SOW_final].docx

Statistical Analysis of Datasets from National Coral Reef Monitoring Program’s Pacific Islands Region

Statement of Work Background:

The Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center (PIFSC) is a part of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The PIFSC administers and conducts scientific research and monitoring programs that support the domestic and international conservation and management of living marine resources across the Pacific Islands Region. In response to mandates from the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000, and with the support of NOAA’s Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP), the PIFSC initiated the interdisciplinary Pacific Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (Pacific RAMP) in 2000 to establish baselines and initiate long-term monitoring of the status and trends of the coral reef ecosystems of the U.S. Pacific Islands. In 2001, PIFSC established the Coral Reef Ecosystem Program (CREP), which is now a part of the Ecosystem Sciences Division (ESD) to implement Pacific RAMP and conduct benthic habitat mapping and applied research to support management and conservation of coral reefs. In 2002, NOAA, in cooperation with the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force, released A National Coral Reef Action Strategy to address and reduce threats to coral reefs worldwide. PIFSC conducted biennial Pacific RAMP surveys from 2000 to 2012, and triennial surveys from 2012 to 2017, in each of the U.S.-affiliated Pacific Islands jurisdictions. In 2010, Pacific RAMP was incorporated into NOAA’s newly established National Coral Reef Monitoring Program (NCRMP) to systematically collect ecosystem observations across biological, climatic, and socio-economic domains to monitor the status and trends of the nation’s coral reefs. NCRMP/Pacific RAMP surveys use consistent survey methodologies across over 40 Pacific island, atoll, and shallow-bank ecosystems to enable comparative analyses across diverse gradients of biogeography, environmental conditions, and human uses.

Accurate and up to- date characterizations of coral reef ecosystems are necessary to inform ecosystem-based management and evaluate the effectiveness of management actions for sustainable use and long-term conservation. The Pacific RAMP survey also improves the government’s understanding of ecosystem structure, function, and processes, and the cause- and-effect mechanisms that influence the status and resilience of coral reefs. By collecting biennial and triennial reef ecosystem ‘snapshot’ surveys during ship-based research expeditions, the Pacific RAMP was designed to observe the status and detect long-term changes in reef ecosystem conditions over periods of many years to several decades. They provide an improved understanding of island- and region-scale conditions that serve as background context to support more frequent and finer-scale local monitoring of coral reefs in populated island communities and jurisdictions designed to evaluate effectiveness of local management actions.

Conducting these surveys and the inherent logistical and budgetary constraints posed by the vast and remote U.S. Pacific Islands region continues to shape many aspects of the long-term Pacific RAMP. The lack of additional financial resources to account for annual increases in operational costs along with increased logistical coordination needed to complete the full suite of data collection, threatens the sustainability of this effort and requires us to critically review the current Pacific RAMP effort through the lens of scientific value, budget, and logistics, with a goal of strategically “right-sizing” Pacific RAMP.

Objectives:

Consultants must evaluate the performance of specific indicators collected during NCRMP/Pacific RAMP cruises to assess the status and trends of the coral reef ecosystems and to improve our understanding of Pacific reef ecosystems structure, function, and processes, and the cause- and- effect mechanisms that influence the status and resilience of coral reefs. Below please find key questions for analysis to be conducted by the Consultants with a focus on statistical power to detect ecological and environmental changes and recommendations to optimize sampling strategies for efficiency and management relevancy. Specific indicators are organized by the different NCRMP themes and PIFSC teams to address those themes: Ocean and Climate, Benthic Monitoring, and Fish Monitoring as the focus for this analysis.

Tasks:

1. Ocean and Climate Change Dataset Assessments

a. Data Streams and Indicators

i. Carbonate Chemistry water sampling:

1. Aragonite Saturation State (DIC and TA measured, saturation state and pH computed)

2. Onshore-Offshore Gradients (GLODAP v2 reference, more recent offshore sampling)

ii. Calcification Accretion Units (CAUs):

1. Net Carbonate Accretion Rate

iii. Subsurface Temperature Recorders (STRs):

1. Vertical thermal stress

2. Temperature Anomaly (relative to satellite climatology)

iv. Autonomous Reef Monitoring Structures (ARMS): To assess conservation of biodiversity (ESA, UN SDG14) and as an indicator of ecological resilience, we use metrics in a Hill Number framework, which returns the effective number of species. As we rely on specifically indicators with a Hill number (q) of 1-2=m, this approach maps nicely onto standard biodiversity metrics like Shannon-Weiner (though the Hill number equivalent is exponentially transformed) and the Inverse Simpson’s Index. For these analyses, we recommend you stick with q=2, or the Inverse Simpson’s.

1. Metazoan ARMS diversity (per island)

2. Diversity by major taxonomic group (brachyuran, shrimp, gastropods, non-gastropod molluscs)

b. Analysis/Focus

i. For all of these datasets, the government works at permanent, fixed sites, with 3-5 sites at a subset of NCRMP islands (typically 4 islands per region). We supplement fixed site carbonate chemistry water sampling with stratified random (from benthic team), STRs with a number of longer-term time series outside of the NCRMP structure, and CAUs routinely have one extra site per NCRMP island (for a usual total of 5).

ii. Possible changes: More/fewer sites per island, or more/fewer samples per site. Sampling Effort: Carbonate = 1/site, 5-8 sites per island; CAUs = 5 per site, 3-5 sites per island; STR = 3-4 per site (in depth transect, 1m, 5m, 15m, 25m), 3-4 sites per island in cardinal directions (north, south, east, west; ARMS = 3 units/site; 3-4 sites per island.

iii. For each of the above indicators, given current sampling and variability,

1. What is the power of our current sampling to detect change at the island scale? Regional/archipelagic scale?

2. To what degree are we at an inflection point with sampling – i.e. are there datastreams in which somewhat less sampling would have little impact on power, or a little bit more would have a major impact?

3. How few islands could we sample and still get the same status at a regional-scale?

4. Are there ways to partition the islands/regions in such a way to better generate power given a specific level of sampling? i.e., should we “over” sample in more variable regions, and “under” sample where there is less variability.

2. Biological Dataset Assessments

a. Data Streams and Indicators (Data are reported at the island-scale.)

i. REA Photoquad benthic cover (%):

1. Coral cover

2. Crustose coralline algae (CCA) cover

3. Macro-algal (MA) cover

ii. Scleractinian Demographic Surveys:

1. Total colony abundance

2. Juvenile colony (<5cm) abundance

3. Abundance for 5 genera (Porites, Pocillopora, Monitpora, Acropora, Pavona)

4. Abundance for 4 species (Porites lobata, Pocillopora meandrina, Leptastrea purpurea, Pavona varians)

5. Prevalence of partial mortality, bleaching, and disease

iii. REA fish surveys

1. Island-scale reef fish biomass (total, consumer groups, parrotfish)

2. Island-scale species richness

iv. Towed-diver fish surveys (hard and soft-bottom habitats)

1. Regional-scale abundance of all large (>50 cm TL) fishes

2. Regional-scale abundance sharks (grouped)

v. Towed-diver benthic surveys (hard and soft-bottom habitats)

1. Benthic cover, specifically coral cover (%)

2. Crown-of-thorns seastar (COTS) relative abundance

3. Giant clam relative abundance

4. Urchin relative abundance

5. Sea cucumber relative abundance

b. Additional indicators of interest

i. REA fish survey

1. Common target families (goatfish, surgeonfish, emperor, soldierfish, jacks, groupers, targeted wrasse, snapper)

2. Functional groups (browsers, scrapers, large excavators, detritivores)

3. Rapid visual estimate of benthic cover (coral, CCA, MA)

4. Fisheries target species (varies by region – we can provide a species list)

5. Live coral-dependent species (benthic butterflyfish by species)

c. Analysis/Focus

i. Fish and benthic rapid ecological assessment surveys (REAs) follow a stratified random sampling design with sampling effort allocated within each strata in proportion to the extent of hard-bottom habitat and variance. Data are summarized among strata to the island scale.

ii. For each of the above indicators, given current sampling and variability:

1. What is our power to assess status and detect trends over 2-10 sampling cycles, assuming 3-year sampling intervals, for a low, medium and high effect size?

2. To what degree are we at an inflection point with sampling – i.e. are there datastreams in which somewhat less sampling would have little impact on power, or a little bit more would have a major impact?

3. From an ecosystem assessment and monitoring perspective, what is the value of sampling the full NRCMP collection of islands (~40 islands on a 3-year cycle)?

4. What three strengths and weaknesses do you see in the biological datasets and what top three things would you recommend we do to improve upon these weaknesses to help us meet the NCRMP goals?

Core Task: Develop an appropriate and consistent approach to assess power of the data stream to detect change, including ecologically plausible trends, for each Ocean and Climate Change and Biological Indicators listed above.

Then, for each Indicator:

a. Assess power using data gathered over multiple sampling cycles - specifically for 2 to up to 10 sampling cycles (each cycle being a 3 years period in which we typically have one Pacific RAMP cruise per jurisdiction, but also including data gathered on reef fish and partner cruises [e.g. Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument cruises to Northwestern Hawaiian Islands]

b. Following NCRMP goals/objectives, power will be analyzed to detect change or trends of data at island-scale (the core NCRMP reporting unit).

c. Power analyses should include assessments for a range of small-to-large effect sizes. Appropriate for each data stream.

1. ESD will make all raw data for the above listed data streams and indicators available to the Consultants, but in addition, we will provide data for each indicator generated at the base unit of analysis (i.e. site-level or sub-site replicate level) together with information on sample design and stratification)

2. Consultants will meet in person with ESD Leadership and Team Leads to go over the relevant data sets and indicators, make final decisions on analyses to be conducted, and provide them with the context and background needed to properly conduct the required analysis.

3. Upon completion of the analysis, Consultants will provide all analytical products created as part of this contract including copies of all analytical codes used to conduct the power analysis. Consultants will also provide recommendations on the ability of each current data streams to inform the appropriate indicator that is associated with these data.

4. Consultants will provide recommendations on how to optimize the statistical power of each indicator to maximize analytical power and efficiency.

5. Consultants will provide final analysis, code used, and all other relevant analytical information resulting from their analysis plus recommendations to be submitted to the DO/ESD Leadership for approval within 2 weeks of receipt.

Minimum Qualifications:

· PhD in Fishery Management and Applied Statistics

· 15-20 years of progressively responsible work experience in bio-statistical analysis for long-term monitoring

· 5 years of experience working with National Coral Reef Monitoring Program (NCRMP) datasets

Deliverables Schedule:

Exact dates will be determined per the mutual agreement of the contractor and the government after the award.

Place of Performance:

All tasks shall be performed at the Consultant’s place of business except for the in-person meeting to be conducted at the NOAA Inouye Regional Center in Honolulu, HI.

Special Requirements:

The NOAA IRC facility is located on an active military base. Therefore, the successful contractor and their support staff must be able to gain access to the military base/federal facility. Contractors will be subject to security screenings and other requirements in line with national and agency security directives and policies.