This dataset provides projected sea surface temperature and salinity as well as projected ocean bottom temperature and salinity in the Northwest Atlantic under an intermediate emission scenario Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5. The results are generated by a North Atlantic Ocean-ice Downscaling System (NAODS) that downscales the global Hedley Centre Global Environmental Model Version 2 with an Earth System component (HadGEM2-ES) output. NAODS couples a 1/12 ^o model for the northwest Atlantic with a 1/4 ^o model for the North Atlantic (Han et al., 2025). Bi-decadal means are included for 1986-2005, 2006-2025, 2026-2045, 2046-2065, 2066-2085, and 2080-2099, respectively.

This dataset provides projected sea surface temperature and salinity as well as projected ocean bottom temperature and salinity in the Northwest Atlantic under a high emission scenario Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5. The results are generated by a North Atlantic Ocean-ice Downsling System (NAODS) that downscales the global Climate Change System Model Version 4 (CCSM4) output. NAODS couples 1/12-degree model for the northwest Atlantic with a 1/4-degree model for the North Atlantic (Han et al., 2025). Bi-decadal means are included for 1986-2005, 2006-2025, 2026-2045, 2046-2065, 2066-2085, and 2080-2099, respectively.

This dataset contains the modelled and observed data used in the publication "Fjord circulation permits persistent subsurface water mass in a long, deep mid-latitude inlet" by Laura Bianucci et al., DFO Ocean Sciences Division, Pacific Region (published in the journal Ocean Science in 2024). An application of the Finite Volume Community Ocean Model (FVCOM v4.1) was run from May 24 to June 27, 2019 in the Discovery Islands region of British Columbia, Canada. Observed temperature and salinity profiles available in this area during this time period are included in the dataset, along with the modelled values at the same times and locations.

The Global Ice-Ocean Prediction System (GIOPS) produces global sea ice and ocean analyses and 10 day forecasts daily. This product contains time-mean sea ice and ocean forecast fields interpolated to two grids. One of the grids is a 0.2° resolution regular latitude-longitude grid covering the global ocean (north of 80° S). The other grid is in north-polar stereographic projection with a 5-km spacing at the standard parallel 60° N and covers the Arctic Ocean and the neighbouring sub-polar seas. Data is available for 50 depths. The data files are in netCDF format and comply with the Climate and Forecast Conventions.

This dataset contains the outputs for Bute Inlet from two simulations shown in the publication "Fjord circulation permits persistent subsurface water mass in a long, deep mid-latitude inlet" by Laura Bianucci et al., DFO Ocean Sciences Division, Pacific Region (published in the journal Ocean Science in 2024). The Finite Volume Community Ocean Model (FVCOM v4.1) was run with two different sets of initial conditions for the Discovery Islands region of British Columbia, Canada, from May 24 to June 27, 2019. The "Baseline" simulation used observed initial conditions, while the "Sensitivity" simulation removed the observed cold subsurface water mass from the initial profiles. Here in this dataset, we provide 29-day averages of the following variables in a transect along Bute Inlet: potential temperature, density, along-inlet velocity, and Brunt-Väisälä frequency (N^2). The averaging properly removes the tidal effects.

Data Description:Monthly mean simulation results from Canada's three Oceans model (sensitivity experiments--2017). Experiment codes can be matched to specific parameter sets following Table 1 in Christian et al 2026 from Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 3721.Abstract from the report:A numerical ocean model with biogeochemistry has been developed for a domain that spans Canada's three oceans: the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic. The domain extends to 26°N in the Atlantic and 44°N in the Pacific, and spans the full width of each basin as well as the whole of the Arctic Ocean. The resolution is moderate to high (≈0.25°, 75 levels). A series of simulations was conducted to assess the best choices for biogeochemical model parameters across the diverse regions, using a variety of validation data sets including satellite ocean colour (surface chlorophyll and particulate organic carbon, integrated primary production), surface underway pCO2, and depth profiles of oxygen and nitrate concentration from ships and Argo floats. An extensive set of parameter sensitivity experiments was conducted which are documented in detail here, with a focus on zooplankton grazing and phytoplankton and zooplankton mortality (linear and quadratic) parameters, and particle sedimentation rates. Sensitivity to many of the parameter adjustments examined is low, but the experiments conducted span the range from weak seasonal biological drawdown of surface inorganic carbon and nutrients, to excessively large drawdown and thermocline oxygen demand. Further, the general nonlinearity of the model response to parameter adjustments is shown by similar parameter sets having very different effects on different data metrics. In addition, the model solution's general insensitivity to some phytoplankton processes (exudation, chlorophyll photooxidation) that are neglected in the 'base case' model simulation is demonstrated. An optimal set of parameters for this domain is proposed, but it is possible that there are unexplored regions of the parameter space that could improve performance, especially if additional observational constraints are applied.

Description:This dataset consists of three simulations from the Northeastern Pacific Canadian Ocean Ecosystem Model (NEP36-CanOE) which is a configuration of the Nucleus for European Modelling of the Ocean (NEMO) V3.6. The historical simulation is an estimate of the 1986-2005 mean climate. The future simulations project the 2046-2065 mean climate for representative concentration pathways (RCP) 4.5 (moderate mitigation scenario) and 8.5 (no mitigation scenario). Each simulation is forced by a climatology of atmospheric forcing fields calculated over these 20 year periods and the winds are augmented with high frequency variability, which introduces a small amount of interannual variability. Model outputs are averaged over 3 successive years of simulation (the last 3, following an equilibration period); standard deviation among the 3 years is available upon request. For each simulation, the dataset includes the air-sea carbon dioxide flux, monthly 3D fields for potential temperature, salinity, potential density, total alkalinity, dissolved inorganic carbon, nitrate, oxygen, pH, total chlorophyll, aragonite saturation state, total primary production, and monthly maximum and minimum values for oxygen, pH, and potential temperature. The data includes 50 vertical levels at a 1/36 degree spatial resolution and a mask is provided that indicates regions where these data should be used cautiously or not at all. For a more detailed description please refer to Holdsworth et al. 2021.The data available here are the outputs of NEP36-CanOE_RCP 8.5; a projection of the 2046-2065 climate for the no mitigation scenario RCP 8.5.Methods:This study uses a multi-stage downscaling approach to dynamically downscale global climate projections at a 1/36° (1.5 − 2.25 km) resolution. We chose to use the second-generation Canadian Earth System model (CanESM2) because high-resolution downscaled projections of the atmosphere over the region of interest are available from the Canadian Regional Climate Model version 4 (CanRCM4). We used anomalies from CanESM2 with a resolution of about 1° at the open boundaries, and the regional atmospheric model, CanRCM4 (Scinocca et al., 2016) for the surface boundary conditions. CanRCM4 is an atmosphere only model with a 0.22° resolution and was used to downscale climate projections from CanESM2 over North America and its adjacent oceans.The model used is computationally expensive. This is due to the relatively high number of points in the domain (715 × 1,021 × 50) and the relatively complex biogeochemical model (19 tracers). Therefore, rather than carrying out interannual simulations for the historical and future periods, we implemented a new method that uses atmospheric climatologies with augmented winds to force the ocean. We show that augmenting the winds with hourly anomalies allows for a more realistic representation of the surface freshwater distribution than using the climatologies alone.Section 2.1 describes the ocean model that is used to estimate the historical climate and project the ocean state under future climate scenarios. The time periods are somewhat arbitrary; 1986–2005 was chosen because the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) historical simulations end in 2005 as no community-accepted estimates of emissions were available beyond that date (Taylor et al., 2009); 2046–2065 was chosen to be far enough in the future that changes in 20 year mean fields are unambiguously due to changing GHG forcing (as opposed to model internal variability) (e.g., Christian, 2014), but near enough to be considered relevant for management purposes.While it is true that 30 years rather than 20 is the canonical value for averaging over natural variability, in practice the difference between a 20 and a 30 year mean is small (e.g., if we average successive periods of an unforced control run, the variance among 20 year means will be only slightly larger than for 30 year means). Also, there is concern that longer averaging periods are inappropriate in a non-stationary climate (Livezey et al., 2007; Arguez and Vose, 2011). We chose 20 year periods because they are adequate to give a mean annual cycle with little influence from natural variability, while minimizing aliasing of the secular trend into the means. As the midpoints of the two time periods are separated by 60 years, the contribution of natural variability to the differences between the historical and future simulations is negligible e.g., (Hawkins and Sutton, 2009; Frölicher et al., 2016).Section 2.2 describes how climatologies derived from observations were used for the initialization and open boundary conditions for the historical simulations and pseudo-climatologies were used for the future scenarios. The limited availability of observations means that the years used for these climatologies differs somewhat from the historical and future periods. Section 2.3 details the atmospheric forcing fields and the method that we developed to generate winds with realistic high-frequency variability while preserving the daily climatological means from the CanRCM4 data. Section 2.4 shows the equilibration of key modeled variables to the forcing conditionsData Sources:Model outputUncertainties:These climate projections are downscaled from a single global climate model (CanESM2/CanRCM4) because the cost of ensembles is presently prohibitive. Our experimental design uses climatological forcing for each time period so the differences between them are almost entirely due to anthropogenic forcing with little effect of natural variability.

Description:This dataset consists of three simulations from the Northeastern Pacific Canadian Ocean Ecosystem Model (NEP36-CanOE) which is a configuration of the Nucleus for European Modelling of the Ocean (NEMO) V3.6. The historical simulation is an estimate of the 1986-2005 mean climate. The future simulations project the 2046-2065 mean climate for representative concentration pathways (RCP) 4.5 (moderate mitigation scenario) and 8.5 (no mitigation scenario). Each simulation is forced by a climatology of atmospheric forcing fields calculated over these 20 year periods and the winds are augmented with high frequency variability, which introduces a small amount of interannual variability. Model outputs are averaged over 3 successive years of simulation (the last 3, following an equilibration period); standard deviation among the 3 years is available upon request. For each simulation, the dataset includes the air-sea carbon dioxide flux, monthly 3D fields for potential temperature, salinity, potential density, total alkalinity, dissolved inorganic carbon, nitrate, oxygen, pH, total chlorophyll, aragonite saturation state, total primary production, and monthly maximum and minimum values for oxygen, pH, and potential temperature. The data includes 50 vertical levels at a 1/36 degree spatial resolution and a mask is provided that indicates regions where these data should be used cautiously or not at all. For a more detailed description please refer to Holdsworth et al. 2021.The data available here are the outputs of NEP36-CanOE_RCP 4.5; a projection of the 2046-2065 climate for the moderate mitigation scenario RCP 4.5.Methods:This study uses a multi-stage downscaling approach to dynamically downscale global climate projections at a 1/36° (1.5 − 2.25 km) resolution. We chose to use the second-generation Canadian Earth System model (CanESM2) because high-resolution downscaled projections of the atmosphere over the region of interest are available from the Canadian Regional Climate Model version 4 (CanRCM4). We used anomalies from CanESM2 with a resolution of about 1° at the open boundaries, and the regional atmospheric model, CanRCM4 (Scinocca et al., 2016) for the surface boundary conditions. CanRCM4 is an atmosphere only model with a 0.22° resolution and was used to downscale climate projections from CanESM2 over North America and its adjacent oceans.The model used is computationally expensive. This is due to the relatively high number of points in the domain (715 × 1,021 × 50) and the relatively complex biogeochemical model (19 tracers). Therefore, rather than carrying out interannual simulations for the historical and future periods, we implemented a new method that uses atmospheric climatologies with augmented winds to force the ocean. We show that augmenting the winds with hourly anomalies allows for a more realistic representation of the surface freshwater distribution than using the climatologies alone.Section 2.1 describes the ocean model that is used to estimate the historical climate and project the ocean state under future climate scenarios. The time periods are somewhat arbitrary; 1986–2005 was chosen because the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) historical simulations end in 2005 as no community-accepted estimates of emissions were available beyond that date (Taylor et al., 2009); 2046–2065 was chosen to be far enough in the future that changes in 20 year mean fields are unambiguously due to changing GHG forcing (as opposed to model internal variability) (e.g., Christian, 2014), but near enough to be considered relevant for management purposes.While it is true that 30 years rather than 20 is the canonical value for averaging over natural variability, in practice the difference between a 20 and a 30 year mean is small (e.g., if we average successive periods of an unforced control run, the variance among 20 year means will be only slightly larger than for 30 year means). Also, there is concern that longer averaging periods are inappropriate in a non-stationary climate (Livezey et al., 2007; Arguez and Vose, 2011). We chose 20 year periods because they are adequate to give a mean annual cycle with little influence from natural variability, while minimizing aliasing of the secular trend into the means. As the midpoints of the two time periods are separated by 60 years, the contribution of natural variability to the differences between the historical and future simulations is negligible e.g., (Hawkins and Sutton, 2009; Frölicher et al., 2016).Section 2.2 describes how climatologies derived from observations were used for the initialization and open boundary conditions for the historical simulations and pseudo-climatologies were used for the future scenarios. The limited availability of observations means that the years used for these climatologies differs somewhat from the historical and future periods. Section 2.3 details the atmospheric forcing fields and the method that we developed to generate winds with realistic high-frequency variability while preserving the daily climatological means from the CanRCM4 data. Section 2.4 shows the equilibration of key modeled variables to the forcing conditionsData Sources:Model outputUncertainties:These climate projections are downscaled from a single global climate model (CanESM2/CanRCM4) because the cost of ensembles is presently prohibitive. Our experimental design uses climatological forcing for each time period so the differences between them are almost entirely due to anthropogenic forcing with little effect of natural variability.

Geographic bathymetric grid data at 100 m x 100 m pixel resolution. Datum: WGS84Collaboration of Canada, the United States of America and the European Union as part of the Atlantic Ocean Research Alliance's fifth project under the Galway Statement. Project mapped the North Atlantic seafloor along a transect from Halifax, Canada to Tromsø, Norway to further the understanding of marine habitats, conservation and navigation. Chief Scientist / Primary Investigator name: Paola Travaglini Platform: CCGS Louis S. St- Laurent (Canadian heavy icebreaker)Device 1 type: Multibeam echo-sounder (sonar)Device 1 manufacturer: Kongsberg Device 1 model: EM122 behind an ice protection window Data and Data format:100 m resolution grid of bathymetryBAG format: Bathymetric Attributed Grid ObjectNavigation and positioning: Trimble GNSS receiver + antennae Applanix POS/MV v5 inertial measuring system Horizontal Datum: WGS84 (G1762) Tidal correction:Zero tide applied: tides are not well known for the major part of the data and tides over very deep water are generally negligible. Sound Velocity Profile measurements:In-situ sound velocity profiles were applied.Note on accuracy/S-44 survey standards:Considering the intended output from this survey (IHO Order 1a - Areas shallower than 100 metres where under-keel clearance is less critical but features of concern to surface shipping may exist.) and using an average depth of 2000 m as ‘d’ in the IHO Standard Equation - the allowable Total Vertical Uncertainty (TVU) must be < 26m which indeed the data has achieved (by comparison with overlapping datasets from other surveys/agency data).IHO Order 1aHorizontal positioning accuracy: 5.0 m + 5% of depth (95% Confidence level)(~105 m at a mean depth of 2000 m)Vertical positioning accuracy: 2.5 m < 26.0 m = Sqrt((0.5 m)^2+(0.013 x 2000 m)^2)

The map displays bedrock formations at or near the surface of the land, on the sea floor above the continental crust that forms the Canadian landmass, and oceanic crust surrounding the landmass. The bedrock units are grouped and coloured according to geological age and composition. The colours of offshore units and oceanic crust are paler and more generalized than those on land, although the constituent units offshore are still easily discernible from their dashed boundaries. This colour design, coupled with the use of a white buffer zone at the coast allows the coastline of Canada to be readily distinguished and still show the grand geological architecture of the Canadian landmass.The map also shows major faults that have disrupted the Earth's crust, onshore and offshore, and a variety of special geological features such as kimberlite pipes, which locally contain diamonds, impact structures suspected to have been caused by meteorites, and extinct and active spreading centres in the surrounding oceans.