Click
Here

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 114, C10008, doi:10.1029/2009JC005346, 2009

for

Full
ArticleAn oceanic cyclonic eddy on the lee side of Lanai Island, Hawai’i
Changming Dong,1 Timothy Mavor,2,3 Francesco Nencioli,4 Songnian Jiang,4Yusuke Uchiyama,1 James C. McWilliams,1 Tommy Dickey,4 Michael Ondrusek,2
Hongchun Zhang,5 and Dennis K. Clark2
Received 27 February 2009; revised 6 July 2009; accepted 9 July 2009; published 9 October 2009.

[1] A young cold core cyclonic eddy displaying a significant increase in surface

chlorophyll was observed offshore Lanai Island, Hawai’i, where the Marine Optical Buoy
(MOBY) is located. During one of its deployments, MOBY broke free from its mooring.
In the course of its 3-day free drifting period, MOBY followed a cyclonic eddy, which
is manifested by satellite remote sensing data, chlorophyll data from Moderate Resolution
Imaging Spectroradiometer, and sea surface temperature (SST) from a Geostationary
Operational Environmental Satellite. The time series of the SST show that the cold core
eddy was in a formative stage. It existed as a stand-alone eddy for about 9 days before
it merged with cold water south of Oahu Island. A high-resolution numerical model
simulation reproduces similar eddies in terms of location, size, and intensity. An eddy
detection algorithm is described and applied to locate and track the modeled eddies. The
results demonstrate that mesoscale and submesoscale eddies are frequently generated on
and pass through the lee side of Lanai Island and the statistical analysis quantifies thegeneral features of eddies in the area.
Citation: Dong, C., T. Mavor, F. Nencioli, S. Jiang, Y. Uchiyama, J. C. McWilliams, T. Dickey, M. Ondrusek, H. Zhang, and
D. K. Clark (2009), An oceanic cyclonic eddy on the lee side of Lanai Island, Hawai’i, J. Geophys. Res., 114, C10008,
doi:10.1029/2009JC005346.

1. Introduction[2] Lee sides of islands (headlands) are areas rich in eddy
activities in terms of the direction of either winds or oceanic
currents [e.g., Patzert, 1969; Signell and Geyer, 1991;
Aristegui et al., 1994; Lumpkin, 1998; Barton et al., 2000;
Barton, 2001; Chavanne et al., 2002; Dong and McWilliams,
2007; Calil et al., 2008]. There are two mechanisms for theeddy formation in the wake of islands: the one involves theoceanic response to wind stress curls and the other isoceanic island current wakes. For the former one, windblocking due to the presence of islands can introduce
positive (negative) wind stress curls on the right (left) sideof the island while looking downstream, which causes
upward (downward) Ekman pumping (see illustration by
Chavanne et al. [2002] and Jimenez et al. [2008]). For thelatter, as oceanic flow passes an island, the horizontal shear
and inhomogeneity in bottom stress can induce vorticity.
The mixture of two processes associated with the shelteringof wind from the island [Caldeira and Marchesiello, 2002]
takes place with almost all islands, which makes the1
Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, University ofCalifornia, Los Angeles, California, USA.
2
STAR, NESDIS, NOAA, Camp Springs, Maryland, USA.
3
IMSG, Rockville, Maryland, USA.
4
Department of Geography, University of California, Santa Barbara,
California, USA.
5
Raytheon Information Solution, Pasadena, California, USA.

Copyright 2009 by the American Geophysical Union.
0148-0227/09/2009JC005346$09.00

scenario much more complicated. The Hawaiian Islands
are located in the path of trade winds (quite steady northeasterly winds in this region) and the North Equatorial Current,
so in principle, these two processes could be operative on thelee side of the island chain. In fact, eddies are ubiquitous on
the lee side of the Hawaiian Islands [e.g., Patzert, 1969;
Lumpkin, 1998; Chavanne et al., 2002; Dickey et al., 2008].
Cold core eddies are active agents promoting nutrient flux
from depth to the euphotic zone, especially in the subtropic
ocean, such as the area around the Hawaiian Islands, a socalled oceanic ‘‘desert’’ or oligotrophic ocean due to theexistence of a subtropical gyre. These eddies are thus usuallyassociated with high biological activity as reported in several
papers within the past decade [e.g., Benitez-Nelson et al.,2007; Dickey et al., 2008; Rii et al., 2008; Nencioli et al.,2008; Kuwahara et al., 2008; Brown et al., 2008; Landry etal., 2008; Bidigare et al., 2003; Seki et al., 2001, 2002;
Vaillancourt et al., 2003]. However the eddies’ roles in the
biological and biogeochemical processes remain enigmatic,
partially because of the challenges of in situ eddy measurements due to the spontaneity in eddy generation and present
technological limitations [Dickey and Bidigare, 2005].
Benitez-Nelson et al. [2007] and Benitez-Nelson and
McGuillicuddy [2008] reported an extensive set of measurements of eddies on the lee side of the Big Hawaii Island in
2005. In particular, two eddies were extensively studied
during their cruises on the lee side of the Big Island of
Hawaii, an eddy-rich area [see Dickey et al., 2008].
[3] In this paper, we describe a cyclonic eddy observed
around the mooring location of the Marine Optical Buoy

C100081 of 13

DONG ET AL.: EDDY ON THE LEE SIDE OF LANAI ISLAND

C10008

C10008Figure 1. The trajectory of MOBY during the period after it broke free from its mooring and before it
was recovered (18 December 1355 to 22 December 0303 UT). The blue stars are the GPS locations of
MOBY and the red arrows depict the Lagrangian velocities estimated from the distance between two
recording times. The color contours indicate the SST average for 19 and 20 December 2007 from GOES
data with a resolution of about 5 km (units are in °C).
(MOBY) offshore of Lanai Island, Hawai’i. The MOBY
accidently broke from its mooring and floated as a drifter
for about 4 days in Decemeber 2007. The drifting locationsof MOBY were recorded by its Argos, a satellite-based
location system, and show that MODY traveled in an
anticlockwise (cyclonic) path offshore of Lanai Island.
The tracking data and other satellite observations, such as
the sea surface temperature (SST) and the chlorophyll
concentration, are analyzed and all of them confirm that
MOBY was following a cyclonic eddy on the lee side of
Lanai Island. Altimetric sea surface height data are not usedsince the satellite tracks passed only over the edge of theeddy. A high-resolution numerical model is applied to thestudy and the numerical results show that eddies frequently
occur on the lee side of Lanai Island. Finally, a statisticalanalysis of the numerical solution is reported.
[4] The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 demonstrates that MOBY followed a cyclonic eddy based upon the
MOBY Argos location data and satellite data, the eddy’s
intensity is analyzed and its generation mechanism are
discussed. Section 3 presents a numerical solution and its
statistical eddy analysis based on an eddy detection scheme.
The discussion and summary are presented in section 4.

2. Observations
2.1. A Cyclonic Eddy[5] MOBY is the critical measurement platform for calibration of several ocean color sensing satellites including
the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer(MODIS) and the Sea-viewing Wide Field-of-view Sensor(SeaWiFS). Approximately 15.24 m long, the spar buoy is
the world’s largest marine optical device. A physical oceanography group from the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories

constructed MOBY in 1991 and it (and a replacement twin
MOBY) continues to be maintained at a site about 24 km
offshore Lanai Island, Hawai’i. The site was chosen for its
relatively clear sky conditions, low turbidity ocean waters,
and moderate winds and waves (an island shadow zone withrespect to prevailing northeast trade winds) [Clark et al., 1997].
[6] Because of maintenance requirements, a MOBY platform has to be recovered and a replacement is redeployedat approximately 3-month intervals. A serial number isassigned for each individual deployment. The deployment
number for the one of interest here from 10 September to
20 December 2007, is MOBY239; for more information
about the MOBY, please refer to the website http://physoce.
mlml.calstate.edu/moby/ [also Clark et al., 1997, 2003].
MOBY broke free from its mooring at 1352 UT 18 December
and then drifted before it was recovered at 0303 UT
22 December. The period of the MOBY drifting time is85.18 hours or 3.5 days. The number of the MOBY positions
recorded by Argos is 116. The time intervals of position
records are uneven, from 0.02 to 1.98 hours and the averagetime interval is 0.74 hours. The MOBY drifting trajectory isplotted in Figure 1, and shows that the free drifting MOBY
traveled first northwestward, then turned southwestward on
December 19, and continued its journey southeastward
before it was recovered early December 22. MOBY madehalf an anticlockwise circle with a diameter of about 50 km
during the drifting period. The rotating period for the eddy iscomparable with that of cyclonic eddies observed on the leeside of Gran Canaria [Sangra et al., 2007], which is 4.5 days.
[7] To determine if MOBY’s trajectory followed that of a
streamline for a cyclonic eddy, the daily sea surface temperature (SST) data from the Geostationary Operational
Environmental Satellite (GOES) with the horizontal spatial
resolution of 5 km are used. The 2-day averaged GOES SST

2 of 13

C10008

DONG ET AL.: EDDY ON THE LEE SIDE OF LANAI ISLAND

C10008Figure 2. SST time series (units are in °C) with 2-day average from the GOES data.
data are plotted Figure 1, and overlays the MOBY path. In
the center of the incomplete anticlockwise circle of
MOBY’s trajectory lies cooler waters and the trajectory of
the freed MOBY appears to generally follow the edge of thecold water, the expression of the cyclonic eddy. Thissuggests that the MOBY was indeed tracking a cycloniceddy with a diameter of at least 50km. A cyclonic eddy
likely upwells cold water from below to the surface in thevicinity of the eddy center (e.g., see realization by Dickey
et al. [2008]). However, because of the thermocline depth
and intensity of the eddy as well as possible surface overprints of warm waters, cool waters are not necessarily seenat the surface in the presence of a cyclonic eddy, thus, theage of a given cyclonic eddy is likely biased toward a lower
estimate. Nonethless, in this case, cooler surface waters areclearly evident.
[8] A time series of the mappings of SST in the area isshown in Figure 2 in order to further demonstrate that wehave observed a cyclonic eddy and to investigate thelifetime history of the eddy. The 2-day averaged data arepresented to reduce the impact of missing data (e.g., cloud
obscuration issues). On 15 –16 December, the area where
MODY would pass a few days later was still occupied bywarm waters. On 16– 17 December, a patch of slightly cooler
water started to appear at the surface. On 17– 18 December,distinctively cooler water could be seen in the area. On
18– 19 December, when MOBY broke from its mooring,the circular cooler water patch was well developed and its
evolution continued during 19– 20 December. Its northwestern portion spread northward on 20– 21 December, andsplit into pieces 1 day later. During 22– 24 Deember, it started

to move northwestward and then merged with cooler water
south of Oahu Island which was there since the beginning of
the period. The development of the cyclonic eddy suggeststhat the cold water is formed locally, i.e., upwelled.
[9] Chlorophyll data collected during the period are
examined to discern any response in the marine biologicalsystem (nutrient generated new primary productivity) associated with the eddy. Such data can provide additional
observational evidence of the eddy. Again, the upwelling
occurring from beneath the central portion of the cycloniceddy would bring nutrients from below to the euphotic zone
and the concentration of the chlorophyll could increase.
Upwelling of the chlorophyll lying in the subsurface
chlorophyll maximum could also come into play. The
daily chlorophyll data observed from MODIS with spatial
resolution of 9 km are used. The time series of the SST
distributions in Figure 2 show that the eddy stayed nearits original formation location for almost one week (17 –22 December). This allows us to use multiple day averaged
chlorophyll data to avoid the cloud contamination problem.
The 8-day averaged MODIS satellite-based chlorophyll
concentration data are shown in Figure 3. To compare with
the SST spatial pattern, the SST distribution is also plottedin Figure 3 for the same period. The spatial pattern of the
SST and the chlorophyll concentration match each othervery well: the higher chlorophyll concentration and thelower SST are both south of Oahu Island and west of Lanai
Island (in the cyclonic eddy area).
[10] In summary, both the SST and chlorophyll datasuggest that eddy-related upwelling took place within anarea described by an anticlockwise trajectory (radially

3 of 13

C10008

DONG ET AL.: EDDY ON THE LEE SIDE OF LANAI ISLAND

C10008[12] MOBY was not designed to be a Lagrangian drifter,
so points devoted to its forced motion bear discussion. After
MOBY broke from the mooring, it oscillated at the air-sea
interface. The wind, oceanic waves and eddy currents could
all have varying degrees of direct effects on MOBY’s
motion. The Lagrangian current, derived from the Argos
location data, can be decomposed as follows:
Ulagran ¼ Ueuler þ Ustokes¼ Uekman þ Ugeost þ Ures þ Ueddy þ Ustokes ;Figure 3. (top) The MODIS chlorophyll concentration(averaged over the period of 18– 24 December 2007) at thesea surface during the period when the cyclonic eddy
formed and developed. The colorbar is shown with alogarithmic scale and the data in the unit of mg m3. The
data are based on the MODIS Aqua 9-km daily data.
(bottom) The SST (also averaged over the period of 18–
24 December 2007) from the GOES with the resolutionof 5 km (units are in °C). The spatial correlation between
the chlorophyll concentration and SST is 0.76.
outward) of the freed MOBY made. This clearly demonstrates that the freed MOBY was following a mesoscale
sized cyclonic eddy with a radius of at least 25 km.
2.2. Eddy Intensity[11] To estimate the eddy intensity, the velocity of theeddy is calculated from the MOBY trajectory data. Figure 4ashows the drifting speed of MOBY. Before it turned eastward from westward, its speed was 46 cm s1. After its
turning point, its speed decreased by a half and became
22 cm s1. When a drifter follows a streamline of a coherent
eddy at a fixed radial distance from the eddy’s center, its
tangential speed should be constant (i.e., approximate solid
body rotation at a given distance from the axis of rotation).
To understand the dramatic change in the Lagrangian
speed, the motion of MOBY is projected onto the zonal
and meridional directions. From Figures 4a and 4d, it can
be clearly seen how the change takes place. Along thezonal direction, the MOBY speed before and after itpassed the west-east turning point decreased dramaticallyfrom 40.19 cm s1 to 13.77 cm s1, however the speeds
along the meriodional direction do not change before andafter the west-east turning point though there is small change
at the turning point from the northward to southward. To
understand this dramatic change in the speed, the velocity
derived from the drift location data is decomposed into
several terms according to its different momentum sources.

ð1Þ

where Ulagran, Ueuler and Ustokes are the Lagrangian,Eulerian and Stokes current, respectively. The Euleriancurrent Ueuler includes four parts: the one is the Ekman drift
Uekman due to the sea surface wind, the sea surface
geostrophic current Ugeost due to the surface pressure, Uresdue to the nonlinearity, and Ueddy is the azimuthal current
around the eddy given the eddy shape is circular. The current
for the eddy, i.e., the azimuthal velocity, is almost constantalong the circular eddy at the presumed constant radial
distance from the eddy’s center.
[13] The first three terms on the right side of equation(1) are the large-scale current, i.e., the background flow.
The nonlinear residual is generally small for the large-scalecurrent [Dong et al., 2009]. The Ekman drifting current
Uekman is theoretically directed 45° toward the right facing
toward the wind direction in the northern hemisphere,
however in real geostrophic flows, the deflection angle ismuch less than 45° and is found to range between 5° and
20° [Cushman-Roisin, 1994]. The daily blended wind datawith the QuikSCAT satellite-based wind product [Zhang
et al., 2006] show the wind direction is almost uniform
northeastly (Figure 5) and constant from 10 December to theend of December at about 75° on the basis of the meteorolgical wind direction convention (Figure 6). The MOBY
Ekman drift is generally in the westward direction withslightly northward by 5° on the basis of the above estimateof the deflection angle. The surface Ekman drifting current is
Uekman = 2kt
rfD , where k is the vertical unit vector, t windstress, f the local Coriolis coefficient, r the water density,
D is theqﬃﬃ Ekman layer thickness, which is estimated byt
D = 0:4fr as 76 m [Cushman-Roisin, 1994]. The coefficient 2
is due to the assumption that the linear change in thevelocity in the Ekman layer. Given the wind stress is about
0.1 N/m2 from Figure 6, Uekman = 5.0 cm/s. The altimtermeasured sea surface height data from the Archiving,
Validation, and Interpretation of Satellite Oceanographic data
(AVISO) product (http://www.aviso.oceanobs.com) are used
to estimate the geostrophic current, and it is about 5.0 cm/s
westward.
[14] The wave-induced mass transport, i.e., Stokes drift
velocity can be estimated theoretically, uSt, as [e.g., LeBlondand Mysak, 1978]
uSt ¼

2
Hsig
wk cosh 2kðz þ hÞ

8 sinh2 khð2Þalong with the linear dispersion relation

4 of 13

w2 ¼ gk tanh kh;

ð3ÞDONG ET AL.: EDDY ON THE LEE SIDE OF LANAI ISLAND

C10008

a)

b)

c)

d)

C10008Figure 4. (a) The solid line is the drifting distance of MOBY from the breaking point versus the time,
and the dashed lines are the linear regressions for two periods separated by the star at the turning point
where MOBY drifted from westward to the eastward. (b) The solid line is the drifting distance projectedon the zonal direction versus the time, and the dashed lines are the linear regressions for the two periods
separated by the square at the turning point. (c) The same as Figure 4b except for the distance projectedon the meridional direction and the separated point is marked by the triangle at the turning point from
northward to southward. (d) The trajectory of MOBY. The numbers are the slope of the linear regression
lines, which is the velocity or speed of MOBY for specified period.
where Hsig is significant wave height; z is verticalcoordinate (z = 0 for the surface drift); h is local water
depth; w is wave frequency; k is wavenumber vector and k
is its magnitude; and g is the gravitational constant. We
make use of the in situ wave data from two National Data
Buoy Center (NDBC) roll-pitch buoys (http://www.ndbc.
noaa.gov/) northwest of Kauai Island, HI (NDBC 51001,
23.445 °N & 162.279 °W) and at Christmas Island (NDBC
51028, 0.0 °N & 153.913 °W), both of which measured
Hsig, w and k/k required for the uSt estimation. From
18 December to 20 December, the meridional component of
2 cm/s equatorward is much smaller compared with thezonal component, which is about 5 cm/s westward. Since
20 December, the southwesterly waves were predominant,both the meridional and zonal components of uSt are in thesame magnitude of about 2 cm/s (Figure 7). To get wave
data near the eddy site, a global NOAA-National Center for
Environmental Prediction (NCEP) wave hindcast productwith the Wave Watch III (WW3) model [Tolman, 2002] at(157.5°W, 21.0°N), near the eddy area, is used. The data
and model production descriptions are available at http://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/waves/index2.shtml. The model grid

spacing is 1.0 degree in the meridional direction and1.25 degree in the zonal direction, and the data output issampled every 3 hours. The Stokes drift derived the wave
model data is in the same scale of the magnitude as thosefrom NDBC Buoy, see Figure 7.
[15] In summary, the dramatic change in the Lagrangian
current in the zonal direction before and after the west-east
turning point is due to the Ekman drift and geostrophic
current (the residual current can be neglected). The smallchange in the Lagrangian current in the meridional directionin the course of the MOBY drifting is because the Ekman
drift and the geostrophic current are neglectable and the
Stoke drift is in a small magnitude. In the first order ofapproximation, before the east-west turning point (seeFigure 4), the mean zonal speed for the eddy can be estimatedas Ueddy = Ulagran  Uekman  Ugeost  Ustokes = 40.19 +5.0 + 5.0 + 5.0 = 25.19 cm/s. For the mean meridional speed
for the eddy is Veddy = Vlagran  Vekman  Vgeost Vstokes =14.35 + 2.0 = 12.35 cm/s, where Vekman and Vgeost
are neglectable. After the east-west turning point, theLagrangian current Ulagran decreases to 13.77 cm/s andon the basis of the similar calculation as above, the

5 of 13

C10008

DONG ET AL.: EDDY ON THE LEE SIDE OF LANAI ISLAND

C10008Figure 5. Daily averaged merged wind [Zhang et al., 2006] on 15 December (the onset of the cycloniceddy). The blue vectors are the wind vectors (units are in m/s) and the wind stress curls are plotted incolor contours (units are in Pa/100 km). Blue srars are the MOBY locations, and the black solid line is thetransection across the center of the eddy during the MOBY drifting period. The black circles on the solidline denote wind data points (see Figure 8). The red cross indicates the center of the eddy. The winddirection is about 75.0° (the direction the wind is coming from is in degrees clockwise from true northaccording to the meteorological convention). The wind direction persists in this direction from 10 to 26
December with a standard deviation of about 5.0°.
eastward Ueddy = 28.77 cm/s, which is very close to thewestward Eulerian current before the turning point, reflecting
the circular eddy shape. On the basis of the above estimate,
the azimuthal current for the eddy is about 30.0 cm s1

in magnitude (averaged from westward and eastward
currents).
[16] The current for the eddy could be caused by either
the flow instability or wind stress curl. Given that the

Figure 6. Time series of the daily wind direction (thin line) and speed (thick line) at the point which isthe closest wind data point to the center of the eddy. The direction the wind is coming from is in degrees
clockwise from true north according to the meteorological convention.
6 of 13

C10008

DONG ET AL.: EDDY ON THE LEE SIDE OF LANAI ISLAND

C10008Figure 7. Stokes drifter velocities inferred from the NDBC buoys and a NCEP global wave model(WW3). The following two buoys which are the closest NDBC buoys carrying the wave data are used:
51028 (0.0°N, 153.913°W) and 51001 (23.445°N, 162.279°W). The wave model data are located at
21.0°N, 157.5°W.

radius of the trajectory from the center of the eddy is about
25 km, the vorticity of the eddy is about 1.2  105 s1,which is comparable with the background rotating rate
2.5  105 s1. The divergence scale of the eddy is also
1.2  105 s1, and thus the upward vertical velocity is

about 0.9  103 m/s (77.8 m/d) if the mixing layer is in thesame scale of the Ekman layer.
2.3. Discussion on Eddy Generation[17] The time series of the SST from the GOES (Figure 2)
show the cooler temperature at the eddy site is generated

Figure 8. Time series of the daily wind stress curl along the transection (see Figure 5). The units are in
Pa/100 km. The black line denotes the location of the eddy center during the MOBY drifting period.
7 of 13

C10008

DONG ET AL.: EDDY ON THE LEE SIDE OF LANAI ISLAND

C10008Figure 9. The geostrophic current averaged for 19– 20 December 2007 (arrows) and the bathymetry(contours). The former is from the daily AVISO product with the spatial resolution of 1/3°  1/3°,
merged from multiple satellite altimetry data. The latter is from ETOPO2 bathymetry data (units are inm). The coastline data are from the M-MAP (a set of mapping tools written for Matlab version 5 andlater) package, shown in the gray blocks. The black blocks are islands resolved by the ETOPO2 data.
locally other than remotely. It implies the eddy could be
generated by the local external forcing such as wind stresscurl or a local flow instability. Because of the lack of local
measurements of the oceanic current or the vertical profileof the density and current, we have no clue if any flow
instability took place at the time when the eddy was formed.
However the time series of the wind speed (Figure 6) show
a sudden increase in the wind speed on 15 December, thedate of the onset of the cyclonic eddy, which results in asignificant increase of the wind stress curl on the northsideof the center of the eddy on 15 December, see Figure 8. The
burst of a high wind is coincident with the appearance of thecooler water timely, which suggests the eddy could be
induced by the local wind stress curl [Pullen et al., 2008].
[18] Interaction of the oceanic flow with the bottom
topography is also a possible mechanism to generate thecyclonic eddy. Figure 9 shows the bottom topography(contours) and the surface geostrophic currents averaged
over 19 and 20 December 2007. The surface geostrophic
current data are donwloaded from the AVISO product:
http://www.aviso.oceanobs.com/en/home/index.html. The
AVISO geostrophic currents are calculated from multiple
satellites altimetry sea surface height data with the resolution of 1/3°  1/3° and daily sampled. The surface oceanic
current flows along the island chain northwestward. On thelee side of islands, the large-scale circulation is an anticyclonic gyre. The sharp change (a trench) in the water depth
west of the Lanai Island could induce cyclonic eddies,
however, because of the resolution limit, the AVISO datacannot resolve the eddy tracked by the MOBY. A high-resolution model simulation could provide a solution, seesection 3.

3. Numerical Simulation[19] To further examine the eddy activity and dynamics
on lee side of Lanai Island, the Regional Oceanic Modeling
System (ROMS) is utilized. ROMS solves the rotating
primitive equations. It is a split explicit, free surface oceanic
model, where short time steps are used to advance thesurface elevation and barotropic momentum equations, witha larger time step used for temperature, salinity, and baroclinic momentum [Shchepetkin and McWilliams, 2005]. A
third-order, upstream-biased advection operator allows thegeneration of steep gradients in the solution, enhancing theeffective resolution of the solution for a given grid size whenthe explicit viscosity is small. The numerical diffusion
implicit in the upstream-biased operator allows the explicit
viscosity to be set to zero without excessive computational
noise or instability. (For detailed discussion on zero explicit
viscosity, please refer to Dong et al. [2007].) It has been
demonstrated that the ROMS can reproduce mesoscaleeddies observed on the lee side of the Big Island of Hawai’i[Calil et al., 2008].
[20] We developed two-level offline nesting grids using
the Regional Oceanic Model System (ROMS) (L1 is 1/10
degree and L2 is 1/32 degree). The model is forced by the2007 daily blended wind data with the 25 km resolution[Zhang et al., 2006]. The open boundary data are from themonthly SODA data set [Carton et al., 2000a, 2000b]. The

8 of 13

C10008

DONG ET AL.: EDDY ON THE LEE SIDE OF LANAI ISLAND

C10008Figure 10. A typical example of cyclonic eddies evident offshore Lanai Island using results from the
ROMS numerical simulation. During the 3-year repeated runs, the cyclonic eddies could appear atdifferent times at the different years. (a) The surface current and temperature (units are in °C), and (b) thevertical profiles of the temperature (units are in °C) and (c) the meridional velocity (units are in m/s).
model is repeated for four years. The last three years areanalyzed. The mean circulation of the last three years iscompared with the drifter-derived climatological surface
current and shows its consistence with the circulation
derived from the drifter data (Lumpkin and Garraffo[2005] data are available online at http://www.aoml.noaa.
gov/phod/dac/drifter-climatology.html and an analysis by
Qiu et al. [1997]). West of the Hawaiian Islands anddownstream of generally prevailing northeasterly tradewind, North Equator Current (NEC), cyclonic and anticyclonic eddies are frequently generated and propagate generally northwestward and southeastward, respectively [Calilet al., 2008]. In Figure 10, a cyclonic eddy with a similar
location to that described by our observations and withcomparable intensity is selected for comparison and analysis. The similarity allows us to examine the vertical structure and variability of a model-generated cyclonic eddy
which is not possible due to data unavailability for theobserved eddy. The signature of the eddy can be seen as
deep as 300m. This depth of impression is comparable tothose of Cyclones Noah and Opal off Hawaii observed
during the E-Flux field experiment and reported by Dickey
et al. [2008], Kuwahara et al. [2008], and Nencioli et al.
[2008].
[21] Statistical analysis of the eddies in the area of the
MOBY drift pattern is performed. In particular, we developed an eddy detection algorithm to do statistical analysis of
the eddies that were generated and passed through the study
area. The algorithm directly uses oceanic currents to detect
vorticity on the basis of the minimum speed and the reversal
in velocity direction (see Appendix A and also F. Nencioli
et al. (A vector geometry based eddy detection algorithm
and its application to high-resolution numerical model
products and high-frequency radar surface velocities in theSouthern California Bight, submitted to Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 2009) for the details),
which is an algorithm different from other existing
approaches: Okubo-Weiss Parameter [Isern-Fontanet etal., 2003; Chelton et al., 2007], the wavelet analysis [Siegel
and Weiss, 1997; Doglioli et al., 2007] and the winding

9 of 13

C10008

DONG ET AL.: EDDY ON THE LEE SIDE OF LANAI ISLAND

C10008Figure 11. Trajectories of modeled eddies on lee side of the Hawaii Islands in the repeated 3 years of
ROMS simulation. The modeled current data are sampled daily. Circles denote the eddy generation sites.
Red circles indicate anticylonic eddies and blue circles show cyclonic eddies. The thin lines are thetrajectories of eddies (again red for anticyclonic and blue for cyclonic). The patterns shows that on thenorthern (southern) lee flank of Hawai’i Island there are more cyclonic (anticyclonic) eddies generated.
The box is the area where the statistic analysis is applied. On the northern (southern) lee flank of thegroup of middle islands, there are more cyclonic (anticyclonic) eddies. This is consistent with theargument that there is symmetry in cyclonic and anticylonic eddy generation on the lee side of an island.
angle method [Sadarjoen and Post, 2000; Chaigneau et al.,2008]. Figure 11 shows the trajectories of eddies generated
over the course of three years. An interesting pattern isevident: i.e., on the northern (southern) lee flank of thegroup of islands in the chain including the Big Island of
Hawaii, generally more cyclonic (anticyclonic) eddies areevident in the model results. This is consistent with theargument that there is north-south symmetry in cyclonic andanticylonic eddy generation on the lee side of an island.
When the trade winds (northeasterly generally) pass theislands from the east, the positive (negative) wind stress curlis generated on the north (south) flank of the lee side of theislands, which could induce the cyclonic (anticyclonic)
eddies [Dong et al., 2007; Chavanne et al., 2002]. When
the westward NEC approaches the islands, the current shear
instability could enhance such eddy generation [Calil et al.,2008].
[22] We next focus specifically on the lee side of Lanai
Island (158.5°W – 156.5°W, 20°N– 21.5°N, see Figure 10).
The statistical results of the eddies in the area are listed inTable 1. The daily eddy number and eddy sizes detected in
the area are similar for cyclonic and anticyclonic eddies.
The average lifetime for a cyclonic eddy is somewhat longer
than for an anticyclonic eddy. The lifetime of an eddy is
only for the time when the eddy is within the numerical
domain therefore the lifetime is underestimate of the actual
lifetime. This is in agreement with work reported by Jin etal. [2009]. The intensities of cyclonic eddies are also
relatively greater than for the anticyclonic eddies in termsof relative vorticity, SST and SSH anomalies.

4. Summary and Discussion[23] The optical buoy MOBY is a primary in situ observation platform used to calibrate the MODIS and SeaWiFS.

MOBY broke free from its mooring off Lanai Island on
December 18, 2007 and was recovered on Dec 22, 2007.
During MOBY’s about 4-day drift at sea, it tracked acyclonic eddy on the lee side of Lanai. The cyclonic eddy
was evident in the satellite remote sensing data: chlorophyllfrom MODIS, SST from GOES. The time series of satellitebased SST show that the cold core eddy was likely young inage: for about 9 days it was clearly a distinctive eddy but
then it merged with cold waters south of Oahu Island. An
increase in chlorophyll concentration within the young coldcore eddy suggests nutrient export from depth to the surface(upwelling at the eddy center), which is vital to the marine
primary productivity in the oligotrophic ocean (nutrientdeficient water). The dramatic changes in the Lagrangian
velocity of MOBY are due to the westward Ekman drift andbackground geostrophic current. The estimate of its intensity shows it is a strong eddy.
Table 1. Cyclonic and Anticyclonic Eddy Statistics Averaged
Over 3 Years of Simulationa
Property

Cyclonic

Anticyclonicpopulation
radius (km)lifetime (days)
dSST (°C/100 km)
h0/fo
SST0 (°C)
SSH0 (m)0.69 ± 0.74
16.43 ± 13.11
17.17 ± 29.35
1.15 ± 0.82
0.96 ± 0.38
0.40 ± 0.38
0.075 ± 0.072

0.73 ± 0.74
13.26 ± 11.44
13.14 ± 13.22
0.64 ± 0.53
0.91 ± 0.36
0.10 ± 0.29
0.053 ± 0.049

a
All eddies with a lifetime longer than 4 days were included in thecomputation. Population is the average number of cyclones and anticyclones inside the area at any given day. The dSST is the average valueof the mean amplitude of the temperature gradient within each eddy. Hereh0/fo, SST0, and SSH0 are the averages of the maximum anomalies foundwithin the eddies. The anomalies were computed with respect to the spatial
mean of the day the eddy was detected. The standard deviations arepresented after the ± signs.

10 of 13

C10008

DONG ET AL.: EDDY ON THE LEE SIDE OF LANAI ISLAND[24] An offline two-level nesting numerical model(ROMS) was applied to simulate the eddy formation andevolution on the lee side of Lanai Island. The highresolution numerical simulation shows the frequent existence of mesoscale eddy activities on the lee side of Lanai.
To detect the eddies in the area, an eddy detection algorithm
based on the velocity field was developed. The statisticalresult shows that the populations and sizes of cyclonic andanticyclonic eddies are similar, but the lifetimes of cycloniceddies are longer than those of anticyclonic eddies and theintensities of cyclonic eddies are greater than those of
anticyclonic eddies.
[25] The present analysis of the trajectory of the freedrifting MOBY is incorporated with the satellite observational data. During the lifetime of the observed eddy, there
were no other in situ data available. Looking forward, it
may be possible in the future to utilize surface drifter data
by applying automated trajectory-tracked eddy detection
schemes to detect eddies [e.g., Lankhorst, 2006; Boebel etal., 2003; Lilly and Gascard, 2006], and then assemble
satellite data within eddy areas to quantify eddy features andtheir physical and biogeochemical impacts in the world
ocean given that more and more drifters and satellite data
are becoming available [Lumpkin and Pazos, 2007].

Appendix A:
Algorithm

Eddy Detection and Tracking[26] This appendix briefly describes the algorithm developed for this study to objectively detect and track mesoscaleeddies. A more exhaustive and complete description of themethod, which was inspired by E-Flux ship-based operations, will be presented in a separate paper by Nencioli et al.
(submitted manuscript, 2009).
[27] Mesoscale eddies can be defined as structures of theflow field where the velocity vectors rotate around a center.
The velocity fields associated with mesoscale cyclones andanticyclones are characterized by common features, such asa velocity minimum in proximity of their centers, andtangential velocities that increase approximately linearlywith distance form the center before reaching a maximum
value and then decreasing. Furthermore, because of therotational nature of the motion, the meridional or v component of velocity reverses in sign along an east-west
section across an eddy center, and the westward or u
component reverses in sign along a north-south section. A
recent study of a mesoscale cyclone (Cyclone Opal) sampled in the lee of the Big Island of Hawaii showed that thesefeatures can be successfully used to estimate the location ofan eddy’s center [Nencioli et al., 2008]. The detection
algorithm used in this study was developed using the same
concept. Eddy detection is based entirely on the geometry of
the surface velocity fields.
[28] Existing eddy detection algorithms are either basedon the distribution of physical quantities such as the OkuboWeiss parameter [i.e., Isern-Fontanet et al., 2003; Chelton
et al., 2007], or the vertical component of relative vorticity[Doglioli et al., 2007]; or they are hybrid methods in whicha physical quantity (i.e., Sea Level Anomaly) is used todetect eddy centers, and then the geometrical characteristicsof the flow field (i.e., instantaneous streamlines) are us ed toderive eddy dimensions [Chaigneau et al., 2008]. We

C10008developed a new method as an alternative to the existingones, because preliminary results using the Okubo-Weissparameter (not shown) revealed that features such as strong
frontal regions as well as the shear regions in the island
wakes are often wrongly detected as mesoscale eddies since
they are characterized by similar values; furthermore, apurely geometrical method would allow to detect also thoseeddies th at are not characterized by a strong SLA minimaor maxima.
[29] Four constraints were derived in conformance withthe general characteristics associated with the eddy’s velocity field and eddy centers at hose grid points where all theconstraints are satisfied. The four constraints follow:[30] 1. The v component of velocity has to reverse in signalong a east-west section across the eddy center, and it
magnitude has to increase a points away in both eastward
and westward directions away from it.
[31] 2. The u component of velocity has to reverse in signalong a north-south section across the eddy center, and its
magnitude has to increase a points away in both southward
and northward directions away from it. The sense ofrotation has to be the same as for the v component.
[32] 3. The eddy center is characterized by the minimum
in velocity magnitude within the region that extends up to b
grid points around it.
[33] 4. The direction of the velocity vectors at a  1 grid
points around the eddy center have to change with aconstant sense of rotation, and the directions of two neighboring velocity vectors have to lay within the same, or two
adjacent quadrants (the four quadrants are defined by thenorth-south and west-east axes; the first quadrant encompasses all the directions from east to north, the second
quadrant the directions from north to west, the third quadrant the directions from west to south, and the fourth
quadrant the directions from south to east).
[34] The two parameters a and b had to be defined inorder to optimize the automated eddy detection. Following
Chaigneau et al. [2008], the algorithm results for different
combination of a and b were compared to the results frommanual detection for 10 days randomly selected amongthe 1080 available. The best performance was obtained
for a = 3 and c = 2: among the 85 eddies which weremanually detected, 76 where successfully detected by
the algorithm (success of detection  89.4%), and only
3 points were wrongly detected as eddy center (excess ofdetection  3.5%).
[35] Once the eddy centers are detected, the size of eacheddy are determined using streamfunctions. Since velocity
fields associated with mesoscale eddies are characterized byweak divergence, contour of the stream function are, to afirst order, streamlines. Eddy limits are defined as the largest
closed streamline around the eddy center. As a further
constraint, the velocity magnitude has to increase radiallyacross the closed streamline. This condition is included inorder to physically define the eddy boundary as the point at
which tangential velocity begins to decrease. The radius ofeach eddy is then computed as the mean distance between
the center of the eddy and the eddy limits using thisformalisms. The adopted definition of eddy boundary
results in a conservative estimate of eddy sizes. However
the method is consistent, since visually larger eddies arecharacterized by larger boundaries.

11 of 13

C10008

DONG ET AL.: EDDY ON THE LEE SIDE OF LANAI ISLAND[36] An eddy is tracked by comparing the position of its
center at successive time steps (daily output in this case).
The track of a given eddy is updated from time step t to time
step t+1 by looking for eddy centers of the same type
(cyclonic or anticyclonic) within a searching area of 15
numerical grid points (approximately 48 km) at t+1, centered at the location of the eddy at t. If a center cannot belocated, then the search is performed at t+2, and thesearching area increased to 21 grid points (approximately
68 km) (this is to prevent the algorithm from recording two
distinct eddies, the same eddy was not be detected during aparticular day because it is too weak or too asymmetric). If
even at t+2 no centers are detected, then the eddy is
considered dissipated and the track for that specific eddy
is closed. Again, the eddy tracking illustrated in Figure 11
followed this methodology.Lifetime of each eddy is computed as the difference between the last and ant the first day
on record for each track. Since a track is interrupted if theeddy abandon the domain, the values obtained are in several
cases underestimates of real eddy lifetimes.
[37] Acknowledgments. C.D. and J.C.M. appreciate supports fromthe National Science Foundation (OCE 06-23011) and the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (grant NNX08AI84G). T.M. appreciates the support of the GOES-R program office. F.N. and T.D. acknowledges support from the National Science Foundation (grants OCE 0241121
and OCE 0754095) and his Secretary of the Navy/Chief of Naval
Operations Chair in Oceanographic Sciences (grant N00014-08-1-1178).
The MOBY is operated by the team from the Moss Landing Marine
Laboration, California State University. The team includes M. Yarbrough,M. Feinholz, T. Houlihan, D. Peters, S. Flora, Y. Kim, E. Stengel, andM. Murphy. Comments from two anonymous reviewers helped improvethe manuscript. The contents of this paper are solely the opinions of theauthors and do not constitute a statement of policy, decision, or position
on behalf of NOAA or the U.S. Government.

References
Aristegui, J., P. Sangra, S. Hernandez-Leon, M. Canton, A. HernandezGuerra, and J. Kerling (1994), Island-induced eddies in the CanaryIslands, Deep Sea Res. Part I, 41, 1509 – 1525.
Barton, E. (2001), Island wakes, in Encyclopedia of Ocean Sciences, vol. 5,edited by J. H. Steele, S. A. Thorpe, and K. K. Turekian, pp. 1397 – 1402,
Academic, Orlando, Fla.
Barton, E., G. Basterretxea, P. Flament, E. Mitchelson-Jacob, B. Jones,
J. Aristegui, and F. Herrera (2000), Lee region of Gran Canaria, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 17,173 – 17,193.
Benitez-Nelson, C., and D. J. McGuillicuddy Jr. (Eds.) (2008), Mesoscale
Physical-Biological-Biogeochemical Linkages in the Open Ocean:
Results from the E-FLUX and EDDIES Programs, Deep Sea Res.,
55(10 – 13), 1133 – 1518.
Benitez-Nelson, C. R., et al. (2007), Mesoscale eddies drive increased silica
export in the subtropical Pacific ocean, Science, 316, 1017 – 1021,
doi:10.1126/science.1126221.
Bidigare, R. R., C. Benitez-Nelson, C. L. Leonard, P. D. Quay, M. L.
Parsons, D. G. Foley, and M. P. Seki (2003), Influence of a cycloniceddy on microheterotroph biomass and carbon export in the lee of
Hawaii, Geophys. Res. Lett., 30(6), 1318, doi:10.1029/2002GL016393.
Boebel, O., J. Lutjeharms, C. Schmid, W. Zenk, T. Rossby, and
C. Barron (2003), The Cape Cauldron: A regime of turbulent inter-ocean
exchange, Deep Sea Res. Part B, 50, 57 – 86.
Brown, S. L., M. R. Landry, K. E. Selph, E. J. Yang, Y. M. Rii, and R. R.
Bidigare (2008), Diatoms in the desert: Plankton community response toa subtropical mesoscale eddy in the North Pacific, Deep Sea Res. Part II,
55, 1321 – 1333.
Caldeira, R. M. A., and P. Marchesiello (2002), Ocean response to windsheltering in the Southern California Bight, Geophys. Res. Lett., 29(13),1635, doi:10.1029/2001GL014563.
Calil, P. H. P., K. Richards, Y. Jia, and R. Bidigare (2008), Eddy activity inthe Lee of the Hawaiian Islands, Deep Sea Res. Part II, 55, 1179 – 1194.
Carton, J. A., G. Chepurin, X. Cao, and B. Giese (2000a), A simple ocean
data assimilation analysis of the global upper ocean 1950 – 95. Part I:
Methodology, J. Phys. Ocean., 30, 294 – 309.

C10008

Carton, J. A., G. Chepurin, and X. Cao (2000b), A simple ocean data
assimilation analysis of the global upper ocean 1950 – 95. Part II: Results,
J. Phys. Ocean., 30, 311 – 326.
Chaigneau, A., A. Gizolmea, and C. Gradosb (2008), Mesoscale eddies off
Peru in altimeter records: Identification algorithms and eddy spatiotemporal patterns, Prog. Oceanogr., 79, 106 – 119, doi:10.1016/j.pocean.
2008.10.013.
Chavanne, C., P. Flament, R. Lumpkin, B. Dousset, and A. Bentamy (2002),
Scatterometer observations of wind variations by oceanic islands: Implications for wind driven ocean circulation, J. Remote Sens., 28, 466 – 474.
Chelton, D. B., M. G. Schlax, R. Samelson, and R. A. de Szoeke (2007),
Global observations of large oceanic eddies, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34,
L15606, doi:10.1029/2007GL030812.
Clark, D. K., H. R. Gordon, K. J. Voss, Y. Ge, W. Broenkow, andC. Trees (1997), Validation of atmospheric correction over the oceans,
J. Geophys. Res., 102, 17,209 – 17,217.
Clark, D. K., M. A. Yarbrough, M. E. Feinholz, S. Flora, W. Broenkow,
Y. S. Kim, B. C. Johnson, S. W. Brown, M. Yuen, and J. L. Mueller(2003), MOBY, a radiometric buoy for performance monitoring andvicarious calibration of satellite ocean color sensors: Measurementand data analysis protocols, in Ocean Optics Protocols for Satellite
Ocean Color Sensor Validation, 4th ed., Special Topics in Ocean Optics
Protocols and Appendices, vol. VI, edited by J. L. Mueller, G. S.
Fargion, and C. R. McClain, pp. 3 – 34, NASA Goddard Space FlightCent., Greenbelt, Md.
Cushman-Roisin, B. (1994), Introduction to Geophysical Fluid Dynamics,
320 pp., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.
Dickey, T. D., and R. R. Bidigare (2005), Interdisciplinary oceanographic
observations: The wave of the future, Sci. Mar., 69, suppl. 1, 23 – 42.
Dickey, T. D., F. Nencioli, V. S. Kuwahara, C. Leonard, W. Black,Y. M. Rii, R. R. Bidigare, and Q. Zhang (2008), Physical and biooptical observations of oceanic cyclones west of the island of Hawai’i,
Deep Sea Res. Part II, 55, 1195 – 1217.
Doglioli, A. M., B. Blanke, S. Speich, and G. Lapeyre (2007), Tracking
coherent structures in regional ocean model with wavelet analysis:
Application to Cape Basin eddies, J. Geophys. Res., 112, C05043,
doi:10.1029/2006JC003952.
Dong, C., and J. C. McWilliams (2007), A numerical study of island wakes
in the Southern California Bight, Cont. Shelf Res., 27, 1233 – 1248,
doi:10.1016/j.csr.2007.01.016.
Dong, C., J. C. McWilliams, and A. F. Shchepetkin (2007), Island wakes indeep water, J. Phys. Ocean., 37, 962 – 981, doi:10.1175/JPO3047.1.
Dong, C., E. Idica, and J. McWilliams (2009), Circulation and multiplescale variability in the Southern California Bight, Prog. Oceanogr.,
doi:10.1016/j.pocean.2009.07.005, in press.
Isern-Fontanet, J., E. Garcia-Ladona, and J. Font (2003), Identification ofmarine eddies from altimetric maps, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 20,
772 – 778.
Jimenez, B., P. Sangra, and E. Mason (2008), A numerical study of
the relative importance of wind and topographic forcing on oceanic
eddy shedding by tall, deep water islands, Ocean Modell., 22,
146 – 157.
Jin, X., C. Dong, J. Kurian, J. McWilliams, D. Chelton, and Z. Li (2009),
Wind-SST interaction in coastal upwelling: oceanic simulation with anempirical coupling, J. Phys. Oceanogr., in press.
Kuwahara, V. S., F. Nencioli, T. D. Dickey, Y. M. Rii, and R. R. Bidigare(2008), Physical dynamics and biological implications of Cyclone
Noah in the lee of Hawai’i during E-Flux I, Deep Sea Res. Part II,
55, 1231 – 1251.
Landry, M. R., M. Decima, M. P. Simmons, C. C. S. Hannides, and
E. Daniels (2008), Mesozooplankton biomass and grazing responses
to Cyclone Opla, Deep Sea Res. Part II, 55, 1378 – 1388.
Lankhorst, M. (2006), A self-contained identification scheme for eddies indrifter and float trajectories, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 23, 1583 – 1592,
doi:10.1175/JTECH1931.1.
LeBlond, P., and L. A. Mysak (1978), Waves in the Ocean, 602 pp.,
Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Lilly, J. M., and J.-C. Gascard (2006), Wavelet ridge diagnosis of timevarying elliptical signals with application to an oceanic eddy, Nonlinear
Processes Geophys., 13, 467 – 483.
Lumpkin, C. F. (1998), Eddies and currents in the Hawaiian islands, Ph.D.
dissertation, 281 pp., Univ. of Hawaii at Manoa, Manoa, Hawaii.
Lumpkin, R., and Z. Garraffo (2005), Evaluating the decomposition oftropical Atlantic drifter observations, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 22,1403 – 1415.
Lumpkin, R., and M. Pazos (2007), Measuring surface currents with Surface Velocity Program drifters: The instrument, its data, and some recent
results, in Lagrangian Analysis and Prediction of Coastal and Ocean
Dynamics, edited by A. Griffa et al., chap. 2, pp., Cambridge Univ. Press,
Cambridge, U. K.

12 of 13

C10008

DONG ET AL.: EDDY ON THE LEE SIDE OF LANAI ISLAND

Nencioli, F., T. D. Dickey, V. S. Kuwahara, R. R. Bidigare, and Y. M. Rii(2008), Physical dynamics and biological implications of a mesoscale
eddy in the lee of Hawaii: Cyclone Opal observations during E-Flux
III, Deep Sea Res. Part II, 55, 1195 – 1217.
Patzert, W. C. (1969), Eddies in Hawaiian Islands, Rep. HIG-69-8, Hawaii
Inst. of Geophys., Manoa, Hawaii.
Pullen, J., J. D. Doyle, P. May, C. Chavanne, P. Flament, and R. A.
Arnone (2008), Monsoon surges trigger oceanic eddy formation andpropagation in the lee of the Philippine islands, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
35, L07604, doi:10.1029/2007GL033109.
Qiu, B., D. A. Koh, C. Lumpkin, and P. Flament (1997), Existence andformation mechanism of the north Hawaiian ridge current, J. Phys.
Oceanogr., 27, 431 – 444.
Rii, Y. M., S. L. Brown, F. Nencioli, V. Kuwahara, T. Dickey,
D. M. Karl, and R. R. Bidigare (2008), The transient oasis: Nutrientphytoplankton dynamics and particle export in Hawaiian lee cyclones,
Deep Sea Res. Part II, 55, 1275 – 1290.
Sadarjoen, A., and F. H. Post (2000), Detection, quantification, and trackingof vortices using streamline geometry, Visual. Comput. Graphics, 24,
333 – 341.
Sangra, P., M. Auladellb, A. Marrero-Diaza, J. L. Pelegrib, E. Fraile-Nueza,
A. Rodriguez-Santanaa, J. M. Martin, E. Masona, and A. HernandezGuerraa (2007), On the nature of oceanic eddies shed by the Island ofGran Canaria, Deep Sea Res. Part I, 54, 687 – 709.
Seki, M. P., J. J. Polovina, R. E. Brainard, R. R. Bidigare, C. L. Leonard,
and D. G. Foley (2001), Biological enhancement at cyclonic eddies
tracked with GOES thermal imagery in Hawaiian waters, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 28, 1583 – 1586.
Seki, M. P., R. Lumpkin, and P. Flament (2002), Hawaii cyclonic eddies
and blue marlin catches: the case study of the 1995 Hawaiian International Billfish Tournament, J. Oceanogr., 58, 739 – 745.

C10008

Shchepetkin, A. F., and J. C. McWilliams (2005), The Regional Oceanic
Modeling System (ROMS): A split-explicit, free-surface, topographyfollowing-coordinate oceanic model, Ocean Modell., 9, 347 – 404,
doi:10.1016/j.ocemod.2004.08.002.
Siegel, A., and J. B. Weiss (1997), A wavelet-packet census algorithm forcalculating vortex statistics, Phys. Fluids, 9, 1988 – 1999.
Signell, R. P., and W. R. Geyer (1991), Transient eddy formation aroundheadlands, J. Geophys. Res., 96, 2561 – 2575.
Tolman, H. L. (2002), User manual and system documentation of
WAVEWATCH-III version 2.22, Tech. Note 222, 133 pp., NOAA,
Washington, D. C.
Vaillancourt, R. D., J. Marra, M. P. Seki, M. L. Parsons, and R. R. Bidigare(2003), Impact of a cyclonic eddy field on phytoplankton community
structure and photosynthetic competency in the subtropical North Pacific
Ocean, Deep Sea Res. Part I, 50, 829 – 847.
Zhang, H.-M., J. J. Bates, and R. W. Reynolds (2006), Assessment ofcomposite global sampling: Sea surface wind speed, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
33, L17714, doi:10.1029/2006GL027086.


D. K. Clark, T. Mavor, and M. Ondrusek, STAR, NESDIS, NOAA, 5200
Auth Road, Camp Springs, MD 20746, USA.
T. Dickey, S. Jiang, and F. Nencioli, Department of Geography,
University of California, 1832 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 930164060, USA.
C. Dong, J. C. McWilliams, and Y. Uchiyama, Institute of Geophysics
and Planetary Physics, University of California, 405 Hilgard Avenue,
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567, USA. (cdong@atmos.ucla.edu)
H. Zhang, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology,
4800 Oak Grove Drive, Mail Stop 300-324, Pasadena, CA 91109, USA.

13 of 13