Cruise: 33HQ20150809 (dataset:GLODAPv2.2019.NEW) Data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021 Successor: GLODAPv2.2022, v2.2023
Synonyms (including errata!) for this cruise: ARC01; 33HQ20150809; alias: ARC01; 32H120150809; ARC01
IMPORTANT information for GLODAP Reference Group Editors: This adjustment version is immutable and published in GLODAPv2.2019! Click here to switch to new version (GLODAPv2.2019)
Please wait while loading list of related files
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
Redfield.png | View | ||
tracer.png | View | ||
tracer_complete.png | View |
- no files! -
Plot/Data files re. Parameter(s) (select parameter on left side to view!):
alkalinity:2
cfc11:1
cfc12:1
cruise:3
nitrate:10
oxygen:9
phosphate:10
salinity:10
silicate:10
tco2:1
- no files! -
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
06AQ19960712_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
06AQ20070728_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
18HS19930824_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
18SN19940724_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
32PZ20020819_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
49NZ20040901_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
77DN19910726_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
77DN20050819_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)
33HQ20150809 - salinity
All crossovers show only very small Offsets. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:38:22 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
tco2_MLR_po4.png | View |
View comment(s) (filtered by tco2 in subject)
33HQ20150809 - tco2
No crossovers present. But a comparison of the depth average of this cruise
versus surrounding cruises (2153 μmol kg−1 vs 2158 μmol kg−1) indicates
"acceptable" data. Additional MLR analyses (here only the one with a R-squared
value above 0.4 included) actually indicates quite accurate (even slightly too
high) concentrations. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-08-21 14:54:34 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
ta_MLR_ni.png | View | ||
talk_MLR_po4.png | View |
View comment(s) (filtered by alkalinity in subject)
33HQ20150809 - alkalinity
No crossovers present. But a comparison of the depth average of this cruise
versus surrounding cruises (2300 μmol kg−1 vs 2298 μmol kg−1) indicates accurate
data. Additional MLR analyses Support this finding. Note the very low R-squared
values... Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-08-21 14:57:30 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
View comment(s) (filtered by ph in subject)
33HQ20150809 - ph
A carbon inter consistency check (type 2) indicates that the pH data fits nicely
to TA and tco2 data (showing a mean offset of 0.0022). Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-07-27 10:50:19 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
33HQ20150809 - phosphate
The results of the crossovers seem to be dependant on the region. I.e.
crossovers in the west show no or positive offsets (e.g. 77DN1991), whereas
crossovers based on stations in the east show negative offsets (e.g. 32PZ2002 -
even below the limit). Given this "pattern" and that the weighted mean is within
the acceptable range no adjustment suggested.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:37:06 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
06AQ19960712_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
06AQ20070728_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
18HS19930824_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
18SN19940724_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
32PZ20020819_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
49NZ20040901_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
77DN19910726_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
77DN20050819_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by nitrate in subject)
33HQ20150809 - nitrate
18HS1994 is the only crossover with an offset above 1. It is based on only few
measurements of stations relative close to the coast, i.e. it is not too
reliable. The other offsets (except one outlier) are consistently between 0.99
and 1 indicatingh good accuracy. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:31:02 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
06AQ19960712_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
06AQ20070728_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
18HS19930824_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
18SN19940724_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
32PZ20020819_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
49NZ20040901_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
77DN19910726_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
77DN20050819_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by phosphate in subject)
33HQ20150809 - phosphate
The results of the crossovers seem to be dependant on the region. I.e.
crossovers in the west show no or positive offsets (e.g. 77DN1991), whereas
crossovers based on stations in the east show negative offsets (e.g. 32PZ2002 -
even below the limit). Given this "pattern" and that the weighted mean is within
the acceptable range no adjustment suggested.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:37:06 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
06AQ19960712_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
06AQ20070728_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
18HS19930824_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
18SN19940724_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
32PZ20020819_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
33PY19960913_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
49NZ20040901_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
77DN19910726_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
77DN20050819_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by silicate in subject)
33HQ20150809 - silicate
All offsets, but the one of 06AQ1996 (not reliable), are above 1. Note that
18HS1993 is also not too reliable, as the crossover-stations are very close to
the coast. The other offsets are either just above the upper limit or within the
acceptable range. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:43:13 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
06AQ19960712_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
06AQ20070728_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
18HS19930824_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
18SN19940724_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
32PZ20020819_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
49NZ20040901_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
77DN19910726_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
77DN20050819_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by oxygen in subject)
33HQ20150809 - oxygen
All crossovers, except for 77DN1991, indicate too low concentrations. 49NZ2004
was strongly adjusted upward (?)...
Nevertheless, not enough evidence for a small adjustment.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:26:03 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
CFC-12-saturation.png | View |
View comment(s) (filtered by cfc12 in subject)
33HQ20150809 - cfc12
The data seems to be just on the acceptable limit. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:46:18 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
CFC-11-saturation.png | View |
View comment(s) (filtered by cfc11 in subject)
33HQ20150809 - cfc11
The data seems to be just on the acceptable limit. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:46:21 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
View 10 comment(s) (Lists all comments)
33HQ20150809 - alkalinity
No crossovers present. But a comparison of the depth average of this cruise
versus surrounding cruises (2300 μmol kg−1 vs 2298 μmol kg−1) indicates accurate
data. Additional MLR analyses Support this finding. Note the very low R-squared
values... Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-08-21 14:57:30 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
33HQ20150809 - tco2
No crossovers present. But a comparison of the depth average of this cruise
versus surrounding cruises (2153 μmol kg−1 vs 2158 μmol kg−1) indicates
"acceptable" data. Additional MLR analyses (here only the one with a R-squared
value above 0.4 included) actually indicates quite accurate (even slightly too
high) concentrations. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-08-21 14:54:34 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
33HQ20150809 - ph
A carbon inter consistency check (type 2) indicates that the pH data fits nicely
to TA and tco2 data (showing a mean offset of 0.0022). Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-07-27 10:50:19 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
33HQ20150809 - cfc11
The data seems to be just on the acceptable limit. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:46:21 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
33HQ20150809 - cfc12
The data seems to be just on the acceptable limit. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:46:18 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
33HQ20150809 - silicate
All offsets, but the one of 06AQ1996 (not reliable), are above 1. Note that
18HS1993 is also not too reliable, as the crossover-stations are very close to
the coast. The other offsets are either just above the upper limit or within the
acceptable range. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:43:13 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
33HQ20150809 - salinity
All crossovers show only very small Offsets. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:38:22 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
33HQ20150809 - phosphate
The results of the crossovers seem to be dependant on the region. I.e.
crossovers in the west show no or positive offsets (e.g. 77DN1991), whereas
crossovers based on stations in the east show negative offsets (e.g. 32PZ2002 -
even below the limit). Given this "pattern" and that the weighted mean is within
the acceptable range no adjustment suggested.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:37:06 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
33HQ20150809 - nitrate
18HS1994 is the only crossover with an offset above 1. It is based on only few
measurements of stations relative close to the coast, i.e. it is not too
reliable. The other offsets (except one outlier) are consistently between 0.99
and 1 indicatingh good accuracy. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:31:02 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
33HQ20150809 - oxygen
All crossovers, except for 77DN1991, indicate too low concentrations. 49NZ2004
was strongly adjusted upward (?)...
Nevertheless, not enough evidence for a small adjustment.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-06-14 14:26:03 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021
Hide comments