U.S. GLOBEC Scientific Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

Woods Hole, MA --- 7-8 Oct 93

Present from the steering committee were: Powell (Chair), Costa, Dickey, Durbin, Eckman, Gaines, Hedgecock, Hofmann, Hollowed, Hunter, Huntley, Mountain, Ortner, Robinson, P. Smith, Steele and Walstad. Steering committee members unable to attend were Briscoe, Olson and S. Smith. Others present at the SSC meeting were Peterson (NOAA), Taylor (NSF), Eakin (NOAA), L. Clark (NSF), Garrison (NSF), Freise (GLOBEC.INT), Brander (ICES Cod and Climate), deYoung (Canada GLOBEC/OPEN), Batchelder (U.S. GLOBEC SSC Office) and Lynch (U.S. GLOBEC SSC Office). Powell welcomed and introduced Keith Brander (ICES) and Brad deYoung (Canada GLOBEC co-chair) who were invited to the meeting to participate in the discussions of the NW Atlantic program, which would be the focus of discussion for most of the first day. Powell noted that because of the time devoted to NW Atlantic PI presentations on Thursday, and the joint meeting with the CoOP SSC on Friday morning, many regular topics of discussion at SSC meetings, such as agency reports on funding, chairs reports, and subcommittee reports would not occur at this meeting. We will return to them at our next meeting.


Peterson provided an update of his activities since the June 1993 meeting and then provided an overview of each of the funded NW Atlantic projects and how they meshed together to provide a coordinated program of research. We spent much of the time discussing the evolution of the broad-scale survey program-the most difficult and last component of the NW Atlantic project to be organized and funded. The broad-scale program aims for bank-wide description of the physics and biology, but also must include efforts to resample at frequent intervals a select number of sites (probably near the fixed moorings) to provide sufficient samples for temporal analysis of organism dynamics (esp. zooplankton). The best that can probably be achieved is sampling at 2-3 sites every 7-10 days during the January-to-July period of the Georges Bank study. Biological sampling will be done using MOCNESS and pumping (at fewer stations), and hopefully acoustics.

Peterson reviewed some perceived needs of the program that were not yet resolved-mostly due to insufficient funds. These needs include funds for and a place to house the (probably NOAA) plankton sorters, funds to support processing of ADCP data collected on the NOAA vessel, and some funds for equipment. Paul Smith commented on the "broadness" of the broad-scale surveys now that the station density had been reduced by half and constricted more narrowly to the bank itself. His concern was that the broad-scale sampling plan, although sufficient to estimate total populations of the target species, may not be sufficient to measure exchange rates (of water, properties, etc.) at the margins of the sampled region. Mountain commented that the broad-scale survey group recognized that the sampling plan might have to be modified for the field year (1997) in which exchange processes were the principal foci. Hunter commented on the apparent lack of benthic trawling of recently settled juvenile fish for otolith analysis (aging) and birthdate backcalculation. Peterson indicated that there was an O-group survey of juveniles in September during the groundfish survey and that the otoliths were in good enough condition to do daily increment counting. Peterson also commented on the uncertain role of the Polish sorting center. Potential missing elements of the program include in situ optical measurements in support of SeaWIFS calibrations, nutrient analyses and size-fractionated chlorophyll extractions. Potential underfunded (or unfunded to date) items are the broad-scale survey, acoustics, the data management office, and the project office.


Following some introductory remarks by Powell, a series of (8-10 min) presentations were made by the NW Atlantic PI's. NW Atlantic presentations were grouped into four major categories: modelling, retrospective analysis, broad-scale surveys and process-oriented research. Cabell Davis provided a general overview of the U.S. GLOBEC NW Atlantic program-its uniqueness is in measuring pattern and the processes controlling pattern simultaneously.

Investigators funded to do modelling are Lynch (and co-PI's), Cushman-Roisin, and Gawarkiewikz (and co-PI's). Lynch described some earlier diagnostic model results indicating the importance of the location and timing of spawning, and the depth of eggs and larvae in determining whether larvae are retained on Georges Bank or advected elsewhere. Future plans are to develop a prognostic model. Cushman-Roisin will model currents on the southern flank of Georges Bank, concentrating on the region which appears critical to retention of larvae on the Bank. Gawarkiewikz's group will investigate the effect of transient events (such as storms and ring intrusions) on the physics and biology using trophodynamics and stage-structured population dynamics models.

Investigators funded for retrospective studies are Meise (and co-PI's), Bollens (and co-PI's), and Bisagni (and co-PI's). Meise will examine the 0.053 mm and 0.165 mm plankton samples from the MARMAP program for ca. 27 month period during 1978-1980. Bollens will be re- examining a set of ca. 0.250 mm mesh Clarke-Bumpus samples collected on 11 cruises during 1939-1941. Bisagni will examine the Georges Bank AVHRR and CZCS data for the periods when the sensors overlapped in time. They will also be responsible for archiving, and making contemporary satellite sensing data available (in real or near-real time) to other program investigators.

Investigators who made presentations about the broad-scale survey and mooring program were Lough, Brink, Dickey (for Van Holliday), Mountain, Wally Smith, Miller, Durbin and Wiebe. Lough outlined the timetable and station locations for broad-scale sampling (field program overview). Brink (and co-PI's) will deploy long-term moorings and drifters for Eulerian and Lagrangian measurements of physics, optics, acoustics and biology to study residence time, water paths, stratification, advection (esp. interannual variability) and episodic events. Dickey, presenting for Van Holliday, described the acoustic technologies that will be deployed to measure zooplankton abundance and size structure. Mountain described the reformulated broad- scale research program (reformulated because funds were insufficient to support the broad-scale survey as originally planned and proposed). He showed a schedule for the cruises and sampling and the instruments that will be deployed. Wally Smith described the sampling that his group will do to evaluate egg and larval abundance and distribution. Samples will be sent to Poland for sorting and identification and then returned to the U.S. for otolith analysis of age, growth, and birthdate. Miller described how he planned to exploit the broadscale and process cruise samples by evaluating dry weights, molting frequencies, lipid contents, etc., and will model population dynamics of the copepods. Ted Durbin described plans to collect zooplankton by pumps (with a fine mesh) for evaluation of Calanus egg and naupliar abundance and distribution, and to identify the timing and location of copepod reproduction and recruitment. Wiebe described how he planned to assess the biomass (possibly size-structured) of zooplankton and nekton using acoustics methods, coupled with net collections (for calibration). Cabell Davis and Scott Gallager showed some video collected by the VPR during the afternoon coffee-break.

Beardsley, Lough, Buckley, Gifford, Gallager, Durbin, Runge, Moore, Bucklin, Blades- Eckelbarger, Madin and Grosslein made presentations about process-oriented research. Beardsley described the moored measurement program and shipboard studies that will be conducted during January to July. Moorings will be deployed for ca. 6 months at three sites on the southern flank of Georges Bank. Lough described plans to use MOCNESS to sample the vertical distribution, growth and condition of larval fish. Buckley will measure short-term growth of larval fish using RNA/DNA indices. Gifford and Gallager described how their group will investigate the ingestion of microzooplankton by copepods and the early feeding larvae of cod. Durbin and Runge will measure growth and egg production, respectively, of Calanus and Pseudocalanus in shipboard and in situ experiments. Moore described the research that he and Stegeman will do to evaluate short-term growth in copepods using cellular markers. Bucklin described the integration of biology and physics, and investigations of population source regions and transport patterns, that she hopes to achieve by coupling genetic diversity information and physical circulation patterns. Blades-Eckelbarger described the continuous flow-through culture facility that will be developed to maintain long-term cultures of oceanic copepods (esp. Calanus), and her proposed experiments to evaluate diapause phasing and physiology in Calanus. Madin and Grosslein described the work that the predation group will conduct to evaluate predation mortality by invertebrates and vertebrates, like schooling fishes, upon larval cod and haddock and copepods also. This also includes MERL tank experiments of predation rate and measurement of digestion rates. Grosslein showed data indicating that schools of mackerel follow the 7-8 deg. C isotherm across Georges Bank in the spring, and that these migrating schools have a severe impact on the abundance and distribution of cod larvae. Their predation studies are a collaborative effort funded by the NOAA Coastal Ocean Program and U.S. GLOBEC.

To wrap up the first day, there were two general presentations. Wiebe spoke about the need to have a data management office for the NW Atlantic program that would ensure high quality data, prompt data submission and distribution and data archiving. Finally, Mountain summarized the program (quoting Mick Jagger) "You can't always get what you want....". He observed that (1) primary production, nutrient concentrations, zooplankton egestion and respiration, and long-term moorings at two additional sites were "missing" from the program; (2) broad-scale studies of zooplankton and predator populations, broad-scale acoustics for zooplankton and predators, and support for fish stomach analyses were underfunded (underrepresented); and (3) issues of trawling on broad-scale surveys, bunk allotments on process cruises, selection of an advisory council, and data management remained to be resolved.

All of the presentations were done well. Discussions following the presentations were lively, topical and hopefully useful and informative to both the PI's and the SSC. We adjourned for the day following the summary by Mountain.


Brad deYoung, co-chair of the Canada-GLOBEC SSC, and participant in the Canadian OPEN (Ocean Production Enhancement Network) program summarized ecosystem (esp. fisheries related) research in Canada in OPEN-1 and OPEN-2, and provided an update on Canada- GLOBEC's planning activities. The OPEN-1 program, which is just concluding, focused on scallops and fish populations. Cod were studied in several environments. Cod fitness and survival were studied on the western Bank of the Scotian Shelf. Initially studies were planned for spring-summer, but when reproduction was found to occur principally in fall-winter, the program evolved into a winter larval patch study. A larval patch was followed in December 1992 using large-scale mapping surveys and sophisticated numerical modeling. Genetic studies were used to evaluate cod stocks, and especially genotype-specific survival. Off Newfoundland, studies of cod focused on the relationship between the environment, cod stock distributions and cod migration pathways. Off Northern Newfoundland, adult cod spawn at the shelf break and migrate inshore. Moorings, shipboard surveys, numerical modeling and genetic and age- dependent antifreeze proteins were used as tools to evaluate the relation between the environment and fish distribution and behavior.

OPEN-2, a successor to OPEN-1, is in the proposal development stage. Themes for the program are that it deal with (1) the groundfish crisis that is occurring off Atlantic Canada (focus here will likely be cod stocks); (2) shellfish enhancement for scallops (possibly on Georges Bank or in the Bay of Fundy); (3) toxic blooms and fish diseases (because of their importance to aquaculture). Groundfish studies will focus on rebuilding the population structure of northern cod and on hindcast modelling of Scotian Shelf cod stocks. OPEN-2 studies will likely begin in April 1994 and continue till 1998.

Canada GLOBEC held their first meeting in Fredericton, New Brunswick (June 1993) to develop a plan for developing a Canadian GLOBEC program. Themes that emerged from that meeting and subsequent discussions include the following: advective coupling between regions, such as between Newfoundland, the Scotian Shelf, and Georges Bank; the coupling of physics to fish via phytoplankton and fish; an emphasis on climate variability, especially as it may affect freshwater outflow (for example, from the Gulf of St. Lawrence); nested numerical modelling; and the use of experiments to understand longer-time scales. Regions identified for tentative field studies are the Newfoundland Shelf, the Gulf of St. Lawrence to Georges Bank, including Scotian Shelf, and the Pacific coast, possibly focusing on the LaPareuse Bank region.

DAY TWO (Friday, 8 October 1993; Carriage House)

The morning session, devoted to discussion of a U.S. West Coast study, was joint with the Coastal Ocean Processes (CoOP) scientific steering committee. All U.S. GLOBEC SSC members, except Hofmann, that were present on the prior day were in attendance. CoOP SSC members present were: John Bane, Ken Brink, Tom Church, Chris Fairall, Susan Henrichs, George Jackson, Val Klump, Chris Martens, John Milliman, Dave Rogers, Mike Roman, Bob Smith and Jim Yoder.

Also attending this day were Gary Geernaert (ONR, ex CoOP SSC), John Hobbie (LMER Coordinating Office, MBL, Woods Hole), Amy Freise (GLOBEC.INT), Ron Schlitz (ONR), Ted Strub (OSU), and Larry Madin (WHOI).


Following introductions of all present, the chairs of the two SSC's, Powell and Roman, provided brief introductions to the development and goals of the respective programs, U.S. GLOBEC and CoOP. Powell noted that the first major U.S. GLOBEC effort, in the NW Atlantic/Georges Bank region, has just begun. The U.S. West Coast has been a focus of the program since its early days and now is the time to complete its plan. He explained that U.S. GLOBEC was particularly interested in investigating the interplay of physics and biology in the complicated mesoscale structure of the California Current. Roman provided a vision of CoOP, which is a sequence of major interdisciplinary process studies in the coastal ocean. The wind-driven shelf off the U.S. West Coast was selected by the CoOP SSC as the first of this series of studies. He reviewed earlier pilot studies that have taken place under the aegis of CoOP. The most prominent of these is an investigation of larval transport, benthic boundary layer processes, and settlement processes off Duck, NC-selected because of the long-historical record of physical observations made by an Army Corp of Engineers facility there. An overview of this study will soon appear in Sea Technology. Roman also mentioned that a CoOP report will appear soon from a workshop held to discuss long-time series measurements in the coastal ocean.

Bob Smith (Chair of the CoOP workshop on Wind Driven Processes on the U.S. West Coast) summarized the discussions that took place at the July workshop in Portland, OR. Ted Strub (Chair of the U.S. GLOBEC California Current Working Group) then reviewed GLOBEC's planning efforts to date and attempted to identify themes, goals and approaches which were similar, complementary, or at odds between the GLOBEC and CoOP plans. Discussions in Portland took place with consideration to the overall CoOP goal: "to obtain a new level of quantitative understanding of the processes that dominate the transports, transformations and fates of biologically, chemically and geologically important matter on the continental margins". CoOP's west coast study would focus on cross-shelf transport phenomena occurring in strongly wind dominated coastal shelves.

Discussions at the Portland workshop occurred in both disciplinary and interdisciplinary working groups-much more so in the latter. Five interdisciplinary working groups determined primarily by different regions (or features) within an upwelling coastal domain were identified: upper ocean, interior ocean, bottom boundary layer, inner shelf and fronts. Each working group had representatives from most of the five disciplines: physical, biological, geological and chemical oceanography and marine meteorology. Smith listed the fundamental "motherhood" questions posed by each interdisciplinary working group and then listed and briefly discussed the specific issues which each working group discussed. A report of the Portland workshop will be published by CoOP.

In summary, both GLOBEC and CoOP agree that ocean dynamics (and the ecosystem) need to be studied in a three-dimensional sense. Approaches of both programs will likely involve moored instrumentation packages, drifting instruments, shipboard surveys and extensive oceanographic station work. Both programs believe that future field programs should be concentrated where prior studies have been done-to best use knowledge gained from earlier observations. Both programs believe that field programs must be accompanied by modelling- numerical and theoretical. To quote the CoOP report, "The processes of interest to CoOP, along with the straw-man sampling plans of the interior, inner shelf and frontal zone working groups, are similar to those in the detailed mesoscale surveys discussed by U.S. GLOBEC. Comparative studies between sites as discussed by the same groups could also be included in those discussed in U.S. GLOBEC's approach to large-scale comparative studies."

U.S. GLOBEC's focus on climate change and marine animal populations, including zooplankton, fish and the pelagic larvae of benthic invertebrates, is more focused than CoOP's interest in interactions among physical, chemical, geological and biological components of shelf systems. There may be emphasis placed on different trophic levels in the two programs (GLOBEC- zooplankton and fish; CoOP-phytoplankton), which could be complementary. Finally, the two programs anticipate different durations: CoOP is looking to a 1-2 year focused field study, whereas GLOBEC is looking towards a 5-7 year study. Mountain pointed out that perhaps the shorter-term CoOP cross-margin exchange study is analogous to the isolation of important processes-e.g., stratification, exchange, etc.-in the Georges Bank study into different focused field years. As such, a collaborative field study with CoOP could be viewed as only a single component of a much broader, larger (basin) scale and longer-term GLOBEC study.

During the discussion that followed the presentations, Hunter commented that the consequences of a CoOP-GLOBEC marriage ("affair" in Strub's words) should be carefully considered. Focusing a project solely on the issue of "retention on or return to the shelf", which is where the two programs interests most overlap, would mean that some economically major "pelagic" stocks, such as hake and sardine, of the west coast would not be studied in favor of other species, such as crabs, urchins and groundfish. These latter species have shorter historical catch statistics, are of lower economic value (and thus importance) and potentially of less interest to NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service. Hunter also remarked that the major effect of climate change on the U.S. West coast may be shifts in faunal provinces (such as are caused by El Nio events), long-term shifts in the abundance dominant species (sardine/anchovy), effects on spawning habitat, and changes in trophic structure. He expressed concern that our understanding of such effects may not be advanced much by studying mesoscale dynamics effects on coastal species. Huntley commented that GLOBEC should attempt to couple coastal processes (which are studied) to offshore processes as a way to answer the "pelagics question".

Perhaps Walstad summarized the impending "affair" best: "GLOBEC needs to know what's coming out to the mesoscale California Current from the nearshore. The large alongshore and cross-shore gradients need to be known, and CoOP's planned studies can help in this regard." It was resolved that U.S. GLOBEC and CoOP would develop separate implementation plans, but in concert with one another. Each program will identify five scientists to develop the implementation plan. Chair of the U.S. GLOBEC implementation working group is Ted Strub. Bob Smith will probably chair the CoOP group. Such an arrangement should facilitate communication between the programs since both are at Oregon State University. Remaining implementation group members are to be selected by the chair and each program's SSC. Later in the afternoon, U.S. GLOBEC developed a list of scientists, from which Strub, with guidance from the SSC, will select to complete the makeup of the U.S. GLOBEC California Current Implementation group. As for a schedule, we asked that the implementation group be selected and develop an implementation plan which could be presented to the SSC and discussed at the March 1994 SSC meeting.


Ortner and Mountain summarized how they view their responsibility as liaison between the NWAtlantic PI advisory council (or steering committee) and the U.S. GLOBEC SSC. They see two primary roles. The first is to facilitate communication between the two groups to ensure overall success of the NW Atlantic program, but also to ensure that longer-term needs of U.S. GLOBEC are met. An example of this latter is timely feedback of research results which might aid in generating additional funding for the program in the future. The second role is to identify potential problems. They began by listing for the SSC several remaining unresolved issues which require attention. They are (1) a local project office staffed with a project scientist and 3-6 months time/year to a senior project manager, (2) local data management, (3) calibration concerns of distributed vs. centralized plankton sorting, (4) identification of funds and people to analyze NOAA vessel ADCP data, (5) underfunded acoustics (for zooplankton and predators) on the broad-scale survey, and finally (6) lack of data on nutrient and extracted chlorophyll to tie in with the satellite remote sensing.


Leonard Walstad summarized the significant new features of the U.S. GLOBEC Data Policy document on Thursday during the NW Atlantic PI session. We discussed the policy again on Friday. Following discussions on Thursday, Leonard proposed several changes related to SSC oversight functions and the Data Management Office (DMO). The new oversight policy will be that the PI's will provide to the DMO (who will then report it to the SSC [or a subcommittee of the SSC]) the following: (1) data to be collected; (2) quality/methodology; (3) time-frame when the data would be expected to be available following collection; and (4) the PI's data needs (i.e., what ancillary data is needed) and schedule. PI's should also provide a discussion of how they will compare the data to be collected during the program with data collected previously (i.e., PI's should be aware of the program's need to examine long-term changes and should strive to achieve data intercomparability.) The DMO will provide this information to the SSC for guidance (not approval). The information requested will generally not impose much on the PI, since most of it should be present in a "well written proposal". The information is requested by the SSC so that larger (cross-project) climate change issues and interdisciplinary issues can be addressed, and to aid in the identification of potential missing components within the project. Finally, the information submitted to the DMO by the individual PI's will be collated, become part of the permanent database, and made available to all PI's involved in the program. Walstad moved that we accept the Data Policy Report with minor modifications (as described by Leonard at the meeting). The motion passed. Our office will attempt to get the completed U.S. GLOBEC Data Policy Document published by January 1, 1994. Comments on the Data Policy Document should be sent to Leonard at L.WALSTAD (Omnet) or walstad@oce.orst.edu by November 1, 1993.


Powell noted that last year we had an exceptionally large "year class" of new SSC members in order to increase NOAA representation following the signing of the joint memorandum of agreement between NOAA and NSF. It was decided at that time that the size of the SSC would be reduced (from its current 20) gradually in the next several years. He noted that the terms of seven members expire on December 31, 1993. He proposed that Allan Robinson and Sharon Smith be renominated to serve another three year term. Robinson has been very important in the development of U.S. GLOBEC's Long-Range Plan and internationally (he Chaired the Numerical Modelling meeting of GLOBEC.INT). Last year, Smith joined the executive committee. Powell suggested that the terms of Eckman, Hedgecock, Hunter, Steele and Walstad be allowed to expire without replacement (or at most that only one be filled). That would reduce the size of the committee to fifteen (or sixteen) for the next year. Most agreed that the committee size should be reduced, however some felt that there might not be adequate representation on the SSC of some subdisciplines (e.g., biotechnology, marine genetics, climatology modeling, benthos). Several were nominated from the floor, and Powell agreed to contact them to learn of their interest in standing. Powell also will advertise (on Omnet, EOS, or both) that the U.S. GLOBEC committee may add one additional member this year, and request nominations and supporting materials from the scientific community.


TOR, tasks and current membership for most of the existing subcommittees of the program were discussed at the June meeting. Included in the briefing book for this meeting was a Committee Handbook summarizing those earlier discussions. Some committees, e.g., Technology, Outreach, and Southern Ocean, need either TOR or tasks defined. Hofmann agreed to produce TOR and tasks for the U.S. GLOBEC Southern Ocean subcommittee.

We discussed membership on the outreach committee, which Huntley has agreed to chair. Other members are Batchelder, Paul Smith, Sharon Smith, and Eckman. Huntley (and possibly Eckman, as well) agreed to attend the Global Change Conference being held on 27-28 October at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

Dickey expressed his desire to step down as chair of the Technology committee. Ortner was asked to assume the responsibility and accepted. We discussed membership and eventually suggested a committee of Ortner (C), Dickey, Briscoe, Tim Stanton(WHOI) and Uwe Kils. Powell agreed to contact Kils and Stanton to determine their willingness to serve on this committee. Tasks which we identified for this committee include: keeping abreast of new sensor (acoustic/optic) developments; serving as liaison with JGOFS technology, sensors, sampling, methodology and techniques; examining cross-scale issues (integration of sensing technologies from fine-scale to broad-scale); investigating the issue of a national facility for instruments; determining how to proceed on calibration and standardization issues; and keeping U.S. GLOBEC moving towards the transition from fixed-period process studies to long-term monitoring operations.


Robinson made presentations on the U.S. GLOBEC Long Range Plan and on a white paper on A U.S. GLOBEC Initiative for Retrospective Research. The Long-Range Plan has changed in emphasis from his earlier draft to the more recent version. Specifically, compared to the earlier draft, the newer version places more emphasis on higher trophic levels (living marine resources), including fish, and de-emphasizes the role of zooplankton in moderating (via feed-back processes) climate change. The new draft was distributed to the SSC for their comments. Robinson noted that the literature provides few examples of large spatial or temporal changes in marine ecosystems at the zooplankton or higher trophic level that are clearly the result of large- scale, persistent climate change. The LRP presently identifies Pacific Basin sardine stocks, which have undergone apparently parallel patterns of abundance in some widely separated stocks across the entire Pacific basin. This might be related to basin-scale environmental influences. The LRP committee seeks to add comparable examples, especially for the Atlantic. A deadline of November 1, 1993 was set for returning comments to Robinson.

Robinson briefly summarized the white paper on retrospective research that was included in the briefing book. The document reflects the U.S. West Coast regional bias of its developers. We decided that it needed to be broadened by adding a global perspective, especially to the examples presented within the text. Four tasks were identified during our discussions for improving this document: (1) suggest specific existing datasets, and potential research questions that can be addressed by retrospective examination of the datasets (identify hypotheses); (2) develop a "work in progress" table which lists ongoing retrospective studies, and how they have contributed to scientific understanding not achievable in any other way; (3) develop a comprehensive bibliography of relevant retrospective references (e.g., relevant to issues of climate change); and (4) add a genetics component to retrospective research to examine changes through time from archived samples. As an example of ongoing research, Paul Smith noted that the CPR data is being re-examined. Finally, comments on the first draft (as included in the briefing book) are desired. The deadline for commenting on the Retrospective Research document is January 1, 1994. It is hoped that a revised draft of this report will be completed by February 1, 1994, so that it is available for distribution to SSC members that attend the San Diego Ocean Sciences meeting.


Open Ocean (Blue Water) Workshop Summary. Larry Madin summarized the discussions that took place September 13-15, 1993 in Woods Hole. He presented a rationale for why GLOBEC should study the open ocean, listed the problems and challenges which would be encountered in open ocean study of marine animals, and offered recommendations for action. Participants of the workshop broke into working groups to discuss (1) population characteristics and genetics, (2) distribution patterns and sampling problems, (3) biological processes and rates, and (4) physical and biological processes. There is almost nothing known about the life history or population biology of most of the species which inhabit the largest environment on Earth. This provides an immense opportunity for GLOBEC, but also an obstacle. Sampling of the oceanic environment offers distinct challenges. Many of the species are delicate and damage easily when collected with nets. Just the remoteness offers a challenge, since it is difficult to sample frequently enough to learn about the dynamics of populations.

At the workshop a consensus was developed to recommend a multiple step implementation. First would be retrospective studies, e.g., reanalysis of existing data sets and review of the literature to screen potential target species candidates. Second, would be pilot scale studies, which might include repeating prior sampling programs (transects) to examine temporal changes, such as are likely in phytoplankton in the North Pacific subtropical gyre. This second phase might also include the initiation of several "low-tech" time series observations by developing countries. A final phase would be a dedicated open ocean program, which would include large scale studies aimed at target species over a 1-2 year period. The study should be repeated 5-10 years later to examine global scale climate change. Inasmuch as the workshop was less than one month before the SSC meeting, there was no written report. Madin estimated that a report of the workshop might be available in about six months.

Southern Ocean. Huntley briefly summarized the Southern Ocean GLOBEC.INT meeting held in Norfolk, VA in June 1993. A report from the meeting will be produced which summarizes the discussions and recommendations from the meeting. This report will provide the foundation for a meeting that will be held in spring 1994 to develop an implementation plan for a Southern Ocean GLOBEC program.

Upwelling Programs. Hunter briefly mentioned an international upwelling program that is developing. Several countries, including Spain, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Mexico, South Africa and Japan have expressed interest in conducting comparative studies in upwelling systems. There will be an international ad hoc science plan meeting in summer, 1994.

GLOBEC Glossy. Batchelder provided to SSC members draft copies of the first U.S. GLOBEC Glossy brochure. He asked that comments on the science content and technical layout be returned to him by November 15, 1993. He hopes to revise the glossy and have it printed by mid-January, in time for it to be available for the February Ocean Sciences meeting.


Powell made some final remarks, especially noting that our next SSC meeting would be 10-11 March 1994, in either Washington, D.C. or Denver. The meeting adjourned at approximately 1700.

Quotes of the meeting occurred during our discussion
of the "marriage" of CoOP and GLOBEC in developing a 
joint U.S. West Coast Plan...

Best we can hope for is an affair.  -Ted Strub

That would be no stranger than some of the marriages 
      in California                    -Tom Powell
       ...especially when they are both on welfare.
                                           -Paul Smith

homepage minutes contents previous next