How well does the Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) sample zooplankton? A comparison with the Longhurst Hardy Plankton Recorder (LHPR) in the northeast Atlantic

The Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) survey has collected data on basin- scale zooplankton abundance in the North Atlantic since the 1930s. These data have been used in many studies to elucidate seasonal patterns and long-term change in plankton populations, as well as more recently to validate ecosystem models. There has, however, been relatively little comparison of the data from the CPR with that from other samplers. In this study we compare zooplankton abundance estimated from the CPR in the northeast Atlantic with near-surface samples collected by a Longhurst-Hardy Plankton Recorder (LHPR) at Ocean Weather Station India (59 degree N, 19 degree W) between 1971 and 1975. Comparisons were made for six common copepods in the region: Acartia clausi, Calanus finmarchicus, Euchaeta norvegica, Metridia lucens, Oithona sp. and Pleuromamma robusta. Seasonal cycles based on CPR data were similar to those recorded by the LHPR. Differences in absolute abundances were apparent, however, with the CPR underestimating abundances by a factor of between 5 and 40, with the exception of A. clausi. Active avoidance by zooplankton is thought to be responsible. This avoidance is species specific, so that care must be taken describing communities, as the CPR emphasises those species that are preferentially caught, a problem common to many plankton samplers.

How well do ecosystem indicators communicate the effects of anthropogenic eutrophication?

Anthropogenic eutrophication affects the Mediterranean, Black, North and Baltic Seas to various extents. Responses to nutrient loading and methods of monitoring relevant indicators vary regionally, hindering interpretation of ecosystem state changes and preventing a straightforward pan-European assessment of eutrophication symptoms. Here we summarize responses to nutrient enrichment in Europe's seas, comparing existing time-series of selected pelagic (phytoplankton biomass and community composition, turbidity, N:P ratio) and benthic (macro flora and faunal communities, bottom oxygen condition) indicators based on their effectiveness in assessing eutrophication effects. Our results suggest that the Black Sea and Northern Adriatic appear to be recovering from eutrophication due to economic reorganization in the Black Sea catchment and nutrient abatement measures in the case of the Northern Adriatic. The Baltic is most strongly impacted by eutrophication due to its limited exchange and the prevalence of nutrient recycling. Eutrophication in the North Sea is primarily a coastal problem, but may be exacerbated by climatic changes. Indicator interpretation is strongly dependent on sea-specific knowledge of ecosystem characteristics, and no single indicator can be employed to adequately compare eutrophication state between European seas. Communicating eutrophication-related information to policy-makers could be facilitated through the use of consistent indicator selection and monitoring methodologies across European seas. This work is discussed in the context of the European Commission's recently published Marine Strategy Directive.

Influences of the Oceans on Human Health and Well-Being

Human health and well-being are tied to the vitality of the global ocean and coastal systems on which so many live and rely. We engage with these extraordinary environments to enhance both our health and our well-being. But, we need to recognize that introducing contaminants and otherwise altering these ocean systems can harm human health and well-being in significant and substantial ways. These are complex, challenging, and critically important themes. How the human relationship to the oceans evolves in coming decades may be one of the most important connections in understanding our personal and social well-being. Yet, our understanding of this relationship is far too limited. This remarkable volume brings experts from diverse disciplines and builds a workable understanding of breadth and depth of the processes – both social and environmental – that will help us to limit future costs and enhance the benefits of sustainable marine systems. In particular, the authors have developed a shared view that the global coastal environment is under threat through intensified natural resource utilization, as well as changes to global climate and other environmental systems. All these changes contribute individually, but more importantly cumulatively, to higher risks for public health and to the global burden of disease. This pioneering book will be of value to advanced undergraduate and postgraduate students taking courses in public health, environmental, economic, and policy fields. Additionally, the treatment of these complex systems is of essential value to the policy community responsible for these questions and to the broader audience for whom these issues are more directly connected to their own health and well-being.

Remote sensing of assimilation number for marine phytoplankton

Estimating primary production at large spatial scales is key to our understanding of the global carbon cycle. Algorithms to estimate primary production are well established and have been used in many studies with success. One of the key parameters in these algorithms is the chlorophyll-normalised production rate under light saturation (referred to as the light saturation parameter or the assimilation number). It is known to depend on temperature, light history and nutrient conditions, but assigning a magnitude to it at particular space-time points is difficult. In this paper, we explore two models to estimate the assimilation number at the global scale from remotely-sensed data that combine methods to estimate the carbon-to-chlorophyll ratio and the maximum growth rate of phytoplankton. The inputs to the algorithms are the surface concentration of chlorophyll, seasurface temperature, photosynthetically-active radiation af the surface of the sea, sea surface nutrient concentration and mixed-layer depth. A large database of in situ estimates of the assimilation number is used to develop the models and provide elements of validation. The comparisons with in situ observations are promising and global maps of assimilation number are produced.

Family-level AMBI is valid for use in the north-eastern Atlantic but not for assessing the health of microtidal Australian estuaries

Analysis of benthic macroinvertebrate samples at a higher taxonomic level than species, e.g. family, potentially provides a more cost-effective protocol for environmental impact assessments and monitoring as it requires less time, funds and taxonomic expertise. Using the AMBI database, species ecological group scores are shown to be coherent within families. Faunal data from a wide range of environmental impact scenarios in the north-eastern Atlantic demonstrate that AMBI, calculated from mean values for families, exhibits a strong linear relationship with species-level AMBI, the correlation improving by using square-root transformed rather than untransformed abundances. In many regions of the world, however, the sensitivity of benthic macroinvertebrates to environmental perturbations is unknown, precluding the use of AMBI for environmental assessments. Yet the families are essentially the same as in the AMBI database. The utility of family-level AMBI is tested using data for four south-western Australian estuaries previously subjected to environmental quality assessments, but where only 17 species of the 144 taxa are included in the AMBI database. Although family-level AMBI scores reflect differences in environmental quality spatially and temporally within an estuary, they do not follow variations in environmental quality among estuaries. Indeed, south-western Australia estuaries are numerically dominated by families with high AMBI scores, probably due to the detrimental effects of natural accumulations of organic material in estuaries with long residence times. As taxonomic distinctness follows trends in environmental quality among estuaries, as well as temporally and spatially within a system, it provides an appropriate substitute for assessing the 'heath' of microtidal estuaries.

Tillin, H. & Tyler-Walters, H., 2014. Assessing the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats to pressures associated with marine activities. Phase 2 Report – Literature review and sensitivity assessments for ecological groups for circalittoral and offshore Level 5 biotopes. JNCC Report No. 512B, 260 pp.

Human activities within the marine environment give rise to a number of pressures on seabed habitats. Improved understanding of the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats is required to underpin the management advice provided for Marine Protected Areas, as well as supporting other UK marine monitoring and assessment work. The sensitivity of marine sedimentary habitats to a range of pressures induced by human activities has previously been systematically assessed using approaches based on expert judgement for Defra Project MB0102 (Tillin et al. 2010). This previous work assessed sensitivity at the level of the broadscale habitat and therefore the scores were typically expressed as a range due to underlying variation in the sensitivity of the constituent biotopes. The objective of this project was to reduce the uncertainty around identifying the sensitivity of selected subtidal sedimentary habitats by assessing sensitivity, at a finer scale and incorporating information on the biological assemblage, for 33 Level 5 circalittoral and offshore biotopes taken from the Marine Habitat Classification of Britain and Ireland (Connor et al. 2004). Two Level 6 sub-biotopes were also included in this project as these contain distinctive characterising species that differentiate them from the Level 5 parent biotope. Littoral, infralittoral, reduced and variable salinity sedimentary habitats were excluded from this project as the scope was set for assessment of circalittoral and offshore sedimentary communities. This project consisted of three Phases. • Phase 1 - define ecological groups based on similarities in the sensitivity of characterising species from the Level 5 and two Level 6 biotopes described above. • Phase 2 - produce a literature review of information on the resilience and resistance of characterising species of the ecological groups to pressures associated with activities in the marine environment. • Phase 3 - to produce sensitivity assessment ‘proformas’ based on the findings of Phase 2 for each ecological group. This report outlines results of Phase 2. The Tillin et al., (2010) sensitivity assessment methodology was modified to use the best available scientific evidence that could be collated within the project timescale. An extensive literature review was compiled, for peer reviewed and grey literature, to examine current understanding about the effects of pressures from human activities on circalittoral and offshore sedimentary communities in UK continental shelf waters, together with information on factors that contribute to resilience (recovery) of marine species. This review formed the basis of an assessment of the sensitivity of the 16 ecological groups identified in Phase 1 of the project (Tillin & Tyler-Walters 2014). As a result: • the state of knowledge on the effects of each pressure on circalittoral and offshore benthos was reviewed; • the resistance, resilience and, hence, sensitivity of sixteen ecological groups, representing 96 characteristic species, were assessed for eight separate pressures; • each assessment was accompanied by a detailed review of the relevant evidence; Assessing the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats to pressures associated with human activities • knowledge gaps and sources of uncertainty were identified for each group; • each assessment was accompanied by an assessment of the quality of the evidence, its applicability to the assessment and the degree of concordance (agreement) between the evidence, to highlight sources of uncertainty as an assessment of the overall confidence in the sensitivity assessment, and finally • limitations in the methodology and the application of sensitivity assessments were outlined. This process demonstrated that the ecological groups identified in Phase 1 (Tillin & Tyler-Walters 2014) were viable groups for sensitivity assessment, and could be used to represent the 33 circalittoral and offshore sediments biotopes identified at the beginning of the project. The results of the sensitivity assessments show: • the majority of species and hence ecological groups in sedimentary habitats are sensitive to physical change, especially loss of habitat and sediment extraction, and change in sediment type; • most sedimentary species are sensitive to physical damage, e.g. abrasion and penetration, although deep burrowing species (e.g. the Dublin Bay prawn - Nephrops norvegicus and the sea cucumber - Neopentadactyla mixta) are able to avoid damaging effects to varying degrees, depending on the depth of penetration and time of year; • changes in hydrography (wave climate, tidal streams and currents) can significantly affect sedimentary communities, depending on whether they are dominated by deposit, infaunal feeders or suspension feeders, and dependant on the nature of the sediment, which is itself modified by hydrography and depth; • sedentary species and ecological groups that dominate the top-layer of the sediment (either shallow burrowing or epifaunal) remain the most sensitive to physical damage; • mobile species (e.g. interstitial and burrowing amphipods, and perhaps cumaceans) are the least sensitive to physical change or damage, and hydrological change as they are already adapted to unstable, mobile substrata; • sensitivity to changes in organic enrichment and hence oxygen levels, is variable between species and ecological groups, depending on the exact habitat preferences of the species in question, although most species have at least a medium sensitivity to acute deoxygenation; • there is considerable evidence on the effects of bottom-contact fishing practices and aggregate dredging on sedimentary communities, although not all evidence is directly applicable to every ecological group; • there is lack of detailed information on the physiological tolerances (e.g. to oxygenation, salinity, and temperature), habitat preferences, life history and population dynamics of many species, so that inferences has been made from related species, families, or even the same phylum; • there was inadequate evidence to assess the effects of non-indigenous species on most ecological groups, and Assessing the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats to pressures associated with human activities • there was inadequate evidence to assess the effects of electromagnetic fields and litter on any ecological group. The resultant report provides an up-to-date review of current knowledge about the effects of pressures resulting from human activities of circalittoral and offshore sedimentary communities. It provides an evidence base to facilitate and support the provision of management advice for Marine Protected Areas, development of UK marine monitoring and assessment, and conservation advice to offshore marine industries. However, such a review will require at least annual updates to take advantage of new evidence and new research as it becomes available. Also further work is required to test how ecological group assessments are best combined in practice to advise on the sensitivity of a range of sedimentary biotopes, including the 33 that were originally examined.