AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF. for the. in the plume water for 30 to 50 days. On the basis of the data taken

Transcription

1 AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF HASONG PAK (Name) for the DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Degree) in OCEANOGRAPHY presented on July 14, 1969 (Major) Title: THE COLUMBIA RIVER AS A SOURCE OF MARINE LIGHT SCATTERING PARTICLES Abstract approved: Redacted for Privacy orge F. Beardley, Jr. The Columbia River plume region was investigated during the period of ZO June to 3 July, 1968 by light scattering measurements and standard hydrographic station observations. The Columbia River plume was traced by the light scattering particles of the plume water. The light scattering particles are estimated to be contained in the plume water for 3 to 5 days. On the basis of the data taken in the Columbia River plume region, a conceptual model is made to describe the flow of river originated particles to the ocean water. In the distribution of the light scattering particles a northward deep current under the plume near the river mouth and a subsurface offshore flow near the bottom of the Columbia River plume are shown.

2 The Columbia River as a Source of Marine Light Scattering Particles by Hasong Pak A THESIS submitted to Oregon State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy June 197

3 APPROVED: Redacted for Privacy Ass in charge of major Redacted for Privacy C hairm.n of Department of ceanography Redacted for Privacy Dean o'f Graduate School Date thesis is presented \cj) (k9 Typed by Donna L. Olson for Hasong Pak

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author is deeply indebted to Dr. George F. Beardsley, Jr., my thesis advisor, for providing the indispensable means and needs for the investigation. He also would like to express his sincere appreciation to Dr. Robert L, Smith, who provided many constructive criticisms and advice, Kendall Carder, who helped in light scattering measurements, data reduction, and error analysis, and Robert Hodgeson, who also helped in error analysis. Special thanks are due to Dr. P. K. Park, who provided space and water samples on the 686C Columbia Plume Cruise. This investigation was supported by the Office of Naval Research, Grant No. 1Z86(1O).

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 Problem 1 History 3 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM 5 INTERPRETATION OF SEA WATER LIGHT SCATTERING DATA 1 DATA 14 RESULTS 55 General Features of 1968 Summer Columbia River Plume 55 Flows 67 Model Plume 73 DISCUSSION 77 BIBLIOGRAPHY 9 APPENDIX I - COLUMBIA RIVER AND ITS ESTUARY 94 APPENDD( II REVIEW OF REGIOi'AL OCEANOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS OFF THE OREGON-WASHING- TON COAST 97 APPENDIX III - BRICE PHOENIX LIGHT SCATTERING PHOTOMETER 1

6 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. The cruise track and positions of the hydrographic stations of the R/V YAQUINA 686C, 2 June to 3 July, Section I follows closely to the plume axis, and sections II to V are approximately along the latitude An example of the volume scattering function for coastal and oceanic water, and the theoretical curve for pure water (Spilhaus, 1965) Salinity distribution on the sea surface Scattering particle distribution on the sea surface Salinity distribution on the 3m surface Scattering particle distribution on the 3m surface. 33 7, Salinity distribution on the lom surface Scattering particle distribution on the lom surface Salinity distribution on the ZOm surface Scattering particle distribution on the ZOm surface Salinity distribution on the 3m surface Scattering particle distribution on the 3m surface Salinity distribution on Section I Scattering particle distribution on Section I. 41

7 Figure Page 15. Temperature distribution on Section I Sigma-t distribution on Section I Oxygen distribution on Section I Salinity distribution on Section II Scattering particle distribution on Section II Temperature distribution on Section II Sigma-t distribution on Section U Oxygen distribution on Section II Scattering distribution on Section III Salinity distribution on Section III Scattering particle on Section IV Salinity distribution on Section IV Scattering particle on Section V Temperature and salinity vs. depth curves for stations MC-5 and MC Sigma-t distribution on the 3m surface Temperature distribution on the 3m surface Columbia River plume axes defined by salinity, temperature, sigma -t, and scattering particle on the 3m surface Salinity distribution at sea surface, Brown Bear Cruise 38, 7-19 June 1962 (Budinger et al., 1964) Temperature vs. scattering particle on Section II. 7

8 Figure Page 34. Distribution of Holocene clay-mineral groups Plume model in the vertical section along the plume axis Plume model on a section across the plume axis Scattering particle profile at MC-5 and MC Stability (Brunt-Vaisrd. Frequency) profiles at MC-5, Profiles of stability and scattering particles at MC-25, near the river mouth Profiles of stability and scattering particles at MC-33, at the edge of the plume Stability profiles at MC-5 and MC Columbia River basin. 95

9 LIST OF TABLES Table Page C Columbia plume cruise data, Meridional components of geostrophic current and Ekman transport Results of error analysis. 18

10 THE COLUMBIA RIVER AS A SOURCE OF MARINE LIGHT SCATTERING PARTICLES INTRODUCTION Problem The various dissolved and suspended substances in the ocean produce optical properties which vary markedly from place to place. A systematic method of interpreting the spatial and temporal distribution of these properties will assist in the solution of many oceanographic problems. Such a systematic approach to the analysis and interpretation of optical properties must include considerations of the sources, sinks, and reservoirs of these particles. Rivers are sources of optical properties just as they are sources of fresh water. The Columbia River is the major river bringing fresh water from the North American continent to the Northeastern Pacific ocean. This thesis is the result of an experimental effort to understand the process by which particles are introduced into an oceanic region by a localized source (a major river), and to develop a conceptual model which describes the basic process by which rivers introduce one type of optical property, light scattering by particulate matter, into the ocean. The experimental program was carried out in the Columbia River plume region.

11 Light scattering by suspended material is the specific parameter studied in this thesis, and the word "optical property" is used to imply this scattering property. The process of light scattering has been treated theoretically by the application of electromagnetic wave theory. Mie (198) derived a rigorous expression in this way for the light field resulting from the scattering of a plane monochromatic wave by spherical, non-absorbing particles. He showed that the light scattering depends in a complicated way upon the particle size and relative index of refraction. However, assuming that the particles are separated by at least three times their radii and scattered light has the same wavelength as the incident light, then one useful consequence of the Mie theory is that the scattering by a system of particles is the sum of the scattered light from individual particles. Thus the light scattering is directly related to the particle concentration. Theoretical analysis of light scattering to obtain particle sizes, shapes, and constituents is not possible with present techniques, thus an experimental method is needed. Since for a given set of those parameters, a unique scattering field is derived, the study of changes in the scattered light reflects the variations in these parameters themselves. 2

12 3 History The progress of optical oceanography has been slow mainly because of the difficulties in making suitable instruments. Kalle (Jerlov, 1968) applied the photoelectric cell and made a scattering meter to determine particle distributions in the deep ocean. Jerlov (1953) made an extensive application of these optical properties of sea water to the study of water masses and circulation. During the Swedish Deep Sea Expedition ( ), Jerlov (1953) determined the particle concentration using the Tyndall meter measurements. He applied the method to an identification of water types, the Equatonal current system, deep water circulation, and particle detachment from bottom sediments in connection with bottom topography. Jerlov (1959) applied the turbulence and diffusion theory to describe the vertical particle distribution and presented several empirical measurements. He concluded the following: *... It seems established that there is often an indisputable relationship between particle distribution and salinity distribution inasmuch as particle distribution is much controlled by the turbulence and ultimately by the flow of the different water masses. The application of light scattering measurements to the outflow of river effluent has been made by Jerlov (1953a, 1953b and 1958) and by Ketchum and Shonting (1958). incomplete due to insufficient area coverage. These studies are considered The Po River plume,

13 studied by the former author (1958), provided a comprehensive guide to the problem, but geographic and hydrographic conditions of the plume region complicated the results, The latter authors traced the Orinoco River plume in the Cariaco Trench, which is more than 25 nautical miles from the source. Their findings are considered incomplete since the path between the region of the studied plume and the source of the plume was not studied. It seems imperative for the interpretation of the measurements made in the Cariaco Trench to consider the progress of the plume between the source and the Cariaco Trench, The particle constituents, sizes, shapes, and dispersion processes of the plume may or may not support the interpretation made by the latter authors on the particle distributions observed in the Cariaco Trench. On this basis, a thorough study of the optical properties at their source region is believed to improve and extend the use of these properties. 4

14 5 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM An ideal scientific experiment is one in which the whole system can be controlled. Usually such controlled experiments are not feasible in oceanography, so field experiment programs must be used instead, A good field program is easiest to develop when the phenomena to be studied are simple, with a well defined geometry, and with features that vary slowly in comparison with the possible speed of survey. Approximations of synoptic observations, which are often practiced in oceanographic works, are based on such conditions. The availability of supporting data from previous studies is also helpful in planning field programs. The Columbia River plume region was considered excellent for the proposed study. The use of the Columbia River water as a coolant for nuclear power plants at Hanford has motivated many prior cruises in the plume area, and the basic physical, chemical, biological, and geological features are well known (References are given in Appendix II). The plume is well developed during the summer months, and shows a persistency during this season. Previous studies (Budinger et al., 1964; Frederick, 1967; and Cissel, 1969) have shown that fourteen days at sea are sufficient to obtain an accurate and nearly synoptic picture of the plume during the summer in a region about 1 by ZOO nautical miles.

15 The oceanic region into which the Columbia River effluent flows is characterized as an Eastern Boundary current region of the North Pacific Ocean with a weak but recognizable southward surface flow during the summer. North or Northwesterly wind persists during the summer, and coastal upwelling is observed along the coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California. Thus during the summer, the weak southward surface current, a persistant north or northwesterly wind, and upwelling along the coast cause the Columbia effluent to form a tongue-shaped plume extending toward the south or southwest. This plume is bounded by upwelled water on the coast side and by clear oceanic water on the offshore side. It is clearly identified by a salinity minimum. The Columbia River plume maintains a well defined, simple form during the summer because the dry regional climate during that season eliminates the complicating effects of coastal streams, and the persistent wind system keeps the plume position at an approximately steady state. Further details of the Columbia River, its estuary and regional oceanographic conditions are presented in Appendices I and II. The Columbia River plume cruise (686C)1 was planned to study the physical, chemical, and biological aspects of the Columbia 'The 686C Cruise was planned and executed by Dr. P. K. Park

16 River plume and its environmental water during summer upwelling conditions. The addition of an optics program to this cruise allowed us to obtain the data required for this study. The cruise took place during the period of June 2 to July 3, 1968, and included 67 hydrographic stations and another hundred auxiliary stations of bucket samples placed between hydrographic stations (Figure 1). The data obtained at each hydrographic station and used in this study include temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, and light scattering, listed in Table 1, along with computed values of sigma-t (density) and the stability parameter (Brunt-Väisälä frequency). All the measurements were made on samples taken with Teflon-coated Nans en-bottles. The hydro-casts and samples were taken according to standard procedures. The temperature was measured by reversing thermometers attached to the Nans en-bottles. The salinity was measured by an hlhytechh inductive salinometer, The dissolved oxygen was measured by the Winkler method. Light scattering was measured in the ship?s laboratory with a Brice-Phoenix light scattering photometer. This instrument measures the light scattered by a water sample contained in a glass scattering cell. The instrument and its operational procedures are presented in Appendix LII. The standard sampling depths were, 3, 6, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 75, 1, 125, and 15 meters. A BT was cast before each 7

17 6. SECT ION I /. a.uoô. I S. - / - ''n ó.. S_/' ---"/! -11 :o ---/ r SC O I I / :,, / 3' - a.-' in a o 2 ' ),A I i ' I' w / a \. R. /F() in çsj 4 in' N, in I) SECTION V / N?.5,. -_.. (cjj',,/' 5, ' (.. I:.: a: I...' : k.- ' --c &. ' I:: i-i. o 'I 2 N-:f- F::'.' '/E- I N) IU) 5' sic)', 1. i Figure 1. The cruise track and positions of the hydrographic stations of the RIV YAQUINA 686 C, 2 June to 3 July, Section I follows closely to the plume axis, and sections II to V are approximately along the latitude.

18 hydro-cast and additional Nansen-bottles were added to the standard depths whenever significant features, such as temperature inversions or any other rapid changes with depth,were found on the BT slide, Since the casts were all shallow and made under good conditions, no corrections for wire angle were necessary.

19 INTERPRETATION OF SEA WATER LIGHT SCATTERING DATA 1 The volume scattering function, p(8), is defined by: (8) J(6) HV (1) where J() is the intensity of scattered light in the direction of 8, H is the input irradiance, and V the scattering volume defined by intersection of the light beam and the detectivity beam. Figure 2 shows three observed volume scattering functions plotted against scattering angle, 8. The total scattering coefficient can be defined by: (111 b = Zrr 13(8) sin8do (2) The total scattering coefficient is usually computed from 13(8) measured at certain intervals of. The measurement of 13(8) at a small angle is considerably difficult, and a separate instrument is usually used for the small angle measurement (Spilhaus, 1965; and Morrison, 1967). FTom the regular behavior of the angular dependence of the volume scattering function, Jerlov (1953a), Tyler (1961c), Spilhaus (1965),*and Morrison (1967) concluded that the total scattering coefficient can be computed by 13 (45) with small error showing b and 13 (45) are linearly dependent. Thus the total scattering coefficient

20 11 C OASTAL OCEANIC o D C C C A THEORETICAL c L!J Figure 2. An example of the volume scattering function for coastal and oceanic water, and the theoretical curve for pure water (Spilhaus, 1965).

21 in the form of equation (2) is not computed considering 1) 3 (45) is an adequate substitute for b, 2) more time involved in measuring () at many angles to apply equation (2), and 3) the difficulties in small angle () measurement, which has some uncertainty remaining. According to the Mie theory, the scattering coefficient from N particles per unit volume can be represented by: 12 b=knird2/4=kna (3) where K is efficiency factor or the effective area coefficient, D is the diameter of the particles, and A is the cross-sectional area of particle. In case of polydispersed particles, the scattering coefficient is given by: b K. N. (4) Burt (1956) computed the effective area coefficient, on the basis of Rayleigh's equation and Mie theory for non-absorbing spheres, as a function of refractive index, size, and wavelengths. With increasing particle size, K increases rapidly at small radii, then it passes a maximum for sizes of the same order as the wavelength, and it tends thereafter toward a constant value of 2 for larger radii irrespective of the wavelength.

22 On the basis of the equation (3) or (4), the scattering coefficient measured in sea water can be interpreted as a measure of particle concentration with a mean diameter D Particularly for a system of polydispersed particles in which the mean size remains constant, or D N' then the volume scattering function measured at 45, p (45), is proportional to the concentration of particles. 13

23 14 DATA The final reduced data are listed in Table 1, The data were analyzed on horizontal surfaces at several depths and in vertical sections along the plume axis and across the plume axis, Figures relevant to the discussion and results are listed below and collected in the following pages. The volume scattering function measured at 45 angle is expressed in absolute unit of (meter-steradian) Through the relation between the total scattering coefficient and the volume scattering function measured at 45 P (45), as described in the previous section, (45) is directly interpreted as a parameter indicating 1 suspended particle concentrations. List of Analysis Figure 3, Salinity distribution on the sea surface, 4, Scattering particle distribution on the sea surface, 5. Salinity distribution on the 3m surface, 6. Scattering particle distribution on the 3m surface, 7. Salinity distribution on the lom surface. 8, Scattering particle distribution on the lom surface, 9, Salinity distribution on the ZOm surface, 1, Scattering particle distribution on the ZOm surface,

24 11. Salinity distribution on the 3m surface. 12. Scattering particle distribution on the 3m surface. 13, Salinity distribution on Section I 14, Scattering particle distribution on Section I. 15, Temperature distribution on Section L 16. Sigma-t distribution on Section I Oxygen distribution on Section I. 18, Salinity distribution on Section II. 19. Scattering particle distribution on Section II. 2. Temperature distribution on Section II. 21. Sigma-t distribution on Section II. 22. Oxygen distribution on Section II. 23. Scattering distribution on Section III. 24. Salinity distribution on Section III. 25. Scattering distribution on Section IV. 26. Salinity distribution on Section IV. 27. Scattering particle distribution on Section V.

25 Table c Columbia Plume Cruise data. LI 2 T S 2 Ni S45 S9 (mi/i) DB L DB-3 io ,64 25,24 2, , o 7, DB i o ,Q48 2, i.5l , , DB , i o Y-o ,4? o i.7c4 1.Q Li DB , , R , , i TDB ,4oi 2, , r'

26 Table 1. (continued) Z T S 2 Ni S45 S9 ( C) (mi/i) DR-IS 3 7, () , i.6o !i R S ? 33, , o DB Ri , ,74 32, P Q,19 32, , ? , ' l , i 'J ( DB Q , , , i.6n i.i D qo DB , lot,2 33, o6 1,68 257LL , L /

27 Table 1. (continued) Z T S 2 Ni S45 S9 St't. J (mi/i) (3) DB_LI ' c , , S.4i ,63 i.cio , , , o6? , C , R P9t , c9 1, lco o l , ,1 32, Q 25, Q , , , , j U oi8o ' MC , p i5.c , i , ,492 7,3 2LJ , I , , MC , , , n , i , , ,759 18

28 Table 1. (continued) Z T S 2 Ni S45 S9 Stat. j (mi/i) j MC-4 16.Li.LI ) A i.i '? , ? , ,9/ ?'lc , l'i)l4 3,Lj 6, ,8/ L '6 37, o , Q , H / ,7889 MC-7 16, C ?.T / , ? SQ , / , , , ,42 4,21 26,

29 Table 1. (continued) 2 MC -7 MC-8 NC-9 MC-l NC-il MC-12 L Z T S cj , , , :3 75 7,2; (mi/i) , , ,93 25, ,55 26,2 2, , , , , '6.6i ? ,f2 3.' 25, ' 2,15 Lp Ni , ,792 i.6io P7 4,792 2,15 r)ry) 5 S45 2) S ) , , ce , /

30 Table 1. (continued) 21 J ic.i Z T S 2 Ni S45 S9 (mi/i) MC-l ' , ,3547 3, , , ,2679 MC , c.965 6, c,,14Q '3,1 3, , ,62 2, ,Qc 2.i ' ? , o i MC , , , ,8 26, , / ,37 33, , , MC o ' ,77 32.! , , , , MC , , i,i

31 Table 1. (continued) Z T S 2 NI S45 S9 Stat. J j (mi/i) MC ,1 32.LJ ,69 32.c , R i.34' ?'C * c c ,7o QSfl , , c , i,45i , , , MC io ' p , P , , '33, i ,3543 MC , ? , " c.4i so 7, , , , ,26 33,777 2, ' MC ,185 6, , ,6o Ah

32 Table 1. Z (continued) T S 2 Ni ii S45 23 S9 L:1 (in 1/1) - L1 i%dl.&! MC , , , ' , MC , , , io;o4i MC , ? MC o , ,447 6.io 6, , MC i L , , , MC , , c i MC ,3 4, , , , ,43 32,Q c MC c ,

33 6961 6$i' 6ot L1' '9 ic 9L ai 9L1i oic oo oi oy1 L6L9' 1L9'I '1i? 69 f1' t19'o L9ó1.16b6' 1j' 11 1Y9,9?T 91 t7916' 9U'1 96'I? 1I?9 96'6??7'1 UI ji 1?L6' 1'b1 19 i1 9 ;o8i C9?1 993I t'9 6:8 119L c9l6l 9UUT --" L9'I o6' ot7c I'9I I8?1?91L't CY l9' LI'L I g69'i 17'l LY Ya 9 oi: 9? 1Tt 6VL V9? 1e 11 t6y1 YI 6C'I 99 1' U9 96'( 9L e;o 68O 68I?9 96t' L8?9(i' 6o1 ty8'9 9f?C Z88 Iti L?9ti'I tl ot $7'6 1 T1bI 9?tiI 8191 Le7? LI'L 19(?( to1 6I 19tL O917 I11? 9 86I 1 1tL 1Lti1 9'? C '1 9' 96'Ia 9 6Y6 16t1?61C 9 I1? Olie'? o'6? L61 I i'9 oz Ct7 ó99' -L1 c1i L j ' 11'I 1O1 $1c::'9 o1' o1y 8YL o o11 oey1 1L' 6' ;ic CC'ti -?6C 6I9C i'o oi 1i?9 coco; 6I 8 9 Q9Y?L 1 9 9' ::s1't1 c98' 9' '9 1I 999 1e'i O'1 1O (v9?'1 It6eL't? I' --- Y9 9? 'L??' 961i1i'? 1' i L 1 9C'e 6'1 C9 6'? LoY L L86 s8' 99'1 91'9 9O 9' 9c?' 96 II1 8'1 66 LiC Cc 66'L 1 91?'ti?9 68'Z 16?C 19'3 1 C16' ' c19'i1 9L't ;t1 :ii'oi $7 9,17 16' O'1 96?I 111 O-DW 1?' 8'Z ' 96?1 Li6' z 1L 4i L 9L'1 39 1' o1L I1IY? 16'1 69'CC 691' 68' OL 9c'cZ 69's 9O O1'6 1 17't C Z'II 9 69c 9?'9 6' LY9 99'1 ü'i c L8Y9 66'c 2'z C' L9'9 o68'o IY?I 691?6t7 6o? --- 6C9 8' 9eY 17 9I8'?6t7'I 9117'I 6V9 99 L1?' 981 o' 176 o6 Z8 D9Z cco 1iO6 csiz 1iI 89I 1ô 1 8-W ty r 'i riir 6S SS IN EQ S Z (pnuuo) 1 Tqi

34 Table 1. (continued) Z T S 2 Ni S45 S9 (mi/i) J MC , , i.5i , , , ,92 3, MC , ,625 5,97 21, , io,is , , o 2s.6o i.56i ' io 8.o MC , , , &i.32 6.o8 24, , , ,97 32,6 7, , , 'l MC , , o c io , , i iso , MC s , o ,

35 Table 1. Stat. Z JJ (continued) T c_ S 2 (mi/i) 26 Ni S45 S9 (3) MC , ' ,LI , , MC fl ) , , NC , , , , , , ? , MC , , , ,78 3, , ) , '.54 25, NC-4i i.6o oi , , , i ,

36 Table 1. (continued) 27 Z J1 T Lcl S 1i 2 (mi/i) Ni S45 S9 (3) MC , ?1C NC Mc , i 1, MC , Q ,

37 Table 1. Stat. J (continued) Z T S 2 Ni S45 S9 (mi/i) MC , , , !1c , , , , MC , , MC ,53 32, , MC ' , , , , , , 3.9Q MC ' , r, , c , , i.oi , , MC i , C.J ,1292 6, i.ii ' ( MC i ,59 2,45 1, j 28

38 99L 16'1 9t9 ' L 1 11 c1 1 t2'c L' 6C1'? LCIYt d9'i 9Z9 o6' O9' OL'L 6 L t2p9 6' 9L Z 9-1- c9'6 1 L9O ti99 i6 9?'9 Lt' LVOI 9 I1L lilieyli 9' L' i1'9 16 io1 9L1i 699's r't 9S9 99'3 'T1 colli 9?81'I --- C9??I'C 99" 19'L 18L1 66'T O9 61 7eY ç9 41 9L?Y1 8o6 LYI O'9? $' 18??9/ O 9c1 I6gVz i 6' o' e.9'l? 1oo 6t'z 91'? 9'41 irc 6G'& 1 1Ol9' OOYt7 Ls71' 6'41? tl'9 41L?' 6LO1 9 99Y9 9199c 9Lo'41 6?4i? L LO?C?C'?I 99'l til6'c 19C? $1'!. L2? 17L'?I 93W 19' Cr? -; 9'9??6' ç9 oi 19rY? 9LO'? 9C '9Z II'L c1 1o6'1 611i Y 419? 'L1? 99Y oiyi L6 41oc'c 69 1?91 z4116ó' 81?'I 8Z11??E?L 9?919'I 8?'I II7CI 9Y.? 6it7 L96'? 69'L ?1s ICt11 99? j?8'i7 98?C oyel L?' OliliI 9Y2 t?ll'z 6L ot 6899'I 9641'I 911'1 $7? 96'ti O9'? iil 9i7'??1?21?'? 9C91 6zS 'L o '1 9aC1 ti'1 86'li? 1'9 1?Z 69's? ti9?'ll?961'$ ii LL'? 61'e o?1 1 C1i' 6o'C i93 C? 9L??1?L'?I 9 61'? I 1L'?? 119 6a'o 11 69'? 41??9??, 17L'Z? Ili'9 L 98tiI 9C1 9LL' 41'9? 99'? 81L '1 C96419 TCY 41'9? z1' Z' 9'?1 919'1 t1166 9O'1?1'9? 41L$' e9'l 1 cct79'i ' 9? 1'1 L't s76'l L ç9t 919'.O'1 9Z'2 9?'9 L41??141'1 z9ç' 9Z6' ct' Y9 11'? 11b' 41 i6otyi 99C66' c1419' go' 6' ci.o o?4199't?1(?'i LY1 9L'1? 1L 9?C'? 9'T??C19'I 8941'1 6?oC 99,C? '9 9C2'IC 41c'L 1 (9i.'z?9Y1 t7?1' 9.1Z 411'9 91L'6? 61i C'? 1?9'T I6srC 941'I? t.o9 o61 41C'6? : el91'? E C411? 1'9?C'6? 416'1 99C6'? 1C6Z'? 4141'9? c1'? 9' 917'L 1 91'? 411'1?9'1?.'9? 69'CC 99'L?16'1 9'1 141J'1 e.'9? 9(' 69'L? 6oY? 99O? 116'I 1.'? 41?'1 966'? 31'B 1 9?cO'( 11?9'? C9'I L? 6L 41 66'? 6c'e 9 3L'41 c99'c 41c1' L?'c'? L8 Lz'OI 61?o'c 16c9'41?9?'I ZZ'? 81'9 19??41'OI ol?l' z'9 9'I L 6si 9419'??1?L'I 9L9' 841'9? 9'1 841g'c O1i't 41'? 6941' '9? 'Z 418Y 't 6z 16'? 69 T 99'1 19? 88'? Y 8' 61 ZDW ty tt (T t5t tf 6S SI'S IN S.1. Z iql t (panut;uoz) 6Z

39 3 I I [S%ol 46 N \\I 'I 2 ) I I I Jf : I. 45 N I! I I I / I I / /J' I / // -r I! // / // I 44 N / 28/ / :..; 3 //./:* I I I I 4;:.: I; / I Figure 3. Salinity distribution on the sea surface.

40 31 I 13(45)xK5z (rn-sir)' OL. [1 SI. S / S S.. zo / ORT /. In C.JI / Figure 4. Scattering particle distribution on the sea surface.

41 32 i N L$%oI 32 3' 3 / '.-.-, AOM / 26 I ////////// / /7'/7)./ '4.. RT 44 N ;. ;' j'.<4:;l N- '.D It) / /:: CJ Figure 5. Salinity distribution on the 3m surface.

42 33 I I I I3(45)xIO2(m-str 4. S 5iWPORT Figure 6. Scattering particle distribution on the 3m surface.

43 34 I.R... (. N n / 31 )X Figure 7. Salinity distribution on the lom surface.

44 35 I I 46 N (45)xId2(m-Str1' Ii /4.t... S 45 N 1. /I/ S 4 I 5 5d4 IL 44 N :: Figure 8. Scattering particle distribution on the lom surface.

45 S II S R I S,, 32.5, S S 33 S; RT S S / S S ( S :;., S S ID 7' l.() (7 t I Figure 9. Salinity distribution on the 2Orn surface.

46 37 4 N (45)Kr (m-str 4 N..:.7 WPORT 44 N, / ) 3. / / )) / 1' F.- w U) Figure 1. Scattering particle distribution on the Zm surface.