{"@context":{"content":"http:\/\/purl.org\/rss\/1.0\/modules\/content\/","dc":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/","foaf":"http:\/\/xmlns.com\/foaf\/0.1\/","og":"http:\/\/ogp.me\/ns#","rdfs":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/01\/rdf-schema#","sioc":"http:\/\/rdfs.org\/sioc\/ns#","sioct":"http:\/\/rdfs.org\/sioc\/types#","skos":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2004\/02\/skos\/core#","xsd":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2001\/XMLSchema#","owl":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2002\/07\/owl#","rdf":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/02\/22-rdf-syntax-ns#","rss":"http:\/\/purl.org\/rss\/1.0\/","site":"https:\/\/www.bco-dmo.org\/ns#","odo":"http:\/\/ocean-data.org\/schema\/","emo":"http:\/\/ocean-data.org\/schema\/entity-matching#","bibo":"http:\/\/purl.org\/ontology\/bibo\/","crypto":"http:\/\/id.loc.gov\/vocabulary\/preservation\/cryptographicHashFunctions\/","bcodmo":"http:\/\/lod.bco-dmo.org\/id\/","tw":"http:\/\/tw.rpi.edu\/schema\/","dcat":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/ns\/dcat#","time":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2006\/time#","geo":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2003\/01\/geo\/wgs84_pos#","geosparql":"http:\/\/www.opengis.net\/ont\/geosparql#","sf":"http:\/\/www.opengis.net\/ont\/sf#","void":"http:\/\/rdfs.org\/ns\/void#","sd":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/ns\/sparql-service-description#","dctype":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/dcmitype\/","prov":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/ns\/prov#","schema":"http:\/\/schema.org\/","geolink":"http:\/\/schema.geolink.org\/1.0\/base\/main#","spdx":"http:\/\/spdx.org\/rdf\/terms#","bcodmo_vocab":"http:\/\/schema.bco-dmo.org\/"},"@id":"http:\/\/lod.bco-dmo.org\/id\/dataset\/2592#graph","@graph":[{"http:\/\/lod.bco-dmo.org\/id\/dataset\/2592":{"@id":"http:\/\/lod.bco-dmo.org\/id\/dataset\/2592","@type":["http:\/\/ocean-data.org\/schema\/DeploymentDatasetCollection","http:\/\/www.w3.org\/ns\/dcat#Dataset","http:\/\/ocean-data.org\/schema\/Dataset"],"http:\/\/ocean-data.org\/schema\/hasAcquisitionDescription":[{"@value":"
\n PI:<\/b> Neil Tindale\n of:<\/b> Texas A&M University\n dataset:<\/b> Aerosols, short irradiation neutron activation analysis\n dates:<\/b> January 08, 1995 to December 25, 1995 \n\n location:<\/b> N: 23.7953 S: 09.9776 W: 57.2609 E: 68.7641\n project:<\/b> Arabian Sea\n ship:<\/b> Thomas Thompson\n<\/pre>\nDr. Neil Tindale, Texas A & M Univ.\nJGOFS\/Arabian Sea\nAerosols, short and long irradiation neutron activation analysis\n<\/h2>\n\nJGOFS Arabian Sea Aerosol Data<\/b>\n\nThis mineral aerosol concentration data set is from samples collected\nduring several cruises on the R\/V Thomas Thompson during the JGOFS\nArabian Sea field program. The data set includes the sampling period\nfor each sample; the \"Day of Year\", yrday, number for the start of the\nsampling period for each sample; and the concentration of different\nelements for each sample, in micrograms per cubic meter. For the\nsampling period, \"nd\" is used as a filler to indicate \"no data\" gaps in\nthe data array. The dust values are estimated using aluminum\nconcentrations determined by neutron activation analysis. While most\nsamples cover a multi-day period, we only have data for about 150\ndays. We didn't participate in all of the cruises and, on the cruises\nwhere samples were collected, often sampling conditions were less than\nideal (bad weather, ship maneuvering, relative wind from astern etc.).\nA few samples that were collected showed obvious contamination from\nlocal sources, presumably from material from the R\/V Thompson or from\nnearby fishing boats, and these samples were discarded and are not\nincluded in the data set. While the sampling period represents the\nperiod during which sampling occurred, sampling was usually not\ncontinuous. Sampling was frequently stopped, whenever sampling\nconditions were no longer suitable. Thus the concentration value at\nany particular date represents a time integrated sample which is\nusually non-continuous.\n\nCautionary comments:\n1. There may be a problem with the estimate for the mineral \"dust\"\nconcentration. Most researchers use the average crustal ratio to estimate\nmineral dust concentrations using elemental concentration data (Al, Fe,\netc.). Surface sand and silt samples that were collected in Oman in the\nWahibah Sands region have distinct, non-crustal ratios. If individual\naerosol samples are comprised of material from distinct sources, including\nOman, then it is not unreasonable for their elemental ratios to differ from\nthe published \"average\" crustal ratio that is used in most aerosol studies.\n\n2. The amount of Ti in all the aerosol samples was small, despite there\nbeing a reasonable amount of dust material in most samples. The peaks for\nCr and Ti overlap in the neutron activation short irradiation analysis and\nif significant quantities of Cr are present, this will interfere with the Ti\nanalysis. With the exception of one sample, the Ti values are at or below\nthe detection limit. The sole value above the detection limit was corrected\nfor the Cr contribution using a correction based on the Cr values from the\nlong irradiations. The correction changed the Ti value by less than 5%.\nThe Ti data flagged as being at or below the detection limit was not\ncorrected for possible Cr interference.\n<\/pre>
Data management office notes on supplementary fields - aerosols data<\/h2>\n\nlat, lon<\/b>\n\nA nominal ship location is given in lat\/lon. The location is the noon\nposition most near the middle of the sampling period, e.g. for a sample\nwhich was pumped intermittently from Jan. 3 - 5, the location is given for\nnoon, Jan. 4. Intended as an aid to understanding, not a discrete location.\n\ndate_begin, date_end<\/b>\n\nWe have included the start and stop day for each sample which we\nbelieve constrains the sample time about as well as is useful for these\ndata. We also have pump volume and thus a mean concentration of dust\nper cubic meter of air for that time frame. The actual number of hours\nsampled during a time block (number of days) is complicated to\npresent. Pumps were turned on and off repetitively depending upon ship\nmaneuvers and relative wind direction (to prevent ship exhaust\ncontamination). Also, the total number of hours the pumps were on is a\nless useful measure than pump volume, because of the variability in\npump efficiency due to changing barometric pressures. An hours worth of\npumping does not always yield the same volume of air.\n<\/pre><\/div>","@type":"rdf:HTML"}],"http:\/\/ocean-data.org\/schema\/hasBriefDescription":[{"@value":"Aerosols, short irradiation neutron activation analysis","@language":"en-US"}],"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/description":[{"@value":"
\n PI:<\/b> Neil Tindale\n of:<\/b> Texas A&M University\n dataset:<\/b> Aerosols, short irradiation neutron activation analysis\n dates:<\/b> January 08, 1995 to December 25, 1995 \n location:<\/b> N: 23.7953 S: 09.9776 W: 57.2609 E: 68.7641\n project:<\/b> Arabian Sea\n ship:<\/b> Thomas Thompson\n\n PI Notes and Methodology<\/b><\/a>\n A note from DMO on supplementary fields<\/b><\/a>\n<\/pre>
\nHiVol pump sampler methods are described in: N. W. Tindale and P. P. Pease, Aerosols
\n over the Arabian Sea: Atmospheric transport pathways and concentrations of dust
\n and sea salt, Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in OceanographyVolume 46,
\n Issues 8-9, August 1999, Pages 1577-1595.<\/p>\n