Digital Still Transect Images from the Hawaii Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (CRAMP): Data from 2004 (NODC Accession 0037908)

Metadata also available as - [Outline] - [Parseable text] - [XML]

Frequently anticipated questions:


What does this data set describe?

Title:
Digital Still Transect Images from the Hawaii Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (CRAMP): Data from 2004 (NODC Accession 0037908)
Abstract:
This dataset consists of video transect images (JPG files) from CRAMP surveys taken in 2004 at 6 sites, some of which had multiple depths. Digital images are important for future researchers to resolve any question about how the image data were interpreted for the quantitative database, to provide the opportunity to re-analyze the images using other methods, and to return to the same locations for future comparisons.
Supplemental_Information:
Entry_ID Unknown Sensor_Name digital camera Source_Name SCUBA Project_Campaign: Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (CRAMP) Originating_Center Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology Storage_Medium JPEG images Reference None Online_size: 3.3 gigabytes

mm/dd/yy SITE LAT LONG DEPTH ISLAND SITE 2004 CODE (M) NAME DATE DIRECTORY KaHan03m 22 12.656 159 30.727 3.00 Kauai Hanalei 9/6/04 04KaHan KaHan08m 22 12.703 159 30.721 8.00 Kauai Hanalei 9/6/04 04KaHan KaLim01m 22 13.489 159 34.755 1.00 Kauai Limahuli 9/7/04 04KaLim KaLim10m 22 13.544 159 34.755 10.00 Kauai Limahuli 9/7/04 04KaLim MoKma03m 21 04.179 157 00.014 3.00 Molokai Kamilioloa 3/12/04 2004 Kamiloloa MoKma10m 21 04.090 157 00.055 10.00 Molokai Kamilioloa 3/12/04 2004 Kamiloloa MoKmo03m 21 02.496 156 53.837 3.00 Molokai Kamalo 3/10/04 2004 Kamalo MoKmo10m 21 02.248 156 53.854 10.00 Molokai Kamalo 3/10/04 2004 Kamalo MoPal03m 21 05.352 157 06.460 3.00 Molokai Palaau 3/11/04 2004 Palaau MoPal10m 21 05.223 157 06.510 10.00 Molokai Palaau 3/11/04 2004 Palaau OHk 21 26.884 157 48.548 5-12 Oahu Hawaii Kai 2004 04OHK

Resource Description: NODC Accession Number 0037908

  1. How should this data set be cited?

    Jokiel, Dr. Paul , Rodgers, Dr. Kuulei , Brown, Mr. Eric , and Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology Department Of Oceanograhpy School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology University Of Hawaii, Unknown, Digital Still Transect Images from the Hawaii Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (CRAMP): Data from 2004 (NODC Accession 0037908).

    Online Links:

  2. What geographic area does the data set cover?

    West_Bounding_Coordinate: -159.57925
    East_Bounding_Coordinate: -156.89728
    North_Bounding_Coordinate: 22.22573
    South_Bounding_Coordinate: 21.03746

  3. What does it look like?

  4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?

    Beginning_Date: Mar-2004
    Ending_Date: Sep-2004
    Currentness_Reference: ground condition

  5. What is the general form of this data set?

  6. How does the data set represent geographic features?

    1. How are geographic features stored in the data set?

    2. What coordinate system is used to represent geographic features?

  7. How does the data set describe geographic features?

    Entity_and_Attribute_Overview:
    Original data received as JPEG files. Data organized in directory data/ See table above to match site with directory.

    filename convention: site_code+tt+fff.tif

    where site_code: (see #SAMPLING STATIONS: above in documentation) (2-digit year + 2-char island + 3-char site + 3-char depth) tt: transect number (2 digits) and fff: frame number (3 digits)

    Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation: None


Who produced the data set?

  1. Who are the originators of the data set? (may include formal authors, digital compilers, and editors)

  2. Who also contributed to the data set?

    Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,Hawaii Coral Reef Initiative,National Ocean Service,United States Geological Survey,State of Hawaii, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Aquatic Resources,Kahoolawe Island Reserve Commission,United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Coastal Program,Limahuli National Botanical Garden,Save Our Seas

  3. To whom should users address questions about the data?

    Dr. Paul Jokiel
    Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology University of Hawaii
    Principal Investigator
    P.O. Box 1346
    Kaneohe, Hawaii 96744
    USA

    808-236-7440 (voice)
    jokiel@hawaii.edu


Why was the data set created?

geographic areas and to monitor change at each given site.


How was the data set created?

  1. From what previous works were the data drawn?

  2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?

    Date: Unknown (process 1 of 1)
    CRAMP Protocol One of the major objectives of the CRAMP program during the first year was to establish a sampling protocol that could detect change in coral cover over time with sufficient statistical power (P>0.8). The first step involved the evaluation of historical methods to determine if any of these procedures could be incorporated into the CRAMP protocol. After careful analysis it was determined that only the fixed photoquadrats utilized by Dr. Steve Coles at Bishop Museum had sufficient power. The method, which samples a relatively small area, is suitable to address small-scale questions on coral growth, recruitment and mortality, but inference on general reef condition is difficult across broader sections of reef.

    The second step involved soliciting input from colleagues conducting coral reef monitoring programs in the Florida Keys and the Great Barrier Reef. Their general recommendation was to use digital video to sample coral cover over large areas of the reef. Before we could implement their designs, however, we had to evaluate the appropriateness of these techniques for Hawai'i. The following parameters in the sampling design were determined in the third step:

    1.Repeatability and appropriate length of the transects using different methods 2.Observer variation within different methods 3.Number of points per frame to analyze 4.Number of frames per transect to analyze 5.Number of transects per depth to sample 6.Random versus fixed transects 7.Time and monetary considerations to optimize sampling design

    The results of this evaluation were presented at the National Coral Reef Institute Conference in Florida and are summarized by the CRAMP research team (Brown, et al. 1999). Repeatability and appropriate transect length were tested using photoquadrats on a transect line sampled over a short time interval. Shorter transects of 10m were found to have higher precision (Ability to replicate quadrats on a transect) than transects of 25m and 50m. Photoquadrats produced similar results to visual estimation techniques, regardless of observer, but neither method yielded satisfactory precision.

    Digital video was evaluated at Hanauma Bay, Oahu over 2 time intervals separated by 84 days. It was assumed that overall coral cover would not change dramatically during this time period. Power curves were constructed using methods described by Zar (1999) for detecting a 10% change in coral cover across 2 time periods (Figure 1). Number of frames was more important in increasing power than number of points though the difference was not substantial. This is primarily due to the fact that more frames sample a larger portion of the habitat, which incorporates more of the heterogeneity of the substrate. A sample size of 10 transects per site appeared to be adequate for characterizing the coral cover using a power value of 0.8 set as a convention by Cohen (1988).

    Digital still images replaced the video images in 2004.

    Fixed transects were chosen over random for several reasons. First, it is difficult to properly implement a randomized protocol for transect placement without a map of benthic habitats that is geo-referenced. At present this does not exist for the state of Hawai'i. Second, the majority of the historical data uses fixed transect locations so integrating the current protocol with previous work will be simpler. Third, after the initial random setup the fixed transects should be easier to resample, thus reducing preparation time and ultimately costs to generate the random grid for subsequent transect measurements (Green and Smith, 1997). Fourth, randomized sampling of transects will have difficulty in detecting change in coral cover if reefs change dramatically over time. This is because the random protocol measures inherent spatial variation at each sampling period, which adds variance associated with spatial heterogeneity of the reef rather than changes or patterns that are time-related (Green and Smith, 1997). Fifth, using a repeated measures ANOVA design with fixed transects can provide additional information on population and community structure that is difficult to obtain with random transects (Hughes, 1996; Connell et al. 1997). Sixth, the time and cost complications with random transects are not worth the broader inference about reef "condition" especially if the fixed transects are representative of habitat variation (Andy Taylor, personal communication). Finally, interpreting results from fixed transects is much easier for the general public and resource managers to comprehend than using a randomized sampling design.

    Time and monetary constraints were examined to determine the optimum sampling protocol. The analysis revealed that digital video collected more data per unit time than visual estimation, planar point intercept and photoquadrats. It was the most expensive option considered at $5,500 for the system but since field time underwater is the principal limiting factor then the quantity of field data collected outweighs the expense. In addition, digital video and photoquadrats also enable archiving of the data for later re-analysis to address additional questions.

    Based on the results from the evaluation procedure we have selected 2 methods to address changes in overall coral cover and growth, recruitment and mortality of benthic organisms. Digital video will be used to measure changes in coral cover by initially selecting at random, ten permanent (fixed) transects at 2 depths (3m and 10m). Each transect will be 10m in length and analyzed using 20 randomly selected video frames with 50 randomly selected points per frame. Frequency of sampling will be once a year at each site. This should be sufficient to detect a 10% change in coral cover over time with high statistical power across of variety of habitats in Hawai'i.

    The second method will employ fixed photoquadrats to examine trends of individual organisms with regards to growth, recruitment and mortality. Five haphazardly selected photoquadrats at each depth contour will be established with 4 pins at each corner to ensure accurate repositioning of the frame. The frame dimension will sample 0.33 m2 of the substrate at a height of 0.5m from the bottom. Images of sessile organisms will be traced and digitized for 2D estimates of aerial coverage. Sampling will be scheduled once a year at each site in concordance with the digital video surveys. Site Survey Protocol

    Two types of protocol are utilized by CRAMP: Monitoring Protocol and Assessment Protocol. This submission to NOAA only includes data taken using the Monitoring Protocol. The Assessment Protocol is simply an abbreviated version of the Monitoring Protocol. The Assessment Protocol is a rapid method that is most useful for describing spatial relationships. The Assessment Protocol lacks the statistical power of the Monitoring Protocol to detect change in the benthos. The Assessment Protocol is a more cost-effective method for answering certain questions on the status of coral reefs.

    Monitoring Protocol - General Description

    Installing the fixed monitoring sites is a process that was generally completed by a team of six divers during a single dive. All primary sites have been installed. The initial monitoring of a given site was generally initiated at some time after installation. More detail on installation is discussed under the section on Benthic Monitoring. Upon reaching an established monitoring site site a number of tasks must be performed. CRAMP generally surveys one site (3 m and 10 m transect locations at each site) per day with a team of 6 divers. The deeper site is surveyed in the morning, the shallow site in the afternoon after a proper surface interval. The beginning of the transect is located by visual lineups and/or GPS by skin divers and marked with a dive flag to alert boaters of our presence and enable quick location by the divers. Subsequent SCUBA teams entering the water take materials needed for the survey (spooled transect tapes, rugosity chain, video camera, photo-quadrat apparatus, extra marker pins, etc) and deposit the material near the start of the transect for use by the teams during the dive.

    The first SCUBA team to enter the water consists of two divers: the person doing the fish survey and a back-up diver who stays within visual range and photographs the fixed photo-quadrats as the fish survey proceeds. Estimates of fish species richness, abundance, and biomass are taken before the benthic transect lines are laid out so as to sample a relatively undisturbed habitat. The standard CRAMP fish transect is taken along a depth contour within the CRAMP grid of benthic transects, and consists of four, 5x25m transects that are separated by 5m. The scientist doing the fish survey counts fish while deploying a 25 m line behind him/her. As the survey proceeds, two more SCUBA divers enter the water. One of the pair starts video taping the replicate benthic transects while the second deploys the transect tapes and records species information on the corals/algae located along each transect for later reference. The third team of two divers follows the video transect team and measures rugosity under the replicate transects. Upon completion of the fish transect, the first dive team completes the photo-quadrats. As other teams complete their work they return to the start of the transect and begin taking up the transect tapes.

    During the survey, various divers complete additional functions. These include taking sediment samples, stabilizing or replacing lose transect pins, routine photography of organisms, description of habitats, making algae collections or various activities.

    The same procedure is carried out at the shallow site during the afternoon. In addition, at various times of the day (depending on time availability) two members of the group will skin dive with a dive flag and water proof GPS unit while describing and recording habitat distribution throughout the study site for later mapping efforts.

    Benthic Monitoring

    The basic unit for long term CRAMP monitoring is a 100 m x 3 m transect corridor that follows a depth contour. The transect is divided into a grid of 1 m intervals along its length by 0.5 m intervals along its width. Stainless steel pins are driven along the length of the central line or "spine" (shown in yellow on diagram below) to serve as the reference point for installation of the 10 transects and five photoquadrats. The spine pins are marked by slipping a short length of plastic tubing over the pin to identify the pin as a "spine" pin. In addition, the first spine pin (0 m) is marked with a single cable tie, the fifth pin (50 m) is marked with two cable ties and the tenth pin (100 m) is marked with three cable ties.

    Digital Image Transect Method:

    1. Field Recording

    Data are taken using a digital waterproof cameras. 20 digital images are taken on each of the 10 transects of each line, or 200 per survey.

    The photographer follows the following procedure: While on the surface, the diver photographs the landmark "line-ups" used to locate the site. These serve to identify the tape if there is any question of proper labeling. Also, the images can be subsequently printed and laminated for use when relocating the site. In many cases the use of landmarks is faster and more convenient than using the GPS position to relocate the transect site. The diver then goes to the bottom and videotapes a full 360 degree panorama of the site as part of the permanent image record. The diver proceeds to the start of the first 10 m transect and records the transect number on the video through use of hand signals in front of the camera (number of fingers representing transect no.). The photographer then moves slowly (4 min per transect) along the 10 m transect while filming the bottom at a distance of 0.5 m. Initially a rod attached to the camera was used to insure proper distance from the bottom. This has been replaced with two small underwater lasers that cross at 0.5 m, allowing the photographer to hold the distance constant by keeping an overlap on the two red laser dots. Each of the 10 transects along the 100 m spine line is recorded in this manner. Brown, E, E Cox, B Tissot, K Rodgers, and W Smith (1999). Evaluation of benthic sampling methods considered for the Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (CRAMP) in Hawaii. International Conference on Scientific Aspects of Coral Reef Assessment, Monitoring, and Restoration. April 14-16, Ft. Lauderdale, FL.

    Connell, J H, T P Hughes, C C Wallace (1997). A 30-year study of coral abundance, recruitment, and disturbance at several scales in space and time. Ecol. Mono. 67(4): 461-488.

    Friedlander, Alan and Parrish, James 1998. Habitat characteristics affecting fish assemblages on a Hawaiian coral reef. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 224: 1-30.

    Green, R H and S R Smith (1997). Sample program design and environmental impact assessment on coral reef. Proc 8th International Coral Reef Symposium. 2: 1459-1464.

    McCormick, Mark 1994. Comparison of field methods for measuring surface topography and their associations with a tropical reef fish assemblage. Marine Ecology Progress Series 112: 87-96.

    Person who carried out this activity:

    Dr. Paul Jokiel
    Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology University of Hawaii
    Principal Investigator
    P.O. Box 1346
    Kaneohe, Hawaii 96744
    USA

    808-236-7440 (voice)
    jokiel@hawaii.edu

  3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?


How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?

  1. How well have the observations been checked?

  2. How accurate are the geographic locations?

  3. How accurate are the heights or depths?

  4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?

    The 2004 surveys were 100% complete

  5. How consistent are the relationships among the observations, including topology?

    see Process Step


How can someone get a copy of the data set?

Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data?

Access_Constraints: None
Use_Constraints: Dataset credit required

  1. Who distributes the data set? (Distributor 1 of 1)

    NOAA/NESDIS/National Oceanographic Data Center
    Attn: Data Access Group, User Services Team
    SSMC-3 Fourth Floor
    Silver Spring, MD 20910-3282
    USA

    301-713-3277 (voice)
    301-713-3302 (FAX)
    services@nodc.noaa.gov

    Hours_of_Service: 8am-5pm, Monday through Friday
  2. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set?

    Downloadable Data

  3. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?

    NOAA makes no warranty regarding these data,expressed or implied, nor does the fact of distribution constitute such a warranty. NOAA, NESDIS, NODC and NCDDC cannot assume liability for any damages caused by any errors or omissions in these data, nor as a result of the failure of these data to function on a particular system.

  4. How can I download or order the data?


Who wrote the metadata?

Dates:
Last modified: 08-Dec-2012
Last Reviewed: 23-Mar-2009
Metadata author:
Mr. Patrick C. Caldwell
NOAA/NESDIS/NODC/NCDDC
Hawaii/US Pacific Liaison
1000 Pope Road, MSB 316
Honolulu, Hawaii 96822
USA

(808)-956-4105 (voice)
(808) 956-2352 (FAX)
caldwell@hawaii.edu

Hours_of_Service: 8 AM to 5 PM weekdays
Contact_Instructions: check services@nodc.noaa.gov if not available
Metadata standard:
FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (FGDC-STD-001-1998)


Generated by mp version 2.9.13 on Fri Aug 29 10:41:53 2014