TO VIEW PROPERLY YOU MAY NEED TO SET YOUR 
                                    BROWSER'S CHARACTER ENCODING TO UNICODE 8 
                                    OR 16 AND USE YOUR BACK BUTTON TO RE-LOAD


CRUISE REPORT: I09N_2007
(Updated: 01 JUL 2017)

A. HIGHLIGHTS

A.1.  CRUISE SUMMARY INFORMATION

    CLIVAR/CO2/WHP designation:  I09N
        Expedition Designation:  33RR20070322
               Chief Scientist:  Janet Sprintall/SIO*
            Co-Chief Scientist:  Sabine Mecking**
                  Cruise Dates:  22 March 2007 to 01 May 2007
                          Ship:  R/V Roger Revelle
                 Ports of Call:  Fremantle, Australia to Phuket, Thailand
            Number of stations:  111
                                              18° 0.19' N
Stations Geographic boundaries:  85° 39.44' E              95° 0.87' E
                                              28° 18.8' S

  Floats and drifters deployed:  14 Argo floats deployed
Moorings deployed or recovered:  0
          Contributing Authors:  none cited

                    Chief Scientists' Contact Information
                               *JANET SPRINTALL
                  Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UCSD
                            La Jolla CA 92093-0230
      Phone: 858-8220589 • Fax: 858-5349820 • Email: jsprintall@ucsd.edu
                               **SABINE MECKING          
            University of Washington • Applied Physics Laboratory
                      Box 355640, Seattle, WA 98105-6698
 Phone: 206-221-6570 • Fax: 206-221-6771 • Email: smecking@apl.washington.edu



TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. CRUISE NARRATIVE
   A.1   Chief Scientist Information
   A.2   Cruise Summary Information
   A.3   List of Principal Investigators and Cruise Participants
   A.4   Scientific Program and Cruise Highlights
   A.5   Major Problems and Goals Not Achieved
   A.6   Other Incidents of Note

B. HYDROGRAPHIC MEASUREMENTS - DESCRIPTIONS, TECHNIQUES AND CALIBRATIONS
   B.1   CTD/Hydrographic Measurements Program
   B.2   LADCP
   B.3   Salinity Analysis
   B.4   Oxygen Analysis
   B.5   Nutrient Analysis
   B.6   CFC Measurements
   B.7   DIC Measurements
   B.8   TA Measurements
   B.9   pH Discrete Measurements
   B.10  Discrete pCO2
   B.11  Carbon/Oxygen Isotopes
   B.12  Dissolved Organic Carbon/Dissolved Organic Nutrients 
   B.13  CDOM, chlorophyll, bacterial suite
   B.14  Helium-tritium
   B.15  Trace Metals
   B.16  Optical Casts
   
C. UNDERWAY MEASUREMENTS
   C.1   Shipboard ADCP and HDFS 
   C.2   Argo Floats
   C.3   NOAA/PMEL Underway pCO2
   C.4   FSU Aerosol Sampling
   C.5   Thermosalinograph, Meteorological, Navigation and Bathymetry

D. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

E. REFERENCES

APPENDICES 

DATA PROCESSING NOTES




A.2.  Cruise Summary

The R/V Roger Revelle completed a hydrographic survey of CLIVAR/CO2 section I9N 
in the Indian Ocean, nominally along 95°E (between 28°S and 4°S) and up into the 
Bay of Bengal, from 22 March to 01 May 2007 (Figure 1). The 41 day cruise began 
at 0800 22 March 2007 from Fremantle, Western Australia and ended at 0800 01 May 
2007 in Phuket Thailand. 

A total of 111 stations were occupied. The station numbers were consecutive with 
those from the I8S cruise (Chief Scientist Jim Swift) that was occupied just 
prior to I9N from 2 February to 17 March 2007. The first cast of I9N, Station 
89, was a reoccupation of the I8S Station 88. Station spacing was nominally 30 
nm apart, except at the equator where station spacing was 20 nm. Stations 89 
through 147 are exact repeats of the 1995 WOCE I9N Stations 155 to 212. Our 
transect then deviated slightly westwards from WOCE I9N to avoid the Indonesian 
EEZ, before angling northwestward up into the Bay of Bengal. Stations 172 
through 176 are reoccupations of 1995 WOCE I1E Stations 991,990,989 (also WOCE 
I9N Station 268), 987 and 986. Stations 178 through 193 followed the original 
WOCE I9N section Station 260 to 271 across the north-eastward central axis of 
the Bay of Bengal. Station 182 repeated station 174 as well as the corresponding 
WOCE I1  (989) and WOCEI9N (268) stations.  After a short northward section from 
Station 193, our station sampling ended at Station 199 in ~2000 m water depth. 

Each station consisted of a CTD/LADCP/rosette cast to within 10-15 m of the 
bottom. Water samples (usually 36-bottles) at each station were analyzed for 
salinity, nutrients, dissolved oxygen, dissolved inorganic carbon, total 
alkalinity, dissolved organic matter, colored dissolved organic matter, 
chlorofluorocarbons, helium/tritium, particulate organic carbon, carbon-14, 
bacteria and chlorophyll.  Trace metal casts to 1000m were conducted at 
approximately every other station for a total of 49 trace metal casts.  The 
trace metal casts were conducted near the same locations as the CTD profiles and 
were either before or after the full-depth casts depending on time of day. 
Optical profiles were collected once each day when on station, generally near 
12:00-14:00 local time. Argo floats were deployed at 14 locations upon departure 
from a station. Underway surface pCO2, temperature, conductivity, dissolved 
oxygen, fluorometer, meteorological, aerosol and multi-beam acoustical 
bathymetric measurements were also made along the cruise track. No major 
problems were encountered on the cruise and all major cruise objectives were 
achieved.


A.3.  List of Principal Investigators and Cruise Participants

Thirty-four scientists from 10 oceanographic institutions participated in the 
cruise. Several other science programs were supported with no dedicated cruise 
participant. The principal investigators, the science team and their 
responsibilities are listed in Table 1. Two foreign observers from Bangladesh 
also participated in the cruise.


Table 1: Research projects, principal investigators and participants on I9N.

Research Project     Principal Investigator      I9N Participant                      Participant email
-------------------  --------------------------  -----------------------------------  ----------------------------
Chief Scientist                                  Janet Sprintall (SIO/UCSD)           jsprintall@ucsd.edu
Co-Chief Scientist                               Sabine Mecking (APL/UW)              smecking@apl.washington.edu 
Chief Scientist                                  Erica Key (RSMAS)                    ekey@rsmas.miami.edu
  Support                                        Kyla Drushka (SIO/UCSD)              kdrushka@ucsd.edu
CTD/Hydrography/     Jim Swift (SIO)             Kristin Sanborn(STS/SIO/UCSD)        ksanborn@ucsd.edu
  Data Management
                                                 Melinda Kelley (STS/SIO/UCSD)        melinda@odf.ucsd.edu
                                                 Mary Johnson (STS/SIO/UCSD)          mary@odf.ucsd.edu
                                                 Carl Mattson (STS/SIO/UCSD)          carl@odf.ucsd.edu
                                                 Rob Palomares (STS/SIO/UCSD)         rpalomares@ucsd.edu
                                                 Sue Reynolds (STS/SIO/UCSD)          sreynolds@ucsd.edu
                                                 Eric Quiroz (TAMU for STS/SIO/UCSD)  erik@gerg.tamu.edu
                                                 Dan Schuller (STS/SIO/UCSD)          dan@odf.ucsd.edu
Resident Technician  Resident Technicians Group  Lucian Parry (STS/SIO/UCSD)          loparry@ucsd.edu
Shipboard Computer   Frank Delahoyde (SIO)       Bud Hale (STS/SIO/UCSD)              bhale@ucsd.edu
Support  
Lowered and          Andreas Thurnherr (LDEO)    Debra Tilllinger (LDEO)              debrat@ldeo.columbia.edu
  Shipboard ADCP     Eric Firing (U. Hawaii) 
CFC                  Bill Smethie (LDEO)         Eugene Gorman (LDEO)                 egorman@ldeo.columbia.edu
                     John Bullister (NOAA/PMEL)  David Cooper (for NOAA/PMEL & LDEO)  fleece@eritter.net
                                                 Suzanne Rab Green (for LDEO)         rabgreen@hotmail.com
DIC                  Richard Feely (NOAA/PMEL)   Geoff Lebon (NOAA/PMEL)              Geoffrey.T.Lebon@noaa.gov
                     Chris Sabine (NOAA/PMEL)    Esa Peltola (NOAA/AOML)              Esa.peltola@noaa.gov
TA and pH            Frank Millero (RSMAS)       Jeremy Mathis (RSMAS)                jmathis@rsmas.miami.edu
                                                 Mareva Chanson (RSMAS)               mchanson@rsmas.miami.edu
                                                 Nancy Williams (U. Miami)            nancy.Williams@noaa.gov
                                                 Alex Abrams (U. Miami)               alexabrams@aol.com
DOC                  Dennis Hansell (RSMAS)      Wenhao Chen (RSMAS)                  wenchen@rsmas.miami.edu
CDOM                 Dave Siegel (UCSB)          Chantal Swan (UCSB)                  swan@icess.ucsb.edu
                     Norm Nelson (UCSB)          Elisa Wallner (UCSB)                 wallner@lifesci.ucsb.edu
                     Craig Carlson (UCSB)
Helium-tritium       Peter Schlosser (LDEO)      Anthony Dachille (LDEO)              dachille@ldeo.columbia.edu

Trace metals (sea-   Chris Measures (U. Hawaii)  Bill Landing (FSU)                   wlanding@fsu.edu
  water & aerosols)  Bill Landing (FSU)          Kati Gosnell (FSU)                   gosnell@ocean.fsu.edu
                                                 Bill Hiscock (U. Hawaii)             hiscock@hawaii.edu
                                                 Mariko Hatta (U. Hawaii)             mhatta@hawaii.edu
Carbon isotopes      Ann McNichol (WHOI)         Wenhao Chen (RSMAS)                  wenchen@rsmas.miami.edu
                     Robert Key (Princeton)
Transmissometer      Wilf Gardner (TAMU)         Chantal Swan (UCSB)                  swan@icess.ucsb.edu
Argo floats          Stephen Riser (UW)          Sabine Mecking (APL/UW)              smecking@apl.washington.edu
Aerosols             Bill Landing (FSU)          Bill Landing (FSU)                   wlanding@fsu.edu
Underway pCO2        Richard Feely (NOAA/PMEL)   Esa Peltola (NOAA)                   Esa.peltola@noaa.gov
Foreign Observers                                Lt. Cmd Shahid Ahmed                 shahid.shahidahmed@gmail.com
                                                   (Bangladesh Naval HQ)
                                                 Md. Mosir Mondol                     mosiruddin_bapex@yahoo.com
                                                   (Bangladesh Hydrography)


A.4.  Scientific Program and Cruise Highlights

The I9N cruise is part of a decadal series of repeat hydrography sections 
jointly funded by the National Science Foundation and NOAA Office of Global 
Programs as part of the Climate Variability and Predictability Study (CLIVAR) 
CO2 Repeat Hydrography Program (http://ushydro.ucsd.edu). The CLIVAR repeat 
hydrography program focuses on the need to monitor inventories of CO2, heat and 
freshwater and their transports in the ocean.  Earlier programs in the 1990s 
under WOCE and JGOFS have provided baseline observational fields for these 
parameters. The new CLIVAR measurements will serve as a structure for assessing 
changes in the ocean's physical and biogeochemical cycle in response to natural 
and/or man-induced activity.

A total of 111 stations were undertaken during CLIVAR I9N, with the location of 
the discrete bottle samples at each cast shown in Figure 2. A description of the 
techniques, calibrations and preliminary data quality control for all 
hydrographic measurements of CLIVAR I9N can be found in Section C. Here we 
briefly describe the oceanographic regimes and conditions along the CLIVAR I9N 
transect, with a focus primarily on the CTD measurements.

The meridional CLIVAR I9N transect passed through four distinct climatic 
regimes: the subtropical gyre, the Indonesian Throughflow plume, the equatorial 
regime and the Bay of Bengal. In each of these four regimes, the surface to 
intermediate water mass and biogeochemical characteristics are fairly 
distinctive. 

The subtropical Indian Ocean is distinguished by a relatively salty surface 
layer, with a mid-thermocline maximum in oxygen and CFCs that corresponds to the 
Subtropical Mode Water, and the salinity minimum of the Antarctic Intermediate 
Water (AAIW) found at 750 to 1100 m depth. 

The distinctively fresh surface to intermediate waters of the Indonesian 
Throughflow are found from ~15°S to 11°S. In the upper few hundred meters of the 
surface layer, the frontal change from the salty to fresh water was dramatic and 
occurred over Stations 108 to 110. Below the surface, at depths from ~150 to 400 
m, temperature, salinity and oxygen showed evidence of strong interleaving 
between the different subtropical and tropical water masses that mix at these 
latitudes. Between about 15°S and 11.5°S we crossed a bullet of freshwater from 
~800 to 1200 m depth, that is the characteristic signature of the Indonesian 
Intermediate Water. We also found maxima in silicate, phosphate and CFC in this 
intermediate water mass, and these property characteristics help to distinguish 
it from the AAIW found at the same depth range further south. 

In the equatorial regime, between 2.5°S and the equator, the LADCP data showed a 
relatively strong (~0.5 m/s) and fresh (~34) westward current from the surface 
to ~100 m depth, and a core of equally strong westward flow centered around 400-
500 m depth that is separated from the surface flow by relatively weak and 
saltier (35.5) eastward flow. At around 1400-1500 m depth, there is a core of 
eastward flow found at ~2°S. These "stacked" equatorial jets of relatively deep 
alternating flow are perhaps the Indian Ocean counterparts of those known to 
exist in the Pacific equatorial zone. Interestingly, there appears to be no 
significant flow shown in the L-ADCP data at these depths north of the equator. 

In the Bay of Bengal the upper surface waters are the freshest (< 34) and among 
the warmest  (> 28(C) observed along the I9N transect. Oxygen and CFCs are close 
to equlibrium with the atmosphere in the surface layer, but drop to near zero 
below the thermocline. Although the surface layer is well mixed in temperature 
down to about 50-80 m depth, there is much structure in the salinity with lots 
of local maxima and minima over the same depth range and a weak salinity maximum 
in the thermocline. In the deeper layers, close to the bottom, a weak oxygen 
maximum and a slight trace of CFC probably indicates the presence of the 
ventilated Antarctic Bottom Waters that circulates through the deep water gaps 
of the Ninety-east Ridge. Finally, there is a benthic layer in the Bay of Bengal 
(Gordon et al., 2002) that is characterized by high silicate, nitrate and 
phosphate, but low oxygen concentrations within100 m off the bottom. This layer 
was most apparent on the "bow-tie" and adjacent stations 166-186 that were 
undertaken in the western part of the Bay of Bengal.

By design, the combined CLIVAR I8S/I9N section, between 60°S and 4°N, is a 
reoccupation of the WOCE I8S section undertaken in December-January 1995 (PI 
Mike McCartney) and the I9N section undertaken in January-March 1995 (PI Arnold 
Gordon). A preliminary investigation into property differences between the 1995 
and 2007 cruises suggest a freshening trend observed in the AAIW throughout the 
subtropical region with the northern most extent marked by the southern boundary 
of the Indonesian Throughflow Waters. Interestingly there is no apparent 
corresponding oxygen trend observed in this water mass. Other decadal trends 
will no doubt come to light with a more thorough investigation of the full data 
set. 


A.5.  Major Problems and Goals Not Achieved

Specific problems with individual measurements on CLIVAR I9N are discussed in 
Section B and C below. No significant problems were encountered with the ship 
engine, winch or CTD gear.


A.6.  Other Incidents of Note.

The deepest casts of the cruise were Stations 108-100 between 16ºS and 17.5ºS, 
with bottom depths of 6000-6200m. Because of the pressure limitations of the L-
ADCP battery and the fluorometer (rated to 6000 db), the deepest bottle at each 
of these stations were fired at a maximum wire-out of 6000m, leaving the bottom 
85-175m unsampled. A similar data gap occurred on WOCE I9N in 1995, probably for 
the same reasons.

In between Stations 165 and 166, we made a brief stop for repairs of 
meteorological sensors (anemometer, rain gauge and air-temperature/relative 
humidity gauge) on a NOAA Atlas buoy located at 8°N, 90°E.

On 19 April 2007 (around Station 169) we were informed by Ship's Scheduling that 
the U.S Department of State (DoS) would not give us permission for our cruise 
applications 2006-092 and 2006-111 to sample in Bangladesh waters. The official 
notification from DoS:

"The U.S. needs to remain neutral regarding other States' unresolved maritime 
boundaries. There are no maritime boundaries established in the research areas 
identified for cruise applications 2006-092 and 2006-111. In such a situation, 
marine scientific research cannot be conducted without the prior consent of the 
relevant coastal States in the area (in this case, India, Bangladesh, and 
Burma).  To do otherwise may put the research cruise in the middle of a dispute 
if one of the coastal States believes it should have been asked to grant 
permission. The research cannot occur as proposed in the applications because we 
did not obtain acceptable clearances from all relevant countries.  There was no 
clearance obtained from Burma. India's authorization was not acceptable because 
it provided restrictions on the release of research data that are inconsistent 
with U.S. policy."

Because of this, stations had to be missed at the end of the cruise, and we 
readjusted our original sampling plan in the Bay of Bengal to include the "bow-
tie" section from Stations 172 to 176 (reoccupation of I1E stations) and then 
Stations 178 to 182 that extended the original WOCE I9N section through the 
central axis of the Bay of Bengal. Stations 174 and 182 were duplicate stations 
on CLIVAR I9N, and also reoccupations of Station 268 (WOCE I9N) and Station 989 
(WOCE I1E). We completed our sampling at Station 199 at 18°N, 89°51'E in ~2100 m 
water depth. 

After our last station we undertook a short bathymetric survey of the 2500 m 
isobath between 17°7'N; 88°30'E and 16°13'N; 90°24'E in international waters. 



___________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________



B.  HYDROGRAPHIC MEASUREMENTS - DESCRIPTIONS, TECHNIQUES AND CALIBRATIONS

                                                                                  
                             Data Submitted by: Kristin Sanborn, Mary Carol Johnson, Dan Schuller, 
                              Sue Reynolds, Mindy Kelley, Erik Quiroz, Carl Mattson, Rob Palomares
                                         Oceanographic Data Facility & Shipboard Electronics Group
                                   Shipboard Technical Support/Scripps Institution of Oceanography 




SUMMARY

A hydrographic survey consisting of Rosette/CTD/LADCP sections, bio-optical
casts, trace metals rosette sections, underway shipboard ADCP, float
deployments in the northeast Indian Ocean was carried out in March to May
2007. The R/V Revelle departed Fremantle, Australia on 22 March 2007.  A
total of 111 stations were occupied. 111 Rosette/CTD/LADCP casts, 49 Trace
Metals Rosette casts and 31 bio-optical casts were made, and 14 ARGO floats
were deployed from 26 March to 27 April 2007.  Water samples (up to 36) and
CTD data were collected on each Rosette/CTD/LADCP cast, in most cases to
within 10-20 meters of the bottom.  Salinity, dissolved oxygen and nutrient
samples were analyzed for up to 36 water samples from each cast of the
principal Rosette/CTD/LADCP program.  Water samples were also measured for
DIC, Total Alkalinity, CFCs and CDOM, and samples were collected for
DOC/DON, POC, Helium/Tritium, and C13/C14.  Underway surface pCO2,
temperature, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, fluorometer, meteorological
and multibeam acoustical bathymetric measurements were made.  The cruise
ended in Phuket, Thailand on 1 May 2007.


INTRODUCTION

A sea-going science team gathered from 8 oceanographic institutions
participated on the cruise.  Several other science programs were supported
with no dedicated cruise participant.  The science team and their
responsibilities are listed below.


Scientific Personnel I9N
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
 Duties                Name                            Affiliation             email                       
 --------------------  ------------------------------  ----------------------  ----------------------------
 Chief Scientist       Janet Sprintall                 UCSD/SIO                jsprintall@ucsd.edu         
 Co-Chief Scientist    Sabine Mecking                  UWashington             smecking@apl.washington.edu 
 ET/Salinity/TIC       Carl Mattson                    UCSD/SIO/STS/SEG        carl@odf.ucsd.edu           
 Bottle Data           Kristin Sanborn                 UCSD/SIO/STS/ODF        ksanborn@ucsd.edu           
 CTD Data              Mary Carol Johnson              UCSD/SIO/STS/ODF        mary@odf.ucsd.edu           
 Data/Salinity/Deck    Melinda (Mindy) Kelley          UCSD/SIO/ST/ODF         mskelley@ucsd.edu           
 ET/O2/Deck Leader     Rob Palomares                   UCSD/SIO/STS/SEG        rpalomares@ucsd.edu         
 O2/Deck               Susan Reynolds                  UCSD/SIO/STS/ODF        smreynol@ucsd.edu           
 Nutrients/Deck        Dan Schuller                    UCSD/SIO/STS/ODF        dschuller@ucsd.edu          
 Nutrients/Deck        Erik Quiroz                     TAMU for UCSD/SIO/STS   erik@gergx.gerg.tamu.edu    
 CTD Watchstander      Kyla Drushka                    UCSD/SIO                kdrushka@ucsd.edu           
 CTD Watchstander      Erica Key                       UMiami/RSMAS            ekey@rsmas.miami.edu        
 CDOM                  Chantal Swan                    UCSB                    swan@icess.ucsb.edu         
 CDOM                  Elisa  Wallner                  UCSB                    wallner@lifesci.ucsb.edu    
 CFC                   David Cooper                    NOAA/PMEL and LDEO      fleece@critter.net          
 CFC                   Eugene Gorman                   LDEO                    egorman@ldeo.columbia.edu   
 CFC                   Suzanne Rab Green               LDEO                    rabgreen@hotmail.com        
 DIC                   Geoffrey Todd (Geoff) Lebon     UWashington             Geoffrey.T.Lebon@noaa.gov   
 DIC                   Esa Petri Peltola               NOAA-AOML               esa.peltola@noaa.gov        
 DOM                   Wenhao Chen                     UMiami/RSMAS            wenchen@rsmas.miami.edu     
 Helium/Tritium        Anthony Dachille                LDEO                    dachille@ldeo.columbia.edu  
 LADCP/Deck            Debra Tillinger                 LDEO                    debrat@ldeo.columbia.edu    
 PH & TAlk             Alexander Abrams                UMiami/RSMAS            alexabrams@aol.com          
 PH & TAlk             Mareva Chanson                  UMiami/RSMAS            mchanson@rsmas.miami.edu    
 PH & TAlk             Jeremy Troy Mathis              UMiami/RSMAS            jmathis@rsmas.miami.edu     
 PH & TAlk             Nancy Louise Williams           NOAA                    Nancy.Williams@noaa.gov     
 TRACE METAL           William Hiscock                 UHawaii                 hiscock@hawaii.edu          
 TRACE METAL           Kathleen Joehr (Kati) Gosnell   FSU                     gosnell@ocean.fsu.edu       
 TRACE METAL           Mariko Hatta                    UHawaii                 mhatta@hawaii.edu           
 TRACE METAL           William Michael (Bill) Landing  FSU                     wlanding@fsu.edu            
 Computer Tech         Bud Hale                        UCSD/SIO/STS CR         scg@rv-revelle.ucsd.edu     
 Deck Leader/Salinity  Lucian Parry                    UCSD/SIO/STS/MTG        loparry@ucsd.edu            
 Observor/Deck         LtCmd Sheikh Shahid Ahmed       Bangladesh Naval HQ     Shahid.shahidahmed@gmail.com
 Observor/Deck         Md Mosir Uddin Mondal           Bangladesh Hydrography  Mosiruddin_bapex@yahoo.com  
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
                         


B.1.  CTD/Hydrographic Measurements Program
      Description of Measurement Techniques

The basic CTD/hydrographic measurements consisted of salinity, dissolved
oxygen and nutrient measurements made from water samples taken on
Rosette/CTD/LADCP casts, plus pressure, temperature, conductivity/salinity,
dissolved oxygen, transmissometer and fluorometer from CTD profiles.  A
total of 111 Rosette/CTD/LADCP casts were made, usually to within 10-20m of
the bottom.  No major problems were encountered during the operation. The
distribution of samples is illustrated in figures 1.0 and 1.1.


Figure 1.0: Sample distribution, stations 89-144.
Figure 1.1: Sample distribution, stations 145-199.


B.1.1.  Water Sampling Package

Rosette/CTD/LADCP casts were performed with a package consisting of a
36-bottle rosette frame (SIO/STS), a 36-place carousel (SBE32) and 36
10.4L, issuing 10.0L when the spigot is used for sampling, Bullister
bottles (SIO/STS).  Underwater electronic components consisted of a Sea-
Bird Electronics SBE9plus CTD (SIO/STS #381) with dual pumps, dual
temperature (SBE3plus), dual conductivity (SBE4C), dissolved oxygen
(SBE43), transmissometer (Wetlabs), fluorometer (Wetlabs CDOM), altimeter
(Simrad) and LADCP (RDI).  The bottle in position 34 was of older design
with a sampling volume of 9.2L.

The CTD was mounted vertically in an SBE CTD cage attached to the bottom of
the rosette frame and located to one side of the carousel.  The SBE4C
conductivity, SBE3plus temperature and SBE43 Dissolved oxygen sensors and
their respective pumps and tubing were mounted vertically as recommended by
SBE on a bracket adjacent to the CTD cage.  Pump exhausts were attached to
the sensor bracket on the side opposite from the sensors and directed
downward.  The transmissometer and fluorometer were mounted horizontally
along the bottom of the rosette frame.  The altimeter was mounted on the
inside of the bottom frame ring. The RDI LADCP was mounted vertically on
one side of the frame between the bottles and the CTD. Its battery pack was
located on the opposite side of the frame, mounted on the bottom of the
frame.
              _______________________________________________
               Heights referenced to bottom of rosette frame 
               ---------------------------------------------
               Temperature sensors                      8 cm 
               SBE35                                   11 cm 
               Altimeter                                4 cm 
               Transmissometer                         12 cm 
               CDOM Fluorometer                         3 cm 
               Pressure Sensor                         28 cm 
               Inner bottle midline                   115 cm 
               Outer bottle midline                   120 cm 
               BB LADCP XDCR Face midline               9 cm 
               Zero tape                                 3 m 
              _______________________________________________


The rosette system was suspended from a UNOLS-standard three-conductor
0.322" electro-mechanical sea cable.  The sea cable was reterminated at the
beginning of I9N, no additional terminations were performed.  The R/V
Revelle's forward starboard-side Markey winch was used for all casts.

The deck watch prepared the rosette 10-30 minutes prior to each cast.  The
bottles were cocked and all valves, vents and lanyards were checked for
proper orientation.  Once stopped on station, the rosette was moved out
from the aft hanger to the deployment location under the squirt boom block
using an air-powered cart and tracks.  The CTD was powered-up and the data
acquisition system in the computer lab started when directed by the deck
watch leader. The rosette was unstrapped from it's tiedown location on the
cart.  Tag lines were threaded through the rosette frame and syringes were
removed from the CTD intake ports.  The winch operator was directed by the
deck watch leader to raise the package, the squirt boom and rosette were
extended outboard and the package quickly lowered into the water. The tag
lines were removed and the package was lowered to 10 meters, by which time
the sensor pumps had turned on. The winch operator was then directed to
bring the package back to the surface (0 winch wireout) and to begin the
descent.

Each rosette cast was lowered to within 8-15 meters of the bottom, using
the altimeter, winch wireout, CTD depth and echosounder depth to determine
the distance.  One cast was lowered to within 3 meters of the bottom and
three casts lowered to 6000m, the pressure limit of some of the package
instrumentation.

During the up cast the winch operator was directed to stop the winch at
each bottle trip depth. The CTD console operator waited 30 seconds before
tripping a bottle to insure the package wake had dissipated and the bottles
were flushed, then an additional 10 seconds after each bottle closure to
insure that stable CTD comparison data had been acquired.  Some bottle
flushing issues were being observed in the data, so from Station 107
onward, the CTD console operators waited 40 seconds for bottles between
1500m and the surface.  Once the next-to-last bottle had been closed, the
deck watch leader directed the package to the surface for the last bottle
trip.

Standard sampling depths were used throughout CLIVAR I9N.  These standard
depths were staggered every station using 3 sampling schemes.

Recovering the package at the end of the deployment was essentially the
reverse of launching, with the additional use of poles and snap-hooks to
attach tag lines.  The rosette was secured on the cart and moved into the
aft hanger for sampling.  The bottles and rosette were examined before
samples were taken, and anything unusual noted on the sample log.

Each bottle on the rosette had a unique serial number. This bottle
identification was maintained independently of the bottle position on the
rosette, which was used for sample identification.  Various parts of
bottles were occasionally changed or repaired.

Routine CTD maintenance included soaking the conductivity and DO sensors in
fresh water between casts to maintain sensor stability and occasionally
putting dilute Triton-X solution through the conductivity sensors to
eliminate any accumulating biofilms.  Rosette maintenance was performed on
a regular basis. O-rings were changed and lanyards repaired as necessary.
Bottle maintenance was performed each day to insure proper closure and
sealing. Valves were inspected for leaks and repaired or replaced as
needed.


B.1.2.  Underwater Electronics Packages

CTD data were collected with a SBE9plus CTD (STS/ODF #381).  This
instrument provided pressure, dual temperature (SBE3), dual conductivity
(SBE4), dissolved oxygen (SBE43), CDOM fluorometer (Wetlabs),
transmissometer (Wetlabs) and altimeter (Simrad 807) channels.  The CTD
supplied a standard SBE-format data stream at a data rate of 24
frames/second.


Table 1.2.0: CLIVAR I9N Rosette Underwater Electronics.
___________________________________________________________________________
 Sea-Bird SBE32 36-place Carousel Water Sampler   3216715-0187             
 Sea-Bird SBE9plus CTD                            0381                     
 Paroscientific Digiquartz Pressure Sensor        S/N 58952                
 Sea-Bird SBE11plus Deck Unit                     11P41717-0727            
 Sea-Bird SBE3plus Temperature Sensor             S/N 03P-4588 (Primary)   
 Sea-Bird SBE3plus Temperature Sensor             S/N 03P-4226 (Secondary) 
 Sea-Bird SBE4C Conductivity Sensor               S/N 04-3176 (Primary)    
 Sea-Bird SBE4C Conductivity Sensor               S/N 04-3058 (Secondary)  
 Sea-Bird SBE43 DO Sensor                         S/N 43-1129              
 Sea-Bird SBE5 Pump                               S/N 05-4160 (Primary)    
 Sea-Bird SBE5 Pump                               S/N 05-4377 (Secondary)  
 Sea-Bird SBE35 Reference Temperature Sensor      S/N 35-0035              
 Wetlabs CDOM Fluorometer                         S/N FLCDRTD-428          
 Wetlabs CStar Transmissometer                    S/N CST-327DR            
 Simrad 807 Altimeter                             S/N 4051                 
 RDI LADCP, UH BB 150                             S/N 1546                 
___________________________________________________________________________
          

The CTD was outfitted with dual pumps. Primary temperature, conductivity
and dissolved oxygen were plumbed into one pump circuit and secondary
temperature and conductivity into the other. The sensors were deployed
vertically.  The primary temperature and conductivity sensors (T1 #03P-4588
and C1 #04-3176) were used for reported CTD temperatures and conductivities
on all casts.  The secondary temperature and conductivity sensors were used
as calibration checks for all other casts. A SBE35RT reference temperature
sensor was connected to the SBE32 carousel and recorded a temperature for
each bottle closure. These temperatures were used as additional CTD
calibration checks.

The SBE9plus CTD was connected to the SBE32 36-place carousel providing for
single-conductor sea cable operation.  The sea cable armor was used for
ground (return).  Power to the SBE9plus CTD (and sensors), SBE32 carousel
and Simrad 807 altimeter was provided through the sea cable from the
SBE11plus deck unit in the main lab.


B.1.3.  Navigation and Bathymetry Data Acquisition

Navigation data were acquired at 1-second intervals from the ship's GP90
GPS receiver by a Linux system beginning March 22.

Bathymetric data were logged from the Ship's Simrad EM120 multibeam
echosounder system and merged with the navigation time series. These depths
were corrected using sound velocity profiles derived from CTD casts.


B.1.4.  CTD Data Acquisition and Rosette Operation

The CTD data acquisition system consisted of an SBE-11plus (V2) deck unit
and three networked generic PC workstations running CentOS-4.4 Linux.  Each
PC workstation was configured with a color graphics display, keyboard,
trackball and DVD+RW drive. One of the systems also had 8 additional RS-232
ports via a Comtrol Rocketport PCI serial controller.  The systems were
interconnected through a 1000BaseTX ethernet switch which was also
connected to the ship's network. These systems were available for real-time
operational and CTD data displays, and provided for CTD and hydrographic
data management and backup.

One of the workstations was designated the CTD console and was connected to
the CTD deck unit via RS-232. The CTD console provided an interface and
operational displays for controlling and monitoring a CTD deployment and
closing bottles on the rosette. Another of the workstations was designated
as the website and database server and maintained the hydrographic database
for I9N. All three systems were used to maintain redundant backups of the
data.

CTD deployments were initiated by the console watch after the ship had
stopped on station.  The watch maintained a console operations log
containing a description of each deployment, a record of every attempt to
close a bottle and any relevant comments. The deployment and acquisition
software presented a short dialog instructing the operator to turn on the
deck unit, to examine the on-screen CTD data displays and to notify the
deck watch that this was accomplished.

Once the deck watch had deployed the rosette, the winch operator lowered it
to 10 meters.  The CTD sensor pumps were configured with an 8-second
startup delay after detecting seawater conductivities, and were usually on
by this time. The console operator checked the CTD data for proper sensor
operation, waited an additional 60 seconds for sensors to stabilize, then
instructed the winch operator to bring the package to the surface and
descend to a specified target depth (wire-out). The profiling rate was no
more than 30m/min to 50m, no more than 45m/min to 200m and no more than
60m/min deeper than 200m, depending on sea cable tension and sea state.

The progress of the deployment and CTD data quality were monitored through
interactive graphics and operational displays. Bottle trip locations were
transcribed onto the console and sample logs. The sample log was used later
as an inventory of samples drawn from the bottles.  The altimeter channel,
CTD depth, winch wire-out and bathymetric depth were all monitored to
determine the distance of the package from the bottom, usually allowing a
safe approach to within 10-20 meters.

Bottles were closed on the up cast by operating an on-screen control. The
winch operator was given a target wire-out for the bottle stop, proceeded
to that depth and stopped. Bottles were tripped 30-40 seconds after
stopping to allow the rosette wake to dissipate and the bottles to flush.
The winch operator was instructed to proceed to the next bottle stop at
least 10 seconds after closing bottles to insure that stable CTD data were
associated with the trip and to allow the SBE35RT tertiary temperature
sensor time to make a measurement.

After the last bottle was closed, the console operator directed the deck
watch to bring the rosette on deck.  Once the rosette was on deck, the
console operator terminated the data acquisition, turned off the deck unit
and assisted with rosette sampling.


B.1.5.  CTD Data Processing

Shipboard CTD data processing was performed automatically during each
Rosette/CTD/LADCP deployment, and at the end of each Trace Metals rosette
deployment using SIO/ODF CTD processing software.  The Trace Metals rosette
contained its own CTD and carousel. These data were acquired using SBE
SeaSave software, then copied to a Linux workstation for further
processing. No shipboard calibration was done for Trace Metals rosette CTD
data.

Processing was performed during data acquisition for Rosette/CTD/LADCP
deployments. The raw CTD data were converted to engineering units,
filtered, response-corrected, calibrated and decimated to a more manageable
0.5-second time-series. The laboratory calibrations for pressure,
temperature and conductivity were applied at this time. The 0.5-second
time-series data were used for real-time graphics during deployments, and
were the source for CTD pressure and temperature associated with each
rosette bottle.  Both the raw 24 Hz data and the 0.5-second time-series
were stored for subsequent processing. During the deployment the data were
backed up to another Linux workstation.

Processing was performed after data acquisition for Trace Metals rosette
deployments.  The raw CTD data and bottle trips acquired by SBE SeaSave on
the Windows XP workstation were copied onto the Linux database and web
server workstation and processed to a 0.5-second time series, then bottle
trip values were extracted.

At the completion of a deployment a sequence of processing steps were
performed automatically. The 0.5-second time-series data were checked for
consistency, clean sensor response and calibration shifts. A 2-decibar
pressure-series was then generated from the down cast.  Both the 2-decibar
pressure-series and 0.5-second time-series data were made available for
downloading, plotting and reporting on the shipboard cruise website.

Rosette/CTD/LADCP CTD data were routinely examined for sensor problems,
calibration shifts and deployment or operational problems. The primary and
secondary temperature sensors (SBE3plus) were compared to each other and to
the SBE35 temperature sensor.  CTD conductivity sensors (SBE4C) were
compared to each other, then calibrated by examining differences between
CTD and check-sample conductivity values.  The CTD dissolved oxygen sensor
data were calibrated to check-sample data.  Additional theta-Salinity and
theta-O2 comparisons were made between down and up casts as well as with
adjacent deployments. Vertical sections were made of the various properties
derived from sensor data and checked for consistency.

Few CTD acquisition or data processing problems were encountered during
I9N.

A total of 111 casts were made using the 36-place CTD/LADCP rosette, and 49
casts using the 12-place Trace Metals rosette.


B.1.6.  CTD Sensor Laboratory Calibrations

Laboratory calibrations of the CTD pressure, temperature, conductivity and
dissolved oxygen sensors were performed prior to CLIVAR I9N.  The
calibration dates are listed in table 1.6.0.


Table 1.6.0: CLIVAR I9N CTD sensor laboratory calibrations.
______________________________________________________________________________________
 Sensor                              S/N       Calibration Date  Calibration Facility
 ----------------------------------  --------  ----------------  --------------------
 Paroscientific Digiquartz Pressure  58952     17 December 2006  SIO/ODF             
 Sea-Bird SBE3plus T1 Temperature    03P-4588  14 December 2006  SBE                 
 Sea-Bird SBE3plus T2 Temperature    03P-4226  14 December 2006  SBE                 
 Sea-Bird SBE4C C1 Conductivity      04-3176   30 November 2006  SBE                 
 Sea-Bird SBE4C C2 Conductivity      04-3058   30 November 2006  SBE                 
 Sea-Bird SBE43 Dissolved Oxygen     43-1129   05 December 2006  SBE                 
______________________________________________________________________________________



B.1.7.  CTD Shipboard Calibration Procedures

CTD #381 was used for all Rosette/CTD/LADCP casts on I9N.  The CTD was
deployed with all sensors and pumps aligned vertically, as recommended by
SBE.  The primary temperature and conductivity sensors (T1 & C1) were used
for all reported CTD data for all casts, with the secondary sensors (T2 &
C2) serving as calibration checks.  The SBE35RT Digital Reversing
Thermometer (S/N 3528706-0035) served as an independent calibration check
for T1 and T2.  In-situ salinity and dissolved O2 check samples collected
during each cast were used to calibrate the conductivity and dissolved O2
sensors.


B.1.7.1.  CTD Pressure

The Paroscientific Digiquartz pressure transducer (S/N 58952) was
calibrated in December 2006 at the SIO/ODF Calibration Facility.
Calibration coefficients derived from the calibration were applied to raw
pressures during each cast.  Residual pressure offsets (the difference
between the first and last submerged pressures) and CTD pressure readings
on-deck were monitored to check for calibration shifts. The offset was
0.7-0.8db during the test cast, and it was noted that the offsets from the
end of the preceding I8S leg were similar.  A -0.5db offset was applied to
CTD pressure data for every cast after the test cast.  The residual
pressure offsets for all I9N casts were 0-0.3db at cast start, and -0.2-0db
at cast end.  No additional adjustments were made to the calculated
pressures.


B.1.7.2.  CTD Temperature

A single primary temperature sensor (T1 = SBE3plus, S/N 03P-4588) and
secondary sensor (T2 = SBE3plus, S/N 03P-4226) served the entire cruise.
Calibration coefficients derived from the pre-cruise calibrations, plus
shipboard temperature corrections determined during the preceding I8S leg
for the same sensors, were applied to raw primary and secondary
temperatures during each cast.

The SBE35RT Digital Reversing Thermometer is an internally-recording
temperature sensor that operates independently of the CTD. It is triggered
by the SBE32 carousel in response to a bottle closure. According to the
Manufacturer's specifications the typical stability is 0.001 deg.C/year.
The SBE35RT on I9N was set to internally average over approximately one
ship roll period (8 seconds). It was located equidistant between T1 and T2
with the sensing element aligned in a plane with the T1 and T2 sensing
elements.

Two independent metrics of calibration accuracy were examined.  The primary
and secondary temperatures were compared at each bottle closure, and the
SBE35RT temperatures were compared to primary and secondary temperatures at
each bottle closure.  During I8S, all three temperatures were within
+/-0.001 deg.C, with the SBE35RT between T1 and T2. Deep residual
differences for I9N, after applying I8S corrections, showed no evidence of
drift for T1 with time, requiring only a small offset, approximately
+0.0003 deg.C.  T2 drifted slowly with time, requiring a slightly
increasing offset with each cast, then apparently stabilized midway through
the leg. (+0.00045 deg.C at station 89 to +0.0008 deg.C at station 141
until the end of the leg).

A secondary response to pressure was corrected for both SBE3plus sensors on
I8S.  This was re-checked on I9N, and required a small adjustment for both
sensors: casts 1200m deeper were available on I9N to define the deeper end
of the fit better.  The deep-end adjustment was about +0.00039 and +0.00032
deg.C for T1 and T2, respectively; the second-order adjustment changed
surface temperatures by less than 0.001 deg.C.  The first-order
temperature-dependent correction from I8S was not adjusted for either
sensor.

The deep residual differences after correction are shown in figures 1.7.2.0
and 1.7.2.1.


Figure 1.7.2.0: T1-T2 by station (P>1000db).
Figure 1.7.2.1: SBE35RT-T1 by station (P>1000db).


The 95% confidence limit for the mean lower-gradient differences is
+/-0.0048 deg.C for T1-T2, and +/-0.0040 deg.C for SBE35RT-T1.


B.1.7.3.  CTD Conductivity

A single primary conductivity sensor (C1 = SBE4C, S/N 04-3176) and
secondary conductivity sensor (C2 = SBE4C, S/N 04-3058) served for the
entire cruise.  Conductivity sensor calibration coefficients derived from
the pre-cruise calibrations, plus shipboard conductivity corrections
determined during the preceding I8S leg for the same sensors, were applied
to raw primary and secondary conductivities.

Comparisons between the primary and secondary sensors and between each of
the sensors to check sample conductivities (calculated from bottle
salinities) were used to derive conductivity corrections.  To reduce the
contamination of the comparisons by package wake, differences between
primary and secondary temperature sensors were used as a metric of
variability and used to qualify the comparisons.  The coherence of this
relationship is illustrated in figure 1.7.3.0.


Figure 1.7.3.0: C1-C2 by T1-T2, all points.


The uncorrected comparison between the primary and secondary sensors is
shown in figure 1.7.3.1, and between C1 and the bottle conductivities in
1.7.3.2.


Figure 1.7.3.1: Uncorrected C1 minus C2 conductivity differences by cast
                (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.7.3.2: Uncorrected Bottle minus C1 residual conductivity
                differences by cast (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).


Deep conductivity residuals, after applying I8S corrections (same offset
for every cast), indicated that both conductivity sensors required a slowly
increasing offset with time.  Cumulative I9N C1 and C2 drifts totaled
+0.0009 and +0.0013 mS/cm, respectively, over 111 casts.

Only C2 exhibited a first-order pressure response during I8S.  No further
pressure-dependent corrections to C1 or C2 were warranted during I9N.
However, both sensors exhibited the need for more correction at the surface
than deep, on the order of +0.0013 and +0.0019 mS/cm more to surface
conductivities for C1 and C2, respectively.  This was best characterized by
applying a second-order conductivity-dependent correction to each that left
deep data essentially unchanged and pulled the shallow data closer to a 0
residual.

The comparison of the primary and secondary conductivity sensors by cast
after applying shipboard corrections are summarized in figures 1.7.3.3 and
1.7.3.4.


Figure 1.7.3.3: Corrected C1 minus C2 conductivity differences by cast
                (-0.01 deg.C<=T1-T2<=0.01 deg.C).
Figure 1.7.3.4: Corrected C1 minus C2 conductivity differences by cast
                (Pressures > 1000db).


Salinity residuals after applying shipboard T1/C1 corrections are
summarized in figures 1.7.3.5 through 1.7.3.9.  Only CTD and bottle oxygen
data with "acceptable" quality codes are included in the differences.
Figures 1.7.3.0-1.7.3.2 show the residual differences between bottle and
calibrated CTD O2 where both CTD and bottle oxygen data are coded
"acceptable".  Note that a 4,2 standard deviation rejection filter was
applied to the BottleSalt-S1 differences in the pressure-dependence plot
before plotting, to eliminate larger values in higher-gradient regions.
This shows a more realistic picture of any residual pressure dependence.


Figure 1.7.3.5: Corrected S1 minus S2 salinity differences by cast (all 
                Pressures)
Figure 1.7.3.6: Salinity residuals by cast (all Pressures).
Figure 1.7.3.7: Salinity residuals by pressure (after 4,2 std.dev. rej.
                filter applied to differences).
Figure 1.7.3.8: Corrected S1 minus S2 salinity differences by cast 
                (Pressure>1000db)
Figure 1.7.3.9: Salinity residuals by cast (Pressure>1000db).


Figures 1.7.3.8 and 1.7.3.9 represent estimates of the deep salinity
accuracy of CLIVAR I9N.  The 95% confidence limits are +/-0.0010 PSU
relative to S2, and +/-0.0018 PSU relative to the bottle salts.  Tables of
T1/C1 corrections applied to I9N (non-Trace Metal) CTD casts can be found
in Appendix A.


B.1.7.4.  CTD Dissolved Oxygen

A single SBE43 dissolved O2 (DO) sensor was used during this cruise (S/N
43-1129).  The sensor was plumbed into the primary T1/C1 pump circuit after
C1.

The DO sensors were calibrated to dissolved O2 check samples at bottle
stops by calculating CTD dissolved O2 then minimizing the residuals using a
non-linear least-squares fitting procedure. The fitting procedure
determined the calibration coefficients for the sensor model conversion
equation, and was accomplished in stages. The time constants for the
exponential terms in the model were first determined for each sensor.
These time constants are sensor-specific but applicable to an entire
cruise.  Next, casts were fit individually to check sample data. The
resulting calibration coefficients were then smoothed and held constant
during a refit to determine sensor slope and offset.

Standard and blank values for bottle oxygen data were smoothed and the
bottle oxygen recalculated prior to the final fitting of CTD oxygen.  The
time-constants and coefficients used to correct I9N CTD Oxygen data are
listed in Appendix B.

Figures 1.7.4.0-1.7.4.2 show the residual differences between bottle and
calibrated CTD O2 where both CTD and bottle oxygen data are quality-coded
"acceptable".  A 4,2 standard deviation rejection filter was applied to the
oxygen differences for the pressure-dependence plot to eliminate larger
values in higher-gradient regions; this shows a more realistic picture of
any residual pressure dependence.  The deep residuals plot has some larger
differences in earlier casts from a deeper region of high-gradient oxygen.


Figure 1.7.4.0: O2 residuals by cast (all Pressures).
Figure 1.7.4.1: O2 residuals by pressure (after 4,2 std.dev. rej. filter
                   applied to differences).
Figure 1.7.4.2: O2 residuals by cast (Pressure>1000db).


The standard deviations of 3.143 umol/kg for all oxygens and 0.958 umol/kg
for deep oxygens are only presented as general indicators of goodness of
fit.  ODF makes no claims regarding the precision or accuracy of CTD
dissolved O2 data.

The general form of the ODF O2 conversion equation for Clark cells follows
Brown and Morrison [Brow78] and Millard [Mill82], [Owen85].  ODF models
membrane and sensor temperatures with lagged CTD temperatures and a lagged
thermal gradient.  In-situ pressure and temperature are filtered to match
the sensor response. Time-constants for the pressure response Taup, two
temperature responses TauTs and TauTf, and thermal gradient response TaudT
are fitting parameters.  The thermal gradient term is derived by low-pass
filtering the difference between the fast response (Tf) and slow response
(Ts) temperatures. This term is SBE43-specific and corrects a non-linearity
introduced by analog thermal compensation in the sensor.  The Oc gradient,
dOc/dt, is approximated by low-pass filtering 1st-order Oc differences.
This gradient term attempts to correct for reduction of species other than
O2 at the sensor cathode.  The time-constant for this filter, Tauog, is a
fitting parameter.  Dissolved O2 concentration is then calculated:

   O2ml/l=[c1*Oc+c2]*fsat(S,T,P)*e**(c3*Pl+c4*Tf+c5*Ts+c6*dOc/dt(1.7.4.0)

where:

O2ml/l      = Dissolved O2 concentration in ml/l;
Oc          = Sensor current (uamps);
fsat(S,T,P) = O2 saturation concentration at S,T,P (ml/l);
S           = Salinity at O2 response-time (PSUs);
T           = Temperature at O2 response-time (deg.C);
P           = Pressure at O2 response-time (decibars);
Pl          = Low-pass filtered pressure (decibars);
Tf          = Fast low-pass filtered temperature (deg.C);
Ts          = Slow low-pass filtered temperature (deg.C);
dOc/dt      = Sensor current gradient (uamps/secs);
dT          = low-pass filtered thermal gradient (Tf - Ts).


B.2.  LADCP
      Lowered Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (LADCP) 
      Shipboard Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (SADCP)
      High-resolution Doppler Sonar System (HDSS)
      R/V Roger Revelle; March 29 - April 2, 2007
      
      Primary Onboard Personnel: Debra Tillinger, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (LDEO)
                                 debrat@ldeo.columbia.edu
      Principal Investigator:    Andreas Thurnherr, LDEO
      Additional Personnel:      Jules Hummon, University of Hawaii
                                 Bruce Huber, LDEO


B.2.1. Summary

One downward looking LADCP was mounted on the CTD rosette frame and collected 
data at every station. Preliminary processing was completed during the cruise 
using the LDEO LADCP software. The most striking LADCP result was the resolution 
of the equatorial current structure including an eastward jet at 1400 db with 
velocities up to 20 cm/s. The LADCP also showed an inverted "u" shape of 
westward current from 4 degrees south to 4 degrees north, with a maximum depth 
of 2000 db and a 300 db minimum just south of the equator (Figure 1). Velocities 
were lower and uncertainties higher in regions of low backscatter away from the 
equator. SADCP data were logged through station 115 on 4 April, after which time 
the SADCP  disk failed. After a four hour delay, the SADCP resumed logging data. 
However, part of the disk was damaged and the data could not be accessed on 
board. Final processing will include these data. The HDSS system functioned well 
for most of the cruise and the data from that system will be processed at 
Scripps Institute of Oceanography (SIO).


B.2.2. Equipment

A Teledyne RD Instruments broadband 150kHz (BB150) ADCP was mounted on the 
rosette frame but not attached to the CTD cable. It used a Deep Sea Power and 
Light 48V lead-acid gel cell  rechargeable battery that was charged after each 
cast. On deck communication with the LADCP was accomplished via an RS-232 cable 
connected through a Keyspan 4-port RS-232 to USB converter attached to a Mac 
Mini running Mac OS 10.4.8. 

The BB150 is an older instrument with a lower frequency and thus a greater 
profiling range than the newer LADCPs. The plan for this cruise was to use the 
BB150 for as long as it worked and then replace it with a pair of 300 kHz "work 
horse" ADCPs, one of which is a higher-powered prototype (WH300 and HP-WH300). 
Despite problems on I8S, the BB150 performed well for the entire cruise and did 
not need to be replaced. This was fortunate as the HP-WH300 was found to have a 
damaged bulkhead connector and a replacement part was not available. The 
remaining WH300 is most likely too weak to work as a stand-alone.

The R/V Revelle has three Doppler sonars. The primary SADCP is a Teledyne RD 
Instruments150 kHz narrowband instrument. It is operated by an SIO-owned rack 
mount unit running the University of Hawaii Data Acquisition System (UHDAS). 
UHDAS requires data from the NB150, the gyro heading (for reliability), the 
Ashtech heading (for accuracy), and GPS position.

The other two Doppler sonars on board are the 50 kHz and 140 kHz HDSS. They were 
designed at SIO to gather high-quality ocean velocity and shear measurements and 
will be processed there.


Figure 1: Zonal (top) and meridional (bottom) velocity with latitude along 
          I9N from the inverse solution of the LADCP measurements.


B.2.3.  Sampling

The LADCP was deployed at all CTD stations. A command file was uploaded to the 
instrument approximately five minutes before each deployment. Sampling 
parameters are detailed in Table 1. 

                   ____________________________________
                    Ensembles per burst         2
                    Pings per ensemble          1
                    Time per burst            2.6 s
                    Time per ensemble           1 s
                    Time between pings          0 s
                    Number of depth cells      32
                    Bin size                    8 m*
                    Blank after transmit       16 m
                    Transmit length            16 m
                    Ambiguity velocity        330 cm/s
                   ____________________________________
                   *The bin size was changed to 10m at 
                    station 108 to improve resolution. 
                    No change in data quality was noticed, 
                    so it was returned to 8m at station 117.


The SADCP and HDSS ran continuously during the cruise with the exception of 
short periods during which they received repairs. 


B.2.4. Preliminary Processing

Data were processed using the LDEO LADCP software version IX written by Martin 
Visbeck and Andreas Thurnherr. The LDEO software produces both an inverse and a 
shear solution., with the inverse solution considered the more reliable of the 
two. CTD and GPS data were incorporated into the processing at all stations. 
SADCP data were used when available (stations 89-115). Once the remaining SADCP 
data are recovered from the damaged disk, they can be used to re-process the 
LADCP data.


B.2.5. Preliminary Results

Velocity data from the inverse solution are presented in Figure 1. Most of the 
transect shows velocities slower that 10 cm/s. The upper 2000 meters of the 
transect shows alternating zonal jets near the equator. These are shown in 
greater detail in Figure 2. These are characterized by an inverted "u" shape of 
westward velocities from 10 cm/s up to 30 cm/s. At 1300 m there is a strong 
eastward jet with a maximum velocity of nearly 20 cm/s. Figure 3 shows surface 
currents along the length of the cruise track. Figure 4 shows the error velocity 
and the shear-derived velocities for comparison. The error velocity, which is 
the range of possible inverse solution, is low for most of the transect but 
reaches 0.3 cm/s between -27 and -20 degrees, an area with few scatterers and 
rough bathymetry . The shear solution shows less detail than the inverse 
solution but agrees in overall structure. The area of highest difference also 
occurs near the rough bathymetry of -27 to -20 degrees.


Figure 2: Inverse solution of the LADCP zonal (top) and meridional (bottom) 
          velocity for the equatorial region of the CLIVAR I9N transect.
Figure 3: Currents averaged over 20-50 m along CLIVAR I9N from the LADCP 
          velocity measurements.
Figure 4: Zonal (top) and meridional (bottom) velocity along CLIVAR I9N 
          determined from the shear solution of the LADCP velocity 
          measurements.


B.2.6.  Files and Directories 

The LADCP datasets should contain the following directories, which contain 
everything that is needed in order to re-process the LADCP data: 
 
  raw        raw data, instrument-setup command files, communication logfiles
  CTD        CTD time series and profiles used for LADCP processing 
  SADCP      shipboard ADCP data used for LADCP processing 
  processed  processed data files and processing figures 



BOTTLE SAMPLING

At the end of each rosette deployment water samples were drawn from the
bottles in the following order:


  • CFCs
  • He-3
  • O2
  • Dissolved Inorganic Carbon (DIC)
  • Total Alkalinity
  • C-13 and C-14
  • Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) and Dissolved Organic Nitrogen (DON)
  • Tritium
  • Nutrients
  • CDOM
  • POC
  • Salinity


At Station 98, the sampling order was changed slightly, Tritium was sampled
after other samples were collected.  This was changed again at Station 114
and Tritium was sampled before salinity.  The correspondence between
individual sample containers and the rosette bottle position (1-36) from
which the sample was drawn was recorded on the sample log for the cast.
This log also included any comments or anomalous conditions noted about the
rosette and bottles.  One member of the sampling team was designated the
sample cop, whose sole responsibility was to maintain this log and insure
that sampling progressed in the proper drawing order.

Normal sampling practice included opening the drain valve and then the air
vent on the bottle, indicating an air leak if water escaped.  This
observation together with other diagnostic comments (e.g., "lanyard caught
in lid", "valve left open") that might later prove useful in determining
sample integrity were routinely noted on the sample log.  Drawing oxygen
samples also involved taking the sample draw temperature from the bottle.
The temperature was noted on the sample log and was sometimes useful in
determining leaking or mis-tripped bottles.

Once individual samples had been drawn and properly prepared, they were
distributed for analysis.  Oxygen, nutrient and salinity analyses were
performed on computer-assisted (PC) analytical equipment networked to the
data processing computer for centralized data management.


Bottle Data Processing

Water samples collected and properties analyzed shipboard were centrally
managed in a relational database (PostgreSQL-8.0.8) running on a Linux
system. A web service (OpenAcs-5.2.3 and AOLServer-4.0.10) front-end
provided ship-wide access to CTD and water sample data.  Web-based
facilities included on-demand arbitrary property-property plots and
vertical sections as well as data uploads and downloads.

The sample log (and any diagnostic comments) was entered into the database
once sampling was completed.  Quality flags associated with sampled
properties were set to indicate that the property had been sampled, and
sample container identifications were noted where applicable (e.g., oxygen
flask number).

Analytical results were provided on a regular basis by the various
analytical groups and incorporated into the database. These results
included a quality code associated with each measured value and followed
the coding scheme developed for the World Ocean Circulation Experiment
(WOCE) Hydrographic Programme (WHP) [Joyc94].


Table 1.9.0 shows the number of samples drawn and the number of times each
WHP sample quality flag was assigned for each basic hydrographic property:


Table 1.9.0: Frequency of WHP quality flag assignments.
_______________________________________________________________________
                    Rosette Samples Stations 89-199                      
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
              Reported                  WHP Quality Codes             
              levels       1        2     3      4     5      7      9
 -----------++----------+---------------------------------------------
 Bottle     ||  3993    |  0     3991     0      1     0      0      1
 CTD Salt   ||  3993    |  0     3993     0      0     0      0      0
 CTD Oxy    ||  3988    |  0     3988     0      0     0      0      5
 Salinity   ||  3990    |  0     3888    30     72     1      0      2
 Oxygen     ||  3988    |  0     3972     8      8     4      0      1
 Silicate   ||  3989    |  0     3948    39      2     2      0      2
 Nitrate    ||  3989    |  0     3974    12      3     2      0      2
 Nitrite    ||  3989    |  0     3987     0      2     2      0      2
 Phosphate  ||  3989    |  0     3985     2      2     2      0      2
_______________________________________________________________________
          

Additionally, all WHP water bottle/sample quality code comments are
presented in Appendix C.

Various consistency checks and detailed examination of the data continued
throughout the cruise.


B.3.  Salinity Analysis

Equipment and Techniques

Two Guildline Autosal 8400A salinometers (S/N 57-396, 53-503) located in
the hydro lab, were used for salinity measurements.  Autosal 57-396 was
first employed at the start of the expedition, it developed a cell fouling
problem and 53-503 was used while the other autosal was being repaired.
Autosal 53-503 had a tendency to have a slight drift during a sample
reading.  While 53-503 was being used as the primary salinometer, the
electrodes were replaced in the conductivity cell from 57-396.  After the
cell was reassembled and reinstalled, a check was performed with the
results of a salinity run from this machine readings stable and reliable
with the CTD.  Autosal 57-396 was then used as the the primary machine.
These salinometers were configured by SIO/STS to provide an interface for
computer-aided measurement.

The salinity analyses were performed after samples had equilibrated to
laboratory temperature, usually within 6-8 hours after collection.  The
salinometers were standardized for each group of analyses (usually 1-2
casts, up to ~75 samples) using at least two fresh vials of standard
seawater per group.  Once it was determined that the salinometer was
providing stable readings, standardization was performed every 24 hours and
additionally if a bath temperature change occurred.  Salinometer
measurements were made by computer, the analyst prompted by the software to
change samples and flush.


Sampling and Data Processing

A total of 3990 salinity measurements were made (586 for Trace Metals) and
approximately 164 vials of standard seawater (IAPSO SSW) were used.

Salinity samples were drawn into 200 ml Kimax high-alumina borosilicate
bottles, which were rinsed three times with sample prior to filling.  The
bottles were sealed with custom-made plastic insert thimbles and Nalgene
screw caps.  This assembly provides very low container dissolution and
sample evaporation.  Prior to sample collection, inserts were inspected for
proper fit and loose inserts replaced to insure an airtight seal.  The draw
time and equilibration time were logged for all casts.  Laboratory
temperatures were logged at the beginning and end of each run.

PSS-78 salinity [UNES81] was calculated for each sample from the measured
conductivity ratios.  The difference (if any) between the initial vial of
standard water and the next one run as an unknown was applied as a linear
function of elapsed run time to the data.  The corrected salinity data were
then incorporated into the cruise database.

The estimated accuracy of bottle salinities run at sea is usually better
than +/-0.002 PSU relative to the particular standard seawater batch used.
The 95% confidence limit for residual differences between the bottle
salinities and calibrated CTD salinity relative to SSW batch P-147 was
+/-0.0067 PSU for all acceptable salinities, and +/-0.0014 PSU for
salinities deeper than 2500db.


Laboratory Temperature

The water bath temperature was set and maintained at a value near the
laboratory air temperature.  The following table provide a summary of the
bath and lab temperature ranges.  The temperature in the salinometer
laboratory varied from ~17 to 26 deg.C, during the cruise.  The lab
temperature dropped to ~17 deg.C when the ship's engineers cleared a
clogged cooling pipe.  The air temperature change during any particular run
varied from -1.6 to +1.3 deg.C with one run varying by 3.1 deg.C.


Salinometer Bath and Lab Temperatures I9N
      _____________________________________________________________
         Station        |Serial Number |Bath Temp | Lab Temp Range
       -----------------+--------------+----------+---------------
          89-93         |   57-396     |   24     |   21.9-23.6   
        94-105/2        |   53-503     |   24     |   22.1-23.9   
        105/1-112       |   53-503     |   27     |   24.1-25.7   
         113-132        |   57-396     |   27     |   22.6-26.2   
         133-142        |   57-396     |   21     |   16.8-21.4   
         143-199        |   57-396     |   24     |   20.7-22.7   
      _____________________________________________________________
                 


Standards

IAPSO Standard Seawater Batch P-147 was used to standardize all casts.


Comparison of 2007 reoccupied Stations
     _______________________________________________________________
      Comparison of deep water on reoccupied Stations 88 versus 89.
      -------------------------------------------------------------
       STN     SAMP     PRESS     TEMP            
       NBR     NBR      DBARS     ITS-90    SALINITY       DIFF   
       ---     ----     ------    ------    --------     -------
        88     308      1913.3    2.5057    34.7056               
        89     308      1913.0    2.4883    34.7058      -0.0002  
        88     307      2013.4    2.4006    34.7114               
        89     307      2013.7    2.3335    34.7155      -0.0041  
        88     306      2266.7    2.0769    34.7247               
        89     306      2265.3    2.0712    34.7263      -0.0016  
        88     304      2519.1    1.8278    34.7298               
        89     305      2517.8    1.8542    34.7306      -0.0008  
        88     305      2519.1    1.8280                          
        89     304      2520.6    1.8506    34.7316               
        88     303      2773.1    1.6241    34.7296               
        89     303      2772.4    1.6555    34.7309      -0.0013  
        88     302      2974.9    1.4853    34.7267               
        89     302      2974.6    1.5241    34.7291      -0.0024  
        88     301      3100.8    1.4595    34.7265               
        89     301      3104.1    1.4718    34.7283      -0.0017  
     _______________________________________________________________


     _________________________________________________________________
      Comparison of deep water on reoccupied Stations 174 versus 182.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------
       STN     SAMP     PRESS     TEMP            
       NBR     NBR      DBARS     ITS-90    SALINITY       DIFF   
       ---     ----     ------    ------    --------     -------
       174     209      2364.5    2.2768    34.7603               
       182     109      2364.5    2.2766    34.7585       0.0018  
       174     208      2615.2    2.0031    34.7459               
       182     108      2617.3    2.0034    34.7458       0.0000  
       174     207      2869.3    1.8200    34.7381               
       182     107      2869.1    1.8156    34.7383      -0.0001  
       174     206      3121.7    1.6737    34.7320               
       182     106      3123.2    1.6681    34.7315       0.0005  
       174     205      3345.6    1.5395    34.7263               
       182     105      3346.5    1.5379    34.7268      -0.0005  
       174     204      3390.5    1.5130    34.7263               
       182     104      3386.7    1.5170    34.7260       0.0003  
       174     203      3426.4    1.4898    34.7250               
       182     103      3427.3    1.4858    34.7248       0.0002  
       174     202      3461.4    1.4658    34.7242               
       182     102      3488.6    1.4627    34.7236       0.0006  
       174     201      3547.3    1.4674    34.7238               
       182     101      3548.1    1.4671    34.7219       0.0018  
     _______________________________________________________________



B.4.  Oxygen Analysis

Equipment and Techniques

Dissolved oxygen analyses were performed with an SIO/ODF-designed automated
oxygen titrator using photometric end-point detection based on the
absorption of 365nm wavelength ultra-violet light.  The titration of the
samples and the data logging were controlled by PC LabView software.
Thiosulfate was dispensed by a Dosimat 665 buret driver fitted with a 1.0
ml buret.  ODF used a whole-bottle modified-Winkler titration following the
technique of Carpenter [Carp65] with modifications by Culberson et al.
[Culb91], but with higher concentrations of potassium iodate standard
(~0.012N) and thiosulfate solution (~55 gm/l).  Pre-made liquid potassium
iodate standards were run every day (approximately every 2-4 stations),
unless changes were made to the system or reagents.  Reagent/distilled
water blanks were determined every day or more often if a change in
reagents required it to account for presence of oxidizing or reducing
agents.


Sampling and Data Processing

5975 oxygen measurements were made.  Samples were collected for dissolved
oxygen analyses soon after the rosette was brought on board.  Using a Tygon
and silicone drawing tube, nominal 125ml volume-calibrated iodine flasks
were rinsed 3 times with minimal agitation, then filled and allowed to
overflow for at least 3 flask volumes.  The sample drawing temperatures
were measured with an electronic resistance temperature detector (RTD)
embedded in the drawing tube.  These temperatures were used to calculate
umol/kg concentrations, and as a diagnostic check of bottle integrity.
Reagents (MnCl2 then NaI/NaOH) were added to fix the oxygen before
stoppering.  The flasks were shaken twice (10-12 inversions) to assure
thorough dispersion of the precipitate, once immediately after drawing, and
then again after about 20 minutes.

The samples were analyzed within 1-4 hours of collection, and the data
incorporated into the cruise database.

Thiosulfate normalities were calculated from each standardization and
corrected to 20 deg.C.  The 20 deg.C normalities and the blanks were
plotted versus time and were reviewed for possible problems.  The blanks
and thiosulfate normalities for each batch of thiosulfate were smoothed
(linear fits) in two groups during the cruise and the oxygen values
recalculated.


Volumetric Calibration

Oxygen flask volumes were determined gravimetrically with degassed
deionized water to determine flask volumes at ODF's chemistry laboratory.
This is done once before using flasks for the first time and periodically
thereafter when a suspect volume is detected.  The volumetric flasks used
in preparing standards were volume-calibrated by the same method, as was
the 10 ml Dosimat buret used to dispense standard iodate solution.


Standards

Liquid potassium iodate standards were prepared in 6 liter batches and
bottled in sterile glass bottles at ODF's chemistry laboratory prior to the
expedition.  The normality of the liquid standard was determined by
calculation from weight.  The standard was supplied by Alfa Aesar and has a
reported purity of 99.4-100.4%.  All other reagents were "reagent grade"
and were tested for levels of oxidizing and reducing impurities prior to
use.


Comparison of 2007 reoccupied Stations
     _______________________________________________________________
      Comparison of deep water on reoccupied Stations 88 versus 89.
      -------------------------------------------------------------
       STN      SAMP     PRESS      TEMP              O2          
       NBR      NBR      DBARS      ITS-90     UMOL/KG     DIFF   
       ---      ----     ------     ------     -------     ----
       88       308      1913.3     2.5057      158.4             
       89       308      1913.0     2.4883      159.7      -1.3   
       88       307      2013.4     2.4006      161.4             
       89       307      2013.7     2.3335      164.0      -2.6   
       88       306      2266.7     2.0769      171.5             
       89       306      2265.3     2.0712      171.4       0.1   
       88       304      2519.1     1.8278      178.0             
       89       305      2517.8     1.8542      177.9       0.1   
       88       305      2519.1     1.8280                        
       89       304      2520.6     1.8506      177.9             
       88       303      2773.1     1.6241      183.8             
       89       303      2772.4     1.6555      182.5       1.3   
       88       302      2974.9     1.4853      185.8             
       89       302      2974.6     1.5241      185.0       0.8   
       88       301      3100.8     1.4595      187.0             
       89       301      3104.1     1.4718      187.0       0.0   
     _______________________________________________________________
 
     ________________________________________________________________
      Comparison of deep water on reoccupied Stations 174 versus 182.
      --------------------------------------------------------------
       STN      SAMP     PRESS      TEMP              O2          
       NBR      NBR      DBARS      ITS-90     UMOL/KG     DIFF   
       ---      ----     ------     ------     -------     ----
       174      209      2364.5     2.2768      126.0             
       182      109      2364.5     2.2766      125.5       0.5   
       174      208      2615.2     2.0031      133.5             
       182      108      2617.3     2.0034      133.4       0.1   
       174      207      2869.3     1.8200      140.6             
       182      107      2869.1     1.8156      140.5       0.1   
       174      206      3121.7     1.6737      147.2             
       182      106      3123.2     1.6681      147.4      -0.2   
       174      205      3345.6     1.5395      157.9             
       182      105      3346.5     1.5379      157.6       0.3   
       174      204      3390.5     1.5130      159.1             
       182      104      3386.7     1.5170      158.5       0.6   
       174      203      3426.4     1.4898      158.7             
       182      103      3427.3     1.4858      158.5       0.2   
       174      202      3461.4     1.4658      157.0             
       182      102      3488.6     1.4627      153.1       3.9   
       174      201      3547.3     1.4674      152.8             
       182      101      3548.1     1.4671      152.5       0.3   
     ________________________________________________________________



B.5.  Nutrient Analysis

Equipment and Techniques

Nutrient analyses (phosphate, silicate, nitrate and nitrite) were performed
on an ODF-modified 4-channel Technicon AutoAnalyzer II, generally within
one to two hours after sample collection.

The methods used are described by Gordon et al. [Gord92].  The analog
outputs from each of the four colorimeter channels were digitized and
logged automatically by computer (PC) at 2-second intervals.

Silicate was analyzed using the technique of Armstrong et al. [Arms67].  An
acidic solution of ammonium molybdate was added to a seawater sample to
produce silicomolybdic acid which was then reduced to silicomolybdous acid
(a blue compound) following the addition of stannous chloride.  Tartaric
acid was also added to impede PO4 color development.  The sample was passed
through a 15mm flowcell and the absorbence measured at 660nm.

A modification of the Armstrong et al. [Arms67] procedure was used for the
analysis of nitrate and nitrite.  For the nitrate analysis, the seawater
sample was passed through a cadmium reduction column where nitrate was
quantitatively reduced to nitrite.  Sulfanilamide was introduced to the
sample stream followed by N-(1-naphthyl)ethylenediamine dihydrochloride
which coupled to form a red azo dye.  The stream was then passed through a
15mm flowcell and the absorbence measured at 540nm.  The same technique was
employed for nitrite analysis, except the cadmium column was bypassed, and
a 50mm flowcell was used for measurement.

Phosphate was analyzed using a modification of the Bernhardt and Wilhelms
[Bern67] technique.  An acidic solution of ammonium molybdate was added to
the sample to produce phosphomolybdic acid, then reduced to phosphomolybdous 
acid (a blue compound) following the addition of dihydrazine sulfate.  The 
reaction product was heated to ~55 deg.C to enhance color development, then 
passed through a 50mm flowcell and the absorbence measured at 820nm.

Explicit corrections for carryover in nutrient analyses are not made.  In a
typical AutoAnalyzer system, sample to sample carryover is (p1-2% of the
concentration difference between samples.  This effect is minimized by
running samples in order of increasing depth such that concentration
differences between samples are minimized.  The initial surface samples
were run twice since these samples followed standard peaks.


Sampling and Data Processing

4576 nutrient samples were analyzed of these 586 were analyzed for Trace
Metal casts.

Nutrient samples were drawn into 45 ml polypropylene, screw-capped "oak-
ridge type" centrifuge tubes.  The tubes were cleaned with 10% HCl and
rinsed with sample 2-3 times before filling.  Standardizations were
performed at the beginning and end of each group of analyses (typically one
cast, up to 36 samples) with an intermediate concentration mixed nutrient
standard prepared prior to each run from a secondary standard in a low-
nutrient seawater matrix.  The secondary standards were prepared aboard
ship by dilution from primary standard solutions.  Dry standards were pre-
weighed at the laboratory at ODF, and transported to the vessel for
dilution to the primary standard.  Sets of 7 different standard
concentrations were analyzed periodically to determine any deviation from
linearity as a function of absorbence for each nutrient analysis.  A
correction for non-linearity was applied to the final nutrient
concentrations when necessary.  A correction for the difference in
refractive indices of pure distilled water and seawater was periodically
determined and applied.  In addition, a "deep seawater" high nutrient
concentration check sample was run with each station as an additional check
on data quality.  The pump tubing was changed 3 times.

After each group of samples was analyzed, the raw data file was processed
to produce another file of response factors, baseline values, and
absorbences.  Final nutrient concentrations were then determined from this
file.  The data were then added to the cruise database.

Nutrients, reported in micromoles per kilogram, were converted from
micromoles per liter by dividing by sample density calculated at 1 atm
pressure (0 db), in situ salinity, and a per-analysis measured analytical
temperature.


Standards

Primary standards for silicate (Na2SiF6) and nitrite (NaNO2) were obtained
from Johnson Matthey Chemical Co.; the supplier reported purities of >98%
and 97%, respectively. Primary standards for nitrate (KNO3) and phosphate
(KH2PO4) were obtained from Fisher Chemical Co.; the supplier reported
purities of 99.999% and 99.999%, respectively.  The efficiency of the
cadmium column used for nitrate was monitored throughout the cruise and
ranged from 99-100%.

No major problems were encountered with the measurements.  The temperature
of the laboratory used for the analyses ranged from 23.0 deg.C to 24.5
deg.C.


Comparison of 2007 reoccupied Stations
____________________________________________________________________________
 Comparison of deep water on reoccupied Stations 88 versus 89.       
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
  STN  SAMP  PRESS   TEMP         SiO3              NO3            PO4     
  NBR  NBR   DBARS   ITS-90  UMOL/KG   DIFF   UMOL/KG   DIFF  UMOL/KG  DIFF 
  ---  ----  ------  ------  -------  -----   -------   ----  -------  ----
   88  308   1913.3  2.5057   99.85            33.35           2.35        
   89  308   1913.0  2.4883   98.93    0.92    33.06    0.29   2.34    0.01
   88  307   2013.4  2.4006  101.25            33.16           2.34        
   89  307   2013.7  2.3335  101.39   -0.14    32.95    0.21   2.33    0.01
   88  306   2266.7  2.0769  105.43            32.55           2.28        
   89  306   2265.3  2.0712  105.87   -0.44    32.53    0.02   2.28    0.00
   88  304   2519.1  1.8278  109.41            32.23           2.26        
   89  305   2517.8  1.8542  109.14    0.33    32.23    0.00   2.26    0.00
   88  305   2519.1  1.8280                                                
   89  304   2520.6  1.8506  109.55            32.27           2.26        
   88  303   2773.1  1.6241  113.21            32.13           2.24        
   89  303   2772.4  1.6555  112.82    0.40    32.16   -0.03   2.25   -0.01
   88  302   2974.9  1.4853  117.02            32.17           2.25        
   89  302   2974.6  1.5241  116.52    0.50    32.21   -0.04   2.26   -0.01
   88  301   3100.8  1.4595  117.83            32.17           2.25        
   89  301   3104.1  1.4718  117.75    0.08    32.25   -0.08   2.26   -0.01
____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________
 Comparison of deep  water  on reoccupied Stations 174 versus 182.    
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
  STN  SAMP  PRESS   TEMP         SiO3              NO3            PO4     
  NBR  NBR   DBARS   ITS-90  UMOL/KG   DIFF   UMOL/KG   DIFF  UMOL/KG  DIFF 
  ---  ----  ------  ------  -------  -----   -------   ----  -------  ----
  174  209   2364.5  2.2768  135.14            35.71           2.57        
  182  109   2364.5  2.2766  134.31    0.83    35.62    0.09   2.56    0.01
  174  208   2615.2  2.0031  138.18            35.51           2.52        
  182  108   2617.3  2.0034  137.31    0.87    35.42    0.09   2.52    0.00
  174  207   2869.3  1.8200  139.38            35.22           2.49        
  182  107   2869.1  1.8156  139.10    0.28    35.10    0.12   2.49    0.00
  174  206   3121.7  1.6737  140.99            35.02           2.46        
  182  106   3123.2  1.6681  140.29    0.70    34.90    0.12   2.46    0.00
  174  205   3345.6  1.5395  138.31            34.54           2.40        
  182  105   3346.5  1.5379  138.65   -0.34    34.40    0.14   2.40    0.00
  174  204   3390.5  1.5130  138.07            34.48           2.39        
  182  104   3386.7  1.5170  139.03   -0.96    34.39    0.09   2.39    0.00
  174  203   3426.4  1.4898  139.68            34.38           2.39        
  182  103   3427.3  1.4858  140.21   -0.53    34.43   -0.05   2.39    0.00
  174  202   3461.4  1.4658  142.72            34.62           2.40        
  182  102   3488.6  1.4627  146.05   -3.33    34.87   -0.25   2.41   -0.01
  174  201   3547.3  1.4674  147.00            35.06           2.42        
  182  101   3548.1  1.4671  146.84    0.16    34.92    0.14   2.42    0.00
____________________________________________________________________________

 
 
References 
 
Arms67. 
     Armstrong, F. A. J., Stearns, C. R.,  and Strickland, J. D. H., "The
     measurement of upwelling and subsequ ent biological processes by means
     of the Technicon Autoanalyzer and as sociated equipment," Deep-Sea
     Research, 14, pp. 381-389 (1967). 
 
Bern67. 
     Bernhardt, H. and Wilhelms, A., "The  continuous determination of low
     level iron, soluble phosphate and to tal phosphate with the
     AutoAnalyzer," Technicon Symposia, I , pp. 385-389 (1967).
 
Brow78.
     Brown, N. L. and Morrison, G. K., "WHOI/Brown conductivity,
     temperature and depth microprofiler," Technical Report No. 78-23,
     Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (1978).

Carp65.
     Carpenter, J. H., "The Chesapeake Bay Institute technique for the
     Winkler dissolved oxygen method," Limnology and Oceanography, 10, pp.
     141-143 (1965).

Culb91.
     Culberson, C. H., Knapp, G., Stalcup, M., Williams, R. T., and
     Zemlyak, F., "A comparison of methods for the determination of
     dissolved oxygen in seawater," Report WHPO 91-2, WOCE Hydrographic
     Programme Office (Aug 1991).

Gord92.
     Gordon, L. I., Jennings, J. C., Jr., Ross, A. A., and Krest, J. M., "A
     suggested Protocol for Continuous Flow Automated Analysis of Seawater
     Nutrients in the WOCE Hydrographic Program and the Joint Global Ocean
     Fluxes Study," Grp. Tech Rpt 92-1, OSU College of Oceanography Descr.
     Chem Oc. (1992).

Joyc94.
     Joyce, T., ed. and Corry, C., ed., "Requirements for WOCE Hydrographic
     Programme Data Reporting," Report WHPO 90-1, WOCE Report No. 67/91,
     pp. 52-55, WOCE Hydrographic Programme Office, Woods Hole, MA, USA
     (May 1994, Rev. 2). UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPT.

Mill82.
     Millard, R. C., Jr., "CTD calibration and data processing techniques
     at WHOI using the practical salinity scale," Proc. Int. STD Conference
     and Workshop, p. 19, Mar. Tech. Soc., La Jolla, Ca. (1982).

Owen85.
     Owens, W. B. and Millard, R. C., Jr., "A new algorithm for CTD oxygen
     calibration," Journ. of Am. Meteorological Soc., 15, p. 621 (1985).

UNES81.
     UNESCO, "Background papers and supporting data on the Practical
     Salinity Scale, 1978," UNESCO Technical Papers in Marine Science, No.
     37, p. 144 (1981).



B.6.  CFC Measurements
      Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) Measurements during CLIVAR I9N 

      Principal Investigators: John L. Bullister and Bill Smethie
      Samplers and Analysts:   David Cooper, Eugene Gorman and Suzanne Rab Green

The CFC measurements during I9N follow on from those made during I8S, using the 
same instrumentation and techniques.  Samples for the analyses of dissolved CFC-
11 and CFC-12 were drawn from approximately 2500 water samples collected during 
the expedition. Water samples were collected in modified niskin bottles with an 
end-cap designed to minimize the contact of the water sample with O-rings after 
closing. Water samples for CFC were the first samples drawn from the 10-liter 
bottles. Care was taken to coordinate the sampling of CFCs with other samples to 
minimize the time between the initial opening of each bottle and the completion 
of sample drawing. In most cases, dissolved oxygen and He samples were collected 
within several minutes of the initial opening of each bottle. To minimize 
contact with air, the CFC samples were drawn directly through the stopcocks of 
the 10-liter bottles into 250 ml precision glass syringes equipped with three-
way plastic stopcocks. The syringes were immersed in a holding tank of clean 
surface seawater held at approximately 0 degrees Centigrade until 30 minutes 
before being analyzed.  At that time, the syringe was place in a bath of surface 
seawater heated to 25 degrees C.   

For atmospheric sampling, a ~100 m length of 3/8" OD Dekaron tubing was run from 
the CFC, van located on the fantail, to the bow of the ship. A flow of air was 
drawn through this line into the main laboratory using a Kadet pump. The air was 
compressed in the pump, with the downstream pressure held at ~1.5 atm. using a 
backpressure regulator. A tee allowed a flow (100 ml min-1) of the compressed 
air to be directed to the gas sample valves of the CFC  analytical systems, 
while the bulk flow of the air (>7 l min-1) was vented through the backpressure 
regulator. Air samples were only analyzed when the relative wind direction was 
within 60 degrees of the bow of the ship to reduce the possibility of shipboard 
contamination.  Analysis of bow air was performed at several locations along the 
cruise track. At each location, at least five measurements were made to increase 
the precision. The measured concentrations are reported in Tables 1 and 2.  
Concentrations of CFC-11 and CFC-12 in air samples, seawater, and gas standards 
were measured by shipboard electron capture gas chromatography (EC-GC) using 
techniques modified from those described by Bullister and Weiss (1988). 

For seawater analyses, water was transferred from a glass syringe to a glass 
sparging chamber  (~190 ml). The dissolved gases in the seawater sample were 
extracted by passing a supply of CFC-free purge gas through the sparging chamber 
for a period of 6 minutes at 175 ml min-1. Water vapor was removed from the 
purge gas during passage through an 18 cm long, 3/8" diameter glass tube packed 
with the desiccant magnesium perchlorate. The sample gases were concentrated on 
a cold-trap consisting of a 1/16" OD stainless steel tube with a ~5 cm section 
packed tightly with Porapak Q (60-80 mesh) and a 22 cm section packed with 
Carboxen 1004.  A Neslab cryocool was used to cool the trap, to -70°C.  After 6 
minutes of purging, the trap was isolated, and it was heated electrically to 
~175°C. The sample gases held in the trap were then injected onto a pre-column 
(~60 cm of 1/8" O.D. stainless steel tubing packed with 80-100 mesh Porasil B, 
held at 80°C) for the initial separation of CFC-12 and CFC-11 from later eluting 
peaks.  After the F12 had passed from the pre-column through the second pre-
column (5 cm of 1/8" O.D. Stainless steel tubing packed with  MS5A, 80°C) and 
into the analytical column #1 (~170 cm of 1/8" OD stainless steel tubing packed 
with MS5A and held at 80°C)  the outflow from the first pre-column was diverted 
to the second analytical column (~150 cm 1/8" OD stainless steel tubing packed 
with Carbograph 1AC, 80-100 mesh, held at 100°C).  After CFC-11 had passed 
through the first pre-column, the remaining gases were backflushed from the pre-
column and vented.  Column #1and the pre-columns were in a Shimadzu GC8 gas 
chromatograph with electron capture detector (340°C).  Column #2 was in a 
Shimadzu Mini2 gas chromatograph, also with electron capture detector (250°C).

Both of the analytical systems were calibrated frequently using a standard gas 
of known CFC composition. Gas sample loops of known volume were thoroughly 
flushed with standard gas and injected into the system. The temperature and 
pressure was recorded so that the amount of gas injected could be calculated. 
The procedures used to transfer the standard gas to the trap, pre-column, main 
chromatographic column, and EC detector were similar to those used for analyzing 
water samples. Four sizes of gas sample loops were used. Multiple injections of 
these loop volumes could be made to allow the system to be calibrated over a 
relatively wide range of concentrations. Air samples and system blanks 
(injections of loops of CFC-free gas) were injected and analyzed in a similar 
manner. The typical analysis time for seawater, air, standard or blank samples 
was ~11 minutes.  Concentrations of the CFCs in air, seawater samples, and gas 
standards are reported relative to the SIO98 calibration scale (Cunnold et. al., 
2000). Concentrations in air and standard gas are reported in units of mole 
fraction CFC in dry gas, and are typically in the parts per trillion (ppt) 
range. Dissolved CFC concentrations are given in units of picomoles per kilogram 
seawater (pmol kg-1). CFC concentrations in air and seawater samples were 
determined by fitting their chromatographic peak areas to multi-point 
calibration curves, generated by injecting multiple sample loops of gas from a 
working standard (PMEL cylinder 45186) into the analytical instrument. The 
response of the detector to the range of moles of CFC passing through the 
detector remained relatively constant during the cruise. Full-range calibration 
curves were run at intervals of 4-5 days during the cruise. Single injections of 
a fixed volume of standard gas at one atmosphere were run much more frequently 
(at intervals of ~90 minutes) to monitor short-term changes in detector 
sensitivity. 

Based on the analysis of duplicate samples, we estimate precisions (1 standard 
deviation) of less than 1% or 0.005 (whichever is greater) for both dissolved 
CFC-11 and CFC-12 measurements.  A very small number of water samples had 
anomalously high CFC concentrations relative to adjacent samples. These samples 
occurred sporadically during the cruise and were not clearly associated with 
other features in the water column (e.g., anomalous dissolved oxygen, salinity, 
or temperature features). This suggests that these samples were probably 
contaminated with CFCs during the sampling or analysis processes. Measured 
concentrations for these anomalous samples are included in the preliminary data, 
but are given a quality flag value of either 3 (questionable measurement) or 4 
(bad measurement). A quality flag of 5 was assigned to samples which were drawn 
from the rosette but never analyzed due to a variety of reasons (e.g., leaking 
stopcock, plunger jammed in syringe barrel). 

In addition to the samples analyzed using the PMEL system, some samples were 
taken early in the cruise for separate and comparative analysis using the 
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (LDEO) CFC/SF6 system.  The basic principle of 
operation is very similar to the PMEL system.  Duplicate samples taken for the 
two systems are in good agreement, with error estimates no larger than for 
duplicate samples taken for either system.  No distinction between the sources 
of the CFC data was noted in the preliminary data submission.  A total of 2449 
samples are reported from the PMEL system and 141 samples from the LDEO system.  
Data for F113 were submitted in the 141 LDEO samples.  Where both systems were 
used, the PMEL data are reported.


References:

Bullister, J.L., and R.F. Weiss, 1988: Determination of  CC13F and CC12F2 
    seawater and air. Deep-Sea Res., v. 25,  pp. 839-853. 

Prinn, R.G., R.F. Weiss, P.J. Fraser, P.G. Simmonds, D.M.  Cunnold, F.N. 
    Alyea, S. O'Doherty, P. Salameh, B.R.  Miller, J. Huang, R.H.J. Wang, 
    D.E. Hartley, C. Harth,  L.P. Steele, G. Sturrock, P.M. Midgley, and 
    A. McCulloch,  2000: A history of chemically and radiatively 
    important gases in air deduced from ALE/GAGE/ AGAGE. J. Geophys.  
    Res., v. 105, pp. 17,751-17,792. 



B.7.  DIC Measurements
      Total CO2 Measurements

Samples for TCO2 measurements were drawn according to procedures outlined in the 
Handbook of Methods for CO2 Analysis (DOE 1994) from 10.4-L Niskin bottles 
(except Niskin 34, 9.6 L) into cleaned 300-mL glass bottles. Bottles were rinsed 
and filled from the bottom, leaving 6 mL of headspace; care was taken not to 
entrain any bubbles. After 0.12 mL of 50% saturated HgCl2 solution was added as 
a preservative, the sample bottles were sealed with glass stoppers lightly 
covered with Apiezon-L grease and were stored at room temperature for a maximum 
of 12 hours prior to analysis.
     
TCO2 samples were collected at every degree from 36 depths with three replicate 
samples. Some samples were also collected at every half-degree. The replicate 
seawater samples were taken from the surface, 1000 m, and bottom Niskin bottles 
and run at different times during the cell. No systematic difference between the 
replicates was observed. A total of 2526 samples for TCO2 were collected and 
analyzed during the cruise. 
     
The TCO2 analytical equipment was set up in a seagoing laboratory van. The 
analysis was done by coulometry with two analytical systems (PMEL1 and PMEL2) 
used simultaneously on the cruise. Each system consisted of a coulometer (UIC, 
Inc.) coupled with a single operator multi-parameter metabolic analyzer (SOMMA) 
inlet system developed by Kenneth Johnson (Johnson et al. 1985, 1987, 1993, and 
1999; Johnson 1992) now retired from Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL). In 
the coulometric analysis of TCO2, all carbonate species are converted to CO2 
(gas) by addition of excess hydrogen ion (acid) to the seawater sample, and the 
evolved CO2 gas is swept into the titration cell of the coulometer with pure air 
or compressed nitrogen, where it reacts quantitatively with a proprietary 
reagent based on ethanolamine to generate hydrogen ions. In this process, the 
solution changes from blue to colorless, which triggers a current through the 
cell and causes coulometrical generation of OH- ions at the anode. The OH- ions 
react with the H+, and the solution turns blue again. A beam of light is shone 
through the solution, and a photometric detector at the opposite side of the 
cell senses the change in transmission. Once the percent transmission reaches 
its original value, the coulometric titration is stopped, and the amount of CO2 
that enters the cell is determined by integrating the total charge during the 
titration.
     
The coulometers were calibrated by injecting aliquots of pure CO2 (99.995%) by 
means of an 8-port valve outfitted with two sample loops with known gas volumes  
bracketing the amount of CO2 extracted from the water samples for the two PMEL 
systems.
     
The stability of each coulometer cell solution was confirmed three different 
ways: the Certified Reference Material (CRM), Batch 78, supplied by Dr. A. 
Dickson of SIO, was measured at the beginning, gas loops in the beginning and at 
the end, and the duplicate samples at the beginning, middle, and end of each 
cell solution. The coulometer cell solution was replaced after 25 mg of carbon 
was titrated, typically after 9-12 hours of continuous use.
     
The pipette volume was determined by taking aliquots at known temperature of 
distilled water from the volumes. The weights with the appropriate densities 
were used to determine the volume of the pipettes. 
     
Calculation of the amount of CO2 injected was according to the CO2 handbook (DOE 
1994). The concentration of CO2 ([CO2]) in the samples was determined according 
to:

                           (Counts-Blank*Run Time)*K µmol/count
        [CO2]=Cal.factor * ------------------------------------
                             pipette volume*density of sample


where Cal. Factor is the calibration factor, Counts is the instrument reading at 
the end of the analysis, Blank is the counts/minute determined from blank runs 
performed at least once for each cell solution, Run Time is the length of 
coulometric titration (in minutes), and K is the conversion factor from counts 
to µmol.

The instrument has a salinity sensor, but all TCO2 values were recalculated to a 
molar weight (µmol/kg) using density obtained from the CTD's salinity sensor. 
The TCO2 values were corrected for dilution by 0.12 mL of  50% saturated HgCl2 
used for sample preservation. The total water volume of the sample bottles was 
302.55 mL (calibrated by Dana Greeley, PMEL). The correction factor used for 
dilution was 1.0004. A correction was also applied for the offset from the CRM. 
This correction was applied for each cell using the CRM value obtained in the 
beginning of the cell. The results underwent initial quality control on the ship 
using property plots: TCO2-Depth, TCO2-Potential Temperature, TCO2-Salinity, 
TCO2- NO3; TCO2-SiO3, TCO2-PO4, TCO2- TALK, and TCO2-pH. Also TCO2-LAT-Depth 
contour plots were used to analyze the quality of the data.

The overall performance of the instruments was good during the cruise. Valve 8 
malfunctioned at the station 95 on PMEL1. It was replaced. The acid delivery 
malfunctioned on PMEL2 during the station 172 due to pinched tubing. The PMEL2 
coulometer stopped counting during the station 180.



B.8  TA Measurements
     Total Alkalinity Analyses

     Principal Investigator: Frank J. Millero, U. Miami, RSMAS
                             4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, FL 33149
                             fmillero@rsmas.miami.edu
     Samplers:               Alexander Abrams (15:00 - 03:00)
                             aabrams@rsmas.miami.edu
                             Nancy Williams (03:00 - 15:00)
                             n.williams6@umiami.edu
     Analysts:               Alexander Abrams (15:00 - 03:00)
                             aabrams@rsmas.miami.edu
                             Nancy Williams (03:00 - 15:00)
                             n.williams6@umiami.edu
     Data Reduction:         Mareva Chanson (03:00 - 15:00)
                             mchanson@rsmas.miami.edu
                             Nancy Williams (03:00 - 15:00)
                             n.williams6@umiami.edu


Sampling:

Samples were drawn from 10-l Niskin bottles into 500 ml borosilicate flasks 
using silicone tubing that fit over the petcock to avoid contamination of DOC 
samples.  Bottles were rinsed a minimum of two times and filled from the bottom, 
overflowing a quarter of a volume while taking care not to entrain any bubbles.  
Approximately 15 ml of water was withdrawn from the flask by arresting the 
sample flow and removing the sampling tube, thus creating a small expansion 
volume and a reproducible headspace.  The sample bottles were sealed at a ground 
glass joint with a glass stopper.  The samples were thermostated at 25(C before 
analysis. Periodically, multiple duplicate samples were drawn with a specific 
focus on photic zone and region of high dissolved organic carbon (DOC).  The 
purpose was to determine the difference in Total Alkalinity after filtration 
with a 0.45 µm nylon membrane filter.


Table 1: Preliminary quality control of total alkalinity

                      ____________________________________
                       Total number of samples:      2459
                       Questionable (QC=3):             9
                       Bad (QC=4):                     13
                       Not Reported (QC=5):            20
                       Duplicate (QC=6):              283
                       Set of Filtered/unfiltered:    142
                      ____________________________________



Analyzer Description:

The total alkalinity of seawater (TAlk) was evaluated from the proton balance at 
the alkalinity equivalence point, pHequiv = 4.5 at 25°C and zero ionic strength 
in one kilogram of sample.  The method utilizes a multi-point hydrochloric acid 
titration of seawater according to the definition of total alkalinity (Dickson, 
1981). The potentiometric titrations of seawater not only give values of TAlk 
but also those of DIC and pH, respectively from the volume of acid added at the 
first end point and the initial emf, E0.

Two titration systems, A and B were used for TAlk analysis. Each of them 
consists of a Metrohm 665 Dosimat titrator, an Orion 720A pH meter and a custom 
designed plexiglass water-jacketed titration cell (Millero et al., 1993b). Both 
the seawater sample and acid titrant were temperature equilibrated to a constant 
temperature of 25 ± 0.1°C with a water bath (Neslab, model RTE-17).  The water-
jacketed cell is similar to the cells used by Bradshaw and Brewer (1988) except 
a larger volume (~200 ml) is employed to increase the precision.  Each cell has 
a fill and drain valve which increases the reproducibility of the volume of 
sample contained in the cell. A typical titration recorded the EMF after the 
readings became stable (deviation less than 0.09 mV) and then enough acid was 
added to change the voltage a pre-assigned increment (13 mV).  A full titration 
(~25 points) takes about 20 minutes.  The electrodes used to measure the EMF of 
the sample during a titration consisted of a ROSS glass pH electrode (Orion, 
model 810100) and a double junction Ag, AgCl reference electrode (Orion, model 
900200).


Reagents:

A single 50-l batch of ~0.25 m HCl acid was prepared in 0.45 m NaCl by dilution 
of concentrated HCl, AR Select‚ Mallinckrodt, to yield a total ionic strength 
similar to seawater of salinity 35.0 (I ≈ 0.7 M).  The acid was standardized by 
a coulometric technique (Marinenko and Taylor, 1968; Taylor and Smith, 1959) and 
verified with alkalinity titrations on seawater of known alkalinity.  
Furthermore, Andrew Dickson's laboratory performed an independent determination 
of the acid molality on sub-samples.  The calibrated molarity of the acid used 
was 0.2648 ± 0.0001 M HCl.  The acid was stored in 500-ml glass bottles sealed 
with Apiezon(r) L grease for use at sea.


Standardization:

The volumes of the cells used were determined to ± 0.03 ml in port at Fremantle 
by multiple titrations using seawater of known total alkalinity and CRM.  
Calibrations of the burette of the Dosimat with water at 25ºC indicate that the 
systems deliver 3.000 ml (the approximate value for a titration of seawater) to 
a precision of ± 0.0004 ml, resulting in an error of ± 0.3 µmol•kg-1 in TAlk.  
The reproducibility and precision of measurements are checked using low nutrient 
surface seawater and Certified Reference Material (Dr. Andrew Dickson, Marine 
Physical Laboratory, La Jolla, California), Batch 78.  CRM were utilized in 
order to account for instrument drift and to maintain measurement precision.  
Opened CRM bottles, referred as 'old' were given by the DIC analysts. These 
opened bottles were used to rinse the cell before using the new CRM bottles. 
Duplicate analyses provide additional quality assurance and were taken from same 
Niskin bottle. Duplicates were either measured on the same instrument, A or B, 
or measured on both systems, A and B. 

The assigned values of the Certified Reference Material provided by A. Dickson 
of SIO is:

   Batch 78:  Total Alkalinity: 2185.57 ± 0.45 µmol•kg-1    Salinity: 33.285 


Data Processing:

An integrated program controls the titration, data collection, and the 
calculation of the carbonate parameters (TAlk, pH, and DIC) (Millero et al., 
1993a).  The program is patterned after those developed by Dickson (1981), 
Johansson and Wedborg (1982), and U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) (1994).  The 
program uses a Levenberg-Marquardt nonlinear least-squares algorithm to 
calculate the TAlk, DIC, and from the potentiometric titration data.


Table 2: Comparison of the measured alkalinity of the CRM and the certified value
_____________________________________________________________________________
           CRM                   Instrument A              Instrument B
 -------------------------  ----------------------    ----------------------
 Total number of sets:                96                        101    
 Standard deviation (new):  ± 2.9 µmol/kg-1 (n=49)    ± 2.9 µmol/kg-1 (n=53)
 Standard deviation (old):  ± 6.5 µmol/kg-1 (n=47)    ± 3.1 µmol/kg-1 (n=48)
_____________________________________________________________________________


Table 3: Comparison of total alkalinity from the same Niskin bottle
_____________________________________________________________________________
 Replicates             Instrument A       Instrument B      Between Systems
 --------------------- ---------------    ---------------    ---------------
 Total number of sets:       94                118                 68
 Number of sets used:        84                109                 64
 Standard deviation:   ± 0.8 µmol/kg-1    ± 0.8 µmol/kg-1    ± 1.5 µmol/kg-1
_____________________________________________________________________________


Table 4: Comparison of total alkalinity between filtered and unfiltered samples
                   _________________________________________
                    Filtered/Unfiltered      Instrument A 
                    ---------------------  ----------------
                    Total number of sets:        142
                    Number of sets used:         137
                    Standard deviation:    ± 1.31 µmol/kg-1
                   _________________________________________


Note:  Outliers were determined if the differences were one and a half times 
larger than the standard deviation.  The number omitted is the difference 
between the total number of set and the sets used.


Problems:

After the first station, 89, instrument A was shut down as its power supply was 
wrongly wired and was considered as a fire hazard. Many thanks to the ET on 
board, Robert Palomares who rewired the power supply, correctly this time, which 
allowed us to use two instruments. Occasionally, if the two systems were to fill 
their cell at the same time, the piston of instrument B would not fail closing 
the valves. Because of this problem, the sampling bottle would drain and 
seawater would be lost.  Sporadically, a solenoid valve at the bottom of the 
titration cell would fail to engage or disengage, resulting in the loss of the 
sample or a failed titration due to a poor rinse or an air bubble. 


References

Bradshaw, A.L., and P.G. Brewer, 1988:  High precision measurements of 
    alkalinity and total carbon dioxide in seawater by potentiometric 
    titration, 1: Presence of unknown protolyte(s)?  Mar. Chem., v. 23, pp. 
    69-86.

Dickson, A.G., 1981: An exact definition of total alkalinity and a procedure 
    for the estimation of alkalinity and total CO2 from titration data. Deep-
    Sea Res., Part A, v. 28, pp. 609-623.

DOE, 1994:  Handbook of methods for the analysis of the various parameters of 
    the carbon dioxide system in sea water. Version 2, A.G. Dickson and C. 
    Goyet (eds.), ORNL/CDIAC-74.

Johansson, O., and M. Wedborg, 1982:  On the evaluation of potentiometric 
    titrations of seawater with hydrochloric acid. Oceanologica Acta, v. 5, 
    pp. 209-218.

Marinenko, G., and J.K. Taylor, 1968:  Electrochemical equivalents of benzoic 
    and oxalic acid.  Anal. Chem., v. 40, pp. 1645-1651.

Millero, F.J., R.H. Byrne, R. Wanninkhof, R. Feely, T. Clayton, P. Murphy, 
    and M.F. Lamb, 1993a: The internal consistency of CO2 measurements in the 
    equatorial Pacific.  Mar. Chem., v. 44, pp. 269-280.

Millero, F.J., J.-Z. Zhang, K, Lee, and D.M. Campbell, 1993b: Titration 
    alkalinity of seawater.  Mar. Chem., v. 44, pp. 153-165.

Taylor, J.K., and S.W. Smith, 1959: Precise coulometric titration of acids 
    and bases. J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stds., v. 63, pp. 153-159.



B.9.  pH Discrete Measurements
      Discrete and Underway pH Analyses

      Principal Investigators: Frank J. Millero, U. Miami, RSMAS
                               4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, FL 33149
                               fmillero@rsmas.miami.edu
      Samplers:                Mareva Chanson (03:00 - 15:00)
                               mchanson@rsmas.miami.edu
                               Jeremy Mathis (15:00 - 03:00)
                               jmathis@rsmas.miami.edu
      Analysts:                Mareva Chanson (03:00 - 15:00)
                               mchanson @rsmas.miami.edu
                               Jeremy Mathis (15:00 - 03:00)
                               jmathis@rsmas.miami.edu
      Data Reduction:          Mareva Chanson (03:00 - 15:00), 
                               mchanson@rsmas.miami.edu
      

Sampling:

Underway samples were taken from March 23 - 25, every 6 hours. A flowing 
seawater line was connected to a Seabird model 45 to measure the insitu salinity 
and to the automated pH analyzer. Every 10 minutes, salinity was recorded and pH 
was measured. 

For discrete pH measurements, two methods were performed on the seawater 
samples. From stations 89 to 123, samples were drawn into 50 ml glass syringes 
using polycarbonate Luer-lock valves that fit in the petcock for the fully 
automated pH analyzer. After failure of the automated system, from stations 124 
to 199, samples were drawn into 10 cm cylindrical glass spectrophotometric cells 
and were processed manually.  The syringes were rinsed a minimum of three times 
and filled while taking care not to entrain any bubbles. The samples were 
thermostated at 25(C before analysis. 


Analyzer Description:

Measurements of the pH of seawater, on the total scale (pHt) were first made 
using multi-wavelength spectrophotometric techniques of Clayton and Byrne 
(1993). The conversion of the pHt (mol/kgH2O) to the seawater scale (mol/kgsol) 
can be made using equations of Dickson and Millero (1987), Dickson and Riley 
(1979), and Dickson (1990).

Sulphonphthalein indicators such as m-cresol purple (mCP), thymol blue, and 
cresol red are suitable for the determination of pH.  The system is patterned 
after the standard operating procedure developed by the U.S. Department of 
Energy (DOE) (1994) and utilizes mCP.  This fully automated system performs 
discrete analysis of pH samples approximately every 12 minutes on a sample 
volume of 25 ml.  A microprocessor controlled syringe and sampling valve 
aspirates and injects the seawater sample into the 10 cm optical cell at a 
precisely controlled rate.  The syringe rinses and primes the optical cell with 
20 ml of sample and the software permits five minutes for temperature 
stabilization. A refrigerated circulating temperature bath (Neslab, model RTE-
17) regulates the temperature of the sample at 25 ± 0.01°C.  An Agilent 8453 
UV/VIS spectrophotometer measures background absorbance of the sample.  The 
automated syringe and sampling valves aspirates 4.90 ml seawater and 0.008 ml of 
indicator and injects the mixture into the cell.  After the software permits 
five minutes for temperature stabilization, a Guildline 9540 digital platinum 
resistance thermometer measures the temperature and the spectrophotometer 
acquires the absorbance at 434, 578 and 730 nm. For the manual analysis, a 
Gilmont micro burette was used to inject the indicator into the 
spectrophotometric cells. 


Reagents:

A concentrated solution, 2.0 mM, of mCP (C21H18O3S) dye solution of known pHt = 
7.91 and R = 1.625 at 25ºC.


Standardization:

A precision of better than 0.001 pH units is possible with care, specifically 
with regard to temperature equilibration and sample handling.  Measurements made 
on duplicate samples, TRIS buffers and Certified Reference Material, Batch 78 
(Dr. Andrew Dickson, Marine Physical Laboratory, La Jolla, California) provide 
validation of the precision and accuracy.  Duplicate analyses provide additional 
quality assurance and were taken from same Niskin bottle. 

               Batch 78: | pHsws @ 25°C | 7.870 ± 0.005 (n = 19)
               ----------|---------------|-----------------------
                         |    Salinity   |        33.285


Data Processing:

The pHt of the sample is perturbed by the addition of the indicator.  The 
magnitude of this perturbation is a function of the difference between the 
seawater and indicator acidity. A correction factor applied for each batch of 
dye adjusts for this perturbation.  For a 4.90 ml sample of seawater, 0.008 ml 
of mCP is added and the absorbance ratio measured.  From a second addition of 
mCP and a second absorbance ratio measurement, a change in the absorbance ratio 
per ml of added indicator (DR) is calculated. The value of the absorbance ratio 
(Rm) measured subsequent to the initial addition of the indicator was used to 
calculate R from:

    R = Rm + (-0.00173 + 0.000382 Rm) Vind                           (1)
    R = Rm + (-0.00254 + 0.000571 Rm) Vind                           (2)

where Vind is the volume of mCP used.  Clayton and Byrne (1993) calibrated the 
mCP indicator using TRIS buffers (Ramette et al., 1977) and the equations of 
Dickson (1993).  These equations are used to calculate pHt, the total scale in 
units of moles per kilogram of solution.  


Table 5: Preliminary quality control of  pH measured on the automated and 
         manual system
    _____________________________________________________________________
                              Overall  Automated System  Manual Analysis
                              -------  ----------------  ---------------
     Total number of samples   2480          772              1708
     Questionable (QC=3)         40           31                 9
     Bad (QC=4)                  25           11                14
     Lost (QC=5)                116           82                34
     Duplicate (QC=6)           278           76               202
    _____________________________________________________________________


Table 6: Preliminary accuracy and precision of pH measured on the automated 
         system
                     CRM            7.848 ± 0.006 (n=4)
                     TRIS Buffer    8.081 ± 0.006 (n=38)
                     Duplicates           ± 0.006


Table 7: Preliminary accuracy and precision of pH measured on the manual 
         system
                     CRM  7.871           ± 0.005 (n=44)
                     TRIS Buffer    8.081 ± 0.006 (n=40)
                     Duplicates           ± 0.002
     

Note: The instrumental software automatically runs a duplicate analysis when the 
baseline absorbance at 730 nm is beyond a set threshold, thus a large number of 
omitted duplicate results. Duplicate samples whose difference was three times 
larger than the standard deviation were omitted from the analyses.  The number 
omitted is the difference between the total number of sets and the sets used.


Problems:

Occasionally, samples drawn from the syringe entrained an air bubble because the 
valve was improperly opened, tubing was pinched, or the syringe plunger was dry 
and became stuck in the barrel. Sporadically the software would lose 
communication with the microprocessor-controlled syringe pumps and pause 
analysis; the problem was resolved by following the steps outlined in the 
software to reestablish communication. The ambient temperature of the hydrolab 
reached 30ºC and stayed like that for almost 3 weeks. This caused the valves not 
to function properly and were drawing samples from the wrong syringe. The 
Automated analyzer was shut down after station 123 and replaced by the manual 
one.


References

Clayton, T.D., and R.H. Byrne, 1993: Spectrophotometric seawater pH 
    measurements: Total hydrogen ion concentration scale calibration of m-
    cresol purple and at-sea results.  Deep-Sea Res., v. 40, pp. 2315-2329.

Dickson, A.G., 1990:  Thermodynamics of the dissociation of boric acid in 
    synthetic seawater from 273.15 to 318.15 K.  Deep-Sea Res., Part A, v. 
    37, no. 5, pp. 755-766.

Dickson, A.G., 1993:  The measurement of seawater.  Mar. Chem., v. 44, no. 2-
    4, pp. 131-142.

Dickson, A.G., and F.J. Millero, 1987:  A comparison of the equilibrium 
    constants for the dissociation of carbonic acid in seawater media.  Deep-
    Sea Res., Part A, v. 34, no. 10, pp. 1733-1743.

Dickson, A.G., and J.P. Riley, 1979:  The estimation of acid dissociation 
    constants in seawater media from potentiometric titration with strong 
    base, 1: The ionic product of water-KSUS-w.  Mar. Chem., v. 7, no. 2, pp. 
    89-99.

DOE, 1994:  Handbook of methods for the analysis of the various parameters of 
    the carbon dioxide system in sea water. Version 2, A.G. Dickson and C. 
    Goyet (eds.), ORNL/CDIAC-74.

Ramette, R.W., C.H. Culberson, and R.G. Bates, 1977: Acid-base properties of 
    Tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane (Tris) buffers in seawater from 5 to 
    40°C. Anal. Chem., v. 49, pp.867-870.



B.10.  Discrete pCO2


B.11.  Carbon/Oxygen Isotopes.
       14C Sampling

14C samples were taken at ~ every 4 stations. 472 samples were taken in total. 
Bottles were cleaned at WHOI before the cruise. Samples were taken and sealed 
for storage according to the instructions provided by WHOI (1). Samples will be 
shipped back to WHOI for 13C and C14 analyses.

(1) Measuring 14C in seawater total CO2 by accelerator mass spectrometry, WHP 
    Operation and Methods, July, 2003.


B.12.  Dissolved Organic Carbon/Dissolved Organic Nutrients 
       DOC sampling

DOC samples were taken from every Niskin bottles at every other station. 1870 
samples were taken from 52 stations in total. Samples from up 250 m were 
filtered through GF/F filters using in-line filtration. Samples from deeper 
depths were not filtered. High density polyethylene 60 ml sample bottles were 
10% HCl cleaned and Mili-Q water rinsed. Filters were combusted at 450°C for 
overnight. Filter holders were 10% HCl cleaned and Mili-Q water rinsed. Samples 
were introduced into the sample bottles by a  pre-cleaned silicone tubing. 
Bottles were rinsed by sample for 3 times before filling. 40-50 ml of  water 
were taken for each sample. Samples were kept frozen in the ship's freezer room. 
Frozen samples will be shipped back by express shipping to RSMAS for DOC 
analysis.



B.13.  CDOM, chlorophyll, bacterial suite
       Chromophoric DOM -- A Photoactive Tracer of Geochemical Process

       Principal Investigators: D. Siegel, N. Nelson, C.Carlson (University of California, Santa Barbara)
       Support:                 NASA Ocean  Biology and Biogeochemistry; NSF Chemical Oceanography

       Field Team (I8S):        N. Nelson (PI), D. Menzies (Sr. Engineer)
       Field Team (I9N):        C. Swan (GS), E. Wallner (GS)


Project Goals:

Our goals are to determine chromophoric dissolved matter (CDOM) distributions 
over a range of oceanic regimes on selected sections of the CO2/CLIVAR Repeat 
Hydrography survey, and to quantify and parameterize CDOM production and 
destruction processes with the goal of mathematically constraining the cycling 
of CDOM. CDOM is a poorly characterized organic matter pool that interacts with 
sunlight, leading to the production of climate-relevant trace gases, attenuation 
of solar ultraviolet radiation in the water column, and an impact upon ocean 
color that can be quantified using satellite imagery. We believe that the global 
distribution of CDOM in the open ocean is controlled by microbial production and 
solar bleaching in the upper water column, and relative rates of advection and 
remineralization in intermediate and deep waters. Furthermore, changes in the 
optical properties of CDOM and its relationship with DOC over time suggest the 
use of CDOM as an indicator of the prevalence of refractory DOC in the deep 
ocean. We are testing these hypotheses by a combination of field observation and 
controlled experiments. We are also interested in the deep-sea reservoir of CDOM 
and its origin and connection to surface waters and are making the first large-
scale survey of the abundance of CDOM in the deep ocean.


Activities on I8S and I9N:

Profiling Instruments

Once each day we cast a hand-deployed free-fall Satlantic MicroPro II 
multichannel UV/Visible spectroradiometer. This instrument has 14 upwelling 
radiance sensors and 14 downwelling irradiance sensors in wavelength bands 
ranging from 305 to 683 nm. The package also mounts a WetLabs ECO chlorophyll 
fluorometer, plus ancillary sensors including X-Y tilt, internal and external 
temperatures. The instrument is allowed to trail away behind the port-side 
stern, then free-falls to 150m and is hand-recovered. We are using the 
radiometric data to study the effects of CDOM on the underwater light 
environment, to validate satellite ocean radiance sensor data, and to develop 
new algorithms employing satellite and in situ optical sensor data to retrieve 
ocean properties such as CDOM light absorbance, chlorophyll concentration, and 
particulate backscattering.

On the core CTD we deploy a WetLabs UV fluorometer (Ex 370 nm, Em 460 nm), which 
stimulates and measures fluorescence of CDOM. We are evaluating the use of this 
instrument to supplement or enhance bottle CDOM measurements, as bottle samples 
often do not have the depth resolution needed to resolve the observed strong 
near-surface gradients in CDOM concentration, and on cruises such as this we are 
not able to sample CDOM on every station. Differences between the fluorescence 
and absorption profiles may reveal gradients in chemical composition of CDOM. On 
I8S the fluorometer has performed very well: problems with temperature 
compensation encountered on P16N have been corrected. Signal to noise ratios 
remain low for the open ocean areas that we are studying. 

This fluorometer is ganged to a WetLabs C-star 660 nm 0.25m pathlength beam 
transmissometer belonging to Dr. Wilford Gardner, TAMU. The transmissometer is 
used to gauge particle load in the water column, which can be calibrated to 
produce estimates of particulate carbon. Decline of the particle load with depth 
can then be related to POC flux, another element of the carbon system. 

Bottle Samples

CDOM is at present quantified by its light absorption properties. We are 
collecting samples of seawater for absorption spectroscopy on one deep ocean 
cast each day. CDOM is typically quantified as the absorption coefficient at a 
particular wavelength or wavelength range (we are using 325 nm). We determine 
CDOM at sea by measuring absorption spectra (280-730 nm) of 0.2um filtrates 
using a liquid waveguide spectrophotometer with a 200cm cell. On I8S and I9N 
duplicate samples were collected at a rate of ca. 2 samples per cast. RMS 
differences in absorption coefficient at 325 nm between the duplicate samples 
were just over 0.003 m-1, which is ca. 4% of the average absorption coefficient 
at that wavelength.

We also concurrently collect samples for bacterial abundance and DOM 
characterization (including carbohydrate and neutral sugar analysis) to compare 
the distribution of these quantities to that of CDOM. In surface waters (< 300m) 
we are also estimating bacterial productivity of field samples by measuring the 
uptake of bromo-deoxyuridine (BrdU), a non-radioactive alternative to the 
standard bacterial productivity technique using tritiated thymidine. We also 
filter large volume samples (2L) at 6 depths in the upper 1000m for later 
bacterial DNA analysis. (The Trace Metals group provides us with unfiltered 
water from their casts for this measurement.)

Because of the connections to light availability and remote sensing, we collect 
bottle samples in the top 200m for chlorophyll analysis in addition to surface 
samples (from the ship's uncontaminated seawater system) for chlorophyll, 
carotenoid, and mycosporine-like amino acid pigment analysis (HPLC) and 
particulate absorption (spectrophotometric). We are sporadically collecting 
large volume (ca. 2L) samples for CDOM photolysis experiments back at UCSB, and 
occasionally collecting large volume samples for POC analysis to compare with 
transmissometer data. We have the cooperation again of the Trace Metals group 
for the large-volume subsurface samples from their Go-Flo bottles. We are only 
analyzing the CDOM and chlorophyll a at sea and the rest of the samples we 
prepare and store for analysis on shore.


B.14.  Helium-tritium

Helium samples were collected in stainless steel containers with pneumatic 
valves ("bunnies").  To draw a sample, two pieces of tubing are attached to the 
ends of the container, and one end is attached to the spigot on the Niskin 
bottle.  The sample is held vertically above the water level in the Niskin 
bottle, the valve is opened to establish flow, and the sample is lowered over a 
ten- to twenty-second period to establish gravity flow.  The relatively slow 
entry of the water into the container minimizes trapped air and bubble 
formation.  The amount of water flushed through the tube is about six volumes.  
During the flush period, the container is tapped to remove bubbles.  The 
pneumatic valves are closed and the sample is stored until it can be further 
processed.

After all samples were collected, the helium samples were degassed and extracted 
into glass vials for analysis in the shore-based laboratory.  In general, the 
extraction and degassing procedures were executed with several (~8) samples in 
parallel, with extraction or degassing sections coupled to a common vacuum 
manifold. 

Tritium samples were collected in 1 liter flint glass bottles, sealed with caps 
fitted with high density polyethylene cones to minimize water vapor 
transpiration.  To achieve a minimum contamination, the bottles were pretreated 
to remove adsorbed water.  The bottles are sealed with argon inside.  After the 
tritium samples were collected they are sealed and retuned to the shore-based 
laboratory for analysis.

During the cruise a total of XXX stations were occupied, yielding a total of XXX 
samples of helium and XXX samples of tritium.


B.15.  Trace Metals
       Trace Metals Group; April 28, 2007

       Personnel: Department of Oceanography, SOEST, University of Hawaii:
                  William T. Hiscock, Mariko Hatta

                  Department of Oceanography, Florida State University:
                  William M. Landing, Kathleen J. Gosnell

Sea water samples for on board trace metal determinations were collected using 
12 L Go-Flo bottles on a 12-place rosette system equipped with a SeaBird 911 
CTD, oxygen sensor and a Wet Labs FL-1 fluorometer.  The rosette package was 
deployed from the stern of the ship with the Go-Flo bottles in the open 
configuration using a 4 conductor Kevlar cable sheathed in polyurethane.  The 
package was lowered at ~30 m min-1 to 100 m and then at ~50 m min-1 to ~10 m 
below the target depth of the deepest bottle.  As the package was raised back 
through the water column the Go-Flo bottles were tripped individually at pre-
assigned depths while the package was moving at ~10~30 m min-1.  The depths that 
the bottles were tripped was one of three sampling patterns that were designed 
to match the three sampling schemes used by the main hydrography program. 

Upon package recovery the Go-Flo bottles were taken from the rosette into the 
trace metal sampling van for sub sampling.  Unfiltered sub-samples were 
collected directly from each bottle for salinity and nutrient determinations and 
also to ensure that each Go-Flo bottle had closed at the correct depth.  
Unfiltered samples were collected from every fifth station for archive purposes 
at UH and FSU.  Filtered sub-samples were collected from each bottle through a 
47mm in-line Nuclepore polycarbonate track-etched disc filters, 0.4 (m, after 
attaching the bottles to a 10 psi filtered air supply. 

During the cruise a total of 49 stations were occupied, yielding a total of 586 
samples.

Filtered samples were collected from each depth for shipboard analysis of 
dissolved Fe, Al, Mn using the University of Hawaii flow-injection system.  A 
complete data set for dissolved Fe, Al and Mn was obtained from the UH FIA 
analytical system on 586 samples collected on 49 stations for the entire leg 
(March 25 to April 26, 2007).  We collected archived samples from each trace 
metal cast (49 stations, 586 samples) for FSU shore-based analysis of dissolved 
Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, and Pb using isotope dilution Inductively-Coupled 
Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS).  The Total Suspended Matter from each trace 
metal cast was collected on 47 mm 0.4 um Nuclepore filters for Energy Dispersive 
X-Ray Fluorescence (EDXRF) analysis of total particulate Si, Mn, Fe, and Al (Dr. 
Joe Resing at NOAA/PMEL).  In addition, subsamples from the trace metal rosette 
for DNA and CDOM analysis by the UCSB group on numerous casts. Details (dates, 
stations, casts) can be found in the UCSB group cruise report.


Contact Persons:

William T. Hiscock                 William M. Landing
Postdoctoral Research Associate    Professor of Environmental & Marine Chem.
Department of Oceanography, SOEST  Department of Oceanography, 325 OSB
University of Hawai'i              Florida State University
Honolulu, HI 96822                 Tallahassee, FL 32306-4320
Phone: 808-956-6632                850 644 6037
Fax:   808-956-7112                850 644 2581 Fax
Email: hiscock@hawaii.edu          wlanding@mailer.fsu.edu



B.16.  Optical Casts
       See B10 CDOM, bacterial etc. section



___________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________



C.  UNDERWAY MEASUREMENTS

C.1.  Shipboard ADCP and HDFS 
      See B.2 LADCP report.

C.2.  Argo Floats     

Fourteen Web Research APEX floats were launched for Dr. Steve Riser at the 
University of Washington in Seattle. The floats are part of the U.S. ARGO 
program that is a global network of 3000 profiling floats. The floats are 
designed to sink to a depth of about 2000m. They then cruise at depth for about 
10 days before returning to the surface. During the descent and ascent of the 
floats, temperature, salinity, and with some floats oxygen profiles are measured 
and recorded. At the surface, before the next dive begins, the acquired data and 
position of the float are transmitted via satellite. The life time of the floats 
in the water is 4-5 years.
 
Except for the first two floats on I9N, all floats were pressure activated which 
means that they could be launched without prior startup in the lab.  Each float 
was launched upon departure from the station closest to the nominal latitude 
given by Steve Riser for deployment. Immediately following deployment, an email 
was sent to Steve Riser to report the exact time and position of the float.  The 
first two floats (id 3025 and 3026) were new prototypes with carbon fiber hulls 
that did not contain pressure activation system. They were started in port 
shortly before the cruise departed Fremantle. Unfortunately, these two floats, 
once deployed, did not communicate back to shore which is most likely due to 
insufficient testing at the manufacturer before delivery of this new model. 
Communication with all other floats deployed worked properly. A few of the 
floats contained oxygen sensors. The launch information is shown in the table 
below.

___________________________________________________________________________________
 Launch time            Float Type         Float Id  Station     Lat.       Lon.  
 ---------------  ------------------------ --------  -------  ---------  ---------
 20070327:041500  A2Apf8Sbe41                3025       91    27°06.44S  95°00.14E
 20070328:204400  A2Apf8Sbe41                3026       96    24°08.21S  95°00.60E
 20070330:184800  Apex260Apf9aSbe41          5217      102    20°45.70S  95°00.30E
 20070401:105000  Apex260Apf9aSbe41          0009      107    17°58.03S  95°00.59E
 20070403:022200  Apex260Afp9aSbe41          5126      112    15°10.11S  94°59.86E
 20070404:235800  Apex260Afp9aSbe41          5127      118    11°56.85S  95°00.24E
 20070406:223000  Apex260Afp9aSbe41          5156      124     8°43.92S  95°00.81E
 20070408:140900  Apex260Afp9aSbe41          5157      129     6°04.11S  95°00.34E
 20070410:102300  Apex260N2Apf9iSbe41cpIdo   5209      135     3°07.57S  94°25.66E
 20070415:084400  Apex260N2Apf9aSbe41Optode  5128      154     3°00.93N  91°45.09E
 20070417:074300  Apex260Afp9aSbe41          5159      162     6°07.43N  89°37.49E
 20070419:143300  Apex260N2Apf9iSbe41cpIdo   5210      170     9°05.99N  87°20.59E
 20070425:194500  Apex260N2Apf9aSbe41Optode  5130      193    15°00.28N  89°50.06E
 20070426:172900  Apex260Afp9aSbe41          5161      197    17°00.13N  89°51.20E
___________________________________________________________________________________


In addition to the fourteen floats deployed on I9N, there were two floats that 
did not pass the pre-cruise testing performed in port. These floats were shipped 
back to Seattle before the cruise started. Their information is given below.

                    _________________________________________
                        Float Type       FloatId   Nom. Lat.
                     -----------------   -------   ---------
                     Apex260Afp9aSbe41    5160        0º
                     Apex260Afp9aSbe41    5158       12ºN
                    _________________________________________


C.3.  NOAA/PMEL Underway pCO2

Equipment and Analytical Techniques: Underway pCO2 System (Version 2.5) AOML:

The shipboard automated underway pCO2 system is situated in the hydrolab.  It 
runs on an hourly cycle during which three gas standards, eight headspace 
samples from the equilibrator, and three ambient air samples are analyzed. The 
system consists of an equilibrator box where surface seawater from the bow 
intake is equilibrated with headspace, a valve box that contains the infrared 
analyzer, and a computer and interface boards that control valves and log 
sensors.

The equilibrator is a cylindrical Plexiglas(tm) chamber approximately 22.5 cm 
high and 8.8 cm wide.  Surface seawater flows through a spiral spray head in the 
top at a rate of 2 ±0.5 l/min. The water spray through the ~0.5-l headspace and 
the turbulence of the water streams impinging on the surface of 0.5 l of water 
cause the gases in water and headspace to equilibrate.  Excess water flows 
through an outlet at the bottom of the equilibrator into an over-the-side drain.  
Two vents in the top of the equilibrator insure that the headspace remains at 
the measured laboratory pressure.  Headspace gas circulates in a closed loop 
driven by a KNF pump at 150 ± 50 ml/min.  From the equilibrator the gas passes 
through a condensor, a column of magnesium perchlorate, a mass flow meter (MFM), 
a 1.0 µm Acro(r) disk filter, the 12 ml sample cell of a Licor(tm) Model 6251 


non-dispersive infrared analyzer (IR), and back into the equilibrator headspace.

A second KNF pump draws marine air from an intake on the bow mast through 100 m 
of 0.95 cm (= 3/8") OD Dekoron(tm) tubing at a rate of 6-8 l/min.  A filter of 
glass wool at the intake prevents particles from entering the gas stream.  At 
designated times, the program diverts 175 ± 25 ml/min of air from this line into 
the Licor sample cell for analysis.  Excess marine air empties into a rotometer 
on the front panel of the valve box.

Both sample streams (equilibrator headspace and marine air) are analyzed bone 
dry.  They pass first through a cold trap (condensor) at 3o C and then through a 
column of magnesium perchlorate.  Standard gases also run through the magnesium 
perchlorate.

A custom developed program run under LabView(tm) controls the system and 
graphically displays air and water XCO2 readings.  The program logs the voltage 
and temperature of the infrared analyzer, water flow, gas flows, equilibrator 
temperature, and barometric pressure.  The program writes all of this data to 
disk at the end of each measurement phase.

The details of instrumental design can be found in Wanninkhof and Thoning 
(1993), Ho et al. (1995), and Feely et al. (1998).


Sampling Cycle:

The system runs on an hourly cycle during which three standard gases, three 
marine air samples, and eight surface water samples (from the equilibrator 
headspace) are analyzed on the schedule listed below.  A Valco multi-port valve 
selects the gas to be analyzed.  Each measurement phase starts by flowing either 
standard (@~50ml/min), equilibrator headspace (@~150 ml/min), or marine air 
(@~175 ml/min) through the Licor.  Fifteen seconds before the end of each phase, 
a solenoid valve stops the gas flow.  Ten seconds later, the program logs all 
sensors and writes the data to disk.


Table 2.14:  Hourly sampling cycle for the underway pCO2 system (version 2.5).
             ____________________________________________________
              Minutes after
                the Hour     Sample
              -------------  -----------------------------------
                   4         Low standard
                   8         Mid standard
                   12        High standard
                   16.5      Water (= headspace of equilibrator)
                   21        Water
                   25.5      Water
                   30        Water
                   34        Air (marine air from the bow line)
                   38        Air
                   42        Air
                   46.5      Water
                   51        Water
                   55.5      Water
                   60        Water
             ____________________________________________________


Standards:

The unit is standardized every hour with three compressed air standards 
containing known amounts of CO2 gas in (natural) air. The standard gases are 
purchased from NOAA/CMDL in Boulder and are directly traceable to the WMO scale.

The standards used on the cruise are:

    Mole Fraction
    Tank #    CO2 (ppm) (= XCO2)
    CA06827   284.71
    CA05334   380.98
    CA06380   448.29

Units:

All XCO2 values are reported in parts per million (ppm), and fCO2 values are 
reported in micro atmospheres (µatm).

Data Availability:

The system ran well during the entire cruise from March 22 to April 27.  The 
data will be posted on the web approximately 1 month after the end of the cruise 
at:
                  http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/ocd/gcc/index.php


References

Feely, R.A., R. Wanninkhof, H.B. Milburn, C.E. Cosca, M. Stapp, and P.P. 
    Murphy, 1998: A new automated underway system for making high precision 
    pCO2 measurements onboard research ships.  Analytica Chim. Acta, v. 377, 
    pp. 185-191.

Ho, D.T., R. Wanninkhof, J. Masters, R.A. Feely, and C.E. Cosca, 1997: 
    Measurement of underway fCO2 in the eastern equatorial Pacific on NOAA 
    ships Baldrige and Discoverer.  NOAA Data Report, ERL AOML-30, 52 pp.

Wanninkhof, R., and K. Thoning, 1993: Measurement of fugacity of CO2 in 
    surface water using continuous and discrete sampling methods. Mar. Chem., 
    v. 44, no. 2-4, pp. 189-205.



C.4.  FSU Aerosol Sampling

      Dr. William M. Landing, Kathleen Gosnell
      Department of Oceanography, Florida State University

Aerosol Sampling

Aeolian transport and deposition of soluble aerosol Fe is believed to influence 
phytoplankton primary productivity in the majority of the open ocean (far from 
Fe inputs from rivers and coastal sediments). The purpose of the FSU aerosol 
sampling program is primarily to measure the concentration of total aerosol Fe, 
and to quantify the aerosol Fe fractions that are soluble in natural surface 
seawater and in ultra-pure deionized water. Additional analyses are conducted on 
the samples in an effort to understand the atmospheric processes that yield 
differences in the aerosol Fe solubility. 

The aerosol sampling equipment consists of four replicate filter holders 
deployed on a 20' fold-down aerosol tower mounted on the forward, starboard 
corner of the 03 deck of the ship. One of the replicate filters (0.4 micrometer 
Nuclepore polycarbonate track-etched) is used for total aerosol measurements 
(see below); one replicate filter (0.45 micrometer polypropylene) is used to 
quantify the seawater-soluble fraction; one replicate filter (0.45 micrometer 
polypropylene) is used to quantify the ultra-pure deionized water soluble 
fraction; and one replicate filter (0.45 micrometer polypropylene) is used for 
precision (QA) tests or stored as a backup sample. Size-fractionated aerosols 
are also collected for 72 hour intervals starting every fourth day using a MOUDI 
cascade impactor (>3.2 micrometer, 1.0-3.2 micrometer, 0.56-1.0 micrometer, 
0.056-0.56 micrometer).

Air is pulled through the filters using two high-capacity vacuum pumps. The 
sampling is controlled by a Campbell Scientific CR10 datalogger that immediately 
shuts off the flow when the wind might blow stack exhaust forward towards the 
sampling tower, or when the wind drops below 0.5 m/s. Air flow is measured using 
Sierra mass-flow meters. 

We have collected 24-hour integrated aerosol samples each day for the entire leg 
(March 25 to April 26, 2007) for the following analyses:

  • Total aerosol Si, Al, Fe (to be analyzed using Energy Dispersive X-Ray 
    Fluorescence by Dr. Joe Resing at NOAA/PMEL). 
  • Seawater-soluble aerosol Al and Fe (to be run back at FSU).
  • Ultra-pure water soluble Si, Al, Ti, Fe, chloride, sulfate, nitrate, sodium (to 
    be run back at FSU). 

The MOUDI size-fractionated aerosol filters are also leached with ultra-pure water 
for these same analytes.


Other Sampling

We collected archived samples from each trace metal cast (49 stations, 588 
samples) for FSU shore-based analysis of dissolved Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, 
and Pb using isotope dilution ICPMS.

The Total Suspended Matter from each trace metal cast was collected on 47 mm 0.4 
um Nuclepore filters for EDXRF analysis of total particulate Si, Mn, Fe, and Al 
(Joe Resing, NOAA/PMEL). 

Rain was collected on 8 different days, often with enough volume to filter an 
aliquot for comparison between total and dissolved trace elements.  The samples 
were filtered and frozen for analyses at FSU for soluble Si, Al, Ti, Fe, 
chloride, sulfate, nitrate, and sodium.

We took subsamples from our rosette sampling for DNA and CDOM analysis by the 
UCSB group on numerous casts. Details (dates, stations, casts) can be found in 
the UCSB group cruise report.


C.5 Thermosalinograph, Meteorological, Navigation and Bathymetry 

As cruise clivari9n got underway and entered international waters from 
Fremantle, Australia underway science data instrumentation systems were 
activated and science data collection was commenced.  That date and time was 
approximately 7 PM, March 22, 2007, local time. Data collection from that 
instrumentation was terminated at approximately 5 PM, local time, April 28, 
2007.

The underway seawater system sensor instrumentation provide the following:

  • Sea Surface Temperature
  • Thermosalinograph
  • Oxygen
  • Flourometer
  • Flowmeter

The accuracy specifications for that instrumentation is as follows:
         _____________________________________________________________
          Instrumentation            Range               Accuracy
          -----------------    --------------------    --------------
          Thermosalinograph    -5 to +35 Deg C         +/- 0.01 Deg C
          Oxygen               120% surf saturation    2%
          Flourometer          0.03 to 75 ug/l         unspecified 
          Flowmeter            0.27 - 18.9 LPM         +/- 1.0%FS
         _____________________________________________________________

Meteorlogical sensor instrumentation provides the following measurement and 
accuracy:
         _____________________________________________________________
          Parameter                  Range            Accuracy
          -----------------     ----------------  ------------------
          Air Temperature       -50 to +50 deg C  +/- 0.3 deg C
          Barometric Pressure   800 to 1060 mb    +/- 0.5 mb
          Relative Humidity/    RH 0-100%         +/- 1.5%
          Air Temperature       -40 to +60 deg C  +/- 0.2 deg C
          Wind Speed/           Dir 0-360 deg     +/- 2.0 deg
                  Direction     Spd 0-70 m/s      +/- 0.1 m/s
          Long Wave Radiation   3.5-50 um         +/- 1% linearity
          Short Wave Radiation  305-2800 nm       +/- 0.25% linearity
          Surface PAR           400-700 nm        unspecified
          Precipitation         0-50 mm           +/- 1.0 mm
         _____________________________________________________________

Navigation systems consisting of the following GPS systems: Furuno GP90, Ashtech 
ADU2, Trimble D200, Trimble Accutime, and MX421 were operated through out the 
cruise. Stable platform systems consisting of the Marinus, Phins and Sperry Mk37 
gyro  packages were operated. 

The Kongsberg EM120 Multibeam Bathmetric Sonar system was activated upon 
entering international waters March 22, 2007. It operated throughout the cruise. 
That system was supported by both the CTD data collection as well as the XBT 
system to provide Sound Velocity Profile correction tables. A SVP was created 
and entered to the EM120 system on a daily basis. Upon leaving Fremantle and 
before the cruise had arrived at the first CTD cast station the XBT system was 
used to create the SVPs.  At that time three XBT releases were done with one 
failure. The system worked fine. Near the end of the cruise, after CTD casts had 
been terminated and during the Bangladesh survey one additional XBT was  
released for a SVP. Otherwise the CTD casts was user to create the SVPs on a 
daily basis. Data collection from the EM120 was terminated promptly at 5 PM on 
April 28, 2007.

Additionally the Bell Aerospace BGM-3 Gravimeter was activated upon entering 
international waters on March 22, 2007. It was continuously operated until the 
end of the cruise at 5 PM, April 28, 1007. 


D.  Acknowledgements.  

The scientific party of the I9N cruise would like to express sincere thanks to 
Captain Dave Murline and all of the crew of the R/V Roger Revelle for their 
outstanding work in support of our cruise. 


E.  References

DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1994. Handbook of Methods for the Analysis 
    of the Various Parameters of the Carbon Dioxide System in Seawater. 
    Version 2.0. ORNL/CDIAC-74. Ed. A. G. Dickson and C. Goyet. Carbon  
    Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak  
    Ridge, Tenn.     

Gordon et al. (2002)

Johnson, K. M., A. Körtzinger, L. Mintrop, J. C. Duinker, and D. W. R. 
    Wallace. 1999. "Coulometric total carbon dioxide analysis for marine  
    studies: Measurement and internal consistency of underway surface TCO2  
    concentrations." Marine Chemistry 67:123-44.

Johnson, K. M., K. D. Wills, D. B. Butler, W. K. Johnson, and C. S. Wong. 
    1993. "Coulometric total carbon dioxide analysis for marine studies: 
    Maximizing the performance of an automated gas extraction.

Johnson, K. M. 1992. Operator's Manual: Single-Operator Multiparameter  
    Metabolic Analyzer (SOMMA) for Total Carbon Dioxide (CT) with Coulometric  
    Detection. Brookhaven National Laboratory, Brookhaven, N.Y. 

Johnson, K. M., P. J. Williams, L. Brandstrom, and J. McN. Sieburth. 1987. 
    "Coulometric total carbon analysis for marine studies: Automation and  
    calibration." Marine Chemistry 21:117-33.

Johnson, K. M., A. E. King, and J. McN. Sieburth. 1985. "Coulometric TCO2  
    analyses for marine studies: An introduction." Marine Chemistry 16:61-82.



___________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________





                                          APPENDICES




                                          Appendix A

               CLIVAR I9N:  CTD Temperature and Conductivity Corrections Summary

                        PRT Response Time used for all casts: 0LAG secs                        

                IPTS-68 Temperature Coefficients                Conductivity Coefficients
 Sta/         corT = tp2*P**2 + tp1*P + t1*T + t0              corC = c2*C**2 + c1*C + c0
 Cast       tp2          tp1          t1          t0           c2            c1          c0

089/03  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002573
090/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002581
091/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002589
092/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002598
093/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002606
094/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002614
095/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002622
096/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002631
097/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002639
098/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002647

099/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002655
100/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002663
101/03  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002672
102/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002680
103/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002688
104/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002696
105/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002704
106/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002713
107/03  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002721
108/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002729

109/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002737
110/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002746
111/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002754
112/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002762
113/03  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002770
114/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002778
115/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002787
116/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002795
117/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002803
118/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002811

119/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002820
120/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002828
121/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002836
122/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002844
123/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002852
124/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002861
125/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002869
126/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002877
127/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002885
128/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002893


129/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002902
130/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002910
131/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002918
132/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002926
133/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002935
134/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002943
135/03  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002951
136/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002959
137/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002967
138/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002976

139/03  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002984
140/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.002992
141/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003000
142/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003009
143/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003017
144/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003025
145/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003033
146/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003041
147/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003050
148/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003058

149/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003066
150/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003074
151/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003083
152/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003091
153/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003099
154/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003107
155/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003115
156/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003124
157/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003132
158/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003140

159/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003148
160/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003156
161/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003165
162/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003173
163/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003181
164/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003189
165/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003198
166/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003206
167/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003214
168/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003222


169/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003230
170/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003239
171/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003247
172/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003255
173/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003263
174/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003272
175/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003280
176/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003288
177/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003296
178/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003304

179/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003313
180/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003321
181/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003329
182/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003337
183/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003345
184/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003354
185/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003362
186/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003370
187/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003378
188/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003387

189/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003395
190/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003403
191/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003411
192/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003419
193/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003428
194/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003436
195/03  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003444
196/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003452
197/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003461
198/01  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003469

199/02  -5.3050e-11   7.2800e-08   4.0109e-04  -0.000653   5.77963e-06  -2.89198e-04   0.003477




                                          Appendix B

                       Summary of CLIVAR I9N CTD Oxygen Time Constants
                                 (time constants in seconds)

              __________________________________________________________________
                      Temperature        | Pressure | O2 Gradient | dT Gradient
               Fast(TauTf) | Slow(TauTs) |  (Taup)  |   (Tauog)   |    (dT)    
               ------------+-------------+----------+-------------+------------
                  10.00    |   100.00    |  16.00   |    1.00     |   400.00   
              __________________________________________________________________
              


                 CLIVAR I9N: Conversion Equation Coefficients for CTD Oxygen               
                                 (refer to Equation 1.7.4.0)

 Sta/    OcSlope      Offset       Plcoeff      Tfcoeff     Tscoeff    dOc/dtcoeff   TdTcoeff
 Cast      (c1)        (c2)         (c3)         (c4)         (c5)        (c6)         (c7)

089/03  5.3652e-04   2.8777e-03   2.8408e-04  -2.2830e-01  1.4081e-04   6.3488e-07  -0.00386889
090/01  5.3644e-04   1.2012e-02  -8.3131e-03  -2.2125e-01  1.3301e-04   1.5025e-06   0.00195106
091/01  5.4713e-04   3.7961e-03  -1.4517e-03  -2.3366e-01  1.3405e-04  -1.7560e-08   0.0013851
092/02  5.7632e-04   2.6561e-03  -1.8696e-03  -2.6238e-01  1.3453e-04   2.1770e-06   0.0133887
093/02  5.6759e-04  -3.3301e-03   4.5423e-03  -2.5419e-01  1.3505e-04   2.3339e-06   0.0105387
094/01  5.7197e-04  -1.9070e-03   2.9361e-03  -2.5426e-01  1.3277e-04   1.2138e-06   0.0111804
095/02  5.5593e-04   2.1882e-03  -3.1609e-04  -2.3890e-01  1.3355e-04   6.7196e-07   0.000892855
096/01  5.7050e-04  -1.1588e-03   2.0907e-03  -2.5291e-01  1.3352e-04   2.3995e-06   0.00596837
097/02  5.7396e-04   3.6561e-03  -2.5639e-03  -2.5173e-01  1.3136e-04   4.2541e-07   0.00420441
098/01  5.5095e-04   3.0765e-04   1.7040e-03  -2.2995e-01  1.3146e-04   1.4236e-06   0.00153869

099/02  5.6621e-04   2.6379e-03  -1.5668e-03  -2.4068e-01  1.2918e-04   1.9965e-06   0.00238324
100/01  5.8665e-04   2.2863e-03  -1.9688e-03  -2.6304e-01  1.3107e-04   1.6129e-06   0.004848
101/03  5.6738e-04   5.7382e-03  -4.3431e-03  -2.4513e-01  1.3176e-04   1.6754e-06   0.000516714
102/01  5.9454e-04   3.6942e-03  -3.6397e-03  -2.7214e-01  1.3212e-04   1.4317e-06   0.00714462
103/01  5.6415e-04  -4.4206e-04   1.9067e-03  -2.3905e-01  1.2978e-04   1.7608e-06   0.00724561
104/02  5.7561e-04  -5.3741e-03   6.3532e-03  -2.5000e-01  1.2959e-04   3.5504e-07   0.0153311
105/02  5.9332e-04   5.9163e-03  -5.9690e-03  -2.6636e-01  1.2960e-04   1.0818e-06   0.00147518
106/01  5.7200e-04  -3.8388e-03   4.6755e-03  -2.4112e-01  1.2702e-04   1.6361e-06   0.0144435
107/03  5.6736e-04  -1.7095e-02   1.8064e-02  -2.3516e-01  1.2605e-04   5.0009e-06   0.032636
108/01  5.7334e-04   1.6611e-03  -5.0405e-04  -2.4979e-01  1.3221e-04   1.4348e-06   0.00175771

109/01  5.7582e-04   3.3452e-03  -2.2185e-03  -2.5214e-01  1.3264e-04   5.2150e-07   0.00099213
110/02  5.8951e-04   2.2254e-02  -2.1939e-02  -2.6342e-01  1.3159e-04   8.3933e-07  -0.0204049
111/02  5.7813e-04  -5.4335e-03   5.8318e-03  -2.4491e-01  1.2706e-04   2.9303e-06   0.0172679
112/01  5.8872e-04   2.4458e-02  -2.4074e-02  -2.5981e-01  1.3015e-04   1.3666e-06  -0.017138
113/03  5.9481e-04  -1.7543e-03   1.6177e-03  -2.6118e-01  1.2694e-04   2.2103e-06   0.00930109
114/01  5.8434e-04  -2.1381e-03   2.0686e-03  -2.5017e-01  1.2656e-04   4.3718e-06   0.0159788
115/01  5.8406e-04   7.3334e-03  -6.9042e-03  -2.5380e-01  1.2899e-04   5.6835e-07   0.0112612
116/02  5.8321e-04   3.7175e-03  -3.0880e-03  -2.5465e-01  1.3030e-04   5.8681e-07   0.0031972
117/02  5.8197e-04   1.0102e-03  -7.7089e-04  -2.4518e-01  1.2412e-04  -1.1375e-06   0.0227193
118/01  5.8442e-04   3.0172e-03  -2.7544e-03  -2.5184e-01  1.2698e-04   4.2532e-07   0.00692597

119/01  5.9000e-04   1.3097e-02  -1.2775e-02  -2.5964e-01  1.2888e-04   3.6167e-07  -0.00579383
120/01  5.7779e-04   5.5001e-03  -4.7840e-03  -2.4539e-01  1.2743e-04   2.1188e-07   0.00779941
121/01  5.7931e-04   1.1455e-02  -1.0830e-02  -2.4480e-01  1.2615e-04  -3.9796e-07   0.0113107
122/01  5.7671e-04  -6.4348e-03   7.0885e-03  -2.3919e-01  1.2441e-04  -7.0033e-08   0.0302915
123/02  5.8011e-04   3.5016e-03  -3.1801e-03  -2.4726e-01  1.2757e-04   1.6027e-06   0.00741551
124/01  5.8234e-04   5.5948e-03  -5.3840e-03  -2.4442e-01  1.2410e-04   8.2980e-07   0.0202557
125/01  5.7231e-04   1.7766e-02  -1.6325e-02  -2.4138e-01  1.2850e-04   4.2633e-07  -0.00242562
126/01  5.7143e-04   2.3407e-04   4.5907e-04  -2.2899e-01  1.2066e-04   6.5735e-08   0.0420254
127/02  5.7807e-04   2.7294e-02  -2.6662e-02  -2.4599e-01  1.2812e-04   9.2679e-07  -0.0252536
128/01  5.9471e-04   1.6581e-02  -1.6024e-02  -2.6231e-01  1.2841e-04   8.0136e-07  -0.0129792

129/01  5.8624e-04   9.8883e-03  -9.6515e-03  -2.4774e-01  1.2414e-04   7.4120e-08   0.0126704
130/01  5.8229e-04   1.3642e-04   3.5322e-04  -2.4776e-01  1.2634e-04   4.5956e-05   0.0161247
131/01  5.7970e-04   8.6789e-03  -7.9156e-03  -2.4302e-01  1.2470e-04   1.1431e-06   0.00636248
132/01  5.8614e-04   2.5070e-02  -2.4383e-02  -2.5003e-01  1.2517e-04   1.2530e-06   0.00645922
133/02  5.8946e-04   9.4695e-03  -9.3197e-03  -2.5041e-01  1.2421e-04   2.0906e-06  -0.00264115
134/01  5.8856e-04   1.6091e-02  -1.5616e-02  -2.5337e-01  1.2640e-04   2.4989e-06  -0.0107501
135/03  5.9170e-04  -5.0216e-03   4.6302e-03  -2.4848e-01  1.2076e-04   3.8876e-07   0.0357597
136/01  5.9143e-04  -2.2600e-03   2.2110e-03  -2.5402e-01  1.2462e-04   7.5903e-06   0.0167296
137/01  5.9796e-04   6.6422e-03  -6.8483e-03  -2.5697e-01  1.2254e-04   3.7425e-06   0.00481287
138/01  5.8071e-04   1.7244e-03  -1.1735e-03  -2.4343e-01  1.2422e-04   4.2070e-06   0.016299

139/03  5.7835e-04   1.6079e-02  -1.5224e-02  -2.4694e-01  1.2764e-04   2.6855e-06  -0.00216057
140/01  5.8047e-04   1.8457e-02  -1.7787e-02  -2.4849e-01  1.2752e-04   3.5044e-06  -0.0113498
141/01  5.7759e-04   1.4677e-02  -1.4032e-02  -2.4386e-01  1.2693e-04   8.5783e-07  -0.00719668
142/01  5.8650e-04   1.2381e-02  -1.2273e-02  -2.4530e-01  1.2152e-04   1.5867e-06   0.0100417
143/02  5.8806e-04   1.3747e-02  -1.3740e-02  -2.4769e-01  1.2241e-04   5.2545e-06   0.013534
144/01  5.9350e-04   1.4873e-02  -1.5132e-02  -2.5385e-01  1.2304e-04   4.7481e-06  -0.00182326
145/02  5.9205e-04   1.7804e-02  -1.7747e-02  -2.5556e-01  1.2520e-04   2.4204e-06  -0.0202419
146/01  5.9242e-04   9.9998e-03  -9.9454e-03  -2.5860e-01  1.2728e-04   6.5593e-06  -0.0191579
147/02  5.8758e-04   8.4572e-04  -8.9882e-04  -2.5367e-01  1.2720e-04   5.8921e-07   3.41883e-05
148/02  5.8021e-04   6.4417e-03  -5.9946e-03  -2.4472e-01  1.2543e-04   4.7623e-06   0.0160267

149/01  5.7763e-04   6.8194e-03  -6.4371e-03  -2.3803e-01  1.2338e-04   6.0053e-06   0.0115684
150/01  5.7785e-04   5.6121e-03  -5.1127e-03  -2.4349e-01  1.2658e-04   9.2058e-07   0.0144825
151/01  5.9345e-04  -3.1609e-03   3.0755e-03  -2.5465e-01  1.2346e-04   1.5499e-06   0.0143859
152/01  5.8606e-04   2.8229e-02  -2.7785e-02  -2.5016e-01  1.2523e-04   1.3586e-06  -0.0235823
153/01  5.7976e-04   1.7579e-03  -1.4478e-03  -2.4132e-01  1.2452e-04   1.5281e-06   0.0281637
154/02  5.8144e-04   1.6383e-02  -1.5836e-02  -2.4801e-01  1.2757e-04   3.2309e-07  -0.0137057
155/01  5.7429e-04   1.3229e-02  -1.2407e-02  -2.4128e-01  1.2804e-04   1.4122e-06   0.00429502
156/02  5.8396e-04   1.5346e-02  -1.5176e-02  -2.4386e-01  1.2286e-04  -1.1720e-07   0.00447595
157/01  6.1793e-04   9.2679e-03  -1.0672e-02  -2.6900e-01  1.1100e-04   1.5711e-06  -0.00748641
158/01  5.7855e-04   1.6396e-02  -1.5033e-02  -2.5875e-01  1.3824e-04   3.4458e-06  -0.0602948

159/01  5.9885e-04   1.2136e-02  -1.2527e-02  -2.6421e-01  1.2453e-04   4.9639e-07  -0.0567697
160/01  6.0900e-04   1.4182e-02  -1.5474e-02  -2.4760e-01  9.9486e-05   3.0146e-06   0.0352118
161/01  6.2066e-04   3.0455e-02  -3.2046e-02  -2.6351e-01  1.0430e-04   4.3494e-06   0.0101765
162/02  6.3379e-04   1.7084e-02  -1.9178e-02  -2.6737e-01  9.7843e-05   2.2267e-06   0.00338996
163/01  5.6300e-04   4.0430e-02  -3.8583e-02  -2.4465e-01  1.3699e-04   3.1236e-06  -0.0835
164/02  6.1508e-04   9.7829e-03  -1.0795e-02  -2.6932e-01  1.1624e-04   2.4378e-06  -0.0196635
165/01  5.9747e-04   5.3677e-02  -5.3632e-02  -2.6677e-01  1.2627e-04  -4.6797e-07  -0.140384
166/01  5.6143e-04   4.2826e-02  -4.0207e-02  -2.5992e-01  1.5147e-04   1.1363e-06  -0.214795
167/02  6.1621e-04   6.0241e-02  -6.1711e-02  -2.6427e-01  1.1095e-04   1.9025e-06  -0.0222878
168/01  6.1420e-04   1.7736e-02  -1.8900e-02  -2.6004e-01  1.0862e-04   1.8004e-07   0.0366017

169/02  5.6562e-04   4.9546e-02  -4.7599e-02  -2.4926e-01  1.3844e-04   2.4710e-06  -0.129197
170/01  5.8764e-04   2.1996e-02  -2.1336e-02  -2.5563e-01  1.2612e-04   4.1622e-07  -0.0532475
171/01  6.0602e-04   6.8111e-02  -6.9176e-02  -2.4847e-01  1.0499e-04  -1.3091e-06   0.0244595
172/01  5.7213e-04   1.8968e-02  -1.7669e-02  -2.4999e-01  1.3545e-04   5.4106e-07  -0.0837079
173/02  5.9620e-04   2.3151e-02  -2.3420e-02  -2.5264e-01  1.1775e-04   1.2481e-06   0.00102797
174/02  5.8698e-04   4.7057e-02  -4.6316e-02  -2.5213e-01  1.2436e-04  -1.5223e-06  -0.0459638
175/01  5.8766e-04   3.8911e-02  -3.8536e-02  -2.5156e-01  1.2216e-04   3.4786e-07  -0.030567
176/01  5.8924e-04   4.0399e-02  -3.9943e-02  -2.5612e-01  1.2426e-04   2.7744e-07  -0.0689111
177/01  5.8776e-04   3.2218e-02  -3.1727e-02  -2.5791e-01  1.2734e-04   2.0887e-06  -0.0738375
178/01  6.0431e-04   1.0416e-02  -1.2950e-02  -2.0815e-01  7.6521e-05   2.1608e-06   0.252092

179/01  6.0559e-04   1.1567e-02  -1.2660e-02  -2.4943e-01  1.0675e-04   6.8433e-07   0.0725385
180/01  5.7673e-04   2.2997e-02  -2.2340e-02  -2.4854e-01  1.2882e-04   1.8045e-06  -0.039961
181/01  5.7839e-04   3.7581e-02  -3.6468e-02  -2.5392e-01  1.3212e-04   8.8227e-07  -0.0739325
182/01  5.7837e-04   3.6779e-02  -3.5905e-02  -2.4796e-01  1.2714e-04   1.4118e-07  -0.0276708
183/02  6.0147e-04   7.6783e-03  -8.1972e-03  -2.6194e-01  1.2021e-04   1.3604e-06  -0.0409681
184/01  5.8704e-04   1.8229e-02  -1.8040e-02  -2.5875e-01  1.2918e-04   2.1643e-06  -0.0712392
185/02  5.7289e-04   2.7199e-02  -2.5925e-02  -2.5233e-01  1.3601e-04   1.3454e-06  -0.0931157
186/01  5.6038e-04   4.3637e-03  -2.3648e-03  -2.4162e-01  1.3851e-04   1.5129e-06  -0.0595107
187/02  5.4820e-04   2.3046e-02  -2.0343e-02  -2.3882e-01  1.4650e-04  -3.5106e-08  -0.100162
188/01  5.3956e-04   4.1952e-02  -3.8679e-02  -2.3721e-01  1.5295e-04   1.0881e-06  -0.14822

189/02  5.6391e-04   3.0128e-02  -2.8084e-02  -2.4793e-01  1.3922e-04   2.1712e-06  -0.115256
190/01  5.6014e-04   4.8614e-02  -4.6870e-02  -2.4033e-01  1.3674e-04   5.2363e-07  -0.082301
191/02  5.3596e-04   4.1808e-02  -3.8135e-02  -2.3486e-01  1.5400e-04   9.1696e-07  -0.135573
192/01  5.1062e-04   2.5451e-02  -1.9973e-02  -2.2632e-01  1.7344e-04   9.2629e-07  -0.160517
193/02  4.5709e-04   3.1535e-02  -2.2895e-02  -2.0206e-01  2.0577e-04   6.0301e-07  -0.258497
194/01  7.1290e-04   2.6575e-02  -3.2608e-02  -3.0390e-01  5.8487e-05   1.1324e-06   0.0868364
195/03  6.0011e-04   8.6421e-03  -8.9941e-03  -2.5703e-01  1.1590e-04   3.5264e-06  -0.0153117
196/01  5.2210e-04   2.9805e-02  -2.5444e-02  -2.2464e-01  1.5818e-04   4.5945e-07  -0.135011
197/02  5.6617e-04   3.6813e-02  -3.5097e-02  -2.4777e-01  1.3351e-04   4.3874e-07  -0.127959
198/01  4.9785e-04   1.9117e-02  -1.3107e-02  -2.1679e-01  1.8102e-04   2.3037e-06  -0.152496

199/02  5.7061e-04   3.7022e-02  -3.5559e-02  -2.4442e-01  1.2683e-04   5.9365e-07  -7.7645e-02





                               Appendix C


                   CLIVAR I9N:  Bottle Quality Comments



Comments from the Sample Logs and the results of STS/ODF's investigations
are included in this report.  Units stated in these comments are degrees
Celsius for temperature, Unless otherwise noted, milliliters per liter for
oxygen and micromoles per liter for Silicate, Nitrate, Nitrite, and
Phosphate.  The sample number is the cast number times 100 plus the bottle
number.  Investigation of data may include comparison of bottle salinity
and oxygen data with CTD data, review of data plots of the station profile
and adjoining stations, and re-reading of charts (i.e. nutrients).


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
89/3   301   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Station 88 was a            
                          reoccupation. Oxygen and nutrients, except as   
                          noted, are acceptable. During analysis of       
                          Station 93 found a problem with the             
                          salinometer.  Code salinity bad.                
89/3   302   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Station 88 was a            
                          reoccupation. Oxygen and nutrients, except as   
                          noted, are acceptable. During analysis of       
                          Station 93 found a problem with the             
                          salinometer.  Code salinity bad.                
89/3   303   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Station 88 was a            
                          reoccupation. Oxygen and nutrients, except as   
                          noted, are acceptable. During analysis of       
                          Station 93 found a problem with the             
                          salinometer.  Code salinity bad.                
89/3   304   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Station 88 was a            
                          reoccupation. Oxygen and nutrients, except as   
                          noted, is acceptable. Bottles 4 and 5 were      
                          tripped at the same depth, oxygen and nutrients 
                          show little difference, salinity is 0.001. The  
                          difference is within the accuracy of the        
                          measurement. During analysis of Station 93      
                          found a problem with the salinometer.  Code     
                          salinity bad.                                   
89/3   305   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Station 88 was a            
                          reoccupation. Oxygen and nutrients, except as   
                          noted, is acceptable. Bottles 4 and 5 were      
                          tripped at the same depth, oxygen and nutrients 
                          show little difference, salinity is 0.001. The  
                          difference is within the accuracy of the        
                          measurement. During analysis of Station 93      
                          found a problem with the salinometer.  Code     
                          salinity bad.                                   
89/3   306   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Station 88 was a            
                          reoccupation. Oxygen and nutrients, except as   
                          noted, are acceptable. During analysis of       
                          Station 93 found a problem with the             
                          salinometer.  Code salinity bad.                
89/3   307   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Station 88 was a            
                          reoccupation. Oxygen and nutrients, except as   
                          noted, are acceptable. During analysis of       
                          Station 93 found a problem with the             
                          salinometer.  Code salinity bad.                
89/3   310   po4       3  PO4 high; no corresponding no3 feature.  Real   
                          peak; no analytical problems noted. Code PO4    
                          questionable.                                   
89/3   313   po4       3  PO4 high; no corresponding no3 feature.  Real   
                          peak; no analytical problems noted. Code PO4    
                          questionable.                                   
89/3   320   bottle    2  Ran out of water after CDOM, no salinity        
                          sample.Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Spigot was very tight, samplers could not close 
                          quickly enough, so the bottle ran out of water. 
                          Salinity was not sampled.                       
90/1   101   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Found a problem with salinometer. Oxygen and    
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
90/1   102   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Found a problem with salinometer. Oxygen and    
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
90/1   103   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Found a problem with salinometer. Oxygen and    
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
90/1   104   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Found a problem with salinometer. Oxygen and    
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
90/1   105   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Found a problem with salinometer. Oxygen and    
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
90/1   106   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Found a problem with salinometer. Oxygen and    
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
90/1   107   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Found a problem with salinometer. Oxygen and    
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
90/1   107   sio3      2  SiO3 high compared with adjoining stations and  
                          station profile. Oxygen and nutrient are        
                          acceptable. 7-8 agree with Stations 91 thru 93, 
                          4-6 agree with Station 89. Nutrient analyst:    
                          106-104 are low. Corresponding high feature in  
                          o2. All peaks real.                             
90/1   108   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Found a problem with salinometer. Oxygen and    
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
90/1   108   sio3      2  SiO3 high compared with adjoining stations and  
                          station profile. Oxygen and nutrient are        
                          acceptable. 7-8 agree with Stations 91 thru 93, 
                          4-6 agree with Station 89. Nutrient analyst:    
                          106-104 are low. Corresponding high feature in  
                          o2. All peaks real.                             
90/1   120   bottle    2  Leaking from bottom endcap. Oxygen, as well as  
                          salinity and nutrients, is acceptable. Leak did 
                          not seem to have an affect on the samples.      
90/1   132   o2        2  Oxygen low compared with adjoining stations,    
                          agrees with CTDO. Oxygen, as well as salinity   
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
90/1   132   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Oxygen appears low. Salinity agrees with down   
                          trace, feature seen in CTD salinity and oxygen. 
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
91/1   102   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. During analysis of Station  
                          93 found a problem with salinometer. Oxygen and 
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
91/1   104   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. 3 attempts for a good       
                          salinity reading. Additional reading resolved   
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
91/1   107   o2        4  Oxygen high, 0.1, compared with CTDO and        
                          adjoining stations. Salinity and nutrients are  
                          acceptable. Oxygen analyst: Rechecked end       
                          point; no analytical problems noted. Code       
                          oxygen bad.                                     
91/1   108   sio3      2  SiO3 low compared with adjoining stations and   
                          station profile. Nutrient analyst: There is a   
                          corresponding high feature in oxygen, although  
                          not quite as obvious.                           
91/1   109   sio3      2  SiO3 low compared with adjoining stations and   
                          station profile. Nutrient analyst: There is a   
                          corresponding high feature in oxygen, although  
                          not quite as obvious.                           
91/1   110   sio3      2  SiO3 low compared with adjoining stations and   
                          station profile. Nutrient analyst: There is a   
                          corresponding high feature in oxygen, although  
                          not quite as obvious.                           
91/1   115   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. 3 attempts for a good       
                          salinity reading. Additional reading resolved   
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
91/1   117   o2        2  Oxygen appears low compared with adjoining      
                          stations, relationship with higher SiO3. Oxygen 
                          and well as salinity, except as noted on 18,    
                          and nutrients are acceptable.                   
91/1   118   o2        2  Oxygen appears low compared with adjoining      
                          stations, relationship with higher SiO3. Oxygen 
                          and well as salinity, except as noted on 18,    
                          and nutrients are acceptable.                   
91/1   118   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. During analysis of Station  
                          93 found a problem with salinometer. Oxygen and 
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
91/1   120   bottle    2  Leaking from endcap. Oxygen, as well as         
                          salinity and nutrients, is acceptable. Leak     
                          from endcap did not affect samples.             
91/1   122   salt      2  Salinity samples 22-31 were off one level.      
                          Salinity analyst did not report any bottles     
                          left upside down. Operator error, corrected and 
                          salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
91/1   124   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. 4 attempts for a good       
                          salinity reading. Additional reading resolved   
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
91/1   127   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. 5 attempts for a good       
                          salinity reading. Additional reading resolved   
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
92/2   201   bottle    2  Leaking slightly, no comment as to from what    
                          point. Suspect that sampler needs to pull       
                          harder on the spigot. Oxygen does appear        
                          slightly high, but within accuracy of           
                          measurement. Freon sampled duplicates on this   
                          bottle. Nutrients are acceptable, salinity is   
                          bad due to a salinometer problem.               
92/2   201   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. 3    
                          attempts for a good salinity reading. During    
                          analysis of Station 93, a problem was detected  
                          with the salinometer. Oxygen and nutrients are  
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
92/2   202   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          station profile. During analysis of Station 93, 
                          a problem was detected with the salinometer.    
                          Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable. Code       
                          salinity bad.                                   
92/2   204   no3       3  NO3 high, no corresponding high PO4. Oxygen and 
                          other nutrients are acceptable. Nutrient        
                          analyst: Anomolously high, but real peak.  No   
                          analytical errors noted. Code NO3 questionable. 
92/2   204   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          During analysis of Station 93, a problem was    
                          detected with the salinometer. 3 attempts for a 
                          good salinity reading.  Oxygen and nutrients    
                          are acceptable. Code salinity bad.              
92/2   206   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          During analysis of Station 93, a problem was    
                          detected with the salinometer. Oxygen and       
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
92/2   207   no3       4  NO3 low, no corresponding low PO4. Oxygen and   
                          other nutrients are acceptable. Nutrient        
                          analyst: Bad peak, read by hand. Code NO3 bad.  
92/2   207   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          During analysis of Station 93, a problem was    
                          detected with the salinometer. Oxygen and       
                          nutrients, except NO3, are acceptable. Code     
                          salinity bad.                                   


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
92/2   210   o2        4  Oxygen higher than CTDO and adjoining stations, 
                          no corresponding SiO3 feature. Salinity and     
                          nutrients are acceptable. Oxygen analyst:       
                          Rechecked endpoint: Graph not good. Code oxygen 
                          bad.                                            
92/2   216   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. 5    
                          attempts for a good salinity reading. During    
                          analysis of Station 93, a problem was detected  
                          with the salinometer. Oxygen and nutrients are  
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
92/2   218   sio3      2  SiO3 low, no corresponding high oxygen.         
                          Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.  
                          Nutrient analyst: Real peak.  No analytical     
                          errors noted, within specs of measurement.      
92/2   226   o2        2  Oxygen redrawn, bubble in flask. Oxygen, as     
                          well as salinity and nutrients, is acceptable.  
92/2   227   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low, 2 units, compared with  
                          CTD. During analysis of Station 93, a problem   
                          was detected with the salinometer. Oxygen and   
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
92/2   229   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          During analysis of Station 93, a problem was    
                          detected with the salinometer. 3 attempts for a 
                          good salinity reading. Oxygen and nutrients are 
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
92/2   234   CTDT1     3  SBE35RT-CTDT1/CTDT2-CTDT1 difference is         
                          +0.21/+0.17 deg.C (high gradient).  Code CTDT1  
                          questionable.                                   
93/2   201   bottle    2  Bottle drips if the valve is not pulled out     
                          enough. Oxygen appears slightly high, within    
                          accuracy of measurement, and SiO3 is low.       
93/2   201   no3       2  NO3 high, no corresponding high PO4. Salinity   
                          and, SiO3 appears low, nutrients are            
                          acceptable. Oxygen is slightly high, but within 
                          accuracy of measurement.  Nutrient analyst: All 
                          are real peaks and within accuracy of AA.       
                          Nutrients are acceptable.                       
93/2   226   o2        2  Oxygen sample re-draw, bubble in flask. Oxygen, 
                          as well as salinity and nutrients, is           
                          acceptable.                                     
93/2   234   o2        2  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Rechecked titration plot: looks good. Oxygen    
                          similar to CTDO. Oxygen, as well as salinity    
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
94/1   101   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Salinometer switched before this station        
                          analysis session, found to have a problem which 
                          was resolved within the next couple of          
                          stations. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable   
                          unless otherwise noted. Code salinity bad.      
94/1   102   salt      4  See sample 1 salinometer comment. Code salinity 
                          bad.                                            
94/1   103   salt      4  See sample 1 salinometer comment. Code salinity 
                          bad.                                            
94/1   104   salt      4  See sample 1 salinometer comment. Code salinity 
                          bad.                                            
94/1   105   salt      4  See sample 1 salinometer comment. Code salinity 
                          bad.                                            
94/1   106   salt      4  See sample 1 salinometer comment. Code salinity 
                          bad.                                            
94/1   107   salt      4  See sample 1 salinometer comment. Code salinity 
                          bad.                                            
94/1   108   salt      4  See sample 1 salinometer comment. Code salinity 
                          bad.                                            
94/1   110   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. See  
                          salinometer comment noted with sample 1. Oxygen 
                          and nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity     
                          bad.                                            


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
94/1   125   no3       2  NO3 high, corresponding high PO4 feature.       
                          Salinity and oxygen and nutrients are           
                          acceptable. Nutrient analyst: Real peak, no     
                          analytical errors noted.                        
95/2   201   no3       2  NO3 low, corresponding low PO4, also reasonable 
                          low SiO3 high oxygen relationship. Salinity is  
                          high compared with CTD and adjoining stations,  
                          still working on problems with salinometer,     
                          however, suspect operator error. Nutrient       
                          analyst: Real peaks, no analytical errors       
                          noted. Code salinity bad.                       
95/2   201   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high, 0.01, compared with    
                          CTD. 3 attempts for a good salinity reading.    
                          Salinometer temperature issues which are        
                          resolved by Station 97. Oxygen and nutrients    
                          are acceptable. Code salinity bad.              
95/2   205   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Salinometer problems which  
                          are resolved by Station 97. Within accuracy of  
                          measurement. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are 
                          acceptable.                                     
95/2   207   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Salinometer problems which  
                          are resolved by Station 97. Oxygen and          
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
95/2   208   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Salinometer problems which  
                          are resolved by Station 97. Within accuracy of  
                          measurement. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are 
                          acceptable.                                     
95/2   209   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Salinometer problems which  
                          are resolved by Station 97. Oxygen and          
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
95/2   210   salt      2  3 attempts for a good salinity reading.         
                          Additional reading gave better agreement with   
                          CTD and adjoining stations. Salinity, oxygen    
                          and nutrients are acceptable.                   
95/2   212   salt      2  3 attempts for a good salinity reading.         
                          Additional reading gave better agreement with   
                          CTD and adjoining stations. Salinity, oxygen    
                          and nutrients are acceptable.                   
95/2   217   o2        2  Oxygen appears low, but agrees with CTDO.       
                          Oxygen, as well as salinity and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
95/2   223   salt      2  4 attempts for a good salinity reading.         
                          Additional reading gave better agreement with   
                          CTD and adjoining stations. Salinity, oxygen    
                          and nutrients are acceptable.                   
95/2   224   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  Salinometer problems which 
                          are resolved by Station 97. Oxygen and          
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
95/2   226   salt      2  3 attempts for a good salinity reading.         
                          Additional reading gave better agreement with   
                          CTD and adjoining stations. Salinity, oxygen    
                          and nutrients are acceptable.                   
96/1   101   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.Salinometer problems which   
                          are resolved by Station 97. Oxygen and          
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
96/1   102   no3       2  NO3 slightly high, no corresponding high PO4.   
                          Salinity, oxygen and other nutrients are        
                          acceptable.  Nutrient analyst: Real peak.  No   
                          analytical problems noted.                      
96/1   106   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Salinometer problems which  
                          are resolved by Station 97. Oxygen and          
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
96/1   108   no3       2  NO3 low, no corresponding low PO4. Salinity,    
                          oxygen and other nutrients are acceptable.      
                          Nutrient analyst: Real peak.  No analytical     
                          problems noted.                                 
96/1   117   po4       2  PO4 high, no corresponding high NO3. Salinity,  
                          oxygen and other nutrients are acceptable.      
                          Nutrient analyst:  Corresponding yet smaller    
                          feature in SiO3 and oxygen.  Real peak; no      
                          analytical problems noted.                      
97/2   201   no3       2  NO3 lower than adjoining stations. Nutrient     
                          analyst: NO3 and PO4 are okay.  No analytical   
                          problems.  201-203 are right on.  Oxygen shows  
                          a similar pattern.                              
97/2   201   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Salinometer problem with    
                          sample temperature. Oxygen and nutrients are    
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
97/2   202   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Salinometer problem with    
                          sample temperature. Oxygen and nutrients are    
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
97/2   203   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Salinometer problem with    
                          sample temperature. Oxygen and nutrients are    
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
97/2   207   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations. Within accuracy 
                          of the measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen 
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
97/2   208   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Within accuracy of the      
                          measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen and    
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
97/2   225   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
97/2   228   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
97/2   230   o2        2  Oxygen appears high compared with adjoining     
                          stations, but agrees with CTDO. Oxygen, as well 
                          as salinity and nutrients, is acceptable.       
98/1   101   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Salinometer problem with    
                          sample temperature. Oxygen and nutrients are    
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
98/1   103   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Suspect salinometer problem 
                          with sample temperature. Salinity within        
                          accuracy of measurement. Salinity, oxygen and   
                          nutrients are acceptable.                       
98/1   111   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, oxygen  
                          and nutrients are acceptable.                   
98/1   117   o2        4  Bubble introduced during second shake before    
                          analysis and sample contaminated. Oxygen higher 
                          than both CTDO and adjoining stations. Salinity 
                          and nutrients are acceptable. Code oxygen bad.  
98/1   120   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, oxygen  
                          and nutrients are acceptable.                   
99/2   207   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Within accuracy of          
                          measurement. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are 
                          acceptable.                                     
99/2   210   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, looks like a      
                          bottle flushing issue, salinity, oxygen and     
                          nutrients are acceptable.                       


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
99/2   221   CTDT2     3  SBE35RT-CTDT2 or CTDT1-CTDT2 difference is      
                          +0.025 deg.C (deep).  Code CTDT2 questionable.  
99/2   223   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, oxygen  
                          and nutrients are acceptable.                   
99/2   236   o2        2  Oxygen redrawn, bubbles in flask. Oxygen, as    
                          well as salinity and nutrients, is acceptable   
                          for a surface bottle.                           
100/1  101   o2        2  Oxygen draw temperature high, probably due to   
                          slow equilibration of temperature probe.        
                          Adjusted temperature, as per in-situ data and   
                          next bottle. Oxygen, as well as salinity and    
                          nutrients, is acceptable. Salinity is within    
                          accuracy of measurement.                        
100/1  108   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  3 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional readings resolve   
                          the large difference, 0.01, but still does not  
                          agree. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Code salinity bad.                              
100/1  117   bottle    2  Spigot trickled when vent was opened, stopped   
                          after ~5 seconds, when stop cockle turned.      
                          Salinity is a little low compared with CTD.     
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
101/3  301   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Lab temperature increased   
                          during the run. Oxygen and nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Code salinity questionable.         
101/3  302   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Lab temperature increased   
                          during the run. Oxygen and nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Code salinity questionable.         
101/3  303   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Lab temperature increased   
                          during the run. Oxygen and nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Code salinity questionable.         
101/3  307   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. 3 attempts for a good       
                          salinity reading. Lab temperature increased     
                          during the run. Oxygen and nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
101/3  308   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Lab temperature increased   
                          during the run. Oxygen and nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Code salinity questionable.         
101/3  309   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Lab temperature increased   
                          during the run. Oxygen and nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Code salinity questionable.         
101/3  310   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Lab temperature increased   
                          during the run. Oxygen and nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Code salinity questionable.         
101/3  331   o2        2  Oxygen appears high compared with adjoining     
                          profile and CTDO down trace, agrees with the up 
                          trace. Oxygen, as well as salinity and          
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
102/1  102   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Within accuracy of          
                          measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen and    
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
102/1  110   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
102/1  111   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  Gradient, salinity, as     
                          well as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.    


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
102/1  128   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
103/1  110   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
103/1  111   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. 3    
                          attempts for a good salinity reading.           
                          Additional reading resolved salinity            
                          difference. Salinity, as well as oxygen and     
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
103/1  128   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. 3    
                          attempts for a good salinity reading.           
                          Additional reading resolved salinity            
                          difference. Salinity, as well as oxygen and     
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
103/1  132   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
104/2  201   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Suspect sample temperature  
                          not perfect for analysis. Oxygen and nutrients  
                          are acceptable, NO3 is slightly higher and SiO3 
                          slightly low. Code salinity bad.                
104/2  205   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Salinity within accuracy of 
                          the measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen    
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
104/2  206   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Salinity within accuracy of 
                          the measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen    
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
104/2  209   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Deep salinity maximum,      
                          suspect flushing problem. Within accuracy of    
                          measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen and    
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
104/2  221   no2       4  Nutrients are exactly the same, 21 appears to   
                          be drawn from bottle 20. Code nutrients bad.    
104/2  221   no3       4  Nutrients are exactly the same, 21 appears to   
                          be drawn from bottle 20. Code nutrients bad.    
104/2  221   po4       4  Nutrients are exactly the same, 21 appears to   
                          be drawn from bottle 20. Code nutrients bad.    
104/2  221   sio3      4  Nutrients are exactly the same, 21 appears to   
                          be drawn from bottle 20. Code nutrients bad.    
104/2  226   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
104/2  228   no3       2  NO3, PO4 and SiO3 lower than adjoining          
                          stations. Similar feature seen in oxygen.       
                          Salinity gradient agrees with CTD.  Nutrient    
                          analyst: Real peaks.  No analytical problems.   
                          Station 105 has similar pattern.                
105/2  206   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Within accuracy of          
                          measurement. NO3 and SiO3 slightly high on      
                          station profile. Salinity, as well as oxygen    
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
105/2  228   no3       2  NO3, and PO4 lower than adjoining stations,     
                          SiO3 lower with corresponding higher oxygen.    
                          Salinity gradient agrees with CTD. Similar      
                          feature in Station 104.                         
105/2  228   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
105/2  233   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
106/1  111   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems      
                          noted. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Code salinity questionable.                     
106/1  130   o2        2  Oxygen high compared with adjoining stations    
                          and CTDO down trace, agrees with the up trace.  
                          Oxygen, as well as salinity and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
107/3  301   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems      
                          noted, within accuracy of measurement.          
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
107/3  302   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems      
                          noted, within accuracy of measurement.          
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
107/3  305   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  3 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional reading resolved   
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
108/1  117   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems      
                          noted. oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Code salinity questionable.                     
109/1  103   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Within accuracy of the      
                          measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen and    
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
109/1  106   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems      
                          noted. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Code salinity questionable.                     
109/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, are acceptable.                      
110/2  201   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Within accuracy of          
                          measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen and    
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
110/2  232   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. Lots  
                          of structure in CTD salinity. Salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
110/2  235   salt      5  Salinity sample lost, bottle stand did not hold 
                          and sample fell, spilling everywhere.           
111/2  202   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. 4 attempts for a good       
                          salinity reading. Additional reading resolved   
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
111/2  223   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Suspect analyst missed a    
                          reading, resolved mixup and salinity            
                          difference. Salinity, as well as oxygen and     
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
111/2  224   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Suspect analyst missed a    
                          reading, resolved mixup and salinity            
                          difference. Salinity, as well as oxygen and     
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
111/2  225   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Suspect analyst missed a    
                          reading, could not resolve mixup and salinity   
                          is low compared with CTD. Oxygen and nutrients  
                          are acceptable. Code salinity bad.              


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
111/2  228   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
112/1  102   o2        2  Oxygen redrawn, bubbles in flask. Oxygen, as    
                          well as salinity and nutrients, is acceptable.  
113/3  307   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Within accuracy of          
                          measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen and    
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
113/3  329   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
114/1  102   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. May have had a sample       
                          temperature issue, much of the salinity run is  
                          noisy. Within the accuracy of the measurement.  
                          Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.            
114/1  104   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. May have had a sample       
                          temperature issue, much of the salinity run is  
                          noisy. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Code salinity bad.                              
114/1  105   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Within accuracy of          
                          measurement, although much of the salinity run  
                          is noisy. Salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
114/1  106   o2        3  Oxygen low compared with CTDO and adjoining     
                          stations. Rechecked endpoint: No analytical     
                          problems noted. No corresponding increase in    
                          SiO3. SiO3 exhibits an unexpected low in value  
                          for 106. NO3 and PO4 are acceptable. Code       
                          oxygen questionable.                            
114/1  106   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. May have had a sample       
                          temperature issue, much of the salinity run is  
                          noisy. Code salinity bad.                       
114/1  107   o2        3  Oxygen low compared with CTDO and adjoining     
                          stations. Rechecked endpoint: No analytical     
                          problems noted. No corresponding SiO3 feature.  
                          Nutrients are acceptable. Code oxygen           
                          questionable.                                   
114/1  133   bottle    2  Bottle was misfired at 170 meters, bottles 32   
                          and 33 were fired at the same depth. Salinities 
                          agree by 0.002, oxygen by 0.006, NO3 0.01, PO4  
                          and SiO3 agree exactly with one another.        
114/1  133   o2        2  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Rechecked titration plot: looks good. Oxygen    
                          similar to CTDO. Oxygen, as well as salinity    
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
114/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. Lots  
                          of structure at the surface. Salinity, as well  
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
114/1  136   bottle    2  There is no surface bottle due to the misfire   
                          of bottle 33; bottle 36 was fired at 35 meters. 
115/1  130   o2        2  Oxygen redrawn due to false bubbles, bubbles in 
                          the glass itself. Oxygen, as well as salinity   
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
116/2  206   no3       2  NO3 low, no corresponding PO4 feature.          
                          Salinity, oxygen and other nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Nutrient analyst: Real peak. No     
                          analytical problems noted.                      
116/2  232   no3       2  NO3 low, corresponding low PO4, salinity also   
                          high with corresponding SiO3 and oxygen.        
                          Nutrient Analyst: Corresponding o2 max. Both    
                          real peaks. No analytical errors noted.         


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
117/2  201   po4       2  PO4 high, no corresponding NO3 feature. SiO3    
                          high, no corresponding low oxygen feature.      
                          Nutrient analyst: N:P ratio looks good.  Slight 
                          low feature in oxygen.  On edge of AA           
                          capability. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are  
                          acceptable.                                     
117/2  215   o2        2  Oxygen draw temperature for sample 15 was       
                          missed. Calculated approximate draw temperature 
                          for conversion to kg units, acceptable.         
117/2  228   o2        5  Oxygen was lost during analysis, buret tip was  
                          not in flask. No CTDO, coded not sampled        
                          because bottle oxygen is lost.                  
118/1  101   no3       2  NO3 high, no corresponding PO4 feature.         
                          Salinity, oxygen and other nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Nutrient analyst: Real peak. No     
                          analytical problems noted. Edge of AA           
                          capability.                                     
118/1  127   reft      3  SBE35RT-CTDT1 or SBE35-CTDT2 difference is      
                          -0.74 deg.C.  Code SBE35RT questionable.        
118/1  130   o2        2  Oxygen high compared with CTDO, but similar to  
                          adjoining stations. Rechecked endpoint:  No     
                          analytical problems noted. No corresponding     
                          SiO3 feature.  Data Processor: Bottle oxygen    
                          agrees with up trace. Oxygen, as well as        
                          salinity and nutrients, is acceptable.          
118/1  131   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
118/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
119/1  101   no3       2  NO3 high, 0.1, no corresponding PO4 feature.    
                          Salinity, oxygen and other nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Nutrient analyst: N:P ratio looks   
                          good.  Real peak.  No analytical errors noted.  
119/1  102   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problem       
                          noted, all of the deep salinities appear high   
                          by 0.001. Within accuracy of measurement.       
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
119/1  110   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations, agrees with the secondary   
                          sensor. No analytical problem noted. Oxygen and 
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity         
                          questionable.                                   
119/1  119   o2        2  Oxygen flask, 1539, switched during sampling    
                          with 13, 1413. This is not a problem, just a    
                          note of interest. Oxygen is acceptable.         
119/1  128   o2        2  Oxygen appears high compared with CTDO and      
                          Stations 120 and 121. Agrees with CTD up trace  
                          and close to Station 118. Oxygen as well, as    
                          salinity and nutrients, is acceptable.          
119/1  135   o2        2  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Rechecked titration plot: looks good. Oxygen    
                          similar to CTDO. Oxygen, as well as salinity    
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
119/1  136   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. It was pouring rain when    
                          the sample was collected. Oxygen and nutrients  
                          are acceptable. Code salinity bad.              
120/1  110   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Salinity is within the      
                          accuracy of the measurement. Salinity, as well  
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
120/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
121/1  105   sio3      3  SiO3 for sample 1-8 were rerun for SiO3. SiO3   
                          is high. Nutrient analyst: 104- peak looks      
                          good, no analytical error noted.  105-106       
                          questionable peak.  Code SiO3 questionable.     
121/1  106   sio3      3  SiO3 for sample 1-8 were rerun for SiO3. SiO3   
                          is high. Nutrient analyst: 104- peak looks      
                          good, no analytical error noted.  105-106       
                          questionable peak.  Code SiO3 questionable.     
121/1  120   salt      3  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations, although it does agree with 
                          Station 120. No analytical problem found.       
                          Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable. Code       
                          salinity questionable.                          
121/1  135   reft      3  SBE35RT-CTDT1/SBE35-CTDT2 difference is         
                          +0.38/+0.45 deg.C (high gradient).  Code        
                          SBE35RT questionable.                           
121/1  135   salt      3  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. Large 
                          gradient, 0.4, suspect salinometer was not      
                          flushed enough times between higher sample, 0.6 
                          higher. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.    
                          Code salinity questionable.                     
122/1  108   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems      
                          found, within accuracy of measurement.          
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
122/1  132   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems      
                          found, sample could have been run too fast.     
                          Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable. Code       
                          salinity questionable.                          
122/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Salinity agrees with the    
                          secondary conductivity sensor. Salinity, as     
                          well as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.    
122/1  136   bottle    2  Bottle tripped partially out of the water.      
                          Oxygen, salinity and nutrients are acceptable.  
123/2  201   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Deep salinity samples all   
                          appear high, but within accuracy of measurement 
                          and agree with secondary sensor. Salinity,      
                          oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.            
123/2  203   sio3      2  SiO3 low, ~1.0, compared with adjoining         
                          stations, no corresponding oxygen feature.      
                          Within accuracy of the measurement. Salinity,   
                          oxygen and nutrients are acceptable. Nutrient   
                          analyst:  Real peak.  No analytical error       
                          noted.                                          
123/2  207   no3       2  NO3 high, as much as 0.03, compared with        
                          adjoining stations. PO4 has a similar feature,  
                          but agrees with adjoining stations. Salinity,   
                          oxygen and other nutrients are acceptable.      
                          Nutrient analyst: Real peak.  No analytical     
                          error noted. N:P ratio looks good. Leave NO4 as 
                          is.                                             
123/2  208   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Deep salinity samples all   
                          appear high, but within accuracy of measurement 
                          and agree with secondary sensor. Salinity,      
                          oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.            
123/2  210   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          0.002, and low compared with adjoining          
                          stations. Deep salinity samples all appear      
                          high, but within accuracy of measurement and    
                          agree with secondary sensor. CTD shows a low    
                          feature, suspect that this could be a bottle    
                          flushing problem or difference between CTD and  
                          bottle location. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients 
                          are acceptable.                                 


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
123/2  220   salt      3  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. This  
                          bottle has been problematic, oxygen is          
                          acceptable. When full sampling is done,         
                          Stations 121 and 123, salinity has been low, on 
                          Station 125 salinity was high.  Code salinity   
                          questionable.                                   
123/2  231   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. Lots  
                          of structure, salinity, as well as oxygen and   
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
123/2  233   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. Lots  
                          of structure, salinity, as well as oxygen and   
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
123/2  234   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
123/2  235   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, oxygen high and   
                          agrees with CTDO. Salinity, as well as oxygen   
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
124/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations for a shallow    
                          sample. Lots of structure in the CTD data.      
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
125/1  102   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
125/1  105   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations and secondary sensor.        
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
125/1  107   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Within accuracy of measurement.         
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
125/1  108   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Within accuracy of measurement.         
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
125/1  109   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Within accuracy of measurement.         
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
125/1  110   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
125/1  111   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
125/1  112   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
125/1  113   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
125/1  114   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
125/1  120   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. This 
                          bottle has been problematic, oxygen is          
                          acceptable. When full sampling is done,         
                          Stations 121 and 123, salinity has been low, on 
                          Station 125 salinity was high. Code salinity    
                          questionable.                                   
125/1  126   bottle    2  Spigot partially open. Salinity, oxygen and     
                          nutrients agree with adjoining stations.        
126/1  101   no3       3  NO3 high, 0.03, compared with adjoining         
                          station. No similar feature in PO4. Salinity,   
                          oxygen and other nutrients are acceptable. Code 
                          NO3 questionable. Nutrient analyst:Real peak.   
                          No analytical errors noted.                     
126/1  101   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with secondary sensor. Salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, except NO3, is         
                          acceptable.                                     
126/1  102   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with secondary sensor. Within accuracy   
                          of measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen and 
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
126/1  103   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with secondary sensor. Salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
126/1  104   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          low with adjoining stations. The bottle was     
                          upright in the box however, it was not full.    
                          Suspect sampling error. Code salinity bad.      
126/1  105   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
126/1  106   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
126/1  107   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
126/1  108   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
126/1  109   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
126/1  110   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
126/1  135   reft      3  SBE35RT-CTDT1/SBE35-CTDT2 difference is         
                          -0.11/-0.22 deg.C (high gradient).  Code        
                          SBE35RT questionable.                           
126/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
128/1  105   no2       9                                                  
128/1  105   no3       9  Nutrient tube brought to lab empty.             
128/1  105   po4       9                                                  
128/1  105   sio3      9                                                  
129/1  101   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
129/1  103   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
129/1  105   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor, within accuracy of measurement.         
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
129/1  107   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
129/1  110   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations and secondary    
                          sensor. Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
129/1  136   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD,       
                          acceptable with adjoining stations. Salinity,   
                          as well as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable. 
130/1  106   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  3 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional readings resolve   
                          difference. Salinity, as well as oxygen and     
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
130/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
131/1  101   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations, and secondary comparison.   
                          Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable. Code       
                          salinity questionable.                          
131/1  125   salt      3  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD, both  
                          down and up trace, and adjoining stations.      
                          Feature seen in oxygen which CTDO confirms, no  
                          features in nutrients. Could be bottle flushing 
                          issue. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Code salinity questionable.                     
132/1  101   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  102   o2        3  Oxygen higher than CTDO and adjoining stations. 
                          Oxygen analyst: No corresponding SiO3 feature.  
                          Nutrients acceptable. Rechecked endpoint: no    
                          analytical problems noted. Code oxygen          
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  102   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  103   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  104   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  105   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  106   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  107   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  108   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
132/1  109   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  110   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, except SiO3, is        
                          acceptable.                                     
132/1  110   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  111   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  112   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  113   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  114   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  115   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  116   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  117   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  118   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  119   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  120   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  121   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  122   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  123   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  124   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  125   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  126   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  127   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  128   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  129   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
132/1  130   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  131   CTDT2     3  SBE35RT-CTDT2/CTDT1-CTDT2 difference is         
                          +0.14/+0.18 deg.C (high gradient).  Code CTDT2  
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  131   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  132   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  133   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  134   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, except SiO3, is acceptable.          
132/1  135   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
132/1  136   sio3      3  SiO3 profile looks high. Investigation did not  
                          reveal any analytical problems. Code SiO3       
                          questionable.                                   
133/2  234   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
134/1  107   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations. Within accuracy 
                          of the measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen 
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
134/1  110   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Slight gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen    
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
134/1  126   o2        5  Oxygen lost, flask broken and not analyzed. No  
                          CTDO, coded not sampled because bottle oxygen   
                          is lost.                                        
134/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. Could 
                          be the 1 meter bottle vs. CTD location.         
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
135/3  305   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations. Within accuracy 
                          of measurements. Salinity, as well as oxygen    
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
135/3  306   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with adjoining stations. Within accuracy 
                          of measurements. Salinity, as well as oxygen    
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
136/1  108   sio3      2  SiO3 low, no corresponding oxygen feature.      
                          Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.  
                          Nutrient analyst: Checked and corrected, still  
                          low, but within accuracy, leave as is.          
137/1  102   no3       3  NO3 deep profile looks low. Nutrient Analyst:   
                          102-103 and 105-107 look ~0.2 low.  Real peaks. 
                          No analytical errors noted.                     
137/1  103   no3       3  NO3 deep profile looks low. Nutrient Analyst:   
                          102-103 and 105-107 look ~0.2 low.  Real peaks. 
                          No analytical errors noted.                     
137/1  105   no3       3  NO3 deep profile looks low. Nutrient Analyst:   
                          look ~0.2 low.  Real peaks.  No analytical      
                          errors noted. Code NO3 questionable.            
137/1  106   no3       3  NO3 deep profile looks low. Nutrient Analyst:   
                          look ~0.2 low.  Real peaks.  No analytical      
                          errors noted. Code NO3 questionable.            


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
137/1  107   no3       3  NO3 deep profile looks low. Nutrient Analyst:   
                          look ~0.2 low.  Real peaks.  No analytical      
                          errors noted. Code NO3 questionable.            
138/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
139/3  307   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Suspect samples run too     
                          quickly through cell. Salinity, as well as      
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
139/3  308   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  3 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional reading resolved   
                          salinity difference, suspect samples run too    
                          quickly through cell. Salinity, as well as      
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
139/3  309   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Suspect samples run too     
                          quickly through cell. Salinity, as well as      
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
140/1  103   bottle    9  Bottle opened by recovery hook, water poured    
                          out. CTDO not reported because there is no      
                          bottle oxygen.                                  
140/1  109   no3       3  NO3 high, ~0.06, no corresponding PO4 feature.  
                          Salinity, oxygen and other nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Nutrient analyst: Real peak.  No    
                          analytical error noted. Code NO3 questionable.  
140/1  127   o2        2  Oxygen appears low compared with adjoining      
                          stations, agrees with the CTDO. Oxygen, as well 
                          as salinity and nutrients, is acceptable.       
140/1  129   o2        2  Oxygen appears high compared with CTDO and      
                          adjoining stations, agrees with the CTDO up     
                          trace. Oxygen, as well as salinity and          
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
141/1  101   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations. CTD salinity    
                          has a slight low feature. Salinity, as well as  
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
141/1  105   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations. Gradient,       
                          salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
141/1  106   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations. Gradient,       
                          salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
141/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
142/1  106   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
143/2  203   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Oxygen and nutrients are    
                          acceptable. Code salinity questionable.         
143/2  209   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
143/2  226   bottle    2  Freon sampler reports that spigot was open, but 
                          did not appear to leak. Oxygen, as well as      
                          salinity and nutrients, is acceptable.          
144/1  131   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Probably physical location difference of bottle 
                          and CTD. Salinity, as well as oxygen and        
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
144/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
144/1  136   bottle    2  Raining on recovery of rosette. Salinity,       
                          oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.            
145/2  204   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems,     
                          could be sampling issue. Oxygen and nutrients   
                          are acceptable. Code salinity bad.              
145/2  213   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems      
                          found. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Code salinity bad.                              
145/2  226   o2        4  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Oxygen higher than both CTDO and adjoining      
                          stations.  Rechecked endpoint: plot no good. No 
                          corresponding SiO3 feature.  Nutrients are      
                          acceptable. Code oxygen bad.                    
145/2  230   reft      3  SBE35RT-CTDT1/SBE35-CTDT2 difference is         
                          -0.14/-0.24 deg.C (high gradient).  Code        
                          SBE35RT questionable.                           
146/1  109   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Suspect sample analyzed too 
                          slow, within accuracy of measurement. Salinity, 
                          as well as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable. 
146/1  119   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  6 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Analyst read the wrong        
                          sample, issue resolved. Salinity, as well as    
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
146/1  121   sio3      3  SiO3 low, ~3, no corresponding oxygen feature.  
                          Salinity, oxygen and other nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Code SiO3 questionable. Nutrient    
                          analyst: Strong gradient region. Real peak- no  
                          analytical errors noted.                        
146/1  126   o2        2  Oxygen less than both CTDO and adjoining        
                          stations. Rechecked endpoint:  No analytical    
                          problems noted. No corresponding SiO3 feature.  
                          Nutrients are acceptable. Processor: Difference 
                          between down and up, oxygen is acceptable.      
146/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
147/2  201   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Samples were run before     
                          they had time to equilibrate to lab/bath        
                          temperature. Oxygen and nutrients are           
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
147/2  207   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Samples were run before     
                          they had time to equilibrate to lab/bath        
                          temperature. Oxygen and nutrients are           
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
147/2  209   no3       3  NO3 high, ~0.2, no corresponding PO4, SiO3 low. 
                          Salinity, and oxygen acceptable. Code NO3       
                          questionable. Nutrient analyst: Real peak-no    
                          analytical errors noted.                        
147/2  212   sio3      2  SiO3 low, ~2, no corresponding O2, within       
                          precision of measurement. Salinity, and oxygen  
                          acceptable. Nutrient analyst: o2 is slightly    
                          low at this level.   Real peak- no analytical   
                          errors noted.                                   
148/2  217   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations.  3 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional readings did not   
                          resolve salinity difference, must have been a   
                          salt crystal. Oxygen and nutrients are          
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
148/2  227   o2        2  Oxygen appears high compared with CTDO and      
                          adjoining stations. Salinity and nutrients are  
                          acceptable. Code oxygen questionable. Rechecked 
                          endpoint: No analytical problems noted and      
                          graph is good. Re-plotted and sample value is   
                          similar to adjoining stations. Code oxygen      
                          acceptable.                                     
148/2  233   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
149/1  107   o2        4  Oxygen higher than both CTDO and adjoining      
                          stations. Rechecked endpoint:  Bad graph, non-  
                          recoverable. Salinity and nutrients are         
                          acceptable. Code oxygen bad.                    
149/1  109   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
149/1  122   o2        2  Oxygen slightly less than both CTDO and         
                          adjoining stations. Rechecked endpoint:  looks  
                          OK. Processor: Oxygen agrees with CTDO up       
                          trace. Oxygen, as well as salinity and          
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
149/1  123   o2        2  Oxygen less than both CTDO and adjoining        
                          stations. Rechecked endpoint: No analytical     
                          problems noted and graph is good. Corresponding 
                          SiO3 feature. Nutrients acceptable.  Processor: 
                          Oxygen agrees with CTDO up trace. Oxygen, as    
                          well as salinity and nutrients, is acceptable.  
149/1  123   sio3      2  SiO3 high, ~3, corresponding oxygen feature.    
                          Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.  
                          Agrees with Station 153. Nutrient analyst:      
                          Strong gradient region. Real peak-no analytical 
                          errors noted.                                   
149/1  132   CTDS1     2  Bottle-CTDC1 difference is -0.23 PSU (high      
                          gradient).  BottleSalt-CTDS1 is less than -0.01 
                          PSU in gradient, so code CTDS1 acceptable;      
                          matches up with CTDT1.                          
149/1  132   CTDT1     2  SBE35RT-CTDT1/CTDT2-CTDT1 difference is         
                          +0.20/+0.17 deg.C (high gradient).  BottleSalt- 
                          CTDS1 is less than -0.01 PSU in gradient, so    
                          code CTDT1 acceptable; matches up with CTDC1.   
150/1  102   o2        2  Debris in oxygen flask. Oxygen, as well as      
                          salinity and nutrients, is acceptable.          
150/1  105   no3       3  NO3 higher than adjoining stations. Slight      
                          corresponding oxygen feature. Other nutrients   
                          are acceptable. No analytical problems noted    
                          and peak looks good. Code NO3 questionable.     
150/1  106   no3       3  NO3 higher than adjoining stations: Slight      
                          corresponding oxygen feature. Other nutrients   
                          are acceptable. No analytical problems noted    
                          and peak looks good. Code NO3 questionable.     
150/1  107   no3       3  NO3 higher than adjoining stations. Slight      
                          corresponding oxygen feature. Other nutrients   
                          are acceptable. No analytical problems noted    
                          and peak looks good. Code NO3 questionable.     
150/1  119   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. 4 attempts for a good       
                          salinity reading. Additional readings did not   
                          resolve difference. Oxygen and nutrients are    
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
150/1  122   o2        2  Biology in oxygen sample. Oxygen, as well as    
                          salinity and nutrients, is acceptable.          
150/1  125   o2        2  Oxygen appears low compared with adjoining      
                          stations. Agrees well, for a shallow bottle,    
                          with CTDO up trace.                             
150/1  133   CTDT2     3  CTDT1-CTDT2 difference is +0.27 deg.C (high     
                          gradient).  Code CTDT2 questionable.            
150/1  133   reft      3  SBE35RT-CTDT1 difference is +0.12 deg.C (high   
                          gradient).  Code SBE35RT questionable.          


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
150/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
150/1  136   reft      3  SBE35RT-CTDT1/SBE35-CTDT2 difference is         
                          +0.24/+0.30 deg.C (surface).  Code SBE35RT      
                          questionable.                                   
151/1  117   no3       2  NO3 low, no corresponding PO4 feature.          
                          Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.  
                          Nutrient analyst: Slight corresponding po4      
                          feature.  Real peak- no analytical error noted. 
151/1  121   sio3      2  SiO3 high, ~5, no corresponding oxygen feature. 
                          Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.  
                          Agrees with Station 154. Nutrient analyst: o2   
                          min at this level.  Real peak- no analytical    
                          errors noted                                    
151/1  130   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. No    
                          analytical problems found. Gradient, salinity,  
                          oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.            
151/1  134   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Appears to be an            
                          analytical/salinometer problem. Oxygen and      
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
151/1  135   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Appears to be an            
                          analytical/salinometer problem. Oxygen and      
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
151/1  136   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Appears to be an            
                          analytical/salinometer problem. Oxygen and      
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
152/1  130   no3       2  NO3 high, ~3, corresponding PO4 feature.        
                          Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.  
                          Nutrient analyst: corresponding po4 and o2      
                          feature.  Real peak- no analytical errors       
                          noted.                                          
152/1  132   no3       2  NO3 high, ~10, corresponding PO4 feature.       
                          Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.  
                          Nutrient analyst:  corresponding po4 and o2     
                          feature.  Real peak- no analytical errors noted 
152/1  132   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
152/1  133   CTDT1     3  SBE35RT-CTDT1/CTDT2-CTDT1 difference is         
                          +0.29/+0.22 deg.C (high gradient).  Code CTDT1  
                          questionable.                                   
152/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problem       
                          noted, appears there was sufficient flushing    
                          after a higher conductivity on the previous     
                          sample. Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen   
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
153/1  105   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Within accuracy of          
                          measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen and    
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
153/1  125   o2        2  Oxygen appears high compared with CTDO and      
                          adjoining stations. Agrees with CTDO up trace.  
                          Oxygen, as well as salinity and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
153/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
154/2  205   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations.  3 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional reading did not    
                          resolve salinity difference. Oxygen and         
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
154/2  208   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. 3 attempts for a good       
                          salinity reading. Additional reading resolved   
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
154/2  235   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Gradient, salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
155/1  102   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Within accuracy of          
                          measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen and    
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
155/1  105   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Within accuracy of          
                          measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen and    
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
155/1  108   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Within accuracy of          
                          measurement. Salinity, as well as oxygen and    
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
155/1  132   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          adjoining stations and CTD down trace.          
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
155/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
156/2  232   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Salinity structure, salinity, as well as oxygen 
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
157/1  109   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Sample was analyzed too     
                          quickly, not giving it enough time to come to   
                          equilibration. Oxygen and nutrients are         
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
158/1  103   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  3 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional reading resolved   
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
158/1  111   po4       2  PO4 low, corresponding NO3, oxygen high, but    
                          agrees with CTDO. No other parameters sampled   
                          on this bottle. Salinity, and oxygen            
                          acceptable. Nutrient analyst: Real peaks- no    
                          analytical errors noted.                        
158/1  131   po4       2  PO4 low. Nutrient analyst:  Corresponding NO3,  
                          SiO3, and oxygen signal.  Real peaks- no        
                          analytical errors noted.                        
158/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Salinity structures,        
                          salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
158/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
159/1  132   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
160/1  118   o2        4  Oxygen low compared to CTDO and adjoining       
                          stations, no corresponding SiO3 feature.        
                          Salinity and nutrients are acceptable. Oxygen   
                          analyst: Forgot to lower buret tip into flask;  
                          had to abort end point. System appears to have  
                          given small shot, between 0.003 and 0.004ml,    
                          when redone before actually aborting. Value     
                          will be incorrect low.                          
160/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
161/1  102   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Sample appears to be run    
                          too fast, machine diagnostic confirm a problem. 
                          Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable. Code       
                          salinity bad.                                   
161/1  106   no3       2  NO3 high, no corresponding PO4.  Nutrient       
                          analyst: Real peak; no analytical errors noted. 
                          Nutrients, as well as salinity and oxygen, are  
                          acceptable.                                     
161/1  108   o2        5  Sample analysis was aborted after Stop Thio     
                          button was accidentally clicked. Thus final     
                          titer volume not acquired; oxygen lost. No      
                          CTDO, coded not sampled because bottle oxygen   
                          lost.                                           
161/1  129   po4       2  PO4 high.  Nutrient analyst:  Corresponding     
                          NO3, SiO3, and oxygen signal.  Real peaks- no   
                          analytical errors noted.                        
161/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
162/2  205   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  4 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional readings resolved  
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
162/2  209   o2        4  Sample overtitrated and backtitrated. End point 
                          rechecked: bad graph. Oxygen higher than CTDO   
                          and does not agree with trend descending water  
                          column of adjoining stations. No corresponding  
                          SiO3 feature. Nutrients acceptable. Code oxygen 
                          bad.                                            
162/2  221   o2        2  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Rechecked endpoint: Graph good. Oxygen slightly 
                          higher than CTDO but similar to adjoining       
                          stations. Oxygen is acceptable.                 
162/2  226   no3       2  NO3 low, ~2, corresponding low PO4, low SiO3,   
                          high oxygen, but relationship does not fall on  
                          curve. Nutrient analyst:  Real peaks- no        
                          analytical errors noted.                        
162/2  230   o2        2  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Rechecked endpoint: Graph good. Oxygen slightly 
                          higher than CTDO and similar to low oxygen      
                          (minimum) trend in adjoining stations. Oxygen   
                          is acceptable.                                  
163/1  102   o2        3  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Endpoint: Flat Graph...slope close to           
                          zero...not good. Oxygen slightly higher than    
                          CTDO, but follows pattern of adjoining          
                          stations. Slight similar corresponding SiO3 and 
                          NO3 features at adjoining stations. Oxygen code 
                          questionable.                                   
163/1  105   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Structure seen in nutrients 
                          and oxygen, acceptable. Code salinity           
                          questionable.                                   
163/1  107   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Suspect sample run a little 
                          too fast. Structure seen in nutrients and       
                          oxygen, acceptable. Code salinity questionable. 
163/1  108   o2        5  Oxygen flask damaged before analysis and sample 
                          contaminated. Oxygen lost. No CTDO because      
                          bottle oxygen lost.                             
163/1  116   o2        2  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Rechecked endpoint: Graph good. Oxygen agrees   
                          with CTDO and adjoining stations. Oxygen is     
                          acceptable.                                     


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
163/1  126   o2        2  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Rechecked endpoint: graph not very good...quite 
                          flat. However, Oxygen agrees with CTDO and      
                          adjoining stations. Oxygen is acceptable.       
163/1  128   o2        2  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Rechecked endpoint: Graph good. Oxygen agrees   
                          with both CTDO and adjoining stations.          
                          Nutrients acceptable. Oxygen is acceptable.     
163/1  129   o2        2  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Rechecked endpoint: Graph good. Oxygen agrees   
                          with both CTDO and adjoining stations.          
                          Nutrients acceptable. Oxygen is acceptable.     
163/1  130   o2        2  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Rechecked endpoint: Graph not very good...quite 
                          flat.   However, Oxygen agrees with both CTDO   
                          and adjoining stations. Oxygen is acceptable.   
163/1  132   o2        3  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Rechecked endpoint: Graph not very good. Oxygen 
                          higher than CTDO at exact depth, but agrees     
                          with O2 concentration slightly above in the     
                          water column...hence sample water may be mixed  
                          with water higher in the water column. Oxygen   
                          agrees with trend in upper waters at adjoining  
                          stations. Oxygen code questionable.             
164/2  202   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  3 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional readings resolved  
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
164/2  207   o2        2  Graph started higher than normal on voltage.    
                          Rechecked endpoint: Graph good. Oxygen similar  
                          to both CTDO and adjoining stations. Oxygen is  
                          acceptable.                                     
164/2  236   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problem       
                          found, suspect difference between location of   
                          bottle versus CTD. Oxygen and nutrients are     
                          acceptable. Code salinity questionable.         
165/1  104   o2        2  Oxygen appears to have had a voltage shift that 
                          dropped UV source strength. Rechecked endpoint: 
                          Graph good. Oxygen similar to both CTDO and     
                          adjoining stations. Oxygen is acceptable.       
165/1  107   sio3      2  SiO3 high. Nutrient Analyst: Corresponding low  
                          o2 at this level.  Real peak- no analytical     
                          errors noted.                                   
165/1  131   o2        2  Bottom portion of graph distorted as bubble     
                          came out of solution in UV path. Rechecked      
                          endpoint: Graph good. Oxygen similar to both    
                          CTDO and adjoining stations.  Oxygen is         
                          acceptable.                                     
166/1  131   reft      3  SBE35RT-CTDT1/SBE35-CTDT2 difference is         
                          +0.14/+0.21 deg.C (high gradient).  Code        
                          SBE35RT questionable.                           
166/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
167/2  207   o2        2  Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          outgassing microbubbles severely distorted UV   
                          path. Oxygen does appear slightly high.         
                          Salinity and nutrients are acceptable. Oxygen   
                          analyst: Rechecked endpoint: graph not very     
                          good. However, oxygen agrees with both CTDO and 
                          adjoining stations. Oxygen is acceptable.       
167/2  234   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
168/1  114   po4       2  PO4 low, NO3 is slightly lower compared with    
                          adjoining stations. Nutrients, as well as       
                          salinity and oxygen, are acceptable. Nutrient   
                          Analyst:  Real peaks.  No analytical errors     
                          noted.                                          
168/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
168/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
169/2  211   CTDT2     3  SBE35RT-CTDT2/CTDT1-CTDT2 difference is         
                          +0.075/+0.053 deg.C.  Code CTDT2 questionable.  
170/1  109   salt      3  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Could be a bottle flushing  
                          issue. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Code salinity questionable.                     
170/1  132   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Salinity structure, salinity, as well as oxygen 
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
171/1  132   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
171/1  133   reft      3  SBE35RT-CTDT1/SBE35-CTDT2 difference is         
                          +0.14/+0.21 deg.C (high gradient).  Code        
                          SBE35RT questionable.                           
171/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
172/1  102   bottle    2  Vent open, leaked when oxygen pulled spigot.    
                          Oxygen, as well as salinity and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
172/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
173/2  209   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Salinity run was a little   
                          noisy. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Code salinity bad.                              
173/2  210   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Salinity run was a little   
                          noisy. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Code salinity bad.                              
174/2  209   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  3 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional reading did not    
                          resolve salinity difference. Oxygen and         
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity         
                          questionable.                                   
174/2  236   reft      3  SBE35RT-CTDT1/SBE35-CTDT2 difference is         
                          +0.22/+0.33 deg.C (surface).  Code SBE35RT      
                          questionable.                                   
174/2  236   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Oxygen and nutrients are    
                          acceptable. Code salinity questionable.         
175/1  132   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Salinity agrees with the down trace, likely     
                          "shed wake". Salinity, as well as oxygen and    
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
175/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
176/1  104   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  4 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional reading resolved   
                          salinity difference.                            
176/1  109   salt      3  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Oxygen and nutrients are    
                          acceptable. Code salinity questionable.         


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
176/1  119   no2       4                                                  
176/1  119   no3       4                                                  
176/1  119   o2        4  Oxygen higher than CTDO and dissimilar in       
                          descending trend to adjacent stations.          
                          Rechecked endpoint: No analytical errors noted  
                          and graph is good. SiO3 for 119 also exhibits a 
                          value higher than adjoining stations and is     
                          questionable. Code bottle did not trip as       
                          scheduled and samples bad.                      
176/1  119   po4       4                                                  
176/1  119   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. Code bottle did not trip as 
                          scheduled, salinity and other samples bad.      
176/1  119   sio3      4                                                  
176/1  124   salt      2  4 attempts for a good salinity reading.         
                          Additional reading resolved salinity            
                          difference. Salinity, as well as oxygen and     
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
176/1  133   salt      4  4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Suspect 
                          operator error, from program diagnostics could  
                          be sample 32 that sat too long. Oxygen and      
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
177/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD,      
                          agrees with down trace, likely "shed wake".     
                          Gradient, different structure seen in CTD       
                          trace. Salinity, as well as oxygen and          
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
178/1  111   bottle    2  Vent may have been open, CFC could not          
                          remember. It has been stated that all valves    
                          were checked two times before deployment.       
                          salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.  
179/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. There is a lot of structure 
                          in the CTD trace, probably "shed wakes".        
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
179/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. There is a lot of structure 
                          in the CTD trace, probably "shed wakes".        
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
179/1  136   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. There 
                          is a lot of structure in the CTD trace,         
                          probably "shed wakes". Salinity, as well as     
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
180/1  102   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  3 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional readings resolved  
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
180/1  107   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Additional readings         
                          resolved salinity difference. Salinity, as well 
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
180/1  110   salt      4  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          adjoining stations. 3 attempts for a good       
                          salinity reading. Additional readings did not   
                          resolve salinity difference. Suspect an         
                          operator error. Oxygen and nutrients are        
                          acceptable. Code salinity bad.                  
180/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Salinity appears to be drawn from bottle 34,    
                          but value agrees with structure of trace.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
180/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
181/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Structure seen in CTD. Salinity, as well as     
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
182/1  114   no3       2  NO3 low compared with adjoining stations and    
                          reoccupation 174, PO4 has corresponding         
                          feature, but SiO3 and oxygen do not show the    
                          same.                                           
182/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Structure in CTD, salinity, as well as oxygen   
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
183/2  205   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problem       
                          noted. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Code salinity bad.                              
184/1  105   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problem       
                          noted. Salinity from this bottle was low on the 
                          Station 183, but looks good on 185. Within      
                          accuracy of measurement, salinity, as well as   
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
184/1  120   salt      3  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and    
                          agrees with 183, but not with down or up CTD    
                          trace. No analytical problem noted. Oxygen and  
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity         
                          questionable.                                   
184/1  132   bottle    2  Vent was open. Oxygen, as well as salinity and  
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
184/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Probably difference between bottle vs. CTD      
                          physical locations, looks reasonable for        
                          shallow water with adjoining stations.          
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
184/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Probably difference between bottle vs. CTD      
                          physical locations, looks reasonable for        
                          shallow water with adjoining stations.          
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
184/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Probably difference between bottle vs. CTD      
                          physical locations, looks reasonable for        
                          shallow water with adjoining stations.          
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
184/1  136   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Probably difference between bottle vs. CTD      
                          physical locations, looks reasonable for        
                          shallow water with adjoining stations.          
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
185/2  201   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems      
                          noted. Salinity just within accuracy of the     
                          measurement. Oxygen and nutrients are           
                          acceptable, NO3 a little high, but has          
                          corresponding PO4 feature. Code salinity        
                          questionable.                                   
185/2  206   o2        2  O2 flask order switched with sample 207. Flask  
                          number for sample 206 for this station is 1697  
                          from box 5. Oxygen is acceptable.               
185/2  207   o2        2  O2 flask order switched with sample 206. Flask  
                          number for sample 207 for this station is 1706  
                          from box 5. Oxygen is acceptable.               
185/2  217   no2       5  Missed 2 sample tubes when loading carousel,    
                          samples dumped before error noticed.  Code      
                          nutrients samples lost.                         


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
185/2  217   no3       5  Missed 2 sample tubes when loading carousel,    
                          samples dumped before error noticed.  Code      
                          nutrients samples lost.                         
185/2  217   po4       5  Missed 2 sample tubes when loading carousel,    
                          samples dumped before error noticed.  Code      
                          nutrients samples lost.                         
185/2  217   sio3      5  Missed 2 sample tubes when loading carousel,    
                          samples dumped before error noticed.  Code      
                          nutrients samples lost.                         
185/2  218   no2       5  Missed 2 sample tubes when loading carousel,    
                          samples dumped before error noticed.  Code      
                          nutrients samples lost.                         
185/2  218   no3       5  Missed 2 sample tubes when loading carousel,    
                          samples dumped before error noticed.  Code      
                          nutrients samples lost.                         
185/2  218   po4       5  Missed 2 sample tubes when loading carousel,    
                          samples dumped before error noticed.  Code      
                          nutrients samples lost.                         
185/2  218   sio3      5  Missed 2 sample tubes when loading carousel,    
                          samples dumped before error noticed.  Code      
                          nutrients samples lost.                         
185/2  229   o2        2  Overtitrated and backtitrated. Oxygen analyst's 
                          notes: filamental debris in sample. Oxygen      
                          agrees with both CTDO and adjoining stations.   
                          Rechecked endpoint: Graph is good. Oxygen is    
                          acceptable.                                     
185/2  233   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient and salinity structure, salinity, as   
                          well as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.    
185/2  235   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
186/1  131   o2        2  Oxygen analyst's notes: power spike during read 
                          gave 1 erroneous value not used in slope        
                          computation. Oxygen value agrees with CTDO and  
                          pattern in adjoining stations. Rechecked        
                          endpoint: No analytical problems noted and      
                          graph is good. Oxygen is acceptable.            
186/1  135   o2        2  Oxygen appears high compared with CTDO down     
                          trace and adjoining stations, agrees with the   
                          up trace. Oxygen, as well as salinity and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
186/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, agrees with adjoining stations.       
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
186/1  136   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. Bottle may not have been    
                          flushed well enough. Oxygen and nutrients are   
                          acceptable. Code salinity questionable.         
187/2  233   bottle    2  Grease on bottle. Bottles were inspected and    
                          grease was not found inside. Salinity, oxygen   
                          and nutrients are acceptable.`                  
187/2  234   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Package was undulating about 1 meter during     
                          bottle trip causing "shed wakes". Salinity, as  
                          well as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.    
188/1  103   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems      
                          noted, within accuracy of measurement.          
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
188/1  104   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems      
                          noted, within accuracy of measurement.          
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
188/1  134   o2        3  Oxygen high compared with CTDO and adjoining    
                          stations. Oxygen analyst: Rechecked endpoint:   
                          No analytical problems noted and graph is good. 
                          No corresponding SiO3 feature. Nutrients are    
                          acceptable. Code oxygen questionable.           
188/1  135   bottle    2  Tripped when partially exposed at the surface,  
                          CFC said ~4" air in top of bottle. Oxygen, as   
                          well as salinity and nutrients, is acceptable.  
189/2  201   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. This salinity run did       
                          appear to be a little high, but no analytical   
                          reason. Within accuracy of measurement,         
                          salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
189/2  203   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. This salinity run did       
                          appear to be a little high, but no analytical   
                          reason. Within accuracy of measurement,         
                          salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
189/2  204   bottle    2  Bottle was leaking from the bottom end cap.     
                          Salt and nutrients were sampled right away when 
                          leak was noted by oxygen sampler. Inspected     
                          bottle caps. Biological debris found on lower   
                          cap o-ring and brown gooey stain on lower seal  
                          surface of bottle. Removed debris, cleaned      
                          bottle seal surfaces, replaced both end cap o-  
                          rings. Inspection of bottle interior found no   
                          traces of debris. Oxygen, as well as salinity   
                          and nutrients, is acceptable.                   
189/2  205   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. This salinity run did       
                          appear to be a little higher, but no analytical 
                          reason. Within accuracy of measurement,         
                          salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
189/2  207   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. This salinity run did       
                          appear to be a little higher, but no analytical 
                          reason. Within accuracy of measurement,         
                          salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
189/2  232   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, package creating "shed wakes"         
                          affecting the CTD, deeper higher salinity.      
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
189/2  233   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, package creating "shed wakes"         
                          affecting the CTD, deeper higher salinity.      
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
189/2  234   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, package creating "shed wakes"         
                          affecting the CTD, deeper higher salinity.      
                          Salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
190/1  105   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations. Full sampling   
                          from this bottle, CFC, PH, TALK, DIC and CDOM   
                          seems to occasionally give higher bottle        
                          salinity. Salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
190/1  107   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations. Salinity, as    
                          well as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.    


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
190/1  109   o2        3  Oxygen high, ~0.07, compared with CTDO and      
                          adjoining stations. Code oxygen questionable.   
                          Oxygen analyst: Rechecked endpoint: No          
                          analytical problems noted and graph is good.    
190/1  132   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
191/2  203   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  3 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional reading resolved   
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
191/2  204   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. 3 attempts for a good       
                          salinity reading. Additional readings resolved  
                          salinity difference. Salinity, as well as       
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
191/2  205   salt      4  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations.  4 attempts for a good      
                          salinity reading. Additional readings did not   
                          resolve salinity difference. This bottle        
                          occasionally exhibits higher salinity, it       
                          seemed it was with large sampling, which was    
                          not the case on this stations. Oxygen and       
                          nutrients are acceptable. Code salinity bad.    
191/2  233   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Agrees with down trace, structure in CTD and    
                          variations which appear to be caused by "shed   
                          wakes". Salinity, as well as oxygen and         
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
192/1  104   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations. Within accuracy 
                          of measurement, salinity, as well as oxygen and 
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
192/1  105   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations. Within accuracy 
                          of measurement, this bottle has been giving     
                          high values intermittently. Salinity, as well   
                          as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.         
192/1  114   bottle    2  Bottle is leaking. Salinity, oxygen and         
                          nutrients are acceptable.                       
192/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
192/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
194/1  101   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with  adjoining stations. Salinity, as   
                          well as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.    
194/1  102   bottle    2  Leaking from the bottom end cap. The lanyard    
                          was stuck between bottle and end cap (leak      
                          fixed on deck). Oxygen, as well as salinity and 
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
194/1  130   o2        2  Oxygen overtitrated and backtitrated. Oxygen    
                          value agrees with both CTDO and adjoining       
                          stations. Rechecked endpoint: Graph is good.    
                          Oxygen is acceptable.                           
194/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, agrees with down trace. Salinity, as  
                          well as oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.    
195/3  302   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD       
                          agrees with adjoining stations. Deep gradient,  
                          salinity, as well as oxygen and nutrients, is   
                          acceptable.                                     
195/3  303   salt      3  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and   
                          adjoining stations. No analytical problems      
                          noted. Oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.     
                          Code salinity questionable.                     


__________________________________________________________________________
Stn   Samp           Qual                                                      
/Cast  No.   Prop    Code Comment                                         
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
195/3  335   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Structure in CTD trace, salinity, as well as    
                          oxygen and nutrients, is acceptable.            
196/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
196/1  134   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
196/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
197/2  233   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
197/2  234   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
198/1  104   o2        3  Oxygen is higher than both CTDO and adjoining   
                          stations. Rechecked endpoint: No analytical     
                          problems noted and graph is good. No            
                          corresponding SiO3 feature. Nutrients are       
                          acceptable. Oxygen is questionable.             
198/1  118   o2        2  Oxygen was overtitrated and backtitrated.       
                          Oxygen value agrees with both CTDO and          
                          adjoining stations. Rechecked endpoint: Graph   
                          is good. Oxygen is acceptable.                  
198/1  133   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
198/1  135   salt      2  Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD.      
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
199/2  230   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
199/2  231   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
199/2  232   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.                       
199/2  234   salt      2  Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD.       
                          Gradient, salinity, as well as oxygen and       
                          nutrients, is acceptable.