oceans
Type of resources
Available actions
Topics
Keywords
Contact for the resource
Provided by
Years
Formats
Representation types
Update frequencies
status
Scale
Resolution
-
Benthic macro-infauna biomass in the northern Bering and Chukchi Seas from 1970 to 2012, displayed as decadal pattern Adapted from Grebmeier et al. (2015a) with permission from Elsevier. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/benthos" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 98 - Figure 3.3.6 Cumulative scores of benthos drivers for each of the 8 CAFF-AMAs. The cumulative scores are taken from the last column of Table 3.3.1. The flower chart/plot helps to visualize the data.
-
Trends in biomass of marine fish Focal Ecosystem Components across each Arctic Marine Area STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 4 - Page 180 - Figure 4.4
-
Marine Ecosection classification for coastal and offshore British Columbia. The Marine Ecosections are: Johnstone Strait; Continental Slope; Dixon Entrance; Hecate Strait; Queen Charlotte Strait; Juan de Fuca Strait; North Coast Fjords; Queen Charlotte Sound; Strait of Georgia; Subarctic Pacific; Transitional Pacific; and Vancouver Island Shelf. The British Columbia Marine Ecological Classification (BCMEC) is a hierarchical classification that delineates Provincial marine areas into Ecozones, Ecoprovinces, Ecoregions and Ecosections. The classification was developed from previous Federal and Provincial marine ecological classifications which were based on 1:2,000,000 scale information. The BCMEC has been developed for marine and coastal planning, resource management and a Provincial marine protected areas strategy. A new, smaller level of classification termed ecounits developed using 1:250,000 scale depth, current, exposure, subsurface relief and substrate was created to verify the larger ecosections, and to delineate their boundaries. CRIMS is a legacy dataset of BC coastal resource data that was acquired in a systematic and synoptic manner from 1979 and was intermittently updated throughout the years. Resource information was collected in nine study areas using a peer-reviewed provincial Resource Information Standards Committee consisting of DFO Fishery Officers, First Nations, and other subject matter experts. There are currently no plans to update this legacy data.
-
This visualization product displays the number of Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) monitoring surveys and the associated temporal coverage per beach. EMODnet Chemistry included the collection of marine litter in its 3rd phase. Since the beginning of 2018, data of beach litter have been gathered and processed in the EMODnet Chemistry Marine Litter Database (MLDB). The harmonization of all the data has been the most challenging task considering the heterogeneity of the data sources, sampling protocols and reference lists used on a European scale. Preliminary processing were necessary to harmonize all the data: - Exclusion of OSPAR 1000 protocol: in order to follow the approach of OSPAR that it is not including these data anymore in the monitoring; - Selection of MSFD surveys only (exclusion of other monitoring, cleaning and research operations); - Exclusion of beaches without coordinates. More information is available in the attached documents. Warning: the absence of data on the map doesn't necessarily mean that they don't exist, but that no information has been entered in the Marine Litter Database for this area.
-
Bay Scale Assessment of Nearshore Habitat Bras dOr Lake - Malagawash 2007 2008 data is part of the publication Bay Scale Assessment of Nearshore Habitat Bras d'Or Lakes. A history of nearshore benthic surveys of Bras d’Or Lake from 2005 – 2011 is presented. Early work utilized drop camera and fixed mount sidescan. The next phase was one of towfish development, where camera and sidescan were placed on one platform with transponder-based positioning. From 2009 to 2011 the new towfish was used to ground truth an echosounder. The surveys were performed primarily in the northern half of the lake; from 10 m depth right into the shallows at less than 1 m. Different shorelines could be distinguished from others based upon the relative proportions of substrate types and macrophyte canopy. The vast majority of macrophytes occurred within the first 3 m of depth. This zone was dominated by a thin but consistent cover of eelgrass (Zostera marina L.) on almost all shores with a current or wave regime conducive to the growth of this plant. However, the eelgrass beds were frequently in poor shape and the negative impacts of commonly occurring water column turbidity, siltation, or possible localized eutrophication, are suspected. All survey data were placed into a Geographic Information System, and this document is a guide to that package. The Geographic Information System could be used to answer management questions such as the placement and character of habitat compensation projects, the selection of nearshore protected areas or as a baseline to determine long term changes. Vandermeulen, H. 2016. Video-sidescan and echosounder surveys of nearshore Bras d’Or Lake. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 3183: viii + 39 p. Cite this data as: Vandermeulen H. Bay Scale Assessment of Nearshore Habitat Bras d'Or Lake - Malagawash 2007 - 2008. Published May 2022. Coastal Ecosystems Science Division, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, N.S.
-
The Global Deterministic Wave Prediction System (GDWPS) produces wave forecasts out to 120 hours in the future using the third generation spectral wave forecast model WaveWatch III® (WW3). The model is forced by the 10 meters winds and the ice concentration from the Global Deterministic Prediction System (GDPS). The ice concentration is used by the model to attenuate wave growth in areas covered by 25% to 75% ice and to suppress it for concentration above 75%. Forecast elements include significant wave height, peak period and primary swell height, direction and period.
-
The assessment of the status of eelgrass (Zostera marina) beds at the bay-scale in turbid, shallow estuaries is problematic. The bay-scale assessment (i.e., tens of km) of eelgrass beds usually involves remote sensing methods such as aerial photography or satellite imagery. These methods can fail if the water column is turbid, as is the case for many shallow estuaries on Canada’s eastern seaboard. A novel towfish package was developed for the bay-scale assessment of eelgrass beds irrespective of water column turbidity. The towfish consisted of an underwater video camera with scaling lasers, sidescan sonar and a transponder-based positioning system. The towfish was deployed along predetermined transects in three northern New Brunswick estuaries. Maps were created of eelgrass cover and health (epiphyte load) and ancillary bottom features such as benthic algal growth, bacterial mats (Beggiatoa) and oysters. All three estuaries had accumulations of material reminiscent of the oomycete Leptomitus, although it was not positively identified in our study. Tabusintac held the most extensive eelgrass beds of the best health. Cocagne had the lowest scores for eelgrass health, while Bouctouche was slightly better. The towfish method proved to be cost effective and useful for the bay-scale assessment of eelgrass beds to sub-meter precision in real time. Cite this data as: Vandermeulen H. Data of: Bay Scale Assessment of Eelgrass Beds Using Sidescan and Video - Bouctouche. Published: November 2017. Coastal Ecosystems Science Division, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, N.S. https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/b4c83cd2-20f2-47d8-8614-08c1c44c9d8c
-
The number of key sites (monitored colonies) for seabirds (in 22 CSMP ecoregions) by country (a total of 125 sites). Sites are categorized as having fully, partially, or not met the CSMP criteria for parameters monitored (see 2.6.2). Data were from Appendix 3 of the CSMP (Irons et al. 2015); the degree of implementation may have changed at some sites since this summary was compiled. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/seabirds" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 134 - Figure 3.5.2
-
This product displays for DDT, DDE, and DDD, positions with percentages of all available data values per group of animals that are present in EMODnet regional contaminants aggregated datasets, v2024. The product displays positions for all available years.
-
This product displays for Mercury, positions with values counts that have been measured per matrix for each year and are present in EMODnet regional contaminants aggregated datasets, v2024. The product displays positions for every available year.
Arctic SDI catalogue