Enhancing the Global Ocean Observing System to meet evidence based needs for the ecosystem-based management of coastal ecosystem services

Ecosystem-based approaches (EBAs) to managing anthropogenic pressures on ecosystems, adapting to changes in ecosystem states (indicators of ecosystem health), and mitigating the impacts of state changes on ecosystem services are needed for sustainable development. EBAs are informed by integrated ecosystem assessments (IEAs) that must be compiled and updated frequently for EBAs to be effective. Frequently updated IEAs depend on the sustained provision of data and information on pressures, state changes, and impacts of state changes on services. Nowhere is this truer than in the coastal zone, where people and ecosystem services are concentrated and where anthropogenic pressures converge. This study identifies the essential indicator variables required for the sustained provision of frequently updated IEAs, and offers an approach to establishing a global network of coastal observations within the framework of the Global Ocean Observing System. The need for and challenges of capacity-building are highlighted, and examples are given of current programmes that could contribute to the implementation of a coastal ocean observing system of systems on a global scale. This illustrates the need for new approaches to ocean governance that can achieve coordinated integration of existing programmes and technologies as a first step towards this goal.

Feeding rates and prey selectivity of planktonic decapod larvae in the Western English Channel

Meroplankton are seasonally important contributors to the zooplankton, particularly at inshore sites, yet their feeding ecology is poorly known relative to holoplankton. While several studies have measured feeding in decapod larvae, few studies have examined the feeding rates of decapod larvae on natural prey assemblages throughout the reproductive season. We conducted 8 feeding experiments with Necora puber, Liocarcinus spp. and Upogebia spp. zoea larvae collected from the L4 monitoring site off Plymouth (50°15.00′N, 4°13.02′W) during spring–summer 2009 and 2010. This period spanned moderate-to-high food availability (0.5–1.6 µg chl-a L−1), but a great range in food composition with small cells <20 µm dominating in 2010. Daily rations averaged 17, 60 and 22 % of body C for the 3 respective decapod species. Clearance rates differed according to prey type, and all 3 decapod genera showed evidence of selection of dinoflagellates. Importantly, small cells including nano- and pico-plankton were ingested, this being demonstrated independently by flow cytometric analysis of the feeding experiments and molecular analysis. PCR-based analysis of the haptophyte portion of the diet revealed ingestion of Isochrysis galbana by decapod larvae in the bottle incubations and Isochrysis galbana and Phaeocystis globosa by decapod larvae collected directly from the field. This study has shown that pico- and nano-sized plankton form an important supplement to the diverse and variable diet of decapod larvae.

An Objective Framework to Test the Quality of Candidate Indicators of Good Environmental Status

Large efforts are on-going within the EU to prepare the Marine Strategy Framework Directive’s (MSFD) assessment of the environmental status of the European seas. This assessment will only be as good as the indicators chosen to monitor the eleven descriptors of good environmental status (GEnS). An objective and transparent framework to determine whether chosen indicators actually support the aims of this policy is, however, not yet in place. Such frameworks are needed to ensure that the limited resources available to this assessment optimize the likelihood of achieving GEnS within collaborating states. Here, we developed a hypothesis-based protocol to evaluate whether candidate indicators meet quality criteria explicit to the MSFD, which the assessment community aspires to. Eight quality criteria are distilled from existing initiatives, and a testing and scoring protocol for each of them is presented. We exemplify its application in three worked examples, covering indicators for three GEnS descriptors (1, 5 and 6), various habitat components (seaweeds, seagrasses, benthic macrofauna and plankton), and assessment regions (Danish, Lithuanian and UK waters). We argue that this framework provides a necessary, transparent and standardized structure to support the comparison of candidate indicators, and the decision-making process leading to indicator selection. Its application could help identify potential limitations in currently available candidate metrics and, in such cases, help focus the development of more adequate indicators. Use of such standardized approaches will facilitate the sharing of knowledge gained across the MSFD parties despite context-specificity across assessment regions, and support the evidence-based management of European seas.

An Objective Framework to Test the Quality of Candidate Indicators of Good Environmental Status

Large efforts are on-going within the EU to prepare the Marine Strategy Framework Directive’s (MSFD) assessment of the environmental status of the European seas. This assessment will only be as good as the indicators chosen to monitor the eleven descriptors of good environmental status (GEnS). An objective and transparent framework to determine whether chosen indicators actually support the aims of this policy is, however, not yet in place. Such frameworks are needed to ensure that the limited resources available to this assessment optimize the likelihood of achieving GEnS within collaborating states. Here, we developed a hypothesis-based protocol to evaluate whether candidate indicators meet quality criteria explicit to the MSFD, which the assessment community aspires to. Eight quality criteria are distilled from existing initiatives, and a testing and scoring protocol for each of them is presented. We exemplify its application in three worked examples, covering indicators for three GEnS descriptors (1, 5 and 6), various habitat components (seaweeds, seagrasses, benthic macrofauna and plankton), and assessment regions (Danish, Lithuanian and UK waters). We argue that this framework provides a necessary, transparent and standardized structure to support the comparison of candidate indicators, and the decision-making process leading to indicator selection. Its application could help identify potential limitations in currently available candidate metrics and, in such cases, help focus the development of more adequate indicators. Use of such standardized approaches will facilitate the sharing of knowledge gained across the MSFD parties despite context-specificity across assessment regions, and support the evidence-based management of European seas.