US JGOFS Antarctic Environments Southern Ocean Process Study (AESOPS) Palmer Leg 96-04a; October-November 1996 Documentation file for: TRACE METAL Rosette Hydrographic Bottle Data LEG 96-04a L.A. Codispoti (lou@ccpo.odu.edu) Old Dominion University, June 1998 General Comments: This "readme" file pertains to the salinity, dissolved oxygen, and nutrient data taken from sampling bottles with the trace metal rosette that was equipped with 8 ~30-liter "Go-Flo" bottles made mostly of PVC and equipped with orange silicone o-rings during Palmer leg 96-04a (October-November 1996). Dr. W. O. Smith of the University of Tennessee was the chief scientist during this leg (wosmith@utkux.utk.edu). This cruise was the first process study leg of the U.S. JGOFS program in the Southern Ocean (AESOPS). The CTD system on the trace metal rosette was not capable of the precision obtained from the system on the hydrographic rosette, and Go-Flo bottles, while superior for obtaining trace metal clean samples, are not the bottles of choice for obtaining hydrographic (salinity, oxygen, and nutrient) data. In addition, the handling system for the Trace Metal rosette was cumbersome and, at times, freezing occurred in the water in the Go-Flo bottles while this rosette was being "wrestled" into its wet laboratory location. At times, bottle "firing" problems also complicated the interpretation of the data from the trace metal rosette. BECAUSE THESE DATA FROM THE TRACE METAL ROSETTE ARE NOT OF THE SAME QUALITY AS THE DATA FROM THE HYDROGRAPHIC ROSETTE, THEY SHOULD BE MAINTAINED IN A SEPARATE FILE. Some questionable data are not included in this report. These data are retained in files at Old Dominion University and are available upon request. No units are given for salinity in this report because the most recent definitions of salinity define it as a dimensionless number. To accommodate every preference, Winkler oxygen values are reported in ml/l, micromolar, and micromoles per kg. The latter values can only be calculated with a knowledge of the oxygen sample temperatures when the samples were drawn. These "draw temperatures" are not reported here, but can be obtained by contacting lou@ccpo.odu.edu. Nutrient values are reported in micromolar. They can be converted to micromoles per kg, by combining laboratory temperature on the Palmer (approx. 21 deg C during this leg) and the salinity of the sample to compute density and then dividing the value in micromolar by this number. Methods: In general, the methods employed for the bottle salinity, Winkler dissolved oxygen, and nutrient analyses did not differ significantly from those described in the JGOFS protocols that were distributed in 1994 (UNESCO, IOC Manual and Guide #29). Minor differences included the following: 1) The weights of the potassium iodate used for primary standards for dissolved oxygen were not adjusted to an "in vacuo" basis as suggested in the protocols. It is unlikely that this departure from procedure would cause significant errors. Our calculations suggest that the maximum differences arising from our decision to not correct to an "in vacuo" basis would be 0.02%. 2) The protocols give one a choice of adjusting nutrient methods so that calibration curves are strictly linear, or opting for more response and taking into account non-linearities. We choose the former method. 3) No corrections were made for "carryover" between nutrient samples run on the Technicon Autoanalyzer. Carryover effects in our nutrient analyses are generally less than ~2% of the concentration difference between adjacent samples, and were minimized by arranging samples in depth order and by running duplicate samples in some cases. 4) Calibration and re-calibration of volumetric ware were not exactly as described in the JGOFS protocols, but this was largely compensated for by comparing independent standards. 5) Duplicate oxygen samples were not routinely drawn. 6) The JGOFS protocols do not describe an automated technique for the determination of ammonium concentrations. We employed the Berthelot reaction using a method somewhat similar to that described by Whitledge et al. (1981, Whitledge, T.E., Malloy, S.C., Patton, C.J. and Wirick, C.D. Automated Nutrient Analyses in Seawater. Brookhaven National Laboratory Rept. BNL 51398, 216pp.). Details on this method can be obtained from Dr. Louis I. Gordon (lgordon@orst.oce.edu). Temperature: The temperature data associated with each bottle depth were taken by the CTD system during the bottle tripping process. Sampling: The samples in this report were taken from ~30 liter Go-Flo bottles. Bottles were generally held at the sampling depth for at least 30 seconds before tripping. Salinity: Salinities were determined with Guildline Autosal salinometers. New vials of standard sea-water were used to standardize before and at the end of every run. These bottle salinities were in general about 0.02 higher than the CTD salinities which are also reported here except in cases where freezing in the Go-Flo bottles caused the differences to be greater. Dissolved oxygen: The Winkler dissolved oxygen set-up was built and supplied by the SIO/ODF group. This system is computer controlled and detects the end-point photometrically. Temperature of the thiosulfate and standard solutions is automatically monitored by this system. Nutrients: Note that the terminology used to describe nutrients has become somewhat loose over the years and that silicate=silicic acid or reactive silicate, and phosphate=reactive phosphorus. Nutrient analyses were performed on a 5-channel Technicon II AA system that was modified and provided by Dr. Lou Gordon of Oregon State University. The nutrient standards provided by Dr. Gordon's group were compared with standards from the Ocean Data Facility Group at Scripps and with standards purhased from Ocean Scientific International (OSI). The results of these comparisons were good. Interested users may contact Dr. Louis I. Gordon (lgordon@oce.orst.edu) if they are interested in the details of these intercomparisons. The only notable differences were a tendency for the OSI silicate values to be ~1% high relative to the OSU standards, and 4% low relative to OSU nitrite standards. We believe that the OSI nitrite standards may be in error, but in any event, nitrite values in the data reported here from this leg were always less than 0.25 micromolar, so the error would be <0.01 micromolar even if the OSI nitrite standards were correct. No ammonium standards were available from OSI for intercomparison, but the ammonium concentrations in the data reported here from this leg are all quite low (<0.25 micromolar), so it is unlikely that there will be any significant systematic errors in excess of ~0.01 micromolar. The salinity of the low nutrient sea water used to make nutrient standards was monitored during this cruise as was the efficiency of the cadmium columns used in the nitrate analyses. The cadmium column efficiencies appeared to never fall below 97% during this leg (PALMER96-04a). Questions about these data may be addressed to: Dr. L.A. Codispoti CCPO Old Dominion University Norfolk, VA 23529 lou@ccpo.odu.edu