ORNL/CDIAC-122 NDP-071 CARBON DIOXIDE, HYDROGRAPHIC, AND CHEMICAL DATA OBTAINED DURING THE R/V THOMAS G. THOMPSON CRUISE IN THE PACIFIC OCEAN (WOCE SECTION P10, OCTOBER 5 NOVEMBER 10, 1993) Contributed by Christopher L. Sabine*, Robert M. Key*, and Melinda Hall**, *Department of Geosciences Princeton University Princeton, New Jersey **Department of Physical Oceanography Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Woods Hole, Massachusetts Prepared by Alexander Kozyr*** Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, Tennessee ***Energy, Environment, and Resources Center The University of Tennessee Knoxville, Tennessee Environmental Sciences Division Publication No. 4894 Date Published: August 1999 Prepared for the Environmental Sciences Division Office of Biological and Environmental Research U.S. Department of Energy Budget Activity Numbers KP 12 04 01 0 and KP 12 02 03 0 Prepared by the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-6335 managed by LOCKHEED MARTIN ENERGY RESEARCH CORP. for the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under contract DE-AC05-96OR22464 ABBREVIATIONS 14C radiocarbon ADCP acoustic Doppler current profiler AMS accelerator mass spectrometry ASCII American Standard Code for Information Interchange BNL Brookhaven National Laboratory CDIAC Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center CFC chlorofluorocarbon CMDL Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics Laboratory CO2 carbon dioxide CPU central processing unit CRM certified reference material CTD conductivity, temperature, and depth sensor DOE U.S. Department of Energy emf electromotive force fCO2 fugacity of CO2 FTP file transfer protocol GASCAL gas loop titration efficiency GEOSECS Geochemical Ocean Sections Study GMT Greenwich Mean Time IR infrared LV large volume NDP numeric data package NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology nm nautical mile NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOSAMS National Ocean Sciences Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Facility OSU Oregon State University pCO2 partial pressure of CO2 PRT platinum resistance thermometer PSS practical salinity scale PU Princeton University QA/QC quality assurance/quality control R/V research vessel SD standard deviation SIO Scripps Institute of Oceanography SOMMA single-operator multiparameter metabolic analyzer SV small volume TALK total alkalinity TCO2 total carbon dioxide TE titration efficiency UH University of Hawaii URL universal resource locator UW University of Washington WHOI Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution WHP WOCE Hydrographic Program WOCE World Ocean Circulation Experiment xCO2 mole fraction of CO2 ABSTRACT Sabine, C. L., R. M. Key, M. Hall, and A. Kozyr (ed.). 1999. Carbon Dioxide, Hydrographic, and Chemical Data Obtained During the R/V Thomas G. Thompson Cruise in the Pacific Ocean (WOCE Section P10, October 5 - November 10, 1993). ORNL/CDIAC-122, NDP-071 Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, U.S.A. 70 pp. doi: 10.3334/CDIAC/otg.ndp071 This data documentation discusses the procedures and methods used to measure total carbon dioxide (TCO2), total alkalinity (TALK), and radiocarbon (delta 14C), at hydrographic stations, as well as the underway partial pressure of CO2 (pCO2) during the R/V Thomas G. Thompson oceanographic cruise in the Pacific Ocean (Section P10). Conducted as part of the World Ocean Circulation Experiment (WOCE), the cruise began in Suva, Fiji, on October 5, 1993, and ended in Yokohama, Japan, on November 10, 1993. Measurements made along WOCE Section P10 included pressure, temperature, salinity [measured by conductivity, temperature, and depth sensor (CTD)], bottle salinity, bottle oxygen, phosphate, nitrate, nitrite, silicate, chlorofluorocarbons (CFC-11 , CFC-12), TCO2, TALK, delta 14C, and underway pCO2. The TCO2 was measured by coulometry using a Single-Operator Multiparameter Metabolic Analyzer (SOMMA). The overall precision and accuracy of the analyses was ±2 µmol/kg. Samples collected for TALK were measured by potentiometric titration; precision was ±4 µmol/kg. Small volume samples collected for 14C were sent to shore and measured by use of an accelerator mass spectrometry technique. Underway xCO2 was measured by infrared photometry with a precision of ±1 µatm. The CO2-related measurements aboard the R/V Thomas G. Thompson were supported by the U.S. Department of Energy. P10 is the western most section of the U.S. WOCE survey of the North Pacific Ocean. It is important for understanding the dynamics of the far western equatorial Pacific. The results from this cruise can be used to infer the relative magnitude of various tracers to the North Pacific from the South China Sea and the Sea of Japan. WOCE Section P10 also provides a transect across the Kuroshio Current that can be used to better understand the northward transport of heat, salt, and other important ocean tracers. The underway surface measurements show a small outgassing of CO2 at the equator. The TCO2, TA, and radiocarbon values show profiles typical for the North Pacific. TA correlates strongly with salinity. 14C correlates strongly with silicate. Deflection of the isolines of all parameters at the northern end of the cruise results from the Kuroshio Current. The WOCE Section P10 data set is available free of charge as a numeric data package (NDP) from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center. The NDP consists of four oceanographic data files, four FORTRAN 90 data-retrieval routine files, a documentation file, and this printed report, which describes the contents and format of all files as well as the procedures and methods used to obtain the data. Instructions on how to access the data are provided. Keywords: carbon dioxide; coulometry; World Ocean Circulation Experiment; Pacific Ocean; hydrographic measurements; alkalinity; partial pressure of carbon dioxide; radiocarbon; carbon cycle PART 1: OVERVIEW 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The World Ocean plays a dynamic role in the Earth's climate: it captures heat from the sun, transports it, and releases it thousands of miles away. These oceanic-solar-atmospheric interactions affect winds, rainfall patterns, and temperatures on a global scale. The oceans also play a major role in global carbon-cycle processes. Carbon is unevenly distributed in the oceans because of complex circulation patterns and biogeochemical cycles. The oceans are estimated to hold 38,000 gigatons of carbon, 50 times more than that in the atmosphere and 20 times more than that in plants, animals, and soil. If only 2% of the carbon stored in the oceans were released, the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) would double. Every year, the amount of CO2 exchanged across the sea surface is more than 15 times that produced by the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, and other human activities (Williams 1990). To better understand the ocean's role in climate and climatic changes, several large experiments have been conducted, and others are under way. The largest oceanographic experiment ever attempted is the World Ocean Circulation Experiment (WOCE). A major component of the World Climate Research Program, WOCE brings together the expertise of scientists and technicians from more than 30 nations. In the United States, WOCE is supported by the federal government under the Global Change Research Program. The multiagency U.S. effort is led by the National Science Foundation and is supported by major contributions from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the Office of Naval Research, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Although total carbon dioxide (TCO2) is not an official WOCE measurement, a coordinated effort, supported in the United States by DOE, was made on WOCE cruises to measure the global distributions of TCO2 and other carbon-related parameters [total alkalinity (TALK), partial pressure of CO2 (pCO2), and pH]. The goal of the DOE's CO2 survey includes estimation of the meridional transport of inorganic carbon in a manner analogous to the oceanic heat transport (Bryden and Hall 1980; Brewer et al. 1989; Roemmich and Wunsch 1985), evaluation of the exchange of CO2 between the atmosphere and the ocean, preparation of a database suitable for carbon-cycle modeling, and subsequent assessment of anthropogenic CO2 in the oceans. The final data set is expected to cover ~23,000 stations. This report presents CO2-related measurements obtained during the 37-days of the Research Vessel (R/V) Thomas G. Thompson expedition along the WOCE meridional Section P10. 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE EXPEDITION 2.1 R/V Thomas G. Thompson Cruise Information R/V Thomas G. Thompson cruise information follows: Ship name Thomas G. Thompson Expedition code 3250TN026/1 WOCE Section P10 Location Suva, Fiji, to Yokohama, Japan Dates October 5 - November 10, 1993 Chief Scientist Melinda Hall (WHOI) Parameters measured Institution Principal investigators CTD,* salinity, oxygen WHOI M. Hall Nutrients OSU L. Gordon Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) UW M. Warner Tritium and helium WHOI W. Jenkins TCO2, TALK, and underway xCO2 PU C. Sabine Radiocarbon (14C) PU R. Key Underway ADCP** WHOI T. Joyce Lowered ADCP UH P. Hacker and E. Firing Participating Institutions WHOI Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution OSU Oregon State University UW University of Washington PU Princeton University UH University of Hawaii _________________________________________________ *Conductivity, temperature, and depth sensor. **Acoustic Doppler current profiler. 2.2 Brief Cruise Summary The objective of this cruise was to occupy a hydrographic section nominally along 149° E from Papua, New Guinea, to the shelf of Japan near Yokohama as part of the one-time WOCE Hydrographic Program (WHP) survey of the Pacific Ocean. A CTD with a 36-place, 10-L rosette was used on a total of 94 small-volume (SV) stations with water sampling for salinity, oxygen, nutrients, CFCs, tritium/helium, TALK, TCO2, and 14C. The station spacing ranged from 5 to 40 nautical miles (nm), and most lowerings were made to within 10 m of the bottom. A lowered ADCP was attached to the rosette on 53 of the stations. At seven stations, additional casts were made for large-volume (LV) sampling of 14C in the deep and mid-depth waters. These LV casts were usually made with nine, 250-L Gerard barrels. Underway measurements along the cruise track included pCO2, ADCP, digital echo-sounding, thermosalinograph, and meteorology. The P10 cruise was the third in a series of three WHP one-time cruises aboard the R/V Thomas G. Thompson in 1993, following P17N and P14N. The ship departed Suva, Fiji, on November 5, 1993, and steamed north-west to the northern coastline of Papua, New Guinea, where the section began at the 200-m isobath. During the 7-day deadhead, three test stations were occupied (not included in the station numbering scheme) to shake down equipment and water-sampling methodology. The station track, designed in early planning documents for 145° E, was shifted eastward in an effort to depart the New Guinea coastline perpendicular to the bathymetry, then skirt the Mariana Ridge and Trough to the east, thus making the whole section in the East Mariana Basin, rather than in both that basin and the Philippine Basin farther west. Where bottom depths changed rapidly (near the coast and passing the Caroline Seamounts around 6-8° N), station spacing was dictated by topographic changes; within 3° of the Equator, spacing was every 15 min of latitude along the ship track (nominally 15 nm, but slightly more due to the track angle), stretching to 30 nm up to 10.5° N, then 40 nm from there to station 73 at 28.5° N. At that point the cruise track was going straight toward the Japan coast in order to cross the Kuroshio Current. The ADCP results indicated that this crossing was approximately perpendicular to the current. Over the northern dogleg, station spacing gradually decreased to resolve the strong front of the Kuroshio Current, and ultimately, to accommodate rapid topographic changes near the coast. Stations generally went to within 10 m of the bottom except over the Japan Trench and a few other stations where bottom depths exceed 6000 dbar. No stations were lost due to weather, and the ship arrived in Yokohama on November 10, 1993. The general sampling strategy for the carbon work was to collect and analyze as many full profiles for TCO2 and TALK as practical. The TCO2 analysis was slightly faster than the TALK analysis and generally determined the frequency of sampling. Full profiles were collected at 32 of the 94 hydrographic stations occupied on this leg, with gaps of no more than two consecutive stations between profiles. Duplicate samples were collected at every sample station from Niskins tripped in shallow, mid-depth, and deep waters for both TCO2 and TALK to evaluate the quality and precision of sampling and analysis. All TCO2 samples were analyzed at sea; however ~20% (220 samples) of the TALK samples were returned to Princeton University for shore-based analysis. To preserve the continuity of the profiles, all of the TALK samples at select stations were bottled for return to the laboratory. At least three additional replicate TALK samples were collected at these stations and analyzed at sea to ensure the compatibility of the two data sets [see further explanation in quality assurance / quality control (QA/QC) section]. In addition to the TCO2 samples collected for on-board analysis, 40 samples were collected at 10 stations for shore-based TCO2 analysis by vacuum extraction and manometry by Charles D. Keeling of Scripps Institute of Oceanography (SIO). 3. DESCRIPTION OF VARIABLES AND METHODS 3.1 Hydrographic Measurements Two WHOI-modified EG&G Mk-III CTDs were provided for the cruise, although only one was used throughout the entire cruise (CTD #10). It was provided with an optional oxygen current and temperature channel and modified at WHOI to include a thermally isolated titanium pressure transducer, with a separately digitized pressure and temperature channel. The temperature and pressure calibrations were made at WHOI prior to and following the cruise. The CTD pressure, temperature, and conductivity data were processed and corrected according to laboratory calibrations. Pressure values are expected to be accurate to ±3 dbar; temperature values to ±0.002 C. The water samples for the analysis of salinity, dissolved oxygen, and nutrients were collected from each of the 36 10-L bottles tripped on the upcast of each CTD station, in accordance with the recommendations of the WOCE Hydrographic Office. The vertical distribution of these samples was a compromise between the need to obtain deep samples for the calibration of the CTD conductivity and oxygen sensors and the requirement to define the characteristics of the water masses by the distributions of the various measured parameters. Salinity samples were drawn into 120-mL Boston Round flint glass bottles with screw caps equipped with Poly-Seal® cones to prevent leakage and evaporation. After determining some problems with the quality of salinity measurements, it was decided to change the bottles. Beginning with station 59, samples for salinity measurements were collected in 200-mL square Kimax bottles, with polyethylene caps and inserts, owned by SIO, and a dramatic improvement was seen. Salinity was determined on the basis of electrical conductivity with a Guildline Autosal® salinometer. Samples for dissolved oxygen were collected soon after the rosette sampler was brought on board and after CFC and helium samples were collected. Samples were titrated in the volume-calibrated iodine flasks with a 1-mL microburette, using whole-bottle automated Winkler titration. Estimated accuracy was 0.02 mL/L. Nutrient samples were drawn from all CTD/rosette casts at stations 1 through 94 and at several test stations that preceded station 1. High-density polyethylene bottles of ~30-mL volume were used as sample containers, and these same bottles were positioned directly in the autosampler tray. These bottles were routinely rinsed at least three times with one-third to one-half of their volume of sample before filling and were thoroughly cleaned with 10% HCl every two or three days. The measurements were performed with an Alpkem Rapid Flow Analyzer, model 300. A Keithley data acquisition system was used in parallel with analog strip-chart recorders to acquire the absorbance data. The software used to process the nutrient data was developed at OSU. All of the reagent and standard materials were provided by OSU. 3.2 TCO2 Measurements During the R/V Thomas G. Thompson expedition along WOCE Section P10, 1072 TCO2 samples were collected according to methods outlined in the DOE Handbook (DOE 1994) and stored in 300-mL borosilicate glass bottles in a 20°C water bath until the samples could be processed (maximum of 12 h). Samples were poisoned immediately after collection with 200 µL of saturated HgCl2 solution to minimize biological activity prior to analysis. Samples were analyzed using a computer controlled single-operator multiparameter metabolic analyzer (SOMMA) system and UIC model 5011 coulometer following standard methods (Johnson et al. 1985, 1987; DOE 1994). The SOMMA temperature sensors (National Semiconductor, Santa Clara, Calif., model LM34CH) were calibrated against a certified mercury thermometer and thermistors certified to 0.01°C (Thermometrics, Edison, N.J., part number CSP60BT103M). These sensors monitored the pipette, the gas sample loops, and the coulometer cell temperatures. The Digiquartz Transducer barometer (Paroscientific, Redmond, Wash., model 216B-101) was factory- calibrated prior to the cruise. The SOMMA sample delivery pipette volume was gravimetrically determined before the cruise to be 21.7758 ± 0.0016 mL using deionized water at a temperature of 20.32°C. Post-cruise calibration confirmed that the pipette volume remained constant throughout the cruise. Sample weight was calculated from the pipette volume, the measured sample temperature, and the bottle salinity value measured by the WHOI CTD group on all but three samples. The bottle salinity values from station 18, Niskins 25, 26, and 27, had values significantly different (>0.1) from the CTD salinity values and from other bottle salinity values from equivalent depths of the surrounding casts. This difference was large enough to result in an error in the calculated density that was greater than the sample precision; therefore, the sample density was recalculated for those three samples using the CTD salinity. Cylinders of compressed ultrahigh-purity nitrogen and 350-ppm CO2 in air were used as the system's carrier gas and headspace gas, respectively. Titration cells were prepared with fresh cathode and anode solutions at the beginning of each cast. A system blank was determined for each cell by keeping track of the total number of counts accumulated by the coulometer's voltage-to-frequency converter over a 10-min period. The counts used for determining the TCO2 of a sample were then determined by subtracting the blank counts (average blank value in counts per minute times the length of the titration in minutes) from the total counts registered for that titration. Two methods were used to evaluate the calibration of the TCO2 system. The first method titrated a known volume of CO2 gas to determine a system efficiency. This method involved filling one of two different-sized gas loops with primary standard-grade CO2 gas (Scott Grade 5 CO2, 99.999% pure). Based on the loop volume, pressure, and temperature, a known amount of CO2 was introduced into the coulometer and titrated. Gas calibrations using both the large (1.5224 mL) and small (1.0586 mL) loops were run at the beginning and end of each titration cell. The second calibration method involved the titration of certified reference materials (CRMs) provided by Andrew Dickson of SIO at the beginning and end of every titration cell. The CRMs were analyzed in the same manner as a sample and the results compared to the certified value determined by vacuum extraction and manometry. Although the gas loop and CRM calibration methods are very different (pure CO2 gas vs seawater), the results can be directly compared by examining the titration efficiency (TE; coulometer counts per µmole of carbon titrated) determined for each sample. The TE for the CRM samples (TECRM) was determined from the blank corrected coulometer counts, sample volume (vol), sample density (p) (Millero and Poisson 1981), and certified CRM value (Tcert; 2031.65 µmol/kg): TEcrm = counts / (Tcert × vol × p) . The TE for the gas loop calibrations was determined by dividing the blank corrected coulometer counts by the amount of CO2 (µmoles) introduced to the coulometer. The amount of CO2 was determined by dividing the loop volume by the molar volume of CO2 (VCO2) at the measured loop temperature (T) and pressure (P) using an iterative approach: VCO2 = RT / P × [1 + B(T) / VCO2] , where B(T) is the first viral coefficient for pure CO2, and R is the gas constant. Generally, the gas loop calibration is very reliable and accurate for SOMMA system calibrations (Johnson et al. 1987); however, a plot of the CRM and gas loop TE values shows that during the first half of the cruise, the gas loop efficiency was lower than the TEcrm values (Fig. 3 in hard copy). Because the loop calibration system was new and untested on this system, and there was no reason to think that the CRM values would not be stable over the length of the cruise, the TEcrm values were deemed to be more representative of the system efficiency. The gas loop TE values determined near the end of the cruise were more consistent with the TECRM values. Despite post-cruise recalibration of the SOMMA at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) and extensive conversations with Ken Johnson of BNL, the exact cause of the gas loop problem has not been determined. A small increase in efficiency was observed in the TEcrm values during the cruise. The TE values used to calibrate the sample TCO2 values, therefore, were determined by fitting the TEcrm values with a linear regression as a function of time (Fig. 3). The TCO2 of samples in µmol/kg was determined using the following equation: TCO2 = counts / (0.1763148 × day + 4746.161) × [1000 / (vol × p )] × 1.00067 , where counts are the blank corrected coulometer counts, day includes the fractional day determined from the titration time, vol is the "to deliver" volume of the pipette corrected for the thermal expansion of glass, p is the density of seawater, and 1.00067 corrects for the dilution of the sample by the addition of 200 µL of HgCl2 to the 300-mL sample bottle. The analytical precision of the TCO2 analyses can be estimated from the standard deviation (SD) of the 83 CRMs analyzed throughout the cruise. The SD of the calibrated batch 15 CRM values was ±1.91 µmol/kg. The sample precision can be evaluated from the 70 sets of duplicate samples collected in shallow, mid-depth, and deep waters at every station. The average difference between duplicates was 0.16 ± 1.71 µmol/kg, suggesting that sample precision was not significantly different from the analytical precision of the CRMs. As a further check on the accuracy of the TCO2 analyses, duplicate samples from the surface and the 3000-m Niskins were collected from 10 stations along the cruise track and returned to SIO for analysis by vacuum extraction and manometry in C. D. Keeling's laboratory. Ten samples have been analyzed to date, giving a mean difference (shore - sea) of 0.52 ± 1.78 µmol/kg, which is not statistically different from zero (Table 1). Note that one sample was considered bad and was excluded from the calculation because it was more than two standard deviations from the mean. These replicates also further corroborate the use of the CRM calibration since the mean difference for the gas loop calibration values would have been 2.97 ± 2.49 µmol/kg. Table 1. Comparison of shipboard TCO2 analyses to shore-based TCO2 analyses made by C. D. Keeling at SIO ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Station no. Niskin no TCO2 (PU) TCO2 (SIO) delta CO2 (SIO - PU) (µmol/kg) (µmol/kg) (µmol/kg) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 3 2332.0 2332.2 0.2 27 36 1895.4 1894.5 -0.9 38 36 1857.6 1856.4 -1.2 47 36 1893.5 1897.1 3.6 47 14 2337.8 2336.3 -1.5 65 12 2330.0 2336.0 6.0 71 13 2336.9 2336.9 0.0 80 13 2344.9 2345.9 0.9 86 35 1946.6 1949.7 3.0 86 12 2343.3 2343.9 0.6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mean Delta* 0.52 SD* 1.78 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ *does not include sample from station no. 65, Niskin no. 12. 3.3 TALK Measurements During the expedition, 1099 TALK samples were collected according to methods outlined in the DOE Handbook (DOE 1994) and stored in 250-mL borosilicate glass bottles until the samples could be processed. Samples were poisoned immediately after collection with 200 µL of a saturated solution of HgCl2 in deionized water to minimize biological activity prior to analysis. A total of 879 samples were analyzed at sea, and the remaining 220 were returned to the laboratory for analysis. The samples returned for shore-based analysis were from six stations: 30, 41, 54, 71, 77, and 86. Samples analyzed at sea were brought to 25°C in a water bath, then pumped into a water- jacketed, 100-cm3, closed titration cell with a peristaltic pump. The cell design is described in the DOE Handbook (DOE 1994). The acid titrant was made by adding concentrated HCl to a 0.5 molar NaCl solution to give a normality of approximately 0.2. The calibrated acid normality (0.195091 ± 0.000041µmol/kg solution) was determined immediately after the cruise by A. Dickson of SIO using the coulometric technique described by Millero et al. (1993). The titration system consisted of a personal computer, a Metrohm 665 Dosimat digital burette, an Orion 720A pH meter, and a Corning semi micro pH electrode. Using a program similar to those used by previous investigators (Bradshaw and Brewer 1988; Millero et al. 1993), the system automatically titrated the sample past the carbonic acid endpoint with electromotive force (emf) intervals of approximately 13 mV. The TALK was calculated from the full titration curve using the nonlinear least-squares approach described in the DOE Handbook (DOE 1994), with the exception that the effect of temperature on the dissociation constants was determined for every titration point based on the measured sample temperature. Sample weight was calculated from the cell volume, the measured sample temperature, and the bottle salinity value measured by the WHOI CTD group on all but three samples. The bottle salinity values from station 18, Niskins 25, 26, and 27, were significantly different (>0.1) from the CTD salinity values and from other bottle salinity values from equivalent depths for the surrounding casts. This difference was large enough to result in an error in the calculated density that was greater than the sample precision, therefore the sample density was recalculated for those three samples using the CTD salinity. To evaluate the performance of the alkalinity system, CRMs were titrated between each set of samples from a station. Two titration cells were used to run the at-sea samples. The first cell was used for stations 1 to 33. This cell was replaced with a new cell before running the station 36 samples, because the CRM values titrated on first cell had a steady upward drift with time for the 8 days it was in use. The replacement cell gave a much more satisfactory performance and was used for the remainder of the cruise. Sodium carbonate standards were dried and stored in airtight vials following the procedures described in the DOE Handbook (DOE 1994). Sets of four solutions were made in precalibrated volumetric flasks using a 0.7 molar NaCl solution with nominal concentrations of 600, 1200, 2400, and 2800 µmol/kg. Four replicate titrations of each solution were made to generate a calibration curve for the cell. Fresh standards were prepared and titrated at the beginning of the cruise, before replacing the first alkalinity cell, after the replacement cell was in place, and at the end of the cruise. The time-dependent increase in the first-cell TALK values was removed using a linear fit of the CRM TALK values as a function of time (Fig. 4 in hard copy). The mean TALK of the corrected CRM values was adjusted to match the mean of the second cell CRM values. The final calibration of all samples run at sea was then determined by fitting the sodium carbonate titration data as outlined in the DOE Handbook (DOE 1994). The fit of the nominally measured alkalinity vs the alkalinity calculated from the weight of sodium carbonate gave a slope of 0.987 ± 0.006 and an intercept of 12 ± 11 (Fig. 5). The final cell volume was determined by dividing the nominal cell volume by the slope. Applying this correction resulted in a mean batch 15 CRM alkalinity value of 2207.2 ± 3.9 µmol/kg (N = 98) for the cruise. The mean difference for sample replicates run at sea was 0.5 ± 3.8 µmol/kg (N = 71). The P10 alkalinity samples returned to the laboratory for analysis were titrated using the same methods described for the at-sea samples. However, since accurate analytical balances were available, the cell volume was determined by careful weighing of the titration cell both empty and full of deionized water at a known temperature. The sample weight was converted to a cell volume based on density. A CRM sample (batch 17) was titrated every working day that the P10 samples were titrated to confirm the stability of the titration cell. The mean value for CRMs titrated over this period (~35 days) was 2207.6 ± 3.5 µmol/kg (N = 40). The mean difference between duplicate P10 samples run in the lab was 3.8 ± 5.2 µmol/kg (N = 12), not quite as good as the samples run at sea but not significantly different from zero. The mean difference between the samples run in the laboratory and the replicates run at sea immediately after collection was 3.8 ± 4.0 µmol/kg indicating that the storage of the samples did not affect the TALK values. 3.4 Underway xCO2 Measurements The R/V Thomas G. Thompson departed Suva, Fiji, on October 5, 1993, for WOCE leg P10. C. Sabine started the Princeton underway pCO2 system the following day and provided necessary maintenance until the system was shut down the day before entering Yokohama, Japan, on November 10, 1993. Major problems with the gas selection valve were encountered on the cruise, resulting in a gap in data collection between 14° and 29° N. On average, one set of surface water and atmospheric CO2 mole fraction (xCO2) measurements was collected by the Princeton underway system approximately every 5 min while the system was operating normally. The sample locations along the cruise track are shown in Fig. 6 in hard copy. 3.4.1 Methods for Measurement and Computation The Princeton underway CO2 system uses a rotating disk equilibrator design with an infrared detector that has been shown to provide stable, consistent results with minimal attention by the operator (Sabine and Key 1996, 1997). The equilibrator is a modified disk- stripper design that was found to be very efficient at removing radon from seawater (Schink et al. 1970). The components of the system are linked to a computer and sample analysis is fully automated. The primary advantages of this system are the rapid response time of the equilibrator and the low level of expertise necessary to maintain the system relative to a gas chromatographic detector design. The gain in equilibrator response time sacrifices simplicity relative to the shower-head equilibrator, since the disk equilibrator has moving parts in addition to the air-circulation pump present on all seagoing pCO2 instruments. On the other hand, the disk equilibrator design is not sensitive to changes in water pressure from the bow pump. Figure 7 in hard copy shows the major components of the Princeton system. Uncontaminated water from the ship's bow pump flows through the lower half of a disk equilibrator at approximately 18 L/min. CO2 in the water equilibrates with recirculated air in the top half of the chamber. Equilibrator air, air pumped from the ship's bow/stern (depending on wind direction), and four standard gases (reference, low, mid, and high) are plumbed into a computer-controlled gas- sampling valve that determines which gas is directed to the detector. The mole fraction of the sample gas is determined by a Li-Cor 6251 nondispersive dual-beam infrared detector. During calibration, the instrument measures the concentrations of four standards that have a range of CO2 concentrations in air, normalizes the detector voltage to temperature and pressure, and fits the results with a third-order polynomial. A full description of the system is presented by Sabine and Key (1997) with a few minor differences as noted in the following sections. 3.4.2 Thermal Control The system used on this cruise was a predecessor of the system described by Sabine and Key (1997) used during the WOCE Indian Ocean cruises. The primary physical difference between the systems was the lack of thermal control on the detector rack on the earlier system. Although normalizing the detector response to the measured temperature removed most of the short-term variability in the detector response to standards, the remaining variability was still correlated with detector temperature. This variability was removed in the calibration routine (see discussion in Sect. 3.4.3), but it was decided to minimize this complicating effect in later versions of the system by enclosing the detector and associated plumbing in a temperature- controlled box. 3.4.3 Component Calibration The working standard gas concentrations were calibrated against primary CO2 standards, provided by P. Tans (NOAA/CMDL), in the laboratory using the seagoing detector prior to the cruise. Working standards were a mixture of CO2 in artificial air prepared by Scott Specialty Gases. Multiple measurements of the working standards (0.00, 282.51, 349.77, and 400.70 ppm CO2) were made with the detector calibrated against the primary standards. Measurement precision was better than 0.1 ppm on all standards. Equilibrator temperature was monitored by a Rosemont ultralinear platinum resistance thermometer (PRT). The PRT was calibrated in the laboratory against a National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) traceable mercury thermometer. Estimated accuracy was ±0.01°C on the ITS90 scale. Temperature readings from the Li-Cor detector were not explicitly calibrated for this survey because the final results are only a function of the relative changes in temperature between the standard gases and the sample. The sensor used to monitor the system pressure (Setra Systems Inc.) was factory- calibrated against NIST-traceable primary standards prior to the cruise. Estimated accuracy was ±0.05%. All system inputs were read into the computer as voltages using a Keithly A/D board. Accuracy of the board's readings was confirmed with a Fluke model 8840A 5-digit voltmeter prior to the cruise. The resolution of the readings was a function of the voltage range being measured, but in all cases was at least an order of magnitude smaller than the estimated precision of the measurement. Both the sea surface temperature and salinity values were calibrated against the WOCE preliminary surface bottle values at each station. Although the exact trip time is not generally recorded in the WOCE ".SEA" files, the ".SUM" files do record the beginning and ending times of each cast. Since the Niskin bottles were tripped on the upcast, the surface bottle was tripped immediately before the rosette was brought aboard and the cast was completed. The end time for the cast was taken, therefore, as the trip time for the surface bottle at each station. The surface station data were then tied to the underway data by calculating the mean and median values of the underway data for the 15 min prior to the recorded cast end time. Although the ship was not underway while the cast was in progress, there was the potential that differences between the underway temperature readings and the discrete samples could have been real in very high gradient regions. Stations where the mean and median values were greater than 0.01 units apart were flagged, therefore, as questionable and not considered in the calibration fits. 3.4.4 Analysis Sequence The Princeton system normally operates automatically with a single microcomputer (80486 CPU) controlling sample selection, valve switching, and data logging. Figure 8 (in hard copy) shows a typical record of detector voltages recorded for one full calibration and measurement cycle. The details of exactly how the system selects the standards and determines sample stability is described by Sabine and Key (1997). The primary difference between the operation of this version of the system and that described by Sabine and Key (1997) is the frequency at which the system sampled each gas. For this cruise, a full set of standards (reference, low, mid, and high standards) was analyzed every 3 h with a partial standard set (low, mid, and high standards) run every hour in-between full calibrations. An hourly calibration sequence was chosen to ensure that detector drift was captured, but this was found to be well in excess of what was necessary. The reference gas was analyzed only at 3 h intervals because the detector took a long time to stabilize with the 0-ppm CO2 reference and the 0-ppm detector readings were very stable. After calibration, the system alternately collected six marine air and six equilibrator sample gases until it was time for another calibration. 3.4.5 Data Calibration Listed below, in order of calculation, are the steps that were used to calibrate the results with the Princeton system. 1. Average the readings (four per calibration) for the reference gas and each standard gas for each calibration run. 2. Estimate the response for each gas as a function of time by calculating the set of linear regression lines that connect the estimated responses from the calibration runs. In other words, "connect the dots" generated by step 1 plotted as a function of time. Various smoothing curves could be used here, but this procedure yields the lowest uncertainty of any tried to date (possibly because of the short time scale correlation among the four results). 3. Based on the four sets (one set for each standard gas) of regression lines generated by step 2, calculate the response for each standard gas at the time each equilibrator gas or bow air sample was measured. 4. Use the results of step 3 with the detector response for the measurements to calculate the concentration of the unknown samples. Here it is assumed that the relationship between detector response and gas concentration follows a third-order polynomial; therefore, this step requires finding the real roots of a third-order polynomial for each unknown sample measurement. The result obtained from these four steps is the xCO2 of the measured dry gas. This value can be corrected to pCO2 or fugacity of CO2 (fCO2) at in situ conditions. These adjustments have been described in great detail in DOE Handbook (DOE 1994). The CO2 concentrations reported in the final data tables were given at the measured equilibrator temperature (average 0.49 ± 0.1°C greater than sea surface temperature) and were corrected to in situ temperature using the relationship of Weiss et al. (1982). In order to calculate xCO2 between surface water and the atmosphere, the atmospheric results were interpolated to the times surface water measurements were made. A separate file with the measured atmospheric values is also provided. 3.4.6 Precision and Accuracy The primary calibration method for the system is periodic analysis of gas standards using known CO2 concentrations. The infrared detector response is slightly curvilinear (i.e., not straight) with respect to CO2 concentration in the sample gas path. Additionally, the detector has been found to have a slow drift over a period of several hours. Frequent calibration against standards can give an estimate of the analytical precision; however, this technique has the potential of systematic error with respect to accuracy. There is currently no known rigorous statistical test to determine optimal instrumental settings, or, for that matter, even to estimate the expected uncertainty of the results; however, it was attempted to estimate the precision and accuracy of these results with the best available information. One estimate of precision was obtained by looking at the standard deviation of repeated measurements of the gas standards. The mean of the standard deviations determined for this instrument was 0.007 V, which was approximately equivalent to 0.9 ppm CO2. This can be interpreted as a crude estimate of the analytical precision if one assumes (1) that the precision obtained when analyzing sample gas is the same as for a standard and (2) that no additional uncertainty is incurred when interpolating calibration runs to the sampling time. This estimate assumes that no significant error was incurred in converting to in situ conditions. This assumption is reasonable with respect to precision, but not necessarily for accuracy. The primary correction to get xCO2 at in situ conditions was the warming of the water as it passed through the ship and equilibrator. A 1-degree increase in temperature results in roughly a 4% or ~14 ppm change in xCO2 (Takahashi et al. 1993; Copin-Montegut 1988; Weiss et al. 1982); therefore, both sea surface and equilibrator water temperatures must be known to an accuracy of ~.05°C to calculate xCO2 values accurate to ±1 ppm. A second estimate of accuracy can be obtained by comparison with other systems. No other pCO2 systems were running on this cruise, but the Princeton system has given very consistent results with R. Weiss's gas- chromatograph-based/shower-type system when the two systems were run in parallel (Sabine and Key 1997). It was estimated that the accuracy of this system was ~1 ppm. 3.4.7 Major Problems Two days after the cruise began, the underway CO2 system started to have problems with the Valco gas-sampling valve. Occasionally during position switching, the valve actuator would not stop, and the valve would continue to spin until the fuse blew or the power was switched off and back on again. By October 9 the problem had become more frequent. The valve was completely dismantled and cleaned. Valco technical support was contacted by phone. The problem was deduced to be in the Valco logic board, which could not be repaired at sea. Upon reassembly the valve seemed to work better. It was watched carefully and the spinning was corrected when necessary by switching the power to the valve off and on again. On the morning of October 14, the air flow in the bow air line had dropped substantially. The tubing was flushed with deionized water to remove any salt deposits in the line, and the valve port was cleaned with a cotton-tipped swab. The pump head was also replaced on the air cadet pump, and the flow returned to normal. On October 15, the Valco gas-sampling valve was disassembled and cleaned because sample gas flow was very low. Flow rate was much better after cleaning. On October 17 at 18:30 h, a problem was discovered with the drying tube while the system was running a standardization. The Nafion® tubing had apparently pulled out of the fitting. This problem could not have occurred too long before it was discovered because the sample was contaminated with 0-ppm gas, which was giving very unusual readings. The entire drying tube assembly was replaced, and the system was recalibrated. On October 18, the Valco spinning problem was too severe for the automated sampling program. The system was run using a program that required the operator to hit a key on the computer to change valve positions. This way, if the valve started spinning, it could be fixed right away. An attempted was made to run the system on the same schedule that the automated system was programmed to run. On October 23 at 22:30, the water pump failed, and the equilibrator was found drained. The system was switched to sample bow air while the water pump was repaired. On October 25, the bow and equilibrator gas flow rates were very low. The Valco was taken apart and cleaned. Upon reassembly, the actuator would do nothing but spin. Many unsuccessful attempts were made to repair the problem. The system was shut down until a solution could be found. On November 3, the ship's engine room crew managed to manufacture a handle that would allow the rotor to be manually rotated. The system was started again and run using the manual program for the remainder of the cruise. 3.4.8 Results Despite the many mechanical difficulties on this cruise, more than 11,600 surface seawater and 4,000 marine air measurements covering more than 50 degrees of latitude in the far western Pacific where collected. Figure 9 in hard copy shows the surface water and atmospheric xCO2 concentrations as a function of the day of the year on the cruise. It is clear that the surface water CO2 concentration can vary significantly over relatively short time (space) scales. Values corrected to sea surface temperature ranged from a low of 314.8 ppm to a high of 389.9 ppm. Low xCO2 values were observed at the beginning of the cruise (near Fiji) and at the end of the cruise (near Japan). The highest xCO2 values were observed near the equator, crossed on day 289. 3.5 Radiocarbon Measurements During the R/V Thomas G. Thompson expedition along WOCE Section P10, 588 accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) delta 14C samples were collected at 38 stations. In addition to the AMS samples, LV Gerard samples were also collected during this cruise. The LV measurements will be published in a separate report. Sampling of 14C during the cruise was carried out by R. Key of the Ocean Tracer Laboratory at Princeton University. Sample extraction, delta 13C analyses, and 14C analyses were performed by the National Ocean Sciences AMS Facility (NOSAMS) at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Key collected the data from the originators, merged the files, assigned quality control flags to the 14C results, and submitted the data files to the WOCE office in April 1998. All SV samples were collected from standard CTD/rosette casts into 500-mL glass bottles fitted with high-quality ground-glass stoppers. The samples were poisoned with HgCl2 immediately after collection and were sent for extraction and analysis at NOSAMS after the cruise. Details of the extraction, counting, etc., are available from Key (1991), McNichol and Jones (1991), Gagnon and Jones (1993), and Cohen et al. (1994). The delta 14C values reported here were originally published in a NOSAMS data report (NOSAMS, March 13, 1998). That report included results that had not been through the WOCE quality control procedures. All 588 of the AMS samples from this cruise have been measured and presented in this report. Replicate measurements were made on 21 water samples. These replicate analyses are tabulated in Table 2. Table 2. Summary of Replicate Analyses --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sta-cast-bottle delta 14C Error Error-weighted mean* Uncertainty** --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6-1-3 -209.4 2.8 -211.0 2.3 -212.6 2.8 6-1-5 -187.3 2.7 -189.2 4.4 -193.5 4.2 31-1-29 90.8 6.0 89.4 3.4 88.7 4.2 34-3-18 -159.8 6.9 -155.2 5.1 -152.6 5.3 34-3-25 -52.8 4.5 -55.3 2.6 -56.5 3.1 34-3-27 70.2 5.3 71.5 3.4 72.4 4.5 36-1-24 -80.0 3.5 -79.8 2.8 -79.4 4.9 65-3-33 135.0 4.1 134.6 2.5 134.4 3.1 65-3-35 118.0 3.4 118.6 2.6 119.5 4.0 68-1-30 117.2 4.6 117.0 3.1 116.7 4.1 71-1-25 -126.5 3.1 -129.1 4.1 -132.3 3.4 71-1-30 109.8 4.1 107.4 3.6 104.6 4.5 74-3-15 -235.1 2.7 -234.1 3.6 -229.9 5.6 76-1-28 53.7 3.5 50.3 5.0 46.6 3.6 78-1-31 128.4 4.1 123.0 6.8 118.8 3.6 83-1-34 121.0 4.1 120.2 2.7 119.6 3.6 85-1-24 -110.6 4.0 -115.2 5.8 -118.8 3.5 85-1-27 34.9 5.3 30.6 4.9 28.0 4.0 90-1-4 -232.2 2.7 -230.4 3.6 -227.1 3.7 90-1-17 -76.5 3.6 -71.9 6.5 -67.4 3.6 90-1-20 2.9 3.1 1.6 4.3 -3.2 5.8 *Error-weighted mean reported with data set. **Larger of the standard deviation and the error-weighted standard deviation of the mean. Table 2 shows the error-weighted mean and uncertainty for each set of replicates. Uncertainty is defined here as the larger of the standard deviation and the error-weighted standard deviation of the mean. For these replicates, the simple average of the tabulated uncertainties for the replicates is 4.0 o/oo (equal weight for each replicate set). This precision is typical for the time frame over which these samples were measured (February October 1997). Note that the errors given for individual measurements in the final data report (with the exception of the replicates) include only counting errors and errors due to blanks and backgrounds. The uncertainty obtained for replicate analyses is an estimate of the true error that includes errors due to sample collection, sample degassing, etc. For a detailed discussion of this see Key (1996). Figures 10-14 in hard copy summarize the delta 14C data collected on the P10 Section. Only delta 14C measurements with a quality flag value of 2 ("good") or 6 ("replicate") are included in each figure. Figure 10 shows the delta 14C values with 2 sigma error bars plotted as a function of pressure. The mid-depth delta 14C minimum occurs around 2000 to 2400 m, but is weak in this data set relative to the eastern North Pacific. Measurements in the thermocline region fall into two distinct groups with the higher values being from the southern end of the section and the extreme northern end while the lower grouping is from the central portion (see Figs. 11 and 12). Figure 11 (see hard copy) shows the delta 14C values plotted against silicate. The straight line shown in the figure is the least squares regression relationship derived by Broecker et al. (1995) on the basis of the GEOSECS global data set. According to their analysis, this line (delta 14C = -70 - Si) represents the relationship between naturally occurring radiocarbon and silicate for most of the ocean. Broecker et al. interpret deviations in delta 14C above this line to be due to input of bomb-produced radiocarbon; however, they note that the interpretation can be problematic at high latitudes. Samples collected from shallower depths at these stations show an upward trend with decreasing silicate values reflecting the addition of bomb-produced 14C. As in Fig. 10, two distinct trends are apparent. Here the upper grouping is from the northern end of the section and the lower from the southern end. Another way to visualize the 14C silicate correlation is as a section. Figure 12 shows delta 14C as contour lines in silicate-latitude space for samples having a potential density greater than 26.9, which corresponds to ~500 m. In this space, shallow waters are toward the bottom of the figure. The density cutoff was selected to eliminate those samples with a very large bomb-produced 14C component. For this data set, Broecker's hypothesis does not work very well. The delta 14C isolines trend upward to the north, and the spacing between the isolines decreases northward, for contours that fall below the depth of bomb-radiocarbon contamination. The upward curvature of the isolines at the northern end of the section is due to the addition of bomb-produced radiocarbon via ventilation or due to an "anomalous" silicate signal (Talley and Joyce 1992). Figures 13-14 show delta 14C contoured along the section. Figure 13 is a normal section in latitude-depth space whereas Fig. 14 shows the same data set in potential density-latitude space. The depth section was gridded by means of LeTraon's (1990) objective technique, and the density section was gridded using the "loess" methods described in Chambers et al. (1983), Chambers and Hastie (1991), Cleveland (1979), and Cleveland and Devlin (1988). In Fig. 13, the primary structure of the isopleths is due to the presence of the Pacific North Equatorial Current which flows westward across the southern end of the section and the Japan current that flows northeastward across the far northern end of the section. Upwelling near the equator is not particularly evident in Fig. 13 but is the source of most of the structure seen in the isopleths in Fig. 14 in the low-latitude zone. The deep and bottom water AMS results are too sparse to contour. 4. DATA CHECKS AND PROCESSING PERFORMED BY CDIAC An important part of the NDP process at the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) involves the quality assurance (QA) of data before distribution. Data received at CDIAC are rarely in a condition that would permit immediate distribution, regardless of the source. To guarantee data of the highest possible quality, CDIAC conducts extensive QA reviews that involve examining the data for completeness, reasonableness, and accuracy. The QA process is a critical component in the value-added concept of supplying accurate, usable data for researchers. The following information summarizes the data processing and QA checks performed by CDIAC on the data obtained during the R/V Thomas G. Thompson cruise along WOCE Section P10 in the Pacific Ocean. 1. The final carbon-related data and radiocarbon measurements were provided to CDIAC by Chris Sabine and Bob Key of Princeton University. The final hydrographic and chemical measurements and the station information files were provided by the WOCE Hydrographic Program Office (WHPO) after quality evaluation. A FORTRAN 90 retrieval code was written and used to merge and reformat all data files. 2. To check for obvious outliers, all data were plotted by use of a PLOTNEST.C program written by Stewart C. Sutherland (Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory). The program plots a series of nested profiles, using the station number as an offset; the first station is defined at the beginning, and subsequent stations are offset by a fixed interval (Figs. 15 and 16 in hard copy report). Several outliers were identified and marked with the quality flags of "3" (questionable measurement) or "4" (bad measurement) (see File Descriptions in Part 2 of this documentation). 3. To identify "noisy" data and possible systematic, methodological errors, property-property plots for all parameters were generated (Fig. 17 in hard copy), carefully examined, and compared with plots from previous expeditions in the Pacific Ocean. 4. All variables were checked for values exceeding physical limits, such as sampling depth values that are greater than the given bottom depths. 5. Dates, times, and coordinates were checked for bogus values (e.g., values of MONTH < 1 or > 12; DAY < 1 or > 31; YEAR < or > 1993; TIME < 0000 or > 2400; LAT < 10.000 or > 40.000; and LONG < 140.000 or > 180.000). 6. Station locations (latitudes and longitudes) and sampling times were examined for consistency with maps and cruise information supplied by C. Sabine and R. Key of Princeton University. 7. The designation for missing values, given as 9.0 in the original files, was changed to -999.9. 5. HOW TO OBTAIN THE DATA AND DOCUMENTATION This database (NDP-071) is available free of charge from CDIAC. The data are available from CDIAC's anonymous file transfer protocol (FTP) area via the Internet. Please note: Your computer needs to have FTP software loaded on it (this is built in to most newer operating systems). Use the following commands to obtain the database. >ftp cdiac.esd.ornl.gov or >ftp 128.219.24.36 Login: "anonymous" or "ftp" Password: your e-mail address ftp> cd pub/ndp071/ ftp> dir ftp> mget (files) ftp> quit The complete documentation and data may also be obtained from the CDIAC oceanographic Web site at the following URL: http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/oceans/doc.html. You may also order through CDIAC's online ordering system (http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/pns/how_order.html) or by contacting CDIAC directly to request the data on your choice of media. For additional information, contact CDIAC. Address: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center Oak Ridge National Laboratory P.O. Box 2008 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-6335 U.S.A. Telephone: (423) 574-3645 (Voice) (423) 574-2232 (Fax) Electronic mail: cdiac@ornl.gov Internet: http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/ 6. REFERENCES Bradshaw A. L., and P. G. Brewer. 1988. High-precision measurements of alkalinity and total carbon dioxide in seawater by potentiometric titration-1. Presence of unknown protolyte (s)? Marine Chemistry 23:69-86. Brewer, P. G., C. Goyet, and D. Dyrssen. 1989. Carbon dioxide transport by ocean currents at 25° N latitude in the Atlantic Ocean. Science 246:477-79. Broecker, W. S., S. C. Sutherland, and W. Smethie. 1995. Oceanic radiocarbon: Separation of the natural and bomb components. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 9(2):263-88. Bryden, H. L., and M. M. Hall. 1980. Heat transport by ocean currents across 25° N latitude in the North Atlantic Ocean. Science 207:884. Chambers, J. M., and T. J. Hastie. 1991. Statistical Models. Cole Computer Science Series, Pacific Grove, Calif. Chambers, J. M., W. S. Cleveland, B. Kleiner, and P. A. Tukey. 1983. Graphical Methods for Data Analysis. Wadsworth, Belmont, Calif. Cohen, G. J., D. L. Hutton, E. A. Osborne, K. F. Von Reden, A. R. Gagnon, A. P. McNichol, and G. A. Jones. 1994. Automated sample processing at the National Ocean Sciences AMS Facility. Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research Sect. B--Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms 92(1-4): 129-33. Copin-Montegut, C. 1988. A new formula for the effect of temperature on the partial pressure of CO2 in seawater. Marine Chemistry 25:29-37. Cleveland, W. S. 1979. Robust locally weighted regression and smoothing scatterplots. Journal of the American Statistical Association 74:829-36. Cleveland, W. S., and S. J. Devlin. 1988. Locally-weighted regression: An approach to regression analysis by local fitting. Journal of the American Statistical Association 83:596-610. DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1994. Handbook of Methods for the Analysis of the Various Parameters of the Carbon Dioxide System in Sea Water. Ver. 2. ORNL/CDIAC-74. A. G. Dickson and C. Goyet (eds.). Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tenn. Gagnon, A. R., and G. A. Jones. 1993. AMS-graphite target production methods at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution during 1986-1991. Radiocarbon 35(2):301-10. Johnson, K. M., A. E. King, and J. McN. Sieburth. 1985. Coulometric TCO2 analyses for marine studies: An introduction. Marine Chemistry 16:61-82. Johnson, K. M., J. M. Sieburth, P. J. B. Williams, and L. Brändström. 1987. Coulometric TCO2 analysis for marine studies: Automation and calibration. Marine Chemistry 21:117-33. Key, R. M. 1991. Radiocarbon. In WOCE Hydrographic Operations and Methods Manual, Report No. WHPO 91-68. WOCE Hydrographic Programme Office. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Mass. Key, R. M. 1996. WOCE Pacific Ocean radiocarbon program. Radiocarbon 38(3):415-23. LeTraon, P. Y. 1990. A method for optimal analysis of fields with spatially variable mean. Journal of Geophysical Research 95:13,543-547. McNichol, A. P., and G. A. Jones. 1991. Measuring 14C in seawater by accelerator mass spectrometry. In WOCE Hydrographic Operations and Methods Manual, Report No. WHPO 91-68. WOCE Hydrographic Programme Office, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Mass. Millero, F. J., and A. Poisson. 1981. International one-atmosphere equation of state for sea water. Deep-Sea Research 28:625-29. Millero, F. J., J.-Z. Zhang, K. Lee, and D. M. Campbell. 1993. Titration alkalinity of seawater. Marine Chemistry 44:153-65. NOSAMS. 1998. National Ocean Sciences AMS Facility Data Report #98-027, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Mass. Roemmich, D., and C. Wunsch. 1985. Two transatlantic sections: Meridional circulation and heat flux in the subtropical North Atlantic Ocean. Deep-Sea Research 32:619-64. Sabine, C. L., and R. M. Key. 1996. A new instrument design for continuous determination of oceanic pCO2. Tech. Rpt. # OTL 96-12, Ocean Tracer Laboratory, Princeton University, Princeton, N. J. Sabine, C. L., and R. M. Key. 1997. Surface Water and Atmospheric Underway Carbon Data Obtained During the World Ocean Circulation Experiment Indian Ocean Survey Cruises (R/V Knorr, December 1994 - January 1996). ORNL/CDIAC-103, NDP-064, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn. Schink D. R., J. J. Sigalove, R. L. Charnel, and N. L. Guinasso, Jr. 1970. Use of Rn/Ra ratios to determine air-sea gas exchange and vertical mixing in the ocean. Technical Report, Contract # N00014-69-C-0254, Office of Naval Research, Palo Alto, Calif. Takahashi, T., J. Olafsson, J. G. Goddard, D. W. Chipman, and S. C. Sutherland. 1993. Seasonal variation of CO2 and nutrients in the high-latitude surface oceans: A comparative study. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 7:843-78. Talley, L. D., and T. M. Joyce. 1992. The double silica maximum in the North Pacific. Journal of Geophysical Research 97:5465-80. Weiss, R. F., R. A. Jahnke, and C. D. Keeling. 1982. Seasonal effects of temperature and salinity on the partial pressure of CO2 in seawater. Nature 300:511-13. Williams, P. J. 1990. Oceans, Carbon, and Climate Change. Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research (SCOR), Halifax, Canada. PART 2: CONTENT AND FORMAT OF DATA FILES 7. FILE DESCRIPTIONS This section describes the content and format of each of the nine files that comprise this NDP (see Table 3). Because CDIAC distributes the data set in several ways (e.g., via anonymous FTP and on floppy diskette), each of the nine files is referenced by both an ASCII file name, which is given in lower-case, bold-faced type (e.g., ndp071.txt) and a file number. The remainder of this section describes (or lists, where appropriate) the contents of each file. Table 3. Content, size, and format of data files ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- File number, name, Logical File size and description records in bytes ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ndp071.txt: 1,908 123,028 a detailed description of the cruise network, the four FORTRAN 90 data-retrieval routines, and the four oceanographic data files 2. stainv.for: 47 1,439 a FORTRAN 90 data-retrieval routine to read and print p10sta.txt (File 6) 3. p10dat.for: 55 2,144 a FORTRAN 90 data-retrieval routine to read and print p10dat.txt (File 7) 4. p10pco2a.for: 43 1,440 a FORTRAN 90 data-retrieval routine to read and print p10pco2a.txt (File 8) 5. p10pco2w.for: 46 1,666 a FORTRAN 90 data-retrieval routine to read and print p10pco2w.txt (File 9) 6. p10sta.txt: 104 8,372 a listing of the station locations, sampling dates, and sounding bottom depths for each of the 94 stations of WOCE Section P10 7. p10dat.txt: 2,833 475,105 hydrographic, carbon dioxide, and chemical data from 94 stations occupied on WOCE Section P10 8. p10pco2a.txt: 4,029 321,977 underway atmospheric measurements of pCO2 along the cruise track of WOCE Section P10 9. p10pco2w.txt: 11,656 1,223,329 underway surface water measurements of pCO2 along the cruise track of WOCE Section P10 _____ _______ Total 20,721 2,158,500 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 7.1 ndp071.txt (File 1) This file contains a detailed description of the data set, the four FORTRAN 90 data- retrieval routines, and the four oceanographic data files. It exists primarily for the benefit of individuals who acquire this database as machine-readable data files from CDIAC. 7.2 stainv.for (File 2) This file contains a FORTRAN 90 data-retrieval routine to read and print p10sta.txt (File 6). The following is a listing of this program. For additional information regarding variable definitions, variable lengths, variable types, units, and codes, please see the description for p10sta.txt in Sect. 7.6. c******************************************************************** c* FORTRAN 90 data retrieval routine to read and print the file c* named "p10sta.txt (File 6). c******************************************************************** c*Defines variables* INTEGER stat, cast, depth REAL latdcm, londcm CHARACTER expo*11, sect*3, date*10, time*4 OPEN (unit=1, file='p10.sta') OPEN (unit=2, file='p10.stat') write (2, 5) c*Writes out column labels* 5 format (1X, 'STATION INVENTORY: R/V THOMAS G. THOMPSON', 1 2X, 'CRUISE DATES 10051993-11101993',/, 2 1X,'EXPOCODE',8X,'SECT',2X,'STNBR',2X,'CAST',9X, 3 'DATE',2X,'TIME',2X,'LATITUDE',2X,'LONGITUDE',2X, 4 'DEPTH',/) c*Sets up a loop to read and format all the data in the file* read (1, 6) 6 format (////////) 7 CONTINUE read (1, 10, end=999) expo, sect, stat, cast, date, time, 1 latdcm, londcm, depth 10 format (A11, 7X, A3, 4X, I3, 5X, I1, 3X, A10, 2X, A4, 3X, 1 F7.3, 3X, F8.3, 3X, I4) write (2, 20) expo, sect, stat, cast, date, time, 1 latdcm, londcm, depth 20 format (A11, 7X, A3, 4X, I3, 5X, I1, 3X, A10, 2X, A4, 3X, 1 F7.3, 3X, F8.3, 3X, I4) GOTO 7 999 close(unit=5) close(unit=2) stop end 7.3 p10dat.for (File 3) This file contains a FORTRAN 90 data-retrieval routine to read and print p10dat.txt (File 7). The following is a listing of this program. For additional information regarding variable definitions, variable lengths, variable types, units, and codes, please see the description for p10dat.txt in Sect. 7.7. c******************************************************************** c* FORTRAN 90 data retrieval routine to read and print the file c* named "p10dat.txt" (File 7). c******************************************************************** CHARACTER qualt*12, bot*5 INTEGER sta, cast, samp REAL pre, ctdtmp, ctdsal, ctdoxy, theta, sal, oxy, silca REAL nitrat, nitrit, phspht, tcarb, alkali, dc14, c14er OPEN (unit=1, file='p10dat.txt') OPEN (unit=2, file='p10.data') write (2, 5) c*Writes out column labels* 5 format (2X,'STNNBR',2X,'CASTNO',2X,'SAMPNO',2X,'BTLNBR',2X, 1 'CTDPRS',2X,'CTDTMP',2X,'CTDSAL',2X,'CTDOXY',3X,'THETA',4X, 2 'SALNTY',2X,'OXYGEN',2X,'SILCAT',2X,'NITRAT',2X,'NITRIT',2X, 3 'PHSPHT',2X,'TCARBN',2X,'ALKALI',2X,'DELC14',2X,'C14ERR',7X, 4 'QUALT1',/, 5 36X,'DBAR',2X,'ITS-90',2X,'PSS-78',1X,'UMOL/KG',2X,'ITS_90', 6 4X,'PSS-78',1X,7('UMOL/KG',1X),1X,'/MILLE',2X,'/MILLE',12X, 7 '*',/, 8 25X,'*******',17X,2('*******',1X),10X,9('*******',1X), 9 19X,'*') c*Sets up a loop to read and format all the data in the file* read (1, 6) 6 format (//////////) 7 CONTINUE read (1, 10, end=999) sta, cast, samp, bot, pre, ctdtmp, 1 ctdsal, ctdoxy, theta, sal, oxy, silca, nitrat, nitrit, 2 phspht, tcarb, alkali, dc14, c14er, qualt 10 format (5X, I3, 7X, I1, 6X, I2, 3X, A5, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.4, 1 1X, F7.4, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.4, 1X, F9.4, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.2, 2 1X, F7.2, 1X, F7.2, 1X, F7.2, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.1, 3 1X, F7.1, 1X, A12) write (2, 20) sta, cast, samp, bot, pre, ctdtmp, 1 ctdsal, ctdoxy, theta, sal, oxy, silca, nitrat, nitrit, 2 phspht, tcarb, alkali, dc14, c14er, qualt 20 format (5X, I3, 7X, I1, 6X, I2, 3X, A5, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.4, 1 1X, F7.4, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.4, 1X, F9.4, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.2, 2 1X, F7.2, 1X, F7.2, 1X, F7.2, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.1, 3 1X, F7.1, 1X, A12) GOTO 7 999 close(unit=1) close(unit=2) stop end 7.4 p10pco2a.for (File 4) This file contains a FORTRAN 90 data-retrieval routine to read and print p10pco2a.txt (File 8). The following is a listing of this program. For additional information regarding variable definitions, variable lengths, variable types, units, and codes, please see the description for p10pco2a.txt in Sect. 7.8. c******************************************************************** c* FORTRAN 90 data retrieval routine to read and print the file c* named "p10pco2a.txt" (File 8). c******************************************************************** CHARACTER sect*8 INTEGER year, qflag REAL jdate, latit, longit, surtmp, sursal, atmpre, xco2a OPEN (unit=1, file='p10pco2a.txt') OPEN (unit=2, file='p10pco2a.dat') write (2, 5) c*Writes out column labels* 5 format (2X,'SECTION',2X,'YEAR',3X,'JULIAN',4X,'LATIT',3X, 1 'LONGIT',2X,'SUR_TMP',2X'SUR_SAL',1X,'ATM_PRE',3X,'XCO2A', 2 1X,'QF',/, 3 5X,'#',13X,'DATE',6X,'DCM',6X,'DCM',4X,'DEG_C',5X,'PSS', 4 6X,'ATM',5X,'PPM') c*Sets up a loop to read and format all the data in the file* read (1, 6) 6 format (/////////) 7 CONTINUE read (1, 10, end=999) sect, year, jdate, latit, longit, 1 surtmp,sursal, atmpre, xco2a, qflag 10 format (1X, A8, 2X, I4, 2X, F7.3, 2X, F7.3, 2X, F7.3, 2X, 1 F7.4, 2X, F7.4, 2X, F6.4, 2X, F7.3, 1X, I1) write (2, 20) sect, year, jdate, latit, longit, 1 surtmp,sursal, atmpre, xco2a, qflag 20 format (1X, A8, 2X, I4, 2X, F7.3, 2X, F7.3, 2X, F7.3, 2X, 1 F7.4, 2X, F7.4, 2X, F6.4, 2X, F7.3, 1X, I1) GOTO 7 999 close(unit=1) close(unit=2) stop end 7.5 p10pco2w.for (File 5) This file contains a FORTRAN 90 data-retrieval routine to read and print p10pco2w.txt (File 9). The following is a listing of this program. For additional information regarding variable definitions, variable lengths, variable types, units, and codes, please see the description for p10pco2w.txt in Sect. 7.9. c******************************************************************** c* FORTRAN 90 data retrieval routine to read and print the file c* named "p10pco2w.txt" (File 9). c******************************************************************** CHARACTER sect*8 INTEGER year, qflag REAL jdate, latit, longit, surtmp, sursal, eqtmp, atmpre REAL xco2eq, xco2sst, xco2a OPEN (unit=1, file='p10pco2w.txt') OPEN (unit=2, file='p10pco2w.dat') write (2, 5) c*Writes out column labels* 5 format (2X,'SECTION',2X,'YEAR',3X,'JULIAN',4X,'LATIT',3X, 1 'LONGIT',2X,'SUR_TMP',2X'SUR_SAL',1X,'EQTMP',1X,'ATM_PRE', 2 2X,'XCO2_EQ',1X,'QF',1X,'XCO2_SST',3X,'XCO2A',/, 3 5X,'#',13X,'DATE',6X,'DCM',6X,'DCM',4X,'DEG_C',5X,'PSS', 4 3X,'DEG_C',4X,'ATM',5X,'PPM',9X,'PPM',6X,'PPM') c*Sets up a loop to read and format all the data in the file* read (1, 6) 6 format (/////////) 7 CONTINUE read (1, 10, end=999) sect, year, jdate, latit, longit, 1 surtmp,sursal, eqtmp, atmpre, xco2eq, qflag, xco2sst, xco2a 10 format (1X, A8, 2X, I4, 2X, F7.3, 2X, F7.3, 2X, F7.3, 2X, 1 F7.4, 2X, F7.4, 2X, F4.1, 2X, F6.4, 2X, F7.3, 2X, I1, 2X, 2 F7.3, 2X, F7.3) write (2, 20) sect, year, jdate, latit, longit, surtmp, 1 sursal, eqtmp, atmpre, xco2eq, qflag, xco2sst, xco2a 20 format (1X, A8, 2X, I4, 2X, F7.3, 2X, F7.3, 2X, F7.3, 2X, 1 F7.4, 2X, F7.4, 2X, F4.1, 2X, F6.4, 2X, F7.3, 2X, I1, 2X, 2 F7.3, 2X, F7.3) GOTO 7 999 close(unit=1) close(unit=2) stop end 7.6 p10sta.txt (File 6) This file provides station inventory information for each of the 94 stations occupied during the R/V Thomas G. Thompson cruise along WOCE Section P10. Each line of the file contains an expocode, section number, station number, cast number, sampling date (month/date/year), sampling time, latitude, longitude, and sounding depth. The file is sorted by station number and can be read by using the following FORTRAN 90 code (contained in stainv.for, File 2): INTEGER stat, cast, depth CHARACTER expo*11, sect*3, date*10, time*4 REAL latdcm, londcm read (1, 10, end=999) expo, sect, stat, cast, date, time, 1 latdcm, londcm, depth 10 format (A11, 7X, A3, 4X, I3, 5X, I1, 3X, A10, 2X, A4, 3X, 1 F7.3, 3X, F8.3, 3X, I4) Stated in tabular form, the contents include the following: ------------------------------------------------------------------- Variable Variable Variable Starting Ending type width column column ------------------------------------------------------------------- expo Character 11 1 11 sect Character 3 19 21 stat Numeric 3 26 28 cast Numeric 1 34 34 date Character 10 38 47 time Character 4 50 53 latdcm Numeric 7 58 63 londcm Numeric 8 67 74 depth Numeric 4 78 81 ------------------------------------------------------------------ The variables are defined as follows: expo is the expedition code of the cruise; sect is the WOCE section number; stat is the station number; cast is the cast number; date is the sampling date (month/day/year); time is the sampling time [Greenwich mean time (GMT)]; latdcm is the latitude of the station (in decimal degrees; negative values indicate the Southern Hemisphere); londcm is the longitude of the station (in decimal degrees; negative values indicate the Western Hemisphere); depth is the sounding depth of the station (in meters). 7.7 p10dat.txt (File 7) This file provides hydrographic, carbon dioxide, and chemical data for the 94 stations occupied during the R/V Thomas G. Thompson cruise along WOCE Section P10. Each line consists of a station number, cast number, sample number, bottle number, CTD pressure, CTD temperature, CTD salinity, CTD oxygen, potential temperature, bottle salinity, oxygen, silicate, nitrate, nitrite, phosphate, total CO2, total alkalinity, delta 14C, 14C error, and data-quality flags. The file is sorted by station number and pressure and can be read by using the following FORTRAN 90 code (contained in p10dat.for, File 3): CHARACTER qualt*12, bot*5 INTEGER sta, cast, samp REAL pre, ctdtmp, ctdsal, ctdoxy, theta, sal, oxy, silca REAL nitrat, nitrit, phspht, tcarb, alkali, dc14, c14er read (1, 10, end=999)sta, cast, samp, bot, pre, ctdtmp, 1 ctdsal, ctdoxy, theta, sal, oxy, silca, nitrat, nitrit, 2 phspht, tcarb, alkali, dc14, c14er, qualt 10 format (5X, I3, 7X, I1, 6X, I2, 3X, A5, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.4, 1 1X, F7.4, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.4, 1X, F9.4, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.2, 2 1X, F7.2, 1X, F7.2, 1X, F7.2, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.1, 1X, F7.1, 3 1X, F7.1, 1X, A12) Stated in tabular form, the contents include the following: ------------------------------------------------------------------- Variable Variable Starting Ending Variable type width column column ------------------------------------------------------------------- sta Numeric 3 7 8 cast Numeric 1 16 16 samp Numeric 2 23 24 bot Character 5 28 32 pre Numeric 7 34 40 ctdtmp Numeric 7 42 48 ctdsal Numeric 7 50 56 ctdoxy Numeric 7 58 64 theta Numeric 7 66 72 sal Numeric 9 74 82 oxy Numeric 7 84 90 silca Numeric 7 92 98 nitrat Numeric 7 100 106 nitrit Numeric 7 108 114 phspht Numeric 7 116 122 tcarb Numeric 7 124 130 alkali Numeric 7 132 138 dc14 Numeric 7 140 146 c14er Numeric 7 148 154 qualt Character 12 156 167 ------------------------------------------------------------------ The variables are defined as follows: sta is the station number; cast is the cast number; samp is the sample number; bot* is the bottle number; pre is the CTD pressure (dbar); ctdtmp is the CTD temperature (°C); ctdsal* is the CTD salinity [on the Practical Salinity Scale (PSS)]; ctdoxy* is the CTD oxygen (µmol/kg); theta is the potential temperature (°C); sal* is the bottle salinity (on the PSS); oxy* is the oxygen concentration (µmol/kg); silca* is the silicate concentration (µmol/kg); nitrat* is the nitrate concentration (µmol/kg); nitrit* is the nitrite concentration (µmol/kg); phspht* is the phosphate concentration (µmol/kg); tcarb* is the total carbon dioxide concentration (µmol/kg); alkali* is the total alkalinity concentration (µmol/kg); dc14* is the radiocarbon delta 14C (per mille); c14er is the error of delta 14C (percent); qualt is a 12-digit character variable that contains data-quality flag codes for parameters underlined with asterisks (*******) in the file header. _________________________________ *Variables that are underlined with asterisks in the data file's header indicate they have a data-quality flag. Data-quality flags are defined as follows: 1 = sample for this measurement was drawn from water bottle but analysis was not received; 2 = acceptable measurement; 3 = questionable measurement; 4 = bad measurement; 5 = not reported; 6 = mean of replicate measurements; 7 = manual chromatographic peak measurement; 8 = irregular digital chromatographic peak integration; 9 = sample not drawn for this measurement from this bottle. 7.8 p10pco2a.txt (File 8) This file provides underway measurements of pCO2 in air during the R/V Thomas G. Thompson cruise along WOCE Section P10. Each line of the file contains a section number, sampling year, julian date (GMT), latitude, longitude, underway measurements of sea surface temperature, salinity, atmospheric pressure, air pCO2, and quality flag. The file is sorted by julian date and can be read by using the following FORTRAN 90 code (contained in p10pco2a.for, File 4): CHARACTER sect*8 INTEGER year, qflag REAL jdate, latit, longit, surtmp, sursal, atmpre, xco2a read (1, 10, end=999) sect, year, jdate, latit, longit, 1 surtmp,sursal, atmpre, xco2a, qflag 10 format (1X, A8, 2X, I4, 2X, F7.3, 2X, F7.3, 2X, F7.3, 2X, 1 F7.4, 2X, F7.4, 2X, F6.4, 2X, F7.3, 1X, I1) Stated in tabular form, the contents include the following: ------------------------------------------------------------------ Variable Variable Variable Starting Ending type width column column ------------------------------------------------------------------ sect Character 8 2 9 year Numeric 4 12 15 jdate Numeric 7 18 24 latit Numeric 7 27 33 longit Numeric 7 36 42 surtmp Numeric 7 45 51 sursal Numeric 7 54 60 atmpre Numeric 6 63 68 xco2a Numeric 7 71 77 qflag Numeric 1 79 79 ----------------------------------------------------------------- The variables are defined as follows: sect is the WOCE Section number; year is the sampling year; jdate is the julian day of the year; latit is the latitude of the sampling (in decimal degrees; negative values indicate the Southern Hemisphere); longit is the longitude of the sampling (in decimal degrees; negative values indicate the Western Hemisphere); surtmp is the sea surface temperature (°C); sursal is the sea surface salinity (on the PSS); atmpre is the atmospheric pressure (atm); xco2a is the observed mole fraction of CO2 in air [ppm (dry air)]; qflag is the quality flag of xco2a: 2 = acceptable measurements of xco2a; 3 = questionable measurements of xco2a. 7.9 p10pco2w.txt (File 9) This file provides underway measurements of pCO2 in surface water during the R/V Thomas G. Thompson cruise along WOCE Section P10. Each line of the file contains a section number, sampling year, julian date (GMT), latitude, longitude, underway measurements of sea surface temperature, salinity, equilibrator temperature, atmospheric pressure, surface water xCO2 measured at equilibrator temperature, quality flag for measured xCO2, surface water xCO2 measured at sea surface temperature, and observed mole fraction of CO2 in air interpolated to the times when water measurements were made. The file is sorted by julian date and can be read by using the following FORTRAN 90 code (contained in p10pco2w.for, File 5): CHARACTER sect*8 INTEGER year, qflag REAL jdate, latit, longit, surtmp, sursal, eqtmp, atmpre REAL xco2eq, xco2sst, xco2a read (1, 10, end=999)sect, year, jdate, latit, longit, 1 surtmp,sursal, eqtmp, atmpre, xco2eq, qflag, xco2sst, xco2a 10 format (1X, A8, 2X, I4, 2X, F7.3, 2X, F7.3, 2X, F7.3, 2X, 1 F7.4, 2X, F7.4, 2X, F4.1, 2X, F6.4, 2X, F7.3, 2X, I1, 2X, 2 F7.3, 2X, F7.3) Stated in tabular form, the contents include the following: ------------------------------------------------------------------- Variable Variable Variable Starting Ending type width column column ------------------------------------------------------------------- sect Character 8 2 9 year Numeric 4 12 15 jdate Numeric 7 18 24 latit Numeric 7 27 33 longit Numeric 7 36 42 surmp Numeric 7 45 51 sursal Numeric 7 54 60 eqtmp Numeric 4 63 66 atmpre Numeric 6 69 74 xco2eq Numeric 7 77 83 qflag Numeric 1 86 86 xco2sst Numeric 7 89 95 xco2a Numeric 7 98 104 ------------------------------------------------------------------- The variables are defined as follows: sect is the WOCE Section number; year is the sampling year; jdate is the julian day of the year; latit is the latitude of the sampling (in decimal degrees; negative values indicate the Southern Hemisphere); longit is the longitude of the sampling (in decimal degrees; negative values indicate the Western Hemisphere); surtmp is the sea surface temperature (°C); sursal is the sea surface salinity (on the PSS); eqtmp is the equilibrator temperature (°C); atmpre is the atmospheric pressure (atm); xco2eq is the observed mole fraction of CO2 in surface seawater at the equilibrator temperature [ppm (dry air)]; qflag is the xco2eq quality flag: 2 = acceptable measurements of xco2eq; 3 = questionable measurements of xco2eq; xco2sst is the mole fraction of CO2 in surface seawater corrected to sea surface temperature [ppm (dry air)]. Temperature correction was determined from the equations of Weiss et al. (1982); xco2a is the atmospheric xCO2 concentrations interpolated to the times when water measurements were made [ppm (dry air)]. 8. VERIFICATION OF DATA TRANSPORT The data files contained in this numeric data package can be read by using the FORTRAN 90 data-retrieval programs provided. Users should visually examine each data file to verify that the data were correctly transported to their systems. To facilitate the visual inspection process, partial listings of each data file are provided in Tables 4-7. Each of these tables contains the first and last twenty-five lines of a data file. Table 4. Partial listing of p10sta.txt (File 6) First twenty-five lines of the file: *********************************************************************** * Source: C. Sabine and R. Key M. Hall * * Princeton University Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute * * Princeton, NJ Woods Hole, MA * * * * NDP-071 August 1999 * *********************************************************************** *STATION INVENTORY: R/V THOMAS G. THOMPSON CRUISE DATES 10/05/1993-11/10/1993 *EXPOCODE SECT STNBR CAST DATE TIME LATITUDE LONGITUDE DEPTH 3250TN026/1 P10 1 1 10/12/1993 1425 -4.015 144.811 201 3250TN026/1 P10 2 1 10/12/1993 1604 -3.978 144.833 795 3250TN026/1 P10 3 1 10/12/1993 1837 -3.889 144.892 1381 3250TN026/1 P10 4 1 10/13/1993 0047 -3.617 145.012 1884 3250TN026/1 P10 5 1 10/13/1993 0426 -3.308 145.150 2183 3250TN026/1 P10 6 1 10/13/1993 0850 -2.997 145.289 2078 3250TN026/1 P10 7 1 10/13/1993 1253 -2.750 145.358 1709 3250TN026/1 P10 8 1 10/13/1993 1626 -2.500 145.428 1085 3250TN026/1 P10 9 1 10/13/1993 1936 -2.253 145.497 997 3250TN026/1 P10 10 1 10/13/1993 2239 -2.000 145.570 733 3250TN026/1 P10 11 1 10/14/1993 0145 -1.756 145.642 1921 3250TN026/1 P10 12 1 10/14/1993 0524 -1.503 145.711 2199 3250TN026/1 P10 13 1 10/14/1993 0905 -1.250 145.786 2297 3250TN026/1 P10 14 1 10/14/1993 1319 -0.999 145.858 2321 3250TN026/1 P10 15 1 10/14/1993 1915 -0.747 145.928 2436 3250TN026/1 P10 16 3 10/15/1993 0627 -0.472 146.005 3563 Last twenty-five lines of the file: 3250TN026/1 P10 70 1 11/02/1993 0849 26.511 149.328 6200 3250TN026/1 P10 71 1 11/02/1993 1632 27.167 149.336 5998 3250TN026/1 P10 72 1 11/03/1993 0041 27.833 149.333 6100 3250TN026/1 P10 73 1 11/03/1993 0817 28.506 149.322 6332 3250TN026/1 P10 74 3 11/03/1993 2344 29.161 149.278 6087 3250TN026/1 P10 75 1 11/04/1993 0746 29.681 148.689 6344 3250TN026/1 P10 76 1 11/04/1993 1538 30.189 148.053 6304 3250TN026/1 P10 77 1 11/05/1993 0008 30.700 147.403 6349 3250TN026/1 P10 78 1 11/05/1993 0810 31.214 146.770 6179 3250TN026/1 P10 79 1 11/05/1993 1630 31.717 146.120 6357 3250TN026/1 P10 80 1 11/06/1993 0033 32.230 145.472 5988 3250TN026/1 P10 81 1 11/06/1993 0745 32.686 144.889 5677 3250TN026/1 P10 82 1 11/06/1993 1453 33.142 144.320 5932 3250TN026/1 P10 83 1 11/06/1993 2306 33.661 143.664 5712 3250TN026/1 P10 84 1 11/07/1993 0526 33.925 143.175 5471 3250TN026/1 P10 85 1 11/07/1993 1155 34.189 142.711 5700 3250TN026/1 P10 86 1 11/07/1993 1852 34.408 142.308 5893 3250TN026/1 P10 87 1 11/08/1993 0145 34.597 141.930 5899 3250TN026/1 P10 88 1 11/08/1993 0827 34.739 141.642 5383 3250TN026/1 P10 89 1 11/08/1993 1335 34.806 141.458 4097 3250TN026/1 P10 90 1 11/08/1993 1800 34.931 141.206 3346 3250TN026/1 P10 91 1 11/08/1993 2147 35.039 140.983 1932 3250TN026/1 P10 92 1 11/09/1993 0105 35.092 140.889 1156 3250TN026/1 P10 93 1 11/09/1993 0400 35.125 140.831 473 3250TN026/1 P10 94 1 11/09/1993 0600 35.167 140.753 209 Table 5. Partial listing of p10dat.txt (File 7) First twenty-five lines of the file *********************************************************************** * Source: C. Sabine and R. Key M. Hall * * Princeton University Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute * * Princeton, NJ Woods Hole, MA * * * * NDP-071 August 1999 * *********************************************************************** * EXPOCODE 3250TN026/1 WHP-ID P10 CRUISE DATES 10051993-11101993 * * STNNBR CASTNO SAMPNO BTLNBR CTDPRS CTDTMP CTDSAL CTDOXY THETA SALNTY OXYGEN SILCAT NITRAT NITRIT PHSPHT TCARBN ALKALI DELC14 C14ERR QUALT1 * DBAR ITS-90 PSS-78 UMOL/KG ITS_90 PSS-78 UMOL/KG UMOL/KG UMOL/KG UMOL/KG UMOL/KG UMOL/KG UMOL/KG /MILLE /MILLE * * ******* ******* ******* ******* ******* ******* ******* ******* ******* ******* ******* ******* * 1 1 9 WG009 8.4 28.1734 34.5153 217.4 28.1714 34.5182 207.0 1.16 0.05 0.01 0.06 1925.4 2271.1 102.6 3.1 222222222222 1 1 8 WG008 28.6 27.3515 34.5910 215.5 27.3448 34.6016 210.1 1.34 0.06 0.01 0.08 1932.1 2278.6 -999.9 -999.9 222222222229 1 1 7 WG007 53.3 26.7672 34.6662 207.0 26.7550 34.6671 209.7 1.19 0.01 0.01 0.10 1936.2 2282.0 -999.9 -999.9 222222222229 1 1 6 WG006 78.4 26.1114 34.7574 204.6 26.0939 34.7571 205.3 1.20 0.49 0.05 0.15 1949.1 2283.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222229 1 1 5 WG005 102.7 25.1121 34.9401 192.3 25.0898 34.9421 197.1 1.69 1.96 0.10 0.25 1976.9 2296.2 107.1 3.5 222222222222 1 1 4 WG004 127.0 22.9543 35.2994 174.1 22.9284 35.2824 175.6 2.34 4.77 0.11 0.47 2025.8 2318.5 -999.9 -999.9 222222222229 1 1 3 WG003 152.3 21.9475 35.3641 159.8 21.9173 35.3628 166.9 2.83 6.30 0.19 0.58 2047.9 2323.5 101.7 3.1 222222222222 1 1 2 WG002 177.0 17.1255 35.3490 153.6 17.0961 35.3535 154.7 5.56 11.49 0.17 0.94 2107.1 2328.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222229 1 1 1 WG001 200.2 16.3796 35.2938 155.0 16.3473 35.3017 155.3 6.19 12.41 0.02 1.00 2113.4 2327.0 72.1 3.1 222222222222 2 1 23 WG023 10.1 27.6108 34.5490 220.6 27.6084 34.5474 209.3 1.31 0.04 -0.01 0.05 1925.7 2273.8 -999.9 -999.9 222222222229 2 1 22 WG022 22.4 27.5248 34.5653 220.4 27.5195 34.5690 208.1 1.32 0.04 -0.01 0.06 1927.1 2273.8 -999.9 -999.9 222222222229 2 1 21 WG021 50.3 26.7328 34.6767 221.2 26.7214 34.6779 209.2 1.34 0.09 0.00 0.09 1939.3 2281.7 -999.9 -999.9 222222222229 2 1 20 WG020 74.4 26.0432 34.7634 212.1 26.0267 34.7750 206.2 1.50 0.71 0.02 0.15 1951.6 2286.4 -999.9 -999.9 222222222229 Last twenty-five lines of the file 92 1 6 SW006 604.2 4.2845 34.1092 79.3 4.2396 34.1139 81.1 95.69 37.26 0.00 2.68 -999.9 -999.9 -129.8 2.7 222222222992 92 1 5 SW005 704.7 4.2564 34.2014 64.7 4.2036 34.2011 66.4 102.84 38.32 0.00 2.74 -999.9 -999.9 -143.3 2.7 222222222992 92 1 4 WG035 802.1 3.8491 34.2431 56.5 3.7909 34.2425 56.5 113.32 39.83 0.00 2.84 -999.9 -999.9 -165.2 2.7 222222222992 92 1 3 SW003 903.4 3.5056 34.3310 51.0 3.4416 34.3302 49.4 124.30 40.72 0.00 2.91 -999.9 -999.9 -184.0 2.7 222222222992 92 1 2 WG034 1055.5 3.1321 34.3884 46.5 3.0592 34.3885 46.1 134.60 41.45 -0.01 2.95 -999.9 -999.9 -203.0 4.0 222222222992 92 1 1 SW001 1156.4 3.0035 34.4065 45.2 2.9237 34.4067 44.3 138.29 41.59 0.00 2.96 -999.9 -999.9 -205.9 4.4 222222222992 93 1 10 SW010 16.1 22.9298 34.7384 203.1 22.9265 34.7377 213.1 2.10 1.28 0.07 0.11 -999.9 -999.9 110.1 2.7 222222222992 93 1 9 SW009 55.3 22.9422 34.7398 203.7 22.9310 34.7379 210.8 2.12 1.35 0.08 0.11 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222999 93 1 8 SW008 105.0 18.4414 34.6376 195.5 18.4231 34.5654 183.5 9.66 7.60 0.09 0.55 -999.9 -999.9 87.6 2.7 222222222992 93 1 7 SW007 155.1 15.4053 34.6001 168.4 15.3815 34.5591 174.6 15.98 11.58 0.03 0.82 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222999 93 1 6 SW006 203.6 12.9652 34.4838 157.1 12.9374 34.4831 164.2 24.56 15.90 0.01 1.13 -999.9 -999.9 42.2 2.7 222222222992 93 1 5 SW005 253.6 10.5459 34.3599 145.5 10.5156 34.3581 151.9 36.31 20.99 0.00 1.48 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222999 93 1 4 WG035 304.2 8.2608 34.2380 132.2 8.2295 34.2202 135.7 53.64 26.96 0.00 1.91 -999.9 -999.9 -54.2 2.5 222222222992 93 1 3 SW003 351.7 6.3111 34.0912 130.7 6.2801 34.0943 132.4 63.81 30.07 0.00 2.15 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222999 93 1 2 WG034 398.7 5.7229 34.0751 121.4 5.6895 34.0761 124.1 70.12 31.85 0.00 2.28 -999.9 -999.9 -85.5 2.4 222222222992 93 1 1 SW001 471.7 5.4645 34.0867 112.0 5.4256 34.0878 114.1 75.02 33.02 0.00 2.36 -999.9 -999.9 -85.4 3.2 222222222992 94 1 19 SW019 10.0 22.7604 34.7029 208.5 22.7584 34.7029 212.8 2.23 0.93 0.11 0.10 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222999 94 1 18 SW018 20.6 22.7593 34.7055 210.6 22.7551 34.7053 212.4 2.07 0.95 0.10 0.11 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222999 94 1 17 SW017 44.9 22.7662 34.7046 215.9 22.7571 34.7041 215.4 2.09 1.02 0.10 0.11 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222999 94 1 16 SW016 69.6 22.6832 34.6918 213.1 22.6692 34.6909 214.4 2.29 1.15 0.12 0.11 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222999 94 1 15 SW015 94.9 20.0431 34.3963 221.4 20.0256 34.3997 218.6 3.53 2.05 0.24 0.22 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222999 94 1 14 SW014 118.5 18.3880 34.4453 196.3 18.3674 34.4446 194.2 9.33 6.71 0.40 0.50 -999.9 -999.9 78.6 2.6 222222222992 94 1 13 SW013 147.8 16.1662 34.5325 180.0 16.1427 34.5316 177.1 15.12 10.69 0.11 0.77 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222999 94 1 12 SW012 175.9 14.9282 34.5205 169.6 14.9018 34.5204 172.1 18.47 12.59 0.08 0.91 -999.9 -999.9 67.5 2.7 222222222992 94 1 11 WG021 208.4 13.7493 34.5054 167.9 13.7197 34.4921 166.6 22.70 14.44 0.08 1.05 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 -999.9 222222222999 Table 6. Partial listing of p10pco2a.txt (File 8) First twenty-five lines of the file: ******************************************* * Source: C. Sabine and R. Key * * Princeton University * * Princeton, NJ * * * * NDP-071 August 1999 Underway pCO2 (air) * ******************************************* * EXPOCODE 3250TN026/1 WHP-ID P10 CRUISE DATES 10/05/1993-11/10/1993 * SECTION YEAR JULIAN LATIT LONGIT SUR_TMP SUR_SAL ATM_PRE XCO2A QF * # DATE DCM DCM DEG_C PSS ATM PPM WOCE_P10 1993 279.479 -16.442 172.219 24.9544 34.8887 1.0035 363.551 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.480 -16.440 172.214 24.9554 34.8873 1.0035 363.736 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.480 -16.439 172.213 24.9564 34.8868 1.0033 363.585 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.481 -16.438 172.209 24.9583 34.8859 1.0035 363.459 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.481 -16.437 172.207 24.9594 34.8859 1.0033 363.543 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.481 -16.436 172.205 24.9604 34.8858 1.0035 363.432 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.489 -16.417 172.164 24.9743 34.8867 1.0036 362.967 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.490 -16.414 172.158 24.9742 34.8859 1.0035 362.960 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.491 -16.412 172.153 24.9747 34.8864 1.0033 362.998 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.492 -16.411 172.148 24.9734 34.8868 1.0031 363.022 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.493 -16.410 172.146 24.9723 34.8860 1.0033 362.686 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.493 -16.409 172.144 24.9712 34.8849 1.0035 362.575 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.502 -16.389 172.097 25.0189 34.8889 1.0032 362.159 2 WOCE_P10 1993 279.503 -16.387 172.092 25.0219 34.8930 1.0031 362.331 2 Last twenty-five lines of the file: WOCE_P10 1993 313.069 35.092 140.886 22.8056 34.7069 1.0113 361.778 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.070 35.092 140.885 22.8056 34.7047 1.0114 360.790 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.073 35.093 140.885 22.7894 34.7082 1.0114 361.405 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.074 35.093 140.885 22.7868 34.7062 1.0113 361.906 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.346 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0133 360.936 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.347 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0134 362.198 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.351 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0136 361.668 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.355 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0137 356.804 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.356 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0136 357.078 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.357 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0136 361.544 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.360 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0136 357.720 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.362 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0136 358.324 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.364 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0136 360.752 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.364 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0135 361.010 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.370 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0136 357.927 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.373 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0136 358.662 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.374 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0136 359.086 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.378 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0137 359.124 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.379 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0136 360.472 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.382 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0137 359.128 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.384 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0136 358.169 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.385 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0137 357.410 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.385 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0137 357.378 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.386 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0136 357.847 2 WOCE_P10 1993 313.387 35.077 140.699 22.5957 34.6925 1.0137 357.331 2 Table 7. Partial listing of p10pco2w.txt (File 9) First twenty-five lines of the file: ********************************************** * Source: C. Sabine and R. Key * * Princeton University * * Princeton, NJ * * * * NDP-071 August 1999 Underway pCO2 (water) * ********************************************** *EXPOCODE 3250TN026/1 WHP-ID P10 CRUISE DATES 10051993-11101993 * SECTION YEAR JULIAN LATIT LONGIT SUR_TMP SUR_SAL EQTMP ATM_PRE XCO2_EQ QF XCO2_SST XCO2A * # DATE DCM DCM DEG_C PSS DEG_C ATM PPM PPM PPM WOCE_P10 1993 279.420 -16.574 172.519 24.9960 34.9220 25.5 1.0040 334.032 2 327.262 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.421 -16.572 172.514 25.0023 34.9200 25.5 1.0038 334.059 2 327.373 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.423 -16.568 172.505 25.0249 34.9183 25.5 1.0040 334.065 2 327.311 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.424 -16.566 172.501 25.0379 34.9203 25.5 1.0038 333.866 2 327.043 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.425 -16.564 172.496 25.0476 34.9298 25.6 1.0040 333.951 2 327.133 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.433 -16.547 172.456 25.0267 34.9210 25.5 1.0038 333.839 2 326.989 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.433 -16.545 172.452 25.0286 34.9171 25.5 1.0040 333.198 2 326.387 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.434 -16.544 172.450 25.0292 34.9176 25.5 1.0038 332.751 2 325.955 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.435 -16.542 172.446 25.0279 34.9189 25.5 1.0041 332.530 2 325.722 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.435 -16.540 172.443 25.0277 34.9183 25.5 1.0038 333.617 2 326.785 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.438 -16.534 172.426 25.0173 34.9179 25.5 1.0037 332.665 2 325.837 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.447 -16.515 172.386 25.0140 34.9095 25.5 1.0040 331.778 2 324.925 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.447 -16.514 172.382 25.0168 34.9112 25.5 1.0040 331.498 2 324.686 363.551 WOCE_P10 1993 279.448 -16.512 172.378 25.0177 34.9104 25.5 1.0038 331.550 2 324.749 363.551 Last twenty-five lines of the file: WOCE_P10 1993 313.137 35.161 140.761 22.7287 34.6720 23.2 1.0107 348.520 2 342.453 361.680 WOCE_P10 1993 313.147 35.143 140.796 22.8101 34.7079 23.3 1.0108 358.675 3 351.749 361.644 WOCE_P10 1993 313.148 35.142 140.798 22.8165 34.7054 23.3 1.0106 356.027 3 349.175 361.642 WOCE_P10 1993 313.149 35.141 140.800 22.8175 34.7101 23.3 1.0106 354.690 3 347.810 361.639 WOCE_P10 1993 313.149 35.139 140.803 22.8175 34.7138 23.3 1.0106 352.185 3 345.352 361.637 WOCE_P10 1993 313.150 35.138 140.805 22.8233 34.7091 23.3 1.0109 350.912 3 344.054 361.634 WOCE_P10 1993 313.152 35.135 140.813 22.8578 34.7018 23.3 1.0109 347.521 2 341.208 361.626 WOCE_P10 1993 313.155 35.130 140.823 22.8950 34.7053 23.4 1.0107 347.819 2 341.376 361.616 WOCE_P10 1993 313.157 35.126 140.828 22.9147 34.7121 23.4 1.0108 346.201 2 339.931 361.610 WOCE_P10 1993 313.158 35.125 140.830 22.9189 34.7141 23.4 1.0108 345.310 2 339.113 361.606 WOCE_P10 1993 313.159 35.125 140.831 22.9201 34.7184 23.4 1.0109 344.826 2 338.271 361.602 WOCE_P10 1993 313.161 35.124 140.830 22.9150 34.7208 23.4 1.0109 343.663 2 337.187 361.595 WOCE_P10 1993 313.162 35.124 140.830 22.9148 34.7212 23.3 1.0108 344.565 2 339.222 361.591 WOCE_P10 1993 313.173 35.126 140.830 22.9128 34.7226 23.4 1.0108 362.996 3 356.408 361.553 WOCE_P10 1993 313.173 35.126 140.830 22.9133 34.7212 23.4 1.0108 361.850 3 355.357 361.551 WOCE_P10 1993 313.174 35.126 140.830 22.9127 34.7216 23.4 1.0108 359.334 3 352.942 361.548 WOCE_P10 1993 313.178 35.126 140.831 22.9136 34.7228 23.3 1.0108 354.218 2 348.319 361.533 WOCE_P10 1993 313.179 35.126 140.832 22.9145 34.7215 23.3 1.0107 354.444 2 348.555 361.529 WOCE_P10 1993 313.181 35.127 140.832 22.9125 34.7230 23.3 1.0108 351.879 2 346.264 361.523 WOCE_P10 1993 313.183 35.127 140.832 22.9060 34.7265 23.3 1.0107 350.529 2 344.973 361.518 WOCE_P10 1993 313.184 35.127 140.832 22.9086 34.7231 23.3 1.0108 350.694 2 345.173 361.515 WOCE_P10 1993 313.184 35.128 140.832 22.9053 34.7244 23.3 1.0108 349.981 2 344.424 361.511 WOCE_P10 1993 313.186 35.128 140.832 22.8965 34.7264 23.3 1.0108 349.948 2 344.398 361.504 WOCE_P10 1993 313.189 35.126 140.832 22.8930 34.7219 23.3 1.0108 352.820 2 347.308 361.496 WOCE_P10 1993 313.190 35.126 140.832 22.8878 34.7287 23.3 1.0108 352.819 2 347.232 361.491