2014 JNCC/MSS Solan Bank Reef Drop Down Video Survey
The Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) and Marine Scotland Science (MSS) undertook an offshore seabed survey of Solan Bank Reef Site of Community Importance (SCI) on the MRV Scotia from 28 October 2014 to 9 November 2014 (Cruise Code: 1714S). The survey was planned with the aim of evaluating whether sponge morphological abundance can be sufficiently measured from drop down camera images and videos, to inform development of a national indicator of 'Good Environmental Status' as part of the UK's obligations under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). Initial baseline data on epifaunal communities and associated environmental variables in the Solan Bank SCI was collected, to assist in determining whether the indicator is viable for UK offshore waters. Data collected on this survey was assessed to determine whether there are sufficient abundances of different sponge morphologies at the site to detect significant change in these communities. 166 combined Drop Frame Drop Down Video (DDV) and Seabird 19 (CTD) transects were completed and Acoustic Doppler Current Profile (ADCP) data from 3 stations were collected.
dataset
JNCCOFFSURV1714S
http://https://jncc.gov.uk
eng
urn:ogc:def:crs:EPSG::4326
Goudge, H., Morris-Webb, E., Stamp, T., Perry, F., Deamer-John, A. & O'Connor, J., (2016), Analysis of seabed video and stills data collected by drop down camera on the Solan Bank Reef SCI (1714S) (2014), JNCC Report No. 582, JNCC, Peterborough, ISSN 0963-8091. [https://hub.jncc.gov.uk/assets/82565f06-561e-4534-b203-caa69c950a82]
biota
imageryBaseMapsEarthCover
oceans
revision
2008-01-06
revision
2009-11-16
-5.3000
-4.8000
59.2000
58.8000
creation
2009-06-18
Scottish Continental Shelf
creation
1954-01-01
North Sea
revision
2010-01-01
circalittoral
2014-10-28
2014-11-09
publication
2018-05-17
creation
2015-12-01
revision
2015-12-01
notPlanned
Targeted sampling was undertaken in areas where sponges had been observed on the CEND1108 survey of the site in 2008, or were deemed likely to occur based on existing habitat data for site. Effort was concentrated in areas of the site previously delineated as bedrock reef and as stony reef. ADCP stations were selected to maximise coverage across the site and on the substrate features of interest (Annex I bedrock and stony reef, as previously delineated). Drop down video system set up and operation followed the MESH 'Recommended Operating Guidelines (ROG) for underwater video and photographic imaging techniques'. Annex I Reef habitat subtypes were assigned to stills and distinct habitats within video clips. Due to the sparse and sand-scoured look of the reefs observed in some imagery, surveyors were not confident in assigning some areas with the Annex I reef designation, although the areas met the reef criteria. As a result, surveyor confidence was attributed to Annex I reef assignment, with assignments qualitatively split into 'low' 'medium' and 'high' confidence by surveyors. To ensure all surveyors undertook analysis and recording in the same way, and to minimise inter-surveyor variability, the first few days of analysis were used for Quality Assurance (QA) purposes. Whilst working together, the team watched and split the first few video transects and analysed the video samples and several corresponding stills. This ensured recording was consistent and any difficulties in species or substrate identification were highlighted and addressed. To ensure species and habitat identification was consistent between surveyors, regular discussion was maintained between the surveyors throughout analysis. In addition, all surveyors saved screen-grabs of taxa from stills and video, and organised these by phyla. Screen grabs were taken of both identifiable taxa and also taxa that presented ID difficulties either due to image clarity or ID uncertainty. At least once a week during the analysis stage, the surveyors spent half a day together reviewing uncertain taxa, agreeing how to deal with them, the appropriate taxonomic level they should be recorded to, and where appropriate, any relevant qualifier. After the analysis stage was complete, a minimum of 10% of video clips and all associated stills were re-analysed by a different surveyor, to ensure inter-surveyor variability was reduced to a minimum. If, after re-analysis, the Quality Assurance (QA) highlighted significant inter-worker variability, the two surveyors worked together to determine where discrepancies occurred and formulated specific rules to overcome such differences for future analysis. If significant differences were identified between surveyors, consistent errors were corrected post analysis (for instance, inconsistent misnaming of one taxa or substrate). The qualifiers of some taxa were changed as part of quality control to ensure consistency following surveyor discussions, whilst some taxa were merged (for instance, where several different encrusting sponges were considered the same sponge at different exposure levels), prior to Marine Recorder (MR) data entry.
publication
2018-01-23
true
See the referenced specification
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
Data Officer
Marine Scotland Science
originator
Data
Joint Nature Conservation Committee - Peterborough Office
originator
Data
Joint Nature Conservation Committee - Peterborough Office
custodian
Data
Joint Nature Conservation Committee - Peterborough Office
pointOfContact
2020-02-13