<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article"><?xmltex \bartext{Research article}?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">BG</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Biogeosciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">BG</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Biogeosciences</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1726-4189</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/bg-19-4431-2022</article-id><title-group><article-title>Observation-constrained estimates of the global ocean carbon sink from Earth system models</article-title><alt-title>Observation-constrained estimates of the global ocean carbon sink</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Observation-constrained estimates of the global ocean carbon sink}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{J. Terhaar et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Terhaar</surname><given-names>Jens</given-names></name>
          <email>jens.terhaar@unibe.ch</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9377-415X</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Frölicher</surname><given-names>Thomas L.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Joos</surname><given-names>Fortunat</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9483-6030</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Climate and Environmental Physics, Physics Institute, University of
Bern, Bern, Switzerland</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research, University of Bern, Bern,
Switzerland</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Jens Terhaar (jens.terhaar@unibe.ch)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>15</day><month>September</month><year>2022</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>19</volume>
      <issue>18</issue>
      <fpage>4431</fpage><lpage>4457</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>17</day><month>June</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>20</day><month>June</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>17</day><month>August</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>19</day><month>August</month><year>2022</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2022 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2022</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://bg.copernicus.org/articles/.html">This article is available from https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d1e106">The ocean slows global warming by currently taking up
around one-quarter of all human-made CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. However, estimates
of the ocean anthropogenic carbon uptake vary across various
observation-based and model-based approaches. Here, we show that the global
ocean anthropogenic carbon sink simulated by Earth system models can be
constrained by two physical parameters, the present-day sea surface salinity
in the subtropical–polar frontal zone in the Southern Ocean and the strength
of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, and one biogeochemical
parameter, the Revelle factor of the global surface ocean. The Revelle
factor quantifies the chemical capacity of seawater to take up carbon for a
given increase in atmospheric CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. By exploiting this three-dimensional
emergent constraint with observations, we provide a new model- and
observation-based estimate of the past, present, and future global ocean
anthropogenic carbon sink and show that the ocean carbon sink is 9 %–11 %
larger than previously estimated. Furthermore, the constraint reduces
uncertainties of the past and present global ocean anthropogenic carbon sink
by 42 %–59 % and the future sink by 32 %–62 % depending on the scenario,
allowing for a better understanding of the global carbon cycle and better-targeted climate and ocean policies. Our constrained results are in good
agreement with the anthropogenic carbon air–sea flux estimates over the last three decades
based on observations of the CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> partial pressure at the ocean surface
in the Global Carbon Budget 2021, and they suggest that existing hindcast
ocean-only model simulations underestimate the global ocean anthropogenic
carbon sink. The key parameters identified here for the ocean anthropogenic carbon sink
should be quantified when presenting simulated ocean anthropogenic carbon
uptake as in the Global Carbon Budget and be used to adjust these simulated
estimates if necessary. The larger ocean carbon sink results in enhanced ocean
acidification over the 21st century, which further threatens marine
ecosystems by reducing the water volume that is projected to be
undersaturated towards aragonite by around <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" 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:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>–<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.4</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> more
than originally projected.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e185">The emissions of anthropogenic carbon (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) since the beginning of
industrialization through fossil-fuel burning, cement production, and
land-use change have altered the global carbon cycle and climate
(Friedlingstein et al., 2022). Around 40 % of the
additional carbon since 1850 has accumulated in the atmosphere, where it
represents the main anthropogenic greenhouse gas
(IPCC, 2021). More than half of the
emitted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> has been taken up by the land biosphere (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30 %) and the ocean (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 25 %)
(Friedlingstein et al., 2022). The remaining <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5 % is the budget imbalance, a mismatch between carbon emissions and sink
estimates which cannot be explained yet (Friedlingstein et
al., 2022). By each taking up around a quarter of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions,
the land biosphere and ocean sinks slow down global warming and climate
change.</p>
      <p id="d1e243">The ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink is defined here as a combination of the uptake of
newly emitted carbon and the change in the natural carbon inventory in the
ocean due to changes in temperatures, winds, and the freshwater cycle caused
by climate change (Joos et al., 1999;
Frölicher and Joos, 2010; McNeil and Matear, 2013). The uptake rate of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> on sub-millennial timescales is mainly determined by the ocean
circulation and carbonate chemistry and only partly by biology (Sarmiento et
al., 1998; Joos et al., 1999; Caldeira and Duffy, 2000; Sabine et al.,
2004) despite the overall importance of marine biology for natural carbon
fluxes (Falkowski et al., 1998; Steinacher
et al., 2010). The rate-limiting process of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake is the
circulation that transports surface waters with high <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations into the deeper ocean and allows waters with low or no
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations to upwell back to the ocean surface. The largest
part of this ocean upwelling occurs in the Southern Ocean where strong
westerlies drive northward Ekman transport of surface waters, which are then
replaced by older, deeper water masses
(Marshall and Speer, 2012; Talley, 2013;
Morrison et al., 2015). These predominantly northward flowing waters take up
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the atmosphere and are eventually transferred to mode and
intermediate waters that sink back into the ocean interior
(Marshall and Speer, 2012; Talley, 2013). This
overturning makes the Southern Ocean the largest marine <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 40 % of global ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake) (Caldeira and Duffy,
2000; Mikaloff Fletcher et al., 2006; Frölicher et al., 2015; Terhaar et
al., 2021b). Another region of large uptake rates is the North Atlantic
(Caldeira and Duffy, 2000; Mikaloff
Fletcher et al., 2006), where the Atlantic Meridional Overturning
Circulation (AMOC) transports surface waters with high <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
(Pérez et al., 2013) and subsurface waters with
low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations northward (Ridge
and McKinley, 2020). The subsurface waters outcrop in the subpolar North
Atlantic where they take up <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the atmosphere
(Ridge and McKinley, 2020). These high
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> waters are then ventilated by the AMOC into the deep ocean where
the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is efficiently stored (Joos
et al., 1999; Winton et al., 2013).</p>
      <p id="d1e398">While the circulation determines the volume that is transported into the
deeper ocean, the Revelle factor (Revelle and Suess, 1957; Sabine et al.,
2004) determines the concentration of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in these water
masses. The Revelle factor describes the biogeochemical capacity of the
ocean to take up <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This biogeochemical capacity is strongly
dependent on the amount of carbonate ions in the ocean that react with
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and H<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>O to form bicarbonate ions (Egleston
et al., 2010; Goodwin et al., 2009; Revelle and Suess, 1957). The more
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is transferred via this reaction to bicarbonate ions, the more CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> can be taken up again from the atmosphere. The available amount of carbonate
ions for this reaction depends sensitively on the difference between ocean
alkalinity and dissolved inorganic carbon (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Fig. A2 in Appendix A) (Egleston
et al., 2010; Goodwin et al., 2009; Revelle and Suess, 1957), highlighting
the importance of alkalinity for the global ocean carbon uptake
(Middelburg et al., 2020). As the buffer factor
influences the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake, it also exerts a strong control on the
transient climate response, i.e., the warming per cumulative CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions (Katavouta et al.,
2018; Rodgers et al., 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e491">In addition to slowing global warming, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake by the ocean also
causes ocean acidification (Orr et al., 2005;
Gattuso and Hansson, 2011; Kwiatkowski et al., 2020), i.e., a decline in
ocean pH and carbonate ion concentrations. The decline in carbonate ion
concentrations has negative effects on the growth and survival of many
marine species, especially on calcifying organisms whose shells and
skeletons are made up of calcium carbonate minerals (Orr
et al., 2005; Fabry et al., 2008; Kroeker et al., 2010, 2013; Doney et al.,
2020). Calcium carbonate minerals in the ocean exist mainly in the
metastable forms of aragonite and high-magnesium calcite and the more stable
form calcite. The stability of calcium carbonate minerals is described by
their saturation states (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), which describe the product of the
concentrations of calcium ([Ca<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>]) and carbonate ions
([CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>]) divided by their product in equilibrium. Reductions of
saturation states of aragonite (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">arag</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and calcite (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">calc</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) have been shown to negatively impact organisms and ecosystems (Langdon
and Atkinson, 2005; Kroeker et al., 2010; Bednaršek et al., 2014;
Albright et al., 2016). Once saturation states drop below one, the water is
undersaturated and actively corrosive towards the respective mineral form.</p>
      <p id="d1e563">Accurately quantifying the ocean anthropogenic carbon sink is thus of
crucial importance for understanding and quantifying the carbon cycle,
global warming, and climate change, as well as ocean acidification. A better
knowledge of the size of the historical and future ocean carbon sink and
reduced uncertainties will hence not only lead to an improved understanding
of the overall carbon cycle and global climate change
(IPCC, 2021) but also allow targeted
climate and ocean policies (IPCC, 2022). One of
the key tools to assess the past, present, and future ocean carbon sink is
Earth system models (ESMs). However, the simulated ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink
varies across the different ESMs (Frölicher et
al., 2015; Wang et al., 2016; Bronselaer et al., 2017; Terhaar et al.,
2021b), and the model differences grow over time; i.e., ESMs that simulate a
small ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake over the last decades also simulate a small
uptake over the 21st century (Fig. 1b)
(Wang et al., 2016). Therefore, a better knowledge
of the ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink in the last decades would be one possibility to
reduce uncertainties in the simulated ocean carbon from 1850 to 2100.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e601">Simulated ocean anthropogenic carbon uptake from Earth
system models. <bold>(a)</bold> Simulated annual mean air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes from 17
CMIP6 Earth system models from 1990 to 2020 before (orange line) and after
the constraint is applied (blue line). After 2014, results from SSP5-8.5
were chosen as this is the only SSP for which each model provided results,
and differences in atmospheric CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing ratios in SSP5-8.5
(Meinshausen et al., 2020) are small compared to
observations until 2020 (maximum difference of 2.5 ppm in 2020)
(NOAA/GML, 2022). In
addition, mean air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes based on multiple observation-based
estimates (solid black line) and hindcast simulations (dashed black line)
from the Global Carbon Budget 2021 (Friedlingstein et al.,
2022) are shown. For readability, the uncertainties of these estimates (on
average 0.24 Pg C yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for observation-based estimates and 0.28 Pg C yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for hindcast simulations) are not shown in the figure.
<bold>(b)</bold> Simulated cumulative ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake since 1765 for the
historic period until 2014 (17 ESMs) and for the future from 2015 to 2100
under SSP1-2.6 (blue, 14 ESMs), SSP2-4.5 (orange, 16 ESMs), and SSP5-8.5
(red, 17 ESMs). Thin lines show the results from each individual ESM, the
dashed lines the multi-model mean, the solid lines the constrained estimate,
and the shading the uncertainty around the constrained estimate.
Furthermore, the observation-based ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inventory estimate in
2010 from Khatiwala et al. (2013) is shown. As ESM simulations in CMIP6
start in 1850, the air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes were corrected upwards for the
late starting date in the constrained estimate following Bronselaer et al. (2017) (see Appendix A, Sect. A1).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/19/4431/2022/bg-19-4431-2022-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Quantifying the past ocean anthropogenic carbon sink with observations and
hindcast simulations and existing uncertainties</title>
      <p id="d1e713">The large background concentration of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the ocean and the vast ocean
volume make it difficult to directly observe the relatively small
anthropogenic perturbations in the ocean interior. Therefore, different
methods have been developed to estimate the accumulation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the ocean (Khatiwala et al., 2013), such
as the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>C<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> method
(Gruber et al., 1996;
Sabine et al., 2004) or the transient time distribution method
(Hall et al., 2002) based on observations of
inert tracers, like CFCs. These estimates result in an estimated ocean
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inventory in 2010 of 155 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 31 Pg C (Khatiwala et
al., 2013) (Fig. 1b, Table 1) but do not or only partly include
climate-driven changes in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e784">Further development of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>C<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> method into the eMLR(C<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) method
(Clement and Gruber, 2018) and more observations
through new techniques, such as Biogeochemical-Argo (BGC-Argo) floats
(Claustre et al., 2020), and more
research cruises (Lauvset et al., 2021) will allow the increase in marine <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to be quantified on shorter timescales and with reduced
uncertainty. The increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from 1994 to 2007 by the eMLR(C<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)
method is 34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4 Pg C (12 % uncertainty, Table 1)
(Gruber et al., 2019a), again not accounting for
potential climate-driven changes in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. In addition to interior
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> estimates, surface ocean observations of the partial pressure of
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) and new statistical methods, such as neural networks (Landschützer et al., 2016), have
led to a variety of observation-based estimates of the air–sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux (Rödenbeck
et al., 2014; Zeng et al., 2014; Landschützer et al., 2016; Gregor et
al., 2019; Watson et al., 2020; Iida et al., 2021; Gregor and Gruber, 2021;
Chau et al., 2022). When subtracting the pre-industrial outflux of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
due to riverine carbon fluxes (Sarmiento
and Sundquist, 1992; Aumont et al., 2001; Jacobson et al., 2007; Resplandy
et al., 2018; Lacroix et al., 2020; Regnier et al., 2022) from these air–sea
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux estimates, the global ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake can be derived (Friedlingstein et al., 2022), resulting in an estimated
ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake from 1994 to 2007 of 29 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4 Pg C (14 %
uncertainty, Table 1).</p>
      <p id="d1e956">The difference of 5 Pg C between the interior and surface ocean mean
estimates was attributed to outgassing of ocean CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> caused by a
changing climate and climate variability (Gruber et
al., 2019a). However, simulations from ESMs of the sixth phase of the
Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) estimate the climate-driven
and externally forced climate-variability-driven air–sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux from
1994 to 2007 to be only <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.5 Pg C (Table A3). When averaging over
an ensemble of ESMs, forced variability (e.g., due to the volcanic eruptions
or varying emissions of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and other radiative agents) is still
preserved. However, unforced interannual-to-decadal variability is largely
removed when averaging over an ensemble of ESMs. Although comparisons
suggest that the ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake was low compared to atmospheric
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the 1990s and high in the 2000s (Rödenbeck
et al., 2013, 2022), a comparison of different <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake estimates
for different decadal-scale periods does not reveal any clear
variability-related deviation for the 1994–2007 period (IPCC, 2021, AR6 WGI, chap. 5, Fig. 5.8; Canadell et al., 2021). Overall, uncertainties
remain at present too large for any quantitative conclusions, but it seems
unlikely that unforced variability causes an air–sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Pg C (difference between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Pg C from Gruber et al. (2019a) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Pg C
from ESMs), twice as large as the simulated flux from forced variability and
climate change. It hence remains a challenge to derive the total ocean
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink from interior estimates that do not account for climate-driven
changes in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1097">An alternative way of estimating the strength of the ocean carbon sink is
the use of global ocean biogeochemical models forced with atmospheric
reanalysis data (Sarmiento et
al., 1992; Friedlingstein et al., 2022). From 1994 to 2007, the ocean
biogeochemical hindcast models that participated in the Global Carbon Budget
2021 (Friedlingstein et al., 2022) simulate a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake of 26 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3 Pg C (Table 1). This estimate is 3 Pg C below the
surface observation-based estimate, and the difference increases further
after 2010 (Fig. 1a). Compared to the interior ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> estimate,
the simulated uptake by these hindcast models is 3–6 Pg C (10 %–19 %)
smaller depending on the correction term that is used for climate-change-induced outgassing of natural CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. Such differences between
observation-based and simulated ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake could be explained
regionally by systematic biases in models (Goris et al., 2018;
Terhaar et al., 2020a, 2021a, b), as well as data sparsity (Bushinsky
et al., 2019; Gloege et al., 2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e1150">Overall, the difference between ocean hindcast models, observation-based
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux estimates, and interior ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> estimates, as well as
the uncertainties in the climate-driven change in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and pre-industrial
outgassing, indicate that uncertainties of the ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink over the
last decades remain substantial. The uncertainty of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink
appears larger than the uncertainty typically given for an individual
estimate of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink from a specific data product.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e1221">Global ocean air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux estimates based on 17 ESMs from CMIP6 before and after being
starting-date-corrected and constrained, as well as previous estimates over
different time periods. Prior uncertainty is the multi-model standard
deviation. The uncertainty of the starting-date-corrected values also
includes the uncertainty from that correction. The constrained uncertainty
is a combination of the starting date correction, the multi-model standard
deviation after the constraint is applied, and the uncertainty from the
correction itself (see Sects. 3.1 and A1). Uncertainties from the
decadal variability on shorter timescales, e.g., for 1994–2007, are not
included. The star indicates estimates that do not account for
climate-driven changes in the ocean carbon sink.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.95}[.95]?><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Period</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col7" align="center">Cumulative air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux (Pg C) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">CMIP6 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Global Carbon Budget 2021</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center">Others </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col5">(Friedlingstein et al., 2022)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Prior</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Starting-date-</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Constrained</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Observation-based/</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Estimate</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Source</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">corrected</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">hindcast simulations</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1994–2007</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">26.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">28.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">31.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">29 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4/26 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Gruber et al. (2019a)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1990–2020</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">69.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">74.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">80.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">81 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7/68 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1765–2010</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">164 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">177 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">155 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 31<inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Khatiwala et al. (2013)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1850–2014</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">138 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">157 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">171 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">150 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1960–2020</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">106 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">117 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">128 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">115 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1850–2020</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">154 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">174 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">189 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">170 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 35</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2020–2100 (SSP1-2.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">150 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">156 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">173 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2020–2100 (SSP2-4.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">244 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">251 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">277 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2020–2100 (SSP5-8.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">399 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">407 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">445 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Constraining the ocean anthropogenic carbon sink in Earth system models</title>
      <p id="d1e1834">Another way to constrain the past, present, and future global ocean
anthropogenic carbon sink is the use of process-based emergent constraints
(Orr, 2002) that identify a relationship across an ensemble of
ESMs between a relatively uncertain variable, such as the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake
in the Southern Ocean, and a variable that can be observed with a relatively
small uncertainty, such as the sea surface salinity in the subtropical–polar
frontal zone in the Southern Ocean. The identified relationship is then
combined with observations, in this example the sea surface salinity, to
better estimate the uncertain variable, here the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake in the
Southern Ocean (Terhaar et al., 2021b). Such relationships
must be explainable by an underlying mechanism (Hall
et al., 2019); i.e., higher sea surface salinity in the frontal zone leads
to denser sea surface waters and stronger mode and intermediate water
formation, which enhances the transport of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the ocean surface
to the ocean interior and allows hence for more <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake. In recent
years, process-based emergent constraints  have successfully reduced
uncertainties in simulated processes across ensembles of ESMs (Orr,
2002; Matsumoto et al., 2004; Wenzel et al., 2014; Kwiatkowski et al., 2017;
Goris et al., 2018; Eyring et al., 2019; Hall et al., 2019; Terhaar et al.,
2020a, 2021a, b; Bourgeois et al., 2022). In the ocean,
for example, a bias towards smaller <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake was identified in
the Southern Ocean (Terhaar et al., 2021b). Similarly, ESMs
from CMIP5 were shown to underestimate the future uptake of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the
North Atlantic due to smaller than observed sequestration of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> into the deeper
ocean (Goris et al., 2018). However, the relatively uncertain
observation-based estimates of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sequestration (see section above)
did not allow Goris et al. (2018) to reduce uncertainties. Similarly, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake in
the tropical Pacific Ocean across ESMs could be reduced with observations of
the local surface ocean carbonate ion concentrations
(Vaittinada Ayar et al., 2022), which is anti-correlated to
the Revelle factor. Despite a better understanding of the regional
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake, uncertainties of the global ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink have
not been reduced yet.</p>
      <p id="d1e1959">Here, we identify a mechanistic constraint for the global ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink across 17 ESMs from CMIP6 (Table A1 in Appendix A). We demonstrate that a linear
combination of three observable quantities, (1) the sea surface salinity in
the subtropical–polar frontal zone in the Southern Ocean, (2) the strength
of the AMOC at 26.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, and (3) the globally averaged surface
ocean Revelle factor, can successfully predict the strength of the global
ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink across the CMIP6 ESMs (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" 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> of 0.87 for the global
ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake from 1994 to 2007). The sea surface salinity in the
subtropical–polar frontal zone in the Southern Ocean and the AMOC determine
the strength of the two most important regions of mode, intermediate, and
deep-water formation (Goris et al., 2018, 2022;
Terhaar et al., 2021b). In addition, the Revelle factor accounts for biases
in the biogeochemical buffer capacity of the ocean, i.e., the relative
increase in ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for a given relative increase in ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Revelle and Suess, 1957). As the Revelle
factor quantifies relative increases in ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the increase in
surface ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> depends on the Revelle factor and the natural
surface ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Therefore, the Revelle factor in the ESMs was adjusted
for model biases in natural surface ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (see Sect. A1).
Compared to observations, CMIP6 models represent the observation-based
average strength of the AMOC from 2004 to 2020 (16.91 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.49 Sv)
(McCarthy et al., 2020) right but have a large inter-model
spread (16.91 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.00 Sv), underestimate the observed inter-frontal sea
surface salinity (34.07 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.02) and have a large inter-model spread
(33.89 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.13), and overestimate the surface-averaged Revelle factor
that was derived by GLODAPv2 (10.45 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.01) by 0.24 (10.73 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.24) with the largest Revelle factor biases in the main <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake
regions (Fig. 2). The underestimation of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-adjusted Revelle
factor by the ESM ensemble is mainly due to a bias towards
concentrations of surface ocean carbonate ion concentrations that are smaller than the observed concentrations (Sarmiento et al., 1995), caused by a simulated
difference of surface ocean alkalinity and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> that is smaller than the observed difference (Fig. A2).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e2166">Sea surface salinity in the Southern Ocean, the Atlantic
Meridional Overturning Circulation, and the Revelle factor at the ocean
surface from observations and Earth system models. Annual mean sea surface
salinity from the <bold>(a)</bold> World Ocean Atlas 2018 (Zweng et
al., 2018; Locarnini et al., 2018), <bold>(b)</bold> 17 Earth system models from
CMIP6 from 1995 to 2014, and <bold>(c)</bold> the difference between both. The
black lines in <bold>(a, b)</bold> indicate the annual mean positions of the
polar and subtropical fronts. The strength of the monthly-averaged Atlantic
Meridional Overturning Circulation, here defined as the maximum of the
streamfunction at 26.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, from 2004 to 2020 <bold>(d)</bold> as observed by the RAPID array (McCarthy et al., 2020),
<bold>(e)</bold> as simulated by 17 Earth system models from CMIP6, and
<bold>(f)</bold> the difference between both. Each model simulation is shown in
<bold>(e)</bold> and <bold>(f)</bold> as a thin red line, the multi-model average is
shown as a thick red line, and the multi-model standard deviation is shown
as red shading. The annual mean sea surface Revelle factor calculated with
<italic>mocsy2.0</italic> (Orr and Epitalon, 2015) from <bold>(g)</bold> gridded GLODAPv2 observations
that are normalized to the year 2002 (Lauvset et al., 2016),
from <bold>(h)</bold> output of 17 Earth system model simulations from CMIP6 in
2002 and adjusted for biases in the surface ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (see Sect. A1),
and <bold>(i)</bold> their difference.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/19/4431/2022/bg-19-4431-2022-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Applying the constraint and uncertainty estimation</title>
      <p id="d1e2244">For the three-dimensional emergent constraint, multi-linear regression was
used. First, it was assumed that the ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake for every model
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) can be approximated by a linear combination of the
inter-frontal sea surface salinity in the Southern Ocean in model <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
(SSS<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Southern</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ocean</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), the AMOC strength in model <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
(AMOC<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), and the globally averaged surface ocean Revelle factor in
model <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (Revelle<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">global</mml:mi><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M185" display="block"><mml:mtable rowspacing="0.2ex" class="split" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSS</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Southern</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ocean</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMOC</mml:mi><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Revelle</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">global</mml:mi><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
          The parameters <inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are scaling parameters of the three predictor
variables, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> intercept, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> describes the residual
between the predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux by this multi-linear regression model
and the simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake by model <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. The free parameters <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> were
fitted based on the simulated inter-frontal sea surface salinity in the
Southern Ocean, AMOC, Revelle factor, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake. The three
predictors are not statistically correlated (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" 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">0.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for salinity
and AMOC, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" 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">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for Revelle factor and AMOC, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" 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">0.10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
for salinity and Revelle factor) and can hence be used in a multi-linear
regression.</p>
      <p id="d1e2569">The constrained <inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux is estimated by replacing the simulated
inter-frontal sea surface salinity in the Southern Ocean, AMOC, and Revelle
factor by the observed ones and by setting <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to zero. As the
Revelle factor describes the inverse of the ocean capacity to take up
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the atmosphere, Eq. (1) should in principal be used with
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Revelle</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">global</mml:mi><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula>. However, using <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Revelle</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">global</mml:mi><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
facilitates understanding and the presentation of the results and only
introduces maximum errors of around 0.1 % for the Revelle factor
adjustment for the models that simulate the largest deviations from the
observed Revelle factor. To estimate the uncertainty, all model results were
first corrected for their biases in the three predictor variables; i.e., if
a model has a salinity that is 0.2 smaller than the observed salinity, the
simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake by this model is increased by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The
same correction is made for the other two predictor variables (Fig. 3). If
the three predictor variables were predicting the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux perfectly,
the bias-corrected <inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake from all models would be the same. The
remaining inter-model standard deviation therefore represents the
uncertainty from the multi-linear regression model due to other factors that
influence the ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake. The second part of the uncertainty
originates from the uncertainty in the observations of the predictor
variables that influences the magnitude of the correction. This uncertainty
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is calculated as follows:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M214" display="block"><mml:mtable class="split" rowspacing="0.2ex" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSS</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Southern</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ocean</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMOC</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Revelle</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">global</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
          with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSS</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Southern</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ocean</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">AMOC</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Revelle</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">global</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> being the uncertainty of the three
observed predictor variables. Eventually, the overall uncertainty of this
constrained <inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux is estimated as the square root of the sum of the
products of the square of both uncertainties.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e2858">Global ocean anthropogenic carbon simulated by Earth
system models from CMIP6 corrected for biases in sea surface salinity in the
Southern Ocean, the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, and the
Revelle factor. <bold>(a)</bold> Global ocean anthropogenic carbon (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) uptake
from 1994 to 2007 as simulated by 17 ESMs from CMIP6 and corrected for the
late starting date (Bronselaer et al., 2017). For
each ESM, one ensemble member was used, as the difference between ensemble
members has been shown to be small compared to the inter-model differences
(Terhaar et al., 2020a, 2021b). In
the years 1994 and 2007, only half of the annual <inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake was
accounted for to make it comparable to interior ocean estimates that compare
changes in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from mid-1994 to mid-2007 and not from the start of
1994 to the end of 2007 (Gruber et al., 2019a).
<bold>(b)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake after correcting the simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake
from <bold>(a)</bold> for biases in the Southern Ocean sea surface salinity
(Terhaar et al., 2021b) from <bold>(c)</bold>. The dots in
<bold>(c)</bold> represent individual models before (red) and after (orange) the
sea surface salinity correction. <bold>(d)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake after
correcting sea-surface-salinity-corrected <inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake from <bold>(b)</bold> for biases in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation from
<bold>(e)</bold>. The dots in <bold>(e)</bold> represent individual models before
(orange) and after (blue) the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation
correction. <bold>(f)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake after correcting the sea-surface-salinity- and AMOC-corrected
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake from <bold>(d)</bold> for biases in the global ocean surface
Revelle factor from <bold>(g)</bold>. The dots in <bold>(g)</bold> represent
individual models before (blue) and after (green) the Revelle factor
correction. The simulated Revelle factor by the ESMs was adjusted for biases
in the surface ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (see Sect. A1). The dashed colored lines in
<bold>(a)</bold>, <bold>(b)</bold>, <bold>(d)</bold>, and <bold>(f)</bold> show the multi-model
mean, and the shading shows the uncertainty, which is a combination of the
multi-model standard deviation after correction and the uncertainty of the
correction factor due to the uncertainty of the observational constraint
(see Sect. A1). The dashed black lines in <bold>(c)</bold>, <bold>(e)</bold>, and
<bold>(g)</bold> show the observations from the World Ocean Atlas 2018 (Zweng et
al., 2018; Locarnini et al., 2018), the RAPID array
(McCarthy et al., 2020), and GLODAPv2
(Lauvset et al., 2016) with their uncertainties as grey
shading, the colored lines show linear fits, and the arrows illustrate the
correction for individual models.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=355.659449pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/19/4431/2022/bg-19-4431-2022-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Exploiting the constraint with observations</title>
      <p id="d1e3050">By exploiting this multi-variable emergent constraint with observations, the
simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake by ESMs from 1994 to 2007 increases from 28.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.2 to 31.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.9 Pg C (Figs. 1 and 3, Tables 1 and
A2). Biases in the Southern Ocean salinity are responsible for around 60 %
of the bias in the global ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake in the CMIP6 models, while
the bias in the Revelle factor explains the remaining 40 % (Fig. 3). The
AMOC, whose multi-model mean in ESMs is similar to observations, does not
change the central <inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake estimate but allows
uncertainties (Fig. 3) to be reduced. The constrained <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake of 31.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.9 Pg C is 0.9 Pg C smaller than the interior ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> estimate of
34 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4 Pg C based on observations (Gruber et
al., 2019a) when subtracting the multi-model mean climate-driven CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
flux estimate from the CMIP6 models of 1.6 Pg C (Table A3). This difference
of 0.9 Pg C is smaller than the uncertainties. Furthermore, the constrained
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake of 31.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.9 Pg C is 2.5 Pg C larger than the
observation-based air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux estimates from 1994 to 2007 of 29 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4 Pg C from the Global Carbon Budget 2021 (Table 1), but both
estimates agree within the uncertainties. When comparing a short period, for
example the years after 2013, the observation-based air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux
estimates can deviate from the constrained CMIP6 ESM estimates (Fig. 1)
due to unforced climate-variability-driven CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux. Thus, the small
difference between observation-based ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake estimates from
1994 to 2007 and the results provided here may not exist over a longer
period of time and be caused by a different timing and magnitude of decadal
variabilities in ESMs and the real world (Landschützer
et al., 2016; Gruber et al., 2019b; Bennington et al., 2022), as well as
uncertainties in the observation-based products (Bushinsky
et al., 2019; Gloege et al., 2021, 2022). Indeed, when the entire period for
which observation-based air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux estimates from the Global
Carbon Budget are available (1990–2020), the constrained estimate of the
ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink based on ESMs (80.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.5 Pg C) is very similar to
the observation-based estimate from surface ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> observations (81 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7 Pg C) (Table 1).</p>
      <p id="d1e3267">The good agreement between the air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux estimates from ESMs and
surface ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> observations in combination with interior ocean
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of a similar magnitude suggests that the air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux from
hindcast simulations over the last three decades (68 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 Pg C) and
possibly also over the 1994–2007 period (26 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3 Pg C) underestimates
the ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake (Table 1). Therefore, the Global Carbon Budget
2021 estimate of the ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake over the last decades, which is
an average of the estimate of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake from observation-based
methods and hindcast models, should be corrected upwards. Reasons for this
underestimation may be an underestimation of the AMOC or the Southern Ocean
inter-frontal sea surface salinity, an overestimation of the Revelle factor,
a small ensemble of models (8 models) that are biased towards low uptake
models, very short spin-up times (Séférian et al.,
2016), neglecting the water vapor pressure when calculating the local
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in each ocean grid cell (Hauck et al., 2020) as is
done in CMIP models (Orr et al., 2017), or different
pre-industrial atmospheric CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing ratios
(Bronselaer et al., 2017; Friedlingstein et
al., 2022). However, even after correcting these hindcast simulations
upwards by employing the emergent constraint identified here, their
corrected estimate may remain below the CMIP-derived estimate for the period
from 1994 to 2017 due to the historical decadal variations in the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake that is not represented with the same phasing in fully
coupled ESMs (Landschützer
et al., 2016; Gruber et al., 2019b; Bennington et al., 2022). A detailed
analysis by the individual modeling teams would be necessary to identify
the reason for underestimation in the individual hindcast models, as the
output is not openly available.</p>
      <p id="d1e3404">Over the historical period from 1850 to 2020, the constraint identified here
increases the simulated ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake by 15 Pg C (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" 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">0.80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) from 174 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 13 to 189 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7 Pg C (Table 1). The
constrained estimate of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> agrees within the uncertainties  of
the estimate from the Global Carbon Budget for the same period (170 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 35 Pg C) (Friedlingstein et al., 2022), which is a
combination of prognostic approaches until 1959 (Khatiwala et al., 2013; DeVries,
2014), and ocean hindcast simulations and observation-based CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux
products from 1960 to 2020 (Friedlingstein et al., 2022).
However, our new estimate is 19 Pg C larger and could explain around three-quarters of the budget imbalance (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) between global CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
emissions and sinks over the period 1850 to 2020 (25 Pg C)
(Friedlingstein et al., 2022) and contribute to answering an
important outstanding question in the carbon cycle community.</p>
      <p id="d1e3495">Overall, this new estimate of the ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake, based on ESMs and
constrained by observations, presents an independent and new estimate of the
past and present ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake that is around 10 % larger and
42 %–59 % less uncertain than the multi-model average and its standard
deviation, respectively. The lower bound of the uncertainty correction is
for the past ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake since 1765 in which the late starting date
correction introduces an uncertainty that cannot be reduced without running
the simulations from 1765 onwards. Towards the end of the 20th century,
the uncertainty from this correction becomes smaller so that the emergent
constraint can reduce uncertainties by almost 60 %.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2.SSS1">
  <label>3.2.1</label><title>Southern Ocean</title>
      <p id="d1e3539">While the constraints were applied globally, they are also applicable
regionally as shown for the inter-frontal sea surface salinity in the
Southern Ocean (Terhaar et al., 2021b). Here, we update the
regional constraint in the Southern Ocean with the now additionally
available ESMs and extend the constraint by adding the basin-wide-averaged
Revelle factor in the Southern Ocean as a second variable. For the period
from 1765 to 2005, the simulated multi-model mean air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux
that is adjusted for the late starting date is 63.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6.1 Pg C. Please
note that the numbers here are for fluxes from 1765 to 2005 and are not the
same as in Terhaar et al. (2021b), where fluxes from 1850 to 2005 were
reported. The two-dimensional constraint shows a higher correlation
coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" 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">0.70</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) than the one-dimensional constraint when only
the inter-frontal sea surface salinity is used as a predictor
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" 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">0.62</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Slight differences to Terhaar et al. (2021b) exist due to
the additional ESMs that are by now available. When exploiting this
relationship with observations of the Southern Ocean Revelle factor
(12.19 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.01) and the sea surface salinity, the best estimate of the
cumulative air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux from 1765 to 2005 in the Southern Ocean
increases to 72.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.4 Pg C. In comparison, observation-based
estimates for the same period report 69.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12.4 Pg C
(Mikaloff Fletcher et al., 2006) and
72.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12.6 Pg C (Gerber et al., 2009). The
constraint thus reduces the uncertainty not only globally but also in the
Southern Ocean by 44 %.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2.SSS2">
  <label>3.2.2</label><title>Atlantic Ocean</title>
      <p id="d1e3638">As for the Southern Ocean, we also apply a two-dimensional constraint to the
Atlantic Ocean, using the AMOC and the basin-wide-averaged surface ocean
Revelle factor in the North Atlantic as predictors. The unconstrained
cumulative air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux from 1765 to 2005 in the North Atlantic
adjusted for the late starting date is 21.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.3 Pg C. For this
period, the two-dimensional constraint results in a relationship with a
correlation coefficient of 0.57. If only the AMOC had been used, the
correlation factor would have been 0.49. When exploiting this relationship
with observations of the North Atlantic Revelle factor and AMOC, the best
estimate of the cumulative air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux from 1765 to 2005 in the
Atlantic Ocean increases to 22.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.2 Pg C. In comparison,
observation-based estimates are 20.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4.9 Pg C
(Mikaloff Fletcher et al., 2006) and
20.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6.5 Pg C (Gerber et al., 2009). The
constrained and unconstrained estimates are both above the observation-based
estimates but within the uncertainties. The constrained estimate is even
higher than the unconstrained one but only by 0.8 Pg C, and its uncertainty
is reduced by 33 %.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Consequences for projected ocean anthropogenic carbon uptake and
acidification over the 21st century</title>
      <p id="d1e3702">As the present and future <inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake are strongly correlated across
ESMs, the relationship identified here can also be used to constrain future
projections of the global ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake. The global ocean
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake from 2020 to 2100 increases from 156 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11 to
173 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 Pg C (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" 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">0.56</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) under the high-mitigation, low-emission
Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 1-2.6 (SSP1-2.6) that likely allows us to keep
global warming below 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C (O'Neill et al., 2016;
Riahi et al., 2017), from 251 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 17 to 277 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9 Pg C
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" 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">0.74</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) under the middle-of-the-road SSP2-4.5, and from 407 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30 Pg C to 445 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12 Pg C (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" 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">0.87</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) under the high-emission, no-mitigation SSP5-8.5 (Fig. 1b). Overall, the future ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake
in CMIP6 models is thus 9 %–11 % larger than simulated by ESMs and 32 %–62 %
less uncertain depending on the future scenario. The correlation coefficient
and hence the uncertainty reduction reduces – but remains still large – when
atmospheric CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> stops increasing (SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5). Larger
uncertainties for stabilization than for near-exponential growth scenarios
are expected, as the reversal of the atmospheric CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> growth rate will
exert a stronger external impact on the magnitude of the ocean carbon sink
(McKinley et al., 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e3865">The increase in projected uptake of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> also increases the estimate of
future ocean acidification rate. For ocean ecosystems, the threshold for
water masses to become undersaturated towards specific calcium carbonate
minerals (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is of critical importance (Orr et al.,
2005; Fabry et al., 2008; Doney et al., 2020), although negative effects for
some calcifying organisms can already be observed at saturation states above
one (Ries et al., 2009), and some calcifying
organisms can even live in undersaturated waters
(Lebrato et al., 2016). Over the
21st century, the volume of water masses in the global ocean that
remain supersaturated towards the meta-stable calcium carbonate mineral
aragonite is projected to decrease in CMIP6 from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">283</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in
2002 (based on GLODAPv2 observations; Lauvset et al., 2016)
to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">194</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> under SSP1-2.6, to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">143</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> under SSP2-4.5, and to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">97</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> under SSP5-8.5.
The constraint reduces these estimates to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">186</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">138</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">93</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" 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="M336" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.31–0.69), resulting
in an additional decrease in the available habitat for calcifying organisms
of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" 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:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>–<inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.4</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> depending on the scenario. This additionally
projected habitat loss is mainly located in the mesopelagic layer between
200  and 1000 m and thus affects organisms that live there permanently or
temporarily during diel vertical migration (Behrenfeld et al., 2019). The
additionally undersaturated volume corresponds to an area of 1.6–3.1 times
the area of the Mediterranean Sea whose mesopelagic layer would be
additionally undersaturated towards aragonite. However, the global character
of the constraint and the uncertainty of the interior distribution of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> do not allow us to localize these areas.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <label>5</label><title>Robustness of the emergent constraint and possible impact of changing riverine carbon input over time</title>
      <p id="d1e4255">Emergent constraints across large datasets such as an ensemble of ESMs with
hundreds of variables can always be found and might not necessarily be
reliable and robust (Caldwell et al.,
2014; Brient, 2020; Sanderson et al., 2021; Williamson et al., 2021). To
test the robustness of emergent constraints, three criteria were proposed
(Hall et al., 2019). The constraint must be relying
on a well-understood mechanism, that mechanism must be reliable, and the
constraint must be validated in an independent model ensemble.</p>
      <p id="d1e4258">Here, the well-understood mechanisms are the fundamental ocean
biogeochemical properties such as the Revelle factor
(Revelle and Suess, 1957), as well as the
Southern Ocean and North Atlantic large-scale ocean circulation features
that are known to be the determining factors for the ocean ventilation
(Marshall and Speer, 2012; Talley,
2013; Buckley and Marshall, 2016). For the Southern Ocean, the verification
of the link between sea surface salinity and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake was previously
done by linking the sea surface salinity to the density and to the volume
of intermediate and mode waters in each model. Furthermore, the robustness
of the constraint was tested against changes in the definition of the
inter-frontal zone (Terhaar et al., 2021b). In addition,
other potential predictors were tested, such as the magnitude and seasonal
cycle of sea-ice extent, wind curl, and the mixed layer depth, as well as upwelling
strength of circumpolar deep waters. All these variables are known to
influence air–sea gas exchange, freshwater fluxes, and circulation and, in
turn, salinity and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake. However, none of these factors alone
explains biases in the surface salinity and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake in the Southern
Ocean. Therefore, the sea surface salinity that emerges as a result of all
these individual processes represents, so far, the best variable in terms of
mechanistic explanation and observational uncertainty to bias-correct models
for Southern Ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake. Further evidence for the underlying
mechanism of the relationship between Southern Ocean sea surface salinity
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake was provided by a later study that analyzed explicitly
the stratification in the water column (Bourgeois et al.,
2022). Here, we further showed that the Southern Ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake
constrained by the Revelle factor and the inter-frontal sea surface salinity
compares much better to observation-based estimates than the unconstrained
estimate, further corroborating the identified regional constraint and
mechanism (Sect. 3.2.1).</p>
      <p id="d1e4328">Similarly, it was shown that the transport of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by the AMOC is
crucial for the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake in the North Atlantic
(Winton et al., 2013; Goris et
al., 2018; Brown et al., 2021). As the AMOC is predominantly observed at
26.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, a change to the definition is not possible. Instead, we
replaced the AMOC as a predictor by another indicator for deep-water
formation, namely the area of waters in the North Atlantic below which the
water column is weakly stratified (see Sect. A1 and Table A4)
(Hess, 2022). The results remain almost unchanged, indicating the
robustness of the constraint and that the AMOC is indeed a good indicator
for the stability of the water column in the North Atlantic and the
associated deep-water formation. As for the Southern Ocean, we also made a
regional two-dimensional constraint using the AMOC and the regional Revelle
factor and compared it to observation-based <inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux estimates. The
good relationship between the AMOC and the North Atlantic <inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake
improves the confidence in the AMOC as a valid predictor.</p>
      <p id="d1e4384">Eventually, we also tested the robustness of the biogeochemical
predictor by varying the definition of the Revelle factor. First, the
Revelle factor was only calculated north of 45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and south of
45<inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S, assuming that the high-latitude regions are responsible for
the largest <inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake, and second, the global Revelle factor was
calculated by weighting the Revelle factor in each cell by the multi-model
mean cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake from 1850 to 2100 in that cell so that the
Revelle factor in cells with larger uptake is more strongly weighted. Under
both definitions, the results remain almost unchanged (Table A4).
Furthermore, the Revelle factor has been shown here to improve the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake in the Atlantic and Southern Ocean and has been earlier
shown to determine the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake in the tropical Pacific Ocean
(Vaittinada Ayar et al., 2022), suggesting that the Revelle
factor is a robust predictor of global and regional ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake.</p>
      <p id="d1e4462">To provide further indication of the importance of the AMOC and the
Southern Ocean surface salinity and the three-dimensional constraint in
general, we have compared simulated CFC-11, provided by 10 ESMs from CMIP6,
with observed CFC-11 from GLODAPv2.2021 (Lauvset et al.,
2021) (Sect. A4) and also compared the interior ocean distribution of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with observation-based estimates
(Sabine et al., 2004; Gruber et al., 2019a)
(Sect. A5). The comparison of CFCs demonstrates the importance of the
AMOC for the ventilation of the North Atlantic, as ESMs with a low AMOC
underestimate the observed subsurface CFC-11 concentrations in the North
Atlantic. Similarly, ESMs with a small inter-frontal Southern Ocean surface
salinity underestimate observed subsurface (below 200 m) CFC-11
concentrations in the Southern Hemisphere. In addition to the evaluation
with observations of CFC, the comparison of the interior ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> distribution demonstrates first that the ESMs on average represent the
observation-based distributions within the margins of error (Tables A5 and
A6). Only in the Southern Hemisphere does the ESM average remain below, as
expected due to the average ESM bias towards inter-frontal sea
surface salinities that are too low compared to observed ones, less formation of mode and intermediate waters,
and hence relatively little storage of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the Southern Hemisphere. When
using the model that represents best the three predictors, GFDL-ESM4 (Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory ESM4; Dunne
et al., 2020; Stock et al., 2020), the comparison to observation-based
interior ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> distribution becomes almost identical (Tables A7
and A8), suggesting that a better representation of these parameters indeed
improves the simulation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake and its distribution in the
ocean interior.</p>
      <p id="d1e4520">To validate the constraint identified here in another model ensemble, we
used all six ESMs of the CMIP5 ensemble that provided all necessary output
variables (Table A1). As these six ESMs are not sufficient to robustly fit a
function with four unknown parameters, we applied the predicted relationship
by the CMIP6 models to the CMIP5 models and evaluated how well this
relationship allows the simulated historical <inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake to be predicted by
these models. The CMIP6-derived relationship allows us to predict the simulated
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake with an accuracy of 3 % (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5 Pg C) for the period
from 1850 to 2014 and with an accuracy of 4 % (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.3 Pg C) for the
period from 1994 to 2007 (Fig. A5). The largest uncertainty stems from the
NorESM2-ME (Norwegian Earth System Model version 2) model, which simulates a historical AMOC strength of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30 Sv, almost twice as large as the observed AMOC strength
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9 Sv larger than all other CMIP6 ESMs over which the
relationship was fitted. For such strong deviations from the observations
and other ESMs, the linear relationship might not be applicable anymore.
However, despite one out of six ESMs from CMIP5 having a particularly high
AMOC, the relationship identified here still allows us to predict the simulated
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake with small uncertainties and hence confirms its
applicability.</p>
      <p id="d1e4585">Despite this robustness, emergent constraints are, by definition, always
relying on the existing ESMs and on the processes that are represented by
these ESMs. If certain processes are not implemented or implemented in the
same way across all ESMs, biases over the entire model ensemble can occur
that cannot be corrected by an emergent constraint (Sanderson
et al., 2021). Possible non-represented processes in our case are, among
others, changing freshwater input from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheet
that may impact the freshwater cycle and circulation in the Southern Ocean
or the AMOC, as well as changes in riverine input of carbon over time. However, the
expected effect of ice melt on sea surface salinity in the Southern Ocean
and on the AMOC is small compared to the model spread
(Bakker et al., 2016; Terhaar et al.,
2021b), at least on the timescales considered here. Changing riverine carbon
fluxes could, however, have a larger effect. So far, only one CMIP6 ESM, the
CNRM-ESM2-1 (Séférian et al., 2019),
has dynamic carbon riverine delivery that changes with global warming. In
this model, carbon riverine delivery increases over the 20th century so
that the interior ocean change in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2000 is around 19 Pg C
smaller than the air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake (Fig. A4). The situation
reverses at the beginning of the 21st century so that riverine carbon
delivery increases, and the interior ocean change in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> becomes up to
60 Pg C larger than the air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake. As such, riverine carbon
delivery has the potential to enhance or decrease the ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inventory in addition to air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake. This would also
question the comparability of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inventory and air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake estimates. However, the present state of the ESMs does not allow a
quantitative assessment of this process, and future research is needed.</p>
      <p id="d1e4677">In addition, parametrizations of non-represented processes such as mesoscale
and sub-mesoscale circulation features like small-scale eddies may lead to
biases in the model ensemble. For individual models, it has been shown that
changes in horizontal resolution and hence a more explicitly simulated
circulation change the model physics and biogeochemistry and hence also the
ocean carbon and heat uptake (Lachkar et al.,
2007, 2009; Dufour et al., 2015; Griffies et al., 2015). However, an
increase in resolution does not necessarily lead to improved simulations, and
the changes in oceanic <inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake may be lower or higher, depending on
the model applied. When increasing the NEMO (Nucleus for European Modelling of the Ocean) ocean model from a non-eddying
version (2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> horizontal resolution) to an eddying version
(0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), Lachkar et al. (2009) find a decrease in the sea surface
salinity of around 0.1 at the Southern Ocean surface that brings the model
further away from the observed salinity, a decrease in the volume of
Antarctic intermediate water, and a decrease in the Southern Ocean uptake of
CFC and hence likely also of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This example corroborates the
underlying mechanism of the emergent constraint in the Southern Ocean that
higher sea surface salinity directly affects the formation of Antarctic
intermediate water and the uptake of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Another example can be found
within the ESM ensemble of CMIP6. The MPI-ESM-1-2-HR and MPI-ESM-1-2-LR have
a horizontal resolution of 0.4 and 1.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively,
but the same underlying ocean model. The high-resolution version has an
inter-frontal salinity of 33.98, a Southern Ocean surface Revelle factor of
12.82, and a Southern Ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake from 1850 to 2005 of 56.4 Pg C. The coarser-resolution version has an inter-frontal sea surface salinity
of 33.92, a Southern Ocean surface Revelle factor of 12.89, and a Southern
Ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake of 58.0 Pg C. These differences are much smaller than
the inter-model differences (33.66–34.15 for salinity, 12.14–13.11 for the
Revelle factor, and 48.8–71.1 Pg C for the Southern Ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake) that result from different ocean circulation and biogeochemical
models, sea-ice models, and atmospheric and land biosphere models, as well
as the coupling between these models. These examples show that higher
resolution does not necessarily lead to better results, affecting potentially
the predictor and the predicted variable in the same way, and that
differences in the underlying model components and spin-up and
initialization strategies lead so far to much larger differences between
ESMs than resolution does (Séférian et al., 2020).
As long as simulations with higher resolution, which are also spun-up over
hundreds of years (Séférian et al., 2016), are not yet
available, and potentially important processes such as changing riverine
fluxes and freshwater from land ice are not included, it remains speculative
if higher resolution would lead to a reduction in inter-model uncertainty
or even a better representation of the observations. Moreover, the
relationships identified here that are based on the current understanding of
physical and biogeochemical oceanography and that were tested for robustness
in several ways may likely also exist across ensembles of eddy-resolving
models.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>6</label><title>Conclusion</title>
      <p id="d1e4782">The three-dimensional emergent constraint identified here reveals a bias towards an insufficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake by the CMIP6 ESM ensemble, reduces
uncertainties of the global ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink, and leads to an enhanced
process understanding of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake in ESMs. The constraint was
tested for robustness in multiple ways and across different model ensembles.
It was evaluated regionally and globally against CFC measurements, against estimates
of the interior ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> accumulation, and against observation-based
estimates of the air–sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M392" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux globally and regionally. The
constraint demonstrates that the global ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake can be
estimated from three observable variables, the salinity in the
subtropical–polar frontal zone in the Southern Ocean, the Atlantic
Meridional Overturning Circulation, and the global surface ocean Revelle
factor. The uncertainties of the regional ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake estimates
in the Atlantic and Southern Ocean can also be reduced with the respective
regional predictors. Improved or continuing observations of these quantities (Lauvset
et al., 2016; Zweng et al., 2018; Locarnini et al., 2018; Claustre et al.,
2020; McCarthy et al., 2020) and their representation and evaluation in ESMs
and ocean models should therefore be of priority in the next years and
decades. Although biogeochemical variables were tuned or calibrated in more
ESMs in CMIP6 than in CMIP5 (Séférian et al.,
2020), this tuning does not seem to result in better results than in untuned
ESMs yet (Fig. A3).</p>
      <p id="d1e4861">Moreover, biases in these quantities and corrections for the late starting
date may well be the reason for offset between models and observations over
the last 30 years (Hauck et al., 2020;
Friedlingstein et al., 2022). Although the constraints identified here
cannot correct for misrepresentation of the unforced decadal variability,
such variability likely plays a minor role when averaging results over
longer periods. Indeed, we find good agreement between our estimate and the
observation-based estimate from the Global Carbon Budget 2021 for the period
from 1990 to 2020. This agreement suggests that the hindcast models
underestimate the ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M395" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake.  This underestimation is thus likely
the explanation for the difference between models and the observation-based
product in the Global Carbon Budget (Friedlingstein et al.,
2022). However, the output of the Global Carbon Budget hindcast models is
not publicly available for evaluating possible data–model differences for
the inter-frontal sea surface salinity, the AMOC, and the Revelle factor.</p>
      <p id="d1e4875">Despite this step forward in the understanding of ESMs, a comprehensive
research strategy that combines the measurements of important physical,
biogeochemical, and biological parameters in the ocean with other data
streams and modeling is needed. A comprehensive approach is necessary to
improve our still incomplete understanding of the global carbon cycle and
its functioning in the climate and Earth system over the past and under
ongoing global warming.</p>
      <p id="d1e4878">The larger than previously estimated future ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M396" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink
corresponds to around 2 to 4 years of present-day CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10.5 Pg C yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) depending on the emission pathway.
The larger ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M400" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink thus increases the estimated remaining
emission budget but only by a small amount. However, it also results in
enhanced projected ocean acidification that may be harmful for large, unique
ocean ecosystems (Fabry
et al., 2008; Gruber et al., 2012; Kawaguchi et al., 2013; Kroeker et al.,
2013; Doney et al., 2020; Hauri et al., 2021; Terhaar et al., 2021a).</p>
      <p id="d1e4932">This study follows recent approaches by the IPCC and climate science that
suggest using the best available information about models instead of a
multi-model mean to provide consistent and accurate information for climate
science and policy (IPCC, 2021;
Hausfather et al., 2022). The improved estimate provided here of the size of
the global ocean carbon sink may help to close the carbon budget imbalance
from 1850 onwards (Friedlingstein et al., 2022) and to improve the
understanding of the overall carbon cycle and the global climate
(IPCC, 2021). Eventually, a better
understanding of the ocean carbon sink and the reduction of its
uncertainties in the past and in the future will allow better-targeted climate and ocean policies (IPCC, 2022).</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><app-group>

<app id="App1.Ch1.S1">
  <?xmltex \currentcnt{A}?><label>Appendix A</label><title/>
<sec id="App1.Ch1.S1.SS1">
  <label>A1</label><title>Earth system models</title>
      <p id="d1e4952">Model outputs from 18 Earth system models from CMIP6 and 6 Earth system
models from CMIP5 (Table A1) were used for the analyses.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.S1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A1}?><label>Table A1</label><caption><p id="d1e4958">CMIP5 and CMIP6 models used in this study and the corresponding
model groups.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="justify" colwidth="3cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="justify" colwidth="7.5cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="justify" colwidth="6cm"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Model name<inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Modeling center</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">References</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">ACCESS-ESM1-5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Ziehn et al. (2020)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>CanESM2</italic> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CanESM5 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CanESM5-CanOE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Chylek et al. (2011), Christian et al. (2022)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>CESM1-BGC</italic> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CESM2 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>CESM2-WACCM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Community Earth System Model contributors</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Gent et al. (2011), Lindsay et al. (2014), <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>Danabasoglu et al. (2020)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CMCC-ESM2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Centro Euro-Mediterraneo per I Cambiamenti Climatici</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Lovato et al. (2022)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CNRM-ESM2-1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Centre National de Recherches Meteorologiques/Centre Europeen de Recherche et Formation Avancees en Calcul Scientifique</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Séférian et al. (2019)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">EC-Earth3-CC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">EC-Earth consortium</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Döscher et al. (2022)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>GFDL-ESM2M</italic> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>GFDL-CM4 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>GFDL-ESM4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(NOAA GFDL)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Dunne et al. (2012), Held et al. (2019), <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>Dunne et al. (2020), Stock et al. (2020)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">IPSL-CM6A-LR</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace (IPSL)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Boucher et al. (2020)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">MIROC-ES2L</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, Atmosphere and Ocean Research Institute (The University of Tokyo), and National Institute for Environmental Studies</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Hajima et al. (2020)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>MPI-ESM-LR</italic> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?> <italic>MPI-ESM-MR</italic> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>MPI-ESM-1-2-LR <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>MPI-ESM-1-2-HR</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Max-Planck-Institut für Meteorologie <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(Max Planck Institute for Meteorology)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Giorgetta et al. (2013), Mauritsen et al. (2019), Gutjahr et al. (2019)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">MRI-ESM2-0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Meteorological Research Institute <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>(Japan Meteorological Agency)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Yukimoto et al. (2019)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><italic>NorESM1-ME</italic> <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>NorESM2-LM <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?>NorESM2-MM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Norwegian Climate Centre</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Bentsen et al. (2013), Tjiputra et al. (2020)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">UKESM1-0-LL</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Met Office Hadley Centre</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Sellar et al. (2020)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e4961"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M401" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> CMIP5 models are written in italics.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A1</label><caption><p id="d1e5214">Correction of simulated anthropogenic carbon air–sea flux for the
late starting date in Earth system models. <bold>(a)</bold> Multi-model annual mean
anthropogenic carbon (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) air–sea flux for 17 ESMs from CMIP6 before
(dashed lines) and after (solid lines) the correction for the late starting
date over the historical period from 1850 to 2014 (black) and for the future
from 2015 to 2100 under SSP1-2.6 (blue), SSP2-4.5 (orange), and SSP5-8.5
(red). <bold>(b)</bold> Cumulative ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake since 1765 (corrected simulated
flux) and 1850 (raw simulated flux), <bold>(c)</bold> difference between cumulative ocean
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake between corrected and raw simulated flux, and <bold>(d)</bold> the
correction factor that was applied. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M406" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> correction that was
estimated by Bronselaer et al. (2017) is shown in <bold>(c)</bold>. The cumulative
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M407" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake from 1765 to 1850 was set to 12 Pg C as estimated by
Bronselaer et al. (2017).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=441.017717pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/19/4431/2022/bg-19-4431-2022-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.S1.T3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A2}?><label>Table A2</label><caption><p id="d1e5298">Global ocean air–sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M408" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux
estimates based on 17 ESMs from CMIP6 before and after constraint over
different periods with corrected and uncorrected estimates and with and
without CNRM-ESM2-1. Prior uncertainty is the multi-model standard deviation,
and constrained uncertainty is a combination of the multi-model standard
deviation after correction and the uncertainty from the correction itself
(see Sect. 3.1).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Period</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col7" align="center">Cumulative air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M409" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux (Pg C) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1">Raw simulated </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center" colsep="1">Starting-date-corrected </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center">Corrected <inline-formula><mml:math id="M410" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> CNRM-ESM2-1 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Prior</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Constrained</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Prior</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Constrained</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Prior</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Constrained</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1994–2007</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">26.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M411" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">29.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M412" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">28.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M413" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">31.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M414" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">28.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M415" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">31.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M416" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1850–2014</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">138 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M417" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">150 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M418" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">157 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M419" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">171 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M420" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">156 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M421" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">171 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M422" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1850–2020</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">154 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M423" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">167 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M424" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">174 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M425" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">189 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M426" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">173 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M427" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">189 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M428" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2020–2100 (SSP1-2.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">150 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M429" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">167 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M430" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">156 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M431" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">173 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M432" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">156 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M433" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">173 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M434" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2020–2100 (SSP2-4.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">244 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M435" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">269 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M436" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">251 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M437" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">277 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M438" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">251 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M439" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">276 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M440" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2020–2100 (SSP5-8.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">399 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M441" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">436 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M442" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">407 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M443" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">445 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M444" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">405 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M445" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">444 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M446" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e5804">The analyzed variables include the air–sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M447" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux (fgco2, name of the
variable in standardized CMIP output), total dissolved inorganic carbon
(dissic), total alkalinity (talk), total dissolved inorganic silicon (si),
total dissolved inorganic phosphorus (po4), potential temperature (thetao),
salinity (so), and the Atlantic meridional streamfunction (msftmz or
msftyz). All ESMs were included for which the entire set of variables was
available on the website of the Earth System Grid Federation at the start of
the analysis. Based on these variables, all other presented variables were
derived.
<list list-type="bullet"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5818">The air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M448" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux was calculated as the difference in air–sea
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M449" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux between the historical plus future (SSP for CMIP6 and RCP (Representative Concentration Pathway) for
CMIP5) simulation and the corresponding pre-industrial control simulation on
the native model grids (where possible). The air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M450" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes were
corrected for their late starting date in 1850 (and 1861 for GFDL-ESM2M) and
the slightly higher atmospheric CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M451" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing ratio in that year compared
to the beginning of industrialization and the start of the CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M452" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
increase in 1765 (Bronselaer et al., 2017). To that
end, we scaled the simulated air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M453" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux with the anthropogenic
change in the atmospheric partial pressure of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M454" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M455" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M456" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) with
respect to pre-industrial conditions following previous studies (Mikaloff
Fletcher et al., 2006; Gruber et al., 2009; Terhaar et al., 2021b):<disp-formula id="App1.Ch1.S1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>A1</label><mml:math id="M457" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">corr</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1765</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1850</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M458" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> being the simulated air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M459" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux by the
respective ESM in year <inline-formula><mml:math id="M460" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M461" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">corr</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> being the
corrected air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M462" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux. For GFDL-ESM2M, which starts in 1861, the
correction was made with respect to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M463" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M464" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1861</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. When <inline-formula><mml:math id="M465" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M466" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is close to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M467" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M468" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1850</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, their difference becomes
unrealistically large, causing overly strong flux corrections. Therefore, we
limited the flux correction in magnitude using the correction term in the year
1950 as an upper limit. By doing so, we do not only remove unrealistically
high air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M469" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes before 1950 but also reach excellent agreement
with the previously estimated air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M470" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux correction term of
Bronselaer et al. (2017) (Fig. A1). When the cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M471" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes
since 1765 are shown, an additional amount of 12 Pg C (16 Pg C for
GFDL-ESM2M) was added that was estimated to have entered the ocean before
1850 (Bronselaer et al., 2017). For comparison, we
also calculated the constrained estimates for the ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M472" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sink when
no air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M473" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux correction is applied (Table A2). Bronselaer et al. (2017) estimate the uncertainty of the correction to be <inline-formula><mml:math id="M474" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 16 % for
cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M475" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes from 1765 to 1995. Although uncertainties reduce
over time, we apply the 16 % from the past to all estimates and hence
provide a conservative upper bound of this uncertainty.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e6204">Accordingly, the change in ocean interior <inline-formula><mml:math id="M476" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was calculated as the
difference in total dissolved inorganic carbon between the historical plus
future (SSP/RCP) simulation and the corresponding pre-industrial control
simulation on the native model grids (where possible).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e6219">The change in air–sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M477" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux that is caused by a changing climate was
calculated as the difference in fgco2 in the historical simulation and the
“bgc” simulation in which only atmospheric CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M478" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> changes but not the
climate. These “bgc” simulations were available for five ESMs (Table A3).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e6241">The surface ocean Revelle factor was calculated from sea surface total
dissolved inorganic carbon (dissic), total alkalinity (talk), total
dissolved inorganic silicon (si), total dissolved inorganic phosphorus
(po4), potential temperature (thetao), and salinity (so) averaged around the
year 2002 (from 1997 to 2007 for CMIP6 and 1999 to 2005 for CMIP5; 2005 is
the last year of the historical simulation) using <italic>mocsy2.0</italic> (Orr and Epitalon,
2015) with its default constants that are recommended for best
practice (Dickson et al., 2007). The years were centered around
2002 to make the Revelle factor comparable to the one estimated based on
GLODAPv2, which is normalized to the year 2002 (Lauvset et
al., 2016). As the Revelle factor describes the relative change in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M479" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
per relative change in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M480" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M481" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> (Revelle and
Suess, 1957), the absolute uptake of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M482" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> does not only depend on the
Revelle factor but also on the natural <inline-formula><mml:math id="M483" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the surface ocean. To
calculate the buffer capacity for each ESM, the Revelle factor was therefore
adjusted in each grid cell by multiplying it by the ratio of observed
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M484" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the simulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M485" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in each ESM separately. Data from each ESM
were regridded on a regular 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M486" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M487" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M488" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> grid to make them
comparable to the gridded GLODAPv2 data. Furthermore, a mask was applied
before the basin-wide-averaged Revelle factor was calculated so that only those
values were used for which all ESMs and the gridded GLODAPv2 product had data.
In addition, marginal seas (Mediterranean Sea, Hudson Bay, Baltic Sea) were
excluded because global ESMs are not designed to accurately represent these
small-scale seas. In addition, the surface ocean carbonate ion
(CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M489" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) concentration was calculated so that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M490" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-adjusted
Revelle factor is mainly determined by the CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M491" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations,
which itself can be approximated by the difference between surface ocean
alkalinity and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M492" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. A2).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e6398">The monthly AMOC strength was calculated as the maximum of the
streamfunction below 500 m at the latitude in the respective model that is
closest to 26.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M493" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N for each month from 2004 to 2020. After 2014,
simulated outputs from SSP5-8.5 and RCP4.5 were used as all ESMs provided
output for these pathways. For SSP5-8.5, the mole fraction of atmospheric
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M494" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in SSP5-8.5 is 414.9 ppm in 2020 (Meinshausen et
al., 2020), 2.5 ppm over the observed mole fraction of atmospheric CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M495" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in 2020 (NOAA/GML, 2022). For RCP4.5, the mole fraction of atmospheric CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M496" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is 412.4 ppm in 2020. Such small differences in the mole fraction of atmospheric
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M497" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> do not cause detectable changes in global warming or the AMOC
(IPCC, 2021).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e6447">Future saturation states of aragonite were calculated from simulated changes
in total dissolved inorganic carbon (dissic), total alkalinity (talk), total
dissolved inorganic silicon (si), total dissolved inorganic phosphorus
(po4), potential temperature (thetao), and salinity (so) since 2002 that are
added to the respective observed variables from the gridded GLODAPv2
product, which are normalized to 2002, using <italic>mocsy2.0</italic> (Orr and Epitalon, 2015) with
its default constants that are recommended for best practice
(Dickson et al., 2007). By only adding simulated differences,
model uncertainties in the initial state of the ocean biogeochemical system
in the deeper ocean are removed (Orr et al., 2005;
Terhaar et al., 2020a, 2021a, b). All variables were regridded before on a
regular 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M498" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M499" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M500" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> grid so that they could be added to the
gridded GLODAPv2 data. The same mask that was also used to compare the
Revelle factor was applied to make all projections comparable.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e6479">The annual average sea surface salinity between the polar and subtropical
front in the Southern Ocean was derived from regridded (1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M501" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M502" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M503" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> regular grid) monthly sea surface salinity and temperatures
(for defining the fronts) following Terhaar et al. (2021b).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e6508">The area of weakly stratified waters was calculated based on climatologies
of the potential temperature and salinity from 1995 to 2014 (Hess,
2022). All data were regridded on a regular 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M504" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M505" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M506" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> grid
with 33 depth levels before analysis. An area was defined as weakly
stratified if the density gradient between the surface and the cell at 1000 m depth was smaller than 0.5 kg m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M507" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in a given month, assuming that
such a small monthly mean gradient allows mixing of water into the lower
limb of the AMOC at some time in that month. This predictor, as well as the
different ways of calculating the Revelle factor predictor (see Sect. 5, “Robustness of the emergent constraint and possible impact of changing
riverine carbon input over time”), was used to test the robustness of the
emergent constraint identified here (Table A4).</p></list-item></list>
The model CNRM-ESM2-1 was not used for the constraints because it includes
dynamical riverine forcing that no other model includes (Fig. A4) and is
not directly comparable. Instead, output from this ESM was prominently used
in the section “Robustness of the emergent constraint and possible impact
of changing riverine carbon input over time”. However, even if CNRM-ESM2-1
had been included, the results would change by less than 1 % (Table A2).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.S1.T4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A3}?><label>Table A3</label><caption><p id="d1e6552">Climate-driven changes in the air–sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M508" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux (Pg C yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M509" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) as simulated by five Earth
system models from CMIP6.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="8">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Year</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col8" align="center">Climate-driven changes in the cumulative air–sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M510" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux (Pg C) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">ACCESS-</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">CanESM5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">MIROC-ES2L</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">MRI-ESM2-0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">NorESM2-LM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Multi-model</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Multi-model</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">ESM1-5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">standard</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">deviation</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1994–2007</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M511" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M512" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M513" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M514" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M515" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M516" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A2</label><caption><p id="d1e6771">Surface ocean Revelle factor against the difference of surface
alkalinity and dissolved inorganic carbon, as well as against surface carbonate ion
concentrations. Basin-wide-averaged surface ocean Revelle factor as
simulated by 18 ESMs from CMIP6 (blue dots) against the basin-wide-averaged
surface ocean <bold>(a)</bold> difference between total alkalinity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M517" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M518" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <bold>(b)</bold> carbonate ion (CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M519" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) concentrations. The
observation-based estimates from GLODAPv2 are shown as black crosses. The
Revelle factor in each ESM was adjusted for biases in the surface ocean
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M520" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (see Sect. A1).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/19/4431/2022/bg-19-4431-2022-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A3</label><caption><p id="d1e6838">Surface ocean Revelle factor against the surface alkalinity and
dissolved inorganic carbon. Basin-wide-averaged surface ocean Revelle factor
as simulated by 18 ESMs from CMIP6 (blue dots) against the basin-wide-averaged surface ocean <bold>(a)</bold> total alkalinity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M521" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and <bold>(b)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M522" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The
observation-based estimates from GLODAPv2 are shown as black crosses. The
Revelle factor in each ESM was adjusted for biases in the surface ocean
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M523" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (see Sect. A1).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/19/4431/2022/bg-19-4431-2022-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.S1.T5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A4}?><label>Table A4</label><caption><p id="d1e6889">Constrained global ocean air–sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M524" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux estimates based on 17 ESMs from CMIP6 with varying
predictors.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Period</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col5" align="center">Cumulative air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M525" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux (Pg C) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Standard</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center">Revelle factor </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Area of weakly</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">stratified water column</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="M526" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">45</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M527" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M528" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">45</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M529" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Flux-weighted</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1994–2007</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">31.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M530" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.9 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M531" 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">0.87</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M532" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.1 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M533" 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">0.80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">31.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M534" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.0 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M535" 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">0.83</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">31.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M536" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.1 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M537" 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">0.78</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1850–2014</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">171 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M538" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M539" 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">0.80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">172 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M540" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M541" 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">0.65</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">173 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M542" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M543" 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">0.73</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">171 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M544" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M545" 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">0.74</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1850–2020</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">189 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M546" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M547" 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">0.80</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">190 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M548" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M549" 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">0.64</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">191 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M550" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M551" 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">0.72</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">189 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M552" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M553" 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">0.73</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2020–2100 (SSP1-2.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">173 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M554" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M555" 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">0.56</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">173 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M556" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M557" 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">0.56</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">172 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M558" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M559" 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">0.55</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">171 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M560" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 8 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M561" 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">0.53</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2020–2100 (SSP2-4.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">277 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M562" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M563" 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">0.74</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">278 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M564" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M565" 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">0.71</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">277 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M566" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M567" 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">0.71</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">274 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M568" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 9 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M569" 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">0.72</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2020–2100 (SSP5-8.5)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">445 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M570" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M571" 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">0.87</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">450 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M572" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 13 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M573" 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">0.83</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">449 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M574" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M575" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.84</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">442 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M576" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 12 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M577" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.84</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A4</label><caption><p id="d1e7660">Anthropogenic carbon air–sea fluxes and inventory changes
simulated by CNRM-ESM2-1. <bold>(a)</bold> Cumulative air–sea anthropogenic carbon
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M578" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) fluxes (solid lines) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M579" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> interior changes (dashed lines)
as simulated by CNRM-ESM2-1 for the historic period until 2014 (black) and
from 2015 to 2100 under SSP1-2.6 (blue), SSP2-4.5 (orange), and SSP5-8.5
(red), <bold>(b)</bold> as well as the difference of both quantities. The thin dashed
black line in <bold>(b)</bold> indicates zero difference.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/19/4431/2022/bg-19-4431-2022-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="App1.Ch1.S1.SS2">
  <label>A2</label><title>Observations and observation-based products</title>
      <p id="d1e7708">Throughout this paper, three observation-based products are used to
constrain the ESM output.</p>
      <p id="d1e7711">Monthly climatologies of sea surface salinity and sea surface temperatures
from the World Ocean Atlas 2018 (Zweng et
al., 2018; Locarnini et al., 2018) were used to derive annual averages and
uncertainties of the sea surface salinity between the polar and subtropical
fronts in the Southern Ocean following Terhaar et al. (2021b). Climatologies
of the World Ocean Atlas 2018 were also used to calculate the area of weakly
stratified surface waters.</p>
      <p id="d1e7714">Time series of the AMOC strength from the RAPID array
(McCarthy et al., 2020) were used to calculate monthly
means and uncertainties of the AMOC from 2004 to 2020.</p>
      <p id="d1e7717">The gridded observation-based estimates of total dissolved inorganic carbon,
total alkalinity, total dissolved inorganic silicon, total dissolved
inorganic phosphorus, in situ temperature, and salinity from GLODAPv2
(Lauvset et al., 2016) were used to calculate the Revelle
factor and acted as a starting point for projected saturation states over the
21st century (see above).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="App1.Ch1.S1.SS3">
  <label>A3</label><title>Validation of the identified constraint in CMIP5</title>
      <p id="d1e7728">The emergent constraint identified here was derived from an ensemble of 17
ESMs from CMIP6. To test the robustness of emergent constraints, these
constraints should be validated in an independent ensemble of ESMs
(Hall et al., 2019). Here, we used all six ESMs from
CMIP5, which provided all necessary output variables for this analysis (see
Sect. A1). For all these models, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M580" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake for the period from
1994 to 2007 and from 1850 to 2014 was predicted based on the simulated
inter-frontal sea surface salinity in the Southern Ocean, the AMOC strength,
and the global ocean basin-wide-averaged Revelle factor using the
multi-linear relationship derived from the CMIP6 models (Fig. A5).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A5</label><caption><p id="d1e7744">Global ocean anthropogenic carbon uptake simulated by
Earth system models from CMIP5 against the predicted uptake based on
simulated predictors from CMIP6 models. Global ocean anthropogenic carbon
uptake simulated by six ESMs from CMIP5 (Table A1) <bold>(a)</bold> from 1994 to
2007 and <bold>(b)</bold> from 1850 to 2014 against the predicted anthropogenic
carbon uptake based on the simulated CMIP6 predictors in each ESM: the
inter-frontal annual mean sea surface salinity in the Southern Ocean, the
Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, and the Revelle factor adjusted
for surface ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M581" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Please note that two ESMs are at almost the same
place in <bold>(a)</bold> with a predicted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M582" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake of around 31 Pg C.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/19/4431/2022/bg-19-4431-2022-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="App1.Ch1.S1.SS4">
  <label>A4</label><title>Comparison between simulated and observed CFC-11 concentrations</title>
      <p id="d1e7792">Comparison between simulated and observed CFC-11 uptake can be used to estimate
the ventilation of waters from the surface waters to the deeper ocean (Hall et al., 2002). Although CFCs can
roughly evaluate the ventilation rate of the ocean, no perfect agreement
between CFCs and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M583" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> can be expected as CFCs are not taken up at the
same speed as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M584" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (i.e., fast air–sea equilibration timescale for CFC),
and their solubility has a different temperature dependency than the
solubility of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M585" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (warm waters can hold less CFCs but more
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M586" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> due to their low Revelle factor, whereas cold waters hold more CFCs
but less <inline-formula><mml:math id="M587" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Revelle and
Suess, 1957; Broecker and Peng, 1974; Weiss, 1974). These differences can
lead to differences between uptake, storage, and distribution of CFCs and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M588" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> that can become especially large in high-latitude oceans
(Matear et al., 2003; Terhaar et
al., 2020b).</p>
      <p id="d1e7862">Here, we use simulated CFC-11 from ESMs and observed CFC-11 from
GLODAPv2.2021 (Lauvset et al., 2021) to provide further
evidence that the inter-frontal sea surface salinity in the Southern Ocean
and the AMOC are good indicators of the ocean ventilation and that ESMs
tend to underestimate the ventilation of surface waters to the deeper ocean.
Out of the 18 ESMs from CMIP6, 10 provided simulated three-dimensional fields of CFC-11
(CanESM5, CESM2, CESM2-WACCM, EC-Earth-CC, GFDL-CM4, GFDL-ESM4, MRI-ESM2-0,
NorESM2-LM, NorESM2-MM, UKESM1-0-LL). To compare these ESMs to the observed
concentrations, all ESMs were sampled at the same time (month and year), the
same latitude and longitude, and the same depth as the observations. To
assess the ventilation below the mixed layer, we only used observations
below 200 m. Furthermore, we limited our assessment to observations until
2004 as CFC-11 in the atmosphere peaked in 1994
(Bullister, 2017), and subducted waters since then
might already re-emerge to the surface. Thus, 506 000 measurements remained.
As these measurements are not equally distributed and strongly clustered in
the Northern Hemisphere (Lauvset et al., 2021), we mapped all
measurements on a regular 5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M589" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M590" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M591" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> grid with 11 depth
levels from 200 to 6000 m that increase with depth. In each cell on the
grid the average bias was calculated. Afterwards, the volume-averaged bias
was calculated for the Southern Hemisphere and the North Atlantic (limited
by the Equator and 65<inline-formula><mml:math id="M592" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N) (Fig. A6).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A6</label><caption><p id="d1e7901">Biases in subsurface CFC-11 concentrations between observations
against the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation and the
inter-frontal Southern Ocean salinity. Basin-wide-averaged biases in CFC-11
concentrations (observations minus simulated) below 200 m for all 10 ESMs
that provided simulated CFC-11 (blue dots) <bold>(a)</bold> in the North Atlantic Ocean
(north of the Equator and limited by the Fram Strait, the Barents Sea
Opening, and Baffin Bay) and against the AMOC and <bold>(b)</bold> in the Southern
Hemisphere (south of the Equator) against the inter-frontal annual mean sea
surface salinity in the Southern Ocean. The observation-based estimates for
the AMOC and the inter-frontal annual mean sea surface salinity in the
Southern Ocean are shown as black crosses and with zero bias in CFC-11.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/19/4431/2022/bg-19-4431-2022-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="App1.Ch1.S1.SS5">
  <label>A5</label><?xmltex \opttitle{Comparison between simulated and observation-based estimates of the interior ocean $C_{\mathrm{ant}}$ accumulation}?><title>Comparison between simulated and observation-based estimates of the interior ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M593" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> accumulation</title>
      <p id="d1e7937">Another way to test the emergent constraint identified here is the
comparison to observation-based estimates of the interior ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M594" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
accumulation. Here, we compare model results against the estimate for
interior ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M595" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> accumulation from 1800 to 1994
(Sabine et al., 2004) and from 1994 to 2007
(Gruber et al., 2019a), although different
reconstruction methods yield different results (e.g., Khatiwala et al.,
2013, their Fig. 4). While a good representation of the interior ocean
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M596" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> distribution is not necessarily related to a correct estimate of
the air–sea <inline-formula><mml:math id="M597" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux, it can provide an indication of the model
performance and the robustness of the applied corrections. For both
comparisons, we compare the multi-model mean and standard deviation and
results from the ESM that represent best the three observational predictors
(i.e., GFDL-ESM4). GFDL-ESM4 has a global ocean Revelle factor of 10.37, an
inter-frontal sea surface salinity of 34.00, and an AMOC of 18.25. The
biases that may exist in the multi-model mean, such as relatively little  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M598" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
in the Southern Hemisphere due to a multi-model-averaged sea surface
salinity that is too low compared to observed sea surface salinities, should be smaller for GFDL-ESM4.</p>
      <p id="d1e7995">The comparison to the observation-based estimate of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M599" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> accumulation
from 1800 to 1994 (Sabine et al., 2004) demonstrates that
the ESMs represent the distribution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M600" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the ocean between the
basins and different latitudinal regions well (Table A5). Small
underestimations exist in the Indian and Atlantic tropical oceans, as well as
in the southern subpolar Atlantic Ocean. The differences in the Indian Ocean
may well be to observational uncertainties that are especially large in this
relatively under-sampled ocean basin (Sabine
et al., 2004; Gruber et al., 2019a). The underestimation in the Southern
Atlantic and the Atlantic sector of the Southern Ocean are consistent with
an underestimation of the formation of mode and intermediate waters in the
Southern Ocean due to a sea surface salinity that is too low. This underestimation
is strongly reduced in the GFDL-ESM4 model (Table A6), indicating that the
better representation of the inter-frontal sea surface salinity in the
Southern Ocean also improves the simulated distribution of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M601" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the
ocean. Furthermore, GFDL-ESM4 also simulates slightly higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M602" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in
the North Atlantic, consistent with its AMOC being slightly too high.</p>
      <p id="d1e8042">The comparison for the period from 1994 to 2007 also indicates that the ESMs
on average simulate the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M603" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> interior storage pattern as estimated
based on observations of Gruber et al. (2019a) (Table A7). The ESMs agree with the observation-based estimates with respect to the
basin and hemispheric distribution. However, they underestimate on average
the storage in the Southern Hemisphere in line with the underestimation of
the formation of intermediate and mode waters in the Southern Ocean. When
only considering GFDL-ESM4 (Table A8), this underestimation is reduced, and
all other regions show very good agreement.</p>
      <p id="d1e8057">The remaining small difference in both comparisons may be also due to different
alignments of the basin boundaries, an unknown distribution of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M604" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
that entered the ocean before 1850 and has been advected 50 years longer in
the ocean interior in the case of Sabine et al. (2004), a different decadal
variability in GFDL-ESM4 than in the real world in the case of Gruber et al. (2019a), and uncertainties in the observation-based estimates. Despite all
these potential pitfalls, the three-dimensional repartition of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M605" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> between
observation-based products and ESMs agree, and the model that best simulates
the three key predictors, GFDL-ESM4, is almost identical to the
observation-based estimates.</p><?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?><?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.S1.T6"><?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?><?xmltex \currentcnt{A5}?><label>Table A5</label><caption><p id="d1e8086">Distribution of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M606" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inventories (in Pg C) by basin
and latitude band for 1994. The first number in each cell is the multi-model
mean and standard deviation across all 18 ESMs from CMIP6, and the second
number is from Table S1 in Sabine et al. (2004).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.95}[.95]?><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Atlantic</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Pacific</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Indian</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">World</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">50–65<inline-formula><mml:math id="M607" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M608" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1/4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M609" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0/1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">/</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M610" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1/5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">14–50<inline-formula><mml:math id="M611" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">14 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M612" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3/16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">11 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M613" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1/11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M614" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0/1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">27 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M615" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3/28</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">14<inline-formula><mml:math id="M616" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S–14<inline-formula><mml:math id="M617" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M618" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1/7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M619" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2/8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M620" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1/6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">17 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M621" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3/21</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">14–50<inline-formula><mml:math id="M622" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M623" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2/11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">17 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M624" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3/18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M625" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2/13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">39 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M626" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6/42</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M627" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M628" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M629" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1/2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M630" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1/6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M631" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1/2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">11 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M632" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3/10</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Total</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">33 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M633" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6/40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">43 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M634" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 5/44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">22 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M635" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3/22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">102 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M636" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 13/106</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.S1.T7"><?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?><?xmltex \currentcnt{A6}?><label>Table A6</label><caption><p id="d1e8475">Distribution of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M637" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inventories (in Pg C) by basin
and latitude band for 1994. The first number in each cell is derived from
GFDL-ESM4, and the second number is from Table S1 in Sabine et al. (2004).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Atlantic</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Pacific</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Indian</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">World</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">50–65<inline-formula><mml:math id="M638" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6/4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1/1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">/</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">7/5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">14–50<inline-formula><mml:math id="M639" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">18/16</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">12/11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1/1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">31/28</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">14<inline-formula><mml:math id="M640" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S–14<inline-formula><mml:math id="M641" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5/7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">11/8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5/6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">21/21</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">14–50<inline-formula><mml:math id="M642" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">9/11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">20/18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15 /13</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">44/42</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M643" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula><inline-formula><mml:math id="M644" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5/2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6/6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3/2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">14/10</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Total</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">45/40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">49/44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">23/22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">117/106</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.S1.T8"><?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?><?xmltex \currentcnt{A7}?><label>Table A7</label><caption><p id="d1e8703">Distribution of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M645" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inventories (in Pg C) by basin
and hemisphere from 1994 to 2007. The first number in each cell is
the multi-model mean and standard deviation across all 18 ESMs from CMIP6,
and the second number is from Table 1 in Gruber et al. (2019a).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Atlantic</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Pacific</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Indian</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Other basins</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Global</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Northern Hemisphere</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M646" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.0/6.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M647" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M648" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.0/5.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M649" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M650" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.4/0.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M651" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M652" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.3/1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M653" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.6 <?xmltex \hack{\hfill\break}?></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">13.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M654" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.8/13.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M655" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Southern Hemisphere</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M656" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.0/5.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M657" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">7.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M658" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.0/8.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M659" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M660" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.3/6.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M661" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">/</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">16.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M662" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2.1/20.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M663" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.8</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Entire basin</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M664" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.5/11.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M665" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">12 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M666" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1/13.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M667" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M668" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.5/7.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M669" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M670" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.3/1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M671" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">29.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M672" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.2/33.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M673" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.S1.T9"><?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?><?xmltex \currentcnt{A8}?><label>Table A8</label><caption><p id="d1e9030">Distribution of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M674" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ant</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inventories (in Pg C) by basin
and hemisphere from 1994 to 2007. The first number in each cell is derived
from GFDL-ESM4, and the second number is from Table 1 in Gruber et al. (2019a).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Atlantic</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Pacific</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Indian</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Other basins</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Global</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Northern Hemisphere</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6.6/6.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M675" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.1/5.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M676" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.9/0.8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M677" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.6 /1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M678" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">14.2/13.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M679" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Southern Hemisphere</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4.6/5.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M680" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">7.9/8.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M681" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">7.7/6.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M682" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">/</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">20.2/20.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M683" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.8</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Entire basin</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">11.2/11.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M684" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">13 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M685" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0/13.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M686" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">8.6/7.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M687" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 3.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">1.6/1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M688" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">34.4/33.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M689" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?>
</sec>
</app>
  </app-group><notes notes-type="codeavailability"><title>Code availability</title>

      <p id="d1e9267">The mocsy2.0 code is publicly available via <uri>https://github.com/jamesorr/mocsy</uri> (Orr and Epitalon, 2015).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e9276">The Earth system model output used in this study
is available via the Earth System Grid Federation (<uri>https://esgf-node.ipsl.upmc.fr/projects/esgf-ipsl/</uri>, last access: 1 June 2022). For
further information, please see Table A1.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e9285">JT was responsible for conceptualization, methodology, software, investigation, visualization, and writing the original draft. TLF and FJ were responsible for funding acquisition. TLF and FJ were responsible for project administration. JT, TLF, and FJ were responsible for writing, review, and editing.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e9291">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="d1e9297">The work reflects only the authors' view; the European
Commission and their executive agency are not responsible for any use that
may be made of the information the work contains.
<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e9306">This work was funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and
innovation program under grant agreement no. 821003 (project 4C,
Climate–Carbon Interactions in the Current Century) (Jens Terhaar, Thomas L. Frölicher, Fortunat Joos) and no.
820989 (project COMFORT, Our common future ocean in the Earth
system-quantifying coupled cycles of carbon, oxygen and nutrients for
determining and achieving safe operating spaces with respect to tipping
points) (Thomas L. Frölicher, Fortunat Joos), as well as by the Swiss National Science Foundation under grant
PP00P2_198897 (Thomas L. Frölicher) and grant #200020_200511 (Jens Terhaar, Fortunat Joos).  We also thank Donat Hess
for his work on the North Atlantic anthropogenic carbon uptake during his
master thesis at our institute, as well as Friedrich Burger, Nadine Goris,
and Jens Müller for discussions. We also thank one anonymous reviewer
and Roland Séférian for their careful and helpful assessment of our
manuscript  and Jack Middelburg for his efficient editorial handling.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e9312">This research has been supported by the Horizon 2020 (4C (grant no. 821003) and COMFORT (grant no. 820989)) and the Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (grant nos. 200020_200511 and PP00P2_198897).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e9318">This paper was edited by Jack Middelburg and reviewed by Roland Séférian and one anonymous referee.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Albright, R., Caldeira, L., Hosfelt, J., Kwiatkowski, L., Maclaren, J. K.,
Mason, B. M., Nebuchina, Y., Ninokawa, A., Pongratz, J., Ricke, K. L.,
Rivlin, T., Schneider, K., Sesboüé, M., Shamberger, K., Silverman,
J., Wolfe, K., Zhu, K., and Caldeira, K.: Reversal of ocean acidification
enhances net coral reef calcification, Nature, 531, 362–365,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17155" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nature17155</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Aumont, O., Orr, J. C., Monfray, P., Ludwig, W., Amiotte-Suchet, P., and
Probst, J.-L.: Riverine-driven interhemispheric transport of carbon, Global
Biogeochem. Cy., 15, 393–405,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999GB001238" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/1999GB001238</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bakker, P., Schmittner, A., Lenaerts, J. T. M., Abe-Ouchi, A., Bi, D., van
den Broeke, M. R., Chan, W.-L., Hu, A., Beadling, R. L., Marsland, S. J.,
Mernild, S. H., Saenko, O. A., Swingedouw, D., Sullivan, A., and Yin, J.:
Fate of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation: Strong decline
under continued warming and Greenland melting, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43,
12252–12260, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070457" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016GL070457</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bednaršek, N., Tarling, G. A., Bakker, D. C. E., Fielding, S., and
Feely, R. A.: Dissolution Dominating Calcification Process in Polar
Pteropods Close to the Point of Aragonite Undersaturation, PLoS One, 9, e109183,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0109183" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1371/journal.pone.0109183</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Behrenfeld, M. J., Gaube, P., Della Penna, A., O'Malley, R. T., Burt, W. J.,
Hu, Y., Bontempi, P. S., Steinberg, D. K., Boss, E. S., Siegel, D. A.,
Hostetler, C. A., Tortell, P. D., and Doney, S. C.: Global
satellite-observed daily vertical migrations of ocean animals, Nature, 576,
257–261, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1796-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41586-019-1796-9</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bennington, V., Gloege, L., and McKinley, G. A.: Variability in the global ocean carbon sink from 1959 to 2020 by correcting models with observations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 49, e2022GL098632, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GL098632" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2022GL098632</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bentsen, M., Bethke, I., Debernard, J. B., Iversen, T., Kirkevåg, A., Seland, Ø., Drange, H., Roelandt, C., Seierstad, I. A., Hoose, C., and Kristjánsson, J. E.: The Norwegian Earth System Model, NorESM1-M – Part 1: Description and basic evaluation of the physical climate, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 687–720, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-687-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-6-687-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Boucher, O., Servonnat, J., Albright, A. L., Aumont, O., Balkanski, Y.,
Bastrikov, V., Bekki, S., Bonnet, R., Bony, S., Bopp, L., Braconnot, P.,
Brockmann, P., Cadule, P., Caubel, A., Cheruy, F., Codron, F., Cozic, A.,
Cugnet, D., D'Andrea, F., Davini, P., de Lavergne, C., Denvil, S., Deshayes,
J., Devilliers, M., Ducharne, A., Dufresne, J.-L., Dupont, E., Éthé,
C., Fairhead, L., Falletti, L., Flavoni, S., Foujols, M.-A., Gardoll, S.,
Gastineau, G., Ghattas, J., Grandpeix, J.-Y., Guenet, B., Guez E., L.,
Guilyardi, E., Guimberteau, M., Hauglustaine, D., Hourdin, F., Idelkadi, A.,
Joussaume, S., Kageyama, M., Khodri, M., Krinner, G., Lebas, N.,
Levavasseur, G., Lévy, C., Li, L., Lott, F., Lurton, T., Luyssaert, S.,
Madec, G., Madeleine, J.-B., Maignan, F., Marchand, M., Marti, O., Mellul,
L., Meurdesoif, Y., Mignot, J., Musat, I., Ottlé, C., Peylin, P.,
Planton, Y., Polcher, J., Rio, C., Rochetin, N., Rousset, C., Sepulchre, P.,
Sima, A., Swingedouw, D., Thiéblemont, R., Traore, A. K., Vancoppenolle,
M., Vial, J., Vialard, J., Viovy, N., and Vuichard, N.: Presentation and
Evaluation of the IPSL-CM6A-LR Climate Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy.,
12, e2019MS002010, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019MS002010</ext-link>,
2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bourgeois, T., Goris, N., Schwinger, J., and Tjiputra, J. F.: Stratification
constrains future heat and carbon uptake in the Southern Ocean between
30<inline-formula><mml:math id="M690" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S and 55<inline-formula><mml:math id="M691" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S, Nat. Commun., 13, 340,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-27979-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-022-27979-5</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Brient, F.: Reducing Uncertainties in Climate Projections with Emergent
Constraints: Concepts, Examples and Prospects, Adv. Atmos. Sci., 37, 1–15,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-019-9140-8" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00376-019-9140-8</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Broecker, W. S. and Peng, T.-H.: Gas exchange rates between air and sea,
Tellus, 26, 21–35, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1974.tb01948.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.2153-3490.1974.tb01948.x</ext-link>, 1974.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bronselaer, B., Winton, M., Russell, J., Sabine, C. L., and Khatiwala, S.:
Agreement of CMIP5 Simulated and Observed Ocean Anthropogenic CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M692" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>
Uptake, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44,  212–298,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074435" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017GL074435</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Brown, P. J., McDonagh, E. L., Sanders, R., Watson, A. J., Wanninkhof, R.,
King, B. A., Smeed, D. A., Baringer, M. O., Meinen, C. S., Schuster, U.,
Yool, A., and Messias, M.-J.: Circulation-driven variability of Atlantic
anthropogenic carbon transports and uptake, Nat. Geosci., 14, 571–577,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00774-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41561-021-00774-5</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Buckley, M. W. and Marshall, J.: Observations, inferences, and mechanisms of
the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation: A review, Rev. Geophys.,
54, 5–63, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015RG000493" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015RG000493</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bullister, J. L.: Atmospheric Histories (1765–2015) for CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-113, CCl4, SF6 and N2O (NCEI Accession 0164584), NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3334/CDIAC/otg.CFC_ATM_Hist_2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3334/CDIAC/otg.CFC_ATM_Hist_2015</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bushinsky, S. M., Landschützer, P., Rödenbeck, C., Gray, A. R.,
Baker, D., Mazloff, M. R., Resplandy, L., Johnson, K. S., and Sarmiento, J.
L.: Reassessing Southern Ocean Air-Sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M693" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> Flux Estimates With the
Addition of Biogeochemical Float Observations, Global Biogeochem. Cy.,
33, 1370–1388, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GB006176" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019GB006176</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Caldeira, K. and Duffy, P. B.: The Role of the Southern Ocean in Uptake and
Storage of Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide, Science, 287, 620–622,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.287.5453.620" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.287.5453.620</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Caldwell, P. M., Bretherton, C. S., Zelinka, M. D., Klein, S. A., Santer, B.
D., and Sanderson, B. M.: Statistical significance of climate sensitivity
predictors obtained by data mining, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 1803–1808,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL059205" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2014GL059205</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Canadell, J. G.,  Monteiro, P. M. S., Costa, M. H.,  Cotrim da Cunha, L., Cox, P. M.,  Eliseev, A. V., Henson,  S., Ishii,  M., Jaccard,  S.,
Koven, C., Lohila,  A., Patra, P. K., Piao,  S., Rogelj,  J., Syampungani,  S., Zaehle,  S., and Zickfeld, K.: Global Carbon and
other Biogeochemical Cycles and Feedbacks. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of
Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte,
V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K.,
Lonnoy,E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou,  B., Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA,  673–816, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/9781009157896.007</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chau, T. T. T., Gehlen, M., and Chevallier, F.: A seamless ensemble-based
reconstruction of surface ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M694" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M695" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and air–sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M696" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes over
the global coastal and open oceans, Biogeosciences, 19, 1087–1109,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-1087-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-19-1087-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Christian, J. R., Denman, K. L., Hayashida, H., Holdsworth, A. M., Lee, W. G., Riche, O. G. J., Shao, A. E., Steiner, N., and Swart, N. C.: Ocean biogeochemistry in the Canadian Earth System Model version 5.0.3: CanESM5 and CanESM5-CanOE, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 4393–4424, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4393-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-15-4393-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Chylek, P., Li, J., Dubey, M. K., Wang, M., and Lesins, G.: Observed and model simulated 20th century Arctic temperature variability: Canadian Earth System Model CanESM2, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 11, 22893–22907, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-11-22893-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acpd-11-22893-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Claustre, H., Johnson, K. S., and Takeshita, Y.: Observing the Global Ocean
with Biogeochemical-Argo, Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci., 12, 23–48,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-marine-010419-010956" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1146/annurev-marine-010419-010956</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Clement, D. and Gruber, N.: The eMLR(C<inline-formula><mml:math id="M697" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) Method to Determine Decadal Changes
in the Global Ocean Storage of Anthropogenic CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M698" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, Global Biogeochem.
Cy., 32, 654–679, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GB005819" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017GB005819</ext-link>,
2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Danabasoglu, G., Lamarque, J.-F., Bacmeister, J., Bailey, D. A., DuVivier,
A. K., Edwards, J., Emmons, L. K., Fasullo, J., Garcia, R., Gettelman, A.,
Hannay, C., Holland, M. M., Large, W. G., Lauritzen, P. H., Lawrence, D. M.,
Lenaerts, J. T. M., Lindsay, K., Lipscomb, W. H., Mills, M. J., Neale, R.,
Oleson, K. W., Otto-Bliesner, B., Phillips, A. S., Sacks, W., Tilmes, S.,
van Kampenhout, L., Vertenstein, M., Bertini, A., Dennis, J., Deser, C.,
Fischer, C., Fox-Kemper, B., Kay, J. E., Kinnison, D., Kushner, P. J.,
Larson, V. E., Long, M. C., Mickelson, S., Moore, J. K., Nienhouse, E.,
Polvani, L., Rasch, P. J., and Strand, W. G.: The Community Earth System
Model Version 2 (CESM2), J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001916,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001916" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019MS001916</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>DeVries, T.: The oceanic anthropogenic CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M699" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> sink: Storage, air-sea
fluxes, and transports over the industrial era, Global Biogeochem. Cy.,
28, 631–647, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GB004739" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013GB004739</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dickson, A. G., Sabine, C. L., and Christian, J. R. (Eds.):
Guide to Best Practices for Ocean CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M700" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> Measurements,
PICES Special Publication 3, 191 pp., North Pacific Marine Science Organization
Sidney, British Columbia, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.25607/OBP-1342" ext-link-type="DOI">10.25607/OBP-1342</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Doney, S. C., Busch, D. S., Cooley, S. R., and Kroeker, K. J.: The Impacts
of Ocean Acidification on Marine Ecosystems and Reliant Human Communities,
Annu. Rev. Env. Resour., 45, 83–112,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-012320-083019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1146/annurev-environ-012320-083019</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Döscher, R., Acosta, M., Alessandri, A., Anthoni, P., Arsouze, T., Bergman, T., Bernardello, R., Boussetta, S., Caron, L.-P., Carver, G., Castrillo, M., Catalano, F., Cvijanovic, I., Davini, P., Dekker, E., Doblas-Reyes, F. J., Docquier, D., Echevarria, P., Fladrich, U., Fuentes-Franco, R., Gröger, M., v. Hardenberg, J., Hieronymus, J., Karami, M. P., Keskinen, J.-P., Koenigk, T., Makkonen, R., Massonnet, F., Ménégoz, M., Miller, P. A., Moreno-Chamarro, E., Nieradzik, L., van Noije, T., Nolan, P., O'Donnell, D., Ollinaho, P., van den Oord, G., Ortega, P., Prims, O. T., Ramos, A., Reerink, T., Rousset, C., Ruprich-Robert, Y., Le Sager, P., Schmith, T., Schrödner, R., Serva, F., Sicardi, V., Sloth Madsen, M., Smith, B., Tian, T., Tourigny, E., Uotila, P., Vancoppenolle, M., Wang, S., Wårlind, D., Willén, U., Wyser, K., Yang, S., Yepes-Arbós, X., and Zhang, Q.: The EC-Earth3 Earth system model for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2973–3020, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dufour, C. O., Griffies, S. M., de Souza, G. F., Frenger, I., Morrison, A.
K., Palter, J. B., Sarmiento, J. L., Galbraith, E. D., Dunne, J. P.,
Anderson, W. G., and Slater, R. D.: Role of Mesoscale Eddies in
Cross-Frontal Transport of Heat and Biogeochemical Tracers in the Southern
Ocean, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 45, 3057–3081,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-14-0240.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JPO-D-14-0240.1</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dunne, J. P., John, J. G., Adcroft, A. J., Griffies, S. M., Hallberg, R. W.,
Shevliakova, E., Stouffer, R. J., Cooke, W., Dunne, K. A., Harrison, M. J.,
Krasting, J. P., Malyshev, S. L., Milly, P. C. D., Phillipps, P. J.,
Sentman, L. T., Samuels, B. L., Spelman, M. J., Winton, M., Wittenberg, A.
T., and Zadeh, N.: GFDL's ESM2 Global Coupled Climate–Carbon Earth System
Models. Part I: Physical Formulation and Baseline Simulation
Characteristics, J. Climate, 25, 6646–6665,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00560.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00560.1</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dunne, J. P., Horowitz, L. W., Adcroft, A. J., Ginoux, P., Held, I. M.,
John, J. G., Krasting, J. P., Malyshev, S., Naik, V., Paulot, F.,
Shevliakova, E., Stock, C. A., Zadeh, N., Balaji, V., Blanton, C., Dunne, K.
A., Dupuis, C., Durachta, J., Dussin, R., Gauthier, P. P. G., Griffies, S.
M., Guo, H., Hallberg, R. W., Harrison, M., He, J., Hurlin, W., McHugh, C.,
Menzel, R., Milly, P. C. D., Nikonov, S., Paynter, D. J., Ploshay, J.,
Radhakrishnan, A., Rand, K., Reichl, B. G., Robinson, T., Schwarzkopf, D.
M., Sentman, L. T., Underwood, S., Vahlenkamp, H., Winton, M., Wittenberg,
A. T., Wyman, B., Zeng, Y., and Zhao, M.: The GFDL Earth System Model
Version 4.1 (GFDL-ESM 4.1): Overall Coupled Model Description and Simulation
Characteristics, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS002015,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019MS002015</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Egleston, E. S., Sabine, C. L., and Morel, F. M. M.: Revelle revisited:
Buffer factors that quantify the response of ocean chemistry to changes in
DIC and alkalinity, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 24, GB1002,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003407" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008GB003407</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Eyring, V., Cox, P. M., Flato, G. M., Gleckler, P. J., Abramowitz, G.,
Caldwell, P., Collins, W. D., Gier, B. K., Hall, A. D., Hoffman, F. M.,
Hurtt, G. C., Jahn, A., Jones, C. D., Klein, S. A., Krasting, J. P.,
Kwiatkowski, L., Lorenz, R., Maloney, E., Meehl, G. A., Pendergrass, A. G.,
Pincus, R., Ruane, A. C., Russell, J. L., Sanderson, B. M., Santer, B. D.,
Sherwood, S. C., Simpson, I. R., Stouffer, R. J., and Williamson, M. S.:
Taking climate model evaluation to the next level, Nat. Clim. Change, 9,
102–110, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0355-y" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41558-018-0355-y</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fabry, V. J., Seibel, B. A., Feely, R. A., and Orr, J. C.: Impacts of ocean
acidification on marine fauna and ecosystem processes, ICES J. Mar. Sci.,
65, 414–432, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsn048" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1093/icesjms/fsn048</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Falkowski, P. G., Barber, R. T., and Smetacek, V.: Biogeochemical Controls
and Feedbacks on Ocean Primary Production, Science, 281, 200–206,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.281.5374.200" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.281.5374.200</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Friedlingstein, P., Jones, M. W., O'Sullivan, M., Andrew, R. M., Bakker, D. C. E., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S. R., Anthoni, P., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Bopp, L., Chau, T. T. T., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Currie, K. I., Decharme, B., Djeutchouang, L. M., Dou, X., Evans, W., Feely, R. A., Feng, L., Gasser, T., Gilfillan, D., Gkritzalis, T., Grassi, G., Gregor, L., Gruber, N., Gürses, Ö., Harris, I., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Luijkx, I. T., Jain, A., Jones, S. D., Kato, E., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Körtzinger, A., Landschützer, P., Lauvset, S. K., Lefèvre, N., Lienert, S., Liu, J., Marland, G., McGuire, P. C., Melton, J. R., Munro, D. R., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., Ono, T., Pierrot, D., Poulter, B., Rehder, G., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Schwingshackl, C., Séférian, R., Sutton, A. J., Sweeney, C., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tubiello, F., van der Werf, G. R., Vuichard, N., Wada, C., Wanninkhof, R., Watson, A. J., Willis, D., Wiltshire, A. J., Yuan, W., Yue, C., Yue, X., Zaehle, S., and Zeng, J.: Global Carbon Budget 2021, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 1917–2005, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Frölicher, T. L. and Joos, F.: Reversible and irreversible impacts of
greenhouse gas emissions in multi-century projections with the NCAR global
coupled carbon cycle-climate model, Clim. Dynam., 35, 1439–1459,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-009-0727-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-009-0727-0</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Frölicher, T. L., Sarmiento, J. L., Paynter, D. J., Dunne, J. P.,
Krasting, J. P., and Winton, M.: Dominance of the Southern Ocean in
Anthropogenic Carbon and Heat Uptake in CMIP5 Models, J. Climate, 28,
862–886, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00117.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00117.1</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Gattuso, J.-P. and Hansson, L. (Eds.): Ocean acidification, Oxford University
Press, ISBN 9780199591091, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gent, P. R., Danabasoglu, G., Donner, L. J., Holland, M. M., Hunke, E. C.,
Jayne, S. R., Lawrence, D. M., Neale, R. B., Rasch, P. J., Vertenstein, M.,
Worley, P. H., Yang, Z.-L., and Zhang, M.: The Community Climate System
Model Version 4, J. Climate, 24, 4973–4991,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI4083.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2011JCLI4083.1</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gerber, M., Joos, F., Vázquez-Rodríguez, M., Touratier, F., and
Goyet, C.: Regional air-sea fluxes of anthropogenic carbon inferred with an
Ensemble Kalman Filter, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 23, GB1013,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003247" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008GB003247</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Giorgetta, M. A., Jungclaus, J., Reick, C. H., Legutke, S., Bader, J.,
Böttinger, M., Brovkin, V., Crueger, T., Esch, M., Fieg, K., Glushak,
K., Gayler, V., Haak, H., Hollweg, H.-D., Ilyina, T., Kinne, S., Kornblueh,
L., Matei, D., Mauritsen, T., Mikolajewicz, U., Mueller, W., Notz, D.,
Pithan, F., Raddatz, T., Rast, S., Redler, R., Roeckner, E., Schmidt, H.,
Schnur, R., Segschneider, J., Six, K. D., Stockhause, M., Timmreck, C.,
Wegner, J., Widmann, H., Wieners, K.-H., Claussen, M., Marotzke, J., and
Stevens, B.: Climate and carbon cycle changes from 1850 to 2100 in MPI-ESM
simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5, J. Adv.
Model. Earth Sy., 5, 572–597,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20038" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/jame.20038</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gloege, L., McKinley, G. A., Landschützer, P., Fay, A. R.,
Frölicher, T. L., Fyfe, J. C., Ilyina, T., Jones, S., Lovenduski, N. S.,
Rodgers, K. B., Schlunegger, S., and Takano, Y.: Quantifying Errors in
Observationally Based Estimates of Ocean Carbon Sink Variability, Global
Biogeochem. Cy., 35, e2020GB006788,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GB006788" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020GB006788</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gloege, L., Yan, M., Zheng, T., and McKinley, G. A.: Improved Quantification
of Ocean Carbon Uptake by Using Machine Learning to Merge Global Models and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M701" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M702" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> Data, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002620,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002620" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2021MS002620</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Goodwin, P., Williams, R. G., Ridgwell, A., and Follows, M. J.: Climate
sensitivity to the carbon cycle modulated by past and future changes in
ocean chemistry, Nat. Geosci., 2, 145–150, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo416" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ngeo416</ext-link>,
2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Goris, N., Tjiputra, J. F., Olsen, A., Schwinger, J., Lauvset, S. K., and
Jeansson, E.: Constraining Projection-Based Estimates of the Future North
Atlantic Carbon Uptake, J. Climate, 31, 3959–3978,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0564.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0564.1</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Goris, N., Johannsen, K., and Tjiputra, J.: Gulf Stream and interior western boundary volume transport as key regions to constrain the future North Atlantic Carbon Uptake, Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss. [preprint], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2022-152" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-2022-152</ext-link>, in review, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gregor, L. and Gruber, N.: OceanSODA-ETHZ: a global gridded data set of the surface ocean carbonate system for seasonal to decadal studies of ocean acidification, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 777–808, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-777-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/essd-13-777-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gregor, L., Lebehot, A. D., Kok, S., and Scheel Monteiro, P. M.: A comparative assessment of the uncertainties of global surface ocean CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M703" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> estimates using a machine-learning ensemble (CSIR-ML6 version 2019a) – have we hit the wall?, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 5113–5136, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-5113-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-12-5113-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Griffies, S. M., Winton, M., Anderson, W. G., Benson, R., Delworth, T. L.,
Dufour, C. O., Dunne, J. P., Goddard, P., Morrison, A. K., Rosati, A.,
Wittenberg, A. T., Yin, J., and Zhang, R.: Impacts on Ocean Heat from
Transient Mesoscale Eddies in a Hierarchy of Climate Models, J. Climate, 28,
952–977, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00353.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00353.1</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gruber, N., Sarmiento, J. L., and Stocker, T. F.: An improved method for
detecting anthropogenic CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M704" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> in the oceans, Global Biogeochem. Cy.,
10, 809–837, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96GB01608" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/96GB01608</ext-link>, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gruber, N., Gloor, M., Mikaloff Fletcher, S. E., Doney, S. C., Dutkiewicz,
S., Follows, M. J., Gerber, M., Jacobson, A. R., Joos, F., Lindsay, K.,
Menemenlis, D., Mouchet, A., Müller, S. A., Sarmiento, J. L., and
Takahashi, T.: Oceanic sources, sinks, and transport of atmospheric
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M705" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 23, GB1005,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003349" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008GB003349</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gruber, N., Hauri, C., Lachkar, Z., Loher, D., Frölicher, T. L., and
Plattner, G.-K.: Rapid Progression of Ocean Acidification in the California
Current System, Science, 337, 220–223,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1216773" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1216773</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gruber, N., Clement, D., Carter, B. R., Feely, R. A., van Heuven, S.,
Hoppema, M., Ishii, M., Key, R. M., Kozyr, A., Lauvset, S. K., Lo Monaco,
C., Mathis, J. T., Murata, A., Olsen, A., Perez, F. F., Sabine, C. L.,
Tanhua, T., and Rik, W.: The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M706" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> from
1994 to 2007, Science, 363, 1193–1199,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau5153" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.aau5153</ext-link>, 2019a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gruber, N., Landschützer, P., and Lovenduski, N. S.: The variable
southern ocean carbon sink, Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci., 11, 159–186,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-marine-121916-063407" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1146/annurev-marine-121916-063407</ext-link>,  2019b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gutjahr, O., Putrasahan, D., Lohmann, K., Jungclaus, J. H., von Storch, J.-S., Brüggemann, N., Haak, H., and Stössel, A.: Max Planck Institute Earth System Model (MPI-ESM1.2) for the High-Resolution Model Intercomparison Project (HighResMIP), Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3241–3281, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3241-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-12-3241-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hajima, T., Watanabe, M., Yamamoto, A., Tatebe, H., Noguchi, M. A., Abe, M., Ohgaito, R., Ito, A., Yamazaki, D., Okajima, H., Ito, A., Takata, K., Ogochi, K., Watanabe, S., and Kawamiya, M.: Development of the MIROC-ES2L Earth system model and the evaluation of biogeochemical processes and feedbacks, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2197–2244, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2197-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-13-2197-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hall, A., Cox, P., Huntingford, C., and Klein, S.: Progressing emergent
constraints on future climate change, Nat. Clim. Change, 9, 269–278,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0436-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41558-019-0436-6</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hall, T. M., Haine, T. W. N., and Waugh, D. W.: Inferring the concentration
of anthropogenic carbon in the ocean from tracers, Global Biogeochem.
Cy., 16, 78-1–78-15,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001835" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001GB001835</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hauck, J., Zeising, M., Le Quéré, C., Gruber, N., Bakker, D. C. E.,
Bopp, L., Chau, T. T. T., Gürses, Ö., Ilyina, T., Landschützer,
P., Lenton, A., Resplandy, L., Rödenbeck, C., Schwinger, J., and
Séférian, R.: Consistency and Challenges in the Ocean Carbon Sink
Estimate for the Global Carbon Budget, Front. Mar. Sci., 7, 571720,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.571720" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3389/fmars.2020.571720</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hauri, C., Pagès, R., McDonnell, A. M. P., Stuecker, M. F., Danielson,
S. L., Hedstrom, K., Irving, B., Schultz, C., and Doney, S. C.: Modulation
of ocean acidification by decadal climate variability in the Gulf of Alaska,
Commun. Earth Environ., 2, 191, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-021-00254-z" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s43247-021-00254-z</ext-link>,
2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hausfather, Z., Marvel, K., Schmidt, G. A., Nielsen-Gammon, J. W., and
Zelinka, M.: Climate simulations: recognize the “hot model” problem, Nature,
605, 26–29, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-01192-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/d41586-022-01192-2</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Held, I. M., Guo, H., Adcroft, A., Dunne, J. P., Horowitz, L. W., Krasting,
J., Shevliakova, E., Winton, M., Zhao, M., Bushuk, M., Wittenberg, A. T.,
Wyman, B., Xiang, B., Zhang, R., Anderson, W., Balaji, V., Donner, L.,
Dunne, K., Durachta, J., Gauthier, P. P. G., Ginoux, P., Golaz, J.-C.,
Griffies, S. M., Hallberg, R., Harris, L., Harrison, M., Hurlin, W., John,
J., Lin, P., Lin, S.-J., Malyshev, S., Menzel, R., Milly, P. C. D., Ming,
Y., Naik, V., Paynter, D., Paulot, F., Ramaswamy, V., Reichl, B., Robinson,
T., Rosati, A., Seman, C., Silvers, L. G., Underwood, S., and Zadeh, N.:
Structure and Performance of GFDL's CM4.0 Climate Model, J. Adv. Model.
Earth Sy., 11, 3691–3727,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001829" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019MS001829</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hess, D.: Constraining the anthropogenic carbon uptake in the North Atlantic
over the 21st century, University of Bern, 1–45, <uri>https://ube.swisscovery.slsp.ch/discovery/fulldisplay?vid=41SLSP_UBE:UBE&amp;docid=alma99117299352705511&amp;lang=en&amp;context=L</uri>, last access: 1 June 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Iida, Y., Takatani, Y., Kojima, A., and Ishii, M.: Global trends of ocean
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M707" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> sink and ocean acidification: an observation-based reconstruction
of surface ocean inorganic carbon variables, J. Oceanogr., 77, 323–358,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10872-020-00571-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10872-020-00571-5</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>IPCC: Summary for Policymakers, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical
Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by:
Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C.,
Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M.,
Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield,
T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/9781009157896.001</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>IPCC: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by:  Shukla, P. R., Skea,  J., Slade,  R., Al Khourdajie, A., van Diemen, R., McCollum, D., Pathak, M., Some, S., Vyas, P.,  Fradera, R., Belkacemi, M., Hasija, A., Lisboa, G., Luz, S., and Malley, J., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157926" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/9781009157926</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Jacobson, A. R., Mikaloff Fletcher, S. E., Gruber, N., Sarmiento, J. L., and
Gloor, M.: A joint atmosphere-ocean inversion for surface fluxes of carbon
dioxide: 1. Methods and global-scale fluxes, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 21, GB1019,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GB002556" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005GB002556</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Joos, F., Plattner, G.-K., Stocker, T. F., Marchal, O., and Schmittner, A.:
Global Warming and Marine Carbon Cycle Feedbacks on Future Atmospheric
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M708" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, Science, 284, 464–467,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.284.5413.464" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.284.5413.464</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Katavouta, A., Williams, R. G., Goodwin, P., and Roussenov, V.: Reconciling
Atmospheric and Oceanic Views of the Transient Climate Response to
Emissions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 6205–6214,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL077849" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2018GL077849</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kawaguchi, S., Ishida, A., King, R., Raymond, B., Waller, N., Constable, A.,
Nicol, S., Wakita, M., and Ishimatsu, A.: Risk maps for Antarctic krill
under projected Southern Ocean acidification, Nat. Clim. Change, 3,
843–847, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1937" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nclimate1937</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Khatiwala, S., Tanhua, T., Mikaloff Fletcher, S., Gerber, M., Doney, S. C., Graven, H. D., Gruber, N., McKinley, G. A., Murata, A., Ríos, A. F., and Sabine, C. L.: Global ocean storage of anthropogenic carbon, Biogeosciences, 10, 2169–2191, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-2169-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-10-2169-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kroeker, K. J., Kordas, R. L., Crim, R. N., and Singh, G. G.: Meta-analysis
reveals negative yet variable effects of ocean acidification on marine
organisms, Ecol. Lett., 13, 1419–1434,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01518.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01518.x</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kroeker, K. J., Kordas, R. L., Crim, R., Hendriks, I. E., Ramajo, L., Singh,
G. S., Duarte, C. M., and Gattuso, J.-P.: Impacts of ocean acidification on
marine organisms: quantifying sensitivities and interaction with warming,
Glob. Change Biol., 19, 1884–1896,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12179" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcb.12179</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kwiatkowski, L., Bopp, L., Aumont, O., Ciais, P., Cox, P. M.,
Laufkötter, C., Li, Y., and Séférian, R.: Emergent constraints
on projections of declining primary production in the tropical oceans, Nat.
Clim. Change, 7, 355–358, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3265" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nclimate3265</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kwiatkowski, L., Torres, O., Bopp, L., Aumont, O., Chamberlain, M., Christian, J. R., Dunne, J. P., Gehlen, M., Ilyina, T., John, J. G., Lenton, A., Li, H., Lovenduski, N. S., Orr, J. C., Palmieri, J., Santana-Falcón, Y., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Stock, C. A., Tagliabue, A., Takano, Y., Tjiputra, J., Toyama, K., Tsujino, H., Watanabe, M., Yamamoto, A., Yool, A., and Ziehn, T.: Twenty-first century ocean warming, acidification, deoxygenation, and upper-ocean nutrient and primary production decline from CMIP6 model projections, Biogeosciences, 17, 3439–3470, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-3439-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-17-3439-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lachkar, Z., Orr, J. C., Dutay, J.-C., and Delecluse, P.: Effects of mesoscale eddies on global ocean distributions of CFC-11, CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M709" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M710" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>C, Ocean Sci., 3, 461–482, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/os-3-461-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/os-3-461-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lachkar, Z., Orr, J. C., Dutay, J.-C., and Delecluse, P.: On the role of
mesoscale eddies in the ventilation of Antarctic intermediate water, Deep-Sea Res. Pt. I, 56, 909–925,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2009.01.013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.dsr.2009.01.013</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lacroix, F., Ilyina, T., and Hartmann, J.: Oceanic CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M711" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> outgassing and biological production hotspots induced by pre-industrial river loads of nutrients and carbon in a global modeling approach, Biogeosciences, 17, 55–88, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-55-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-17-55-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Landschützer, P., Gruber, N., and Bakker, D. C. E.: Decadal variations
and trends of the global ocean carbon sink, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 30,
1396–1417, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GB005359" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015GB005359</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Langdon, C. and Atkinson, M. J.: Effect of elevated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M712" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M713" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> on
photosynthesis and calcification of corals and interactions with seasonal
change in temperature/irradiance and nutrient enrichment, J. Geophys. Res.-Ocean, 110, C09S07, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JC002576" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004JC002576</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lauvset, S. K., Key, R. M., Olsen, A., van Heuven, S., Velo, A., Lin, X., Schirnick, C., Kozyr, A., Tanhua, T., Hoppema, M., Jutterström, S., Steinfeldt, R., Jeansson, E., Ishii, M., Perez, F. F., Suzuki, T., and Watelet, S.: A new global interior ocean mapped climatology: the 1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M714" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M715" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>  1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M716" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> GLODAP version 2, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 8, 325–340, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-325-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/essd-8-325-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lauvset, S. K., Lange, N., Tanhua, T., Bittig, H. C., Olsen, A., Kozyr, A., Álvarez, M., Becker, S., Brown, P. J., Carter, B. R., Cotrim da Cunha, L., Feely, R. A., van Heuven, S., Hoppema, M., Ishii, M., Jeansson, E., Jutterström, S., Jones, S. D., Karlsen, M. K., Lo Monaco, C., Michaelis, P., Murata, A., Pérez, F. F., Pfeil, B., Schirnick, C., Steinfeldt, R., Suzuki, T., Tilbrook, B., Velo, A., Wanninkhof, R., Woosley, R. J., and Key, R. M.: An updated version of the global interior ocean biogeochemical data product, GLODAPv2.2021, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 5565–5589, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-5565-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/essd-13-5565-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lebrato, M., Andersson, A. J., Ries, J. B., Aronson, R. B., Lamare, M. D.,
Koeve, W., Oschlies, A., Iglesias-Rodriguez, M. D., Thatje, S., Amsler, M.,
Vos, S. C., Jones, D. O. B., Ruhl, H. A., Gates, A. R., and McClintock, J.
B.: Benthic marine calcifiers coexist with CaCO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M717" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-undersaturated
seawater worldwide, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 30, 1038–1053,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GB005260" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015GB005260</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lindsay, K., Bonan, G. B., Doney, S. C., Hoffman, F. M., Lawrence, D. M.,
Long, M. C., Mahowald, N. M., Keith Moore, J., Randerson, J. T., and
Thornton, P. E.: Preindustrial-Control and Twentieth-Century Carbon Cycle
Experiments with the Earth System Model CESM1(BGC), J. Climate, 27,
8981–9005, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00565.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00565.1</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Locarnini, R. A., Mishonov, A. V., Baranova, O. K., Boyer,
T. P., Zweng, M. M., Garcia, H. E., Reagan, J. R., Seidov, D., Weathers, K., Paver, C. R., and Smolyar, I.: World
Ocean Atlas 2018, Volume 1: Temperature, Tech. Rep., A. Mishonov Technical Ed.; NOAA Atlas NESDIS 81,
<uri>https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/world-ocean-atlas-2018/</uri> (last
access: 1 June 2022), 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lovato, T., Peano, D., Butenschön, M., Materia, S., Iovino, D.,
Scoccimarro, E., Fogli, P. G., Cherchi, A., Bellucci, A., Gualdi, S.,
Masina, S., and Navarra, A.: CMIP6 Simulations With the CMCC Earth System
Model (CMCC-ESM2), J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002814,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002814" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2021MS002814</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Marshall, J. and Speer, K.: Closure of the meridional overturning
circulation through Southern Ocean upwelling, Nat. Geosci., 5, 171–180,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1391" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ngeo1391</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Matear, R. J., Wong, C. S., and Xie, L.: Can CFCs be used to determine
anthropogenic CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M718" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>?, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 17, 1013,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001415" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001GB001415</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Matsumoto, K., Sarmiento, J. L., Key, R. M., Aumont, O., Bullister, J. L.,
Caldeira, K., Campin, J.-M., Doney, S. C., Drange, H., Dutay, J.-C.,
Follows, M., Gao, Y., Gnanadesikan, A., Gruber, N., Ishida, A., Joos, F.,
Lindsay, K., Maier-Reimer, E., Marshall, J. C., Matear, R. J., Monfray, P.,
Mouchet, A., Najjar, R., Plattner, G.-K., Schlitzer, R., Slater, R., Swathi,
P. S., Totterdell, I. J., Weirig, M.-F., Yamanaka, Y., Yool, A., and Orr, J.
C.: Evaluation of ocean carbon cycle models with data-based metrics,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L07303, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GL018970" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003GL018970</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mauritsen, T., Bader, J., Becker, T., Behrens, J., Bittner, M., Brokopf, R.,
Brovkin, V., Claussen, M., Crueger, T., Esch, M., Fast, I., Fiedler, S.,
Fläschner, D., Gayler, V., Giorgetta, M., Goll, D. S., Haak, H.,
Hagemann, S., Hedemann, C., Hohenegger, C., Ilyina, T., Jahns, T.,
Jimenéz-de-la-Cuesta, D., Jungclaus, J., Kleinen, T., Kloster, S.,
Kracher, D., Kinne, S., Kleberg, D., Lasslop, G., Kornblueh, L., Marotzke,
J., Matei, D., Meraner, K., Mikolajewicz, U., Modali, K., Möbis, B.,
Müller, W. A., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nam, C. C. W., Notz, D., Nyawira,
S.-S., Paulsen, H., Peters, K., Pincus, R., Pohlmann, H., Pongratz, J.,
Popp, M., Raddatz, T. J., Rast, S., Redler, R., Reick, C. H., Rohrschneider,
T., Schemann, V., Schmidt, H., Schnur, R., Schulzweida, U., Six, K. D.,
Stein, L., Stemmler, I., Stevens, B., von Storch, J.-S., Tian, F., Voigt,
A., Vrese, P., Wieners, K.-H., Wilkenskjeld, S., Winkler, A., and Roeckner,
E.: Developments in the MPI-M Earth System Model version 1.2 (MPI-ESM1.2)
and Its Response to Increasing CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M719" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11,
998–1038, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001400" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2018MS001400</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>McCarthy, G. D., Brown, P. J., Flagg, C. N., Goni, G., Houpert, L., Hughes,
C. W., Hummels, R., Inall, M., Jochumsen, K., Larsen, K. M. H., Lherminier,
P., Meinen, C. S., Moat, B. I., Rayner, D., Rhein, M., Roessler, A., Schmid,
C., and Smeed, D. A.: Sustainable Observations of the AMOC: Methodology and
Technology, Rev. Geophys., 58, e2019RG000654, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000654" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019RG000654</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>McKinley, G. A., Fay, A. R., Eddebbar, Y. A., Gloege, L., and Lovenduski, N.
S.: External Forcing Explains Recent Decadal Variability of the Ocean Carbon
Sink, AGU Adv., 1, e2019AV000149,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019AV000149" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019AV000149</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>McNeil, B. I. and Matear, R. J.: The non-steady state oceanic CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M720" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> signal: its importance, magnitude and a novel way to detect it, Biogeosciences, 10, 2219–2228, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-2219-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-10-2219-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib96"><label>96</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Meinshausen, M., Nicholls, Z. R. J., Lewis, J., Gidden, M. J., Vogel, E.,
Freund, M., Beyerle, U., Gessner, C., Nauels, A., Bauer, N., Canadell, J.
G., Daniel, J. S., John, A., Krummel, P. B., Luderer, G., Meinshausen, N.,
Montzka, S. A., Rayner, P. J., Reimann, S., Smith, S. J., van den Berg, M.,
Velders, G. J. M., Vollmer, M. K., and Wang, R. H. J.: The shared
socio-economic pathway (SSP) greenhouse gas concentrations and their
extensions to 2500, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3571–3605,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3571-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-13-3571-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib97"><label>97</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Middelburg, J. J., Soetaert, K., and Hagens, M.: Ocean Alkalinity, Buffering
and Biogeochemical Processes, Rev. Geophys., 58, e2019RG000681,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000681" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019RG000681</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib98"><label>98</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mikaloff Fletcher, S. E., Gruber, N., Jacobson, A. R., Doney, S. C.,
Dutkiewicz, S., Gerber, M., Follows, M., Joos, F., Lindsay, K., Menemenlis,
D., Mouchet, A., Müller, S. A., and Sarmiento, J. L.: Inverse estimates
of anthropogenic CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M721" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake, transport, and storage by the ocean,
Global Biogeochem. Cy., 20,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GB002530" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005GB002530</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib99"><label>99</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Morrison, A. K., Frölicher, T. L., and Sarmiento, J. L.: Upwelling in
the Southern Ocean, Phys. Today, 68, 27–32,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.2654" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1063/PT.3.2654</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib100"><label>100</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>NOAA/GML: Trends in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide,  NOAA/GML [data set], <uri>https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/gl_data.html</uri>, last access: 1 June 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib101"><label>101</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>O'Neill, B. C., Tebaldi, C., van Vuuren, D. P., Eyring, V., Friedlingstein,
P., Hurtt, G., Knutti, R., Kriegler, E., Lamarque, J.-F., Lowe, J., Meehl,
G. A., Moss, R., Riahi, K., and Sanderson, B. M.: The Scenario Model
Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9,
3461–3482, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3461-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-9-3461-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib102"><label>102</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Orr, J. C. (Ed.): Global Ocean Storage of Anthropogenic Carbon, Inst. Pierre Simon
Laplace, Gif-sur-Yvette, France, 116 pp., <uri>http://ocmip5.ipsl.jussieu.fr/OCMIP/reports/GOSAC_finalreport_lores.pdf</uri> (last access: 1 June 2022), 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib103"><label>103</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Orr, J. C. and Epitalon, J.-M.: Improved routines to model the ocean carbonate system: mocsy 2.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 485–499, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-485-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-8-485-2015</ext-link>, 2015 (software code available at: <uri>https://github.com/jamesorr/mocsy</uri>, last access: 1 June 2022).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib104"><label>104</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Orr, J. C., Fabry, V. J., Aumont, O., Bopp, L., Doney, S. C., Feely, R. A.,
Gnanadesikan, A., Gruber, N., Ishida, A., Joos, F., Key, R. M., Lindsay, K.,
Maier-Reimer, E., Matear, R., Monfray, P., Mouchet, A., Najjar, R. G.,
Plattner, G.-K., Rodgers, K. B., Sabine, C. L., Sarmiento, J. L., Schlitzer,
R., Slater, R. D., Totterdell, I. J., Weirig, M.-F., Yamanaka, Y., and Yool,
A.: Anthropogenic ocean acidification over the twenty-first century and its
impact on calcifying organisms, Nature, 437, 681–686,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04095" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nature04095</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib105"><label>105</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Orr, J. C., Najjar, R. G., Aumont, O., Bopp, L., Bullister, J. L., Danabasoglu, G., Doney, S. C., Dunne, J. P., Dutay, J.-C., Graven, H., Griffies, S. M., John, J. G., Joos, F., Levin, I., Lindsay, K., Matear, R. J., McKinley, G. A., Mouchet, A., Oschlies, A., Romanou, A., Schlitzer, R., Tagliabue, A., Tanhua, T., and Yool, A.: Biogeochemical protocols and diagnostics for the CMIP6 Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP), Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 2169–2199, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2169-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-10-2169-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib106"><label>106</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Pérez, F. F., Mercier, H., Vázquez-Rodríguez, M., Lherminier,
P., Velo, A., Pardo, P. C., Rosón, G., and Ríos, A. F.: Atlantic
Ocean CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M722" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake reduced by weakening of the meridional overturning
circulation, Nat. Geosci., 6, 146–152, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1680" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ngeo1680</ext-link>,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib107"><label>107</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Regnier, P., Resplandy, L., Najjar, R. G., and Ciais, P.: The land-to-ocean
loops of the global carbon cycle, Nature, 603, 401–410,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04339-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41586-021-04339-9</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib108"><label>108</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Resplandy, L., Keeling, R. F., Rödenbeck, C., Stephens, B. B.,
Khatiwala, S., Rodgers, K. B., Long, M. C., Bopp, L., and Tans, P. P.:
Revision of global carbon fluxes based on a reassessment of oceanic and
riverine carbon transport, Nat. Geosci., 11, 504–509,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0151-3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41561-018-0151-3</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib109"><label>109</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Revelle, R. and Suess, H. E.: Carbon Dioxide Exchange Between Atmosphere and
Ocean and the Question of an Increase of Atmospheric CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M723" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> during the Past
Decades, Tellus, 9, 18–27, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1957.tb01849.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.2153-3490.1957.tb01849.x</ext-link>, 1957.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib110"><label>110</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Riahi, K., van Vuuren, D. P., Kriegler, E., Edmonds, J., O'Neill, B. C.,
Fujimori, S., Bauer, N., Calvin, K., Dellink, R., Fricko, O., Lutz, W.,
Popp, A., Cuaresma, J. C., KC, S., Leimbach, M., Jiang, L., Kram, T., Rao,
S., Emmerling, J., Ebi, K., Hasegawa, T., Havlik, P., Humpenöder, F., Da
Silva, L. A., Smith, S., Stehfest, E., Bosetti, V., Eom, J., Gernaat, D.,
Masui, T., Rogelj, J., Strefler, J., Drouet, L., Krey, V., Luderer, G.,
Harmsen, M., Takahashi, K., Baumstark, L., Doelman, J. C., Kainuma, M.,
Klimont, Z., Marangoni, G., Lotze-Campen, H., Obersteiner, M., Tabeau, A.,
and Tavoni, M.: The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land
use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: An overview, Global Environ.
Chang., 42, 153–168, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.009</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib111"><label>111</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ridge, S. M. and McKinley, G. A.: Advective Controls on the North Atlantic
Anthropogenic Carbon Sink, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 34, e2019GB006457,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GB006457" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019GB006457</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib112"><label>112</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ries, J. B., Cohen, A. L., and McCorkle, D. C.: Marine calcifiers exhibit
mixed responses to CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M724" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>-induced ocean acidification, Geology, 37, 1131–1134,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1130/G30210A.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1130/G30210A.1</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib113"><label>113</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rödenbeck, C., Keeling, R. F., Bakker, D. C. E., Metzl, N., Olsen, A., Sabine, C., and Heimann, M.: Global surface-ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M725" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M726" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and sea–air CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M727" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux variability from an observation-driven ocean mixed-layer scheme, Ocean Sci., 9, 193–216, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/os-9-193-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/os-9-193-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib114"><label>114</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rödenbeck, C., Bakker, D. C. E., Metzl, N., Olsen, A., Sabine, C., Cassar, N., Reum, F., Keeling, R. F., and Heimann, M.: Interannual sea–air CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M728" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux variability from an observation-driven ocean mixed-layer scheme, Biogeosciences, 11, 4599–4613, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-4599-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-11-4599-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib115"><label>115</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rödenbeck, C., DeVries, T., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C., and Keeling, R. F.: Data-based estimates of interannual sea–air CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M729" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux variations 1957–2020 and their relation to environmental drivers, Biogeosciences, 19, 2627–2652, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-2627-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-19-2627-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib116"><label>116</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rodgers, K. B., Schlunegger, S., Slater, R. D., Ishii, M., Frölicher, T.
L., Toyama, K., Plancherel, Y., Aumont, O., and Fassbender, A. J.:
Reemergence of Anthropogenic Carbon Into the Ocean's Mixed Layer Strongly
Amplifies Transient Climate Sensitivity, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47,
e2020GL089275, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089275" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020GL089275</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib117"><label>117</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sabine, C. L., Feely, R. A., Gruber, N., Key, R. M., Lee, K., Bullister, J.
L., Wanninkhof, R., Wong, C. S., Wallace, D. W. R., Tilbrook, B., Millero,
F. J., Peng, T.-H., Kozyr, A., Ono, T., and Rios, A. F.: The Oceanic Sink
for Anthropogenic CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M730" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, Science, 305, 367–371,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097403" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1097403</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib118"><label>118</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sanderson, B. M., Pendergrass, A. G., Koven, C. D., Brient, F., Booth, B. B. B., Fisher, R. A., and Knutti, R.: The potential for structural errors in emergent constraints, Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 899–918, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-899-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/esd-12-899-2021</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib119"><label>119</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sarmiento, J. L. and Sundquist, E. T.: Revised budget for the oceanic uptake
of anthropogenic carbon dioxide, Nature, 356, 589–593,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/356589a0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/356589a0</ext-link>, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib120"><label>120</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sarmiento, J. L., Orr, J. C., and Siegenthaler, U.: A perturbation
simulation of CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M731" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> uptake in an ocean general circulation model, J.
Geophys. Res.-Ocean, 97, 3621–3645,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/91JC02849" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/91JC02849</ext-link>, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib121"><label>121</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sarmiento, J. L., Le Quéré, C., and Pacala, S. W.: Limiting future
atmospheric carbon dioxide, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 9, 121–137,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/94GB01779" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/94GB01779</ext-link>, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib122"><label>122</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sarmiento, J. L., Hughes, T. M. C., Stouffer, R. J., and Manabe, S.:
Simulated response of the ocean carbon cycle to anthropogenic climate
warming, Nature, 393, 245–249, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/30455" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/30455</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib123"><label>123</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Séférian, R., Gehlen, M., Bopp, L., Resplandy, L., Orr, J. C., Marti, O., Dunne, J. P., Christian, J. R., Doney, S. C., Ilyina, T., Lindsay, K., Halloran, P. R., Heinze, C., Segschneider, J., Tjiputra, J., Aumont, O., and Romanou, A.: Inconsistent strategies to spin up models in CMIP5: implications for ocean biogeochemical model performance assessment, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1827–1851, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1827-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-9-1827-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib124"><label>124</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Séférian, R., Nabat, P., Michou, M., Saint-Martin, D., Voldoire, A.,
Colin, J., Decharme, B., Delire, C., Berthet, S., Chevallier, M.,
Sénési, S., Franchisteguy, L., Vial, J., Mallet, M., Joetzjer, E.,
Geoffroy, O., Guérémy, J.-F., Moine, M.-P., Msadek, R., Ribes, A.,
Rocher, M., Roehrig, R., Salas-y-Mélia, D., Sanchez, E., Terray, L.,
Valcke, S., Waldman, R., Aumont, O., Bopp, L., Deshayes, J., Éthé,
C., and Madec, G.: Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM-ESM2-1: Role
of Earth System Processes in Present-Day and Future Climate, J. Adv. Model.
Earth Sy., 11, 4182–4227,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001791" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019MS001791</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib125"><label>125</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Séférian, R., Berthet, S., Yool, A., Palmiéri, J., Bopp, L.,
Tagliabue, A., Kwiatkowski, L., Aumont, O., Christian, J., Dunne, J.,
Gehlen, M., Ilyina, T., John, J. G., Li, H., Long, M. C., Luo, J. Y.,
Nakano, H., Romanou, A., Schwinger, J., Stock, C., Santana-Falcón, Y.,
Takano, Y., Tjiputra, J., Tsujino, H., Watanabe, M., Wu, T., Wu, F., and
Yamamoto, A.: Tracking Improvement in Simulated Marine Biogeochemistry
Between CMIP5 and CMIP6, Curr. Clim. Chang. Reports, 6, 95–119,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-020-00160-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s40641-020-00160-0</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib126"><label>126</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sellar, A. A., Walton, J., Jones, C. G., Wood, R., Abraham, N. L.,
Andrejczuk, M., Andrews, M. B., Andrews, T., Archibald, A. T., de Mora, L.,
Dyson, H., Elkington, M., Ellis, R., Florek, P., Good, P., Gohar, L.,
Haddad, S., Hardiman, S. C., Hogan, E., Iwi, A., Jones, C. D., Johnson, B.,
Kelley, D. I., Kettleborough, J., Knight, J. R., Köhler, M. O.,
Kuhlbrodt, T., Liddicoat, S., Linova-Pavlova, I., Mizielinski, M. S.,
Morgenstern, O., Mulcahy, J., Neininger, E., O'Connor, F. M., Petrie, R.,
Ridley, J., Rioual, J.-C., Roberts, M., Robertson, E., Rumbold, S., Seddon,
J., Shepherd, H., Shim, S., Stephens, A., Teixiera, J. C., Tang, Y.,
Williams, J., Wiltshire, A., and Griffiths, P. T.: Implementation of U.K.
Earth System Models for CMIP6, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12,
e2019MS001946, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001946" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019MS001946</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib127"><label>127</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Steinacher, M., Joos, F., Frölicher, T. L., Bopp, L., Cadule, P., Cocco, V., Doney, S. C., Gehlen, M., Lindsay, K., Moore, J. K., Schneider, B., and Segschneider, J.: Projected 21st century decrease in marine productivity: a multi-model analysis, Biogeosciences, 7, 979–1005, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-979-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-7-979-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib128"><label>128</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stock, C. A., Dunne, J. P., Fan, S., Ginoux, P., John, J., Krasting, J. P.,
Laufkötter, C., Paulot, F., and Zadeh, N.: Ocean Biogeochemistry in
GFDL's Earth System Model 4.1 and Its Response to Increasing Atmospheric
CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M732" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS002043,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002043" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019MS002043</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib129"><label>129</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Talley, L. D.: Closure of the Global Overturning Circulation Through the
Indian, Pacific, and Southern Oceans: Schematics and Transports,
Oceanography, 26, 80–97, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2013.07" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5670/oceanog.2013.07</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib130"><label>130</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Terhaar, J., Kwiatkowski, L., and Bopp, L.: Emergent constraint on Arctic
Ocean acidification in the twenty-first century, Nature, 582, 379–383,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2360-3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41586-020-2360-3</ext-link>, 2020a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib131"><label>131</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Terhaar, J., Tanhua, T., Stöven, T., Orr, J. C., and Bopp, L.: Evaluation of data-based estimates of anthropogenic carbon in the Arctic Ocean, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 125, e2020JC016124, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JC016124" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020JC016124</ext-link>, 2020b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib132"><label>132</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Terhaar, J., Torres, O., Bourgeois, T., and Kwiatkowski, L.: Arctic Ocean acidification over the 21st century co-driven by anthropogenic carbon increases and freshening in the CMIP6 model ensemble, Biogeosciences, 18, 2221–2240, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-2221-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-18-2221-2021</ext-link>, 2021a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib133"><label>133</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Terhaar, J., Frölicher, T., and Joos, F.: Southern Ocean anthropogenic
carbon sink constrained by sea surface salinity, Sci. Adv., 7, 5964–5992,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd5964" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/sciadv.abd5964</ext-link>, 2021b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib134"><label>134</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tjiputra, J. F., Schwinger, J., Bentsen, M., Morée, A. L., Gao, S., Bethke, I., Heinze, C., Goris, N., Gupta, A., He, Y.-C., Olivié, D., Seland, Ø., and Schulz, M.: Ocean biogeochemistry in the Norwegian Earth System Model version 2 (NorESM2), Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2393–2431, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2393-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-13-2393-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib135"><label>135</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Vaittinada Ayar, P., Bopp, L., Christian, J. R., Ilyina, T., Krasting, J. P., Séférian, R., Tsujino, H., Watanabe, M., Yool, A., and Tjiputra, J.: Contrasting projections of the ENSO-driven CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M733" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux variability in the equatorial Pacific under high-warming scenario, Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 1097–1118, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1097-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/esd-13-1097-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib136"><label>136</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wang, L., Huang, J., Luo, Y., and Zhao, Z.: Narrowing the spread in CMIP5
model projections of air-sea CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M734" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes, Sci. Rep.-UK, 6, 37548,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/srep37548" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/srep37548</ext-link>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib137"><label>137</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Watson, A. J., Schuster, U., Shutler, J. D., Holding, T., Ashton, I. G. C.,
Landschützer, P., Woolf, D. K., and Goddijn-Murphy, L.: Revised
estimates of ocean-atmosphere CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M735" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> flux are consistent with ocean carbon
inventory, Nat. Commun., 11, 4422,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18203-3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-020-18203-3</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib138"><label>138</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Weiss, R. F.: Carbon dioxide in water and seawater: the solubility of a
non-ideal gas, Mar. Chem., 2, 203–215,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4203(74)90015-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0304-4203(74)90015-2</ext-link>, 1974.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib139"><label>139</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wenzel, S., Cox, P. M., Eyring, V., and Friedlingstein, P.: Emergent
constraints on climate-carbon cycle feedbacks in the CMIP5 Earth system
models, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 119, 794–807,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JG002591" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013JG002591</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib140"><label>140</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Williamson, M. S., Thackeray, C. W., Cox, P. M., Hall, A., Huntingford, C.,
and Nijsse, F. J. M. M.: Emergent constraints on climate sensitivities, Rev.
Mod. Phys., 93, 25004, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025004" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025004</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib141"><label>141</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Winton, M., Griffies, S. M., Samuels, B. L., Sarmiento, J. L., and
Frölicher, T. L.: Connecting Changing Ocean Circulation with Changing
Climate, J. Climate, 26, 2268–2278,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00296.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00296.1</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib142"><label>142</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yukimoto, S., Kawai, H., Koshiro, T., Oshima, N., Yoshida, K., Urakawa, S.,
Tsujino, H., Deushi, M., Tanaka, T., Hosaka, M., Yabu, S., Yoshimura, H.,
Shindo, E., Mizuta, R., Obata, A., Adachi, Y., and Ishii, M.: The
Meteorological Research Institute Earth System Model Version 2.0,
MRI-ESM2.0: Description and Basic Evaluation of the Physical Component, J.
Meteorol. Soc. Jpn. Ser. II, 97, 931–965,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2019-051" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2151/jmsj.2019-051</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib143"><label>143</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zeng, J., Nojiri, Y., Landschützer, P., Telszewski, M., and Nakaoka, S.:
A Global Surface Ocean <inline-formula><mml:math id="M736" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>CO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M737" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> Climatology Based on a Feed-Forward Neural
Network, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 31, 1838–1849,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-13-00137.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JTECH-D-13-00137.1</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib144"><label>144</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Ziehn, T., Chamberlain, M. A., Law, R. M., Lenton, A., Bodman, R. W., Dix,
M., Stevens, L., Wang, Y.-P., and Srbinovsky, J.: The Australian Earth
System Model: ACCESS-ESM1.5, J. South. Hemisph. Earth Syst. Sci., 70,
193–214, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib145"><label>145</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zweng, M. M., Reagan, J. R., Seidov, D., Boyer, T. P., Locarnini, R. A., Garcia, H. E., Mishonov, A. V., Baranova,
O. K., Weathers, K., Paver, C. R., and Smolyar, I.: World
Ocean Atlas 2018, Volume 2: Salinity, Tech. Rep., A. Mishonov Technical Ed.; NOAA Atlas NESDIS 81,
<uri>https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/world-ocean-atlas-2018/</uri> (last
access: 1 June 2022), 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Observation-constrained estimates of the global ocean carbon sink from Earth system models</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Albright, R., Caldeira, L., Hosfelt, J., Kwiatkowski, L., Maclaren, J. K.,
Mason, B. M., Nebuchina, Y., Ninokawa, A., Pongratz, J., Ricke, K. L.,
Rivlin, T., Schneider, K., Sesboüé, M., Shamberger, K., Silverman,
J., Wolfe, K., Zhu, K., and Caldeira, K.: Reversal of ocean acidification
enhances net coral reef calcification, Nature, 531, 362–365,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17155" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17155</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Aumont, O., Orr, J. C., Monfray, P., Ludwig, W., Amiotte-Suchet, P., and
Probst, J.-L.: Riverine-driven interhemispheric transport of carbon, Global
Biogeochem. Cy., 15, 393–405,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999GB001238" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/1999GB001238</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Bakker, P., Schmittner, A., Lenaerts, J. T. M., Abe-Ouchi, A., Bi, D., van
den Broeke, M. R., Chan, W.-L., Hu, A., Beadling, R. L., Marsland, S. J.,
Mernild, S. H., Saenko, O. A., Swingedouw, D., Sullivan, A., and Yin, J.:
Fate of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation: Strong decline
under continued warming and Greenland melting, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43,
12252–12260, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070457" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070457</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bednaršek, N., Tarling, G. A., Bakker, D. C. E., Fielding, S., and
Feely, R. A.: Dissolution Dominating Calcification Process in Polar
Pteropods Close to the Point of Aragonite Undersaturation, PLoS One, 9, e109183,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0109183" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0109183</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Behrenfeld, M. J., Gaube, P., Della Penna, A., O'Malley, R. T., Burt, W. J.,
Hu, Y., Bontempi, P. S., Steinberg, D. K., Boss, E. S., Siegel, D. A.,
Hostetler, C. A., Tortell, P. D., and Doney, S. C.: Global
satellite-observed daily vertical migrations of ocean animals, Nature, 576,
257–261, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1796-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1796-9</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Bennington, V., Gloege, L., and McKinley, G. A.: Variability in the global ocean carbon sink from 1959 to 2020 by correcting models with observations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 49, e2022GL098632, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GL098632" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GL098632</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Bentsen, M., Bethke, I., Debernard, J. B., Iversen, T., Kirkevåg, A., Seland, Ø., Drange, H., Roelandt, C., Seierstad, I. A., Hoose, C., and Kristjánsson, J. E.: The Norwegian Earth System Model, NorESM1-M – Part 1: Description and basic evaluation of the physical climate, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 687–720, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-687-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-687-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Boucher, O., Servonnat, J., Albright, A. L., Aumont, O., Balkanski, Y.,
Bastrikov, V., Bekki, S., Bonnet, R., Bony, S., Bopp, L., Braconnot, P.,
Brockmann, P., Cadule, P., Caubel, A., Cheruy, F., Codron, F., Cozic, A.,
Cugnet, D., D'Andrea, F., Davini, P., de Lavergne, C., Denvil, S., Deshayes,
J., Devilliers, M., Ducharne, A., Dufresne, J.-L., Dupont, E., Éthé,
C., Fairhead, L., Falletti, L., Flavoni, S., Foujols, M.-A., Gardoll, S.,
Gastineau, G., Ghattas, J., Grandpeix, J.-Y., Guenet, B., Guez E., L.,
Guilyardi, E., Guimberteau, M., Hauglustaine, D., Hourdin, F., Idelkadi, A.,
Joussaume, S., Kageyama, M., Khodri, M., Krinner, G., Lebas, N.,
Levavasseur, G., Lévy, C., Li, L., Lott, F., Lurton, T., Luyssaert, S.,
Madec, G., Madeleine, J.-B., Maignan, F., Marchand, M., Marti, O., Mellul,
L., Meurdesoif, Y., Mignot, J., Musat, I., Ottlé, C., Peylin, P.,
Planton, Y., Polcher, J., Rio, C., Rochetin, N., Rousset, C., Sepulchre, P.,
Sima, A., Swingedouw, D., Thiéblemont, R., Traore, A. K., Vancoppenolle,
M., Vial, J., Vialard, J., Viovy, N., and Vuichard, N.: Presentation and
Evaluation of the IPSL-CM6A-LR Climate Model, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy.,
12, e2019MS002010, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002010</a>,
2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Bourgeois, T., Goris, N., Schwinger, J., and Tjiputra, J. F.: Stratification
constrains future heat and carbon uptake in the Southern Ocean between
30°&thinsp;S and 55°&thinsp;S, Nat. Commun., 13, 340,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-27979-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-27979-5</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Brient, F.: Reducing Uncertainties in Climate Projections with Emergent
Constraints: Concepts, Examples and Prospects, Adv. Atmos. Sci., 37, 1–15,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-019-9140-8" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-019-9140-8</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Broecker, W. S. and Peng, T.-H.: Gas exchange rates between air and sea,
Tellus, 26, 21–35, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1974.tb01948.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1974.tb01948.x</a>, 1974.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Bronselaer, B., Winton, M., Russell, J., Sabine, C. L., and Khatiwala, S.:
Agreement of CMIP5 Simulated and Observed Ocean Anthropogenic CO<sub>2</sub>
Uptake, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44,  212–298,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074435" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074435</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Brown, P. J., McDonagh, E. L., Sanders, R., Watson, A. J., Wanninkhof, R.,
King, B. A., Smeed, D. A., Baringer, M. O., Meinen, C. S., Schuster, U.,
Yool, A., and Messias, M.-J.: Circulation-driven variability of Atlantic
anthropogenic carbon transports and uptake, Nat. Geosci., 14, 571–577,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00774-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00774-5</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Buckley, M. W. and Marshall, J.: Observations, inferences, and mechanisms of
the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation: A review, Rev. Geophys.,
54, 5–63, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015RG000493" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015RG000493</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Bullister, J. L.: Atmospheric Histories (1765–2015) for CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-113, CCl4, SF6 and N2O (NCEI Accession 0164584), NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.3334/CDIAC/otg.CFC_ATM_Hist_2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3334/CDIAC/otg.CFC_ATM_Hist_2015</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Bushinsky, S. M., Landschützer, P., Rödenbeck, C., Gray, A. R.,
Baker, D., Mazloff, M. R., Resplandy, L., Johnson, K. S., and Sarmiento, J.
L.: Reassessing Southern Ocean Air-Sea CO<sub>2</sub> Flux Estimates With the
Addition of Biogeochemical Float Observations, Global Biogeochem. Cy.,
33, 1370–1388, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GB006176" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GB006176</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Caldeira, K. and Duffy, P. B.: The Role of the Southern Ocean in Uptake and
Storage of Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide, Science, 287, 620–622,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.287.5453.620" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.287.5453.620</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Caldwell, P. M., Bretherton, C. S., Zelinka, M. D., Klein, S. A., Santer, B.
D., and Sanderson, B. M.: Statistical significance of climate sensitivity
predictors obtained by data mining, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 1803–1808,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL059205" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL059205</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Canadell, J. G.,  Monteiro, P. M. S., Costa, M. H.,  Cotrim da Cunha, L., Cox, P. M.,  Eliseev, A. V., Henson,  S., Ishii,  M., Jaccard,  S.,
Koven, C., Lohila,  A., Patra, P. K., Piao,  S., Rogelj,  J., Syampungani,  S., Zaehle,  S., and Zickfeld, K.: Global Carbon and
other Biogeochemical Cycles and Feedbacks. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of
Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by: Masson-Delmotte,
V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C., Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M., Leitzell, K.,
Lonnoy,E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield, T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou,  B., Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA,  673–816, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.007</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Chau, T. T. T., Gehlen, M., and Chevallier, F.: A seamless ensemble-based
reconstruction of surface ocean <i>p</i>CO<sub>2</sub> and air–sea CO<sub>2</sub> fluxes over
the global coastal and open oceans, Biogeosciences, 19, 1087–1109,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-1087-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-1087-2022</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Christian, J. R., Denman, K. L., Hayashida, H., Holdsworth, A. M., Lee, W. G., Riche, O. G. J., Shao, A. E., Steiner, N., and Swart, N. C.: Ocean biogeochemistry in the Canadian Earth System Model version 5.0.3: CanESM5 and CanESM5-CanOE, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 4393–4424, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4393-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4393-2022</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Chylek, P., Li, J., Dubey, M. K., Wang, M., and Lesins, G.: Observed and model simulated 20th century Arctic temperature variability: Canadian Earth System Model CanESM2, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 11, 22893–22907, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-11-22893-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acpd-11-22893-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Claustre, H., Johnson, K. S., and Takeshita, Y.: Observing the Global Ocean
with Biogeochemical-Argo, Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci., 12, 23–48,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-marine-010419-010956" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-marine-010419-010956</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Clement, D. and Gruber, N.: The eMLR(C*) Method to Determine Decadal Changes
in the Global Ocean Storage of Anthropogenic CO<sub>2</sub>, Global Biogeochem.
Cy., 32, 654–679, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GB005819" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GB005819</a>,
2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Danabasoglu, G., Lamarque, J.-F., Bacmeister, J., Bailey, D. A., DuVivier,
A. K., Edwards, J., Emmons, L. K., Fasullo, J., Garcia, R., Gettelman, A.,
Hannay, C., Holland, M. M., Large, W. G., Lauritzen, P. H., Lawrence, D. M.,
Lenaerts, J. T. M., Lindsay, K., Lipscomb, W. H., Mills, M. J., Neale, R.,
Oleson, K. W., Otto-Bliesner, B., Phillips, A. S., Sacks, W., Tilmes, S.,
van Kampenhout, L., Vertenstein, M., Bertini, A., Dennis, J., Deser, C.,
Fischer, C., Fox-Kemper, B., Kay, J. E., Kinnison, D., Kushner, P. J.,
Larson, V. E., Long, M. C., Mickelson, S., Moore, J. K., Nienhouse, E.,
Polvani, L., Rasch, P. J., and Strand, W. G.: The Community Earth System
Model Version 2 (CESM2), J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS001916,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001916" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001916</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
DeVries, T.: The oceanic anthropogenic CO<sub>2</sub> sink: Storage, air-sea
fluxes, and transports over the industrial era, Global Biogeochem. Cy.,
28, 631–647, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GB004739" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GB004739</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Dickson, A. G., Sabine, C. L., and Christian, J. R. (Eds.):
Guide to Best Practices for Ocean CO<sub>2</sub> Measurements,
PICES Special Publication 3, 191 pp., North Pacific Marine Science Organization
Sidney, British Columbia, <a href="https://doi.org/10.25607/OBP-1342" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.25607/OBP-1342</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Doney, S. C., Busch, D. S., Cooley, S. R., and Kroeker, K. J.: The Impacts
of Ocean Acidification on Marine Ecosystems and Reliant Human Communities,
Annu. Rev. Env. Resour., 45, 83–112,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-012320-083019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-012320-083019</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Döscher, R., Acosta, M., Alessandri, A., Anthoni, P., Arsouze, T., Bergman, T., Bernardello, R., Boussetta, S., Caron, L.-P., Carver, G., Castrillo, M., Catalano, F., Cvijanovic, I., Davini, P., Dekker, E., Doblas-Reyes, F. J., Docquier, D., Echevarria, P., Fladrich, U., Fuentes-Franco, R., Gröger, M., v. Hardenberg, J., Hieronymus, J., Karami, M. P., Keskinen, J.-P., Koenigk, T., Makkonen, R., Massonnet, F., Ménégoz, M., Miller, P. A., Moreno-Chamarro, E., Nieradzik, L., van Noije, T., Nolan, P., O'Donnell, D., Ollinaho, P., van den Oord, G., Ortega, P., Prims, O. T., Ramos, A., Reerink, T., Rousset, C., Ruprich-Robert, Y., Le Sager, P., Schmith, T., Schrödner, R., Serva, F., Sicardi, V., Sloth Madsen, M., Smith, B., Tian, T., Tourigny, E., Uotila, P., Vancoppenolle, M., Wang, S., Wårlind, D., Willén, U., Wyser, K., Yang, S., Yepes-Arbós, X., and Zhang, Q.: The EC-Earth3 Earth system model for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6, Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 2973–3020, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-2973-2022</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Dufour, C. O., Griffies, S. M., de Souza, G. F., Frenger, I., Morrison, A.
K., Palter, J. B., Sarmiento, J. L., Galbraith, E. D., Dunne, J. P.,
Anderson, W. G., and Slater, R. D.: Role of Mesoscale Eddies in
Cross-Frontal Transport of Heat and Biogeochemical Tracers in the Southern
Ocean, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 45, 3057–3081,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-14-0240.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-14-0240.1</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Dunne, J. P., John, J. G., Adcroft, A. J., Griffies, S. M., Hallberg, R. W.,
Shevliakova, E., Stouffer, R. J., Cooke, W., Dunne, K. A., Harrison, M. J.,
Krasting, J. P., Malyshev, S. L., Milly, P. C. D., Phillipps, P. J.,
Sentman, L. T., Samuels, B. L., Spelman, M. J., Winton, M., Wittenberg, A.
T., and Zadeh, N.: GFDL's ESM2 Global Coupled Climate–Carbon Earth System
Models. Part I: Physical Formulation and Baseline Simulation
Characteristics, J. Climate, 25, 6646–6665,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00560.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00560.1</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Dunne, J. P., Horowitz, L. W., Adcroft, A. J., Ginoux, P., Held, I. M.,
John, J. G., Krasting, J. P., Malyshev, S., Naik, V., Paulot, F.,
Shevliakova, E., Stock, C. A., Zadeh, N., Balaji, V., Blanton, C., Dunne, K.
A., Dupuis, C., Durachta, J., Dussin, R., Gauthier, P. P. G., Griffies, S.
M., Guo, H., Hallberg, R. W., Harrison, M., He, J., Hurlin, W., McHugh, C.,
Menzel, R., Milly, P. C. D., Nikonov, S., Paynter, D. J., Ploshay, J.,
Radhakrishnan, A., Rand, K., Reichl, B. G., Robinson, T., Schwarzkopf, D.
M., Sentman, L. T., Underwood, S., Vahlenkamp, H., Winton, M., Wittenberg,
A. T., Wyman, B., Zeng, Y., and Zhao, M.: The GFDL Earth System Model
Version 4.1 (GFDL-ESM 4.1): Overall Coupled Model Description and Simulation
Characteristics, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS002015,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002015</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Egleston, E. S., Sabine, C. L., and Morel, F. M. M.: Revelle revisited:
Buffer factors that quantify the response of ocean chemistry to changes in
DIC and alkalinity, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 24, GB1002,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003407" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003407</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Eyring, V., Cox, P. M., Flato, G. M., Gleckler, P. J., Abramowitz, G.,
Caldwell, P., Collins, W. D., Gier, B. K., Hall, A. D., Hoffman, F. M.,
Hurtt, G. C., Jahn, A., Jones, C. D., Klein, S. A., Krasting, J. P.,
Kwiatkowski, L., Lorenz, R., Maloney, E., Meehl, G. A., Pendergrass, A. G.,
Pincus, R., Ruane, A. C., Russell, J. L., Sanderson, B. M., Santer, B. D.,
Sherwood, S. C., Simpson, I. R., Stouffer, R. J., and Williamson, M. S.:
Taking climate model evaluation to the next level, Nat. Clim. Change, 9,
102–110, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0355-y" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0355-y</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Fabry, V. J., Seibel, B. A., Feely, R. A., and Orr, J. C.: Impacts of ocean
acidification on marine fauna and ecosystem processes, ICES J. Mar. Sci.,
65, 414–432, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsn048" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsn048</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Falkowski, P. G., Barber, R. T., and Smetacek, V.: Biogeochemical Controls
and Feedbacks on Ocean Primary Production, Science, 281, 200–206,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.281.5374.200" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.281.5374.200</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Friedlingstein, P., Jones, M. W., O'Sullivan, M., Andrew, R. M., Bakker, D. C. E., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C., Peters, G. P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Sitch, S., Canadell, J. G., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Alin, S. R., Anthoni, P., Bates, N. R., Becker, M., Bellouin, N., Bopp, L., Chau, T. T. T., Chevallier, F., Chini, L. P., Cronin, M., Currie, K. I., Decharme, B., Djeutchouang, L. M., Dou, X., Evans, W., Feely, R. A., Feng, L., Gasser, T., Gilfillan, D., Gkritzalis, T., Grassi, G., Gregor, L., Gruber, N., Gürses, Ö., Harris, I., Houghton, R. A., Hurtt, G. C., Iida, Y., Ilyina, T., Luijkx, I. T., Jain, A., Jones, S. D., Kato, E., Kennedy, D., Klein Goldewijk, K., Knauer, J., Korsbakken, J. I., Körtzinger, A., Landschützer, P., Lauvset, S. K., Lefèvre, N., Lienert, S., Liu, J., Marland, G., McGuire, P. C., Melton, J. R., Munro, D. R., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nakaoka, S.-I., Niwa, Y., Ono, T., Pierrot, D., Poulter, B., Rehder, G., Resplandy, L., Robertson, E., Rödenbeck, C., Rosan, T. M., Schwinger, J., Schwingshackl, C., Séférian, R., Sutton, A. J., Sweeney, C., Tanhua, T., Tans, P. P., Tian, H., Tilbrook, B., Tubiello, F., van der Werf, G. R., Vuichard, N., Wada, C., Wanninkhof, R., Watson, A. J., Willis, D., Wiltshire, A. J., Yuan, W., Yue, C., Yue, X., Zaehle, S., and Zeng, J.: Global Carbon Budget 2021, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 1917–2005, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-1917-2022</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Frölicher, T. L. and Joos, F.: Reversible and irreversible impacts of
greenhouse gas emissions in multi-century projections with the NCAR global
coupled carbon cycle-climate model, Clim. Dynam., 35, 1439–1459,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-009-0727-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-009-0727-0</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Frölicher, T. L., Sarmiento, J. L., Paynter, D. J., Dunne, J. P.,
Krasting, J. P., and Winton, M.: Dominance of the Southern Ocean in
Anthropogenic Carbon and Heat Uptake in CMIP5 Models, J. Climate, 28,
862–886, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00117.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00117.1</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Gattuso, J.-P. and Hansson, L. (Eds.): Ocean acidification, Oxford University
Press, ISBN 9780199591091, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Gent, P. R., Danabasoglu, G., Donner, L. J., Holland, M. M., Hunke, E. C.,
Jayne, S. R., Lawrence, D. M., Neale, R. B., Rasch, P. J., Vertenstein, M.,
Worley, P. H., Yang, Z.-L., and Zhang, M.: The Community Climate System
Model Version 4, J. Climate, 24, 4973–4991,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI4083.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI4083.1</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Gerber, M., Joos, F., Vázquez-Rodríguez, M., Touratier, F., and
Goyet, C.: Regional air-sea fluxes of anthropogenic carbon inferred with an
Ensemble Kalman Filter, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 23, GB1013,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003247" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003247</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Giorgetta, M. A., Jungclaus, J., Reick, C. H., Legutke, S., Bader, J.,
Böttinger, M., Brovkin, V., Crueger, T., Esch, M., Fieg, K., Glushak,
K., Gayler, V., Haak, H., Hollweg, H.-D., Ilyina, T., Kinne, S., Kornblueh,
L., Matei, D., Mauritsen, T., Mikolajewicz, U., Mueller, W., Notz, D.,
Pithan, F., Raddatz, T., Rast, S., Redler, R., Roeckner, E., Schmidt, H.,
Schnur, R., Segschneider, J., Six, K. D., Stockhause, M., Timmreck, C.,
Wegner, J., Widmann, H., Wieners, K.-H., Claussen, M., Marotzke, J., and
Stevens, B.: Climate and carbon cycle changes from 1850 to 2100 in MPI-ESM
simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5, J. Adv.
Model. Earth Sy., 5, 572–597,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20038" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20038</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Gloege, L., McKinley, G. A., Landschützer, P., Fay, A. R.,
Frölicher, T. L., Fyfe, J. C., Ilyina, T., Jones, S., Lovenduski, N. S.,
Rodgers, K. B., Schlunegger, S., and Takano, Y.: Quantifying Errors in
Observationally Based Estimates of Ocean Carbon Sink Variability, Global
Biogeochem. Cy., 35, e2020GB006788,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GB006788" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GB006788</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Gloege, L., Yan, M., Zheng, T., and McKinley, G. A.: Improved Quantification
of Ocean Carbon Uptake by Using Machine Learning to Merge Global Models and
<i>p</i>CO<sub>2</sub> Data, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002620,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002620" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002620</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Goodwin, P., Williams, R. G., Ridgwell, A., and Follows, M. J.: Climate
sensitivity to the carbon cycle modulated by past and future changes in
ocean chemistry, Nat. Geosci., 2, 145–150, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo416" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo416</a>,
2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Goris, N., Tjiputra, J. F., Olsen, A., Schwinger, J., Lauvset, S. K., and
Jeansson, E.: Constraining Projection-Based Estimates of the Future North
Atlantic Carbon Uptake, J. Climate, 31, 3959–3978,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0564.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0564.1</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Goris, N., Johannsen, K., and Tjiputra, J.: Gulf Stream and interior western boundary volume transport as key regions to constrain the future North Atlantic Carbon Uptake, Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss. [preprint], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2022-152" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2022-152</a>, in review, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Gregor, L. and Gruber, N.: OceanSODA-ETHZ: a global gridded data set of the surface ocean carbonate system for seasonal to decadal studies of ocean acidification, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 777–808, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-777-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-777-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Gregor, L., Lebehot, A. D., Kok, S., and Scheel Monteiro, P. M.: A comparative assessment of the uncertainties of global surface ocean CO<sub>2</sub> estimates using a machine-learning ensemble (CSIR-ML6 version 2019a) – have we hit the wall?, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 5113–5136, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-5113-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-5113-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Griffies, S. M., Winton, M., Anderson, W. G., Benson, R., Delworth, T. L.,
Dufour, C. O., Dunne, J. P., Goddard, P., Morrison, A. K., Rosati, A.,
Wittenberg, A. T., Yin, J., and Zhang, R.: Impacts on Ocean Heat from
Transient Mesoscale Eddies in a Hierarchy of Climate Models, J. Climate, 28,
952–977, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00353.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00353.1</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Gruber, N., Sarmiento, J. L., and Stocker, T. F.: An improved method for
detecting anthropogenic CO<sub>2</sub> in the oceans, Global Biogeochem. Cy.,
10, 809–837, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96GB01608" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/96GB01608</a>, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Gruber, N., Gloor, M., Mikaloff Fletcher, S. E., Doney, S. C., Dutkiewicz,
S., Follows, M. J., Gerber, M., Jacobson, A. R., Joos, F., Lindsay, K.,
Menemenlis, D., Mouchet, A., Müller, S. A., Sarmiento, J. L., and
Takahashi, T.: Oceanic sources, sinks, and transport of atmospheric
CO<sub>2</sub>, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 23, GB1005,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003349" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003349</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Gruber, N., Hauri, C., Lachkar, Z., Loher, D., Frölicher, T. L., and
Plattner, G.-K.: Rapid Progression of Ocean Acidification in the California
Current System, Science, 337, 220–223,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1216773" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1216773</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Gruber, N., Clement, D., Carter, B. R., Feely, R. A., van Heuven, S.,
Hoppema, M., Ishii, M., Key, R. M., Kozyr, A., Lauvset, S. K., Lo Monaco,
C., Mathis, J. T., Murata, A., Olsen, A., Perez, F. F., Sabine, C. L.,
Tanhua, T., and Rik, W.: The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO<sub>2</sub> from
1994 to 2007, Science, 363, 1193–1199,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau5153" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau5153</a>, 2019a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Gruber, N., Landschützer, P., and Lovenduski, N. S.: The variable
southern ocean carbon sink, Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci., 11, 159–186,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-marine-121916-063407" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-marine-121916-063407</a>,  2019b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Gutjahr, O., Putrasahan, D., Lohmann, K., Jungclaus, J. H., von Storch, J.-S., Brüggemann, N., Haak, H., and Stössel, A.: Max Planck Institute Earth System Model (MPI-ESM1.2) for the High-Resolution Model Intercomparison Project (HighResMIP), Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 3241–3281, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3241-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-3241-2019</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Hajima, T., Watanabe, M., Yamamoto, A., Tatebe, H., Noguchi, M. A., Abe, M., Ohgaito, R., Ito, A., Yamazaki, D., Okajima, H., Ito, A., Takata, K., Ogochi, K., Watanabe, S., and Kawamiya, M.: Development of the MIROC-ES2L Earth system model and the evaluation of biogeochemical processes and feedbacks, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2197–2244, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2197-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2197-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Hall, A., Cox, P., Huntingford, C., and Klein, S.: Progressing emergent
constraints on future climate change, Nat. Clim. Change, 9, 269–278,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0436-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0436-6</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Hall, T. M., Haine, T. W. N., and Waugh, D. W.: Inferring the concentration
of anthropogenic carbon in the ocean from tracers, Global Biogeochem.
Cy., 16, 78-1–78-15,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001835" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001835</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Hauck, J., Zeising, M., Le Quéré, C., Gruber, N., Bakker, D. C. E.,
Bopp, L., Chau, T. T. T., Gürses, Ö., Ilyina, T., Landschützer,
P., Lenton, A., Resplandy, L., Rödenbeck, C., Schwinger, J., and
Séférian, R.: Consistency and Challenges in the Ocean Carbon Sink
Estimate for the Global Carbon Budget, Front. Mar. Sci., 7, 571720,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.571720" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.571720</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Hauri, C., Pagès, R., McDonnell, A. M. P., Stuecker, M. F., Danielson,
S. L., Hedstrom, K., Irving, B., Schultz, C., and Doney, S. C.: Modulation
of ocean acidification by decadal climate variability in the Gulf of Alaska,
Commun. Earth Environ., 2, 191, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-021-00254-z" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-021-00254-z</a>,
2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Hausfather, Z., Marvel, K., Schmidt, G. A., Nielsen-Gammon, J. W., and
Zelinka, M.: Climate simulations: recognize the “hot model” problem, Nature,
605, 26–29, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-01192-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-01192-2</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Held, I. M., Guo, H., Adcroft, A., Dunne, J. P., Horowitz, L. W., Krasting,
J., Shevliakova, E., Winton, M., Zhao, M., Bushuk, M., Wittenberg, A. T.,
Wyman, B., Xiang, B., Zhang, R., Anderson, W., Balaji, V., Donner, L.,
Dunne, K., Durachta, J., Gauthier, P. P. G., Ginoux, P., Golaz, J.-C.,
Griffies, S. M., Hallberg, R., Harris, L., Harrison, M., Hurlin, W., John,
J., Lin, P., Lin, S.-J., Malyshev, S., Menzel, R., Milly, P. C. D., Ming,
Y., Naik, V., Paynter, D., Paulot, F., Ramaswamy, V., Reichl, B., Robinson,
T., Rosati, A., Seman, C., Silvers, L. G., Underwood, S., and Zadeh, N.:
Structure and Performance of GFDL's CM4.0 Climate Model, J. Adv. Model.
Earth Sy., 11, 3691–3727,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001829" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001829</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Hess, D.: Constraining the anthropogenic carbon uptake in the North Atlantic
over the 21st century, University of Bern, 1–45, <a href="https://ube.swisscovery.slsp.ch/discovery/fulldisplay?vid=41SLSP_UBE:UBE&amp;docid=alma99117299352705511&amp;lang=en&amp;context=L" target="_blank"/>, last access: 1 June 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Iida, Y., Takatani, Y., Kojima, A., and Ishii, M.: Global trends of ocean
CO<sub>2</sub> sink and ocean acidification: an observation-based reconstruction
of surface ocean inorganic carbon variables, J. Oceanogr., 77, 323–358,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10872-020-00571-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10872-020-00571-5</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
IPCC: Summary for Policymakers, in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical
Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by:
Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., Connors, S. L., Péan, C.,
Berger, S., Caud, N., Chen, Y., Goldfarb, L., Gomis, M. I., Huang, M.,
Leitzell, K., Lonnoy, E., Matthews, J. B. R., Maycock, T. K., Waterfield,
T., Yelekçi, O., Yu, R., and Zhou, B., Cambridge University Press, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.001</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
IPCC: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by:  Shukla, P. R., Skea,  J., Slade,  R., Al Khourdajie, A., van Diemen, R., McCollum, D., Pathak, M., Some, S., Vyas, P.,  Fradera, R., Belkacemi, M., Hasija, A., Lisboa, G., Luz, S., and Malley, J., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157926" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157926</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Jacobson, A. R., Mikaloff Fletcher, S. E., Gruber, N., Sarmiento, J. L., and
Gloor, M.: A joint atmosphere-ocean inversion for surface fluxes of carbon
dioxide: 1. Methods and global-scale fluxes, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 21, GB1019,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GB002556" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GB002556</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Joos, F., Plattner, G.-K., Stocker, T. F., Marchal, O., and Schmittner, A.:
Global Warming and Marine Carbon Cycle Feedbacks on Future Atmospheric
CO<sub>2</sub>, Science, 284, 464–467,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.284.5413.464" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.284.5413.464</a>, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Katavouta, A., Williams, R. G., Goodwin, P., and Roussenov, V.: Reconciling
Atmospheric and Oceanic Views of the Transient Climate Response to
Emissions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 6205–6214,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL077849" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL077849</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Kawaguchi, S., Ishida, A., King, R., Raymond, B., Waller, N., Constable, A.,
Nicol, S., Wakita, M., and Ishimatsu, A.: Risk maps for Antarctic krill
under projected Southern Ocean acidification, Nat. Clim. Change, 3,
843–847, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1937" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1937</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Khatiwala, S., Tanhua, T., Mikaloff Fletcher, S., Gerber, M., Doney, S. C., Graven, H. D., Gruber, N., McKinley, G. A., Murata, A., Ríos, A. F., and Sabine, C. L.: Global ocean storage of anthropogenic carbon, Biogeosciences, 10, 2169–2191, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-2169-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-2169-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Kroeker, K. J., Kordas, R. L., Crim, R. N., and Singh, G. G.: Meta-analysis
reveals negative yet variable effects of ocean acidification on marine
organisms, Ecol. Lett., 13, 1419–1434,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01518.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01518.x</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
Kroeker, K. J., Kordas, R. L., Crim, R., Hendriks, I. E., Ramajo, L., Singh,
G. S., Duarte, C. M., and Gattuso, J.-P.: Impacts of ocean acidification on
marine organisms: quantifying sensitivities and interaction with warming,
Glob. Change Biol., 19, 1884–1896,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12179" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12179</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
Kwiatkowski, L., Bopp, L., Aumont, O., Ciais, P., Cox, P. M.,
Laufkötter, C., Li, Y., and Séférian, R.: Emergent constraints
on projections of declining primary production in the tropical oceans, Nat.
Clim. Change, 7, 355–358, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3265" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3265</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Kwiatkowski, L., Torres, O., Bopp, L., Aumont, O., Chamberlain, M., Christian, J. R., Dunne, J. P., Gehlen, M., Ilyina, T., John, J. G., Lenton, A., Li, H., Lovenduski, N. S., Orr, J. C., Palmieri, J., Santana-Falcón, Y., Schwinger, J., Séférian, R., Stock, C. A., Tagliabue, A., Takano, Y., Tjiputra, J., Toyama, K., Tsujino, H., Watanabe, M., Yamamoto, A., Yool, A., and Ziehn, T.: Twenty-first century ocean warming, acidification, deoxygenation, and upper-ocean nutrient and primary production decline from CMIP6 model projections, Biogeosciences, 17, 3439–3470, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-3439-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-3439-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Lachkar, Z., Orr, J. C., Dutay, J.-C., and Delecluse, P.: Effects of mesoscale eddies on global ocean distributions of CFC-11, CO<sub>2</sub>, and Δ<sup>14</sup>C, Ocean Sci., 3, 461–482, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/os-3-461-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/os-3-461-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Lachkar, Z., Orr, J. C., Dutay, J.-C., and Delecluse, P.: On the role of
mesoscale eddies in the ventilation of Antarctic intermediate water, Deep-Sea Res. Pt. I, 56, 909–925,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2009.01.013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2009.01.013</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>
Lacroix, F., Ilyina, T., and Hartmann, J.: Oceanic CO<sub>2</sub> outgassing and biological production hotspots induced by pre-industrial river loads of nutrients and carbon in a global modeling approach, Biogeosciences, 17, 55–88, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-55-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-55-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><mixed-citation>
Landschützer, P., Gruber, N., and Bakker, D. C. E.: Decadal variations
and trends of the global ocean carbon sink, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 30,
1396–1417, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GB005359" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GB005359</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><mixed-citation>
Langdon, C. and Atkinson, M. J.: Effect of elevated <i>p</i>CO<sub>2</sub> on
photosynthesis and calcification of corals and interactions with seasonal
change in temperature/irradiance and nutrient enrichment, J. Geophys. Res.-Ocean, 110, C09S07, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JC002576" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JC002576</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><mixed-citation>
Lauvset, S. K., Key, R. M., Olsen, A., van Heuven, S., Velo, A., Lin, X., Schirnick, C., Kozyr, A., Tanhua, T., Hoppema, M., Jutterström, S., Steinfeldt, R., Jeansson, E., Ishii, M., Perez, F. F., Suzuki, T., and Watelet, S.: A new global interior ocean mapped climatology: the 1°&thinsp; × &thinsp;&thinsp;1° GLODAP version 2, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 8, 325–340, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-325-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-325-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><mixed-citation>
Lauvset, S. K., Lange, N., Tanhua, T., Bittig, H. C., Olsen, A., Kozyr, A., Álvarez, M., Becker, S., Brown, P. J., Carter, B. R., Cotrim da Cunha, L., Feely, R. A., van Heuven, S., Hoppema, M., Ishii, M., Jeansson, E., Jutterström, S., Jones, S. D., Karlsen, M. K., Lo Monaco, C., Michaelis, P., Murata, A., Pérez, F. F., Pfeil, B., Schirnick, C., Steinfeldt, R., Suzuki, T., Tilbrook, B., Velo, A., Wanninkhof, R., Woosley, R. J., and Key, R. M.: An updated version of the global interior ocean biogeochemical data product, GLODAPv2.2021, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 5565–5589, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-5565-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-5565-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><mixed-citation>
Lebrato, M., Andersson, A. J., Ries, J. B., Aronson, R. B., Lamare, M. D.,
Koeve, W., Oschlies, A., Iglesias-Rodriguez, M. D., Thatje, S., Amsler, M.,
Vos, S. C., Jones, D. O. B., Ruhl, H. A., Gates, A. R., and McClintock, J.
B.: Benthic marine calcifiers coexist with CaCO<sub>3</sub>-undersaturated
seawater worldwide, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 30, 1038–1053,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GB005260" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GB005260</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><mixed-citation>
Lindsay, K., Bonan, G. B., Doney, S. C., Hoffman, F. M., Lawrence, D. M.,
Long, M. C., Mahowald, N. M., Keith Moore, J., Randerson, J. T., and
Thornton, P. E.: Preindustrial-Control and Twentieth-Century Carbon Cycle
Experiments with the Earth System Model CESM1(BGC), J. Climate, 27,
8981–9005, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00565.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00565.1</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><mixed-citation>
Locarnini, R. A., Mishonov, A. V., Baranova, O. K., Boyer,
T. P., Zweng, M. M., Garcia, H. E., Reagan, J. R., Seidov, D., Weathers, K., Paver, C. R., and Smolyar, I.: World
Ocean Atlas 2018, Volume 1: Temperature, Tech. Rep., A. Mishonov Technical Ed.; NOAA Atlas NESDIS 81,
<a href="https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/world-ocean-atlas-2018/" target="_blank"/> (last
access: 1 June 2022), 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><mixed-citation>
Lovato, T., Peano, D., Butenschön, M., Materia, S., Iovino, D.,
Scoccimarro, E., Fogli, P. G., Cherchi, A., Bellucci, A., Gualdi, S.,
Masina, S., and Navarra, A.: CMIP6 Simulations With the CMCC Earth System
Model (CMCC-ESM2), J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, e2021MS002814,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002814" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002814</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><mixed-citation>
Marshall, J. and Speer, K.: Closure of the meridional overturning
circulation through Southern Ocean upwelling, Nat. Geosci., 5, 171–180,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1391" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1391</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><mixed-citation>
Matear, R. J., Wong, C. S., and Xie, L.: Can CFCs be used to determine
anthropogenic CO<sub>2</sub>?, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 17, 1013,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001415" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GB001415</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><mixed-citation>
Matsumoto, K., Sarmiento, J. L., Key, R. M., Aumont, O., Bullister, J. L.,
Caldeira, K., Campin, J.-M., Doney, S. C., Drange, H., Dutay, J.-C.,
Follows, M., Gao, Y., Gnanadesikan, A., Gruber, N., Ishida, A., Joos, F.,
Lindsay, K., Maier-Reimer, E., Marshall, J. C., Matear, R. J., Monfray, P.,
Mouchet, A., Najjar, R., Plattner, G.-K., Schlitzer, R., Slater, R., Swathi,
P. S., Totterdell, I. J., Weirig, M.-F., Yamanaka, Y., Yool, A., and Orr, J.
C.: Evaluation of ocean carbon cycle models with data-based metrics,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L07303, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GL018970" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GL018970</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><mixed-citation>
Mauritsen, T., Bader, J., Becker, T., Behrens, J., Bittner, M., Brokopf, R.,
Brovkin, V., Claussen, M., Crueger, T., Esch, M., Fast, I., Fiedler, S.,
Fläschner, D., Gayler, V., Giorgetta, M., Goll, D. S., Haak, H.,
Hagemann, S., Hedemann, C., Hohenegger, C., Ilyina, T., Jahns, T.,
Jimenéz-de-la-Cuesta, D., Jungclaus, J., Kleinen, T., Kloster, S.,
Kracher, D., Kinne, S., Kleberg, D., Lasslop, G., Kornblueh, L., Marotzke,
J., Matei, D., Meraner, K., Mikolajewicz, U., Modali, K., Möbis, B.,
Müller, W. A., Nabel, J. E. M. S., Nam, C. C. W., Notz, D., Nyawira,
S.-S., Paulsen, H., Peters, K., Pincus, R., Pohlmann, H., Pongratz, J.,
Popp, M., Raddatz, T. J., Rast, S., Redler, R., Reick, C. H., Rohrschneider,
T., Schemann, V., Schmidt, H., Schnur, R., Schulzweida, U., Six, K. D.,
Stein, L., Stemmler, I., Stevens, B., von Storch, J.-S., Tian, F., Voigt,
A., Vrese, P., Wieners, K.-H., Wilkenskjeld, S., Winkler, A., and Roeckner,
E.: Developments in the MPI-M Earth System Model version 1.2 (MPI-ESM1.2)
and Its Response to Increasing CO<sub>2</sub>, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 11,
998–1038, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001400" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001400</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><mixed-citation>
McCarthy, G. D., Brown, P. J., Flagg, C. N., Goni, G., Houpert, L., Hughes,
C. W., Hummels, R., Inall, M., Jochumsen, K., Larsen, K. M. H., Lherminier,
P., Meinen, C. S., Moat, B. I., Rayner, D., Rhein, M., Roessler, A., Schmid,
C., and Smeed, D. A.: Sustainable Observations of the AMOC: Methodology and
Technology, Rev. Geophys., 58, e2019RG000654, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000654" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000654</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><mixed-citation>
McKinley, G. A., Fay, A. R., Eddebbar, Y. A., Gloege, L., and Lovenduski, N.
S.: External Forcing Explains Recent Decadal Variability of the Ocean Carbon
Sink, AGU Adv., 1, e2019AV000149,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019AV000149" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019AV000149</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><mixed-citation>
McNeil, B. I. and Matear, R. J.: The non-steady state oceanic CO<sub>2</sub> signal: its importance, magnitude and a novel way to detect it, Biogeosciences, 10, 2219–2228, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-2219-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-2219-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib96"><label>96</label><mixed-citation>
Meinshausen, M., Nicholls, Z. R. J., Lewis, J., Gidden, M. J., Vogel, E.,
Freund, M., Beyerle, U., Gessner, C., Nauels, A., Bauer, N., Canadell, J.
G., Daniel, J. S., John, A., Krummel, P. B., Luderer, G., Meinshausen, N.,
Montzka, S. A., Rayner, P. J., Reimann, S., Smith, S. J., van den Berg, M.,
Velders, G. J. M., Vollmer, M. K., and Wang, R. H. J.: The shared
socio-economic pathway (SSP) greenhouse gas concentrations and their
extensions to 2500, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 3571–3605,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3571-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-3571-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib97"><label>97</label><mixed-citation>
Middelburg, J. J., Soetaert, K., and Hagens, M.: Ocean Alkalinity, Buffering
and Biogeochemical Processes, Rev. Geophys., 58, e2019RG000681,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000681" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000681</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib98"><label>98</label><mixed-citation>
Mikaloff Fletcher, S. E., Gruber, N., Jacobson, A. R., Doney, S. C.,
Dutkiewicz, S., Gerber, M., Follows, M., Joos, F., Lindsay, K., Menemenlis,
D., Mouchet, A., Müller, S. A., and Sarmiento, J. L.: Inverse estimates
of anthropogenic CO<sub>2</sub> uptake, transport, and storage by the ocean,
Global Biogeochem. Cy., 20,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GB002530" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GB002530</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib99"><label>99</label><mixed-citation>
Morrison, A. K., Frölicher, T. L., and Sarmiento, J. L.: Upwelling in
the Southern Ocean, Phys. Today, 68, 27–32,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.2654" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.2654</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib100"><label>100</label><mixed-citation>
NOAA/GML: Trends in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide,  NOAA/GML [data set], <a href="https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/gl_data.html" target="_blank"/>, last access: 1 June 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib101"><label>101</label><mixed-citation>
O'Neill, B. C., Tebaldi, C., van Vuuren, D. P., Eyring, V., Friedlingstein,
P., Hurtt, G., Knutti, R., Kriegler, E., Lamarque, J.-F., Lowe, J., Meehl,
G. A., Moss, R., Riahi, K., and Sanderson, B. M.: The Scenario Model
Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) for CMIP6, Geosci. Model Dev., 9,
3461–3482, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3461-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3461-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib102"><label>102</label><mixed-citation>
Orr, J. C. (Ed.): Global Ocean Storage of Anthropogenic Carbon, Inst. Pierre Simon
Laplace, Gif-sur-Yvette, France, 116 pp., <a href="http://ocmip5.ipsl.jussieu.fr/OCMIP/reports/GOSAC_finalreport_lores.pdf" target="_blank"/> (last access: 1 June 2022), 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib103"><label>103</label><mixed-citation>
Orr, J. C. and Epitalon, J.-M.: Improved routines to model the ocean carbonate system: mocsy 2.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 485–499, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-485-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-485-2015</a>, 2015 (software code available at: <a href="https://github.com/jamesorr/mocsy" target="_blank"/>, last access: 1 June 2022).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib104"><label>104</label><mixed-citation>
Orr, J. C., Fabry, V. J., Aumont, O., Bopp, L., Doney, S. C., Feely, R. A.,
Gnanadesikan, A., Gruber, N., Ishida, A., Joos, F., Key, R. M., Lindsay, K.,
Maier-Reimer, E., Matear, R., Monfray, P., Mouchet, A., Najjar, R. G.,
Plattner, G.-K., Rodgers, K. B., Sabine, C. L., Sarmiento, J. L., Schlitzer,
R., Slater, R. D., Totterdell, I. J., Weirig, M.-F., Yamanaka, Y., and Yool,
A.: Anthropogenic ocean acidification over the twenty-first century and its
impact on calcifying organisms, Nature, 437, 681–686,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04095" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04095</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib105"><label>105</label><mixed-citation>
Orr, J. C., Najjar, R. G., Aumont, O., Bopp, L., Bullister, J. L., Danabasoglu, G., Doney, S. C., Dunne, J. P., Dutay, J.-C., Graven, H., Griffies, S. M., John, J. G., Joos, F., Levin, I., Lindsay, K., Matear, R. J., McKinley, G. A., Mouchet, A., Oschlies, A., Romanou, A., Schlitzer, R., Tagliabue, A., Tanhua, T., and Yool, A.: Biogeochemical protocols and diagnostics for the CMIP6 Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP), Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 2169–2199, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2169-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-2169-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib106"><label>106</label><mixed-citation>
Pérez, F. F., Mercier, H., Vázquez-Rodríguez, M., Lherminier,
P., Velo, A., Pardo, P. C., Rosón, G., and Ríos, A. F.: Atlantic
Ocean CO<sub>2</sub> uptake reduced by weakening of the meridional overturning
circulation, Nat. Geosci., 6, 146–152, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1680" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1680</a>,
2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib107"><label>107</label><mixed-citation>
Regnier, P., Resplandy, L., Najjar, R. G., and Ciais, P.: The land-to-ocean
loops of the global carbon cycle, Nature, 603, 401–410,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04339-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04339-9</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib108"><label>108</label><mixed-citation>
Resplandy, L., Keeling, R. F., Rödenbeck, C., Stephens, B. B.,
Khatiwala, S., Rodgers, K. B., Long, M. C., Bopp, L., and Tans, P. P.:
Revision of global carbon fluxes based on a reassessment of oceanic and
riverine carbon transport, Nat. Geosci., 11, 504–509,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0151-3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0151-3</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib109"><label>109</label><mixed-citation>
Revelle, R. and Suess, H. E.: Carbon Dioxide Exchange Between Atmosphere and
Ocean and the Question of an Increase of Atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> during the Past
Decades, Tellus, 9, 18–27, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1957.tb01849.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2153-3490.1957.tb01849.x</a>, 1957.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib110"><label>110</label><mixed-citation>
Riahi, K., van Vuuren, D. P., Kriegler, E., Edmonds, J., O'Neill, B. C.,
Fujimori, S., Bauer, N., Calvin, K., Dellink, R., Fricko, O., Lutz, W.,
Popp, A., Cuaresma, J. C., KC, S., Leimbach, M., Jiang, L., Kram, T., Rao,
S., Emmerling, J., Ebi, K., Hasegawa, T., Havlik, P., Humpenöder, F., Da
Silva, L. A., Smith, S., Stehfest, E., Bosetti, V., Eom, J., Gernaat, D.,
Masui, T., Rogelj, J., Strefler, J., Drouet, L., Krey, V., Luderer, G.,
Harmsen, M., Takahashi, K., Baumstark, L., Doelman, J. C., Kainuma, M.,
Klimont, Z., Marangoni, G., Lotze-Campen, H., Obersteiner, M., Tabeau, A.,
and Tavoni, M.: The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land
use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: An overview, Global Environ.
Chang., 42, 153–168, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.009</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib111"><label>111</label><mixed-citation>
Ridge, S. M. and McKinley, G. A.: Advective Controls on the North Atlantic
Anthropogenic Carbon Sink, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 34, e2019GB006457,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GB006457" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GB006457</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib112"><label>112</label><mixed-citation>
Ries, J. B., Cohen, A. L., and McCorkle, D. C.: Marine calcifiers exhibit
mixed responses to CO<sub>2</sub>-induced ocean acidification, Geology, 37, 1131–1134,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1130/G30210A.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1130/G30210A.1</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib113"><label>113</label><mixed-citation>
Rödenbeck, C., Keeling, R. F., Bakker, D. C. E., Metzl, N., Olsen, A., Sabine, C., and Heimann, M.: Global surface-ocean <i>p</i>CO<sub>2</sub> and sea–air CO<sub>2</sub> flux variability from an observation-driven ocean mixed-layer scheme, Ocean Sci., 9, 193–216, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/os-9-193-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/os-9-193-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib114"><label>114</label><mixed-citation>
Rödenbeck, C., Bakker, D. C. E., Metzl, N., Olsen, A., Sabine, C., Cassar, N., Reum, F., Keeling, R. F., and Heimann, M.: Interannual sea–air CO<sub>2</sub> flux variability from an observation-driven ocean mixed-layer scheme, Biogeosciences, 11, 4599–4613, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-4599-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-4599-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib115"><label>115</label><mixed-citation>
Rödenbeck, C., DeVries, T., Hauck, J., Le Quéré, C., and Keeling, R. F.: Data-based estimates of interannual sea–air CO<sub>2</sub> flux variations 1957–2020 and their relation to environmental drivers, Biogeosciences, 19, 2627–2652, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-2627-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-2627-2022</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib116"><label>116</label><mixed-citation>
Rodgers, K. B., Schlunegger, S., Slater, R. D., Ishii, M., Frölicher, T.
L., Toyama, K., Plancherel, Y., Aumont, O., and Fassbender, A. J.:
Reemergence of Anthropogenic Carbon Into the Ocean's Mixed Layer Strongly
Amplifies Transient Climate Sensitivity, Geophys. Res. Lett., 47,
e2020GL089275, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089275" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL089275</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib117"><label>117</label><mixed-citation>
Sabine, C. L., Feely, R. A., Gruber, N., Key, R. M., Lee, K., Bullister, J.
L., Wanninkhof, R., Wong, C. S., Wallace, D. W. R., Tilbrook, B., Millero,
F. J., Peng, T.-H., Kozyr, A., Ono, T., and Rios, A. F.: The Oceanic Sink
for Anthropogenic CO<sub>2</sub>, Science, 305, 367–371,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097403" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097403</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib118"><label>118</label><mixed-citation>
Sanderson, B. M., Pendergrass, A. G., Koven, C. D., Brient, F., Booth, B. B. B., Fisher, R. A., and Knutti, R.: The potential for structural errors in emergent constraints, Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 899–918, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-899-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-899-2021</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib119"><label>119</label><mixed-citation>
Sarmiento, J. L. and Sundquist, E. T.: Revised budget for the oceanic uptake
of anthropogenic carbon dioxide, Nature, 356, 589–593,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/356589a0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/356589a0</a>, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib120"><label>120</label><mixed-citation>
Sarmiento, J. L., Orr, J. C., and Siegenthaler, U.: A perturbation
simulation of CO<sub>2</sub> uptake in an ocean general circulation model, J.
Geophys. Res.-Ocean, 97, 3621–3645,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/91JC02849" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/91JC02849</a>, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib121"><label>121</label><mixed-citation>
Sarmiento, J. L., Le Quéré, C., and Pacala, S. W.: Limiting future
atmospheric carbon dioxide, Global Biogeochem. Cy., 9, 121–137,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/94GB01779" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/94GB01779</a>, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib122"><label>122</label><mixed-citation>
Sarmiento, J. L., Hughes, T. M. C., Stouffer, R. J., and Manabe, S.:
Simulated response of the ocean carbon cycle to anthropogenic climate
warming, Nature, 393, 245–249, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/30455" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/30455</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib123"><label>123</label><mixed-citation>
Séférian, R., Gehlen, M., Bopp, L., Resplandy, L., Orr, J. C., Marti, O., Dunne, J. P., Christian, J. R., Doney, S. C., Ilyina, T., Lindsay, K., Halloran, P. R., Heinze, C., Segschneider, J., Tjiputra, J., Aumont, O., and Romanou, A.: Inconsistent strategies to spin up models in CMIP5: implications for ocean biogeochemical model performance assessment, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 1827–1851, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1827-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1827-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib124"><label>124</label><mixed-citation>
Séférian, R., Nabat, P., Michou, M., Saint-Martin, D., Voldoire, A.,
Colin, J., Decharme, B., Delire, C., Berthet, S., Chevallier, M.,
Sénési, S., Franchisteguy, L., Vial, J., Mallet, M., Joetzjer, E.,
Geoffroy, O., Guérémy, J.-F., Moine, M.-P., Msadek, R., Ribes, A.,
Rocher, M., Roehrig, R., Salas-y-Mélia, D., Sanchez, E., Terray, L.,
Valcke, S., Waldman, R., Aumont, O., Bopp, L., Deshayes, J., Éthé,
C., and Madec, G.: Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM-ESM2-1: Role
of Earth System Processes in Present-Day and Future Climate, J. Adv. Model.
Earth Sy., 11, 4182–4227,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001791" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001791</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib125"><label>125</label><mixed-citation>
Séférian, R., Berthet, S., Yool, A., Palmiéri, J., Bopp, L.,
Tagliabue, A., Kwiatkowski, L., Aumont, O., Christian, J., Dunne, J.,
Gehlen, M., Ilyina, T., John, J. G., Li, H., Long, M. C., Luo, J. Y.,
Nakano, H., Romanou, A., Schwinger, J., Stock, C., Santana-Falcón, Y.,
Takano, Y., Tjiputra, J., Tsujino, H., Watanabe, M., Wu, T., Wu, F., and
Yamamoto, A.: Tracking Improvement in Simulated Marine Biogeochemistry
Between CMIP5 and CMIP6, Curr. Clim. Chang. Reports, 6, 95–119,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-020-00160-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-020-00160-0</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib126"><label>126</label><mixed-citation>
Sellar, A. A., Walton, J., Jones, C. G., Wood, R., Abraham, N. L.,
Andrejczuk, M., Andrews, M. B., Andrews, T., Archibald, A. T., de Mora, L.,
Dyson, H., Elkington, M., Ellis, R., Florek, P., Good, P., Gohar, L.,
Haddad, S., Hardiman, S. C., Hogan, E., Iwi, A., Jones, C. D., Johnson, B.,
Kelley, D. I., Kettleborough, J., Knight, J. R., Köhler, M. O.,
Kuhlbrodt, T., Liddicoat, S., Linova-Pavlova, I., Mizielinski, M. S.,
Morgenstern, O., Mulcahy, J., Neininger, E., O'Connor, F. M., Petrie, R.,
Ridley, J., Rioual, J.-C., Roberts, M., Robertson, E., Rumbold, S., Seddon,
J., Shepherd, H., Shim, S., Stephens, A., Teixiera, J. C., Tang, Y.,
Williams, J., Wiltshire, A., and Griffiths, P. T.: Implementation of U.K.
Earth System Models for CMIP6, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12,
e2019MS001946, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001946" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS001946</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib127"><label>127</label><mixed-citation>
Steinacher, M., Joos, F., Frölicher, T. L., Bopp, L., Cadule, P., Cocco, V., Doney, S. C., Gehlen, M., Lindsay, K., Moore, J. K., Schneider, B., and Segschneider, J.: Projected 21st century decrease in marine productivity: a multi-model analysis, Biogeosciences, 7, 979–1005, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-979-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-979-2010</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib128"><label>128</label><mixed-citation>
Stock, C. A., Dunne, J. P., Fan, S., Ginoux, P., John, J., Krasting, J. P.,
Laufkötter, C., Paulot, F., and Zadeh, N.: Ocean Biogeochemistry in
GFDL's Earth System Model 4.1 and Its Response to Increasing Atmospheric
CO<sub>2</sub>, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 12, e2019MS002043,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002043" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019MS002043</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib129"><label>129</label><mixed-citation>
Talley, L. D.: Closure of the Global Overturning Circulation Through the
Indian, Pacific, and Southern Oceans: Schematics and Transports,
Oceanography, 26, 80–97, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2013.07" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2013.07</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib130"><label>130</label><mixed-citation>
Terhaar, J., Kwiatkowski, L., and Bopp, L.: Emergent constraint on Arctic
Ocean acidification in the twenty-first century, Nature, 582, 379–383,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2360-3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2360-3</a>, 2020a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib131"><label>131</label><mixed-citation>
Terhaar, J., Tanhua, T., Stöven, T., Orr, J. C., and Bopp, L.: Evaluation of data-based estimates of anthropogenic carbon in the Arctic Ocean, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 125, e2020JC016124, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JC016124" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JC016124</a>, 2020b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib132"><label>132</label><mixed-citation>
Terhaar, J., Torres, O., Bourgeois, T., and Kwiatkowski, L.: Arctic Ocean acidification over the 21st century co-driven by anthropogenic carbon increases and freshening in the CMIP6 model ensemble, Biogeosciences, 18, 2221–2240, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-2221-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-2221-2021</a>, 2021a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib133"><label>133</label><mixed-citation>
Terhaar, J., Frölicher, T., and Joos, F.: Southern Ocean anthropogenic
carbon sink constrained by sea surface salinity, Sci. Adv., 7, 5964–5992,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd5964" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd5964</a>, 2021b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib134"><label>134</label><mixed-citation>
Tjiputra, J. F., Schwinger, J., Bentsen, M., Morée, A. L., Gao, S., Bethke, I., Heinze, C., Goris, N., Gupta, A., He, Y.-C., Olivié, D., Seland, Ø., and Schulz, M.: Ocean biogeochemistry in the Norwegian Earth System Model version 2 (NorESM2), Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2393–2431, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2393-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2393-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib135"><label>135</label><mixed-citation>
Vaittinada Ayar, P., Bopp, L., Christian, J. R., Ilyina, T., Krasting, J. P., Séférian, R., Tsujino, H., Watanabe, M., Yool, A., and Tjiputra, J.: Contrasting projections of the ENSO-driven CO<sub>2</sub> flux variability in the equatorial Pacific under high-warming scenario, Earth Syst. Dynam., 13, 1097–1118, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1097-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-13-1097-2022</a>, 2022.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib136"><label>136</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, L., Huang, J., Luo, Y., and Zhao, Z.: Narrowing the spread in CMIP5
model projections of air-sea CO<sub>2</sub> fluxes, Sci. Rep.-UK, 6, 37548,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/srep37548" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/srep37548</a>, 2016.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib137"><label>137</label><mixed-citation>
Watson, A. J., Schuster, U., Shutler, J. D., Holding, T., Ashton, I. G. C.,
Landschützer, P., Woolf, D. K., and Goddijn-Murphy, L.: Revised
estimates of ocean-atmosphere CO<sub>2</sub> flux are consistent with ocean carbon
inventory, Nat. Commun., 11, 4422,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18203-3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18203-3</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib138"><label>138</label><mixed-citation>
Weiss, R. F.: Carbon dioxide in water and seawater: the solubility of a
non-ideal gas, Mar. Chem., 2, 203–215,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4203(74)90015-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4203(74)90015-2</a>, 1974.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib139"><label>139</label><mixed-citation>
Wenzel, S., Cox, P. M., Eyring, V., and Friedlingstein, P.: Emergent
constraints on climate-carbon cycle feedbacks in the CMIP5 Earth system
models, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 119, 794–807,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JG002591" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JG002591</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib140"><label>140</label><mixed-citation>
Williamson, M. S., Thackeray, C. W., Cox, P. M., Hall, A., Huntingford, C.,
and Nijsse, F. J. M. M.: Emergent constraints on climate sensitivities, Rev.
Mod. Phys., 93, 25004, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025004" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025004</a>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib141"><label>141</label><mixed-citation>
Winton, M., Griffies, S. M., Samuels, B. L., Sarmiento, J. L., and
Frölicher, T. L.: Connecting Changing Ocean Circulation with Changing
Climate, J. Climate, 26, 2268–2278,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00296.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00296.1</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib142"><label>142</label><mixed-citation>
Yukimoto, S., Kawai, H., Koshiro, T., Oshima, N., Yoshida, K., Urakawa, S.,
Tsujino, H., Deushi, M., Tanaka, T., Hosaka, M., Yabu, S., Yoshimura, H.,
Shindo, E., Mizuta, R., Obata, A., Adachi, Y., and Ishii, M.: The
Meteorological Research Institute Earth System Model Version 2.0,
MRI-ESM2.0: Description and Basic Evaluation of the Physical Component, J.
Meteorol. Soc. Jpn. Ser. II, 97, 931–965,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2019-051" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2019-051</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib143"><label>143</label><mixed-citation>
Zeng, J., Nojiri, Y., Landschützer, P., Telszewski, M., and Nakaoka, S.:
A Global Surface Ocean <i>f</i>CO<sub>2</sub> Climatology Based on a Feed-Forward Neural
Network, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 31, 1838–1849,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-13-00137.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-13-00137.1</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib144"><label>144</label><mixed-citation>
Ziehn, T., Chamberlain, M. A., Law, R. M., Lenton, A., Bodman, R. W., Dix,
M., Stevens, L., Wang, Y.-P., and Srbinovsky, J.: The Australian Earth
System Model: ACCESS-ESM1.5, J. South. Hemisph. Earth Syst. Sci., 70,
193–214, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib145"><label>145</label><mixed-citation>
Zweng, M. M., Reagan, J. R., Seidov, D., Boyer, T. P., Locarnini, R. A., Garcia, H. E., Mishonov, A. V., Baranova,
O. K., Weathers, K., Paver, C. R., and Smolyar, I.: World
Ocean Atlas 2018, Volume 2: Salinity, Tech. Rep., A. Mishonov Technical Ed.; NOAA Atlas NESDIS 81,
<a href="https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/world-ocean-atlas-2018/" target="_blank"/> (last
access: 1 June 2022), 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
