the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
CO2 and hydrography acquired by Autonomous Surface Vehicles from the Atlantic Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea: data correction and validation
Abstract. The ATL2MED demonstration experiment involved two autonomous surface vehicles provided by Saildrone Inc. (SD) along a route from the tropical eastern North Atlantic to the Adriatic Sea between October 2019 and July 2020. This nine-month long experiment located in a transition zone between the temperate and tropical belts represents a major challenge in the use of SD. The sensors on board were subjected, to varying degradation degrees depending on the geographical area and the season, to biofouling with consequent deterioration of the acquired measurements. As a result, several maintenance along the mission's course were necessary.
We address the difficulty of correcting the data during a period of COVID-19 restrictions, which significantly reduced the number of discrete samples planned for SD salinity and dissolved oxygen validation. This article details alternative correction methods for salinity and dissolved oxygen. Due to the lack of in situ data, model products have been used to correct the salinity data acquired by the SDs, and then the resulting corrected salinity was validated with data from fixed ocean stations, gliders, and Argo floats. In addition, dissolved oxygen data acquired from SDs after correction using air oxygen measurements were tested and found to be in line with the oxygen values expected from temperature and chlorophyll-a data. The correction methods are relevant and useful in situations where validation capabilities are lacking, which was the case during the ATL2MED demonstration experiment. For future experiments, it is recommended that validation samples are collected more frequently. An overview over data availability is found in Section 5, Table 5.
- Preprint
(2565 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2023-457', Anonymous Referee #1, 01 Feb 2024
The authors described surface CO2 and hydrographical data acquired by Autonomous Surface Vehicles from the Atlantic Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea between October 2019 and July 2020. They addressed the difficulty of correcting the data during a period of COVID-19 restrictions, which significantly reduced the number of discrete samples planned for SD salinity and dissolved oxygen validation. Although the data correction is absolutely necessary and valuable, it does NOT deserve publishing by itself. Given that many pCO2 data have been reported over the similar area, I wonder how to evaluate the scientific significance of these data under review, even if preliminarily. I suggest the authors to tell a story similar to a recent reference, i.e., Landschützer P, et al. (2023) Sailing through the southern seas of air–sea CO2 flux uncertainty. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 381: 20220064. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2022.0064.
Many plots are badly displayed. Please enhance the definition of those charts. Also the font size should be enlarged.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-457-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Riccardo Martellucci, 30 Mar 2024
Thank you for the recommendations you provided. The rationale behind selecting this particular journal stems from the fact that our paper aims to present an original and validated dataset, aligning precisely with the objectives of the journal. Furthermore, the journal explicitly discourages process studies, which aligns with our paper's focus.
Allow me to append the Aims & Scope of the journal:
“Articles in the data section may pertain to the planning, instrumentation, and execution of experiments or collection of data. Any interpretation of data is outside the scope of regular articles.”
After the validation of the data, our intention is to utilize it for conducting a process study. Additionally, we will enhance the figures as per the provided suggestions.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-457-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Riccardo Martellucci, 30 Mar 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on essd-2023-457', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Feb 2024
Please find my review and comments in the attached pdf file
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Riccardo Martellucci, 30 Mar 2024
Thank you sincerely for all your valuable suggestions and recommendations. Your input will play a significant role in enhancing the quality of our paper. We will carefully consider all your comments, revise and summarize the text as suggested, and incorporate statistical analyses to rectify any data discrepancies.
Regarding the use of logarithms in the oxygen correction method, we acknowledge that a typographical error led to the inclusion of logarithms in the methods section. Specifically, the natural logarithm was employed for the oxygen correction. This will be corrected accordingly.
Following these adjustments, we will submit the revised manuscript for your review. Once again, we deeply appreciate your invaluable assistance.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-457-AC2
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Riccardo Martellucci, 30 Mar 2024
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2023-457', Anonymous Referee #1, 01 Feb 2024
The authors described surface CO2 and hydrographical data acquired by Autonomous Surface Vehicles from the Atlantic Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea between October 2019 and July 2020. They addressed the difficulty of correcting the data during a period of COVID-19 restrictions, which significantly reduced the number of discrete samples planned for SD salinity and dissolved oxygen validation. Although the data correction is absolutely necessary and valuable, it does NOT deserve publishing by itself. Given that many pCO2 data have been reported over the similar area, I wonder how to evaluate the scientific significance of these data under review, even if preliminarily. I suggest the authors to tell a story similar to a recent reference, i.e., Landschützer P, et al. (2023) Sailing through the southern seas of air–sea CO2 flux uncertainty. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 381: 20220064. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2022.0064.
Many plots are badly displayed. Please enhance the definition of those charts. Also the font size should be enlarged.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-457-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Riccardo Martellucci, 30 Mar 2024
Thank you for the recommendations you provided. The rationale behind selecting this particular journal stems from the fact that our paper aims to present an original and validated dataset, aligning precisely with the objectives of the journal. Furthermore, the journal explicitly discourages process studies, which aligns with our paper's focus.
Allow me to append the Aims & Scope of the journal:
“Articles in the data section may pertain to the planning, instrumentation, and execution of experiments or collection of data. Any interpretation of data is outside the scope of regular articles.”
After the validation of the data, our intention is to utilize it for conducting a process study. Additionally, we will enhance the figures as per the provided suggestions.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-457-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Riccardo Martellucci, 30 Mar 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on essd-2023-457', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Feb 2024
Please find my review and comments in the attached pdf file
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Riccardo Martellucci, 30 Mar 2024
Thank you sincerely for all your valuable suggestions and recommendations. Your input will play a significant role in enhancing the quality of our paper. We will carefully consider all your comments, revise and summarize the text as suggested, and incorporate statistical analyses to rectify any data discrepancies.
Regarding the use of logarithms in the oxygen correction method, we acknowledge that a typographical error led to the inclusion of logarithms in the methods section. Specifically, the natural logarithm was employed for the oxygen correction. This will be corrected accordingly.
Following these adjustments, we will submit the revised manuscript for your review. Once again, we deeply appreciate your invaluable assistance.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-457-AC2
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Riccardo Martellucci, 30 Mar 2024
Data sets
ATL2MED mission: SD1053 & SD1030 Ingunn Skjelvan, Riccardo Martellucci, Michele Giani, Vanessa Cardin, Elena Mauri, Carolina Cantoni, Anna Luchetta, Roberto Bozzano, Sara Pensieri, Laurent Coppola, Marine Fourrier, Melf Paulsen, Bjorn Fiedler, and Benjamin Pfeil https://fileshare.icos-cp.eu/s/eyLp9m685QA8ME7
RV METEOR cruise Björn Fiedler and Melf Paulsen https://fileshare.icos-cp.eu/s/eyLp9m685QA8ME7
Dyfamed observatory data Laurent Coppola, Emilie Diamond Riquier, Thierry Carval, Jean-Olivier Irisson, and Corinne Desnos https://doi.org/10.17882/43749
Glider MOOSE sections Pierre Testor, Laurent Mortier, Laurent Coppola, Hervé Claustre, Fabrizio D'Ortenzio, François Bourrin, Xavier Durrieu de Madron, and Patrick Raimbault https://www.seanoe.org/data/00409/52027/
W1M3A FIXED STATION Roberto Bozzano and Sara Pensieri https://fileshare.icos-cp.eu/s/eyLp9m685QA8ME7
E2M3A-2017-2019-time-series-SouthAdriatic Vanessa Cardin, Laura Ursella, Giuseppe Siena, Fabio Brunetti, Stefano Kuchler, and Elena Partescano https://nodc.ogs.it/catalogs/doidetails?4&doi=10.6092/d0d50095-bd30-4ff7-8d0a-a12121e72f78
OGS GLIDER MISSION Convex20 Dataset Riccardo Gerin, Antonio Bussani, Stefano Kuchler, Riccardo Martellucci, Massimo Pacciaroni, Annunizata Pirro, Piero Zuppelli, and Elena Mauri https://nodc.ogs.it/catalogs/doidetails?8&doi=10.13120/e7277c6b-444a-4d61-8288-596af1bac3ff
PALOMA FIXED STATION Anna Luchetta and Carolina Cantoni https://fileshare.icos-cp.eu/s/eyLp9m685QA8ME7
MIRAMARE FIXED STATION Michele Giani https://fileshare.icos-cp.eu/s/eyLp9m685QA8ME7
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
394 | 103 | 47 | 544 | 44 | 44 |
- HTML: 394
- PDF: 103
- XML: 47
- Total: 544
- BibTeX: 44
- EndNote: 44
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1