Minutes from the Third U.S. SO GLOBEC Science Steering Committee Meeting

9-10 July 2001

National Science Foundation Headquarters, Room 530, Arlington, VA

Attendees:  B. Beardsley, D. Costa, E. Hofmann, J. Torres, P. Wiebe, A. Doyle (Raytheon Polar Services), P. Penhale (NSF), B. Lettau (NSF), A. Sutherland (NSF), R. Muench (NSF and ONR)

The third meeting of the U.S. Southern Ocean GLOBEC (SO GLOBEC) Science Steering Committee took place at the National Science Foundation Headquarters in Arlington, VA on 9 and 10 July 2001. The meeting began with a review of the agenda and Peter Wiebe requested that items related to space requirements on the ships for the upcoming cruises, funding for BIOMAPER, and help with BIOMAPER from Raytheon Polar Services personnel be added to the section of the agenda dealing with logistical issues for the July-August cruise.

The first items on the agenda were reports about the recently completed U.S. SO GLOBEC cruises on the RV Gould (LMG01-04) and RVIB Palmer (NBP01-03). However, these were delayed while a video projector was located and set up. While waiting for the projector, Hofmann distributed a draft version of the minutes from the joint cruise meeting that took place in Punta Arenas, Chile on 19 April 2001 and requested any comments or corrections to these. The minutes will be posted on the U.S. SO GLOBEC web site. Hofmann next distributed the description of a special session that was submitted for the 2002 Ocean Sciences Meeting. The session is on physical and biological processes in Antarctic coastal waters and is co-convened by Hofmann, Costa, Wiebe, and Torres. Hofmann said that decisions on acceptance of special sessions for the Ocean Sciences Meeting will be made in late July.

Next a discussion of representation of SO GLOBEC at national and international meetings was started. The international meetings of note are the IGBP Ocean Science Meeting, Ocean Odyssey, and iAnZone. Uli Bathmann is representing SO GLOBEC at the IGBP meeting. However, getting a SO GLOBEC poster done in time for him to take to the meeting was problematic. As a result, representation at this meeting was not as hoped. Dan Costa is attending the Ocean Odyssey meeting in October 2001 and will take along a SO GLOBEC poster. There should be enough time to get a poster done for this meeting. Robin Muench, who is a co-convener of the upcoming iAnZone meeting in October 2001, gave a brief description of iAnZone and the purpose of this meeting. Muench said that the iAnZone meetings bring together researchers with interests in the Southern Ocean an attempt to make them aware of ongoing or planned research activities, The focus of the iAnZone participants is mostly physical oceanography, but other areas of ocean sciences are welcome to participate. At the October 2001 iAnZone meeting, John Klinck will make a presentation on the U.S. SO GLOBEC first year field activities. Polly Penhale mentioned that SCAR will be holding its delegates meeting in July 2002 in Shanghai, China. She suggested that SO GLOBEC be included in the report on U.S. Southern Ocean activities. Hofmann said that she would provide the text needed for this. Muench said that the European Geophysical Society meeting will be held in Nice, France in spring 2002. He will be attending this meeting and is willing to make a presentation on SO GLOBEC.

The discussion of representation at meetings was suspended until later upon arrival of the video projector. Jose Torres, who was chief scientist for LMG01-04, gave an overview of the activities that took place during this first process cruise. Torres began by describing the process sites that were occupied during the cruise, which were based on five locations suggested in the earlier cruise planning activities. The five process sites that were occupied are: site 1-offshore portion of canyon going into Marguerite Bay; site 5-LeBeouf Fjord, predator study focus; site 4-George VI Sound; site 3- Lazarev Bay-replaced original site 3, site 2-off the tip of Alexander Island. The order in which the sites were occupied was determined by weather conditions and the needs of the scientific groups on the Gould. Torres said that the predator groups (seal and penguin) were able to deploy all of their satellite tags. Live animals were captured either by diving or nets and used in numerous laboratory experiments on board the ship. The on-board laboratory work included metabolism studies, krill growth rate determinations, feeding studies, as well as other studies such as determination of primary production rates. Hydrographic measurements (temperature, salinity, nutrients) were made at numerous locations and fine-scale surveys of the upper ocean current structure were made with the ship-mounted Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP). Torres also noted that trawls were done to obtain fish distributions and community assemblages. Torres said that overall the cruise was very successful.

Peter Wiebe, who was chief scientist on for NBP01-03, gave an overview of the activities that took place during the first survey cruise. Wiebe showed the track followed during NBP01-03 and described the many activities that took place during the cruise. These included CTD casts, MOCNESS tows, BIOMAPER surveys, XBT and XCTD drops, bird and mammal surveys, surface drifter deployments, underway hydrographic and meteorological data acquisition, and ROV under-ice surveys. In all 84 stations were occupied, the entire survey area was covered, and several special focused projects/studies were done. The focused studies included fine-scale krill patch studies, fine-scale bathymetry mapping around the current meter moorings, deployment of two Automatic Weather Stations, strobe light/net capture experiments, and targeted bird and mammal studies. Wiebe also presented preliminary results submitted by the different science groups on NBP01-03 for inclusion in the cruise report. Wiebe said that the survey cruise met and exceeded its goals and as a result was very successful.

Bob Beardsley next gave an overview of activities on the first mooring cruise, LMG01-03, which took place prior to the process and survey cruises. During this cruise six current meter moorings were deployed in two lines: one extending across the shelf from Adelaide Island, and one extending across the opening of Marguerite Bay. An additional activity on this cruise was deployment of eight passive acoustic moorings intended to record sounds from marine mammals. Also, several surface drifters were deployed, which provided baseline circulation information for the process and survey cruises. Beardsley said that the mooring deployments required less time than anticipated, so there was time at the end of the cruise to devote to marine mammal and bird surveys. He said that the marine mammal group was also successful in obtaining biopsies of several minke and humpback whales. The mooring cruise was successful and provided useful baseline data sets for the subsequent process and survey cruises.

Following the presentation of the overviews there was a discussion of issues that arose from the cruises. Muench asked if the personnel for the cruises was optimal. Torres said that LMG01-04 was under-staffed for the numerous activities that took place on the cruise. He said that the Marine Project Coordinator (Skip Owen) on the Gould took up much of the slack and that this was much appreciated by the scientists. Torres also requested that sonar be placed on the Gould that can provide detailed bathymetry and warning for times when nets or other gear are being towed in areas of variable bathymetry.

Beardsley said that there are cross-calibration issues that need addressing for the meteorological sensors on the Gould and Palmer. These issues are detailed in the meteorological portion of the cruise report for NBP01-03. Beardsley requested that Raytheon look at these and try to ensure that the sensor packages on the two ships be cross-calibrated. Beardsley also said that the there is a need for redundant meteorological sensors on both ships. He noted that the heat budget in the austral fall is mostly a longwave radiation balance which is relatively easy to quantify. He asked if the Gould and Palmer have been numerically modeled to determine the wind flow around the ships. He said that it is possible to do this and that having this information is important in interpreting the data from the wind sensors. In lieu of modeling the wind flow, the ships can be rotated in order to get a sense of what winds are being measured. Beardsley requested that this be done on the next cruise. Having this information will allow more quantitative meteorological data to be obtained from the two ships.

Costa, who will be the chief scientist on the next Gould cruise (LMG01-06), asked about the seal tagging that took place on LMG01-04. Torres said that the majority of the seals that were tagged were in Lazarev Bay near the frontal region and in the area with variable topography where krill were on the bottom. Costa said that the animals do not go back in the water once they have hauled out, so the seal team can work at night. He said that data from the tags that were put out on LMG01-03 suggested that the crabeater seals are diving deeper than expected, most likely to get the krill that are concentrated on the bottom.

Doyle provided a summary of the Raytheon personnel who will be participating in the next process and survey cruises. Hofmann said that there is still one available bunk on the survey vessel that had been allocated to the CTD group. However, given the late date, it is unlikely that someone will be able to go in this slot. Doyle mentioned that the Gould can only hold gray water for 24 hours. She asked if dumping of gray water would interfere with activities at the process sites. The ship also needs to be underway to make freshwater. These two requirements might put constraints on when the N.B. Palmer needs to move the Gould, assuming that the Gould cannot move in the ice conditions. It was agreed that these two issues will be put on the agenda for the joint cruise meeting that will be held in Punta Arenas on 17 July 2001.

Wiebe said that there seems to be bottleneck for equipment and samples that are shipped out of Punta Arenas following a cruise. He asked Alice Doyle to check on this to find out what the problem(s) might be. Doyle said she would do this. Wiebe said that he was especially concerned about getting preserved samples back in timely manner so that they could be analyzed and the results presented at the Ocean Sciences Meeting, which is scheduled for February 2002. Doyle said she would check on this.

The next issue raised was the need for printers for the EK-500 on the N.B. Palmer. Wiebe said that logging onto paper seems to be only way to archive data from this sensor. There is a concern that only a particular printer will work with the instrument and that ink cartridges for the printer are difficult to obtain. Costa said that the AMLR group at the NMFS laboratory in La Jolla, CA uses an EK-500 for acoustic mapping of krill biomass. He said that this group has a way of processing the data from the sensor. Doyle said that she would check on this.

The next issue brought up was that of putting Zodiacs over the side with people in them. Sutherland and Doyle said that this is not the recommended way of deploying the Zodiacs and that it presents a potential safety issue. This is likely to be an issue for the diving group on the LMG01-06 cruise. Sutherland said that the preferred method of deploying people is to put them over the side onto the ice with a basket or have them climb down the ladder into the Zodiac. One option is to put slings on the Zodiacs to support the additional weight of the people if they are deployed in the inflatibles. Sutherland said that NSF would establish a policy on this prior to the departure of LMG01-06. He said that he would communicate the policy to the groups that are potentially affected by it.

The space layouts for the NBP01-04 cruise were discussed. Wiebe said that space would be tight on this cruise because of the different science activities that would take place. There will be two radiation vans on the helo deck. The MOCNESS 1 and 10 will be deployed off the stern of the Palmer around BIOMAPER. It was acknowledged that there will be logistical issues associated with deploying multiple types of equipment off the Palmer and that these will need to be dealt with on the cruise. The issue of storing containers for Torres' equipment was brought up. Doyle said that these could go in the hold on the Palmer. Costa said that the some of the space allocations for the Gould would need to be worked out once all of the participants were on the ship. He mentioned that there might be a need to share some space between projects.

Wiebe brought up a re-visit to the Argentine station, San Martin. Sutherland said that he would send a courtesy message to Molinari, director of the Argentine Antarctic program, saying that the Palmer and/or Gould may call at the station. Wiebe said that if it is possible to visit the base, then the plan is to bring items such as fresh vegetables, magazines, and maybe mail to those on the base.

Doyle next brought up the issue of purchasing rapid response CTD sensors. The purchase of these sensors was suggested at an earlier SO GLOBEC science investigator meeting, pending availability of funds. Doyle said that her budget has funds that are sufficient to cover the cost of the sensors. The ensuing discussion came to the conclusion that such sensors are needed and Doyle was asked to go ahead and purchase them. The issues to be considered now are the need for a dedicated person to take care of the sensors, data acquisition, and data processing. Beardsley suggested that the rapid response sensors could be tested on the mooring recovery/deployment cruise scheduled for March 2002. The acquisition and implementation of the sensors was considered to a high priority because microstructure measurements represent a critical data set that is not being collected. (Tom Powell has been funded to do this, but did not participate in the 2001 cruises.) The suggestion was also made to talk with Laurie Padman about the rapid response sensors and ask for advice and help in getting these implemented by the 2002 cruises. Hofmann also said that she will talk with Ann Gargett, who is an expert on microstructure, about the best approach to take for getting these measurements.

Hofmann presented a station distribution for NBP01-04 in which the stations occupied during NBP01-03 were shifted one kilometer to north, stations were added to cover the coastal current as it enters and exits Marguerite Bay, and some of offshore stations from NBP01-03 were eliminated. The shifting of the survey grid to the north allows Sea Beam mapping of an additional part of the bathymetry. It was agreed that the revised station distribution would be used for NBP01-04. Hofmann said that she would send electronic versions of the station locations to Wiebe and Costa.

It was requested that the Sea Beam data from the two cruises be made available as a gridded data set and that the bathymetry measurements from the Gould be merged with those from the Palmer. Beardsley brought up the issue of correcting the Sea Beam data using sound speed profiles obtained from the CTD. He said that sound speed changes over the region included in the Sea Beam surveys and that this needs to be included the post-processing of these data. Hofmann mentioned that some of the sound speed profiles input to Sea Beam during the first survey cruise were based on XBT data that had not been corrected. As a result, the sound speed was in error. Beardsley asked if Raytheon could fund Tom Bolmar, who is at WHOI and was involved in the Sea Beam data collection, to clean up the data. Another option is to have the Raytheon Sea Beam technician on NBP01-04 reprocess the data set. However, this is likely not feasible. Beardsley said he would follow up with a proposal to do the Sea Beam data post processing.

Doyle said that it is important to let everyone know prior to the cruises that they will be responsible for doing ping editing of Sea Beam data. She said that everyone should take a turn at editing. The Sea Beam technician on the cruise is not responsible for editing all of the data. This person is on the cruise to ensure that the data are collected and to make maps from the processed data. Wiebe asked if the Sea Beam data from NBP01-03 can be made available to the bridge on NBP01-04. Doyle said that this can be done.

Hofmann distributed a message she received from Dave Leger about the use of laptop computers on NBP01-03. The issue is that there were more laptops on this cruise than had been suggested by the numbers on the SIPS. Leger indicated that the network on the Palmer could not handle the number of laptops that were available. Several people said that laptops are standard equipment and will be on the cruises. However, not all the laptops need to be connected to the ship's network. Everyone will try to give a better count of laptops on the SIPS for next year. Doyle said that there was a lot of confusion about how to do the connections for some of the laptops to be on the network. She thought this was the real issue. She also mentioned that digital photographs take a lot of disk space and that this was a problem at times on the cruise. She said that the network on the Palmer is being upgraded and that connections/capacity may not be a problem in the future. She also said that the desk top computers now on the Palmer will not be replaced in kind.

Doyle said that Raytheon personnel on NBP01-04 will help with BIOMAPER as needed. She said that they are aware of the need to do this.

Limits on electronic mail were next discussed. Doyle said that the Raytheon/NSF policy is generous compared to that used on other ships; however, she said that she will check the UNOLS policy. The definition of the 75K limit on electronic messages was requested. The issue is that this is not well defined and files including images, but were below this limit, were not permitted to be transferred. The possibility of setting a system that allows each individual to pay for file transmission was discussed. This system would be similar to the one used to make phone calls. Doyle and Sutherland said that they would check into how this might be done. Doyle said that the MPC has permission to send large files, such as data files. She said that this needs to be worked out with each science group/investigator. Torres asked about using electronic mail for doing outreach work, such as communication with teachers at local schools. Doyle and Sutherland said that this is something that can be worked out ahead of the cruise.

Hofmann brought up a request from Ari Friedlaender to put satellite tags on whales that would last for up to six months. These would be deployed in 2002. Costa said that he would check the Marine Mammal Act to determine if permits were needed to do this.

Costa brought up a request from the bird and mammal groups to set up a remote field camp during the 2002 cruise periods. Scientists would be dropped off at the camp for 7 to 10 days while other groups did open water work. This request was based on experiences from the NBP01-04 cruise in which the bird and mammal groups were unable to work for extended periods.

In order to make the most effective use of time with the SO GLOBEC program managers, the SSC decided to list the issues that needed to be discussed with them the next day (Tuesday). These issues are:

1.  additional funding for MOCNESS/BIOMAPER group to go on both survey cruises in 2002;
2.  the need for microstructure measurements;
3.  analysis of the MOC-1 collection from LMG01-04;
4.  analysis of microzooplankton measurements taken during the survey cruises;
5.  MOC-1 collections from the survey cruises;
6.  the need for rate measurements for microzooplankton;
7.  last minute add-on projects, such as the Fast Repitition Rate Fluorometer (FRRF), that take time that was not requested/discussed during cruise planning meetings,;
8.  funding/person to post-process and clean up Sea Beam data; and
9.  a shortfall in the funds needed to prepare BIOMAPER for the survey cruises.

The final issue discussed before adjourning for the day was the duties of the nutrient technician on the Gould. It was suggested that this person could also do the oxygen titrations and salinity samples needed for calibration of the CTD on the Gould.

After a nice dinner at a local restaurant suggested by Robin Muench, the SO GLOBEC SSC reconvened on Tuesday morning. The focus was on the issues identified at the end of the previous day. The first issue taken up with Bernie Lettau was the need for microstructure measurements (issue 2). Lettau said that it is possible for a proposal to be written so that an existing grant can be supplemented to allow the measurements to be made. This proposal would not need external review because these need for these measurements was justified in the original proposal. Other options are that the SSC identify a person or group to receive additional funds to make microstructure measurements or that existing program funds be subcontracted to another person/group. If it is decided to submit a new proposal, then Lettau asked that the SSC send him a statement of why the proposal is needed. Hofmann agreed to draft a letter to Lettau on behalf of the SSC outlining the need for the measurements and some approaches for obtaining the measurements on the 2002 SO GLOBEC cruises. Lettau said that if a new proposal is submitted to NSF for microstructure work, then it needs to conform to the NSF format. He said the proposal will be mostly a work statement. He suggested that it be more like a sole source justification.

Additional funding for the BIOMAPER group (issue 1) was discussed with Polly Penhale. At this time, Wiebe's group is only funded for three of the four SO GLOBEC cruises. Wiebe's group provides a core data set and loss of this on one cruise would severely compromise the data sets from all of the survey and process cruises. Penhale asked if the available funds could reallocate to allow BIOMAPER participation in both cruises by deleting some activities. Wiebe said that the issue is salary support for people to go to sea and operate the instrument. This cannot be made up from existing funds. Penhale said that she recognized the problem, but did not have additional funds available. She requested that Wiebe provide her an estimate of what funds are needed and she will see what can be done. She said that one option is to have a minimal cruise in year two, but that this is not desirable. She said that in September or October she would know more about available funding.

For issues 3, 4 and 5, which involve analyses of data collected during the survey and process cruises, Penhale suggested submitting proposals to the Office of Polar Programs core panel. She said that these type of follow-on proposals are acceptable for this panel.

For issue 6, which is involving someone to do microzooplankton rate measurements, Penhale said that this will need to be funded from existing grants to individual science investigators. She said that her program will not make funds available for this. However, Raytheon could provide supplies for such measurements, if an investigator is identified. Hofmann said she would check with Eugene Murphy (British Antarctic Survey) and Uli Bathmann (Alfred Wegener Institute) to find out if anyone from their groups might be interested in doing these measurements on the 2002 cruises.

Wiebe provided Al Sutherland with a breakdown of the unanticipated costs that were incurred in preparing BIOMAPER for the survey cruises (issue 9). These included such things as outfitting the on-deck van used for BIOMAPER repairs. Sutherland said that he would review the costs and determine which (if any) could be reimbursed from operational funds. He said that he would discuss this with Doyle and Wiebe.

Merging, processing and correction of the Sea Beam data sets (issue 8) was discussed next. At this time there is no SO GLOBEC science investigator funded to take responsibility for the Sea Beam data sets. Bob Beardsley said that he is willing to take this on because the data are very important to the program. Doyle said that she will talk with the Sea Beam technician on the upcoming NBP01-04 cruise and find out how much of the data correction and processing can be done during this cruise. Beardsley said that he will provide a break down of what needs to be done with the data and a cost estimate. He said that it is desirable for post-processing of the data to be done with PI supervision at a home institution. He again suggested having Tom Bolmar do this at WHOI. Doyle said she would look into the feasibility of doing this within Raytheon. Beardsley said that the initial Sea Beam data collection on the ship can be improved by using the CTD data to obtain the sound speed profile that is input to the data collection system. He also suggested that Tom Bolmar, who will be on NBP01-04, could start on some of the post processing of the Sea Beam data sets. It was also suggested that the OPP geophysics program might be interested in funding analysis of the Sea Beam data sets.

Beardsley said that he tried to locate the Automatic Weather Station data on the University of Wisconsin web site and was unable to do so. He said that it is important to know if the data are good, so if there is a problem it can potentially be fixed during the upcoming cruise. Doyle said that she will get Jeff Otten (Raytheon ET) to check the data.

The last issue discusses was that of add-on measurements (issue 7). Wiebe said that these should be done on a non-interfere basis. For the NBP01-04 cruise, the FRRP would be used only on CTD casts that were less than 500 m, for example.

A follow-on synthesis phase to SO GLOBEC was brought up with Lettau and Penhale. Penhale said that there were no plans to have this as a named activity within her program. Several members of the SSC pointed to the usefulness and importance of the synthesis activities that are taking place in U.S. JGOFS and the Northwest Atlantic GLOBEC program. Penhale said that synthesis could take place through proposals to the core panel. These proposals could be submitted for the June 2003 proposal deadline, which is the next reasonable deadline given the 2002 SO GLOBEC field season. However, this will result in an interruption of funding for the proposals that are successful. Penhale asked that the SSC write a one-page draft AO for synthesis that she and Lettau can use to advance this type of effort within Polar Programs. Wiebe suggested looking into joint NSF-European Union funding for synthesis activities since SO GLOBEC is an international program and involves European partners.

Planning for the 2002 cruises was next discussed. Much of this will done at the next science investigator meeting scheduled for 10-12 December 2001 at the Holiday Inn in Arlington, VA. As a starting point, it was decided to stay with the same chief scientists for the 2002 process and survey cruises. However, other suggestions for alternates were made. The final decisions on this will be made at the science investigator meeting.

The December science investigator meeting will be part cruise planning and part data exchange/analysis. Each science group will be asked to make a presentation on results. This will also help in terms of preparation for the Ocean Sciences Meeting. Hofmann will put together a draft agenda/plan for the science investigator meeting and send to the SSC for comments.

The SSC will meet the night of December 9, prior to the start of the science investigator meeting. This meeting will take care of any last minute issues related to this meeting that may come up. The SSC will also attempt to meet at the Ocean Sciences meeting in Honolulu in February 2002.

Once the event logs for the cruises are available Bob Groman, from the GLOBEC data management office, will ensure that data are submitted in accordance the program data policy. Penhale said that it would be useful for the OPP data policy to be sent to all SO GLOBEC science investigators. Hofmann agreed to do this. She also said that the metadata for each project need to be entered into the international Antarctic data base. She said examples of what are needed can be obtained by looking at this data base, which is maintained by the Snow and Ice Center.

The discussion returned to representation of SO GLOBEC at various meetings. Wiebe mentioned the ICES-PICES zooplankton meeting scheduled for April-May 2003. He thought it would be important to have SO GLOBEC representation at this meeting. Hofmann mentioned that International GLOBEC is holding its Second Open Science Meeting in Qingdao, China in October 2002. The intent is to highlight SO GLOBEC results at this meeting. However, funding to allow participation in this meeting was not included in any of the proposals submitted for U.S. SO GLOBEC. Penhale said that she is willing to provide supplemental funding for U.S. SO GLOBEC investigators to participate in this meeting. Hofmann said that because of conflict with the International GLOBEC Open Science Meeting, the SCAR-sponsored workshop on Sea Ice Physics and Biology will be delayed until fall 2003.

Hofmann said that the Mike Fogarty, chair of U.S. GLOBEC, has requested an article on SO GLOBEC for the issue of Oceanography Magazine that is being devoted to GLOBEC. She said that this article will take the place of the article for EOS. She will ask for input to this article from SSC members once Fogarty provides the guidelines for writing it.

Hofmann brought up the topic of mini-workshops that are focused on specific issues. The SO GLOBEC planning office has funding for a small number of focused workshops. The first of these will likely be focused on analysis of hydrography, drifter, ADCP and BIOMAPER data sets from the 2001 cruises. Hofmann said she would contact people who might be interested in attending this workshop.

There being no other business, the SO GLOBEC SSC meeting was adjourned.