Foraging ecology of large benthic mesopredators: Effects of myliobatid rays on marine benthic communities (2007-2009)

Metadata:

Identification_Information:
Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator:
DISL: Fisheries Ecology Lab
Publication_Date:
Unpublished material
Title:
Foraging ecology of large benthic mesopredators: Effects of myliobatid rays on marine benthic communities (2007-2009)
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form:
spreadsheet
Description:
Abstract:
The impacts of schooling mesopredators (smaller sharks and rays that are prey to large sharks) on benthic shellfish communities has become a strong concern for natural resource managers with the loss of top-down pressure from great sharks. Mesopredators, which occupy intermediate trophic levels, are being found as increasingly abundant in various parts of the globe as their predators are vanishing, and are often represented by the Myliobatidae (eagle rays). One such myliobatid species, the cownose ray (Rhinoptera bonasus), has already been demonstrated as integral to the destruction of some temperate shellfisheries on the east coast of the United States. However, the impacts of the schooling cownose ray have not been quantified in the northern Gulf of Mexico. This study examines the foraging ecology of two myliobatid species (cownose ray and spotted eagle ray - Aetobatus narinari) through gut content analyses, acoustic telemetry and field manipulation experiments where rays are excluded from natural foraging areas.
Purpose:
From our studies on the movements and foraging behavior we aim to simultaneously advance knowledge on the feeding ecology of elasmobranch fishes (sharks, skates and rays), investigate classic foraging theories within highly tractable predator-prey systems, and provide valuable quantitative data towards proper management of benthic living resources. Utilizing two myliobatid species will allow us to better generalize foraging ecology and behavior in this group.
Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Range_of_Dates/Times:
Beginning_Date:
20070706
Ending_Date:
20091114
Currentness_Reference:
ground condition
Status:
Progress:
In work
Maintenance_and_Update_Frequency:
As needed
Spatial_Domain:
Description_of_Geographic_Extent:
Northern Gulf of Mexico (Alabama, USA) and North Atlantic (Bermuda)
Bounding_Coordinates:
West_Bounding_Coordinate:
-88.3173
East_Bounding_Coordinate:
-87.04293
North_Bounding_Coordinate:
30.58955
South_Bounding_Coordinate:
20.239346
Keywords:
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus:
None
Theme_Keyword:
foodwebs
Theme_Keyword:
predation
Theme_Keyword:
mesopredator
Theme_Keyword:
trophic cascade
Theme_Keyword:
prey
Theme_Keyword:
foraging ecology
Theme_Keyword:
myliobatid rays
Theme_Keyword:
cownose rays
Theme_Keyword:
Rhinoptera bonasus
Theme_Keyword:
spotted eagle rays
Theme_Keyword:
Aetobatus narinari
Theme_Keyword:
sharks
Theme_Keyword:
mesocosm experiments
Theme_Keyword:
satellite biotelemetry
Theme_Keyword:
bivalves
Theme_Keyword:
migration
Theme_Keyword:
schooling effect
Theme_Keyword:
aerial survey
Theme_Keyword:
gillnet sampling
Theme_Keyword:
gut content
Theme_Keyword:
acoustic monitoring
Theme_Keyword:
gastric lavage
Theme_Keyword:
habitat use
Theme_Keyword:
foraging behavior
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus:
ISO Topic
Theme_Keyword:
biota
Theme_Keyword:
002
Theme_Keyword:
environment
Theme_Keyword:
007
Theme_Keyword:
oceans
Theme_Keyword:
014
Place:
Place_Keyword_Thesaurus:
None
Place_Keyword:
Northern Gulf of Mexico
Place_Keyword:
NGOM
Place_Keyword:
Alabama
Place_Keyword:
Pelican Island
Place_Keyword:
Dauphin Island
Place_Keyword:
Western Atlantic Ocean
Place_Keyword:
Bermuda
Place_Keyword:
Harrington Sound
Place_Keyword:
Tucker's Bay
Place_Keyword:
Major's Bay
Place_Keyword:
Trunk Island
Access_Constraints:
Permission to access these data must be given by Dr. Sean Powers or Matt Ajemian of the Dauphin Island Sea Lab's Fisheries Ecology Lab.
Use_Constraints:
Acknowledgment of the DISL: Fisheries Lab, the University of South Alabama, Northern Gulf Institute, the Shelby Center for Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management would be appreciated in products developed from these data, and such acknowledgment as is standard for citation and legal practices for data source is expected by users of these data. Users should be aware that comparison with other data sets for the same area from other time periods may be inaccurate due to inconsistencies resulting from changes in mapping conventions, data collection, and computer processes over time. The distributor shall not be liable for improper or incorrect use of these data, based on the description of appropriate/inappropriate uses described in the metadata document. These data are not legal documents and are not to be used as such.
Point_of_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person:
Dr. Sean Powers or Matt Ajemian
Contact_Organization:
DISL: Fisheries Lab
Contact_Position:
Principal Investigator
Contact_Address:
Address_Type:
mailing and physical
Address:
101 Bienville Blvd.
City:
Dauphin Island
State_or_Province:
Al
Postal_Code:
36528
Country:
USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone:
251-861-2141 ext. 2384 or 2265
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address:
spowers@disl.org
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address:
majemian@disl.org
Hours_of_Service:
8-5:00 CST
Contact_Instructions:
Please email Dr. Sean Powers or Matt Ajemian for further information.
Native_Data_Set_Environment:
Microsoft Excel
Back To Index
Data_Quality_Information:
Logical_Consistency_Report:
not applicable
Completeness_Report:
The data collection began on 20070706 and ends on 20091114. There are no major lapses in the data. However, the project is ongoing so data will be added as it is collected.
Lineage:
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
Aerial surveys and gillnet sampling -- The goal was to use the aerial surveys as a primary means of mapping the occurrence, general directionality of migration, distributions and large-scale habitat use by both cownose and spotted eagle ray species. When ray(s) were located from the air, they were marked as a waypoint in a GPS. The aircraft then diverted from the line-transect to take photographs of the group. In addition, bottom substrate type (seagrass, sand, etc.), general direction of travel, tidal state, water temperature (where possible from local moorings) and time of day for each sighting was characterized. Water depth was determined from NOAA bathymetry maps using the GPS coordinates associated with the identified school. Estimation of school size (number of individuals) was made by digitizing survey photos, and counting individuals. For cownose ray surveys in the Northern Gulf of Mexico north-south transects were flown between Pensacola, Florida and Biloxi, Mississippi (approximately 200 km) once a month from March to December. Four additional flights during peak abundance periods in 2011 and 2012 are also scheduled. Abundance data on cownose rays captured from the Fisheries Ecology Lab inshore gillnet survey provided additional data on distribution and gross movements (via tag returns), which may be missed from aerial surveys due to poor visibility in estuarine regions. The gear utilized for the gillnet survey were 300-m (3.0 m depth) gillnets with alternating panels of 4-inch and 6-inch stretched mesh. Surveys were stratified by depth and habitat type (seagrass, oyster, sand, mud), and a variety of environmental parameters (temperature, salinity, turbidity) were recorded with each gillnet set. Catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) of each set was defined as the number rays caught divided by the soak time of the net. These data, in association with environmental parameters, were used to determine essential habitat for the cownose rays and examine seasonal abundance trends. Two-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) were run on cownose ray CPUE using location and time-of-year as fixed factors. Moreover, multiple linear regression and binary logistic regression were used to determine which environmental parameters best explained cownose ray abundance trends. Aerial surveys were conducted to quantify seasonal changes in abundance of spotted eagle rays in Bermuda. In addition to bimonthly surveying, four additional flights were scheduled to be performed during periods of peak abundance to further elucidate habitat affinities. All flights were conducted during neap tides under calm wind conditions to maximize visibility. Aerial surveys were used in Bermuda to map coral reefs and seagrasses around the islands. Due to the high water clarity around the Bermuda islands, this method provided sufficient abundance data on spotted eagle rays. Satellite telemetry -- One obvious disadvantage of utilizing aerial or acoustic data to determine large-scale movements was that my conclusions were limited to the survey boundaries. Satellite telemetry, on the other hand, resolved this issue by tracking individual movements to unlimited spatial extents (i.e. global scale). Locations were determined by measuring light intensity and depth and these data were transmitted at a pre-programmed time to ARGOS system satellites. This project utilized Wildlifecomputers Smart Positioning or Temperature (SPOT5) transmitting tags to monitor large-scale movements and connectivity of distant habitats by these large rays. Tags had an estimated battery life of 240 d, and were set out at different times of the year when rays were most abundant. Six large (>120 cm DW) spotted eagle rays in Bermuda were tagged and 6 large (>90 cm DW) cownose rays in coastal waters off Alabama were tagged. For both species, individuals with dummy tags were monitored at the DISL Estuarium (cownose ray) and Bermuda Aquarium (spotted eagle ray) for three months prior to tagging to determine any altered behavior and optimize tag location (which seemed to be the dorsal “saddle” region). Tag transmissions were transmitted to ARGOS satellites on a daily basis, and these data were downloaded to help elucidate migratory patterns of the rays. In situ acoustic biotelemetry -- A combination of acoustic biotelemetry and traditional gut contents was used to address habitat use and foraging choices of both species under natural conditions. Recent advances in acoustic telemetry have allowed researchers to gain valuable insight into the behavior of marine animals. By recording detections of individuals tagged with ultrasonic transmitters, animals can be tracked with near-continuous determination of locations by a network of moored or moving hydrophones. In a pilot study (Ajemian and Powers, In review), an array of 6 autonomously logging hydrophones (Lotek WHS 3050) was utilized to track 8 acoustically tagged spotted eagle rays in Bermuda. Extended residence of spotted eagle rays (up to 30 days) was demonstrated, with multiple visits over a summer period, and detection range of 900-1200m using the MAP 16 tags and WHS 3050 hydrophones. Eagle ray habitat use information was increased in Harrington Sound by developing a “grid” configuration (Heupel et al. 2006) to allow for fine-scale tracking and habitat use determination, with two “gate-keeping” hydrophones at the sole entrance used for Harrington Sound residency estimates. Signals detected by the WHS 3050 were time stamped and stored electronically, and were then downloaded and processed with Asynchronous Logger Positioning Software (ALPS, Lotek Wireless, inc.) to estimate tag locations based on time of arrival of tag transmissions at various hydrophones relative to moored beacon transmitters. Thus, ALPS was utilized to quantify animal location, which helped determine animal movement, site-fidelity and habitat preference of our tagged individuals. Spotted eagle rays used in acoustic monitoring experiments were collected from purse-seines and fitted with MAP16 (16 mm width x 88 mm long, 40 g in air) transmitters that were affixed to the dorsal “saddle” region of the rays using neoprene and NMFS M-tags. Each tag had an expected longevity of > 90 days with a burst interval of 2 s. Tags transmited a unique encoded identity number over a frequency of 76 kHz. During 2008, 5 (n = 10 total, 50% male; 50% female) spotted eagle rays were tagged and their movement examined for 60 days. Movements were then plotted over local habitat maps, and areas of high and low ray use were sampled for ambient prey densities. For one of the key study sites, Harrington Sound, information on habitat types and bivalve prey abundance already existed in GIS format. To monitor those animals that moved out of the gated array, biweekly transects using our mobile hydrophone tracking system (MAP600-RT)were conducted. Signals were detected by the MAP600 receiver in the same manner as the WHS 3050; however, the signal was received from two hydrophones mounted on either side of the vessel. Hydrophone detection along with dGPS coordinates of the boat track (all with identical time stamps) were imported into Synthetic Aperture Positioning Software (SYNAPS, Lotek Wireless, Inc.) for analysis. The software treated the moving hydrophones on the boat as a series of temporary fixed hydrophones to triangulate position with an error of ± 2m. In the NGOM, acoustic monitors were distributed throughout Mobile Bay and Mississippi Sound (2009-2010) in gated arrays to elucidate movement patterns of cownose rays with changes in environmental conditions. Cownose rays were also fitted with MAP 16 tags. Fifty-two cownose rays were tagged over the course of two years. Individuals were monitored for movements across different migratory corridors from passive hydrophones. In addition, habitat use information was collected from tracking with the MAP 600 system. For both species, mobile tracking was utilized to determine habitat use and diel behaviors. Animals were tagged with MAP 16 transmitters during abundance surveys (gillnet – cownose ray, purse seine – spotted eagle rays) and tracked for 12 hours. First, individual centers of activity (COA) were determined, which were based on the average position of an individual over a 30 minute interval. This information allowed for the determination of individual home ranges. Home range was calculated based on COA locations using 50% and 95% fixed kernel estimates calculated from the Animal Movement Extension for ArcView (Hooge and Eichenlaub 2000). Linear regression was used to determine if there was a relationship between the size of total season home ranges and length of residency. Analyses of variance (ANOVA) was then used to test for differences in daily and weekly home range sizes among years, habitat types and seasons. Time spent in various habitat types (seagrass, sand, oyster reef, etc.) were binned by hour of the day for each species and compared using two-way univariate ANOVAs with hour of the day, habitat type and the interaction between the two as fixed factors, and residency time as the dependent variable. Chi-square tests (Goodness of fit) were used to assess significant differences in residency patterns at passive hydrophones from my arrays. Food habits -- For both study species a quantitative description of their diet was necessary to understand foraging behavior and habitat preferences in the proposed regions. For cownose rays, gut contents were analyzed from specimens collected during gillnet surveys across coastal Alabama. All individuals were sexed, weighed with a spring scale, and measured for straight disc width (SDW) and disc length (DL; distance from the anterior margin of the snout to cloaca). Stomachs and spiral valve intestines were removed immediately upon capture after overdosing the animals with MS-222. Guts were then placed in containers with 10% buffered formalin and transferred to ethanol 48 hrs after fixation. Due to the unconfirmed population status of spotted eagle rays in Bermuda, no individuals were sacrificed for their gut contents. Instead, pulsed gastric lavage (PGL) was utilized, which is a non-lethal alternative to culling animals for gut contents. In PGL a flexible hose is inserted in the esophagus of the animal, the animal is inverted on its back and a moderate stream of seawater is run into the stomach (at fixed volumes) so that ingested items can be emitted out the mouth or anus. Comparisons with gut contents of spotted eagle rays that died during collection revealed similar contents. Spotted eagle rays were visually spotted from slowly moving skiffs and collected utilizing a 400’ purse-seine net. As with the cownose rays, all captured spotted eagle rays were sexed, and measured for SDW, DL and weighed. Prey items were enumerated, weighed and identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level. In addition, the volume of each of the prey items was measured by placing items into a calibrated graduated cylinder. Benthic sampling -- Examination of the prey community has been largely ignored in the study of predator-prey interactions due to the logistic difficulty in delineating the feeding habitat of mobile fishes, which is generally dynamic, both in time and space. However, our acoustic work and large-scale analyses of migration and predator movement can assist with assessing where to sample prey abundance. Strauss’s Index (Strauss 1979) was utilized to examine the selectivity of cownose and spotted eagle rays based on a comparing prey type in the diet to the relative abundance of prey in the environment. Densities of potential cownose ray prey were quantified with sediment cores (0.02 m2), which were conducted before, after, and during periods of high cownose ray abundance. Preliminary data show that high densities of cownose rays were present off NGOM barrier islands from March – May, and again from September – November (M.J. Ajemian, unpublished data). Monthly benthic sampling was conducted year-round, with increased effort (i.e. weekly) during months where rays were locally abundant (March – April, and October – November). For each sample individuals were identified down to the lowest taxonomic level. In Bermuda, prey abundance was quantified using randomized quadrats and video surveys along 25 m transect lines throughout Harrington Sound. In addition, three regions were sampled continuously to develop ambient density estimates for exclosure experiments. Photos and cores were then analyzed for epifauna and infauna abundance. The use of both benthic sampling techniques allowed for estimation of prey density at larger scales (photos) and inclusion of cryptic fauna (cores). Field-based manipulations -- To assess impacts of rays to benthic communities, the effect of excluding rays from the natural foraging areas was investigated. Exclosures were 4 m2 PVC frames, with 1 m pieces of rebar secured through the frame vertically. Rebar stakes were separated at a distance of 25 cm from one another within the frame. In addition 6 rebar stakes were distributed in the middle of the patch to deter animals that may enter the exclosure cage from above (e.g. during spring tide). Ambient prey densities from benthic sampling were compared to prey densities within the exclosures. This paired design was analyzed with t-tests. In a second experiment, the response of predators to changing prey densities was investigated. Rays were exposed to 5 different treatments: a control patch that was covered with a vexar cage (complete predator exclosure), a patch with a rebar stockade (ray exclosure), and low density of bivalves and three open patches with low, medium and high densities of bivalves. These patches were distributed among the same plots as the exclosures. As with the captive patch selection experiments, bivalve predation among experimental prey patches of the enclosures was quantified by calculating the rate of prey morality per day. Bivalves were marked initially and counted every week, and bivalve mortality was used as a response variable with treatment types as fixed factors. Univariate ANOVAs were run to investigate the effect of excluding rays, and the effect of prey density on mortality rate. To determine whether bivalve mortality was a function of bivalve density, the fit of the curve was tested by least squares goodness of it (sensu Peterson et al., 2001). In Alabama, patches were distributed across Pelican Island, and were comprised of hard clam (Mercenaria mercenaria). High catch rates of cownose rays and good water clarity characterized this region in spring and fall. In Bermuda, patches of manipulated calico clam densities were dispersed throughout various regions of Harrington Sound where eagle rays are known to occur with high frequency (inferred from acoustic monitoring studies). Experimental plots were replicated and assorted randomly within 3 different locations across Harrington Sound: Tucker’s Bay, Major’s Bay, and Trunk Island. These experiments took place over two three-week periods in both June and September 2009 and June and September 2010. Large-scale enclosures (ponds) -- Foraging behavior was assessed through acoustic monitoring of individuals in large experimental enclosures and measuring their responses to manipulated densities of prey and conspecifics. Enclosures ensured animal retention while maintaining a relatively open system to reduce caging effects. Experimental rays were fitted with Lotek MAP 11 transmitters (11 mm diameter x 56 mm length, 9.2 g in air) , which had an expected longevity of >30 days with a burst interval of 2 s. Transmitters were attached externally to the spiracular cartilage via a roto-tag. Preliminary lab experiments showed that the above tagging procedure was non-lethal and animals resumed feeding in 2-3 days. Moreover, the physical condition of cownose rays bearing transmitters >3 months and did not significantly change. MAP 11’s transmited a unique encoded identity number over a frequency of 76 kHz. An array of eight hydrophones cabled to a central receiver/recorder (Lotek MAP 600) were used to monitor movements within the enclosure. The networked hydrophones allowed for 3-D position determination after post-processing through MAP host software. Functional response experiments were conducted using a variety of predator densities. Initially, a sole individual was introduced to the enclosure. Base prey levels of 1%, 2%, 4 %, and 8% of total ray weight (based on tissue wet weight of live clams or oysters) were placed in the center of the enclosure in a flat basket. Prey mortality (# of clams or oysters) was checked once a day for six days. Prey were restocked each day. The experiment was then repeated with three additional treatments: predator densities of 2, 4 and 8. Prey ration was adjusted according to the total weight of rays' prey: predator is constant. The resulting 4 (predator densities) x 4 (prey levels) design was replicated 6 times over one summer (cownose rays = summer 2009). All rays used in the experiments were acoustically tagged to monitor interspecific interactions. To avoid learning of patch locations by experimental rays, individuals were only used once per experiment. To examine how rays distribute themselves relative to prey patch locations, a series of acoustic tracking experiments was performed in which landscapes of different prey patches within the large mesocosms were created and their movements were monitored using the Lotek MAP 600 system. Tagged rays were allowed to acclimate for one day in the large experimental enclosures while prey patches were randomly distributed at three different densities in the enclosures. When a new individual was added to the enclosure, a starvation period of 1 day ensued again. Patches (1 m2 area) of high, medium and low densities of clam, oyster, and a clam/oyster mix were placed throughout the experimental pond (9 patches). Bivalve predation among experimental prey patches of the ponds was assessed by calculating rate of mortality per day. Bivalves were counted every day during a three-day period, and trays were refilled to the original densities when necessary. The experiment was replicated 6 times and residency times, order of residency among patches, # of visits per site and daily mortality were used as dependent variables in the analyses. Positioning and residency of individuals was quantified using BioMap software (Lotek Wireless, Inc.). Behaviors such as “foraging”, “traveling” and “resting” were classified base on how much time individuals were spending in a patch, as well as the number of “turns” observed over a given area. Minimal movement and a high frequency of turns was indicative of foraging behavior. These results were compared to energetic and prey choice models developed over the course of the investigation. Functional response and patch selection experiments on cownose rays were conducted at the Claude Peteet Mariculture Facility (CPMC) in Gulf Shores, Alabama. Experimental ponds at CPMC were identical in size (0.11 hectares) shape (rectangular, 50 m x 25 m) and volume (~1,000,000 L) and were used to maintain cownose rays and experimental prey (oyster, clam) patches. Cownose rays caught during the nearby gillnet survey in Perdido Bay were transported to this facility for experiments. Rays were removed from gillnets and checked for physical condition and only healthy individuals (no bleeding, trauma, etc.) were utilized for the experiments. Enclosure experiments on spotted eagle rays in Bermuda took place behind BAMZ over a sandflat in Harrington Sound. Experiments were run under similar MAP600 methods described for the cownose rays, however, calico clam (Macrocallista maculata) were used as prey for the functional response experiments and calico clams and small milk conch (Strombus costatus) were used in the prey patch experiments.
Process_Date:
Not complete
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person:
Dr. Sean Powers or Matt Ajemian
Contact_Organization:
DISL: Fisheries Lab
Contact_Position:
Principal Investigator
Contact_Address:
Address_Type:
mailing and physical
Address:
101 Bienville Blvd.
City:
Dauphin Island
State_or_Province:
Al
Postal_Code:
36528
Country:
USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone:
251-861-2141 ext. 2384 or 2265
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address:
spowers@disl.org
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address:
majemian@disl.org
Hours_of_Service:
8-5:00 CST
Contact_Instructions:
Please email Dr. Sean Powers or Matt Ajemian for further information.
Back To Index
Entity_and_Attribute_Information:
Overview_Description:
Entity_and_Attribute_Overview:
Tables contain data cataloging elasmobranch and bycatch CPUE (catch per unit effort) using a 300m gillnet divided into 4 inch mesh and 6 inch mesh halves.
Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation:
Gillnet effort attributes include: collection number, date, year, month, set/day, site, latitude, longitude, set in (start time of gillnet setup), set out (gillnet is completely set up), haul begin (start of gill net retrieval), haul end (net is completely out of the water), set time days (total time net was in the water), set time (hours), temperature (C), salinity (ppt), depth (m), turbidity (cm), dissolved oxygen (mg/L), bottom type, bottom type number.
Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation:
Elasomobranch catch data includes the above information plus the following attributes: precaudal length, standard length, fork length, total length, stretch total length (AKA disc length), species caught, elasmobranch ID, number of individuals, sex, maturity state, weight (g), weight (kg), tag1 ID, tag1 type
Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation:
Bycatch data includes all gillnet effort attributes plus: mesh size, number of individuals, species, precaudal length, standard length, total length, fork length, weight (kg)
Back To Index
Distribution_Information:
Distributor:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person:
Dr. Sean Powers or Matt Ajemian
Contact_Organization:
DISL: Fisheries Lab
Contact_Position:
Principal Investigator
Contact_Address:
Address_Type:
mailing and physical
Address:
101 Bienville Blvd.
City:
Dauphin Island
State_or_Province:
Al
Postal_Code:
36528
Country:
USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone:
251-861-2141 ext. 2384 or 2265
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address:
spowers@disl.org
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address:
majemian@disl.org
Hours_of_Service:
8-5:00 CST
Contact_Instructions:
Please email Dr. Sean Powers or Matt Ajemian for further information.
Distribution_Liability:
The Dauphin Island Sea Lab's Fisheries Lab makes no warranty regarding these data, expressed or implied, nor does the fact of distribution constitute such a warranty. The DISL: Fisheries Lab cannot assume liability for any damages caused by any errors or omissions in these data, nor as a result of the failure of these data to function on a particular system.
Technical_Prerequisites:
These data were created in Microsoft Excel. A program capable of reading these files is necessary.
Back To Index
Metadata_Reference_Information:
Metadata_Date:
2011
Metadata_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Organization_Primary:
Contact_Organization:
Dauphin Island Sea Lab
Contact_Person:
Data Management Specialist
Contact_Position:
Data Management Specialist
Contact_Address:
Address_Type:
mailing and physical
Address:
101 Bienville Blvd.
City:
Dauphin Island
State_or_Province:
Al
Postal_Code:
36528
Country:
USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone:
251-861-2141
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address:
metadata@disl.org
Hours_of_Service:
8-5:00 CST
Contact_Instructions:
Please email the metadata specialist for further information.
Metadata_Standard_Name:
FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata
Metadata_Standard_Version:
FGDC-STD-001-1998
Metadata_Access_Constraints:
none
Back To Index