End-to-End Models: Management Applications

Preface to the 2012 issue of Progress in Oceanography

John H. Steele, 1926–2013

This special issue of Oceanography is dedicated to the memory of John H. Steele, who passed away on November 4, 2013, at the age of 86. John was a seminal figure in the creation of the US Global Ocean Ecosystem Dynamics (GLOBEC) and International GLOBEC programs, and remained involved in them through his scientific endeavors and program leadership. We benefitted from his keen intellect, wide-ranging knowledge, deep insight, and unfailing good humor and gentlemanly manner

Biological Signature of Scotian Shelf Water Crossovers on Georges Bank During Spring 1997

Episodic crossovers of cold low salinity Scotian Shelf Water (SSW) onto the Northeast Peak of Georges Bank are a potentially important mechanism transporting plankton species, including the copepod Calanus finmarchicus and its prey and predators, onto the Bank each spring. We provide the first detailed investigation of horizontal and vertical zooplankton distributions in SSW crossovers compared to other onbank locations from three GLOBEC cruises during spring 1997. SSW crossovers are physically and biologically distinct from other Bank locations. In late spring, chlorophyll concentrations and in vivo fluorescence are elevated and light transmission is reduced in SSW, while during early spring, these parameters are more variable. SSW communities do not contain a unique zooplankton assemblage or indicator species but instead show differences in abundance and life history parameters for various taxa compared to other Bank locations. SSW has high abundances of young C. finmarchicus life history stages, almost no diel vertical migration of zooplankton, low abundances of invertebrate predators, and low fish egg abundance. Population development of C. finmarchicus in SSW lags that in adjacent water. The potential biological impact of SSW crossovers on Georges Bank varies seasonally. In April, density inversions and interleaving of SSW and non‐SSW suggest active mixing, resulting in similar community composition of SSW and adjacent non‐SSW. SSW crossovers are probably an important source to Georges Bank of young stages of C. finmarchicus in early spring. In May, after stratification strengthens, the greater differentiation between SSW plankton and elsewhere indicates that mixing between communities is more limited

Analysis of Energy Flow in US GLOBEC Ecosystems Using End-to-End Models

End-to-end models were constructed to examine and compare the trophic structure and energy flow in coastal shelf ecosystems of four US Global Ocean Ecosystem Dynamics (GLOBEC) study regions: the Northern California Current, the Central Gulf of Alaska, Georges Bank, and the Southwestern Antarctic Peninsula. High-quality data collected on system components and processes over the life of the program were used as input to the models. Although the US GLOBEC program was species-centric, focused on the study of a selected set of target species of ecological or economic importance, we took a broader community-level approach to describe end-to-end energy flow, from nutrient input to fishery production. We built four end-to-end models that were structured similarly in terms of functional group composition and time scale. The models were used to identify the mid-trophic level groups that place the greatest demand on lower trophic level production while providing the greatest support to higher trophic level production. In general, euphausiids and planktivorous forage fishes were the critical energy-transfer nodes; however, some differences between ecosystems are apparent. For example, squid provide an important alternative energy pathway to forage fish, moderating the effects of changes to forage fish abundance in scenario analyses in the Central Gulf of Alaska. In the Northern California Current, large scyphozoan jellyfish are important consumers of plankton production, but can divert energy from the rest of the food web when abundant

Comparing species and ecosystem-based estimates of fisheries yields

Author Posting. © The Author(s), 2011. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of Elsevier B.V. for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Fisheries Research 111 (2011): 139-144, doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2011.07.009.Three methods are described to estimate potential yields of commercial fish species: (i) single-species calculation of maximum sustainable yields, and two ecosystem-based methods derived from published results for (ii) energy flow and for (iii) community structure. The requirements imposed by food-web fluxes, and by patterns of relative abundance, provide constraints on individual species. These constraints are used to set limits to ecosystem-based yields (EBY); these limits, in turn, provide a comparison with the usual estimates of maximum sustainable yields (MSY). We use data on cod and haddock production from Georges Bank for the decade 1993-2002 to demonstrate these methods. We show that comparisons among the three approaches can be used to demonstrate that ecosystem based estimates of yields complement, rather than supersede, the single-species estimates. The former specify the significant changes required in the rest of the ecosystem to achieve a return to maximum sustainable levels for severely depleted commercial fish stocks. The overall conclusion is that MSY defines changes required in particular stocks, whereas EBY determines the changes required in the rest of the ecosystem to realize these yields. Species specific MSY only has meaning in the context of the prey, predators and competitors that surround it.We acknowledge NSF awards OCE081459 (to DJG) and OCE0814474 (to JHS)

Analysis of Energy Flow in US GLOBEC Ecosystems Using End-to-End Models

End-to-end models were constructed to examine and compare the trophic structure and energy flow in coastal shelf ecosystems of four US Global Ocean Ecosystem Dynamics (GLOBEC) study regions: the Northern California Current, the Central Gulf of Alaska, Georges Bank, and the Southwestern Antarctic Peninsula. High-quality data collected on system components and processes over the life of the program were used as input to the models. Although the US GLOBEC program was species-centric, focused on the study of a selected set of target species of ecological or economic importance, we took a broader community-level approach to describe end-to-end energy flow, from nutrient input to fishery production. We built four end-to-end models that were structured similarly in terms of functional group composition and time scale. The models were used to identify the mid-trophic level groups that place the greatest demand on lower trophic level production while providing the greatest support to higher trophic level production. In general, euphausiids and planktivorous forage fishes were the critical energy-transfer nodes; however, some differences between ecosystems are apparent. For example, squid provide an important alternative energy pathway to forage fish, moderating the effects of changes to forage fish abundance in scenario analyses in the Central Gulf of Alaska. In the Northern California Current, large scyphozoan jellyfish are important consumers of plankton production, but can divert energy from the rest of the food web when abundant

Reconciling end-to-end and population concepts for marine ecosystems

Author Posting. © The Author(s), 2010. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of Elsevier for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Journal of Marine Systems 83 (2010): 99-103, doi:10.1016/j.jmarsys.2010.06.006.The inherent complexities in the structure and dynamics of marine food webs have led to two major simplifying concepts, a species-centric approach focused on physical processes driving the population dynamics of single species and a trophic-centric approach emphasizing energy flows through broad functional groups from nutrient input to fish production. Here we review the two approaches and discuss their advantages and limitations. We suggest that these concepts are complementary: their applications involve different time scales and distinct aspects of population and community resilience, but their integration is necessary for ecosystem-based managementWe acknowledge NOAA-CICOR award NA17RJ1233 (J.H. Steele) and NSF award OCE0217399 (D.J. Gifford)

End-to-end foodweb control of fish production on Georges Bank

Author Posting. © The Author(s), 2009. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of Oxford University Press for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in ICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil 66 (2009): 2223-2232, doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsp180.The ecosystem approach to management requires the productivity of individual fish stocks to be considered in the context of the entire ecosystem. In this paper, we derive an annual end-to-end budget for the Georges Bank ecosystem, based on data from the GLOBEC program and fisheries surveys for the years 1993-2002. We use this budget as the basis to construct scenarios that describe the consequences of various alterations in the Georges Bank trophic web: reduced nutrient input, increased benthic production, removal of carnivorous plankton such as jellyfish, and changes in species dominance within fish guilds. We calculate potential yields of cod and haddock for the different scenarios, and compare the results with historic catches and estimates of maximum sustainable yield (MSY) from recent stock assessments. The MSYs of cod and haddock can be met if the fish community is restructured to make them the dominant species in their respective diet-defined guilds. A return to the balance of fish species present in the first half of the 20th century would depend on an increase in the fraction of primary production going to the benthos rather than to plankton. Estimates of energy flux through the Georges Bank trophic web indicate that rebuilding the principal groundfish species to their MSY levels requires restructuring of the fish community and repartitioning of energy within the food web.We acknowledge NOAA-CICOR award NA17RJ1233 (J.H. Steele) and NSF award OCE0217399 (D.J. Gifford and J.S. Collie)

Construction kits or virtual worlds; management applications of E2E models

Author Posting. © The Author(s), 2011. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of Elsevier B.V. for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Journal of Marine Systems 109/110 (2013): 103-108, doi:10.1016/j.jmarsys.2011.10.016.We review briefly the diversity of modeling activity that comes under the rubric of end-to-end (E2E) models, but the focus of this paper – of joint concern to researchers and to managers - is on applications to management and decision making. The models and applications span a range from “construction kits” that identify particular management issues and use comparisons across ecosystems; to “virtual worlds” that immerse managers in the details of strategic evaluations for particular systems. The general conclusion is that “application” is not a straightforward transition from theory to practice but a complex interactive process.This review is based on the proceedings of a workshop, held at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, 19-22 April 2010, as part of CAMEO (Comparative Analysis of Marine Ecosystem Organization), a program supported jointly by NOAA (U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency) and NSF (U.S. National Science Foundation)

Planktonic Microbes in the Gulf of Maine Area

In the Gulf of Maine area (GoMA), as elsewhere in the ocean, the organisms of greatest numerical abundance are microbes. Viruses in GoMA are largely cyanophages and bacteriophages, including podoviruses which lack tails. There is also evidence of Mimivirus and Chlorovirus in the metagenome. Bacteria in GoMA comprise the dominant SAR11 phylotype cluster, and other abundant phylotypes such as SAR86-like cluster, SAR116-like cluster, Roseobacter, Rhodospirillaceae, Acidomicrobidae, Flavobacteriales, Cytophaga, and unclassified Alphaproteobacteria and Gammaproteobacteria clusters. Bacterial epibionts of the dinoflagellate Alexandrium fundyense include Rhodobacteraceae, Flavobacteriaceae, Cytophaga spp., Sulfitobacter spp., Sphingomonas spp., and unclassified Bacteroidetes. Phototrophic prokaryotes in GoMA include cyanobacteria that contain chlorophyll (mainly Synechococcus), aerobic anoxygenic phototrophs that contain bacteriochlorophyll, and bacteria that contain proteorhodopsin. Eukaryotic microalgae in GoMA include Bacillariophyceae, Dinophyceae, Prymnesiophyceae, Prasinophyceae, Trebouxiophyceae, Cryptophyceae, Dictyochophyceae, Chrysophyceae, Eustigmatophyceae, Pelagophyceae, Synurophyceae, and Xanthophyceae. There are no records of Bolidophyceae, Aurearenophyceae, Raphidophyceae, and Synchromophyceae in GoMA. In total, there are records for 665 names and 229 genera of microalgae. Heterotrophic eukaryotic protists in GoMA include Dinophyceae, Alveolata, Apicomplexa, amoeboid organisms, Labrynthulida, and heterotrophic marine stramenopiles (MAST). Ciliates include Strombidium, Lohmaniella, Tontonia, Strobilidium, Strombidinopsis and the mixotrophs Laboea strobila and Myrionecta rubrum (ex Mesodinium rubra). An inventory of selected microbial groups in each of 14 physiographic regions in GoMA is made by combining information on the depth-dependent variation of cell density and the depth-dependent variation of water volume. Across the entire GoMA, an estimate for the minimum abundance of cell-based microbes is 1.7×1025 organisms. By one account, this number of microbes implies a richness of 105 to 106 taxa in the entire water volume of GoMA. Morphological diversity in microplankton is well-described but the true extent of taxonomic diversity, especially in the femtoplankton, picoplankton and nanoplankton – whether autotrophic, heterotrophic, or mixotrophic, is unknown