Dr. Paul Jokiel
Dr. Kuulei Rodgers
Mr. Eric Brown
Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology, Department Of Oceanography, School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, University Of Hawaii
Unknown
Hawaii Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (CRAMP):
Benthic Data from 2002-2004 (NODC Accession 0002313)
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/archive/accession/0002313
This dataset consists of CRAMP surveys taken in 2002-2004 and includes
quantitative estimates of substrate and species type. From the data
percent coverage of a given species can be estimated. The types and coverages
were derived objectively from photographic images using PhotoGrid, a
software package which analyzes random points on images of coral reefs
and substrate. This dataset does not include the images from video
transects or photoquadrats however these have been provided to NOAA separately.
Fish transects were discontinued after 2002.
In 2002, there were 57 lines surveyed at 28 sites. Due to funding cuts,
the number of surveys dropped in 2003 and 2004. There were 8 surveys
provided to NODC for 2003 and 5 in 2004. A few more surveys during this
time period could become available at a later date. Surveys
typically consist of shallow (~3m) and deep (~10m) lines.
To understand the ecology of Hawaiian coral reefs in relation to other geographic areas and to monitor change at each given site. CRAMP experimental design allows detection of changes that can be attributed to various factors such as: overuse (over-fishing, anchor damage, aquarium trade collection, etc.), sedimentation, nutrient loading, catastrophic natural events (storm wave impact, lavaflows), coastal construction, urbanization, global warming(bleaching), introduced species, algal invasions, and fish and invertebrate diseases. The emphasis of the program is on the major problems facing Hawaiian coral reefs as listed by managers and reef scientists during workshops and meetings held in Hawaii (1997-1998). These are: over-fishing, sedimentation, eutrophication, and algal outbreaks. CRAMP experimental design gives priority to areas where baseline data relevant to these issues were previously collected. Transect dimensions, number of replicates, and methods of evaluation have been selected to detect changes with statistical confidence. Standard techniques include the establishment of permanent transects to quantify fish, coral, algae, and invertebrates at study sites. CRAMP researchers are quantifying changes that have occurred on coral reefs subjected to varying degrees of fishing pressure, sedimentation, eutrophication, and algal growth and are conducting experimental work in order to test hypotheses concerning the role of these environmental factors in the ecology of coral reefs. We are also in the process of resurveying, updating and integrating existing ecological information on an array of coral reefs that have been designated as areas of concern or, "hot spots," by managers and scientists.
NOAASupplemental: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: MS Excel and ASCII CSV
Reference: None Online_size: 110556 kilobytes
20020327
20040907
ground condition
Annually
-159.7273
-155.0171
22.2109
19.5118
NCEI Geoportal FilterCoRIS_Metadata
CoRIS Discovery Thesaurus
Numeric Data Sets > Habitats
CoRIS Theme Thesaurus
EARTH SCIENCE > Oceans > Coastal Processes > Coral Reefs > Coral Reef Ecology > Habitats
EARTH SCIENCE > Biosphere > Aquatic Habitat > Benthic Habitat
EARTH SCIENCE > Biosphere > Zoology > Corals > Reef Monitoring and Assessment
None
Coastal studies
Coral reef monitoring and assessment
substrate type
coral reef species
per cent coral coverage
ISO 19115 Topic Category
biota
002
environment
007
CoRIS Place Thesaurus
OCEAN BASIN > Pacific Ocean > Central Pacific Ocean > Hawaiian Islands > Kauai Island > Kauai Island (22N159W0001)
COUNTRY/TERRITORY > United States of America > Hawaii > Hawaii > Kauai Island (22N159W0001)
COUNTRY/TERRITORY > United States of America > Hawaii > Honolulu > Oahu (21N157W0003)
OCEAN BASIN > Pacific Ocean > Central Pacific Ocean > Hawaiian Islands > Oahu Island > Oahu (21N157W0003)
OCEAN BASIN > Pacific Ocean > Central Pacific Ocean > Hawaiian Islands > Molokai Island > Molokai Island (21N157W0001)
COUNTRY/TERRITORY > United States of America > Hawaii > Hawaii > Molokai Island (21N157W0001)
COUNTRY/TERRITORY > United States of America > Hawaii > Maui > Maui Island (20N156W0004)
OCEAN BASIN > Pacific Ocean > Central Pacific Ocean > Hawaiian Islands > Maui Island > Maui Island (20N156W0004)
OCEAN BASIN > Pacific Ocean > Central Pacific Ocean > Hawaiian Islands > Hawaii Island > Hawaii Island (19N155W0003)
COUNTRY/TERRITORY > United States of America > Hawaii > Hawaii > Hawaii Island (19N155W0003)
CoRIS Region
MHI
None
Pacific Ocean
Kauai
Oahu
Molokai
Maui
Hawaii
Kaapuna
Laaloa
Laupahoehoe
Leleiwi
Kawaihae
Nenue Pt.
Hanalei
Hoai
Limahuli
Milolii
Nualolo Kai
Honolua North
Honolua South
Kanehena Bay
Kanehena Pt.
Kahekili
Molokini
Olowalu
Puamana
Kamilioloa
Kamalo
Palaau
Hanauma Bay
Heeia
Kahe
Pili O
Kaalaea
Moku o Loe
Pupukea
Ala Wai
None
Benthic
None
Dataset credit required
Dr. Paul Jokiel
Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology
University of Hawaii
Principal Investigator
mailing address
P.O. Box 1346
Kaneohe
Hawaii
96744
USA
808-236-7440
jokiel@hawaii.edu
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
MS Excel, ASCII CSV
see Process Step
The 2002-2004 surveys were 100% complete
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).
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 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.
Video Transect and Digital Still Methods:
1. Field Recording
Data are taken using a Sony DCR-TRV900 Mini DV camcorder enclosed in an
Amphibico VHDB0900 Dive Buddy Housing. During early 2000 we added a Quest
Aqua-Lite dual head U/W video light system.
The videographer follows the following procedure:
While on the surface, the diver videotapes 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 frame-grabbed and
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 video 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 videographer then moves slowly (4 min per transect) along the 10 m
transect while videotaping 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 videographer 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. One digital videotape (1 hour tape)
is used to capture 10 transects.
Digital stills replaced video transects in 2004. 20 images were taken per
transect or 200 images per survey line.
2. Laboratory Data Analysis
PointCount99 was replaced with PhotoGrid starting in 2002.
PhotoGrid was designed for CRAMP to output data in a PointCount format. They
should be fully compatible except many of the categories are not applicable
(N/A). The methodology of PhotoGrid software is similar to PointCount99.
Each transect is 10 m in length. Twenty non-overlapping video frames or still
images are selected and processed using Photogrid software to
develop estimates for coral and substrate types. The statistical data
analysis includes a repeated measures ANOVA design with nesting of transects
in depth where frames per transect are treated as sub-samples along a
transect.
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.
Unknown
Dr. Paul Jokiel
Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology
University of Hawaii
Principal Investigator
mailing address
P.O. Box 1346
Kaneohe
Hawaii
96744
USA
808-236-7440
jokiel@hawaii.edu
Directories separate for year 2002 and years 2003-2004
1. data/2002
CSV (ASCII) output from the PhotoGrid for all surveyed lines.
Filename template:
yyIISDDmyyyymmdd.csv
where: yy: last two digits of year
II: Island (Ka Kauai, Oa Oahu, Mo Molokai, Ma Maui, Ha Hawaii)
S: site
DD: depth
m: always "m", meters
yyyymmdd: survey date
Fields in these files:
Site Name - usually NA (not available)
Station - usually NA
Frame No - usually NA
Image Date - usually NA, get survey (image) date from filename
ID Name - equivalent to TaxonName in PointCount99, this is the species
recorded but for some organisms if not identifiable to the
species or even genus level then just to taxanomic level
ID Code - usually NA
The following are PhotoGrid parameters equivalent to PointCount parameters
of the same name.
Point - Point number on the frame
X - X coordinate on the image for each point
Y - Y coordinate on the image for each point
Intensity - value for the point
Red - RGB value on the image
Green - RGB value on the image
Blue - RGB value on the image
Notes from Kuulei Rodgers concerning these parameters:
"Point X and Y are the coordinates for each of the 50 points that are generated
on an image. This way if you want to go back and check if it is correct or
what someone called some organism it will regenerate the frame with the random
points that were originally used. If for example you see Pavona maldivensis
and want to see if that is correct because you don't think it is at that site
and may have been interpreted, you can go back and look at point #7 to see
what is under it. The program will use the coordinates to reconstruct the
original random points on that frame. Red, Green
and Blue are just the exact colors as the person who first did the analysis
saw it. Since you can adjust the color balance and the contrast, the program
saves the adjustments so it can be revisited if need be later."
Filename - this is a critical parameter. It is the name of the image file.
Convention is yyIISSSDDmTTFFF,
yy : last two digits of year
II : island
SSS : site (see #STATIONS above)
DDm : depth in meters
TT : transect number
FFF : frame number
The remaining parameters can be ignored and are usually NA:
Total Points,ID Date,Site ID,Site Code,Time Code,Institution,User
Name,Habitat,WQS,Length,Depth
Potential frequently asked question:
-The CRAMP website lists available benthic data parameters: coral and
substrate cover. Can these be derived from the PhotoGrid data given?
How?
Reply from Ku'ulei Rodgers:
We use ACCESS, a relational database that calculates these for us
but it can be done in EXCEL as well by sorting alphabetically and deriving a
percent of the total for each substrate type. For example if you have 10
points that are Porites compressa and there are 20 frames with 50 points on
each, this would be 10 out of 1000 points for the whole transect so 1% cover.
This is then done for each substrate type. Then all the coral species
percentages are added together for a total coral cover number.
Within directory data/2002, there is a directory access/, which
contains MS Excel spreadsheets that were made from various MS Access
tables and queries. Redundant CSV files were made of each. Data are
from 1999-2002. Files are:
Filename Comments
qryTaxonList.xls Taxon Name, Family, Species Code, synonym, Common
Name, Hawaiian Name, Trophic, Endemic, mobility
qryTaxonList.csv ASCII copy
tblCoralSummary.xls Year, Site, Transect, Frame, Total of Taxon,
Specific counts for taxa types, Total Coral
tblCoralSummary.csv ASCII copy
tblSite.xls SiteID, Island, Site, SiteName, Depth, Depth Code,
Latitude, Longitude, Status, ReserveSize
tblSite.csv ASCII copy
tblSurvey.xls SurveyID, SiteID, Survey, Date, Year
tblSurvey.csv ASCII copy
tblTaxon.xls TaxonID, TaxonIDCode, Type, Family, SpeciesCode,
TaxonName, synonym, Hawaiian Name, Common Name,
Trophic, Endemic, Mobility
tblTaxon.csv ASCII copy
2. data/2003_4
These are output from PhotoGrid as CSV files. Format same as
described for the 2002 above.
Files Comments
03OaAla03m.CSV Ala Wai, Oahu, 30 Nov 2003, 3m
03OaAla10m.csv same, 10m
03OaHee02m.CSV Heeia, Oahu, 03 Oct 2003, 2m
03OaHee08m.CSV same, 8m
03OaMok03m.CSV Moku o loe, Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, 23 Oct 2003, 3m
03OaMok08m.CSV same, 8m
03OaWai02m.CSV Waiahole (Kaalaea), Kaneohe Bay, Oahu,
26 Sep 2003, 2m
03OaWai8m.CSV same, 8m
04KaHan03m.CSV Hanalei, Kauai, 06 Sep 2004, 3m
04KaHan04m.CSV same, 4m
04KaHan08m.CSV same, 8m
04KaLim.CSV Limahuli, Kauai, 07 Sep 2004, all depths
04 Kamalo.CSV Kamalo, Molokai, 10 Mar 2004, all depths
04 Kamiloloa.CSV Kamiloloa, Molokai, 12 Mar 2004, all depths
04 Palaau.CSV Palaau, Molokai, 11 Mar 2004, all depths
None
NOAA/NESDIS/NODC/NCDDC (National Coastal Data Development Center)
Mailing and Physical Address
National Coastal Data Development Center, Building 1100
Stennis Space Center
MS
39529
866-732-2382
228-688-2968
ncddcgetdata@noaa.gov
8am-5pm, Monday through Friday
Downloadable Data
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.
20210106
20090323
Mr. Patrick C. Caldwell
NOAA/NESDIS/NODC/NCDDC
Hawaii/US Pacific Liaison
mailing
1000 Pope Road, MSB 316
Dept. of Oceanography
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Honolulu
Hawaii
96822
USA
(808)-956-4105
(808) 956-2352
caldwell@hawaii.edu
8 AM to 5 PM weekdays
check services@nodc.noaa.gov if not available
FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata
FGDC-STD-001-1998
20090323125107
None
20020327
20040907
https://www.coris.noaa.gov/metadata/records/html/nodc_cr_benthic_02_04_fgdc_0002313.html
2657