Cruise: 06M320110624 (dataset:GLODAPv2.2019.NEW) Data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Synonyms (including errata!) for this cruise: M85/1; 06M320110624; alias: M85/1; erratum:06MT20110624 (06M3 is correct Expocode prefix!)
IMPORTANT information for GLODAP Reference Group Editors: This adjustment is a published version for GLODAPv2.2019!
Please wait while loading list of related files
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
tracer.png | View |
- no files! -
Plot/Data files re. Parameter(s) (select parameter on left side to view!):
cfc11:1
cfc12:1
cruise:1
oxygen:11
salinity:21
- no files! -
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
06GA20000506_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
06MM20060523_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
06MM20090714_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
06MT19970611_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
06MT19970707_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
06MT20010507_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
06MT20010717_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
06MT20030723_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
18HU20060524_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
18HU20090517_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
18HU20110506_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
316N19961102_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
316N19971005_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
33RO20030604_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
35TH20020611_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
35TH20100608_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
74AB19910501_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
74DI20080820_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
74DI20110715_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by salinity in subject)
06M320110624 - salinity
Offsets strongly depend on the location and time, e.g. Hudson vs "North
Atlantic" crossovers.
Following the weighted mean and the most recent crossovers no adjustment
suggested.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-05-25 08:29:32 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
06M320110624 - salinity
Temporal trend in salinity concentrations visible, resulting in more negative
offsets for older cruises, esp. cruises older 1998. Hence the total weighted
mean offset of -0.01 should not be used as an indication for an adjustment. Many
of the more recent cruises even have positive offsets, in some cases even above
the limit, e.g. 06MM2009. All in all no adjustment should be applied.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-04-26 13:54:46 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
06GA20000506_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
06MM20090714_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
06MT19970707_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
06MT19990711_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
06MT20030723_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
18HU20010530_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
18HU20100513_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
316N19961102_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
35TH20100608_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
74DI20080820_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by oxygen in subject)
06M320110624 - oxygen
Many crossovers present. Most of the offsets are within the acceptable range,
which is also reflected in the total weighted mean offset being very close to 1.
Given the large variability and high number of acceptable offsets there is
Little to no reason for an adjustment.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-04-26 13:59:10 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
CFC-12-saturation.png | View |
View comment(s) (filtered by cfc12 in subject)
06M320110624 - cfc12
The saturation ratio of the upper 20m points towards too high CFC_12
concentrations. However, given the good fit to the CFC_11 data and given the
threshold limit no adjustment should be applied.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-04-26 14:03:19 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
CFC-11-saturation.png | View |
View comment(s) (filtered by cfc11 in subject)
06M320110624 - cfc11
The saturation mixing ratio points towards too high CFC_11 concentrations.
However, it is still within the accepted range and the data fits good to the
CFC_12 data, too. No adjustment.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-04-26 14:06:08 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
View comment(s) (filtered by c13 in subject)
06M320110624 - c13
Becker et al. 2016:
These cruises are also known as M39 cruises with three legs
of 13C-DIC sampling (M39-2, M39-3, M39-4). Since each
leg of this cruise had only a few stations with 13C-DIC
samples, and all these samples were analyzed together, these
cruises were summarized for the crossover study. Neither the
inversion routine nor the single crossover with the adjusted
cruises show evidence for an offset.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-05 17:01:39 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
View 6 comment(s) (Lists all comments)
06M320110624 - c13
Becker et al. 2016:
These cruises are also known as M39 cruises with three legs
of 13C-DIC sampling (M39-2, M39-3, M39-4). Since each
leg of this cruise had only a few stations with 13C-DIC
samples, and all these samples were analyzed together, these
cruises were summarized for the crossover study. Neither the
inversion routine nor the single crossover with the adjusted
cruises show evidence for an offset.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-05 17:01:39 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
06M320110624 - salinity
Offsets strongly depend on the location and time, e.g. Hudson vs "North
Atlantic" crossovers.
Following the weighted mean and the most recent crossovers no adjustment
suggested.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-05-25 08:29:32 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
06M320110624 - cfc11
The saturation mixing ratio points towards too high CFC_11 concentrations.
However, it is still within the accepted range and the data fits good to the
CFC_12 data, too. No adjustment.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-04-26 14:06:08 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
06M320110624 - cfc12
The saturation ratio of the upper 20m points towards too high CFC_12
concentrations. However, given the good fit to the CFC_11 data and given the
threshold limit no adjustment should be applied.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-04-26 14:03:19 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
06M320110624 - oxygen
Many crossovers present. Most of the offsets are within the acceptable range,
which is also reflected in the total weighted mean offset being very close to 1.
Given the large variability and high number of acceptable offsets there is
Little to no reason for an adjustment.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-04-26 13:59:10 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
06M320110624 - salinity
Temporal trend in salinity concentrations visible, resulting in more negative
offsets for older cruises, esp. cruises older 1998. Hence the total weighted
mean offset of -0.01 should not be used as an indication for an adjustment. Many
of the more recent cruises even have positive offsets, in some cases even above
the limit, e.g. 06MM2009. All in all no adjustment should be applied.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-04-26 13:54:46 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Hide comments