Dear Jonathan, John and Philip,
Thanks for the discussion of these names. As Philip has pointed out,
the correct chemical symbol for silicon is Si, not S (oops!).
2) inorganic_phosphorus|phosphate and inorganic_silicon|silicate
Alison wrote:
>
> We have agreed that in the recently introduced biogeochemistry names
> inorganic_phosphorus|phosphate are intended to mean the same thing, as
> are inorganic_silicon|silicate. It has been suggested that we
> standardize on phosphorus/silicon for these names.
>
> Just to double check, am I correct in thinking that
> 'dissolved_inorganic_phosphorus' essentially means phosphate (PO4)3-
> ions and 'dissolved_inorganic_silicon' means silicate (SO4-)4- ions?
> Or
> does 'inorganic_X' encompass other species beyond phosphate and
> silicate?
>
> If we are only really talking about phosphate and silicate then I am
> beginning to think that we should standardize on those terms rather
> than
> on phosphorus/silicon. And in those circumstances do we really need
> the
> 'inorganic'? Aren't phosphate and silicate ions inorganic by
> definition?
<SNIP>
>
> If, on the other hand, we are talking about species other than just
> phosphate and silicate, then we probably should standardize on
> inorganic_phosphorus|silicon for the newest names and expand the
> definitions a bit.
John wrote:
> We've gotten to
> the point where the names have evolved considerably in order to
conform
> to a diverse suite of ideals (e.g. wanting to use elemental names for
> all, but realizing that some led to ambiguities i.e. N2 vs DON vs NO3
> vs
> NH4), such that no one name is idead. At this point, I think it's
> mostly just a judgement call as to which of those ideals to
prioritize.
> I am quite certain that each of these situations will have potential
> pitfalls with some folks - e.g. as 'silicic acid' is sometimes
> preferred
> over either 'silicate' or 'silicon' and others might point out that
the
> 'phosphate' (PO4) structure is retained whether in the dissolved form
> or
> when incorporated into organic material - but I do feel like any of
> these choices are suitable given that the names have grown quite
> description.
OK, for the dissolved inorganic species names introduced for CMIP5 I
think that Jonathan is correct to argue for consistency. John has
indicated that there is no clear case for preferring silicon over
silicate/phosphorus over phosphate in these names or vice versa. Having
thought about this some more, I suggest that we standardize on
'dissolved_inorganic_silicon' and 'dissolved_inorganic_phosphorus' as
originally proposed by Jonathan in this thread, as this will result in
the creation only two aliases:
tendency_of_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_inorganic_silicate_in_sea_wa
ter_due_to_biological_processes ->
tendency_of_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_inorganic_silicon_in_sea_wat
er_due_to_biological_processes
tendency_of_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_inorganic_phosphate_in_sea_w
ater_due_to_biological_processes ->
tendency_of_mole_concentration_of_dissolved_inorganic_phosphorus_in_sea_
water_due_to_biological_processes
I will add these aliases at the next update of the standard name table.
My main concern, however, is the definitions rather than the names
themselves. The exisiting definitions of the
dissolved_inorganic_silicon/silicate names include the sentence '
"Dissolved inorganic silicon/silicate" means silicate ions in solution.'
A corresponding sentence appears in the definition of the
dissolved_inorganic_phosphorus/phosphate names. Are these definitions
adequate or do we need to add more information?
I would also point out that there are some older existing names (7 in
total) that still refer to phosphate/silicate in sea water so we still
have not achieved total consistency across the standard name table, but
perhaps this is the best we can do at present.
>
> 3) elemental/molecular_nitrogen
>
> Jonathan has suggested changing the recently added biogeochemistry
> names
> to refer to molecular_nitrogen rather than elemental_nitrogen. This
> would affect the following three names:
> tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_elemental_nitrogen_due_to_fixation
>
tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_elemental_nitrogen_due_to_deposition_
> a
> nd_fixation_and_runoff
> tendency_of_ocean_mole_content_of_elemental_nitrogen_due_to_fixation
>
> Personally, I would be happy with either molecular_nitrogen or
> elemental_nitrogen as both are very clear. I think the decision should
> depend on how these quantities are calculated in CMIP5.
>
I have not received any further comments on these names. Given that the
names were only recently discussed and accepted for CMIP5, that their
intent is clear and that we already use the phrase 'elemental_mercury'
in the atmosphere, I don't think there is a strong case for changing
them. Therefore I propose that we keep the term elemental_nitrogen in
these names.
Best wishes,
Alison
------
Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
NCAS/British Atmospheric Data Centre Fax: +44 1235 446314
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Email: alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk
Chilton, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
--
Scanned by iCritical.
Received on Mon Jun 14 2010 - 07:17:51 BST
