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





CRUISE REPORT: SBI
(Updated OCT 2010) 



HIGHLIGHTS 

                            CRUISE SUMMARY INFORMATION

             WOCE Section Designation  SBI
   Expedition designation (ExpoCodes)  320620030705
                     Chief Scientists  Dr. James Swift / SIO
                                       Dr. Louis Codispoti / HPL
                                Dates  05 JUL 2003 - 18 AUG 2003
                                 Ship  NATHANIEL B. PALMER
                        Ports of call  Dutch Harbor, Alaska - Barrow, Alaska

                                                    74.40367 N
                Geographic Boundaries  168.91787 W              148.63085 W
                                                    53.85128 N

                             Stations  329
         Floats and drifters deployed  0
       Moorings deployed or recovered  0

                                Chief Scientists:
                                 Dr. James Swift
        Scripps Institution of Oceanography • Oceanographic Data Facility
               9500 Gilman Rd. MC 0214 • La Jolla, CA • 92093-0214
                   Tel: 858.534.3387 • Email: jswift@ucsd.edu

                               Dr. Louis Codispoti 
                              Horn Point Laboratory
               PO Box 775 • 2020 Horn Pt. Rd. • Cambridge, MD 21613
                 Tel: 410.221.8479 • Email: codispot@hpl.umces.edu





A colored line joins consecutive stations (see pdf).  From it one may discern 
that two sections of stations were repeated during the cruise, one near the 
mouth of Barrow Canyon and the other on the section near 152°W.  The shaded 
bathymetry is drawn from the ETOPO-5 bathymetric database with blue shading 
chosen to emphasize bottom depth variations nonlinearly between 35 and 500 
meters.  The coastline and colored isobaths - 500, 1000, 1500, 2000, 2500, 3000, 
and 3500 meters - were taken from the isobath database prepared by Professor 
Joseph Reid, UCSD/SIO.



PURPOSE OF THE CRUISE 

The Arctic Shelf-Basin Interactions (SBI) project focuses on shelf, shelf break 
and upper slope water mass and ecosystem modifications, material fluxes and 
biogeochemical cycles on the outer shelf and slope of Chukchi and Beaufort seas. 
This is the region where it is believed that key processes control water mass 
exchange and biogeochemical cycles, and where the greatest responses to climate 
changes are expected to occur.  The primary scientific goal of the SBI 2003 
Survey cruise was to carry out a CTD/lADCP/O2/nutrient/chl-a survey of the US 
SBI Phase 2 Field Program study region.  It was planned that the survey include 
high-resolution sections across key regions, cover the entire SBI study area 
more comprehensively than feasible during other SBI cruises, and repeat one or 
more of the intensely-sampled sections during the cruise.  The cruise was one of 
eight during 2002-2004 planned for the Western Arctic Shelf-Basin Interactions 
Phase II Field Program (SBI), and was intended to be the only survey-type cruise 
of that program. Note:

    CTD       Conductivity/Temperature/'Depth'(pressure) measurement device
    LADCP     Lowered Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler
    O2        Dissolved Oxygen
    nutrient  Silicate, Phosphate, Nitrate, Nitrite, Ammonia, Urea
    chl-a     Chlorophyll-a and other related phyto pigments



PRE-CRUISE ADVISORY PLANNING 

Prior to the cruise the SBI Advisory Committee issued the following priorities 
for the cruise: 

1. Occupation of the four shelf-basin sections made during the 2002 process 
   cruises, with close station spacing in the bathymetric zones sampled closely 
   during the 2002 mooring cruise. 
2. Reoccupation during the survey cruise (two occupations during the cruise) 
   of as many of the four 2002 shelf-basin sections as feasible.  Close spacing on 
   the second occupation if feasible. 
3. Occupation of cross-canyon Barrow Canyon sections, including reoccupation 
   during the cruise. 
4. Occupation of SBI stations and lines from Bering Strait to just north of 70°N. 
5. Occupation of a Beaufort shelf-slope section east of the 2002 sections. 
6. Occupation of a meridional section in the western portion of the SBI study 
   area along the longitude where the 2002 mooring cruise carried out a high-
   resolution section. 
7. If time, extending sections, for example extending the shelf-basin 
   sections deeper into the Arctic Ocean interior than was possible in 2002. The 
   SBI Advisory Committee set lower priority to (a) carrying out a meridional 
   section on the far west boundary of the SBI study area (e.g., just east of the 
   treaty line), or (b) carrying out a section along the northern boundary of the 
   SBI study area. 

The SBI Science Team chose early/mid-June through July 2003 as the optimum time 
for the SBI survey cruise, based on overall SBI objectives.  The SBI Survey 
cruise was scheduled on the Antarctic research vessel Nathaniel B. Palmer due to 
a lack of availability of suitable Arctic-based icebreaking vessels in that time 
frame.  Consultants advised NSF and ECO regarding the ship's ice capabilities 
versus expected early-mid summer ice conditions in the SBI study region. Their 
advice was to delay the cruise somewhat to a time with more open areas and 
larger leads, specifically more navigation room around multi-year floes and 
chunks. 



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

All hands, whether from Edison Chouest Offshore, Raytheon Polar Services, or the 
nine institutions comprising the scientific party, showed outstanding teamwork 
and professionalism, working together superbly to bring about this achievement.  
It is a pleasure to acknowledge and thank the National Science Foundation Office 
of Polar Programs, not only for the fiscal and logistics support which made this 
expedition possible, but equally for the continuing advice and encouragement 
received from our program managers.  

If one person were to be singled out for praise - among the many who deserve 
praise - it would be nutrient analyst Susan Becker (UCSD/SIO).  Not only did she 
cope with a higher daily sample load than usual (the cruise was planned for two 
nutrient analysts but one was unable to participate), and accomplish this with a 
6-channel autoanalyzer significantly more complex and troublesome than the usual 
4-channel machine, but she did this while maintaining a standard of data quality 
that was second to none, period.  All on board were continually impressed with 
her dedication, perseverance, and expertise. 



SCIENCE TEAM PERSONNEL

Bruce Andrews         Prism Helicopters        helicopter pilot
Bob Anthony           Prism Helicopters        helicopter mechanic
Craig Aumack          UofTexas                 CTD operator, stable isotopes (student)
Susan Becker          UCSD/SIO                 nutrient analyst
John Bengtson         NOAA                     marine mammal studies
Marie-Claude Beaupre  UCSD/SIO                 data processing, chemistry
Jerry Bucher          RPSC                     electronics technician
John Calderwood       UCSD/SIO                 oxygen analyses, marine/electronics tech
Mike Cameron          NOAA                     marine mammal studies
Emily Constantine     RPSC                     marine technician
Jesse Doren           RPSC                     marine technician
Paul Ellis            UCSD/SIO                 oxygen analyses, marine tech
Brent Evers           RPSC                     electronics technincian
Kathleen Gavahan      RPSC                     computer/network technician
Eric Hutt             RPSC                     marine science technician
Eric Johnson          Earth & Space Resources  CTD operator, lowered ADCP
Luther Leavitt, Jr.   Barrow, AK               community participant
Leopoldo Llinàs       UofMiami                 CTD operator, plankton tows (student)
Jeremy Mathis         UofMiami                 CTD operator, particulate and 
                                               dissolved organic matter (student)
Charles Menadelook    Little Diomede, AK       community participant
Stephanie Moreland    UofAlaska                pigments
Karl Newyear          RPSC                     Marine Projects Coordinator
Robert Palomares      UCSD/SIO                 electronic technician, salinity analyes
Jim Rogers            Polson School District,  Teachers Experiencing the Arctic and 
                      Polson, Montana,         Antarctic sample cop
Kristin Sanborn       UCSD/SIO                 data processing
Heather Smith         UofWashington            marine mammal studies (student)
Dean Stockwell        UofAlaska                pigments
James Swift           UCSD/SIO                 Chief Scientist
Jim Waters            RPSC                     computer/network technician
Jenny White           RPSC                     marine technician



PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS

Patameter                        P.I.          Institution
-------------------------------  ------------  -----------
Hydrography                      J. Swift      SIO/UCSD
Nutrients, Oxygen, Ammonium      L. Codispoti  HPL
DOC, Chloroa, Phaeophytin, Urea  D. Hansell    RSMAS/MAC

HPL:   Horn Point Laboratory
MAC:   Marine and Atmospheric Chemistry
RSMAS: Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science
SIO:   Scripps Institutin of Oceanography
UCSD:  University of California, San Diego



Edison Chouest Offshore Personnel

Joe Borkowski III  Captain
Vladimir Repin     Ice Consultant / Navigator
Mike Watson        Chief Mate
Jay Bouzigard      2nd Mate
Robert Potter      3rd Mate
     
Dave Munroe        Chief Engineer
Johnny Pierce      Chief Engineer
Robert Morris      1st Engineer
Edward Forbes      2nd Engineer
Gerald Tompsett    2nd Engineer
Fredy Dela Cruz    3rd Engineer
Victor Maskey      Oiler
Rolly Rogando      Oiler
Doyle Lee          Oiler
David Cooley       Oiler
Tim Kennedy        Cadet
     
Ric Tamayo         Deck / Winch Operator
Enrque Alvezo      Deck / Winch Operator
Danilo Plaza       Deck / Winch Operator
Ronald Mack        Deck
Marcelo Mera       Deck
Lorenzo Sandoval   Deck
George Rayford     Deck
     
Ernest Stelly      Chief Steward
Mark Stone         Chief Steward
Jody Keown         Galleyhand
Alejandra Monje    Galleyhand



NARRATIVE 

Most SBI equipment was loaded during the Palmer's pre-cruise port stop in 
Honolulu, although items were also loaded in Dutch Harbor, Alaska.  All 
members of the scientific party reached the Palmer in Dutch Harbor before 
departure on 05 July, although many of the group experienced air travel delays 
of one or two days due to flight cancellations (low ceilings at Dutch Harbor), 
and so the vessel's departure was delayed about eight hours - into the early 
evening - to allow those who finally made flights that day to join the ship. 

The ship departed Dutch Harbor in excellent weather, and the weather remained 
excellent during the two and one half day run north to Nome, Alaska.  During 
that time the science party carried out safety and emergency training, brought 
equipment to final readiness, organized the watch teams, and carried out a 
CTD/rosette wet test cast.  In Nome the Palmer was joined by the helicopter, 
pilot, and mechanic who were intended to support ice reconnaissance, a marine 
mammal observation program, and ferrying the science party ashore at the end of 
the cruise. 

The SBI science program began early on the morning of 09 July with a five-

STATION CTD/hydrographic section across US waters in Bering Strait.  The 

STATIONs went well, the only problem of note being a hydraulic failure on the 
starboard A-frame which cancelled the first of three planned bongo net tows on 
the section, but that program was soon back in action.  Ceilings lowered and fog 
increased late that morning, making weather unsuitable for flying, so friends of 
Community Participant Charles Menadelook brought him out to the ship by small 
boat from his home on Little Diomede Island, after which the Palmer began its 
steam north to the primary SBI study region over the shelf-slope-basin 
transition zone. 

On 09 July 2003 at 1934 Alaska Time the distinguished Antarctic research vessel 
RVIB Nathaniel B. Palmer crossed 66 deg 33 min North Latitude, and thus became, 
for at least one cruise, an Arctic research vessel.  One short section across US 
waters in the southern Chukchi Sea and two other stations were completed during 
the steam north. 

The first high resolution CTD/hydrographic section across the Alaskan 
continental slope and into the Arctic Ocean interior northeast of Barrow began 
on 12 July.  Stations were only 3 miles apart for much of the section.  This 
provided a finely detailed, coherent view of the variations across the shelf and 
continental slope.  Over the slope concentrations of chlorophyll and dissolved 
oxygen were high in the biologically active layer and there were strong lateral 
gradients in nutrients, with appreciable concentrations of nitrite, ammonia, and 
urea.  This contrasted with the basin interior, where the concentrations of 
these nutrients were very low.  There, the underside of the sea ice appeared 
relatively clean, contributing to the impression of reduced biological activity 
in the upper layer, compared to the slope region. 

Because this was first penetration of the Arctic ice pack by the Palmer, there 
was much interest in the ship's performance.  As it turned out, the ice was 
mostly broken and loose, with many leads and sometimes considerable areas of 
open water.  Hence the Palmer very rarely experienced any significant 
impediments to progress, both during this first section and later during the 
expedition.  Ice performance forecasts provided pre-cruise had been based 
largely on a 1983 statistical compilation.  It is the Chief Scientist's opinion 
that there may have been in the last few years a change in the character of the 
ice cover on this region from a permanent, multi-year pack ice cover to a more 
nearly seasonal ice cover, dominated almost to exclusion by first-year ice.  
This is based, however, on anecdotes from recent cruises and local observers, 
and even if it is the case, it may represent an anomaly rather than a trend.

The ship returned to the shelf along a second high-resolution section.  Both 
sections were east of Barrow Canyon, the principal bathymetric cut from the deep 
ocean into the Chukchi shelf in US waters.  Because both shelf-basin sections 
showed a narrow band of high-oxygen water throughout most of the water column, 
sited over the same isobath, and because other measured characteristics were 
also distinctive in this zone, this heightened interest in the subsequent 
oceanographic survey of Barrow Canyon with four high-resolution cross-canyon 
sections.  The first was across the mouth of the canyon, and the second, 
occupied one tidal cycle later, was approximately 50 km up-canyon, with the 
other two sections each an additional 50 km up-canyon.  Indeed, these proved to 
be interesting sections from an oceanographic standpoint, each clearly 
exhibiting zones of water similar to the distinctive waters seen a few days 
earlier over the Beaufort Slope, the inference being that all six sections had 
crossed the core of the 2003 version of the Barrow Canyon early summer outflow.  
There were also hints that the canyon sections crossed shelf outflow water 
entering the upper reaches of Barrow Canyon on the west side, and then being 
pushed over to the east side (by rotational effects). 

Flying weather had for the most part not been favorable during the first two 
shelf-basin transects, but near the end of the second transect a change of 
weather provided fine flying conditions.  The marine mammal group completed 
seven aerial surveys with the helicopter over ice habitats in the basin and 
shelf zones.  They encountered low densities of ringed and bearded seals, with 
higher densities of bearded seals over the shelf in the marginal ice zone.  They 
also observed numerous groups of walrus at the ice edge, and spotted beluga 
whales near the shelf slope.  Then the weather turned foggy again. 

The original plan had been to set Charles Menadelook off at Barrow after 3-5 
days aboard but it was not convenient to do so at the time and thus he was 
aboard 9 days.  Finally good flying conditions coincided with proximity to 
Barrow, and the helicopter flew him ashore and returned with Community 
Participant Luther Leavitt, Jr., from Barrow.  The Palmer was just offshore of 
Barrow at the same time that the Sir Wilfrid Laurier was disembarking a science 
party including Jackie Grebmeier of the SBI Advisory Committee. 

Meanwhile, after a short crossing of the shelf near Barrow Canyon, the cruise 
continued with another pair of high-resolution shelf-slope-basin sections, this 
time west of Barrow Canyon, first doing the eastern member of the pair and then 
the western section.  As the of this section pair progressed and the daily data 
updates were assembled, it became clear that on the eastern section a trio of 
eddies had been crossed, two of which had distinctive halocline cold, high-
oxygen cores. 

It is worthwhile mentioning that the LADCP program had been off to a slow start 
on this cruise regarding interpretation due to problems with the software used 
to process the data.  But about the time the first of the west-of-Barrow-Canyon 
sections were being run, LADCP plots were coming available.  These showed a 
velocity structure to the eddies which extended laterally well past the cold-
core signature.  In fact, some of the highest velocities were in an outer layer 
which was high in nutrients and low on oxygen, giving rise to speculation that 
the core and edge waters had split from a source region as a unit. 

On the first of the western pair of sections there were no obvious signs of 
upper slope water property structures similar to those that had led to the 
Barrow Canyon outflow, i.e. there were at first no obvious signatures of a 
similar outflow from Herald Valley, a canyon in the shelf nominally upstream 
from the section.  There was then a growing realization that while this was 
true, there had been a second distinctive water type in Barrow Canyon on its 
west side, low in oxygen and high in nutrients.  This water was not seen on the 
eastern member of the pair of shelf-slope-basin sections west of Barrow Canyon 
but was clear on the western member of the pair.  This observation of water to 
the west of Barrow Canyon nearly the same as water in Barrow Canyon, but 
apparently separated by a zone where that water type was not found, later became 
an important element in the planning of the final third of the expedition. 

The next planned activity for the cruise was a shelf survey to map out whatever 
regional property variations occurred there.  The depth of the shelf is about 50 
meters, so casts were short and survey progress was usually rapid. 
It should be mentioned that the marine mammal program was impacted by unsuitable 
flying weather but the team felt that they were proceeding well despite 
intermittent foggy days.  During aerial survey flights over ice habitats in the 
basin and shelf zones they encountered low densities of ringed and bearded 
seals, with higher densities of bearded seals over the shelf in the marginal ice 
zone.  Numerous groups of walrus were also observed at the ice edge, and beluga 
whales were spotted during the surveys near the slope of the continental shelf.  

During all four excursions well into the Canada Basin none of the predicted 
multiyear ice was observed.  Ice concentrations were sometimes high, but the ice 
was first-year ice with no large or consolidated floes.  Most of the ice was 
rotten and in apparent melt, although nearer the ice edge on the Chukchi shelf 
there was a band of heavier ice, mostly pieces of pressure ridge and jumbled 
ice, that presented a much different appearance.  But in the far north, as over 
most of the area, there were substantial open areas, some so large that ice was 
difficult to see in some directions.  This is similar, if not even more open 
conditions, to ice observations made from the Polar Star during the 2002 Chukchi 
Borderlands field program. 

The bongo net tow program decreased its frequency of casts mid-way through the 
cruise because good catch success earlier in the cruise was using up 
preservatives and sample jars faster than expected. 

On 28 July it was necessary to reterminate the CTD wire:  During a cast there 
was an unidentified error but with the bottom contact switch suspected even 
though the rosette was 1250 meters above the bottom.  After aborting the cast 
and inspecting, the cast was begun again but an identical error occurred.  On 
the third try, the cast worked OK until the deck unit lost power on the up cast.  
Eventually it was determined there was an electrical arc between two pins on a 
data cable which disabled the main CTD underwater unit (the 'fish') and possibly 
blew a fuse in the deck box.  In short order the central CTD underwater unit was 
installed, along with two new sensor cables, and the wire was reterminated.  The 
casts following this procedure were problem-free. 

At the completion of one of the shelf sections of CTD casts and bongo net tows, 
the vessel was a few miles off the Alaskan coast, southwest of Wainwright.  This 
afforded an opportunity to fly the second Community Participant, Luther Leavitt, 
Jr., back to Barrow some 75 miles away.  His stay on board turned out to be 12 
days, instead of the 3-5 planned, due to the sparse coincidence of proximity to 
Alaska with flying weather.  For that matter the weather was a bit foggy for the 
return flight, but the expert crew from Prism Helicopters took all necessary 
precautions and made the trip safely.   

The next shelf section took the vessel west, closer to Russian waters, into an 
area anticipated to be a source region for water similar to the low oxygen, high 
nutrient Barrow Canyon water.  Indeed, that turned out to be the case, 
temporarily deepening the mystery attending to the path the water would take if 
it were to reach a Barrow Canyon without crossing the first of the shelf-slope-
basin sections west of Barrow Canyon. 

On 02 August there was radio contact with the Xue Long, a Chinese vessel 
conducting SBI-like research in the area.  The vessel was actually quite close 
by, but heavy fog made sighting impossible. 

From the individual CTD profiles from the shelf survey, the larger spatial 
structure of the property distributions was not always apparent.  Sometimes 
there were three or more layers at a shelf station, and when the individual 
profiles were combined into the long sections which formed the survey, 
meaningful patterns came clear.  It was possible to trace a Bering Strait 
component with an unusual nutrient signature, to locate a shelf region where the 
near-bottom waters are very high in nutrients, to uncover transition zones where 
the chlorophyll maximum shifted significantly in the vertical, and to identify 
areas where shelf waters might break into the slope region. 


On 04 August the Palmer reached the highest latitude for the cruise, and also 
completed the top priority aspects of the cruise, with two weeks of sampling 
time remaining.  A plan was devised for the remainder of the science time which 
permitted reoccupation of two sections done earlier during the cruise and 
conduct a survey of  the outer Chukchi shelf, a survey which it was hoped would 
identify better the sources and pathways of the low oxygen, high nutrient shelf 
bottom water.  The outer shelf section included a section along the shelf edge, 
including closely-spaced stations across the mouth of Herald Valley, and two 
spur sections over the slope into the Canada Basin.  The hydrographic data 
defined a likely path for the high-nutrient shelf bottom water around subtle 
bathymetric features into Barrow Canyon, a path that bypassed the first of the 
long shelf-slope-basin sections west of the canyon.  The lowered-ADCP data 
revealed a shelf edge flow supporting these inferences.  The earlier deep basin 
observations of high-nutrient outer reaches on cold core eddies may indicate one 
mechanism which could move these waters away from the slope into the basin 
interiors. 

Next came a reoccupation of the section of stations across the mouth of Barrow 
Canyon, followed by a repeat of the section of stations east of Barrow Canyon, 
both in the vicinity of SBI moored arrays. 

The sampling program for the cruise concluded with a section of stations from 
the Beaufort shelf to the deep Canada Basin, east of any yet done for the SBI 
program.  When this section began the ship was in open water while the winds 
rose and were sustained to over 25-30 knots.  The ship handled well in the 
developing swell, and other than some wave slop wetting down the Baltic Room 
there were no untoward incidents.  By the time the section was completed, early 
on 17 August, the weather had improved and the seas were slowly dying.  Surface 
salinities were low at the easternmost locations, perhaps due in part to 
presence of Mackenzie River water as well as summer ice melt.  There was a 
surprise oceanographic feature seen at the final stations over the Canada Basin: 
a strong westward flow of water with nearly identical properties to those over 
the Beaufort slope. 

During the last three days of the cruise, samples were analyzed, data were 
processed, science equipment was packed and secured, the laboratories were 
cleaned, and other final business of a research expedition was completed.  The 
CTD/rosette and most other data which were the prime product of the cruise were 
prepared for posting at the SBI website hosted by JOSS, so that SBI 
investigators could begin working with what the sea team provided. 

The primary and secondary CTD temperature and conductivity sensors remained in 
use throughout the cruise.  Near the end of the cruise, as the final section was 
being completed, the oxygen sensor failed.  Its replacement was a little slow to 
settle in, causing a loss of CTD oxygen sensor data in the upper layer at two 
stations.  But the deeper oxygens fit quite well with those from the previous 
oxygen sensor.   

A realtively frequent problem with the CTD data in some regions was apparent 
ingestion of biological debris (or, by observation, entire organisms such as 
jellyfish) into the CTD pumps and sensors.  Sometimes this cleared rapidly, but 
at other times it was necessary to haul the package out of the water and flush 
out the sensors.  Another ongoing problem was modulo noise errors, sometimes 0-3 
per cast but occasionally much more often.  An investigation of the severity and 
effect of these errors is planned after the cruise.  It was, however, possible 
to process all CTD data except for a very few severely impacted groups of CTD 
data scans. 

262 stations were planned, an optimistic number which assumed good progress in 
the ice and few problems with equipment.  The final tally was 329 CTD stations 
and 90 vertical bongo net tows completed, evidence partly of the easy ice 
conditions but mostly of outstanding teamwork and professionalism.

Three graduate students were funded by NSF to participate at sea.  They not only 
ran CTD and bongo tow casts, but also helped with sampling, carried out research 
programs of their own (and of their advisors), and worked up property-property 
plots and vertical sections comparing the 2003 data to data from the three 2002 
SBI cruises, and excellent plots of the ship's underway data.  

The lowered-ADCP was a very useful adjunct to the CTD profiles.  The ship's 
hull-mounted ADCP did not perform acceptably in shallow water (a known and 
expected problem) and so the LADCP velocity profiles were the only velocity 
measurements during approximately one-half the cruise.  The velocity profiles 
show features which fit well with the hydrography across each section, and there 
were substantive velocity features geographically consistent between sections. 

The marine mammal surveys produced good results, although unfavorable weather 
limited use of the helicopter.  Across the study area, the team observed lower 
densities of seals than expected, presumably due to declining haulout rates 
following the annual molting period.  Consistently high densities of walrus were 
observed hauled out on a band of ice just inside the outer fringe of the 
marginal ice zone. 

Cruise participants were treated to frequent wildlife sightings: bald eagles and 
puffins in Dutch Harbor, polar bears, walrus, and seals in the pack ice, and 
whales as well as various species of sea birds.  This and views of the ever-
changing ice added welcome reprieve from the sometimes unending-seeming sequence 
of stations.  

The SBI Survey cruise was also host to Jim Rogers, a high school teacher from 
Polson in northwestern Montana (and an avid birder), supported by the NSF's 
Teachers Experiencing the Antarctic and Arctic program.  He stood watch (as 
sample cop) and participated in the overall program.  He made a verified 
sighting of an Ivory Gull during this trip, a species that breeds in eastern 
Arctic Canada but is rarely found near Alaska.  His URL 
<http://tea.rice.edu/tea_jrogersfrontpage.html> includes logs and photos about 
life and work aboard the Palmer and the people who participated in this cruise. 

The first steps of the trek home for the scientific party commenced from Barrow, 
which was hosting a conference that completely filled the town.  But the same 
flights which brought the conferees to Barrow had plenty of empty seats heading 
south.  Personnel, luggage, and cargo were disembarked via helicopter flights 
during 18-20 August as the Palmer stood offshore. 

RVIB Palmer returned to Dutch Harbor, and then sailed on to Honolulu, where most 
SBI equipment was unloaded, finally heading to port in New Zealand.   



HYDROGRAPHIC MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES AND CLIBRATIONS
5 July to 20 August 2003 

On board team: 

Kristin Sanborn, Marie Beaupre, Susan Becker, John Calderwood, Paul Ellis, Rob 
Palomares Other team members: Leopoldo LLinas, Jeremy Mathis, Craig Amuck, Jim 
Rogers (TEA), Dean Stockwell and Stephanie Moreland (Chlorophyll),  Charles 
Menadelook (Community Participant), Erik Johnson (LADCP and ADCP) 


Data Set Overview 

329 CTD stations were occupied. Eight of these stations had aborted casts, Cast 
1 on stations 027, 175, 227, 282, 310and 313. Station 132 had 3 aborted casts 
and Station 032 cast 1 was a special cast for C13, N15 and is not reported in 
the CTD data set. Stations 69, 70 and 329 did not have any water samples.  Also 
note that an ADDENDUM with data quality notes based on a post-cruise QA analysis 
is appended to this report. 


Instrumentation 

CTD casts were performed with the Raytheon Polar Services Company's (RPSC) 
rosette system consisting of a 24-place rosette frame with 10-Liter Niskin-type 
bottles equipped with internal plastic coated springs and a 24-place SBE-32 
Carousel pylon.  Underwater electronic components included the following: 

Sea-Bird Electronics, Inc. (SBE) 911plus CTD,
WetLabs C-Star transmissometer with a 25cm pathlength and 660nm wavelength,
Biospherical Instruments, Inc. Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR) sensor,
Chelsea MkIII Aquatracka fluorometer, and
Simrad, 5 volt = 500 meters altimeter. 

Additionally a Dr. Haardt fluorometer designed to detect colored organic matter 
(CDOM) and  a Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) Lowered ADCP pair were 
mounted on the rosette. The CTD, transmissometer and fluorometers were mounted 
horizontally along the bottom of the rosette frame. The PAR sensor was located 
at the top of the rosette. All sensors except the LADCP were interfaced with the 
CTD system. This instrument package provided pressure, dual temperature and dual 
conductivity channels as well as light transmissivity and fluorometric signals 
at a sample rate of 24 scans per second.  The CDOM fluorometer was removed from 
the package at Station 020 after it was finally deemed inoperative. At Station 
137, a WetLabs fluorometer was added for an additional fluorometric trace. 

The rosette system was suspended from a standard UNOLS 3-conductor 0.322" 
electromechanical cable. 

CTD serial number 09P4857-0232 with a 401K-105 pressure sensor, S/N 43528, was 
used for Stations 1 through 132, cast 3. For the remainder of the expedition CTD 
serial number 09P10716-0377 with 401K-105, S/N 58949, was used. Serial numbers 
for other sensors are listed in Table 1.  Mounting heights for sensors are 
listed in Table 2. 


TABLE 1:  Instrument/Sensor Serial Numbers

  Primary      Primary      Secondary    Secondary
Temperature  Conductivity  Temperature  Conductivity   Pressure    Transmissometer
-----------  ------------  -----------  ------------  -----------  ---------------
SBE 3plus      SBE 4C       SBE 3plus     SBE 4C      401K-105        C-Star
03-2367        04-2513      03-2299       04-2067     43528/58949     CST-397DR


             Dissolved                                        Auxiliary
              Oxygen      Fluorometer     PAR     Altimeter  Fluorometer
            ----------   --------------  -------  ---------  -----------
              SBE 43     Chelsea Aqua 3  QSP-200   Simrad    WetLabs AFL
            0080/ 0139       88080        4361     9704077     AFLD-016



EQUIPMENT POSITIONS 

TABLE 2:  Instrument mounting heights  

                         Height above                      Height above
       Sensor           base of rosette        Sensor     base of rosette
---------------------  -----------------      --------  -------------------
Altimeter                   15 cm             Pressure         17 cm
Transmissometer              8 cm             T (pri)    15 cm Sta. 1-213 
Fluorometer (Chelsea)        9 cm             T (sec)    12 cm Sta. 214+
Fluorometer (Haardt)    18 cm Sta. 1-20       Par       180 cm Sta. < 1000m
Fluorometer (Wetlabs)  18 cm Sta.< 1000m      "Zero"          253 cm
 

The temperature, conductivity, and oxygen sensors were mounted on a panel on the 
rosette frame. The horizontal separation between primary and secondary intakes 
was ~50 cm on Stations 1-204. For Stations 205-213, the separation was reduced 
to ~33 cm. After Station 213 the mounting was changed again, positioning the 
intakes ~10cm apart. The vertical distance between the TC duct intakes and the 
pressure sensor was 2 cm on Stations 1-213. Starting with Station 214, the 
intakes were 5 cm below the pressure sensor.  

The distance of the mid-points of the 10-Liter Niskin bottles from the bottom-
mounted sensors was ~0.97 m.  The PAR sensor was ~0.66m above the mid-point of 
the Niskin bottles. The distance between the PAR sensor and the pressure sensor 
was ~1.64m.  The 10-Liter Niskin bottles are ~0.87m long. 

The 10-Liter Niskin-type bottles were equipped with Buna-N O-rings and the 
springs were coated with epoxy to minimize the occurrence of rust. They were 
inspected before the cruise. Problems with the bottles were reported to the RPSC 
MTs, who inspected and made repairs as required. Any necessary touch-ups were 
done with Scotch-Kote and allowed to air dry for 24 hours before being put back 
into service.  


Problems & Changes to Instrumentation  

• The Haardt Fluorometer was removed after Station 20. This instrument did not 
  respond to the water column.  
• CTD -0232 failed at Station 132 during cast 03. CTD -0377 was installed before 
  Station 132 cast 04. 
• A WetLabs AFL fluorometer was attached at Station 137 to confirm the response 
  of the Chelsea fluorometer 
• Dissolved Oxygen sensor #0080 (SBE 43) failed at Station 318. Another SBE 43, 
  #0139, replaced it for the remaining stations. 


OVERVIEW OF SCIENCE PROGRAMS

CTD Measurements

There was at least one (almost always only one) CTD/rosette cast at each SBI 

STATION, using USAP-owned SeaBird 911+ CTDs.  There was a dissolved oxygen 
sensor on the CTD.  Although the O2 data were not processed, availability of the 
O2 traces during the down cast was of great assistance with guiding bottle 
sampling in these waters.  Also, the unprocessed CTD oxygen profiles were useful 
in assessing the bottle oxygen measurements.  In addition to the P, C, T, and O2 
data from the CTD, there were transmissometer, fluorometer, Haardt fluorometer, 
and PAR sensor data from the SeaBird.  The Palmer's CTDs were used, augmented 
with some ODF and SBI sensors.  ODF calibrated the pressure sensors in advance 
of the cruise.

The investigator for the Haardt fluorometer is Dr. Ron Benner (University of 
South Carolina; benner@biol.sc.edu; 803-777-9561).  He was not on the cruise.  
ODF looked after this instrument.

There was a lowered-ADCP on the rosette.  The PI supplying the lowered ADCP was 
Dr. Robert Pickart (WHOI; rpickart@whoi.edu; 508-289-2858).  The person 
responsible for the lowered ADCP and hull-mounted ADCP data during the cruise 
was Dr. Eric Johnson (Earth and Space Research; ejohnson@esr.org; 206-726-0501 
ext.12).

The CTD was mounted on an RPSC 24-place rosette frame, with SeaBird pylon, and 
outfitted with 24 10-liter ODF-constructed bottles owned by RPSC.  ODF will 
supplies a Simrad xxxxxx altimeter as part of the underwater package.

The RPSC CTD contacts were Karl Newyear (NewyeaKa@usap.gov) and Paul Olsgaard 
(OlsgaaPa@usap.gov).  ODF CTD contacts were Robert Palomares (ET; 
rpalomares@ucsd.edu; 858-534-1907), Kristin Sanborn (data processing; 
kris@odf.ucsd.edu; 858-534-1903), and Marie Beaupre (data processing; 
marie@odf.ucsd.edu; 858-534-1906).


bottle sampling depths 

Bottle sampling depths on this cruise were focused on obtaining samples from 
cores of principal water masses, well-mixed layers, 20-meter or less bottle 
spacing through the halocline, primary extrema of T/S/O2, and near-bottom.  
Standard sampling depths applied to a degree.: 


salinity 

The CTD exhibited stable conductivity behavior, and thus primary salinities came 
from processed CTD data.  Salinity samples were drawn and analyzed to calibrate 
the CTD.   This ranged from a minimum of 2 samples to a maximum of about 12.   
ODF used the Palmer's Autosal. 

oxygen 

A dissolved oxygen value was obtained from each level sampled with the rosette.  
There were 3422 oxygen analyses.  ODF supplied the equipment and personnel for 
dissolved oxygen analyses.  The primary contact is Susan Becker (SIO/ODF; 
susan@odf.ucsd.edu; 858-534-9831). 


nutrients 

A 6-channel suite of nutrient values was acquired from each level sampled with 
the rosette.  The total was 3422 nutrient analyses. ODF supplied the equipment 
and all chemicals.  The primary contact is Susan Becker (SIO/ODF; 
susan@odf.ucsd.edu; 858-534-9831). 


Chl-a and other Pigments 

Samples for pigment analyses were drawn from a subset of the rosette bottles and 
analyzed on board by a two person team from the University of Alaska, Fairbanks.  
The primary contact is Dr. Dean Stockwell (dean@ims.uaf.edu; 907-474-5556).  


DOM Sampling 

Samples were drawn, frozen, and stored for Dissolved Organic Matter for return 
to shore.  Equipment, any chemicals, and one person will be provided by the 
University of Miami (Jeremy Mathis; jtmathis@hotmail.com).  Freezer storage 
space is required for the samples.  The pre-cruise contact is Dr. Dennis Hansell 
(University of Miami; dhansell@rsmas.miami.edu; 305-361-4078).  


18O/16O Sampling 

Sampling containers were provided for oxygen-18 samples.  The requested samples 
were collected and returned to shore for analyses.  The data contact is Dr. Lee 
Cooper (lcooper1@utk.edu; 865-974-2990; fax 865-974-7896). 


Plankton Tows 

A total of 90 vertical bongo tows were completed aboard the 2003 SBI cruise.  Of 
these, 12 tows were to depths of 1000 meters while the rest were to depths of 
100 meters or shallower.  These tows resulted in 180 preserved zooplankton 
samples along the arctic coast in two distinct size fractionations (>335 mm and 
>153 mm).  Another 150-160 samples were preserved for molecular analysis.  Dry 
weight percentage at three different size ranges (>1050 mm, 1050>x>550 mm, and 
550>x>202 mm) was also calculated at 80 sites from both fractionations.  The 
data contacts are Dr. Sharon Smith (University of Miami; ssmith@rsmas.miami.edu; 
305-361-4177) and Leopoldo Llinás (University of Miami; lllinas@rsmas.miami.edu; 
305-361-4702). 




Stable Isotopes 

Over 400 samples were taken for isotopic analysis (d13C and d15N).  Of these, 
180 were organic particulate (POM) samples.  The rest were a variety of 
zooplankton collected from individual bongo tows including the copepods Calanus 
glacialis, Calanus hyperboreus, Metrida longa, and Paraeuchaeta novergeica. The 
data contact is Dr. Ken Dunton, University of Texas, xxx-xxx-xxxx, 
xxx@xxxxx.edu. 

The plankton and stable isotope teams note that the number of sampling locations 
and opportunities far exceeded their expectations.  As such, the 2003 summer 
cruise aboard RVIB Palmer was considered a huge success by both the zooplankton 
ecology and marine botany representatives. 


Underway Systems 

Multibeam sonar data was acquired.  A display available in the vicinity of the 
CTD operator, and the multibeam data were recorded (without post-processing), 
and the data provided to JOSS. 

An underway measurement suite including centerline depth to bottom, seawater 
temperature & salinity, fluorometry, ADCP, standard meteorological parameters, 
position, time, ship speed/heading/etc., and other routine parameters was 
carried out by RPSC technicians. 


TEA 

Jim Rogers, a science teacher from Polson, Montana, was on board experiencing 
oceanographic field research first hand as part of NSF's Teachers Experiencing 
the Antarctic and Arctic program.  He stood watch as a sample cop, and worked on 
other TEA activities.  Contact information: phone 406-883-3611; 
jrogers@polson.k12.mt.us. 


JOSS 

The cruise wassupported ashore by the SBI team at the Joint Office for Science 
Support at UCAR.  This included data catalogs, data distribution, cruise maps, 
cruise reports, etc.  Contact:  Jim Moore, JOSS; jmoore@ucar.edu; 303-497-8635. 


Marine Mammal Survey 

Marine mammal surveys were carried out transparent to the CTD survey program on 
a not-to-interfere basis.  The primary marine mammal program was helicopter-
borne sweeps on specified tracks with a team of two observers.  Contact: John 
Bengtson, NOAA; john.bengtson@noaa.gov; 206-526-4016. 


Raytheon Polar Service Corporation (RPSC) 

There were 9 RPSC technicians on the cruise, each working 12-hour shifts: one 
Marine Projects Coordinator (MPC), one marine science technician, 3 marine 
technicians, two network/computer techs, and two electronics techs. 

RPSC techs supervised rosette launch and recovery. 
RPSC techs handled underway data logging, including systems maintenance and 
routine review of data for reasonableness. 

RPSC techs carried out multibeam sonar data logging, including system 
maintenance and routine oversight of data for reasonableness. 

Network assistance and email was handled by the RPSC techs. 

Hazmat laboratory wastes were collected in RPSC-provided containers.  RPSC 
handled the paperwork. 


LADCP Data Collection Summary (Earth and Space Research) 

The Lowered Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers were deployed and returned data 
from all 329 stations of the RVIB Nathaniel B. Palmer's 2003 SBI cruise.  The 
first 44 stations were compromised by compass errors in the downward looking 
instrument, apparently due to a coil of power leads secured to the rosette 
framework nearby.  This problem has been corrected in the data processing by 
rotating to the upper instrument's compass which was not significantly affected.  
Of the 329 stations 316 have been successfully processed and made available in 
Matlab format as vertical profiles of velocity.  Of the 13 stations not yet 
successfully processed 6 consist of upward-looking data only, and cannot be 
processed without further software modifications.  The other seven unprocessed 

STATIONs consist of data taken in shallow water using instrument settings 
optimized for deeper water.  These stations should be recoverable with more 
robust processing software, though vertical resolution is likely to be poor. 

The data itself are very robust except were shallow water limited the range and 
duration of data gathering.  Tidal amplitudes appear to be small in that no 
obvious tidal signal has been discerned, consistent with expectations reported 
from tide models.  The outstanding features include strong flow down Barrow 
Canyon during the earlier part of the cruise with some evidence of water feeding 
into it from the surrounding shelf; strong eastward flow along the shelf edge 
east of Barrow canyon, evidently a continuation of its outflow; a lesser outflow 
from Harold Valley to the west: and seaward of these a consistent westward flow 
along the outer shelf edge, particularly massive in the last, eastern-most 
section.  Beyond this westward flow there is abundant evidence of eddies that 
were not fully resolved by the sampling scheme.  Velocity in the aforementioned 
major features ranges from 30 to 110 cm/s.  Over the shelf smaller, more 
confused velocities prevailed.  Their significance is not yet apparent, and they 
certainly contain aliased time and space variability.  Nevertheless it is 
possible that in conjunction with the hydrography they may yet prove useful in 
outlining some general sense of water mass movement across the shelf. 

Technically the only result worth mentioning is that shallow water results were 
much improved by restricting the instruments to only twelve 5 m bins, 
lengthening the ping interval to 1.5 sec, and switching to broadband mode to 
enhance data reliability at shorter ranges.  



CTD DATA 

CTD Laboratory Calibration Procedures 

Pre-cruise laboratory calibrations of CTD pressure, temperature and conductivity 
sensors were used to generate coefficients for the calculation of these 
parameters from their respective sensor frequencies. The conductivity and 
temperature calibrations were performed at Sea-Bird Electronics, Inc. in 
Bellevue, Washington.  Calibration of the pressure sensors was performed by 
SIO/STS/ODF personnel. The laboratory temperature calibrations were referenced 
to the International Temperature Scale of 1990 (ITS-90). 


CTD Data Acquisition 

The CTD 911plus was operated generally as suggested in the Sea-Bird CTD 
Operating and Repair Manual, which contains a description of the system, its 
operation and functions (Sea-Bird Electronics, Inc., 2002). Unlike Sea-Bird's 
suggested procedure, data acquisition was started on deck. This allows a check 
of the pressure offset and an unblocked reading from the transmissometer. The 
SeaSave acquisition program, (SeaSave WIN32 Version 5.28e,) provided a real-time 
graphical display of selected parameters adequate to monitor CTD performance and 
information for the selection of bottle-tripping depths. Raw data from the CTD 
were archived on the PC's hard disk at the full 24 Hz sampling rate.  

A CTD Station Sheet form was filled in for each deployment, providing a record 
of times, positions, bottom depth, bottle sampling depths, and every attempt to 
trip a bottle, as well as any pertinent comments. When the equipment and 
personnel were ready, data acquisition was started.  

After activation, the rosette/CTD system was lowered into the water and held at 
5 meters for 3-5 minutes to permit activation of the CTD pumps and equilibration 
of the sensors.   Then, the operator requested that the CTD be brought to the 
surface. Once at the surface, usually 2-3 meters depending on sea-state, the 
operator requested that the winch operator start the package down to a desired 
target depth, usually within 5-10 meters of the EM-120 Multibeam depth reading. 
Just as the winch operator started the package down, the CTD operator created a 
flag in the "inventory" file.  The operator also created a flag at the deepest 
point of the cast. Bottom depths were calculated by combining the distance above 
bottom, reported by the altimeter, and the maximum depth of the CTD package when 
bottom altimeter readings were available.  If there was no altimeter reading, 
then the bottom depth is reported from the ship's Seatex Seapath 200 depth 
recorder.  This depth, corrected for the draft of the transducer, was logged in 
uncorrected meters (assuming a sound velocity of 1500 m/sec). If the altimeter 
and depth recorder data were unavailable, the final resort was to use depth data 
from the Multibeam system (corrected sound velocities). The CTD operators were 
instructed to wait for the sensor readings to stabilize, at least 30 seconds, 
before tripping the bottle. 

The depth of each bottle trip was written on the station log and flagged in the 
data file.  The performance of all sensors was monitored during the cast.  Prior 
to recovering the rosette, the operator created a flag marking the end of cast. 
When rosette recovery was complete, the operator ended data acquisition. Any 
faulty equipment or exceptionally noisy data were noted on the log sheet. 


Problems and Procedural Changes 

• Prior to station 114, position information was not being appended to every 
  scan. 
• At Station 132, cast 3, the primary CTD blew a fuse. For some stations 
  preceding there had been an inconsistent number of modulo errors, dropping of 
  bytes in the data stream. 
• After Station 174, a procedure of using a detergent solution to flush the 
  sensors after every third shallow station was adopted. 
• After Station 284, the equilibration depth was increased to 20 meters.  

(At Station 284, after detergent cleaning, a ~20 minute clean water flush, and 
clearing the air bleed, the sensors failed to clear. The CTD was sent down to 20 
meters and the problem cleared. We suspect that bubbles were being trapped 
within the conductivity cell, and pressure and agitation were required to 
dislodge them.) 


CTD Data Processing 

Pressure 

CTD values determined on deck before and after each cast were compared to 
determine a pressure offset correction. The comparison suggested that no 
pressure offset was necessary.   

Temperature 

The primary temperature sensor was calibrated just before the expedition.  The 
dual temperature sensors were monitored during the expedition and exhibited good 
agreement.  It appears that no additional corrections need to be applied.  

Conductivity 

Corrected CTD pressure and temperature values were used with bottle salinities 
to back-calculate bottle conductivities. Comparison of these bottle values with 
the CTD primary conductivity values indicated that a slope and offset needed to 
be applied to the data from the beginning of the expedition. The sensors drifted 
over the length of the expedition and an additional slope and offset should be 
applied to the data. This has not been done as there was not enough time to 
finish this process. It is anticipated that the correction would not be more 
than 0.003 and may be applied to the data after Station 121.   

Transmissometer 

A WetLab calibrated Transmissometer was utilized throughout the cruise.  An on 
deck calibration check was performed and even though there was little 
degradation from the last calibration the new coefficients were applied to the 
data set.   

Oxygen, Fluorometer, and PAR 

The CTD oxygen data are intended only for qualitative use.  Similarly, the 
fluorometric and PAR data are not calibrated. 


Data Processing Procedure 

Sea-Bird Seasoft CTD processing software was employed. The processing programs 
are outlined below.  A more complete description may be found in the Sea-Bird 
Software Manual which is available from the Sea-Bird website (www.seabird.com). 

The sequence of programs that were run in processing CTD data from this cruise 
are as follows: 

• DATCNV - Converts data from raw frequencies and voltages to corrected 
  engineering units
• WILDEDIT - Eliminates large spikes
• CELLTM - Applies conductivity cell thermal mass correction
• FILTER - A low pass filter to smooth pressure for LOOPEDIT
• LOOPEDIT - Marks scans where velocity is less than selected value to avoid 
  pressure reversals from ship roll 
• DERIVE - Computes calculated parameters
• BINAVG - Average data into desired pressure bins 

The quality control steps included: 

• Sensor verification consisted of rechecking CTD sensor serial numbers and 
  locations after initial entry into the computer to verify that there were no 
  tabulation errors.
• Seasoft Configuration File was reviewed to verify that individual sensors were 
  represented correctly, with the correct coefficients.
• Temperature was verified by comparing primary and secondary sensor data.
• Conductivity was checked by comparison of the two sensors with each other and 
  with bottle salinity samples. 
• Position Check consisted of producing a chart of the ship's track which was 
  reviewed for any serious problems.  The positions were acquired from the 
  ship's Trimble P-code navigation system. 
• Visual Check consisted of producing plots for each usable cast. These were 
  reviewed for any noise and spikes that may have been missed by the processing 
  programs.
• The density profile was checked for inversions which might have been produced 
  by sensor noise or response mismatches.  
• Additional Sea-Bird programs were run on all or some stations to maximize the 
  data quality. 


CTD Data Footnoting  

WHP water bottle quality flags were assigned as defined in the WOCE Operations 
Manual (Joyce and Corry, 1994). These flags and interpretation are tabulated in 
the CTD and Bottle Data Distribution, Quality Flags section of this document. 


Data Comments  

Fine structure including minor density inversions that may appear in 
approximately the upper 10 meters of the profiles is most likely caused by ship 
discharges/turbulence.  To minimize the ship effect, engine cooling water 
discharges were restricted to the port side of the ship. The ship's draft is 6.7 
meters; it is suspected that the ship's thrusters and props disturb the water to 
20 meters depth.  

All salinity, nutrient and dissolved oxygen data collected have gone through 
several stages of editing and are not likely to change significantly.  The 
chlorophyll observations reported are, however, preliminary and may undergo 
significant post-cruise editing. Due to a lack of necessary solvent, some 
chlorophyll data were not able to be processed during the cruise. These data 
will be submitted later. 



BOTTLE DATA 

Generally speaking, the sampling order for each cast was as follows, but there 
was some cast-to-cast variation. 

• Hydrographic 
• Oxygen, 
• Chlorophyll/Phaeophytin 
• Phytoplankton
• Nutrients
• Salinity 
• 18O/16O  
• 13C, N15
• Particulate Organic Matter
• Dissolved Organic Matter  

The correspondence between individual sample containers and the rosette bottle 
from which the sample was drawn was recorded on the sample log for the cast. 
This log also included any comments of anomalous conditions noted about the 
rosette and bottles. Normal sampling practice included opening the drain valve 
before the air vent on the bottle, to check for air leaks. The valve was then 
shut and the vent opened to check for water leaks. These observations, together 
with other diagnostic comments (e.g., "lanyard caught in lid", "valve left 
open") that might later prove useful in determining sample integrity, were 
routinely noted on the sample log. Drawing oxygen samples also involved taking 
the sample draw temperature from the bottle.  


Bottle Data Processing 

After the samples were drawn and analyzed, the next stage of processing involved 
merging the different data streams into a common file. The rosette cast and 
bottle numbers were the primary identification for all ODF-analyzed samples 
taken from the bottle, and were used to merge the analytical results with the 
CTD data associated with that bottle. 

Diagnostic comments from the sample log, and notes from analysts and/or bottle 
data processors were entered into a computer file associated with each station 
(the "quality" file) as part of the quality control procedure. Sample data from 
bottles suspected of leaking were checked to see if the properties were 
consistent with the profile for the cast, with adjacent stations, and, where 
applicable, with the CTD data. Direct inspection of the tabular data, property-
property plots and vertical sections were all employed to check the data. 
Revisions were made whenever there was an objective reason to delete, annotate 
or re-calculate a datum. WHP water sample codes were selected to indicate the 
reliability of the individual parameters affected by the comments. WHP bottle 
codes were assigned where evidence showed the entire bottle was affected, as in 
the case of a leak, or a bottle trip at other than the intended depth. 

Bottle Data Footnoting   

WHP water bottle quality flags were assigned as defined in the WOCE Operations 
Manual [Joyce]. These flags and interpretation as tabulated in the Data 
Distribution, Bottle Data, Quality Flags section of this document. 


Pressure and Temperatures 

All pressures and temperatures for the bottle data tabulations were obtained by 
averaging CTD data for a brief interval at the time the bottle was closed and 
then applying the appropriate calibration data.  The temperatures are reported 
using the International Temperature Scale of 1990. 


SALINITY 

There were a total of 1438 salinity samples analyzed.  


Sampling and Data Processing 

Salinity samples were drawn into 200 ml high-alumina borosilicate bottles, which 
were rinsed three times with sample prior to filling. The bottles were sealed 
with custom-made plastic insert thimbles and Nalgene screw caps This container 
provides very low container dissolution and sample evaporation.   


Equipment and Techniques 

Both a SIO/STS/ODF Guildline Autosal 8400A, #55-654, and the RVIB N.B.Palmer's 
Guildline Autosal 8400B, #59-213, standardized with IAPSO Standard Seawater 
(SSW), batch P-141, were used to measure the salinities. Prior to the analyses, 
the samples were stored in the temperature regulated analysis room to permit 
equilibration to laboratory temperature, usually 8-20 hours.  Both salinometers 
were outfitted with an ODF-developed interface for computer-aided measurement. 
The salinometer was standardized with a fresh vial of standard seawater at the 
beginning of each analysis run.  Instrument drift was determined by running a 
SSW vial after the last sample was run through the autosal. The salinometer cell 
was flushed twice, and readings taken until two readings met software criteria 
for consistency; these were then averaged for a final result. The estimated 
accuracy of bottle salinities run at sea is usually better than 0.002 PSU 
relative to the particular standard seawater batch used. 


Laboratory Temperature 

Temperature stability in the salinometer laboratory was good. Salinity analysis 
was performed in a converted refrigeration room that has been modified to 
maintain a consistent ambient temperature within a range of ±2ºC centered 
around 22ºC. Autosal bath temperature of 24ºC was used for analysis. 


Comments 

• Autosal #55-654 Thermistor #1 failed. The unit was used with circuit #2 for 
  the first 2 "runs" (Stations 1-21). Bath repaired at Station 213. 
• Autosal #59-213 used from Station 22 until the cruise ended. 


OXYGEN ANALYSIS 

There were a total of 3457 oxygen samples analyzed.  


Sampling and Data Processing 

Samples were collected for dissolved oxygen analysis soon after the rosette was 
brought on board. Using a Tygon drawing tube, nominal 125ml volume-calibrated 
iodine flasks were rinsed, then filled and allowed to overflow for at least 3 
flask volumes. The sample draw temperature was measured with a small platinum 
resistance thermometer embedded in the drawing tube. Reagents were added to fix 
the oxygen before stoppering. The flasks were shaken twice to assure thorough 
dispersion of the precipitate, once immediately after drawing, and then again 
after about 20 minutes.  

Thiosulfate normalities were calculated from each standardization and corrected 
to 20ºC. The 20ºC normalities and the blanks were plotted versus time and 
reviewed for possible problems. Oxygen concentrations were converted from 
milliliters per liter to micromoles per kilogram using the sampling temperature 
("draw temperature") and the salinity to calculated the density of the sample at 
atmospheric pressure.  


Equipment and Techniques 

Dissolved oxygen analyses were performed with an ODF-designed automated oxygen 
titrator using photometric end-point detection based on the absorption of 365nm 
wavelength ultra-violet light. The titration of the samples and the data logging 
were controlled by PC software. Thiosulfate was dispensed by a Dosimat 665 buret 
driver fitted with a 1.0ml buret. The ODF method used a whole-bottle modified-
Winkler titration following the technique of Carpenter (1965) with modifications 
by Culberson (1991), but with higher concentrations of potassium iodate standard 
(approximately 0.012N) and thiosulfate solution (55-65 g/l). Standard KIO3 
solutions prepared ashore were run at the beginning of each run. Reagent and 
distilled water blanks were determined, to account for presence of oxidizing or 
reducing materials. 


Volumetric Calibration 

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


Standards 

Potassium Iodate was obtained from Johnson Matthey Chemical Co. and was reported 
by the supplier to be >99.4% pure.  

Comments 

Beginning at Station 27, a new procedure was adopted for casts deeper than ~ 250 
meters. Sampling began at the deepest bottle to be sampled for chlorophyll and 
continued up to the surface bottle, then resumed with the deepest bottle. 

The primary sampling thermometer failed during Station 25. The secondary was 
then used. This thermometer read 0.4ºC low (e.g. 0ºC read as -0.4ºC). The 
primary had no offset at the beginning of the cruise. 


NUTRIENT ANALYSIS 

There were 3476 nutrient samples analyzed. 


Sampling and Data Processing 

Nutrient samples were drawn into 45ml polypropylene, screw-capped "oak-ridge 
type" centrifuge tubes. The tubes were cleaned with 10% HCl and rinsed with 
sample three times before filling. Samples were refrigerated, for up to 16 
hours, between collection and analysis.  

Standardizations were performed at the beginning and end of each group of 
analyses (typically 24-30 samples) with an intermediate concentration mixed 
nutrient standard prepared prior to each run from a secondary standard in a low-
nutrient seawater matrix. Sets of 6-7 different standard concentrations covering 
the range of sample concentrations were analyzed periodically to determine the 
deviation from linearity, if any, as a function of concentration for each 
nutrient analysis.  A correction for non-linearity was applied to the final 
nutrient concentrations when necessary.  

After each group of samples was analyzed, the raw data file was processed to 
produce another file of response factors, baseline values, and absorbances. 
Computer-produced absorbance readings were spot checked for accuracy against 
values taken from a strip chart recording. 

Nutrients, when reported in micromoles per kilogram, were converted from 
micromoles per liter by dividing by sample density calculated at 1 atm pressure 
(0 db), in situ salinity, and an assumed laboratory temperature of 25ºC. 


Equipment and Techniques 

Nutrient analyses (phosphate, silicate, nitrate+nitrite, urea, ammonium, and 
nitrite) were performed on an ODF-modified 6-channel Technicon AutoAnalyzer II. 
The analog outputs from each of the six channels were digitized and logged 
automatically by computer (PC) at 2-second intervals.   

Silicate was analyzed using the technique of Armstrong et al., (Armstrong, 
1967). The sample was passed through a 15mm flowcell and the absorbance measured 
at 660nm. 

A modification of the Armstrong et al. (Armstrong 1967) procedure was used for 
the analysis of nitrate and nitrite. For the nitrate plus nitrite analysis, the 
seawater sample was passed through a cadmium reduction column where nitrate was 
quantitatively reduced to nitrite. The stream was then passed through a 15mm 
flowcell and the absorbance measured at 540nm.  The same technique was employed 
for nitrite analysis, except the cadmium column was bypassed, and a 50mm 
flowcell was used for measurement.  Periodic checks of the column efficiency 
were made by running alternate equal concentrations of NO2 and NO3 through the 
NO3 channel to ensure that column efficiencies were high (> 95%). Nitrite 
concentrations were subtracted from the nitrate+nitrite values to obtain nitrate 
concentrations. 

Phosphate was analyzed using a modification of the Bernhardt and Wilhelms 
(Bernhardt 1967) technique. The reaction product was heated to ~55ºC to enhance 
color development, then passed through a 50mm flowcell and the absorbance 
measured at 820m.

Ammonium was determined by the Berthelot reaction (Patton and Crouch 1977) in 
which sodium hypochlorite and phenol react with ammonium ion to produce 
indophenol blue, a blue compound, with an absorption maximum at 637nm.  The 
solution was heated to 55°C and passed through a 50mm flowcell at 640nm. 

Urea was analyzed via a modification of the method of Rahmatullah and Boyde 
(1980), which is based on the classic diacetyl monoxime method.  A solution of 
diacetyl monoxime, thiosemicarbizide and acetone is followed by the addition of 
ferric chloride, which acts as a catalyst.  The resultant solution is heated to 
90°C and passed through a 50mm flowcell. The absorbance is measured at 520nm. 


Nutrient Standards 

• Na2SiF6, the silicate primary standard, was obtained from Johnson Matthey 
  Company and was reported by the supplier to be >98% pure.  
• Primary standards for nitrite (NaNO2) were obtained from Johnson Matthey 
  Chemical Company. The supplier reported purities of 97%.  
• Primary standards for nitrate (KNO3) were obtained from Fisher Scientific. The 
  supplier reported purities of 99.999%. 
• Primary standards for phosphate (KH2PO4) were obtained from Fisher Scientific. 
  The supplier reported purities of 99.999%.  
• Ammonia, (NH4(SO4)2), and Urea primary standards were obtained from Fisher 
  Scientific and reported to be >99% pure.
• The secondary standards were prepared aboard ship by dilution from primary 
  standard solutions.  Dry standards were pre-weighed at the laboratory at ODF, 
  and transported to the vessel for dilution to the primary standard. 


Chlorophyll-a and other Pigments (University of Alaska, Fairbanks)
(report not yet received) 


DOM SAMPLING (University of Miami) 

There were two main University of Miami organic biogeochemistry laboratory 
objectives for the 2003 SBI Survey Cruise.  The main objective was to obtain 
high-resolution sampling of the East of Barrow Canyon transect.  Prior years' 
sampling of this line revealed the possible presence of eddies.  These eddies 
could be a mechanism for influx of carbon and nitrogen into the deep basin.  The 
second objective of the cruise was to sample the bottom waters of the shelf 
itself to identify a relationship between sediment character and DOM 
concentrations. 

Sampling for organic matter during the cruise (dissolved organic carbon and 
nitrogen, DOC and DON; and particulate organic carbon and nitrogen, POC and PON) 
had two aims.  First, DOM samples were taken as a survey of the shelf bottom 
waters in an effort to determine the relationship between sediment/benthos 
characteristics and DOM release from the sediments (using bottom water DOM 
concentrations as an index for release).  In previous work (2002 field season) 
we found that near bottom DOM was occasionally elevated, with indications that 
the most productive waters (in the western shelf) and the Alaskan Coastal waters 
overlaid these zones.  Areas overlain by Bering Shelf water did not exhibit 
elevated values of bottom water DOM.  Unfortunately, sampling then was not 
adequate to determine if there was a true causative relationship between 
sediment character (e.g., POM input, benthic richness, sediment composition, 
bottom water nutrient concentrations) and DOM concentrations in the overlying 
water.  The present survey was designed to sample the full range of benthic 
types found in the region, from the inner shelf to the shelf break, from high 
productive to biologically impoverished.  DOM concentrations will be compared to 
literature assessments of sediment/benthos distributions on the Chukchi Shelf. 

Second, DOM and POM samples were collected from the upper 250 m of the densely 
sampled East of Barrow Canyon (EBC) line.  This line crosses a region of eddy 
formation, and we seek to evaluate the role of these eddies in transporting 
organic matter from the shelf/shelf break region into the Arctic Basin.  This 
survey was done with the hope that an eddy would be present at the time of 
sampling and that we could begin the assessment of transport by this mechanism.  
Figure 1 illustrates the resolution of sampling on the EBC line, which included 

STATIONs 38 to 59.  We collected 229 DOM and 229 POM samples on the EBC line.  
The POM samples were collected by vacuum filtration of 500-1000 mL of water onto 
GF/F filters.  These samples will take on greater importance if an eddy was 
indeed present during occupation of the line. If not, their priority for 
analysis will be reduced. 

In the bottom water survey, we took 243 samples for DOM analysis.  These samples 
were collected by gravity filtration through GF/F filters held by in-line filter 
holders.  The Data Set Overview and Data Collection 


DISSOLVED ORGANIC CARBON 

Funding Source and Grant Number
NSF OPP-0124900 

Author & Data Contact

Prof. Dennis A. Hansell • Chairman 
Division of Marine and Atmospheric Chemistry
Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science • University of Miami
4600 Rickenbacker Causeway • Miami, FL 33149
Tel: 1-305-421-4078 • FAX 1-305-421-4689 • dhansell@rsmas.miami.edu
http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/groups/organic-biogeochem/ 

Dr. N.R. Bates • Bermuda Biological Station for Res. Inc.
17 Biological Lane • St George's GE01 • Bermuda
Tel: 1-441 297-1880 (x210) • FAX: 1-441 297-8143 • nick@bbsr.edu
http://www.bbsr.edu/Labs/co2lab/co2main.html 



DATA SET OVERVIEW AND DATA COLLECTION 

The dissolved organic carbon (DOC) data contain in this data set was taken 
during July and August of 2003 aboard the Nathaniel B. Palmer as part of the 

Arctic Shelf Basin Interactions (SBI) Project. The 2003 Survey Cruise aboard the 
Palmer was designed to study a broad area, from Bering Strait to out over the 
deep Arctic Basin of the Chukchi Sea. During this cruise, data for DOC was 
gathered from the bottom waters of the Chukchi Self and one full transect line 
from on-shelf to off-shelf east of Point Barrow. The bottom water was taken from 
the deepest cast depth, usually less than 3 meters above the bottom in water 
depths of less than 250 meters. The high resolution line was sampled for DOC 
throughout the water column.  

Samples were taken using a SeaBird 911+ CTD mounted on a 24- placed rosette 
frame, with SeaBird pylon, and outfitted with 24 ten liter bottles. To ensure 
that particulate organic carbon (POC) did not contribute to estimates of DOC in 
the upper ocean, all samples were filtered through an inline combusted GF/F 
filter held in acid washed polycarbonate filter holders. The filter cartridge 
was attached directly to the Niskin bottle with an acid cleaned and MilliQ water 
rinsed silicone tube. Samples were collected into preconditioned and DOC-free, 
60 mL HDPE bottles and frozen in organic solvent free freezers, then shipped in 
ice to the shore-based laboratories. The filter cartridges were cleaned between 
uses and newly combusted GF/F filters were loaded prior to sampling each cast.      

All samples were analyzed using the Shimadzu TOC-V system. Extensive 
conditioning and standardization procedures were performed prior to analyzing 
samples each day. Four point standard curves of potassium hydrogen phthalate 
(KHP) were used to standardize DOC measurements. In addition, seawater DOC 
reference standards produced by the Hansell CRM program 
(http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/groups/organic- biogeochem/crm.html) were also 
analyzed each day. To maintain highest quality data control, samples were 
systematically checked against low carbon water and deep and surface reference 
waters every sixth analysis (Hansell and Carlson 1998a). The between-day 
precision in the DOC measurement was 1-2 M, or a CV of 2-3%.


Instrument Description  Shimadzu TOC-VCSH.  

References: http://www1.shimadzu.com/products/lab/toc.html  

Data Format  DOC data is reported in ìmol/l.  


DATA REMARKS  

Quality flag 2 are good data. Missing data are -9999.  


18O/16O SAMPLING (University of Tennessee, Knoxville)
(report not yet received)


ZOOPLANKTON DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE IN THE CHUKCHI AND BEAUFORT SEAS 
(University of Miami) 

Leopoldo Llinás, Research Assistant (lllinas@rsmas.miami.edu) 

The purpose of this project is to determine which species of copepods are 
transported off the Chukchi and Beaufort shelves and the physical processes 
associated with that transport. Our research also aims at documenting the 
vertical distribution of copepods in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas. 

We conducted over 80 bongo net tows including eleven 0-1000m bongo net tows. 
Sampling was carried out every third CTD/hydrographic station with emphasis 
along the track covering portions of the Chukchi and Beaufort shelves similar to 
the track followed during the SBI Summer Cruise 2002: HLY-02-03 where forty-five 

STATIONs were occupied and fifty-two Bongo tows were completed. Other areas 
sampled with a lower resolution include the Chukchi shelf where Bongos with 
depths up to 50 meters were conducted, and a final section east of the previous 
2002 sections.  

Portions of each sample were split on board. For taxonomical analysis, 50% of 
each sample was preserved in 4% buffered formalin solution. For bulk biomass 
estimates, 20% was filtered for different size meshes (>1050_m, 1050-560_m, and 
560-202_m) and dried at 60ºC. For molecular analysis, another 20% was preserved 
in ethanol. The remaining 10% was given to Craig Aumack. Aumack will measure the 
isotopic ratios of Carbon 12 and Nitrogen 14 on the large-bodied zooplankton to 
identify the source (ice algae, diatoms) of the carbon and nitrogen.  

Few problems occurred while towing the Bongo nets. At station 001, the planned 
Bongo was cancelled due to a hydraulic failure of the A-frame on the aft deck. 
After the five-station section in Bering Strait, time constrains required for 
the Raytheon Polar Services Company science support team to take over the Bongo 
collection for the rest of the cruise, an assignment our team was very grateful 
for. Later on,  while rinsing the nets on board at station 204, the occurrence 
of strong winds (> 40 mph)  flailed the nets and broke the shackle of a cod-end 
against the deck floor. 

In general, deep tows (0-1000m) contained the copepods Paraeuchaeta sp. and 
Metrida sp., while on the 0-100m the large-bodied zooplankton was dominated by 
Calanus hyperboreus, C. glacialis and chaetognatha. Preserved samples will be 
analyzed for taxonomy and abundance at the Rosenstiel School of Marine and 
Atmospheric Sciences, and Bongo net data will result in a qualitative record of 
the vertical distribution of copepods in the Arctic Basin. In the future, to 
obtain a quantitative knowledge of the vertical distributions of zooplankton we 
expect to use a vertically hauled opening-closing net system.  

Contact information:

Leopoldo Llinás • Division of Marine Biology and Fisheries
RSMAS, University of Miami • 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway • Miami, Fl 33149
Tel: 305 361 4702 • lllinas@rsmas.miami.edu


STABLE ISOTOPES 
(University of Texas) 

A total of 90 vertical bongo tows were completed aboard the 2003 SBI cruise.  Of 
these, 12 tows were to depths of 1000 m. while the rest were to depths of 100 m. 
or shallower.  These tows resulted in 180 preserved zooplankton samples along 
the arctic coast in two distinct size fractionations (>335 µm and >153 µm).  
Another 150-160 samples were preserved for molecular analysis.  Dry weight 
percentage at three different size ranges (>1050 µm, 1050>x>550 µm, and 
550>x>202 µm) was also calculated at 80 sites from both fractionations. 

Over 400 samples were taken for isotopic analysis (∆13C and ∆15N).  Of these, 
180 were organic particulate (POM) samples.  The rest were a variety of 
zooplankton collected from individual bongo tows including the copepods Calanus 
glacialis, Calanus hyperboreus, Metrida longa, and Paraeuchaeta novergeica. The 
magnitude of sampling locations and sampling opportunity far exceeded 
expectations.  As such, the 2003 summer cruise aboard the R/V Palmer was 
considered a huge success by both the zooplankton ecology and marine botany 
representatives. 


MARINE MAMMAL DISTRIBUTION IN THE CHUKCHI AND BEAUFORT SEAS 

John L. Bengtson and Michael F. Cameron • National Marine Mammal Laboratory/NOAA
7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA  98115

Heather R. Smith • University of Washington • Seattle, WA  98115


Background 

The shelf, slope, and basin zones of the western arctic provide productive 
habitats for polar marine mammals.  Determining the seasonal patterns of marine 
mammal abundance and distribution is key to understanding the ecological 
interactions involving these apex predators and the ecosystem "hotspots" where 
they are often found.  Different marine mammal species integrate the environment 
across variable spatial and temporal scales, with the composite result 
reflecting oceanographic primary and secondary productivity derived from 
transport processes and mesoscale oceanographic features.  During the 2003 SBI 
survey cruise, although abundance and distribution data on all marine mammal 
species observed was recorded, our main focus was on two species of seals in the 
sea ice zone:  bearded seals (benthic foragers), and ringed seals (fish and 
crustacean predators).  Our principal research objectives were to determine 
marine mammal distribution, relative abundance and habitat associations via 
visual surveys, and to relate these patterns to measures of mesoscale 
oceanographic structure and potential prey availability.  

Ringed seals are small phocids (adults are typically 1.3 - 1.5 meters in length) 
found throughout the arctic in areas of seasonal sea ice as well as within the 
permanent polar ice cap (Smith 1987, Kelly 1988, Ramsay and Farley 1996, Reeves 
1998).  In the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas, ringed seals haul out in highest 
densities in shorefast ice during the May-June molting season, immediately 
following the March-April pupping season (Johnson et al. 1966, Burns and Harbo 
1972, Frost et al. 1988, 1997, 1998, 1999, Bengtson et al. 2000).  It is often 
assumed that the May-June distribution of seals reflects their winter-long 
distribution in the shorefast ice, although ringed seals may begin to disperse 
from their wintering grounds during May-June (Kingsley 1991).  Little is known 
about the distribution of ringed seals during the 'open water' season, July-
October, but ringed seals have been seen both hauled out on pack ice and 
foraging in open water some distance away from the nearest sea ice (Smith 1987).  
Whether ringed seals foraging in open water commute from ice edge haulouts or 
forage in open water all summer long without hauling out is currently unknown.  
Ringed seals migrate north and south with the retreat and advance of the sea ice 
edge, but some seals in areas of seasonal shorefast sea ice may be sedentary 
(Burns 1970; Smith 1987).  In addition to ice-associated migrations, ringed 
seals can also travel long distances east or west (> 2000 km), particularly 
young seals (Smith 1987, Kapel et al. 1998).  Ringed seals in the SBI study area 
reportedly prey primarily upon arctic cod during the winter (November-April) and 
upon pelagic, benthic, and sympagic (ice-associated) macrozooplankton during 
spring and summer (Lowry et al. 1980b).  Ringed seals feed less frequently and 
lose weight during March-June when their behavior is constrained by breeding, 
pupping, and molting (Lowry et al. 1980b).  They increase their food intake in 
late summer or autumn, when locally dense concentrations of prey appear to be 
important (Lowry et al. 1980b).   

Bearded seals inhabit circumpolar arctic and subarctic waters in relatively 
shallow water depths that are seasonally ice-covered (Stirling et al. 1982, 
Kingsley et al. 1985).  The distribution of bearded seals appears to be strongly 
influenced by water depth and prey biomass (Kelly 1988b).  Bearded seals feed at 
depths less than 200 m (Burns et al. 1981, Stirling et al. 1982, Kingsley et al. 
1985).  In Alaska, bearded seals are distributed over the ice-covered 
continental shelves of the Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort seas (Burns 1981b).  In 
the Bering and Chukchi seas, the majority of bearded seals move south with the 
seasonally advancing ice in winter, and north with the retreating sea ice in 
spring.  Bearded seals are benthic feeders, consuming clams, shrimp, crabs, 
benthic invertebrates, and fish (Johnson et al. 1966, Burns 1967, Lowry et al. 
1980a).   Of these items, clams, shrimp and crabs appear to be the most 
important prey species in the Bering and Chukchi Seas (Lowry et al. 1980a).  In 
the Beaufort Sea, crabs and shrimp appear to be primary prey items, though clams 
are important prey species in August, and arctic cod is a primary prey species 
in November and February.
 

Figure 1: Distribution of aerial surveys for marine mammals in the SBI study 
          area (July - August 2003).  Thick solid lines show locations of "on 
          effort" line transect sampling; thin dashed line shows the cruise 
          track of the  R/V N.B. Palmer.


Survey protocols 

Pinniped aerial surveys were flown at a speed of approximately 100-170 km/h (60-
100 knots) at 90 m (300 ft) during mid-day (2 hours either side of local solar 
noon) when the greatest proportion of seals were expected to be hauled out.  As 
conditions allowed, helicopter survey tracks were set out perpendicular to 
bathymetric and sea ice gradients (Figure 1).  An observer positioned at each 
window on the right and left sides of the aircraft counted seals seen during 
each flight.  Data were recorded by audio/video recorder and later transcribed 
to computer files.  Perpendicular distances of seals from the survey line were 
estimated by sighting along six fixed 10o vertical angles (0o-60o from the 
horizon in 10o increments) on a plexiglass strip attached to the helicopter's 
window.  The perpendicular distance intervals were computed from the 
helicopter's altitude and the assigned angle category.  The area beneath the 
aircraft (60o- 90o) was not visible to the observers, so this survey strip was 
monitored by a downward-looking digital video recorder mounted inside the 
helicopter behind the lower plexiglass window near the foot rest of the co-
pilot's seat.  These data provide information on sea ice characteristics as well 
as an independent record of seal densities.   

When weather conditions were not suitable for flying, surveys were conducted 
from the Palmer's ice tower as the ship moved through the pack ice.  Shipboard 
surveys of pinnipeds were conducted between 1000 and 1600 hours local solar time 
whenever the ship was transiting through ice capable of supporting a seal's 
weight.  Survey effort outside of this time window was of limited usefulness 
because very few seals haul out then.  Routine survey data collection included 
pinniped sightings, location, ice classification, and visibility conditions. 


Preliminary results 

The R/V N.B. Palmer proved to be an efficient platform from which to conduct 
surveys of this type, and the helicopter flights had virtually no impact upon 
the other science missions.  Despite foggy weather during most of the cruise, 
approximately 3,655 km (2,193 nm) of linear transects of sea ice habitat were 
surveyed during 18 helicopter flights (Figure 1, Table 1).  Six species of 
marine mammals were seen:  4100 walrus, 48 ringed seals, 16 bearded seals, 3 
gray whales, 24 beluga whales, and 6 polar bears.  Shipboard surveys yielded 
sightings of 310 walrus, 33 bearded seals, 5 ringed seals, and 6 polar bears.  
Density estimates based on these tallies and their relationships to 
environmental features await further data processing and analysis. 

Across the study area, lower densities of ringed and bearded seals than expected 
were observed, presumably due to declining haulout rates following the seals' 
annual molting period.  Consistently high densities of walrus were observed 
hauled out on bands of ice just inside the outer fringe of the marginal ice 
zone, where several thousands of walrus were seen in relatively localized areas.  
Relatively high densities of bearded seals were encountered on the continental 
shelf in the western portion of the study area, presumably in a zone where the 
benthic productivity is high.  We are eager to compare these results with 
relevant findings from other SBI investigators. 


Table 1: Aerial survey flights for marine mammals during the July - August SBI 
         survey cruise, 2003.

                            Event       Survey          Survey
           Date              no.       time (h)      distance (nm)
           ---------        -----      --------      -------------
           14-Jul-03          1          0.8             70.0
           17-Jul-03          2          1.3            106.6
           17-Jul-03          3          1.5            120.9
           19-Jul-03          4          1.3            122.7
           19-Jul-03          5          1.8            147.9
           20-Jul-03          6          1.8            148.7
           20-Jul-03          7          1.6            141.5
           28-Jul-03          8          1.1             70.6
            5-Aug-03          9          1.5            128.6
            5-Aug-03         10          1.8            167.8
            6-Aug-03         11          0.3             22.4
            7-Aug-03         12          1.7            137.6
            7-Aug-03         13          1.5            148.2
            8-Aug-03         14          2.0            172.2
            8-Aug-03         15          2.1            181.5
            8-Aug-03         16          1.2            104.7
           13-Aug-03         17          1.5            140.8
           13-Aug-03         18          0.6             59.8
                           Totals       25.3            2,192.5


References 

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

Bengtson, J.L., P.L. Boveng, L. M. Hiruki-Raring, K. Laidre, C. Pungowiyi and 
    M.A. Simpkins.  2000. Abundance and distribution of ringed seals (Phoca 
    hispida) in the coastal Chukchi Sea, Alaska, May-June 1999. In:  "National 
    Marine Mammal Laboratory annual report," A. Lopez and D. P. DeMaster (eds.). 
    U.S. Dept. of Commerce.  p. 149-155.  

Bernhardt, Wilhelms A., "The continuous determination of low level iron, soluble 
    phosphate and total phosphate with the AutoAnalyzer", Technicon Symposia, I,  
    pp. 385-389 (1967). 

Burns, J.J.  1967.  "The Pacific bearded seal."  Alaska Dep. Fish and Game, 
    Pittman-Robertson Proj. Rep. W-6-R and W-14-R.  66 pp. 

Burns, J.J.  1970.  "Remarks on the distribution and natural history of 
    pagophilic pinnipeds in the Bering and Chukchi seas."  J. Mammal. 51:445-
    454.   

Burns, J.J.  1981.  Bearded seal- Erignathus barbatus Erxleben, 1777.  In:.  
    "Handbook of marine mammals."  Vol. 2.  Seals,:  S.H Ridgway and R.J. 
    Harrison (eds.), Academic Press, New York.  p. 145-170. 

Burns, J.J. and S.J. Harbo, Jr.  1972.  "An aerial census of ringed seals, 
    northern coast of Alaska."  Arctic 25:279-290.   

Carpenter, J.H., "The Chesapeake Bay Institute technique for the Winkler 
    dissolved oxygen method," Limnology and Oceanography, 10, pp. 141-143 
    (1965). 

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

Frost, K.J., L.F. Lowry, J.R. Gilbert and J.J. Burns.  1988.  "Ringed seal 
    monitoring: relationships of distribution and abundance to habitat 
    attributes and industrial activities."  U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA, OCSEAP 
    Final Report 61 (1989):345-445.  

Frost, K.J., L.F. Lowry, C. Hessinger, G. Pendleton, D. DeMaster and S. Hills.  
    1999.  "Monitoring distribution and abundance of ringed seals in northern 
    Alaska." Interim Report April 1998-March 1999, U.S. Dept. of Interior, 
    Minerals Management Service, Cooperative Agreement 14-35-001-30810. 37 pp.  

Frost, K.J., L.F. Lowry, S. Hills, G. Pendleton and D. DeMaster.  1997.  
    "Monitoring distribution and abundance of ringed seals in northern Alaska." 
    Interim Report May 1996-March 1997.  U.S. Dept. of Interior, Minerals 
    Management Service, Cooperative Agreement 14-35-001-30810. 42 pp. 

Gordon, L.I., Jennings, J.C., Ross, A.A. and J.M. Krest, "A Suggested Protocol 
    for Continuous Flow Automated Analysis of Seawater Nutrients in the WOCE 
    Hydrographic Program and the Joint Global Ocean Fluxes Study". 1993. WOCE 
    Hydrographic Programs Office, Methods Manual WHPO 91-1.  Intergovernmental 
    Oceanographic Commission, Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research Manual 
    and Guides 29 Protocols for the Joint Global Ocean Flux Study (JGOFS) Core 
    Measurements.  UNESCO, 170pp., (1994). 

Johnson, M.L., C.H. Fiscus, B.T. Ostenson and M.L. Barbour.  1966.  Marine 
    Mammals.  In: "Environment of the Cape Thompson region, Alaska."  N.J.  
    Wilimovsky and J.N. Wolfe (eds.). U. S. Atomic Energy Comm., Oak Ridge,  
    Tenn.  p. 877-924.  

Joyce, T. ed., and Corry, C. ed., "Requirements for WOCE Hydrographic Programme 
    Data Reporting," Report WHPO 90-1, WOCE Report No. 67/91 3.1, pp. 52-55, 
    WOCE Hydrographic Programme Office, Woods Hole, MA, USA (May 1994, Rev. 2), 
    UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPT  

Kelly, B.P.  1988a.  Ringed seal.  In: "Selected marine mammals of Alaska: 
    species accounts with research and management recommendations."  J.W. 
    Lentfer (ed.), Marine Mammal Commission, Washington, D. C.  p. 57-75. 

Kelly, B.P.  1988b.  Bearded seal, Erignathus barbatus.  In: "Selected marine 
    mammals of Alaska: species accounts with research and management 
    recommendations."  J.W. Lentfer (ed.), Marine Mammal Commission, Washington, 
    D.C.  p. 77-94.  

Kingsley, M.C.S., I. Stirling and W. Calvert.  1985.  "The distribution and 
    abundance of seals in the Canadian High Arctic," 1980-82.  Can. J. Fish. 
    Aquat. Sci. 42:1189-1210. 

Lowry, L.F., K.J. Frost and J.J. Burns.  1980a.  "Feeding of bearded seals in 
    the Bering and Chukchi seas and trophic interaction with Pacific walruses."  
    Arctic 33:330-342. 

Lowry, L.F., K.J. Frost and J.J. Burns.  1980b.  "Variability in the diet of 
    ringed seals, Phoca hispida, in Alaska."  Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 37:2254-
    2261.    

Macdonald, R.W., F. A. McLaughlin and C.S. Wong, "The storage of reactive 
    silicate samples by freezing," Limnology and Oceanography, 31, pp. 1139-1142 
    (1986). 

Patton, C.J. and Crouch, S.R., "Spectrophotometric and kinetics investigation of 
    the Berthelot reaction for the determination of ammonia," Analytical 
    Chemistry, 49(3), pp.464-469 (1977). 

Rahmatullah, Mohammed, and Boyde, T.R.C, "Improvements in the determination of 
    urea using diacetyl monoxime; methods with and without deproteinisation," 
    Clinica Chimica Acta, 107, pp.3-9 1980. 

Ramsay, M., and S. Farley.  1997.  Upper trophic level research: polar bears and 
    ringed seals.  In:  "The 1994 Arctic Ocean section: The first scientific 
    crossing of the Arctic Ocean," W. Tucker and D. Cate (eds.). CRREL Special 
    Report 96-23, U.S. Army Cold Regions Laboratory, Hanover, New Hampshire.  p. 
    55-58. 

Reeves, R.R.  1998.  Distribution, abundance and biology of ringed seals (Phoca 
    hispida): an overview.   In:  "Ringed Seals in the North Atlantic," M.P. 
    Heide-Jørgensen and C. Lydersen (eds.). The North Atlantic Marine Mammal 
    Commission, Tromsø, Norway.  p. 9-46. 

Sea-Bird Electronics, Inc, CTD Data Acquisition Software Manual, March 2001 


Sea-Bird Electronics, Inc., CTD Operating and Repair Manual, February 2002 

Smith, T.G.  1987.  "The ringed seal, Phoca hispida, of the Canadian Western 
    Arctic."  Can. Bull. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 216:81 pp 

Stirling, I., M. Kingsley and W. Calvert.  1982.  "The distribution and 
    abundance of seals in the eastern Beaufort Sea," 1974-79.  Can. Wildl. Serv. 
    Occas. Pap.  47:1-23.   


Data Distribution  

The CTD and bottle data can be obtained through NCAR's Earth Observing 
Laboratory web-site, www.eol.ucar.edu/project/sbi. The data are reported using 
the WHP-Exchange (WOCE Hydrographic Program) format and the quality coding 
follows those outlined by the WOCE program (Joyce, 1994). In addition, the 
format can be obtained through the WOCE Hydrographic Program web-site, 
WHPO.ucsd.edu. The descriptions in this document have been edited from the 
reference to annotate the format specific to this data distribution. ASCII files 
for each station were created with comments recorded on the CTD Station Logs 
during data acquisition. These ASCII files include data processing comments 
noting any problems, the resolution, and footnoting that may have occurred.  A 
separate ASCII file was also created with the comments from the Sample Log 
Sheets that include problems with the Niskin bottles that could compromise the 
samples. Comments arising from inspection and checking of the data are also 
included in the ASCII file. These comment files are also in the EOL/JOSS 
database.  Raw (unprocessed) CTD data are located in the EOL/JOSS database as 
well.  The file nbp03_ctd_raw.zip contains ssscc.cfg, ssscc.con, ssscc.dat and 
ssscc.hdr (where sss = station number and cc = cast number) files as acquired by 
the SeaBird SeaSave acquisition program, sbscan.sum file and calibration 
information for all sensors.  The *.cfg file is datcnv.cfg with the beginning 
scan number and *.con files may include a correction based on the bottle 
salinity samples.  The sbscan.sum file is a list of stations and beginning scan 
number.  Configuration files for the various SeaBird CTD processing programs are 
also included where applicable.   


General rules for WHP-exchange: 

1. Each line must end with a carriage return or end-of-line.
2. With the exception of the file type line, lines starting with a "#" 
   character, or including and following a line which reads "END_DATA", each 
   line in the file must have exactly the same number of commas as do all other 
   lines in that file.
3. The name of a quality flag always begins with the name of the parameter 
   with which it is associated, followed by an underscore character, followed 
   by "FLAG", followed by an underscore, and then followed by an alphanumeric 
   character, W. 
4. The "missing value" for a data value is always defined as -999, but 
   written in the decimal place format of the parameter in question. For 
   example, a missing salinity would be written -999.0000 or a missing phosphate 
   -999.00.
5. The first four characters of the EXPOCODE are the U.S. National Oceanographic 
   Data Center (NODC) country-ship code, then followed by up to an 8 characters 
   expedition name of cruise number, i.e. 3206NBP0304A. 


CTD Data 

CTD data is located in file 3206NBP0304a_ct1.zip.  This file contains 
ssscc_ct1.csv files for each station and cast where sss=3 digit station 
identifier and cc=2 digit cast identifier. 

Description of ssscc_ct1.csv file layout.

1st line     File type, here CTD, followed by a comma and a DATE_TIME stamp 
             YYYYMMDDdivINSwho YYYY   4 digit year MM     2 digit month DD     
             2 digit day div    division of Institution INS    Institution name 
             who initials of responsible person 
# lines      A file may include 0-N optional lines at the start of a data file, 
             each beginning with a "#" character and each ending with carriage 
             return or end-of-line.  Information relevant to file change/update 
             history may be included here, for example.
2nd line     NUMBER_HEADERS = n (n = 10 in this table and the example_ct1.csv 
             file.)
3rd line     EXPOCODE = [expocode] The expedition code, assigned by the user.
4th line     SECT_ID = [section] The SBI station specification. Optional.
5th line     STNNBR = [station] The originator's station number
6th line     CASTNO = [cast] The originator's cast number
7th line     DATE = [date] Cast date in YYYYMMDD integer format.
8th line     TIME = [time] Cast time that CTD was at the deepest sampling point.
9th line     LATITUDE = [latitude] Latitude as SDD.dddd where "S" is sign (blank 
             or missing is positive), DD are degrees, and dddd are decimal 
             degrees. Sign is positive in northern hemisphere, negative in 
             southern hemisphere 10th line  LONGITUDE = [longitude] Longitude as 
             SDDD.dddd where "S" is sign (blank or missing is positive), DDD are 
             degrees, and dddd are decimal degrees. Sign is positive for "east" 
             longitude, negative for "west" longitude
11th line    DEPTH = [bottom] Reported depth to bottom. Preferred units are 
             "meters" and should be specified in Line 2. In general, corrected    
             depths are preferred to uncorrected depths. Documentation 
             accompanying data includes notes on methodology of correction. 
             Optional.
next line    Parameter headings.
next line    Units.
data lines   A single _ct1.csv CTD data file will normally contain data lines 
             for one CTD cast.
END_DATA     The line after the last data line must read END_DATA, and be 
             followed by a carriage return or end of line.
other lines  Users may include any information they wish in 0-N optional lines 
             at the end of a data file, after the END_DATA line.


Parameter names, units, format, and comments 

      Parameter      Units    Format  Comments
      -------------  -------  ------  -------------------------------------
      CTDPRS         DB       F7.1    CTD pressure, decibars
      CTDPRS_FLAG_W           I1      CTDPRS quality flag
      CTDTMP         ITS-90   F8.3    CTD temperature, degrees C (ITS-90)
      CTDTMP_FLAG_W           I1      CTDTMP quality flag
      CTDSAL                  F8.3    CTD salinity 
      CTDSAL_FLAG_W           I1      CTDSAL quality flag
      CTDOXY         UMOL/KG  F7.1    CTD oxygen, micromoles/kilogram
      CTDOXY_FLAG_W           I1      CTDOXY quality flag
      XMISS          %TRANS   F7.1    Transmissivity, percent transmittance
      XMISS_FLAG_W            I1      XMISS quality flag
      FLUOR          VOLTS    F8.3    Fluorometer, voltage
      FLUOR_FLAG_W            I1      Fluorometer quality flag
      PAR            VOLTS    F8.3    PAR, voltage
      PAR_FLAG_W              I1      PAR quality flag
      SPAR           VOLTS    F8.3    Surface PAR, voltage
      SPAR_FLAG_W             I1      Surface PAR quality flag


Quality Flags 

CTD data quality flags were assigned to the CTDTMP (CTD temperature), CTDSAL 
(CTD salinity) and XMISS (Transmissivity) parameters as follows: 

2  Acceptable measurement.
3  Questionable measurement. The data did not fit the station profile or 
   adjacent station comparisons (or possibly bottle data comparisons). The data 
   could be acceptable, but are open to interpretation.
4  Bad measurement. The CTD data were determined to be unusable.
5  Not reported. The CTD data could not be reported, typically when CTD 
   salinity is flagged 3 or 4.
9  Not sampled. No operational sensor was present on this cast

WHP CTD data quality flags were assigned to the CTDOXY (CTD O2), FLUORO 
(Fluorometer), PAR (PAR), SPAR (Surface PAR), and HAARDT (Haardt Fluorometer 
CDOM) parameter as follows:

1  Not calibrated. Data are uncalibrated.
9  Not sampled. No operational sensor was present on this cast. Either the 
sensor cover was left on or the depth rating necessitated removal. 


Bottle Data 

                      Description of 3206NBP0304A_hy1.csv file layout. 

1st line     File type, here BOTTLE, followed by a comma and a DATE_TIME stamp   
             YYYYMMDDdivINSwho
             YYYY  4 digit year 
             MM    2 digit month 
             DD    2 digit day 
             div   division of Institution 
             INS   Institution name 
             who   initials of responsible person 
 
#lines       A file may include 0-N optional lines, typically at the start of a 
             data file, but after the file type line, each beginning with a "#" 
             character and each ending with carriage return or end-of-line. 
             Information relevant to file change/update history of the file 
             itself may be included here, for example.
2nd line     Column headings. 
3rd line     Units. 
data lines   As many data lines may be included in a single file as is 
             convenient for the user, with the proviso that the number and order 
             of parameters, parameter order, headings, units, and commas remain 
             absolutely consistent throughout a single file. 
END_DATA     The line after the last data line must read END_DATA.
other lines  Users may include any information they wish in 0-N optional lines 
             at the end of a data file, after the END_DATA line.


                                          Header columns

Parameter      Format  Description notes
-------------  ------  ---------------------------------------------------------
EXPOCODE       A12     The expedition code, assigned by the user. 
SECT_ID        A7      The SBI station specification. Optional.
STNNBR         A6      The originator's station number. 
CASTNO         I3      The originator's cast number. 
BTLNBR         A7      The bottle identification number.
BTLNBR_FLAG_W  I1      BTLNBR quality flag.
DATE           I8      Cast date in YYYYMMDD integer format. 
TIME           I4      Cast time (UT) as HHMM
LATITUDE       F8.4    Latitude as SDD.dddd where "S" is sign (blank or missing 
                       is positive), DD are degrees, and dddd are decimal 
                       degrees. Sign is positive in northern hemisphere, 
                       negative in southern hemisphere
LONGITUDE      F9.4    Longitude as SDDD.dddd where "S" is sign (blank or 
                       missing is positive), DDD are degrees, and dddd are 
                       decimal degrees. Sign is positive for "east" longitude, 
                       negative for "west" longitude
DEPTH          I5      Reported depth to bottom. Preferred units are "meters" 
                       and should be specified in Line 2. In general, corrected 
                       depths are preferred to uncorrected depths. Documentation 
                       accompanying data includes notes on methodology of 
                       correction. Optional.


Parameter names, units, and comments:

Parameter      Units    Format  Comments
-------------  -------  ------  ------------------------------------------------
CTDPRS         DB       F9.1    CTD pressure, decibars
CTDPRS_FLAG_W           I1      CTDPRS quality flag
SAMPNO                  A7      Cast number *100+BTLNBR. Optional
CTDTMP         ITS-90   F9.4    CTD temperature, degrees C, (ITS-90)
CTDTMP_FLAG_W           I1      CTDTMP quality flag
CTDCOND        MS/CM    F9.4    CTD Conductivity, milliSiemens/centimeter
CTDCOND_FLAG_W          I1      CTDCOND quality flag
CTDSAL                  F9.4    CTD salinity 
CTDSAL_FLAG_W           I1      CTDSAL quality flag
SALNTY                  F9.4    bottle salinity
SALNTY_FLAG_W           I1      SALNTY quality flag
SIGMA          THETA    F9.4    Sigma Theta
SIGMA_FLAG_W            I1      Sigma Theta quality flag
CTDOXY         UMOL/KG  F9.1    CTD oxygen, micromoles/kilogram
CTDOXY_FLAG_W           I1      CTDOXY quality flag
CTDOXY         ML/L     F9.3    CTD oxygen, milliliters/liter 
CTDOXY_FLAG_W           I1      CTDOXY quality flag
OXYGEN         UMOL/KG  F9.1    bottle oxygen
OXYGEN_FLAG_W           I1      OXYGEN quality flag
OXYGEN         ML/L     F9.3    bottle oxygen, milliliters/liter
OXYGEN_FLAG_W           I1      OXYGEN quality flag
O2TEMP         DEGC     F6.1    Temperature of water from spigot during oxygen 
                                draw, degrees C
O2TEMP_FLAG_W           I1      O2TEMP quality flag
SILCAT         UMOL/KG  F9.2    SILICATE, micromoles/kilogram 
SILCAT_FLAG_W           I1      SILCAT quality flag
SILCAT         UMOL/L   F9.2    SILCATE, micromoles/liter
SILCAT_FLAG_W           I1      SILCAT quality flag
NITRAT         UMOL/KG  F9.2    NITRATE, micromoles/kilogram 
NITRAT_FLAG_W           I1      NITRAT quality flag
NITRAT         UMOL/L   F9.2    NITRATE, micromoles/liter
NITRAT_FLAG_W           I1      NITRAT quality flag
NITRIT         UMOL/KG  F9.2    NITRITE, micromoles/kilogram 
NITRIT_FLAG_W           I1      NITRIT quality flag
NITRIT         UMOL/L   F9.2    NITRITE, micromoles/liter
NITRIT_FLAG_W           I1      NITRIT quality flag
PHSPHT         UMOL/KG  F9.2    PHOSPHATE, micromoles/kilogram
PHSPHT_FLAG_W           I1      PHSPHT quality flag
PHSPHT         UMOL/L   F9.2    PHOSPHATE, micromoles/liter
PHSPHT_FLAG_W           I1      PHSPHT quality flag
NH4            UMOL/KG  F9.2    AMMONIUM, micromoles/kilogram
NH4_FLAG_W              I1      NH4 quality flag
NH4            UMOL/L   F9.2    AMMONIUM, micromoles/liter
NH4_FLAG_W              I1      NH4 quality flag
UREA           UMOL/KG  F9.2    UREA, micromoles/kilogram
UREA_FLAG_W             I1      UREA quality flag
UREA           UMOL/L   F9.2    UREA, micromoles/liter
UREA_FLAG_W             I1      UREA quality flag
FLUORO         VOLTS    F8.3    Fluorometer, voltage
FLUORO_FLAG_W           I1      Fluorometer quality flag
PAR            VOLTS    F8.3    PAR, voltage
PAR_FLAG_W              I1      PAR quality flag
SPAR           VOLTS    F8.3    Surface PAR, voltage
SPAR_FLAG_W             I1      Surface PAR quality flag
HAARDT         VOLTS    F8.3    CDOM Fluorometer, voltage
HAARDT_FLAG_W           I1      CDOM Fluorometer quality flag
N**            UMOL/L   F9.2    N**, micromoles/liter
N**_FLAG_W              I1      N** quality flag
CHLORO         UG/L     F8.2    Chlorophyll, micrograms/liter
CHLORO_FLAG_W           I1      Chlorophyll quality flag
PHAEO          UG/L     F8.2    Phaeophytin, micrograms/liter
PHAEO_FLAG_W            I1      Phaeophytin quality flag
BTL_DEP        METERS   F5.0    bottle depth, meters
BTL_LAT                 F8.4    Latitude at time of bottle trip, decimal degrees
BTL_LONG                F9.4    Longitude at time of bottle trip, decimal degrees
JULIAN                  F8.4    Julian day and time as fraction of day of the 
                                bottle trip.


Quality Flags 

CTD data quality flags were assigned to CTDPRS (CTD pressure), CTDTMP (CTD 
temperature), CTDCOND (CTD Conductivity), and CTDSAL (CTD salinity) as defined 
in Data Distribution, CTD Data, Quality Flags section of this document. CTDOXY 
(CTD O2), FLUORO (Fluorometer), PAR (PAR), and SPAR (Surface PAR) parameters are 
flagged with either a 2, acceptable or 9, not drawn. 

Bottle quality flags were assigned to the BTLNBR (bottle number) as defined in 
the WOCE Operations Manual [Joyce] with the following additional 
interpretations: 

2  No problems noted.
3  Leaking.  An air leak large enough to produce an observable effect on a 
   sample is identified by a flag of 3 on the bottle and a flag of 4 on the 
   oxygen.  (Small air leaks may have no observable effect, or may only affect 
   gas samples.)
4  Did not trip correctly.  Bottles tripped at other than the intended depth 
   were assigned a flag of 4.  There may be no problems with the associated 
   water sample data.
9  The samples were not drawn from this bottle.   

WHP water sample quality flags were assigned to the water samples using the 
following criteria: 

1  The sample for this measurement was drawn from the water bottle, but the 
   results of the analysis were not (yet) received.
2  Acceptable measurement.
3  Questionable measurement. The data did not fit the station profile or 
   adjacent station comparisons (or possibly CTD data comparisons). No notes 
   from the analyst indicated a problem. The data could be acceptable, but are 
   open to interpretation.
4  Bad measurement. The data did not fit the station profile, adjacent 
   stations or CTD data. There were analytical notes indicating a problem, but 
   data values were reported. Sampling and analytical errors were also flagged 
   as 4.
5  Not reported. The sample was lost, contaminated or rendered unusable.
9  The sample for this measurement was not drawn. 

Not all of the quality flags are necessarily used on this data set. 



APPENDIX A:  Bottle Quality Comments

Remarks for deleted samples, missing samples, PI data comments, and WOCE codes 
other than 2 from NBP03-04A, SBI Survey. Comments from the Sample Logs and the 
results of ODF's investigations are included in this report. Investigation of 
data may include comparison of bottle salinity and oxygen data with CTD data, 
review of data plots of the station profile and adjoining stations, and 
rereading of charts (i.e. nutrients). Units stated in these comments are degrees 
Celsius for temperature, Practical Salinity Units for salinity, and unless 
otherwise noted, milliliters per liter for oxygen and micromoles per liter for 
Silicate, Nitrate, Nitrite, Phosphate and Urea and Ammounium, if appropriate. 
The first number before the comment is the cast number (CASTNO) times 100 plus 
the bottle number (BTLNBR).  


STATION 001.001 

101 Salinity analysis: "Three tries for good reading." PI: "Salinity is 
    acceptable." 
102 SampleLog: "Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM." 
103 Salinity analysis: "Three tries for good reading." PI: "Salinity is 
    acceptable." 
103-105 Cast 1 Nuts: NH4 not reported due to equipment malfunction for this 
    channel. 
    

STATION 002.001 

101 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
105 Sample Log: "First two draws had small bubbles. O2 draw was taken after 3 
    draws." High oxygen; could have been degassing. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    Salinity analysis: "Three tries for good reading." PI: "Salinity is acceptable." 
106 PI: "PO4 low, not in good agreement with bottle 109." DQ: "Density inversion 
    and poor CTD vs. bottle salinity agreement, probably a gradient." This is a 
    gradient, primary and secondary agree with one another, but the 1 meter bottle 
    difference makes a difference in the bottle salinity. Nutrients: "Rechecked po4 
    = real." 
107-108 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
109 PI:"PO4 high, not in good agreement with bottle 106." Nutrients: "Rechecked 
    po4 = real." 
    

STATION 003.001 

101 SampleLog: "Tentacles on spigots." 
106-107 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 004.001 

101 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
104 PI:"02 may be a little high, compared to CTD. Also nuts, but leave as is." 
107 Oxygen: "Long delay between unstoppering and analysis." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
    

STATION 005.001 

101 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
102 Oxygen: "3 small bubbles." PI: "Oxygen agrees well with nuts but not so well 
    with CTD. Oxygen is acceptable." CTDO-bottle difference is ˜0.05, but bottle O2 
    could be low by ˜0.02 as compared with Station 004. DQ: "Oxygen is acceptable". 
103 SampleLog: "O2 drawn twice." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
104 Sample Log: "O2 drawn twice. Still small bubble on third try." PI: "Oxygen 
    is acceptable." 
106-107 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
109 SampleLog: "O2 drawn twice; still small bubble." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 006.001 

101 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
105 Fromlooking more closely at data (nutrient data in particular), looks like 
    sample 105 is from slightly deeper water than sample 106. There does not appear 
    to be a problem with the CTD bottle trip files. It may be that this was a 
    flushing problem, and that there was still deeper water being carried along when 
    the bottle was tripped. Bottle 
106 would have had time to be completely flushed. Data should be marked as 
    questionable. Salinity analysis: "Four tries for good reading." Agreement with 
    CTD is reasonable, but will still leave coding as questionable. 
105-106 PI: "105 and 106 have identical pressures. Were they really both tripped 
    at 18.7db?" See 105 comments. 
107-108 Sample Log: "C13/N15 only drawing 7 liters of water per bottle; 3 rinses 
    on bottle, but no water left when spigot pushed in. MT's checking bottles; found 
    slow leak on 108. Bottom o-ring, bottle changed between stas 6 & 7." Samples 
    were only drawn for C13/N15. Cast 1 Sample Log: "10 meter bottle not tripped; 
    missed during acquisition." 
    

STATION 007.001 

101 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
104-105 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
107 Bottle salinity is high compared with CTD. Footnote bottle salinity 
    questionable. 
108-109 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 008.001 

102 DQ:"CTD salinity seems high." Primary and secondary temperature and 
    conductivity agree with one another. Temperature is lower than duplicate trip 
    which could account for higher salinity. Since agreement between the sensors is 
    reasonable, leave data as is. Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
103,106 Sample Log: "Phyto (Flint) sample taken at 12m & surf bottles." 
104-105 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 009.001 

101 Nuts:NH4: not reported due to equipment malfunction for this channel. 
102 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
105 PI:"Salt difference larger than usual, 0.127." 
    

STATION 010.001 

101 DQ: "Disagreement between CTD vs. bottle salinity." CTD primary and 
    secondary agree with one another, could possibly be shed-wake effect, less 
    saline water from shallower in the water column. However, other data do not 
    indicate this phenomenon. Footnote salinity bad. 
101,103-107 Nuts: NH4: not reported due to equipment malfunction for this 
    channel. 
102 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
103 DQ:"Disagreement between CTD vs. bottle salinity." Gradient, leave as is. 
103-107 
105 PI:"O2 a little low compared to CTD and nutrient profiles." 
    

STATION 011.001 

101 DQ: "CTD questionable." Primary and secondary conductivity agree with one 
    another. account for higher salinity. Since agreement between the sensors is 
    reasonable and bottle salinity and oxygen agrees with CTD, leave data as is. 
102 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
103-104 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
107 Large Bottle-CTD difference, 0.04, gradient, leave as is. 
108 Bottle-CTD difference, 0.01, gradient, leave as is, also within data 
    tolerance. 
109-110 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 012.001 

102 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
103 Oxygen: "1 tiny bubble." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
104 Oxygen: "small bubble." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 013.001 

102 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
106 Oxygen: "bubble." PI: "Oxygen sample missing. No explanation." Corrected 
    bottle number entered incorrectly. Cast 1 PI: "No problem seen in oxygen data." 
    

STATION 014.001 

101 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
102-103 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
109-110 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 015.001 

101 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
104-105 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 016.001 

101 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
    

STATION 017.001 

102 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
105 PI:"Urea seems very high." Nutrients: "Rechecked urea = real." PI: "Large 
    salt difference." Package came through large gradient, could be a flushing 
    problem. Salinity is ˜0.3 higher than CTD. 
    

STATION 018.001 

102 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
    

STATION 019.001 

102 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
    

STATION 020.001 

102 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
107 PI: "Large salt difference." Gradient, even a difference between primary and 
    secondary sensors, -0.02, data are acceptable. 
    

STATION 021.001 

102 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
106 Oxygen: "Check endpoint" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 022.001 

102 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
107 SampleLog: "Air vent open." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 023.001 

102 Samples were only drawn for DOM/POM. 
108,110,112 Salinity was not drawn. 
114 PI: "Oxygen may be a little low. Compare to CTD." DQ: "Double check O2 scan. 
    " Oxygen trace looks reasonable at 9.1ml/l, value reported is 9.2. Reported 
    value of 9.2 could be a little high, 0.18, because of drift that occurs at 
    bottle trip. DQ: "Values are acceptable." Salinity was not drawn. Cast 1 Sample 
    Log: "Oxygen sensor has a jellyfish in it-on top of rosette, too." 
    

STATION 024.001 

102 Oxygen, Salinity, and Nutrients were not drawn. 
104 PI:"NO2 a little low, and oxygen a little low, compare to CTD." Oxygen 
    agrees with CTD. Nutrients: "Rechecked no2 = real." 
109,111,113 Salinity was not drawn. 
115,119 Salinity was not drawn. 
116-117 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. Cast 1 Sample Log: "Tentacles on 
    rosette frame and bottles." 
    

STATION 025.001 

101 Oxygen: "large bubble." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
101-109 Nuts: NH4: not reported due to equipment malfunction for this channel. 
106,109,111 Salinity was not drawn. 
108 PI:"NO3 a little low." Nutrients: "Rechecked no3 = real." 
113 SampleLog: "Air leak." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." Salinity was not drawn. 
114,118-119 Salinity was not drawn. 
116 Sample Log: "Sampler thought there may be an air leak, reported small 
    dripping." No problem reported on Station 26. No modification made to the 
    bottle." CTD and bottle oxygen agreement is reasonable. Salinity was not drawn. 
120 Oxygen: "tentacle?." CTD and bottle oxygen agreement is reasonable. Salinity 
    was not drawn. 
    

STATION 026.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
115 Sample Log: "Air leak." Bottle tested after the cast. No leak found could 
    have been the jellyfish tentacle caught in lid." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
121 Sample Log: "C13 started sampling before nutrients and salinity. Sampler 
    stopped sampling and there was enough water for nutrients and salinity. Cast 1 
    Sample Log: "Jellyfish on rosette and bottles." 
    

STATION 027.002 Cast 1 Sample Log: "Cast 1 aborted - bottle tripped at surface." 

201 Oxygen value looks low - no comments. Noted that nutrients also show 
    something; probably real. Looks real. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
201-224 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
208 SampleLog: "Very small top cap leak." 
210,212-216 Salinity was not drawn. 
218-223 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 028.001 

110,112-116 Salinity was not drawn. 
117 Salinity is high compared with CTD, 0.5. There appears to be a difference in 
    the electronics of the instrument on this sample. It was run after a higher 
    sample, but suspect the analyst took this into consideration during flushing. 
    Code salinity bad. 
118 PI:"NO3 a little low." Nutrients: "Rechecked no3 = real." 
118-123 Salinity was not drawn. 


STATION 029.001 

101-124 No PAR data, sensor removed, sampling depth too deep. 
107 PI:"Urea high." Nutrients: "Rechecked urea = peak changed." 
110-117 Salinity was not drawn. 
115 SampleLog: "Air leak." Oxygen agrees with CTD and appears reasonable. 
118 CTDOappears low, code CTDO questionable. 
119-122 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 030.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
110-114 Salinity was not drawn. 
115 DQ: "Bottle salt has same value as 119 and it looks way off." Rechecked 
    data, no obvious indication that this was a analytical error, could have been a 
    sampling error or analyst could have run the sample twice. Code bottle salinity 
    bad. 
116-118 Salinity was not drawn. 
120-122 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 031.001 

110-115 Salinity was not drawn. 
112 PI:"NO2 a little high." Nutrients: "Rechecked no2 = real." 
113 DQ: "CTD O2 scan questionable." CTDO agrees with bottle oxygen as well as 
    the rest of the profile. 
117-120 Salinity was not drawn. 
122-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
123 SampleLog: "Tentacles." Data appears reasonable, SiO3 could be a little low. 
    

STATION 032.002 
201-224 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
210,212-220 Salinity was not drawn. 
211 PI: "Fairly large salt difference." There does appear to be a difference 
    between the down trace and up trace in this gradient area and the primary and 
    secondary sensors have a larger than usual difference, 0.01. Since it is such a 
    large difference, code salinity questionable, The sample should not have been 
    taken in the gradient. 
219 Oxygen: "Strange end point, added 1ml to try a new reading." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
222-223 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 033.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
105 PI:"Urea high." Nutrients: "Rechecked urea = real." 
109 PI: "No O2 data in file." Wrong bottle number was assigned, was entered as 
11 instead of 9. Corrected data files. 
111-115 Salinity was not drawn. 
117-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
118 Oxygen: "Overtitrate and backtitrate, 0.86952. Added 1 ml after first 
    titration to get better reading. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 034.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
108 SampleLog: "Air leak." PI: Oxygen is acceptable." 
110-112 Salinity was not drawn. 
114-116 Salinity was not drawn. 
115 SampleLog: "Air leak." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
118-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
121,123 Oxygen: "First titer had bad slope, added 1ml KIO3 to get good reading." 
    PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 035.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
102 Oxygen: "+10ml KIO3,+O2Raw." Oxygen: "Invalid Endpoint .... Error . . . 
    verror= 806 Illegal Function Call"; decided to add 10ml KIO3 and redo titration 
    so we could subtract std value & possibly get O2 value for sample. PI: "No 
    oxygen value in file." Oxygen was lost. 
109,111-114 Salinity was not drawn. 
115 SampleLog: "Air leak." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
116-119 Salinity was not drawn. 
118 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
121-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 036.001 

101 Oxygen: "Check endpoint; 1 division high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
102 Oxygen: "No endpoint; wanted to do overtitrate and backtitrate, but hit 
    wrong button, so added 1ml of KIO3 and did titration, calling it cast 91, bottle 
    1." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
105 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
110-115 Salinity was not drawn. 
113 Nuts:"Bottle tripped but no water in nuts sample tube." 
115 SampleLog: "Air leak." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
117-119 Salinity was not drawn. 
121-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 037.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
115 SampleLog: "Very small vent or top cap leak on bottle." Oxygen: "Tiny 
    bubble." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." Cast 1 Sample Log: "Sodium Hydroxide 
    dispenser is sticking." 
    

STATION 038.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
110,112 Salinity was not drawn. 
114-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
115 SampleLog: "No air leak." 
120-121 Sample Log: "No bottle samples for 20 and 21, this was for C13, N15." 
121-122 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
122 DQ: "CTD O2 scan questionable" CTDO trace agrees with Stations 37-40. Bottle 
    oxygen is low, ˜0.3, compared with Station 040. Code bottle oxygen questionable. 
    

STATION 039.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
103 PI:"NO3 a little low." Nutrients: "Rechecked no3 looks ok." 
109,111 Salinity was not drawn. 
111 Nuts:"Bottle tripped but no water in nuts sample tube." Footnote nutrients 
    lost. 
113 Sample Log: "Air leak." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." PI: "NO3 is high." 
    Nutrients: "Rechecked no3 looks good." 
113-118 Salinity was not drawn. 
120-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
121 Samplewas only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 040.001 

101 Oxygen: "Long delay." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
108 Large bottle-CTD salinity difference, 0.015. Conductivity sensors agree with 
    each other, gradient, leave as is. 
109 Oxygen: "Added acid after stirrer bar." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
110 Oxygen: "Check endpoint. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
110-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
112 Large bottle-CTD salinity difference, 0.03. Conductivity sensors agree with 
    each other, gradient, leave as is. 
113-115 Salinity was not drawn. 
115 SampleLog: "Air leak." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable. 
116 DQ: "Check CTD and bottle salinity." Primary and secondary conductivity 
    sensor agreement is very good. No analyses problems, oxygen could be high, SiO3 
    low, NO3 low and PO4 low. DQ: "Bottle oxygen looks high. Analyst notes no 
    problem" 
117-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
124 Oxygen: "Big copepod whirling around in flask during titration." PI: "Oxygen 
    is acceptable." 
    

STATION 041.001 

101 Oxygen: "Check endpoint." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
102 Oxygen: "Lost sample." 
103 PI:"O2 a little high." 
111-116 Salinity was not drawn. 
118-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 042.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
122 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
124 Salt: "Yes! Bottle (salt) 24-Niskin 24 reads 0.66154." Bottle salinity is 
    high compared with CTD. No analyses problem, this was a real measurement; 
    probably came from fresh water lens from melt water which didn't go as deep as 
    CTD on rosette when bottle tripped. Deck crew talked about how CTD only halfway 
    into "lens". DQ: "Do refractive index need adjustment for surface salinity of 
    10.343. NOTE: Needs to be corrected CTD salt greater than bottle salinity." 
    

STATION 043.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 044.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
102 Bottle salinity is low compared with CTD. Salinity appears to have been 
    misdrawn from bottle 4. Footnote bottle salinity bad. PI: "Agree with salinity 
    determination, bottle salinity looks bad." 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
119 Oxygenflask was broken during "second shake". No O2 sample. 
121 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15, no other samples taken. 


STATION 045.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 046.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
102 Oxygen, Salinity, and Nutrients were not drawn. 
113-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 047.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
112 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." PI: ""Oxygen a little low, but okay as is." 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 048.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
106 Oxygen: "Noticed filament streaming from thio burette tip." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
107 Oxygen: "Long delay." PI: "Oxygen may be high, but is okay as is." 
110-113 Salinity was not drawn. 
113 Oxygen: "Check endpoint." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
115-116 Salinity was not drawn. 
117 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
118-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
121 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 049.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
119 Oxygen: "Lost sample" No explanation why the sample was lost. 
123 Oxygen: "Tiny bubble." DQ: "Bottle O2 questionable. Density inversion 
    between 
123 and 122. Check CTD SCAN." Bottle oxygen agrees well with CTDO. Salinity does 
    become much saltier in the CTD trace, does not look like a spike in the data. 
    The density inversion is ˜0.03, leave as is. 
    

STATION 050.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. Cast 1 1st occupation of Station 300. Sample 
    Log: "10-min delay in sampling while searched for O2 draw tubes." 
    

STATION 051.001 

103 Sample Log: "Niskin 3 came off its mounting during recovery with some 
    leakage due to cap being jarred." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." PI: "NO2 is very 
    high, may be real. Trend also seen on station 052.001." Nutrients: "Rechecked 
    no2 = real." 
107-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
113-119 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 052.001 

107-112 Salinity was not drawn. 
108 Sample Log: "Very small air leak - probably the top cap." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
114-119 Salinity was not drawn. Cast 1 1st occupation of Station 302. Sample 
    Log: "Niskin 3 replaced prior to 05201. (NB 3 is mislabelled as 5.) Needs to be 
    relabeled to 3." 
    

STATION 053.001 

103 SampleLog: "Bottle has a very slow spigot." 
103-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
108-113 Salinity wad not drawn. 
114-115 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
116 PI: "No nutrients, but no note here why." Nutrient data indicates sample 
    from bottle 14, but Sample Log indicates that sample was drawn from bottle 
    16. Nutrients: "Rechecked, labeled wrong, changed the file." 
    

STATION 054.001 

102-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 SampleLog: "Replacement bottle is very slow." 
108-109 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 055.001 

103 SampleLog: "Original bottle back in place on rosette." 
103-107 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 056.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 057.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 058.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 059.001 

102,105 Salinity was not drawn. 
103-104 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15 and DOM/POM. 
    

STATION 060.001 

103-104 Salinity not drawn. 
104 PI:"Urea seems high." Nutrients: "Rechecked urea = real." 
105-106 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
109 DQ: "Urea was off-scale and suspiciously high (3.8 micromolar), check peaks, 
    etc. At a minimum this would be questionable because it is outside the 
    calibration range." 
    

STATION 061.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 PI:"Urea seems high." Nutrients: "Rechecked urea = real." 
    

STATION 062.001 

102-110 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 Nuts: NH4 and urea: bad measurement due to possible sample contamination. 
    Footnote nh4 and urea bad. 
108 Oxygen: "Small airleak." Oxygen agrees with CTDO and is acceptable. 
111 DQ: "Poor agreement between CTD and bottle salinity = poor flushing or bad 
    CTD scan or bottle salinity. Please check." Large surface gradient. No real 
    problem seen in the CTD profile, but obvious mixing. Deeper more saline water 
    could have been dragged up with the package. There is a fairly large, 0.4, 
    difference between primary and secondary sensors. Leave as is. 

STATION 063.001 

101 Salt: "Thimble was full of water and loose in bottle; suspect this spiked 
    the sample." PI: "Salt is acceptable." 
103-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
108-112 Salinity was not drawn. 
113 DQ: "No footnote about missing nutrient data from 113 and 112." Nutrient 
    data claims bottles 14 and 15 instead of 12 and 13. Corrected data files. 
    

STATION 064.001 

101 DQ:"No footnote about missing nutrients, also could be a mis-trip. Bottle 
    salt looks like it came from 102 instead of 101. Mis-trip, mis-sample, or wrong 
    data entry. Check bottle salinity! Bottle O2 also looks suspicious. Results in 
    density inversion." Corrected data entry of bottle, station assignment in 
    nutrient data tabulated as Station 066 bottle 1. Appears to be a drawing error 
    on salinity, Bottle-CTD is -0.094. Code salinity bad. DQ: "Poor agreement 
    between CTD and bottle salinity and oxygen." 
102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
106 DQ: "Does not fit profile. Analyst notes no problems" Urea questionable. 
107-114 Salinity was not drawn. 
112-113 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 065.001 

101 PI:"Large salinity difference, these are all in high salinity bottom layers. 
    May not be possible to get better salinity agreement." DQ: "Bottle salinity 
    suggests poor flushing." Primary and secondary conductivity sensor agreement is 
    reasonable. Bottle salinity was run after a lower value, 5 units lower. Although 
    salinity analyses values do not indicate a problem, it could be that the 
    previous sample influenced the readings on this sample. 
102-109 Salinity was not drawn. 
110 Oxygen: "Flask order wrong." Salinity: "very fresh value - analyst says a 
    real measurement; probably came from melt water fresh water lens which did not 
    go as deep as CTD on rosette when bottle tripped." 
    

STATION 066.001 

102-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 067.001 

101 PI:"Large salinity difference, this is in high salinity bottom layer; may 
    not be possible to get better salinity agreement." 
102-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 068.001 

101 PI:"Large salinity difference, this is in high salinity bottom layer; may 
    not be possible to get better salinity agreement." 
102-109 Salinity was not drawn. 
107-108 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 

STATION 071.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 072.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
106-107 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 073.001 

102-109 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 074.001 

101 PI: "Large salt difference." DQ: "Suspect this was a mis-trip. Need to check 
    O2's and salts against CTD profile." Even though both pair of sensors show the 
    same higher temperature, higher salinity, the agreement between the conductivity 
    is high, 0.05, and the primary conductivity, -0.29. DQ: "Poor bottle flushing" 
103-109 Salinity was not drawn. 
106 Nutrients: NH4 off-scale, same when re-ran sample. Nutrients may have been 
    contaminated. Concentration is greater than what could be recorded. Could be 
    real or could be a contaminated sample. Discussed coding this value as 
    questionable, decided it may be a high value and may be higher than what is 
    actually reported, leave this as is. PI: "Suspect NH4 is contaminated." Footnote 
    questionable as per PI and DQ. DQ: "Mark NH4 as off-scale and questionable. Not 
    enough PO4 to justify." 
107 Agreement between bottle and CTDO is about 0.4 lower than the rest of the 
    profile. No real problem seen in CTD profile, but it does indicate oxygen 
    minimum which can be seen a little higher in the water column on the down cast. 
    DQ: "Values are acceptable". 
    

STATION 075.001 

101 DQ:"Bottle salinity seems low. Poor flushing sampled from 102 instead of 
101? Also note that no nutrients were sampled. Could there be confusion here?" 
    CTD-bottle salinity difference is -0.011, salinity does appear to be from bottle 
    2. This is the same sampler as previous large difference salinity samples at 
    this level. Oxygen agreement is reasonable and nutrients appear reasonable. Code 
    salinity questionable. Corrected data entry of bottle, station assignment in 
    nutrient data tabulated as Station 077. 
102-109 Salinity was not drawn. 
106-107 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 076.001 

101 DQ:"Why no nutrient samples?" Station assignment error in nutrient data 
    tabulated as Station 078. Entry corrected. 
102 PI:"Oxygen is low." No analytical problem noted, code oxygen questionable. 
102-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 077.001 

102-103,107 Salinity was not drawn. 
104-105 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
107 SampleLog: "Top vent not closed." Oxygen does appear a little high, there 
    were only 7 bottles so sampling went quickly. Code oxygen questionable. Console 
    Log: "Deck crew requested CTD be brought on board as quickly as possible. Ice 
    was closing in on rosette." Cast 1 Sample Log: "Ice on top of rosette." 
    

STATION 078.001 

102 PI:"SiO3 may be low." Nutrients: "Rechecked sil = real." 
102,103,105 Salinity was not drawn. 


STATION 079.001 

102 Salinity was not drawn. 
103-104 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. Cast 1 DQ: "Sigma theta values 
    suggest that this station was entered upside down! Highest sigma theta at 
    surface and lowest at bottom. The differences are small but..." Bottle trip 
    information is machine generated and the bottle number assignment is correct. 
    Primary and secondary sensors agree, data is acceptable. 
    

STATION 080.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. Cast 1 DQ: "Highest sigma theta for mid-depth 
    sample; check data entry as for Station 79 and check CTD scan data." There is a 
    difference between the down and up cast. The surface is significantly different 
    even as the bottle is being tripped. Data are acceptable. 
    

STATION 081.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 082.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 083.001 

102-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 084.001 

101 DQ:"Poor flushing indicated by bottle salinity. Was this the evil watch? We 
    seem to vacillate between good bottle salinity agreement and bad agreement. Sure 
    it could be random error, but I think that we should find the evil 
    watchstanders!" The machines diagnostics indicate a slight electronics 
    difference. Other than that there does not appear to be any problem, if the. 
    salinity agreement was better this signal would not even have been questioned. 
    The sampler is not the same as the last series of questionable bottom salts. 
    Code salinity questionable. 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 085.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 086.001 

101 DQ: "Another station where bottle salinity agrees poorly with CTD scan." 
    Primary and secondary sensor agreement is reasonable. Bottle salinity was run 
    after a lower value, 5 units lower. Although salinity analyses values do not 
    indicate a problem, it could be that the previous sample influenced the readings 
    on this sample. There appears to be a slight offset, 0.1, at the bottom of the 
    cast. The bottle-CTDO is 0.9 higher than normal. Code CTDO questionable. 
102 DQ:"Poor agreement between CTD and bottle O2 after adjusting for O2 probe 
    offset. Both values are questionable unless we can identify what happened." The 
    CTD profile indicates a drift of over 1.0 while the package sat at this level 
    for the bottle trip. The trip data could have averaged the lower CTDO values. 
    Code CTDO questionable. 
102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 087.001 

101 DQ: "All samples seem questionable. Bottle and CTD salts don't agree. Bottle 
    O2 went up, but CTD O2 went down and nutrients look low, all bottle data 
    questionable." Code bottle leaking, and all samples bad. 
102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
104-105 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 


STATION 088.001 

104-105 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
106 Salinity was not drawn. Cast 1 Sample Log: "Tentacles on sensors." 
    

STATION 089.001 

103 SampleLog: "Bottle did not close." After this cast the carousel was checked 
    and position 3 was cleaned." No samples were drawn. 
104 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 090.001 

101-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 See103 bottle firing comment, no samples were drawn from this bottle. 
107-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
108 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen difficult to 
    judge, leave as is." Cast 1 Sample Log: "All bottle tripped, carousel was 
    cleaned and checked prior to this station." DQ: "No print-out. Were there bottle 
    data from this station?" 
    

STATION 091.001 

101 Oxygen: flask 1156 has flask 1592 stopper. Oxygen: checked and flask volumes 
    very different - coding as questionable. PI: "Oxygen looks okay." Removed 
    questionable footnote based on PI comments. Oxygen is acceptable. 
102 Oxygen: flask 1192 has flask 1556 stopper. Oxygen: checked and flask volumes 
    very different - coding as questionable. Oxygen is acceptable. Removed 
    questionable footnote based on PI comments. 
102-110 Salinity was not drawn. 
106 PI:"Oxygen is acceptable." 
109-109 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
111 Oxygen: "Check endpoint." bad endpoint, decided to backtitrate, but program 
    prompted for next sample, then didn't switch to O2UVLO so second try lost. 
    Diagnostic program used to check and adjust enpoint. Oxygen: Changed sample 
    flask to 1528 from 1148 (duplicated from sample above for 110). Went back and 
    checked box: flask no. 1528 is correct. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 092.001 

101 DQ:"Once again bottle salinity suggests little or no soak time; although 
    diff is within error bounds." 
103-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
106 PI: "Oxygen is high, but is in an oxygen gradient, is acceptable." DQ: 
    "Check CTD O2." 
109-111 No samples were drawn. Cast 1 Sample Log: "3 bottles tripped at the 
    surface; jellyfish were around the rosette as reported by MT's. Tripped bottles 
    until the jellyfish went away, then sample from last bottle tripped." 
    

STATION 093.001 

101 DQ: "Once again bottle salinity suggests poor flushing/little soak time 
    although the absolute difference is small. Created a slight density inversion. 
    Could be offset between autosal and CTD, but I am suspicious." 
102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." 
    

STATION 094.001 

102-107 Salinity was not drawn. 
104-105 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. Cast 1 Oxygen: Sampler did not put 
    water in tops of flask after 2nd shake. As per analyst, all flasks had small 
    bubbles around edges. 


STATION 095.001 

101 PI:"Large salt difference." DQ: "This is a mis-trip!" 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 Salts: "Salt bottle 11 thimble came out with cap - bottle filled solid - no 
    air space." 
    

STATION 096.001 

101 PI:"Large salt difference." DQ: "Once again bottle salinity suggests poor 
    flushing (or sampling from wrong bottle)." 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 097.001 

101 Nuts: NH4: not reported due to equipment malfunction for this channel. DQ: 
    "Once again bottle salinity and apparent density inversion suggest very poor 
    bottle flushing." 
102 Nuts: NH4 reported as questionable as single readable peak in the middle of 
    bubble trouble, but this one looked like a real peak as per analyst. PI: "NH4 
    looks reasonable." 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
103-104,107 Nuts: NH4: not reported due to equipment malfunction for this 
    channel. 
105-106 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 098.001 

101-105 Nuts: NH4: not reported due to equipment malfunction for this channel. 
102 PI: "Large oxygen difference, reexamine CTDO trace and the titration; may 
    just be large gradient." 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 099.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 100.001 

102-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
106-107 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
109 DQ:"Large density inversion. Could be that salinity and temps increased 
    towards surface and that shallow depth of bottle relative to CTD created this 
    apparent inversion, but check CTD scan and bottle salinity. Note sigma theta as 
    questionable." Rechecked CTD trip information, no obvious problem in the CTD 
    data. Agreement between the two sensors is reasonable, -0.008, for a surface 
    trip. Temperature is a little cooler and salinity does increase. There are some 
    different features that the CTD is sensing, so there could be ship's influence. 
    Cannot footnote the sigma theta as suggested by DQ. Cast 1 Console Log: "Near 
    bottom: observed temperature increase with O2 decrease." 
    

STATION 101.001 

101-103,105 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 Oxygen: "sample spilled" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." DQ: "Notes say oxygen 
    sample spilled, but a value is reported." 
107-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
108 SampleLog: "Bottle leaking from top vent." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 102.001 

102-112 Salinity was not drawn. 
104,107,108 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
110 Samples were not drawn. 
113 DQ:"Poor CTD and bottle agreement, but could be strong gradient." This is a 
    gradient area, no problem with either pair of sensors. 


STATION 103.001 

101 DQ:"Slight density inversion." Primary and secondary sensors agree very well 
    with one another. Water is well-mixed for 10-15 meters before this trip. No 
    problems seen in salinity analyses, except that it was analyzed after a much 
    fresher sample. 
101-106 Nuts: NH4: not reported due to equipment malfunction for this channel. 
102-116 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 DQ:"CTD O2 scan questionable?" CTDO agrees well with the down trace. No 
    problem in the CTD data. 
112 DQ:"Density inversion, check CTD scans." Three bottles were tripped at this 
    depth. There appears to be ship roll which could be influencing the sensors. 
    Okay, leave as is. 
113-114 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 104.001 

102 Oxygen: "LONG delay" - started stirring before entered bottle and flask 
    information. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
102-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
106 DQ: "Check CTD scans." Primary and secondary agree with one another. 
    Gradient, sensing water from deeper in the water column which has either caught 
    up with the package or from ship roll. 
113-114 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 105.001 

102 Oxygen: "Delay between stirring & titration." started stirring before 
    entering bottle/ flask info. PI: "Oxygen are acceptable." 
105-113 Salinity was not drawn. 
108 SampleLog: "Very small top cap leak." PI: "Oxygen are acceptable." 
114 Nuts:NH4: bad measurement - strange peak. Footnote NH4 bad. Cast 1 DQ: 
    "Salinities suggest poor bottle flushing for this station." There were modulo 
    word errors, 8, on this cast. Most of them were on the down cast, the other two 
    do not affect the trip data. Tried reextracting the trip data using a different 
    timing criteria, this made the primary and secondary agreement better, but made 
    the CTD-salinity difference worse. 
    

STATION 106.001 

106-114,117 Salinity was not drawn. 
115-116 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. Cast 1 Sample Log: "Note: Nutrient 
    tubes are split between TWO racks - Lite & Dark Blue." 
    

STATION 107.001 

101 Salts: "note blue thread found lodged under thimble salt btl 18." PI: 
    "Salinity is acceptable." 
105-116 Salinity was not drawn. 
110 SampleLog: "Air vent leak as vent was loose." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
117 Salts: "note thimble came out with cap salt btl 22 - no air gap." DQ: 
    "Density inversion due to bottle salinity looking like it comes from > 10m. 
    Notes suggest that there was a problem with this sample. Should be noted as 
    questionable." Code salinity questionable. 
    

STATION 108.001 

101-121 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
110-120 Salinity was not drawn. 
115,121 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
    

STATION 109.001 

105-119 Salinity was not drawn. 
122 Samples was only drawn for C13/N15. 
123-124 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 110.001 

101 Console Log: "Instead of making a mark at the surface, accidentally fired 
    bottle 1." No data from bottle 1 is being reported. 
101-123 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
102 PI:"Oxygen is acceptable." 
103 Sample Log: "Flasks 1504 & 775 may have been reversed in box." 775 may be 
    for 103, and vice versa. Oxygen: "Flask had 1504 top." when? before sampling or with 
    sample? sample drawer sure flasks & stoppers were matched when sampling - 
    possible mix-up when analyzing? flasks have very different volumes (775 vol: 
    136.9544) & O2 values look ok PI: "Oxygen is okay, but maybe a little bit low." 
    DQ: "Could be a mis-trip; bottle values look the same as bottle 104." Salinity 
    bad. Code bottle did not trip as scheduled and water samples bad. Although CTD 
    data files do not indicate any problem the water samples are a perfect match for 
    bottle 4. 
111-115 Salinity was not drawn. 
117-120 Salinity was not drawn. 
122-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 111.001 

111-116 Salinity was not drawn. 
118-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 112.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
111-115 Salinity was not drawn. 
113 Sample Log: "Bottle was not tripped when brought to surface; then No samples 
    were drawn. it tripped when it hit the side of the ship during recovery." 
117-121,124 Salinity was not drawn. 
122 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 113.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
107 SampleLog: "Top vent leak." PI: "Data are acceptable." 
108 SampleLog: "Top cap leak, not certain if cap or vent." PI: "Data are 
    acceptable." 
111-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
115 SampleLog: "Leaking; top vent closed water issuing from spigot." 
    

STATION 114.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
108 SampleLog: "Air leak." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
110-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
117 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." Cast 1 DQ: "No apparent flushing problems. This must be the good 
    watch." 
    

STATION 115.001 

111-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 116.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
111 DQ: "Check bottle O2." No analytical problems noted. CTDO at bottle trips 
    are questionable. Oxygen agrees weill with Station 114, 113 and 117. Station 115 
    did not sample at this depth. Code CTDO questionable. 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 117.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
109 Oxygen: "Check endpoint." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. Cast 1 Sample Log: "MnCl2 dispenser is NOT 
    working smoothly." 
    

STATION 118.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
105 Oxygen: "Check endpoint ˜1 division high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
108 Sample Log: "Leak in top vent." Oxygen: "Check endpoint, 5 divisions low." 
    PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." Large bottle-CTD difference, 0.03, gradient area, 
    CTD sensors agree with one another. 
109-120 Salinity was not drawn. 
111 Oxygen: "Check endpoint 1 division high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
120 Oxygen: "Many mini bubbles." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
121 Large bottle-CTD difference, 0.21, gradient area, CTD sensors agree with one 
    another. 
122-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
123 Oxygen: "Check endpoint 8 divisions high." Oxygen data rechecked and 
    corrected appropriately. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." Cast 1 DQ: "Flushing not so 
    good - bad watch?" 
    

STATION 119.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
107 PI:"NO3 a little low?" Nutrients: "Rechecked no3 = real." 
108 SampleLog: "leaky (top?)." 
109-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
118 SampleLog: "Leak from top end cap, when vent opened." 
118-119 PI: "Identical nutrients. Suggest sampler drew two nuts from same 
    niskin-cannot tell which depth is correct. (The NO2 data are clincher.) No 
    isolayer in salinity or oxygen." 
120-121 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 120.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
105 Oxygen: "Overtitrate and backtitrate, (No EP)." 
108 Sample Log: "Small leak, air vent, but sampler not certain if endcap or 
    vent." Oxygen flask on Sample Log should be 1520, not 520 - double-checked. 
110-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 121.001 

101 Oxygen: "Sample Lost; forgot to add acid before addition of thio and 
    starting stirring. 
107 PI: "Urea is much higher than adjacent stations, footnote questionable." 
    Nutrients: "Rechecked urea = peak changed." 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
119 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 


STATION 122.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
121 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 123.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
116 Oxygen: "Overtitrate and backtitrate, 0.60049." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
119 Oxygen: "Overtitrate and backtitrate, 0.75938." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 124.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
111-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 125.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
112-122 Salinity was not drawn. 
118,119 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
123 Nuts: Silicate peak is really lower than surface one on charts. Rest of 
    nutrients look reasonable, so leave as is. PI: "Silicate is acceptable." 
    Nutrients: "Rechecked sil low but real." 
    

STATION 126.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
111-121,123 Salinity was not drawn. 
122 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 127.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
108 Oxygen: changed flask no to 1520 from 150 as per Sample Log and after 
    checking flasks in box R. 
110 PI: "Urea, 0.13, is higher than adjacent stations, code questionable." 
    Nutrients: "Rechecked urea peak changed." DQ: "Value is acceptable" 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
113 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." Cast 1 Oxygen: standardization run with samples showed bad thio - 
    used standardization results from previous day's run 
    

STATION 128.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
106 Oxygen: "Check endpoint 1 division high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
120 DQ:"O2 scan, double check for spikes." No problem seen in CTDO. 
    

STATION 129.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
110 Oxygen: "Check endpoint." PI: "Data are acceptable." 
112-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
113 Oxygen: "Check endpoint 2 div hi." ran o2chk and adjusted endpoint vol from 
    0.60126 to 0.60102 (skip 4 pts) PI: "Data are acceptable." 
    
    

STATION 130.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
102 Oxygen: "Endpoint?" Ran diagnostic program and adjusted endpoint. PI: 
    "Oxygen is acceptable." 
110 Oxygen: "check endpoint 3 divisions high." Ran diagnostic program and 
    adjusted endpoint. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
110-120,123 Salinity was not drawn. 
112 Oxygen: "Check endpoint 3 divisions high hi." Ran diagnostic program and 
    adjusted endpoint. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
121-122 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 131.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
105 Oxygen: "Overtitrate and backtitrate. (No endpoint) over-over-over titrate." 
    analyst reported program kept asking to overtitrate but graph showed lines had 
    gone off to begin with. O2 sample lost. 
107 Oxygen: "Overtitrate and backtitrate, (No endpoint)" PI: "Data are 
    acceptable." 
109-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 132.003 Cast 1 Sample Log: "Cast aborted after first 3 bottles were 
    tripped." Console Log: "Lost power, short in cable possible. Cast aborted on up 
    way up, three bottles were tripped." ODF tech reported deck unit error light was on. 
    301-303 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
    303 Oxygen: "Overtitrate and backtitrate, (No endpoint)." 
    

STATION 132.004 
    401-403 No samples were drawn. 
    401-424 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
    408,409 Oxygen: "Overtitrate and backtitrate, (No endpoint)" PI: "Data are 
    acceptable." 
    409-420,423 Salinity was not drawn. 
    416-417 PI: "There is a chance that both nutrient tubes were filled from the 
    same bottle, but gradients are small so leave as is." 
    421-422 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    424 Sample Log: "Leak at bottom end cap when top vent open, tried reseating, no 
    relief." PI: "O2 D-C is high, Code bottle oxygen bad." 
    

STATION 133.001 

101-122 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
108 SampleLog: "Air Leak." PI: "Data are acceptable." 
108-121 Salinity was not drawn. 
111 Oxygen: "Overtitrate and backtitrate, 0.63911 bad value, overtitrate fail." 
    Value looks okay from property-property plot. PI: "Data are acceptable." 
    

STATION 134.001 

101-119 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
106 Ureais higher than adjacent values. Code urea questionable." 
107-118 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 135.001 

101-117 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
105-114,116 Salinity was not drawn. 
107 PI:"O2 D-C a little low, but okay for gradient if bottle not flushed well. 
    Leave as is." 
115 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 


STATION 136.001 

101-115 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
104-114 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 137.001 

103-113 Salinity was not drawn. 
110 PI:"Oxygen difference, bottle-CTD, is a little low, but nuts match bottle 
    O2. CTDO2 is too high? Leave as is." 
    

STATION 138.001 

101-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
106-110,113 Salinity was not drawn. 
111-112 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
114 Oxygen: "Endpoint ˜ 1 division high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." PI: 
    "Oxygen difference, bottle-CTD, is a little low, but nuts match bottle O2. CTDO2 
    is too high? Leave as is." 
    

STATION 139.001 

101-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
106-110 Salinity was not drawn. 
110 DQ:"Density inversion bottles 111 and 110. Suspect CTD salinity. No problem 
    seen in CTD salinity or temperature trace. However, the agreement between the 
    two sensors is high even for surface value. Review indicates that the CTD 
    operator held the package longer than other bottle trips, which indicates there 
    was a difference between the two sensors. Leave as is. 
111 Oxygen: "Endpoint ˜ 2 divisions high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 140.001 

101 DQ: "Bottle salinity looks like it came from 102 - poor flushing? Causes a 
    density inversion between 101 and 102." CTD Operator held the package at the 
    bottom for quite awhile, the shallower, less salty water could have caught up 
    with the package. Leave as is. 
102 Oxygen: "1 division high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
102-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 141.001 

108 Bottle not sampled for chl, pha according to sample log however data 
    received from analyst Bottle not sampled for chl, pha according to sample log 
    however data received from analyst 
108-109 Tripped two extra bottles at 11 meters, thought chl max was changed. Chl 
    person said sampling for C13, N15 should stay at the 18 meters. 
    

STATION 142.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. Cast 1 CTD conductivity and oxygen sensor are 
    not usable from the down cast, suspect biological fouling. Will use the 
    secondary sensors and eliminate the CTD oxygen. The bottle trip information is 
    probably okay. 
    

STATION 143.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 144.001 

102-103,106 Salinity was not drawn. 
104-105 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 145.001 

102,103,105 Oxygen: "Overtitrate and backtitrate, (No endpoint)" 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 146.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 147.001 

102 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 148.001 

102 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 149.001 

102 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 150.001 

103 Console Log: "Bottle 3 did not close, so we sent the CTD back to the surface 
    to collect the surface sample." Bottle 3 closed when bottle 4 was tripped. 
    Bottle not sampled for chl, pha according to sample log however data received 
    from analyst Bottle not sampled for chl, pha according to sample log however 
    data received from analyst 
    

STATION 151.001 

101-102 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
104-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 152.001 

102 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 153.001 

102 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 154.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 155.001 

102,104 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 156.001 

101-102 DQ: "Density inversion between bottles 101 and 102. Bottle salinity 
    looks low, either bad salinity or poor flushing OR extreme gradients or some 
    combination." 
102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 Oxygen: "copepod" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 157.001 

102 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 158.001 

102 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 159.001 

102 Salinity was not drawn. 
103-104 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 160.001 

102 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 161.001 

102 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 162.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 Oxygen: "bubble" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 163.001 

103 Sample Log: "Did not trip; bottom end cap hung up on sensors tygon tubing; 
    very freak incident. CHL stated this was an extra bottle and there was no need 
    to recast." Bottle not sampled for chl, pha according to sample log however data 
    received from analyst Bottle not sampled for chl, pha according to sample log 
    however data received from analyst 
    

STATION 164.001 

101 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
102,104 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 Samples were only drawn fo C13/N15. 
    

STATION 165.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 166.001 

101 DQ:"Possible mis-trip. Poor agreement between CTD and bottle salinity and 
    bottom nutrients slightly lower than nutrients on 102. Another possibility is 
    that they tripped bottle too soon because of proximity to bottom. Density 
    inversion between 101 and 102." Temperature and conductivity sensors agree with 
    one another. There are no notes indicating any anyalytical problem for salinity 
    or nutrients. DQ: "poor flushing. Note all samples as questionable". 
102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 167.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 168.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 169.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 170.001 

102 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 171.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 


STATION 172.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 PI: "PO4 high by about 0.5; no match in NO3. Code PO4 questionable." DQ: 
    "PO4 seems high. Check peak." Nutrients: "Rechecked po4 peak changed." DQ: 
    "Still high. Note as questionable" 
104 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
    

STATION 173.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 174.001 

102,105-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
103-104 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 175.002 
202-204 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 176.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 177.002 
101,103-104 Salinity was not drawn. Cast 1 Sample Log: "All top vents were found 
    open, redid the cast as Cast 2." 
    

STATION 178.001 

102-103,105 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 Oxygen: "copepod" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
104 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 179.001 

101 Salt: "bubble in cell which would not clear - lost sample - cell required 
    cleaning" - "sample lost on last run due to dirty sample cell from algae" Sample 
    not reported, lost. 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 PI:"Oxygen bottle-CTD low, but okay for gradient." 
    

STATION 180.001 

102 PI:"Oxygen bottle-CTD low, but okay for gradient." 
102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 181.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 Oxygen: ">10ml, right flask!" PI: "Oxygen bottle-CTD low, but okay for 
    gradient." 
    

STATION 182.001 

101 DQ:"Mis-trip; CTD and bottle salinity and O2 do not agree, bottom nutrients 
    a little lower than 102 data, density inversion, etc." Temperature and 
    conductivity sensors agree with one another. There are no notes indicating any 
    anyalytical problem for salinity or nutrients. DQ: "Mis-trip or very poor 
    flushing. All samples questionable" 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    
    

STATION 183.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 184.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 185.001 

102 Oxygen: "copepods?" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 186.001 

101 Oxygen: "Endpoint 2 division high, biological?" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
103-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 Oxygen: "2 black bits" PI: "Oxygen bottle-CTD low, but okay for gradient." 
106-107 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
108 Oxygen: "Endpoint 1 division high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 187.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 188.001 

101 Salt: "Take 1st reading - sample continuously increasing - suspect salt 
    crystal; bottle overfull to the rim." PI: "Salinity is acceptable." 
102-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 189.001 

103 PI: "Bottle oxygen high, nutrients low, looks like water from 20 meters. 
    But, down CTD trace shows thin layer matching the oxygen layer. Leave as is." 
    DQ: "Mis-trip." DQ: "Further review indicates mis-trip" 
103-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
106 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." 
107 Oxygen: "Brown deposit, may be high. Flask was used at 177-1 to draw sample, 
    but was an aborted cast & so sample not run and just dumped out; probably 
    residue on flask walls - flask and others used were thoroughly cleaned out." 
    Code oxygen bad. 
    

STATION 190.001 

102 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 191.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 192.001 

102-107 Salinity was not drawn. 
106 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
    

STATION 193.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
106-107 Salinity was not drawn. 
    
    

STATION 194.001 

102-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 DQ:"CTD O2 bad??" There is a spike in the CTD data on the up trace. Code CTD 
    oxygen bad. 
    

STATION 195.001 

102-107 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 196.001 

102-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 197.001 

102-109 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 198.001 

102-110,112 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
108 Console Log: "Surface scratch repaired upper seal surface." PI: "Data are 
    acceptable." 
111 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 199.001 

103-112 Salinity was not drawn. 
110 Sample Log: "Bottle was tripped think it was chl max, instead max was at 
    bottle 11 and subsequent bottle tripped to capture the feature. Bottle 10 was 
    not sampled." Cast 1 Sample Log: "Sea tentacles on bottles." PI: "Data are 
    acceptable." 
    

STATION 200.001 

102 DQ:"Probably a mis-trip. Density inversion, poor CTD-bottle salt agreement, 
    nutrients look like they come from a shallower depth, etc." Temperature and 
    conductivity sensors agree with one another. There are no notes indicating any 
    anyalytical problem for salinity or nutrients. Water is well-mixed and should 
    have been similar to deeper waters. Code bottle leaking and samples bad. 
103-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
114 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
    

STATION 201.001 

104-114 Salinity was not drawn. 
110 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." DQ: "Nutrients and O2 
    look funny. Possible mis-trip. Bottle 11 did not close because of rosette 
    malfunction which increases my suspicion that 110 was a mis-trip." Oxygen, 
    nitrate, and phosphate agree with Stations 200-203. SIO3 appears low compared 
    with adjoining stations. DQ: "Data acceptable" 
111 Sample Log: "Bottle did not trip, latch on carousel was half tripped." 
    Footnote no samples drawn from this bottle. 
    

STATION 202.001 

103 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." 
105-116 Salinity was not drawn. 
111 Sample Log: "Bottle did not trip, even though MT's cleaned it, the ET's will 
    replace the latch." Footnote bottle did not trip as scheduled, no samples. 
    

STATION 203.001 

105-119 Salinity was not drawn. 
112 Nosamples were drawn. 
116 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 204.001 

103 SampleLog: "Bottle got hung-up on primary vent, therefore, there is NO 
    sample." 
105-114,116 Salinity was not drawn. 
113 PI: "Urea, 0.28, approximately 0.24 higher than above or below no matching 
    feature at nearby stations, but near pycnocline." Nutrients: "Rechecked urea = 
    real." DQ: "Urea value acceptable" 
115 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 205.001 

103-113 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 206.001 

103-110 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 207.001 

103 Oxygen: "Endpoint 2,5 5 divisions high." Ran diagnostic program and adjusted 
    endpoint. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
103-109 Salinity was not drawn. 
108 Oxygen: "strand on tip" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
110 DQ:"Poor agreement between CTD and bottle salt and between CTD and O2 temps. 
    Gradients? No objective reason to question data." This is a gradient. 
111 Oxygen: "copepods" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." DQ: "Poor agreement between 
    CTD and O2 temps Gradients? No objective reason to question data." 
112 CTDoperator tripped two bottles at the surface, thinking that bottle 11 was 
    still having a tripping problem. No samples were taken. CTD data is reported, 
    but no samples were taken. 
    

STATION 208.001 

101 Sample Log: "Redrew O2, NAOH dispenser had a deposit on it that was not 
    noticed until sample was taken." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
102-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
107,108 Oxygen: "copepods" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 209.001 

102-107 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 Oxygen: "Endpoint 3 high, copepods." Ran diagnostic program, rechecked 
    endpoint, okay. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
108 Oxygen: "Endpoint 2 high, copepods." Ran diagnostic program, rechecked 
    endpoint, okay. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 210.001 

101-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
102 Oxygen: "Check endpoint, copepods." Ran diagnostic program and adjusted 
    endpoint. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
104 Oxygen: "Check endpoint 4 divisions high." Ran diagnostic program and to 
    recheck endpoint, okay. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    
    
STATION 211.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 PI:"O2 bottle-CTD high, but nutrients agree with O2. Probably flushing 
    problem." 
    

STATION 212.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
106 DQ:"Poor agreement between bottle and CTD salinity. Suspect bad bottle salt 
    analysis. Check autosal run for problems? Density inversion." CTD sensors agree 
    with one another. No problems indicated during salinity analyses. 
    

STATION 213.001 

101 DQ:"Poor agreement between bottle and CTD salt. Salinity coded questionable. 
    Density inversion due to poor bottle/CTD salt agreement. Check autosal run. " No 
    analytical problems noted for salinity. Water is well mixed, agreement between 
    bottle and CTD is within accuracy. Leave as is. 
102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
106 DQ:"CTD O2 scan is questionable." CTD oxygen looks good, well mixed at the 
    surface and agrees with down trace. Bottle oxygen is 0.1 ml/l higher than 
    adjacent stations. Leave as is. 
    

STATION 214.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
106-107 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 215.001 

101 DQ: "Check bottle and CTD salinities." No analytical or sampling problems 
    noted. Sample was analyzed after a much lower sample, 0.15 conductivity units. 
    Should not have effected the sample, but this is the only thing of any 
    mentionable difference. 
102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 217.001 

101 DQ: "Bottle salinity leading to density inversion. CTD 32.6133, bottle 
    32.257. Suspect bad bottle salt." No analytical or sampling problems noted. 
    Sample was analyzed after a much lower sample, 0.14 conductivity units. Should 
    not have effected the sample, but this is the only thing of any mentionable 
    difference. Much lower than adjoining stations, CTD sensor agreement is 
    reasonable. Code salinity questionable. 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 218.001 

101 DQ:"Poor agreement between bottle and CTD salinity leading to density 
    inversion." No analytical or sampling problems noted. Within accuracy, leave as 
    is. 
102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 219.001 

101 DQ:"Suspect bad bottle salinity; density inversion." No analytical or 
    sampling problems noted. Sample was analyzed after a much lower sample, 0.17 
    conductivity units. Should not have effected the sample, but this is the only 
    thing of any mentionable difference. Much lower than adjoining stations, CTD 
    sensor agreement is reasonable. Code salinity questionable. 
102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 220.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 


STATION 221.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. Cast 1 Console Log: "After cast, found 
    significant jellyfish tentacles in both secondary sensors; no change in 
    differences during cast." Data does not appear to have been affected, no unusual 
    differences other than down and up cast differences. PI: "Data are acceptable." 
    

STATION 222.001 

102-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
106 DQ:"Suspect bad CTD scan; density inversion. Check CTD scan salinity." 
    Offset in primary conductivity sensor at ˜50 meters on the up cast. Report the 
    secondary conductivity data for entire cast. 
    

STATION 223.001 

102-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
107 SampleLog: "Top vent was not closed." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 224.001 

103-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
109-110 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
111 Oxygen: "Endpoint 2 divisions high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 225.001 

101 Console Log: "Fired bottle 1 at surface instead of making a mark. No samples 
    drawn. 
106-110 See Cast 1 Sample Log comment. Salinity from primary sensor bad on the 
    up cast. Offset in primary conductivity sensor at ˜43 meters on the up cast. 
    Report the secondary conductivity data for entire cast. 
108 SampleLog: "Leak from spigot." PI: "Data are acceptable." Cast 1 Sample Log: 
    "Jellyfish tentacles in primary sensor, drew all salinities." Temperature looks 
    okay, secondary sensors may be okay. MT's took tubing off after the cast, the 
    tentacle of jellyfish was through the intake and out the outflow of the sensors. 
    Console Log: "46 meters wire out, something is wrong with salinity (coming up), 
    jumped from 32 to 29, then at 35 meters wire out jumped from 29 to 30." 
    

STATION 226.001 

102-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
109 Oxygen: "copepod" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." Cast 1 Sample Log: "Prior to 
    this cast, tubes were removed and cleaned, sensors were flushed with fresh water 
    for 20 minutes." 
    

STATION 227.002 Cast 1 Sample Log: "Cast 1 was aborted, CTD was at 100 meters, 
    primary conductivity sensor was "stuck"." 
201-209 Salinity was not drawn. 
219 Oxygen: "Copepods." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 228.001 

101 Oxygen: "Copepod" PI: "Oygen is acceptable." 
102-113 Salinity was not drawn. 
108 SampleLog: "Did not trip." 
113 SampleLog: "Leak on bottle, top seal did not seat properly." 
    

STATION 229.001 

102-113 Salinity was not drawn. 
109 Bottle not sampled for chl, pha according to sample log however data 
    received from analyst Bottle not sampled for chl, pha according to sample log 
    however data received from analyst 
110 Oxygen: "Bubble" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 


STATION 230.001 

103 Oxygen: "Tiny bubble" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
103-114 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 Oxygen: "Streamers on probe" Not certain what oxygen analyst meant, but PI 
    accepted oxygen data. 
    

STATION 231.001 

103-114 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." PI: "Urea, 0.19, approximately 0.13 higher than other samples and 
    Maximum not seen at neighboring stations. Footnote urea questionable." 
112 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 232.001 

103-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 233.001 

102-109 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 234.001 

102-107 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 PI:"Oxygen bottle-CTD high, but okay for gradient." Cast 1 DQ: "Very poor 
    CTD-bottle salinity agreement causing apparent density inversions. Looks like a 
    bad station vis a vis flushing, on salts or CTD readings. Flushing offsets > 
    10m" CTD sensors agree will with one another. 
    

STATION 235.001 

102-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 236.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 237.001 

101 DQ: "Looks like a mis-trip or poor flushing. Poor bottle and CTD salinity 
    and O2 agreement. Density inversion, nutrient inversions." The water is well-
    mixed for about 7 meters, this could have been a late closure on the bottle, 
    where the lanyard released or hungup. See PI comment on Station 238. DQ: "Data 
    questionable due to mis-trip or poor flushing" 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
    

STATION 238.001 

101 Oxygen value seems high; salinity and nutrients seem low; no obvious 
    problems; leave as is. Note that sta 249.001 at same isobath is almost identical 
    PI: "Data is acceptable." DQ: "Bad station; mis-trip or poorly flushed. Bad CTD 
    and salinity agreement, density inversion, nutrient inversion, O2% sat 
    inversion, etc." 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 DQ:"Also terrible agreement between bottle and CTD salinity causing apparent 
    density inversion, but nutrients look ok. Same possibilities, mis-trip or poorly 
    flushed." No analytical or sampling problems noted. Sample was analyzed after a 
    much lower sample, 0.11 conductivity, 2.1 salinity units. Should not have 
    effected the sample, but this is the only thing of any mentionable difference. 
    CTD sensor agreement is reasonable. Code salinity questionable. 
    
    

STATION 239.001 

101 DQ:"Another station where incomplete flushing creates inversions between 101 
    and 102." No analytical or sampling problems noted. Sample was analyzed after a 
    much lower sample, 0.14 conductivity, 2.4 salinity units. Should not have 
    effected the sample, but this is the only thing of any mentionable difference. 
    CTD sensor agreement is reasonable and water is well-mixed for about 10 meters. 
    Code salinity questionable. 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 240.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
104-105 Sample Log: "2 extra bottles tripped at chl max for C13, N15, found out 
    that samples were not requested and therefore not sampled." No samples drawn 
    from these bottles. 
    

STATION 241.001 

101 Noanalytical or sampling problems noted. Sample was analyzed after a much 
    lower sample, 0.15 conductivity, 3.0 salinity units. Should not have effected 
    the sample, but this is the only thing of any mentionable difference. CTD sensor 
    agreement is reasonable. Water is well-mixed for about 10 meters. Code salinity 
    questionable. 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 242.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 243.001 

101 DQ:"Looks like a mis-trip. Again, bad CTD and bottle salinity agreement, 
    same for CTD and bottle O2, slight NO3 and Si inversions, density inversion 
    could be due to strong gradients and only fair flushing." No analytical or 
    sampling problems noted. Sample was analyzed after a much lower sample, 0.15 
    conductivity, 3.1 salinity units. Should not have effected the sample, but this 
    is the only thing of any mentionable difference. CTD sensor agreement is 
    reasonable. Water is well-mixed for 10 meters. Code salinity questionable. 
103 Salinity ws not drawn. 
104 Large Bottle-CTD salinity difference. Water is well-mixed for 5 meters. No 
    analytical or sampling problems noted. Sample was analyzed after a much lower 
    sample, 0.11 conductivity, 2.3 salinity units. Should not have effected the 
    sample, but this is the only thing of any mentionable difference. CTD sensor 
    agreement is reasonable. Code salinity questionable. 
    

STATION 244.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
104-105 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 245.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 Oxygen: "Copepods" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 246.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 247.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 Oxygen: "Copepods" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 248.001 

101 DQ: "Could be a mis-trip. Again, poor bottle and CTD salinity and O2 
    agreement, apparent density inversions slight Si inversion, etc. Could be ok - 
    strong gradient." No analytical or sampling problems noted. Sample was analyzed 
    after a much lower sample, 0.15 conductivity, 2.8 salinity units. Should not 
    have effected the sample, but this is the only thing of any mentionable 
    difference. CTD sensor agreement is reasonable. Code salinity questionable. 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 PI:"Oxygen bottle-CTD low, but okay if bottle flushing was not ideal." 
    

STATION 249.001 

101 Oxygen value seems high; salinity and nutrients seem low; no obvious 
    problems; leave as is. Note that sta 238.001 at same isobath is almost identical 
    DQ: "A clear mis-trip - no brainer." Samples coded questionable. 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 250.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 Oxygen: "biota" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
106 DQ:"Poor CTD-bottle salinity agreement leading to density inversion. Mis-
    trip? Bad salt? CTD problem?" No analytical or sampling problems noted. Sample 
    was analyzed after a much higher sample, 0.18 conductivity, 3.5 salinity units. 
    Should not have effected the sample, but this is the only thing of any 
    mentionable difference. CTD sensor agreement is reasonable. 
    

STATION 251.001 

102-106 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 252.001 

102-107 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 PI:"Oxygen bottle-CTD differences are larger, but okay for flushing and 
    gradient." 
105 PI:"Oxygen bottle-CTD differences are larger, but okay for flushing and 
    gradient." 
    

STATION 253.001 

102-109 Salinity was not drawn. 
109 Oxygen: "biota" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 254.001 

101-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
108-113 Salinity was not drawn. 
111-112 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
113 Oxygen: "Red colored precipitate." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 255.001 

101-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 Oxygen: "copepod?" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 256.001 

102 DQ: "Could be a mistrip, note values for this samples as questionable." 
    Nutrients: "Checked charts, no problem noted." DQ: "Values acceptable" 
102-110 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 Oxygen: "ABORT, Overtitrate, cracked flask leak." Oxygen: sample lost; not 
    reported. 


STATION 257.001 

102-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 257.002 Cast 2 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 257.003 Cast 3 Pigments only, cast 01 samples dumped in error. 
    

STATION 258.001 

101 Sample Log: "Oxygen was drawn 3 times due to faulty MnCl2 dispenser (serial 
    no 1031033), which was finally replaced. DQ: "Could be a mis-trip, but more likely 
    that poor flushing leads to apparent density inversion." No analytical or 
    sampling problems noted. Sample was analyzed after a much lower sample, 0.11 
    conductivity, 2.3 salinity units. Should not have effected the sample, but this 
    is the only thing of any mentionable difference. CTD sensor agreement is 
    reasonable. Code salinity questionable. 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 Sample Log: "Bottle was closed before winch stopped at surface; no samples." 
    Only C13/N15 were drawn. 
    

STATION 259.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 260.001 

101 while oxygen and nutrients may be OK due to smaller gradients. Note bottle 
    salt 101 as questionable." 
101-102 DQ: "Density and PO4 inversions probably due to incomplete flushing." No 
    analytical problems noted. CTD sensors agreement is reasonable. Bottle and CTD 
    oxygen are also lower on 102. Not sure how this could be a flushing problem. 
    Pressure is 39-32db. 050406 DQ: "Tis is a case where a strong salinity gradient 
    causes bottle salt to be questionable, 
102-103,105 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 261.001 

101 DQ: "Bad bottle salinity != bad sigma theta." No analytical or sampling 
    problems noted. Sample was analyzed after a much lower sample, 0.15 
    conductivity, 3.0 salinity units. Should not have effected the sample, but this 
    is the only thing of any mentionable difference. CTD sensor agreement is 
    reasonable, 3 meter mixed area after gradient. Code salinity questionable. 
102 PI:"Unusual oxygen bottle-CTD is caused by bottle sample missing thin layer 
    seen in CTD. Nutrients and bottle oxygen agree, okay." 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 262.001 

101 DQ:"Bad bottle salinity." Do not know how this could be such a high value, 
    34.63. Last time this salinity bottle was used, the value was 32.xx, so it could 
    not have been a sampling issue. Code salinity bad. 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 263.001 

102-103,105 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 264.002 Cast 1 Console Log: "Cast 1 aborted at the bottom, thought there 
    was biological debris in the sensors. 
202-204 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 265.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 266.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 267.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 268.001 

102 DQ: "CTD O2 scan Spike?" CTD oxygen is reasonable, no spikes, "equilibrated" 
    close to down cast. 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 PI:"High oxygen bottle-CTD caused by thin low O2 layer (CTDO) missed by 
    bottle, okay." 
    

STATION 269.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 270.001 

101 Oxygen: "<1mm bubble" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 Oxygen: "biota" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
104 Oxygen: "biota" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 271.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. Cast 1 Sample Log: "Top of rosette has a lot of 
    biological matter." PI: "Data are acceptable." 
    

STATION 272.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 Oxygen: "<1mm bubble" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
105 DQ: "Poor agreement between CTD and bottle salinity-poor flushing? Check 
    data. Poor agreement between CTD and bottle O2 also. CTD spikes?" CTD sensors 
    agree well with one another. There is a spike in the data, but it was deleted in 
    the averaging. 
    

STATION 273.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 274.001 

101 Oxygen: "biota" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
106 Oxygen: "copepod" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 275.001 

102-107 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 Oxygen: "biota" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
106 Gradient, large difference between the two conductivity sensors. 
108 DQ:"Slight density inversion due to incomplete flushing and strong 
    gradient." 


STATION 276.001 

101 Oxygen: "<1mm bubble." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
102-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
107 Oxygen: "big copepod." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
108 Oxygen: "copepod." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
109 Samples were only drawn for C14/N15. 
    

STATION 277.001 

102 Oxygen: "Endpoint 1 division high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    
102-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 278.001 

102 Oxygen: "Endpoint 1 division high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
102-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
111 Oxygen: "copepod" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 279.001 

103-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
112 Oxygen: "biota" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 280.001 

101 Oxygen: "copepod" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
102-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
111 Oxygen: "Endpoint 1 division high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 281.001 

102-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
110 Oxygen: "Endpoint 4 divisions high." Diagnostic program used to adjust 
    endpoint. PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 282.002 Cast 1 Sample Log: "Cast 1 aborted, conductivity sensor 
    difference was 1.+. After in ocean flushing did not resolve this issue, the CTD 
    was brought on board to clean and force DI water through the sensors. This did 
    not resolve the problem. The MT reported that they found during the cleaning a 
    lot of sticky biological matter around the sensors. The CTD was taken to ˜50 
    meters, a yoyo was done and eventually the "bubble" came out. 
202-213 Salinity was not drawn. 
210,212 Pigments only. No other samples drawn. 
211 Oxygen: "Stir bar added first." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
213 Oxygen: "1-in long bug" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 283.001 

102-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 DQ: "PO4 data (peaks, etc) from this station should be double checked. Are 
    PO4 maxima and N** minima for bottles 103 and 107 real?" PO4 agrees with Station 
    67, 
107 depth not sampled at 67. Nutrients: "Rechecked po4 peak changed." 
    

STATION 284.001 

102-107 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 285.001 

102-104 Salinity was not drawn. 

STATION 286.001 

102-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
105 Oxygen: "Overtitrate and backtitrate, 0.71081. Bad Overtitrate, data bad." 
    coding as 4: Bad Measurement PI: "Oxygen looks okay and and fits nutrients." 
113 Sample for DOM only. 
    

STATION 287.001 

102-113 Salinity was not drawn. 
113-115 DQ: "Check CTD scan; Density inversion near surface ship effect?" No 
    problem seen in CTD sensors. 
114 Sample for DOM only. 
    

STATION 288.001 

102-110 Salinity was not drawn. 
111 Sample for DOM only. 
    

STATION 289.001 

102-105 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 290.001 

102-103 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 Sample for DOM only. 
    

STATION 291.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
106 DQ:"Check urea peak." Nutrient analyst: "Rechecked charts, no analytical 
    problem found." 
115-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
124 Sample Log: "Bottom cap began to leak when opened." Oxygen: "<1mm bubble" 
    PI: "Footnote oxygen questionable." 
    

STATION 292.001 

103-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
106 PI:"Urea high, also seen at Station 293." DQ: "Slightly high urea again. 
    Check peak: contaminated? No objective reason to question value unless peak is 
    funny." Nutrients: "Rechecked urea = real." 
    

STATION 293.001 

103-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
106 PI: "Urea high, also seen at Station 292." DQ: "High urea peak again. Same ˜ 
    depth as at station 292, so it could be real, but was this bottle changed or 
    worked on prior to Station 291?" Nutrients: "Rechecked urea = real." 
    

STATION 294.001 

103-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 Oxygen: "Endpoint 1 division high." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
105 DQ:"Check NO3 peaks, etc. NO3 looks low, NH4 looks high, no objective reason 
    to question data." Nutrients: "Rechecked no3, nh4 = real." 
    

STATION 295.001 

102-112 Salinity was not drawn. 
    
    

STATION 296.001 

101 PI: "Urea high, 0.90, certainly an error. Footnote urea bad." DQ: "Check 
    urea data." Nutrient analyst: "Rechecked charts, no analytical problem found." 
    The data did not fit the station profile or adjacent station comparisons. The 
    data could be acceptable, but are open to interpretation. Coded Questionable. 
102-112 Salinity was not drawn. 
107 DQ:"Check CTD O2 scans." CTD O2 did "change' during the bottle trip, but 
    there are no spikes in the O2 trace and during the equilibration the oxygen 
    values became higher. 
    

STATION 297.001 

102-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 298.001 

102-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
112 PI: "Urea high, 0.26, likely an error. Footnote urea questionable." 
    Nutrients: "Rechecked urea = real." DQ: "Urea value acceptable" 
    

STATION 299.001 

103-112 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 300.001 

103-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 301.001 

103-112 Salinity was not drawn. 
104-105 Sample Log: "Bottle 4 was repaired prior to cast. Bottle 5 fired to 
    ensure sample at depth in the event that 4 failed to close." 
105 See 104-105 comment. No samples drawn from this bottle. 
111 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
    

STATION 302.001 

103-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 303.001 

103-110 Salinity was not drawn. Cast 1 Repeat of Station 53. DQ: "I am guessing 
    that this station was taken by the 'bad watch'." The bottom two salinities do 
    have poor agreement with the CTD. However, there does not seem to be consistent 
    problem for one watch vs. the other. 
    

STATION 304.001 

103-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 305.001 

102-105,107 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 PI: "Urea, 0.26, high, may be okay, or questionable?" Nutrients: "Rechecked 
    urea = real." 
106 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." Cast 1 Repeat of Station 
    55. The secondary conductivity was offset from the primary. Footnote secondary 
    conductivity as bad so it won't come out in the difference reports. 
    

STATION 306.001 

102-103,105 Salinity was not drawn. 
103 SampleLog: "Small leak on bottom end cap. Lots of biological matter on 
    rosette, suspect caught in cap." PI: "Data are acceptable." 


STATION 307.001 

101-102 Salinity not drawn. 
103-105 See sample log comment, footnote CTD temp, sal and oxygen bad. Data from 
    secondary sensors. 
    

STATION 308.001 

103 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 310.002 

202-203 Salinity was not drawn. 
204-205 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. Cast 2 Cast 1, aborted due to 
    biological fouling. 
    

STATION 311.001 

103-105 Use secondary conductivity sensor data for entire cast for CTD salinity 
    and CTD oxygen bad. This could be another occurrence of biological fouling. 
104 PI:"CTD salinity low; unstable. Footnote CTD salinity/conductivity 
    questionable." 
    

STATION 312.001 

101-117 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
106-116 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 313.002 

201-213 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
202-212 Salinity was not drawn. 
210 DQ: "Poor agreement between CTD and bottle O2." There is an oxygen minimum 
    seen in both down and up cast. No problem seen in CTD oxygen. Bottle oxygen 
    could be a little high as compared with Stations 311-315. No analytical problems 
    noted. Cast 2 Cast 1 aborted due to biological fouling. 
    

STATION 314.001 

106-116 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 315.001 

101-120 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
107-116 Salinity was not drawn. 
111 Oxygen: "copepod" PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
117-118 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
    

STATION 316.001 

101-121 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
109-120 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 317.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
111-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
119 PI:"Large oxygen bottle-CTD, okay for gradient." 
123-124 Bottles appear to have bottom cap leaks after the vents are opened. PI: 
    "Oxygens are acceptable." 
    

STATION 318.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
111-123 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 319.001 

103 Nosamples were drawn. 
104-112 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 320.001 

101-114 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
102 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated." PI: "Oxygen is 
    acceptable." 
103-108 Salinity was not drawn. 
109-110 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
111-113 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 321.001 

103-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 322.001 

102-110 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 323.001 

102-110 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 324.001 

101-112 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
102-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
104 Sample Log: "Slow leak, bottom end cap, reseated still leaking." PI: "Oxygen 
    is acceptable." 
    

STATION 325.001 

101-114 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
103 Oxygen: "Sample was overtitrated and backtitrated. Last 5 division high?, 
    noisy." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
103-109 Salinity was not drawn. 
110-111 Samples were only drawn for C13/N15. 
112-113 Salinity was not drawn. 
113 SampleLog: "Upper cap leak." PI: "Oxygen is acceptable." 
    

STATION 326.001 

101-112 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
103-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 327.001 

101-112 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
103-111 Salinity was not drawn. 
    

STATION 328.001 

101-124 No PAR sensor, sampling too deep for instrument depth rating. 
108-124 Salinity was not drawn. 
115 Sample Log: "Leak on top cap." Oxygen appears slightly low, but acceptable. 
    Leave as is. 
119-124 DQ: "CTD O2 data looks weird." Oxygen sensor appears to have a poor to 
    no response at about 90 meters on the up cast. Code CTD oxygen bad. Sensor could 
    have a poor response from about 160 meters up. The profile seems to be close to 
    the down cast, but deviates by strange amounts. 
121 Oxygen: "crash 21(1168) lost" Oxygen: lost sample due to computer crash. 
122 PI: "Large oxygen bottle-CTD. Bottle oxygen does not match gradient or 
    possible flushing problem. But, CTD oxygen trace does show the oxygen maximum. 
    Oxygen is acceptable." 




ADDENDUM

Additional Notes on Bottle Data and CTD Oxygen Sensor Data 
(L.A. Codispoti)
23 May 2005

At the conclusion of this cruise, the SBI Service Team prepared a cruise report 
detailing the methods and equipment employed, data formats, etc. that are 
included with the metadata from this cruise. Further editing of the data 
continued at Scripps and then the data were sent to L.A. Codispoti for a final 
review of the bottle salinity, nutrient and dissolved oxygen data. Specific 
comments on individual measurements arising from LAC's inspection and from data 
editing during the cruise and by the staff at Scripp's Ocean Data Facility have 
been incorporated as quality control flags in the data tables following a WOCE 
format described in the Service Team's cruise report.  LAC's review suggests 
that the following additional comments may be an aid to some users. 

1.  In general, the data from this cruise appear to be of high quality, but 
    note that the dissolved oxygen data from the CTD's oxygen sensor are 
    uncalibrated and should only be employed for qualitative purposes, such as 
    inferring the shape of oxygen gradients. 
    
2.  A comparison of bottle and CTD salinity data showed generally excellent 
    agreement, but there was a tendency for the bottom bottle salinity to be 
    slightly less than the CTD salinity, and for the rest of the bottle salinities 
    to be slightly higher.  These results suggest insufficient flushing of the CTD's 
    sample bottles in some cases.  In the upper ~200m salinities tend to increase 
    strongly with depth, so a bottom bottle "contaminated" by waters from above the 
    sampling depth would have salinities less than indicated by the CTD and vice 
    versa for the subsequent bottles that would be tripped as the cast ascended.  In 
    general the apparent  depth offsets caused by incomplete flushing were small, 
    and values > 5 m are rare, but the user interested in fine differences with 
    depth should compare bottle and CTD salts to assess the possibility of 
    incomplete bottle flushing.   
    
3.  Normally, our protocols call for storing nutrients samples (in the dark  
    and in a refrigerator) for no longer than 12 hrs before the samples are run, but 
    there was only one nutrient analyst on this cruise, so many samples were stored 
    for more than 12 hours before being run.  The data do not display, any obvious 
    problems arising from the undesirably long storage periods. 
    
4.  We do not make explicit corrections for "carryover" in our nutrient 
    analyses.  In a typical AutoAnalyzer system, sample to sample carryover is ~ 1-
    2% of the concentration difference between samples.  We minimize this effect by 
    running samples in order of increasing depth such that concentration differences 
    between samples are minimized.  We also run initial surface samples twice or run 
    a low nutrient sea water sample ahead of the surface sample since these samples 
    generally follow standard peaks or a high nutrient value from a preceding cast. 
    
5.  The ammonium and urea analyses are not described in WOCE/JGOFS protocols, 
    and they are the least reliable of our nutrient determinations. In addition, 
    they are the analyses most likely to be effected by differences between sample 
    salinities and the salinity of our standard matrix (S ~30) and by storage.  One 
    cannot assign, a precise uncertainty, to these data, over the complete sampling, 
    storage and analysis cycle, but a practical suggestion would be that a robust 
    difference in values for these variables is ~ 0.25 µM.  
    
6.  Comments or questions about these data can be addressed to: 
    James H. Swift :    jswift@ucsd.edu 
    Louis A. Codispoti: codispoti@hpl.umces.edu 
    



APPENDIX B: Raytheon Polar Service Corporation (RPSC)
RPSC Cruise Support
Cruise NBP 03-4A
5 July - 20 August 2003


General 

Raytheon Polar Services Company (RPSC) is contracted by the National Science 
Foundation (NSF) to provide logistical and technical support and infrastructure 
for the United States Antarctic Program (USAP).  Through this mandate, RPSC 
charters the RVIB Nathaniel B. Palmer (NBP) from Edison Chouest Offshore, Inc. 
(ECO).  RPSC and ECO work together to provide a safe, comfortable, and 
productive living and working environment for NSF-funded science projects.  An 
unusual series of events prevented the US and Canadian Coast Guards from 
providing a platform for the 2003 SBI Survey cruise, while at the same time the 
NBP had a long open period in her schedule because contractually required major 
upgrades were completed, tested, and accepted ahead of schedule. 

The Nathaniel B. Palmer completed a maintenance period in Lyttelton, New Zealand 
at the end of the 2002-03 austral summer season, then left port on 23 May 2003 
to transit north to support the SBI program.  Scientific cargo was onloaded 
during a port call in Honolulu, Hawaii from 11 to 24 June 2003.  During this 
time, Rob Palomares representing the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, 
Shipboard Technical Support, Oceanographic Data Facility (SIO/STS/ODF) visited 
the ship to account for all cargo items and to inspect several on-board systems.  
The vessel continued on to Dutch Harbor, Alaska with a 2 July 2003 arrival.  
Some remaining cargo items plus fuel and fresh food were onloaded to the NBP, 
scientists embarked onto the ship, and laboratory setup began.  The ship sailed 
from Dutch Harbor on 5 July 2003 to begin cruise NBP 03-4A. 

Prior to beginning the primary survey portion of the cruise, the NBP arrived 
offshore of Nome, Alaska on 8 July 2003 where a helicopter and crew joined our 
complement.  During the planning process, NSF identified the need for a 
helicopter to 1.) allow for ice reconnaissance, 2.) assist in passenger offload 
at Barrow, Alaska at the conclusion of the cruise, and 3.) to support aerial 
surveys of marine mammals for a funded component of the SBI project.  Working 
through the US Dept. of the Interior's Office of Aircraft Services (OAS), NSF 
contracted with Prism Helicopters, Inc. for such support.  RPSC made 
arrangements for shipboard support of the aircraft crew including aviation grade 
fuel and training of passengers in safety and operational matters related to the 
helicopter.  RPSC was delegated to oversee Prism's contract, including properly 
accounting for flight hours and aircraft availability.  In practice, ice 
conditions did not warrant reconnaissance flights.  Two flights were undertaken 
to transfer community participants to/from shore, exchange of scientific crews 
and cargo in Barrow required several hours of flight time, while the remainder 
of the flights were for marine mammal surveys.  At total of 51.2 hours of flight 
time were completed in association with this cruise (not counting offload of 
passengers at Barrow). 

RPSC maintains and logs data from several underway systems including: ship's 
position, heading, speed, pitch and roll, multibeam sonar, meteorology (air 
temperature and humidity, wind speed and direction, barometric pressure), 
upward-looking radiometers (PSP, PIR, PAR), and surface seawater properties 
(temperature, salinity, transmissivity, fluorometry).  For this cruise, RPSC 
also provided a full CTD system including 24 -10 liter niskin bottles and 
rosette, SeaBird 911 CTD fish, primary and secondary temperature, salinity, and 
dissolved oxygen sensors (all from SeaBird), PAR sensor, Chelsea and Wet Labs 
fluorometers, and a Wet Labs transmissometer.  These were supplemented by a 
lowered ADCP, Simrad altimeter, and Haardt fluorometer provided by the 
scientists.  In addition, RPSC maintains several NSF-funded science of 
opportunity systems, described below, which are included in the end of cruise 
data report provided to the science party.  These systems are standardized 
throughout the USAP but can be reconfigured at the science party's request.  The 
purpose of this underway data is to provide science groups with a set of 
standard measurements for use in interpreting other data specific to the 
project. 

A list of specific makes and models of sensors used during this cruise are 
included in the end of cruise data report.  Pre- and post-cruise sensor 
calibrations will be provided as available. 

Other support provided by RPSC includes the following: 

• Computer services including maintenance of the shipboard LAN, printer 
  services, daily backups, disk space management, logging of the underway data 
  described above, end of cruise data distribution of underway data, and email 
  support for all cruise participants including the TEA (Teacher Experiencing 
  the Arctic). 
• Provision of general laboratory equipment such as dissecting microscopes 
  and camera system, autosal salinometer, fume hoods, filtration rigs with 
  pumps, and other miscellaneous laboratory materials. 
• Deployment and recovery of the CTD rosette and the bongo nets provided by 
  the scientists. 
• Collection, documentation, and disposal of all laboratory-generated 
  hazardous waste according the USAP protocols. 
• Overseeing the contract for helicopter support from Prism Helicopters, 
  Inc. as negotiated by the US Department of the Interior's Office of Aircraft 
  Services and the NSF. 
• Operation of the TeraScan remote-sensing system and coordination of 
  Radarsat SAR imagery from the National Ice Center via an agreement between the 
  NSF and the Canadian Space Agency. 


Problems 

All systems were generally problem-free throughout cruise NBP 03-4A, though 
there were minor items of note, some related to water depth.   

First, the Simrad EM120 multibeam sonar system collected much more data than is 
normally the case, leading to difficulties in archiving (i.e. data filled up 
backup tapes).  This is because the ping rate is inversely proportional to water 
depth and a large portion of this cruise occurred in quite shallow water (<100 
meters).  The system does not allow the ping rate to be manually changed.  
Therefore, multibeam data was subdivided into smaller sections to permit 
recording on several tapes without truncating the data.  No data was lost or 
compromised because of this, but it was a minor annoyance. 

Secondly, the hull-mounted ADCP system sometimes had difficulty in calculating 
the ship's speed through the water because it was hearing acoustic reflections 
from the bottom and/or multiple reflections from the surface and bottom.  
Occasionally, the ship's speed as calculated by GPS differed from that 
calculated by the ADCP by more than 5 knots.  While one system outputs speed 
over ground and the other gives speed through the water, this difference was 
much greater than local oceanic currents or ship's drift due to wind.  This is a 
recognized problem in data integrity, but there is no easy solution. 
The EM120 multibeam crashed twice.  The first time was prior to reaching Nome 
and prior to the start of science data collection.  On 7 August 2003, it was 
down for 41 minutes.  The cause of this crash is unknown. 

The computer that logs underway data crashed twice.  On 3 August 2003, 10 
minutes of data were lost.  On 6 August 2003, 20 minutes of data were lost.  
RPSC is continuing to investigate the cause of such instabilities and to remedy 
the situation. 

The slip ring on the CTD winch was swapped out with a spare approximately midway 
through the cruise because an unacceptable number of modulo errors were observed 
on casts.  The CTD fish suffered an electrical short of unknown cause, also 
approximately midway through the cruise.  A spare unit was installed and the 
damaged fish will be returned to the manufacturer for repair.  During this short 
interruption in the survey, the electromechanical CTD cable was reterminated.  
No further problems were encountered after these minor repairs. 


Science of Opportunity 

There are several permanently installed science of opportunity systems on board 
the NBP that were operated during this cruise.  All data collected from these 
systems will be included in the cruise-end data report provided to the science 
party.  RPSC personnel monitored these systems as part of their normal duties. 

Gravity Meter: This system requires very little maintenance and experienced no 
problems during cruise NBP 03-4A.  As part of the normal upkeep of the 
gravimeter, a gravity tie was performed in Dutch Harbor prior to the cruise and 
another will be done immediately afterward.  The gravimeter occupies a small 
room in the Aft Dry Lab and is part of the NSF equipment pool.  There is no PI 
responsible for data collection. 

Hull-mounted ADCP: This system is not science of opportunity in the purest sense 
of the term, since it is an important component of the SBI program and it was 
slightly reconfigured to SBI's specifications.  Dr. Eric Firing of the 
University of Hawaii is the cognizant PI for this program, and questions about 
data quality, format, etc. can be directed to him at efiring@hawaii.edu or 808-
956-7894.  

pCO2: This system measures the concentration of carbon dioxide dissolved in the 
surface seawater, as a tool for determining the overall carbon exchange between 
the ocean and atmosphere.  Measurements are calibrated against standard gasses 
provided by Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.  The PI in charge of this system 
is Dr. Colm Sweeney (csweeney@splash.princeton.edu, 609-258-6619, 609-258-2850 
(fax)), assisted by Tim Newberger (tnewberg@ldeo.columbia.edu, 845-365-8790).     





APPENDIX C:  DATA REPORT
United States Antarctic Program RVIB Nathaniel B. Palmer Raytheon Polar Services 
Data Report Prepared by: Jim Waters and Kathleen Gavahan


INTRODUCTION 

The NBP data acquisition systems continuously log data from the instruments used 
during the cruise. This document describes: 

• The structure and organization of the data on the distribution media. 
• The format and contents of the data strings. 
• Formulas for calculating values. 
• Information about the specific instruments in use during the cruise. 
• A log of acquisition problems and events during the cruise that may affect the 
  data. 
• Scanned calibration sheets for the instruments in use during the cruise. 

The data is distributed on a DVD-ROM (DVD-R) written in ISO9660 level-1 format. 
It is readable by virtually every computing platform. 

All the data have been compressed using Unix "gzip," identifiable by the ".gz" 
extension. It has been copied to the distribution media in the Unix tar archive 
format, ".tar" extension. Tools are available on all platforms for decompressing 
and de-archiving these formats: On Macintosh, use Stuffit Expander with 
DropStuff. On Windows operating systems use WinZip. 

MultiBeam and BathyW data, if collected, are distributed separately. 

IMPORTANT: Read the last section, "Acquisition Problems and Events," for 
important information that may affect the processing of this data. 

Raytheon Polar Services 1 United States Antarctic Program 


DISTRIBUTION CONTENTS AT A GLANCE 

DVD Contents 

            304A.trk                      rvdas/uw/   304Abat.tar
            304A.mgd                                  304Aeng.tar
            304A.gmt                                  304Agrv.tar
            304Adata.doc                              304Ambdp.tar
            304Acoef.txt                              304Amet.tar
            b304Atrk.ps                               304Apco2.tar
            304Atrk.ps                                304Asim.tar
            s304Atrk.ps                               304Asvp.tar
                                                      304Atsg.tar
                           
            process/      304Ajgof.tar    adcp/       304Aadcp.tar
                          304AMGD.tar            
                          304Apco2.ta     ocean/      304Actd.tar
                          304Aproc.tarr               304Axbt.tar
                          304Aqcps.ta            
                          304Atsg.tar     imagery/    Isobar.tarr
                                                      ice.tar
            rvdas/nav/    304Aadcp.tar                seaice.tar
                          304Aadu.tar                 wx.tar
                          304Agyr.tar           
                          304Apcod.tar    TEAjnl/     TEAjnl.tar
                          304Aseap.tar           


Extracting Data 

The Unix tar command has many options. It is often useful to know exactly how an 
archive was produced when expanding its contents. All archives were created 
using the command, 

   tar cvf  archive_filename files_to_archive 


To create a list of the files in the archive, use the Unix command, 

   tar tvf archive_filename > contents.list 

where contents.list is the name of the file to create 


To extract the files from the archive: 

   tar xvf archive_filename file(s)_to_extract 


Gzipped files will have a ".gz" extension on the filename. These files can be 
decompressed after de-archiving, using the Unix command, 

   gunzip filename.gz 



DISTRIBUTION CONTENTS 

CRUISE INFORMATION 

Cruise Track 

The distribution DVD includes a GMT cruise track file (304A.trk). It contains 
the longitude and latitude at one-minute intervals extracted from the 304A.gmt 
file. 

Three PostScript cruise track files have been produced and placed in the / 
directory. 304Atrk.ps is standard US Letter sized (8.5" x 11"). s304Atrk.ps is 
standard US Letter sized (8.5 x 11") showing the main CTD survey area. 
b304Atrk.ps is archE size. 

Satellite Images 

Satellite Images processed for this cruise can be found in the directory, 
/imagery. 

Teacher Experiencing Antarctica Journal 

The journal created by the Teacher Experiencing Antarctica can be found in the 
directory /TEAjnl. 

NBP DATA PRODUCTS 

Two datasets are created on each cruise: JGOFS and MGD77. 

JGOFS 

The JGOFS data set can be found on the distribution media in the file 
/process/304Ajgof.tar. The archive contains a single file produced each day 
named jgDDD.dat.gz where DDD is the year-day the data was acquired. The ".gz" 
extension indicates that the individual files are compressed before archiving. 
The daily file consists of 22 columnar fields in text format described in the 
table below. The JGOFS data set is obtained primarily by applying calibrations 
to raw data and decimating to whole minute intervals. Several fields are derived 
measurements from more than a single raw input. For example, Course Made Good 
(CMG) and Speed Over Ground (SOG) are calculated from gyro and GPS. During the 
cruise, the JGOFS data set produces the daily data plots. Note: Null, unused, or 
unknown fields are indicated as "NAN" or as 9999 in the JGOFS data. 

Field  Data                                                   Units 
-----  -----------------------------------------------------  ----------------------
01     GMT date                                               dd/mm/yy 
02     GMT time                                               hh:mm:ss 
03     NGL latitude (negative is South)                       tt.tttt 
04     NGL longitude (negative is West)                       ggg.gggg 
05     Speed over ground                                      Knots 
06     GPS HDOP                                               -
07     Gyro Heading                                           Degrees (azimuth) 
08     Course made good                                       Degrees (azimuth) 
09     Mast PAR                                               µEinsteins/meters2 sec 
10     Sea surface temperature                                °C 
11     Sea surface conductivity                               siemens/meter 
12     Sea surface salinity                                   PSU 
13     Sea depth (uncorrected, calc. sw sound vel. 1500 m/s)  meters 
14     True wind speed (port windbird)                        meters/sec 
15     True wind direction (port windbird)                    degrees (azimuth) 
16     Ambient air temperature                                °C 
17     Relative humidity                                      % 
18     Barometric pressure                                    mBars 
19     Sea surface fluorometry                                volts (0-5 FSO) 
20     Not used                                               -
21     PSP                                                    W/m2 
22     PIR                                                    W/m2 



MGD77 

The MGD77 data set is contained in a single file for the entire cruise. It can 
be found in the top level of the distribution data structure as 304A.mgd. Also 
at the root level, 304A.gmt is the output of the mgd77togmt utility using 
304A.mgd as input. The 304A.gmt file can be used by GMT (Generic Mapping Tool) 
plotting software. 

The data used to produce the 304A.mgd file can be found on the distribution 
media in the file / process/304AMGD.tar. The data files in the archive contain a 
day's data and follow the naming convention Dddd.fnl.gz, where ddd is the year-
day. These files follow a space-delimited columnar format that may be more 
accessible for some purposes. They contain data at one-second intervals rather 
than one minute and are individually "gzipped" to save space. Below is a 
detailed description of the MGD77 data set format. The other files in the 
archive contain interim processing files and are included to simplify possible 
reprocessing of the data using the RVDAS NBP processing scripts. 

All decimal points are implied. Leading zeros and blanks are equivalent. Unknown 
or unused fields are filled with 9's. All "corrections", such as time zone, 
diurnal magnetics, and EOTVOS, are understood to be added. 

Col      Len  Type  Contents                      Description, Possible Values, Notes 
-------  ---  ----  ----------------------------  ------------------------------------------- 
1        1    Int   Data record type              Set to "5" for data record 
2-9      8    char  Survey identifier   
10-12    3    int   Time zone correction          Corrects time (in characters 13-
                                                  27) to GMT when added; 0 = GMT 
13-16    4    int   Year  4 digit year 
17-18    2    int   Month  2 digit month 
19-20    2    int   Day   
21-22    2    int   Hour   
23-27    5    real  Minutes x 1000   
28-35    8    real  Latitude x 100000             + = North 
                                                  - = South. (-9000000 to 9000000) 
36-44    9    real  Longitude x 100000            + = East 
                                                  - = West. (-18000000 to 18000000) 
45       1    int   Position type code            1=Observed fix 
                                                  3=Interpolated 
                                                  9=Unspecified 
46-51    6    real  Bathymetry, 2-way             In 10,000th of seconds. Corrected 
                    travel time                   for transducer depth and
                                                  other such corrections 
52-57    6    real  Bathymetry, corrected depth   In tenths of meters. 
58-59    2    int   Bathymetric correction code   This code details the procedure 
                                                  used for determining the sound velocity 
                                                  correction to depth.   
60       1    int   Bathymetric type code         1 = Observed 
                                                  3 = Interpolated (Header Seq. 12) 
                                                  9 = Unspecified 
61-66    6    real  Magnetics total field,        In tenths of nanoteslas 
                    1ST sensor(gammas) 
67-72    6    real  Magnetics total field,        In tenths of nanoteslas 
                    2ND sensor                    (gammas), for trailing sensor 
73-78    6    real  Magnetics residual field      In tenths of nanoteslas (gammas). The 
                                                  reference field used is in Header Seq. 13.   
79       1    int   Sensor for residual field     1 = 1st or leading sensor 
                                                  2 = 2nd or trailing sensor 
                                                  9 = Unspecified 
80-84    5    real  Magnetics diurnal correction  In tenths of nanoteslas (gammas). 
                                                  (In nanoteslas) if 9-filled (i.e., set 
                                                  to "+9999"), total and residual fields 
                                                  are assumed to be uncorrected; if used, 
                                                  total and residuals are assumed 
                                                  to have been already corrected. 
85-90    6    F6.0  Depth or altitude of          (In meters) 
                    magnetics sensor              + = Below sea level 
                                                  3 = Above sea level 
91-97    7    real  Observed gravity              In 10th of mgals. Corrected for Eotvos, 
                                                  drift, tares 
98-103   6    real  EOTVOS correction             In tenths of mgals. 
                                                  E = 7.5 V cos phi sin alpha + 0.0042 V*V 
104-108  5    real  Free-air anomaly              In tenths of milligals G = observed G 
                                                  = theoretical 
109-113  5    char  Seismic line number           Cross-reference for seismic data 
114-119  6    char  Seismic shot-point number   
120      1    int   Quality code for navigation   5=Suspected, by the originating institution 
                                                  6=Suspected, by the data center 
                                                  9=No identifiable problem found 


SCIENCE OF OPPORTUNITY 

ADCP 

The shipboard ADCP system measures currents in the depth range from about 30 to 
300 m --in good weather. In bad weather or in ice, the range is less, and 
sometimes no valid measurements are made. It is the USAP-funded project of Eric 
Firing (University of Hawaii) and Teri Chereskin (Scripps Institution of 
Oceanography). ADCP data collection occurs on the both LMG and the NBP for the 
benefit of the scientists on individual cruises, and for the long-term goal of 
building a climatology of current structure in the Southern Ocean. 

The ADCP data set collected during this cruise has been placed on the 
distribution media in the archive /adcp/304Aadcp.tar. The archive consists of a 
single file for each day of data collection. The files are named PINGDATA.xxx 
where xxx is a day number that is NOT a year-day. For the date, use the file's 
creation date. 


Some ADCP data is also transmitted to RVDAS. East and north vectors for ship's 
speed relative to the reference layer and ship's heading are archived 
as304Aadcp.tarin the directory, / rvdas/nav. 


PCO2 

The NBP carries Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory's (LDEO) pCO2 system and RPSC 
staff maintain it. Data is sent to LDEO at the end of each cruise. The pCO2 data 
is transmitted and archived on RVDAS. You will find it in a file 
namednpb304Apco2.tarin the rvdas/uw directory, which contains the pCO2 
instrument's data merged with GPS, meteorological and other oceanographic 
measurements. For more information contact Colm Sweeney 
(csweeney@ldeo.columbia.edu).. 


CRUISE SCIENCE 

CTD 

The ctd data have been placed in the tar file ocean/304Actd.tar. Raw data are 
contained in the archive's ctd/raw directory. 


XBT 

During the cruise Expendable Bathythermographs were used to obtain water column 
temperature profiles. These were used to adjust the sound velocity profile for 
the SeaBeam system. The data files from these launches are included as 
304Axbt.tar in the /ocean directory. 


RVDAS 

The Research Vessel Data Acquisition System (RVDAS) was developed at Lamont-
Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University and has been in use on its 
research ship for many years. It has been adapted for use on the USAP research 
vessels. 

Daily data processing of the RVDAS (Research Vessel Data Acquisition System) 
data is performed to convert values into useable units and as a check of the 
proper operation of the DAS. Both raw and processed data sets from RVDAS are 
included in the data distribution. The tables below provide detailed information 
on the data. Be sure to read the "Significant Acquisition Events" section for 
important information about data acquisition during this cruise. 


SENSORS AND INSTRUMENTS 

RVDAS data is divided into two general categories, underway and navigation. They 
can be found on the distribution media as archives under the top level rvdas 
directory: /rvdas/uw, and / rvdas/nav. Each instrument or sensor produces a data 
file named with its channel ID. Each data file is gzipped to save space on the 
distribution media. Not all data types are collected every day or on every 
cruise. 


The naming convention for data files produced by the sensors and instruments is 
         NBP[CruiseID][ChannelID].dDDD 
Example: NBP0107.met1.d317 

• The CruiseID is the numeric name of the cruise, in this case, 304A. 
• The Channel ID is a 4-character code representing the system being logged. An 
  example is "met1," the designation for meteorology. 
• DDD is the day of year the data was collected. 


UNDERWAY SENSORS 

Meteorology and Radiometry 

Measurement        Channel ID  Collect. Status  Rate     Instrument 
-----------------  ----------  ---------------  -------  --------------------
Air Temperature       met1       continuous     1 sec    R. M. Young 41372LC 
Relative Humidity     met1       continuous     1 sec    
Wind Speed/Direction  met1       continuous     1 sec    R.M. Young 5106 
Barometer             met1       continuous     1 sec    R.M. Young 61201 
PIR (LW radiation)    met1       continuous     1 sec    Eppley PIR 
PSP (SW radiation)    met1       continuous     1 sec    Eppley PSP 
PAR                   met1       continuous     1 sec    BSI QSR-240 


Geophysics 

Measurement        Channel ID  Collect. Status  Rate     Instrument 
-----------------  ----------  ---------------  -------  --------------------
Gravimeter            grv1       continuous     10 sec*  LaCoste & Romberg 
Bathymetry            bat1       Continuous     Varies   ODEC Bathy 2000 
Bathymetry            sim1     depth < 2500 m   Varies   Simrad EK500 Sonar 
*Data is output every second buuut it only changes every 10 seconds. 


Oceanography 

Measurement        Channel ID  Collect. Status  Rate     Instrument 
-----------------  ----------  ---------------  -------  --------------------
Conductivity          tsg1       continuous     3 sec    SeaBird 21 
Salinity              Tsg1       continuous     3 sec    Calc. from pri. temp 
Sea Surface Temp      tsg1       continuous     3 sec    SeaBird 3-01/S 
Fluorometry          flrtsg1     continuous     3 sec    Turner 10-AU-005 
Transmissometry       tsg1       continuous     3 sec    WET Lab C-Star 
pCO2                  pco2       continuous     150 sec  (LDEO) 
ADCP                  adcp       continuous     varies   RD Instruments 


NAVIGATIONAL INSTRUMENTS 

Measurement        Channel ID  Collect. Status  Rate      Instrument 
-----------------  ----------  ---------------  -------  --------------------
Attitude GPS          adu1       continuous     1 sec     Ashtech ADU2 
P-Code GPS            PCOD       continuous     1 sec     Trimble 20636-00SM 
Gyro                  gyr1       continuous     0.2 sec   Yokogawa Gyro 


DATA 

Data are received from the RVDAS system via RS-232 serial connections. A time 
tag is added at the beginning of each line of data in the form, 

yy+dd:hh:mm:ss.sss [data stream from instrument]

where 

yy     = two-digit year 
ddd    = day of year 
hh     = 2 digit hour of the day 
mm     = 2 digit minute 
ss.sss = seconds 

All times are reported in UTC. 

The delimiters that separate fields in the raw data files are often spaces and 
commas but can be other characters such as : = @. Occasionally no delimiter is 
present. Care should be taken when reprocessing the data that the field's 
separations are clearly understood. 

In the sections below a sample data string is shown, followed by a table that 
lists the data contained in the string. 


UNDERWAY DATA 

Meteorology (met1) 

      01+322:00:03:27.306 04.5 292 010 05.7 294 010 0959.6 000.2 093 -000.1537
                               0001.0886 0012.8248


Field     Data                                           Units 
   1      RVDAS time tag       
   2      Port anemometer speed (relative)               m/s 
   3      Port anemometer direction (relative)           deg 
   4      Port anemometer standard deviation             deg       
   5      Starboard anemometer speed (relative)          m/s 
   6      Starboard anemometer direction (relative)      deg 
   7      Starboard anemometer standard deviation        deg       
   8      Barometer                                      mBar 
   9      Air temperature                                °C 
  10      Relative humidity                              % 
  11      PSP (short wave radiation)*                    mV 
  12      PIR (long wave radiation)*                     mV 
  13      PAR (photosynthetically available radiation)*  mV 
  *See page 17 for calculations. 


Gravimeter (grv1) 

99+099:00:18:19.775 your_line#1999 99 01818 9735.4 

Field  Data                 Conversion                      Units 
-----  -------------------  ------------------------------  -----
  1    RVDAS time tag 
  2    Text string 
  3    Gravity device date  yyyydddhhmmss 
  4    Gravity count        mgal = count x 1.0047 + offset  count 


Bathy 2000 (bat1) 

00+019:23:59:53.901 ;I04485.3ME -23.0, I00000.0,-99.9,0000@01/11/00, 23:59:52.08 
PW2 PF1 SF1 PL3 MO4 SB3 PO0 TX1 TR: GM5 1500 06.7 -72.1 


Field  Data                           Format/Possible Values          Units 
-----  -----------------------------  ------------------------------  ------
   1   RVDAS time tag 
   2   Flagged low frequency chn.     ;FDDDDD.Dun where F = flag      meters
       depth w/ units                 (Vfor valid, I for invalid),
                                      D=depth, un = units  
   3   Low Frequency echo strength    EEE.EE    dB 
   4   Flagged high freq. chn. depth  not used 
   5   High frequency echo strength   not used 
   6   Signed heave data              SHHHH                           cm 
   7   Date                           mm/dd/yy 
   8   Time                           hh:mm:ss 
   9   Transmit pulse window type     PW1=Rectangular 
                                      PW2=Hamming 
                                      PW3=Cosine 
                                      PW4=Blackman 
  10    Primary transmit frequency    PF1=3.5 kHz PF2=12.0 kHz        kHz 
  11    Parametric mode secondary     SF1=3.5 kHz SF2=12.0 kHz        kHz 
        frequency
  12    Pulse length                  PL1=200usec 
                                      PL2=500usec 
                                      PL3=1msec 
                                      PL4=2msec 
                                      PL5=5msec 
                                      PL6=10msec 
                                      PL7=25msec 
                                      If transmit mode is FM: 
                                      PL1=25msec 
                                      PL2=50msec 
                                      PL3=100msec 
  13    Operating mode                MO1=CW parametric 
                                      MO2=CW 
                                      MO3=FM parametric 
                                      MO4=FM 
  14    Frequency sweep bandwidth     SB1=1 kHz                       kHz
                                      SB2=2 kHz 
                                      SB3=5 kHz 
  15    Power level                   PO1 = 0dB 
                                      PO2 = -6dB 
                                      PO3 = -12dB 
                                      PO4 = -18dB 
                                      PO5 = -24dB 
                                      PO6 = -30dB 
                                      PO6 = -30 dB 
                                      PO7 = -36dB 
                                      PO8 = -42dB 
  16    Transmit mode                 TX1=single ping active 
                                      TX2=pinger listen 
                                      TX3=multipinging TR  
                                      TX4=multipinging TR 
                                      TX5=multipinging TTRR 
                                      TX6=multipinging TTTTRRRR 
                                      TX7=multipinging TTTTTRRRRR 
  17    Transmit Rate                 TR3 = 4Hz                       Hz 
                                      TR4 = 2Hz 
                                      TR5 = 1Hz 
                                      TR6 = .5Hz 
                                      TR7 = .33Hz 
                                      TR8 = .25Hz 
                                      TR9 = .20Hz 
                                      TR: = .10Hz 
                                      TR; = .05Hz 
  18    System gain mode              GM0=hydrographic AGC 
                                      GM1 to GM9=hydrographic 
                                        +3db to + 27db manual. 
                                      GMA to GMD=hydrographic 
                                        + 30db through + 60db manual 
                                      GME to GMK=sub-bottom 1 
                                        through sub-bottom 7 
  19    Speed of sound                                                m/sec 
  20    Depth of sonar window below                                   meters  
        sea-level 
  21    Background noise level in                                     dB/V 
        fixed point reference        


Simrad (sim1) 

00+005:00:00:52.388 D1,23583509,1479.6, 17, 1, 0 

Field  Data                                    Units 
-----  --------------------------------------  -----
  1    RVDAS time tag 
  2    Header 
  3    Time tag                                hhmmss.sss 
  4    Depth    m 
  5    Bottom surface backscattering strength  dBar 
  6    Transducer number ( 1 = 38 kHz ) 
  7    


Thermosalinograph (tsg1) 

00+019:23:59:46.976 15A16CFC163F8C2C100 

Field  Data                                                           Units 
-----  -------------------------------------------------------------  -----
  1    RVDAS time tag 
  2    Seabird hex string (see page 17 for conversion to real units) 


pCO2 

00+021:23:59:43.190 2000021.9992 2382.4 984.2 30.73 50.8 345.9 334.1 -1.70 
-68.046 -144.446 Equil 

Field  Data                                               Units 
-----  -------------------------------------------------  ----------
   1   RVDAS time tag 
   2   pCO2 time tag (decimal is fractional time of day)  yyyddd.ttt 
   3   Raw voltage                                        mV 
   4   Barometer                                          mBar 
   5   Cell temperature                                   °C 
   6   Flow rate                                          cm3/min 
   7   Concentration                                      ppm 
   8   pCO2 pressure                                      microAtm 
   9   Equilibrated temperature                           °C 
  10   Latitude (not collected) 
  11   Longitude (not collected) 
  10   Flow source (Equil = pCO2 measurement) 


Navigational Data 

Seapath GPS (seap) 

The Seapath GPS outputs six data strings, four in NMEA format and two in 
proprietary PSXN format: 

  • INZDA 
  • INGGA 
  • INVTG 
  • INHDT 
  • PSXN, 22 
  • PSXN, 23 


INZDA 

02+253:00:00:00.772 $INZDA,235947.70,09,09,2002,,*7F 

Field  Data            Units 
-----  --------------  ---------
  1    RVDAS time tag 
  2    $INZDA 
  3    time            hhmmss.ss 
  4    Day             dd 
  5    Month           mm 
  6    Year            yyyy 
  7    (empty field) 
  8    Checksum 


INGGA 

02+253:00:00:00.938 
INGGA,235947.70,6629.239059,S,06827.668899,W,1,07,1.0,11.81,M,,M,,*6F 

Field  Data                                   Units 
-----  -------------------------------------  -----------
   1   RVDAS time tag 
   2   $INGGA 
   3   time                                   hhmmss.ss 
   4   Latitude                               ddmm.mmmmmm 
   5   N or S for north or south latitude 
   6   Longitude                              ddmm.mmmmmm 
   7   E or W for east or west longitude 
   8   GPS quality indicator, 0=invalid, 
       1=GPS SPS, 2=DGPS, 3=PPS, 4=RTK, 
       5=float RTK, 6=dead reckoning 
   9   number of satellites in use (00-99)    
  10   HDOP                                   x.x 
   9   height above ellipsoid in meters       m.mm 
  11   M 
  12   (empty field) 
  13   M 
  14   age of DGPS corrections in seconds     s.s 
  15   DGPS reference station ID (0000-1023) 
  16   Checksum 


INVTG 

02+253:00:00:00.940 $INVTG,19.96,T,,M,4.9,N,,K,A*39 

Field  Data                              Units 
-----  --------------------------------  -----
   1   RVDAS time tag 
   2   $INVTG 
   3   course over ground, degrees true  d.dd 
   4   T 
   5   , 
   6   M 
   7   speed over ground in knots        k.k 
   8   N 
   9   , 
  10   K 
  11   Mode 
  12   Checksum 


INHDT 

02+253:00:00:00.941 $INHDT,20.62,T*23 

Field  Data                   Units 
-----  ---------------------  -----
  1    RVDAS time tag 
  2    $INHDT 
  3    Heading, degrees true  d.dd 
  4    T 
  5    Checksum 


PSXN,22 

02+253:00:00:00.942 $PSXN,22,0.43,0.43*39 

Field  Data                                                     Units 
-----  -------------------------------------------------------  -----
  1    RVDAS time tag 
  2    $PSXN 
  3    22 
  4    gyro calibration value since system start-up in degrees  d.dd 
  5    short term gyro offset in degrees                        d.dd 
  6    Checksum 


PSXN,23 

02+253:00:00:02.933 $PSXN,23,0.47,0.57,20.62,0.03*0C 

Field  Data                                         Units 
-----  -------------------------------------------  -----
  1   RVDAS time tag 
  2   $PSXN 
  3   23 
  4   roll in degrees, positive with port side up  d.dd 
  5   pitch in degrees, positive with bow up       d.dd 
  6   Heading, degrees true                        d.dd 
  7   heave in meters, positive down               m.mm 
  8   Checksum 


Ashtech GPS (adu1) 

The Ashtech GPS outputs three NMEA standard data strings: 

  • Measurement data (PBN) 
  • Attitude data (ATT) 
  • GPS position fix (GGA) 


Measurement data (PBN) 

01+324:00:00:00.064 $PASHR,PBN,172812.00,2129908.6,-1869076.7,-5694992.4, 
-063:41.9477,-041:16.0918,00066.2,000.16,002.85,-000.90,08,????,02,01,01, 
01*3A 

Field  Data                       Units 
-----  -------------------------  -------
   1   RVDAS time tag 
   2   $PASHR 
   3   PBN 
   4   GPS Time sec. of the week  seconds 
   5   Station Position: ECEF X   meters 
   6   Station Position: ECEF Y   meters 
   7   Station Position: ECEF Z   meters 
   8   Latitude ( -= South )      deg:min 
   9   Longitude ( -= West )      deg:min 
  10   Altitude                   meters 
  11   Velocity in ECEF X         m/sec 
  12   Velocity in ECEF Y         m/sec 
  13   Velocity in ECEF Z         m/sec 
  14   Number of satellites used 
  15   Site name 
  16   PDOP 
  17   HDOP 
  18   VDOP 
  19   TDOP 


GPS Position Fix - Geoid/Ellipsoid (GGA) 

01+324:00:00:00.323 $GPGGA,235959.00,6341.9477,S,04116.0918,W,1,08,00.9, 
+00066,M,,M,,*77 

Field  Data                              Units 
-----  --------------------------------  ---------
   1   RVDAS time tag 
   2   $GPGGA 
   3   UTC time at position              hhmmss.ss 
   4   Latitude                          ddmm.mmm 
   5   North (N) or South (S) 
   6   Longitude                         ddmm.mmm 
   7   East (E) or West (W) 
   8   GPS quality: (1 = GPS, 2 = DGPS)  
   9   Number of GPS satellites used 
  10   HDOP 
  11   Antenna height                    meters 
  12   M for Meters 
  13   Geoidal height 
       (no data in the sample string)    meters 
  14   M for meters 
  15   Age of diff. GPS data 
       (no data in the sample string) 
  16   Differential reference station ID 
       (no data in the sample string) 
  17   Checksum 
       (no delimiter before this field) 


Attitude Data (ATT) 

01+324:00:00:00.845 $PASHR,ATT,172813.0,137.88,+000.52,-001.41,0.0029, 
0.0254,0*2F 

Field  Data                          Units 
-----  ----------------------------  -------
   1   RVDAS Time tag 
   2   $PASHR 
   3   ATT 
   4   GPS Time sec. Of the week     seconds 
   5   Heading (rel. to true North)  degrees 
   6   Pitch                         degrees 
   7   Roll                          degrees 
   8   Measurement RMS error         meters 
   9   Baseline RMS error            meters 
  10   Attitude reset flag 


Trimble P-Code GPS (PCOD) 

The P-Code GPS outputs four NMEA standard data strings: 

  • Position fix (GGA) 
  • Latitude / longitude (GLL), 
  • Track and ground speed (VTG) 
  • Recommended Minimum Specific GNSS Data (RMC) 


GGA: GPS Position Fix - Geoid/Ellipsoid 

01+319:00:04:11.193 $GPGGA,000410.312,6227.8068,S,06043.6738,W,1,06,1.0, 

031.9,M,-017.4,M,,*49 

Field  Data                                               Units 
-----  -------------------------------------------------  ----------
   1   RVDAS Time tag 
   2   $GPGGA 
   3   UTC time at position                               hhmmss.sss 
   4   Latitude                                           ddmm.mmm 
   5   North (N) or South (S) 
   6   Longitude                                          ddmm.mmm 
   7   East (E) or West (W) 
   8   GPS quality: 
        0 = Fix not available or invalid 
        1 = GPS, SPS mode, fix valid 
        2 = DGPS (differential GPS), SPS mode, fix valid 
        3 = P-CODE PPS mode, fix valid 
   9   Number of GPS satellites used 
  10   HDOP (horizontal dilution of precision) 
  11   Antenna height                                     meters 
  12   M for meters 
  13   Geoidal height                                     meters 
  14   M for meters 
  15   Age of differential GPS data 
       (no data in the sample string) 
  16   Differential reference station ID 
       (no data in the sample string) 
  17   Checksum 
       (no delimiter before this field) 


GLL: GPS Latitude/Longitude 

01+319:00:04:11.272 $GPGLL,6227.8068,S,06043.6738,W,000410.312,A*32 

Field  Data                        Units 
-----  --------------------------  ----------
  1    RVDAS Time tag 
  2    $GPGLL 
  3    Latitude                    degrees 
  4    North or South 
  5    Longitude                   degrees 
  6    East or West 
  7    UTC of position             hhmmss.sss 
  8    Status of data (A = valid) 
  9    Checksum 


VTG: GPS Track and Ground Speed 

01+319:00:04:11.273 $GPVTG,138.8,T,126.0,M,000.0,N,000.0,K*49 

Field  Data                  Units 
-----  --------------------  -------
   1   RVDAS time tag 
   2   $GPVTG 
   3   Heading               degrees 
   4   Degrees true (T) 
   5   Heading               degrees 
   6   Degrees magnetic (M) 
   7   Ship speed	knots 
   8   N = knots 
   9   Speed                 km/hr 
  10   K = km per hour 
  11   Checksum 


RMC: GPS Recommended Minimum Specific GNSS Data 

03+180:00:00:00.517 $GPRMC,235959.449,A,3802.8974,N,16515.3288,W, 
010.7,350.0,280603,12.5,E*47 

Field  Data                   Units 
-----  ---------------------  ------------
   1   RVDAS time tag 
   2   $GPRMC 
   3   UTC of position fix    hhmmss.ss 
   4   Status (A=Data valid) 
   5   Latitude               degrees 
   6   North or South 
   7   Longitude 
   8   East or West 
   9   Speed over ground      knots 
  10   Course over ground     degrees true 
  11   Date                   ddmmyy 
  12   Magnetic variation     degrees 
  13   East or West 
  14   Mode Indicator 
  15   Checksum 


Gyro Compass (gyr1) 

00+019:23:59:59.952 $HEHRC25034,-020*73 

Field  Data                                     Units 
-----  ---------------------------------------  -------
   1   RVDAS time tag 
   2   $HEHRC 
   3   Heading XXXXX = ddd.dd                   degrees 
   4   Rate of change SYYY S = +/-, YYY = r.rr 
   5   Checksum 


ADCP Course (adcp) 

00+019:23:59:59.099 $PUHAW,UVH,-1.48,-0.51,250.6 

Field  Data                                                  Units 
-----  ----------------------------------------------------  -------
   1   RVDAS time tag 
   2   $PUHAW 
   3   UVH (E-W, N-S, Heading) 
   4   Ship Speed relative to reference layer, east vector   kn 
   5   Ship Speed relative to reference layer, north vector  kn 
   6   Ship heading                                          degrees 


Sound Velocity Probe (svp1) 

00+348:01:59:52.128 1539.40 

Field  Data                               Units 
-----  ---------------------------------  -----
   1   RVDAS Time tag 
   2   Sound velocity in ADCP sonar well  m/s 



OCEAN 


pCO2-merged 

00+346:23:58:20.672 2000346.9991 2398.4 1008.4 0.01 45.4 350.3 342.6 15.77 Equil 
-43.6826 173.1997 15.51 33.90 0.33 5.28 9.05 1007.57 40.0 14.87 182.44 

Field  Data                                    Units 
-----  --------------------------------------  ----------
   1   RVDAS time tag 
   2   PCO2 time tag (decimal is time of day)  yyyddd.ttt 
   3   Raw voltage                             mV 
   4   Barometer                               mB 
   5   Cell temperature                        °C 
   6   Flow rate                               cm3/min 
   7   Concentration                           ppm 
   8   PCO2 pressure                           microAtm 
   9   Equilibrated temperature                °C 
  10   Flow Source (Equil = pCO2 measurement)  
  11   RVDAS latitude                          degrees 
  12   RVDAS longitude                         degrees 
  13   TSG external temperature                °C 
  14   TSG salinity                            PSU 
  15   TSG fluorometry                         V 
  16   RVDAS true wind speed                   m/s 
  17   RVDAS true wind direction               degrees 
  18   Barometric Pressur                      mBars 
  19   Uncontaminated seawater pump flow rate  l/min 
  20   Speed over ground                       knots 
  21   Course made good	degrees 


tsgfl 

00+075:00:00:04.467 -01.488 -01.720 02.6783 33.63748 1.002442 0.002442 

Field  Data                        Units 
-----  --------------------------  --------
  1    RVDAS time tag 
  2    Internal water temperature  °C 
  3    Sea Surface Temperature     °C 
  4    Conductivity                mSiemens 
  5    Salinity                    PSU 
  6    Fluorometry                 V 
  7    Transmissivity              V 



Calculations 

The file 304Acoefl.txt located in the / directory contains the calibration 
factors for shipboard instruments. This was the file used by the RVDAS 
processing software. 


TSG 

Raw TSG data is stored as a 20 byte (character) long hex string 

                        Bytes  Data
                        -----  -----------------------
                         1-4   Sensor Temperature 
                         5-8   Conductivity 
                         9-14  Remote Temperature 
                        15-17  Fluorometer voltage 
                        18-20  Transmissometer voltage 


The coefficients for temperature and conductivity sensors can be found the 
rvdascal.txt file and on the calibrations sheets in the appendix. 

Calculating Temperature - ITS-90 

T = decimal equivalent of bytes 1-4 
Temperature Frequency: f = T/19 +2100 
Temperature = 1/{g + h[ln(f0/f)] + i[ln2(f0/f)] + j[ln3(f0/f)]} - 273.15 (°C) 

Calculating Conductivity - ITS-90 

C = decimal equivalent of bytes 5-8 
Conductivity Frequency f = sqrt(C*2100+6250000) 
Conductivity = (g + hf2 + if3 + jf4)/[10(1 + dt + ep)] (siemens/meter) 
t = temperature (°C); p = pressure (decibars); d = Ctcor; e = CPcor 

Calculating Fluorometry Voltage 

f = decimal equivalent of bytes 15-17 
Fluorometry Voltage = f/819 

Calculating Transmittance 

Vdark = 0.058 V 
Vref = 4.765 V 
t = decimal equivalent of bytes 18 - 20 
Transmissometer Voltage (Vsignal) = t/819 
% Transmittance = (Vsignal - Vdark) / (Vref - Vdark) 


PAR 

raw data = mV 
calibration scale = 6.08 V/(mEinstiens/cm 2sec) 
offset (Vdark) = 0.3 mV 
(raw mV - Vdark)/scale x 104 cm2/m2 x 10-3 V/mV= mEinstiens/m2sec 
or 
(data mV - 0.3 mV) x 1.65 (mEinstiens/m2sec)/mV = mEinstiens/m2sec 


PIR 

raw data = mV 

calibration scale = 4.13 x 10-6 V/(W/m2) 
data mV / (scale x 103 mV/V ) = W/m2 
or 
data mV x 242.1(W/m2)/mV = W/m2 


PSP 

raw data = mV 
calibration scale = 8.28 x 10-6 V/(W/m2) 
data mV / (scale x 103 mV/V) = W/m2 
or 
data mV x 120.7 (W/m2)/V = W/m2 


Acquisition Problems and Events 

This section lists problems with acquisition noted during this cruise including 
instrument failures, data acquisition system failures and any other factor 
affecting this data set. The format is ddd:hh:mm (ddd is year-day, hh is hour, 
and mm is minute). Times are reported in GMT. 

  Start      End      Description 
---------  ---------  ---------------------------------------------------------
186:00:00             Start RVDAS data collection 
205:04:22             ADCP BT off 
207:22:27             Fluorometer output string bad 
207:23:15             Fluorometer output string bad 
210:02:25             Reset Ashtech 
210:02:00             Cleaned CTD connectors prior to CTD cast #132-01 
210:11:36             Cast #134-04 CTD fish 0322 failed. Replaced with 0377, 
                      cut off 60m wireline & reterminated, checked wireline for 
                      continuity & shorts using Megger, cleaned all connectors, 
                      replaced DO and primary temp cables, replaced 4 Amp deck 
                      unit fuse with the correct • Amp fuse, system started up 
                      without any problems 
210:03:30             Turned ADCP Bottom Tracking on 
211:04:30             Cast 137-01: Added PAR and Wetlabs Fluorometer to CTD 
                      Package    
212:19:45             Ashtech stopped outputting data, reset 
212:23:00             ADCP on/off, BT on/off for debugging. Continued thru 
                      8/1/2003    
213:22:57             ADCP Bottom Tracking turned back on 
214:14:28             Ashtech stopped outputting data, reset 
215:01:24  215:01:31  RVDAS data collection interrupted by server failure 
218:10:49  218:11:14  RVDAS data collection interrupted by server failure 
216:19:45             Replaced CTD bottle #11 trigger latch assembly 
218:08:00             Before Cast 214-01: As per scientists' request, remounted 
                      CTD temp and conductivity sensors so they are closer 
                      together 
219:02:00             Reset Ashtech 
222                   Windbirds froze up by ice 
223:01:25             Reset Ashtech 
225:04:01             ADCP Bottom tracking turned off 
227:03:01             Removed PAR and Flourometer from CTD 
227:14:48             Reset Ashtech 
228                   Changed Dissolved oxygen sensor prior to cast 318 
229:14:42             Reset Ashtech 
           229        End RVDAS data collection 


Appendix: Sensors and Calibrations 

Shipboard Sensors 
                                                      Last 
                                                      Calibration 
Sensor              Description         Serial #      Date         Status 
------------------  ------------------  ------------  -----------  ---------
Meteorology & Radiometers 

Port Anemometer     RM Young 5106       WM46262       02/25/03     Collected 
Stbd Anemometer     RM Young 5106       WM46263       12/08/02     Collected 
Barometer           RM Young 61201      01705         05/30/03     Collected 
Air Temp/Rel. Hum.  RM Young 41372LC    06135         04/09/03     Collected 
PIR (Pyrgeometer)   Eppley PIR          33023F3       11/07/02     Collected 
PSP (Pyranometer)   Eppley PSP          33090F3       01/24/03     Collected 
Mast PAR            BSI QSR-240         6356          02/03/03     Collected 

Underway 

TSG                 SeaBird SBE21       21310203198   11/22/02     Collected 
TSG Remote Temp     SeaBird 3-01/S      032593        02/06/03     Collected 
Fluorometer         Turner 10-AU-005    5651 FRTD     04/20/02     Collected 
                    Lamp: daylight 
                    10-045; ref. 
                    filter: 10-032, 
                    em. filter: 10-051,
                    ex. filter: 10-050
Transmissometer     WET Labs C-Star     CST-422PR     02/24/03     Collected 
Gravimeter          LaCoste & Romberg                              Collected 
                    Gravity Meter             
Bathymetry          Simrad EK500        3001          11/1/95      Collected 
Bathymetry          ODEC Bathy 2000                                Collected 

Other 

P-Code GPS          Trimble 20636-00    0220035116    Key expired  Collected 
                    (SM)
Attitude GPS        Ashtech ADU2        700273F2114   N/A          Collected
                                        FW 7B13-D1C21  
Seapath GPS         Kongsberg Seatex    2253          N/A          Collected 
                    Seapath 200 


CTD Sensors                                          Last 
                                                     Calibration 
Sensor                  Comments        Serial #     Date         Status 
----------------------  --------------  -----------  -----------  ---------
Fish #1                 SBE-9+          094857-0232  6/3/03       Collected 
Fish #2                 SBE-9+          094857-0377  6/3/03       Collected 
Pressure Sensor #1      410K-105        43528        6/3/03       Collected 
Pressure Sensor #2      410K-105        58949        6/3/03       Collected 
Temperature #2          Primary         2367         5/20/03      Collected 
Temperature #6          Secondary       2299         6/5/03       Collected 
Conductivity #3         Primary         42067        6/12/03      Collected 
Conductivity #7         Secondary       42513        6/3/03       Collected 
Dissolved Oxygen #1     SBE-43          80           6/17/03      Collected 
Dissolved Oxygen #2     SBE-43          139          6/17/03      Collected 
PAR Sensor              Biospherical    4361         11/11/02     Collected
                        Instruments   
                        QSP-200L4S
Fluorometer #1          Chelsea Mk III  88080        2/23/03      Collected 
                        Aquatracka
Fluorometer #2          Wetlabs AFL     AFL-016D     2/23/03      Collected 
Transmissometer         Wetlabs         CST-397DR    2/25/03      Collected 
                        CST-397DR 
Pump                    Primary         051646 3.0K  2/2/02 
Pump                    Secondary       051645 3.0K  2/2/02 
Carousel Water Sampler  SBE-32          3211265-0066 
Pinger, 12khz           6000 (OIS)      5118 
Bottom Contact Switch                   #1    
Deck Unit               SBE 11-Plus     11P198580490              Collected 
Scripps Altimeter                                    6/03         Collected 
Harrdt Fluorometer                                   6/03         Collected 


Calibrations 

The following pages are replicas of current calibration sheets for the sensors 
used during this 
cruise. 




DATA PROCESSING NOTES

Event Date  Person             Data Type  Summary 
----------  -----------------  ---------  --------------------------------------
2010-05-12  Bartolocci, Danie  BTL        NetCDF, WOCE files online 
            2010.04.23 DBK
            Reformatting for the sbi_320620030705 bottle file. Submitted by Bob 
            Key as part of CARINA. 
              NOTE: Bob's file is missing DELO18 and DOC. Both parameters were 
                    collected on this cruise.
            Edits made:
            • Parameters: AMMONI to NH4
                          PHAEO to PPHYTN
                          FLUORO to FLUOR
            • Units:      DBARS to DBAR
                          DEGC to DEG C
            In order to merge in time, format check and order the parameters, 
            the following new parameters were added to the parameters list: PAR, 
            SPAR, HAARDT, UREA

            Converted file to netcdf and woce formats sbi_320620030705_hy1.csv 
            and sbi_320620030705_nc_hyd.zip. Opened exchange and netcdf in JOA 
            with no errors. Visually checked woce formatted file 
            sbi_320620030705hy.txt. moved all files to new directory created for 
            this cruise and linked all files online. 

            Sent copy of these notes to Jerry on 2010.05.13

2010-05-14  Key, Bob           DOC         to go online 
            The file I sent  (320620030705.exc.csv with first line timestamp of 
            12/4/08) did have DOC data. I had converted the DOC to /kg units 
            using measured salinity and an assumed temperature of 22C. Attached 
            is a copy of the original DOC file (and README) I have (from 
            Hansell). DOC still in /L in this file and #decimals is wrong, but 
            no other problems. I have no record of O-18 data for this cruise, 
            but the cruise report also mentions C13 and N15. I checked the ucar 
            site this morning and didn't see any record of these isotopic data. 
            The documentation I have doesn't say who was responsible for these 
            measurements 


