CRUISE REPORT: SR03
(Updated FEB 2019)








Highlights





                        Cruise Summary Information

               Section Designation  SR03 (IN1801, IN2018_V01, P11S, S04)
Expedition designation (ExpoCodes)  096U20180111
                  Chief Scientists  Steve Rintoul / CSIRO
                             Dates  2018 JAN 11 - 2018 FEB 22
                              Ship  R/V Investigator
                     Ports of call  Hobart

                                                44°0'5.4"S
             Geographic Boundaries  131°59'59"E            150°0'54.7"E
                                                66°25'36"S

                          Stations  108 CTD vertical profile stations
      Floats and drifters deployed  29 floats deployed
    Moorings deployed or recovered  0

                           Contact Information:

                              Steve Rintoul
            GPO Box 1538 • Hobart, Tasmania • 7001 • Australia
                          steve.rintoul@csiro.au
















                ace 
                CRC

          ANTARCTIC CLIMATE
            & ECOSYSTEMS
     Cooperative Research Centre








 RV Investigator Marine Science Cruise IN1801 (CSIRO Voyage Designation 
IN2018_V01), SR3 Plus Additional Southern Transects - Oceanographic Field 
                        Measurements and Analysis


                              MARK ROSENBERG
                        ACE CRC, Hobart, Australia

                              STEVE RINTOUL
        CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Hobart, Australia


                      unpublished    September, 2018



























                             LIST OF CONTENTS




                                                                     Page


ABSTRACT                                                               6

1  INTRODUCTION                                                        6

2  CTD INSTRUMENTATION                                                 8

3  PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED                                                9

4  CTD DATA PROCESSING AND CALIBRATION                                11

5  CTD AND BOTTLE DATA RESULTS AND DATA QUALITY                       12

   5.1  Conductivity/salinity                                         12
   5.2  Temperature                                                   14
   5.3  Pressure                                                      14
   5.4  Dissolved oxygen                                              15
   5.5  Fluorescence, backscatter, PAR, transmittance/beam 
        attenuation, altimeter                                        16
   5.6  Nutrients                                                     17
   5.7  Additional CTD data processing/quality notes                  17

6  UNDERWAY MEASUREMENTS                                              18

7  INTERCRUISE COMPARISONS                                            18

8  FILE FORMATS                                                       19

APPENDIX 1  HYDROCHEMISTRY LAB/VOYAGE REPORT                          31

APPENDIX 2  HYDROCHEMISTRY DATA PROCESSING REPORT                     39

APPENDIX 3  CFC LAB REPORT                                            69

REFERENCES                                                            72

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS                                                      73

CCHDO Data Processing Notes                                           73








                              LIST OF TABLES




                                                                     Page


Table 1:  Summary of station information for cruise in1801.           20

Table 2:  CTD calibration coefficients and calibration dates 
          for cruise in1801.                                          21

Table 3:  CTD conductivity calibration coefficients 
          for cruise in1801.                                          22

Table 4:  Station-dependent-corrected conductivity slope term 
          (F2 + F3 . N), for station number N, and F2 and F3 the 
          conductivity slope and station-dependent correction 
          calibration terms respectively, for cruise in1801.          23

Table 5:  Surface pressure offsets (i.e. poff in dbar) 
          for cruise in1801.                                          24

Table 6:  CTD dissolved oxygen calibration coefficients 
          for cruise in1801.                                          24

Table 7:  Missing data points in 2 dbar-averaged files 
          for cruise in1801.                                          26

Table 8:  Suspect CTD 2 dbar averages (not deleted from the 
          CTD 2 dbar average files) for the indicated parameters, 
          for cruise in1801.                                          26

Table 9:  Obvious bad salinity bottle samples (not deleted from 
          bottle data file) for cruise in1801.                        27

Table 10: Suspect (qc flag=3) and bad (qc flag=4) dissolved oxygen 
          bottle values for cruise in1801.                            27

Table 11: Suspect (qc flag=3) and bad (qc flag=4) nutrient sample 
          values for cruise in1801.                                   28 

Table 12: Scientific personnel (cruise participants) 
          for cruise in1801.                                          28

Table 13: Summary of float deployments on cruise in1801.              29







                             LIST OF FIGURES
                            (see PDF version)




                                                                     


Figure 1:  CTD station positions and ship's track for cruise 
           in1801.                                                    

Figure 2:  Conductivity ratio cbtl/ccal versus station number 
           for cruise in1801.                                         

Figure 3:  Salinity residual (sbtl - scal) versus station number 
           for cruise in1801.                                         

Figure 4:  Difference between secondary and primary temperature 
           sensors with (a) pressure, and (b) temperature.            

Figure 5:  Dissolved oxygen residual (obtl - ocal) versus station 
           number for cruise in1801.                                  

Figure 6:  Nitrate+nitrite versus phosphate data for cruise in1801.   

Figure 7a: Bulk plots showing intercruise comparisons of nitrate+
           nitrite vs phosphate data for SR3 (low end of nutrient 
           values not included in plot).                              

Figure 7b: Bulk plots showing intercruise comparisons of nitrate+
           nitrite vs phosphate data for south end of SR3 (includ-
           ing cruises au1402 and au1602).                            

Figure 8:  Bulk plots showing intercruise comparisons of silicate 
           data for SR3, shown as bottle salinity vs silicate (low 
           end of silicate values not included in plot).              

Figure 9:  Bulk plots showing intercruise comparisons of dissolved 
           oxygen data for SR3, shown as bottle salinity vs bottle 
           dissolved oxygen (and only plotting data below 500 dbar).  












 
 RV Investigator Marine Science Cruise IN1801 (CSIRO Voyage Designation 
IN2018_V01), SR3 Plus Additional Southern Transects - Oceanographic Field 
                        Measurements and Analysis


     MARK ROSENBERG (ACE CRC, Hobart) and STEVE RINTOUL (CSIRO CMAR)

                             September, 2018




ABSTRACT

Oceanographic measurements were collected aboard RV Investigator cruise 
in1801 (CSIRO voyage designation in2018_v01) from 11th January to 22nd 
February 2018, along CLIVAR Southern Ocean repeat meridional section SR3, 
followed by Adelie land shelf stations, small meridional sections along 
150E (the south end of CLIVAR section P11S) and 132E, and several 
stations along CLIVAR zonal section S4. A total of 108 CTD vertical 
profile stations were taken on the cruise, most to within 14 metres of 
the bottom. Over 2800 Niskin bottle water samples were collected for the 
measurement of salinity, dissolved oxygen, nutrients (phosphate, 
nitrate+nitrite, silicate, ammonia and nitrite), CFC’s plus tracers (CFC-
11, CFC-12, SF6 and N2O), dissolved inorganic carbon (i.e. TCO2), 
alkalinity, pH, C13/C14, genomics, HPLC, POC, chlorophyll, radiogenic 
isotopes, helium, ice nucleation, and Ca/Mg, using a 36 bottle rosette 
sampler. Full depth current profiles were collected by an LADCP attached 
to the CTD package. Upper water column current profile data were 
collected by a ship mounted ADCP (75 kHz). Trace metal rosette and in 
situ pump deployments were done at some of the CTD stations. 
Meteorological and water property data were collected by the array of 
ship's underway sensors. A large assortment of 29 drifting floats was 
deployed throughout the cruise. A summary of all CTD data and data 
quality is presented in this report.




1  INTRODUCTION

Marine science cruise in1801 (CSIRO voyage designation in2018_v01) was 
conducted aboard the RV Investigator from January to February 2018. The 
major constituent of the cruise was the tenth complete occupation of the 
CLIVAR SR3 CTD section south of Tasmania, completed from north to south, 
followed by CTD’s at (in order):

* 6 Adelie Land shelf stations
* a Ninja float deployment site
* 11 stations south to north along 150E (the southern end of CLIVAR P11S 
  section)
* 10 stations east to west along CLIVAR S4 section
* 18 stations north to south along 132E (including a station occupied by 
  the Eltanin in the 1970’s)
* 2 northern stations (part of the CAPRICORN meteorology project on the 
  cruise) 

giving a total of 108 CTD stations (Figure 1, Table 1).


The primary scientific objectives for the oceanography were:

1. to measure changes in water mass properties and inventories throughout 
   the full ocean depth between Australia and Antarctica along SR3;

2. to estimate the transport of mass, heat and other properties south of 
   Australia, and to compare the results to previous occupations of the 
   SR3 line and other sections in the Australian sector;

3. to quantify changes in Antarctic Bottom Water in the Australian 
   Antarctic Basin;

4. to quantify the evolving inventory of heat, freshwater, oxygen, CFCs, 
   and carbon dioxide in the upper 2000 m and to infer changes in the 
   ventilation rate of intermediate waters and ocean acidification;

5. to determine the distributions of trace metals and isotopes, their 
   change with time, and the physical, chemical and biological processes 
   controlling those evolving distributions.

(the last of these was part of the trace metal project, not discussed 
further).

This report describes the CTD and Niskin bottle data and data quality for 
this cruise. All information required for use of the data set is 
presented in tabular and graphical form. CTD station positions are shown 
in Figure 1, while CTD station information is summarised in Table 1. 
Float deployments are summarised in Table 13. The hydrochemistry lab 
report and detailed data processing report (by the cruise hydrochemists 
Christine Rees, Kendall Sherrin, Stephen Tibben and Kristina Paterson) 
are in Appendix 1 and 2 respectively. The CFC lab report (by Mark Warner) 
is in Appendix 3. Data from the LADCP and ADCP are not discussed further.


Summary of cruise itinerary:

Voyage Designation  in1801  (CSIRO voyage in2018_v01)

Chief Scientist     Steve Rintoul (CSIRO CMAR)

Ship                RV Investigator

Main projects       Physical Oceanography, Trace Metal, 
                    CAPRICORN (meteorology) 

Ports of Call       Hobart

Cruise Dates        Jan 11th – Feb 22nd 2018



2  CTD INSTRUMENTATION

SeaBird SBE9plus CTD (CSIRO serial #24) was used, with dual temperature 
(SBE3Plus), conductivity (SBE4C) and dissolved oxygen (SBE43) sensors, 
mounted on a SeaBird 36 bottle rosette frame, together with a SBE32 36 
position pylon and 36 x 12 litre Ocean Test Equipment Niskin bottles. A 
fin was mounted on the frame, to help minimize package spin. The 
following additional sensors/instruments were mounted:

* Wetlabs FLBBRTD (scattering meter and fluorometer) serial 4799
* Biospherical Instruments PAR sensor QCP2300HP, serial 70111
* Wetlabs C-star transmissometer serial 1421DR
* Teledyne RDI lowered ADCP (i.e. LADCP) workhorse monitor – 300 kHz 
  head looking upward, 150 kHz head looking
* Tritech 200 kHz altimeter serial 05300.313642
* Tritech 500 kHz altimeter serial 05301.228403
* CSIRO Intertial Motion Unit (data coming up serial line)

15 seal tags (from Clive McMahon, IMAS) were secured to the frame on 
stations 1 to 4 and 57 to 66, for calibration of the tags against CTD 
data.

CTD data were transmitted up a 8 mm seacable to a SBE11plusV2 deck unit, 
at a rate of 24 Hz, and logged using SeaBird data acquisition software 
"Seasave" (version unknown).

The CTD deployment method was as follows:

* CTD initially deployed down to ~10 to 20 m
* after confirmation of pump operation, CTD returned up to just below the 
  surface (depth dependent on sea state, though in most cases it was on 
  the conservative side)
* after returning to just below the surface, downcast proper commenced

Pre-cruise temperature, conductivity and pressure calibrations (Table 2, 
including calibration dates) were performed by CSIRO and SeaBird. For the 
SBE43 oxygen sensors, these calibrations were used for initial data 
display only. Manufacturer supplied calibrations were used for the 
transmissometer, PAR, altimeters and FLBB. “Dark” profiles for the FLBB 
were measured on stations 25 and 106 by taping over the FLBB sensors, and 
these dark values were used to correct backscatter and fluorescence data. 
Deck measurements of path open and path blocked voltages were used to 
correct transmissometer data. Final conductivity and dissolved oxygen 
calibrations derived from in situ Niskin bottle samples are listed later 
in the report. Final transmissometer data are referenced to a clean water 
value.





3  PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED

The main problem on the cruise was a medivac early on. After completing 
CTD 8 on day 3, all work was paused for a return to Hobart with a sick 
crewman. Back in the Derwent River the ship parked for a short time off 
Wrest Point while the crewman was taken ashore by FRC. The ship then 
returned south to resume work at CTD 9, with a total of 39 hours lost in 
the roundtrip. An extra day of ship time was granted to compensate.

CTD winch spooling problems were a constant throughout the cruise. A 
small mismatch of the spooler with the wire feed occurs as the winch drum 
rapidly spins during heave compensation events. This mismatch cumulates 
throughout a cast, requiring several stops for spooler realignment. Over 
the whole cruise this added up to several hours lost.

Heave compensation was engaged for most of the cruise, however it did not 
accurately match ship’s motion. There was clearly a lag between ship 
motion and response of the heave compensation, evident in the jagged CTD 
profile features in steep gradients in the upper water column. Heave 
compensation was briefly turned off during station 104 in an attempt to 
reduce tension spiking during a period of large ship rolls, but it became 
clear that the situation was better with heave compensation on – some 
evidence that at least heave compensation was having an effect in the 
right direction. Any errant profile features should mostly be removed 
during 2 dbar averaging.

The dreaded winch software “e-stops” occurred on several stations – 
software error messages with an unknown cause, and requiring winch 
software reset. Additional winch software problems came and went 
throughout the cruise, including no tension display, and inability to 
enter wire speed.

A spooling problem on the upcast of station 83 (possibly as deep as 3000 
dbar) was not noticed in time, and as a result the spooling was a bit of 
a mess for the remainder of the upcast, with numerous bad wraps, 
particularly near the cheeks. This was fixed during the downcast of 
station 84 with a slow and cautious descent, making numerous stops for 
manual spooler repositioning.

During periods of higher well with more rolling of the ship, wire tension 
problems often occurred when the rosette was near surface at the start 
and end of the cast. This appears to be a problem with the 36 bottle 
package, which has lots of drag through the water. The result is 
slackening and shock loading of the CTD wire, causing wire kinks. 65 kg 
of weight was added to the bottom of the frame prior to station 26 to try 
and improve things. Overall, this “snapping” of the wire with the rosette 
near surface meant caution was needed when returning the rosette close to 
the surface for commencement of the downcast proper. In general this near 
surface value was conservative, and as a result numerous casts are 
missing the top 8 to 10 dbar of data. In addition, on several occasions 
the shallowest Niskin had to be fired fast, without the usual wait for 
equilibration (e.g. stations 24 and 48). The following CTD wire 
reterminations were required, due to various degrees of wire kinking: 
mechanical only prior to station 20; mechanical and electrical prior to 
station 21.

The trace metal rosette deployment method designed in port, using the 
coring winch below deck, failed early on in the cruise. The whole 
deployment method required changing, and the CTD winch used initially for 
CTD 1 to 5 was now needed for trace metal rosette deployments. CTD ops 
were changed to the second CTD winch for stations 6 onwards.

The CTD door was often very slow moving during opening and closing. This 
sluggish behaviour was attributed to the effect of cold on the door 
hydraulics. Heaters were left on in the CTD room at agreed times, to try 
and improve things.

For the hull mounted ADCP, the 150 kHz head was not working - only 75 kHz 
data were available.

Niskin bottle leakage was a significant problem on the cruise. The main 
offender was top cap leakage, occurring frequently and for many bottles. 
The problem was traced to the non-standard large cylindrical floats on 
the top Niskin lanyards, combined with the tight long lanyard to the 
bottom cap – together these placed stress on the top caps during recovery 
of the rosette, causing frequent top cap leaks. Half the Niskins (the 
most common leakers) were relanyarded, using the standard small white 
balls for floats, and joining the long lanyard to the top lanyard at a 
more central position (thus avoiding the tight lanyard to the bottom cap 
after bottle closure). There were insufficient small white balls on board 
to relanyard all the Niskins. Top cap leakage was dramatically reduced 
after the relanyarding, with only the occasional leak occurring. Note 
that top cap leakers were still sampled, and in almost all cases the 
salinity, oxygen and CFC samples were good – showing that leakage 
occurred after the rosette left the water. Fortunately for the gas 
samples this premature top cap “opening” was insufficient to contaminate 
water drawn from the bottom of a Niskin; assisted also by CFC and oxygen 
sampling being at the start of the sampling order.

Mobile pack ice was reasonably close to the ship during stations 69 and 
70, so the ship was allowed to drift north with the pack at ~1 knot 
during these CTD’s, rather than holding station.

Temperature sensor changes were required at stations 11 and 13, to first 
identify and then replace the sensor with calibration issues (serial 
6189).

A small amount of bad oxygen data (both primary and secondary) were first 
observed at station 86, an indicator of a developing fault. At station 88 
both oxygen sensors went bad near the start of the downcast. The package 
was retrieved and the y-cable to the oxygen sensors replaced, fixing the 
problem.

Primary salinity was fouled at ~307 dbar on the upcast of station 41, 
with values shifting and never coming good. Sea snot was removed from 
around the sensor inlet after the cast, however a small S2-S1 difference 
remained for station 42. After the cast the primary line was backflushed 
from the outlet end, fixing the problem.

Secondary conductivity was fouled at ~3200 dbar on the upcast of station 
92. The fouling mostly disappeared at ~3050 dbar on the upcast, however a 
subtle sensor difference remained, and it is unclear whether the tiny 
remnant fouling was ever fully removed.

A small number of Niskins pre-tripped, the most obvious occasions being 
for Niskin 24 on stations 21 and 23, and Niskins 25 and 29 on stations 25 
and 26.




4  CTD DATA PROCESSING AND CALIBRATION

Preliminary CTD data processing was done at sea, to confirm correct 
functioning of instrumentation. Final processing of the data was done in 
Hobart. The first processing step is application of a suite of the 
SeaBird "Seasoft" processing programs to the raw data, in order to:

* convert raw data signals to engineering units
* remove the surface pressure offset for each station
* realign the oxygen sensor with respect to time (note that conductivity 
  sensor alignment is done by the deck unit at the time of data logging)
* remove conductivity cell thermal mass effects
* apply a low pass filter to the pressure data
* flag pressure reversals
* search for bad data (e.g. due to sensor fouling etc)

Further processing and data calibration were done in a MS-Windows 
environment, using a suite of fortran and matlab programs. Processing 
steps here include:

* forming upcast burst CTD data for calibration against bottle data,   
  where each upcast burst is the average of 10 seconds of data centered 
  on each Niskin bottle firing
* merging bottle and CTD data, and deriving CTD conductivity calibration 
  coefficients by comparing upcast CTD burst average conductivity data 
  with calculated equivalent bottle sample conductivities
* forming pressure monotonically increasing data, and from there 
  calculating 2 dbar averaged downcast CTD data
* calculating calibrated 2 dbar averaged salinity from the 2 dbar 
  pressure, temperature and conductivity values
* deriving CTD dissolved oxygen calibration coefficients by comparing 
  bottle sample dissolved oxygen values (collected on the upcast) with 
  CTD dissolved oxygen values from the equivalent 2 dbar downcast 
  pressures

Full details of the data calibration and processing methods are given in 
Rosenberg et al. (unpublished), referred to hereafter as the CTD 
methodology. Additional processing steps are discussed below in the 
results section. For calibration of the CTD oxygen data, split profile 
fits were used for most stations deeper than 1400 dbar, with the 
exception of stations 7, 13, 57 and 93, where whole profile fits were 
used (better results than the split profile fits). Whole profile fits 
were used for stations shallower than 1400 dbar (stations 1-3, 41, 58-66, 
94-95, 107-108).

Final station header information, including station positions at the 
start, bottom and end of each CTD cast, were obtained from underway data 
for the cruise (see section 6 below). Note the following for the station 
header information:

* All times are UTC.
* "Start of cast" information is at the commencement of the downcast 
  proper, as described above.
* "Bottom of cast" information is at the maximum pressure value.
* "End of cast" information is when the CTD leaves the water at the end 
  of the cast, as indicated by a drop in salinity values.
* All start and end of cast bottom depth values are corrected for local 
  sound speed, where sound speed values are calculated from the CTD data 
  at each station.
* "Bottom of cast" depths are calculated from CTD maximum pressure 
  (converted to depth) and altimeter values at the bottom of the casts.

Lastly, data were converted to MATLAB format, and final data quality 
checking was done within MATLAB.




5  CTD AND BOTTLE DATA RESULTS AND DATA QUALITY

Data from the secondary CTD sensors (temperature, conductivity and 
dissolved oxygen) were used for the whole cruise. Suspect CTD 2 dbar 
averages are listed in Table 8, while suspect and bad nutrient data are 
listed in Table 11. Nutrient and dissolved oxygen comparisons to previous 
cruises are made in section 7. Hydrochemistry lab and data processing 
reports are in Appendices 1 and 2. The CFC lab report is in Appendix 3.


5.1  Conductivity/salinity

The conductivity calibration and equivalent salinity results for the 
cruise are plotted in Figures 2 and 3, and the derived conductivity 
calibration coefficients are listed in Tables 3 and 4. Station groupings 
used for the calibration are included in Table 3. A single duplicate 
salinity sample was taken for most stations, usually from Niskin 2, as a 
quality check. International standard seawater batch numbers P161 (expiry 
date 03/05/2020) and P158 (expiry date 25/03/2018) were used for 
salinometer standardisations. Lab temperature for salinity analyses 
mostly ranged between 20 and 24°C over the course of the cruise (see lab 
temperature figure at the end of Appendix 1).

Two Guildline Autosals serials 71613 and 72151 were used over the course 
of the cruise, with analyses taking place in the salinity lab. 
Salinometer performance overall was mostly good, though a few problems 
were encountered during the cruise, including:

- bubble trouble when running the station 47 samples;
- unstable performance of salinometer 71613 when analysing station 47 or 
  48 (unclear which from lab notes); anaylsis shifted to salinometer 
  72151 for remainder of the day;
- cell flush/rinse problems for salinometer 72151 during analysis of 
  station 99, due to build up of contamination at the end of the flow 
  path.

Full details can be found in the hydrochemistry reports (Appendices 1 and 
2). Overall CTD salinity accuracy for the cruise is well within 0.002 
(PSS78) (Figure 3).

The following station groupings were used for CTD conductivity 
calibration: 

Group 1 = station 1-11
Group 2 = station 12-80
Group 3 = station 81-108

The initial group change after station 11 was due to temperature sensor 
changes. The large group sizes after that are an indication of reasonably 
stable CTD conductivity cell performance for the cruise. Subtle outlier 
stations in the post calibration salinity residuals (of the order 0.001 
PSS78 e.g. stations 7 and 8) are more likely due to salinometer 
performance.

For initial calibration of the CTD conductivity against bottle data, the 
CPCOR conductivity coefficient was set to the factory recommended value 
of -9.57e-8. Significant pressure dependence of the CTD-bottle residuals 
remained, with a maximum range of ~0.004 PSS78 over the deep profiles.
Compressibility of the borosilicate glass in a CTD conductivity cell is 
individual to each cell (SeaBird, pers. comm.), meaning the recommended 
value is not suitable as a blanket application for all sensors. CPCOR for 
the secondary conductivity cell was changed to -8.45e-8 and the data 
recalibrated/reprocessed, thereby minimizing the pressure dependent 
salinity residual. Any remaining pressure dependency was insignificant.

The 36 bottle package drags more water than the 24 bottle system, and as 
a result more sample equilibration time is required in steeper vertical 
gradients in the upper water column. The standard 30 second bottle stop 
(prior to firing) was adhered to for most of the cruise, but salinity 
residuals (i.e. bottle-CTD) were still high in the steep gradients, 
rendering those samples unusable for CTD conductivity calibration. For 
station 85 onwards 60 second bottle stops were adopted in the upper 
profile where a steep gradient was present. This dramatically improved 
the bottle-CTD salinity comparisons in those parts of the water column.

Several inserts for the salinity sample bottles were damaged, going 
unnoticed and remaining in circulation until station 83, and resulting in 
several bad samples.

Close inspection of the vertical profiles of the bottle-CTD salinity 
difference values reveals a slight biasing for a few stations, of the 
order 0.001 (PSS78) or less, as follows:


station  bottle-CTD bias (PSS78)   station  bottle-CTD bias (PSS78)
———————  ———————————————————————   ———————  ———————————————————————
   7     +0.001                      48     +0.0005 above 2000 dbar    
   8     +0.001                      57     -0.0005  
  11     -0.001 below ~1100 dbar     58     -0.001  
  13     -0.001 below ~1000 dbar     61     -0.0015  
  15     +0.0005 below ~1100 dbar    68     -0.0005  
  17     +0.0005                     71     -0.0005  
  19     -0.001 below ~1100 dbar     81     +0.0005  
  21     -0.0005 below ~1100 dbar    82     -0.001  
  25     -0.0005                     83     +0.0005  
  26     -0.0005                     84     +0.0005  
  28     +0.0005 below ~1100 dbar    90     small p dependence 
                                            remains, +0.001 at top,  
                                            -0.001 at bottom 
  39     -0.0005                     47     -0.001 below 2000 dbar  
  98     -0.0005                    102     -0.0005


This is most likely due to a combination of factors, including 
salinometer performance. There is no significant diminishing of overall 
CTD salinity accuracy from this apparent biasing.

Bad salinity bottle samples (not deleted from the data files) are listed 
in Table 9.


5.2  Temperature

Temperature differences between the primary and secondary CTD temperature 
sensors (Tp and Ts respectively), from data at Niskin bottle stops, are 
shown in Figure 4. Temperature sensor changes were required at stations 
11 and 13, to first identify and then replace the sensor with a 
calibration problem (serial 6189) (evident in Figure 4). For station 14 
onwards, with 2 well calibrated temperature sensors in place, sensor 
difference is less than 0.0005°C over all depths, with no obvious 
pressure dependence (Figure 4a), and no obvious temperature dependence 
(Figure 4b). Despite these sensor changes, a good temperature sensor 
always remained in the secondary sensor position (serial 6180 for 
stations 1-11 and 14-108; serial 4522 for stations 12-13).


5.3  Pressure

Surface pressure offsets for each cast (Table 5) were obtained from 
inspection of the data before the package entered the water. Pressure 
spiking, a problem on some previous cruises, did not occur.




5.4  Dissolved oxygen

CTD oxygen data were calibrated as per the CTD methodology, with profiles 
deeper than 1400 dbar calibrated as split profile fits, and profiles 
shallower than 1400 dbar calibrated as whole profile fits – with the 
exception of stations 7, 13, 57 and 93, all deeper than 1400 dbar and for 
which whole profile fits were used (better results than the split profile 
fits). To summarise:

whole profile fits used for stations 
               1-3, 7, 13, 41, 57-66, 93-95, 107-108
split profile fits used for stations 
               2-6,8-12, 14-40, 42-56, 67-92, 96-106

Calibration results are plotted in Figure 5, and the derived calibration 
coefficients are listed in Table 6. Oxygen bottle data were high quality, 
with only a minimum number of bad and suspect samples (Table 10) (many of 
the bad samples were due to pre-tripping Niskins, discussed in section 
3). Overall, the calibrated CTD oxygen agrees with the bottle data to 
within 1% of full scale (where full scale is ~370 µmol/l above 750 dbar, 
and ~260 µmol/l below 750 dbar) i.e. from the standard deviation values 
in Figure 5. Cruise lab and data processing notes, including sample 
analysis method, are in the hydrochemistry reports (Appendices 1 and 2).

* For some stations, the top of the upcast and downcast differ due to 
  ocean variability, stations 4 and 5 in particular. Numerous bottle 
  rejections were required to calibrate these two stations, and a meld 
  point (between shallow and deep calibrations in the split profile fit) 
  of 2000 dbar was used (usually 1500 dbar for stations of this depth, as 
  per CTD methodology).

* For station 21, the bottom 2 oxygen samples were not available for 
  calibration (bottle 1 titration bad, and bottle 2 suspect); as a 
  result, CTD oxygen is possibly low by ~2 µmol/l for 3600 to 3854 dbar 
  i.e. the bottom part of the profile.

* For station 107, the bottom oxygen sample was bad, so the bottom part 
  of the CTD oxygen profile (850 to 1002 dbar) is suspect.

* The small number of missing deep CTD oxygen data bins for stations 10, 
  12, 46 and 100 (Table 7) are due to sensor fouling.

* Close comparison of CTD oxygen profiles with bottle data reveal a 
  number of near surface CTD profile segments which are slightly low. The 
  magnitude is ~1% or less of the expected CTD oxygen accuracy, and the 
  data are therefore not flagged as suspect. Specifically:

station  pressure(dbar)        CTD oxygen
———————  ——————————————  ——————————————————————
   1          6-14       low by up to ~5 µmol/l
  20          8-12       low by up to ~4 µmol/l
  25         10-12       low by ~3 µmol/l
  59          6-18       low by up to ~4 µmol/l
  63          6-12       low by up to ~4 µmol/l
  67          8-16       low by up to ~3 µmol/l
  68          6-20       low by up to ~4 µmol/l
  73          8-12       low by up to ~4 µmol/l
  82          6-20       low by up to ~4 µmol/l
  83          8-22       low by up to ~4 µmol/l
 100          4-18       low by up to ~4 µmol/l
 105         10-28       low by up to ~4 µmol/l


5.5  Fluorescence, backscatter, PAR, transmittance/beam attenuation, 
     altimeter

Note that fluorescence and backscatter data come from the FLBB sensor; 
and transmittance and beam attenuation are different data calculations 
derived from the same transmissometer sensor voltage. All fluorescence, 
backscatter, PAR and transmittance/beam attenuation data have a 
manufacturer supplied calibration (Table 2) applied to the data, with 
transmittance/beam attenuation values referenced to clean water. For 
fluorescence and backscatter, “dark profiles” were collected on stations 
25 and 106 by taping over the FLBB sensors. Fluorescence and backscatter 
data were recalculated using these field dark voltage values (and note 
that these are the dark voltages listed in Table 2). For 
transmittance/beam attenuation, an additional field correction was made 
to the calibration by measuring the on deck path open and path blocked 
voltage values.

In the CTD 2dbar averaged data files, both downcast and upcast data are 
supplied for fluorescence, PAR and transmittance. Note that upcast 2 dbar 
backscatter data, with the sensor in the wake of the rosette package, are 
considered suspect, as particles are potentially broken up by the rosette 
(Emmanuel Boss, pers. com.). Backscatter CTD upcast burst average data in 
the bottle data files are on the other hand considered okay, as the 
package is in theory stationary (other than the obvious motion with the 
swell). Note that all 2 dbar data for these sensors are strictly 2 dbar 
averages (as distinct from other calculations used in previous cruises 
i.e. au0703, au0803 and au0806).

For fluorescence and transmittance/beam attenuation, the 2 dbar averaged 
upcast data (in the CTD 2 dbar files) do not always match the upcast 10 
second burst average data (in the bottle data file). This is due to the 
difference between 2 dbar and 10 second averaging on data with 
significant vertical structure.

The PAR calibration coefficients in Table 2 were calculated from the 
manufacturer supplied calibration sheet, using the method described in 
the following SeaBird documents: page 53 of SeaSave Version 7.2 manual; 
Application Note No. 11 General; and Application Note No. 11 QSP-L.

The usual altimeter “artefacts”, as seen on previous cruises (described 
in Rosenberg and Rintoul, unpublished-1), were observed on both the 200 
and 500 kHz Tritech sensors, with false bottom readings often observed 
before coming within nominal altimeter range. While doing a cast at sea, 
these artefacts are easily identifiable by simultaneously plotting the 
200 and 500 kHz data during logging – artefacts are identifiable by a 
mismatch between plots for the two altimeters.

Maximum transmittance values are slightly more than the expected 100%, 
and beam attenuation values are equivalently slightly less than the 
expected 0 value, due to a small calibration error (possibly by 
referencing to clean water).

* For stations 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6, suspect small segments of downcast 
  transmittance/beam attenuation CTD 2 dbar data are listed in Table 8.

* Fluorescence and backscatter data for stations 25 and 106 are not 
  included in the files, as the FLBB sensors were taped over to collect 
  dark profiles.


5.6  Nutrients

Nutrients measured were phosphate, total nitrate (i.e. nitrate+nitrite), 
silicate, ammonia and nitrite, using a SEAL Autoanalyzer 3 HR (AA3) (a 
continuous segmented flower analyser). Samples were run within 12 hours 
of collection, either kept in the dark or refrigerated prior to analysis. 
Full lab and data processing details are in the hydrochemistry reports 
(Appendices 1 and 2). Laboratory temperatures for nutrient analyses 
ranged between 19 and 22°C over the course of the cruise, except for 
station 108 where the temperature was slightly higher at ~22.7°C.

Suspect and bad nutrient data are listed in Table 11, and nitrate+nitrite 
versus phosphate data are shown in Figure 6. The following full scale 
values apply to the analyses: 3.0 µmol/l for phosphate; 42.0 µmol/l for 
nitrate+nitrite; 140 µmol/l for silicate; 2.0 µmol/l for ammonia; 1.4 
µmol/l for nitrite. Phosphate depletion for shallow samples, consistent 
with previous cruises (Rosenberg et al., unpublished-1, 2 and 3), can be 
seen in Figure 6 as a tail of lower phosphate values around the 25 µmol/l 
nitrate+nitrite level. For cruise in1801, these lower phosphates all come 
from the top 100 dbar and south of 54oS. Further assessment of nutrient 
data quality is given in section 7 below, comparing the data to previous 
cruises.

Overall nutrient data quality is considered very good, and possibly the 
best to date measured on the SR3 transect. Measurements within the cruise 
are consistent, profile shapes look good, and scatter is low. Note that 
flagging of ammonia and nitrite data may not be complete - at the low 
levels at which these nutrients are measured, suspect data can sometimes 
be hard to pick. Flag values have all been left at 2 for these two 
nutrients.


5.7  Additional CTD data processing/quality notes

For some stations, heave compensation error of the CTD winch, discussed 
above in section 3, resulted in jagged features in the 24 Hz CTD profile 
data in steep gradients in the upper water column. Any errant profile 
features should mostly be removed during 2 dbar averaging.

At station 71, the CTD was initially taken down to ~200 dbar then 
returned to near surface to check sensor performance. This initial yoyo 
down to 200 dbar was removed from the 24 Hz data prior to processing.




6  UNDERWAY MEASUREMENTS

Underway data, logged by the full suite of Marine National Facility (MNF) 
underway water and meteorological sensors, are available on request. The 
MNF data file in2018_v01uwy.nc contains 5 sec instantaneous data in 
netcdf format, with data from all sensors merged and synchronised. For 
most sensors there has been no quality control, so there may be a few 
suspect data points (in particular for underway sea surface conductivity 
and salinity). Along track bathymetry data from the 18 kHz sounder 
(multibeam was not run on this voyage) are also available on request, as 
5 sec instantaneous data in the files in1801bath.alf (text format) and 
in1801bathalf.mat (matlab format). Bottom depths in these files are from 
the water surface, and calculated using sound speed 1500 m/s. (Note that 
bottom depths in all CTD data files are corrected for local sound speed). 
At the time of writing, the 18 kHz data have not yet been quality 
controlled (i.e. by manually line-picking the bottom in bathymetry data 
processing software).




7  INTERCRUISE COMPARISONS

Intercruise comparisons of nitrate+nitrite vs phosphate, silicate and 
dissolved oxygen bottle data compare data from cruise in1801 with 
previous cruises. For the whole SR3 line, comparisons are made to Aurora 
Australis cruises au9407, au9404, au9501, au9601, au0103, au0806 and 
au1121, ranging over the years 1994 to 2011 (i.e. former occupations of 
the entire SR3 line, with the omission of au9101 and au9309) (Figures 7a, 
8 and 9). At the south end of SR3, comparisons are made to Aurora 
Australis cruises au9407, au9404, au0103, au0806, au1121, au1402 and 
au1602, ranging over the years 1994 to 2015 (Figure 7b). For au1402 and 
au1602, note that nutrients were frozen and returned home for analysis.

For nitrate+nitrite vs phosphate, cruises au9407, au9404, au9501, au0806 
and au1121 all approximately overlay in1801 (Figure 7a), with in1801 
clearly showing the tightest spread of values. For au9501 and au0806, the 
spread is biased towards higher phosphate values; similarly for au9407, 
but to a lesser degree. Note that the axes in Figure 7a are curtailed at 
1.3 µmol/l phosphate and 22 µmol/l nitrate+nitrite, to make comparisons 
easier to see (the trends continue in a similar fashion towards low 
nutrient values beyond the axes). Au0103 and au9601 are apparent outliers 
in Figure 7a, discussed in previous data reports. The same intercruise 
trends can be seen at the south end of SR3 (Figure 7b). Phosphates for 
au1402 and au1602 clearly lie between in1801 and au0103 values. For 
phosphates in general. intercruise variability is most likely due to 
variation in autoanalyser performance (specific reasons unknown); and for 
au1402 and au1602, due freezing of samples for later analysis back in 
Hobart. From this initial comparison, data quality for in1801 looks 
better than for previous cruises, though confirmation would require a 
future occupation of SR3, with nutrient analyses via the SEAL 
autoanalyser.

Figure 8 shows intercruise comparisons of silicate, plotted against 
bottle salinity. Note that silicate values below 50 µmol/l are not shown 
in the plots. Good agreement is seen between in1801 au1121 (the latest 
SR3 occupation previous to in1801 with on board nutrient analysis). 
Au0103 also compares favourably with in1801, but there is increased 
scatter for the remaining cruises, with slightly lower silicates evident 
for au9404, au9501 and au9601 (the lower au9407 values are a small number 
of outliers).

Figure 9 shows intercruise comparisons of bottle dissolved oxygen, 
plotted against bottle salinity. Note that only data deeper than 500 dbar 
are plotted. In1801 data are mostly tighter (i.e. less scattered) than 
for the other cruises (with the exception of au9407). There’s reasonable 
agreement between in1801 and au9407. Au9501 and au0806 also have 
reasonable agreement with in1801, though values for au9501 and au0806 are 
slightly biased on the high side, and there’s significantly more scatter 
for au0806 data. Au9404 and au1121 values are often higher than in1801, 
while au9601 and au0103 show the highest offset.

Overall, nutrient data quality appears much improved for in1801, though 
confirmation requires a repeat SR3 occupation.




8  FILE FORMATS

Data are supplied as column formatted text files, or as matlab files, 
with all details fully described in the README file included with the 
data set. Note that all dissolved oxygen and nutrient data in these file 
versions are in units of µmol/l.

The data are also available in WOCE “Exchange” format files. In these 
file versions, dissolved oxygen and nutrient data are in units of 
µmol/kg. For density calculation in the volumetric to gravimetric units 
conversion, the following were used:

dissolved oxygen – in situ temperature and CTD salinity at which each 
Niskin bottle was fired; zero pressure

nutrients – laboratory temperature, and in situ CTD salinity at which 
each Niskin bottle was fired; zero pressure. Note that laboratory 
temperature for all the nutrient runs, run over several weeks, mostly 
ranged from ~19 to 22°C; a mean value of 21°C (over all the runs) was 
used.




Table 1: Summary of station information for cruise in1801. All times are 
         UTC; "alt" = minimum altimeter value (m), "maxp" = maximum 
         pressure (dbar).

           ----------start of CTD-----------------------------  -----------------bottom of CTD---------------  -------------------end of CTD----------
CTD station    date      time    latitude     longitude  depth   time    latitude    longitude  depth   time    latitude    longitude  depth  alt maxp
001 SR3    11 Jan 2018  081635  44 00.09 S   146 19.24 E  251   082356  44 00.09 S  146 19.24 E  253   085350  44 00.12 S  146 19.26 E  253  10.4  244
002 SR3    11 Jan 2018  113033  44 02.98 S   146 17.41 E  561   115907  44 02.98 S  146 17.41 E  568   123535  44 02.93 S  146 17.33 E  558   7.6  566
003 SR3    11 Jan 2018  135925  44 07.19 S   146 13.21 E 1019   142150  44 07.19 S  146 13.22 E 1028   151438  44 07.14 S  146 13.16 E 1014   9.7 1029
004 SR3    11 Jan 2018  184121  44 22.81 S   146 11.36 E 2321   192501  44 22.79 S  146 11.27 E 2327   204427  44 22.77 S  146 11.23 E 2321   9.7 2349
005 SR3    11 Jan 2018  231414  44 43.20 S   146 02.57 E 3205   001257  44 43.13 S  146 02.43 E 3219   014740  44 43.24 S  146 02.60 E 3205   9.3 3261
006 SR3    12 Jan 2018  123729  45 13.31 S   145 51.14 E 2847   132826  45 13.56 S  145 51.13 E 2853   151100  45 13.73 S  145 51.08 E 2837   7.5 2888
007 SR3    12 Jan 2018  181943  45 42.24 S   145 39.38 E 2043   190524  45 42.64 S  145 38.93 E 2146   201538  45 43.00 S  145 38.29 E 2403  13.7 2161
008 SR3    13 Jan 2018  010739  46 10.16 S   145 28.33 E 2713   015928  46 10.18 S  145 28.34 E 2724   032642  46 10.13 S  145 28.30 E 2714   8.3 2756
009 SR3    14 Jan 2018  233315  46 39.04 S   145 15.22 E 3312   003543  46 39.03 S  145 15.23 E 3327   022900  46 38.96 S  145 15.13 E 3319   8.6 3373
010 SR3    15 Jan 2018  143119  47 08.95 S   144 54.64 E 4796   160720  47 09.03 S  144 54.64 E 4810   181412  47 08.95 S  144 54.67 E 4798  11.4 4895
011 SR3    15 Jan 2018  202031  47 28.19 S   144 53.96 E 4389   214043  47 28.12 S  144 53.98 E 4401   234008  47 28.23 S  144 53.98 E 4391  11.3 4473
012 SR3    16 Jan 2018  044621  48 00.00 S   144 40.21 E 4338   061545  48 00.06 S  144 40.19 E 4378   082621  48 00.02 S  144 40.22 E 4268   3.9 4457
013 SR3    16 Jan 2018  104619  48 19.24 S   144 31.79 E 4022   120957  48 19.31 S  144 31.78 E 4081   142253  48 19.51 S  144 31.70 E 4076   7.1 4149
014 SR3    16 Jan 2018  210918  48 46.87 S   144 19.13 E 4130   222642  48 47.11 S  144 19.18 E 4122   002923  48 47.29 S  144 19.22 E 4095   9.4 4189
015 SR3    17 Jan 2018  053900  49 16.23 S   144 05.48 E 4227   065922  49 16.34 S  144 06.26 E 4375   091224  49 16.70 S  144 07.36 E 4381   6.7 4452
016 SR3    17 Jan 2018  202448  49 36.51 S   143 55.84 E 3654   213616  49 36.56 S  143 55.76 E 3697   232537  49 36.59 S  143 55.73 E 3667  12.0 3749
017 SR3    18 Jan 2018  012437  49 53.47 S   143 47.90 E 3668   023643  49 53.41 S  143 48.02 E 3725   044018  49 53.41 S  143 48.02 E 3663   7.5 3783
018 SR3    18 Jan 2018  082601  50 09.56 S   143 39.46 E 3657   093912  50 09.50 S  143 38.98 E 3816   114527  50 09.57 S  143 38.52 E 3706   9.6 3874
019 SR3    18 Jan 2018  134525  50 24.05 S   143 31.69 E 3542   145136  50 23.97 S  143 31.81 E 3509   163629  50 23.92 S  143 31.88 E 3493   9.7 3559
020 SR3    19 Jan 2018  033735  50 40.69 S   143 25.04 E 3471   044121  50 40.72 S  143 25.03 E 3483   063943  50 40.68 S  143 25.07 E 3470  11.9 3530
021 SR3    19 Jan 2018  112246  51 00.56 S   143 16.31 E 3787   124426  51 00.72 S  143 16.19 E 3801   144955  51 01.04 S  143 15.92 E 3772  13.7 3855
022 SR3    19 Jan 2018  172020  51 15.67 S   143 07.95 E 3740   183408  51 15.94 S  143 07.88 E 3789   202715  51 16.30 S  143 07.78 E 3620   6.4 3850
023 SR3    20 Jan 2018  003340  51 33.12 S   143 00.03 E 3632   014720  51 33.29 S  142 59.96 E 3609   032550  51 33.42 S  142 59.92 E 3594   9.2 3663
024 SR3    20 Jan 2018  141346  51 48.63 S   142 50.42 E 3688   153022  51 48.88 S  142 50.18 E 3690   172323  51 49.38 S  142 49.89 E 3654  11.3 3744
025 SR3    20 Jan 2018  191829  52 04.86 S   142 42.68 E 3472   202848  52 05.30 S  142 43.01 E 3461   221808  52 05.90 S  142 43.05 E 3521  11.8 3509
026 SR3    21 Jan 2018  004030  52 22.30 S   142 31.95 E 3368   020556  52 22.55 S  142 31.82 E 3427   040740  52 22.47 S  142 31.88 E 3344  11.3 3475
027 SR3    21 Jan 2018  082028  52 40.10 S   142 23.42 E 3353   093524  52 40.29 S  142 23.20 E 3388   112909  52 40.89 S  142 22.13 E 3396  10.8 3435
028 SR3    21 Jan 2018  142201  53 07.76 S   142 08.42 E 3082   152141  53 07.77 S  142 08.46 E 3104   165209  53 07.78 S  142 08.68 E 3102  12.8 3142
029 SR3    21 Jan 2018  233115  53 34.75 S   141 51.73 E 2495   002036  53 34.63 S  141 51.84 E 2488   014159  53 34.53 S  141 51.92 E 2419  11.7 2514
030 SR3    22 Jan 2018  064756  54 04.26 S   141 35.87 E 2496   073725  54 04.25 S  141 35.88 E 2531   091042  54 04.24 S  141 35.93 E 2510   8.7 2561
031 SR3    22 Jan 2018  193751  54 31.67 S   141 19.76 E 2769   203800  54 31.54 S  141 19.96 E 2823   220202  54 31.50 S  141 20.04 E 2782  11.1 2857
032 SR3    23 Jan 2018  041538  55 01.28 S   141 01.27 E 3139   052407  55 01.24 S  141 01.30 E 3318   070603  55 01.24 S  141 01.31 E 3162  12.4 3362
033 SR3    23 Jan 2018  134700  55 29.97 S   140 43.81 E 4048   150956  55 29.95 S  140 43.79 E 4176   170630  55 29.98 S  140 43.89 E 4062  11.4 4245


           ----------start of CTD-----------------------------  -----------------bottom of CTD---------------  -------------------end of CTD----------
CTD station    date      time    latitude     longitude  depth   time    latitude    longitude  depth   time    latitude    longitude  depth  alt maxp
034 SR3    23 Jan 2018  200321  55 55.81 S   140 24.56 E 3569   211700  55 55.80 S  140 24.56 E 3656   225829  55 55.80 S  140 24.59 E 3600  11.6 3710
035 SR3    24 Jan 2018  050932  56 25.82 S   140 06.05 E 3843   062639  56 25.80 S  140 06.01 E 3927   082435  56 25.81 S  140 06.05 E 3843  11.7 3989
036 SR3    24 Jan 2018  112749  56 55.78 S   139 50.93 E 4097   124741  56 55.76 S  139 50.93 E 4127   144014  56 55.76 S  139 51.09 E 4102  12.2 4194
037 SR3    24 Jan 2018  205021  57 21.04 S   139 53.08 E 4090   220630  57 20.94 S  139 53.45 E 4095   235059  57 21.06 S  139 53.06 E 4087  10.6 4163
038 SR3    25 Jan 2018  024825  57 50.99 S   139 51.02 E 3971   040124  57 50.99 S  139 50.98 E 3992   060143  57 51.01 S  139 51.01 E 3971  11.8 4055
039 SR3    25 Jan 2018  103255  58 21.11 S   139 51.14 E 3953   114544  58 21.06 S  139 51.04 E 3994   135330  58 21.07 S  139 51.01 E 3944   9.7 4060
040 SR3    25 Jan 2018  184621  58 51.00 S   139 50.33 E 3879   200048  58 51.00 S  139 50.31 E 3893   213622  58 51.04 S  139 50.30 E 3880   9.3 3957
041 SR3    26 Jan 2018  023630  58 50.74 S   139 50.38 E 3860   030030  58 50.72 S  139 50.41 E 3860   034147  58 50.72 S  139 50.38 E 3859    -  1004
042 SR3    26 Jan 2018  101856  59 21.02 S   139 51.02 E 4125   113947  59 21.02 S  139 51.10 E 4166   133951  59 21.02 S  139 50.90 E 4121  11.4 4236
043 SR3    26 Jan 2018  164740  59 50.96 S   139 51.59 E 4441   180955  59 50.99 S  139 51.53 E 4455   200536  59 51.02 S  139 51.51 E 4441  11.0 4534
044 SR3    27 Jan 2018  010338  60 21.05 S   139 51.13 E 4404   022650  60 20.99 S  139 50.99 E 4416   044020  60 20.94 S  139 50.84 E 4403  11.5 4494
045 SR3    27 Jan 2018  092040  60 50.98 S   139 50.94 E 4366   104255  60 51.05 S  139 51.10 E 4379   124440  60 51.11 S  139 51.34 E 4367  12.4 4454
046 SR3    28 Jan 2018  002523  61 21.01 S   139 50.44 E 4305   014550  61 21.09 S  139 50.42 E 4317   034344  61 21.11 S  139 50.45 E 4304  12.4 4391
047 SR3    28 Jan 2018  063729  61 51.05 S   139 50.31 E 4253   075541  61 51.05 S  139 50.38 E 4266   101333  61 51.04 S  139 50.36 E 4254  12.5 4338
048 SR3    28 Jan 2018  203525  62 21.61 S   139 50.38 E 3908   215759  62 21.74 S  139 50.75 E 3920   235140  62 21.89 S  139 51.27 E 3914   7.0 3988
049 SR3    29 Jan 2018  031655  62 51.01 S   139 51.11 E 3168   042236  62 50.99 S  139 51.05 E 3179   060556  62 50.98 S  139 51.02 E 3169  11.1 3223
050 SR3    29 Jan 2018  130506  63 20.99 S   139 49.67 E 3759   141715  63 20.99 S  139 49.72 E 3774   160431  63 20.97 S  139 49.93 E 3763   8.6 3837
051 SR3    29 Jan 2018  211350  63 51.88 S   139 51.94 E 3686   222301  63 51.58 S  139 52.31 E 3703   235442  63 51.17 S  139 52.92 E 3694  11.4 3761
052 SR3    30 Jan 2018  115914  64 12.81 S   139 50.19 E 3482   130355  64 12.86 S  139 49.96 E 3495   144638  64 12.86 S  139 49.84 E 3481  10.2 3549
053 SR3    30 Jan 2018  172842  64 33.08 S   139 51.01 E 3039   182547  64 33.05 S  139 50.83 E 3052   194414  64 32.99 S  139 50.65 E 3044  11.4 3093
054 SR3    30 Jan 2018  213823  64 48.66 S   139 51.62 E 2556   223009  64 48.61 S  139 51.56 E 2566   234242  64 48.65 S  139 51.57 E 2557  11.7 2596
055 SR3    31 Jan 2018  041844  65 04.19 S   139 51.56 E 2458   050332  65 04.16 S  139 51.56 E 2475   063220  65 04.19 S  139 51.52 E 2459  11.6 2503
056 SR3    31 Jan 2018  100512  65 23.95 S   139 51.17 E 2390   105444  65 23.93 S  139 51.19 E 2399   122432  65 23.89 S  139 51.24 E 2394  10.2 2426
057 SR3    31 Jan 2018  212221  65 25.78 S   139 51.06 E 1797   220253  65 25.79 S  139 51.01 E 1939   230701  65 25.76 S  139 51.07 E 1794  13.5 1953
058 SR3    01 Feb 2018  015231  65 31.81 S   139 51.03 E 1289   021748  65 31.85 S  139 51.00 E 1317   030122  65 31.78 S  139 50.94 E 1296  10.3 1324
059 SR3    01 Feb 2018  051552  65 34.19 S   139 51.18 E  800   053427  65 34.21 S  139 51.19 E  819   061919  65 34.24 S  139 51.17 E  782  10.0  818
060 SR3    01 Feb 2018  073939  65 42.70 S   139 51.69 E  283   074720  65 42.70 S  139 51.69 E  283   081821  65 42.67 S  139 51.67 E  285   7.8  278
061 shelf  01 Feb 2018  234040  66 25.60 S   145 04.19 E  423   235012  66 25.59 S  145 04.22 E  424   001752  66 25.58 S  145 04.24 E  421  10.0  418
062 shelf  02 Feb 2018  063107  66 20.84 S   144 39.53 E  414   064119  66 20.85 S  144 39.55 E  419   070940  66 20.83 S  144 39.50 E  414  12.0  411
063 shelf  02 Feb 2018  081037  66 19.25 S   144 23.46 E  432   082147  66 19.17 S  144 23.29 E  434   085305  66 19.11 S  144 23.02 E  433   8.3  431
064 shelf  02 Feb 2018  110336  66 14.50 S   144 01.33 E  439   111409  66 14.47 S  144 01.36 E  442   114758  66 14.44 S  144 01.42 E  435  10.0  437
065 shelf  02 Feb 2018  130425  66 07.24 S   143 49.78 E  432   131522  66 07.22 S  143 49.84 E  437   134740  66 07.20 S  143 49.88 E  432   9.7  432
066 shelf  02 Feb 2018  145858  65 59.99 S   143 38.44 E  424   150745  66 00.00 S  143 38.41 E  423   153126  66 00.01 S  143 38.39 E  422   9.4  418


           ----------start of CTD-----------------------------  -----------------bottom of CTD---------------  -------------------end of CTD----------
CTD station    date      time    latitude     longitude  depth   time    latitude    longitude  depth   time    latitude    longitude  depth  alt maxp
067 Ninja  02 Feb 2018  231547  64 59.90 S   145 29.73 E 3301   001613  64 59.90 S  145 29.86 E 3312   014615  64 59.89 S  145 30.16 E 3307  12.1 3359
068 P11S   03 Feb 2018  122048  65 23.99 S   150 00.05 E 2853   131345  65 23.99 S  150 00.01 E 2866   145327  65 23.98 S  149 59.98 E 2854   6.6 2908
069 P11S   03 Feb 2018  171310  65 35.49 S   149 59.87 E 2478   180138  65 35.12 S  149 59.42 E 2494   191305  65 34.72 S  149 58.24 E 2522  11.3 2522
070 P11S   04 Feb 2018  034754  65 38.32 S   150 00.91 E 2328   043552  65 38.10 S  150 00.83 E 2345   055216  65 37.22 S  149 59.36 E 2401  10.2 2371
071 P11S   04 Feb 2018  093618  64 59.96 S   149 59.75 E 3254   104434  64 59.97 S  149 59.90 E 3274   121901  65 00.00 S  150 00.31 E 3264  10.0 3322
072 P11S   04 Feb 2018  144722  64 35.99 S   150 00.01 E 3423   155018  64 36.00 S  150 00.04 E 3434   172606  64 36.01 S  150 00.09 E 3425  11.9 3484
073 P11S   04 Feb 2018  223939  64 17.97 S   149 59.98 E 3525   234608  64 18.04 S  150 00.13 E 3549   012105  64 18.10 S  150 00.26 E 3527  14.1 3600
074 P11S   05 Feb 2018  034355  63 54.01 S   150 00.03 E 3628   044945  63 54.02 S  150 00.08 E 3639   064111  63 54.04 S  150 00.17 E 3629  11.8 3695
075 P11S   05 Feb 2018  091006  63 29.96 S   150 00.00 E 3690   102716  63 29.96 S  150 00.02 E 3703   122502  63 30.09 S  150 00.18 E 3692  11.2 3761
076 P11S   05 Feb 2018  184038  62 59.99 S   150 00.02 E 3807   195028  63 00.02 S  150 00.05 E 3817   213250  63 00.04 S  150 00.08 E 3805  11.5 3878
077 P11S   06 Feb 2018  002818  62 30.01 S   150 00.01 E 3834   013737  62 30.01 S  150 00.01 E 3851   034006  62 30.13 S  150 00.07 E 3846  11.6 3912
078 P11S   06 Feb 2018  064253  62 00.02 S   149 59.98 E 3707   074933  62 00.02 S  149 59.98 E 3722   100259  62 00.08 S  149 59.95 E 3705  11.3 3780
079 S4     06 Feb 2018  215412  63 11.37 S   147 49.91 E 3871   230552  63 11.44 S  147 49.88 E 3881   004815  63 11.43 S  147 49.90 E 3869  11.1 3944
080 S4     07 Feb 2018  042848  63 03.01 S   146 26.86 E 3910   054114  63 03.00 S  146 26.97 E 3920   073445  63 02.99 S  146 27.00 E 3909  11.5 3984
081 S4     07 Feb 2018  150634  62 54.00 S   145 01.79 E 3982   162157  62 54.03 S  145 01.76 E 3995   180351  62 54.55 S  145 01.20 E 3979  11.0 4061
082 S4     07 Feb 2018  220108  62 45.02 S   143 37.18 E 4074   231737  62 45.05 S  143 37.15 E 4086   010148  62 45.05 S  143 37.16 E 4076  11.4 4155
083 S4     08 Feb 2018  092211  62 36.01 S   142 12.03 E 4090   103906  62 36.02 S  142 12.01 E 4101   125444  62 36.07 S  142 11.89 E 4088  11.3 4170
084 S4     08 Feb 2018  161921  62 28.81 S   141 01.76 E 4124   174701  62 28.80 S  141 01.80 E 4138   192836  62 28.82 S  141 01.73 E 4123  11.4 4207
085 S4     09 Feb 2018  141146  62 10.31 S   138 24.57 E 3948   153325  62 10.19 S  138 24.61 E 3959   171818  62 10.15 S  138 24.73 E 3947  11.5 4024
086 S4     09 Feb 2018  215510  61 59.93 S   137 00.04 E 3846   231118  61 59.61 S  137 00.56 E 3863   005334  61 59.51 S  137 00.82 E 3851   9.4 3927
087 S4     10 Feb 2018  053917  62 00.00 S   135 34.87 E 4286   065731  62 00.02 S  135 34.84 E 4300   091225  62 00.02 S  135 34.87 E 4285  13.5 4373
088 S4     10 Feb 2018  163024  62 01.19 S   134 10.27 E 4327   174953  62 01.21 S  134 10.02 E 4340   194449  62 01.22 S  134 10.11 E 4327  11.2 4416
089 132E   11 Feb 2018  013846  62 29.98 S   132 02.98 E 4427   030145  62 29.99 S  132 02.98 E 4441   050218  62 30.01 S  132 02.99 E 4430  11.1 4521
090 132E   11 Feb 2018  093151  63 05.05 S   132 06.08 E 4242   105032  63 05.06 S  132 06.10 E 4254   125942  63 05.04 S  132 05.97 E 4243   9.4 4330
091 132E   11 Feb 2018  173525  63 29.99 S   132 04.81 E 4015   185032  63 30.01 S  132 04.77 E 4028   202850  63 30.04 S  132 04.75 E 4017  11.3 4095
092 132E   11 Feb 2018  231824  63 58.48 S   132 06.38 E 3204   001745  63 58.52 S  132 06.33 E 3218   014423  63 58.63 S  132 06.50 E 3206  11.1 3264
093 132E   12 Feb 2018  063708  64 26.93 S   132 04.60 E 1465   071342  64 26.90 S  132 04.57 E 1471   082303  64 26.87 S  132 04.55 E 1469  11.3 1479
094 132E   12 Feb 2018  182930  64 50.27 S   132 05.41 E  862   184812  64 50.27 S  132 05.53 E  863   191509  64 50.24 S  132 05.70 E  855   7.4  866
095 132E   12 Feb 2018  202939  64 58.76 S   132 03.87 E  292   203654  64 58.74 S  132 03.85 E  293   205514  64 58.76 S  132 03.86 E  292   8.3  288
096 132E   13 Feb 2018  180521  61 59.70 S   132 00.20 E 4466   192615  61 59.71 S  132 00.02 E 4479   212239  61 59.69 S  131 59.60 E 4465  10.8 4559
097 132E   14 Feb 2018  020013  61 29.99 S   131 59.99 E 4521   032137  61 30.00 S  131 59.96 E 4533   055647  61 30.01 S  132 00.25 E 4520   8.4 4618
098 132E   14 Feb 2018  091032  60 59.94 S   132 00.17 E 4572   103444  60 59.98 S  132 00.52 E 4582   125306  61 00.17 S  132 00.50 E 4570  11.2 4665
099 132E   14 Feb 2018  160416  60 31.54 S   132 07.75 E 4612   173012  60 31.50 S  132 07.82 E 4626   192526  60 31.49 S  132 07.82 E 4611  11.2 4710
100 132E   14 Feb 2018  222318  60 01.94 S   132 13.00 E 4648   235057  60 01.91 S  132 13.06 E 4662   014809  60 01.89 S  132 13.01 E 4649  10.7 4748
101 132E   15 Feb 2018  045852  59 30.00 S   132 06.01 E 4672   062431  59 30.01 S  132 06.06 E 4684   082534  59 29.98 S  132 05.99 E 4671  11.5 4770
102 132E   15 Feb 2018  112236  58 58.27 S   132 01.51 E 4663   124949  58 58.32 S  132 01.69 E 4676   150026  58 58.31 S  132 01.75 E 4663  10.0 4763
103 132E   15 Feb 2018  174716  58 29.97 S   132 00.47 E 4655   192152  58 30.01 S  132 00.65 E 4667   212621  58 30.05 S  132 00.70 E 4653   9.9 4753
104 132E   16 Feb 2018  002512  58 00.00 S   131 59.98 E 4656   015126  58 00.00 S  131 59.94 E 4670   042149  58 00.04 S  131 58.73 E 4656  11.4 4754
105 132E   16 Feb 2018  071142  57 31.03 S   132 00.15 E 4656   083549  57 31.00 S  132 00.20 E 4672   110506  57 30.95 S  132 00.20 E 4658  10.9 4757
106 132E   16 Feb 2018  141327  56 57.92 S   132 09.18 E 4529   153627  56 57.92 S  132 09.21 E 4553   173819  56 57.91 S  132 09.22 E 4533  10.5 4634
107 eddy   18 Feb 2018  085930  56 32.99 S   141 29.63 E 3592   092143  56 32.99 S  141 29.63 E 3609   100328  56 33.00 S  141 29.66 E 3664    -  1003
108 eddy   19 Feb 2018  045536  53 37.73 S   142 58.78 E 2999   051737  53 37.75 S  142 58.79 E 3003   060631  53 37.75 S  142 58.79 E 3003    -  1003




Table 2: CTD calibration coefficients and calibration dates for cruise 
         in1801. Note that platinum temperature calibrations are for the 
         ITS-90 scale. Pressure slope/offset, temperature, conductivity 
         and oxygen values are from CSIRO and SeaBird pre cruise 
         calibrations. Fluorometer and PAR values are manufacturer 
         supplied. Transmissometer values are a rescaling of the 
         manufacturer supplied coefficients to give transmittance as a %, 
         referenced to clean water. For oxygen, the final calibration 
         uses in situ bottle measurements (the manufacturer supplied 
         coefficients are not used). Note the revised CPcor value used 
         for primary and secondary conductivity, which reduces the depth 
         dependent calibration error due to compressibility of the 
         borosilicate glass cell. For FLBB fluorometer and backscatter, 
         dark value derived from “dark profiles” at stations 25 and 106.


Primary Temperature, serial 6189, 04/04/2017     Secondary Temperature, serial 6180, 19/04/2017     
(station 1 to 13)                                (station 1 to 11, 14 to 108)     
G      :4.38623631e-003                                   G      :4.33710187e-003     
H      :6.41207874e-004                                   H      :6.34603081e-004     
I      :2.30415384e-005                                   I      :2.17586153e-005     
J      :2.14398355e-006                                   J      :1.99921954e-006     
F0     :1000.000                                          F0     :1000.000     
Slope  :1.0000000                                         Slope  :1.0000000     
Offset :0.0000                                            Offset :0.0000               

Primary Temperature, serial 4522, 15/12/2017     Secondary Temperature, serial 4522, 15/12/2017     
(station 14 to 108)                              (station 12 to 13)     
G      :4.33235720e-003                                   G      :4.33235720e-003     
H      :6.34643520e-004                                   H      :6.34643520e-004     
I      :1.98678350e-005                                   I      :1.98678350e-005     
J      :1.55527340e-006                                   J      :1.55527340e-006     
F0     :1000.000                                          F0     :1000.000     
Slope  :1.0000000                                         Slope  :1.0000000     
Offset :0.0000                                            Offset :0.0000               

Primary Conductivity, serial 4685, 02/05/2017    Secondary Conductivity, serial 4664, 02/05/2017     
G      :-9.99847835e+000                                  G      :-9.89576006e+000     
H      :1.34567880e+000                                   H      :1.34531130e+000     
I      :2.26080131e-004                                   I      :-2.43201518e-004     
J      :3.94289636e-005                                   J      :7.66668505e-005     
CTcor  :3.2500e-006                                       CTcor  :3.2500e-006     
CPcor  :-8.4500000e-008                                   CPcor  :-8.4500000e-008     
Slope  :1.00000000                                        Slope  :1.00000000     
Offset :0.00000                                           Offset :0.00000               

CTD704 Pressure, serial 1332, 21/08/2017     
C1     :-4.143143e+004     
C2     :-3.307590e-001     
C3     :1.332300e-002     
D1     :3.552400e-002     
D2     :0.000000e+000     
T1     :3.046230e+001     
T2     :-4.100470e-004     
T3     :3.894920e-006     
T4     :4.633350e-009     
T5     :0.000000e+000     
Slope  :1.000000     
Offset :0.5800 (dbar) 
AD590M :1.279750e-002 
AD590B :-9.342582e+000          

Primary Oxygen, serial 3534, 26/04/2017          Secondary Oxygen, serial 3542, 26/04/2017 
        (for display at time of logging only)    (for display at time of logging only) 
        Soc     :4.75400e-001                              Soc     :5.01200e-001     
        Voffset :-4.97900e-001                             Voffset :-5.22300e-001     
        A       :-4.35090e-003                             A       :-3.60190e-003     
        B       :2.23240e-004                              B       :1.95170e-004     
        C       :-3.44950e-006                             C       :-3.06820e-006     
        E       :3.60000e-002                              E       :3.60000e-002     
        Tau20   :1.34000e+000                              Tau20   :1.97000e+000     
        D1      :1.92634e-004                              D1      :1.92634e-004     
        D2      :-4.64803e-002                             D2      :-4.64803e-002     
        H1      :-3.30000e-002                             H1      :-3.30000e-002     
        H2      :5.00000e+003                              H2      :5.00000e+003     
        H3      :1.45000e+003                              H3      :1.45000e+003        
        

Transmissometer, serial 1421DR, 07/08/2017       PAR, serial 70111, QCP2300HP, 26/06/2017   
    (referenced to clean water)                  M             :1.000     
        M           :21.2815                     B             :0.000     
        B           :-0.1277                     Cal. Constant :2.1834061e+010
        Path length :0.25 (m)                    Multiplier    :1.0     
                                                 Offset        :-4.6362e-002               

FLBBRTD, serial 4799, 09/08/2017     
Fluorometer                                      Backscatter     
        Dark output  :0.0500                           Dark output  :0.0615     
        Scale factor :6.000e+000                       Scale factor :1.429e-003 
                                                       Wavelength   :700     




Table 3: CTD conductivity calibration coefficients for cruise in1801.  
         F1, F2 and F3 are respectively conductivity bias, slope and 
         station-dependent correction calibration terms. n is the number 
         of samples retained for calibration in each station grouping; σ 
         is the standard deviation of the conductivity residual for the n 
         samples in the station grouping.

stn grouping        F1              F2              F3           n      σ      
————————————  ——————————————  ——————————————  ———————————————  ————  ————————
 001 to 011   -0.34912601E-02  0.10002407E-02  -0.25260120E-08   216  0.000675    
 012 to 080   -0.19948864E-03  0.10001028E-02   0.43004868E-09  1499  0.000623    
 081 to 108    0.10274673E-01  0.99966219E-03   0.13331931E-08   638  0.000702    







Table 4: Station-dependent-corrected conductivity slope term 
         (F2 + F3 . N), for station number N, and F2 and F3 the 
         conductivity slope and station-dependent correction 
         calibration terms respectively, for cruise in1801.

station  (F2  + F3 . N)  station  (F2 + F3 . N)  station  (F2 + F3 . N) 
number                   number                  number
———————————————————————  ——————————————————————  ——————————————————————
   1     0.10002382E-02    37    0.10001187E-02    73    0.10001342E-02
   2     0.10002357E-02    38    0.10001191E-02    74    0.10001346E-02
   3     0.10002332E-02    39    0.10001196E-02    75    0.10001351E-02
   4     0.10002306E-02    40    0.10001200E-02    76    0.10001355E-02
   5     0.10002281E-02    41    0.10001204E-02    77    0.10001359E-02
   6     0.10002256E-02    42    0.10001209E-02    78    0.10001363E-02
   7     0.10002230E-02    43    0.10001213E-02    79    0.10001368E-02
   8     0.10002205E-02    44    0.10001217E-02    80    0.10001372E-02
   9     0.10002180E-02    45    0.10001222E-02    81    0.99977018E-03
  10     0.10002155E-02    46    0.10001226E-02    82    0.99977151E-03
  11     0.10002129E-02    47    0.10001230E-02    83    0.99977284E-03
  12     0.10001080E-02    48    0.10001234E-02    84    0.99977418E-03
  13     0.10001084E-02    49    0.10001239E-02    85    0.99977551E-03
  14     0.10001088E-02    50    0.10001243E-02    86    0.99977684E-03
  15     0.10001093E-02    51    0.10001247E-02    87    0.99977818E-03
  16     0.10001097E-02    52    0.10001252E-02    88    0.99977951E-03
  17     0.10001101E-02    53    0.10001256E-02    89    0.99978084E-03
  18     0.10001105E-02    54    0.10001260E-02    90    0.99978218E-03
  19     0.10001110E-02    55    0.10001265E-02    91    0.99978351E-03
  20     0.10001114E-02    56    0.10001269E-02    92    0.99978484E-03
  21     0.10001118E-02    57    0.10001273E-02    93    0.99978618E-03
  22     0.10001123E-02    58    0.10001277E-02    94    0.99978751E-03
  23     0.10001127E-02    59    0.10001282E-02    95    0.99978884E-03
  24     0.10001131E-02    60    0.10001286E-02    96    0.99979017E-03
  25     0.10001136E-02    61    0.10001290E-02    97    0.99979151E-03
  26     0.10001140E-02    62    0.10001295E-02    98    0.99979284E-03
  27     0.10001144E-02    63    0.10001299E-02    99    0.99979417E-03
  28     0.10001148E-02    64    0.10001303E-02   100    0.99979551E-03
  29     0.10001153E-02    65    0.10001308E-02   101    0.99979684E-03
  30     0.10001157E-02    66    0.10001312E-02   102    0.99979817E-03
  31     0.10001161E-02    67    0.10001316E-02   103    0.99979951E-03
  32     0.10001166E-02    68    0.10001320E-02   104    0.99980084E-03
  33     0.10001170E-02    69    0.10001325E-02   105    0.99980217E-03
  34     0.10001174E-02    70    0.10001329E-02   106    0.99980351E-03
  35     0.10001179E-02    71    0.10001333E-02   107    0.99980484E-03
  36     0.10001183E-02    72    0.10001338E-02   108    0.99980617E-03










Table 5: Surface pressure offsets (i.e. poff in dbar) for cruise in1801. 
         For each station, these values are subtracted from the pressure 
         calibration "offset" value in Table 2.

stn   poff  stn   poff  stn   poff  stn   poff  stn   poff  stn   poff      
———  —————  ———  —————  ———  —————  ———  —————  ———  —————  ———  —————
001  -0.24  019  -0.55  037  -0.35  055  -0.51  073  -0.47  091  -0.67  
002  -0.23  020  -0.33  038  -0.35  056  -0.49  074  -0.48  092  -0.70  
003  -0.24  021  -0.36  039  -0.39  057  -0.40  075  -0.44  093  -0.65  
004  -0.35  022  -0.36  040  -0.48  058  -0.39  076  -0.45  094  -0.52  
005  -0.37  023  -0.30  041  -0.56  059  -0.37  077  -0.45  095  -0.53  
006  -0.36  024  -0.27  042  -0.45  060  -0.39  078  -0.42  096  -0.59  
007  -0.41  025  -0.29  043  -0.45  061  -0.38  079  -0.49  097  -0.60  
008  -0.38  026  -0.32  044  -0.41  062  -0.45  080  -0.53  098  -0.54  
009  -0.13  027  -0.32  045  -0.43  063  -0.38  081  -0.48  099  -0.52  
010  -0.10  028  -0.43  046  -0.73  064  -0.44  082  -0.50  100  -0.47  
011  -0.12  029  -0.55  047  -0.86  065  -0.47  083  -0.47  101  -0.46  
012  -0.16  030  -0.58  048  -0.65  066  -0.49  084  -0.52  102  -0.48  
013  -0.18  031  -0.59  049  -0.59  067  -0.46  085  -0.59  103  -0.50  
014  -0.21  032  -0.66  050  -0.48  068  -0.51  086  -0.61  104  -0.55  
015  -0.23  033  -0.54  051  -0.43  069  -0.55  087  -0.61  105  -0.65  
016  -0.28  034  -0.53  052  -0.42  070  -0.41  088  -0.52  106  -0.65  
017  -0.33  035  -0.45  053  -0.50  071  -0.47  089  -0.60  107  -0.20  
018  -0.40  036  -0.41  054  -0.49  072  -0.47  090  -0.62  108  -0.05  




Table 6: CTD dissolved oxygen calibration coefficients for cruise in1801: 
         slope, bias, tcor ( = temperature correction term), and pcor 
         ( = pressure correction term). dox is equal to 2.8σ, for σ as 
         defined in the CTD Methodology. For deep stations, coefficients 
         are given for both the shallow and deep part of the profile, 
         according to the profile split used for calibration (see section 
         5.4 in the text); whole profile fit used for stations shallower 
         than 1400 dbar (i.e.  stations with only "shallow" set of 
         coefficients in the table) (see section 5.4 for exceptions).

----------------------shallow-----------------------------   ----------------------deep-------------------------- 
stn    slope      bias       tcor        pcor       dox       slope       bias      tcor        pcor       dox    

  1   0.709093  -0.627685  -0.007671   0.000116   0.074810    
  2   1.134027  -1.205114  -0.030850   0.000017   0.125380    
  3   0.499810  -0.296171   0.004628   0.000227   0.084345    
  4   0.495413  -0.227123   0.000071   0.000123   0.089076   0.606878  -0.384455  -0.005512   0.000148   0.032341  
  5   0.551999  -0.319929  -0.001389   0.000147   0.133773   0.396292  -0.105922   0.005163   0.000124   0.014800  
  6   0.490131  -0.226701   0.002200   0.000126   0.103328   0.483104  -0.249410   0.016116   0.000153   0.029972  
  7   0.501120  -0.226831   0.000235   0.000110   0.140051            
  8   0.494991  -0.226034   0.001354   0.000116   0.115084   0.345230  -0.086060   0.028373   0.000156   0.019862  
  9   0.514558  -0.265847  -0.000201   0.000142   0.098784   0.721823  -0.452590  -0.048065   0.000108   0.026115  
 10   0.511081  -0.261538   0.000322   0.000140   0.087704   0.492506  -0.186540  -0.021769   0.000108   0.022974  
 11   0.497222  -0.240383   0.002468   0.000138   0.129674   0.450343  -0.107375  -0.029335   0.000093   0.045070  
 12   0.550091  -0.336700  -0.001891   0.000179   0.080386   0.502941  -0.175235  -0.032700   0.000098   0.044229  
 13   0.554933  -0.296494  -0.006077   0.000123   0.080305                       
 14   0.489782  -0.232446   0.003770   0.000137   0.109942   0.485390  -0.244160   0.017125   0.000145   0.046903  
 15   0.543642  -0.281502  -0.005000   0.000123   0.102582   0.523869  -0.233119  -0.020946   0.000115   0.058348  
 16   0.492830  -0.216458   0.000921   0.000117   0.121193   0.550769  -0.314064   0.001429   0.000144   0.038747  
 17   0.492498  -0.215635   0.000668   0.000117   0.110306   0.538958  -0.269344  -0.013742   0.000125   0.032062  
 18   0.497023  -0.219673   0.000761   0.000110   0.088014   0.562819  -0.311112  -0.010519   0.000134   0.027950  
 19   0.512231  -0.252161  -0.000334   0.000132   0.078896   0.506831  -0.261339   0.007677   0.000143   0.029020  
 20   0.495379  -0.261468   0.005875   0.000170   0.109040   0.608817  -0.380791  -0.006316   0.000142   0.029399  
 21   0.511507  -0.309571   0.006602   0.000210   0.085618   0.743902  -0.452456  -0.060886   0.000094   0.052206  
 22   0.509788  -0.289455   0.004832   0.000188   0.087803   0.608924  -0.377428  -0.008765   0.000141   0.043013  
 23   0.406392  -0.087341   0.011126   0.000077   0.094383   0.605107  -0.382466  -0.005476   0.000147   0.037306  
 24   0.510442  -0.291727   0.004672   0.000192   0.131895   0.604461  -0.386859  -0.000790   0.000150   0.056012  
 25   0.524595  -0.281221  -0.001065   0.000151   0.095463   0.490138  -0.222256   0.002764   0.000131   0.049667  
 26   0.545832  -0.294204  -0.005917   0.000134   0.111469   0.560066  -0.339158   0.010721   0.000151   0.050995  
 27   0.461197  -0.190630   0.010510   0.000125   0.118564   0.605434  -0.389465  -0.002973   0.000151   0.048830  
 28   0.510490  -0.253664   0.001005   0.000140   0.080402   0.405757  -0.098418   0.010210   0.000117   0.031034  
 29   0.517210  -0.268364   0.000640   0.000148   0.042756   0.698103  -0.500655  -0.021813   0.000143   0.015449  
 30   0.536610  -0.290428  -0.004525   0.000144   0.044117   0.699202  -0.499638  -0.028841   0.000142   0.011877  
 31   0.521820  -0.277616   0.000277   0.000155   0.093576   0.481750  -0.156752  -0.024899   0.000097   0.016571  
 32   0.500655  -0.246255   0.005958   0.000139   0.105586   0.451270  -0.112710  -0.021395   0.000093   0.025011  
 33   0.499849  -0.244736   0.005105   0.000142   0.096232   0.600174  -0.403236   0.008915   0.000165   0.019475  
 34   0.529495  -0.279120  -0.000804   0.000143   0.091344   0.697589  -0.496648  -0.025959   0.000147   0.037855  
 35   0.516209  -0.262705   0.002562   0.000139   0.056744   0.583164  -0.354774  -0.001974   0.000144   0.023805  
 36   0.510957  -0.253334   0.003322   0.000137   0.080036   0.433891  -0.096910  -0.017232   0.000098   0.023800  
 37   0.511298  -0.255871   0.003755   0.000139   0.076315   0.404480  -0.099555   0.016318   0.000120   0.029387  
 38   0.522191  -0.268248   0.000088   0.000139   0.042243   0.698042  -0.497542  -0.028990   0.000148   0.025218  
 39   0.521381  -0.267445  -0.001037   0.000140   0.090227   0.403721  -0.100009   0.016545   0.000120   0.029864  
 40   0.525332  -0.279482   0.000372   0.000151   0.105738   0.405162  -0.098055   0.015692   0.000119   0.028572  
 41   0.516446  -0.251790   0.000069   0.000119   0.114305            
 42   0.520233  -0.275634   0.006966   0.000146   0.077000   0.402748  -0.099707   0.020339   0.000122   0.027079  
 43   0.518161  -0.274096   0.008219   0.000150   0.088765   0.404546  -0.098322   0.019864   0.000121   0.029332  
 44   0.523618  -0.279798   0.005875   0.000148   0.110171   0.695168  -0.499442  -0.032451   0.000150   0.029923  
 45   0.533589  -0.292723   0.004394   0.000148   0.114991   0.348560   0.012168  -0.004547   0.000098   0.026705  
 46   0.515282  -0.262933   0.006766   0.000140   0.104404   0.401612  -0.100556   0.025607   0.000125   0.023061  
 47   0.523353  -0.275468   0.004088   0.000145   0.053110   0.403183  -0.099727   0.022251   0.000124   0.029287  
 48   0.528013  -0.280755   0.002163   0.000147   0.041316   0.696122  -0.501946  -0.028695   0.000146   0.019713  
 49   0.529768  -0.275554  -0.003294   0.000142   0.071005   0.401867  -0.098909   0.023840   0.000134   0.015471  
 50   0.541600  -0.321111   0.020951   0.000163   0.065903   0.401767  -0.101060   0.024397   0.000134   0.024396  
 51   0.548028  -0.315427  -0.005411   0.000163   0.119708   0.491148  -0.211795   0.002606   0.000129   0.029108  
 52   0.473284  -0.154562  -0.030278   0.000105   0.090771   0.404037  -0.096492   0.024391   0.000132   0.028694  
 53   0.558745  -0.357213   0.035685   0.000179   0.065744   0.408498  -0.089334   0.009972   0.000124   0.034577  
 54   0.522752  -0.264220   0.002730   0.000139   0.096748   0.493406  -0.209440  -0.007390   0.000127   0.015079  
 55   0.543285  -0.307222   0.008888   0.000156   0.108826   0.339152   0.078220  -0.088387   0.000066   0.017838  
 56   0.532706  -0.283737   0.002375   0.000148   0.102698   0.464079  -0.156548  -0.018589   0.000116   0.019528  
 57   0.583623  -0.385123   0.026551   0.000183   0.090631            
 58   0.527170  -0.269540   0.003479   0.000141   0.094280            
 59   0.537021  -0.290998   0.014607   0.000171   0.155403            
 60   0.498319  -0.192782   0.012196   0.000117   0.043574            
 61   0.523013  -0.267371   0.001429   0.000179   0.132414            
 62   0.501716  -0.218162  -0.003458   0.000109   0.112257            
 63   0.509702  -0.215402   0.015172   0.000152   0.108634             
 64   0.601828  -0.414234   0.028989   0.000272   0.091321            
 65   0.486093  -0.198652  -0.016456   0.000107   0.095527            
 66   0.523323  -0.262507  -0.000540   0.000148   0.085874            
 67   0.515332  -0.237537  -0.008401   0.000117   0.110292   0.405806  -0.093689   0.023275   0.000128   0.024162  
 68   0.547669  -0.314049   0.003841   0.000156   0.122370   0.606365  -0.390516  -0.009269   0.000145   0.021951  
 69   0.517301  -0.248839  -0.001490   0.000128   0.093823   0.424794  -0.041734  -0.124109   0.000061   0.018162  
 70   0.533134  -0.284080  -0.004472   0.000146   0.099304   0.376946   0.004715  -0.068832   0.000081   0.019936  
 71   0.534375  -0.297227   0.005665   0.000157   0.059422   0.696757  -0.503283  -0.037048   0.000139   0.018771  
 72   0.527723  -0.304915   0.028685   0.000166   0.075009   0.697499  -0.502310  -0.037131   0.000139   0.015100  
 73   0.532210  -0.304946   0.018856   0.000163   0.029445   0.695664  -0.503527  -0.032484   0.000144   0.020585  
 74   0.532710  -0.324635   0.041288   0.000173   0.044780   0.404988  -0.095442   0.020255   0.000124   0.018318  
 75   0.507196  -0.196693  -0.037312   0.000103   0.081028   0.697840  -0.501484  -0.035911   0.000141   0.015552  
 76   0.525201  -0.356876   0.081402   0.000206   0.094769   0.695334  -0.502524  -0.029458   0.000147   0.019828  
 77   0.529672  -0.288294   0.006728   0.000151   0.047482   0.406140  -0.095017   0.015367   0.000120   0.024758  
 78   0.528670  -0.316181   0.031071   0.000170   0.046321   0.694208  -0.503084  -0.028745   0.000149   0.020427  
 79   0.510261  -0.299300   0.044864   0.000175   0.062647   0.403564  -0.097571   0.021391   0.000126   0.019131  
 80   0.533949  -0.303146   0.013213   0.000155   0.086478   0.546219  -0.278738  -0.018208   0.000124   0.017746  
 81   0.515015  -0.308336   0.050301   0.000177   0.067253   0.610754  -0.383798  -0.012959   0.000139   0.032684  
 82   0.529629  -0.285982   0.006538   0.000147   0.067988   0.539262  -0.268001  -0.011846   0.000124   0.039949  
 83   0.527093  -0.314831   0.033276   0.000174   0.074984   0.508246  -0.230029  -0.011202   0.000124   0.020360  
 84   0.511384  -0.305312   0.047343   0.000188   0.096424   0.401982  -0.101189   0.033118   0.000130   0.031398  
 85   0.525139  -0.261187  -0.005724   0.000132   0.036417   0.402024  -0.099964   0.027658   0.000128   0.023893  
 86   0.524287  -0.264370  -0.005172   0.000138   0.048846   0.696135  -0.501323  -0.029260   0.000147   0.020725  
 87   0.520158  -0.280838   0.015097   0.000150   0.088778   0.699553  -0.497109  -0.040580   0.000141   0.029837  
 88   0.510239  -0.246543   0.002648   0.000135   0.117525   0.492521  -0.211418  -0.000154   0.000126   0.041384  
 89   0.525248  -0.276246   0.001478   0.000145   0.094025   0.490557  -0.200943  -0.005772   0.000119   0.016534  
 90   0.526587  -0.277618   0.001493   0.000146   0.061147   0.505303  -0.231421   0.002853   0.000127   0.020581  
 91   0.531627  -0.287823   0.004230   0.000150   0.111040   0.699135  -0.497025  -0.040304   0.000139   0.033962  
 92   0.523437  -0.282810   0.014655   0.000154   0.109164   0.609480  -0.451085   0.065802   0.000197   0.091676  
 93   0.506874  -0.222908   0.004907   0.000107   0.111116            
 94   0.520519  -0.259221  -0.000479   0.000137   0.081166            
 95   0.501916  -0.194606   0.018539   0.000138   0.088159            
 96   0.522640  -0.272849   0.003129   0.000145   0.060961   0.492670  -0.208094  -0.007246   0.000123   0.025981  
 97   0.519180  -0.283234   0.014917   0.000154   0.082959   0.698237  -0.499422  -0.035920   0.000147   0.042723  
 98   0.534042  -0.275915  -0.006591   0.000135   0.083320   0.446371  -0.128621  -0.007465   0.000109   0.013784  
 99   0.522605  -0.270201   0.000893   0.000144   0.067569   0.406044  -0.100526   0.020403   0.000121   0.042262  
100   0.522584  -0.266143   0.001110   0.000139   0.066456   0.405076  -0.098248   0.020449   0.000120   0.038391  
101   0.520815  -0.270435   0.001967   0.000145   0.087136   0.693192  -0.498866  -0.027377   0.000154   0.031291  
102   0.525651  -0.270329  -0.000469   0.000141   0.098838   0.469901  -0.160608  -0.011017   0.000110   0.035693  
103   0.524404  -0.263961  -0.001334   0.000136   0.075948   0.406946  -0.096948   0.016400   0.000117   0.031326  
104   0.518365  -0.266535   0.003285   0.000142   0.069254   0.428853  -0.095954  -0.010602   0.000102   0.028232  
105   0.528976  -0.269413  -0.002078   0.000134   0.104911   0.691892  -0.499306  -0.021879   0.000156   0.031926  
106   0.518852  -0.255249  -0.000274   0.000134   0.052223   0.430564  -0.098886  -0.010768   0.000102   0.025899  
107   0.542638  -0.286916  -0.005663   0.000133   0.142384            
108   0.527812  -0.279738  -0.000353   0.000154   0.046445  







Table 7: Missing data points in 2 dbar-averaged files for cruise in1801. 
         "x" indicates missing data for the indicated parameters: 
         T=temperature; S/C=salinity and conductivity; O=oxygen; 
         F=fluorescence downcast; PAR=photosynthetically active radiation 
         downcast; TR=transmittance/beam attenuation downcast; 
         BS=backscatter downcast; F_up=fluorescence upcast; 
         PAR_up=photosynthetically active radiation upcast; 
         TR_up=transmittance/beam attenuation upcast. Note: 2 to 8 dbar 
         values (i.e. first four bins) not included here as they’re 
         missing for many casts.

         pressure (dbar)
station    where data     T  S/C  O  F  PAR  TR  BS  F_up  PAR_up  TR_up
            missing
———————  ———————————————  —  ———  —  —  ———  ——  ——  ————  ——————  —————
    6    10               x   x   x  x   x   x   x
   10    4520                     x
   10    4682-4698                x
   12    4458             x   x   x  x   x   x   x    x      x      x
   13    10               x   x   x  x   x   x   x
   21    10-14            x   x   x  x   x   x   x
   25    whole profile               x           x    x
   35    10               x   x   x  x   x   x   x
   41    10-12            x   x   x  x   x   x   x
   46    4392             x   x   x  x   x   x   x    x      x      x
   48    10               x   x   x  x   x   x   x
   85    10-14            x   x   x  x   x   x   x
  100    2428-2430            x   x
  106    whole profile               x           x    x




Table 8: Suspect CTD 2 dbar averages (not deleted from the CTD 2 dbar 
         average files) for the indicated parameters, for cruise in1801.

stn  suspect 2 dbar          parameters                      comment                  
      value (dbar)            
———  ——————————————  ——————————————————————————  ———————————————————————————————
 1       66-104      downcast trans/beam atten.  suspect profile shape, does not
                                                 match upcast     
 3       26-90       downcast trans/beam atten.  suspect profile shape, does not
                                                 match upcast     
 4      168-678      oxygen                      bottles flagged out for 
                                                 calibration due to significant 
                                                 downcast to upcast profile 
                                                 difference     
 4        2-114      downcast trans/beam atten.  suspect profile shape, does not
                                                 match upcast     
 5       80-690      oxygen                      bottles flagged out for 
                                                 calibration due to significant 
                                                 downcast to upcast profile 
                                                 difference      
 5   50-70, 80-120   downcast trans/beam atten.  suspect profile shape, does not
                                                 match upcast     
 6       46-64       downcast trans/beam atten.  suspect profile shape, does not      
                                                 match upcast      
21     3600-3854     oxygen                      may be low by ~2µmol/l as bottom                        
                                                 2 bottles flagged out for 
                                                 calibration      
107     850-1002     oxygen                      suspect as bottom bottle flagged 
                                                 out for calibration      




Table 9: Obvious bad salinity bottle samples (not deleted from bottle 
         data file) for cruise in1801 (note: there may be other less 
         obvious ones).

station  rosette position      station  rosette position      station  rosette position   
———————  ————————————————      ———————  ————————————————      ———————  ————————————————
   8           12                42           22                78           23   
  13           32                42            5                78           19     
  14           25                43           22                78           18   
  14           24                43           21                79           23    
  14            8                43           17                79            9    
  15            1                43           10                79            8    
  19           29                43            1                79            7    
  20           11                44           18                79            5    
  21           24                44           10                79            3    
  22           13                44            7                80           11    
  23           24                45            6                83           22    
  24           11                47           29                83           17    
  24           10                47           26                84           14    
  25           29                49           25                84            9    
  25           25                49            2                84            3    
  25           11                50           27                86           12    
  26           29                50            3                87           14    
  26           25                51           23                88           10    
  26           18                51           14                89           21    
  27           11                52           25                90            9    
  28           15                53           14                90            4    
  29           19                54           15                91            7    
  29            3                55           17                96            7    
  31            5                55           15                97           20    
  33           36                56            9                98           14    
  33           10                58           13                98           10    
  34           34                62           23                98            7    
  34           20                62           13                99           18    
  34           13                67           14                99           13    
  34            8                69            1                99           10    
  35            3                72           13               100           16    
  36            4                73           11               102           20    
  37            7                74           14               104           26    
  40           21                74           12               106           18    
  40            6                75           11               107            3    
  41           12                77           15                      




Table 10: Suspect (qc flag=3) and bad (qc flag=4) dissolved oxygen bottle 
          values for cruise in1801.

suspect samples (qc flag=3)     bad samples (qc flag = 4)
station  rosette position       station  rosette position
———————  ————————————————       ———————  ————————————————
    1         33                   13           32           
   21         2                    19           24           
   92         28                   21           24           
  107         2                    23           24           
                                   25           25, 29
                                   26           25, 29
                                   97           6
                                  102           20




Table 11: Suspect (qc flag=3) and bad (qc flag=4) nutrient sample values 
          for cruise in1801. For the nutrients, P=phosphate, 
          N=nitrate+nitrite, S=silicate. In the comments, % refers to % 
          of full scale (as listed in section 5.6). Note that nitrite and 
          ammonia are difficult to QC, due to the low concentrations 
          (approaching precision levels)

station  rosette position  nutrient         comment         flag           
———————  ————————————————  ————————  —————————————————————  ————
    9           18          P,N,S    high by at least ~10%    4           
   36           31          P        possibly high by ~4%     3           
   56           31          N        possibly low by ~6%      3           
   81            7          S        possibly low by ~3%      3           
  102           32          P        possibly high by ~4%     3           




Table 12: Scientific personnel (cruise participants) for cruise in1801.

Sophie Bestley             CTD
Benoit Legresy             CTD
Steve Rintoul              chief scientist, CTD
Mark Rosenberg             CTD, float deployments
Katherine Tattersall       CTD
Esmee van Wijk             CTD, float deployments

Dan Anderson               CFC
Mark Warner                CFC

Kate Berry                 carbon
Joshua Denholm             carbon
Leo Mahieu                 carbon
Craig Neill                carbon
Paula Conde Pardo          carbon
Abe Passmore               carbon

Andrew Bowie               GEOTRACES
Matt Corkill               GEOTRACES, most of everything and then some
Melanie East               GEOTRACES
Tom Holmes                 GEOTRACES
Pauline Latour             GEOTRACES
Pier van der Merwe         GEOTRACES
Morgane Perron             GEOTRACES
Christine Weldrick         GEOTRACES

Swan Li San Sow            genomics

Kristina Paterson          hydrochemistry
Christine Rees             hydrochemistry
Kendall Sherrin            hydrochemistry
Stephen Tibben             hydrochemistry

Dan Buonome                CAPRICORN, radiosondes
Ruhi Humphries             CAPRICORN, co-chief scientist
Jay Mace                   CAPRICORN, co-chief scientist
Kathryn Moore              CAPRICORN, monumental endeavour in aerosol lab
Alexander Norton           CAPRICORN
Chiemeriwo Godday Osuagwu  CAPRICORN
Isabel Suhr                CAPRICORN, radiosondes

Francis Chui               programmer
Matt Eckersley             doctor, CTD sampling
Ian McRobert               electronics
Peter Shanks               programmer
Tegan Sime                 voyage manager
Aaron Tyndall              electronics




Table 13: Summary of float deployments on cruise in1801.

float type        serial    latitude       longitude         UTC time      depth  CTD
                                                                            (m)
————————————————  ——————  —————————————  ——————————————  ————————————————  —————  ———
APEX APF-11       8156    45° 13.787' S  145° 50.734' E  1525, 12/01/2018   2850     6
APEX APF-11       8155    49° 36.726' S  143° 55.663' E  2338, 17/01/2018   3683    16
NAVIS             0688    48° 19.229' S  144° 30.747' E  1824, 16/01/2018   4076    13
SOCCOM            12736   53° 35.285' S  141° 51.457' E  0200, 22/01/2018   2690    29
SOCCOM            12779   55° 30.261' S  140° 43.212' E  1722, 23/01/2018   4180    33
SOCCOM            12784   58° 21.637' S  139° 51.055' E  1413, 25/01/2018   3996    39
SOCCOM            12769   60° 21.810' S  139° 51.251' E  0503, 27/01/2018   4420    44
SOCCOM            12782   62° 51.266' S  139° 50.917' E  0946, 29/01/2018   3200    49
SOCCOM            12709   64° 48.6’ S    139° 51.6’ E    0243, 31/01/2018   2590    54
SOCCOM            12702   65° 24.617' S  149° 59.995' E  2018, 03/02/2018   2890    68
SOCCOM            12741   62° 00.410' S  149° 59.260' E  1342, 06/02/2018   3769    78
SOCCOM            12748   63° 30.140' S  132° 05.520' E  2044, 11/02/2018   4047    91
SOCCOM            12370   58° 29.60’ S   132° 00.58’ E   2142, 15/02/2018   4664   103
BIO FLOAT         ??      60° 50.674' S  139° 51.088' E  2120, 27/01/2018   4389    45
pCO2 float        16003   60° 21.810' S  139° 51.251' E  0504, 27/01/2018   4420    44
pCO2 float        16011   63° 54.18’ S   149° 59.83’ E   0656, 05/02/2018   3660    74
pCO2 float        16001   60° 01.53’ S   132° 12.93’ E   0201, 15/02/2018   4660   100
pCO2 float        16009   56° 58.036' S  132° 09.574' E  1752, 16/02/2018   4532   106
deep SOLO         6042    60° 50.660' S  139° 51.968' E  2136, 27/01/2018   4388    45
deep SOLO         6041    61° 29.83’ S   132° 00.12’ E   0616, 14/02/2018   4538    97
deep SOLO         6040    60° 01.70’ S   132° 12.94’ E   0159, 15/02/2018   4660   100
deep SOLO         6039    58° 29.84’ S   132° 00.58’ E   2140, 15/02/2018   4664   103
deep SOLO         6038    56° 57.98’ S   132° 09.50’ E   1750, 16/02/2018   4532   106
Ninja (with O2 )  24      63° 21.31’ S   139° 49.83’ E   1642, 29/01/2018   3792    50
Ninja             22      65° 00.039' S  145° 30.106' E  0212, 03/02/2018   3340    67
Ninja             25      63° 30.157' S  149° 59.839' E  1556, 05/02/2018   3724    75
ARVOR             005     64° 13.274' S  139° 49.899' E  1524, 30/01/2018   3508    52
ARVOR             104     64° 36.226' S  149° 59.631' E  2042, 04/02/2018   3453    72
ARVOR             004     63° 05.287' S  132° 05.893' E  1510, 11/02/2018   4267    90




Figure 1: CTD station positions and ship's track for cruise in1801.

Figure 2: Conductivity ratio cbtl/ccal versus station number for cruise 
          in1801. The solid line follows the mean of the residuals for 
          each station; the broken lines are vvthe  standard deviation of 
          the residuals for each station. ccal = calibrated CTD 
          conductivity from the CTD upcast burst data; cbtl = ‘in situ’ 
          Niskin bottle conductivity, found by using CTD pressure and 
          temperature from the CTD upcast burst data in the conversion of 
          Niskin bottle salinity to conductivity.

Figure 3: Salinity residual (sbtl - scal) versus station number for 
          cruise in1801. The solid line is the mean of all the residuals; 
          the broken lines are ± the standard deviation of all the  
          residuals. scal = calibrated CTD salinity; sbtl = Niskin bottle 
          salinity value.

Figure 4: Difference between secondary and primary temperature sensors 
          with (a) pressure, and (b) temperature. Data are from the 
          upcast CTD data bursts at Niskin bottle stops.

Figure 5: Dissolved oxygen residual (obtl - ocal) versus station number 
          for cruise in1801. The solid line follows the mean residual for 
          each station; the broken lines are ± the standard deviation of 
          the residuals for each station. ocal=calibrated downcast CTD 
          dissolved oxygen; obtl=Niskin bottle dissolved oxygen value.

Figure 6: Nitrate+nitrite versus phosphate data for cruise in1801.

Figure 7a: Bulk plots showing intercruise comparisons of nitrate+nitrite 
           vs phosphate data for SR3 (low end of nutrient values not 
           included in plot).

Figure 7b: Bulk plots showing intercruise comparisons of nitrate+nitrite 
           vs phosphate data for south end of SR3 (including cruises 
           au1402 and au1602).

Figure 8: Bulk plots showing intercruise comparisons of silicate data for 
          SR3, shown as bottle salinity vs silicate (low end of silicate 
          values not included in plot).

Figure 9: Bulk plots showing intercruise comparisons of dissolved oxygen 
          data for SR3, shown as bottle salinity vs bottle dissolved 
          oxygen (and only plotting data below 500 dbar).








APPENDIX 1 – HYDROCHEMISTRY LAB/VOYAGE REPORT



         Marine
           National Facility


                             RV INVESTIGATOR
                       HYDROCHEMISTRY VOYAGE REPORT




Voyage:                                       in2018_v01
Chief Scientist:                             Steve Rintoul
Voyage title:                 Detecting Southern Ocean change from repeat 
                               hydrography, deep Argo and trace element
                                      biogeochemistry & CAPRICORN
Report compiled by:            Christine Rees, Kendall Sherrin, Stephen
                                       Tibben, Kristina Paterson
 





Contents


MNF - Highlights, issues, incidents & near misses                      32
Itinerary                                                              32
Key personnel list                                                     32
Hydrochemistry                                                         33
CTD stations                                                           33
Water sample bottles                                                   33
Nutrient analysis                                                      34
Salinity analysis                                                      35
Oxygen analysis                                                        36
HyPro 5.3                                                              36
Milli-Q Systems                                                        37
General Labs                                                           37
Consumables given                                                      37
Freight to ship                                                        38
Freight from ship                                                      38
Recommendations for next voyage                                        38
Chemistry inventory                                                    38
Temperature Plot (see .pdf version)
Miscellaneous                                                          38
Appendix                                                               38




MNF - Highlights, issues, incidents & near misses

The main objective of the voyage was to quantify changes in Antarctic 
Bottom Water in the Australian Antarctic Basin by analysing nutrients, 
salinity and dissolved oxygen samples. The samples were collected along 
the GO-SHIP hydrographic reference sections SR3 and S4, on the Antarctic 
shelf near the Mertz glacier and along two transect lines at 150° E and 
132° E. Five nutrients were analysed; silicate, phosphate, nitrate + 
nitrite, nitrite and ammonium. This was the first time ammonium has been 
measured successfully on every station for a hydrographic voyage. 

High quality data was produced for the three measured parameters. 
Certified reference materials for nutrients in seawater were within the 
specified limits of the certified value. The chief scientist highlighted 
to all participants that it is the best quality data ever collected along 
the SR3 transect and congratulated the hydrochemistry team on their 
efforts.

A large amount of time was spent during the voyage trouble shooting the 
Niskin bottles for leaks.

The Guild line salinometers were also problematic during the voyage, with 
one instrument needing a fan replaced which made the instrument unstable 
for the remainder of the voyage.  The other instrument had a blockage on 
the inlet tubing within the water bath requiring a small amount of tubing 
to be removed where the blockage occurred.

There was one incident within the lab where the drain pipe leading from 
the Auto-Analyser-3 was knocked out of the scupper and the waste spilled 
over the laboratory floor. This caused slightly lower quality ammonium 
data for the samples being analysed at the time due to the Milli-Q water 
container becoming contaminated from ammonia fumes.  The pipe was fixed 
and the lab floor was washed with a mop.

A freezing experiment for nutrient samples to determine how freezing 
affects nutrient concentrations over time was conducted on board during 
the voyage, the experiment is continuing on shore in Hobart.


Itinerary

Depart  Date        Time
Hobart  11/01/2018  0900
Arrive  Date        Time
Hobart  22/02/2018  1000

Key personnel list

      Name              Role        Organisation
—————————————————  ———————————————  ————————————
Tegan Sime         Voyage Manager      CSIRO
Steve Rintoul      Chief Scientist     CSIRO
Christine Rees     Hydrochemist        CSIRO
Kendall Sherrin    Hydrochemist        CSIRO
Stephen Tibben     Hydrochemist        CSIRO
Kristina Paterson  Hydrochemist        CSIRO




Hydrochemistry


Analysis parameter      Total    Processing Status
                       Samples     at voyage end
                        taken
—————————————————————  ————————  —————————————————
Nutrients              2825 CTD      Completed 
(Seal AA3)             63 UWY        Completed
                       108 EXP       Completed

Salinity (Guildline    2819 CTD      Completed
salinometer)           30 TSG        Completed

Dissolved Oxygen       2824 CTD      Completed
(automated titration)  38 UWY        Completed
                       1 EXP         Completed



    Analysis               Data files
—————————————————  ———————————————————————————
AA3 Files          in 2018_v01nut001 to nut103
00 files           in 2018_v01oxy001 to oxy103

Salinometer Files  ln2018 _v01sal001 to sal108


CTD stations

Total No. of CTD Stations    108



Water sample bottles

• 36 bottle rosette used, 12 L Niskin bottles.
• Bottles were labelled next to the spigots to minimise confusion for 
  samplers.
• Many issues were reported with the bottle end caps seating incorrectly. 
  Members of the science perso nnel attr ibuted this to the t ightness of 
  the tripped lanyards, and presence of large, heavy floats which could 
  be pulled around in t urbulent water or being brought on deck. In most 
  cases this was a superf icial issue, with bottles failing a leak test 
  but their samples remaining unaffected. Large floats were removed and 
  the lanyards were altered to better reflect the stock OTE 
  configuration.
• Mark Rosenberg will provide a copy of the Logbook as to what repairs 
  were done to each niskin bottle, as the sampling teams took on the 
  majority of this responsibility.




Nutrient analysis

Nutrient seawater samples assayed using a Seal AA3HR segmented flow 
instrument.

• Standards prepared were for Antarctic concentrations, Calibrant 6 used 
  for NOx and Silicate. Two sets of stock standards were prepared and 
  compared to the old set of stocks on board the ship (see appendix for 
  results). The 2 sets were deemed good to use.  Only stock set 1 were 
  used during the voyage.
• Working standards were prepared one at a time and decanted immediately 
  into the 30 ml polypropylene tubes, this was to minimize silicate 
  contamination.
• Intermediate standards were prepared approximately every 3 days.
• CTD Samples were collected in 30 ml HDPE bottles with screw cap, 
  underway samples were collected in 10  ml polypropylene tubes with 
  screw cap and experimental samples were collected in 30 ml 
  polypropylene tubes with screw caps.
• A Reference Material Nutrient Seawater (RM NS CC, CB & CD) was analysed 
  initially on first run. Thereafter CC was run in every analytical run 
  and CB and CD ran intermittently.
• All samples assayed within 12 hours of collection, samples were kept in 
  the dark or refrigerated until analysis. Samples were taken out of 
  fridge at least 2 hours before analysis.
• Tray protocol consisted of after each Drift, a Null (LNSW), Null 
  (wash), Baseline (MQ)
  - this improves the ammonium analysis and helps stop the low ammonium 
    samples from going negative.
• The concentrated sulphuric acid (H2S04) trap for ammonium (NH4) 
  analysis was changed to 10% H2SO4, as the pH is still low enough to 
  trap NH4 and it is safer.
• The standard cleaning protocol after each run was performed. This 
  consisted of MQ water for 10 minutes and then 10% Hypochlorite for each 
  channel except NH4 and 10% HCl through the NH4 channel for 10 minutes 
  followed by MQ for 10 minutes.
• If there was noise seen in the phosphate or silicate channel then they 
  were given an extra clean with NaOH and EDTA.
• The MQ containers and wash pot were also cleaned regularly with 10% 
  Hypochlorite.
• The pump tubes were changed approximately every 70 hours, pharmed air 
  tubing was changed twice during the voyage.
• The Cd column was changed when the conversion efficiency dropped to 
  98%.
• The CTD samples were warmed in the sink in 16-20°C water.
• The lids were kept on the samples until all the standards and QC's had 
  been analysed.  Then they were removed and covered individually with 
  foil.
• All data files on Nutrient PC - AACE software saved in voyage folder 
  (in2018_v01)
• For run nut021, the ammonia results are slightly lower than expected 
  due to a higher than usual background. The cause of the higher 
  background was identified after the run, the culprit being the drainage 
  pipe had become misaligned with the scupper. This caused the AA3 waste, 
  containing high concentrations of ammonium, to be spilt across the lab 
  and under the benches. This was immediately cleaned up, with the floors 
  being completely cleaned before the next analysis. The background was
  significantly lower for the next analysis. The drain pipe was fixed 
  before the end of the day to ensure this same issue could not happen 
  again. It was likely caused by the rough sea conditions and a tote box 
  sliding into the pipe and knocking it from the scupper.
• Nitrite analysis was repeated on CTD25 and 26 due to the RMN S, 
  internal QC and BQC all stepping up, the waterfall profiles also showed 
  the samples were offset from previous CTD's.  The repeated results were 
  better, the cause may have been the NEDD colour reagent.
• On CTD 56 run Nut056 the nitrite baseline stepped up on sample 5627 and 
  5625, then stepped back down on 5624 and 5623 but then stepped back up 
  on 5622 and stayed elevated. Drift s are also elevated and end 
  baselines. Flagged all data for NO2 as bad.
• Communication was a problem to the auto-sampler, however once the 
  serial/usb cable was changed to a different type this problem no longer 
  occurred.




Salinity analysis

• Guildline 71613 was calibrated with OSIL P161.
• 21/1/2018. The salinometer started up as usual and a new file was 
  created. Before a sample could be run the software displayed the error 
  message that comms had been lost. Reconnecting the software using the 
  connect button on the top right resulted in a 'run time error 5' 
  message and the software shutting down. This was resolved by restarting 
  the computer twice and did not recur on the 21/1. The salinometer had 
  previously lost comms twice during the same run (a few days prior), 
  each time it was thought to be due to flushing the cell while still in 
  the read position. The two errors may or may not be related
• 24/1/2018 06:30 UTC prior to new run (during the set up phase) the fan 
  of salinometer 71613 failed (partial failure) characterized by very 
  loud buzzing noise and vibrations as it rattled the external case. 
  Possibly bearings? It was replaced and sampling resumed.
• 30/01/2018 salinometer 71613 began 'wandering' throughout analyses. 
  Sample conductivity measurements would drift to lower values during 
  each reading. Samples were analysed on the backup instrument, 72151, 
  with on issues.
• 31/01/2018 salinometer 71613 bath was drained and conductivity cell 
  removed from inside. Cell removed from electronics and cleaned with a 
  mixture of 85% ethanol (methanol suggested but not available), 15% 
  Milli-Q water, and 5% Decon-90. The cell was left to soak in this 
  solution for 24 hours before being flushed with Milli-Q and reassembled 
  inside the instrument. The lamp globes were replaced and the bath was 
  refilled with new Milli-Q water before the instrument was powered back 
  on.
• 08/02/18 - after a few runs of sporadic bad readings that were not also 
  reflected in sensor or oxygen/nutrient their cause was investigated. It 
  was noted that some inserts were split very close to the cap-side edge 
  and thus likely not sealing the sample correctly. The clean inserts 
  were then inspected between analysis and being handed to the samplers 
  and any compromised pieces removed. In addition, the container for the 
  clean inserts was also rinsed clean and wiped dry to remove any salt 
  that may have accumulated during the voyage.
• Cast 103 sampled without using sampling tube.
• 15/2/2018 During analysis of CTD 099 salinometer 72151 began to 
  struggle with flushing/rinsing the cell. More speed on the pump was 
  needed to push the sample through the cell and noticeable back pressure 
  built up on occasions leading to leaks after the peristaltic pump and 
  the tubing popping off at that location. Cleaning with ethanol helped 
  for a short time. The next day the salinometer was opened, tubing 
  relating to the air flush of the cell and sample water flow path was 
  cleaned with fine copper wire. This did not resolve the problem and 
  SITS (Ian McRoberts) attended found there was a build-up of material at 
  the end of the inlet flow path where it connects to a stainless steel 
  through to the temperature controlled bath.  Cutting out the affected 
  part of tubing and reattaching was enough to solve the problem.
• The second (and final) TSG calibration samples run on 21 Feb 2018 ran 
  under filename in2018_v01SalTSGcalibrationfilebatch2. This file name 
  was too long for the export.csvexcel file function of the software and 
  caused an error. A print screen of the results is located with the 
  other TSG calibration data in V:\current\hydrochem\hypro\Salinity\TSG 
  Cal Results.




Oxygen analysis

• Water bath started leaking quite severely out the front, where the 
  clear acrylic joins to rest of the water bath. The brown adhesive used 
  to seal the join had become brittle and cracked under slight pressure 
  from a flask. This was fixed by using some Aquafix, a waterproof epoxy. 
  It is flexible and should resist cracking and forming leaks.
• DO instrument lost connection to computer, the standardisation 
  information was lost from the day, reverting to the previous day's 
  standardisation. Standardisation information was written down in log 
  book however, so samples were analysed using old standardisation. The 
  results were then recalculated using the macro and results copied back 
  into the. LST for HyPro to read in. This affected files oxy008-009.
• 31/01/2018 UV lamp would not power on before analysis of CTD 54, so it 
  was replaced. CTD 54 was analysed the following day. Detector voltages 
  were more stable after the installation of a new lamp.
• 14/02/2018 sample line from bottle to burette split.  Air was dispensed 
  into one sample (CTD97 RP06) which gave a bad result. This was 
  apparently due to over-tightening of the connection which had damaged 
  the sample line. The damaged piece of sample line was re moved and the 
  new opening flanged to provide a functional seal.


HyPro 5.3
• Version of HyPro 5.3 was used for the voyage.
• Initially Log editor was not functioning due to scripts between seasave 
  and CAPPro not working. However Dap fixed this issue on the 12/01/2018.
• Issue arose where nutrient run nut011, did not have a CC for NOx due to 
  restart of analysis. HyPro did not have the capability to deal with 
  this scenario, Francis however fixed this issue by checking if a CC 
  exists, if not it proceeds without producing a plot for column 
  efficiency. See AA3Analysis.m line 2494.
• Occasionally for NOx placing the # at the beginning of the peak start 
  column did not flag the data as BAD, and a # would need to be placed in 
  front of the AD value column for the data to be flagged as BAD.
• Salinity and the CTD salinity was incorrectly plotted at times within 
  the waterfall plots. It looked like there was an offset when there 
  wasn't one.
• Suggestions for HyPro updates:
  o  HyPro to have same flagging system as "WOCE"
  o  Option to export BAD data within the deployment data to csv
  o  Option to not export BAD data to netcdf file


Milli - Q Systems

• No issues, routine maintenance was performed during mobilisation for 
  in2018_v01. See maintenance log for more information.


General Labs

• 12/02/18 Lime boxes were low on limestone. Refilled by Kendall with new 
  limestone. This new limestone seemed to be a higher purity than the 
  previous batch.  New batch is completely white. Old batch was mottled 
  and left undissolved gravel pieces which were cleared out of the boxes 
  in the Hydrochemistry lab.
• HyPro matlab processing computer is suspected to have a Trojan/adware 
  and kept on downloading, processing data and sending data back to 
  unknown IP addresses. It was using the majority of the ships bandwidth 
  so was switched off from the internet.
• The folder in2018_v01_AA3_files for storing a backup copy of the AACE 
  run files also had the master .anl and a few other files copied and 
  placed into it.  These do not automatically get copied to this folder. 
  The master .anl file is required if you want to process the run files 
  through AACE.
• The master .anl file was accidently deleted twice from the AACE folder 
  in2018_v01, which meant the run files would not work. The file was 
  restored the first time from the bin on the desktop and the second time 
  from the backup copy in the in2018_v01_AA3_files folder.


Consumables given

• Order more tubing for the AA3: 116-0536-18c
• Order more of inlet tubing on guildlines
• Order 100 ml plastic measuring cylinder
• Order 1 litre plastic conical flask with screw lid for nutrients
• 2 litre amber coloured bottle for OPA reagent




Freight to ship

• N/A


Freight from ship

• N/A


Recommendations for next voyage 

Chemistry inventory

Available to view in Hydrochemistry confluence: 
https://confluence.csiro.au/display/HYD/Hydrochemistry


Temperature Plot

The AC in the nutrient lab was set to cool at 21°C and the salinity lab 
cool at 24°C on leaving Hobart.

AC in salinity lab was set on heat 24°C while the main laboratory AC was 
set to cool 21°C. The salt lab was still being cooled however, indicating 
that the slave control unit is the one in the salt lab. Once the main 
laboratory AC was switched to heat 20°C, the salt lab was heated. This 
change occurred on the 16/01 at approximately 0630 local time. The main 
lab was changed to heat at 19°C a couple hours after the initial change 
and the fan was set at 2.

On the 19/01/2018 the temperature in the salt lab was too hot and the 
AC's were switched to cool again. Main lab was cool at 22°C initially and 
then later 21°C as it was still over 22°C. The salt lab was set to cool 
at 24°C. On the 31/01/2018 the AC in ma in lab was set back to heat at 
18°C as the room was still too warm.

Along with the Hobo temperature profiles, laboratory temperature was 
logged into Grafana.


Hydrochemistry Lab (file located in voyage folder): Scale is 18°C to 
24.5°C

Salinity Lab (located in salinity folder): Scale is l8°C to 27°C



Miscellaneous






Appendix


Table 1: Mean concentrations after 10 measurements of a Cal 3 produced 
         from each stock standard. The percentage difference between the 
         new stock standard mean and the old stock standards means is 
         shown.

                   Old Stock(A/D)  New Stock 1 (A/D)  New Stock 2 (A/D)
                   ——————————————  —————————————————  —————————————————
NOx                    36958.7          36978.5            37018.59 
Difference to Old                        0.054%             0.162%

Phosphate              37653.2          37698.2            37665.6
Difference to Old                        0.119%             0.033%

Silicate               16459.1          16466.1            16432.5
Difference to Old                        0.042%            -0.162%

Nitrite                19550.5          19506.2            19468.8
Difference to Old                       -0.227%            -0.420%

Ammonia                33390.8          32840.8            32642.0
Difference to Old                        -1.67%             -2.29%










APPENDIX 2 – HYDROCHEMISTRY DATA PROCESSING REPORT

     Marine
      National Facility


                             RV INVESTIGATOR
                    HYDROCHEMISTRY DATA PROCESS REPORT



 
Voyage:                                IN2018_v01

Chief Scientist:                    Dr. Steve Rintoul

Voyage title:              Detecting Southern Ocean change from
                            repeat hydrography, deep Argo and
                        trace element biogeochemistry & CAPRICORN

Report compiled by:  Christine Rees, Kendall Sherrin, Stephen Tibben
                                & Kristina Paterson


Contents

1  Executive Summary                                                   41
2  Itinerary                                                           41
3  Key personnel list                                                  41
4  Summary                                                             42
   4.1  Hydrochemistry Samples Analysed                                42
   4.2  Rosette and CTD                                                42
   4.3  Data Procedure Summary                                         42
5  Salinity Data Processing                                            43
   5.1  Salinity Parameter Summary                                     43
   5.2  Salinity Method                                                43
   5.3  CTD Salinities vs Hydrochemistry Salinities Plot               44
   5.4  Missing or Flagged Salinity Data and Actions taken             44
6  Dissolved Oxygen Data Processing                                    47
   6.1  Dissolved Oxygen Parameter Summary                             47
   6.2  Dissolved Oxygen Method                                        47
   6.3  CTD Dissolved Oxygen vs Hydrochemistry Dissolved Oxygen Plot   48
   6.4  Dissolved Oxygen thiosulphate normality and blanks across 
        voyage                                                         48
   6.5  Missing or Flagged Dissolved Oxygen Data and Actions taken     48
7  Nutrient Data Processing                                            48
   7.1  Nutrient Parameter Summary                                     48
   7.2  Nutrient Methods                                               49
   7.3  Instrument Calibration and Data Parameter Summary              49
   7.4  Accuracy - Reference Material for Nutrient in Seawater (RMNS) 
        Plots                                                          51
        7.4.1  Silicate RMNS Plot                  (see .pdf version)
        7.4.2  Phosphate RMNS Plot                 (see .pdf version)
        7.4.3  Nitrate + Nitrite (NOx) RMNS Plot   (see .pdf version)
        7.4.4  Nitrite RMNS Plot                   (see .pdf version)
   7.5  Internal Quality Control                                       52
   7.6  Analytical Precision                                           53
   7.7  Sampling Precision                                             54
        7.7.1  Silicate Duplicate/Replicates Plot  (see .pdf version)
        7.7.2  Phosphate Duplicate/Replicates Plot (see .pdf version)
        7.7.3  Nitrate + Nitrite (NOx) Duplicate/Replicates Plot (.pdf)
        7.7.4  Nitrite Duplicate/Replicates Plot   (see .pdf version)
        7.7.5  Ammonia Duplicate/Replicates Plot   (see .pdf version)
        7.7.6  Redfield Ratio Plot (14.0)          (see .pdf version)
   7.8  Flagged Nutrient Calibration and Quality Control Data          54
   7.9  Missing or Flagged Nut ri ent Data and Actio ns taken          58
   7.10 Temperature & Humidity Changeover Nutrient Analyses            62
8  Appendix                                                            62
   8.1  Salinity Reference Matrial                                     62
   8.2  HyPro Flag Key for CSV & NetCDF file                           62
   8.3  GO-SHIP Specifications                                         63
   8.4  RMNS Values for each CTD Deployment                            64
   8.5  Internal Quality Control Values for each CTD Deployment        67
9  References                                                          68




1  Executive Summary

Nutrients, dissolved oxygen and salinity samples were collected and 
analysed through the full depth for climate studies and to quantify 
changes in the Antarctic Bottom Water in the Australian Antarctic Basin. 
The samples were collected along the GO-SHIP hydrographic reference 
sections SR3 and S4, on the Antarctic shelf near the Mertz glacier and 
along two transect lines at 150°E and 132°E. Five nutrients were 
analysed: silicate, phosphate, nitrate + nitrite, nitrite and ammonium. 
This was the first time ammonium has been measured successfully on every 
station for a hydrographic voyage.

High quality data was produced for the three measured parameters. 
Certified reference materials for nutrients in seawater were within the 
specified limits of the certified value.

All finalized data can be obtained from the CSIRO data centre Contact: 
DataLibrariansOAMNF@csiro.au.




2  Itinerary

Hobart to Hobart 11 January 2018 to 22 February 2018



3  Key personnel list

Name               Role                    Organisation          
—————————————————  ——————————————————————  —————————————————————
Steve Rintoul      Chief Scientist         CSIRO & ACE CRC          
Tegan Sime         Voyage Manager          CSIRO          
Alain Protat       Principal Investigator  Bureau of Meteorology          
Andrew Bowie       Principal Investigator  IMAS-UTAS/ACE CRC          
Bronte Tilbrook    Principal Investigator  CSIRO & ACE CRC          
Lev Bodrossy       Principal Investigator  CSIRO          
Christine Rees     Hydrochemist            CSIRO          
Kendall Sherrin    Hydrochemist            CSIRO          
Stephen Tibben     Hydrochemist            CSIRO          
Kristina Paterson  Hydrochemist            CSIRO
  
  
  
  
4  Summary  
  
4.1  Hydrochemistry Samples Analysed

Analysis                                Number of Samples
——————————————————————————————————————  —————————————————
Salinity (Guildline Salinometer)            2819 CTD
                                            30TSG

Dissolved Oxygen (automated titration)      2824 CTD
                                            38 UWY
                                            1 EXP

Nutrients (AA3)                             2825 CTD
                                            63 UWY
                                            108 EXP

Note:

• Conductivity Temperature Density (CTD); samples collected from NISKIN 
  bottles on the CTD rosette.
• Underway (UWY); samples collected from underway clean instrument 
  seawater supply in the PCO2 lab.
• Experimental (EXP): sample from microcosm experiments
• For sample information on UWY and EXP samples refer to the 
  Hydrochemistry ELog from the voyage.


4.2  Rosette and CTD

• 108 CTD stations were sampled with a 36 bottle rosette (12 L).
• See in2018_v01_HYD_VoyageReport.pdf (voyage report) for more details on 
  sample collection.


4.3  Data Procedure Summary


The procedure for data processing is outlined below.

Figure 1: The processing steps for hydrology data following sample assay.














5  Salinity Data Processing

5.1  Salinity Parameter Summary


Details
————————————————————————  ——————————————————————————————————————————————
HyPro Version             5.3

Instrument                Guildline Autosal Laboratory Salinometer 
                          8400(8) - SN 72151 and SN 71613

Software                  OSIL Data Logger ver 1.2

Methods                   Hydrochemistry Operations Manual + Quick 
                          Reference Manual

Accuracy                  + 0.001 practical salinity units

Analyst(s)                Kristina Paterson

Lab Temperature (±0.5°C)  21.5 - 23.5°C during analysis.	

Bath Temperature          24.0l°C

Reference Material        Osil IAPSO - Batch P161 and P158 (see appendix 
                          8.1)

Sampling Container type   200 ml volume OSIL bottles made of type II 
                          glass (clear) with disposable plastic insert 
                          and plastic screw cap.

Sample Storage            Samples held in Salt Room for 6 - 12 hrs to 
                          reach 22°C before analsis

Comments                  Both instruments were used interchangeably

 

5.2  Salinity Method

The method uses a high precision laboratory salinometer (Guildline 
Autosal 8400B) which is operated in accordance with its technical manual.

Practical salinity (S) is defined in terms of the ratio (K_15) of the 
electrical conductivity measured at 15°C 1atm of seawater to that of a 
potassium chloride (KCI) solution of mass fraction 32.4356 x 10^-3.

The Autosal is calibrated with standard seawater (OSIL, IAPSO) of known 
conductivity ratio against which the samples are measured. The Autosal is 
calibrated before each batch run of samples.

Salinity samples are collected into 200ml OSIL bottles - from the bottom 
via a PTFE straw filled till overflowing. The sample is decanted to allow 
a headspace of approximately 25cm^3. A plastic insert is fitted, the 
bottle inverted and rinsed then capped and stored cap-down until 
measured. To measure, the salinometer cell is flushed three times with 
the sample and then measured after the fourth and fifth flush. Further 
flush-measurement cycles are done where the initial values are more than 
3 digits different. The conductivity ratio data is captured by the Osil 
data logger vl.2 program which then calculates the practical salinity.

        
5.3  CTD Salinities vs Hydrochemistry Salinities Plot


5.4  Missing or Flagged Salinity Data and Actions taken

Data is flagged based on notes from CTD sampling log sheet, observations 
during analysis, and examination of depth profile and waterfall plots.


CTD  RP   Run  Flag  Reason for Flag or Action
———  ———  ———  ————  ————————————————————————————————————————————————————
008  D12    8  133   Salinometer measurement was good, potentially 
                     sampled from the wrong niskin (niskin 11).    
021  K16  021  133   Bottle was dropped/some sample spilled. The
                     subsequent reading was at first unstable (poor
                     agreement between readings) then stable but
                     comparatively low salinity/out of profile.    
021  K24  021  133   Salinometer measurement was good. Comparatively
                     low salinity/out of profile.    
023  E24  023  133   Comparatively high Salinity/out of profile, unusual
                     nutrient and cfc data points suggests bottle fired 
                     at wrong depth    
024  K10  024   69   First effort to sample was unstable, second effort 
                     was comparatively stable across 3 readings but high    
                     compared to CTD/out of profile.    
025  C25  025  133   Out of profile (as is nuts and possibly other        
                     measurements) likely fired at wrong depth    
025  C29  025  133   Out of profile (as is nuts and possibly other    
                     measurements) likely fired at wrong depth    
026  E29  026   69   Sample was unstable during analysis (three attempts    
                     to make a stable measurement), cause unknown    
026  E25  026  133   Sample was analysed ok, result out of profile cause    
                     unknown    
033  C10  033  133   Salinometer measurement was good, high/ out of  
                     profile.  
033  C36  033  133   The first sample attempt was variable with a large  
                     difference between the two readings, the second 
                     sample was comparatively stable between the two  
                     readings but in comparison to the rest of the cast 
                     is out of profile/high  
034  M34  034  133   Result is out of profile and comparatively high.  
035  G03  035  133   Analysis was good and agreement good, sample is out 
                     of profile (high) cause unknown  
043  E17  043  133   The sample was unstable and the result constantly  
                     increasing during analysis. The sample is high and 
                     out of profile  
043  E10  043  133   Salinometer measurement was good. Result is high/ 
                     out of profile.  
043  E0l  043  133   Salinometer measurement was good. Result is high/out 
                     of profile.      
047  C26  045  133   Salinometer measurement was good. The result is out 
                     of profire, cause unknown, The measurement over the 
                     entire CTD was the most problematic to date, small 
                     bubbles forming on the electrodes and other unknown 
                     problems causing jumps of up to .003 units  
047  C29  046  133   Salinometer measurement was good. The result is out 
                     of profile, cause unknown, The measurement over the 
                     entire CTD was the most problematic to date, small 
                     bubbles forming on the electrodes and other unknown 
                     problems causing jumps of up to .003 units  
050  A03  050  133   High salinity/out of profile, measurement was 
                     erratic and difficult to obtain two readings within 
                     QC accepted range of each other.   
052  E25  052  069   Salinity is comparatively high for the profile, but 
                     mimics/exaggerates a feature (spike/increase) seen 
                     in the CTD data. The sample needed two measurements, 
                     the first was low with poor agreement over two 
                     readings, the second reading was ok  
055  M31  055  133   The sample ran poorly 2 times (significant 
                     difference between the two readings, internally 
                     stable for each of the 5 sub-readings within a read- 
                     ing), third try was stable but the value is high  
055  M15  055  133   The sample ran poorly on the first attempt stepping  
                     up from 34.7044 to 34.7080, and remaining stable at 
                     the higher reading on the second attempt. Both 
                     results were significantly higher than the CTD.  
056  G09  056  133   The sample analysed poorly on four attempts - one  
                     was within or close to acceptable limits but the 
                     final result is high/out of profile. Could be 
                     related to salt inserts (conclusion post discovery 
                     of the lid holes on CTD 083). It was APPROXIMATELY 
                     at this point that inserts from the reserve bag of 
                     good/new inserts were introduced into circulation 
                     and which were later found to have approximately 50 
                     with punctures near the top lip due to the insertion 
                     of a screwdriver to remove the inserts from the 
                     sample bottle. Some inserts with this problem may 
                     have been in circulation for the entire voyage, and 
                     may be the reason for anomalous high salinity 
                     readings.  
058  C13  058   69   The sample had poor agreement during the first  
                     analysis attempt, and was low/out of profile.  
067  E14  067  133   Salinometer measurement was good, high salinity/out 
                     of profile cause unknown. Could be related to salt 
                     inserts (conclusion post discovery of the lid holes 
                     after CTD 083)  
069  C0l  069  133   High salinity, cause unknown. Sample was run twice 
                     due to instability second reading was stable (but
                     high compared to the rest of the profile and CTD
                     salinity). Could be related to salt inserts 
                     (conclusion post discovery of the lid holes on CTD 
                     083)  
073  Ell  073  133   Salinometer measurement was good. Results is
                     low/ out of profile. Could be related to salt 
                     inserts (conclusion post discovery of the lid holes 
                     on CTD 083)  
074  M12  074  133   The sample analysed poorly on the first attempt and 
                     well on the second attempt, but the value is
                     high/out of profile. Could be related to salt 
                     inserts (conclusion post discovery of the lid holes 
                     on CTD 083)
077  Gl5  077  133   Salinometer measurement was good. Results is low/out 
                     of profile. Could be related to salt inserts 
                     (conclusion post discovery of the lid holes on CTD 
                     083)
078  M23  078   69   The sample analysed poorly and took 4 tries. 
                     Consensus was reached finally but there were 
                     significant differences between readings.
078  M18  078  133   The sample analysed poorly and took 3 tries. 
                     Consensus was reached but high compared to the CTD
                     profile. Could be related to salt inserts 
                     (conclusion post discovery of the lid holes 
                     on CTD 083)
079  A23  079  133   Low/out of profile, sample ran poorly (three 
                     attempts). Could be related to salt inserts 
                     (conclusion post discovery of the lid holes 
                     on CTD 083)
083  M17  083  133   Analysed poorly. A hole was found in one insert
                     from this CTD, not confirmed to be from this sample,
                     but likely was from this sample based on the cluster
                     of recent "off" samples
086  C12  086  113   High salinity caused by small slit in insert.
087  J14  087  133   High salinity caused by small slit in insert.
101  M16  101   69   Sample analysed poorly on 1st attempt. High/out of 
                     profile (not caused by hole in insert)    
102  B20  201  133   High/out of profile , potentially a misfire, suspect 
                     nutrient results also    
















6  Dissolved Oxygen Data Processing


6.1  Dissolved Oxygen Parameter Summary


Details
——————————————————————  —————————————————————————————————————————————————
HyPro Version           5.3

Instrument              Automated Photometric Oxygen system

Software                SCRIPPS

Methods                 SCRIPPS

Accuracy                0.01 ml/L + 0.5%

Analyst(s)              Stephen Tibben & Kendall Sherrin

Lab Temperature (±l°C)  Variable, 20.0 - 23.0°C

Sample Container type   Pre-numbered glass 140 ml glass vial w/stopper, 
                        sorted into 18 per box and boxes labelled A to S.

Sample Storage          Samples were stored within Hydrochemistry lab 
                        under the forward starboard side bench until 
                        analysis. All samples were analysed within 48 hrs

Comments                8 - 34 samples were collected from each 
                        deployment


 
6.2  Dissolved Oxygen Method

SCRIPPS method used. The method is based on the whole-bottle modified 
Winkler titration of Carpenter (1965) plus modifications by Culberson et 
al (1991).

Manganese chloride followed by alkaline iodide, is added to the sample, 
and the precipitated manganous hydroxide is distributed evenly throughout 
the bottle by shaking. At this stage, the dissolved oxygen oxidizes an 
equivalent amount of Mn (II) to Mn (IV). Just before titration, the 
sample is acidified, converting the Mn (IV) back to the divalent state
liberating an amount of Iodine equivalent to the original dissolved 
oxygen content of the water. The Iodine is auto-titrated with a 
standardised thiosulphate solution using a Met Rohm 665 Dosimat with a 1 
ml burette. The endpoint is determined by measuring changes in the UV 
absorption of the tri-iodide ion at 365 nm. The point at which there is 
no change in absorbance is the end point.

The thiosulphate solution is standardised by titrating a 10ml aliquot of 
potassium iodate primary standard. The blank correction is determined 
from the difference between two consecutive titres for 1 ml aliquots of 
the same potassium iodate solution.


6.3  CTD Dissolved Oxygen vs Hydrochemistry Dissolved Oxygen Plot


6.4 Dissolved Oxygen thiosulphate normality and blanks across voyage


6.5  Missing or Flagged Dissolved Oxygen Data and Actions taken

Data is flagged as Good, Suspect or Bad in HyPro based on notes from CTD 
sampling log sheet, observations during analysis, and examination of 
depth profile and waterfall plots.






7  Nutrient Data Processing


7.1  Nutrient Parameter Summary


Details

HyPro Version          5.3

Instrument             AA3

Software               Seal AACE 6.10

Methods                AA3 Analysis Methods internal manual

Nutrients analysed        Silicate      Phosphate     Nitrate+Nitrite     Nitrite         Ammonia
                       -------------  --------------  ---------------  --------------  --------------
Concentration Range    140 µmol l^-1  3 µmol l^-1     42.0 µmol l^-1   1.4 µmol l^-1   2.0 µmol l^-1

Method Detection       0.2 µmol l^-1  0.02 µmol l^-1  0.02 µmol l^-1   0.02 µmol l^-1  0.02 µmol l^-1  
Limit* (MDL)

Matrix Corrections           N              N               N                N               N

Analyst(s)             Christine Rees, Kendall Sherrin, Stephen Tibben

Lab Temperature        Variable, 19.0 - 22.0°C
(±1°C)

Reference MateriaI     RMNS - CC, CB, CD

Sampling Container     50 ml HOPE screw cap lids for CTD samples
type                   30 ml polypropylene sample tubes for experimental samples
                       10 m l polypropylene sample tubes for underway samples

Sample Storage         < 2 hrs at room temperature or ≤ 12 hrs @ 4°C

Pre-processing of      None
Samples

Comments

 
	 	 

7.2  Nutrient Methods

CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere Hydrochemistry nutrient analysis is performed 
with a segmented flow auto-analyser - Seal AA3 HR - to measure silicate, 
phosphate, nitrite, nitrate plus nitrite (NOx), and ammonium

Silicate: colourimetric, molybdenum blue method. Based on Armstrong et 
al. (1967). Silicate in seawater is reacted with acidified ammonium 
molybdate to produce silicomolybdic acid. Tartaric acid is added to 
remove the phosphate molybdic acid interference. Tin (II) chloride is 
then added to reduce the silicomolybdic acid to silicomolybdous acid and 
its absorbance is measured at 660nm.

Phosphate: colourimetric, molybdenum blue method. Based on Murphy and 
Riley (1962) with modifications from the NIOZ-SGNOS Practical Workshop 
2012 optimizing the antimony catalyst/phosphate ratio and the reduction 
of silicate interferences by pH. Phosphate in seawater forms a 
phosphomolybdenum complex with acidified ammonium molybate. It is then 
reduced by ascorbic acid and its absorbance is measured at 880nm.

Nitrate: colourimetric analysis, Cu-Cd reduction - Naphthylenediamine 
photometric method. Based on Wood et.al (1967). Nitrate is reduced to 
nitrite by first adding an ammonium chloride buffer then sending it 
through a copper-cadmium column. Sulphanilamide is added under acidic 
conditions to form a diazo compound. This compound is coupled with 1-N-
naphthly-ethylenediamine di-hydrochloride to produce a reddish purple azo 
complex and its absorbance is measured at 520 nm.

Nitrite: colourimetric analysis, Naphthylenediamine photometric method. 
As per nitrate method without the copper cadmium reduction column and 
buffer.

Ammonium: fluorescence analysis, ortho-phtaldiadehyde method. Based on 
Roger Kerouel and Alain Arninot, IFREMER (1997 Mar.Clhem.57). Ammonium 
reacted with ortho­phtaldialdehyde and sulphite at a pH of 9.0-9.5 to 
produce an intensely fluorescent product. Its emission is measured at 
460nm after excitation at 370nm.

Detailed SOPs can be obtained from the CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere Hydro 
chemistry Group on request.


7.3  Instrument Calibration and Data Parameter Summary

All instrument parameters and reagent batch compositions are logged for 
each analysis run. This information is available on request.

The raw data from each analysis run on the Seal AA3HR is imported in to 
HyPro for peak height determination, constructing the calibration curve, 
deriving the sample results and applying drift and carry-over 
corrections.

Following standard procedures, the operator may choose to not include bad 
calibration points (see section 7.8 for edited data). Below are the 
corrections and settings that HyPro applied to the raw data.

All runs have a corresponding "AA3_Run_Analysis_sheet" to record the 
following: sample details, LNSW batch, cadmium column, working standards, 
reagent information, instrumentation settings, and pump tube hours. The 
NUT### file numbers that correspond to each analytical run and the CTD 
samples analysed are in table 8.4. The NUT### file numbers for underway 
and experimental samples are available upon request. Calibration summary 
data for each analysis run are in the voyage documentation and available 
upon request.


Result Details         Silicate   Phosphate  Nitrate +   Nitrite    Ammonia    
                                             Nitrite
—————————————————————  —————————  —————————  —————————  —————————  —————————
Data Reported as       µmo1 1^-1  µmo1 1^-1  µmo1 1^-1  µmo1 1^-1  µmo1 1^-1    

Calibration Curve       Linear     Linear    Quadratic  Quadratic  Quadratic    
degree

Forced through zero?       N          N          N          N          N    

# of points in             7          6          7          6          6    
Calibration

Matrix Correction          N          N          N          N          N    

Blank Correction           N          N          N          N          N    

Carryover Correction       Y          Y          Y          Y          Y
(HyPro)                    

Baseline Correction        Y          Y          Y          Y          Y 
(HyPro)   

Drift Correction           y          y          y          y          y    
(HyPro)                            

Data Adj for RMNS          N          N          N          N          N    

Window Defined*          HyPro      HyPro      HyPro      HyPro      HyPro

Medium of Standards    LNSW (bulk on deck of Investigator) collected on 
                       28/9/2016. Sub-lot passed through a 10 micron filter 
                       and stored in 20 L carboys in the clean dry laboratory 
                       at 22°C.

Medium of Baseline     18.2 ΩMQ

Proportion of samples  Samples were collected in duplicate at the greatest 
                       depth either RPOl or RP02 on the CTD rosette.
in duplicate?

Comments               Calibration and QC data that was edited or removed is 
                       located in the table within section 7.8. The reported 
                       data is not corrected to the RMNS. Per deployment 
                       RMNS data can be found in appendix 8.4.

 




7.4  Accuracy - Reference Material for Nutrient in Seawater (RMNS) Plots

Japanese KANSO certified reference materials (RMNS) for silicate, 
phosphate, nitrate and nitrite in sea water was used in each nutrient 
analysis run to determine the accuracy. For each analysis run, a new RMNS 
bottle was opened and used. The RMNS was assayed in quadruplicate after 
the calibration standards.

RMNS lots CB, CC and CD were used. Their stated values in µmol/kg are 
converted to µmol/^-1 at 21°C and are listed below. RMNS do not have 
certified ammonium values.
 

Table 1:  RMNS CB, CC and CD concentrations with expanded uncertainty 
          (µmol/L) at 21°C

RMNS      NO_3          NO_x          NO_2          PO_4           SiO_4
————  ————————————  ————————————  —————————————  ————————————  —————————————
CB    36.65 ± 0.28  36.77 ± 0.28  0.119 ± 0.006  2.58 ± 0.02   111.82 ± 0.64
CC    31.62 ± 0.25  31.74 ± 0.25  0.119 ± 0.006  2.13 ± 0.02    88.23 ± 0.49
CD     5.63 ± 0.05   5.65 ± 0.06  0.018 ± 0.005  0.46 ± 0.008   14.26 ± 0.10


The submitted nutrient results do NOT have RMNS corrections applied.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
RMNS Correction

Ratio = Certified RMNS Concentration/Measured RMNS Concentration in each 
run Corrected Concentration = Ratio x Measured Nutrient Concentration 

Or for smoothing data

Ratio = Average RMNS Concentration across voyage/Measured RMNS 
Concentration in each run Corrected Concentration = Ratio x Measured 
Nutrient Concentration
—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————


The following plots show RMNS values within 1% (green lines), 2% (pink 
lines) and 3% (red lines) of the published RMNS value except for nitrite. 
The nitrite limit is set to ±0.020 µM (MDL) as 1% is below the method 
MDL. The GO-SHIP criteria (Hyde et al., 2010), appendix 8.3, specifies 
using 1-3% of full scale (depending on the nutrient) as accept able 
limits of accuracy. The assayed RMNS values per CTD deployment are 
reported in the table in appendix 8.4.



7.4.1  Silicate RMNS Plot


7.4.2  Phosphate RMNS Plot


7.4.3  Nitrate + Nitrite (NOx) RMNS Plot


7.4.4  Nitrite RMNS Plot
 

7.5  Internal Quality Control

The internal quality control samples were prepared on the 28/9/2017 by 
filtering more than 2 litres of low nutrients seawater (LNSW) from a 
carboy through a 0.2µM Acropak filter into HDPE square 1L bottles and 
then autoclaving.

A LNSW control was prepared to account for any nutrients already in the 
LNSW and also any nutrients picked up in the autoclaving. The autoclaved 
LNSW was well mixed and poured into an acid cleaned and dry HDPE square 
lL bottle and lid screwed shut and wrapped with parafilm around the lid 
and stored at 4°C.

The Spiked internal quality control was prepared by spiking nutrients 
into the autoclaved LNSW from an OSIL kit containing 5 nutrients each in 
separate bottles containing 50 ml. The concentrations of each bottle were 
as follows: Silicate 1000 µmol/L, Phosphate 100 µmol/L, Nitrate 1000 
µmol/L, Nitrite 100 µmol/L and Ammonia 10,000 µmol/L.

The following amounts were pipetted into a calibrated 1L volumetric 
flask. 

                10 ml of phosphate 100 µmol/L = 1 uM

                 5 ml of Nitrate 1000 µmol/L = 5 µM

                10 ml of silicate 1000 µmol/L= 10 µM 

                 5 ml of nitrite 100 µmol/L= 0.5 µM

               0.1 ml of ammonium 10,000 = l µM


The flask was then made to volume with the autoclaved LNSW. It was mixed 
well and poured into an acid-cleaned and dry HDPE square lL bottle with 
the lid screwed shut and parafilm wrapped around the lid and stored at 
4°C.

An initial measurement was made in October 2017 and another measurement 
was made in December 2017. It was determined that the standards were 
stable to be used on the voyage. The internal QC's were decanted into a 
number of 10 ml polypropylene screw lid sample tubes on three separate 
occasions and stored at 4°C.  A sample tube of the control and the spike 
were analysed with the CTD samples, due to limited volume not all 
analytical runs contained an internal quality control.



7.6  Analytical Precision

The CSIRO Hydrochemistry method measurement uncertainty (MU) has been 
calculated for each nutrient based on variation in the calibration curve, 
calibration standards, pipette and glassware calibration, and precision 
of the RMNS over time (Armishaw 2003).

                     
                Silicate  Phosphate  Nitrate + Nitrite  Nitrite  Ammonia 
                                           (NOx)
                ————————  —————————  —————————————————  ———————  ———————
Calculated MU*   ±0.017    ±0.024         ±0.019        ±0.137   ±0.296¥
@ 1 µmo1 1^-1

* The reported uncertainty is an expanded uncertainty using a coverage 
  factor of 2 giving a 95% level of confidence.

 

¥ The ammonia MU precision component does not include data on the RMNS.

Method detection limits (MDL) achieved during the voyage were much lower 
than the nominal detection limits, indicating high analytical precision 
at lower concentrations. RMNS and MDL precision data listed below. 
Results are µmol l^-1.

 
MDL                             Silicate  Phosphate  Nitrate + Nitrite  Nitrite  Ammonia 
                                                           (NOx)
                                ————————  —————————  —————————————————  ———————  ———————

Nominal MDL*                     0.20       0.02           0.02          0.02     0.02
Standard Dev. Min                0.00       0.00           0.00          0.000    0.00
Standard Dev. Max                0.057      0.010          0.0057        0.0040   0.0057
Standard Dev. Mean               0.023      0.003          0.0053        0.0010   0.0007
Standard Dev. Median             0.00       0.005          0.00          0.0005   0.00
Precision of MDL (stdev)         0.186      0.012          0.012         0.004    0.030

*MDL is based on 3 times the 
 standard deviation of Low 
 Nutrient Seawater (LNSW) 
 analysed in each nutrient run.

Published RMNS CD (µmol 1^-1)   14.26       0.46           5.65          0.018    
w/std deviation                ± 0.009    ± 0.001        ± 0.004       ± 0.001    
RMNS Min                        13.6        0.44           5.51          0.028    1.43
RMNS Max                        14.2        0.47           5.61          0.044    1.91
RMNS Mean                       13.90       0.46           5.56          0.033    1.61
RMNS Median                     13.90       0.46           5.57          0.033    1.56
RMNS Std Dev                     0.16       0.006          0.03          0.003    0.14

Published RMNS CC (µmol 1^-1)   88.23       2.13          31.74          0.119     
w/std deviation                ± 0.053    ± 0.005        ± 0.029       ± 0.002     
RMNS Min                        86.8        2.10          31.67          0.121    1.22
RMNS Max                        88.5        2.18          32.45          0.141    2.35
RMNS Mean                       87.74       2.14          31.92          0.132    1.60
RMNS Median                     87.8        2.15          31.92          0.130    1.60
RMNS Std Dev                     0.29       0.01           0.095         0.003    0.19

Published RMNS CB (µmol 1^-1)  111.82       2.58          36.768         0.119     
w/std deviation                ± 0.053    ± 0.004        ± 0.020       ± 0.002
RMNS Min                       110.5        2.57          36.59          0.131    1.16
RMNS Max                       111.9        2.63          37.08          0.147    1.66
RMNS Mean                      111.24       2.60          36.82          0.138    1.39
RMNS Median                    111.25       2.60          36.83          0.138    1.38
RMNS Std Dev                     0.32       0.01           0.12          0.004    0.13




7.7  Sampling Precision

Duplicate samples were collected during CTD deployments from the NISKIN 
bottle in rosette position 01 or 02 to measure the sample precision. The 
multiple measurements are reported in the data as an average, when all 
measurements are flagged GOOD. The sampling precision is deemed good if 
the difference between the concentrations is below the MDL for silicate, 
phosphate and nitrite and within 0.06 µM for nitrate.


7.7.1  Silicate Duplicate/Replicates Plot

7.7.2  Phosphate Duplicate/Replicates Plot

7.7.3  Nitrate + Nitrite (NOx) Duplicate/Replicates Plot

7.7.4  Nitrite Duplicate/Replicates Plot

7.7.5  Ammonia Duplicate/Replicates Plot

7.7.6  Redfield Ratio Plot (14.0)
Plots consists of phosphate versus NOx, best fit ratio = 14.47.



7.8  Flagged Nutrient Calibration and Quality Control Data

The table below identifies all flagged data by HyPro. The calibration 
curve is fitted to the standards by performing several passes over each 
standard point and weighting its contribution to the curve depending on 
the magnitude of the difference between its measured and calculated 
value. The larger the difference, the less weighting is given to the 
standard's contribution towards the curve construction. The cut-off 
limits for good calibration data are

• ±0.5% of the concentration of the top standard for silicate and nitrate 
  +nitrite (as per WOCE).

• 0.02uM for phosphate, nitrite and ammonium.



CTD  Peak         Run    Analysis        Reason for Flag or Action
———  ——————————  ——————  ————————  —————————————————————————————————————
1    Cal 4       Nut001    NH4     Both points BAD as greater than 
                                   calibration error, not used in 
                                   calibration.
1    BQC         Nut001    All     Suspect (MAD) peak shape, placed test 
                                   in front so not to be used in 
                                   calculations.
3    Cal 4       Nut002    NH4     Both points BAD as greater than 
                                   calibration error, not used in 
                                   calibration.
4    BQC         Nut003    SiO2    3rd point flagged BAD (soft), large 
                                   error compared to other 2 points.
5    Cal 2       Nut004    PO4     2nd Point suspect less weighting in 
                                   calibration curve.
5    Cal 2&4     Nut004    NH4     <70% of calibration peaks are within 
                                   calibration limits. Cal 2 & 4 suspect 
                                   less weighting in calibration curve.
5    Duplicate   Nut004    SiO2    Suspect, duplicate difference >0.2 µM.  
     RP02                          [First peak (lower concentration) is 
                                   noisier than second].
5    Duplicate   Nut004    NOx     Second sample flagged as BAD (mad) 
                                   peak shape. Duplicates much greater 
                                   than 0.06 µM, due to bad peak shape 
                                   exceed A/D value, peak window on side 
                                   of peak.
5    Duplicate   Nut004    NH4     First sample flagged as BAD (op) peak 
                                   window slipped down side of peak.
6    Cal 3&4     Nut005    NH4     <70% of calibration peaks are within 
                                   calibration limits. Cal 3 & 4 suspect 
                                   less weighting in calibration curve.
7    Cal 4       Nut006    NH4     Cal 4 both point s suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
8    CC RMNS     Nut007    NO2     Base off set was higher than normal 
                                   all results looked too high. Re-run 
                                   samples for NO2 only in Nut008, 
                                   results good. Also No High low sample 
                                   for analysis Nut 008 due to running 
                                   out of volume. Hypro used previous 
                                   high low measurement.
8    CC RMNS     Nut007    PO4     1st point suspect, greater than 2%
8    CD RMNS     Nut007    SiO2    All points greater than 3%
9    Cal 3       Nut009    NH4     Both points BAD as greater than 
                                   calibration error, not used in 
                                   calibration.
10   Cal 2&3     Nut010    NH4     Cal 2 1st point and cal 3 both points 
                                   suspect less weighting in calibration 
                                   curve.
11   Cal 3       Nut011    NH4     Both points BAD as greater than 
                                   calibration error, not used in 
                                   calibration.
12   Cal 3       Nut012    NH4     Both points BAD as greater than 
                                   calibration error, not used in 
                                   calibration.
16   Cal 5&6     Nut016    NOx     2nd points suspect, less weighting in 
                                   calibration curve.
19   Cal 5       Nut019    NH4     Both points BAD greater than 
                                   calibration error, not used in 
                                   calibration.
21   Duplicate   Nut021    NOx     Suspect, duplicate difference greater 
     RP0l                          than 0.06 µM
22   CD RMNS     Nut022    SiO2    All points greater than 3%
24   Duplicate   Nut024    NOx     First duplicate Suspect (MAD) peak 
     RP01                          shape.
25   All         Nut025    NO2     Bad data, hashed out of file, re-run 
                                   in nut027, processed as nut027b
26   All         Nut026    NO2     Bad data, hashed out of file, re-run 
                                   in nut028, processed as nut028b
26   Cal 4       Nut026    NH4     1st point suspect, less weighting in 
                                   calibration curve.
28   Duplicates  Nut028    NOx     Suspect, duplicate difference greater 
     RP01                          than 0.06 µM. 
30   Cal 2,3&4   Nut030    NH4     Cal 2 suspect (both points), Cal 3 
                                   suspect (2nd point)-less weighting in 
                                   calibration curve. Cal 4 BAD both 
                                   points - not used in calibration.
30   CD RMNS     Nut030    SiO2    All points greater than 3%.
32   Cal 3       Nut032    NH4     Cal 3 suspect, less weighting in 
                                   calibration curve.
35   Cal 2       Nut035    NOx     Cal 2, 1st point suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
38   Duplicates  Nut038    SiO2    Suspect duplicate difference greater 
     RP01                          than 0.2 µM. 
42   Cal 2       Nut042    NOx     Cal 2 suspect, less weighting in 
                                   calibration curve.
43   Cal 2       Nut043    NOx     Cal 2 suspect, less weighting in 
                                   calibration curve.
44   Cal 2       Nut044    NOx     Cal 2 suspect, less weighting in 
                                   calibration curve.
45   Cal 2       Nut045    NOx     Cal 2 suspect, less weighting in 
                                   calibration curve.
45   Cal 6       Nut045    SiO2    Cal 6 2nd point greater than 
                                   calibration error.
48   Cal 3       Nut048    NH4     Cal 3 2nd point suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
51   Cal 2       Nut051    PO4     Cal 2 1st point suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
52   Cal 2       Nut052    PO4     Cal 2 1st point suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
54   Cal 5       Nut054    PO4     Cal 5 2nd point suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
54   BQC         Nut054    SiO2    1st point Suspect (MAD) peak shape.
54   Cal 4       Nut054    NH4     Cal 4 both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
54   Drift       Nut052    NO2     Last drift has large spike in plateau, 
                                   swapped the drift and drift sample 
                                   check peaks around.
55   Cal 4       Nut055    NH4     Cal 4 both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
56   Ca1 4       Nut056    NH4     Cal 4 1st point suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
58   RMNS        Nut058    NOx     2nd last RM NS peak is suspect (mad) 
                                   peak shape.
61   Drift       Nut060    NOx     Last drift has large spike in plateau, 
                                   swapped the drift and drift sample 
                                   check peaks around.
70   Baseline    Nut066    NO2     Baseline stepped up on the Null before 
                                   the BQC samples and then stepped down 
                                   again on the uwy sample. # out all of 
                                   those samples and stds etc. #peak 
                                   start of NO2 and it didn't work, had 
                                   to # the AD value column.
70   Drift       Nut066    NO2     2nd Drift is BAD. Baseline stepped up 
                                   on the Null before the BQC samples and 
                                   then stepped down again on the uwy and 
                                   ctd samples. # out all of the BQC and 
                                   drift stds. All samples good.
71,  Cal 3       Nut067    NH4     Cal 3 both points suspect (MAD), less 
72                                 weighting in calibration curve.
75   Duplicates  Nut070    NOx &   Bad peak shapes, re-ran samples
     RPOl                  SiO2    at end of the run and they were OK.
76   Cal 6       Nut071    NOx     Cal 6 2nd point was flagged Bad (MAD) 
                                   peak shape, not used in calibration.
78   Cal 2       Nut073    NO2     Cal 2 2nd point BAD greater than 
                                   calibration error.
80   Cal 1       Nut075    NH4     Cal 1 2nd point suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
81   Cal 1 &     Nut076    NH4     Cal 1 both points suspect and Cal 3 
     Cal 3                         1st point suspect, greater than 
                                   calibration error.
82   Cal 1 &     Nut077    NH4     Cal 1 both points suspect and Cal 3
     Cal 3                         1st point suspect, less weighting in 
                                   calibration curve.
83   Cal 3       Nut078    NH4     Cal 3 both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
84   Cal 4 & 5   Nut079    NOx     Blockage occurred during the cats (cal 
                                   4-2 and 5-1 bad, rest perfect), this 
                                   offset the timing, meaning the peaks 
                                   were shifted. This only really 
                                   affected the carryover (use from last 
                                   run) and the first two RMNS (hashed 
                                   out).... RMNS values good on peaks 
                                   that are good. Magical. Second MDL 
                                   also hashed out - the rest are good.
85   Cal 3       Nut080    NH4     Cal 3 both points Bad greater than 
                                   calibration error.
86   RMNS        Nut081    SiO2    RMNS CD, 1 point flagged suspect 
                                   outside of 3% line
87   Cal 3 &     Nut082    NH4     Cal 3 2nd point and Cal 4 both points 
     Cal 4                         suspect greater than calibration 
                                   error.
87   Cal 2       Nut082    NOx     Cal 2 both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
88   Cal 4       Nut083    NH4     Cal 4 both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
88   Cal 2       Nut083    NOx     Cal 2 both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
89   Cal 2         Nut084  NOx     Cal 2 both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
89   Cal 2         Nut084  NOx     Cal 5 2nd point suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
89   Cal 3         Nut084  NH4     Cal 3 both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
89   Cal 5         Nut084  NOx     Cal 5 2nd point suspect, less
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
89   Cal 3         Nut084  NH4     Cal 3 both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
89   Cal 4         Nut084  NH4     Cal 4 both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
90   Cal 2         Nut085  NOx     Cal 2 both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
90   Cal 3         Nut085  NH4     Cal 3 both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
91   Cal 3         Nut086  NH4     Cal 3 first point suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
93   Cal 3         Nut088  NH4     Cal 3 both points are suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
93   Cal 5         Nut088  NOx     Cal 5 2nd point suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
94,  Cal 3         Nut089  NH4     Cal 3 first point suspect, less 
95                                 weighting in calibration curve.
96   Cal 3         Nut090  NOx     Cal 3 both points suspect greater than 
                                   calibration error.
96   RMNS          Nut090  NOx     Fourth peak is suspect (mad) peak 
                                   shape.
99   Cal 5         Nut093  NOx     Cal 5 2nd point suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
100  Cal 2         Nut094  PO4     Cal 2 1st point suspect greater than 
                                   calibration error.
101  Cal 5         nut095  NOx     Cal 5 lst point bad shape, 2nd point 
                                   greater than calibration error.
102  Cal 6         Nut096  PO4     Cal 5 2nd point is suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.
uwy  Cal l         Nut103  NH4     Cal l both points suspect, less 
                                   weighting in calibration curve.











7.9  Missing or Flagged Nutrient Data and Actions taken.

The table below identifies all flagged data and any samples that had 
repeated analyses performed to obtain GOOD data. Data that falls below 
the detection limit, Flag 63, is not captured in this tab le. All GOOD 
data is flagged 0 in the .csv and .netcdf files. Data that is flagged BAD 
is not exported within the .csv files. Suspect data (Flag 69) is exported 
in the .csv file. Refer to Appendix 8.2 for flag explanations.


 CTD    RP    Run    Analysis  Flag     Reason for Flag or Action
—————  ————  ——————  ————————  ————  ———————————————————————————————
  4    18    Nut003    All     133   Outliers on profiles, sampled 
                                     from wrong Niskin.
  5    02    Nut004    SiO2     69   Duplicates greater than MDL 0.2 
                                     [First peak (lower concentra-
                                     tion) is noisier than second].
  5    02    Nut004    NOx     129   Duplicates much greater than 
                                     0.06 µM, due to bad peak shape 
                                     exceed A/D value, peak window 
                                     on side of peak.
  5    02    Nut004    PO4     133   BAD air spikes.
  5    02    Nut004    NH4     133   First sample flagged as BAD 
                                     peak window slipped down side 
                                     of peak.
  9    18    Nut009    NOx,     69   Outlier on profile [not seen on 
                       PO4,          salinity or dissolved oxygen - 
                       SiO2          same value as RP16, possible 
                                     duplicate or sampled from wrong 
                                     Niskin)
 15    12    Nut012    SiO2,   133   Outliers on profiles.
                       NO2    
 16    25    Nut016    All     141   Sample missing accidently not 
                                     collected.
 21    All   Nut021    NH4     N/A   Higher than usual background 
                                     caused these samples to be 
                                     slightly lower than expected, 
                                     resulting in slightly negative
                                     values instead of 0. However 
                                     results are good.
 21    01    Nut021    NOx      69   Duplicates greater than 0.06 µM
 21    24    Nut021    All     133   Outliers on profiles, Niskin 
                                     misfire. Also seen in salinity 
                                     data.
 23    24    Nut023    All     133   Outliers on profiles, Niskin 
                                     misfire. Also seen in salinity 
                                     data.
 24    01    Nut024    NOx      69   1st duplicate suspect peak 
                                     shape.
 25    All   Nut025    NO2     133   Bad data# out of file and re-
                                     run in nut027, processed as 
                                     nut027b, this data is good.
 25  25, 29  Nut025    All     133   Outliers on profiles, Niskin 
                                     misfire. Also seen in salinity 
                                     data.
 26    29    Nut026    All     133   Outliers on profiles, Niskin 
                                     misfire. Also seen in salini ty 
                                     data.
 26    All   Nut026    NO2     N/A   The rmns, BQC and intQC all 
                                     stepped up. The sample profiles 
                                     were also offset from previous 
                                     ctd profiles.  CTD 25 & 26 were 
                                     re-run for NO2 in the nut027b & 
                                     nut028b. The initial NO2 
                                     results were # out of original 
                                     files and second results used 
                                     as they were good.
 28    01    Nut028    NOx      69   Duplicates greater than 0.06 µM
 28    29    Nut028    NOx     141   It's marked as Bad (soft) in 
                                     trace. However error given in 
                                     HyPro is exceeds A/D value 
                                     129, we do not have value for 
                                     this one.
 28  26, 27  Nut028    NOx     N/A   BAD peak shapes but were re-
                                     run at end of analysis and 
                                     results OK.
 29    21    Nut029    NOx     133   Bad peak shape, repeated in 
                                     nut030 and result good. The 
                                     repeated measurement for other 
                                     nutrient data was # out of file
                                     as original results were good.
 36    33    Nut036    PO4     133   Bad peak shape repeated in 
                                     nut037 and result is good. The 
                                     repeated measurement for other 
                                     nutrient data was # out of file 
                                     as original results were good.
 38    01    Nut038    SiO2     69   Duplicates greater than 0.2 µM
 44    23    Nut044    PO4     133   Bad peak shape repeated in 
                                     nut045, and result is good. The 
                                     repeated measurement for other 
                                     nutrient data was # out of file 
                                     as original results were good.
 49    17    Nut049    NO2      69   Outlier on profile, bump on 
                                     peak plateau.
 56    All   Nut056    NO2     133/  Nitrite baseline stepped up on 
                               141   sample 5627 and 5625, then 
                                     stepped back down on 5624 and 
                                     5623 but then stepped back up 
                                     on 5622 and stayed elevated. 
                                     Drifts are also elevated and 
                                     end baselines. Flagged all data 
                                     for NO2 as bad.
 75    02    Nut070    SiO4    133   Bad peak shape, repeated during 
                                     run and result is OK, # out bad 
                                     results.
 75    02    Nut070    NOx     133   Bad peak shape, repeated during 
                                     run and result is OK, # out bad 
                                     results.
 79    08    Nut074    SiO2    133   Bad peak shape, repeated in 
                                     Nut075 and result is good. The 
                                     repeated measurement for other 
                                     nutrients data was # out of 
                                     file as original results were 
                                     good.
 81    07    Nut076    SiO4,    69   Outlier on profile, peak shapes 
                       NOx,          good - not seen in salinity or 
                       PO4           dissolved oxygen.
 89    09    Nut084    SiO4    133   Bad peak shape. Outlier on pro 
                                     file. Re-run and replaced as 
                                     new result is good. The 
                                     repeated measurement for other 
                                     nutrient data was # out of file 
                                     as original results were good.
 89    04    Nut084    SiO4    133   Bad peak shape. Outlier on 
                                     profile. Re-run and replaced. 
                                     The repeated measurement for 
                                     other nutrient data was # out 
                                     of file as original results 
                                     were good.
 96    23    Nut090    NOx      69   Suspect peak shape was re-run 
                                     later in the run and result was 
                                     OK used that result for all 
                                     nutrients and "tested" first 
                                     one out.
 97    06    Nut091    SiO4    133   Bad peak shape, re-run at end 
                                     of the run and this result was 
                                     OK and used. The repeated 
                                     measurement for other data was 
                                     # out of file as original 
                                     results were good.
 98  18, 19  Nut092    NO2     133   Outliers on profile, re-run in 
                                     Nut094 results ok in nut094. 
                                     The repeated measurement for 
                                     other data was # out of file as 
                                     original results were good.
 98  34, 35  Nut092    All     141   Samples missing accidently not 
                                     collected.
 99    14    Nut093    NOx     133   Bad outlier on profile, 
                                     repeated in Nut94 this result 
                                     good. The repeated measurement 
                                     for other data was # out of 
                                     file as original results were 
                                     good.
102    20    Nut096    All     133   Bad, outlier in vertical 
                                     profile plot (also when 
                                     repeated in following run). 
                                     Also seen as outlier in 
                                     salinity and D.O. data.
104    29    Nut098    NOx     133   Bad peak shape, repeated and 
                                     measurement OK. The repeated 
                                     measurement for other nutrient 
                                     data was # out of file as 
                                     original results were good.
104    36    Nut098    All     141   Sample missing accidently not 
                                     collected.
Uwy    08    Nut026    NO2     133   The rmns, BQC and intQC all 
                                     stepped up. The sample profiles 
                                     were also offset from previous 
                                     ctd profiles. CTD 25, 26 and 
                                     uwy were re-run and for NO2 in 
                                     the nut027b & nut028b. The 
                                     initial NO2 results were # out 
                                     of original files and second 
                                     results used as they were good.




7.10  Temperature & Humidity Change over Nutrient Analyses

The temperature and humidity within the AA3 chemistry module was logged 
using a temperature/humidity logger QP6013 (Jaycar) placed on the deck of 
the chemistry module.

Refer to "in2018_v01_hyd_voyagereport.docx" for room temperature graphs, 
nutrient samples were placed on XY3 auto sampler at the average room 
temperature of 21.7°C.












8 Appendix

8.1  Salinity Reference  Material


                    Osil IAPSO Standard Seawater
                 ———————————————————————————————————
                 Batch        P161        P158
                 Use by date  03/05/2020  25/03/2018
                 K_15         0.99987     0.99970



8.2  HyPro Flag Key for CSV & NetCDF file

Flag  Meaning
————  ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
0     Data GOOD - nothing detected.

192   Data not processed.

63    Below nominal detection limit.


69    Data flagged suspect by operator. Set suspect by software if 
      Calibration or Duplicate data is outside of set limits but not so 
      far out as to be flagged bad.

65    Peak shape is suspect.

133   Error flagged by operator. Data bad - operator identified by # 
      in slk file or by clicking on point.

129   Peak exceeds maximum A/D value. Data bad.

134   Error flagged by software. Peak shape bad - Median Absolute 
      Deviation (MAD) analysis used. Standards, MDL's and Duplicates 
      deviate from the median, Calibration data falls outs ide set 
      limits.

141   Missing data, no result for sample ID. Used in netcdf file as an 
      array compiles results. Not used in csv file.

79    Method Detection Limit (MDL) during run was equal to or greater 
      than nominal MDL. Data flagged as suspect.









8.3  GO-SHIP Specifications

Salinity  Accuracy of 0.001 is possible with Autosal™ salinometers and 
          concomitant attention to methodology, e.g., monitoring Standard 
          Sea Water. Accuracy with respect to one particular batch of 
          Standard Sea Water can be achieved at better than 0.001 PSS-78. 
          Autosal precision is better than 0.001 PSS-78. High precision 
          of approximately 0.0002 PSS-78 is possible following the 
          methods of Kawano (this manual) with great care and experience. 
          Air temperature stability of ± 1°C is very important and should 
          be recorded.*

O2        Target accuracy is that 2 sigma should be less than 0.5% of the 
          highest concentration found in the ocean. Precision or 
          reproducibility (2 sigma) is 0.08% of the highest concentration 
          found in the ocean.

SiO2      Approximately 1-3% accuracy †,** and 0.2% precision, full -
          scale.

PO4       Approximately 1-2% accuracy †,** and 0.4% precision, full 
          scale.

NO3       Approximately 1% accuracy †,** and 0.2% precision, full scale.


Notes:

†  If no absolute standards are available for a measurement then accuracy 
   should be taken to mean the reproducibility presently obtainable in 
   the better laboratories.

*  Keeping constant temperature in the room where salinities are 
   determined greatly increases their quality. Also, room temperature 
   during the salinity measurement should be noted for later 
   interpretation, if queries occur. Additionally, monitoring and 
   recording the bath temperature is also recommended. The frequent use 
   of IAPSO Standard Seawater is endorsed. To avoid the changes that 
   occur in Standard Seawater, the use of the most recent batches is 
   recommended. The bottles should also be used in an interleaving 
   fashion as a consistency check within a batch and between batches.

** Developments of reference materials for nutrients are underway that 
   will enable improvements in the relative accuracy of measurements and 
   clearer definition of the performance of laboratories when used 
   appropriately and the results are reported with the appropriate meta 
   data.







8.4  RMNS Values for each CTD Deployment

Analysis Run     CTD #      SiO4      PO4       NO2       NOx
                          measured  measured  measured  measured
————————————  ——————————  ————————  ————————  ————————  ————————
CB reported               111.821    2.580     0.199     36.649
      1          1,2      111.367    2.603     0.144     36.713
      7            8      111.100    2.590               36.730
      8            8                           0.135 
     17           17      110.967    2.590     0.140     36.737
     23           23      111.200    2.573     0.135     36.640
     30           30      111.100    2.620     0.136     36.753
     36           36      110.633    2.613     0.145     36.833
     44           44      111.267    2.600     0.145     36.917
     51           51      110.900    2.610     0.138     36.843
     59           60      111.767    2.623     0.139     37.057
     67           71      111.567    2.593     0.141     36.983
     81           86      111.433    2.600     0.132     36.823
     99          105      111.600    2.610     0.135     36.900
CC reported                88.228    2.130     0.119     31.740
    1,2          1,2       87.767    2.130     0.133     31.787
      3            3       87.600    2.120     0.140     31.893
      4            4       87.533    2.130     0.130     31.857
      5            5       87.663    2.114     0.129     31.836
      6            6       87.775    2.138     0.133     31.788
      7            7       87.600    2.123     0.137     31.860
      8            8       87.600    2.128               31.858
      8            8                           0.133 
      9            9       87.400    2.138     0.135     31.S63
     10           10       81.925    2.145     0.130     31.828
     11           11       87.425    2.143     0.138     31.868
     12           12       87.850    2.150     0.133     31.908
     13           13       87.625    2.140     0.138     31.848
     14           14       87.925    2.145     0.131     31.925
     15           15       87.625    2.140     0.132     31.798
     16           16       87.875    2.150     0.131     31.810
     17           17       87.400    2.125     0.133     31.815
     18           18       87.325    2.118     0.131     31.778
     19           19       87.375    2.135     0.130     31.825
     20           20       87.375    2.125     0.130     31.845
     21           21       87.425    2.120     0.130     31.883
     22           22       87.525    2.110     0.130     31.868
     23           23       87.450    2.118     0.131     31.878
     24           24       87.225    2.128     0.133     31.875
     25           25       87.750    2.128               31.923
     26           26       87.375    2.130               31.738
     27           27       87.375    2.120     0.130     31.820
     28           28       87.425    2.130     0.134     31.700
     29           29       87.475    2.128     0.133     31.835
     30           30       87.450    2.153     0.130     31.835
     31           31       87.667    2.160     0.130     31.877
     32           32       87.975    2.160     0.140     31.930
     33           33       88.025    2.155     0.131     31.898
     34           34       87.500    2.155     0.133     31.925
     35           35       87.225    2.160     0.132     31.905
     36           36       87.175    2.153     0.136     32.005 
     37           37       87.050    2.163     0.134     31.915
     38           38       87.475    2.155     0.133     31.885
     39           39       87.675    2.160     0.131     31.943
     40           40       87.775    2.146     0.131     31.966
     41           41       87.800    2.143     0.138     31.970
     42           42       87.925    2.150     0.141     32.038
     43           43       87.857    2.139     0.129     31.904
     44           44       87.675    2.140     0.139     31.953
     45           45       87.625    2.140     0.129     31.895
     46           46       87.850    2.150     0.131     31.880
     47           47       87.517    2.140     0.136     31.882
     48           48       87.625    2.143     0.128     32.060
     49           49       87.650    2.150     0.131     32.013
     50           50       87.960    2.168     0.135     31.836
     51           51       86.975    2.145     0.135     31.963
     52           52       87.586    2.156     0.133     31.897 
     53           53       87.925    2.145     0.132     32.005
     54           54       87.775    2.160     0.139     31.908
     55           55       87.775    2.165     0.129     31.960
     56           56       87.825    2.150     0.128     31.933
     57           57       87.650    2.150     0.133     32.013
     58         58, 59     88.025    2.168     0.130     32.000
     59           60       88.175    2.168     0.131     32.035
     60           61       88.050    2.163     0.133     32.153
     61       62, 63, 64   88.250    2.175     0.133     31.935
     62         65, 66     88.175    2.158     0.136     31.993
     63           67       87.575    2.155     0.134     31.988
     64           68       88.233    2.165     0.131     32.048
     65           69       88.167    2.152     0.133     32.057
     66           70       88.000    2.168     0.129     32.082
     67         71, 72     87.880    2.132     0.143     32.022
     68           73       87.925    2.140     0.130     31.960
     69           74       87.825    2.148     0.138     32.020
     70           75       87.900    2.148     0.132     32.058 
     71           76       88.025    2.135     0.130     32.008
     72           77       87.775    2.150     0.129     31.868 
     73           78       87.975    2.153     0.129     31.993
     74           79       87.275    2.138     0.128     31.915
     75           80       87.750    2.150     0.131     31.875
     76           81       88.000    2.150     0.133     31.995
     77           82       87.800    2.150     0.132     32.090
     78           83       87.900    2.158     0.133     31.880
     79           84       87.800    2.145     0.131     31.890
     80           85       87.667    2.155     0.134     31.863
     81           86       87.800    2.140     0.128     31.780
     82           87       87.875    2.168     0.138     32.018
     83           88       87.825    2.163     0.134     31.995
     84           89       87.800    2.173     0.134     32.000 
     85           90       88.000    2.160     0.132     32.140
     86           91       88.250    2.148     0.128     32.050 
     87           92       88.000    2.158     0.133     31.973
     88           93       88.100    2.158     0.131     31.938 
     89         94, 95     88.200    2.158     0.134     31.945
     90           96       87.950    2.157     0.129     31.938
     91           97       88.150    2.160     0.130     31.933
     92           98       87.950    2.160     0.130     31.930
     93           99       87.175    2.155     0.130     31.963
     94          100       87.675    2.155     0.132     31.998
     95          101       87.600    2.150     0.128     32.010     
     96          102       87.500    2.160     0.135     31.990     
     97          103       87.950    2.148     0.132     31.953     
     98          104       87.850    2.158     0.135     31.875     
     99          105       87.925    2.150     0.134     31.910     
    100          106       87.875    2.160     0.131     31.888     
    101          107       88.125    2.158     0.135     32.030     
    102          108       87.700    2.160     0.133     31.860
    103          uwy       87.775    2.158     0.134     31.910
CC reported                14.264    0.457     0.018      5.648
      1          1, 2      14.100    0.447     0.447      5.527
      7            8       13.725    0.463     0.463      5.573
     17           17       14.000    0.460     0.460      5.540
     23           23       13.800    0.460     0.460      5.597      
     30           30       13.600    0.460     0.460      5.553
     36           36       13.700    0.463     0.463      5.590
     44           44       13.800    0.463     0.463      5.547
     51           51       13.875    0.470     0.470      5.590
     59           60       14.125    0.470     0.470      5.570
     67           71       14.050    0.455     0.455      5.610
     81           86       13.950    0.460     0.460      5.512
     99          105       14.025    0.460     0.460      5.592





8.5  Internal Quality Control Values for each CTD Deployment

Measured concentrations (µM) of the internal quality control and the low 
nutrient seawater that were produced in the shore laboratory.


CTD Date  LNSW  Spike   LNSW   Spike  LNSW  Spike  LNSW   Spike  LNSW  Spike  
          NOx   NOx     PO4     PO4   SiO2  SiO2   NO2    NO2    NH4   NH4
————————  ————  —————  ——————  —————  ————  —————  —————  —————  ————  —————
Prepared
Concen-    NA    5.5     NA     1.0    NA    10     NA     0.5    NA    1.0
tration
————————  ————  —————  ——————  —————  ————  —————  —————  —————  ————  —————
                         Measured concentrations (µM)
————————  ————  —————  ——————  —————  ————  —————  —————  —————  ————  —————
 Oct-17   0.07  5.59   -0.001  0.99    0.9  11.3   0.06   0.55   0.34   1.31    
 Dec-17   0.1   5.46    0.017  1.02    1.0  11.4   0.041  0.56   0.39   1.36  
 CTD 1&2  0.09  5.43    0.01   1.01    0.7  11.2   0.037  0.537  0.35   1.31        
 CTD 3    0.09  5.44    0.01   1       0.5  10.9   0.04   0.54   0.36   1.31   
 CTD 4    0.09  5.43    0.02   1.01    0.4  10.8   0.037  0.535  0.37   1.31        
 CTD 5    0.09  5.44    0.01   0.99    0.5  10.9   0.037  0.534  0.34   1.28    
 CTD 6    0.1   5.47    0.02   1.01    0.5  11     0.043  0.536  0.34   1.3         
 CTD 7    0.09  5.48    0.01   1       0.4  10.5   0.046  0.548  0.36   1.31                  
 CTD 8    0.09  5.46    0.01   1       0.4  10.9                 0.34   1.29        
 CTD 9    0.1   5.45    0.02   1.01    0.4  10.8   0.038  0.538  0.39   1.33        
 CTD 10   0.1   5.48    0.01   1.01    0.4  10.9   0.038  0.525  0.39   1.32        
 CTD 11   0.11  5.45    0.01   1.01    0    10.5   0.043  0.537  0.36   1.32              
 CTD 12   0.1   5.45    0.02   1.01    0.5  11     0.035  0.53   0.36   1.32
 CTD 13   0.11  5.48    0.02   1.01    0.2  10.7   0.042  0.538  0.37   1.33
 CTD 14   0.1   5.5     0.01   1.01    0.5  11     0.034  0.538  0.36   1.33
 CTD 15   0.11  5.49    0.01   1.01    0.2  10.7   0.036  0.535  0.37   1.34
 CTD 16   0.11  5.46    0.03   1.02    0.7  11.1   0.033  0.527  0.38   1.34
 CTD 17   0.09  5.44    0.02   1.01    0.6  11     0.038  0.535  0.37   1.33
 CTD 18   0.1   5.44    0.02   1       0.5  10.9   0.04   0.527  0.37   1.32
 CTD 19   0.1   5.45    0.02   1.01    0.5  10.9   0.041  0.527  0.37   1.31
 CTD 20   0.1   5.43    0.01   1       0.4  10.9   0.032  0.53   0.36   1.32
 CTD 21   0.1   5.44    0.02   1.01    0.5  10.9   0.037  0.528  0.32   1.26
 CTD 22   0.09  5.49    0.02   0.99    0.5  10.9   0.039  0.532  0.38   1.35
 CTD 23   0.09  5.48    0.02   0.99    0.4  10.9   0.038  0.526  0.36   1.3
 CTD 24   0.09  5.48    0.02   1.01    0.4  10.8   0.039  0.526  0.36   1.31  
 CTD 25   0.09  5.49    0.02   1.01    0.4  10.9   0.048  0.545  0.36   1.31  
 CTD 26   0.1   5.43    0.01   1       0.1  10.8   0.046  0.543  0.36   1.31   
 CTD 27   0.09  5.43    0.01   0.99    0.4  10.9   0.034  0.523  0.37   1.33        
 CTD 28   0.11  5.4     0.02   1       0.5  10.9   0.038  0.529  0.37   1.31  
 CTD 29   0.1   5.43    0.02   1       0.6  11     0.04   0.533  0.38   1.35  
 CTD 30   0.1   5.48    0.01   1.02    0.1  10.6   0.033  0.532  0.36   1.29  
 CTD 31   0.09  5.45    0.02   1.02    0.5  10.9   0.041  0.542  0.38   1.34  
 CTD 32   0.09  5.46    0.02   1.02    0.5  11     0.044  0.543  0.35   1.32    
 CTD 33   0.09  5.44    0.03   1.02    0.6  11.1   0.033  0.527  0.37   1.33    
 CTD 34   0.12  5.5     0.02   1.02    0.6  11     0.043  0.539  0.36   1.34    
 CTD 35   0.13  5.48    0.02   1.01    0.4  10.8   0.039  0.539  0.37   1.34    
 CTD 36   0.12  5.49    0.01   1.01    0.4  10.8   0.044  0.552  0.38   1.34    
 CTD 37   0.12  5.49    0.02   1.02    0.1  10.5   0.045  0.548  0.37   1.33    
 CTD 38   0.11  5.45    0.02   1.02    0.5  10.9   0.04   0.535  0.37   1.33    
 CTD 39   0.12  5.48    0.01   1.02    0.4  10.9   0.038  0.535  0.37   1.33         
 CTD 40   0.11  5.45    0.01   1.01    0.3  10.6   0.038  0.532            
 CTD 41   0.1   5.42    0.01   1.01    0.3  10.8   0.045  0.536  0.36   1.33    
 CTD 42   0.12  5.47    0.01   1.01    0.5  11     0.048  0.551  0.36   1.33    
 CTD 43   0.12  5.44    0.01   1.01    0.5  11     0.034  0.529  0.36   1.31         
 CTD 44   0.12  5.47    0.01   1.01    0.4  10.9   0.04   0.536  0.37   1.32    
 CTD 45   0.12  5.45    0.01   1.01    0.3  10.9   0.034  0.536  0.38   1.32    
 CTD 46   0.11  5.46    0.01   1.02    0.6  11.1   0.041  0.535  0.36   1.33    
 CTD 48   0.11  5.47    0.01   1.01    0.6  11     0.045  0.546  0.39   1.34          
 CTD 50   0.11  5.49    0.02   1.02    0.7  11.1   0.038  0.53   0.37   1.34    
 CTD 52   0.12  5.46    0.02   1.01    0.4  10.8   0.04   0.531  0.38   1.35    
 CTD 54   0.12  5.44    0.02   1.02    0.5  10.9   0.048  0.541  0.36   1.33    
 CTD 56   0.11  5.47    0.02   1.02    0.6  11.1   0.039  0.534  0.37   1.35    
 CTD 58   0.12  5.48    0.02   1.03    0.5  11     0.036  0.526  0.36   1.33    
 CTD 59   0.11  5.48    0.02   1.02    0.6  11.2   0.037  0.53   0.37   1.34    
 CTD 68   0.13  5.48    0.02   1.03    1    11.5   0.036  0.537  0.37   1.33    
 CTD 70   0.11  5.51    0.02   1.03    0.6  11.1   0.035  0.533  0.39   1.36      
 CTD 73   0.1   5.49    0.01   1.01    0.6  11.1   0.039  0.534  0.38   1.34    
 CTD 74   0.1   5.51    0.02   1.02    0.6  11     0.056  0.547  0.36   1.32    
 CTD 77   0.12  5.52    0.02   1.02    0.6  11.l   0.041  0.537  0.37   1.33    
 CTD 78   0.12  5.52    0.03   1.02    0.6  11.1   0.043  0.536  0.37   1.33     
 CTD 80   0.12  5.54    0.01   1.01    0.5  11     0.04   0.536  0.36   1.32    
 CTD 82   0.12  5.47    0.02   1.01    0.5  10.9   0.043  0.538  0.36   1.32    
 CTD 85   0.12  5.42    0.02   1.02    0.5  11     0.05   0.538  0.39   1.35    
 CTD 87   0.14  5.5     0.02   1.03    0.4  10.9   0.052  0.545  0.36   1.31    
 CTD 89   0.14  5.48    0.02   1.03    0.5  10.9   0.042  0.533  0.37   1.34    
 CTD 90   0.14  5.48    0.01   1.02    0.6  11.1   0.046  0.547  0.38   1.39    
 CTD 92   0.12  5.46    0.02   1.02    0.5  11     0.038  0.533  0.38   1.34    
 CTD 94   0.1   5.48    0.02   1.02    0.7  11.2   0.042  0.542  0.37   1.33    
 CTD 96   0.13  5.49    0.02   1.02    0.5  11     0.052  0.542  0.4    1.37    
 CTD 97   0.11  5.45    0.02   1.02    0.7  11.1   0.039  0.528  0.37   1.33
 CTD 98   0.1   5.45    0.02   1.02    0.6  11     0.044  0.531  0.4    1.36
 CTD 99   0.12  5.46    0.01   1.01    0.4  10.7   0.039  0.53   0.39   1.35
 CTD 100  0.11  5.49    0.02   1.02    0.7  11.1   0.041  0.536  0.39   1.36
 CTD 101  0.11          0.01           0.6         0.037         0.39    
 CTD 102  0.16  5.49    0.02   1.02    0.5  11     0.048  0.548  0.39   1.33
 CTD 103  0.12          0.02           0.6         0.045         0.41    
 CTD 104  0.12  5.5     0.02   1.02    0.6  11.1   0.042  0.542  0.39   1.34
 CTD 105  0.12  5.49    0.02   1       0.6  11     0.041  0.533  0.39   1.36




9  References

Armishaw, Paul, "Estimating measurement uncertainty in an afternoon. A 
    case study in the practical application of measurement uncertainty." 
    Accred Qual Assur, 8, pp. 21 8-224 (2003).

Armstrong, F.A.J., Stearns, C.A., and Strickland, J.D.H., "The 
    measurement of upwelling and subsequent biological processes by means 
    of the Technicon Autoanalyzer and associated equipment," Deep-Sea 
    Research, 14, pp.3 81-389 (1967).

Hood, E.M. (2010). "Introduction to the collection of expert reports and 
    guidelines." The GO­SHIP Repeat Hydrography Manual: A Collection of 
    Expert Reports and Guidelines. IOCCP Report No 14, ICPO Publication 
    Series No. 134, Version 1, 2010.

Hydes, D., Aoyarma, M., Aminot, A., Bakker, K., Becker, S., Coverly, S., 
    Daniel, A.G., Dickson, O., Grosso, R., Kerouel, R., van Ooijen, J., 
    Sato, K., Tanhua, T., Woodward, E.M.S., and Zhang, J.Z. (2010). 
    "Determination of dissolved nutrients (N, P, Si) in seawater with 
    high precision and inter-comparability using gas-segmented continuous 
    flow analysers." The GO-SHIP Repeat Hydrography Manual: A Collection 
    of Expert Reports and Guidelines. IOCCP Report No 14, ICPO 
    Publication Series No. 134, Version 1, 2010.

Kerouel, Roger and Alain Aminot, "Fluorometric determination of ammonia 
    in sea and estuarine waters by direct segmented flow analysis". 
    Journal of Marine Chemistry 57 (1997) pp. 265-275.

Murphy, J. And Riley, J.P., "A Modified Single Solution Method for the 
    Determination of Phosphate in Natural Waters", Anal. Chim. Acta, 27, 
    p.30, (1962)

Wood, E.D., F.A.J. Armstrong, and F.A. Richards. (1967) "Determination of 
    nitrate in seawater by cadmium-copper reduction to nitrite." Journal 
    of the Marine Biological Association of U.K. 47: pp. 23-31.











                       APPENDIX 3 – CFC LAB REPORT

2018 SR3 Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC), Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6), and Nitrous
                        Oxide (N2O)* Measurements


* Note that N2O measurements are a Level 3 measurement. The 
  concentrations were measured on the same water samples collected for 
  the Level 1 CFC/SF6 measurements. The N2O analysis is still under 
  development. Please contact the PI for any use of these data
 

PI: Mark J. Warner, University of Washington (warner@u.washington.edu) 

Samplers and Analysts: Mark J. Warner, University of Washington
                       Daniel Anderson, University of Washington


Samples for the analysis of dissolved CFC-11, CFC-12, SF6, and N2O were 
collected from approximately 1720 of the Niskin water samples during the 
expedition. When taken, water samples for CFC analysis were the first 
samples drawn from the 12-liter bottles. Care was taken to co-ordinate 
the sampling of CFCs with other samples to minimize the time between the 
initial opening of each bottle and the completion of sample drawing. In 
most cases, dissolved oxygen and dissolved inorganic carbon were 
collected within several minutes of the initial opening of each bottle. 
To minimize contact with air, the CFC samples were collected from the 
Niskin bottle petcock into 250-cc ground glass syringes through plastic 
3-way stopcocks. The syringes were stored in large ice chest in the 
laboratory at 3.5° - 6°C until 30-45 minutes before analysis to reduce 
the degassing and bubble formation in the sample. At that time, they were 
transferred to a water bath at approximately 29°C in order to increase 
the stripping efficiency during analysis.

Concentrations of CFC-11, CFC-12, SF6, and N2O in air samples, seawater 
and gas standards were measured by shipboard electron capture gas 
chromatography (EC-GC). This system from the University of Washington was 
located in a portable laboratory on the heli-deck. Samples were 
introduced into the GC-EC via a purge and trap system. Approximately 200-
ml water samples were purged with nitrogen and the compounds of interest 
were trapped on a Porapak Q/Carboxen 1000/Molecular Sieve 5A trap cooled 
by an immersion bath to - 60°C. During the purging of the sample (6 
minutes at 220 ml min-1 flow), the gas stream was stripped of any water 
vapor via a Nafion trap in line with an ascarite/magnesium perchlorate 
dessicant tube prior to transfer to the trap. The trap was isolated and 
heated by direct resistance to 175°C. The desorbed contents of the trap 
were back-flushed and transferred onto the analytical pre-columns. The 
first precolumn was a 40-cm length of 1/8-in tubing packed with 80/100 
mesh Porasil B. This precolumn was used to separate the CFC-11 from the 
other gases. The second pre-column was 13 cm of 1/8-in tubing packed with 
80/100 mesh molecular sieve 5A. This pre-column separated the N2O from 
CFC-12 and SF6. Three analytical columns in three gas chromatographs with 
electron capture detectors were used in the analysis. CFC-11 was 
separated from other compounds by a long column consisting of 36 cm of 
Porasil B and 150 cm of Carbograph 1AC maintained at 90°C. CFC-12 and SF6 
were analyzed using a column consisting of 2.33 m of molecular sieve 5A 
and 1.5 m of Carbograph 1AC maintained at 80°C.  The analytical column 
for N2O was 30 cm of molecular sieve 5A in a 120°C oven. The carrier gas 
for this column was instrumental grade P-5 gas (95% Ar/5% CH4) that was 
directed onto the second precolumn and into the third column for the N2O 
analyses. All three detectors were run at 300°C.

The analytical system was calibrated frequently using a standard gas of 
known gas composition. Gas sample loops of known volume were thoroughly 
flushed with standard gas and injected into the system. The temperature 
and pressure were recorded so that the amount of gas injected could be 
calculated. The procedures used to transfer the standard gas to the trap, 
precolumns, main chromatographic columns and EC detectors were similar to 
those used for analyzing water samples. Three sizes of gas sample loops 
were used. Multiple injections of these loop volumes could be made to 
allow the system to be calibrated over a relatively wide range of 
concentrations. Air samples and system blanks (injections of loops of 
CFC-free gas) were injected and analyzed in a similar manner. The typical 
analysis time for samples was 750 sec.

For atmospheric sampling, an ~100 meter length of 3/8-in OD Dekaron 
tubing was run from the portable laboratory to the bow of the ship. A 
flow of air was drawn through this line to the main laboratory using an 
Air Cadet pump. The air was compressed in the pump, with the downstream 
pressure held at ~1.5 atm. using a back-pressure regulator.  A tee 
allowed a flow (100 ml min-1) of the compressed air to be directed to the 
gas sample valves of the CFC/SF6/N2O analytical system, while the bulk 
flow of the air (>7 l min-1) was vented through the back-pressure 
regulator. Air samples were generally analyzed when the relative wind 
direction was within 50 degrees of the bow of the ship to reduce the 
possibility of shipboard contamination.  The pump was run for 
approximately 30 minutes prior to analysis to insure that the air inlet 
lines and pump were thoroughly flushed. The average atmospheric 
concentrations determined during the cruise (from a sets of 4 or 5 
measurements analyzed when possible) were 241.7 +/- 8.7 parts per 
trillion (ppt) for CFC-11 (n=21), 518.6 +/- 10.9 ppt for CFC-12 (N=21), 
9.3 +/- 0.5 ppt for SF6 (N=20), and 336.2 +/- 5.5 parts per billion for 
N2O (N=5). Note that a larger aliquot was required for higher precision 
N2O analysis, and this higher aliquot resulted in SF6 peak areas outside 
the range of the calibration curve used for seawater samples.

Concentrations of the CFCs in air, seawater samples and gas standards are 
reported relative to the SIO98 calibration scale (Prinn et al., 2000). 
Concentrations in air and standard gas are reported in units of mole 
fraction in dry gas, and are typically in the parts per trillion (ppt) 
range for CFCs and SF6 and parts per billion (ppb) for N2O. Dissolved CFC 
concentrations are given in units of picomoles per kilogram seawater 
(pmol kg-1), SF6 in femtomoles per kilogram seawater (fmol kg-1), and N2O 
in nanomoles per kilogram seawater (nmol kg-1). CFC concentrations in air 
and seawater samples were determined by fitting their chromatographic 
peak areas to multi-point calibration curves, generated by injecting 
multiple sample loops of gas from a working standard (UW WRS 32399) into 
the analytical instrument. Full-range calibration curves were run at the 
beginning and end of the cruise, as well as during long transits/weather 
delays when possible. Single injections of a fixed volume of standard gas 
at one atmosphere were run much more frequently (at intervals of 2 hours) 
to monitor short-term changes in detector sensitivity. The SF6 peak was 
often on a small bump on the baseline, resulting in a large dependence of 
the peak area on the choice of endpoints for integration. Estimated 
accuracy is +/- 3%. Estimated limit of detection is 1 fmol kg-1 for CFC-
11, 2 fmol kg-1 for CFC-12, 0.05 fmol kg-1 for SF6, and 0.5 nmol kg-1 for 
N2O.

The efficiency of the purging process was evaluated at every other 
station by re-stripping water samples and comparing the residual 
concentrations to initial values. These re-strip values were less than 1% 
for CFC-11 and essentially zero for CFC-12 and SF6. For N2O, the re-strip 
values were complicated by the apparent production of N2O within the re-
stripped sample within the sparging chamber for a subset of the samples. 
See the discussion below. Based on the re-strips of numerous samples from 
the deep ocean, the mean values were approximately 4%.

On this expedition, based on the analysis of 45 duplicate samples, we 
estimate precisions (1 standard deviation) of 0.3% or 0.002 pmol kg-1 
(whichever is greater) for dissolved CFC-11, 0.8% or 0.004 pmol kg-1 for 
CFC-12 measurements, 0.036 fmol kg-1 or 4.1% for SF6, and 0.18 nmol kg-1 
or 1.2% for N2O.


Analytical Difficulties

The major analytical challenge for this voyage was the sensitivity of the 
electron capture detector used for the measurement of SF6 and CFC-12 to 
changes in atmospheric pressure. The peak area of an injection of one 
large sample loop of the increased by approximately 4% per decrease of 1 
mb in atmospheric pressure. In addition the baseline shifted upwards and 
was very sensitive to the motion of the ship. At atmospheric pressures 
below 970 mb, the broad plateau on which the SF6 peak eluted became a 
broad peak with the SF6 peak on the downslope. In rough seas, it was 
difficult to separate the smaller SF6 peaks from the broader peaks 
associated with the ship roll. For most of the analyses during these 
periods, any peak within a time window (74 to 80 sec) was identified as 
SF6 with endpoints manually chosen. In most of these instances, the 
reported low-level SF6 concentrations are flagged as questionable (flag 
3).

One CTD (#32) was not sampled due to analytical difficulties with this 
same ECD. Unknown contamination caused the detector voltage to be pegged 
at its maximum response. After 6 hours or so, it returned to normal.


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



REFERENCES

Rosenberg, M., Fukamachi, Y., Rintoul, S., Church, J., Curran, C., 
    Helmond, I., Miller, K., McLaughlan, D., Berry, K., Johnston, N. and 
    Richman, J., unpublished. Kerguelen Deep Western Boundary Current 
    Experiment and CLIVAR I9 transect, marine science cruises AU0304 and 
    AU0403 - oceanographic field measurements and analysis. ACE 
    Cooperative Research Centre, unpublished report. 78 pp.

Rosenberg, M. and Rintoul, S., unpublished-1. Aurora Australis marine 
    science cruise AU1121 – oceanographic field measurements and 
    analysis. ACE Cooperative Research Centre, September 2011, 
    unpublished report. 45 pp.

Rosenberg, M. and Rintoul, S., unpublished-2. Aurora Australis marine 
    science cruise AU1203 – oceanographic field measurements and 
    analysis. ACE Cooperative Research Centre, November 2012, unpublished 
    report. 30 pp.

Rosenberg, M. and Rintoul, S., unpublished-3. Aurora Australis marine 
    science cruise AU1402, Totten and Mertz CTDs and moorings – 
    oceanographic field measurements and analysis. ACE Cooperative 
    Research Centre, May 2016, unpublished report. 65 pp.






ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to all scientific personnel who participated in the cruise, to the 
oceanography and hydrochemistry team for a great job collecting and 
analysing the data, to all MNF support staff on the cruise, and to the 
crew of the RV Investigator.

Funding support comes from the Australian Government Department of the 
Environment and CSIRO through the National Environment Science Program 
and the Centre for Southern Hemisphere Oceans Research. Additional 
support comes from the Australian Government Business Cooperative 
Research Centres Programme through the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems 
Cooperative Research Centre (ACECRC). Acknowledgement also for long term 
support goes to the Australian Antarctic Division and Australia’s 
Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS), and to the Marine National 
Facility (MNF) for ongoing support.




CCHDO Data Processing Notes

Data History

• File Online Carolina Berys
in1801.pdf (download) #93736 
Date: 2018-10-03 
Current Status: unprocessed

• File Online Carolina Berys
in1801.sea (download) #d4203 
Date: 2018-10-03 
Current Status: unprocessed

• File Online Carolina Berys
in1801.sum (download) #dc7de 
Date: 2018-10-03 
Current Status: unprocessed

• File Online Carolina Berys
in2018_v01_CTD.zip (download) #ca1d9 
Date: 2018-10-03 
Current Status: unprocessed

• File Online Carolina Berys
README_in1801_ctd_exchangeformat (download) #296d7 
Date: 2018-10-03 
Current Status: unprocessed

• File Online Carolina Berys
096U20180111_woceexchange_version01oct2018.zip (download) #b74e7 
Date: 2018-10-03 
Current Status: unprocessed

• File Submission Carolina for Mark Rosenberg
096U20180111_woceexchange_version01oct2018.zip (download) #b74e7 
Date: 2018-10-03 
Current Status: unprocessed 
Notes
096U20180111_woceexchange_version01oct2018.zip contains data and cruise 
report for RV Investigator cruise 096U20180111 (aliases in2018_v01, 
in1801) includes CTD data and bottle data with CFC update.

• File Submission Carolina for Mark Rosenberg
README_in1801_ctd_exchangeformat (download) #296d7 
Date: 2018-10-03 
Current Status: unprocessed 
Notes
096U20180111_woceexchange_version01oct2018.zip contains data and cruise 
report for RV Investigator cruise 096U20180111 (aliases in2018_v01, 
in1801) includes CTD data and bottle data with CFC update.

• File Submission Carolina for Mark Rosenberg
in2018_v01_CTD.zip (download) #ca1d9 
Date: 2018-10-03 
Current Status: unprocessed 
Notes
096U20180111_woceexchange_version01oct2018.zip contains data and cruise 
report for RV Investigator cruise 096U20180111 (aliases in2018_v01, 
in1801) includes CTD data and bottle data with CFC update.

• File Submission Carolina for Mark Rosenberg
in1801.sum (download) #dc7de 
Date: 2018-10-03 
Current Status: unprocessed 
Notes
096U20180111_woceexchange_version01oct2018.zip contains data and cruise 
report for RV Investigator cruise 096U20180111 (aliases in2018_v01, 
in1801) includes CTD data and bottle data with CFC update.

• File Submission Carolina for Mark Rosenberg
in1801.sea (download) #d4203 
Date: 2018-10-03 
Current Status: unprocessed 
Notes
096U20180111_woceexchange_version01oct2018.zip contains data and cruise 
report for RV Investigator cruise 096U20180111 (aliases in2018_v01, 
in1801) includes CTD data and bottle data with CFC update.

• File Submission Carolina for Mark Rosenberg
in1801.pdf (download) #93736 
Date: 2018-10-03 
Current Status: unprocessed 
Notes
096U20180111_woceexchange_version01oct2018.zip contains data and cruise 
report for RV Investigator cruise 096U20180111 (aliases in2018_v01, 
in1801) includes CTD data and bottle data with CFC update.
