Metadata Federation of PICES Member Countries

(Document pdf contains 193 pages) Executive Summary (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 1. Introduction (pdf, 0.2 Mb) 1.1 Data sharing, international boundaries and large marine ecosystems 2. Objectives (pdf, 0.3 Mb) 3. Background (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 3.1 North Pacific Ecosystem Metadatabase 3.2 First federation effort: NPEM and the Korea Oceanographic Data Center 3.2 Continuing effort: Adding Japan’s Marine Information Research Center 4. Metadata Standards (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 4.1 Directory Interchange Format 4.2 Ecological Metadata Language 4.3 Dublin Core 4.3.1. Elements of DC 4.4 Federal Geographic Data Committee 4.5 The ISO 19115 Metadata Standard 4.6 Metadata stylesheets 4.7 Crosswalks 4.8 Tools for creating metadata 5. Communication Protocols (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 5.1 Z39.50 5.1.1. What does Z39.50 do? 5.1.2. Isite 6. Clearinghouses (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 7. Methodology (pdf, 0.2 Mb) 7.1 FGDC metadata 7.1.1. Main sections 7.1.2. Supporting sections 7.1.3. Metadata validation 7.2 Getting a copy of Isite 7.3 NSDI Clearinghouse 8. Server Configuration and Technical Issues (pdf, 0.4 Mb) 8.1 Hardware recommendations 8.2 Operating system – Red Hat Linux Fedora 8.3 Web services – Apache HTTP Server version 2.2.3 8.4 Create and validate FGDC-compliant Metadata in XML format 8.5 Obtaining, installing and configuring Isite for UNIX/Linux 8.5.1. Download the appropriate Isite software 8.5.2. Untar the file 8.5.3. Name your database 8.5.4. The zserver.ini file 8.5.5. The sapi.ini file 8.5.6. Indexing metadata 8.5.7. Start the Clearinghouse Server process 8.5.8. Testing the zserver installation 8.6 Registering with NSDI Clearinghouse 8.7 Security issues 9. Search Tutorial and Examples (pdf, 1 Mb) 9.1 Legacy NSDI Clearinghouse search interface 9.2 New GeoNetwork search interface 10. Challenges (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 11. Emerging Standards (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 12. Future Activity (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 13. Acknowledgments (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 14. References (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 15. Acronyms (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 16. Appendices 16.1. KODC-NPEM meeting agendas and minutes (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 16.1.1. Seattle meeting agenda, August 22–23, 2005 16.1.2. Seattle meeting minutes, August 22–23, 2005 16.1.3. Busan meeting agenda, October 10–11, 2005 16.1.4. Busan meeting minutes, October 10–11, 2005 16.2. MIRC-NPEM meeting agendas and minutes (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 16.2.1. Seattle Meeting agenda, August 14-15, 2006 16.2.2. Seattle meeting minutes, August 14–15, 2006 16.2.3. Tokyo meeting agenda, October 19–20, 2006 16.2.4. Tokyo, meeting minutes, October 19–20, 2006 16.3. XML stylesheet conversion crosswalks (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 16.3.1. FGDCI to DIF stylesheet converter 16.3.2. DIF to FGDCI stylesheet converter 16.3.3. String-modified stylesheet 16.4. FGDC Metadata Standard (pdf, 0.1 Mb) 16.4.1. Overall structure 16.4.2. Section 1: Identification information 16.4.3. Section 2: Data quality information 16.4.4. Section 3: Spatial data organization information 16.4.5. Section 4: Spatial reference information 16.4.6. Section 5: Entity and attribute information 16.4.7. Section 6: Distribution information 16.4.8. Section 7: Metadata reference information 16.4.9. Sections 8, 9 and 10: Citation information, time period information, and contact information 16.5. Images of the Isite server directory structure and the files contained in each subdirectory after Isite installation (pdf, 0.2 Mb) 16.6 Listing of NPEM’s Isite configuration files (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 16.6.1. zserver.ini 16.6.2. sapi.ini 16.7 Java program to extract records from the NPEM metadatabase and write one XML file for each record (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) 16.8 Java program to execute the metadata extraction program (pdf, < 0.1 Mb) A1 Addendum 1: Instructions for Isite for Windows (pdf, 0.6 Mb) A2 Addendum 2: Instructions for Isite for Windows ADHOST (pdf, 0.3 Mb)

Parasitology and pathology of marine organisms of the world ocean

The Symposium in which the communications, as they were called during the meeting, comprising this volume were presented was held at the Zoological Institute of the Academy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R. in Leningrad during 13 to 16 October 1981. Conducted as part of the cooperative program of the U.S.A.-U.S.S.R. Working Group on Biological Productivity and Biochemistry of the World Ocean, the Leningrad meeting was sponsored by the Academy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R. (the Zoological Institute) and the Ministry of Fisheries of the U.S.S.R. (The Scientific Council on Fish Diseases of the Ichthyological Commission). It was an extremely interesting and successful Symposium, offering all participants the opportunity to describe the results of their studies and reviews during the course of the formal presentations and direct interchange between scientists during breaks in the program and the organized and casual social activities. The facilities provided by the Zoological Institute were quite adequate and the assistance offered by its Director, O. A. Scarlato and his staff in organization,logistics, and translation was excellent. Several of our Soviet colleagues presided over the proceedings, as did I. All were businesslike and efficient, yet graceful and accommodating. To O. N. Bauer Jell the brunt of programmatic detail and follow-up. He bore his burdens well and, with Director Scarlato and his staff, including A. V. Gussev and others of the professional and technical staffs of the Zoological Institute, helped make our stay pleasant and the Symposium productive. These organizations and individuals deserve much credit and praise as well as the thanks of their American and British colleagues. (PDF file contains 141 pages.)

Soviet-American Cooperative Research on Marine Mammals. Volume 1- Pinnipeds: Under Project V.6. Marine Mammals, of the US-USSR Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of Environmental Protection

Some 25 to 30 yr ago, when we as students were beginning our respective careers and were developing for the first time our awareness of marine mammals in the waters separating western North America from eastern Asia, we had visions of eventually bridging the communication gap which existed between our two countries at that time. Each of us was anxious to obtain information on the distribution, biology, and ecological relations of "our" seals and walruses on "the other side," beyond our respective political boundari~s where we were not permitted to go to study them. We were concerned that the resource management practices on the other side of the Bering and Chukchi Seas, implemented in isolation, on a purely unilateral basis, might endanger the species which we had come to know and were striving to conserve. At once apparent to both of us was the need for free exchange of biological information between our two countries and, ultimately, joint management of our shared resources. In a small way, we and others made some initial efforts to generate that exchange by personal correspondence and through vocal interchange at the annual meetings of the North Pacific Fur Seal Commission. By the enabling Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of Environmental Protection, reached between our two countries in 1972, our earlier visions at last came true. Since that time, within the framework of the Marine Mammal Project under Area V of that Agreement, we and our colleagues have forged a strong bond of professional accord and respect, in an atmosphere of free intercommunication and mutual understanding. The strength and utility of this arrangement from the beginning of our joint research are reflected in the reports contained in this, the first compendium of our work. The need for a series of such a compendia became apparent to us in 1976, and its implementation was agreed on by the regular meeting of the Project in La Jolla, Calif., in January 1977. Obviously, the preparation and publication of this first volume has been excessively delayed, in part by continuing political distrust between our governments but mainly by increasing demands placed on the time of the contributors. In this period of growing environmental concern in both countries, we and our colleagues have been totally immersed in other tasks and have experienced great difficulty in drawing together the works presented here. Much of the support for doing so was provided by the State of Alaska, through funding for Organized Research at the University of Alaska-Fairbanks. For its ultimate completion in publishable form we wish to thank Helen Stockholm, Director of Publications, Institute of Marine Science, University of Alaska, and her staff, especially Ruth Hand, and the numerous referees narned herein who gave willingly oftheir time to review each ofthe manuscripts critically and to provide a high measure of professionalism to the final product. (PDF file contains 110 pages.)

Proceedings of the International Workshop on age determination of oceanic pelagic fishes: Tunas, billfishes, and sharks, Miami, Florida, February 15-18,1982

Accurate and precise estimates of age and growth rates are essential parameters in understanding the population dynamics of fishes. Some of the more sophisticated stock assessment models, such as virtual population analysis, require age and growth information to partition catch data by age. Stock assessment efforts by regulatory agencies are usually directed at specific fisheries which are being heavily exploited and are suspected of being overfished. Interest in stock assessment of some of the oceanic pelagic fishes (tunas, billfishes, and sharks) has developed only over the last decade, during which exploitation has increased steadily in response to increases in worldwide demand for these resources. Traditionally, estimating the age of fishes has been done by enumerating growth bands on skeletal hardparts, through length frequency analysis, tag and recapture studies, and raising fish in enclosures. However, problems related to determining the age of some of the oceanic pelagic fishes are unique compared with other species. For example, sampling is difficult for these large, highly mobile fishes because of their size, extensive distributions throughout the world's oceans, and for some, such as the marlins, infrequent catches. In addition, movements of oceanic pelagic fishes often transect temperate as well as tropical oceans, making interpretation of growth bands on skeletal hardparts more difficult than with more sedentary temperate species. Many oceanic pelagics are also long-lived, attaining ages in excess of 30 yr, and more often than not, their life cycles do not lend themselves easily to artificial propagation and culture. These factors contribute to the difficulty of determining ages and are generally characteristic of this group-the tunas, billfishes, and sharks. Accordingly, the rapidly growing international concern in managing oceanic pelagic fishes, as well as unique difficulties in ageing these species, prompted us to hold this workshop. Our two major objectives for this workshop are to: I) Encourage the interchange of ideas on this subject, and 2) establish the "state of the art." A total of 65 scientists from 10 states in the continental United States and Hawaii, three provinces in Canada, France, Republic of Senegal, Spain, Mexico, Ivory Coast, and New South Wales (Australia) attended the workshop held at the Southeast Fisheries Center, Miami, Fla., 15-18 February 1982. Our first objective, encouraging the interchange of ideas, is well illustrated in the summaries of the Round Table Discussions and in the Glossary, which defines terms used in this volume. The majority of the workshop participants agreed that the lack of validation of age estimates and the means to accomplish the same are serious problems preventing advancements in assessing the age and growth of fishes, particularly oceanic pelagics. The alternatives relating to the validation problem were exhaustively reviewed during the Round Table Discussions and are a major highlight of this workshop. How well we accomplished our second objective, to establish the "state of the art" on age determination of oceanic pelagic fishes, will probably best be judged on the basis of these proceedings and whether future research efforts are directed at the problem areas we have identified. In order to produce high-quality papers, workshop participants served as referees for the manuscripts published in this volume. Several papers given orally at the workshop, and included in these proceedings, were summarized from full-length manuscripts, which have been submitted to or published in other scientific outlets-these papers are designated as SUMMARY PAPERS. In addition, the SUMMARY PAPER designation was also assigned to workshop papers that represented very preliminary or initial stages of research, cursory progress reports, papers that were data shy, or provide only brief reviews on general topics. Bilingual abstracts were included for all papers that required translation. We gratefully acknowledge the support of everyone involved in this workshop. Funding was provided by the Southeast Fisheries Center, and Jack C. Javech did the scientific illustrations appearing on the cover, between major sections, and in the Glossary. (PDF file contains 228 pages.)

Distribution and abundance of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) and other marine mammals off the northern Washington coast

We examined the summer distribution of marine mammals off the northern Washington coast based on six ship transect surveys conducted between 1995 and 2002, primarily from the NOAA ship McArthur. Additionally, small boat surveys were conducted in the same region between 1989 and 2002 to gather photographic identification data on humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) and killer whales (Orcinus orca) to examine movements and population structure. In the six years of ship survey effort, 706 sightings of 15 marine mammal species were made. Humpback whales were the most common large cetacean species and were seen every year and a total of 232 sightings of 402 animals were recorded during ship surveys. Highest numbers were observed in 2002, when there were 79 sightings of 139 whales. Line-transect estimates for humpback whales indicated that about 100 humpback whales inhabited these waters each year between 1995 and 2000; in 2002, however, the estimate was 562 (CV= 0.21) whales. A total of 191 unique individuals were identified photographically and mark recapture estimates also indicated that the number of animals increased from under 100 to over 200 from 1995 to 2002. There was only limited interchange of humpback whales between this area and feeding areas off Oregon and California. Killer whales were also seen on every ship survey and represented all known ecotypes of the Pacific Northwest, including southern and northern residents, transients, and offshore-type killer whales. Dall’s porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli) were the most frequently sighted small cetacean; abundance was estimated at 181−291 individuals, except for 2002 when we observed dramatically higher numbers (876, CV= 0.30). Northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus) and elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) were the most common pinnipeds observed. There were clear habitat differences related to distance offshore and water depth for different species.