Comparison of sampling methods to assess benthic marine biodiversity: Are spatial and ecological relationships consistent among sampling gear?

Marine benthic biodiversity can be measured using a range of sampling methods, including benthic sleds or trawls, grabs, and imaging systems, each of which targets a particular community or habitat. Due to the high cost and logistics of benthic sampling, particularly in the deep sea, studies are oft...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Other Authors: Geoscience Australia (isOwnedBy)
Format: Dataset
Language:unknown
Published: data.gov.au
Subjects:
Online Access:https://researchdata.edu.au/comparison-sampling-methods-sampling-gear/1940538
http://data.gov.au/dataset/d0387e39-5598-46af-8024-6faa3b2afdad
id ftands:oai:ands.org.au::1940538
record_format openpolar
spelling ftands:oai:ands.org.au::1940538 2023-09-05T13:20:37+02:00 Comparison of sampling methods to assess benthic marine biodiversity: Are spatial and ecological relationships consistent among sampling gear? Geoscience Australia (isOwnedBy) Spatial: GA1 Spatial: 151.122622,-25.371968 Spatial: true https://researchdata.edu.au/comparison-sampling-methods-sampling-gear/1940538 http://data.gov.au/dataset/d0387e39-5598-46af-8024-6faa3b2afdad unknown data.gov.au https://researchdata.edu.au/comparison-sampling-methods-sampling-gear/1940538 http://data.gov.au/dataset/d0387e39-5598-46af-8024-6faa3b2afdad comparison-of-sampling-methods-to-assess-benthic-marine-biodiversity-are-spatial-and-ecological Geoscience Australia Earth Sciences GA Publication NERP Record marine dataset ftands 2023-08-14T23:06:17Z Marine benthic biodiversity can be measured using a range of sampling methods, including benthic sleds or trawls, grabs, and imaging systems, each of which targets a particular community or habitat. Due to the high cost and logistics of benthic sampling, particularly in the deep sea, studies are often limited to only one or two biological sampling methods. Results of biodiversity studies are used for a range of purposes, including species inventories, environmental impact assessments, and predictive modelling, all of which underpin appropriate marine resource management. However, the generality of marine biodiversity patterns identified among different sampling methods is unknown, as are the associated impacts on management decisions. \nThis report reviews studies that have used two or more sampling methods in order to determine the consistency of their results among gear types, as well as the optimum combination of gear types. In addition, we directly analyse data that were acquired using multiple gear types to examine the consistency of biodiversity patterns among different gear types. These data represent two regions: 1) Joseph Bonaparte Gulf (JBG) in northern Australia, and 2) Icelandic waters as part of the Benthic Invertebrates of Icelandic Waters (BIOICE) program. For each dataset, we investigate potential patterns of biodiversity (measured by species richness, diversity indices, abundance, and community structure) in relation to environmental variables such as depth, geomorphology, and substrate. \nThe availability of worldwide data from benthic marine biodiversity surveys reporting the results of two or more gear types is generally poor. Surveys were concentrated in the coastal regions of UK, Norway and Australia, with limited or no studies elsewhere and only 13% including the slope or deep sea. \nBetween different gear groups, our review and analysis of datasets from two regions (northern Australia and Iceland) demonstrates there is little consistency in marine biodiversity trends, with only one study ... Dataset Iceland Research Data Australia (Australian National Data Service - ANDS) Bonaparte ENVELOPE(160.833,160.833,-83.083,-83.083) Norway
institution Open Polar
collection Research Data Australia (Australian National Data Service - ANDS)
op_collection_id ftands
language unknown
topic Earth Sciences
GA Publication
NERP
Record
marine
spellingShingle Earth Sciences
GA Publication
NERP
Record
marine
Comparison of sampling methods to assess benthic marine biodiversity: Are spatial and ecological relationships consistent among sampling gear?
topic_facet Earth Sciences
GA Publication
NERP
Record
marine
description Marine benthic biodiversity can be measured using a range of sampling methods, including benthic sleds or trawls, grabs, and imaging systems, each of which targets a particular community or habitat. Due to the high cost and logistics of benthic sampling, particularly in the deep sea, studies are often limited to only one or two biological sampling methods. Results of biodiversity studies are used for a range of purposes, including species inventories, environmental impact assessments, and predictive modelling, all of which underpin appropriate marine resource management. However, the generality of marine biodiversity patterns identified among different sampling methods is unknown, as are the associated impacts on management decisions. \nThis report reviews studies that have used two or more sampling methods in order to determine the consistency of their results among gear types, as well as the optimum combination of gear types. In addition, we directly analyse data that were acquired using multiple gear types to examine the consistency of biodiversity patterns among different gear types. These data represent two regions: 1) Joseph Bonaparte Gulf (JBG) in northern Australia, and 2) Icelandic waters as part of the Benthic Invertebrates of Icelandic Waters (BIOICE) program. For each dataset, we investigate potential patterns of biodiversity (measured by species richness, diversity indices, abundance, and community structure) in relation to environmental variables such as depth, geomorphology, and substrate. \nThe availability of worldwide data from benthic marine biodiversity surveys reporting the results of two or more gear types is generally poor. Surveys were concentrated in the coastal regions of UK, Norway and Australia, with limited or no studies elsewhere and only 13% including the slope or deep sea. \nBetween different gear groups, our review and analysis of datasets from two regions (northern Australia and Iceland) demonstrates there is little consistency in marine biodiversity trends, with only one study ...
author2 Geoscience Australia (isOwnedBy)
format Dataset
title Comparison of sampling methods to assess benthic marine biodiversity: Are spatial and ecological relationships consistent among sampling gear?
title_short Comparison of sampling methods to assess benthic marine biodiversity: Are spatial and ecological relationships consistent among sampling gear?
title_full Comparison of sampling methods to assess benthic marine biodiversity: Are spatial and ecological relationships consistent among sampling gear?
title_fullStr Comparison of sampling methods to assess benthic marine biodiversity: Are spatial and ecological relationships consistent among sampling gear?
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of sampling methods to assess benthic marine biodiversity: Are spatial and ecological relationships consistent among sampling gear?
title_sort comparison of sampling methods to assess benthic marine biodiversity: are spatial and ecological relationships consistent among sampling gear?
publisher data.gov.au
url https://researchdata.edu.au/comparison-sampling-methods-sampling-gear/1940538
http://data.gov.au/dataset/d0387e39-5598-46af-8024-6faa3b2afdad
op_coverage Spatial: GA1
Spatial: 151.122622,-25.371968
Spatial: true
long_lat ENVELOPE(160.833,160.833,-83.083,-83.083)
geographic Bonaparte
Norway
geographic_facet Bonaparte
Norway
genre Iceland
genre_facet Iceland
op_source Geoscience Australia
op_relation https://researchdata.edu.au/comparison-sampling-methods-sampling-gear/1940538
http://data.gov.au/dataset/d0387e39-5598-46af-8024-6faa3b2afdad
comparison-of-sampling-methods-to-assess-benthic-marine-biodiversity-are-spatial-and-ecological
_version_ 1776201264228466688