Coral Remote Sensing Workshop: Proceedings and Recommendations, 17-18 September, Sheraton, Brickell Ave, Miami FL

Coral reefs exist in warm, clear, and relatively shallow marine waters worldwide. These complex assemblages of marine organisms are unique, in that they support highly diverse, luxuriant, and essentially self-sustaining ecosystems in otherwise nutrient-poor and unproductive waters. Coral reefs are highly valued for their great beauty and for their contribution to marine productivity. Coral reefs are favorite destinations for recreational diving and snorkeling, as well as commercial and recreational fishing activities. The Florida Keys reef tract draws an estimated 2 million tourists each year, contributing nearly $800 million to the economy. However, these reef systems represent a very delicate ecological balance, and can be easily damaged and degraded by direct or indirect human contact. Indirect impacts from human activity occurs in a number of different forms, including runoff of sediments, nutrients, and other pollutants associated with forest harvesting, agricultural practices, urbanization, coastal construction, and industrial activities. Direct impacts occur through overfishing and other destructive fishing practices, mining of corals, and overuse of many reef areas, including damage from souvenir collection, boat anchoring, and diver contact. In order to protect and manage coral reefs within U.S. territorial waters, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce has been directed to establish and maintain a system of national marine sanctuaries and reserves, and to monitor the condition of corals and other marine organisms within these areas. To help carry out this mandate the NOAA Coastal Services Center convened a workshop in September, 1996, to identify current and emerging sensor technologies, including satellite, airborne, and underwater systems with potential application for detecting and monitoring corals. For reef systems occurring within depths of 10 meters or less (Figure 1), mapping location and monitoring the condition of corals can be accomplished through use of aerial photography combined with diver surveys. However, corals can exist in depths greater than 90 meters (Figure 2), well below the limits of traditional optical imaging systems such as aerial or surface photography or videography. Although specialized scuba systems can allow diving to these depths, the thousands of square kilometers included within these management areas make diver surveys for deeper coral monitoring impractical. For these reasons, NOAA is investigating satellite and airborne sensor systems, as well as technologies which can facilitate the location, mapping, and monitoring of corals in deeper waters. The following systems were discussed as having potential application for detecting, mapping, and assessing the condition of corals. However, no single system is capable of accomplishing all three of these objectives under all depths and conditions within which corals exist. Systems were evaluated for their capabilities, including advantages and disadvantages, relative to their ability to detect and discriminate corals under a variety of conditions. (PDF contains 55 pages)

Evaluation of the In Situ Ichthyoplankton Imaging System (ISIIS): comparison with the traditional (bongo net) sampler

Plankton and larval fish sampling programs often are limited by a balance between sampling frequency (for precision) and costs. Advancements in sampling techniques hold the potential to add considerable efficiency and, therefore, add sampling frequency to improve precision. We compare a newly developed plankton imaging system, In Situ Ichthyoplankton Imaging System (ISIIS), with a bongo sampler, which is a traditional plankton sampling gear developed in the 1960s. Comparative sampling was conducted along 2 transects ~30–40 km long. Over 2 days, we completed 36 ISIIS tow-yo undulations and 11 bongo oblique tows, each from the surface to within 10 m of the seafloor. Overall, the 2 gears detected comparable numbers of larval fishes, representing similar taxonomic compositions, although larvae captured with the bongo were capable of being identified to lower taxonomic levels, especially larvae in the small (<5 mm), preflexion stages. Size distributions of the sampled larval fishes differed considerably between these 2 sampling methods, with the size range and mean size of larval fishes larger with ISIIS than with the bongo sampler. The high frequency and fine spatial scale of ISIIS allow it to add considerable sampling precision (i.e., more vertical sections) to plankton surveys. Improvements in the ISIIS technology (including greater depth of field and image resolution) should also increase taxonomic resolution and decrease processing time. When coupled with appropriate net sampling (for the purpose of collecting and verifying the identification of biological samples), the use of ISIIS could improve overall survey design and simultaneously provide detailed, process-oriented information for fisheries scientists and oceanographers.

Observation on the production performance of Penaeus monodon with Liza parsia under different cropping system

Study was conducted in six ponds each with an area of 0.1 ha in the pond complex of Brackishwater Station, Paikgacha, Khulna from February to October '96, to find out the variation of production rate in two culture system viz., single and double crop of P. monodon with L. parsia. In treatment T1 wild fry of P. monodon (0.006g) and L. parsia (0.20g) collected from nearby river were stocked at a rate of 40,000 and 10,000/ha, respectively, for a culture period of 120 days. In treatment T2, the rate was 20,000/ha for bagda fry in 1st and 2nd crop each and 10,000 for parsia fry/ha for an extended period of 225 days. The highest survivability and growth of P. monodon and L. parsia were 57.08% (1st crop of T2) and 75.26% (T2), and 27.08g (1st crop of T2) and 47.78g (T2), respectively with a significant variations (P>0.05) with other treatment. The net profit (Tk. 93,134) and cost benefit ratio of 1:1.76 were also found higher in T2.