by a coastal plume and one outside its influence. Surface turbidity and ChlF decreased after 5 d, following the profiler exiting the coastal plume. Below the surface, the pattern was reversed. ChlF at the subsurface chlorophyll maximum (SCM, ChlF<sub>SCM</sub>) was initially relatively low and then approximately doubled after the drifting platforms left the plume (14 to 20 July). Meanwhile, turbidity near the SCM (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SCM</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) initially decreased and subsequently increased as ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> increased (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2"/>d and e). Outside the plume, turbidity is expected to primarily reflect algal biomass. The observed turbidity outside the plume, especially with its co-variability with ChlF near the SCM, indicates that variability in ChlF reflects changes in biomass and not just pigment concentrations.</p>
      <p id="d2e1860">Diffuse attenuation was strongly influenced by turbidity and was enhanced within the plume, limiting PAR<sub>SCM</sub> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m of 1021.5 kg m<sup>−3</sup> isopycnal, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>b). After the drifting buoys left the plume, however, turbidity and diffuse attenuation decreased, leading to a doubling of maximum day-time PAR<sub>SCM</sub>, even though surface PAR was relatively steady. This increase in PAR<sub>SCM</sub> was coincident with increasing ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>a). From 18 to 23 July, wind speeds decreased to an average of 4.4 m s<sup>−1</sup>, net heat fluxes were consistently large at a daily average of 139 W m<sup>−2</sup>, and the total rainfall measured 4.4 mm (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2"/>). Subsequently, the atmospheric conditions transitioned from mostly sunny conditions to mostly cloudy conditions around 23 July with the onset of the “active” phase of the southwest Monsoon (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2"/>a). From 23 to 28 July, surface-buoy-measured shortwave radiation and net heat fluxes decreased, with a daily average <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">39</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> W m<sup>−2</sup>, winds increased to an average of 8.8 m s<sup>−1</sup>, and rainfall remained low, totaling 28 mm (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2"/>). During this time, PAR<sub>SCM</sub> dropped significantly and ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> decreased, even though near-surface turbidity and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were at a minimum.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Gross ChlF production from diel cycles</title>
      <p id="d2e2040">The rapid vertical profiling of the Wirewalkers allowed the assessment of bio-optical variability from a time-varying, along-isopycnal frame of reference (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2"/>d vs. Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>a). We use the observed density to convert ChlF to an along-isopycnal reference frame. This approach moderates the effect of passing internal waves that confound measurements taken at discrete depths and highlighted the variability of ChlF at diel timescales (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>). Due to high variability in surface densities, we omit the upper 20 m in the along-isopycnal figure (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>a). We also note that due to the relatively dense surface densities from 12 to 18 July, the along-isopycnal figure has missing data (black regions) to up to 30 m depth (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1021.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> kg m<sup>−3</sup> isopycnal), as no ChlF observations were made at these densities. The diel cycle at the SCM showed peak concentrations around 3 h after local noon and minimum concentrations at dawn (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>a and c). The noon maximum in PAR<sub>SCM</sub> (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>b teal) coincided with a rapid increase in ChlF<sub>SCM</sub>, as found previously in the bay <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24" id="paren.52"/>. All records were corrected for NPQ, which had a fairly small effect on ChlF variability.</p>
      <p id="d2e2093">The consistent timing of irradiance and the diel cycle (e.g., maximum in ChlF rate of change at noon, not shown) has been used to estimate gross production and loss from dissolved oxygen and other biological variables <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27 bib1.bibx35 bib1.bibx3 bib1.bibx18" id="paren.53"/>. Here we adapt these diel models to estimate the gross ChlF production (GCP) and the rate of ChlF loss from the on-isopycnal variability of ChlF and co-located PAR at the SCM. By modeling growth from the co-located PAR (PAR<sub>SCM</sub>), the impact of variable cloud cover, changes in ocean clarity, or passing internal waves on growth can be accounted for, improving the performance of the model.</p>
      <p id="d2e2108">The observed diel periodicity and the multi-day trend in ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> were effectively emulated by the model for each DBASIS platform (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>c and Supplement). The fitted rate of ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> growth was closely coupled to ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> loss (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>d), reflecting strong recycling in this oligotrophic setting. When the rate of ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> loss exceeded GCP<sub>SCM</sub>, daily-averaged ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> decreased even when GCP<sub>SCM</sub> and the diel variability in ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> remained large (from 21 July, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>c and d).</p>
      <p id="d2e2190">The observed GCP<sub>SCM</sub> increased and decreased following respective changes in PAR<sub>SCM</sub>. PAR<sub>SCM</sub> was a function of shortwave radiation at the surface (largest effect, e.g., 22 July onwards, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>), diffuse attenuation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the water column (e.g., 12 to 15 July), and the SCM depth (e.g., 20 to 21 July at M1, see Supplement). Over the deployment, GCP<sub>SCM</sub> linearly scaled with the daily averaged shortwave radiation and PAR<sub>SCM</sub> (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4"/>a and c), with a significant positive correlation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" 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">0.34</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). From this linear regression, as shortwave radiation decreased by 80 % following the transition from the break to active monsoon conditions (21 to 26 July), GCP<sub>SCM</sub> decreased by 82 %. Similarly, as the drifting systems left the coastal plume, PAR<sub>SCM</sub> and the regression-estimated GCP<sub>SCM</sub> increased by 58 % (12 to 21 July). The fit with in situ PAR<sub>SCM</sub> was superior to the fit with shortwave radiation due to the influence of the time-variable diffuse attenuation reflected in that measurement, with days with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>15 m decreasing the performance of the shortwave radiation fit. These findings suggest that spatial variability in diffuse attenuation, due to ocean clarity, and surface irradiance, due to intraseasonal oscillations in monsoon weather, act together to influence subsurface productivity in the northern Bay of Bengal.</p>

      <fig id="F4" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d2e2351">Light-limited productivity. Daily averaged PAR<sub>0</sub> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis, converted from shortwave radiation) vs. <bold>(a)</bold> GCP<sub>SCM</sub> and <bold>(b)</bold> gross turbidity production (GTP<sub>SCM</sub>) for all profilers and sample days with a good diel cycle fit (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" 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">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), colored corresponding to the inverse diffuse attenuation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). <bold>(c, d)</bold> Similar to the above panel, but with PAR<sub>SCM</sub>. We least-squares linear fit each panels gross production and light variable, labeling the resulting linear regression (black), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value, and mean absolute error (MAE).</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/22/443/2026/os-22-443-2026-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e2463">We also note that due to the SCM depth being approximately 10 m deeper at M1 compared to the other profilers, PAR<sub>SCM</sub> was lowest, on average, at this profiler. We can slightly improve the fit (MAE decreased by 12 %) of GCP<sub>SCM</sub> to PAR<sub>SCM</sub> (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4"/>b) by accounting for phytoplankton light adaption by relating GCP<sub>SCM</sub> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PAR</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SCM</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PAR</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SCM</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> instead of PAR<sub>SCM</sub>, where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">PAR</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SCM</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula> is the along-isopycnal average of the PAR<sub>SCM</sub> at each profiler. This suggests phytoplankton were adapted to a lower irradiance (i.e., isolume) at M1 than the other profilers, but regardless, GCP<sub>SCM</sub> similarly increased for larger PAR<sub>SCM</sub>.</p>
      <p id="d2e2571">Despite the occasional non-algal sources of high turbidity, especially at M3, we estimated a good diel cycle fit (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" 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">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) in turbidity for 28 d in total across the three profilers. The estimated gross turbidity production at the SCM (GTP<sub>SCM</sub>) linearly varied with PAR at the surface and SCM, similar to GCP<sub>SCM</sub> variability (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4"/>b and d). This indicates the co-variability of ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> and light availability is not limited to pigment concentration (e.g., photo-acclimation) but also corresponds to changes in biomass.</p>
      <p id="d2e2618">Our findings of light-limited ChlF could additionally be found by analyzing the instantaneous ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> and depth-integrated ChlF, but the relationships were much weaker. We compared depth-integrated ChlF over the upper 80 m to depth-integrated PAR, and ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> to PAR<sub>SCM</sub>. Both linear regressions returned weak correlations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" 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">0.13</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) that remained significant (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, not shown). The instantaneous and depth-integrated ChlF was additionally influenced by ChlF loss and represents the accumulated biomass rather than just growth. Despite this, the strong influence of light availability on ChlF variability remained evident in both instantaneous ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> and GCP<sub>SCM</sub>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Barrier layer stability</title>
      <p id="d2e2702">In the southern BoB, SCM productivity was linked to barrier layer thickness, defined as the depth-region between the mixed layer depth (MLD) base and the isothermal layer <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="paren.54"><named-content content-type="pre">ITL,</named-content></xref>. Here, we define the ITL depth as the shallowest depth where the temperature was at least 1 °C cooler than the sea surface temperature (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> °C), and the MLD as the shallowest depth where the density increase from the surface value corresponds to a temperature decrease of 1 °C. The ITL was on-average within 1.5 m of the SCM depth at M3 and the barrier layer thickness was highly dependent on salinity variations (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5"/>a–c).</p>

      <fig id="F5" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d2e2728">Barrier layer vs. the SCM. At M3, <bold>(a, d)</bold> in situ temperature, <bold>(b, e)</bold> salinity on the practical salinity scale, and <bold>(c, f)</bold> ChlF, over the upper 70 m <bold>(a–c)</bold> and at specific depths <bold>(d–f)</bold>. <bold>(a–c)</bold> Depth of the isothermal layer (ITL, pink), SCM (black), and mixed layer depth (MLD, yellow). <bold>(d–f)</bold> Variability at near-surface (black), and mixed layer depth (purple). <bold>(f)</bold> Variability at the SCM (green).</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/22/443/2026/os-22-443-2026-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e2762">While M3 was within the coastal plume (before 15 July), the MLD approximately equaled the SCM depth, which continued till 17 July (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5"/>a and b). While within the plume, water temperature and salinity at the surface and MLD were different, indicating a very thin barrier layer was present, but ChlF was the same (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5"/>d–f). A passing storm resulted in a shallow rain-layer forming around 17 July, the rapid shoaling of the MLD, diverging surface and MLD temperature and salinity <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="paren.55"><named-content content-type="pre">see</named-content></xref>, and a rapid decrease in ChlF at the MLD base (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5"/>). Over the remaining observation period, the MLD deepened until it reached the SCM around July 25. ChlF at the MLD and SCM then converged, and surface ChlF increased despite the transition to active monsoon conditions and decrease in light availability. The thick barrier layer that formed from the rain event should theoretically isolate upper ocean mixing from the SCM. The observed increase in ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> and GCP<sub>SCM</sub> from 18 July may therefore be due to both the sustained sunny break conditions and a decrease in SCM mixing from the barrier layer formation (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>d).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Regional and seasonal context</title>
      <p id="d2e2805">To determine whether our observations of co-varying PAR<sub>SCM</sub> and GCP<sub>SCM</sub> in the central Bay of Bengal were representative of the region and season, we analyzed the BGC-Argo subsurface ChlF, ERA5 estimated PAR and MODIS-Aqua diffuse attenuation climatology (see Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2.SS4"/> and <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2.SS5"/>). To illustrate, we show one example of positively correlated PAR<sub>SCM</sub> and ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> over 12 months (WMO ID: 2902193; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" 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">0.58</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">70</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6"/>). At the seasonal time scale, trends in PAR<sub>SCM</sub> were more similar to SCM depth than the incident surface PAR, where PAR exponentially decays with depth and so SCM depth can largely control PAR<sub>SCM</sub>. In contrast, during the monsoon months of June to September, temporal variability was comparable between surface PAR and ChlF<sub>SCM</sub>. This intraseasonal signal was sufficiently strong such that during the southwest monsoon period, surface PAR and subsurface ChlF (averaged over the upper 140 m) were significantly positively correlated (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" 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">0.26</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), even without accounting for changes in SCM depth.</p>

      <fig id="F6" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d2e2953">Co-varying light and ChlF from a 2016 BGC-Argo deployment (WMO ID: 2902193, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1"/>a). ChlF concentrations <bold>(a)</bold> depth-averaged over the 20 m centered on the 1022 kg m<sup>−3</sup> isopycnal we designate as the SCM (green, left <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis) and <bold>(b)</bold> contoured over depth. Also on panel <bold>(a)</bold>, for each BGC-Argo profile we find the closest ERA5 surface PAR <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx17" id="paren.56"><named-content content-type="pre">purple, right <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis;</named-content></xref> and MODIS-Aqua 490 nm diffuse attenuation <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx14" id="paren.57"/>, converted to a PAR equivalent <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx30" id="paren.58"/>, to estimate PAR<sub>SCM</sub> (black, right <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis). Yellow shading in panel <bold>(a)</bold> indicates the southwest monsoon period. In panel <bold>(b)</bold>, isopycnals are contoured in gray every 1 kg m<sup>−3</sup>, with the SCM plotted in blue.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/22/443/2026/os-22-443-2026-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e3046">The BGC-Argo float observed the largest change in ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> during the southwest monsoon between the end of July and start of August. The minimum and maximum PAR<sub>SCM</sub> around this time were on 23 July and 6 August, with observed ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> on these days of 0.38 and 1.65 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g L<sup>−1</sup>, respectively (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6"/>). The time of observation will also impact ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> in this region of strong diel cycles. We note the time of sampling of the minimum and maximum PAR<sub>SCM</sub> was at 16:12 and 03:08 LT, respectively, where the DBASIS float observed daily maximum ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> at 15:00 LT and minimum at 07:00 LT, on average (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>c). The over 300 % increase in ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> observed by BGC-Argo was not only due to the transition from active to break monsoon conditions (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6"/>), but also the shoaling of the SCM that further increased light availability.</p>
      <p id="d2e3141">If we contrast to the DBASIS platform observations, at M3 ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> decreased from 0.96 to 0.58 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>g L<sup>−1</sup> on 21 to 25 July, and at the same local time as the minimum and maximum BGC-Argo sample (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>c). This equates to a 40 % difference at M3, compared to the 77 % difference in the BGC-Argo float. We note the change in gross ChlF production at the SCM at the DBASIS platform was double the ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> change, at an <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % decrease, where this number is independent of sampling time (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>e). This may suggest changes in gross ChlF production due to intraseasonal oscillations at the BGC-Argo exceeded what we observed at M3, given variability in ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> was larger at the BGC-Argo float than at M3.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Primary productivity during the southwest monsoon</title>
      <p id="d2e3223">During the 2019 monsoon in the central Bay of Bengal and away from the coastal plume, ChlF and turbidity had a subsurface maximum, denoted the subsurface chlorophyll maximum (SCM, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2"/>), and the SCM almost always coincided with the 1021.5 kg m<sup>−3</sup> isopycnal. Both ChlF and turbidity also had a diel periodicity at the SCM, further suggesting that variations in ChlF at the SCM represent similar changes in biomass, as has been previously shown in the Indian Ocean waters <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5 bib1.bibx38" id="paren.59"/>. The diel periodicity in ChlF has been observed elsewhere in the BoB <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24 bib1.bibx38" id="paren.60"/>, and highlights a tight coupling between phytoplankton growth and loss in these oligotrophic waters. At the SCM, the gross production derived from both ChlF and turbidity varied with PAR<sub>SCM</sub> (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4"/>). Estimated gross ChlF production at the SCM (GCP<sub>SCM</sub>) responded to variations in light from passing monsoon storms and changing ocean clarity (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4"/>b and Supplement). GCP<sub>SCM</sub>, estimated from the diel cycle in ChlF<sub>SCM</sub>, linearly scaled with surface shortwave radiation at each DBASIS system, but the fit was sensitive to changing ocean color and turbidity. By accounting for variations in diffuse attenuation by linearly scaling GCP<sub>SCM</sub> with PAR<sub>SCM</sub> rather than PAR at the surface (PAR<sub>0</sub>), we improved the linear fit (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F4"/>). We conclude we observed light limited SCM growth, contrary to prior studies showing the subtropical oligotrophic waters were typically nutrient limited <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="paren.61"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>.</p>
      <p id="d2e3322">The estimated GCP<sub>SCM</sub> rapidly decreased following the transition from sunny “break” to cloudy “active” monsoon conditions by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % in the northern BoB (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>d and e). This intraseasonal signal in ChlF gross production was also evident in BGC-Argo ChlF measurements from central BoB, with a similar difference in ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> levels during the active vs. break periods as that observed by our measurements (e.g., 24 July to 8 August in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6"/>a). Due to the southwest monsoon, surface PAR fluctuates on timescales of days to months over the entire bay <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11 bib1.bibx26 bib1.bibx45" id="paren.62"/>. Average surface PAR increased from 20 to 8° N, while the monthly standard deviation in surface PAR decreases from north to south (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F7"/>). This indicates that the southern BoB waters have higher and more consistent surface PAR, and towards the north, intraseasonal oscillations have a larger impact on surface PAR. We hence predict our observed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % difference in SCM productivity due to intraseasonal oscillations was representative of northern and perhaps central BoB variability during the southwest monsoon, confirmed by the BGC-Argo observations from central BoB (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F6"/>). From the surface PAR fluctuations, we expect weaker but still prevalent oscillations in productivity to occur in more southern waters.</p>

      <fig id="F7"><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d2e3377">ERA5 derived monthly climatology (2012–2022) of surface PAR (PAR<sub>0</sub>). ERA5 PAR<sub>0</sub> at fixed locations around the bay (color), <bold>(a)</bold> monthly averaged and <bold>(b)</bold> monthly standard deviation. Gray shading indicates the southwest summer monsoon period.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/22/443/2026/os-22-443-2026-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <fig id="F8" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d2e3413">Diel vertical migration to the SCM. <bold>(a)</bold> PAR<sub>0</sub> (converted from shortwave radiation), and <bold>(b)</bold> on isopycnal acoustic backscatter at 1 MHz (depth as Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>a).</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/22/443/2026/os-22-443-2026-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d2e3439">Observations from the southern BoB have highlighted the importance of the barrier layer in supporting SCM productivity by impeding the mixing of the SCM into the mixed layer <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="paren.63"/>. Our observations deviated from the southern BoB observation but still confirmed the importance of the barrier layer. The formation of a shallow rain-layer rapidly shoaled the mixed layer, increasing the barrier layer thickness, and isolating the SCM from being eroded by upper ocean mixing (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F5"/>). Had the sunny break conditions not followed after a storm event, we expect observed intraseasonal oscillations in ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> and GCP<sub>SCM</sub> would have decreased. At M3, the erosion of the barrier layer co-occurred with minimum ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> rather than when ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> was enhanced, like observations by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="text.64"/>. The erosion of the barrier hence had minimal impact on the already decreased SCM productivity, but likely contributed to the observed decrease in ChlF<sub>SCM</sub>. We also note that at M3, the bulk of the SCM productivity was below the barrier layer, while <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="text.65"/> observed enhanced ChlF within the barrier layer when it was present. As the SCM is typically located at the deepest depth where PAR is sufficient for growth and the shallowest depth where nutrients are available, our observations may suggest a relatively deeper nutricline than in the southern BoB. The barrier layer still separated the SCM from upper ocean mixing, and hence will influence SCM productivity, as found in the southern BoB <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="paren.66"/>.</p>
      <p id="d2e3502">Both the DBASIS and BGC-Argo observations indicate the intraseasonal variability in surface light project onto the SCM primary productivity. These observations suggest propagating coupled ocean-atmosphere intraseasonal weather patterns may leave a biological footprint of time- and space-variable primary productivity within the Bay of Bengal. Barrier layer formation is additionally impacted by intraseasonal oscillations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx46 bib1.bibx13 bib1.bibx38" id="paren.67"/>, and will impact ChlF vertical distributions <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="paren.68"/> and hence SCM productivity. Other biogeochemical properties may also be dependent on intraseasonal weather patterns, since primary productivity modulates dissolved oxygen, particulate organic carbon, and dissolved inorganic carbon concentrations <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx39" id="paren.69"/>. Similar patterns could also be evident in other tropical and subtropical oceans subject to intraseasonal atmospheric variability.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Higher trophic levels</title>
      <p id="d2e3522">Although we focus on the light limitation on primary productivity in this manuscript, grazing by higher trophic levels can also constrain phytoplankton variability. To provide some information on this component of the food web, we used acoustic backscatter measurements from 1 MHz Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers onboard the Wirewalkers <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx36" id="paren.70"><named-content content-type="pre">Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F8"/>,</named-content></xref>. The backscatter measurements showed enhanced values at night in shallow waters with depths less than 50 m and density of 1022 kg m<sup>−3</sup> or less (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F8"/>). Then during the day, backscatter measurements were enhanced in deeper waters at around 60 m depth. These observations are consistent with a shallow diel migration of zooplankton between around 60 m at daytime to near the SCM at nighttime. Although we do not have observations to confirm the size and species present, as highlighted in the “Introduction”, previous analysis with a 1 MHz acoustic backscatter confirms its sensitivity to smaller zooplankton species, including grazers <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx23 bib1.bibx36 bib1.bibx12" id="paren.71"/>. These smaller species tend to have slower and shallower vertical migrations than larger species <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12" id="paren.72"/>, so the shallow diel migration in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F8"/>b is consistent with a small zooplankton species.</p>
      <p id="d2e3555">The acoustic backscatter strength near the SCM increased over time and reached a maximum on 24 July (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F8"/>b). During this period of increasing acoustic backscatter, the rate of ChlF<sub>SCM</sub> loss began to exceed that of GCP<sub>SCM</sub> (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>d), leading to a decrease in Chl<sub>SCM</sub> from 21 July. This suggests that grazing could have contributed to the increased loss rate and might provide a link between intraseasonal variability in primary production and higher trophic levels. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx38" id="text.73"/> highlighted that a better understanding of barrier layer formation under variable phytoplankton growth rates and zooplankton grazing is required. Here, we reveal important linkages between these processes and additionally highlight the importance of the intraseasonal oscillations in imparting periodicity to phytoplankton growth at the SCM.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d2e3602">The coupled bio-optical and physical observations collected from the DBASIS drifting buoy-profiler systems allowed concurrent measurements of the subsurface irradiance and the diel cycles of subsurface chlorophyll fluorescence during the southwest monsoon (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3"/>a). These observations showed that changes in subsurface irradiance in the northern Bay of Bengal were coupled with intraseasonal variability in monsoon weather and spatial variability in the turbidity of surface waters, and led to major changes in subsurface primary productivity.</p>
      <p id="d2e3607">Coupled ocean-atmosphere global forecasting models are challenged to accurately represent intraseasonal variability in the tropical and subtropical ocean. Here we have shown that intraseasonal variability extends to the subsurface biogeochemical properties of the Northern Indian Ocean. Representing this variability correctly in climate predictions is necessary to reduce forecast uncertainty since it impacts both the ocean carbon system and the optical characteristics of the upper ocean, which modulate ocean heat content. Continued advances in autonomous measurement techniques, and widespread deployment of those platforms, is necessary to improve our understanding of the contribution of intraseasonal biogeochemical variability to the ocean ecosystem.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="codedataavailability"><title>Code and data availability</title>

      <p id="d2e3614">Data underlying the presented figures and tables are freely available. Biogeochemical-Argo data are freely available through one of the two Global Data Assembly Centers (GDAC), using the WMO number of the float, which is its specific identifier. Argo data were collected and made freely available by the International Argo Program and the national programs that contribute to it (<uri>http://www.argo.ucsd.edu</uri>, last access: September 2020, <uri>http://argo.jcommops.org</uri>, last access: September 2020). The Argo Program is part of the Global Ocean Observing System.</p>

      <p id="d2e3623">Ocean color satellite measurements are freely available through the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Ocean Ecology Laboratory, Ocean Biology Processing Group (2018) (<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/KD490/2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/KD490/2018</ext-link>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx33" id="altparen.74"/>, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/PAR/2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/PAR/2018</ext-link>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx32" id="altparen.75"/>, and <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/CHL/2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/CHL/2018</ext-link>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx34" id="altparen.76"/>). The VGPM NPP measurements were provided by the Ocean Productivity team at Oregon State University (<uri>http://sites.science.oregonstate.edu/ocean.productivity/index.php</uri>, last access: 21 April 2023). The altimeter products were produced and distributed by the EU Copernicus Marine Service Information (<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.48670/moi-00021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.48670/moi-00021</ext-link>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="altparen.77"/>). The modified dielcycle code is publically available (<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18409716" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.18409716</ext-link>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx42" id="altparen.78"/>). All other code used is available upon request.</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d2e3660">The supplement related to this article is available online at <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/os-22-443-2026-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/os-22-443-2026-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d2e3669">The manuscript contains observations from the Office of Naval Research MISO-BOB 2019 field campaign. AJL and JTF led the conception, planning, and execution of the field experiment and TLS assisted in the execution. TLS conducted the majority of the data analysis and MO contributed the biogeochemical Argo analysis. TLS and AJL drafted the initial manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d2e3675">The contact author has declared that none of the authors has any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d2e3681">Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. The authors bear the ultimate responsibility for providing appropriate place names. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d2e3687">We thank the crew, volunteers, and scientists who aided in the field data collection aboard the R/V <italic>Sally Ride</italic>. We would like to thank Debasis Sengupta of the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore for his contributions to our understanding of intraseasonal variability in the Northern Indian Ocean. This study has been conducted using EU Copernicus Marine Service Information; <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.48670/moi-00021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.48670/moi-00021</ext-link> and OC-CCI data <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx40 bib1.bibx41" id="paren.79"/>.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d2e3701">This research has been supported by the Office of Naval Research (grant nos. MISO-BOB, N00014-17-1-2391, N00014-17-1-2987, and AWD05945) and the National Science Foundation (grant not. NSF 2048491).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d2e3708">This paper was edited by Karen J. Heywood and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bibx1"><label>Antoine et al.(1996)Antoine, Andr, and Morel</label><mixed-citation>Antoine, D., André, J.-M., and Morel, A.: Oceanic primary production 2. Estimation at global scale from satelite (coastal zone color scanner) chlorophyll, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 10, 57–60, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GL016889" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003GL016889</ext-link>, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx2"><label>Argo(2000)</label><mixed-citation>Argo: Argo float data and metadata from Global Data Assembly Centre (Argo GDAC), SEANOE [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.17882/42182" ext-link-type="DOI">10.17882/42182</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx3"><label>Barone et al.(2019)Barone, Nicholson, Ferrn, Firing, and Karl</label><mixed-citation>Barone, B., Nicholson, D., Ferrón, S., Firing, E., and Karl, D.: The estimation of gross oxygen production and community respiration from autonomous time-series measurements in the oligotrophic ocean, Limnol. Oceanogr.: Meth., 17, 650–664, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/lom3.10340" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/lom3.10340</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx4"><label>Britton and Dodd(1976)</label><mixed-citation>Britton, C. and Dodd, J.: Relationships of photosynthetically active radiation and shortwave irradiance, Agricult. Meteorol., 17, 1–7, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-1571(76)90080-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0002-1571(76)90080-7</ext-link>, 1976.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx5"><label>Cornec et al.(2021)Cornec, Claustre, Mignot, Guidi, Lacour, Poteau, D'Ortenzio, Gentili, and Schmechtig</label><mixed-citation>Cornec, M., Claustre, H., Mignot, A., Guidi, L., Lacour, L., Poteau, A., D'Ortenzio, F., Gentili, B., and Schmechtig, C.: Deep Chlorophyll Maxima in the Global Ocean: Occurrences, Drivers and Characteristics, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 35, 1–30, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GB006759" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020GB006759</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx6"><label>Cullen(1982)</label><mixed-citation>Cullen, J. J.: The Deep Chlorophyll Maximum: Comparing Vertical Profiles of Chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 39, 791–803, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1139/f82-108" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1139/f82-108</ext-link>, 1982.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx7"><label>Cullen(2015)</label><mixed-citation>Cullen, J. J.: Subsurface chlorophyll maximum layers: Enduring enigma or mystery solved?, Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci., 7, 207–239, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-marine-010213-135111" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1146/annurev-marine-010213-135111</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx8"><label>Davis et al.(2008)Davis, Ohman, Rudnick, Sherman, and Hodges</label><mixed-citation>Davis, R. E., Ohman, M. D., Rudnick, D. L., Sherman, J. T., and Hodges, B.: Glider surveillance of physics and biology in the southern California Current System, Limnol. Oceanogr., 53, 2151–2168, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2008.53.5_part_2.2151" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4319/lo.2008.53.5_part_2.2151</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx9"><label>EU Copernicus Marine Service Information(2026)</label><mixed-citation>EU Copernicus Marine Service Information: Global Ocean Physics Reanalysis, EU Copernicus Marine Service Information [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.48670/moi-00021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.48670/moi-00021</ext-link>, 2026.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx10"><label>Frenzel et al.(2020)Frenzel, Sharp, Fassbender, and Buzby</label><mixed-citation>Frenzel, H., Sharp, J., Fassbender, A., and Buzby, N.: OneArgo-Mat: A MATLAB toolbox for accessing and visualizing Argo data, Zenodo [code], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6588042" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.6588042</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx11"><label>Gadgil et al.(2005)Gadgil, Rajeevan, and Nanjundiah</label><mixed-citation> Gadgil, S., Rajeevan, M., and Nanjundiah, R.: Monsoon prediction – Why yet another failure?, Curr. Sci., 88, 1389–1400, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx12"><label>Gastauer et al.(2022)Gastauer, Nickels, and Ohman</label><mixed-citation>Gastauer, S., Nickels, C. F., and Ohman, M. D.: Body size- and season-dependent diel vertical migration of mesozooplankton resolved acoustically in the San Diego Trough, Limnol. Oceanogr., 67, 300–313, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.11993" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/lno.11993</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx13"><label>Girishkumar et al.(2011)Girishkumar, Ravichandran, McPhaden, and Rao</label><mixed-citation>Girishkumar, M. S., Ravichandran, M., McPhaden, M. J., and Rao, R. R.: Intraseasonal variability in barrier layer thickness in the south central Bay of Bengal, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 116, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JC006657" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010JC006657</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx14"><label>Goddard Space Flight Center and Ocean Ecology Laboratory(2018a)</label><mixed-citation>Goddard Space Flight Center and Ocean Ecology Laboratory: Moderate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Aqua Downwelling Diffuse Attenuation Coefficient Data; 2018 Reprocessing, NASA OB.DAAC [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5067/ORBVIEW-2/SEAWIFS/L2/OC/2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5067/ORBVIEW-2/SEAWIFS/L2/OC/2018</ext-link>, 2018a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx15"><label>Gray et al.(2018)Gray, Johnson, Bushinsky, Riser, Russell, Talley, Wanninkhof, Williams, and Sarmiento</label><mixed-citation>Gray, A. R., Johnson, K. S., Bushinsky, S. M., Riser, S. C., Russell, J. L., Talley, L. D., Wanninkhof, R., Williams, N. L., and Sarmiento, J. L.: Autonomous Biogeochemical Floats Detect Significant Carbon Dioxide Outgassing in the High-Latitude Southern Ocean, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 9049–9057, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2018GL078013</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx16"><label>Hansell(2009)</label><mixed-citation>Hansell, D. A.: Dissolved organic carbon in the carbon cycle of the Indian Ocean, Geophys. Monogr. Ser., 185, 217–230, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GM000684" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007GM000684</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx17"><label>Hersbach et al.(2018)Hersbach, Bell, Berrisford, Biavati, Hornyi, Sabater, Nicolas, Peubey, Radu, Rozum, Schepers, Simmons, Soci, Dee, and Thpaut</label><mixed-citation>Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Biavati, G., Horányi, A., Sabater, J. M., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Rozum, I., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Dee, D., and Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5 hourly data on single levels from 1940 to present, Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS) [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.adbb2d47" ext-link-type="DOI">10.24381/cds.adbb2d47</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx18"><label>Johnson and Bif(2021)</label><mixed-citation>Johnson, K. S. and Bif, M. B.: Constraint on net primary productivity of the global ocean by Argo oxygen measurements, Nat. Geosci., 14, 769–774, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00807-z" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41561-021-00807-z</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx19"><label>Johnson et al.(2017)Johnson, Plant, Coletti, Jannasch, Sakamoto, Riser, Swift, Williams, Boss, Haëntjens, Talley, and Sarmiento</label><mixed-citation>Johnson, K. S., Plant, J. N., Coletti, L. J., Jannasch, H. W., Sakamoto, C. M., Riser, S. C., Swift, D. D., Williams, N. L., Boss, E., Haëntjens, N., Talley, L. D., and Sarmiento, J. L.: Biogeochemical sensor performance in the SOCCOM profiling float array, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 122, 6416–6436, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JC012838" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017JC012838</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx20"><label>Kerhalkar et al.(2025)Kerhalkar, Tandon, Farrar, MacKinnon, Schlosser, Johnson, Lucas, Hormann, and Centurioni</label><mixed-citation>Kerhalkar, S., Tandon, A., Farrar, J., MacKinnon, J. A., Schlosser, T. L., Johnson, L., Lucas, A. J., Hormann, V., and Centurioni, L. R.: Modulation of Diurnal SST and Diurnal Warm Layer Variability by Salinity-Driven Stratification in the Bay of Bengal, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 56, 245–266, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/jpo-d-25-0134.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/jpo-d-25-0134.1</ext-link>, 2025.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx21"><label>Kumar et al.(2010a)Kumar, Narvekar, Nuncio, Kumar, Ramaiah, Sardesai, Gauns, Fernandes, and Paul</label><mixed-citation> Kumar, S. P., Narvekar, J., Nuncio, M., Kumar, A., Ramaiah, N., Sardesai, S., Gauns, M., Fernandes, V., and Paul, J.: Is the biological productivity in the Bay of Bengal light limited?, Curr. Sci., 98, 1331–1339, 2010a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx22"><label>Kumar et al.(2010b)Kumar, Nuncio, Narvekar, Ramaiah, Sardesai, Gauns, Fernandes, Paul, Jyothibabu, and Jayaraj</label><mixed-citation> Kumar, S. P., Nuncio, M., Narvekar, J., Ramaiah, N., Sardesai, S., Gauns, M., Fernandes, V., Paul, J. T., Jyothibabu, R., and Jayaraj, K. A.: Seasonal cycle of physical forcing and biological response in the Bay of Bengal, Ind. J. Mar. Sci., 39, 388–405, 2010b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx23"><label>Lavery et al.(2007)Lavery, Wiebe, Stanton, Lawson, Benfield, and Copley</label><mixed-citation>Lavery, A. C., Wiebe, P. H., Stanton, T. K., Lawson, G. L., Benfield, M. C., and Copley, N.: Determining dominant scatterers of sound in mixed zooplankton populations, J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 122, 3304–3326, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2793613" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1121/1.2793613</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx24"><label>Lucas et al.(2016)Lucas, Nash, Pinkel, MacKinnon, Tandon, Mahadevan, Omand, Freilich, Sengupta, Ravichandran, and Boyer</label><mixed-citation>Lucas, A., Nash, J., Pinkel, R., MacKinnon, J., Tandon, A., Mahadevan, A., Omand, M., Freilich, M., Sengupta, D., Ravichandran, M., and Boyer, A. L.: Adrift Upon a Salinity-Stratified Sea: A View of Upper-Ocean Processes in the Bay of Bengal During the Southwest Monsoon, Oceanography, 29, 134–145, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2016.46" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5670/oceanog.2016.46</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx25"><label>Malan et al.(2020)Malan, Archer, Roughan, Cetina-Heredia, Hemming, Rocha, Schaeffer, Suthers, and Queiroz</label><mixed-citation>Malan, N., Archer, M., Roughan, M., Cetina-Heredia, P., Hemming, M., Rocha, C., Schaeffer, A., Suthers, I., and Queiroz, E.: Eddy-Driven Cross-Shelf Transport in the East Australian Current Separation Zone, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 125, 1–15, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JC015613" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019JC015613</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx26"><label>Mandke et al.(2020)Mandke, Pillai, and Sahai</label><mixed-citation>Mandke, S. K., Pillai, P. A., and Sahai, A. K.: Simulation of monsoon intra-seasonal oscillations in Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory models from Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project integrations of Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5, Int. J. Climatol., 40, 5574–5589, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.6536" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/joc.6536</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx27"><label>Marra(1997)</label><mixed-citation>Marra, J.: Analysis of diel variability in chlorophyll fluorescence, J. Mar. Res., 55, 767–784, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1357/0022240973224274" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1357/0022240973224274</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx28"><label>Mignot et al.(2014)Mignot, Claustre, Uitz, Poteau, D'Ortenzio, and Xing</label><mixed-citation>Mignot, A., Claustre, H., Uitz, J., Poteau, A., D'Ortenzio, F., and Xing, X.: Understanding the seasonal dynamics of phytoplankton biomass and the deep chlorophyll maximum in oligotrophic environments: A Bio-Argo float investigation, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 28, 856–876, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GB004781" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013GB004781</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx29"><label>Mishra et al.(2005)Mishra, Narumalani, Rundquist, and Lawson</label><mixed-citation>Mishra, D. R., Narumalani, S., Rundquist, D., and Lawson, M.: Characterizing the vertical diffuse attenuation coefficient for downwelling irradiance in coastal waters: Implications for water penetration by high resolution satellite data, ISPRS J. Photogram. Remote Sens., 60, 48–64, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2005.09.003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2005.09.003</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx30"><label>Morel et al.(2007)Morel, Huot, Gentili, Werdell, Hooker, and Franz</label><mixed-citation>Morel, A., Huot, Y., Gentili, B., Werdell, P. J., Hooker, S. B., and Franz, B. A.: Examining the consistency of products derived from various ocean color sensors in open ocean (Case 1) waters in the perspective of a multi-sensor approach, Remote Sens. Environ., 111, 69–88, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2007.03.012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.rse.2007.03.012</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx31"><label>Müller et al.(2001)Mller, Li, and Niyogi</label><mixed-citation>Müller, P., Li, X. P., and Niyogi, K. K.: Non-photochemical quenching. A response to excess light energy, Plant Physiol., 125, 1558–1566, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.125.4.1558" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1104/pp.125.4.1558</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx32"><label>NASA Goddard Space Flight Center and Ocean Ecology Laboratory(2018)</label><mixed-citation>NASA Goddard Space Flight Center and Ocean Ecology Laboratory: Moderate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Aqua Photosynthetically Available Radiation Data; 2018 Reprocessing, NASA OB.DAAC [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/PAR/2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/PAR/2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx33"><label>NASA Goddard Space Flight Center et al.(2014a)</label><mixed-citation>NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Ocean Ecology Laboratory, and Ocean Biology Processing Group: MODIS-Aqua Ocean Color Data, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Ocean Ecology Laboratory, Ocean Biology Processing Group [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/KD490/2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/KD490/2018</ext-link>, 2014a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx34"><label>NASA Goddard Space Flight Center et al.(2014b)</label><mixed-citation>NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Ocean Ecology Laboratory, and Ocean Biology Processing Group: MODIS-Aqua Ocean Color Data, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Ocean Ecology Laboratory, Ocean Biology Processing Group [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/CHL/2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/CHL/2018</ext-link>, 2014b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx35"><label>Nicholson et al.(2015)Nicholson, Wilson, Doney, and Karl</label><mixed-citation>Nicholson, D. P., Wilson, S. T., Doney, S. C., and Karl, D. M.: Quantifying subtropical North Pacific gyre mixed layer primary productivity from Seaglider observations of diel oxygen cycles, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 4032–4039, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL063065" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015GL063065</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx36"><label>Ohman et al.(2019)Ohman, Davis, Sherman, Grindley, Whitmore, Nickels, and Ellen</label><mixed-citation>Ohman, M. D., Davis, R. E., Sherman, J. T., Grindley, K. R., Whitmore, B. M., Nickels, C. F., and Ellen, J. S.: Zooglider: An autonomous vehicle for optical and acoustic sensing of zooplankton, Limnol. Oceanogr.: Meth., 17, 69–86, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/lom3.10301" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/lom3.10301</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx37"><label>Pinkel et al.(2011)Pinkel, Goldin, Smith, Sun, Aja, Bui, and Hughen</label><mixed-citation>Pinkel, R., Goldin, M. A., Smith, J. A., Sun, O. M., Aja, A. A., Bui, M. N., and Hughen, T.: The Wirewalker: A vertically profiling instrument carrier powered by ocean waves, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 28, 426–435, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JTECHO805.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2010JTECHO805.1</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx38"><label>Prasanth et al.(2023)Prasanth, Vijith, and Vinayachandran</label><mixed-citation>Prasanth, R., Vijith, V., and Vinayachandran, P. N.: Formation, maintenance and diurnal variability of subsurface chlorophyll maximum during the summer monsoon in the southern Bay of Bengal, Prog. Oceanogr., 212, 102974, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2023.102974" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.pocean.2023.102974</ext-link>, 2023. </mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx39"><label>Sarma et al.(2012)Sarma, Krishna, Rao, Viswanadham, Kumar, Kumari, Gawade, Ghatkar, and Tari</label><mixed-citation>Sarma, V. V., Krishna, M. S., Rao, V. D., Viswanadham, R., Kumar, N. A., Kumari, T. R., Gawade, L., Ghatkar, S., and Tari, A.: Sources and sinks of CO<sub>2</sub> in the west coast of Bay of Bengal, Tellus B, 64, 10961, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v64i0.10961" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3402/tellusb.v64i0.10961</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx40"><label>Sathyendranath et al.(2019)Sathyendranath, Brewin, Brockmann, Brotas, Calton, Chuprin, Cipollini, Couto, Dingle, Doerffer, Donlon, Dowell, Farman, Grant, Groom, Horseman, Jackson, Krasemann, Lavender, Martinez-Vicente, Mazeran, Mlin, Moore, Mller, Regner, Roy, Steele, Steinmetz, Swinton, Taberner, Thompson, Valente, Zühlke, Brando, Feng, Feldman, Franz, Frouin, Gould, Hooker, Kahru, Kratzer, Mitchell, Muller-Karger, Sosik, Voss, Werdell, and Platt</label><mixed-citation>Sathyendranath, S., Brewin, R., Brockmann, C., Brotas, V., Calton, B., Chuprin, A., Cipollini, P., Couto, A., Dingle, J., Doerffer, R., Donlon, C., Dowell, M., Farman, A., Grant, M., Groom, S., Horseman, A., Jackson, T., Krasemann, H., Lavender, S., Martinez-Vicente, V., Mazeran, C., Mélin, F., Moore, T., Müller, D., Regner, P., Roy, S., Steele, C., Steinmetz, F., Swinton, J., Taberner, M., Thompson, A., Valente, A., Zühlke, M., Brando, V., Feng, H., Feldman, G., Franz, B., Frouin, R., Gould, R., Hooker, S., Kahru, M., Kratzer, S., Mitchell, B., Muller-Karger, F., Sosik, H., Voss, K., Werdell, J., and Platt, T.: An Ocean-Colour Time Series for Use in Climate Studies: The Experience of the Ocean-Colour Climate Change Initiative (OC-CCI), Sensors, 19, 4285, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/s19194285" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/s19194285</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx41"><label>Sathyendranath et al.(2023)Sathyendranath, Jackson, Brockmann, Brotas, Calton, Chuprin, Clements, Cipollini, Danne, Dingle, Donlon, Donlon, Groom, Krasemann, Lavender, Mazeran, Mlin, Mller, Steinmetz, Valente, Zhlke, Feldman, Franz, Frouin, Werdell, and Platt</label><mixed-citation>Sathyendranath, S., Jackson, T., Brockmann, C., Brotas, V., Calton, B., Chuprin, A., Clements, O., Cipollini, P., Danne, O., Dingle, J., Donlon, C., Donlon, C., Groom, S., Krasemann, H., Lavender, S., Mazeran, C., Mélin, F., Müller, D., Steinmetz, F., Valente, A., Zühlke, M., Feldman, G., Franz, B., Frouin, R., Werdell, J., and Platt, T.: ESA Ocean Colour Climate Change Initiative (Ocean-Colour-cci): Global attenuation coefficient for downwelling irradiance (Kd490) gridded on a geographic projection at 4km resolution, Version 6.0, <uri>https://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/8ecae26f390b4938b67a97cbce3ecd8b/</uri> (last access: 10 December 2025), 2023.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx42"><label>Schlosser(2026)</label><mixed-citation>Schlosser, T. L.: dielFit – adapted to accept PAR inputs, Zenodo [code], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18409716" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.18409716</ext-link>, 2026.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx43"><label>Schlosser et al.(2022)Schlosser, Lucas, Jones, Nash, and Ivey</label><mixed-citation>Schlosser, T. L., Lucas, A. J., Jones, N. L., Nash, J. D., and Ivey, G. N.: Local winds and encroaching currents drive summertime subsurface blooms over a narrow shelf, Limnol. Oceanogr., 67, 888–902, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.12043" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/lno.12043</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx44"><label>Schmechtig et al.(2018)Schmechtig, Poteau, Claustre, D'Ortenzio, Dall'Olmo, and Boss</label><mixed-citation>Schmechtig, C., Poteau, A., Claustre, H., D'Ortenzio, F., Dall'Olmo, G., and Boss, E.: Processing BGC-Argo particle backscattering at the DAC level. Version 1.4, 07 March 2018, Tech. rep., IFREMER for Argo Data Management, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.13155/39459" ext-link-type="DOI">10.13155/39459</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx45"><label>Shroyer et al.(2021)Shroyer, Tandon, Sengupta, Fernando, Lucas, Farrar, Chattopadhyay, de Szoeke, Flatau, Rydbeck, Wijesekera, McPhaden, Seo, Subramanian, Venkatesan, Joseph, Ramsundaram, Gordon, Bohman, Prez, Simoes-Sousa, Jayne, Todd, Bhat, Lankhorst, Schlosser, Adams, Jinadasa, Mathur, Mohapatra, Rao, Sahai, Sharma, Lee, Rainville, Cherian, Cullen, Centurioni, Hormann, MacKinnon, Send, Anutaliya, Waterhouse, Black, Dehart, Woods, Creegan, Levy, Kantha, and Subrahmanyam</label><mixed-citation>Shroyer, E., Tandon, A., Sengupta, D., Fernando, H. J., Lucas, A. J., Farrar, J. T., Chattopadhyay, R., de Szoeke, S., Flatau, M., Rydbeck, A., Wijesekera, H., McPhaden, M., Seo, H., Subramanian, A., Venkatesan, R., Joseph, J., Ramsundaram, S., Gordon, A. L., Bohman, S. M., Pérez, J., Simoes-Sousa, I. T., Jayne, S. R., Todd, R. E., Bhat, G., Lankhorst, M., Schlosser, T., Adams, K., Jinadasa, S., Mathur, M., Mohapatra, M., Rao, E. P. R., Sahai, A. K., Sharma, R., Lee, C., Rainville, L., Cherian, D., Cullen, K., Centurioni, L. R., Hormann, V., MacKinnon, J., Send, U., Anutaliya, A., Waterhouse, A., Black, G. S., Dehart, J. A., Woods, K. M., Creegan, E., Levy, G., Kantha, L. H., and Subrahmanyam, B.: Bay of Bengal Intraseasonal Oscillations and the 2018 Monsoon Onset, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 102, E1936–E1951, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-20-0113.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/bams-d-20-0113.1</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx46"><label>Thadathil et al.(2007)Thadathil, Muraleedharan, Rao, Somayajulu, Reddy, and Revichandran</label><mixed-citation>Thadathil, P., Muraleedharan, P. M., Rao, R. R., Somayajulu, Y. K., Reddy, G. V., and Revichandran, C.: Observed seasonal variability of barrier layer in the Bay of Bengal, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 112, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JC003651" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2006JC003651</ext-link>, 2007. </mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx47"><label>Todd et al.(2009)Todd, Rudnick, and Davis</label><mixed-citation>Todd, R. E., Rudnick, D. L., and Davis, R. E.: Monitoring the greater San Pedro Bay region using autonomous underwater gliders during fall of 2006, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 114, 1–13, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JC005086" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008JC005086</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx48"><label>Uchida et al.(2019)Uchida, Balwada, Abernathey, Prend, Boss, and Gille</label><mixed-citation>Uchida, T., Balwada, D., Abernathey, R., Prend, C. J., Boss, E., and Gille, S. T.: Southern Ocean Phytoplankton Blooms Observed by Biogeochemical Floats, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 124, 7328–7343, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JC015355" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019JC015355</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx49"><label>Weller et al.(2016)Weller, Farrar, Buckley, Matthew, Venkatesan, Lekha, Chaudhuri, Kumar, and Kuman</label><mixed-citation>Weller, R., Farrar, J. T., Buckley, J., Matthew, S., Venkatesan, R., Lekha, J. S., Chaudhuri, D., Kumar, N. S., and Kuman, B. P.: Air-Sea Interaction in the Bay of Bengal, Oceanography, 29, 28–37, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2016.36" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5670/oceanog.2016.36</ext-link>, 2016. </mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx50"><label>White et al.(2017)White, Barone, Letelier, and Karl</label><mixed-citation>White, A. E., Barone, B., Letelier, R. M., and Karl, D. M.: Productivity diagnosed from the diel cycle of particulate carbon in the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 3752–3760, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL071607" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016GL071607</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx51"><label>Wong et al.(2022)Wong, Keeley, and Carval</label><mixed-citation>Wong, A., Keeley, R., and Carval, T.: Argo Quality Control Manual for CTD and Trajectory Data, Tech. rep., ARCHIMER, USA, France, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.13155/33951" ext-link-type="DOI">10.13155/33951</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx52"><label>Zheng et al.(2022)Zheng, Lucas, Pinkel, and Boyer</label><mixed-citation>Zheng, B., Lucas, A. J., Pinkel, R., and Boyer, A. L.: Fine-Scale Velocity Measurement on the Wirewalker Wave-Powered Profiler, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 39, 133–147, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-21-0048.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JTECH-D-21-0048.1</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Monsoons, plumes, and blooms: intraseasonal variability  of subsurface primary productivity in the Bay of Bengal</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>Antoine et al.(1996)Antoine, Andr, and Morel</label><mixed-citation>
      
Antoine, D., André, J.-M., and Morel, A.: Oceanic primary production 2.
Estimation at global scale from satelite (coastal zone color scanner)
chlorophyll, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 10, 57–60, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GL016889" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GL016889</a>, 1996.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>Argo(2000)</label><mixed-citation>
      
Argo: Argo float data and metadata from Global Data Assembly Centre (Argo
GDAC), SEANOE [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.17882/42182" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.17882/42182</a>, 2000.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>Barone et al.(2019)Barone, Nicholson, Ferrn, Firing, and
Karl</label><mixed-citation>
      
Barone, B., Nicholson, D., Ferrón, S., Firing, E., and Karl, D.: The
estimation of gross oxygen production and community respiration from
autonomous time-series measurements in the oligotrophic ocean, Limnol.
Oceanogr.: Meth., 17, 650–664, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/lom3.10340" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/lom3.10340</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>Britton and Dodd(1976)</label><mixed-citation>
      
Britton, C. and Dodd, J.: Relationships of photosynthetically active radiation and shortwave irradiance, Agricult. Meteorol., 17, 1–7,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-1571(76)90080-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-1571(76)90080-7</a>, 1976.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>Cornec et al.(2021)Cornec, Claustre, Mignot, Guidi, Lacour, Poteau,
D'Ortenzio, Gentili, and Schmechtig</label><mixed-citation>
      
Cornec, M., Claustre, H., Mignot, A., Guidi, L., Lacour, L., Poteau, A.,
D'Ortenzio, F., Gentili, B., and Schmechtig, C.: Deep Chlorophyll Maxima in
the Global Ocean: Occurrences, Drivers and Characteristics, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 35, 1–30, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GB006759" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GB006759</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>Cullen(1982)</label><mixed-citation>
      
Cullen, J. J.: The Deep Chlorophyll Maximum: Comparing Vertical Profiles of
Chlorophyll <i>a</i>, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 39, 791–803, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1139/f82-108" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1139/f82-108</a>, 1982.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>Cullen(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
      
Cullen, J. J.: Subsurface chlorophyll maximum layers: Enduring enigma or
mystery solved?, Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci., 7, 207–239,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-marine-010213-135111" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-marine-010213-135111</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>Davis et al.(2008)Davis, Ohman, Rudnick, Sherman, and
Hodges</label><mixed-citation>
      
Davis, R. E., Ohman, M. D., Rudnick, D. L., Sherman, J. T., and Hodges, B.:
Glider surveillance of physics and biology in the southern California Current
System, Limnol. Oceanogr., 53, 2151–2168, <a href="https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2008.53.5_part_2.2151" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2008.53.5_part_2.2151</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>EU Copernicus Marine Service Information(2026)</label><mixed-citation>
      
EU Copernicus Marine Service Information: Global Ocean Physics Reanalysis, EU Copernicus Marine Service Information [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.48670/moi-00021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.48670/moi-00021</a>, 2026.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>Frenzel et al.(2020)Frenzel, Sharp, Fassbender, and
Buzby</label><mixed-citation>
      
Frenzel, H., Sharp, J., Fassbender, A., and Buzby, N.: OneArgo-Mat: A MATLAB
toolbox for accessing and visualizing Argo data, Zenodo [code], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6588042" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6588042</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>Gadgil et al.(2005)Gadgil, Rajeevan, and Nanjundiah</label><mixed-citation>
      
Gadgil, S., Rajeevan, M., and Nanjundiah, R.: Monsoon prediction – Why yet
another failure?, Curr. Sci., 88, 1389–1400, 2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>Gastauer et al.(2022)Gastauer, Nickels, and Ohman</label><mixed-citation>
      
Gastauer, S., Nickels, C. F., and Ohman, M. D.: Body size- and season-dependent diel vertical migration of mesozooplankton resolved acoustically in the San Diego Trough, Limnol. Oceanogr., 67, 300–313,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.11993" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.11993</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>Girishkumar et al.(2011)Girishkumar, Ravichandran, McPhaden, and
Rao</label><mixed-citation>
      
Girishkumar, M. S., Ravichandran, M., McPhaden, M. J., and Rao, R. R.:
Intraseasonal variability in barrier layer thickness in the south central Bay
of Bengal, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 116, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JC006657" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JC006657</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>Goddard Space Flight Center and Ocean Ecology Laboratory(2018a)</label><mixed-citation>
      
Goddard Space Flight Center and Ocean Ecology Laboratory:
Moderate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Aqua Downwelling
Diffuse Attenuation Coefficient Data; 2018 Reprocessing, NASA OB.DAAC [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5067/ORBVIEW-2/SEAWIFS/L2/OC/2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5067/ORBVIEW-2/SEAWIFS/L2/OC/2018</a>, 2018a.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>Gray et al.(2018)Gray, Johnson, Bushinsky, Riser, Russell, Talley,
Wanninkhof, Williams, and Sarmiento</label><mixed-citation>
      
Gray, A. R., Johnson, K. S., Bushinsky, S. M., Riser, S. C., Russell, J. L.,
Talley, L. D., Wanninkhof, R., Williams, N. L., and Sarmiento, J. L.:
Autonomous Biogeochemical Floats Detect Significant Carbon Dioxide Outgassing
in the High-Latitude Southern Ocean, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 9049–9057, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078013</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>Hansell(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hansell, D. A.: Dissolved organic carbon in the carbon cycle of the Indian
Ocean, Geophys. Monogr. Ser., 185, 217–230, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GM000684" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GM000684</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>Hersbach et al.(2018)Hersbach, Bell, Berrisford, Biavati, Hornyi,
Sabater, Nicolas, Peubey, Radu, Rozum, Schepers, Simmons, Soci, Dee, and
Thpaut</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Biavati, G., Horányi, A., Sabater, J. M., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Rozum, I., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Dee, D., and Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5 hourly data on single levels from 1940 to present, Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS) [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.adbb2d47" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.adbb2d47</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>Johnson and Bif(2021)</label><mixed-citation>
      
Johnson, K. S. and Bif, M. B.: Constraint on net primary productivity of the
global ocean by Argo oxygen measurements, Nat. Geosci., 14, 769–774,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00807-z" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00807-z</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>Johnson et al.(2017)Johnson, Plant, Coletti, Jannasch, Sakamoto,
Riser, Swift, Williams, Boss, Haëntjens, Talley, and
Sarmiento</label><mixed-citation>
      
Johnson, K. S., Plant, J. N., Coletti, L. J., Jannasch, H. W., Sakamoto, C. M., Riser, S. C., Swift, D. D., Williams, N. L., Boss, E., Haëntjens, N., Talley, L. D., and Sarmiento, J. L.: Biogeochemical sensor performance in the SOCCOM profiling float array, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 122, 6416–6436, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JC012838" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JC012838</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>Kerhalkar et al.(2025)Kerhalkar, Tandon, Farrar, MacKinnon,
Schlosser, Johnson, Lucas, Hormann, and Centurioni</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kerhalkar, S., Tandon, A., Farrar, J., MacKinnon, J. A., Schlosser, T. L.,
Johnson, L., Lucas, A. J., Hormann, V., and Centurioni, L. R.: Modulation of
Diurnal SST and Diurnal Warm Layer Variability by Salinity-Driven
Stratification in the Bay of Bengal, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 56, 245–266,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/jpo-d-25-0134.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/jpo-d-25-0134.1</a>, 2025.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>Kumar et al.(2010a)Kumar, Narvekar, Nuncio, Kumar,
Ramaiah, Sardesai, Gauns, Fernandes, and Paul</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kumar, S. P., Narvekar, J., Nuncio, M., Kumar, A., Ramaiah, N., Sardesai, S.,
Gauns, M., Fernandes, V., and Paul, J.: Is the biological productivity in the
Bay of Bengal light limited?, Curr. Sci., 98, 1331–1339, 2010a.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>Kumar et al.(2010b)Kumar, Nuncio, Narvekar, Ramaiah,
Sardesai, Gauns, Fernandes, Paul, Jyothibabu, and
Jayaraj</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kumar, S. P., Nuncio, M., Narvekar, J., Ramaiah, N., Sardesai, S., Gauns, M.,
Fernandes, V., Paul, J. T., Jyothibabu, R., and Jayaraj, K. A.: Seasonal
cycle of physical forcing and biological response in the Bay of Bengal, Ind. J. Mar. Sci., 39, 388–405, 2010b.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>Lavery et al.(2007)Lavery, Wiebe, Stanton, Lawson, Benfield, and
Copley</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lavery, A. C., Wiebe, P. H., Stanton, T. K., Lawson, G. L., Benfield, M. C.,
and Copley, N.: Determining dominant scatterers of sound in mixed zooplankton
populations, J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 122, 3304–3326, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2793613" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2793613</a>, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>Lucas et al.(2016)Lucas, Nash, Pinkel, MacKinnon, Tandon, Mahadevan, Omand, Freilich, Sengupta, Ravichandran, and Boyer</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lucas, A., Nash, J., Pinkel, R., MacKinnon, J., Tandon, A., Mahadevan, A.,
Omand, M., Freilich, M., Sengupta, D., Ravichandran, M., and Boyer, A. L.:
Adrift Upon a Salinity-Stratified Sea: A View of Upper-Ocean Processes in the
Bay of Bengal During the Southwest Monsoon, Oceanography, 29, 134–145,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2016.46" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2016.46</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>Malan et al.(2020)Malan, Archer, Roughan, Cetina-Heredia, Hemming,
Rocha, Schaeffer, Suthers, and Queiroz</label><mixed-citation>
      
Malan, N., Archer, M., Roughan, M., Cetina-Heredia, P., Hemming, M., Rocha, C., Schaeffer, A., Suthers, I., and Queiroz, E.: Eddy-Driven Cross-Shelf
Transport in the East Australian Current Separation Zone, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 125, 1–15, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JC015613" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JC015613</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>Mandke et al.(2020)Mandke, Pillai, and Sahai</label><mixed-citation>
      
Mandke, S. K., Pillai, P. A., and Sahai, A. K.: Simulation of monsoon
intra-seasonal oscillations in Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory models
from Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project integrations of Coupled Model
Intercomparison Project phase 5, Int. J. Climatol., 40, 5574–5589, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.6536" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.6536</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>Marra(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
      
Marra, J.: Analysis of diel variability in chlorophyll fluorescence, J. Mar. Res., 55, 767–784, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1357/0022240973224274" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1357/0022240973224274</a>, 1997.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>Mignot et al.(2014)Mignot, Claustre, Uitz, Poteau, D'Ortenzio, and
Xing</label><mixed-citation>
      
Mignot, A., Claustre, H., Uitz, J., Poteau, A., D'Ortenzio, F., and Xing, X.:
Understanding the seasonal dynamics of phytoplankton biomass and the deep
chlorophyll maximum in oligotrophic environments: A Bio-Argo float
investigation, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 28, 856–876,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GB004781" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GB004781</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>Mishra et al.(2005)Mishra, Narumalani, Rundquist, and
Lawson</label><mixed-citation>
      
Mishra, D. R., Narumalani, S., Rundquist, D., and Lawson, M.: Characterizing
the vertical diffuse attenuation coefficient for downwelling irradiance in
coastal waters: Implications for water penetration by high resolution
satellite data, ISPRS J. Photogram. Remote Sens., 60, 48–64, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2005.09.003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2005.09.003</a>, 2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>Morel et al.(2007)Morel, Huot, Gentili, Werdell, Hooker, and
Franz</label><mixed-citation>
      
Morel, A., Huot, Y., Gentili, B., Werdell, P. J., Hooker, S. B., and Franz,
B. A.: Examining the consistency of products derived from various ocean color
sensors in open ocean (Case 1) waters in the perspective of a multi-sensor
approach, Remote Sens. Environ., 111, 69–88, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2007.03.012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2007.03.012</a>, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>Müller et al.(2001)Mller, Li, and Niyogi</label><mixed-citation>
      
Müller, P., Li, X. P., and Niyogi, K. K.: Non-photochemical quenching. A
response to excess light energy, Plant Physiol., 125, 1558–1566,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.125.4.1558" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.125.4.1558</a>, 2001.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>NASA Goddard Space Flight Center and Ocean Ecology Laboratory(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
      
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center and Ocean Ecology Laboratory:
Moderate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) Aqua Photosynthetically
Available Radiation Data; 2018 Reprocessing, NASA OB.DAAC [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/PAR/2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/PAR/2018</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>NASA Goddard Space Flight Center et al.(2014a)</label><mixed-citation>
      
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Ocean Ecology Laboratory, and Ocean Biology Processing Group: MODIS-Aqua Ocean Color Data, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Ocean Ecology Laboratory, Ocean Biology Processing Group [data set],
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/KD490/2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/KD490/2018</a>, 2014a.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>NASA Goddard Space Flight Center et al.(2014b)</label><mixed-citation>
      
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Ocean Ecology Laboratory, and Ocean Biology Processing Group: MODIS-Aqua Ocean Color Data, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Ocean Ecology Laboratory, Ocean Biology Processing Group [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/CHL/2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L3M/CHL/2018</a>, 2014b.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>Nicholson et al.(2015)Nicholson, Wilson, Doney, and
Karl</label><mixed-citation>
      
Nicholson, D. P., Wilson, S. T., Doney, S. C., and Karl, D. M.: Quantifying
subtropical North Pacific gyre mixed layer primary productivity from
Seaglider observations of diel oxygen cycles, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 4032–4039, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL063065" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL063065</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>Ohman et al.(2019)Ohman, Davis, Sherman, Grindley, Whitmore, Nickels, and Ellen</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ohman, M. D., Davis, R. E., Sherman, J. T., Grindley, K. R., Whitmore, B. M.,
Nickels, C. F., and Ellen, J. S.: Zooglider: An autonomous vehicle for
optical and acoustic sensing of zooplankton, Limnol. Oceanogr.: Meth., 17, 69–86, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/lom3.10301" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/lom3.10301</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>Pinkel et al.(2011)Pinkel, Goldin, Smith, Sun, Aja, Bui, and
Hughen</label><mixed-citation>
      
Pinkel, R., Goldin, M. A., Smith, J. A., Sun, O. M., Aja, A. A., Bui, M. N.,
and Hughen, T.: The Wirewalker: A vertically profiling instrument carrier
powered by ocean waves, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 28, 426–435, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JTECHO805.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JTECHO805.1</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>Prasanth et al.(2023)Prasanth, Vijith, and
Vinayachandran</label><mixed-citation>
      
Prasanth, R., Vijith, V., and Vinayachandran, P. N.: Formation, maintenance and diurnal variability of subsurface chlorophyll maximum during the summer
monsoon in the southern Bay of Bengal, Prog. Oceanogr., 212, 102974, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2023.102974" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2023.102974</a>, 2023.


    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>Sarma et al.(2012)Sarma, Krishna, Rao, Viswanadham, Kumar, Kumari,
Gawade, Ghatkar, and Tari</label><mixed-citation>
      
Sarma, V. V., Krishna, M. S., Rao, V. D., Viswanadham, R., Kumar, N. A.,
Kumari, T. R., Gawade, L., Ghatkar, S., and Tari, A.: Sources and sinks of CO<sub>2</sub> in the west coast of Bay of Bengal, Tellus B, 64, 10961, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v64i0.10961" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusb.v64i0.10961</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>Sathyendranath et al.(2019)Sathyendranath, Brewin, Brockmann, Brotas, Calton, Chuprin, Cipollini, Couto, Dingle, Doerffer, Donlon, Dowell, Farman, Grant, Groom, Horseman, Jackson, Krasemann, Lavender, Martinez-Vicente, Mazeran, Mlin, Moore, Mller, Regner, Roy, Steele, Steinmetz, Swinton, Taberner, Thompson, Valente, Zühlke, Brando, Feng, Feldman, Franz, Frouin, Gould, Hooker, Kahru, Kratzer, Mitchell, Muller-Karger, Sosik, Voss, Werdell, and Platt</label><mixed-citation>
      
Sathyendranath, S., Brewin, R., Brockmann, C., Brotas, V., Calton, B., Chuprin, A., Cipollini, P., Couto, A., Dingle, J., Doerffer, R., Donlon, C., Dowell, M., Farman, A., Grant, M., Groom, S., Horseman, A., Jackson, T., Krasemann, H., Lavender, S., Martinez-Vicente, V., Mazeran, C., Mélin, F., Moore, T., Müller, D., Regner, P., Roy, S., Steele, C., Steinmetz, F., Swinton, J., Taberner, M., Thompson, A., Valente, A., Zühlke, M., Brando, V., Feng, H., Feldman, G., Franz, B., Frouin, R., Gould, R., Hooker, S., Kahru, M., Kratzer, S., Mitchell, B., Muller-Karger, F., Sosik, H., Voss, K., Werdell, J., and Platt, T.: An Ocean-Colour Time Series for Use in Climate Studies: The Experience of the Ocean-Colour Climate Change Initiative (OC-CCI), Sensors, 19, 4285, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/s19194285" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/s19194285</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>Sathyendranath et al.(2023)Sathyendranath, Jackson, Brockmann,
Brotas, Calton, Chuprin, Clements, Cipollini, Danne, Dingle, Donlon, Donlon, Groom, Krasemann, Lavender, Mazeran, Mlin, Mller, Steinmetz, Valente, Zhlke, Feldman, Franz, Frouin, Werdell, and Platt</label><mixed-citation>
      
Sathyendranath, S., Jackson, T., Brockmann, C., Brotas, V., Calton, B.,
Chuprin, A., Clements, O., Cipollini, P., Danne, O., Dingle, J., Donlon, C.,
Donlon, C., Groom, S., Krasemann, H., Lavender, S., Mazeran, C., Mélin, F., Müller, D., Steinmetz, F., Valente, A., Zühlke, M., Feldman, G., Franz, B., Frouin, R., Werdell, J., and Platt, T.: ESA Ocean Colour Climate Change Initiative (Ocean-Colour-cci): Global attenuation coefficient for downwelling irradiance (Kd490) gridded on a geographic projection at 4km resolution, Version 6.0,
<a href="https://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/8ecae26f390b4938b67a97cbce3ecd8b/" target="_blank"/> (last access: 10 December 2025), 2023.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>Schlosser(2026)</label><mixed-citation>
      
Schlosser, T. L.: dielFit – adapted to accept PAR inputs, Zenodo [code], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18409716" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18409716</a>, 2026.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>Schlosser et al.(2022)Schlosser, Lucas, Jones, Nash, and
Ivey</label><mixed-citation>
      
Schlosser, T. L., Lucas, A. J., Jones, N. L., Nash, J. D., and Ivey, G. N.:
Local winds and encroaching currents drive summertime subsurface blooms over
a narrow shelf, Limnol. Oceanogr., 67, 888–902, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.12043" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.12043</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>Schmechtig et al.(2018)Schmechtig, Poteau, Claustre, D'Ortenzio,
Dall'Olmo, and Boss</label><mixed-citation>
      
Schmechtig, C., Poteau, A., Claustre, H., D'Ortenzio, F., Dall'Olmo, G., and
Boss, E.: Processing BGC-Argo particle backscattering at the DAC level.
Version 1.4, 07 March 2018, Tech. rep., IFREMER for Argo Data Management, <a href="https://doi.org/10.13155/39459" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.13155/39459</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>Shroyer et al.(2021)Shroyer, Tandon, Sengupta, Fernando, Lucas,
Farrar, Chattopadhyay, de Szoeke, Flatau, Rydbeck, Wijesekera, McPhaden, Seo, Subramanian, Venkatesan, Joseph, Ramsundaram, Gordon, Bohman, Prez,
Simoes-Sousa, Jayne, Todd, Bhat, Lankhorst, Schlosser, Adams, Jinadasa,
Mathur, Mohapatra, Rao, Sahai, Sharma, Lee, Rainville, Cherian, Cullen,
Centurioni, Hormann, MacKinnon, Send, Anutaliya, Waterhouse, Black, Dehart,
Woods, Creegan, Levy, Kantha, and Subrahmanyam</label><mixed-citation>
      
Shroyer, E., Tandon, A., Sengupta, D., Fernando, H. J., Lucas, A. J., Farrar,
J. T., Chattopadhyay, R., de Szoeke, S., Flatau, M., Rydbeck, A., Wijesekera,
H., McPhaden, M., Seo, H., Subramanian, A., Venkatesan, R., Joseph, J.,
Ramsundaram, S., Gordon, A. L., Bohman, S. M., Pérez, J., Simoes-Sousa,
I. T., Jayne, S. R., Todd, R. E., Bhat, G., Lankhorst, M., Schlosser, T.,
Adams, K., Jinadasa, S., Mathur, M., Mohapatra, M., Rao, E. P. R., Sahai,
A. K., Sharma, R., Lee, C., Rainville, L., Cherian, D., Cullen, K.,
Centurioni, L. R., Hormann, V., MacKinnon, J., Send, U., Anutaliya, A.,
Waterhouse, A., Black, G. S., Dehart, J. A., Woods, K. M., Creegan, E., Levy,
G., Kantha, L. H., and Subrahmanyam, B.: Bay of Bengal Intraseasonal
Oscillations and the 2018 Monsoon Onset, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 102, E1936–E1951, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-20-0113.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-20-0113.1</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>Thadathil et al.(2007)Thadathil, Muraleedharan, Rao, Somayajulu,
Reddy, and Revichandran</label><mixed-citation>
      
Thadathil, P., Muraleedharan, P. M., Rao, R. R., Somayajulu, Y. K., Reddy,
G. V., and Revichandran, C.: Observed seasonal variability of barrier layer
in the Bay of Bengal, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 112, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JC003651" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JC003651</a>, 2007.


    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>Todd et al.(2009)Todd, Rudnick, and Davis</label><mixed-citation>
      
Todd, R. E., Rudnick, D. L., and Davis, R. E.: Monitoring the greater San Pedro Bay region using autonomous underwater gliders during fall of 2006, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 114, 1–13, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JC005086" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JC005086</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>Uchida et al.(2019)Uchida, Balwada, Abernathey, Prend, Boss, and
Gille</label><mixed-citation>
      
Uchida, T., Balwada, D., Abernathey, R., Prend, C. J., Boss, E., and Gille,
S. T.: Southern Ocean Phytoplankton Blooms Observed by Biogeochemical
Floats, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 124, 7328–7343, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JC015355" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JC015355</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>Weller et al.(2016)Weller, Farrar, Buckley, Matthew, Venkatesan,
Lekha, Chaudhuri, Kumar, and Kuman</label><mixed-citation>
      
Weller, R., Farrar, J. T., Buckley, J., Matthew, S., Venkatesan, R., Lekha,
J. S., Chaudhuri, D., Kumar, N. S., and Kuman, B. P.: Air-Sea Interaction in
the Bay of Bengal, Oceanography, 29, 28–37, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2016.36" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2016.36</a>,
2016.


    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>White et al.(2017)White, Barone, Letelier, and Karl</label><mixed-citation>
      
White, A. E., Barone, B., Letelier, R. M., and Karl, D. M.: Productivity
diagnosed from the diel cycle of particulate carbon in the North Pacific
Subtropical Gyre, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 3752–3760,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL071607" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL071607</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>Wong et al.(2022)Wong, Keeley, and Carval</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wong, A., Keeley, R., and Carval, T.: Argo Quality Control Manual for CTD and Trajectory Data, Tech. rep., ARCHIMER, USA, France, <a href="https://doi.org/10.13155/33951" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.13155/33951</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>Zheng et al.(2022)Zheng, Lucas, Pinkel, and Boyer</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zheng, B., Lucas, A. J., Pinkel, R., and Boyer, A. L.: Fine-Scale Velocity
Measurement on the Wirewalker Wave-Powered Profiler, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 39, 133–147, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-21-0048.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-21-0048.1</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
