US Department of Commerce (USDOC), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Ocean Service (NOS), National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular Research (CCEHBR).
2006
National Benthic Inventory Chesapeake Bay Environmental Assessment 2004
database
Charleston, South Carolina
NOAA's Ocean Service, National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
http://www.nbi.noaa.gov
The goal of the present study was to estimate the current status of ecological condition in five of these areas and thus help to complete the overall toxics inventory for the Bay. These five systems included the Chester River, Nanticoke River, Pocomoke River, Lower Mobjack Bay (Poquosin and Back Rivers) and the South and Rhode Rivers. This study utilized a Sediment Quality Triad (SQT) approach in combination with additional water-column contaminant analysis to allow for a “weight of evidence” assessment of environmental condition. A total of 60 stations distributed among the five systems, using a probabilistic stratified random design, were sampled during the summer of 2004 to allow for synoptic measures of sediment contamination, sediment toxicity, andbenthic condition. Upon completion of all analyses, stations were assigned to one of fourcategories based on the three legs of the triad. Stations with high sediment quality had no hits on any of the three legs of the triad; those with moderate quality had one hit; those with marginal quality had two hits; and those with poor quality had hits for all three legs of the triad. The Pocomoke River had by far the largest proportion of the total area (97.5%) classified as having high sediment quality, while the Rhode/South system had the highest proportion (11.4%) classified as poor. None of the stations in the Chester River, Nanticoke River, and Lower Mobjack Bay systems were classified as poor. More than 65% of the area of each of the five systems was classified with high to moderate sediment quality. The Rhode/South system had 30.4% of total area classified with marginally to severely poor quality. The results of this study highlight the importance of using multiple indicators and a “weight of evidence” approach to characterizeenvironmental quality and the potential bioeffects of toxic contaminants.
The main objective of the present study was to estimate the current status in ecological condition of five such river areas of the Chesapeake Bay and thus to help complete the overall toxics inventory goal for the bay. These systems included the Chester River, Nanticoke River, Pocomoke River, Lower Mobjack Bay (Poquoson and Back Rivers), and the South and Rhode Rivers. The study utilized a Sediment Quality Triad (SQT) approach in combination with additional water-column contaminant analysis.
2004
2004
observed
As needed
Chesapeake Bay
-77.0
-75.9
39.6
36.7
None
coastal
marine
latitude
longitude
taxa
infauna
macroinfauna
benthic
species
Coastal Monitoring
oceans
temperature
salinity
depth
grain size
toc
dissolved oxygen
abundance
Taxonomic serial number
None
Chesapeake Bay
Atlantic Ocean
None
Marine
invertebrate
infauna
macroinfauna
benthic
benthos
benthic macroinfauna
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
database
After the original taxonomic classification was completed for these samples a Taxonomic Serial Number (TSN) was assigned to each taxa. This TSN was based upon the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS, www.itis.usda.gov) and usually represents a one to one correlation, where the taxa name in this database matches the taxa name associated with the assigned TSN in the ITIS database (e.g., Owenia fusiformis TSN-67647). However, a one to one correlation was not always possible. When a species was identified as part of this database, but there was no TSN available for that exact taxa then the next existing TSN in that species' taxonomic hierarchy was used (e.g., Original name = Amathimysis serrata; ITIS Name = Amathimysis TSN = 90335; Reason for Discrepancy = New species name, not updated in ITIS database).
Barry A. Vittor & Associates
mailing
Mobile
AL
36695
251-633-6100
Samples were live-sieved in the field on 0.5mm wire mesh sieves and all material retained on the screen was preserved with 10% buffered formalin with Rose Bengal dye. In the laboratory these previously fixed samples were re-sieved and transferred to a 70%-ethanol solution. All benthic macroinfauna retained on the 0.5mm screen were identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level, usually species.The level of taxonomy varied depending upon the salinity of the habitat from which the samples were collected. Oligochaetes and chironomids from tidal fresh and oligohaline salinity zones were identified to species (or lowest possible taxon) whereas individuals of these groups from higher salinities (> 5) were not identified to the species level. Additionally, certain faunal groups were not identified to the species level due to inherent taxonomic difficulties associated with the group and the limited value to be gained relative to the effort required for the additional level of detail. These groups and the corresponding level of expected taxonomic classification are as follows:Phylum Porifera (Sponges) - Phylum; Phylum Ectoprocta (Bryozoans) - Phylum; Class Hydrozoa - Order (e.g., Hydroida, Actinulida); Class Hirudinea - Class; Class Anthozoa - Order [e.g., Alcyonacea (soft corals), Gorgonacea (sea fans and whips), Pennnatulacea (sea pens), Actiniaria (sea anemones), Scleractinia, (stony corals), Ceriantharia]; Other Dipteran Families - Family (e.g., Ceratopogonidae, Chaoboridae).
individuals
USDOC/NOAA/NOS/NCCOS/CCEHBR/Coastal Ecology
physical
Charleston
SC
29412
843-762-8511
www.nbi.noaa.gov
All benthic macroinfauna (> 0.5mm) were identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level, usually species.The taxonomic classification system described in this metadata covers the major taxonomic categories of the database from Kingdom down to the level of Order only. This does not represent the more detailed taxonomic information that is available in database (usually species).
Kingdom
Animalia
Phylum
Annelida
Class
Clitellata
Order
Haplotaxida
Class
Polychaeta
Order
Aciculata
Order
Canalipalpata
Phylum
Arthropoda
Subphylum
Crustacea
Class
Malacostraca
Order
Amphipoda
Order
Cumacea
Order
Decapoda
Order
Isopoda
Order
Mysida
Order
Tanaidacea
Phylum
Chordata
Subphylum
Tunicata
Class
Ascidiacea
Class
Cephalochordata
Phylum
Cnidaria
Class
Anthozoa
Order
Actiniaria
Order
Pennatulacea
Phylum
Echinodermata
Subphylum
Echinozoa
Class
Echinoidea
Order
Clypeasteroida
Class
Holothuroidea
Order
Dendrochirotida
Class
Stelleroidea
Order
Ophiurida
Phylum
Mollusca
Class
Bivalvia
Order
Arcoida
Order
Limoida
Order
Myoida
Order
Mytiloida
Order
Pholadomyoida
Order
Veneroida
Class
Gastropoda
Order
Archaeogastropoda
Order
Cephalaspidea
Order
Heterostropha
Order
Neogastropoda
Order
Neotaenioglossa
Order
Nudibranchia
Class
Polyplacophora
Class
Scaphopoda
Order
Gadilida
Phylum
Nemertea
Class
Anopla
Order
Heteronemertea
Order
Paleonemertea
Phylum
Platyhelminthes
Class
Turbellaria
Phylum
Porifera
Phylum
Sipuncula
None
The National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) requests that all individuals who download these data acknowledge the source of these data in any reports, papers, or presentations. If you publish these data, please include a statement similar to: "Some or all of the data described in this article were produced by NOAA through its National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science - NOAA National Benthic Inventory.
USDOC/NOAA/NOS/NCCOS/CCEHBR/Coastal Ecology
physical
219 Fort Johnson Road
Charleston
SC
29412
843-762-8511
http://www.nbi.noaa.gov
A variety of QA/QC procedures were implemented during the processing of benthic infauna samples to ensure consistent production of high quality data. A minimum of 10% of all benthic infauna samples sorted by each technician were re-sorted by a different technician to monitor performance and provide feedback necessary to maintain acceptable standards. The minimum acceptable sorting efficiency was 90%. Approximately 10% of the samples were randomly selected and re-checked by an independent qualified taxonomist. The minimum acceptable taxonomic efficiency was 90%.
All data are believed to be logically consistent.
All taxa identified and enumerated within a benthic infauna sample are included in this database. Additional data including physical characteristics of the sediments and concentration of measured chemical contaminants are available by submitting a request to the individual study's contact that is provided on the Contacts web page at nnbi.noaa.gov.
Not relevant to the dataset.
A Young grab (0.04 m2) was used to collect benthic and sediment samples from all stations. Three replicate grabs were taken at each of the sampled stations. All sediments collected in each grab were prepared for benthic analyses by gently washing the material through a 0.5-mm mesh sieve and washing the material retained on the sieve into a labeled container and preserved with 10% buffered formaldehyde and seawater mixed with rose begal dye. In the laboratory at Barry A. Vittor & Associates, Inc., Mobile, AL, organisms were separated from the remaining debris, identified by experienced taxonomists, and enumerated. Identification and counts were entered into a spreadsheet file and community parameter estimates were calculated.
2004
Point
.0001
.0001
Decimal degrees
No correction
0.1
meters
Attribute values
Data File
The data file reports information regarding this study including location, basic environmental parameters and benthic community data (taxa and abundance).
USDOC/NOAA/NOS/NCCOS/CCEHBR
Study
Name of the study
NBI database
Study is the name of the study and provides a unique identifier for a particular study. Study includes the year in which the study was conducted.
Location
Geographic area in which study was conducted
NBI database
Location provides a very brief description of the general geographic area in which a study was conducted.
Year
Year in which the study was conducted
NBI database
1998
2001
Year
Strata
This is a code representing groups of stations.
NBI database
No strata used in this study
Station
This is a code representing a group of replicate samples all from one specific location.
NBI database
1
213
no unit of measure - a station identifier
Rep.
Replicate number
NBI database
1
3
no units of measure - a replicate identifier
Lat.
Latitude of station.
NBI database
36.7
39.6
decimal degrees
Longitude
Longitude of station.
NBI database
-79.0
-77.9
decimal degrees
Depth(m)
Depth at a station
NBI database
1.7
25.6
meters
0.1
Salinity(ppt)
Bottom salinity at a station
NBI database
6.0
30.6
parts per thousand
0.1
Dissolved Oxygen(mg/l)
Bottom dissolved oxygen at a station
NBI database
0.00
17.90
milligrams per liter
0.01
TOC(percent)
Total organic carbon in sediment at a station
NBI database
0.00
10.99
weight percent
0.01
gravel(percent)
gravel fraction of sediment at a station
NBI database
0
5
percent
0.01
sand(percent)
sand fraction of sediment at a station
NBI database
1
99
percent
0.01
silt(percent)
silt fraction of sediment at a station
NBI database
0
52
percent
0.01
clay(percent)
clay fraction of sediment at a station
NBI database
0
69
percent
0.01
TSN
Taxonomic serial number
ITIS database
Information regarding TSNs can be found at http:/www.itis.usda.gov
Taxon
The scientific name of the organism found within the sample.
NBI database
Organisms were identified to the lowest possible taxonomic category, usually species. If an organism was left at a higher level then that name is given (e.g. family name).
Ab.
Abundance, the number of that taxa counted within that replicate.
NBI database
1
4784
count of individuals present in a sample
USDOC/NOAA/NOS/NCCOS/CCEHBR/Coastal Ecology
physical
219 Fort Johnson Road
Charleston
SC
29412
843-762-8511
http://www.nbi.noaa.gov
None
ASCII
http://www.nbi.noaa.gov
none
http://www.nbi.noaa.gov
20060523
20090113
USDOC/NOAA/NOS/NCCOS/CCEHBR/Coastal Ecology
physical
219 Fort Johnson Road
Charleston
South Carolina
29412
(843) 762 8511
nnbi.noaa.gov
FGDC Biological Data Profile of the Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata
FGDC-STD-001.1-1999