Growth and production of Pacific ocean perch (Sebastes alutus) in nursery habitats of the Gulf of Alaska

Nursery areas for juvenile fishes are often important for determining recruitment in marine populations by providing habitats that can maximize growth and thereby minimize mortality. Pacific ocean perch (POP, Sebastes alutus) have an extended juvenile period where they inhabit rocky nursery habitats. We examined POP nursery areas to link growth potential to recruitment. Juvenile POP were captured from nursery areas in 2004 and 2008, and estimated growth rates ranged from −0.19 to 0.60 g day−1 based on differences in size between June and August. Predicted growth rates from a bioenergetics model ranged from 0.05 to 0.49 g day−1 and were not significantly different than observed. Substrate preferences and the distribution of their preferred habitats were utilized to predict the extent of juvenile POP nursery habitat in the Gulf of Alaska. Based on densities of fish observed on underwater video transects and the spatial extent of nursery areas, we predicted 278 and 290 million juvenile POP were produced in 2004 and 2008. Growth potential for juvenile POP was reconstructed using the bioenergetics model, spring zooplankton bloom timing and duration and bottom water temperature for 1982–2008. When a single outlying recruitment year in 1986 was removed, growth potential experienced by juvenile POP in nursery areas was significantly correlated to the recruitment time-series from the stock assessment, explaining ∼30% of the variability. This research highlights the potential to predict recruitment using habitat-based methods and provides a potential mechanism for explaining some of the POP recruitment variability observed for this population.

Prey landscapes help identify potential foraging habitats for leatherback turtles in the NE Atlantic

Identifying key marine megavertebrate habitats has become ever more important as concern increases regarding global fisheries bycatch and accelerated climate change. This will be aided by a greater understanding of the patterns and processes determining the spatiotemporal distribution of species of conservation concern. We identify probable foraging grounds for leatherback turtles in the NE Atlantic using monthly landscapes of gelatinous organism distribution constructed from Continuous Plankton Recorder Survey data. Using sightings data (n = 2013 records, 1954 to 2003) from 9 countries (UK, Ireland, France, Belgium, The Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, Norway and Sweden), we show sea surface temperatures of approximately 10 to 12 degree C most likely indicate the lower thermal threshold for accessible habitats during seasonal foraging migrations to high latitudes. Integrating maps of gelatinous plankton as a possible indicator of prey distribution with thermal tolerance parameters demonstrates the dynamic (spatial and temporal) nature of NE Atlantic foraging habitats. We highlight the importance of body size- related thermal constraints in structuring leatherback foraging populations and demonstrate a latitudinal gradient in body size (Bergmann's rule) where smaller animals are excluded from higher latitude foraging areas. We highlight the marine area of the European continental shelf edge as being both thermally accessible and prey rich, and therefore potentially supporting appreciable densities of foraging leatherbacks, with some suitable areas not yet extensively surveyed.

Mesoscale fronts as foraging habitats: composite front mapping reveals oceanographic drivers of habitat use for a pelagic seabird

The oceanographic drivers of marine vertebrate habitat use are poorly understood yet fundamental to our knowledge of marine ecosystem functioning. Here, we use composite front mapping and high-resolution GPS tracking to determine the significance of mesoscale oceanographic fronts as physical drivers of foraging habitat selection in northern gannets Morus bassanus. We tracked 66 breeding gannets from a Celtic Sea colony over 2 years and used residence time to identify area-restricted search (ARS) behaviour. Composite front maps identified thermal and chlorophyll-a mesoscale fronts at two different temporal scales—(i) contemporaneous fronts and (ii) seasonally persistent frontal zones. Using generalized additive models (GAMs), with generalized estimating equations (GEE-GAMs) to account for serial autocorrelation in tracking data, we found that gannets do not adjust their behaviour in response to contemporaneous fronts. However, ARS was more likely to occur within spatially predictable, seasonally persistent frontal zones (GAMs). Our results provide proof of concept that composite front mapping is a useful tool for studying the influence of oceanographic features on animal movements. Moreover, we highlight that frontal persistence is a crucial element of the formation of pelagic foraging hotspots for mobile marine vertebrates.

Feeding and overwintering of Antarctic krill across its major habitats: The role of sea ice cover, water depth, and phytoplankton abundance

Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba) were sampled in contrasting habitats: a seasonally ice-covered deep ocean (Lazarev Sea), ice-free shelves at their northern range (South Georgia) and the Antarctic Peninsula (Bransfield Strait), and shelf and oceanic sites in the Scotia Sea. Across 92 stations, representing a year-round average, the food volume in krill stomachs comprised 71 +/- 29% algae, 17 +/- 21% protozoans, and 12 +/- 25% metazoans. Fatty acid trophic markers showed that copepods were consistently part of krill diet, not a switch food. In open waters, both diatom and copepod consumption increased with phytoplankton abundance. Under sea ice, ingestion of diatoms became rare, whereas feeding on copepods remained constant. During winter, larvae contained high but variable proportions of diatom markers, whereas in postlarvae the role of copepods increased with krill body length. Overwintering differed according to habitat. Krill from South Georgia had lower lipid stores than those from the Bransfield Strait or Lazarev Sea. Feeding effort was much reduced in Lazarev Sea krill, whereas most individuals from the Bransfield Strait and South Georgia contained phytoplankton and seabed detritus in their stomachs. Their retention of essential body reserves indicates that krill experienced most winter hardship in the Lazarev Sea, followed by South Georgia and then Bransfield Strait. This was reflected in the delayed development from juveniles to adults in the Lazarev Sea. Circumpolar comparisons of length frequencies suggest that krill growth conditions are more favorable in the southwest Atlantic than in the Lazarev Sea or off East Antarctica because of longer phytoplankton bloom periods and rewarding access to benthic food.

Conceptual Ecological Modelling of Sublittoral Rock Habitats to Inform Indicator Selection

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.

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.

Tillin, H. & Tyler-Walters, H., 2014. Assessing the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats to pressures associated with marine activities. Phase 2 Report – Literature review and sensitivity assessments for ecological groups for circalittoral and offshore Level 5 biotopes. JNCC Report No. 512B, 260 pp.

Human activities within the marine environment give rise to a number of pressures on seabed habitats. Improved understanding of the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats is required to underpin the management advice provided for Marine Protected Areas, as well as supporting other UK marine monitoring and assessment work. The sensitivity of marine sedimentary habitats to a range of pressures induced by human activities has previously been systematically assessed using approaches based on expert judgement for Defra Project MB0102 (Tillin et al. 2010). This previous work assessed sensitivity at the level of the broadscale habitat and therefore the scores were typically expressed as a range due to underlying variation in the sensitivity of the constituent biotopes. The objective of this project was to reduce the uncertainty around identifying the sensitivity of selected subtidal sedimentary habitats by assessing sensitivity, at a finer scale and incorporating information on the biological assemblage, for 33 Level 5 circalittoral and offshore biotopes taken from the Marine Habitat Classification of Britain and Ireland (Connor et al. 2004). Two Level 6 sub-biotopes were also included in this project as these contain distinctive characterising species that differentiate them from the Level 5 parent biotope. Littoral, infralittoral, reduced and variable salinity sedimentary habitats were excluded from this project as the scope was set for assessment of circalittoral and offshore sedimentary communities. This project consisted of three Phases. • Phase 1 - define ecological groups based on similarities in the sensitivity of characterising species from the Level 5 and two Level 6 biotopes described above. • Phase 2 - produce a literature review of information on the resilience and resistance of characterising species of the ecological groups to pressures associated with activities in the marine environment. • Phase 3 - to produce sensitivity assessment ‘proformas’ based on the findings of Phase 2 for each ecological group. This report outlines results of Phase 2. The Tillin et al., (2010) sensitivity assessment methodology was modified to use the best available scientific evidence that could be collated within the project timescale. An extensive literature review was compiled, for peer reviewed and grey literature, to examine current understanding about the effects of pressures from human activities on circalittoral and offshore sedimentary communities in UK continental shelf waters, together with information on factors that contribute to resilience (recovery) of marine species. This review formed the basis of an assessment of the sensitivity of the 16 ecological groups identified in Phase 1 of the project (Tillin & Tyler-Walters 2014). As a result: • the state of knowledge on the effects of each pressure on circalittoral and offshore benthos was reviewed; • the resistance, resilience and, hence, sensitivity of sixteen ecological groups, representing 96 characteristic species, were assessed for eight separate pressures; • each assessment was accompanied by a detailed review of the relevant evidence; Assessing the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats to pressures associated with human activities • knowledge gaps and sources of uncertainty were identified for each group; • each assessment was accompanied by an assessment of the quality of the evidence, its applicability to the assessment and the degree of concordance (agreement) between the evidence, to highlight sources of uncertainty as an assessment of the overall confidence in the sensitivity assessment, and finally • limitations in the methodology and the application of sensitivity assessments were outlined. This process demonstrated that the ecological groups identified in Phase 1 (Tillin & Tyler-Walters 2014) were viable groups for sensitivity assessment, and could be used to represent the 33 circalittoral and offshore sediments biotopes identified at the beginning of the project. The results of the sensitivity assessments show: • the majority of species and hence ecological groups in sedimentary habitats are sensitive to physical change, especially loss of habitat and sediment extraction, and change in sediment type; • most sedimentary species are sensitive to physical damage, e.g. abrasion and penetration, although deep burrowing species (e.g. the Dublin Bay prawn - Nephrops norvegicus and the sea cucumber - Neopentadactyla mixta) are able to avoid damaging effects to varying degrees, depending on the depth of penetration and time of year; • changes in hydrography (wave climate, tidal streams and currents) can significantly affect sedimentary communities, depending on whether they are dominated by deposit, infaunal feeders or suspension feeders, and dependant on the nature of the sediment, which is itself modified by hydrography and depth; • sedentary species and ecological groups that dominate the top-layer of the sediment (either shallow burrowing or epifaunal) remain the most sensitive to physical damage; • mobile species (e.g. interstitial and burrowing amphipods, and perhaps cumaceans) are the least sensitive to physical change or damage, and hydrological change as they are already adapted to unstable, mobile substrata; • sensitivity to changes in organic enrichment and hence oxygen levels, is variable between species and ecological groups, depending on the exact habitat preferences of the species in question, although most species have at least a medium sensitivity to acute deoxygenation; • there is considerable evidence on the effects of bottom-contact fishing practices and aggregate dredging on sedimentary communities, although not all evidence is directly applicable to every ecological group; • there is lack of detailed information on the physiological tolerances (e.g. to oxygenation, salinity, and temperature), habitat preferences, life history and population dynamics of many species, so that inferences has been made from related species, families, or even the same phylum; • there was inadequate evidence to assess the effects of non-indigenous species on most ecological groups, and Assessing the sensitivity of subtidal sedimentary habitats to pressures associated with human activities • there was inadequate evidence to assess the effects of electromagnetic fields and litter on any ecological group. The resultant report provides an up-to-date review of current knowledge about the effects of pressures resulting from human activities of circalittoral and offshore sedimentary communities. It provides an evidence base to facilitate and support the provision of management advice for Marine Protected Areas, development of UK marine monitoring and assessment, and conservation advice to offshore marine industries. However, such a review will require at least annual updates to take advantage of new evidence and new research as it becomes available. Also further work is required to test how ecological group assessments are best combined in practice to advise on the sensitivity of a range of sedimentary biotopes, including the 33 that were originally examined.

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.

Identifying predictable foraging habitats for a wide-ranging marine predator using ensemble ecological niche models

Aim: Ecological niche modelling can provide valuable insight into species' environmental preferences and aid the identification of key habitats for populations of conservation concern. Here, we integrate biologging, satellite remote-sensing and ensemble ecological niche models (EENMs) to identify predictable foraging habitats for a globally important population of the grey-headed albatross (GHA) Thalassarche chrysostoma. Location: Bird Island, South Georgia; Southern Atlantic Ocean. Methods: GPS and geolocation-immersion loggers were used to track at-sea movements and activity patterns of GHA over two breeding seasons (n = 55; brood-guard). Immersion frequency (landings per 10-min interval) was used to define foraging events. EENM combining Generalized Additive Models (GAM), MaxEnt, Random Forest (RF) and Boosted Regression Trees (BRT) identified the biophysical conditions characterizing the locations of foraging events, using time-matched oceanographic predictors (Sea Surface Temperature, SST; chlorophyll a, chl-a; thermal front frequency, TFreq; depth). Model performance was assessed through iterative cross-validation and extrapolative performance through cross-validation among years. Results: Predictable foraging habitats identified by EENM spanned neritic (<500 m), shelf break and oceanic waters, coinciding with a set of persistent biophysical conditions characterized by particular thermal ranges (3–8 °C, 12–13 °C), elevated primary productivity (chl-a > 0.5 mg m−3) and frequent manifestation of mesoscale thermal fronts. Our results confirm previous indications that GHA exploit enhanced foraging opportunities associated with frontal systems and objectively identify the APFZ as a region of high foraging habitat suitability. Moreover, at the spatial and temporal scales investigated here, the performance of multi-model ensembles was superior to that of single-algorithm models, and cross-validation among years indicated reasonable extrapolative performance. Main conclusions: EENM techniques are useful for integrating the predictions of several single-algorithm models, reducing potential bias and increasing confidence in predictions. Our analysis highlights the value of EENM for use with movement data in identifying at-sea habitats of wide-ranging marine predators, with clear implications for conservation and management.

Identifying predictable foraging habitats for a wide-ranging marine predator using ensemble ecological niche models

Aim: Ecological niche modelling can provide valuable insight into species' environmental preferences and aid the identification of key habitats for populations of conservation concern. Here, we integrate biologging, satellite remote-sensing and ensemble ecological niche models (EENMs) to identify predictable foraging habitats for a globally important population of the grey-headed albatross (GHA) Thalassarche chrysostoma. Location: Bird Island, South Georgia; Southern Atlantic Ocean. Methods: GPS and geolocation-immersion loggers were used to track at-sea movements and activity patterns of GHA over two breeding seasons (n = 55; brood-guard). Immersion frequency (landings per 10-min interval) was used to define foraging events. EENM combining Generalized Additive Models (GAM), MaxEnt, Random Forest (RF) and Boosted Regression Trees (BRT) identified the biophysical conditions characterizing the locations of foraging events, using time-matched oceanographic predictors (Sea Surface Temperature, SST; chlorophyll a, chl-a; thermal front frequency, TFreq; depth). Model performance was assessed through iterative cross-validation and extrapolative performance through cross-validation among years. Results: Predictable foraging habitats identified by EENM spanned neritic (<500 m), shelf break and oceanic waters, coinciding with a set of persistent biophysical conditions characterized by particular thermal ranges (3–8 °C, 12–13 °C), elevated primary productivity (chl-a > 0.5 mg m−3) and frequent manifestation of mesoscale thermal fronts. Our results confirm previous indications that GHA exploit enhanced foraging opportunities associated with frontal systems and objectively identify the APFZ as a region of high foraging habitat suitability. Moreover, at the spatial and temporal scales investigated here, the performance of multi-model ensembles was superior to that of single-algorithm models, and cross-validation among years indicated reasonable extrapolative performance. Main conclusions: EENM techniques are useful for integrating the predictions of several single-algorithm models, reducing potential bias and increasing confidence in predictions. Our analysis highlights the value of EENM for use with movement data in identifying at-sea habitats of wide-ranging marine predators, with clear implications for conservation and management.

High Level Environmental Screening Study for Offshore Wind Farm Developments – Marine Habitats and Species Project

High level environmental screening study for offshore wind farm developments – marine habitats and species This report provides an awareness of the environmental issues related to marine habitats and species for developers and regulators of offshore wind farms. The information is also relevant to other offshore renewable energy developments. The marine habitats and species considered are those associated with the seabed, seabirds, and sea mammals. The report concludes that the following key ecological issues should be considered in the environmental assessment of offshore wind farms developments: • likely changes in benthic communities within the affected area and resultant indirect impacts on fish, populations and their predators such as seabirds and sea mammals; • potential changes to the hydrography and wave climate over a wide area, and potential changes to coastal processes and the ecology of the region; • likely effects on spawning or nursery areas of commercially important fish and shellfish species; • likely effects on mating and social behaviour in sea mammals, including migration routes; • likely effects on feeding water birds, seal pupping sites and damage of sensitive or important intertidal sites where cables come onshore; • potential displacement of fish, seabird and sea mammals from preferred habitats; • potential effects on species and habitats of marine natural heritage importance; • potential cumulative effects on seabirds, due to displacement of flight paths, and any mortality from bird strike, especially in sensitive rare or scarce species; • possible effects of electromagnetic fields on feeding behaviour and migration, especially in sharks and rays, and • potential marine conservation and biodiversity benefits of offshore wind farm developments as artificial reefs and 'no-take' zones. The report provides an especially detailed assessment of likely sensitivity of seabed species and habitats in the proposed development areas. Although sensitive to some of the factors created by wind farm developments, they mainly have a high recovery potential. The way in which survey data can be linked to Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) sensitivity assessments to produce maps of sensitivity to factors is demonstrated. Assessing change to marine habitats and species as a result of wind farm developments has to take account of the natural variability of marine habitats, which might be high especially in shallow sediment biotopes. There are several reasons for such changes but physical disturbance of habitats and short-term climatic variability are likely to be especially important. Wind farm structures themselves will attract marine species including those that are attached to the towers and scour protection, fish that associate with offshore structures, and sea birds (especially sea duck) that may find food and shelter there. Nature conservation designations especially relevant to areas where wind farm might be developed are described and the larger areas are mapped. There are few designated sites that extend offshore to where wind farms are likely to be developed. However, cable routes and landfalls may especially impinge on designated sites. The criteria that have been developed to assess the likely marine natural heritage importance of a location or of the habitats and species that occur there can be applied to survey information to assess whether or not there is anything of particular marine natural heritage importance in a development area. A decision tree is presented that can be used to apply ‘duty of care’ principles to any proposed development. The potential ‘gains’ for the local environment are explored. Wind farms will enhance the biodiversity of areas, could act as refugia for fish, and could be developed in a way that encourages enhancement of fish stocks including shellfish.