A.   CRUISE NARRATIVE: P02T

A.1. HIGHLIGHTS
                         WHP CRUISE SUMMARY INFORMATION

                WOCE section designation  P02T
       Expedition designation (EXPOCODE)  49K6KY9401_1
Chief Scientist(s) and their affiliation  KUNIAKI OKUDA/NRIFS*
                                   Dates  1994.JAN.07 - 1994.FEB.10
                                    Ship  R/V KAIYO-MARU
                           Ports of call  Tokyo, Japan to Longbeach, USA

                                                      32 44.98'N
  Geographic boundaries of the stations   133 6.85'E             121 11.97'W
                                                      29 55.87'N
                      Number of stations  59
            Floats and drifters deployed  unknown
          Moorings deployed or recovered  unknown
                    Contributing Authors  Kuniaki Okuda, Ichiro Yasuda, Tadashi 
                                          Kamano, Chizuru Saito, 

                                *Chief Scientist
      Tohoku National Fisheries Research Institute ~ 3-27-5 Shinhama-cho
Shiogama, Miyagi ~ 985-0001 Japan ~ Phone: 81-22-365-9927 ~ Fax: 81-22-367-1250 
                          Email: kokuda@myg.affrc.go.jp


A.2. CRUISE SUMMARY

P02 was composed of four different cruises which were carried out during the 
period from October 14, 1993 to November 14, 1994 utilizing three different 
observation ships. No large volume sampling was carried out. Most of the 
observation line is located on 30N. But west of 134.5 E, the line goes 
northwest toward Cape Ashizuri along the PCM5 line. Also, east of 123W the line 
bends northeast to avoid Mexican territory.

Two of the four cruise were intended to get high-quality CTD data on high 
density observation stations.  For example, the shortest interval between 
stations is 30 nautical miles around some topographic features, with small 
volume water sampling for nutrient analysis (Salinity, Dissolved oxygen, 
Silicate, Phosphate, Nitrate, (Nitrite) and pH). These two cruises compose the 
central and eastern part of P02, and the western most part of P02, respectively. 
The first cruise began on 14 October 1993 and the latter began on the 15th 
of January, 1994. The third cruise was to get nutrient and chemical 
tracers data (Freon, Total Carbon, Tritium, Radioactive carbon/sampling only, 
pC02) mainly at 32 depths with CTD-ROSSETE 101 system. This cruise startrd on 
the 7th January, 1994.  The fourth and final cruise, which measured ctd data as 
well as discreet salinity and oxygen data, began on November 1, 1994.

Standards for nutrient is controlled by PIs among these three cruises. Standards 
used for these cruise were re-standardized at Scripps institution of 
Oceanography in the course of first cruise.


A.3. LIST OF PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS

                      |Principal        |
Parameter             |Investigator(s)  |Affiliation
----------------------|-----------------|------------------------------------------------
CTD02/rosette         |Masao Fukasawa   |School of Marine Science, Tokai University
                      |Ichiro Yasuda    |Tohoku Regional Fisheries Research Laboratory
                      |Hiroyuki Yoritaka|Hydrographic Department, MSA
T,S                   |Hiroyuki Yoritaka|Hydrographic Department, MSA
02                    |Yoshihisa Kato   |School of Marine Science, Tokai University
                      |Katsumi Yokouchi |Tohoku Regional Fisheries Research Laboratory
N03, NO2, NH4         |Hiromi Kasai     |Hokkaido Regional Fisheries Research Laboratory
P04, SiO2             |Chizuru Saito    |National Institute for Environmental Studies
3H, 14C, CFC         |Yutaka Watanabe  |National Institute for Resources and Environment
Sig.C02/pH/Alkali/pCO2|Tsuneo Ono       |Faculty of Fisheries, Hokkaido University
T (underway), ADCP    |Ichiro Yasuda    |Tohoku Regional Fisheries Research Laboratory
S (underway)          |Masao Fukasawa   |School of Marine Science, Tokai University
XBT                   |Hiroyuki Yoritaka|Hydrographic Department, MSA
Moorings              |Masao Fukasawa   |School of Marine Science, Tokai University
Surface Drifters      |Yutaka Michida   |Hydrographic Department, MSA
    
    
A.4. SCIENTIFIC GOALS
    
To get reliable dataset to estimate meridional transport of physical and 
chemical mass across 30N. Especially, at relatively shallow depths, the zonal 
transport of total carbon and CFCs included in NPIW-corresponding layer and 
NPSTMW are object to be estimated. Also heat and fresh water (and/or salinity) 
fluxes across 30N are subject to be estimated.

From 1991, WOCE-like observation programmes have been carried out along 32.5 N 
by the Hydrographic Department, Maritime Safety Agency and School of Marine 
Science, Tokai University. In these programmes current variations were checked 
by current meter moorings around the Shatsky Rise. Also, nutrient variations 
were examined through 5 different cruises. Results from these programmes show 
that eddies which are associated with the Shatsky Rise give so large effects on 
oceanic conditions around the region. The variation of nutrient profiles excess 
20% of their mean structure at the intermediate depth in magnitude.

In P02 cross section, we encounter three large topographic features, the Shatsky 
Rise, the Emperor Seamount and the Hess Rise. As explained in foregoing section, 
same P02 line will be repeated twice within three months. This strategy of 
operation will help us to know some standard errors in estimated fluxes through 
information about time-dependent oceanic structures.


A.5 WATER SAMPLING EQUIPMENT AND UNDERWAY MEASUREMENTS

    Small Volume Sampling: 24-place rosettes with 10-liter bottles.
    Large Volume Sampling: None
    CTD System:            NBIS Mark III CTD, with 02 sensor
    Salinometer:           Guildline Autosals.
    Nutrient Analysis:     Auto-analyzer 11
    Oxygen Analysis:       Carpenter method (automatic titration)
    Underway Sampling:     75 kHz ADCP manufactured by RD 


A.6. CRUISE TRACK AND STATIONS

Station positions are shown on Figure 1, where solid circles show stations for 
small volume sampling (Kaiyo-maru). Stations are fundamentally spaced at 30 nm 
interval, and spaced at 48 nm interval over flat bottom region, along 30N. In 
western boundary, stations are spaced at 10-15 nm interval along PCM5 line. In 
eastern boundary, stations are spaced at 28 nm interval. Small volume sampling 
(CFCs, Tritium, Radioactive Carbon) were be carried out every 2 or 3 stations 
(at 60-96 nm interval).


A.7 CRUISE PARTICIPANTS

    Kuniaki Okuda        NFRL, JFA          Chief Scientist
    Ichiro Yasuda        Tohoku FRL, JFA    CTDO, T, S, 02
    Makoto Okazaki       Far Sea FRL, JFA   CTDO, T, S, 02
    Hiromi Kasai         Hokkaido FRL, JFA  02, NO3, PO4, SiO3, NO2, NH4
    Katsumi Yokouchi     Tohoku FRL, JFA    02, NO3, PO4, SiO3, NO2, NH4
    Chizuru Saito        NIES               NO3, PO4, SiO3
    Ayako Nishina        Tokai Univ.        02, NO3, PO4, SiO3
    Yutaka Watanabe      NIRE               CFC, 3H, 14C
    Ken-ichoro Kuwahara  Tokai Univ.        CFC, 3H, 14C
    Tsuneo Ono           Hokkaido Univ.     sigmaC02, pH, pCO2, Alkalinity
    Kozo Okuda           Hokkaido Univ.     sigmaC02, pH, pCO2, Alkalinity
    Mamoru Tamaki        Tokai Univ.        sigmaC02, pH, pCO2, Alkalinity
    
    
B. UNDERWAY MEASUREMENTS   (no data)
   1) Navigation
   2) Bathymetry
   3) Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP)
   4) Thermosalinograph and related measurements
   5) XBT and/or XCTD
   6) Meteorological observations
   7) Atmospheric chemistry data




C.3 HYDROGRAPHIC MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES AND CALIBRATIONS

C.3.1 SAMPLE SALINITY MEASUREMENTS.
      (Kuniaki Okuda, Ichiro Yasuda and Tadashi Kamano)
      7 December, 1995

On R/V Kaiyo Maru cruise 3, the salinity analysis of samples was
carried out on the two IOS DL Guildline Autosal salinometer model 8400.
The one is on the Kaiyo Maru, and the other was brought from National
Institute of Fisheries Science. The former instrument was used for
Station K1 to K3. The sub-standard sample salinity drifted about
0.01psu. We decided to change room, and moved to the other room with
air condition independent of the vessel one. However, the Autosal
temperature regulation was broken down.

We used the other Autosal for all the stations after K3. The
instrument was operated in the room temperature (24-25C), and bath
temperature was set to be 24.5C. Every day, 2-3 station samples (50-80
samples) were measured. At each measurement, formal standardization by
use of IAPSO Standard Seawater was performed, and was closed with the
same batch of the Standard Seawater. Sub-standard measurements were
performed about every 10 samples. The Autosal had not been very well.
After about 100 sample measurements (4-5 hours measurement time), a
drift of reading in conductivity ratio occurred. Then we have to stop
the measurement and to turn off the power after substandard and
standard measurements. For these reasons, we stopped the measurements
in rather a short time (3-4 hours). Then the performance was
satisfactory.

There were 101 pairs of replicate (i.e. from the same rosette bottle)
samples drawn; and 14 pairs of duplicate (i.e., from different rosette
bottles fired at the same depth) samples.  The standard deviations of
the groups of sample pairs are given in Table C.3.1 below.

TABLE C.3.1: Salinity replicate and duplicate statistics
               
               Quantity   Mean difference  Number of pairs
               --------------------------------------------------
               Duplicates  0.0012 psu      14   for all layers
               Duplicates  0.0020 psu       6   for halocline
               Duplicates  0.0005 psu       8   for surface layer
               
               Replicates  0.0005 psu     101


C.3.2 OXYGEN MEASUREMENTS (REVISED ON JULY 15, 1997)

EQUIPMENT AND TECHNIQUES

Bottle oxygen samples were collected from Niskin bottles to calibrated glass 
bottles immediately after the drawing of samples for salinity as the first item. 
The subsampling bottles consists of the ordinary flask (ca.100ml) and glass 
stopper with long nipple. Overflow was carried out for 10 seconds during each 
sampling. The volume for overflow varied from 120 ml to 430 ml according to 
sampling persons. Potential temperature was used to allow corrections of sample 
density. Analysis followed whole bottle method. The thiosulfate titration was 
carried out in an air-conditioned laboratory. The same thiosulfate solution was 
used during this cruise. The standardization was done at the beginning, middle 
and end of the cruise.  Duplicate samples were taken on every cast; usually 
these were from the bottles of number 1, 7, 13 and 19 of 24. 

The pure water blanks was determined to be 0.0083 ml in average with a 
standard deviation of 0.0051 ml according to Carpenter (1965), after Drs. T. 
Joyce and M. Aoyama pointed out serious shift of our values through WHP property 
inter-comparisons from crossing lines in North Pacific. The volume of oxygen 
added with the reagents was 0.0017ml (Murray et al., 1968). The analytical 
method and the preparation of reagents were fundamentally done according to the 
WHP Operations and Methods (Culberson, 1991).

The end point was detected at a wavelength of 372nm by an automatic 
photometric titrator (Model ART-3DO-1) manufactured by Hirama Laboratories, 
Japan. Because endpoint readings were erroneous for the early stations K1 to K14 
due to too fast speed of piston buret, these samples were flagged as suspect. 
The volume of oxygen dissolved in the water was converted to mass fraction by 
use of the factor 44.66 and an appropriate value of the density. 


REPRODUCIBILITY OF MEASUREMENTS

Approximately 1400 samples were taken during the cruise; in addition, 198 
duplicates (14%) were taken from the same bottle in almost range of oxygen 
concentrations.  Statistics on the duplicates are given in Table 1.

Table C.3.2: Statistics of duplicates.

                            Oxygen concentration difference (mol/kg)
           Stations  Number
                                Mean           Std.dev.      mean
           ----------------------------------------------------------
           K1-K14     12        2.85             2.37        2.25
           K15-K62   181        1.10             1.24        1.71



Duplicates from 181 pairs of samples taken from stations K15 to K62 had a mean 
difference of 1.10 mol/kg with a standard deviation of 1.24 mol/kg (1.71%), 
while 12 pairs of samples from stations K1 to K14 gave a mean difference of 2.85 
mol/kg with a standard deviation of 2.37 mol/kg (2.25%, Table 1).


REFERENCES

Carpenter, J.H. 1965. The Chesapeake Bay Institute technique for the Winkler 
    dissolved oxygen method. Limnol. Oceanogr., 10: 141-143.
Culberson, C.H. 1991. 15 pp in the WOCE Operations Manual (WHP Operations and 
    Methods) WHPO 91/1, Woods Hole. 
Murray, N., J.P. Riley and T.R.S. Wilson 1968. The solubility of oxygen in 
    Winkler reagents used for the determination of dissolved oxygen. Deep-Sea 
    Res., 15: 237-238.


C.3.3  NUTRIENTS, KAIYO MARU
       (Chizuru Saito)

EQUIPMENT AND TECHNIQUE

The nutrient analyses were performed on an AutoAnalyzer-IITM. The methods 
for silicic acid, nitrate plus nitrite and phosphate were those given in the 
WOCE and JGOFS manual (Gordon et al.,1992).   Just for phosphate measurement, 
cool down process was insufficient so one more 10 turn coil joined after first 
one.   The room temperature was maintained between 22 and 25 deg C.

SAMPLING PROCEDURE

Sampling of nutrients followed that for CFCs, pH, TA, C-14 and dissolved 
oxygen on average 45-60 minutes after the casts were on deck.  Samples were 
drawn into 250 cm3 polyethylene, narrow mouth, screw-capped bottles.   They were 
immediately introduced into the AA-II sampler by pouring into 4 cm3 polyethlene 
cups which fit the sampler tray.  Both the 250 cm3 bottles and 4 cm3 cups were 
rinsed more than twice.   Samples were analyzed as rapidly as possible after 
sampling.   Polyethlene sample cups were soaked in 0.1 N HCl solution until next 
measurement began.

STANDARDS

For silicate standard, we used Na2SiF6 standard solution in P2 cruise and 
after this cruise the standard solution was calibrated by SiO2 solution.   This 
purity was 97.22% but silicate concentrations in this report were not 
recalculated.    Other elements standards were prepared as WOCE manual's methods 
(Gordon et al.,1992).

LOW NUTRIENT SEAWATER

Surface seawater was collected in Kuroshio Extension Area as low nutrient 
seawater (LNSW).   Collected seawater was stored in the 20 liter container for a 
few months and then filtered with 0.45 mm pore size filter to prepare the 
working standard solution.   The concentration of nutrients in each batch of 
LNSW were determined carefully.

SHORT TERM PRECISION  

During this cruise we monitored short-term precision by analyzing replicate 
samples taken from the same sample bottle and duplicate samples taken from the 
same Niskin bottle.   Duplicate samples were drawn from two water samplers at 
each station.   One pair was drawn from the deepest depth, the other pair from 
the near nitrate/phosphate maximum.

Measured samples were totally ca. 1500, duplicate samples were about 110 
and replicate analysis were about 120 samples.   The precision of duplicate 
samples of nitrate plus nitrite, phosphate and silicate were 1.0, 0.58 and 0.96 
%, respectively.   On the other hand, each replicate precisions were 0.81, 0.44 
and 0.98%.  Unfortunately, these values did not satisfy the WOCE requirements 
thought they should indicate the trend of regional concentrations of nutrients 
included these dispersions.


REFERENCES

Gordon, L.I., Jennings, Jr. J.C., Ross, A.A. and Krest, J.M., 1992,  An 
    suggested protocol for Continuous Flow Automated Analysis of seawater 
    nutrients (Phosphate, Nitrate, Nitrite and Silicic Acid) in the WOCE 
    Hydrographic Program and the Joint Global Ocean Fluxes Study.  OSU Coll. of 
    Oc. Descr. Chem. Oc. Grp. Tech. Rpt. 92-1.  



C.3.6  CTD MEASUREMENTS, KAIYO MARU
       (Ichiro Yasuda)
       December 22, 1995

GANTRY AND WINCH ARRANGEMENTS

The gantry of R/V Kaiyo Maru consists of A-frame and equipment of
fixing of the CTD package. In the deployment, the winch winds up the
7.4mm armored cable and the CTD package goes up. When the top of the
CTD package is at the A-frame (about 3m from the deck), the CTD package
is fixed by a stopper. Then the A-frame brings the CTD over the sea
(about 5m from the sea surface and about 2m from the side of the ship).
After the stopper is released, the CTD goes into the sea. The
employment is the reverse operation. The operation is safe and all
right through the cruise. Every time after the CTD operation and water
samples are drawn out from Niskin bottles, the CTD package is come into
the CTD room.

The winch system is driven by oil-pressure. The wire tension, the
wire length and the pressure from CTD is monitored at the winch and in
a CTD operation room. During the cruise, the weather was always severe.
Thus the wire speed had to be slow down so as to be enough tension on
the wire, especially near the sea-surface (from 100m to surface). This
is for preventing the wire from kink. As will be reported in the
performance section, the wire kinks frequently occurred in the early
stage of the cruise.  In the bad weather conditions, one CTD down-up
cast took more than 6 hours. For example, at Sta. K11, the cast took 8
hours which was the longest. In a good condition, one cast took about 4
hours for 6000m cast. The wire sometimes was wound not orderly around
the drum. This caused further delay of the cast. To avoid the rough
winding, shifter was replaced two times during the cruise.

EQUIPMENT, CALIBRATIONS AND STANDARDS

1. Neil Brown MK3B CTD with Beckman oxygen sensor which was the
   property of SEA company and was leased to National Research Institute
   of Fisheries Science.  Identification S/N #01-1156.

2. General Oceanics 10 liter 24 bottle rosette which was modified from
   2.5L 24 bottle rosette. The 10-liter bottles consisted from Niskin
   bottles and lever-action-type bottles.

3. Seven digital reversing thermometers and two digital reversing
   pressure meters.

4. Benthos 12kHz pinger 2216.

Backup equipment consisted of spare CTD-DO sensor (owned by Kaiyo maru), 
Niskin bottles and underwater unit for 2.5L 24bottle rosette.

The shipboard equipment consisted of two complete integral systems for 
demodulating and displaying the CTD data as well as controlling the rosette 
multisampler. Each system included the following major units:

1. FSI (Falmouth Scientific Inc.) demodulator deck unit data terminal.
   Model DT-1050.

2. DECpc 466D2LP system which is compatible with IBM/DOS machine.

3. Neil Brown data interrupt-type rosette firing module.

The data was backed up also in the NEC PC computer disk and DAT
cassette data recorder through Neil-Brown Deck Terminal 1150.

Laboratory calibration of the Mk III CTD temperature, pressure and
conductivity sensors was carried out at Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution just before (December 6, 10, 15 in 1993) and after (April
1994) the Kaiyo-P2 cruise by FSI.

Temperature sensor was adjusted to error-free by the pre-calibration,
and then it was calibrated at five temperatures. According to the
pre-calibration data set (Table C.3.2), temperature was corrected as :

     T=1.000056 x Traw - 1.919476E-6 x Traw*Traw + 0.738327E-3

with the standard deviation of the error is 0.6368E-3 C.

This temperature calibration factor was used throughout the cruise and the CTD 
Data set.


Table C.3.3. Pre-cruise Temperature calibration in unit of degrees Celsius.

                     Standard Temp.  CTD-Temp.  Difference
                     -------------------------------------
                       .39238           .3920     -0.00038
                      7.65324          7.6512     -0.00204
                     15.06606         15.0656     -0.00046
                     22.29096         22.2900     -0.00096
                     28.99132         28.9904     -0.00092


Table C.3.4. Post-cruise temperature calibration.

                            Standard Temp.  TCTD-TSTD
                                (TSTD)        (C)
                            --------------------------
                             0.43501         +0.002
                             0.43526         +0.002
                            
                             7.69441         +0.002
                             7.69466         +0.002

                            15.14306         +0.004
                            15.14306         +0.005
                            15.14356         +0.004
                            
                            22.44979         +0.007
                            22.44979         +0.007
                            22.45004         +0.007
                            
                            29.32793         +0.008
                            29.32793         +0.008


From the pre- and post-cruise temperature calibrations, temperature
sensor errors during the cruise are estimated to be 0.002C for 0-8C,
0.004C at 15C, 0.007C at 22C and 0.008C at 29C. The temperature error
below the thermocline (T<8C) is within the WOCE requirement.

From the pressure sensor calibration data with a deadweight tester,
the following fit for the CTD pressure was found at an ambient
temperature of ice-point, with a rms.  error of 0.8 dbar.

P = -0.645806E-10 x Praw**3 + 0.653211E-06 x Praw**2 + 0.999061 x PRAW + 0.59

Further corrections were applied during data processing for variation
of offset (on-deck pressure just before and after each sampling, and
up/down hysteresis).


EQUIPMENT PERFORMANCE

GENERAL

In the CTD-rosette deployment and employment, problems arose
almost from the wire-kink, miss-fire of rosette and bottle-leak from
the lever-action-type bottles. The wire-kink occurred 5 times from Sta.
AS12 to Sta. K10 (Sta. AS12, AS13, just before K4, K4, K10) because the
CTD-package was too light in weight to be stable in rough sea
conditions. This was recovered by attaching 6x20kg weight at the
package at Sta. K4.  The deficiency of the lever-action-type bottles
caused miss-fire of the rosette system. This was from the difficulty in
the setting of the bottle. Too much tension pulls the rosette-release
pin, which results in no-release of the bottle. Weak tension causes
insufficient coverage of the bottle, resulting in leak. We replaced the
lever-action-type bottles to the Niskin bottles as much as possible.
Then, the miss-fire was considerably reduced.


CTD

CTD performance had been almost nice through the cruise. We were
calibrating the CTD data with comparison with water sampled data on the
course of the cruise. We also compared the CTD data with historical
NODC and Levitus data set by superimposing the CTD data on the data
points around 10x10 degree mesh data (vertical profiles, T-S, T-DO,
S-DO diagrams) in order to detect sensor failure. This comparison
routine was provided by Dr. Tomowo Watanabe in Far Seas Fisheries
Research Institute.  


PROBLEMS CONCERNING CTD ARE SUMMARIZED AS FOLLOWS:

Sta. AS4
  At Sta. AS4, the CTD- package was deployed without removing sensor
  covers of conductivity and dissolved oxygen. This miss-operation lead
  to DO-sensor broken. We replaced a new oxygen sensor just before Sta.
  K2. Since the measurements of water sample oxygen was not good from
  Sta. K1 to K14, the oxygen data by the old DO sensor [Sta. K1, AS2,
  AS3, AS4 and AS5] cannot be used. We cannot use the conductivity (thus
  salinity) data of Sta.  AS4.  
  
Sta. K61
  Just before Sta. K61, the deck-unit terminal DT-1050 broken down probably 
  because of the failure of power supply parts. The back-up unit consisting 
  of Neil-Brown Deck Terminal1150 and NEC-PC98 Personal Computer system was 
  used to obtain the CTD data only at Sta. K61. The data storage routine was
  provided by Dr. Kiyoshi Kawasaki in National Research Institute of Fisheries
  Science, who also largely helped the data processing at the station. The
  data format of the original data at K61 was converted to the one which 
  corresponds to the formal format, and then we used the same data processing
  procedure as used in the other stations. At the final station, Sta. K62, 
  the back-up Terminal 1050 was used for data acquisition.

24-Bottle Rosette System
  As noted earlier, this system gave many problems, non-closing of
  bottles and double bottle closing.

12kHz Pinger
  The performance of the pinger was satisfactory during the cruise. 


C.3.7  CTD DATA COLLECTION AND PROCESSING

DATA CAPTURE AND REPORTING

Every time CTD deployment, the CTD-package was stopped near the
sea-surface for about 1 minute in order to make sensors adjusted in the
sea-water. Then, the cable was released.

Full CTD data with 31.25 per second are passed from the CTD Deck
Unit to  the DEC-PC and are processed with a CTD processing software
provided by EG&G. All the raw data are archived in the PC. The data
processing procedure almost exactly follows the method by Millard &
Yang (1993: CTD Calibration and processing methods used at Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution). Firstly, we perform first difference check
in which if a data value jumps more than a certain critical value, the
data was marked and discarded. The critical values are as follows:

                Pressure Level    P     T      C      Oc      Ot
                (dbar)
                ------------------------------------------------
                0-100           1.0    0.5    0.5    1.0     1.0
                100-500         1.0    0.1    0.1    0.5     1.0
                500-1000        1.0    0.05   0.05   0.25    1.0
                1000-3000       1.0    0.02   0.02   0.1     1.0
                3000-5000       1.0    0.015  0.015  0.05    1.0
                5000-6500       1.0    0.015  0.015  0.025   1.0
                
The remaining downcast data are averaged in the 2db-pressure interval.
In this process, calibrations of pressure, temperature, conductivity
and time-constant mismatch are applied. CTD salinity and dissolved
oxygen concentrations are reconciled with sample values, and any
necessary adjustments made. The downcast data are extracted, sorted on
pressure and averaged to 2dbar intervals: any gaps in the averaged data
are filled by linear interpolation.


TEMPERATURE CALIBRATION

The following calibration was applied to the CTD temperature data:

    T=1.000056 x Traw - 1.919476E-6 x Traw*Traw + 0.738327E-3

This calibration was in C on the ITS68 scale, which was used for all
temperature data reported from this cruise. For the purpose of
computing derived oceanographic variables, temperature were converted
to the 1968 scale, using T68 = 1.00024 T90 as suggested by Saunders
(1990).  

In order to allow for the mismatch between the time constants
of the temperature and conductivity sensors, the temperature were
corrected. The time constant was estimated to be 0.303719 seconds,
which was determined to minimize fine-scale salinity fluctuations (Dr.
Kiyoshi Kawasaki, National Research Institute of Fisheries Science,
provided the processing programs).


PRESSURE CALIBRATION

The following calibration was applied to the downcast CTD pressure data:

P = -0.645806E-10 x Praw**3 + 0.653211E-06 x Praw**2 + 0.999061 x Praw - Pdeck

where Pdeck is a pressure reading when the CTD is on deck just before the cast.

A final adjustment to pressure is to make a correction to upcast
pressures for hysteresis in the sensor. This is calculated on the basis
of laboratory measurements of the hysteresis. The hysteresis after a
cast of 5863dbar (denoted by dp5863(p)) is given in Table C.3.4.

Table C.3.5. Laboratory measurements of hysteresis in pressure sensor
             dp5863(p)=(upcast-downcast) pressure at various pressures, P 
             (from deadweight tester), in a simulated 5863 dbar cast.

                             P(dbar)       dp5500(p)
                                             (dbar)
                             -----------------------
                              5863           0.0
                              5518           0.3
                              4138           1.24
                              2758           2.4
                              1378           4.4
                               689           5.4
                                 0           0.2


The following calibration was applied to the upcast pressure calibration:

P = -0.29655E-9 x Praw**3 + 0.296207E-05 x Praw**2 + 0.992595 x Praw - Pdeck

where Pdeck is a pressure reading when the CTD is on deck just after the cast.

The hysteresis is compensated for by matching the uptrace water samples and 
downtrace CTD profile using the following equation:

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

                         W = exp[-(Pbottom - Pdn)/Z0]

where P is the adjusted pressure, Pup is the pressure value scaled with
the uptrace calibration, Pdn is the pressure value scaled with the
downtrace calibration, Pbottom is the maximum pressure of the station,
and Z0=500dbar.


SALINITY CALIBRATION

Salinity was calibrated  by comparison with sample salinities. The
laboratory calibration of the conductivity sensor showed that

                        C = Craw*1.00028 - 0.408124E-2

with the 6 points (the points are around C=60.02142, 37.42179) and the
standard deviation of 0.61E-3.

This was applied to station data as an initial calibration. The initial
calibration was followed by the correction to conductivity ratio

                C = G x [1 - 6.5E-6 x (T-2.8) + 1.5E-8 x (P-3000)]

IN-SITU SALINITY CALIBRATION


CELL FACTOR ESTIMATION

We compared all CTD conductivity data with those of water samples which
was converted from salinity with temperature and pressure at the points
bottles closed. We fitted a linear regression equation of

                                C = a x Cctd + b

with minimizing RMS error. The water sample data whose values are
beyond 2.8 x sigma (standard deviation) criterion are rejected. This
rejection and fitting procedure is repeated until all data are within
the 2.8 x sigma criterion. This procedure follows Millard and Yang
(1993). By using the CTD salinity determined with the cell factors
determined by the above procedure, we again compared the CTD salinity
and sample salinities. In this process, we detected bottle leak,
miss-fire bottles and bottles taken at different depth. With the
information of bottle rearrangements and rejection of questionable
sample data, we again determined the cell factor as

                          a=1.0009114;  b=-0.03172988

For all, 1328 set of water sample and CTD data, from Sta. K1-K62, we
determined one set of cell factor. In the process of rejections of
beyond-2.8-sigma data, 333 set of data were rejected, and the standard
deviation of the difference between CTD and water sample salinities for
the remaining data was 0.002461mmho/cm. These data in the above process
are reported in text files of all.his (cell factor determination),
all.rej (list of rejected data) and all.res (list of remaining data).

With the cell factor determined by the above procedure, mean difference
between CTD and water sample and standard deviations for depth ranges
in the deep part are in the Table C.3.5.

Table C.3.6. 

        Depth Range   Mean Salinity Difference        Standard Deviation
                      Ssample - Sctd  (mmho/cm)            (mmho/cm)
        ----------------------------------------------------------------
        >=1000dbar           0.000179                      0.002188
        >=2000dbar           0.0009017                     0.00143
        >=3000dbar           0.001136                      0.00128
        >=4000dbar           0.001285                      0.00125
        
Since data number is larger in shallow part than in deep part, a
systematic error (bias) tends to increase with depth. For the depth >=
3000dbar, there is a bias of about 0.001.  To remove this bias, the
bias part of the cell factor, we set b=-0.03172988 + 0.001= -
0.03072988. With this operation, almost no bias is present for
d>=2000dbar; while there exits a bias of about 0.001 for near surface
data (d<1000dbar).


PROBLEM IN CTD SALINITY DATA

1) CTD salinity data at Sta. AS4 (filename=ka03d004.prs) is not good
   because of the sensor failure.

2) A large part of the data which are rejected when the present cell
   factor is near a intermediate salinity minimum (North Pacific
   Intermediate Water) for 200-1000dbar and in sharp thermocline and
   halocline. There is a tendency that a salinity difference, delta-S
   (Sctd-Ssample) is positive (negative) for the depth larger (less) than
   in salinity minimum. This suggests that the CTD sensor traveled upward
   at the time when the bottle was closed after CTD data (average of 30
   data) was obtained (5-10 seconds in advance of bottle closing). The
   rosette system is not non-interrupt type, this difference is
   inevitable. By these reasons, we keep the Bottle File data even when
   the salinity is somewhat (|delta-S|<0.02) different from the
   corresponding sample salinity data. A data user would be better to
   refer to the water sample salinity data when he or she uses the
   salinity data with combination of other water sampled data as nutrients
   and Freon.
   
3) As a course of the cruise, there is a tendency that conductivity
   difference delta-C (=Cctd-Csample) increases after Sta. K33. The
   delta-C averaged for 1000-6500dbar data is -0.0005}0.0005mmho/cm in
   Sta. K4-K33; while the delta-C is increasing as station and at Sta. K62
   delta-C is +0.0015mmho/cm. The increase of delta-C is almost linear
   with station. It is possible to remove this station-dependent change;
   but we have not done that because overall accuracy is within the WOCE
   requirement. This station dependent change in conductivity might arise
   from the CTD temperature increase found between pre- and post-cruise
   temperature calibration (delta-T=0.002C for 0-8C) as already reported.


OXYGEN CALIBRATION

CTD oxygen were calibrated by fitting to sample values using the
following formula (Owens and Millard, 1985):

Oxm = [A x ( Oc + B x dOc/dt ) + C] x oxsat(T,S) x exp[tcor x (Tctd +
                    Wt x (Tctd - Ot) + pcor x p)

where one set of the coefficients A, B, C, tcor, Wt and pcor were
chosen for the whole cruise, and Oc, Tctd and Ot are Oxygen current,
temperature by CTD and temperature in the oxygen sensor, respectively.
Water sample oxygen data for Sta. K1-K15 are excluded from the
calibration data set because the oxygen measurement was not good for
those stations. At Sta. AS4 (CTD file name= ka03d004.prs), CTD oxygen
sensor was broken down, and was replaced just before the station K2.
Since neither the CTD oxygen nor the water sample data are available
for Sta. AS1-AS5 and K1, oxygen data are not present for these
stations. The CTD oxygen data are almost all right, but there is high
frequency noise for 0-300dbar that makes the measurement accuracy
lower.

For oxygen data available in Sta. K16-K62, one set of calibration
parameters is determined as:

   C    =  0.019       non-dimensional
   A    =  0.9778      
   Pcor =  0.1363E-3/dbar
   Tcor = -0.03165/C
   Wt   =  0.8680      non-dimensional
   B    = -2.147       seconds

For this fitting, standard deviation is 0.064ml/l. This large error
arise from the high- frequency noise in 0-500dbar. In deep water, CTD
oxygen measurements are whitin WOCE requirement as following Table:

            Pressure Range   Standard Deviation (ml/l)   Data Number
            --------------------------------------------------------
            0    =<  <100            0.093                   51
            100       200            0.089                   58
            200       300            0.081                   41
            300       500            0.083                   74
            500       700            0.089                   64
            700      1000            0.064                   99
            1000     1500            0.049                   83
            1500     2000            0.048                   87
            2000     3000            0.047                   43
            3000 -   6500            0.040                  251

The CTD oxygen sensor is stable for Sta. K16-K62, so that we applied
the above one set of calibration parameter for the whole CTD data for
Sta. K2-K62. 

The average of the difference Ores=Octd-Osample for each
station fluctuates from station to station but is within 0.05ml/l for
Sta. K16-K62. The standard deviation is less than 0.025ml/l, which is
comparable with or less than the standard deviation of Ores for each
station.  The oxygen calibration history, rejected data list and
remaining data list are contained in file "37-90ox.his", 37-90ox.rej"
and "37-90ox.res".

We estimated the fitting parameters for several sets of station groups as 
follows:

         (ml/L)   data#                     (e-2)   (e-3)   (e-1) 
station  sigma    (rej.#)  bias   slope     Pcor    Tcor     Wt       Lag
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
K15-K21  0.0598  147(8)    0.000  0.1055   0.1367  -0.3521  0.9657   0.1856
K22-K28  0.0531  136(17)   0.005  0.09999  0.1403  -0.3314  0.9337   6.171
K29-K33  0.0636  107(5)    0.010  0.09962  0.1413  -0.3142  1.085   -2.603
K34-K40  0.0514  129(14)   0.006  0.09848  0.1392  -0.3376  0.7285  -1.462
K41-K47  0.0574  132(20)   0.011  0.09376  0.1400  -0.3094  0.6607  -6.838
K48-K55  0.0684  171(6)    0.010  0.09782  0.1388  -0.3177  0.8137  -4.093
K56-K62  0.0565  136(13)   0.009  0.1036   0.1342  -0.3564  0.9349  -2.756


We applied the above sets of calibration parameters for each station group.  For 
K2-K14, the first set of parameters were applied to obtain downcast CTD oxygen 
data. Thus the CTD-oxygen data for K2-K14 were not directly calibrated with 
water sample data. This fact should be noted for data users. However, judging 
from that the oxygen sensor is fairly stable for the course of the cruise, it is 
possible to use the CTD oxygen data of sta. K2-K14.

Station number and CTD file number comparison List


STNNBR    File name   | STNNBR    File name | STNNBR    File name
--------------------- | ------------------- | -------------------
K1(AS1)  KA03d001.prs | K11          29     | K37          59
AS2          02       | St.16        30     | K38          61
AS3          03       | K12          31     | K39          62
AS4          04       | St.18        32     | K40          63
AS5          05       | K13          34     | K41          64
K2           06       | K14          35     | K42          65
AS7          07       | K15          36     | K43          66
AS8          08       | K16          37     | K44          67
AS9          09       | K17          38     | K45          68
K3       10(1ST CAST) | K18          39     | K46          69
             11 (2ND) | K19          40     | K47          70
AS11         12       | K20          41     | K48          71
AS12         13       | K21          42     | K49          72
AS13         14       | K22          43     | K50          73
K4           15       | K23          44     | K51          74
St.2         16       | K24          45     | K52          75
K5           17       | K25        46 47    | K53          76
St.4         18       | K26          48     | K54          77
K6           19       | K27          49     | K55          78
St.6         20       | K28          50     | K56          79
K7           21       | K29          51     | K57          80
St.8         22       | K30          52     | K58          82
K8           23       | K31          53     | K59          83
St.10        24       | K32          54     | K60          84
K9           25       | K33          55     | K61          90
St.12        26       | K34          56     | K62          85
K10          27       | K35          57     | 
St.14        28       | K36          58     |


FINAL CFC DATA QUALITY EVALUATION (DQE) COMMENTS ON P02T. 
(David Wisegarver)
Dec 2000

Based on the data quality evaluation, this data set meets the relaxed WOCE 
standard (3% or 0.015 pmol/kg overall precision) for CFC's. Detailed comments on 
the DQE process have been sent to the PI and to the WHPO. 

The CFC concentrations have been adjusted to the SIO98 calibration Scale (Prinn 
et al. 2000) so that all of the Pacific WOCE CFC data will be on a common 
calibration scale.  For further information, comments or questions, please, 
contact the CFC PI for this section (watanabe@nire.go.jp) or David Wisegarver 
(wise@pmel.noaa.gov). Additional information on WOCE CFC synthesis may be 
available at: http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/cfc. 

******************************************************************************** 
Prinn, R.G., R.F. Weiss, P.J. Fraser, P.G. Simmonds, D.M. Cunnold, F.N. Alyea, 
   S. O'Doherty, P. Salameh, B.R. Miller, J. Huang, R.H.J. Wang, D.E. Hartley, 
   C. Harth, L.P. Steele, G. Sturrock, P.M. Midgley, and A. McCulloch, A History 
   of Chemically and Radiatively Important Gases in Air Deduced from 
   ALE/GAGE/AGAGE J. Geophys. Res., 105, 17,751-17,792, 2000. 
********************************************************************************



DATA PROCESSING NOTES

Date      Contact     Data Type          Data Status Summary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
09/09/97  Yasuda      CTD/BTL/SUM        Submitted for DQE  (also DOC)
          
10/15/97  Aoyama      NUTs               Submitted for DQE  (on disk}
          
10/17/97  Aoyama      NUTs/DOC           Submitted for DQE  
          
10/19/98  Thompson    DELC14             No Data Submitted
          Masao Fukasawa/Tokai Univ. needs help processing C14 data  
          
06/29/99  Bartolacci  CTD/BTL/SUM        Data Update
          I have updated the P02T (49K6KY9401_1) bottle, sum, and ctd files with 
          the most recent reformatted files from Sarilee.  The specifics on the 
          reformatting can be found in "notes.p02t" in the original directory of 
          p02t on the public site (you should be able to get to the file there, 
          if not let me know and I'll just mail you a copy).  The table has been 
          updated to reflect the change.  Danie
          
05/09/00  Okuda       CTD/BTL            Data are Public  
          Of course, our data can be made "public/unencrypted".  
          
08/15/00  Diggs       CTD/BTL            Website Updated  data unencrypted
          All params in all files decrypted by me. Okuda sent a message to WHPO 
          stating that all data could be public.
          
11/17/00  Fukasawa    He/Tr              No Data Submitted  PI is Hirose/MRI-JMA  
          
12/18/00  Kappa       DOC                Doc Update  
          oxy, nuts, ctd reports combined into txt version  
          
02/17/01  Diggs       CFCs/CO2           Reformatting Needed; given to Dave Muus  
          
02/20/01  Okuda       He/Tr              Not Measured - Planned, not carried out
          The sampling for helium/tritium might be planed for P2 at first and 
          reported to WHP office, but actually did not made, I think.   
          


Date      Contact     Data Type          Data Status Summary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
02/21/01  Kappa       NUTs/CFCs/CO2      Submitted
          Downloaded data from public JODC website  The Bottle File has the 
          following parameters: SILCAT, NO2+NO3, NITRIT, PHSPHT, CFC-11, CFC-12, 
          TCARBN, ALKALI, PH.  The Bottle File contains: CastNumber 
          StationNumber BottleNumber SampleNumber.  And would like the following 
          done to the data: reformat,merge,put online:Public
          
02/27/01  Diggs       CTD                PI update  
          Fukasawa & Yasuda/U Tokyo also responsible  
          
03/07/01  Muus        BTL                Data Merged
          20010306 merged file replaced by 20010307 file.
          Merged nutrients, freons, and carbon data from 
          2001.02.27_P02T_CFC_CARBON.DIR/P2_RUTIN_WOCEFMT.txt into the 
          19990616WHPOSIOSA web file and assumed the 1999 web SUMMARY  
          file is correct.    

          Station 11 cast 1 on new file seems to be the same as station 10 cast 
          2 on web file.

          No Sta 11/1 on web file and no Sta 10/2 on new file.

          Station 47 cast 1 on new file seems to be the same as station 47 cast 
          2 on web file.

          No Sta 47/1 on web file and no Sta 47/2 on new file.
          Summary file on web (dated 19990615) agrees with web .SEA file.

          Station 1 Cast 1 on web file but no Station 1 on new file.
          Successfully ran wocecvt on merged file (p02thy.txt dated 20010307).
          
03/12/01  Diggs       S/O/NUTs/CFCs/C02  Website Updated
          Data merged into online file  Bottle: (salnty, oxygen, silcat, no2 
          no3, cfc-11, cfc-12, tcarbn, alkali)

          Placed new bottle data file online that Dave Muus Merged. "Merged 
          nutrients, freons, and carbon data from 2001.02.27 _P02T_CFC_ 
          CARBON.DIR/ P2_RUTIN_ WOCEFMT.txt into the 19990616 WHPOSIOSA web file 
          and assumed the 1999 web SUMMARY file is correct."
          


Date      Contact     Data Type          Data Status Summary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
04/04/01  Key         DELC14             Data Request
          It has just come to my attention that the C-14 results from the 
          Japanese occupation of line P2T have been published. The number of 
          stations is rather small, but the data are in an area which the U.S. 
          did not cover (zonally). They should be willing to release the data 
          since they consider it an official WOCE cruise. The reference is:

          Watanabe, et al., 1999, J. Oceanogr. Soc. Japan, A preliminary study 
          of oceanic bomb radiocarbon inventory in the North Pacific during the 
          last two decades, 55, 705-716.

          I will e-mail Watanabe today with an initial request for the data for 
          inclusion in the atlas. If I have no luck, perhaps one of you can 
          followup.
          
06/22/01  Uribe       CTD/BTL            Website Updated: CSV File Added
          CTD and Bottle files in exchange format have been put online.
          
06/29/01  Wisegarver  CFCs               DQE Complete
          precision outside orignal WOCE standards; meets "relaxed" stnds
          The calculated precision for CFC-12 based on replicate pars was 1.8%,  
          Although the precison of measurements did not meet the original WOCE 
          quality standards [1.9% or 0.002 pmol/kg for CFC-12], the data does 
          fall within the relaxed standards of 3% or 0.015 pmol/kg.
          
01/15/02  Kappa       DOC                Complied PDF and Text cruise Reports

