SIGLA - Sistema Integrato per il Monitoraggio e Gestione di Lagune ed Ambiente, sotto-azione CARLA Parte I : CARatterizzazione chimica e chimico-fisica e qualità acque LAguna di Cabras e Golfo di Oristano

È stata effettuata una prima caratterizzazione chimica e chimico-fisica della colonna d’acqua nella Laguna di Cabras tramite l’analisi di dati raccolti in precedenti indagini. Tali studi sono stati completati con campionamenti di acqua e misure in situ delle variabili idrologiche nella laguna e nel golfo di Oristano. Su questo set di dati sono state effettuate le analisi per individuare le relazioni tra le variabili misurate e per studiare le variabilità stagionali delle caratteristiche chimico-fisiche della colonna d’acqua. Lo studio ha permesso la compilazione di un protocollo metodologico di indagine e di monitoraggio dello stato trofico e di salute di ambienti lagunari costieri. I dati più recenti hanno mostrato come rispetto alle medie storiche, si sia avuto un aumento della temperatura e una diminuzione della salinità. Quest’ultima viene associata ad un limitato scambio tra la laguna ed il mare. I valori di ossigeno e pH non sono indicativi di un elevato stress ambientale, infatti non sono state rilevate condizioni di ipossia o anossia, e valori di pH superiori alla norma. Tuttavia in precedenti campionamenti nell’estate 2002 sono stati descritti al fondo valori ipossici. Tali valori hanno indicato come la laguna sia periodicamente soggetta a crisi anossiche. Il netto calo di nutrienti rispetto agli anni ottanta-novanta è associato ad una diminuzione degli input d’acqua dolce nel periodo monitorato. Inoltre non è trascurabile l’influenza degli scambi tra sedimento e colonna d’acqua. In conclusione, dagli studi condotti si può dedurre come nello specifico, nella Laguna di Cabras, lo stato trofico del sistema sia principalmente condizionato dagli input d’acqua dolce, e come questi condizionino anche gli scambi con il golfo. In aggiunta, data la diminuzione degli input di acqua dolce nel periodo monitorato e vista la relazione positiva tra volumi e nutrienti in entrata, il loro abbattimento in entrata tramite depurazione delle acque sembra essere un valido strumento di mitigazione e di recupero

Sensor monitoring strategy

In its overall strategy, COMMON SENSE work packages (11) can be grouped into 3 key phases: (1) RD basis for cost-effective sensor development, (2) Sensor development, sensor web platform and integration, and (3) Field testing. In the Phase 1, within WP1 and WP2, partners have provided a general understanding and integrated basis for a cost effective sensors development. In Phase 2, within the WP3 and WPs 4 to 8, the new sensors have been created and planned to be integrated into instruments for the different identified platforms and how data produced will be processed, organised and saved. During the phase 3, within WP9, partners are deploying precompetitive prototypes at chosen platforms (e.g. research vessels, oil platforms, buoys and submerged moorings, ocean racing yachts, drifting buoys). Starting from August 2015 (month 22; Task 9.2), these platforms are permitting the partnership to test the adaptability and performance of the in-situ sensors and verify if the transmission of data is properly made and correct observed deviations. Sensor monitoring strategy (Deliverable 2.4 for Task 2.5) is the last task within Phase 1. As the other tasks in Phase 1 it has to provide a basis for designing field testing activities to be useful. That is how to validate the performance of sensors, integration, data acquisition, transmission, under real conditions in different platforms. Since there is a wide sensor variety, each one with its own characteristics, and several platforms, to prepare a general methodological review and give the corresponding directions as it was initially planned, would be a huge and useless effort. Given the initially fixed calendar a first version of the present deliverable was presented when most of the sensors were still not developed. The document addressed how projected sensors should be tested, their limitations and conditions for their monitoring and final certification. Now, when D2.2 (Procedures of sensors deployment methodology on physical supports/platforms) has been rewritten (May 2016), all sensors are fully developed and most of them have started their tests at sea, the present new updated version of the deliverable becomes more precise, with much better knowledge on the real sensors and their performance. In addition, a complete new chapter on data transmission –initially proposed but not developed in the previous version– is included. The information from the six sensor developers in COMMON SENSE on which the initial plan on where and how to test each sensor that was presented in D9.1 (April 2015) has been updated (May 2016). The update includes the final properties of sensors after the respective full laboratory tests and even some of the results from field tests that had been carried out starting August 2015. This task assesses field testing procedures and deployment specificities. Two tables are presented based on the information of the report for D9.1 delivered in April 2015. One table was created for sensor developers and one for those who will test the sensors at sea. In this report some information from the testers’ table is shown and updated according to the new version of D2.2 (May 2016) for platforms. Objectives and rationale The objective of Task 2.5 within the WP2 is the definition of sensor monitoring strategy based on the premises for water monitoring, sensor performances and data storage and transmission. For any new sensor, available instruments currently used in the oceanographic studies will be identified to perform comparisons. Suitable transmission technology will be selected according to the test conditions: open sea, coastal areas, remote locations, etc. Sensitivity and stress tests will be designed in order to establish confidence limits under different environmental situations, so that the results obtained in the testing exercises (WP9) will enable to certify the performance of the new instruments

Procedures of sensors deployment methodology on physical supports/platforms

The aim of task 2.3 is to define specific platform characteristics and identify deployment difficulties in order to determine the adequacy of sensors within specific platforms. In order to obtain the necessary information, two online questionnaires were realized. One questionnaire was created for sensor developers and one for those partners that will test the sensors at sea. The seven developers in COMMON SENSE have provided information on seven sensors: two for underwater noise – CEFAS and IOPAN; two for microplastics – IDRONAUT and LEITAT; one for an innovative piro and piezo resistive polymeric temperature and pressure – CSIC; one for heavy metal – CSIC; one for eutrophication sensor – DCU. Outside the scope of the questionnaire, FTM has proposed three sensors of which two for oil spill and one for heavy metals, realized in the framework of a previous EU project but that can be improved and tested with several platforms. This information is anyway incomplete because in most cases for the novel sensors which will be developed over the course of COMMON SENSE, the sensors cannot be clearly designed yet as the project only started a few months ago - and, consequently, technical characteristics cannot actually be perfectly defined. This produces some lag in the acquired information that will be solved in the near future. In the other questionnaire, partners-testers have provided information on eleven platforms. Outside the questionnaire, IOPAN has described two more platforms, one of which is a motorboat not previously listed in the DoW, and they have informed us that the oceanographic buoy in Gdansk Bay is not actually available. This is valid also for platforms from other partners where there were only preliminary contacts like for example for Aqualog and OBSEA Underwater observatory. In the following months, new information will be provided and questionnaires information updated. Then important characteristics have to be considered such as maintenance, energy autonomy, data transfer/storage and dimension of the sensors that are actually missing. Further updates of this report are therefore necessary in order to individuate the most suitable platforms to test each kind of sensor and then used at the end of 2014 when WP9 (Testing activities) will start. Objectives and rationale The objective of deliverable 2.2 is the definition of the characteristics and procedures of sensors deployment methodology on physical supports/platforms, possible needs and characteristics of the available platform. This is preparatory for the activities in other WPs and tasks: - for task 2.2 (New generation technologies), that will provide cost-effective sensors for large scale production through Deliverable 2.1 [month 10]; - for task 2.5 (Monitoring strategy) where sensitivity and stress tests of new sensors will be designed in order to establish confidence limits under different situations and certify the performance of the new instruments [Deliverable 2.5 at month 16]. - for WP9 (Field testing) starting at month 12 (October 2014) when the deployment of new sensors will be drawn and then realized

Review of existing and operable observing systems and sensors

Deliverable 1.4 is aimed at identification of existing and operable observing systems and sensors which are relevant to COMMON SENSE objectives. Report aggregates information on existing observing initiatives, programmes, systems, platforms and sensors. The Report includes: • inventory of previous and current EU funded projects. Some of the them, even if started before 2007, were aimed at activities which are relevant or in line with those stemming from MSFD in 2008. The ‘granulation’ of the contents and objectives of the projects varies from sensors development through observation methodologies to monitoring strategies, • inventory of research infrastructure in Europe. It starts from an attempt to define of Marine Research Infrastructure, as there is not a single definition of Research Infrastructure (RI) or of Marine Research Infrastructure (MRI), and there are different ways to categorise them. The chapter gives the categorization of the MRI, together with detailed description and examples of MRI – research platforms, marine data systems, research sites and laboratories with respect of four MSFD descriptors relevant to COMMON SENSE project, • two chapters on Research Programs and Infrastructure Networks; the pan-European initiatives aimed at cooperation and efficient use of infrastructural resources for marine observation and monitoring and data exchange are analysed. The detailed description of observing sensors and system are presented as well as frameworks for cooperation, • information on platforms (research vessels) available to the Project for testing developed sensors and systems. Platforms are available and operating in all three regions of interest to the project (Mediterranean, North Sea, Baltic), • annexed detailed description of two world-wide observation networks and systems. These systems are excellent examples of added value offered by integrated systems of ocean observation (from data to knowledge) and how they work in practice. Report concludes that it is seen a shortage of new classes of sensors to fulfil the emerging monitoring needs. Sensors proposed to be developed by COMMON SENSE project shall answer to the needs stemmed from introduction of MSFD and GES descriptors

Field testing, validation and optimization report

The COMMON SENSE project has been designed and planned in order to meet the general and specific scientific and technical objectives mentioned in its Description of Work (page 77). As the overall strategy, the 11 work packages (WPs) of the work plan were grouped into 3 key phases: (1) RD basis for cost-effective sensor development , (2) Sensor development, sensor web platform and integration, and (3) Field testing. In the first two phases, partners involved in WP1 and WP2 have provided a general understanding and integrated basis for a cost effective sensors development. Within the following WPs 4 to 8 the new sensors were created and integrated into different identified platforms. During the third phase of field testing (WP9), partners have deployed precompetitive prototypes at chosen platforms (e.g. research vessels, oil platforms, buoys and submerged moorings, ocean racing yachts, drifting buoys). Starting from August 2015 (month 22; task 9.2), these platforms have allowed the partnership to test the adaptability and performance of the in-situ sensors and verify if the transmission of data is properly made, correcting deviations. In task 9.1 all stakeholders identified in WP2 have been contacted in order to agree upon a coordinated agenda for the field testing phase for each of the platforms. Field testing procedures (WP2) and deployment specificities, defined during sensor development in WPs 4 to 8, have been closely studied by all stakeholders involved in field testing activities in order for everyone to know their role, how to proceed and to provide themselves with the necessary material and equipment (e.g. transport of instruments). All this information have provided the basis for designing and coordinating field testing activities. Subsequently, the available new sensors have been tested since August 2015 till mid-October of the current year (2016) as part of task 9.2, following the indications defined in D9.1, such as the intercomparison of the new sensors with commercial ones, when possible. The availability of new sensors was quite different in time starting with the first tests in September and October 2015 on noise, nutrient and heavy metals sensors and closing with pCO2 in late September 2016. Sensors are technically fully described in the deliverables of WPs 3 to 8 and are here just mentioned where necessary. For further details, please consider those reports. Objectives and rationale The protocols prepared in D9.1 have been verified during the field testing activities of the innovative sensors on platforms. These can be summarized into 3 categories: (1) Research vessels (regular cruises); (2) Fixed platforms; (3) Ocean racing yachts. An exhaustive analysis of the different data obtained during field testing activities has been carried on in order to set possible optimization actions for prototypes design and performances. The data from each platform have been analyzed to verify limits and optimal installations or possible improvements. Finally a set of possible optimization actions has been defined. Data and observations collected during the course of field testing have been used to iteratively optimize the design and performance of the precompetitive prototypes

Protocols for the field testing

The COMMON SENSE project has been designed and planned in order to meet the general and specific scientific and technical objectives mentioned in its Description of Work (page 77). In an overall strategy of the work plan, work packages (11) can be grouped into 3 key phases: (1) RD basis for cost-effective sensor development, (2) Sensor development, sensor web platform and integration, and (3) Field testing. In the first two phases WP1 and WP2 partners have provided a general understanding and integrated basis for a cost effective sensors development. Within the following WPs 4 to 8 the new sensors are created and integrated into different identified platforms. During the third phase 3, characterized by WP9, partners will deploy precompetitive prototypes at chosen platforms (e.g. research vessels, oil platforms, buoys and submerged moorings, ocean racing yachts, drifting buoys). Starting from August 2015 (month 22; task 9.2), these platforms will allow the partnership to test the adaptability and performance of the in-situ sensors and verify if the transmission of data is properly made, correcting deviations. In task 9.1 all stakeholders identified in WP2, and other relevant agents, have been contacted in order to close a coordinated agenda for the field testing phase for each of the platforms. Field testing procedures (WP2) and deployment specificities, defined during sensor development in WPs 4 to 8, are closely studied by all stakeholders involved in field testing activities in order for everyone to know their role, how to proceed and to provide themselves with the necessary material and equipment (e.g. transport of instruments). All this information will provide the basis for designing and coordinating field testing activities. Type and characteristics of the system (vessel or mooring, surface or deep, open sea or coastal area, duration, etc.), used for the field testing activities, are planned comprising the indicators included in the above-mentioned descriptors, taking into account that they must of interest for eutrophication, concentration of contaminants, marine litter and underwater noise. In order to obtain the necessary information, two tables were realized starting from the information acquired for D2.2 delivered in June 2014. One table was created for sensor developers and one for those partners that will test the sensors at sea. The six developers in COMMON SENSE have provided information on the seven sensors: CEFAS and IOPAN for underwater noise; IDRONAUT and LEITAT for microplastics; CSIC for an innovative piro and piezo resistive polymeric temperature and pressure and for heavy metal; DCU for the eutrophication sensor. This information is anyway incomplete because in most cases the novel sensors are still far to be ready and will be developed over the course of COMMON SENSE. So the sensors cannot be clearly designed yet and, consequently, technical characteristics cannot still be perfectly defined. This produces some lag in the acquired information and, consequently, in the planning of their testing on specific platforms that will be solved in the near future. In the table for Testers, partners have provided information on fifteen available platforms. Specific answers have been given on number and type of sensors on each platforms, their availability and technical characteristics, compatibility issues and, very important when new sensors are tested, comparative measurements to be implemented to verify them. Finally IOPAN has described two more platforms, a motorboat not listed in the DoW, but already introduced in D2.2, and their oceanographic buoy in the Gdansk Bay that was previously unavailable. The same availability now is present for the OBSEA Underwater observatory from CSIC, while their Aqualog undulating mooring is still not ready for use. In the following months, new information on sensors and platforms will be provided and the planning of testing activities will improve. Further updates of this report will be therefore necessary in order to individuate the most suitable platforms to test each kind of sensor. Objectives and rationale The objective of deliverable 9.1 is the definition of field testing procedures (WP2), the study of deployment specificities during sensor development work packages (from WP4 to WP8) and the preparation of protocols. This with the participation of all stakeholders involved in field testing activities in order for everyone to know their role, how to proceed and to provide themselves with the necessary material and equipment

Predicting future thermal habitat suitability of competing native and invasive fish species: from metabolic scope to oceanographic modelling

Global increase in sea temperatures has been suggested to facilitate the incoming and spread of tropical invaders. The increasing success of these species may be related to their higher physiological performance compared with indigenous ones. Here, we determined the effect of temperature on the aerobic metabolic scope (MS) of two herbivorous fish species that occupy a similar ecological niche in the Mediterranean Sea: the native salema (Sarpa salpa) and the invasive marbled spinefoot (Siganus rivulatus). Our results demonstrate a large difference in the optimal temperature for aerobic scope between the salema (21.8°C) and the marbled spinefoot (29.1°C), highlighting the importance of temperature in determining the energy availability and, potentially, the distribution patterns of the two species. A modelling approach based on a present-day projection and a future scenario for oceanographic conditions was used to make predictions about the thermal habitat suitability (THS, an index based on the relationship between MS and temperature) of the two species, both at the basin level (the whole Mediterranean Sea) and at the regional level (the Sicilian Channel, a key area for the inflow of invasive species from the Eastern to the Western Mediterranean Sea). For the present-day projection, our basin-scale model shows higher THS of the marbled spinefoot than the salema in the Eastern compared with the Western Mediterranean Sea. However, by 2050, the THS of the marbled spinefoot is predicted to increase throughout the whole Mediterranean Sea, causing its westward expansion. Nevertheless, the regional-scale model suggests that the future thermal conditions of Western Sicily will remain relatively unsuitable for the invasive species and could act as a barrier for its spread westward. We suggest that metabolic scope can be used as a tool to evaluate the potential invasiveness of alien species and the resilience to global warming of native species

Analysis of relevant technical issues and deficiencies of the existing sensors and related initiatives currently set and working in marine environment. New generation technologies for cost-effective sensors

The last decade has seen significant growth in the field of sensor networks, which are currently collecting large amounts of environmental data. This data needs to be collected, processed, stored and made available for analysis and interpretation in a manner which is meaningful and accessible to end users and stakeholders with a range of requirements, including government agencies, environmental agencies, the research community, industry users and the public. The COMMONSENSE project aims to develop and provide cost-effective, multi-functional innovative sensors to perform reliable in-situ measurements in the marine environment. The sensors will be easily usable across several platforms, and will focus on key parameters including eutrophication, heavy metal contaminants, marine litter (microplastics) and underwater noise descriptors of the MSFD. The aims of Tasks 2.1 and 2.2 which comprise the work of this deliverable are: • To obtain a comprehensive understanding and an up-to-date state of the art of existing sensors. • To provide a working basis on “new generation” technologies in order to develop cost-effective sensors suitable for large-scale production. This deliverable will consist of an analysis of state-of-the-art solutions for the different sensors and data platforms related with COMMONSENSE project. An analysis of relevant technical issues and deficiencies of existing sensors and related initiatives currently set and working in marine environment will be performed. Existing solutions will be studied to determine the main limitations to be considered during novel sensor developments in further WP’s. Objectives & Rationale The objectives of deliverable 2.1 are: • To create a solid and robust basis for finding cheaper and innovative ways of gathering data. This is preparatory for the activities in other WPs: for WP4 (Transversal Sensor development and Sensor Integration), for WP(5-8) (Novel Sensors) to develop cost-effective sensors suitable for large-scale production, reducing costs of data collection (compared to commercially available sensors), increasing data access availability for WP9 (Field testing) when the deployment of new sensors will be drawn and then realized

Conservation physiology of marine fishes: advancing the predictive capacity of models

At the end of May, 17 scientists involved in an EU COST Action on Conservation Physiology of Marine Fishes met in Oristano, Sardinia, to discuss how physiology can be better used in modelling tools to aid in management of marine ecosystems. Current modelling approaches incorporate physiology to different extents, ranging from no explicit consideration to detailed physiological mechanisms, and across scales from a single fish to global fishery resources. Biologists from different sub-disciplines are collaborating to rise to the challenge of projecting future changes in distribution and productivity, assessing risks for local populations, or predicting and mitigating the spread of invasive species

Behavioral responses of juvenile golden grey mullet Liza aurata to changes in coastal temperatures and consequences for benthic food resources.

Temperature is an important factor for fish. Yet, little is known about temperature effects on the feeding behavior of fish and the subsequent consequences of these behavioral changes on the spatial distribution of resources.We analyzed the differences in the feeding behavior of two size classes of juvenile Liza aurata at two water temperatures (i.e. 10 °C and 20 °C), using laboratory mesocosms. We also examined whether potential temperature-induced changes in feeding behavior of the smaller size of L. aurata would affect the spatial distribution of the microphytobenthos (MPB) biomass, an important resource in coastal systems. Both the number of feeding events and the swimming velocity during feeding were higher at 20°C than at 10°C, independent of the fish size. The time spent feeding did not vary between 10 °C and 20 °C, while the distance covered during feeding was significantly smaller at 20 °C than at 10 °C. Grazing did not affect the mean MPB biomass, but did increase its spatial variance at the smaller scale (i.e. a few centimeters) at 20 °C. A high number of feeding events, a high swimming velocity during feeding and a small distance covered during feeding in 20 °C-acclimated L. aurata most likely represented an adaptation to an increase in metabolism, as well as to the need to reduce the energy costs of feeding at 20°C. Results also indicated that changes in feeding behavior of the 20 °C-acclimated L. aurata were responsible for the increase in small-scale spatial variability in the MPB biomass but not an overall significant effect on theMPBmean.We suggested that the enhanced spatial patchiness due to grazing by fish at 20 °C might yield a local increase in the mean MPB biomass, probably increasing photosynthetic efficiency of cells and algal growth that counterbalance the negative effect of algal removal by fish