Single-walled carbon nanotube-based polymer monoliths for the enantioselective nano-liquid chromatographic separation of racemic pharmaceuticals

Many protocols have been used for extraction of DNA from Thraustochytrids. These generally involve the use of CTAB, phenol/chloroform and ethanol. They also feature mechanical grinding, sonication, N2 freezing or bead beating. However, the resulting chemical and physical damage to extracted DNA reduces its quality. The methods are also unsuitable for large numbers of samples. Commercially-available DNA extraction kits give better quality and yields but are expensive. Therefore, an optimized DNA extraction protocol was developed which is suitable for Thraustochytrids to both minimise expensive and time-consuming steps prior to DNA extraction and also to improve the yield. The most effective method is a combination of single bead in TissueLyser (Qiagen) and Proteinase K. Results were conclusive: both the quality and the yield of extracted DNA were higher than with any other method giving an average yield of 8.5 µg/100 mg biomass.

Reducing the incidence of under-skin browning in 'Honey Gold' mango (Mangifera indica L.) fruit

'Honey Gold' mango is a relatively new cultivar in Australia, with an appealing skin colour and a sweet fibre-free flesh. However, fruit can develop 'under-skin browning' (USB), which appears several days after packing as a distinct 'bruise'-like discolouration under the epidermis and can affect large areas of the fruit surface. We investigated the anatomy of USB and the impact of post-harvest fruit handling conditions on the disorder. Starch accumulated around the resin canals and discoloured cells in the affected area, with no visible change to the cuticle or epidermis. Delays of 1 d at ambient temperature (27 degrees - 35 degrees C) before packing, and 2 d at 18 degrees - 20 degrees C (after packing), before placing fruit at 12 degrees - 14 degrees C and road transportation, reduced the incidence of USB by 83% compared to placing fruit at 12 degrees - 14 degrees C within 13 h of picking. The incidence of USB was 88 100% higher in fruit that were cooled to 12 degrees - 14 degrees C within 13 h of picking, then commercially road-freighted for 4 d at 12 degrees - 14 degrees C, than in fruit held under similar temperature conditions, but not road-freighted. Wrapping each fruit in bubble-wrap to minimise direct contact with other fruit, with the plastic insert, or with the cardboard tray, reduced the incidence of USB by 84% after road-freight compared to not using bubble-wrap. These results suggest that USB is a unique disorder of mango skin associated with a rapid post-harvest reduction in temperature, from high ambient temperatures to 12 degrees - 14 degrees C, and with physical damage during road-freight.

Interaction between production characteristics and postharvest performance and practices for fresh fruit

Significant interactions have been demonstrated between production factors and postharvest quality of fresh fruit. Accordingly, there is an attendant need for adaptive postharvest actions to modulate preharvest effects. The most significant preharvest effects appear to be mediated through mineral nutrition influences on the physical characteristics of fruit. Examples of specific influencers include fertilisers, water availability, rootstock, and crop load effects on fruit quality attributes such as skin colour, susceptibility to diseases and physiological disorders, and fruit nutritional composition. Also, rainfall before and during harvest can markedly affect fruit susceptibility to skin blemishes, physical damage, and diseases. Knowledge of preharvest-postharvest interactions can help determine the basis for variability in postharvest performance and thereby allow refinement of postharvest practices to minimise quality loss after harvest. This knowledge can be utilised in predictive management systems. Such systems can benefit from characterisation of fruit nutritional status, particularly minerals, several months before and/or at harvest to allow informed decisions on postharvest handling and marketing options. Other examples of proactive management practices include adjusting harvesting and packing systems to account for rainfall effects before and/or during harvest. Improved understanding of preharvest-postharvest interactions is contributing to the delivery of consistently higher quality of fruit to consumers. This paper focuses on the state of knowledge for sub-tropical and tropical fruits, in particular avocado and mango.

Interaction between production characteristics and postharvest performance and practices for fresh fruit

Significant interactions have been demonstrated between production factors and postharvest quality of fresh fruit. Accordingly, there is an attendant need for adaptive postharvest actions to modulate preharvest effects. The most significant preharvest effects appear to be mediated through mineral nutrition influences on the physical characteristics of fruit. Examples of specific influencers include fertilisers, water availability, rootstock, and crop load effects on fruit quality attributes such as skin colour, susceptibility to diseases and physiological disorders, and fruit nutritional composition. Also, rainfall before and during harvest can markedly affect fruit susceptibility to skin blemishes, physical damage, and diseases. Knowledge of preharvest-postharvest interactions can help determine the basis for variability in postharvest performance and thereby allow refinement of postharvest practices to minimise quality loss after harvest. This knowledge can be utilised in predictive management systems. Such systems can benefit from characterisation of fruit nutritional status, particularly minerals, several months before and/or at harvest to allow informed decisions on postharvest handling and marketing options. Other examples of proactive management practices include adjusting harvesting and packing systems to account for rainfall effects before and/or during harvest. Improved understanding of preharvest-postharvest interactions is contributing to the delivery of consistently higher quality of fruit to consumers. This paper focuses on the state of knowledge for sub-tropical and tropical fruits, in particular avocado and mango.

Comparison of three pollination methods for Eucalyptus argophloia, a small-flowered eucalypt

Context Most studies assess pollination success at capsule maturity, and studies of pre-zygotic processes are often lacking. Aims This study investigates the suitability of controlled pollination for a potential forestry plantation species, Eucalyptus argophloia, by examining pre- and post-zygotic pollination success. Methods Pollen tube development, capsule set and seed set are compared following three-stop pollination, artificially induced protogyny (AIP), AIP unpollinated and open pollination. The fecundity of stored pollen was compared with that of fresh pollen. Results Three-stop pollination, AIP and open pollination had similar numbers of pollen tubes, but AIP unpollinated had none. Open pollination produced significantly more capsules and total number of seeds than the other treatments. There were significantly more seeds per retained capsule for the open pollination and three-stop pollination treatments than for the AIP and AIP unpollinated pollination treatments. There were no significant differences relative to the age of pollen. Conclusions Pre-zygotic success in terms of pollen tubes was similar for open-pollinated, three stop and AIP, but was not reflected in post-zygotic success when the open pollination and three-stop method produced significantly more seeds per retained capsule than the AIP treatments and open pollination yielded more seeds. Capsule set and total seed set for open pollination, and fewer capsules in controlled pollinations, may reflect physical damage to buds because of the small E. argophloia flowers. Suitable alternative breeding strategies other than controlled pollinations are discussed for this species.

Fuzzy-logic-based health monitoring and residual-life prediction for composite helicopter rotor

A health-monitoring and life-estimation strategy for composite rotor blades is developed in this work. The cross-sectional stiffness reduction obtained by physics-based models is expressed as a function of the life of the structure using a recent phenomenological damage model. This stiffness reduction is further used to study the behavior of measurable system parameters such as blade deflections, loads, and strains of a composite rotor blade in static analysis and forward flight. The simulated measurements are obtained using an aeroelastic analysis of the composite rotor blade based on the finite element in space and time with physics-based damage modes that are then linked to the life consumption of the blade. The model-based measurements are contaminated with noise to simulate real data. Genetic fuzzy systems are developed for global online prediction of physical damage and life consumption using displacement- and force-based measurement deviations between damaged and undamaged conditions. Furthermore, local online prediction of physical damage and life consumption is done using strains measured along the blade length. It is observed that the life consumption in the matrix-cracking zone is about 12-15% and life consumption in debonding/delamination zone is about 45-55% of the total life of the blade. It is also observed that the success rate of the genetic fuzzy systems depends upon the number of measurements, type of measurements and training, and the testing noise level. The genetic fuzzy systems work quite well with noisy data and are recommended for online structural health monitoring of composite helicopter rotor blades.

Seagrass and Aquatic Habitat Assessment Workshop Summary

Seagrass communities are among the richest and most productive, photoautotrophic coastal systems in the world. They protect and improve water quality, provide shoreline stabilization, and are important habitats for an array of fish, birds, and other wildlife. Hence, much can be gained by protecting and restoring these important living resources. Human’s impact on these vital resources from population growth, pollution, and physical damage from boating and other activities can disrupt the growth of these seagrasses communities and have devastating effects on their health and vitality. Inventory and monitoring are required to determine the dynamics of seagrasses and devise better protection and restoration for these rich resources. The purpose of this seagrass workshop, sponsored by NOAA’s CSC , USGS, and FMRI, was to move toward greater objectivity and accuracy in seagrass mapping and monitoring. This workshop helped foster interaction and communication among seagrass professionals. In order to begin the process of determining the best uniform mapping process for the biological research community. Increasing such awareness among the seagrass and management communities, it is hoped that an improved understanding of the monitoring and mapping process will lead to more effective and efficient preservation os submerged aquatic vegetation. (PDF contains 20 pages)

Field guide to requiem sharks (Elasmobranchiomorphi: Carcharhinidae) of the Western North Atlantic

Identification problems are common for many sharks due to a general lack of meristic characteristics that are typically useful for separating species. Other than number of vertebrae and number and shape of teeth, identifications are frequently based on external features that are often shared among species. Identification problems in the field are most prevalent when live specimens are captured and releasing them with a minimum of stress is a priority (e.g., shark tagging programs). Identifications must be accurate and conducted quickly but this can be challenging, especially if specimens are very active or too large to be landed without physical damage. This field guide was designed primarily for use during field studies and presents a simplified method for identifying the 21 species of western North Atlantic Ocean sharks belonging to the family Carcharhinidae (carcharhinids). To assist with identifications a dichotomous key to Carcharhinidae was developed, and for the more problematic Carcharhinus species (12 species), separation sheets based on important distinguishing features were constructed. Descriptive text and illustrations provided in the species accounts were developed from field observations, photographs, and published references. (PDF file contains 36 pages.)

Effect of box stowage on quality fish

Quality of boxed cod and haddock was compared with that of penned fish in terms of organoleptic grading, trimethylamine values, Intelectron Fish Tester readings and fish and fillet yield. Boxed fish showed a higher percentage of grade one fish than penned fish. TMA values, however, did not differ greatly. There was less physical damage due to squeezing with boxed fish and consequently a greater yield of landed round fish and fillets.

Potential risks of contaminants with specific reference to mercury

Fresh water and fish are important to the people who live in the Lake Victoria region therefore the quality of the water and fish is of major importance (Johnson & Odada, 1996). It is well known that dirty water and spoilt fish can lead to poor health and lower standards of living, and that quality can be affected by the pollution in the environment. Even though Lake Victoria is very large, it is relatively shallow and the water remains in the lake basin for a long time (Bootsma & Hecky, 1993). There are a number of environmental issues in Lake Victoria, including water hyacinth~over-population and increased farming causing problems with the lake ecosystem. All these factors combine to keep contaminants within the lake for long time, which will lead to gradually increasing concentrations in the lake. Pollution is a term that covers a wide variety of chemicals and physical changes and their adverse effects on the environment. Here we focus on contaminants, which are unwanted chemicals introduced to the environment. Contaminants include a very wide variety of chemicals, both man-made and natural, for example, mercury, pesticides and herbicides, heavy metals, and natural plant and algae toxins. Many contaminants do not always lead to adverse effects immediately, but can gradually induce long-term problems leading to chronic illnesses and physical damage. A few contaminants have very rapid impacts resulting in immediately obvious changes such as death or injury. Sources of contaminants are varied. Contaminants can get in the lake by the way of agricultural treatment of crops near the lake, industrial effluent, intentional introduction such as fish poisoning byfishermen, natural sources such as heavy metals from particular types of rocks, and even some plants naturally release their toxins. Contaminant sources are not always found near Lake Victoria.

Trespass revisited

Discusses the Chancery Division ruling in Sinclair v Gavaghan on the measure of damages to be awarded for temporary trespass during the development of land where no physical damage to the land had been sustained. Examines case law prior to Sinclair involving temporary occupation and permanent encroachment. Considers the factors to be taken into account when determining a valuation based on hypothetical negotiations for a licence.

Assessing the sensitivity of seagrass bed biotopes to pressures associated with marine activities.

This project was commissioned to generate an improved understanding of the sensitivities of seagrass habitats to pressures associated with human activities in the marine environment - to provide an evidence base to facilitate and support management advice for Marine Protected Areas; development of UK marine monitoring and assessment, and conservation advice to offshore marine industries. Seagrass bed habitats are identified as a Priority Marine Feature (PMF) under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, they are also included on the OSPAR list of threatened and declining species and habitats, and are a Habitat of Principle Importance (HPI) under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, in England and Wales. The purpose of this project was to produce sensitivity assessments with supporting evidence for the HPI, OSPAR and PMF seagrass/Zostera bed habitat definitions, clearly documenting the evidence behind the assessments and any differences between assessments. Nineteen pressures, falling in five categories - biological, hydrological, physical damage, physical loss, and pollution and other chemical changes - were assessed in this report. Assessments were based on the three British seagrasses Zostera marina, Z. noltei and Ruppia maritima. Z. marina var. angustifolia was considered to be a subspecies of Z. marina but it was specified where studies had considered it as a species in its own rights. Where possible other components of the community were investigated but the basis of the assessment focused on seagrass species. To develop each sensitivity assessment, the resistance and resilience of the key elements were assessed against the pressure benchmark using the available evidence. The benchmarks were designed to provide a ‘standard’ level of pressure against which to assess sensitivity. Overall, seagrass beds were highly sensitive to a number of human activities: • penetration or disturbance of the substratum below the surface; • habitat structure changes – removal of substratum; • physical change to another sediment type; • physical loss of habitat; • siltation rate changes including and smothering; and • changes in suspended solids. High sensitivity was recorded for pressures which directly impacted the factors that limit seagrass growth and health such as light availability. Physical pressures that caused mechanical modification of the sediment, and hence damage to roots and leaves, also resulted in high sensitivity. Seagrass beds were assessed as ‘not sensitive’ to microbial pathogens or ‘removal of target species’. These assessments were based on the benchmarks used. Z. marina is known to be sensitive to Labyrinthula zosterae but this was not included in the benchmark used. Similarly, ‘removal of target species’ addresses only the biological effects of removal and not the physical effects of the process used. For example, seagrass beds are probably not sensitive to the removal of scallops found within the bed but are highly sensitive to the effects of dredging for scallops, as assessed under the pressure penetration or disturbance of the substratum below the surface‘. This is also an example of a synergistic effect Assessing the sensitivity of seagrass bed biotopes to pressures associated with marine activities between pressures. Where possible, synergistic effects were highlighted but synergistic and cumulative effects are outside the scope off this study. The report found that no distinct differences in sensitivity exist between the HPI, PMF and OSPAR definitions. Individual biotopes do however have different sensitivities to pressures. These differences were determined by the species affected, the position of the habitat on the shore and the sediment type. For instance evidence showed that beds growing in soft and muddy sand were more vulnerable to physical damage than beds on harder, more compact substratum. Temporal effects can also influence the sensitivity of seagrass beds. On a seasonal time frame, physical damage to roots and leaves occurring in the reproductive season (summer months) will have a greater impact than damage in winter. On a daily basis, the tidal regime could accentuate or attenuate the effects of pressures depending on high and low tide. A variety of factors must therefore be taken into account in order to assess the sensitivity of a particular seagrass habitat at any location. No clear difference in resilience was established across the three seagrass definitions assessed in this report. The resilience of seagrass beds and the ability to recover from human induced pressures is a combination of the environmental conditions of the site, growth rates of the seagrass, the frequency and the intensity of the disturbance. This highlights the importance of considering the species affected as well as the ecology of the seagrass bed, the environmental conditions and the types and nature of activities giving rise to the pressure and the effects of that pressure. For example, pressures that result in sediment modification (e.g. pitting or erosion), sediment change or removal, prolong recovery. Therefore, the resilience of each biotope and habitat definitions is discussed for each pressure. Using a clearly documented, evidence based approach to create sensitivity assessments allows the assessment and any subsequent decision making or management plans to be readily communicated, transparent and justifiable. The assessments can be replicated and updated where new evidence becomes available ensuring the longevity of the sensitivity assessment tool. The evidence review has reduced the uncertainty around assessments previously undertaken in the MB0102 project (Tillin et al 2010) by assigning a single sensitivity score to the pressures as opposed to a range. Finally, as seagrass habitats may also contribute to ecosystem function and the delivery of ecosystem services, understanding the sensitivity of these biotopes may also support assessment and management in regard to these. Whatever objective measures are applied to data to assess sensitivity, the final sensitivity assessment is indicative. The evidence, the benchmarks, the confidence in the assessments and the limitations of the process, require a sense-check by experienced marine ecologists before the outcome is used in management decisions.

Assessing the sensitivity of Sabellaria spinulosa to pressures associated with marine activities.

The Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) commissioned this project to generate an improved understanding of the sensitivities of Sabellaria spinulosa reefs based on the OSPAR habitat definition. This work aimed to provide an evidence base to facilitate and support management advice for Marine Protected Areas, development of UK marine monitoring and assessment, and conservation advice to offshore marine industries. The OSPAR list of threatened and declining species and habitats refers to subtidal S. spinulosa reefs on hard or mixed substratum. S. spinulosa may also occur as thin crusts or individual worms but these are not the focus of conservation. The purpose of this project was to produce sensitivity assessments with supporting evidence for S. spinulosa reefs, clearly documenting the evidence behind the assessments and the confidence in these assessments. Sixteen pressures, falling in five categories - biological, hydrological, physical damage, physical loss, and pollution and other chemical changes - were assessed in this report. To develop each sensitivity assessment, the resistance and resilience of the key elements of the habitat were assessed against the pressure benchmark using the available evidence. The benchmarks were designed to provide a ‘standard’ level of pressure against which to assess sensitivity. The highest sensitivity (‘medium’) was recorded for physical pressures which directly impact the reefs including: • habitat structure changes – removal of substratum; • abrasion and penetration and sub-surface disturbance; • physical loss of habitat and change to habitat; and • siltation rate changes including and smothering. The report found that no evidence for differences in the sensitivity of the three EUNIS S. spinulosa biotopes that comprise the OSPAR definition. However, this evidence review has identified significant information gaps regarding sensitivity, ecological interactions with other species and resilience. No clear difference in resilience was established across the OSPAR S. spinulosa biotopes that were assessed in this report. Using a clearly documented, evidence based approach to create sensitivity assessments allows the assessment and any subsequent decision making or management plans to be readily communicated, transparent and justifiable. The assessments can be replicated and updated where new evidence becomes available ensuring the longevity of the sensitivity assessment tool. Finally, as S. spinulosa habitats may also contribute to ecosystem function and the delivery of ecosystem services, understanding the sensitivity of these biotopes may also support assessment and management in regard to these. Whatever objective measures are applied to data to assess sensitivity, the final sensitivity assessment is indicative. The evidence, the benchmarks, the confidence in the assessments and the limitations of the process, require a sense-check by experienced marine ecologists before the outcome is used in management decisions.

Assessing the sensitivity of blue mussel beds to pressures associated with human activities.

The Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) commissioned this project to generate an improved understanding of the sensitivities of blue mussel (Mytilus edulis) beds, found in UK waters, to pressures associated with human activities in the marine environment. The work will provide an evidence base that will facilitate and support management advice for Marine Protected Areas, development of UK marine monitoring and assessment, and conservation advice to offshore marine industries. Blue mussel beds are identified as a Habitat of Principle Importance (HPI) under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, as a Priority Marine Feature (PMF) under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, and included on the OSPAR (Annex V) list of threatened and declining species and habitats. The purpose of this project was to produce sensitivity assessments for the blue mussel biotopes included within the HPI, PMF and OSPAR habitat definitions, and clearly document the supporting evidence behind the assessments and any differences between them. A total of 20 pressures falling in five categories - biological, hydrological, physical damage, physical loss, and pollution and other chemical changes - were assessed in this report. The review examined seven blue mussel bed biotopes found on littoral sediment and sublittoral rock and sediment. The assessments were based on the sensitivity of M. edulis rather than associated species, as M. edulis was considered the most important characteristic species in blue mussel beds. To develop each sensitivity assessment, the resistance and resilience of the key elements are assessed against the pressure benchmark using the available evidence gathered in this review. The benchmarks were designed to provide a ‘standard’ level of pressure against which to assess sensitivity. Blue mussel beds were highly sensitive to a few human activities: • introduction or spread of non-indigenous species (NIS); • habitat structure changes - removal of substratum (extraction); and • physical loss (to land or freshwater habitat). Physical loss of habitat and removal of substratum are particularly damaging pressures, while the sensitivity of blue mussel beds to non-indigenous species depended on the species assessed. Crepidula fornicata and Crassostrea gigas both had the potential to outcompete and replace mussel beds, so resulted in a high sensitivity assessment. Mytilus spp. populations are considered to have a strong ability to recover from environmental disturbance. A good annual recruitment may allow a bed to recovery rapidly, though this cannot always be expected due to the sporadic nature of M. edulis recruitment. Therefore, blue mussel beds were considered to have a 'Medium' resilience (recovery within 2-10 years). As a result, even where the removal or loss of proportion of a mussel bed was expected due to a pressure, a sensitivity of 'Medium' was reported. Hence, most of the sensitivities reported were 'Medium'. It was noted, however, that the recovery rates of blue mussel beds were reported to be anywhere between two years to several decades. In addition, M. edulis is considered very tolerant of a range of physical and chemical conditions. As a result, blue mussel beds were considered to be 'Not sensitive' to changes in temperature, salinity, de-oxygenation, nutrient and organic enrichment, and substratum type, at the benchmark level of pressure. The report found that no distinct differences in overall sensitivity exist between the HPI, PMF and OSPAR definitions. Individual biotopes do however have different sensitivities to pressures, and the OSPAR definition only includes blue mussel beds on sediment. These differences were determined by the position of the habitat on the shore and the sediment type. For example, the infralittoral rock biotope (A3.361) was unlikely to be exposed to pressures that affect sediments. However in the case of increased water flow, mixed sediment biotopes were considered more stable and ‘Not sensitive’ (at the benchmark level) while the remaining biotopes were likely to be affected.

Using a clearly documented, evidence-based approach to create sensitivity assessments allows the assessment basis and any subsequent decision making or management plans to be readily communicated, transparent and justifiable. The assessments can be replicated and updated where new evidence becomes available ensuring the longevity of the sensitivity assessment tool. For every pressure where sensitivity was previously assessed as a range of scores in MB0102, the assessments made by the evidence review have supported one of the MB0102 assessments. The evidence review has reduced the uncertainty around assessments previously undertaken in the MB0102 project (Tillin et al., 2010) by assigning a single sensitivity score to the pressures as opposed to a range. Finally, as blue mussel bed habitats also contribute to ecosystem function and the delivery of ecosystem services, understanding the sensitivity of these biotopes may also support assessment and management in regard to these. Whatever objective measures are applied to data to assess sensitivity, the final sensitivity assessment is indicative. The evidence, the benchmarks, the confidence in the assessments and the limitations of the process, require a sense-check by experienced marine ecologists before the outcome is used in management decisions.

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.