Techniques for spatial analysis and visualization of benthic mapping data: final report

The mapping and geospatial analysis of benthic environments are multidisciplinary tasks that have become more accessible in recent years because of advances in technology and cost reductions in survey systems. The complex relationships that exist among physical, biological, and chemical seafloor components require advanced, integrated analysis techniques to enable scientists and others to visualize patterns and, in so doing, allow inferences to be made about benthic processes. Effective mapping, analysis, and visualization of marine habitats are particularly important because the subtidal seafloor environment is not readily viewed directly by eye. Research in benthic environments relies heavily, therefore, on remote sensing techniques to collect effective data. Because many benthic scientists are not mapping professionals, they may not adequately consider the links between data collection, data analysis, and data visualization. Projects often start with clear goals, but may be hampered by the technical details and skills required for maintaining data quality through the entire process from collection through analysis and presentation. The lack of technical understanding of the entire data handling process can represent a significant impediment to success. While many benthic mapping efforts have detailed their methodology as it relates to the overall scientific goals of a project, only a few published papers and reports focus on the analysis and visualization components (Paton et al. 1997, Weihe et al. 1999, Basu and Saxena 1999, Bruce et al. 1997). In particular, the benthic mapping literature often briefly describes data collection and analysis methods, but fails to provide sufficiently detailed explanation of particular analysis techniques or display methodologies so that others can employ them. In general, such techniques are in large part guided by the data acquisition methods, which can include both aerial and water-based remote sensing methods to map the seafloor without physical disturbance, as well as physical sampling methodologies (e.g., grab or core sampling). The terms benthic mapping and benthic habitat mapping are often used synonymously to describe seafloor mapping conducted for the purpose of benthic habitat identification. There is a subtle yet important difference, however, between general benthic mapping and benthic habitat mapping. The distinction is important because it dictates the sequential analysis and visualization techniques that are employed following data collection. In this paper general seafloor mapping for identification of regional geologic features and morphology is defined as benthic mapping. Benthic habitat mapping incorporates the regional scale geologic information but also includes higher resolution surveys and analysis of biological communities to identify the biological habitats. In addition, this paper adopts the definition of habitats established by Kostylev et al. (2001) as a “spatially defined area where the physical, chemical, and biological environment is distinctly different from the surrounding environment.” (PDF contains 31 pages)

Development and growth of hatchery-reared larval Florida pompano (Trachinotus carolinus)

Although the Florida pompano (Trachinotus carolinus) is a prime candidate for aquaculture, the problematic production of juveniles remains a major impediment to commercial culture of this species. In order to improve the understanding of larval development and to refine hatchery production techniques, this study was conducted to characterize development and growth of Florida pompano from hatching through metamorphosis by using digital photography and image analysis. Newly hatched larvae were transparent and had a large, elongate yolk sac and single oil globule. The lower and upper jaws as well as the digestive tract were not fully developed at hatching. Rotifers were observed in the stomach of larvae at three days after hatching (DAH), and Artemia spp. were observed in the stomach of larvae at 14 DAH. Growth rates calculated from total length measurements were 0.22 ±0.04, 0.23 ±0.12, and 0.35 ±0.09 mm/d for each of the larval rearing trials. The mouth gape of larvae was 0.266 ±0.075 mm at first feeding and increased with a growth rate of 0.13 ± 0.04 mm/d. Predicted values for optimal prey sizes ranged from 80 to 130 μm at 3 DAH, 160 to 267 μm at 5 DAH, and 454 to 757 μm at 10 DAH. Based on the findings of this study, a refined feeding regime was developed to provide stage- and size-specific guidelines for feeding Florida pompano larvae reared under hatchery con