Search the data

Metadata Report for BODC Series Reference Number 1273610


Metadata Summary

Data Description

Data Category Water sample data
Instrument Type
NameCategories
Technicap NOEX bottle  discrete water samplers
Instrument Mounting lowered unmanned submersible
Originating Country Netherlands
Originator Dr Wim Helder
Originating Organization Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
Processing Status banked
Online delivery of data Download available - Ocean Data View (ODV) format
Project(s) OMEX II-II
 

Data Identifiers

Originator's Identifier PLG109_CTD_NUTS_11:CTD16
BODC Series Reference 1273610
 

Time Co-ordinates(UT)

Start Time (yyyy-mm-dd hh:mm) 1997-07-29 05:39
End Time (yyyy-mm-dd hh:mm) -
Nominal Cycle Interval -
 

Spatial Co-ordinates

Latitude 42.33372 N ( 42° 20.0' N )
Longitude 9.68457 W ( 9° 41.1' W )
Positional Uncertainty Unspecified
Minimum Sensor or Sampling Depth 10.0 m
Maximum Sensor or Sampling Depth 1772.0 m
Minimum Sensor or Sampling Height -11.0 m
Maximum Sensor or Sampling Height 1751.0 m
Sea Floor Depth 1761.0 m
Sea Floor Depth Source -
Sensor or Sampling Distribution Unspecified -
Sensor or Sampling Depth Datum Unspecified -
Sea Floor Depth Datum Instantaneous - Depth measured below water line or instantaneous water body surface
 

Parameters

BODC CODERankUnitsTitle
ADEPZZ011MetresDepth (spatial coordinate) relative to water surface in the water body
AMONAAD51Micromoles per litreConcentration of ammonium {NH4+ CAS 14798-03-9} per unit volume of the water body [dissolved plus reactive particulate <0.2um phase] by filtration and colorimetric autoanalysis
BOTTFLAG1Not applicableSampling process quality flag (BODC C22)
NTRIAAD51Micromoles per litreConcentration of nitrite {NO2- CAS 14797-65-0} per unit volume of the water body [dissolved plus reactive particulate <0.2um phase] by filtration and colorimetric autoanalysis
NTRZAAD51Micromoles per litreConcentration of nitrate+nitrite {NO3+NO2} per unit volume of the water body [dissolved plus reactive particulate <0.2um phase] by filtration and colorimetric autoanalysis
PHOSAAD51Micromoles per litreConcentration of phosphate {PO43- CAS 14265-44-2} per unit volume of the water body [dissolved plus reactive particulate <0.2um phase] by filtration and colorimetric autoanalysis
SAMPRFNM1DimensionlessSample reference number
SLCAAAD51Micromoles per litreConcentration of silicate {SiO44- CAS 17181-37-2} per unit volume of the water body [dissolved plus reactive particulate <0.2um phase] by filtration and colorimetric autoanalysis

Definition of BOTTFLAG

BOTTFLAGDefinition
0The sampling event occurred without any incident being reported to BODC.
1The filter in an in-situ sampling pump physically ruptured during sample resulting in an unquantifiable loss of sampled material.
2Analytical evidence (e.g. surface water salinity measured on a sample collected at depth) indicates that the water sample has been contaminated by water from depths other than the depths of sampling.
3The feedback indicator on the deck unit reported that the bottle closure command had failed. General Oceanics deck units used on NERC vessels in the 80s and 90s were renowned for reporting misfires when the bottle had been closed. This flag is also suitable for when a trigger command is mistakenly sent to a bottle that has previously been fired.
4During the sampling deployment the bottle was fired in an order other than incrementing rosette position. Indicative of the potential for errors in the assignment of bottle firing depth, especially with General Oceanics rosettes.
5Water was reported to be escaping from the bottle as the rosette was being recovered.
6The bottle seals were observed to be incorrectly seated and the bottle was only part full of water on recovery.
7Either the bottle was found to contain no sample on recovery or there was no bottle fitted to the rosette position fired (but SBE35 record may exist).
8There is reason to doubt the accuracy of the sampling depth associated with the sample.
9The bottle air vent had not been closed prior to deployment giving rise to a risk of sample contamination through leakage.

Definition of Rank

  • Rank 1 is a one-dimensional parameter
  • Rank 2 is a two-dimensional parameter
  • Rank 0 is a one-dimensional parameter describing the second dimension of a two-dimensional parameter (e.g. bin depths for moored ADCP data)

Problem Reports

No Problem Report Found in the Database


Data Access Policy

Public domain data

These data have no specific confidentiality restrictions for users. However, users must acknowledge data sources as it is not ethical to publish data without proper attribution. Any publication or other output resulting from usage of the data should include an acknowledgment.

The recommended acknowledgment is

"This study uses data from the data source/organisation/programme, provided by the British Oceanographic Data Centre and funded by the funding body."


Narrative Documents

Technicap NOEX bottle

The Technicap NOEX water bottle was designed for oceanographic sampling. The bottle comprises a plastic tube with caps at each end and is deployed with the caps held open, then closed at the target depth. Multiple bottles can be deployed on a CTD frame rosette. Bottle capacity is variable, but normally several litres. The bottle was developed by Technicap in the 1990s but has been superseded by more recent models. There is no known source of support available for this sampler.

Nutrients for cruises Pelagia PLG109 and PLG138

Document History

Converted from CDROM documentation

Content of data series

AMONAAD2 Dissolved ammonium
Colorimetric autoanalysis (0.4/0.45µm pore filtered)
Micromoles/litre
AMONAAD5 Dissolved ammonium
Colorimetric autoanalysis (0.2µm pore filtered)
Micromoles/litre
AMONAATX Dissolved ammonium
Colorimetric autoanalysis (unfiltered)
Micromoles/litre
AMONMATX Ammonium (unfiltered)
Manual Colorimetric analysis (unfiltered)
Micromoles/litre
NTRIAAD2 Dissolved nitrite
Colorimetric autoanalysis (0.4/0.45µm pore filtered)
Micromoles/litre
NTRIAAD5 Dissolved nitrite
Colorimetric autoanalysis (0.2µm pore filtered)
Micromoles/litre
NTRIAATX Nitrite (unfiltered)
Colorimetric autoanalysis (unfiltered)
Micromoles/litre
NTRZAAD2 Dissolved nitrate + nitrite
Colorimetric autoanalysis (0.4/0.45µm pore filtered)
Micromoles/litre
NTRZAAD5 Dissolved nitrate + nitrite
Colorimetric autoanalysis (0.2µm pore filtered)
Micromoles/litre
NTRZAATX Nitrate + nitrite (unfiltered)
Colorimetric autoanalysis (unfiltered)
Micromoles/litre
PHOSAAD2 Dissolved phosphate
Colorimetric autoanalysis (0.4/0.45µm pore filtered)
Micromoles/litre
PHOSAAD5 Dissolved phosphate
Colorimetric autoanalysis (0.2µm pore filtered)
Micromoles/litre
PHOSAATX Phosphate (unfiltered)
Colorimetric autoanalysis (unfiltered)
Micromoles/litre
PHOSMATX Phosphate (unfiltered)
Manual Colorimetric analysis (unfiltered)
Micromoles/litre
SLCAAAD2 Dissolved silicate
Colorimetric autoanalysis (0.4/0.45µm pore filtered)
Micromoles/litre
SLCAAAD5 Dissolved silicate
Colorimetric autoanalysis (0.2µm pore filtered)
Micromoles/litre
SLCAAATX Silicate (unfiltered)
Colorimetric autoanalysis (unfiltered)
Micromoles/litre
SLCAMATX Silicate (unfiltered)
Manual Colorimetric analysis (unfiltered)
Micromoles/litre
UREAMDD2 Dissolved urea
Manual analysis using the diacetylmonoximeµmethod (0.4/0.45µm pore filtered)
Micromoles/litre
UREAMDTX Urea (unfiltered)
Manual analysis using the diacetylmonoxime method
Micromoles/litre

Data Originator

Dr Wim Helder NIOZ, Texel, the Netherlands.

Sampling strategy and methodology

Samples were taken from CTD bottles into polyethylene bottles, filtered through a 0.2 µm acrodisc filter and analysed within 10 hours. Nutrient concentrations were determined colorimetrically, following the methods described by Grashoff (1983) using a Bran and Luebbe Traacs 800 Autoanalyser. Samples were always analysed from the surface to the bottom to minimise the risk of cross-sample contamination.

Working standards were freshly prepared daily by diluting stock standards to the required concentration with natural, aged, low-nutrient seawater. The nutrient concentrations in this were determined by manual Colorimetric analysis. The low-nutrient seawater was also used as a wash between samples. A second mixed nutrient stock, poisoned with 0.2% chloroform or 20 mg/l HgCl2, was used as an independent check. Pipettes and volumetric flasks were calibrated before each cruise and standard batches were intercalibrated.

Accuracy of analyses is reported as about 1% of the full-scale value for nitrate, nitrite and silicate and 2% of the full scale for phosphate and ammonium.

The data were supplied to BODC as nitrate (corrected for nitrite) and nitrite. A nitrate+nitrite channel was generated by summing NO2 and NO3. The data from some cruises were supplied in units of micromoles/kg. The true density was used to convert these to micromoles/litre.

Comments on data quality

The following comments on data quality were either included in the cruise report by the analyst or notes made during the BODC data audit.

Nutrient Intercalibration

Many efforts were made during the period of OMEX II-II to compare nutrient data produced from different laboratories. The 'formal' Work Package 4 intercalibration was based on samples collected during two contemporaneous cruises in June 1997. The following is summarised from the intercalibration report.

Intercalibration samples were taken from cruise CD105B and analysed by Plymouth Marine Laboratory, the Instituto de Investigaçiones Marias (IIM) and University of Brussels (ULB). At Stations S90, S200 and S2250, samples were taken from the CTD bottle, filtered through acid-washed, 0.45 m cellulose nitrate filters and then sub-sampled. One sub-sample was analysed onboard Charles Darwin, and four were immediately frozen. Of these, three were transferred to Belgica (BG9714B) for analysis, and one was returned to PML for later analysis. On 20/06/97, simultaneous CTD casts were made from Charles Darwin and Belgica, and 24 replicate samples were analysed on both ships.

The following table summarises the results of the comparison between PML and IIM:

Slope Y Intercept R2
Nitrate 1.04 0.00 1.00
Phosphate 0.85 0.01 0.92
Silicate 0.70 -0.47 0.98
Ammonium 0.27 0.22 0.11

A regression of the nitrate concentrations determined by the two laboratories shows almost perfect agreement with a slope of 1.04 for the fitted line, an intercept of zero and an R2value of 1.00. The phosphate intercalibration was also good with R2 of 0.85. However, the slope was no longer unity and the IIM estimates were higher than those of the PML. The R2 value for the silicate determinations suggests that the precision of both laboratories is good (the regression yields a straight line with R2 value of 0.98), but there is a problem with accuracy. In other words, the relative changes in silicate concentration were well described by both laboratories but there is doubt about the absolute value of silicate concentration, with the PML consistently measuring lower concentrations than the IIM. Finally, the analysis of ammonium shows wide variations with the IIM estimates being higher than the PML estimates. However, in the case of ammonium, both precision and accuracy were suspect. This may be a consequence of storage of samples or of contamination on board ship, which is a recognised problem in ammonium determinations.

There was excellent agreement between the phosphate measurements made by the ULB and the PML. The slope of the fitted line was 1.09, the intercept was 0.01 and the R2 was 0.99. That is, precision and accuracy were both excellent in these measurements. The silicate data also showed a perfect linear trend with an R2 value of 1.00. However, as with the intercalibration of the PML and the IIM, the slope was not unity and the PML estimates were consistently below those obtained by ULB. It is clear that the PML standard silicate solution was not correct

There were a number of other cruises when analysts were present from more than one laboratory and cross-checked results from common samples. Both PML and IIM participated in CD114 and samples collected on ST0898 were analysed by both IEO and IIM. All versions of the data have been loaded into the database and may be retrieved for comparison if required.

References

Brewer, P.G. and Riley, J.P., 1965. The automatic determination of nitrate in seawater. Deep-Sea Research, 12, 765-772.

Garside, C., 1982. A chemiluminescent technique for the determination of nanomolar concentrations of nitrate and nitrite in seawater. Marine Chemistry, 11, 159-167.

Goeyens, L, Kindermans, N, AbuYusuf, M and Elskens, M., 1998. A room temperature procedure for the manual determination of urea in seawater. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science. 47: 415-418.

Grasshoff, K., 1976. Methods of seawater analysis. Verlag Chemie, Weiheim. 317pp

Grasshoff, K., Ehrhardt, M. and Kremling, K. eds., 1983. Methods of seawater analysis. Verlag Chemie.

Jones, R.D., 1991. An improved fluorescence method for the determination of nanomolar concentrations of ammonium in natural waters. Limnology and Oceanography, 36, 814-819.

Kirkwood, D., 1989. Simultaneous determination of selected nutrients in sea water. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), CM 1989/C:29.

Koroleff, F., 1969. Direct determination of ammonia in natural waters as indophenol blue. Int. Counc. Explor. Sea, CM., 9, 19-22.

Mantoura, R.F.C. and Woodward, E.M.S., 1983. Optimisation of the indophenol blue method for the automated determination of ammonia in estuarine waters. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 17, 219-224.


Project Information

Ocean Margin EXchange (OMEX) II - II

Introduction

OMEX was a European multidisciplinary oceanographic research project that studied and quantified the exchange processes of carbon and associated elements between the continental shelf of western Europe and the open Atlantic Ocean. The project ran in two phases known as OMEX I (1993-1996) and OMEX II - II (1997-2000), with a bridging phase OMEX II - I (1996-1997). The project was supported by the European Union under the second and third phases of its MArine Science and Technology Programme (MAST) through contracts MAS2-CT93-0069 and MAS3-CT97-0076. It was led by Professor Roland Wollast from Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium and involved more than 100 scientists from 10 European countries.

Scientific Objectives

The aim of the Ocean Margin EXchange (OMEX) project was to gain a better understanding of the physical, chemical and biological processes occurring at the ocean margins in order to quantify fluxes of energy and matter (carbon, nutrients and other trace elements) across this boundary. The research culminated in the development of quantitative budgets for the areas studied using an approach based on both field measurements and modeling.

OMEX II - II (1997-2000)

The second phase of OMEX concentrated exclusively on the Iberian Margin, although RV Belgica did make some measurements on La Chapelle Bank whilst on passage to Zeebrugge. This is a narrow-shelf environment, which contrasts sharply with the broad shelf adjacent to the Goban Spur. This phase of the project was also strongly multidisciplinary in approach, covering physics, chemistry, biology and geology.

There were a total of 33 OMEX II - II research cruises, plus 23 CPR tows, most of which were instrumented. Some of these cruises took place before the official project start date of June 1997.

Data Availability

Field data collected during OMEX II - II have been published by BODC as a CD-ROM product, entitled:

  • OMEX II Project Data Set (three discs)

Further descriptions of this product and order forms may be found on the BODC web site.

The data are also held in BODC's databases and subsets may be obtained by request from BODC.


Data Activity or Cruise Information

Data Activity

Start Date (yyyy-mm-dd) 1997-07-29
End Date (yyyy-mm-dd) 1997-07-29
Organization Undertaking ActivityRoyal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
Country of OrganizationNetherlands
Originator's Data Activity IdentifierPLG109_CTD_CTD16
Platform Categorylowered unmanned submersible

BODC Sample Metadata Report for PLG109_CTD_CTD16

Sample reference number Nominal collection volume(l) Bottle rosette position Bottle firing sequence number Minimum pressure sampled (dbar) Maximum pressure sampled (dbar) Depth of sampling point (m) Bottle type Sample quality flag Bottle reference Comments
563121   12.00     1798.50 1799.50 1772.00 Technicap NOEX bottle No problem reported    
563122   12.00     1013.70 1014.70  999.00 Technicap NOEX bottle No problem reported    
563123   12.00      505.10  506.10  498.00 Technicap NOEX bottle No problem reported    
563124   12.00      252.30  253.30  249.00 Technicap NOEX bottle No problem reported    
563125   12.00      101.00  102.00  100.00 Technicap NOEX bottle No problem reported    
563126   12.00       49.20   50.20   49.00 Technicap NOEX bottle No problem reported    
563127   12.00       24.90   25.90   25.00 Technicap NOEX bottle No problem reported    
563128   12.00        9.70   10.70   10.00 Technicap NOEX bottle No problem reported    

Please note:the supplied parameters may not have been sampled from all the bottle firings described in the table above. Cross-match the Sample Reference Number above against the SAMPRFNM value in the data file to identify the relevant metadata.

Cruise

Cruise Name PE109
Departure Date 1997-07-15
Arrival Date 1997-08-06
Principal Scientist(s)Tjeerd van Weering (Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research)
Ship RV Pelagia

Complete Cruise Metadata Report is available here


Fixed Station Information


No Fixed Station Information held for the Series


BODC Quality Control Flags

The following single character qualifying flags may be associated with one or more individual parameters with a data cycle:

Flag Description
Blank Unqualified
< Below detection limit
> In excess of quoted value
A Taxonomic flag for affinis (aff.)
B Beginning of CTD Down/Up Cast
C Taxonomic flag for confer (cf.)
D Thermometric depth
E End of CTD Down/Up Cast
G Non-taxonomic biological characteristic uncertainty
H Extrapolated value
I Taxonomic flag for single species (sp.)
K Improbable value - unknown quality control source
L Improbable value - originator's quality control
M Improbable value - BODC quality control
N Null value
O Improbable value - user quality control
P Trace/calm
Q Indeterminate
R Replacement value
S Estimated value
T Interpolated value
U Uncalibrated
W Control value
X Excessive difference

SeaDataNet Quality Control Flags

The following single character qualifying flags may be associated with one or more individual parameters with a data cycle:

Flag Description
0 no quality control
1 good value
2 probably good value
3 probably bad value
4 bad value
5 changed value
6 value below detection
7 value in excess
8 interpolated value
9 missing value
A value phenomenon uncertain
Q value below limit of quantification