Title: Case Study of the ArcGIS Marine Data Model: Examining Habitat Utilization Patterns of Reef Fish Along the West Coast of Hawaii
1Case Study of the ArcGIS Marine Data Model
Examining Habitat Utilization Patterns of Reef
Fish Along the West Coast of Hawaii
Alyssa Aaby, OSU Dawn Wright, OSU Brian Tissot,
WSU ESRI UC 2004
Photos from www.fishbase.org
2Outline
- Background
- Part 1 The ArcGIS Marine Data Model (MDM)
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Part 2 Habitat Analysis
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion and Conclusion
3Marine Resource Management
- Marine resources are at risk (eg. Leslie et al.,
2003, Mumby et al., 2001, Puniwai et al., 2003) - Growing interest in Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)
- Management tool
- Effective both ecologically and economically (eg.
Carr et al., 2003, Friedlander and Brown, 2003,
Tissot et al., 2004)
4Marine Resource Management
- How can we make MPAs as effective as possible?
- Identify areas with patterns of high habitat
utilization
5Two Main Questions
- Question 1 What is the habitat utilization of
specific fish species at a coarse-scale? -
6Two Main Questions
- Question 1 What is the habitat utilization of
specific fish species at a coarse-scale? - To answer question, use ArcGIS MDM
7Two Main Questions
- Question 1 What is the habitat utilization of
specific fish species at a coarse-scale? - To answer question, use ArcGIS MDM
- Use real data to test model itself
8Two Main Questions
- Question 1 What is the habitat utilization of
specific fish species at a coarse-scale? - To answer question, use ArcGIS MDM
- Use real data to test model itself
- Question 2 How well does the MDM meet the needs
of the marine GIS community?
9Conceptualizing the MDM
- Building industry-specific data models for ArcGIS
- In 2001, researchers decided to create a model
specifically for the marine community - The ArcGIS Marine Data Model
10What is the MDM?
- A geodatabase template
- A new way to spatially model marine data
- A database used to assemble, store and query data
- Model that captures the behavior of real-world
objects
11Why use the MDM?
- Standardized template
- Implement project
- Organize data
- GIS and data management
- Easy to share
- Build upon
- Querying ability
- Object orientation
12Outline
- Background
- Part 1 The Marine Data Model (MDM)
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Part 2 Habitat Analysis
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion and Conclusion
13Testing the ArcGIS Marine Data Model 3 Goals
- Case study tested 3 goals (Wright et al, 2002)
- Goal 1 Assembling, managing, and querying in
ArcGIS - Goal 2 Provide a template
- Goal 3 Improve the understanding of geodatabase
models
14Outline
- Background
- Part 1 The Marine Data Model (MDM)
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Part 2 Habitat Analysis
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion and Conclusion
15Methodology
- Goals 1 and 2
- Data Gathered
- Formatting
- Importing
- Querying
- Goal 3
- Tutorial created
16Data Gathered
- West Hawaii Aquarium Project (WHAP) (Tissot et
al., 2004) - Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program
(CRAMP) (Brown et al., 2004) - State of Hawaiis Division of Aquatic Resources
(DAR) (DAR, 2004) - Saving Mauis Reefs project (Brown, 1998)
- Individual peer-reviewed journal articles
- Date, sites, method, frequency, info
17Formatting Getting Data into the MDM
Formatting data to fit MDM template
Portion of MDM
MS Access
http//dusk.geo.orst.edu/djl/arcgis/diag.html
18Importing Personalizing the MDM
- Adding fields to the feature classes, tables
- Adding new tables and relationships
- Attention to detail required
- Worth it in the end!
19Database Set Up
Table Names Survey Location (Survey Point) Divemaster RunDetail Species Information (Integrated Species)
Information stored in each table SurveyID Reference location Latitude Longitude Island Site Area_Desc Depth Comments Reference location Transect_Co TransectRunID Transect Date Time Observer Source Transect_Co TaxonID Count Size Comments TaxonID EBrownID TaxonName Alpha Type Family FamCode Quest DAR Synomyn HawaiiName CommonName Trophic Status
20(No Transcript)
21Querying
22Goal 3 Improve Understanding of Geodatabase Model
- Benefits of MDM
- The MDM Tutorial
- Response
23Outline
- Background
- Part 1 The Marine Data Model (MDM)
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Part 2 Habitat Analysis
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion and Conclusion
24Results Goals
Goals Results
Goal 1 Common structure for assembling, managing, and querying in ArcGIS Met
Goal 2 Provide a template Met
Goal 3 Improve the understanding of the Geodatabase model Met
25Outline
- Background
- Part 1 The Marine Data Model (MDM)
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Part 2 Habitat Analysis
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion and Conclusion
26Habitat Utilization
- What is the habitat utilization pattern of
selected fish species at a coarse-scale? - Can fine-scale substrate info be correlated to
coarse-scale habitat info? - Does depth play a role in the location of
coarse-scale habitat types? -
-
27Outline
- Background
- Part 1 The Marine Data Model (MDM)
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Part 2 Habitat Analysis
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion and Conclusion
28Done with the MDM
29Fish Analysis done with MDM
- Select WHAP data
- Determined site location in each habitat type and
zone
30Sites classified by Habitat and Zone
Habitat Type Reef/Aggregate Coral (RA) Reef/Colonized Volcanic Rock/Boulder (RCB) No data
Location Anaehoomalu Kalahiki Beach Honokohau
Keawaiki Kamilo Gultch Hookena (Auau)
Keei Kaupulehu Makalawena
N. Keauhou Kealakekua Bay Manuka
S. Oneo Bay Keopuka Omakaa
Red Hill Kualanui Pt Wawaloli
Waiakailio Bay Lapakahi Wawaloli Beach
Papawai
Puako
Zone All sites with data were located in the
shelf zone, with the exception of Puako which
was located in the fore-reef zone.
31Querying to Determine Fish Location
32Logistic Regression Analysis
Fish Species Percentage of species found in RA habitat type Percentage of species found in RA habitat type Percentage of species found in RCB habitat type Percentage of species found in RCB habitat type
N (absent) Y (present) N (absent) Y (present)
Acanthurus triostegus 57.1 42.8 55.5 44.4
Ctenochaetus strigosus 14.2 85.7 0 100
Scarus dubius 14.2 85.7 0 100
Scarus psittacus 0 100 11.1 88.8
Zebrasoma flavescens 0 100 0 100
Chaetodon ornatissimus 0 100 0 100
Chaetodon quadrimaculatus 57.1 42.8 0 100
Forcipiger spp. 0 100 0 100
Acanthurus achilles 0 100 0 100
Naso lituratus 0 100 0 100
Paracirrhites arcatus 0 100 0 100
Paracirrhites foresteri 0 100 0 100
Acanthurus nigrofuscus 0 100 0 100
33Can fine-scale substrate info be correlated to
coarse-scale habitat info?
34Substrate Results
Substrate type RA Mean Cover (SD) RCB Mean Cover (SD) P
Boulder 0.29 (0.59) 2.26 (3.92) 0.153
Porites compressa 34.9 (13.6) 12.2 (11.1) 0.004
Porites lobata 23.26 (9.97) 33.1 (8.96) 0.059
Pocillopora meandrina 0.167 (0.44) 0.88 (1.87) 0.277
Rubble 6.73 (6.23) 7.14 (6.68) 0.897
Sand 0.92 (1.77) 7.00 (10.9) 0.117
Dead Coral 28.6 (10.1) 32.3 (17.6) 0.601
35Does depth play a role in the location of
coarse-scale habitat types?
Study Site Habitat Type Depth (ft)
Anaehoomalu RA 32.00
Kealakekua Bay RCB 32.00
Puako Bay RCB 32.00
Papawai RCB 34.00
Keopuka RCB 35.00
Kualanui Pt. RCB 36.00
S. Oneo Bay RA 37.00
Ke'ei RA 39.00
Hookena (Kalahiki) RCB 39.00
Kamilo Gultch RCB 40.00
Lapakahi RCB 40.00
Ka'upulehu RCB 42.00
Waiakailio Bay RA 45.00
Keawaiki RA 46.00
N. Keauhou RA 46.00
Red Hill RA 47.00
- Mean depth for RCB habitat type is 37 /- 3.65ft
- Mean depth for RA habitat type is 41.71 /- 5.77ft
36Does depth play a role in the location of
coarse-scale habitat types?
- P0.088
- Trend indicates that RA habitat occur deeper than
RCB
37Outline
- Background
- Part 1 The Marine Data Model (MDM)
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Part 2 Habitat Analysis
- Research Questions
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion and Conclusion
38Discussion Habitat Analysis
Future research Tie fine-scale substrate info
be tied to specific fish?
1. How do specific fish utilize coarse-scale
habitats? A Inconclusive
A. WHAP Fish Info
B. Coarse-scale NOAA habitat info
Regional Habitat Utilization Patterns?
C. Fine-scale WHAP substrate info
3. Does depth play a role in the location of RA
and RCB habitat types? A Strong trend, p.088
2. Can fine-scale substrate info be correlated to
coarse-scale habitat types? A Yes, PC (plt.05) in
RA and a strong trend with PL (p.059) in RBC
39Conclusions Management
- Use information from this study to evaluate
current protected areas - For example
- RA habitat shows trends toward being located
deeper - P. compressa is found significantly more often in
RA habitat - P. compressa provides and important habitat for
yellow tang (Tissot et al., 2003, Dollar, 1982) - Thus, to protect the yellow tang, must have
protected areas that extend into deeper waters - Consistent with study that MPA encompassing range
to depth values shown to be more efficient for
yellow tang (Tissot et al, 2004)
40Discussion
- Through habitat analysis
- Goal 1 Met
- Goal 2 Met
- Goal 3 Met
41Discussion Ideal User?
- MDM is tailored to a specific user
- Data
- Amount
- Variety
- Time
- Cost
- Experience of user
- Experienced GISuse object-orientation
- Inexperienceduse template
42Conclusions
- The MDM is a powerful tool
- Information to aid managers evaluate the West
Coast MPAs - Future research
- Data to HNHP
43Thanks to
- All the Rogues in Davy Jones
- The Hawaii Natural Heritage Program
- DAR, WHAP, CRAMP, and Saving Mauis Reefs for
letting me use their data
44Questions?
- For more information on the marine data model go
to - http//dusk.geo.orst.edu/djl/arcgis/
45(No Transcript)
46(No Transcript)
47Habitat Utilization Analysis
- What is the habitat utilization pattern of
selected fish species at a coarse-scale?
(A) WHAP Fish Info
Regional Habitat Utilization Patterns?
(C) fine-scale WHAP substrate info
(B) coarse-scale NOAA habitat info
2. Can fine-scale substrate information be
correlated to coarse-scale habitat types?
3. Does depth play a role in the classification
of RA and RCB habitat types?
48The 13 reef fish analyzed
Aquarium Fish
Acanthurus achilles (Achilles Tang)
Chaetodon ornatissimus (Ornate Butterflyfish)
Chaetodon quadrimaculatus (Foursport Butterflyfish)
Forcipiger spp (eg., Longnose Butterflyfish)
Naso lituratus (Orangespine Unicornfish)
Zebrasoma flavescens (Yellow Tang)
Non-aquarium fish
Acanthurus nigrofuscus (Brown surgeonfish)
Acanthurus triostegus (Convict surgeonfish)
Ctenochaetus strigosus (Striated surgeonfish)
Paracirrhites arcatus (Arc-eye hawkfish)
Paracirrhites foresteri (Blackside hawkfish)
Scarus dubius (Regal parrot)
Scarus psittacus (Common parrotfish)
All photos from www.fishbase.org
49Statistical Analysis
- Porites compressa (finger coral) P.004
- Significantly more abundant in RA relative to RCB
- Porites lobata (lobe coral) p.059
- Shows strong trends toward being found in RCB
relative to RA
50What is the habitat utilization pattern of
selected fish species at a coarse-scale?
?
www.fishbase.org
- fine vs. coarse-scale habitat information
- Importance
- Habitat utilization
- Management
51Can fine-Scale Substrate Info be Correlated to
coarse-Scale Habitat Info?
- fine-scale WHAP substrate information
- Importance
- Cost
- Time
- Information
?
52Does depth play a role in the classification of
coarse-scale habitat types?
Study Site Habitat Type Depth (ft)
Anaehoomalu RA 32.00
Kealakekua Bay RCB 32.00
Puako Bay RCB 32.00
Papawai RCB 34.00
Keopuka RCB 35.00
Kualanui Pt. RCB 36.00
S. Oneo Bay RA 37.00
Ke'ei RA 39.00
Hookena (Kalahiki) RCB 39.00
Kamilo Gultch RCB 40.00
Lapakahi RCB 40.00
Ka'upulehu RCB 42.00
Waiakailio Bay RA 45.00
Keawaiki RA 46.00
N. Keauhou RA 46.00
Red Hill RA 47.00
53Why use the MDM Model?
- Why a data model?
- Standardized template
- Implement project
- Organize data
- GIS and data management
- Easy to share
- Build upon
- Querying ability
- Object orientation
54(No Transcript)