Spatially explicit estimates of length and biomass of Micromesistius poutassou (Blue Whiting) from acoustic and trawl surveys in the North-East Atlantic in May 2004

Acoustic estimates of herring and blue whiting abundance were obtained during the surveys using the Simrad ER60 scientific echosounder. The allocation of NASC-values to herring, blue whiting and other acoustic targets were based on the composition of the trawl catches and the appearance of echo recordings. To estimate the abundance, the allocated NASC -values were averaged for ICES-squares (0.5° latitude by 1° longitude). For each statistical square, the unit area density of fish (rA) in number per square nautical mile (N*nm-2) was calculated using standard equations (Foote et al., 1987; Toresen et al., 1998). To estimate the total abundance of fish, the unit area abundance for each statistical square was multiplied by the number of square nautical miles in each statistical square and then summed for all the statistical squares within defined subareas and over the total area. Biomass estimation was calculated by multiplying abundance in numbers by the average weight of the fish in each statistical square then summing all squares within defined subareas and over the total area. The Norwegian BEAM soft-ware (Totland and Godø 2001) was used to make estimates of total biomass.

Geophysical investigations in the European Alps

Joint interpretation of magnetotelluric and geomagnetic depth sounding data in the western European Alps offer new insights into the conductivity structure of the Earth's crust and mantle. This first large scale electromagnetic study in the Alps covers a cross-section from Germany to northern Italy and shows the importance of the alpine mountain chain as an interrupter of continuous conductors. Poor data quality due to the highly crystalline underground is overcome by Remote Reference and Robust Processing techniques. 3d-forward-modelling reveals on the one hand interrupted dipping crustal conductors with maximum conductance of 4960 S and on the other hand a lithosphere thickening up to 208 km beneath the central western Alps. Graphite networks arising from Paleozoic sedimentary deposits are considered to be accountable for the occurrence of high conductivity and the distribution pattern of crustal conductors. The influence of huge sedimentary molasse basins on the electromagnetic data is suggested to be minor compared with the influence of crustal conductors. In conclusion, electromagnetic results can be attributed to the geological, tectonic and palaeogeographical background. Dipping direction (S-SE) and maximum angle (10.1°) of the northern crustal conductor reveal the main thrusting conditions beneath the Helvetic Alps whereas the existence of a crustal conductor in the Briançonnais supports theses about its palaeographic belonging to the Iberian Peninsula.

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in summer 2002 during the National Monitoring Programme

The dataset is based on samples collected in the summer of 2002 in the Western Black Sea in front of Bulgaria coast. The whole dataset is composed of 47 samples (from 19 stations of National Monitoring Grid) with data of mesozooplankton species composition abundance and biomass. Sampling for zooplankton was performed from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. Zooplankton samples were collected with vertical closing Juday net,diameter - 36cm, mesh size 150 µm. Tows were performed from surface down to bottom meters depths in discrete layers. Samples were preserved by a 4% formaldehyde sea water buffered solution. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length. Mesozooplankton abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Lyudmila Kamburska using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972). Taxon-specific abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Lyudmila Kamburska using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972).

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in summer 2005 during Phase 2: Leg1 from the GEF Project

The sampling area was extended to the Western-South area off the Black Sea coast from Kaliakra cape toward the Bosforous. Samples were collected along four transects. The whole dataset is composed of 17 samples (from 10 stations) with data of mesozooplankton species composition abundance and biomass. Sampling for zooplankton was performed from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. These data are organized in the "Control of eutrophication, hazardous substances and related measures for rehabilitating the Black Sea ecosystem: Phase 2: Leg I: PIMS 3065". Data Report is not published. Zooplankton samples were collected with vertical closing Juday net,diameter - 36cm, mesh size 150 µm. Tows were performed from surface down to bottom meters depths in discrete layers. Samples were preserved by a 4% formaldehyde sea water buffered solution. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length. Mesozooplankton abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Kremena Stefanova using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972). Taxon-specific abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Kremena Stefanova using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972).

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in autumn 1999 during the National Monitoring Programme

The dataset is based on samples collected in the summer of 1999 in the Western Black Sea in front of Bulgaria coast. The whole dataset is composed of 59 samples (from 24 stations of National Monitoring Grid) with data of mesozooplankton species composition abundance and biomass. Samples were collected in discrete layers 0-10, 0-20, 0-50, 10-25, 25-50, 50-100 and from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Lyudmila Kamburska using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972). The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Lyudmila Kamburska using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972).

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in spring 1997 during the National Monitoring Programme

The "15BO1997001" dataset is based on samples collected in the spring of 1997. The whole dataset is composed of 66 samples (from 27 stations of National Monitoring Sampling Grid) with data of zooplankton species composition, abundance and biomass. Samples were collected in discrete layers 0-10, 0-20, 0-50, 10-25, 25-50, 50-100 and from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. Zooplankton samples were collected with vertical closing Juday net,diameter - 36cm, mesh size 150 µm. Tows were performed from surface down to bottom meters depths in discrete layers. Samples were preserved by a 4% formaldehyde sea water buffered solution. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length. Mesozooplankton abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Lyudmila Kamburska using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972). Taxon-specific abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Lyudmila Kamburska using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972).

Biomass of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in 1997 during the Cooperative Marine Science Program for the Black Sea (CoMSBlack)

The "15BO1997001" dataset is based on samples collected in the spring of 1997. The whole dataset is composed of 66 samples (from 27 stations of National Monitoring Sampling Grid) with data of zooplankton species composition, abundance and biomass. Samples were collected in discrete layers 0-10, 0-20, 0-50, 10-25, 25-50, 50-100 and from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. The collected material was analysed using the method of Dimov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Asen Konsulov using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972 ). The biomass was estimated as wet weight by Petipa, 1959 (based on species specific wet weight). Wet weight values were transformed to dry weight using the equation DW=0.16*WW as suggested by Vinogradov & Shushkina, 1987. The collected material was analysed using the method of Dimov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Asen Konsulov using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972 ). The biomass was estimated as wet weight by Petipa, 1959 ussing standard average weight of each species in mg/m3. WW were converted to DW by equation DW=0.16*WW (Vinogradov ME, Sushkina EA, 1987).

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in summer 1991 during the NATO Programme Hydroblack

The "Hydroblack91" dataset is based on samples collected in the summer of 1991 and covers part of North-Western in front of Romanian coast and Western Black Sea (Bulgarian coasts) (between 43°30' - 42°10' N latitude and 28°40'- 31°45' E longitude). Mesozooplankton sampling was undertaken at 20 stations. The whole dataset is composed of 72 samples with data of zooplankton species composition, abundance and biomass. Samples were collected in discrete layers 0-10, 0-20, 0-50, 10-25, 25-50, 50-100 and from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. Zooplankton samples were collected with vertical closing Juday net,diameter - 36cm, mesh size 150 µm. Tows were performed from surface down to bottom meters depths in discrete layers. Samples were preserved by a 4% formaldehyde sea water buffered solution. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length Mesozooplankton abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Asen Konsulov using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972). Taxon-specific abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Asen Konsulov using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972).

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in spring 2002 during the National Monitoring Programme of the Bulgarian Institute of Oceanography

The dataset is based on samples collected in the spring of 2002 in the Western Black Sea in front of Bulgaria coast. The whole dataset is composed of 76 samples (from 27 stations of National Monitoring Grid) with data of mesozooplankton species composition abundance and biomass. Sampling on zooplankton was performed from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. Zooplankton samples were collected with vertical closing Juday net,diameter - 36cm, mesh size 150 µm. Tows were performed from surface down to bottom meters depths in discrete layers. Samples were preserved by a 4% formaldehyde sea water buffered solution. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length. Mesozooplankton abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Kremena Stefanova using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972). Taxon-specific abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Kremena Stefanova using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972).

Abundance of zooplankton based on a long-term study at the Galata transect and covers the spring-summer periods from 1967 till 2005

The dataset is based on a long-term study (38 years) at the Galata transect and covers the spring-summer periods from 1967 till 2005. The whole dataset is composed of 360 data of total zooplankton biomass and abundance . Samples were collected in discrete layers 0-10m, 10-20m, 10-25m, 25-50m, 50-70m, 50-100m, 100-150. Mesozooplankton abundance: the collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Fishery Resource by Prof. Asen Konsulov and Institute of Oceanology by Prof. Asen Konsulov, Lyudmila Kamburska and Kremena Stefanova using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972). Taxon-specific mesozooplankton abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Fishery Resource by prof. Asen Konsulov and Institute of Oceanology by Prof. Asen Konsulov, Lyudmila Kamburska and Kremena Stefanova using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972).

Abundance of mesozooplankton collected in October and November 1991 at 20 stations in the South Aegean Sea during O91

The O91- Mesozooplankton dataset is based on samples collected in mid October-mid November 1991 at 20 stations in the South Aegean, the SE.Ionian Sea and in NW Levantine. Samples were collected at discrete layers (from the surface till 300m. These data are published. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length. The entire sample (for deep layers) or aliquot of Taxon-specific mesozooplankton abundance (1/4) (for the upper layer) was analyzed under the binocular microscope. Copepod and cladoceran species were identified and enumerated; the other zooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as zooplankton groups). Taxonomic identification was done by I.Siokou-Frangou, E.Christou, and N.Fragopoulu, using the relevant taxonomic literature. The entire sample (for deep layers) or aliquot of Mesozooplankton total abundance (1/4) (for the upper layer) was analyzed under the binocular microscope. All zooplankters were enumerated.

Counts of harpacticoid copepods associated with cold-water coral substrates obtained from several Belgica cruises, Porcupine Seabight (North-East Atlantic)

The influence of microhabitat type on the diversity and community structure of the harpacticoid copepod fauna associated with a cold-water coral degradation zone was investigated in the Porcupine Seabight (North-East Atlantic). Three substrate types were distinguished: dead fragments of the cold-water coral Lophelia pertusa, skeletons of the glass sponge Aphrocallistes bocagei and the underlying sediment. At the family level, it appears that coral fragments and underlying sediment do not harbour distinctly diVerent assemblages, with Ectinosomatidae, Ameiridae, Pseudotachidiidae, Argestidae and Miraciidae as most abundant. Conclusions on assemblage structure and diversity of the sponge skeletons are limited as only two samples were available. Similarity analysis at species level showed a strong variation in the sediment samples, which did not harbour a distinctly different assemblage in opposition to the coral and sponge samples. Several factors (sediment infill on the hard substrates, mobility of the copepods, limited sample sizes) are proposed to explain this apparent lack of a distinct difference between the microhabitats. Coral fragments and sediment were both characterised by high species diversity and low species dominance, which might indicate that copepod diversity is not substantially influenced by hydrodynamic stress. The additive partitioning of species diversity showed that by adding locations species richness was greatly enhanced. The harpacticoid community in the cold-water coral degradation zone is highly diverse and includes 157 species, 62 genera and 19 families. Information from neighbouring soft-bottom regions is necessary to assess whether total species diversity is increased by the presence of these complex habitatproviding substrates.

n-Alkanes and lignin in bottom sediments of the West European Basin (area of the battleship Bismark wreck site)

Three bottom sediment cores were collected from the top, slope, and foot of a small topographic high located near the West European continental rise within the Porcupine abyssal plain at the battleship Bismark wreck site. Using high-efficient gas chromatography technique we determined content and examined molecular composition of n-alkane fraction of hydrocarbons and phenol compounds of lignin. n-Alkane and phenol concentrations in bottom sediments of all three cores were low both in values per unit mass of sediments and in organic matter composition that is typical for pelagic deposits of the World Ocean. They vary from 0.07 to 2.01 µg/g of dry sediment and from 0.0001 to 0.01% of TOC; phenol ranges are from 1.43 to 11.1 µg/g and from 0.03 to 0.6%. Non-uniform supply of terrigenous matter to the bottom under conditions of changes in sedimentation environment in different geological epochs is the principal reason for significant variations in n-alkane and lignin concentrations with depth in the cores. Lignin and its derivatives make the main contribution to formation of organic matter composition of the region in study. With respect to n-alkane and lignin concentrations organic matter of deposits of the West European Basin is composed of remains of higher plants and of autochtonous organic matter of marine flora; they have mixed terrigenous-autochtonous (terrigenous-planktonogenic) origin.

Literature review of elasmobranch bycatch and retention rate

To address growing concern over the effects of fisheries non-target catch on elasmobranchs worldwide, the accurate reporting of elasmobranch catch is essential. This requires data on a combination of measures, including reported landings, retained and discarded non-target catch, and post-discard survival. Identification of the factors influencing discard vs. retention is needed to improve catch estimates and to determine wasteful fishing practices. To do this we compared retention rates of elasmobranch non-target catch in a broad subset of fisheries throughout the world by taxon, fishing country, and gear. A regression tree and random forest analysis indicated that taxon was the most important determinant of retention in this dataset, but all three factors together explained 59% of the variance. Estimates of total elasmobranch removals were calculated by dividing the FAO global elasmobranch landings by average retention rates and suggest that total elasmobranch removals may exceed FAO reported landings by as much as 400%. This analysis is the first effort to directly characterize global drivers of discards for elasmobranch non-target catch. Our results highlight the importance of accurate quantification of retention and discard rates to improve assessments of the potential impacts of fisheries on these species.

Data base on heterotrophic dinoflagellates grazing and growth rate as a function of size, prey size and type compiled from the literature

Microzooplankton (the 20 to 200 µm size class of zooplankton) is recognised as an important part of marine pelagic ecosystems. In terms of biomass and abundance heterotrophic dinoflagellates are one of the important groups of organism in microzooplankton. However, their rates - grazing and growth - , feeding behaviour and prey preferences are poorly known and understood. A set of data was assembled in order to derive a better understanding of heterotrophic dinoflagellates rates, in response to parameters such as prey concentration, prey type (size and species), temperature and their own size. With these objectives, literature was searched for laboratory experiments with information on one or more of these parameters effect studied. The criteria for selection and inclusion in the database included: (i) controlled laboratory experiment with a known dinoflagellate feeding on a known prey; (ii) presence of ancillary information about experimental conditions, used organisms - cell volume, cell dimensions, and carbon content. Rates and ancillary information were measured in units that meet the experimenter need, creating a need to harmonize the data units after collection. In addition different units can link to different mechanisms (carbon to nutritive quality of the prey, volume to size limits). As a result, grazing rates are thus available as pg C dinoflagellate-1 h-1, µm3 dinoflagellate-1 h-1 and prey cell dinoflagellate-1 h-1; clearance rate was calculated if not given and growth rate is expressed as the growth rate per day.