120o E

1
Equatorial Box Project
35o
35o
8
25o
25o
Hawaii
6
15o
15o
5o
Nitrate Concentrations (?M)
4
5o
5o
5o
2
Nuka Hiva
15o
15o
0
25o
25o
120o E
160o W
160o E
120o W
140o E
80o W
180o
140o W
100o W
University of Maryland, ESSIC Bigelow
Laboratory NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental
Laboratory University of Maine University of
Maryland, ESSIC Canadian Centre for Climate
Modeling and Analysis (call 250-363-8319) Oregon
State University
2
This graphic shows the first principal component
for the full model domain for SST, SSS, and
surface NO3, DIC, nDIC, and pCO2 (nDIC is DIC
normalized to constant S35), and the means of
these same fields within the 'box'. As you can
see, the box mean is a pretty good indicator of
the largest mode of variability across the whole
domain. Jim
3
Revisiting the Box Project Proposal
Top-level Objective Pilot study addressing the
question, To what degree can we confidently
detect and predict change in carbon cycle
components of aquatic systems and what are
currently the greatest sources of
uncertainty? Key Components Evaluation and
intercomparison of Conversion Models and
Coupled Models focused on the surface mixed
layer within the Equatorial Box and involving
comparisons with field data
4
Revisiting the Box Project Proposal

• Proposed Approach
• Four field studies. After first cruise, results
  will be used to test and tune model parameters.
  Models will then be executed to predict Box
  properties during second cruise. After second
  cruise, results will be compared to predictions
  and models further adjusted. Cycle continued for
  all cruises.
• Key Properties
• Algal biomass, primary production, POC and DOC
• Additional Questions
• How do uncertainties in model predictions change
  if uncertainties in initial conditions are
  reduced? Do predictions improve if the model
  state is fit to extensive observations at time
  zero?
• Can information on advective properties within
  the study volume, from measurements or the
  Coupled model, improve predictions of the
  Conversion models by providing insights into the
  recent history of the water mass?

5
Revisiting the Box Project Proposal
Conversion Model 1 POC Compare/relate field
measurements of cp and bbp to POC Compare field
bbp to satellite inversion bbp Calculate POC from
satellite and compare to coupled
model Conversion Model 2 DOC Compare/relate
field measurements of cDOM and DOC possibly
employ additional properties Compare field cDOM
with satellite cDOM Calculate DOC from satellite
and compare to coupled model Conversion Model
3 Algal biomass Productivity Compare field
pigment biomass to SeaWiFS and MODIS standard
pigment products Evaluate phytoplankton carbon
biomass estimates from scattering
properties Compare ChlC variability with
physiological properties (PI data) Compare field
NPP data to field-based and satellite-based NPP
estimates from chlorophyll- based models
(e.g., VGPM) and carbon-based model
(CbPM) Evaluate relationship between NPP model
error and variable fluorescence
properties Calculate NPP using field-tuned NPP
models and compare to coupled model Coupled
Model Analysis Compare model estimates of algal
biomass (carbon, chlorophyll), NPP, POC, and DOC
with field data Conduct comparisons with
Conversion Models identified above
6
Revisiting the Box Project Proposal
Deliverables an overarching goal for us is, at
the end of this study, to be able to provide a
quantitative, although regionally restricted,
answer to the question of how well Conversion and
Coupled models are able to describe and forecast
variability in a select set of carbon cycle
components. We also anticipate that, from this
study, a more complete understanding will be
achieved regarding similarities and differences
between model classes and the basis for the
discrepancies. At a more fundamental level, this
project will (1) lead to a better
characterization of a truly interdisciplinary
ocean-atmosphere system that is a major component
of the global carbon cycle, (2) contribute to the
evaluation/application of remote sensing products
and to the development of new products, (3)
provide much-needed testbed data at an
appropriate scale for evaluating future Coupled
models, and (4) provide important new insights on
forcing-response relationships for key model
variables, such as NC and CChl ratios.
7
Achievements of the Box Project
Thanks! Julie Rois
8
Achievements of the Box Project
Thanks! Kirby, Wayne mike
9
Achievements of the Box Project
Thanks! Julie, Rois Wayne
10
Achievements of the Box Project
Thanks! Toby, Kirby mike
11
Achievements of the Box Project
2005 2006A 2006B 2007

SST x x x x
SSS x x x x
Chl (z) x x x x
Nuts (z) x x x x
HPLC/Pig (3 z) HPLC/Pig (3 z) x x x x
Abs-part (3 z) Abs-part (3 z) x x x x
cDOM (z) x x x x
3-vol CHN (3 z) 3-vol CHN (3 z) x x x x
DOC/DON (3 z) DOC/DON (3 z) x x x x
DIC (z) x x x
14C -Surface 14C -Surface x x x x
14C -Profiles 14C -Profiles x x x x
14C Time-series 14C Time-series x x x
Fractionation Exp Fractionation Exp x
DNA x
FRR x x x x
ac-9 x x
ac-s x x
C-star (2) x x x x
bb x x x x
LISST x x x x
Coulter x
Attenuation (z) Attenuation (z) x x x x
Backscatter (z) Backscatter (z) x x x x
Measured properties
12
Meeting Outline

• Day I
• 1) Project Overview (Mike)
• 2) Collin (HPLC, 14C, cruise 1 optics, remote
  sensing reflectance)
• 3) Emmanuel / Wayne (optics cruise 2 and 3)
• 4) Break
• 5) Giorgio (cruise 3 AC-S, cruise 4 prelim.
  results, Petes data)
• 6) Mike (PAR, FRR, POC, PON, turner chlorophyll)
• Lunch
• 7) Toby Conversion model products
• 8) Wendy Coupled model result
• 9) Jim Christian More modeling (shoot for
  330/345)
• 9) Group Discussion
• Cross-cutting themes
• Model-model and model-data comparisons
• 10) Breakout
• Subgroup real-time comparisons
• Data reanalysis
• .or simply time for a walk, run, swim, etc.
• 11) Reconvene discussion of breakout results

13
Meeting Outline

• Day II
• Year 3 planning
• Challenges and division of labor
• Schedule for Cruise 4 data analysis and delivery
• Schedule of milestones
• Near-term papers
• Synthesis paper
• Next meeting

Copy of powerpoints for everyone will distribute