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.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Cowen, Robert K., Greer, Adam T., Guigand, Cedric M., Hare, Jonathan A., Richardson, David E., Walsh, Harvey J.
Format: article biblioteca
Language:English
Published: 2013
Subjects:Biology, Ecology, Fisheries,
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/1834/30353
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id dig-aquadocs-1834-30353
record_format koha
spelling dig-aquadocs-1834-303532021-06-26T05:34:39Z Evaluation of the In Situ Ichthyoplankton Imaging System (ISIIS): comparison with the traditional (bongo net) sampler Cowen, Robert K. Greer, Adam T. Guigand, Cedric M. Hare, Jonathan A. Richardson, David E. Walsh, Harvey J. Biology Ecology Fisheries 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. 2021-06-24T16:50:27Z 2021-06-24T16:50:27Z 2013 article TRUE 0090-0656 10.7755/FB.111.1.1 http://hdl.handle.net/1834/30353 en http://fishbull.noaa.gov/1111/cowen.pdf application/pdf application/pdf 1-12 rcowen@rsmas.miami.edu http://aquaticcommons.org/id/eprint/14490 403 2014-02-13 04:26:39 14490 United States National Marine Fisheries Service
institution UNESCO
collection DSpace
country Francia
countrycode FR
component Bibliográfico
access En linea
databasecode dig-aquadocs
tag biblioteca
region Europa del Oeste
libraryname Repositorio AQUADOCS
language English
topic Biology
Ecology
Fisheries
Biology
Ecology
Fisheries
spellingShingle Biology
Ecology
Fisheries
Biology
Ecology
Fisheries
Cowen, Robert K.
Greer, Adam T.
Guigand, Cedric M.
Hare, Jonathan A.
Richardson, David E.
Walsh, Harvey J.
Evaluation of the In Situ Ichthyoplankton Imaging System (ISIIS): comparison with the traditional (bongo net) sampler
description 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.
format article
topic_facet Biology
Ecology
Fisheries
author Cowen, Robert K.
Greer, Adam T.
Guigand, Cedric M.
Hare, Jonathan A.
Richardson, David E.
Walsh, Harvey J.
author_facet Cowen, Robert K.
Greer, Adam T.
Guigand, Cedric M.
Hare, Jonathan A.
Richardson, David E.
Walsh, Harvey J.
author_sort Cowen, Robert K.
title Evaluation of the In Situ Ichthyoplankton Imaging System (ISIIS): comparison with the traditional (bongo net) sampler
title_short Evaluation of the In Situ Ichthyoplankton Imaging System (ISIIS): comparison with the traditional (bongo net) sampler
title_full Evaluation of the In Situ Ichthyoplankton Imaging System (ISIIS): comparison with the traditional (bongo net) sampler
title_fullStr Evaluation of the In Situ Ichthyoplankton Imaging System (ISIIS): comparison with the traditional (bongo net) sampler
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the In Situ Ichthyoplankton Imaging System (ISIIS): comparison with the traditional (bongo net) sampler
title_sort evaluation of the in situ ichthyoplankton imaging system (isiis): comparison with the traditional (bongo net) sampler
publishDate 2013
url http://hdl.handle.net/1834/30353
work_keys_str_mv AT cowenrobertk evaluationoftheinsituichthyoplanktonimagingsystemisiiscomparisonwiththetraditionalbongonetsampler
AT greeradamt evaluationoftheinsituichthyoplanktonimagingsystemisiiscomparisonwiththetraditionalbongonetsampler
AT guigandcedricm evaluationoftheinsituichthyoplanktonimagingsystemisiiscomparisonwiththetraditionalbongonetsampler
AT harejonathana evaluationoftheinsituichthyoplanktonimagingsystemisiiscomparisonwiththetraditionalbongonetsampler
AT richardsondavide evaluationoftheinsituichthyoplanktonimagingsystemisiiscomparisonwiththetraditionalbongonetsampler
AT walshharveyj evaluationoftheinsituichthyoplanktonimagingsystemisiiscomparisonwiththetraditionalbongonetsampler
_version_ 1756078682062979072