Marine Science Faculty Publications

Consistency and Synthesis of Pacific Ocean CO2 Survey Data


M. F. Lamb, NOAA/Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory
C. L. Sabine, NOAA/Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory
R. A. Feely, NOAA/Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory
R. Wanninkhof, NOAA/Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory
R. M. Key, Princeton University
G. C. Johnson, NOAA/Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory
F. J. Millero, University of Miami
K. Lee, NOAA/Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory
T.-H. Peng, NOAA/Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory
A. Kozyr, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, ORNL
J. L. Bullister, NOAA/Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory
D Greeley, NOAA/Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory
R. H. Byrne, University of South FloridaFollow
D. W. Chipman, Columbia University
A. G. Dickson, University of California, San Diego
C. Goyet, Marine Chemistry & Geochemistry Department, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole
P. R. Guenther, University of California, San Diego
M. Ishii, Meteorological Research Institute, 1-1 Nagamine, Tsukuba
K. M. Johnson, DOE/BNL
C. D. Keeling, University of California, San Diego
T. Ono, National Research Institute of Fisheries Science, 12-4 Hukuura, Kanazawa-Ku
K. Shitashima, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, 1646 Abiko, Abiko
B. Tilbrook, Antarctic CRC and CSIRO Marine Research, GPO Box 1538, Hobart
T. Takahashi, Columbia University
D. W.R. Wallace, DOE/BNL
Y. W. Watanabe, National Institute for Resources and Environment, 16-3 Onogawa, Tsukuba-shi
C. Winn, University of Hawaii
C. S. Wong, Institute of Ocean Sciences, 9860 W. Saanich Road, Sidney, British Columbia

Document Type


Publication Date


Digital Object Identifier (DOI)


Between 1991 and 1999, carbon measurements were made on twenty-five WOCE/JGOFS/OACES cruises in the Pacific Ocean. Investigators from 15 different laboratories and four countries analyzed at least two of the four measurable ocean carbon parameters (DIC, TAlk, fCO2, and pH) on almost all cruises. The goal of this work is to assess the quality of the Pacific carbon survey data and to make recommendations for generating a unified data set that is consistent between cruises. Several different lines of evidence were used to examine the consistency, including comparison of calibration techniques, results from certified reference material analyses, precision of at-sea replicate analyses, agreement between shipboard analyses and replicate shore based analyses, comparison of deep water values at locations where two or more cruises overlapped or crossed, consistency with other hydrographic parameters, and internal consistency with multiple carbon parameter measurements. With the adjustments proposed here, the data can be combined to generate a Pacific Ocean data set, with over 36,000 unique sample locations analyzed for at least two carbon parameters in most cases. The best data coverage was for DIC, which has an estimated overall accuracy of ∼3 μmol kg−1. TAlk, the second most common carbon parameter analyzed, had an estimated overall accuracy of ∼5 μmol kg−1. To obtain additional details on this study, including detailed crossover plots and information on the availability of the compiled, adjusted data set, visit the Global Data Analysis Project web site at:

Was this content written or created while at USF?


Citation / Publisher Attribution

Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, v. 49, issues 1-3, p. 21-58