Contributors | Affiliation | Role |
---|---|---|
Campbell, Lisa | Texas A&M University (TAMU) | Principal Investigator |
Henrichs, Darren W. | Texas A&M University (TAMU) | Co-Principal Investigator |
Fiorendino, James | Texas A&M University (TAMU) | Contact |
Copley, Nancy | Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI BCO-DMO) | BCO-DMO Data Manager |
On each of 2 cruise legs 01 and 03, samples were collected at 7 stations (S01, S06, S11, S16, S21, SS and GI) from 2 depths [surface and chlorophyll maximum depth when possible; see HRR-bottle data]) by CTD-rosette. At each station, triplicate 5-ml samples pre-filtered through 150 µm Nitex were analyzed immediately with an onboard Imaging FlowCytobot. All image data can be viewed on the TOAST dashboard: https://toast.tamu.edu/timeline?dataset=HRR_cruise.
Image analysis and feature extraction were performed using software developed by Sosik and colleagues which is available on github (https://github.com/hsosik/ifcb-analysis/). The automated classification approach of Sosik & Olson (2007), as modified and described by Anglès et al. (2019), was employed and the automated classification results were then inspected visually and manually corrected into a total of 102 categories that included 35 categories of diatoms, 30 categories of dinoflagellates, 10 categories of ciliates, 10 categories of flagellates, and 17 ‘others’, which included filamentous cyanobacteria, freshwater chlorophytes, coccolithophorids, and small cells that could not be identified taxonomically from images (refer to Fiorendino et al. 2021. for more details). See related dataset.
For comparison with the Texas Observatory for Algal Succession Time series (TOAST), IFCB images were also classified automatically into one of 112 classes utilizing a custom convolutional neural network (CNN) trained on a curated set of images (Henrichs et al. 2021.). See related dataset.
This dataset: Biomass for each image was estimated using the algorithm developed by Moberg & Sosik (2012) to calculate cellular volume from the extracted image features and then convert to total carbon per image (Menden-Deuer & Lessard 2000) and summed for each class..
Sampling locations:
Sample ID |
Station |
Leg |
Location Lat oN/Long oW |
L1_S01 |
S01 |
1 |
27.2286 -97.2686 |
L3_S01 |
S01 |
3 |
|
L1_S06 |
S06 |
1 |
27.8358 -96.9874 |
L3_S06 |
S06 |
3 |
|
L1_S11 |
S11 |
1 |
28.2614 -96.4129 |
L3_S11 |
S11 |
3 |
|
L1_S16 |
S16 |
1 |
28.5366 -95.8656 |
L3_S16 |
S16 |
3 |
|
L1_S21 |
S21 |
1 |
28.7644 -95.2978 |
L3_S21 |
S21 |
3 |
|
L1_SS |
SS |
1 |
28.9600 -95.0946 |
L3_SS |
SS |
3 |
|
L1_GI |
GI |
1 |
29.0649 -94.9000
|
L3_GI |
GI |
3 |
- BCO-DMO Processing Notes:
- data submitted in Excel file "manual_carbon_ifcb.xlsx" sheet "Biomass" extracted to csv
- added conventional header with dataset name, PI name, version date
- modified parameter names to conform with BCO-DMO naming conventions
- rounded values to 2 decimal places
File |
---|
IFCB_manual_carbon.csv (Comma Separated Values (.csv), 14.91 KB) MD5:600d135449c74be4238709b917d6928d Primary data file for dataset ID 840147 |
Parameter | Description | Units |
Major_Category | 5 major groups of microplankton | unitless |
Class | Taxonomic names of the species or genus (if known) or group identified | unitless |
L1GI_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station GI; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1GI_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station GI; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1GI_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station GI; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1SS_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station SS; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1SS_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station SS; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1SS_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station SS; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S21_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S21; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S21_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S21; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S21_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S21; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S16_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S16; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S16_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S16; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S16_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S16; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S11_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S11; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S11_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S11; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S11_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S11; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S06_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S06; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S06_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S06; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S06_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S06; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S01_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S01; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S01_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S01; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L1S01_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 1 station S01; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3GI_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station GI; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3GI_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station GI; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3GI_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station GI; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3SS_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station SS; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3SS_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station SS; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3SS_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station SS; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S21_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S21; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S21_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S21; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S21_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S21; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S16_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S16; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S16_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S16; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S16_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S16; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S11_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S11; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S11_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S11; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S11_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S11; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S06_1 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S06; replicate 1 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S06_2 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S06; replicate 2 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S06_3 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S06; replicate 3 | micrograms carbon/liter |
L3S01 | Biomass of class at Leg 3 station S01 | micrograms carbon/liter |
Dataset-specific Instrument Name | Image FlowCytobot (McLane Research Laboratories, Inc.) |
Generic Instrument Name | Imaging FlowCytobot |
Generic Instrument Description | The Imaging FlowCytobot (IFCB) is an in-situ automated submersible imaging flow cytometer that generates images of particles in-flow taken from the aquatic environment. https://mclanelabs.com/imaging-flowcytobot/ |
Dataset-specific Instrument Name | |
Generic Instrument Name | Niskin bottle |
Dataset-specific Description | Used to collect samples |
Generic Instrument Description | A Niskin bottle (a next generation water sampler based on the Nansen bottle) is a cylindrical, non-metallic water collection device with stoppers at both ends. The bottles can be attached individually on a hydrowire or deployed in 12, 24, or 36 bottle Rosette systems mounted on a frame and combined with a CTD. Niskin bottles are used to collect discrete water samples for a range of measurements including pigments, nutrients, plankton, etc. |
Website | |
Platform | R/V Point Sur |
Start Date | 2017-09-22 |
End Date | 2017-10-03 |
Description | HRR study with three legs.
Chief Scientists: Steve DiMarco (Leg 1); Kristen Thyng (Leg 2); Lisa Campbell (Leg 3).
R2R Cruise Page: https://www.rvdata.us/search/cruise/PS1809 |
NSF Award Abstract:
Hurricane Harvey is the strongest hurricane to hit the Texas coast in decades and the resulting tidal surges, flooding and terrestrial runoff have had a severe impact on the coastal ocean. The effects on the phytoplankton, the first link in the food chain, may be unprecedented. To determine how the phytoplankton community will respond to such drastic changes in salinity, nutrient inputs, and potential toxins, immediate and continuous sampling is the only way to fully capture the effects and to identify when conditions return to "normal". An automated, continuous phytoplankton imaging instrument that is deployed on the Texas coast records images of the phytoplankton and permits calculation of the abundance of different species. Together with molecular information on the genes that have been "turned on", or expressed, outcomes of this project will help determine the responses of individual types of phytoplankton. Extreme storms are expected to increase in frequency with future climate change, so the responses identified now will be valuable in predicting how such events will affect these primary producers, which in turn support most of the food webs in marine ecosystems, in the future.
High temporal resolution observations from the Imaging FlowCytobot (IFCB) have revealed that hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico cause drastic changes in the phytoplankton community structure. The objectives of this RAPID project are: 1) to characterize the dynamics of the phytoplankton species in relation to the environmental variables along the Texas coast; 2) to assess the short and long-term changes in the phytoplankton community; and 3) to identify the strategies of the phytoplankton community for resource acquisition. To accomplish these objectives, this project will utilize IFCB time series to follow phytoplankton community structure during the recovery period from Hurricane Harvey. In addition, two RAPID response cruises (in late September and early October) to sample at 5 sites along a transect from Galveston to Port Aransas, TX. At each station, CTD profiles and water samples from surface and the chlorophyll maximum will be collected for nutrients, carbonate chemistry, and RNA sequencing for metatranscriptomic analysis. Metatranscriptomics can provide an indication of the metabolic strategies employed and functional relationships within the plankton community in response to changes in the environment. The advantage of a metatranscriptomic approach is that the entire molecular response to the environment is captured. So, while the response of phytoplankton to increased nutrient inputs from floodwater runoff is targeted, the responses to other environmental stresses (toxics, hypoxia, acidification) are also captured. Analyses of this time series using multivariate statistical techniques, such as principal component analysis (PCA), and network analysis, a powerful technique for identifying potential interactions among taxa, will provide insights on the environmental factors and metabolic responses structuring the community during the aftermath of the hurricane.
Related data from the The Texas Observatory for Algal Succession Time-Series (TOAST) can be found at the following: https://toast.tamu.edu/timeline?dataset=HRR_Cruise
Funding Source | Award |
---|---|
NSF Division of Ocean Sciences (NSF OCE) |