Hi Alison,
Thanks for your email.
I am not an expert on ecosystems, and so will defer to those who are.
I had assumed that the variable was for carbon production CAUSED by
nitrate through some process, in which case _due_to_ seemed to me to be
appropriate.
Going back to your spreadsheet, I see that the description for
net_new_primary_mole_productivity_of_carbon was 'Vertically integrated
primary (organic carbon) production by phytoplankton based on NO3 alone'.
So now I'm not so sure, and need guidance from an expert.
Is this quantity just being calculated using nitrate as a proxy data
source, or is it production caused by nitrate?
BTW, we might consider replacing NO3 and NH4 in the description with
'nitrate' and 'ammonium', or 'NO3-' and 'NH4+', or making it unambiguous
in some other way, that these are ions and not radicals. Admittedly, this
is probably obvious to most people with some familiarity with the
chemistry or biology, but we might as well be precise.
Best wishes,
Philip
On Wed, 28 Apr 2010, [email protected] wrote:
Dear Philip,
Thanks very much for forwarding these emails to the list and sorry for
not picking up on this thread sooner.
The standard names
tendency_of_mole_concentration_of_particulate_organic_matter_expressed_a
s_carbon_in_sea_water_due_to_net_new_primary_production; mol m-3 s-1
net_new_primary_mole_productivity_of_carbon; mol m-2 s-1
were accepted after discussion in the 'CMIP5 ocean biogeochemistry
standard names' thread.
However, the name
net_primary_mole_productivity_of_carbon_due_to_nitrate
is now being proposed for the second quantity because there is some
confusion as to the precise meaning of 'new' production.
As the accepted names have not yet been added to the standard name table
I think we could change them provided everyone agrees. Both names should
be changed to be consistent with one another. The phrase 'due_to' is
reserved in standard names for describing a process, e.g.
'due_to_convection', so 'due_to_nitrate' doesn't really fit that
pattern. Would
net_primary_mole_productivity_of_carbon_from_nutrients_containing_nitrat
e
or just
net_primary_mole_productivity_of_carbon_from_nitrate_nutrients
be an accurate description?
The first name could then be changed to
tendency_of_mole_concentration_of_particulate_organic_matter_expressed_a
s_carbon_in_sea_water_due_to_net_primary_production_from_{nutrients_cont
aining_nitrate}|{nitrate_nutrients}.
Perhaps John Dunne could also comment on these ideas.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
NCAS/British Atmospheric Data Centre Fax: +44 1235 446314
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Email: [email protected]
Chilton, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:cf-metadata-
[email protected]] On Behalf Of Philip J. Cameronsmith1
Sent: 22 April 2010 00:05
To: CF-metadata email list
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] BGC output for CMIP5 simulations (fwd)
Hi,
It appears that the wrong email address for the CF list was used for
some
of the emails in the conversation below. Hence, I am forwarding the
final email for the record.
Best wishes,
Philip
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Dr Philip Cameron-Smith Atmospheric, Earth, and Energy Division
[email protected] Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
+1 925 4236634 7000 East Avenue, Livermore, CA94550,
USA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 13:15:39
From: Keith Lindsay <[email protected]>
To: Philip J. Cameronsmith1 <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], Ernst Maier-Reimer <ernst.maier-
[email protected]>,
Corinne Le Quere <[email protected]>,
Bruce Hackett <[email protected]>,
Thomas LOUBRIEU <[email protected]>,
Laurent Bopp <[email protected]>,
Pierre Friedlingstein <[email protected]>,
James Orr <[email protected]>, Laurence Crosnier
<lcrosn...@mercator-
ocean.fr>,
Chris Jones <[email protected]>, cf-
[email protected],
Karl Taylor <[email protected]>, Yann BARZIC
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] BGC output for CMIP5 simulations
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Philip J. Cameronsmith1 wrote:
Hi Keith, et al.
By no3 I assume you mean the negatively charged nitrate ion (NO3-).
In which
case I recommend using 'nitrate' in the standard name instead of
'no3'. This
will then be consistent with existing standard names, and avoid
confusion
with the uncharged nitrate radical (NO3).
In looking at the standard name table I think it would also be more
consistent to use _due_to_ instead of _from_. The latter is mainly
used for
physical directions, eg _into_sea_water_from_rivers, while the
former
is
mainly used when when the quantity is changing _due_to_ another
process, eg
tendency_of_air_temperature_due_to_shortwave_heating.
Hence, I suggest you consider the following:
net_primary_mole_productivity_of_carbon_due_to_nitrate
Best wishes,
Philip
Philip,
Thanks for the feedback. Your comments are on target. I propose going
with your
standard name.
Keith
******************************************************************
Keith Lindsay http://**www.**cgd.ucar.edu/oce/klindsay/
email: [email protected] phone: 303-497-1722 fax: 303-497-1700
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://*mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
--
Scanned by iCritical.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Philip Cameron-Smith Atmospheric, Earth, and Energy Division
[email protected] Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
+1 925 4236634 7000 East Avenue, Livermore, CA94550, USA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
