Climate change and marine plankton

Understanding how climate change will affect the planet is a key issue worldwide. Questions concerning the pace and impacts of climate change are thus central to many ecological and biogeochemical studies, and addressing the consequences of climate change is now high on the list of priorities for funding agencies. Here, we review the interactions between climate change and plankton communities, focusing on systematic changes in plankton community structure, abundance, distribution and phenology over recent decades. We examine the potential socioeconomic impacts of these plankton changes, such as the effects of bottom-up forcing on commercially exploited fish stocks (i.e. plankton as food for fish). We also consider the crucial roles that plankton might have in dictating the future pace of climate change via feedback mechanisms responding to elevated atmospheric CO sub(2) levels. An important message emerges from this review: ongoing plankton monitoring programmes worldwide will act as sentinels to identify future changes in marine ecosystems.

A global ocean observing system framework for sustainable development

Sustainable development depends on maintaining ecosystem services which are concentrated in coastal marine and estuarine ecosystems. Analyses of the science needed to manage human uses of ecosystem services have concentrated on terrestrial ecosystems. Our focus is on the provision of multidisciplinary data needed to inform adaptive, ecosystem-based approaches (EBAs) for maintaining coastal ecosystem services based on comparative ecosystem analyses. Key indicators of pressures on coastal ecosystems, ecosystem states and the impacts of changes in states on services are identified for monitoring and analysis at a global coastal network of sentinel sites nested in the ocean-climate observing system. Biodiversity is targeted as the “master” indicator because of its importance to a broad spectrum of services. Ultimately, successful implementation of EBAs will depend on establishing integrated, holistic approaches to ocean governance that oversee the development of integrated, operational ocean observing systems based on the data and information requirements specified by a broad spectrum of stakeholders for sustainable development. Sustained engagement of such a spectrum of stakeholders on a global scale is not feasible. The global coastal network will need to be customized locally and regionally based on priorities established by stakeholders in their respective regions. The E.U. Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the U.S. Recommendations of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force are important examples of emerging regional scale approaches. The effectiveness of these policies will depend on the co-evolution of ocean policy and the observing system under the auspices of integrated ocean governance.

A uniform, quality controlled Surface Ocean CO2 Atlas (SOCAT)

A well documented, publicly available, global data set of surface ocean carbon dioxide (CO2) parameters has been called for by international groups for nearly two decades. The Surface Ocean CO2 Atlas (SOCAT) project was initiated by the international marine carbon science community in 2007 with the aim of providing a comprehensive, publicly available, regularly updated, global data set of marine surface CO2, which had been subject to quality control (QC). Many additional CO2 data, not yet made public via the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC), were retrieved from data originators, public websites and other data centres. All data were put in a uniform format following a strict protocol. Quality control was carried out according to clearly defined criteria. Regional specialists performed the quality control, using state-of-the-art web-based tools, specially developed for accomplishing this global team effort. SOCAT version 1.5 was made public in September 2011 and holds 6.3 million quality controlled surface CO2 data points from the global oceans and coastal seas, spanning four decades (1968–2007). Three types of data products are available: individual cruise files, a merged complete data set and gridded products. With the rapid expansion of marine CO2 data collection and the importance of quantifying net global oceanic CO2 uptake and its changes, sustained data synthesis and data access are priorities.

A uniform, quality controlled Surface Ocean CO2 Atlas (SOCAT)

A well-documented, publicly available, global data set of surface ocean carbon dioxide (CO2) parameters has been called for by international groups for nearly two decades. The Surface Ocean CO2 Atlas (SOCAT) project was initiated by the international marine carbon science community in 2007 with the aim of providing a comprehensive, publicly available, regularly updated, global data set of marine surface CO2, which had been subject to quality control (QC). Many additional CO2 data, not yet made public via the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC), were retrieved from data originators, public websites and other data centres. All data were put in a uniform format following a strict protocol. Quality control was carried out according to clearly defined criteria. Regional specialists performed the quality control, using state-of-the-art web-based tools, specially developed for accomplishing this global team effort. SOCAT version 1.5 was made public in September 2011 and holds 6.3 million quality controlled surface CO2 data points from the global oceans and coastal seas, spanning four decades (1968–2007). Three types of data products are available: individual cruise files, a merged complete data set and gridded products. With the rapid expansion of marine CO2 data collection and the importance of quantifying net global oceanic CO2 uptake and its changes, sustained data synthesis and data access are priorities.

Comparisons of zooplankton time series

Evidence for climate-correlated low frequency variability of various components of marine ecosystems has accumulated rapidly over the past 2 decades. There has also been a growing recognition that society needs to learn how the fluctuations of these various components are linked, and to predict the likely amplitude and steepness of future changes. Demographic characteristics of marine zooplankton make them especially suitable for examining variability of marine ecosystems at interannual to decadal time scales. Their life cycle duration is short enough that there is little carryover of population membership from year to year, but long enough that variability can be tracked with monthly-to-seasonal sampling. Because zooplankton are rarely fished, comparative analysis of changes in their abundance can greatly enhance our ability to evaluate the importance of and interaction between physical environment, food web, and fishery harvest as causal mechanisms driving ecosystem level changes. A number of valuable within-region analyses of zooplankton time series have been published in the past decade, covering a variety of modes of variability including changes in total biomass, changes in size structure and species composition, changes in spatial distribution, and changes in seasonal timing. But because most zooplankton time series are relatively short compared to the time scales of interest, the statistical power of local analyses is often low, and between-region and between-variable comparisons are also needed. In this paper, we review the results of recent within- and between-region analyses, and suggest some priorities for future work.

Impacts of the Oceans on Climate Change

The oceans play a key role in climate regulation especially in part buffering (neutralising) the effects of increasing levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and rising global temperatures. This chapter examines how the regulatory processes performed by the oceans alter as a response to climate change and assesses the extent to which positive feedbacks from the ocean may exacerbate climate change. There is clear evidence for rapid change in the oceans. As the main heat store for the world there has been an accelerating change in sea temperatures over the last few decades, which has contributed to rising sea‐level. The oceans are also the main store of carbon dioxide (CO2), and are estimated to have taken up ∼40% of anthropogenic-sourced CO2 from the atmosphere since the beginning of the industrial revolution. A proportion of the carbon uptake is exported via the four ocean ‘carbon pumps’ (Solubility, Biological, Continental Shelf and Carbonate Counter) to the deep ocean reservoir. Increases in sea temperature and changing planktonic systems and ocean currents may lead to a reduction in the uptake of CO2 by the ocean; some evidence suggests a suppression of parts of the marine carbon sink is already underway. While the oceans have buffered climate change through the uptake of CO2 produced by fossil fuel burning this has already had an impact on ocean chemistry through ocean acidification and will continue to do so. Feedbacks to climate change from acidification may result from expected impacts on marine organisms (especially corals and calcareous plankton), ecosystems and biogeochemical cycles. The polar regions of the world are showing the most rapid responses to climate change. As a result of a strong ice–ocean influence, small changes in temperature, salinity and ice cover may trigger large and sudden changes in regional climate with potential downstream feedbacks to the climate of the rest of the world. A warming Arctic Ocean may lead to further releases of the potent greenhouse gas methane from hydrates and permafrost. The Southern Ocean plays a critical role in driving, modifying and regulating global climate change via the carbon cycle and through its impact on adjacent Antarctica. The Antarctic Peninsula has shown some of the most rapid rises in atmospheric and oceanic temperature in the world, with an associated retreat of the majority of glaciers. Parts of the West Antarctic ice sheet are deflating rapidly, very likely due to a change in the flux of oceanic heat to the undersides of the floating ice shelves. The final section on modelling feedbacks from the ocean to climate change identifies limitations and priorities for model development and associated observations. Considering the importance of the oceans to climate change and our limited understanding of climate-related ocean processes, our ability to measure the changes that are taking place are conspicuously inadequate. The chapter highlights the need for a comprehensive, adequately funded and globally extensive ocean observing system to be implemented and sustained as a high priority. Unless feedbacks from the oceans to climate change are adequately included in climate change models, it is possible that the mitigation actions needed to stabilise CO2 and limit temperature rise over the next century will be underestimated.

Climate change and food safety: A review

Climate change and variability may have an impact on the occurrence of food safety hazards at various stages of the food chain, from primary production through to consumption. There are multiple pathways through which climate related factors may impact food safety including: changes in temperature and precipitation patterns, increased frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, ocean warming and acidification, and changes in contaminants’ transport pathways among others. Climate change may also affect socio-economic aspects related to food systems such as agriculture, animal production, global trade, demographics and human behaviour which all influence food safety. This paper reviews the potential impacts of predicted changes in climate on food contamination and food safety at various stages of the food chain and identifies adaptation strategies and research priorities to address food safety implications of climate change. The paper concludes that there is a need for intersectoral and international cooperation to better understand the changing food safety situation and in developing and implementing adaptation strategies to address emerging risks associated with climate change.

The potential use of mapped extent and distribution of habitats as indicators of Good Environmental Status (GES)

The Healthy and Biologically Diverse Seas Evidence Group (HBDSEG) has been tasked with providing the technical advice for the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) with respect to descriptors linked to biodiversity. A workshop was held in London to address one of the Research and Development (R&D) proposals entitled: ‘Mapping the extent and distribution of habitats using acoustic and remote techniques, relevant to indicators for area/extent/habitat loss.’ The aim of the workshop was to identify, define and assess the feasibility of potential indicators of benthic habitat distribution and extent, and identify the R&D work which could be required to fully develop these indicators. The main points that came out of the workshop were: (i) There are many technical aspects of marine habitat mapping that still need to be resolved if cost-effective spatial indicators are to be developed. Many of the technical aspects that need addressing surround issues of consistency, confidence and repeatability. These areas should be tackled by the JNCC Habitat Mapping and Classification Working Group and the HBDSEG Seabed Mapping Working Group. (ii) There is a need for benthic ecologists (through the HBDSEG Benthic Habitats Subgroup and the JNCC Marine Indicators Group) to finalise the list of habitats for which extent and/or distribution indicators should be considered for development, building upon the recommendations from this report. When reviewing the list of indicators, benthic habitats could also be distinguished into those habitats that are defined/determined primarily by physical parameters (although including biological assemblages) (e.g. subtidal shallow sand) and those defined primarily by their biological assemblage (e.g. seagrass beds). This distinction is important as some anthropogenic pressures may influence the biological component of the ecosystem despite not having a quantifiable effect on the physical habitat distribution/extent. (iii) The scale and variety of UK benthic habitats makes any attempt to undertake comprehensive direct mapping exercises prohibitively expensive (especially where there is a need for repeat surveys for assessment). There is a clear need therefore to develop a risk-based approach that uses indirect indicators (e.g. modelling), such as habitats at risk from pressures caused by current human activities, to develop priorities for information gathering. The next steps that came out of the workshop were: (i) A combined approach should be developed by the JNCC Marine Indicators Group together with the HBDSEG Benthic Habitats Subgroup, which will compile and ultimately synthesise all the criteria used by the three different groups from the workshop. The agreed combined approach will be used to undertake a final review of the habitats considered during the workshop, and to evaluate any remaining habitats in order to produce a list of habitats for indicator development for which extent and/or distribution indicators could be appropriate. (ii) The points of advice raised at this workshop, alongside the combined approach aforementioned, and the final list of habitats for extent and/or distribution indicator development will be used to develop a prioritised list of actions to inform the next round of R&D proposals for benthic habitat indicator development in 2014. This will be done through technical discussions within JNCC and the relevant HBDSEG Subgroups. The preparation of recommendations by these groups should take into account existing work programmes, and consider the limited resources available to undertake any further R&D work.

Horizon scanning for invasive alien species with the potential to threaten biodiversity in Great Britain

Invasive alien species (IAS) are considered one of the greatest threats to biodiversity, particularly through their interactions with other drivers of change. Horizon scanning, the systematic examination of future potential threats and opportunities, leading to prioritization of IAS threats is seen as an essential component of IAS management. Our aim was to consider IAS that were likely to impact on native biodiversity but were not yet established in the wild in Great Britain. To achieve this, we developed an approach which coupled consensus methods (which have previously been used for collaboratively identifying priorities in other contexts) with rapid risk assessment. The process involved two distinct phases: 1. Preliminary consultation with experts within five groups (plants, terrestrial invertebrates, freshwater invertebrates, vertebrates and marine species) to derive ranked lists of potential IAS. 2. Consensus-building across expert groups to compile and rank the entire list of potential IAS. Five hundred and ninety-one species not native to Great Britain were considered. Ninety-three of these species were agreed to constitute at least a medium risk (based on score and consensus) with respect to them arriving, establishing and posing a threat to native biodiversity. The quagga mussel, Dreissena rostriformis bugensis, received maximum scores for risk of arrival, establishment and impact; following discussions the unanimous consensus was to rank it in the top position. A further 29 species were considered to constitute a high risk and were grouped according to their ranked risk. The remaining 63 species were considered as medium risk, and included in an unranked long list. The information collated through this novel extension of the consensus method for horizon scanning provides evidence for underpinning and prioritizing management both for the species and, perhaps more importantly, their pathways of arrival. Although our study focused on Great Britain, we suggest that the methods adopted are applicable globally.

Prioritization of knowledge needs for sustainable aquaculture: a national and global perspective

Aquaculture is currently the fastest expanding global animal food production sector and is a key future contributor to food security. An increase in food security will be dependent upon the development and improvement of sustainable practices. A prioritization exercise was undertaken, focusing on the future knowledge needs to underpin UK sustainable aquaculture (both domestic and imported products) using a ‘task force’ group of 36 ‘practitioners’ and 12 ‘research scientists’ who have an active interest in sustainable aquaculture. A long list of 264 knowledge needs related to sustainable aquaculture was developed in conjunction with the task force. The long list was further refined through a three stage process of voting and scoring, including discussions of each knowledge need. The top 25 knowledge needs are presented, as scored separately by ‘practitioners’ or ‘research scientists’. There was similar agreement in priorities identified by these two groups. The priority knowledge needs will provide guidance to structure ongoing work to make science accessible to practitioners and help to prioritize future science policy needs and funding. The process of knowledge exchange, and the mechanisms by which this can be achieved, effectively emerged as the top priority for sustainable aquaculture. Viable alternatives to wild fish-based aquaculture feeds, resource constraints that will potentially limit expansion of aquaculture, sustainable offshore aquaculture and the treatment of sea lice also emerged as strong priorities. Although the exercise was focused on UK needs for sustainable aquaculture, many of the emergent issues are considered to have global application.

Chapter 11: Human activities and ecosystem service use: impacts and trade-offs

Ecosystem services provided by the marine environment are fundamental to human health and well-being. Despite this, many marine systems are being degraded to an extent that may reduce their capacity to provide these ecosystem services. The ecosystem approach is a strategy for the integrated management of land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way (UN Convention on Biological Diversity, 2000). Its application to marine management and spatial planning has been proposed as a means of maintaining the economic and social value of the oceans, not only in the present but for generations to come. Characterising the susceptibility of services (and combinations of services) to particular human activities based on knowledge of impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (as described in preceding chapters) is a challenge for future management of the oceans. In this chapter, we highlight the existing, but limited knowledge of how ecosystem services may be impacted by different human activities. We discuss how impacts on one service can impact multiple services and explore how the impacts on services can vary both spatially and temporally and according to context. We focus particularly on the effects on ecosystem services of activities whose impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning have already been considered in previous chapters. Some of these activities are associated with poor management of ecosystem benefits, for example, from provisioning services (aquaculture and fisheries), or with excessive input of wastes, fertilisers and contaminants into the system overburdening the waste treatment and assimilation services. Other impacts are associated with the construction of structures or use of space designed to generate benefits from environmental services such as the presence of water as a carrier for shipping, or sources of wind, wave and tidal power. We discuss the trade-offs that are made, consciously or otherwise, between different ecosystem services, which arise from human activities to optimise or manage specific ecosystem services.