Marine sampling field manual for towed underwater camera systems. In: Field Manuals for Marine Sampling to Monitor Australian Waters

Towed underwater camera systems, of various configurations, have been used since the turn of the 20th century to acquire video and photographic still images of the seafloor (Bicknell et al. 2016) They are deployed on a cable from a surface vessel, have no propulsion mechanisms, and generally have forward-looking oblique and/or downward-looking cameras that either record images which are stored and subsequently downloaded, or transmit data directly to the surface in real-time via a coaxial or fibre optic cable (Bowden and Jones 2016, Durden et al. 2016a). Towed underwater cameras not only augment data from collected specimens (Chapter 8, 9); they also provide an important non-invasive sampling alternative where extractive methods are either unnecessary or unsuitable, such as in sensitive deep-sea habitats (e.g. Althaus et al. 2009, Williams et al. 2015, Sherlock et al. 2016), or for repeated sampling in marine reserves (e.g. Lawrence et al. 2015). Towed platforms also have the added advantage of providing cost-effective permanent data capture along transects that can be up to several kilometers in length and can be used to traverse highly heterogeneous seafloor topography (Shortis et al. 2007, Sheehan et al. 2016). The quality of imagery acquired by towed systems depends largely on sea conditions and water clarity, both of which may vary considerably depending on geographic location, season of sampling and extent of tidal influence. In depths greater than around 30 m, lighting and camera specifications become increasingly important to image quality. The quality and versatility of equipment and the maintenance of a consistent flying altitude above the seabed are also critical factors affecting image quality and usability. Conventional underwater still photography and video imagery were initially applied by marine ecologists to collect basic qualitative data (e.g. simple visual assessment of seabed conditions to assess habitat type or dominant species), or often low-accuracy quantitative data estimated through the use of parallel lasers to define the scale of the images (see Harvey et al. 2002, Shortis et al. 2008, Durden et al. 2016a). Recent technological advancements have emerged that permit collection of high-resolution benthic imagery using versatile multifunctional towed platforms carrying a variety of camera systems (e.g. stereo-image measurement systems) and a range of other sensors (e.g. high-resolution multibeam and side-scan sonars, motion sensors, conductivity temperature and depth sensors, and subsea acoustic positioning systems) (Kocak et al., 2008, Rattray et al. 2014, Bowden and Jones 2016, Durden et al. 2016a, Logan et al. 2017). This technology, coupled with advances in camera resolution, positional accuracy, digital data processing and visualisation techniques, has enabled more quantitative and spatially-referenced studies of the seafloor. Calibrated stereo-imaging in particular has facilitated more reliable length measurements of mobile species, such as epibenthic invertebrates and demersal fish, and more accurate estimates of biomass and population distributions (Harvey et al. 2002, Shortis et al. 2009). Towed underwater imaging systems can be applied to acquire baseline data, evaluate benthic diversity, map benthic habitats, identify vulnerable communities, assess changes in biota, and support spatial and ecological modelling/monitoring.

[1]  Stefan B. Williams,et al.  Variable Responses of Benthic Communities to Anomalously Warm Sea Temperatures on a High-Latitude Coral Reef , 2014, PloS one.

[2]  Kenneth L. Smith,et al.  An evaluation of deep-sea benthic megafauna length measurements obtained with laser and stereo camera methods , 2015 .

[3]  Pere Ridao,et al.  A Comparison of G2o Graph SLAM and EKF Pose Based SLAM with Bathymetry Grids , 2013 .

[4]  Scott D. Foster,et al.  Image subsampling and point scoring approaches for large-scale marine benthic monitoring programs , 2016 .

[5]  Euan S. Harvey,et al.  A Review of Underwater Stereo-Image Measurement for Marine Biology and Ecology Applications , 2009 .

[6]  Stefan B. Williams,et al.  Monitoring of Benthic Reference Sites: Using an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle , 2012, IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine.

[7]  Jakub Stoklosa,et al.  A climate of uncertainty: accounting for error in climate variables for species distribution models , 2015 .

[8]  Scott D. Foster,et al.  Analysis and prediction of faunal distributions from video and multi‐beam sonar data using Markov models , 2009 .

[9]  Euan S. Harvey,et al.  A Comparison of the Accuracy and Precision of Measurements from Single and Stereo-Video Systems , 2002 .

[10]  Alan Williams,et al.  A vessel-towed camera platform for surveying seafloor habitats of the continental shelf , 1999 .

[11]  Tony Rees,et al.  A Standardised Vocabulary for Identifying Benthic Biota and Substrata from Underwater Imagery: The CATAMI Classification Scheme , 2015, PloS one.

[12]  Rory Quinn,et al.  Development of benthic monitoring methods using photoquadrats and scuba on heterogeneous hard-substrata: a boulder-slope community case study , 2011 .

[13]  Scott D. Foster,et al.  Temporal and spatial variability in the cover of deep reef species: Implications for monitoring , 2017 .

[14]  Beom Jin Park,et al.  Using Stereo-Video for Deep Water Benthic Habitat Surveys , 2008 .

[15]  S. Foster,et al.  Altered niche of an ecologically significant urchin species, Centrostephanus rodgersii, in its extended range revealed using an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle , 2015 .

[16]  Dob O. B. Jones,et al.  The use of towed camera platforms in deep-water science , 2009 .

[17]  Stuart R. PHINN,et al.  Evaluating benthic survey techniques for validating maps of coral reefs derived from remotely sensed images , 2008 .

[18]  J. Monk,et al.  Sensitivity of fine‐scale species distribution models to locational uncertainty in occurrence data across multiple sample sizes , 2017 .

[19]  Scott D. Foster,et al.  Uncertainty in spatially predicted covariates: is it ignorable? , 2012 .

[20]  Stefan B. Williams,et al.  True Color Correction of Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Imagery , 2016, J. Field Robotics.

[21]  D.M. Kocak,et al.  Underwater imaging and optics: Recent advances , 2008, OCEANS 2008.

[22]  Jacquomo Monk,et al.  Quantification of Spatial and Thematic Uncertainty in the Application of Underwater Video for Benthic Habitat Mapping , 2014 .

[23]  Alan Williams,et al.  Towed camera imagery and benthic sled catches provide different views of seamount benthic diversity , 2015 .

[24]  Euan S. Harvey,et al.  A comparison of calibration methods and system configurations of underwater stereo‐video systems for applications in marine ecology , 2015 .

[25]  Jan Seiler,et al.  Assessing size, abundance and habitat preferences of the Ocean Perch Helicolenus percoides using a AUV-borne stereo camera system , 2012 .

[26]  Jennifer M. Durden,et al.  Comparison of image annotation data generated by multiple investigators for benthic ecology , 2016 .

[27]  Stefan B. Williams,et al.  Quantifying the response of structural complexity and community composition to environmental change in marine communities , 2016, Global change biology.

[28]  Grégory Germain,et al.  An experimental comparison of three towed underwater video systems using species metrics, benthic impact and performance , 2016 .

[29]  Stefan B. Williams,et al.  An efficient approach to bathymetric SLAM , 2009, 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[30]  Tim Ingleton,et al.  Seabed habitat mapping of the continental shelf of NSW , 2010 .

[31]  Rudy J. Kloser,et al.  Impacts of bottom trawling on deep-coral ecosystems of seamounts are long-lasting , 2009 .

[32]  Alan Williams,et al.  A vessel towed platform for deepwater high resolution benthic imaging , 2016, OCEANS 2016 - Shanghai.

[33]  Stefan B. Williams,et al.  Outcropping reef ledges drive patterns of epibenthic assemblage diversity on cross-shelf habitats , 2016, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[34]  Lene Buhl-Mortensen,et al.  Monitoring marine populations and communities: methods dealing with imperfect detectability , 2012 .

[35]  Stefan B. Williams,et al.  A simple, fast, and repeatable survey method for underwater visual 3D benthic mapping and monitoring , 2017, Ecology and evolution.

[36]  Craig R. Johnson,et al.  Changes in deep reef benthic community composition across a latitudinal and environmental gradient in temperate Eastern Australia , 2017 .

[37]  Stefan B. Williams,et al.  Stereo‐imaging AUV detects trends in sea urchin abundance on deep overgrazed reefs , 2016 .

[38]  Alexandre C. G. Schimel,et al.  Combining underwater video methods improves effectiveness of demersal fish assemblage surveys across habitats , 2017 .

[39]  Brendan J. Godley,et al.  Camera technology for monitoring marine biodiversity and human impact , 2016 .

[40]  Pål Buhl-Mortensen,et al.  Current and future trends in marine image annotation software , 2016 .

[41]  Jeffrey M. Dambacher,et al.  Mapping Habitats and Developing Baselines in Offshore Marine Reserves with Little Prior Knowledge: A Critical Evaluation of a New Approach , 2015, PloS one.

[42]  Donna M. Kocak,et al.  A Focus on Recent Developments and Trends in Underwater Imaging , 2008 .

[43]  Anne Jordt,et al.  Perspectives in visual imaging for marine biology and ecology: from acquisition to understanding , 2016 .