Search Help Show/Hide Menu

Data Management Plan

DMP Template v2.0.1 (2015-01-01)

Please provide the following information, and submit to the NOAA DM Plan Repository.

Reference to Master DM Plan (if applicable)

As stated in Section IV, Requirement 1.3, DM Plans may be hierarchical. If this DM Plan inherits provisions from a higher-level DM Plan already submitted to the Repository, then this more-specific Plan only needs to provide information that differs from what was provided in the Master DM Plan.

URL of higher-level DM Plan (if any) as submitted to DM Plan Repository:
Always left blank

1. General Description of Data to be Managed

1.1. Name of the Data, data collection Project, or data-producing Program:
Benthic Surveys in Vatia, American Samoa: comprehensive assessment of coral demography (adult and juvenile corals) from belt transect surveys in 2015 and 2020
1.2. Summary description of the data:

Jurisdictional managers have expressed concerns that nutrients from the village of Vatia, Tutuila, American Samoa, are having an adverse effect on the adjacent coral reef ecosystem. Excess nutrient loads promote increases in algal growth that can have deleterious effects on corals, such as benthic algae outcompeting and overgrowing corals. Nitrogen and phosphorus can also directly impact corals by lowering fertilization success, and reducing both photosynthesis and calcification rates. Land-based contributions of nutrients come from a variety of sources; in Vatia the most likely sources are poor wastewater management from piggeries and septic systems.

NOAA scientists conducted benthic surveys to establish a baseline against which to compare changes in the algal and coral assemblages in response to land-based sources of pollution, including nutrient fluxes.

The data described here result from benthic coral demographic surveys within belt transects of specified length and width for two life stages (juveniles and adults) in Vatia Bay American Samoa in 2015, and 2020. The data provide information on adult coral colony counts, morphology, size, partial mortality (old and recent dead), presence and causation of disease and other compromised health conditions, including bleaching. Juvenile colony surveys include morphology and size. Taxonomic identification of adult colonies is to the species level and genus level for juveniles.

In 2015, the survey implemented a two-stage stratified random sampling (StRS) design to assess the Vatia coral reef community, and a one-stage StRS design in 2020. The survey domain encompassed the majority of the mapped area of reef and hard bottom habitats in the 0–30 m depth range. The stratification scheme included cardinal position (i.e., north and south) and depth (i.e., shallow: >0–6 m and mid-depth: >6–18 m). Sampling effort allocation was determined based on strata area and sites randomly located within strata. The StRS design effectively reduces estimate variance through stratification using environmental covariates and by sampling more sites rather than more transects per site. Therefore, site-to-site comparisons should proceed with caution.

Taken From: Item Identification | Abstract
Notes: Only a maximum of 4000 characters will be included.
1.3. Is this a one-time data collection, or an ongoing series of measurements?
One-time data collection
Taken From: Extents / Time Frames | Time Frame Type
Notes: Data collection is considered ongoing if a time frame of type "Continuous" exists.
1.4. Actual or planned temporal coverage of the data:
2015-11-02 to 2015-11-12, 2020-01-15 to 2020-01-30
Taken From: Extents | Time Frame - Start, Time Frame - End
Notes: All time frames from all extent groups are included.
1.5. Actual or planned geographic coverage of the data:
W: -170.67555555556, E: -170.66666666667, N: -14.24305555556, S: -14.25138888889

Vatia Bay, Tutuila, American Samoa

Taken From: Extents | Geographic Area Bounds, Geographic Area Description
Notes: All geographic areas from all extent groups are included.
1.6. Type(s) of data:
(e.g., digital numeric data, imagery, photographs, video, audio, database, tabular data, etc.)
Table (digital)
1.7. Data collection method(s):
(e.g., satellite, airplane, unmanned aerial system, radar, weather station, moored buoy, research vessel, autonomous underwater vehicle, animal tagging, manual surveys, enforcement activities, numerical model, etc.)
No information found
1.8. If data are from a NOAA Observing System of Record, indicate name of system:
Always left blank due to field exemption
1.8.1. If data are from another observing system, please specify:
Always left blank due to field exemption

2. Point of Contact for this Data Management Plan (author or maintainer)

2.1. Name:
Brooke Olenski
Taken From: Support Roles (Metadata Contact) | Person
Notes: The name of the Person of the most recent Support Role of type "Metadata Contact" is used. The support role must be in effect.
2.2. Title:
Metadata Contact
Always listed as "Metadata Contact"
2.3. Affiliation or facility:
Taken From: Support Roles (Metadata Contact) | Organization
Notes: The name of the Organization of the most recent Support Role of type "Metadata Contact" is used. This field is required if applicable.
2.4. E-mail address:
Notes: The email address is taken from the address listed for the Person assigned as the Metadata Contact in Support Roles.
2.5. Phone number:
No information found
Notes: The phone number is taken from the number listed for the Person assigned as the Metadata Contact in Support Roles. If the phone number is missing or incorrect, please contact your Librarian to update the Person record.

3. Responsible Party for Data Management

Program Managers, or their designee, shall be responsible for assuring the proper management of the data produced by their Program. Please indicate the responsible party below.

3.1. Name:
Bernardo Vargas-Angel
Taken From: Support Roles (Data Steward) | Person
Notes: The name of the Person of the most recent Support Role of type "Data Steward" is used. The support role must be in effect.
3.2. Position Title:
Data Steward
Always listed as "Data Steward"

4. Resources

Programs must identify resources within their own budget for managing the data they produce.

4.1. Have resources for management of these data been identified?
4.2. Approximate percentage of the budget for these data devoted to data management (specify percentage or "unknown"):

5. Data Lineage and Quality

NOAA has issued Information Quality Guidelines for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information which it disseminates.

5.1. Processing workflow of the data from collection or acquisition to making it publicly accessible
(describe or provide URL of description):

Lineage Statement:
The data described here were collected via belt transect surveys of coral demography (adult and juvenile corals) by the NOAA Coral Reef Ecosystem Program (CREP) following the same protocol to that established by the NOAA National Coral Reef Monitoring Program (NCRMP).

Process Steps:

  • Biological surveys implemented a modified stratified random sampling design to assess the survey domain which encompassed the hard-bottom reef habitat from 0 to 18 m in depth within Vatia Bay. Based on the geomorphology of the reef, the stratification scheme combined two depth categories (shallow: 0–6 m and mid-depth: 6–18 m) and two cardinal positions (north and south) into four distinct strata: i.e., mid-depth north, mid-depth south, shallow north, and shallow south). A digital map of the survey domain was overlaid with a 30 m × 30 m grid designating potential survey sites in all four strata. Sampling effort was allocated relative to strata area and survey sites were randomly selected within each stratum Belt-transects were the focal point of the biological surveys. Coral community composition was assessed within a number of 1.0 m × 2.5 m segments located at the 0–2.5 m, 5.0–7.5 m, 10–12.5 m, 15–17.5 m mark along each transect; bottom-time permitting, covering a total area ranging 5–10 m2 per transect. Over time, protocols were adjusted to increase efficiency such that two, 18-m transects in 2015, and one 18-m transect in 2020. Within segments, all adult coral colonies (≥5 cm maximum diameter) whose center fell within 0.5 m on either side of the transect line were identified to the genus-level and measured for size (maximum diameter to nearest cm). Juvenile coral colonies (<5 cm), distinguished by the presence of a distinct tissue and skeletal boundary (not a remnant of a larger colony), were surveyed within three 1.0 m × 1.0 m segments at the 0–1.0 m, 5.0–6.0 m, and 10.0–11.0 m mark of each transect (covering 3 m2 per transect). Juvenile colonies were identified to genus and measured for size (maximum diameter to nearest 5 mm). For the estimation of benthic cover, still photographs were collected using the photoquadrat method at predetermined points along the transect line with a high-resolution digital camera mounted on a pole. In 2015, photographs were taken every meter from the 1-m to the 15-m mark on each of the two transects per site (n = 30) and in 2020, every meter from the 1-m to the 30-m mark along an extended belt-transect line (n = 30). Photoquadrats were analyzed implementing the computer software CoralNet. These data are documented separately. Survey protocols followed the National Coral Reef Monitoring Program methodologies historically implemented by NOAA's Ecosystem Sciences Division. (Citation: Ecosystem Sciences Division standard operating procedures: data collection for rapid ecological assessment benthic surveys)
5.1.1. If data at different stages of the workflow, or products derived from these data, are subject to a separate data management plan, provide reference to other plan:
Always left blank
5.2. Quality control procedures employed
(describe or provide URL of description):

The quality control occurred at two major stages - 1) data entry and 2) data management. Data entry quality control included both review and manual error correction steps. Data management quality control included several standard error queries followed by correction prior to ingestion into Oracle database.

6. Data Documentation

The EDMC Data Documentation Procedural Directive requires that NOAA data be well documented, specifies the use of ISO 19115 and related standards for documentation of new data, and provides links to resources and tools for metadata creation and validation.

6.1. Does metadata comply with EDMC Data Documentation directive?
Notes: All required DMP fields must be populated and valid to comply with the directive.
6.1.1. If metadata are non-existent or non-compliant, please explain:

Missing/invalid information:

  • 1.7. Data collection method(s)
Notes: Required DMP fields that are not populated or invalid are listed here.
6.2. Name of organization or facility providing metadata hosting:
NMFS Office of Science and Technology
Always listed as "NMFS Office of Science and Technology"
6.2.1. If service is needed for metadata hosting, please indicate:
Always left blank
6.3. URL of metadata folder or data catalog, if known:
Always listed as the URL to the InPort Data Set record
6.4. Process for producing and maintaining metadata
(describe or provide URL of description):
Metadata produced and maintained in accordance with the NOAA Data Documentation Procedural Directive:
Always listed with the above statement

7. Data Access

NAO 212-15 states that access to environmental data may only be restricted when distribution is explicitly limited by law, regulation, policy (such as those applicable to personally identifiable information or protected critical infrastructure information or proprietary trade information) or by security requirements. The EDMC Data Access Procedural Directive contains specific guidance, recommends the use of open-standard, interoperable, non-proprietary web services, provides information about resources and tools to enable data access, and includes a Waiver to be submitted to justify any approach other than full, unrestricted public access.

7.1. Do these data comply with the Data Access directive?
7.1.1. If the data are not to be made available to the public at all, or with limitations, has a Waiver (Appendix A of Data Access directive) been filed?
7.1.2. If there are limitations to public data access, describe how data are protected from unauthorized access or disclosure:


7.2. Name of organization of facility providing data access:
National Centers for Environmental Information - Silver Spring, Maryland (NCEI-MD)
Taken From: Support Roles (Distributor) | Organization
Notes: The name of the Organization of the most recent Support Role of type "Distributor" is used. The support role must be in effect. This information is not required if an approved access waiver exists for this data.
7.2.1. If data hosting service is needed, please indicate:
Taken From: Data Management | If data hosting service is needed, please indicate
Notes: This field is required if a Distributor has not been specified.
7.2.2. URL of data access service, if known:
Taken From: Distribution Info | Download URL
Notes: All URLs listed in the Distribution Info section will be included. This field is required if applicable.
7.3. Data access methods or services offered:

Data can be accessed online via the NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) Ocean Archive.

7.4. Approximate delay between data collection and dissemination:
7.4.1. If delay is longer than latency of automated processing, indicate under what authority data access is delayed:

8. Data Preservation and Protection

The NOAA Procedure for Scientific Records Appraisal and Archive Approval describes how to identify, appraise and decide what scientific records are to be preserved in a NOAA archive.

8.1. Actual or planned long-term data archive location:
(Specify NCEI-MD, NCEI-CO, NCEI-NC, NCEI-MS, World Data Center (WDC) facility, Other, To Be Determined, Unable to Archive, or No Archiving Intended)
8.1.1. If World Data Center or Other, specify:
Taken From: Data Management | Actual or planned long-term data archive location
Notes: This field is required if archive location is World Data Center or Other.
8.1.2. If To Be Determined, Unable to Archive or No Archiving Intended, explain:
Taken From: Data Management | If To Be Determined, Unable to Archive or No Archiving Intended, explain
Notes: This field is required if archive location is To Be Determined, Unable to Archive, or No Archiving Intended.
8.2. Data storage facility prior to being sent to an archive facility (if any):
Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center - Honolulu, HI
Taken From: Physical Location | Organization, City, State, Location Description
Notes: Physical Location Organization, City and State are required, or a Location Description is required.
8.3. Approximate delay between data collection and submission to an archive facility:
8.4. How will the data be protected from accidental or malicious modification or deletion prior to receipt by the archive?
Discuss data back-up, disaster recovery/contingency planning, and off-site data storage relevant to the data collection

NOAA IRC and NOAA Fisheries ITS resources and assets.

9. Additional Line Office or Staff Office Questions

Line and Staff Offices may extend this template by inserting additional questions in this section.

Always left blank