from: Lauren Jackson - NOAA Federal to: "Sigdel, Bipana" date: Mar 15, 2022, 9:21 AM subject: Re: FW: NCEI Accession 0245830 mailed-by: noaa.gov Hi Bipana, Thank you for providing this updated information. I will update your accession with the two files you attached to this email. Have a great day! Thank you, Lauren from: Sigdel, Bipana to: Lauren Jackson - NOAA Affiliate date: Mar 14, 2022, 4:02 PM subject: FW: NCEI Accession 0245830 signed-by: tamucc.edu Hi Lauren, It was very nice talking with you last week. I am sorry that we could not get all the answers from the researcher regarding your queries on this data package, but I am glad we tried to figure out the best we could to move it forward. I appreciate all your input. As we discussed, I have updated the ReadMe (text file) and the GRIIDC metadata (XML file). Please find the attachments. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Thank you, Bipana from: Sigdel, Bipana to: Lauren Jackson - NOAA Affiliate date: Mar 10, 2022, 12:26 PM subject: FW: GoMRI Dataset R6.x815.000:0035 signed-by: tamucc.edu Hi Lauren, I had contacted Frank Hernandez and Emily Gipson regarding our questions on blank cells and the "NRDA Sample ID" naming convention [NCEI Accession 0245830]. I heard back from him today, and he could not find any additional information about the naming of samples (Email chain below!). Let's talk about this tomorrow during our meeting on how to move this data package forward. I look forward to talking to you tomorrow! Best, Bipana Bipana Sigdel Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative Information and Data Cooperative (GRIIDC) From: Frank Hernandez Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2022 10:25 AM To: Sigdel, Bipana Cc: Emily Gipson Subject: RE: GoMRI Dataset R6.x815.000:0035 Hello Bipana, From what I can tell, no data were recorded for the blank cells; so they could just be “no data recorded”, or something to that effect. As for the naming of samples, I’ve dug through the NRDA SOPs and I cannot find any additional info. Cheers, Frank from: Sigdel, Bipana to: Lauren Jackson - NOAA Federal date: Feb 11, 2022, 5:23 PM subject: RE: NCEI Accession 0245830 signed-by: tamucc.edu Hi Lauren, No worries! I appreciate the time you took to look over it again and your detailed feedback on the issues. I will go ahead and reach out to the researcher and let you know what I find out asap. Thank you so much. Have a good weekend! from: Lauren Jackson - NOAA Federal to: "Sigdel, Bipana" date: Feb 11, 2022, 2:57 PM subject: Re: NCEI Accession 0245830 mailed-by: noaa.gov Hi Bipana, I am sorry that it has taken me all week to get back to you on this. I think it will be best to go ahead and ask the PI about those unexpected blank cells in that spreadsheet and also about the rest of the NRDA Sample ID construct. Think there may be a few different patterns. One of them I am familiar with and can follow, but the other I am not. The information you provided (thank you!) defines most of the NRDA Sample ID, but leaves a few gaps at the end as you mentioned. NRDA sample ID follows this naming convention: [Cruise name and number + filtered methods – 10m MOCNESS + station ID (B# stations are from the NOAA SEAMAP Grid) Day/Nighttime of the day during sampling where D (day) is 1 hour after sunrise to 1 hour before sunset, N (night) is 1-hour post-sunset to 1-hour pre-sunrise) + net number and Hernandez number (where available)]. If this is helpful, from my memory NRDA Sample IDs with this construct is defined as the following: NS9-B0421-B003D-MOC-N7-I-P019 [CruiseID]-[B (for 2011)MMDD]-[station ID (B# stations are from the NOAA SEAMAP Grid) Day/Nighttime of the day during sampling where D (day) is 1 hour after sunrise to 1 hour before sunset, N (night) is 1-hour post-sunset to 1-hour pre-sunrise)]-[MOC (for MOCNESS)]-[N# (Net Number)]- [I(for Ichthyoplankton)]-(P(Identification lab = Pascagoula)###(sequential ichthyoplankton vial number)] Therefore, I am not sure on the following NRDA Sample ID what the highlighted below portion represents: MS6-B0315-MOC10-B163N-Y6-A1-04 or MS7-B0618-MOC10-SW11D-183-A1-01 Please feel free to let me know if you have any additional questions or suggestions. Thank you, Lauren from: Sigdel, Bipana to: Lauren Jackson - NOAA Federal date: Feb 3, 2022, 6:33 PM subject: RE: NCEI Accession 0245830 signed-by: tamucc.edu Hi Lauren, Thank you so much for your email regarding our recent data submission, NCEI Accession 0245830. I know you are very familiar with this data. So, I am trying to answer some of your queries but would love to get your feedback/input as well! :) Q1. Unexpected blank cells in the Paralepididae_Gut_Content_Data.csv file. Thank you for pointing this out. I could see two random blank cells [M124 and S19] in the file. I could not find any explanation documented in our system regarding these empty files. Is it possible that data was not available? Would you like me to contact and check with the researcher? Q2. GRIIDC provided ReadMe.txt file states that the fish specimens were dried at 60 degrees Celsius for 48 hours while the CSV README states that the samples were dried for 24hrs instead. Good catch again, and sorry for overlooking this. Information in the CSV file (24 hours) is right. I will correct the ReadMe.txt and GRIIDC metadata (XML file). I checked and found that the information provided in the S2N form is correct. Q3. Would it be possible to provide a little more information in an updated ReadMe.txt file to help the understanding of the ‘NRDA Sample ID' (this will also facilitate the understanding of the 'Fish Sample ID' as well since it is built off of the NRDA Sample ID)? It looks like NRDA Sample ID is again built off of sample deployment ID (i.e. the unique identifier for each sampling station and MOCNESS tows assigned to the sample at sea) followed by the net number for each depth discrete net sample within the MOCNESS tows. Thank you for linking it with a similar dataset (NCEI Accession 0239999). Yes, they all are related, and the information used to describe the samples in that dataset also applies to this. After referring to similar data you mentioned, I found that NRDA sample ID follows this naming convention: [Cruise name and number + filtered methods – 10m MOCNESS + station ID (B# stations are from the NOAA SEAMAP Grid) Day/Nighttime of the day during sampling where D (day) is 1 hour after sunrise to 1 hour before sunset, N (night) is 1-hour post-sunset to 1-hour pre-sunrise) + net number and Hernandez number (where available)]. I understand this naming convention will still leave a few of the elements of the NRDA Sample ID to be defined. Please let me know if you would like me to contact the researcher for more detailed descriptions, or this information should work? I appreciate all your help in reviewing and archiving GRIIDC datasets at NCEI. Thank you so much! Best, Bipana -- Bipana Sigdel Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative Information and Data Cooperative (GRIIDC) from: Lauren Jackson - NOAA Federal to: "Sigdel, Bipana" date: Feb 2, 2022, 9:45 AM subject: NCEI Accession 0245830 mailed-by: noaa.gov Hi Bipana, I am on the final stages of reviewing your data submission titled "Diet and stable isotope (bulk-tissue and compound specific amino acid) data of larval and juvenile deep pelagic Paralepidid fishes collected during multiple cruises in the northern Gulf of Mexico from 2010-09-10 to 2011-08-23 (NCEI Accession 0245830)". I have a few questions that I would appreciate your input on to help clarify for the understanding of this dataset. I am very familiar with this data, so if you would like for me to help provide input to bridge any gaps, please let me know and we can tag up to talk them over. My first question is in the Paralepididae_Gut_Content_Data.csv file. There are a few unexpected blank cells in this spreadsheet. Can you please provide clarity for these empty cells or provide a statement that explains that they are intentional so that future users of this data will not think information is missing. This is very in the weeds, but I figured I would ask. Please let me know if I am just overlooking something or not understanding the methods. In the ReadMe.txt file you provided (thank you!), it states that the fish specimens were dried 'at 60 degrees Celsius for 48 hours' while the csv README states that the samples were dried for 24hrs instead. Please see below for relevant excerpts from each file. Can you please clarify which time period (24hrs vs 48hrs) is correct? ReadMe.txt Methods: Guts were removed from targeted fish specimens in the laboratory and the contents were identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible. Fish specimens were then flushed with deionized water for 48 hours before being transferred to an oven to dry at 60 degrees Celsius for 48 hours. ... README_FOR_PARALEPIDIDAE_DIET_AND_STABLE_ISOTOPE_DATA_README.csv Fish preparation and isotope analysis: Fish were transferred from 85% EtOH to deionized water, with water changes conducted every 24 hours for 2 days to remove residual preservative. Fish were dried at 60 °C for 24 hrs, and dried fish were ground to powder and were weighed to targeted amounts (1.5 mg for CSIA analysis, 0.3 mg - 0.5mg for bulk stable isotope analysis). ... Lastly, would it be possible to provide a little more information in an updated ReadMe.txt file to help the understanding of the 'NRDA Sample ID' (this will also facilitate the understanding of the 'Fish Sample ID' as well since it is built off of the NRDA Sample ID). Would information that was used to describe the DHPAA Archive Number In a similar dataset (NCEI Acession 0239999) also apply to these NRDA Sample IDs? I think this will still leave a few of the elements of the NRDA Sample ID to be defined, but it should give us a good start. 0239999/1.1/data/0-data/NS9/Data/R6-x815-000-0027_MOCNESS_Ichthyoplankton_Data/ Documentation/R6-x815-000-0027-metadata.xml Archive number (number assigned to the sample in the Deepwater Horizon Plankton Assessment Archive, typically one archive number per field sample id), cruise name, cruise number, station id (B# stations are from the NOAA SEAMAP Grid), DayNightSample (time of day associated with the sample where D (d ]]>