A.   Cruise Narrative: P24



A.1. Highlights
                         WHP Cruise Summary Information

             WOCE section designation  P24
    Expedition designation (EXPOCODE)  49RY9511_2
          Chief Scientist/affiliation  Masahiko Fujimura, JMA/MD
                                Dates  1995.11.15 - 1995.11.30
                                 Ship  RYOFU MARU
                        Ports of call  Nagoya, Japan to Naha, Japan
                   Number of stations  26
                                                   31°15.48''N 
Geographic boundaries of the stations  131°28.19''E           137°04.41''E
                                                   23°57.99''N
         Floats and drifters deployed  none
       Moorings deployed or recovered  none
                 Contributing Authors  Y. Takatsuki
             (in order of appearance)  H. Kamiya
                                   K.  Nemoto
                                   I.  Kaneko
 
 
 
                    CRUISE REPORT OF RY9511, LEG-2 (WHP-P24)
 
                            Oceanographical Division
                         Climate and Marine Department
                          Japan Meteorological Agency
                                 November 1999
 
1	CRUISE NARRATIVE
1.1	Highlights
	WOCE section designation:	WOCE WHP P24
	Expedition Designation
		(EXPOCODE):		49RY9511/2
					(Ryofu Maru 95-11 cruise, leg 2)
	Ship:				R/V Ryofu Maru
	Ports of Call:			Nagoya, Japan to Naha, Japan
	Cruise Dates:			November 15 to November 30,1995.
	Chief Scientist:		Masahiko Fujimura1
					Oceanographical Division
					Marine Department
					Japan Meteorological Agency
					1-3-4 Otemachi, Chiyoda-ku,
					Tokyo 100, JAPAN
					E-mail: attention seadata@hq.kishou.go.jp

1.2	Cruise Summary

CRUISE TRACK

The station locations along the WHP P24 section are shown in *Figure 1.

NUMBER OF STATIONS

26 stations of CTD/Rosette casts were completed and pre-and post-CTD/Rosette casts 
for CFC bottle blank measurements were also occupied.

SAMPLING

Measured parameters and numbers of samples are as follows:
Numbers of water samples analyzed:

	salinity	815 samples at 26 stations
	oxygen		691 layers at 26 stations
	nutrients	691 layers at 26 stations
	CFCs		147 layers at 9 stations

1 - present affiliation: Maritime Meteorological Division, Climate and Marine 
Department, Japan Meteorological Agency
Numbers of water samples collected for shore-based analysis:


*Figure 1: WHP-P24 station locations.
           Contour level of the water depth: 200, 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000, 6000m.

		helium-3 (3He)	89 layers at 6 stations
		tritium (3H)	89 layers at 6 stations
		AMS radiocarbon	159 layers at 6 stations plus ca.160 		
				samples for the forthcoming Pacific radiocarbon inter-
				comparison.

FLOATS, DRIFTERS, AND MOORINGS

No floats, drifters, or moorings were deployed on this leg of the cruise.

1.3	List of Principal Investigators

The principal investigators responsible for the major parameters measured on the 
cruise and their E-mail address are listed in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively.

1.4	Scientific Programme and Methods


NARRATIVE

Primary goal of the cruise is to obtain a high-quality standard data set along P24 
section, where the Kobe Marine Observatory of the Japan Meteorological 
Agency(JMA)will continue to carryout repeat hydrographic observations (PR17)and 
compare their data with the present standard data to detect long-term variations 
from sea surface to deep ocean. Another goal is to obtain detailed structure of 
deep circulation in the Shikoku and Northern Philippine Basins from deep density 
structure and property field along the section. Since most of the instruments and 
equipments worked properly and the weather during the casts was not so severe, CTD 
observations, measurements of sample water salinity, dissolved oxygen and 
nutrients were carried out as intended. We also measured CFCs and collected water 
samples for shore-based analysis for 3He/3H,radiocarbon.

The cruise track is shown in *Figure 1. After leaving Nagoya, the section began at 
(31-15N, 131-28E) off the coast of Kyushu. The Ryofu Maru headed southeastward 
along WOCE WHP P24.The distances between the neighboring stations were around 30 
NM over some Basin, less than 30 NM over steep bathymetry in the Daito Ridge, 
between 10 and 20 NM over the continental slope. The last station was settled at 
(25-00N, 137-00E) which is the station WOCE P9-31.This section was not from coast 
to coast, however, three revisited stations were occupied at (24-15N, 136-12E: P3-
322), (24-00N, 137-00E: P9-33), and (25-00N, 137-00E: P9-31) to confirm the trace 
ability of the measurements.


PRELIMINARY RESULTS

*Figure 2 shows the distribution of sample observations made on the P24 section. The 
preliminary results comparing the data this cruise and previous P3 and P9 cruises at 
three revisited stations showed in good agreements within the WOCE onetime standard 
of water samples.


SALINITY

We had three revisited stations on WHP P3 and P9. Salinity values interpolated 
with potential temperature below 1.6°C and differences are shown in Table 3. The 
deep water salinity values at the station P3-224 in 1985 are slightly lower (about 
0.002 or 0.003) than those at the present station P24-24. While the salinity 
values at the stations P9-33 and P9-31 in 1994 are almost the same (almost within 
0.002) with our P24-25 and P24-26.


Table 1: List of the parameters to be measured, the sampling groups responsible for 
         each, and the principal investigator for each.

Chief Scientist: Masahiko Fujimura

Parameter		Sampling group	Principal Investigator
--------------------------------------------------------------
CTD/Rosette		JMA/MD		Yasushi Takatsuki
Salinity		JMA/MD		Yasushi Takatsuki
O2, NO3, NO2, PO4, SiO2	JMA/MD		Hitomi Kamiya
Chlorofluorocarbons	JMA/MD		Kazuhiro Nemoto
3H/3He			JMA/MRI		Michio Aoyama
Radiocarbon		JMA/MRI		Michio Aoyama
ADCP			JMA/MD		Masahiko Fujimura

JMA/MD		Marine Department, Japan Meteorological Agency
JMA/MRI		Meteorological Research Institute, JMA


Table 2: List of E-mail address of each PI.

Masahiko Fujimura	fujimura.ma@met.kishou.go.jp
Yasushi Takatsuki	attention seadata@hq.kishou.go.jp
Hitomi Kamiya		attention seadata@hq.kishou.go.jp
Kazuhiro Nemoto		k-nemoto@met.kishou.go.jp
Michio Aoyama		maoyama@mri-jma.go.jp


*Figure 2: Location of 12-liter water samples collected on P24.


OXYGEN

Accuracy was checked by comparison with P3 and P9 data. Data taken at stations 24, 
25 and 26 were compared with P3 station 322, P9 stations 33 and 31 respectively. 
Our data agrees with the old data within 1% of reproducibility in all cases. 
Comparison with data of P24 and P9 (Stn.30 -34) is given in *Figure 4.


Table 3: Salinity values and differences on isotherms of P24, P3 and P9.

Potential Temp.	         1.20	 1.30	 1.40	 1.50	 1.60
(Depth ca.)	        (4000m)	(3400m)	(3000m)	(2750m)	(2500m)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-15N, 136-12E					
P24-24			  -	34.672	34.662	34.652	34.640
P3-322			  -	34.669	34.660	34.649	34.638
diff.			  -	+0.003	+0.002	+0.003	+0.002
24-00N, 137-00E					
P24-25			  -	34.671	34.663	34.653	34.642
P9-33			34.681	34.672	34.663	34.654	34.642
diff.			  -	-0.001	 0.000	-0.001	 0.000
25-00N, 137-00E					
P24-26			34.681	34.671	34.662	34.652	34.643
P9-31			34.679	34.672	34.665	34.652	34.642
diff.			+0.002	-0.001	-0.003	0.000	+0.001


*Figure 3: Salinity vs. potential temperature for P24 (+), P9 (Stn.30 -34; 
           circle)and P3 (Stn. 322 -324; diamond) data.

*Figure 4: Dissolved oxygen concentration vs. potential temperature for P24 (+), P9 
           (Stn.30 -34; circle)and P3 (Stn.322 -324; diamond)data.


NUTRIENTS

Accuracy was checked by comparison with P3 and P9 data. Data taken at stations 24, 
25 and 26 were compared with P3 station 322, P9 stations 33 and 31 respectively. 
Some comparisons are given in *Figure 5. Our data agrees with the P9 data within 1% 
of reproducibility in all cases. On the other hand, our deep silicate concentrations 
were ca. 4.3 µmol/kg lower and deep phosphate data were ca. 0.1 µmol/kg higher on 
average than the P3 data.

1.5	Major Problems Encountered on the Cruise

A major problem was the unstable cold welder for Helium samples. It caused 25 
percent losses of the samples.

1.6 List of Cruise Participants

The members of the scientific party are listed in Table 4, along with their 
responsibilities.


Table 4: Cruise participants

Name			Affiliation and Responsibilities
--------------------------------------------------------------
Masahiko Fujimura	Chief Scientist (JMA/MD ADCP)
Yasushi Takatsuki	(JMA/MD CTD/Rosette, Salinity)
Yoshiaki Kanno		(JMA/MD CTD/Rosette, Salinity)
Tetsuya Nakamura	(JMA/MD CTD/Rosette, Salinity)
Sinji Masuda		(JMA/MD CTD/Rosette, Salinity, Oxygen)
Ichiro Terashima	(JMA/MD Oxygen)
Hitomi Kamiya		(JMA/MD Oxygen, Nutrients)
Sonoki Iwano		(JMA/MD Nutrients)
Yoshisuke Takatani	(JMA/MD Nutrients)
Takafumi Umeda		(JMA/MD Oxygen)
Ikuo Kaneko		(JMA/MD CFCs)
Kazuhiro Nemoto		(JMA/MD CFCs)
Shu Saito		(JMA/MD CFCs)
Michio Aoyama		(JMA/MRI Radiocarbon, 3H /3He)

JMA/MD	Marine Department, Japan Meteorological Agency
JMA/MRI	Meteorological Research Institute, JMA



2	HYDROGRAPHIC MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES AND CALIBRATIONS
2.1	Sample Salinity Measurements
	by Y. Takatsuki (April 26,1999)

EQUIPMENT AND TECHNIQUE

Salinity samples were collected in 150 ml amber glass bottles with rubber caps and 
stored in an air-conditioned laboratory for more than 24 hours before salinity 
measurements. The salinities were measured with two Guildline TM Autosal TM Model 
8400B salinometer (S/N 60,027 and 61,282)with an Ocean Scientific International 
peristaltic-type sample intake pump. The salinometer was standardized with IAPSO 
Standard Seawater (SSW) batch P124 (18 Jan. 1994, K 15 0.99990) everyday when it 
was used for sample measurements. The instruments were operated in the ship's 
separate laboratory at a bath temperature of 27°C with the laboratory temperature 
between 24°C and 26°C. We made efforts to keep the variation of laboratory 
temperature within 1°C between two standardizations before and after a series of 
salinity measurements, though the variation sometimes exceeded the limit and 
reached 2°C at the maximum.

During the cruise, we regularly took a batch of deep water below 1000 m depth, 
sealed in a polyethylene rectangular bag and used as a sub-standard water to 
monitor instrument drifts. We kept a batch of sub-standard sea water being 
isolated from air and stirred with a magnet stirrer so as to maintain its 
constancy of salinity during salinity sample measurements. A batch of sub-standard 
sea water was replaced by new one when the bag decreased in volume by half. This 
is because salinity of the sub-standard sea water tended to increase by about 
0.0004 when its volume decreased largely.

31 outputs of conductivity ratio from the Autosal were taken by a PC at each 
reading, and their median and standard deviation were calculated and recorded.

There were 30 pairs of replicate samples drawn; and 40 pairs of duplicate samples. 
Of the duplicate pairs, 30 were from below 400m. The standard deviations of the 
three groups of sample pairs are given in Table 5 below. The precision of salinity 
measurements deeper than 400m depths is estimated at 0.0006.


*Figure 5: Silicate (upper), phosphate (middle), and nitrate (bottom) concentration
           vs. potential temperature for P24 (+), P9 (Stn. 30-34; circle) and P3 (Stn.
           322-324; diamond) data.


Table 5: Salinity duplicate and replicate statistics

Quantity	Standard Deviation   Number of pairs
-------------------------------------------------
Replicates		0.0003		30
Duplicates (All)	0.0030		40
Duplicates (>400m)	0.0006		30


2.2	Sample Oxygen Measurements
	by H. Kamiya (March 11,1999)

EQUIPMENT AND TECHNIQUE

The dissolved oxygen samples were analyzed with an automated titration system. The 
titrator used in the P24 cruise, Model ART-3 TM, was a photometric type (372nm), 
which has been manufactured by Hirama Riken Inc. The volume of burette is 5 ml, 
and the resolution of titration is 0.0025 ml.

The dissolved oxygen samples were collected in 120 ml borosilicate glass bottles 
immediately following the drawing of samples for CFCs. Our bottle has a collar on 
its mouth and its round glass stopper contains a long nipple, which is inserted 
into the bottle, displacing ca. 30 ml of sample water. The temperature of a sample 
was measured with a thermistor probe being inserted into seawater after adding 
reagents.

The reagents were prepared according to the recipes by Carpenter (1965)and Culberson 
(1991) though normality of sodium thiosulfate for titration was selected about 0.05 
in order that a titration for the highest oxygen concentration would be finished 
within a volume of the burette.

Titration blank was measured during cruise, determined as -0.0075 ml, and 
subtracted from all of thiosulfate titers of the samples.


PRECISION OF MEASUREMENTS

During the cruise we monitored precision by analyzing duplicate samples taken from 
the samplers (Niskin bottles); both from the same sampler (replicate) and from two 
samplers tripped together at the same depth (duplicate). Replicate/duplicate 
samples were taken on every cast. The standard deviation of the difference were 
0.81 (replicate) and 1.01 (duplicate) µmol/kg indicates the precision is about 
0.4%. The results of comparisons between replicate/duplicate samples are shown in 
Table 6.

Table 6: Statistics of duplicates and Replicate for dissolved oxygen

			Standard Deviation
Case		µmol/kg		(%of F.S.)	Number of data
Replicates	0.81		(0.37)		   80
Duplicates	1.01		(0.46)		   32
Full Scale	220		


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):Dissolved Oxygen. in WHP Operations and Methods -July 1991.


2.3	Nutrients
	by H. Kamiya (March 11,1999)

EQUIPMENT AND TECHNIQUES

The nutrient analyses were performed on a Technicon AutoAnalyzer-TM -II (AA-II). We 
prepared the regents and flow lines referred to the manual by L.I. Gordon et. al. 
(1993). However, as for phosphate and silicate analyses, we introduced the ascorbic 
acid method for convenience of reagent handling. Our system heated silicate and 
phosphate samples up to 37°C so as to keep coloration rate stable. The laboratory 
temperature was maintained from 23.5 to 25°C.

Sampling of nutrients followed that for the trace gases and dissolved oxygen. 
Samples were drawn into 12 ml polymethylpentene test tubes with silicone caps 
which fit the AA-II sampler tray. Both the test tubes and caps were rinsed with 
10% HCl and deionized water before sampling at every stations.

The analysis routinely were started within half an hour after sampling on deck. 
Samples were introduced to the manifolds through the cycle of 80 seconds sampling 
and 45 seconds washing with artificial seawater of salinity ca. 34.7.


CALIBRATIONS AND STANDARDS

Nominal concentrations of standard are given in Table 7. All volumetric flasks and 
pipettors used on this work were calibrated before the cruise.

Linearity was checked beginning of leg and again at the end of station work and 9 
sets of data were taken. Standards concentrations (µmol/kg)were :silicate 160, 80, 
40, 20, 0; nitrate 40, 30, 20, 10, 0; phosphate 3, 2.25, 1.5, 0.75, 0. The mean 
difference (µmol/kg) of the mid-scale offset from straight lines were silicate 
0.57, nitrate 0.19, phosphate 0.004, the standard deviations (µmol/kg) were 0.25, 
0.03, 0.010 respectively.

For the reproducibility we measured 93 standards. The means (µmol/kg) were: silicate 
82.45, nitrate 21.71, phosphate 1.57, the standard deviations (µmol/kg) were 0.74, 0.19, 
0.033 respectively.

During the cruise we monitored precision by analyzing replicate/duplicate samples 
taken from the Sampler. Replicate/duplicate samples were taken on every cast. The 
results of comparisons between replicate/duplicate samples are shown in Table 8.


Table 7: Concentrations of nutrients standard
									(Unit: µmol/kg)
		Silicate	Nitrate	      NO3+NO2	    Nitrite	  Phosphate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A standard	66454		25000			    12500	    1875
B standard	1993.6		500			      500	    37.5
C standard	159.5		40		41	        1	       3


Table 8: Statistics of duplicates and replicates for nutrients

				    (Unit:upper:µmol/kg lower: %of full scale).
Case		Silicate   Nitrate	Nitrite	  Phosphate	Number of data
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replicates	0.214	   0.080	0.002	  0.010		97
		(0.13)	   (0.20)	(0.18)	  (0.35)	
Duplicates	0.175	   0.064	0.006	  0.013		33
		(0.11)	   (0.16)	(0.65)	  (0.44)	
Full Scale	  159	      41	    1	      3	


REFERENCES

Gordon, L.I., J.C. Jennings, Jr., A.A. Ross, and J.M. Krest (1993): 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. in WOCE Hydrographic 
    Program Office, Method Manual, 91-1.


2.4	CFC-11 and CFC-12 measurements
	by K. Nemoto and I. Kaneko (March 18,1998)

EQUIPMENT AND TECHNIQUE

Concentrations of the dissolved chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) F-11 and F-12 were 
measured by shipboard electron-capture (ECD) gas chromatography, according to the 
methods described by Bullister and Weiss (1988). Our extraction and analysis 
system was assembled by GL Science Corp. The ECD gas chromatograph is Hitachi 
Corp., Model 263-30. CFCs samples were analyzed at 153 layers of 9 stations along 
the WHP-P24 section. Replicate samples were drawn and analyzed at each station, 
except the first station (P24-01, RF-0069).


WATER SAMPLING AND DATA PROCESSING

We used a 12-liter (Niskin bottle) x 24 rosette system (General Oceanic Co. Ltd.) 
for water sampling. The inner walls of the Niskin bottles and stainless springs 
had been coated with epoxy. According to Bullister and Weiss (1988), the O-rings 
of the bottle caps were heated to 60°Celsius in a purged vacuum oven for two days 
to degas them, stored in a gas tight container and installed on the bottles just 
before the first station for CFCs sampling. CFCs samples were always drawn firstly 
by using 100 ml glass syringes. The samples were injected in the system and 
processed within 12 hours after sampling. Approximately 30 ml of samples was 
flushed, and 30 ml was transferred to the stripping chamber.

The volumes of our gas sample loop and water sample cylinder were determined after 
the cruise by the method to fill the sample loop/cylinder with distilled water and 
measure its weight increase. The volumes of the gas sample loop and water sample 
cylinder were determined to 1.152 ml and 29.84 ml, respectively.

Calibration curves used for converting output peak areas to CFCs concentrations 
are generated by multiple (up to seven, if necessary) injections of the known 
volume of standard gas. The coefficients of polynomial expressions used at each 
station are shown in Table 9.

On the basis of several stripping test during the cruise, we determined the 
stripping efficiencies to 0.996 for F-11 and 0.990 for F-12. We divide output peak 
area by these factors to estimate total amounts of F-11/F-12 dissolved in seawater 
samples.


SAMPLE BLANKS

Sample blanks of F-11 and F-12 for each bottle were obtained before and after the 
observations along the P24 section, at 2500 m depth of Station RF-0068 (31-25N, 133-
03E; Nov.16, 1995) and RF-0095 (25-49N, 129-49E; Nov.27, 1995). The results are shown 
in Table 10. The mean and standard deviation of F-11/F-12 blanks are approximately 
0.02±0.005 pmol/kg, and no bottle seriously contaminated was found. During the 
observation, samples drawn from the deepest bottle were analyzed to monitor 
contamination of the system. The results (Table 11) shows that the system was not 
seriously contaminated during the observation.

Sample blanks which should be subtracted from measurement values are determined so 
that F-11/F-12 concentrations are zero below 2000 m depth at each station. The 
values are shown in Table 12.


PRECISION

The reproducibility was estimated from replicate analyses of 100-500m depths water 
at 8 stations (Table 13). It was approximately less than 2% for F-11 and F-12, but 
at two stations (RF-0085 and RF-0091) the F-12 differences showed extraordinary 
large values.


AIR SAMPLING

At 25-39N, 131-11E after the observations along the P24 section, on November 26 of 
1995, we took marine air samples with a 300 ml syringe and injected them in the 
system to analyze CFCs. The results are shown in Table 6 with the CFCs 
concentration of the laboratory air simultaneously analyzed.


STANDARD GAS

A standard gas used in our cruise was made by Nippon Sanso Inc. Concentrations of 
F-11 and F-12 contained in our standard gas were calibrated by Dr. Yutaka Watanabe 
of National Research Institute for Resources (NIRE)on October 25, about twenty 
days before the WHP-P24 observations. F-11 and F-12 concentrations of our standard 
gas referred to a NIRE standard gas were 288.0±2.8 pptv and 482.4±5.7 pptv, 
respectively. We used these values to calculate the F-11 and F-12 concentrations 
of seawater/air samples obtained during the cruise. The NIRE standard gas has been 
scaled by a SIO standard gas used in the Hokkaido University. Therefore, our 
values determined via NIRE standard gas ought to have consistency with data scaled 
with SIO standards.


Table 9: CFC scaling factors.

CFC concentration = A + BX + CX2 + DX3, X: Area

F12	RF-0070		RF-0072		RF-0074		RF-0078		RF-0082
	P24-02		P24-04		P24-06		P24-10		P24-14
A	-9.38E -15	-2.19E -15	 8.48E -15	-6.64E -15	 2.42E -15
B	 1.29E -04	 1.19E -04	 1.22E -04	 1.11E -04	 1.18E -04
C	-2.84E -10	 6.10E -10	 4.29E -10	 1.24E -09	 5.20E -10
D	 2.58E -14	-1.68E -15	 3.17E -15	-1.57E -14	-2.16E -15
F12	RF-0085		RF-0088		RF-0091		RF-0093		RF-0095
	P24-17		P24-20		P24-23		P24-25		Blank test
A	-1.86E -14	 7.48E -15	 5.14E -16	 6.10E -15	 6.63E -17
B	 1.19E -04	 1.16E -04	 1.20E -04	 1.09E -04	 1.08E -04
C	 2.16E -10	 6.57E -10	 1.99E -10	 1.26E -09	 8.97E -10
D	 7.27E -15	-4.75E -15	 4.31E -15	-1.75E -14	 0.00E+00
F11	RF-0070		RF-0072		RF-0074		RF-0078		RF-0082
	P24-02		P24-04		P24-06		P24-10		P24-14
A	-8.05E -15	 2.25E -15	 3.85E -15	 1.22E -15	 0.00E +00
B	 1.91E -05	 1.81E -05	 1.87E -05	 1.78E -05	 1.95E -05
C	-2.46E -11	 6.66E -12	-1.38E -11	 9.36E -14	-1.99E -11
D	 1.38E -16	-5.66E -17	 4.47E -17	-9.09E -18	 9.87E -17
F11	RF-0085		RF-0088		RF-0091		RF-0093		RF-0095
	P24-17		P24-20		P24-23		P24-25		Blank test
A	-2.98E -15	-6.85E -16	 2.30E -15	-1.65E -15	 1.11E -17
B	 1.98E -05	 2.11E -05	 2.19E -05	 1.81E -05	 1.97E -05
C	-3.75E -11	-3.79E -11	-6.19E -11	-1.59E -11	 1.69E -11
D	 1.71E -16	 1.52E -16	 2.72E -16	 5.27E -17	 0.00E+00


Table 10: Sample blanks at the test stations.

(1)Before P24 section	Station	Bottle   Syringe  Depth(m)  F12(pmol/kg)  F11(pmol/kg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
			RF-0068	1	   1	   2500		0.030   	0.028
			Blank	2	   2	   2500		0.019   	0.029
			Test	3	   3	   2500		0.036   	0.037
				4	   4	   2500		0.023   	0.025
				5	   5	   2500		0.032   	0.025
				6	   6	   2500		0.014   	0.028
				7	   7	   2500		0.024   	0.030
				8	   8	   2500		0.025   	0.030
				9	   9	   2500		0.027   	0.021
				10	   10	   2500		0.027   	0.028
				18	   18	   2500		0.020   	0.022
				19	   19	   2500		0.021   	0.024
				11	   11	   2500		0.020   	0.026
				12	   12	   2500		0.021   	0.031
				13	   13	   2500		0.021   	0.022
				15	   15	   2500		0.019   	0.023
				14	   14	   2500		0.026   	0.029
				16	   16	   2500		0.015   	0.023
				17	   17	   2500		0.021   	0.024
				20	   20	   2500		0.014   	0.022
				21	   21	   2500		0.023   	0.023
				22	   22	   2500		0.011   	0.023
				23	   23	   2500		0.023   	0.024
				24	   24	   2500		0.018   	0.038
						   MEAN		0.022   	0.026
						   S.D.		0.006   	0.005
						
(2) After P24 section	Station	Bottle   Syringe  Depth(m)  F12(pmol/kg)  F11(pmol/kg)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
			RF-0095	1	   1	   2500		0.017   	0.014
			Blank	2	   2	   2500		0.008   	0.014
			Test	3	   3	   2500		0.013   	0.014
				4	   4	   2500		0.014   	0.019
				5	   5	   2500		0.012   	0.016
				6	   6	   2500		0.013   	0.016
				7	   7	   2500		0.013   	0.015
				8	   8	   2500		0.011   	0.014
				9	   9	   2500		0.019*  	0.024*
				10	   10	   2500		0.013   	0.016
				11	   11	   2500		0.017   	0.018
				12	   12	   2500		0.015   	0.018
				13	   13	   2500		0.011   	0.014
				14	   14	   2500		0.010   	0.012
				15	   15	   2500		0.012   	0.014
				16	   16	   2500		0.010   	0.014
				17	   17	   2500		0.031   	0.026
				18	   18	   2500		0.016   	0.014
				19	   19	   2500		0.018   	0.017
				20	   20	   2500		0.014   	0.015
				21	   21	   2500		0.014   	0.014
				22	   22	   2500		0.013*  	0.029*
				23	   23	   2500		0.014   	0.021
				27	   24	   2500		0.023*  	0.027*
						   MEAN		0.015   	0.017
						   S.D.		0.005   	0.005
								  * : bad measurement


Table 11: Sample blanks of the deepest bottles.

					Depth	 F12	 F11
	Station		Cast	Bottle	(m)   (pmol/kg) (pmol/kg)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
RF-0072	(P24-04)	1	1	2058	0.019	0.038
RF-0074	(P24-06)	1	1	3909	0.017	0.030
				1	3909	0.029	0.035
RF-0076	(P24-08)	1	1	4833	0.010	0.021
				24	4834	0.017	0.023
				1	4833	0.023	0.027
				24	4834	0.016	0.023
RF-0077	(P24-09)	1	1	5009	0.023	0.026
				1	5009	0.029	0.022
				1	5009	0.026	0.025
				1	5009	0.023	0.020
RF-0078	(P24-10)	1	1	4152	0.019	0.025
				1	4152	0.022	0.022
RF-0082	(P24-14)	1	1	4290	0.017	0.022
RF-0084	(P24-16)	1	1	4881	0.022	0.029
				1	4881	0.020	0.022
				1	4881	0.018	0.017
RF-0085	(P24-17)	1	1	5164	0.020	0.025
RF-0091	(P24-23)	1	1	5376	0.027	0.034
RF-0093	(P24-25)	1	1	4170	0.018	0.024
				1	4170	0.016	0.025


Table 12: Sample blanks determined at each station.

			F-12	F-11
	Station	      (pmol/kg) (pmol/kg)
--------------------------------------------
RF0070	(P24-02)	0.019	0.038
RF0072	(P24-04)	0.019	0.038
RF0074	(P24-06)	0.018	0.027
RF0078	(P24-10)	0.011	0.026
RF0082	(P24-14)	0.016	0.016
RF0085	(P24-17)	0.025	0.020
RF0088	(P24-20)	0.008	0.019
RF0091	(P24-23)	0.013	0.031
RF0093	(P24-25)	0.009	0.023


REFERENCES

Bullister, J.L. and R.F. Weiss,1988:Determination of CCl3F and CCl2F2 in sea water 
   and air. Deep Sea Research ,35, 839 -853.


Table 13: Reproducibility estimated by replicate analyses.

					Depth	F-12	F-11	   F12 Diff   F11 Diff
Station		Cast	Bottle	Syringe	(m)   (pmol/kg) (pmol/kg)    (%)	 (%)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RF-0072		1	15	15	200	1.291	2.364	     0.07	 0.30
P24-04			15	15	200	1.292	2.357		
			20	20	49	1.061	1.886	     3.41	 0.83
			20	20	49	1.098	1.901		
RF-0074		1	 6	14	204	1.292	2.385	     0.53	 0.36
P24-06			 6	14	204	1.299	2.376		
RF-0078		1	 6	14	201	1.187	2.119	     0.53	 0.43
P24-10			 6	14	201	1.180	2.110		
			 8	16	101	1.090	1.791	     2.30	 1.88
			 8	16	101	1.066	1.758		
RF-0082		1	 6	14	203	1.359	2.486	     0.97	 0.79
P24-14			 6	15	203	1.345	2.466		
RF-0085		1	 6	14	202	1.297	2.525	     0.44	14.69
P24-17			 6	15	202	1.291	2.179		
RF-0088		1	 6	14	203	1.365	2.458	     0.71	 2.68
P24-20			 6	15	203	1.356	2.393		
RF-0091			 6	16	201	1.373	2.640	     1.11	13.58
P24-23			 6	17	201	1.358	2.304		
			 3	12	504	0.941	1.708	     2.00	 1.84
			 3	13	504	0.922	1.676		
RF-0093		 1	19	13	504	1.069	2.048	     0.00	 1.68
P24-25			19	14	504	1.069	2.082		
			21	16	201	1.311	2.224	     1.82	 4.07
			21	17	201	1.288	2.135		


Table 14: Air measurements at 25-39 N, 131-11 E.

			F12	F11
Nov.26,1995		(ppt)	(ppt)
the open air		557.7	284.0
			569.4	286.4
			556.7	281.6
			570.8	297.2
the air inside ship	582.2	426.1
(in the laboratory)	571.1	360.1


2.5	CTD measurements
	by Y. Takatsuki (April 30,1999)

EQUIPMENT, CALIBRATIONS AND STANDARDS

The CTD equipment used on this cruise was the property of JMA. The following 
equipment was deployed on the CTD/rosette underwater frame:

  1.	Falmouth Scientific, Inc. (FSI) Triton ICTD TM (#1316).
  2.	General Oceanics 12 liter 24 bottle rosette multi-bottle sampler Model 1015.
  3.	Benthos Altimeter Model 2110-1.
  4.	Preussag 10 kHz pinger Model TBB.
  5.	One SIS (Sensoren Instrumente Systeme) digital reversing thermometer (RTM) and 
  	two SIS digital reversing pressure meters (RPM).

The shipboard equipment consisted of complete integral system for demodulating and 
displaying the CTD data as well as controlling the rosette multi-bottle sampler. 
The system included the following major units:

  1.	FSI deck terminal Model 1050.
  2.	Compaq Deskpro TM PC system with 128 Mbytes 3.5 inch Magneto-optical (MO) disk 
  	drive.
  3.	General Oceanics rosette firing module for Model 1015.

Pre-cruise temperature and pressure calibrations for CTD #1316 was carried out by 
S.E.A. corporation in October/November, 1995. Correction on RTM and RPMs data were 
done according to the correction tables, which attached at shipping.

Pre-and post-cruise calibrations of the conductivity sensors were not carried out, 
so the calibration constants were calculated from a fit to the salinities measured 
from the water samples collected at each station.


CTD TEMPERATURE CALIBRATION

CTD temperature was calibrated on 30 October 1995 in degrees Centigrade in the 
IPTS-68 scale at fifteen temperatures ranging from 0.99 to 30.1° by the S.E.A. 
corporation. The transfer standard had been calibrated on 20 October 1995 at the 
triple point of water. The following linear fit for CTD temperature was used, with 
a rms error of 0.3 millidegrees.

				T68 =0 .9999239 x T(raw) -0.0111757

CTD PRESSURE CALIBRATION 

CTD pressure was calibrated on 2 November 1995 with a dead-weight tester at ten 
point pressures ranging from 0.0 to 5878.2 dbar by the S.E.A. corporation. The 
following equations for CTD pressure for downcast and up-cast were used, with a 
rms error of 0.11 dbar and 0.08 dbar, respectively.

P(down)	=	0.219960 +1.000173 x P(raw)
		-1.174592E - 7 x P(raw)2 +1.68155E -11 x P(raw)3 (down cast ,full scale)
P(up)'	=	-0.2453189 +0.9999456 x P(raw)
		-7.525608E -8 x P(raw)2 +1.860992E -11 x P(raw)3 (up cast ,full scale)

Digital RTM calibration RTM was calibrated by SIS before shipping. Correction 
values for RTM are listed in Table 15.


Table 15: Digital RTM correction value 'c'.

				T(cal) =T(raw) + c
T777 (date of calibration:3 Nov.1993)
Temperature	   -2	     0	     5	    10	    15	  19.5	    20
c		0.000	-0.001	-0.001	-0.001	-0.001	-0.001	-0.001


DIGITAL RPM CALIBRATION

We used three RPMs, P6184, P6299H, and P6300H. Two of them were calibrated by SIS 
before shipping. P6184 has no calibration data, hence we have done no corrections 
on data from P6184. Correction values for RPMs are listed in Table 16.


Table 16: Digital RPM correction value ''at 3°C.

				P(cal) =P(raw) + c
P6299H (date of calibration:10 Sep.1993)
Pressure	-10	1000	2007	3008	4009	5005	5999
       c	+10	  +1	  -5	  -5	  -5	   0	  +6
P6300H (date of calibration:10 Sep.1993)
Pressure	-5	1001	2006	3008	4008	5007	6003
       c	+5	   0	  -4	  -5	  -4	  -2	  +2


CTD DATA COLLECTION AND PROCESSING

The RS-232C signal from a FSI 1050-deck terminal was taken by a Compaq Deskpro-TM PC 
to log and process data. The CTD data at down-and up-casts were fully logged in 
real time to the RAM disk, and were copied to MO disks after CTD recovery. Data 
were processed on the PC with the software programmed by the members of Nagasaki 
Marine Observatory, according to the method by Millard and Yang (1993).

A time-constant difference between the temperature and conductivity sensors, which 
is necessary for salinity de-spiking, was determined Tau =0 .250 seconds so as to 
minimize fluctuations of salinity profile (Kawabe and Kawasaki, 1993).

The calibration for CTD #1316 was done according to the IPTS-68 scale, temperature 
was converted to the ITS-90 scale by following equation:

				T90 =0 .99976 x T68.

Owing to pressure sensor hysteresis, pressure for up-cast (P up were calculated 
with following equations according to Millard and Yang (1993):

			P(up) =P(up)'(1 - W )+P(down)W
			W = exp ( - ( P(bottom) - P(down)) / Z0,

where, P(bottom) is the maximum pressure for the cast, and Z0 is scaling factor, which 
is 300 dbar for ICTD.


Table 17: Position on rosette of RTM and RPMs.

Inst #	  position
T777	   3
P6184	   3
P6300H	   9
P6299H	  13

Condition of the temperature and pressure sensors during the cruise were monitored 
to some extent through comparisons of CTD measurements with Digital RTM and 
Digital RPM at the time the water bottle was tripped. The position on rosette of 
RTM and RPMs were set are tabulated in Table 17. Any drift exceeding a nominal 
precision of RTM and RPM were not detected for the CTD (*Figure 6 and 7).


*Figure 6: Temperature differences between CTD and Reversing Temperature Meter (RTM)


*Figure 7: Pressure differences between CTD and Reversing Pressure Meter (RPM)


Table 18: Correction coefficients for conductivity sensor of CTD #1316

		C = A x C(raw)' +B
	 Station	 A	   B
P24-01	-P24-02	  1.000626   -0.0110
P24-03	-P24-09	  1.000700   -0.0110
P24-10	-P24-18	  1.000687   -0.0110
P24-19	-P24-26	  1.000701   -0.0110

As mentioned above, we could not carryout pre-and post-cruise calibrations of the 
conductivity sensors. The conductivity data were converted for cell material 
deformation correction at first:

	C(raw)'	=	(1 + alpha (P - P0) + beta (T -T0))C(raw)
	alpha	=	-3.0E -5
	beta	=	1.5E -8
	T0	=	2.8
	P0	=	0.0.

The bias was assumed in advance, and then, the slope was determined from a linear-
fit to the salinities measured from the water samples collected at each station. 
The coefficients for correction finally adopted for the data processing are listed 
in Table 18.

Figure 8 shows the differences between CTD salinity and salinity of water samples. 
Statistical analysis of the difference between the CTD and water sample salinities 
deeper than 2000 m showed a standard deviation less than 0.0023 (all data) and 
less than 0.0008 (exclude three doubtful data, that is, 2275.8 dbar at P24-07, 
2787.1 dbar and 2530.9 dbar at P24-09).

*Figure 8: Differences between CTD salinity and salinity of water samples. Station 
           number vs. salinity difference (deeper than 2000m; left), Pressure vs. salinity 
           difference (right).


REFERENCES

Kawabe, and Kawasaki,1993:CTD Data Calibration. JODC manual guide JP013-93-1, 73 pp
    (in Japanese).
Millard, R.C. and K. Yang,1993:CTD Calibration and Processing Methods used at
    Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. WHOI Technical Report WHOI-93-44, 104 pp.

*All figures shown in pdf file.



FINAL CFC DATA QUALITY EVALUATION (DQE) COMMENTS ON P24.
(David Wisegarver)
Dec 2000 by


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 

         I. Kaneko (ikuo-kaneko@met.kishou.go.jp, knemoto@mri-jma.go.jp)
                                       or
                     David Wisegarver (wise@pmel.noaa.gov)

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

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




WHPO CTD DATA CONSISTENCY CHECK
2002.JAN.15

The WHP-Exchange format bottle and/or CTD data from this cruise have been
examined by a computer application for contents and consistency. The
parameters found for the files are listed, a check is made to see if all
CTD files for this cruise contain the same CTD parameters, a check is made
to see if there is a one-to-one correspondence between bottle station
numbers and CTD station numbers, a check is made to see that pressures
increase through each file for each station, and a check is made to locate
multiple casts for the same station number in the bottle data. Results of
those checks are reported in this '_check.txt' file.

When both bottle and CTD data are available, the CTD salinity data (and, if
available, CTD oxygen data) reported in the bottle data file are subtracted
from the corresponding bottle data and the differences are plotted for the
entire cruise. Those plots are the' _sal.ps' and '_oxy.ps' files.

Following parameters found for bottle file:

     EXPOCODE       DEPTH          SILCAT         CFC-12_FLAG_W
     SECT_ID        CTDPRS         SILCAT_FLAG_W  TRITUM
     STNNBR         CTDTMP         NITRAT         TRITUM_FLAG_W
     CASTNO         CTDSAL         NITRAT_FLAG_W  HELIUM
     SAMPNO         CTDSAL_FLAG_W  NITRIT         HELIUM_FLAG_W
     BTLNBR         SALNTY         NITRIT_FLAG_W  DELHE3
     BTLNBR_FLAG_W  SALNTY_FLAG_W  PHSPHT         DELHE3_FLAG_W
     DATE           CTDOXY         PHSPHT_FLAG_W  DELC14
     TIME           CTDOXY_FLAG_W  CFC-11         DELC14_FLAG_W
     LATITUDE       OXYGEN         CFC-11_FLAG_W  
     LONGITUDE      OXYGEN_FLAG_W  CFC-12  

- All ctd parameters match the parameters in the reference station.
- All stations correspond among all given files.
- No bottle pressure inversions found.
- Bottle file pressures are increasing.

p24_hy1.csv -> contains stations with multiple casts:

  station -> 10: | station -> 15: | station -> 20: | station -> 26:
     2 casts.    |    2 casts.    |    2 casts.    |    2 casts.
  station -> 11: | station -> 16: | station -> 21: | station -> 6:
     2 casts.    |    2 casts.    |    2 casts.    |    2 casts.
  station -> 12: | station -> 17: | station -> 22: | station -> 7:
     2 casts.    |    2 casts.    |    2 casts.    |    2 casts.
  station -> 13: | station -> 18: | station -> 23: | station -> 8:
     2 casts.    |    2 casts.    |    2 casts.    |    2 casts.
  station -> 14: | station -> 19: | station -> 24: | station -> 9:
     2 casts.    |    2 casts.    |    2 casts.    |    2 casts.



WHPO DATA PROCESSING NOTES

Date      Contact      Data Type    Data Status Summary
===============================================================================
02/28/96  Fujimura     DOC          Cruise Rpt Rcvd @ WHPO    

02/28/96  Fujimura     SUM          Submitted    
            
10/16/97  Fujimura     CTD/BTL      Submitted for DQE    
            
08/07/98  Diggs        CTD          Website Updated    
            
12/06/99  Huynh        CTD/BTL/SUM  Data Update  New data files received  

12/06/99  Diggs        DOC          Submitted  Hard copy only  
            
04/20/00  Key          DELC14       No Data Submitted  See Note:
          Unfortunately, I can provide no new information on the C14 
          status for cruises P15N and P24. I do know that acquiring data 
          from CS Wong (P15N) has been very difficult. I'll try to 
          investigate.
            
07/07/00  Huynh        DOC          Website Updated; pdf, txt versions online
             
08/04/00  Saiki        CTD/BTL      Data Status changed to Public
          SALNTY, OXYGEN, NUT's, CFC's and CTD 
          
          I am pleased to inform you that the PIs and participants of the 
          one-time and repeat cruises conducted by the Japan Meteorological 
          Agency's vessels agreed to change most of the data status to 
          public.  The only exception is the He/Tr of P09 and He/Tr, C-14 of 
          P24.  
          
          In this respect, a list of the cruises which we wish to change the 
          status from non-public to public follows for confirmation.
            
08/08/00  Diggs        CTD/BTL      Website Updated; data unencryted
          JMA just released these data and Dave Muus and Jim Swift 
          requested that the data be correctly pressure sorted. That is now 
          done and the files are unencrypted and online.
           
          CTD files are now unencrypted and online as well.
          
          All tables and files associated with this cruise have been updated 
          as well.
            
07/03/01  Wisegarver   CFCs         DQE Complete; precision outside 
          original WOCE standards, meets 'relaxed' standard  In regards to 
          P24, the surface saturation of CFC-12 is about 100% while that of 
          CFC-11 is about 90% at stations 2, 10, 20, 23, and 25. THis 
          difference is greater than normally expected.  Typically, an 
          undersaturation of 10% can be associated with upwelling, deep 
          mixing or convection, but even then, the two gasses are usually 
          close in saturation.
          
          In light of this, CFC-11 QUALT1 flags of '2' (good) for stations 2 
          and 23 have been given QUALT2 flags if '3' (questionable) as well 
          as the shallow low ratio values at stations 10, 17, 20 and 25. 
          With these additional flags, P24 meets the 'relaxed' standard.  We 
          will forward our QUALT2 DQE flag recommendations to the WHP 
          Office.  We will not alter any of the original CFC data or flags 
          sent by your group to the WOCE office for P24.
            
11/16/01  Bartolacci   CFCs         Updated CFCs ready to be merged
          I have placed the updated CFC data file sent by Wisegarver into the 
          P24 original directory in a  subdirectory called 
          2001.07.09_P24_CFC_UPDT_WISEGARVER This directory contains data, 
          documentation and readme files. data are ready for merging
            
01/07/02  Uribe        CTD          Website Updated: CSV File Added  
          CTD has been converted to exchange using the new code and put online.
            
01/17/02  Hajrasuliha  CTD          Internal DQE completed  See Note:
          created .ps files, check with gs viewer.  Created *check.txt file.
            
02/13/02  Swift        He/Tr        Data will not be processed; lack of funding  
          Please update the records for P24 (49RY9511_2).  He/Tr will not be 
          processed due to lack of funds.  Swift talked to Aoyama at the Ocean 
          Sciences meeting yesterday and reminded him of that fact.
            
02/16/02  Diggs        C14          Data ready to be merged
          I have recently located the Radiocarbons for P24 (Aoyama).  They 
          are in the following directory and are ready to merge:
          ...  data/onetime/pacific/p24/original/20011129_P24_C14_AOYAMA
          I did some refomatting to get them into WOCE format and should 
          merge without problems.
            
02/26/02  Muus         DELC14       Data Merged into new online BTL & CSV files 
          - Merged DELC14 and C14ERR into web bottle file.
          - Added QUALT2 same as QUALT1.
          - Put new woce format and exchange format bottle files on-line.
          
          Notes on P24  merging     Feb 26, 2002  D.Muus
          
          1. Merged DELC14 and C14ERR from:                        
             File p24hy.mao received from M. Aoyama Nov 29, 2001. 
             into bottle file from web (20010327WHPOSIOKJU)
          
          2. SUMMARY file has parameter code 12 (C14) on Stations 2/1, 6/1, 
             6/2, 14/1, 14/2, 17/1, 17/2, 23/1, 23/2, 26/1 and 26/2.
             New data file (p24hy.mao) has C14 data for Stations 17/1, 17/2, 
             23/1 and 23/2 only. Left SUMMARY file unchanged.
          
          3. Changed all remaining quality code "1"s to "9"s and made QUALT2 
             word same as QUALT1.
          
          4. Made new exchange file for Bottle data.
          
          5. Checked new bottle file with Java Ocean Atlas.
                    
06/25/02  Kappa        DOC          Cruise Report updated
          Added CFC DQE Report, CTD Data Consistency Check, and WHPO Data 
          Processing Notes to both PDF and TXT documents.


