Cruise: GEOSECS_INDIAN (dataset:CARINA) Data product: CARINA
Synonyms (including errata!) for this cruise: geoindsv; GEOSECS_INDIAN; geoindsv;
IMPORTANT information for GLODAP Reference Group Editors: This adjustment is a published version for CARINA!
Please wait while loading list of related files
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
RC_SO.png | [autogenerated from RC_Toste/adjustments!] |
View | |
manualXovers.png | [autogenerated from manual_xovers/adjustments!] |
View |
- no files! -
Plot/Data files re. Parameter(s) (select parameter on left side to view!):
cruise:2
- no files! -
View comment(s) (filtered by salinity in subject)
GEOSECS_INDIAN - salinity
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is +0.9 ppm.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests no significant adjustment (-3.1 +/-6.8
ppm).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
5 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is -4.0 (+/-10.7)
ppm.
4 cross overs show no significant differences (<5 ppm) and involve cruises that
are thought to have no significant offset in salinity. This suggests that no
adjustment would be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses agree.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for salinity.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 16:25:33 UTC for data product: CARINA
View comment(s) (filtered by tco2 in subject)
GEOSECS_INDIAN - tco2
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is +17.9 umol/kg.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests that an adjustment of -20 umol/kg could be
required (-20.2 +/-3.1 umol/kg).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
4 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is +21.9 (+/-6.2)
umol/kg.
2 cross overs show offsets of 22-23 umol/kg and involve cruises that are thought
to have no offset in TCO2. When the offsets suggested for the other cruises are
taken into account the average of all cross overs is 22.9 (+/-1.5) umol/kg. This
suggests that an adjustment of -23 umol/kg could be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses suggest that an adjustment would be required,
but they result in slightly different numbers (-20 and -23 umol/kg,
respectively). The latter is in very good agreement with GLODAP correction
(-22.5 umol/kg).
Based on this I suggest an adjustment of -23 umol/kg for TCO2.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 16:41:02 UTC for data product: CARINA
View comment(s) (filtered by alkalinity in subject)
GEOSECS_INDIAN - alkalinity
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is +1.8 umol/kg.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests no significant adjustment (-2.7 +/-3.9
umol/kg).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
3 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is +8.6 (+/-5.9)
umol/kg.
Only 1 cross over shows no significant differences (<5 umol/kg), but when the
suggested offsets are taken into account the average of all cross overs is +2.7
(+/-1.8) umol/kg. This suggests that no adjustment would be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses agree.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for alkalinity.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 16:53:21 UTC for data product: CARINA
View comment(s) (filtered by ph in subject)
GEOSECS_INDIAN - phosphate
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is 0.991.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests that an adjustment could be required
(1.035 +/-0.022).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
4 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is 1.007 (+/-0.036).
3 cross overs show no significant differences (<2%) and 2 of them involve
cruises that are thought to have no significant offset in phosphate. This
suggests that no adjustment would be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses disagree, the global inversion suggesting that
an adjustment of 1.03 could be required. This result, however, is not coherent
with the analysis of individual cross overs (see Cruise plot file: RC_SO).
Because the latter is supported by the regional analysis, it is likely that the
inversion has failed here.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for phosphate.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 17:12:30 UTC for data product: CARINA
View comment(s) (filtered by nitrate in subject)
GEOSECS_INDIAN - nitrate
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is 1.010.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests no significant adjustment (1.016
+/-0.016).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
5 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is 1.003 (+/-0.010).
All cross overs show no significant differences (<2%) and all involve cruises
that are thought to have no significant offset in nitrate. This suggests that no
adjustment would be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses agree.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for nitrate.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 17:00:45 UTC for data product: CARINA
View comment(s) (filtered by phosphate in subject)
GEOSECS_INDIAN - phosphate
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is 0.991.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests that an adjustment could be required
(1.035 +/-0.022).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
4 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is 1.007 (+/-0.036).
3 cross overs show no significant differences (<2%) and 2 of them involve
cruises that are thought to have no significant offset in phosphate. This
suggests that no adjustment would be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses disagree, the global inversion suggesting that
an adjustment of 1.03 could be required. This result, however, is not coherent
with the analysis of individual cross overs (see Cruise plot file: RC_SO).
Because the latter is supported by the regional analysis, it is likely that the
inversion has failed here.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for phosphate.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 17:12:30 UTC for data product: CARINA
View comment(s) (filtered by silicate in subject)
GEOSECS_INDIAN - silicate
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is 1.018.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests no significant adjustment (1.004
+/-0.023).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
5 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is 0.990 (+/-0.015).
3 cross overs show no significant differences (<2%), and 2 of them involve
cruises that are thought to have no offset in silicate (cruises 317519950922 and
49NZ20031209). This suggests that no adjustment would be required.
It should be noted, however, that 2 other cross overs (with cruises
74DI20041213 and 35MF20040103) suggests that an adjustment of 0.95 could be
required for stations along 60E.
CONCLUSION:
The analysis of cross overs found in the central and eastern part of the basin
agrees with the result of the inversion, suggesting that no adjustment would be
required.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for silicate, but note that stations along
60E could have high silicate values.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 18:01:39 UTC for data product: CARINA
View comment(s) (filtered by oxygen in subject)
GEOSECS_INDIAN - oxygen
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is 1.001.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests no significant adjustment (1.001
+/-0.008).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
4 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is 0.995 (+/-0.014).
3 cross overs show offsets no significant differences (<1%) and involve cruises
that are thought to have no significant offset in oxygen. This suggests that no
adjustment would be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses agree.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for oxygen.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 18:12:08 UTC for data product: CARINA
View 7 comment(s) (Lists all comments)
GEOSECS_INDIAN - oxygen
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is 1.001.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests no significant adjustment (1.001
+/-0.008).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
4 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is 0.995 (+/-0.014).
3 cross overs show offsets no significant differences (<1%) and involve cruises
that are thought to have no significant offset in oxygen. This suggests that no
adjustment would be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses agree.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for oxygen.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 18:12:08 UTC for data product: CARINA
GEOSECS_INDIAN - silicate
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is 1.018.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests no significant adjustment (1.004
+/-0.023).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
5 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is 0.990 (+/-0.015).
3 cross overs show no significant differences (<2%), and 2 of them involve
cruises that are thought to have no offset in silicate (cruises 317519950922 and
49NZ20031209). This suggests that no adjustment would be required.
It should be noted, however, that 2 other cross overs (with cruises
74DI20041213 and 35MF20040103) suggests that an adjustment of 0.95 could be
required for stations along 60E.
CONCLUSION:
The analysis of cross overs found in the central and eastern part of the basin
agrees with the result of the inversion, suggesting that no adjustment would be
required.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for silicate, but note that stations along
60E could have high silicate values.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 18:01:39 UTC for data product: CARINA
GEOSECS_INDIAN - phosphate
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is 0.991.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests that an adjustment could be required
(1.035 +/-0.022).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
4 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is 1.007 (+/-0.036).
3 cross overs show no significant differences (<2%) and 2 of them involve
cruises that are thought to have no significant offset in phosphate. This
suggests that no adjustment would be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses disagree, the global inversion suggesting that
an adjustment of 1.03 could be required. This result, however, is not coherent
with the analysis of individual cross overs (see Cruise plot file: RC_SO).
Because the latter is supported by the regional analysis, it is likely that the
inversion has failed here.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for phosphate.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 17:12:30 UTC for data product: CARINA
GEOSECS_INDIAN - nitrate
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is 1.010.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests no significant adjustment (1.016
+/-0.016).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
5 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is 1.003 (+/-0.010).
All cross overs show no significant differences (<2%) and all involve cruises
that are thought to have no significant offset in nitrate. This suggests that no
adjustment would be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses agree.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for nitrate.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 17:00:45 UTC for data product: CARINA
GEOSECS_INDIAN - alkalinity
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is +1.8 umol/kg.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests no significant adjustment (-2.7 +/-3.9
umol/kg).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
3 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is +8.6 (+/-5.9)
umol/kg.
Only 1 cross over shows no significant differences (<5 umol/kg), but when the
suggested offsets are taken into account the average of all cross overs is +2.7
(+/-1.8) umol/kg. This suggests that no adjustment would be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses agree.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for alkalinity.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 16:53:21 UTC for data product: CARINA
GEOSECS_INDIAN - tco2
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is +17.9 umol/kg.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests that an adjustment of -20 umol/kg could be
required (-20.2 +/-3.1 umol/kg).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
4 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is +21.9 (+/-6.2)
umol/kg.
2 cross overs show offsets of 22-23 umol/kg and involve cruises that are thought
to have no offset in TCO2. When the offsets suggested for the other cruises are
taken into account the average of all cross overs is 22.9 (+/-1.5) umol/kg. This
suggests that an adjustment of -23 umol/kg could be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses suggest that an adjustment would be required,
but they result in slightly different numbers (-20 and -23 umol/kg,
respectively). The latter is in very good agreement with GLODAP correction
(-22.5 umol/kg).
Based on this I suggest an adjustment of -23 umol/kg for TCO2.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 16:41:02 UTC for data product: CARINA
GEOSECS_INDIAN - salinity
GLOBAL ANALYSIS (Cruise plot file: RC_SO):
The average of all cross overs is +0.9 ppm.
The global inversion (WDLSQ) suggests no significant adjustment (-3.1 +/-6.8
ppm).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS:
5 cross overs were analyzed. The average of all cross overs is -4.0 (+/-10.7)
ppm.
4 cross overs show no significant differences (<5 ppm) and involve cruises that
are thought to have no significant offset in salinity. This suggests that no
adjustment would be required.
CONCLUSION:
The global and regional analyses agree.
Based on this I suggest no adjustment for salinity.
___________________
Paris, August 2008
Claire Lo Monaco
Posted by claire.lomonaco@locean.upmc.fr on 2008-10-05 16:25:33 UTC for data product: CARINA
Hide comments