Abundance, horizontal and vertical distribution of the invasive ctenophore Mnemiopsis leidyi in the central Baltic Sea, November 2007

The distribution and abundance of the invasive ctenophore Mnemiopsis leidyi in the Bornholm Basin, an important spawning ground of several fish stocks, and in adjacent areas in the central Baltic Sea was studied in November 2007. The study showed that M. leidyi were relatively small (body length 18.6 ± 7.6 mm) and they were patchily distributed over a large part of the investigated area. Specimens were found on 68 and 59% of stations sampled with a Bongo net (n=39) and an Isaac-Kidd midwater trawl (n=51), respectively. Vertically, the highest densities of M. leidyi occurred at 40 to 60 m around the halocline. Horizontally, the highest abundances were found north and west of Bornholm, but relatively high densities were also observed in the Slupsk Furrow. The mean abundance was 1.58 ± 2.12 ind. m-2, the peak abundance was 8.92 ind. m-2, and the average and peak population density were 0.03 ± 0.05 and 0.28 ind. m-3, respectively. The abundances are low compared to densities recently observed in other areas of the Baltic region (e. g. Limfjorden, Åland Sea) and the estimated predation impact on zooplankton by M. leidyi was negligible in November 2007. However, because of the ctenophore’s wide distribution in the central Baltic Sea, its ability for rapid population growth, and its potential influence on fish stocks by competing for food and by preying on fish eggs and newly hatched larvae, close monitoring of the future development of M. leidyi in the Baltic Sea is strongly recommended

Report of the Working Group on Commercial Catches (WGCATCH)

The Working Group on Commercial Catches (WGCATCH), chaired by Mike Arm- strong (UK) and Hans Gerritsen (Ireland), met in ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark, 10–14 November 2014. The meeting was attended by 34 experts from 21 laboratories or organizations, covering 16 countries. Currently, an important task for WGCATCH is to improve and review sampling sur- vey designs for commercial fisheries, particularly those for estimating quantities and size or age compositions of landings and discards and providing data quality indica- tors. However, the scope of WGCATCH is broader than this, covering many other aspects of collection and analysis of data on fishing activities and catches. This will be end-user driven, and coordinated with the work of other ICES data EGs such as the Working Group on Biological Parameters (WGBIOP), the Planning Group on Data Needs for Assessments and Advice (PGDATA) and the Working Group on Recrea- tional Fisheries Surveys (WGRFS) to ensure synergy and efficiency. The report of the meeting commences with background information on the formation of WGCATCH and its overall role. The remainder of the report provides the out- comes for each of the Terms of Reference (ToRs) and responses to external requests, the proposed future work plan and the ToRs for the 2015 meeting. The group formed two large subgroups to deal with the two major terms of reference which are the development of guidelines for carrying out sampling of catches on shore and the provision of advice on adapting sampling programmes to deal with the landing obligation. In order to evaluate methods and develop guidelines for best practice in carrying out sampling of commercial sampling of commercial fish catches onshore, a question- naire was circulated before the meeting. This questionnaire was structured around guidelines developed by the ICES Workshop on Practical Implementation of Statisti- cally Sound Catch Sampling Programmes (WKPICS) for best practice at each stage of the sampling process, and asked for a description of current practices at each of these stages. Based on these questionnaires, common and specific problems were cata- logued and potential solutions were identified. At the same time, the discussion of the questionnaires provided a form of peer-review of the sampling designs and iden- tified where improvements could be made. WGCATCH provided guidelines for de- signing a sampling survey and summarized earlier guidelines provided by the 2010 Workshop on methods for merging métiers for fishery based sampling (WKMERGE) The other main subject addressed by WGCATCH concerns the provision of advice on adapting sampling protocols to deal with the impact of the introduction of the land- ing obligation, which will alter discarding practices and result in additional catego- ries of catch being landed. A second questionnaire was circulated before the meeting to allow the group to identify the fleets that will be affected and possible issues that are anticipated, as well as to propose solutions to adapt existing monitoring and sampling schemes and to quantify bias resulting from the introduction of this regula- tion. WGCATCH outlined a range of likely scenarios and the expected effects of these on fishery sampling programmes, and developed guidelines for adapting sam- pling schemes. The group also explored a range of analyses that could be conducted in order to quantify bias resulting from the introduction of the landing obligation. Finally a number of pilot studies/case studies were summarized, highlighting the practical issues involve

Report of the Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the North Sea and Eastern Arctic (RCM NS&EA) 2014

Report of the Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the North Sea and Eastern Arctic (RCM NS&EA) 2014 Swedish University of Agriculture Sciences (SLU Aqua) Lysekil, Sweden 08-12 September 2014The RCM NS&EA met in Lysekil (Sweden) between 8-12 September 2014. The main purpose of the RCM is coordinate the National Programmes (NP) of the Member States (MS) in the North Sea region for 2015

Report of the Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the North Sea and Eastern Arctic (RCM NS&EA) 2015

The RCM NS&EA met 31st August - 4th September 2015 at den Haag, Netherlands with 27 participants form 11 member states and autonomous regions attending, including representatives of ICES and the Commission. National correspondents from Spain, UK, Denmark, Lithuania, Germany, Sweden and the Netherlands were present. The meeting was co-chaired by Katja Ringdahl (Sweden) and Alastair Pout (Scotland). The RCM N&SEA considered the recommendations from the 11th Liasion meeting and summaries were presented of the work of expert groups and end users for the 2014-15 period to the plenary session of the meeting. The expert groups included WGCATCH, PGDATA, WKISCON2, WKRDB 2014-01, RDB–SC, STECF and the Zagreb meeting on transversal variables. ICES, as a main end user, provided feedback. A summary was presented of the progress in the regional coordination project (fishPi). This project involves over 40 participants from 12 members states from NS&EA, NA and Baltic regions, two external statistical experts, and ICES. The project has a wide scope of regional cooperation issues including sampling designs, data formats, code lists, PETS, stomach sampling, small scale and recreational sampling, and data quality software production. It has a budget of €400,000, and a one year time line and with a planned completion date of April 2016. A project with identical aims is running in paralleled in the Mediterranean and Black Sea regions The majority of the ToRs of the RCM NS&EA were addressed by three subgroups: one concerned with data analysis, one with the landing obligation, and one with issues particularly related to role and work of national correspondents

Report of the Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the North Sea and Eastern Arctic (RCM NS&EA) 2013

Report of the Regional Co-ordination Meeting for the North Sea and Eastern Arctic (RCM NS&EA) 2013 final report European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) Vigo, Spain 09/09/2013-13/09/2013The Regional Coordination Meeting for the North Sea & Eastern Arctic (RCM NS&EA) was held in September 2013 in Vigo (Spain). The main task of the RCM’s is to coordinate the National Programmes (NP), which propose the national data collection to be carried out by the Member States (MS) under the EU Data Collection Framework (DCF). It was envisaged that, from 2104 onwards, data collection by the MS would be carried out under a new framework (DC-MAP). However, the legislation for this framework is not ready yet. Therefore the Commission has decided to extend the present DCF for the time being and the most recent NPs have been adopted for 2014. Since these NP have been adopted without any changes, there is no need for major coordinatio

Viscoat versus Visthesia during phacoemulsification cataract surgery: corneal and foveal changes

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) are widely used in phacoemulsification cataract surgery to maintain adequate intraocular space, stabilize ocular tissue during the operation and decrease the possible damage of the corneal endothelium. Our study has the purpose to compare the corneal and foveal changes of Viscoat and Visthesia in patients undergoing uneventful phacoemulsification cataract surgery.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Participants in our study were 77 consecutive patients, who were randomized into two groups based on type of OVD used during phacoemulsification: Viscoat or Visthesia. All patients underwent a complete ophthalmological examination i.e., measurement of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) by means of Snellen charts, intraocular pressure examination by Goldmann tonometry, slit lamp examination, fundus examination, optical coherence tomography, specular microscopy and ultrasound pachymetry preoperatively and at three time points postoperatively (day 3, 15, 28 postoperatively). The differences in baseline characteristics, as well as in outcomes between the two groups were compared by Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test and Student's t-test, as appropriate.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Intraoperatively, there was no statistically significant difference in the duration of the ultrasound application between the two groups, while Viscoat group needed more time for the operation performance. It is also worthy to mention that Visthesia group exhibited less intense pain than patients in Viscoat group. Postoperatively, there was a statistically significant difference in central corneal thickness, endothelial cell count and macular thickness between the two groups, but BCVA (logMAR) did not differ between the two groups.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our study suggests that Viscoat is more safe and protective for the corneal endothelium during uneventful phacoemulsification cataract surgery, while Visthesia is in superior position regarding intraoperative pain. Patients of both groups acquired excellent visual acuity postoperative. Finally, this is the first study comparing OVDs in terms of macular thickness, finding that Visthesia cause a greater increase in macular thickness postoperatively than Viscoat, although it reaches normal ranges in both groups.</p

Report of the Working Group on Commercial Catches (WGCATCH)

The Working Group on Commercial Catches (WGCATCH), chaired by Mike Arm- strong (UK) and Hans Gerritsen (Ireland), met in ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark, 10–14 November 2014. The meeting was attended by 34 experts from 21 laboratories or organizations, covering 16 countries. Currently, an important task for WGCATCH is to improve and review sampling sur- vey designs for commercial fisheries, particularly those for estimating quantities and size or age compositions of landings and discards and providing data quality indica- tors. However, the scope of WGCATCH is broader than this, covering many other aspects of collection and analysis of data on fishing activities and catches. This will be end-user driven, and coordinated with the work of other ICES data EGs such as the Working Group on Biological Parameters (WGBIOP), the Planning Group on Data Needs for Assessments and Advice (PGDATA) and the Working Group on Recrea- tional Fisheries Surveys (WGRFS) to ensure synergy and efficiency. The report of the meeting commences with background information on the formation of WGCATCH and its overall role. The remainder of the report provides the out- comes for each of the Terms of Reference (ToRs) and responses to external requests, the proposed future work plan and the ToRs for the 2015 meeting. The group formed two large subgroups to deal with the two major terms of reference which are the development of guidelines for carrying out sampling of catches on shore and the provision of advice on adapting sampling programmes to deal with the landing obligation. In order to evaluate methods and develop guidelines for best practice in carrying out sampling of commercial sampling of commercial fish catches onshore, a question- naire was circulated before the meeting. This questionnaire was structured around guidelines developed by the ICES Workshop on Practical Implementation of Statisti- cally Sound Catch Sampling Programmes (WKPICS) for best practice at each stage of the sampling process, and asked for a description of current practices at each of these stages. Based on these questionnaires, common and specific problems were cata- logued and potential solutions were identified. At the same time, the discussion of the questionnaires provided a form of peer-review of the sampling designs and iden- tified where improvements could be made. WGCATCH provided guidelines for de- signing a sampling survey and summarized earlier guidelines provided by the 2010 Workshop on methods for merging métiers for fishery based sampling (WKMERGE) The other main subject addressed by WGCATCH concerns the provision of advice on adapting sampling protocols to deal with the impact of the introduction of the land- ing obligation, which will alter discarding practices and result in additional catego- ries of catch being landed. A second questionnaire was circulated before the meeting to allow the group to identify the fleets that will be affected and possible issues that are anticipated, as well as to propose solutions to adapt existing monitoring and sampling schemes and to quantify bias resulting from the introduction of this regula- tion. WGCATCH outlined a range of likely scenarios and the expected effects of these on fishery sampling programmes, and developed guidelines for adapting sam- pling schemes. The group also explored a range of analyses that could be conducted in order to quantify bias resulting from the introduction of the landing obligation. Finally a number of pilot studies/case studies were summarized, highlighting the practical issues involve

Controversies in the Use of MIGS

Abstract Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) has fulfilled an unmet need in the management of glaucoma. This chapter highlights some controversial issues regarding the use of MIGS in clinical practice, including (1) whether there is sufficient evidence to advocate combining MIGS with cataract surgery over cataract surgery alone, (2) the merits and drawbacks of different approaches to trabecular bypass and canal-based MIGS procedures, (3) the effect of MIGS on endothelial cell loss, (4) suprachoroidal MIGS devices and whether there is still a role for these procedures, and (5) a comparison between subconjunctival MIGS and trabeculectomy. Several questions are still left unanswered and hopefully, further research and more clinical experience with these new technologies will help improve surgical outcomes for patients