Sea-floor videos and location of bottom video tracklines collected in Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts, in May 2016 and May 2017 by the U.S. Geological Survey during field activities 2016-005-FA and 2017-022-FA (MP4 video files and polyline shapefile)

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?
   U.S. Geological Survey, 20201116, Sea-floor videos and location of bottom video tracklines collected in Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts, in May 2016 and May 2017 by the U.S. Geological Survey during field activities 2016-005-FA and 2017-022-FA (MP4 video files and polyline shapefile): data release DOI:10.5066/P9UK5IOF, U.S. Geological Survey, Coastal and Marine Hazards and Resources Program, Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center, Woods Hole, Massachusetts.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.5066/P9UK5IOF
   • https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5f11eb6882ce21d4c409d2cc

   This is part of the following larger work.
   Huntley, Emily C., Ackerman, Seth D., Brothers, Laura L., Blackwood, Dann S., Irwin, Barry J., and Pendleton, Elizabeth A., 2020, Sea-floor sediment and imagery data collected in Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts, 2016 and 2017: data release DOI:10.5066/P9UK5IOF, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.5066/P9UK5IOF

   Other_Citation_Details:

   Suggested citation: Huntley, E.C., Ackerman, S.D., Brothers, L.L., Blackwood, D.S., Irwin, B.J., and Pendleton, E.A., 2020, Sea-floor sediment and imagery data collected in Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts, 2016 and 2017: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/P9UK5IOF.

2. What geographic area does the data set cover?

   West_Bounding_Coordinate: -70.173007
   East_Bounding_Coordinate: -70.037137
   North_Bounding_Coordinate: 41.436385
   South_Bounding_Coordinate: 41.320671
   

3. What does it look like?

   https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/file/get/5f11eb6882ce21d4c409d2cc/?name=2016-005-FA_and_2017-022-FA_videos_browse.jpg (JPEG)

   Map of sea-floor video locations in the survey area in Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts.

4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?

   Beginning_Date: 02-May-2016

   Ending_Date: 04-May-2017

   Currentness_Reference:

   Data were collected on the following dates: 20160502, 20160503, 20160507, and 20170504

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

   Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: raster and vector digital data
   

6. How does the data set represent geographic features?
   1. How are geographic features stored in the data set?
      This is a Vector data set. It contains the following vector data types (SDTS terminology):
      • String (79)
   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 0.0000001. Longitudes are given to the nearest 0.0000001. Latitude and longitude values are specified in Decimal degrees. The horizontal datum used is D_WGS_1984.
      The ellipsoid used is WGS_1984.
      The semi-major axis of the ellipsoid used is 6378137.000000.
      The flattening of the ellipsoid used is 1/298.257224.
      
7. How does the data set describe geographic features?

   2016-005-FA_and_2017-022-FA_videos

   Bottom video tracklines and bottom videos collected during USGS field activities 2016-005-FA and 2017-022-FA in Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts, in 2016 and 2017. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey)

   FID

   Internal feature number. (Source: Esri) Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated.

   Shape

   Feature geometry. (Source: Esri) Coordinates defining the features.

   FIELD_NO

   Site number as assigned in the field. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey) String used to distinguish site numbers.

   LINENAME

   Name of bottom video used to uniquely identify between surveys, cameras, and video files: e.g., 2016005FA_SeaViewer_20160502T134251Z_CLIP0000045.mp4 where 2016005FA refers to the field activity identifier, SeaViewer refers to the camera, 20160502T134251Z refers to the date and start time in the ISO 8601 standard (YYYYMMDD T [time separator] HHMMSS Z [Zulu/UTC time]), and CLIP0000045 refers to the sequential video number assigned to the video by the camera. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey) String used to distinguish bottom videos.

   STARTTIME

   Start time of the bottom video drift in UTC in the format HH:MM:SS. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey) String used to distinguish UTC start times of the bottom video.

   ENDTIME

   End time of the bottom video drift in UTC in the format HH:MM:SS. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey) String used to distinguish UTC end times of the bottom video.

   JD

   Julian day that the bottom video was collected based on UTC time; Julian day is the integer number representing the interval of time in days since January 1 of the year. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	123
   Maximum:	128
   Units:	Julian days
   Resolution:	1

   DATE

   Date based on UTC time that the bottom video was collected in the format YYYYMMDD. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey) String used to distinguish dates.

   YEAR

   Year that the bottom video was collected. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	2016
   Maximum:	2017
   Units:	years
   Resolution:	1

   LENGTH_M

   Length in meters of the bottom video trackline. Length was calculated in WGS 84 UTM Zone 19N. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	5.5
   Maximum:	216.4
   Units:	meters
   Resolution:	0.1

   CAMERA

   Camera used to collect bottom video. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey) String used to distinguish between different camera models mounted on the sampler; however, for these surveys, only one camera was used to collect bottom video.

   FA_ID

   Serial number assigned to the field activity during which the bottom video was collected. This value is in the format YYYY-XXX-FA where YYYY is the survey year, XXX is the number assigned to the activity within that year, and FA indicates Field Activity. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey) String used to distinguish field activities by year and ID number.

   DEVICE_ID

   Sampling device used to collect the bottom video. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey) String used to identify the sampling configuration used during the survey.

   VEHICLE_ID

   Vehicle (ship) used to collect data during the field activity. (Source: U.S. Geological Survey) String used to identify the survey vessel.

Who produced the data set?

1. Who are the originators of the data set? (may include formal authors, digital compilers, and editors)
   • U.S. Geological Survey
2. Who also contributed to the data set?
3. To whom should users address questions about the data?
   Seth Ackerman

   U.S. Geological Survey

   Geologist

   384 Woods Hole Rd.

   Woods Hole, MA
   

   USA

   508-548-8700 x2315 (voice)

   508-457-2310 (FAX)

   sackerman@usgs.gov

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?

   Date: 04-May-2017 (process 1 of 6)

   Step 1: Collected data.
   Two marine geological surveys were conducted in Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts, in May 2016 and May 2017. The survey vessel occupied one of the target sites and the MiniSEABOSS was deployed off the vessel's starboard side in 2016 and off the vessel's stern in 2017. The MiniSEABOSS was equipped with a modified Van Veen grab sampler, two GoPro HERO4 Black digital cameras, an oblique downward-looking SeaViewer 6000 HD Sea-Drop video camera with a topside feed, and a dive light to illuminate the sea floor for video and photograph collection. The elements of this particular MiniSEABOSS system were held within a stainless-steel frame that measured ~1 x 1 meter. The frame had a stabilizer fin that oriented the system as it drifted over the seabed. Two red lasers were set 20 centimeters apart (both as they are mounted on the MiniSEABOSS frame and as seen in photographs and video on the seabed) for scale measurements. The red laser dots can usually be seen in the sea-floor photos and videos depending on the bottom type and distance to the sea floor. A third laser is positioned at an angle so that when it intersects the other lasers, the MiniSEABOSS is at the optimum height (approximately 75 centimeters) off the bottom for a photograph. The winch operator lowered the sampler until the sea floor was observed in the topside live video feed. Generally, the vessel and sampler drifted with wind and current for up to a few minutes to ensure a decent photo with a clear view of the sea floor was acquired. Bottom video was also recorded during the drift from the oblique downward-looking SeaViewer 6000 HD Sea-Drop video camera directly to a solid-state drive using an Odyssey7 video recorder. Then, the winch operator lowered the Van Veen sampler until it rested on the sea floor. When the system was raised, the Van Veen sampler closed and collected a sample as it was lifted off the sea floor. The sampler was recovered to the deck of the survey vessel where a subsample was taken for grain-size analysis at the sediment laboratory at the USGS Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center. A total of 76 sites were occupied with the MiniSEABOSS: 55 sites were occupied aboard the R/V Rafael in May 2016 during field activity 2016-005-FA, and 21 sites were occupied aboard the R/V Tioga in May 2017 during field activity 2017-022-FA. Bottom video was collected at all but one site (site 2016-005-043 does not have a video). Person who carried out this activity:
   

   Seth Ackerman

   U.S. Geological Survey

   Geologist

   384 Woods Hole Rd.

   Woods Hole, MA
   

   USA

   508-548-8700 x2315 (voice)

   508-457-2310 (FAX)

   sackerman@usgs.gov

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • Original bottom video

   Date: 2017 (process 2 of 6)

   Step 2: Acquired and processed navigation.
   During field activity 2016-005-FA, DGPS navigation from a Hemisphere DGPS receiver was logged through HYPACK navigation software and a DataBridge data logger. The DGPS was set to receive fixes at a 2-second interval in geographic coordinates (WGS 84). Dates and times were recorded in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). Log files for each MiniSEABOSS deployment were saved in text format and then combined for each Julian day. An AWK script (awkseth.gprmc.16005.awk) was used to parse the GPRMC navigation string from the log files and create ASCII Comma Separated Values (CSV) text files. The output files were merged and then reformatted using an AWK script (nav_time_reformat.awk), creating a processed navigation CSV text file for the survey (2016-005-FA_OdysseyAudioStamp_nav_ALL.csv). For field activity 2017-022-FA, a GPS log file in text format for the R/V Tioga was provided by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. The navigation was collected at a 1-second interval in geographic coordinates (WGS 84), and dates and times were recorded in UTC. An AWK script (awksethTioga.gprmc.17022.awk) was used to parse the GPRMC navigation string from the log file, creating a processed navigation CSV text file for the survey (2017022FA_TiogaShip_nav.csv). Person who carried out this activity:
   

   Seth Ackerman

   U.S. Geological Survey

   Geologist

   384 Woods Hole Rd.

   Woods Hole, MA
   

   USA

   508-548-8700 x2315 (voice)

   508-457-2310 (FAX)

   sackerman@usgs.gov

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • Processed navigation files

   Date: Dec-2019 (process 3 of 6)

   Step 3: Processed video files.
   The original video files were copied from the Odyssey7 solid-state drive to the processing computer. A shell script (do_concat_and_TCBurn.sda) was run on the original video files to join the video clips for each site (the Odyssey7 splits clips into less than 4 GB segments), burn the GPS date and time in UTC on to the upper right corner of the video, and transcode the video from MOV to MP4 format. The script also created a text file for each survey with the date, start time, and duration of each video recording. The videos were then clipped to the duration that the camera was within view of the sea floor as needed. One video (clip 100) was of two deployments at the same site, so it was split to create separate videos for each deployment and clipped to the duration that the camera was within view of the sea floor. The text files with the date, start time, and duration of each video recording for each survey were updated with the start times and durations of the clipped videos. The videos were renamed to include the field activity identifier, camera, and date and start time in the ISO 8601 standard (YYYYMMDD T [time separator] HHMMSS Z [Zulu/UTC time]) in the filename. Person who carried out this activity:
   

   Seth Ackerman

   U.S. Geological Survey

   Geologist

   384 Woods Hole Rd.

   Woods Hole, MA
   

   USA

   508-548-8700 x2315 (voice)

   508-457-2310 (FAX)

   sackerman@usgs.gov

   Data sources used in this process:

   • Original bottom video

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • Final bottom video
   • Start times/durations text files

   Date: Dec-2019 (process 4 of 6)

   Step 4: Interpolated to create 1-second navigation.
   The navigation fixes were interpolated to create 1-second navigation. This was done because the application used to geotag the bottom photos would have interpolated between fixes; therefore, the navigation was interpolated so that the sediment and imagery data could be mapped using the same 1-second navigation. To interpolate the 2016 navigation data, first, a column of the original source filename was deleted from the processed navigation CSV text file (2016-005-FA_OdysseyAudioStamp_nav_ALL.csv). Next, a shapefile was created from the CSV file in Esri ArcGIS (version 10.3.1) and projected to WGS 84 UTM Zone 19N so that the distance in meters between the navigation fixes could be calculated. Then, the Generate Near Table tool was run using the planar method with the input and output features set to the UTM navigation shapefile and with the option checked to find only the closest feature. The output table was used to identify erroneous fixes, and two erroneous fixes were deleted from the navigation CSV text file. A Jupyter Notebook Python script (Interp_NAV_Dec2019_for_Nantucket2016-005-FA.ipynb) was run to interpolate and create a CSV text file of 1-second navigation. The original 2-second fixes were logged only when the video was recorded, so the script also interpolated between the end point of a video trackline and the start point of the next trackline. To create a final file of 1-second navigation, the points between the video trackline start and end times were extracted (which removed the interpolated positions during the transits between the video tracklines) and were saved as a CSV text file (out_interp_2016Nantucket_sel_for_gpx.csv). Finally, the CSV file was reorganized and formatted to have fields of the latitude, longitude, hours, minutes, seconds, Julian day, year, field activity ID, and Julian day and time. For the 2017 survey, navigation data were logged for the full Julian day, including when the survey vessel was at the dock and when it was transiting to, from, and between the sampling sites. First, the navigation data from 13:30:00 to 19:14:59 were extracted from the processed navigation CSV text file (2017022FA_TiogaShip_nav.csv) to remove the navigation logged at, departing, and returning to the dock. Next, columns of the original source filename and time (the hours, minutes, and seconds were listed individually in other columns) were deleted from the CSV text file, and leading spaces were deleted as needed. Then, a shapefile was created from the CSV file in Esri ArcGIS (version 10.3.1) and projected to WGS 84 UTM Zone 19N so that the distance in meters between the navigation fixes could be calculated. The Generate Near Table tool was run using the planar method with the input and output features set to the UTM navigation shapefile and with the option checked to find only the closest feature. The output table was used to identify erroneous fixes, but no erroneous fixes were identified. The navigation data, however, were noisy. To smooth the data, the coordinates were rounded from seven to six decimal places and every fourth fix was extracted. A Jupyter Notebook Python script (Interp_NAV_Dec2019_for_Nantucket2017-022-FA.ipynb) was run to interpolate and create a CSV text file of 1-second navigation (2017022FA_TiogaShip_nav_4secint_round6_interp_for_gpx.csv). Finally, the CSV file was reorganized and formatted to have fields of the latitude, longitude, hours, minutes, seconds, Julian day, year, field activity ID, and Julian day and time to create a final CSV file of 1-second navigation for the survey. This process step and the subsequent process steps were performed by the same person, Emily Huntley. Person who carried out this activity:
   

   Emily Huntley

   U.S. Geological Survey

   Geographer/Database Specialist

   384 Woods Hole Rd.

   Woods Hole, MA
   

   USA

   508-548-8700 (voice)

   508-457-2310 (FAX)

   ehuntley@contractor.usgs.gov

   Data sources used in this process:

   • Processed navigation files

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • Final processed navigation files

   Date: Dec-2019 (process 5 of 6)

   Step 5: Created a CSV file of the bottom video trackline points.
   A Jupyter Notebook Python script (Video_trackline_prep_WORKING_v2.ipynb) was run for each survey to create a CSV file of the bottom video trackline points by extracting the navigation data for each video drift using information from the start times/durations text files. The script reads the video start time and duration from the text files, calculates the video end time, extracts the navigation points that fall within those start and end times, and exports the navigation points to a CSV file. Data sources used in this process:

   • Final processed navigation files
   • Start times/durations text files

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • Bottom video trackline points CSV files

   Date: Jan-2020 (process 6 of 6)

   Step 6: Created the final bottom video tracklines shapefile.
   Point shapefiles were created for each survey using the bottom video trackline points CSV files in Esri ArcGIS (version 10.3.1). The Points to Line tool was then run for each survey with the video trackline points as the input features and the video filenames as the line field to create a polyline shapefile of the video tracklines. XTools Pro (version 12.0) for Esri ArcGIS was used to rename, reorganize, and add new fields (Table Operations - Table Restructure) to the polyline shapefiles, including an attribute for the site number of the video trackline (FIELD_NO), start time of the bottom video drift in UTC (STARTTIME), end time of the video drift in UTC (ENDTIME), Julian day of collection (JD), date of collection (DATE), year of collection (YEAR), trackline length in meters (LENGTH_M), camera used (CAMERA), survey ID (FA_ID), sampling device used to collect the video (DEVICE_ID), and survey vessel (VEHICLE_ID). XTools Pro changed some of the bottom video trackline features from singlepart to multipart features if they overlapped or intersected themselves. To correct this, the Spatial Join tool was run for each survey with the original bottom video tracklines shapefile as the input features and the updated tracklines shapefile as the join features using the intersect match option to add the updated attributes to the original singlepart features. Unnecessary fields created when running the Spatial Join tool were deleted (i.e., Join_Count and TARGET_FID). Next, the bottom video tracklines shapefiles for each survey were joined with the trackline points shapefiles to add the start and end times of the video drifts (STARTTIME and ENDTIME, respectively), Julian day of collection (JD), and date of collection (DATE). Then, the trackline length (LENGTH_M) was calculated using the Calculate Geometry tool (Property=Length; Use coordinate system of the data frame=WGS 1984 UTM Zone 19N; Unit=Meters). Four tracklines from 2016 (clips 44, 46, 58, and 90) and three tracklines from 2017 (clips 239, 245, and 259) were for calibration videos or videos taken during transits between sites and were removed. The bottom video tracklines shapefiles for each survey were then joined with the survey logs to assign the site number (FIELD_NO) of each video trackline. The trackline shapefiles were then combined using the Merge tool. Finally, the bottom video line names (LINENAME) were updated to match the new video filenames, which include the field activity identifier, camera, and date and start time in the ISO 8601 standard in the filename. Data sources used in this process:

   • Bottom video trackline points CSV files
   • Survey logs

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • Final bottom video tracklines shapefile

3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?
   Ackerman, Seth D., Brothers, Laura L., Foster, David S., Andrews, Brian D., Baldwin, Wayne E., and Schwab, William C., 2016, High-resolution geophysical data from the inner continental shelf: South of Martha’s Vineyard and north of Nantucket, Massachusetts: Open-File Report 2016–1168, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.

   Online Links:

   • https://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20161168

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

1. How well have the observations been checked?
   The end time of the video drift used to map the bottom video tracklines (field ENDTIME in the shapefile) was calculated using the video start time and duration. This end time may be off by up to 2 seconds and was not assessed for accuracy by comparing it with the Global Positioning System (GPS) time overlay on the video's last frame (the videos have an overlay of the GPS date and time).
2. How accurate are the geographic locations?
   Sources of horizontal inaccuracy may be due to the video end time used to create the shapefile or the navigation data. The end time of the video drift used to map the bottom video tracklines (field ENDTIME in the shapefile) was calculated using the video start time and duration, rather than using the GPS time overlay on the video's last frame. The calculated end time may be off by up to 2 seconds and accounts for +/- 1 meter of horizontal uncertainty. Navigation for field activity 2016-005-FA used a Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS). The DGPS was set to receive fixes at a 2-second interval in geographic coordinates (World Geodetic System of 1984 [WGS 84]). The fixes were later interpolated to get 1-second navigation. For field activity 2017-022-FA, navigation data for the R/V Tioga from a GPS were provided by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. The 2017 navigation was collected at a 1-second interval in geographic coordinates (WGS 84); however, the navigation data were noisy, so a fix every 4 seconds was extracted and then interpolated to get smoother 1-second navigation. The recorded position of each point along the video trackline is the position of the DGPS/GPS antenna on the survey vessel, located on the aft port side of the R/V Rafael's cabin just off the centerline in 2016 and on the forward center of the R/V Tioga's wheelhouse in 2017, not the location of the MiniSEABOSS. The MiniSEABOSS was deployed approximately 2 meters to the starboard side of the DGPS antenna in 2016 and approximately 13 meters aft the GPS antenna in 2017. No layback or offset was applied to the recorded position. In addition, the sampler may drift away from the survey vessel when deployed to the sea floor. Based on the various sources of horizontal offsets, a conservative estimate of the horizontal accuracy of the video trackline locations is 2-4 meters in 2016 and 13-15 meters in 2017. At times the ship was moving so slowly that the resolution of the DGPS/GPS makes a trackline appear to double back on itself.
3. How accurate are the heights or depths?
   
4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?
   This dataset includes bottom video in MP4 format and a trackline shapefile of the location of the ship for the duration of the video collected during field activities 2016-005-FA and 2017-022-FA. Seventy-six sites were occupied within the study area, and bottom video was acquired at all but one of the sites (site 2016-005-043 does not have a video). Four videos collected in 2016 (clips 44, 46, 58, and 90) and three videos acquired in 2017 (clips 239, 245, and 259) are not included in this publication; these videos are calibration videos or were taken during transits between sites. The videos were generally clipped to the duration that the camera was within view of the sea floor but may include up to a minute of sampler deployment or retrieval. This dataset includes 79 videos with a total duration of 2 hours 50 minutes and 79 video tracklines with a total length of 4.4 kilometers.
5. How consistent are the relationships among the observations, including topology?
   All bottom videos were acquired using a SeaViewer 6000 HD Sea-Drop video camera on the MiniSEABOSS. Each site usually had only one deployment of the sampler; however, four sites (sites 2016-005-001, 2016-005-053, 2017-022-004, and 2017-022-008) had two separate deployments because a sediment grab was not successfully collected during the first deployment. One video per deployment was collected so there are two videos for each of these four sites. One continuous video (clip 100) of both deployments was taken at site 2016-005-053; however, it was split into two videos and clipped to the duration that the camera was within view of the sea floor. Gaps in sequential clip numbers exist because test videos were not mapped. The tracklines may self-intersect or self-overlap; at times the ship was moving so slowly that the resolution of the GPS makes a trackline appear to double back on itself.

How can someone get a copy of the data set?

1. Who distributes the data set? (Distributor 1 of 1)
   
   U.S. Geological Survey - ScienceBase

   Denver Federal Center, Building 810, Mail Stop 302

   Denver, CO
   

   USA

   1-888-275-8747 (voice)

   sciencebase@usgs.gov
2. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set? Sea-floor videos and location of bottom video tracklines collected in Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts, in May 2016 and May 2017 by the U.S. Geological Survey during field activities 2016-005-FA and 2017-022-FA. This dataset contains the following files: a shapefile of the bottom video trackline locations (2016-005-FA_and_2017-022-FA_videos.shp); 79 bottom videos from the SeaViewer 6000 HD Sea-Drop video camera in three zip files (2016-005-FA_and_2017-022-FA_mp4_2016.zip, 2016-005-FA_and_2017-022-FA_mp4_2017_1.zip, and 2016-005-FA_and_2017-022-FA_mp4_2017_2.zip); a browse graphic of bottom video trackline locations (2016-005-FA_and_2017-022-FA_videos_browse.jpg); and a Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (CSDGM) metadata file (2016-005-FA_and_2017-022-FA_videos_meta.xml).
3. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?
   Neither the U.S. Government, the Department of the Interior, nor the USGS, nor any of their employees, contractors, or subcontractors, make any warranty, express or implied, nor assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, nor represent that its use would not infringe on privately owned rights. The act of distribution shall not constitute any such warranty, and no responsibility is assumed by the USGS in the use of these data or related materials. Any use of trade, product, or firm 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:

     This dataset contains a shapefile of bottom video trackline locations and videos of the sea floor collected by the U.S. Geological Survey in Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts, in 2016 and 2017 and the associated metadata. The transfer size of the shapefile, browse graphic, and associated metadata is 0.5 MB. The MP4 videos are available in three zip files with a total transfer size of 12.2 GB. in format Shapefile (version Esri ArcGIS 10.3.1) Shapefile Size: 12248

     Network links:

     https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5f11eb6882ce21d4c409d2cc https://doi.org/10.5066/P9UK5IOF

     Data format:

     This dataset contains a shapefile of bottom video trackline locations and videos of the sea floor collected by the U.S. Geological Survey in Nantucket Sound, Massachusetts, in 2016 and 2017 and the associated metadata. The transfer size of the shapefile, browse graphic, and associated metadata is 0.5 MB. The MP4 videos are available in the following three zip files with a total transfer size of 12.2 GB: 2016-005-FA_and_2017-022-FA_mp4_2016.zip, which contains the 56 videos collected in 2016 and has a file size of 5.2 GB; 2016-005-FA_and_2017-022-FA_mp4_2017_1.zip, which contains 11 videos collected in 2017 at sites 2017-022-001 through 2017-022-009 and has a file size of 3.5 GB; and 2016-005-FA_and_2017-022-FA_mp4_2017_2.zip, which contains 12 videos collected in 2017 at sites 2017-022-010 through 2017-022-021 and has a file size of 3.6 GB. in format MP4 Size: 12248

     Network links:

     https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/5f11eb6882ce21d4c409d2cc https://doi.org/10.5066/P9UK5IOF

   • Cost to order the data: none

5. What hardware or software do I need in order to use the data set?
   This dataset contains data available as a polyline shapefile and MP4 video files. The user must have software capable of reading shapefile format to use the polyline shapefile. A video viewer can be used to see the MP4 video files.

Who wrote the metadata?

Dates:

Last modified: 19-Mar-2024

Metadata author:

Emily Huntley

U.S. Geological Survey

Geographer/Database Specialist

384 Woods Hole Rd.

Woods Hole, MA

USA

508-548-8700 (voice)

508-457-2310 (FAX)

whsc_data_contact@usgs.gov

Contact_Instructions:

The metadata contact email address is a generic address in the event the person is no longer with USGS. (updated on 20240319)

Metadata standard:

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