Priority questions to shape the marine and coastal policy research agenda in the United Kingdom

United Kingdom (UK) and European Union policy is rapidly developing to meet international targets for the sustainable use and protection of the marine environment. To inform this process, research needs to keep pace with these changes and research questions must be focused on providing robust scientific evidence. Thirty four priority research questions within six broad themes were identified by delegates who attended the 1st marine and coastal policy Forum, hosted by the Centre for Marine and Coastal Policy Research at Plymouth University in June 2011. The priority questions formed through this research are timely and reflect the pace and change of marine policy in the UK in response to international, European and national policy drivers. Within the data theme, the majority of questions seek to find improved procedures to manage and use data effectively. Questions related to governance focus on how existing policies should be implemented. The marine conservation questions focus entirely upon implementation and monitoring of existing policy. Questions related to ecosystem services focus on research to support the conceptual links between ecosystem services, ecosystem function, and marine management. Questions relating to marine citizenship are fundamental questions about the nature of societal engagement with the sea. Finally, the marine planning questions focus upon understanding the general approaches to be taken to marine planning rather than its detailed implementation. The questions that have emerged from this process vary in scale, approach and focus. They identify the interdisciplinary science that is currently needed to enable the UK to work towards delivering its European and international commitments to achieve the sustainable use and protection of the marine environment

Ecological Investigations with the Continuous Plankton Recorder: The Zooplankton (other than Copepoda and Young Fish) in the Southern North Sea, 1932-37.

I. The report describes the main monthly changes in the distribution and abundance of the zooplankton, other than Copepoda and young fish (dealt with in separate reports), over the southern part of the North Sea from 1932 to 1937. The work is part of the survey carried out by Continuous Plankton Recorders towed at a depth of 10 metres on regular steamship lines between England and the Continent. 2. The limitations to the sampling method are discussed, and it is shown to be unsuitable for recording Mysidacea and Euphausiacea on account of their marked diurnal variation due presumably to vertical migration; they are omitted from the report. 3. The changing distribution of Sagitta, Limacina, Clione, Lamellibranch larvae, Cladocera, Caprellid Amphipoda, Decapod larvae, Echinoderm larvae and Oikopleura are shown in a series of monthly charts while their seasonal fluctuations are compared in time-chart histograms. 4. The Alima larvae of Squilla are recorded on a few occasions in the regions where the Channel opens into the North Sea. 5. The distributional characteristics of the different forms, i.e. their tendencies to even or " patchy " production, are compared.

A method to assess the sensitivity of sedimentary communities to fishing activities.

1.Methods of sensitivity assessment to identify species and habitats in need of management or protection have been available since the 1970s. 2.The approach to sensitivity assessment adopted by the Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) assumes that the sensitivity of a community or biotope is dependent on the species within it. However, the application of this approach to sedimentary communities, especially offshore, is complex because of a lack of knowledge of the structural or functional role of many sedimentary species. 3.This paper describes a method to assess the overall sensitivity of sedimentary communities, based on the intolerance and recoverability of component species to physical disturbance. A range of methods were applied to identify the best combinations of abundant, dominant or high biomass species for the assessment of sensitivity in the sedimentary communities examined. 4.Results showed that reporting the most frequent species' sensitivity assessment, irrespective of the four methods used to select species, consistently underestimated the total sensitivity of the community. In contrast, reporting the most sensitive assessment from those species selected resulted in a range of biotope sensitivities from very low to very high, that was better able to discriminate between the sensitivities of the communities examined. 5.The assumptions behind the methodology, its limitations and potential application are discussed.