Marine biodiversity and climate change: assessing and predicting the influence of climatic change using intertidal rocky shore biota. Occasional Publication of the Marine Biological Association 20

In the last 60 years climate change has altered the distribution and abundance of many seashore species. Below is a summary of the findings of this project. The MarClim project was a four year multi-partner funded project created to investigate the effects of climatic warming on marine biodiversity. In particular the project aimed to use intertidal species, whose abundances had been shown to fluctuate with changes in climatic conditions, as indicator species of likely responses of species not only on rocky shores, but also those found offshore. The project used historic time series data, from in some cases the 1950s onwards, and contemporary data collected as part of the MarClim project (2001-2005), to provide evidence of changes in the abundance, range and population structure of intertidal species and relate these changes to recent rapid climatic warming. In particular quantitative counts of barnacles, limpets and trochids were made as well as semi-quantitative surveys of up to 56 intertidal taxa.Historic and contemporary data informed experiments to understand the mechanisms behind these changes and models to predict future species ranges and abundances.

Effect of elevated CO2 on the dynamics of particle-attached and free-living bacterioplankton communities in an Arctic fjord

In the frame of the European Project on Ocean Acidification (EPOCA), the response of an Arctic pelagic community (<3 mm) to a gradient of seawater pCO(2) was investigated. For this purpose 9 large-scale in situ mesocosms were deployed in Kongsfjorden, Svalbard (78 degrees 56.2' N, 11 degrees 53.6' E), in 2010. The present study investigates effects on the communities of particle-attached (PA; >3 mu m) and free-living (FL; <3 mu m > 0.2 mu m) bacteria by Automated Ribosomal Intergenic Spacer Analysis (ARISA) in 6 of the mesocosms, ranging from 185 to 1050 mu atm initial pCO(2), and the surrounding fjord. ARISA was able to resolve, on average, 27 bacterial band classes per sample and allowed for a detailed investigation of the explicit richness and diversity. Both, the PA and the FL bacterioplankton community exhibited a strong temporal development, which was driven mainly by temperature and phytoplankton development. In response to the breakdown of a picophytoplankton bloom, numbers of ARISA band classes in the PA community were reduced at low and medium CO2 (similar to 185-685 mu atm) by about 25 %, while they were more or less stable at high CO2 (similar to 820-1050 mu atm). We hypothesise that enhanced viral lysis and enhanced availability of organic substrates at high CO2 resulted in a more diverse PA bacterial community in the post-bloom phase. Despite lower cell numbers and extracellular enzyme activities in the post-bloom phase, bacterial protein production was enhanced in high CO2 mesocosms, suggesting a positive effect of community richness on this function and on carbon cycling by bacteria.

European Project on Ocean Acidification (EPOCA): Objectives, products and scientific highlights

The European Project on Ocean Acidification (EPOCA) is Europe's first large-scale research initiative devoted to studying the impacts and consequences of ocean acidification. More than 100 scientists from 27 institutes and nine countries bring their expertise to the project, resulting in a multidisciplinary and versatile consortium. The project is funded for four years (2008 to 2012) by the European Commission within its Seventh Framework Programme. This article describes EPOCA and explains its different aspects, objectives, and products. Following a general introduction, six boxes highlight outcomes, techniques, and scientific results from each of the project's core themes.

Putting meaning into NETMAR – the open service network for marine environmental data

The open service network for marine environmental data (NETMAR) project uses semantic web technologies in its pilot system which aims to allow users to search, download and integrate satellite, in situ and model data from open ocean and coastal areas. The semantic web is an extension of the fundamental ideas of the World Wide Web, building a web of data through annotation of metadata and data with hyperlinked resources. Within the framework of the NETMAR project, an interconnected semantic web resource was developed to aid in data and web service discovery and to validate Open Geospatial Consortium Web Processing Service orchestration. A second semantic resource was developed to support interoperability of coastal web atlases across jurisdictional boundaries. This paper outlines the approach taken to producing the resource registry used within the NETMAR project and demonstrates the use of these semantic resources to support user interactions with systems. Such interconnected semantic resources allow the increased ability to share and disseminate data through the facilitation of interoperability between data providers. The formal representation of geospatial knowledge to advance geospatial interoperability is a growing research area. Tools and methods such as those outlined in this paper have the potential to support these efforts.

Assessing the sensitivity of seagrass bed biotopes to pressures associated with marine activities.

This project was commissioned to generate an improved understanding of the sensitivities of seagrass habitats to pressures associated with human activities in the marine environment - to provide an evidence base to facilitate and support management advice for Marine Protected Areas; development of UK marine monitoring and assessment, and conservation advice to offshore marine industries. Seagrass bed habitats are identified as a Priority Marine Feature (PMF) under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, they are also included on the OSPAR list of threatened and declining species and habitats, and are a Habitat of Principle Importance (HPI) under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, in England and Wales. The purpose of this project was to produce sensitivity assessments with supporting evidence for the HPI, OSPAR and PMF seagrass/Zostera bed habitat definitions, clearly documenting the evidence behind the assessments and any differences between assessments. Nineteen pressures, falling in five categories - biological, hydrological, physical damage, physical loss, and pollution and other chemical changes - were assessed in this report. Assessments were based on the three British seagrasses Zostera marina, Z. noltei and Ruppia maritima. Z. marina var. angustifolia was considered to be a subspecies of Z. marina but it was specified where studies had considered it as a species in its own rights. Where possible other components of the community were investigated but the basis of the assessment focused on seagrass species. To develop each sensitivity assessment, the resistance and resilience of the key elements were assessed against the pressure benchmark using the available evidence. The benchmarks were designed to provide a ‘standard’ level of pressure against which to assess sensitivity. Overall, seagrass beds were highly sensitive to a number of human activities: • penetration or disturbance of the substratum below the surface; • habitat structure changes – removal of substratum; • physical change to another sediment type; • physical loss of habitat; • siltation rate changes including and smothering; and • changes in suspended solids. High sensitivity was recorded for pressures which directly impacted the factors that limit seagrass growth and health such as light availability. Physical pressures that caused mechanical modification of the sediment, and hence damage to roots and leaves, also resulted in high sensitivity. Seagrass beds were assessed as ‘not sensitive’ to microbial pathogens or ‘removal of target species’. These assessments were based on the benchmarks used. Z. marina is known to be sensitive to Labyrinthula zosterae but this was not included in the benchmark used. Similarly, ‘removal of target species’ addresses only the biological effects of removal and not the physical effects of the process used. For example, seagrass beds are probably not sensitive to the removal of scallops found within the bed but are highly sensitive to the effects of dredging for scallops, as assessed under the pressure penetration or disturbance of the substratum below the surface‘. This is also an example of a synergistic effect Assessing the sensitivity of seagrass bed biotopes to pressures associated with marine activities between pressures. Where possible, synergistic effects were highlighted but synergistic and cumulative effects are outside the scope off this study. The report found that no distinct differences in sensitivity exist between the HPI, PMF and OSPAR definitions. Individual biotopes do however have different sensitivities to pressures. These differences were determined by the species affected, the position of the habitat on the shore and the sediment type. For instance evidence showed that beds growing in soft and muddy sand were more vulnerable to physical damage than beds on harder, more compact substratum. Temporal effects can also influence the sensitivity of seagrass beds. On a seasonal time frame, physical damage to roots and leaves occurring in the reproductive season (summer months) will have a greater impact than damage in winter. On a daily basis, the tidal regime could accentuate or attenuate the effects of pressures depending on high and low tide. A variety of factors must therefore be taken into account in order to assess the sensitivity of a particular seagrass habitat at any location. No clear difference in resilience was established across the three seagrass definitions assessed in this report. The resilience of seagrass beds and the ability to recover from human induced pressures is a combination of the environmental conditions of the site, growth rates of the seagrass, the frequency and the intensity of the disturbance. This highlights the importance of considering the species affected as well as the ecology of the seagrass bed, the environmental conditions and the types and nature of activities giving rise to the pressure and the effects of that pressure. For example, pressures that result in sediment modification (e.g. pitting or erosion), sediment change or removal, prolong recovery. Therefore, the resilience of each biotope and habitat definitions is discussed for each pressure. Using a clearly documented, evidence based approach to create sensitivity assessments allows the assessment 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. 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 seagrass habitats may 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.

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.