Coral Reef In Situ Product (CRISP): a global compilation of coral reef temperature time series
Abstract. Coral reef ecosystems are increasingly affected by climate-driven marine heatwaves, but the thermal environments experienced by corals at the reef-scale are still not well resolved by satellite-derived sea surface temperature (SST) products. In situ temperature loggers can capture much of this fine-scale variability, including diel temperature ranges, short-term extremes, and depth-dependent structure. However, these datasets are often fragmented across sources, inconsistently formatted, or not readily accessible for synthesis and reuse. To address these gaps, we developed the Coral Reef In Situ Product (CRISP), a global aggregation of temperature time series collected from coral reef environments. At the time of writing, CRISP includes 2,548 logger deployments assembled from a mix of public repositories, peer-reviewed literature, gray literature, and community contributions. Each deployment record is associated with available metadata fields stored in a consistent manner across all loggers. The entire dataset is provided in NetCDF format to support use in common scientific workflows (e.g., MATLAB, Python, R). By bringing together these otherwise fragmented observations, CRISP enables analyses of fine-scale thermal variability across coral reef systems. The dataset adheres to the FAIR data principles by emphasizing findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability. CRISP can be used for a variety of scientific applications including coral bleaching research, thermal stress assessment, reef climate monitoring, model validation, and investigations of environmental variability across reef systems.
CRISP is a great idea and will be of great value to the coral reef community.
Providing the data in netCDF format is great for scientists skilled in data analysis. However, a user-friendly interface should be provided. Many scientists and most coral reef managers have no idea how to handle NetCDF data but may wish to access particular datasets.
Line 33: Mortality can result from SEVERE or prolonged heat stress.
Line 36:Â You really should cite recent papers on the third and fourth global coral bleaching events here.
Line 40:Â Actually, CRW has a suite of products. DHW is only one of them. This should be noted here.
Line 59:Â Exposure to higher DTRs MAY experience improved thermal tolerance -- this is not a given.
Line 66: It isn't just the coarse resolution but also the thin layer of surface water that is measured by satellites.
Lines 69-70:  Pat may have said in situ loggers are the "gold standard" but they only measure what is happening at a very precise point. Therefore, they are only the "gold standard" for adjacent corals. Unless someone plans to deploy a fine mesh of loggers, loggers don't address the spatial variability you describe earlier in this paragraph. In situ loggers are a great tool, but they aren't perfect either! Don't oversell them.
Line 80:Â Accessible to people trained in the use of NetCDF but not to a broad audience unless a friendly user interface is created as well.
Line 100: NOAA is a big organization that does a lot more than coral reefs. Which parts of NOAA? While not as big as NOAA, AIMS is a big organization that does a lot more than coral reefs. Which parts of AIMS? NOAA Coral Reef Watch has a compilation of logger data that may not be in NCEI. Did you reach out to them?
Lines 110-112:Â CRISP should include a list of these inaccessible data in case others wish to pursue them.
Lines 132-133: Using the mid-point of depth ranges is a good solution.
Line 161:Â UTC is the correct universal time based on the atomic clock standard and should be used instead of the now archaic GMT. This should be corrected in both the dataset and the paper.
Line 205:Â Was this a single 9.2 year logger deployment? Those HoboTemp units had a 6-year nominal life and a non-replaceable battery. Files should indicate when units were swapped out or maintenance was performed. Neither is noted here, implying a continuous record.
Conclusion:Â You fail to indicate the future of CRISP. Is this a one-and-done exercise? Is there a plan to continue to update CRISP with new data? An effort like this one really deserves to have a long-term future.
Line 317: Storing the data in NCEI is the right place.
Line 319: Â Well that's odd. You just said they were at NCEI? Where are they really?