A.    Cruise Narrative P04 (10 N TRANSPACIFIC CRUISE)

A.1.  Highlights

                    WHP Cruise Summary Information

WOCE section designation:                  P04
Expedition designation (EXPOCODE):         32MW893_1-3
Chief Scientist(s) and their affiliation:  J. Toole*, T. Joyce**. 
                                           H. Bryden***
Dates:                                     1989.02.06 - 1989.05.19
Ship:                                      R/V Moana Wave
Ports of call:                             Mindanao, Philippines to 
                                           Puntarenas, Costa Rica
Number of stations:                        221 full ocean depth stations
Geographic boundaries of the stations:                 9° 50.3' N
                                           126° 32.9' E          85° 45' W
                                                       7° 58.1' N
Floats and drifters deployed:              none
Moorings deployed or recovered:            none

It is difficult to apportion credit for the success of the 10 N trans-Pacific 
hydrographic section measurement program in a single author list.  First of all, 
all of the cruise participants listed in Appendix A were essential.  Authors of 
individual sections of the Data Report are noted at the head of each section. 
George Knapp and Lorraine Barbour drafted the property sections, Plates 1, 2, 3, 
& 4. Jane Dunworth-Baker and Ann Spencer prepared the data listings in Appendix 
C.  Overall compilation and editing of this report were done by Marvel Stalcup, 
George Knapp, Barbara Gaffron, Harry Bryden and John Toole.
WHP Cruise and Data Information

*John Toole                             ** Terrence M. Joyce
 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution      Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
 Department of Physical Oceanography       360 Woods Hole Road
 3 Clark Laboratory -- MS 21               Woods Hole  MA 02543-1541
 Woods Hole  MA 02543-1541                 Phone: 1-508-289-2530
 Phone: 1-508-289-2531                     FAX:   1-508-457-2181
 FAX:   1-508-457-2181                     Email: tjoyce@whoi.edu
 Email: jtoole@whoi.edu
                        ***Harry L. Bryden
                           Southampton Oceanography Centre
                           James Rennell Division
                           Empress Dock
                           Southampton SO14 3ZH
                           UK
                           Phone: 44-1703-596437
                           FAX:   44-1703-596204
                           Email: harry.bryden@soc.soton.ac.uk

NOTE: All figure are available in the PDF version.  Captions and tables have 
been moved to the end of each section. 

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.


ABSTRACT

A trans-Pacific hydrographic section along approximate latitude 10 N was 
occupied in February-May, 1989, from the R/V Moana Wave.  A description of the 
instrumentation employed and data reduction techniques is given.  Listings of 
the observations and plates of contoured sections of the water property 
distributions are presented, along with statements of data accuracies and 
uncertainties.

1. INTRODUCTION

The trans-Pacific hydrographic section across 10 N was initially proposed by 
Drs. Harry Bryden and John Toole to the National Science Foundation in 1987. The 
motivations for this section were to help complete the first comprehensive 
survey of the water mass characteristics of the North Pacific Ocean; to 
determine the structure of the meridional circulation across 10 N and its 
associated meridional heat and fresh water transports; and, in conjunction with 
the trans-Pacific hydrographic section carried out along 12-15 S in 1988, to 
estimate the cross-equatorial exchange between the South and North Pacific 
oceans.  Because this 10 N trans-Pacific section is the longest hydrographic 
section ever attempted (16,000 km in length or 40% of the earth's circumference) 
and because of the emphasis on determining the cross-equatorial exchange in the 
Pacific Ocean, we have taken to calling this program the Equatorial Pacific 
Interocean Circulation (EPIC) study.  Following acceptance of this proposal by 
the National Science Foundation, the hydrographic section was scheduled for 
early 1989 and an announcement of opportunity was made for additional sampling 
programs to augment the temperature, salinity and dissolved oxygen measurement 
effort. Programs to measure nutrients, chlorofluorocarbons and heliµm/tritium 
concentrations were proposed, accepted and carried out on the 10 N hydrographic 
section.  R/V Moana Wave cruise #89-3,-4,-6 consisted of three legs, which form 
one long hydrographic section, generally along 9.5 N, from the east coast of 
Mindanao in the Philippines to Puntarenas, Costa Rica in Central America.  This 
report presents the CTD and water sample data collected on the 221 full ocean 
depth stations during the 10 N trans-Pacific hydrographic section carried out 
aboard the R/V Moana Wave during February to May 1989.  The data set collected 
during this cruise is called the Moana Wave 89-3 data.

2. INSTRUMENTATION AND DATA ACQUISITION

Three EG&G/Neil Brown Instrument Systems (NBIS) Mark IIIB CTD/O2 
(Conductivity/Temperature/Depth/Oxygen) profilers (WHOI instruments #8, #9, and 
#10) were employed on the cruise.  The underwater package consisted of a CTD 
instrument, a 24-position General Oceanics, Inc.  (GO) rosette sampler, and a 12 
kHz acoustic pinger, all mounted within a guard cage of WHOI design. Several 
hundred pounds of lead weight were added to the cage to facilitate rapid 
lowering of the package.  A detailed description of the CTD instrumentation can 
be found in Brown and Morrison (1978).  Ten-liter PVC sample bottles, 
manufactured by GO and Scripps Institution of Oceanography were employed.  
Several additional 2.4-liter bottles, designed by J. Bullister, were attached to 
the rosette frame and tripped simultaneously with adjacent 10-liter bottles.  
All of the 10 liter Niskin and SIO sampling bottles were shipped to Palau in an 
insulated 201 container.  The container was mounted on the Moana Wave for the 
entire voyage where it served as storage space for spare equipment.

The Markey winch system used on the cruise was originally located on the R/V 
Thomas Thompson.  It was transferred to R/V Moana Wave purposely for the 10 N 
trans-Pacific cruise.  Leg one commenced with 10,000 m of 0.322" three-conductor 
electromechanical cable installed on the winch.  A spare drum holding 
approximately 6000 m of wire was secured on deck.  Lowering rates during the 
voyage averaged 60 m/min, limited chiefly by the relatively slow terminal 
velocity of the large rosette package.  Raising rates were typically 70 m/min 
leading to average station times of 3.5 hrs in 5000 m of water.

Binary data from the CTD were obtained via MkIII deck units equipped with a WHOI 
built interface which shifted the output data rate from its 5000 baud default to 
9600 baud.  The primary data acquisition system consisted of a Digital 
Electronics Corporation (DEC) Microvax computer (MicroVax II BA23 enclosure with 
a 71 MB hard disk and 3 MB of memory) running the VAX/VMS operating system, 
version 4.4.  The Aqui89 WHOI CTD Data Acquisition Software (pre 1.0 version) 
was employed to scale the data to physical units as well as to list and display 
the data graphically in real time.  Raw data were concurrently archived to disk 
and 9-track digital tape.  Audio tape back-up analog recordings were also 
collected.  Data were organized and processed on the MicroVax II as described by 
Millard and Galbraith (1982), with only minor updates and enhancements.  Because 
the MicroVax system had only been previously tested in the laboratory and was a 
preliminary version, data were logged concurrently to a NEC Powermate 286 
microcomputer, using the EG&G Oceansoft MkIII/SCTD Acquisition software package.

Water sample analysis for salinity and dissolved oxygen was conducted in a WHOI 
portable laboratory secured to the main deck of the ship.  The portable 
laboratory is capable of maintaining a constant environmental temperature within 
+/- 1 C.  The nominal laboratory temperature was 22 C.  Two Guildline Autosal 
Model 8400A salinometers were utilized to determine water sample salinities 
(WHOI instrument numbers 8 and 9).  Water sample analysis for dissolved oxygen 
was also performed in the constant temperature laboratory using a modified 
Winkler titration technique.  The measurements were conducted on 50 ml aliquots 
of the samples.  A Metrohm Titroprocessor controlling a Metrohm Dosimat was used 
to titrate to an amperometric endpoint as described by Knapp et al. (1989).

Analyses of water sample nutrient concentrations were performed by a team of 
analysts from Oregon State University, using an Alpkem Corp.  Rapid Flow 
Analyzer, Model RFA?-300. This instrumentation was setup in one of Moana Wave's 
laboratories.  In an adjacent laboratory, the concentrations of the dissolved 
atmospheric chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) F-11 (trichlorofluoromethane) and F-12 
(dichlorodifluoromethane) were measured by shipboard electron-capture gas 
chromatography.  The shipboard CFC program was multi-institutional, and the 
equipment was supplied by R. Weiss's group at Scripps Institution of 
Oceanography.  Finally, selected water samples were collected during the cruise 
for subsequent shore-based analysis of 3He and Tritium at the WHOI facility.

The ship's equipment inventory included an acoustic Doppler velocity profiling 
(ADCP) system, RD 150-kHz profiler with an IBM PC compatible acquisition 
computer running a customized version of the RDI data acquisition software 
developed by Dr. Eric Firing, U. Hawaii.  A shipboard computer system (Sun 
workstation based) was employed to archive navigation information (transit and 
GPS fixes) from which all CTD station navigation information was updated after 
each leg.  Relative wind speed and direction were also recorded by the Sun 
computer.  Analog bathymetric recordings from a 3.5 kHz sounding system were 
made continuously while underway between stations.  A hull-mounted 12 kHz 
transducer was employed on leg 1 to monitor the CTD underwater package height 
off the bottom.  This transducer did not function well.  A portable transducer 
was employed on legs 2 and 3 with intermittent success.

3. CRUISE OVERVIEW

Leg 1 of the trans-Pacific section, R/V Moana Wave cruise #89-3, began in Palau 
in early February, 1989 when the first party of scientists joined the ship to 
prepare the instrumentation and equipment.  A list of the scientific 
participants, including responsibilities and affiliations is presented in 
Appendix A.  The bulk of the equipment had previously been shipped to Hawaii and 
loaded on the vessel.  The R/V Moana Wave subsequently transited from Honolulu 
to Palau, arriving in port on February 2.  While setting up the instrumentation 
in port, leaks were discovered in the water baths in Autosal Salinometers #8 and 
#9 around their heat exchangers.  Both instruments were disassembled and 
repaired before the ship left Palau.  Autosal #8 was designated as the primary 
instrument for the voyage.

Departure from Palau for the Philippine coast occurred on February 6.  En route, 
two stations near 9.3 N, 130.8 E were occupied to test instrumentation. These 
test stations revealed a level-winding problem with the hydrographic winch/wire 
system.  Subsequent tests determined that the wire and leibus grooving on the 
drum were incompatible (the wire diameter was smaller than specification).  
After extensive deliberation it was decided to initiate work with the existing 
wire/drum set-up, deferring a drum change until the next port stop. Results from 
the test station also motivated selection of CTD #8 as the primary instrument.

Station 3 was occupied in 125 m of water at 8 N off the coast of Mindanao 
Island, Philippines at longitude 126.5 E.  Sampling proceeded to the east on 8 N 
to longitude 130 E, reoccupying sites sampled by the U.S./P.R.C. Cooperative 
Program (Cook et al., 1990).  The cruise track was then angled slightly to the 
north to avoid a region of complicated bathymetry.  As the water sample salinity 
data from the Philippine Basin accumulated, a subtle problem with the CTD 
derived salinity became apparent. (This problem is detailed in Section 5c, 
below.)  Thus on station 27, CTD #9 was designated the primary instrument, and 
was subsequently utilized for the bulk of the stations across the Pacific.  
Stations 26 (with CTD #8) and 27 (with #9) were in the same location to 
facilitate calibration of the complete data set.

During leg 1, monitoring the CTD underwater package height above the bottom 
using the 12 kHz pinger proved problematic.  No recognizable bottom echo was 
observable on the analogue recorder in water depths greater than 1000 m. 
Consequently, operational CTD station depths were calculated from the 3.5 kHz 
echosounder data (which included a generous margin of safety).  We estimate that 
leg one casts terminate within 100-200 m of the bottom.

A problem developed with the General Oceanics rosette tripping mechanism during 
the first leg of the cruise which resulted in both mis-firing and double-
tripping of the water sampling bottles.  This problem was eventually traced to 
slippage between the stepping motor and the tripping mechanism caused by 
excessive tension on the tripping lanyards.  The higher than normal tension was 
the result of mounting several Bullister style, 2.4 liter, water sampling 
bottles to the rosette frame and attaching their tripping lanyards to some of 
the lanyards used to trip the Niskin bottles.  This problem was identified and 
corrected during leg one and did not recur during the cruise.

On February 27, at station 67, one transducer of the ADCP array failed.  The 
problem was finally diagnosed two days later and the system was run with 3 
transducers, beginning with station 71.  (Three acoustic beams are sufficient to 
estimate the relative velocity profile, the 4-beam. standard configuration 
provides redundant information.)  A two day gap exists in the final ADCP record, 
spanning the longitude range 161.7-165.0 E.

The first leg measurement program was completed with stations 82 and 83 at 9.5 
N, 171.3 E on March 4.  Station 82 was with CTD #9, 83 with #8; the double 
station was an effort to monitor relative sensor drift in the two instruments.  
From this location the ship departed from the cruise track to change scientific 
parties and CTD cables at Majuro in the Marshall Islands.

Stations 84 and 85, the first two made during the second leg, were occupied at 
the same position as stations 82-83, and again utilized both CTD instruments, 8 
and 9, respectively.  The time interval between stations 83 and 84 was 5 days.  
Station 90 marked the first use of the portable 12 kHz transducer. Subsequent 
casts were made to within 10 m of the ocean floor.  The ship crossed the 
international dateline between stations 96 and 97, with 97 signaling the start 
of West longitudes.  Once away from the western boundary of the Pacific Central 
Basin, station spacing opened up to 50 nm, the maximum spacing employed on the 
transect.  Late in leg 2, water sample salinity data became somewhat noisy 
(scatter on deep water potential temperature/salinity plots was somewhat in 
excess of 0.001).  Poor flushing of the Autosal conductivity cell was ultimately 
discovered to be the problem.  Station 119 at 9.5 N, 161.2 W completed work on 
the second leg of the cruise.  The ship then steamed to Hawaii in order to meet 
a prior commitment to the Hawaii Ocean Time Series (HOTS) station.  The HOTS 
work occupied 9 days of ship time.  During this interval, the bulk of the 
scientific equipment remained setup aboard the vessel.  The two CTD instruments 
were stored ashore (with the sensors covered and immersed in distilled water.)  
Because CTD #8 was considered suspect, a third instrument (WHOI CTD #10) was 
prepared and air-shipped to Hawaii for leg 3.  While in port, the ADCP 
transducer was replaced by a new unit.

Leg 3 departed from Hawaii on April 2.  The transit south was extended by 3 days 
because of a medical emergency.  Stations 120 and 121 (with CTD instruments 10 
and 9 respectively), the first two made during the third leg, were made near the 
position of station 119, about 19 days later.  Autosal instrument #9 was used to 
measure all of the salinities during leg three.  Careful examination of the 
final salinity data reveals a subtle shift of order 0.0015 at a potential 
temperature of 0.90 to 0.95 C between stations at the end of leg 2 and the 
beginning of leg 3.  The shift is in both the water sample data and the CTD data 
which were calibrated to the bottle salts.  It is conceivable that the shift is 
instrumental; Autosal #8 was experiencing problems at the end of leg 2.  The 
shift might also be real, the break between legs 2 and 3 occurred near the Line 
Islands ridge separating the Central and Northeast Pacific basins.  As we have 
no additional information to guide interpretation of these measurements, the 
shift has been retained in the final data set.

Stations on leg 3 continued at latitude 9.5 N with nominal 50 nm spacing using 
CTD #9.  There was a tendency for the conductivity cell on CTD #9 to drift fresh 
with time, consistent with conductivity cell coating. on leg 3, the CTD salinity 
shifts became bi-directional between stations 174-178.  Large jumps in 
conductivity then became evident during stations 193-195.  The decision was made 
at this point to switch over to the third instrument, CTD #10.  Post-cruise 
examination of CTD #9 revealed a crack in the conductivity cell.

Stations 215-217 were made in deep water at the same geo- graphical position, 
9.6 N and 86.2 W, to compare the data from the three CTDs used during this 
cruise.  On approach of the Central American coast, the cruise track was 
diverted north so as to intersect the coast at approximately right angle. 
Station 221, the last of the cruise, was made in 312 m of water near the coast 
of Costa Rica.  R/V Moana Wave then transited to Puntarenas, Costa Rica where 
the scientific party left ship.  The bulk of the scientific equipment, which was 
loaded into the portable laboratory and shipping van, rode the ship through the 
Panama Canal and was shipped back to WHOI from Jacksonville, Florida, the Moana 
Wave's next port of call.

4. WATER MASS PROPERTY DISTRIBUTIONS

Plate 1 contains a chart showing the location of the stations and the section of 
potential density along the ship's track.  Plates 2, 3 and 4 are profiles 
showing the distribution of potential temperature and salinity, dissolved oxygen 
and silica, and nitrate and phosphate.  The horizontal axis of the plots is 
along-track distance (hence the uneven longitude scales) and the vertical axis 
is depth in meters.  The upper portion of each figure displays an expanded view 
of the first 1000 m of the water column with a vertical exaggeration of 1250:1.  
Below these are the full-depth sections with a vertical exaggeration of 500:1.  
The bottom topography shown in these sections is from the acoustic bathymetry 
measured along the ship's track and has been corrected for the speed of sound in 
seawater according to Carter (1980).  The sections showing potential 
temperature, potential density, salinity and oxygen were prepared from the 
calibrated CTD data.  The locations of the water samples used to construct the 
nutrient sections are shown by the dots at each station position.  All property 
distributions were contoured by hand.

The CTD data are presented for each station at standard depths, and the 
hydrographic data at observed depths in Appendix C.  The listing for each 
station also includes the calculated variables, potential temperature, potential 
densities relative to 0, 2000 and 4000 dbar, dynamic height, Brunt-Vaisala 
frequency and depth.  A complete description of the station listing including 
units, algorithms, and references is presented in Appendix C.

5.  DESCRIPTION OF ANALYSIS PROCEDURES AND CALIBRATION METHODS

5a. UNDERWAY MEASUREMENTS

The suite of continuous underway measurements collected during the cruise was 
processed as follows.  The analogue bathymetric sounding records were manually 
digitized on board (using a digitizer board integrated into the shipboard 
computer system) by the R/V Moana Wave's marine technicians.  The relative wind 
speed and direction information were processed to one minute averages, as were 
ship navigation, heading and speed information. Absolute wind speed and 
direction were determined from merging the navigation and relative wind 
measurements.  Stick plots of the time series wind vectors during the 10 N 
cruise (Figure 5a-1) show that the cruise occurred during a period of reasonably 
steady northeast trade winds.  The ADCP data were vector averaged in 5 minute 
blocks, yielding estimates of east and north relative velocity profiles to 200 
to 300 m depth.  These data were subsequently combined with ship navigation data 
to yield absolute ocean velocity data.  This post-cruise processing was done in 
collaboration with Eric Firing of the Hawaii Institute of Geophysics at the 
University of Hawaii basically following the procedure described by Bahr et al. 
(1989).  Time series of east and north velocities measured by the ADCP at depths 
of 20, 60, 100, 140, 180 and 220 m (Figures 5a-2 to 5a-7) show that the 10 N 
section occurred in the region of westward currents associated with the North 
Equatorial Current.  Furthermore, these velocities were averaged over 5 deg. 
longitude bins for presentation in Tables 5a-1 and 5a-2.


FIGURE CAPTIONS SECTION 5a

Figure 5a-1:  Stick plots of the time series wind vectors measured during the 10 
              N section.
Figure 5a-2:  Time series of north velocities measured by the ADCP at depths of 
              20, 60, 100, 140, 180 and 220m for leg 1.
Figure 5a-3:  Time series of east velocities measured by the ADCP at depths of 
              20, 60, 100, 140, 180 and 220m for leg 1.
Figure 5a-4:  Time series of north velocities measured by the ADCP at depths of 
              20, 60, 100,140, 180 and 220m for leg 2.
Figure 5a-5:  Time series of east velocities measured by the ADCP at depths of 
              20, 60, 100, 140, 180 and 220m for leg 2.
Figure 5a-6:  Time series of north velocities measured by the ADCP at depths of 
              20, 60, 100, 140, 180 and 220m for leg 3.
Figure 5a-7:  Time series of east velocities measured by the ADCP at depths of 
              20, 60, 100, 140, 180 and 220m for leg 3. 


TABLE CAPTIONS SECTION 5a

Table 5a-1:  ADCP velocities averaged over 5 longitude bins for legs 1-3, north 
             component.
Table 5a-2:  ADCP velocities averaged over 5 longitude bins for legs 1-3, east 
             component. 

5b.  PRECISION AND ACCURACY OF WATER SAMPLE SALINITY AND OXYGEN MEASUREMENTS
     (G.P. Knapp, M.C. Stalcup and R.J. Stanley)

A complete description of the dissolved oxygen and salinity measurement 
techniques used during this cruise is presented by Knapp et al. (1989).  As 
described in this report, samples are collected for the analysis of dissolved 
oxygen and salinity from each of the 24 ten-liter Niskin (SIO) bottles tripped 
on the upcast of each CTD station.  The vertical distribution of these samples 
was a compromise between the need to obtain deep samples for the calibration of 
the CTD conductivity and oxygen sensors and the requirement to define the 
characteristics of the water masses by the distributions of the various measured 
parameters.

Several analyses were performed on the water retrieved from each rosette bottle.  
Analysis samples were drawn from the rosette bottles in the sequence recommended 
by the World Ocean Circulation Experiment (WOCE) Hydrographic Program: CFC, 
Helium-Tritium, oxygen, nutrients, salinity. Several tests were performed during 
the cruise to assess possible degradation of oxygen samples collected from the 
overflow of the copper tubes used to collect the Helium-Tritium samples.  No 
change was observed in oxygen samples collected in this manner.  Each oxygen 
bottle was rinsed twice with sample water and then carefully filled to avoid 
aeration.  Approximately 200 ml of the sample was permitted to overflow the 
bottle.  One ml each of the MnCl2 and NaI-NaOH reagents was immediately added to 
the seawater, and the sample bottle was capped and shaken vigorously.  The 
salinity sample bottles and caps were rinsed three times with sample water 
before filling.  An air space of approximately 8 cc was left in the bottle to 
allow for the expansion of cold samples.  When all of the oxygen and salinity 
samples had been collected, they were placed in the constant temperature 
portable lab to equilibrate thermally and await analysis.  About an hour after 
the oxygen samples were collected, they were shaken a second time to ensure 
complete oxidation of the precipitant.

Just before the oxygen samples were to be titrated, one ml of H2SO4 was added to 
each sample, followed by a second vigorous shaking to dissolve the precipitate 
and release iodine proportional to the dissolved oxygen originally in the 
sample.  A 50 ml aliquot of the iodine solution from each bottle was titrated 
with 0.01 N sodium thiosulphate using an automated amperometric, dead-stop 
method controlled by a Metrohm Titroprocessor.  The normality of the 
thiosulphate was determined regularly by comparison with a biiodate standard 
solution which has a normality of exactly 0.0100.  The reagent blank value was 
also determined periodically.


SALINITY

Analysis of the salinity samples was not conducted until samples achieved 
laboratory temperature, generally about 3-4 hours after collection.  Before each 
salinity bottle was opened it was thoroughly shaken to remove gradients.  Both 
the filling tube and the sealing cork on the salinometer were carefully dried 
before each sample was measured to avoid contamination from the previous sample.  
The rate at which the air pump fills the conductivity cell with seawater is 
adjusted to ensure that the sample reaches bath temperature before the 
conductivity ratio is measured.  The Guildline Autosal Model 8400-A salinometer 
was standardized with IAPSO Standard Sea Water (SSW) Batch P-97, and the zero 
reference and heater lamps were checked daily.

The salinometer manufacturer claims a precision of 0.0002 and an accuracy of 
0.003 when the instrument is operated at a temperature within +4 C and -2 C of 
ambient.  They also note that, when measurements are made in a laboratory in 
which the temperature is constant (+/-1 C) and maintained about 1-2 C below that 
of the salinometer water bath, the accuracy is better than 0.001.  All of the 
salinity measurements made during this cruise were made within a temperature 
controlled (+/-1 C) portable laboratory maintained about 2 C below that of the 
salinometer water bath (set to 24 C) .

Mantyla (1987) has found that the conductivity ratio of some batches of standard 
water appears to change as they age.  The batch used during this cruise (P-97) 
is dated 3/3/1983 and, because of concern over the aging problem identified by 
Mantyla, has been routinely compared with fresher batches for the past several 
years.  These comparisons show that the conductivity ratio of P-97 has not 
changed since it was bottled.  He also notes that P-97 is slightly fresher than 
the PSS78 KCl standard.  Based on his work a correction of +0.0008 has been 
applied to all of the salinities measured during this cruise.

Table 5b-1 shows the results of salinity measurements made during the cruise 
from 43 duplicate samples collected at different stations from each of two 10 
liter Niskin bottles tripped at the same depth.  The standard deviation of the 
differences in salinity measured from these samples is 0.0010.

Figure 5b-1a shows water sample salinities interpolated at potential 
temperatures of 1.0 , 1.2 , 1.4 , 1.6 , 1.8 and 2.0 C plotted versus longitude.  
A least squares line has been fitted to the data at each temperature.  The 
salinity increases toward the east at an average rate of about 0.00014 per 
degree of longitude at all but the coldest temperature.  The standard deviation 
and the coefficients of variation of the differences between these lines and the 
data are presented in Table 5b-2.  The values plotted in Figure 5b-la and the 
differences presented in this table include the effects of linear interpolations 
between observations above and below each potential temperature, the effects of 
oceanic variability, and errors introduced during the sampling and analysis of 
the salinity samples.  In order to assess the accuracy of the salinity 
measurements better, data were selected from a region where the (oceanic) 
variability was low.  In both Figures 5b-la and 5b-1b the measurements made 
between 110 W and 150 W at potential temperatures of 1.6 deg and 1.8deg show 
reduced variability.  These data are presented in Figures 5b-1f and 5b-1g where 
least squares lines have been fitted to the data at each potential temperature.  
Although the non-random character of the small scale variability in this figure 
might suggest that the variability was due to systematic measurement errors, the 
16 daily standardizations of the salinometer during this part of the cruise 
revealed no measurable drift.  In addition the salinometer "standby" number was 
recorded at each station.  This reading indicates whether the standardize 
control setting has been changed or if the electronics have drifted during the 
course of the measurements.  The standard deviation of this value during this 
part of the cruise is equivalent to a change in salinity of 0.00017.  Thus the 
non-random changes in the salinities shown in Figure 5b-1f are most likely the 
result of small and somewhat regular variations in the deep salinity along the 
cruise track.  The standard deviation of the differences between these salinity 
data and a least squares line is 0.0010.  This value includes the variation due 
to oceanic variability and errors introduced during the interpolation procedure 
as well as problems with sampling and analysis.  We interpret these data to 
indicate that the accuracy of the salinities measured during Moana Wave 89-3 is 
probably better than +/-0.001.

OXYGEN

All of the dissolved oxygen samples measured during this cruise were analysed 
with an automated Winkler titration system described by Knapp et.al (1989).  On 
two separate occasions 13 duplicate dissolved oxygen samples were collected from 
a single 10 liter Niskin bottle and titrated to assess the precision of the 
dissolved oxygen measurements.  The standard deviations of the two tests were 
0.005 and 0.007 ml/l and indicates the precision of the oxygen measurements is 
about 0.1%.  Table 5b-1 shows the results from the measurement of replicate 
samples collected from separate Niskin bottles tripped at the same depth at 21 
different stations and indicates a precision of 0.015 ml/l or about 0.2%.  
Figure 5b-1b shows dissolved oxygen values interpolated at potential 
temperatures of 1.0 1.2 , 1.4 , 1.6 , 1.8 and 2.0 C at each of the stations with 
a least squares fit to the data at each temperature. Table 5b-2 presents the 
standard deviations and coefficients of variation for the differences between 
the interpolated oxygen data and the least squares lines. Figure 5b-1g is for 
the same stations shown in Figure 5b-1f and depicts oxygen values interpolated 
at potential temperatures of 1.6 and 1.8 C together with least squares lines fit 
to the data between 150 W and 110 W, in a region of reduced oceanic variability.  
The standard deviation of the differences between these lines and the data at 
potential temperatures of 1.6 and 1.8 C is 0.8 and 0.019 and 0.028 ml/l 
respectively.  Using the same assumptions regarding oceanic variability that 
were made for the salinity measurements, these data indicate that the accuracy 
of the oxygen measurements made during this cruise is likely better than 1%.

FIGURE CAPTIONS SECTION 5b

Figures 5b-1a to 5b-1e.
  Salinity, oxygen, silica, nitrate and phosphate values were interpolated at 
  six potential temperatures for all of the stations occupied during Moana Wave  
  89-3.  The square symbols are at theta = 1.0 C, the asterisks are at 1.2 C, 
  the diamonds are 1.4 C, the stars are at 1.6 C, the pluses are at 1.8 C and 
  triangles are at 2.0 C.  Least-squares lines, fit to the data versus longitude 
  on each potential temperature surface, show the east-west trend of the 
  variables.  To avoid over-plotting the data, only the three deepest surfaces 
  are shown in the nutrient plots.

Figures 5b-1f and 5b-1g.  
  Salinity and oxygen values interpolated at potential temperatures of 1.6 and 
  1.8 C from data collected between 148 W and 110 W where the oceanic 
  variability is low.  These data were selected to assess the accuracy of the 
  salinity and oxygen measurements made during this cruise. The standard 
  deviations and coefficients of variation of the differences between a least-
  squares linear fit to the data are shown in Table 5b-2.

Figure 5b-1a: 
  Salinity values interpolated at six potential temperatures for all of the 
  stations occupied during Moana Wave 89-3.  The square symbols are at theta = 
  1.0 C, the asterisks are at 1.2 C, the diamonds are 1.4 C, the stars are at 
  1.6 C, the pluses are at 1.8 C, and triangles are at 2.0 C.

Figure 5b-1b: 
  Oxygen values interpolated at six potential temperatures for all of the 
  stations occupied during Moana Wave 89-3.  The square symbols are at theta = 
  1.0 C, the asterisks are at 1.2 C, the diamonds are 1.4 C, the stars are at 
  1.6 C, the pluses are at 1.8 C and triangles are at 2.0 C.

Figure 5b-1c: 
  Silica values interpolated at three potential temperatures for all of the 
  stations occupied during Moana Wave 89-3.  The square symbols are at theta = 
  1.0 C, the asterisks are at 1.2 C, the diamonds are 1.4 C.

Figure 5b-1d: 
  Nitrate values interpolated at three potential temperatures for all of the 
  stations occupied during Moana Wave 89-3.  The square symbols are at theta = 
  1.0 C, the asterisks are at 1.2 C, the diamonds are 1.4 C.

Figure 5b-1e: 
  Phosphate values interpolated at three potential temperatures for all of the 
  stations occupied during Moana Wave 89-3.  The square symbols are at theta = 
  1.0 C, the asterisks are at 1.2 C, the diamonds are 1.4 C.

Figure 5b-1f: 
  Salinity values interpolated at potential temperatures of 1.6 and 1.8 C from 
  data collected between 148 W and 110 W where the oceanic variability is low.

Figure 5b-1g: 
  Oxygen values interpolated at potential temperatures of 1.6 and 1.8 C from 
  data collected between 148 W and 110 W where the oceanic variability is low.


TABLES SECTION 5b

Table 5b-1.
  Samples were collected from two 10 liter Niskin bottles which were tripped at 
  the same depth at 21 stations.  The differences between the salinity and 
  oxygen measurements made on these duplicate samples are shown.  The standard 
  deviation of the salinity and oxygen differences are respectively, 0.0010 PSU 
  and 0.015 ml/l.

              Differences                     Differences
Sta  Bottle  Salt     Oxy.    Sta  Bottle    Salt     Oxy
 #     #     PSS78    ml/l     #       #     PSS78    ml/l
----------------------------------------------------------
36    4,5    0.001    0.01    64      6,7    0.001    0.02
38    4,5    0.001    0.01    64    11,12    0.000    0.02
47    4,5    0.000    0.03    65      7,8    0.000    0.00
50    1,2    0.000    0.01    65     9,10    0.002    0.01
50    4,5    0.001    0.02    65    18,19    0.000    0.02
51    4,5    0.000    0.02    66    16,17    0.002    0.01
52    1,2    0.001    0.01    66    18,19    0.001    0.01
52    4,5    0.000    0.00    66    20,21    0.002    0.06
53    2,3    0.001    0.00    67    18,19    0.000    0.04
53    4,5    0.000    0.01    67    21,22    0.001    0.01
54    1,2    0.000    0.02    68    16,17    0.002    0.00
58    4,5    0.000    0.00    69    14,15    0.000    0.01
58    8,9    0.003    0.00    69    16,17    0.003    0.01
59    4,5    0.002    0.00    69    18,19    0.002    0.02
59    8,9    0.000    0.02    69    20,21    0.001    0.05
61   13,14   0.000    0.02    70    15,16    0.002    0.01
62    7,8    0.001    0.00    70    17,18    0.003    0.01
62    9,10   0.000    0.00    70    19,20    0.000    0.02
62   11,12   0.000    0.01    70    22,23    0.001    0.06
62   17,18   0.000    0.01    71    14,15    0.002    0.00
63   13-14   0.000    0.03    71    20,21    0.000    0.04
63   19,20   0.003    0.02


Table 5b-2.
  Pressure, salinity, oxygen and nutrient values were interpolated at six   
  potential temperatures for all of the stations.  A least squares fit was made 
  to the data on each potential temperature surface and the differences were 
  calculated.  These differences were used to determine the standard deviation 
  and the coefficient of variation (standard deviation / average * 100) for each 
  variable.  The two sub-tables labeled "Stations between 110 W and 150 W" were 
  calculated as described above and show the standard deviations and 
  coefficients of variation at theta equals 1.6 and 1.8 C.  The data used in 
  these calculations are shown in Figures 5b-1f and 1g and were selected from a 
  region where the oceanic variability appears to be low in order to assess 
  better the accuracy of the salinity and oxygen measurements made during this 
  cruise.

STANDARD DEVIATION OF WATER SAMPLE DATA

      Theta  Pts  Press  Salnty   Oxygen  Silcat   Phspht   Nitrat
        C           db             ml/l     µm/1    µm/1     µm/1
------------------------------------------------------------------
MW     1.0    65   202   0.0017   0.039   1.2841   0.0292   0.2687
MW     1.2   133   111   0.0014   0.034   1.6349   0.0353   0.2787
MW     1.4   171    71   0.0015   0.039   1.7089   0.0339   0.3062
MW     1.6   193   114   0.0017   0.044   1.8516   0.0337   0.3427
MW     1.8   206    53   0.0016   0.046   1.5895   0.0338   0.3720
MW     2.0   207    65   0.0015   0.052   1.4664   0.0353   0.4065

Stations between 110 W and 150 W

MW   1.6   43   34   0.0010   0.019
MW   1.8   43   40   0.0010   0.028

COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION OF WATER SAMPLE DATA

      Theta  Pts   Press  Salnty  Oxygen  Silcat  Phspht  Nitrat
----------------------------------------------------------------
MW     1.0    65   4.613   0.005   0.968   0.916   1.179   0.749
MW     1.2   133   3.000   0.004   0.976   1.080   1.361   0.743
MW     1.4   171   2.295   0.004   1.256   1.104   1.264   0.793
MW     1.6   193   4.192   0.005   1.566   1.193   1.225   0.871
MW     1.8   206   2.276   0.005   1.792   1.040   1.204   0.931
MW     2.0   207   3.126   0.004   2.162   0.983   1.238   1.005

Stations between 110 W and 150 W

MW   1.6   43   1.27   0.002   0.708
MW   1.8   43   1.72   0.003   1.147


5c.  CTD MEASUREMENTS
     (C. MacMurray and J. Toole)

The NBIS CTD/O2 instrument is equipped with sensors to measure pressure, and sea 
water temperature, conductivity and dissolved oxygen concentration.  The 
ultimate accuracy of the reduced data set hinges on the calibration of these 
sensors.  Both laboratory measurements and water sample data obtained at sea are 
used to determine the sensor calibrations.  General information on CTD 
calibration methodology and data processing procedures can be found in the 
reports of Fofonoff, Hayes, and Millard (1974) and Millard and Galbraith (1982).

TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE DATA
Laboratory calibrations, performed before and after the 10 N cruise, provide the 
sole correction information for the CTD pressure and temperature sensors. Note 
that temperature and pressure calibrations are used to scale the data profiles 
as well as the CTD component of the rosette water sample data files. Laboratory 
temperature calibrations of CTD #9 at the WHOI calibration facility before and 
after the cruise showed a change of .0004 at 0 C and .0026 at 24 C (instrument 
reported colder in time).  Pre- to post-cruise differences were even less for 
CTD #81, .0003 at 0 C and .0014 at 24 C (instrument reported colder at 24 C in 
post-cruise calibration but warmer at 0 C).  Due to tight shipping schedules, 
there was not much time to perform a careful check of CTD #10 prior to leg 3.  
The pre-cruise calibration for CTD #10 was hurried, and we do not give it much 
credibility.  Nevertheless, the observed pre-to-post cruise temperature shift at 
0 C was only on the order of one half a millidegree.  Based on these results, we 
believe the relative accuracy of the temperatures reported here, on the IPTS-68 
temperature scale, is on the order of 2 m C.  As absolute accuracy of the 
temperature data involves calibration and stability of the laboratory transfer 
standard and the homogeneity of the calibration bath, the 10 N absolute 
temperature data is probably uncertain by 3-4 m C.

No electronic adjustments were made to the temperature sensor interface boards 
during laboratory calibrations in order to preserve a long standing history on 
the stability of these sensors.  Instead, corrections, determined by polynomial 
least-squares fits to the laboratory calibration data, were applied to the data.  
Temperature calibrations consisted of quadratic fits to 8-11 temperature points 
ranging between 0 and 30 C in reference to a platinum thermometer standard, 
Figure 5c-1.  The following temperature correction algorithms were used in the 
reduction of CTD downcast and water sample rosette data collected on the 10 N 
transpacific cruise.

CTD#8  T = .593955E-2 + (.499779E-3)*Traw +(.343056E-11) *T2raw
       (Post-cruise) where Traw is the raw counts of the temperature channel.  
       For CTD #8, a time lag correction of 0.250 seconds between C and T 
       sensors (deduced during the cruise) was also made.

CTD#9  T = .953261E-2 + (.499906E-3) * Traw + (.104558E-11) * T2raw
       (Pre-cruise) Data from CTD #9 were corrected for a time-lag of .15 
       seconds.

CTD#10 T = .784017E-3 + (.499702E-3) * Traw + (.432617E-11) * T2raw
       (Post-cruise) Data from CTD #10 were corrected for a time-lag of .25 
       seconds.

Pressure calibrations were done using a dead-weight tester; data were sampled at 
1000 psi intervals with both increasing and decreasing pressure between 0 and 
10000 psi.  Data reduction employed a cubic calibration algorithm determined 
from a least-squares-fit to these data, Figure 5c-2.  The pressure bias term 
applied to each CTD cast was determined by the pre-lowering deck unit pressure 
reading (du). The following downcast (0-6000 db range) pressure calibration 
algorithm was applied to the CTD #9 profiles.

CTD#9  P = - (du) + (.998880E-1) Praw + (.113246E-7) P2raw - (.169297E-12) P3raw
       (Pre-cruise) where Praw is the raw counts of the pressure channel.

Final pressure data obtained with CTD #8 and CTD #10 contain empirical 
corrections which were applied to rectify a discrepancy between water sample and 
CTD derived salinity data.  This correction is explained more fully below in the 
discussion of conductivity calibration.  The downcast pressure calibration 
algorithm applied to CTD #8 data was:

CTD#8  P = - (du) + (.100459) Praw - (.147732E-7) P2raw + (.118881E-12) P3raw
       (Post-cruise plus empirical correction)

The downcast calibration algorithm for instrument #10 pressure data was:

CTD#10 P = - (du) + (.983410E-1) Praw + (.628596E-7) P2raw - (.633079E-12) 3raw
       (Post-cruise plus empirical correction)

In similar fashion, cubic calibration curves were constructed from the 
decreasing pressure (upcast) laboratory calibration data.  A weighted 
combination of the pre-cruise downcast and upcast pressure calibrations were 
then applied to the CTD component of the rosette water sample data.  The effect 
of this scaling is to force the down and up pressure calibration curves to be 
continuous at the bottom of the cast; the algorithm is:

                           P = (1-W) *Pup + W*Pdn

with Pup and Pdn being the results of the upcast and downcast calibration 
algorithms. The Pup calibration algorithms for each instrument are:

CTD9  Pup = -.299188El + (.999125E-1) Praw + (.146870E-7) P2raw - 
(.197944E-12) P3raw
(Pre-cruise)

CTD8	Pup = .869254EO+ (.992531E-1)Praw + (.327062E-7) P2raw
(.335345E-12) P3raw
(Post-cruise)

CTD10	Pup = -.218008E0 + (.990681E-1) Praw + (.251184E-7) P2raw
(.164667E-12) P3raw
(Post-cruise)

The weighting, W, is given by:

                                (P - Pbottom)
                   W = exp ----------------------
                                   300 db

Pbottom is the maximum pressure of the cast.  The scale depth of 300 db was 
established from laboratory calibration data in which the CTD was cycled from 0 
to 5000 psi.

CONDUCTIVITY DATA
Linear conductivity calibration algorithms, derived from pre-cruise laboratory 
data, were used to generate CTD data acquisition display plots.  The algorithms 
employed were:

CTD #8:   C = -.166747E-1 + (.100159E-2) * Craw * [1+A*(T-TO)+B*(P-PO)] 
CTD #9:   C =  .396792E-2 + (.999569E-3) * Craw * [1+A*(T-TO)+B*(P-PO)] 
CTD #10:  C = -.286030E-2 + (.100004E-2) * Craw * [1+A*(T-TO)+B*(P-PO)]

where:
   Craw   is the raw counts of the conductivity channel;
   A  is  the temperature correction coefficient (-.65E-5 C-1)
   B  is  the coefficient of cell contraction with pressure (1.5E-8 db-1)
   T  is  scaled temperature
   T0 is  2.8 C
   P  is  scaled pressure
   P0 is  3000 db

Final conductivity calibrations were derived from a least-squares regression of 
CTD and water sample conductivity data to determine the slope and bias terms in 
the above algorithms (Millard and Galbraith, 1982).  As CTD #9 was employed for 
the bulk of the stations on the 10 N cruise, its conductivity calibration was 
addressed first.  The regression routine for estimating conductivity bias and 
slope adjustments was initially run over all CTD #9 water sample data using the 
nominal A and B cell deformation coefficients in the above equation.  Time 
series plots of water sample - CTD conductivity differences were then 
constructed to identify station subgroups in which the CTD conductivity cell 
appeared stable in time, or drifted linearly in time. Expanded-scale potential 
temperature/salinity plots were also used to confirm the groupings.  Careful 
examination of the deep-water temperature/salinity information revealed a subtle 
salinity departure (order .001) of the CTD trace from the water sample data.  
This discrepancy was minimized by setting the coefficient of cell deformation 
with pressure (B in the equation) to zero (as was done for a previously analyzed 
data set collected with CTD #9 by Cook et al., 1991).  We have no explanation 
for why CTD #9's conductivity data is nonstandard.  Table 5c-1 presents the 
coefficients of the CTD #9 conductivity correction algorithm used to produce the 
final data.

Derivation of conductivity calibration algorithms for data acquired with CTD 
instruments 8 and 10 proved significantly more difficult.  Correction 
algorithms, defined from regressions between upcast CTD measurements and water 
sample observations, when applied to downcast CTD data resulted in CTD salinity 
data that was inconsistent with the water sample salinity observations. CTD and 
water sample salinity data diverged with increasing temperature on potential 
temperature-salinity diagrams; the discrepancy was greatest at the salinity 
minimum level around potential temperature 6.0 C where CTD-bottle salinity 
differences were on order .005-.0067.  The error was ultimately traced to 
residual hysteresis in the pressure data (see below).  The magnitude of the 
salinity error associated with this problem was quantified by estimating the 
salinity differences between CTD downcast and upcast at selected temperature 
surfaces.  If the ocean temperature/salinity relationship was steady in the time 
interval between down and up, there should be no difference in the two CTD 
salinity values.  Figure 5c-3 shows that there were measurable salinity 
differences between the down- and upcasts.

After much thought, it was concluded that the salinity error was caused by error 
in the pressure data.  The nominal sensitivity of the derived salinity on 
pressure is 0.001 per 2.5 db (Fofonoff and Millard, 1983).  The observed 
salinity errors are indicative of pressure errors of order 10-15 db.  However, 
the static pressure calibrations, performed at the WHOI Calibration Facility in 
1989, are believed accurate to .1% or 6 decibars (G. Bond, personal 
communication, 1991).  The standard NBIS CTD pressure sensor can be sensitive to 
thermal transients of this magnitude when the time response of the pressure 
gauge and its associated thermistor collar (Brown and Morrison, 1978) are 
mismatched.  Laboratory thermal shock tests, performed after the cruise, 
revealed pressure errors in the correct sense to explain the 10 N salinity 
error.

We derived empirical pressure correction algorithms to account for the pressure 
sensor error.  The algorithm applied to the downcast data consisted of an 
adjustment to the laboratory derived cubic correction equation discussed above.  
The adjustment varied linearly with decreasing pressure (as suggested by the 
salinity difference data of Figure 5c-3) from zero adjustment at 5000 db to 
order 10 db adjustment at 1000 db.  At shallower levels the pressure adjustment 
returned smoothly to zero value at the surface.  The adjusted correction 
algorithms are reported above.  No adjustment was made to the upcast data as it 
was argued that, apart from the upper few hundred meters of the water column, 
the CTD experiences no strong thermal transients, and so should accurately 
report its pressure.

Determination of the coefficients in the conductivity correction algorithm for 
CTD #8 and #10 data then proceeded straightforwardly as for CTD #9 data. 
Conductivity was fit over all stations for each of these instruments.  No 
subgrouping or drifting was apparent.  Table 5c-1 presents the bias and slope 
values used to produce the final data.

Uncertainty in the final CTD salinity data may be measured by differences 
between CTD and water sample salinity data.  Absolute CTD salinity accuracy of 
course hinges on the accuracy of the water sample data (see the preceding 
section).  Two measures of CTD/water-sample consistency were prepared (Figures 
5c-4 and 5c-5, lower panels).  The time series plot of salinity differences as a 
function of station number shows the final data to be uniformly calibrated.  The 
histogram of the salinity differences for the full data set is Gaussian with 
zero mean as would be expected from random measurement error; the standard 
deviation of the population is .00177 in the deep water (pressure greater than 
2500 db).  The distribution of potential density anomaly along 10 N is presented 
in Plate 1 together with the location of each station. The distribution of 
potential temperature (C) and salinity along the section is shown in Plate 2.

OXYGEN DATA
Coefficients in the CTD oxygen sensor calibration algorithm were derived from in 
situ water sample oxygen data following Owens and Millard (1985).  The algorithm 
is:

Oxm = [A * (Oc + B	dOc/dt) + C] Oxsat (T, S) e D	[T + E * (To-T) + F * P


Where
   Oc is the measured oxygen current
   To is the measured oxygen temperature
   Oxsat(T,S) is the oxygen saturation according to Weiss (1970)
   A is the oxygen current slope;
   B is the oxygen sensor lag;
   C is the oxygen current bias;
   D, E, and F represent adjustments for the oxygen sensor's Teflon membrane 
               sensitivity to temperature and pressure.

CTD oxygen sensors were replaced several times during the cruise when it 
appeared that the data were degrading.  Table 5c-2 reports the sensor history 
for the cruise.

The process of calibrating the data began by subdividing the stations into 
groups which appeared to have homogeneous calibration characteristics.  A 
multiple regression technique was then used to define the coefficients in the 
above equation.  Note that the regression is between downcast CTD oxygen sensor 
data and water sample observations obtained on the upcast.  (This is because 
erroneous CTD oxygen data are obtained when the underwater package is stopped to 
close a rosette bottle.  As well, the oxygen sensor typically exhibits excessive 
up-down hysteresis.)

Oxygen sensor characteristics changed markedly in time on the 10 N cruise. 
Regression groups were typically small, and frequently consisted of single 
stations.  Because of the extremely low oxygen values found in the Pacific 
Ocean, some of the oxygen fitting routines did not give satisfactory results; 
the algorithm occasionally returned values below zero.  These areas, generally 
in the shallow thermocline, were interpolated over.  Some fits also needed to be 
weighted either more heavily at the surface or bottom to obtain reasonable fits, 
while other stations required large lags in order to get the CTD to match the 
water sample data at the thermocline.  We have no explanation for the lack of 
sensor stability or its occasional nonstandard behavior.  The following details 
the algorithm coefficients used to generate the final data:

As was the case for the salinity data, a measure of CTD derived oxygen data 
uncertainty is given by comparison with the water sample data (Figures 5c-4 and 
5c-5, upper panels), but the absolute accuracy depends directly on the water 
sample accuracy.  The population of oxygen difference data has a standard 
deviation of .03 ml/l in the deep water (pressure greater than 2500 db), with a 
mean indistinguishable from zero.  The distribution of dissolved oxygen (ml/1) 
along 10 N is shown in Plate 3.


FIGURE CAPTIONS SECTION 5c
 
Figure 5c-1:
  Temperature calibrations with 8-11 temperature points ranging between 0 and 
  30 C in reference to a platinum thermometer standard.

Figure 5c-2:
  Pressure calibrations employed a cubic calibration algorithm determined from a 
  least squares fit.

Figure 5c-3:
  Salinity differences between the down- and upcasts vs. pressure.

Figure 5c-4:
  The time series of salinity differences as a function of station number shows 
  the final data to be uniformly calibrated.

Figure 5c-5:
  Histograms showing the water sample minus CTD differences for oxygen and 
  salinity at pressures greater than 2500 db. 


TABLES SECTION 5C

Table 5c-1.
  Bias and slope coefficients of the conductivity correction algorithm applied 
  to the 10N CTD data.
  
Sta #    Ctd     Bias          Slope     Sta #  Ctd     Bias         Slope
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-7,9-15  8  -.26691994E-1  .10018587E-2  159       .16260127E-1  .99907210E-3
   16        -.26691994E-1  .10018866E-2  160       .16260127E-1  .99907932E-3
 17-26       -.26691994E-1  .10018587E-2  161       .16260127E-1  .99908653E-3
 27-33    9   .16260127E-1  .99890810E-3  162       .16260127E-1  .99909374E-3
 34-73        .16260127E-1  .99890250E-3  163       .16260127E-1  .99910095E-3
   74         .16260127E-1  .99890904E-3  164       .16260127E-1  .99910816E-3
   75         .16260127E-1  .99891558E-3  165       .16260127E-1  .99911538E-3
   76         .16260127E-1  .99892212E-3  166       .16260127E-1  .99912259E-3
   77         .16260127E-1  .99892866E-3  167       .16260127E-1  .99912980E-3
   78         .16260127E-1  .99893520E-3  168       .16260127E-1  .99917699E-3
   79         .16260127E-1  .99894174E-3  169       .16260127E-1  .99918409E-3
   80         .16260127E-1  .99894828E-3  170       .16260127E-1  .99919143E-3
   81         .16260127E-1  .99895482E-3  171       .16260127E-1  .99915865E-3
   82         .16260127E-1  .99896136E-3  172       .16260127E-1  .99916586E-3
  85-93       .16260127E-1  .99892646E-3  173       .16260127E-1  .99917307E-3
  94-103      .16260127E-1  .99895662E-3  174       .16260127E-1  .99926356E-3
 104-119       .1260127E-1  .99898404E-3  175       .16260127E-1  .99920249E-3
 121-122      .16260127E-1  .99890250E-3  176       .16260127E-1  .99925299E-3
 123-135      .16260127E-1  .99892002E-3  177       .16260127E-1  .99954766E-3
  137         .16260127E-1  .99890250E-3  178       .16260127E-1  .99924243E-3
 138-142      .16260127E-1  .99892002E-3  179       .16260127E-1  .99923715E-3
  143         .16260127E-1  .99895671E-3  180       .16260127E-1  .99923186E-3
  144         .16260127E-1  .99896392E-3  181       .16260127E-1  .99922658E-3
  145         .16260127E-1  .99897114E-3  182       .16260127E-1  .99922130E-3
  146         .16260127E-1  .99897835E-3  183       .16260127E-1  .99921602E-3
  147         .16260127E-1  .99898556E-3  184       .16260127E-1  .99921073E-3
  148         .16260127E-1  .99899277E-3  185       .16260127E-1  .99920545E-3
  149         .16260127E-1  .99899998E-3  186       .16260127E-1  .99920017E-3
  150         .16260127E-1  .99900720E-3  187       .16260127E-1  .99919489E-3
  151         .16260127E-1  .99901441E-3  188       .16260127E-1  .99918960E-3
  152         .16260127E-1  .99902162E-3  189       .16260127E-1  .99918432E-3
  153         .16260127E-1  .99902883E-3  190       .16260127E-1  .99923485E-3
  154         .16260127E-1  .99903604E-3  191       .16260127E-1  .99917376E-3
  155         .16260127E-1  .99904326E-3  192       .16260127E-1  .99916847E-3
  156         .16260127E-1  .99905047E-3  193       .16260127E-1  .99925103E-3
  157         .16260127E-1  .99905768E-3  194       .16260127E-1  .99915791E-3
  158         .16260127E-1  .99906489E-3  195       .16260127E-1  .99915263E-3
                                          136  10   .56433148E-3  .99991328E-3
                                        196-214     .56433148E-3  .99991328E-3
                                        217-221     .56433148E-3  .99991328E-3


Table 5c-2:
  Summary of oxygen sensors employed on the 10 N cruise. Sensors on each 
  instrument were assigned sequential letter codes (A, B, C,

STA   3-7          CTD   #8   Oxygen sensor A
STA   9-26         CTD   #8   Oxygen sensor B
STA   27-82        CTD   #9   Oxygen sensor A
STA   85-195       CTD   #9   Oxygen sensor B
STA   136,196-221  CTD  #10   Oxygen sensor A


Table 5c-3: Summary of dissolved oxygen algorithm coefficients used to reduce 
            the 10 N transpacific CTD/02 data.
  
 Sta      BIAS    SLOPE     PCOR           TCOR          WT           LAG
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  3-7    -0.019   0.927   0.1502E-03    -0.3491E-01   0.6734E+00   0.6239E+01
   9     -0.067   1.012   0.1953E-03    -0.3645E-01   0.6934E+00   0.4202E+01
  10      0.040   0.761   0.1546E-03    -0.3003E-01   0.6064E+00   0.4092E+01
 11-14   -0.003   0.920   0.1614E-03    -0.3008E-01   0.9130E+00   0.8000E+01
 15-16   -0.021   0.992   0.1701E-03    -0.3328E-01   0.8260E+00   0.6773E+00
  17      0.011   0.918   0.1601E-03    -0.3008E-01   0.8698E+00   0.8004E+01
 18-20   -0.075   1.139   0.1902E-03    -0.3575E-01   0.7879E+00   0.8000E+01
  21     -0.008   0.975   0.1616E-03    -0.3081E-01   0.9660E+00   0.8000E+01
 22-25    0.016   0.861   0.1746E-03    -0.2542E-01   0.8607E+00   0.8000E+01
  26     -0.064   1.186   0.1661E-03    -0.3779E-01   0.6705E+00   0.7987E+01
  27     -0.029   0.977   0.1366E-03    -0.3627E-01   0.1000E+01   0.8000E+01
  28     -0.027   1.025   0.1410E-03    -0.3424E-01   0.8475E+00   0.8005E+01
 29-32    0.016   0.906   0.1398E-03    -0.2847E-01   0.8195E+00   0.8465E+01
  33      0.017   0.878   0.1419E-03    -0.2841E-01   0.7404E+00   0.8000E+01
  34      0.010   0.945   0.1460E-03    -0.2914E-01   0.8875E+00   0.8032E+01
  35      0.022   0.878   0.1432E-03    -0.2818E-01   0.1084E+01   0.8000E+01
 36-38   -0.006   1.015   0.1404E-03    -0.3223E-01   0.8163E+00   0.8000E+01
 39-40   -0.019   1.078   0.1414E-03    -0.3472E-01   0.8125E+00   0.4732E+01
 41-45   -0.008   1.053   0.1400E-03    -0.3081E-01   0.7990E+00   0.8000E+01
  46     -0.016   1.068   0.1385E-03    -0.3106E-01   0.7669E+00   0.8000E+01
  47     -0.020   1.095   0.1344E-03    -0.3052E-01   0.9005E+00   0.8000E+01
  48     -0.044   1.211   0.1211E-03    -0.3506E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
 49-50   -0.030   1.158   0.1312E-03    -0.3135E-01   0.7656E+00   0.8000E+01
  51     -0.031   1.200   0.1275E-03    -0.3168E-01   0.8362E+00   0.8000E+01
 52-53   -0.015   1.114   0.1261E-03    -0.2993E-01   0.7671E+00   0.6683E+01
  54      0.013   0.997   0.1277E-03    -0.2507E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
 55-56   -0.010   1.041   0.1287E-03    -0.2480E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
 57-59   -0.006   1.077   0.1200E-03    -0.2796E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
 60-61   -0.011   1.138   0.1159E-03    -0.2430E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
  62     -0.015   1.082   0.1188E-03    -0.2668E-01   0.8367E+00   0.8000E+01
 63-65    0.020   0.982   0.1203E-03    -0.1993E-01   0.7535E+00   0.8000E+01
  66      0.009   1.126   0.1100E-03    -0.2127E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
  67      0.001   1.205   0.9421E-04    -0.2266E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
  68     -0.019   1.213   0.1062E-03    -0.2563E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
  69     -0.008   1.183   0.1150E-03    -0.2433E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
  70      0.000   1.249   0.1002E-03    -0.2385E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
  71     -0.007   1.195   0.1095E-03    -0.2029E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
  72     -0.032   1.468   0.9045E-04    -0.2794E-01   0.1000E+01   0.8000E+01
  73      0.009   1.165   0.1187E-03    -0.1765E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
 74-75    0.005   1.225   0.1040E-03    -0.1996E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
 76-77   -0.016   1.440   0.8805E-04    -0.2043E-01   0.1000E+01   0.3800E+02
  78     -0.028   1.814   0.1441E-04    -0.2508E-01   0.1000E+01   0.3800E+02
 79-81   -0.010   1.447   0.8550E-04    -0.2034E-01   0.1000E+01   0.3800E+02
  82      0.036   1.005   0.1199E-03    -0.9294E-02   0.4175E+01   0.3800E+02
  85     -0.001   1.053   0.1285E-03    -0.3295E-01   0.9741E+00   0.8000E+01
  86      0.020   0.862   0.1639E-03    -0.2574E-01   0.1000E+01   0.8000E+01
  87      0.077   0.737   0.1639E-03    -0.1835E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
 88-90    0.010   1.106   0.1427E-03    -0.3276E-01   0.8171E+00   0.8000E+01
 91-93   -0.020   1.216   0.1486E-03    -0.3459E-01   0.9586E+00   0.8000E+01
  94      0.028   1.226   0.1221E-03    -0.3618E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
  95     -0.003   1.214   0.1396E-03    -0.3794E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
  96     -0.007   1.142   0.1554E-03    -0.3303E-01   0.4886E+00   0.8000E+01
  97     -0.020   1.247   0.1447E-03    -0.3545E-01   0.7009E+00   0.8000E+01
 98-99   -0.002   1.205   0.1410E-03    -0.3388E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
100-101  -0.003   1.153   0.1451E-03    -0.3265E-01   0.1099E+01   0.8000E+01
  102    -0.018   1.228   0.1413E-03    -0.3490E-01   0.1090E+01   0.8000E+01
  103     0.011   1.069   0.1454E-03    -0.3122E-01   0.6922E+00   0.8000E+01
104-105   0.006   1.084   0.1469E-03    -0.2924E-01   0.1083E+01   0.8000E+01
106-111   0.016   1.042   0.1505E-03    -0.2958E-01   0.9851E+00   0.8000E+01
112-119   0.007   1.075   0.1505E-03    -0.3011E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
  121    -0.008   1.042   0.1583E-03    -0.3113E-01   0.4796E+00   0.8000E+01
  122    -0.014   1.164   0.1377E-03    -0.3485E-01   0.9135E+00   0.8000E+01
  123     0.012   1.098   0.1338E-03    -0.3309E-01   0.3371E+00   0.8000E+01
124-129  -0.008   1.167   0.1389E-03    -0.3486E-01   0.8682E+00   0.8000E+01
  130    -0.021   1.252   0.1326E-03    -0.3596E-01   0.5423E+00   0.8000E+01
131-134  -0.006   1.156   0.1368E-03    -0.3473E-01   0.8463E+00   0.8000E+01
  135    -0.009   1.174   0.1382E-03    -0.3414E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
  136    -0.049   0.980   0.1394E-03    -0.3635E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
137-143  -0.009   1.174   0.1382E-03    -0.3414E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
144-145  -0.005   1.132   0.1387E-03    -0.3229E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
146-155  -0.002   1.114   0.1418E-03    -0.3162E-01   0.6225E+00   0.8000E+01
156-173   0.002   1.082   0.1404E-03    -0.3029E-01   0.1033E+01   0.8000E+01
174-186  -0.002   1.093   0.1397E-03    -0.3149E-01   0.7500E+00   0.8000E+01
187-195  -0.001   1.067   0.1398E-03    -0.2974E-01   0.1000E+01   0.8000E+01
  196    -0.012   0.906   0.1389E-03    -0.4545E-01   0.7500E+00   0.1200E+02
197-203  -0.019   0.920   0.1417E-03    -0.3027E-01   0.7500E+00   0.1200E+02
204-211  -0.020   0.953   0.1375E-03    -0.3168E-01   0.7500E+00   0.1200E+02
212-214  -0.024   1.025   0.1203E-03    -0.3683E-01   0.1000E+01   0.1200E+02
  217    -0.078   1.066   0.1482E-03    -0.4942E-01   0.1000E+01   0.1200E+02
  218    -0.041   1.000   0.1384E-03    -0.3451E-01   0.1000E+01   0.1200E+02
219-221  -0.044   1.163   0.7750E-04    -0.3959E-01   0.1000E+01   0.1200E+02



5d.  NUTRIENT PRECISION AND ACCURACY DURING MOANA WAVE 89-3
     (L.I. Gordon and J.C. Jennings, Jr.)

Nutrient analyses were performed by a team of analysts from Oregon State 
University, using an Alpkem Corp., Rapid Flow Analyzer, Model RFA?300.  The 
methods for silicic acid, nitrate plus nitrite, and nitrite were those given in 
the Alpkem manual (Alpkem Corp., 1987).  The method for phosphate was an 
adaptation of our hydrazine reduction method for the AutoAnalyzer -II (Atlas et 
al., 1971).  The adaptation consisted of scaling reagent concentrations and pump 
tube sizes to duplicate final concentrations of reagents in the sample stream 
used with our AutoAnalyzer -II phosphate method.  We had tested all of these 
methods as implemented on the RFA-300 by comparison with an AutoAnalyzer -II 
simultaneously running our existing AutoAnalyzer -II methods. The results were 
equal or better in all cases, with respect to accuracy, precision, linearity and 
interferences.

Sampling for nutrients followed that for the tracer gases, Helium, Tritium, 
CFCs, and dissolved oxygen on average 30-45 minutes after the casts were on 
deck.  Samples were drawn into 30cc high-density polyethylene, narrow mouth, 
screw-capped bottles.  Then they were immediately introduced into the RFA 
sampler by pouring into 4 cc polystyrene cups which fit the RFA sampler tray.  
Both the 30 cc bottles and 4 cc cups were rinsed three times with approximately 
one third their volume prior to filling.  Analyses routinely were begun within 
twenty minutes after the 30 cc bottles were filled and completed within an 
additional hour and a half.  When the RFA malfunctioned at three stations, 
delays of up to one and a half hours after casts arrived on deck were 
experienced.  If the delay were anticipated to be more than one half hour, the 
samples were refrigerated.  Samples were refrigerated and stored up to one hour 
on stations 3, 23 and 181.

During the work we monitored short-term precision by analyzing replicate samples 
taken from the same Niskin bottle and by taking replicate samples from Niskin 
bottles tripped at the same depth.  We also compared results from similar depths 
on the same station.  The results are shown in Table 5d-1.

To check accuracy we compared our results with historical data from the region.  
There is not much historical data, however.  We used GEOSECS and Western Pacific 
Ocean Circulation Study (WEPOCS) data for comparison but the WEPOCS study area 
was too far south to be definitive.  The present data set agrees with the old 
within our accuracy estimated from identified sources of error and estimates of 
their magnitude, i.e., silicic acid, 2%; nitrate plus nitrite, 1%; and nitrite, 
0.1 micromoles per liter.  The fractional values are relative to the highest 
concentrations found in the regional water columns.  Our deep phosphate 
concentrations may be up to about 0.07 micromolar higher on average than the 
GEOSECS data.  We have no recorded laboratory notebook entries that could 
explain the difference.  The distribution of silicic acid (µmol/1) along 10 N is 
shown in Plate 3 and the distribution of nitrate and phosphate along the section 
is shown in Plate 4.


Table 5d-1: 
  Precision results from cruise Moana Wave 89-3.  Entries are one standard   
  deviation of a single analysis computed by pooling variances.  Units are 
  micromoles per liter throughout.  To convert the nutrient values to 
  micromoles/kg, use the potential densities of the seawater samples computed 
  for the salinity of the sample and for 23 C, the mean laboratory temperature 
  at the time of measurement of the nutrients.  (This is the temperature at 
  which the volume of the sample captured by the nutrient analyzer is fixed.)  
  The nutrient lab temperature varied by a maximum of +/-3 C during the cruise.  
  Therefore this parameter introduces a small, non-random error of 0.08% or less 
  into the nutrient concentrations.  Case I describes replicates taken from 
  different Niskin bottles tripped at the same depth; case II, replicates from 
  the same Niskin bottles; and case III, samples from closely adjacent depths. 
  "DF" gives the number of degrees of freedom for each case.

Case  Phosphate  Nitrate + Nitrite  Silicic Acid  Nitrite  DF
-------------------------------------------------------------
Leg 1                                        
I       0.013           0.07            0.22      0.001    53
II       .008            .08             .35       .002    49
Leg 2                                   
II       .010            .08             .17       .008    36
III      .006            .12             .09       .00      4
Leg 3                                   
II       .014            .05             .24       .003    97
III      .007            .05             .13       .002    34

Table 5d-2. 
  Average nutrient laboratory temperatures measured for each station's analyses 
  during the 10 N transpacific section.  These temperatures are used to convert 
  the units from µmol/1 to µmol/kg.

Nutrient Lab temperature summary, 10 N Pacific
 
Sta   Date     Time  Temp  Sta   Date     Time  Temp  Sta    Date     Time  Temp
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1  07 Feb 89  1430  23.7  75  02 Mar 89  2331  22.1  149  19 Apr 89  1940  22.5
 2     --       --   22.8  76  03 Mar 89  0625  22.8   15  20 Apr 89  0440  22.0
 3  10 Feb 89  0045  22.0  77  03 Mar 89  1325  24.8  151  20 Apr 89  1230  22.0
 4  10 Feb 89  0045  22.0  78  03 Mar 89  1920  24.4  152  20 Apr 89  2120  21.6
 5  10 Feb 89  0250  22.8  79  03 Mar 89  2245  24.5  153  21 Apr 89  0530  22.0
 6  10 Feb 89   --   22.0  80  03 Mar 89  0505  25.0  154  21 Apr 89  1445  22.2
 7  10 Feb 89  1406  24.0  81  04 Mar 89  1020  25.0  155  21 Apr 89  2410  21.3
 8  10 Feb 89  2045  25.0  82     --      1700  24.4  156  22 Apr 89  0900  22.0
 9  11 Feb 89  0830  24.4  83  04 Mar 89  2150  20.5  157  22 Apr 89  1715  22.4
10     --      1015  23.8  84     --      0352  22.0  158     --       --   22.3
11  11 Feb 89  1600  25.0  85     --      0715  21.0  159     --      1020  22.2
12  11 Feb 89  2230  25.0  86     --      1515  21.0  160  23 Apr 89  1830  22.8
13  12 Feb 89  0425  24.0  87     --      2350  23.0  161  23 Apr 89  0330  22.0
14  12 Feb 89   --   25.0  88  10 Mar 89  0705  22.5  162  24 Apr 89  1225  22.1
15  12 Feb 89  2005  25.5  89  10 Mar 89  1500  24.0  163  24 Apr 89  2140  21.1
16  13 Feb 89  0340  24.8  90     --      2215  23.0  164  25 Apr 89  0615  20.6
17  13 Feb 89  1025  25.5  91     --      0730  22.7  165  25 Apr 89  1310  22.4
18     --       --   25.5  92     --      1550  22.5  166  25 Apr 89  2030  22.0
19  14 Feb 89  0145  25.5  93  11 Mar 89  0025  22.2  167  26 Apr 89  0420  21.8
20  14 Feb 89  0730  25.5  94  12 Mar 89  0940  22.0  168  26 Apr 89  1150  22.5
21  14 Feb 89  1225  25.5  95    --        --   22.0  169  26 Apr 89  2005  20.9
22  14 Feb 89  1643  25.9  96  13 Mar 89  0308  22.0  170  27 Apr 89  0430  21.0
23     --      2250  26.4  97  13 Mar 89  1215  22.0  171  27 Apr 89  1200  22.6
24     --       --   26.4  98  13 Mar 89  2150  22.0  172  27 Apr 89  2000  22.2
25  15 Feb 89  1115  27.0  99     --      0745  22.5  173  28 Apr 89  0340  22.0
26  15 Feb 89  1830  27.2  100    --      1715  21.8  174  28 Apr 89  1127  22.8
27  15 Feb 89   --   27.0  101  15 Mar 89 0225  21.2  175  28 Apr 89  1940  21.9
28  16 Feb 89  0640  26.0  102  15 Mar 89 1335  23.0  176  29 Apr 89  0400  22.0
29  16 Feb 89  1220  25.0  103  15 Mar 89 2220  21.7  177  29 Apr 89  1100  22.3
30  16 Feb 89  1645  23.5  104  16 Mar 89 0725  22.7  178  29 Apr 89  1738  21.8
31  16 Feb 89  2155  22.5  105  16 Mar 89 1645  23.7  179  30 Apr 89  0055  22.5
32     --      0050  22.7  106  17 Mar 89 0118  22.5  180  30 Apr 89  0750  22.7
33  17 Feb 89  0630  22.7  107  17 Mar 89 1035  22.0  181  30 Apr 89  1540  21.5
34  17 Feb 89  1220  23.0  108  17 Mar 89 1830  23.0  182  30 Apr 89  2350  22.0
35  17 Feb 89  1740  23.5  109     --      --   23.0  183  01 May 89  0700  22.0
36  17 Feb 89  2235  22.3  110  18 Mar 89 1045  23.0  184  01 May 89  1358  21.1
37  18 Feb 89  0432  22.5  111  18 Mar 89 1844  24.0  185  01 May 89  2125  22.0
38  18 Feb 89  1205  22.7  112  19 Mar 89 0325  23.3  186  02 May 89  0500  22.0
39  18 Feb 89  1624  22.7  113  19 Mar 89 1127  23.0  187  02 May 89  1131  22.6
40  18 Feb 89   --   22.7  114  19 Mar 89 1950  23.5  188  02 May 89  1818  21.5
41             0430  22.7  115  20 Mar 89  --   23.5  189  03 May 89  0040  21.5
42  19 Feb 89  1500  22.7  116  20 Mar 89 1140  23.5  190  03 May 89  0420  21.5
43  19 Feb 89  2245  22.0  117  20 Mar 89 1720  23.5  191  03 May 89  0800  22.3
44  20 Feb 89  0815  21.8  118     --     0255  22.0  192  03 May 89  1330  22.8
45  20 Feb 89  1240  23.0  119  21 Mar 89 1145  22.0  193  03 May 89  2110  22.3
46  20 Feb 89   --   22.9  120  09 Apr 89 0630  21.9  194  04 May 89  0420  22.0
47  21 Feb 89  0140  22.9  121  09 Apr 89 1105  23.2  195  04 May 89  1034  22.4
48  21 Feb 89  0925  22.8  122  09 Apr 89 1940  23.1  196  04 May 89  1720  21.9
49  21 Feb 89  1455  23.3  123  10 Apr 89 0350  23.3  197  05 May 89  0025  20.9
50  21 Feb 89  1925  23.0  124  10 Apr 89 1158  25.3  198  05 May 89  0705  20.4
51  22 Feb 89   --   23.0  125  10 Apr 89 2125  25.0  199  05 May 89  1415  20.8
52     --      0750  22.8  126  11 Apr 89 0700  24.1  200  05 May 89  2135  21.0
53  22 Feb 89  1620  23.5  127  11 Apr 89 1540  25.5  201  06 May 89  0600  20.7
54  22 Feb 89   --   23.3  128  11 Apr 89  --   22.6  202  06 May 89  1335  22.8
55  23 Feb 89  1035  23.2  129  12 Apr 89 1020  22.9  203  06 May 89  2110  21.0
56  23 Feb 89  1955  24.0  130  12 Apr 89 1850  23.0  204  07 May 89  0410  20.5
57  24 Feb 89  0420  23.2  131     --     0315  20.7  205  07 May 89  1135  22.0
58  24 Feb 89  1320  25.0  132  13 Apr 89 1310  22.9  206  07 May 89  2000  21.5
59  24 Feb 89   --   24.5  133  13 Apr 89 2210  21.9  207  08 May 89  0320  20.2
60  25 Feb 89  0845  24.0  134  14 Apr 89 0930  21.9  208  08 May 89  0900  20.5
61  25 Feb 89  1905  23.4  135  14 Apr 89 1740  22.6  209  08 May 89  1430  21.9
62  26 Feb 89  0425  23.5  136  15 Apr 89 0215  21.5  210  08 May 89  2000  20.7
63  26 Feb 89  1505  24.3  137  15 Apr 89 1030  21.5  211  09 May 89  0150  20.3
64  26 Feb 89  0045  24.7  138  15 Apr 89 1900  21.8  212  09 May 89   --   20.3
65  27 Feb 89  1120  23.0  139  16 Apr 89 0315  21.3  213  09 May 89  1315  20.9
66  27 Feb 89  2025  22.0  140  16 Apr 89 1130  22.8  214  09 May 89  1635  21.0
67  28 Feb 89  0550  22.3  141  16 Apr 89 2010  22.0  215  09 May 89  1945  20.5
68  28 Feb 89  1425  22.3  142  17 Apr 89 0600  21.7  216     --       --   20.3
69  28 Feb 89  2355  23.7  143  17 Apr 89 1435  21.2  217     --       --   20.3
70  01 Mar 89   --   23.7  144  17 Apr 89 0029  21.8  218  10 May 89  0500  20.
71  01 Mar 89  1750  23.7  145  18 Apr 89 1020  21.7  219  10 May 89  0717  20.4
72  02 Mar 89  0130  23.0  146  18 Apr 89 1935  21.9  220  10 May 89  0912  20.8
73  02 Mar 89  0905  23.5  147  19 Apr 89 0320  22.0  221  10 May 89  1039  21.7
74    --       1558  23.0  148  19 Apr 89 1125  22.7        


5e.  CHLOROFLUOROCARBONS MEASURED DURING MOANA WAVE CRUISE 89-3
     (R. Weiss and R. Van Woy)

Concentrations of the dissolved atmospheric chloro- fluorocarbons (CFCs) F-11 
(trichlorofluoromethane) and F-12 (dichlorodifluoromethane) were measured by 
shipboard electron-capture gas chromatography, according to the methods 
described by Bullister and Weiss (1988).  The CFC measurements were carried out 
as a collaboration between the Scripps Institution of Oceanography (R. F. 
Weiss), the University of Miami (R. A. Fine), and the Woods Hole Oceanographic 
Institution (J. L. Bullister).  The Scripps group provided the CFC analytical 
system, and carried out the shorebased data processing and initial quality 
control.  A total of 3001 water samples were measured for CFCs, of which 241 
were replicates.

The CFC analytical system functioned well, although there were CFC contamination 
problems of an unprecedented severity on this expedition. Nearly all of the 
analytical equipment, including the 10-liter Niskin bottles used for the 
majority of the hydrographic work, were sent to Majuro in a shipping container 
which was severely contaminated with CFCs, probably originating from packing 
foams used for other equipment in the container.  The CFC measurement system was 
badly contaminated, although we were able to get the system reasonably clean 
after a few stations (there was also some F-12 contamination from refrigeration 
leaks aboard ship which had to be repaired). However, the most serious problem 
was the contamination of the Niskin sampling bottles, apparently by the 
absorption and subsequent desorption of F-11 and F-12 by the PVC material of the 
bottles themselves.  Despite every effort to clean the bottles and to expose 
them to uncontaminated air aboard ship, the contamination for F-11 persisted for 
nearly all of the expedition, and the contamination for F-12 persisted for most 
of the first leg.

These difficulties caused serious losses for the deeper low-level measurements, 
especially in the beginning of the expedition, and added a tremendous amount of 
work to data processing.  This problem was exacerbated by the practice of 
identifying each Niskin bottle only by its position on the sampling rosette, 
rather than assigning each physical bottle a number regardless of position on 
the rosette, as has been done on many other expeditions.  Bottle positions were 
frequently changed during the expedition, including rotations of position and 
substitutions of spare bottles, in an attempt to find the bottles with the 
lowest blanks and in an effort to assess the blanks of each of the bottles by 
using them to sample CFC-free deep waters at some of the stations.  Fortunately 
the changes were recorded by the CFC analysts, and with this information a map 
of actual bottle number versus rosette position at each station was constructed.

This map was first used in an attempt to construct a blank history for each 
bottle, but it was found that there was insufficient information to determine a 
blank level for each bottle throughout the expedition.  It was possible, 
however, to construct a composite history for each type of bottle used.  There 
were four different bottle types used on this expedition.  The most highly 
contaminated were the 10-liter Niskin provided by the WHOI CTD group which were 
used for the vast majority of the sampling.  Also used were a few 2.4-liter 
custom sampling bottles designed by J. Bullister, and one 10-liter bottle 
designed by B. Thomas of the Scripps Oceanographic Data Facility group.  All of 
these bottles were shipped to the expedition in the same container, and had 
similar problems of varying degree.  For the final leg of the expedition, 
several uncontaminated 10-liter bottles from the University of Miami were air 
freighted to the ship.  These had significantly lower blank levels.

Sample blank histories for each type of bottle were determined by plotting the 
measured CFC concentrations as a function of potential density to identify a 
potential density at which we would safely conclude that there was no longer a 
decreasing CFC trend with increasing potential density.  Waters at greater 
densities were considered to be effectively CFC-free.  We selected waters with 
sigma-theta values of 27.5 or greater, which is consistent with the density 
regime of CFC-free waters found on the 47 N and 24 N trans-Pacific sections in 
1985 (Warner, 1988).  For each type of bottle, the resulting blanks were fitted 
to a simple first-order exponential decay as a function of time for each of the 
three legs:

                                    C = ae -bT

where T is time in days, C is the blank concentration in picomoles/kg, and a and 
b are the fitted constants. The results of this fit are listed below for each of 
the three legs and for each bottle type:


Table 5e-1: 
  F-11 Sample Blank Fit Results

                      Leg 1           Leg 2           Leg 3
Bottle Type         a       b       a       b       a       b
---------------------------------------------------------------
WHOI 10 1        0.0474  0.0387  0.0222  0.0306  0.0094  0.0266
Bullister 2.4 1  0.0252  0.0108  0.0260  0.1121  0.0058  0.0206
Scripps 10 1     0.0474  0.0387        
Miami 10 1       0.0041  0.0350


Table 5e-1: Continued.
  F-12 Sample Blank Fit Results

                      Leg 1           Leg 2           Leg 3
Bottle Type         a       b       a       b       a       b
---------------------------------------------------------------
WHOI 10 1        0.0186  0.0787  0.0050    0.0   0.0050     0.0
Bullister 2.4 1  0.0120  0.0587  0.0040    0.0   0.0040     0.0
Scripps 10 1     0.0186  0.0787        
Miami 10 1       0.0058  0.0592


The precision (+/- one s.d.) of the CFC measurements, as determined from 
replicate analyses, is normally about 1% or about 0.005 pmol/kg, whichever is 
greater, for both CFCs.  However, the uncertainties introduced by the large and 
variable blank values for F-11 during most of the expedition, and for F-12 
during the first leg, increased the error in low-level CFC measurements in the 
early part of the expedition to about 0.05 picomoles/kg for F-11, and to about 
0.02 picomoles/kg for F-12.  The estimated accuracy of the calibrations is about 
1.3% for F-11 and 0.5% for F-12.  The results of individual replicate analyses 
are listed in Table 5e-1, and their mean values are reported in the main bottle 
data listings, annotated with a 161 in the Quality word.  All results are 
reported on the SIO 1986 calibration scale.

It is important to emphasize that the data have been edited to remove serious 
'flyers' and contaminated samples, and to correct gross numerical errors. 
However, all of the data have not yet been subjected to the level of scrutiny 
associated with careful interpretive work.  Readers are therefore requested to 
contact the Scripps CFC group for any revisions in the data which may post-date 
this report, and to draw to our attention any suspected inconsistencies.

The following flags appear in the Quality word in the data listings:

6 = mean of replicate measurements
7 = manual peak integration
8 = irregular digital integration


Final CFC Data Quality Evaluation (DQE) Comments on tps10 (P04).
(David Wisegarver)
Dec 2000
  
Based on the data quality evaluation, this data set meets the relaxed WOCE 
standard (3% or 0.015 pmol/kg overall precision) for CFCs.  Detailed comments on 
the DQE process have been sent to the PI and to the WHPO.

The CFC concentrations have been adjusted to the SIO98 calibration Scale (Prinn 
et al. 2000) so that all of the Pacific WOCE CFC data will be on a common 
calibration scale.

For further information, comments or questions, please, contact the CFC PI for 
this section (J. Bullister, johnb@pmel.noaa.gov, R. Weiss, rfw@gaslab.ucsd.edu, 
R. Fine, rana@rsmas.miami.edu) or David Wisegarver (wise@pmel.noaa.gov).

More information may be available at www.pmel.noaa.gov/cfc.

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

The information below was provided by the CFC PI for this section.
(None available at time of most recent update)


5f.  MEASUREMENT OF HELIUM ISOTOPES AND TRITIUM AT 10 N
     (W.J. Jenkins)

Tritium and helium sampling was done with a maximum station separation of 5 
longitude in the interior, and 3 near the ends of the section.  Tritium samples 
were obtained from the Niskin water samplers in pretreated and argon filled 
flint glass bottles with polyseal caps.  Each bottle was nearly filled and 
returned to the shorebased laboratory for subsequent degassing and Me regrowth 
analysis.  Helium samples on the first two legs were taken in crimped copper 
tubes for shorebased extraction.  For the third leg, helium samples were taken 
in stainless steel cylinders and extracted on board.  Helium extraction and 
tritium degassing techniques are similar to those described elsewhere (Jenkins, 
1981).  Both tritium and helium measurements were (and are being) made on a dual 
collecting, statically operated magnetic sector mass spectrometer.  For mass 
spectrometric procedures, see Lott and Jenkins, 1984.

A total of 655 samples were taken, of which 373 helium analyses and 101 tritium 
analyses have been performed.  All samples have been extracted or degassed, and 
completion of analyses is anticipated within the next six months of the time of 
writing (August, 1991).  Not all the data are yet available, in particular 
tritium has not been analyzed due to the mandatory incubation period, but 
sufficient exists to show some interesting, if qualitative, results. Figure 5f-1 
shows the section of Me (expressed as the helium isotope ratio anomaly in 
permil) along 10 N viewed from the south (west on the left).  Data points are 
indicated on the diagram by vertical crosses, and it should be noted that 
additional data (samples have been extracted but not yet analyzed) will fill in 
the details primarily in the western half of the section (and also at the 
extreme eastern end).  The lower panel is the full depth section, showing the 
deep, primordial Me plume emanating westward from the East Pacific Rise.  It is 
analogous to the corresponding plume observed at 15 S (Lupton and Craig, 1981), 
presumably driven by beta-plume dynamics (Stommel, 1982), and is a signature of 
hydrothermal effluent at the ridge.  A cross section of this plume can be 
clearly seen in the meridional GEOSECS sections at approximately 120 and 180 W 
(GEOSECS, 1987).  Two "bullseyes" appear north and south of the equator at those 
latitudes. The maximum value in this plume, slightly more than 400?, is somewhat 
less than its southern counterpart.  Below the plume, the incoming, Me 
impoverished bottom water can be seen.  Careful analysis of the 10 N data 
indicates the "cleanest" water is entering near the dateline, and apparently 
recirculating southward between 120 and 160 W (Johnson, 1990).

In the shallow water (upper panel of Figure 5f-1) one sees a minimum Me at a 
depth of about 400 m, overlain by a maximum at a depth of 200-300 m.  This 
shallow maximum is produced by the in situ decay of Me, a feature also observed 
in the Atlantic thermocline (e.g. see Jenkins, 1988).  The important question is 
to what extent is this "tritiugenic Me signal" contaminated by primordial Me.  
The presence of the minimum below implies that it should be possible to separate 
the two signals.  Noting that the deep silica and Me distributions look 
qualitatively alike, one is tempted to use silica as an analog of primordial 3He 
(cf. Broecker, 1980).  Although the ultimate sources of these tracers are 
different, it can be argued that the upward mixing or upwelling of primordial Me 
should be accompanied by deep silica.  Figure 5f-2 (upper panel) is a plot of 
ë(3He) vs. silica, highlighting the incoming bottom water (the downward hook on 
the RHS of the graph), the primordial plume (the spike above it), and the 
tritiugenic Me maximum at the low silica end.  The region between the deep water 
plume and the tritiugenic hump is strikingly linear (lower panel in Figure 5f-
2), so that one anticipates using the linear relation as a predictor of the 
component of primordial Me in shallower waters.  A significant fraction of the 
Me variance about the line can be accounted for by an additional correlation 
with AOU (the range of AOU across the section at these density horizons is 50-
100 µm/kg) due to a small component of in situ dissolution.

This refinement is currently being investigated.

Using the silica correction, one can then construct the "corrected" Me section, 
shown vs. å? in the upper panel of Figure 5f-3.  The lower panel is the tritium 
distribution, also in T.U. for the same section.  The lower panel shows the 
tritium data available to date for the same section (analyses are currently 
underway).

The relationship between the two tracers is consistent with observations in the 
North Atlantic thermocline: the tritiugenic Me maximum is below the tritium 
maximum, embedded in the top of the "tritium-cline".  As expected, the corrected 
Me approaches "zero" (atmospheric equilibrium value, near -17T in the deep 
water. This gives us confidence that the primordial Me subtraction scheme is 
correct at least to first order.  One can then attempt to compute tritium-helium 
ages, shown in Figure 5f-4 (upper panel), which can be combined with AOU 
measurements to obtain oxygen utilization rates (lower panel of Figure 5f-4).  
Figure 5f-4 Tritium-3He age in years (upper panel) and Oxygen Utilization Rates 
(in µm/kg/y, lower panel) for the 10 N section.  The reader should be cautioned 
that the data are preliminary in addition to being rather incomplete, and that 
the correction scheme, although promising, requires refinement.  Nonetheless, 
the features seen in Figures 5f-3 and 5f-4 are interesting.  The tritium maximum 
centered on å? = 24-25 lies at the  base of the salinity maximum associated with 
the penetration of subtropical common water into the tropics.  The tritium-3He 
age associated with this feature clocks the time scale of this circulation, i.e. 
the time lapse since this water was at the sea surface in the subtropics, as 
approximately 8-10 years.  Fine et al. (1987) estimated an upper limit of 14 
years to this exchange time scale, and the higher precision obtained by tritium-
3He dating refines their estimate.  It is notable that although the salinity and 
tritium extrema associated with this feature are not seen east of about 160 W, 
the tritium-3He age does not increase on this isopycnal beyond the watermass's 
eastward extent.  The data are unfortunately sparse at present, awaiting the 
completion of analyses.  A final note regarding interpretation of the tritium-
3He age is a reminder that ages much beyond 15-20 years must be interpreted 
within the framework of a model, since these ages will be strongly affected by 
mixing (see Jenkins, 1987, 1988), and that even for the shorter time-frames, 
some caution should be exercised. 

The oxygen utilization rate pattern is interesting (Figure 5f-4, lower panel).  
The values are low near the surface due to competition of photosynthesis vs. 
oxidation, reach maximum below the euphotic zone, and then decrease with depth. 
Intensity of consumption is greater on the eastern boundary, consistent with 
higher productivity there.  Further, the scale height associated with the OUR 
decrease with depth is shorter on the eastern end, although on the whole it is 
comparable to that observed in the Atlantic (e.g., cf. Jenkins, 1987).  A crude 
integration of the section OURs yields an estimated new production of order 2 
mole(C)m-2y-1 with a slightly higher value ? 2.5 mole(C)m-2y-1) on the eastern 
side.  The difference between the oxygen deficient zone and the interior is not 
greater due to the compensatory change in scale height.  One observation is that 
although the region of intense oxygen deficiency is characterized by higher 
productivity; it is in fact largely due to poor ventilation.

The estimates of new production obtained here are significantly larger than 
those made by "conventional" estimates.  Chavez and Barber (1987), for example, 
estimate rates of order 0.5 to 1.0 mole(C)m-2y-1 in the equatorial regions, with 
values approaching 2 to 2.5 mole(C)m-2y-1 off the coast of Peru. Overall, the 
productivity values computed for this section are similar to, but less than, 
those observed in the Atlantic.  Evidence is beginning to accumulate that the 
Pacific is biologically less productive (in the sense of new production) than 
the Atlantic.

Finally, I show the tritium section (Figure 5f-5, upper panel), but this time 
vs. depth with a contour interval of 0.025 TU, a value still more than 5 times 
detection limit.  Here one sees the equatorward penetration of intermediate 
waters at a depth of about 800 m on the extreme western side of the section. An 
extremely interesting diagnostic of source regions for this water is the 
tritium-freon ratio: due to the inherent hemispheric asymmetry in the 
distribution of tritium, the tritium-freon ratio of southern waters is much 
lower than northern waters.  This analysis will be done in the future.  A 
section of tritiµm/freon ratio should prove useful in assessing the relative 
components of southern and northern waters.

FIGURE CAPTIONS SECTION 5f
 
Figure 5f-1:	
  Me sections along 10 N in the Pacific (west to the left) expressed in terms of 
  helium isotope ratio anomaly in permil.  Vertical crosses indicate data 
  points.  Lower panel is the full depth section, upper panel is the upper 1000 
  m only.

Figure 5f-2:
  Me (in permil) vs. silica (u/Kg) correlations for 10 N in the Pacific.

Figure 5f-3:
  Me section expressed in T.U. (upper panel) corrected for primordial Me using 
  silica.  The lower panel is the tritium distribution, also in T.U. for the 
  same section.

Figure 5f-4:
  Tritium-3He age in years (upper panel) and Oxygen Utilization Rates (in 
  µm/kg/y, lower panel) for the 10 N section.

Figure 5f-5:
  Tritium for the 10 N section.  Note the contour intervals change from 0.025 to 
  0.10 to 0.50 TU. 


6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Support for the trans-Pacific hydrographic section across 10 N was provided by 
the National Science Foundation (NSF).  Specifically, NSF Grant OCE-8716910 to 
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (Drs. Harry Bryden and John Toole, 
principal investigators) supported the CTD data acquisition and processing, the 
analysis of water samples for salinity and oxygen, and the acquisition of the 
underway acoustic Doppler current profiling (ADCP) data.  Dr. Eric Firing and 
Frank Bahr at the University of Hawaii were instrumental in calibrating and 
processing the ADCP measurements into final form.  The analysis of the water 
samples for nutrient concentrations was directed by Prof. Louis Gordon and Joe 
Jennings of Oregon State University with support from NSF Grant OCE-8812553.  
Analysis of the water samples for chlorofluorocarbons was undertaken by a 
consortium of Drs. Ray Weiss at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Rana Fine 
at the University of Miami and John Bullister at Woods Hole Oceanographic 
Institution with support primarily from NSF Grant OCE-8510842.  Finally, 
analysis of the water samples for tritium and helium was directed by Dr. William 
Jenkins of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution under NSF Grant OCE-8812576.
We thank the officers and crew of the R/V Moana Wave for a most enjoyable three-
month voyage.  Captain William Leonard on the first two legs and Captain Robert 
Hayes on the long third leg were unflaggingly optimistic that we would finish 
this longest of hydrographic sections with no sacrifice to our sampling plan.  
Dave Gravatt put the CTD and Rosette water sampling system into the water and 
recovered it at the end of each and every station.  Paul Ramos and Guy Webster 
kept the entire shipboard party content with a constant supply of freshly 
prepared, freshly caught fish and a wide variety of junk food to go with it. 
Finally, the outstanding communications system aboard R/V Moana Wave allowed the 
scientific party to keep in close contact with their colleagues around the world 
through twice daily e-mail messages.



7. REFERENCES

Alpkem Corporation. 1987. Operator's Manual, RFA?-300, Preliminary Version. 
  Clackamas, Oregon. Unnumbered, loose leaf pages.

Atlas, E.L., S.W. Hager, L.I. Gordon and P.K. Park. 1971.  A Practical Manual 
  for Use of the Technicon(tm) AutoAnalyzer(tm) in Seawater Nutrient Analyses; 
  Revised.

Technical Report 215, Reference 71-22.  Oregon State University, Department of 
  Oceanography. 49 pp.

Bahr, F., E. Firing and J. Songnian. 1989. Acoustic Doppler Current Profiling in 
  the Western Pacific during the US-PRC TOGA Cruises 2, 3, and 4.  JIMAR Report 
  89-0175. Univ. of Hawaii. 199 pp.

Broecker, W.S. 1980.  The distribution of 3He anomalies in the deep Atlantic. 
  Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 49, 513-519.

Brown, N.L. and G.K. Morrison. 1978. W.H.O.I./Brown Conductivity, Temperature, 
  and Depth Microprofiler. WHOI Technical Report No. 78-23.

Bryden, H. L. 1973.  New polynomials for thermal expansion, adiabatic 
  temperature gradient and potential temperature of sea water. Deep-Sea Res., 
  20, 401-408.

Bullister, J.L. and R.F. Weiss. 1988.  Determination of CC13F and CC12F2 in 
  seawater and air.  Deep-Sea Res., 35, 839-853.

Carter, D.J.T. 1980. Echo-sounding correction tables. Hydrographic Dept., 
  Ministry of Defence, Taunton, Somerset, U.K. 150 pp.

Chavez, F.P. and R.T. Barber. 1987.  An estimate of new production in the 
  equatorial Pacific. Deep-Sea Res., 34, 1229-1243.

Cook, M., L. Magnum, R. Millard, G. LaMontagne, S. Pu, J. Toole, Z. Wang, K. 
  Wang, and L. Zhao. 1990.  Hydrographic Observations from the US/PRC 
  Cooperative Program in the Western Equatorial Pacific Ocean: Cruises 1-4. WHOI 
  Technical Report No. 90-07, 379 pp.

Cook, M.F., J.M. Toole and G.P. Knapp. 1991.  A Trans-Indian Hydrographic 
  Section at Latitude 32 S: Data Report of RRS Charles Darwin Cruise #29. WHOI 
  Technical Report in preparation.

Fine, R.A., W.H. Peterson, and H.G. Ostlund. 1987.  The penetration of tritium 
  into the tropical Pacific. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 17, 553-564.

Fofonoff, N.P. 1962.  Physical properties of sea water. The Sea, Vol. I, Editor 
  M.N. Hill, Interscience Publishers, New York, pp. 3- 30.

Fofonoff, N.P. 1985. Physical properties of seawater:  A new salinity scale and 
  equation of state for seawater. J. Geophys. Res., 90, 3332-3342.

Fofonoff, N.P., S.P. Hayes, and R.C. Millard Jr. 1974. WHOI/Brown CTD 
  microprofiler: methods of calibration and data handling. WHOI Technical Report 
  No. 74-89, 64 pp.

Fofonoff, N.P. and R.C. Millard, Jr. 1983.  Algorithms for computation of 
  fundamental properties of seawater. UNESCO Technical Papers in Marine Science, 
  44. 53 pp.

GEOSECS, 1987. GEOSECS Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Ocean expeditions Atlas, 
  Vol. 7: Shorebased Data and Graphics (H.G. Ostlund, H. Craig, W.S. Broecker 
  and D. Spencer, Ed). National Science Foundation IDOE

Jenkins, W.J. 1981.  Mass Spectrometric measurement of tritium and helium-3. 
  IAEA Tech Doc-246, 179-190.

Jenkins, W.J. 1987.  3H and Me in the Beta Triangle: Observations of gyre 
  ventilation and oxygen utilization rates. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 17, 763-783.

Jenkins, W.J. 1988.  The use of anthropogenic tritium and Me to study 
  subtropical gyre ventilation and circulation. Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), 325, 
  43-61.

Jenkins, W.J., D.E. Lott, M.W. Pratt, and R.D. Boudreau. 1983.  Anthropogenic 
  tritium in bottom water in the South Atlantic. Nature, 305, 45-46.

Johnson, G.C. 1990.  Near Equatorial deep circulation in the Indian and Pacific 
  Oceans. Ph.D Thesis.  MIT/WHOI Joint Program in Oceanography and Oceanographic 
  Engineering. WHOI Technical Report 90-50. 157 pp.

Knapp, G.P., M.C. Stalcup and R.J. Stanley. 1989.  Dissolved oxygen measurements 
  in seawater at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. WHOI Technical Report 
  No. 89-23. 13 pp.

Lott, D.E. and W.J. Jenkins. 1984.  An automated cryogenic charcoal trap system 
  for helium isotope mass spectrometry. Rev. Sci. Inst., 55, 1982-1988.

Lupton, J.E. and H. Craig. 1981.  A major Me source at 15 S on the East Pacific 
  Rise. Science, 214, 13-18.

Mantyla, A. W. 1987.  Standard Seawater Comparisons updated. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 
  17, 543-548.

Millard, R.C., Jr. 1982. CTD calibration and data processing techniques using 
  the 1978 Practical Salinity Scale. Proc.  International STD Conf. and 
  Workshop, Mar. Tech. Soc., 19 pp.

Millard, R.C. and N. Galbraith. 1982. WHOI processed CTD data organization. WHOI 
  Technical Report No. 82-37. 36 pp.

Millard, R.C., W.B. Owens, and N.P. Fofonoff. 1990.  On the calculation of the 
  Brunt-Vaisala frequency. Deep-Sea Res., 37, 167-181.

Owens, W.B., and R.C. Millard, Jr. 1985.  A new algorithm for CTD oxygen 
  calibration. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 15, 621-631.

Stommel, H. 1982.  Is the South Pacific Me plume dynamically active? Earth 
  Planet. Sci. Lett., 61, 63-67.

Warner, M.J. 1988. Chlorofluoromethanes F-11 and F-12:  Their solubilities in 
  water and studies of their distributions in the South Atlantic and North 
  Pacific Oceans. Ph.D. Dissertation.  University of California at San Diego. 
  124 pp.

Weiss, R.F. 1970.  The solubility of nitrogen, oxygen and argon in water and 
  seawater. Deep-Sea Res., 17, 721-735.

Weiss, R.F. 1981.  Oxygen solubility in seawater.  Unesco Technical Papers in 
  Marine Science No. 36.




APPENDIX A

List of Scientific Participants, their responsibility during the cruise and 
Institutional affiliation.

MW 89-3 (Leg 1)  Palau to Majuro, Feb. 6 - Mar. 9, 1989
Name                    Responsibility     Affiliation
------------------------------------------------------------
John Toole              Chief Scientist    WHOI
Esther Brady            Scientist          WHOI
Jeffrey Kinder          CTD Hardware       WHOI
Carol MacMurray         CTD Software       WHOI
Margaret Francis        CTD Software       WHOI
Marvel Stalcup          Salts/Oxygens      WHOI
John Bullister          CFCs               WHOI
Christopher Johnston    CFCs               WHOI
Scot Birdwhistell       Tritiµm/Helium     WHOI
Joseph Jennings         Nutrients          OSU
Stanley Moore           Nutrients          OSU
Donald Cook             Watch Stander      WHOI
Kurt Polzin             Watch Stander      WHOI

MW 89-4 (Leg 2)  Majuro to Hawaii, March 9-24, 1989
------------------------------------------------------------
Esther Brady            Chief Scientist    WHOI
Harry Bryden            Scientist          WHOI
Jeffrey Kinder          CTD Hardware       WHOI
Carol MacMurray         CTD Software       WHOI
Robert Stanley          Salts/Oxygens      WHOI
Christopher Johnston    CFCs               WHOI
Scot Birdwhistell       Tritiµm/Helium     WHOI
Stanley Moore           Nutrients          OSU
Nurit Cress             Nutrients          OSU
Ruth Gorski             Watch Stander      WHOI
Gregory Johnson         Watch Stander      WHOI
Rebecca Schudlich       Watch Stander      WHOI
David Wellwood          Watch Stander      WHOI

MW 89-6 (Leg 3)  Hawaii to Costa Rica, Apr. 2 - May 10, 1989
------------------------------------------------------------
Harry Bryden            Chief Scientist    WHOI
Esther Brady            Scientist          WHOI
Jeffrey Kinder          CTD Hardware       WHOI
Carol MacMurray         CTD Software       WHOI
George Knapp            Salts/Oxygens      WHOI
Joseph Jennings         Nutrients          OSU
James Krest             Nutrients          OSU
Kathy Tedesco           CFCs               SIO
Kevin Sullivan          CFCs               RSMAS/UM
William Jenkins         Tritiµm/Helium     WHOI
Carol Alessi            Watch Stander      WHOI
Barbara Gaffron         Watch Stander      WHOI
Sophie Wacongne         Watch Stander      ORSTOM, Brest
Theresa Turner          Watch Stander      WHOI
Timothy Stockdale       Watch Stander      Oxford Univ.



APPENDIX B

Plate 1
  (upper): The location of each of the CTD stations occupied during R/V Moana 
  Wave cruise #89-3, -4, -6 is shown by the dots along 10 N.  The depth to the 
  bottom, measured during the cruise, is shown in each of the sections.

Plate 1
  (lower): The distribution of potential density anomaly (kg/m3) is shown in the 
  upper 1000 m relative to 0 db.  Below 1000 m the potential density is relative 
  to 4000 db.

Plate 2
  (upper):  The distribution of CTD potential temperature ( C) measured along 
  the 10 N section.

Plate 2
  (lower):  The distribution of CTD salinity measured along the 10 N section.

Plate 3
  (upper):  The distribution of CTD oxygen (ml/1) measured along the 10 N 
  section.

Plate 3
  (lower):  The distribution of water sample silica (µmol/1) measured along the 
  10 N section.

Plate 4
  (upper):  The distribution of water sample nitrate (µmol/1) measured along the 
  10 N section.

Plate 4
  (lower):  The distribution of water sample phosphate (µmol/1) measured along 
  the 10 N section.



                               APPENDIX C

Station listings for the 10 N transpacific hydrographic section are presented 
following this description of the fields in each station listing.  The Fortran 
algorithms employed in the generation of these listings are documented in UNESCO 
Tech.  Report 44 "Algorithms for computation of fundamental properties of 
seawater" by N. P. Fofonoff and R. C. Millard (1983).

The header of each station listing contains the time and position at the bottom 
of the cast.  Positions are determined from satellite navigation or by dead 
reckoning from the last satellite fix.  The speed of sound is an average value 
computed over the full station depth.  The water depth is from an echo sounder, 
corrected for the speed of sound (Carter, 1980).

The first block of data is calibrated CTD data and calculated variables.  
Starting at the left, the station variables are categorized in four groups as 
follows.  The observed variables: temperature, salinity, and oxygen are 
vertically filtered values at the pressure level indicated.  The standard Woods 
Hole Oceanographic Institution 2 dbar pressure-averaged CTD data are centered on 
odd pressure intervals (1,3,5,7,...) while the adopted pressure listing levels 
are at even pressure values.  The 2 dbar temperature, salinity, and oxygen data 
were smoothed with a binomial filter and then linearly interpolated as required 
to the standard levels.  The potential temperature, potential density anomaly, 
and potential density anomaly referenced to 2000 and 4000 dbars that follow in 
the listings were computed using the Fortran algorithms of UNESCO Tech. Report 
44.  The dynamic height and potential energy are integral quantities from the 
surface to the pressure interval indicated.  These assume that the value of the 
specific volume anomaly of the first level of the 2 dbar CTD data profile can be 
extrapolated to the sea surface.  A trapezoidal integration method was employed.  
The next quantities: potential temperature and salinity gradients, potential 
vorticity, and Brunt-Vaisala frequency, involve the calculation of vertical 
gradients.  Gradient quantities were estimated from a centered linear least 
squares fit calculated over half of the neighboring listing intervals.  The 
calculated depth involves a dynamic height correction and a latitude dependent 
gravity correction.

The second block of data consists of both observed and calculated variables at 
actual bottle levels: Botl. No. is the position on the rosette of the Niskin 
bottle. Next listed are CTD pressure and temperature, calculated potential 
temperature, potential density anomaly, and potential density anomaly referenced 
to 2000 and 4000 dbars and CTD salinity (all, as described above). Listed next 
are the measured bottle salinity, oxygen, silica, phosphate, nitrate, nitrite, 
CFC-11, CFC-12, and calculated depth.  Finally, a quality word is included, 
associated with the listed variables that are marked with a double asterisk.


Appendix C: Continued.

The columns of the station listing (first block) are:

PRES      DBAR      Pressure (P) level in decibars.

TMP       C         Temperature (T) in degrees Celsius calibrated
                    on the 1968 International Temperature scale
                    (IPTS 1968).

SALT                Salinity (S) computed from conductivity (C),
                    temperature and pressure measured by the CTD
                    sensor according to the 1978 practical salinity
                    scale. (Fofonoff and Millard, 1983).
                    C(35,15,O) = 42.914 mmho/cm.

OXYG      ML/L      Oxygen in milliliters per liter measured by
                    the CTD sensor.  The partial pressure of oxygen
                    is computed from the polarographic electrode
                    measurements using an algorithm described by Owens and 
                    Millard (1985).

PTMP      C         Potential temperature in degrees Celsius
                    computed by integrating the adiabatic lapse
                    rate after Bryden (1973) (see Fofonoff and
                    Millard, 1983).  The reference level, Pr, for
                    the calculation is 0.0 decibars. (S,T,P,Pr).

SIG-TH    kg/m3     Potential density anomaly in kilograms/m3.
                    Obtained by computing the density anomaly
                    at 0 pressure replacing the in situ tempera-
                    ture with potential temperature referenced
                    to 0 dbars.

SIG-2     kg/m3     Potential density anomaly referenced to
                    2000 dbars in kilograms/m3.  Obtained by
                    computing the density anomaly at 2000 dbars
                    replacing the in situ temperature with
                    potential temperature referenced to 2000 dbars.

SIG-4     kg/m3     Potential density anomaly referenced to
                    4000 dbars in killograms/m3.  Obtained by
                    computing the density anomaly at 4000 dbars
                    replacing the in situ temperature with
                    potential temperature referenced to 4000 dbars.

DYN-HT    Dyn m     Dynamic height in units of dynamic meters
                    (10 Joules/kg) is the integral with pressure of
                    specific volume anomaly (Fofonoff, 1962).

PE        10-5J     Potential energy anomaly in 10-5 Joules/m2 is
          m2        the integral with pressure of the specific
                    volume anomaly multiplied by pressure
                    (Fofonoff, 1962) .

GRD-PT    10-3C     Potential temperature gradient in units of
          DB        millidegrees Celsius per decibar.  Estimated
                    from the least squares temperature gradient
                    over half the surrounding pressure intervals
                    minus the center pressure adiabatic lapse rate.

GRD-S     10-3      Salinity gradient per decibar.  Estimated
          DB        from the least squares salinity gradient over
                    half the surrounding pressure intervals.

POT-V     10-12     Planetary potential vorticity times 10-12 per
          (M S)     meter-second.

B-V       CPH       Brunt-Vaisala frequency in cycles per hour.
                    This is the natural frequency of oscillation of
                    a water parcel when vertically displaced from
                    a rest position assuming no exchanges of heat
                    or salt with surroundings.  This calculation uses the 
                    adibatic leveling of steric anomaly (Fofonoff, 1985; 
                    Millard, Owens, and Fofonoff,1990).

DEPTH     m         The depth of the pressure interval including
                    the local gravity and dynamic height (see
                    DYN-HT definition) corrections (Fofonoff and
                    Millard, 1983).

The columns of the station listing (second block) are:

BOTL NO   Bottle    number represents the firing position
                    of the Niskin bottle on the rosette.

PRES      DBAR      Pressure (P) level in decibars.

CTDTMP    C         Temperature (T) in degrees Celsius calibrated
                    on the 1968 International Temperature scale
                    (IPTS 1968)

THETA     C         Potential temperature in degrees Celsius
                    computed by integrating the adiabatic lapse
                    rate after Bryden (1973) (see Fofonoff and
                    Millard, 1983).  The reference level, Pr, for
                    the calculation is 0.0 decibars.

SIG-TH    kg/m3     Potential density anomaly in kilograms/m3.
                    Obtained by computing the density anomaly
                    at 0 pressure replacing the in situ tempera-
                    ture with potential temperature referenced
                    to 0 dbars.

SIG-2     kg/m3     Potential density anomaly referenced to
                    2000 dbars in kilograms/m3.  Obtained by
                    computing the density anomaly at 2000 dbars
                    replacing the in situ temperature with
                    potential temperature referenced to 2000 dbars.

SIG-4     kg/m3     Potential density anomaly referenced to
                    4000 dbars in kilograms/m3.  Obtained by
                    computing the density anomaly at 4000 dbars
                    replacing the in situ temperature with
                    potential temperature referenced to 4000 dbars.

CTDSAL              Salinity (S) computed from conductivity (C),
                    temperature and pressure measured by the CTD
                    sensor according to the 1978 practical salinity
                    scale (Fofonoff and Millard, 1983).
                    C(35,15,O) = 42.914 mmho/cm.

SALNTY              Water sample salinities measured with a
                    Guildline Autosal 8400A, using PSS-78 con-version 
                    tables.  Values are corrected by +.0008, for SSW Batch 
                    P-97 offset (Mantyla, 1987).

OXYGEN    ml/l*     Water sample dissolved oxygen measurements in
                    milliliters per liter as described by Knapp, et
                    al. (1989).

SILCAT    µm/l*     Water sample silicate measurements in micro-
                    moles per liter as described in the section on
                    nutrients.

PHSPHT    µm/l*     Water sample phosphate measurements in micro-
                    moles per liter as described in the section on
                    nutrients.

NITRAT    µm/l*     Water sample nitrate measurements in micro-
                    moles per liter as described in the section on
                    nutrients.

Appendix C: Continued.

NITRIT    µm/l*     Water sample nitrite measurements in micro-
                    moles per liter as described in the section on
                    nutrients.

CFC-11    pM/kg     Water sample chlorofluorcarbon (Freon-11)
                    measurements made in pico-moles per kilogram
                    as described in the section on CFCs.

CFC-12    pM/kg     Water sample chlorofluorcarbon (Freon-12)
                    measurements made in pico-moles per kilogram
                    as described in the section on CFCs.

DEPTH     m         The depth of the pressure interval including
                    the local gravity and dynamic height (see
                    DYN-HT definition) corrections (Fofonoff and
                    Millard, 1983).

QUALT1              A series of alphanumeric characters, one for
                    each variable marked with a double asterisk,
                    to indicate the quality of each measurement.


Quality Indicators

1 = Sample for this measurement was drawn but results of analysis not yet 
    received.
2 = Acceptable measurement.
3 = Questionable measurement.
4 = Bad measurement.
5 = Not Reported.
6 = Mean of replicate measurements.
7 = Manual chromatographic peak integration.
8 = Irregular digital chromatographic peak integration.
9 = Sample not drawn for this measurement at this bottle.
A,B,C.....Investigator specific descriptors.

*  To convert ml/l of dissolved oxygen to µm/kg, multiply oxygen ml/l by 44.660 
   (1000/molar volume of oxygen at STP (Weiss, 1981) and divide the result by 
   the density of the sea water at the time the sample was pickled.  If the 
   temperature at this time is not known, the potential temperature may be used 
   to calculate the density.  To convert nutrients in µm/1 to µm/kg divide by 
   the density of the seawater sample at the time the sample is analyzed.




                            DATA PROCESSING NOTES

Date      Contact     Data Type    Data Status Summary
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5/28/92   Joyce       NITRAT       Values appear to be high
  letter sent to A. Mantyla:  As I was preparing the 15 and P4 pre-WOCE data to 
  send you, I noticed problems with the nitrate values, with a sharp 9 µmole/I 
  increase in values at all depths after station 25. Upon further examination, 
  it appears that when separating nitrate and nitrite from the data, the 
  nitrite values were subtracted from the total (N03+NO2) even when there were 
  no nitrite values (assigned -9 in the data). Subtracting a -9 would increase 
  nitrate values by the right amount. The data appearing in the hard cover 
  report suffer from this problem; the present file does not. I do not know why 
  there were no nitrites after station 25; the nutrient report by Gordon and 
  Jennings doesn't say anything about problems. I will ask Bryden when he 
  returns from P6 later this week. Perhaps you know something? I have also 
  included a floppy disk with the second year of HOTS data; I expect the third 
  year sometime later this month. Of course, I don't expect you to start right 
  in with the DQE work, especially since we haven't sent any money yet!
  					
6/17/92   Bryden      NITRAT       Some values are high; Appears to be a 
  computer glich:  Regarding your recent query about high nitrate values on 
  some stations on the 10°N transpacific hydrographic section, I have looked 
  into the issues and conclude that some of the nitrate values printed in the 
  10°N data report are high by 9 µmole/l. As you pointed out in your 28 May 
  letter to Arnold Mantyla these erroneously high values are due to a glich in 
  the computer software that generated the data report tables. In particular, 
  when there is no printed nitrite value, the software subtracted a -9 (used 
  internally to indicate no nitrite reading) from the total nitrate + nitrite 
  value to derive a nitrate value 9 µmole/l higher than the nitrate + nitrite 
  value.
  
  I believe that the printed nitrate values are 9 µmole/l too high for the 
  following stations in the 10°N data report:
  
  9	Bottle 1
  26-39
  41-42
  43	Bottle 7
  44-57
  71
  72	Bottles 5-10
  73-74
  76
  97	Bottle 10
  134-135
  163
  212	Bottles 21-24
  213
  
  Please note that the problem is not continuous after station 25 as your 
  letter to Mantyla, suggested. The problem stations and bottles axe easy to 
  spot because they consist of all bottles for which nitrate concentration is 
  printed but no nitrite concentration is printed.
  
  Because there is essentially no nitrite concentration below 125 m depth for 
  nearly all of the 10°N section, reasonable nitrate values can be derived for 
  most of these problem stations by subtracting 9 µmole/I from the printed 
  nitrate values, that is effectively to equate nitrite + nitrate concentration 
  with nitrate concentration. More careful consideration is needed only in the 
  upper 125 m over the entire section and between 250 m and 450 m depths on 
  stations 212-213 where there may indeed be some nitrite present. Otherwise, I 
  would conclude that nitrate concentrations for these problem stations could 
  be accurately derived from the values printed in the data report.
  
  Because the nutrient analysis directly measures two primary quantities, 
  nitrate + nitrite concentration and nitrite concentration, and then derives 
  nitrate concentration by taking the difference between the primary 
  quantities, it may be sensible to archive and present the primary quantities 
  in WHP data reports. The less appealing alternative seems to be that when 
  there is no nitrite measurement the nitrate concentration cannot be 
  presented, even though there is a valid measurement of nitrate + nitrite 
  concentration that almost always represents accurately the nitrate 
  concentration.
  
  Thank you for pointing out the problem with the nitrate concentrations 
  printed in the data report.
  					
8/15/97	Uribe     DOC          Submitted        See Note:
  2000.12.11 KJU
  File contained here is a CRUISE SUMMARY and NOT sumfile. Documentation is 
  online.
  
  2000.10.11 KJU
  Files were found in incoming directory under whp_reports. This directory was 
  zipped, files were separated and placed under proper cruise. All of them are 
  sum files.
  Received 1997 August 15th.
  					
3/26/99   Ross        SUM          Data Update; see note:
  This is Andy Ross speaking.... I'm working with Lou Gordon on the GODS
  Pacific project.  No doubt you'll be hearing more from me.
  
  In regard to the "P10 - Nitrate" note Lou sent to you the other day - the
  data listed under the "NITRATE" column is in fact the total of "Nitrate AND
  Nitrite" or N+N.  You are correct in stating that to obtain NITRATE only,
  you must subtract out the corresponding NITRITE value.   Again, the units of
  µmol/Kg are correct for all nutrients.
  
  To clarify, I obtained the P10 data (p10hy.txt) from the WOCE website that
  your PACIFIC data listing website linked -
  http://whpo.ucsd.edu/data/onetime/pacific/p10/index.htm.
  
  After downloading  and checking cruise TPS10 (WOCE p04ehy.txt, p04chy.txt,
  p04why.txt) from the WOCE website, I've determined the same situation to be
  true.  The data listed under the "NITRATE" column is actually NITRATE and
  NITRITE combined.  The units of µmol/Kg are correct for all the nutrients in
  the WOCE files.
  					
4/5/99    Diggs       CTD          Website Updated; corrected data now OnLine
  					
4/19/00   Bartolacci  DELC14       Website Updated
  P4C/E/W  Changed to indicate no samples collected.
  					
5/23/00   Key         BTL/SUM      Update Needed	See note:
  1. in the sum file(s):  No entry for station 8 or 215 (data exists in hyd 
     files) Entry for station 77 out of order (data in hyd file in correct 
     order)
  2. in the sum AND hyd files:  No entry for stations 1,2,84 or 216. Station 
     and data entries existed for these in older versions of the files (32MW893-
     i.yyy)
  
  Data records for 119 bottles now "missing".
  					
7/24/00   Salameh     CFCs         Update Needed; See note:  There are two 
  problems with the TPS10 CFC data.  The first has to do with contaminated 
  bottles.  Nearly all of the analytical equipment, including the WHOI 10-liter 
  Niskin bottles used for the majority of the hydrographic work, were sent to 
  Majuro in a shipping container which was severely contaminated with CFCs, 
  probably originating from packing foams used for other equipment in the 
  container.
  
  There were 4 types of bottles used during this cruise, each with a different 
  initial CFC blank, and each cleaning up at a different (about exponential) 
  rate.  Ricky and I did our best to fit the blanks for each bottle type to an 
  exponential as a function of time.  To give you some idea, the initial blanks 
  (in pmol/kg) at the start of each leg for each bottle type were:
  
  Leg1                          CFC-11    CFC-12
  
  10  liter WHOI Niskin          0.047     0.019 
  2.4 liter Niskin               0.025     0.012 
  10  liter SIO Barron           0.047     0.019 
    
  Leg2                          CFC-11    CFC-12
  
  10  liter WHOI Niskin          0.022     0.005 
  2.4 liter Niskin               0.026     0.004 
  
  Leg3                          CFC-11    CFC-12
  
  10  liter WHOI Niskin          0.009     0.005 
  2.4 liter Niskin               0.006     0.004 
  10  liter Miami Niskin         0.004     0.006 
    
  When determining these blanks we also had the problem that CFC-free water was 
  not sampled for all bottle types at all times, so some guess work was 
  involved.  As I write this, Ray reminds me that we have already written a 
  detailed report on this.  I have attached this as PostScript file "text.ps" 
  if you would like all the details.
  
  The second problem I discovered recently when comparing the WHPO database 
  with our CFC database, as part of the WOCE synthesis.  For TPS10 leg3, I 
  found a few values where the two databases do not match, and also quite a few 
  samples where the WHPO file shows CFC values of 0.0 where we report no value.  
  These were clearly merging problems at the old WHPO at WHOI.  I have attached 
  the list of mis-matches and a correct version of the tps10 leg3 CFC data.  I 
  will send the corrected data to the WHPO next week (see below).
  
  Please note that all the SIO TPS data (TPS10, 24 and 47) are still on the SIO 
  1986 standard scale.  All the other SIO data at the WHPO are on the SIO 1993 
  standard scale.  Early next week I will update the WHPO database with SIO 
  1993 values for the TPS cruises (the conversion from SIO 1986 to SIO 1993 
  requires dividing CFC-12 values by 0.9874 and CFC-11 values by 1.0251).  If 
  you would like, I will email you a copy of these data when I send them to the 
  WHPO.
  					
10/23/00  Toole       DOC          Update Needed
  complete e. version requested by J. Swift.  Paper version on hand at WHPO
  					
11/30/00  Toole       DOC          As far as I know, there are  no electronic 
  versions of any figures from this report.
  					
12/8/00   Huynh       DOC          Website Updated; pdf, txt versions online
					
5/8/01    Talley      NITRIT       Update Needed; bad quality 1 flags
  The quality flags for nitrite (NITRIT) on station 40 must all be set to 
  "bad" - I see that bad flags on adjacent stations are "5"'s.
  
  If you want, I can plot the section for you with and without these data - 
  they are clearly impossible (uniformly 0.13 throughout most of water column - 
  there isn't any way anywhere in the world that you would find such uniformity 
  to such great depth).
  
  Should I just go ahead and do this and send you the edited file with a date 
  stamp on it?
  					
5/10/01   Diggs       NITRIT       Update Needed      Lynne's comments will be 
  QUALT2 flags.  The P04 section needs more work than you have time for, but 
  we did want you to give your flags as QUALT2 (rather than QUALT1) flags.  I 
  guess we can work out the details on this soon.
  					
6/22/01   Uribe       CTD/BTL      Website Updated; CSV File Added
  CTD and Bottle files in exchange format have been put online.
  					
6/29/01   Wisegarver  CFCs         DQE Complete; precision outside original 
  WOCE standards; meets "relaxed" stnds	The precision of the CFC-11 and 
  CFC-12 measurements fell outside of the original WOCE standards of 1% or 
  0.005 pmol/kg with an estimated precision of 1.3% or 0.006 for CFC-11 and an 
  estimated precision of 1.9% or 0.002 pmol/kg for CFC-12.  Estimates of 
  precision were based on the median value of percent deviation for mean 
  concentrations > 0.5 pmol/kg and median standard deviation for mean 
  concentrations less than or equal to 0.5 pmol/kg.
  
  Due to bottle contamination experienced during the initial phase of the 
  project, the calculated deep CFC concentrations were variable, in stpite of 
  efforts to correct for the problem.  The standard deviation of samples in the 
  deep, presumable zero CFC concentration water was 0.01 for CFC-11 and 0.007 
  for CFC-12 during leg 1, but was reduced to 0.04 and 0.003 for CFC-11 and 
  CFC-12 respectively by leg 3.  This lever of scatter can be seen throughout 
  the water column.
  
  Based on the precision of the replicate samples and the scatter due to bottle 
  contamination, this data set does not meet the original WOCE quality 
  standards [1.3% or 0.006 for CFC-11 and 1.9% or 0.002 pmol/kg for CFC-12], 
  but does fall within the relaxed standards of 3% or 0.015 pmol/kg.
					
8/21/01   Bartolacci  CFCs         Submitted; CFCs need to be merged into BTL 
  file.  I have placed the new file containing updated CFC values for ALL P04 
  cruises in the subdirectory called  original/20010709_CFC_WISEGARVER_P04 
  located in the parent P04 directory. These data are in need of merging into 
  the individual P04 bottle files currently online.
  					
8/27/01   Muus        CTD/BTL/SUM  Update Needed
  Station present in BTl that is not in SUM, correction needed, see note:
  PO4W has Station 8 rosette data on web SEA file (20010326WHPOSIOKJU) but not 
  in web SUMMARY file (20010326WHPOSIOKJU)
  
  This is a Pre-WOCE cruise, TPS-10N, R/V Moana Wave, Palau, Feb 6, to Majuro, 
  Mar 4, 1989.  EXPOCODE 32MW803_1. Chief Scientist:   John Toole (WHOI) On 
  board CFCs:     John Bullister
  (WHOI) CFC Documentation: R. Weiss/R. Van Woy
  
  Station 8, Cast 1 SEA file has 24 bottles with oxygen, nutrients, and 5 
  levels of CFCs. No Station 8 data in revised CFC file from Wisegarver, May 
  2001.
  
  The Chief Scientist's report in the .DOC file leaves out Station 8 in all CTD 
  correction tables but the Nutrient lab temperature table contains Station 8. 
  The "Cruise Overview" section mentions 2 test casts, Station 3 as the first 
  real station at 125m bottom depth, and then a CTD instrument change at 
  Station 27. I could find no other mention of Station 8.  Sta. 8 appears to be 
  a Philippine Trench station, 6501.3db max sample depth, per SUMMARY file 
  positions for Stations 7 and 9.
  
  The WHOI Technical Report (WHOI-91-32) has Station 7 on Page 76 and Station 9 
  on Page 77 but no data for Station 8.  Plate 1 (Station Position Plots) does 
  show Station 8 at the same latitude as the adjacent stations.
  
  The WOCE Exchange File:  BOTTLE,20001101WHPSIOJJW
  #code : jjward hyd_to_exchange.pl V1.0
  #original files copied from HTML directory: 2000.8.10
  #original HYD file: p04why.txt   Thu Aug 10 13:43:30 2000
  #original SUM file: p04wsu.txt.tmp   Wed Nov  1 11:45:13 2000
  
  32MW893_1, P04W, 7, 1,  1,  1,2,19890209,2255, 8.0017, 127.0833, 5985, 5927.1
  32MW893_1, P04W, 8, 1, 24, 24,2,19890209,-999, 8.0017, 127.3033, -999, 5.7
  32MW893_1, P04W, 8, 1,  1,  1,2,19890209,-999, 8.0017, 127.3033, -999, 6501.3
  32MW893_1, P04W, 9, 1, 24, 24,2,19890210,1335, 8.0017, 127.6650, 5793, 9.5
  
  has SUM file "p04wsu.txt.tmp". Do not know if JJW had a real position or just 
  interpolated one to make the exchange conversion work.
  
  Is this worth a message to Toole and Weiss/Bullister/Wisegarver or should we
  delete Station 8.
  					
8/29/01	Muus	BTL/SUM          CFCs merged into BTL file, SUM file updated
  Notes on P04C CFC merging Aug 29, 2001.     D. Muus
  
  1. New CFC-11 and CFC-12 from:

         /usr/export/html-public/data/onetime/pacific/p04/original
              20010709_CFC_WISEGARVER_P04/20010709.165933
                   _WISEGARVER_P04_tps10_CFC_DQE.dat
  
     merged into web SEA files as of Aug 21, 2001: P04C (20010327WHPOSIOKJU) 
   
     One file contained new CFC data for all three legs.
     No SEA file QUALT2 words so added QUALT2 identical to QUALT1 prior to 
     merging.
  
     New CFC data file appears to have SAMPNO and BTLNBR swapped with respect to 
     .SEA file data. 
     Checked that .SEA file SAMPNO same as CFC file "btlnbr" with respect to 
     Sta#, Cast# and CTDPRS.
  
  2. SUMMARY file (20010326WHPOSIOKJU) has "INT" (interpolated?) as NAV entry 
     numerous times. "INT" not a NAV code per WOCE Manual.
  
     EVENT CODE is BO, EN, BE rather than normal sequence of BE, BO, EN.
     All three position and time entries for each station are identical since 
     this is a Pre-WOCE cruise. Left SUMMARY file unchanged.
  
  3. Exchange file checked using Java Ocean Atlas.
  
  					
8/31/01   Muus        BTL/SUM      CFCs merged into BTL file; SUM file updated
  1. New CFC-11 and CFC-12 from John Bullister, 
     PMEL anonymous ftp site on Aug 31, 2001:
     wocecfc/freon/pacific/FINALDQE/RELAXED/tps10_CFC_DQE.dat
     merged into web SEA file as of Aug 21, 2001: P04W (20010326WHPOSIOKJU)
            
     The first revised CFC file received this summer was missing Station 8 
     because it was not in the SUMMARY file: 

         /usr/export/html-public/data/onetime/pacific/p04/original
          20010709_CFC_WISEGARVER_P04/20010709.165933_WISEGARVER
                           _P04_tps10_CFC_DQE.dat
  
     One file contained new CFC data for all three legs. No SEA file QUALT2 
     words so added QUALT2 identical to QUALT1 prior to merging. New CFC data 
     file appears to have SAMPNO and BTLNBR swapped with respect to .SEA file 
     data. Checked that .SEA file SAMPNO same as CFC file "btlnbr" by comparing 
     to Sta#, Cast# and CTDPRS.
  
  2. SUMMARY file (20010326WHPOSIOKJU) has "INT" (interpolated?) as NAV entry 
     numerous times. "INT" not a NAV code per WOCE Manual.
  
     EVENT CODE is BO, EN, BE rather than normal sequence of BE, BO, EN. All 
     three position and time entries for each station are identical since this 
     is a Pre-WOCE cruise.
  
     No Station 8 in SUMMARY file although .SEA file contains Station 8, Cast 1 
     with 24 bottles (see Item 3 below).
     Added Station 8 data to SUMMARY file per John Toole info received Aug 28, 
     2001. Left rest of SUMMARY unchanged.
  
  3. Station 8, Cast 1 in Mar 26, 2001 .SEA file has 24 bottles with oxygen, 
     nutrients, and 5 levels of CFCs.  Message from Chief Scientist, John Toole, 
     Aug 28, 2001, says Station 8 not used because CTD sensor guards left on 
     making the CTD temperature suspect and the CTD salinities useless. He said 
     bottle data can be used and noted air vents open on bottles 14, 19 and 22.
     Changed all CTDSAL quality codes from 2 to 4 (bad measurement).
     Changed BTLNBR quality codes for bottles 14, 19 & 22 from 2 to 3 (leaking).
     Changed CTDPRS for Station 8 to final calibrated pressures supplied by John 
     Toole.
  
  4. Exchange file checked using Java Ocean Atlas.
  					
9/4/01    Muus        BTL/SUM      CFCs merged into BTL; SUMfile updated
  1. New CFC-11 and CFC-12 from John Bullister, PMEL anonymous ftp site on Sept 
     4, 2001:
     wocecfc/freon/pacific/FINALDQE/RELAXED/tps10_CFC_DQE.dat
     merged into web SEA file as of Aug 21, 2001: P04E (20010326WHPOSIOKJU)
  
     The first revised CFC file received this summer was missing Station 215 
     because it was not in the SUMMARY file: 

           /usr/export/html-public/data/onetime/pacific/p04/original
            20010709_CFC_WISEGARVER_P04/20010709.165933_WISEGARVER
                            _P04_tps10_CFC_DQE.dat
  
     One file contained new CFC data for all three legs.
     No SEA file QUALT2 words so added QUALT2 identical to QUALT1 prior to 
     merging.
     New CFC data file appears to have SAMPNO and BTLNBR swapped with respect to 
    .SEA file data. Checked that .SEA file SAMPNO same as CFC file "btlnbr" 
     compared with Sta#, Cast# and CTDPRS.
  
  2. SUMMARY file (20010326WHPOSIOKJU) has "INT" (interpolated?) as NAV entry 
     numerous times. "INT" not a NAV code per WOCE Manual.
     EVENT CODE is BO, EN, BE rather than normal sequence of BE, BO, EN. All  
     three position and time entries for each station are identical since this 
     is a Pre-WOCE cruise.
     No Station 215 in SUMMARY file although .SEA file contains Station 215, 
     Cast 1 with 24 bottles (see Item 3 below).
  
  3. Station 215, Cast 1 in Mar 26, 2001 .SEA file has 24 bottles with oxygen, 
     nutrients, and 14 levels of CFCs. 
  
    .DOC overview states: "Stations 215-217 were made in deep water at the same 
     geo- graphical position, 9.6 N and 86.2 W, to compare the data from the 
     three CTDs used during this cruise." 
    .DOC ctd corrections have no info for Stations 215 or 216, only 217. No 
     bottle or ctd data in WHOI Technical Report WHOI-91-32 for Stations 215 or 
     216.

     Station 217 SEA file has bottle salinities and oxygens but no nutrients or 
     CFCs.Do not know what, if any, CTD corrections applied to Station 215 
     CTDPRS, CTDTMP or CTDSAL.  Ctd data look reasonable compared to Station 217 
     at approximately the same location.

     In order to provide users with nutrients and CFCs for this location I have 
     added Station 215 to the SUMMARY file with a comment about the uncertain 
     status of the ctd data.  Also changed quality codes for CTDSAL from "2" to 
     "3" as an added caution for users.
     Changed parameter numbers for 217 from "1-8" to "1-2".
     Used parameter numbers "1-8" for 215.
     Used intended position and estimated time and date for 215.
  
  4. Exchange file checked using Java Ocean Atlas.
  					
9/7/01    Bartolacci  BTL/SUM      Website Updated     CFCs merged into BTL, 
  new file online, updates SUM file online.  I have replaced the previously 
  online bottle file for P04W with the bottle file containing newly merged 
  CFCs. Data updates were sent by D. Wisegarver and merged by D. Muus. New 
  updated sumfile was also created by D. Muus. all previous files have been 
  moved to original subdirectory. and have been renamed. All references have 
  been updated to reflect this change. Notes regarding merging will be sent to 
  meta data manager under separate email.

9/7/01    Bartolacci  BTL/SUM      Website Updated     CFCs merged into BTL 
  file, new file online. SUMfile updated and online.  I have replaced the 
  previously online bottle file for P04E with the bottle file containing newly 
  merged CFCs. Data updates were sent by D. Wisegarver and merged by D. Muus. 
  New updated sumfile was also created by D. Muus. all previous files have been 
  moved to original subdirectory and have been renamed. All references have 
  been updated to reflect this change. Notes regarding merging will be sent to 
  meta data manager under separate email.

9/7/01    Bartolacci  BTL          Website Updated     CFCs merged into BTL, new 
  file online.  I have replaced the previously online bottle file for P04C with 
  the bottle file containing newly merged CFC's. Data updates were sent by D. 
  Wisegarver and merged by D. Muus. all previous files have been moved to 
  original subdirectory and have been renamed. All references have been updated 
  to reflect this change. Notes regarding merging will be sent to meta data 
  manager under separate email. 
  					
  					
  

