Fine-scale spatial variation of northern shrimp and Atlantic cod across three Norwegian fjord systems and implications for management

The spatial complexity of coastal ecosystems represents a challenge for the management of inshore resources. Here we compared two large fjord systems in northern Norway that have been closed for all bottom trawling for 50 years to a fjord with continuous shrimp fishery with bottom trawls. No significant differences were found between fjords with and without commercial trawling in population density and stock composition of northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) and their main predator, Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua). Shrimp density was instead linked with bottom depth, while shrimp size and stage composition as well as cod density were explained by seasonal effects and shrimp density. For shrimp, a large degree of the observed variation was captured by spatial correlation that could not be explained by other covariates. The results underline the complex ecology in heavily structured coastal habitats and indicate that coastal shrimp dynamics are shaped by an interplay of multiple ecological and environmental drivers, possibly in concert with local genetic adaptations. The substantial fine-scale spatial variation adds to the challenges of assessing and managing fisheries resources in these fjord ecosystems. Because shrimp are an important forage species, notably as prey for cod, there are potential management conflicts between rebuilding cod stocks and reopening closed shrimp trawling areas.publishedVersio

Biased signaling of lipids and allosteric actions of synthetic molecules for GPR119

AbstractGPR119 is a Gαs-coupled lipid-sensor in the gut, where it mediates release of incretin hormones from the enteroendocrine cells and in pancreatic α-cells, where it releases insulin. Naturally occurring lipids such as monoacylglycerols (MAGs) and N-acylethanolamines (NAEs), like oleoylethanolamide (OEA), activate GPR119, and multiple synthetic ligands have been described. Here, we extend the GPR119 signaling profile to Gαq and Gαi in addition to β-arrestin recruitment and the downstream transcription factors CRE (cAMP response element), SRE (serum response element) and NFAT (nuclear factor of activated T cells). The endogenous OEA and the synthetic AR231453 were full agonists in all pathways except for NFAT, where no ligand-modulation was observed. The potency of AR231453 varied <16-fold (EC50 from 6 to 95nM) across the different signaling pathways, whereas that of OEA varied >175-fold (from 85nM to 15μM) indicating a biased signaling for OEA. The degree of constitutive activity was 1–10%, 10–30% and 30–70% of OEA-induced Emax in Gαi, Gαq and Gαs-driven pathways, respectively. This coincided with the lowest and highest OEA potency observed in Gαi and Gαs-driven pathways, respectively. Incubation for 2h with the 2-MAG-lipase inhibitor JZL84 doubled the constitutive activity, indicating that endogenous lipids contribute to the apparent constitutive activity. Finally, besides being an agonist, AR231453 acted as a positive allosteric modulator of OEA and increased its potency by 54-fold at 100nM AR231453. Our studies uncovering broad and biased signaling, masked constitutive activity by endogenous MAGs, and ago-allosteric properties of synthetic ligands may explain why many GPR119 drug-discovery programs have failed so far

Environmental information for stock evaluation and management advice purposes

This report summarizes the work of an internal working group appointed by the Institute of Marine Research's management group to evaluate inclusion of environmental parameters in stock evaluation. The report discusses the current and potential usage of environmental information and presents specific recommendation on how to increase the usage of environmental information for stock evaluation and management advice purposes. NORSK SAMMENDRAG: Rapporten sammenfatter arbeidet til et utvalg nedsatt av ledergruppen ved Havforskningsinstituttet for å evaluere bruk av miljøinformasjon i bestandsvurdering og rådgivning. Rapporten diskuterer dagens- og potensiell bruk av miljøinformasjon og gir konkrete anbefalinger for hvordan Havforskningsinstituttet kan øke bruken av miljøinformasjon i bestandsvurderinger og rådgivning

Prøvefiske etter dypvannsreke i ytre Porsangerfjorden - Resultater fra 2021–2023

Porsangerfjorden ble stengt for tråling etter dypvannsreke (Pandalus borealis) tidlig på 1970-tallet. Da deler av det grunnlaget som fjorden opprinnelig ble stengt på har falt bort, vurderer Fiskeridirektoratet igjen høsting av rekeressursene i fjorden ved bruk av bunntrål. I 2021 åpnet Fiskeridirektoratet ytre del av Porsangerfjorden for et prøvefiske etter reker med en påmeldingsordning. Totalkvoten for området ble satt til 40 tonn. Også i 2022 og 2023 ble kvoten satt til 40 tonn.Prøvefiske etter dypvannsreke i ytre Porsangerfjorden - Resultater fra 2021–2023publishedVersio

Toktrapport fra økosystemtokt i Vestlandsfjordene — Hydrografi, vannkjemi, reker, krill, bunnfisk, tobis og perifylla

Den Strategiske instituttsatsingen CoastRisk (2019–2023) har hatt som mål å styrke kunnskapsgrunnlaget om ulike påvirkningsfaktorers betydning for kystøkosystemenes tilstand, funksjon og utvikling. Vestland fylke er ett av flere studieområder i prosjektet, med bla. dypvannsreke (Pandalus borealis), kysttorsk (Gadus morhua), tobis og dyreplankton valgt ut som fokusarter/-grupper.Toktrapport fra økosystemtokt i Vestlandsfjordene — Hydrografi, vannkjemi, reker, krill, bunnfisk, tobis og perifyllapublishedVersio

Politivirksomhet i et norsk landdistrikt

See abstract in article

Set fiskefunna dine i Artsdatabanken : Report fish findings to The Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre

Scientists study the current status of the most important fish populations in Norwegian waters annually. Population estimates are based on the results of our own field studies, research and fisheries. Observations by the general public also make an important contribution of the scientists’ knowledge base, particularly for fish in coastal waters

Toolkit Testing in the Planning of Smart Energy Communities. PI-SEC Report 1.3 / 2.3 : Municipal practice and project planning

”Planning Instruments for Smart Energy Communities” (PI-SEC) is a Norwegian research project being carried out in the period April 2016 to March 2019. It is funded by the Research Council of Norway and aims to develop effective planning tools for the integration of energy issues at community level. The project will contribute with increased knowledge about parameters that are key to cities focusing on smart and sustainable energy and will provide guidance as to how these cities address issues related to the planning, operation and monitoring of new and existing areas. The project’s research partners are NTNU and SINTEF, in collaboration with the cities of Bergen and Oslo. Standard Norway, FutureBuilt and the Norwegian Green Building Council are reference partners. The districts Ådland and Loddefjord in Bergen, and Furuset in Oslo, are participating in pilot studies as part of the project. The project is divided into two work packages (WPs). WP1 adopts a bottom-up approach from building project development, while WP2 has a top-down approach from municipal planning. There are four tasks assigned to each work package. The aims of this research have been to test the planning tools available to energy smart communities developed in PI-SEC 2016-2017 (Nielsen et al, 2016; Walnum et al., 2017): • How do the selected targets, KPIs and planning instruments perform when implemented into Norwegian neighbourhood development projects? • Can planning instruments be improved based on these results? • What targets, KPIs and planning instruments form the best basis for the development of a common definition and assessment framework for smart energy communities in Norway? The results are based on qualitative group and individual interviews of potential users of the tools, carried out during project meetings and workshops. LEGO and design games were used as a part of workshop data collection approaches. Results and conclusions: • The selected aims, key indicators and planning instruments seem to fit well in the context of the selected pilot studies and shed light on the ways in which cities can work towards achieving emissions reduction targets. The tools receive positive evaluations at superior level. However, it remains a challenge to persuade municipal employees to use the tools. • It is difficult to identify the right employees and end-users for tools that map overall energy use and related emissions. Data collection in connection with the tools is time-consuming, and there is a lack of clarity regarding the responsibility for evaluation of overall emissions, and how this should be applied. Even if the municipalities have a legal responsibility for energy supply, many outsource this by transferring responsibility to private or inter-municipal companies, which are expected to take responsibility for both practice and expertise. This greatly erodes the levels of responsibility and expertise for energy issues within the municipalities themselves. This may mean that the toolbox is inappropriate and unadjusted, that the wrong catchments have been addressed, or that recommendations from Annex 632 regarding each municipality’s key duty to employ personnel with responsibility have been ignored. It is probable that the answer is a mixture of these alternatives. In the future, we have to - Improve the toolbox and focus it on needs - Recommend focused role clarification, and room for energy smart communities as part of municipal Planning If responsibility for community energy planning is defined more clearly within the municipalities, the tools may become more relevant and enable the municipalities more easily to implement them in the future planning of energy-smart communities. • Informants within the municipalities require checklists or tools, provided that these are perceived as relevant. They want tools that encourage interaction in situations where participating stakeholders are empowered to learn from each other and collaborate more efficiently and meaningfully. This is in line with findings in other studies showing that city planners are inclined to reject new time-consuming tasks but welcome the expansion of networks that enable the sharing of specific experiences, combined with innovation. • Work with the PI-SEC planning wheel shows that decision-making processes depend on a good start. It is key to obtain appropriate and engaged stakeholders right from the start. There is still a requirement for focused work to encourage energy companies, property developers, property managers, municipal planners, the national highway authorities and residents to work more strategically in teams. The current planning system is too rigid and divides the stakeholders into process directions that are not conducive to effective, integrated planning. One solution to this lies in the development of alternative approaches to strategic planning (for example, as illustrated by Bergen’s strategic plan programme). There is a striking lack of knowledge of the energy companies’ different roles and opportunities within the municipalities. • A key challenge to the implementation of the PI-SEC Scenario Calculator within the municipalities is the major current lack of focus on stationary energy in municipal planning. Overall emissions reduction targets are not sufficiently detailed to enable measurement of CO2 emissions, or to find out if a given municipality’s targets are met. The Calculator may help to increase awareness and expertise. However, this will require greater commitment to the targets among the various municipal departments. • Even if the largest city municipalities possess the expertise to apply the PI-SEC Scenario Calculator, many smaller municipalities do not, and are heavily reliant on consultants. Energy and other consultants may represent a more appropriate target group for the Calculator than municipal personnel. Informants state that if the aim is to encourage municipal personnel to apply the tool, they want more automation, a link between the tool and GIS, and the automatic input of building data and energy into the model. They do not want to spend time punching data into the tool. • It is difficult to assess the usefulness of the PI-SEC Scenario Calculator without testing by potential users. A municipality employee in one of the test cities stated that after testing the tool against a real project, she perceived its usefulness in a completely new way. Persuading municipal personnel to use the Scenario Calculator has remained a challenge that PI SEC has been focusing on for some time. Unfortunately, the motivation of municipal personnel has not been sufficient to encourage more people to test it. • The PI-SEC Scenario Calculator cannot be used independently of other tools for area planning, because emission reduction targets have to be grouped together with other area quality targets. • There are also barriers linked to taking results from the PI-SEC Scenario Calculator into account. Results often demonstrate that the energy efficiency of privately-owned buildings has a major impact in reducing CO2 emissions. The municipalities seem to lack instruments that can be applied for these types of processes involving private sector landlords. Free energy consultations and creative initiatives for providing financial help and support will be decisive in following up the results generated by the PI-SEC Scenario Calculator.publishedVersio

Toolkit for the planning of smart energy communities. PI-SEC report 2.3. Challenges and best practices from testing of the PI-SEC Planning Wheel

For at vi skal nå nullutslippsambisjonene, må de viktigste aktørene jobbe tettere sammen. Dette er fordi ulike virkemidler må settes inn i kombinasjon for å nå de høye målsetningene som de norske bykommunene har satt seg. PI-SEC er et norsk forskningsprosjekt som varer fra april 2016 til oktober 2019. Prosjektet er finansiert av EnergiX-programmet i Norges Forskningsråd. I dette prosjektet har vi studert planleggingen av to smarte energisamfunn, et i Bergen og et i Oslo. Prosjektet er delt inn i to arbeidspakker (WP), hvor WP1 tar utgangspunkt i utviklingsprosjekter (bottom-up), mens WP2 tar utgangspunkt i kommuneplanlegging (top-down). Arbeidspakke 1 ledes av SINTEF Byggforsk, Arbeidspakke 2 av NTNU. Sammen utvikler vi en verktøykasse for planlegging av smarte energisamfunn som inneholder både overordnede planleggingssteg og måleverktøy for energieffektivisering. Verktøykassen er tolket bredt og omfatter mange typer virkemidler, fra lovverk til erfaring og kontaktnett. De to smarte energisamfunnene eller også kalt casene, består av Zero Village Bergen (ZVB) og Furuset forbildeprosjekt. ZVB er et pilotprosjekt hvor utbyggeren ByBo sammen med Snøhetta har designet et område bestående av 800 nullutslippsbygg på Ådland utenfor Bergen. Furuset Forbildeprosjekt er et fortettingsprosjekt i en eksisterende drabantby i Oslo, som har store sosiale og miljømessige målsetninger. En ny måte å jobbe sammen på krever en ny type planleggingsprosess hvor flere aktører finner en grunn til å være med. Energiaspekter må inn tidligere i planprosessen enn det som er vanlig, reguleringshindringer må diskuteres og løftes tidlig. Energiselskaper forklarer at de trenger et insentiv for å være med tidlig, en grunn til å skulle være med på tidlig planlegging. Hva kan dette bestå av fra kommunens side? Alt avhenger av en god start, derfor er det essensielt å ha fokus på å forbedre konseptutvikling og få til gode avtaler tidlig i planleggingsfasen. Dette har vi forsøkt å drøfte i delkapitlene A-Z. For å få til den tverrfaglige innovasjonen det legges opp til og som kreves for å nå bærekraftig fremtid, må vi se videre på bruken av alternative reguleringssoner som går langt utover energi i bygg. Disse demo-sonene må ha vilkår for bedre og oppdaterte måter å involvere sluttbrukere/innbyggere på, profesjonelle ‘koordineringsteam’ og en god visjonssetting som inkluderes i alle ledd. Identitet kan skape en sterk drivkraft i pilotene, men også mangel på samarbeidsvilje mellom regionene. Og hvem eier egentlig visjonen? Dette er et viktig spørsmål å svare på. For mer om verktøyene, se rapportene på nett: https://www.ntnu.edu/smartcities/PI-SEC/publicationspublishedVersio