Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-zeroOct 2023View details →

NOAA NCCOS Assessment: Agency priorities for mapping coral reef ecosystems in American Samoa, 2023-06-06 to 2023-08-07

Description:NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP) has identified a need for priority locations based on emerging management requirements in shallow coral reef areas (up to 40 meters depth) surrounding American Samoa. The priorities provided by participating agencies will inform research and monitoring activities, address current and future management needs, and maximize opportunities to leverage and complement existing regional efforts.To meet this need, NOAA's National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) developed a systematic, quantitative approach and online GIS application to gather seafloor mapping priorities from researchers and coral reef managers. Participants placed virtual coins into a grid overlaid on the project area to express the location of their mapping priorities. They also used pull-down menus to indicate specific mapping data needs and the rationale for their selections. Participants' inputs were compiled and analyzed to identify high priority areas along with their justifications and requirements. A total of nine participant groups entered their mapping priorities into the online tool. Identifying these high priority areas provide a critical spatial framework for prioritizing mapping efforts in shallow coral reef ecosystems in American Samoa.Purpose:The overall goal of the project was to systematically gather and quantify suggestions for mapping needs to support management of shallow coral reef ecosystems along the coast of the American Samoa. This dataset supports these goals by compiling input from a diversity of regional experts on their recommended priorities for mapping data collection.Methods:An advisory group was established which included individuals from NOAA CRCP and NOAA Fisheries. This advisory team customized the prioritization process specifically to meet the needs of CRCP and local coral reef manager priorities. In the online prioritization tool the study area was divided into 160 hexagonal grid cells 2.6 km2 in size. Existing relevant spatial datasets (e.g., bathymetry layers, Sanctuary Protection Areas, etc.) were provided as a digital atlas to help participants understand information and data gaps within the project area and to identify locations they wanted to prioritize for future data collections. Each participant was provided with 50 virtual coins to place into grid cells that they wished to prioritize. They were instructed to place more coins in grid cells that were higher priorities. A maximum of 5 coins could be placed into an individual grid cell. Respondents also reported why these locations were important by selecting a minimum of one, and a maximum of two, management uses from the following list: endangered species management (e.g.,), habitat restoration, monitoring, coastal vulnerability planning, watershed management, fisheries management, consultations and permitting, emergency response, and spatial protection and management. Respondents also reported requirements of data were needed in priority cells. A minimum of one, to a maximum of two choices were selected from the following list: delineations of large topographic features, delineations of hard vs. soft bottom, models of habitat suitability for key taxa or communities, delineations of substrate type (e.g. sand, mud, coral, rock), models of presence/absence or density of corals, identification of coral species and their local environments, documentation of individual specimen condition. Coin values were summarized and mapped to identify high priority areas, reasons for those priorities, and information needs. This ESRI shapefile contains the 2.6 km2 grid cells used in this prioritization and their associated coin values overall, as well as by management use, data product, and mapping methodology. Other summary values include the number of participants, number of participating groups, number of management uses, and number of data requirements. Additionally, coins for microscale (identification of coral species and their local environments and documentation of individual specimen condition), mesoscale (delineations of substrate type, models of presence/absence/density of corals), and regional (delineations of topographic features, delineations of hard vs. soft bottom, models of habitat suitability) requirements were summarized. Also included is a ranking of each grid cell based on the total number of coins, management uses, and participating groups allocating coins in the respective cell. For a complete description of the process and analysis see: Hile et al. 2023, in prep.

opencc-zeroAug 2022View details →

NOAA NCCOS Assessment: Agency priorities for mapping coral reef ecosystems in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, 2021-11-03 to 2022-01-14

Description: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) developed a spatial framework, process, and online application (Buja and Christensen 2019) to identify mapping needs along the Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Island (USVI) coasts to support shallow coral reef management by NOAA’s Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP). Participants from local, federal, academic, and other institutions (sixteen in Puerto Rico, eighteen in USVI), entered their priorities in an online participatory Geographic Information System (pGIS). Participants used virtual coins to denote their priorities in 2.6 km2 hexagonal grid cells overlaid on the study area, individually for Puerto Rico and USVI. Grid cells with more coins were higher priorities than cells with fewer coins. Participants also reported why these locations were important, what data types were needed, and data collection methodologies using a pre-set list of options. Results were compiled, summarized, and mapped to identify high priority areas, reasons for those priorities, and information needs. Identifying these high priority areas provide a critical spatial framework for prioritizing mapping efforts in shallow coral reef ecosystems in Puerto Rico and USVI.   Purpose: The overall goal of the project was to systematically gather and quantify suggestions for mapping needs to support management of shallow coral reef ecosystems along the coasts of Puerto Rico and USVI. This dataset supports these goals by compiling input from a diversity of regional experts on their recommended priorities for mapping data collection.   Methods: An advisory group was established which included individuals from NOAA CRCP and NOAA Fisheries. This advisory team customized the pGIS process specifically to meet the needs of CRCP and local coral reef manager priorities. In the online pGIS, the Puerto Rico study area was divided into 2007 hexagonal grid cells 2.6 km2 in size. The USVI study area was divided into 644 hexagonal grid cells 2.6 km2 in size. Existing relevant spatial datasets (e.g., bathymetry, Sanctuary Protection Areas, etc.) were provided as a digital atlas to help participants understand information and data gaps within the project area and to identify locations they wanted to prioritize for future data collections. The pGIS was used by 16 participants in Puerto Rico and 18 participants in USVI to convey their recommendations. Each Puerto Rico participant was provided with 600 virtual coins to place into grid cells that they wished to prioritize. Each USVI participant was provided with 200 coins. They were instructed to place more coins in grid cells that were higher priorities. A maximum of 60 coins could be placed into an individual grid cell in Puerto Rico by each respondent, and a maximum of 20 coins could be place into an individual grid cell in USVI. Respondents also reported why these locations were important by selecting a minimum of one, and a maximum of two, management uses from the following list: endangered species management (e.g.,), habitat restoration, monitoring, coastal vulnerability planning, watershed management, fisheries management, consultations and permitting, emergency response, and spatial protection and management. Respondents also reported requirements of data were needed in priority cells. A minimum of one, to a maximum of two choices were selected from the following list: delineations of large topographic features, delineations of hard vs. soft bottom, models of habitat suitability for key taxa or communities, delineations of substrate type (e.g. sand, mud, coral, rock), models of presence/absence or density of corals, identification of coral species and their local environments, documentation of individual specimen condition. Coin values were summarized and mapped to identify high priority areas, reasons for those priorities, and information needs. This ESRI shapefile contains the 2.6 km2 grid cells used in this prioritization and their associated coin values overall, as well as by management use, data product, and mapping methodology. Other summary values include the number of participants, number of participating groups, number of management uses, and number of data requirements. Additionally, coins for microscale (identification of coral species and their local environments and documentation of individual specimen condition), mesoscale (delineations of substrate type, models of presence/absence/density of corals), and regional (delineations of topographic features, delineations of hard vs. soft bottom, models of habitat suitability) requirements were summarized. Also included is a ranking of each grid cell based on the total number of coins, management uses, and participating groups allocating coins in the respective cell. For a complete description of the process and analysis see: Kraus et al. 2022, in prep.

Fig. 6 in Multiple Environmental Factors Increase the Niche Complexity and Species Diversity of Brachyuran Crabs in an Intertidal Algal Reef Ecosystem in Northwestern Taiwan.

Fig. 6. The box plot of abundance of all crab species with a carapace width smaller than 10 mm across the six sites (A) and seasons (B) in the reef habitat. The core volumes are 950 cm3.

Fig. 2 in Multiple Environmental Factors Increase the Niche Complexity and Species Diversity of Brachyuran Crabs in an Intertidal Algal Reef Ecosystem in Northwestern Taiwan.

Fig. 2. The species compositions in all six study sites in the algal reef habitat. Each bar represents the total number of species recorded at each site. Family is the lowest taxonomic category in this figure.

Fig. 3 in Multiple Environmental Factors Increase the Niche Complexity and Species Diversity of Brachyuran Crabs in an Intertidal Algal Reef Ecosystem in Northwestern Taiwan.

Fig. 3. Relationship between the species richness and local contribution to beta diversity (LCBD) indexes among the six sites in the algal reef habitat.

Fig. 5 in Multiple Environmental Factors Increase the Niche Complexity and Species Diversity of Brachyuran Crabs in an Intertidal Algal Reef Ecosystem in Northwestern Taiwan.

Fig. 5. The box plot of abundance of all crab species with carapace width larger than 10 mm for three factors: A: season; B: tidal and sampling time; C: study site and sampling time. The gray bar is daytime; the dark gray bar is night. The high tidal level is the edge between the sand and reef; the medium tidal level is at the algal reef 1 m below sea level.

opencc-by-4.0Jan 2016View details →

Figure 1. - A in Possible collapse of reef shark populations in remote coral reef ecosystems in the Coral Sea (Western Pacific)

Figure 1. - A: Location of the Chesterfield and Bampton reefs in a central position among the Coral Sea, between the Australian Eastern coast and New Caledonia. B: Close up of the reefs where the 2010 and 2011 field trips were conducted; specific spots for shark surveys are shown with circles around the Bampton Reefs. C: Close up on the Chesterfield reefs with circles showing the locations for fishing and underwater visual surveys.

opencc-by-4.0Jan 2016View details →

Figure 3 in Possible collapse of reef shark populations in remote coral reef ecosystems in the Coral Sea (Western Pacific)

Figure 3. - Comparison of average sizes of grey reef shark (C. amblyrhynchos) assessed through underwater visual censuses during the 2010 (blue) and 2011 (orange) field trips. In order to facilitate the comparison, shark numbers were linked to effort (h). Sizes above 120 cm TL are essentially rep- resented by the assessment in BF3 spot (North Avon Islet) for which densities and sizes were far above the rest of the Bampton and Chesterfield reefs.

opencc-by-4.0Jan 2016View details →

Figure 2 in Possible collapse of reef shark populations in remote coral reef ecosystems in the Coral Sea (Western Pacific)

Figure 2. - Number of grey reef shark (C. amblyrhynchos) per size classes caught in Moorea Island (French Polynesia) and Chesterfield Islands reefs (New Caledonia), respectively, with similar techniques and fishing effort (25 h × 1 operator). The size difference was assessed as highly significantly (P <0.001), and greater in Moorea than in the Chesterfield, by a one-tailed Mann-Whitney U-test.

dryad40/100

Data from: Restoring marine ecosystems: spatial reef configuration triggers taxon-specific responses among early colonizers

1. The longstanding debate in conservation biology on the importance of single large or several small (SLOSS) habitats for preserving biodiversity remains highly relevant, given the ongoing degradation and loss of natural habitats worldwide. Restoration efforts are often constrained by limited resources, and insights from SLOSS studies therefore have important implications if restoration efforts can be optimized by manipulating the spatial configuration of restored habitats. Yet, the relevance of SLOSS for habitat restoration remains largely unexplored. 2. Here, we report the effects of spatial reef configuration on early colonization of marine organisms after restoring boulder reef habitats. Reefs were restored in single large (SL) and several small (SS) designs in the western Baltic Sea, where century-long boulder extraction has severely degraded large reef areas and likely exacerbated regional declines in commercially important gadoids (Gadidae spp.). We sampled the field sites using remote underwater video systems in a before-after control-impact (BACI) design and obtained probabilistic inferences on restoration and SLOSS effects from Bayesian hierarchical models. 3. Probabilities of a positive restoration effect were high (>95%) for gadoids, labrids and demersal gobies, moderate (60-75%) for species richness and sand gobies, and low (<5%) for flatfish abundance. Notably, gadoid abundance increased 60-fold and 129-fold on average at SL and SS, respectively. The species composition at restored reefs deviated from control sites, mainly driven by large-bodied piscivores. 4. Spatial reef configuration had the strongest effect on small-bodied mesopredators, including gobies, which were more abundant and driving a distinct species assemblage at SS. In addition to providing suitable conditions for reef species, results suggest that SS can also benefit soft-bottom taxa, possibly through a dispersed predator-mediated effect relative to SL. 5. Synthesis and applications. This study demonstrates that boulder reef restoration can strongly promote the abundance of exploited gadoids and is therefore a promising management tool to support top-down controls by predatory fishes in degraded marine systems. The higher abundance of mesopredators at SS reefs suggests that SLOSS could have long-term implications for trophic structure and resilience of restored habitats, and should therefore become an important facet within restoration strategies.

opencc-zeroAug 2021View details →

Fig. 5 in Preliminary observations of macrobenthic invertebrates and megafauna communities in the upper mesophotic coral ecosystems in Apo Reef Natural Park, Philippines

Fig. 5. Barplots represent the total species richness across the depths (A) and reef types (B). C and E show the abundance of macrobenthic invertebrates and megafauna, respectively, with their corresponding trophic groups across depths. D and F show the abundance of macrobenthic invertebrates and megafauna, respectively, with their corresponding trophic groups across reef types.

Fig. 3 in Preliminary observations of macrobenthic invertebrates and megafauna communities in the upper mesophotic coral ecosystems in Apo Reef Natural Park, Philippines

Fig. 3. Macrobenthic invertebrate species in Apo Reef Natural Park. A, Holothuria atra; B, Holothuria fuscogilva; C, Thelenota anax; D, Thelenotarubra lineata; E, Thromidia catalai; F, Tridacna sp.; G, Xetospongia sp.

Fig. 2 in Preliminary observations of macrobenthic invertebrates and megafauna communities in the upper mesophotic coral ecosystems in Apo Reef Natural Park, Philippines

Fig. 2. Reef fish and marine reptile megafaunal species in Apo Reef Natural Park. A, Eretmochelys imbricata; B, Bolbometopon muricatum; C, Balistoides viridescens; D, Cheilinus undulatus; E, Caranx melampygus; F, Cephalopholis argus; G, Macolor niger; H, Sphyraena qenie; I, Triaenodon obesus.

Fig. 1 in Preliminary observations of macrobenthic invertebrates and megafauna communities in the upper mesophotic coral ecosystems in Apo Reef Natural Park, Philippines

Fig. 1. Map showing the location of Apo Reef Natural Park in the Philippines, as well as, the study sites that were surveyed in March 2016.