- Email: [email protected]
Earth observations for marine and coastal biodiversity and ecosystems
Remote Sensing of Environment 112 (2008) 3297–3299
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Remote Sensing of Environment j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / r s e
Preface
Earth observations for marine and coastal biodiversity and ecosystems
Keywords: Earth observations Remote sensing Coastal biodiversity Coastal Marine ecosystems
1. Introduction This Special Issue illustrates the efforts of the marine and coastal Earth observation communities to subscribe to the vision of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS), reflecting the worldwide scientific and political consensus on the need to assess the state of the Earth through continuous and coordinated observations. The demand from different scientific and management communities for focus on oceans and coastal zones has steadily increased in the recent past due to global warming, the role of oceans in climate regulation, and increased direct impacts by human activities that threaten the sustainability of ecosystem services from local to global scales (Halpern et al., 2008). In this area specifically, monitoring of marine biodiversity requires adequate support by Earth observations. Classically, “diversity” applies to the full range of organization levels, including genes, species, communities, habitats and ecosystems. Here, we follow the definition given by the Convention on Biological Diversity (hhtp://www.cbd.int): biodiversity, from “biological diversity”, means the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems. Remote-sensing methods have become the most cost-effective method for collecting environmental data at a range of spatial scales, and enable mapping of aspects of biodiversity that are impractical with in situ methods. New technologies allow the collection of more data from more places, and more cost-effectively than in the past. Data collection platforms include satellites, aeroplanes, balloons, moored and drifting buoys, undersea Remote Operated Vehicles (ROV), sensors attached to animals, and ships. Digital data appear as photographs, videos, and spectral images; and the properties observed may be chemical, physical, seismic and biological in nature. Once data are acquired, various tools in informatics and related fields are used to process, quality control, archive, visualise, publish online, integrate and analyse these data (Costello and Vanden Berghe, 2006). In this issue, examples of studies centred on how satellite and aerial imagery can be used to map and/or monitor aspects of marine biodiversity are provided. The field of biodiversity is wide, and virtually any thematic environmental study can be related to some aspects of biodiversity. Examples include identification of species, understanding the processes that have fashioned modern and past diversity, understanding 0034-4257/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2008.04.006
how diversity affects and regulates processes, and last but not least in our rapidly changing world, the conservation of diversity (Gaston, 2000). 2. Content of the special issue For this special issue in Remote Sensing of Environment focussing on the marine environment, we left open the organization levels targeted by the different studies, the type of approaches and the type of sensors. As much as possible, we asked that descriptive, functional and technical studies should clearly state their relevance for biodiversity assessment, beyond the technical remote-sensing aspects. It was anticipated that this collection of papers would serve as an important reference source for the scientific community and for policy makers dedicated to the cause of developing a global observation system as the basis for informed decision making related to sustainable management of marine resources, and to living with, and adapting to, climate change. This special issue incorporates papers that address various aspects of biodiversity, such as: • identifying functional types of phytoplankton according to their roles in ocean biogeochemistry (Nair et al., 2008-this issue); • establishing accurate baselines in habitat extent and composition with optical and acoustic data, thus significantly removing gaps in basic knowledge needed for future effective investigations (Wabnitz et al., 2008-this issue; Degraer et al., 2008-this issue; Phinn et al., 2008-this issue); • identifying ways to define habitats in the open ocean, monitor their status, detect anomalies and provide indicators of change using large-scale operational remotely-sensed products such as chlorophyll-a and sea-surface temperature (Platt and Sathyendranath, 2008-this issue; Hardman-Mountford et al., 2008-this issue; Barale et al., 2008-this issue; Gohin et al., 2008-this issue); • monitoring dynamics of coastal marine ecosystem from centimetre scale up to entire regions, from weeks to decadal time-scales, using cameras, spectrometers and satellites (Murphy et al., 2008-this issue; Palandro et al., 2008-this issue); • monitoring effectively highly mobile species such as seabird communities (Certain and Bretagnolle, 2008-this issue); • establishing ecological niches relating marine species and their behaviours to their oceanic habitats using climatology of large-scale remotely-sensed products (Panigada et al., 2008-this issue; Oliveira and Stratoudakis, 2008-this issue; Tetley et al., 2008-this issue); and • quantifying and understanding the biogeochemical cycles in the ocean as one of the processes ultimately driving the spatial and temporal structuring of marine communities, by means of regional scale remote sensing (Platt et al., 2008-this issue). The suite of papers in this special issue is thus representative of a variety of applications, ranging from coastal temperate (Murphy et al.,
3298
Preface
2008-this issue) and tropical marine biodiversity (Wabnitz et al., 2008-this issue), to basin-scale ocean biogeochemistry (Platt et al., 2008-this issue). They straddle various stages of development from research (Certain and Bretagnolle, 2008-this issue) to operational (Platt and Sathyendranath, 2008-this issue). Furthermore, they reveal the interface necessary with domains such as statistical analysis and modelling, to build true interdisciplinary avant-garde applications (Panigada et al., 2008-this issue). As such, most papers do not offer any new real technical developments in terms of processing raw remote-sensing data (but see Platt et al., 2008-this issue and Platt and Sathyendranath, 2008-this issue). Instead, standard operational Earth Observations products were used to set in situ observations into their spatial and temporal environmental context, and model the behaviours of marine species (Tetley et al., 2008-this issue). Surprisingly, no studies submitted for this special issue explicitly covered marine biodiversity conservation, specifically the use of remote sensing to optimize the design of marine protected area (MPA) networks and assess their efficiency. Biodiversity conservation along with MPA design and effectiveness is a current major societal application that drives many remote-sensing efforts in national waters and high seas, because of their usefulness in developing consistent products and widely-applicable methods. Lessons can be taken from individual studies, but also by analysing the contrasts between studies. For instance, the studies by Wabnitz et al. (2008-this issue) and Phinn et al. (2008-this issue) targeted similar habitats (seagrass) in different regions (Caribbean and Australia). The differences in scale (regional in Wabnitz et al., local bay in Phinn et al.) reflected different study goals (i.e. presence/ absence for Wabnitz et al.; cover, species, biomass for Phinn et al.), remote-sensing strategy (mono-sensor vs multi-sensor assessments), ground-truth requirements (none and detailed) and achieved accuracies. These two studies, as far apart in design as can be, provide the end-points between which any future seagrass assessment, from local to regional scales, could refer to. Other naturally pairing studies include the marine mammals' studies by Tetley et al. (2008-this issue) and Panigada et al. (2008-this issue). They provide thematical information on species behaviours and favourite habitats, but also methodological lessons in using an array of operational remotesensing products for niche modelling. Niche modelling, or habitat suitability modelling, using standard operational products will likely be a major biodiversity application in the near future, helped by computing technologies, and easier access to large environmental and taxonomic spatially-explicit databases (Baker et al., 2007). The paper by Hardman-Mountford et al. (2008-this issue) presents a new approach to identify and map large-scale ecological provinces in the ocean through remote sensing. It is logically completed by Platt and Sathyendranath (2008-this issue) who discuss the use of remote sensing to quantify and map various ecological indicators at basin scale. In a similar vein but at a much smaller scale, Gohin et al. (2008this issue) use satellite data to classify coastal waters according to the eutrophication risk criteria of the Water Framework Directive of the European Union. 3. Perspectives The different applications in this issue are representative of the initial response to the global need for interdisciplinary, multi-scale studies taking advantage of remote-sensing capacities for marine science, management and conservation. This response further fits the framework established by the intergovernmental organisation Group on Earth Observations (GEO), launched following calls for action by the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development and was founded to develop the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) to provide decision-support tools to a wide variety of users interested in natural and human-induced disasters; health hazards; energy resources; climate change and its impacts; water resources;
weather forecasts; ecosystems management; sustainable agriculture, and biodiversity conservation. For the latter, GEO has recently established the Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO-BON) to develop a plan for integrating biodiversity and environmental data. Obviously, there is still room for pioneer investigations to test concepts and approaches worldwide, and identify limits to remotesensing capacities for all levels of biological organizations. Most papers that appear in this special issue are representative of these worthwhile efforts. However, a large part of the future interdisciplinary work lies in the global systematization of the data acquisition and processing protocols, archiving, cataloguing and modelling approaches, in a quasi-operational way. For example, the demonstration of how remote sensing can be used to map aspects of biodiversity at large scales (e.g. habitats like seagrass) paves the way for globalscale mapping of shallow water habitats using remote sensing, which can be linked to in situ data available in open systems like the Ocean Biogeographic Information System (www.iobis.org). Mapping of this sort falls under the responsibilities of large international collaborative networks given the technical means needed. New and old approaches need to be combined to enhance knowledge of biodiversity and enlarge the spectrum of applications that can be targeted. For this, adequate and early integration of remote-sensing capacities in the design of biodiversity studies traditionally based on field data is especially recommended along the lines of the applications provided in this issue. References Baker, D. J., Farmer, D., & Yarincik, K. (2007). The green ocean — observations of marine biodiversity. The full picture (pp. 267−270). Geneva: GEO Secretariat. Costello, M. J., & Vanden Berghe, E. (2006). “Ocean Biodiversity Informatics” enabling a new era in marine biology research and management. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 316, 203−214. Gaston, K. J. (2000). Global patterns in biodiversity. Nature, 405, 220−227. Halpern, B. S., Walbridge, S., Selkoe, K. A., Kappel, C. V., Micheli, F., D' Agrosa, C., Bruno, J. F., Casey, K. S., Ebert, C., Fox, H. E., Fujita, R., Heinemann, D., Lenihan, H. S., Madin, E. M. P., Perry, M. T., Selig, E. R., Spalding, M., Steneck, R., & Watson, R. (2008). A global map of human impact on marine ecosystems. Science, 319, 948−952.
Contributions to this Special Issue: Barale, V., Jaquet, J. M., & Ndiaye, M. (2008). Algal blooming patterns and anomalies in the Mediterranean Sea as derived from the SeaWiFS data set (1998–2003). Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3300−3313 (this issue). Certain, G., & Bretagnolle, V. (2008). Monitoring seabirds population in marine ecosystem: the use of strip-transect aerial surveys. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3314−3332 (this issue). Degraer, S., Moerkerke, G., Rabaut, M., Van Hoey, G., Du Four, I., Vincx, M., Henriet, J. -P., & Van Lancker, V. (2008). Very-high resolution side-scan sonar mapping of biogenic reefs of the tube worm Lanice conchilega. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3323−3328 (this issue). Gohin, F., Salquin, B., Oger-Jeanneret, H., Lozac'h, L., Lampert, L., Lefèbvre, A., Riou, P., & Bruchon, F. (2008). Towards a better assessment of the ecological status of coastal waters using satellite-derived chlorophyll-a concentrations. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3329−3340 (this issue). Hardman-Mountford, N. J., Hirata, T., Richardson, K. A., & Aiken, J. (2008). An objective methodology for the classification of ecological pattern into biomes and provinces for the pelagic ocean. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3341−3352 (this issue). Murphy, R. J., Underwood, A. J., Tolhurst, T. J., & Chapman, M. G. (2008). Field-based remote-sensing for experimental intertidal ecology: case studies using hyperspatial and hyper-spectral data for New South Wales (Australia). Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3353−3365 (this issue). Nair, A., Sathyendranath, S., Platt, T., Morales, J., Stuart, V., Forget, M., Devred, E., & Bouman, H. (2008). Remote sensing of phytoplankton functional types. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3366−3375 (this issue). Oliveira, P. B., & Stratoudis, Y. (2008). Satellite-derived conditions and advection patterns off Iberia and NW Africa: potential implications to sardine recruitment dynamics and population structuring. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3376−3387 (this issue). Palandro, D. A., Andréfouët, S., Hu, C., Hallock, P., Muller-Karger, F. E., Dustan, P., Callahan, M. K., Kranenburg, C., & Beaver, C. R. (2008). Quantification of two decades of shallow-water coral reef habitat decline in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary using Landsat data (1984–2002). Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3388−3399 (this issue). Panigada, S., Zanardelli, M., MacKenzie, M., Donovan, C., Mélin, F., & Hammond, P. S. (2008). Modelling habitat preferences for fin whales and striped dolphins in the Pelagos Sanctuary (Western Mediterranean Sea) with physiographic and remote sensing variables. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3400−3412 (this issue).
Preface Phinn, S., Roelfsema, C. M., Dekker, A. G., Brando, V. E., & Anstee, J. (2008). Mapping seagrass species, cover and biomass in shallow waters: an assessment of satellite multi-spectral and airborne hyper-spectral Imaging systems in Moreton Bay (Australia). Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3413−3425 (this issue). Platt, T., & Sathyendranath, S. (2008). Ecological indicators for the pelagic zone of the ocean from remote sensing. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3426−3436 (this issue). Platt, T., Sathyendranath, S., Forget, M., White, G. N., Caverhill, C., Bouman, H., Devred, E., & Son, S. H. (2008). Operational estimation of primary production at large geographical scales. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3437−3448 (this issue). Tetley, M. J., Mitchelson-Jacob, E. G., & Robinson, K. P. (2008). The summer distribution of coastal minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) in the southern outer Moray Firth, NE Scotland, in relation to co-occuring mesoscale oceanographic features. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3449−3454 (this issue). Wabnitz, C. C., Andréfouët, S., Torres-Pulliza, D., Müller-Karger, F. E., & Kramer, P. A. (2008). Regional-scale seagrass habitat mapping in the Wider Caribbean region using Landsat sensors: applications to conversation and ecology. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3455−3467 (this issue).
FURTHER READING
Andréfouët, S., Costello, Mark J., Rast, Michael, & Sathyendranath, Shubha (2008). Preface: Earth observations for marine and coastal biodiversity and ecosystems. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3297−3299 (this issue).
Serge Andréfouët Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Centre IRD — Nouméa, BP A5-98848 Noumea, New Caledonia
3299
Mark J. Costello Leigh Marine Laboratory, University of Auckland, PO Box 349, Warkworth 0941, New Zealand Michael Rast GEO Secretariat, 7bis, avenue de la Paix, Casale postale 2300, Ch-1211 Geneva 2, Suisse, Switzerland Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected]. Shubha Sathyendranath Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Prospect Place, The Hoe, Plymouth PL1 3DH, United Kingdom 7 April 2008
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Remote Sensing of Environment j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / r s e
Preface
Earth observations for marine and coastal biodiversity and ecosystems
Keywords: Earth observations Remote sensing Coastal biodiversity Coastal Marine ecosystems
1. Introduction This Special Issue illustrates the efforts of the marine and coastal Earth observation communities to subscribe to the vision of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS), reflecting the worldwide scientific and political consensus on the need to assess the state of the Earth through continuous and coordinated observations. The demand from different scientific and management communities for focus on oceans and coastal zones has steadily increased in the recent past due to global warming, the role of oceans in climate regulation, and increased direct impacts by human activities that threaten the sustainability of ecosystem services from local to global scales (Halpern et al., 2008). In this area specifically, monitoring of marine biodiversity requires adequate support by Earth observations. Classically, “diversity” applies to the full range of organization levels, including genes, species, communities, habitats and ecosystems. Here, we follow the definition given by the Convention on Biological Diversity (hhtp://www.cbd.int): biodiversity, from “biological diversity”, means the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems. Remote-sensing methods have become the most cost-effective method for collecting environmental data at a range of spatial scales, and enable mapping of aspects of biodiversity that are impractical with in situ methods. New technologies allow the collection of more data from more places, and more cost-effectively than in the past. Data collection platforms include satellites, aeroplanes, balloons, moored and drifting buoys, undersea Remote Operated Vehicles (ROV), sensors attached to animals, and ships. Digital data appear as photographs, videos, and spectral images; and the properties observed may be chemical, physical, seismic and biological in nature. Once data are acquired, various tools in informatics and related fields are used to process, quality control, archive, visualise, publish online, integrate and analyse these data (Costello and Vanden Berghe, 2006). In this issue, examples of studies centred on how satellite and aerial imagery can be used to map and/or monitor aspects of marine biodiversity are provided. The field of biodiversity is wide, and virtually any thematic environmental study can be related to some aspects of biodiversity. Examples include identification of species, understanding the processes that have fashioned modern and past diversity, understanding 0034-4257/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2008.04.006
how diversity affects and regulates processes, and last but not least in our rapidly changing world, the conservation of diversity (Gaston, 2000). 2. Content of the special issue For this special issue in Remote Sensing of Environment focussing on the marine environment, we left open the organization levels targeted by the different studies, the type of approaches and the type of sensors. As much as possible, we asked that descriptive, functional and technical studies should clearly state their relevance for biodiversity assessment, beyond the technical remote-sensing aspects. It was anticipated that this collection of papers would serve as an important reference source for the scientific community and for policy makers dedicated to the cause of developing a global observation system as the basis for informed decision making related to sustainable management of marine resources, and to living with, and adapting to, climate change. This special issue incorporates papers that address various aspects of biodiversity, such as: • identifying functional types of phytoplankton according to their roles in ocean biogeochemistry (Nair et al., 2008-this issue); • establishing accurate baselines in habitat extent and composition with optical and acoustic data, thus significantly removing gaps in basic knowledge needed for future effective investigations (Wabnitz et al., 2008-this issue; Degraer et al., 2008-this issue; Phinn et al., 2008-this issue); • identifying ways to define habitats in the open ocean, monitor their status, detect anomalies and provide indicators of change using large-scale operational remotely-sensed products such as chlorophyll-a and sea-surface temperature (Platt and Sathyendranath, 2008-this issue; Hardman-Mountford et al., 2008-this issue; Barale et al., 2008-this issue; Gohin et al., 2008-this issue); • monitoring dynamics of coastal marine ecosystem from centimetre scale up to entire regions, from weeks to decadal time-scales, using cameras, spectrometers and satellites (Murphy et al., 2008-this issue; Palandro et al., 2008-this issue); • monitoring effectively highly mobile species such as seabird communities (Certain and Bretagnolle, 2008-this issue); • establishing ecological niches relating marine species and their behaviours to their oceanic habitats using climatology of large-scale remotely-sensed products (Panigada et al., 2008-this issue; Oliveira and Stratoudakis, 2008-this issue; Tetley et al., 2008-this issue); and • quantifying and understanding the biogeochemical cycles in the ocean as one of the processes ultimately driving the spatial and temporal structuring of marine communities, by means of regional scale remote sensing (Platt et al., 2008-this issue). The suite of papers in this special issue is thus representative of a variety of applications, ranging from coastal temperate (Murphy et al.,
3298
Preface
2008-this issue) and tropical marine biodiversity (Wabnitz et al., 2008-this issue), to basin-scale ocean biogeochemistry (Platt et al., 2008-this issue). They straddle various stages of development from research (Certain and Bretagnolle, 2008-this issue) to operational (Platt and Sathyendranath, 2008-this issue). Furthermore, they reveal the interface necessary with domains such as statistical analysis and modelling, to build true interdisciplinary avant-garde applications (Panigada et al., 2008-this issue). As such, most papers do not offer any new real technical developments in terms of processing raw remote-sensing data (but see Platt et al., 2008-this issue and Platt and Sathyendranath, 2008-this issue). Instead, standard operational Earth Observations products were used to set in situ observations into their spatial and temporal environmental context, and model the behaviours of marine species (Tetley et al., 2008-this issue). Surprisingly, no studies submitted for this special issue explicitly covered marine biodiversity conservation, specifically the use of remote sensing to optimize the design of marine protected area (MPA) networks and assess their efficiency. Biodiversity conservation along with MPA design and effectiveness is a current major societal application that drives many remote-sensing efforts in national waters and high seas, because of their usefulness in developing consistent products and widely-applicable methods. Lessons can be taken from individual studies, but also by analysing the contrasts between studies. For instance, the studies by Wabnitz et al. (2008-this issue) and Phinn et al. (2008-this issue) targeted similar habitats (seagrass) in different regions (Caribbean and Australia). The differences in scale (regional in Wabnitz et al., local bay in Phinn et al.) reflected different study goals (i.e. presence/ absence for Wabnitz et al.; cover, species, biomass for Phinn et al.), remote-sensing strategy (mono-sensor vs multi-sensor assessments), ground-truth requirements (none and detailed) and achieved accuracies. These two studies, as far apart in design as can be, provide the end-points between which any future seagrass assessment, from local to regional scales, could refer to. Other naturally pairing studies include the marine mammals' studies by Tetley et al. (2008-this issue) and Panigada et al. (2008-this issue). They provide thematical information on species behaviours and favourite habitats, but also methodological lessons in using an array of operational remotesensing products for niche modelling. Niche modelling, or habitat suitability modelling, using standard operational products will likely be a major biodiversity application in the near future, helped by computing technologies, and easier access to large environmental and taxonomic spatially-explicit databases (Baker et al., 2007). The paper by Hardman-Mountford et al. (2008-this issue) presents a new approach to identify and map large-scale ecological provinces in the ocean through remote sensing. It is logically completed by Platt and Sathyendranath (2008-this issue) who discuss the use of remote sensing to quantify and map various ecological indicators at basin scale. In a similar vein but at a much smaller scale, Gohin et al. (2008this issue) use satellite data to classify coastal waters according to the eutrophication risk criteria of the Water Framework Directive of the European Union. 3. Perspectives The different applications in this issue are representative of the initial response to the global need for interdisciplinary, multi-scale studies taking advantage of remote-sensing capacities for marine science, management and conservation. This response further fits the framework established by the intergovernmental organisation Group on Earth Observations (GEO), launched following calls for action by the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development and was founded to develop the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) to provide decision-support tools to a wide variety of users interested in natural and human-induced disasters; health hazards; energy resources; climate change and its impacts; water resources;
weather forecasts; ecosystems management; sustainable agriculture, and biodiversity conservation. For the latter, GEO has recently established the Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO-BON) to develop a plan for integrating biodiversity and environmental data. Obviously, there is still room for pioneer investigations to test concepts and approaches worldwide, and identify limits to remotesensing capacities for all levels of biological organizations. Most papers that appear in this special issue are representative of these worthwhile efforts. However, a large part of the future interdisciplinary work lies in the global systematization of the data acquisition and processing protocols, archiving, cataloguing and modelling approaches, in a quasi-operational way. For example, the demonstration of how remote sensing can be used to map aspects of biodiversity at large scales (e.g. habitats like seagrass) paves the way for globalscale mapping of shallow water habitats using remote sensing, which can be linked to in situ data available in open systems like the Ocean Biogeographic Information System (www.iobis.org). Mapping of this sort falls under the responsibilities of large international collaborative networks given the technical means needed. New and old approaches need to be combined to enhance knowledge of biodiversity and enlarge the spectrum of applications that can be targeted. For this, adequate and early integration of remote-sensing capacities in the design of biodiversity studies traditionally based on field data is especially recommended along the lines of the applications provided in this issue. References Baker, D. J., Farmer, D., & Yarincik, K. (2007). The green ocean — observations of marine biodiversity. The full picture (pp. 267−270). Geneva: GEO Secretariat. Costello, M. J., & Vanden Berghe, E. (2006). “Ocean Biodiversity Informatics” enabling a new era in marine biology research and management. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 316, 203−214. Gaston, K. J. (2000). Global patterns in biodiversity. Nature, 405, 220−227. Halpern, B. S., Walbridge, S., Selkoe, K. A., Kappel, C. V., Micheli, F., D' Agrosa, C., Bruno, J. F., Casey, K. S., Ebert, C., Fox, H. E., Fujita, R., Heinemann, D., Lenihan, H. S., Madin, E. M. P., Perry, M. T., Selig, E. R., Spalding, M., Steneck, R., & Watson, R. (2008). A global map of human impact on marine ecosystems. Science, 319, 948−952.
Contributions to this Special Issue: Barale, V., Jaquet, J. M., & Ndiaye, M. (2008). Algal blooming patterns and anomalies in the Mediterranean Sea as derived from the SeaWiFS data set (1998–2003). Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3300−3313 (this issue). Certain, G., & Bretagnolle, V. (2008). Monitoring seabirds population in marine ecosystem: the use of strip-transect aerial surveys. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3314−3332 (this issue). Degraer, S., Moerkerke, G., Rabaut, M., Van Hoey, G., Du Four, I., Vincx, M., Henriet, J. -P., & Van Lancker, V. (2008). Very-high resolution side-scan sonar mapping of biogenic reefs of the tube worm Lanice conchilega. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3323−3328 (this issue). Gohin, F., Salquin, B., Oger-Jeanneret, H., Lozac'h, L., Lampert, L., Lefèbvre, A., Riou, P., & Bruchon, F. (2008). Towards a better assessment of the ecological status of coastal waters using satellite-derived chlorophyll-a concentrations. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3329−3340 (this issue). Hardman-Mountford, N. J., Hirata, T., Richardson, K. A., & Aiken, J. (2008). An objective methodology for the classification of ecological pattern into biomes and provinces for the pelagic ocean. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3341−3352 (this issue). Murphy, R. J., Underwood, A. J., Tolhurst, T. J., & Chapman, M. G. (2008). Field-based remote-sensing for experimental intertidal ecology: case studies using hyperspatial and hyper-spectral data for New South Wales (Australia). Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3353−3365 (this issue). Nair, A., Sathyendranath, S., Platt, T., Morales, J., Stuart, V., Forget, M., Devred, E., & Bouman, H. (2008). Remote sensing of phytoplankton functional types. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3366−3375 (this issue). Oliveira, P. B., & Stratoudis, Y. (2008). Satellite-derived conditions and advection patterns off Iberia and NW Africa: potential implications to sardine recruitment dynamics and population structuring. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3376−3387 (this issue). Palandro, D. A., Andréfouët, S., Hu, C., Hallock, P., Muller-Karger, F. E., Dustan, P., Callahan, M. K., Kranenburg, C., & Beaver, C. R. (2008). Quantification of two decades of shallow-water coral reef habitat decline in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary using Landsat data (1984–2002). Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3388−3399 (this issue). Panigada, S., Zanardelli, M., MacKenzie, M., Donovan, C., Mélin, F., & Hammond, P. S. (2008). Modelling habitat preferences for fin whales and striped dolphins in the Pelagos Sanctuary (Western Mediterranean Sea) with physiographic and remote sensing variables. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3400−3412 (this issue).
Preface Phinn, S., Roelfsema, C. M., Dekker, A. G., Brando, V. E., & Anstee, J. (2008). Mapping seagrass species, cover and biomass in shallow waters: an assessment of satellite multi-spectral and airborne hyper-spectral Imaging systems in Moreton Bay (Australia). Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3413−3425 (this issue). Platt, T., & Sathyendranath, S. (2008). Ecological indicators for the pelagic zone of the ocean from remote sensing. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3426−3436 (this issue). Platt, T., Sathyendranath, S., Forget, M., White, G. N., Caverhill, C., Bouman, H., Devred, E., & Son, S. H. (2008). Operational estimation of primary production at large geographical scales. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3437−3448 (this issue). Tetley, M. J., Mitchelson-Jacob, E. G., & Robinson, K. P. (2008). The summer distribution of coastal minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) in the southern outer Moray Firth, NE Scotland, in relation to co-occuring mesoscale oceanographic features. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3449−3454 (this issue). Wabnitz, C. C., Andréfouët, S., Torres-Pulliza, D., Müller-Karger, F. E., & Kramer, P. A. (2008). Regional-scale seagrass habitat mapping in the Wider Caribbean region using Landsat sensors: applications to conversation and ecology. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3455−3467 (this issue).
FURTHER READING
Andréfouët, S., Costello, Mark J., Rast, Michael, & Sathyendranath, Shubha (2008). Preface: Earth observations for marine and coastal biodiversity and ecosystems. Remote Sensing of Environment, 112, 3297−3299 (this issue).
Serge Andréfouët Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Centre IRD — Nouméa, BP A5-98848 Noumea, New Caledonia
3299
Mark J. Costello Leigh Marine Laboratory, University of Auckland, PO Box 349, Warkworth 0941, New Zealand Michael Rast GEO Secretariat, 7bis, avenue de la Paix, Casale postale 2300, Ch-1211 Geneva 2, Suisse, Switzerland Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected]. Shubha Sathyendranath Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Prospect Place, The Hoe, Plymouth PL1 3DH, United Kingdom 7 April 2008