Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Geoform and Landform Classification of ContinentalShelves using Geospatially Integrated IKONOS SatelliteImagery
Christopher Makowski†‡*, Charles W. Finkl‡§, and Heather M. Vollmer†
†Coastal Education and ResearchFoundation, Inc. (CERF)
Coconut Creek, FL 33073, U.S.A.
‡Department of GeosciencesFlorida Atlantic UniversityBoca Raton, FL 33431, U.S.A.
§Coastal Education and ResearchFoundation, Inc. (CERF)
Fletcher, NC 28732, U.S.A.
ABSTRACT
Makowski, C.; Finkl, C.W., and Vollmer, H.M., 2017. Geoform and landform classification of continental shelves usinggeospatially integrated IKONOS satellite imagery. Journal of Coastal Research, 33(1), 1–22. Coconut Creek (Florida),ISSN 0749-0208.
Geomorphological characterization of coastal environments along continental shelves depends on accurate interpretationof mesoscale lithic and clastic benthic geoforms and landforms. Using the Geospatially Integrated Seafloor ClassificationScheme (G-ISCS), cognitive visual interpretations of seafloor geoforms and their associated landforms were conductedalong a diverse segment of the southeast (SE) Florida continental shelf. GeoEye IKONOS-2 satellite imagery providedthe remotely sensed visual medium on which interpretations were based. With ESRI ArcGISt ArcMap software,classification maps were created from the cognitive interpretations to show spatial distribution results of geoform andlandform features throughout the study area. Additionally, smaller-scale ‘‘call-out figures’’ documented specificgeomorphological associations among the classified units. Analysis attribute tables compared and contrasted theabundance (i.e. number of classifying vector polygons) and calculated areas for each geoform and landform classified. Itwas determined that classification of geoform and landform benthic features along continental shelves can be achievedwhere water clarity conditions allow for the cognitive visual interpretation of such seafloor formations. Future studiesmay build upon the classification of continental shelf geoforms and landforms to integrate more transientbiogeomorphological features of the marine environment (e.g., sediment distribution, biological species identification,density of flora and fauna present), thus creating a more detailed and inclusive classification of a selected coastal region.
ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS: Remote sensing, seafloor mapping, submarine geomorphology, benthic interpretation,Florida Reef Tract, IKONOS, Florida Bay, Florida Keys, geographic information systems, ESRI ArcGISt.
INTRODUCTIONOne of the standard components of classifying continental
shelf coastal environments is the demarcation of spatially
distributed geomorphological signatures along the seafloor,
commonly known as geoforms and landforms. The interpreta-
tion of these general-to-specific benthic features provides a
‘‘structural framework’’ of the seascape topology by which a
hierarchical census of biophysical units can be compiled for a
given shelf region (see, for example, Fairbridge, 2004; Finkl,
2004); the ultimate result then allowing for hierarchical
classifications to be extrapolated over large coastal areas and
applied to corresponding mapping units. This, in return, would
potentially elucidate spatial relationships between geoforms
and landforms of a given area by showing how exposed lithic
structures, unconsolidated clastic materials, and other geo-
morphological substrates available to sessile biological com-
munities are universally distributed and interconnected. By
accurately interpreting geoform and landform-based forma-
tions over a select region of continental shelf, the delineation of
coastal environments and creation of a comprehensive geo-
spatially referenced classification map can be achieved (e.g.,
Achatz, Finkl, and Paulus, 2009; Finkl and Banks, 2010; Finkl,
Benedet, and Andrews, 2004, 2005a,b; Finkl and Vollmer,
2011; Lidz, Reich, and Shinn, 2003; Lidz et al., 2006; Makowski,
2014; Makowski, Finkl, and Vollmer, 2015, 2016; Steimle and
Finkl, 2011).
In the past few decades, multispectral satellite senor images
have been among the most preferred mediums by which visual
interpretation of coastal environments are carried out (e.g.,
Andréfouët et al., 2001, 2003; Bouvet, Ferraris, and
Andréfouët, 2003; Dial et al., 2003; Dobson and Dustan, 2000;
Finkl, Makowski, and Vollmer, 2014; Finkl and Vollmer, 2011;
Hochberg, Andréfouët, and Tyler, 2003; Klemas, 2011; Klemas
and Yan, 2014; Makowski and Finkl, 2016; Makowski, Finkl,
and Vollmer, 2015, 2016; Manson et al., 2001; Mumby and
Edwards, 2002; Palandro et al., 2003; Steimle and Finkl, 2011).
Specifically, GeoEye IKONOS-2 satellite images can offer an
enhanced view of benthic geomorphological features along
those continental shelf regions where optimal water clarity
permits it. In conjunction with specialized spatial analysis
software applications, such as ESRI’s ArcGISt 10.3 ArcMap
program, IKONOS-2 images provide the visual means to
cognitively identify, delineate, and classify seafloor geoforms
and landforms along coastal shelf environments.
The objective of this study was to cognitively interpret,
classify, and map geoforms and associated landforms along a
segment of the southeast (SE) Florida continental shelf (Figure
1) using IKONOS-2 satellite imagery and the Geospatially
DOI: 10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-16A-00003.1 received 29 January 2016;accepted in revision 21 February 2016; corrected proofs received22 July 2016; published pre-print online 1 September 2016.*Corresponding author: [email protected]�Coastal Education and Research Foundation, Inc. 2017
Journal of Coastal Research 33 1 1–22 Coconut Creek, Florida January 2017
Integrated Seafloor Classification Scheme (G-ISCS) method
(Makowski, Finkl, and Vollmer, 2015). By doing so, analysis of
geomorphological attributes can aid in determining how the
‘‘structural framework’’ over a given shelf area is spatially
distributed and interrelated. Overall, the goal is to potentially
expand upon the results presented in this paper, as well as
other studies (e.g., Makowski, Finkl, and Vollmer, 2016), in an
effort to create an inclusive classification of this continental
shelf segment by integrating more transient biogeomorpho-
logical features of the marine environment (e.g., sediment
distribution, biological species identification, density of flora
and fauna present) with larger-scale physiographic realms and
morphodynamic process zones.
METHODSGeoEye IKONOS-2 (i.e. IKONOS-2) multispectral satellite
images were acquired, processed, and visually interpreted
using the study methods derived from the Geospatially
Integrated Seafloor Classification Scheme (G-ISCS), as devel-
oped by Makowski, Finkl, and Vollmer (2015). Specialized
processing software (IDRISI� Taiga, Clark Labs, Worcester,
Massachusetts, U.S.A.; Environmental Systems Research
Institute’s [ESRI] ArcGIS 10.3 ArcMap geographical informa-
tion system program, Redlands, California, U.S.A.) allowed for
appropriate digital enhancement techniques to the IKONOS-2
images, which then provided the required raster-based GIS
and image processing modules for cognitive interpretation.
Using the G-ISCS method, each geoform and associated
landforms were interpreted in tandem to describe the benthic
substrate framework by which surface sediments accumulate
upon and biological communities grow (Table 1). For
example, in the case of the Coral Reef Geoform, which
contains ridge-like structures throughout the Florida Reef
Tract (FRT) Physiographic Realm built from living coral,
coral skeletons, calcareous algae, mollusks, and protozoans,
the corresponding landforms of Barrier Reef, Patch Reef,
Aggregated Reef, Coral Apron, and Reef Gap were found
(Banks et al., 2007; Cronin et al., 1981; Finkl, 2004; Finkl and
Andrews, 2008; Finkl, Benedet, and Andrews, 2005a; Finkl et
al., 2008; Hoffmeister, 1974; Jaap, 1984; Lidz, 2004, 2006;
Lidz, Hine, and Shinn, 1991; Lidz et al., 1997). Hardbottom
Geoforms, conversely, are exposed Pleistocene limestone
(e.g., bedrock, boulders, rubble), including reef debris and
dredged spoil piles, that are found intermittently in the
Atlantic Ocean Morphodynamic Zones, Hawk Channel
Physiographic Realm, Biscayne Bay Physiographic Realm,
and along the leeward and windward sides of the Florida
Keys Physiographic Realm (Chiappone and Sullivan, 1994;
Finkl, 2004; Finkl et al., 2008; Lidz et al., 2006). Associated
Hardbottom landforms include flat, generally featureless,
continuous platforms in the form of Subtidal Pavement and
conically shaped Rubble Fields and Dredged Spoil Piles
(Buddemeier, Smith, and Kinzie, 1975; Finkl et al., 2008;
Lidz et al., 2006; Lirman and Fong, 1997; Selkoe et al., 2009).
When Islands associated with the coral and mud-based
Florida Keys Physiographic Realm archipelago are classified
as the predominant geoform, the resultant landforms include
Bay Key, Karst Island, and Salina (Finkl, 2004; Hoffmeister,
1974; Lidz, Hine, and Shinn, 1991; Lidz et al., 1997; Nunn,
1994). Sediment Flat Geoforms, which constitute extensive,
unconsolidated seafloor sediments composed of sand and mud
combinations, are divided among the landforms of Intertidal
Sand Flat and Planar Bed Forms and Ripples (Davis, Hine,
and Shinn, 1992; Duane and Meisburger, 1969; Finkl, 2004;
Finkl and Andrews, 2008; Finkl and Warner, 2005; Finkl,
Benedet, and Andrews, 2005b; Finkl et al., 2008; Hoffmeister,
1974; Lidz, Hine, and Shinn, 1991; Lidz, Robbin, and Shinn,
1985). The geoform of Dune and Beach is a geomorphologi-
cally coupled coastal system consisting of Holocene dune
fields, foredunes, and beach berms. The associated landforms
include Bay Beach and Ocean Beach (Finkl, 1993, 2004; Finkl
and Restrepo-Coupe, 2007; Finkl, Benedet, and Andrews,
2006; Hoffmeister, 1974; Wright and Short, 1984). Ridge
Fields are geoforms where continental shelf sand waves
display parallel long-axis alignment on sandy seafloors and
contain landforms that are designated as either Discrete
Ridges or Complex Ridges (Ashley, 1990; Duane and Meis-
burger, 1969; Finkl, 2004; Finkl and Andrews, 2008; Finkl,
Andrews, and Benedet, 2006; Finkl, Benedet, and Andrews,
2005b; Finkl et al., 2007, 2008; Stapor, 1982). Channel
Geoforms are low relief, elongated tidal conduits cut into
seafloor bank sediments or karst bedrock. The associated
landforms are Neochannel, Paleochannel, and Seafloor
Channel (Davis and Fitzgerald, 2004; Finkl, 2004; Finkl
Figure 1. LANDSAT satellite imagery zoomed in over the southern region of
peninsular Florida, U.S.A. The red polygon outlines the segment of
continental shelf used in this study. Included in the area of investigation is
a diverse mix of coastal environments, including highly urbanized Miami,
Florida; the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS); Everglades
National Park; Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve; Biscayne Bay National Park;
and John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park. Source: Googlee Earth (2015).
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
2 Makowski, Finkl, and Vollmer
Figure 2. Exported view of cognitive delineation results from interpreting enhanced IKONOS-2 satellite imagery. Of the 3888 vector polygons digitally created in
the study area (outlined in magenta), note the increase in complexity of benthic features with the westward distance offshore of the Florida Keys and toward the
Florida Reef Tract (FRT). Conversely, nearshore rock shelves, sediment flats, and offshore banks display more monotypic patterns of benthic habitats. A nominal
scale of 1:230,000 was set for this image export out of ArcMap.
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
Classification of Continental Shelves: Geoforms and Landforms 3
Table
1.
Def
init
ion
sta
ble
for
geo
form
sa
nd
ass
ocia
ted
lan
dfo
rms
alo
ng
the
SE
Flo
rid
aco
nti
nen
tal
shel
f,in
clu
din
glo
cati
ons,
def
init
ion
s,d
escr
ipti
ons,
an
dre
fere
nce
s.
Geo
form
Lan
dfo
rmL
ocati
onD
efin
itio
ns,
Des
crip
tion
s,an
dR
efer
ence
s
Cor
al
Ree
fT
he
Flo
rid
aR
eef
Tra
ct(F
RT
),a
shel
f-ed
ge
barr
ier
reef
syst
em,
lies
seaw
ard
ofH
aw
kC
han
nel
an
d
the
Atl
an
tic
Oce
an
Lit
tora
lZ
one
Th
eon
lyli
vin
gco
ral
barr
ier
reef
inth
eco
nti
nen
tal
Un
ited
Sta
tes,
the
FR
Tm
imic
sth
ep
lan
form
arc
ofth
eF
lori
da
Key
s,bu
tth
ere
ctil
inea
r
sect
ion
inB
isca
yn
eN
ati
onal
Park
isor
ien
ted
nor
th–so
uth
;th
ese
reef
s,
wh
ich
occu
rin
azo
ne
that
isabou
t6–7
km
wid
e,are
rid
ge-
lik
e
stru
ctu
res
bu
ilt
from
livin
gco
ral,
cora
lsk
elet
ons,
calc
are
ous
alg
ae,
mol
lusk
s,an
dp
roto
zoan
s;arr
an
ged
insu
cces
sive
layer
sof
lim
esto
ne
an
dd
row
ned
by
Qu
ate
rnary
sea-l
evel
flu
ctu
ati
ons,
cora
lre
efs
(i.e
.
barr
ier,
aggre
gate
d,
patc
hre
efs)
ofth
eF
RT
(als
ok
now
nas
the
Gre
at
Flo
rid
aR
eef,
Flo
rid
aR
eefs
,an
dF
lori
da
Key
sR
eef)
exte
nd
alo
ng
the
20
mis
obath
into
dee
per
wate
r(e
.g.,
Ban
ks
eta
l.,
2007;
Cro
nin
eta
l.,
1981;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Lid
z,2004,
2006;
Lid
z,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1991;
Lid
z
eta
l.,
1997)
Barr
ier
Ree
fL
ies
para
llel
toth
em
ain
lan
dan
dth
eF
lori
da
Key
s,fo
llow
ing
the
shel
fed
ge
abov
eth
e
con
tin
enta
lsl
ope
an
dse
para
ted
from
lan
dby
Bis
cayn
eB
ay,
Card
Sou
nd
,H
aw
kC
han
nel
,an
d
the
Atl
an
tic
Oce
an
Lit
tora
lZ
one
Ase
ries
ofbarr
ier
reef
segm
ents
lyin
gof
fsh
ore,
sep
ara
ted
by
reef
gap
s,
that
para
llel
the
shel
fed
ge
an
dm
imic
the
gen
eral
con
figu
rati
onof
main
lan
dan
dk
eys;
als
ok
now
nas
con
tin
enta
lsh
elf
orp
latf
orm
reef
s,
thes
ebarr
ier
reef
sare
stro
ngly
asy
mm
etri
cin
cros
s-se
ctio
n,
bei
ng
stee
p-t
oon
seaw
ard
marg
ins
an
dgen
tly
slop
ing
shor
eward
toa
sed
imen
tw
edge
inH
aw
kC
han
nel
;sh
orew
ard
marg
ins
ofth
eF
RT
are
dec
orate
dby
cora
lh
ead
s,p
atc
hre
efs,
cora
lap
ron
s,an
daggre
gate
ban
kre
efs
(e.g
.,B
an
ks
eta
l.,
2007;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Hof
fmei
ster
,1974;
Jaap
,1984;
Lid
z,2006;
Lid
z,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1991;
Lid
zet
al.
,1991,
1997;
Sh
inn
,1963)
Patc
hR
eef
Isol
ate
dre
efp
atc
hes
scatt
ered
inback
reef
,in
tra-
reef
al,
inn
erre
ef,
an
dou
ter
reef
zon
es
Isol
ate
dp
atc
hes
oreq
uan
tp
latf
orm
ssc
att
ered
thro
ugh
out
the
FR
T;
patc
hre
efs,
com
mon
lyfo
un
din
shel
tere
den
vir
onm
ents
that
are
un
att
ach
edto
oth
erm
ajo
rre
efst
ruct
ure
s,are
typ
icall
ysu
rrou
nd
edby
san
dor
seagra
ssh
alo
s;th
eyoc
cur
inop
enoc
ean
an
dh
igh
-en
ergy
reef
gap
are
as,
as
wel
las
shel
tere
dback
reef
zon
esan
dra
nge
insi
zefr
om
afe
wsq
uare
met
ers
tola
rger
reef
form
s(e
.g.,
Ban
ks
eta
l.,
2007;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl,
Ben
edet
,an
dA
nd
rew
s,2005a;
Jaap
,1984;
Lid
z,
2006;
Lid
z,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1991;
Lid
zet
al.
,1991,
1997;
Sh
inn
,
1963)
Aggre
gate
dR
eef
Occ
up
ies
the
back
reef
zon
ebet
wee
nth
ese
aw
ard
marg
ins
ofH
aw
kC
han
nel
an
dth
ein
tra-r
eefa
l
sed
imen
tfl
ats
Isol
ate
dgro
up
sof
coale
sced
patc
hre
efs,
occu
rrin
gin
vari
able
shap
es
wit
hou
tm
ajo
rsa
nd
chan
nel
s(e
.g.,
Ban
ks
eta
l.,
2007;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Jaap
,1984;
Lid
z,2006;
Lid
z,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1991;
Lid
zet
al.
,1991,
1997;
Mu
mby
an
dH
arb
orn
e,1999;
Sh
inn
,1963)
Cor
al
Ap
ron
Del
toid
al
shap
edacc
um
ula
tion
sof
cora
lsc
ree
an
d
fin
er-g
rain
edca
rbon
ate
sed
imen
tsalo
ng
the
lee
sid
eof
aggre
gate
dan
dbarr
ier
reef
s
Over
wash
stor
md
epos
its
con
tain
ing
fin
e-gra
inco
mm
inu
ted
carb
onate
s
an
dla
rger
cora
lfr
agm
ents
der
ived
from
stor
mw
aves
an
dsu
rge;
ap
ron
mate
rials
mig
rate
dow
nth
ele
eward
sid
eof
aggre
gate
dan
d
barr
ier
reef
san
dacc
um
ula
tein
back
reef
trou
gh
sad
jace
nt
toin
tra-
reef
al
sed
imen
tfl
ats
(e.g
.,F
ink
l,2004;
Fin
kl
an
dA
nd
rew
s,2008;
Fin
kl,
Ben
edet
,an
dA
nd
rew
s,2005b;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2008)
Ree
fG
ap
Per
pen
dic
ula
rto
shor
e-p
ara
llel
an
dsh
elf-
para
llel
barr
ier
reef
sse
para
tin
gth
emin
totr
act
sor
segm
ents
Sed
imen
tary
spil
lways
com
pos
edof
eros
ion
al
reli
cts
ofp
ale
o-in
lets
or
river
chan
nel
scu
tin
toth
eu
nd
erly
ing
subst
rate
;re
efgap
s,w
hic
h
segm
ent
barr
ier
reef
sin
totr
act
s,fo
rmvari
able
-wid
thco
rrid
ors
that
lin
kth
eop
enoc
ean
wit
hla
goo
nal
wate
rsof
Haw
kC
han
nel
an
d
Bis
cayn
eB
ay
(e.g
.,B
an
ks
eta
l.,
2007;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
d
An
dre
ws,
2008;
Fin
kl,
Ben
edet
,an
dA
nd
rew
s,2005b)
Hard
bot
tom
Isol
ate
dou
tcro
ps
ofli
mes
ton
ebed
rock
,d
ebri
s
fiel
ds,
an
dd
red
ge
spoi
ld
isp
erse
din
term
itte
ntl
y
thro
ugh
out
the
Atl
an
tic
Oce
an
zon
es,
Haw
k
Ch
an
nel
,B
isca
yn
eB
ay,
an
dalo
ng
the
leew
ard
an
dw
ind
ward
sid
esof
the
Flo
rid
aK
eys
Exp
osed
Ple
isto
cen
eli
mes
ton
e(e
.g.,
bed
rock
,bou
lder
s,ru
bble
)in
clu
din
g
reef
deb
ris
an
dd
red
ged
spoi
lp
iles
;th
ese
featu
res
have
low
reli
efw
ith
smoo
thor
rou
gh
surf
ace
san
dty
pic
all
yca
rry
ath
inven
eer
(afe
w
cen
tim
eter
s)of
surf
ace
sed
imen
tw
ith
macr
oalg
ae
(e.g
.,C
hia
pp
one
an
d
Su
lliv
an
,1994;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2008;
Lid
zet
al.
,2006)
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
4 Makowski, Finkl, and Vollmer
Table
1.
Con
tin
ued
.
Geo
form
Lan
dfo
rmL
ocati
onD
efin
itio
ns,
Des
crip
tion
s,an
dR
efer
ence
s
Su
bti
dal
Pavem
ent
On
the
con
tin
enta
lsh
elf,
shor
eward
ofth
eF
RT
in
the
Atl
an
tic
Oce
an
zon
es,
exte
nsi
vel
yin
the
nor
ther
np
art
sof
Haw
kC
han
nel
,an
dalo
ng
the
flan
ks
ofth
eF
lori
da
Key
s
Fla
t,gen
erall
yfe
atu
rele
ssco
nti
nu
ous
hard
bot
tom
that
isty
pic
all
y
part
iall
ym
an
tled
wit
ha
thin
san
dven
eer
an
dm
acr
oalg
ae
that
part
iall
yob
scu
reth
en
atu
reof
the
un
der
lyin
gsu
rface
;p
avem
ents
may
occu
ras
isol
ate
dro
ckou
tcro
ps
offs
hor
eor
as
nea
rsh
ore
pla
tfor
ms
alo
ng
the
lan
dw
ard
an
dse
aw
ard
marg
ins
ofth
eF
lori
da
Key
s(e
.g.,
Bu
dd
emei
er,
Sm
ith
,an
dK
inzi
e,1975;
Lid
zet
al.
,2006;
Sel
koe
eta
l.,
2009)
Ru
bble
Fie
lds
an
dD
red
ged
Sp
oil
Pil
es
Dep
osit
sin
the
Atl
an
tic
Oce
an
Lit
tora
lZ
one,
offs
hor
eof
Fis
her
Isla
nd
,an
din
nor
ther
n
Bis
cayn
eB
ay
Con
icall
ysh
ap
edru
bble
fiel
ds
an
dd
red
ged
spoi
lp
iles
der
ived
from
the
dre
dgin
gof
Bis
cayn
eB
ay,
Por
tof
Mia
mi,
an
dB
ear
Cu
t;sp
oil
pil
es
occu
rin
des
ign
ate
dd
epos
itio
nal
zon
esan
dp
rovid
esu
bst
rate
sfo
r
macr
oalg
ae
(e.g
.,F
ink
let
al.
,2008;
Lir
man
an
dF
ong,
1997)
Isla
nd
Cor
al
an
dm
ud
-base
dF
lori
da
Key
arc
hip
elago
that
sep
ara
tes
Bis
cayn
eB
ay
from
Haw
kC
han
nel
Lan
dth
at
isco
mp
lete
lysu
rrou
nd
edby
wate
ran
did
enti
fied
as
Flo
rid
a
Key
s(l
imes
ton
e-co
red
kars
tk
eys,
wit
hm
an
gro
ves
,m
ars
hes
,an
d
sali
nas)
an
dm
ud
dy-s
an
dy
isla
nd
s(B
ay
Key
s)(e
.g.,
Fin
kl,
2004;
Hof
fmei
ster
,1974;
Lid
z,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1991;
Lid
zet
al.
,1997;
Nu
nn
,1994)
Bay
Key
Sm
all
,co
mp
act
edm
ud
isla
nd
sbet
wee
nk
ars
t
isla
nd
sor
as
soli
tary
subaer
ial
lan
dfo
rms
(exp
osed
ban
ks)
inB
isca
yn
eB
ay
Alo
w-l
yin
g,
com
pact
edm
ud
isla
nd
(em
erged
ban
k)
inth
eF
lori
da
Key
s
arc
hip
elago
oras
isol
ate
dst
ruct
ura
lban
ks
inB
isca
yn
eB
ay
an
dC
ard
Sou
nd
;d
evel
oped
from
coars
erse
dim
ent
acc
um
ula
tion
str
an
spor
ted
abov
em
ean
hig
hti
de
du
rin
gst
orm
s,bay
key
sco
nta
inor
gan
ic-r
ich
mu
dd
ysu
rfic
ial
mate
rials
stabil
ized
by
man
gro
ves
(e.g
.,E
nos
,1989;
Hall
ey,
Vach
er,
an
dS
hin
n,
1997;
Sw
art
an
dK
ram
er,
1997)
Kars
tIs
lan
dL
imes
ton
e-co
red
key
sth
at
sep
ara
teB
isca
yn
eB
ay
an
dC
ard
Sou
nd
from
Haw
kC
han
nel
Isla
nd
sin
the
Flo
rid
aK
eys
com
pos
edof
ooli
tic
gra
inst
one
(i.e
.M
iam
i
Lim
esto
ne)
,fo
ssil
cora
lre
efro
ck(i
.e.
Key
Larg
oL
imes
ton
e),
an
d
coqu
ina
shel
lbed
rock
(i.e
.A
nast
asi
aF
orm
ati
on);
kars
tis
lan
ds
are
typ
icall
yco
lon
ized
by
man
gro
ves
an
dw
etla
nd
sbu
tm
ay
have
are
as
of
exp
osed
bed
rock
inh
igh
erel
evati
ons
wit
hli
ttle
veg
etati
ve
cover
(e.g
.,
Fin
kl,
2004;
Hall
ey,
Vach
er,
an
dS
hin
n,
1997;
Hin
e,2013;
Hof
fmei
ster
,1974;
Lid
z,R
eich
,an
dS
hin
n,
2003;
Mu
lter
eta
l.,
2002;
Wan
less
eta
l.,
1988)
Sali
na
Low
-lyin
gd
epre
ssio
ns
ink
ars
tis
lan
ds
orbay
key
sE
ncl
osed
orse
mi-
encl
osed
dep
ress
ion
sin
kars
tis
lan
ds
wit
hn
om
ajo
r
sou
rce
offr
esh
gro
un
dw
ate
ror
surf
icia
lfr
esh
wate
rin
pu
tso
that
evap
orati
onex
ceed
sra
infa
ll,
all
owin
gfo
rbri
nes
an
dot
her
evap
orit
es
tofo
rm;
thes
esh
all
ow,
inla
nd
dep
ress
ion
sare
fill
edw
ith
salt
wate
r
dir
ectl
yfr
omth
ese
aor
from
salt
ygro
un
dw
ate
r(e
.g.,
Hof
fmei
ster
,
1974;
Wan
less
eta
l.,
1988;
Wan
less
eta
l.,
1989)
Sed
imen
tF
lat
Un
con
soli
date
dse
afl
oor
exte
nsi
vel
yfo
un
d
thro
ugh
out
Bis
cayn
eB
ay,
Card
Sou
nd
,H
aw
k
Ch
an
nel
,th
eA
tlan
tic
Oce
an
Lit
tora
lZ
one,
an
d
inin
tra-r
eefa
lp
ock
ets
ofth
eF
RT
Exte
nsi
ve,
un
con
soli
date
dse
afl
oor
sed
imen
tsco
mp
osed
ofsa
nd
an
dm
ud
that
are
usu
all
ysu
bm
erged
,ex
cep
ton
inte
rtid
al
san
dfl
ats
;se
dim
ents
that
are
subje
ctto
tran
spor
tfr
omw
aves
an
dcu
rren
tsoc
cur
in
vari
able
thic
kn
ess
over
kars
tifi
edbed
rock
;se
dim
ent
flat
lan
dfo
rms
are
chara
cter
ized
by
pla
nar
bed
form
s,ri
pp
les,
an
din
tert
idal
san
dfl
ats
(e.g
.,B
an
ks
eta
l.,
2007;
Davis
,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1992;
Du
an
ean
d
Mei
sbu
rger
,1969;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
dA
nd
rew
s,2008;
Fin
kl,
Ben
edet
,an
dA
nd
rew
s,2005b;
Fin
kl
an
dW
arn
er,
2005;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2008;
Hof
fmei
ster
,1974;
Lid
z,R
obbin
,an
dS
hin
n,
1985;
Lid
z,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1991)
Inte
rtid
al
San
dF
lat
Per
iod
icall
yex
pos
edse
dim
ent
flats
fou
nd
in
Bis
cayn
eB
ay
Inte
rtid
al
flats
ass
ocia
ted
wit
hst
ruct
ura
lban
ks
inB
isca
yn
eB
ay;
thes
e
flats
may
have
bare
surf
ace
sor
be
colo
niz
edw
ith
seagra
ssor
macr
oalg
ae
(e.g
.,D
avis
,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1992;
Du
an
ean
d
Mei
sbu
rger
,1969;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
dA
nd
rew
s,2008;
Fin
kl,
Ben
edet
,an
dA
nd
rew
s,2005b)
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
Classification of Continental Shelves: Geoforms and Landforms 5
Table
1.
Con
tin
ued
.
Geo
form
Lan
dfo
rmL
ocati
onD
efin
itio
ns,
Des
crip
tion
s,an
dR
efer
ence
s
Pla
nar
Bed
For
ms
an
dR
ipp
les
Fla
t,sm
ooth
,or
rip
ple
dsa
nd
an
dm
ud
shee
ts
occu
rrin
gin
Bis
cayn
eB
ay,
Card
Sou
nd
,H
aw
k
Ch
an
nel
,th
eA
tlan
tic
Oce
an
Lit
tora
lZ
one,
an
d
inin
tra-r
eefa
lp
ock
ets
ofth
eF
RT
Carb
onati
can
dsi
lici
-cla
stic
seafl
oor
sed
imen
tary
dep
osit
sra
ngin
gin
gra
insi
zefr
omsa
nd
tom
ud
,w
ith
ad
mix
ture
sof
organ
icm
att
er;
thes
e
sed
imen
tfl
ats
may
be
un
colo
niz
edor
colo
niz
edw
ith
seagra
ss
mea
dow
s;alt
hou
gh
seafl
oor
surf
ace
sed
imen
tsare
typ
icall
y
featu
rele
ss,
sed
imen
tth
ick
nes
svari
esw
ith
the
irre
gu
lar
kars
tifi
ed
bed
rock
top
ogra
ph
y(e
.g.,
Davis
,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1992;
Du
an
ean
d
Mei
sbu
rger
,1969;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
dA
nd
rew
s,2008;
Fin
kl
an
d
Warn
er,
2005;
Hof
fmei
ster
,1974;
Lid
z,R
obbin
,an
dS
hin
n,
1985;
Lid
z,
Hin
e,an
dS
hin
n,
1991)
Du
ne
an
dB
each
Cou
ple
dd
un
ean
dbea
chsy
stem
fron
tin
gH
aw
k
Ch
an
nel
,th
ebay
sid
esof
Fis
her
Isla
nd
,V
irgin
ia
Key
,an
dK
eyB
isca
yn
e,an
dth
eoc
ean
icsi
de
of
the
SE
Flo
rid
aC
oast
al
Zon
en
orth
ofB
ear
Cu
t
Ageo
mor
ph
olog
icall
yco
up
led
syst
emco
nta
inin
gH
oloc
ene
du
ne
fiel
ds,
fore
du
nes
,an
dbea
chber
ms;
salt
-tol
eran
ttr
ees,
shru
bs,
gra
sses
,an
d
oth
erveg
etati
onch
ara
cter
ize
du
ne
an
dback
-bea
chgeo
form
s;so
ils
are
thin
,w
eak
lyd
evel
oped
,co
ars
eto
fin
ete
xtu
red
,an
dex
cess
ivel
y
dra
ined
carb
onate
san
ds;
ocea
nbea
ches
are
freq
uen
tly
rew
ork
edby
win
dan
dw
aves
,w
hil
ebay
bea
ches
are
rela
tivel
yu
nd
istu
rbed
an
d
con
tain
ah
igh
ersi
ltco
nte
nt
(e.g
.,F
ink
l,1993,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
d
Res
trep
o-C
oup
e,2007;
Fin
kl,
Ben
edet
,an
dA
nd
rew
s,2006;
Hof
fmei
ster
,1974;
Wri
gh
tan
dS
hor
t,1984)
Bay
Bea
chL
owen
ergy
bea
chsy
stem
salo
ng
the
bay
sid
eof
Fis
her
Isla
nd
,V
irgin
iaK
ey,
an
dK
eyB
isca
yn
e
Carb
onate
bea
chse
dim
ents
ram
ped
up
alo
ng
the
bay
sid
eof
Fis
her
Isla
nd
,V
irgin
iaK
ey,
an
dK
eyB
isca
yn
e;lo
wen
ergy
con
dit
ion
s,
alo
ngsh
ore
rock
ysu
bst
rate
s,an
dlo
w-e
levati
onk
ars
th
ead
lan
ds
hel
p
pro
tect
thes
ebea
ches
;d
un
ed
evel
opm
ent
isin
cip
ien
tor
abse
nt
(e.g
.,
Fin
kl,
2004;
da
Fon
tou
raK
lein
,B
ened
et,
an
dS
chu
mach
er,
2002)
Oce
an
Bea
chH
igh
-en
ergy
du
ne
an
dbea
chsy
stem
alo
ng
the
ocea
nsi
de
ofF
ish
erIs
lan
d,
Vir
gin
iaK
ey,
Key
Bis
cayn
e,an
dth
eS
EF
lori
da
Coa
stal
Zon
e
nor
thof
Bea
rC
ut
Natu
ral
an
dre
nou
rish
edoc
ean
bea
ches
,w
hic
hfr
ont
the
nor
ther
n
sect
ion
sof
Haw
kC
han
nel
an
dth
esh
ore
nor
thof
Bea
rC
ut,
con
tain
inci
pie
nt
fore
du
nes
beh
ind
bea
chber
ms
that
hel
pp
rote
ctth
eback
-
shor
efr
omst
orm
surg
ean
dov
erw
ash
;th
ed
un
e-bea
chco
nfi
gu
rati
on
dis
sip
ate
sw
ave
ener
gy
(e.g
.,F
ink
l,2004;
Fin
kl
an
dA
nd
rew
s,2008;
Gin
sbu
rgan
dJam
es,
1974;
Hin
e,2013;
Hof
fmei
ster
,1974;
Sh
ort,
1999;
Wri
gh
tan
dS
hor
t,1984)
Rid
ge
Fie
ldO
ffsh
ore
lin
ear
san
dri
dges
(waves
)oc
curr
ing
in
Haw
kC
han
nel
an
dth
eA
tlan
tic
Oce
an
Lit
tora
l
Zon
e,bet
wee
nth
eF
lori
da
Key
san
dth
eF
RT
,in
SW
Bis
cayn
eB
ay,
an
dw
ith
inth
eS
Ep
orti
onof
the
FR
T
Sh
elf
san
dri
dges
(waves
)sh
owp
ara
llel
lon
g-a
xis
ali
gn
men
ton
san
dy
seafl
oors
inH
aw
kC
han
nel
;th
ese
rid
ges
are
chara
cter
isti
cof
tid
e-an
d
stor
m-d
omin
ate
dsh
elves
wh
ere
ther
eis
suff
icie
nt
sed
imen
tsu
pp
lyto
acc
um
ula
tein
mou
nd
sse
ver
al
met
ers
thic
k;
the
rid
ges
are
orie
nte
din
dis
tin
ctp
att
ern
s:N
Wby
SE
,N
Eby
SW
,an
dN
-NW
by
S-S
E;
the
du
ne
fiel
ds
rest
onsa
nd
flats
lyin
gov
erli
mes
ton
ebed
rock
;th
ese
san
d
rid
ges
are
con
fin
edto
the
Haw
kC
han
nel
mor
ph
odyn
am
iczo
ne,
wh
ere
tid
al
an
dst
orm
curr
ents
pro
du
ceth
ed
iffe
ren
tri
dge
fiel
dor
ien
tati
ons;
seagra
ssm
ead
ows
may
occu
rin
the
swale
sbet
wee
nsa
nd
rid
ges
(e.g
.,
Ash
ley,
1990;
Du
an
ean
dM
eisb
urg
er,
1969;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
d
An
dre
ws,
2008;
Fin
kl,
An
dre
ws,
an
dB
ened
et,
2006;
Fin
kl,
Ben
edet
,
an
dA
nd
rew
s,2005b;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2007,
2008;
Sta
por
,1982)
Dis
cret
eR
idges
Isol
ate
d,
sin
gle
san
dri
dges
orie
nta
ted
inth
esa
me
dir
ecti
onw
ith
inth
efi
eld
inB
isca
yn
eB
ay,
Haw
k
Ch
an
nel
,an
dth
eF
RT
Ou
tlie
rsof
the
com
ple
xri
dge
fiel
dw
her
ein
div
idu
al
rid
ges
are
isol
ate
d
onth
ese
afl
oor
inH
aw
kC
han
nel
an
dth
eF
RT
;d
iscr
ete
rid
ges
mod
ifie
dby
tid
al
curr
ents
als
ooc
cur
inB
isca
yn
eB
ay
an
din
reef
gap
s
ofth
eF
RT
(e.g
.,A
shle
y,
1990;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
dA
nd
rew
s,2008;
Fin
kl,
An
dre
ws,
an
dB
ened
et,
2006;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2007;
Sta
por
,1982)
Com
ple
xR
idges
Fie
ldof
cris
scro
ssin
gsa
nd
rid
ges
inH
aw
k
Ch
an
nel
an
dth
eA
tlan
tic
Oce
an
Lit
tora
lZ
one
An
are
aw
her
em
ult
iple
subp
ara
llel
rid
ges
are
form
edalo
ng
mor
eth
an
one
axis
tocr
eate
aco
mp
lex
cris
scro
ssp
att
ern
ofri
dge
an
dsw
ale
top
ogra
ph
yon
the
seafl
oor
(e.g
.,A
shle
y,
1990;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
d
An
dre
ws,
2008;
Fin
kl,
An
dre
ws,
an
dB
ened
et,
2006;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2007,
2008;
Sta
por
,1982)
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
6 Makowski, Finkl, and Vollmer
Table
1.
Con
tin
ued
.
Geo
form
Lan
dfo
rmL
ocati
onD
efin
itio
ns,
Des
crip
tion
s,an
dR
efer
ence
s
Ch
an
nel
Intr
a-k
eyco
nd
uit
sco
nn
ecti
ng
Bis
cayn
eB
ay
an
d
Card
Sou
nd
wit
hH
aw
kC
han
nel
,or
as
soli
tary
gro
oves
cut
wit
hin
the
offs
hor
eban
kof
Bis
cayn
e
Bay
Low
reli
ef,
elon
gate
dti
dal
con
du
its
that
are
cut
into
seafl
oor
ban
k
sed
imen
tsor
kars
tbed
rock
that
faci
lita
teth
eex
chan
ge
ofw
ate
r
bet
wee
nB
isca
yn
eB
ay,
Card
Sou
nd
,an
dH
aw
kC
han
nel
;n
eoch
an
nel
s
are
mod
ern
-day
tid
al
chan
nel
sth
at
are
cut
into
sed
imen
tary
ban
d
dep
osit
s,w
her
eas
pale
och
an
nel
sare
old
erfe
atu
res,
pro
bably
inle
ts,
that
wer
eass
ocia
ted
wit
hlo
wer
sea
level
san
dcu
tin
tobed
rock
(e.g
.,
Ban
ks
eta
l.,
2007;
Davis
an
dF
itzg
erald
,2004;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
d
An
dre
ws,
2008;
Fin
kl,
Ben
edet
,an
dA
nd
rew
s,2005b;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2008;
Hof
fmei
ster
,1974;
Lid
z,2006;
Lid
z,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1991;
Lid
z,R
obbin
,an
dS
hin
n,
1985;
Lid
zet
al.
,1997,
2006)
Neo
chan
nel
Tid
al
san
dch
an
nel
sin
the
Safe
tyV
alv
ean
don
sed
imen
tary
ban
ks
sou
thof
Key
Bis
cayn
e,an
d
tran
siti
onal
bet
wee
nB
isca
yn
eB
ay,
Card
Sou
nd
,
an
dH
aw
kC
han
nel
Dis
trib
uta
ryor
stra
igh
tch
an
nel
scu
tth
rou
gh
un
con
soli
date
dca
rbon
ate
ban
kd
epos
its;
thes
esu
bti
dal
chan
nel
sfa
cili
tate
tid
al
flow
sbet
wee
n
Bis
cayn
eB
ay,
Card
Sou
nd
,an
dH
aw
kC
han
nel
(e.g
.,D
avis
an
d
Fit
zger
ald
,2004;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
dA
nd
rew
s,2008;
Lid
z,2006;
Lid
zet
al.
,1997,
2006)
Pale
och
an
nel
Bed
rock
chan
nel
sse
para
tin
gth
eF
lori
da
Key
sC
han
nel
scu
tth
rou
gh
the
kars
tifi
edbed
rock
ofth
eF
lori
da
Key
s
arc
hip
elago;
thes
ep
ale
och
an
nel
s,fo
rmer
inle
tsor
Ple
isto
cen
eri
ver
s,
are
stable
con
du
its
bet
wee
nB
isca
yn
eB
ay,
Card
Sou
nd
,an
dH
aw
k
Ch
an
nel
;p
ale
och
an
nel
sty
pic
all
yd
isp
lay
floo
d-
an
deb
b-t
idal
del
tas
an
dm
ay
have
ass
ocia
ted
sed
imen
tfl
ats
(e.g
.,B
an
ks
eta
l.,
2007;
Davis
an
dF
itzg
erald
,2004;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
dA
nd
rew
s,2008;
Fin
kl,
Ben
edet
,an
dA
nd
rew
s,2005b;
Lid
z,2006;
Lid
zet
al.
,1997,
2006)
Sea
floo
rC
han
nel
Tid
al
chan
nel
scu
tw
ith
inth
eban
ks
ofB
isca
yn
e
Bay
Low
reli
efti
dal
chan
nel
scu
tin
toca
rbon
ate
san
dfl
ats
ofB
isca
yn
eB
ay;
thes
ese
afl
oor
chan
nel
sm
ay
be
stra
igh
tor
bif
urc
ate
into
com
ple
x
dis
tal
segm
ents
bef
ore
mer
gin
gim
per
cep
tibly
wit
hsa
nd
y-m
ud
dy
bot
tom
s;th
eym
ay
be
un
colo
niz
edor
con
tain
seagra
ssm
ead
ows
(e.g
.,
Ban
ks
eta
l.,
2007;
Bib
er,
2007;
Davis
an
dF
itzg
erald
,2004;
Fin
kl,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
dA
nd
rew
s,2008;
Lid
z,2006)
Del
taA
tria
ngu
lar
tract
ofse
dim
ent
dep
osit
edat
the
term
ini
ofti
dal
pale
och
an
nel
sth
at
are
tran
siti
onal
bet
wee
nB
isca
yn
eB
ay,
Card
Sou
nd
,
an
dH
aw
kC
han
nel
Ad
epos
itio
nal
geo
form
pro
du
ced
from
the
shoa
lin
gse
dim
enta
tion
at
the
term
ini
oftr
an
siti
onal
pale
och
an
nel
tid
al
pass
esbet
wee
nB
isca
yn
e
Bay,
Card
Sou
nd
,an
dH
aw
kC
han
nel
;p
ale
och
an
nel
sty
pic
all
yco
nta
in
ebb-
an
dfl
ood
-tid
al
del
tas,
dep
end
ing
onth
esh
oali
ng
loca
tion
(e.g
.,
Ban
ks
eta
l.,
2007;
Davis
an
dF
itzg
erald
,2004;
Davis
,H
ine,
an
d
Sh
inn
,1992;
Fin
kl
an
dA
nd
rew
s,2008;
Fin
kl,
Ben
edet
,an
dA
nd
rew
s,
2005b;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2008;
Lid
z,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1991;
Sch
wart
z,
2005)
Ebb-T
idal
Del
taD
elta
icfo
rmati
ons
intr
an
siti
onal
pale
och
an
nel
s
onse
aw
ard
term
ini
inH
aw
kC
han
nel
Atr
ian
gu
lar-
shap
edacc
um
ula
tion
ofse
dim
ent
at
the
seaw
ard
term
inu
s
tid
al
pale
och
an
nel
sin
Haw
kC
han
nel
;th
ese
small
ebb-t
idal
del
tas
are
mod
ifie
dby
ocea
nw
aves
an
dcu
rren
tsth
at
cros
sov
erth
eF
RT
to
pro
du
ceasy
mm
etri
cal
del
tafo
rms
(e.g
.,B
an
ks
eta
l.,
2007;
Davis
an
d
Fit
zger
ald
,2004;
Davis
,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1992;
Fin
kl
an
dA
nd
rew
s,
2008;
Fin
kl,
Ben
edet
,an
dA
nd
rew
s,2005b;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2008;
Lid
z,
Hin
e,an
dS
hin
n,
1991)
Flo
od-T
idal
Del
taD
elta
icfo
rmati
ons
intr
an
siti
onal
pale
och
an
nel
s
onsh
orew
ard
term
ini
inB
isca
yn
eB
ay
an
dC
ard
Sou
nd
Atr
ian
gu
lar-
shap
edacc
um
ula
tion
ofse
dim
ent
at
the
shor
eward
term
inu
sti
dal
pale
och
an
nel
sin
Bis
cayn
eB
ay
an
dC
ard
Sou
nd
;th
ese
small
floo
d-t
idal
del
tas
are
mod
ifie
dby
fetc
h-l
imit
edbay
waves
an
d
curr
ents
top
rod
uce
asy
mm
etri
cal
del
tafo
rms
(e.g
.,B
an
ks
eta
l.,
2007;
Davis
an
dF
itzg
erald
,2004;
Davis
,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1992;
Fin
kl
an
d
An
dre
ws,
2008;
Fin
kl,
Ben
edet
,an
dA
nd
rew
s,2005b;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2008;
Lid
z,H
ine,
an
dS
hin
n,
1991)
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
Classification of Continental Shelves: Geoforms and Landforms 7
and Andrews, 2008; Finkl, Benedet, and Andrews, 2005b;
Finkl et al., 2008; Hoffmeister, 1974; Lidz, 2006; Lidz, Hine,
and Shinn, 1991; Lidz, Robbin, and Shinn, 1985; Lidz et al.,
1997, 2006). Deltas are depositional geoforms produced from
the shoaling sedimentation of paleochannel tidal passes.
Representative landforms include Ebb-Tidal Deltas and
Flood-Tidal Deltas (Davis and Fitzgerald, 2004; Davis, Hine,
and Shinn, 1992; Finkl and Andrews, 2008; Finkl, Benedet,
and Andrews, 2005b; Finkl et al., 2008; Lidz, Hine, and
Shinn, 1991; Schwartz, 2005). The final geoform identified
was categorized as the Peninsula and Coastal Plain, which
includes the low-lying marshlands of the Everglades within
the Southeast Distal Florida Physiographic Realm and such
morphodynamic zones as Tree Island Biohydrologic Systems,
Marsh Prairie Regimes, Mangrove Forest Biomes, and
Everglades Swampland Systems (Makowski, Finkl, and
Vollmer, 2016). Landforms include Intertidal Mud Flat,
Supratidal Mud Flat, and Anthropogenic Modified Coastal
Plain (Finkl, 1994; Finkl and Makowski, 2013; Finkl and
Restrepo-Coupe, 2007; Finkl et al., 2008; Gorsline, 1963;
Hoffmeister, 1974; White, 1970). Locations, definitions, and
descriptions of all interpreted geoforms and associated
landforms along the continental shelf study area are
provided in Table 1.
For the purposes of onscreen cognitive interpretation of
geoforms and landforms, enhanced IKONOS-2 satellite
images were imported into ESRI’s ArcGIS 10.3 ArcMap
program and displayed on a 1.2 m interactive SmartBoardt
Table
1.
Con
tin
ued
.
Geo
form
Lan
dfo
rmL
ocati
onD
efin
itio
ns,
Des
crip
tion
s,an
dR
efer
ence
s
Pen
insu
laan
dC
oast
al
Pla
inL
ow-l
yin
g,
mars
hla
nd
s(E
ver
gla
des
)of
Sou
thea
st
Dis
tal
Flo
rid
aan
dth
eS
outh
east
Flo
rid
aC
oast
al
Zon
ead
jace
nt
toB
isca
yn
eB
ay
an
dC
ard
Sou
nd
Fla
t,lo
w-l
yin
gp
oin
tof
lan
dth
at
incl
ud
esth
esa
lien
tan
dce
ntr
al
exte
nsi
ons
of
Sou
thea
stD
ista
lF
lori
da
an
dth
eS
outh
east
Flo
rid
aC
oast
al
Zon
ead
jace
nt
to
Bis
cayn
eB
ay
an
dC
ard
Sou
nd
;th
isgeo
form
isd
omin
ate
dby
an
thro
pog
enic
mod
ifie
d
urb
an
an
dagri
cult
ura
lare
as,
exce
pt
for
are
as
inth
eso
uth
,w
her
eth
eyare
com
pos
ed
ofin
tert
idal
an
dsu
pra
tid
al
mu
dfl
ats
wit
hor
gan
ic-r
ich
sed
imen
ts(F
ink
lan
d
Mak
owsk
i,2013;
Fin
kl
an
dR
estr
epo-
Cou
pe,
2007;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2008;
Gor
slin
e,1963;
Hof
fmei
ster
,1974;
Wh
ite,
1970)
Inte
rtid
al
Mu
dF
lat
Sh
all
ow,
mu
dd
y,
carb
onate
shor
esalo
ng
the
frin
ges
ofth
eE
ver
gla
des
fron
tin
glo
wer
Bis
cayn
eB
ay
an
din
toC
ard
Sou
nd
Sh
all
ow-s
lop
ed,
low
ener
gy
mu
dd
ysh
orel
ines
ad
jace
nt
tolo
wer
Bis
cayn
eB
ay
an
din
to
Card
Sou
nd
;in
tert
idal
mu
dfl
ats
con
tain
poo
rly
sort
ed,
silt
y,
carb
onate
sed
imen
ts
wit
hh
igh
organ
icco
nte
nts
;m
an
gro
ves
an
dot
her
wet
lan
dveg
etati
onare
ofte
n
pre
sen
t(e
.g.,
Fin
kl,
1994,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
dA
nd
rew
s,2008;
Fin
kl
an
dR
estr
epo-
Cou
pe,
2007;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2008;
Hof
fmei
ster
,1974;
Wh
ite,
1970;
Wol
an
ski,
2007)
Su
pra
tid
al
Mu
dF
lat
Back
shor
em
ud
flats
lan
dw
ard
ofin
tert
idal
mu
dd
y
are
as
that
mer
ge
wit
hS
outh
east
Dis
tal
Flo
rid
a
ecot
onal
succ
essi
ons
Low
gra
die
nt,
mu
dd
yback
shor
esly
ing
lan
dw
ard
ofin
tert
idal
mu
dfl
ats
;th
ese
mu
d
flats
,w
hic
hco
nta
inor
gan
ic-r
ich
mu
dso
ils
an
dare
seld
omin
un
date
d,
sup
por
ta
vari
ety
ofw
etla
nd
veg
etati
on,
incl
ud
ing
mars
hp
rair
iere
gim
esan
dtr
eeis
lan
d
bio
hyd
rolo
gic
syst
ems
ofS
outh
east
Dis
tal
Flo
rid
a(e
.g.,
Fin
kl,
1994,
2004;
Fin
kl
an
d
An
dre
ws,
2008;
Fin
kl
an
dR
estr
epo-
Cou
pe,
2007;
Fin
kl
eta
l.,
2008;
Hof
fmei
ster
,
1974;
Wh
ite,
1970;
Wol
an
ski,
2007)
An
thro
pog
enic
Mod
ifie
d
Coa
stal
Pla
in
Urb
an
dev
elop
men
tan
dagri
cult
ura
lla
nd
son
the
Atl
an
tic
Coa
stal
Pla
inan
dd
rain
edE
ver
gla
des
inth
eS
outh
east
Flo
rid
aC
oast
al
Zon
e
Urb
an
dev
elop
men
t(i
.e.
citi
esan
dsu
bu
rbs
tofo
rma
con
urb
ati
on)
mix
edw
ith
com
mer
cial
agri
cult
ura
lla
nd
s,sm
all
farm
plo
ts,
an
dop
ensp
ace
inth
eE
ver
gla
des
an
dalo
ng
the
Atl
an
tic
Coa
stal
Pla
inw
ith
inth
eS
outh
east
Flo
rid
aC
oast
al
Zon
e(e
.g.,
Fin
kl,
1994;
Fin
kl
an
dM
ak
owsk
i,2013)
Table 3. Quantity of cognitively classified vector polygons (n) and
calculated areas (km2) for seven selected landforms interpreted from the
IKONOS-2 satellite imagery. Each individual percentage from the total is
listed in brackets below.
Landform
Quantity of Vector
Polygons, n [%]
Calculated
Area, km2 [%]
Patch Reef 2705 [69.5] 119.7 [8.5]
Subtidal Pavement 44 [1.1] 31.0 [2.2]
Bay Key 77 [2.0] 5.3 [0.4]
Karst Island 54 [1.4] 37.4 [2.6]
Planar Bed Forms
and Ripples 429 [11.0] 681.5 [48.4]
Discrete Ridges 7 [0.2] 21.0 [1.5]
Complex Ridges 13 [0.3] 36.8 [2.6]
Table 2. Quantity of cognitively classified vector polygons (n) and
calculated areas (km2) for nine geoforms interpreted from the IKONOS-2
satellite imagery. Each individual percentage from the total is listed in
brackets below.
Geoform
Quantity of Vector
Polygons, n [%]
Calculated
Area, km2 [%]
Coral Reef 2824 [72.6] 119.7 [8.5]
Hardbottom 63 [1.6] 32.7 [2.3]
Island 135 [3.5] 44.5 [3.1]
Sediment Flat 474 [12.3] 692.2 [49.2]
Dune and Beach 7 [0.2] 1.4 [0.1]
Ridge Field 20 [0.5] 57.8 [4.1]
Channel 63 [1.6] 44.4 [3.2]
Delta 5 [0.1] 12.6 [0.9]
Peninsula and
Coastal Plain 297 [7.6] 402.1 [28.6]
Total 3888 [100] 1407.4 [100]
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
8 Makowski, Finkl, and Vollmer
overlay system. This allowed for the real-time, onscreen
digitization of geoform and landform features based on
varying color tones, saturations, textures, and relative
spectral reflectance signatures. Closed vector polygons were
drawn around areas of similar visual composition, thereby
cognitively delineating the boundaries of specific geoforms
and landforms as defined in Table 1. A nominal scale of
1:6000 was selected when cognitively digitizing boundaries,
Figure 3. Geographic representation of geoforms from the interpreted IKONOS-2 satellite imagery (viz. Figure 2). The legend identifies nine (9) geoforms
classified from the imagery and are color coded to show the spatial relationships among them. The broader-scale geoforms allow for a more detailed delineation
with associated landforms (viz. Figure 4). A nominal scale of 1:230,000 was set for this image export out of ArcMap.
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
Classification of Continental Shelves: Geoforms and Landforms 9
as no minimum mapping unit (MMU) was designated for this
study. Individual geoform and landform thematic-layered
maps, along with associated legends, were created, with
vector polygons being assigned a specific classifying color
that corresponded to the appropriate cognitive interpretation
mapping unit.
Attribute tables of all interpreted geoforms and landforms
were complied for the purpose of analysis and directly
Figure 4. Geographic distribution of landforms as interpreted from IKONOS-2 satellite imagery, subdividing the larger-scale geoforms (viz. Figure 3). The
legend provides a color distinction for each classified landform interpreted from the imagery (viz. Figure 2) and allows for visual understanding of spatial
parameters, as related to the 24 landforms identified. This image export was set at a 1:230,000 nominal scale within the layout view feature of ArcMap.
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
10 Makowski, Finkl, and Vollmer
corresponded to the cognitively digitized polygons. By doing so,
a multitude of spatially queried information, including the
areal extents of each classified geoform and landform, could be
stored for further investigation and analysis.
RESULTSApplication of the previously described methods resulted in a
classification of possible geoforms and landforms occurring
along the SE Florida continental shelf. In addition to providing
full-extent area maps showing the distribution of cognitively
interpreted geoforms and landforms, those classifying units
that recorded the highest and lowest number of vector
polygons, as well as the greatest and smallest calculated areas,
are reported. Furthermore, smaller-scale call-out figures are
shown to provide side-by-side results of IKONOS-2 image
interpretation by comparing annotated images with those
containing superimposed color coded classifying units.
An amalgamation of 14 GeoEye IKONOS-2 satellite scenes
resulted in a platform of high-resolution, multispectral images
for the purposes of classifying 1407.4 km2 of the study area. A
total of 3888 cognitive vector delineations were interpreted
from the IKONOS-2 imagery (Figure 2). The boundaries of nine
(9) geoforms and 24 associated landforms, with corresponding
legends, are shown with color-assigned visual representations
exported from ArcMap (Figures 3 and 4).
Among all the classifying units, the Coral Reef Geoform and
associated Patch Reef Landform recorded the highest number
of cognitively delineated vector polygons, with 2823 and 2705,
respectively. The lowest number of vector polygons were tallied
by Delta Geoforms (n¼5) and the Ebb-Tidal Delta Landform (n¼ 2). Additionally, the Sediment Flat Geoform and associatedPlanar Bed Forms and Ripples Landform recorded the greatest
total areas, with 692.3 km2 and 681.5 km2, respectively, while
the Dune and Beach Geoform (1.4 km2) and associated Bay
Figure 5. In order to interpret and classify the separate components of the Coral Reef Geoform, the left panel shows associated landform examples of Barrier
Reef, Patch Reef, Aggregated Reef, Coral Apron, and Reef Gap within the IKONOS-2 satellite image. The right panel overlays color coordinated classification
units, as show in the legend, on top of the IKONOS-2 to visually demonstrate the spatial distribution of landforms. In addition to the colors and units provided in
the legend, yellow areas in the right panel represent the Planar Bed Forms and Ripples Landform, which is a subclassification unit of the Sediment Flat Geoform.
The blacked out portion on the right-hand side of both panels represents where the water depth exceeded the threshold by which the IKONOS-2 sensor could
visually register any benthic spectral signatures. The satellite image and interpretive overlay panel were exported out of ArcMap program at a nominal scale of
1:24,000 within the layout view feature.
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
Classification of Continental Shelves: Geoforms and Landforms 11
Figure 6. Example of the Hardbottom Geoform in relation the Port of Miami. The IKONOS-2 satellite image in the left panel shows the benthic signature
differences between the Subtidal Pavement Landform versus the Rubble Fields and Dredged Spoil Piles Landform, while the right panel overlays color coded
classification units to visually demonstrate the interpreted features. In addition to the colors and units provided in the legend, yellow areas in the right panel
represent the Planar Bed Forms and Ripples Landform, which is a subclassification unit of the Sediment Flat Geoform, and tan areas represent the
Anthropogenic Modified Coastal Plain Landform associated with the Port of Miami. Both panels were exported out of ArcMap at a nominal scale of 1:8000 within
the layout view feature.
Figure 7. Detailed example showing visual spectral characteristics of the IKONOS-2 imagery (left panel) when identifying the Island Geoform and the associated
landform examples of Bay Key, Karst Island, and Salina in relation to Biscayne Bay. The right panel overlays landform classification units assigned by color to
visually demonstrate spatial distribution of interpreted features. In addition to the colors and units provided in the legend, yellow areas in the right panel
represent the Planar Bed Forms and Ripples Landform, which is a subclassification unit of the Sediment Flat Geoform; orange areas represent Paleochannel
Landforms; and teal areas represent Flood-Tidal Delta Landforms. The sharp contrast in the top left-hand corner of the left panel is indicative of merging two
separate IKONOS-2 satellite images from the same sampling area. Both panels were exported out of ArcMap in the layout view feature at a nominal scale of
1:8000.
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
12 Makowski, Finkl, and Vollmer
Figure 8. Zoomed in example of an IKONOS-2 satellite image (left panel) and the superimposed classifying units (right panel) that represent the breakdown of
the Sediment Flat Geoform into two (2) associated landforms: Intertidal Sand Flat and Planar Bed Forms and Ripples. The Intertidal Sand Flat Landform
occasionally breaches the water’s surface in relation to the tides, whereas the Planar Bed Forms and Ripples Landform constitutes the majority of the
surrounding benthos. A nominal scale of 1:9000 was used for both panels exported out of ArcMap.
Figure 9. Detailed example of two (2) landforms associated within the Dune and Beach Geoform in relation to Biscayne Bay and Hawk Channel. Spectral
reflectance patterns in the left panel (IKONOS-2 image) show the terrestrial and supratidal signatures of both the Bay Beach Landform and Ocean Beach
Landform. The right panel contains color coded mapping units from the landform legend (viz. Figure 4) that are an interpretation of the left panel, where
classifications are placed on top of the satellite imagery for visual comparison and analysis. In addition to the colors and units provided in the legend above, yellow
areas in the right panel represent the Planar Bed Forms and Ripples Landform, which is a subclassification unit of the Sediment Flat Geoform; orange areas
represent Paleochannel Landforms; dark purple areas represent Karst Island Landforms; light purple areas represent Intertidal Sand Flat Landforms; dark blue
areas represent Subtidal Pavement Landforms; light green areas represent Rubble Fields and Dredged Spoil Pile Landforms; and tan areas represent the
Anthropogenic Modified Coastal Plain Landform. Both panels were exported out of ArcMap at a nominal scale of 1:20,000 within the layout view feature.
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
Classification of Continental Shelves: Geoforms and Landforms 13
Beach Landform (0.1 km2) recorded the smallest total areas.
Figures 5 through 14 illustrate specific small-scale results
when applying geoform and landform classifying units to the
raw, uninterpreted IKONOS-2 satellite imagery.
ANALYSIS
Analysis of interpreted geoforms along the SE Florida
continental shelf showed that the Coral Reef Geoform was
among the most optimal for cognitive recognition in the
IKONOS-2 imagery. When compared with other geoforms
identified, Coral Reef recorded the greatest quantity of vector
polygons, with over 72% of the overall total, but only
constituted less than 10% of the total study area (Table 2).
This was possible because of specific recognition of color, tone,
texture, pattern, and spectral reflectance from the Coral Reef
Geoform benthic signatures allowing for a more precise
delineation without grossly overestimating the size of such
features along the seafloor.
Further examination of the landforms associated with the
Coral Reef Geoform shows that geomorphological recognition of
Patch Reef was the most optimal. With nearly 70% of all the
vector polygons drawn in the study area and less than 2% of the
total area classified (Table 3), Patch Reef Landform interpre-
tation can be considered precise due to specific tone, hue, and
spectral reflectance differences when the sunlight hits the sand
or seagrass halos that usually surround these isolated reef
patches. The IKONOS-2 imagery provides the visual means to
discern these differences when interpreting the various
landforms associated with geoforms such as Coral Reefs
(Figure 15).
When analyzing the Hardbottom Geoform, a greater recog-
nition of structural textures and color saturations was shown
for Subtidal Pavement Landforms. This is because distinct
Figure 10. Detailed example showing distinctive spectral reflectance patterns for landforms associated with Coral Reef, Sediment Flat, Hardbottom, and Ridge
Field Geoforms. The largest benthic feature identified in the left panel is the Complex Ridge Landform, which is located between the Hardbottom Geoforms of
Hawk Channel and the Barrier and Patch Reef Landforms of the Florida Reef Tract (FRT). Notice how the high-resolution of the IKONOS-2 imagery is able to
capture the characteristic crisscrossing pattern along the seafloor. The right panel overlays color-assigned classification units on top of the satellite imagery to
visually demonstrate the distribution of landforms along the benthos. In addition to Complex Ridges, yellow areas in the right panel represent the Planar Bed
Forms and Ripples Landform, which is a subclassification unit of the Sediment Flat Geoform; dark blue areas represent Subtidal Pavement Landforms; dark red
areas represent Patch Reef Landforms; and bright red areas represent Barrier Reef Landforms. Both panels were exported out of ArcMap at a nominal scale of
1:19,000 within the layout view feature.
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
14 Makowski, Finkl, and Vollmer
Figure 11. Detailed example of Channel Geoform interpretations using IKONOS-2 satellite imagery. The left panel shows the identification of associated
landforms, which include Neochannel and Paleochannel, while the right panel overlays mapping units of specific color (viz. Figure 4) on top of the satellite
imagery to visually demonstrate spatial dynamics. In addition to the colors and units provided in the legend above, yellow areas in the right panel represent the
Planar Bed Forms and Ripples Landform, which is a subclassification unit of the Sediment Flat Geoform; dark purple areas represent Karst Island Landforms;
and dark blue areas represent Subtidal Pavement Landforms. A nominal scale of 1:16,000 was used for both panels when exported out of ArcMap.
Figure 12. Detailed example of a Channel Geoform (as interpreted by the Seafloor Channel Landform) in relation to the Sediment Flat Geoform (as interpreted
by the Planar Bed Forms and Ripples Landform) in Biscayne Bay. The left panel shows the high-resolution IKONOS-2 satellite image by which the color coded
classification units were overlaid (right panel). The sharp contrast along the top portion of the left panel is indicative of merging two separate IKONOS-2 satellite
images from the same sampling area. Both panels were exported out of ArcMap at a nominal scale of 1:20,000 within the layout view feature.
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
Classification of Continental Shelves: Geoforms and Landforms 15
tones and spectral reflectance of the rigid exposed Pleistocene
limestone outcrops allowed for a higher level of textural
contrast and color saturation characteristics to be identified
in the IKONOS-2 imagery and demarcated along the seabot-
tom. Similarly, Bay Key and Karst Island Landforms, both
associated with the Island Geoform, showed individual
recognition from one another during cognitive interpretation.
Specific visual cues in the IKONOS-2 imagery allowed for
identification of small, compact mud islands (i.e. Bay Key)
versus those main islands formed from oolitic grainstone, fossil
coral reef rock, and coquina shell bedrock (i.e. Karst Island).
However, analysis of landforms associated with the Sediment
Flat Geoform showed that Planar Bed Forms and Ripples were
grossly recognizable within the IKONOS-2 imagery mainly
because of the general tone and spectral reflectance of the
unconsolidated materials. This then provided a basis for large-
scale differentiation of seafloor sedimentary deposits versus
rigid, hard structures, such as reef or hardbottom. Further
analysis of unconsolidated materials in the IKONOS-2 imagery
allowed for the detection of shelf sand waves, also known as
Ridge Field Geoforms, and the discernment between those
landforms oriented in the same direction (i.e. Discrete Ridges)
and those forming a crisscrossing pattern of ridge and swale
topography along the seafloor (i.e. Complex Ridges). This is
because the spectral reflectance of light and the contrasting
pattern of shadows along the benthic plane allow for interpre-
tation of Discrete Ridges, which are aligned along one axis,
versus Complex Ridges, which form along more than one axis to
create a compound field of ridges (Figure 16).
DISCUSSIONUsing GeoEye IKONOS-2 satellite imagery and the Geo-
spatially Integrated Seafloor Classification Scheme (G-ISCS)
method, cognitive interpretation of continental shelf geo-
forms and associated landforms was conducted over a coastal
segment off SE Florida. Classification of benthic components
Figure 13. Detailed example of IKONOS-2 satellite imagery (left panel) showing the two (2) landforms associated with the Delta Geoform, along with
surrounding features. The left panel shows Ebb-Tidal Delta Landforms and Flood-Tidal Delta Landforms, while the right panel represents interpreted
distribution of features by overlaying color coded mapping units from the landform legend (viz. Figure 4) on top of the satellite imagery. In addition to the colors
and units provided in the legend above, yellow areas in the right panel represent the Planar Bed Forms and Ripples Landform, which is a subclassification unit of
the Sediment Flat Geoform; orange areas represent Paleochannel Landforms; dark purple areas represent Karst Island Landforms; brown areas represent Bay
Key Landforms; and grey areas represent the Salina Landform. The sharp contrast in the top left-hand corner of the left panel is indicative of merging two
separate IKONOS-2 satellite images from the same sampling area. A nominal scale of 1:23,000 was used for both panels exported out of ArcMap.
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2017
16 Makowski, Finkl, and Vollmer
along continental shelves is predicated upon the interpreta-
tion of these standard geomorphological structural frame-
works known as geoforms and landforms. The identification
of such spatially distributed biophysical features potentially
allows coastal researchers and resource managers to bridge
the classification of larger-scale physiographic realms and
morphodynamic process zones (Makowski, Finkl, and Vollm-
er, 2016) with more temporally influenced characteristics,
such as unconsolidated sediment accumulations (e.g., sand,
mud), sessile biological assemblages (e.g., scleractinian coral
growth), and flora proliferations (e.g., seagrass and macro-
algae cover). Hierarchical approaches to continental shelf
classification prove to be most effective in locations where
optimal water clarity is present, for example, along the coast
of SE Florida. In addition to exhibiting favorable visual
properties of the water column, the continental shelf off SE
Florida contains a diverse mix of coastal environments (e.g.,
highly urbanized Miami, Florida; Florida Keys National
Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS); Everglades National Park;
Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve; Biscayne Bay National
Park; John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park) in which
numerous geoforms and landforms could be identified and
delineated along the seafloor.
Previous studies have attempted to interpret and classify
benthic geoform and landform attributes in marine environ-
ments using various remotely sensed platforms (e.g., Ansari et
al., 2014; Costello, 2009; Finkl and Andrews, 2008; Finkl,
Benedet, and Andrews, 20