An Objective Framework to Test the Quality of Candidate Indicators of Good Environmental Status

Large efforts are on-going within the EU to prepare the Marine Strategy Framework Directive’s (MSFD) assessment of the environmental status of the European seas. This assessment will only be as good as the indicators chosen to monitor the eleven descriptors of good environmental status (GEnS). An objective and transparent framework to determine whether chosen indicators actually support the aims of this policy is, however, not yet in place. Such frameworks are needed to ensure that the limited resources available to this assessment optimize the likelihood of achieving GEnS within collaborating states. Here, we developed a hypothesis-based protocol to evaluate whether candidate indicators meet quality criteria explicit to the MSFD, which the assessment community aspires to. Eight quality criteria are distilled from existing initiatives, and a testing and scoring protocol for each of them is presented. We exemplify its application in three worked examples, covering indicators for three GEnS descriptors (1, 5 and 6), various habitat components (seaweeds, seagrasses, benthic macrofauna and plankton), and assessment regions (Danish, Lithuanian and UK waters). We argue that this framework provides a necessary, transparent and standardized structure to support the comparison of candidate indicators, and the decision-making process leading to indicator selection. Its application could help identify potential limitations in currently available candidate metrics and, in such cases, help focus the development of more adequate indicators. Use of such standardized approaches will facilitate the sharing of knowledge gained across the MSFD parties despite context-specificity across assessment regions, and support the evidence-based management of European seas.

An Objective Framework to Test the Quality of Candidate Indicators of Good Environmental Status

Large efforts are on-going within the EU to prepare the Marine Strategy Framework Directive’s (MSFD) assessment of the environmental status of the European seas. This assessment will only be as good as the indicators chosen to monitor the eleven descriptors of good environmental status (GEnS). An objective and transparent framework to determine whether chosen indicators actually support the aims of this policy is, however, not yet in place. Such frameworks are needed to ensure that the limited resources available to this assessment optimize the likelihood of achieving GEnS within collaborating states. Here, we developed a hypothesis-based protocol to evaluate whether candidate indicators meet quality criteria explicit to the MSFD, which the assessment community aspires to. Eight quality criteria are distilled from existing initiatives, and a testing and scoring protocol for each of them is presented. We exemplify its application in three worked examples, covering indicators for three GEnS descriptors (1, 5 and 6), various habitat components (seaweeds, seagrasses, benthic macrofauna and plankton), and assessment regions (Danish, Lithuanian and UK waters). We argue that this framework provides a necessary, transparent and standardized structure to support the comparison of candidate indicators, and the decision-making process leading to indicator selection. Its application could help identify potential limitations in currently available candidate metrics and, in such cases, help focus the development of more adequate indicators. Use of such standardized approaches will facilitate the sharing of knowledge gained across the MSFD parties despite context-specificity across assessment regions, and support the evidence-based management of European seas.

Parameterisation of bivalve functional traits for mechanistic eco-physiological dynamic energy budget (DEB) models

Mechanistic models such as those based on dynamic energy budget (DEB) theory are emergent ecomechanics tools to investigate the extent of fitness in organisms through changes in life history traits as explained by bioenergetic principles. The rapid growth in interest around this approach originates from the mechanistic characteristics of DEB, which are based on a number of rules dictating the use of mass and energy flow through organisms. One apparent bottleneck in DEB applications comes from the estimations of DEB parameters which are based on mathematical and statistical methods (covariation method). The parameterisation process begins with the knowledge of some functional traits of a target organism (e. g. embryo, sexual maturity and ultimate body size, feeding and assimilation rates, maintenance costs), identified from the literature or laboratory experiments. However, considering the prominent role of the mechanistic approach in ecology, the reduction of possible uncertainties is an important objective. We propose a revaluation of the laboratory procedures commonly used in ecological studies to estimate DEB parameters in marine bivalves. Our experimental organism was Brachidontes pharaonis. We supported our proposal with a validation exercise which compared life history traits as obtained by DEBs (implemented with parameters obtained using classical laboratory methods) with the actual set of species traits obtained in the field. Correspondence between the 2 approaches was very high (>95%) with respect to estimating both size and fitness. Our results demonstrate a good agreement between field data and model output for the effect of temperature and food density on age-size curve, maximum body size and total gamete production per life span. The mechanistic approach is a promising method of providing accurate predictions in a world that is under in creasing anthropogenic pressure.

A new approach for objective identification of turns and steps in organism movement data relevant to random walk modelling

1. A first step in the analysis of complex movement data often involves discretisation of the path into a series of step-lengths and turns, for example in the analysis of specialised random walks, such as Lévy flights. However, the identification of turning points, and therefore step-lengths, in a tortuous path is dependent on ad-hoc parameter choices. Consequently, studies testing for movement patterns in these data, such as Lévy flights, have generated debate. However, studies focusing on one-dimensional (1D) data, as in the vertical displacements of marine pelagic predators, where turning points can be identified unambiguously have provided strong support for Lévy flight movement patterns. 2. Here, we investigate how step-length distributions in 3D movement patterns would be interpreted by tags recording in 1D (i.e. depth) and demonstrate the dimensional symmetry previously shown mathematically for Lévy-flight movements. We test the veracity of this symmetry by simulating several measurement errors common in empirical datasets and find Lévy patterns and exponents to be robust to low-quality movement data. 3. We then consider exponential and composite Brownian random walks and show that these also project into 1D with sufficient symmetry to be clearly identifiable as such. 4. By extending the symmetry paradigm, we propose a new methodology for step-length identification in 2D or 3D movement data. The methodology is successfully demonstrated in a re-analysis of wandering albatross Global Positioning System (GPS) location data previously analysed using a complex methodology to determine bird-landing locations as turning points in a Lévy walk. For this high-resolution GPS data, we show that there is strong evidence for albatross foraging patterns approximated by truncated Lévy flights spanning over 3·5 orders of magnitude. 5. Our simple methodology and freely available software can be used with any 2D or 3D movement data at any scale or resolution and are robust to common empirical measurement errors. The method should find wide applicability in the field of movement ecology spanning the study of motile cells to humans.

Challenges and difficulties in assessing the Environmental Status under the requirements of the Ecosystem Approach in North-African countries, illustrated by eutrophication assessment

Marine ecosystems provide many ecosystem goods and services. However, these ecosystems and the benefits they create for humans are subject to competing uses and increasing pressures. As a consequence of the increasing threats to the marine environment, several regulations require applying an ecosystem-based approach for managing the marine environment. Within the Mediterranean Sea, in 2008, the Contracting Parties of the Mediterranean Action Plan decided to progressively apply the Ecosystem Approach (EcAp) with the objective of achieving Good Environmental Status (GES) for 2018. To assess the Environmental Status, the EcAp proposes 11 Ecological Objectives, each of which requires a set of relevant indicators to be integrated. Progress towards the EcAp entails a gradual and important challenge for North-African countries, and efforts have to be initiated to propose and discuss methods. Accordingly, to enhance the capacity of North-African countries to implement EcAp and particularly to propose and discuss indicators and methods to assess GES, the aim of this manuscript is to identify the practical problems and gaps found at each stage of the Environmental Status assessment process. For this purpose, a stepwise method has been proposed to assess the Environmental Status using Ecologic Objective 5-Eutrophication as example.

Challenges and difficulties in assessing the Environmental Status under the requirements of the Ecosystem Approach in North-African countries, illustrated by eutrophication assessment

Marine ecosystems provide many ecosystem goods and services. However, these ecosystems and the benefits they create for humans are subject to competing uses and increasing pressures. As a consequence of the increasing threats to the marine environment, several regulations require applying an ecosystem-based approach for managing the marine environment. Within the Mediterranean Sea, in 2008, the Contracting Parties of the Mediterranean Action Plan decided to progressively apply the Ecosystem Approach (EcAp) with the objective of achieving Good Environmental Status (GES) for 2018. To assess the Environmental Status, the EcAp proposes 11 Ecological Objectives, each of which requires a set of relevant indicators to be integrated. Progress towards the EcAp entails a gradual and important challenge for North-African countries, and efforts have to be initiated to propose and discuss methods. Accordingly, to enhance the capacity of North-African countries to implement EcAp and particularly to propose and discuss indicators and methods to assess GES, the aim of this manuscript is to identify the practical problems and gaps found at each stage of the Environmental Status assessment process. For this purpose, a stepwise method has been proposed to assess the Environmental Status using Ecologic Objective 5-Eutrophication as example.

Assessing the sensitivity of blue mussel beds to pressures associated with human activities.

The Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) commissioned this project to generate an improved understanding of the sensitivities of blue mussel (Mytilus edulis) beds, found in UK waters, to pressures associated with human activities in the marine environment. The work will provide an evidence base that will facilitate and support management advice for Marine Protected Areas, development of UK marine monitoring and assessment, and conservation advice to offshore marine industries. Blue mussel beds are identified as a Habitat of Principle Importance (HPI) under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, as a Priority Marine Feature (PMF) under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, and included on the OSPAR (Annex V) list of threatened and declining species and habitats. The purpose of this project was to produce sensitivity assessments for the blue mussel biotopes included within the HPI, PMF and OSPAR habitat definitions, and clearly document the supporting evidence behind the assessments and any differences between them. A total of 20 pressures falling in five categories - biological, hydrological, physical damage, physical loss, and pollution and other chemical changes - were assessed in this report. The review examined seven blue mussel bed biotopes found on littoral sediment and sublittoral rock and sediment. The assessments were based on the sensitivity of M. edulis rather than associated species, as M. edulis was considered the most important characteristic species in blue mussel beds. To develop each sensitivity assessment, the resistance and resilience of the key elements are assessed against the pressure benchmark using the available evidence gathered in this review. The benchmarks were designed to provide a ‘standard’ level of pressure against which to assess sensitivity. Blue mussel beds were highly sensitive to a few human activities: • introduction or spread of non-indigenous species (NIS); • habitat structure changes - removal of substratum (extraction); and • physical loss (to land or freshwater habitat). Physical loss of habitat and removal of substratum are particularly damaging pressures, while the sensitivity of blue mussel beds to non-indigenous species depended on the species assessed. Crepidula fornicata and Crassostrea gigas both had the potential to outcompete and replace mussel beds, so resulted in a high sensitivity assessment. Mytilus spp. populations are considered to have a strong ability to recover from environmental disturbance. A good annual recruitment may allow a bed to recovery rapidly, though this cannot always be expected due to the sporadic nature of M. edulis recruitment. Therefore, blue mussel beds were considered to have a 'Medium' resilience (recovery within 2-10 years). As a result, even where the removal or loss of proportion of a mussel bed was expected due to a pressure, a sensitivity of 'Medium' was reported. Hence, most of the sensitivities reported were 'Medium'. It was noted, however, that the recovery rates of blue mussel beds were reported to be anywhere between two years to several decades. In addition, M. edulis is considered very tolerant of a range of physical and chemical conditions. As a result, blue mussel beds were considered to be 'Not sensitive' to changes in temperature, salinity, de-oxygenation, nutrient and organic enrichment, and substratum type, at the benchmark level of pressure. The report found that no distinct differences in overall sensitivity exist between the HPI, PMF and OSPAR definitions. Individual biotopes do however have different sensitivities to pressures, and the OSPAR definition only includes blue mussel beds on sediment. These differences were determined by the position of the habitat on the shore and the sediment type. For example, the infralittoral rock biotope (A3.361) was unlikely to be exposed to pressures that affect sediments. However in the case of increased water flow, mixed sediment biotopes were considered more stable and ‘Not sensitive’ (at the benchmark level) while the remaining biotopes were likely to be affected.

Using a clearly documented, evidence-based approach to create sensitivity assessments allows the assessment basis and any subsequent decision making or management plans to be readily communicated, transparent and justifiable. The assessments can be replicated and updated where new evidence becomes available ensuring the longevity of the sensitivity assessment tool. For every pressure where sensitivity was previously assessed as a range of scores in MB0102, the assessments made by the evidence review have supported one of the MB0102 assessments. The evidence review has reduced the uncertainty around assessments previously undertaken in the MB0102 project (Tillin et al., 2010) by assigning a single sensitivity score to the pressures as opposed to a range. Finally, as blue mussel bed habitats also contribute to ecosystem function and the delivery of ecosystem services, understanding the sensitivity of these biotopes may also support assessment and management in regard to these. Whatever objective measures are applied to data to assess sensitivity, the final sensitivity assessment is indicative. The evidence, the benchmarks, the confidence in the assessments and the limitations of the process, require a sense-check by experienced marine ecologists before the outcome is used in management decisions.