The Mechanics of QSR 2000

Assessment of the quality of the marine environment forms an important part of the new 1992 OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic that was ratified and entered into force on 25 March 1998. In the ministerial statement at the signing of the Convention it was agreed that the first assessment (Quality Status Report, QSR) for all Convention waters should be produced for the year 2000. To oversee this charge a new Environmental Assessment and Monitoring Committee (ASMO) was established and a junior group under this committee, to implement necessary actions, the Assessment Co-ordination Group (ACG). Because of the wide geographical diversity and varying levels of information available in different parts of the Convention area it was decided to produce five regional reports for: I The Arctic; II The North Sea; III The Celtic seas; IV The Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast; V The Wider Atlantic, which will be synthesised in a holistic QSR for the year 2000. The report for the North Sea will largely be an update of QSR 1993 and forms the third cycle of a developing management system for the North Sea. This paper will present the procedures that have been adopted to implement the QSRs, and outlines the guidelines that have been developed for their structure, format, design and publication.

DIESE Final Report

The DIESE program (Determination of relevant Indicators for Environmental monitoring: A Strategy for Europe) brought together seven French and British research teams, a private company and the agencies responsible for the management of water bodies of the two countries (ONEMA and the Environmental Agency) in a joint effort to document the ecotoxicological effects related to the presence of chemicals in the environment. To contribute to a better understanding and management of the environment, the program has expanded its efforts to (1) use existing knowledge, or new information acquired during the research program, to identify important biological problems affecting wildlife, (2) increase our understanding of toxicological mechanisms involved and thus be able to identify the causes of the identified dysfunctions and (3) to hone our expertise and vigilance systems in order to better monitor changes in the environment and make appropriate diagnoses. The first part of the program identified clear biological effects, and using biological tests representative of the mechanisms of action of compounds, identified the responsible compounds present in the environment. In connection with the feminization observed in many fish species in European streams, a search for estrogenic and anti-androgenic compounds was conducted. A new test identifying estrogenic compounds has been developed in roach and the ER-Calux test for anti-androgenic effects has been implemented. The results showed that, in addition to biocides such as triclosan and chlorophène, many aromatic hydrocarbon compounds are likely to disturb the physiology of living organisms by interacting with the androgen receptor. Six of these were identified in sediment extracts: benzanthrone, fluoranthene, 1,2- benzodiphenylene sulfide, benzo[a]pyrene, benz[a] anthracene, and 9-phenylcarbazole. The second part of the program aimed at documenting and understanding the mechanisms of action of chemicals leading to physiological changes. This work represents a particular challenge when dealing with molluscs, as knowledge about their physiology and endocrinology is still fragmentary. Thus, new technologies including metabolomic and transcriptomic analyses have been implemented in order to obtain a comprehensive picture of the effects on molluscs. Metabolomic research demonstrated that estrogenic compounds are able to alter the metabolism of eicosanoids and amines, while transcriptomic strategies identified genes whose expression is altered in intersex clams. Because these genes mainly appear as “male” genes, the results suggest that these profound physiological changes result from demasculinisation of male clams. Proteomic studies have also been carried out to elucidate the mechanisms of action of pollutants on fish physiology. These studies generally included a set of molecular marker measurements in an integrative and ecological perspective. The results showed that not only male fish physiology is altered but also female reproductive status is impaired. Moreover, it appeared that other alterations of the fish endocrine system, such as androgenic effects, are at work and that the immune system is also subject to chemical pressure including effects from environmental estrogens. Notably, the immune system, like the endocrine system, seems to show periods of particular sensitivity during development. Measurements on growth and on the general metabolism emphasize the importance of environmental conditions in the physiology of aquatic organisms and in particular the inter-site variability due to temperature,hypoxic conditions, and fish development strategies. They thus provide a unique perspective that allow us to better understand the context and consequences of natural conditions on the population. In a third part of the program, the research conducted had the objective of developing and testing a biomarker strategy to support the environmental management methodologies. Two lanes of specific studies have been followed. The first was to implement, over all or part of the study area, robust biomarkers to establish maps that highlight the water bodies at risk and provide information on sources of compounds and associated disturbances. The second part of the work aimed at exploring methodologies to take advantage of biomarker measurements and to integrate them in a very simple and clear index. Partial or comprehensive maps of the Channel area were produced to report the presence of mutagenic or anti-androgenic compounds in the sediments, intersex fish and clams, and imposex. These maps may remain to be completed and work will be necessary to confront this information in order to learn relevant lessons for management of the environment, a goal that the DIESE program has contributed to by providing some necessary and original information.

Making modelling count - increasing the contribution of shelf-seas community and ecosystem models to policy development and management

Marine legislation is becoming more complex and marine ecosystem-based management is specified in national and regional legislative frameworks. Shelf-seas community and ecosystem models (hereafter termed ecosystem models) are central to the delivery of ecosystem-based management, but there is limited uptake and use of model products by decision makers in Europe and the UK in comparison with other countries. In this study, the challenges to the uptake and use of ecosystem models in support of marine environmental management are assessed using the UK capability as an example. The UK has a broad capability in marine ecosystem modelling, with at least 14 different models that support management, but few examples exist of ecosystem modelling that underpin policy or management decisions. To improve understanding of policy and management issues that can be addressed using ecosystem models, a workshop was convened that brought together advisors, assessors, biologists, social scientists, economists, modellers, statisticians, policy makers, and funders. Some policy requirements were identified that can be addressed without further model development including: attribution of environmental change to underlying drivers, integration of models and observations to develop more efficient monitoring programmes, assessment of indicator performance for different management goals, and the costs and benefit of legislation. Multi-model ensembles are being developed in cases where many models exist, but model structures are very diverse making a standardised approach of combining outputs a significant challenge, and there is a need for new methodologies for describing, analysing, and visualising uncertainties. A stronger link to social and economic systems is needed to increase the range of policy-related questions that can be addressed. It is also important to improve communication between policy and modelling communities so that there is a shared understanding of the strengths and limitations of ecosystem models.