Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Underwater photogrammetry in Antarctica: long-term observations in benthic ecosystems and legacy data rescue

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Polar Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The need for sound baseline information about community structure and composition against which changes can be detected and quantified is a well-recognised priority in Antarctica. Here, the collection of such data is challenging, especially at sea, where long-term monitoring is usually logistically feasible only in the proximity of permanent research stations. In recent years, underwater photogrammetry has emerged as a non-destructive and low-cost method for high-resolution topographic reconstruction. We decided to apply this technique to videos, recorded during standard SCUBA surveys of Antarctic benthos in Tethys Bay (Ross Sea, Antarctica) in 2006 and 2015 and originally not meant for photogrammetry. Our aim was to assess the validity and utility of the photogrammetric method to describe benthic communities from the perspective of long-term monitoring. For this purpose, two of the transects surveyed in 2015 were revisited in 2017. Videos were processed with photogrammetric procedures to obtain 3D models of the seafloor and inhabiting organisms. Overall, a total of six 20 m-long transects, corresponding to a total area of ~ 200 m2 of seafloor were analysed. Accuracy of the resulting models, expressed in terms of Length Measurement Error (LME), was 1.9 mm on average. The 2017 transects showed marked differences in some species, such as a 25–49% increase in the number of sea urchins Sterechinus neumayeri (Meissner, 1900) and the complete disappearance of some sponges Mycale (Oxymycale) acerata Kirkpatrick, 1907. Our analyses confirm the efficacy of photogrammetry for monitoring programmes, including their value for the re-analysis of legacy video footage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agrafiotis P, Skarlatos D, Forbes T, Poullis C, Skamantzari M, Georgopoulos A (2018) Underwater photogrammetry in very shallow waters: main challenges and caustics effect removal. Int. Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spatial Inf Sci. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-15-2018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass GF (1970) Archaeology under water. Thames and Hudson (ed) Penguin Book, London

  • Barthel D (1995) Tissue composition of sponges from the Weddell Sea, Antarctica: not much meat on the bones. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 123:149-153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennecke S, Kwasnitschka T, Metaxas A, Dullo WC (2016) In situ growth rates of deep-water octocorals determined from 3D photogrammetric reconstructions. Coral Reefs 35:1227–1239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bojakowski P, Bojakowski KC, Naughton P (2015) A comparison between structure from motion and direct survey methodologies on the Warwick. J marit archeol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11457-015-9141-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowden DA (2005) Quantitative characterization of shallow marine benthic assemblages at Ryder Bay, Adelaide Island, Antarctica. Mar biol 146:1235–1249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brey T, Rumohr H, Ankar S (1988) Energy content of macrobenthic invertebrates: general conversion factors from weight to energy. J Exp Mar Bio Ecol 117:271–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brey T, Müller-Wiegmann C, Zittier ZM, Hagen W (2010) Body composition in aquatic organisms—a global data bank of relationships between mass, elemental composition and energy content. J Sea Res 64:334–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brueggeman P (2003) Diving under Antarctic ice: a history. Scripps Institution of Oceanography Technical Report 41

  • Burns JHR, Delparte D, Gates RD, Takabayashi M (2015a) Integrating structure-from-motion photogrammetry with geospatial software as a novel technique for quantifying 3D ecological characteristics of coral reefs. Peer J 3:e1077

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burns JHR, Delparte D, Gates RD, Takabayashi M (2015b) Utilizing underwater three-dimensional modelling to enhance ecological and biological studies of coral reefs. Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci 40:61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns JHR, Delparte D, Kapono L, Belt M, Gates RD, Takabayashi M (2016) Assessing the impact of acute disturbances on the structure and composition of a coral community using innovative 3D reconstruction techniques. Methods in Oceanography 15:49–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callahan JT (1984) Long-term ecological research. Bioscience 34:363–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chennu A , Färber P, De’ath G, de Beer D, Fabricius KE (2017) A diver-operated hyperspectral imaging and topographic surveying system for automated mapping of benthic habitats Scientific Reports 7:7122

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Conlan KE, Kim SL, Lenihan HS, Oliver JS (2004) Benthic changes during 10 years of organic enrichment by McMurdo Station, Antarctica. Mar Pollut Bull 49:43–60

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Conlan KE, Kim SL, Thurber AR, Hendrycks E (2010) Benthic changes at McMurdo Station, Antarctica following local sewage treatment and regional iceberg-mediated productivity decline. Mar Pollut Bull 60:419–432

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Constable AJ, Costa DP, Schofield O, Newman L, Urban ER, Fulton EA, Willaim K (2016) Developing priority variables (“ecosystem Essential Ocean Variables”—eEOVs) for observing dynamics and change in Southern Ocean ecosystems. J mar syst 161:26–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings V, Thrush S, Norkko A, Andrew N, Hewitt J, Funnell G, Schwarz AM (2006) Accounting for local scale variability in benthos: implications for future assessments of latitudinal trends in the coastal Ross Sea. Antarct sci 18:633–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings VJ, Hewitt JE, Thrush SF, Marriott PM, Halliday NJ, Norkko AM (2018) Linking Ross Sea coastal benthic communities to environmental conditions: documenting baselines in a spatially variable and changing world. Frontiers in Marine Science 5:232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dayton PK (1989) Interdecadal variation in an Antarctic sponge and its predators from oceanographic climate shifts. Science 245:1484–1486

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dayton PK, Robilliard GA, DeVries AL (1969) Anchor ice foundation in McMurdo Sound, Antarctica, and its biological effects. Science 163:273–274

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dayton PK, Robilliard GA, Paine RT (1970) Benthic faunal zonation as a result of anchor ice at McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. In: Holdgate (ed) Antarctic Ecology. Academic Press, London pp 244-257

    Google Scholar 

  • Dayton PK, Robilliard GA, Paine RT, Dayton LB (1974) Biological accommodation in the benthic community at McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. Ecol monogr 44:105–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dayton PK, Kim S, Jarrell SC, Oliver JS, Hammerstrom K, Fisher JL, O’Connor K, Barber JS, Robilliard G, Barry J, Thurber AR, Conlan K (2013) Recruitment, growth and mortality of an Antarctic hexactinellid sponge, Anoxycalyx joubini PLoS ONE 8:e56939. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0056939

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Dayton P, Jarrell S, Kim S, Thrush S, Hammerstrom K, Slattery M, Parnell E (2016) Surprising episodic recruitment and growth of Antarctic sponges: implications for ecological resilience. J exp mar biol ecol 482:38–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deregibus D, Quartino M, Zacher K, Campana G, Barnes D (2017) Understanding the link between sea ice, ice scour and Antarctic benthic biodiversity– the need for cross-station and international collaboration. Polar Rec 53:143–152. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0032247416000875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drap P (2012) Underwater photogrammetry for archaeology, special applications of photogrammetry. In: DC da Silva (ed) Tech, pp 111–136

  • El-Sayed SZ (1994) Southern ocean ecology: the BIOMASS perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari R, Bryson M, Bridge T, Hustache J, Williams SB, Byrne M, Figueira W (2016) Quantifying the response of structural complexity and community composition to environmental change in marine communities. Glob chang biol 22:1965–1975

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari R, Figueira WF, Pratchett MS, Boube T, Adam A, Kobelkowsky-Vidrio T, Doo SS, Brooke Atwood T, Byrne M (2017) 3D photogrammetry quantifies growth and external erosion of individual coral colonies and skeletons. Sci Rep 7:16737

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Flannery E, Przeslawski R (2015) Comparison of sampling methods to assess benthic marine biodiversity: Are spatial and ecological relationships consistent among sampling gear? Record 2015/07. Geoscience Australia Canberra. https://doi.org/10.11636/Record.2015.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes T, Goldsmith M, Mudur S, Poullis C (2018) DeepCaustics: classification and removal of caustics from underwater imagery. IEEE J Oceanic Eng 99:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Förstner W, Wrobel BP (2016) Photogrammetric computer vision. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman A, Pizarro O, Williams SB, Johnson-Roberson M (2012) Multi-scale measures of rugosity, slope and aspect from benthic stereo image reconstructions. PLoS ONE 7:e50440

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Fryer JG, Kniest HK (1985) Errors in depth determination caused by waves in through-water photogrammetry. Photogramm Rec 11:745–753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granshaw SI (2016) Photogrammetric terminology. Photogramm Rec 31:210–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruzov EN, Pushkin AE (1970) Bottom communities of the upper sublittoral of Enderby Land and the South Shetland Islands. In: Holdgate (ed) Antarctic ecology. Academic Press, London pp 35–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutt J, Starmans A (1998) Structure and biodiversity of megabenthos in the Weddell and Lazarev Seas (Antarctica): ecological role of physical parameters and biological interactions. Polar biol 20:229–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutt J, Starmans A (2002) Quantification of iceberg impact and benthic recolonisation patterns in the Weddell Sea (Antarctica). Ecological Studies in the Antarctic Sea Ice Zone. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 210–214

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hill J, Wilkinson C (2004) Methods for ecological monitoring of coral reefs. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville, p 117

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosie GW, Fukuchi M, Kawaguchi S (2003) Development of the Southern Ocean continuous plankton recorder survey. Prog Oceanogr 58:263–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosie G, Mormede S, Kitchener J, Takahashi K, Raymond B (2014) 10.3 Near-surface zooplankton communities. In: Broyer C, Koubbi P (eds) Biogeographic Atlas of the Southern Ocean. Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research, Cambridge, pp 422–430

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu H, Ferrari R, McKinnon D, Roff G, Smith R, Upcroft B (2012) Measuring reef complexity and rugosity from monocular video bathymetric reconstruction. Proceedings of the 12th International Coral Reef Symposium, Cairns, Australia, 9–13 July 2012

  • Jaffe JS (2015) Underwater optical imaging: the past, the present, and the prospects. IEEE j oceanic eng 40:683–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe JS (2016) To sea and to see: that is the answer. Methods Oceanogr 15:3–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe JS, Moore KD, McLean J, Strand MP (2001) Underwater optical imaging: status and prospects. Oceanography 14:66–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karara HM, Faig W (1972) Interior Orientation in Close Range Photogrammetry- An Analysis of Alternative Approaches. In: Close-Range Photogrammetric Systems, Commission V Report, XIIth International Congress for Photogrammetrie

  • Kennicutt MC, Chown SL, Cassano JJ, Liggett D, Peck LS, Massom R, Allison I (2015) A roadmap for Antarctic and Southern Ocean science for the next two decades and beyond. Antarct sci 27:3–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennicutt MC, Kim YD, Rogan-Finnemore M et al (2016) Delivering 21st century Antarctic and Southern Ocean science. Antarct Sci 28:407–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohler KE, Gill SM (2006) Coral Point Count with Excel extensions (CPCe): A Visual Basic program for the determination of coral and substrate coverage using random point count methodology. Comput Geosci 32:1259–1269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotowski R (1988) Phototriangulation in multi-media photogrammetry. Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens 27:324–334

    Google Scholar 

  • Leon JX, Roelfsema CM, Saunders MI, Phinn SR (2015) Measuring coral reef terrain roughness using ‘Structure-from-Motion’ close-range photogrammetry. Geomorphology 242:21–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lizotte MP (2001) The contributions of sea ice algae to Antarctic marine primary production. Am zool 41:57–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Lotze HK, Worm B (2009) Historical baselines for large marine animals. Trends Ecol Evol 24:254–262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ludvigsen M, Eustice R, Singh H (2006) Photogrammetric models for marine archaeology. OCEANS 2006:1–6

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann T (2010) Close range photogrammetry for industrial applications. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 65:558–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann T, Robson S, Kyle S, Boehm J (2013) Close-range photogrammetry and 3D imaging. de Gruyter W (ed)

  • Macedo IM, Masi BP, Zalmon IR (2006) Comparison of rocky intertidal community sampling methods at northern coast of Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil. Braz J Oceanogr 54:147–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magurran AE, Baillie SR, Buckland ST, Dick JM, Elston DA, Scott EM, Smith RI, Somerfield PJ, Watt AD (2010) Long-term datasets in biodiversity research and monitoring: assessing change in ecological communities through time. Trends Ecol Evol 25:574–582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mallet D, Pelletier D (2014) Underwater video techniques for observing coastal marine biodiversity: a review of sixty years of publications (1952–2012). Fish res 154:44–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masry SE (1974) Digital correlation principles. Photogramm Eng 40:303–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Mertes J, Thomsen T, Gulley J (2014) Evaluation of Structure from Motion software to create 3d models of late nineteenth century great lakes shipwrecks using archived diver-acquired video surveys. J marit archaeol 9:173–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Micheletti N, Chandler JH, Lane SN (2015) Structure from Motion (SfM) photogrammetry In: Clarke LE, Nield JM (ed) Geomorphological Techniques (Online Edition). British Society for Geomorphology, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullen AD, Treibitz T, Roberts PL, Kelly EL, Horwitz R, Smith JE, Jaffe JS (2016) Underwater microscopy for in situ studies of benthic ecosystems. Nat Commun 7:12093

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Nicosevici T, Gracias N, Negahdaripour S, Garcia R (2009) Efficient three-dimensional scene modeling and mosaicing. Journal of Field Robotics 26:759–788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nocerino E, Menna F, Remondino F (2014) Accuracy of typical photogrammetric networks in cultural heritage 3D modeling projects. Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci 40:465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nocerino E, Lago F, Morabito D, Remondino F, Porzi L, Poiesi F, Rota Bulo S, Chippendale P, Locher A, Havlena M, Van Gool L, Eder M, Fötschl A, Hilsmann A, Kausch L, Eisert P, Van Gool L (2017) A smartphone-based 3d pipeline for the creative industry– the replicate eu project. Int arch photogramm remote sens spat inf sci. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W3-535-2017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Numanami H, Hamada E, Naito Y, Taniguchi A (1986) A biomass estimation of epifaunal megabenthos by stereophotography around Syowa Station, Antarctica. Memoirs Natl Inst Polar Res 44:145–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Parravicini V, Morri C, Ciribilli G, Montefalcone M, Albertelli G, Bianchi CN (2009) Size matters more than method: visual quadrats vs photography in measuring human impact on Mediterranean rocky reef communities. Estuar coast shelf sci 81:359–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pech D, Condal AR, Bourget E, Ardisson PL (2004) Abundance estimation of rocky shore invertebrates at small spatial scale by high-resolution digital photography and digital image analysis. J exp mar biol ecol 299:185–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peirano A, Bordone A, Marini S, Piazza P, Schiaparelli S (2016) A simple time-lapse apparatus for monitoring macrozoobenthos activity in Antarctica. Antarct Sci 28:473–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piazza P, Cummings V, Lohrer D, Marini S, Marriott P, Menna F, Nocerino E, Peirano A, Schiaparelli S (2018) Divers-operated underwater photogrammetry: applications in the study of Antarctic benthos. Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci 42:885–892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pizarro O, Eustice RM, Singh H (2009) Large area 3-D reconstructions from underwater optical surveys. IEEE J Oceanic Eng 34:150–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pizarro O, Friedman A, Bryson M, Williams SB, Madin J (2017) A simple, fast, and repeatable survey method for underwater visual 3D benthic mapping and monitoring. Ecol Evol 7:1770–1782

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Pollefeys M, Nistér D, Frahm JM, Akbarzadeh A, Mordohai P, Clipp B, Salmi C (2008) Detailed real-time urban 3d reconstruction from video. Int j comput vis 78:143–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollio J (1968) Applications of underwater photogrammetry (No NOO-IR-68-52). Naval Oceanographic Office NSTL, Station MS

  • Raoult V, David PA, Dupont SF, Mathewson CP, O’Neill SJ, Powell NN, Williamson JE (2016) GoPros™ as an underwater photogrammetry tool for citizen science. PeerJ 4:e1960

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rees HL (ed) (2009) Guidelines for the study of the epibenthos of subtidal environments. ICES Techniques in Marine Environmental Science, Baltic Sea p 42

  • Remondino F, El-Hakim S (2005) Critical overview of image-based 3D modeling. In: Recording, Modeling and Visualization of Cultural Heritage: Proceedings of the International Workshop, Centro Stefano Franscini, Monte Verita, Ascona, Switzerland. May 22–27, 2005 CRC Press, p 299

  • Remondino F, El-Hakim S (2006) Image-based 3D modelling: A review. Photogramm Rec 21:269–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remondino F, Del Pizzo S, Kersten TP, Troisi S (2012) Low-cost and open-source solutions for automated image orientation– A critical overview. Euro-Mediterranean Conference. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 40–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Remondino F, Spera MG, Nocerino E, Menna F, Nex F (2014) State of the art in high density image matching. Photogramm Rec 29:144–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remondino F, Nocerino E, Toschi I, Menna F (2017) A critical review of automated photogrammetric processing of large datasets. Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W5-591-2017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salwicka K, Rakusa-Suszczewski S (2002) Long-term monitoring of Antarctic pinnipeds in Admiralty Bay (South Shetlands, Antarctica). Acta Theriol 47:443–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiaparelli S (2010) Progetto 2006/08.01: L’ecosistema costiero di Baia Terra Nova nell’ambito del programma LGP (Latitudinal Gradient Project) PNRA Technical Report Rapporto sulla Campagna Antartica Estate Australe 2009-2010 XXV Spedizione pp 30–33

  • Schiaparelli S, Linse K (2006) A reassessment of the distribution of the common Antarctic scallop Adamussium colbecki (Smith, 1902). Deep Sea Res II 53:912–920

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shmutter B, Bonfiglioli L (1967) Orientation problem in two-medium photogrammetry. Photogramm eng 33:1421–1428

    Google Scholar 

  • Slama C (1980) Manual of Photogrammetry. American Society of Photogrammetry Falls Church, Virginia

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith RC, Baker KS, Fraser WR, Hofmann EE, Karl DM, Klinck JM, Vernet M (1995) The Palmer LTER: A long-term ecological research program at Palmer Station, Antarctica. Oceanography 8:77–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snavely N, Seitz SM, Szeliski R (2008) Modeling the world from internet photo collections. Int J Comput Vis 80:189–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solan M, Germano JD, Rhoads DC, Smith C, Michaud E, Parry D, Carey D (2003) Towards a greater understanding of pattern, scale and process in marine benthic systems: a picture is worth a thousand worms. J Exp Mar Biol Gcol 285:313–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stark JS, Snape I, Riddle MJ (2006a) Abandoned waste disposal sites in Antarctica: monitoring remediation outcomes and limitations at Casey Station. Ecol Manag Restor 7:21–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stark JS, Johnstone GJ, Palmer AS, Snape I, Larner BL, Riddle MJ (2006b) Monitoring the remediation of a near shore waste disposal site in Antarctica using the amphipod Paramoera walkeri and diffusive gradients in thin films (DGTs). Mar Pollut Bull 52:1595–1610

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Storlazzi CD, Dartnell P, Hatcher GA, Gibbs AE (2016) End of the chain? Rugosity and fine-scale bathymetry from existing underwater digital imagery using structure-from-motion (SfM) technology. Coral Reefs 35:889–894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-016-1462-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strayer D, Glitzenstein JS, Jones CG, Kolasa J, Likens GE, McDonnell MJ, Pickett ST (1986) Long-term ecological studies: an illustrated account of their design, operation, and importance to ecology. Occasional Publ Inst Ecosyst Stud 2:9

    Google Scholar 

  • Teixidó N, Garrabou J, Gutt J, Arntz WE (2004) Recovery in Antarctic benthos after iceberg disturbance: trends in benthic composition, abundance and growth forms. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 278:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teixidó N, Albajes-Eizagirre A, Bolbo D, Le Hir E, Demestre M, Garrabou J, Soria-Frisch A (2011) Hierarchical segmentation-based software for cover classification analyses of seabed images (Seascape). Mar Ecol Prog Ser 431:45–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tewinkel GC (1963) Water depths from aerial photographs. Photogramm Eng 29:1037–1042

    Google Scholar 

  • Thatje S, Mutschke E (1999) Distribution of abundance, biomass, production and productivity of macrozoobenthos in the sub-Antarctic Magellan Province (South America). Polar Biol 22:31–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson MM (1966) Manual of Photogrammetry, 3rd edn. ASPRS, Virgina Falls

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson WL, White GC, Gowan C (1998) Monitoring vertebrate populations. Academic Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornton B, Bodenmann A, Pizarro O, Williams SB, Friedman A, Nakajima R, Matsui Y (2016) Biometric assessment of deep-sea vent megabenthic communities using multi-resolution 3D image reconstructions. Deep Sea Res I Oceanogr Res Papers 116:200–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thrush SF, Hewitt JE, Cummings VJ, Norkko A, Chiantore M (2010) β-diversity and species accumulation in Antarctic coastal benthos: influence of habitat, distance and productivity on ecological connectivity. PLoS ONE 5:e11899

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Tin T, Fleming Z, Hughes K, Ainley D, Convey P, Moreno C, Snape I (2009) Impacts of local human activities on the Antarctic environment. Antarct Sci 21:3–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102009001722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trygonis V, Sini M (2012) photoQuad: a dedicated seabed image processing software, and a comparative error analysis of four photoquadrat methods. J exp mar biol ecol 424:99–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullman S (1979) The interpretation of Structure from Motion. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol sci 203:405–426

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Verhoeven G (2011) Taking computer vision aloft–archaeological three-dimensional reconstructions from aerial photographs with PhotoScan. Archaeol prospect 18:67–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verhoeven G, Doneus M, Briese C, Vermeulen F (2012) Mapping by matching: a computer vision-based approach to fast and accurate georeferencing of archaeological aerial photographs. J archaeol sci 39:2060–2070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westoby MJ, Brasington J, Glasser NF, Hambrey MJ, Reynolds JM (2012) ‘Structure-from-Motion’ photogrammetry: A low-cost, effective tool for geoscience applications. Geomorphology 179:300–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young GC, Dey S, Rogers AD, Exton D (2017) Cost and time-effective method for multi-scale measures of rugosity, fractal dimension, and vector dispersion from coral reef 3D models. PLoS ONE 12:e0175341

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Sitography

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Project "ICE-LAPSE" (PNRA 2013/AZ1.16: “Analysis of Antarctic benthos dynamics by using non-destructive monitoring devices and permanent stations”) was funded by the Italian National Antarctic Program. We are indebted to the Comando Subacquei ed Incursori (COMSUBIN) of the Italian Navy for help and assistance during the dives. This paper is a contribution to the SCAR-ANTOS Expert Group (https://www.scar.org/science/antos/home/). Some of geospatial procedures carried out during this study were performed at the Geo-technology Centre of University of Siena (www.geotecnologie.unisi.it) in the lab of Prof. R. Salvini. The collection of the 2006 and 2017 video recordings was funded by the NZ Ministry of Primary Industries and Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, respectively, and supported by Antarctica New Zealand and the excellent NIWA dive teams.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. MNA, Italian National Antarctic Museum, Section of Genoa, University of Genoa, PO Box 16132, Genoa, Italy

    Paola Piazza, Alice Guzzi & Stefano Schiaparelli

  2. DSFTA, Department of Physical Sciences, Earth and Environment, University of Siena, PO Box 53100, Siena, Italy

    Paola Piazza

  3. NIWA, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, PO Box 14901, Wellington, New Zealand

    Vonda Cummings & Peter Marriott

  4. DISTAV, Department of Earth, Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Genoa, PO Box 16132, Genoa, Italy

    Alice Guzzi & Stefano Schiaparelli

  5. University of Waikato, 58 Cross Road, Sulphur Point, Tauranga, 3110, New Zealand

    Ian Hawes

  6. NIWA, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, PO Box 11115, Hamilton, New Zealand

    Andrew Lohrer

  7. CNR/ISMAR-SP, Research National Council, Institute of Marine Science U.O.S. La Spezia, PO Box 19032, Lerici, La Spezia, Italy

    Simone Marini

  8. FBK- 3DOM, 3D Optical Metrology Unit, Bruno Kessler Foundation, PO Box 38122, Trento, Italy

    Fabio Menna

  9. Polytech, Campus de Luminy, Bat. A, LIS laboratory - Laboratoire d’informatique et Systèmes. I&M Team, Images & Models Aix Marseille Univ, Université de Toulon, CNRS, 163 avenue de Luminy - case 925, 13288, Marseille, France

    Erica Nocerino

  10. Theoretical Physics, ETH Zurich, 8093, Zurich, Switzerland

    Erica Nocerino

  11. ENEA, Marine Environment Research Center, PO Box 19032, Lerici, La Spezia, Italy

    Andrea Peirano

  12. KOPRI, Korean Oceanographic and Polar Research Institute, Songdo-miraero 26, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, 21990, South Korea

    Sanghee Kim

Authors
  1. Paola Piazza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vonda Cummings
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alice Guzzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ian Hawes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Andrew Lohrer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Simone Marini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Peter Marriott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Fabio Menna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Erica Nocerino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Andrea Peirano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Sanghee Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Stefano Schiaparelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefano Schiaparelli.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No conflicts of interest to declare.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

300_2019_2480_MOESM1_ESM.tif

Supplementary material 1 (TIFF 37166 kb) Online Resource 1. Photos recorded by S. Schiaparelli at the site “Zecca” (Tethys Bay, Terra Nova Bay) in previous underwater surveys, conducted in 2006- XXI PNRA Expedition, Boxes (a), (b) and (c)- and 2009- XXV PNRA Expedition, Box (d). These images depict small areas of the seafloor (the field of view is always approximately ≤ 1 m2) at similar depths of in the same area described in our study. Even they were not shot with the purpose of quantifying A. colbecki densities (they lack of an appropriate scale bar), they highlight how higher the number of specimens of this species was compared with 2015 and 2017 images. Box (a): A Dendrilla antarctica Topsent, 1905 surrounded by 8 A. colbecki specimens (7th February 2006, 22.9 m depth); Box (b): 5 specimens of A. colbecki in a small area of seafloor (21st January 2006, 22.9 m depth); Box (c): An Urticinopsis antarctica (Verrill, 1922) ‘hemmed in’ by more than 20 A. colbecki (31st January 2006, 26.8 m depth); Box (d): A massive Mycale acerata specimen with some A. colbecki aside (18th December 2009, 22,7 m depth).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Piazza, P., Cummings, V., Guzzi, A. et al. Underwater photogrammetry in Antarctica: long-term observations in benthic ecosystems and legacy data rescue. Polar Biol 42, 1061–1079 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-019-02480-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-019-02480-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation