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


CRUISE REPORT: S04P
(Updated APR 2011)





HIGHLIGHTS

                             CRUISE SUMMARY INFORMATION

               Section Designation  SO4P
Expedition designation (ExpoCodes)  320620110219
                   Chief Scientist  Dr. James H Swift
                Co-Chief Scientist  Dr. Alejandro Orsi
                             Dates  19 FEB 2011-23 APR 2011
                              Ship  R/V Nathaniel B Palmer
                     Ports of call  McMurdo Station, Ross Island, Antarctica -
                                    Punta Arenas Chile

                                                   66° 12.62'S
             Geographic Boundaries  168° 37.59' E               72° 54.55'W
                                                   77° 20.94' S

                          Stations  140
      Floats and drifters deployed  0
    Moorings deployed or recovered  1 mooring deployed; 2 ESR moorings and 1
                                    biophysical mooring recovered


                                 Dr. James H. Swift
      University of California, San Diego • Scripps Institution of Oceanography
                9500 Gilman Drive • MS 0214 • La Jolla CA 92093-0214
           Tel: 858-534-3387 • Fax: 858-534-7383 • Email: jswift@ucsd.edu

                                 Dr. Alejandro Orsi
Texas A&M University • O&M Building, Room 616 • MS 3146 • College Station, TX 77843
           Tel: 979.845 4014 • Fax: 979.847.8879 • Email: aorsi@tamu.edu






       US Global Ocean Carbon and Repeat Hydrography Program Section SO4P
            Nathaniel B. Palmer Cruise NBP-1102 (RPSC event 0-287-N)
                       19 February 2011 - 23 April 2011 UTC
         McMurdo Station, Ross Island, Antarctica - Punta Arenas, Chile
                      Chief Scientist: Dr. James H. Swift
                      Scripps Institution of Oceanography
                     Co-Chief Scientist: Dr. Alejandro Orsi
                              Texas A&M University






Narrative

NBP-1 102 was scheduled for a 60-70 day voyage, beginning at the US 
Antarctic Program McMurdo base and ending at Punta Arenas, Chile. The 
cruise was unique for the US Global Ocean Carbon and Repeat Hydrography 
Program in that it was carried out on a ship operated by a commercial 
operator, EdisonChouest Offshore (ECO) (under charter to the US National 
Science Foundation), with pre-cruise planning, shipping, logistics, and 
on-board science support from a second company, Raytheon Polar Services 
Corporation (RPSC) (via contract with the US National Science Foundation).

The science team assembled in Christchurch, New Zealand, where they 
attended a pre-ice-flight briefing and cold weather clothing issue on 13 
February, and then on 14 February flew to the ice sheet runway near Ross 
Island via a US Air Force C-17 transport. Although cancelled flights and 
"boomerangs" (flights turned back by weather or equipment problems) are 
frequent, this flight went without incident, and ended with an 
extraordinarily smooth landing. The science team was impressed with the 
view from the landing site and excited to be in Antarctica. After a ride 
to the McMurdo base, the team was briefed on McMurdo basics, issued room 
keys and linens, and told where to eat.

The flight had been scheduled ahead of the Nathaniel B. Palmer's arrival 
at McMurdo in order to allow for cancelled or "boomeranged" flights, and, 
after the team was at the McMurdo base, the base operators decided to fuel 
the ship as soon as it arrived (instead of after loading equipment as is 
usually done). Thus the science team had more than two days to enjoy the 
unique amenities, scenery, and recreational opportunities at the base, 
including a guided tour to Robert F. Scott's 1902 "Discovery Hut" at Hut 
Point on Ross Island.

During a routine visit on 15 February to the base site where the RPSC 
McMurdo staff had set most of the SO4P cargo it was immediately apparent 
that RPSC personnel had allowed much of the SO4P "do not freeze" cargo to 
sit outdoors in sub-freezing conditions, despite well-in-advance-of-shipping 
notice provided to RPSC (Denver) using their guidelines and forms, and 
despite proper and copious labeling of these cargo items as "do not 
freeze". The reasons for this incredible blunder remain unknown. In the 
end, the chief scientific damage was to the Argo float program, which was 
cancelled with all 17 floats shipped back to the USA. By what appears to 
be a blind stroke of good fortune, the one "do not freeze" cargo container 
kept above freezing contained the salinity and carbon seawater standards - 
with the loss of either the expedition would have been cancelled.

The other primary cargo damage incident was equally inexplicable: During 
unpacking it was discovered that some of the  SIO  ODF boxes which had been 
packed by  SIO  personnel inside an  SIO -owned 20-foot standard cargo 
container (in excellent condition), had become wet at some point. Some of 
the contents of those boxes molded, and then froze. Two of the boxes had 4 
and 6+ inches of water in them, frozen solid. The chief losses (after 
thawing and clean-up) were computer manuals, office supplies, a back-up 
hard drive, and some of the Chief Scientist's sea clothes. There was no 
evidence of leaks in the van until the steam to port. A pin-hole amount of 
light was recognized in the container. Inspection on the top of the 
container revealed that there was in fact a patch which was easily taken 
off revealing improper repairs to the cargo container's roof, presumably 
done by  SIO  personnel at some point prior to shipping - had left a route 
for water on the container's roof to drain into the container's interior.

The science team was brought to the ship at 1300 on 17 February and after 
a short safety briefing and ship tour, immediately set to unloading 
scientific cargo from the 5 20-foot container vans and setting up the C02 
lab van (a trace metal lab van was already at the ship from the previous 
leg). All RPSC staff on the ship (staff from the previous cruise plus 
staff from the SO4P cruise) plus all ECO personnel were extremely helpful. 
The basic unloading of container vans was completed before dinner on the 
17th, though as usual additional cargo was loaded over the next two days. 
Lab set-up for science and seas went very well, again with RPSC and ECO 
personnel efficiently providing assistance.

Because fueling the ship was done before it was possible to set up the 
labs (which is usually done while fueling), it was necessary to make that 
up by delaying the ship's departure one day.

RVIB Nathaniel B. Palmer departed McMurdo Base at noon local time on 20 
February 2011 in good weather, into Sound waters wider open (more nearly 
free of sea ice) than at any other time in recent memory. The planned 
transit to the first station was estimated to be approximately two days. 
On the 21St the science team held two test/training rosette casts with the 
large 36-place rosette. The altimeter wasnot working properly (so was later 
replaced) and there were a few leaking bottles, easily repaired. The
only potentially serious operational problem was that due to specifics of 
the way that  SIO  ODF sets up its CTD system, the CTD winch operator was not able 
to see the CTD pressure information (referred to as "CTD depth" by the ship) on 
his winch display, as he usually can when RPSC CTD equipment is being used. This 
problem was rectified in a few days by RPSC and ODF personnel.

The evening of the 21st the trace metal team carried out a trace metal 
cast of opportunity, making up a station from the previous cruise lost to 
weather.

During the 22nd, as the ship neared the location of the first S04P 
station, off Cape Adare, winds rose well past 30 knots during the day, 
into the low 40s, with a second storm forecast immediately following the 
first. It was thus necessary to wait until 1000 local time on 23 February 
to begin the S04P transect stations.

The SO4P transect began nearly flawlessly - when the weather permitted 
stations. Three storms interrupted work, forcing 105 hours in time lost to 
weather between stations 001 and 024. But after the storm of 03-05 March 
abated, there was a long stretch of weather mostly suitable for work.

Unusual problems surfaced with the bottle data at two stations: evidence 
of bottles closing at depths other than the intended level, almost always 
two at one level with an adjacent skipped level. The most likely culprit 
was lanyard errors when cocking the rosette (both episodes were traced to 
the same watch), and so lanyard-carousel positional information was 
strengthened, as was pre-cast inspection, and this seemed to solve the 
problem.

One of the two Lowered Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (LADCP) 
instruments on the rosette - the downward facing unit - increasingly ceased 
to function correctly during stations 50-52. It was swapped out with the 
upward-facing unit (there were no spares).

Work along the SO4P line proper stopped at 150°W on 11 March when the ship 
headed south along 150°W - part of the original "top priority" cruise plan 
in order to box in the Ross Sea as well as to complete the Antarctic end of 
WOCE/CLIVAR line P16 for the first time. This work went very well, with 
only one minor weather interruption. The 2011 work overlapped with stations 
from the 2005 P1 6S cruise from 67710S. Comparisons showed some water mass 
changes, but also general agreement where reasonable, except that the 
nitrate data were low, before being readjusted to the international 
reference standards (not available in 2005).

During the work south, email (via INMARSAT) became increasing sporadic. At 
the south end of P16s, the final five stations were in increasingly heavy 
ice, with young ice running the gamut from grease ice to new pancakes to 
larger, consolidated pancakes. There was also some leftover first year ice 
from the previous season and older ice, plus impressively thick slabs of 
ice that must have broken off thinning ends of ice sheets. There were also 
numerous icebergs, some of which were huge. Navigation to the stations was 
not seriously impeded by ice. The intent then was to head closer to the 
Continent, where ice maps obtained by the co-chief scientist seemed to show 
easier going, possibly where ice had been pushed offshore by the winds. 
Access to new ice maps was hindered by the INMARSAT problems, and so it 
was not yet known that the latest ice maps showed the area near the 
continent had closed in. Thankfully this was realized - in effect - by 
heavy ice conditions which severely slowed progress. Hence the ship turned 
to the NW to head out of the ice. The ensuing transit around the ice to 
the site of the "Mooring A" recovery turned into one of the scenic 
highlights of the voyage, because weather was excellent and there was 
abundant ice in many forms and wildlife.

As the ship worked near the Mooring A site, weather was deteriorating. 
Acoustic contact with the release was marginal at first. Via triangulation 
it was learned that the mooring had moved more than one mile from its 
February 2010 position. It became too dark to recover the mooring, and so 
a line of CTD stations, in the ice, was completed overnight. By morning 
(19 March), conditions had worsened to the point where recovery would not 
be feasible, and so the ship moved to the Mooring B site in an attempt to 
located the mooring. Winds in the 50+ knot range and worsening seas made 
it impossible to contact the mooring. The ship took a "comfort" course 
until winds subsided. Mooring A was recovered on the morning of March 
20th, the only incident being accidental severing of the mooring line by 
the ship. But both parts had floatation and were recovered along with all 
instruments. At the Mooring B site it was discovered that the mooring had 
been moved more than 2 miles from its deployment site. It was recovered 
without incident. During the lines of CTD stations at each mooring site 
water at several hundred meters depth was observed that was colder than the 
freezing point at the sea surface. This can take place when cold water 
circulates and is cooled under floating, very deep reaching Antarctic ice 
shelves.

Next was a ca. 300 mile steam to the start of the next line of CTD 
stations. During this day and a half transit the students and other 
helpers dropped XBT5 every 30 minutes.

As the central Ross Sea cross-shelf section was being carried out, cruise 
plan adjustments were discussed. On the plus side, the station work had 
been going well and much less time was spent in the ice than estimated 
when the cruise was planned. On the minus side, more than 7 days had been 
lost to bad weather. The cruise to that point had included work of such 
high scientific priority that it was carried out as planned, without 
reduction, with the ship waiting out bad weather. To manage time for the 
remainder of the cruise, it was decided to allot specific amounts of time 
to each remaining segment of the cruise except for required elements, such 
as deployment of the Yuan/Sprintall mooring. The Captain worked in a 
somewhat similarly: within proper maritime limits he allocated fuel in a 
cruise-segment manner roughly similar to our allocation of time.

It was thus decided to attempt the south-to-north line of stations along 
170°W by allocating sufficient time to do 8 stations with average 43-mile 
spacing (but positioned to hit the deeper channels), and to then complete 
as much of it as the weather permits. The section across the Ross Sea 
slope just NW of the major shelf channels had captured cold, fresh, 
high-oxygen bottom waters of shelf origin on the slope. The 170°W stations 
would then potentially track this water into the deep interior of the Ross 
Sea. As it turned out there were no weather delays on the 170°W line, 
which was completed over 6 hours ahead of the timeline. And, indeed, a 
broad near-bottom core of the cold, low-salinity, high-oxygen water was 
sampled via the section. At the final station (095) a group of four 
Humpback whales swam around the ship at close range for more than two 
hours.

The ship then steamed eastward to a point on the SO4P line (67°S) 40 
nautical miles beyond the last station done on the line before turning 
south on P16S (150°W). Weather was worsening during the transit, and all 
the time gained on the 170°W line, and then some, was lost. The first 
station on the resumed line was moved to 45 nautical miles from the 
previous one, and 45-mile spacing was retained until the mooring site. 
Another storm blew in meanwhile, causing at least a 9-hour additional 
delay. Beginning at station 100 (67°S and ca. 140°W), there w as a strong 
shift in water properties to a warmer temperature maximum, deeper and more 
extreme salinity maximum, and an accompanying significant
shift in the isopycnals.

The only significant analytic problem on the cruise arose at station 101: 
the alkalinity measurements suddenly no longer met quality standards 
except when run by only one of the two analysts. An exhaustive search for 
clues and solutions was undertaken without avail. The analysts could 
alternate samples, with both of them watching carefully every step of the 
procedure, and, completely inexplicably, the results from only one of them 
met standards. A third analyst was trained, and that analyst had no 
success either. Every feasible (and not so feasible) avenue was 
approached, without success. In the end, it was necessary to continue to 
limit the number of alkalinity samples analyzed per day to those that 
could be run by the one analyst. Advice was provided on what samples to 
skip with least damage to the overall program.

After Station 102, the ship proceeded to the site of a mooring deployment 
for Xiaojun Yuan (LDEO) and Janet Sprintall (Sb). The specifications 
called for the top float of the mooring to be 100 meters below the sea 
surface - in ca. 4500 meters of water - plus the mooring needed to be in an 
area where the bottom was flat, and had to be deployed in reasonably good 
weather. The Palmer's multi-beam bathymetric mapping system (managed by 
Chris Linden, RPSC) was used to map the ocean floor. By the time the 
bathymetric survey was well in progress, weather was deteriorating. In 
addition to winds >40 knots, there was considerable mixed swell, such that 
even after the wind subsided, seas were too high for CTD work, let alone 
mooring deployment. When winds and seas eased, a CTD cast was completed at 
the chosen mooring deployment spot to measure the water characteristics 
and verify the bottom depth. There were also XBT casts and one more CTD 
cast associated with the mooring science program. The anchor-last 
deployment itself began the morning of 05 April, and went well, with the 
anchor ending up only about 130 meters from the desired location. The 
total time lost to weather during this activity was approximately 24 
hours, because in ideal conditions the mooring could have been deployed 
one full day earlier.

The principal CTD program resumed with station 105, at 45-mile spacing from 
102, though spacing was increased to 60 miles, where it stayed for the S04P 
(67°S) portions of the cruise until the easter n boundary stations.

After Station 117, near 1040W, the Palmer steamed south to the ice edge 
near the location of the southern end of the P18 (2007) line. Significant 
sea ice was encountered beginning ca. 69° 30'S. Initially it was possible 
to make good way through the ice, but increasingly large floes and 
especially a heavy snow cover greatly slowed progress, and penetration 
reached to only about 69° 50'S before the ship's officers stopped the ship. 
[Obviously, it was also impossible to attempt recovery of any of Stan 
Jacobs' moorings in the area.] (The goal had been the 500-meter isobath 
near 71°S.) A brief "ice party", i.e., an opportunity for the shipboard 
party to go out onto the ice, was held in the morning after the ship 
stopped, and one station was occupied after that. Because that station did 
not show any promising differences from the nearest P18 (2007) stations - 
other than what appeared to be the same CTD calibration offset seen in 
comparing 2007 and 2011 data at 67°S - it was decided to cut losses and 
head bac k to the SO4P line so that the line could be completed with a 
small weather allowance.

The completion of the eastern end of the 67°S (SO4P) line was remarkable 
in terms of ambient winds, which were very low the entire time and in fact 
all but one day to port. The final 8 days of sampling went very smoothly, 
with only some light to moderate swell and nearly no local waves. At 05:25 
local time on Tuesday, 19 April 2011, the rosette from station 140, the 
easternmost station planned, and the last one on CLIVAR SO4P, was brought 
into the Baltic Room. This completed the over-the-side work for the cruise, 
though it took a day to analyze the samples that were backlogged as the 
expedition crossed the eastern boundary of the study area. The ship 
arrived at the eastern end a little earlier than expected due to the 
unprecedented (for this cruise) eight day string of days with light winds, 
plus the equipment worked nearly flawlessly.

An incredible coincidence occurred: five days before the last CTD station 
was completed, Service Argos reported that a signal had been received from 
a long-lost mooring - a 400 meter long biophysical mooring for Dr. Richard 
Limeburner (Woods Hole), deployed in 450 meters of water more than ten 
years ago by Jim Ryder (the mooring tech on the cruise), but lost in 2001 
when it failed to rise to the surface when triggered to do so. The 
location was only about 8 hours away. So after the final station the ship 
moved to the last reported location and - voila! - there it was! Jim Ryder, 
the RPSC marine techs, and the students and other helpers then recovered 
the entire string of instruments, covered with ten years of marine growth. 
Everything was cleaned and was stored to be returned to Dr. Limeburner.

The ship then headed to Punta Arenas, Chile. Underway weather was very 
good except on April 21 when winds to 30-40 knots made for a rough ride. On 
the way to port, on the evening of the 21st, there was a variety show on 
the ship, featuring skits and music from the "polliwogs" (those for whom 
this was their first Antarctic crossing) plus some of the "red noses". 
There was a traditional induction for the polliwogs the morning of the 
22nd, and a cruise video night that evening.

During the long steam to port the analytic rigs, sampling equipment, and 
other laboratory items were broken down and packed for shipping, and the 
labs readied for port. The Captain chose speed and course to get the ship 
in ahead of schedule, arriving Saturday, April 23, 2011, at about 1800 
local time instead of the planned Monday, April 25, at 0800. Unloading 
commenced Monday due to the Easter holiday.

Data quality on this cruise appears to meet very high quality standards. 
The nutrient data were a challenge in this ocean system of very low 
variability. They started out at the "very good" level and improved. Away 
from high gradient portions of the water column, the differences between 
the bottle salts and oxygens and the CTD values were very small. This 
requires both top quality bottle salts and oxygens, and skillful, 
attentive CTDO data processing. Perhaps the Palmer's salinometer room - one 
of the best set-up salinometer rooms on any research ship - contributed. 
The F11 and F12 sections show clean contours with little data noise. (The 
other parameters, including the ocean carbon data analyzed at sea, receive 
final processing ashore.) The data processing bringing this all together 
was to high standard from Day 1.

The expedition experienced an extraordinarily small amount of analytic and 
instrumental problems, the chief exception being the alkalinity data. 
There were occasional problems with the SF6 analyses, but that is a very 
sensitive analysis which is not yet regarded as a mainstream measurement in most 
CFC laboratories. Only a little more than one hour of ship time was lost due to 
CTD system problems. The chief cause of down time was weather, with 190 hours (8 
days) lost to bad weather. At an average of 4.5 hours per station, this is the 
equivalent of 42 stations lost to weather.


Time lost              
  hours  from       to          reason
  -----  ---------- ----------  ---------------------------------------------
   24    1200 02/19 1200 02/20  ship fueled before loading cargo (instead of 
                                after loading); science team lost one day of 
                                set-up time usually done during fueling and 
                                thus needed an extra set-up day in port
   14    2000 02/22 1000 02/23  weather, then 3-4 hour transit (in good 
                                weather) to first station from sheltered 
                                location
   55.5  0030 02/25 0800 02/27  weather
   0.5   2130 02/27 2200 02/27  failed trace metal cast (electrical problems)
   2     1300 02/28 1500 02/28  weather (then found some ice and hid in it to 
                                do a cast)
   5.5   2230 02/28 0400 03/01  weather (same storm)
   42    0730 03/03 0130 03/05  weather
   7.5   1700 03/11 0030 03/12  weather
   35    1000 03/19 1900 03/20  weather
   5.5   1415 03/22 1945 03/22  weather (swell, mostly)
   3     2300 03/22 0200 03/23  weather
   8     2000 03/29 2200 03/29  weather
   9     1800 03/31 0300 04/01  weather
   24    1400 04/02 1400 04/03  mooring deployment delayed one day due to 
                                weather
   3     1230 04/05 1530 04/05  weather
   5     1100 04/11  161504/11  Chief Scientist error: ship had been asked to 
                                go further south the previous night, but Ch. 
                                Sci. was unaware the ship had stopped; could 
                                have done Station 118 the night before
   0.5   1750 04/15 1820 04/15  exhaust hole blockage on main CTD; serviced & 
                                was OK


Acknowledgements

This cruise would not have been possible without the continuing advice, 
encouragement, and support of our NSF and NOAA program managers. The 
assistance of NSF in scheduling the cruise is especially appreciated. We 
are also grateful for the Edison Chouest Offshore support at sea from RVIB 
Nathaniel B. Palmer Captain Maghrabi, his officers, and crew, who 
contributed a great deal, daily, to the success of the cruise, and to the 
technicians from Raytheon Polar Services Corporation who worked every 
station with our science team.

This cruise was supported via these grants and the other listed sources:

   NSF OCE-091 9454     ODF sea work (CTDO, 5, 02, nutrients, data)
   NSF OCE-0752970      physical oceanography (incl. LADCP) and students
   NSF OCE-0752972      NSF-supported parts of the ocean carbon program
   NSF OCE-0752980      CFC and He/Tr programs
   NSF OCE-0825163      C14/C13 program
   NSF OCE-0962393      trace metal program
   NSF OCE-0962158      aerosol program
   NSF ANT-0839005      Orsi mooring program
   NSF ANT-0632282      Jacobs' mooring and snow counter
   NSF ANT-1 043669     Yuan mooring program

The NOAA-sponsored portions of the ocean carbon program were supported by 
the NOAA Climate Program Office, Climate Observation Division.

The TAMU transmissometer program was supported by TAMU Account 51007340000 
- Cook Professorship.

The NASA bio-optics program was supported by NASA NNX09AN94G, NASA Ocean 
Biology and Biogeochemistry (OBB) Calibration and Validation Office (CVO) 
Director Support.






HYDROGRAPHIC/CTD DATA, SALINITY, OXYGEN AND NUTRIENTS

Oceanographic Data Facility and Research Technicians
Shipboard Technical Support/Scripps Institution of Oceanography
La Jolla, CA 92093-0214

The Southern Ocean SO4P repeat hydrographic line was reoccupied for the US 
Global Ocean Carbon and Repeat Hydrography Program (sometimes referred to 
as "CLIVAR/C02") during February-April 2011 from RVIB Nathaniel B. Palmer 
via a survey consisting of CTD/rosette/LADCP stations, trace-metal 
stations, and a variety of underway measurements. The ship departed 
McMurdo, Antarctica, on 19 February 2011 and arrived Punta Arenas, Chile, 
on 23 April 2011 (UTC dates).

A total of 140 stations were occupied with one CTD/rosette/LADCP cast 
completed at each. The expedition included in addition to the SO4P transect 
reoccupations of segments of lines P16S and P15S, and one station 
overlapping with P18S (NBP-1 102 stations 46-66, 77-96 and 118, 
respectively). CTDO profiles were collected with minimal water sampling in 
the vicinity of three mooring sites (stations 67-76 and 103-104). CTDO data 
and water samples were collected on each CTD/rosette/LADCP cast, usually to 
within 10 meters of the bottom. Water samples were measured on board for 
salinity, dissolved oxygen, nutrients, DIC, pH, total alkalinity, and CFCs. 
Additional water samples were collected and stored for shore analyses of 
helium, tritium, 0-18, DOC/DON, 13C/14C, chromophoric dissolved organic 
matter (CDOM), phytoplankton pigments, particulate absorption and image 
cytoplankton, and density.

A sea-going science team gathered from 12 oceanographic institutions 
participated on the cruise. The programs and Pis, and the shipboard science 
team and their responsibilities, are listed below.


Principal Programs of CLIVAR SO4P               

Program                       Affiliation  Principal Investigator/email
----------------------------  -----------  ----------------------------
CTDO/Rosette, Nutrients, 02,  UCSD/SIO     James H. Swift     
Salinity, Data Processing                  jswift@ucsd.edu
ADCP/LADCP                    LDEO         Eric Firing     
                                           efiring @soest.hawaii.edu   
CFCs                          LDEO         Bill Smethie     
                                           bsmeth@ldeo.columbia.edu
SF,                           UH           David Ho     
                                           ho@hawaii.edu
C02-DIC/Underway pCO2         NOAA/PMEL    Chris Sabine     
                                           chris.sabine@ noaa.gov
Total Alkalinity              SIO          Andrew Dickson     
                                           adickson@ucsd.edu
Dissolved Organic Carbon/     UM/RSMAS     Dennis Hansell     
Total Dissolved Nitrogen                   dhansell@rsmas.miami.edu
3He- 3H  18O                  LDEO         Peter Schlosser     
                                           schlosser@ldeo.columbia.edu
pH                            UM/RSMAS     Frank Millero     
                                           fmillero@rsmas.miami.edu
Underway pCO2 with            NOAA/AOML    Rik Wanninkhof     
underway T&S                               Rik.Wanninkhof@noaa.gov
Underway Discrete pCO2        LDEO         Taro Takahashi     
                                           taka@ldeo.columbia.edu
Carbon/Oxygen Isotopes        WHOI         Ann McNichol
13C/14C                                    amcnichol@whoi.edu
                              Princeton    Robert Key    
                                           key@Princeton.EDU
Trace Metals                  UH           Chris Measures     
                                           chrism@soest.hawaii.edu
                              FSU          Bill Landing     
                                           landing@ocean.fsu.edu
Transmissometer               TAMU         Wilt Gardner    
                                           wgardner@tamu.edu
Chromographic Dissolved       NASNGSFC     Charles R. McClain
Organic Matter                             charles.r. mcclain@ nasa.gov
                              UCSB         Norm Nelson   
                                           norm@icess.ucsb.edu
Aerosols                      FSU          Bill Landing     
                                           landing@ocean.fsu.edu
Mercury                       USGS         David Krabbenhoft     
                                           dpkrabbe@usgs.gov
Biogeochem, Pigments and      NASNGSFC     Charles R. McClain    
Particulate Absorption                     charles.r. mcclain@ nasa.gov
Imaging Cyto-Plankton counts  WHOI         Sam Laney     
                                           slaney@whoi.edu
Mooring Recovery              TAMU         Alex Orsi
                                           aorsi@tamu.edu
Mooring Deployments           LDEO         Xiaojun Yuan 
                                           xyuan@ldeo.columbia.edu
                              SIO          Janet Sprintall 
                                           jsprintall@ucsd.edu



Shipboard Scientific Personnel on CLIVAR SO4P

Name/Shore Email                  Affiliation        Shipboard Duties   
--------------------------------  -----------------  ----------------------------
James H. Swift                    SIO                Chief Scientist 
  jswift@ucsd.edu  
Alex Orsi                         TAMU               Co-Chief Scientist 
  aorsi@tamu.edu  
Jessica Anderson                  UW                 CTD Watchstander 
  jessea2@u.washington.edu  
Sam Billheimer                    SIO                CTD Watch 
  sbillhei@ucsd.edu  
Eric Mortenson                    FSU                CTD Watch 
  eam09j@fsu.edu  
Stuart Pearce                     TAMU               CTD Watch 
  spearce@ocean.tamu.edu  
Kristin Sanborn                   SIO/STS/ODF        Data, Group Leader 
  ksanborn@ucsd.edu  
Mary Carol Johnson                SIO/STS/ODF        Data, CTD 
  mcj@ucsd.edu  
Dan Schuller                      SIO/STS/ODF        Nutrients, Lead Chemist 
  dschuller@ucsd.edu  
Ben Gire                          SIO/STS/ODF        Nutrients 
  bgire@ucsd.edu  
Courtney Schatzman                SIO/STS/ODF        02, Data 
  cschatzman@ucsd.edu  
Alex Quintero                     SIO/STS/ODF        02, Data 
  a1quintero@ucsd.edu  
Robert Thombley                   SIO/STS/RT-E ET,   Salinity 
  rthomble@ucsd.edu  
Brett Hembrough                   SIO/STS/RT-Marine  Salinity 
  bhembrough@ucsd.edu  
Thomas DeCloedt                   Uhawaii            ADCP/LADCP 
  decloedt@hawaii.edu  
Eugene Gorman                     LDEO               CFC 
  egorman@ldeo.columbia.edu  
Mingxi Yang                       UH                 CFC 
  reelguy@gmail.com  
Sarah Eggleston                   UH                 CFC 
  sarah.eggleston@gmail.com  
Nancy Willams                     PMEL/NOAA          DIC 
  Nancy.Williams@noaa.gov  
Kevin Sullivan                    PMEL/NOAA          DIC, U/W pCO2 
  Kevin.Sullivan@noaa.gov  
Anthony Dachille                  LDEO               3He/ 3H, 18 
  dachille@ldeo.columbia.edu  
Laura Fantozzi                    SIO                TALK 
  lfantozzi@ucsd.edu  
Emily Bockmon                     SIO                TALK 
  ebockmon@ucsd.edu  
Ryan Woosley                      RSMAS              pH 
  rswoosley@rsmas.miami.edu  
Wilson Mendoza                    RSMAS              pH 
  wmendoza@rsmas.miami.edu  
Charles Farmer                    RSMAS              13C & 14C, DOC/TDN 
  cfarmer@rsmas.miami.edu  
Chris Measures                    UH Trace           Metals 
  cmeasures@hawaii.edu  
Maxime Marcel Grand               UH Trace           Metals 
  maxime@hawaii.edu  
Hugo Oliviera                     UH Trace           Metals 
  hmoliveira@gmail.com  
William M. Landing                FSU                Aerosols, Trace Metals 
  landing@ocean.fsu.edu    
Brian Kilgore                     FSU                Aerosols, Trace Metals 
  b815162342@gmail.com  
Jim Ryder                         WHOI               Moorings 
  jryder@whoi.edu  
Aimee Neeley                      NASNGSFC           CDOM, Particulate Absorption 
  aimee.neeley@nasa.gov  
Emily Peacock                     WHOI               Image plankton 
  epeacock@whoi.edu  
Juan Botella                      NSF                OUTREACH 
  jbotella@mac.com  
Buzz Scott                        RPSC               MPC 
  buzz.scott.contractor@usap.gov  
Kris Merrill                      RPSC               IT 
  kris.merrill.contractor@usap.gov  
Chris Linden                      RPSC               IT 
  chris.linden.contractor@usap.gov  
Lily Glass                        RPSC               MST 
  lily.glass.contractor@usap.gov  
Tony D'Aoust                      RPSC               ET 
  tony.daoust.contractor@usap.gov  
Mike Lewis                        RPSC               MT 
  mike.lewis.contractor@usap.gov  
Barry Bjork                       RPSC               MT 
  barry.bjork.contractor@usap.gov  




DESCRIPTION OF MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES

1. CTDlHydrographic Measurements Program

A total of 140 CTD/rosette/LADCP casts were made at 140 stations. Most 
casts were lowered to within 1 Om of the bottom.

Hydrographic measurements consisted of salinity, dissolved oxygen and 
nutrient water samples taken from each rosette cast. Pressure, 
temperature, conductivity/salinity, dissolved oxygen, transmissometer 
and fluorometer data were recorded from CTD profiles. Current velocities 
were measured by the RDI workhorse ADCP. The distribution of samples are 
shown in the following figures.


Figure 1.0: SO4P Sample distribution, stations 2-45 96-102 105-140 
            with P18S Station 118.

Figure 1.1: SO4P Sample distribution on the southern extension of P1 
            5s, stations 77-95.

Figure 1.2: S04P Sample distribution on the southern extension of P1 
            6S, stations 45-66.


1.1. Water Sampling Package

CTD/rosette/LADCP casts were performed with a package consisting of a 
36-bottle rosette frame (SIO/STS), a 36-place carousel (5BE32) and 36 
10.0L Bullister bottles (SIO/STS) with an absolute volume of 10.4L. 
Underwater electronic components consisted of a Sea-Bird Electronics 
SBE9pIus CTD with dual pumps (SBE5), dual temperature (SBE3pIus), 
reference temperature (SBE35RT) dual conductivity (SBE4C), dissolved 
oxygen (5BE43), transm issometer (Wetlabs), fluorometer (Wetlabs), 
altimeter (Benthos) and LADCP (RDI).

The CTD was mounted vertically in an SBE CTD cage attached to the bottom 
of the rosette frame and located to one side of the carousel. The SBE4C 
conductivity, SBE3p/us temperature and 5BE43 dissolved oxygen sensors 
and their respective pumps and tubing were mounted vertically in the CTD 
cage, as recommended by SBE. Pump exhausts were attached to the CTD cage 
on the side opposite from the sensors and directed downward. The 
transmissometer was mounted horizontally, and the fluorometer was 
mounted vertically near the bottom of the rosette frame. The altimeter 
was mounted on the inside of the bottom frame ring. The 300 KHz 
bi-directional Broadband LADCP (RDI) was mounted vertically on the top 
and bottom sides of the frame. Its battery pack was located opposite the 
flourometer, also mounted on the bottom of the frame. Table 1.1.0 shows 
height of the sensors referenced to the bottom of the frame.


Table 1.1.0: Heights referenced to bottom of rosette frame

             Instrument                      Height in cm
             ------------------------------  ------------
             Temperature/Conductivity Inlet             9
             5BE35                                      9
             Altimeter                                  2
             Transmissometer                            5
             Chlorophyll Fluorometer                   15
             Pressure Sensor, inlet to 
               capillary tube                          17
             Inner bottle midline                     109
             Outer bottle midline                     113
             ADCP face midline (bottom)                 7
             ADCP face midline (top):                 183
             Zero tape                                266


The rosette system was suspended from a UNOLS-standard three-conductor 
0.322" electro-mechanical sea cable. The sea cable was terminated at the 
beginning of SO4P. A electrical retermination was performed during the 
2-day run to station 24. A full re-termination (preventatively, electrical and 
mechanical) was performed after station 95, during the 2-day run to Station 96. 
The RVIB Nathaniel B. Palmer's DESH-5 winch was used for all casts.

The deck watch prepared the rosette 10-30 minutes prior to each cast. 
The bottles were cocked and all valves, vents and lanyards were checked 
for proper orientation. Once stopped on station, the ship's crew and 
Marine Technician would check the sea state prior to cast and decide if 
conditions were acceptable for deployment. All decisions and policies 
on board the NBP were respected, benefiting both parties interests. 
Overall the deployment and recovery of the CTD rosette on board the 
RVIB Nathaniel B. Palmer (NBP) went very well and were accomplished 
without incident. The typical procedure was as follows:

1) Remove securing straps from rosette
2) Open hydraulically locked Baltic Room bulkhead door
3) Pay in wire to pull rosette towards door on sliding track
4) Once rosette is centered under the squirt boom block, the rosette 
   is lifted off the deck
5) Simultaneous extension of squirt boom while paying out wire kept 
   the rosette level and in position to fit through the limited clearance 
   allowed by the width and height of the Baltic Room door. (Approximately 4" on 
   either side of 36 place rosette, and approximately 1' clearance from bottom 
   of door to base of rosette.)
6) Continue to extend boom and level rosette until full extension is reached.
7) Time the lowering of the rosette with the sea conditions.

Due to the confined space and limited scope of wire available to adjust 
rosette height (approximately 8-16 inches from cable grip to block) the 
procedure required precise handling of winch controls, especially in 
the timing of the extension and wire payout. All winch operators were 
extremely proficient and paid very careful attention to this aspect of 
CTD operations. Once the boom had reached full extension, the Marine 
Technician (MT) directed the winch operator in the timing of lowering 
the rosette into the water, as at this point the winch operator no 
longer has visual contact with the CTD package.

Most rosette casts were lowered to within 10 meters of the bottom, 
using the altimeter, winch wire-out, CTD depth and multibeam depth.

For each up-cast, the winch operator was directed to stop the winch at 
up to 36 predetermined sampling depths. These standard depths were 
staggered every station using 3 sampling schemes. The CTD console 
operator waited 30 seconds prior to tripping sample bottles, to ensure 
package shed wake had dissipated. An additional 10 seconds elapsed 
before moving to the next consecutive trip depth, which allowed for the 
SBE35RT to record bottle trip temperature.

Recovering the package at the end of the deployment was essentially the 
reverse of launching. The RPSC marine technician and winch operator 
guided the rosette back through the open water tight door and used 
lines to secure the package to the Baltic Room floor.

The rosette, CTD and carousel were rinsed with fresh water frequently. 
CTD maintenance included rinsing de-ionized water through both plumbed 
sensor lines between casts. On average, once every 20 stations, 1% 
Triton-x solution was also rinsed through both conductivity sensors. 
The rosette was routinely examined for valves and 0-rings leaks, which 
were maintained as needed.

Each bottle on the rosette had a unique serial number, independent of 
the bottle position on the rosette. Sampling for specific programs was 
outlined on sample log sheets prior to cast recovery or at the time of 
collection. The bottles and rosette were examined before samples were 
drawn. Any abnormalities were noted on the sample log.
Specific difficulties encountered when deploying on the NBP included:

1) Slow deployment time due to tight fit of rosette through door, and 
   limited adjustment of wire scope.
2) Risk of taking a wave through the open Baltic Room door and 
   flooding the room, (specific risk to electronic winch controls). 
   Waves can often reach chest height.
3) Wave hitting rosette while passing through doorway or while 
   lowering rosette into water leading to potential shock loading. A 
   high strength bungee system was employed to help counter act shock 
   loading.


1.2. Underwater Electronics

The SBE9plus CTD supplied a standard SBE-format data stream at a data 
rate of 24 frames/second.


Table 1.2.0: CLIVAR SO4P Rosette Underwater Electronics. 
             Transmissometer provided by TAMU; Altimeter 47042 and 
             Deck-Unit provided by USAP; LADCP provided and operated by UH. 
             All other sensors belong to SIO/STS/ODF.

                                                   Serial        AD       Stations
Instrument/Sensor       Mfr./Model                 Number        Channel  Used
----------------------  -------------------------  ------------  -------  ----------
Carousel 36-pI Sampler  Sea-Bird 5BE32             3216715-0187           Test,2-140
Reference Temperature   Sea-Bird 5BE35             35-0011                Test,2-140
CTD                     Sea-Bird SBE9plus SIO      831                    Test,2-140
Pressure                Paroscientific Digiquartz  99677                  Test,2-140
Primary Temperature     Sea-Bird SBE3pIus          03P-4943               Test,2-10
Primary Temperature     Sea-Bird SBE3pIus          03P-5046               11-140
Primary Conductivity    Sea-Bird SBE4C             04-3057                Test,2-10
Primary Conductivity    Sea-Bird SBE4C             04-2593                11-140
Dissolved Oxygen        Sea-Bird 5BE43             43-1136       Aux4N6   Test,2-140
Primary Pump            Sea-Bird SBE5T             05-3334                Test,2-140
Secondary Temperature   Sea-Bird SBE3pIus          03P-5046               Test,2-10
Secondary Temperature   Sea-Bird SBE3pIus          03P-4943               11-140
Secondary Conductivity  Sea-Bird SBE4C             04-3176                Test
Secondary Conductivity  Sea-Bird SBE4C             04-2593                2-10
Secondary Conductivity  Sea-Bird SBE4C             04-3399                11-140
Secondary Pump          Sea-Bird SBE5T             05-3376                Test,2-140
Transmissometer         WETLab5 C-STAR             CST-327DR     Aux3N4   Test,2-140
Fluorometer             WETLab5                    5CF2743       AuxiNO   Test,2-140
Altimeter (500m)        Simrad 1007                90107         Aux2N2   Test
Altimeter (lOOm)        Benthos PSA-916D           45531         Aux2N2   2-124
Altimeter (lOOm)        Benthos PSA-916D           47042         Aux2N2   125-140
LADCP Down              RDI Workhorse 300kHz       12734                  Test,2-52
LADCP Up                RDI Workhorse 300kHz       13330                  Test,2-52
LADCP Down              RDI Workhorse 300kHz       13330                  53-140
Deck Unit               Sea-Bird SBE1 1            11 P47914-0768         Test,2-140


An SBE35RT reference temperature sensor was connected to the 5BE32 
carousel and recorded a temperature for each bottle closure. These 
temperatures were used as additional CTD calibration checks. The SBE35RT 
was utilized per the manufacturer's specifications and instructions, as 
described on their website, www.seabirdelectronics.com. The SBE9plus CTD 
was connected to the 5BE32 36-place carousel providing for 
single-conductor sea cable operation. The sea cable armor was used for 
ground. Power to the SBE9plus CTD, sensors, 5BE32 carousel was provided 
through the sea cable from the SBE1 1 plus deck unit in the main lab.


1.3. Navigation and Bathymetry Data Acquisition

Navigation data were acquired at 1-second intervals from the ship's 
Kongsberg Seatex Seapath GPS 200 (receiver "1 ") by a Linux system 
beginning 19 February 2011. Centerbeam bathymetric data from the 
Kongsberg Simrad EM-1 20 multibeam echosounder system were fed realtime 
into the STS acquisition system and merged with navigation data. Depth 
data displayed by the ship were 7m deeper than the feed to STS; a 7m hull depth 
offset was added later to STS depth data for all events stored in the 
hydrographic database.

Bottom depths associated with rosette casts were also recorded on the 
Console Logs during deployments. The Kongsberg Simrad EM-120 centerbeam 
depths were typically used. In addition, uncorrected (1500 m/sec) LF/3.5 
kHz data from a Knudsen 320 (LF/3.5 kHz) system were also displayed for 
comparison or as an alternate source for bottom depth when the multibeam 
signal was out of range or unavailable.

CTD Depth plus Distance Above Bottom (DAB) are reported in STS/ODF 
bottle and CTD data files for ocean-bottom depth whenever both of these 
data values were available; otherwise, centerbeam bottom depths are 
reported. Corrected multibeam center depths are reported for each cast 
event in the WOCE 90-1 format ".sum" file.


1.4. CTD Data Acquisition and Rosette Operation

The CTD data acquisition system consisted of an SBE-1 1 plus (V2) deck 
unit and three networked generic PC workstations running CentOS-5.5 Linux. 
Each PC workstation was configured with a color graphics display, keyboard, 
trackball and DVD+RW drive. One system had a Comtrol Rocketport PCI multiple 
port serial controller providing 8 additional RS-232 ports. The systems were 
interconnected through the ship's network. These systems were available for 
real-time operational and CTD data displays, and provided for CTD and 
hydrographic data management.

One of the workstations was designated the CTD console and was connected 
to the CTD deck unit via RS-232. The CTD console provided an interlace 
and operational displays for controlling and monitoring a CTD deployment 
and closing bottles on the rosette. Another of the workstations was 
designated the website and database server and maintained the 
hydrographic database for SO4P. Redundant backups were managed 
automatically.

CTD deployments were initiated by the console watch after the ship had 
stopped on station. The acquisition program was started and the deck 
unit turned on at least 3 minutes prior to package deployment. The watch 
maintained a console operations log containing a description of each 
deployment, a record of every attempt to close a bottle and any relevant 
comments. The deployment and acquisition software presented a short 
dialog instructing the operator to turn on the deck unit, to examine the 
onscreen CTD data displays and to notify the deck watch that this was 
accomplished.

Once the deck watch had deployed the rosette, the winch operator lowered 
it to 10 meters, deeper in heavier seas. The CTD sensor pumps were 
configured with a 5-second start-up delay after detecting seawater 
conductivities. The console operator checked the CTD data for proper 
sensor operation and waited for sensors to stabilize, then instructed 
the winch operator to bring the package to the surface and descend to a 
specified target depth, based on CTD pressure available on the winch 
display. The profiling rate was at most 30m/min to 1 OOm and 60m/min 
deeper than 1 OOm, depending on sea cable tension and sea state.

The progress of the deployment and CTD data quality were monitored 
through interactive graphics and operational displays. Bottle trip 
locations were transcribed onto the console and sample logs. The sample 
log was used later as an inventory of samples drawn from the bottles. 
The altimeter channel, CTD depth, winch wire-out and bathymetric depth 
were all monitored to determine the distance of the package from the 
bottom, allowing a safe approach to 8-10 meters.

Bottles were closed on the up-cast by operating an on-screen control. 
The expected CTD pressure was reported to the winch operator for every 
bottle trip. Bottles were tripped 30-40 seconds after the package 
stopped to allow the rosette wake to dissipate and the bottles to flush. 
The winch operator was instructed to proceed to the next bottle stop at 
least 10 seconds after closing bottles to ensure that stable CTD data 
were associated with the trip and to allow the SBE35RT temperature 
sensor to measure bottle trip temperature.

It was necessary at some stations in higher sea states to close 
shallower bottles (normally only the shallowest bottle) on the fly due 
to the need to keep tension on the CTD cable. At those closures - always 
noted on the CTD Console Log Sheet - the SBE35RT temperature is not 
usable.

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


1.5. CTD Data Processing

Shipboard CTD data processing was performed automatically during and 
after each deployment using SIO/STS CTD processing software v.5.1.6-1.

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

At the completion of a deployment a sequence of processing steps were 
performed automatically. The 0.5-second time series data were checked 
for consistency, clean sensor response and calibration shifts. A 
2-decibar pressure series was generated from the down cast data. The 
pressure-series data were used by the web service for interactive plots, 
sections and CTD data distribution. Time-series data were also available 
for distribution through the website.

CTD data were routinely examined for sensor problems, calibration shifts 
and deployment or operational problems. The primary and secondary 
temperature sensors (SBE3pIus) were compared to each other and to the 
5BE35 temperature sensor. CTD conductivity sensors (SBE4C) were compared 
to each other, then calibrated by examining differences between CTD and 
check sample conductivity values. CTD dissolved oxygen sensor data were 
calibrated to check sample data. Theta-Salinity and theta-02 comparisons 
were made between down and up casts as well as between groups of 
adjacent deployments.

A total of 140 casts were made using the 36-place CTD/LADCP rosette. 
Further elaboration of CTD procedures specific to this cruise are found 
in the next section.


1.6. CTD Acquisition and Data Processing Details

During the run to the Eastern Ross Sea mooring sites, routine 
Theta-Salinity overlays of deep pressureseries (downcast) data showed 
that primary sensors were not overlaying the bottle data. Closer 
examination showed that downcast salinity data were routinely 0.001 to 
0.002 PSU lower than upcast salinity data. This was not an issue for the 
secondary sensors. It was decided to use the secondary sensors for 
reporting data wherever possible, and only use the primary sensors where 
the secondary sensors were not usable. This did not seem to have any 
effect on oxygen data, which was connected into to the primary ducting.

Another problem also surfaced while examining time-series data in more 
detail on both Theta-Salinity plots and property-property plots near 
density inversions. The data for both sensors was unusually noisy, more 
than could be attributed to shiproll. The SBE1 1 deck unit settings were 
checked, and both sensors had the standard 0.073-second "advance". 
Various tests were performed, which showed that both sensor pairs 
required additional lags to match the TC data for the least noisy 
salinity data. T1C1 required an 0.06-second lag, and T2C2 required an 
additional 0.05-second lag.

Various reasons were proposed for this unusual extra lag, directly 
related to the low water temperatures -rarely outside ±2°C. It is 
suspected that this either slowed down the pump rates, or the 
conductivity sensor responses.

All CTD data were re-averaged through station 96 using the additional 
lags, and noise was greatly reduced for both sensor pairs. The lags were 
used for initial processing for the remainder of the casts.

Altimeter 90107 (500m range) was replaced by Altimeter 45531 (lOOm 
range) after the second Test cast because it was reading 50m too far off 
the bottom. C2/3176 was replaced by C2/2593 at the same time because it 
was anywhere from 0.02 to 0.06 mS/cm lower than Cl, with a notable drift 
between its own down and up casts. The deck unit alarm went off when the first 
test cast went into the water; perhaps this is related to the bad conductivity 
sensor values.

CI I/3057 was replaced by C2/3399 after station 10 due to excessive drift 
from cast to cast in the first 10 stations. The secondary TC sensors were 
shifted into the primary ducting, and the previous primary T was shifted into 
the secondary ducting with the new conductivity sensor. The original secondary 
TC sensors were used for reporting data for stations 2-10.

The secondary TC sensors were used for all data reported for stations 
11-140, except where those sensors were not usable. The following 
stations used the primary sensors for reporting data:

042/01  spiking/offsets/noise on C2: high late downcast, low all of upcast.

043/02  spiking/offsets (high) on C2 downcast until just above 2900db; 
        upcast still noisy.

076/01  problems with C2 stabilizing at start of cast, T2 also 
        intermittently flaky. lowering to 20-30db did not help. Appeared 
        to clear itself around 40-60db.

077/01  similar problem to station 76: unstable at surface, stabilized 
        deeper in cast.

Secondary pump 05-3376 was replaced with 05-4377 after station 77 and 
resolved the stabilization problems. A bench test showed no problem with 
the original pump.

Altimeter 45531 flooded during station 124, and was replaced by 
Altimeter 47042, with the same make/model/range.


The following table reflects other misc. problems noted during specific casts:

station/
cast      Comment
--------  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
3/1       inflection at surface in all parameters mirrors upcast - Ok.
11/1      blockage in tubing or frozen at top of cast, start pressure-sequencing 
          at 10db
16/1      Conductivity sensors not stable until 14db down, oxygen not 
          stable until much deeper. Probable freezing issue in pump tubes: 
          upcast shows a big mixed layer. Top 28db of raw CTDO data despiked to 
          same value as 28db (after it stabilized), before fitting. Coded
          CTDO as questionable because so much was extrapolated.
17/1      unusually noisy data: vertically mounted CTD was vibrating 
          significantly within its cage. 3of the 4 cage mounting bolts were 
          completely loose. They were cranked down with a socket.
22/1      Noisy, possible biological contamination on first descent to 
          35m; used second yoyo/start-down to start pressure-sequencing
23/2      CTD alarm went off near bottom of cast, 31 "sync" errors during cast. 
          Mechanical retermination done during 2-day run to station 24.
45/1      Stop at 3908m down cast to work on wire.
53/1      Downward-looking ADCP (12734) removed from rosette between stations 52 
          and 53. Upward-looking ADCP (13330) was moved to the downward-looking 
          ADCP position.
59/2      Prior to deployment, cleaned air bleed hole and rinsed/flushed 
          system with Triton-X.
62/1      first cast attempt aborted after launch due to reported bubbles coming 
          up from rosette when sitting at 1 Om. No problem found, re-used same 
          cast number.
69/1      carousel froze: No bottles closed.
78/1      Down to 20m for equilibration then up to 15m weather/seas issue. 
          Conductivity response much better this cast.
82/1      Did not bring to surface before downcast: cast begins at 8db.
85/1      offset in all sensors on upcast at -1350db. Post cast: found 2-inch 
          long weird fish in tube,looked like a combination between a dark brown 
          slug and an earwig, with little fins.
95/1      full preventative re-termination (electrical and mechanical) after 
          sta. 95, during 2-day runto sta.96.
96/1      downcast started at 8db.
98/1      Altimeter did not give a reading (true value) until 35m above the 
          bottom, it has 'kicked in' at -70m.
109/1     Start downcast at 20db due to heavy roll (no yoyo back to surface).
126/2     Cast stopped at lOOm due to odd CTD data, brought back on deck; visual       
          inspection showed no apparent blockage or loose connectors. Sucked out 
          pumps w/syringe, flushed w/DI slight pooling of water above exhaust 
          hole (primary) cleaned exhaust holes on both tubing section. Flushed 
          with DI, suctioned water w/syringe re-deployed as cast 3.


1.7. CTD Sensor Laboratory Calibrations

Laboratory calibrations of the CTD pressure, temperature, conductivity 
and dissolved oxygen sensors were performed prior to CLIVAR S04P. The 
calibration dates are listed in table 1.7.0.


Table 1.7.0 CLIVAR SO4P CTD sensor laboratory calibrations.

                                                             Calib.    Stations 
Sensor                                S/N       Date         Facility  Used
------------------------------------  --------  -----------  --------  ----------
Paroscientific Digiquartz Pressure    99677     01 Nov 2010  SIO/STS   Test,2-140
Sea-Bird SBE3 plus Ti Temperature     03P-4943  09 Nov 2010  SIO/STS   Test,2-10
Sea-Bird SBE3plus Ti Temperature      03P-5046  09 Nov 2010  SIO/STS   11-140
Sea-Bird SBE3plus T2 Temperature      03P-5046  09 Nov 2010  SIO/STS   Test,2-10
Sea-Bird SBE3plus T2 Temperature      03P-4943  09 Nov 2010  SIO/STS   11-140
Sea-Bird SBE4C Ci Conductivity        04-3057   28 Oct 2010  SBE
Test,2-iO
Sea-Bird SBE4C Ci Conductivity        04-2593   28 Oct 2010  SBE       11-140
Sea-Bird SBE4C C2 Conductivity        04-3176   20 Aug 2010  SBE       Test
Sea-Bird SBE4C C2 Conductivity        04-2593   28 Oct 2010  SBE       2-10
Sea-Bird SBE4C C2 Conductivity        04-3399   11 Nov 2010  SBE       11-140
Sea-Bird SBE43 Dissolved Oxygen       43-1136   20 Sep 2010  SBE       Test,2-140
Sea-Bird SBE35 Reference Temperature  35-0011   10 Dec 2010  SBE       Test,2-140


1.8. CTD Shipboard Calibration Procedures

CTD #831 was used for all CTD/rosette/LADCP casts during S04P. The CTD 
was deployed with all sensors and pumps aligned vertically, as 
recommended by SBE.

The SBE35RT Digital Reversing Thermometer (S/N 3516590-0011) served as 
an independent calibration check for Ti and T2. In situ salinity and 
dissolved 02 check samples collected during each cast were used to 
calibrate the conductivity and dissolved 02 sensors.

1.8.1. CTD Pressure

The Paroscientific Digiquartz pressure transducer (S/N 831-99677) was 
calibrated in November 2010 at the SIO/STS Calibration Facility. The 
calibration coefficients provided on the report were used to convert 
frequencies to pressure. The SIO/STS pressure calibration coefficients 
already incorporate the slope and offset term usually provided by 
Paroscientific.

Pre- and post-cast on-deck/out-of-water pressure offsets varied from 
-0.28 to +0.47 dbar before the casts, and -0.26 to +0.43 dbar after the 
casts. The in/out pressures within a cast were very consistent; most of 
the variation can be attributed to lows and highs in atmospheric 
pressure (including a day or two of more than 1020mb, and another 
period over 1010mb). No adjustments were made to calculated pressures.

1.8.2. CTD Temperature

The same two temperature sensors (03P-4943 and 03P-5046) were used 
during all SO4P casts. 4943 started out in the primary ducting, and 
5046 in the secondary. After station 10, the secondary TC pair was 
physically shifted to the primary circuit, and the original primary T 
was shifted to the secondary circuit with a new conductivity sensor. 
For the purposes of this report, Ti will refer to sensor 5046, and T2 
to sensor 4943 (referring to where they were ducted for most of the 
cruise).

Calibration coefficients derived from the pre-cruise calibrations, plus 
shipboard temperature corrections determined during the cruise, were 
applied to raw primary and secondary sensor data during each cast.

A single SBE35RT was used as a tertiary temperature check. It was 
located equidistant between Ti and T2 with the sensing element aligned 
in a plane with the Ti and T2 sensing elements. The SBE35RT Digital 
Reversing Thermometer is an internally-recording temperature sensor 
that operates independently of the CTD. It is triggered by the SBE32 
carousel in response to a bottle closure. According to the 
manufacturer's specifications, the typical stability is 0.001°C/year.

Two independent metrics of calibration accuracy were examined. At each 
bottle closure, the primary and secondary temperature were compared 
with each other and with the SBE35RT temperatures.

A single temperature correction was required for each sensor during 
CLIVAR SO4P. Both primary and secondary temperature sensors exhibited a 
linear pressure response compared to the SBE35RT. Offsets for both 
temperature sensors remained stable through-out the cruise, and did not 
warrant any adjustment.

The final corrections for temperature data reported on CLIVAR SO4P are 
summarized in Appendix A. All corrections made to CTD temperatures had 
the form:
                            T(ITS90) = T+tp(1)P+t(0)

Residual temperature differences after correction are shown in figures 
1.8.2.0 through 1.8.2.8.


Figure 1.8.2.0: SBE35RT-T1 by station (-0.01°C≤T1 - T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.2.1: Deep SBE35RT-T1 by station (Pressure >= 2000dbar).

Figure 1.8.2.2: SBE35RT-12 by station (-0.01°C≤T1 - T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.2.3: Deep SBE35RT-T2 by station (Pressure >= 2000dbar).

Figure 1.8.2.4: 11-12 by station (-0.01°C≤T1 - T2≤0.0l°C).

Figure 1.8.2.5: Deep 11-12 by station (Pressure >= 2000dbar).

Figure 1.8.2.6: SBE35RT-T1 by pressure (-0.01°C≤T1 - T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.2.7: SBE35RT-T2 by pressure (-0.01°C≤T1 - T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.2.8: T1-Y2 by pressure (-0.01°C≤T1 - T2ˆ0.01°C).


The 95% confidence limits for the mean low-gradient differences are 
±0.00942°C for SBE35RT-T1, ±0.00782°C for SBE35RT-T2 and ±0.01055°C for 
T1-T2. The 95% confidence limit for deep temperature residuals (where 
pressure > 2000db) is ±0.00080°C for SBE35R 1-Ti, ±0.00083°C for SBE35R 
T-T2 and ±0.00064°C for 11-12.

1.8.3. CTD Conductivity

Two conductivity sensors were rejected for drift issues: secondary 
sensor 04-3176 was replaced after the test cast, and primary sensor 
04-3057 was replaced after station 10. No data were used from either of 
these sensors. After station 10, the secondary IC pair was physically 
shifted to the primary circuit, and the original primary T was shifted 
to the secondary circuit with the new conductivity sensor.

Secondary sensor 04-2593 was used on stations 2-10, then shifted to 
primary after station 10. It will be referred to as Cl for the purposes 
of this report. The new conductivity sensor (04-3399) was placed in the 
secondary position from station 11 to the end of the cruise, and will be 
referred to as C2 in this report.

Calibration coefficients derived from the pre-cruise calibrations were 
applied to convert raw frequencies to conductivity. Shipboard 
conductivity corrections, determined during the cruise, were applied to 
primary and secondary conductivity data for each cast.

Corrections for both CTD temperature sensors were finalized before 
analyzing conductivity differences. Two independent metrics of 
calibration accuracy were examined. At each bottle closure, the primary 
and secondary conductivity were compared with each other. Each sensor 
was also compared to conductivity calculated from check sample 
salinities using CTD pressure and temperature.

The differences between primary and secondary temperature sensors were 
used as filtering criteria to reduce the contamination of conductivity 
comparisons by package wake. The coherence of this relationship is shown 
in figure 1.8.3.0.


Figure 1.8.3.0: Coherence of conductivity differences as a function 
                of temperature differences. 


Uncorrected conductivity comparisons are shown in figures 1.8.3.1 through 1.8.3.3.


Figure 1.8.3.1: Uncorrected C(bottle) - Cl by station (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.3.2: Uncorrected C(bottle) - C2 by station (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.3.3: Uncorrected C1 - C2 by station (-0.01°C≤T1 - T2≤0.01°C).


Offsets for each C sensor were determined using C(bottle) - C(CTD) 
differences in a deeper pressure range (500 or more dbars). Cl generally 
displayed no drift with time, although offsets were adjusted for 
stations 2-10, while the conductivity sensor was still acclimating at 
the start of the cruise. C2 offsets had a steady, slow shift with time; 
the rate of change flattened about halfway through the cruise. C2 
offsets were last evaluated for stations 11-85; then station 85's C2 
offset was used for later stations.

After conductivity offsets were applied to all casts, response to 
pressure and conductivity were examined for each conductivity sensor. 
The pressure response was not very linear for Cl, so residual 
differences were examined against conductivity first. All differences 
from stations 2-9 were used to determine a linear correction as a 
function of conductivity, which held throughout the cruise.

Cl and C2 pressure-dependent corrections were then determined. Only 
casts deeper than 4000db, and differences deeper than 500db, were used 
to determine the coefficients for Cl, stations 2-76. Excluding shallower 
values corrected deep conductivity data better without skewing the 
shallow data. All stations, and all pressure ranges, were used to 
determine pressure-response coefficients for C2, stations 11-76.

After the pressure dependency was corrected, residual differences were 
examined against conductivity for C2. A linear correction as a function 
of conductivity was determined using stations 11-81, including only data 
where (T1-T2) differences were within ±0.005°C.

Differences were monitored for both sensors during the rest of the 
cruise. No further adjustment to the pressure- or conductivity-dependent 
coefficients was warranted. Deep Theta-S overlays showed that deep CTD 
data overlaid well for the data reported.

The residual conductivity differences after correction are shown in 
figures 1.8.3.4 through 1.8.3.15.


Figure 1.8.3.4: Corrected C(bottle) - C1 by station (-0.01°C≤T1-12≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.3.5: Deep Corrected C(bottle) - C1 by station (Pressure >= 2000dbar).

Figure 1.8.3.6: Corrected C(bottle) - C2 by station (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.3.7: Deep Corrected C(bottle) - C2 by station (Pressure >=2000dbar).

Figure 1.8.3.8: Corrected C1 - C2 by station (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.3.9: Deep Corrected C1 - C2 by station (Pressure >= 2000dbar).

Figure 1.8.3.10: Corrected C(bottle) - C1 by pressure (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.3.11: Corrected C(bottle) - C2 by pressure (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.3.12: Corrected C1 - C2 by pressure (-0.01°C≤T1-12≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.3.13: Corrected C(bottle) - C1 by conductivity (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.3.14: Corrected C(bottle) - C2 by conductivity (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.3.15: Corrected C1 - C2 by conductivity (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).


The final corrections for all conductivity sensors used on CLIVAR SO4P 
are summarized in Appendix A. Corrections made to all conductivity 
sensors had the form:

                    C(cor)=C+cp(2)P(^2)+cp(1)P+c(1)C+c(0)

Salinity residuals after applying shipboard P/TIC corrections are 
summarized in figures 1.8.3.16 through 1.8.3.18. Only CTD and bottle 
salinity data with "acceptable" quality codes are included in the 
differences.


Figure 1.8.3.16: Salinity residuals by station (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.3.17: Salinity residuals by pressure (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.3.18: Deep Salinity residuals by station (Pressure >= 2000dbar).


Figures 1.8.3.17 and 1.8.3.18 represent estimates of the salinity 
accuracy of CLIVAR SO4P. The 95% confidence limits are ±0.0012 PSU 
relative to bottle salinities for deep salinities, and ±0.0049 PSU 
relative to bottle salinities for all salinities, where Ti -T2 is within 
±0.01°C.

1.8.4. CTD Dissolved Oxygen

A single 5BE43 dissolved 02 sensor (DO/43-1136) was used during CLIVAR 
S04P. The sensor was plumbed into the primary T1/C1 pump circuit after C1.

The DO sensor was calibrated to dissolved 02 check samples taken at 
bottle stops by matching the down cast CTD data to the up cast trip 
locations on isopycnal surfaces, then calculating CTD dissolved 02 using 
a DO sensor response model and minimizing the residual differences from 
the check samples. A nonlinear least-squares fitting procedure was used 
to minimize the residuals and to determine sensor model coefficients, 
and was accomplished in three stages.

The time constants for the lagged terms in the model were first 
determined for the sensor. These time constants are sensor-specific but 
applicable to an entire cruise. Next, casts were fit individually to 
check sample data. Consecutive casts were checked on plots of Theta vs 
O2 to check for consistency.

The small CTDO2 drop at the surface of most casts seems to be an 
artifact of a long equilibration time for this particular sensor. The 
upcast shows no routine drops, nor is any such drop seen in raw Trace 
Metal CTDO2 data at the surface on the same stations. On a few stations 
where a second yoyo was done, it did not appear at the top of the second 
yoyo. These low data at the surface are marked as questionable in the 
final reported CTD data files.

Standard and blank values for check sample oxygen titration data were 
smoothed, and the oxygen values recalculated, after the final fitting of 
CTD oxygen. However, the changes to bottle oxygen values were small and 
would have had little effect on the fits.

CTD dissolved 02 residuals are shown in figures 1.8.4.0-1.8.4.2.


Figure 1.8.4.0: O2 residuals by station (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.4.1: O2 residuals by pressure (-0.01°C≤T1-T2≤0.01°C).

Figure 1.8.4.2: Deep O2 residuals by station (Pressure >= 2000dbar).


The standard deviations of 2.83 µmol/kg for all oxygens and 0.42 µmol/kg 
for deep oxygens are only presented as general indicators of goodness of 
fit. SIO/STS makes no claims regarding the precision or accuracy of CTD 
dissolved O2 data.

The general form of the SIO/STS DO sensor response model equation for 
Clark cells follows Brown and Morrison [Brow78], and Millard [Mi1182], 
[Owen85]. SIO/STS models DO sensor secondary responses with lagged CTD 
data. In situ pressure and temperature are filtered to match the sensor 
responses. Time constants for the pressure response (tp), a slow 
(tTf) and fast (tTS) thermal response, package velocity (rdp), 
thermal diffusion (tdT) and pressure hysteresis (th) are fitting 
parameters. Once determined for a given sensor, these time constants 
typically remain constant for a cruise. The thermal diffusion term is 
derived by low-pass filtering the difference between the fast response 
(Ts) and slow response (T1) temperatures. This term is intended to 
correct non-linearities in sensor response introduced by inappropriate 
analog thermal compensation. Package velocity is approximated by 
low-pass filtering 1storder pressure differences, and is intended to 
correct flow-dependent response. Dissolved O2 concentration is then 
calculated:

                                                                    dOc   dP
                        p(h)                      (C4T1+C5Ts+C7P1+C6---+C8--+C9dT)
02ml/l=[C(1)V(DO)e(^C(2)----)+ C(3)]·f(sat)(T,P)·e                  dt    dt           (1.8.4.0)
                        5000

where:

    02ml/l       Dissolved 02 concentration in mill;
    V(DO)        Raw sensor output;
    C(1)         Sensor slope
    C(2)         Hysteresis response coefficient
    C(3)         Sensor offset
    f(sat)(T,P)  02 saturation at T,P (mill);
    T            in situ temperature (°C);
    P            in situ pressure (decibars);
    P(h)         Low-pass filtered hysteresis pressure (decibars);
    T(l)         Long-response low-pass filtered temperature (°C);
    T(s)         Short-response low-pass filtered temperature (°C);
    P(1)         Low-pass filtered pressure (decibars);
    dOc/dt       Sensor current gradient (µamps/sec);
    dP/dt        Filtered package velocity (db/sec);
    dT           low-pass filtered thermal diffusion estimate (T - T1).
    C4 - C9      Response coefficients.

CTD 02m111 data are converted to mollkg units on demand.


1.9. Bottle Sampling

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

    • CFC-11,CFC-12,SF6
    • 3He
    • 02
    • Dissolved Inorganic Carbon (DIC)
    • pH
    • Total Alkalinity
    • 13C and 14C
    • Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) and Total Dissolved Nitrogen (TDN)
    • Tritium
    • 18)
    • Nutrients
    • Chromophoric Dissolved Organic Matter (CDOM)
    • Salinity
    • Phytoplankton Pigments (Chlorophyll a, Particulate Organic Carbon)
    • Particulate Absorption
    • Phytoplankton-Cytrometry
    • Millero Density

The correspondence between individual sample containers and the rosette 
bottle position (1-36) from which the sample was drawn was recorded on 
the sample log for the cast. This log also included any comments or 
anomalous conditions noted about the rosette and bottles. One member of 
the sampling team was designated the sample cop, whose sole 
responsibility was to maintain this log and insure that sampling 
progressed in the proper drawing order.

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

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


1.10. Bottle Data Processing

Water samples collected and properties analyzed shipboard were centrally 
managed in a relational database (PostgreSoL 8.1.18) running on a Linux 
system. A web service (OpenACS 5.5.0 and AOLServer 4.5.1) front-end 
provided ship-wide access to CTD and water sample data. Web-based 
facilities included on-demand arbitrary property-property plots and 
vertical sections as well as data uploads and downloads.

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

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

Table 1.10.0 shows the number of samples drawn and the number of times 
each WHP sample quality flag was assigned for each basic hydrographic 
property:


Table 1.10.0: Frequency of WHP quality flag assignments.

                        Rosette Samples Stations -140
              ----------------------------------------------
                       Reported       WHP Quality Codes
                        levels   1   2     3   4   5   7   9
                       --------  -  ----  ---  --  --  -  --
              Bottle     4413    0  4358    2  40   0  0  12
              CTD Salt   4413    0  4350   38  24   0  0   0
              CTD Oxy    4356    0  4253  102   0   0  0  57
              Salinity   4372    0  4328   25  18   5  0  36
              Oxygen     4350    0  4325    8  16  27  0  36
              Silicate   4314    0  4310    2   1   1  0  98
              Nitrate    4314    0  4307    2   4   1  0  98
              Nitrite    4314    0  4294   18   1   1  0  98
              Phosphate  4312    0  4279    1  31   3  0  98
              

Additionally, data investigation comments are presented in Appendix C.

Various consistency checks and detailed examination of the data 
continued throughout the cruise. Chief Scientist, James Swift, reviewed 
the data and compared it with historical data sets.


1.11. Salinity

Equipment and Techniques

A single Guildline Autosal 8400A salinometer (S/N 57-396) located in the 
Palmer's "Thermo Kool" temperature controlled room, was used for all 
salinity measurements. This salinometer had been modified to include a 
communication interlace for computer-aided measurement, a higher 
capacity pump and two additional temperature sensors. An external 
temperature probe was used to measure the air temperature in the room, 
and an internal probe was used to monitor the water bath temperature. 
Hand held thermometers were used to monitor the salinity bottle 
temperature. This was accomplished by inserting the temperature probe 
outside salinity bottles in the center of the salinity case.

Samples were analyzed after they had been brought to 1 or 2°C below the 
Autosal's water bath temperature, usually within 3-12 hours after 
collection. This was accomplished using a separate water bath, described 
below. The salinometer was standardized for each group of analyses 
(usually 1-2 casts, up to -67 samples) using at one fresh vial of 
standard seawater before analysis and one fresh vial after, to determine 
if the standardization had drifted.

Salinometer measurements were aided by a computer with SIO/STS software 
compiled in LabView. The software maintained a log of each salinometer 
run which included Autosal settings and air and bath temperatures. The 
air temperature was displayed and monitored via a 24-hour strip-chart in 
order to observe changes. The program also guided the operator through 
the standardization procedure and making sample measurements. The 
analyst was prompted to change samples and flush the cells between 
readings.

Special standardization procedures included flushing the cell at least 4 
times with a fresh vial of Standard Seawater (SSW), setting the flow 
rate as low as possible during the last fill, and monitoring the STD 
dial setting. If the STD dial changed by 10 units or more since the last 
salinometer run (or during standardization), another vial of SSW was 
opened and the standardization procedure repeated to verify the setting.

Samples were run using 3 flushes before the final fill. The program user 
defined configuration determined the stability of a measurement and 
prompted for additional readings if there appeared to be drift. The 
operator could annotate the salinometer log, and would routinely add 
comments about cracked sample bottles, loose thimbles, salt crystals or 
anything unusual in the amount of sample in the bottle.

Prior to the first salinity run of the cruise, it was determined that 
due to the low temperature of the sample water (-2°C) a scheme other 
than air equilibration needed to be incorporated. The samples were 
taking more than 24 hours for the salt cases to reach approximate room 
temperature. A warm water bath was utilised to bring samples to room 
temperature. The bottles were only partialy submerged to preventing 
fresh water from entering the cap/thimble. Once the water bath 
equilibrated, warm or cold water was added to bring the temperature of 
the bottles up to 19° and stay there for approximately 10 minutes. At 
this point, the box was removed from the water and moved to the 
controlled temperature room. Analysis began within 15-30 minutes. This 
process was completed in approximately 1.5 hours.

Standard seawater was stored out of the constant temperature room and 
brought into the room 3 or 4 cases at a time to ensure that it had 
enough time to come up to room temperature before being used.

Sampling and Data Processing

A total of 5104 salinity measurements drawn from the CLIVAR STS/ODF 
rosette and trace metal casts. There were 45 samples from the underway 
sampling program. Approximately 298 vials of standard seawater (IAPSO 
SSW) were used.

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

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

Data processing included double checking that the station, sample and 
box number had been correctly assigned, and reviewing the data and log 
files for operator comments. The salinity data were compared to CTD 
salinities and were used for shipboard sensor calibration. Comments the 
analyst made were gleaned from the program provided file and any 
anomalous values and investigation and data coding are reported in 
Appendix C.

Laboratory Temperature

The salinometer water bath temperature was maintained slightly higher 
than ambient laboratory air temperature at 21°C. The ambient air 
temperature varied from 19 to 22°C during the cruise.

The constant temperature room was 8'x8' and temperature was maintained 
using a Heatcraft TL21AF heating and cooling unit, controlled using a 
Ranco ETC electronic temperature controller. Room temperature varied 
sinusoidally about a mean of 20.3°C, with a period of approximately 10 
minutes and an amplitude of approximately 1.2°C (standard deviation of 
temperature recorded at 1 minute intervals was 1.2°C). The mean 
temperature, averaged daily, fluctuated randomly due to the ambient 
temperature of the ship.

Standards

IAPSO Standard Seawater Batche P-152 was used to standardize stations 
1-140.

Analytical Problems

There were few analytical problems. There were two stations that 
appeared to have not been properly equilibrated before analysis. There 
was also three salinity runs which had unusual standard dial changes. 
This was attributed to bad standards and appeared in only one box of 
standard vials.


1.12. Oxygen Analysis

Equipment and Techniques

Dissolved oxygen analyses were performed with an SIO/ODF-designed 
automated oxygen titrator using photometric end-point detection based on 
the absorption of 365nm wavelength ultra-violet light. The titration of 
the samples and the data logging were controlled by ODF PC software 
compiled in LabView. Thiosulfate was dispensed by a Dosimat 665 buret 
driver fitted with a 1.0 mL buret. The ODF method used a whole-bottle 
modified-Winkler titration following the technique of Carpenter [Carp65] 
with modifications by Culberson et al. [Culb9l], but with higher 
concentrations of potassium iodate standard (~0.012N) and thiosulfate 
solution (~55 gm/l). Standard Sb3 soluttions prepared ashore were run 
daily (approximately every 2-4 stations), unless changes were made to 
the system or reagents. Reagent/distilled water blanks were also 
determined daily or more often if a change in reagents required it to 
account for presence of oxidizing or reducing agents.

Sampling and Data Processing

4376 samples were analyzed for oxygen from the main rosette and 44 from 
the underway sampling program.

Samples were collected for dissolved oxygen analyses soon after the 
rosette was brought on board. Three different cases of 36 flasks each 
were rotated by station to minimize flask calibration issues. Using a 
silicone drawing tube, nominal 125m1 volume-calibrated iodine flasks 
were rinsed 3 times with minimal agitation, then filled and allowed to 
overflow for at least 3 flask volumes. The sample drawing temperatures 
were measured with an electronic resistance temperature detector (RTD) 
embedded in the drawing tube. These temperatures were used to calculate 
umol/kg concentrations, and as a diagnostic check of bottle integrity. 
Reagents (MnCl2 then Nal/NaOH) were added to fix the oxygen before 
stoppering. The flasks were shaken twice (10-12 inversions each time) to 
assure thorough dispersion of the precipitate, once immediately after 
drawing, and then again after about 20 minutes.

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

Thiosulfate normalities were calculated from each standardization and 
corrected to 20°C. The thiosulfate normalities and blanks were monitored 
for possible drifting or possible problems when new reagents were used. 
An average blank and thiosulfate normality were used to recalculate 
oxygen concentrations. The difference between the original and 
"smoothed" data averaged 0.06% over the course of the cruise.

Bottle oxygen data was reviewed ensuring proper station, cast, bottle 
number, flask, and draw temperature were entered properly. Comments made 
during analysis were reviewed. All anomalous actions were investigated 
and resolved. If an incorrect end point was encountered, the analyst re-
examined raw data and program recalculated a correct end point. The 
occurrences were attributed to debris in the water bath.

After the data was uploaded to the database, bottle oxygen was 
graphically compared with CTD oxygen and adjoining stations. Any 
erroneous looking points were reviewed and comments made regarding the 
final outcome of the investigation. These investigations and final data 
coding are reported in Appendix C.

Volumetric Calibration

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

Standards

Liquid potassium iodate standards were prepared in 6 liter batches and 
bottled in sterile glass bottles at ODF's chemistry laboratory prior to 
the expedition. The normality of the liquid standard was determined by 
calculation from weight. The standard was supplied by Alfa Aesar (lot 
B05N35) and has a reported purity of 99.4-100.4%. All other reagents were 
"reagent grade" and were tested for levels of oxidizing and reducing impurities 
prior to use.

Analytical Problems

The cruise began with a Schott Titronix T100 autoburet outfitted with a 
glass tip to dispense the thiosulfate solution. During the first week of 
the expedition there were multiple lost samples due to "freezing" of the 
PC as well as incorrect endpoints; possibly from the wide glass tip 
interfering with the light path. After 13 stations, the Titronics unit 
was switched out for the traditional Dosimat 765 unit. No further 
program freezing or ligh path problems were noted. ODF chemists will 
troubleshoot and reevaluate the Titronics unit on shore.


1.13. Nutrient Analysis

Equipment and Techniques

Nutrient analyses (phosphate, silicate, nitrate plus nitrite and 
nitrite) were performed on a Seal Analytical continuous-flow 
AutoAnalyzer 3 (AA3). After each run, the charts were reviewed for any 
problems and any problems and final concentrations (micromoles per 
liter) calculated using SEAL Analytical AACE 6.05 software. The 
analytical methods used are described by Gordon et a!. [Gord92] Hager et 
al. [Hage68] and Atlas et al. [Atla7l].

Silicate

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

Reagents

Tartaric Acid (ACS Reagent Grade)

  200g tartaric acid dissolved in DW and diluted to 1 liter volume. Stored 
  at room temperature in a polypropylene bottle.

Ammonium Molybdate

  10.8g Ammonium Molybdate Tetrahydrate dissolved in l000ml dilute H2S04*.

  *(Dilute H2S04 = 2.8m1 concentrated H2S04 to a liter DW). Added 5 drops 
  15% ultra pure SIDS per liter of solution.

Stannous Chloride (ACS Reagent Grade)

  Stock solution:

  40g of stannous chloride dissolved in 100 ml 5N HCI. Refrigerated in a 
  polypropylene bottle.

  Working solution:

  5 ml of stannous chloride stock diluted to 200 ml final volume with 1.2N 
  HCI. Made up daily - refrigerated when not in use in a dark 
  polypropylene bottle.

  NOTE: Oxygen introduction was minimized by swirling rather than shaking 
  the stock solution.

Nitrate plus Nitrite

A modification of the Armstrong et al. [Arms67] procedure was used for 
the analysis of nitrate and nitrite. For the nitrate analysis, the 
seawater sample was passed through a cadmium reduction column where 
nitrate was quantitatively reduced to nitrite. Sulfanilamide was 
introduced to the sample stream followed by N-(1-naphthyl)ethylenediamine 
dihydrochloride which coupled to form a red azo dye. The stream was then passed 
through a 15mm flowcell and the absorbance measured at 540nm. The same technique 
was employed for nitrite analysis, except the cadmium column was not present and 
a 50mm flowcell was used for measurement.

Reagents

Sulfanilamide (ACS Reagent Grade)

  log sulfanilamide dissolved in l.2N HCI and brought to 1 liter volume. 
  Added 2 drops of 40% surfynol 465/485 surfactant. Stored at room 
  temperature in a dark polypropylene bottle.

N-(l-Naphthyl)-ethylenediamine dihydrochioride (N-i-N) (ACS Reagent Grade)

  lg N-1-N in DIW, dissolved in DW and brought to 1 liter volume. Added 2 
  drops 40% surfynol 465/485 surfactant. Stored at room temperature in a 
  dark polypropylene bottle. Discarded if the solution turned dark reddish 
  brown.

Imidazole Buffer (ACS Reagent Grade)

  13.6g imidazole dissolved in -3.8 liters DIW. Stirred for at least 30 
  minutes until completely dissolved. Added 60 ml of CuSO4 + NH4CI mix 
  (see below). Added 4 drops 40% surfynol 465/485 surfactant. Using a 
  calibrated pH meter, adjusted to pH of 7.83-7.85 with 10% 
  (1.2N)HCI(about 20-30m1 of acid, depending on exact strength). Final 
  solution brought to 4L with DIW. Stored at room temperature.

NH4CI + CuSO4 mix:

  2g cupric sulfate dissolved in DIW, brought to 100 ml volume (2%). 250g 
  ammonium chloride dissolved in DIW, brought to 1 liter volume. Added 5m1 
  of 2% CuSO4 solution to the NH4CI stock.

  Note: 40% Surfynol 465/485 is 20% 465 plus 20% 485 in DIW.
  Prepared solution at least one day before use to stabilize.

Phosphate

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

Reagents

Ammonium Molybdate (ACS Reagent Grade)

  H2S04 solution:

  420 ml of DIW poured into a 2 liter Ehrlenmeyer flask or beaker, this 
  flask or beaker was placed into an ice bath. SLOWLY added 330 ml of conc 
  H2S04. This solution gets VERY HOT!!

  27g ammonium molybdate dissolved in 250m1 of DIW. Brought to 1 liter 
  volume with the cooled sulfuric acid solution. Added 5 drops of 15% 
  ultra pure SIDS surfactant. Stored in a dark polypropylene bottle.

Dihydrazine Sulfate (ACS Reagent Grade)

  6.4g dihydrazine sulfate dissolved in DIW, brought to 1 liter volume and 
  refrigerated.

Sampling and Data Processing

4998 nutrient samples from 140 CLIVAR and trace metal stations were 
analyzed as well as 45 samples from the underway sampling program. The 
cruise started with new pump tubes and were changed four times, after 
Stations 14, 49, 66 and 120. Two Beer's Law calibration checks were run 
throughout the cruise. Four sets of primary/secondary standards were 
made up over the course of the cruise. The cadmium column reduction efficiency 
was checked periodically and ranged between 98%-100%.

Nutrient samples were drawn into 40 ml polypropylene screw-capped 
centrifuge tubes. The tubes and caps were cleaned with 10% HCI and 
rinsed once with de-ionized water and 3 times with sample before 
filling. Samples were analyzed within two hours after sample collection, 
allowing sufficient time for all samples to reach room temperature. The 
centrifuge tubes fit directly onto the sampler.

Carryover was minimized by running the samples from low to high 
concentration. In addition, percent carryover was calculated and applied 
using a provision in the AACE software, which involved running one high 
peak immediately folllowed by two low peaks. A mid-range drift samples 
was run immediately prior and after each set of samples. A linearly 
interpolated baseline and instrument drift correction was applied to 
each run.

Nutrients, reported in micromoles per kilogram, were converted from 
micromoles per liter by dividing by sample density calculated at i atm 
pressure (0 db), in situ salinity, and an assumed lab temperature of 
20°C.

Standards and Glassware

A 3-point standardization calibration curve was performed at the 
beginning of each group of analyses. The calibration curve consisted of 
low, medium and high concentration mixed nutrient standard prepared 
prior to each run from a secondary standard in a low-nutrient seawater 
matrix. A group usually consisted on one station.cast (up to 36 
samples). The secondard standards were prepared aboard ship by dilution 
from the pre-weighed primary standards. A set of 7 different standard 
concentrations (Table 1.13.0) were analyzed twice. This determined the 
deviation from standard as a function of absorbance for each nutrient 
(Beer's Law). All runs and both Beer's Law were linear for all four 
parameter (correlation coefficient = 0.9999 - 1.0000). An aliquot from a 
large volume of stable deep seawater was also run with each set of 
samples as a substandard and additional check.


Table 1.13.0: CLIVAR SO4P Concentration of Beer's Law standards (uM)

                      std    N+N    PO4   SiO3  NO2
                      ---   -----   ---   ----  ----
                       1)    0.0    0.0   0.0   0.0
                       2)    7.75   0.6    30   0.25
                       3)   15.50   1.2    60   0.50
                       4)   23.25   1.8    90   0.75
                       5)   31.00   2.4   120   1.00
                       6)   38.75   3.0   150   1.25
                       7)   46.50   3.6   180   1.50


All glass volumetric flasks and pipettes were gravimetrically calibrated 
prior to the cruise. The primary standards were dried and weighed prior 
to the cruise. The exact weight was noted for future reference. When 
primary standards were made, the flask volume at 20°C, the weight of the 
powder, and the temperature of the solution were used to buoyancy-correct 
the weight, calculate the exact concentration of the solution and determine 
how much of the primary was needed for the desired concentrations of secondary 
standard.

All the reagent solutions, primary and secondary standards were made 
with fresh distilled deionized water (DIW).

Working standards were made up in low nutrient seawater (LNSW). LNSW was 
collected off shore of coastal California and treated in the ODF 
chemistry lab. The water was first filtered through a 0.45 micron filter 
then re-circulated for -8 hours through a 0.2 micron filter, an UV lamp 
and a second 0.2 micron filter. The actual concentration of nutrients in 
this water was empirically determined during the calculation of the 
non-linear corrections that were applied to the nutrient concentrations.

The Nitrate (KNO3 lot# 042263) and phosphate (KH2PO4 lot# 991608) 
primary standards were obtained from Fisher Scientific with reported 
purites of 100% and 99.8%, respectively. The silicate (Na2SiF6 lot# 
J25E26) and nitrite (NaNO2 lot# K19D12) standards were obtained from 
Alfa Aesar with reported purities of >98% and 97%.


Quality Control

As is standard ODF practice, a deep calibration "check" sample was run 
with each set of samples. The cruise-averaged data are tabulated in 
Table 1.13.1.


Table 1.13.1: CLIVAR SO4P Deep calibration cruise-averaged data

                       Parameter  Concentration (uM)
                       ---------  ------------------
                          NO3        32.60 ±0.13
                          PO4         2.26 ±0.01
                          SIL       104.49 ±0.56


Reference Material for Nutrients in Seawater (RMNS)

Lot "BE" RMNS samples were run on Stations 14-140 as an unknown check 
sample (sample "98"). The cruise-averaged data are tabulated in Table 
1.13.2.


Table 1.13.2: CLIVAR SO4P RMNS cruise-averaged data

      Parameter  Calculated Concentrations  Certified Concentration
                         (umol/kg)                 (umol/kg)
      ---------  -------------------------  -----------------------
         NO3           36.65 ±0.13                  36.64
         PO4            2.66 ±0.01                   2.67
         SIL          100.00 ±0.57                 101.2


Analytical Problems

The cruise began with an AAI pump, which was replaced by an AAII pump 
immediately prior to Station 46. Stations 1-66 experienced less of a 
peak plateau than optimal for the N+N channel only. Data was adjusted 
by comparing the average calculated RMNS value versus the certified 
value. Stations 1-66 NO3 full water column profiles were thus adjusted 
by multiplying the calculated concentrations by a factor of 1.0177. The 
peak plateau issue was remiedied after Station 66 by changing out the 
pump, pump tubes and cadmium column.



References

Arms67.
    Armstrong, F. A. J., Stearns, C. R., and Strickland, J. D. H., "The 
    measurement of upwelling and subsequent biological processes by 
    means of the Technicon Autoanalyzer and associated equipment," 
    Deep-Sea Research, 14, pp. 381-389 (1967).

Atla7l.
    Atlas, E. L., Hager, S. W., Gordon, L. I., and Park, P. K., "A 
    Practical Manual for Use of the Technicon AutoAnalyzer® in Seawater 
    Nutrient Analyses Revised," Technical Report 215, Reference 71-22, 
    p. 49, Oregon State University, Department of Oceanography (1971).

Bern67.
    Bernhardt, H. and Wilhelms, A., "The continuous determination of 
    low level iron, soluble phosphate and total phosphate with the 
    AutoAnalyzer," Technicon Symposia, I, pp. 385-389 (1967).
    
Brow78.
    Brown, N. L. and Morrison, G. K., "WHOI/Brown conductivity, 
    temperature and depth microprofiler," Technical Report No. 78-23, 
    Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (1978).
    
Carp6S.
    Carpenter, J. H., "The Chesapeake Bay Institute technique for the 
    Winkler dissolved oxygen method," Limnology and Oceanography, 10, 
    pp. 141-143 (1965).

Culb9l.
    Culberson, C. H., Knapp, G., Stalcup, M., Williams, R. 1., and 
    Zemlyak, F., "A comparison of methods for the determination of 
    dissolved oxygen in seawater," Report WHPO 91-2, WOCE Hydrographic 
    Programme Office (Aug 1991).

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

Hage68.
    Hager, S. W., Gordon, L. I., and Park, P. K., "A Practical Manual 
    for Use of the Technicon AutoAnalyzer® in Seawater Nutrient 
    Analyses.," Final report to Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Contract 
    14-17-0001-1759., p. 3lpp, Oregon State University, Department of 
    Oceanography, Reference No. 68-33. (1968).

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

Mi1182.
    Millard, R. C., Jr., "CTD calibration and data processing techniques 
    at WHOI using the practical salinity scale," Proc. Int. STD 
    Conference and Workshop, p. 19, Mar. Tech. Soc., La Jolla, Ca. 
    (1982).

Owen85.
    Owens, W. B. and Millard, R. C., Jr., "A new algorithm for CTD oxygen 
    calibration," Journ. of Am.
    Meteorological Soc., 15, p. 621 (1985).
    
UNES81.
    UNESCO, "Background papers and supporting data on the Practical 
    Salinity Scale, 1978," UNESCO Technical Papers in Marine Science, 
    No. 37, p. 144 (1981).
    




                                           APPENDIX A

               CLIVAR SO4P: CTD TEMPERATURE AND CONDUCTIVITY CORRECTIONS SUMMARY
                          *NOTE: T2C2 for stations 2-10 are the same
                         physical sensors as T1 Cl for stations 11-end

          ITS-90 Temperature
             Coefficients                    Conductivity Coefficients            T vs C  Sensor
 Sta/      corT=tp1*corP+t0               corC=cp2*corP2+cp1*corP+c1*C+c0          Lag    Pair
 Cast       tp1          t0         cp2          Cp1            c1          c0    (secs.) Used*
------  -----------  ---------  -----------  ------------  ------------  -------- ------- ------
002/01  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  4.39191e-10  -1.09680e-06  -9.19178e-04  0.025425  0.06   T2C2*
003/01  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  4.39191e-10  -1.09680e-06  -9.19178e-04  0.024925  0.06   T2C2*
004/01  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  4.39191e-10  -1.09680e-06  -9.19178e-04  0.024925  0.06   T2C2*
005/01  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  4.39191e-10  -1.09680e-06  -9.19178e-04  0.024925  0.06   T2C2*
006/02  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  4.39191e-10  -1.09680e-06  -9.19178e-04  0.024425  0.06   T2C2*
007/01  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  4.39191e-10  -1.09680e-06  -9.19178e-04  0.023925  0.06   T2C2*
008/01  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  4.39191e-10  -1.09680e-06  -9.19178e-04  0.023925  0.06   T2C2*
009/01  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  4.39191e-10  -1.09680e-06  -9.19178e-04  0.023925  0.06   T2C2*
010/02  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  4.39191e-10  -1.09680e-06  -9.19178e-04  0.023925  0.06   T2C2*
011/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005542  0.05   T2C2

012/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005556  0.05   T2C2
013/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005569  0.05   T2C2
014/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005586  0.05   T2C2
015/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005601  0.05   T2C2
016/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005623  0.05   T2C2
017/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005659  0.05   T2C2
018/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005675  0.05   T2C2
019/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005692  0.05   T2C2
020/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005713  0.05   T2C2
021/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005731  0.05   T2C2

022/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005752  0.05   T2C2
023/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005772  0.05   T2C2
024/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005902  0.05   T2C2
025/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005921  0.05   T2C2
026/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005941  0.05   T2C2
027/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005960  0.05   T2C2
028/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005976  0.05   T2C2
029/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.005994  0.05   T2C2
030/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006013  0.05   T2C2
031/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -l.48498e-04  0.006031  0.05   T2C2

032/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006051  0.05   T2C2
033/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006068  0.05   T2C2
034/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006087  0.05   T2C2
035/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006106  0.05   T2C2
036/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006127  0.05   T2C2
037/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006147  0.05   T2C2
038/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006165  0.05   T2C2
039/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006183  0.05   T2C2
040/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006206  0.05   T2C2
041/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006225  0.05   T2C2

042/01  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  2.64698e-10  -8.46958e-07  -9.19178e-04  0.024629  0.06   T1C1*
043/02  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  2.64698e-10  -8.46958e-07  -9.19178e-04  0.024629  0.06   T1Cl*
044/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006285  0.05   T2C2
045/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006303  0.05   T2C2
046/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006338  0.05   T2C2
047/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006357  0.05   T2C2
048/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006378  0.05   T2C2
049/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006398  0.05   T2C2
050/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006416  0.05   T2C2
051/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006434  0.05   T2C2

052/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006456  0.05   T2C2
053/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006474  0.05   T2C2
054/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006495  0.05   T2C2
055/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006515  0.05   T2C2
056/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006533  0.05   T2C2
057/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006550  0.05   T2C2
058/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006572  0.05   T2C2
059/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006594  0.05   T2C2
060/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006612  0.05   T2C2
061/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006632  0.05   T2C2

062/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006651  0.05   T2C2
063/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006667  0.05   T2C2
064/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006684  0.05   T2C2
065/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006694  0.05   T2C2
066/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006702  0.05   T2C2
067/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006840  0.05   T2C2
068/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006843  0.05   T2C2
069/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006847  0.05   T2C2
070/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006851  0.05   T2C2
071/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006855  0.05   T2C2

072/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006957  0.05   T2C2
073/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006962  0.05   T2C2
074/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006971  0.05   T2C2
075/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.006975  0.05   T2C2
076/01  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  2.64698e-10  -8.46958e-07  -9.19178e-04  0.024629  0.06   T1C1*
077/01  -2.6480e-07  -0.000803  2.64698e-10  -8.46958e-07  -9.19178e-04  0.024629  0.06   T1C1*
078/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007081  0.05   T2C2
079/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007099  0.05   T2C2
080/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007106  0.05   T2C2
081/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007112  0.05   T2C2

082/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007124  0.05   T2C2
083/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007139  0.05   T2C2
084/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007152  0.05   T2C2
085/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
086/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
087/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
088/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
089/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
090/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
091/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2

092/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
093/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
094/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
095/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
096/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
097/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
098/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
099/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
100/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
101/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2

102/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
103/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
104/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
105/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
106/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
107/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
108/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
109/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
110/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
111/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2

112/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
113/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
114/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
115/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
116/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
117/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
118/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
119/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
120/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
121/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2

122/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
123/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
124/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
125/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
126/03  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
127/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
128/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
129/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
130/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
131/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2

132/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
133/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
134/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
135/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
136/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
137/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
138/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
139/01  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2
140/02  -6.2133e-07  -0.000589  7.14471e-11  -3.65949e-07  -1.48498e-04  0.007163  0.05   T2C2





                                           APPENDIX B

                        SUMMARY OF CLIVAR SO4P CTD OXYGEN TIME CONSTANTS
                                   (time constants in seconds)


   Pressure          Temperature        Pressure     O2 Gradient  Velocity     Thermal
Hysteresis(rh)  Long(tTI)  Short(tTs)  Gradient(tp)     (tog)       (TdP)   Diffusion(tdT)
--------------  ---------  ----------  ------------  -----------  --------  --------------
    100.0        300.0        8.0         0.50          8.00       100.00       300.0


                  CLIVAR SO4P: Conversion Equation Coefficients for CTD Oxygen
                                  (refer to Equation 1.8.4.0)

                                                                        dOc/dt   dP/dt
 Sta/    OcSlope   Offset  Phcoeff  T1coeff    Tscoeff     P1coeff      coeff    coeff  TdTcoeff
 Cast     (C1)      (C3)    (C2)     (C4)        (C5)        (C6)        (C7)    (C8)     (Cg)
------  ---------  ------  ------  ---------  ----------  ----------  ---------  -----  --------
002/01  4.596e-04   0.451  -2.106  2.136e-01   1.036e-01  -4.124e-04   9.191e-03   0   -0.014307
003/01  3.041e-04   0.235   1.415  8.204e-02  -1.493e-01  -4.699e-04  -8.593e-03   0    0.251290
004/01  5.762e-04  -0.076  -2.440  1.665e-01  -2.959e-02   3.449e-04   9.809e-04   0   -0.203460
005/01  6.356e-04  -0.271   1.137  6.824e-02   8.057e-03  -2.428e-04  -5.869e-03   0   -0.074906
006/02  4.llOe-04   0.027   1.013  3.912e-02  -8.443e-02  -1.107e-04  -1.089e-03   0    0.010066
007/01  5.448e-04  -0.185   0.635  7.757e-04   9.468e-04  -3.910e-05   6.634e-03   0   -0.021685
008/01  5.577e-04  -0.221   0.294  9.130e-03  -1.384e-02   5.791e-05   6.092e-03   0    0.008291
009/01  6.244e-04  -0.323   1.132  1.567e-02  -4.737e-03  -1.669e-04   1.056e-03   0    0.023515
010/02  6.163e-04  -0.309   0.575  1.467e-03   1.673e-02  -1.970e-05  -9.390e-04   0   -0.005720
011/01  5.734e-04  -0.240   0.548 -1.796e-04   4.210e-03  -1.401e-05   3.828e-03   0   -0.007968
   
012/01  8.278e-04  -0.649   0.802  1.131e-02   6.858e-02  -1.094e-04  -3.388e-03   0    0.003361
013/01  9.476e-04  -0.839   0.545  1.571e-02   1.109e-01  -1.697e-05  -1.184e-03   0   -0.006671
014/01  6.313e-04  -0.345   0.003  1.822e-02   4.511e-04   1.710e-04   4.993e-03   0    0.020581
015/01  6.826e-04  -0.423   0.885  7.122e-03   3.822e-02  -1.166e-04   1.007e-03   0   -0.002404
016/01  5.543e-04  -0.206   0.391  1.120e-02  -1.758e-02   2.301e-05   3.898e-03   0    0.007185
017/01  5.967e-04  -0.286   0.068  7.736e-03  -5.486e-04   1.322e-04   4.856e-03   0    0.004261
018/01  5.661e-04  -0.235  -0.014  1.027e-02  -1.599e-02   1.480e-04   4.739e-05   0    0.012345
019/01  5.824e-04  -0.262  -0.031  6.917e-03  -3.536e-03   1.591e-04   5.016e-03   0    0.000457
020/01  5.852e-04  -0.271  -0.032  7.569e-03  -2.259e-03   1.641e-04   4.628e-03   0    0.007626
021/01  6.044e-04  -0.311  -0.069  3.439e-03   1.933e-02   1.939e-04   2.921e-03   0    0.000253
   
022/01  5.750e-04  -0.254   0.091  9.493e-03   4.957e-03   1.194e-04  -1.702e-03   0   -0.007337
023/02  5.875e-04  -0.273  -0.024  4.698e-03   3.316e-03   1.617e-04   2.788e-03   0   -0.004815
024/01  5.774e-04  -0.253   0.081  2.720e-03   9.630e-03   1.191e-04   8.795e-05   0   -0.019357
025/01  6.121e-04  -0.316  -0.004  3.680e-03   1.518e-02   1.679e-04   1.066e-03   0   -0.000054
026/01  6.114e-04  -0.317  -0.001  1.013e-02   1.234e-02   1.679e-04   8.950e-04   0    0.001920
027/02  6.048e-04  -0.307  -0.025  7.093e-03   1.006e-02   1.736e-04  -1.785e-04   0    0.002566
028/01  6.046e-04  -0.305  -0.043  6.485e-03   7.132e-03   1.790e-04  -7.764e-04   0    0.004621
029/01  6.093e-04  -0.306   0.019  7.284e-03   1.223e-02   1.527e-04  -5.045e-04   0   -0.013355
030/01  7.293e-04  -0.518   0.031  4.949e-03   6.557e-02   2.130e-04  -7.435e-04   0   -0.009033
031/01  6.040e-04  -0.299   0.005  6.097e-03   7.740e-03   1.571e-04   5.655e-03   0    0.001906
   
032/01  5.676e-04  -0.233  -0.041  4.111e-03  -7.702e-03   1.523e-04   5.387e-03   0    0.000405
033/01  5.839e-04  -0.260   0.047  1.063e-02  -4.805e-03   1.317e-04   3.312e-03   0    0.004150
034/01  5.912e-04  -0.279  -0.061  1.055e-02  -5.939e-04   1.759e-04   9.190e-03   0    0.008061
035/01  6.482e-04  -0.377  -0.013  7.515e-03   2.956e-02   1.886e-04  -5.578e-03   0    0.001913
036/01  4.922e-04  -0.101  -0.078  8.257e-03  -4.895e-02   1.278e-04   1.006e-02   0    0.009796
037/02  6.081e-04  -0.305  -0.012  9.813e-03   7.768e-03   1.654e-04   2.914e-03   0    0.002636
038/01  6.370e-04  -0.362  -0.044  1.007e-02   2.574e-02   1.991e-04   4.212e-03   0    0.009868
039/01  5.843e-04  -0.263  -0.015  7.398e-03  -7.183e-04   1.544e-04   3.736e-03   0    0.000838
040/01  5.903e-04  -0.275   0.009  1.072e-02   1.217e-03   1.499e-04   1.828e-03   0    0.004395
041/01  5.817e-04  -0.256   0.037  4.556e-03   2.132e-03   1.329e-04   5.706e-03   0   -0.011741
   
042/01  5.932e-04  -0.280  -0.004  8.388e-03   5.080e-03   1.554e-04   3.177e-03   0   -0.005771
043/02  5.843e-04  -0.264   0.035  7.657e-03   6.731e-04   1.390e-04   2.812e-03   0   -0.000475
044/01  5.830e-04  -0.265  -0.030  7.818e-03   1.545e-03   1.614e-04   5.280e-03   0   -0.000941
045/01  6.237e-04  -0.337  -0.032  1.209e-02   1.977e-02   1.867e-04   6.518e-03   0    0.009107
046/01  6.171e-04  -0.321  -0.008  5.938e-03   1.552e-02   1.684e-04   1.051e-02   0   -0.001987
047/01  5.753e-04  -0.245  -0.025  7.729e-03  -8.814e-03   1.513e-04   4.940e-03   0    0.001869
048/01  6.277e-04  -0.342  -0.005  1.398e-02   2.088e-02   1.756e-04   8.157e-03   0    0.003083
049/02  6.101e-04  -0.308  -0.000  6.270e-03   1.162e-02   1.622e-04   2.799e-03   0   -0.000823
050/01  5.950e-04  -0.279   0.002  8.203e-03   1.554e-03   1.518e-04   4.063e-03   0   -0.000999
051/01  5.924e-04  -0.275  -0.009  8.734e-03   2.245e-03   1.554e-04   7.795e-03   0    0.000446
   
052/01  5.868e-04  -0.267  -0.015  1.852e-03   5.573e-03   1.552e-04   5.727e-03   0   -0.005213
053/01  5.900e-04  -0.268  -0.000  6.581e-03   1.212e-03   1.488e-04   6.102e-03   0   -0.001095
054/01  5.767e-04  -0.245  -0.006  1.558e-03  -2.289e-03   1.454e-04   3.407e-03   0   -0.002214
055/02  5.649e-04  -0.223   0.047  6.756e-03  -7.849e-03   1.214e-04   6.592e-03   0   -0.003745
056/01  5.777e-04  -0.251  -0.048  4.261e-03  -4.180e-03   1.626e-04   2.983e-03   0    0.003465
057/01  5.686e-04  -0.231  -0.006  9.804e-04  -2.876e-03   1.413e-04   6.347e-03   0   -0.006516
058/01  6.680e-04  -0.401   0.024  5.366e-03   2.832e-02   1.782e-04   7.902e-03   0   -0.002192
059/02  5.705e-04  -0.241   0.000  6.270e-03  -5.164e-03   1.448e-04   2.457e-03   0    0.001364
060/01  5.005e-04  -0.127  -0.285  9.703e-04  -3.234e-02   1.947e-04  -4.849e-03   0    0.015703
061/01  5.810e-04  -0.254   0.002  1.999e-03  -1.555e-05   1.457e-04   4.074e-03   0    0.003237
   
062/01  5.873e-04  -0.265  -0.014  4.411e-03  -1.669e-03   1.535e-04   4.950e-03   0    0.000603
063/01  6.147e-04  -0.304   0.121  2.693e-03   1.026e-02   1.126e-04   6.511e-04   0   -0.009660
064/01  5.714e-04  -0.233   0.166 -3.493e-06  -8.002e-04   9.139e-05   8.576e-03   0   -0.002969
065/02  4.929e-04  -0.133   0.979 -1.569e-02  -2.0lOe-02  -1.005e-04   4.596e-03   0    0.042484
066/02  6.144e-03  -0.629   1.257  1.588e+00  -1.137e-01  -2.351e-04   1.795e-06   0   -1.314100
067/01  1.166e-03  -0.795  -0.096  3.031e-01  -9.195e-03   2.648e-04  -5.252e-04   0   -0.291010
068/01  1.310e-03  -0.786   0.423  3.330e-01   5.461e-02   9.237e-05   7.702e-04   0   -0.221180
069/01  9.663e-04  -0.480   0.629  2.525e-01   9.758e-03  -4.214e-06  -2.055e-03   0   -0.317590
070/01  6.408e-04  -0.423  -0.019 -3.098e-02   3.438e-03   2.631e-04   1.756e-04   0    0.038206
071/01  5.916e-04  -0.195   0.288  2.022e-02   2.992e-02   4.387e-05   2.091e-03   0   -0.375940
   
072/01  2.426e-04   0.009  -0.095 -4.346e-01   5.809e-02  -1.085e-04   9.192e-04   0   -0.138680
073/01  9.333e-04  -0.313   0.734  2.369e-01   7.919e-02  -2.838e-05   2.659e-04   0   -0.421030
074/01  1.404e-03  -0.512   1.083  5.318e-01   4.554e-03  -1.282e-04   4.978e-04   0   -0.592220
075/01  1.202e-03  -0.466   0.989  4.210e-01   1.741e-02  -7.616e-05  -9.806e-04   0   -0.356960
076/01  3.035e-04  -0.155   0.347 -4.011e-01   1.160e-02   1.146e-04  -1.033e-03   0    0.601460
077/01  3.551e-04  -0.072   1.936 -2.351e-01   1.610e-02  -2.908e-04   3.659e-03   0    0.169010
078/01  4.792e-04  -0.207   2.283 -9.903e-02  -1.120e-02  -2.609e-04  -8.027e-04   0    0.081094
079/01  9.502e-04  -0.946   1.583 -6.784e-02   1.033e-01  -1.727e-04  -3.907e-03   0    0.064557
080/01  5.555e-04  -0.205   1.360  1.369e-02  -1.748e-02  -2.185e-04   1.623e-03   0    0.018059
081/01  5.797e-04  -0.249   0.072  8.468e-03  -6.519e-03   1.205e-04   3.080e-04   0    0.000530
   
082/01  5.777e-04  -0.250   0.142  2.417e-03  -5.811e-03   1.053e-04  -3.221e-03   0    0.003479
083/02  7.076e-04  -0.450   0.296  1.209e-02   3.100e-02   6.742e-05  -1.684e-04   0   -0.010935
084/01  5.774e-04  -0.245   0.109 -2.283e-03   4.590e-03   1.076e-04   1.746e-03   0   -0.015206
085/01  6.052e-04  -0.289   0.069  7.433e-03   2.383e-03   1.275e-04  -1.915e-05   0   -0.004422
086/01  6.043e-04  -0.289   0.174  7.534e-03   5.871e-03   9.270e-05   2.265e-04   0   -0.009421
087/01  5.692e-04  -0.238  -0.024  4.486e-03  -8.383e-03   1.503e-04   2.125e-03   0    0.004496
088/01  5.890e-04  -0.267   0.030  9.967e-03  -4.134e-03   1.375e-04  -3.818e-04   0   -0.001455
089/01  6.162e-04  -0.312   0.042  4.795e-03   8.453e-03   1.444e-04  -9.967e-04   0   -0.004816
090/01  6.296e-04  -0.334   0.022  9.721e-03   9.557e-03   1.590e-04   2.162e-03   0    0.006287
091/02  6.235e-04  -0.323   0.015  5.803e-03   6.785e-03   1.575e-04   5.769e-03   0    0.002007
   
092/01  6.061e-04  -0.291   0.064  7.562e-03   2.831e-03   1.299e-04  -2.638e-03   0   -0.002960
093/02  6.017e-04  -0.291  -0.023  7.310e-03  -1.545e-03   1.646e-04   2.521e-03   0    0.007011
094/01  4.474e-04  -0.031   0.061  5.935e-03  -4.407e-02   8.155e-05   1.959e-03   0    0.004443
095/01  5.065e-04  -0.132  -0.029  5.796e-03  -2.636e-02   1.253e-04   9.737e-03   0    0.004933
096/01  5.809e-04  -0.255  -0.013  7.430e-03  -5.679e-03   1.511e-04   7.774e-03   0    0.003456
097/01  6.124e-04  -0.310  -0.000  6.046e-03   9.832e-03   1.621e-04   3.170e-03   0    0.001289
098/01  5.779e-04  -0.253  -0.025  1.002e-02  -8.823e-03   1.552e-04   6.463e-03   0    0.007444
099/01  5.804e-04  -0.256  -0.024  6.698e-03  -2.234e-03   1.555e-04   3.180e-03   0   -0.000997
100/01  5.908e-04  -0.275  -0.018  5.926e-03  -6.263e-04   1.599e-04  -5.715e-04   0    0.006169
101/01  5.801e-04  -0.252  -0.011  4.984e-03  -3.660e-03   1.484e-04   3.008e-03   0    0.001520
   
102/02  5.965e-04  -0.285  -0.023  4.372e-03   2.800e-03   1.645e-04   2.622e-03   0    0.004663
103/01  6.829e-04  -0.436   0.044 -1.179e-02   5.349e-02   1.827e-04  -5.207e-04   0   -0.016300
104/01  6.522e-04  -0.381   0.027 -8.620e-03   3.893e-02   1.738e-04   5.665e-03   0   -0.009719
105/01  6.236e-04  -0.328   0.010  7.595e-03   7.496e-03   1.638e-04   1.804e-03   0    0.006730
106/01  5.888e-04  -0.267  -0.015  1.039e-02  -6.489e-03   1.544e-04   1.850e-03   0    0.008257
107/01  4.850e-04  -0.077   0.252  9.208e-03  -4.138e-02   3.964e-05   7.265e-03   0   -0.003507
108/01  5.669e-04  -0.228  -0.026  9.414e-03  -1.423e-02   1.463e-04   3.776e-03   0    0.005682
109/01  5.460e-04  -0.192  -0.027  7.855e-03  -2.049e-02   1.370e-04   6.703e-03   0    0.004953
110/01  5.481e-04  -0.195  -0.042  8.736e-03  -1.959e-02   1.416e-04   7.520e-03   0    0.004338
111/01  6.106e-04  -0.309  -0.006  6.945e-03   3.741e-03   1.663e-04   6.466e-03   0    0.009425
   
112/01  5.785e-04  -0.248  -0.019  7.245e-03  -6.234e-03   1.499e-04   7.227e-03   0    0.001086
113/01  6.068e-04  -0.301  -0.006  9.158e-03   2.340e-03   1.631e-04   7.167e-03   0    0.004757
114/01  6.068e-04  -0.307  -0.030  1.926e-02  -8.868e-03   1.768e-04   3.960e-03   0    0.025503
115/01  5.768e-04  -0.247  -0.029  5.803e-03  -6.425e-03   1.540e-04   5.126e-03   0    0.005720
116/01  5.618e-04  -0.213   0.125  2.191e-03  -5.487e-03   9.294e-05   5.098e-03   0   -0.017917
117/01  6.158e-04  -0.319  -0.004  1.336e-02   3.926e-04   1.689e-04   3.797e-04   0    0.016364
118/01  5.363e-04  -0.181  -0.035  6.182e-03  -1.487e-02   1.382e-04   8.826e-03   0    0.001067
119/01  5.874e-04  -0.267   0.000  3.296e-03   7.624e-04   1.497e-04   2.560e-04   0    0.000770
120/01  6.107e-04  -0.310   0.007  1.718e-02  -4.145e-03   1.608e-04   8.904e-04   0    0.012026
121/01  5.894e-04  -0.273  -0.005  1.647e-02  -1.082e-02   1.542e-04   5.341e-03   0    0.011252
   
122/02  6.119e-04  -0.315  -0.049  1.481e-02  -7.171e-03   1.880e-04   6.190e-03   0    0.027507
123/01  5.932e-04  -0.279  -0.003  8.458e-03  -9.684e-04   1.551e-04   4.301e-03   0    0.004999
124/02  6.008e-04  -0.290  -0.007  9.807e-03  -3.281e-05   1.597e-04   2.156e-03   0    0.004677
125/01  5.803e-04  -0.251   0.007  4.281e-03  -2.788e-03   1.421e-04   4.532e-03   0    0.000298
126/03  5.628e-04  -0.218   0.083 -1.366e-04  -1.755e-03   1.079e-04   5.751e-03   0   -0.016284
127/01  5.908e-04  -0.271  -0.033  1.308e-02  -1.133e-02   1.627e-04   8.189e-04   0    0.014632
128/02  5.826e-04  -0.253   0.061  5.632e-03  -8.537e-04   1.233e-04   2.658e-03   0   -0.010092
129/01  6.638e-04  -0.411   0.028 -1.782e-03  4.600e-02  1.884e-04  5.118e-03   0   -0.006654
130/02  6.349e-04  -0.353   0.011  3.419e-03  2.204e-02  1.736e-04  2.266e-03   0    0.004780
131/01  4.945e-04  -0.079   0.252  1.425e-02 -5.495e-02  3.477e-05  3.607e-03   0   -0.000867

132/02  6.044e-04  -0.304  -0.015  4.456e-03  1.348e-02  1.713e-04 -2.167e-03   0    0.002323
133/01  5.843e-04  -0.258   0.008  6.606e-03  4.697e-04  1.437e-04  5.478e-03   0   -0.005303
134/01  5.611e-04  -0.214   0.071  1.239e-02 -2.007e-02  1.127e-04  6.636e-03   0    0.003453
135/01  5.498e-04  -0.196  -0.074  3.502e-03 -1.950e-02  1.517e-04  5.580e-03   0    0.006683
136/02  5.801e-04  -0.251  -0.029  5.390e-03 -5.179e-03  1.545e-04  5.498e-03   0    0.001072
137/01  5.843e-04  -0.254   0.117  6.817e-03 -4.066e-03  1.080e-04  4.149e-03   0   -0.002352
138/02  6.035e-04  -0.295   0.406  1.089e-02  1.667e-02  2.666e-05  1.699e-03   0   -0.002283
139/01  6.144e-04  -0.316   0.014  3.174e-02  2.188e-02  1.162e-04  2.639e-03   0   -0.023959
140/02  5.249e-04  -0.109  -4.697  3.259e-01 -2.797e-02  5.231e-04  5.538e-03   0   -0.205740






                                           APPENDIX C


                              CLIVAR SO4P: Bottle Quality Comments



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


Stn/  Samp  Prop- Qual.
Cast  No.   erty  Code  Comment
----  ----  ----  ----  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2/1   102   O2     2   02 value high. Over-titration, could not recover. Processor: "Sample was not
                        over-titrated as analyst thought, used original value resolving oxygen
                        discrepancy."
 2/1   103   O2     5   02 sample lost, possible light interference.
 2/1   103   salt   5   Salinity sample kept increasing, lost sample.
 2/1   104   O2     5   Oxygen-no endpoint. Sample lost.
 2/1   106   salt   3   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity value very similar to sample 5,
                        cannot recognize that operator had a problem. Code salinity questionable,
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
 2/1   109   O2     5   Oxygen sample lost.
 3/1   101   O2     5   Analyst: "sample lost." 02 draw temperature probe had a problem, added
                        +2.5 to the temperatures, should not make a difference in computed kilogram
                        units as all temperatures are less than 5 degrees.
 3/1   101   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resulted in a good
                        agreement with the CTD and adjoining stations. Salinity as well as nutrients
                        are acceptable.
 3/1   103   no3    2   N03, possibly P04 N03 seems a bit high, maybe by 0.3. Since this is only
                        1 %, probably leave coded as good. Analyst: "Peaks look good, no analytical
                        errors.
 3/1   104   salt   2   5 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resulted in a good
                        agreement with the CTD and adjoining stations. Salinity as well as oxygen
                        and nutrients are acceptable.
 3/1   110   salt   5   Salinity readings kept increasing, could not get a stable reading, value was
                        lost.
 3/1   113   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resulted in a good
                        agreement with the CTD and adjoining stations. Salinity as well as oxygen
                        and nutrients are acceptable.
 3/1   114   salt   5   Salinity readings kept increasing, could not get a stable reading, value was
                        lost.
 4/1   101   O2     5   Analyst: "sample lost. Dosimat stalled."
 4/1   101   p04    2   P04 0.02-0.04 low. Analyst: "Valid peaks, no analytical errors noted."
 4/1   102   p04    2   P04 0.02-0.04 low. Analyst: "Valid peaks, no analytical errors noted."
 4/1   103   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved slightly high
                        salinity , salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
 4/1   104   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved slightly high
                        salinity , salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
 4/1   106   no3    2   There is N03 chatter at +1- 0.3 level. Since this is only +1- 1%, probably leave
                        coded as good. Analyst: "Peaks look good, no analytical problems noted."
 4/1   107   no3    2   There is N03 chatter at +1- 0.3 level. Since this is only +1- 1%, probably leave
                        coded as good. Analyst: "Peaks look good, no analytical problems noted."
 4/1   108   no3    2   There is N03 chatter at +1- 0.3 level. Since this is only +1- 1%, probably leave
                        coded as good. Analyst: "Peaks look good, no analytical problems noted."
 4/1   109   no3    2   There is N03 chatter at +1- 0.3 level. Since this is only +1- 1%, probably leave
                        coded as good. Analyst: "Peaks look good, no analytical problems noted."
 4/1   110   no3    2   There is N03 chatter at +1- 0.3 level. Since this is only +1- 1%, probably leave
                        coded as good. Analyst: "Peaks look good, no analytical problems noted."
 4/1   110   O2     2   Sample was over-titrated then back titrated, appears that first analysis was
                        okay, corrected value and data appears acceptable.
 4/1   113   reft   3   SBE35T -0.015/-0.01 vs CTDT1 /CTDT2; somewhat unstable SBE35T
                        reading.
 4/1   115   O2     2   Sample was over-titrated then back titrated, appears that first analysis was
                        okay, corrected value and data appears acceptable.
 4/1   116   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved slightly high
                        salinity, salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
 4/1   118   O2     5   Analyst: "sample lost. Dosimat stalled."
 4/1   119   O2     4   02 value low vs CTD0, nearby bottles. No analytical notes. Code bad.
 4/1   120   btl.   9   Closed too shallow, possibly partially out of water. Did not use this bottle for
                        sampling, closed bottle 21 at the same depth.
 5/1   101   p04    2   P04 0.02-0.03 low, within accuracy of measurement. Analyst: "Valid peaks,
                        no analytical errors noted."
 5/1   102   p04    2   P04 0.02-0.03 low, within accuracy of measurement. Analyst: "Valid peaks,
                        no analytical errors noted."
 5/1   103   O2     5   sample lost.
 5/1   103   p04    2   P04 0.02-0.03 low, within accuracy of measurement. Analyst: "Valid peaks,
                        no analytical errors noted."
 5/1   104   p04    2   P04 0.02-0.03 low, within accuracy of measurement. Analyst: "Valid peaks,
                        no analytical errors noted."
 5/1   105   p04    2   P04 0.02-0.03 low, within accuracy of measurement. Analyst: "Valid peaks,
                        no analytical errors noted."
 5/1   105   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD, agrees with adjoining stations as
                        does oxygen and nutrients. There is a spike in the CTD trace, code CTD
                        salinity questionable.
 5/1   106   O2     5   Analyst: "OT, no endpoint." 02 value very high vs CTDO and nearby bottles.
                        Oxygen value lost.
 5/1   108   O2     2   Low oxygen with corresponding 5i03 and salinity. Data are acceptable.
 5/1   115   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity is slightly high and is
                        acceptable.
 5/1   121   O2     5   Analyst: "sample lost."
 5/1   126   no2    2   N02 -1.7 too high. Analyst: "All peaks look good. TSG sample was analyzed
                        immediately prior to 126 and produced identical results."
 6/2   203   no3    3   N:P ratio is low. Analyst: "Peaks look good- no analytical errors. Code
                        questionable."
 6/2   206   btl.   2   Nozzles are hard to pull out.
 6/2   206   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD, agrees within accuracy of the
                        measurement with adjoining stations. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients
                        are acceptable.
 6/2   207   btl.   2   Nozzles are hard to pull out.
 6/2   208   btl.   2   Nozzles are hard to pull out.
 6/2   208   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD, agrees within accuracy of the
                        measurement with adjoining stations. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients
                        are acceptable.
 6/2   210   salt   2   Thimble came off with cap. 4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity as
                        well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
 6/2   214   O2     2   02 low, corresponding high 5i03 feature. Oxygen as well as salinity and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
 6/2   215   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD, agrees within accuracy of the
                        measurement with bottle data on adjoining stations. Fine structure seen in
                        the CTD trace. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
 6/2   216   salt   2   Thimble came off with cap. 3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity as
                        well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
 6/2   218   salt   2   Thimble came off with cap. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
 7/1   116   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
 7/1   121   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD, gradient area. Salinity as well as
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
 7/1   135   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
 7/1   136   salt   3   Bottle salinity is 0.04 low compared with CTD, also low compared with
                        adjoining stations, code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients
                        acceptable.
 8/1   102   no3    2   N03 0.7 low. Analyst: "All valid peaks. No analytical errors noted."
 8/1   110   btl.   2   Full stream on open spigot, valve fully closed. Oxygen as well as salinity and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
 8/1   126   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity within accuracy of
                        measurement, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
 9/1   103   O2     4   Bubble dispensed through burette. 02 high 0.2. Code oxygen bad.
 9/1   106   O2     3   02 appears low, 0.1. No analytical problems noted. Code oxygen
                        questionable, salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
 9/1   110   salt   3   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salt crystal fell in, bad seal on rubber
                        stopper on second read. First reading gives better agreement, still high.
                        Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
 9/1   116   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Second and third readings give better
                        agreement, leave as is. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
 9/1   117   O2     2   02 value high, tried over titration. Analyst thought sample was over-titrated
                        and performed a back-titration. The original value is acceptable.
 9/1   121   O2     5   Analyst: "Dosimat stalled, kicked program and tried over titration. Sample
                        lost."
 9/1   129   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Second and third readings give better
                        agreement, leave as is. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
 9/1   132   ctds   2   Somewhat noisy CTDT/CTDS during soak, but stabilized before trip. Code
                        CTDS acceptable.
 9/1   132   salt   3   Salinity +0.035 vs CTDS1/52; code Salinity questionable. "Bottle salinity high
                        compared with Station 8 as is the CTD.
 9/1   134   O2     5   Aborted analysis, sample pickling missed.
10/2   205   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   205   O2     2   Interesting sample: bottle 02 possibly a little high (may also be the case to a
                        lesser extent on bottle 06) by ca. 0.08 mI/I, which is edging into questionable
                        (code 3) territory. But N03 & 5i03 are a little low, and even bottle salt a tiny
                        low, which all are in same oceanographic direction as the high 02. Another
                        interesting possibility - consistent with every ODF property except N03
                        (which has been chattering a bit) - is that 05 closed at the same time that 04
                        closed. Suggest taking a look at CFC data. Processor: "This comment was
                        made prior to bottle reassignment."
10/2   206   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   207   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   208   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   209   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   210   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   210   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
10/2   211   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   212   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   213   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   214   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   215   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   216   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   216   salt   4   5 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings did not resolve
                        salinity difference, code salinity bad, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
10/2   217   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   218   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   219   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   220   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   221   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   222   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   223   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   224   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   225   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   226   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   227   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   228   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   229   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   229   reft   3   SBE35T is +0.04/+0.065 vs CTDT1/CTDT2; unstable SBE35T reading.
10/2   230   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   231   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   232   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   233   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   234   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   235   btl.   4   Bottles tripped one level deeper than intended. Suspect that the lanyard for 5
                        was in the latch position with 4. Trip data was reassigned based on this
                        assessment and salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable unless
                        otherwise individually noted. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled.
10/2   236   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
11/1   101   O2     3   Oxygen appears -0.1 low compared with CTDO and adjoining stations. No
                        analytical problem noted, except sample was run second, which sometimes
                        means that lines were not properly flushed. Oxygen is questionable, salinity
                        and nutrients are acceptable.
11/1   101   p04    2   The entire station for P04 & N03 appear high compared with adjoining
                        stations. Analyst: "Station 11 has noisy peaks for N03 and especially P04.
                        There were some autoanalyzer problems for this station. Leave data coded
                        as acceptable except as noted, 10 & 11.
11/1   105   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen are acceptable. Thimble came off with
                        cap, unstable sample.
11/1   110   btl.   2   Leaking when spigot first tested. Oxygen as well as salinity are acceptable.
11/1   110   no3    4   N03 & P04 seems low (by about 0.04?) and N03 a tiny bit high, leading to
                        an outlier on a N03/P04 plot. Might be worth a look at P04 at this level.
                        Analyst: "Noisy peak, code bad."
11/1   110   p04    4   P04 possibly a small amount low, though within error limits. Analyst: "Noisy
                        peak, code bad."
11/1   111   no3    4   N03 & P04 seems low (by about 0.04?) and N03 a tiny bit high, leading to
                        an outlier on a N03/P04 plot. Might be worth a look at P04 at this level.
                        Analyst: "Noisy peak, code bad."
11/1   111   p04    4   P04 possibly a small amount low, though within error limits. Analyst: "Noisy
                        peak, code bad."
11/1   112   O2     2   Analyst: "No peak, sample lost" Analyst thought sample had over-titrated and
                        performed a back-titration. The original readings are acceptable.
11/1   130   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen are acceptable.
11/1   131   O2     2   Analyst: "Stirrer bar missing on first titration." Back-titration resulted in an
                        acceptable value.
11/1   136   btl.   2   Tripped on the fly due to weather. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients
                        are acceptable.
12/1   104   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Thimble came off with cap. First
                        reading resolved salinity difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients
                        are acceptable.
12/1   106   O2     5   Analyst: "No peak, sample lost."
12/1   121   O2     4   Oxygen high no analytical notes, code oxygen bad.
12/1   124   O2     5   Analyst: "No peak, analysis aborted, sample lost."
12/1   125   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
12/1   131   reft   3   SBE35T -0.035/-0.025 vs CTDT1/CTDT2; unstable SBE35T reading.
12/1   136   btl.   2   Tripped on the fly due to weather. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients
                        are acceptable.
13/1   110   btl.   2   May have slight leak-water comes out of spigot when vent is closed. The
                        spigot was knocked on recovery (by hand). Oxygen as well as salinity and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
13/1   115   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Inner cap not seated well. First reading
                        resolved salinity difference, salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
13/1   117   salt   4   Bottle salinity +0.01 vs CTDS. Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and
                        adjoining stations. Inner cap not seated well. Code salinity bad, oxygen and
                        nutrients acceptable.
13/1   129   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference, salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
13/1   135   O2     5   Analyst: "Dosimat froze during titration. Sample lost."
13/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
13/1   136   O2     5   Analyst: "Dosimat froze during titration. Sample lost."
14/1   119   salt   4   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No analytical
                        problems noted. Code salinity bad, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
14/1   132   reft   3   SBE35T reading unstable.
14/1   133   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
14/1   133   salt   2   Bottle salinity -0.02 vs CTDS, code CTDS questionable. Gradient, variation in
                        CTD while entrained water is dispersing. Bottle salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable. Neither CTD nor bottle is bad, likely 1 meter bottle
                        vs. CTD difference.
15/1   104   sio3   3   Si03 low 2.1 compared with adjoining stations. P04 slightly low 0.02, N03
                        low 0.09, 02 high 0.03, and Salinity are all within accuracy of the
                        measurements. Analyst: "Valid peak. No analytical error noted." Code 5i03
                        questionable, salinity, oxygen and other nutrients acceptable.
15/1   105   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading gave a better salinity
                        agreement. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
15/1   118   btl.   2   Bottle possibly didn't close properly, clip on lanyard prematurely unclipped,
                        probably Ok, suspect occurrence at bottle trip. Oxygen as well as salinity and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
15/1   134   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. Code CTD salinity a questionable, CTD is okay, just does
                        not compare well with bottle salinity.
15/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD agrees with adjoining stations,
                        variation in CTD, both sensors agree with one another, causing the large
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
15/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
16/1   105   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
16/1   115   O2     2   Possible drawn duplicate of 16. Processor: "Does not appear to have been
                        drawn from 16, leave as is."
16/1   116   O2     2   0.03 difference with CTD not the best but OK to leave as code 2
                        (acceptable). 02 flasks for 16 and 17 were switched in the box, data file
                        follows Sample Log.
16/1   122   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
16/1   133   no2    2   N02 0.5 high compared with adjoining stations. Analyst: "Valid peak; follows
                        trend. No analytical error noted."
16/1   133   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD agrees with adjoining stations,
                        variation in CTD, both sensors agree with one another, causing the large
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
16/1   136   btl.   2   Tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
17/1   111   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   112   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   113   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   113   salt   2   Salinity bottles out of order, 13 = bottle 14, 14 = bottle 15, 15 = bottle 13, 16=
                        bottle 16, corrected in text file and salinity is acceptable.
17/1   114   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   115   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   116   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   117   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   118   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   119   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   120   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   121   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   122   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   123   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   124   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   125   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   126   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   127   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   128   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   129   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   130   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   131   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   132   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   133   btl.   3   Bottle did not close completely, top end cap got stuck on upper LADCP.
                        Oxygen, although a little high, and nutrients appears acceptable.
17/1   133   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   134   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
17/1   134   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD, agrees with adjoining stations.
                        Large gradient, and large variation in CTD signal, code CTDS as
                        questionable, salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
17/1   135   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
17/1   136   btl.   2   Tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients agree with
                        adjoining stations.
17/1   136   p04    4   P04 none of these P04s look good to me - something happened. Analyst:
                        "AutoAnalyzer error-code bad. The bottom should be OK.
18/1   101   p04    5   P04 0.05 high on the entire station profile. Analyst: "AutoAnalyzer error P04
                        channel only, P04 lost."
18/1   102   p04    5   P04 0.05 high on the entire station profile. Analyst: "AutoAnalyzer error P04
                        channel only, P04 lost."
18/1   110   btl.   2   Bottle leaking from spigot before vented. Oxygen and salinity are acceptable.
18/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
19/1   103   O2     5   Oxygen sample lost.
19/1   107   O2     4   Oxygen 0.2 low, no analytical problems noted. This is the first sample run
                        after a "wake-up" sample which has a tendency to be low. Code oxygen bad,
                        salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
19/1   110   btl.   2   Vent 0-ring changed prior to cast.
19/1   112   btl.   2   Minor leak when spigot opened before venting. Oxygen as well as salinity
                        and nutrients are acceptable.
19/1   113   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
19/1   115   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. 5 attempts
                        for a good salinity reading. Thimble came off with cap, bottle not sealed
                        perfectly to bung until after 2nd read, runaway sample. First reading resolved
                        high salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
19/1   116   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved high salinity.
                        Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
19/1   120   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved high salinity.
                        Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
19/1   127   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved high salinity.
                        Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
19/1   132   btl.   2   Slow Spigot leak when vented.
19/1   135   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
19/1   135   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD, large gradient. Salinity as well as
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
19/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle.
20/1   121   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading, inner cap not seated. Salinity as well
                        as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
20/1   132   btl.   2   Leaked, vent found open. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
21/1   115   O2     2   Bottle 02 a tiny bit high (by 0.04), but unless there is a reason to mark it
                        questionable, probably leave as code 2 (acceptable).
21/1   118   O2     5   High titration, possible lodate spillage on titration.
21/1   120   O2     5   Unreasonably high titration, stirrer bar missing.
21/1   130   btl.   2   Pin on spigot is bent. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
21/1   132   btl.   2   Spigot/nozzle is loose. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
21/1   132   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. Code CTD salinity questionable, CTD is okay, just does
                        not compare well with bottle salinity.
21/1   132   reft   3   SBE35T reading unstable.
21/1   133   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. Code CTD salinity questionable, CTD is okay, just does
                        not compare well with bottle salinity.
21/1   134   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. Code CTD salinity questionable, CTD is okay, just does
                        not compare well with bottle salinity.
21/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD, agrees with adjoining stations.
                        Variation in CTD at bottle trip. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
22/1   104   O2     5   02 pipette not in flask for analysis. Sample lost.
22/1   128   O2     2   5i03 vs. 02 slightly low, 02 does appear slightly low although within the
                        accuracy of the measurement. Oxygen, nutrients and salinity are acceptable.
22/1   128   sio3   2   5i03 vs. 02 slightly low, 5i03 does appear slightly low although within the
                        accuracy of the measurement. Nutrients as well as oxygen and salinity are
                        acceptable.
22/1   130   btl.   2   Prior to cast, straightened bent pin on spigot. No leaking complaints during
                        sampling.
22/1   132   btl.   2   Prior to cast, replaced spigot. No leaking complaints during sampling.
22/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and oxygen are
                        acceptable. N:P ratio does appear slightly high.
23/2   205   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
23/2   210   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
23/2   224   salt   3   Salinity high, no analytical problem noted. Code salinity questionable, oxygen
                        and nutrients are acceptable.
23/2   227   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
23/2   231   no2    2   N02 0.04 high compared to adjoining stations. Analyst: "Real peak- no
                        analytical error noted."
23/2   236   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
24/1   101   sio3   2   5i03 low, 02, salinity and other nutrients exhibit a feature, but 5i03 vs. 02
                        relationship is low. Analyst: "Real peak- no analytical error noted."
24/1   102   sio3   2   5i03 low, 02, salinity and other nutrients exhibit a feature, but 5i03 vs. 02
                        relationship is low. Analyst: "Real peak- no analytical error noted."
24/1   105   sio3   2   5i03 appears high, 02, salinity and other nutrients also exhibit a feature.
                        5i03 vs. 02 relationship is high. Analyst: "Real peak- no analytical error
                        noted."
24/1   123   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
25/1   110   btl.   2   Leaking, spigot open-vent closed water comes out fast. Vent is unseated and
                        tilted to the side. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
25/1   113   O2     5   02 Analyst: "Acid not added, Sample lost."
25/1   135   O2     3   Oxygen low, same value as oxygen from bottle 34. Salinity and nutrients are
                        Ok, probable mis-draw.
26/1   102   O2     5   Analysis was aborted, oxygen lost.
26/1   110   btl.   2   Prior to cast, bottle was replaced with a new bottle, s/n 37.
26/1   120   O2     5   Sample was over-titrated and then back-titrated and did not give a good
                        value, oxygen lost.
26/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
27/2   202   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved the small salinity
                        difference.
27/2   205   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved the small salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
27/2   210   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings are acceptable.
                        Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
27/2   231   salt   3   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No analytical
                        problems noted, code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients acceptable.
27/2   232   salt   3   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No analytical
                        problems noted, code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients acceptable.
28/1   132   ctds   3   Small gradient, Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal
                        oscillation during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with
                        bottle salinity.
28/1   132   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD, agrees with adjoining stations.
                        Variation in CTD at bottle trip is causing the difference. Code CTD salinity
                        questionable, bottle salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
28/1   134   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
28/1   134   reft   3   SBE35T reading somewhat unstable.
28/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD, agrees with adjoining stations.
                        Variation in CTD at bottle trip is causing the difference. Code CTD salinity
                        questionable, bottle salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
29/1   101   O2     5   Force quit Dosimat stall oxygen sample lost.
29/1   116   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved small salinity
                        difference. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
29/1   125   O2     2   Oxygen, strange curve. Oxygen is slightly high compared with CTD trace,
                        within accuracy of the measurement. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients
                        are acceptable.
29/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
30/1   103   btl.   2   Possible leak through nozzle (valve not shut all the way?). Oxygen as well as
                        salinity and nutrients are acceptable, bottle acceptable.
30/1   133   reft   3   SBE35T reading unstable.
30/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen and salinity are acceptable.
31/1   119   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved small salinity
                        difference. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
31/1   134   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause CTD signal oscillation during
                        bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity code
                        CTD salinity questionable.
31/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD, okay with adjoining stations.
                        Gradient, salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
32/1   101   btl.   4   Appears that bottle mis-tripped. Wait until all parameters are measured. Trip
                        level 4 3197 not reported, bottles 2-4 shift 1 level deeper, bottles 5-33
                        remain the same, bottles 34-36 shift 1 deeper, bottle 1 tripped at the surface.
                        Suspect that lanyards were mis-strung into the carousel.
32/1   101   p04    2   P04 high, -0.1. Analyst: "Good looking run- no analytical errors noted."
32/1   102   btl.   4   Code bottles did not trip as scheduled.
32/1   103   btl.   4   Code bottles did not trip as scheduled.
32/1   104   btl.   4   Code bottles did not trip as scheduled.
32/1   117   no2    5   Inadequate sample volume, sample lost.
32/1   117   no3    5   Inadequate sample volume, sample lost.
32/1   117   p04    5   Inadequate sample volume, sample lost.
32/1   117   sio3   5   Inadequate sample volume, sample lost.
32/1   132   reft   3   SBE35T -0.04/-0.055 vs CTDT1/CTDT2; unstable SBE35T reading.
32/1   134   btl.   4   Code bottles did not trip as scheduled.
32/1   135   btl.   4   Code bottles did not trip as scheduled.
32/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
33/1   112   O2     4   Bottle oxygen is a little high but only a bit over 0.03 mI/I different. No
                        intrusions seen in CTD trace. Examine bottle and titration records?
                        Processor: "No analytical problems noted. No corresponding feature seen in
                        sio3 or salinity. Code oxygen questionable."
33/1   116   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved the salinity
                        difference, salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
33/1   134   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
33/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and low compared with adjoining
                        stations. Gradient, salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
33/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
34/1   101   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings are acceptable.
                        Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
34/1   103   salt   3   Salinity low compared with CTD, station profile and adjoining stations, 2
                        salinity is also low, but within accuracy of the measurement. Code salinity
                        questionable, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
34/1   105   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings are acceptable.
                        Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
34/1   125   O2     2   Bad endpoint. Fixed. 02 is acceptable.
35/1   117   O2     4   Oxygen value high compared to CTDO. jhs: "Bottle oxygen may be code 4
                        (bad). No intrusions seen in CTD trace. Examine bottle and titration
                        records?" Processor: "No analytical problems noted, code oxygen bad,
                        salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
36/1   104   O2     4   Oxygen value low compared to CTDO. kms: Low compared with adjoining
                        stations, no analytical problems noted. Code oxygen questionable, salinity
                        and nutrients are acceptable. JHS: Bottle oxygen should be code 4 (bad).
36/1   107   salt   3   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. Just outside
                        the precision of the measurement, code salinity questionable, oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
36/1   122   O2     2   Oxygen flasks were out of order compared with previous runs. Sample
                        number assignment follow the Sample Log sheet. Oxygen appears to be
                        okay.
36/1   123   O2     2   Oxygen flasks were out of order compared with previous runs. Sample
                        number assignment follow the Sample Log sheet. Oxygen appears to be
                        okay.
36/1   132   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
36/1   132   O2     3   Oxygen low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No analytical
                        problems noted. Code oxygen questionable, salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
36/1   132   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD is comparably high with adjoining
                        stations as is 5i03. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
36/1   134   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
36/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD is comparably high with adjoining
                        stations as is Si03. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
36/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
37/2   205   salt   3   Bottle salinity high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. 3 attempts for
                        a good salinity reading for bottle 5 first reading results in higher salinity.
                        Analyst could have switched the bottles and read 6 twice which is the 3
                        readings and disagreement with the first reading. Cannot completely resolve,
                        5 and 6 are within the accuracy of the measurement, 5i03 is comparably
                        high. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
37/2   206   salt   3   Bottle salinity high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. 3 attempts for
                        a good salinity reading for bottle 5 first reading results in higher salinity.
                        Analyst could have switched the bottles and read 6 twice which is the 3
                        readings and disagreement with the first reading. Cannot completely resolve,
                        5 and 6 are within the accuracy of the measurement, 5i03 is comparably
                        high. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
37/2   207   salt   3   Bottle salinity high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. 3 attempts for
                        a good salinity reading for bottle 5 first reading results in higher salinity.
                        Analyst could have switched the bottles and read 6 twice which is the 3
                        readings and disagreement with the first reading. Cannot completely resolve,
                        5 and 6 are within the accuracy of the measurement, 5i03 is comparably
                        high. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
37/2   228   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
38/1   101   salt   3   Bottle salinity is too low, suspect analyst had bottle 2-19 read off one level
                        after the spilled sample. 4 attempts for a good salinity reading. No
                        explanation for the very low salinity. There was an issue with the lab
                        temperature and the standard dial needed to be changed by 5 units. Spilled
                        some of the sample. Suspect that analyst got off, based on the comment on
                        bottle 16 and 19. Suspect that fresher water was run through the salinometer
                        and samples 1, 2 and 3 are low because of this. Code salinity questionable,
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
38/1   113   O2     4   02 10 umol/kg high vs. CTDO and adjoining stations, Bad value.
38/1   116   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Suspect the second and third readings
                        are for bottle 17, corrected data files to reflect this. Salinity as well as oxygen
                        and nutrients are acceptable.
38/1   119   salt   2   Noticed on 19 the count was off, count said 18 which is normal, bottle
                        number display should have switched to 20, may have double ran a bottle.
                        Processor: "Comments for 16 confirm this, reorganized data file. Data
                        appears acceptable, witnessed analysis and the progression seemed
                        reasonable.
38/1   134   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
39/1   133   no2    2   N02 high, -0.1. Analyst: "Real peak. No analytical errors noted."
39/1   134   ctds   3 
39/1   134   reft   3   SBE35T reading unstable.
39/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD, agrees with adjoining stations.
                        Gradient, salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable. Shiproll
                        plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation during bottle
                        stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
39/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
40/1   116   p04    2   P04 low and N:P high compared to adjacent stations. Good run with nice
                        looking peaks. JHS: "P04s 18-24 are perplexing, especially when
                        accompanied by gradients in Si03 and at least some variation in N03. P04
                        is acceptable."
40/1   117   p04    2   P04 low and N:P high compared to adjacent stations. Good run with nice
                        looking peaks. JHS: "P04s 18-24 are perplexing, especially when
                        accompanied by gradients in Si03 and at least some variation in N03. P04
                        is acceptable."
40/1   118   p04    2   P04 low and N:P high compared to adjacent stations. Good run with nice
                        looking peaks. JHS: "P04s 18-24 are perplexing, especially when
                        accompanied by gradients in Si03 and at least some variation in N03. P04
                        is acceptable."
40/1   119   p04    2   P04 low and N:P high compared to adjacent stations. Good run with nice
                        looking peaks. JHS: "P04s 18-24 are perplexing, especially when
                        accompanied by gradients in Si03 and at least some variation in N03. P04
                        is acceptable."
40/1   120   p04    2   P04 low and N:P high compared to adjacent stations. Good run with nice
                        looking peaks. JHS: "P04s 18-24 are perplexing, especially when
                        accompanied by gradients in Si03 and at least some variation in N03. P04
                        is acceptable."
40/1   121   p04    2   P04 low and N:P high compared to adjacent stations. Good run with nice
                        looking peaks. JHS: "P04s 18-24 are perplexing, especially when
                        accompanied by gradients in Si03 and at least some variation in N03. P04
                        is acceptable."
40/1   122   p04    2   P04 low and N:P high compared to adjacent stations. Good run with nice
                        looking peaks. JHS: "P04s 18-24 are perplexing, especially when
                        accompanied by gradients in Si03 and at least some variation in N03. P04
                        is acceptable."
40/1   123   p04    2   P04 low and N:P high compared to adjacent stations. Good run with nice
                        looking peaks. JHS: "P04s 18-24 are perplexing, especially when
                        accompanied by gradients in Si03 and at least some variation in N03. P04
                        is acceptable."
40/1   124   p04    2   P04 low and N:P high compared to adjacent stations. Good run with nice
                        looking peaks. JHS: "P04s 18-24 are perplexing, especially when
                        accompanied by gradients in Si03 and at least some variation in N03. P04
                        is acceptable."
41/1   106   sio3   2   Si03 appears slightly high compared with adjoining stations, within accuracy
                        of the measurement.
42/1   113   O2     2   Oxygen flasks 1729 & 1706 were switched for bottles 13 and 19 respectively.
                        Analyst followed the Sample Log recording and oxygen appears acceptable.
42/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
44/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   101   btl.   2   Styrofoam was put on the rosette in a mesh bag.
45/1   106   sio3   2   5i03 is low vs. oxygen relationship, 3.0. Analyst: "both SIL and 02 profiles
                        look OK compared to neighboring stations. SIL chart is good- no analytical
                        errors."
45/1   113   O2     2   Odd curve. Oxygen also did not agree with CTDO and adjoining stations.
                        Flasks were switched in the box, 13=1729 and 19=1706, corrected file then
                        oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
45/1   116   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   117   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   118   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   119   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   120   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   121   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   122   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   123   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   124   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   125   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   126   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   127   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   128   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   129   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   130   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   131   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   132   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   133   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   134   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   135   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
45/1   136   btl.   2   Bottles tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
46/1   132   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading results in a higher salinity
                        with better agreement with the CTD. Gradient, salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
46/1   133   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading results in a lower salinity
                        with better agreement with the CTD. Thimble came off with cap. Gradient,
                        salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
47/1   101   salt   2   Salinity is slightly low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No
                        analytical problem noted, within accuracy of the measurement. Salinity,
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
47/1   121   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
47/1   134   btl.   4   Bottle was mistakenly tripped with 33 at 65m. Changed depth of 35 to 30m
                        to compensate. N03, P04 and 5i03 appear low versus adjoining stations,
                        but agree with each other very well. Salinity and oxygen also are lower than
                        adjoining stations.
48/1   103   btl.   9   Bottle failed to close, bottom cap got stuck on adjacent bottle.
48/1   105   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Thimble came off with cap. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
48/1   111   salt   4   Salinity high compared with CTD and adjacent stations. Appears to have
                        been mis-drawn. Code salinity bad, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
48/1   112   btl.   2   Leak at vent, 0-ring changed after this cast. Oxygen as well as salinity and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
48/1   135   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings are acceptable.
                        Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
49/2   204   O2     4   Oxygen high, -0.1, vs. CTD and adjoining stations. 02 analyst thought water
                        dropped into the sample. 5i03 does appear comparably low. Code oxygen
                        bad, salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
49/2   210   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Cap came off in lid. Additional
                        readings produced an acceptable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
49/2   212   btl.   2   Vent 0-ring changed on bottle 12 prior to cast.
49/2   217   salt   2   6 attempts for a good salinity reading. Cap came off in lid. First reading
                        resolved salinity discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
49/2   224   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Cap came off in lid. First reading
                        resolved salinity discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
49/2   225   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced an
                        acceptable salinity. Additional readings produced an acceptable salinity.
                        Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
49/2   227   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Cap came off in lid. Additional reading
                        produced an acceptable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
49/2   229   O2     2   Oxygen appeared low in relationship to 5i03, both parameters appear
                        reasonable on station comparisons. Oxygen, nutrients and salinity are
                        acceptable.
50/1   108   no3    3   N03 looks high by ca. 0.5. No extrema in 5i03, P04, or 02. Analyst: "Peaks
                        and curves look good, no analytical errors." Code N03 questionable.
50/1   110   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
50/1   114   salt   2   Analysis was interrupted by fire alarm. 14 had been run, 15 does appear
                        slightly high within accuracy of the measurement. Salinity as well as oxygen
                        and nutrients are acceptable.
50/1   115   btl.   2   Spigot hard to open, changed prior to next station.
50/1   116   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
51/1   105   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        acceptable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
51/1   106   botl   2   Spigot dripping when closed and vent open. bh: "Found that spigot was not
                        pulled all the way out. Replaced collar on spigot."
51/1   108   salt   4   Accidentally read at full flow rate, value look a tad high. Code salinity bad,
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
51/1   112   btl.   2   Leaks at spigot before venting. Top and bottom end caps 0-rings changed
                        after this station.
51/1   114   salt   4   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Code salinity bad, oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
51/1   117   btl.   2   Minor leak at spigot before venting. Top and bottom end caps 0-rings
                        changed after this station.
51/1   122   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
51/1   124   02     5   Flask broke, sample lost. Flask number 1527 replaced with 1735.
51/1   124   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
51/1   134   ctds   3
51/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD agrees with adjoining stations.
                        Gradient, much CTD signal oscillation during bottle stop. Code CTD salinity
                        questionable, bottle salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
51/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
52/1   106   btl.   2   Replaced collar on spigot prior to this station."
52/1   108   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        acceptable salinity. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
52/1   110   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        acceptable salinity. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
52/1   112   btl.   2   Top and bottom end cap 0-rings changed prior to this station.
52/1   117   btl.   2   Top and bottom end cap and vent 0-rings changed prior to this station.
53/1   117   btl.   2   Top and bottom end cap and vent 0-rings changed prior to this station.
54/1   106   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced an
                        acceptable salinity. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
54/1   125   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
54/1   128   02     4   Oxygen appears high, looks like it was drawn at bottle 29.
54/1   134   ctds   3
54/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD, reasonable with adjoining stations.
                        Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
54/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
55/2   201   salt   3   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. 5i03 has a
                        high feature, does not qualify the high salinity. Code salinity questionable,
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
55/2   206   btl.   2   Leak when spigot open, valve closed. Oxygen as well as salinity and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
55/2   211   salt   4   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional reading did not resolve
                        salinity discrepancy. Code salinity bad, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
55/2   212   btl.   2   Leak when spigot open, valve closed. Oxygen as well as salinity and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
55/2   216   btl.   2   Leak when spigot open, valve closed. Oxygen as well as salinity and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
55/2   224   p04    4   AutoAnalyzer error- bad peak. Code P04 bad, other nutrients and salinity
                        and oxygen are acceptable.
55/2   231   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resulted in better
                        agreement. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
55/2   236   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
56/1   101   O2     2   Difficulty fitting CTD oxygen until bottom bottle removed from weighting. No
                        analytical problem noted. Oxygen is within accuracy of the measurement.
                        Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
56/1   106   O2     2   Reviewed and recalculated with fixed endpoint. Oxygen as well as salinity
                        and nutrients are acceptable.
56/1   116   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced a
                        reasonable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
56/1   130   btl.   2   Strong flow when nozzle opened with vent closed; reasonably tight, but could
                        be tighter. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
56/1   134   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
56/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. Salinity as
                        well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
57/1   105   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        acceptable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
57/1   106   salt   4   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No
                        analytical problems noted. Salinity appears to have been mis-drawn from
                        bottle 8. Code salinity bad, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
57/1   107   salt   4   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No
                        analytical problems noted. Salinity appears to have been mis-drawn from
                        bottle 9. Code salinity bad, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
57/1   111   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
57/1   115   salt   4   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. There
                        seems to be a few mis-draws on this cast. Reviewed salinity analysis and it
                        does not look like that is off by one bottle. Code salinity bad, oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
57/1   121   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
57/1   128   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
57/1   133   p04    3   P04 high. No analytical error noted. Processor: "Some form of
                        contamination, 1.x high. Feature not seen in any other property."
57/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
58/1   109   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First salinity reading resolved small
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
58/1   112   btl.   2   Leak at valve? Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
58/1   122   p04    4   AutoAnalyzer error- un-recoverable peak. Code P04 bad.
58/1   134   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause CTD signal oscillation during
                        bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
58/1   134   O2     2   Bottle oxygen appears to have been switched. Physically checked order in
                        the box and could not see that flasks had been switched. Changed the
                        sample numbers and oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
58/1   135   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause CTD signal oscillation during
                        bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
58/1   135   O2     2   Bottle oxygen appears to have been switched. Physically checked order in
                        the box and could not see that flasks had been switched. Changed the
                        sample numbers and oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
58/1   135   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD agrees with adjoining stations.
                        Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
59/2   202   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings resulted in
                        acceptable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
59/2   226   sio3   3   Unexpected 5i03 minimum. No corresponding feature in other nuts or 02.
                        Good run- no analytical error noted. Code 5i03 questionable.
60/1   101   sio3   2   5i03 low vs. oxygen, 5um/l. Analyst: "Similar feature in pH, DIC, TAlk. No
                        analytical error."
60/1   118   O2     2   Oxygen flasks were switched in the box. Data file agrees with order as
                        written and sampled per Sample Log.
60/1   119   O2     2   Oxygen flasks were switched in the box. Data file agrees with order as
                        written and sampled per Sample Log.
60/1   122   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        acceptable salinity. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
60/1   130   no2    2   N02 low 0.06 compared with adjoining stations until plotted with station 58.
                        Analyst: "Not evident on plot with 058-062. No analytical errors noted."
60/1   131   btl.   4   Bottles accidentally tripped at the same/similar pressures.
60/1   132   btl.   4   Bottles accidentally tripped at the same/similar pressures.
61/1   101   sio3   2   5i03 appears low on station profile and versus oxygen.
61/1   102   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy, salinity is slightly low but within accuracy of the measurement.
                        Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
61/1   105   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy, salinity is slightly low but within accuracy of the measurement.
                        Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
61/1   109   salt   4   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Salinity high with first reading,
                        contamination of the sample. Code salinity bad. Oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
61/1   111   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
61/1   112   btl.   2   Leak from spigot. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
61/1   115   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
61/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
62/1   104   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional reading produced
                        reasonable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
62/1   105   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy, although a little low, it is within accuracy of the measurement.
                        Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
62/1   108   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        reasonable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
62/1   119   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
62/1   121   O2     2   02 draw temps all the same for bottles 21-31; reset thermometer after bottle
                        31. Draw temperature used for conversion to mass units, has little or no effect
                        below 5 degrees.
62/1   122   O2     2   02 draw temps all the same for bottles 21-31; reset thermometer after bottle
                        31. Draw temperature used for conversion to mass units, has little or no effect
                        below 5 degrees.
62/1   123   O2     2   02 draw temps all the same for bottles 21-31; reset thermometer after bottle
                        31. Draw temperature used for conversion to mass units, has little or no effect
                        below 5 degrees.
62/1   124   O2     2   02 draw temps all the same for bottles 21-31; reset thermometer after bottle
                        31. Draw temperature used for conversion to mass units, has little or no effect
                        below 5 degrees.
62/1   125   O2     2   02 draw temps all the same for bottles 21-31; reset thermometer after bottle
                        31. Draw temperature used for conversion to mass units, has little or no effect
                        below 5 degrees.
62/1   126   O2     2   02 draw temps all the same for bottles 21-31; reset thermometer after bottle
                        31. Draw temperature used for conversion to mass units, has little or no effect
                        below 5 degrees.
62/1   127   O2     2   02 draw temps all the same for bottles 21-31; reset thermometer after bottle
                        31. Draw temperature used for conversion to mass units, has little or no effect
                        below 5 degrees.
62/1   128   O2     2   02 draw temps all the same for bottles 21-31; reset thermometer after bottle
                        31. Draw temperature used for conversion to mass units, has little or no effect
                        below 5 degrees.
62/1   129   O2     2   02 draw temps all the same for bottles 21-31; reset thermometer after bottle
                        31. Draw temperature used for conversion to mass units, has little or no effect
                        below 5 degrees.
62/1   130   O2     2   02 draw temps all the same for bottles 21-31; reset thermometer after bottle
                        31. Draw temperature used for conversion to mass units, has little or no effect
                        below 5 degrees.
62/1   131   O2     2   02 draw temps all the same for bottles 21-31; reset thermometer after bottle
                        31. Draw temperature used for conversion to mass units, has little or no effect
                        below 5 degrees.
63/1   109   salt   3   Salinity high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. Appears it was mis-
                        drawn from 10. Code salinity questionable. Oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
63/1   114   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
63/1   116   salt   3   Salinity low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No analytical problem
                        noted. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
63/1   118   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        reasonable salinity. Cap popped. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
63/1   122   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Cap came off in lid. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
63/1   123   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
63/1   124   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Cap came out in lid. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
63/1   126   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
63/1   127   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy, still a little low but within accuracy of the measurement. Salinity
                        as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
63/1   129   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional reading produced
                        reasonable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
63/1   130   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced lower salinity,
                        leave as is within accuracy of the measurement. Salinity as well as oxygen
                        and nutrients are acceptable.
63/1   132   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
64/1   110   O2     3   Oxygen appears high on sio3 vs. 02 plot, adjoining stations and CTDO. No
                        analytical problems noted. Code oxygen questionable, salinity and nutrients
                        acceptable.
64/1   115   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced a slightly better
                        salinity value. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
64/1   118   O2     2   Bottle o2s are low/high vs CTDO. Bottle flasks appear to be switched:
                        Switched the flask numbers, oxygen data are acceptable.
64/1   119   O2     2   Bottle o2s are low/high vs CTDO. Bottle flasks appear to be switched:
                        Switched the flask numbers, oxygen data are acceptable.
64/1   128   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
65/2   210   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
65/2   215   salt   4   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings as well as first
                        reading gave discrepancy. Thimble came off with cap. Sample must have
                        been contaminated, code salinity bad, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
65/2   216   btl.   2   Heavy leak from spigot after venting.
65/2   217   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 18. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
65/2   219   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 20. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
65/2   221   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 22. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
65/2   223   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 24. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
66/2   207   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 8. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
66/2   209   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 10. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
66/2   211   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 12. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
66/2   213   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 14. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
67/1   101   btl.   2   Mooring cast, 3 bottles, no nutrients.
67/1   101   ctds   3   Gradient caused much CTD signal oscillation during bottle stop. CTD is okay,
                        just does not compare well with bottle salinity for calibration purposes.
67/1   101   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. Gradient at the bottom of the cast.
                        Salinity as well as oxygen are acceptable.
68/1   101   btl.   2   Air vent open. Oxygen as well as salinity are acceptable.
68/1   102   btl.   2   Air vent open. Oxygen as well as salinity are acceptable.
68/1   103   btl.   2   Air vent open. Oxygen as well as salinity are acceptable.
69/1   101   btl.   9   No bottles closed due to frozen carousel.
69/1   102   btl.   9   No bottles closed due to frozen carousel.
69/1   103   btl.   9   No bottles closed due to frozen carousel.
69/1   104   btl.   9   No bottles closed due to frozen carousel.
69/1   105   btl.   9   No bottles closed due to frozen carousel.
69/1   106   btl.   9   No bottles closed due to frozen carousel.
70/1   101   btl.   9   Bottle did not trip.
71/1   105   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced reasonable
                        salinity.
72/1   101   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced reasonable
                        salinity. Thimble came off with cap.
72/1   102   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced reasonable
                        salinity.
73/1   102   O2     4   Analyst: "Flask cracked and leaking. Replaced flask." Value low, code bad.
73/1   104   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produces reasonable
                        salinity.
73/1   105   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produces reasonable
                        salinity.
74/1   104   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced reasonable
                        salinity. Thimble came off with cap.
74/1   105   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced reasonable
                        salinity.
76/1   101   btl.   9   Bottle 1 did not close, caught on wire of bottle 36.
77/1   101   O2     2   Oxygen was run after wakeup sample, should have been run sixth to the last
                        of run. Oxygen appears acceptable.
77/1   109   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 8. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
77/1   111   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 10. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
77/1   113   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 12. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
77/1   115   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 14. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
77/1   117   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 16. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
77/1   119   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 18. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
77/1   120   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
78/1   101   no2    3   N02 0.03-0.05 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
78/1   101   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
78/1   102   no2    3   N02 0.03-0.05 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
78/1   103   no2    3   N02 0.03-0.05 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
78/1   104   no2    3   N02 0.03-0.05 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
78/1   104   O2     2   Flask order switched around. This should be 1764. Files corrected
                        accordingly. Oxygen does appear low with corresponding high Si03.
78/1   105   no2    3   N02 0.03-0.05 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
78/1   105   O2     3   Flask order switched around. This should be 1760. Processor: "Files
                        produced accordingly. Oxygen does appear high does not have
                        corresponding low Si03. Oxygen appears 0.08 high, code questionable,
                        salinity and nutrients are acceptable."
78/1   105   sio3   2   Oxygen maximum verified by CTDO, no corresponding low Si03 feature.
                        Analyst: "Nice peak/run- no analytical errors noted. This is indeed an
                        interesting feature. It does not appear to show up in DIC, TALK or pH."
78/1   107   salt   2   5 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Thimble came off with cap, runaway sample. Salinity as well as
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
78/1   108   O2     4   Sample was over-titrated and back-titrated. Original titration is correct, files
                        updated. Processor: "Code oxygen bad, salinity and nutrients acceptable."
78/1   110   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        reasonable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
78/1   111   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First readings do not resolve salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
78/1   113   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 14. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
78/1   115   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 16. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
78/1   117   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 18. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
78/1   119   btl.   2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 20. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
78/1   120   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
78/1   121   btl.   2   Out of water, from the spigot, for salinity and nutrients used the dregs.
                        Duplicate DIC samples taken from this surface bottle along with a full suite.
78/1   121   salt   3   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD agrees with Stations 75, 76, and 79.
                        Suspect technique of drawing from the dregs, may not have rinsed the
                        salinity bottle properly. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
79/1   101   no2    3   N02 0.03-0.05 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
79/1   102   no2    3   N02 0.03-0.05 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
79/1   102   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolves salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
79/1   103   no2    3   N02 0.03-0.05 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
79/1   108   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produce better
                        salinity than first reading. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
79/1   113   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced a low salinity
                        than the additional readings. Leave as is. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
79/1   114   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced a low salinity
                        than the additional readings. Leave as is. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
79/1   117   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced a reasonable
                        salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
79/1   120   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced a reasonable
                        salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
80/1   101   btl.   2   22 bottles tripped.
81/1   101   btl.   2   31 bottles tripped.
81/1   101   no2    3   N02 0.02-0.03 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
81/1   102   no2    3   N02 0.02-0.03 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
81/1   103   no2    3   N02 0.02-0.03 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
81/1   104   no2    3   N02 0.02-0.03 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
81/1   105   no2    3   N02 0.02-0.03 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
81/1   120   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
81/1   120   salt   2   Bottle salinity low compared with CTD. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
81/1   122   btl.   2   Winch operator mis-heard console operator, bottle stop and trip and 224
                        instead of scheme 3, 235. Okay not a data problem.
82/1   101   no2    3   N02 0.01-0.03 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
82/1   102   no2    3   N02 0.01-0.03 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
82/1   103   no2    3   N02 0.01-0.03 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
82/1   104   no2    3   N02 0.01-0.03 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
82/1   105   no2    3   N02 0.01-0.03 high, no corresponding fluorometer feature. Analyst: "These
                        are strange, they are showing as real peaks and the RMNS checks out.
                        Perhaps the nutrient tubes got contaminated somehow. The issue does not
                        show in station 83."
82/1   113   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
82/1   133   btl.   2   Duplicate trips with 32, sampling for pigments, ODF samples were not drawn.
82/1   135   btl.   2   Duplicate trips with 34, sampling for pigments, ODF samples were not drawn.
82/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
83/2   211   salt   2   Fire alarm went off during sample run, sat on autosal for 5 minutes. Salinity
                        as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
83/2   219   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced a better salinity.
                        Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
83/2   220   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        reasonable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
83/2   233   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
83/2   233   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. 3 attempts for a good salinity
                        reading. Thimble came off with cap. First reading did not resolve salinity
                        discrepancy. Gradient, salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
83/2   234   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        reasonable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
83/2   236   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
84/1   101   btl.   2   35 bottles tripped.
84/1   127   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference although still a little high within accuracy of the measurement.
                        Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
86/1   120   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved the salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
86/1   136   btl.   2   Tripped quickly due to waves. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
87/1   103   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
87/1   104   O2     2   bottle 02 slightly hi (niskin 4) and slightly low (niskin 5). Flask numbers not
                        assigned correctly during analysis. Verified correct flasks/order on sample
                        log, and current order in the sample box. Switched flask numbers in data
                        files, 02 values are Ok.
87/1   105   O2     2   bottle 02 slightly hi (niskin 4) and slightly low (niskin 5). Flask numbers not
                        assigned correctly during analysis. Verified correct flasks/order on sample
                        log, and current order in the sample box. Switched flask numbers in data
                        files, 02 values are Ok.
87/1   125   O2     5   Analyst: detector volts topped at 1.6V out of 2.5V, resultant h2o discolored
                        brown. Unusually high thio for depth, no obvious analytical errors. Abort end
                        point due to apparent contamination.
87/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
88/1   102   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
88/1   112   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        acceptable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
88/1   124   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Loose cap. First reading resolved
                        salinity difference. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
88/1   136   btl.   2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
89/1   134   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity,
                        code questionable.
89/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD, agrees with adjoining stations.
                        Gradient, CTD signal oscillation during bottle stop.
90/1   103   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
90/1   108   O2     4   Oxygen too high, 0.79. No analytical problem noted, draw temperature does
                        not indicate a mis-trip. Nutrients are acceptable.
90/1   112   O2     4   Oxygen too high, 3.6. No analytical problem noted, draw temperature does
                        not indicate a mis-trip. Nutrients are acceptable.
91/2   221   O2     2   Flask 1171 broken during sampling, replaced with 1294. Oxygen as well as
                        salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
91/2   223   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        reasonable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
91/2   227   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced
                        reasonable salinity. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
91/2   234   ctds   3   Gradient with much CTD signal oscillation during bottle stop. CTD is okay,
                        just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
91/2   234   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. Gradient, leave bottle salinity as is,
                        oxygen and nutrients are also acceptable.
91/2   236   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
92/1   102   salt   2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
92/1   127   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
93/2   207   O2     3   Oxygen low, 0.04, compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No analytical
                        problem noted. Code oxygen questionable, salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
93/2   209   O2     4   High titration value attributed to loose valve attached to Thio. Valve was
                        drawing air into the tubing. Fixed valve ran check. Unfixable.
93/2   210   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
93/2   236   btl.   9   Bottle did not trip. Acquisition recorded carousel confirmation. Lanyard got
                        stuck between bottles, corrected and okay on test and next cast.
94/1   103   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First read was on too high of a
                        flowrate. Additional reading resolved salinity discrepancy. Salinity as well as
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
94/1   133   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
94/1   133   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD agrees with adjoining stations,
                        Station 91. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable. Gradient,
                        oscillation in CTD trip data.
95/1   105   salt   4   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. 3 attempts
                        for a good salinity reading. First reading did not resolve salinity discrepancy.
                        Some kind of contamination of the salinity. Code salinity bad, oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
95/1   109   O2     2   Flask 1413 broken during sampling, replaced with 1117.
95/1   118   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading did not resolve salinity
                        discrepancy, within the accuracy of the measurement. Salinity as well as
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
95/1   136   p04    2   P04 high, -0.1 compared with adjoining stations. Analyst: "Real peak. No
                        analytical error noted. Matches underway sample run."
96/1   130   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
96/1   130   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. Gradient, salinity as well as
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
97/1   121   O2     2   Flask 1171 in template box file. Actual flask was 1294. Measurement
                        appears good. Flask 1171 was broken on Station 91, also used on Station
                        94, assignments were okay.
97/1   130   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
97/1   130   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. Gradient, salinity as well as oxygen
                        and nutrients are acceptable.
97/1   133   btl.   2   Bottle has a slow flow. Salinity is low compared with CTD, within accuracy of
                        the measurement. Oxygen and nutrients are also acceptable.
98/1   103   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Thimble came off with cap. First
                        reading resolved salinity discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients
                        are acceptable.
98/1   107   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
98/1   130   O2     2   Bubbles found under cap prior to running sample. Sample value appears
                        normal.
98/1   134   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity
98/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. Gradient, Salinity as well as
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
99/1   103   salt   2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Thimble came off with cap. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
99/1   134   ctds   3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity
99/1   134   salt   2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. Gradient, salinity as well as oxygen
                        and nutrients are acceptable.
100/1   134   ctds  3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity
100/1   134   salt  2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. Gradient, salinity as well as
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
101/1   101   salt  2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produces lower salinity.
                        Suspect cells were not sufficiently flushed after the higher conductivity
                        standard seawater reading. The lab temperature was also marginally high,
                        0.8 too high and ending -1.0 lower than bath. Salinity is within accuracy of
                        the measurement. Oxygen and nutrients are also acceptable.
101/1   108   salt  2   5 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced a reasonable
                        salinity, within accuracy of the measurement. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
101/1   111   salt  2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
101/1   129   salt  2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced a
                        reasonable salinity value. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
102/2   203   salt  3   Suspect that salinity was either drawn off one bottle or analyzed off one
                        bottle. Suspect analysis, bottle 3 & 5 had additional readings which could be
                        an indication that the bottle was put in place at the wrong time. Sample
                        drawer is certain that salt bottle number was verified against niskin bottle.
                        Changed data file, suspecting that 5 was actually bottle 5 and 6 and error
                        was caught and order corrected at 20. 3 attempts for a good salinity reading.
                        First reading resolved salinity difference, although a little high within the
                        accuracy of the measurement. Thimble came off with cap. Code salinity
                        questionable, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
102/2   204   O2    2   Box template file lists different flask. Verified with sample log, flask is 1764.
                        Bottle value is in line with subsequent samples and agrees with CTDO.
102/2   204   salt  2   CHECK: Suspect that salinity was either drawn off one bottle or analyzed off
                        one bottle. Suspect analysis, bottle 3 had additional readings which could be
                        an indication that the bottle was put in place at the wrong time. Sample
                        drawer is certain that salt bottle number was verified against niskin bottle.
102/2   205   O2    2   Box template file lists different flask. Verified with sample log, flask is 1760.
                        Bottle value is in line with subsequent samples and agrees with CTDO.
102/2   205   salt  2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        difference. Salinity is slightly high within accuracy of the measurement.
                        Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
102/2   206   salt  3   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. Tried to
                        reorganize salinity values, suspect that the actual problem is the bath
                        temperature, it changed by 1.2 degrees during the run. This anomaly is not a
                        tripping issue. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
102/2   207   O2    2   Did not run wake-up sample prior to starting run. Bottle value is in line with
                        subsequent samples and agrees with CTDO.
102/2   207   salt  2   Suspect that salinity was either drawn off one bottle or analyzed off one
                        bottle. Suspect analysis, bottle 3 & 5 had additional readings which could be
                        an indication that the bottle was put in place at the wrong time. Sample
                        drawer is certain that salt bottle number was verified against niskin bottle.
                        Changed data file, suspecting that 5 was actually bottle 5 and error was
                        caught and order corrected at 20.
102/2   208   salt  2   Suspect that salinity was either drawn off one bottle or analyzed off one
                        bottle. Suspect analysis, bottle 3 & 5 had additional readings which could be
                        an indication that the bottle was put in place at the wrong time. Sample
                        drawer is certain that salt bottle number was verified against niskin bottle.
                        Changed data file, suspecting that 5 was actually bottle 5 and error was
                        caught and order corrected at 20.
102/2   209   salt  2   Suspect that salinity was either drawn off one bottle or analyzed off one
                        bottle. Suspect analysis, bottle 3 & 5 had additional readings which could be
                        an indication that the bottle was put in place at the wrong time. Sample
                        drawer is certain that salt bottle number was verified against niskin bottle.
                        Changed data file, suspecting that 5 was actually bottle 5 and error was
                        caught and order corrected at 20.
102/2   210   salt  2   Suspect that salinity was either drawn off one bottle or analyzed off one
                        bottle. Suspect analysis, bottle 3 & 5 had additional readings which could be
                        an indication that the bottle was put in place at the wrong time. Sample
                        drawer is certain that salt bottle number was verified against niskin bottle.
                        Changed data file, suspecting that 5 was actually bottle 5 and error was
                        caught and order corrected at 20.
102/2   211   salt  3   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. Tried to
                        reorganize salinity values, suspect that the actual problem is the bath
                        temperature, it changed by 1.2 degrees during the run. This anomaly is not a
                        tripping issue. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
102/2   212   salt  3   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. Tried to
                        reorganize salinity values, suspect that the actual problem is the bath
                        temperature, it changed by 1.2 degrees during the run. This anomaly is not a
                        tripping issue. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
102/2   213   salt  3   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. Tried to
                        reorganize salinity values, suspect that the actual problem is the bath
                        temperature, it changed by 1.2 degrees during the run. This anomaly is not a
                        tripping issue. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
102/2   214   salt  2   Suspect that salinity was either drawn off one bottle or analyzed off one
                        bottle. Suspect analysis, bottle 3 & 5 had additional readings which could be
                        an indication that the bottle was put in place at the wrong time. Sample
                        drawer is certain that salt bottle number was verified against niskin bottle.
                        Changed data file, suspecting that 5 was actually bottle 5 and error was
                        caught and order corrected at 20.
102/2   215   salt  2   Suspect that salinity was either drawn off one bottle or analyzed off one
                        bottle. Suspect analysis, bottle 3 & 5 had additional readings which could be
                        an indication that the bottle was put in place at the wrong time. Sample
                        drawer is certain that salt bottle number was verified against niskin bottle.
                        Changed data file, suspecting that 5 was actually bottle 5 and error was
                        caught and order corrected at 20.
102/2   216   O2    2   Bottle value appears slightly low for subsequent bottle values. P04 and S103
                        show similar supporting features. Bottle value is valid code good.
102/2   216   salt  2   Suspect that salinity was either drawn off one bottle or analyzed off one
                        bottle. Suspect analysis, bottle 3 & 5 had additional readings which could be
                        an indication that the bottle was put in place at the wrong time. Sample
                        drawer is certain that salt bottle number was verified against niskin bottle.
                        Changed data file, suspecting that 5 was actually bottle 5 and error was
                        caught and order corrected at 20.
102/2   217   O2    2   Oxygen flask 1738 in this position. No note that 1284 was replaced.
102/2   217   salt  2   Suspect that salinity was either drawn off one bottle or analyzed off one
                        bottle. Suspect analysis, bottle 3 & 5 had additional readings which could be
                        an indication that the bottle was put in place at the wrong time. Sample
                        drawer is certain that salt bottle number was verified against niskin bottle.
                        Changed data file, suspecting that 5 was actually bottle 5 and error was
                        caught and order corrected at 20.
102/2   218   salt  2   Suspect that salinity was either drawn off one bottle or analyzed off one
                        bottle. Suspect analysis, bottle 3 & 5 had additional readings which could be
                        an indication that the bottle was put in place at the wrong time. Sample
                        drawer is certain that salt bottle number was verified against niskin bottle.
                        Changed data file, suspecting that 5 was actually bottle 5 and error was
                        caught and order corrected at 20.
102/2   219   salt  2   Suspect that salinity was either drawn off one bottle or analyzed off one
                        bottle. Suspect analysis, bottle 3 & 5 had additional readings which could be
                        an indication that the bottle was put in place at the wrong time. Sample
                        drawer is certain that salt bottle number was verified against niskin bottle.
                        Changed data file, suspecting that 5 was actually bottle 5 and error was
                        caught and order corrected at 20.
103/1   101   btl.  2   Cast for Mooring.
103/1   102   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels. Oxygen and salinity are acceptable.
103/1   103   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels. Oxygen and salinity are acceptable.
103/1   103   salt  2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolves salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity and oxygen check samples are acceptable.
103/1   104   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels. Oxygen and salinity are acceptable.
103/1   105   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels. Oxygen and salinity are acceptable.
103/1   106   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels. Oxygen and salinity are acceptable.
103/1   107   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels. Oxygen and salinity are acceptable.
103/1   107   salt  2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolves salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity and oxygen check samples are acceptable.
103/1   108   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels. Oxygen and salinity are acceptable.
103/1   109   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels. Oxygen and salinity are acceptable.
103/1   110   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels. Oxygen and salinity are acceptable.
104/1   101   btl.  2   Cast for Mooring.
104/1   102   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels.
104/1   103   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels.
104/1   104   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels.
104/1   105   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels.
104/1   106   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels.
104/1   107   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels.
104/1   108   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels.
104/1   109   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels.
104/1   110   btl.  2   Bottles tripped on the fly. 10 levels.
105/1   136   btl.  9   Lanyard never released, bottle did not close. No samples taken. Backed out
                        screw on latch that prevented it from firing. Fixed the latch and dismantled
                        the carousel to check all other latches. Everything looked good on a test
                        firing.
106/1   102   salt  2   Salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. It appears that
                        samples were either misdrawn or analyzed off one bottle with 7 and 8 having
                        exactly the same conductivity ratio. Will leave as is, there is no way to justify
                        where sample 2 came from.
106/1   108   salt  3   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. Lab
                        temperature dropped 2 degrees during run. Suspect salinities from bottle 11
                        to 1 were effected with 8 being outside of accuracy of the measurement.
                        Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
107/1   103   salt  3   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No
                        analytical problem noted. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients
                        acceptable. Many samples taken with a duplicate for DIC prior to salinity,
                        could have an impact. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients
                        acceptable.
107/1   112   O2    2   Replaced 02 flask 1700 with 1696, could not remove stopper. Oxygen as
                        well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
108/1   106   salt  4   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. 3 attempts
                        for a good salinity reading. Code salinity bad, oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
108/1   136   btl.  2   Tripped on the fly. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
109/1   121   O2    2   Template flask file mislabeled 1284, actual 1294. 02 bottle value good.
111/1   117   btl.  2   Small leak at spigot, (w/vent may be loose). Oxygen as well as salinity and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
112/1   127   salt  2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading produced a slightly better
                        salinity, additional readings were within the accuracy of the measurement.
                        Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
112/1   130   btl.  2   Leak, vent loose. Oxygen as well salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
113/1   134   ctds  3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
113/1   134   salt  2   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. Gradient, lots of variation in CTD.
                        Bottle salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
114/1   103   salt  3   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No analytical
                        problem noted. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
114/1   112   salt  2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No
                        analytical problem noted. Code salinity questionable, oxygen and nutrients
                        are acceptable.
114/1   115   O2    5   Analyst: 02 rig problem, sample lost.
114/1   116   O2    2   Analyst: Possible 02 rig problem; concomitant feature in silicate present,
                        value Ok.
114/1   133   ctds  3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
114/1   133   salt  2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. Gradient, lots of variation in CTD
                        with lower sampling as though from shallower. Bottle salinity as well as
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
115/1   115   O2    3   02 is 0.lml/l high. Feature not seen in other parameters. No obvious
                        analytical errors.
115/1   117   btl.  3   Appears that bottle leaked. pH also confirms, no DIC or TALK drawn, cfc
                        indicates okay, salinity low. Code bottle 3, salinity, oxygen and nutrients 4.
115/1   117   no2   4   N03 value is high, No Auto-Analyzer error found, peak looks good.
115/1   117   no3   4   N03 value is high, No Auto-Analyzer error found, peak looks good.
115/1   117   O2    4   02 is high, appears that bottle mistripped.
115/1   117   p04   4   P04 value is high, No Auto-Analyzer error found, peak looks good.
115/1   117   salt  4   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. Bottle
                        leaked, code bottle 3, salinity, oxygen and nutrients 4.
115/1   117   sio3  4   Si03 value is high, No Auto-Analyzer error found, peak looks good.
116/1   134   ctds  3   Shiproll plus poor mixing in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation
                        during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
116/1   134   salt  2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. Gradient, salinity as well as
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
118/1   120   salt  2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity
                        discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
118/1   135   ctds  3   Gradient causes CTD signal oscillation during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just
                        does not compare well with bottle salinity.
118/1   135   salt  2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. Gradient, salinity appears
                        acceptable as does oxygen and nutrients.
119/1   108   O2    2   Oxygen flask 1697 was broken prior to this station during underway
                        sampling, replaced with 1517.
119/1   126   O2    5   Analyst: 02 rig problem, sample lost.
121/1   131   O2    2   Analyst: Red flaky contaminant in sample. Bottle value appears normal, code
                        good.
122/2   234   ctds  3   Gradient, caused CTD signal oscillation during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just
                        does not compare well with bottle salinity.
122/2   234   salt  2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. Gradient, caused CTD signal
                        oscillation during bottle stop. CTD is okay, just does not compare well with
                        bottle salinity.
123/1   101   btl.  2   Strong transmissometer minimum at bottom, will this affect 5i03.
123/1   124   salt  2   03 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced a
                        reasonable salinity value. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
123/1   128   salt  2   03 attempts for a good salinity reading. Additional readings produced a
                        reasonable salinity value. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
124/2   236   salt  5   Salinity lost, did not save value during run.
125/1   128   salt  2   4 attempts for a good salinity reading. Cap was loose and popped. First
                        reading resolved the small salinity discrepancy. Salinity as well as oxygen
                        and nutrients are acceptable.
126/3   301   btl.  2   Cast 2 aborted, there was a blockage in the exhaust hole, had to bring on
                        board to clear.
127/1   101   salt  2   Unusually high standard setting of 463, same results after trying 2 duff
                        standard seawater bottles. Salinity agrees with CTD and adjoining stations.
                        The drift is not unusually high and all salinity are within the accuracy of the
                        measurement. Salinity as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
127/1   116   btl.  2   Leaked, vent not tight enough. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
127/1   120   btl.  2   Leaked, vent not tight enough. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
127/1   122   salt  2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Loose cap, came off in lid. First
                        reading produced a lower, 0.001, salinity value. All readings were within the
                        accuracy of the measurement. Salinity, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
127/1   125   salt  4   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No analytical
                        problems noted. Appears to have been drawn from bottle 27, none of the
                        other samples indicate a mis-trip. Code salinity bad, oxygen and nutrients
                        acceptable.
129/1   121   O2    2   02 bottle value appears low for column, however supporting feature in p04
                        and sio3. Value good.
129/1   133   ctds  3   Gradient resulting in CTD signal oscillation during bottle stop. CTD is okay,
                        just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
129/1   133   salt  2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. Gradient causing CTD signal
                        oscillation. Code CTD salinity questionable, salinity, oxygen and nutrients
                        acceptable.
130/2   201   no3   4   N03 high, no corresponding feature in any other parameters, some type of
                        contamination.
130/2   211   O2    2   02 slightly high, 0.025, no analytical problems noted and within the accuracy
                        of the measurement. Oxygen as well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
132/2   229   btl.  2   Bottle tripped on the fly. Did not wait 30 seconds, two ship rolls, before
                        tripping the bottle. Changed lanyard on bottom cap prior to this station. This
                        was a preventive maintenance, previous stations are acceptable. Oxygen as
                        well as salinity and nutrients are acceptable.
133/1   103   salt  4   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No
                        analytical notes, appears to have been drawn from bottle 4, exactly the same
                        conductivity readings. Code salinity bad, oxygen and nutrients are
                        acceptable.
133/1   132   ctds  3   Gradient causes much CTD signal oscillation during bottle stop. CTD is okay,
                        just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
133/1   132   salt  2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. Gradient, salinity as well as
                        oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
135/1   127   btl.  2   Ran out of water on salinity which was mistakenly drawn before nutrients.
                        Duplicate CFC samples with other samples resulted in the consumption of
                        water. Salinity sample was taken, but not with a complete fill, nutrients were
                        not drawn.
135/1   127   salt  2   Low sample volume, approximately half bottle. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
135/1   134   ctds  3   Shiproll in gradient cause much CTD signal oscillation during bottle stop.
                        CTD is okay, just does not compare well with bottle salinity.
135/1   134   salt  2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
137/1   101   btl.  2   35 bottles tripped per sampling schedule.
137/1   101   salt  2   Issues with std not approaching a consistent value. Replaced pick up tube
                        and metal elbow to combat potential leak. Seemed to correct the problem,
                        used 2 stds. Stations 137 and 138 analyzed together, both stations appear
                        reasonable.
138/2   201   salt  2   Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD and adjoining stations. 3 attempts
                        for a good salinity reading. First reading resolved salinity discrepancy. Salinity
                        as well as oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
138/2   203   salt  4   Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD and adjoining stations. No analytical
                        problems noted. Code salinity bad, oxygen and nutrients are acceptable.
138/2   223   btl.  2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 24. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
138/2   225   btl.  2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 26. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
138/2   227   btl.  2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 28. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
138/2   229   btl.  2   Accidentally opened bottle, mistaken for a duplicate for HPLC, not sampled
                        by CFC, DIC, pH or TALK.
138/2   231   btl.  2   Duplicate bottle tripped with 32. Sampling for pigments, ODF samples were
                        not drawn.
139/1   110   salt  2   3 attempts for a good salinity reading. Analyst ran samples out of order, 9 as
                        10, 10 as 9, corrected in data file. Checked the data to verify samples were
                        not off up to bottle 12, and they do not. Salinity as well as oxygen and
                        nutrients are acceptable.
139/1   112   salt  5   Sampling error on salinity, sample bottle was turned upside down indicating
                        that it was not drawn, analyst did not attempt to run it. Salinity lost.




                                           Appendix D

                     CLIVAR SO4P: Pre-Cruise Sensor Laboratory Calibrations


CTD 831 Sensors - Table of Contents        
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTD                              Manufacturer           Serial        Station     Appendix D Page
Sensor                           and Model No.          Number        Number       (Un-Numbered)
------------------------------  ----------------------  ------------  ----------  ---------------
PRESS (Pressure)                 Digiquartz 401 K-i 05  99677         Test,2-400        1-3
Ti (Primary Temperature)         Sea-Bird SBE3pIus      03P-4943      Test,2-iO          4
Ti (Primary Temperature)         Sea-Bird SBE3pIus      03P-5046      11 -400            5
Ci (Primary Conductivity)        Sea-Bird SBE4C         04-3057       Test,2-iO          6
Ci (Primary Conductivity)        Sea-Bird SBE4C         04-2593       11 -400            7
02 (Dissolved Oxygen)            Sea-Bird SBE43         43-1136       Test,2-400         8
T2 (Secondary Temperature)       Sea-Bird SBE3pIus      03P-5046      Test,2-1 0         5
T2 (Secondary Temperature)       Sea-Bird SBE3pIus      03P-4943      11-400             4
C2 (Secondary Conductivity)      Sea-Bird SBE4C         04-3176       Test               9
C2 (Secondary Conductivity)      Sea-Bird SBE4C         04-2593       2-10               7
C2 (Secondary Conductivity)      Sea-Bird SBE4C         04-3399       11-400            10
TRANS (Transmissometer)          WETLab5 C-Star         CST-327DR     Test,2-400        11
FLUOR (Chlorophyll Fluorometer)  Seapoint               SCF2743       Test,2-4          
REFT (Reference Temperature)     Sea-Bird SBE35         3516590-0011  Test,2-400        12




                           Pressure Calibration Report
                           STS/ODF Calibration Facility



SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 0831
CALIBRATION DATE: 01-NOV-2010
Mfg: SEABIRD Model: 09P CTD Prs s/n: 99677

C1 = -4.346032E+4
C2 = -4.006928E-1
C3 =  1.660343E-2
D1 =  3.341 599E-2
D2 =  0.000000E+0
T1 =  3.004630E+1
T2 = -4.444244E-4
T3 =  4.435306E-6
T4 = -4.321959E-9
T5 =  0.000000E+0
AD590M =  1.28916E-2
AD59OB = -8.23481 E+0
Slope  =  1 .00000000E+0
Offset =  0.00000000E+0

Calibration Standard: Mfg: RUSKA Model: 2400 s/n: 34336 
tO = tl +t2*td+t3*td*td+t4*td*td*td 
w = 1 t0*t0*f*f 
Pressure = (0.6894759*((cl+c2*td+c3*td*td)*w*(1-(dl +d2*td)*w)14.7)


  SBE9                SBE9     Ruska-SBE9  Ruska-SBE9  
  Freq      Ruska   New_Coefs  Prev_Coefs  New_Coefs    Tprs  Bath_Temp
---------  -------  ---------  ----------  ----------  -----  ---------
33287.487     0.18      0.22     -0.20       -0.04     -0.46   -1.464
33489.391   365.06    365.09     -0.17       -0.02     -0.44   -1.464
33678.616   709.32    709.33     -0.15       -0.01     -0.44   -1.464
33866.651  1053.58   1053.54     -0.09        0.03     -0.38   -1.464
34053.516  1397.87   1397.83     -0.08        0.04     -0.38   -1.464
34423.812  2086.48   2086.46     -0.07        0.03     -0.38   -1.463
34789.654  2775.16   2775.14     -0.06        0.02     -0.36   -1.464
35151.152  3463.91   3463.86     -0.02        0.05     -0.36   -1.464
35508.454  4152.72   4152.60      0.08        0.12     -0.33   -1.464
35861.718  4841.60   4841.47      0.10        0.13     -0.33   -1.464
36211.160  5530.54   5530.58     -0.06       -0.04     -0.29   -1.464
36556.684  6219.55   6219.61     -0.06       -0.05     -0.28   -1.464
36898.411  6908.63   6908.54      0.10        0.09     -0.28   -1.464
36556.725  6219.56   6219.69     -0.14       -0.14     -0.28   -1.464
36211.223  5530.55   5530.70     -0.17       -0.15     -0.28   -1.464
35861.789  4841.60   4841.56      0.01        0.05     -0.28   -1.464
35508.541  4152.72   4152.69     -0.02        0.03     -0.25   -1.464
35151.246  3463.91   3463.94     -0.09       -0.03     -0.25   -1.464
34789.750  2775.16   2775.22     -0.14       -0.05     -0.25   -1.464
34423.910  2086.48   2086.50     -0.11       -0.01     -0.23   -1.464
34053.613  1397.87   1397.87     -0.12        0.00     -0.23   -1.464
33866.762  1053.58   1053.61     -0.16       -0.03     -0.23   -1.464
33678.719   709.32    709.33     -0.14       -0.01     -0.23   -1.464
33489.499   365.06    365.07     -0.15       -0.00     -0.20   -1.464
33291.248     0.18      0.17     -0.09        0.01      7.85    6.998
33493.172   365.06    365.05     -0.08        0.01      7.87    6.998
33682.428   709.32    709.31     -0.08        0.01      7.89    6.998
33870.470  1053.58   1053.56     -0.07        0.02      7.90    6.998
34057.367  1397.87   1397.87     -0.08       -0.00      7.92    6.998
34427.686  2086.48   2086.48     -0.07        0.00      7.94    6.998
34793.555  2775.16   2775.18     -0.08       -0.02      7.96    6.998
35155.086  3463.91   3463.90     -0.05        0.01      7.98    6.998
35512.414  4152.72   4152.66      0.00        0.06      7.99    6.998
35865.745  4841.60   4841.58     -0.03        0.02      8.03    6.998
35512.460  4152.73   4152.70     -0.02        0.03      8.06    6.998
35155.145  3463.91   3463.95     -0.10       -0.04      8.06    6.998
34793.630  2775.16   2775.24     -0.14       -0.07      8.06    6.998
34427.775  2086.48   2086.53     -0.12       -0.05      8.09    6.998
34057.449  1397.87   1397.89     -0.10       -0.02      8.09    6.998
33870.560  1053.58   1053.57     -0.07        0.01      8.11    6.998
33682.524   709.32    709.32     -0.08        0.00      8.12    6.998
33493.282   365.06    365.04     -0.07        0.02      8.14    6.998
33294.531     0.18      0.13      0.01        0.04     16.67   16.211
33496.494   365.06    365.06     -0.03        0.00     16.68   16.211
33685.762   709.32    709.30     -0.02        0.02     16.72   16.211
33873.841  1053.58   1053.58     -0.03        0.00     16.75   16.211
34060.757  1397.87   1397.88     -0.05       -0.01     16.78   16.211
34431.110  2086.48   2086.49     -0.04       -0.00     16.80   16.211
34797.022  2775.16   2775.18     -0.06       -0.02     16.84   16.211
35158.598  3463.91   3463.93     -0.07       -0.02     16.85   16.211
35515.930  4152.73   4152.62      0.06        0.10     16.88   16.211
35158.615  3463.91   3463.93     -0.06       -0.02     16.90   16.211
34797.067  2775.17   2775.21     -0.09       -0.05     16.92   16.211
34431.184  2086.48   2086.54     -0.10       -0.06     16.93   16.211
34060.820  1397.87   1397.88     -0.05       -0.01     16.96   16.211
33873.923  1053.58   1053.59     -0.04       -0.01     16.97   16.211
33685.857   709.32    709.32     -0.03        0.00     16.98   16.211
33496.601   365.06    365.05     -0.03        0.01     17.01   16.211
33297.716     0.18      0.15      0.06        0.03     27.99   27.026
33499.699   365.06    365.03      0.06        0.04     28.05   27.026
33689.015   709.32    709.31      0.03        0.01     28.08   27.026
33877.128  1053.58   1053.58      0.02        0.00     28.12   27.026
34064.061  1397.87   1397.86      0.01        0.01     28.13   27.026
34434.477  2086.48   2086.47      0.01        0.02     28.15   27.026
34800.453  2775.17   2775.18     -0.03       -0.01     28.17   27.026
35162.047  3463.91   3463.84      0.04        0.07     28.17   27.026
34800.463  2775.17   2775.19     -0.04       -0.03     28.18   27.026
34434.525  2086.48   2086.54     -0.06       -0.05     28.19   27.026
34064.097  1397.87   1397.89     -0.01       -0.02     28.22   27.026
33877.170  1053.58   1053.61     -0.02       -0.03     28.22   27.026
33689.070   709.32    709.35     -0.01       -0.03     28.22   27.026
33499.772   365.06    365.08      0.01       -0.02     28.24   27.026
33297.779     0.18      0.16      0.05        0.02     28.25   27.026



SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 4943
CALIBRATION DATE:     10-Nov-2010
Mfg:                  Seabird 
Model:                03
Previous cal:         20-Jul-10
Calibration Tech:     CAL

ITS-90-COEFFICIENTS  IPTS-68_COEFFICIENTS 
 g = 4.37958507E-3    a = 4.37979056E-3 
 h = 6.41227776E-4    b = 6.41439771E-4
 i = 2.26364538E-5    c = 2.26685433E-5
 j = 2.13452861E-6    d = 2.13600248E-6
 fO = 1000.0          Slope = 1.0        Offset = 0.0

Calibration Standard:   Mfg: ASL   Model: F18   s/n: 245-5149
Temperature ITS-90  = 1/{g+h[ln(fO/f)]+i[1n2(fO/f)]+j[1n3(fO/f)]}-273.15(°C)
Temperature IPTS-68 = 1/{a+b[ln(fO/f)]+c[1n2(fO/f)]+d[In3(fO/f)]}-273.15(°C)
T68 = 1.00024 * T90 (-2 to -35 Deg C)

SBE3       SPRT     SBE3     SPRT-SBE3  SPRT-SBE3
Freq       ITS-90   ITS-90   Old_Coefs  New_Coefs
---------  -------  -------  ---------  ---------
3093.1711  -1.5070  -1.5070  -0.00000    0.00004
3272.0007   0.9934   0.9934  -0.00007   -0.00005
3812.4840   7.9962   7.9962   0.00004   -0.00004
4105.4554  11.4984  11.4983   0.00021    0.00007
4738.0302  18.4954  18.4954   0.00025   -0.00003
5078.8528  21.9959  21.9959   0.00037    0.00003
5811.1056  28.9977  28.9977   0.00040   -0.00005
6203.0814  32.4981  32.4981   0.00050    0.00003



SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 5046
CALIBRATION DATE:     09-Nov-2010
Mfg: Seabird Model:   03
Previous cal:         22-Apr-10
Calibration Tech:     CAL

ITS-90 COEFFICIENTS  IPTS-68 COEFFICIENTS
 g = 4.41731675E-3    a = 4.41753473E-3
 h = 6.45948441 E-4   b = 6.46164705E-4
 i = 2.37696576E-5    c = 2.38022244E-5
 j = 2.31686942E-6    d = 2.31837795E-6
fO = 1000.0           Slope= 1.0         Offset = 0.0

Calibration Standard:   Mfg: ASL   Model: F18   s/n: 245-5149
Temperature ITS-90  = 1/{g+h[ln(fO/f)]+i[1n2(fO/f)]+j[1n3(fO/f)]}-273.15(°C)
Temperature IPTS-68 = 1/{a+b[ln(fO/f)]+c[1n2(fO/f)]+d[In3(fO/f)]}-273.15(°C)
T68 = 1.00024 * T90 (-2 to -35 Deg C)

SBE3       SPRT     SBE3     SPRT-SBE3  SPRT-SBE3
Freq       ITS-90   ITS-90   Old_Coefs  New_Coefs
---------  -------  -------  ---------  ---------
3271.2117  -1.5064  -1.5064  -0.00001    0.00001
3459.9695   0.9939   0.9940   0.00006   -0.00005
4030.4221   7.9974   7.9972   0.00050    0.00015
4339.5382  11.4991  11.4992   0.00033   -0.00009
5006.7589  18.4954  18.4955   0.00045   -0.00005
5366.1497  21.9954  21.9954   0.00052   -0.00002
6138.1421  28.9970  28.9969   0.00077    0.00013
6551.5251  32.4990  32.4991   0.00065   -0.00008




                           SEA-BIRD ELECTRONICS, INC.
            13431 NE 20th Street, Bellevue, Washington, 98005-2010 USA
     Phone: (425) 643 - 9866 Fax (425) 643 - 9954 Email: seabird@seabird.com



SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 3057      SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 28-Oct-10      PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seimens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
g = -1.01998429e+001            a =  3.07403474e-004
h =  1.28503430e+000            b =  1.28497046e+000
i =  3.37575251e-004            c = -1.01992051e+001
j =  3.03944407e-005            d = -8.17551825e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)  m = 3.3
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)  CPcor = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL  BATH COND   INST FREO  INST COND     RESIDUAL
 (ITS-90)    (PSU)   (Siemens/m)   (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  ----------  ---------  ----------   ----------
  0.0000    0.0000    0.00000     2.81603    0.00000       0.00000
 -1.0000   34.8387    2.80621     5.45085    2.80624       0.00003
  1.0000   34.8401    2.97781     5.57153    2.97777      -0.00004
 15.0000   34.8407    4.27429     6.41029    4.27427      -0.00002
 18.5000   34.8401    4.62118     6.61664    4.62121       0.00003
 29.0000   34.8384    5.70553     7.22343    5.70552      -0.00001
 32.5001   34.8309    6.07826     7.42050    6.07826       0.00001

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4) /10(1 + δt + εp) Siemens/meter
Conductivity = (afm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +εp) Siemens/meter
t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; δ = CTcor; ε = CPcor;
Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients
  


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 2593    SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 28-Oct-10    PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seimens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS              ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
g = -9.43305749e+000          a =  4.97227108e-006
h =  1.37053922e+000          b =  1.36765136e+000
i = -1.21141484e-003          c = -9.42787186e+000
j =  1.68892936e-004          d = -8.73763824e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008          (nominal) m = 5.2
CTcor =  3.2500e-006          (nominal) CPcor = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL  BATH COND   INST FREO  INST COND     RESIDUAL
 (ITS-90)    (PSU)   (Siemens/m)   (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  ----------  ---------  ----------   ----------
  0.0000    0.0000    0.00000     2.62543    0.00000       0.00000
 -1.0000   34.8387    2.80621     5.23377    2.80624       0.00003
  1.0000   34.8401    2.97781     5.35203    2.97777      -0.00003
 15.0000   34.8407    4.27429     6.17252    4.27427      -0.00002
 18.5000   34.8401    4.62118     6.37404    4.62121       0.00003
 29.0000   34.8384    5.70553     6.96599    5.70553       0.00000
 32.5001   34.8309    6.07826     7.15803    6.07826      -0.00000

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4) /10(1 + δt + εp) Siemens/meter
Conductivity = (afm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +εp) Siemens/meter
t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; δ = CTcor; ε = CPcor;
Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients
  


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 1136    SBE 43 OXYGEN CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 20-Sep-10p

COEFFICIENTS  A = -3.1186e-003    NOMINAL DYNAMIC COEFFICIENTS

Soc      0.4448   B =  1.6645e-004     Dl =  i.92634e-4   H1 = -3.30000e-2
Voffset -0.5227   c = -3.2930e-006     D2 = -4.64803e-2   H2 =  5.00000e+3
Tau20    1.54     E nominal = 0.036                       H3 =  1.45000e+3 

BATH OX  BATH TEMP  BATH SAL   INSTRUMENT    INSTRUMENT    RESIDUAL
 (ml/l)   ITS-90      PSU     OUTPUT(VOLTS)  OXYGEN(ml/l)   (ml/l)
-------  ---------  --------  -------------  ------------  --------
  1.26      6.00      0.02        0.851          1.26       -0.00
  1.26      2.00      0.02        0.816          1.26        0.00
  1.26     12.00      0.02        0.907          1.27        0.00
  1.28     20.00      0.02        0.985          1.28        0.00
  1.28     26.00      0.02        1.045          1.28        0.00
  1.29     30.00      0.02        1.090          1.29        0.00
  4.16      2.00      0.02        1.495          4.16       -0.00
  4.18     12.00      0.02        1.792          4.17       -0.00
  4.19     20.00      0.02        2.036          4.19       -0.00
  4.19     30.00      0.02        2.366          4.19        0.00
  4.19      6.00      0.02        1.619          4.19       -0.00
  4.20     26.00      0.02        2.229          4.19       -0.00
  6.56     30.00      0.02        3.404          6.56       -0.00
  6.65     12.00      0.02        2.546          6.66        0.00
  6.68     20.00      0.02        2.935          6.68       -0.00
  6.69      6.00      0.02        2.273          6.69        0.00
  6.72     26.00      0.02        3.260          6.73        0.00
  6.73      2.00      0.02        2.095          6.73        0.00

Oxygen(ml/1)=Soc*(V+Voffset)*(1.0+A*T+B*T2+C*T3)*OxSol(T,S)*exp(E*P/K)
V = voltage output from 5BE43, T = temperature [deg C], S = salinity [PSU] 
K = temperature [deg K], OxSol(T,S) = oxygen saturation [mill], P = pressure [dbar], 
Residual = instrument oxygen - bath oxygen
  


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 3176      SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 20-Aug-10      PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seirnens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
g = -9.85456533e+000            a =  7.47119546e-007
h =  1.34309646e+000            b =  1.33782107e+000
i = -1.90224920e-003            c = -9.84258541e+000
j =  2.06940381e-004            d = -8.04511090e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)  m =  6.0
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)  CPcor = -9.5700e-008(nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL  BATH COND   INST FREO  INST COND     RESIDUAL
 (ITS-90)    (PSU)   (Siemens/m)   (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  ----------  ---------  ----------   ----------
  0.0000     0.0000   0.00000     2.71240    0.00000       0.00000
 -1.0000    34.6952   2.79573     5.31432    2.79568      -0.00004
  0.9999    34.6950   2.96657     5.43306    2.96662       0.00005
 15.0000    34.6966   4.25848     6.25747    4.25847      -0.00001
 18.4999    34.6963   4.60416     6.46010    4.60416       0.00001
 29.0000    34.6945   5.68461     7.05560    5.68460      -0.00001
 32.5000    34.6872   6.05602     7.24886    6.05602       0.00000

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4) /10(1 + δt + εp) Siemens/meter
Conductivity = (afm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +εp) Siemens/meter
t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; δ = CTcor; ε = CPcor;
Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients
  


SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 3399      SBE4 CONDUCTIVITY CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 11-Nov-10      PSS 1978: C(35,15,0) = 4.2914 Seimens/meter

GHU COEFFICIENTS                ABCDM COEFFICIENTS
g = -1.01473070e+001            a =   1.24862927e-006
h =  1.53415621e+000            b =   1.52916896e+000
i = -1.96230638e-003            c  = -1.01376931e+001
j =  2.34505763e-004            d  = -8.40350084e-005
CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)  m = 5.9
CTcor =  3.2500e-006 (nominal)  CPcor = -9.5700e-008 (nominal)

BATH TEMP  BATH SAL  BATH COND   INST FREO  INST COND     RESIDUAL
 (ITS-90)    (PSU)   (Siemens/m)   (kHz)    (Siemens/m)  (Siemens/m)
---------  --------  ----------  ---------  ----------   ----------
  0.0000     0.0000   0.00000     2.57476    0.00000       0.00000
 -1.0000    34.8750   2.80886     4.99872    2.80883      -0.00003
  1.0000    34.8743   2.98045     5.10963    2.98049       0.00004
 15.0000    34.8753   4.27808     5.88034    4.27806      -0.00002
 18.5000    34.8747   4.62528     6.06987    4.62528       0.00000
 29.0000    34.8729   5.71054     6.62707    5.71057       0.00003
 32.5000    34.8664   6.08374     6.80800    6.08372      -0.00002

Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 +jf4) /10(1 + δt + εp) Siemens/meter
Conductivity = (afm + bf2 + c + dt) / [10 (1 +εp) Siemens/meter
t = temperature [°C)]; p = pressure [decibars]; δ = CTcor; ε = CPcor;
Residual = (instrument conductivity - bath conductivity) using g, h, i, j coefficients









P0 Box 518                                                    (541) 929-5650
620 Applegate St.                                             Fax (541) 929-5277
Philomath,OR 97370                  WET Labs                  www.wetlabs.com

                               C-Star Calibration


Date: November 30, 2010         S/N#: CST-327DR                Pathlength: 25 cm


                                 Analog meter
                                 ------------
Vd                                  0.059 V
Vair                                4.752 V
Vref                                4.660 V


Temperature of calibration water                                          21.3°C
Ambient temperature during calibration                                    21.5°C



Relationship of transmittance (Tr) to beam attenuation coefficient (c), and 
pathlength (x, in meters): Tr = e(^-cx)

To determine beam transmittance: Tr = (V(sig) - V(dark))/(V(ref)-V(dark))

To determine beam attenuation coefficient: c = 1/x* In(Tr)


Vd    Meter output with the beam blocked. This is the offset.
Vair  Meter output in air with a clear beam path.
Vref  Meter output with clean water in the path.
Temperature of calibration water: temperature of clean water used to obtain Vref.
Ambient temperature: meter temperature in air during the calibration.
Vsig  Measured signal output of meter.

















SENSOR SERIAL NUMBER: 0011      SBE 35 TEMPERATURE CALIBRATION DATA
CALIBRATION DATE: 10-Dec-10p    ITS-90 TEMPERATURE SCALE

ITS-90 COEFFICIENTS

a0 =  5.07932084e-003
al = -1.40241599e-003
a2 =  2.05831106e-004
a3 = -1.13843353e-005
a4 =  2.41071702e-007

                   BATH TEMP  INSTRUMENT  INST TEMP  RESIDUAL
                   (ITS-90)   OUTPUT (n)  (ITS-90)   (ITS-90)
                   ---------  ----------  ---------  ---------
                   -1.499860  790160.86   -1.499833   0.000027
                    1.000060  707445.12    1.000033  -0.000027
                    4.500120  607351.97    4.500075  -0.000045
                    8.000140  522810.78    8.000162   0.000022
                   11.500190  451243.15   11.500237   0.000047
                   15.000220  390515.84   15.000243   0.000023
                   18.500200  338861.85   18.500173  -0.000027
                   22.000230  294814.97   22.000176  -0.000054
                   29.000240  224891.30   29.000294   0.000054
                   32.500380  197165.70   32.500359  -0.000021

Temperature ITS-90=1/{aO+al[ln(n)]+a2[1n2(n)]+a3[1n3(n)]+a4[1n4(n)]}-273.15(°C)

Residual = instrument temperature - bath temperature





LOWERED ACOUSTIC DOPPLER CURRENT PROFILER 
Report. Thomas Decloedt CLIVAR S4P 2011 
McMurdo, Antarctica to Punta Arenas, Chile

P1 Contact: Eric Firing
            University of Hawaii at Manoa
            1000 Pope Rd.
            Honolulu, HI
            96822
            efiring@hawaii.edu


Two RD Instruments Work Horse 300-kHz (WH300), Model WHM300-I-UG5O, were 
used throughout the cruise, powered by a DEEPSEA Power & Light 50V 
SeaBattery. Both ADCPs were installed on the main rosette, one looking 
up and one looking down. The instruments provide full water column 
profiles of horizontal velocity currents with a vertical resolution of 
approximately eight meters.

LADCP downloading and processing were done on a Lenovo  SIO e 
laptop running Ubuntu Linux, and using a python gui 
developed at the University of Hawaii. Data was processed 
using LDEO software maintained by Andreas Thurnherr, with 
vertical profiles as well as longitude section plots being 
produced for general use. CTD time series data, GPS data 
and shipboard ADCP data, were used to constrain 
calculations.

At station 50, the downward-looking ADCP started having trouble as 
evidenced by bogus values when running the UH scanbb program (zmax= 
10000). At station 51, the LDEO software also warned of a 'broken beam 
3' and the downward-looking ADCP (RDI workhorse 300kHZ SN#: 12734) was 
removed from the rosette between stations 52 and 53. The upward-looking 
rosette was moved into the downward-looking position. Inspection of the 
instrument revealed that the ADCP had flooded and was damaged beyond 
immediate repair. From station 53 onward, the LADCP was a 
downward-looking system only. While this reduces the accuracy of the 
measurements, it does not affect vertical resolution.

Figure 1 shows vector plots of the current velocities averaged over 0- 
lOOm of depth. The main portion of the S4P cruisetrack is zonal, 
eastward along 67 degrees south. The first part of the cruise ran from 
near the Antarctic Continent at 70S30', 168E 21' (station 2) 
northeastward to 67 5, 175 E 35' (station 18). Figure 2 shows the zonal 
and meridional velocities inferred by the LADCP. Near the coast, the 
Antarctic Slope current (ASF) was sampled. Further offshore, two 
features most likely due to submesoscale eddies were crossed.

Figure 3 shows the meridional and zonal velocities along 67 S. Station 
spacing was variable due to time constraints. The spacing was 30 
nautical miles from stations 18 (169E35') to 45 (150W), then 45 
nautical miles from stations 96 (148 W) to 107 (130 W 11') and finally 
60 nautical miles from stations 108 (127W37') to 127.


Figure 1: Vector plots of average current for the upper 100 m.


Figure 1: Zonal and meridional velocities LADCP velocities from Cape Adare to 67 
degrees south. The westward flowing ASF is evident at stations 3,4 & 5. 
The features at stations 7 and 11 are most likely due to submesoscale 
eddies.

Figure 2: Zonal and meridional velocities along 67 S.




CFC AND SF6 MEASUREMENTS

PI: William Smethie (Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University)

Analysts: Eugene Gorman (Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory) 
          Sarah Eggleston (University of Hawaii at Manoa) 
          Mingxi Yang (University of Hawaii at Manoa)

Report Prepared by Mingxi Yang
April 15, 2011

Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University measured discrete 
waterside and airside concentrations of chlorofluorocarbons (CFC-11, 12, 113) 
and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) using purge-and-trap gas chromatography (GC) with 
separate electron capturing devices (ECD).  With approximately 3000 samples 
analyzed, the system performed well during the S4P cruise overall.

Water samples for CFCs and SF6 were the first to be drawn from the main CTD 
rosette at every cast to minimize interaction between seawater and room air.  
Except for Station 7, which was skipped due to time constraints, approximately 
25 samples were taken from the CTD rosette every station.  Water was transferred 
from niskin bottles to 0.5 L sampling bottles via a Clearflex 60(TM) PVC tube.  
Air bubbles were avoided by overfilling the glass sampling bottle as well as a 
plastic holding container that is ~4 cm taller than the glass sampling bottle, 
and then capping the sampling bottle underwater.  Greater numbers of samples 
were generally taken near the ocean bottom and surface.  The water samples were 
analyzed after being warmed to ~10 °C in a water bath; warming reduces gas 
solubility and improve purging efficiency (>99%).  Water was transferred from 
the sampling bottle to a 23 mL sparging column for CFCs and 350 mL sparging 
column for SF6; the greater volume for the latter was needed as a result of the 
three orders of magnitude lower ambient SF6 concentration.  The trace gases were 
purged out of the water phase at ~ 75 (CFCs) and ~150 mL per minute (SF6) with 
purified nitrogen gas for 4 (CFCs) and 5 (SF6) minutes, which were captured in a 
Unibeads-2S(TM) (CFCs) and Carboxen-1000(TM) (SF6) traps that were cooled to ~ 
−80 °C with liquid carbon dioxide.  Electronically heating the CFC trap to ~110 
°C for one minute and injecting the sample gas into a Porasil-B(TM) pre-column 
and then a Carbograph 1AC(TM) column result in the separation of the CFC peaks.  
Heating the SF6 trap to ~165 °C for one minute and injecting the sample gas into 
a MS-5A(TM) pre-column and column separate SF6.  The concentrations of trace 
gases were quantified with a dual ECD Hewlett Packard 6890 GC.  

Concentrations from standard gases were measured at least once per cast; these 
results were used to monitor drift in instrument sensitivity.  Calibrations were 
performed weekly by measuring the concentrations of the standard gases at 
different known volumes that vary by an order of magnitude.  Duplicates were 
taken on roughly half of the stations, which generally yielded differences of 
less than 1% for CFC-11 and 12 and ~2% for CFC-113 and SF6.  As expected, 
greater concentrations of CFCs and SF6 near the ocean bottom were observed in 
the Ross Sea as a result of deepwater formation.  Deepwater concentrations 
decline to further the east to near zero by ~130°W along 67°S.  Due to a problem 
with controlling the water level of the SF6 purging column and high background 
levels of SF6 from the GC carrier gas (nitrogen), no SF6 measurements were made 
for Stations 18~27, 55~66, and 120.

Triplicates of ambient air samples were taken from the deck everyday with a 200 
mL syringe and analyzed for CFCs and SF6 using the same system as the waterside 
measurements.  Interpolated to times when water samples were taken, airside 
measurements allowed for calculations of surface saturations.  The saturations 
of these gases were typically higher in open water (~90%) than in regions 
covered in ice (~80%), and were positively correlated with the surface 
saturation of oxygen.  

Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University and University of Hawaii 
(PI: David Ho) also collaborated to measure underway samples for CFCs and SF6.  
An underway sample was typically taken within minutes to when the 5-m niskin 
bottle was tripped and analyzed in the same fashion as niskin samples.  
Intercomparison between 5-m niskin and underway samples generally yielded good 
agreement.  Duplicates of underway samples taken sequentially also demonstrate 
excellent precision, which supports the development of continuous underway 
sampling in the future.  In addition to sampling when the ship was stationary, 
~hourly underway samples were taken during the periods of March 21~22, March 
29~30, and April 12 while the ship was transecting.  The variability in measured 
concentrations was much greater during the first transect in the Ross sea than 
during the later transects near 67°S and further to the east.




TOTAL DISSOLVED INORGANIC CARBON (DIC)

PI's:  Richard Feely, Christopher Sabine, Rick Wanninkhof
Shipboard Technicians: Nancy Williams, Kevin Sullivan

Samples were drawn from the Niskin-type bottles into cleaned, combusted 300 ml 
borosilicate glass bottles using Tygon tubing with silicone ends. Bottles were 
rinsed once and filled from the bottom, overflowing half a volume and leaving a 
6 ml headspace, taking care not to entrain any bubbles. After 0.125 ml of 50% 
saturated HgCl2 solution was added as a preservative, the sample bottles were 
sealed with glass stoppers lightly covered with Apiezon-L grease and stored at 
room temperature up to a maximum of 8 hours.

Partial profiles (~26 out of 36 Niskins) were sampled for all stations, with 
replicate samples taken from the surface, 1000m, and bottom bottles. Partial 
profiles were drawn throughout the water column with focus on the bottom four 
Niskins and the upper 500m.  The replicate samples (N=314) were interspersed 
throughout the station analysis for quality assurance and integrity of the 
coulometer cell solutions. No systematic differences between the replicates were 
observed.  Over 3200 samples were analyzed for discrete DIC.

The DIC analytical equipment is set up in a seagoing container modified for use 
as a shipboard laboratory. The analysis is done by coulometry with two 
analytical systems (PMEL-1 and PMEL-2) used simultaneously on the cruise.  Each 
system consists of a 5011 coulometer (UIC, Inc.) coupled with a SOMMA (Single 
Operator Multiparameter Metabolic Analyzer) inlet system developed by Ken 
Johnson (Johnson et al., 1985,1987,1993; Johnson, 1992) of Brookhaven National 
Laboratory (BNL).  In the coulometric analysis of DIC, all carbonate species are 
converted to CO2 (gas) by addition of excess hydrogen to the seawater sample, 
and the evolved CO2 gas is carried into the titration cell of the coulometer, 
where it reacts quantitatively with a proprietary reagent based on ethanolamine 
to generate hydrogen ions.  These are subsequently titrated with coulometrically 
generated OH-. CO2 is thus measured by integrating the total change required to 
achieve this.

The stability of each coulometer cell solution was confirmed three different 
ways: the Certified Reference Material (CRM), Batch 106 supplied by Dr. Andrew 
Dickson of SIO, was measured at the beginning, gas loops were run at the 
beginning and at the end, and the replicate samples interspersed - but typically 
run at the beginning, middle, and end of each cell solution. The coulometer cell 
solution was replaced after no more than 28 mg of carbon was titrated, typically 
after 9-11 hours of continuous use.

The coulometers were each calibrated by injecting aliquots of pure CO2 (99.995%) 
by means of an 8-port valve outfitted with two sample loops (Wilke et al., 
1993).  These calibrations were run at the beginning and end of each cell with a 
set of the gas loop injections. Calculation of the amount of CO2 injected was 
done in accordance with the Guide to best practices for Ocean CO2 Measurements 
(PICES 2007).

The instruments each have a salinity sensor, but all DIC values were 
recalculated to a molar weight (µmol/kg) using density obtained from the CTD's 
salinity sensor. The DIC values were corrected for dilution by the saturated 
HgCl2 addition used for sample preservation. The correction factor used for 
dilution was 1.0004. A correction was also applied for the offset from the CRM. 
On this cruise, the overall accuracy and precision for the CRMs on both 
instruments combined was 1.90 µmol/kg (n=201). DIC data reported to the database 
directly from the ship are to be considered preliminary until a more thorough 
quality assurance can be completed shore side. 


References:

Dickson, A.G., Sabine, C.L. and Christian, J.R. (Eds.), (2007): Guide to Best 
    Practices for Ocean C O2 Measurements. PICES Special Publication 3, 191 pp.

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

Johnson, K.M., A.E. King, and J. McN. Sieburth (1985): Coulometric DIC analyses 
    for marine studies: An introduction. Mar. Chem., 16, 61-82.

Johnson, K.M., P.J. Williams, L. Brandstrom, and J. McN. Sieburth (1987): 
    Coulometric total carbon analysis for marine studies: Automation and 
    calibration. Mar. Chem., 21, 117-133.

Johnson, K.M. (1992): Operator's manual: Single operator multiparameter 
    metabolic analyzer (SOMMA) for total carbon dioxide (CT) with coulometric 
    detection. Brookhaven National Laboratory, Brookhaven, N.Y., 70 pp.

Johnson, K.M., K.D. Wills, D.B. Butler, W.K. Johnson, and C.S. Wong (1993): 
    Coulometric total carbon dioxide analysis for marine studies: Maximizing the 
    performance of an automated continuous gas extraction system and coulometric 
    detector. Mar. Chem., 44, 167-189.

Lewis, E. and D. W. R. Wallace (1998) Program developed for CO2 system 
    calculations. Oak Ridge, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 
    http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/oceans/

Wilke, R.J., D.W.R. Wallace, and K.M. Johnson (1993): Water-based gravimetric 
    method for the determination of gas loop volume. Anal. Chem. 65, 2403-2406.





ALKALINITY 

(Laura Fantozzi and Emily Bockmon, laboratory of Andrew G. Dickson, 
Marine Physical Laboratory, Scripps Institution of Oceanography)

Samples were taken at every station, depending on cast depth the number 
of niskins sampled varied. Bottles were chosen to match what DIG was 
sampling. After thorough rinsing; samples were collected in 250 ml Pyrex 
bottles. A headspace of approximately Smls was removed and 0.06 
milliliters of a saturated mercuric chloride solution was added to each 
sample. The samples were capped with a glass stopper in a Teflon sleeve. 
All samples were equilibrated to 20 degrees Celsius using a Thermo 
Scientific water bath.

Beginning on Station 100, samples could only be analyzed between noon 
and midnight due to an unknown electrical problem. Between Stations 
114-117 a third analyst, Wilson Mendoza, tried running samples. 
Unfortunately this did not alleviate the problem, but he ran 
approximately 30 samples during this period. Therefore, beginning at 
Station 121 fewer niskins, usually deep water, were sampled at each 
station for the remainder of the cruise. If a station was not sampled 
during this period it was due to the analyst being too far behind due to 
this unknown electrical problem. During this period of system problems 
the extra bottles that G14 requested be analyzed for alkalinity were not 
sampled or analyzed.

Samples of volume 92.085 ± 0.021 ml were prepared using a volumetric 
pipette and a system of relay valves and air pumps, controlled by a 
laptop using Lab VIEW 2001. The temperature of the samples at time of 
dispensing was taken automatically by a computer using a Measurement 
Specialties 4600 thermometer, to convert this volume to mass for 
analysis.

Samples were analyzed using an open beaker titration procedure using two 
thermostated beakers; one sample being titrated while the second was 
being prepared and equilibrating to the system temperature of 20 degrees 
G. After an initial aliquot of approximately 2.2 mls of standardized 
hydrochloric acid (-'O.lMolar HG1 in "'0.6M NaG1 solution), the sample 
was stirred for approximately 5 minutes to remove liberated carbon 
dioxide. The stir time has been minimized by bubbling air into the 
sample. After equilibration, 19 aliquots of 0.04 mls were added. The 
data within the pH range of 3.5 to 3.0 were processed using a non-linear 
least squares fit from which the alkalinity value of the sample was 
calculated (Dickson, et.al., 2007). This procedure was performed 
automatically by a laptop running Lab VIEW 10.

Dickson laboratory Certified Reference Materials (GRM) Batch 106 was 
used to determine the accuracy of the analysis.

Depending on cast depth one, two or three duplicates were analyzed. 
These duplicates were taken at the surface, intermediate and/or deep 
water. Throughout the cruise, approximately 289 duplicates were 
analyzed. The pooled standard deviation was approximately 1.02 t mol 
kg-1.

The data should be considered preliminary since the correction for the 
difference between the GRMs stated and measured values has yet to be 
finalized and applied. Additionally, the correction for the mercuric 
chloride addition has yet to be applied. As part of the data evaluation,
a determination was made for the possible contribution of the mercuric 
chloride to the alkalinity. The data indicate no contribution, either 
positive or negative, from the mercuric chloride.

REFERENCE 

Dickson, Andrew G., Chris Sabine and James R. Christian, editors, "Guide to Best 
    Practices for Ocean C02 Measurements", Pices Special Publication 3, IOCCP 
    Report No. 8, October 2007, SOP 3b, "Determination of total alkalinity in 
    sea water using an open-cell titration"




DOC/TDN 
PI: Dr. Dennis Hansell, University of Miami, 
    Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science
Ship Technician: Charles T. Farmer


A total of 2591 seawater samples were collected and frozen during the S4P cruise 
for Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC) /Total Dissolved Nitrogen (TDN) analysis. The 
samples were collected by Charles T. Farmer during the cruise and consist of 
approximately 50 ml of seawater collected directly from the Niskin bottles on 
the rosette, with samples collected from 250 meters to the surface being 
filtered through a GF/F filter during sampling.  The frozen seawater samples 
will be returned to the University of Miami, Rosenstiel School of Marine and 
Atmospheric Science for analysis using High Temperature Catalytic Oxidation 
(HTCO) with Shimadzu TOC-VCSH instruments.   For further information about the 
analysis or data availability please contact Dr. Dennis Hansell 
(dhansell@rsmas.miami.edu). 


Reference

Farmer, C. and D.A. Hansell. 2007. Determination of dissolved organic carbon and 
    total dissolved nitrogen in sea water. Dickson, A.G., Sabine, C.L. and 
    Christian, J.R. (Eds.) 2007. Guide to best practices for ocean CO2 
    measurements. PICES Special Publication 3, 191 pp.





HELIUM SAMPLING
PI: Peter Schlosser, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory
On board technician: Anthony Dachille

690 Helium samples were taken. 

Samples were taken roughly every 2.5-3.5 degrees, with 28 stations sampled.

Helium samples were taken in stainless steel sample cylinders. The sample 
cylinders were leak-checked and Back filled with N2 prior to the cruise. Samples 
were drawn using tygon tubing connected to the Niskin bottle at one end and the 
cylinder at the other. Silicon tubing was used as an adapter to prevent the 
tygon from touching the Niskin per the request of the CDOM group. Cylinders are 
thumped vigorously with a bat while being flushed with water from the Niskin to 
help remove bubbles. After flushing roughly 1 liter of water through them, the 
plug valves are closed. As the cylinders are sealed by O-ringed plug valves, the 
samples must be extracted within 24 hours to limit out-gassing.

Eight samples at a time were extracted using our At Sea Extraction line set up 
in the Biolab. The stainless steel sample cylinders are attached to the vacuum 
manifold and pumped down to ~2e-7 Torr using a diffusion pump for a minimum of 1 
hour to check for leaks. The sections are then isolated from the vacuum manifold 
and introduced to the reservoir cans which are heated to >90°C for roughly 10 
minutes. Glass bulbs are attached to the sections and immersed in an individual 
ice water bath during the extraction process. After 10 minutes each bulb is 
flame sealed and packed for shipment back to WHOI. The extraction cans and 
sections are cleaned with distilled water and isopropanol,and then dried between 
each extraction.

Helium samples will be analyzed using a mass spectrometer at LDEO.





TRITIUM/OXYGEN-18 SAMPLING
PI: Peter Schlosser, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory
On board technician: Anthony Dachille

556 Tritium and 750 oxygen-18 samples were taken on the same stations as the 
Helium samples. Each Tritium sample taken corresponded to a Helium sample taken 
on that station. 

Tritium samples were taken using a silicon adapter and tygon tubing to fill 1-qt 
glass jugs. The jugs were baked in an oven, backfilled with argon, and the caps 
were taped shut with electrical tape prior to the cruise. While filling, the 
jugs are place on the deck and filled to about 2 inches from the top of the 
bottle, being careful not to spill the argon. Caps were replaced and taped shut 
with electrical tape before being packed for shipment back to WHOI.

Tritium samples will be degassed in the lab at WHOI and stored for a minimum of 
6 months before mass spectrometer analysis. Oxygen-18 were sampled in the same 
manner, without the use of argon.





DISCRETE PH ANALYSES
PI: Dr. Andrew Dickson and Dr. Frank Millero
Ship technicians: Ryan Woosley and Wilson Mendoza


Sampling

Samples were collected in 250ml borosilicate glass bottles rinsing a minimum of 
3 times, allowing approximately half the volume to overflow, and thermostated to 
25°C before analysis. Three duplicates were collected from each station. Samples 
were collected on the same bottles as total alkalinity or dissolved inorganic 
carbon in order to completely characterize the carbon system. All data should be 
considered preliminary.


Analysis

pH (mmol/kg H2O) on the total scale was measured using an Agilent 8453 
spectrophotometer according to the methods outlined by Clayton and Byrne (1993). 
A RTE17 water bath maintained spectrophotometric cell temperature at 25.0°C. A 
10cm flow through cell was filled automatically using a Kloehn 3v syringe pump. 
The sulfonephthalein indicator m-cresol purple (mCp) was also injected 
automatically by the kloehn 3v syringe pump  into the spectrophotometric cells, 
and the absorbance of light was measured at two different wavelengths (434 nm, 
578 nm). The baseline was subtracted from these wavelengths, determined by 
averaging the absorbances from 730-735nm. The samples were run with the tungsten 
lamp unplugged. In order to correct for the increased noise caused by this the 
spectrum was measured 6 times in rapid succession and then averaged. The ratios 
of absorbances at the different wavelengths were input and used to calculate pH 
on the total scales, incorporating temperature and salinity into the equations. 
Salinity data were obtained from the conductivity sensor on the CTD. These data 
were later corroborated by shipboard measurements. Temperature of the samples 
was measured immediately after spectrophotometric measurements using a YSI 4600 
thermometer.



Reagents

The mCp indicator dye made to a concentration of 2.0mM in 100ml batches as 
needed. A total of 4 batches were used during the cruise. The pH of the first 
two batches were adjusted to ~7.9 (NBS) by the addition of ~0.1N HCl. The last 
two batches were adjusted to a pH of ~7.6. This was done because of the small pH 
range of the water column in this area (<0.3) which made it difficult to 
determine the slope of the perturbation caused by the addition of the indicator. 



Standardization

The precision of the data can be accessed from measurements of duplicate 
samples, and certified reference material

(CRM) Batch 106 (Dr. Andrew Dickson, UCSD). CRMs were measured approximately 
every other.  The mean and standard deviation for the CRMs was 7.9168± 0.0031 
(n=110).



Data Processing

Addition of the indicator affects the pH of the sample and the degree to which 
pH is affected is a function of the differences between the pH of the seawater 
and indicator. Therefore, a correction is applied for each batch of dye. To 
determine this correction 2 samples from each station where measured twice. Once 
with a normal amount of indicator and once with double the amount of the 
indicator. The ΔR/ΔAiso versus the average of the ratio (R) is then plotted and 
fitted with a linear equation; where Aiso is the absorbance as the isosbestic 
point (488nm). From this fitted equation the slope and intercept (b and a 
repectively) are determined by:

  ΔR/ΔA(iso) = bR + a                                                       (1)

From this the corrected ratio (R') can be determined by:

  R' =R - A(iso)(bR + a)                                                    (2)

Preliminary quality control of the data are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1: Preliminary Quality Control

                         Total Number of Samples  3046
                         -----------------------  ----
                         Questionable (QC=3)        31
                         Bad (QC=4)                 14
                         Lost (QC=5)                 6
                         Duplicate (QC=6)           327



Problems

Very few problems occurred during the cruise. During the first 10 stations 
duplicates were very poor due to bubbles in the cell. This was solved by 
allowing the cell to soak in surface seawater for over 24hrs to condition the 
cell. Around stations 20-26 an unusual peak sometimes appeared at <400nm. 
Although it did not appear to affect the pH (rerunning the sample and getting a 
spectrum without the peak gave the same pH). The baseline absorbance was also 
higher than expected, so the spectrophotometer was replaced with a spare. The 
usual peak no longer appeared after the replacement and background absorbance 
was normal (<0.001). 


References

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





DENSITY SAMPLES
PI: Dr. Frank Millero
Ship Technicians: Ryan Woosley and Wilson Mendoza

Density samples were taken at twelve stations during the cruise, 
sampling the same bottles as the inorganic carbon parameters (Stations 
11, 44, 64, 66, 89, 101, 109, 114, 120, 124, 138, 140). The samples were 
drawn into 150 mL HDPE bottles rinsing three times before filling. These 
samples will be analyzed for density using an Anton-Parr vibrating 
densitometer and re-analyzed for salinity (to account for any 
evaporation) back in Miami.



DISCRETE SAMPLE COLLECTION FROM UNDERWAY SEA WATER SYSTEM

In support of the autonomous underway pCO2 measurements, discrete 
samples were collected from the underway sea water system when the 
spacing between CTD stations was greater than 60 nautical miles. There 
were four transits to the start of the next line of CTD stations, and 
forty-four collections were done along these transits. The spacing 
between CTD stations on a line was never greater than 60 nautical miles. 
The parameters measured at essentially all of these underway stations 
were dissolved inorganic carbon, total alkalinity, pH, nutrients, 
oxygen, and salinity.

Eight of the collections occurred while a CTD cast was being done. The 
results from the underway discrete samples compared very well with the 
discrete samples from the CTD Niskin bottles at the two shallowest 
depths - typically 5 and 25 meters. The inlet for the underway sea water 
line is at approximately 6 meters depth. The underway seawater line 
appeared to provide sea water representative of the surface mixed layer.





CARBON14 
PI: Dr. Ann McNichol, Woods Hole Oceanographic 
Institution Dr. Robert Key, Princeton 
University Ship Technician: Charles T. Farmer


A total of 527 seawater samples were collected and preserved on the 
54P cruise for 14C analysis. The samples were collected by Charles T. 
Farmer and/or Juan Botella, and consist of approximately 500 ml of 
seawater collected directly from the rosette. The samples will be 
returned to Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution for analysis. For more 
information about the data or analysis please contact Dr. Ann McNichol 
(amcnicholwhoi.edu or Dr. Robert Key (key@princeton.edu)


Reference:

McNichol, A., Quay. P. D., Gagnon, A. R., Burton, J. R., "Collection and 
    Measurement of Carbon Isotopes in Seawater DIG", WHP Operations and Methods-
    March 2009.





TRACE METAL HYDROGRAPHIC CASTS 
Contact person: Shipboard work
Chris Measures
Department of Oceanography
University of Hawaii
Honolulu HI 96822
Phone 8089568693
Email: chrism@soest.hawaii.edu

Contact person: Shore-based work
Bill Landing
Department of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Science
Florida State University
117 N. Woodward Ave., Tallahassee, FL 32306-4320
Phone: 850-644-6037
Email: wlanding@fsu.edu

Hydrographic sampling for the trace elements Al, Fe and Mn was 
conducted during the CLIVAR 54P cruise aboard the RN. N.B. Palmer. In 
total (not counting station 1) 56 stations were occupied at 
approximately 10 longitude spacing along each of the sections yielding a 
total of 671 subsamples. Data generated onboard were submitted to the 
shipboard data assembly system and each parameter on each subsample was 
assigned a WOCE quality flag.

Samples were collected using a specially designed rosette system 
which consists of 12 xl2L GO-FLO bottles mounted on a powdercoated 
rosette frame. The package was equipped with a SeaBird SBE 911 ctd that 
also had an SBE 43 oxygen sensor and a Wet Labs FL I flourometer. The 
package was lowered using a Kevlar conducting cable and bottles were 
tripped at predetermined depths from the ship using a deck box (Measures 
et al., 2008b).

The necessity to store the (TM) rosette outside on the deck resulted 
in significant problems with the SBE 43 oxygen sensor. On several 
occasions after particularly cold periods the sensor readings were 
clearly offset from the expected dissolved oxygen concentrations. The 
sensor however continued to provide a signal that varied with depth in 
the water column in an oceanographically reasonable manner. So, even 
though the sensor was not yielding accurate values of dissolved oxygen 
on board the ship, the data from the sensor were collected for the 
duration of the cruise in the expectation that either post cruise 
calibration of the sensor, or by fitting data from the hydrography 
rosette the (TM) sensor values could be made useful at a future date.

Water sub samples were collected from the GO-FLO bottles in the (TM) 
van using previously documented procedures (Measures et al., 2008b). Dissolved 
Al, Fe and Mn were determined on these water samples on board ship using the 
Flow Injection Analysis methods of Resing and Measures, 1994; Measures 
et al., 1995; Resing and Mottl, 1992 respectively. In addition samples 
were collected for shorebased ICPMS determinations of dissolved Mn, Fe, 
Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, and Pb using isotope dilution ICPMS (Milne et al., 
2010). The suspended matter collected on filters from each GO-FLO bottle 
will be analyzed at FSU. The samples will be digested in strong acid and 
analyzed for a suite of trace elements including Al, Ti, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, 
Cu, Zn, Cd, and Pb using ICPMS. Unfiltered 4 litre samples were also 
collected for Aimee Neeley (NASA), for shipboard filtration and 
shorebased determination of phytoplankton pigments.

In addition to the regular shipboard program additional unfiltered 
seawater samples were collected from 12 profiles for shore-based 
analysis of total mercury and methylmercury, in collaboration with Dr. 
David Krabbenhoft (USGS).


References

Measures, C.I., J. Yuan and J. A. Resing, Determination of Iron in 
    Seawater by Flow Injection Analysis using in-line Preconcentration and 
    Spectrophotometric Detection, Marine Chemistry, , 3-12, 1995

Measures, C. I., W. M. Landing, M. T. Brown, and C. S. Buck (2008a), 
    High-resolution Al and Fe data from the Atlantic Ocean CLIVAR-C02 Repeat 
    Hydrography A16N transect: Extensive linkages between atmospheric dust 
    and upper ocean geochemistry, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 22, GB 1005, 
    doi:10.1029/2007GB003042.

Measures, C.I., Landing, W.M., Brown, M.T. and Buck, C.S. (2008b). A 
    commercially available rosette system for trace metal clean sampling. 
    Limnol and Oceanography methods, 6, 384-394.

Angela Milne, William Landing, Michael Bizimis, Peter Morton. 
    Determination of Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd and Pb in seawater using 
    high resolution magnetic sector inductively coupled mass spectrometry 
    (HR-ICP-MS), Analytica Chimica Acta 665, 200-207, 2010.

Resing, J.A. and M.J. Mottl,(1992). Determination of manganese in 
    seawater using flow injection analysis with on-line pre-concentration 
    and spectrophotometric detection. Analyt. Chem., 64, 682-2,687

Resing, J. and C.I. Measures, Fluorimetric determination of Al in 
    seawater by FIA with in-line preconcentration, Anal. Chem., 
    66,4105-4111, 1994.





SUMMARY OF TRANSMISSOMETER SAMPLING PROCEDURE
PT: W.D. Gardner, Texas A&M Department of Oceanography
    Mary J0 Richardson, Texas A&M Department of Oceanography
Technician: Robert Thombley, Kristin Sanborn, Alex Quintero, Brett Hembrough
            S JOISTS

TRANSMISSOMETER:

Instrument: WetLabs C-Star Transmissometer 327DR

AIR CALIBRATION:

• Calibrated the transmissometer in the lab at beginning and end of the cruise 
  with a pigtail cable attachment to CTD.
• Wash and dried the windows with Kimwipes and distilled water. 
• Compare the output voltage with the Factory Calibration data. 
• Recorded the final values for unblocked and blocked voltages on the 
  TRANSMISSOMETER CALIBRATION/CAST LOG. In most cases recorded the approximate 
  air temperature as well. 

OPERATION:

• With the transmissometer connected to the CTD, cleaned and dried optical 
  windows. Block the light path in the center of the instrument with your 
  fingers or a paper towel and measure the output voltage.  Took reading of the 
  output (voltage or counts) through the CTD and record the value on the 
  "TRANSMISSOMETER CALIBRATION/CAST LOG". If the new value is substantially 
  different, wash the windows with slightly soapy water or alcohol and rinsed 
  with fresh water, then wipe dry. Checked output voltage again for stable 
  readings then ceased drying the transmissometer windows; typically employing 
  one or two, wipes with Kimwipes, of each window. This was done before cast, at 
  the beginning and end of the cruise as well as every 20 casts. Temperature 
  disequilibrium and condensation on windows will cause erratic readings.    
• Washed the windows before every cast. Rinsed both windows with a distilled 
  water bottle that contains 2-3 drops of liquid soap.  This was the last thing 
  before the CTD went in the water. 
• Rinse instrument with fresh water at end of cruise.

                  Blocked   Unblocked 
          Date    Value Vd  Value Vair  Air T (°C)  Remarks
        --------  --------  ----------  ----------  -------------------
        11/30/11   0.059      4.752       21.5  
                              4.660       21.3      Factory Calibration
        2/23/11    0.056      4.707         
        3/12/11    0.056      4.673        5.8  
        3/22/11    0.056      4.675        6.0  
        4/04/11    0.056      4.652        5.8  
        4/14/11    0.057      4.666        7.2  
        4/19/11    0.059      4.665        8.3  
        4/20/11    0.059      4.690         20  
 
 

 

SUMMARY OF THE BIOGEOCHEMICAL SAMPLING PROGRAM

NASA Ocean Ecology Branch
PI:Charles R. McClain
Ship Technician: Aimee Neeley


The primary objective of the participation of NASA's Ocean Ecology 
Branch was to collect biogeochemical data for 'ground-truthing' data 
products obtained from NASA Ocean Color Satellites, both current and 
future. The following samples were collected from both the 
uncontaminated seawater system of the Nathaniel B Palmer and/or from the 
CTD rosette when water was available: phytoplankton pigments, absorption 
of particulate organic matter (Ap), suspended particulate mailer (SPM), 
particulate organic carbon (POC), chromophoric dissolved organic mailer 
(aCDOM) and dissolved organic carbon (DOC). CDOM samples were collected 
for a collaborator, Norm Nelson of the University of California, Santa 
Barbara, who has participated in previous field campaigns within the CLI 
VAR program. All sample analysis will take place post cruise at the 
University of California (CDOM) and at NASA Goddard. Detailed protocols 
of analysis procedures will be provided in the final cruise report

Sample Collection Protocol

CDOM samples were collected from the rosette mid-day using silicone 
tubing from 17-18 depths. Each sample was filtered in a glass filtration 
set up through 25mm, 0.2 um polycarbonate filters. The filtrate for each 
sample was stored in a 4OmL amber glass vial and kept in the dark at 
4°C. Phytoplankton pigments were filtered through plastic filter 
funnels, in duplicate, by gentle vacuum (7psi) onto 25mm Whatman GFF 
filters. Pigment samples were stored in liquid nitrogen. POC and Ap were 
filtered as pigments but onto combusted 25mm GFF filters and using glass 
filter funnels. Ap samples were flash-frozen and stored at -80°C, while 
POC samples were stored in liquid nitrogen. SPM samples were filtered 
through pre-weighed, 47mm polycarbonate filters, also through glass 
filter funnels and stored at -20°C. DOC samples were collected at some 
stations either straight from the underway system (unfiltered) or 
filtered through a glass filter funnel. These samples were collected in 
4OmL pre-combusted glass amber vials and stored in the dark at 4°C. At 
each station where samples were collected from the underway seawater 
system, latitude, longitude, time, station number and underway 
fluorescence were recorded onto a log sheet. Surface water was collected 
in a 20L carboy. For each parameter a 1L or 4L plastic amber bottle was 
filled and inverted onto filtration set up. Volumes of filtration were 
dependent on the chlorophyll fluorescence values. Typically 1- 4L of 
water, occasionally 6L for pigments, were filtered. When water was 
collected from the rosette, sampling depths were dependent on the 
structure and intensity of the fluorescence trace. Water was filtered 
for pigments as priority and then POC and/or Ap depending upon available 
volume. Please see the table below for the identification of stations 
sampled, method of sampling and parameters that were collected. On a few 
occasions (stations 47, 83, 97, 102, and 111) water was collected from 
the trace metal rosette.

     Surface              
     (Under                
     -way       CTD      Depths sampled     Pig-
Stn  system)  rosette    (from rosette)     ments  POC  Ap  SPM  DOC  aCDOM 
---  -------  -------  -------------------  -----  ---  --  ---  ---  -----
  2     X                                     X          X   X          
  3                                                                     X
  5              X     3, 20, 40, 65,140      X          X               
  9     X                                     X     X    X   X          X
 11                    4,20,40,65,177,140     X                        
 12     X                                     X     X    X   X          X
 15     X                                     X     X    X               
 16              X     3.5,35,60,85,110       X                         X
 18     X                                     X     X    X   X    X     X
 19     X        X     34,60,84,110           X                         
 21     X                                     X     X    X   X    X     X
 22     X        X     35,58,85,109           X                         
 25     X                                     X     X    X   X          X
 26     X        X     20,40,65               X                         
 28     X        X     35,60,84               X                        
 29     X                                     X     X    X   X    X     X
 32     X        X     3.8,20,65,90,115       X     X    X   X          X 
 33     X                                     X     X    X               
 35     X        X     20,40                  X     X    X   X    X     X
 36     X                                     X     X    X               
 37     X                                     X                         
 38     X        X     20,40,65               X     X    X               
 39     X                                     X     X    X   X          X
 41     X        X     20,40,65               X     X    X               
 42     X                                     X     X    X   X          X
 43     X                                     X     X    X               
 45     X        X     24,50,73,100           X     X    X   X          X
 46     X                                     X     X    X               
 47     X        X     20,40,65,90            X     X    X   X    X     X
 48     X        X     25,50,75               X     X    X               
 50     X        X     20,40,65               X     X    X   X    X     
 51     X                                     X     X    X   X    X     X 
 52     X                                     X     X    X               
 53     X                                     X                         
 54     X                                     X     X    X   X    X     X
 55     X        X     20,40,65               X     X    X               
 56     X                                     X                         
 57     X                                     X     X    X   X          X
 58     X                                     X     X    X               
 59     X                                     X                         
 60     X                                     X     X    X              X
 61     X        X     2.7,35,60              X     X    X               
 62     X                                     X                         
 64     X                                     X     X    X              X
 65              X     4.5,20,40,65           X     X    X               
 66              X     2.2,25,50,75           X                         
 77     X        X     25,50,75,100124,150    X     X    X   X    X     X     
 78     X        X     35,60,85,110           X     X    X               
 79     X                                     X     X    X               
 80     X                                     X                         
 81     X                                     X                         
 82     X        X     20,40                  X     X    X   X          X
 83     X        X     20,53,75               X     X    X               
 84     X                                     X                         
 85     X                                     X                         
 86     X                                     X     X    X   X    X     X
 87     X        X     33,60,84               X                         
 88     X        X     20,40,64               X                         
 89     X                                     X                         
 90     X                                     X     X    X   X    X     X 
 91     X                                     X     X                    
 92     X                                     X                         
 93     X                                     X     X    X   X    X     X
 94     X                                     X     X    X               
 95     X        X     25,50                  X     X    X   X    X     X
 97     X        X     20,41,65               X     X    X               
 98     X        X     2.2,25,50,75           X     X    X               
 99     X                                     X                        
100     X        X     20,40,66               X     X    X   X    X     X
101     X                                     X     X                    
102     X        X     20,33,60               X     X    X               
105     X                                     X     X                    
106     X                                     X     X                    
107     X                                     X     X                    
108     X                                     X                         
109     X              24,74,99               X     X    X   X    X     
110     X                                     X                         
111     X        X     19,40,55               X     X    X   X          X
112     X                                     X                         
113     X                                     X     X    X   X    X     X
114     X                                     X                         
115     X                                     X                         
116     X        X     60.5                   X     X    X   X    X     
117     X                                     X                         
118     X                                     X                         X
119     X                                     X     X     X   X            
120     X                                     X                          
121     X                                     X     X     X   X   X     X
122     X                                     X                          
123     X                                     X     X     X   X   X     X
124     X                                     X                          
125     X                                     X                          
126     X                                     X     X     X   X   X      
127     X                                     X                          
128     X        X     50.2                   X                         X
129     X                                     X     X     X   X            
130     X                                     X                            
131     X                                     X     X     X   X            
132     X                                     X     X     X   X            
133     X                                     X                            
134     X                                     X                            
135     X                                     X                         X
136     X        X     50                     X     X     X   X   X      
137     X                                     X                            
139              X     5.6,65,89,99           X     X                      
140     X                                     X                           





ATMOSPHERIC SAMPLING PROGRAM: AEROSOLS AND PRECIPITATION
April 14, 2011

Contact person: William M. Landing, 
                Professor of Environmental and Marine Chemistry 
                Department of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Science
                Florida State University 
                117 N. Woodward Ave. Tallahassee, FL 32306-4320 
                VOICE: 850-644-6037; FAX 850-644-2581; WLANDING@FSU.EDU

1. The role of iron as a limiting plant nutrient in the oceans is widely 
recognized, but still poorly understood. Atmospheric transport of 
mineral dust is the major mechanism by which Fe is supplied to the open 
ocean, and therefore has a major impact on upper ocean biogeochemical 
cycling of carbon and the major plant nutrients. As a result of 
industrialization and increased use of fossil fuels (oil and coal), 
aerosols from urban areas are also reported to carry high concentrations 
of soluble Fe. There are very few data on the concentrations of total 
aerosol Fe and the percentage of soluble aerosol Fe over the open ocean. 
The aerosol sampling/analytical component of the CLIVAR Trace Metals 
research effort utilizes a 4-channel aerosol sampling system deployed on 
the forward safety rail on the top of the conning tower of the RVIB NB 
Palmer. The aerosol sampling system is operational when the wind speed 
is greater than 2 kts and the wind has been continuously blowing towards 
the bow of the ship (±75 degrees) for at least 2.5 minutes. If the wind 
speed drops below this threshold, or moves out of the designated sector, 
the air flow is immediately shut off using electronically actuated 
relays and solenoid valves to avoid contamination from stack exhaust. 
All personnel on board are cautioned not to smoke or conduct any 
activity forward of the aerosol mast that might generate small 
particles.

We collect replicate bulk aerosol samples on 47 mm diameter filters. The 
analyses of these samples is designed to help understand the processes 
responsible for solubilizing Fe and Al in natural aerosols. One of the 
bulk aerosol filters is analyzed for total aerosol Fe and Al (and other 
trace elements). A replicate filter is leached with freshly-collected 
0.2 t m filtered surface seawater to measure seawater-soluble aerosol 
Fe, Al, Mn, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, and Pb. Another replicate filter is 
leached with ultra-high purity (UHP) deionized water to measure water 
soluble Fe and a suite of 40-50 other trace elements. UHP water-soluble 
anions (including excess sulfate and nitrate) and cations (sodium) are 
also measured on these samples.

Samples were collected (48-hour integrated) from February 23, 2011 (70° 
26.395' 5, 168° 28.7'E) through April 20, 2011. A total of 25 sets of 
48-hour integrated aerosol samples were collected. Aerosol data are 
generally available within 12 months of the end of the cruise.

We also made an effort to collect snow samples using three methods. The 
large polyethylene funnel that is normally used to collect rain samples 
was deployed on the forward safety rail of the ship's bridge deck, 
however the snow did not collect efficiently in the funnel. We also 
deployed three SOOmL widemouth polyethylene bottles on a PVC pole 
mounted atop the conning tower. These bottles have threaded openings on 
each end, and are normally found in use in fast-food outlets to dispense 
condiments (known as "first in, first out" or FiFo bottles). When the 
top cap is removed, the openings in the back end caps allow air to pass 
through the bottles while snow collects inside the bottle. This method 
worked very well on a few occasions, but it requires very heavy snowfall 
while the ship is pointed "bow into the wind".

Finally, we took advantage of the opportunity when the ship moored to a 
large ice floe to leave the ship, walk upwind for 100 meters, and 
collect snow off the surface of the ice floe.

The collected snow is allowed to melt inside the collection 
bottles, then transferred to a smaller polyethylene bottle for 
frozen storage, to be analyzed at FSU.

The atmospheric sampling data will be made available through the 
Biological and Chemical Oceanography Data Management Office, Department 
of Marine Chemistry and Geochemistry, Woods Hole Oceanographic 
Institution. The data will be available at: hap :!!data.bco-dmo.org!j 
g!dir!BCO!CLIVAR AEROSOL


2. Instruments and Methods: 

a. Total aerosol Fe and Al is measured on 47 mm, 0.4 pm polycarbonate track-
   etched filters following strong acid digestion at FSU. 
b. Seawater-soluble aerosol Fe is measured on freshly-collected 47 mm, 0.45 pm 
   Pall! GN6 (cellulosic esters) aerosol filters. The loaded filter is placed in 
   a clean polycarbonate vacuum filtration rig and 100 mL of 0.2 pm filtered 
   surface seawater (natural pH) is pulled though the filter in 5-10 seconds. 
   Samples are further acidified to pH <2 (0.024M HC1) for storage and analysis 
   of total dissolved Fe at FSU. 
c. For the UHP-water aerosol solubility measurements, a replicate loaded aerosol 
   filter is placed in a clean polycarbonate vacuum filtration rig and 100 mL of 
   ultrapure deionized water (UHP; pH 5.4-5.5) is pulled though the filter in 5-
   10 seconds. These samples are immediately frozen for return to FSU. After 
   thawing and analysis of the soluble anions and cations (section (e) below) 
   the samples are acidified to pH <2 (0.024M HC1) and stored for analysis of 
   total UHP soluble aerosol Fe and Al. 
d. Total aerosol Fe and Al, and total soluble, aerosol Fe and Al (and other 
   trace elements) are measured on the digested aerosols and the seawater and 
   UHP-water aerosol leaches using high-resolution Inductively-Coupled Plasma 
   Mass Spectrometry (ICPMS). 
e. Soluble aerosol anions and cations are measured on the UHP-water leaches 
   using ion chromatography (for chloride, nitrate, sulfate) and flame Atomic 
   Absorption Spectroscopy (for sodium). 
f. Snow samples are analyzed for major ions using the methods listed under (e) 
   above, and for total trace elements using the methods listed under (d) above.


3. Additional Cooperative Sampling

None





FLOWCYTOBOT REPORT
20 April 2011
Peacock/Laney - WHOI


The primary goal of this component was to operate the Imaging 
FlowCytobot continuously from the ship's flow-through system over the 
entire cruise track of NBP1102. This included the S4P line, along 67 S 
latitude from 170 E to 72 W longitude as well as transects south on 
170W, 150W, and 103W, and all transits between transects. This sampling 
continued during and between fixed stations. The phytoplankton cell 
images collected with this instrument provide information about the 
microplankton assemblage composition, for comparison to HPLC proxies for 
assemblage composition and for direct assessment of algal composition 
while at sea. In addition, during a majority of fixed stations and 
longer transits, surface samples from the ship's flow-through system 
were analyzed by flow cytometry with an Accuri C6 Flow Cytometer. As 
time and water availability permitted, discrete volumes from CTD bottle 
samples were also analyzed for images and flow-cytometry to provide 
similar algal composition information from those samples. Bottle samples 
were taken down to "400 meters, depending on the fluorescence profile.

The Imaging FlowCytobot operated continuously throughout the cruise, 
taking "'2300 Sml samples. Discrete CTD bottle samples were also 
analyzed from 22 stations.

A total of 224 discrete water samples were analyzed by flow-cytometry. 
Surface water was analyzed from 84 out of 140 CTD stations occupied 
during NBP11-02. CTD bottle profiles were analyzed from 23 stations. 
The remaining 133 were surface samples taken between stations with 6Onm 
spacing or during longer transits.

Post-cruise analysis will involve a detailed examination of algal 
assemblage structure using these image and flow-cytometry data.





EASTERN ROSS SEA MOORING PROGRAM

The Atmosphere-Ice-Ocean Interactions in the Eastern Ross Sea study 
is funded by NSF-OPP (Grant: ANT-0839005; PT: Orsi) to investigate what 
processes control the flow of warm Circumpolar Deep Water onto the 
Antarctic continental shelf in the eastern Ross Sea. It is based on 1-yr 
moored time series of currents, temperature, conductivity and pressure 
in the interior of the Little America Trough. Also data from 
high-resolution conductivity/temperature/depth (CTD) and expandable 
temperature profiling (XBT) measurements are used to characterize the 
summer regional water mass stratification and circulation, their 
boundaries and spreading paths, and their interactions with the sea-ice 
and continental ice.

Two identical moorings were built at the Geochemical and 
Environmental Research Group of Texas A&M University (TAMU). Each of 
these moorings had dual Benthos acoustic release, three Sea-Bird SBE-37 
Microcats, and two Nortek Aquadopps 3000 (Figure 1).

Antarcic Ross Sea Mooring Program

Proposed Mooring Configuration

All shackles to be load rated domestic screw pin shackles wlinsulated 12 ga. 
copper seizing wire

Swivels and pear links to be included beneath each buoyancy package

Instrument line 3x19 plastic jacketed. torque balanced, galvanized wire rope 
wiheavy duty galvanized thimbles and dual Nicopress sleeve crimps. Each 
termination protected by heavy duty adhesive lined shrink tube to reduce drag


Figure 1: Schematic of mooring design.


During the 09/10 Antarctic field season a team from TAMU sailed on the Swedish 
Oden icebreaker and deployed the two ERS moorings, one near the mouth of the 
Little America Trough and the other farther inshore along its eastern flank 
(Figure 2). The final location of each mooring was established using the ship 
GPS position when the anchor weight was slipped at the end of the deployment. 
Because winch failures prevented the occupation of CTD stations, only a handful 
of XCTD launches were done within a mile of each mooring site.

Buoy expert James Ryder from WHOT met with a team of assistants well ahead of 
time to go over a detailed procedure to be followed during the mooring 
recoveries on theN.B. Palmer. Recovery of both ESR moorings took place on 20 
March 2011 (Table 1, Figure 2). Prior to that the ship had first arrived at the 
mooring A location, communication to the acoustic released was established and 
after a few hours of ranging from different locations the final mooring position 
was determined to be about a mile off from that determined during its deployment 
the previous year. After several unsuccessful attempts to range the releases 
under worsening seas it was decided to cancel operations until the next morning. 
Five CTD stations (67-71) were occupied along a short section of the eastern 
flank of the LAT during the night hours, and then the boat proceeded to the 
second mooring B site. Here again communication with both releases was also 
established but only to get inconsistent ranges and the exact mooring location 
was not determined at that time. It was decided to wait until the seas calmed 
down before attempting any mooring recovery.


Figure 2: Locations of the two ERS moorings and complementary CTD stations 
          across the eastern flank of the Little America Trough.


On the morning of March 20, 2011 the ship was once again on 
location at mooring A. The releases were enabled, interrogated and 
released without any difficulties. The floats were spoiled about twelve 
minutes later. Seas and ice conditions made the full mooring recovery 
challenging at times, but it was eventually loaded on the ship about an 
hour and a half later. All instrumentation was recovered in good 
conditions, except for two Benthos yellow hard-hat floats that were lost 
during the handling of a temporary wire entanglement. No appreciable 
fouling was observed on any of the instruments. About four hours later 
the ship had located mooring B, enabled and interrogated the releases, 
and immediately after the releases were triggered. The freed mooring was 
easily spoiled and all of the instruments were brought on board in less 
than two hours.

With the exception of the top Aquadopp current meter on mooring 
B whose batteries stopped on 16 September 2010, one hundred percentage 
of data recovery was achieved from the remaining of the instruments.


Table 1: Mooring locations.

Mooring     Location     Location  Longitude    Date     Water Depth
-------  --------------  --------  ---------  ---------  -----------
   A       Mid Little    -77.312   -161.067   20 Mar 11     640 m
         America Trough     
   B      Outer Little   -76.920   -163.283   20 Mar 11     587 m
         America Trough     


Five CTD stations (72-76) were occupied spanning mooring B, before the 
ship headed toward the next CLIVAR 54P line along 170°W. A total of 
sixty nine XBTs were launched along this transit at spacing varying 
from 5 miles to ten miles. XBT probes were provided by TAMU and RPSC.





YUAN MOORING PROGRAM 
PI: Xiaojun Yuan of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution 
    Janet Sprintall of Scripps Institution of Oceanography 
Technician: Jim Ryder of WHOI

                              Deployment Operation

                            LDEO ADP Profiler Mooring

                                 NSF ANT-1043669


Prior to deployment, the RVIB N.B. Palmer did a set and drift at 
the desired anchor position. The Palmer was then positioned now 7 n 
miles to the north of the anchor over position. A general walk through 
of the deployment procedures took place on the aft deck. The personnel 
included were: The deck leader, 2 ea ship's MT's, TSE winch operator, 
stopper line operator, hydraulic tugger operator, A-frame operator, and 
a mooring log person.

The 45 inch syntactic sphere was positioned under the a-frame. 
Shackled to the bottom of the sphere was the 0.5 meter shot of chain, 
microcat, 1.6 meter shot of chain, and the aqua-dopp current meter. The 
top of the 85.1 meter shot of 1/4 inch wire rope was reeved through the 
Gifford block and shackled to the bottom of the aquadopp cage. The TSE 
winch paid out roughly 20 meters of wire rope and two SBE-39's were 
attached to the markings on the wire rope. The hydraulic tugger was 
shacked to a west coast release. The quick release was attached to the 
bottom of the stainless bridle of the 45 inch sphere. The hydraulic 
tugger raised the sphere off the deck while the a-frame boomed out. The 
instruments below the sphere were lowered by hand over the stern. When 
the sphere was in the water the quick release was tripped. The a-frame 
was boomed in and the west coast release was removed. The tugger was 
shackled to the Gifford block and was raised about 5 feet of the deck. 
The winch paid out slowly to attach the seven remaining instruments on 
the 85.1 meter shot. A stopper line was snapped into the 5/8" pear link 
at the bottom of the 85.1 meter shot. The Gifford block was lowered and 
removed from the tugger. The 41 inch steel sphere was positioned under 
the a-frame. The bottom of the 85.1 shot was shackled to the 1 meter 1/2 
inch chain on top of the sphere. The west coast release was shackled 
back to the hydraulic tugger. The quick release was attached to the 
bottom of the sphere. The top of the 1008 meter shot was reeved through 
the Gifford block and shackled to the 1 meter shot of 1/2 inch chain. 
The hydraulic tugger took up the slack of the wire and the stopper line 
was removed. The tugger raised the sphere off the deck while the a-frame 
boomed out. The TSE winch paid out the wire while the frame was being 
boomed out. When the sphere was in the water the quick release was 
tripped. The a-frame was boomed back in and the quick release was removed. 
The Gifford block was shackled back to the tugger winch and raised off the 
deck about 5 feet.

The TSE winch paid out the 1008 meter shot and near the end of the 
1008 shot the winch stopped paying out. The Gifford block was lowered to 
the deck. The MMP was attached to the wire. A 150 foot 3/8" slipped line 
was rigged to the MMP and to the Gifford block. The Gifford block was 
raised with the tugger winch and the MMP was slipped into the water. The 
3/8" vls line was cleared and removed from the Gifford block.

The 500 meter 1/4" wire was paid out, at the bottom of that shot 
the mooring was stopped off to add 8 each Benthos glass balls. The glass 
balls were slipped out over the stern. With one glass ball still on deck 
the stopper line was attached to the bottom of the chain and made fast 
to a deck cleat. The next 500 meter shot was shackled to the bottom of 
the shot of the 1/2 inch chain. The TSE winch took up the slack and the 
stopper line was eased off and removed. The remaining of the mooring was 
paid out in the same manner until all the wire rope was paid out from 
the winch. The mooring was stopped off and the Gifford block was 
removed.

The next step was the deployment of 22 each glass balls. The wire 
rope was shackled to the top of the 1/2" chain. A string 8 glass balls 
were shackled together. The bottom of the shot of chain was connected to 
the winch leader and took up the slack. The two stopper lines were eased 
off and cleared. The winch paid out the glass balls slowly. With one 
glass ball remaining on deck, the winch was stopped and another set of 8 
glass balls was shackled together. The stopper line was attached to the 
bottom of the chain and then took up the slack. The winch leader was 
eased off and removed. The stopper line eased out the glass balls. This 
was the procedure for deploying the glass balls. The 5 meter shot of 
1/2" chain was shackled into the last section of glass balls and stopped 
off with roughly 1 meter of chain remaining on deck.

At this point, the ship was still approximately 1.2 nm from the 
target drop position. The ship towed the mooring toward the drop 
position in this configuration. Approximately 0.5 nm from the site, 
the final sections of the mooring were prepared. The tandem-mounted 
acoustic releases were shackled into the mooring chain at the transom. 
Another 5-meter shot of chain was attached to the bottom link on the 
dual release chain. A 70 foot 3/4" nystron slip line placed through 
the 5/8" link which was shackled to the 20 meter shot of 7/8" plaited 
nylon. The two ends of the slip line were bowline to the winch leader. 
The slip line and the 20 meter shot of nylon was wound on the winch. 
The 5 meter 1/2" chain from the releases was shackled to the 20 meter 
shot of nylon.

The west coast release was shackled into the hydraulic tugger 
and hooked into the chain just below the acoustic releases. The tugger 
was raised lifting the releases off the deck. The tugger paid out and 
the A-frame was boomed out until the releases were clear of the 
transom. The working line was lowered and the quick release was 
tripped. The winch continued to pay out until the end of the 20-meter 
nylon was near the transom.

The anchor was then positioned center line under the a-frame. The 
anchor was rigged with a 5-meter shot of 1/2" chain. The 5 meter shot 
was shackled to the end of the 20 meter shot of nylon. The quick release 
now shackled to the ship's trawl winch and hooked into the anchor. With 
100 meters to go to the drop site, the trawl winch lifted the anchor off 
the deck while the a-frame boomed out. Once the anchor was clear of the 
transom the trawl winch was paid out until the anchor was in the water. 
Once in position, the line on the quick release was made fast to the 
deck cleat and the trawl wire paid out tripping the quick release.

The below figures are the anchor survey, anchor position of the 
mooring, and also the mooring drawing.





REPORT OF ACTIVITIES OF JUAN BOTELLA, POIARTREC TEACHER, ABOARD THE 
N.B. PALMER DURING THE CLIVAR & CARBON S4P CRUISE.

My job during the cruise was to produce outreach materials about the 
activities that took place on the ship, and help out with the sampling 
of the rosette.

I kept an online journal in English and Spanish for the general 
community. PoIarTREC assisted by posting the texts and images that 
I sent through email. I wrote a journal entry for every day save 
two or three. The topics covered ranged from science, life aboard 
the ship, and recent events on the expedition. A big component of 
the journal was devoted to answering questions received from the 
general audience. I received a lot of questions from students from 
pre-k to grad school level. The address for the journal is 
http://www.polartrec.com/exped itions/seawater-property-changes-i 
n-thesouthern-ocean

I delivered five live presentations on different forums. Dr. Jim 
Swift participated in two of the presentations. PoIarTREC setup an 
Internet system in which anyone with an Internet connections could 
participate in the virtual live presentations, called PolarConnect. I 
sent the slides to PoIarTREC ahead of time and then delivered the 
presentation through the iridium phone. Two of the presentations 
where hosted at the Madison Children's Museum; one at the Monona 
Grove High School, in Monona, WI; one by PoIarTREC's CISE course; and 
one hosted by PoIarTREC opened to a general audience.

I created several videos showing important aspects of the scientific 
activities. Among these videos, there is a description of the 
procedure for obtaining and partially analyzing hydrographic samples. 
Another video shows the recovery of oceanographic moorings, and 
another one describes the CLIVAR trace metals program. I also made 
video-recordings of interviews to scientists on board and other 
smaller events.

I have generated a few lesson plans based on the activities on 
board the Palmer, and are collaborating with another teacher on 
elaborating another lesson plan.

I also participated on the sampling for Carbon -14 during some of the 
stations.

I would like to thank Dr. Jim Swift, from Scripps Institution of 
Oceanography, as well as the PoIarTREC program of Arctic Research 
Consortium of the United States (ARCUS) for selecting me to 
participate in this project.


Students at Sea

The NSF physical oceanography grant for the US Global Ocean Carbon and 
Repeat Hydrography Program supports participation of physical 
oceanography and CFC students on program cruises. Below are statements 
from the student participants on SO4P (NBP-1102).


Jesse Anderson (University of Washington)

When I first told people that I was headed to the Southern Ocean for 
60-70 days to participate in my first oceanographic research cruise, 
many responded that I was "nuts". While the days onboard were, as 
warned, often monotonous, participating in the CLIVAR 54P cruise has 
been the highlight of my graduate studies so far. Everyone on the 
Nathaniel B. Palmer, the science party, Raytheon employees, and ECO 
crew, has been fantastic to work with and learn from.

My current research examines near-surface processes in the tropical 
western Pacific from autonomous profiling floats, so the mission of 
the 54P cruise was a great contrast to my normal area of research. It 
was nice to finally get out from behind my computer and experience 
firsthand all of the hard work that goes into collecting such a 
high-quality data set as well as making sure an ambitious science plan 
gets completed despite the weather. While unfortunately I was not able 
to deploy my first "Argo" float, I enjoyed assisting with preparing 
the rosette for launch, running the CTD console, and collecting water 
samples for analysis. Through both this hands-on work and impromptu 
discussions in the dry lab, I greatly enhanced my knowledge of 
observational oceanography techniques, instrumentation, as well as 
Southern Ocean processes. This cruise was also a great opportunity to 
expand my general knowledge of chemical and biological processes. I 
would strongly recommend that all graduate students go to sea at least 
once during their studies and I hope I can participate in another 
cruise soon.


Sam Biliheimer (Scripps Institution of Oceanography)

A lot of thought and hard work goes into observing the ocean. It's 
been great to learn about the water column structure and dynamics of 
the Southern Ocean by watching real-time profiles, pointing out water 
masses, and watching these water masses change form with latitude and 
longitude, but the most revealing part of this sea-going experience 
has been observing the execution of the necessary planning, and 
particularly re-planning, that goes into the making of a hydrographic 
section. Resources (including time) are finite at sea, where one is 
completely independent and isolated, so a good plan is necessary. With 
hang-ups like weather looming, it's important to be aware of the 
scientific priorities and intended use of the hydrographic section in 
order to redraft the plan in a way that is oceanographically 
appropriate. Watching the weather eat away at the allotted time for 
this cruise, it was revealing to listen and contribute to discussions
about how to save time by skipping pieces of sections or increasing 
station spacing. These conversations effectively point out the 
cruise's scientific goals by explaining what regions are priorities 
and why. Sea-going also makes it easy to appreciate the amount of work 
that goes into a section. The method is inherently aggressive, 
steaming out to the desired positions and physically drawing water 
samples or leaving behind moored instruments for later recovery. This 
imparts a better understanding of the true, massive scale of the 
ocean, and in turn the scale of the work that goes into observing it. 
Living and working together on a research vessel revolves around 
getting the job done, but it can also be a lot of fun. The most 
exciting parts of the cruise were the continental approaches. Powering 
through the ice provided some excellent wildlife viewing and 
spectacular scenery. I never knew there were so many forms of sea ice. 
Also, stomping around in McMurdo was pretty awesome. I'm glad I got 
the chance to catch a glimpse of what life is like on an Antarctic 
base.


Eric Mortenson (Florida State University)

I am a second year physical oceanography graduate student, and before 
this cruise I had never been on an extended oceanographic cruise. I 
first heard about the CLIVAR-SO4P cruise from my advisor Dr. Kevin 
Speer, who recommended my participation to the chief scientist, Dr. 
Jim Swift. In total, there were four physical oceanography graduate 
students who were invited to join. Our jobs were essentially the 
same, two of us on the noon to midnight shift and the other pair on 
the midnight to noon shift. We were responsible for manning the CTD 
station and monitoring the rosette/CTD assembly as it was lowered to 
within 10 meters of the sea floor and brought back to the surface, 
all of which could take several hours on an average cast. Once a 
given cast was back on board, we split the work of extracting salt 
and nutrient samples and working as 'sample cop', the latter title 
entailed making sure that all the samples were taken correctly and in 
the correct order. Occasionally, XBTs were used to obtain higher 
resolution temperature data without stopping the ship. In addition to 
these responsibilities, there were random jobs around the ship, for 
example, helping with mooring deployment and recovery, assisting with 
other sample collections, or just lending an extra hand when needed. 
This is a repeat hydrography cruise, and as I mentioned, for me the 
first extended oceanographic cruise experience, which has given me a 
chance to see in person how this type of cruise is operated. It has 
also given me the chance to work with talented oceanographers who 
have been more than willing to take time to answer any questions I 
have had concerning the science that this cruise is based on or 
oceanography in general. I would like to thank both my advisor and 
the chief scientist for providing me with the chance to participate 
on this cruise, as well as everyone on board for helping make this a 
rewarding and enjoyable experience.


Stuart Pierce (Texas A&M University)

As a green physical oceanography student brought along to aid in CTD 
and sampling operations, the SO4P CLIVAR research cruise has presented 
me with a vast and opportune learning experience for operational 
oceanography at sea. Regarding myself, I've particularly discovered 
that I am capable of a longer cruise experience, I find the hours and 
schedules tolerable, and while not a requirement, it is to my 
advantage that I don't get sea-sick. My introduction to the logistics 
of operating a large scale research cruise and collecting large 
amounts of data have now probably forever spoiled me; since this 
specific voyage has appeared, from my observations, to have been very 
successful. The few mishaps that we have encountered have proven to be 
little to no detriment and only minor inconveniences, owing to superb 
flexibility and seemingly Zen-like qualities of the ones most 
affected. I am convinced that I am among some of the best in this 
field and that this has been the best introduction to operational 
oceanography that I could have asked for and am glad to have 
participated.

Most importantly, my oceanography ideals have changed for the better. 
Previous to this cruise, I was incredulous towards the reported 
precision of density measurements obtained from captured 
oceanographic water samples and sensitive electronic sensors and 
believed that numbers reported were only applicable to general 
assessments of ocean structure; any fine scale analyses were simply 
extrapolations. Distinguishing water masses by mere hundredths of a 
kg/m3 defied, what I believed, were the limits from which information 
could be extracted with certainty. I easily imagined errors that 
might arise from human error, lack of confidence in instrumentation 
or sampling equipment, or from lack of control of environmental 
variables resulting in noise (electronic or otherwise) preventing 
confidence to the degree often reported in observations. However, 
after my participation on this cruise and seeing for myself the care 
given to data collection along with discussions concerning 
precisions, accuracy, and confidence of instrumentation, I now 
believe the solidarity of the measurements that I was previously 
skeptical of that alone is worth the 65 days spent at sea.


Mingxi Yang (University of Hawaii)

Even though I had just graduated with a PhD in oceanography prior to 
the CLIVAR S4P, being able to participate on this cruise has been an 
invaluable educational experience. I had been a teaching assistant 
for an introductory oceanography class, where we examined data sets 
from previous CLIVAR as well as WOCE cruises. On the Ocean Atlas 
program, each station appeared like a dot and each profile a string 
of numbers. As the CFC student on this cruise, I sampled 
approximately half of the casts and analyzed about a third of the 
samples, which gave me new appreciation for the difficulty and hard 
worked involved in obtaining quality data in these kinds of repeat 
hydrography cruises. While sampling and analysis themselves could at 
times be laborious and repetitive, I was given a side project to 
intercompare CFC and SF6 measurements between CTD samples and 
samples taken from the ship's uncontaminated underway seawater 
line. I also measured atmospheric concentrations of 
CFCs and S176 and computed their surface saturation values - a 
familiar exercise for me because I partly focused on air-sea gas 
exchange for my PhD. This side project was helpful in maintaining my 
focus and scientific interest. Overall, I learned a lot of about the 
physical oceanography in the Southern Ocean. The trace metal chemists 
and biologists on boarded provided additional insights also in their 
discipline. Perhaps most importantly, I was very impressed by how the 
chief scientists improvised cruise plans when weather became 
unfavorable, and were able to keep different groups together working 
as a team. These leadership qualities are what I will need to master 
if I were to lead my own lab one day.


Sarah Eggleston (University of Hawaii)

Sarah was directly supported by the CFC grant. She wrote:

When I was given the opportunity to join the 54P CLIVAR cruise on 
January 11, 2011, I didn't even know how to decide whether to take the 
opportunity or not. Knowing what I know now, I'm not sure that I would 
have taken it, as I've learned that I am somewhat prone to 
seasickness, and I've also learned just how difficult it is to put 
life on hold for three months while living at sea. But I know now that 
I made the right decision, as I have learned infinitely more at sea 
about science and, at the risk of sounding cliché, about myself, than 
I ever have during three months on land. The many opportunities to 
speak with professors, technicians, and other graduate students from 
around the country gave me a chance to learn about possible career 
paths and to get advice on writing my master's thesis. I had the 
chance to learn not only about measuring trace gases at sea by 
collecting and analyzing samples for CFCs and SF6 every day for over 
fifty days, but I also got to learn from others about a variety of 
sampling procedures, from using data from the ADCP to filtering 
biological samples. The educational aspect of this cruise was 
incredibly valuable, but even more important to me is that I felt 
completely at home with the other sixtyfive people on the ship, who I 
now consider to be extended family. The first time I experienced 
seasickness, six days into a cruise that would last over sixty days, I 
felt like the cruise would never end. Now, as we prepare to disembark, 
I wish the cruise would never end.





CCHDO DATA PROCESSING NOTES

Date        Contact   Data Type    Summary
----------  --------  -----------  ---------------------------------------
2011-04-25  Sandborn  BTL/CTD/SUM  Submitted Exchange format; to go online


