• EMODnet product catalogue
  •   Search
  •  Sign in

Mapping the distribution of benthic biotopes of Loch Maddy. Small area. Biotopes

The study ?Trialing of AGDS and video sledge monitoring techniques in Loch Maddy? is part of a larger project ?Loch Maddy monitoring trials? which itself contributes to Task 2.1 of the UK marine SACs LIFE project. This aims to establish an appropriate programme of surveillance and monitoring for the Special Areas for Conservation (SAC) and to trial monitoring methodologies and protocols for the features of a site. The Loch Maddy project will assist in the development of best practise for future monitoring and reporting programmes for other marine SACs in the UK and Europe. The first phase (1998-9) concentrates on testing variability within methodologies and the determination of the minimum intensity of sampling necessary to provide adequate data for monitoring. The second phase (1999-2000) will concentrate on repeatability However, the major part of the 1998-9 study, which concentrates on the use of acoustic ground discrimination systems (AGDS) for biotope mapping, will make use of previous mapping studies undertaken in 1996 and will provide valuable guidance for future studies on repeatability of mapping.

Simple

Alternate title

GB100030

Alternate title

EnvLochMaddyMNCR_O

Date (Publication)
1999-12-01
Edition date
1999-12-01
Purpose

Nature conservation

Credit

1999. Trialing of Acoustic Ground Discrimination Sonar (AGDS) and Video Sledge Monitoring Techniques in Loch Maddy. SNH project code: BAT/98/99/48

Point of contact
Organisation name Individual name Electronic mail address Role

Scottish Natural Heritage

James Dargie

James.Dargie@snh.gov.uk

Point of contact

title

  • Habitats

title

  • 44E2

Place
  • Scottish Continental Shelf

Use limitation

None - Available under the Open Government License

Spatial representation type
Vector
Character set
UTF8
Topic category
  • Oceans
Begin date
1998-10-11
End date
1999-08-24
N
S
E
W
thumbnail




Reference system identifier
OSGB36

Distributor

Distributor contact
Organisation name Individual name Electronic mail address Role

Scottish Natural Heritage| Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Group, Inverness Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Group

Dylan Todd

dylan.todd@snh.gov.uk

Point of contact
Distributor format
Name Version

Unknown

Unknown

OnLine resource
Protocol Linkage Name

OGC:WMS

https://ows.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/geoserver/emodnet_view_maplibrary/wms?

gb100030

OGC:WFS

https://ows.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/geoserver/emodnet_open_maplibrary/wfs?

gb100030

WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link

https://files.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/data/EMODnetSBHsurvey_GB100030.zip

EMODnet Seabed Habitats download

Hierarchy level
Dataset

Conceptual consistency

Name of measure

MESH Confidence Assessment

Measure description

https://www.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/resources/mesh-archive/

Quantitative attribute accuracy

Name of measure

RemoteTechnique

Evaluation method description

An assessment of whether the remote techniques used to produce this map were appropriate to the environment they were used to survey:

3 = technique(s) highly appropriate

2 = technique(s) moderately appropriate

1 = technique(s) inappropriate

Completeness commission

Name of measure

RemoteCoverage

Evaluation method description

An assessment of the coverage of the remote sensing data including consideration of heterogeneity of the seabed: (See Coverage X Heterogeneity matrix below)



Coverage scores - use these to determine coverage then combine with heterogeneity assessment to derive finale scores

3 = good coverage; 100% (or greater) coverage or AGDS track spacing <50m

2 = moderate coverage; swath approx 50% coverage or AGDS track spacing >100m

1 = poor coverage; large gaps between swaths or AGDS track spacing > 100m



Final scores

3 = good coverage OR moderate coverage + low heterogeneity

2 = moderate coverage + moderate heterogeneity OR poor coverage + low heterogeneity

1 = moderate coverage + high heterogeneity OR poor coverage + moderate or high heterogeneity

Relative internal positional accuracy

Name of measure

RemotePositioning

Evaluation method description

An indication of the positioning method used for the remote data:

3 = differential GPS

2 = GPS (not differential) or other non-satellite 'electronic' navigation system

1 = chart based navigation, or dead-reckoning

Topological consistency

Name of measure

RemoteStdsApplied

Evaluation method description

An assessment of whether standards have been applied to the collection of the remote data. This field gives an indication of whether some data quality control has been carried out:

3 = remote data collected to approved standards

2 = remote data collected to ?internal? standards

1 = no standards applied to the collection of the remote data

Temporal validity

Name of measure

RemoteVintage

Evaluation method description

An indication of the age of the remote data:

3 = < 5yrs old.

2 = 5 to 10 yrs old.

1 = > 10 years old

Non quantitative attribute accuracy

Name of measure

BGTTechnique

Evaluation method description

An assessment of whether the ground-truthing techniques used to produce this map were appropriate to the environment they were used to survey. Use scores for soft or hard substrata as appropriate to the area surveyed.



Soft substrata predominate (i.e. those having infauna and epifauna)

3 = infauna AND epifauna sampled AND observed (video/stills, direct human observation)

2= infauna AND epifauna sampled, but NOT observed (video/stills, direct human observation)

1 = infauna OR epifauna sampled, but not both. No observation.



Hard substrata predominate (i.e. those with no infauna)

3 = sampling included direct human observation (shore survey or diver survey)

2 = sampling included video or stills but NO direct human observation

1 = benthic sampling only (e.g. grabs, trawls)

Non quantitative attribute accuracy

Name of measure

PGTTechnique

Evaluation method description

An assessment of whether the combination of geophysical sampling techniques were appropriate to the environment they were used to survey. Use scores for soft or hard substrata as appropriate to the area surveyed.



Soft substrata predominate (i.e. gravel, sand, mud)

3 = full geophysical analysis (i.e. granulometry and/or geophysical testing (penetrometry, shear strenght etc))

2 = sediments described following visual inspection of grab or core samples (e.g. slightly shelly, muddy sand)

1 = sediments described on the basis of remote observation (by camera).



Hard substrata predominate (i.e. rock outcrops, boulders, cobbles)

3 = sampling included in-situ, direct human observation (shore survey or diver survey)

2 = sampling included video or photographic observation, but NO in-situ, direct human observation

1 = samples obtained only by rock dredge (or similar)

Relative internal positional accuracy

Name of measure

GTPositioning

Evaluation method description

An indication of the positioning method used for the ground-truth data:

3 = differential GPS

2 = GPS (not differential) or other non-satellite 'electronic' navigation system

1 = chart based navigation, or dead-reckoning

Completeness commission

Name of measure

GTDensity

Evaluation method description

An assessment of what proportion of the polygons or classes (groups of polygons with the same ?habitat? attribute) actually contain ground-truth data:

3 = Every class in the map classification was sampled at least 3 times

2 = Every class in the map classification was sampled

1 = Not all classes in the map classification were sampled (some classes have no ground-truth data)

Conceptual consistency

Name of measure

GTStdsApplied

Evaluation method description

An assessment of whether standards have been applied to the collection of the ground-truth data. This field gives an indication of whether some data quality control has been carried out:

3 = ground-truth samples collected to approved standards

2 = ground-truth samples collected to 'internal' standards

1 = no standards applied to the collection of ground-truth samples

Temporal validity

Name of measure

GTVintage

Evaluation method description

An indication of the age of the ground-truth data:

3 = < 5 yrs old

2 = 5 to 10 yrs old

1 = > 10 years old

Topological consistency

Name of measure

GTInterpretation

Evaluation method description

An indication of the confidence in the biological interpretation of the ground-truthing data:

3 = Evidence of expert interpretation; full descriptions and taxon list provided for each habitat class

2 = Evidence of expert interpretation, but no detailed description or taxon list supplied for each habitat class

1 = No evidence of expert interpretation; limited descriptions available

Completeness commission

Name of measure

RemoteInterpretation

Evaluation method description

An indication of the confidence in the interpretation of the remotely sensed data:

3 = Appropriate technique used and documentation provided

2 = Appropriate technique used but no documentation provided

1 = Inappropriate technique used



Note that interpretation techniques can range from ?by eye? digitising of side scan by experts to statistical classification techniques.

Completeness commission

Name of measure

DetailLevel

Evaluation method description

The level of detail to which the 'habitat' classes in the map have been classified:

3 = Classes defined on the basis of detailed biological analysis

2 = Classes defined on the basis of major characterising species or lifeforms

1 = Classes defined on the basis of physical information, or broad biological zones

Thematic classification correctness

Name of measure

MapAccuracy

Evaluation method description

A test of the accuracy of the map:

3 = high accuracy, proven by external accuracy assessment

2 = high accuracy, proven by internal accuracy assessment

1 = low accuracy, proved by either external or internal assessment OR no accuracy assessment made

Domain consistency

Name of measure

Remote

Domain consistency

Name of measure

GT

Domain consistency

Name of measure

Interpretation

Statement

Survey technique(s): Towed video ; AGDS

Description

Classification scheme: MNCR

Description

Classification scheme details: 97.06 version. 5 categories

Description

Survey technique details: Variable methodologies. Ground truthed by towed video recorder.

Processor
Organisation name Individual name Electronic mail address Role

SeaMap Research Group (Newcastle University)

SeaMap Research Group (Newcastle University)

Principal investigator
Description

Mapping method: Supervised classification

Metadata

File identifier
f9ee15e2-7fc7-4025-90fc-4b9b420be0da XML
Character set
UTF8
Parent identifier
GB100029

GB100029

Date stamp
2022-02-17T15:18:29
Metadata standard name

ISO 19115:2003/19139

Metadata standard version

1.0

Metadata author
Organisation name Individual name Electronic mail address Role

Scottish Natural Heritage

Unknown

enquiries@snh.gov.uk

Point of contact
 
 

Overviews

Spatial extent

thumbnail

Keywords

title

Habitats


Provided by

logo
Access to the catalogue
Read here the full details and access to the data.




  •   About
  •   Github
  •