Durham Coast benthic substrate map
An acoustic survey of the Durham Coast was carried out by SeaMap Research Group of the University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne (10-13 February 1998) using a vertical acoustic ground discrimination system, the RoxAnn. The area was surveyed using 3km long parallel tracks, 250m apart. Acoustic mapping using the RoxAnn system provides data on the physical nature of the sea bed - depth, roughness and hardness. The acoustic data have no biological meaning unless they are related to biological assemblages, determined from direct observations or samples of the sea bed at pre-determined point locations. Thus sub-tidal grab samples and video drops were taken within the survey area.
Simple
- Alternate title
-
GB100023
- Alternate title
-
EnvDurhamSUB_O
- Date (Publication)
- 1998-12-01
- Edition date
- 1998-12-01
- Purpose
-
Nature conservation
- Credit
-
Environment Agency, 1998. Durham Coast Project, ?Turning the Tide?
- Point of contact
-
Organisation name Individual name Electronic mail address Role Durham County Council
Unknown
heritagecoast@durham.gov heritagecoast@durham.gov.uk
Point of contact Environment Agency
Unknown
webmaster@environment-agency.gov.uk
Point of contact
-
title
-
-
Habitats
-
-
title
-
-
38E8
-
- Place
-
-
Northern North Sea
-
- Use limitation
-
Data may only be used with permission from, and according to any conditions imposed by, the data owner(s)
- Spatial representation type
- Vector
- Character set
- UTF8
- Topic category
-
- Oceans
- Begin date
- 1998-02-10
- End date
- 1998-02-13
- Reference system identifier
- OSGB36
Distributor
- Distributor contact
-
Organisation name Individual name Electronic mail address Role Environment Agency
null null
webmaster@environment-agency.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? gb100023
OGC:WFS
https://ows.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/geoserver/emodnet_open_maplibrary/wfs? gb100023
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
https://files.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/data/EMODnetSBHsurvey_GB100023.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 scores3 = good coverage; 100% (or greater) coverage or AGDS track spacing <50m2 = moderate coverage; swath approx 50% coverage or AGDS track spacing >100m1 = poor coverage; large gaps between swaths or AGDS track spacing > 100mFinal scores3 = good coverage OR moderate coverage + low heterogeneity2 = 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 GPS2 = GPS (not differential) or other non-satellite 'electronic' navigation system1 = 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 standards2 = remote data collected to ?internal? standards1 = 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 observation1 = 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 observation1 = 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 GPS2 = GPS (not differential) or other non-satellite 'electronic' navigation system1 = 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 times2 = Every class in the map classification was sampled1 = 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 standards2 = ground-truth samples collected to 'internal' standards1 = 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 old2 = 5 to 10 yrs old1 = > 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 class2 = Evidence of expert interpretation, but no detailed description or taxon list supplied for each habitat class1 = 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 provided2 = Appropriate technique used but no documentation provided1 = Inappropriate technique usedNote 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 analysis2 = Classes defined on the basis of major characterising species or lifeforms1 = 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 assessment2 = high accuracy, proven by internal accuracy assessment1 = 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): Drop camera ; AGDS ; Grabs
- Description
-
Classification scheme: Substrate only
- Description
-
Classification scheme details: 8 categories
- Description
-
Survey technique details: Track spacing 250m. Ground truthed using drop down video and grab samples
- 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
- a13fe477-a657-4cc9-b78e-24c5a07e5160 XML
- Character set
- UTF8
- Date stamp
- 2022-02-10T14:43:28
- Metadata standard name
-
ISO 19115:2003/19139
- Metadata standard version
-
1.0
- Metadata author
-
Organisation name Individual name Electronic mail address Role Environment Agency
Unknown
webmaster@environment-agency.gov.uk
Point of contact