An Introduction to the Natural Geography In
Shore Areas (NaGISA) Project
P. Robin Rigby
Tetsuya Kato
Yoshihisa Shirayama
ABSTRACT
An official Census of Marine Life (CoML) field project since 2000, the Natural
Geography In Shore Areas (NaGISA) project is a collaborative effort whose goal
is inventorying and monitoring the biodiversity in the narrow inshore zone of
the world’s oceans at depths of less than 20m; the area people identify with and
impact most.
INTRODUCTION
Biodiversity is a measure of ecosystem health and of biological interactions
such as competition, disturbance, facilitation, predation, recruitment, and productivity of a system [1, 2]. On a larger scale, biodiversity measurements can
serve as indicators of the balance between speciation and extinction [3, 4]. Making inventories and monitoring biodiversity are crucial to identifying the causal
processes and activities that impact ecosystems and the shifts over time. The
first step towards understanding these complexities on the grand scale is to investigate global patterns of biodiversity (i.e. taxonomic composition and diversity
of assemblages and abundance of single taxon) over a broad range of spatial
scales and to form a sustainable network for long-term coastal monitoring.
Using protocols developed during the International Biodiversity Observation
Year (IBOY) on hard bottom algae and developing its own set of protocols
for soft bottom seagrass communities [5, 6]; NaGISA‘s goal is a series of welldistributed standard transects from the high inter-tidal zone to the depth of 20
m covering the world (from pole to pole and around the equator), with standardized techniques that will provide a baseline for future biodiversity comparisons. The NaGISA protocol is simple, cost efficient and intentionally low-tech,
thus allowing it to be adopted by many different research groups and countries.
Seto Marine Biological Lab, Kyoto University, 459 Shirahama, Wakayama 649-2211, Japan.
E-mail: robin@seto.kyoto-u.ac.jp
The unique standardized data will be provided to researchers, policy makers,
stakeholders and the general public through NaGISA‘s own database, accessible
through the NaGISA website (www.nagisa.coml.org). It also will be incorporated into CoML‘s Ocean Biogeography Information System (www.iobis.org),
an online global atlas for accessing, modeling and mapping marine biological
data in a multidimensional geographic context.
METHODS
NaGISA protocols constitute the minimum standardized sampling requirements for biodiversity determination [6], although scientists may incorporate
additional sampling parameters at local sites. The standardized protocol includes:
ˆ Passive sampling, photography and observational techniques, estimates of
percent cover of sessile colonial invertebrates and rhizoidal macroalgae and
counts of algal stripes and solitary fauna within quadrates.
ˆ Active sampling, core samples of sea grass beds, and careful removal of
organisms from small quadrants within macroalgal sites.
ˆ Assessment, measurements of surface and bottom seawater temperature
and a visual classification of substrata.
NaGISA sites are managed locally through universities, schools, institutes
and research stations in participating countries that coordinate sampling, outreach and education. Each site is connected to NaGISA through a chain of administration. NaGISA headquarters, based in Japan, is responsible for the overall project and the links between the seven regional divisions (Western Pacific,
Eastern Pacific, Caribbean, South America, Europe, Atlantic, Indian Ocean
and the South Seas). Administrative centers (University of Kyoto; University of
Alaska, Fairbanks; University of Pisa; Simon Bolivar University; Central University of Venezuela) organize NaGISA regionally with the assistance of national
organizers (Examples: University of Baja-California; Phuket Marine Biological Center and University of Cape Town) that work within each participating
country and with NaGISA site managers.
DISCUSSION
NaGISA is a unique scientific project in its endeavor to produce global biodiversity coverage through empowering locally vested interests around the world
(Figure 1 ). Its core is a simple idea that will result in the creation of a standardized data matrix suitable for testing a wide range of ecological theories and
solving practical problems. No other project has ever dealt with biodiversity
information with such fine resolution on such a wide scale. Due to this combination of large international, geographic and taxonomic scopes, various aspects of
the project have developed their own importance. Two examples of this are the
educational products that have started to develop from NaGISA dedication to
Figure 1. Work Locally Study Globally: A flow chart of the NaGISA Project
capacity building (taxonomic workshops, high school and university programs
and knowledge base exchanges) and new techniques and methods for the taxonomic study of meiofauna. NaGISA hopes that by improving general knowledge,
strengthening scientific capabilities and improving methods of taxonomic study,
a more thorough and accurate characterization of biodiversity may be achieved,
understood and maintained.
REFERENCES
1. Loreau, M., S. Naeem, P. Inchausti, J. Bengtsson, J. P. Grime, A. Hector, D. U.
Hooper, M. A. Huston, D. Raffaelli, B. Schmid, D. Tilman, and D. A. Wardle,
2001. “Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: Current knowledge and future
challenges.” Science, 5543(2-3):804–808.
2. Pachepsky, C. J. W., E., J. L. Brown, and G. Squire, 2001. “Towards a general
theory of biodiversity.” Nature, 410(6831):923–926.
3. Petraitis, P. S., R. E. Latham, and R. A. Niesenbaum, 1989. “The maintenance of
species diversity by disturbance.” The Quar. Rev. of Bio., 64:393–418.
4. Mittelbach, G. G., C. F. Steiner, S. M. Scheiner, K. L. Gross, H. L. Reynolds, R. B.
Waide, W. R. Willig, S. I. Dodson, and L. Gough, 2001. “What is the observed
relationship between species richness and productivity?” Ecology, 82:2381–2396.
5. Y., S., A. A. Rowden, D. P. Gordon, and H. Kawai, 2002. “Latitudinal biodiversity in coastal macrophyte communities.” In T. Nakashizuka and N. Stork, eds.,
“Biodiversity Research Methods: IBOY in Western Pacific and Asia,” pp. 162–182.
Kyoto University and Trans Pacific Press, Kyoto.
6. Konar, B. and K. Iken, 2003. “Natural Geography In Nearshore Areas (NaGISA):
The Nearshore Component of the Census of Marine Life.” In K. Iken and B. Konar,
eds., “Proceedings of the Arctic Biodiversity Workshop: New Census of Marine Life
Initiative,” pp. 35–47. Alaska Sea Grant College Program, University of Alaska
Fairbanks.