WHP Cruise Summary Information WOCE section designation P21EW Expedition designation (EXPOCODE) 318MWESTW_4-5 Chief Scientist(s) and their affiliation Michael McCartney, WHOI (leg 4) Harry Bryden, JRC (leg 5) Dates 1994.03.27 - 1994.05.15 (leg 4) 1994.05.19 - 1994.06.25 (leg 5) Ship MELVILLE Ports of call Iquique, Chile to Papeete, Tahiti (leg 4) Papeete to Brisbane, Australia (leg 5) Number of stations 161 (leg 4); 133 (leg 5) Geographic boundaries of the stations: Leg 4 14°30.00''S 149°20.17''W 74°08.00''W 17°30.33''S Leg 5 17°25.00''S 179°40.17''W 147°49.83''W 25°45.67''S Floats and drifters deployed none Moorings deployed or recovered none Contributing Authors G. Anderson A. CRUISE NARRATIVE A.1. Highlights a. WOCE designation: P21E and P21W b. EXPOCODE 318MWESTW/4 318MWESTW/5 c. Chief scientist: Leg 1: Michael McCartney, WHOI Leg 2: Harry Bryden, JRC d. Ship: R/V Melville e. Ports of call: Leg 1: Iquique, Chile to Papeete, Tahiti Leg 2: Papeete to Brisbane, Australia f. Cruise dates: Leg 1: March 27 to May 15, 1994 Leg 2: May 19 to June 25, 1994 A.2. Cruise Summary Information A.2.a. Geographic boundaries: 14 30 S 154 E 74 W 25 43 S The cruise was conducted within 1deg of 17 S from 74 W to 169 E. The section then bore WSW to finish at 25 43 S 154 E. A.2.b. Stations occupied: A trackline is shown in Figure 1. The bottle sampling scheme is shown in Figure 2. A total of 294 CTD/rosette stations were occupied. 161 stations were occupied on Leg 4 and 133 on Leg 5. A.2.c. Floats and drifters deployed: No information yet available. A.2.d. Moorings deployed or recovered: No moorings were deployed or recovered on this cruise. A.3. List of Principal Investigators Table 1: List of Principal Investigators Measurement Principal Investigator Institution Salinity, oxygen John Toole WHOI CTD/O2 John Toole WHOI Nutrients Lou Gordon OSU Chlorofluorocarbons Rana Fine RSMAS Helium/tritium Bill Jenkins WHOI ADCP Mike Kosro OSU ALACE floats Russ Davis SIO Drifters Peter Niiler SIO TCO2 Chris Winn Univ. of Hawaii Catherine Goyet WHOI pH Frank Millero RSMAS Alkalinity Catherine Goyet WHOI Frank Millero RSMAS Underway pCO2 Catherine Goyet WHOI Meteorology David Wirth SIO Air chemistry ? ? Bathymetry Stu Smith SIO A.4. Scientific Programme and Methods The object of this cruise was to occupy a series of CTD/O2 (Conductivity- Temperature-Depth-Oxygen) stations approximately along 17°S from the continental shelf of Peru to the continental shelf of Australia, with an intermediate port stop in Tahiti. This collection of high-quality water-property data will help define the pattern of circulation in the South Pacific. At each station measurements of temperature, salinity, and dissolved-oxygen concentration were made continuously with depth, and the concentrations of dissolved silica, phosphate, nitrate, and nitrite were measured at up to 36 discrete levels. In addition, measurements of freon, tritium concentrations and CO2 were made at selected levels. The station spacing ranged from 5 to 40 nautical miles, and all lowerings were made to within 10-20 m of the bottom. Continuous echo- sounding was maintained along the cruise track, as well as ADCP current measurements. A.5. Major Problems and Goals Not Achieved None noted. A.6. Other Incidents of Note As part of the obligations stated as a condition of research in the waters of Peru, Lieutenant Jorge Paz Acosta, Chief of the Department of Environment, Peruvian Navy, participated in the cruise from Iquique, Chile to Tahiti. He was given complete preliminary data files upon his departure from Tahiti. As part of the obligations stated as a condition of research in the waters of the Cook Islands, Mr. Benjamin E. Ponia, Acting Senior Fisheries Research Officer, participated in the cruise from Tahiti to Australia. He replaced Mr. Ian Bertram, who was originally scheduled to participate. A.7. List of Cruise Participants B. Underway Measurements B.1 Navigation and bathymetry B.2 Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP) B.3 Thermosalinograph and underway dissolved oxygen, etc B.4 XBT and XCTD B.5 Meteorological observations B.6 Atmospheric chemistry C. Hydrographic Measurements C.1. General Information and CTD observation log C.2. Water sample salinity and oxygen data Water samples were collected from every bottle during this cruise for the determination of salinity and dissolved oxygen. The primary purpose of these measurements is to accurately calibrate the sensors on the CTD. C.1.a. Salinity Water was collected in 8 ounce glass bottles. The bottles were rinsed twice, and then filled to the neck. After the sample reach the lab temperature of 21°C, they were analyzed for salinity using a Guildline Autosal Model 8400B salinometer. The salinometer was standardized once a day using IAPSO Standard Seawater Batch P-123. Salinity readings were logged automatically to a computer, merged with the CTD data, and finally used to update the CTD calibrations. Accuracy of salinity measurements were ± 0.001 PSU. C.1.b. Dissolved oxygen Measurements were made using a modified Winkler technique similar to that described by Strickland and Parson (1972). Each seawater sample was collected in a 150 ml brown glass Tincture bottle. When reagents are added, iodine is liberated in amounts proportional to the dissolved oxygen in the sample. A carefully measure aliquot was collected from the prepared oxygen sample and was titrated for total iodine content. Titration was automated, using a PC controller and a Metrohm Model 665 Dosimat burette. The titration endpoint was determined amperometrically using a dual plate platinum electrode, with a standard deviation of replicate samples of 0.005. This technique is described more thoroughly by Knapp et al (1990). Calculated oxygen was merged with the CTD data, and used to update the CTD calibrations. C.3. Water sample nutrient data C.4. CTD/O2 data C.5. Chlorofluorocarbons C.6. Radiocarbon sampling C.7. Helium and tritium measurements C.8. Carbon dioxide C.9. Transmissometer C.10. Surface measurements of 228-Radium D. Acknowledgments E. References Knapp, G.P., M.C. Stalcup and R.J. Stanley, 1990. Automated Oxygen Titration and Salinity Determination. WHOI Technical Report, WHOI-90-35, 25 pp. Strickland, J.D.H. and T.R. Parsons, 1972. The Practical Handbook of Seawater Analysis. Bulletin 167, Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 310 pp. Unesco, 1983. International Oceanographic tables. Unesco Technical Papers in Marine Science, No. 44. Unesco, 1991. Processing of Oceanographic Station Data. Unesco memorgraph By JPOTS editorial panel. F. WHPO Summary Four figures are usually created by the WHPO for the benefit of the reader (NOT SHOWN). Figure 3 shows station number versus the difference between the individual oxygen water samples and their corresponding CTD value (OXYGEN-CTDOXY). Figure 4 shows the oxygen difference versus pressure. Figure 5 shows station number versus the difference between the individual salinity water samples and their corresponding CTD value (SALNTY-CTDSAL). Figure 6 shows the salinity difference versus pressure. Several data files are associated with this report. They are the 318westw_4.sum and 318westw_5.sum, 318westw_4.hyd and 318westw_5.hyd, 318westw_4.csl and 318westw_5.csl and *.wct files. The *.sum file contains a summary of the location, time, type of parameters sampled, and other pertinent information regarding each hydrographic station. The *.hyd file contains the bottle data. The *.wct files are the ctd data for each station. The *.wct files are zipped into one file called 318westw_4wct.zip and 318westw_5wct.zip. The *.csl file is a listing of ctd and calculated values at standard levels. The following is a description of how the standard levels and calculated values were derived for the *.csl file: Salinity, Temperature and Pressure: These three values were smoothed from the individual CTD files over the N uniformly increasing pressure levels using the following binomial filter- t(j) = 0.25ti(j-1) + 0.5ti(j) + 0.25ti(j+1) j=2....N-1 When a pressure level is represented in the *.csl file that is not contained within the ctd values, the value was linearly interpolated to the desired level after applying the binomial filtering. Sigma-theta(SIG-TH:KG/M3), Sigma-2 (SIG-2: KG/M3), and Sigma-4(SIG-4: KG/M3): These values are calculated using the practical salinity scale (PSS-78) and the international equation of state for seawater (EOS-80) as described in the Unesco publication 44 at reference pressures of the surface for SIG-TH; 2000 dbars for Sigma-2; and 4000 dbars for Sigma-4. Gradient Potential Temperature (GRD-PT: C/DB 10-3) is calculated as the least squares slope between two levels, where the standard level is the center of the interval. The interval being the smallest of the two differences between the standard level and the two closest values. The slope is first determined using CTD temperature and then the adiabatic lapse rate is subtracted to obtain the gradient potential temperature. Equations and Fortran routines are described in Unesco publication 44. Gradient Salinity (GRD-S: 1/DB 10-3) is calculated as the least squares slope between two levels, where the standard level is the center of the standard level and the two closes values. Equations and Fortran routines are described in Unesco publication 44. Potential Vorticity (POT-V: 1/ms 10-11) is calculated as the vertical component ignoring contributions due to relative vorticity, i.e. pv=fN2/g, where f is the coriolius parameter, N is the buoyancy frequency (data expressed as radius/sec), and g is the local acceleration of gravity. Buoyancy Frequency (B-V: cph) is calculated using the adiabatic leveling method, Fofonoff (1985) and Millard, Owens and Fofonoff (1990). Equations and Fortran routines are described in Unesco publication 44. Potential Energy (PE: J/M2: 10-5) and Dynamic Height (DYN-HT:M) are calculated by integrating from 0 to the level of interest. Equations and Fortran routines are described in Unesco publication 44. Neutral Density (GAMMA-N: KG/M3) is calculated with the program GAMMA-N (Jackett and McDougall) version 1.3 Nov. 94. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- August 23, 1999 Cruise P21E, R/V Melville March 27, 1994 to May 15, 1994, Iquique, Chile to Papeete, Tahiti EXPOCODE: 318MWESTW/4 Chief Scientist: Dr. Michael McCartney DQE of the discrete data listing for CTD pressure, temperature, salinity, and oxygen, and bottle data for salinity, oxygen, silicate, nitrate, nitrite, and phosphate The evaluation consisted of preparing plots of the parameters to be investigated. All parameters and sigma-theta (calculated using the CTD derived potential temperature and the bottle salinity) were plotted versus pressure. As necessary, supplementary plots of theta-salinity and salinity-silicate were prepared for individual stations or groups of stations. In addition, plots of phosphate (x-axis) versus nitrate (y- axis) were prepared for each station. From these data, plots of the NO3/PO4 ratio and y-intercept versus station number were prepared (attached). Positions from the .sum file were plotted and appear to be correct. Cast times and dates were checked for consistency. Inconsistencies were found on two stations. These have been corrected. The bottle data from this cruise has been compared to that from other cruises where cruise tracks cross (see station position map), but the comparisons will not be presented in this report. P21E was the first leg of a two leg cruise. Since the equipment, techniques, personnel, etc. were similar for both legs, all data comparisons will be detailed in the DQE report for P21W. Results: Overall the data look good and generally meet WOCE quality standards, but there are some problems that deserve special mention. 1. Bottle oxygen analyses: precision and analytical procedures used [See the data summary for station 162 in Appendix One at the end of this report] In the very brief cruise report available for the DQE work the accuracy and precision of the oxygen technique used during this cruise are stated as: ~0.02 and ~0.005 ml/l respectively. At station 162 the mean of the CTD-oxygen data was 178.2 ± 0.24 µmoles/kg. This precision is ~0.005 ml/l, the same value stated in the cruise report. However, the mean of the bottle oxygen data was 180.8 ± 0.76 µmoles/kg; this precision is ~ 0.017 ml/l, about 3 times the precision indicated in the cruise report and ~4 times the recommended precision for discrete oxygen measurements listed in the WOCE manual (page 20). At a concentration of 180.6 µmoles/kg, a precision of 0.76 equals ~0.4%. All bottle oxygens from this cast were flagged 3 (questionable measurement). This may have been done because the two data sets appear to be offset by ~2.6 µmoles/kg. However, the precision is probably a reasonable estimate of the overall quality of the oxygen data from both legs of this cruise, taking into account Niskin bottle integrity, sampling errors, and all errors associated with the actual analysis. The later would include errors resulting from the procedure used on this cruise where aliquots of sample were titrated rather than the Carpenter (1965) recommended whole bottle titration. In the last ten years there have been improvements in sampling, system components are routinely calibrated, automated burettes are being used, end point detection has improved, and there is now wide spread use of computer assisted titrators. It would be worthwhile to re-evaluate these two techniques of sample titration to determine the extent, if any, of the differences resulting from the added manipulation of acidified samples before titration with thiosulfate over the range of oxygen concentrations likely to be seen in the open ocean. 2. CTD Oxygen data evaluations. With very few exceptions, the data originator has not flagged the CTD oxygen data. Excluding the surface levels (typically the1st through 3rd bottles) and a few deep values, the CTD-oxygens look very reasonable. Even if the CTD and bottle oxygen differ the shape of the curves are very similar. In the Cruise Report for WOCE Cruise P31 there are several paragraphs devoted to the problems of collecting and processing CTD oxygen data. The following statement appears: "Therefore the usefulness of data in the top 100 decibars should be carefully considered (page 11)." This is very true, not just for P31 but most recent cruises on which CTD oxygen data have been taken and processed. Notwithstanding, an effort has been made to review and annotate the CTD oxygen data on P21E. The following approach was taken in assigning quality 2 flags: in the upper 100 db of the water column, if the CTD oxygen value disagreed by ~10 or more µmoles/kg from the bottle oxygen, these could be flagged either 3 or 4 depending on the magnitude of the difference. If the CTD oxygen data indicated maxima or minima not seen in the bottle data or suggested by the data on adjacent stations, these would be flagged. For example, if the bottle data showed a true mixed layer in the first three levels of the cast and the CTD oxygen trace showed a pronounced maximum at the second level, this CTD oxygen value would be flagged 3 or 4. 3. CTD Salinity data from CTD 10. At the end of station 111, the CTD was lost. Through station 111, CTD 10 was used for most casts. Differences in salinity between the CTD and bottles in the upper 500 db were high. As a way of evaluating these large differences, the maximum difference between the CTD and bottle salts was tabulated for two groups of 11 stations, stations 29-39 early in the cruise using CTD 10 and 125-135 using CTD 9 (see Appendix Two). For stations 29-39, the differences ranged between 0.070 and -0.228 p.s.u. The mean was -0.018 ± 0.106 p.s.u. When the mean was recomputed using the absolute values, the results were 0.081 ± 0.067 p.s.u. Analogous computations for stations 125-135 gave means of -0.012 ± 0.011 and 0.015 ± 0.005 p.s.u. Even in the near surface mixed layer, differences as large as 0.020 p.s.u. were seen with CTD 10, e.g., Station 37. It would appear from these representative data that the CTD salinity data in the upper 500 db when CTD 10 was used have the potential of large differences that could perhaps be decreased by further data processing, specifically adjusting the sensor lag factors. A large difference could also be explained in part by differences in the two sampling packages; the 36-place rosette is larger and packed with more instrumentation with resulting differences in flow characteristics through the package. 4. Bottle spacing when using the 24 place rosette Through station 110 a 36-place rosette was used. No water samples were collected at station 111. On station 112, a 24-place rosette was employed with a different CTD. However, with the 24 place rosette, deep water bottles were often tripped ~300 db apart. The WOCE manual (page 12) states, "It is expected that the vertical sample interval will not exceed 200 m for each full-depth station..." With the 24-bottle rosette this coverage was impossible. The interval spacing on stations 110 and 112 follow. The upper water column was sampled about the same with both rosettes. Station 110 Station 112 Cast to ~3700 db, 36 bottles Cast to ~3700 db, 24 bottles Sampling range bottle spacing Sampling range bottle spacing (db) (db) (db) (db) 400 - 1600 100 400 - 800 100 1 level of 150 1 level of 250 1750 - 3400 150 1050 - 1800 250 1 level of 200 2100 - 3600 300 Minor difficulties included: 1. occasional levels where bottles leaked and/or closed at depths not desired. 2. a few "bad" bottle salts. 3. a few stations where the phosphate data appear to be offset from the data on adjacent stations from 0.02 to as much as 0.05 µmoles/kg. (See e.g. Stations 24 and 118.) 4. inconsistencies in data flagging, e.g., on Stations 7 (896.7 db) and 31 (898.7db), the Q1 flag for the bottle was 2, but all bottle data were flagged 3 or 4 because the bottle either leaked or tripped in the wrong place. The Q1 bottle flag of 2 would appear to be the wrong choice. And sometimes the PO4 and NO3 values for a leaky bottle would be flagged 2, while all other water samples, including silicate, would be flagged 3 or 4. Even when falling on the property/db curve, I believe these nutrient values should be flagged uncertain (see e.g., stations 35 & 36 at ~400 db). 5. bottle problems not being caught promptly. On stations 34-36, the bottle at ~400 db, #SI9328, either leaked or tripped at the wrong depth. Before Station 37 which started ~ 17 hrs after the completion of station 34, this bottle was replaced. I would like to think that problems such as this could be caught and rectified more quickly. 6. When received at the WHPO, the nutrient data were in units of µM/l and the reported nitrate data were uncorrected for nitrite. The conversion of the nutrient data to µM/kg and the correction of the nitrate + nitrite data to nitrate have been made. Personal communications with Lou Gordon, the PI for nutrients on this cruise, indicated that the volume units of µM/l should be converted to mass units of µM/kg using a temperature of 21±2°C. The processing program used to make the conversion used a temperature of 25°C. Over the range of salinity of 33 to 37 p.s.u., the conversion using the density of seawater at 25°C. would give values ~0.11% higher than if the density based on 21° is used. For silicate at a concentration of 140 µM/l, and a salinity of 35 p.s.u., the difference would be ~0.15 µMoles/kg, 136.81 vis 136.65. At the same salinity and for a nitrate concentration of 45 µM/l, the difference would be ~0.05 µM/kg; similarly for phosphate at 3 µM/l, the difference would be 0.003 µM/kg. Although this does represent a bias in the data, the ~0.1% difference is well within the WOCE recommended reproducibility values for these three parameters of ~1 to ~3% in the "better" laboratories. (WOCE manual, page 20). 7. As a result of the subtraction of the nitrite data from the nitrate + nitrite data, the data listing now shows some negative nitrate values. At the extreme, there are values higher than -0.4 µmoles/kg (see e.g., station 44, bottles 36 and 35). 8. At station 113 no nitrite values have been reported. The nitrate values on this station would be expected to be high since there was no nitrite value to subtract from the results of the nitrate + nitrite channel. The nitrite values at adjacent stations have been reviewed. On these stations, the nitrite values are very low, never exceeding 0.10 µmoles/kg. Based on this, it would appear that the nitrate values could be used without the necessity of approximating corrections based on the data from the adjacent stations. 9. Excluding the station position data from a few stations early in the cruise, it would appear that the positions were recorded as degrees, minutes and tens of seconds. The tens of seconds were converted to decimal minutes and rounded to 2 decimal places. This may account for the positions which consistently show decimal minutes of 0.17, 0.33, 0.50, 0.67, and 0.83. 10. There are some stations occupied between 3 and 4 hours which show no changes in position over the duration of the station, see for example Stations 41, 57 and 93. Assuming that positions were recorded to tens of seconds, this means that the ship drifted less than ~1000 feet during this interval. Either the watch was not using the GPS to acquire the positions at the relevant times or the actual positions represent some smoothing of the data over the interval during which the station was occupied. 11. Depth of surface bottle. Over the first 100 stations, the range in "depth" of the surface bottle was 4.2 to 14.4 db; the median was ~8.5 db. The deepest surface bottle was at 25.5 db, station 127 and for all of P21E, there were seven stations at which the surface bottle was deeper than 20 db. Unless there were problems with weather or the CTD/Rosette package, 20 db seems rather deep for a surface bottle. Attached are listed changes to be considered by the data originator with some explanations. Most of these changes involve the CTD and bottle data for salinity and oxygen. These "changes-to-be-considered" have not been separately annotated because they reflect the comments made in the text above. A few suggestions have been made regarding other data. These have been explained in this listing. George C. Anderson DQ Evaluator References: Carpenter, J.H. (1965b), The Chesapeake Bay Institute Technique for the Winkler Oxygen Method, Limnology and Oceanography, 10, 141-143. Oceanographic Data Facility (ODF), 18 July 1997, Final Cruise Report, Cruise P31. WOCE Operations Manual, May 1994, Vol. 3, Section 3.1, Part 3.1.2, WHP Office Report 90-1, Rev. 2, Woods Hole, Mass, USA. List of plots: All plots are shown in PDF file. Plots of the NO3/PO4 ratio, and y-intercept versus station number Station positions, all of Cruise P21 APPENDIX ONE: DATA FROM STATION 162 P21W At the start of leg 2 of this cruise, labeled P21W, at station 162, all 36 bottles on the rosette were tripped at ~ 3900 db. Plots of the data versus pressure indicate no appreciable gradients in any of the properties. The data listing for this station is attached. The means and standard deviations of all values have been computed and are listed below: Property Mean Standard Deviation Relative % WOCE precisions CTD-Temp 1.4467 ±0.0002 0.0005°C CTD-Salinity 34.6938 ±0.0003 0.001 p.s.u. Bottle-Sal 34.6947 ±0.0011 0.001 p.s.u. CTD-Oxygen 178.2 ±0.24 0.14 1.0 % Bottle-O2 180.8 ±0.76 0.42 0.1 % Silicate 122.50 ±0.18 0.14 0.2 % Nitrate 33.61 ±0.12 0.37 0.2 % Phosphate 2.34 ±0.02 0.72 0.4 % WHI-ID P21W STATION 162: DATA WITH MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS Salinity Oxygen CTD less Bottle Pressure Temperature CTD-sal CTD-O2 Theta Bott-sal Bot-O2 SIL NO3 NO2 PO4 Sigma-theta bottle less CTD 3910.9 1.4470 34.6933 177.9 1.1392 34.6963 180.1 122.16 33.58 0.03 2.34 1.027792 -0.0030 2.2 3911.1 1.4468 34.6937 177.9 1.1389 34.6944 180.1 122.29 33.58 0.02 2.33 1.027790 -0.0007 2.2 3911.2 1.4469 34.6936 177.9 1.1390 34.6961 181.0 122.17 33.70 0.02 2.35 1.027792 -0.0025 3.1 3911.3 1.4465 34.6934 177.9 1.1386 34.6950 182.5 122.93 33.55 0.03 2.34 1.027791 -0.0016 4.6 3911.4 1.4465 34.6936 177.9 1.1386 34.6950 182.5 122.49 33.62 0.02 2.35 1.027791 -0.0014 4.6 3911.4 1.4467 34.6937 177.9 1.1388 34.6944 180.1 122.35 33.53 0.02 2.35 1.027790 -0.0007 2.2 3911.5 1.4464 34.6932 177.9 1.1385 34.6954 180.1 122.36 33.63 0.02 2.35 1.027791 -0.0022 2.2 3911.6 1.4464 34.6937 177.9 1.1385 34.6952 181.2 122.37 33.59 0.02 2.34 1.027791 -0.0015 3.3 3911.7 1.4465 34.6942 177.9 1.1386 34.6916 180.4 122.38 33.70 0.02 2.35 1.027788 0.0026 2.5 3911.8 1.4468 34.6942 177.9 1.1389 34.6948 180.8 122.55 33.52 0.02 2.35 1.027791 -0.0006 2.9 3911.8 1.4469 34.6941 177.9 1.1390 34.6961 180.8 123.01 33.47 0.02 2.36 1.027792 -0.0020 2.9 3911.9 1.4465 34.6940 177.9 1.1386 34.6958 180.8 122.71 33.43 0.02 2.35 1.027792 -0.0018 2.9 3911.9 1.4467 34.6934 178.4 1.1388 34.6948 180.8 122.42 33.49 0.02 2.35 1.027791 -0.0014 2.4 3912.0 1.4469 34.6933 178.2 1.1389 34.6946 180.8 122.28 33.64 0.02 2.34 1.027791 -0.0013 2.6 3912.1 1.4470 34.6943 178.4 1.1390 34.6956 179.9 122.60 33.73 0.03 2.36 1.027791 -0.0013 1.5 3912.2 1.4465 34.6940 178.4 1.1385 34.6956 179.9 122.76 33.55 0.02 2.36 1.027791 -0.0016 1.5 3912.3 1.4470 34.6939 178.4 1.1390 34.6936 181.1 122.67 33.53 0.02 2.34 1.027790 0.0003 2.7 3912.4 1.4467 34.6944 178.4 1.1387 34.6936 181.6 122.49 33.75 0.00 2.32 1.027790 0.0008 3.2 3912.5 1.4465 34.6938 178.4 1.1385 34.6934 180.8 122.49 33.75 0.00 2.32 1.027790 0.0004 2.4 3912.5 1.4464 34.6939 178.4 1.1384 34.6971 180.8 122.49 33.75 0.00 2.32 1.027793 -0.0032 2.4 3912.7 1.4470 34.6937 178.4 1.1390 34.6926 181.1 122.49 33.75 0.00 2.32 1.027789 0.0011 2.7 3912.8 1.4470 34.6940 178.4 1.1389 34.6952 181.1 122.49 33.75 0.00 2.32 1.027791 -0.0012 2.7 3912.8 1.4467 34.6943 178.4 1.1387 34.6946 181.1 122.49 33.75 0.00 2.32 1.027791 -0.0003 2.7 3912.9 1.4465 34.6937 178.4 1.1385 34.6940 181.6 122.49 33.75 0.00 2.32 1.027790 -0.0003 3.2 3912.9 1.4469 34.6937 178.4 1.1388 34.6954 180.1 122.49 33.75 0.00 2.32 1.027791 -0.0017 1.7 3913.1 1.4470 34.6941 178.2 1.1389 34.6940 181.0 122.49 33.75 0.00 2.32 1.027790 0.0001 2.8 3913.4 1.4470 34.6940 178.2 1.1389 34.6950 179.4 122.49 33.75 0.00 2.32 1.027791 -0.0010 1.2 3913.6 1.4465 34.6939 178.5 1.1384 34.6944 180.1 122.59 33.51 0.02 2.37 1.027790 -0.0005 1.6 3913.7 1.4470 34.6938 178.2 1.1389 34.6938 182.8 122.60 33.43 0.01 2.36 1.027790 0.0000 4.6 3913.7 1.4466 34.6934 178.2 1.1385 34.6950 180.8 122.46 33.39 0.00 2.35 1.027791 -0.0016 2.6 3913.8 1.4469 34.6934 178.5 1.1387 34.6940 180.8 122.62 33.43 0.02 2.38 1.027790 -0.0006 2.3 3913.8 1.4468 34.6939 178.5 1.1386 34.6952 180.8 122.48 33.50 0.01 2.35 1.027791 -0.0013 2.3 3914.1 1.4465 34.6937 178.5 1.1383 34.6940 179.4 122.49 33.59 0.02 2.34 1.027790 -0.0003 0.9 3914.2 1.4469 34.6934 178.5 1.1387 34.6938 181.0 122.35 33.60 0.02 2.35 1.027790 -0.0004 2.5 3914.2 1.4470 34.6938 178.5 1.1388 34.6960 181.0 122.66 33.37 0.01 2.36 1.027792 -0.0022 2.5 3914.6 1.4469 34.6934 178.2 1.1387 34.6942 180.5 122.49 33.75 0.00 2.32 1.027790 -0.0008 2.3 Average 1.4467 34.6938 178.2 1.1387 34.6947 180.8 122.50 33.61 0.01 2.34 1.027791 -0.0009 2.58 Stdev 0.0002 0.0003 0.24 0.0002 0.0011 0.76 0.176 0.124 0.010 0.017 0.000001 0.0012 0.83 Rel % 0.0152 0.0009 0.14 0.0189 0.0031 0.42 0.143 0.369 0.723 0.000085 APPENDIX TWO: CRUISE P21E: CTD SALINITY, BOTTLE SALINITY COMPARISONS BEFORE AND AFTER STATION 111 CTD Fish #10 CTD Fish #9 Station Pressure Max diff. Abs. Station Pressure Max diff. Abs. No. CTD less Value No. CTD less Value bottle salt bottle salt 29 97.1 -0.060 0.060 125 202.7 -0.021 0.021 30 149.3 -0.016 0.016 126 300.9 -0.017 0.017 31 149.0 0.065 0.065 127 250.3 -0.017 0.017 32 99.4 -0.022 0.022 128 251.6 -0.017 0.017 33 95.7 0.126 0.126 129 100.8 -0.017 0.017 34 50.5 -0.228 0.228 130 252.4 -0.019 0.019 35 402.4 0.037 0.037 131 151.9 -0.016 0.016 36 98.5 -0.047 0.047 132 400.5 0.005 0.005 37 203.7 0.049 0.049 133 300.9 0.011 0.011 38 50.8 -0.171 0.171 134 300.0 -0.015 0.015 39 200.3 0.070 0.070 135 200.6 -0.006 0.006 Average -0.018 0.081 Average -0.012 0.015 Std dev. 0.106 0.067 Std dev. 0.011 0.005 STATIONS BEFORE STATION 111 WITH SIGNIFICANT CTD/BOTTLE SALT DIFFERENCES IN THE SURFACE WATER Station Pressure CTD less No. Range bottle salt 37 6.1 to 24.7 -0.020 39 9.3 to 25.6 0.014 54 10.2 to 25 -0.006 55 9.2 to 25.3 0.006 a swing of 0.012 p.s.u. on adjacent stations 68 8.7 to 24.1 -0.012 85 9.2 to 22.9 -0.033 -0.012 Most stations however, showed surface differences in the range of ± 0.003 p.s.u. DQE Comments Cruise P21E Stat. Bottle Depth CTD Bottle Data Q Flags Comments No. (db) Salt O2 Salt O2 SIL NO3 NO2 PO4 1 2 4 SI9301 117.0 X 3 2 5 9306 8.0 X 2 3 9305 28.3 X 2 3 7 9320 896.5 2 3 Bottle leaked or tripped at the wrong depth, not flagged 8 9313 2202.2 X 2 3 9302 4383.9 X 2 3 9301 4434.5 X 2 3 9 9336 13.6 X 2 4 9318 1397.7 X 2 3 Bottle salt looks low 10 9336 5.9 X 2 4 11 9335 25.7 X 3 4 9326 602.2 X 3 2 Bottle oxygen falls on property curve 9320 1200.8 X X 2,3 3,2 CTD salt suspect, bottle salt okay; perhaps wrong salt flagged "3" 9304 2807.0 X X X X X 2's 3's Oxygen, nutrients look noisy; perhaps a mix-up during sample drawing 9302 3043.3 X X X X X 2's 3's Oxygen, nutrients look noisy 12 9330 248.9 X 3 4 Bottle salt very questionable 9301 2987.7 X 2 3 13 9333 50.5 X X 2's 4's CTD data very suspect 50.5 X 3 2 9308 2299.1 X 3 4 Bottle salt very questionable 16 9426 51.2 X 3 2 CTD oxygen values falls on property curve 9417 699.2 X 2 3 17 9435 26.8 X 2 3 9434 52.3 X 3 2 CTD oxygen values falls on property curve 9407 2942.5 X 2 3 silicate value looks low compared to adjacent stations 9402 3787.0 X 2 3 9401 3852.0 X 2 3 18 9427 504.1 X 2 3 9412 3347.2 X 2 3 19 9435 23.8 X 4 2 Value falls on property curve 9433 98.7 X X 2's 3,4 Values not on property curves 20 9332 149.5 X 2 3 9309 3499.2 X 3 2 Value appears consistent with data from adjacent stations 9308 3745.7 X 3 2 Value appears consistent with data from adjacent stations 9307 3997.0 X 3 2 Value appears consistent with data from adjacent stations 9301 5322.4 X 2 3 21 SI9334 52.9 X 3 2 9325 603.4 X 2 3 9305 3594.8 X 3 2 Values look okay; fall on NO3/PO4 data plot for this station 9304 3799.1 X Values look okay; fall on NO3/PO4 data plot for this station 22 9324 798.0 X 2 3 9318 1401.2 X 2 3 23 9336 6.3 X 2 3 9335 23.5 X 2 4 9323 896.8 2 3 Bottle either leaked or tripped at the wrong depth. 24 9336 8.0 X 2 3 Deep phosphates 0.02 to 0.04 µmoles/kg low compared to 9334 48.1 X X adjacent stations. Deep salts noisy; Sigma-theta vs db plot 2's 3's not smooth 9327 499.8 X 2 3 25 9336 7.8 X 2 4 9327 500.7 X 4 2 9326 602.2 X 2 3 9302 4117.8 X 2 3 26 9334 48.2 X 2 3 9332 999.8 X 3 2 27 9333 26.9 X X 2's 4's 9332 52.9 X 3 2 9322 798.8 X 2 3 28 9334 8.0 X 2 3 9331 99.7 X 3 2 9322 794.8 X X 2's 4,3 9313 1694.9 X 3 2 29 36 7.7 X 2 3 34 48.8 X X 3,2 2,4 It appears as though the CTD salt is better than the bottle salt. 21 1096.0 X 3 2 30 34 49.6 X 2 3 31 199.7 X 3 2 30 249.4 X 5 2 Wrong level flagged as having missing nitrite value. 28 398.3 X 2 3 27 500.3 X 3 2 25 701.5 2 4 Bottle clearly tripped at the wrong depth; change bottle flag to 4. 15 1903.6 X 2 5 Value missing 31 23 898.7 2 3 Bottle leaked; suggest bottle flag be changed to 3. 32 12 2295.9 X 4 3 33 SI9333 95.7 X 2 4 34 9332 148.1 X 4 3 9328 401.4 X 3 4 Value clearly off property curve 9326 598.2 X 3 2 35 9328 402.4 X X X 2's 3's Bottle tripped incorrectly; values suspect even though on property curves 9322 997.9 X 4 3 9321 1102.2 X 2 3 36 9332 149.6 X 2 3 9328 400.8 X X X 2's 3's Bottle tripped incorrectly; values suspect even though on property curves 37 9324 703.3 3 2 Unlikely that bottle leaked; all water samples look acceptable 39 9318 9.3 X 2 3 40 9336 7.5 X 2 3 9333 97.6 X 3 2 9332 148.8 X 4 2 9316 1499.4 X 3 4 41 9336 7.2 X 2 3 Phosphates to ~2600 db flagged "3". Appear to be ~0.05 9304 4247.0 X 3 4 µmoles/kg low compared to adjacent stations. 43 9334 51.5 X 2 3 9312 2339.0 X 3 4 44 9336 11.6 X 2 4 9328 381.5 X 3 2 9320 1211.6 X 2 3 9306 3796.3 X 3 2 9305 3996.4 X 3 2 9304 4244.8 X 3 2 45 9332 148.0 X X 3's 2's 9318 1305.1 X 3 2 47 9332 146.7 X 3 2 9319 1194.0 X 3 2 9309 3199.9 X 2 4 Looks like there was some confusion during the drawing of 9308 3500.8 X 2 3 the oxygens between ~3200 and 3600 db. Data would suggest no value at 3199.9 db. The value at 3199.9 db should be entered at 3500.8 db. 48 9336 8.1 X 2 4 9335 24.0 X X X X 1's 9's No nutrient data reported; sample not drawn 9334 49.3 X 2 3 49 SI9333 99.3 X 2 4 9332 150.2 X 3 4 9331 201.0 X 2 4 50 9335 26.3 X 2 3 52 9336 9.0 X 2 3 9305 3954.5 X 2 3 53 9335 25.3 X 2 3 9334 50.1 X 2 3 9333 100.4 X 2 4 9318 1305.2 X 2 3 9316 1550.2 X 3 2 54 9336 10.2 X 2 3 9335 25.0 X 2 3 9334 51.7 X 2 4 9330 247.5 X 3 2 9328 401.7 X 3 2 55 9334 51.1 X 2 3 9332 153.4 X 3 2 56 9335 25.1 X 2 4 9322 1004.7 X 3 2 The CTD - bottle salinity difference is only 0.0009 p.s.u. 57 9336 8.5 X 2 3 9332 149.4 X 3 2 58 9336 8.7 X 2 3 9335 25.7 X 2 3 9315 1754.6 X 3 4 9303 4156.8 X 4 3 9301 4474.3 X 2 3 59 9336 10.9 X 2 3 9334 50.4 X 2 3 60 9334 54.0 X 2 3 9333 105.4 X 2 3 61 9334 50.5 X 2 3 9302 4203.4 X 2 3 62 9336 10.6 X 2 3 9326 602.1 X 3 2 9312 2395.6 X 4 2 63 SI9333 105.2 X 2 4 65 9336 8.8 X 2 4 9335 243.5 X 2 3 9334 49.3 X 2 3 9313 1997.1 X 2 3 66 9336 7.2 X 2 3 9318 1402.5 X 2 3 67 9336 7.7 X 2 4 9335 24.6 X 2 3 9325 699.4 X X X X X X 2's 3's Bottle probably leaked; suggest bottle and water samples be flagged 3. 9308 2808.7 2 4 Bottle tripped at wrong depth; suggest bottle flag be changed to 4. 9304 3496.9 X 2 3 68 9336 8.7 X 2 3 9335 24.1 X 2 3 9334 50.2 X 2 3 9301 4304.9 X 2 3 69 9326 600.9 X 2 3 70 9336 6.2 X 2 3 9333 97.5 X 2 3 9325 602.4 X 2 3 71 9336 7.8 X 2 3 9333 99.2 X 2 3 9332 140.8 X X 4's 2's Both values fall on property/db curves. 9324 796.5 X X 3's 2's Both values fall on property/db curves. 9323 892.7 X 3 2 9301 3761.3 X 2 3 72 9315 1701.6 X 3 2 9314 1799.4 X 3 2 9308 2695.3 X 3 2 73 9336 5.6 X 2 3 9335 25.0 X 2 3 9334 51.0 X 2 4 74 9336 7.7 X 2 3 75 9336 9.1 X 2 4 9335 24.8 X 2 4 9334 49.4 X 2 4 75 SI9324 799.2 X X 3's 2's Values fall on property/db curves. 9323 899.7 X 3 2 Value fall on property/db curve. 76 9336 10.8 X 2 4 77 9336 5.4 X X 2's 3's 78 9334 48.4 X 2 3 9310 2498.5 X 2 3 79 9335 23.8 X 2 4 9334 48.1 X 2 4 80 9326 495.9 X 3 2 9324 623.7 X 3 2 86 9334 50.3 X 2 4 9331 203.3 X 3 2 9318 1402.4 X 2 3 87 9336 7.5 X 2 4 9335 23.5 X 2 3 9334 47.7 X 2 4 9331 200.3 X X 3,2 2,3 CTD salt looks good; bottle salt suspect, perhaps wrong salt flagged. 9318 1402.8 X 2 3 88 9335 26.1 X 2 3 9334 48.9 X 2 4 9329 298.0 X 3 2 89 9336 10.7 X 2 3 90 9318 8.3 X 2 3 9315 100.2 X 4 2 9301 1202.1 X 3 2 9323 3151.4 X 2 3 9319 3679.6 X X 3's 2's Values fall on property/db curves. 95 9335 25.1 X 2 3 9334 49.6 X 2 3 9323 896.7 X 4 2 9317 1497.4 X 3 2 9301 3643.0 X 2 3 96 9336 10.5 X 2 3 9315 1753.0 X 3 4 97 9335 22.2 X 2 3 9329 306.3 X 3 2 97 SI9328 348.5 X 3 2 98 9336 8.1 X 2 3 9330 250.6 X 3 2 9327 499.1 X X X X 2's 3's 9301 3311.0 X 2 3 99 9336 10.7 X 2 4 9335 24.6 X 2 3 9334 49.4 X 2 3 9315 1699.8 X 4 3 100 9335 24.1 X 2 3 9325 700.8 X 2 3 101 9336 6.4 X 2 4 9333 106.4 X 2 4 9323 898.3 X 2 3 102 9326 602.1 X 3 2 9302 3236.0 X 4 3 103 9330 251.9 X X 3's 4's 104 9336 7.9 X 2 3 9330 251.5 X 3 2 9329 301.5 X 3 2 9312 1998.0 X 2 3 105 9333 102.7 X 2 3 9327 501.0 X X 2's 3's Looks like bottle salinities and oxygens reversed at these two levels. 9326 603.3 X X 2's 3's 9301 3355.2 X 3 2 106 9336 9.4 X 2 4 9335 25.5 X 2 3 9334 48.0 X 2 3 9323 901.2 X 2 3 107 9336 10.6 X 2 3 9335 23.9 X 2 3 9327 504.3 X 2 3 108 9335 23.0 X 2 3 9329 307.4 X 3 4 108 SI9319 1203.4 X 3 2 The shape of the oxygen versus db curve is very similar to 9318 1298.6 X 3 2 that on adjacent stations. The data however, are slightly 9317 1398.7 X 3 2 offset from these data, but not so much as to flag these oxygens "3". 9316 1500.7 X 3 2 9315 1649.7 X 3 2 9314 1796.4 X 3 2 9313 1952.1 X 3 2 109 9336 9.1 X 2 3 9333 101.1 X 2 3 9332 151.2 X 3 2 These nitrate data compare favorable with the data from the 9331 202.9 X 3 2 adjacent stations. 9330 250.2 X 3 2 9329 303.0 X 3 2 110 9336 10.1 X 2 4 9335 25.1 X 2 3 9334 49.9 X 2 3 112 9405 24.5 X 2 3 113 9404 7.2 X 2 5 All nitrite data this station missing; data should be flagged 5. 115 9404 5.9 X 2 3 Surface silicates are slightly negative suggesting a slight baseline problem 116 9404 7.4 X 2 3 117 9405 23.1 X 2 3 9407 48.8 X 2 3 9423 1104.2 X 2 3 118 9404 5.8 X 2 3 All phosphates this station are ~0.03 µmoles/kg lower than 9419 602.6 X 2 3 on adjacent stations. Lower values are not supported by the nitrate or oxygen data. 9429 2297.1 X 2 3 NO3 value of 35.57 much better, perhaps a key entry error of 1 unit. 119 9404 8.2 X 2 4 120 9404 8.1 X 2 3 9405 24.1 X 2 3 9407 47.5 X 2 3 9415 298.6 X 2 3 121 9404 10.8 X 2 3 At this stat Bottle 9433 showed a CTDO/bottle O2 difference 9405 25.4 X 2 3 of 1.1 units and was flagged 2; on stat 127 the bottle again 9433 3346.7 X 2 4 leaked. The CTDO/bottle O2 difference was 0.2 and was flagged 4. Flagging not consistent. 122 9404 6.1 X 2 3 9405 23.1 X 2 3 122 SI9435 3490.6 X X 2,3 4,2 CTD salt is suspect; bottle salt looks okay. 123 9404 7.7 X 2 3 9411 198.9 X 2 3 124 9404 8.8 X 2 4 9405 23.9 X 2 4 9407 48.9 X 2 3 125 9404 10.4 X 2 4 9405 24.7 X 2 3 9407 49.1 X 2 4 130 9421 8.2 X 2 4 Deep PO4's ~0.02 to 0.03 µmoles/kg higher than on adjacent stations. 9413 2953.0 X 2 3 This phosphate value definitely low by ~0.04 moles/kg. 131 9405 26.0 X 2 3 9407 48.8 X 2 3 133 9421 5.4 X 2 4 134 9404 8.9 X 2 3 135 9404 7.8 X 2 3 9407 48.7 X 2 3 136 9404 8.1 X 2 3 9405 25.0 X 2 3 137 9415 300.3 X 2 3 138 9408 98.9 X 2 3 139 9404 8.7 X 2 3 From ~600 db to the bottom, the CTD salinities appear 9405 22.4 X 2 4 offset and higher than the bottle salts by 0.0016 p.s.u. 140 9401 2603.5 X 2 3 CTD salinities offset 0.0012 p.s.u. from ~400 db to the bottom. 141 9404 7.9 X 2 3 142 9404 23.7 X 2 4 9405 48.2 X 2 4 143 9403 1971.0 X 2 3 144 9404 7.1 X 2 3 9421 800.5 X 3 2 Salinity flagging not consistent. At 1204 db with a CTD/ 9428 1204.0 X 2 3 bottle salt difference of 0.0040 psu, salt was flagged 2; at 9403 1930.0 X 3 2 800.5 and 1930 db with salinity differences of ~0.002, salts were flagged "3". 145 9411 50.4 X 2 3 9419 250.3 X 2 4 146 SI9409 21.9 X 2 4 Excluding 3 values, the CTD is offset 0.0018 psu higher than 9411 46.7 X 2 3 the bottle salts. 9401 1482.5 X X 3's 4's 147 9421 897.0 X 4 3 148 9404 9.0 X 2 3 9405 23.1 X 2 3 9407 47.5 X 2 3 9415 292.3 X 2 4 149 9405 24.6 X 2 3 9407 51.4 X 2 3 9428 1997.5 2 3 All water samples suspect; suggest bottle flag be changed to 9431 2642.6 X 4 3 "3". 2642.6 X X 4's 2's Although bottle flagged 3, water samples look fine. 9403 4085.3 X 2 3 150 9404 8.5 X 2 3 9405 25.7 X 2 3 151 9409 46.7 X 2 3 152 9405 48.8 X 2 3 155 9404 24.0 X 2 4 9405 49.0 X 2 3 156 9415 5.9 X 2 4 9416 6.4 X 2 4 9417 23.0 X 2 3 157 9404 8.2 X 2 3 9407 48.3 X 2 3 9420 702.1 X 3 2 Perhaps flagged the wrong property. May have meant to flag salinity since its value was 0.0033 psu different than CTD salinity value. 158 9404 4.2 X 2 3 9415 305.6 2 3 Bottle appears to have leaked; suggest bottle flag to be changed to 3. 9429 1853.4 X 2 3 Bottle appears to have leaked; suggest bottle and oxygen be flagged 3. 159 9405 23.4 X 2 4 9407 47.0 X 2 3 9411 198.0 X It looks like the bottle at 198.0 db wasn't sampled for 9413 248.8 X oxygen while the bottle at 248.8 was sampled twice. 160 9407 50.1 X 2 4 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATA NOTES 1999.03.17 SA P21 had NO2+NO3 and NO2. I subtracted the NO2 from the NO2+NO3 to get the NITRAT (NO3) and replaced the NO2+NO3 with the NITRAT value. Nutrients (SILCAT, NITRAT, NITRIT, and PHSPHT) were in UMOL/L units. I converted to UMOL/KG units. Station 30, bottle 15, sta. 113 bottles 24-1, and sta. 177 bottles 35 and 34 had -99.00 for NITRIT - I changed the -99.00 to -9.00 to be consistent with the rest of the file and the WOCE manual. Station 126, bottles 24 and 23 had -99.00 for NITRAT - I changed the -99.00 to - 9.00 to be consistent with the rest of the file and the WOCE manual. 1998.12.17 SA p21_su.txt Changed EXPOCODE from 318MWESTW/4, /5 to 318MWESTW_4, _5. Mostly consisted of adding and shifting columns to make the file conform to the agreed upon format. p21_newhyd.txt Changed EXPOCODE from 318MWESTW/4, /5 to 318MWESTW_4, _5 WHP-ID from P21 to P21W and P21W to conform with the .sum file. Does not have stas. 1-3, 81-84, 91-94, 111, 161, 163, 172 199,200, and 284. Although the .sum file does not have any comments to indicate why these are missing, there is a file p21_stalist.doc that sheds some light on this (see attached file). There are also some stations that are numbered 913, 980, 985, 918, 401-406, 411- 417, 421-423, and 431-434 that are in the .sum file but are not in the .hyd or .ctd files. Again, the p21_stalist.doc file gives info about this. Header says FC02, should it really be PC02??? Helium units are designated as UMOL/KG. Is that correct? Units for helium should be NMOL/KG - maybe a typo?? Units designated for SILCAT, N02+N03, N02, and P04 are UMOL/L. In comparing with the old file, it looks like that is correct. They should be converted to UMOL/KG units. N02+N03 should have the N02 subtracted and NITRAT reported. .WCT files Changed EXPOCODE for p21e0004.wct-p21e0160.wct from 318MWESTW/4 to 318MWESTW_4 and WHP-ID from P21 to P21E, and for p21w0162.wct- p21w0294.wct from 318MWESTW/5 to 318MWESTW_5 and WHP-ID from P21 to P21W to conform with the .sum file. Sta. p21e0034.wct - Changed CASTNO from 1 to 2 to conform with the .sum and .hyd files. Sta. p21e0079.wct had the date as 042094, changed to 042194 to conform with the .sum file. Sta. p21w0212.wct had the date as 060594, changed to 060494 to conform with the .sum file. There are no .ctd files for stas. 1-3, 81-84, 91-94, 161, 163, and 284 (see attached p21_stalist.doc file). p21_stalist.doc - I found this file in /usr/export/html-public/data/onetime/pacific/p21/original on whpo. Sta_ctd.doc List of which stations were taken with which CTDs. Stations not included in final data set are starred '*'. STATION CTD COMMENTS 1 10* 2 9* Test: repeat same area as 1 3 8* Test: repeat same area as 1 4-13 10 913 9* Test: bottles all deep, not repeating same area 14-39 10 40-53 9 Part test:40-46 and 51-53 are interwoven btw CTD 10 stations, 47- 50 are not. Keep all these stations in the final data. 54-80 10 81-84 8* Test: repeat same area as 78 to 80 but 10 min. further S. 980 10* Back to same location as 80 985 10* Pylon failed 85 10 second station at 985 86-90 10 91-93 1338* Test: repeat same area as 87 to 90 94 1338* NOT INCLUDED IN DATA SET- BAD DATA 95-111 10 CTD 10 lost on recovery of 111 112-160 9 161 8* For comparison with start of next Leg Leg 2 162 9 Same location as 161 163 8* Same location as 161 and 162. 164-171 9 172 9 Pylon failed, no bottle data 173-218 9 918 9 Numbering prob., station in between 218 and 219 so its 918 219-283 9 284 8* Repeat station of 283 with different CTD (correct in sum file) 285-294 9 401-406 9* First yoyo 411-417 9* Second yoyo 421-423 9* Third yoyo 431-434 9* Fourth yoyo The extra stations to be removed are: 1-3,913,81-84,980,985,91-94,161,163,284,401-434 1998: 03/11: sum file errors and replaced by LDT/SCD 08/06: sum file errors and replaced (again) by LDT/SCD 1999: 01/06: new files reformatted from S. Anderson online see doc/*notes* 01/06: CFC masked out (SCD). Almost an "oops!" 01/27: CFCs back in file (Bullister, 1999.01.11) ----- 02/10: CFCs updated (merged in CFCs from R. Fine (D. Willey) 28 March 95 MV05.SEA is the at sea product of P21 made from preliminary, at sea data. This data is only to be used as a reference for other incoming P21 data. CTD information: CTDRAW is unscaled pressure and will not change between the preliminary and final version. Pressure and Temperature are scaled with pre cruise calibration terms. Conductivity and Oxygen are the best 'at sea' fits. Water Sample information: Water Sample Salts and Oxygens are final although quality word may be updated. Nutrients and all others are preliminary results. Note on merging in water sample information: Be sure to merge in data by matching sample number and not pressure. Although we did not have misstrip problems, processing may show that a bottle tripped at a different depth than listed. In that case the bottle and water sample information are shifted together to the correct CTD information. Sarah Zimmermann WHOI CTD GROUP szimmermann@whoi.edu