Bringing together harmonized EUNIS seabed habitat geospatial information for the European Seas

The EUNIS-compliant information on Seabed Habitats that is currently available from the EMODNET portal covers only about half of the European Union (EU) waters in the Northeast Atlantic and adjacent Seas with EU outermost regions in other parts of the Atlantic or in the Indian Ocean still remaining out of the exercise. These gaps limit the geographical comprehensiveness of any studies on seabed-related Ecosystem Functions and Services. However, separate broad-scale seabed habitat mapping sources offer complementary seabed-related geospatial information that can be straightforwardly or, after some basic GIS processing, translated into EUNIS classes. This work focused on expeditiously obtaining a comprehensive coverage of permanently submerged seabed habitats (i.e., EUNIS classes A3 to A6) throughout most of the EU marine waters. This was achieved by bringing in, and harmonizing where need, complementary EUNIS-compliant broad-scale geospatial information from the UNEP’s Global Seafloor Geomorphic Features Map (GSGFM). The new geospatial dataset obtained, a polygon shapefile, extends for approximately 8.7 million km2 and more than doubles the coverage of EUNIS seabed habitat classes when compared to the datasets available from the EMODNET Seabed Habitats portal. The new information details more than 90% of the EU waters down to EUNIS level 2 and 3, improving EMODNET datasets by populating the deep-sea and offshore areas with previously disregarded geomorphic-based EUNIS habitat classes. Conversely, it is acknowledged that the GSGFM data could did not bring in any relevant information concerning EUNIS shelf habitats. The methodology and some area-based statistics on seabed habitat are presented, including overall and basin-specific mapped extents. It is noted that the mapping and quantification of several habitat extents are still geographically biased and underestimate the actual extent of the habitat. A comprehensive and homogeneous coverage of all EU seabed is expected in 2016 from the EMODNET Seabed Habitats programme. Until then, the current synthesis may constitute a valuable dataset for assessing the distribution of many EUNIS seabed habitat classes in EU waters and pursuing spatially-explicit analysis of seabed-related Functions and Services.JRC.H.1-Water Resource

Spatial distribution of marine ecosystem service capacity in the European seas

Practitioners and policy makers at European Union (EU) and Member States level are increasingly seeking spatially-explicit ecosystem service information to use in decision-making and the implementation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. Whilst under the MAES Action, land-cover data has already been used to map the distribution of several ecosystem services provided over the European land surface, a similar exercise exploiting existing seabed habitat data is still lacking for the European Seas. In this work we map the distribution of seabed-associated ecosystem services capacity by using a methodology that brings together (i) a geospatial dataset representing the broadscale distribution of permanently-submerged seabed habitats with (ii) information on each habitat capacity to provide ecosystem services. A compilation of EUNIS-harmonized broadscale seabed habitat maps based on EMODNET Seabed Habitats and UNEP GSGFM is exploited as the pan-European cartographic basis. The exercise extends out to the limits of the Extended Continental Shelf claims, achieving an areal coverage of approximately 8.7 million km2, i.e., more than 90% of the EU seafloor area in the Northeast Atlantic and adjacent seas. Alongside, expert-based assessments of each marine EUNIS habitat's capacity to provide CICES-harmonized Ecosystem Services are compiled from a literature review into a presence-only lookup table. Overall, the new seabed habitats versus ecosystem services lookup tables relate 33 ecosystem services to 67 EUNIS and 24 non-EUNIS seabed habitats. These results suggest that out of all marine habitats (n=974) in the EUNIS classification (EUNIS A1 to A7), only 14% (n=141) have so far been related to at least one ecosystem service. When all potential connections between the existing seabed EUNIS classes and CICES services are considered (n=104,218), results further show that only 2% (i.e., n=2,241) of the have been addressed qualitatively or semi-quantitatively. Based on this information, a total of 30 CICES ecosystem service categories are mapped: 3 at level 1 (CICES Sections), 5 at level 2 (CICES Divisions), 10 at level 3 (CICES Groups) and 12 at level 4 (CICES Classes). From these maps, area-based indicators of ecosystem service capacity (i.e., extent where each service is potentially provided) are extracted per MSFD region/subregion, Ecoregion, Fishing Area and an approximation of EU Member States (MS) maritime areas in the Northeast Atlantic and Adjacent Seas. Along with the maps, the study presents also some spatial statistics based on the extent over which each service is potentially provided. Different segmentations of the European Seas are used to aggregate these statistics including MSFD region/subregion, Ecological Region, FAO Fishing Area and an approximation of the Member State maritime area. Overall, continental shelves and oceanic elevations (islands, seamounts and ridges) were highlighted as ecosystem services hotspots where a larger number of services could be potentially held. When maps were segmented using MSFD region/subregion limits, the Extended Continental Shelf areas claimed by the EU MS in the Northeast Atlantic, together with the Celtic Seas and the Greater North Sea sub-regions stood as the regions holding most ecosystem service capacity. An ecoregion-based segmentation of the maps emphasized the Atlantic Deep Sea as the major ecosystem service capacity holder, followed by ecoregions containing large shelves, notably the Boreal Proper, the Boreal-Lusitanean and the Western Mediterranean. A disaggregation of the results per Fishing Area highlighted the Northeast Atlantic, namely areas around the British Isles and Macaronesia, as well as the western Mediterranean. When an approximation of EU Member States (MS) maritime areas was used, MS with larger EEZs (namely, UK, IT, PT and ES) came up as holding most of the marine ecosystem service capacity. The new maps and associated area-based indicators provide a first spatially-explicit baseline concerning the EU-wide distribution of marine ecosystem services. They contribute to the marine component of MAES and fulfil key objectives of the JRC’s SEACOAST and BES projects. Options to develop this research line and eventually make it more quantitative are expounded in the discussion and summarized in the conclusions. The new information is of value to practitioners, managers and policy makers, at European or Member State level, seeking spatially-explicit ecosystem service information for marine spatial planning and environmental management. Researchers initiating and developing marine ecosystem service mapping studies are also expected users.JRC.H.1-Water Resource

Evaluating seabed habitat representativeness across a diverse set of marine protected areas on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge

Marine ecosystem-based management requires good spatial information on the distribution of marine species and habitats. Often, such information is limited to a few sampled locations, but modelling techniques can be applied to produce predictive distribution maps. A harmonized broad-scale seabed habitat map was recently produced for the archipelagos of Macaronesia under the EMODnet Seabed Habitats Programme. We use this new information to produce an extent-based evaluation of the representativeness and level of protection conferred by the current set of marine protected areas (MPAs) in the Azores to the variety of benthic marine habitats found in this oceanic region. A more objective assessment of the protection effectively provided to the habitats is obtained by applying a scoring system to the MPAs based on the number of allowed extractive and non-extractive human activities and their potential impact on marine biodiversity and habitats. Results show that Azorean habitats within the MPAs are nearly entirely classified as highly protected. In total, 26 habitats (7 of which are endangered and 2 are rare) have at least 10% of their extent in the Azores EEZ protected by MPAs, but another 29 fail to meet this target (4 on-shelf habitats and 25 deep-sea habitats), highlighting the need to extend current protection of bathyal and abyssal habitats and applying adequate ecological coherence criteria. This approach sets a standard that can be used wherever similar information is available, be it in other European regions or beyond.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Mapping the impact of alien species on marine ecosystems: the Mediterranean Sea case study

Aim To develop a standardized, quantitative method for mapping cumulative impacts of invasive alien species on marine ecosystems. Location The methodology is applied in the Mediterranean Sea but is widely applicable. Methods A conservative additive model was developed to account for the Cumulative IMPacts of invasive ALien species (CIMPAL) on marine ecosystems. According to this model, cumulative impact scores are estimated on the basis of the distributions of invasive species and ecosystems, and both the reported magnitude of ecological impacts and the strength of such evidence. In the Mediterranean Sea case study, the magnitude of impact was estimated for every combination of 60 invasive species and 13 habitats, for every 10x10 km cell of the basin. Invasive species were ranked based on their contribution to the cumulative impact score across the Mediterranean. Results The CIMPAL index showed strong spatial heterogeneity. Spatial patterns varied depending on the pathway of initial introduction of the invasive species in the Mediterranean Sea. Species introduced by shipping gave the highest impact scores and impacted a much larger area than those introduced by aquaculture and the Suez Canal. Overall, invasive macroalgae had the highest impact among all taxonomic groups. These results represent the current best estimate of the spatial variation in impacts of invasive alien species on ecosystems, in the Mediterranean Sea. Main Conclusions A framework for mapping cumulative impacts of invasive alien species was developed. The application of this framework in the Mediterranean Sea provided a baseline that can be built upon with future improved information. Such analysis allows the identification of hotspots of highly impacted areas, and prioritization of sites, pathways, and species for management actions.JRC.H.1-Water Resource

Transnational mapping of cetacean bycatch risk in the Bay of Biscay and the Atlantic Iberian coast

International audienceWhat’s going on? • Mass mortality events linked to fisheries bycatch have intensified in the Bay of Biscay and Iberian coast over the last decade • The phenomenon calls for urgent investigation and fisheries impact mitigationWhy it matters? • EU member states are committed to protect marine mammals under the Habitats and the Marine Strategy Framework Directives • Common Fisheries Policy sets bycatch reduction goals (Technical Measures Regulation) • Strong societal demand for protected species bycatch reductio

Shallow-water bryozoans from the Azores (central North Atlantic): native vs. non-indigenous species, and a method to evaluate taxonomic uncertainty

Bryozoan records from the shores and upper shelf (≤50 m depth) of the remote Azores Archipelago (central North Atlantic) have been analyzed, along with unpublished data and data from recent surveys. A checklist of 67 shallow-water species is hereby compiled for the region, of which more than one third represent records from campaigns conducted during the last 20 years. A classification on the origin of the species indicates that the majority (62%) are cryptogenic while 27% (n = 18) are considered native. Given the natural limitations for genetic exchange between the archipelago’s bryozoan populations and those from neighboring shores, the taxa presently considered as cryptogenic may yield a considerable amount of endemic species after taxonomic revision. The remaining 11% are confirmed as non-indigenous species, highlighting the importance of human-mediated transport in considerably enhancing the diversity of bryozoans in remote oceanic archipelagos, which would otherwise be off-limits to their natural dispersal capacity. In view of the need to quantitatively evaluate the certainty of species-level identification when assembling such biodiversity inventories, we have developed a method to attribute a degree of certainty to species records. The application of this method to the current checklist highlights the importance of further studies to ascertain the identification of many species recorded for the Azores, and to be able to categorize them confidently as either native, cryptogenic or non-indigenous