Hi Alison, Following the example of the European intercomparison (CARBOCEAN?), the intent was to have two sets of variables for inorganic C, N, P, Fe, Alk and Si for a tracer equation integrated over the upper 100m such as:
dtracer/dt = Jtracer + tracer_physics where: 1) Jtracer = the net biological source sink terms integrated in the upper 100m in units of mol m2 s-1 2) dtracer = the time rate of change of the tracer(s) integrated in the upper 100m in units of mol m2 s-1 with the calculation of dtracer allows the back-calculation of the accumulated role of physical processes on the tracers. Make sense? - John ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] Date: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 8:10 am Subject: RE: [CF-metadata] CMIP5 ocean biogeochemistry standard names > Dear John, > > I was looking again at the biogeochemistry names in preparation for > adding them to the CMIP5 output document as accepted standard > names. I > am concerned that we may have given the wrong names to some of the > vertically integrated rates of change in the top 100m of the ocean. > Please can you advise on the definitions. Currently the names are > listed as: > > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_carbon > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_nitrogen > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_phosphorus > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_iron > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_silicon > integral_wrt_depth_of_tendency_of_sea_water_alkalinity_expressed_as_mole > _equivalent > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_carbon_due_to_biol > ogical_processes > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_nitrogen_due_to_bi > ological_processes > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_phosphorus_due_to_ > biological_processes > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_iron_due_to_biolog > ical_processes > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_silicon_due_to_bio > logical_processes > integral_wrt_depth_of_tendency_of_sea_water_alkalinity_expressed_as_mole > _equivalent_due_to_biological_processes > > The first two names are defined as follows: > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_nitrogen > 'Net time rate of change of dissolved inorganic carbon in upper 100m' > and > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_phosphorus > 'Net time rate of change of nitrogen nutrients (e.g. NO3+NH4) in upper > 100m'. > If these quantities should be interpreted as the time rate of > change of > the vertically integrated mole_concentration, then these names are > correct. > > However, the remainder of the names have definitions along the > lines of: > tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_dissolved_inorganic_phosphorus > 'Vertical integral of net time rate of change of phosphate in upper > 100m', > which is clearly the vertical integral of the rate of change and > not the > rate of change of the vertical integral. I don't think those two > thingsare identical, are they? > > If the order of the calculation is important then I think we should > adopt the pattern used in the alkalinity names for all these names, > i.e., > integral_wrt_depth_of_tendency_of_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_inorga > nic_phosphorus_in_sea_water, etc. Do you agree? > > Best wishes, > Alison > > ------ > Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065 > NCAS/British Atmospheric Data Centre Fax: +44 1235 446314 > Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Email: > [email protected], Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K. > > > -- > Scanned by iCritical. > _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
