Cost-efficiency assessments of marine monitoring methods lack rigor : a systematic mapping of literature and an end-user view on optimal cost-efficiency analysis

Global deterioration of marine ecosystems, together with increasing pressure to use them, has created a demand for new, more efficient and cost-efficient monitoring tools that enable assessing changes in the status of marine ecosystems. However, demonstrating the cost-efficiency of a monitoring method is not straightforward as there are no generally applicable guidelines. Our study provides a systematic literature mapping of methods and criteria that have been proposed or used since the year 2000 to evaluate the cost-efficiency of marine monitoring methods. We aimed to investigate these methods but discovered that examples of actual cost-efficiency assessments in literature were rare, contradicting the prevalent use of the term “cost-efficiency.” We identified five different ways to compare the cost-efficiency of a marine monitoring method: (1) the cost–benefit ratio, (2) comparative studies based on an experiment, (3) comparative studies based on a literature review, (4) comparisons with other methods based on literature, and (5) subjective comparisons with other methods based on experience or intuition. Because of the observed high frequency of insufficient cost–benefit assessments, we strongly advise that more attention is paid to the coverage of both cost and efficiency parameters when evaluating the actual cost-efficiency of novel methods. Our results emphasize the need to improve the reliability and comparability of cost-efficiency assessments. We provide guidelines for future initiatives to develop a cost-efficiency assessment framework and suggestions for more unified cost-efficiency criteria

Proficiency Test 04/2016 - Taxonomic identification of boreal freshwater lotic, lentic, profundal and North-Eastern Baltic benthic macroinvertebrates

The Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) conducted a benthic macroinvertebrate taxa identification proficiency test in which 22 participants took part. In the lake littoral subtest, one participant out of seven scored lower than 95% correct and three out of seven achieved perfect results in this test. Half of the ten participants in the lake profundal subtest achieved a score higher than 95%, with four participants scoring a perfect result. In the lotic subtest, two participants out of ten scored 100% and half of the participants scored more than 95% correct. In the Baltic test the average result was 94% correctly identified taxa. Even if the general performance of the participants were good, the results clearly demonstrates the need for recurring taxonomic identification tests for lotic, lentic profundal, littoral and Baltic coastal macroinvertebrates as well as regularly arranged taxonomic workshops. Warm thanks to all the participants

Implementation options for DNA-based identification into ecological status assessment under the European Water Framework Directive

Assessment of ecological status for the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) is based on “Biological Quality Elements” (BQEs), namely phytoplankton, benthic flora, benthic invertebrates and fish. Morphological identification of these organisms is a time-consuming and expensive procedure. Here, we assess the options for complementing and, perhaps, replacing morphological identification with procedures using eDNA, metabarcoding or similar approaches. We rate the applicability of DNA-based identification for the individual BQEs and water categories (rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal waters) against eleven criteria, summarised under the headlines representativeness (for example suitability of current sampling methods for DNA-based identification, errors from DNA-based species detection), sensitivity (for example capability to detect sensitive taxa, unassigned reads), precision of DNA-based identification (knowledge about uncertainty), comparability with conventional approaches (for example sensitivity of metrics to differences in DNA-based identification), cost effectiveness and environmental impact. Overall, suitability of DNA-based identification is particularly high for fish, as eDNA is a well-suited sampling approach which can replace expensive and potentially harmful methods such as gill-netting, trawling or electrofishing. Furthermore, there are attempts to replace absolute by relative abundance in metric calculations. For invertebrates and phytobenthos, the main challenges include the modification of indices and completing barcode libraries. For phytoplankton, the barcode libraries are even more problematic, due to the high taxonomic diversity in plankton samples. If current assessment concepts are kept, DNA-based identification is least appropriate for macrophytes (rivers, lakes) and angiosperms/macroalgae (transitional and coastal waters), which are surveyed rather than sampled. We discuss general implications of implementing DNA-based identification into standard ecological assessment, in particular considering any adaptations to the WFD that may be required to facilitate the transition to molecular data

Phantom Friedmann Cosmologies and Higher-Order Characteristics of Expansion

We discuss a more general class of phantom ($p < -\varrho$) cosmologies with various forms of both phantom ($w -1$) matter. We show that many types of evolution which include both Big-Bang and Big-Rip singularities are admitted and give explicit examples. Among some interesting models, there exist non-singular oscillating (or "bounce") cosmologies, which appear due to a competition between positive and negative pressure of variety of matter content. From the point of view of the current observations the most interesting cosmologies are the ones which start with a Big-Bang and terminate at a Big-Rip. A related consequence of having a possibility of two types of singularities is that there exists an unstable static universe approached by the two asymptotic models - one of them reaches Big-Bang, and another reaches Big-Rip. We also give explicit relations between density parameters $\Omega$ and the dynamical characteristics for these generalized phantom models, including higher-order observational characteristics such as jerk and "kerk". Finally, we discuss the observational quantities such as luminosity distance, angular diameter, and source counts, both in series expansion and explicitly, for phantom models. Our series expansion formulas for the luminosity distance and the apparent magnitude go as far as to the fourth-order in redshift $z$ term, which includes explicitly not only the jerk, but also the "kerk" (or "snap") which may serve as an indicator of the curvature of the universe.Comment: REVTEX 4, 23 pages, references updated, to appear in Annals of Physics (N.Y.