Multiple SNP Markers Reveal Fine-Scale Population and Deep Phylogeographic Structure in European Anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus L.)

10 p.

Ecosystem science capabilities required to support NOAA’s mission in the year 2020

The mission of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is to understand and predict changes in the Earth’s environment and conserve and manage coastal and marine resources to meet our nation’s economic, social and environmental needs (NOAA, 2004). In meeting its marine stewardship responsibilities, NOAA seeks to ensure the sustainable use of resources and balance competing uses of coastal and marine ecosystems, recognizing both their human and natural components (NOAA, 2004). Authorities for executing these responsibilities come from over 90 separate pieces of Federal legislation, each with unique requirements and responsibilities. Few of these laws explicitly mandate an ecosystem approach to management (EAM) or supporting science. However, resource managers, the science community, and increasingly, the public, are recognizing that significantly greater connectedness among the scientific disciplines is needed to support management and stewardship responsibilities (Browman and Stergiou, 2004; 2005). Neither NOAA nor any other science agency can meet the increasing demand for ecosystem science products addressing each of its mandates individually. Even if it was possible, doing so would not provide the integration necessary to solve the increasingly complex array of management issues. This focus on the integration of science and management responsibilities into an ecosystem view is one of the centerpieces of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy’s report (USCOP, 2004), and the Administration’s response to that report in the U.S. Ocean Action Plan (CEQ, 2004). (PDF contains 100 pages)

Science-based restoration monitoring of coastal habitats, Volume One: A framework for monitoring plans under the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000 (Public Law 160-457)

Executive Summary: The Estuary Restoration Act of 2000 (ERA), Title I of the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000, was created to promote the restoration of habitats along the coast of the United States (including the US protectorates and the Great Lakes). The NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science was charged with the development of a guidance manual for monitoring plans under this Act. This guidance manual, titled Science-Based Restoration Monitoring of Coastal Habitats, is written in two volumes. It provides technical assistance, outlines necessary steps, and provides useful tools for the development and implementation of sound scientific monitoring of coastal restoration efforts. In addition, this manual offers a means to detect early warnings that the restoration is on track or not, to gauge how well a restoration site is functioning, to coordinate projects and efforts for consistent and successful restoration, and to evaluate the ecological health of specific coastal habitats both before and after project completion (Galatowitsch et al. 1998). The following habitats have been selected for discussion in this manual: water column, rock bottom, coral reefs, oyster reefs, soft bottom, kelp and other macroalgae, rocky shoreline, soft shoreline, submerged aquatic vegetation, marshes, mangrove swamps, deepwater swamps, and riverine forests. The classification of habitats used in this document is generally based on that of Cowardin et al. (1979) in their Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, as called for in the ERA Estuary Habitat Restoration Strategy. This manual is not intended to be a restoration monitoring “cookbook” that provides templates of monitoring plans for specific habitats. The interdependence of a large number of site-specific factors causes habitat types to vary in physical and biological structure within and between regions and geographic locations (Kusler and Kentula 1990). Monitoring approaches used should be tailored to these differences. However, even with the diversity of habitats that may need to be restored and the extreme geographic range across which these habitats occur, there are consistent principles and approaches that form a common basis for effective monitoring. Volume One, titled A Framework for Monitoring Plans under the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000, begins with definitions and background information. Topics such as restoration, restoration monitoring, estuaries, and the role of socioeconomics in restoration are discussed. In addition, the habitats selected for discussion in this manual are briefly described. (PDF contains 116 pages)

Science-based restoration monitoring of coastal habitats, Volume Two: Tools for monitoring coastal habitats

Healthy coastal habitats are not only important ecologically; they also support healthy coastal communities and improve the quality of people’s lives. Despite their many benefits and values, coastal habitats have been systematically modified, degraded, and destroyed throughout the United States and its protectorates beginning with European colonization in the 1600’s (Dahl 1990). As a result, many coastal habitats around the United States are in desperate need of restoration. The monitoring of restoration projects, the focus of this document, is necessary to ensure that restoration efforts are successful, to further the science, and to increase the efficiency of future restoration efforts.

Environmental and aesthetic impacts of small docks and piers, workshop report: Developing a science-based decision support tool for small dock management, phase 1: Status of the science

Few issues confronting coastal resource managers are as divisive or difficult to manage as regulating the construction of private recreational docks and piers associated with residential development. State resource managers face a growing population intent on living on or near the coast, coupled with an increasing desire to have immediate access to the water by private docks or piers. (PDF contains 69 pages)

Connectivity: Science, people and policy in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary

Executive Summary: The Connectivity Colloquium evolved from an exhortation by Dan Basta, Director of the National Marine Sanctuary Program, to come together and assess what we know about the condition of our natural resources, identify information gaps and how to fill them, and transform science and management from an emphasis on documentation to a nexus for action. This purpose in some ways reflects the initiation of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary itself, which was designated by an act of the U.S. Congress in 1990 in the aftermath of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska and three major ship groundings of the Florida Reef Tract in late 1989. Over the next seven years NOAA worked with federal, state, and local partners to develop a comprehensive management plan for the Sanctuary implemented under a co-trustee partnership between NOAA and the State of Florida. (PDF contains 270 pages; 14Mb)

2002-03 Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary science report: An ecosystem report card after five years of marine zoning

Executive Summary: Circulation and Exchange of Florida Bay and South Florida Coastal Waters The coastal ecosystem of South Florida is comprised of distinct marine environments. Circulation of surface waters and exchange processes, which respond to both local and regional forcings, interconnect different coastal environments. In addition, re-circulating current systems within the South Florida coastal ecosystem such as the Tortugas Gyre contribute to retention of locally spawned larvae. Variability in salinity, chlorophyll, and light transmittance occurs on a wide range of temporal and spatial scales, in response to both natural forcing, such as seasonal precipitation and evaporation and interannual “El Niño” climate signals, and anthropogenic forcing, such as water management practices in south Florida. The full time series of surface property maps are posted at www.aoml.noaa.gov/sfp. Regional surface circulation patterns, shown by satellite-tracked surface drifters, respond to large-scale forcing such as wind variability and sea level slopes. Recent patterns include slow flow from near the mouth of the Shark River to the Lower Keys, rapid flow from the Tortugas to the shelf of the Carolinas, and flow from the Tortugas around the Tortugas Gyre and out of the Florida Straits. The Southwest Florida Shelf and the Atlantic side of the Florida Keys coastal zone are directly connected by passages between the islands of the Middle and Lower Keys. Movement of water between these regions depends on a combination of local wind-forced currents and gravitydriven transports through the passages, produced by cross-Key sea level differences on time scales of several days to weeks, which arise because of differences in physical characteristics (shape, orientation, and depth) of the shelf on either side of the Keys. A southeastward mean flow transports water from western Florida Bay, which undergoes large variations in water quality, to the reef tract. Adequate sampling of oceanographic events requires both the capability of near real-time recognition of these events, and the flexibility to rapidly stage targeted field sampling. Capacity to respond to events is increasing, as demonstrated by investigations of the 2002 “blackwater” event and a 2003 entrainment of Mississippi River water to the Tortugas. (PDF contains 364 pages.)

Conservation science in NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuaries: description and recent accomplishments

This report describes cases relating to the management of national marine sanctuaries in which certain scientific information was required so managers could make decisions that effectively protected trust resources. The cases presented represent only a fraction of difficult issues that marine sanctuary managers deal with daily. They include, among others, problems related to wildlife disturbance, vessel routing, marine reserve placement, watershed management, oil spill response, and habitat restoration. Scientific approaches to address these problems vary significantly, and include literature surveys, data mining, field studies (monitoring, mapping, observations, and measurement), geospatial and biogeographic analysis, and modeling. In most cases there is also an element of expert consultation and collaboration among multiple partners, agencies with resource protection responsibilities, and other users and stakeholders. The resulting management responses may involve direct intervention (e.g., for spill response or habitat restoration issues), proposal of boundary alternatives for marine sanctuaries or reserves, changes in agency policy or regulations, making recommendations to other agencies with resource protection responsibilities, proposing changes to international or domestic shipping rules, or development of new education or outreach programs. (PDF contains 37 pages.)

Enabling high-throughput data transfers for climate and earth observation science

Supporting presentation slides from the Janet network end to end performance initiative

Atlas of abundance and distribution patterns of ichthyoplankton from the Northeast Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea ecosystems: based on research conducted by the Alaska Fisheries Science Center (1972–1996)

This regional atlas summarizes and illustrates the distribution and abundance patterns of fish eggs and larvae of 102 taxa within 34 families found in the Northeast Pacific Ocean including the Bering Sea, Gulf of Alaska, and U.S. west coast ecosystems. Data were collected over a 20+ year period (1972–1996) by the Recruitment Processes Program of the Alaska Fisheries Science Center (AFSC). Ichthyoplankton catch records used in this atlas were generated from 11,379 tows taken during 100 cruises. For each taxon, general life history data are briefly summarized from the literature. Published information on distribution patterns of eggs and larvae are reviewed for the study area. Data from AFSC ichthyoplankton collections were combined to produce an average spatial distribution for each taxon. These data were also used to estimate mean abundance and percent occurrence by year and month, and relative abundance by larval length and season. Abundance from each tow was measured as catch per 10 m2 surface area. A larval distribution and abundance map was produced with a geographic information system using ArcInfo software. For taxa with identifiable pelagic eggs, distribution maps showing presence or absence of eggs are presented. Presence or absence of adults in the study area is mapped based on recent literature and data from AFSC groundfish surveys. Distributional records for adults and early life history stages revealed several new range extensions. (PDF file contains 288 pages.)

The Expanded mtDNA Phylogeny of the Franco-Cantabrian Region Upholds the Pre-Neolithic Genetic Substrate of Basques

9 p.

Kommentar zum Worm-et-al.-Artikel„Impacts of Biodiversity Loss on Ocean Ecosystem Services“: erschienen im Wissenschaftsmagazin Science, Vol. 314, am 3. November 2006

Folgende Kernbehauptungen bzw. Hypothesen werden in dem Worm-et-al.-Artikel aufgestellt: -Der Verlust an Biodiversität (Artenzahl) in einem Meeresgebiet reduziert tief greifend seine Produktivität und seine Stabilität in Stressperioden, hervorgerufen u.a. durch Überfischung und Klimaänderung. -Die Zahl der kollabierten Arten nimmt zu. Dieser Trend projeziert den Kollaps aller wildlebenden Arten und Bestände, die gegenwärtig befischt werden, auf das Jahr 2048. -Diese Entwicklung ist zum gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt reversibel, denn das Meer besitzt noch ein großes Potential sich zu regenerieren. Dazu ist aber mehr Umweltschutz notwendig.