US JGOFS Antarctic Environments Southern Ocean Process Study (AESOPS)

Palmer Leg 97-03; April-May 1997

Documentation for:  The Trace Metal Rosette Hydrographic bottle data

L.A. Codispoti (lou@ccpo.odu.edu)
Old Dominion University,  July 1998


General Comments:

This "readme" file pertains to the salinity, dissolved oxygen, and nutrient
data taken from the trace metal rosette that was equipped with 8 ~30-liter
"Go-Flo"  bottles during Palmer leg 97-03 (April-May, 1997). Dr. Hugh Ducklow
of the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences  was the chief  scientist during
this leg (duck@vims.edu).  This cruise was the third 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.
  
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. ALSO NOTE THAT TRACE METAL ROSETTE CASTS WERE TERMINATED AFTER
STATION 10 DURING THIS LEG DUE TO EQUIPMENT PROBLEMS. 

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 degrees 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.  4) Calibration and re-calibration of volumetric ware were not
exactly as described in the JGOFS protocols.  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 that were
designed to minimize trace metal contamination.  This instrument was
constructed at the Moss Landing Marine Laboratory and questions about this
device may be directed to Dr. K. Coale (coale@mlml.calstate.edu). 

Bottles were generally held at the sampling depth for at least 30 seconds 
before tripping, BUT THE  RELATIVELY CALM CONDITIONS ON THIS CRUISE MAY HAVE
PREVENTED COMPLETE  FLUSHING OF THE GO-FLO BOTTLES DESPITE THE 30 SECOND SOAK
TIME. NORMALLY,  INCOMPLETE FLUSHING WOULD MEAN THAT THE BOTTLE CONTAINED A
MIXTURE OF WATER FROM THE DESIRED SAMPLING DEPTHS AND FROM DEEPER  DEPTHS.
EXAMINATION  OF PAIRED BOTTLE AND CTD SALINITIES FROM THE HYDROGRAPHIC ROSETTE
EMPLOYED ON THIS LEG SUGGESTED THAT INCOMPLETE FLUSHING OF THE 10 LITER
BULLISTER BOTTLES  USED ON THAT ROSETTE OFTEN CREATED MIXTURES OF WATER WITH 
EFFECTIVE DEPTHS  A  FEW METERS DEEPER THAN THE ACTUAL SAMPLING DEPTH.  IN THE
CASE OF THE HYDROGRAPHIC ROSETTE, MOST OF THESE APPARENT OFFSETS WERE LESS THAN
5 METERS,  BUT FLUSHING OF THE 30 LITER  GO-FLO BOTTLES  ON THE TRACE METAL
ROSETTE  MAY HAVE BEEN POORER.   PAIRED CTD AND BOTTLE  SALINITY DATA MAY BE OF
SOME HELP IN ADDRESSING THIS FLUSHING PROBLEM BUT THE CTD DATA FROM THE TRACE
METAL ROSETTE HAVE NOT YET BEEN CORRECTED FOR "SPIKING" THAT CAN OCCUR IN
GRADIENTS AND FOR AN OFFSET OF  ABOUT 0.03  (BOTTLE SALINITIES MINUS TRACE
METAL CTD SALINITIES) IN THE TRACE  METAL CTD DATA.   
  

Salinity:

Bottle  Salinities were determined with Guildline Autosal salinometers using 
JGOFS protocols. 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 0.03 higher than the  trace metal rosette's CTD salinities which are also
reported here in the absence of significant flushing or spiking problems (see
above).  Freezing in the Go-Flo bottles can also cause  bottle salinities to be
higher than the CTD values.  The cruise notes  suggest that freezing  was a
problem during some trace metal rosette casts taken during this leg.  

Dissolved oxygen:

The Winkler dissolved oxygen apparatus 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. During an earlier Palmer Leg (96-04a) nutrient
standards provided by Dr. Gordon's  group were compared with standards from the
Ocean Data Facility (ODF)  Group at Scripps and with standards purchased from
Ocean Scientific International (OSI) Leg 96-04a. 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 OSI nitrate
standard signals to be 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 water column  data reported 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. NOTE THAT DURING THIS LEG (PALMER 97-03), MAJOR
PROBLEMS WERE ENCOUNTERED WITH NITRITE STANDARDS. WE HAVE CORRECTED THE NITRITE
DATA TO AN ACCURACY OF ABOUT 10% DURING POST-CRUISE DATA PROCESSING. SINCE
WATER COLUMN NITRITE VALUES WERE GENERALLY LESS THAN ~0.25 MICROMOLAR, MAXIMUM
REMAINING ERRORS IN THE WATER COLUMN NITRITE DATA ARISING FROM THIS PROBLEM
SHOULD BE ON THE ORDER OF 0.02 TO 0.03 MICROMOLAR. Nitrate concentrations have
been adjusted for the changes in nitrite values since nitrate is obtained by
subtracting nitrite from the results of the nitrate+nitrite analysis. Because
of the concentration of effort over the Ross Sea shelf and the season,
significant amounts of nitrite and ammonium could occur throughout the water
column, and the usual method of looking at deep-water values to correct nitrite
and ammonium baselines could not be employed.  Thus, there may be some baseline
uncertainties in nitrite and ammonium concentrations that would induce errors
of less than ~0.1 micromolar for ammonium and less than ~0.02 micromolar for
nitrite.  Tests of the salt effect in the ammonium analysis during this cruise
suggested that it was negligible for the water column values reported here, but
this may not be the case for specialized incubation and ice samples. Most Cd
column efficiencies appeared to be >95%, but correction factors were applied to
the data from stations 06 casts 03, 04, and 06 (Cd column efficiency = 0.7),
and from station 19 cast 01 (Cd column efficiency = 0.86) because of low Cd
column efficiencies and the use of mixed working standards. These standards
contained between 30 to 31 micromolar nitrate and between 1 to 2 micromolar
nitrite depending on the state of degradation of the nitrite standards which
were being oxidized to nitrate during this cruise (the nitrite problem alluded
to above).  Water column nitrite values were so low (generally less than 0.2
micromolar) that it was not found necessary to correct for Cd column efficiency
when subtracting nitrite values from the nitrate plus nitrite analyses to
obtain nitrate concentratrions.  


Queries:

Questions about these data may be addressed to:

Dr. L.A. Codispoti
CCPO
Old Dominion University
Norfolk, VA 23529
lou@ccpo.odu.edu