Request Data from SWOT

The sea turtle data that are housed within the SWOT database have been made publicly-available by the original data contributors and by the State of the World’s Sea Turtles Program for educational purposes and to facilitate exchange among sea turtle researchers and conservationists. Data contained in the SWOT database are protected by SWOT’s Terms of Use, which govern the use and citation of data in the database and outline the process for requesting data.

Data can be downloaded freely by completing the brief request form on the SWOT online mapping portal. If you have any questions, please contact SWOT’s database manager at swotdata@gmail.com. [Note that the use of data for distributions, RMUs, mtDNA, nDNA and habitat suitability requires adherence to additional terms of use that will be shared prior to data delivery]

Examples of How the SWOT Database Has Been Used for Research and Conservation

 
 

Data from the SWOT database have been used in a variety of projects that aim to advance sea turtle research and conservation worldwide. Below are some of the products that have benefited from SWOT’s global sea turtle database.

 
 
 

1. Using climatic suitability thresholds to identify past, present and Future Population viability (Almpanidou et al. 2016)

The authors used climatic niche models to generate thresholds of climatic suitability for loggerhead turtles nesting in the Mediterranean, and assessed the climatic suitability of loggerhead nesting sites in the past and future. The analysis used data on the location of loggerhead nesting sites in the Mediterranean from the SWOT database.

Citation: Almpanidou, V., Schofield, G., Kallimanis, A.S., Türkozan, O., Hays, G.C., and A.D. Mazaris. 2016. Using climatic suitability thresholds to identify past, present and future population viability. Ecological Indicators 71: 551–556.

DataPic1.jpg
 

2. A global gap analysis of sea turtle protection coverage (Mazaris et al. 2014)

The authors evaluated the extent to which the current global network of protected areas encompasses sea turtle nesting sites to identify gaps in sea turtle protection globally and regionally. The analysis used data on the global distribution of sea turtle nesting sites from the SWOT database.

Citation: Mazaris, A.D., Almpanidou, V., Wallace, B.P., Pantis, J.D., and G. Schofield. 2014. A global gap analysis of sea turtle protection coverage. Biological Conservation 173: 17–23.

DataPic2.jpg
 

3. Climate influences the global distribution of sea turtle nesting (Pike, d. A. 2013)

Author David Pike predicted the spatial distributions of nesting habitat under current climatic conditions for seven sea turtle species worldwide in order to understand whether climate limits current sea turtle nesting distributions and shapes the ecological niche of the terrestrial life-history stage of these wide ranging marine vertebrates. The analysis used data on nesting beach locations from SWOT and other sources, and the resulting data layer (a global index of habitat suitability) is available through the SWOT database online.

Citation: Pike, D.A. 2013. Climate influences the global distribution of sea turtle nesting. Global Ecology and Biogeography 22: 555-556.

Data Pic3.png
 

4. Regional Management Units for Marine Turtles: A Novel Framework for Prioritizing Conservation and Research across Multiple Scales (Wallace et al. 2010)

This landmark publication by members of the IUCN-SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group defined Regional Management Units (RMUs, i.e. subpopulations) of marine turtles worldwide for the first time. To delineate the RMUs, the authors collated all available information on marine turtle biogeography, including nesting sites, population abundances and trends, population genetics, and satellite telemetry. The SWOT database was used to help identify and georeference nesting sites globally for all species, a fundamental component of each RMU.

Citation: Wallace, B.P., et al. 2010. Regional Management Units for Marine Turtles: A Novel Framework for Prioritizing Conservation and Research across Multiple Scales. PLoS ONE 5(12): e15465.

 

5. Global and regional priorities for marine biodiversity protection

Authors assessed the global and regional conservation priorities of 4,352 marine species for which geographic ranges are known by mapping priority areas and comparing them to marine protected areas (MPAs) and human impacts. SWOT’s distribution data was used for mapping the geographic ranges of the sea turtle species included in the study.

Citation: Jenkins, C.N., and K.S. Van Houtan. 2016. Global and regional priorities for marine biodiversity protection. Biological Conservation 204(B):333–339.

Picture1.png
 

6. De Vos, D., Nel, R., Schoeman, D., Harris, L.R., and D. du Preez. 2019. Effect of introduced Casuarina trees on the vulnerability of sea turtle nesting beaches to erosion. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 223:147-158.
SEE PUBLICATION

7. Dewald, J.R., and D.A. Pike. 2014. Geographical variation in hurricane impacts among sea turtle populations. Journal of Biogeography 41(2):307–316.
SEE PUBLICATION

8. Fuentes, M.M.P.B., et al. 2016. Conservation hotspots for marine turtle nesting in the United States based on coastal development. Ecological Applications 26(8): 2708–2719.
SEE PUBLICATION

9. Fujioka, E., Kot, C.Y., Wallace, B.P., Best, B.D., Moxley, J., Cleary, J., Donnelly, B., and P.N. Halpin. 2014. Data integration for conservation: Leveraging multiple data types to advance ecological assessments and habitat modeling for marine megavertebrates using OBIS–SEAMAP. Ecological Informatics 20:13-26.
SEE PUBLICATION

10. Harris, L., Nel, R., and D. Hykle. 2012. Report of the Regional Workshop and Fourth Meeting of the Western Indian Ocean Marine Turtle Task Force. Memorandum of Understanding on the Conservation and Management of the Indian Ocean and South East Asia, South Africa.
SEE PUBLICATION

11. Huang, H.W. 2015. Conservation hotspots for the turtles on the high seas of the Atlantic Ocean. PLoS ONE 10(8): e0133614. 
SEE PUBLICATION

12. Mazaris A.D., Kallimanis A.S., Pantis J.D., and G.C. Hays. 2013. Phenological response of sea turtles to environmental variation across a species' northern range. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 280:20122397.
SEE PUBLICATION

13. Mazaris, A.D., Vokou, D., Almpanidou, V., Türkozan, O., and S.P. Sgardelis. 2015. Low conservatism of the climatic niche of sea turtles and implications for predicting future distributions. Ecosphere 6(9):1–12.
SEE PUBLICATION

14. Montero, J.T., Martinez-Rincon, R.O., Heppell, S.S., Hall, M., and M. Ewal. 2016. Characterizing environmental and spatial variables associated with the incidental catch of olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) in the Eastern Tropical Pacific purse-seine fishery. Fisheries Oceanography 25(1):1–14.
SEE PUBLICATION

15. Pagad, S., Genovesi, P. and R. Scalera. 2013. Review of the Impact of Invasive Alien Species on Species Protected Under the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS). The Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) [18:10.11], Bonn, Germany.
SEE PUBLICATION

16.  Pike, D. 2014. Forecasting the viability of sea turtle eggs in a warming world. Global Change Biology 20 (1): 7–15.
SEE PUBLICATION

17.  Putman, N.F., Bane, J.M., and K.J. Lohmann. 2010. Sea turtle nesting distributions and oceanographic constraints on hatchling migration. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 277:3631–3637.
SEE PUBLICATION

18.  Schuyler, Q.A., Wilcox, C., Townsend, K.A., et al. 2016. Risk analysis reveals global hotspots for marine debris ingestion by sea turtles. Global Change Biology 22(2):567–576.
SEE PUBLICATION

19. Shigenaka, G, Wallace, B.P., Stacy, B.A., and Rutherford, N. 2010. Oil Spills and Sea Turtles: Biology, Planning, and Response. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Emergency Response.

20.  Stacy, B.A., B.P. Wallace, T. Brosnan, S. Wissmann, A Lauritsen, B. Schroeder, S. Hargrove, and J.L. Keene. 2020. Guidelines for Oil Spill Response and Natural Resource Damage Assessment: Sea Turtles. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service and National Ocean Service, NOAA Technical Memorandum [NMFS-OPR-61], Washington, D.C.
SEE PUBLICATION

21.  Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice. 2013. Progress Report on Marine and Coastal Biodiveristy: Use of scientific and technical information for describing ecologically or biologically significant marine areas (EBSAs). Convention on Biological Diversity [17], Montreal.
SEE PUBLICATION

22.  Wallace, B.P., DiMatteo, A.D., Bolten, A.B., Chaloupka, M.Y., Hutchinson, B.J., Abreu-Grobois, F.A., et al. 2011. Global conservation priorities for marine turtles. PLoS ONE 6(9): e24510.
SEE PUBLICATION

23. Wallace, B.P., Stacy, B.A., Pilcher, N., Rutherford, N., and G. Shigenaka. 2020. Oil spills and sea turtles: current understanding of effects and considerations for response and assessment efforts. Endangered Species Research 41:17-37.
SEE PUBLICATION

24. Wilmé, L., Waeber, P.O., and J.U. Ganzhorn. 2016b. Marine turtles used to assist Austronesian sailors reaching new islands. Comptes rendus biologies 339:78– 82.
SEE PUBLICATION