Transregional linkages in the North-Eastern Atlantic - An ‘end-to-end ’ analysis of pelagic ecosystems

This review examines interregional linkages and gives an overview perspective on marine ecosystem functioning in the north-eastern Atlantic. It is based on three of the 'systems' considered by the European Network of Excellence for Ocean Ecosystems Analysis (EUR-OC EANS was established in 2004 under the European Framework VI funding programme to promote integration of marine ecological research within Europe), the Arctic and Nordic Seas, North Atlantic shelf seas and North Atlantic. The three systems share common open boundaries and the transport of water, heat, nutrients and particulates across these boundaries modifies local processes. Consistent with the EUR-OC EANS concept of 'end-to-end' analyses of marine food webs, the review takes an integrated approach linking ocean physics, lower trophic levels and working up the food web to top predators such as marine mammals. We begin with an overview of the regions focusing on the major physical patterns and their implications for the microbial community, phytoplankton, zooplankton, fish and top predators. Human-induced links between the regional systems are then considered and finally possible changes in the regional linkages over the next century are discussed. Because of the scale of potential impacts of climate change, this issue is considered in a separate section. The review demonstrates that the functioning of the ecosystems in each of the regions cannot be considered in isolation and the role of the atmosphere and ocean currents in linking the North Atlantic Ocean, North Atlantic shelf seas and the Arctic and Nordic Seas must be taken into account. Studying the North Atlantic and associated shelf seas as an integrated 'basin-scale' system will be a key challenge for the early twenty-first century. This requires a multinational approach that should lead to improved ecosystem-based approaches to conservation of natural resources, the maintenance of biodiversity, and a better understanding of the key role of the north-eastern Atlantic in the global carbon cycle.

The Importance of Regional, System-Wide and Local Spatial Scales in Structuring Temperate Estuarine Fish Communities

An extensive literature base worldwide demonstrates how spatial differences in estuarine fish assemblages are related to those in the environment at (bio)regional, estuary-wide or local (within-estuary) scales. Few studies, however, have examined all three scales, and those including more than one have often focused at the level of individual environmental variables rather than scales as a whole. This study has identified those spatial scales of environmental differences, across regional, estuary-wide and local levels, that are most important in structuring ichthyofaunal composition throughout south-western Australian estuaries. It is the first to adopt this approach for temperate microtidal waters. To achieve this, we have employed a novel approach to the BIOENV routine in PRIMER v6 and a modified global BEST test in an alpha version of PRIMER v7. A combination of all three scales best matched the pattern of ichthyofaunal differences across the study area (rho = 0.59; P = 0.001), with estuary-wide and regional scales accounting for about twice the variability of local scales. A shade plot analysis showed these broader-scale ichthyofaunal differences were driven by a greater diversity of marine and estuarine species in the permanently-open west coast estuaries and higher numbers of several small estuarine species in the periodically-open south coast estuaries. When interaction effects were explored, strong but contrasting influences of local environmental scales were revealed within each region and estuary type. A quantitative decision tree for predicting the fish fauna at any nearshore estuarine site in south-western Australia has also been produced. The estuarine management implications of the above findings are highlighted.

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.