Cruise: 49UF20100108 (dataset:GLODAPv2.2019.NEW) Data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Synonyms (including errata!) for this cruise: ks201001; ks201001; 49UF20100108; non-GO-SHIP but on GO-SHIP line:P13; Section:Eq;
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 | |
---|---|---|---|
Redfield.png | View |
- no files! -
Plot/Data files re. Parameter(s) (select parameter on left side to view!):
alkalinity:3
cruise:1
nitrate:11
oxygen:11
phosphate:12
salinity:13
silicate:9
tco2:3
- no files! -
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
325019931005_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
325020040424_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
49HG20000912_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
49RY19940707_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
49RY20110515_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
49UF20040616_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
49UF20080117_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
49UF20080617_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
49UP20060113_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
49UP20070118_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
49UP20100706_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
49WA19960516_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/salinity!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by salinity in subject)
49UF20100108 - salinity
The uncertainty in almost all crossovers is extreme. However, the data seems to
fit well to the other cruises. The outlier 32502004 with a weighted offset of
0.065 is a consequence of bad interpolation, thus can be ignored. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:38:04 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
322019920816_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/tco2!] |
View | |
49RY20110515_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/tco2!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/tco2!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by tco2 in subject)
49UF20100108 - tco2
Too few data too make a 2nd QC.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:35:41 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
322019920816_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/alkalinity!] |
View | |
49RY20110515_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/alkalinity!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/alkalinity!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by alkalinity in subject)
49UF20100108 - alkalinity
Only 2 crossovers present. The data fits well to 32201992, but shows a weighted
offset of 8.8 (!) to the more recent RY2011 cruise. However it is only one
profile that makes up for most of this high offset. Not enough crossovers for a
full 2nd QC.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:36:12 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
View comment(s) (filtered by ph in subject)
49UF20100108 - ph
No significant crossovers for this cruise. The interconsistency check (type 2)
shows a strong misfit though (offset of -0.0311).
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:38:39 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
49UF20100108 - phosphate
The individual crossover results vary a lot, but the absolute weighted mean
offset is only 1.01. Maintain. Note that the larger offsets are mostly based on
stations at the very southern end of the leg (near PNG).
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:37:32 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
325019931005_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
49HG20000912_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
49RY19940707_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
49RY20110515_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
49UF20040616_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
49UF20080117_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
49UP20060113_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
49UP20070118_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
49UP20100706_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
49WA19960516_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/nitrate!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by nitrate in subject)
49UF20100108 - nitrate
More than 90% of the offsets clearly within the acceptable range. The outliers
are of dubious quality, too. Accurate data, maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:37:09 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
325019931005_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
49HG20000912_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
49RY19940707_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
49RY20110515_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
49UF20040616_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
49UF20080117_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
49UP20060113_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
49UP20070118_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
49UP20080122_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
49UP20100706_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
49WA19960516_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/phosphate!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by phosphate in subject)
49UF20100108 - phosphate
The individual crossover results vary a lot, but the absolute weighted mean
offset is only 1.01. Maintain. Note that the larger offsets are mostly based on
stations at the very southern end of the leg (near PNG).
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:37:32 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
49HG20000912_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
49RY19940707_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
49RY20110515_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
49UF20040616_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
49UF20080117_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
49UP20060113_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
49UP20070118_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
49UP20100706_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/silicate!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by silicate in subject)
49UF20100108 - silicate
The great majority of the crossovers indicate at least 1% too low
concentrations. However, given the limited depth (note the large standard
deviations) the results should be treated with caution. As the absolute
weighted mean offset falls within the acceptable range, maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:38:24 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Filename: | Comment: | Action | |
---|---|---|---|
325019931005_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
49HG20000912_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
49RY19940707_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
49RY20110515_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
49UF20040616_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
49UF20080117_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
49UP20060113_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
49UP20070118_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
49UP20100706_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
49WA19960516_Xover.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View | |
Xresults.png | [autogenerated from RC_Nico/oxygen!] |
View |
View comment(s) (filtered by oxygen in subject)
49UF20100108 - oxygen
Difficult analysis as it is based on only 1500m - 2050m. The consenus for this
cruise is quite strong and most crossovers inidcate too high concentrations.
Nonetheless, other cruises with deeper samples show that especially the
"shallower" data is very variable in this region and that offsets in these
depths (1500m - 2000m) can be misleading. Taking the large standard deviations
into account I find it hard to trust the mean offsets. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:36:51 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
View 9 comment(s) (Lists all comments)
49UF20100108 - ph
No significant crossovers for this cruise. The interconsistency check (type 2)
shows a strong misfit though (offset of -0.0311).
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:38:39 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
49UF20100108 - silicate
The great majority of the crossovers indicate at least 1% too low
concentrations. However, given the limited depth (note the large standard
deviations) the results should be treated with caution. As the absolute
weighted mean offset falls within the acceptable range, maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:38:24 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
49UF20100108 - salinity
The uncertainty in almost all crossovers is extreme. However, the data seems to
fit well to the other cruises. The outlier 32502004 with a weighted offset of
0.065 is a consequence of bad interpolation, thus can be ignored. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:38:04 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
49UF20100108 - phosphate
The individual crossover results vary a lot, but the absolute weighted mean
offset is only 1.01. Maintain. Note that the larger offsets are mostly based on
stations at the very southern end of the leg (near PNG).
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:37:32 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
49UF20100108 - nitrate
More than 90% of the offsets clearly within the acceptable range. The outliers
are of dubious quality, too. Accurate data, maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:37:09 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
49UF20100108 - oxygen
Difficult analysis as it is based on only 1500m - 2050m. The consenus for this
cruise is quite strong and most crossovers inidcate too high concentrations.
Nonetheless, other cruises with deeper samples show that especially the
"shallower" data is very variable in this region and that offsets in these
depths (1500m - 2000m) can be misleading. Taking the large standard deviations
into account I find it hard to trust the mean offsets. Maintain.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:36:51 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
49UF20100108 - alkalinity
Only 2 crossovers present. The data fits well to 32201992, but shows a weighted
offset of 8.8 (!) to the more recent RY2011 cruise. However it is only one
profile that makes up for most of this high offset. Not enough crossovers for a
full 2nd QC.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:36:12 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
49UF20100108 - tco2
Too few data too make a 2nd QC.
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-06 11:35:41 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
49UF20100108 - initialized
non-GO-SHIP but on GO-SHIP line:P13; Section:Eq; Carbon PI:Shiya Minato;
Hydrography PI:Tatsushi Shiga; Oxygen PI:Tatsushi Shiga; Nutrients PI:Tatsushi
Shiga
Posted by nlange@geomar.de on 2018-09-04 08:19:33 UTC for data product: GLODAPv2.2019, v2.2020, v2.2021, v2.2022, v2.2023
Hide comments