1 / 29

MED-GIG: Mediterranean Coastal

Milestone 6 Report. MED-GIG: Mediterranean Coastal. Member States : France Greece Italy Spain Cyprus Malta Slovenia Croatia. Coordinator: Gianna Casazza, Italy. Background information 1. COASTAL WATERS: Common intercalibration types.

sprayberry
Download Presentation

MED-GIG: Mediterranean Coastal

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Milestone 6 Report MED-GIG: Mediterranean Coastal Member States: France Greece Italy Spain Cyprus Malta Slovenia Croatia Coordinator: Gianna Casazza, Italy

  2. Background information 1 COASTAL WATERS: Common intercalibration types (1) In many cases different seabed substrata will occur within one water body type. The dominant substratum should be selected (2)Depth division is based on 30 m depth at 1 mile distance from the coastline.

  3. Background information 2 Countries participating for each type & BQE/pressures All the 7 EU countries, plus Croatia (AC), participated to common group work - countries’ participation differs in the 4 BQE subgroups Common IC types, initially considered: Presently the Phytoplankton subgroup has revised the Type distinction and, analyzing data, is trying to define 2/3 water bodies coastal types that are significant for phytoplankton (i.e. according to water column characteristics).

  4. Phytoplankton:IT, ES, SL, GR, F + Croatia • Macroalgae: GR, ES • + recently IT, F • Angiosperms: Posidonia oceanica: IT, ES, F, Malta • Benthic Invertebrates: IT, ES, GR, F, Cy MED-GIG subgroups:

  5. Macroinvertebrates: options 2-3 Phytoplankton: options 1-2 MACROINVERTEBRATES 3 classification methods under test based on species ecological values Some different metrics PHYTOPLANKTON 1 common metric (chl a) Different tentative data analysis (methods) Macroalgae: options 2-3 Angiosperms (P.oceanica): option 3 MACROALGAE 2 classification methods, based on species ecological values Some different metrics in the 2 methods ANGIOSPERMS: P. oceanica special case: 1 species many methods different metrics IC approach 1. Common metrics, common method 2. Common metrics, different method 3. Different metrics, different method Mainly hybrids General IC approach (which IC option 1, 2, 3 or hybrid was used)

  6. Data Which data was used to set the boundaries applying the BSP (e.g. common GIG dataset [option 2], separate MS data sets [option 3] Phytoplankton: BSP not applied yet; common GIG data set for chl a and nutrients is under study Macroinvertebrates: not applicable as GIG; some MSs (Greece and Cyprus) used their MS data set Macroalgae: Greece and Spain (Catalonia) used their MS dataset Angiosperms (P.oceanica): each participating MS used its own data set. Common agreement on the boundary between good/moderate was reached based on a joint exercise among the different classification methods (using different metrics).

  7. 2. BENTHIC Invertebrate Fauna Assessment Methods combine species (comp.& abun.) with ecological evaluation assigned to species Status EQR setting Cyprus Bentix C (finalized) yes France Multimetric approach (AMBI, Shannon Diversity, BQI Trophic Index) D under development C no Greece Bentix yes Italy AMBI with factor analysis Bentix D D No no Spain - Catalunya AMBI with factor analysis Multivariate analysis D D no no Spain- Balearic is. AMBI with factor analysis Multivariate analysis D D no no National classification methods 1 1. PHYTOPLANKTON: no national methods (1 common metric chl a, under study, as biomass indicator)

  8. 3: MACROALGAE 4: ANGIOSPERMS (Posidonia oceanica) Assessment Method Assessment Method Status Status EQR setting EQR setting National classification methods 2 Greece EEI C Yes France Yes D yes Spain - Catalunya CARLIT/BENTHOS B officially accepted Yes Italy Yes (POSWARE) C yes Spain – Valencia CARLIT/BENTHOS B Yes Malta Yes C yes Spain – Balearic Is CARLIT/BENTHOS B Yes Spain - Catalunya Yes (POMI ) B yes Spain – Valencia Yes D yes

  9. Vertical Density Gradient N Adriatic System Tyrrhenian System PHYTOPLANKTON • Large amount of data • High variability in format, timescales: difficult immediate comparison • no fully developed WFD compliant classification • Use of[chl a] as initial intercalibration metric for biomass comparison • importance of physico-chemical data: chl a and physico-chemical parameters gathered and analysed in a common way • identify coastal waters types, significant for phytoplankton, based on vertical stability (density gradient) of the water column

  10. AQUATIC FLORA: Macroalgae 2 classification systems tested: combine coverage (%) with ecological evaluation assigned to species EEI (Ecological Evaluation Index) (Orfanidis et al, 2001) BENTHOS - CARLIT (Pinedo et al, 2006, Ballesteros et al, 2006) upper infralittoral communities: macroalgae + some fauna spp sensitivity ordered against pollution gradient + cartography, spatial databases abundance of: late successional spp vs opportunistic spp

  11. Cystoseira sp. Lithophyllum incrustans Mytilus sp. Ulvacean algae Blue-green algae Biological Indicators Pollution gradient +pollution -pollution Corallina sp. Lithophyllum byssoides Sensitivity gradient +sensitivity -sensitivity Benthic communities reflect the environmental changes of littoral waters quality

  12. BENTHOS - CARLIT Pinedo et al, 2006 Ballesteros et al, 2006 “Sensitivity level (SL)” is quoted from 1 to 20 for every community (worst to the best) based on “expert” judgement axis II A B axis I C D • Data analysis • Species x stations • Multivariate methods (DCA, CA, MDS) • Environmental and biological variables: Pearson correlations, ANOVAs, DCCA, CCA

  13. ESG II ESG I Ecological State Groups - Sheet filamentous coarsely branched groups - High productivity - Annuals - Ruderals e.g. Ulva,Cladophora, Enteromorpha - Thick leathery, jointed calcareous, crustose groups - Low productivity - Perennials - Competitors e.g. Cystoseira, Corralina, Hydolithon Mean abundance (%) of ESG II Mean abundance (%) of ESG I EEI Ecological Evaluation Index (Orfanidis et al. 2001)

  14. Corallina spp. Cystoseira spp. ESG I Seagrasses Peyssonelia spp.

  15. Caulerpa spp. Dictyota spp. ESG II Ulva spp. Ceramium spp.

  16. AQUATIC FLORA: Angiosperms • WFD requirements: • - composition • abundance Normative Definitions: Disturbance-sensitive taxa, angiosperms abundance P. oceanica chosen asrepresentative of angiosperms: sensitivity and response to disturbance, wide distribution, and the existing knowledge Angiosperms in the MedGIG, a special case: The Posidonia Group Composition: only 1 species - P.oceanica (no variability in composition) Abundance: abundance is not considered as one and only metric – In this case: the descriptors are the metrics (descriptors of Posidonia quality, not only of its abundance).

  17. POMI (Catalunya) (Romero et al, 2005) POSWARE (Italy) (Buia et al, 2005) French system (Pergent et al.) Maltese system (Debono & Borg, 2006) Valencian system Different selections of descriptors Different analytical methods Posidonia subgroup Different classification systems have been proposed:

  18. P. oceanica classification systems in the different participating countries, at present

  19. Setting of Reference conditions1 Common approach for setting of reference conditions There is not a common approach for RCs: each BQE subgroups identified, agreed, or are still discussing, Reference Conditions. Reference criteria BQE 1: PHYTOPLANKTON: different RC according to different water types. Two (or more) coastal types,significant for phytoplankton, (based on water column stability) are under development Then, for each type, sites at high status will be considered BQE 2: BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE FAUNA: There is no common view/agreement on RC. Some countries have identified existing reference sites/conditions, others consider virtual reference conditions. Needs to consider different sub-regions and differences in the reference values for different habitats (e.g. muddy/sandy bottoms, within each typology).

  20. Setting of Reference conditions2 Reference criteria BQE 3: MACROALGAE: Reference sites have been identified according to the low pressures and impacts they receive. In both methods (EEI and BENTHOS/CARLIT) the reference sites are real sites (existing) BQE 4: ANGIOSPERMS (P. oceanica): common view on RC: RC is type independent -RC are defined at sub-ecoregional level (east/west, insularity …) -RC is depth dependant (meadows at different depths) -for some metrics, RC are also season dependant (eg. shoot area) Some countries: pristine sites exist, used as reference site (after evaluation), Others: they do not exist, expert judgment and modeling in combination Ex. of RC( for Italy): distance from impact, legal protection status, land use, absence of impact and biological assessment

  21. Setting of Reference conditions3 Reference sites For some BQE and country, reference sites and criteria (reference values) are available. e.g. Macroalgae: Greek approach (EEI): there is data available on Greek Natura 2000 database Catalan approach (BENTHOS-CARLIT): data is available in CEAB-CSIC Benthic Invertebrate fauna: Greece and Cyprus identified reference stations with real data. Available at HCMR

  22. Setting of Boundaries Common approach for setting of boundaries Procedure, relationships, results Phytoplankton: No clear correlation between pressures and chl a was found, so class boundaries could not be defined by discontinuities in the pressure vs. chl a diagram. Procedure for setting the H/G boundary has been agreed The boundary between high and good will be set according to the 90th percentile for chl a data Benthic Invertebrate fauna: only Greece and Cyprus have already completed the BSP no common agreement has been achieved by others.

  23. Setting of Boundaries Macroalgae: Boundaries are set according to expert judgment and/or results of multivariate analysis No statistical analysis exclusively to set boundaries No discontinuities. Continuum of possibilities with gradual disappearance/appearance of different indicator species Angiosperms (P.oceanica): No agreement concerning the BSP Agreement on Good/Moderate boundary for the different methods: application of WFD conceptual definition of the good/moderate boundary to sites to identify the boundary in each respective EQR scales. The results: Malta=0.55 Italy=0.62 France=0.5 Valencia=0.54 Catalunya=0.6 Experts agreed on EQR=0.55 as the threshold for the good/moderate discrimination. No further agreements about the other class boundaries were reached

  24. How common intercalibration types and common boundaries will be transformed into the national typologies/assessment systems NOT APPLICABLE

  25. Workplan for the continuation of the IC (1) For COASTAL WATERS: No complete IC exercise was achieved in all the subgroups but macroalgae, where still more progress can be made. Continuation of the IC is highly recommended, for at least 1 year for each BQE (longer in some cases). For TRANSITIONAL WATERS: No IC exercise was done: lack of submission of sites and data, from most MSs. Nevertheless work has started in most MSs In the last MED-GIG meeting (Setè, March 06) the first TW expert group met to foresee possible future activities. An agreed document was prepared and signed by the experts (TW Agenda for WFD implementation in the Mediterranean ecoregion) - formalisation of the TW expert working group - re-evaluation of the proposed Typology - organisation of the existing data on hydro-geomorphological features of Mediterranean TW into a Mediterranean data-base - selection of type-specific ecosystems to be inscribed into the Official IC register

  26. Workplan for the continuation of the IC (2) COASTAL WATERS Phytoplankton: Criteria chosen need validation: identify coastal waters types (2/3), significant for phytoplankton, based on vertical stability (density gradient) of the water column Need to further investigate relationship between pressures and[chl a] Benthic invertebrate fauna: IC exercise requires at least 2 more years Some countries (e.g. Italy) need to collect additional data to further test the methods identify reference conditions and apply the BSP Other countries (e.g. Slovenia) will be able to produce data and join the IC exercise in the next future Croatia is willing to participate, contributing with data Need to consider different sub-regions, differences in the reference values for different habitats (e.g. muddy/sandy bottoms, within each typology) Collecting new data with standardized methods in similar habitats.

  27. Workplan for the continuation of the IC (3) COASTAL WATERS Macroalgae: - Involvement of other countries and test the 2 methods in other water bodies - Research: Studies on the processes that drive structural changes of macroalgal communities, subjected to water pollution, for further ecological evaluation of the status of the aquatic ecosystem Angiosperms (P.oceanica): - enlargement and improvement of national databases - involvement of other MSs not present until now in the process, widening the geographical range of the group - performing specific joint field work, carrying out a real IC on sites, testing the different methods

  28. Overview table MED-GIG CONCLUSIONS • - Classification approches at BQEs level: not yet integrated approach • Large amount of data from Mediterranean scientific community • - Some tentative tools for analytical applications PHYTOPLANKTON 1 commom metric tentative data analysis on 2 main water types (vertical stability) ANGIOSPERMS: P. oceanica special case: 1 species many methods different metrics Agreements: - different RC (sub-ecoregional) MACROINVERTEBR 3 classification methods Problems: - data lack - comparability Tentative RC: Eastern Western MACROALGAE 2 classification methods IC: ok Agreement on: - RC - species ecological values

  29. Main problems, gaps, difficulties encountered in the process of IC - Very limited time: 1 year, the MED-GIG started in Feb 05 - No financial support from any EU project, in all the Mediterranean MSs - No IC on Transitional Waters Remarks - the amount of data carried out     - 3 EU new countries (on the total 7) participating in the Group -   - 1 accession country (Croatia) participation Need of particular consideration to the Mediterranean ecoregion issues, where the majority of the coastal countries are not European

More Related