Parameterisation of bivalve functional traits for mechanistic eco-physiological dynamic energy budget (DEB) models

Mechanistic models such as those based on dynamic energy budget (DEB) theory are emergent ecomechanics tools to investigate the extent of fitness in organisms through changes in life history traits as explained by bioenergetic principles. The rapid growth in interest around this approach originates from the mechanistic characteristics of DEB, which are based on a number of rules dictating the use of mass and energy flow through organisms. One apparent bottleneck in DEB applications comes from the estimations of DEB parameters which are based on mathematical and statistical methods (covariation method). The parameterisation process begins with the knowledge of some functional traits of a target organism (e. g. embryo, sexual maturity and ultimate body size, feeding and assimilation rates, maintenance costs), identified from the literature or laboratory experiments. However, considering the prominent role of the mechanistic approach in ecology, the reduction of possible uncertainties is an important objective. We propose a revaluation of the laboratory procedures commonly used in ecological studies to estimate DEB parameters in marine bivalves. Our experimental organism was Brachidontes pharaonis. We supported our proposal with a validation exercise which compared life history traits as obtained by DEBs (implemented with parameters obtained using classical laboratory methods) with the actual set of species traits obtained in the field. Correspondence between the 2 approaches was very high (>95%) with respect to estimating both size and fitness. Our results demonstrate a good agreement between field data and model output for the effect of temperature and food density on age-size curve, maximum body size and total gamete production per life span. The mechanistic approach is a promising method of providing accurate predictions in a world that is under in creasing anthropogenic pressure.

Assessing the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats to pressures associated with marine activities. Phase 1 Report: Rationale and proposed ecological groupings for Level 5 biotopes against which sensitivity assessments would be best undertaken.

The purpose of this study is to produce a series of Conceptual Ecological Models (CEMs) that represent sublittoral rock habitats in the UK. CEMs are diagrammatic representations of the influences and processes that occur within an ecosystem. They can be used to identify critical aspects of an ecosystem that may be studied further, or serve as the basis for the selection of indicators for environmental monitoring purposes. The models produced by this project are control diagrams, representing the unimpacted state of the environment free from anthropogenic pressures. It is intended that the models produced by this project will be used to guide indicator selection for the monitoring of this habitat in UK waters. CEMs may eventually be produced for a range of habitat types defined under the UK Marine Biodiversity Monitoring R&D Programme (UKMBMP), which, along with stressor models, are designed to show the interactions within impacted habitats, would form the basis of a robust method for indicator selection. This project builds on the work to develop CEMs for shallow sublittoral coarse sediment habitats (Alexander et al 2014). The project scope included those habitats defined as ‘sublittoral rock’. This definition includes those habitats that fall into the EUNIS Level 3 classifications A3.1 Atlantic and Mediterranean high energy infralittoral rock, A3.2 Atlantic and Mediterranean moderate energy infralittoral rock, A3.3 Atlantic and Mediterranean low energy infralittoral rock, A4.1 Atlantic and Mediterranean high energy circalittoral rock, A4.2 Atlantic and Mediterranean moderate energy circalittoral rock, and A4.3 Atlantic and Mediterranean low energy circalittoral rock as well as the constituent Level 4 and 5 biotopes that are relevant to UK waters. A species list of characterising fauna to be included within the scope of the models was identified using an iterative process to refine the full list of species found within the relevant Level 5 biotopes. A literature review was conducted using a pragmatic and iterative approach to gather evidence regarding species traits and information that would be used to inform the models and characterise the interactions that occur within the sublittoral rock habitat. All information gathered during the literature review was entered into a data logging pro-forma spreadsheet that accompanies this report. Wherever possible, attempts were made to collect information from UK-specific peer-reviewed studies, although other sources were used where necessary. All data gathered was subject to a detailed confidence assessment. Expert judgement by the project team was utilised to provide information for aspects of the models for which references could not be sourced within the project timeframe. A multivariate analysis approach was adopted to assess ecologically similar groups (based on ecological and life history traits) of fauna from the identified species to form the basis of the models. A model hierarchy was developed based on these ecological groups. One general control model was produced that indicated the high-level drivers, inputs, biological assemblages, ecosystem processes and outputs that occur in sublittoral rock habitats. In addition to this, seven detailed sub-models were produced, which each focussed on a particular ecological group of fauna within the habitat: ‘macroalgae’, ‘temporarily or permanently attached active filter feeders’, ‘temporarily or permanently attached passive filter feeders’, ‘bivalves, brachiopods and other encrusting filter feeders’, ‘tube building fauna’, ‘scavengers and predatory fauna’, and ‘non-predatory mobile fauna’. Each sub-model is accompanied by an associated confidence model that presents confidence in the links between each model component. The models are split into seven levels and take spatial and temporal scale into account through their design, as well as magnitude and direction of influence. The seven levels include regional to global drivers, water column processes, local inputs/processes at the seabed, habitat and biological assemblage, output processes, local ecosystem functions, and regional to global ecosystem functions. The models indicate that whilst the high level drivers that affect each ecological group are largely similar, the output processes performed by the biota and the resulting ecosystem functions vary both in number and importance between groups. Confidence within the models as a whole is generally high, reflecting the level of information gathered during the literature review. Physical drivers which influence the ecosystem were found to be of high importance for the sublittoral rock habitat, with factors such as wave exposure, water depth and water currents noted to be crucial in defining the biological assemblages. Other important factors such as recruitment/propagule supply, and those which affect primary production, such as suspended sediments, light attenuation and water chemistry and temperature, were also noted to be key and act to influence the food sources consumed by the biological assemblages of the habitat, and the biological assemblages themselves. Output processes performed by the biological assemblages are variable between ecological groups depending on the specific flora and fauna present and the role they perform within the ecosystem. Of particular importance are the outputs performed by the macroalgae group, which are diverse in nature and exert influence over other ecological groups in the habitat. Important output processes from the habitat as a whole include primary and secondary production, bioengineering, biodeposition (in mixed sediment habitats) and the supply of propagules; these in turn influence ecosystem functions at the local scale such as nutrient and biogeochemical cycling, supply of food resources, sediment stability (in mixed sediment habitats), habitat provision and population and algae control. The export of biodiversity and organic matter, biodiversity enhancement and biotope stability are the resulting ecosystem functions that occur at the regional to global scale. Features within the models that are most useful for monitoring habitat status and change due to natural variation have been identified, as have those that may be useful for monitoring to identify anthropogenic causes of change within the ecosystem. Biological, physical and chemical features of the ecosystem have been identified as potential indicators to monitor natural variation, whereas biological factors and those physical /chemical factors most likely to affect primary production have predominantly been identified as most likely to indicate change due to anthropogenic pressures.

Global carbon budget 2014

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere is important to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe data sets and a methodology to quantify all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties, based on the combination of a range of data, algorithms, statistics, and model estimates and their interpretation by a broad scientific community. We discuss changes compared to previous estimates, consistency within and among components, alongside methodology and data limitations. CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (E-FF) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, respectively, while emissions from land-use change (E-LUC), mainly deforestation, are based on combined evidence from land-cover-change data, fire activity associated with deforestation, and models. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its rate of growth (G(ATM)) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The mean ocean CO2 sink (S-OCEAN) is based on observations from the 1990s, while the annual anomalies and trends are estimated with ocean models. The variability in S-OCEAN is evaluated with data products based on surveys of ocean CO2 measurements. The global residual terrestrial CO2 sink (S-LAND) is estimated by the difference of the other terms of the global carbon budget and compared to results of independent dynamic global vegetation models forced by observed climate, CO2, and land-cover-change (some including nitrogen-carbon interactions). We compare the mean land and ocean fluxes and their variability to estimates from three atmospheric inverse methods for three broad latitude bands. All uncertainties are reported as +/- 1 sigma, reflecting the current capacity to characterise the annual estimates of each component of the global carbon budget. For the last decade available (2004-2013), E-FF was 8.9 +/- 0.4 GtC yr(-1), E-LUC 0.9 +/- 0.5 GtC yr(-1), G(ATM) 4.3 +/- 0.1 GtC yr(-1), S-OCEAN 2.6 +/- 0.5 GtC yr(-1), and S-LAND 2.9 +/- 0.8 GtC yr(-1). For year 2013 alone, E-FF grew to 9.9 +/- 0.5 GtC yr(-1), 2.3% above 2012, continuing the growth trend in these emissions, E-LUC was 0.9 +/- 0.5 GtC yr(-1), G(ATM) was 5.4 +/- 0.2 GtC yr(-1), S-OCEAN was 2.9 +/- 0.5 GtC yr(-1), and S-LAND was 2.5 +/- 0.9 GtC yr(-1). G(ATM) was high in 2013, reflecting a steady increase in E-FF and smaller and opposite changes between S-OCEAN and S-LAND compared to the past decade (2004-2013). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 395.31 +/- 0.10 ppm averaged over 2013. We estimate that E-FF will increase by 2.5% (1.3-3.5 %) to 10.1 +/- 0.6 GtC in 2014 (37.0 +/- 2.2 GtCO(2) yr(-1)), 65% above emissions in 1990, based on projections of world gross domestic product and recent changes in the carbon intensity of the global economy. From this projection of E-FF and assumed constant E-LUC for 2014, cumulative emissions of CO2 will reach about 545 +/- 55 GtC (2000 +/- 200 GtCO(2)) for 1870-2014, about 75% from E-FF and 25% from E-LUC. This paper documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new carbon budget compared with previous publications of this living data set (Le Quere et al., 2013, 2014). All observations presented here can be downloaded from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (doi:10.3334/CDIAC/GCP_2014).

Global Carbon Budget 2015

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere is important to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe data sets and a methodology to quantify all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties, based on the combination of a range of data, algorithms, statistics, and model estimates and their interpretation by a broad scientific community. We discuss changes compared to previous estimates as well as consistency within and among components, alongside methodology and data limitations. CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and industry (EFF) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on combined evidence from land-cover-change data, fire activity associated with deforestation, and models. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its rate of growth (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The mean ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is based on observations from the 1990s, while the annual anomalies and trends are estimated with ocean models. The variability in SOCEAN is evaluated with data products based on surveys of ocean CO2 measurements. The global residual terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated by the difference of the other terms of the global carbon budget and compared to results of independent dynamic global vegetation models forced by observed climate, CO2, and land-cover change (some including nitrogen–carbon interactions). We compare the mean land and ocean fluxes and their variability to estimates from three atmospheric inverse methods for three broad latitude bands. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ, reflecting the current capacity to characterise the annual estimates of each component of the global carbon budget. For the last decade available (2005–2014), EFF was 9.0 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, ELUC was 0.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM was 4.4 ± 0.1 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 2.6 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 3.0 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1. For the year 2014 alone, EFF grew to 9.8 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, 0.6 % above 2013, continuing the growth trend in these emissions, albeit at a slower rate compared to the average growth of 2.2 % yr−1 that took place during 2005–2014. Also, for 2014, ELUC was 1.1 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, GATM was 3.9 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1, SOCEAN was 2.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 4.1 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1. GATM was lower in 2014 compared to the past decade (2005–2014), reflecting a larger SLAND for that year. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 397.15 ± 0.10 ppm averaged over 2014. For 2015, preliminary data indicate that the growth in EFF will be near or slightly below zero, with a projection of −0.6 [range of −1.6 to +0.5] %, based on national emissions projections for China and the USA, and projections of gross domestic product corrected for recent changes in the carbon intensity of the global economy for the rest of the world. From this projection of EFF and assumed constant ELUC for 2015, cumulative emissions of CO2 will reach about 555 ± 55 GtC (2035 ± 205 GtCO2) for 1870–2015, about 75 % from EFF and 25 % from ELUC. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new carbon budget compared with previous publications of this data set (Le Quéré et al., 2015, 2014, 2013). All observations presented here can be downloaded from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (doi:10.3334/CDIAC/GCP_2015).