1

JERICO WP10: JRAEmerging technologies

(Improve system components)

Glenn Nolan, Antoine GremareGlenn Nolan, Antoine Gremare

Partners involved

WP10 Objectives

• To examine the extent to which existing technologies can be improved and/or adapted to the benefit of coastal operational oceanography and to document and test emerging technologies that will underpin future operational oceanographic systems in Europe’s coastal seas. The work package is sub-divided into tasks including:

• 1. New tools and strategies for monitoring key biological compartments and processes

• 2. Development of new physico-chemical sensors.• 3.Use of emerging profiling technologies for coastal seas.• 4. Increased use of ships of opportunity in making coastal oceanographic

measurements.• 5. Best practices in coastal observatory implementation.

Overview of tasks and sub-tasks

04/19/235

Key personnel

04/19/236

INSU Antoine OGS Rajesh

NIOZ Carlo IFREMER Yannick

NIVA Dominique CSIC Joaquin

NERC David CNR Michela

SYKE Jukka CEFAS Dave

SMHI Bengt MI Glenn

HZG Willi  MUMM Michael

TASK 10.1:• DEVELOPMENTS OF NEW TOOLS AND STRATEGIES FOR THE

MONITORING OF KEY BIOLOGICAL COMPARTMENTS AND PROCESSES:

– (1) in situ video imaging of the water sediment interface using ROV or other mobile carriers to infer the abundance of supra-benthos

– (2) in situ sediment profile images to infer the ecological quality status of benthic habitats using either existing or newly developed indices,

– (3) in situ recorded videos by fixed cameras to assess the activity and growth of benthic organisms,

– (4) images derived from laboratory equipments designed to process and assess both phytoplankton (Flowcam, FlowCytoBot) and zooplankton (Zooscan).

(INSU, NIOZ, NIVA)

Demonstration survey

TASK 10.1 DEVELOPMENTS OF NEW TOOLS FOR THE MONITORING OF KEY BIOLOGICAL COMPARTMENTS

AND PROCESSES (INSU, NIOZ, NIVA)

• Coastal ecosystems are highly productive

biodiversity hotspots (most of them)

heterogeneous in space

submitted to disturbances (man-induced, temporal instability)

• Stakeholders operating in coastal areas are highly interested in biological issues (some of them regarding the top of the food chain)

• They is a growing need for the assessment of ecosystem ecological quality at large spatial scale (from WFD to MSFD)

• From a technical standpoint, the current number of biological parameters that can be included in an operational network is extremely low (increasing the spatial and temporal frequency of Chl a measurements is probably necessary but certainly not

enough when pretending to assess the ecological quality status of coastal ecosystems).

Strong need to develop new tools…

TASK 10.1: DEVELOPMENTS OF NEW TOOLS

• In situ sediment profile images to infer the ecological quality status of benthic habitats using either existing or newly developed indices

• In situ video imaging of the water sediment interface using ROV or other mobile carriers to infer the abundance of suprabenthos

• In situ recorded videos by fixed cameras to assess the activity and growth of benthic organisms

• Images derived from laboratory equipments designed to process and assess both phytoplankton (Flowcam) and zooplankton (Zooscan).

In situ sediment profile images : Monitoring growth

- Based on segmentations of individual images- Used to draw the water/sediment interface, aRPD and biogenic structures- Works automatically and semi automatically

- Challenge: Extend the plasticity of the software to make it applicable (automatically)in the largest possible set of situations

In situ video imaging of the water sediment interface using mobile carriers

- Based on segmentations of individual images- Allow for the identification and quantification of selected species- Long term time series provide an indirect assessment of growth- Already achieved in the Mediterranean

- Challenge: Create an interface allowing for the parametrization of segmentation

In situ recorded videos by fixed cameras : Monitoring activity and movements

- Based on the pixel by pixel comparison of successive images- Threshold of detected changes attributed to activity- Already achieved in the laboratory

- Challenge: Transpose this to the field (noise)

In situ recorded videos by fixed cameras : Monitoring growth

- Based on the pixel by pixel comparison of successive images- Threshold of detected changes attributed to activity- Long term time series can provide an indirect assesment of growth- Already achieved in the laboratory

- Challenge: Achieve direct assessment of growth in situ

Images derived from laboratory equipments to monitor ‘end to end’ plankton community

- Semi-automatic recognition based on a large set of biometric measu- ments and a learning set (currently different instruments and no integration)

- Challenge: Develop an integrated suite of software for image analysis, automatic recognition, predictions validation and images and results management for both Flowcam (protozoa) and Zooscan (metazoa)

- Some of the developments of tools are dealing with the characterization of phytoplankton (including harmful species).

- Other ones are dealing with the monitoring activity of macrobenthos

-A demonstration survey will combine these two inputs. It will be carried out at several contrasted site including an

- oligotropic one (Villefranche),- second featuring important aquaculture activities potentially

affected byharmful algal blooms (Arcachon)- a Baltic one (to be discussed)

DEMONSTRATION SURVEYS

TASK 10.2:

• DEVELOPMENTS OF PHYSICO-CHEMICAL SENSORS AND IMPLEMENTATION ON NEW PLATFORMS– Subtask 10.2.1. Contaminants– Subtask 10.2.2. Algal pigments– Subtask 10.2.3. Carbonate system (adapt and deploy)

(NIVA, NERC, SYKE, SMHI, HZG)

TASK 10.3:• EMERGING TECHNOLOGY - PROFILING

TECHNOLOGY, INTER-COMPARISON WITH MATURE TECHNOLOGY– (1) MAMBO buoy, PAGODE profiling floats and ship-based CTD

systems in the Northern Adriatic Sea, and – (2) the EOL buoy and ship-based measurements in the Ligurian

Sea, – (3) profiling system in the Bay of Biscay (ocean exposed

conditions) compare with those of two FerryBox lines

(OGS, IFREMER, CSIC, MI, INSU, NIVA, NERC)

Two case studies including glider and XBTs from Ferries

TASK 10.4:

• SHIPS OF OPPORTUNITY, NEXT GENERATION FISHING VESSELS PROBES

(IFREMER, CNR, CEFAS, MI)

Short workshop (field activity WP7??)

TASK 10.5

• FERRYBOX DATA QUALITY CONTROL ALGORITHM (M6-M42)

(NERC, NIVA, HZG)

Review (no field activity)

  Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

MS22 12      

MS23   24    

MS24     26  

MS25     26  

MS26     30  

D10.1     36  

D10.2       42

D10.3       42

D10.4       42

Internal reporting 9 24 27 48

Project reporting   18 36  

Field activity        04/19/23

Deliverables: WP10

Milestones

Next steps

• Include SPM satellite task (MUMM)

• Develop a short DoW for WP10– Milestones, deliverables– Timing of experiments– Linkages to other WPs– Resources

JERICO KICK OFF MEETING PARIS – Maison de la recherche - 24 & 25 May 2011