List of all metadata reports | This report's TOC | Previous Page | Next Page
9.0 Summary of Selected International Marine Classifications and Spatial Frameworks
Part One
| Name of system. | 1. Interim marine and coastal regionalisation for Australia. | 2. Physical classification of Australian Estuaries | 3. BioMar-marine biotopes of the NE Atlantic |
|---|---|---|---|
| Date developed. | Version 3.3: 1998 | 1999 | Late 1990's |
| Geographical coverage. | Australia and offshore territories | Australia | NE Atlantic |
| Scale of operation. | I: >1000's km II: 100's-1000's km III: 10's-100's km IV: sites |
Estuary scale | Detailed for biotopes (these combine habitat & community in smallest unit to give a homogenous assemblage of species) |
| Classification based on: | |||
| 1.biogeographical regions. | Yes | No | |
| 2. identifying habitats and communities. | Yes- biological communities are used at more detailed/lower levels of the classification | ||
| 3. physical processes. | Uses biologically important physical factors selected after testing the utility of many physical parameters to explain the distribution of mangroves and saltmarsh. | Yes- major divisions of the most important physical forcing functions drive the upper levels of the classification. Finer distinctions of these functions are used at lower levels. | |
| Coast/marine area covered. | |||
| 1.coastal terrestrial. | Probably no | Supratidal-Yes | |
| 2. estuarine. | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 3. open coast intertidal. | Yes | ||
| 4. open coast subtidal inshore. | Yes. | Yes | |
| 5. open coast subtidal offshore. | Yes | Yes | |
| Structure of classification. | |||
| 1. level 1. | i).Demersal Provinces: 9 core provinces and 8 biotones (transitions) on continental shelf. This is based on classification of demersal fish species diversity/richness. Also 4 topographic based (surrogate) classes beyond the shelf break. ii)Pelagic Provinces and Biotones. 2 core provinces and 2 biotones on continental shelf based on classification of pelagic fish species diversity/richness. 9 classes of water type mass beyond the shelf break based on classification of water column properties (surrogate) |
Climate zone (5) | A:Major habitats- defined by substrate and zonation (6 broad classes). |
| 2. level 2. | Meso scale regions (60) (based on physical and biological information | Extreme tidal range | B: Habitat complex defined by exposure (3 classes) |
| 3. level 3 | Local units | Proportion of total area that is intertidal | C: Biotope complex defined by substrate subcategory-equivalent to community class |
| 4. other levels. | Sites | D: Biotope defined by dominant species -equivalent to community type. E: Subbiotope defined by the interplay of exposure and zonation subcategories. | |
| Original purpose. | To assist with the identification of candidate areas for the nationally representative system of marine protected areas; and to provide a "strategic platform" for sustainable and integrated marine management. | To develop a national classification based on easily quantifiable biologically important physical characteristics. | To develop a classification of benthic marine biotopes which will underpin the management and conservation of coastal ecosystems |
Part Two
| Name of system. | 4. Marine habitat classification for Carribbean coral reefs (Mumby & Harbourne) | 5. US Fish and Wildlife Service Wetland Classification (Cowardin et al) | 6. Roff and Taylor: marine classification for Canada |
|---|---|---|---|
| Date developed. | 1999 | 1979 | 2000 |
| Geographical coverage. | Carribbean | USA | Canada |
| Scale of operation. | Coarse levels -10's-100's m. Fine levels- metres. |
Variable depending on level | Variable - depending on level. Suggest that pelagic seascapes are differentiated and protected at a coarser scale than benthic seascapes. |
| Classification based on: | |||
| 1.biogeographical regions. | No | No | First level of classification only |
| 2. identifying habitats and communities. | Yes- finer levels of the classification use benthic classes (require field work ) | Used partly in 3rd tier of classification | No |
| 3. physical processes. | Yes-coarse levels of classification use geomorphological structure (can be interpreted using remote sensing and have more distinct boundaries than benthic communities.) | Yes-physical factors important for biological communities. | Classification is based on geophysical features/attributes as a surrogate for biological communities |
| Coast/marine area covered. | |||
| 1.coastal terrestrial. | No | No | No |
| 2. estuarine. | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 3. open coast intertidal. | Yes | Yes | Unclear |
| 4. open coast subtidal inshore. | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 5. open coast subtidal offshore. | No | No | Yes |
| Structure of classification. | 2 separate classifications run in parallel. Habitats are described by assigning a geomorphological and benthic class to each polygon on a habitat map. | Classification covers freshwater and marine systems. | Hierarchical classification based on enduring geophysical features of the marine environment, which identify habitat types that reflect changes in biological composition. |
| 1. level 1. | Geomorphological component first tier Benthic component first tier |
(Hydro) system-marine; estuarine. | Based on geography and temperature(to address the very different conditions in the Arctic, Atlantic and Pacific Oceans). |
| 2. level 2. | Geomorphological second tier Benthic second tier |
Subsystem-intertidal or subtidal | Division between the benthic and pelagic realms (recognizing the significant difference in the biota and physical /biological processes) |
| 3. level 3 | Benthic third tier | Class- uses mixture of substrate type and vegetation structure | Classes based on light and depth |
| 4. other levels. | Level 4: pelagic realm divisions based on whether there is seasonal stratification. Level 4 :benthic realm divisions based on substrate particle size. Level 5:benthic realm divisions based on wave exposure and/or slope on benthic communities. | ||
| Original purpose. | To facilitate regional management and mapping of Caribbean coral reefs | To describe homogenous ecological units suitable for mapping; arrange those units in a system to aid resource management decisions; and provide uniformity across USA for concepts and terms. | To develop a national marine classification that will allow the identification of representative and distinctive marine habitats supporting different communities and provide an ecological framework for marine conservation planning at the national (Canada wide) level |
Part Three
| Name of system | 7. U.S. National Marine Sanctuary Classification System | 8. Classification of wetlands in Victoria, Australia (Department of Conservation and Natural Resources) | 9. Geomorphological classification for South African Estuaries (Cooper, Ramm, Harrison) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Date developed | 1982 | 1996 | 1994 |
| Geographic coverage | USA | Victoria, Australia | Natal, South Africa |
| Scale of operation | Various depending on level | Various depending on level | Whole estuary scale |
| Classification basis: | |||
| 1.biogeographic units | Levels 1, II | No | No |
| 2.identifying habitats and communities | Areas of value for particular characteristics are identified in level III | No | No |
| 3.physical processes | Yes | Yes | |
| Coastal/marine area covered: | |||
| 1.coastal terrestrial | No | No | No |
| 2.estuarine | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 3.open coast intertidal | Yes | Yes | No |
| 4.open coast subtidal inshore | Yes | ? | No |
| 5. open coast subtidal offshore | Yes (general) | No | No |
| Structure of classification | Classification for freshwater and marine systems | Identified factors that controlled geomorphic variation between estuaries (ie factors that influenced all of Natal's estuaries were excluded) | |
| 1.level 1 | Zoogeographic region (6) | I-System(inland/marine) | A hierarchical cluster analysis of 7 variables resulted in identification of 7 groups and 4 subgroups of estuaries Variables used: % year outlet closed, average floodplain width, % catchment granitoid rocks(gravel yielding),% catchment tillite/quartzite(fine sand),% catchment shales (fine mud), barrier length, catchment size) |
| 2.level 2 | Coastal biotic province (11) | II-Geomorphic unit/subunit:equivalent to land systems | |
| 3.level 3 | Areas of exceptional resource value eg areas with listed ecologically important marine species. (many classes which can overlap) |
III-Wetland morphology-(marine)tidal flat, estuary | |
| 4. other levels | Areas of exceptional human use value, eg area of importance for recreational fisheries (many classes which can overlap) |
IV-wetland origin-(marine)-rocky reef, mudflat, estuary |
|
| Original purpose | To consolidate, code and facilitate analysis of data on marine sites being evaluated as possible marine sanctuaries. | A wetland classification for Victoria- intention is to classify wetlands as a whole. | To facilitate the application of an estuarine health index to a wider range of estuaries |
Part Four
| Name of system | 10. British Columbia Marine Ecological Classification | 11. California Marine System Classification (University of California) | 12. NOAA National Ocean Service Habitat Classification for Puerto Rico & US Virgin Islands |
|---|---|---|---|
| Date developed | 1990's (in stages) | ? | 2000 |
| Geographic coverage | British Columbia, Canada | California ,USA | Puerto Rico, US Virgin Is |
| Scale of operation | Various depending on level- ecosections 1:2,000,000; ecounits 1:250,000 | Various depending on level | Detailed |
| Classification based on: | |||
| 1.biogeographical regions | Yes-first 4 levels | No | No |
| 2.identifying habitats and communities | Yes- habitats at coarser levels and dominant species (communities) at lower levels. | Yes (levels 2 and 3) | |
| 3.physical processes | Yes- finest level only | Yes-uses physical parameters to define most classification levels | Yes (level 1) |
| Coast/marine area covered: | |||
| 1.coastal terrestrial | No | No | No |
| 2.estuarine | Probably | No | ? |
| 3.open coast intertidal | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 4.open coast subtidal inshore | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 5.open coast subtidal offshore | Yes | No? | No |
| Structure of classification: | Builds on the marine component of Cowardin et al which addresses freshwater and marine systems. | Produces a benthic habitat map (in GIS using scanned aerial photos) | |
| 1.Level 1 | Ecozones (Pacific) | System -marine | Zones (benthic community location eg back reef, reef crest) |
| 2.level 2 | Ecoprovinces (3) | Subsystem-intertidal,subtidal | Broad habitat classes (4) eg submerged vegetation |
| 3.level 3 | Ecoregions (5) | Class (6)-basic habitat eg: rocky bottom, reef | Detailed habitat classes (27) which include class of vegetation, patchiness of some features, and substrate (minimum area that can be mapped using best aerial photo interpretation). Can be expanded where there is more detailed information. |
| 4.other levels | Ecosections (12)- boundaries verified using ecounit information. Ecounits-based on digitised class data for: wave exposure, depth, subsurface relief, currents, seabed substrate. Minimum unit area is 15 sq. km. 65 repetitive classes. |
|
|
| Original purpose | Developed for marine and coastal planning, resource management, a provincial marine protected areas strategy and a national monitoring network. | To better understand the richness of marine wetland types; their many ecosystem functions and processes; extent of impacts on, and losses of, marine wetlands. | To enable a GIS marine habitat map to be prepared. This is to assist with resource management decisions including habitat protection. |