Natural history museum data on Canadian Arctic marine benthos

Study Extent

The Canadian Arctic marine environment is subdivided in five biogeographic units as per Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s Arctic Biogeographic Units (DFO 2009): Arctic Archipelago, Arctic Basin, Eastern Arctic, Western Arctic and Hudson Bay Complex (Fig. 1). Western, Northern and Eastern limits of the study area correspond to the Canadian Arctic Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). DFO (2009) Development of a Framework and Principles for the Biogeographic Classification of Canadian Marine Areas. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci. Advis. Rep. 2009/056, 17 pp.

Sampling

The dataset compiles historical museum records from the Canadian Museum of Nature (6,002 records) and from the US National Museum of Natural History – Smithsonian Institution (240 records) on marine benthic taxa collected in the Canadian Arctic. The dataset includes specimen records for the study area (i.e., the Canadian Arctic) that were, as of July 2015, catalogued and available electronically.

Quality Control

Several steps were necessary to clean and to deliver the most informative database for future users. Firstly, only records having geographic coordinates were selected. Secondly, pelagic invertebrate taxa (e.g., Appendicularia, Chaetognatha, Copepoda, Ctenophora, Gymnosomata, Hyperiidae, Scyphozoa) and occasionally supra-benthic invertebrate taxa (e.g., Euphausiacea, Mysida) were removed. We did not attempt to distinguish meio- from macro-, and macro- from mega-benthic taxa. All size categories of benthos are therefore considered in the present museum database. Thirdly, because most of the specimen records did not have associated depth value, we used the bathymetry relief model of ETOPO1 (Amante and Eakins 2009) and Spatial Analyst/Extraction Tool in ArcGIS 10.2 (ESRI 2013) to add depth values to selected records. In both museum datasets, some marine specimen records had geographic coordinates located on the land. This problem is quite common for historical biodiversity records when the field collector did not record geographic coordinates and inaccurate coordinates were assigned afterwards during the data entry process. To address that issue without deleting all the “inland” records, we created a buffer zone of 20 km in the marine-to-land transitional zone using Analysis/Buffer tool in ArcGIS 10.2 (ESRI 2013). A depth value of 0 m was given to records located within the 20-km buffer zone that were missing depth values. Finally, taxonomic names were verified using the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS Editorial Board 2016). Over the 100-years collection history of the two museums, several currently unaccepted taxonomic names in WoRMS were present in our datasets. To not over-estimate the total number of taxa, we only used the latest accepted taxonomic name found in WoRMS to compile the faunal inventory of 774 taxa. We provide, however, in the dataset the “original” taxonomic terms along with the “WoRMS” accepted taxonomic names.

Method steps

1. Several steps were necessary to clean and to deliver the most informative database for future users. Firstly, only records having geographic coordinates were selected. Secondly, pelagic invertebrate taxa (e.g., Appendicularia, Chaetognatha, Copepoda, Ctenophora, Gymnosomata, Hyperiidae, Scyphozoa) and occasionally supra-benthic invertebrate taxa (e.g., Euphausiacea, Mysida) were removed. We did not attempt to distinguish meio- from macro-, and macro- from mega-benthic taxa. All size categories of benthos are therefore considered in the present museum database. Thirdly, because most of the specimen records did not have associated depth value, we used the bathymetry relief model of ETOPO1 (Amante and Eakins 2009) and Spatial Analyst/Extraction Tool in ArcGIS 10.2 (ESRI 2013) to add depth values to selected records. In both museum datasets, some marine specimen records had geographic coordinates located on the land. This problem is quite common for historical biodiversity records when the field collector did not record geographic coordinates and inaccurate coordinates were assigned afterwards during the data entry process. To address that issue without deleting all the “inland” records, we created a buffer zone of 20 km in the marine-to-land transitional zone using Analysis/Buffer tool in ArcGIS 10.2 (ESRI 2013). A depth value of 0 m was given to records located within the 20-km buffer zone that were missing depth values. Finally, taxonomic names were verified using the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS Editorial Board 2016). Over the 100-years collection history of the two museums, several currently unaccepted taxonomic names in WoRMS were present in our datasets. To not over-estimate the total number of taxa, we only used the latest accepted taxonomic name found in WoRMS to compile the faunal inventory of 774 taxa. We provide, however, in the dataset the “original” taxonomic terms along with the “WoRMS” accepted taxonomic names.

1. Arthropoda
   common name: Arthropod rank: phylum
2. Polychaeta
   common name: Polychaete rank: class
3. Bivalvia
   common name: Bivalve rank: class
4. Gastropoda
   common name: Gastropod rank: class
5. Bryozoa
   common name: Bryozoan rank: phylum
6. Echinodermata
   common name: Echinoderm rank: phylum
7. Cnidaria
   common name: Cnidarian rank: phylum

The Canadian Arctic marine environment is subdivided in five biogeographic units as per Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s Arctic Biogeographic Units (DFO 2009): Arctic Archipelago, Arctic Basin, Eastern Arctic, Western Arctic and Hudson Bay Complex. Western, Northern and Eastern limits of the study area correspond to the Canadian Arctic Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). DFO (2009) Development of a Framework and Principles for the Biogeographic Classification of Canadian Marine Areas. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci. Advis. Rep. 2009/056, 17 pp.