[Exports_pi] Particle size analysis

Wed Aug 1 23:35:31 PDT 2018

Hello Emmanuel, Susanne, et al..,

I’m just coming back online and catching up with email.

With regard to the APL cross calibration work, I originally thought that would be done before the mobilization, then on Monday, but now I see it on the mob calendar for Tuesday and Wednesday.  Tuesday (and maybe Wednesday) are the days my team will be needing to install the LISST DEEP instruments on the respective rosettes during the mobilization, so that makes it difficult to participate in the cross-calibration activities.  Sorry if I missed the conversation, but is there any way we can stick with the original plan and do it on Monday?  Otherwise, We can try to do the same inter calibration measurements with the LISST DEEP at a different time, or at the same time but different places (while they are mounted to the rosettes).

For the LISST DEEPs, I will plan on using some of Emmanuel's bead stock and any available culture material to keep things consistent for the cross calibrations.

Andrew

> On Jul 23, 2018, at 7:20 AM, Emmanuel Boss <emmanuel.boss at maine.edu> wrote:
> 
> PS
> A paper on the comparison between the in-line LISST and a Coulter Counter (as well as the IFCB) from a recent NAAMES cruise can be found at:
> http://misclab.umeoce.maine.edu/documents/Bossetal2018.pdf <http://misclab.umeoce.maine.edu/documents/Bossetal2018.pdf>
> 
> Generally speaking PSDs compared well in shape but with a significant difference in magnitude between LISST and CC. Comparison with other optical devices, biogeochemical measurements, as well as IFCB-dervied PSD of chlorophyll containing particles suggested the LISST was consistent.
> Best,
>   Emmanuel
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:15 AM Emmanuel Boss <emmanuel.boss at maine.edu <mailto:emmanuel.boss at maine.edu>> wrote:
> Susanne and all,
> We will be running a LISST as part of our in-line measurements on board the Ravelle.
> 
> We are planning on running beads through the LISST and other optical sizing sensors prior to embarking on the cruise as part of the optical cross-calibration exercise.
> We should have sufficient numbers of beads available if others would like to use them as well.
> We use optical measurements based on published properties of the beads to constrain the beads' concentration.
> The beads are spherical, nearly mono-dispersed, and much more refractive compared to oceanic particles.
> 
> We will also be bringing and running cultures through the different instruments, primarily to compare sizing capabilities (as opposed to absolute concentrations), though these will also be assessed when on board.
> Best,
>    Emmanuel
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 10:36 AM Susanne Menden-Deuer <smenden at uri.edu <mailto:smenden at uri.edu>> wrote:
> Hi all
> 
> I have lost track of who all is interested and participating in the 
> particle size analysis for EXPORTS, so I thought to send it to all PIs 
> and we can cull from there.
> 
> If you are interested in an inter-instrument particle size/abundance 
> verification, read on!
> 
> We had discussed doing an inter-instrument verification during 
> mobilization next month for both the benchtop instruments (FlowCAM, 
> IFCB, Flowcytometers, Coulter) as well as the in situ instruments (LISST 
> etc) and I wanted to bring some cultures along.
> 
> After we had a request for a workshop to OCB denied (lead Lee 
> Karp-Boss), my lab did a comparison using the instruments we had on hand 
> (FlowCam, BD Influx, microscope, Coulter Counters model 3 and 4). I 
> relate some results below. In short, the bench top instruments agree 
> very well. As far as EXPORTS is concerned, the Guava and IFCB which will 
> be on board were not included, neither were any of the deployable 
> instruments.
> 
> Bringing along enough phytoplankton culture volume in a physiologically 
> valuable state to repeat this in Seattle is prohibitive. My suggestion 
> is that all suppliers of instruments provide verified standard material 
> (e.g. beads) that we can run on as many instruments as possible. From 
> Heidi Sosik I learned that beads are not desirable in terms of flow 
> cytometry and I could bring a modest amount of Dunaniella sp.
> 
> Then, while in transit, I suggest samples are taken from the inflow 
> (preferably still within Puget Sound so large particles are more 
> abundant) and those samples run on both the benchtop and deployable 
> instruments, so we get a comparison of the particle size distribution 
> and abundance. This will help us interpret differences from the 
> different instruments at least when we can reliably say they saw the 
> same water mass. I'd be happy to write up a protocol.
> 
> Let me know what you think
> 
> Best
> 
> smd
> 
> 
> Some results from our in lab comparison:
> 
> we quantified cell size and abundance of 9 phytoplankton species from 
> mono-specific laboratory cultures using optical, electrical and image 
> based bench top instrumentation. We find generally good agreement in 
> estimates of both particle concentration and particle size among 
> instruments. Image based approaches (e.g. microscopy, FlowCAM) delivered 
> lower cell abundance estimates, because image based instruments 
> distinguish cells from non-cell particles. Image based approaches also 
> delivered 10-20% greater estimates of equivalent spherical diameters, 
> because measurements were based only on in-focus images of the target 
> species. Particle counters delivered acceptable estimates with much 
> lower logistical and technical involvement required. Maximum coefficient 
> of variation for size and abundance measurements did not exceed 15%.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Susanne Menden-Deuer, Ph.D.
> Professor of Oceanography
> 
> University of Rhode Island
> Graduate School of Oceanography
> Bay Campus
> Office: 230 Coastal Institute
> Narragansett, RI  02882, USA
> 
> 
> skype: mendens
> http://mendendeuerlab.com/ <http://mendendeuerlab.com/>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Exports_pi mailing list
> Exports_pi at espo.nasa.gov <mailto:Exports_pi at espo.nasa.gov>
> https://espo.nasa.gov/lists/listinfo/exports_pi <https://espo.nasa.gov/lists/listinfo/exports_pi>
> 
> 
> -- 
> ************************************************
> Emmanuel Boss, Professor
> School of Marine Sciences
> 5706 Aubert Hall, University of Maine
> Orono, ME 04469-5706
> Tel: 207-581-4378, Cell: 207-745-3061
> Fax: 207-581-4388 
> emmanuel.boss at maine.edu <mailto:emmanuel.boss at maine.edu>
> http://misclab.umeoce.maine.edu/boss/boss.php <http://misclab.umeoce.maine.edu/boss/boss.php>
> skype: emmanuel.boss
> ************************************************
> 
> 
> -- 
> ************************************************
> Emmanuel Boss, Professor
> School of Marine Sciences
> 5706 Aubert Hall, University of Maine
> Orono, ME 04469-5706
> Tel: 207-581-4378, Cell: 207-745-3061
> Fax: 207-581-4388 
> emmanuel.boss at maine.edu <mailto:emmanuel.boss at maine.edu>
> http://misclab.umeoce.maine.edu/boss/boss.php <http://misclab.umeoce.maine.edu/boss/boss.php>
> skype: emmanuel.boss
> ************************************************
> _______________________________________________
> Exports_pi mailing list
> Exports_pi at espo.nasa.gov
> https://espo.nasa.gov/lists/listinfo/exports_pi

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://espo.nasa.gov/pipermail/exports_pi/attachments/20180801/1fc05218/attachment.html>