WHP CRUISE SUMMARY INFORMATION

WOCE section designation
P19C

Expedition designation (EXPOCODE)
316N138_12

Chief Scientist(s) and their affiliation
Lynne Talley, SIO

Dates
1993.02.22 - 1993.04.13

Ship
KNORR

Ports of call
Punta Arenas, Chile to Panama City, Panama

Number of stations
221

Geographic boundaries of the stations
	9°46.55''N
92°45.59''W	70°51.15''W
	54°12.46''S

Floats and drifters deployed
21 floats and 6 drifters

Moorings deployed or recovered
none

Contributing Authors
(in order of appearance)
F.M Delahoyde
R.T. Williams
M.C. Johnson
R.M. Key
A. Mantyla
M. Rosenberg

WHP Ref. No.: P19C
Last updated: 3 May 1999

A.	Cruise narrative

A.1.	Highlights

A.1.a.	WOCE designation:	P19C
				(R/V Knorr 138-12)
A.1.b.	Expocode		316N138/12
A.1.c.	Chief Scientist		Lynne D. Talley (Scripps Institution of Oceanography)
A.1.d.	Ship			R/V Knorr, Captain C. Swanson
A.1.e.	Ports of Call		Punta Arenas, Chile - Panama City, Panama
A.1.f.	Cruise dates		22 Feb 1993 - 13 April 1993

A.2.	Cruise summary

A.2.a	Geographic Boundaries
	13.536
-92.751		-74.923
	-54.00

A.2.b	Stations Occupied

94 CTD/36-bottle rosette stations
94 CTD/33-bottle rosette/LADCP stations
13 Large volume sampling (Gerard barrel) stations
20 200-meter bio-optics stations (JGOFS)

A.2.c	Floats and drifters deployed

21 ALACE floats deployed (for Davis)
6 surface drifters deployed (for Niiler)

A.2.d	Moorings deployed or recovered

None

A.3.	Principal Investigators

Russ Davis	ALACE floats		SIO		redavis@ucsd.edu
Rana Fine	CFC			RSMAS/U. Miami	rfine@rsmas.miami.edu
Eric Firing	ADCP-LADCP		U.Hawaii	efiring@soest.hawaii.edu
Wilf Gardner	Transmissometer		TAMU		richardson@astra.tamu.edu
Louis Gordon	Nuts support to SIO-ODF	OSU		lgordon@oce.orst.edu
John Lupton	Helium-3		NOAA-PMEL	lupton%new@noaapmel.gov
William Jenkins	Helium-3 & tritium	WHOI		wjj@burford.whoi.edu
Charles Keeling	Carbon Dioxide		SIO		guenther%cdrgmv.span@sds.sdsc.edu
Robert Key	Large volume Carbon-14	Princeton	key@wiggler.princeton.edu
John Marra	Bio-optics		LDEO		marra@lamont.ldgo.columbia.edu
Peter Niiler	Surface drifters	SIO		pniiler@ucsd.edu
Greg Rau	Carbon 13		UC Santa Cruz	rau4@llnl.gov
Stuart Smith	Bathymetry		SIO		sms@gdcsun1.ucsd.edu
James Swift	CTD-hydrography support	SIO-ODF		jswift@ucsd.edu
Taro Takahashi	Carbon Dioxide		LDEO		taka@lamont.ldgo.columbia.edu
Lynne Talley	CTD-hydrography		SIO		ltalley@ucsd.edu
Mizuki Tsuchiya	CTD-hydrography		SIO		jreid@ucsd.edu
Ray Weiss	underway pCO and pN2O	SIO		rfweiss@ucsd.edu

LDEO:		Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Palisades, NY 10964
LLNL:		Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (Rau address is NASA-Ames, 
		MS239-4 Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000)
NOAA/PMEL:	National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Pacific Marine 
		Environmental Laboratory.
OSU:		College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State 
		University, Corvallis, OR 97331-5503
Princeton U.:	Princeton University, Geology Dept., Guyot Hall, Princeton, NJ 
		08544
SIO:		Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UCSD, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
SIO/MTG:	SIO Marine Technical Group, UCSD, La Jolla, CA 92093-0214 USA
SIO/ODF:	SIO Oceanographic Data Facility, UCSD, La Jolla, CA 92093-0214 USA
TAMU:		Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843
U.C. Santa Cruz:(Rau address is NASA-Ames, MS239-4 Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000)
U. Hawaii:	University of Hawaii, 1000 Pope Rd., Honolulu, HI 96822
U. Miami:	University of Miami/RSMAS, 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, FL 
		33143
WHOI:		Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 02543

A.4.	Scientific programme and methods

A.4.a	Narrative

A complete paper, including vertical sections, was published as Tsuchiya, M. and 
L. D. Talley, 1998. A Pacific hydrographic section at 88°W: water property 
distribution. J. Geophys. Res., 103, 12899-12918.

Preliminary results were reported in the International WOCE Newsletter (No. 19, 
June, 1995).

R/V Knorr departed Punta Arenas, Chile for its twelfth leg of cruise 138 on Feb. 
22, 1993.  This was the seventh WOCE hydrographic leg on the Knorr in the South 
Pacific since the beginning of 1992.  P19C was supported by the National Science 
Foundation's Ocean Sciences Division.  P19C was the fourth WOCE hydrographic leg 
on the Knorr with basic technical support from Scripps Institution of 
Oceanography's Oceanographic Data Facility.  Because of the extensive use of the 
ship for this sort of work prior to our leg, we were fortunate in having very 
few problems with equipment.  We were also fortunate with weather, encountering 
only two storms, which affected stations 257 and 274.

Stations were numbered consecutively from the beginning of the R/V Knorr 138-9 
work on P16S (Reid, chief scientist) starting south of Tahiti in October, 1992.  
The first station on P19C was numbered 234.  On 20 days a separate JGOFS bio-
optics station was made within several hours of noon.  These stations extended 
to 200 m.

The original cruise plan was for sampling along 54°S westward out to 88°W and 
then exclusively along 88°W until about 4°N, where the track jogged westward and 
then eastward into Central America.  Because of clearance questions and also 
because of rethinking based on the topography between the Galapagos and South 
America, it was decided to bend the section northeastward to 85°50'W north of 
20°S, thereby passing through the deeper part of the equatorial ocean east of 
the Galapagos.

A.4.b	Interlaboratory comparisons

No interlaboratory comparisons were made per se on P19C, but water sample 
results were compared with preliminary data acquired on P17E (Swift, chief 
scientist, R/V Knorr), P6 (Bryden, chief scientist, R/V Knorr), the two old 1968 
Scorpio sections at 43°S and 28°S, and final data from the 1989 Moana Wave 
cruise at 9°30'N.  Comparisons of P19C salinity, oxygen, silica, nitrate and 
phoshate with data from these cruises are shown in *Figs. 6-9.

WHP accuracies for deep water values for the Southeastern Pacific are: salinity 
- .002 if corrected for SSW batch; oxygen - 1% = .03-.04 ml/l; nitrate - 1% = 
.3-.4 µmol/l; phosphate - 1% = .02-.03 µmol/l; silicate - 1% = 1-2 µmol/l.

P19C and P17E comparison (*Fig. 6).  The P17E cruise, with chief scientist J. 
Swift of SIO, immediately preceded P19C on the same vessel.  Station 206 from 
Swift's cruise was in the same location as 256 from our cruise (54°S, 88°W).  
CTD and salinity/oxygen/nutrient analyses were carried out by SIO's 
Oceanographic Data Facility (but different analysts) on both cruises.  Standard 
sea water (SSW) batch P120 was used for salinity measurements on both legs, as 
on all Knorr WOCE legs carried out by SIO/ODF in 1992-1993.  There is no offset 
for any property.  These stations occurred within a month and a half of each 
other and used the same equipment and methods.  Comparisons refer to potential 
temperatures less than 1.2°C.

P17E stations:	204-208	ODF S,O2,nuts/ SSW P120
P19C stations:	254-258	ODF S,O2,nuts/ SSW P120

Salinity:	no offset between data sets; scatter of both data sets = .003.
Oxygen:		no offset between data sets; scatter of both data sets = .02 ml/l.
Nitrate:	no offset between data sets; scatter of P17E data set = .2 µmol/l; 
		scatter of P19C data set = .5 µmol/l; (one outlier station -255- 
		pushes it to 1.0).
Phosphate:	no offset between data sets; scatter of both data sets = .02-.04 
		µmol/l.
Silicate:	no offset between data set; scatter of P17E data set = 3 µmol/l; 
		scatter of P19C data set < 1 µmol/l.

P19C and P6 comparison (*Fig. 7).  Agreement between P19C and P6 results is not 
as good although both data sets are within WOCE accuracies within themselves; 
some differences between them are larger than WOCE accuracy requirements.  Basic 
hydrography (T,S,O2) on P6 was carried out by WHOI and nutrients by Oregon State 
University.  There is no offset in salinity, possibly due to improvement in 
accuracy of standard sea water. Salinity scatter on P19C was within the WOCE 
precision and half that of P6.  Oxygen on P19C was systematically 0.02 ml/l 
lower than on P6; this is within the WOCE accuracy.  Phosphate on both legs 
agrees well but is less scattered on P19C.  Nitrate and silicate are higher on 
P19C than on P6, with the offset being larger than the WOCE standard for 
accuracy.  The offset can be removed if the same software is used to process the 
two data sets; the procedures differ in treatment of the nonlinearity of 
dependence of concentration on absorbance.  We do not know if other factors 
might have created the offset, but find it encouraging that the P6 nitrate and 
silicate numbers could be precisely matched with the P19C data when linear 
response was assumed.  Comparisons refer to potential temperatures between 1.3 
and 2.5°C.

P6 stations:	33-37	WHOI S,O2 OSU nuts
P19C stations:	297-300	ODF S,O2,nuts/ SSW P120

Salinity:	no offset between data sets; scatter of P19C = .002; scatter of P6 = 
		.004.
Oxygen:		offset with P19C .02 lower; scatter of P19C = .01; scatter of P6 = 
		.01-.02 with 2 bad outliers.
Nitrate:	offset with P19C .3 µmol/l higher - this can be accounted for by the 
		linear/nonlinear calculations; (rerunning ODF/P19C nuts as linear 
		yields excellent agreement with OSU/P6); scatter of P19C = .2 
		µmol/l; scatter of P6 = .2 µmol/l plus 3 outliers.
Phosphate:	no offset between data sets; scatter of P19C = .05 µmol/l (one 
		outlier station, otherwise all agree within .02 µmol/l); scatter of 
		P6 = .07 µmol/l.
Silicate:	offset with P19C higher by 1.0 µmol/l; scatter of P19C = 1. µmol/l; 
		scatter of P6 = 1. µmol/l.

P19C and 10°N comparison (*Fig. 8). The zonal section at 10 N on R/V Moana Wave, 
with principal investigator John Toole, used technical support from WHOI for 
salinity, oxygen and CTD, and from Oregon State University for nutrients.  This 
cruise is considered "pre-WOCE" and of WOCE quality.  Nutrients and oxygen all 
agree quite well between the two cruises at the deepest points, but there are 
systematic offsets at slightly higher temperatures (see appendix and *figure).  
The scatter of the nutrient data sets is comparable.  The P19C salinity and 
oxygen data are less scattered than the Moana Wave data.

Moana Wave stations: 204-208	WHOI S,O2  OSU nuts
P19C stations:	401-405	ODF S,O2,nuts/ SSW P120

Salinity:	no offset; scatter of P19C = .001-.002; scatter of MW = .005.
Oxygen:		offset with P19C .05-.1 ml/l lower; scatter of P19C = .05 ml/l?; 
		scatter of MW = .1 ml/l?.
Nitrate:	offset with P19C .3 µmol/l higher; scatter of P19C = .3 µmol/l; 
		scatter of MW = .3 µmol/l.
Phosphate:	offset with P19C .03 µmol/l higher?; scatter of P19C = .03 µmol/l; 
		scatter of MW = .03 µmol/l.
Silicate:	offset with P19C 2 µmol/l higher; scatter of P19C = 4 µmol/l; 
		scatter of MW = 2 µmol/l.

P19C and Scorpio comparison (*Fig. 9).  The Scorpio data at 28°S and 43°S were 
collected in 1968.  Comparisons are included because these are the premier pre-
WOCE zonal sections across the South Pacific and a specific decision was made to 
not repeat them in WOCE.  Salinity and oxygen precisions are equivalent to WOCE 
precisions.  The difference in standard sea water between Scorpio (P46) and P19C 
(P120) is 0.002 psu and accounts for most of the difference at 28°S (Mantyla, 
personal communication).  The Scorpio data were collected prior to the advent of 
the autoanalyzer method for nutrients so no comparison of nutrient values is 
shown (silicate appears comparable to WOCE but nitrate and phosphate are much 
improved in WOCE).  All properties are offset and the P19 data are much tighter, 
especially in nutrients.  The broad scatter of all properties in both data sets 
and examination of both vertical sections suggests that 43°S is a rough boundary 
between northern and southern water types, so is not a great place for a 
comparison.  Comparisons are for theta of 0.4-1.6°C at 43°S and theta 1.2-2.4°C 
at 28°S.

Scorpio stations (43S): 65-68	SSW P46
P19C stations:	276-280	ODF S,O2,nuts/ SSW P120

Salinity:	offset with P19C .05-.1psu fresher; scatter of P19C = .05; scatter 
		of Scorpio = .07. LP
Oxygen:		offset with P19C .07-.1 ml/l lower; scatter of P19C = .04; scatter of 
		Scorpio = .1.
Nitrate:	offset with P19C lower probably by 1-1.5 µmol/l; difficult to tell 
		since Scorpio so imprecise; scatter of P19C = .2 µmol/l; 
		scatter of Scorpio = 1-2 µmol/l (very large).
Phosphate:	offset with P19C lower by .06 µmol/l; scatter of P19C = .02-.03 
		µmol/l; scatter of Scorpio = .06 µmol/l (very large).
Silicate:	offset with P19C lower by about 5 µmol/l; scatter of P19C = 2 
		µmol/l; scatter of Scorpio = about 10 µmol/l (very large).

Scorpio stations (28S): 100-102	SSW P46
P19C stations:	306-310	ODF S, O2, nuts/ SSW P120

Salinity:	offset with P19C .003 psu fresher; SSW P46 is .002 high, reducing 
		this offset to .001; scatter of P19C = .003; scatter of 
		Scorpio = .003.
Oxygen:		offset with P19C .1 ml/l lower; scatter of P19C = .04; scatter of 
		Scorpio = .07.
Nitrate:	offset with P19C 1-2 µmol/l higher; difficult to tell since Scorpio 
		so imprecise; scatter of P19C = .4 µmol/l; scatter of Scorpio = 4.0 
		µmol/l.
Phosphate:	offset with P19C .15-.2 µmol/l lower; difficult since Scorpio so 
		imprecise; scatter of P19C = .02 µmol/l; scatter of Scorpio = .15-.2 
		µmol/l.
Silicate:	offset with P19C 5 lower; scatter of P19C = 1-2 µmol/l; scatter of 
		Scorpio = 3-4 µmol/l.

Summary. Salinity accuracy appears to be within WOCE requirements on recent 
cruises.  There are offsets in oxygen which are larger than the precision 
required but within the accuracy limits, so indicating no fundamental problems.  
In nutrients however, there are still serious inter-group differences.  In the 
cruise report from P16C (R/V T. Washington, 1991), a similar cruise-cruise 
comparison was made with a plea to take seriously discrepancies in results 
obtained by different groups.  It appears that little has been done to correct 
the differences, and therefore it must be concluded that Pacific WHP nutrient 
and oxygen measurements as a whole will not fall within the required accuracies, 
which would have been achievable had there been action to eliminate the known 
differences in methods between the leading US technical groups.

A.5.	Major problems and goals not achieved

There were no problems resulting in major shortfalls in numbers, spacing, or 
coverage of the stations.  There were no major problems with any of the basic 
WOCE analyses.  Major problems arose with the CO2 analyses about two weeks 
before the end of the cruise, resulting in sparse sampling north of the equator.

A.5.a	Water sample analyses

A full listing of all data of questionable values, including problems with 
bottle tripping and leaking, is available from the chief scientist.

A full report on bottle data collection and analyses is given in section C 
below.

The prototype 36-place General Oceanics pylon and its backup operated very well 
throughout the cruise.  The primary unit was lent to us by John Bullister 
(NOAA/PMEL) and the backup unit was lent by General Oceanics.  Occasional bottle 
tripping problems were almost always correctly indicated to the CTD operator, 
who could then attempt to fire the bottle over and over again.  When this 
occurred, we usually tried a total of three times before giving up and moving to 
the next bottle.  Most of the few problems appeared to be with sticky pylon 
pins, and were corrected with cleaning and lubrication.  The backup pylon was 
used after the deck unit for the first pylon was damaged by when the CTD wire 
shorted to ground.  It was subject to more communications errors than the first 
pylon but nevertheless performed very well.

Many of the 10-liter bottles suffered from various leaks at the start of the 
cruise because the best bottles had been placed on the double-ring rosette with 
two pylons rather than on the rosette with the prototype GO 36-place pylon, 
since it was not expected that the latter could be used at the beginning of the 
cruise.  Its performance was thoroughly successful throughout the cruise, and 
the poorer bottles were gradually replaced with the better ones as time 
permitted.  Also because of the new rosette configuration, there was some 
experimentation with lanyard arrangements, resulting in satisfactory and 
efficient operation for most stations; station 241 had to be repeated because of 
lanyard hangups.

A sudden and violent storm which blew in the middle of station 257 resulted in a 
decision not to collect water samples from the upper 300 meters.  Gerard barrel 
tripping problems were also encountered during the second storm in the same 
region, station 274, where the 4 bottom bottles did not trip.

A.5.b	CTD

A full report on bottle data collection and analyses is given in section C 
below.  There were no major problems.  The full CTD package consisted of 
pressure, temperature, redundant temperature, oxygen, a transmissometer, and an 
altimeter.  The CTD wire had three conductors but one had shorted on an earlier 
leg, so only two were used.

Most of the few problems in conductivity resulted from biological fouling of the 
rosette/CTD during the cast (stas. 271, 344, 355, 383).  The transmissometer 
suffered the most from this fouling, with problems on many more stations.  
Conductivity offsets occurred during stations 330, 348, 379, but the 
conductivity came back to near the original calibration during or after the 
casts.

A.6.	Other incidents of note	None

A.7.	Cruise Participants

Lynne Talley	chief scientist		SIO	      ltalley@ucsd.edu
Mizuki Tsuchiya	Co-chief scientist	SIO	      jreid@ucsd.edu
Gerry McDonald	Large volume		Princeton U.  gerry@weasel.princeton.edu
Martha Denham	watch stander		SIO
James Wells	marine tech/WLdr/	SIO/ODF	      jwells@ucsd.edu
Gene Pillard	marine tech/WLdr/salts	SIO/MTG
Leonard Lopez	marine tech/watch/salts	SIO/ODF	      leo@odf.ucsd.edu
Barry Nisly	marine tech/oxygen	SIO/ODF	      bnisly@ucsd.edu
Loanna Addessi	marine tech/oxygen	SIO/ODF
Mary Johnson	CTD processing		SIO/ODF	      mjohnson@ucsd.edu
Scott Hiller	Electronics tech	SIO/ODF	      scott@odf.ucsd.edu
Doug Masten	Nutrients		SIO/ODF	      dmasten@ucsd.edu
Andrew Ross	Nutrients		OSU	      lgordon@oce.orst.edu
Kevin Sullivan	CFC			U.Miami	      ksullivan@rsmas.miami.edu
Craig Hutchings	CFC			U.Miami
Craig Huhta	ADCP/LADCP/watch	U.Hawaii
Pete Landry	helium/tritium		WHOI
Ron Greene	helium/tritium		NOAA/PMEL     greene%new@pmel.noaa.gov
Clarence Low	Carbon 13		LLNL	      clarence_low@qmgate.arc.nasa.gov
Carol Knudson	biooptics/CO2		LDEO	      knudson@lamont.ldgo.columbia.edu
Rebecca Esmay	CO2			LDEO	      esmay@lamont.ldgo.columbia.edu
Stephany Rubin	CO2			LDEO

For abbreviations and addresses, please see the Principal Investigator table.

B.	Underway Measurements

B.1.	Navigation and bathymetry.

GPS navigation was used throughout P19C.  Bathymetry was obtained by manual 
recording every five minutes from the Knorr's Precision Depth Recorder and 
merged with the GPS navigation into a single file by ODF.

B.2.	Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP) (To be supplied by Firing and  Hacker).

B.3.	Thermosalinograph and underway dissolved oxygen, fluorometer, etc.

The Knorr's "minotaur" system was used throughout the cruise to record surface 
temperature and conductivity.  These values have not been calibrated.

Underway dissolved gases - (text to be supplied by Weiss).

B.4.	XBT and XCTD.	None.

B.5.	Meteorological observations.

Weather data were logged at each station on the bridge and recorded in an ODF 
weather file.  Continuous measurements were made from the IMET system and logged 
in the Knorr's "minotaur" computer system.

B.6.	Atmospheric chemistry. (To be supplied by Weiss).

*Figure 1.	Cruise track for WOCE P19C (R/V Knorr 138-12), 22 Feb 1993 - 13 
		April 1993. Rosette/CTD stations (circles). Large volume plus 
		rosette/CTD station (crossed circles).

*Figure 2.	ALACE float (+) and surface drifter (circle) deployments on P19C.

*Figure 3.	Small volume (10 liter) water samples on P19C.

*Figure 4.	Large volume (Gerard) water samples on P19C.

*Figure 5.	(a) CTD station times (from launch to recovery, not including 
		additional deck time).  (b) Gerard station times, from heaving-to to 
		full-ahead, including one or two Gerard barrel casts and a CTD cast.

*Figure 6.	(a) Salinity, (b) phosphate, (c) oxygen, (d) silica, (e) nitrate vs. 
		potential temperature, from P17E stations 204-208 (x) and from P19C 
		stations 254-258 (solid).  Both data sets are preliminary.

*Figure 7.	(a) Salinity, (b) phosphate, (c) oxygen, (d) silica, (e) nitrate 
		from P6 stations 33-37 (x) and P19C stations 297-300 (solid), 
		centered at 32°30'S. Both data sets are preliminary.

*Figure 8.	(a) Salinity, (b) phosphate, (c) oxygen, (d) silica, (e) nitrate 
		from Moana Wave (10°N) stations 204-208 (x) and P19C stations 401-
		405 (solid), centered at 9°30'N.  Moana Wave data are final.

*Figure 9.	(a) Salinity and (b) oxygen from Scorpio (43°S) stations 65-68 (x) 
		and P19C 276-280 (solid). (c) Salinity and (d) oxygen from Scorpio 
		(28°S) 100-102 (x) and P19C 306-310 (solid).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
World Ocean Circulation Experiment (WOCE) P19C
Knorr 138 Leg 12
Expocode: 316N138/12
22 Feb 1993 - 13 April 1993
Punta Arenas, Chile to Balboa, Panama
CHIEF SCIENTIST
Dr. Lynne Talley
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
La Jolla, CA 92093-0230

DATA SUBMITTED BY:
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
11 January 1995

Oceanographic Data Facility
UC San Diego, Mail Code 0214
9500 Gilman Drive
La Jolla, CA 92093-0214

phone: (858) 534-1903
fax: (858) 534-7383
e-mail: kris@odf.ucsd.edu

C.	DESCRIPTION OF MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES AND CALIBRATIONS

ODF CTD/rosette casts were carried out with a 36 bottle rosette sampler of ODF 
manufacture using General Oceanics pylons.  An ODF-modified NBIS Mark 3 CTD, a 
Benthos altimeter, a SensorMedics oxygen sensor and a SeaTech transmissometer 
provided by Texas A&M University (TAMU) were mounted on the rosette frame.  The 2 
CTD temperature channels were compared after each cast to check for drifting or 
offsets; no problems were noted.  The CTD pressure (and temperature) was monitored 
once daily using a single DSRT; no problems were noted.  The DSRT pressures were 
an average -7 db. compared to the CTD values.  Seawater samples were collected in 
10-liter PVC ODF bottles mounted on the rosette frame.  The frame was a Bullister 
style 36-place rossette with a GO 36-place pylon.  A Benthos pinger was mounted 
separately on the rosette frame; its signal was displayed on the precision depth 
recorder (PDR) in the ship's laboratory.  The rosette/CTD was suspended from a 
three-conductor EM cable which provided power to the CTD and relayed the CTD 
signal to the laboratory.

Each CTD cast extended to within approximately 10 meters of the bottom unless the 
bottom returns from both the pinger and the altimeter were extremely poor.  The 
bottles were numbered 1 through 36.  When one of these 36 bottles needed servicing 
and repairs could not be accomplished by the next cast, the replacement bottle was 
given a new number.  Subsets of CTD data taken at the time of water sample 
collection were transmitted to the bottle data files immediately after each cast to 
provide pressure and temperature at the sampling depth, and to facilitate the 
examination and quality control of the bottle data as the laboratory analyses were 
completed.  The CTD data and documentation are submitted separately.

After each rosette cast was brought on board, water samples were drawn in the 
following order: Freon (CFC-11 and CFC-12), Helium-3, Oxygen, Total-CO2, Alkalinity, 
and AMS 14C.  Tritium, Nutrients (silicate, phosphate, nitrate and nitrite), and 
Salinity are drawn next and could be sampled in arbitrary order.  The identifiers 
of the sample containers and the numbers of the ODF or Niskin samplers from which 
the samples were drawn were recorded on the Sample Log sheet.  Normal ODF sampling 
practice is to open the drain valve before opening the air vent to see if water 
escapes, indicating the presence of a small air leak in the sampler.  This 
observation ("air leak"), and other comments ("lanyard caught in lid", "valve left 
open", etc.) which may indicate some doubt about the integrity of the water samples 
were also noted on the Sample Log sheets.  These comments are included in this 
documentation with investigative comments and results.

Tripping problems were experienced at the beginning of the leg until all the 
lanyards were fine-tuned.  The pylons and their deck units reliably indicated 
bottle tripping problems: the pylon could be repositioned and retried for NO-
confirms, and all but one NO-confirmed bottles came up open, as expected.  The 
only other open bottles were a result of lanyard hangups.

Large Volume Sampling (LVS) was also performed on this expedition.  These commonly 
referred to as Gerard casts were carried out with ~270 liter stainless steel Gerard 
barrels on which were mounted 2-liter Niskin bottles with reversing thermometers.  
Samples for salinity, silicate and 14C were obtained from the Gerard barrels; 
samples for salinity and silicate were drawn from the piggyback Niskin bottles.  
The salinity and silicate samples from the piggyback bottle were used for 
comparison with the Gerard barrel salinities and silicates to verify the 
integrity of the Gerard sample.

The discrete hydrographic data were entered into the shipboard data system and 
processed as the analyses were completed.  The bottle data were brought to a usable, 
though not final, state at sea.  ODF data checking procedures included verification 
that the sample was assigned to the correct depth.  This was accomplished by checking 
the raw data sheets, which included the raw data value and the water sample bottle, 
versus the sample log sheets.  The oxygen and nutrient data were compared by ODF with 
those from adjacent stations.  Any comments regarding the water samples were 
investigated.  The raw data computer files were also checked for entry errors that 
could have been made on the station number, bottle number and/or flask number (as 
would be the case for oxygens).  The salinity and oxygen values were transmitted from 
PC's attached to either the salinometer or oxygen titration system.  Nutrients were 
manually entered into the computer; therefore these values were double checked for 
data entry errors.

Investigation of data included comparison of bottle salinity and oxygen with CTD 
data, and review of data plots of the station profile alone and compared to nearby 
stations.  In addition, Dr. Mizuki Tsuchiya reviewed the bottle data at sea.  He then 
communicated his concerns to the head ODF chemist on board and appropriate revisions 
were applied to the data set.  If a data value did not either agree satisfactorily 
with the CTD or with other nearby data, then analysis and sampling notes, plots, and 
nearby data were reviewed.  If any problem was indicated, the data value was flagged.  
Section E, the Quality Comments, includes comments regarding missing samples and 
investigative remarks for comments made on the Sample Log sheets, as well as all 
flagged (WOCE coded) data values other than 2, an acceptable measurement.

The WOCE codes were assigned to the water data using the criteria:

code 1 =  Sample for this measurement was drawn from water bottle, but results of 
	  analysis not received.
code 2 =  Acceptable measurement.
code 3 =  Questionable measurement. Does not fit station profile or adjoining station 
	  comparisons. No notes from analyst indicating a problem. Datum could be real, but 
	  the decision as to whether it is acceptable will be made by a scientist rather than 
	  ODF's technicians.
code 4 =  Bad measurement. Does not fit station profile and/or adjoining station comparisons. 
	  There are analytical notes indicating a problem, but data values are reported. ODF 
	  recommends deletion of these data values. Analytical notes for salinity and/or 
	  oxygen may include large differences between the water sample and CTD profiles. 
	  Sampling errors are also coded 4.
code 9 =  Sample for this measurement not drawn.
code P =  This code is only used on the LVS pressure. If the Gerard and/or piggyback bottle 
	  pre or post-tripped, and a determination was made as to at what pressure the 
	  bottles actually tripped within ~50m a P will be assigned to the pressure.

Quality flags assigned to parameter BTLNBR (bottle number) as defined in the WOCE 
Operations manual are further clarified as follows:

code 4 =  If the bottle tripped at a different level than planned, ODF assigned 
	  it a code 4. If there is a 4 code on the bottle, and 2 codes on the salinity, 
	  oxygen and nutrients then the pressure assignment was probably correct.
code 3 =  An air leak large enough to produce an observable effect on a sample is 
	  identified by a 3 code on the bottle and 4 code on the oxygen. (Small air leaks may 
	  have no observable effect, or may only affect gas samples).

The following table shows the number of ODF samples drawn and the number of times 
each WOCE sample code was assigned.

Rosette Samples
Stations 234-422
		Reported	Bottle   Codes			Water	Sample	Codes	
	
		levels	   2	 3	4	 9	1	2	3	4	5	9
		6344	6250	31	2	61						
Salinity	6258					14	6196	 7	41	0	 86
Oxygen		6259					 4	6219	 1	35	0	 
85
Silicate	6138					15	6094	 4	25	0	206
Nitrate		6138					15	6028	71	24	0	206
Nitrite		6138					15	6099	 0	24	0	206
Phosphate	6138					15	6080	19	24	0	206

Large Volume Samples
Stations 241, 264, 274, 284, 299, 317, 326, 338, 353, 361, 379, 395, 413
		Reported	Bottle   Codes			Water	Sample	Codes	
		levels	  2	3	4	9	1	2	3	4	5	9	P
		456	441	6	8	1							
Salinity	455					0	443	2	10	0	1	
Silicate	455					0	446	1	 8	0	1	
Temperature	452					0	454	0	 0	0	2	
Pressure	456					0	448	2	 0	0	0	6

C.1.	Pressure and Temperature

All pressures and temperatures for the bottle data tabulations on the rosette casts 
were obtained by averaging CTD data for a brief interval at the time the bottle was 
closed on the rosette.

LVS pressures and temperatures were calculated from deep-sea reversing thermometer 
(DSRT) readings.  Each DSRT rack normally held 2 protected (temperature) 
thermometers and 1 unprotected (pressure) thermometer.  Thermometers were read by 
two people, each attempting to read a precision equal to one tenth of the 
thermometer etching interval.  Thus, a thermometer etched at 0.05 degree intervals 
would be read to the nearest 0.005 degrees.

All reported CTD data are calibrated and processed with the methodology described 
in the documentation accompanying the CTD data submission.

Each temperature value reported on the LVS casts is calculated from the average of 
four readings provided both protected thermometers function normally.  The pressure 
is verified by comparison with the calculation of pressure determined by wireout.  
The pressure from the thermometer is fitted by a polynomial equation which 
incorporates the wireout and wire angle.

Documentation of CTD calibration is included with the CTD data.  Calibration of the 
thermometers are performed in ODF's calibration facility depending on the age of 
the thermometer and not more than two years of the expedition.

The temperatures are based on the International Temperature Scale of 1990.

C.2.	Salinity

A single ODF-modified Guildline Autosal Model 8400A salinometer (Serial Number 57-
396), located in a temperature-controlled laboratory, was used to measure 
salinities.  Analyses and data acquisition were controlled by a small computer 
through an interface board designed by ODF.  The salinometer cell was flushed until 
successive readings met software criteria, then two successive measurements were 
made and averaged for a final result.

Salinity samples were analyzed for the rosette casts and the Large Volume casts 
from both the piggyback bottle and the Gerard barrel.  Salinity samples were drawn 
into 200 ml Kimax high alumina borosilicate bottles, after 3 rinses, and were 
sealed with custom-made plastic insert thimbles and Nalgene screw caps.  This 
assembly provides very low container dissolution and sample evaporation.  If loose 
inserts were found, they were replaced to ensure an airtight seal.  Salinity was 
determined after sample equilibration to laboratory temperature, usually within 8-
36 hours of collection.  Salinity was calculated according to the equations of the 
Practical Salinity Scale of 1978 (UNESCO, 1981).

Salinity samples were compared with CTD data and significant differences were 
investigated.  The salinometer was standardized for each cast with IAPSO Standard 
Seawater (SSW) Batch P-120, using at least one fresh vial per cast.

There were some problems with lab temperature control throughout cruise; the 
Autosal bath temperature was adjusted accordingly. Salinities were generally 
considered good for the expedition despite the lab temperature problem.

The estimated accuracy of bottle salinities run at sea is usually better than 0.002 
psu relative to the particular Standard Seawater batch used.  Although laboratory 
precision of the Autosal can be as small as 0.0002 psu when running replicate 
samples under ideal conditions, at sea the expected precision is about 0.001 psu 
under normal conditions, with a stable lab temperature.

C.3.	Oxygen

Dissolved oxygen analyses were performed with an SIO-designed automated oxygen 
titrator using photometric end-point detection based on the absorption of 365 nm 
wav elength ultra-violet light.  Thiosulfate was dispensed by a Dosimat 665 buret 
driver fitted with a 1.0 ml buret.  ODF uses a whole-bottle Winkler titration 
following the technique of Carpenter (1965) with modifications by Culberson et al. 
(1991), but with higher concentrations of potassium iodate standard (approximately 
0.012N) and thiosulfate solution (50 gm/l).  Standard solutions prepared from pre-
weighed potassium iodate crystals were run at the beginning of each session of 
analyses, which typically included from 1 to 3 stations.  Several standards were 
made up during the cruise and compared to assure that the results were 
reproducible, and to preclude the possibility of a weighing error.  Reagent/
distilled water blanks were determined to account for oxidizing or reducing 
materials in the reagents.  The auto-titrator generally performed very well.

Samples were collected for dissolved oxygen analyses soon after the rosette sampler 
was brought on board and after CFC and helium were drawn.  Nominal 125 ml volume-
calibrated iodine flasks were rinsed twice with minimal agitation, then filled via 
a drawing tube, and allowed to overflow for at least 3 flask volumes.  The sample 
temperature was measured with a small platinum resistance thermometer embedded in 
the drawing tube.  Reagents were added to fix the oxygen before stoppering.  The 
flasks were shaken twice; immediately after drawing, and then again after 20 
minutes, to assure thorough dispersion of the MnO(OH)2 precipitate.  The samples 
were analyzed within 4-36 hours of collection.

Draw temperatures were very useful in detecting possible bad trips even as samples 
were being drawn.  The data were logged by the PC control software and then 
transferred to the Sun (the main computer) and calculated.

Blanks, and thiosulfate normalities corrected to 20°C, calculated from each 
standardization, were plotted versus time, and were reviewed for possible problems.  
New thiosulfate normalities were recalculated after the blanks had been smoothed.  
These normalities were then smoothed, and the oxygen data was recalculated.

Oxygens were converted from milliliters per liter to micromoles per kilogram using 
the in-situ temperature.  Ideally, for whole-bottle titrations, the conversion 
temperature should be the temperature of the water issuing from the Niskin bottle 
spigot.  The sample temperatures were measured at the time the samples were drawn 
from the bottle, but were not used in the conversion from milliliters per liter to 
micromoles per kilogram because the software is not available.  Aberrant 
temperatures provided an additional flag indicating that a bottle may not have 
tripped properly.  Measured sample temperatures from mid-deep water samples were 
about 4-7°C warmer than in-situ temperature.  Had the conversion with the measured 
sample temperature been made, converted oxygen values, would be about 0.08% higher 
for a 6°C warming (or about 0.2 µmol/kg for a 250 µmol/kg sample).

Oxygen flasks were calibrated gravimetrically with degassed deionized water (DIW) 
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 bottle 
volume is detected.  All volumetric glassware used in preparing standards is 
calibrated as well as the 10ml Dosimat buret used to dispense standard Iodate 
solution.

Iodate standards are pre-weighed in ODF's chemistry laboratory to a nominal weight 
of 0.44xx grams and exact normality calculated at sea.

Potassium Iodate (KIO3) is obtained from Johnson Matthey Chemical Co. and is 
reported by the suppliers to be > 99.4% pure.  All other reagents are "reagent 
grade" and are tested for high levels of oxidizing and reducing impurities prior to 
use.

C.4.	Nutrients

Nutrient analyses (phosphate, silicate, nitrate and nitrite) were performed on an 
ODF-modified AutoAnalyzer II, generally within a few hours of the cast, although 
some samples may have been refrigerated at 2 to 6°C for a maximum of 12 hours.  The 
procedures used are described in Gordon et al. (1992).

Silicate is analyzed using the basic method of Armstrong et al. (1967).  Ammonium 
molybdate is added to a seawater sample to produce silicomolybdic acid which is then 
reduced to silicomolybdous acid (a blue compound) following the addition of stannous 
chloride.  The sample is passed through a 15mm flowcell and measured at 820nm.  This 
response is known to be non-linear at high silicate concentrations; this non-
linearity is included in ODF's software.

A modification of the Armstrong et al. (1967) procedure is used for the analysis of 
nitrate and nitrite.  For nitrate analysis, a seawater sample is passed through a 
cadmium column where the nitrate is reduced to nitrite.  This nitrite is then 
diazotized with sulfanilamide and coupled with N-(1-naphthyl)-ethylenediamine to 
form an azo dye.  The sample is then passed through a 15mm flowcell and measured at 
540nm.  A 50mm flowcell is required for nitrite (NO2).  The procedure is the same 
for the nitrite analysis less the cadmium column.

Phosphate is analyzed using a modification of the Bernhardt and Wilhelms (1967) 
method.  Ammonium molybdate is added to a seawater sample to produce 
phosphomolybdic acid, which is then reduced to phosphomolybdous acid (a blue 
compound) following the addition of dihydrazine sulfate.  The sample is passed 
through a 50mm flowcell and measured at 820nm.

Besides running rosette cast samples, LVS cast samples for both Gerard barrels and 
piggyback Niskins were analyzed for silicate as an added check (with salinity) on 
barrel sample integrity.

Nutrient samples were drawn into 45 ml high density polypropylene, narrow mouth, 
screw-capped centrifuge tubes which were rinsed three times before filling.  
Standardizations were performed at the beginning and end of each group of analyses 
(one cast, usually 36 samples) with a set of an intermediate concentration standard 
prepared for each run from secondary standards.  These secondary standards were in 
turn prepared aboard ship by dilution from dry, pre-weighed standards.  Sets of 4-6 
different concentrations of shipboard standards were analyzed periodically to 
determine the deviation from linearity as a function of concentration for each 
nutrient.

All peaks were logged manually, and all the runs were re-read to check for possible 
reading errors.

Temperature regulation problems in the analytical lab did not appear to 
significantly affect the results, which were generally very good. ODF first 
attempted to control the temperature in the lab during the previous leg by rigging 
up a ceramic heater and fan, under the control of a thermistor and in conjunction 
with the ship's cooling.  This worked well on this leg, providing about plus or 
minus 0.5°C stability, except when outside temperatures were too warm in the 
tropics, or when it became too cold and the ship's heating system was erratically 
controlled.

Nutrients, reported in micromoles per kilogram, were converted from micromoles 
per liter by dividing by sample density calculated at zero pressure, in-situ 
salinity, and an assumed laboratory temperature of 25°C.

Silicate standard is obtained from Fischer Scientific and is reported by the 
supplier to be >98% pure.  Nitrate, nitrite and phosphate standards are obtained 
from Johnson Matthey Chemical Co. and the supplier reports a purity of 99.999%, 
97%, and 99.999%, respectively.

D.	REFERENCES AND UNCITED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Armstrong, F. A. J., C. R. Stearns, and J. D. H. Strickland, 1967. The measurement 
   of upwelling and subsequent biological processes by means of the Technicon 
   Autoanalyzer and associated equipment, Deep-Sea Research, 14, 381-389.
Atlas, E. L., S. W. Hager, L. I. Gordon and P. K. Park, 1971. A Practical Manual 
   for Use of the Technicon(r) AutoAnalyzer(r) in Seawater Nutrient Analyses; Revised. 
   Technical Report 215, Reference 71-22. Oregon State University, Department of 
   Oceanography. 49 pp.
Bernhardt, H. and A. Wilhelms, 1967. The continuous determination of low lev el 
   iron, soluble phosphate and total phosphate with the AutoAnalyzer, Technicon 
   Symposia, Volume I, 385-389.
Brewer, P. G. and G. T. F. Wong, 1974. The determination and distribution of iodate 
   in South Atlantic waters. Journal of Marine Research, 32,1:25-36.
Bryden, H. L., 1973. New Polynomials for Thermal Expansion, Adiabatic Temperature 
   Gradient, Deep-Sea Research, 20, 401-408.
Carpenter, J. H., 1965. The Chesapeake Bay Institute technique for the Winkler 
   dissolved oxygen method, Limnology and Oceanography, 10, 141-143.
Carter, D. J. T., 1980 (Third Edition). Echo-Sounding Correction Tables, 
   Hydrographic Department, Ministry of Defence, Taunton Somerset.
Chen, C.-T. and F. J. Millero, 1977. Speed of sound in seawater at high pressures. 
   Journal Acoustical Society of America, 62, No. 5, 1129-1135.
Culberson, C. H., Williams, R. T., et al, August, 1991. A comparison of methods for 
   the determination of dissolved oxygen in seawater, WHP Office Report WHPO 91-2.
Fofonoff, N. P., 1977. Computation of Potential Temperature of Seawater for an 
   Arbitrary Reference Pressure. Deep-Sea Research, 24, 489-491.
Fofonoff, N. P. and R. C. Millard, 1983. Algorithms for Computation of 
Fundamental 
   Properties of Seawater. UNESCO Report No. 44, 15-24.
Gordon, L. I., Jennings, Joe C. Jr, Ross, Andrew A., Krest, James M., 1992. A 
   suggested Protocol for Continuous Flow Automated Analysis of Seawater 
Nutrients in 
   the WOCE Hydrographic Program and the Joint Global Ocean Fluxes Study. OSU College 
   of Oceanography Descr. Chem Oc. Grp. Tech Rpt 92-1.
Hager, S. W., E. L. Atlas, L. D. Gordon, A. W. Mantyla, and P. K. Park, 1972. A 
   comparison at sea of manual and autoanalyzer analyses of phosphate, nitrate, and 
   silicate. Limnology and Oceanography, 17, 931-937.
Lewis, E. L., 1980. The Practical Salinity Scale 1978 and Its Antecedents. IEEE 
   Journal of Oceanographic Engineering, OE-5, 3-8.
Mantyla, A. W., 1982-1983. Private correspondence.
Millero, F. J., C.-T. Chen, A. Bradshaw and K. Schleicher, 1980. A New High 
   Pressure Equation of State for Seawater. Deep-Sea Research, 27A, 255-264.
Saunders, P. M., 1981. Practical Conversion of Pressure to Depth. Journal of 
   Physical Oceanography, 11, 573-574.
Sverdrup, H. U., M. W. Johnson, and R. H. Fleming, 1942. The Oceans, Their Physics, 
   Chemistry and General Biology, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliff, N.J.
UNESCO, 1981. Background papers and supporting data on the Practical Salinity 
   Scale, 1978. UNESCO Technical Papers in Marine Science, No. 37, 144 p.

E.	Quality Comments

Remarks for deleted samples, missing samples, and WOCE codes other than 2 from WOCE 
P19C.  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 rereading of charts (i.e., nutrients).  Comments from the Sample Logs 
and the results of ODF's investigations are included in this report.

Station 234
176 @ 2db	Sample log: "leaking from top cap." Delta-S is -1.002, oxygen ~.1 high, 
		no3 and po4 low, no2 high. Not sure where the water is from. Salinity 
		too low to have come from deeper in water water column. Footnote bottle 
		leaking, samples bad.
175 @ 27db	Sample log: "leaking from cap." Data appears to be okay.
171 @ 44db	Only oxygen drawn.
172 @ 46db	Only oxygen drawn.
173 @ 46db	Only oxygen drawn.
174 @ 48db	Sample log: "leaking slightly from bottom." Oxygen values same as 
		duplicate bottles. Only oxygen drawn.
152 @ 53db	Sample log: "open." No samples drawn.
153 @ 54db	Only oxygen drawn.
154 @ 54db	Sample log: "leaking." Oxygen about .01 ml/l high. Only oxygen drawn. 
		Footnote bottle leaking, oxygen bad.
155 @ 56db	Sample log: "open." No samples drawn.
156 @ 57db	Only oxygen drawn.
157 @ 59db	Only oxygen drawn.
158 @ 61db	Only oxygen drawn.
159 @ 63db	Sample log: "slight leak from top." Oxygen agrees with bottles from 
		same depth. Only oxygen drawn.
160 @ 65db	Only oxygen drawn.
161 @ 66db	Only oxygen drawn.
162 @ 67db	Only oxygen drawn.
163 @ 68db	Only oxygen drawn.
164 @ 69db	Only oxygen drawn.
165 @ 70db	Only oxygen drawn.
132 @ 71db	Only oxygen drawn.
166 @ 71db	Sample log: "open." No samples drawn.
133 @ 72db	Only oxygen drawn.
134 @ 72db	Only oxygen drawn.
136 @ 72db	Only oxygen drawn.
167 @ 72db	Sample log: "slightly leaky from top, very warm draw temp." PI: "leaky 
		btl/high oxy/high draw temp; dup.btls/same depth ok salt looks ok despike
		oxy/leaky bottle, no nuts drawn." Only oxygen drawn, suspect PI was 
		commenting on CTD salinity. ODF recommends deletion of water samples.
		Footnote bottle leaking, oxygen bad.
135 @ 73db	Only oxygen drawn.
168 @ 73db	Only oxygen drawn.
169 @ 73db	Sample log: "leaking from bottom." Oxygen .01 lower than 4 duplicate 
		trips. ODF recommends deletion of oxygen value. Only oxygen drawn.
131 @ 100db	Sample log: "leaking from stem." Data appears to be okay.

Station 235
152 @ 3db	Sample log: "open." No samples drawn.
131 @ 29db	Sample log indicates salinity and nutrients were drawn; they were not 
		analyzed. Footnote salinity and nutrients lost.
176 @ 53db	Sample log: "leaking from bottom." No samples drawn.
174 @ 78db	Sample log indicates salinity and nutrients were drawn; they were not 
		analyzed. Footnote salinity and nutrients lost.
172 @ 103db	Sample log indicates salinity and nutrients were drawn; they were not 
		analyzed. Footnote salinity and nutrients lost.
170 @ 128db	Sample log indicates salinity and nutrients were drawn; they were not 
		analyzed. Footnote salinity and nutrients lost.
128 @ 152db	Sample log indicates nutrients were drawn; they were not analyzed. 
		Footnote nutrients lost.
168 @ 177db	Sample log indicates salinity and nutrients were drawn; they were not 
		analyzed. Footnote salinity and nutrients lost.
167 @ 203db	Sample log: "dry." No samples drawn.
166 @ 233db	Sample log indicates salinity and nutrients were drawn; they were not 
		analyzed. Footnote salinity and nutrients lost.
159 @ 261db	Sample log: "open." No samples drawn.
161 @ 262db	Sample log indicates nutrients were drawn; they were not analyzed. 
		Footnote nutrients lost.
162 @ 262db	Sample log indicates nutrients were drawn; they were not analyzed. 
		Footnote nutrients lost.
163 @ 262db	Sample log indicates nutrients were drawn; they were not analyzed. 
		Footnote nutrients lost.
164 @ 263db	Sample log indicates salinity and nutrients were drawn; they were not 
		analyzed. Footnote salinity and nutrients lost.
165 @ 263db	Sample log indicates salinity and nutrients were drawn; they were not 
		analyzed. Footnote salinity and nutrients lost.
158 @ 301db	Sample log indicates nutrients were drawn; they were not analyzed. 
		Footnote nutrients lost.
156 @ 351db	Sample log: "open." No samples drawn.
155 @ 401db	Sample log: "leaking from bottom." Data appears to be okay.

Station 236
152 @ 2db	Sample log: "open - lanyard problem." No samples drawn.
131 @ 28db	Sample log: "leak." Data appears to be okay.
174 @ 128db	Sample log: "bad O2 T?." chk sil max = ok: salt/nuts also max here, 
		same structure adjoining stations. Delta-S at 128db is 0.0712, 
		salinity is 34.088.
172 @ 180db	Sample log: "leaker." oxy looks high, no corresp. nuts signal; ctd 
		oxy=same structure
170 @ 253db	Sample log: "leaker." Oxygen not drawn, sample log indicates salinity 
		was drawn. Footnote salinity lost, no analysis was performed. Nutrients 
		plot vs. adjoining stations appears reasonable indicating that leak noted 
		on sample log did not effect water samples, no gas samples were drawn.
168 @ 405db	Oxygen not drawn per sampling schedule.
135 @ 406db	See 167 oxygen comment. This also appears high, suspect same problem as 
		167. Footnote oxygen bad.
134 @ 455db	Oxygen not drawn per sampling schedule. Footnote salinity lost. No 
		reason noted why samples weren't run.
132 @ 557db	Oxygen not drawn per sampling schedule. Footnote salinity lost. No 
		reason noted why samples weren't run.
162 @ 656db	Oxygen not drawn per sampling schedule. Footnote salinity lost. No 
		reason noted why samples weren't run.
164 @ 606db	Oxygen not drawn per sampling schedule. Footnote salinity lost. No 
		reason noted why samples weren't run.
167 @ 455db	Sample log: "O2 sodium hydroxide possible problem." Footnote oxygen bad.
166 @ 506db	Oxygen not drawn per sampling schedule.
160 @ 706db	nuts/salt from 1-2 lvls deeper - pretrip?; no oxy drawn Footnote samples
		bad, bottle leaking. ODF recommends deletion of all water samples.
156 @1006db	Sample log: "open - lanyard problem." No samples drawn.

Station 237
151 @ 2db	Sample log: "slight leak at valve." Data appears to be okay.
131 @ 29db	Sample log: "leak from valve." Data appears to be okay.
130 @ 103db	Oxygen not drawn per sampling schedule.
170 @ 205db	Sample log: "small leak." Data appears to be okay.
168 @ 406db	Sample log: "leaks around valve." Data appears to be okay.
134 @ 456db	Sample log: "loose spring tension." Oxygen not drawn per sampling 
		schedule.
132 @ 606db	Oxygen not drawn per sampling schedule.
164 @ 607db	Oxygen not drawn per sampling schedule.
165 @ 607db	Oxygen not drawn per sampling schedule.
166 @ 607db	Oxygen not drawn per sampling schedule.
162 @ 707db	Oxygen not drawn per sampling schedule.

Station 238
152 @ 3db	Sample log: "leaking around bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.
131 @ 38db	Sample log: "leaking around spigot." Data appears to be okay.
176 @ 63db	Sample log: "leaking." Data appears to be okay.
134 @ 380db	Sample log: "leaking." Data appears to be okay.
164 @ 978db	Sample log: "leaking from drain cock." Data appears to be okay.
155 @1782db	Sample log: "slight leak." Data appears to be okay.

Station 239
131 @ 30db	Sample log: "small leak from spigot." Data appears to be okay.
176 @ 81db	Sample log: "leak, bad top end cap." Data appears to be okay.
170 @ 207db	Sample log: "bad leak, bad top end cap." Data appears to be okay.
163 @1213db	Sample log: "bottom spigot open." Data appears to be okay.
160 @1822db	Sample log: "leak from top end cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 240
102 @ 81db	Sample log: "top didn't set - minor leak." Oxygen appears slightly 
		high, other samples acceptable. Suspect leak affected gas samples. 
		Footnote bottle leaking, oxygen bad.
176 @ 106db	Sample log: "leaker." Data appears to be okay.

Station 241
231 @ 56db	Sample log: "small leak in valve." Data appears to be OK.
274 @ 156db	Sample log: "bottom leak." Data appears to be OK.
451 @ 205db	Sample log: "leaking around bottom end cap." looks like pretrip 
		compared to c.2, but in-line on c.4
234 @ 703db	Sample log: "leak from bottom end cap." Samples agree with previous 
		station.
215 @1003db	Sample log: "open - lanyard too short." No samples drawn.
213 @1408db	Sample log: "open - lanyard too short." No samples drawn.
473 @1412db	Sample log: "leaking from drain cock." Data appears to be OK.
211 @1813db	Sample log: "oxy draw temp high - leaker." oxy too high; other bottle 
		values look ok. Footnote bottle leaking, oxygen bad. ODF recommends 
		deletion of gas samples. Salinity and nutrients were not drawn.
209 @2322db	Sample log: "open - lanyard too short." No samples drawn.
207 @2833db	Sample log: "open - lanyard too short." No samples drawn.
434 @3032db	Sample log: "leaking around bottom end cap." Data appears to be okay.
206 @3087db	Sample log: "open - lanyard too short." No samples drawn.
205 @3342db	Sample log: "open - lanyard too short." No samples drawn.
204 @3546db	Sample log: "spigot ring fell off." Data appears to be OK. sil looks 
		low, no analysis comments; matches sta 243
413 @3644db	Sample log: "open, no water." No samples drawn.
203 @3799db	Sample log: "Open, new setup for bottle positions and lanyard were 
		too short, no water." No samples drawn.
410 @3847db	Sample log: "slow leak from drain cock." Data appears to be OK.
411 @3847db	Sample log: "open, no water." No samples drawn.
407 @4049db	Sample log: "open, no water." No samples drawn.
403 @4164db	Sample log: "open, no water." No samples drawn.
276 @4167db	Sample log: "Open, new setup for bottle positions and lanyard were 
		too short, no water." No samples drawn.

Station 242
152 @ 3db	Sample log: "bad leak." Comment of a leak does not appear to have 
		affected the samples. NO3 and PO4 agree with previous stations.
131 @ 57db	Sample log: "bad leak from bottom." Data appears to be OK.
132 @ 82db	Delta-S at 82db is 0.0503, salinity is 33.896. CTD salinity trace 
		has unrealistic spike. Footnote CTD salinity bad.
172 @ 207db	Sample log: "slow leak from bottom." Data appears to be OK.
134 @ 710db	Sample log: "slow leak." Data appears to be OK.
114 @1214db	Sample log: "slow leak (bottom end cap?)." Data appears to be OK.
103 @3552db	Sample log: "top end cap open." all properties from shallower water - 
		reject Footnote bottle leaking, samples bad. ODF recommends deletion 
		of all water samples.
176 @4015db	Sample log: "leaking from top end cap." Data appears to be OK.

Station 243
151 @ 1db	Sample log: "leak at the bottom valve." Data appears to be okay.
131 @ 30db	Sample log: "leak at the bottom valve." Data appears to be okay.
174 @ 130db	Sample log: "leaker bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.
172 @ 181db	Sample log: "leaker bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.
167 @ 704db	Sample log: "leaker bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 244
136 @ 2db	Delta-S at 2db is 0.0334, salinity is 33.956. Bottle salinity agrees 
		with adjoining stations, CTD salinity (up trace) has a spike in the 
		data; footnote CTD salinity bad.
151 @ 31db	Sample log: "slow leak at the valve." Data appears to be okay.
131 @ 56db	Sample log: "slow leak at the valve." Data appears to be okay. 
		Delta-S at 56db is 0.062, salinity is 34.014. Bottle salinity agrees 
		with adjoining stations, CTD salinity (up trace) has a spike in the 
		data; footnote CTD salinity bad.
117 @ 805db	Sample log: "possible leak at the top?." Data appears to be okay.
114 @1210db	Sample log: "O2 T seems high." Data appears to be okay.
111 @1817db	Sample log: "slow leak at the valve." Data appears to be okay.

Station 245
136 @ 3db	Surface nuts/salt max looks strange; oxy draw temp low probable pre-
		trip at 60m. Footnote bottle leaking, samples bad. ODF recommends 
		deletion of all water samples.
134 @ 57db	Sample log: "leaking badly." Data appears to be okay.
131 @ 131db	Sample log: "spigot loose." Data appears to be okay.
117 @1208db	Sample log: "leaking (top end cap?), loose spigot." Data appears to 
		be okay. oxy: check endpoint

Station 246
133 @ 83db	Sample log: "vent open." Data appears to be okay.
131 @ 133db	Sample log: "slight leak." Data appears to be okay.
128 @ 710db	Sample log: "vent not tightly closed." Data appears to be okay.
117 @1109db	Sample log: "leaker." Data appears to be okay.

Station 247
136 @ 2db	Sample log: "surface btl may have trapped air when triggering." surface 
		oxy min/nuts max doubtful; low oxy draw temp=pretrip Footnote bottle 
		leaking, all samples bad. ODF recommends deletion of all water samples.
131 @ 108db	Sample log: "valve leak." Data appears to be okay.
122 @ 611db	Sample log: "open." No samples drawn.
116 @1417db	Sample log: "open." No samples drawn.
111 @2434db	Sample log: "slow valve leak." Data appears to be okay.

Station 248
134 @ 78db	Sample log: " major leak - bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.
131 @ 132db	Sample log: " small leak lower valve." Data appears to be okay.
172 @ 403db	Sample log: " leaky bottom." Data appears to be okay.
121 @ 805db	Sample log: " leaky valve when open." Data appears to be okay.
174 @1305db	Sample log: " Leaky - bottom cap.." Data appears to be okay.

Station 249
131 @ 248db	Sample log: "leaky spigot." Data appears to be okay.
122 @1007db	Sample log: "no water, btm end cap didn't shut." No samples drawn.

Station 250
134 @ 68db	Sample log: "vent open, and leaking." Data appears to be okay.
124 @ 708db	Sample log: "salt bottle 24 broken (salt box A)." Sampler must have 
		gotten another bottle because there is a salinity sample.
117 @1816db	Sample log: "leaker." Data appears to be okay.
113 @2426db	oxy/nuts/salt vert. sects. bulge btwn 1000-3200db. probably ok. ctd deep
		theta-salin curve also diverges from nearby stas oxy low compared to ctd 
		btl/ctd salt diff larger than usual no sample log comments, suspect 
		btl problem silicate low/oxy low Delta-S at 2629db is -0.0081, salinity
		is 34.707. Footnote bottle did not trip as scheduled. Bottles tripped
		with 14, after correction of pressure all samples acceptable.
101 @5080db	Sample log: "leaky bottom collar." Data appears to be okay.

Station 251
131 @ 158db	Sample log: "leak lower valve." Data appears to be okay.
121 @1013db	Sample log: "slow leak lower valve." Data appears to be okay.
117 @1824db	Sample log: "leak from upper cap." Data appears to be okay.
116 @2027db	Sample log: "MnCl2 air on oxygen 1178." salt/nuts low, oxy high, oxy 
		draw temp high - leaker/post-trip? Footnote bottle leaking, samples 
		bad. ODF recommends deletion of water samples.
111 @3045db	Sample log: "small leak lower valve." Data appears to be okay.
109 @3454db	Sample log: "upper vent not closed well." Data appears to be okay.

Station 252
117 @1558db	Sample log: "leaks from petcock with air vent closed." Data appears 
		to be okay.

Station 253
131 @ 206db	Sample log: "valve dripping." Data appears to be okay.
117 @1617db	Sample log: "slow leak." Data appears to be okay.
115 @2024db	salt/nuts low, oxy high - leak? No sample log comments. Footnote 
		bottle leaking, samples bad.

Station 254
117 @1613db	Sample log: "leaking after drain cock pushed in." Data appears to be 
		okay.
108 @3440db	Sample log: "one Niskin popped open on boom during recovery - fresh 
		ding indicates 8." Oxygen: lost smpl: flask label in front of uv 
		beam, missed endpoint. Footnote oxygen lost. No other gas samples drawn.

Station 255
136 @ 4db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
135 @ 37db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
168 @ 67db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
133 @ 103db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
132 @ 156db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
131 @ 206db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain. Sample log: "leak 
		lower valve when open." Data appears to be okay.
130 @ 256db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
129 @ 302db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
128 @ 398db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
127 @ 497db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
126 @ 595db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
125 @ 693db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
124 @ 791db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
123 @ 892db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
122 @ 989db	Nutrients appear to have been drawn from btl 24. Footnote nutrients 
		bad. ODF recommends deletion of nutrients.
121 @1138db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain. Sample log: "top air 
		vent not fully closed (possible top cap leak)." Data appears to be okay.
120 @1291db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
119 @1494db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
118 @1594db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
117 @1694db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
116 @1794db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
115 @1993db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
114 @2189db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
113 @2386db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
112 @2586db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
111 @2786db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
110 @2988db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
109 @3187db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
108 @3384db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
107 @3588db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
106 @3790db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
105 @4036db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
104 @4280db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
103 @4531db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
102 @4801db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
101 @5066db	NO3: cadmium column changed, analyst thought column was conditioned 
		before running samples, (raw data indicated all was okay). After reviewing 
		final calculations, it is apparent that there is a problem with the 
		data, that it is too high. Station 256 was also affected. Footnote 
		nitrate uncertain.

Station 256
136 @ 3db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
135 @ 37db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
168 @ 55db	Sample log: "salt bottle 34 broken, used 22 instead." Salinity appears 
		to be okay. The note from the Sample Log sheet is for inventory purposes. 
		See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
133 @ 84db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
132 @ 117db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
131 @ 157db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
130 @ 200db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
129 @ 257db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
128 @ 307db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
127 @ 407db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
126 @ 506db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
125 @ 602db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
124 @ 700db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
123 @ 801db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
122 @ 901db	Sample log: "bottom did not close." No samples drawn.
121 @1000db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
120 @1202db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
119 @1405db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
118 @1608db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
117 @1761db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
116 @1915db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
115 @2119db	Sample log: "check lower valve o-ring." Data appears to be okay. See 
		101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
114 @2325db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
113 @2528db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
112 @2681db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
111 @2833db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
110 @3038db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
109 @3240db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
108 @3445db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
107 @3649db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
106 @3854db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
105 @4108db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
104 @4365db	See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
103 @4622db	Sample log: "lid did not close properly." salt/nuts/oxy look like post-
		trip; oxy draw temp high asal: salt smpl 3 spilled during bad roll, only 
		1/3 of original sample remained to run. Footnote bottle leaking, samples 
		bad. ODF recommends deletion of water samples. See 101 NO3 comment; footnote 
		nitrate uncertain.
102 @4877db	Nutrients: "po4 low by .02. Stds up especially at end." PO4 agreement 
		compared with adjoining stations is .01 lower, within WOCE standards. 
		See 101 NO3 comment; footnote nitrate uncertain.
101 @5143db	Nutrients: "po4 low by .02. Stds up especially at end." PO4 agreement 
		compared with adjoining stations is .01 lower, within WOCE standards. 
		NO3: cadmium column changed, analyst thought column was conditioned 
		before running samples, (raw data indicated all was okay). After reviewing
		final calculations, it is apparent that there is a problem with the data,
		that it is too high. Station 255 was also affected. Footnote nitrate 
		uncertain.

Station 257
130 @ 297db	Sample log: "empty, bottle open." No samples drawn. Only 29 bottles 
		were scheduled to trip at Console Ops level. Evidently, bad weather 
		conditions prompted the decision. CTD data was acquired at —300db and 
		assigned bottle number 30. There-fore, there were no samples taken from 
		this bottle, because it was purposely not tripped.
116 @1619db	Sample log: "leaking from bottom end cap." oxy high, salts/nuts low 
		Footnote bottle leaking, samples bad. ODF recommends deletion of water 
		samples.
111 @2836db	Sample log: "slight spigot leak." Data appears to be okay.

Station 258
130 @ 165db	Sample log: "did not fire." No samples drawn.
124 @ 583db	oxy/oxy draw temp low; sal/nuts high - pretrip? Footnote bottle 
		leaking, samples bad. ODF recommends deletion of water samples.
116 @1752db	Sample log: "btm lid did not close." No samples drawn.
112 @2558db	sharp oxy/sil max looks phony; sal slightly high; oxy high compared to 
		ctd, o2 draw temp low - pretrip? Footnote bottle leaking, samples bad. 
		ODF recommends deletion of water samples.
108 @3366db	Sample log: "leak from lower cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 259
131 @ 187db	Sample log: "leak from valve and bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 260
136 @ 3db	Sample log: "slight leak from bottom." Data appears to be okay.
116 @1873db	Sample log: "spring lost, bottle empty." No samples drawn.

Station 261
107 @3654db	Sample log: "empty, lanyard hang up." No samples drawn.

Station 262
235 @ 38db	Sample log: "pylon hangup - didn't close." No samples drawn. NO pylon 
		confirm in 3 tries at posn 35/GO-41 errors
214 @2047db	Sample log: "leaker from bottom cap - lots." Data appears to be okay.

Station 263
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 264
236 @ 4db	Sample log: "leaks a bit from btm lid during sampling." Data appears 
		to be okay.

Station 265
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."
117 @1924db	Oxy may be too low, also low compared to ctdoxy. Footnote oxygen 
		uncertain.

Station 266
111 @2601db	Sample log: "slight leak from spigot." Data appears to be okay.

Station 267
136 @ 2db	Sample log: "slight leak from bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 268
136 @ 4db	Sample log: "note temp - maybe therm problem." Data appears to be okay.
135 @ 36db	Niskin 35 open - NO pylon confirm/GO-41 on 3 attempts at posn 35 Sample 
		log: "empty." No samples drawn.
168 @ 61db	Sample log: "note temp." Data appears to be okay.
126 @ 607db	Oxygen: "Sample lost, broke oxy flask 662."
115 @1896db	Sample log: "ring off valve." Data appears to be okay.
112 @2361db	See 106 nutrients comments. Leave data as is-no footnote.
111 @2510db	See 106 nutrients comments. Leave data as is-no footnote. Sample log: 
		"small leak at valve." Data appears to be okay.
110 @2659db	See 106 nutrients comments. Leave data as is-no footnote.
109 @2810db	See 106 nutrients comments. Leave data as is-no footnote.
108 @2960db	See 106 nutrients comments. Leave data as is-no footnote.
107 @3111db	See 106 nutrients comments. Leave data as is-no footnote.
106 @3315db	Nutrients: "Sil 3.0 high bottles 6-12." No problems that analyst can 
		find. Leave data as is-no footnote.
104 @3720db	phosphate slightly too low, nutrient rereads look same Footnote PO4 
		uncertain.

Station 269
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 270
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 271
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."
130 @ 155db	oxy: "tiny bubble in sample flask at titration time."

Station 272
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."
103 @3805db	sal a little too high/.003; does not match ctd Delta-S at 3805db is 
		0.0032, salinity is 34.714. Footnote salinity uncertain.

Station 273
168 @ 2db	NO pylon confirm in 3 attempts at posn 34/GO-41 errors; try again at 
		srfc - NO confirm; niskin came up open Sample log: "empty." No samples 
		drawn.

Station 274
235 @ 31db	NO pylon confirm at posn 15/GO-41 error; retry failed Sample log: 
		"open." No samples drawn.
230 @ 154db	NO pylon confirm at posn 15/GO-41 error; retry failed Sample log: 
		"open." No samples drawn.

Station 275
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 276
130 @ 155db	Sample log: "open, no water." No samples drawn.
126 @ 300db	salinity too low compared to ctd; matches btl 28 salt Footnote salinity 
		bad. ODF recommends deletion of salinity.
114 @1680db	Sample log: "valve way too tight." Data appears to be okay.

Station 277
108 @2277db	Sample log: "slight leak from bottom." Data appears to be okay. Nutrients: 
		"sil 2.0 low. Stds, sw response low." Silicates agree with adjoining 
		stations after changes.

Station 278
168 @ 54db	slight max of no3/po4, also oxy: peaks checked/looks ok-LT Leave data 
		as is-no Footnote.
112 @1852db	Sample log: "slow leak bottom cap when open." Data appears to be okay.
101 @3771db	Nutrients: "sil 2.0 low, bottles 1-9." No problems that analyst can 
		find. Leave data as is-no footnote unless DQE decides differently.

Station 279
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 280
123 @ 507db	Sample log: "check/replace stopcock." Data appears to be okay.

Station 281
223 @ 509db	Sample log: "r/r stopcock." Data appears to be okay.
215 @1461db	salinity too low, looks like misdrawn from btl 16 Footnote salinity 
		bad. ODF recommends deletion of salinity.

Station 282
136 @ 3db	Sample log: "slow leak from bottom cap when vent open." Data appears 
		to be okay.

Station 283
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments." niskins tripped 24->1, then 36->25 for 
		freon blank check

Station 284
236 @ 2db	Surface salinity high, looks like drawn from bottom btl/201 Footnote 
		salinity bad. ODF recommends deletion of salinity.
235 @ 33db	Sample log: "spigot leaks when valve opened." Data appears to be okay.

Station 285
136 @ 3db	Sample log: "small leak when open." Data appears to be okay.

Station 286
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 287
126 @ 307db	oxy: system crashed during analysis, sample "lost at sea" Footnote 
		oxygen lost.
107 @2671db	Sample log: "niskin slid down - valve blocked - fixed by SH & BJN." 
		Data appears to be okay.

Station 288
Cast 1		Sample log: "O2 started sampling at bottle 21.
102 @3396db	Bad peaks and/or bubbles for po4 and sil, each could be up to .002 
		higher but likely ok accounting for reader difference. no3 peaks fine, 
		but definitely higher on btl 1/lower on 2. Footnote silicate and 
		phosphate uncertain.
101 @3619db	Nuts slightly high - problem sample 2, see 102 comment. PI indicates 
		data is acceptable.

Station 289
Cast 1		Sample log: "O2 sampled niskins 13-36, then 1-12." Nutrients: "Rising 
		lab T, chief lowered T 4°C around sample 9." Nutrients: "sil noisy. Large 
		lab temp fluctuations. End stds up." Silicate agrees with adjoining 
		stations after standard corrections.
168 @ 57db	no3/po4 look too low, is min real? DMM: either 35/36 look hi and 68 
		looks low, or 68/33/32 all look low: something here looks strange compared 
		to nearby casts. Rereads same. PI indicates leave data as is-no footnote.
123 @ 508db	Sample log: "leak from bottom cap when open." Data appears to be okay.
108 @2613db	Sample log: "leak from bottom cap when open - does not when cap 
		reseated." Data appears to be okay.

Station 290
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."
110 @2823db	Nutrients look high/oxy low. Compare w/sta.288. Nuts rereads same. ok. 
		Leave as is-no footnote per PI review.
109 @3026db	Nutrients look high/oxy low. Compare w/sta.288. Nuts rereads same. ok. 
		Leave as is-no footnote per PI review.
102 @4091db	See 101 NO3 comment, data appears to be okay.
101 @4287db	Nutrients: "Bottom no3, samples 1-2, high. Sta 289 stds high by 4." NO3 
		may be .1 high after correction to standards, but this is within the accuracy 
		of the measurement, therefore, data acceptable.

Station 291
103 @3740db	Sample log: "top lid caught lanyard and didn't close." No samples 
		drawn.
102 @3892db	Sample log: "bottle is in Davey Jones' locker." No samples drawn.

Station 292
133 @ 73db	Sample log: "bottom end cap leaking - spring tension." Data appears 
		to be okay.
172 @3491db	Sample log: "r/r stopcock (replace/repair)." Samples appear to be 
		okay, this is the first station this bottle was used on. On previous 
		station, bottle was lost.

Station 293
172 @3852db	Sample log: "R/R spigot." Data appears to be okay.

Station 294
232 @ 81db	Sample log: "CO2 drew .5 gallon for optics calib. (after salts)." 
		Data appears to be okay.

Station 295
135 @ 32db	Sample log: "leaks with vent closed." Data appears to be okay.

Station 296
114 @1460db	Sample log: "slight leak from bottom." Data appears to be okay.

Station 297
107 @2527db	Sample log: "change battery on O2 thermometer." Data appears to be 
		okay.

Station 298
Cast 1		Nutrients: "po4 high; stds little high." Deep PO4 is .2 higher than 
		adjoining stations, however, this is within the accuracy of the measurement, 
		therefore, data is acceptable. Sample log: "pylon started from 
		position 13 per freon."
135 @ 610db	Sample log: "leak bottom cap - check spring tension." Data appears 
		to be okay.
124 @1721db	See 113 PO4 comments; footnote PO4 uncertain.
123 @1923db	See 113 PO4 comments; footnote PO4 uncertain.
122 @2126db	See 113 PO4 comments; footnote PO4 uncertain.
121 @2328db	See 113 PO4 comments; footnote PO4 uncertain.
120 @2531db	See 113 PO4 comments; footnote PO4 uncertain.
119 @2732db	See 113 PO4 comments; footnote PO4 uncertain.
118 @2934db	See 113 PO4 comments; footnote PO4 uncertain.
117 @3138db	See 113 PO4 comments; footnote PO4 uncertain.
116 @3342db	See 113 PO4 comments; footnote PO4 uncertain.
115 @3546db	See 113 PO4 comments; footnote PO4 uncertain.
114 @3750db	See 113 PO4 comments; footnote PO4 uncertain.
113 @3894db	Deep po4 systematically hi, bottles 13-24; stds/DW/SW/calcs/peaks all 
		check ok. LT notes that po4 same on sta 299. PO4 does not agree with 
		adjoining stations —.04 high; may not have understood comment made by PI 
		in general comments. Footnote phosphate uncertain.

Station 299
Cast 2		Sample log: "no comments." Deep po4 same as sta 298 (systematically 
		higher than 297) Nutrients: po4 high; sw-dw low by 2 Standard correction 
		has PO4 agree with adjoining stations, that is 300 301 and 297.

Station 300
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."
168 @ 56db	Delta-S at 56db is -0.0258, salinity is 34.530. Agrees with adjoining 
		stations, okay as is. Footnote CTD salinity bad, has an unrealistic spike.
130 @ 107db	slt/oxy low, po4/no3 high; ctd downcast S/Oxy do not match. may be 
		up/down cast diffc? no indication of problem in sample log/co log. ok. 
		Delta-S at 107db is -0.1014, salinity is 34.367.

Station 301
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 302
Cast 2		Sample log: "no comments."
211 @1771db	Sample log indicates nutrients were supposed to be drawn, but nutrient 
		analyst indicates that tube was empty. Footnote nutrients lost.

Station 303
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 304
127 @ 156db	Sample log: "leaking from bottom end cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 305
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."
110 @2022db	Nutrients: "no3 0.40uM low possibly?" Peak OK, calc OK. Footnote nitrate 
		uncertain.

Station 306
Cast 1 15 
		Sample log: "O2 therm problem - questionable digital readings." Comment 
		regarding O2 thermometer problem does not affect the data. However, station 
		profiles were meticulously reviewed and data appears acceptable, unless 
		otherwise noted.

Station 307
Cast 1		Sample log: "digital thermometer flaky for O2."
118 @ 608db	Salt bad - looks like btl 19 salt. Misdraw? Footnote salinity bad, ODF 
		recommends deletion.

Station 308
Cast 1		Sample log: "O2 using glass thermometer (bucket therm)."
130 @ 106db	Sample log: "didn't trip - no water." No samples drawn. co log: NO 
		pylon confirm at btl 30; 2 retries also failed
101 @3771db	Sample log: "bottle leaking with vent closed." Data appears to be okay.

Station 309
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 310
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 311
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments." Nutrients: >1000m po4 0.02uM high After 
		correction to standards, PO4 agrees with adjoining stations.

Station 312
127 @ 156db	Sample log: "small leak problems - check caps." Data appears to be 
		okay.
117 @ 910db	Sample log: "vent left partially open." Data appears to be okay.
101 @3704db	Sample log said btl 71; MJ told prior to cast 1 was back on so use 
		bottle 1 here, not 71; sample log/co log updated.

Station 313
130 @ 107db	Sample log: "open, no water." No samples drawn. co log: NO pylon 
		confirm at btl 30; retry also failed
117 @ 911db	Sample log: "spigot open and vent not fully closed." Data appears to 
		be okay.
112 @1820db	Salt .01 low; no comments; doesn't look like misdraw. Delta-S at 1820db 
		is -0.008, salinity is 34.609. Footnote salinity uncertain.

Station 314
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 315
126 @ 154db	Nutrients: "po4 looks low by .05uM, no3 also looks low." Peaks OK, 
		calcs OK. PO4 and NO3 acceptable for shallow water.
114 @1009db	Sample log: "bottom leak." Data appears to be okay.

Station 316
126 @ 205db	Delta-S at 205db is -0.0729, salinity is 34.519. Agrees with adjoining 
		stations, okay as is. Spike in CTD uptrace which is the reason for the 
		large salinity difference. Footnote CTD salinity bad.
122 @ 407db	Nutrients: "po4 appears .20uM low." 21=22 all nuts. Possible double 
		draw or trip problem? Peak OK, calc OK Oxygen and salt look ok - no trip 
		problem. Double draw on nutrients. Footnote nutrients bad, ODF recommends 
		deletion.
116 @1010db	Sample log: "didn't trip." No samples drawn.

Station 317
211 @2225db	Sample log: "slow leak valve." Data appears to be okay.
272 @3955db	Sample log: "O2 temp seems high." Data appears to be okay.
201 @4193db	Sample log: "O2 temp seems high." Data appears to be okay.

Station 318
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 319
117 @1011db	Sample log: "leaking with air vent closed." Data appears to be okay.
115 @1309db	Sample log: "open." No samples drawn. co log: NO pylon confirm at btl 
		15; retry also failed
172 @3932db	Sample log: "leak at valve." Data appears to be okay.

Station 320
136 @ 2db	Sample log: "drew early to test for nuts contamination." Data appears to 
		be okay.
135 @ 31db	Sample log: "bottle open." No samples drawn. co log: NO pylon confirm 
		at btl 35; 2 retries also failed
124 @ 558db	Nutrients: "NO3 appears high." Peak OK, calc OK. NO3 agrees with 
		next station.
116 @1510db	Sample log: "bottom did not close, lanyard had knot in it." No samples 
		drawn.
115 @1661db	Salt, o2, sil low; po4, no3 high. Looks like mistrip. Footnote bottle 
		leaking, samples bad. ODF recommends deletion of water samples.
107 @2982db	Sample log: "vent not well closed." Data appears to be okay.

Station 321
128 @ 206db	Sample log: "bottle didn't close - lanyard caught on hose clamp." No 
		samples drawn.

Station 322
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 323
136 @ 3db	Sample log: "leaking bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.
128 @ 204db	Sample log: "leaking from bottom cap when vent open." Data appears 
		to be okay.
117 @1107db	Sample log: "leaking spigot - spring tension?." Data appears to be 
		okay.

Station 324
131 @ 137db	Sample log: "bottom cap leak - stopped when cap rotated." Data 
		appears to be okay.
151 @1354db	Sample log: "didn't close - "freak lanyard hangup"." No samples drawn.
172 @4115db	Sample log: "bottom cap leak - stopped when cap rotated." Data 
		appears to be okay.

Station 325
114 @ 457db	Sample log: "small leak bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 326
Cast 2		Sample log: "started sampling @ 24 (except salts)."
225 @ 534db	Sample log: "salt bottle 25 broken and replaced." Data appears to be 
		okay.
216 @1611db	Sample log: "open, no water." No samples drawn.

Station 327
Cast 2		Sample log: "no comments."
227 @ 300db	po4 might be .08 too high; dmm: calcs ok, peaks ok. Footnote PO4 
		uncertain.
226 @ 401db	po4 looks .2 too high; dmm: calcs ok, peaks ok. Footnote PO4 uncertain.

Station 328
130 @ 188db	Sample log: "did not fire (did get confirm on 2nd try)." No samples 
		drawn. co log: NO pylon confirm at btl 30; 2nd try ok
124 @ 635db	Salt high, sil high; looks like mistrip. Footnote bottle leaking, 
		samples bad.
122 @ 835db	Salt, o2, sil high; po4, no3 low; looks like mistrip. Footnote bottle 
		leaking, samples bad.
117 @1332db	Sample log: "bottom didn't close - lanyard not routed correctly." No 
		samples drawn.
172 @4246db	Sample log: "donated to Davy Jones' locker." No samples drawn.

Station 329
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 330
136 @ 3db	See 131 salinity comment; footnote salinity bad, ODF recommends 
		deletion.
135 @ 37db	See 131 salinity comment; footnote salinity bad, ODF recommends 
		deletion.
168 @ 57db	See 131 salinity comment; footnote salinity bad, ODF recommends 
		deletion.
133 @ 81db	See 131 salinity comment; footnote salinity bad, ODF recommends 
		deletion.
132 @ 106db	See 131 salinity comment; footnote salinity bad, ODF recommends 
		deletion.
131 @ 146db	Sample log: "slight bottom leak." Footnote salinity bad, ODF 
		recommends deletion. High surface salinities. Appears that 
		conductivity ratio incorrect; however, since this is an automated 
		reading system, it is very unlikely.
127 @ 330db	Sample log: "slight bottom leak." Data appears to be okay.
114 @1849db	Nutrients: "sil appears high." Peak OK, calc OK. Footnote silicate 
		uncertain.
108 @3022db	Sample log: "bottom leak." Data appears to be okay.

Station 331
136 @ 2db	Sample log: "strange temp - pre-trip?." Salt, o2 low; nuts high. 
		Footnote bottle leaking, samples bad.
131 @ 138db	Sample log: "leak from bottom cap when open." Data appears to be okay.
108 @3123db	Sample log: "leak from bottom cap when open." Data appears to be okay.
		Delta-S at 3123db is -0.0038, salinity is 34.680.
170 @4321db	Nutrients: "po4 btm values appear .03uM high." Peaks OK, calcs OK. 
		Footnote PO4 uncertain.
171 @4553db	Nutrients: "po4 btm values appear .03uM high." Peaks OK, calcs OK. 
		Footnote PO4 uncertain.

Station 332
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 333
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments." Nutrients: "Sil btm values appear low." 
		After correction to standards, sil is acceptable.

Station 334
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments." Nutrients: "Bottom sil values appear high 
		by 1.5uM." After correction to standards, bottom silicates are higher than 
		previous station, but agree with next station.

Station 335
228 @ 275db	Sample log: "bottom didn't close- lanyard caught on hose clamp." No 
		samples drawn.
210 @2844db	Sample log: "slow leak from valve when air vent closed." Data appears to 
		be okay.

Station 336
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments." Nutrients: "Sil btm values appear high 
		by 1.5uM." After correction to standards silicate is acceptable.
168 @ 67db	Nutrients: "Nutrient max real?" Peak OK, calc OK. There is also an 
		oxygen min here. Salinity agreement is reasonable with CTD. NO2 indicates 
		could not have come from deeper or shallower in water column, therefore, 
		suspect this is a real feature.

Station 337
116 @ 330db	Sample log: "leaking from bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.
136 @2493db	Salt high by —.002 - Voltage regulation problem in salt lab. 
		Footnote salinity bad.
135 @2694db	Salt high by —.002 - Voltage regulation problem in salt lab. Delta-S at 
		2694db is 0.0036, salinity is 34.677. Footnote salinity bad.
168 @2893db	Salt high by —.002 - Voltage regulation problem in salt lab. 
		Footnote salinity bad.
133 @3094db	Salt high by —.002 - Voltage regulation problem in salt lab.
		Footnote salinity bad.
132 @3298db	Salt high by —.002 - Voltage regulation problem in salt lab. 
		Footnote salinity bad.
131 @3499db	Salt high by —.002 - Voltage regulation problem in salt lab. 
		Footnote salinity bad.
130 @3700db	Salt high by —.002 - Voltage regulation problem in salt lab. Delta-S at 
		3700db is 0.0035, salinity is 34.689. Footnote salinity bad.
129 @3906db	Nutrients: "Sil bottom values appear low." Peaks OK, calcs OK. NO3 and 
		PO4 are also lower than further up in the water column. Suspect that 
		silicate is acceptable.
128 @4111db	Nutrients: "Sil bottom values appear low." Peaks OK, calcs OK. NO3 and 
		PO4 are also lower than further up in the water column. Suspect that 
		silicate is acceptable.
127 @4313db	Nutrients: "Sil bottom values appear low." Peaks OK, calcs OK. NO3 and 
		PO4 are also lower than further up in the water column. Suspect that 
		silicate is acceptable.
126 @4571db	Nutrients: "Sil bottom values appear low." Peaks OK, calcs OK. NO3 and 
		PO4 are also lower than further up in the water column. Suspect that 
		silicate is acceptable.
125 @4808db	Nutrients: "Sil bottom values appear low." Peaks OK, calcs OK. NO3 and 
		PO4 are also lower than further up in the water column. Suspect that 
		silicate is acceptable.

Station 338
209 @2767db	Sample log: "2 shots Hg2 Cl2 on TCO2 flask 127." Data appears to be 
		okay.
204 @4099db	See 203 silicate comment. Footnote silicate uncertain
203 @4372db	Nutrients: "71, 70, 3 sil appear high at bottom." Peaks OK, calcs OK. 
		Footnote silicate uncertain.

Station 339
Cast 1		Sample log: "O2: NaOH dispensing bubbles." Oxygen data is acceptable.
116 @1557db	Sample log: "very slight bottom leak." Data appears to be okay.

Station 340
114 @2017db	Sample log: "slight bottom leak." Data appears to be okay.
109 @3032db	Salt slightly lower (.002) than CTD salt. Footnote salinity uncertain.

Station 341
Cast 1		Sample log: "O2 sampling back and forth between deep and shallow 
		water bottles."
116 @1502db	Nutrients: "Looks like duplicate draw." Footnote nutrients bad, ODF 
		recommends deletion.
108 @2674db	Sample log: "slow leak from bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 342
Cast 2		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 343
132 @ 105db	Sample log: "bottom lid stuck open, no water." No samples drawn.
120 @ 995db	Sample log: "vent open." Data appears to be okay.

Station 344
121 @ 835db	Sample log: "slight leak from bottom end cap." Data appears to be okay.
114 @1805db	Sample log: "vent open." Data appears to be okay.

Station 345
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."
114 @1902db	Nutrients: "no3 appears 0.6uM low." Peak OK, calc OK. Even though no 
		obvious problem could be found with NO3, it is not an acceptable value, 
		therefore it has been footnoted bad.
111 @2514db	Oxygen too high by .1 ml/l. Could be misdraw from btl 10 Footnote 
		oxygen bad.

Station 346
127 @ 254db	Nutrients: "no3 appears high by 1.0uM although many ups & dns in no3 & 
		po4 traces." Peak OK, calc OK. Not quite sure what PI (MT) is referring 
		to here. Shallow plot pressure vs adjoining stations actually looks clean.
123 @ 500db	Sample log: "PCO2 bottle 47 needs new cap." Data appears to be okay.
108 @3024db	Sample log: "leak from bottom cap - check spring tension, o-ring." 
		Data appears to be okay.

Station 347
133 @ 102db	Nutrients: "Duplicate draw likely with tube 34 sample 68." Footnote 
		nutrients bad, ODF recommends deletion.
114 @1919db	Sample log: "didn't trip @ correct depth?." Data appears to be okay.

Station 348
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 349
123 @ 608db	Sample log: "slight leak from bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 350
328 @ 231db	Sample log: "O2 flask 1087 - maybe some little bubbles in sample." 
		Data appears to be okay.
327 @ 271db	Sample log: "high O2 draw temps." Data appears to be okay.
326 @ 332db	Sample log: "high O2 draw temps." Data appears to be okay.
370 @4148db	Nutrients: "Not drawn." Sample log indicates this sample should have 
		been drawn for nutrients. Footnote nutrients lost.

Station 351
Cast 1		Sample log: "sampled 19-36 then 1-18."
117 @1112db	Sample log: "upper cap leaking slightly." Oxygen too high (.3). 
		Leaking btl. Salt, nuts look ok. Footnote bottle leaking, oxygen 
		bad.
170 @4031db	Sample log: "reversing therm did not fully reverse (lanyard)." Data 
		appears to be okay.

Station 352
117 @1151db	Sample log: "spigot pushed in, slight upper cap leak." Oxygen too high 
		(.3). Leaking btl. Salt, nuts look ok. Footnote bottle leaking, oxygen bad.
114 @1600db	Sample log: "slight leak." Data appears to be okay.
110 @2404db	Sample log: "dripping from spigot." Data appears to be okay.

Station 353
Cast 1		Sample log: "garbage dumped just at last sample."
135 @ 18db	Delta-S at 18db is 0.0329, salinity is 35.219. CTD up trace has a 
		unreasonable spike in the data; footnote CTD salinity bad. Bottle 
		salinity agrees with previous station.
168 @ 28db	Delta-S at 28db is 0.0561, salinity is 35.311. CTD up trace has a 
		unreasonable spike in the data; footnote CTD salinity bad. Bottle 
		salinity agrees with previous station.
117 @1312db	Sample log: "spigot not closed fully, leaks from upper cap." Oxygen too 
		high (.3). Leaking btl. Salt, nuts look ok. Footnote oxygen bad, ODF 
		recommends deletion.

Station 354
135 @ 32db	Sample log: "empty." No samples drawn.
127 @ 287db	Sample log: "slight bottom leak." Data appears to be okay.
117 @1173db	Oxygen too high (.3). Leaking btl. Salt, nuts look ok. Footnote 
		oxygen bad, ODF recommends deletion.
171 @3369db	Sample log: "no smpls drawn for o2 - tripped 750m above bottom on down."

Station 355
117 @1092db	Sample log: "CO2 drew a krill!!!! ." Data appears to be okay.

Station 356
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 357
Cast 2		Sample log: "no comments."
217 @ 916db	Oxygen too high (.3). Leaking btl. Salt, nuts look ok. ODF recommends 
		deletion of gas samples.

Station 358
136 (No Pressure) Sample log: "open, no water." No samples drawn. Console operator 
		must have gotten confused, Console Log seems to indicate that 33 bottles 
		should have been tripped, but only 32 were tripped. Pressure assignment all 
		seems to be corrected properly.
117 @ 859db	Sample log: "leaking." Data appears to be okay.

Station 359
121 @ 409db	Sample log: "leaks from spigot." Data appears to be okay.
117 @ 810db	Sample log: "leaks from spigot - switch bottle out?." Data appears 
		to be okay.
116 @ 911db	Salt and nuts in error. Footnote bottle leaking, samples bad. ODF 
		recommends deletion of water samples.
110 @1819db	Oxygen too high by .1 ml/l Footnote oxygen bad, ODF recommends 
		deletion.

Station 360
117 @ 927db	Sample log: "valve leaks quite a bit when open." Data appears to be 
		okay.

Station 361
Cast 2		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 362
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 363
108 @2095db	Sample log: "slight bottom leak." Data appears to be okay.

Station 364
108 @1612db	Sample log: "leak from bottom cap when open (again)." Data appears 
		to be okay.

Station 365
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 366
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 367
116 @ 658db	Sample log: "slight bottom leak." Data appears to be okay.

Station 368
Cast 1		Sample log: "O2 and salts only."
118 @ 17db	Sample log: "leaking." Data appears to be okay.
116 @ 104db	Sample log: "slight leak - spring tension?." Data appears to be okay.
114 @ 203db	Sample log: "slight bottom leak." Data appears to be okay.

Station 369
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 370
Cast 1		Sample log: "O2 and salts only."
118 @ 15db	oxy: bubble Sample log: "leaking." Data appears to be okay.
106 @ 853db	Sample log: "empty - bottom lid/lanyard jammed." No samples drawn.

Station 371
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 372
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments." Nutrients not drawn per sampling schedule.

Station 373
115 @ 809db	Sample log: "O2 therm flaky - temp on bottle 15 felt more like —8C." 
		Data appears to be okay.
114 @ 909db	Sample log: "O2 therm flaky - temp on bottle 15 felt more like —8C." 
		Data appears to be okay.

Station 374
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments." Nutrients not drawn per sampling schedule.

Station 375
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 376
Cast 1		Nutrients not drawn per sampling schedule.
117 @ 90db	Sample log: "leaking from spigot." Data appears to be okay.

Station 377
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."
117 @ 657db	PI: "Salt too low by .03 psu; probably leaking." Shore based analysis: 
		no3, sil and oxy agree with adjoining stations, po4 slightly low and 
		salinity low. No indication of any problem with salinity analysis, and 
		automated system would have revealed a problem if there were one. Not 
		really sure that bottle was leaking from this information, but will leave 
		bottle code as leaking and will footnote po4 uncertain, salinity bad.

Station 378
Cast 1		Nutrients not drawn per sampling schedule.
119 @ 34db	Sample log: "slight leak from upper end cap." Data appears to be okay. 
		Delta-S at 34db is -0.0294, salinity is 34.123. Area of complex salinity
		structure. Data ok.

Station 379
317 @ 607db	Sample log: "drips from open spigot with vent closed." Data appears 
		to be okay.

Station 380
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 381
117 @ 802db	Sample log: "valve dribbles when vent is closed." Data appears to be 
		okay.

Station 382
132 @ 52db	Sample log: "slight bottom leak." Data appears to be okay.
125 @ 206db	Sample log: "vent almost blocked - raise bottle?." Data appears to 
		be okay.
108 @1589db	Sample log: "leaking from bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 383
119 @ 573db	Sample log: "dripping when spigot pushed in." Data appears to be okay.
105 @2315db	Salt too high by .005 psu; no notes in sample log or data sheet. 
		Delta-S at 2315db is 0.0073, salinity is 34.672. Footnote salinity 
		uncertain.
104 @2469db	Sample log: "redraw O2." Data appears to be okay.

Station 384
121 @ 405db	Sample log: "leaking from the bottom." Data appears to be okay.

Station 385
122 @ 566db	Sample log: "pCO2 - throw out bottle Data appears to be okay.
111 @1674db	Salt too low by .01 psu; no notes in sample log or data sheet. 
		Delta-S at 1674db is -0.0074, salinity is 34.622. Even though no 
		obvious problem could be found with salinity, it is not an acceptable 
		value, therefore it has been footnoted bad.
110 @1775db	Salt too low by .01 psu; no notes in sample log or data sheet. Even 
		though no obvious problem could be found with salinity, it is not an 
		acceptable value, therefore it has been footnoted bad.

Station 386
223 @ 263db	Sample log: "spigot needs replacement." Data appears to be okay.
217 @ 728db	Sample log: "dripping from spigot." Data appears to be okay.

Station 387
117 @ 780db	Sample log: "leaking slightly from spigot." Data appears to be okay.

Station 388
Cast 2		Sample log: "no comments."
204 @1261db	Oxy to high by .15 ml/l. Data sheet: bubble in sample before 2nd shake. 
		Footnote oxygen bad.

Station 389
121 @ 2db	Sample log: "leak from bottom cap - upper valve not well closed." Data 
		appears to be okay.
117 @ 104db	Sample log: "leaking with everything closed (out of valve)." Data 
		appears to be okay. Sample log: "should be swapped -> replaced w/ niskin

Station 390
124 @ 53db	Sample log: "serious leak." Data appears to be okay. Delta-S at 53db is 
		-0.0541, salinity is 34.105.
116 @ 314db	Sample log: "leaking from bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 391
110 @ 532db	Sample log: "leaking from spigot." Data appears to be okay.

Station 392
114 @ 802db	Sample log: "bottom cap leak." Data appears to be okay.

Station 393
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."
Station 394
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 395
Cast 2		Sample log: "total CO2 in 500 ml bottles."

Station 396
110 @1921db	Sample log: "leaks from valve (open) with vent closed." Data appears 
		to be okay.
106 @2632db	Sample log: "valve leaks slowly when closed with vent open." Data 
		appears to be okay.

Station 397
151 @1106db	Sample log: "spigot pushed in." Data appears to be okay.
110 @1818db	Sample log: "O2 temp done after drawing sample was completed - probably 
		wrong." Data appears to be okay.

Station 398
136 @ 2db	No salinity sample analyzed. Sample log says VITA in the box that the 
		salinity bottle number should be. Shore based data processor not certain 
		what this means however, there is no obvious reason that salinity should 
		not have been sampled. It appears that the "Sample cop" was not doing his/her 
		duty properly. Footnote salinity lost.
112 @1532db	Salt too low by .017; no notes in sample log or data sheet. Delta-S at 
		1532db is -0.0155, salinity is 34.605. Footnote salinity uncertain.
109 @1958db	Sample log: "vent open." Sil, no3 low; o2 high. Leaker. Footnote oxygen 
		and nutrients bad, bottle leaking, ODF recommends deletion.
106 @2512db	Salt too high by .007; no notes in sample log or data sheet. Delta-S at 
		2512db is 0.0096, salinity is 34.678. Footnote salinity uncertain.

Station 399
116 @ 978db	Sample log: "didn't close - lanyard caught on hose clamp." No samples
		drawn.

Station 400
135 @ 19db	co log: NO pylon confirm - 3 tries total Sample log: "did not trip 
		correctly." Freon drawn from this bottle. Data appears to be okay. 
		Appears that correct pressure assignment was made.

Station 401
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 402
130 @ 78db	Salt, nuts low; o2 high; leaker? Sample log notes high draw temp (e.g. 
		surface water). Sample log: "O2 draw temp high." Footnote bottle leaking, 
		samples bad.

Station 403
123 @ 327db	Sample log: "vent open." Data appears to be okay.

Station 404
268 @ 65db	Sample log: "valve has slow leak (with vent open)." Data appears to 
		be okay.
214 @1259db	Sample log: "small leak bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 405
136 @ 1db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
135 @ 33db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
168 @ 64db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
132 @ 95db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
130 @ 134db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
128 @ 175db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
127 @ 225db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
126 @ 285db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
125 @ 346db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
124 @ 406db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
123 @ 465db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
122 @ 526db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
121 @ 586db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
120 @ 686db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
119 @ 786db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
118 @ 886db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
151 @ 987db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
116 @1087db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
115 @1187db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
114 @1287db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
113 @1408db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
112 @1558db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
111 @1709db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
110 @1860db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
109 @2012db	See 108 Sample Log comment; data appears to be okay.
108 @2213db	Sample log: "O2 may have inaccurate delivery of MnCl2 (pump 
		difficult to operate); samples 8-16, 51,18-28, 30, 32, 68, 
		35-36." Data appears to be okay.

Station 406
168 @ 3db	Sample log: "open, no water." No samples drawn. co log: NO pylon 
		confirm; retry at surface, no confirm 4x more
136 @ 29db	Sample log: "@25m, no surface." Data appears to be okay. Delta-S at 29db
		is 0.0533, salinity is 33.835. Area of complex salinity structure. Data
		ok.
135 @ 45db	Sample log: "@40m instead of 25." Data appears to be okay. Delta-S at 
		45db is -0.1532, salinity is 33.731. Area of complex salinity structure.
		Data ok.

Station 407
116 @1035db	Oxygen low by .2 umol/l; sil low by 10 umol/l. Footnote oxygen and 
		silicate bad, ODF recommends deletion.
108 @2531db	Sample log: "slight bottom leak." Data appears to be okay.
105 @3142db	Delta-S at 3142db is 0.0049, salinity is 34.675. Salinity values do not 
		agree with adjoining stations. Footnote salinity bad, ODF recommends 
		deletion.

Station 408
268 @ 64db	Sample log: "drips from valve when open." Data appears to be okay.

Station 409
168 @ 39db	Sample log: "open (no confirm)." co log: NO pylon confirm 3x; retry 1x 
		more at srfc, stilling No samples drawn.
130 @ 95db	Sample log: "open (lanyard hang up)." No samples drawn.
128 @ 145db	Sample log: "top did not close well, was ok when top cap shifted 
		slightly." Data appears to be okay.

Station 410
136 @ 2db	Sample log: "CO2 sampled late." Data appears to be okay.

Station 411
127 @ 289db	Salt high by .03. No notes in sample log or data sheet. Delta-S at 
		289db is 0.0332, salinity is 34.800. Footnote salinity uncertain.
125 @ 415db	Sample log: "vent open." Data appears to be okay.
121 @ 717db	Sample log: "leaking." Data appears to be okay.
114 @1625db	Salt, nuts, low; oxy high. Sample log: "O2 temp high - mistrip?." 
		Footnote bottle leaking. Footnote oxygen, salinity, and nuts bad, ODF 
		recommends deletion.

Station 412
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."
118 @1309db	Salinity high by .005. Data sheet: cap lift off and runaway. Footnote 
		salinity bad, ODF recommends deletion.

Station 413
228 @ 511db	Sample log: "empty." No samples drawn.
270 @6012db	Sample log: "top cap open." Data appears to be okay.
271 @6342db	Salt low by .003. Footnote salinity bad, ODF recommends deletion. 
		Sample log: "leaking from bottom cap upon recovery." Other samples 
		look okay. Shore based review: Oxygen does appear slightly low. Based
		on these two parameters problems, footnote bottle leaking, samples bad.

Station 414
128 @ 306db	Sample log: "open, no water." No samples drawn.

Station 415
127 @ 322db	Sample log: "leaking from bottom cap on recovery; stopped when cap 
		rotated." Data appears to be okay.

Station 416
123 @ 638db	Sample log: "leaking from bottom cap on recovery; stopped when cap 
		rotated." Data appears to be okay.

Station 417
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 418
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 419
151 @ 184db	Sample log: "valve opened early." Data appears to be okay.
110 @ 507db	Sample log: "valve drips with vent closed." Data appears to be okay.

Station 420
116 @ 52db	Sample log: "leaking from bottom cap." Data appears to be okay.

Station 421
Cast 1		Sample log: "no comments."

Station 422
110 @ 2db	Sample log: "leaker." Data appears to be okay. 

Quality Comments

Remarks for missing samples, and WOCE codes other than 2 from JUNO - WOCE P16A/P17A 
Large Volume Samples. Investigation of data may include comparison of bottle 
salinity and silicate data from piggy-back and Gerard with CTD cast data, review of 
data plots of the station profile and adjoining stations, and rereading of charts 
(i.e., nutrients). Comments from the Sample Logs and the results of ODF's 
investigations are included in this report.

Station 241
381 @1141db	Sample log: "leaker - upper air valve tight." Salinity and silicate are 
		acceptable; piggy-back (41).
393 @2345db	Sample log: "TCO2 70 taken before salts & nuts. TCO2 71 taken after salts 
		& nuts." TCO2 taken after salts & nuts." Comments from Sample Log are for 
		the benefit of TCO2 analyst, this would not effect the Gerard samples. 
		Piggy-back (49).
141 @2496db	Delta-S(n-g) at 2496db is -0.047, salinity is 34.672. Salinity and 
		silicate are acceptable, Gerard (81) salinity is high.
181 @2497db	Sample log: "top valve open." Salinity is high, silicate is slightly 
		low —.7, but reasonable. Footnote salinity bad, piggy-back (41). PI to 
		determine integrity of other Gerard samples.
183 @2898db	Sample log: "bubbling on & off during PCO2 & TCO2." Salinity and 
		silicate are acceptable, piggy-back (43) are also acceptable.
144 @3099db	Delta-S(n-g) at 3099db is 0.004, salinity is 34.695. Salinity 
		difference is .001 high, but Gerard (84) salinity and silicate are acceptable.
184 @3099db	Sample log: "bubbling during PCO2." Salinity and silicate are 
		acceptable, piggy-back (44) is also acceptable.
145 @3300db	Delta-S(n-g) at 3300db is -0.537, salinity is 34.164. Footnote bottle 
		leaking, low salinity and low silicate bad; Gerard (85) samples are 
		acceptable.
185 @3301db	Sample log: "bubbling during PCO2 & TCO2." Gerard samples are 
		acceptable; piggy-back (45) are bad.
147 @3705db	Delta-S(n-g) at 3705db is 0.002, salinity is 34.715. Salinity and 
		silicate are acceptable, Gerard (89) also acceptable.
189 @3705db	Sample log: "bubbling during TCO2." Salinity and silicate are 
		acceptable, piggy-back (47) also acceptable.
148 @3908db	Delta-S(n-g) at 3908db is 0.003, salinity is 34.713. Salinity and 
		silicate are acceptable; Gerard (90) is also acceptable.
190 @3909db	Sample log: "bubbling during PCO2." Salinity and silicate are 
		acceptable; piggy-back (48) are also acceptable.
149 @4112db	Delta-S(n-g) at 4112db is 0.003, salinity is 34.711. Salinity and 
		silicate are acceptable; Gerard (93) also acceptable.
193 @4113db	Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (49).

Station 264
Cast 3		Sample log: "no comments."
185 @3657db	Sample log: "top vent closed - bottom valve gushing water - leaky." 
		Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (45).
147 @3910db	Sample log: "47/46 reversed in rack - suspect on oppos. Gers, confirmed 
		by therm readings." asal: "reverse 47/46 to connect with samplers 
		6/7." Salinity and silicate slightly low, but within acceptable limits; 
		Gerard (87) samples acceptable. Sample log and thermometer sheet records 
		were changed in an attempt to correct mis-recording at sea. Still 
		appears to be confusion as to what came out of what Gerard or piggy-
		back. However, can not change sample numbers to "fit" the data.
187 @3911db	Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (47) also okay.
189 @4164db	Sample log: "lid didn't catch." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; 
		piggy-back (46). PI to determine the integrity of other LV samples.

Station 274
Cast 1		No double ping until 0828z/7 mins before top barrel stop.
146 @1335db	See comments on Gerard (87). Delta-S(n-g) at 1335db is -0.002, salinity 
		is 34.546. Footnote bottle did not trip as scheduled, footnote salinity 
		and silicate bad for this pressure, footnote pressure uncertain.
187 @1336db	post-trips: last 4 tripped while wire moving up toward 1st barrel. 
		therms not soaked. Gerards 87, 89, 90, and 93 post-tripped, all but 87 
		appear to have correct reassigned pressures. Salinity and silicate from 
		Gerard and piggy-back agree with one another, but too high compared with
		rosette cast and station profile; piggy-back (46). Suspect tripped at
		—1500m, if 1500 were used then ODF would delete the temperature. Footnote
		bottle did not trip as scheduled, footnote pressure uncertain. Footnote
		silicate and salinity bad for this pressure.
383 @1557db	Delta-S(n-g) at 1556db is -0.002, salinity is 34.554. Salinity and 
		silicate are acceptable. Piggy-back (43)
147 @1669db	See post-trip comment on 187. Footnote bottle did not trip as scheduled, 
		pressure post-tripped, samples acceptable at reassigned pressure; Gerard (89).
189 @1669db	See post-trip comment on 187. Footnote bottle did not trip as scheduled, 
		pressure post-tripped, samples acceptable at reassigned pressure; piggy-
		back (47).
148 @1818db	See post-trip comment on 187. Footnote bottle did not trip as scheduled, 
		pressure post-tripped, samples acceptable at reassigned pressure; Gerard (90).
190 @1818db	See post-trip comment on 187. Footnote bottle did not trip as scheduled, 
		pressure post-tripped, samples acceptable at reassigned pressure; piggy-
		back (48).
149 @1975db	Delta-S(n-g) at 1975db is -0.003, salinity is 34.620. See post-trip 
		comment on 187. Footnote bottle did not trip as scheduled, pressure post- 
		tripped, samples acceptable at reassigned pressure; Gerard (93).
193 @1976db	See post-trip comment on 187. Footnote bottle did not trip as scheduled, 
		pressure post-tripped, samples acceptable at reassigned pressure; piggy-
		back (49).
385 @2308db	Sample log: "leaky again." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-
		back (45).
185 @3215db	Sample log: "leak somewhere - all tight - upper valve - water gushes at 
		lower fitting." Salinity and silicate acceptable; piggy-back (45).
390 @3860db	Delta-S(n-g) at 3859db is -0.002, salinity is 34.710. Salinity and 
		silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (48).
393 @4059db	Sample log: "possible mix up with nuts draw/maybe not." Appears all 
		okay. Piggy-back (49)

Station 284
Cast 1		Sample log: "everything ok."
384 @1501db	Sample log: "a gusher at bottom valve." leaks without venting, main 
		clamp block gone. Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (44).
387 @1802db	Sample log: "top valve loose/gusher." Salinity and silicate are 
		acceptable; piggy-back (46).
347 @1952db	Sample log: "niskin failed, bottom cap open - therms ok." Fails to 
		close due to tie wrap hanging up on release pin. Solution: replaced 
		therm lanyard with correct-length lanyard. Gerard (89)
389 @1953db	Sample log: "barrel lid closed but not latched." Salinity and silicate 
		are acceptable; piggy-back (47).
348 @2104db	Therm rack 8 fails to reverse because spring lanyard fails. DeltaS(n-g) 
		at 2104db is -0.0083, salinity is 34.628. Footnote salinity and silicate 
		bad, bottle leaking; Gerard (90) samples acceptable. No temperature.
390 @2104db	No temperature, problem with piggy-back (48). Salinity and silicate are 
		acceptable.
145 @3274db	Delta-S(n-g) at 3274db is -0.0094, salinity is 34.680. Station profile 
		compared with adjoining rosette casts looks reasonable. Rosette data also 
		has a definite "shift" in the data. However, since the salinities and 
		silicates from the Gerard and piggy-back bottle do not agree with one 
		another, footnote silicate uncertain from the piggy-back and salinity 
		from the Gerard (85).
185 @3274db	Footnote salinity uncertain see comments piggy-back (45). PI will have 
		to determine integrity of Gerard samples.
147 @3680db	Delta-S(n-g) at 3680db is -0.7731, salinity is 33.928. Footnote 
		salinity and silicate bad bottle leaking, Gerard (89) salinity and 
		silicate are acceptable.
189 @3680db	Salinity and silicate are acceptable despite problem with piggy-back 
		(47).

Station 299
344 @1528db	Delta-S(n-g) at 1528db is -0.0095, salinity is 34.561. Footnote 
		salinity and silicate uncertain, bottle leaking. Gerard (84) salinity 
		and silicate acceptable.
384 @1528db	Sample log: "leaky, pump is sucking air from barrel." Salinity and 
		silicate are acceptable, piggy-back (44)
347 @1904db	Delta-S(n-g) at 1905db is -0.0052, salinity is 34.614. Gerard (89) 
		salinity slightly high, silicates agree within .2.
389 @1905db	Sample log: "loose pin on barrel." Footnote salinity uncertain, 
		silicates agree within .2. Suspect salinity drawing is a little "sloppy" 
		and not a problem with the barrel; piggy-back (47).
190 @3553db	Sample log: "gusher at btm valve." Salinity and silicate are 
		acceptable; piggy-back (48).

Station 317
Cast 1		Sample log:" no comments
383 @1550db	Sample log: "gusher/leaky." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; 
		piggy-back (43).
385 @1852db	Sample log: "bad vent o-ring/leaky." Salinity and silicate are 
		acceptable; piggy-back (45)
347 @2151db	Sample log: "leaky on valve test before sampling (before venting?)." 
		Silicate and salinity are acceptable; Gerard (89).
389 @2152db	Silicate and salinity are acceptable; piggy-back (47).
349 @2450db	Delta-S(n-g) at 2450db is -0.0078, salinity is 34.661. Gerard (93) 
		salinity is high.
393 @2451db	Salinity is slightly high, silicate is acceptable; piggy-back (49). 
		Suspect Gerard samples okay.

Station 326
Cast 3		Sample log: "no comments."
183 @3134db	Sample log: "gusher at bottom valve." Salinity and silicate are 
		acceptable; piggy-back (43).
145 @3536db	Delta-S(n-g) at 3536db is 0.5725, salinity is 35.259. Footnote bottle 
		leaking, salinity and silicate bad. Gerard (85) appears to be okay.
185 @3537db	Salinity and silicate are acceptable; despite piggy-back (45) problems.
147 @3943db	Sample log: "top lid not sealing again? leaky." Salinity and silicate 
		are acceptable; Gerard (89).
189 @3944db	Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (47).

Station 338
342 @1474db	Sample log: "leaky on valve test." Salinity and silicate are acceptable 
		as are the Gerard (82) salinity and silicate.
382 @1474db	Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (42).
347 @2345db	Sample log: "too warm for depth?." Delta-S(n-g) at 2345db is 1.17, 
		salinity is 35.830. Footnote bottle leaking, salinity and silicate bad. 
		Gerard (89) salinity and silicate acceptable.
389 @2345db	Salinity and silicate acceptable despite piggy-back (47) problems.
193 @4701db	Sample log: "gusher at bottom valve, all appears tight; Lid closed - 
		not latched." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (49).

Station 353
381 @1184db	Sample log: "gusher again." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; 
		piggy-back (41). PI to determine integrity of other Gerard samples.
342 @1306db	Delta-S(n-g) at 1306db is 0.0053, salinity is 34.598. Suspect poor 
		salinity drawing technique, footnote salinity uncertain, it is still 
		usable. Gerard (82) salinity and silicate are acceptable. Gerard (82)
382 @1307db	Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (42).
281 @2300db	Sample log: "gusher." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back 
		(41). PI to determine integrity of other Gerard samples.
283 @2702db	Sample log: "vent valve stuck, gusher." Salinity and silicate are 
		acceptable; piggy-back (43). PI to determine integrity of other Gerard 
		samples.
284 @2903db	Sample log: "no gusher but leak at top valve." Salinity and silicate 
		are acceptable; piggy-back (44). PI to determine integrity of other 
		Gerard samples. Piggy-back (44)
289 @3505db	Sample log: "lid slightly open." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; 
		piggy-back (47). PI to determine integrity of other Gerard samples.

Station 361
347 @1724db	Sample log: "leaky upon valve test - ok after readj. top lid." Salinity 
		and silicate are acceptable; Gerard (89) also acceptable.
389 @1725db	Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (47).
181 @2020db	Sample log: "gusher." Salinity and silicate are acceptable, piggy-back 
		(41). PI will have to determine integrity of Gerard samples.
147 @2926db	Sample log: "leaks on valve test, top cap again?." Delta-S(n-g) at 
		2926db is -0.0157, salinity is 34.678. Salinity and silicate are acceptable; 
		Gerard (89) salinity is high, but silicate is acceptable.
189 @2927db	Footnote salinity bad, see salinity difference comment 147, silicate 
		is acceptable; piggy-back (47).

Station 379
182 @1503db	Sample log: "bad O-ring in vent, barrel leaky at vent." Salinity and 
		silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (42).
190 @2554db	Sample log: "lower gerard fitting unscrews easily." Salinity and 
		silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (48).

Station 395
341 @1347db	Sample log: "not fastened in rack properly/lost a lot of water." 
		Salinity and silicate are acceptable; Gerard (81) also acceptable.
381 @1347db	Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (41).
382 @1448db	Sample log: "bottom valve came out." Salinity and silicate are 
		acceptable; piggy-back (42).
383 @1548db	Sample log: "sucking air bubbles - top vent/btm valve ok, chk o-ring." 
		Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (43).
182 @2414db	therms: "barrel 82 leaks." Sample log: "small gusher, check gerard lid 
		o-ring, may need grease." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-
		back (42).

Station 413
Cast 3		Sample log: "perfect cast. (no comment on therm form either)."
488 (No Pressure) Sample log/therms: "leaks from vent - check both O-rings in cap; 
		lower klein clamp needs work and/or grease - check." Sample log: "not 
		sampled."
492 (No Pressure) Sample log: "not sampled."
494 (No Pressure) Sample log: "not sampled."
447 @1357db	Delta-S(n-g) at 1357db is -0.0049, salinity is 34.593. Gerard (89)
489 @1357db	Sample log: "look fine, no leaks anywhere and all lids latched." Piggy-
		back (47)
448 @1442db	Delta-S(n-g) at 1442db is -0.0031, salinity is 34.602. Salinity and 
		silicate are acceptable, suspect salinity difference is poor drawing. 
		Gerard (90)
490 @1442db	Sample log: "look fine, no leaks anywhere and all lids latched." 
		Salinity and silicate are acceptable, suspect salinity difference is 
		poor drawing technique; piggy-back (48).
449 @1544db	Delta-S(n-g) at 1544db is -0.002, salinity is 34.611. Gerard (93)
493 @1545db	Sample log: "look fine, no leaks anywhere and all lids latched." 
		Piggy-back (49)
190 @5555db	Sample log: "valve unscrews needs teflon? otherwise perfect cast." 
		Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (48).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPENDIX A:

Improving the Measurement of Pressure in the NBIS Mark III CTD

Frank M. Delahoyde and Robert T. Williams

Oceanographic Data Facility
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
La Jolla, Ca. 92093-0214

ABSTRACT

A software model for correcting the dynamic response of the Paine 
Instruments stainless steel strain-gauge pressure transducer used in the 
NBIS Mark IIIB CTD is described.  Laboratory calibration techniques and 
the response characteristics of strain-gauge transducers are discussed.  
Experimental data supporting the model are presented.

August 23, 1994

1.	Introduction

The NBIS Mark IIIB CTD uses a stainless steel strain-gauge pressure 
transducer to measure pressure.  The early models contained sensors 
produced by Standard Controls.  Later versions contain sensors from Paine 
Instruments, with no significant differences in their characteristics.  
These sensors have proven to be reliable and of adequate sensitivity and 
stability for oceanographic profiling applications.  Their accuracy 
depends upon careful and frequent calibration, with attention paid to 
their response characteristics.  With an understanding of these 
characteristics, and applying an appropriate correction model, pressure 
accuracy of 2 db or better can be consistently attained.  This level of 
pressure accuracy is necessary to insure the accuracy of parameters 
calculated from pressure; a 4 db error in pressure can result in a 0.002 
PSU error in calculated salinity.  The manufacturer's specifications are 
shown in Table 1 and have been found to be generally conservative.

Several response characteristics of strain-gauge transducers can 
contribute to significant measurement errors in oceanographic 
applications.  These can be loosely grouped into static or steady-state 
responses and dynamic responses. 

Pressure range			0-8850 psi (0-6100 db)
Compensated temperature range	-32 to 151 °C
Thermal zero shift		0.01 %F.S./°F (1.10 db/°C)
Thermal sensitivity shift	0.005% F.S./°F (0.55 db/°C)
Non-linearity and hysteresis	±0.25% F.S. (15.25 db)
Shock, vibration, acceleration	0.01% F.S./G (0.61 db/G)
Repeatability			±0.05 %F.S. (3.05 db)
Table 1.
Specifications of Paine Instruments Model 211-35-090-05 strain-
gauge pressure transducer.

Most pressure calibration methods have concentrated on measuring steady-
state responses.  A dead-weight tester is used to measure non-linearity 
and hysteresis in the pressure response.  Used in conjunction with a 
temperature-controlled bath, thermal zero and sensitivity shift can be 
measured. A response characteristic that varies with time before it 
reaches a steady-state is a dynamic response.  For oceanographic 
applications where both pressure and temperature are changing, dynamic 
response characteristics become important.

The Mark III CTD Strain-gauge has a thermal response-time several orders 
of magnitude greater than the pressure response-time, due to the 
physical location of the sensor.  The transducer is threaded into a port 
drilled through the CTD pressure case end cap, and located on the inside 
face.  Most of the sensor is inside the pressure case, surrounded by a 
substantial mass of low thermal conductivity stainless steel.  The 
strain-gauge is insulated from the ambient temperature by water filling 
the port and the material encasing the sensing element.  Thermal 
response-time constants on the order of 400 seconds are not unusual.  In 
the ocean, the sensor can be responding to temperatures differing from 
the ambient by more than 20°C, depending on profiling velocity and 
temperature gradients.

Non-linearity and hysteresis are characteristics of the sensor's 
response to pressure.  The amount of hysteresis is dependent upon the 
maximum pressure applied to the sensor.  Typical pressure response-times 
are less than 40 milli-seconds.

Stability is a measure of how often a sensor must be calibrated to 
insure some criteria for accuracy.  This depends on how frequently the 
sensor is used, how it is employed, and the required accuracy.  Typical 
stability metrics for 2 db pressure accuracy are on the order of months, 
and it is usually sufficient to calibrate Mark III pressure sensors 
immediately before and after 1-2 month expeditions.

A response-correction model for Mark III CTD pressure based on these 
sensor characteristics must describe the pressure response as functions 
of pressure, maximum pressure, temperature, and time.

One such model, together with appropriate calibration techniques, was 
developed by the authors and has been in use for several years.  This 
method interpolates the pressure correction, using the sensor pressure 
signal and an estimate of the sensor temperature, from tables of 
calibration values measured at two or more temperatures.  The number of 
calibration temperatures and pressures are selected such that the 
response of the transducer is adequately defined. In practice, pressure 
calibrations are performed to low (25% F.S.) and full-scale pressures at 
each of two widely-spaced temperatures, typically 0 and 25°C.  An 
estimate of the sensor thermal response-time is made by plunging the 
thermally-equilibrated instrument into an ice-bath, generating a thermal 
step-change.  Corrections are derived by linear interpolation between 
calibration points selected from the tables using the uncalibrated 
sensor pressure and a temperature modeled for the thermal response of 
the sensor.

This technique can be applied to other types of pressure transducers, 
where non-linear response characteristics make simpler models 
impractical.  It has the advantage of operating directly from the 
pressure calibration data.

2.	Temperature Effects

The response of a Mark III pressure transducer to a step-change in 
temperature can be modeled as the sum of at least two different 
responses with different response-times.

The faster thermal response is due to internal strain-gauge temperature 
compensation.  The manufacturer uses a resistive temperature-
compensating element in the transducer that ideally would exhibit the 
same thermal response-time as the strain-gauge, exactly canceling the 
temperature response.  In practice this is not readily achieved, as the 
compensating element must be exactly matched to an individual sensor.  
The temperature compensation is adequate to bring the response to within 
the manufacturer's specifications, but typically introduces a second 
temperature response due to mismatches of the magnitude and response-
time of the compensation.  *Figure 1.0 illustrates typical Mark III 
pressure response to a temperature step-change.

The original Mark III CTD design further complicates the pressure 
response by an additional attempt at temperature compensation using a 
thermister attached to the transducer.  The response-time of the 
thermister is grossly mismatched to the transducer, and its placement is 
such that it does not measure the transducer temperature.  The 
correction techniques discussed in this paper assume that this 
compensation has been removed.

The pressure signal can be corrected for thermal response by

	P(corrected) =P(raw) +k(1) T(lagged1) +k(2) T(lagged2) 		(1.0)

Where:
K(1)		is the temperature coefficient (db/°C) associated with the first 
		thermal response;
T(lagged1)	is the lagged temperature associated with the first thermal 
		response;
K(2)		is the temperature coefficient (db/°C) associated with the second 
		thermal response; and
T(lagged2)	is the lagged temperature associated with the second thermal 
		response.

The lagged temperatures can be modeled satisfactorily as a simple 
exponential decay with no initial delay.  They are modeled from the in-
situ temperature using response-time constants determined 
experimentally:

		T(lagged) =e^(-dt/tau) T(p) +(1 -e^(-dt/tau))T	   (2.0)

Where:
dt	is the measurement period in seconds;
tau	is the temperature response-time constant in seconds;
T(p)	is the previous lagged temperature;
T	is the in-situ temperature.

*Figure 1.0 illustrates Mark III CTD pressure response to a step change 
in temperature, together with a 2 term exponential model of the 
response.

One problem with modeling a sensor temperature from the in-situ 
temperature is the choice of an appropriate initialization value.  Using 
the out-of-water CTD pressure and the pressure calibration, a 
reasonably-accurate initial temperature can be calculated.  Because of 
the long response-time associated with the thermal response, care should 
be taken to insure the CTD is reasonably equilibrated with the ambient 
temperature and does not heat up from exposure to the sun.

3.	Pressure Response

Strain-gauge transducers typically exhibit a non-linear pressure 
response. Correcting the response is complicated by hysteresis.  This 
hysteresis is reproducible, and is dependent on the maximum pressure 
applied to the sensor.  *Figure 2.0 illustrates the pressure correction 
curves obtained from a Mark III CTD calibrated to several maximum 
pressures at two different temperatures.  To correct for hysteresis, it 
is necessary to construct an unloading correction curve based on the 
maximum pressure applied to the sensor.

4.	Pressure Hysteresis Correction

A simple method for approximating the unloading curve correction uses 
the ratio of the observed maximum pressure to the calibration maximum 
pressure to scale the amount of hysteresis measured in the calibration 
(see *Figure 3.0):

1	A pressure calibration is performed to some maximum calibration 
	pressure (the "loading" calibration), then back to zero pressure (the 
	"unloading" calibration). Sufficient calibration points are taken to 
	clearly define the response curve. The calibration is then used to 
	correct sensor response. 
2	The sensor response is corrected using the temperature correction and 
	the loading calibration correction until the pressure decreases 
	(begins unloading). The corrected maximum loading pressure P(max) and 
	the maximum calibration pressure P(cal) are noted.
3	The proportion P(max)/P(cal) is calculated. The amount of hysteresis 
	(the difference between loading and unloading calibration curves) at 
	0 decibars is scaled by P(max)/P(cal) to give H(0). The amount of 
	hysteresis at P(max) gives H(max).
4	The slope and intercept of the line between H(0) and H(max) is calculated.
5	At any pressure less than P(max), the difference between this line 
	and the original unloading curve represents the amount of hysteresis 
	at that pressure. This difference, when subtracted from the original 
	loading curve, generates the unloading curve.

Complications to this technique are introduced when repeated raising and 
lowering of the CTD (a "yo-yo" cast) is necessary.  The correction 
scheme must provide a mechanism for returning along the unloading curve 
to the loading curve when the original maximum pressure is exceeded, and 
the construction of a new unloading curve based on the most recent 
maximum pressure.

5.	Correction Interpolation Model

The correction interpolation model for pressure developed by the authors 
combines the modeled thermal response-correction and unloading curve 
interpolation techniques previously described with tables of calibration 
data (*Figure 4.0).  The calibration data are organized into tables at 
different calibration temperatures (stored in ascending temperature 
sequence).  The first table contains the calibration pressures for the 
loading curve, followed by calibration pressures for each of the 
measured unloading curves (stored from shallowest to deepest maximum 
pressures).  The pressures are stored in ascending sequence for each 
curve.  Subsequent tables, at each calibration temperature, contain the 
raw pressure measurement corresponding to the calibration pressure at 
the calibration temperature.  Each table has the same number of points 
as its corresponding calibration pressures table.  The number of 
temperatures and unloading curves are only limited by the amount of 
calibration information necessary to properly correct the response of a 
particular sensor to the required degree of accuracy.

*Figure 4.0.
Calibration data for the correction interpolation model.

The model uses the current raw pressure and a sensor temperature modeled 
from the in-situ temperature to look-up the corrected pressures of 
adjacent calibration points from the calibration tables.  The corrected 
pressure is then calculated by linear interpolation of the adjacent 
calibration points.

The model is initialized when in-situ conductivity exceeds a previously- 
established "in-water" value.  A pressure correction (known pressure 
minus observed pressure) is interpolated from the calibration data 
loading curves bracketing the current sensor temperature.  An offset is 
calculated (the correction still required to bring the pressure to 0.0 
db after the correction interpolated from the loading curves is 
applied).  This offset is applied to the first loading curve interval.  
The model is now in the "loading" state.

The model continues in the "loading" state as long as pressure does not 
decrease.  Calibrated pressures are interpolated from four adjacent 
loading curve points: two higher-pressure points and two lower-pressure 
points at two adjacent temperatures.

When pressure decreases, the model enters the "unloading" state.  
Unloading curves are calculated for the two adjacent temperature 
calibration tables, using the differences between loading and unloading 
curves.  In this model, the possibility of multiple calibration 
unloading curves permits the construction of an unloading curve from the 
shallowest calibration curve that originates at a pressure deeper than 
the maximum observed pressure.  Using the sensor temperature, a 
correction is interpolated from the two calculated unloading curves.  If 
the CTD is again lowered, the calculated unloading curves are followed 
until the original maximum pressure is reached.  The model then reverts 
to the "loading" state.

The pressure correction is extrapolated if the CTD pressure exceeds the 
maximum calibration pressure.  As the maximum calibration pressure is 
typically close to full-scale, the practice of exceeding this pressure 
should be restricted.

The model also extrapolates corrections for temperatures outside the 
range of available calibration information.  This is reasonable behavior 
for Mark III pressure transducers, which generally exhibit linear 
temperature response.  Certain types of pressure sensors (e.g., piezo-
electric quartz transducers) that exhibit nonlinear temperature response 
would necessarily be calibrated at more temperatures to adequately 
define the temperature response.  Any new or unknown pressure sensor 
should be calibrated at several temperatures to insure the thermal 
response is adequately defined.  Subsequent recalibrations can be at 
fewer temperatures if the response is linear.

A graphical representation of the ODF interpolation model is presented 
in *Figure 5.0.

*Figure 5.0
A graphic representation of the ODF interpolation method of 
pressure correction. The left and right hysteresis curves were 
measured at 22.75°C and 0.9°C, respectively. The black circles are 
the loading curve points and the grey circles two unloading curves: 
from 6080db and from 1398db. The center hysteresis curve is 
interpolated by a computer model at 10.0°C with unloading curves at 
1000, 2000, 3000, 4000 and 5000db.

6.	Further Information

WOCE participants interested in implementing either model, or who have 
further questions can contact the authors at the Oceanographic Data 
Facility.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPENDIX B:
CTD Dissolved Oxygen Data Processing

F.M. Delahoyde
Oceanographic Data Facility
Scripps Institution of Oceanography

ABSTRACT

This paper describes the techniques used at the Oceanographic Data 
Facility (ODF) for processing CTD dissolved oxygen data acquired from 
NBIS Mark III instruments, employing Sensormedics1 dissolved oxygen 
sensors.  The response characteristics of the sensors are discussed and 
deployment methods examined.  An algorithm for converting the measured 
oxygen current, pressure, temperature and salinity to dissolved oxygen 
concentration is presented.  The determination of calibration 
coefficients from Winkler titration check-sample data is discussed.  
Results from the application of the algorithm to some recently-collected 
data sets are examined.

August 31, 1993

1-Formerly Beckman.

1.	Introduction

The Oceanographic Data Facility (ODF) at SIO has been making CTD 
measurements since the early 1970s, primarily using NBIS 
instrumentation.  These instruments employ Sensormedics sensors to 
effect dissolved O2 measurement.

Correcting the non-linear response characteristics of these sensors has 
driven the evolution of a series of sensor models.  Early attempts at 
laboratory calibration had proven futile, due to poor sensor stability 
and a lack of data on dynamic response characteristics.  A practical 
field calibration technique proved to be fitting sensor model 
coefficients to differences between modified Winkler titration check-
sample data and the sensor measurements.  Refinements in this technique 
has led to a better understanding of the secondary and dynamic responses 
inherent in these sensors.

The check-sample and sensor data are collected with a 24 or 36-place 
rosette system containing a CTD.  A conducting wire is used to lower and 
raise the package, transmit check-sample trip signals to the rosette, 
and transmit CTD data to the ship for real-time analysis.  O2 check-
samples are normally drawn from all bottles.  At routine profiling 
velocities of 50-80 m/min, the processed CTD data provide 1-2 meters of 
vertical resolution in temperature and salinity structure, and 10-15 
meters in dissolved O2 structure.

2.	The Sensor and Sensor Interface

The Sensormedics sensor is a membrane-covered polarographic detector 
consisting of a 0.5 mil thick FEP Teflon membrane covering a layer of 
KCl gel.  A gold cathode is the sensing electrode, and a silver 
electrode serves as both the anode and the reference.  A 0.8 volt 
potential applied across the two electrodes results in a current 
proportional to the activity of O2 diffusing through the membrane and 
gel, and reducing at the cathode:

		O2 +2H2O+4e-  -> 4OH-

The NBIS interface to the Sensormedics sensor employs a current to 
frequency converter with a sample period of 1.024 seconds.  The sensor 
frequency is resolved to 11-bits, with a full-scale value corresponding to 
2.047 µamps.  The NBIS interface also provides for an 8-bit digitized O2 
membrane temperature, which is not used by ODF.  The interface electronics 
are contained within the CTD pressure case.  The sensor is mounted in an 
ODF-designed pressure-compensating holder, which is typically attached to 
the rosette frame in proximity to the CTD end-cap.  The sensor assembly 
plugs into a bulkhead connector in the end-cap through an underwater 
cable, providing easy servicing and sensor replacement.

3.	Deployment and Maintenance

The Teflon membrane is extremely vulnerable to petroleum distillates, 
such as diesel oil.  Care is taken to deploy the package through clean 
water.  Between casts, an air-tight plexiglass cover is fixed over the 
sensor.  The cover contains an absorbent tissue moistened with distilled 
water.  The sensor membrane is periodically examined for any obvious 
external damage or contamination.

4.	Sensor Response Characteristics
4.1.	O2 Response

The O2 response of the sensor depends upon the O2 activity at the sensor 
cathode.  The selectivity of the reaction is generally guaranteed by the 
relatively anodic value for its equilibrium potential [1].  However, a 
network of reactions can occur at the cathode, depending upon the exact 
state and ionic species present.  H2O2 can appear as a stable reaction 
intermediate and is reduced [2], aliasing the O2 signal.

The sensitivity of the O2 response is determined by the O2 diffusion-
rate through the membrane diffusion layer.  This is determined by 
temperature and pressure.

4.2.	Temperature Response

The rate of O2 diffusion through the Teflon membrane is primarily 
determined by temperature.  The diffusion rate can be characterized:

		Qd =(P0/b) e^(-(Ep/RT))				(4.2.0)

where P0 is a constant for FEP Teflon, b is the membrane thickness, Ep 
is the activation energy for permeation, R is the gas constant and T is 
temperature.  Changes in temperature affect the sensitivity of the O2 
response. 

Secondary temperature effects include changes in sensor geometry due to 
thermal expansion or compression (changing membrane tension), and 
thermal sensitivity of the interface electronics.

4.3.	Pressure Response

The crystalline structure of FEP Teflon changes with pressure.  This 
affects the membrane permeability, and sensitivity of the sensor[3].

4.4.	Flow-dependence

When the flow rate across the sensor membrane decreases below a certain 
level, depletion of dissolved O2 in seawater adjacent to the membrane 
occurs.  The sensor current drops as the membrane diffusion layer 
thickness is effectively increased.  Sensormedics recommends a minimum 
profiling velocity of 17 m/min.

4.5.	Response Time

The time constant for the response of the sensor to an O2 step-change at 
20°C in surface seawater is nominally 2 seconds.  This is the optimal 
case, and is beyond the Nyquist frequency of the sampling electronics.  
At lower temperatures and higher pressures, the time constant can exceed 
15 seconds.

5.	Calibration

Repeated exposures to low temperatures and high pressures adversely 
affects the stability of the sensor, making laboratory calibration 
unfeasible.  Calibration to Winkler titration check-samples insures the 
prompt detection of sensor malfunctions.

The Winkler titration measures dissolved O2 concentration. In contrast, 
the polarographic O2 sensor measures O2 activity.  It is necessary to 
correct for salinity, temperature, and pressure effects when calculating 
concentrations from activity[4,5].

ODF normally collects at least 12 check-samples per cast.  The oxygens 
are generally titrated within 6 hours of the cast.  Modeling 
coefficients and time-constants are then fit to the check-samples.

6.	The Model

The general form of the ODF O2 conversion equation follows WHOI[6,7] and 
NBIS[8]:

		O2 =[c1 Oc +c2]fsat(T, S)e^(c3 P+c4 Tm)	(6.0)

where:
O2	is the dissolved O2 concentration;
Oc	is the sensor current, in µamps;
fsat(S, T, P) is the O2 saturation concentration at T,S in ml/l;
S	is the salinity, in PSUs;
T	is the temperature, in °C;
P	is the pressure at O2 response-time, in decibars;
Tm	is the temperature of the sensor membrane, in °C.

c1, c2, c3 and c4 are coefficients to be determined through check-sample 
comparison.

Tm is derived by NBIS from the digitized O2 temperature. ODF instead 
models a membrane temperature by low-pass filtering the PRT temperature.  
In-situ pressure and temperature are filtered to match the sensor 
response.  Time-constants for the pressure response tau-p, and two 
temperature responses tau-Ts and tau-Tf are fitting parameters.  The Oc 
gradient is approximated by low-pass filtering 1° Oc differences.  This 
term attempts to correct for reduction of species other than O2 at the 
cathode.  The time-constant for this filter, tau-og, is a fitting 
parameter.  Oxygen partial-pressure is then calculated:

	Opp = [c1 Oc +c2]fsat (S, T, P)e^(c3Pl +c4Tf +c5Ts + c6 dOc/dt )	(6.1)

where:
Opp	is the dissolved O2 partial-pressure in atmospheres;
Oc	is the sensor current, in µamps;
fsat (S, T, P)is the O2 saturation partial-pressure at S,T,P in 
	atmospheres;
S	is the salinity at O2 response-time, in PSUs;
T	is the temperature at O2 response-time, in °C;
P	is the pressure at O2 response-time, in decibars;
Pl	is the low-pass filtered pressure, in decibars;
Tf	is the fast low-pass filtered temperature, in °C;
Ts	is the slow low-pass filtered temperature, in °C;
dOc/dt	is the sensor current gradient.

c1, c2, c3, c4, c5 and c6 are coefficients determined by applying a 
modified Levenberg-Marquardt non-linear least-squares fitting procedure-*2 
to differences from the Winkler titration check-sample data.

*2-Procedure snls1 from the Stanford SLATEC math library.

CTD O2 current values used for the fit are normally extracted from the 
downcast at isopycnals corresponding to the actual up-cast check-sample 
points.  This is done to avoid the flow-dependence problems occurring at 
bottle stops.

The response time-constants tau-Ts and tau-P (slow temperature and 
pressure) are typically determined once for a cruise.  The other two 
time-constants tau-og and tau-Tf (O2 current gradient and fast 
temperature) show some variability and are determined for each sensor 
deployment.  The remaining modeling coefficients are determined for each 
sensor deployment.

7.	Results

8.	Summary

References
[1] Hitchman, M.L., Measurement of Dissolved Oxygen, John Wiley & 
    Sons, Inc. and Orbisphere Corp., 1978.
[2] Damjanovic, A., in Modern Aspects of Electrochemistry, (J. O'M. 
    Bockris and B.E. Conway, Eds.), No. 5, Butterworths, London, 1969.
[3] Hopfenburg, H.B., Ed., Permeability of Plastic Films and Coatings 
    to Gases, Vapors and Liquids, Plenum Press, New York, 1974.
[4] Weiss, R. F., "The solubility of nitrogen, oxygen and argon in 
    water and seawater." Deep-Sea Research, 17, 721 (1970).
[5] Eckert, C.A., "The thermodynamics of gases dissolved at great 
    depths." Science, 180, 426 (1973).
[6] Millard, R.C. Jr., "CTD calibration and data processing techniques 
    at WHOI using the practical salinity scale", Proc. Int. STD 
    Conference and Workshop, La Jolla, Mar. Tech. Soc., 19pp. (1982).
[7] Owens, W.B. and Millard, R.C. Jr., "A new algorithm for CTD oxygen 
    calibration", Journ. of Am. Meteorological Soc., 15, 621 (1985).
[8] Brown, N.L. and Morrison, G.K., "WHOI/Brown conductivity, 
    temperature and depth microprofiler", Woods Hole Oceanographic 
    Institution Technical Report No. 78-23, 1978.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix C:

WOCE93-P19C Calibration Figures

Figure 1a: CTD #1 Pre-cruise Pressure Calibration

Figure 1b: CTD #1 Post-cruise Pressure Calibration

Figure 1c: CTD #1 Post-cruise Pressure Calibration plus Offset used for P19C

Figure 2a: CTD #1 Warm-to-Cold Thermal Shock Data

Figure 2b: CTD #1 Cold-to-Warm Thermal Shock Data

Figure 3a: CTD #1 Pre-cruise PRT-1 Temperature Calibration (ITS-90)

Figure 3b: CTD #1 Post-cruise PRT-1 Temperature Calibration (ITS-90)

Figure 4a: P19C Conductivity Slopes, Both CTDs

Figure 4b: P19C Conductivity Offsets, Both CTDs

Figure 5a: P19C Residual Conductivity Bottle-CTD Differences - All Pressures

Figure 5b: P19C Residual Conductivity Bottle-CTD Differences - Prs>1500dbar

Figure 6a: P19C Residual Diss. Oxygen UpBottle-DownCTD Differences - All 
	   Pressures

Figure 6b: P19C Residual Diss. Oxygen UpBottle-DownCTD Differences - 
	   Prs>1500dbar

Figures shown in pdf file.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix D:

WOCE93-P19C Processing Notes

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. CTD Shipboard and Processing Comments
2. Cast Stops Longer Than 1 Minute
3. CTD Temperature and Conductivity Corrections Summary
4. Summary of P19C CTD Oxygen Time Constants
5. Levenberg-Marquardt Non-linear Least-Squares-Fit Oxygen Coefficients

WOCE93-P19C CTD Shipboard and Processing Comments

sta/cast	Comments

234/01		new end termination; 4-min. stop/yoyo from 85 db back up to 71 db 
		on down cast before continuing; almost hit as bottom shoaled up during 
		bottle trip; CTD oxygen data would not auto-fit to bottle values,
		probably because shallow cast with 4-min. stop/yoyo in high gradient 
		area: used coefficients from station 235 cast 1 fit for this cast
235/01		rotate pylon 90 degrees before cast to avoid trip-through at 
		bttm; winch started down at 90 m/min
236/01
237/01		0 db level extrapolated
238/01
239/01
240/01		changed CTD wiring prior to cast: 2 (vs.1) conductors to CTD 
		now: current was stable; some noise caused by change, especially up cast
241/02		back to 1 conductor; some signal noise beginning 2400 db 
		upcast; sparse bottle oxygen data 1000 db to bottom: added cast 4 
		bottle oxygens to fill in the gaps for CTD oxygen fit
241/04		checked/dried cables/connectors prior to cast; signal noise 
		upcast; this is repeat cast at station due to bottle tripping 
		problems on cast 2; cast delayed 1m minute at 8-12 db down; sparse 
		bottle oxygen data top 1000 db: added cast 2 bottle oxygens to fill 
		in the gaps for CTD oxygen fit
242/01		0 db level extrapolated; found/eliminated one bad conductor in 
		wire prior to cast; down by one conductor for rest of cruise, but 
		signal noise is improved; stopped 2 minutes at cast start (0-6 db) 
		before continuing down
243/01
244/01
245/01		0 db level extrapolated; LADCP removed prior to cast; back to 
		36 bottles
246/01
247/01
248/01		acquisition started after ctd in water; pulled package back 
		out before continuing down
249/01
250/01
251/01		0 db level extrapolated
252/01
253/01		0 db level extrapolated
254/01		GO pylon controller box fault light glowing faintly throughout 
		cast; NO-confirm at btl 13, late confirm for btl 14 at same pressure,
		next trip ok; signal missing 2586-2421 db upcast: audio ok, replayed.
255/01		glowing GO pylon controller box fault light throughout cast;
256/01		0 db level extrapolated
257/01		0 db level extrapolated; bad weather/shiproll, slower winch 
		speed first 1000m; stop/slow winch multiple times during up cast to 
		turn ship; wire angle increasing beginning 3400m; NO-confirm at 300m 
		trip/btl.30; stopped tripping here and brought package out because 
		of BAD WEATHER: 90-degree wire angle, ship constantly maneuvering in 
		60-knot winds; perpendicular to swell as package brought out of 
		water; no bottle oxygen data top 300 db: added mostly station 256/some 
		station 258 bottle oxygens to fill in the gap for CTD oxygen fit 
		(station 258 values seemed high for station 257 oxygen shape between 
		100-300 db)
258/01		new end termination; kinks in wire at end of cast; 3 tries/all 
		NO-confirms at 160m/btl 30, reset to btl 31; last 6 btls confirmed ok
259/01		0 db level extrapolated; new end termination; major spiking 
		from 4580 db up to surface, loud noise from deck unit at spikes
260/01		CTD wiring fixed prior to cast = clean signal; cast delayed 1 
		minute at 4-8 db down; large wire angle near bottom; big transmissometer 
		dropout 2900 db to bottom on down cast
261/01
262/02		0 db level extrapolated; btl 35: 3 tries/all NO-confirms, 
		reset to btl 36 for surface trip = ok; high raw CTD oxygen values - 
		CTD oxygen data questionable from approx. 0 to 60 db; short section 
		of conductivity/ salinity drop 98-102 db, probably organic 
		contamination: despiked/ok now
263/01		high raw CTD oxygen values - CTD oxygen data questionable from 
		approx. 6 to 50 db
264/02		0 db level extrapolated
265/01		0 db level extrapolated
266/01		bottom depth decreased 200m during downcast
267/01
268/01		0 db level extrapolated; btl 35: 3 tries/all NO-confirms; reset 
		to btl 36 for surface trip = ok
269/01
270/01		0 db level extrapolated
271/01		0 db level extrapolated; UP cast: big dropout in conductivity 
		140-460 db down, probably organic matter contamination of sensor; up 
		cast ok
272/01		0 db level extrapolated; 6-min. winch stop/yoyo at 385 db back 
		up to 359 db on down cast -affected CTD oxygen data; 3-min. stop/yoyo 
		at 679 db back up to 664 db down cast; btl 35: NO-confirm followed 
		by good confirm
273/01		0 db level extrapolated; choppy seas/windy; btl 34: 3 tries/
		NO-confirm, reset to btl 35; btl 35: NO-confirm followed by good 
		confirm; surface btl 36 tripped on the fly about 5m too deep
274/02		0 db level extrapolated; washed pylon off with fresh water 
		prior to cast; btl 15: NO-confirm followed by good confirm; btl 30: 
		2 tries/both NO-confirms; btl 35: 2 tries/both NO-confirms
275/01		0 db level extrapolated; cleaned pylon connections before cast; 
		voltmeter added to pylon circuit
276/01		0 db level extrapolated; btl 30: 2 tries/both NO-confirms
277/01
278/01
279/01		high raw CTD oxygen values - CTD oxygen data questionable from 
		approx. 8 to 48 db
280/01		0 db level extrapolated; surface btl 36 fired while winch still 
		moving up last meter or so
281/01		0 db level extrapolated; cast ABORTED at 3007 db: forgot to 
		turn on pinger at cast start; brought back to srfc, pinger turned 
		on, restarted as cast 2; reported this cast with final data even 
		though aborted; no btl trips: used cast 2 bottle data for CTD oxygen fit
281/02		0 db level extrapolated
282/01		0 db level extrapolated; two trips at 1212 db - pilot error
283/01		0 db level extrapolated; started pylon tripping at btl 13 for 
		freon blank check; two trips at 2400 db - pilot error
284/02
285/01		0 db level extrapolated; bio-optics cast over the side mid-CTD 
		cast; winch brake problems during cast - stop 24 mins. at 2062-2068 
		db up plus 5/3.5 mins. at 2220-2224/2014-2018 db up
286/01		0 db level extrapolated; winch spd VERY slow 90-100m down, stop 
		15 mins. for brake problems 148-168 db down; stop again 8 mins. at 
		2484-2508 db down for winch problems/check - visible effect on CTD 
		oxygen data from both high-gradient stops
287/01		0 db level extrapolated
288/01
289/01		bottom depth uncertain due to side echoes
290/01		stop ctd 30+ mins. near bottom/4242-4257 db to debug/re-
		initialize GO pylon communications; while debugging, rosette may 
		have touched bottom: brought up to 4211 db w/audio-only running 
		until problem fixed, then back down to near-bottom for bottle trip; 
		delay had offset effect on CTD oxygen data
291/01		10-ft blue marlin swimming under wire lights during cast
292/01
293/01		0 db level extrapolated
294/02		0 db level extrapolated; LADCP back on this cast
295/01		0 db level extrapolated
296/01		0 db level extrapolated
297/01		0 db level extrapolated; transmissometer noisy 1200m down to 
		end of cast
298/01		0 db level extrapolated; started pylon tripping at btl 13 for 
		freon blank check
299/02		0 db level extrapolated; 1.5-min. delay at 2-4 db before starting 
		down
300/01		0 db level extrapolated
301/01		no transmissometer this cast
302/02		no transmissometer this cast
303/01		0 db level extrapolated; transmissometer reinstalled prior to 
		cast btl 30: NO-confirm followed by good confirm
304/01		0 db level extrapolated; last cast with transmissometer #63D
305/01		0 db level extrapolated; transmissometer #173D installed; 
		pinger died on downcast
306/01		new pinger #1223 installed w/fresh batteries; altimeter moved 
		up on rosette
307/01
308/01		0 db level extrapolated; btl 30: 3 tries/all NO-confirms; reset 
		to btl 31 and skip 100m trip
309/01
310/01
311/01
312/01
313/01		0 db level extrapolated; btl 30: 2 tries/both NO-confirms; 
		100m trip skipped
314/01		shallow bottom; btls 27 thru 36 not fired off
315/01		0 db level extrapolated
316/01		0 db level extrapolated; testing new altimiter = Datasonics #330;
		no altimeter signal this cast: powered off altimeter only at 800m 
		down, may have induced some CTD signal noise
317/02		winch not set correctly, yoyo back to surface to re-zero/start 
		down after 1-min. delay at 6-8 db; Datasonics altimeter powered on at 
		100m down, off and on a few times, mostly off during cast; still no 
		good near bottom, left off;
318/01		btl 15: NO-confirm followed by good confirm
319/01		0 db level extrapolated; btl 15: 2 tries/both NO-confirms, reset 
		to btl 16 and skip 1300m trip
320/01		LADCP removed prior to cast; original altimeter back on-line; 
		btl 35: 3 tries/all NO-confirms, reset to btl 36 for surface trip 
		bottom depth nearly 200m less than wire out; CTD probably down in 
		deeper hole just before sta, ship on ledge next to it
321/01		0 db level extrapolated
322/01		0 db level extrapolated; cast start delayed by ship engine problem
323/01		0 db level extrapolated
324/01
325/01		0 db level extrapolated; started pylon tripping at btl 25 for 
		freon blank check
326/02
327/02		0 db level extrapolated; pdr bottom reading mid-cast very 
		uncertain, up to 100m-wide area
328/01		0 db level extrapolated; pinger signal died after first 5 
		mins. of down cast; btl 71: NO-confirm, 1.5-min. delay to re-
		initialize GO pylon communications, then good confirm; btl 30: NO-
		confirm followed by good confirm, came up OPEN anyways; btl 72 now 
		in Davey Jones' locker - MIA at rosette recovery
329/01		0 db level extrapolated
330/01		0 db level extrapolated; entire down cast offset from nearby 
		casts, up cast worse: offsets twice mid-cast
331/01		0 db level extrapolated; down cast conductivity is offset low compared 
		to nearby casts; up cast conductivity offsets higher twice, near 
		bottom and halfway up; nothing on sensor after cast, washed with 
		seawater squirt btl anyways
332/01
333/01		0 db level extrapolated
334/01		0 db level extrapolated
335/02
336/01		0 db level extrapolated; transmissometer noisy 140-700 db down, 
		then suspected organic matter probably washed off
337/01		0 db level extrapolated; conductivity sensor not soaking in 
		water prior to this cast; started pylon tripping at btl 25 for freon 
		blank check
338/02		0 db level extrapolated; 4.5-min. delay at 0-6 db before cast 
		started down; big difference between PDR bottom and maximum wire out
339/01
340/01		0 db level extrapolated
341/01
342/02		0 db level extrapolated
343/01		0 db level extrapolated; conductivity dropout 776-784 db down, 
		probably organic matter that washed off: despiked/ok now; stop 1+ 
		min. at 4156-4160 db down to check noisy altimeter rdgs; CTD voltage 
		increased slightly at 3780 db on up cast, dropping several tenths 
		below 25
344/01		0 db level extrapolated; UP cast, conductivity noisy/offset 
		low at 280-1000 db down, up cast ok; probably organic matter 
		contamination of sensor
345/01
346/01		0 db level extrapolated
347/01		0 db level extrapolated
348/01		0 db level extrapolated; UP cast, -.002 psu salinity offset 
		from 2230 db down to bottom, shifts back at bottom: up cast ok
349/01
350/03		CTD cast done while 3 Gerard barrels stuck at 458mwo and trawl 
		winch under repair
351/01
352/01		0 db level extrapolated; CTD found still powered up 3.5 hrs 
		post-cast: turned off
353/01
354/01		0 db level extrapolated; UP cast, 170 db yoyo on down cast; no 
		altimeter signal/side of seamount, tripped btl and started back up 
		before realizing not tripped at bottom; assume first btl 71 
		contaminated because lowered 750 meters below trip pressure after 
		tripping. 6-min. stop for therm soak at 3874-3878 db up, causes 
		CTD oxygen data to drift high from 3878 to bottom
355/01		0 db level extrapolated; UP cast, LADCP back on rosette, minus 3 
		niskins; conductivity offsets low approx. 65-400 db down (organic 
		matter probably contaminated the sensor), then down originally 
		offset from up below 400 db; conductivity signal noisy/offsetting on 
		up cast until 
		approx. 1850+ db, top 1850 db of up cast compares well to nearby stations
355/11		DOWN cast for station 355: major organic matter contamination 
		of conductivity sensor may begin as early as 65 db with slight 
		increase in conductivity; conductivity still drifting back until 
		about 300-400 db down, then offset from up by .02psu from upcast 
		from 400-1800 db and nearby stations to bottom.
356/01		cond. probe cleaned w/fresh water prior to cast; transmissometer 
		spikes below 1000 db
357/02		weights removed from rosette prior to cast for better LADCP 
		balance; CTD wire shorted in pylon conductor prior to cast, took GO 
		pylon deck unit with it; test cast to 300m not numbered or saved: 
		cut 50m off wire, retermination prior to cast; btl 4: NO-confirm, 
		re-initialized GO pylon communications, then good confirm;
358/01		0 db level extrapolated; pinger died just before bottom approach; 
		transmissometer erratic 2800 db down to 3400 db up, spiking at many 
		bottle stops
359/01		0 db level extrapolated; transmissometer offset/noisy surface 
		to 120 db down, ok after that
360/01		0 db level extrapolated
361/02		0 db level extrapolated
362/01		0 db level extrapolated
363/01		0 db level extrapolated
364/01
365/01
366/01
367/01
368/01		unidentifiable foamy/clumpy organic matter, possibly ship refuse, 
		floating on surface at cast launch
369/01
370/01		transmissometer problem 420-510 db down and deeper sections on 
		down cast; some noise on up cast, not as consistent
371/01
372/01		0 db level extrapolated
373/01		transmissometer dropout 495-550 db
374/01		call back cast at 50m down to re-initialize GO pylon communications, 
		restart as if false start never happened
375/01		GO pylon not responding again at cast start; stop just under surface, 
		re-initialize after bringing package out of water, start again as if 
		false start never happened
376/01		0 db level extrapolated
377/01
378/01		transmissometer dropouts from 700 db down to bottom
379/03		0 db level extrapolated; UP cast, down cast conductivity/
		salinity is offset -.012 psu from up cast until near bottom, up 
		matches nearby casts; no pinger signal, probable operator error
380/01		transmissometer dropouts 285-375 db down and 1370-1250 db up
381/01
382/01
383/01		0 db level extrapolated; UP cast, organic matter contamination on 
		conductivity sensor and transmissometer from 900-1700 db down, up cast ok
384/01		0 db level extrapolated
385/01		0 db level extrapolated; 31-min. stop at 2410-2414 db: lost data 
		acquisition at 1850 db, suspect RS232 port on CTD deck unit, resume 
		after powering off/on fixed deck unit communications; cast replayed 
		from analog backup: no gap, minimal effect on CTD oxygen data
386/01		ABORTED cast, not processed/reported; winch stopped itself at 
		1102m on down cast; over 2.5 hours to recover package, major winch 
		trouble
386/02		switch to Markey winch, new end termination done during 
		A.Johnson winch repair; yoyo back to surface from 480 db/restart 
		cast after resetting winch - false start section of cast not saved.
387/01		0 db level extrapolated
388/02		0 db level extrapolated; yoyo back to surface from 129mwo 
		after late power-up of GO pylon deck unit: out of water before 
		starting back down; transmissometer dropout 770-900 db up
389/01
390/01		0 db level extrapolated
391/01		0 db level extrapolated; several large transmissometer dropouts 
		up cast
392/01
393/01		0 db level extrapolated; transmissometer dropouts bottom to 
		800 db on up cast; rosette came up severely slimed with organic matter
394/01		transmissometer cleaned prior to cast; started pylon tripping 
		at btl 13 for freon blank check
395/02		0 db level extrapolated
396/01		0 db level extrapolated; btl 5: NO-confirm, re-initialized GO 
		pylon communications, then good confirm
397/01
398/01
399/01		0 db level extrapolated
400/01		0 db level extrapolated; btl 35: 3 tries/NO-confirm but came 
		up closed; reset to btl 36 for surface trip/ok
401/01		0 db level extrapolated
402/01		stop 6 mins. at 2252-2258 db down cast to check winch noise problem
403/01		btl 35: NO-confirm followed by good confirm; btl 36: NO 
		confirm followed by good confirm
404/02
405/01		0 db level extrapolated
406/01		0 db level extrapolated; btl 68: 5 tries at 2 pressures/all 
		NO-confirms
407/01
408/02		0 db level extrapolated; btl 35: NO-confirm followed by good confirm
409/01		btl 68: 3 tries/all NO-confirms; reset to btl 35: NO-confirm 
		followed by good confirm
410/01		0 db level extrapolated; LADCP removed prior to this cast
411/01
412/01		0 db level extrapolated
413/02		yoyo 18 db back to surface on down to re-zero/reset winch
414/01		0 db level extrapolated; CTD oxygen data difficult to fit to 
		bottle data: quality of approx. 50 to 2000 db CTD oxygen values 
		degraded to fit deep data better
415/01		0 db level extrapolated
416/01		GO pylon deck unit not turned on until about 100m above bottom
417/01
418/01
419/01
420/01		CTD oxygen data would not auto-fit to bottle values, probably 
		because cast ends during long section of near-0 oxygen values: used 
		coefficients from station 419 cast 1 fit for this cast
421/01
422/01		0 db level extrapolated

WOCE93-P19C: CAST STOPS LONGER THAN 1-MINUTE

station	down	#minutes	avg.pressure	pressure
/cast	/up	stopped		(decibars)	range
234/01	DOWN	 3.7		  85		(82 - 88)
241/04	DOWN	 1.2		  10		(8 - 12)
242/01	DOWN	 2.2		   3		(0 - 6)
260/01	DOWN	 1.0		   6		(4 - 8)
272/01	DOWN	 5.9		 385		(382 - 388)
		 3.1		 679		(678 - 680)
286/01	DOWN	10.1		 151		(148 - 154)
		 4.5		 162		(156 - 168)
		 8.3		2496		(2484 - 2508)
290/01	DOWN	 9.2		4251		(4244 - 4258)
299/02	DOWN	 1.4		   3		(2 - 4)
317/02	DOWN	 1.1		   7		(6 - 8)
328/01	DOWN	 1.6		4481		(4480 - 4482)
338/02	DOWN	 4.5		   3		(0 - 6)
343/01	DOWN	 1.3		4158		(4156 - 4160)
354/01	UP	 5.7		3876		(3874 - 3878)
383/01	UP	 1.0		2009		(2008 - 2010)
		 1.2		2618		(2616 - 2620)
385/01	DOWN	30.6		2412		(2410 - 2414)
402/01	DOWN	 5.7		2255		(2252 - 2258)

WOCE93-P19C: CTD Temperature and Conductivity Corrections Summary

	PRT		Temperature Coefficients		Conductivity Coefficients
	
Sta/	Response	corT = t2 T 2 +t1 T + t0		corC = c1 C +c0	
Cast	Time	   t2		   t1		   t0		   c1		   c0
	(secs)
234/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.04020e-04	0.00381
235/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.07115e-04	0.00391
236/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.10210e-04	0.00402
237/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.13305e-04	0.00412
238/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.16400e-04	0.00423
239/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.19495e-04	0.00433
240/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.22590e-04	0.00444
241/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.25685e-04	0.00454
241/04	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.25685e-04	0.00454
242/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.28781e-04	0.00465
243/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.31876e-04	0.00475
244/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.34971e-04	0.00486
245/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.38066e-04	0.00496
246/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.41161e-04	0.00507
247/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.44256e-04	0.00617
248/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.47351e-04	0.00728
249/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.50446e-04	0.00738
250/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.53541e-04	0.00749
251/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.56636e-04	0.00759
252/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.59731e-04	0.00820
253/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.62826e-04	0.00780
254/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.65921e-04	0.00791
255/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.69016e-04	0.00701
256/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.72111e-04	0.00662
257/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.75206e-04	0.00672
258/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.78301e-04	0.00583
259/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.81397e-04	0.00643
260/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.84492e-04	0.00654
261/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.87587e-04	0.00665
262/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.90682e-04	0.00675
263/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.93777e-04	0.00686
264/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.96872e-04	0.00696
265/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-3.99967e-04	0.00707
266/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.03062e-04	0.00717
267/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.06157e-04	0.00728
268/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.09252e-04	0.00738
269/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.12347e-04	0.00749
270/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.15442e-04	0.00759
271/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.18537e-04	0.00770
272/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.21632e-04	0.00780
273/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.24727e-04	0.00791
274/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.27822e-04	0.00801
275/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.30918e-04	0.00812
276/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.34013e-04	0.00822
277/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.37108e-04	0.00833
278/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.40203e-04	0.00843
279/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.43298e-04	0.00854
280/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.46393e-04	0.00864
281/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.49488e-04	0.00875
281/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.49488e-04	0.00875
282/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.52583e-04	0.00885
283/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.55678e-04	0.00896
284/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.58773e-04	0.00906
285/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.61868e-04	0.00917
286/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.64963e-04	0.00927
287/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.68058e-04	0.00938
288/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.71153e-04	0.00948
289/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.74248e-04	0.00959
290/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.77343e-04	0.00970
291/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.80438e-04	0.00980
292/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.83534e-04	0.01141
293/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.86629e-04	0.00901
294/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.89724e-04	0.00912
295/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.92819e-04	0.00922
296/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.95914e-04	0.00933
297/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-4.99009e-04	0.01043
298/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.02104e-04	0.01054
299/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.05199e-04	0.01064
300/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.08294e-04	0.01075
301/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.11389e-04	0.01085
302/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.14484e-04	0.01196
303/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.17579e-04	0.01206
304/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.20674e-04	0.01217
305/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.23769e-04	0.01227
306/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.26864e-04	0.01238
307/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.29959e-04	0.01248
308/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.33054e-04	0.01359
309/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.36150e-04	0.01269
310/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.39245e-04	0.01280
311/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.42340e-04	0.01290
312/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.45435e-04	0.01301
313/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.48530e-04	0.01311
314/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.51625e-04	0.01222
315/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.54720e-04	0.01232
316/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.57815e-04	0.01243
317/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.60910e-04	0.01254
318/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.64005e-04	0.01264
319/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.67100e-04	0.01275
320/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.70195e-04	0.01285
321/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.73290e-04	0.01296
322/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.76385e-04	0.01306
323/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.79480e-04	0.01317
324/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.82575e-04	0.01327
325/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.85671e-04	0.01338
326/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.88766e-04	0.01348
327/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.91861e-04	0.01359
328/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.94956e-04	0.01369
329/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-5.98051e-04	0.01380
330/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.01146e-04	0.01490
331/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.04241e-04	0.01751
332/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.07336e-04	0.01461
333/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.10431e-04	0.01472
334/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.13526e-04	0.01482
335/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.16621e-04	0.01493
336/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.19716e-04	0.01503
337/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.22811e-04	0.01514
338/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.25906e-04	0.01474
339/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.29001e-04	0.01485
340/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.32096e-04	0.01495
341/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.35191e-04	0.01506
342/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.38287e-04	0.01516
343/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.41382e-04	0.01527
344/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.44477e-04	0.01537
345/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.47572e-04	0.01398
346/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.50667e-04	0.01459
347/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.53762e-04	0.01569
348/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.56857e-04	0.01530
349/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.59952e-04	0.01540
350/03	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.63047e-04	0.01601
351/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.66142e-04	0.01611
352/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.69237e-04	0.01622
353/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.72332e-04	0.01632
354/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.75427e-04	0.01643
355/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.78522e-04	0.01700
355/11	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.78522e-04	0.03550
356/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.81617e-04	0.01429
357/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.84712e-04	0.01448
358/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.87808e-04	0.01466
359/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.90903e-04	0.01484
360/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.93998e-04	0.01502
361/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-6.97093e-04	0.01520
362/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.00188e-04	0.01538
363/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.03283e-04	0.01556
364/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.06378e-04	0.01574
365/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.09473e-04	0.01592
366/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.12568e-04	0.01610
367/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.15663e-04	0.01628
368/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.18758e-04	0.01646
369/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.21853e-04	0.01664
370/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.24948e-04	0.01682
371/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.28043e-04	0.01700
372/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.31138e-04	0.01718
373/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.34233e-04	0.01736
374/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.37328e-04	0.01754
375/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.40424e-04	0.01772
376/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.43519e-04	0.01790
377/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.46614e-04	0.01808
378/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.49709e-04	0.01826
379/03	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.52804e-04	0.01844
380/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.55899e-04	0.01862
381/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.58994e-04	0.01880
382/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.62089e-04	0.01898
383/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.65184e-04	0.01966
384/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.68279e-04	0.01656
385/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.71374e-04	0.01671
386/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.74469e-04	0.01787
387/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.77564e-04	0.01653
388/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.80659e-04	0.01719
389/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.83754e-04	0.01734
390/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.86849e-04	0.01750
391/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.89944e-04	0.01766
392/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.93040e-04	0.01782
393/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.96135e-04	0.01798
394/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-7.99230e-04	0.01813
395/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.02325e-04	0.01829
396/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.05420e-04	0.01845
397/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.08515e-04	0.01861
398/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.11610e-04	0.01876
399/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.14705e-04	0.01892
400/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.17800e-04	0.01908
401/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.20895e-04	0.01924
402/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.23990e-04	0.01889
403/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.27085e-04	0.01905
404/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.30180e-04	0.01971
405/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.33275e-04	0.01987
406/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.36370e-04	0.02002
407/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.39465e-04	0.02068
408/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.42560e-04	0.02034
409/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.45656e-04	0.02050
410/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.48751e-04	0.02066
411/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.51846e-04	0.02081
412/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.54941e-04	0.02097
413/02	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.58036e-04	0.02113
414/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.61131e-04	0.02129
415/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.64226e-04	0.02094
416/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.67321e-04	0.02160
417/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.70416e-04	0.02226
418/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.73511e-04	0.02192
419/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.76606e-04	0.02207
420/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.79701e-04	0.02223
421/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.82796e-04	0.02239
422/01	.30	2.22788e-05	-8.80861e-04	-1.48332	-8.85891e-04	0.02255

Summary of WOCE93-P19C CTD Oxygen Time Constants
       Temperature		Press.	O2 Grad.
Fast(tauTF)	Slow(tauTS)	(tauP)	(tauOG)
10.0		400.0		16.0	16.0

WOCE93-P19C CTD Oxygen: Levenberg-Marquardt Non-linear Least-Squares-Fit 
Coefficients
(see Appendix B for the equations these coefficients plug into)

Sta/	   Slope	    Offset	   Pcoeff	    Tfcoeff	   Tscoeff	  OGcoeff
Cast	   (c1)		  (c2)		   (c3)		(c4/fast)	  (c5/slow)	   (c6)
234/01	7.75352e-04	 3.55304e-03	 4.66554e-04	-1.55458e-02	 1.37148e-02	 1.37200e-06
235/01	7.75352e-04	 3.55304e-03	 4.66554e-04	-1.55458e-02	 1.37148e-02	 1.37200e-06
236/01	1.33465e-03	 1.59708e-02	 8.07042e-05	-9.12802e-03	-4.28678e-02	-1.22977e-05
237/01	1.15783e-03	-5.12441e-02	 2.44313e-04	-1.72318e-02	-1.65488e-02	-2.22767e-06
238/01	1.37402e-03	-3.35338e-02	 1.40493e-04	 6.60910e-03	-5.38619e-02	-1.74725e-05
239/01	1.24569e-03	-1.24334e-02	 1.51517e-04	-1.37420e-02	-2.70425e-02	 1.53732e-05
240/01	1.17559e-03	 1.52895e-02	 1.40601e-04	-1.22424e-02	-2.39017e-02	-3.11494e-06
241/02	1.31242e-03	 2.64981e-04	 1.30459e-04	-1.04036e-02	-4.38156e-02	-2.29271e-05
241/04	1.22447e-03	 1.01586e-02	 1.36176e-04	-7.90643e-03	-3.16191e-02	-1.08954e-05
242/01	1.22373e-03	 5.67873e-03	 1.39961e-04	-3.17743e-04	-3.66316e-02	-1.27899e-06
243/01	1.35005e-03	-1.47365e-02	 1.33144e-04	-2.18148e-02	-3.09893e-02	 2.97192e-06
244/01	1.28055e-03	-5.18172e-03	 1.40523e-04	-8.02299e-03	-3.87908e-02	 3.45118e-06
245/01	1.20828e-03	 1.30215e-02	 1.37858e-04	-3.64473e-03	-3.30337e-02	-1.48172e-05
246/01	1.31360e-03	-2.90433e-04	 1.29336e-04	 4.86159e-03	-5.15715e-02	-3.13708e-05
247/01	1.52833e-03	-4.05127e-02	 1.22371e-04	-1.01016e-02	-5.91846e-02	-1.12182e-05
248/01	1.62678e-03	-6.89529e-02	 1.27537e-04	-2.43837e-02	-5.68011e-02	-1.31304e-05
249/01	1.29330e-03	-6.48183e-03	 1.37432e-04	-1.09528e-02	-3.59620e-02	-1.98877e-05
250/01	1.34160e-03	-8.78066e-03	 1.32215e-04	-1.21245e-02	-4.22118e-02	-3.21732e-07
251/01	1.28180e-03	 1.17562e-03	 1.33834e-04	-3.02213e-03	-4.17837e-02	-6.05701e-06
252/01	1.27114e-03	 3.68120e-03	 1.34314e-04	-9.75255e-03	-3.52634e-02	-2.43072e-06
253/01	1.32437e-03	-1.75412e-02	 1.39691e-04	 1.63227e-03	-4.68196e-02	 4.40410e-06
254/01	1.44306e-03	-5.18099e-02	 1.43702e-04	-5.64415e-03	-5.19225e-02	-2.80786e-05
255/01	1.62273e-03	-9.32757e-02	 1.41729e-04	-1.51730e-02	-6.18826e-02	-3.08185e-05
256/01	1.32934e-03	-2.48046e-02	 1.42934e-04	-9.89008e-03	-3.96311e-02	-2.58626e-05
257/01	1.29013e-03	-6.96057e-04	 1.32655e-04	-8.11755e-04	-4.57550e-02	-2.38334e-05
258/01	1.31078e-03	-1.46364e-02	 1.37653e-04	-4.10744e-03	-4.42713e-02	-2.12304e-05
259/01	1.28182e-03	-1.23479e-02	 1.41769e-04	-4.27991e-03	-4.07035e-02	-4.85786e-04
260/01	1.37168e-03	-2.99016e-02	 1.39860e-04	 2.82142e-03	-5.36075e-02	-3.84840e-04
261/01	1.40634e-03	-2.79897e-02	 1.32719e-04	 3.82277e-03	-5.92769e-02	-2.99344e-03
262/02	1.36785e-03	-2.46122e-02	 1.35395e-04	-6.28458e-03	-4.34820e-02	 3.96864e-03
263/01	1.25583e-03	 9.25171e-03	 1.32022e-04	-9.31070e-03	-3.44182e-02	-7.17371e-05
264/02	1.40535e-03	-2.66381e-02	 1.33590e-04	-2.10167e-03	-5.50115e-02	-7.18045e-04
265/01	1.40217e-03	-2.94105e-02	 1.33854e-04	-4.04382e-03	-4.99672e-02	-1.33862e-03
266/01	1.31805e-03	-1.27158e-02	 1.37042e-04	-5.18153e-03	-3.97403e-02	-3.73961e-06
267/01	1.28711e-03	-7.40818e-03	 1.37644e-04	-5.17505e-03	-3.85564e-02	-8.68100e-06
268/01	1.33768e-03	-1.64172e-02	 1.35307e-04	-2.49373e-03	-4.32231e-02	-3.71288e-06
269/01	1.24454e-03	 1.08351e-03	 1.39153e-04	-6.77304e-04	-3.73970e-02	-9.84952e-06
270/01	1.20566e-03	 6.45115e-03	 1.41871e-04	 2.46602e-03	-3.59840e-02	-1.52038e-05
271/01	1.13969e-03	 2.09149e-02	 1.40313e-04	-9.19762e-03	-1.12708e-02	-1.27393e-05
272/01	1.25339e-03	-1.59266e-04	 1.38974e-04	 6.14067e-04	-4.11059e-02	-1.31840e-05
273/01	1.24391e-03	-6.67888e-03	 1.46734e-04	-1.39049e-02	-2.83250e-02	-1.59371e-05
274/02	1.14483e-03	 1.42580e-02	 1.45766e-04	-4.45936e-03	-2.75860e-02	-8.37811e-06
275/01	1.22541e-03	 8.38158e-04	 1.40836e-04	-1.20289e-02	-2.88828e-02	-2.51357e-05
276/01	1.26498e-03	-5.04131e-03	 1.37364e-04	-8.00100e-04	-3.92202e-02	-1.74437e-05
277/01	1.24923e-03	-6.41713e-03	 1.41322e-04	-6.88973e-03	-3.31617e-02	-5.45972e-06
278/01	1.20624e-03	 1.00767e-02	 1.36242e-04	-4.11571e-03	-3.38851e-02	-8.27337e-06
279/01	1.14811e-03	 1.03064e-02	 1.47468e-04	-6.74248e-05	-2.89785e-02	 2.27496e-03
280/01	1.13048e-03	 1.33441e-02	 1.47069e-04	 3.18961e-03	-2.92645e-02	 7.49685e-06
281/01	1.20312e-03	-3.02467e-03	 1.51006e-04	-5.32248e-03	-2.89845e-02	-3.25744e-06
281/02	1.16054e-03	 8.46244e-03	 1.45667e-04	 4.68845e-03	-3.10188e-02	-1.25485e-05
282/01	1.33351e-03	-2.03048e-02	 1.34244e-04	 1.25625e-03	-4.21143e-02	-3.57191e-06
283/01	1.20474e-03	 1.37023e-03	 1.43309e-04	-2.84721e-03	-2.99125e-02	 6.97873e-06
284/02	1.19327e-03	 1.01625e-03	 1.42646e-04	 5.81403e-03	-3.61104e-02	-5.47439e-06
285/01	1.25183e-03	-9.26356e-03	 1.41154e-04	-6.19138e-03	-3.20837e-02	 2.82626e-06
286/01	1.14420e-03	 1.10248e-02	 1.45631e-04	 7.38812e-03	-3.57504e-02	-1.07213e-05
287/01	1.24694e-03	 2.82450e-04	 1.40991e-04	-1.05421e-03	-3.28872e-02	-6.73642e-08
288/01	1.19907e-03	 7.92431e-03	 1.46204e-04	 2.46779e-03	-3.14017e-02	 1.51681e-06
289/01	1.31578e-03	-3.58961e-03	 1.45205e-04	-6.42553e-03	-2.86543e-02	 2.38086e-05
290/01	1.26659e-03	 1.02109e-02	 1.42989e-04	-4.45986e-03	-2.94654e-02	 3.28363e-07
291/01	1.42933e-03	-2.31064e-02	 1.42709e-04	 6.79272e-03	-4.21820e-02	-1.76534e-05
292/01	1.35843e-03	-9.66114e-04	 1.39586e-04	 1.95570e-03	-3.37095e-02	 4.10113e-06
293/01	1.39342e-03	-8.93964e-03	 1.45723e-04	-6.14155e-03	-2.99693e-02	-7.71797e-06
294/02	1.47942e-03	-1.29542e-02	 1.37461e-04	-5.23746e-04	-3.81007e-02	-1.25477e-05
295/01	1.38856e-03	 1.98285e-03	 1.40744e-04	 1.32147e-03	-3.41683e-02	-7.38983e-06
296/01	1.36281e-03	 6.36291e-03	 1.43899e-04	 5.57845e-03	-3.42371e-02	-1.17212e-05
297/01	1.47605e-03	-1.50197e-02	 1.39819e-04	 7.44381e-03	-4.01445e-02	 3.34689e-06
298/01	1.42233e-03	-5.23430e-04	 1.44801e-04	-6.48933e-03	-2.90093e-02	-6.28144e-06
299/02	1.49919e-03	-1.72302e-03	 1.36101e-04	-2.43372e-03	-3.45432e-02	 1.90493e-05
300/01	1.46452e-03	-1.06439e-03	 1.46851e-04	-2.12791e-03	-3.23197e-02	 1.79723e-07
301/01	1.55585e-03	-1.74233e-02	 1.43632e-04	-1.00684e-03	-3.49344e-02	 5.33584e-06
302/02	1.56033e-03	-9.27531e-03	 1.42623e-04	-3.26052e-03	-3.58827e-02	 1.56319e-05
303/01	1.57392e-03	-8.72916e-03	 1.39695e-04	-4.95132e-04	-3.71699e-02	-9.89115e-06
304/01	1.59887e-03	-6.13551e-03	 1.29685e-04	 8.80494e-04	-3.84254e-02	 6.72129e-06
305/01	1.47869e-03	 2.94730e-04	 1.45581e-04	-2.54665e-03	-3.06974e-02	-1.58634e-06
306/01	1.48798e-03	 7.00448e-03	 1.35972e-04	-3.07776e-03	-3.43376e-02	 4.97351e-06
307/01	1.53904e-03	 3.44496e-03	 1.25959e-04	 1.39917e-03	-3.72507e-02	 3.31312e-06
308/01	1.47941e-03	 7.75140e-04	 1.42025e-04	-1.74885e-04	-3.35739e-02	-8.54967e-06
309/01	1.61714e-03	-1.23522e-02	 1.20160e-04	 2.57504e-04	-3.70206e-02	-3.82779e-06
310/01	1.55111e-03	 4.15063e-03	 1.30329e-04	 9.89404e-04	-3.78047e-02	-1.05372e-05
311/01	1.46998e-03	 7.70494e-03	 1.41996e-04	-8.91142e-03	-2.89695e-02	 5.22384e-06
312/01	1.52243e-03	 4.34846e-04	 1.36697e-04	 1.68225e-03	-3.64026e-02	 3.61477e-06
313/01	1.38091e-03	 3.44072e-02	 1.32627e-04	 6.58777e-03	-3.62075e-02	-3.59263e-06
314/01	1.80224e-03	-1.68730e-02	 6.30523e-05	 2.57244e-03	-4.35922e-02	 5.32673e-06
315/01	1.56010e-03	 9.53376e-04	 1.26836e-04	 8.82375e-04	-3.68836e-02	-4.63004e-06
316/01	1.53502e-03	 6.66787e-03	 1.30383e-04	-1.14570e-03	-3.53237e-02	-1.88295e-07
317/02	1.51604e-03	-3.57824e-03	 1.47850e-04	-5.57521e-03	-3.15535e-02	 1.17955e-05
318/01	1.52733e-03	-1.66701e-03	 1.42159e-04	 3.24205e-03	-3.77038e-02	 4.80745e-07
319/01	1.54577e-03	 2.50351e-04	 1.38406e-04	-7.06652e-03	-3.33650e-02	 5.29189e-06
320/01	1.46121e-03	 1.04441e-02	 1.40695e-04	-5.09979e-03	-3.10076e-02	 5.99810e-06
321/01	1.55639e-03	-9.40892e-04	 1.37274e-04	-5.78337e-04	-3.70577e-02	 6.85097e-06
322/01	1.46270e-03	 1.77236e-02	 1.34836e-04	 1.46096e-03	-3.57410e-02	-1.57747e-06
323/01	1.51682e-03	 4.84044e-03	 1.37995e-04	 1.19815e-04	-3.59049e-02	 3.24703e-07
324/01	1.49669e-03	 6.78950e-03	 1.40813e-04	-7.45108e-03	-2.98804e-02	 4.11839e-06
325/01	1.57006e-03	-4.58283e-03	 1.40078e-04	-5.47646e-03	-3.31416e-02	 1.39562e-05
326/02	1.54908e-03	-5.53514e-03	 1.44785e-04	-3.91221e-03	-3.50316e-02	-6.49402e-06
327/02	1.54926e-03	-1.42075e-03	 1.39509e-04	-2.75124e-03	-3.65473e-02	 1.08715e-05
328/01	1.59741e-03	-1.82133e-02	 1.49444e-04	-1.24048e-02	-2.75995e-02	-9.50024e-06
329/01	1.53679e-03	 5.66463e-03	 1.37696e-04	-1.21296e-03	-3.45782e-02	 8.86121e-06
330/01	1.56426e-03	 7.36037e-04	 1.38450e-04	-1.56158e-03	-3.50097e-02	-2.87340e-06
331/01	1.46258e-03	 1.44385e-02	 1.40012e-04	-3.49717e-03	-3.18150e-02	-1.90168e-06
332/01	1.60271e-03	-1.02589e-02	 1.41181e-04	-4.81387e-03	-3.29387e-02	 1.06907e-06
333/01	1.58836e-03	-6.45337e-03	 1.41256e-04	 1.78045e-03	-3.93025e-02	-4.32814e-06
334/01	1.61085e-03	-1.11407e-02	 1.40491e-04	-1.08693e-02	-2.73688e-02	 7.18566e-06
335/02	1.58936e-03	-3.66200e-03	 1.37411e-04	 8.18649e-04	-3.82174e-02	 6.74041e-06
336/01	1.55577e-03	-5.66537e-03	 1.42792e-04	-4.32864e-03	-3.14958e-02	 7.55191e-07
337/01	1.53702e-03	-1.01296e-03	 1.41492e-04	-5.77038e-03	-3.04503e-02	 5.56670e-06
338/02	1.58720e-03	-4.96057e-03	 1.39296e-04	-6.10604e-04	-3.70031e-02	 3.67010e-06
339/01	1.62057e-03	-1.63812e-02	 1.42110e-04	-1.45295e-02	-2.46819e-02	 1.06797e-06
340/01	1.56842e-03	-5.60248e-03	 1.38964e-04	-1.86065e-03	-3.31656e-02	 9.60926e-06
341/01	1.56646e-03	-2.99248e-03	 1.35938e-04	-6.48143e-03	-2.99384e-02	 1.43557e-05
342/02	1.49361e-03	 7.63789e-03	 1.39757e-04	-1.19740e-02	-2.38721e-02	 7.29042e-06
343/01	1.57718e-03	-1.20404e-02	 1.43535e-04	-1.70651e-02	-1.86699e-02	 1.45415e-05
344/01	1.46047e-03	-5.05721e-04	 1.48227e-04	-2.86127e-02	 3.54828e-03	 1.13099e-05
345/01	1.44234e-03	 4.38243e-03	 1.48949e-04	-1.27239e-02	-1.94562e-02	 1.20478e-05
346/01	1.53237e-03	 1.65694e-03	 1.40095e-04	-5.77077e-03	-2.98786e-02	 1.40230e-05
347/01	1.61603e-03	-3.74607e-03	 1.29966e-04	 1.09497e-02	-4.63032e-02	-8.43797e-06
348/01	1.48564e-03	 2.22117e-03	 1.43433e-04	-1.63009e-02	-9.94466e-03	-2.73275e-05
349/01	1.65880e-03	-3.51365e-03	 1.23078e-04	 2.07574e-02	-5.75766e-02	-7.37243e-06
350/03	1.45376e-03	 5.73821e-03	 1.46151e-04	-5.35957e-03	-2.74755e-02	 7.18163e-06
351/01	1.62895e-03	-1.60448e-02	 1.38012e-04	 1.71784e-03	-3.82188e-02	 1.00520e-05
352/01	1.59237e-03	-3.78055e-03	 1.31543e-04	 3.53301e-03	-3.95271e-02	 1.08402e-05
353/01	1.55027e-03	-8.25594e-03	 1.42665e-04	-6.89856e-03	-2.72649e-02	 4.46937e-06
354/01	1.44152e-03	 1.27716e-03	 1.47365e-04	-1.89031e-02	-4.79165e-03	-2.01977e-05
355/01	1.45868e-03	 9.23646e-04	 1.42468e-04	-1.25054e-02	-1.09628e-02	-6.10623e-05
355/11	1.58239e-03	-4.33622e-03	 1.29458e-04	 1.07390e-02	-4.32438e-02	-1.04264e-06
356/01	1.59003e-03	-1.00754e-02	 1.35688e-04	 4.10406e-03	-3.63776e-02	-3.03747e-06
357/02	1.57747e-03	-4.45453e-03	 1.34688e-04	-3.95913e-03	-3.28014e-02	 4.74477e-06
313/01	1.38091e-03	 3.44072e-02	 1.32627e-04	 6.58777e-03	-3.62075e-02	-3.59263e-06
314/01	1.80224e-03	-1.68730e-02	 6.30523e-05	 2.57244e-03	-4.35922e-02	 5.32673e-06
315/01	1.56010e-03	 9.53376e-04	 1.26836e-04	 8.82375e-04	-3.68836e-02	-4.63004e-06
316/01	1.53502e-03	 6.66787e-03	 1.30383e-04	-1.14570e-03	-3.53237e-02	-1.88295e-07
317/02	1.51604e-03	-3.57824e-03	 1.47850e-04	-5.57521e-03	-3.15535e-02	 1.17955e-05
318/01	1.52733e-03	-1.66701e-03	 1.42159e-04	 3.24205e-03	-3.77038e-02	 4.80745e-07
319/01	1.54577e-03	 2.50351e-04	 1.38406e-04	-7.06652e-03	-3.33650e-02	 5.29189e-06
320/01	1.46121e-03	 1.04441e-02	 1.40695e-04	-5.09979e-03	-3.10076e-02	 5.99810e-06
321/01	1.55639e-03	-9.40892e-04	 1.37274e-04	-5.78337e-04	-3.70577e-02	 6.85097e-06
322/01	1.46270e-03	 1.77236e-02	 1.34836e-04	 1.46096e-03	-3.57410e-02	-1.57747e-06
323/01	1.51682e-03	 4.84044e-03	 1.37995e-04	 1.19815e-04	-3.59049e-02	 3.24703e-07
324/01	1.49669e-03	 6.78950e-03	 1.40813e-04	-7.45108e-03	-2.98804e-02	 4.11839e-06
325/01	1.57006e-03	-4.58283e-03	 1.40078e-04	-5.47646e-03	-3.31416e-02	 1.39562e-05
326/02	1.54908e-03	-5.53514e-03	 1.44785e-04	-3.91221e-03	-3.50316e-02	-6.49402e-06
327/02	1.54926e-03	-1.42075e-03	 1.39509e-04	-2.75124e-03	-3.65473e-02	 1.08715e-05
328/01	1.59741e-03	-1.82133e-02	 1.49444e-04	-1.24048e-02	-2.75995e-02	-9.50024e-06
329/01	1.53679e-03	 5.66463e-03	 1.37696e-04	-1.21296e-03	-3.45782e-02	 8.86121e-06
330/01	1.56426e-03	 7.36037e-04	 1.38450e-04	-1.56158e-03	-3.50097e-02	-2.87340e-06
331/01	1.46258e-03	 1.44385e-02	 1.40012e-04	-3.49717e-03	-3.18150e-02	-1.90168e-06
332/01	1.60271e-03	-1.02589e-02	 1.41181e-04	-4.81387e-03	-3.29387e-02	 1.06907e-06
333/01	1.58836e-03	-6.45337e-03	 1.41256e-04	 1.78045e-03	-3.93025e-02	-4.32814e-06
334/01	1.61085e-03	-1.11407e-02	 1.40491e-04	-1.08693e-02	-2.73688e-02	 7.18566e-06
335/02	1.58936e-03	-3.66200e-03	 1.37411e-04	 8.18649e-04	-3.82174e-02	 6.74041e-06
336/01	1.55577e-03	-5.66537e-03	 1.42792e-04	-4.32864e-03	-3.14958e-02	 7.55191e-07
337/01	1.53702e-03	-1.01296e-03	 1.41492e-04	-5.77038e-03	-3.04503e-02	 5.56670e-06
338/02	1.58720e-03	-4.96057e-03	 1.39296e-04	-6.10604e-04	-3.70031e-02	 3.67010e-06
339/01	1.62057e-03	-1.63812e-02	 1.42110e-04	-1.45295e-02	-2.46819e-02	 1.06797e-06
340/01	1.56842e-03	-5.60248e-03	 1.38964e-04	-1.86065e-03	-3.31656e-02	 9.60926e-06
341/01	1.56646e-03	-2.99248e-03	 1.35938e-04	-6.48143e-03	-2.99384e-02	 1.43557e-05
342/02	1.49361e-03	 7.63789e-03	 1.39757e-04	-1.19740e-02	-2.38721e-02	 7.29042e-06
343/01	1.57718e-03	-1.20404e-02	 1.43535e-04	-1.70651e-02	-1.86699e-02	 1.45415e-05
344/01	1.46047e-03	-5.05721e-04	 1.48227e-04	-2.86127e-02	 3.54828e-03	 1.13099e-05
345/01	1.44234e-03	 4.38243e-03	 1.48949e-04	-1.27239e-02	-1.94562e-02	 1.20478e-05
346/01	1.53237e-03	 1.65694e-03	 1.40095e-04	-5.77077e-03	-2.98786e-02	 1.40230e-05
347/01	1.61603e-03	-3.74607e-03	 1.29966e-04	 1.09497e-02	-4.63032e-02	-8.43797e-06
348/01	1.48564e-03	 2.22117e-03	 1.43433e-04	-1.63009e-02	-9.94466e-03	-2.73275e-05
349/01	1.65880e-03	-3.51365e-03	 1.23078e-04	 2.07574e-02	-5.75766e-02	-7.37243e-06
350/03	1.45376e-03	 5.73821e-03	 1.46151e-04	-5.35957e-03	-2.74755e-02	 7.18163e-06
351/01	1.62895e-03	-1.60448e-02	 1.38012e-04	 1.71784e-03	-3.82188e-02	 1.00520e-05
352/01	1.59237e-03	-3.78055e-03	 1.31543e-04	 3.53301e-03	-3.95271e-02	 1.08402e-05
353/01	1.55027e-03	-8.25594e-03	 1.42665e-04	-6.89856e-03	-2.72649e-02	 4.46937e-06
354/01	1.44152e-03	 1.27716e-03	 1.47365e-04	-1.89031e-02	-4.79165e-03	-2.01977e-05
355/01	1.45868e-03	 9.23646e-04	 1.42468e-04	-1.25054e-02	-1.09628e-02	-6.10623e-05
355/11	1.58239e-03	-4.33622e-03	 1.29458e-04	 1.07390e-02	-4.32438e-02	-1.04264e-06
356/01	1.59003e-03	-1.00754e-02	 1.35688e-04	 4.10406e-03	-3.63776e-02	-3.03747e-06
357/02	1.57747e-03	-4.45453e-03	 1.34688e-04	-3.95913e-03	-3.28014e-02	 4.74477e-06
358/01	1.55934e-03	-4.14322e-03	 1.34794e-04	-6.24229e-04	-3.26510e-02	 4.24866e-06
359/01	1.53681e-03	-3.11668e-03	 1.37157e-04	-3.11375e-03	-3.00916e-02	 7.30831e-06
360/01	1.60198e-03	-6.87871e-03	 1.29263e-04	-2.50436e-03	-3.15237e-02	 7.84459e-06
361/02	1.64337e-03	-8.90334e-03	 1.23168e-04	 1.34229e-03	-3.69280e-02	 3.73055e-06
362/01	1.65722e-03	-1.30585e-02	 1.23288e-04	 4.41612e-03	-3.68171e-02	-4.75627e-06
363/01	1.52931e-03	-9.00883e-04	 1.33805e-04	 2.77012e-03	-3.21128e-02	 7.01403e-06
364/01	1.63948e-03	-5.72738e-03	 1.18175e-04	 5.11034e-03	-3.68236e-02	 3.42458e-06
365/01	1.59903e-03	-8.06685e-04	 1.13977e-04	-3.06837e-03	-3.07604e-02	 8.07452e-06
366/01	1.59041e-03	-5.49369e-03	 1.19019e-04	 1.65587e-03	-3.44217e-02	-1.13537e-06
367/01	1.65184e-03	-5.94726e-03	 1.05528e-04	 6.27738e-03	-3.86955e-02	 1.39135e-05
368/01	1.62819e-03	-4.26397e-03	 1.10790e-04	 1.57847e-04	-3.24399e-02	 5.05201e-05
369/01	1.50893e-03	-1.30807e-03	 1.39795e-04	-3.44761e-03	-2.86157e-02	 8.67417e-06
370/01	1.38848e-03	 1.31519e-03	 1.62141e-04	-2.92186e-03	-2.30093e-02	 2.26170e-05
371/01	1.49932e-03	 3.72510e-03	 1.34806e-04	-7.14270e-04	-3.06054e-02	-6.80468e-06
372/01	1.56900e-03	-2.11829e-03	 1.27781e-04	-1.03309e-03	-3.12426e-02	 1.00310e-05
373/01	1.47106e-03	 6.19374e-03	 1.40434e-04	 5.72674e-03	-3.49170e-02	 1.74343e-05
374/01	1.49895e-03	 6.27324e-03	 1.32149e-04	 2.35790e-03	-3.31526e-02	-1.37618e-06
375/01	1.45964e-03	 1.24286e-02	 1.28583e-04	-4.49806e-03	-2.94821e-02	 1.58058e-05
376/01	1.56705e-03	 5.19005e-03	 1.11024e-04	 9.40670e-03	-4.01970e-02	-5.43522e-06
377/01	1.50944e-03	 1.67707e-04	 1.43146e-04	-3.22599e-03	-3.03330e-02	 6.47492e-06
378/01	1.71025e-03	-9.13654e-03	 1.03829e-04	 4.90925e-03	-3.72673e-02	 6.47864e-06
379/03	1.45785e-03	 2.70046e-03	 1.38798e-04	-1.85668e-02	-7.03845e-03	-2.00235e-05
380/01	1.53225e-03	-5.16768e-03	 1.38262e-04	 1.63210e-03	-3.20047e-02	 6.92141e-06
381/01	1.59176e-03	-2.05544e-03	 1.19595e-04	 4.09759e-03	-3.73142e-02	-6.07401e-06
382/01	1.61502e-03	-2.15186e-04	 1.08614e-04	 2.03905e-03	-3.69069e-02	 2.93371e-06
383/01	1.41099e-03	 3.10399e-03	 1.48598e-04	-2.02266e-02	-4.36929e-03	-5.37768e-06
384/01	1.48234e-03	 3.49670e-03	 1.33200e-04	-1.73901e-03	-2.93009e-02	-7.24469e-06
385/01	1.43523e-03	-7.84633e-05	 1.51733e-04	-2.23471e-03	-2.90056e-02	 9.58248e-06
386/02	1.51857e-03	 6.02565e-03	 1.24556e-04	-6.39528e-04	-3.11593e-02	 1.25276e-05
387/01	1.53496e-03	-1.34990e-03	 1.29906e-04	-6.81857e-03	-2.60287e-02	 1.19893e-06
388/02	1.71942e-03	 1.00279e-02	 4.37767e-05	 5.85101e-03	-4.12829e-02	 5.46158e-06
389/01	2.28339e-03	-9.64600e-03	-9.96188e-05	 7.75028e-03	-5.19936e-02	 3.40649e-06
390/01	2.03600e-03	-9.77715e-03	 1.18237e-06	 7.05196e-03	-4.88967e-02	 1.00670e-05
391/01	2.01787e-03	-6.18950e-03	-2.20040e-06	 3.19772e-03	-4.50124e-02	 7.34880e-06
392/01	1.62982e-03	-3.33026e-04	 1.02411e-04	 5.02818e-03	-3.82902e-02	 7.78989e-06
393/01	1.71324e-03	-1.26017e-02	 1.04865e-04	 6.80001e-03	-4.12664e-02	 6.70558e-06
394/01	1.62900e-03	-1.64689e-03	 1.23051e-04	-2.88801e-03	-3.35023e-02	 2.94251e-06
395/02	1.66512e-03	-7.37788e-03	 1.18428e-04	-4.33073e-03	-3.01900e-02	 2.29709e-06
396/01	1.63858e-03	-1.22165e-02	 1.23601e-04	 9.64596e-03	-4.37978e-02	 2.45479e-06
397/01	1.56774e-03	 2.06346e-03	 1.22311e-04	 1.67759e-02	-5.14658e-02	-8.73140e-06
398/01	1.52426e-03	 1.04980e-04	 1.29302e-04	-1.01693e-03	-3.04511e-02	 9.58035e-06
399/01	1.53877e-03	-2.26667e-03	 1.35374e-04	-1.06104e-02	-2.63372e-02	 1.61224e-05
400/01	1.65104e-03	-8.48969e-03	 1.16496e-04	 7.59609e-03	-4.13892e-02	 2.28876e-06
401/01	1.60882e-03	-5.82629e-03	 1.26530e-04	-1.67739e-02	-2.30740e-02	 2.37789e-05
402/01	1.45945e-03	-3.99954e-03	 1.49312e-04	-4.04327e-03	-2.55561e-02	 3.32965e-06
403/01	1.50692e-03	-1.18815e-03	 1.38757e-04	-4.91172e-03	-2.63025e-02	 1.67863e-07
404/02	1.52468e-03	-6.16635e-03	 1.41548e-04	-9.23209e-03	-2.66445e-02	 6.70728e-06
405/01	1.62054e-03	 4.46413e-03	 1.11515e-04	 2.40066e-02	-5.91655e-02	 3.26575e-06
406/01	1.56210e-03	 1.39009e-03	 1.24948e-04	 9.99760e-03	-4.22082e-02	 5.70056e-06
407/01	1.62085e-03	-3.33614e-03	 1.20371e-04	 2.55403e-02	-5.76442e-02	 7.07357e-06
408/02	1.52700e-03	-6.33480e-03	 1.39808e-04	 5.60175e-03	-3.80972e-02	-1.22715e-06
409/01	1.46912e-03	-6.25682e-04	 1.44782e-04	-1.40805e-03	-3.13084e-02	 1.49193e-06
410/01	1.56623e-03	 2.48674e-03	 1.21628e-04	 2.85820e-02	-6.12733e-02	 1.67840e-06
411/01	1.59749e-03	-9.79838e-04	 1.20609e-04	 3.46869e-02	-6.53846e-02	 8.42932e-06
412/01	1.52271e-03	-1.37462e-03	 1.32172e-04	 2.46078e-02	-5.26770e-02	 2.84585e-06
413/02	1.50235e-03	 3.69454e-03	 1.34045e-04	 1.58514e-03	-3.47837e-02	-6.97484e-06
414/01	1.62755e-03	-1.85832e-02	 1.37936e-04	 4.01637e-02	-7.49309e-02	-6.33250e-06
415/01	1.54496e-03	-6.13903e-03	 1.34212e-04	 3.54880e-03	-3.35056e-02	-7.89485e-06
416/01	1.56517e-03	-2.33504e-03	 1.23689e-04	 1.76820e-02	-4.75106e-02	-8.09638e-06
417/01	1.69022e-03	-7.09671e-04	 8.82789e-05	 1.32192e-02	-4.47324e-02	 2.90193e-07
418/01	2.05774e-03	-6.82197e-03	 9.06717e-06	 2.34076e-02	-6.44391e-02	-7.11790e-06
419/01	4.91018e-03	-1.22319e-02	-4.88910e-04	 3.52342e-02	-1.02078e-01	-1.74239e-05
420/01	4.91018e-03	-1.22319e-02	-4.88910e-04	 3.52342e-02	-1.02078e-01	-1.74239e-05
421/01	2.03119e-02	-1.37578e-02	-2.64255e-03	 1.43830e-02	-1.32537e-01	-6.97251e-06
422/01	5.17937e-04	 1.31972e-02	 1.09196e-03	 2.25231e-02	-1.88006e-02	-1.44454e-06
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WOCE93-P19C (EXPOCODE 316N138/12)
Calibrated Pressure-Series CTD Data Processing Summary and Comments
January 5, 1995

Mary C. Johnson
ODF CTD Group
Oceanographic Data Facility
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
UC San Diego, Mail Code 0214
9500 Gilman Drive
La Jolla, CA 92093-0214

phone: (619) 534-1906
fax: (619) 534-7383
e-mail: mary@odf.ucsd.edu

1.	Introduction

This document describes the CTDO data acquisition, calibration, and 
other processing techniques used on WOCE93-P19C, also known as Knorr 
138/12.  This WOCE leg was done on the R/V Knorr from February 22 - April 
13, 1993.

2.	CTD Acquisition and Processing Summary

190 CTD casts plus two aborted CTD casts were done at 189 P19C stations.  
The rosette used was an ODF-designed system consisting of a single ring 
of 36 10-liter bottles with a 36-place General Oceanics Model 1016 
intelligent pylon mounted in the center.  A CTD, altimeter, pinger and 
transmissometer were mounted on the bottom of the frame.  A University 
of Hawaii self-contained LADCP was mounted in place of 3 bottles for 93 
of the CTD casts. ODF CTD #1, a modified NBIS Mark III-B instrument, was 
used during the leg.

The ODF CTD acquired data at a rate of 25 Hz.  The data consisted of 
pressure, temperature, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, second 
temperature, four CTD voltages, trip confirmation, transmissometer, 
altimeter and elapsed time.  LADCP data were not part of the CTD data 
stream; they were collected and processed separately by University of 
Hawaii.

An ODF-designed deck unit demodulated the FSK CTD signal to an RS-232 
interface.  The raw CTD data signal was split into three paths: to be 
logged in raw digitized form, to be monitored in real time as raw data, 
and to be processed and plotted.  During the P19C expedition, a Sun 
SPARCstation 2 computer served as the real-time data acquisition 
processor.  Various Sun SPARC computers were used during post-cruise 
processing as well.

The analog CTD audio signal was recorded on VHS videotape, and all 
digital binary data were logged on a hard disk and then backed up to 
cartridge tape.  In addition, all intermediate versions of processed 
data were backed up to cartridge tape.

CTD data processing consists of a sequence of steps; some steps are 
optional and used only when necessary.  Data can be re-processed from 
any point in this sequence after the data have been acquired and stored.  
Each CTD cast is assigned a correction file, and while the corrections 
are usually determined for groups of stations, it is possible to fine 
tune the parameters for even a single station.  The acquisition and 
processing steps are as follows:

o  Data are acquired from the CTD sea cable and assembled into 
   consecutive .04-second frames containing all data channels.  The data 
   are converted to engineering units.
o  The raw pressure, temperature and conductivity data are passed 
   through broad absolute value and gradient filters to eliminate noisy 
   data.  The entire frame of raw data is omitted, as opposed to 
   interpolating bad points, if any one of the filters is exceeded.  The 
   filters may be adjusted as needed for each cast.

TYPICAL P19C RAW DAT A FILTERS
Raw Data				Frame-to-Frame
Channel		Minimum	  Maximum	Gradient
Pressure	-40	  6400		2 decibars
Temperature	 -8	  32.7		 .2 °C
Conductivity	  0	 64.355		 .3 mmho
Oxygen			(no filter was used)

O  Pressure and conductivity are phase-adjusted to match the temperature 
   response, since the temperature sensor responds more slowly to 
   change.  Conductivity data are corrected for ceramic compressibility 
   in accordance with the NBIS Mark III-B Reference Manual.
O  The data are averaged into 0.5-second blocks.  During this step, data 
   falling outside four standard deviations from the mean are rejected 
   and the average is recalculated.  Then data falling outside two 
   standard deviations from the new mean are rejected, and the data are 
   re-averaged.  The resulting averages, minus second temperature and 
   CTD voltages, are reported as the 0.5-second time series.  Secondary 
   temperature data are used to verify the stability of the primary 
   temperature channel calibration.  Secondary temperature data are only 
   filtered, averaged and reported with the time-series data when they 
   are used in place of the primary temperature data due to a sensor 
   malfunction.
O  Corrections are applied to the data.  The pressure data are corrected 
   using laboratory calibration data with the procedure described in 
   Appendix A (Delahoyde/Williams).  Temperature corrections, typically 
   a quadratic correction as a function of temperature, are based on 
   laboratory calibrations.  Conductivity and oxygen corrections are 
   derived from water sample data.  Conductivity corrections are 
   typically a linear fit as a function of conductivity.  Oxygen data 
   are corrected on an individual cast basis using the technique 
   described in Appendix B (Delahoyde).  Uncorrected time-series 
   transmisso-meter data are forwarded to TAMU for final processing and 
   reporting.

The averaged data are recorded on hard disk and sent to the real-time 
display system, where the data can be reported and plotted during a 
cast.  The averaging system also communicates with the CTD acquisition 
computer for detection of bottle trips, almost always occurring during 
the up casts.  A 5-second average of the CTD data is stored for each 
detected bottle trip.

A down-cast pressure-series data set is created from the time series by 
applying a ship-roll filter to the down-cast time-series data, then 
averaging the data within 2-dbar pressure intervals centered on the 
reported pressure.  The first few seconds of data for each cast are 
generally excluded from the averages due to sensor adjustment or bubbles 
during the in-water transition.  Pressure intervals with no time-series 
data can optionally be filled by double-parabolic interpolation.  When 
the down-cast CTD data have excessive noise, gaps or offsets, the up-
cast data are used instead.  CTD data from down and up casts are not 
mixed together in the pressure-series data because they do not represent 
identical water columns (due to ship movement, internal waves, wire 
angles, etc.).

The CTD time series is always the primary CTD data record for the 
pressure, conductivity and temperature channels.  The final corrections 
to the CTD oxygen data are made by correcting pressure-series CTD oxygen 
data to match the up-cast oxygen water samples at common isopycnals.  
The final CTDO pressure-series data are the data reported to the 
principal investigator and to the WHPO.

Subsequent sections of this document discuss the laboratory 
calibrations, data processing and corrections for the CTD used during 
P19C.

3.	CTD Laboratory Calibrations
3.1.	Pressure Transducer Calibration

The CTD #1 pressure transducer was calibrated in a temperature-
controlled bath to the ODF Ruska deadweight-tester (DWT) pressure 
standards.  The mechanical hysteresis loading and unloading curves were 
measured both pre- and post-cruise at cold temperature (-2.0 to -1.4°C 
bath) to a maximum of 8830 psi, and at warm temperature (29.1 to 30.0°C 
bath) to a maximum of 2030/4030 psi pre-/post-cruise.  The CTD #1 post-
cruise testing included an additional calibration to 4030 psi in a 
10.3°C bath.

In addition to testing the CTD pressure response to increases in 
pressure at stable temperatures (mechanical hysteresis), CTD pressure 
sensor sensitivity to temperature change was checked by thermal shock 
tests.  The CTD was subjected to a step change in temperature from warm 
air to cold water bath at stable pressure in the laboratory, then the 
CTD pressure and temperature were measured over a period of at least 1 
hour.  The thermal shock response was also checked in the opposite 
direction, cold bath to warm bath; that response was roughly mirror-
image to the warm-to-cold response.

Thermal shock tests for CTD #1 were done from warm air to cold water 
bath, and later from cold bath to warm air, during the post-cruise 
calibration.  Further testing was done in Oct.93 to get a better cold-
to-warm response check by going from cold bath to warm bath; the air was 
too unstable to get a proper check in the May 93 attempt.

CTD #1 pre- and post-cruise pressure calibrations are summarized in 
*Figures 1 and 2.

3.2.	PRT Temperature Calibration

Both CTD #1 PRT temperature transducers were calibrated in a 
temperature-controlled bath.  CTD temperatures were compared with 
temperatures calculated from the resistance of a standard platinum 
resistance thermometer (SPRT) as measured by a NBIS ATB-1250 resistance 
bridge.  The ultimate temperature standards at ODF are water and 
diphenyl ether triple-point cells and a gallium cell.  Six or more 
calibration temperatures, spaced across the range of -2.0 to 30.1°C, 
were measured both pre- and post-cruise.

CTD #1 pre- and post-cruise temperature calibrations, referenced to the 
ITS-90 standard, are summarized in *Figure 3.  Calibration coefficients 
are converted to the IPTS-68 standard: CTD temperature data are 
corrected to the IPTS-68 standard because calculated parameters, 
including salinity and density, are currently defined in terms of that 
standard only.  After all data are finalized, IPTS-68 data are converted 
back to the ITS-90 standard as desired via multiplication by a constant 
factor.

4.	CTD Data Processing
4.1.	Pressure, Temperature and Conductivity/Salinity Corrections

A maximum of 36 salinity and oxygen check samples were collected during 
each CTD cast. DSRT thermometric pressure and temperature data were also 
measured at 1 level during 36 casts on P19C.

A 5-second average of the CTD time-series data was calculated for each 
sample.  The resulting data were then used to verify the pre- and post-
cruise temperature calibrations, and to derive CTD conductivity/salinity 
and oxygen corrections.

The following chart clarifies which sensors/winches were used for each 
cast:

P19C CTD/WINCH CONFIGURATION SUMMARY
Station(s)	CTD*	TAMU	Oxygen	 Winch		UofH
		ID#		Sensor			LADCP
234-244							Yes
245-293			63D				No
294-300					
301-302			none		A.Johnson	Yes
303-304			63D			
305-319		1		  A		
320-354							No
355-386/01		173D				Yes
386/02-409				Markey	
410-422							No
*ODF CTD #1 sensor serial numbers appear below:

CTD			Temperature		
ID#	Pressure	PRT-1	PRT-2		Conductivity
1	131910		14304	FSI-T1320	5902-F117

4.1.1.	CTD #1 Pressure Corrections

Please refer to Appendix A: "Improving the Measurement of Pressure in 
the NBIS Mark III CTD" (Delahoyde/Williams) for details on the ODF 
pressure model and its application.

CTD #1 pre- and post-cruise pressure calibrations, *Figures 1a and 1b, 
were compared.  The warm/shallow and cold/deep calibration curves both 
shifted at the surface by about 2.5 to 3 decibars from pre- to post-
cruise.  The cold/deep pressure calibration curves had similar slopes in 
the top 2400 decibars, then diverged an additional 2 decibars between 
2400 and 6100 decibars.  The post-cruise cold/upcast curve was 1 decibar 
closer to the downcast than pre-cruise.  The warm/shallow slope was less 
steep post-cruise, and the surface points were .5 decibar further from 
the cold curve than they were during the pre-cruise calibration.  The 
post-cruise downcast pressure calibrations had similar slopes at all 3 
temperatures, whereas the pre-cruise warm calibration curve was steeper 
than the cold.

Because of the pre- and post-cruise slope inconsistencies, laboratory 
calibrations from Dec.91, May 92 and Oct.93 were also examined for 
trends over time.  The cold/deep correction curve slopes have gone more 
negative and the warm/cold surface offsets have drifted apart with time.  
Only the Aug.92/pre-cruise calibration contradicts these trends; the May 
93/post-cruise pressure calibrations are much more consistent with the 
history of the instrument.  The post-cruise pressure calibrations were 
used to correct the CTD #1 station data, with an additional offset 
applied to account for the shift in the calibration curves over time.  
No slope change was applied to the May 93 data, since there was less 
than a 1 decibar in 6000 decibars slope change between May 92 and May 93 
laboratory calibrations.

The additional offset to the pressure calibration was determined by 
examining raw CTD pressure vs temperature data from the laboratory 
temperature calibrations and comparable shipboard data.  Raw CTD 
pressure vs temperature data from just before the CTD entered the water 
on each cast were tabulated.  The CTD readings were fairly stable, with 
atmospheric pressures and stable ambient temperatures around the CTD for 
30 or more minutes prior to each cast, similar to conditions during the 
laboratory calibrations.  The post-cruise/May 93 pressure calibration 
curves were shifted by the +1.5-decibar average difference between the 
laboratory and cast data; the resulting data, *Figure 1c, were used to 
correct P19C CTD #1 pressure data.

Post-cruise warm-to-cold thermal shock data, *Figure 2a, were fit to 
determine the time constants and temperature coefficients which model 
the pressure response to rapid temperature change.  May 91 and May 
93/post-cruise data were compared: the results were similar in magnitude 
and response time.  A thermal shock test from cold to warm water baths 
was done in Oct.93, *Figure 2b.  The results were similar in magnitude 
but mirror-image to the warm-to-cold shock tests from May 93.  The May 
93 time constants and temperature coefficients, listed in the table at 
the end of this section, were used to correct the P19C CTD #1 pressure 
data.  The thermal response pressure correction applied to upcasts used 
a modification of the downcast correction to achieve the mirror-image 
effect seen in the laboratory.

DSRT thermometric pressures were measured at 1 deep point on each of 36 
casts.  No shift was observed in thermometric/CTD pressure differences 
during P19C.

The shifted May 93/post-cruise calibration curve, *Figure 1c, was used in 
conjunction with the May 93 thermal shock results, *Figure 2a, to correct 
the pressure for all P19C CTD #1 casts.  Any residual offset was 
compensated for automatically at each station: as the CTD entered the 
water, the corrected pressure was adjusted to 0.

Thermal Response Coefficients for CTD Pressure*
	Short Time	Temp. Coeff.	Long Time	Temp. Coeff.
CTD	Constant (secs)	for Tau1	Constant (secs)	for Tau2
ID#	Tau1		  k1		  Tau2		  k2
1	82.1826		+0.306253	384.176		-0.26423
* see Appendix A (Delahoyde/Williams), Section 2

4.1.2.	CTD #1 Temperature Corrections

CTD #1 had two temperature sensors: PRT-1, a Rosemount sensor, was 
calibrated pre- and post-cruise; PRT-2 was an interchangeable FSI 
sensor.  Different FSI sensors were installed in CTD #1 during the pre- 
and post-cruise calibrations; both FSI sensors underwent repairs between 
the calibrations.

PRT-2 was used to monitor any PRT-1 drift during the cruise.  PRT-1 
versus PRT-2 data showed consistent differences throughout P19C.  DSRT 
thermometric temperatures were measured during 36 casts; they also 
indicated no PRT-1 shift occurred during the leg.

A comparison of the pre- and post-cruise laboratory CTD #1 PRT-1 
temperature transducer calibrations, *Figures 3a and 3b, showed two 
curves with nearly identical slopes and a +.001°C shift in the 
temperature correction over the range of 0 to 32°C.  An average of the 
two laboratory calibrations was calculated by averaging the coefficients 
of the pre- and post-cruise temperature correction curve fits.  The 
corrections were converted to the IPTS-68 standard and then applied to 
the CTD #1 temperature data.

4.1.3.	CTD Conductivity Corrections

In order to calibrate CTD conductivity, check-sample conductivities were 
calculated from the bottle salinities using CTD pressures and 
temperatures.  For each cast, the differences between sample and CTD 
conductivities at all pressures were fit to CTD conductivity using a 
linear least-squares fit.  Values greater than 2 standard deviations 
from the fits were rejected.  The resulting conductivity correction 
slopes were plotted as a function of station number.  The conductivity 
slopes were grouped by stations, based on common PRT and conductivity 
sensor combinations, and then fit as a function of station number to 
generate smoothed slopes for each group.  These smoothed slopes were 
either averages of the slopes in the station group (0-order) or changing 
by a fixed amount from station to station (1st-order as a function of 
station number).

Conductivity differences were then calculated for each cast after 
applying the preliminary conductivity slope corrections.  Residual 
conductivity offsets were computed for each cast and fit to station 
number.  Smoothed offsets were determined by groups as above, based on 
common PRT and conductivity sensor combinations.  The resulting smoothed 
offsets were then applied to the data.  Conductivity slope as a function 
of conductivity was re-checked to ensure that no residual slope 
remained.

4.1.3.1. CTD #1

CTD #1 conductivity slopes were gradually shifting more negative 
throughout P19C, with some scatter in the first 20 casts.  Smoothed 
first-order conductivity slopes as a function of station number were 
applied to the P19C casts; the slopes shifted a total of -.00058 over 
the 189 stations.

Residual CTD #1 conductivity offset values were calculated after 
applying the conductivity slopes.  Conductivity offsets were fit as a 
function of station number by groups.  Smoothed 1st-order offsets were 
applied to CTD conductivities in three station groups: 234-354, 356-388 
and 389-422.  The conductivity sensor on station 355 was severely 
contaminated by organic matter from 75 decibars down to 1900 decibars up 
and required individual offsets for both down and up casts.  The sensor 
was cleaned with fresh water following that cast.  There was a small 
shift in conductivity between stations 383 and 384 caused by organic 
matter contamination during station 383 and probable conductivity sensor 
cleaning afterward.

Some offsets were manually re-adjusted to account for discontinuous 
shifts in the conductivity transducer response, or to insure a 
consistent deep T-S relationship from station to station.

Plots of the final/adjusted P19C conductivity slopes and offsets for CTD 
#1 can be found in *Figures 4a and 4b.

4.1.3.2. Bottle vs. CTD Conductivity Statistical Summary

The P19C calibrated bottle-minus-CTD conductivity statistics include 
salinity values with quality 3 or 4.  There is approximately a 1:1 
correspondence between conductivity and salinity residual differences.  
Plots of the differences at all pressures and at pressures below 1500 
decibars are shown in *Figures 5a and 5b.

The following statistical results were generated from the final bottle 
data set and the corrected up-cast CTD data:

P19C Final Bottle-CTD Conductivity Statistics
pressure	mean conductivity	standard	
range		difference		deviation	#values
(decibars)	(bottle-CTD mmho)	(mmho)		in mean
all pressures	 0.001987**		0.086162	6244
allp (4,2rej) *	-0.000088		0.003780	6106
press < 1500	 0.003630		0.108127	3913
p<1500(4,2rej)*	-0.000109		0.005207	3808
press > 1500	-0.000772**		0.015805	2331
p>1500(4,2rej)*	-0.000191		0.000823	2299
* "4,2rej" means a 4,2 standard-deviation rejection filter 
was applied to the differences before generating the results.
** Plots of these differences can be found in *Figures 5a and 5b.

4.2.	CTD Dissolved Oxygen Data

Please refer to appendix B: "CTD Dissolved Oxygen Data Processing" 
(Delahoyde) for details on ODF CTD oxygen processing.

4.2.1.	CTD Oxygen Corrections

Dissolved oxygen data were acquired using a single Sensormedics 
dissolved oxygen sensor for the entire leg.

CTD oxygen data are corrected after pressure, temperature and 
conductivity corrections have been determined.  CTD raw oxygen currents 
were extracted from the pressure-series data at isopycnals corresponding 
to the up-cast check samples.  Most of the pressure-series data were 
from the down casts, where oxygen data are usually smoother than up-cast 
data because of the more constant lowering rate, avoiding the flow-
dependence problems occurring at up-cast bottle stops.  However, the 
P19C CTD oxygen data were affected with flow-dependence problems, down 
or up cast, each time a cast was stopped.  There can also be flow-
dependence problems if a cast is slowed down, as often happens during 
bottom approaches.

The CTD oxygen correction coefficients were determined by applying a 
modified Levenberg-Marquardt nonlinear least squares fitting procedure 
to residual differences between CTD and bottle oxygen values.  Bottle 
oxygen values were weighted as required to optimize the fitting of CTD 
oxygen to discrete bottle samples.  Some bottle levels were omitted from 
a fit because of large pressure differences between down- and up-cast 
CTD data at isopycnals.  Deep data points were often weighted more 
heavily than shallower data due to the higher density of shallow 
sampling on a typical 36-bottle sampling scheme.

The P19C surface oxygen data fitting was adversely affected by the 
typical going-in-water bubbles/noise, making it difficult to fit CTD 
oxygens to the bottle data in the surface mixed layer of many casts.  
Despiking of the raw oxygen current to smooth out the top few decibars 
helped resolve this problem on many casts.  The sharp near-surface 
gradients combined with extremely low oxygen minima (less than .05 ml/l) 
that occurred in many tropical stations caused problems in fitting the 
CTD oxygen signal to bottle samples.  The slow 1-second response time of 
the oxygen sensor, as well as the fact that down-cast data were being 
fit to up-cast bottles, may have caused these fitting problems.  
Numerous tropical casts have oxygen spikes at the sub-surface maximum 
that precedes the sharp thermocline gradients.  The value of oxygen data 
above the second check sample should be very carefully considered.

Several casts had no bottle oxygen data, or sections of missing bottle 
oxygen data, typically due to equipment failures.  These casts were fit 
by supplementing the data with bottles from other casts at the same 
station (station 241 casts 2+4 and station 281 cast 1) or bottles from 
the two adjacent stations' casts (station 257 above 400 decibars).  Two 
casts could not be fit: station 234 cast 1 was very shallow, mostly 
high-gradient, with numerous replicate bottles/long waits at each stop 
and a 4-minute stop at 85 decibars down.  The oxygen coefficients 
calculated for station 235 cast 1 were used for station 234 cast 1 to 
give a very general fit.  Station 420 cast 1 also would not fit, for 
reasons unknown, so the coefficients for station 419 cast 1 were used to 
give general shape to the calculated oxygen data.  Both down and up cast 
oxygens for station 355 were fit despite major conductivity offsetting 
problems, noted in the "CTD Shipboard and Processing Comments" section 
of Appendix D.

4.2.2.	Bottle vs. CTD Oxygen Statistical Summary

CTD oxygens were generated by fitting up cast oxygen bottle data to down 
cast CTD raw oxygen current measurements along isopycnals.  Residual 
oxygen differences from these fits (up cast bottle oxygens vs corrected 
down cast CTD oxygens), including oxygen values with quality code 3 or 
4, are shown in the table below:

P19C Final Bottle-CTD Oxygen Statistics
pressure	mean			oxygen standard	
range		difference		deviation	#values
(decibars)	(bottle-CTD ml/l)	(ml/l)		in mean
all pressures	-0.00464**		0.15212		6256
allp (4,2rej) *	 0.00332		0.04320		5894
press < 1500	-0.01098		0.17677		3927
p<1500(4,2rej)*	 0.00298		0.06127		3693
press > 1500	 0.00605**		0.09642		2329
p>1500(4,2rej)*	 0.00163		0.01717		2243
* "4,2rej" means a 4,2 standard-deviation rejection filter 
was applied to the differences before generating the results.
** Plots of these differences can be found in *Figures 6a and 6b.

4.3.	Additional Processing

A software filter was used on 48 of 192 casts, including both down and 
up casts of station 355 cast 1, to remove conductivity or temperature 
spiking problems in 0.033% of the time-series data frames for the leg.  
Pressure did not require filtering for any P19C cast.

Oxygen spikes were filtered out of 181 casts.  The filtered oxygen 
levels affected approximately .583% of the time-series data frames. 89% 
of the filtered oxygen data were shallower than 50 dbars and are 
probably directly related to bubbles trapped during the going-in-water 
transition.

The remaining density inversions in high-gradient regions cannot be 
accounted for by a mis-match of pressure, temperature and conductivity 
sensor response.  Detailed examination of the raw data shows significant 
mixing occurring in these areas because of ship roll.  The ship-roll 
filter resulted in a reduction in the amount and size of density 
inversions.

After filtering, the down cast (or up cast - see table below) portion of 
each time-series was pressure-sequenced into 2-decibar pressure 
intervals.  A ship-roll filter was applied to each cast during pressure 
sequencing to disallow pressure reversals.

5.	General Comments/Problems

There is one pressure-sequenced CTD data set, to near the ocean floor, 
for 192 casts at 189 station locations.  In addition to reporting both 
the down and up casts for station 355, two casts are reported at station 
241 (casts 2 and 4) and station 281 (an aborted cast 1 plus cast 2).  
Station 386 cast 1 was aborted because of winch problems and was neither 
processed nor reported.  Cast 2 was done at the same location 
immediately after the winch problem was repaired.

The data reported is from down casts, excepting the 7 casts listed 
below:

P19C UP-CAST PRESSURE-SERIES DAT A
Station(s)	Problem with Down Cast Data
271/01	   big conductivity dropout 140-460 db down,
	   probably organic matter contamination of
	   sensor; up cast ok
344/01	   conductivity noisy/offset low at 280-1000 
	   db down, up cast ok; probably caused by 
	   organic matter contamination on sensor
348/01	   -.002 psu salinity offset from 2230 db down 
	   to bottom, shifts back at bottom: up cast ok
354/01	   170 db yoyo on deep down cast causes 
	   problems with CTD oxygen fit, use up
355/01	   conductivity offsets low approx. 65-400 db 
	   down, probably organic matter contaminated 
	   the sensor; then down offset -.02 psu 
	   compared to up below 400 db; conductivity 
	   signal noisy/offsetting on up cast until approx. 
	   1850+ db, top 1850 db of up cast compares 
	   well to nearby stations - reported both
	   down (called cast 11) and up casts, neither 
	   cast is acceptable in its entirety
379/03	   down cast conductivity/salinity is off-set -
	   .012 psu from up cast until near bottom, up 
	   matches nearby casts/ok
383/01	   organic matter contamination on conductivity
	   sensor and transmissometer from 900-
	   1700 db down, up cast ok

The 0-decibar level of some casts were extrapolated using a quadratic 
fit through the next three deeper levels.  Recorded surface values were 
rejected only when it appeared that the drift was caused by sensors 
adjusting to the in-water transition; if there was any question that the 
surface values might be real, the original data was reported.  
Extrapolated surface levels are identified by a count of "1" in the 
"Number of Raw Frames in Average" reported with each data record in the 
data files.

Other cast-by-cast shipboard or processing comments are listed in the 
"CTD Shipboard and Processing Comments" in Appendix D.

The CTD oxygen sensor often requires several seconds in the water before 
being wet enough to respond properly; this is manifested as low or high 
CTD oxygen values at the start of some casts.  Flow-dependence problems 
occur when the lowering rate varies, or when the CTD is stopped and/or 
slowed, as during bottom approaches, at the cast bottom, or at bottle 
trips, where depletion of oxygen at the sensor causes lower oxygen 
readings.  Significant delays and yoyos during the casts are documented 
in Appendix D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P19C
Final Report for Large Volume Samples and delta-14-C Measurements
Robert M. Key
July 10, 1996

1.0	General Information

WOCE cruise P19C was the third of three legs carried out aboard the R/V Knorr in 
the south central and southeastern Pacific Ocean.  The WHPO designation for this 
leg was 316N138/12 (A.K.A. Juno-3).  Lynne Talley of SIO was chief scientist for 
this leg.  This report covers details of data collection and analysis for the 
large volume Gerard samples.  The reader is referred to the Talley's Final 
Report for general information.  The detailed sampling notes from that report 
regarding Gerard casts are reproduced here as an appendix.  The cruise departed 
Punta Arenas, Chile on February 22, 1993 and ended at Panama City, Panama on 
April 13, 1993.

Thirteen large volume (LV) stations were occupied on this leg.  The planned 
sampling density was 1 station every 5° of latitude (~300nmi).  Each station 
(except station 379 which had only one cast and station 413 which had 3 casts) 
included one deep cast (2500db to the bottom), and an intermediate (1000db to 
2500db) cast.  All LV casts for the Juno cruises were done using the starboard-
aft crane and coring cable on the R/V Knorr.  This arrangement was far superior 
to that used on the R/V Thomas Washington for the TUNES cruises.  The purpose of 
these casts was to collect samples for 14-C analysis.  14-C coverage for the 
upper water column was done via small volume AMS sampling from the Rosette.  
Table 1 summarizes the LV sampling and Figure 1 shows the station positions for 
leg P19C.

Table 1: Station/Cast Summary
Station	Cast	Latitude	West		# LV
		+ => N		Longitude	Samples
241	1	-53.352		76.609		9
	3	-53.342		76.602		9
264	1	-49.979		87.999		9
	3	-50.012		58.000		9
274	1	-45.000		88.025		9
	3	-45.040		87.998		9
284	1	-39.996		87.987		9
	3	-39.996		87.987		9
299	1	-32.499		87.999		9
	3	-32.500		87.998		9
317	1	-24.322		87.998		9
	3	-24.328		88.011		9
326	1	-19.981		88.008		9
	3	-19.971		88.002		9
338	1	-14.573		85.831		9
	3	-14.562		85.828		9
353	2	- 6.994		85.823		9
	3	- 6.988		85.814		9
361	1	- 3.005		85.831		9
	3	- 2.996		85.830		9
379	1	  0.998		85.839		9
395	1	  6.723		88.762		9
	3	  6.712		88.757		9
	1	 13.016		91.777		9
413	3	 13.023		91.760		9
	4	 13.025		91.767		3
13	27	 TOTALS				228

Each Gerard barrel was equipped with a piggyback 5 liter Niskin bottle which, in 
turn, had a full set of high precision reversing thermometers to determine 
sampling pressure and temperature.  Both Gerard and Niskin were sampled for 
salinity and silicate. Additionally, each Gerard was sampled for radiocarbon.  
The salinity samples from the piggyback bottle were used for comparison with the 
Gerard barrel salinities to verify the integrity of the Gerard sample.  As 
samples were collected, information was recorded on a sample log sheet.  Normal 
sampling practice was to open the drain valve before opening the air vent to see 
if water escapes, indicating the presence of a small air leak in the sampler.  
This observation ("air leak"), and other comments ("lanyard caught in lid," 
"valve left open," etc.) which may indicate some doubt about the integrity of 
the water samples were noted on the sample log sheets.  The discrete 
hydrographic data were entered into the shipboard data system and processed as 
the analyses were completed.  The bottle data were brought to a usable, though 
not final, state at sea.  Data checking procedures included verification that 
the sample was assigned to the correct depth.  The salinity and nutrient data 
were compared with those from adjacent stations and with the Rosette cast data 
from the same station.  Any comments regarding the water samples were 
investigated.  The raw data computer files were also checked for entry errors 
that could have been made on the station number, bottle number and/or sample 
container number.

2.0	Personnel 

LV sampling for this cruise was under the direction of the principal 
investigator, Robert M. Key (Princeton). All LV 14-C extractions at sea were 
done by G. McDonald (Princeton).  In addition to McDonald, deck work was done by 
the SIO CTD group with assistance from the scientific party.  J. Wells and G. 
Pillard (ODF) were responsible for reading thermometers.  Salinities and 
nutrients were analyzed by SIO-ODF with assistance from Andy Ross (Oregon State 
U.).  14-C analyses were performed at Göte Östlund's laboratory (U. Miami, 
R.S.M.A.S.).  Minze Stuiver made the 13-C measurements which are necessary to 
correct the 14-C values for fractionation effects.  Key collected the data from 
the originators, merged the files, assigned quality control flags to the 14-C, 
rechecked the flags assigned by ODF and submitted the data files to the WOCE 
office (7/96).

Figure 1*: Large volume station locations for WOCE cruise P19C (4500m 
	   bathymetry).

3.0	Results

This data set and any changes or additions supersedes any prior release.  In 
this data set Gerard samples can be differentiated from Niskin samples by the 
bottle number.  Niskin bottle numbers are in the range 41-49 while Gerards are 
in the range 81-93.

3.1	Pressure and Temperature

Pressure and temperature for the LV casts are determined by reversing 
thermometers mounted on the piggyback Niskin bottle.  Each bottle was equipped 
with the standard set of 2 protected and 1 unprotected thermometer.  Each 
temperature value reported on the LV casts was calculated from the average of 
four readings, provided both protected thermometers functioned normally.  The 
temperatures are based on the International Temperature Scale of 1990.  All 
thermometers, calibrations and calculations were provided by SIO-ODF.  Reported 
temperatures for samples in the thermocline are believed to be accurate to 
0.01°C and for deep samples 0.005°C.  Pressures were calculated using standard 
techniques combining wire out with unprotected thermometer data.  In cases where 
the thermometers failed, pressures were estimated by thermometer data from 
adjacent bottles combined with wire out data.  Because of the inherent error in 
pressure calculations and the finite flushing time required for the Gerard 
barrels, the assigned pressures have an uncertainty of approximately 10 dB.  The 
pressures recorded in the data set for each Gerard-Niskin pair generally differ 
by approximately 0.5 dB with the Gerard pressure being the greater.  This is 
because the Niskin is hung near the upper end of the Gerard.  Figure 2* shows 
potential temperature vs. pressure for the LV casts.

3.2	Salinity

Salinity samples were collected from each Gerard barrel and each piggyback 
Niskin bottle.  Analyses were performed by the same personnel who ran the salt 
samples collected from the Rosette bottles so the analytical precision should be 
the same for LV salts and Rosette salt samples.  When both Gerard and Niskin 
trip properly, the difference between the two salt measurements should be within 
the range 0.000 - 0.003 on the PSU scale.  Somewhat larger differences can occur 
if the sea state is very calm and the cast is not "yoyo'd" once the terminal 
wire out is reached.  This difference is due to the flushing time required for 
the Gerard barrels and the degree of difference is a function of the salinity 
gradient where the sample was collected.  In addition to providing primary 
hydrographic data for the LV casts, measured salinity values help confirm that 
the barrels closed at the desired depth.  For the area covered by this leg, deep 
nutrient values (especially silicate) are as useful for trip confirmation as 
salt measurements.

Figure 2*: Potential temperature from DSRT on LV casts vs. pressure.

Salinity samples were drawn into 200 ml Kimax high alumina borosilicate bottles 
after 3 rinses, and were sealed with custom-made plastic insert thimbles and 
Nalgene screw caps.  This assembly provides very low container dissolution and 
sample evaporation.  As loose inserts were found, they were replaced to ensure a 
continued air-tight seal.  Salinity was determined after a box of samples had 
equilibrated to laboratory temperature, usually within 8-12 hours of collection.  
The draw time and equilibration time, as well as per-sample analysis time and 
temperature were logged.

A single Guildline Autosal Model 8400A salinometer located in a temperature 
controlled laboratory was used to measure salinities.  The salinometer was 
standardized for each cast with IAPSO Standard Seawater (SSW) Batch P-120, using 
at least one fresh vial per cast.  The estimated accuracy of bottle salinities 
run at sea is usually better than 0.002 PSU relative to the particular Standard 
Seawater batch used.  PSS-78 salinity (UNESCO 1981) was then calculated for each 
sample from the measured conductivity ratios, and the results merged with the 
cruise database.  There were some problems with lab temperature control 
throughout cruise; the Autosal bath temperature was adjusted accordingly.  
Salinities were generally considered good for the expedition despite the lab 
temperature problem.  The quality of the temperature and salinity is 
demonstrated by Figure 3 which shows data from all of the large volume samples.  
Each Gerard-Niskin pair is assigned the same temperature which allows direct 
comparison of many of the paired salinity values on the figure. 

Figure 3*: Theta-salinity for all of the large volume cast data with a QC flag 
	   of 2 for both temperature and salinity.

3.3	Nutrients

Nutrient samples were collected from Gerard samples.  On this leg silicate 
values were measured on all samples.  LV nutrients were measured along with 
Rosette nutrients so the analytical precision for Gerard samples should be the 
same as Rosette samples.  Nutrients collected from LV casts are frequently 
subject to systematic offsets from samples taken from Rosette bottles.  For this 
reason it is recommended that these data be viewed primarily as a means of 
checking sample integrity (i.e. trip confirmation).  The Rosette- Gerard 
discrepancy is frequently less for silicate than for other nutrients.

Nutrient samples were drawn into 45 ml high density polypropylene, narrow mouth, 
screw-capped centrifuge tubes which were rinsed three times before filling.  
Standardizations were performed with solutions prepared aboard ship from pre-
weighed chemicals; these solutions were used as working standards before and 
after each cast to correct for instrumental drift during analysis.  Sets of 4-6 
different concentrations of shipboard standards were analyzed periodically to 
determine the linearity of colorimeter response and the resulting correction 
factors.

Nutrient analyses were performed on an ODF-modified 4 channel Technicon 
AutoAnalyzer II, generally within one hour of the cast. Occasionally some 
samples were re-frigerated at 2 to 6°C for a maximum of 4 hours.  The methods 
used are described by Gordon et al. (1992), Atlas et al. (1971), and Hager et 
al. (1972).  All peaks were logged manually, and all the runs were re-read to 
check for possible reading errors.

Silicate was analyzed using the technique of Armstrong et al. (1967).  ODF''s 
methodology is known to be non-linear at high silicate concentrations (>120 mM); 
a correction for this non-linearity was applied.  Phosphate was analyzed using a 
modification of the Bernhardt and Wilhelms (1967) technique.

Na2SiF6, the silicate primary standard, was obtained from Fluka Chemical Company 
and Fischer Scientific and is reported by the suppliers to be >98% pure.  
Primary standards for phosphate, KH2PO4, were obtained from Johnson Matthey 
Chemical Co. and the supplier reports purity of 99.999%.

Nutrients, reported in micromoles per kilogram, were converted from micromoles 
per liter by dividing by sample density calculated at zero pressure, in-situ 
salinity, and an assumed laboratory temperature of 25°C.  The overall quality of 
the silicate data for this cruise is demonstrated in Figure 4* which shows both 
Gerard and piggyback Niskin silicate values as a function of potential 
temperature.  Overlain on the plot (lines) are the Rosette measurements for the 
same stations and depth ranges.

3.4	14-C

Some of the delta-14-C values reported here have been distributed in data 
reports produced by Östlund (1994, 1995).  Those reports included preliminary 
hydrographic data and are superseded by this submission.

All Gerard samples deemed to be "OK" on initial inspection at sea were extracted 
for 14-C analysis using the technique described by Key (1991).  The extracted 
14-CO2/NaOH samples were returned to the Ocean Tracer Lab at Princeton and 
subsequently shipped to Östlund's lab in Miami.  Both 13-C and 14-C measurements 
are performed on the same CO2 gas extracted from the large volume samples.  The 
standard for the 14-C measurements is the NBS oxalic acid standard for 
radiocarbon dating.  R-value is the ratio between the measured specific activity 
of the sample CO2 to that of CO2 prepared from the standard, the latter number 
corrected to a sigma-13-C value of -19 0/00 and age corrected from today to 
AD1950 all according to the international agreement.  delta-14-C is the 
deviation in 0/00 from unity, of the activity ratio, isotope corrected to a 
sample sigma-13-C value of -25 0/00.  For further information of these 
calculations and procedures see Broecker and Olson (1981), Stuiver and Robinson 
(1974) and Stuiver (1980).  Östlund's lab reports a precision of 4 0/00 for each 
measurement based on a long term average of counting statistics.  Of the 123 
Gerard samples collected, 14-C has been measured on 102 (83%).  This exceeds the 
rate funded for this work (80%).  Prior to this cruise, no 14-C data existed for 
this entire region of the ocean, therefore, no comparisons of that type were 
possible.

Figure 4*: Plot includes silicate data from both Gerard and piggyback Niskin 
	   samples. Rosette/CTD data from the same stations and depth ranges are 
	   overlain as lines.

4.0	Data Summary

Figures 5 & 6 summarize the large volume 14-C data collected on this leg.  All 
delta-14-C measurements with a quality flag value of 2 are included in each 
figure.  Figure 5 shows the delta-14-C values plotted as a function of pressure.  
One sigma error bars (±4 0/00) are shown with each datum.  The mid-depth minimum 
which is characteristic of Pacific profiles is present in some of these 
profiles, however, it is interesting that the minimum is more pronounced at the 
southern end of the section than at the northern end.  Figure 6 shows the delta-
14-C values plotted against measured Gerard barrel silicate values.  The angled 
heavy line is the rela-tionship suggested by Broecker et al.  (1995) to be 
representative of the mean global pre-bomb delta-14-C - silicate correlation.  
As was pointed out in that paper, and as is evident with this data set, the 
relationship does not hold for high latitude southern waters.  What is not 
apparent in this figure, is the fact that the "global" relationship is not even 
close to correct for any of these data.  The southern 3 stations (264, 274, 284) 
show the "backward J' shape typical of much of the South Pacific.  Accepting 
Broecker's theme with adjustment for this particular area, the data collected 
north of 30°S, deeper than 1000m (i.e. assumed to have no tritium) and shallower 
than the silicate maximum (taken to be 2500m here) have a linear regression 
intercept of -148±7 and a slope of -0.55±0.05 with an R^2 value of 0.72 for 47 
data values.  These values aren't even in the ballpark with the global values of 
-70 and 1.  This rather extreme deviation should provide interesting research 
material.

Figure 5*: All LV delta-14-C values as a function of pressure. Vertical bars 
	   indicate one sigma (4 0/00) errors.

Figure 7* is a section of the radiocarbon data from P19C large volume samples.  
The northward flowing Antarctic water is clearly evident near the bottom at the 
southern end of the section.  Lying above is the older water (14-C minimum) 
which presumably came from the North Pacific.  The values in the deep basin at 
the north end of the section are quite uniform (delta-14-C ~ -235 0/00) 
throughout most of the deep and bottom waters reflecting the fact that this 
basin has a sill depth in the vicinity of the minimum.

Figure 6*: All LV delta-14-C measurements having a quality control flag value of 
	   2 or 6 are plotted.  Vertical bars are one sigma errors.  The heavy line is that 
	   suggested by Broecker, et al.  (1995) to be representative of the global 
	   relationship between pre-bomb 14-C and silicate.

5.0	Quality Control Flag Assignment

Quality flag values were assigned to all bottles and all measurements using the 
code defined in Tables 0.1 and 0.2 of WHP Office Report WHPO 91-1 Rev. 2 
sections 4.5.1 and 4.5.2 respectively.  In this report the only bottle flag 
values used were 2, 3, 4 and 9.  For the measurement flags values of 2, 3, 4 or 
9 were assigned.  The interpretation of measurement flag 9 is unambiguous, 
however the choice between values 2, 3 or 4 is involves some interpretation.  
For this data set, the salt and nutrient values were checked by plotting them 
over the same parameters taken from the rosette at the same station.  Points 
which were clearly outliers were flagged "4."  Points which were somewhat 
outside the envelop of the other points were flagged "3."  In cases where the 
entire cast seemed to be shifted to higher or lower concentrations (in nutrient 
values), but the values formed a smooth profile, the data was flagged as "2."  
Once the nutrient and salt data had been flagged, these results were considered 
in flagging the 14-C data.  There is no overlap between this data set and any 
existing 14-C data, so that type of comparison was impractical.  The lack of 
other data for comparison led to a more lenient grading on the 14-C data.  When 
flagging 14-C data, the measurement error was taken into consideration.  That 
is, approximately one-third of the 14-C measurements are expected to deviate 
from the true value by more than the measurement precision of ~4 0/00.  At the 
time of this writing, Östlund's final report for this cruise was not available.  
Once that report is out, a few additional 14-C values may be added to this data 
set.  At that time flag values 5 and 9 for the 14-C data can be adjusted to 
their final values.  At this point, these two flag values have been used 
synonymously.

Figure 7*: Radiocarbon section along 88°W for deep and bottom waters.Evident in 
	   the figure are northward flowing waters of Antarctic origin along the bottom and 
	   the older presumably southward flowing deep water around 2500dB.

No measured values have been removed from this data set.  When using this data 
set, it is advised that the nutrient data only be considered as a tool for 
judging the quality of the 14-C data regardless of the quality code value.  A 
summary of all flags is provided in Table 2.

TABLE 2. Quality Code Summary
WHP Quality Codes
	Levels	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
BTLNBR	  456	0	441	6	8	0	0	0	0	1
SALNTY	  456	0	442	3	10	0	0	0	0	1
SILCAT	  456	0	446	1	8	0	0	0	0	1
REVPRS	  456	0	448	2	0	0	0	6*a	0	0
REVTMP	  456	0	452	1	1	0	0	0	0	2
DELC14*b  228	0	145	12	1	70	0	0	0	0
*a. Pressure assigned by means other than thermometric. Assumed error on these 
pressure estimates is ±50dB.
*b. 14-C large volume samples can not be collected from piggyback Niskin bottles

6.0	References and Supporting Documentation

Armstrong, F.A.J., C.R. Stearns, and J.D.H. Strickland, 1967. The measurement of 
   upwelling and subsequent biological processes by means of the Technicon 
   Autoanalyzer and associated equipment, Deep-Sea Research, 14, 381-389. 
Atlas, E.L., S.W. Hager, L.I. Gordon and P.K. Park, 1971. A Practical Manual for 
   Use of the Technicon(r) AutoAnalyzer(r) in Seawater Nutrient Analyses; Revised. 
   Technical Report 215, Reference 71-22. Oregon State University, Department of 
   Oceanography. 49 pp.
Bernhardt, H. and A. Wilhelms, 1967. The continuous determination of low level 
   iron, soluble phosphate and total phosphate with the AutoAnalyzer, Technicon 
   Symposia, Volume I, 385-389.
Broecker, W.S., and E.A. Olson, 1961, Lamont radiocarbon measurements VIII, 
   Radiocarbon, 3, 176-274.
Broecker, W.S., S. Sutherland, W. Smethie, T.-H. Peng and G. Östlund, Oceanic 
   radiocarbon: Separation of the natural and bomb components, Global 
   Biogeochemical Cycles, 9(2), 263-288, 1995.
Gordon, L.I., Jennings, Joe C. Jr., Ross, Andrew A., Krest, James M., 1992, A 
   suggested protocol for continuous flow automated analysis of seawater 
   nutrients in the WOCE Hydrographic Program and the Joint Global Ocean Fluxes 
   Study, OSU College of Oceanography Descr. Chem. Oc. Grp. Tech. Rpt. 92-1.
Hager, S.W., E.L. Atlas, L.D. Gordon, A.W. Mantyla, and P.K. Park, 1972, A 
   comparison at sea of manual and autoanalyzer analyses of phosphate, nitrate, 
   and silicate, Limnology and Oceanography, 17, 931-937.
Key, R.M., 1991, Radiocarbon, in: WOCE Hydrographic Operations and Methods 
   Manual, WOCE Hydrographic Program Office Technical Report.
Key, R.M., D. Muus and J. Wells, 1991, Zen and the art of Gerard barrel 
   maintenance, WOCE Hydrographic Program Office Technical Report.
Östlund, G., WOCE Radiocarbon (Miami), Tritium Laboratory Data Release #94-11, 1994.
Östlund, G., WOCE Radiocarbon (Miami) Remaining Sample Analyses, Tritium 
   Laboratory Data Release #95-39, 1995.
Stuiver, M., and S.W. Robinson, 1974, University of Washington GEOSECS North 
   Atlantic carbon-14 results, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 23, 87-90.
Stuiver, M., 1980, Workshop on 14-C data reporting, Radiocarbon, 3, 964-966.
UNESCO, 1981, Background papers and supporting data on the Practical Salinity 
   Scale, 1978, UNESCO Technical Papers in Marine Science, No. 37, 144 p.

7.0	Appendix

Quality Comments

Remarks for missing samples, and WOCE codes other than 2 from JUNO - WOCE P19C 
Large Volume Samples.  Investigation of data may include comparison of bottle 
salinity and silicate data from piggy-back and Gerard with CTD cast data, review 
of data plots of the station profile and adjoining stations, and rereading of 
charts (i.e., nutrients).  Comments from the Sample Logs and the results of 
ODF's investigations are included in this report.

Station 241

381 @1141db Sample log: "leaker - upper air valve tight." Salinity and silicate 
	are acceptable; piggy-back (41).
393 @2345db Sample log: "TCO2 70 taken before salts & nuts. TCO2 71 taken after 
	salts & nuts." TCO2 taken after salts & nuts." Comments from Sample Log are for 
	the benefit of TCO2 analyst, this would not effect the Gerard samples. 
	Piggy-back (49).
141 @2496db Delta-S(n-g) at 2496db is -0.047, salinity is 34.672. Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable, Gerard (81) salinity is high.
181 @2497db Sample log: "top valve open." Salinity is high, silicate is slightly 
	low ~.7, but reasonable. Footnote salinity bad, piggy-back (41). PI to determine 
	integrity of other Gerard samples.
183 @2898db Sample log: "bubbling on & off during PCO2 & TCO2." Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable, piggy-back (43) are also acceptable.
144 @3099db Delta-S(n-g) at 3099db is 0.004, salinity is 34.695. Salinity 
	difference is .001 high, but Gerard (84) salinity and silicate are acceptable.
184 @3099db Sample log: "bubbling during PCO2." Salinity and silicate are 
	acceptable, piggy-back (44) is also acceptable.
145 @3300db Delta-S(n-g) at 3300db is -0.537, salinity is 34.164. Footnote 
	bottle leaking, low salinity and low silicate bad; Gerard (85) samples are 
	acceptable.
185 @3301db Sample log: "bubbling during PCO2 & TCO2." Gerard samples are 
	acceptable; piggy-back (45) are bad.
147 @3705db Delta-S(n-g) at 3705db is 0.002, salinity is 34.715. Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable, Gerard (89) also acceptable.
189 @3705db Sample log: "bubbling during TCO2." Salinity and silicate are 
	acceptable, piggy-back (47) also acceptable.
148 @3908db Delta-S(n-g) at 3908db is 0.003, salinity is 34.713. Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable; Gerard (90) is also acceptable.
190 @3909db Sample log: "bubbling during PCO2." Salinity and silicate are 
	acceptable; piggy-back (48) are also acceptable.
149 @4112db Delta-S(n-g) at 4112db is 0.003, salinity is 34.711. Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable; Gerard (93) also acceptable.
193 @4113db Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (49).

Station 264

Cast 3 Sample log: "no comments."
185 @3657db Sample log: "top vent closed - bottom valve gushing water - leaky." 
	Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (45).
147 @3910db Sample log: "47/46 reversed in rack - suspect on oppos. Gers, 
	confirmed by therm readings." asal: "reverse 47/46 to connect with samplers 
	6/7." Salinity and silicate slightly low, but within acceptable limits; Gerard 
	(87) samples acceptable. Sample log and thermometer sheet records were changed 
	in an attempt to correct mis-recording at sea. Still appears to be confusion as 
	to what came out of what Gerard or piggy-back. However, can not change sample 
	numbers to "fit" the data.  
187 @3911db Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (47) also okay.
189 @4164db Sample log: "lid didn't catch." Salinity and silicate are 
	acceptable; piggy-back (46). PI to determine the integrity of other LV samples.

Station 274

Cast 1 No double ping until 0828z/7 mins before top barrel stop.
146 @1335db See comments on Gerard (87). Delta-S(n-g) at 1335db is -0.002, 
	salinity is 34.546. Footnote bottle did not trip as scheduled, footnote salinity 
	and silicate bad for this pressure, footnote pressure uncertain.
187 @1336db post-trips: last 4 tripped while wire moving up toward 1st barrel. 
	therms not soaked. Gerards 87, 89, 90, and 93 post- tripped, all but 87 appear 
	to have correct reassigned pressures. Salinity and silicate from Gerard and 
	piggy-back agree with one another, but too high compared with rosette cast and 
	station profile; piggy-back (46). Suspect tripped at ~1500m, if 1500 were used 
	then ODF would delete the temperature. Footnote bottle did not trip as 
	scheduled, footnote pressure uncertain. Footnote silicate and salinity bad for 
	this pressure.
383 @1557db Delta-S(n-g) at 1556db is -0.002, salinity is 34.554. Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable. Piggy-back (43)
147 @1669db See post-trip comment on 187. Footnote bottle did not trip as 
	scheduled, pressure post-tripped, samples acceptable at reassigned pressure; 
	Gerard (89).
189 @1669db See post-trip comment on 187. Footnote bottle did not trip as 
	scheduled, pressure post-tripped, samples acceptable at reassigned pressure; 
	piggy-back (47).
148 @1818db See post-trip comment on 187. Footnote bottle did not trip as 
	scheduled, pressure post-tripped, samples acceptable at reassigned 
	pressure; Gerard (90).
190 @1818db See post-trip comment on 187. Footnote bottle did not trip as 
	scheduled, pressure post-tripped, samples acceptable at reassigned 
	pressure; piggy-back (48).
149 @1975db Delta-S(n-g) at 1975db is -0.003, salinity is 34.620. See post-trip 
	comment on 187. Footnote bottle did not trip as scheduled, pressure post-
	tripped, samples acceptable at reassigned pressure; Gerard (93).
193 @1976db See post-trip comment on 187. Footnote bottle did not trip as 
	scheduled, pressure post-tripped, samples acceptable at reassigned 
	pressure; piggy-back (49).
385 @2308db Sample log: "leaky again." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; 
	piggy-back (45).
185 @3215db Sample log: "leak somewhere - all tight - upper valve - water gushes 
	at lower fitting." Salinity and silicate acceptable; piggy-back (45).
390 @3860db Delta-S(n-g) at 3859db is -0.002, salinity is 34.710. Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (48).
393 @4059db Sample log: "possible mixup with nuts draw/maybe not." Appears all 
	okay. Piggy-back (49)

Station 284

Cast 1 Sample log: "everything ok."
384 @1501db Sample log: "a gusher at bottom valve." leaks without venting, main 
	clamp block gone. Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (44).
387 @1802db Sample log: "top valve loose/gusher." Salinity and silicate are 
	acceptable; piggy-back (46).
347 @1952db Sample log: "niskin failed, bottom cap open - therms ok." Fails to 
	close due to tie wrap hanging up on release pin. Solution: replaced therm 
	lanyard with correct-length lanyard. Gerard (89)
389 @1953db Sample log: "barrel lid closed but not latched." Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (47).
348 @2104db Therm rack 8 fails to reverse because spring lanyard fails. Delta-
	S(n-g) at 2104db is -0.0083, salinity is 34.628. Footnote salinity and silicate 
	bad, bottle leaking; Gerard (90) samples acceptable. No temperature.
390 @2104db No temperature, problem with piggy-back (48). Salinity and silicate 
	are acceptable.
145 @3274db Delta-S(n-g) at 3274db is -0.0094, salinity is 34.680. Station 
	profile compared with adjoining rosette casts looks reasonable. Rosette data 
	also has a definite "shift" in the data. However, since the salinities and 
	silicates from the Gerard and piggy-back bottle do not agree with one 
	another, footnote silicate uncertain from the piggy-back and salinity from 
	the Gerard (85).
185 @3274db Footnote salinity uncertain see comments piggy-back (45). PI will 
	have to determine integrity of Gerard samples.
147 @3680db Delta-S(n-g) at 3680db is -0.7731, salinity is 33.928. Footnote 
	salinity and silicate bad bottle leaking, Gerard (89) salinity and silicate 
	are acceptable.
189 @3680db Salinity and silicate are acceptable despite problem with piggy-back (47).

Station 299

344 @1528db Delta-S(n-g) at 1528db is -0.0095, salinity is 34.561. Footnote 
	salinity and silicate uncertain, bottle leaking. Gerard (84) salinity and 
	silicate acceptable.
384 @1528db Sample log: "leaky, pump is sucking air from barrel." Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable, piggy-back (44)
347 @1904db Delta-S(n-g) at 1905db is -0.0052, salinity is 34.614. Gerard (89) 
	salinity slightly high, silicates agree within .2.
389 @1905db Sample log: "loose pin on barrel." Footnote salinity uncertain, 
	silicates agree within .2. Suspect salinity drawing is a little "sloppy" and not 
	a problem with the barrel; piggy-back (47).
190 @3553db Sample log: "gusher at btm valve." Salinity and silicate are 
	acceptable; piggy-back (48).

Station 317

Cast 1 Sample log:" no comments
383 @1550db Sample log: "gusher/leaky." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; 
	piggy-back (43).
385 @1852db Sample log: "bad vent o-ring/leaky." Salinity and silicate are 
	acceptable; piggy-back (45)
347 @2151db Sample log: "leaky on valve test before sampling (before venting?)." 
	Silicate and salinity are acceptable; Gerard (89).
389 @2152db Silicate and salinity are acceptable; piggy-back (47).
349 @2450db Delta-S(n-g) at 2450db is -0.0078, salinity is 34.661. Gerard (93) 
	salinity is high.
393 @2451db Salinity is slightly high, silicate is acceptable; piggy-back (49). 
	Suspect Gerard samples okay. 

Station 326

Cast 3 Sample log: "no comments."
183 @3134db Sample log: "gusher at bottom valve." Salinity and silicate are 
	acceptable; piggy-back (43).
145 @3536db Delta-S(n-g) at 3536db is 0.5725, salinity is 35.259. Footnote 
	bottle leaking, salinity and silicate bad. Gerard (85) appears to be okay.
185 @3537db Salinity and silicate are acceptable; despite piggy-back (45) 
	problems.
147 @3943db Sample log: "top lid not sealing again? leaky." Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable; Gerard (89).
189 @3944db Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (47).

Station 338

342 @1474db Sample log: "leaky on valve test." Salinity and silicate are 
	acceptable as are the Gerard (82) salinity and silicate.
382 @1474db Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (42).
347 @2345db Sample log: "too warm for depth?." Delta-S(n-g) at 2345db is 1.17, 
	salinity is 35.830. Footnote bottle leaking, salinity and silicate bad. 
	Gerard (89) salinity and silicate acceptable.
389 @2345db Salinity and silicate acceptable despite piggy-back (47) problems.
193 @4701db Sample log: "gusher at bottom valve, all appears tight; Lid closed - 
	not latched." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (49).

Station 353

381 @1184db Sample log: "gusher again." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; 
	piggy-back (41). PI to determine integrity of other Gerard samples.
342 @1306db Delta-S(n-g) at 1306db is 0.0053, salinity is 34.598. Suspect poor 
	salinity drawing technique, footnote salinity uncertain, it is still usable. 
	Gerard (82) salinity and silicate are acceptable. Gerard (82)
382 @1307db Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (42).
281 @2300db Sample log: "gusher." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-
	back (41). PI to determine integrity of other Gerard samples.
283 @2702db Sample log: "vent valve stuck, gusher." Salinity and silicate are 
	acceptable; piggy-back (43). PI to determine integrity of other Gerard samples.
284 @2903db Sample log: "no gusher but leak at top valve." Salinity and silicate 
	are acceptable; piggy-back (44). PI to determine integrity of other Gerard 
	samples. Piggy-back (44)
289 @3505db Sample log: "lid slightly open." Salinity and silicate are 
	acceptable; piggy-back (47). PI to determine integrity of other Gerard samples.

Station 361

347 @1724db Sample log: "leaky upon valve test - ok after readj. top lid." 
	Salinity and silicate are acceptable; Gerard (89) also acceptable.
389 @1725db Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (47).
181 @2020db Sample log: "gusher." Salinity and silicate are acceptable, piggy-
	back (41). PI will have to determine integrity of Gerard samples.
147 @2926db Sample log: "leaks on valve test, top cap again?." Delta- S(n-g) at 
	2926db is -0.0157, salinity is 34.678. Salinity and silicate are acceptable; 
	Gerard (89) salinity is high, but silicate is acceptable.
189 @2927db Footnote salinity bad, see salinity difference comment 147, silicate 
	is acceptable; piggy-back (47).

Station 379

182 @1503db Sample log: "bad O-ring in vent, barrel leaky at vent." Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (42).
190 @2554db Sample log: "lower gerard fitting unscrews easily." Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (48).

Station 395

341 @1347db Sample log: "not fastened in rack properly/lost a lot of water." 
	Salinity and silicate are acceptable; Gerard (81) also acceptable.
381 @1347db Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (41).
382 @1448db Sample log: "bottom valve came out." Salinity and silicate are 
	acceptable; piggy-back (42).
383 @1548db Sample log: "sucking air bubbles - top vent/btm valve ok, chk o-
	ring." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy- back (43).
182 @2414db therms: "barrel 82 leaks." Sample log: "small gusher, check gerard 
	lid o-ring, may need grease." Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-
	back (42).

Station 413

Cast 3 Sample log: "perfect cast. (no comment on therm form either)."
488 (No Pressure) Sample log/therms: "leaks from vent - check both O-rings in 
	cap; lower klein clamp needs work and/or grease - check." Sample log: "not 
	sampled."
492 (No Pressure) Sample log: "not sampled."
494 (No Pressure) Sample log: "not sampled."
447 @1357db Delta-S(n-g) at 1357db is -0.0049, salinity is 34.593. Gerard (89)
489 @1357db Sample log: "look fine, no leaks anywhere and all lids latched." 
	Piggy-back (47)
448 @1442db Delta-S(n-g) at 1442db is -0.0031, salinity is 34.602. Salinity and 
	silicate are acceptable, suspect salinity difference is poor drawing. 
	Gerard (90)
490 @1442db Sample log: "look fine, no leaks anywhere and all lids latched." 
	Salinity and silicate are acceptable, suspect salinity difference is poor 
	drawing technique; piggy-back (48).
449 @1544db Delta-S(n-g) at 1544db is -0.002, salinity is 34.611. Gerard (93)
493 @1545db Sample log: "look fine, no leaks anywhere and all lids latched." 
	Piggy-back (49)
190 @5555db Sample log: "valve unscrews needs teflon? otherwise perfect cast." 
	Salinity and silicate are acceptable; piggy-back (48).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P19C Final Report for AMS 14-C Samples

Robert M. Key
February 24, 1998

1.0	General Information

WOCE cruise P19C was carried out aboard the R/V Knorr in the southeastern 
Pacific Ocean. The WHPO designation for this cruise was 316N138/12.  Lynne 
Talley was the chief scientist.  The cruise departed Punta Arenas, Chile on 
February 22, 1993 and ended on April 13, 1993 at Panama City, Panama.  The 
cruise made an east to west section along approximately 53°S from Punta Arenas 
to approximately 88°W.  From there the track went approximately northward with 
minor jogs in the track to avoid the axis of the East Pacific Rise.  A total of 
191 stations were occupied.  The reader is referred to cruise documentation 
provided by the chief scientists as the primary source for cruise information.  
This report covers details of the small volume radiocarbon samples.  The AMS 
station locations are summarized in Table 1 and shown in *Figure 1.  A total of 
782 AMS delta-14-C samples were collected at 48 stations.  In addition to the 
AMS 
samples, large volume Gerard samples were also collected on this cruise.  The 
large volume results were reported previously by Key, 1996(b).

2.0	Personnel

14-C sampling for this cruise was carried out by G. McDonald from the Ocean 
Tracer Lab at Princeton University.  Sample extraction, delta-13-C analyses and 
14-C 
analyses were performed by NOSAMS (National Ocean Sciences AMS Facility at Woods 
Hole Oceanographic Institution).  Salinity, oxygen and nutrients were analyzed 
by Scripps ODF.  R. Key collected the data from the originators, merged the 
files, assigned quality control flags to the 14-C results and submitted the data 
files to the WOCE office (2/98).  R. Key is the PI for the 14-C data.

3.0	Results

This 14-C data set and any changes or additions supersedes any prior release.  
The delta-14-C results reported here are, under WOCE guidelines, considered 
proprietary for two years after publication of the preliminary data report (Dec. 
1999) or until publication, whichever comes first.

3.1	Hydrography

Hydrography from this leg has been submitted to the WOCE office by the chief 
scientist and described in the hydrographic report which is available via the 
web address 
(http://diu.cms.udel.edu/woce/data/reports/pacific/p19_c_93_talley.sum).

*Figure 1: AMS 14-C station locations for WOCE P19C (map by GMT, Wessel and 
	  Smith, 1991,1995).

TABLE 1. AMS Stations on WOCE Section P19C
Station	  Date	   Latitude	Longitude	Bottom		Max.
						Depth (m)	Sample
								Pressure
236	2/23/93	   -53.111	-75.024		1437		1462
238	2/24/93	   -53.200	-75.494		2011		2032
241	2/25/93	   -53.342	-76.584		4105		4182
244	2/25/93	   -53.723	-78.536		4253		4295
248	2/26/93	   -53.997	-81.580		4683		4784
253	2/28/93	   -54.004	-85.544		5045		5161
256	3/1/93	   -53.999	-88.008		5045		5159
258	3/1/93	   -53.000	-88.016		4940		5046
261	3/2/93	   -51.503	-87.994		4750		4852
264	3/3/93	   -50.007	-88.007		4625		4731
267	3/4/93	   -48.507	-87.991		4565		4658
270	3/5/93	   -47.002	-88.008		4025		4090
274	3/6/93	   -45.015	-88.003		4020		4070
278	3/7/93	   -43.007	-88.006		3718		3789
281	3/8/93	   -41.516	-88.008		4137		4201
284	3/9/93	   -40.008	-88.002		4055		4132
287	3/10/93	   -38.502	-88.002		3777		3848
291	3/11/93	   -36.504	-88.001		4025		4088
295	3/12/93	   -34.499	-87.995		3949		4023
299	3/13/93	   -32.503	-87.994		3737		3796
303	3/14/93	   -30.499	-87.992		3706		3773
307	3/14/93	   -28.499	-88.001		2920		2979
311	3/15/93	   -26.504	-88.000		3367		3410
317	3/17/93	   -24.330	-88.004		4135		4211
322	3/18/93	   -21.991	-88.004		4108		4184
326	3/19/93	   -19.996	-88.000		4310		4387
330	3/20/93	   -18.198	-87.081		4381		4460
334	3/21/93	   -16.376	-86.181		4540		4621
338	3/22/93	   -14.537	-85.826		4709		4796
342	3/23/93	   -12.489	-85.835		4347		4425
346	3/24/93	   -10.493	-85.834		4317		4394
351	3/26/93	   - 8.009	-85.836		4188		4272
353	3/26/93	   - 7.001	-85.830		3955		4022
357	3/28/93	   - 5.004	-85.829		3825		3887
361	3/29/93	   - 2.997	-85.829		3227		3273
364	3/29/93	   - 1.999	-85.833		2742		2785
371	3/30/93	   - 0.334	-85.832		3030		3068
373	3/30/93	     0.004	-85.835		2888		2944
379	3/31/93	     1.004	-85.836		2792		2832
380	3/31/93	     1.340	-85.831		3006		3045
382	4/1/93	     2.002	-85.840		2601		2641
386	4/2/93	     3.500	-85.842		2910		2928
395	4/4/93	     6.715	-88.779		3450		3499
398	4/5/93	     7.728	-89.897		3458		3515
403	4/6/93	     9.432	-91.754		3717		3786
413	4/9/93	    13.029	-91.760		6224		6357
420	4/10/93	    13.488	-91.596		 830		 845
422	4/10/93	    13.536	-91.576		 200		 212

3.2	14-C

The delta-14-C values reported here were originally distributed in two data 
reports 
(NOSAMS, December 13, 1994 and November 21, 1997).  Those reports included 
preliminary results which had not been through the WOCE quality control 
procedures.

All of the AMS samples from this cruise have been measured.  Replicate 
measurements were made on 13 water samples.  These replicate analyses are 
tabulated in Table 2.  The table shows the error weighted mean and uncertainty 
for each set of replicates.  Uncertainty is defined here as the larger of the 
standard deviation and the error weighted standard deviation of the mean.  For 
these replicates, the simple average of the normal standard deviations for the 
replicates is 3.0 0/00 (equal weighting for each replicate set).  This precision 
is 
typical for the time frame over which these samples were measured (Mar. 1994 - 
Nov. 1997).  Note that the errors given for individual measurements in the final 
data report (with the exception of the replicates) include only counting errors, 
and errors due to blanks and backgrounds.  The uncertainty obtained for 
replicate analyses is an estimate of the true error which includes errors due to 
sample collection, sample degassing, etc.  For a detailed discussion of this see 
Key (1996a).

Table 2: Summary of Replicate Analyses
Sta-Cast-Bottle		delta-14-C	Err	E.W.Mean-*a	Uncertainty-*b
261-1-19		-151.81		3.01	-151.97		1.87
			-152.07		2.43		
264-2-28		  10.85		3.16	  11.14		2.62
			  11.80		4.71		
299-2-36		 118.85		4.01	 120.21		3.51
			 123.81		6.53		
303-1-22		- 13.47		2.63	- 13.99		1.81
			- 14.45		2.49				
311-1-15		-163.28		3.24	-168.07		5.32
			-170.81		2.45				
317-2-22		-110.91		2.93	-111.06		2.48
			-111.46		4.66				
338-2-19		-151.37		2.53	-154.10		4.23
			-157.35		2.75				
338-2-20		-144.58		2.64	-145.00		2.00
			-145.56		3.06				
338-2-23		-101.18		5.76	-109.80		7.75
			-112.15		3.01				
346-1-22		-117.33		2.67	-118.42		2.62
			-121.03		4.14				
373-1-13		-173.43		3.15	-175.31		6.59
			-182.75		6.27				

A check on the long term reproducibility of the measurements is possible by 
comparing data from this cruise with previous WOCE cruises in the same area. 
*Figure 2A compares data from P19C with P17E19S (Key, et al., 1996).  The 
comparison is for the section along 88°W near 52°S. *Figure 2B compares data from 
P19C with P6E (Key, et al., 1996).  The comparison is for data bounded by the 
box 30-35°N and 85-90°W (Key, et al., 1996).  For the data shown, the comparison 
is good.  The only apparent difference is near the surface where real 
differences in either delta-14-C concentration or water structure could cause 
the offset.  In each figure the measurements are shown with 2-sigma error bars.

*Figure 2: Data comparison for overlap regions of the cruises indicated. Data 
	  are shown with 2-sigma error bars. Other than near the surface (sigma-
	  theta <27) where real differences may exist, the data appear to agree to
	  within the estimated uncertainty.

4.0	Quality Control Flag Assignment

Quality flag values were assigned to all delta-14-C measurements using the code 
defined in Table 0.2 of WHP Office Report WHPO 91-1 Rev. 2 section 4.5.2. 
(Joyce, et al., 1994).  Measurement flags values of 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 have been 
assigned.  The choice between values 2 (good), 3 (questionable) or 4 (bad) 
involves some interpretation.

When using this data set for scientific application, any 14-C datum which is 
flagged with a "3" should be carefully considered.  My subjective opinion is 
that any datum flagged "4" should be disregarded.  When flagging 14-C data, the 
measurement error was taken into consideration.  That is, approximately one-
third of the 14-C measurements are expected to deviate from the true value by 
more than the measurement precision (~3.0 0/00).  No measured values have been 
removed from this data set, therefore a flag value of 5 implies that the sample 
was totally lost somewhere between collection and analysis.  Table 3 summarizes 
the quality control flags assigned to this data set.  For a detailed description 
of the flagging procedure see Key, et al. (1996). 

Table 3: Summary of Assigned Quality Control Flags
Flag	Number
2	747
3	13
4	0
5	11
6	11

5.0	Data Summary

*Figures 3-9 summarize the delta-14-C data collected on this leg.  Only delta-14-C 
measurements with a quality flag value of 2 ("good") or 6 ("replicate") are 
included in each figure.  *Figure 3 shows the delta-14-C values with 2-sigma error 
bars plotted as a function of pressure.  The mid depth delta-14-C minimum which 
normally occurs around 2200 to 2400 meters in the Pacific is very weak in this data 
set primarily because the mid-depth water values are high relative to the rest of 
the Pacific.  Measurements in the thermocline region fall into two distinct groups 
with the higher values being from the southern end of the section and the lower 
grouping being from the northern end.  There is also a very strong gradient with 
latitude for the deep and bottom waters with the northern waters having 
significantly lower concentrations.

*Figure 4 shows the delta-14-C values plotted against silicate.  The straight line 
shown in the figure is the least squares regression relationship derived by 
Broecker et al. (1995) based on the GEOSECS global data set.  According to their 
analysis, this line (delta-14-C = -70 - Si) represents the relationship between 
naturally occurring radiocarbon and silicate for most of the ocean.  They 
interpret deviations in delta-14-C above this line to be due to input of bomb-
produced radiocarbon, however, they note that the interpretation can be problematic 
at high latitudes.  Samples collected from shallower depths at these stations show 
an upward trend with decreasing silicate values reflecting the addition of bomb 
produced 14-C.  The delta-14-C values for the silicate concentration range 0-50 
mmol/kg fall above Broecker's global pre-bomb trend while those with higher silicate 
values generally fall below the trend.  With most of the Pacific data sets, the 
silicate - delta-14-C trend doubles back on itself with the deep and bottom 
water values having a somewhat steeper slope than the waters from the thermocline 
(down to approximately 2500m).  This doubling back is absent from the P19C data 
(Key, 1996b).

*Figure 3: delta-14-C results for P19C stations shown with 2-sigma error bars. Only 
	  those measurements having a quality control flag value of 2 or 6 are plotted.

Another way to visualize the 14-C - silicate correlation is as a section.  *Figure 
5 shows delta-14-C as contour lines in silicate - latitude space for samples 
collected at depths between 500 and 2500 meters. In this space, shallow waters are 
toward the bottom of the figure.  The 500 meter cutoff was selected to eliminate 
those samples having a very large bomb produced 14-C component.  The 2500 meter 
cutoff was selected because this is the approximate depth of the delta-14-C minimum.  
For reference the 1000 meter depth contour is also shown (heavy line).  For this 
data set, Broecker's hypothesis works reasonably well.  The delta-14-C isolines are 
reasonably horizontal and the spacing of the isolines for contours which fall 
below the depth of bomb-radiocarbon contamination are more or less equal.  The 
upward curvature of the isolines at the southern end of the section is due to 
the addition of bomb-produced radiocarbon via ventilation where the isopycnals 
outcrop in the Southern Ocean.

*Figure 4: delta-14-C as a function of silicate for P19C AMS samples. The straight 
	  line shows the relationship proposed by Broecker, et al., 1995 (delta-14-C = 
	  -70 - Si with radiocarbon in 0/00 and silicate in µmol/kg).

*Figures 6-7 show delta-14-C contoured along the two sections of the cruise track.  
The "A" portion shows the upper 1.5 kilometers of the section and "B" the remainder 
of the water column.  These figures include both AMS and large volume (Stuiver, 
et al.1996) results.  The data were gridded using the "loess" methods described 
in Chambers et al. (1983), Chambers and Hastie (1991), Cleveland (1979) and 
Cleveland and Devlin (1988).  *Figure 8A-B shows the same data as *Figure 6-7A 
except the sections are plotted in potential density (sigma-theta) - latitude space.  
The top of the N-S section (*Figure 8B) was clipped at sigma-theta =23.0 to allow a 
bit more detail for subsurface waters. In the clipped area the delta-14-C=50 0/00 
contour continues almost vertically to the surface.  The slope of the delta-14-C 
contours (-50, -100, -150 0/00) between 40°S and 20°S shown in *Figure 7A and 
*Figure 8B marks the region of separation for the two data groupings in the thermocline 
region of *Figure 3.  For this region of the Pacific, the maximum delta-14-C concentration 
was found at the surface near the southern end of the section where the isopycnals 
outcrop, but subsurface in the main gyre region (35°S - 10°S).  The patterns of 
isolines in *Figure 7 and *Figure 8B are similar to those found for the WOCE P16 and 
P17 sections at the same latitude, however the delta-14-C gradient in the deep and 
bottom waters is stronger on this section (*Figure 7B).  Also unusual is the blob of 
water with delta-14-C<-220 0/00 at the northern end of the section (15°S - 5°N).  
This apparent blob arises because the northernmost station sampled a topographically 
isolated basin with a sill depth near the delta-14-C minimum and therefore has a near 
uniform concentration of -235 0/00.

*Figure 5: Section of 14-C contours along latitude in silicate space for the 
	  500-2500m depth range. Note that for this section, "shallow" is toward 
	  the bottom. The 1000m depth contour is added for orientation (heavier 
	  line). 

*Figure 9 shows 3 maps of the delta-14-C distribution using all available data.  In 
*Figure 9A the distribution is on the sigma-theta = 26.5 surface.  This surface 
outcrops at the southern end of the map (heavy line; Levitus winter data) and 
reaches a maximum depth of approximately 400m around 20°S.  The values in this region 
increase pole-ward due to the input of bomb-produced radiocarbon at the outcrop 
region of the isopycnal layer.  Confidence in this map will increase significantly 
with the addition of the data from WOCE section P18 (NOAA line), however the 
general NW-SE slope of the contours is probably correct.  *Figure 9B shows the delta
-14-C distribution on the 2400m depth surface which is the approximate depth of the 
delta-14-C minimum.  The concentrations clearly increase northward, presumably reflecting 
the southward return of North Pacific Deep Water.  The 2400m bathymetry is also 
shown on this map.  *Figure 9C shows the near bottom delta-14-C distribution for 
stations where the water depth was at least 3500m.  The northward flow of Circumpolar 
Deep Water is clearly evident along the western side of the figure.  The contours in 
the far southeastern portion of the *Figure might change significantly with the addition 
of the Meteor data from the Drake Passage.

*Figure 6: delta-14-C sections for WOCE P19C from Punta Arenas west to 
approximately 
	  54°Sx88°W. The section in shown in two parts to allow more detail. In 
	  B. any existing large volume data is included to maximize the data 
	  density. See text for gridding method. The bottom topography in B is 
	  taken from cruise data, but only using those stations on which delta-14-C 
	  was measured.

*Figure 7: delta-14C sections for WOCE P19C from 54°Sx88°W north to approximately 
	  13.5°Nx91.5°W. The section in shown in two parts to allow more detail. 
	  In B. any existing large volume data is included to maximize the data 
	  density. See text for gridding method. The bottom topography in B is 
	  taken from cruise data, but only using those stations on which delta-14-C
	  was measured.

*Figure 8: delta-14-C along WOCE section P19C plotted in potential density (sigma- 
	  theta) - latitude space. The B section was clipped at sigma-theta=23 north of 
	  ~15S. The data used in these figures is the same as in *Figure 6A and *Figure 7A.

*Figure 9: A. delta-14-C distribution on the sigma-theta=26.5. B. Distribution on 
	  the 2400m surface near the delta-14-C minimum. C. Near-bottom delta-14-C 
	  distribution for stations having bottom depth of at least 3500m.

5.1	References and Supporting Documentation

Broecker, W.S., S. Sutherland and W. Smethie, Oceanic radiocarbon: Separation of 
   the natural and bomb components, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 9(2), 263-288, 
   1995.
Chambers, J.M. and Hastie, T.J., 1991, Statistical Models in S, Wadsworth & 
   Brooks, Cole Computer Science Series, Pacific Grove, CA, 608pp.
Chambers, J.M., Cleveland, W.S., Kleiner, B., and Tukey, P.A., 1983, Graphical 
   Methods for Data Analysis, Wadsworth, Belmont, CA.
Cleveland, W.S., 1979, Robust locally weighted regression and smoothing 
   scatterplots, J. Amer. Statistical Assoc., 74, 829-836.
Cleveland, W.S. and S.J. Devlin, 1988, Locally-weighted regression: An approach 
   to regression analysis by local fitting, J. Am. Statist. Assoc, 83:596-610.
Joyce, T., and Corry, C., eds., Corry, C., Dessier, A., Dickson, A., Joyce, T., 
   Kenny, M., Key, R., Legler, D., Millard, R., Onken, R., Saunders, P., 
Stalcup, 
   M., contrib., Requirements for WOCE Hydrographic Programme Data Reporting, WHPO 
   Pub. 90-1 Rev. 2, 145pp., 1994.
Key, R.M., WOCE Pacific Ocean radiocarbon program, Radiocarbon, 38(3), 415-423, 
   1996(a).
Key, R.M. P19C Final Report for large volume samples, Ocean Tracer Laboratory 
   Technical Report 96-10, 20pp, July, 1996(b).
Key, R.M., P.D. Quay and NOSAMS, WOCE AMS Radiocarbon I: Pacific Ocean results; 
   P6, P16 & P17, Radiocarbon, 38(3), 425-518, 1996.
NOSAMS, National Ocean Sciences AMS Facility Data Report #94-109, Woods Hole 
   Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA, 02543, Dec., 1994.
NOSAMS, National Ocean Sciences AMS Facility Data Report #97-128, Woods Hole 
   Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA, 02543, Nov., 1997.
Stuiver, M., G. Östlund, R.M. Key and P.J. Reimer, Large-volume WOCE radiocarbon 
   sampling in the Pacific Ocean, Radiocarbon, 38(3), 519-561, 1996
Talley, L.D. and t.M. Joyce, The double silica maximum in the North Pacific, J. 
   Geophys. Res., 97, 5465-5480, 1992.
Wessel, P. and W.H.F. Smith, Free software helps map and display data, EOS 
   Trans. AGU, 72(441), 445-446, 1991.
Wessel, P. and W.H.F. Smith, New version of the generic mapping tools released, 
   EOS Trans. AGU, 76, 329, 1995.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DQE Evaluation of CTD data for RV Knorr Cruise along WOCE Section P19C
Expocode 316N138_12

Mark Rosenberg, January 2000

This report contains a data quality evaluation of the CTD data files for 
the Pacific sector cruise along WOCE section P19C (Figure 1*) on the RV 
Knorr in February to April, 1993. Bottle data are evaluated in a separate 
report by Arnold Mantyla. 2 dbar CTD data and upcast CTD burst data in the 
bottle file were examined for all stations. In general, CTD salinity data 
quality is very good, while CTD oxygen data quality is excellent. CTD data 
processing methodology is described very well in the cruise report from 
ODF, and CTD data processing notes are thorough. 

Given that this report comes 7 years after the cruise, comments on 
methodology may no longer be relevant. Please just consider them as 
'historical footnotes'.

STATION SUMMARY FILE (.sum)

The following need fixing in the station summary file:

o  Station 235 maximum pressure reads 5290 dbar - it should be 512 dbar.

o  Station 244 end position is wrong - needs correcting (and confirm 
   that ALACE position is correct). 

o  Station 281 dip 1 maximum pressure value is missing - should be 3008 
   dbar (from CTD file).

o  Station 349 wire out value looks low by ~200 m.

o  Sound speed and transducer depth information for the ship's sounder 
   were not provided in the documentation. "Corrected depth" (.sum file) was 
   therefore calculated from the CTD at the bottom of the cast  i.e. altimeter 
   reading + maximum CTD pressure recalculated in meters (using the method of 
   Saunders and Fofonoff, 1976). For stations with no altimeter reading, no 
   corrected depth was calculated. These corrected depth values are in an 
   ascii file corrdepth.dat, and have not been merged into the .sum file.

SALINITY

In the following discussion on residuals, only CTD and bottle values with a 
quality flag of  2 are considered (i.e. QUALT1=2 for CTDSAL and SALNTY in 
the bottle file).

The salinity residual data delta-S (where delta-S = bottle - CTD salinity 
difference) for all depths is shown in Figure 2 (an additional ~250 data 
points lie outside the axis limits). Below 500 dbar, scatter of delta-S is 
greatly reduced (Figure 3). As mentioned in the DQE report for WOCE line 
P31, increasing the averaging period for CTD burst data at bottle stops to 
10 seconds may help decrease residuals, particularly when the ship is 
rolling.

Standard deviations for delta-S for the whole cruise were calculated from 
data in the bottle file (Table 1). The salinity standard deviation of 
0.0019, calculated using all sampling depths and |delta-S| less than or equal to 
0.008, is a reasonable estimate of the salinity accuracy for the cruise. Overall 
the calibration is good, and the salinity accuracy is within the WOCE 
requirement. Closer inspection reveals a small salinity bias (i.e. CTD 
relative to bottles) remaining for many stations, in some cases for a 
series of consecutive stations (e.g. station 258 to 263), with a magnitude 
mostly < 0.002. Deepwater comparisons of theta-S curves (where theta = 
potential temperature) show that in most cases the bias is due to offset of 
salinity bottle data. Overall these small bottle inaccuracies do not affect 
calibration of the CTD salinity, as evidenced by the consistency of 
deepwater theta-S curves for the CTD data.

Comments on specific stations:

stations 254, 255, 277 - CTD salinity at 0 dbar a bit low, flag as "3" 

station 331 - CTD conductivity cell appears to have been fouled on the 
upcast after the sample at 4320 dbar; the CTD conductivity offset further 
increases after the sample at 2116 dbar. Flag all CTDSAL values above 4320 
dbar in the bottle data file as "4".

station 355 dip 11 (i.e. downcast) - from looking at theta-S comparison 
with surrounding stations, the conductivity readings still look offset by 
the fouling down to ~7°C, so continue the flag "3" for salinity in the CTD 
file from 400 dbar down to 598 dbar; several small salinity spikes occur 
below 2200 dbar - flag as "3" the largest of these at 4102 dbar in the CTD 
file.

station 355 dip 1 (i.e. upcast) - flag as "4" the bottom 11 CTDSAL values 
in the bottle file to match the bad data in the CTD file (the CTDSAL value 
for bottle 12 looks okay, despite the equivalent "4" flag at 1880 dbar in 
the CTD file).

stations 356, 357 - small pressure dependence in the salinity residual 
which may be due to some fouling remaining on the conductivity cell from 
station 355. Too small to worry about (i.e. salinity offset < 0.002).

Table 1: Standard deviations for salinity residuals delta-S (using only 
bottle and CTD data for which the quality flag=2).
data			standard deviation of delta-S
all depths		      0.0241
deeper than 500 dbar	      0.0029
all depths, |delta-S|	      0.0019
less than or equal to 0.008

OXYGEN

CTD oxygen data quality is impressive, and the fit to the oxygen bottle 
data is excellent.

Given the frequent problems usually encountered with CTD oxygen data sets, 
the following specific comments normally wouldn't be worth identifying. 
However against the very high quality of the oxygen data here, these slight 
irregularities are more noticeable:  

station 234 - CTDOXY values in bottle file should be flagged as "3" to 
match flagging of oxygen data in CTD file (bottom 2 values at 123 and 99 
dbar look okay, and can keep their "2" flag).

station 261 - top 70 dbar of CTD oxygen profile looks suspicious; flag 0 to 
70 dbar oxygen as "3" in CTD file.

station 264 - top 22 dbar of CTD oxygen profile looks suspicious; flag 0 to 
22 dbar oxygen as "3" in CTD file.

station 265 - top 30 dbar of CTD oxygen profile looks suspicious; flag 0 to 
30 dbar oxygen as "3" in CTD file.

station 314 - CTD oxygen below 300 dbar low by ~1 µmol/kg compared to 
bottles, but doesn't warrant flagging.

station 411 - CTD oxygen fit for ~800 to 3300 dbar a little poor, with a 
maximum residual of ~4 µmol/kg compared to bottles; okay to leave flag as 
"2" for this cast.

station 414 - CTDOXY values in bottle file for samples from 55 to 1907 dbar 
should be flagged as "3" to match flagging of oxygen data in CTD file.

Final CTD oxygen calibration coefficient values (from Appendix D in the 
cruise report) look reasonable, except for the following:

*  the P coefficient c3 is negative for stations 389, 391, 419, 420, 421
*  the TS coefficient c5 is positive for stations 234, 235, 344

Oxygen data are still acceptable for these stations (except where already 
flagged).

EXTRAPOLATION

A flag value of 6 has been used for many stations at the 0 dbar level, and 
the data processors have noted an extrapolation. This extrapolation can 
occasionally continue to the surface a suspicious gradient between the 4 
and 2 dbar levels. Examples are the 0 dbar salinity value for stations 257, 
276. I don't believe these data extrapolations are necessary - if there's 
insufficient data to create a 0 dbar bin, it would be preferable to leave a 
gap at that bin and flag as 9. 

DENSITY INVERSIONS

Locations of unstable vertical density gradients are shown in Figure 4; 
only gradients more unstable than -0.003 kg/m^3/dbar are shown. Most occur 
in the top 6 dbar, and may often be due to sensor transient 
errors/instabilities at the start of casts (further reason not to 
extrapolate data at the 0 dbar level).

COMPARISONS WITH OTHER CRUISES

Th data processors have put considerable effort into historical 
comparisons, making the cruise report a much more informative document. To 
add to this work, a quick comparison is made between P19C data and data 
from WOCE lines P4 (P.I. H. Bryden on eastern leg) and P21 (P.I. M. 
McCartney on eastern leg). Deepwater theta-S and theta-oxygen curves for 
these data sets are compared in figures 5* and 6*:

Salinity data - P19C and P4 salinity data agree well (figure 5*); P21 
salinities are ~0.001 higher than P19C (figure 6*), which is within the 
accuracy of salinity measurements and the scatter of standard seawater 
batches.

Oxygen data - for both comparisons, oxygen data are scattered over a 
maximum range of     ~5 µmol/kg; P4 oxygens are ~2 µmol/kg higher than P19C 
below theta =2°C (figure 5*); there's no consistent offset between P21 and 
P19C oxygens (figure 6*).

REFERENCES

Saunders, P.M. and Fofonoff, N.P., 1976. Conversion of pressure to depth in 
the ocean. Deep Sea Research, 23:109-111.

Figure 1*

Figure 2*:  Salinity residuals

Figure 3*:  Salinity residuals, data below 500 dbar

Figure 4*:  Local density instabilities

Figure 5a*, b and c:  (a) Station locations, (b) salinity comparison and 
(c) oxygen comparison for P19C/P4 comparison. 

Figure 6a*, b and c:  (a) Station locations, (b) salinity comparison and 
(c) oxygen comparison for P19C/P21 comparison. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DQ Evaluation of WOCE P19C hydrographic data

Arnold Mantyla

WOCE P19C mostly ran along 88°W from 54°S to the central American shelf off of 
Guatemala at 13.5°N.  Combined with P19S, this completes an eastern Pacific 
section to the Antarctic continental slope.  A 36 place rosette was used 
throughout, with the exception of a few additional near-equatorial closely 
spaced stations.  The cruise track crossed WOCE lines P17, P06, P21, and P04; 
both Scorpio lines, and Piquero Expedition.  Data comparisons between the WOCE 
lines were generally very good, but with the usual OSU/SIO nutrient differences, 
especially in the silicate data.  The older expeditions were noisier than the 
WOCE data, as expected from the older, less precise analytical techniques then 
available.  The station to station data agreement on this cruise was very, very 
good, the data originators clearly have done a very thorough job in evaluating 
the oxygen and nutrient standardizations.  Only a couple of stations had 
uncertain nitrates (due to a new cadmium reduction column, used too soon), but 
even those were not very far off from the nearby stations and could be used if 
one wished, with only a small multiplier correction.  As for the SIO/OSU long 
standing silicate differences, it would be possible to resolve those differences 
if someone were willing to take the time to evaluate the original Beer's Law 
runs (not many per cruise); both data sets could be improved.  I'll write a 
separate memo on possible solutions.

As on other WOCE cruises, there were too many data points flagged as "bad" data 
that were only slightly questionable, at times only slight bumps in the profiles 
that were within the WOCE precision expectations.  In the future, I would urge 
greater caution in using the "bad" flag for data that is merely suspicious.  I 
have not changed very many of the flags; mostly just in flagging poor near 
surface CTD oxygens uncertain.  That data is from the down profile and is known 
to have problems.

For the salinity analyses, SSW batch P120 was used, 9 to 11 months old at the 
time of its use.  From Bacon, Smith and Yelland's study (J. Atmos. Oceanic 
Technol., in press) on changes in SSW batches with age, P120 should yield 
salinities nearly .001 too low at the time of its use on P19C, so the SSW bias 
is slight for this cruise.  Two of the crossing lines had SSW batches with 
positive errors, but the maximum spread is .0015S, within ±.001 of the combined 
data.

The following are comments on specific stations that would warrant a second 
look:

Sta. 241 - There are two full depth profiles 6 hours apart, due to multiple trip 
failures on the first try.  The composite data set isn't appropriate because of 
real time differences in the separate trys.  Cast 2 has good data in the top 
905db, and very little for the rest of the water column; while cast 4 has good 
data below 1000db, and only sparse data shallower.  The overlaps are not at the 
same time and naturally show time differences as property extrema (even in 
temperature) that do not exist in the individual data sets.  Therefore I suggest 
that the best of the 2 profiles be saved and the rest of the data omitted: 0-
903db for cast 2 and 1010db to 4165db for cast 4.  That will save future data 
users from going through this same exercise to identify the useful parts of the 
2 data sets.

Sta. 250 - BTL 13 tripped at the same depth as BTL 14 at 2426db, leaving a data 
gap at about 2625db.  Should have left in CTD P, T, S, and O2 at original level 
to minimize the data gap.  Suggest recover the CTD info, if possible.

Sta. 257 - No data listed for top 296db, apparently 6 bottles did not trip.  It 
would be useful to leave in the CTD P, T, S, and O2 data at the intended trip 
levels.

Sta. 287 - Salinities appear to be about .002 high compared to adjacent stations 
and the CTD.  Suggest re-check salinometer calculations, and standard dial 
settings compared to other stations to see if the data can be corrected.

Sta. 309 - Larger than usual bottle-ctd salt differences, recommend re-check 
salinometer calculations.  Any drift, or apparent drift not real per CTD 
comparison?  One watch on this cruise did seem to be a little more careless in 
collecting quality salinity samples compared to stations done in other times of 
the day.

If no problem found, suggest flag all bottle salts uncertain on this station.

Sta. 330 - The top 6 salinities are about 1.985 too high, almost exactly the 
error that would occur if the suppression dial setting on the salinometer was 
0.1 off (2.1 instead of 2.0).  Re-check the salinometer calculations to see if 
the salinities can be salvaged.  No sampling error could result in such a large 
and uniform offset error.

Sta. 331 - CTD salinities appear to be up to .008 high over most of the profile 
compared to adjacent stations and this station.  I've U'd the CTD salts between 
228 and 3930db, but the CTD salts should be re-checked.

Sta. 338 - The wrong silicates were flagged as uncertain, per ODF's notes.  
However, the bottom two are not sufficiently higher than the adjacent stations 
to flag anyway, so I suggest accept all as ok.

Sta. 355, 2077-4156db - The CTD salinities are very poor, can they be improved?  
I've U'd the bottom 11 CTD salts.  Also, the bottle salts from 3271 to 3683db 
appear to have been drawn in reverse order.  I've U'd 3271db, 3683db could be 
U'd also.

Sta. 414 - In the Middle America Trench, the deep salinities are about .002 
lower than the other two stations (412 and 413) in the trench, while the CTD 
values are uniform for all 3 stations.  However the mean CTD salt agrees with 
the mean of the bottle salts, so looks like we're at the limit of salinometer 
salinity, ±.001.  It would be a good idea to look at the salinometer run for 
station 414 to see if the source of the offset can be identified. 

*All figures shown in PDF file.

