OSA's Digital Library

Applied Optics

Applied Optics

APPLICATIONS-CENTERED RESEARCH IN OPTICS

  • Editor: Joseph N. Mait
  • Vol. 51, Iss. 9 — Mar. 20, 2012
  • pp: 1336–1351
« Show journal navigation

Measurement of light absorption by aquatic particles: improvement of the quantitative filter technique by use of an integrating sphere approach

Rüdiger Röttgers and Steffen Gehnke  »View Author Affiliations


Applied Optics, Vol. 51, Issue 9, pp. 1336-1351 (2012)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/AO.51.001336


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (1588 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

Determination of particulate absorption in natural waters is often made by measuring the transmittance of samples on glass-fiber filters with the so-called quantitative filter technique (QFT). The accuracy of this technique is limited due to variations in the optical properties of the sample/filter composite, and due to uncertainties in the path-length amplification induced by multiple scattering inside the filter. Some variations in the optical properties of the sample/filter composite can be compensated by additional measurements of the filter’s reflectance (transmittance–reflectance method [T-R] [TassanS.FerrariG. M., Limnol. Oceanogr. 40, 1358 (1995)]). We propose a different, rarely used approach, namely to measure the filter’s absorptance in the center of a large integrating sphere, to avoid problems with light losses due to scattering. A comparison with other QFTs includes a sensitivity study for different error sources and determination of path-length amplification factors for each measurement technique. Measurements with a point-source integrating-cavity absorption meter were therefore used to determine the true absorption. Filter to filter variability induced a much lower error in absorptance compared to a measured transmittance. This reduced error permits more accurate determination of the usually low absorption coefficient in the near IR spectral region. The error of the T-R method was lower than that of the transmittance measurement but slightly higher than that of an absorptance measurement. The mean path-length amplification was much higher for the absorptance measurement compared to the T-R method (4.50 versus 2.45) but was found to be largely independent of wavelength and optical density. With natural samples the path-length amplification was less variable for the absorptance measurement, reducing the overall error for absorption to less than ±14%, compared to ±25% for the T-R method.

© 2012 Optical Society of America

1. Introduction

2. Materials and Methods

A. General Procedure

Measurements were performed with two types of glass-fiber filters, GF/F (Whatman) and GF-5 (Macherey and Nagel), in a dual-beam UV/VIS spectrophotometer (Lambda 800, Perkin Elmer) that was equipped with a 150 mm integrating sphere (Labsphere Inc.). The sphere was made from Spectralon (Labsphere Inc.) and allowed placement of a sample in its center with the help of special center-mount sample holders, as well as placement of a sample in front of (transmission port) and behind (reflection port) the integrating sphere. For all measurements inside the sphere we used a custom-made, clip-style, center-mount filter holder that allowed arrangement of different angles between the sample and the incident light beam. We performed measurements in three different modes (in front, behind, and at the center of the integrating sphere). These three modes can be considered as measurements of the optical properties transmittance (T), reflectance (R), and absorptance (A). Theoretically we should find that T+R+A=1. Transmittance is measured by placing the filter in front of the entrance of the integrating sphere. Absorptance is measured by placing the filter at the center of the sphere. In both cases the reflectance ports are closed with a white Spectralon reflectance standard. Reflectance is measured by placing the filter behind the integrating sphere without placing a white reflectance plate behind the filter, so the black cover behind the port acts as a light trap. In all cases the reference reflectance port is covered by the reflectance standard. The filters used had a diameter of at least 47 mm (47 or 55 mm). The transmittance and reflectance measurements were performed with complete filters. For absorptance measurements each filter was cut in up to four rectangular pieces of about 1×2cm. During measurement the filters were never completely soaked with water, to avoid any water droplets that might fall down inside the sphere and damage the detectors at the bottom of the sphere. The general procedure was to soak the filter with water for at least 1 h and then briefly put it on a tissue to remove free water. We will show later that filter wetness has a minor effect on the overall attenuation of the filter when placing a filter inside an integrating sphere. The filter was placed at the center of the integrating sphere by the use of a clip-style filter holder (Labsphere Inc., USA). Filters were placed perpendicular to the light beam, and the wavelength scan with the spectrophotometer was started promptly. Spectral measurements were performed from 300 to 900 nm (occasionally only 350 to 750 nm) with a resolution of 2 nm (slit width: 2–4 nm; scan speed: 60200nm/min). We checked the effects of slit width and scan speed on the overall optical density (OD) spectrum and the signal-to-noise ratio. In the range of 1 to 4 nm and 100 to 500nm/min these effects were insignificant for the spectral range of 350 to 750 nm. At shorter and longer wavelengths the signal-to-noise ratio decreased with decreasing slit width and increasing scan speed. Our software permits use of different settings for scan speed and slit width for different spectral regions, and thus, the whole scan was optimized for all wavelengths for good signal-to-noise level and minimal total scanning time to avoid drying of wet filters during the scan. For the spectral region between 830 and 900 nm we used a slit width of 4 nm and a slow scan speed of 60nm/min, and for 300 to 830 nm we used 2 nm and 200nm/min. Before each set of measurements the instrument was allowed to warm up for at least 1 h. The positions of the two light beams were checked after the optical compartment and the sphere were cleaned of dust using ultraclean compressed air. This ensured that the sample light beam passed through the filter for both situations, when the filter was in front of or in the center of the sphere, that the reference beam illuminated exactly the center of the respective reflectance standards that cover the reflectance ports, and that the sample beam crossed the filter patch approximately 5–10 mm distance from the clip holder. The baseline of the spectrophotometer is adjusted by performing an “autozero” run either without any filter or with a dry filter in the center of the integrating sphere. For this run the entrance ports were open, and the reflectance ports were covered with Spectralon reflectance standards. Between measurements the baseline was checked either by performing a scan with the same setup as during the “autozero” scan or by verifying the value at 750 nm.

B. Filter Preparation

We observed specific spectral characteristics of some Whatman GF/F filter batches [Fig. 1(a)] that indicated contamination of the filters with an unknown chemical compound originating from the blue plastic tray that contains the filter. The contamination was observed on filters from new filter packs, was highly variable between filters from any given pack, and was observable in different packs from the same batch of filters. The contaminant was soluble in water as well as in organic solvents and, hence, could influence all kinds of measurements. If detectable in the absorption, it was, e.g., detected by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) analysis techniques, which are used for measuring phytoplankton pigments, or as dissolved matter in the chromophoric dissolved organic matter (CDOM) fraction (pers. observations). It should be noted that the peak was not as obvious when the filters were measured in front of the integrating sphere. In this case the attenuation of the filter is high, so the fractional contribution from the contamination is significantly less. A much lower peak was also seen in original GF-5 filters [Fig. 1(b)]. Combustion of the filters at 450 °C for 4 h removed this contamination and was, hence, used for filter preparation. This combustion did not influence the optical properties of uncontaminated filters significantly [Fig. 1(b)]. In the following, all measurements were made with combusted GF-5 filters. Saldanha-Correa et al. [35

35. F. M. P. Saldanha-Correa, S. M. F. Gianesella, and J. J. Barrera-Alba, “A comparison of the retention capability among three different glass-fiber filters used for chlorophyll-a determinations,” Braz. J. Oceanogr. 52, 243–247 (2004). [CrossRef]

] showed that this filter type has the same particle retention characteristics as the commonly used GF/F filter type.

Fig. 1. (a) Optical density, ODf, as a function of wavelength for different GF/F filters (Whatman) showing contamination (dirty filter) with an absorption maximum around 420 nm; (b) the ODf of uncombusted and combusted GF-5 filters.

C. Cultures and Samples

Cultures of several microalgal species were provided by the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), Bremerhaven, or isolated from the North Sea. These cultures include different diatom species isolated from the North Sea, as well as cultures of Prymnesium parvum, Isochrysis galbana, Trichodesmium erythreum, and Nannochloropsis species. A culture of Prochlorococcus marinus was provided by the University of Freiburg, Germany. The cultures were cultivated as batch cultures in 1 l glass bottles (Duran, Schott) at 20 °C, with an illumination of approximately 20μmphotonsm2s1 with 24 h of light. Samples from natural water were collected on a variety of cruises from the River Elbe, the North Sea, the Baltic Sea, and the Atlantic Ocean.

3. Assessment

A. Filter-to-Filter Variations

Fig. 2. Optical density of empty glass-fiber filters, ODf, as a function of wavelength. Wet filters were soaked in water and then left drying for 10 to 40 min (dot-dashed lines). (a) Measurements against air of dry and wet filters in transmittance (upper six curves) and reflectance mode (lower two curves); (b) the same filters measured in absorptance mode inside an integrating sphere. Note the differences in the y axis.

Table 1. Standard Deviations of the Optical Density, σOD, for Various Error Sources Given for the Full Wavelength Range and the Mean Over All Wavelengthsa

table-icon
View This Table
Fig. 3. Variation in optical density as a function of wavelength for filters from the same filter batch depicted as standard deviation, σOD, for multiple measurements of (a) dry filters, (b) wet filters, and (c) filters prepared from an algal culture sample, measured as transmittance, T, as absorptance, A, and by the T-R method.

B. NIR Absorption

The results described above make it obvious that simple transmittance measurements will generally only give correct absorption results if filter-to-filter variations are null-point corrected, using the OD at a wavelength at which negligible absorption can be assumed. The validity of this assumption can be assessed from measurements we performed during this exercise. We show results of the ODfA for an algal culture and a sample from the North Sea together with that of a reference filter (Fig. 4). Two different sample volumes were used for each sample: (1) to obtain a maximal OD below 0.1 [Fig. 4(a)] and (2) to obtain OD0.1 [Fig. 4(b)] to increase the sensitivity in spectral regions with low absorption (i.e., NIR). The original measurements are shown without any corrections. It is evident that the algal culture does not posses any significant absorption at wavelengths >730nm, as the OD at those wavelengths is not different from that of the reference filter even when high sample volumes are used, as in Fig. 4(b). In contrast, the natural sample showed significant absorption in the NIR spectral region, and in this case using higher sample volumes gave an OD up to 0.1 in the NIR region. A negligible NIR absorption can only be shown for pure algal cultures. Natural samples always contain higher amounts of detrital material that seems to absorb in the NIR region strongly. A scatter error correction (null-point correction) would, hence, always result in an underestimation of absorption. Considering the extent of the scattering error and the significant absorption in the NIR, simple transmission measurements of the particulate absorption can hardly be correct. At longer wavelengths the relative error of this method can be much larger.

Fig. 4. Raw OD versus wavelength spectra of an algal culture and a natural sample measured inside an integrating sphere (absorptance mode). Shown are filters of both samples with (a) a low filter load, and (b) an approximately 10× higher filter load, together with the spectrum of a wet reference filter. No corrections were applied. Significant absorptance is observed in the NIR spectral region for the natural sample.

C. Path-Length Amplification

Fig. 5. Example for the influence of the path-length amplification on the absorption coefficient determined for different optical setups. The true spectral absorption coefficient as a function of wavelength of an algal culture, a, is shown together with theoretical absorption coefficients aβ=1 (i.e., not corrected for path-length amplification) for measurements in modes A, T, and R and for T-R (see text for details).
Fig. 6. Filter load experiment 1. (a) ODf as a function of wavelength measured as absorptance, A, and transmittance, T, with increasing filtered volume, V. (b) Calculated theoretical absorption coefficients without correction for path-length amplification, aβ=1. The real absorption coefficient, a, measured using a PSICAM is shown for comparison. (c) aAβ=1 plotted against aTβ=1. (d) aAβ=1 plotted against a. Linear regression statistics are shown. Arrows denote response to increasing filter load.
Fig. 7. Filter load experiment 2. (a) ODf as a function of wavelength measured as absorptance, A, for increasing filtered volume from 10 to 60 ml. (b) Calculated theoretical absorption coefficient without correction for path-length amplification, aAβ=1. The real absorption coefficient, a, measured using a PSICAM, is shown for comparison. (c) aAβ=1 plotted against aTβ=1, aRβ=1, and aT-Rβ=1, for the samples with 10, 15, and 30 ml only. (d) aAβ=1, aTβ=1, and aT-Rβ=1 plotted against a. The lower curves for each mode are those with the highest filter loads of 45 and 60 ml.
Fig. 8. Theoretical absorption coefficient, aβ=1, measured as absorptance, A, and by the T-R method, plotted against the real absorption coefficient, a, (a) for algal cultures (A: n=23; T-R: n=15) and (b) for natural samples (A: n=31; T-R: n=34). Indicated are the mean slopes (i.e., the mean amplification factor). The data are normalized to the maximum of a of each data set to compensate for differences in the maximum absorption of each sample.

4. Discussion

A. Path-Length Amplification

5. Conclusions

Appendix A: Proposed Measurement Procedure

1. Filter Preparation

New 25 or 47 mm GF/F (Whatman) or GF-5 (Macherey & Nagel) filters are combusted at 450 °C for 4–5 h. Before use the filters are soaked in purified water for more than 1 h.

2. Filtration

The required amount of sample suspension (to achieve 0.02<ODmax<0.1) is filtered onto a filter using a clean glass filter holder and a clean glass filtration unit. To achieve precise absorption measurements for different parts of the spectrum, different volumes of the same sample are filtered, which means more than one triplicate of filters per sample. A higher filter load will normally prevent determination at shorter wavelengths but will improve the determination at longer wavelengths, especially in the NIR region. Very small volumes (e.g., required for highly turbid waters) are homogeneously distributed over the filter by filling the filter funnel with filtered water of the sample and dispensing the small sample volume into it before starting the filtration. The glass filter holder is checked beforehand with a larger volume, such that any inhomogeneity on the filter—due to a partly clogged holder—can be recognized and the holder replaced. The diameter of the clearance area of the filter is measured with a caliper rule (precision: ±0.05mm).

3. Spectrophotometric Measurement

The filter can be measured directly in a spectrophotometer equipped with an integrating sphere that allows placement of the filter inside the sphere. Frozen and stored filters should be soaked in a few drops of water with the same salinity as the sample water for a few minutes. Then the filter is put briefly on a clean tissue to remove free water from the filter. The filter is placed inside the sphere on a filter holder in such a way that the sample light beam is perpendicular to the filter. To place the filter inside the sphere, it might be necessary to cut it into a piece that fits on the specific center-mount filter holder. Reference filters are prepared from the same filter pack as sample filters and measured in the same way after being soaked in filtered seawater for at least one hour. Before measurements commence, the spectrophotometer should be turned on to warm up, the sample compartment and integrating sphere cleaned, and the baseline recorded with a dry, empty filter, open sample and reference entrance ports, and reflectance ports closed with highly reflective Spectralon standards. The position of the sample and reference light beam should be checked by eye. Scans are performed to yield the best signal-to-noise ratio in a reasonable scanning time. The baseline should be regularly checked by a measurement of the same dry, empty filter.

4. Absorption Calculation

Appendix B: Table of Notations

Aabsorptance, i.e., fraction of light that is absorbed, dimensionless
Ttransmittance, i.e., fraction of light that is transmitted, dimensionless
Rreflectance, i.e., fraction of light that is reflected, dimensionless
T-Rtransmittance–reflectance method of Tassan and Ferrari [20

20. S. Tassan and G. M. Ferrari, “An alternative approach to absorption measurements of aquatic particles retained on filters,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 40, 1358–1368 (1995). [CrossRef]

]
ODoptical density as log() of transmission, dimensionless
ODsOD of a sample filter, dimensionless
ODfOD of an empty filter, dimensionless
ODfA,T,R,T-ROD of a filter measured as A, T, R, or T-R, dimensionless
λwavelength [nm]
aabsorption coefficient [m1]
aβ=1a for a filter sample without correction for path-length amplification [m1]
aA,T,R,T-Rβ=1aβ=1 determined for a measurement in mode A, T, R, or T-R [m1]
βpath-length amplification factor, dimensionless

References

1.

K. Shibata, A. A. Benson, and M. Calvin, “The absorption spectra of suspension of living micro-organisms,” Biochim. Biophys. Acta 15, 461–470 (1954). [CrossRef]

2.

K. Shibata, “Spectrophotometry of intact biological materials. absolute and relative measurements of their transmission, reflection, and absorption spectra,” J. Biochem. 45, 599–623 (1958).

3.

C. S. Yentsch, “A non-extractive method for the quantitative estimation of chlorophyll in algal cultures,” Nature 179, 1302–1304 (1957). [CrossRef]

4.

R. M. Pope, A. D. Weidemann, and E. S. Fry, “Integrating cavity absorption meter measurements of dissolved substances and suspended particles in ocean water,” Dyn. Atmos. Oceans 31, 307–320 (2000). [CrossRef]

5.

R. Röttgers, C. Häse, and R. Doerffer, “Determination of particulate absorption of microalgae using a point source integrating cavity absorption meter,” Limnol. Oceanogr. Methods 5, 1–12 (2007). [CrossRef]

6.

B. G. Mitchell, A. Bricaud, K. Carder, J. Cleveland, G. Ferrari, R. Gould, M. Kahru, M. Kishino, H. Maske, T. Moisan, L. Moore, N. Nelson, D. Phinney, R. Reynolds, H. Sosik, D. Stramski, S. Tassan, C. Trees, A. Weidemann, J. Wieland, and A. Vodacek, “Determination of spectral absorption coefficients of particles, dissolved material and phytoplankton for discrete water samples,” in Ocean Optics Protocols for Satellite Ocean Color Sensor Validation, Revision 2, G. S. Fargion and J. L. Mueller, eds., NASA/TM-2000-209966, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md., 2000, pp. 125–153.

7.

N. B. Nelson and B. B. Prézelin, “Calibration of an integrating sphere for determining the absorption coefficient of scattering suspension,” Appl. Opt. 32, 6710–6717 (1993). [CrossRef]

8.

J. T. O. Kirk, Light and Photosynthesis in Aquatic Ecosystems, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University, 1994).

9.

J. Ducha and S. Kubin, “Measurements of in vivo absorption spectra of microscopic algae using bleached cells as a reference sample,” Arch. Hydrobiol. Suppl. 49, 199–213 (1976).

10.

D. Stramski and J. Piskozub, “Estimation of scattering error in spectrophotometric measurements of light absorption by aquatic particles from three-dimensional radiative transfer simulations,” Appl. Opt. 42, 3634–3646 (2003). [CrossRef]

11.

H. Haardt and H. Maske, “Specific in vivo absorption coefficient of chlorophyll a at 675 nm,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 32, 608–619 (1987). [CrossRef]

12.

M. Babin and D. Stramski, “Light absorption by aquatic particles in the near-infrared spectral region,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 47, 911–915 (2002). [CrossRef]

13.

M. Babin and D. Stramski, “Variations in the mass-specific absorption coefficient of mineral particles suspended in water,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 49, 756–767 (2004). [CrossRef]

14.

D. Stramski, S. B. Wozniak, and P. J. Flatau, “Optical properties of Asian mineral dust suspended in seawater,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 49, 749–755 (2004). [CrossRef]

15.

D. Stramski, M. Babin, and S. Wozniak, “Variations in the optical properties of terrigeneous mineral-rich particulate matter suspended in seawater,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 52, 2418–2433 (2007). [CrossRef]

16.

S. Tassan and G. M. Ferrari, “Variability of light absorption by aquatic particle in the near-infrared spectral region,” Appl. Opt. 42, 4802–4810 (2003). [CrossRef]

17.

C. S. Yentsch, “Measurements of visible light absorption by particulate matter in the ocean,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 7, 207–217 (1962). [CrossRef]

18.

H. G. Trüper and C. S. Yentsch, “Use of glass fiber filters for the rapid preparation of in vivo absorption spectra of photosynthetic bacteria,” J. Bacteriol. 94, 1255–1256(1967).

19.

B. G. Mitchell, “Algorithms for determining the absorption coefficient for aquatic particulates using the quantitative filter technique,” Proc SPIE 1302, 137–148 (1990). [CrossRef]

20.

S. Tassan and G. M. Ferrari, “An alternative approach to absorption measurements of aquatic particles retained on filters,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 40, 1358–1368 (1995). [CrossRef]

21.

S. Tassan and G. M. Ferrari, “A sensitivity analysis of the ‘transmittance-reflectance’ method for measuring light absorption by aquatic particles,” J. Plankton Res. 24, 757–774 (2002). [CrossRef]

22.

W. L. Butler, “Absorption of light by turbid samples,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 52, 292–299 (1962). [CrossRef]

23.

B. G. Mitchell and D. A. Kiefer, “Chlorophyll a specific absorption and fluorescence excitation spectra for light-limited phytoplankton,” Deep-Sea Res. A 35, 639–663(1988). [CrossRef]

24.

A. Bricaud and D. Stramski, “Spectral absorption coefficients of living phytoplankton and nonalgal biogenous matter: a comparison between the Peru upwelling area and the Sargasso Sea,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 35, 562–582 (1990). [CrossRef]

25.

C. S. Cleveland and A. D. Weidemann, “Quantifying absorption by aquatic particles: a multiple scattering correction for glass-fiber filters,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 38, 1321–1327 (1993). [CrossRef]

26.

B. Arbones, F. G. Figueiras, and M. Zapata, “Determination of phytoplankton absorption coefficient in natural seawater samples: evidence of a unique equation to correct the path-length amplification on glass-fiber filters,” Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 137, 293–304 (1996). [CrossRef]

27.

Z. V. Finkel and A. J. Irwin, “Light absorption by phytoplankton and the filter amplification correction: cell size and species effects,” J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 259, 51–61(2001). [CrossRef]

28.

C. S. Roesler, “Theoretical and experimental approaches to improve the accuracy of particulate absorption coefficients derived from the quantitative filter technique,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 43, 1649–1660 (1998). [CrossRef]

29.

J. C. Goldman and M. R. Dennet, “Susceptibility of some marine phytoplankton species to cell breakage during filtration and post-filtration rinsing,” J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 86, 47–58 (1985). [CrossRef]

30.

D. Stramski, “Artifacts in measuring absorption spectra of phytoplankton collected on a filter,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 35, 1804–1809 (1990). [CrossRef]

31.

H. M. Sosik, “Storage of marine particulate samples for light-absorption measurements,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 44, 1139–1141 (1999). [CrossRef]

32.

I. Laurion, F. Blouin, and S. Roy, “The quantitative filter technique for measuring phytoplankton absorption: interference by MAAS in the UV waveband,” Limnol. Oceanogr. Methods 1, 1–9 (2003). [CrossRef]

33.

H. Maske and H. Haardt, “Quantitative in vivo absorption spectra of phytoplankton: detrital absorption and comparison with fluorescence excitation spectra,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 32, 620–633 (1987). [CrossRef]

34.

S. G. H. Simis, S. W. M. Peters, and H. J. Gons, “Remote sensing of the cyanobacterial pigment phycocyanin in turbid inland water,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 50, 237–245(2005). [CrossRef]

35.

F. M. P. Saldanha-Correa, S. M. F. Gianesella, and J. J. Barrera-Alba, “A comparison of the retention capability among three different glass-fiber filters used for chlorophyll-a determinations,” Braz. J. Oceanogr. 52, 243–247 (2004). [CrossRef]

36.

R. Röttgers and R. Doerffer, “Measurements of optical absorption by chromophoric dissolved organic matter using a point-source integrating-cavity absorption meter,” Limnol. Oceanogr. Methods 5, 126–135 (2007). [CrossRef]

37.

S. Tassan and G. M. Ferrari, “Measurement of light absorption by aquatic particles retained on filters: determination of the optical path-length amplification by the ‘transmittance-reflectance’ method,” J. Plankton Res. 20, 1699–1709 (1998). [CrossRef]

38.

S. E. Lohrenz, “A novel theoretical approach to correct for path-length amplification and variable sampling loading in measurements of particulate spectral absorption by the quantitative filter technique,” J. Plankton Res. 22, 639–657 (2000). [CrossRef]

OCIS Codes
(010.4450) Atmospheric and oceanic optics : Oceanic optics
(010.1030) Atmospheric and oceanic optics : Absorption

ToC Category:
Atmospheric and Oceanic Optics

History
Original Manuscript: September 13, 2011
Revised Manuscript: December 2, 2011
Manuscript Accepted: December 8, 2011
Published: March 15, 2012

Virtual Issues
Vol. 7, Iss. 5 Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics
April 30, 2012 Spotlight on Optics

Citation
Rüdiger Röttgers and Steffen Gehnke, "Measurement of light absorption by aquatic particles: improvement of the quantitative filter technique by use of an integrating sphere approach," Appl. Opt. 51, 1336-1351 (2012)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/ao/abstract.cfm?URI=ao-51-9-1336


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. K. Shibata, A. A. Benson, and M. Calvin, “The absorption spectra of suspension of living micro-organisms,” Biochim. Biophys. Acta 15, 461–470 (1954). [CrossRef]
  2. K. Shibata, “Spectrophotometry of intact biological materials. absolute and relative measurements of their transmission, reflection, and absorption spectra,” J. Biochem. 45, 599–623 (1958).
  3. C. S. Yentsch, “A non-extractive method for the quantitative estimation of chlorophyll in algal cultures,” Nature 179, 1302–1304 (1957). [CrossRef]
  4. R. M. Pope, A. D. Weidemann, and E. S. Fry, “Integrating cavity absorption meter measurements of dissolved substances and suspended particles in ocean water,” Dyn. Atmos. Oceans 31, 307–320 (2000). [CrossRef]
  5. R. Röttgers, C. Häse, and R. Doerffer, “Determination of particulate absorption of microalgae using a point source integrating cavity absorption meter,” Limnol. Oceanogr. Methods 5, 1–12 (2007). [CrossRef]
  6. B. G. Mitchell, A. Bricaud, K. Carder, J. Cleveland, G. Ferrari, R. Gould, M. Kahru, M. Kishino, H. Maske, T. Moisan, L. Moore, N. Nelson, D. Phinney, R. Reynolds, H. Sosik, D. Stramski, S. Tassan, C. Trees, A. Weidemann, J. Wieland, and A. Vodacek, “Determination of spectral absorption coefficients of particles, dissolved material and phytoplankton for discrete water samples,” in Ocean Optics Protocols for Satellite Ocean Color Sensor Validation, Revision 2, G. S. Fargion and J. L. Mueller, eds., NASA/TM-2000-209966, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md., 2000, pp. 125–153.
  7. N. B. Nelson and B. B. Prézelin, “Calibration of an integrating sphere for determining the absorption coefficient of scattering suspension,” Appl. Opt. 32, 6710–6717 (1993). [CrossRef]
  8. J. T. O. Kirk, Light and Photosynthesis in Aquatic Ecosystems, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University, 1994).
  9. J. Ducha and S. Kubin, “Measurements of in vivo absorption spectra of microscopic algae using bleached cells as a reference sample,” Arch. Hydrobiol. Suppl. 49, 199–213 (1976).
  10. D. Stramski and J. Piskozub, “Estimation of scattering error in spectrophotometric measurements of light absorption by aquatic particles from three-dimensional radiative transfer simulations,” Appl. Opt. 42, 3634–3646 (2003). [CrossRef]
  11. H. Haardt and H. Maske, “Specific in vivo absorption coefficient of chlorophyll a at 675 nm,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 32, 608–619 (1987). [CrossRef]
  12. M. Babin and D. Stramski, “Light absorption by aquatic particles in the near-infrared spectral region,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 47, 911–915 (2002). [CrossRef]
  13. M. Babin and D. Stramski, “Variations in the mass-specific absorption coefficient of mineral particles suspended in water,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 49, 756–767 (2004). [CrossRef]
  14. D. Stramski, S. B. Wozniak, and P. J. Flatau, “Optical properties of Asian mineral dust suspended in seawater,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 49, 749–755 (2004). [CrossRef]
  15. D. Stramski, M. Babin, and S. Wozniak, “Variations in the optical properties of terrigeneous mineral-rich particulate matter suspended in seawater,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 52, 2418–2433 (2007). [CrossRef]
  16. S. Tassan and G. M. Ferrari, “Variability of light absorption by aquatic particle in the near-infrared spectral region,” Appl. Opt. 42, 4802–4810 (2003). [CrossRef]
  17. C. S. Yentsch, “Measurements of visible light absorption by particulate matter in the ocean,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 7, 207–217 (1962). [CrossRef]
  18. H. G. Trüper and C. S. Yentsch, “Use of glass fiber filters for the rapid preparation of in vivo absorption spectra of photosynthetic bacteria,” J. Bacteriol. 94, 1255–1256(1967).
  19. B. G. Mitchell, “Algorithms for determining the absorption coefficient for aquatic particulates using the quantitative filter technique,” Proc SPIE 1302, 137–148 (1990). [CrossRef]
  20. S. Tassan and G. M. Ferrari, “An alternative approach to absorption measurements of aquatic particles retained on filters,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 40, 1358–1368 (1995). [CrossRef]
  21. S. Tassan and G. M. Ferrari, “A sensitivity analysis of the ‘transmittance-reflectance’ method for measuring light absorption by aquatic particles,” J. Plankton Res. 24, 757–774 (2002). [CrossRef]
  22. W. L. Butler, “Absorption of light by turbid samples,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 52, 292–299 (1962). [CrossRef]
  23. B. G. Mitchell and D. A. Kiefer, “Chlorophyll a specific absorption and fluorescence excitation spectra for light-limited phytoplankton,” Deep-Sea Res. A 35, 639–663(1988). [CrossRef]
  24. A. Bricaud and D. Stramski, “Spectral absorption coefficients of living phytoplankton and nonalgal biogenous matter: a comparison between the Peru upwelling area and the Sargasso Sea,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 35, 562–582 (1990). [CrossRef]
  25. C. S. Cleveland and A. D. Weidemann, “Quantifying absorption by aquatic particles: a multiple scattering correction for glass-fiber filters,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 38, 1321–1327 (1993). [CrossRef]
  26. B. Arbones, F. G. Figueiras, and M. Zapata, “Determination of phytoplankton absorption coefficient in natural seawater samples: evidence of a unique equation to correct the path-length amplification on glass-fiber filters,” Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 137, 293–304 (1996). [CrossRef]
  27. Z. V. Finkel and A. J. Irwin, “Light absorption by phytoplankton and the filter amplification correction: cell size and species effects,” J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 259, 51–61(2001). [CrossRef]
  28. C. S. Roesler, “Theoretical and experimental approaches to improve the accuracy of particulate absorption coefficients derived from the quantitative filter technique,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 43, 1649–1660 (1998). [CrossRef]
  29. J. C. Goldman and M. R. Dennet, “Susceptibility of some marine phytoplankton species to cell breakage during filtration and post-filtration rinsing,” J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 86, 47–58 (1985). [CrossRef]
  30. D. Stramski, “Artifacts in measuring absorption spectra of phytoplankton collected on a filter,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 35, 1804–1809 (1990). [CrossRef]
  31. H. M. Sosik, “Storage of marine particulate samples for light-absorption measurements,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 44, 1139–1141 (1999). [CrossRef]
  32. I. Laurion, F. Blouin, and S. Roy, “The quantitative filter technique for measuring phytoplankton absorption: interference by MAAS in the UV waveband,” Limnol. Oceanogr. Methods 1, 1–9 (2003). [CrossRef]
  33. H. Maske and H. Haardt, “Quantitative in vivo absorption spectra of phytoplankton: detrital absorption and comparison with fluorescence excitation spectra,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 32, 620–633 (1987). [CrossRef]
  34. S. G. H. Simis, S. W. M. Peters, and H. J. Gons, “Remote sensing of the cyanobacterial pigment phycocyanin in turbid inland water,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 50, 237–245(2005). [CrossRef]
  35. F. M. P. Saldanha-Correa, S. M. F. Gianesella, and J. J. Barrera-Alba, “A comparison of the retention capability among three different glass-fiber filters used for chlorophyll-a determinations,” Braz. J. Oceanogr. 52, 243–247 (2004). [CrossRef]
  36. R. Röttgers and R. Doerffer, “Measurements of optical absorption by chromophoric dissolved organic matter using a point-source integrating-cavity absorption meter,” Limnol. Oceanogr. Methods 5, 126–135 (2007). [CrossRef]
  37. S. Tassan and G. M. Ferrari, “Measurement of light absorption by aquatic particles retained on filters: determination of the optical path-length amplification by the ‘transmittance-reflectance’ method,” J. Plankton Res. 20, 1699–1709 (1998). [CrossRef]
  38. S. E. Lohrenz, “A novel theoretical approach to correct for path-length amplification and variable sampling loading in measurements of particulate spectral absorption by the quantitative filter technique,” J. Plankton Res. 22, 639–657 (2000). [CrossRef]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited