<div dir="ltr">One follow up question regarding mixed layer depths in ECCO. <div><br></div><div>What is the criteria for the variable "MXLDEPTH" in the ecco v4 product. I think I recall being told it is the density equivalent of 0.8C. Two questions:</div><div>(1) Is this the criteria that was used? It the criteria applied to model profiles at the model timestep?</div><div>(2) If so, isn't this criteria a bit large? 0.125 kg/m^3 or 0.5C seem common MLD criteria when applying criteria to monthly-averaged data. However, criteria that are smaller (~0.03 kg/m^3 or ~0.2 C) are typically applied when using raw observational profiles. </div><div><br></div><div>I know that the MLD criteria is somewhat arbitrary, but I want an idea of the rational for the chosen criteria. </div><div>Thanks!</div><div>Martha</div><div><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 6:04 PM, HONG ZHANG <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hong.zhang@ucla.edu" target="_blank">hong.zhang@ucla.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="m_-7993531269458287600moz-forward-container"><br>
<br>
-------- Forwarded Message --------
<table class="m_-7993531269458287600moz-email-headers-table" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" valign="BASELINE" nowrap>Subject:
</th>
<td>Re: [ecco-support] ECCO2 Mixed Layer Depths Concerns</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" valign="BASELINE" nowrap>Date: </th>
<td>Fri, 28 Apr 2017 12:48:59 -0700</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" valign="BASELINE" nowrap>From: </th>
<td>HONG ZHANG <a class="m_-7993531269458287600moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:hong.zhang@ucla.edu" target="_blank"><hong.zhang@ucla.edu></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" valign="BASELINE" nowrap>To: </th>
<td>Dimitris Menemenlis <a class="m_-7993531269458287600moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:dmenemenlis@gmail.com" target="_blank"><dmenemenlis@gmail.com></a>,
Moisan, John R. (WFF-610W) <a class="m_-7993531269458287600moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:john.r.moisan@nasa.gov" target="_blank"><john.r.moisan@nasa.gov></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="RIGHT" valign="BASELINE" nowrap>CC: </th>
<td>Daria Halkides <a class="m_-7993531269458287600moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:halkides@esr.org" target="_blank"><halkides@esr.org></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<div class="m_-7993531269458287600moz-cite-prefix">On 4/28/17 9:37 AM, Dimitris
Menemenlis wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
Daria or Hong, would you have looked at MXLDEPTH depth in the
“cube92” solution?
<div><a href="ftp://ecco2.jpl.nasa.gov/data1/cube/cube92/lat_lon/quart_90S_90N/MXLDEPTH.nc/" target="_blank">ftp://ecco2.jpl.nasa.gov/<wbr>data1/cube/cube92/lat_lon/<wbr>quart_90S_90N/MXLDEPTH.nc/</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>John, why not use the ECCO-V4, which is
data-constrained?</div>
<div><a href="http://www.ecco-group.org/products.htm" target="_blank">http://www.ecco-group.org/<wbr>products.htm</a></div>
<div>ECCO v4 is on a 1-degree grid, which is closer to
your desired 2x2 degree grid.</div>
<div>
<div><br>
<div> Dimitris Menemenlis </div>
<br>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Apr 26, 2017, at 9:41 AM, Moisan, John
R. (WFF-610W) <<a href="mailto:john.r.moisan@nasa.gov" target="_blank">john.r.moisan@nasa.gov</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="m_-7993531269458287600Apple-interchange-newline">
<div>
<div>
<div class="m_-7993531269458287600BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt">
<div class="m_-7993531269458287600PlainText">Hello ECCO2’ers,<br>
<br>
I would like to make use of the Mixed-Layer
Depth model outputs from the global model
runs 1992-present (Nov. 2016) to drive some
simple 1D biogeochemical models for CDOM. I
have binned to model outputs from the jpg
site into monthly 2x2 deg. grids. One thing
of concern that I have is the trends in the
global MLDs (see attached figure), which are
more extreme in the SO. Is there an issue
with maintaining correct ocean boundary
layers, esp. in the SO for this model? Has
this been observed yet?<br>
<br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<font size="2">Hi John,<br>
You're right, MLD from cube92 run has bias in late stage<br>
because it's a free run for the later period.<br>
As Dimitris said, you can look at other ECCO product provided at
the website.<br>
Please see attached fig showing MLD from ECCOv4 and ECCO llc270
for an example,<br>
where red line is for ECCOv4 (1992-2012) and blue line for ECCO
llc270 (2001-2015) in upper plot<br>
also MLD for cube92 is also shown in lower plot for reference.<br>
</font><br>
cheers<br>
Hong<br>
</div>
</div>
</div></div><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
ecco-support mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ecco-support@mit.edu">ecco-support@mit.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/ecco-support" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/ecco-support</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Martha W. Buckley<br><a href="mailto:marthabuckley@gmail.com" target="_blank">marthabuckley@gmail.com</a><br><a href="http://sites.google.com/site/marthabuckley/home" target="_blank">http://sites.google.com/site/marthabuckley/home</a><br></div>
</div></div></div>