South Florida Holocene coral sea-level database for samples collected from 1977 to 2017

Frequently anticipated questions:

• What does this data set describe?
  1. How might this data set be cited?
  2. What geographic area does the data set cover?
  3. What does it look like?
  4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?
  5. What is the general form of this data set?
  6. How does the data set represent geographic features?
  7. How does the data set describe geographic features?
• Who produced the data set?
  1. Who are the originators of the data set?
  2. Who also contributed to the data set?
  3. To whom should users address questions about the data?
• Why was the data set created?
• How was the data set created?
  1. From what previous works were the data drawn?
  2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?
  3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?
• How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?
  1. How well have the observations been checked?
  2. How accurate are the geographic locations?
  3. How accurate are the heights or depths?
  4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?
  5. How consistent are the relationships among the data, including topology?
• How can someone get a copy of the data set?
  1. Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data?
  2. Who distributes the data?
  3. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set?
  4. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?
  5. How can I download or order the data?
• Who wrote the metadata?

What does this data set describe?

1. How might this data set be cited?
   Stathakopoulos, Anastasios, and Toth, Lauren T., 20191212, South Florida Holocene coral sea-level database for samples collected from 1977 to 2017: U.S. Geological Survey Data Release doi:10.5066/P98QFBJ3, U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg, FL.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.5066/P98QFBJ3

   This is part of the following larger work.
   Stathakopoulos, Anastasios, Riegl, Bernhard M., and Toth, Lauren T., 2019, Revised Holocene coral sea-level database from the Florida reef tract, USA: Peer J, San Diego, CA.

2. What geographic area does the data set cover?

   West_Bounding_Coordinate: -83.048610
   East_Bounding_Coordinate: -80.064464
   North_Bounding_Coordinate: 26.254191
   South_Bounding_Coordinate: 24.434800
   

3. What does it look like?
4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?

   Beginning_Date: 1977

   Ending_Date: 2017

   Currentness_Reference:

   publication date

5. What is the general form of this data set?

   Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: Tabular digital data
   

6. How does the data set represent geographic features?
   1. How are geographic features stored in the data set?
      

      Indirect_Spatial_Reference: GPS coordinates are provided for all data (south Florida).
      

      This is a Point data set.
   2. What coordinate system is used to represent geographic features?
      Horizontal positions are specified in geographic coordinates, that is, latitude and longitude. Latitudes are given to the nearest 0.0198048202. Longitudes are given to the nearest 0.0217736476. Latitude and longitude values are specified in Decimal degrees. The horizontal datum used is World Geodetic System of 1984.
      The ellipsoid used is WGS_1984.
      The semi-major axis of the ellipsoid used is 6378137.0.
      The flattening of the ellipsoid used is 1/298.257223563.
      

      Vertical_Coordinate_System_Definition:

      Depth_System_Definition:

      Depth_Datum_Name: Mean sea level
      Depth_Resolution: 0.05
      Depth_Distance_Units: meters
      Depth_Encoding_Method: Attribute values
      

7. How does the data set describe geographic features?

   South Florida Holocene coral sea-level database

   Coral-based age and elevation data for use in sea-level studies or reconstructions. (Source: USGS)

   Location

   The area (city or region) of south Florida where the coral sample was collected. (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   Pompano Beach	The sample was collected from the nearshore reef habitats adjacent to the town of Pompano Beach, FL.
   Ft. Lauderdale Beach	The sample was collected from the nearshore reef habitats adjacent to the town of Ft. Lauderdale Beach, FL.
   Dania Beach	The sample was collected from the nearshore reef habitats adjacent to the town of Dania Beach, FL.
   Miami Beach	The sample was collected from the nearshore reef habitats adjacent to the town of Miami Beach, FL.
   Biscayne	The sample was collected from the nearshore reef habitats within Biscayne National Park, FL.
   Upper Florida Keys	The sample was collected from the nearshore reef habitats adjacent to the upper Florida Keys, which range from the southern end of Biscayne National Park to the southern end of Upper Matecumbe Key, FL.
   Middle Florida Keys	The sample was collected from the nearshore reef habitats adjacent to the middle Florida Keys, which range from the southern end of Upper Matecumbe Key to Bahia Honda Key, FL.
   Lower Florida Keys	The sample was collected from the nearshore reef habitats adjacent to the lower Florida Keys, which range from Bahia Honda Key to Key West, FL.
   Marquesas Keys	The sample was collected from the nearshore reef habitats around the Marquesas Keys located between Key West, FL and Dry Tortugas National Park.
   Dry Tortugas	The sample was collected from the nearshore reef habitats within Dry Tortugas National Park.

   Location number

   Corresponding figure map number assigned to each sample location, in the associated journal article (Stathakopoulos and others, 2018) drawn from north to south-west. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	1
   Maximum:	31

   Reference

   The citation for the study where the coral data were originally published. All references in this attribute are included as cross-references. (Source: USGS) Includes the last name of the author(s) and date of publication of the study. For publications with two authors, the last names of both authors are listed as well as the date of publication. For publication with three or more authors, the last name of the first author followed by "et al." (meaning and others) and the date of publication.

   Site name

   The name of the specific site where the coral sample was collected within the broader location. (Source: USGS) The name of the specific site where the coral sample was collected within the broader location. Site names were determined by the researcher(s) who collected the coral samples.

   Latitude

   The approximate latitude (in decimal degrees) where the coral sample was collected. Most of the samples were collected before GPS was available so the coordinates are generally estimates from Google Earth that were based on maps provided in the original studies. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	24.434800
   Maximum:	26.254191
   Units:	Decimal degrees

   Longitude

   The approximate longitude (in decimal degrees) where the coral sample was collected. Most of the samples were collected before GPS was available so the coordinates are generally estimates from Google Earth that were based on maps provided in the original studies. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	-83.048610
   Maximum:	-80.064464
   Units:	Decimal degrees

   Sample name

   A unique name for each coral sample included in the dataset. Sample names were typically obtained from the original publication describing the samples (see Reference attribute). In cases where both a U-series and radiocarbon age were measured on the same sample, the sub-samples were distinguished as "-a" for the U-series age and "-b" for the radiocarbon age. (Source: USGS) A unique name for each coral sample included in the dataset. Typically, the names combine an abbreviation of the site name and/or a core or sample number. Please see Reference to the original study for information about how the names of samples were designated in each study. In cases where both a U-series and radiocarbon age were measured on the same sample, the sub-samples were distinguished as "-a" for the U-series age and "-b" for the radiocarbon age.

   Reef tract

   An abbreviation for the part of the Florida reef tract where the sample was collected. (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   SFCRT	SFCRT=southeast Florida continental reef tract; includes the area of coral reef tract north of Biscayne National Park offshore of southeast Florida.
   FKRT	FKRT=Florida Keys reef tract; includes the reef area from Biscayne National Park through the waters south of Key West, FL.
   DTCRE	DTCRE=Dry Tortugas coral-reef ecosystem; includes the coral reefs of Dry Tortugas National Park and the Marquesas Islands west of Key West, FL.

   Taxon

   The taxon (genus or species) of the coral sample that was dated. Coral skeletons were identified to the species level whenever possible, but some coral species (for example, species in the genus Orbicella) could only be reliably identified to the genus level. (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   A. palmata	A. palmata=Acropora palmata
   P. strigosa	P. strigosa=Pseudodiploria strigosa
   M. cavernosa	M. cavernosa=Montastraea cavernosa
   Orbicella spp.	Orbicella spp.=Orbicella faveolata, Orbicella franksii, or Orbicella annularis
   D. labyrinthiformis	D. labyrinthiformis=Diploria labyrinthiformis
   S. siderea	S. siderea=Siderastrea siderea
   C. natans	C. natans=Colpophyllia natans
   A. cervicornis	A. cervicornis=Acropora cervicornis
   P. clivosa	P. clivosa=Pseudodiploria clivosa
   P. astreoides	P. astreoides=Porites astreoides
   S. intersepta	S. intersepta=Stephanocoenia intersepta
   Diploria sp.	Diploria sp.=the coral could not be identified to the species level, but was either Diploria labrynthiformis, Pseudodiploria strigosa, or Pseudodiploria clivosa
   Brain coral	Brain coral=the coral could not be identified to the species level, but was either Colpophyllia natans, Diploria labrynthiformis, Pseudodiploria strigosa, or Pseudodiploria clivosa
   Massive	Massive=the coral could not be identified to the species level, but it has a massive (domed) morphology rather than a branching morphology
   Unidentified	Unidentified=the coral species was not identified by the original researcher and it could not be relocated for identification in this study

   14C age (yrs)

   The measured 14C (radiocarbon) age of the coral sample, not corrected for the fractionation of 13C. This attribute was only reported if uncorrected 14C ages, rather than conventional 14C ages were reported in the original study (see Reference attribute). (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	865
   Maximum:	9440
   Units:	Radiocarbon years

   14C error (1 sigma; yrs)

   The one standard deviation (1 sigma) error in the uncorrected 14C (radiocarbon) age (in years). This attribute was only reported if uncorrected 14C ages, rather than conventional 14C ages were reported in the original study (see Reference attribute). (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	35
   Maximum:	224
   Units:	Radiocarbon years

   delta 13C

   The delta 13C value used to correct measured radiocarbon ages for the fractionation of 13C, which converts the measured radiocarbon age to a conventional radiocarbon age. This attribute was left blank if it was not reported or not measured in the original study (see Reference attribute) and the value could not be obtained by contacting the original researchers or radiocarbon laboratory. In cases where the original study reported only measured radiocarbon ages and the delta 13C value was not originally measured, a value of 0 +/- 4 per mil was used to convert the measured radiocarbon age to a conventional radiocarbon age using the conversion spreadsheet available at: http://calib.org/calib/fractionation.html. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	-3.61
   Maximum:	3.61
   Units:	per mil

   Conventional 14C age (yrs)

   The radiocarbon age (in years) of the sample corrected for the fractionation of 13C based on the measured or assumed delta 13C value. In cases where the original study reported only measured radiocarbon ages and the delta 13C value was not originally measured, a value of 0 +/- 4 per mil was used to convert the measured radiocarbon age to a conventional radiocarbon age using the conversion spreadsheet available at: http://calib.org/calib/fractionation.html. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	380
   Maximum:	9847
   Units:	Radiocarbon years

   Conventional 14C error (1 sigma; yrs)

   The one standard deviation (1 sigma) error (in years) in the conventional radiocarbon age, which has been corrected for the fractionation of 13C. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	20
   Maximum:	233
   Units:	Radiocarbon years

   Delta R (yrs)

   The local marine reservoir age offset, ΔR (Delta-R) values (in years). Values were calculated by Toth and others (2017) by subtracting the predicted radiocarbon age of the sample based on the marine calibration curve (Marine13), from the measured conventional radiocarbon age of that sample (Conventional 14C age). (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	-110.58
   Maximum:	11.43
   Units:	Radiocarbon years

   Delta R error (1 sigma; yrs)

   The 1-standard deviation (1 sigma) uncertainty associated with the estimates of ΔR (Delta-R). Calculated by Toth and others (2017) as the root-mean-square of the error associated with the conventional 14C age of the sample (14C age error) and the error associated with the predicted 14C age from the marine calibration curve (Marine13 14C age error). (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	17.13
   Maximum:	42.03
   Units:	Radiocarbon years

   -2 sigma range (yrs)

   The lower (younger) limit of the 2-standard deviation (2 sigma) range of the calibrated radiocarbon age of the sample in years before present (relative to 1950 CE). (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0
   Maximum:	10530
   Units:	years before present (relative to 1950 CE)

   +2 sigma range (yrs)

   The upper (older) limit of the 2-standard deviation (2 sigma) range of the calibrated radiocarbon age of the sample in years before present (relative to 1950 CE). (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0
   Maximum:	11110
   Units:	Years before present (relative to 1950 CE)

   Calibrated age (yrs cal BP)

   The median calibrated age of the sample in years before present (yrs cal BP) relative to 1950 CE. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0
   Maximum:	10806
   Units:	Years before present (relative to 1950 CE)

   U-series age (yrs BP)

   The U-series age of the sample corrected to years before present (relative to 1950 CE). (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	41
   Maximum:	10242
   Units:	Years before present (relative to 1950 CE)

   U-series error (2 sigma; yrs)

   The 2-standard deviation (2 sigma) uncertainty in U-series age of the sample corrected to years before present (relative to 1950 CE). (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	3
   Maximum:	924
   Units:	Years

   Recalculated U-series age (yrs BP)

   In cases where the U-series age originally reported and given in the "U-series age (yrs BP)" attribute was not calculated with the latest decay constants (Jaffey and others, 1971; Cheng and others 2013), the U-series ages provided in this attribute have been recalculated using those constants. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	41
   Maximum:	10242
   Units:	Years before present (relative to 1950 CE)

   Elevation (m MSL)

   The estimated elevation of the sample in meters relative to mean sea level (m MSL). In most cases the elevation reported by the original study was used (see Reference attribute); however, elevations originally reported relative to a geodetic datum were converted to MSL. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	-31.20
   Maximum:	0.15
   Units:	meters (relative to mean sea level)

   Elevation determination error (m; +/- 2 sigma)

   The 2-standard deviation (2 sigma) uncertainty in sample elevation in meters (m) based on the estimation of water depth in the field at the location where the sample or core was collected. Defined as 0.5 m based on the standard protocol of Hijma and others (2015) and Hibbert and others (2018). (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   0.5	The standard uncertainty suggested by Hijma and others (2015) and Hibbert and others (2018).

   Coring method error (m; +/- 2 sigma)

   The 2-standard deviation (2 sigma) uncertainty in sample elevation in meters (m) associated with samples collected using rotary coring. Defined as 0.15 m based on the standard protocol of Hijma and others (2015) and Hibbert and others (2018). (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   0.15	The standard uncertainty suggested by Hijma and others (2015) and Hibbert and others (2018).

   Sampling method error (m; +/- 2 sigma)

   The 2-standard deviation (2 sigma) uncertainty in sample elevation in meters (m) associated with sampling cores and outcrops. Defined as 0.01 m based on the standard protocol of Hijma and others (2015) and Hibbert and others (2018). (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   0.01	The standard uncertainty suggested by Hijma and others (2015) and Hibbert and others (2018).

   Elevation uncertainty (m; +/- 2 sigma)

   The total, 2-standard deviation (2 sigma) uncertainty in sample elevation in meters (m) calculated as the root-sum-square of the elevation determination error, the coring method error, and the sampling method error. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.50
   Maximum:	0.52
   Units:	The root-sum-square of the elevation determination error, the coring method error, and the sampling method error.

   Coral depth distribution range (m; 95% CI)

   The 95% confidence interval (CI) of the depth range in meters (m) across which a particular coral taxon is distributed based on the data provided by Hibbert and others (2018). Where possible Florida-specific depth distributions of coral taxa were used, but where those data were not available the depth distributions of the taxa throughout the Caribbean region were used instead. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	3.5
   Maximum:	22.0
   Units:	meters (relative to mean sea level)

   Paleo-water depth/Lower combined uncertainty (m; 2 sigma)

   The 2-standard deviation (2 sigma) uncertainty in the lower (deeper) limit of paleo-water depth of the coral sample in meters (m). This value is calculated as the root-sum-square of the elevation determination error, the coring method error, and the sampling method error. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.50
   Maximum:	0.52
   Units:	The root-sum-square of the elevation determination error, the coring method error, and the sampling method error.

   Paleo-water depth/Upper combined uncertainty (m; 2 sigma)

   The 2-standard deviation (2 sigma) uncertainty in the upper (shallower) limit of paleo-water depth of the coral sample in meters (m). This value is calculated as the root-sum-square of the elevation determination error, the coring method error, the sampling method error, and the coral depth distribution range. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	3.54
   Maximum:	22.01
   Units:	meters (relative to mean sea level)

   U-series screening (Pass/Fail)

   Indicates whether the U-series data passed the screening procedure described in Stathakopoulos and others (2019). U-series data that did not pass this screening procedure are not considered to be reliable. This attribute is left blank for samples that were dated using radiocarbon analysis. (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   Pass	The data passed the U-series screening procedure.
   Fail	The data failed the U-series screening procedure.

   Basal attachment (Yes/No)

   Indicates whether the sample had an observable basal attachment to the underlying substrate indicating that it was preserved/collected in situ (in growth position). Left blank if the sample was not available for observation. (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   Yes	The sample had a clearly observable basal attachment.
   No	The sample did not have a clearly observable basal attachment.
   Yes?	The sample appears to have a basal attachment, but it was not as clear as the samples characterized as "Yes".

   Corallite orientation (Normal/Inverted/Horizontal/Indeterminate)

   Indicates the orientation of the corallites of the coral that the sample was collected from. Left blank if the sample was not available for observation. (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   Normal	Normal=the corallites were oriented in an upward vertical direction, which is the direction they grow. Indicates that the sample is likely in growth position.
   Normal?	Normal?=some, but not all of the corallites were oriented in an upward vertical direction or it is not clear whether the corallites were oriented vertically throughout.
   Indeterminate	Indeterminate=It was unclear from observation of the sample whether the corallites were oriented in an upward vertical direction or not.
   Inverted	Inverted=the corallites of the sample were oriented in a downward direction, indicating that they were not preserved in growth position and may have been transported.
   Inverted?	Inverted?=some, but not all of the corallites were oriented in an downward direction or it is not clear whether the corallites were oriented vertically throughout.
   Horizontal	Horizontal=the corallites of the sample were oriented horizontally, indicating that they were not preserved in growth position and may have been transported.

   Geopetal (Normal/Inverted/No)

   Describes the orientation of geopetals (cavity filled with sediment) in the coral that the sample was collected from, if present. Left blank if the sample was not available for observation. (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   Normal	Normal=the geopetal(s) of the sample were filled with sediment in the lowermost portion of the cavity. Indicates that the sample is likely in growth position.
   Inverted	Inverted=the geopetal(s) of the sample were filled with sediment in the uppermost portion of the cavity or were filled with sediment on the side of a cavity, indicating that they were not preserved in growth position and may have been transported.
   Normal?	Normal?=the geopetal(s) of the sample appear to be filled with sediment in the lowermost portion of the cavity, but not as clearly as for the samples categorized as "Normal". Indicates that the sample is likely in growth position.
   Inverted?	Inverted?=the geopetal(s) of the sample appear to be filled with sediment in the uppermost portion of the cavity or were filled with sediment on the side of a cavity, indicating that they were not preserved in growth position and may have been transported. The inversion of the geopetal(s) is not as clear as for the samples categorized as "Inverted".
   No	No=No geopetals were observed in the coral that the sample was collected from.

   Dominant coral composition

   Describes the dominant coral species composition of the 0.5 m sections of reef material in the core box bounding the sample. Left blank if the sample was not available for observation. (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   A. palmata	A. palmata=the section of the reef containing the sample was dominated by Acropora palmata reef framework.
   Massive	Massive=the section of the reef containing the sample was dominated by corals with massive (domed) morphologies.
   Mixed	Mixed=the section of the reef containing the sample was composed of a mix of coral taxa with no type of corals being dominant.
   A. palmata, Mixed	Part of the bounding reef is dominated by Acropora palmata framework. The other part is a mix of various coral species.
   A. palmata, A. cervicornis, Sand	Sample was located in a section of reef dominated by Acropora palmata, Acropora cervicornis, and/or sand. See "Taphonomic screening notes for adjacent 50 cm-sections of recovered core material" attribute for more information.
   A. palmata, A. cervicornis	Sample was located in a section of reef dominated by Acropora palmata and/or Acropora cervicornis.
   Sand, A. palmata rubble	Sample is located within a sand interval containing A. palmata rubble.
   Mixed, massive	The section of the reef containing the sample was composed of a mix of coral taxa with no type of corals being dominant transitioning to a section where massive corals were dominant.
   Massive/Mixed?	The section of the reef containing the sample was difficult to discern but was likely composed of massive corals or of a mix of coral taxa with no type of corals being dominant.

   Intergrown vermetids, H. rubrum, and/or CCA (Yes/No)

   Indicates whether intergrown vermetid worms, the benthic foraminifer Homotrema rubrum (H. rubrum), and/or crustose coralline algae crusts were present on the coral that the sample was collected from. This characteristic indicates that the sample was situated in a shallow, reef-crest environment (according to Blanchon and Perry, 2004). Left blank if the sample was not available for observation. (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   Yes	Yes=intergrown vermetid worms, the benthic foraminifer Homotrema rubrum (H. rubrum), and/or crustose coralline algae crusts were present on the coral that the sample was collected from.
   No	No=intergrown vermetid worms, the benthic foraminifer Homotrema rubrum (H. rubrum), and/or crustose coralline algae crusts were not present on the coral that the sample was collected from.
   Yes?	Yes?=intergrown vermetid worms, the benthic foraminifer Homotrema rubrum (H. rubrum), and/or crustose coralline algae crusts were most likely present on the coral that the sample was collected from, but their presence was not as clear as in samples indicated with "Yes".

   Thickness of intergrown vermetids, H. rubrum, and/or CCA (Thin [mm], Thick [cm], Thin-Thick [mm-cm])

   If intergrown vermetid worms, the benthic foraminifer Homotrema rubrum (H. rubrum), and/or CCA were present, this attribute indicates the thickness of those crusts. Left blank if the sample was not available for observation or those encrusters were not observed. (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   Thin	Thin=The crust(s) of intergrown vermetids, H. rubrum, and/or CCA were millimeters (mm) thick: <1 centimeter (cm).
   Thick	Thick=The crust(s) of intergrown vermetids, H. rubrum, and/or CCA were more than 1 cm thick.
   Thin-Thick	Thin-Thick=The crust(s) of intergrown vermetids, H. rubrum, and/or CCA varied in thickness with some sections <1 cm thick and some > 1 cm thick.
   Thin?	Thin?=The crust(s) of intergrown vermetids, H. rubrum, and/or CCA were likely millimeters (mm) thick: <1 centimeter (cm), but this could not be as definitively determined as those samples indicated with "Thin".

   Sample quality

   An overall rank of the quality of the sample based on all of the screening parameters and characterization of the samples. Ranges from 0-3 with 0 being the highest rank. (Source: USGS)

   Value	Definition
   3	3=lowest quality; the sample should be excluded because a) the core was not available for observation and no explicit mention of in situ characteristics were made in the original publication (see "Reference" attribute), b) the sample did not pass U-series screening (either performed in the original publication, or described in Stathakopoulos and others [2019]), and/or c) the sample did not pass diagenetic screening if performed in the original publication (see "Reference" attribute (as in, X-ray diffraction or Scanning Electron microscope analyses).
   2	2=sample should be excluded because it could not be confidently located within the core and/or the sample possessed inverted corallites and/or geopetals (indicating that the sample was not in situ).
   1	1=sample possessed some ambiguous features (for example, corallite orientation was indeterminate, but possessed a normal geopetal) or were otherwise not clearly definitive.
   0	0=the sample had clearly distinguishable in situ characteristics (for example, normal corallite orientation and no other ambiguous features).

   Taphonomic screening notes for adjacent 50 cm sections of recovered core material

   Provides additional notes about the screening of the samples. (Source: USGS) Provides general notes describing the samples (for example, the observable degree of degradation, the corallite orientation, etc.) and the adjacent material in the reef. Additional complimentary information for most cores in the form of detailed core logs and core photographs are available at https://doi.org/10.5066/F7NV9HJX.

   Additional notes

   Provides additional, relevant notes about the sample including supplemental information about radiometric dating and sample elevation. (Source: USGS) Provides ancillary notes about the sample.

Who produced the data set?

1. Who are the originators of the data set? (may include formal authors, digital compilers, and editors)
   • Anastasios Stathakopoulos
   • Lauren T. Toth
2. Who also contributed to the data set?
3. To whom should users address questions about the data?
   Anastasios Stathakopoulos

   Southeast Region

   Oceanographer

   600 4Th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   United States

   727-502-8136 (voice)

   astathakopoulos@usgs.gov

Why was the data set created?

Holocene coral data collected throughout south Florida were compiled and characterized to evaluate existing models of Holocene relative sea-level change and for use in future sea-level reconstructions.

How was the data set created?

1. From what previous works were the data drawn?
2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?

   Date: 2018 (process 1 of 3)

   Radiometric dating and screening procedures: Samples in this database have been analyzed by uranium-series (U-series) and radiocarbon dating methods. U-series ages were measured using either thermal ionization mass spectrometry or inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Ages reported in the original studies were recalculated using the most recent decay constants reported by Cheng and others (2013) for 230Th and 234U and by Jaffey and others (1971) for 238U, where appropriate. U-series data were screened for: open-system behavior indicated by 234U initial values outside of 137–157 per mil (‰) and incorporation of detrital thorium indicated by 232Th values >2 parts per billion (ppb). In addition, researchers screened the 238U data for values outside of the typical ranges of 2800–3800 ppb for acroporid corals and 2000–3200 ppb for massive corals similar to Toth and others (2017). Samples that did not pass the screening procedure have the potential for diagenetic alteration, which could lead to erroneous age calculations. Radiocarbon ages of corals were determined using standard, bulk radiocarbon dating or accelerator mass spectrometry. If no conventional 14C ages or δ13C values were originally reported then USGS scientists corrected 14C ages to conventional 14C ages, using a δ13C value of 0 ± 4 ‰ with the Calib spreadsheet "d13ccorr.xls" (http://calib.org/calib/fractionation.html). Conventional 14C ages were converted to calibrated calendar years before present (where “present” is 1950 Common Era [CE]) using the Marine 13 calibration curve in the CALIB 7.0.2 computer program accessible at, http://calib.org/calib/. The time-varying ΔR (local marine reservoir correction offsets) values calculated by Toth and others (2017; https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20161074) were used for this calculation.

   Date: 2018 (process 2 of 3)

   Characterization of the samples: Every dated sample identified from the literature was first cross-referenced with the USGS Core Archive (https://doi.org/10.5066/F7319TR3) to determine if the core material was physically available for analysis. If samples were not present in the archive, researchers relied on the information and interpretations provided in the original publication (see “Reference” attribute) to evaluate sample quality. Samples that were stored in the archive were visually inspected to identify taphonomic characteristics that aided in determining whether the samples are in situ, and ultimately, whether they are suitable sea-level indicators. The coral samples were assessed for the presence of: basal attachment surfaces (which form when a coral grows and encrusts its substrate), normally-oriented (in other words, vertical) corallites, normally-oriented geopetals (cavities filled with sediment), and presence and/or thickness of intergrown vermetid worms, crustose coralline algae (CCA), and the benthic foraminifer Homotrema rubrum. USGS researchers also described the 50 centimeters (cm) of core material above and below each dated sample to better characterize the section that the sample was emplaced within and to determine the dominant framework composition of that section (in other words, massive vs. A. palmata corals). Furthermore, any obvious discrepancies between observations of the cores and the published literature were corrected and updated in the database (the most common discrepancies were misidentification of coral species). The overall characterization of the samples was used to rank each sample (from 0–3, with 0 being the highest rank) in terms of the quality and reliability of the sea-level data it could provide. Samples were excluded outright (rank = 3) if one of the following criteria were met: a) the core was not available for observation and no explicit mention of in situ characteristics were made in the original publication, b) the sample did not pass U-series screening (either performed in the original publication, or described above), and/or c) the sample did not pass diagenetic screening if performed in the original publication (in other words, X-ray diffraction or Scanning Electron microscope analyses). Samples were also excluded (rank = 2) if researchers could not confidently locate a sample within its section and/or the sample possessed inverted corallites and/or geopetals (indicating that the sample was not in situ). For samples that possessed some ambiguous features (for example, corallite orientation was indeterminate, but possessed a normal geopetal) or were otherwise not clearly definitive, a rank =1 was assigned, whereas those that had clearly distinguished in situ characteristics (for example, normal corallite orientation and no other ambiguous features) were assigned a rank = 0.

   Date: 13-Oct-2020 (process 3 of 3)

   Added keywords section with USGS persistent identifier as theme keyword. Person who carried out this activity:
   

   U.S. Geological Survey

   Attn: VeeAnn A. Cross

   Marine Geologist

   384 Woods Hole Road

   Woods Hole, MA
   

   508-548-8700 x2251 (voice)

   508-457-2310 (FAX)

   vatnipp@usgs.gov

3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?
   Toth, LT, Stathakopoulos, A, and Kuffner, IB, 2018, Descriptive core logs, high-resolution images and derived data for Holocene reef cores collected from 1976 to 2017 along the Florida Keys reef tract: U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg, FL.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.5066/F7NV9HJX

   Banks, KW, Riegl, BM, Shinn, EA, Piller, WE, and Dodge, RE, 2007, Geomorphology of the Southeast Florida continental reef tract (Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach Counties, USA): Coral Reefs, Springer, Berlin, Germany.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-007-0231-0

   Brock, JC, Palaseanu-Lovejoy, M, Poore, RZ, Nayegandhi, A, and Wright, CW, 2010, Holocene aggradation of the Dry Tortugas coral reef ecosystem: Coral Reefs, Springer, Berlin, Germany.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-010-0658-6

   Lidz, BH, Reich, CD, and Shinn, EA, 2003, Regional Quaternary submarine geomorphology in the Florida Keys: GSA Bulletin, Geological Society of America, McLean, VA.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(2003)115%3C0845:RQSGIT%3E2.0.CO;2

   Lighty, RG, Macintyre, IG, and Stuckenrath, R, 1978, Submerged early Holocene barrier reef south-east Florida shelf: Nature, Springer Nature, London, England.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1038/276059a0

   Ludwig, KR, Muhs, DR, Simmons, KR, Halley, RB, and Shinn, EA, 1996, Sea-level records at ~80 ka from tectonically stable platforms: Florida and Bermuda: Geology, Geological Society of America, McLean, VA.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(1996)024<0211:SLRAKF>2.3.CO;2

   Mallinson, D, Hine, A, Hallock, P, Locker, S, Shinn, E, Naar, D, Donahue, B, and Weaver, D, 2003, Development of small carbonate banks on the south Florida platform margin: response to sea level and climate change: Marine Geology, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-3227(03)00141-5

   Multer, HG, Gischler, E, Lundberg, J, Simmons, KR, and Shinn, EA, 2002, Key Largo limestone revisited: Pleistocene shelf-edge facies, Florida Keys, USA: Facies, Springer, Berlin, Germany.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02668083

   Precht, WF, Macintyre, IG, Dodge, RE, Banks, K, and Fisher, L, 2000, Backstepping of Holocene reefs along Florida’s east coast: Proceedings of the 9th International Coral Reef Symposium, International Society for Reef Studies, Bali, Indonesia.

   Reich, C, Halley, RB, Hickey, T, and Swarzenski, P, 2006, Groundwater characterization and assessment of contaminants in marine areas of Biscayne National Park: National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO.

   Online Links:

   • https://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/reports/bisc_gw_char/index.html

   Reich, CD, Hickey, TD, DeLong, KL, Poore, RZ, and Brock, JC, 2009, Holocene core logs and site statistics for modern patch-reef cores: Biscayne National Park, Florida: U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.

   Online Links:

   • https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2009/1246/pdf/ofr2009-1246.pdf

   Robbin, DM, 1981, Subaerial CaCO3 crust: A tool for timing reef initiation and defining sea level changes: Proceedings of the 4th International Coral Reef Symposium, International Society for Reef Studies, Manila, Philippines.

   Robbin, DM, 1984, A new Holocene sea-level curve for the upper Florida Keys and Florida reef tract In: Gleason PJ (ed) Environments of south Florida, present and past: Miami Geological Society, Miami, FL.

   Scholl, DW, 1964, Recent sedimentary record in mangrove swamps and rise in sea level over the southwestern coast of Florida: Part 2: Marine Geology, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-3227(64)90047-7

   Scholl, DW, and Stuiver, M, 1967, Recent submergence of southern Florida: a comparison with adjacent coasts and other eustatic data: GSA Bulletin, Geological Society of America, McLean, VA.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1967)78[437:RSOSFA]2.0.CO;2

   Shinn, EA, 1980, Geologic history of Grecian Rocks, Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary: Bulletin of Marine Science, University of Miami, Miami, FL.

   Online Links:

   • https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/umrsmas/bullmar/1980/00000030/00000003/art00010

   Shinn, EA, Hudson, JH, Halley, RB, and Lidz, BH, 1977, Topographic control and accumulation rate of some Holocene coral reefs: South Florida and Dry Tortugas: Proceedings of the 3rd International Coral Reef Symposium, International Society for Reef Studies, Miami, FL.

   Online Links:

   • https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/70121477

   Shinn, EA, Hudson, JH, Robbin, DM, and Lidz, BH, 1981, Spurs and grooves revisited: construction versus erosion, Looe Key Reef, Florida: Proceedings of the 4th International Coral Reef Symposium, International Society for Reef Studies, Manila, Philippines.

   Online Links:

   • https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/70122248

   Stathakopoulos, A, and Riegl, BM, 2015, Accretion history of mid-Holocene coral reefs from the southeast Florida continental reef tract, USA: Coral Reefs, Springer, Berlin, Germany.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-014-1233-3

   Toscano, MA, and Lundberg, J, 1998, Early Holocene sea-level record from submerged fossil reefs on the southeast Florida margin: Geology, Geological Society of America, McLean, VA.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(1998)026<0255:EHSLRF>2.3.CO;2

   Toth, LT, Kuffner, IB, Cheng, H, and Edwards, RL, 2015, A new record of the late Pleistocene coral, Pocillopora palmata, from the Dry Tortugas, Florida Reef Tract, USA: PALAIOS, SEPM Society for Sedimentary Geology, Broken Arrow, OK.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.2110/palo.2015.030

   Toth, LT, Cheng, H, Edwards, RL, Ashe, E, and Richey, JN, 2017, Millennial-scale variability in the local radiocarbon reservoir age of south Florida during the Holocene: Quaternary Geochronology, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quageo.2017.07.005

   Turmel, RJ, and Swanson, RG, 1976, The development of Rodriguez Bank, a Holocene mudbank in the Florida reef track: SEPM Society for Sedimentary Geology, Broken Arrow, OK.

   Cheng, H, Edwards, RL, Shen, C-C, Polyak, VJ, Asmerom, Y, Woodhead, J, Hellstrom, J, Wang, Y, Kong, X, Spötl, C, Wang, X, and Calvin Alexander Jr, E, 2013, Improvements in 230Th dating, 230Th and 234U half-life values, and U–Th isotopic measurements by multi-collector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2013.04.006

   Jaffey, AH, Flynn, KF, Glendenin, LE, Bentley, WC, and Essling, AM, 1971, Precision measurement of half-lives and specific activities of 235U and 238U: Physical Review C, American Physical Society, College Park, MD.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.4.1889

   Blanchon, P, and Perry, CT, 2004, Taphonomic differentiation of Acropora palmata facies in cores from Campeche Bank Reefs, Gulf of Mexico: Sedimentology, John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Oxford, United Kingdom.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3091.2003.00610.x

   Hibbert, FD, Williams, FH, Fallon, SJ, and Rohling, EJ, 2018, A database of biological and geomorphological sea-level markers from the Last Glacial Maximum to present: Scientific Data, Nature Research, London, England.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2018.88

   Hijma, MP, Engelhart, SE, Törnqvist, TE, Horton, BP, Hu, P, and Hill, DF, 2015, A protocol for a geological sea-level database: Handbook of Sea-Level Research, John Wiley and Sons, West Sussex, United Kingdom.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118452547.ch34

How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?

1. How well have the observations been checked?
   No formal attribute accuracy tests were conducted.
2. How accurate are the geographic locations?
   No formal positional accuracy tests were conducted.
3. How accurate are the heights or depths?
   No formal positional accuracy tests were conducted.
4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?
   Blank fields within the dataset indicate that a particular attribute was not measured or reported for that sample.
5. How consistent are the relationships among the observations, including topology?
   No formal logical accuracy tests were conducted.

How can someone get a copy of the data set?

Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data?

Access_Constraints: None
Use_Constraints:

Public domain data from the U.S. Government are freely redistributable with proper metadata and source attribution. The U.S. Geological Survey requests to be acknowledged as originator of these data in future products or derivative research.

1. Who distributes the data set? (Distributor 1 of 1)
   
   Anastasios Stathakopoulos

   Southeast Region: St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center

   Oceanographer

   600 4Th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   United States

   727-502-8136 (voice)

   astathakopoulos@usgs.gov
2. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set?
3. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?

   Although these data have been processed successfully on a computer system at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data on any other system, or for general or scientific purposes, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. The USGS shall not be held liable for improper or incorrect use of the data described or contained herein. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

4. How can I download or order the data?
   • Availability in digital form:

     Data format:	CSV (Comma Separated Values), XLSX (version None)
     Network links:	https://coastal.er.usgs.gov/data-release/doi-P98QFBJ3/data/South_Florida_Holocene_coral_sea-level_database.zip

   • Cost to order the data: None

Who wrote the metadata?

Dates:

Last modified: 12-Apr-2021

Metadata author:

Anastasios Stathakopoulos

Southeast Region

Oceanographer

600 4Th Street South

St. Petersburg, FL

United States

727-502-8136 (voice)

astathakopoulos@usgs.gov

Metadata standard:

Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (FGDC-STD-001-1998)