cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879405
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS75/274-4 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821176), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879406
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS75/277-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821177), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879407
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS75/278-4 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821178), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879408
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS75/280-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821179), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879409
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS75/281-4 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821180), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879410
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS75/282-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821181), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879415
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS75/291-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821186), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879416
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS75/293-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821187), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879422
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS75/299-3 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821193), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879423
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS75/270-4 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.821175), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are not used for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879431
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS73/019-2 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.820798), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Taylor et al. 2011 and Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are neither used for the hierarchical cluster analysis (only data &gt;430 nm are considered) performed in Taylor et al. 2011 nor for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879432
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS73/022-2 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.820799), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Taylor et al. 2011 and Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are neither used for the hierarchical cluster analysis (only data &gt;430 nm are considered) performed in Taylor et al. 2011 nor for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879433
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS73/024-2 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.820800), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Taylor et al. 2011 and Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are neither used for the hierarchical cluster analysis (only data &gt;430 nm are considered) performed in Taylor et al. 2011 nor for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879434
title: Upwelling spectral radiance as measured in different depths at radiometer station PS73/026-5 (corrected version)

description: In the previous upwelling radiance (Lu) profile data set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.820801), Lu data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement). The results of the publications related to these data were not affected. Taylor et al. 2013 investigated only Lu data incorrectly shifted by 3 nm, so the analysis was consistent within itself. Taylor et al. 2011 and Bracher et al. 2015 used the remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data calculated from the incorrectly shifted Lu data. The resulting RRS data only showed inconsistencies were the incoming downwelling irradiance changes quickly with wavelengths, which resulted erroneous features &lt;430 nm. We have used both versions (previous and the one presented here) Lu and RRS data and got the same results since the wrong features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are neither used for the hierarchical cluster analysis (only data &gt;430 nm are considered) performed in Taylor et al. 2011 nor for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.878275
title: Abundance of planktonic Calanoida (Copepoda, Crustacea) from Bongo nets during POLARSTERN cruise ANT-III/3 (PS06)

description: Only selected calanoid copepods were enumerated.
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.878276
title: Abundance of planktonic Calanoida (Copepoda, Crustacea) from Multinets during POLARSTERN cruise ANT-III/3 (PS06)
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.879224
title: Remote sensing reflectance during POLARSTERN cruise ANT-XXIV/4

description: In the previous remote sensing reflectance (RRS) data sets , the RRS data were not correctly calculated because the input upwelling radiance (Lu) data were wrongly shifted by 3 nm (which responds to the originally resolution of the measurement. While the effect of this mistake is low were the downwelling irradiance changes slowly with wavelength it becomes strong were it changes quickly which is below 430 nm. In the now submitted data the correct wavelengths for Lu data have been used for the calculations. The results of the publications related to these data were not affected - we had used both versions of RRS data and got the same results since in these studies the errorneous features &lt;430 nm are consistent and are neither used for the hierarchical cluster analysis (only data &gt;430 nm are considered) performed in Taylor et al. 2011 (doi:10.5194/bg-8-3609-2011) nor for the pigment predictions (since these features are contained in the first empirical orthogonal function) in Bracher et al. 2015 (doi:10.5194/os-11-139-2015).
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.877917
title: Seafloor images at near field seafloor observatory DELOS A, off the coast of Angola, in the South East Atlantic Ocean, 2010-02-22 to 2010-04-28, Deployment 3

description: The DELOS (Deep-ocean Environmental Long-term Observatory System, http://www.delos-project.org) system comprises two environmental monitoring platforms located within petroleum lease Block 18 in a mid- slope area off Angola, between the deep-sea fans of the Congo and Kwanza rivers. DELOS A is located in the near field (within 50 m of a sea floor well). DELOS B is located in the far field (~16 km from sea floor infrastructure).The DELOS platforms (DELOS A and DELOS B) are under Angolan jurisdiction and all activities must abide by Angolan law. As such, any person intending to publish DELOS data in any form is required to obtain prior permission from the National Concessionaire (Sonangol). Permission can be requested via Robert O'Brien at BP UK (Robert.OBrien@uk.bp.com) or the DELOS PI Dr. David Bailey (David.Bailey@glasgow.ac.uk). This process is not intended as a deterrent and applications to use DELOS data are welcomed.Participating Institutions: BP Exploration, BP Angola, University of Aberdeen, MBARI, National Oceanography Centre, INIP - Angola Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (Angolan National Institute of Fisheries), Texas A&M University, Glasgow University
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.877933
title: Seafloor images at near field seafloor observatory DELOS A, off the coast of Angola, in the South East Atlantic Ocean, 2010-08-18 to 2011-06-02, Deployment 4

description: The DELOS (Deep-ocean Environmental Long-term Observatory System, http://www.delos-project.org) system comprises two environmental monitoring platforms located within petroleum lease Block 18 in a mid- slope area off Angola, between the deep-sea fans of the Congo and Kwanza rivers. DELOS A is located in the near field (within 50 m of a sea floor well). DELOS B is located in the far field (~16 km from sea floor infrastructure).The DELOS platforms (DELOS A and DELOS B) are under Angolan jurisdiction and all activities must abide by Angolan law. As such, any person intending to publish DELOS data in any form is required to obtain prior permission from the National Concessionaire (Sonangol). Permission can be requested via Robert O'Brien at BP UK (Robert.OBrien@uk.bp.com) or the DELOS PI Dr. David Bailey (David.Bailey@glasgow.ac.uk). This process is not intended as a deterrent and applications to use DELOS data are welcomed.Participating Institutions: BP Exploration, BP Angola, University of Aberdeen, MBARI, National Oceanography Centre, INIP - Angola Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (Angolan National Institute of Fisheries), Texas A&M University, Glasgow University
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.877934
title: Seafloor images at near field seafloor observatory DELOS A, off the coast of Angola, in the South East Atlantic Ocean, 2011-08-23 to 2012-07-14, Deployment 5

description: The DELOS (Deep-ocean Environmental Long-term Observatory System, http://www.delos-project.org) system comprises two environmental monitoring platforms located within petroleum lease Block 18 in a mid- slope area off Angola, between the deep-sea fans of the Congo and Kwanza rivers. DELOS A is located in the near field (within 50 m of a sea floor well). DELOS B is located in the far field (~16 km from sea floor infrastructure).The DELOS platforms (DELOS A and DELOS B) are under Angolan jurisdiction and all activities must abide by Angolan law. As such, any person intending to publish DELOS data in any form is required to obtain prior permission from the National Concessionaire (Sonangol). Permission can be requested via Robert O'Brien at BP UK (Robert.OBrien@uk.bp.com) or the DELOS PI Dr. David Bailey (David.Bailey@glasgow.ac.uk). This process is not intended as a deterrent and applications to use DELOS data are welcomed.Participating Institutions: BP Exploration, BP Angola, University of Aberdeen, MBARI, National Oceanography Centre, INIP - Angola Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (Angolan National Institute of Fisheries), Texas A&M University, Glasgow University
DOI: 10.1594/pangaea.877935
title: Seafloor images at near field seafloor observatory DELOS A, off the coast of Angola, in the South East Atlantic Ocean, 2012-11-03 to 2013-07-31, Deployment 6

description: The DELOS (Deep-ocean Environmental Long-term Observatory System, http://www.delos-project.org) system comprises two environmental monitoring platforms located within petroleum lease Block 18 in a mid- slope area off Angola, between the deep-sea fans of the Congo and Kwanza rivers. DELOS A is located in the near field (within 50 m of a sea floor well). DELOS B is located in the far field (~16 km from sea floor infrastructure).The DELOS platforms (DELOS A and DELOS B) are under Angolan jurisdiction and all activities must abide by Angolan law. As such, any person intending to publish DELOS data in any form is required to obtain prior permission from the National Concessionaire (Sonangol). Permission can be requested via Robert O'Brien at BP UK (Robert.OBrien@uk.bp.com) or the DELOS PI Dr. David Bailey (David.Bailey@glasgow.ac.uk). This process is not intended as a deterrent and applications to use DELOS data are welcomed.Participating Institutions: BP Exploration, BP Angola, University of Aberdeen, MBARI, National Oceanography Centre, INIP - Angola Instituto Nacional de Investigação Pesqueira (Angolan National Institute of Fisheries), Texas A&M University, Glasgow University