ICES ADVICE 2007 AVIS DU CIEM
Books 1- 10
Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, 2007
Book 1 Introduction, Overviews and Special Requests
International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Conseil International pour l’Exploration de la Mer
H.C. Andersens Boulevard 44-46 DK-1553 Copenhagen V Denmark Telephone (+45) 33 38 67 00 Telefax (+45) 33 93 42 15 www.ices.dk [email protected]
Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, 2007.
Books 1 - 10 December 2007
Recommended format for purposes of citation:
ICES. 2007. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, 2007. ICES Advice. Books 1 - 10. 1,333 pp.
For permission to reproduce material from this publication, please apply to the General Secretary.
ISBN 978-87-7482-000-0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ICES ADVICE 2007
BOOK 1
Section Page
1 INTRODUCTION, OVERVIEW AND SPECIAL REQUESTS ...... 1
1.1 About ICES...... 1
1.2 General guidelines for the ICES advice ...... 2 1.2.1 Precautionary approach...... 2 1.2.2 Maximum sustainable yield ...... 5 1.2.3 Ecosystem approach...... 5 1.2.4 European Marine Strategy ...... 6
1.3 Structure of the Report...... 6
1.3.1 A regional orientation ...... 6 1.3.2 Ecosystem overviews...... 7 1.3.3 Human impacts on the ecosystem...... 8 1.3.4 Assessment and advice...... 8 1.3.5 Single stock summaries...... 8
1.4 Basis for the advice...... 8
1.4.1 Data used and data quality ...... 8 1.4.2 Assessing the status of fish stocks ...... 9 1.4.3 Evaluations of management plans...... 10 1.4.4 Three layers in providing fisheries advice ...... 10 1.4.4.1 Single stock exploitation boundaries...... 10 1.4.4.2 Mixed fisheries advice ...... 10 1.4.4.3 Ecosystem aspects...... 11 1.4.5 Quality of the advice...... 11
1.5 Answers to non-Ecoregion specific Special Requests ...... 12
1.5.1 EC DG Fish...... 12
1.5.1.1 Status of fish stocks managed by the Community in the Northeast Atlantic...... 12 1.5.1.2 Status of small cetaceans and bycatch in European waters ...... 15 1.5.1.3 Review of the Data Collection Framework: Definition of environmental indicators to measure the impacts of fisheries on the marine ecosystem...... 19
1.5.2 HELCOM...... 22 1.5.3 NASCO ...... 22 1.5.4 NEAFC ...... 22 1.5.5 OSPAR ...... 22 1.5.5.1 Quality assurance of biological measurements ...... 22 1.5.5.2 Progress on the assessment of the changes in the distribution and abundance of marine species in the OSPAR maritime area in relation to changes in hydrodynamics and sea temperature...... 23 1.5.5.3 Scoping of an assessment of the environmental impact of fisheries ...... 52 1.5.5.4 Development of EcoQO on changes in the proportion of large fish and evaluation of size-based indicators ...... 59 1.5.5.5 An integrated framework for ecosystem advice in European Seas ...... 65 1.5.5.6 Development of JAMP monitoring guidelines...... 78 1.5.5.7 OSPAR OECD test protocols for EDCs...... 105 1.5.5.8 Background concentrations of contaminants in biota and sediments ...... 111
1.5.6 Additional Advice...... 115 1.5.6.1 Progress on integrated chemical biological effects ...... 115 1.5.6.2 Progress in the BEQUALM Programme...... 118 1.5.6.3 Integrated methods for assessments of effects on biota from flame retardants ...... 122 1.5.6.4 Harmonisation of biological effect methods in the EU ...... 125 1.5.6.5 Update on methods for biological effects monitoring...... 129 1.5.6.6 Fish Disease Index – an assessment tool...... 143 1.5.6.7 New disease trends in wild and cultured fish and shellfish...... 146
ICES Advice 2007 i BOOK 2
Section Page
2 ICELAND AND EAST GREENLAND...... 1
2.1 Ecosystem Overview...... 1
2.1.1 Greenland...... 1 2.1.1.1 Ecosystem components...... 1 2.1.2 Iceland ...... 5 2.1.2.1 Ecosystem components...... 5 2.1.2.2 Environmental forcing on Ecosystem dynamics...... 8 2.1.2.3 References ...... 9
2.2 Fishery effects on benthos and fish communities...... 12
2.3 Assessments and advice ...... 13 2.3.1 Assessments and advice regarding protection of biota and habitats...... 13 2.3.2 Assessments and advice regarding fisheries ...... 13 2.3.3 Special requests...... 23 2.3.3.1 NEAFC request on Redfish stock ID...... 23
2.4 Stock summaries ...... 24 2.4.1 Greenland cod (ICES Subarea XIV and NAFO Subarea 1)...... 24 2.4.2 Icelandic cod (Division Va) ...... 32 2.4.3 Icelandic haddock (Division Va) ...... 41 2.4.4 Icelandic saithe (Division Va) (no assessment this year)...... 48 2.4.5 Greenland halibut in Subareas V, VI, XII and XIV ...... 49 2.4.6 Introduction to the redfish complex in Subareas V, VI, XII, XIV ...... 60 2.4.7 Sebastes marinus in Subareas V, VI, XII and XIV ...... 68 2.4.8 Demersal Sebastes mentella on the continental shelf in Subareas V, VI and XIV...... 75 2.4.9 Pelagic fishery for Sebastes mentella in the Irminger Sea ...... 83 2.4.10 Icelandic summer-spawning herring (Division Va) ...... 92 2.4.11 Capelin in the Iceland-East Greenland-Jan Mayen area (Subareas V and XIV and Division IIa west of 5˚W)...... 97
ii ICES Advice 2007 BOOK 3
Section Page
3 THE BARENTS SEA AND THE NORWEGIAN SEA...... 1
3.1 Ecosystem overview...... 1
3.1.1 Ecosystem components ...... 1 3.1.2 Major significant ecological events and trends ...... 10
3.2 Human impacts on the ecosystem ...... 12
3.2.1 Fishery effects on benthos and fish communities...... 12 3.2.2 References...... 13 3.3 Assessments and advice ...... 15 3.3.1 Assessments and advice regarding protection of biota and habitats...... 15 3.3.2 Assessments and advice regarding fisheries ...... 15 3.3.3 Special requests...... 20
3.3.3.1 Norwegian request for advice on NEA Saithe Management Objectives...... 20 3.3.3.2 NEAFC request to provide detailed description of the newly developed pelagic fishery for Sebastes mentella in the Norwegian Sea as well as the traditional fishery on the slopes, especially with regard to temporal and spatial distribution ...... 24
3.4 Stock summaries ...... 30 3.4.1 Northeast Arctic cod ...... 30 3.4.2 Norwegian coastal cod (Subareas I and II) ...... 41 3.4.3 Northeast Arctic haddock (Subareas I and II)...... 47 3.4.4 Northeast Arctic saithe (Subareas I and II) ...... 56 3.4.5 Redfish (Sebastes mentella) in Subareas I and II ...... 66 3.4.6 Redfish (Sebastes marinus) in Subareas I and II...... 77 3.4.7 Greenland halibut in Subareas I and II ...... 85 3.4.8 Barents Sea capelin (Subareas I and II, excluding Division IIa west of 5°W)...... 93 3.4.9 Northern Shrimp (Pandalus borealis) in the Barents Sea, ICES Divisions I and II...... 98
ICES Advice 2007 iii BOOK 4
Section Page
4 THE FAROE PLATEAU ECOSYSTEM ...... 1
4.1 Ecosystem Overview...... 1
4.1.1 Ecosystem Components ...... 1 4.1.2 Major environmental influences on ecosystem dynamics...... 5
4.2 Human impacts on the ecosystem ...... 10
4.2.1 Fishery effects on benthos and fish communities...... 10
4.3 Assessments and advice ...... 16 4.3.1 Assessments and advice regarding protection of biota and habitats...... 16 4.3.2 Assessments and advice regarding fisheries ...... 18
4.4 Stock summaries ...... 19
4.4.1 Faroe Plateau cod (Subdivision Vb1) ...... 19 4.4.2 Faroe Bank cod (Subdivision Vb2) ...... 27 4.4.3 Faroe haddock (Division Vb)...... 32 4.4.4 Faroe saithe (Division Vb)...... 42
iv ICES Advice 2007 BOOK 5
Section Page
5 CELTIC SEA AND WEST OF SCOTLAND...... 1
5.1 Ecosystem Overview...... 1
5.1.1. Ecosystem components ...... 1 5.1.2 Major environmental signals and implications ...... 8
5.2 The human impacts on the ecosystem ...... 9
5.2.1 Fishery effects on benthos and fish communities...... 9
5.3 Assessments and advice ...... 13 5.3.1 Assessments and advice regarding protection of biota and habitats...... 13 5.3.2 Assessment and advice regarding fisheries...... 13 5.3.3 Special requests...... 36
5.3.3.1 Review of conclusions in WESTHER report...... 36 5.3.3.2 Trevose closure ...... 38 5.3.3.3 EC Request for advice on deep-water coral reefs off the coast of Ireland ...... 44
5.4 Stock summaries ...... 47 5.4.1 Cod in Division VIIa (Irish Sea) ...... 47 5.4.2 Cod in Divisions VIIe-k (Celtic Sea Cod)...... 54 5.4.3 Haddock in Division VIIa (Irish Sea) ...... 64 5.4.4 Haddock in Divisions VIIb-k ...... 69 5.4.5 Whiting in Division VIIa (Irish Sea)...... 74 5.4.6 Whiting in Divisions VIIe-k...... 79 5.4.7 Plaice in Division VIIa (Irish Sea) ...... 84 5.4.8 Celtic Sea Plaice (Divisions VIIf and g) ...... 92 5.4.9 Plaice in Division VIIe (Western Channel)...... 101 5.4.10 Plaice Southwest of Ireland (Divisions VIIh-k) ...... 109 5.4.11 Plaice West of Ireland (Division VIIb,c)...... 112 5.4.12 Sole in Division VIIa (Irish Sea)...... 115 5.4.13 Sole in Division VIIf and g (Celtic Sea) ...... 124 5.4.14 Sole in Division VIIe (Western Channel) ...... 133 5.4.15 Irish Sea herring (Division VIIa) ...... 143 5.4.16 Celtic Sea and Division VIIj herring...... 146 5.4.17 Herring in Divisions VIa South and VIIb,c...... 152 5.4.18 Sprat in Divisions VIId,e...... 158 5.4.19 Megrim (L. whiffiagonis) in Divisions VIIb-k and VIIIa,b,d ...... 161 5.4.20 Anglerfish in Divisions VIIb-k and VIIIa,b (L. piscatorius and L. budegassa)...... 166 5.4.21 Cod in Division VIa (West of Scotland) ...... 175 5.4.22 Cod in Division VIb (Rockall)...... 182 5.4.23 Haddock in Division VIa (West of Scotland) ...... 183 5.4.24 Haddock in Division VIb (Rockall) ...... 192 5.4.25 Whiting in Division VIa (West of Scotland)...... 201 5.4.26 Whiting in Division VIb (Rockall)...... 206 5.4.27 Saithe in Subarea VI (West of Scotland and Rockall) ...... 207 5.4.28 Megrim in Subarea VI (West of Scotland and Rockall)...... 208 5.4.29 Anglerfish in Division IIa (Norwegian Sea), Division IIIa (Kattegat and Skagerrak), Subarea IV (North Sea), and Subarea VI (West of Scotland and Rockall) (Lophius piscatorius and L. budegassa)...... 212 5.4.30 Herring in Division VIa North ...... 222 5.4.31 Norway pout in Division VIa (West of Scotland)...... 231 5.4.32 Sandeel in Division VIa ...... 233 5.4.33-36 Nephrops Advice - Please Refer to ICES Advice 2006 – Book 5...... 235 5.4.37 Sole Southwest of Ireland (Division VIIh-k) ...... 236 5.4.38 Sole West of Ireland (Division VIIb,c) ...... 239
ICES Advice 2007 v BOOK 6
Section Page
6 NORTH SEA ...... 1
1 6.1 Ecosystem Overview...... 1
6.1.1 Ecosystem Components ...... 1 6.1.2 Major environmental influences on ecosystem dynamics...... 15
6.2 The human impacts on the ecosystem ...... 16
6.2.1 Fishery effects on benthos and fish communities...... 16
6.3 Assessments and advice ...... 21
6.3.1 Assessments and advice regarding protection of biota and habitats...... 21 6.3.2 Assessment and advice regarding fisheries...... 21 6.3.3 Special requests...... 37 6.3.3.1 Norwegian request on management measures for Norway pout...... 37 6.3.3.2 EC request to update advice for Sprat and Norway pout (see sections 6.4.20 and 6.4.22)…...... 47 6.3.3.3 Request from Denmark on long-term strategies for Norway Pout...... 48 6.3.3.4 EC Request concerning long-term management of sandeel...... 49
6.4 Stock summaries (updates if necessary) ...... 51
6.4.1 Cod in the Kattegat ...... 51 6.4.2 Cod in Subarea IV (North Sea), Division VIId (Eastern English Channel) and Division IIIa (Skagerrak) (Including update) ...... 58 6.4.3 Haddock in Subarea IV (North Sea) and Division IIIa (Skagerrak – Kattegat) (Including update)...... 82 6.4.4 Whiting in Division IIIa (Skagerrak – Kattegat)...... 94 6.4.5 Whiting in Subarea IV (North Sea) and Division VIId (Eastern Channel) (Including update).... 98 6.4.6 Plaice in Division IIIa (Skagerrak – Kattegat) ...... 106 6.4.7 Plaice in Subarea IV (North Sea) (Including update)...... 112 6.4.8 Plaice in Division VIId (Eastern Channel)...... 125 6.4.9 Sole in Division IIIa...... 130 6.4.10 Sole in Subarea IV (North Sea) (Including update) ...... 139 6.4.11 Sole in Division VIId (Eastern Channel) ...... 151 6.4.12 Saithe in Subarea IV (North Sea) Division IIIa (Skagerrak) and Subarea VI (West of Scotland and Rockall...... 160 6.4.13-16 Nephrops Advice - Please Refer to ICES Advice 2006 – Book 6...... 171 6.4.17 Herring in Subdivisions 22-24 and Division IIIa (spring spawners)...... 172 6.4.18 Herring in Subarea IV, Division VIId and Division IIIa (autumn spawners)...... 182 6.4.19 Sprat in Division IIIa...... 199 6.4.20 Sprat in the North Sea (Subarea IV)...... 202 6.4.21 North Sea horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) (Division IIIa (eastern part), Division IVb,c VIId)...... 207 6.4.22 Norway pout in Subarea IV (North Sea and Division IIIa (Skagerrak – Kattegat) (Including update ...... 212 6.4.23 Sandeel in Division IIIa (Skagerrak – Kattegat)...... 224 6.4.24 Sandeel in Subarea IV ...... 225 6.4.25 Sandeel Shetland area...... 237 6.4.26 Shrimp (Pandalus borealis) in Division IVa (Fladen Ground) ...... 239 6.4.27 Shrimp (Pandalus borealis) in Division IIIa and Division IVa East (Skagerrak and Norwegian Deeps)...... 242 6.4.28-29 Nephrops Advice - Please Refer to ICES Advice 2006 – Book 6...... 249
vi ICES Advice 2007 BOOK 7
Section Page
7 BAY OF BISCAY AND IBERIAN SEAS ...... 1
7.1 Ecosystem Overview...... 1
7.1.1 Ecosystem Components ...... 1 7.1.2 Major environmental influences on ecosystem dynamics...... 9
7.2 The human impacts on the ecosystem ...... 9
7.2.1 The major effects of fishing on the ecosystem ...... 9 7.2.2 Other effects of human useof the ecosystem ...... 10 7.2.2.1 Impact of oil spills...... 10 7.2.2.2 Incidental catch of cetaceans ...... 10
7.3 Assessments and Advice ...... 15
7.3.1 Assessment and advice regarding protection of biota and habitats ...... 15 7.3.2 Assessments and advice regarding fisheries...... 15
7.4 Stock summaries...... 25
7.4.1 Hake-Southern stock (Division VIIIc and IXa excluding the Gulf of Cadiz) ...... 25 7.4.2 Megrim (L. boscii and L. whiffiagonis) in Divisions VIIIc and IXa ...... 37 7.4.3 Anglerfish in Divisions VIIIc and IXa (L. piscatorius and L. budegassa)...... 51 7.4.4 Southern horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) (Division IXa) ...... 59 7.4.5 Sardine in Division VIIIc and IXa...... 64 7.4.6 Anchovy in Subarea VIII (Bay of Biscay) ...... 72 7.4.7 Anchovy in Division IXa ...... 79 7.4.8-7.4.9 Nephrops Advice – Please refer to ICES Advice 2006 – Book 7...... 83 7.4.11 Sole in Divisions VIIIa,b (Bay of Biscay)...... 84
ICES Advice 2007 vii BOOK 8
Section Page
8 THE BALTIC SEA ...... 1
8.1 Ecosystem Overview...... 1
8.1.1 Ecosystem Components ...... 1 8.1.2 Major environmental influences on ecosystem dynamics ...... 4
8.2 The human impacts on the ecosystem ...... 4
8.2.1 Fishery effects on benthos and fish communities...... 4 8.2.2 Other effects of human use of the ecosystem...... 5 8.2.3 Conclusions...... 5 8.2.4 References...... 5
8.3 Assessments and advice ...... 11
8.3.1 Stock Trends ...... 11 8.3.2 ICES advice for fisheries management ...... 15
8.3.3 Special requests...... 25 8.3.3.1 Quality assurance of biological measurements...... 25 8.3.3.2 Quality assurance of chemical measurements ...... 27 8.3.3.3 EC request for advice of active gears targeting cod in the Baltic ...... 28
8.4 Stock summaries ...... 38 8.4.1 Cod in Subdivisions 22-24 (including Subdivision 23) ...... 38 8.4.2 Cod in Subdivisions 25-32...... 47 8.4.3 Herring in Subdivisions 22-24 and Division IIIa (spring spawners) (see section 6.4.17 (North Sea) ...... 58 8.4.4 Herring in Subdivisions 25-29 (excluding Gulf of Riga herring) and 32...... 59 8.4.5 Herring in the Gulf of Riga ...... 68 8.4.6 Herring in Subdivision 30, Bothnian Sea...... 76 8.4.7 Herring in Subdivision 31, Bothnian Bay ...... 85 8.4.8 Sprat in Subdivisions 22-32 ...... 89 8.4.9 Flounder ...... 100 8.4.10 Plaice...... 107 8.4.11 Dab...... 110 8.4.12 Turbot in Subdivisions 22 to 32 ...... 112 8.4.13 Brill in Subdivisions 22 to 32...... 115 8.4.14 Salmon in the Main Basin and the Gulf of Bothnia (Subdivisions 22-31)...... 117 8.4.15 Salmon in the Gulf of Finland (Subdivision 32) ...... 135 8.4.16 Sea Trout in the Baltic...... 143
viii ICES Advice 2007 BOOK 9
Section Page
9 WIDELY DISTRIBUTED AND MIGRATORY STOCKS ...... 1
9.1 Ecosystem overview...... 2 9.1.1 Bottom topography, substrates, and circulation ...... 2 9.1.2 Hydrography ...... 2 9.1.3 Plankton ...... 4 9.1.4 Distribution of widely distributed and migratory fish species ...... 5 9.1.5 Feeding and school behaviour...... 10 9.1.6 Potential environmental influences ...... 11 9.1.7 References...... 12
9.2 The human impact on the ecosystem...... 14
9.2.1 Fishery effects on benthos and fish communities...... 14
9.3 Assessments and advice ...... 16
9.3.1 Assessments and advice regarding fisheries ...... 16 9.3.2 Special requests...... 21 9.3.2.1 NEAFC request concerning the spatial and temporal extent of deepwater fisheries in the Northeast Atlantic and a preliminary evaluation of areas closed to fishing by NEAFC by e.g. using VMS data ...... 21 9.3.2.2 NEAFC request on evaluation of assessment methods for blue whiting and Norwegian . Spring-Spawning (Atlanto-Scandian) herring ...... 22 9.3.2.3 EC request on evaluation of management plan for NEA mackerel ...... 25 9.3.2.4 NEAFC request to continue to provide all available new information on distribution of vulnerable habitats in the NEAFC Convention Area and fisheries activities in and in the vicinity of such habitats...... 28 9.3.2.5 NEAFC request to evaluate the use and quality of VMS data and records of catch and effort to be received from NEAFC in order to provide information on the spatial and temporal extent of current deep-water fisheries in the NE Atlantic ...... 37 9.3.2.6 NEAFC request to develop suitable criteria for differentiating fisheries into possible management types (e.g. directed deep-water fisheries, by-catch fisheries etc.) and to apply these criteria to categorise individual fisheries...... 39 9.3.2.7 NEAFC request to compile data on documented historical or present spawning/aggregation areas of blue ling in the NEAFC Convention area (including November update ...... 40 9.3.2.8 NEAFC request to consider co-ordination of existing deep-sea surveys. The evaluation may also include recommendations for the development of new surveys if it is considered to be appropriate ...... 43 9.3.2.9 EC request on evaluation of management plan for western horse mackerel...... 49 9.3.2.10 EC request on Black Sea eel...... 54 9.3.2.11 EC request on the Draft EU Guidelines for Eel Management Plans (EC regulation n° 1100/2007)...... 56 9.4 Stock Summaries ...... 63
9.4.1 Hake – Northern stock (Division IIIa, Subareas IV, VI and VII and Divisions VIIIa,b,d ...... 63 9.4.2 Northeast Atlantic Mackerel (combined Southern, Western and North Sea spawning components)...... 74 9.4.3 Western horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) (Divisions IIa, IVa, Vb, VIa,, VIIa-c, e-k, VIIIa-e) ...... 88 9.4.4 Blue whiting combined stock (Subareas I-IX, XII and XIV)...... 98 9.4.5 Norwegian spring-spawning herring...... 113 9.4.6-8 Nephrops Advice - Please Refer to ICES Advice 2006 – Book 9...... 122 9.4.9 European Eel...... 123
ICES Advice 2007 ix BOOK 10 Section Page
NASCO ADVICE ...... 1
Executive Summary...... 1
1 Introduction...... 1 1.1 Main Tasks...... 1 1.2 Management framework for salmon in the North Atlantic ...... 2 1.3 Management objectives...... 3 1.4 Reference points and application of precaution ...... 3
2 ATLANTIC SALMON IN THE NORTH ATLANTIC AREA...... 4 2.1 Catches of North Atlantic Salmon ...... 4 2.1.1 Nominal catches of salmon ...... 4 2.1.2 Catch and release...... 5 2.1.3 Unreported catches...... 5 2.2 Farming and Sea Ranching of Atlantic Salmon ...... 5 2.3 NASCO has asked ICES to report on significant new or emerging threats to, or opportunities for, salmon conservation and management...... 6 2.3.1 Recovery potential of Bay of Fundy and Southern Upland salmon populations...... 6 2.3.2 Timing and nature of density dependence in Atlantic Province salmon populations...... 6 2.3.3 Monitoring interactions between aquaculture and wild fisheries in Norway ...... 7 2.3.4 Cessation of mixed stock fisheries in Irish coastal waters from 2007...... 7 2.3.5 Development of predictive models for returning salmon in Norway ...... 8 2.3.6 Human activities impacting on aquatic diversity ...... 8 2.3.7 Autumn downstream migration of juvenile Atlantic salmon in the UK – possible implications for the assessment and management of stocks...... 9 2.4 NASCO has asked ICES to provide a framework of indicators which would be used to identify any significant change in the previously provided multi-annual management advice for each Commission area...... 9 2.4.1 Study Group on Establishing a Framework of Indicators of Salmon Stock Abundance...... 9 2.4.2 Update of the Framework of Indicators for the 2007–2009 multi-year catch advice at West Greenland ...... 9 2.4.3 Application of the framework indicator spreadsheet for signalling whether a significant change in management advice may occur for the fisheries in 2008 and 2009 ...... 10 2.5 NASCO has asked ICES to examine associations between changes in biological characteristics of all life-stages of Atlantic salmon and variations in marine survival ...... 11 2.5.1 Small grilse size and growth during the first summer at sea in Scottish and Norwegian salmon populations...... 11 2.6 Tracking and tagging studies ...... 12 2.6.1 Acoustic tracking of migrating Atlantic salmon kelts from the LaHave River, Nova Scotia, Canada...... 12 2.6.2 Monitoring smolt migration in the River Rhine, Germany ...... 12 2.6.3 Data storage tags and tagging studies in Iceland...... 13 2.6.4 Compilation of tag releases and fin clip data by ICES member countries in 2006 ...... 13 2.6.5 Summary of the Workshop on the Development and Use of Historical Salmon Tagging Information from Oceanic Areas (WKDUHSTI)...... 13
3 NORTH-EAST ATLANTIC COMMISSION ...... 28 3.1 Status of stocks/exploitation ...... 28 3.2 Management objectives...... 28 3.3 Reference points...... 29 3.3.1 National conservation limits...... 29 3.3.2 Progress with setting river-specific conservation limits...... 29 3.4 Management advice ...... 29
x ICES Advice 2007 Section Page 3.5 Relevant factors to be considered in management ...... 30 3.6 Pre-Fishery Abundance for 2006–2010 ...... 30 3.7 Comparison with previous assessment...... 31 3.7.1 PFA forecast model...... 31 3.7.2 National PFA model and national conservation limit model...... 31 3.8 NASCO has requested ICES to describe the key events of the 2006 fisheries and the status of the stocks...... 31 3.8.1 Fishing at Faroes in 2005/2006 ...... 31 3.8.2 Significant events in NEAC homewater fisheries in 2006 ...... 31 3.8.3 Gear and effort ...... 31 3.8.4 Catches...... 31 3.8.5 Catch per unit effort (cpue) ...... 32 3.8.6 Age composition of catches ...... 32 3.8.7 Farmed and ranched salmon in catches...... 32 3.8.8 National origin of catches ...... 32 3.8.9 Trends in the PFA for NEAC stocks...... 33 3.8.10 Survival Indices for NEAC stocks ...... 33 3.9 NASCO has requested ICES to provide any new information on the extent to which the objectives of any significant management measures introduced in recent years have been achieved...... 33 3.10 NASCO has requested ICES to provide estimates of bycatch and non-catch fishing mortality of salmon in pelagic fisheries with an assessment of impacts on returns to homewaters...... 34 3.10.1 SGBYSAL...... 34 3.10.2 Bycatch of salmon in non-targeted catches in 2006...... 34
4 North American Commission...... 43 4.1 Status of stocks/exploitation ...... 43 4.2 Management objectives...... 43 4.3 Reference points...... 43 4.4 Management advice ...... 43 4.5 Relevant factors to be considered in management ...... 43 4.6 Updated forecast of 2SW maturing fish for 2007 ...... 43 4.6.1 Catch options for 2007 fisheries on 2SW maturing salmon...... 43 4.7 Pre-fishery abundance of 2SW salmon for 2007-2009 ...... 44 4.7.1 Catch options for 2008–2010 fisheries on 2SW maturing salmon ...... 44 4.8 Comparison with previous assessment and advice...... 44 4.9 NASCO has requested ICES to describe the key events of the 2006 fisheries and the status of the stocks...... 44 4.9.1 Fisheries in 2006 ...... 44 4.9.2 Status of stocks...... 45 4.10 NASCO has requested ICES to evaluate the extent to which the objectives of any significant management measures introduced in recent years have been achieved ...... 45 4.11 NASCO has asked ICES to provide a comprehensive description of coastal fisheries including timing and location of harvest, biological characteristics (size, age, origin) of the catch, and potential impacts on non-local salmon stocks...... 46
5 Atlantic salmon in the West Greenland Commission ...... 54 5.1 Status of stocks/exploitation ...... 54 5.2 Management objectives...... 54 5.3 Reference points...... 54 5.4 Management advice ...... 55 5.5 Relevant factors to be considered in management ...... 55 5.6 Pre-fishery abundance forecasts 2007, 2008, and 2009 ...... 55
ICES Advice 2007 xi Section Page
5.6.1 North American stock complex...... 55 5.6.2 Southern European MSW stock complex...... 55 5.7 Comparison with previous assessment and advice...... 56 5.8 NASCO has requested ICES to describe the events of the 2006 fishery and status of the stocks...... 56 5.8.1 Catch and effort in 2006...... 56 5.8.2 Biological characteristics of the catches...... 56 5.9 NASCO has requested ICES to provide a detailed explanation and critical examination of any changes to the models used to provide catch options...... 57 5.9.1 Run-reconstruction models...... 57 5.9.2 Forecast models for pre-fishery abundance of 2SW salmon ...... 57 5.9.3 Development and risk assessment of catch options...... 57 5.10 NASCO has requested ICES to provide any new information on the extent to which the objectives of any significant management measures introduced in recent years have been achieved...... 58
6 NASCO has requested ICES to identify relevant data deficiencies, monitoring needs, and research requirements, taking into account NASCO's international Atlantic salmon research board's inventory of ongoing research relating to salmon mortality in the sea ...... 66 6.1 Data deficiencies and research needs ...... 66
Annex 1: Glossary of acronyms used by ICES on North Atlantic Salmon, 2007 ...... 67
Annex 2: References...... 69
xii ICES Advice 2007 Preface This report contains the 2007 ICES advice to Clients regarding marine management issues. The report is produced by three advisory committees, all providing advice on behalf of the Council: the Advisory Committee on Fishery Management (ACFM) has the prime responsibility for providing advice on fisheries management, the Advisory Committee on Ecosystems (ACE) has the prime responsibility for providing advice on ecosystems, and the Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment (ACME) provides advice on human impacts on the marine environment, e.g. effects of contaminants. The integration of the advice produced by ACE, ACFM and ACME is a result of the introduction of the Ecosystem Approach.
The members of an advisory committee include one designated scientist from each of the ICES member countries and the committee has an independently elected chair. The chairs of the Consultative Committee and some of the scientific committees are ex-officio members. ACFM meets twice a year to review the status of fish stocks and to provide advice for fisheries in the coming year. ACE and ACME meet once every year. ICES has invited Client Commissions and some stakeholder groups to be present at advisory committee meetings in observer capacity.
The basis for the advice on fisheries is reports of fisheries assessment working groups. These assessment reports are peer reviewed by designated groups, each chaired by an ACFM member. The review groups are composed of scientists who are not members of the assessment working group under review and who normally do not originate from countries with a strong interest in the stocks concerned. A few review groups include invited reviewers not originating in research institutions normally involved in ICES stock assessments. The Assessment Working Group chairs assist the review groups. For other topics the advisory committee members provide the necessary review.
Structure of the report
Book 1 explains the conceptual and institutional framework for the assessments and advice. It contains a general introduction to the ICES advice, and includes general and non-regional advice.
Books 2 - 8 are regional reports. • Book 2: Iceland and East Greenland • Book 3: The Barents Sea and the Norwegian Sea • Book 4: The Faroe Plateau Ecosystem • Book 5: Celtic Sea and West of Scotland • Book 6: North Sea • Book 7: Bay of Biscay and Iberian Seas • Book 8: The Baltic Sea
Book 9 is a separate chapter for widely distributed and migratory stocks and Book 10 provides information on the North Atlantic salmon.
Each of these regional ecosystem-volumes includes an ecosystem overview, a description of the human impact on the ecosystem, answers to specific requests, a description of the fisheries in the region and the operational conclusions based on the stock assessments. Finally the report presents a series of stock summary sheets.
The fisheries advice includes reflection on mixed fisheries issues in fisheries management. For those fisheries for which mixed fisheries issues are known to be minor the advice is given on a stock basis. This applies mainly to pelagic stocks. For most demersal stocks or stocks where mixed fisheries are known to be important the advice is based on an identification of the critical stocks and the overall advice is based on the requirements for those stocks. As a consequence of taking a fisheries perspective the advice for all stocks is now given in the area overview section.
Corrections after release of the Extract Report
The Advisory report is issued as extracts in June and in October 2007. Some minor and a few major errors were discovered in the ICES advice after it was released and these were corrected. This report only contains only the final version and where appropriate corrected versions of these sections. The following sections were corrected:
2.4.3 Haddock in Division Va 3.4.1 Northeast Arctic cod (Divisions I+II) 5.4.3 Haddock in Division VIIa (Irish Sea) 5.4.1 Cod in Division VIIa (Irish Sea) 5.4.37 Sole Southwest of Ireland (Division VIIh–k) 9.4.3 Western horse mackerel (Divisions IIa, IVa, Vb, VIa, VIIa–c,e–k, VIIIa-e) 9.4.5 Norwegian spring-spawning herring
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 xiii List of special requests for 2007
CUSTOMER REQUEST – Special DATE RESPONSE
EC
DG Fish Status of fish stocks managed by the Community January 2007 February 2007 in the Northeast Atlantic 25.08.06 Management measures for Norway pout and June 2007 Sandeel – Remaining part of Norway pout Draft request 25.01.07 Progress report Longterm management of the NEA mackerel ACFM Oct. 2007 stock and fishery 26.03.07
22.02.07 June 2007 Sprat and Norway pout June 2007 Review of conclusions in WESTHER report that West of Scotland herring stock VIa(N) belongs to 30.04.07 same biological stock as herring VIa(S) Secretariat 15 June 2007 Additional projections for North Sea herring Draft request 27.03.07 Saithe ACFM 2007, herring Management plans for NS saithe, NS herring and 20.04.07 stocks June 2008 herring IIIa
25.07.07 ACE/ACFM 6 July 2007 Scientific advice on deep-water coral reefs off the coast of Ireland 20.07.07 ACFM October 2007 Advice on European eel in the Black Sea and the river systems connected to it 25.07.07 ACFM October 2007 Review of DCR definition of environmental indicators ACFM October 2007 07.08.07 Review guidance document for the preparation of eel management plans ACFM October 2007
Evaluate the consequences of implementing the 20.07.07 ‘Management plan for Western Horse Mackerel’ as prepared by Pel RAC 08.10.07 ACFM October 2007 04.10.07 Evaluation of Trevose closure Mid-November 2007
Gear selectivity in Baltic cod fishery November 2007. Advice only for ToR 1 of request. ToRs 2–4 to be Sandeel management plan addressed in 2008
xiv ICES Advice 2007, Book 1
NEAFC Assessment methodology, blue whiting and Norwegian 13.12.06 ACFM October 2007 Spring Spawning (Atlanto-Scandian) herring
Regarding redfish stocks in the North Atlantic (ICES areas 13.12.06 ACFM October 2007 I, II V, VI, X, XII and XIV and the NAFO regulatory area)
Vulnerable deep-water habitats in the NEAFC Regulatory 13.12.06 ACE/ACFM June Area 2007
Deep sea species 13.12.06 ACFM June 2007
Co-ordination of scientific deep sea surveys in the NEAFC 13.12.06 ACFM June 2007 and Convention Area planning group set up at ASC 2007
Blue ling spawning aggregations 13.12.06 ACFM June 2007. Update November 2007
OSPAR An assessment of the changes in the distribution and July 2006 ACE spring 2007 abundance of marine species in the OSPAR maritime area in May 2008: ACE relation to changes in hydrodynamics and sea temperature. produce final response to OSPAR advice. Development of JAMP monitoring guidelines July 2006 ACME 20 April 2007 Development of Background Concentrations July 2006 ACME 20 April 2007 Scoping of an assessment of the environmental impact of fisheries July 2006 ACE June 2007
Peer review of further nominations for threatened and/or declining species and habitats July 2006 ACE 1 February 2007
HELCOM To coordinate quality assurance activities on biological and June 2005 ACME June 2007 chemical measurements in the Baltic marine area and report routinely on planned and ongoing ICES inter-comparison exercises, and to provide a full report on the results MEMBER STATES
Norway NEA saithe management objectives 4 December ACFM 8 June 2007 2006
Denmark Evaluation of fixed TAC strategy for Norway pout 26 September 16 November 2007 2007
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 xv ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ECOSYSTEMS
PARTICIPANTS AT MEETING, MAY 2007
Participants AFFILIATION Mark Tasker Chair Robert Aps Estonia Maria Fatima Borges Portugal Jean Boucher France Are Dommasnes Norway Alejandro Gallego UK Jan Haelters Belgium Jonathan A. Hare USA Anda Ikauniece Latvia Karl-Hermann Kock Germany Andrei Krovnin Russia Antti Lappalainen Finland Santiago Lens Spain Piotr Margonski Poland Henrik Mosegaard Denmark Francis O’Beirn Ireland Jake Rice Canada Karl Gunnarsson Iceland Adriaan Rijnsdorp Netherlands Harald Loeng Chair of CONC Paul Keizer Chair of ACME Martin Pastoors Chair of ACFM Stuart I. Rogers Chair of WGECO Sabine Christiansen Observer, WWF Trine Christiansen Observer, EEA Ian Gatt Observer, North Western Waters RAC Mette Bertelsen ICES Advisory Programme Professional Officer Hans Lassen ICES Head of Advisory Programme
xvi ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON FISHERY MANAGEMENT
PARTICIPANTS AT MEETING, SPRING 2007
PARTICIPANTS AFFILIATION Martin Pastoors Chair Pablo Abaunza Spain Eero Aro Finland Jesper Boje Observer Greenland Ghislain Chouinard Canada Mark Dickey-Collas Netherlands Yuri Efimov Russia André Forest France Ciaran Kelly Ireland Christopher Legault USA Alberto Murta Portugal Maris Plikshs Latvia Tiit Raid Estonia Jákup Reinert Observer Faroe Islands John Simmonds UK Dankert Skagen Chair RMC Bjorn Steinarsson Iceland Kristjan Thorarinsson Observer Iceland Sarunas Toliusis Lithuania Reidar Toresen Norway Willy Vanhee Belgium Morten Vinther Denmark Christopher Zimmermann Germany Juan-Pablo Perteirra Observer EC DG Fish Lisa Borges Observer EC DG Fish Schmidt Stefanie Observer EC DG Fish Christian Olesen Observer Pelagic RAC Sean O’Donoghue Observer Pelagic RAC Päivi Haapasaari Student observer of University of Oulu Finland Mette Bertelsen ICES Advisory Programme Professional Officer Hans Lassen ICES Head of Advisory Programme Henrik Sparholt ICES Fisheries Assessment Scientist
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 xvii ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON FISHERY MANAGEMENT
PARTICIPANTS AT MEETING, AUTUMN 2007
PARTICIPANTS AFFILIATION Martin Pastoors Chair Alain Biseau France Jesper Boje Denmark Fátima Cardador Portugal Max Cardinale Sweden Maurice Clarke Ireland Wim Demaré Belgium Yuri Efimov Russia Joachim Gröger Germany Einar Hjörleifsson Iceland Jan Horbowy Poland Yuri M. Lepesevich Russia Ari Leskelä Finland Harald Loeng Chair CONC Maris Plikshs Lativia Denis Rivard Canada Gary Shepherd USA John Simmonds UK Dankert Skagen Chair RMC Sigurd Tjelmeland Norway Sarunas Toliusis Lithuania Valentin Trujillo Spain Frans van Beek Netherlands Lisa Borges Observer DG Fish Julien Lamothe Observer North Western Waters RAC Sean O’Donoghue Observer Pelagic RAC Christian Olesen Observer Pelagic RAC Carol Phua Observer WWF Mette Bertelsen ICES Advisory Programme Professional Officer Hans Lassen ICES Head of Advisory Programme Henrik Sparholt ICES Fisheries Assessment Scientist Barbara Schoute ICES Advisory Programme Professional Officer
xviii ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON MARINE ENVIRONMENT
PARTICIPANTS AT MEETING, MAY 2007
PARTICIPANTS AFFILIATION Paul Keizer Chair Eugeniusz Andrulewicz Poland Kris Cooreman Belgium Andrew Draxler USA Jose Fumega Spain Michel Gilbert Canada Harri Kankaanpää Finland Jarle Klungsoyr Norway Thomas Lang Germany Robin Law UK Harald Loeng Chair Conc. Eugene Nixon Ireland Evald Ojaveer Estonia Dick Vethaak Netherlands Serguei Zagranitchni Russia Gert Verreet Observer EC DG Environment Claus Hagebro ICES Advisory Programme Professional Officer
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 xix 1 Introduction, overview and special requests
1.1 About ICES
ICES was established in 1902 as an intergovernmental organisation. The ICES Convention from 1964 outlines the fundamental purposes of ICES, which are:
to promote and encourage research and investigations for the study of the sea particularly related to the living resources thereof;
to draw up programmes required for this purpose and to organise, in agreement with the Contracting Parties, such research and investigations as may appear necessary;
to publish or otherwise disseminate the results of research and investigations carried out under its auspices or to encourage the publication thereof.
Under the Convention, ICES is concerned with the Atlantic Ocean and adjacent seas, primarily the North Atlantic. For decades, ICES has led the way in the design and coordination of international marine research, and it has provided scientific advice. Its programmes have been carried out mainly at national expense. Throughout ICES’ long history, its members have unselfishly supported the research programmes designed through ICES, because in reality, the members are ICES and the programmes of ICES are theirs. The past success of ICES has benefited very much from the ownership Member Countries feel for ICES and its programmes, which will also be critically important in the future. ICES has increasingly provided scientific advice based on its research programme. Today, ICES provides the scientific underpinning for most of the regulatory commissions concerned with fisheries and the environment in the Northeast Atlantic and the Baltic Sea.
ICES has grown from a small body of like-minded researchers to a complex organisation involving about 1600 scientists, with 20 Member Countries as well as several Observer Countries and non-governmental organisations. ICES fulfils its functions through an Annual Science Conference, about a dozen committees, more than 100 working and study groups, several symposia annually, and a wide range of publications. There is a Secretariat located in Copenhagen, which currently has 44 full-time professional and support staff.
It is the scientists who participate in ICES activities who generate ICES products. The main products are scientific information based on research conducted in the Member Countries and scientific advice containing information provided in a format that can be used by policy-makers. The responsibility for overseeing the production of scientific advice rests with the Management Committee for the Advisory Process. It assigns advisory tasks to the Advisory Committee on Ecosystems (ACE), the Advisory Committee on Fishery Management (ACFM), or the Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment (ACME). The membership of the advisory committees consists of one member per country.
ICES is requested to provide advice on a range of issues relating to marine policies and management. The clients for such requests are:
• Governments of ICES’ member countries, • European Commission (EC) • Helsinki Commission (HELCOM), • North Atlantic Salmon Commission (NASCO), • North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC) • OSPAR Commission (OSPAR)
ICES may also on its own initiative draw the attention of clients to marine matters which may require policy and management attention. The present report is the ICES advice produced in 2007.
There is growing awareness of the impact that human activities, other than fishing have on the marine environment. ICES responded to the needs of international intergovernmental organisations for advice on how to measure these impacts and how to determine their significance. Many expert groups were formed to study the techniques for measuring chemical and biological variables in marine ecosystems and for determining the effects of human activities on marine biota. Starting in the 1990s, ICES has been asked to provide advice on how to integrate scientific knowledge of ecosystem components to provide the underpinning for an ecosystem approach to managing human activities in marine waters.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1 ICES works with its clients to find the most effective way of delivering integrated advice. The immediate delivery of advice is through the ICES internet site and the annual summary of advice is provided in this document that includes all aspects of ICES’ advice.
Also ICES has had to consider carefully the effectiveness of its organisation in meeting not only the types of requests for advice but also the timeliness in the delivery of that advice and the robustness of its peer review process. As a result of this review ICES expects to move towards a revised advisory process in 2008 that will provide all advice through one single advisory committee.
This has meant challenging many expert working groups to undertake new research or to reconsider existing information in order to provide the scientific basis for this integrated advice.
1.2 General guidelines for the ICES advice
ICES provides advice in relation to policies and objectives identified by governments and international client commissions. ICES provides that advice with reference to a number of international agreements and codes of practice:
• “Precautionary principle”: chapter 17 of Agenda 21 of the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED 1992), • “Precautionary approach”: the United Nations Straddling Fish Stocks agreement (UN 1995) and the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (FAO 1995) • Convention on Biological Diversity (UN 1992), • “Ecosystem approach” and “Maximum Sustainable Yield”: the Johannesburg Declaration of the World Summit of Sustainable Development (UN 2002)
1.2.1 Precautionary approach
The Precautionary Approach was summarised in the UN Straddling Fish Stocks Agreement (UN 1995) as follows:
“States shall be more cautious when information is uncertain, unreliable or inadequate. The absence of adequate scientific information shall not be used as a reason for postponing or failing to take conservation and management measures.”
In 1997, ICES was asked by its clients to suggest an approach for implementing the precautionary approach into fisheries management in the North East Atlantic. The precautionary approach suggested by ICES consists of a dual system of conservation limits (limit reference points) and a buffer to account for the uncertainty of the knowledge about the present and future states relative to the conservation limit (precautionary approach reference points). The reference points are expressed in terms of single-stock exploitation boundaries (limits on fishing mortality) and biomass boundaries (minimum biomass requirements).
In practice the precautionary approach suggested by ICES (ICES 1997; ICES 1998; ICES 1999) is based on the following reference points:
Spawning stock biomass (SSB) Fishing mortality (F) Limit reference point Blim: minimum biomass. Below this Flim: exploitation rate that is expected value recruitment is expected to be to be associated with stock ‘collapse’ ‘impaired’ or the stock dynamics are if maintained over a longer time. unknown. Precautionary reference point Bpa: precautionary buffer to avoid that Fpa: precautionary buffer to avoid that true SSB is at Blim when the perceived true fishing mortality is at Flim when SSB is at Bpa. the perceived fishing mortality is at Fpa. The buffer safeguards against natural variability and uncertainty in the assessment. The size of the buffer depends upon the accuracy of the projections (of SSB and F) and the risk society accepts that the true SSB is below Blim and the true F is above Flim. The accuracy of the projections depends on the magnitude of the variability in the natural system and of the accuracy of the population estimates.
2 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Limit reference points
The minimum spawning stock reference point is described by the symbol Blim (the biomass limit reference point). Blim is set on the basis of historical data so that when a stock would be below Blim, there is a high risk that recruitment will ‘be impaired’ (i.e. substantially lower than when the stock size is higher). Below Blim there is a higher risk that the stock could “collapse”. The meaning of “collapse” is that the stock has reached a level where it suffers from severely reduced productivity. “Collapse” does not mean that a stock is at high risk of biological extinction. However, recovery of the stock to an improved status is likely to be slow and will depend on effective conservation measures.
When information about the relationship between recruitment and SSB is absent or inconclusive, ICES has used the lowest observed biomass Bloss as a proxy for Blim. This interpretation of Blim is as a boundary under which the stock would enter an area where the stock dynamics are unknown..
The limit reference point for fishing mortality Flim is the fishing mortality that is expected to drive the stock to the biomass limit when it is maintained over time.
Precautionary reference points
Spawning stock biomass and fishing mortality can only be estimated with uncertainty. As long as the estimate of spawning biomass is at or above Bpa, the probability of actually being at or below Blim should be small. Similarly for fishing mortality: when the estimate of fishing mortality is at or below Fpa, there should be a low probability of actually fishing at or above Flim.
The precautionary reference points are a mechanism for managing the risk of the stock falling below Blim or the fishing mortality exceeding Flim. This buffer safeguards against natural variability and uncertainty in the assessment. The size of the buffer depends upon the accuracy of the projections (of SSB and F) and the risk society accepts that the true SSB is below Blim and the true F is above Flim. The accuracy of the projections depends on the magnitude of the variability in the natural system and of the accuracy of the population estimates. E.g. if the quality of catch data were to decline, for example, a higher Bpa would be needed for the same Blim. The same applies when society would want to accept a lower risk that the true biomass was below Blim.
How have reference points been estimated?
Most reference points that are currently used were estimated in a process whose results were endorsed by the Advisory Committee on Fishery Management in 1998 (ICES 1999).
The estimation process consisted of the identification of limit reference points based on risk of reduced reproductive capacity and fishing mortality which is expected to drive stocks to reduced reproductive capacity. Precautionary reference points reflect the combined effects of the uncertainties in the assessments and the level of risk society is willing to take. In practice neither of these two effects could be directly quantified. Uncertainties in the assessments were approximated with rules-of-thumb estimates of coefficients of variation in the order of 20%. The level of risk that measures the distance between the limit and precautionary reference points was set at 5-10%. If, for example, the quality of catch data were to decline or multi-year forecasts were required for catch advice, a higher Bpa would be needed for the same Blim. The same is true if society will only accept a very low risk that the true biomass is below Blim.
Fisheries managers and stakeholders shall define the level of risk they were willing to accept this is not a science question. Therefore, the limit reference points have been presented as considerations from ICES and the precautionary reference points as proposals.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 3 How are reference points used in the advice
Precautionary and limit reference points are used in two ways in the fisheries advice: (1) to classify the state of the stocks (see State of the stock in relation to the precautionary text box)1 and (2) to bind the advice for short term exploitation approach boundaries. The framework used to phrase the advice in relation to the precautionary approach relies on the When the spawning biomass is estimated to be below Bpa, ICES advises that management action should be taken to assessment of the status of the stock relative to precautionary reference points. increase the stock to above Bpa. Similarly, to be certain that fishing mortality is below F , fishing mortality should in lim When an assessment indicates that the spawning practice be kept below a lower level Fpa. When fishing mortality is estimated to be above F , ICES advises biomass is below Bpa ICES classifies the stock as pa being “outside safe biological limits”, regardless of management action to reduce it to Fpa. Such advice is given even if the spawning biomass is above B because fishing the fishing mortality rate. pa mortalities above Fpa are considered unsustainable. If a management plan exists which ensures that the SSB will be Specific terminology concerning SSB: kept above Bpa, Fpa may temporarily be above Fpa as long as there are mechanisms ensuring a downward adjustment before If SSB is above Bpa: “having full reproduction capacity.” SSB approaches Bpa. If SSB is below Bpa but above Blim: “being at ICES stresses that these precautionary reference points should risk of reduced reproductive capacity.” not be treated as management targets, but as lower bounds on If SSB is below Blim: “suffering reduced spawning biomass and upper bounds on fishing mortality. reproductive capacity.” or “at a level where the Good management should strive to keep SSB well above B stock dynamics is unknown and therefore pa risking reduced reproductive capacity”. and fishing mortality well below Fpa. If stocks are managed close to their precautionary reference points, then annual scientific advice will be altering conclusions on stock status Specific terminology with regards to fishing and necessary management actions on the basis of assessment mortality: uncertainty as much as on the basis of true changes in stock status. Managing stocks to achieve targets well removed from If F is below Fpa : “harvested sustainably.” the risk-based reference points would result in more stable If F is above Fpa but below Blim: “at risk of being scientific advice, as well as healthier stocks and more harvested unsustainably.” sustainable fisheries.
What happens when if reference points cannot be estimated?
When reference points cannot be established or present knowledge does not enable an assessment of the state relative to reference points, ICES may advise on basis of past pressure which was found to be sustainable. Using fisheries as an example this may be fishing effort or catches from a period where the stock was known to maintain productivity with that pressure. If there are indications that the present state is critical and there is insufficient information to demonstrate that the present pressure is compatible with a reversal of the situation ICES advises considerable reduction in pressure.
1 Referring to “safe biological limits” has in some cases mislead clients and other stakeholders to consider stocks described as being “outside safe biological limits” to be biologically threatened (i.e. close to extinction). The term “outside safe biological limits” is used in international agreements and has been used by ICES in the past to classify stocks for which the spawning biomass is below Bpa. While ICES considers this language to be perfectly justified and in accordance with international practices, the attention of ICES has also been drawn to instances of confusion in the public debate where “outside biological limits” has been equated to biological extinction. ICES has therefore from 2004 used a phrasing which more specifically refers to the concept on which this classification is based by referring to the reproduction capacity of the stock in relation to spawning stock biomass, and sustainable harvest in relation to fishing mortality. It should be emphasised that the expressions “outside safe biological limits” and “being at risk of reduced reproductive capacity” or “suffering reduced reproductive capacity” are considered entirely equivalent by ICES and that the change in language does not imply any change in judgement of the seriousness of the situation when a stock is outside safe biological limits and thereby outside precautionary limits. The following text-table maps the new ICES terminology into the old terminology: New terminology Old terminology Biomass “having full reproductive capacity” “inside safe biological limits” “being at risk of reduced reproductive capacity” “outside safe biological limits” or ”suffering reduced reproductive capacity” Fishing “harvested sustainably” “harvested inside safe biological limits” mortality “at risk of being harvested unsustainably” or “harvested outside safe biological limits” “harvested unsustainably”
4 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.2.2 Maximum sustainable yield
The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD, 2002) has reinstated the concept of maximum sustainable yield (MSY) on the political agenda with regards to fisheries management. WSSD (2002, issue 30) states that:
“30. To achieve sustainable fisheries, the following actions are required at all levels:(a) Maintain or restore stocks to levels that can produce the maximum sustainable yield with the aim of achieving these goals for depleted stocks on an urgent basis and where possible not later than 2015;
ICES’ clients are in the process of translating this requirement into operational management policies and ICES will modify its advice accordingly when policy decisions have been made. ICES contributes to this process by developing options for management strategies that aim to produce high long term yields while ensuring that there is little risk that the reproductive capacity of fish stocks will be impaired.
1.2.3 Ecosystem approach
The adoption of the Ecosystem Approach is intended to contribute to sustainable development. Sustainable development was originally defined in the Brundtland Report as development that
“meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (WCED, 1987)
The Ecosystem Approach has been variously defined, but principally puts emphasis on a management regime that maintains the health of the ecosystem alongside appropriate human use of the environment, for the benefit of current and future generations. For example, the 1992 UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) defines the Ecosystem Approach as:
“ecosystem and natural habitats management” to “meet human requirements to use natural resources, whilst maintaining the biological richness and ecological processes necessary to sustain the composition, structure and function of the habitats or ecosystems concerned.”
The Reykjavik declaration forms the basis for using the Ecosystem Approach to the management of the marine environment:
“in an effort to reinforce responsible and sustainable fisheries in the marine ecosystem, we will individually and collectively work on incorporating ecosystem considerations into that management to that aim.” (FAO 2001) and the World Summit on Sustainable Development:
“(30.d) Encourage the application by 2010 of the ecosystem approach, noting the Reykjavik Declaration on Responsible Fisheries in the Marine Ecosystem 15 and decision V/6 of the Conference of Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity”(UN 2002)
An ecosystem approach is expected to contribute to achieving long-term sustainability for the use of marine resources, including the fisheries sector. An ecosystem approach serves multiple objectives and should emphasise strong stakeholder participation and focus on human behaviour as the central management dimension.
There appears to be a general consensus as to the intent of the expression ‘Ecosystem Approach’. However, the actual definitions of the expression vary and already in the Reykjavik declaration there was a plea to for best practices with regard to “introducing ecosystem considerations into fisheries management”. Several large national and international research programmes attempt to develop an ecosystem approach (see ICES 2002)
How does the “Ecosystem Approach” affect ICES advice?
At the 13th Dialogue Meeting between ICES and the Clients (ICES 2004a), the ICES plans for the introduction an ecosystem approach into the advice were discussed. The implementation of the ecosystem approach into the advice will include stakeholder interaction and will be incremental. ICES has opened its advisory committees to stakeholder observers who will get better insight into the advisory process. Our understanding of the functioning of the ecosystems is confined to certain ecosystem components. Work is ongoing to expand the number of ecosystem components that are included in the analyses. Our understanding is not uniform among the ecosystems; there are ecosystems for which more data and better understanding of the critical processes exist compared to other systems. Therefore, implementation of
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 5 the Ecosystem Approach and ICES ability to satisfy information requirements from clients varies among ecosystems and will develop through time as knowledge is gained.
The organisation of the advisory report in Ecoregions facilitates the ecosystem approach to fisheries management (see section 1.3.1).
Achieving “Ecosystem objectives”
The most effective short-term progress towards meeting ecosystem objectives is likely to be made by implementing the advice for single- and mixed stock fisheries. The advice is mainly to substantially reduce the exploitation of fish stocks. Fishing fleet capacity often exceeds the long-term sustainable use of the ecosystems. There is increasing evidence that fisheries and other human activities are having a serious impact on marine ecosystems. An overall reduction in the exploitation rates for target stocks will reduce the pressures on biota and habitats and will contribute to restoring stocks to full reproductive capacity. This provides the basis for higher long-term yields at lower fishing effort.
1.2.4 European Marine Strategy
Management of all human activities in the sea shall be based on three central features: an Ecosystem Approach, Integrated Management, and a Regional Focus for the coordination and delivery of management programmes. ICES notes that these central features correspond closely to developments intended by its clients. Fisheries management authorities are planning to adopt an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management and Regional Advisory Committees (RACs) have been established as a key component of regionally-based management of fisheries. Hence the new science necessary to support the implementation of the European Marine Strategy will also be necessary to support the major current clients of ICES fishery advice in their traditional and future roles.
The incremental demands on a scientific advisory body to support Integrated Management and an Ecosystem Approach on a regional basis are much more numerous, onerous, and complex than scientific advice on single-sector, single-factor management. ICES has a unique and central role to play in the implementation of the European Marine Strategy. Although ICES capacity and practices will both be challenged to support the Strategy, no other organisation or group of experts in Europe or internationally is nearly as ready to overcome these challenges. ICES can maintain the scientific quality, impartiality, and breadth of expertise that must be contained in the scientific basis for implementation of the European Marine Strategy. In particular, ICES has an established track record for provision of scientific advice on ecosystem management issues.
1.3 Structure of the report
1.3.1 A regional orientation
The ICES advisory report is based on a regional orientation in so-called “Ecoregions” that allows the further development of an ecosystem approach in European waters. A review of existing biogeographical and management regions against a series of evaluation criteria has demonstrated that no existing regions could be adopted as ecoregions (ICES 2004b, p. 115-131). The proposed ecoregions (figure 1) are based on biogeographic and oceanographic features and existing political, social, economic and management divisions:
• Greenland and Iceland Seas (A) • Barents Sea (B) • Faroes (C) • Norwegian Sea (D) • Celtic Seas (E) • North Sea (F) • South European Atlantic Shelf (G) • Mediterranean Ecoregions:
o Western Mediterranean Sea (H) o Adriatic-Ionian Seas (I) o Aegean-Levantine Seas (J)
• Oceanic northeast Atlantic (K) • Baltic Sea (not numbered) • Black Sea (not numbered)
The ecoregions Norwegian Sea (D) and Barents Sea (B) are presented in one single volume (3).
6 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 The widely distributed and migratory species (ecoregion K) and the deepwater species for which stock identity have not been established, are addressed in volume 9.
The North Atlantic salmon stocks that are of interest to the North Atlantic Salmon Commission (NASCO) are treated in a volume 10.
Figure 1. Proposed ecoregions for the implementation of the ecosystem approach in European waters. The ecoregions are Greenland and Iceland Seas (A), Barents Sea (B), Faroes (C), Norwegian Sea (D), Celtic Seas (E), North Sea (F), South European Atlantic Shelf (G), Western Mediterranean Sea (H), Adriatic-Ionian Seas (I), Aegean-Levantine Seas (J) and Oceanic northeast Atlantic (K). The question mark denotes the western Channel (ICES Area VIIe), which could be placed in either the Celtic Sea or North Sea ecoregion. Equidistant azimuthal projection.
1.3.2 Ecosystem overviews
Each of the regional ecosystem-volumes includes an ecosystem overview that provides a description of the ecosystem components and of the major ecological events and trends
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 7 1.3.3 Human impacts on the ecosystem
Description human impact on the ecosystem (if available)
• Fishery effects on benthos and fish communities • Other extractive uses (e.g. description of gravel, oil etc extractions] • Pollution (brief description of trends in pollution)
1.3.4 Assessment and advice (e.g. mixed fisheries overviews)
The sections on assessment and advice contains (if available)
• Assessments and advice regarding protection of biota and habitats • Assessments and advice regarding fisheries. The fisheries advice includes some reflection on mixed fisheries issues in fisheries management. For those stocks for which mixed fisheries issues are known to be minor the advice is given on a stock basis. This applies mainly to pelagic stocks. For most demersal stocks or stocks where mixed fisheries are known to be important the advice is based on an identification of the critical stocks and the overall advice is based on the requirements for those stocks. As a consequence of the need to take a fisheries perspective the advice for all stocks is now given in the area overview section. • Special requests that are applicable to the area or stocks within the area.
1.3.5 Single stock summaries
The single stock summaries contain information on the individual stocks and the basis for the advice. These sections present descriptions of stock trends, short term outlook and main factors to be considered in managing these stocks.
1.4 Basis for the advice
1.4.1 Data used and data quality
Catch and effort data
The quality of the fish stock assessments is closely linked to the quality of the fisheries data, and ICES has expressed the greatest concern over the quality of catch and effort data for some of the important fisheries in the ICES area.
The stock assessments presented in this report are carried out using the best possible estimates of the total catch. These estimates are not necessarily identical with the official landings statistics because they may include estimates of unreported landings and corrections for misallocation of catches by area and species. In the past there have been problems associated with discrepancies between the official landing figures reported to ICES by member countries and the corresponding catch data used by ICES. ICES recognises the need for a clear identification of the categories of the catch data. ICES attempts to identify factors contributing to the total removals from the various stocks through:
• recorded landings, • discards at sea, • slipping of unwanted catches, • losses due to burst nets, etc., • unreported landings, • catch reported as other species, • catch reported as taken in other areas, • catch taken as bycatch in other (e.g. industrial) fisheries.
The discards, slipped fish, unreported landings and industrial bycatches may vary considerably between different stocks and fisheries. It may not always be possible to reveal the sources of the estimated removals because of restrictions on how the data has been made available to ICES (e.g. confidentiality clauses). As a minimum, ICES describes the origin of the data (sampling programmes, field observations, interviews, etc.) so that interested parties can evaluate the quality of the information. Estimates of by-catches from the industrial fisheries are included in the assessments wherever the data is available. In recent years more information on discards has been collected through observer programmes and this information is increasingly made available to ICES for assessment purposes. The catch data used in the stock assessments are presented in the “summary table” in each of the stock summaries (sections x.4 in each Ecoregion).
The catch data used by ICES are collated on a stock basis and not on an area basis so that direct comparisons between these figures and the official statistics are not always appropriate.
8 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 ICES attempts to correct the shortcomings in the catch data. For non-reported landings such corrections, by their very nature, are difficult to document and are obviously open to debate. The stock assessments that are based on these data are of poor quality but they are still expected to be the best possible assessment of the state of the stocks. The fishing industry has on various occasions strongly disagreed with ICES’ estimates and has blamed ICES for not performing well. ICES does not accept the responsibility for quantifying non-reporting fisheries or ensuring access to proper discard data. The responsibility for discards and non-reporting and the uncertainty regarding the extent of these phenomena rests with the national authorities and the industry.
When catch data could not be estimated, the trends in the stocks have sometimes been evaluated using research vessel data. This will only allow relative trends to be estimated and cannot be translated into a numerical advice on removals or effort. .
Research vessel data
Research vessel surveys are an essential fishery-independent source of information for scientists and a vital cross-check to the figures gathered from the international landings and from sampling onboard fishing boats. On research vessel surveys, scientists sample demersal fish such as cod, haddock, hake and plaice or pelagic fish such as mackerel and herring.
To sample fish on or near the seabed scientists use bottom trawls in the same way that fishers do. But whereas fishers target hotspot areas and continually try to upgrade their fishing gear to maximise their catch, fisheries scientists don’t want to maximise their catch but instead collect a representative sample. They also have to compare their results with previous years to follow trends, so it is vital that they use the same standard fishing gear each year rather than continually improving it.
Research vessel surveys are carried out by national research institutes. ICES has an important role in internationally coordinating and analysing the surveys.
Information from the fishing industry
There is an increasing interaction between scientists and fishers during the collection of data in harbours and through observer programmes onboard fishing vessels. There have been a number of joint research projects between the fishing industry and scientists that have aimed to collect additional information on e.g. catch rates or catch compositions. In recent years, fishers in the North Sea have also been filling in questionnaires recording their perception of the state of key fish stock. This information is considered during the process of deriving ICES advice.
Commercial Catch per Unit Effort (CPUE) series have been used in several stocks assessment as an indicator of stock abundance. In most cases the catch is then disaggregated by age through a market sampling process. A major difficulty in the use of CPUE series in stock assessment is the standardisation of fishing effort. The increasing efficiency of fishing vessels (e.g. through technical developments, GPS devices, new gear materials etc.) needs to taken into account in an estimate of effective fishing effort. This is not always possible due to lack of the relevant data for standardisation.
The collaborations between the fishing industry and scientists has provided information which has been included as part of the assessment process. Such information has contributed to the understanding of the fisheries, and is increasingly provided in a form which enables direct inclusion in quantitative assessments.
1.4.2 Assessing the status of fish stocks
Stock sizes and fishing mortalities are estimated in a stock assessment model. Most stock assessment models use catch at age information from the commercial fisheries and use additional information to “calibrate” the assessment. The additional information is mostly research survey indicators or catch rates in the commercial fishery (CPUE information). The estimated catches can be subject to serious bias if there are significant amounts of unreported landings or when information on discards at sea is not available. Catch information tends to become most unreliable when management measures are most restrictive (if they were implemented). In recent years several stocks have been at a low level and catch information has deteriorated for many fisheries. The consequence is that the ability to provide reliable, quantitative catch forecasts has decreased.
Most management strategies in the ICES area rely on some forecast of the outcome of fisheries management in the management year. Under these conditions the Management Option table is an important part of the ICES advice. The catch options rely on estimates of recent stock size and fishing mortality and requires an assumption about the total catch in the current or “assessment” year, because the fishery is rarely over when the assessment is carried out. In many cases, ICES considers two alternatives: 1) to assume that the catch will be equal to the TAC (a TAC constraint), or 2) to assume that the fishing mortality will continue to be equal to that of the previous year(s) (a Fstatus quo constraint). ICES
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 9 attempts to evaluates the weight of the evidence for a TAC constraint vs. a Fstatus quo constraint and selects the more appropriate assumption.
1.4.3 Evaluations of management plans
When fisheries management plans have been agreed or proposed, ICES will evaluate the consistency of the management plan with international agreements and commitments. The main comparison will be in relation to the consistency with the precautionary approach.
The methods for evaluating management plans differ by area, species and type of plan, but the general characteristics are that both fish populations and the management measures are simulated in a computer simulation process. The results of the simulations are scored in relation to the probability with which the stocks would be expected to be below Blim in near to medium term future.
If the evaluation of a management plans indicates that a stock has a low probability (e.g. less that 5%) of being below Blim in the medium term, ICES considers the plan in accordance with the precautionary approach even when the stock is below the precautionary biomass level (Bpa) or above the precautionary fishing mortality (Fpa).
1.4.4 Three layers in providing fisheries advice (“form of the advice”)
The fisheries advice is the result of a three-step process:
• Single-stock exploitation boundaries are identified first, • Consideration of mixed fisheries aspects, • Consideration of ecosystem aspects.
1.4.4.1 Single stock exploitation boundaries
Single-stock exploitation boundaries are identified first. These are the boundaries for the exploitation of the individual fish stock and are identified on the basis of the status of stock in relation to the Precautionary Approach reference points, the (agreed) target reference points and/or and the agreed management plan. The single-stock boundaries also include considerations of the ecosystem implications of the harvesting of that specific species in the ecosystem whenever such implications are known to exist. These single-stock exploitation boundaries are presented in the stock summaries (sections x.4 in each Ecoregion) and summarized in a table for each Ecoregion in Section x.3. The single- stock boundaries would apply directly as advice in the absence of mixed fisheries issues and ecosystem concerns beyond the impact of fishing on that stock.
The ICES advice will always be consistent with the Precautionary Approach. Within these constraints ICES does recommend any particular option and the ICES advice is therefore formulated as an upper bound on catch or exploitation. Where management bodies have agreed to a management plan or recovery plan, ICES will evaluate whether this plan is in accordance with the precautionary approach. If the plan is precautionary, the ICES advice will be based on the management plan. There are cases of non-precautionary management plans typically because the plan is inadequate in situations when the stock is depleted. However, when the stock is not in a precarious situation these management plan may still produce precautionary options and ICES will advise on these options. Obviously, ICES will not advise measures which are not consistent with the precautionary approach. In those cases, ICES will not be based on the management plan but on the strict interpretation of the precautionary approach. In these situations, ICES will calculate the management measures consistent with the management plan but states explicitly that these calculations do not constitute advice unless this is explicitly stated.
1.4.4.2 Mixed fisheries advice
For stocks harvested in mixed fisheries, the single-stock exploitation boundaries will apply to all stocks taken together simultaneously. The major constraints within which mixed fisheries should operate may be those stocks in the fish assemblage which are outside precautionary boundaries and which should therefore become the limiting factor for all fisheries exploiting those stocks. This implies that the stocks which are considered to be in the most critical state may determine the advice on those stocks which are taken together with critical stocks. ICES identifies which species within mixed fisheries have the most management advice and how these should limit the fishing possibilities on the mixed fish assemblage (section x.3 for each Ecoregion).
ICES has worked on these issues together with scientific groups under EC STECF to develop the necessary framework and to build the required databases. Much of this work has initially concentrated on the North Sea demersal fisheries but has been extended to other areas. Many fisheries harvest several quota species simultaneously and this poses at least two management problems:
10 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 • maintain catches of all species within their TACs while trying not to forego catches of species whose TACs are taken up more slowly. • allocate the safe harvest of the shared species among fisheries in ways that allow the fisheries to take their allowable harvest of their various target species, without exceeding the total allowable catch of the shared species.
Experience from fisheries-based management in other parts of the world indicates that the provision of fishery-based advice is possible, but that it requires well-defined fisheries that are based on complete and reliable catch data. In the ICES area, model development has outpaced the compilation of appropriate data, both for defining fisheries and for providing mixed fishery advice. Specifically, the lack of complete catch data (including discards) and the problem of sampling all fisheries are major concerns.
Any approach to managing mixed fisheries that assumes a constant species composition over time implicitly discourages adaptive fishing behaviour. In many jurisdictions fishermen have demonstrated the ability to reduce bycatch of critical species, through season, area, or gear modifications, or through changes in their short-term fishing patterns. There is a danger that the allocation of fishing opportunities for different species based on past catch compositions will lock fisheries into their historical context, and provide no incentive for the industry to find ways to fish without catching species that are restrictive on fleet activities. Such adaptive changes in fishing behaviour are difficult to predict and they will limit the realism of mixed fishery forecasts.
In the absence of an analytical approach to mixed fisheries scenario evaluations, ICES is basing its advice on mixed fisheries on information available on the catch composition in these fisheries and the knowledge about the main interactions between fisheries and species. This means that the single-stock boundaries are supplemented with qualifiers about which targeted and mixed fisheries are known to harvest the critical species as target or incidental bycatch and to which extent different stocks should be seen as linked by being taken in the same fisheries.
1.4.4.3 Ecosystem aspects
Some ecosystem concerns are not related to one specific stock but rather to mixed fisheries or to groups of stocks. Such concerns may for instance include habitat and biota impacts of dragged gear, incidental by-catches of non-commercial species or food chain effects of fishing. Ecosystem concerns may represent further boundaries to fisheries beyond those implied by single-stock concerns and mixed fisheries issues and are presented (if available) in section x.3 for each Ecoregion.
The impact of fisheries on the ecosystem can at present rarely be quantified or predicted in quantitative terms. The incorporation of such considerations in the advice will therefore mainly be through qualifying statements regarding the quality and direction of expected impacts.
Present knowledge about ecosystem impacts is built on studies in specific ecosystems, but may not represent the overall ecosystem and can only be extended to other ecosystems in a general way. Many important ecosystem considerations regarding the impacts of fisheries will therefore be of a general, not area-specific nature.
1.4.5 Quality of the advice
ICES is dedicated to being transparent on the quality of the advice. Since 2004 a number of stakeholder organization are invited as observers to the advisory committee meetings. The quality of the advice can further be assessed through two sources of information in the stock summaries:
• the Advice table contains information on the basis for the advice in the subsequent years • for stocks where analytical assessments could be carried out, a comparison (graph) is presented between the most recent assessment and the previous assessments
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 11 1.5 Answers to non-Ecoregion specific Special Requests
1.5.1 EC DG Fish
1.5.1.1 Indicator: status of fish stocks managed by the Community in the North-East Atlantic
The indicator chosen is the quantity of fish caught in 2005 that was taken from stocks grouped according to whether they were within or outside safe biological limits at the end of the year, i.e. 2006. In general terms, it is considered that a stock is within safe biological limits if its spawning stock biomass is above the value corresponding to a precautionary approach (Bpa) advocated by ICES. Further details on the way ICES formulates advice in precautionary terms can be obtained from the ICES website http://www.ices.dk.
1. Basis for the calculation: 1) Source of data: 2006 ICES Advice report.
2) Selection of stocks: all those for which ICES gives management advice and that are managed by the Community, autonomously or jointly with other partners. This excludes, for example, Arctic stocks managed by Norway or by Russia and Norway.
3) Catch data: taken as the total catch as estimated by ICES for assessment purposes. Sometimes this includes catch taken by third countries.
4) Criteria to judge stock status: If data exist, then a stock is considered within safe biological limits if its spawning stock biomass (SSB) estimated at the end of the year is higher than the SSB corresponding to the precautionary approach level, as recommended by ICES (Bpa). Sometimes these estimates are missing, but ICES gives other types of indication:
- Estimates of fishing mortality (F) in the terminal year and F levels corresponding to the precautionary approach or (Fpa) or other desired levels of F serving as a guide for management. If F is higher than Fpa, then the stock is considered outside safe biological limits1. - Estimates of catch per unit effort (U) and some desired level of U (Upa). For redfish this has been taken as half the maximum observed value. The reasoning goes on as for SSB2
- If no warning signals are given by ICES in its advice, then it is assumed that the stock is within safe biological limits.
- If ICES states, with no precise reference values, that the stock is outside safe biological limits, this is taken as a fact.
5) Type of fish: this is a classification intended to reflect both the biology of the species and the type of fishery realised. To some extent, this breakdown serves also purposes of economic analysis, since it brings together types of fish of comparable commercial value, although important differences still occur within each type. The possibility was examined to use prices per kg by species, but this part of the work is still going on. The difficulty is to obtain uniform price indices by stock. - Benthic: Nephrops, prawns, flatfish, anglerfish - Demersal: roundfish as cod, haddock, whiting, hake, etc - Diadromous: salmon, sea trout (eel is classified in other category)
1 It should be noted that F values do not reflect the size of the stock in the precautionary context, but rather whether the stock is being exploited at precautionary levels. However, one may presume that in the long term, exploiting beyond precautionary levels will lead stocks outside biological limits.
2 In this case, U does reflect the size of the stock and may be used as a proxi for SSB.
12 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 - Pelagic: herring, anchovy, sardine, horse mackerel (North Sea and southern stocks), redfish - Industrial: sprat, sandeel, Norway pout - Widely distributed: blue whiting, western mackerel, western horse mackerel, eel, deepwater fish. 6) Region: The NEAFC regions, also defined in our technical measures legislation (Regulation 850/98). Essentially, Region 1 is ICES Subareas I, II, V, XII and XIV, Region 2 is the Baltic, North Sea and western approaches (ICES Subareas III, IV, VI and VII) and Region 3 is the Bay of Biscay and the Iberian peninsula (ICES Subareas VIII, IX and X.
2 Results and discussion The table below shows the values found for the whole set of stocks examined, broken down by region, type of fish and year. It should be noted that the precautionary reference points chosen (Bpa and Fpa) are not management targets; they rather reflect a stock status that should trigger management action. In other words, maintaining a stock at Bpa values is not necessarily desirable or advisable.
Moreover, it should be noted that stock status as indicated by the relative values of SSB and Bpa cannot always be used to judge whether the stock is being exploited at a sustainable level. As an example, SSB2006 for blue whiting is above Bpa, but the levels of exploitation in recent years are well above sustainable levels and will lead the stock to unsafe levels if no drastic management action is taken.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 13 Table showing catch of stocks (managed by the Community) within and outside safe biological limits (SBL).
2005 2006 Catches Within SBL Outside SBL TOTAL % within % outside REGIO CATCH, Dominant CATCH, Dominant CATCH, SBL(catch SBL(catch N FISH TYPE ' 000 t species ' 000 t species ' 000 t ) ) Redfish 1 Pelagic 1000.00 Herring 73.72 1073.72 93.13 6.87 Nephrops Sole Flounder Plaice 2 Benthic 103.77 Pandalus 91.24 Anglerfish 195.01 53.21 46.79 Haddock Cod Saithe Whiting 2 Demersal 284.93 Whiting 143.15 Hake 428.08 66.56 33.44 Diadromou Salmon 2 s 0.00 2.59 Sea trout 2.59 0.00 100.00 Sandeel Norway 2 Industrial 654.88 Sprat 171.79 Pout 826.67 79.22 20.78 Herring (North Sea and Baltic) Horse 2 Pelagic 984.68 mackerel 22.99 Herring VIa 1007.67 97.72 2.28 2 All 2028.25 431.77 2460.02 82.45 17.55 Sole Nephrops 3 Benthic 53.59 Megrim 13.23 Anglerfish 66.81 80.21 19.79 3 Demersal 0.00 7.44 Hake 7.44 0.00 100.00 Sardine Anchovy Horse Anchovy 3 Pelagic 124.91 mackerel 1.13 Biscay 126.04 99.11 0.89 3 All 178.50 21.79 200.29 89.12 10.88 Horse mackerel Blue 1,2 and 3 Pelagic 2750.02 whiting 0.00 Mackerel 2750.02 100.00 0.00 Deep water 1,2 and 3 Demersal 0.00 143.97 fish 143.97 0.00 100.00 1,2 and 3 All 2750.02 143.97 2893.98 95.03 4.97
All Benthic 157.35 104.47 261.82 60.10 39.90 Demersal 284.93 294.55 579.48 49.17 50.83 Diadromou s 0.00 2.59 2.59 0.00 100.00 Industrial 654.88 171.79 826.67 79.22 20.78 Pelagic 4859.60 97.85 4957.45 98.03 1.97 All All 5956.77 671.25 6628.02 89.87 10.13
14 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.5.1.2 Status of small cetaceans and bycatch in European waters
This section responds to a request for advice from the EU about the status of small cetaceans in European waters. The advice focuses on new information on population sizes, bycatches, and mitigation measures. This information is presented in an extract form and readers should refer to the report of the Working Group on Marine Mammal Ecology for more detailed information.
1.5.1.2.1 New information on population sizes
1.5.1.2.1.1 Results from SCANS II
The SCANS II survey was completed in July 2005 (www.biology.st-andrews.ac.uk/scans2). The area surveyed is shown in Figure 1.5.1.2.1. In addition to the area surveyed during a previous coordinated wide area survey (SCANS I) in July 1994, the project covered continental shelf waters to the west of Britain, Ireland, France, Spain, and Portugal, from about 62°N to the Strait of Gibraltar.
Figure 1.5.1.2.1 Sampling lines flown or steamed during the SCANS II surveys.
A summary of the small cetacean abundance estimates is given below (Table 1.5.1.2.1).
Table 1.5.1.2.1 Summary of SCANS II Abundance Estimates
SPECIES ABUNDANCE ESTIMATE N (COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION) Harbour porpoise 386 000 (0.20) Common dolphin 63 400 (0.46) White-beaked dolphin 22 700 (0.42) Bottlenose dolphin 12 600 (0.27) Minke whale 18 600 (0.30)
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 15 Harbour porpoise was the most commonly sighted species. Porpoise numbers were estimated to be 386 000. The density was lowest in strata along the outer shelf to the west of Britain and Ireland and off the Atlantic coasts of France, Spain, and Portugal (<0.1 animals km−2). It was highest in the south central North Sea and coastal waters of northwest Denmark (~0.6 animals km−2).
Common dolphins were encountered in the waters of Britain and Ireland, in the Channel, and in the shelf waters of France, Spain, and Portugal. Abundance in the entire survey area was estimated to be 63 400 animals. The highest densities occurred in the coastal waters of Ireland.
White-beaked dolphins were found in the northern and central North Sea and west of Britain and Ireland. Abundance in the entire survey area was estimated to be 22 700. The highest densities occurred in the coastal waters of western Scotland.
Bottlenose dolphins were encountered around the coasts of Britain, Ireland, France, Spain, and Portugal. Abundance in the entire survey area was estimated to be 12 600. The highest densities occurred in the Celtic Sea and around Spain and Portugal.
Minke whales were found in the northern and central North Sea and west of Britain and Ireland. Abundance in the entire survey area was estimated to be 18 600. The highest densities occurred in the coastal waters of Ireland.
Comparison between SCANS I and SCANS II surveys concerning harbour porpoise
Figure 1.5.1.2.2 shows the extended survey area of SCANS II compared to the SCANS I area. The abundance estimate for the North Sea and adjacent waters (equivalent to the SCANS I survey area) was 335 000 (Table 1.5.1.2.2). Overall abundance of harbour porpoises in the North Sea and adjacent areas has statistically not changed between the two SCANS surveys.
Figure 1.5.1.2.2 The areas covered by the SCANS I and SCANS II surveys.
Table 1.5.1.2.2 Provisional estimated abundance of harbour porpoises in the North Sea, in the summers of 1994 and 2005.
AREA SURVEYED 1994 2005 North Sea, northern strata 239 000 120 000 North Sea, southern strata 102 000 215 000 Total area surveyed 341 400 (CV=0.14) 385 600 (CV=0.20) SCANS-94 341 400 (CV=0.14) 335 000 (CV=0.21)
One of the main results was that harbour porpoise summer distribution has undergone a southward shift with a two-fold increase in the number of porpoises in the southern North Sea strata while porpoise numbers in the northern North Sea strata have halved (Table 1.5.1.2.2). The reasons for this southward shift are unknown; however, a change in the selective distribution and availability of prey species is considered the most likely explanation, although other explanations are possible.
16 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.5.1.2.2 New information on bycatches
1.5.1.2.2.1 Baltic and North Sea
A database on sighted, stranded, and bycaught harbour porpoises in the Baltic Sea is being compiled by the Research and Technology Centre West Coast (University of Kiel) and can be found on www.balticseaporpoise.org.
The number of porpoises stranding on the Dutch, Belgian, and northern French coasts has increased substantially in recent years (Fig 1.5.1.2.3). From the strandings on these coasts it was possible to estimate the proportion of porpoises initially bycaught in fishing gear and subsequently discarded as between 50 and 80%.
700
600
500
400
300
200 number of porpoises . porpoises of number 100
0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Figure 1.5.1.2.3 Increase of porpoises stranded on the Belgian, northern French, and Dutch coasts (combined data) between 2000 and 2006.
1.5.1.2.2.2 Common dolphins in pelagic trawl fisheries in Atlantic waters – Subareas VII and VIII
Information from the Petracet Project (EU) and national programmes suggests that the total mortality of common dolphins in European pelagic trawl fisheries in the ICES area is currently probably around 800 animals per year, though large interannual variation in bycatch is known to occur in some fisheries, such as in the bass and tuna fisheries. Bycatches of common dolphins though limited in numbers are also known to occur in other fisheries, including VHVO (Very High Vertical Opening) trawls, bottom trawls, and static nets (ICES, 2005).
1.5.1.2.3 Bycatch observation schemes under EU Regulation 812/2004
The information provided in Table 1.5.1.2.3 is based on information currently available and is considered not to be complete. The level of implementation and application of the Regulation varies among the countries listed.
Table 1.5.1.2.3 Level of implementation of EU Regulation 812/2004 among different countries.
COUNTRY OBSERVER SCHEME IN PLACE SINCE Denmark yes early 2007 Sweden yes August 2006 Finland yes second half of 2006 Germany integrated into EC DCR UK yes early 2005 Ireland no, but observations within other research programmes before 2006 Netherlands integrated into EC DCR winter 2004/2005 Belgium no legal obligation (Annex III) but some observations France yes 2006 Spain no, but observations within other research programmes before 2006 Poland yes November 2006 Portugal no information available Lithuania no information available Latvia no information available Estonia no information available
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 17 It was not possible to estimate whether the intended levels of sampling by each EU member state under the requirements of Regulation 812/2004 have been met, because the reporting cycle requires member states to report to the Commission in June for the previous year’s sampling, which means that the levels of sampling achieved in 2006 will not be available until after June 2007. The first assessment of EC Regulation 812/2004 will be conducted at a STECF subgroup meeting in Brussels 10–14 September 2007.
HELCOM has regularly requested ICES to provide information on the status and trends of marine mammals in the Baltic. ASCOBANS undertakes a periodic review of bycatch of small cetacean species in the waters covered by the Agreement. The EU requires reporting of certain bycatch under EC Regulation 812/2004, and under the Habitats Directive. The EU also requests advice from ICES on a regular basis on the status of small cetacean populations and bycatch issues. There appears to be potential to make these reporting processes more consistent and efficient, thereby saving resources. OSPAR, HELCOM, ASCOBANS, and the EC might consider putting a joint request to ICES to evaluate small cetaceans (especially harbour porpoise bycatch in the North Sea) and agreeing a frequency for such an evaluation.
ICES recommends that the scientific achievements of EC Regulation 812/2004 be evaluated by ICES while STECF concentrates its efforts on the technical, social and economical aspects of the Regulation during 2006 and half of 2007.
1.5.1.2.4 New information regarding mitigation measures
In addition to observer schemes, EC Regulation 812/2004 makes the use of pingers compulsory in certain fisheries. The implementation of the pinger requirements is reported by EU Member States in their national reports.
In the Belgian recreational fishery trammel nets were banned and technical measures concerning the height and the total length of gillnets were introduced in 2006.
In the course of the Jastarnia Plan to use alternate gears, tests to replace gillnets and trammel-nets by fish traps started in the southwestern Baltic Sea area.
The Necessity project is investigating the use of exclusion devices in pelagic trawls. In addition, a new acoustic deterrent device suitable for pelagic trawls is under development in France and in the UK.
New tests with pingers showed that spacing for the AQUAmark 100 pinger could be increased from the recommended 200 m up to nearly 500 m without loosing bycatch mitigation efficiency.
The concept of reducing bycatch by deploying so-called ‘alerting pingers’ (pingers that emit sounds that stimulate porpoises to echolocate) was tested in the Danish North Sea hake gillnet fishery in July–August 2006. The test was designed as a controlled experiment with full observer coverage, where the control group consisted of nets with dummy pingers. A total of 17 porpoises were by-caught in the nets with active alerting pingers and 15 porpoises were by-caught in a similar number of nets with dummy pingers. It was concluded that alerting pingers of this type are not efficient in reducing bycatch.
Source of Information
Report of the Working Group on Marine Mammal Ecology. Vilm, Germany, 27-30 March 2007 (ICES CM 2007/ACE:03).
18 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.5.1.3 Review of the Data Collection Framework: definition of environmental indicators to measure the impacts of fisheries on the marine ecosystem
ICES views on a draft first list of operational indicators provided to ICES on 25 July 2007.
ICES welcomes the development of indicators to measure the impact of fishing on the marine ecosystem and the process to incorporate these indicators into the Data Collection Regulation. These form an important part of an ecosystem approach to fisheries management that is being steadily implemented in European waters. ICES notes that indicators of the effects of the environment on fisheries have yet to be developed. A number of potential indicators useful in addressing this could also be relatively easily added to data collection routines on research cruises.
The response below is divided between the two questions asked in the letter of 25 July 2007.
ICES views on list of operational indicators
1. The Report of the Ad Hoc Meeting of independent experts is a good summary of the results of the two SGRN meetings, of INDECO and of INDENT. This Report has not added to or elaborated from these projects but has made a selection from those developed and recommended in those earlier reports and projects. One of the selection criteria though was to use, as far as possible, existing fishery research data and cruises; this is reasonable on cost and resource grounds, but it undoubtedly adds some biases to the utility of some indicators. The report notes other sources of information, being collected under other funding mechanisms, and in many cases are required for other EU processes. Including these sources of information would widen the coverage of components of the ecosystem or pressures on the ecosystem. ICES recommends the ‘research’ projects needed to bring these data into the indicator system be given a high priority.
2. Although outside the regular area of expertise of ICES, we wonder if the addition of an indicator of social gain from fishing would be useful? Jobs per tonne of catch per species per area might be useful for fisheries managers.
3. ICES considers that the selection of indicators is good for waters off north and western Europe. It cannot comment on Mediterranean or Black Sea aspects.
4. The ICES Working Group on the International Bottom Trawl Survey has implemented age and maturity sampling for several further fish species than those examined previously. In 2008 there will be a further enhancement of the survey to collect data on catches of cephalopods and shellfish.
5. ICES considers that the proposed set of indicators meet generally the ICES guidelines for ‘good’ indicators. As such, ICES agrees that those labelled ‘operational immediately’ (Table 1) should become part of the DCR Regulations and suggests areas for minor modification and further development (where appropriate) to improve their utility.
6. The Appendices appear to a reasonably succinct statement of needs. ICES lists below a few detailed comments:
i) Indicators 1-4: Fish-related indicators
Fisheries in the Baltic Sea include coastal freshwater species; current fisheries surveys in this sea cover only offshore areas. Further fisheries-independent coastal surveys would be needed to understand effects in these areas. HELCOM has an international programme to coordinate and sample coastal fish in the Baltic Sea in order to assess environmental and anthropogenic impacts on coastal ecosystems. The state indicators include variables that describe ecosystem function (see http://www.helcom.fi/environment2/ifs/ifs2007/CoastalFish/en_GB/coastalfish/). These indicators overlap with some of the suggested DCR indicators and may therefore be used to assess the coastal-open sea interactions.
Most of the state indicators on fish are based on the results of bottom-trawl surveys, and will therefore not be so useful for the pelagic community, that is often surveyed using acoustic methods. There is also variance in the current length of data series – the deepwater surveys have only started recently, and thus indicators will not be available for these fish communities until the time series is sufficient (about ten years).
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 19 ii) Indicator 1: Conservation status of fish species
It is unclear which species group this indicator refers to. Table 1 indicates these are vulnerable fishes and mentions the IUCN criterion. This omits threatened and endangered fish according to the IUCN criteria. Appendix 1 indicates that vulnerability might be assessed another way.
iii) Indicators 2 and 3: Large fish
ICES notes that the large fish indicators may not be of use in areas of low fish diversity, such as in the (offshore eastern) Baltic Sea.
iv) Indicator 4: Size at maturation of exploited fish species
Further research is required for many deeper water fish species in order to understand the difference between juveniles and ‘resting’ adults. In the Baltic, the overlap between the time of the standard trawl surveys and the spawning season per species suggests that sprat may be sampled during the spring hydroacoustic surveys, while cod and possibly flounder may be sampled during the spring demersal surveys. However, sampling of cod in early spring might not be representative due to the (current) prolonged cod spawning season. Similarly, sampling of flounder by the offshore survey can be biased by the occurrence of larger flounders in deeper waters. Overall the balance of timing of surveys will need to be reassessed if this Indicator is adopted. ICES is willing to examine the detail of this balance and advise on possible solutions.
v) Indicator 5: Distribution of fishing activities
Our interpretation of this indicator and of Appendix 5 is that a binary fish/not-fished will be scored for each month of the year to each 3 x 3 km2 grid cell for each metier (not including vessels below the VMS length limit). It is unclear how this would be used – will this be expressed as proportion of each of the relevant sea area fished, or in another way. ICES recommends that this be clarified.
It is unclear whether all metiers would be dealt with adequately by the proposal, especially as only larger vessels have VMS systems. Unless additional data sources are used (i.e. coastal fishery protection observations) then this measure will be biased towards larger vessels tending to work offshore.
Interpretation of this indicator would be greatly improved with additional processing, particularly the inclusion of log-book information recording the catch composition of the metiers. This will also help to resolve problems with lack of compliance and explain complex patterns of fisher behaviour. Quality of log book data will need to be improved if the six-level metier recommendation is to be met.
The size and units of measurement of the grid should be further evaluated – both from the perspective of the accuracy of VMS signals and from the perspective of ecosystem impact. Many fragile habitats and areas to avoid have been mapped on a much finer spatial scale, and it is not clear that the 3 x 3km2 spatial scale is the most appropriate for any particular use. An increase in frequency of VMS records and a lowering of the minimum size of vessel required to send such signals would undoubtedly improve the ability to evaluate ecosystem impact and manage fishing activities in a more precise spatial framework. This would apply particularly in nearshore areas and areas with a larger proportion of smaller vessels (e.g. the Baltic Sea). ICES recognises the increased cost of such changes.
vi) Indicator 6: Aggregation of fishing activities
It is unclear whether or not highly aggregated or highly dispersed fisheries are the desirable state for this indicator. In other words, the objective of this indicator needs to be clarified.
vii) Indicator 7: Areas not impacted by mobile bottom gears
This indicator appears to be the exact inverse of Indicator 5, thus they appear to be the same. These two indicators could thus be combined and if so, then ICES recommends retaining the depth stratification included in Indicator 7. If these two indicators are retained separately then ICES recommends that the same standard criteria are applied to both of them. ICES notes that the effects of discarded and lost gear would not be taken into account with these indicators.
20 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 viii) Indicators 8 and 9: Discards
The calculation of these discard indices does not specify the raising method and it is suggested that the index may be calculated based on monitored trips only. The Commission's currently method of identifying illegal (“black”) landings by comparing catch composition of monitored and non monitored fishing trips indicates that the construction of a robust discard index requires careful analysis of all available information, rather than just the data from monitored trips. Indicator 9 requires an economic analysis of price dynamics by season and by Member State, that may prove challenging.
Views on conclusions and recommendations
7. ICES notes that the monitoring of ecosystem approach indicators cannot come “free”, or even necessarily particularly cheaply. ICES agrees with the general objective of integration with current monitoring both for cost and efficiency reasons. There has though been particular concern over the costs of fully sorting (not sub- sampling) survey catches and the objective of measuring at least 100 individuals per age class (see Table 2). Post survey, data processing and analysis costs do not appear to have been evaluated and will not necessarily be cheap either. It would be useful to examine the current monitoring schemes alongside these ecosystem suggestions as it may be that some aspects of current monitoring could be scaled back in order to make resources available. In addition to this, ICES notes that training may be required in several areas as relevant expertise is in short supply.
8. ICES has concerns over the balance across taxa/effects of fishing. In summary for state indicators:
Ecosystem component Coverage in suggested list
Fish species and communities Good Habitats Poor Benthos Poor Invertebrates Unsure for larger, poor for smaller Marine mammals Poor Birds Poor
ICES notes that some of these are covered by the research needs list in Table 1/Table 3 of the report, but notes that in addition a process will be required to derive an agreed definition of “sensitive”.
9. In relation to the pressure indicators, ICES considers that the key needs are to know where fishing occurred, with what metier, with what effort (represented appropriately, e.g. hooks set, area trawled) and a full accounting of the catch. Some of these needs are met (wholly or partially) in the current Data Collection Regulation.
Pressure component Coverage currently and in suggested list
Location of fishing Good for larger vessels, poor for smaller vessels and recreational fisheries. Spatial definition not adequate for many purposes Metier in use Moderate. Logbook records required Measure of effort Good for trawling, poor for fixed gear (unless logbook records available and improved) Full catch Good for fish on larger vessels, poor on smaller vessels and in recreational fisheries. May not be adequate for some components of ecosystem and taxonomic precision may need to be improved for some species groups
The amount of fish discarded is obviously of great use for fisheries management purposes, but is of less use for understanding of effects on the ecosystem
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 21 1.5.2 HELCOM
The advice provided in response to special requests from the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM) can be found in Book 8 of the ICES Advice 2007 Report.
1.5.3 NASCO
The advice provided in response to special requests from the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organisation (NASCO) can be found in Book 10 of the ICES Advice 2007 Report.
1.5.4 NEAFC
The advice provided in response to special requests from the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC) can be found in Books 2, 5, and 9 of the ICES Advice 2007 Report.
1.5.5 OSPAR
1.5.5.1 Quality assurance of biological measurements
The advice provided in response to the special request from OSPAR can be found in Book 8 of the ICES Advice 2007 Report under Section 8.3.3.1.
22 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.5.5.2 OSPAR Request: assessment of changes in the distribution and abundance of marine species in the OSPAR maritime area in relation to changes in hydrodynamics and sea temperature
1 Introduction
ICES has been asked to prepare a background document by 2008, as part of the preparations for the next OSPAR Quality Status Report. Specifically ICES has been asked for an ‘assessment of changes in the distribution and abundance of marine species in the OSPAR maritime area in relation to changes in hydrodynamics and sea temperature’. Such a request is timely, in light of the impetus that the 2007 IPCC Report (http://www.ipcc.ch/) has given the global debate about the prospects for changes in the global climate and the potential impacts of those changes on the earth’s ecosystem.
The oceans play an important role in the change and variation in climate, and are affected by changes in atmospheric conditions. The interactions are dynamic and affect essentially all features of the oceans on various space and time scales. A number of changes in hydrographic features over the past few decades have already been documented. Key ones relative to the OSPAR request are summarised in Section 2 of this advice. That section also outlines a systematic approach that ICES proposes to follow in capturing the complex and dynamic hydrographic variation in the OSPAR area in a way that can be used with rigour and consistency in analyses of changes in distribution and abundance of species.
The request from OSPAR has potential to entrain much of the scientific expertise of ICES, including physical and biological oceanographers; experts in benthos, fish, seabirds, and marine mammals; and experts in modelling, data analyses, and ecological synthesis. As a start on developing the response to this request, ICES tasked a number of expert groups dealing with various parts of the ocean’s biota to conduct analyses that they considered appropriate on the distribution and abundance of species within their area of expertise. The results of these initial investigations were reviewed for quality and generality, and key points extracted. These summaries and associated critiques are presented in Annex I of this advice. In addition ICES supported three study groups and workshops that focused specifically on quantifying relationships between oceanographic factors and the biology, abundance, and distribution of species. Their conclusions are extracted in Annex II. Section 3 consists of an overall critique of the body of the work done until now. The overall message is that although piece by piece most of the work is scientifically sound and relevant to the OSPAR request, in aggregate the work cannot yet be integrated readily into a clear and concise reply.
The final section of this advice lays out a plan for more coordinated action by ICES over the next 12 months, to assemble a consistent and readily integrated set of analyses as a basis for a response to this request. The plan includes preparatory work by hydrographic experts and experts in quantitative methods, and more consistent analytical work by the diverse expert groups in ICES. It builds particularly on significant progress made by ICES GLOBEC and the study groups and workshops that focused specifically on relating population processes and status to environmental conditions. ICES encourages OSPAR to review this proposed workplan and expected products, and to engage in dialogue with ICES about refinements to ensure that advice arising from the work will best meet the needs of OSPAR.
ICES stresses that in trying to bring greater consistency to the analyses, it will strive for a balance between flexibility to accommodate real differences among taxa and regions, and standardisation so that “best practices” are used in each investigation. ICES notes that there will be some possible relationships that are not explored as thoroughly as might be desirable from a purely scientific perspective, provided there were infinite resources to deal with the question. However, ICES is confident that if fully accomplished the workplan will provide a sound basis for responding to the request from OSPAR. It is important to note, though, that even a complete response to the OSPAR request is not a complete treatment of the ways that changes in hydrographic conditions may have already affected the distribution and abundance of species, and may affect them even more in the future.
As just one example, in 2008 ICES will not be in a position to analyse how the increasing acidification of the ocean may affect distribution and abundance of species. There has been a demonstrable increase in CO2 concentrations in the upper layer of the sea over recent decades that can be attributed to the proportional rise of CO2 in the atmosphere. Increasing levels of CO2 in the sea will lead to changes in the carbonate system of seawater and to a decrease in pH value, and thus to acidification of the ocean. A strong increase of CO2 concentration has many adverse physiological effects that have been investigated experimentally on various marine organisms. Numerous changes in marine organisms have been identified, for example, in the productivity of algae, metabolic rates of zooplankton and fish, oxygen supply of squid, reproduction of clams, nitrification by microorganisms, and the uptake of metals. Many of these experiments, however, were carried out with CO2 concentrations much higher than might be expected in emission scenarios in present-day discussions for the time frame up to 2100. From today’s viewpoint it seems improbable that marine organisms will suffer from acute poisoning of expected future CO2 levels, but changes in distribution or abundance could be the result for at least some and perhaps many species. Hence it is important for ICES, OSPAR, and
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 23 all clients to remember that even when as thorough a job as possible has been done for this request, there will be more and important questions remaining about how changes in the seas of the OSPAR area may affect the marine species and communities of the areas.
2 The oceanographic context of the OSPAR Request
2.1 Ocean processes of climatic importance
A number of atmospheric and physical oceanographic processes have been affected by the changes in global climate that have already occurred. The ICES Report on Ocean Climate 2005 (IROC – ICES Cooperative Research Report No. 280, and annual updates) provides summaries of long-term observations of environmental conditions to the end of 2005. The time-series from 29 standard stations and sections across the whole North Atlantic show generally rising trends in sea surface temperature (SST) and salinity. Data are presented as anomalies compared with the long-term average (1971–2000). Six of the 29 time-series show anomalies which are more than 2.5 standard deviations above the long- term average during recent years.
Changes in these atmospheric and physical oceanographic processes are expected to continue during the 21st century. Some of those are expected to have strong impacts on the climate and the marine ecosystem. These include the effects of wind on the transport and mixing of water, and the circulation systems generated by freshwater input and thermohaline ventilation. Sea temperature may be affected directly by the global climate change, and indirectly by the impacts on mixing and other physical processes.
Temperature has an impact on all levels of the marine ecosystem, from plankton to fish and marine mammals. A change in temperature may affect species both directly through physiological tolerances, and indirectly through alterations in the food web. For example, generally in Arctic and Arctoboreal ecosystems, increased temperature results in increased growth and reproduction of most, but not all, fish stocks. However, in many contexts, temperature is a proxy for several climate factors. Consequently, temperature is clearly the most frequently used climate parameter because it is both easy to measure and is linked to so many physical and biological processes in the ocean.
The ocean climate, however, is more than temperature. Light changes because of cloud cover, and turbulence changes because of wind conditions. Such factors affect individuals, especially phytoplankton and zooplankton, which are at lower trophic levels and may cause indirect effects at higher trophic levels. Temperature and salinity also determine the vertical stratification and thereby mixing the processes. In addition, currents influence transport and spreading of many organisms in the water masses (e.g. phytoplankton, zooplankton, fish egg and larvae, species that follow currents). Finally, ice conditions are of great importance in the Arctic areas.
There is no doubt that climate variations will have consequences for most marine species. Both abiotic and biotic factors affected by climate change will impact the productivity and distribution of many marine species. Important abiotic factors include water temperature, nutrients, ocean circulation, and the amount of sea ice. Biotic factors include food availability and the presence of competitors and predators. Also, the habitat will change with variations in circulation and temperature, resulting in modified distribution patterns.
ICES could interpret this request to consider temperature and hydrodynamics broadly, based on the arguments above, and carry out analyses that would include a very large number of relevant factors. This would be considered sound science, but be an intractably large task. Therefore ICES is seeking a middle ground in capturing the major complexity of “sea temperature and hydrodynamics” with a small suite of hydrographic attributes. The specific variables to be used in statistical analyses will depend on the data available for a given area and taxon. However, ICES intends to have at least a minimum set of measures from the following three classes: • temperature and/or salinity, • key transport and/or mixing processes, and • (where relevant) the extent of sea ice, for each analysis of trends in distribution and abundance of species. Even a property as superficially straightforward as temperature is in fact quite complex. Extreme temperature values as well as means may be biologically important; sea temperature varies with depth and different species may be affected by temperatures at different depths. The North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO – the difference in normalized sea level pressure between the subtropical eastern North Atlantic and Iceland) index, a popular environmental index often used as a surrogate for transport and mixing processes, is only an indicator of the sea level atmospheric pressure and does not fully describe the effect of wind fields. Section 4 and Annex III lay out ICES proposed strategy in addressing this complexity.
OSPAR is invited to provide comments on the classes of attributes that ICES plans to use in addressing this request, particularly with regard to their interest in scale and scope of the hydrographic indicators.
24 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 2.2 Climate variability vs. climate change
Climate change in IPCC usage refers to any change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity. Decadal and shorter-scale climate variability is thought to increase in the short term and the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events is predicted to increase as part of the climate change. An understanding of the effects of increased variability and extreme events on population dynamics is largely lacking, and requires study. In this context, both variability and change should be included.
3 An evaluation of the information provided by working groups
Individually many of the reports from expert groups in Annex I found evidence for changes in distribution and abundance of at least some species, and in some cases were able to link those changes to changes in hydrographic attributes. However, the approaches taken by individual expert groups often differed with regard to data extraction methods, analytical methods applied, and the reasoning behind their conclusions. At least some of the differences are ones that could affect the conclusions drawn about the likelihood and strength of effects of hydrographic changes on distribution and abundance of species. Hence it is impossible at present for ICES to use the information available to extract clear, consistent, and comprehensive messages about how changes in ocean conditions have affected the biota in the OSPAR regions.
In contrast, ICES has recently sponsored a few expert groups mandated specifically to examine how changes in ocean conditions may have affected a few specified biological processes in specific groups of species. Individually these expert groups did adopt consistent methods for their work. The results appear to support clear and consistent sets of conclusions, as presented in Annex II. Even with three individually clear and coherent summaries, however, differences in the focus of the groups mean that some work remains to be done in order to relate these results directly to the OSPAR request.
Based on these preparatory analyses, ICES faces two challenges in fully addressing the request from OSPAR. One is to build on the achievements of the three focused study groups, to guide the production of comparable work from all the relevant expert groups in ICES. This is a challenge because these three groups were focused exclusively on questions about links between the environment and species’ population dynamics, and most other expert groups will have broader sets of responsibilities. The other challenge is to ensure that the best results possible from each expert group can be synthesised with each other and brought directly to bear on answering the request from OSPAR. Section 4 explains what ICES intends to do to meet these challenges.
4 Emergent themes, and the way forward for 2008 (and beyond)
4.1 Emergent themes – Limitations on the best possible science advice
The work done by ICES in its preparations for a more complete response to this request in 2008 has brought several issues to light. These include: • In a global context the OSPAR area is comparatively data rich with regard to documented trends over time in both hydrographic and biotic features of marine ecosystems. However, when reasonable professional standards are applied to screening data, few long time-series of either hydrographic or biotic ecosystem features are available for rigorous investigation of patterns and linkages. In some cases models may be used to extend time-series or provide model-based indicators of hydrographic features or species abundances and distributions. However, the modelling efforts are likely to be comparably challenged by less-than-ideal data for specifying model parameters and functional relationships. ICES will undertake to provide the best syntheses and advice possible with the information available. It is likely that the 2008 advice will include a number of qualifiers and warnings to users of the advice. These should be taken seriously when the advice is used for development of policy and management. • Even with the best data sets, relationships of trends in hydrographic and biotic features of the ecosystems will be open to multiple interpretations. Hydrodynamics and sea temperature are not the only factors driving observed changes in abundance and distribution of marine organisms. Other drivers include, for example acidification which has been shown to be linked to increased mortality in larval species of fish (Ishimatsu et al., 2004; Watanabe et al., 2006) and copepods (Kurihara et al., 2005). Fishing effects can also impact distribution e.g., the changes in distribution and abundance of cod in OSPAR Region II (Greater North Sea) may be a result of disproportionately high rates of fishing mortality in the southern stock units (Heath, 2007, ms). Again, OSPAR should expect ICES to provide the best advice possible about the likelihood and potential strengths of relationships between changes in ocean conditions and abundance and distribution of biota, as described in Section 4.2. There will, however, again be qualifiers, and these also have to be considered seriously when acting on the advice.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 25 • It became clear in bringing together the products of the expert groups that ‘industry standards’ have not yet emerged for either documenting trends in biotic properties of marine ecosystem or linking those properties to trends in candidate environmental factors. ICES acknowledges a crucial lesson from the experience of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In exploring relationships a diversity of approaches should be considered, but when the time comes to produce conclusions and advice, the scientific methods requires a fair degree of consistency in analytical practices and interpretation of results. In Section 4.3 ICES presents the approach it intends to follow in ensuring both that the range of methods for asking scientific questions of the data is explored fully and rigorously and that the advice from ICES will apply the best practices that arise from that exploration.
4.2 Emergent themes – How far should the investigations go?
4.2.1 Direct or indirect effects and inferring causality
The response of marine organisms to changes in temperature and hydrodynamics can be direct and/or indirect.
Changes in distribution and abundance in phytoplankton and zooplankton have been reported as a direct response to changes in temperature. Phytoplankton distributional changes and abundance/biomass increases are related to increasing temperature (Reid et al., 1998; Edwards, 2000; Edwards et al., 2001; Edwards et al., 2007). Decreases in zooplankton abundance (mainly Calanus copepods), as a result of temperature increase, are reported by, for example, Edwards et al. (2006a), Edwards et al. (2007), and ICES (2006a). Biogeographical shifts in the distribution of calanoid copepods have been linked to both temperature and wind/hydrographic effects (heath et al., 1999, Beaugrand et al., 2002; Edwards et al., 2006). However, changes in plankton distribution and abundance reported in Annex I could be direct consequences of temperature changes, but could also be more indirect consequences of changes in nutrient regimes caused by changes in hydrographic mixing and trophic processes. Clarifying the underlying processes will not be straightforward, even when the patterns are quantified well.
Fish, seabirds, and marine mammals respond directly and indirectly to temperature and hydrodynamic changes. Experimental work on growth rates of fish (cod: Björnsson et al., 2001; Neat and Righton, 2007) and reproductive output of seabirds (Niizuma et al., 2005; Thyen and Becker, 2006) has demonstrated a direct response to temperature. Growth, of course, relates not only to temperature, but also to food availability (ICES, 2002). Bottom-up effects (prey organism abundance and distributions affected by changes in hydrodynamics and temperature) are likely to be an important contributing factor to any observed changes in the range and abundances of fish (e.g. Beaugrand and Reid, 2003; Beaugrand et al., 2003), seabirds (e.g. Frederiksen et al., 2006a; Wanless et al., 2005), and marine mammals (e.g. harbour porpoise: Santos and Pierce, 2003; grey seals: Hamre, 1994).
Additionally, loss of habitat is a component which can directly affect higher organisms, i.e. in the case of species in the Arctic (both permanent residents and visitors whose life cycle is linked to the higher latitudes) the extent and duration of ice for breeding purposes (e.g. pupping) is an important component of population dynamics (Heide-Jørgensen and Lydersen, 1998; Härkönen et al., 1998; Stirling et al., 1999), but this is difficult to quantify.
It is very difficult to demonstrate relationships between changes in distribution, abundance, or condition and climate change/variation, when there is a lack of both of baseline data and relevant long-term datasets. Even with relatively good data the task of quantifying and understanding patterns of distribution relative to hydrographic conditions is complex. Each life history stage of a species may have a different range of physiological tolerances, and each life history stage may or may not occupy the full range of areas that lie within its tolerances. The realised distribution of one life history stage may affect the realised distribution of another: distribution of spawners may affect the distribution of young stages, bottlenecks in the distribution of a young stage may affect their later distribution as adults. Consequently, interpreting either the presence or the absence of an apparent response to temperature can be complex. For example, suppose that a species’ range appeared to expand in association with a change in sea temperature. This may not reflect increased suitability of the hydrographic conditions for the life history stage being surveyed, but for a different life history stage whose distribution in turn affects the distribution of yet another stage. It could also reflect decreased suitability of the area for some particularly effective competitor or predator, or increased suitability for a key prey.
At this point ICES will focus on determining first order relationships between trends in distribution and abundance and trends in hydrographic features. These relationships will be interpreted as far as the information allows, using sound scientific practice. This practice means that the simplest explanation possible will be given the greatest consideration. Direct effects of hydrographic changes on the distribution and abundance of biota, mediated by physiological responses of organisms on local scales and habitat selection processes on regional scales, will therefore be given serious consideration. However, even when such interpretations are plausible, they do not preclude the possibility that changes in abundance and distribution of species are also influenced indirectly through trophodynamic processes from the bottom up or even the top down, if predator fields change in response to hydrographic changes. Similarly, changes in
26 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 abundance and distribution of species that match patterns of temperature or salinity change may nonetheless actually be the result of transport and mixing processes that are themselves interrelated with the temperature and salinity changes.
4.2.2 How far can ICES go with different taxa and regions?
Data on marine mammals are especially deficient. The level of detail of information on seabirds and fish species is variable depending on species type and degree of public interest (e.g. as a conservation species or a commercial species). The output relating to phytoplankton and zooplankton reviewed to this point is dependant on material from the CPR (Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) survey) with little available corroboration from other sources. While the CPR provides an excellent, ocean-scale, series of observations that are unrivalled by any other marine sampling programme, the CPR samples at one depth and with a relatively course mesh. Other site-specific zooplankton/phytoplankton sampling regimes (e.g. the Dove Time-series, Helgoland series) and other sources such as ICES WKEUT (ICES, 2006c) and WKLTVSWE (2007) may offer additional insight through sampling other components of the plankton community e.g. micro- and gelatinous plankton, and will be examined.
There are apparent regional differences in marine organisms related to changes in temperature and hydrodynamics. In marine mammal populations, the greatest changes in condition, abundance, and distribution are observed in the Arctic regions (OSPAR Region I) when compared with other regions. It is not clear if similar regional trends occur in the other ecosystem components since data availability is intermittent. For example, analyses of plankton data are mainly concentrated on the North Sea and North Atlantic regions, omitting polar latitudes. ICES carried out a wide-ranging exploratory analysis of distributions and abundances of fish, using a number of surveys, including various International Bottom Trawl surveys (IBTS). However, due to the choice/availability of surveys, the whole OSPAR region is not represented.
In the coming year, ICES will attempt to conduct similar analyses on data from other areas, particularly in Arctic regions. Information on fish distribution and abundance exists for the Barents Sea, around Iceland, and east Greenland, and should be used more fully. At least for zooplankton there may be time-series other than the CPR series which would allow investigations to extend into the Arctic areas. Ideally, descriptions of the population dynamics and communities of the ecosystem components should be addressed on a regional/sub-regional scale where possible, as a climate trend may not necessarily induce the same population response in all areas. For example, the reproductive success of black- legged kittiwakes to warming trends is negative in the North Sea, but positive in the Newfoundland area.
ICES will identify some specific species on which to conduct such comparative regional investigations, if possible including some marine mammals, seabirds, fish, and zooplankton. These will be chosen according to criteria to be developed in the coming months, to ensure that the suite of selected species provides as much information as possible about the responses of different types of species to changes in hydrographic conditions, and the implications of these changes for the marine ecosystems.
4.3 A plan for a way forward
The review of information currently available from various working groups has highlighted a number of issues. These include the value of further dialogue with OSPAR regarding their requirements for information and advice from ICES, taxa where ICES ability to provide information and advice (e.g. marine reptiles, marine angiosperms, and macroalgae) is severely limited, inconsistencies in the way data and analyses were approached to address this request, and limitations on the ability to interpret relationships between abundance and distribution of biota when such relationships are found. Despite these problems, Annex II illustrates that it is possible to conduct consistent and appropriate analyses of information on fish populations and ocean climate attributes, and provide sound and insightful interpretations and synthesis. The challenge to ICES is to replicate those accomplishments with the information that is available from the other taxa.
Problems of insufficient information for many taxa may not be possible to overcome. Problems arising from different interpretations of the tasks to be addressed, the use of different approaches to similar tasks, and different interpretation of similar results can be managed by a more structured approach to answering the question. In Annex III, ICES sets out a plan with timelines to address these issues during the 2007–08 work programme. Even if the problems summarised above cannot be overcome completely, this plan would allow consistent and useful information and advice to be provided by ICES in response to the OSPAR request, on at least substantial parts of the biota in the OSPAR area. OSPAR is invited to review this plan and timetable, and provide feedback on components of particular interest or concern.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 27 4.4 Considering effects of extreme weather events on the abundance and distribution
The OSPAR request implies a focus on gradual changes in hydrography and biota. This corresponds with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007 Report’s prediction of a gradual rise of sea temperatures in the OSPAR area. The gradual rise in sea temperatures is likely to result in a northward shift in both southern and northern distributional limits for a large number of species, effectively moving their areas of distribution northwards. This means that spawning areas as well as nursery areas and feeding areas will tend to shift northwards. Whether such shifts are “successful” depends on a number of factors: • whether areas with suitable physical features are available farther north (particularly for bottom- spawners); • whether the current systems can bring eggs/larvae/juveniles to suitable nursery areas; • whether the feeding areas farther north have higher or lower food production. Most climate impact studies focus on these gradual changes. However, the repetition rate of extreme events in summer (e.g., hot days) is expected to rise considerably relative to the current climate. Moreover, in the winter season cold days will become extremely rare (IPCC). An increase in these extreme events, and a probable lengthening of the events, could have a higher impact on the abundance or distribution of species than a gradual change in the average temperature.
The effect of extreme (short-time) events will have more impact on sessile or stationary species than it will on species that can escape the affected locations.
Increased occurrence of extreme events of years with high summer temperatures may lead to much larger shifts northward than would have been predicted from the gradual increase in average temperature, because the higher temperatures in the extreme years may be above the tolerance limit of the species, leading to very high mortality near the southern (or warmer) limit of distribution in these years. Repopulation takes time and may not have occurred before the next extreme temperature event.
Fewer effects are expected for mobile species, which could move to colder waters when faced with temperatures super- optimal for growth. This behaviour is shown by young plaice; they moved offshore in the 1990s, most likely in response to higher water temperatures that may have exceeded the maximum tolerance range or increased the food requirements above the available food resources (Van Keeken et al., 2007). This expected behaviour has however not been shown (yet) by all species: individual cod in the southern North Sea faced super-optimal temperatures during summer, and only some individuals moved to colder waters, while most of them did not (Neat and Righton, 2007).
Mobile species are not always able to choose their optimal environment. Some species need specific areas for spawning or need to migrate through specific areas and can then be forced to withstand extreme temperatures caused by extreme events. For example the sockeye salmon in the Fraser river experienced higher-than-usual temperatures during run time in 2004 (Figure 4.4.1), accounting for an increase in direct and indirect mortality (Southern Salmon Fishery Post Season Review, 2005). This possibly led to a decrease in spawning success.
Figure 4.4.1 Temperature profile at Hell’s gate in 2004 (blue line), also showing 60-year mean (black solid line), ± 1 standard deviation (yellow lines), and 60–year minimum and maximums (dashed black lines).
28 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 For several days in mid-August Fraser River (British Columbia, west coast Canada) water temperatures measured at Hell’s gate were the highest ever recorded (Southern Salmon Fishery Post Season Review, 2005).
Mobile species which do not leave with ebb tide and stay behind in small pools could also face direct mortality due to extreme temperature events as shown for juvenile flatfish in the Wadden Sea where water temperatures increased above 20°C on hot days, causing direct mortality (Berghahn, 1983).
The same environments have to be faced by stationary species. An example of this is the eelpout (Zoarces viviparous), also in the Wadden Sea. Pörtner and Knust (2007) provide evidence that thermal constraints on oxygen transport are causing a decline in this species. Pörtner and Knust (2007) find that the critical temperature for the species is around 22°C, a temperature that is reached during some extremely hot summers. Beyond this temperature the animal only survives for a short period. Thermal sensitivity to growth or mobility was found to be more pronounced in large compared to small individuals of various fish species, indicating that larger specimens already face oxygen limitation at lower temperatures. Because of wider thermal windows in smaller specimens, the lower temperatures still allow for the population growth seen in the milder summer of 1998 (Pörtner and Knust, 2007). In the perspective of the increased occurrence of extreme events, acclimatization as discussed by Wang and Overgaard (2007), could play a role. When the events occur more often specimens that survived the last time will probably survive again. However, thermal adaptation could be exhausted for eelpout in their most southern distribution range (Wang and Overgaard, 2007).
Extreme cold winters could effect the distribution or reduce the abundance of species. This is shown for the protozoan pathogen (Haplosporidium nelsoni) of the Eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica). Low winter temperatures (below 3°C) in a single year caused a dramatic reduction in parasite activity over a 2-year period, pausing the northward distribution of the pathogen (Hofmann et al., 2001). The negative effect of extremely cold winters has been shown for further species. For example the bivalve species Tellina tenius and Abra tenius die out in the Wadden Sea during cold winters and only recover later, with stock deriving from North Sea populations (Dekker and Beukema, 1999). During cold winters sole in the North Sea move into deeper relatively warm areas, increasing their catchability. This is enhanced because the cooling will decrease their mobility, especially when temperatures drop below 2°C (Horwood and Millner, 1998).
The expected changes in winter are fewer cold days and probably more relatively hot days in winter. A warm winter can, for instance result in changes in competition, decrease in spawning success, and a miss-match with food sources. As an example bivalves lose more weight in warm winters, because metabolic rates are higher and their food does not react to the higher temperature (it responds to light conditions), resulting in a lower reproductive success the following season (Beukema, 1992).
The OSPAR request to ICES does not mention specifically the changing likelihood of extreme weather. These may, however be among the most biologically significant changes in hydrography. Hence the guidance given to ICES expert groups in responding to the OSPAR request will be explicit in describing how to deal with the changing frequencies of extreme events.
4.5 Need and opportunities for work in the longer term
ICES, OSPAR and society are not interested in these changes in distribution and abundance of species solely to understand the past. As noted in Section 1, climate and ocean conditions are expected to continue to change in the future, and it is important to anticipate to the extent possible how marine ecosystems might respond to those changes. Hence, as a longer-term initiative there would be incremental value in having a common set of scenarios concerning expected future changes in hydrodynamics and sea temperature. These would act as the basis for projecting changes in distribution and abundance, assuming that past trends are a reasonable basis for consideration of future responses to further changes in ocean climate and management. Building on the work in the coming year in response to the current OSPAR request, ICES expert groups could take advantage of the considerable efforts made by IPCC to develop sound climate change scenarios, rather than creating scenarios de novo. For example, the IPCC worked both with time-slices (2020, 2050, 2080) and with temperature slices (1, 2, 3oC) etc. and with the rates linking these.
The provision of future scenarios has to be a two-way process with OSPAR. OSPAR’s interest in scenarios for future management and policy needs to be reflected clearly in the scenarios used by ICES, whereas the scenarios also need to be scientifically reasonable. They must ensure that the information is provided at appropriate time and space scales and that relevant features (e.g. position of mesoscale features, such as fronts) are included. The position of the polar front, for example probably has a major influence on fish species distribution in the Norwegian Sea, the Barents Sea, and around the north of Iceland because it separates ecosystems with different production characteristics (due to vertical mixing).
ICES proposes to work with OSPAR and other interested parties to adopt a set of common scenarios for consideration of changes in the biota as a result of global change. Rather than invent these de novo they should be drawn from those
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 29 routinely used by IPCC. This would be an early step in a longer-term initiative to investigate the ecosystem implications of climate change. These scenarios could be accompanied by a set of questions concerning the interpretation of changes in distribution and abundance, to be addressed to the extent possible for all taxa examined. These scenarios and questions could be developed in consultation with OSPAR, if their interest is not just a description of past changes but also insight into possible future conditions.
Source of Information
A complete list of references is provided in Annex IV.
30 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Annex I – Extracts from working group reports
This annex contains extracts of the reports of individual ICES expert groups, presenting information on possible relationships between changes in distribution and abundance of species and changes in hydrographic conditions and sea temperature. In most cases these reports were responses to specific terms of reference to investigate these relationships. In a few cases (e.g. WGRED) these investigations were part of the work undertaken by the working group to address other terms of reference.
Working Group for Regional Ecosystem Description (WGRED)
Fish • Changes in fish species abundances and distributions linked to changes in the temperature and hydrodynamics have been observed throughout the OSPAR regions. Observed relationships are potentially confounded by fishing effects. • OSPAR Region I–Arctic waters appear to show the most detailed changes in abundances and distributions in local species and reports of higher numbers of ‘southern species’ appearing in areas within the OSPAR region I: o e.g. in Iceland, capelin has shifted both larval drift patterns and nursery areas (Anon, 2006). The gadoids – haddock, saithe, and whiting – have shown the largest increase in abundance and distribution extensions (Astthorsson et al., 2007). Twenty-two southern fish species have been recorded within the Icelandic 200-mile EEZ; nine of the twenty-two are found in more than one location and sampling incidences have increased (Astthorsson and Palsson, 2006). • OSPAR Regions II–Greater North Sea and III–Celtic Seas again show evidence of changes in abundances and distributions of species, with species previously considered as ‘southern species’ being present and in some cases developing into populations that are being exploited: o e.g. in the North Sea, southern species have increased in abundance and fisheries for the striped red mullet Mullus surmuletus and the sea bass D. labrax are developing. However, it is difficult to disentangle some changes in distribution and abundances from fisheries effects. For example, the changes in distribution and abundance of cod may be a result of disproportionately high rates of fishing mortality in the southern stock units (Heath, 2007 ms). o e.g. Celtic Sea/southwest waters of England. Southward et al. (1988) demonstrated that the abundance of herring Clupea harengus and pilchard Sardina pilchardus closely corresponded with fluctuations in water temperature. Sardine were generally more abundant and extended further to the east when the climate was warmer whilst herring were generally more abundant in cooler times. This pattern has apparently been occurring for at least 400 years, and major changes were noted in the late 1960s as waters cooled and spawning of sardine was inhibited. In recent years herring populations have declined throughout the Celtic Seas ecoregion, but it is unclear whether sardine have increased in abundance. There is a northward shift in distribution linked with warming trends of some species from southern waters e.g. sea bass Dicentrarchus labrax and red mullet Mullus surmuletus populations (Beare et al., 2004). • OSPAR Region IV–Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast: Sánchez and Serrano (2003) report on trends in species richness and diversity and consider that both have remained quite stable during the 1990s in the region. No information on species distributions and abundances with respect to temperature and hydrodynamic change are reported by WGRED for this area. • In the deep sea-areas of Region V–Wider Atlantic the environment is considered to be less variable than surface systems. Moreover, due to the long lifespan of exploited species, variations in annual recruitment have a relatively minor effect on the standing biomass so short-term variability in the environment is unlikely to have great effects on stocks. It is not known how global warming might change the deep seas in the longer term. • There is less information available on the Greenland ecoregion. As the northern margins of the OSPAR area appear to be showing the most evidence of species population changes linked to temperature and hydrographic variability, more information would be valuable. Benthos • In OSPAR Region I–Arctic waters some changes have been observed: o e.g. Iceland – shrimp fishery declines are thought to be a function of increasing water temperature and increased predation by young cod. o e.g. Barents Sea – the biomass of benthic animals has been linked to the productivity of the marginal ice zone/ice edge and the seasonal phytoplankton production dynamics. The effects
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 31 of increased variability in an already variable environment on benthos have not been assessed, although species are adapted to tolerate fluctuation in food supply. • OSPAR Region II–Greater North Sea: bottom temperature, sediment type, and trawling intensity have been identified as the main environmental variables affecting community structure. Reliable information on trends in biomass of benthic species is largely lacking. • OSPAR Region III–Celtic Seas: o Heath (2005) used the abundance of benthic invertebrate larvae in CPR (continuous- plankton-recorder) data, to establish trends in benthic production for the ‘Celtic Seas’ ecoregion. Based on these data the author reported an increasing long-term trend in benthic production (by 0.8 g C m−2 y−1) between 1973 and 1999. It is not clear if this is linked to warming trends. • OSPAR Region IV–Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast: In the Cantabrian Sea, and most probably in the whole region, the depth is the main factor of the distribution of both epibenthic and endobenthic communities. A second factor is the sediment characteristics (grain size and organic contents). No information on species distributions and abundances with respect to temperature and hydrodynamic change are reported by WGRED for this area.
Commentary on potential uses of this information
WGRED provided a detailed overview by region, which provided valuable information broken down by area. This source was used to plug knowledge gaps due to material which was unavailable from other working groups.
Working Group on Introductions and Transfers of Marine Organisms (WGITMO)
Published literature on documented climate change impacts on non-native species is sparse. Conclusive evidence is further limited by limited spatial and long-term sampling. Although the range expansions of certain introduced barnacles and algae are probably related to warming, the expansion of other vagrant species (species found at the edge of their tolerance range) is probably not related to climate change. Nevertheless, it is difficult to interpret the difference between vagrant species and introduced species with expanding ranges. Authors have, for example, differed in their interpretation of the range changes of Lusitanian species (Heinz-Dieter and Gutow, 2004; Hiscock et al., 2004; Southward et al., 2004; Kerckhof, pers. comm.). Information on the native range and potential range of many species is also often lacking, i.e. the physiological tolerance of species is often greater than their distribution in their native range. The native range of a species is limited usually by physical and biological interactions, while successful introduced species may face fewer predators, disease, and competitors. Thus, the potential range (i.e. the temperature and salinity tolerances) of a species may be greater than the observed native range. Finally, it is difficult to single out those species which are found at the edge of their tolerance range (vagrants) and which expand and contract with climate fluctuations.
A list of examples of non-indigenous species that are established (i.e. they are reproducing in the new location), and which appear to show range expansion, and/or to show changes in reproductive periods over the last several years includes algae (Codium fragile (a green alga); Sargassum muticum (a brown alga)), molluscs (slipper limpet Crepidula fornicata, Japanese oyster Crassostrea gigas), barnacles (Megabalanus tintinnalulum, Balanus amphitrite, Solidobalanus fallax, Elminius modestus), and bryozoans (Bugula neritina). There are some caveats on this list.
Astthorsson and Palsson (2006) noted that over 22 species of fish normally recorded further south have been found recently in Icelandic waters. These species were categorized as annually recorded species, first-time records, and others. Species that are now recorded annually include the twaite shad Alosa fallax, mackerel Scomber scombrus, sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus, and garpike Belone belone. Nine species recorded recently for the first time are flounder Platichthys flesus, blue shark Prionace glauca, violet cuskeel Brotulotaenia crassa, blackdevil angler fish Melanocetus johnsonii, pink sabertooth Evermannella balbo, palebelly searsid Barbantus curvifrons, Lycodes terraenovae (an eelpout), Poromitra megalops, and Chaunax suttkusi. Some of these fish were seen in more than one location or over several years. Other species extending their ranges are the snake pipe fish Enterlurus aequoreus, greater fork beard Phycis blennoides, and blue antimora Antimora rostarata. Of all these species, only Chaunax suttkusi, Petromyzon marinus, and Platichthys flesus are believed to be introduced species.
Some Lusitanian species have spread into the Eastern Channel and into the southeastern North Sea (Heinz-Dieter and Gutow, 2004) and are considered by some authors as indicators of warming; however, many of these species are considered vagrants by other authors (Herbert et al., 2003; Hiscock et al., 2004; Southward et al., 2004; Kerckhof, pers. comm.). The following species are believed to be Lusitanian vagrants: the red alga Mastocarpus stellatus and two crab species Liocarcinus depurator and Diogenes pugilator. Other species that are possibly expanding their ranges, but not clearly related to climate change include four species of red alga Asparagopsis armata, Antithamnionella ternifolia, Bonnemaisonia hamifera, and Neosiphonia (=Polysiphonia) harveyi; three species of polychaete Hydroides dianthus, Hydroides ezoensis, and Ficopomatus enigmaticus; a crab Eriocheir sinensis; and a tunicate Styela clava. Seven species
32 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 of amphipods on floating seaweeds were reported in samples taken from 1998–2000, but none of them appear to have become established in the North Sea. The tunicate Botrylloides violaceus is reported to be expanding its range due to warmer temperatures (Stachowicz et al., 2002).
Commentary on potential uses of this information
The WGITMO report stresses the difficulty in quantifying the range expansion of species where detailed information is lacking. It is noted that any introduced species will undergo a range expansion, and without historic data it is therefore impossible to disentangle the effects of the range expansion following introduction to any changes in range facilitated by changes in sea temperature or hydrography. These are important considerations in evaluating changes in distribution of all poorly surveyed species, not just the “introduced” or “invasive” species.
Working Group on Zooplankton Ecology (WGZE)
The analysis of the Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) time-series has provided evidence that significant changes have occurred in the abundance, distribution, community structure, and population dynamics of zooplankton and phytoplankton in the OSPAR area. The working group concluded that these events in the plankton are mainly responses to changes in regional climate, caused predominately by the warming of air and sea surface temperatures, and associated changes in hydrodynamics. Some changes and examples of their effects are outlined below: • Change in biomass: this has been observed in both zooplankton and phytoplankton. For example, the population of the previously dominant zooplankton species in the North Sea (Calanus finmarchicus) decreased in biomass by 70% between the 1960s and the 2000s. Species that prefer warmer waters have moved northwards but their total biomass is not as great as the decrease in Calanus biomass (Edwards et al., 2006). There are reported increases in phytoplankton biomass (i.e. determined by the Phytoplankton Colour Index–PCI, i.e. the degree to which the CPR silk is stained green) since the mid-1980s. This is mainly reported in OSPAR regions II, III, and V in relation to increasing sea surface temperature. • Change in distribution: A shift in the distribution of many plankton and fish species by more than 10° latitude northward has been recorded in the OSPAR area over the past thirty years (depending on the temperature affinity of organisms this can be an increase in the range, e.g. in temperate pseudo-oceanic species, or a shift of the centre of distribution, e.g. sub-artic species. This shift is particularly associated with the current running north along the European continental shelf edge margin (Beaugrand et al., 2002; Edwards et al., 2006). Additionally, an extension of the seasonal PCI has been recorded in the OSPAR regions II, III, and V. • Secondary effects on higher trophic levels: The changes in the zooplankton and phytoplankton communities that are at the base of the marine pelagic food-web can affect higher trophic levels (fish, seabirds, whales), for instance through loss of synchrony between predator and prey (match-mismatch) abundance/demand. This synchrony can play an important role (bottom-up control of the marine pelagic environment) in the successful recruitment of top predators, such as fish and seabirds (Beaugrand and Reid, 2003; Beaugrand et al., 2003; Edwards and Richardson, 2004; Richardson and Schoeman, 2004; ICES, 2006b; Frederiksen et al., 2006a). • Changes in the food-web structure: Kirby et al. (2007) demonstrated that in the North Sea warmer conditions earlier in the year combined with increased phytoplankton abundance occurring since the late 1980s has determined the significant increase of meroplankton (i.e. temporary plankton species), in particular echinoderm larvae of Echinocardium cordatum. The larvae may now impart a significant degree of control over the trophodynamics of the North Sea pelagic ecosystem by competitive exclusion of the holoplankton (i.e. permanent plankton species). This may significantly diminish the transfer of energy towards top pelagic predators (e.g. fish) while increasing the same transfer towards the benthic component.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 33
Figure Annex I–1. Maps showing biogeographical shifts of calanoid copepod communities in recent decades, with the warm-water species shifting northwards and the cold-water species likewise retracting north, by over 10o of latitude (Beaugrand et al., 2002).
Commentary on potential uses of this information
WGZE offers articulate and credible evidence of change in the North Atlantic and North Sea. The output from the working group is focused on the available material from the CPR (Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) survey). Since the CPR uses a relatively coarse mesh it only incidentally catches phytoplankton cells. Alternative sources of data are, e.g. sampling that includes the micro-plankton component of plankton, a component that likely contributes to the majority of primary productivity. It would be advantageous to increase the geographic coverage to offer a more complete picture of change in the OSPAR area. Gelatinous zooplankton has been observed to increase and this is thought to be linked to an increase in temperature. WGZE identifies that there is an information gap and problems with sampling this group.
Working Group on Ecosystem Effects of Fishing (WGECO)
Trends in benthos
Trends in abundance
The longest time-series of marine macroinfauna is the North Sea Dove Time-series station M1 (Buchanan and Moore, 1986) where sampling has been continuous since 1972. The most recent analyses of this series (Frid et al.; in review) show no evidence of long-term trends in total abundance (Figure Annex I-2a) but increasing genera richness (Figure Annex I-2b) and a temporal trend in species composition (Figure 9 Annex I-2c). These changes do not correlate with changes in SST, the winter NAO or phytoplankton productivity. Rather the community seems to have responded to warmer conditions, changed amounts, and seasonal patterns of food availability by shifts in the composition of the assemblage, leading to a more diverse system.
34 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 (a)
Total N at M1
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000 Individuals per m2
4000
2000
0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year
(b)
Genera richness at M1
140
120
100
80
60 Number of Genera (5 grabs) 40
20
0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year
2D Stress: 0.14 (c)
Figure Annex I-2 Changes in a benthic time-series, Dove station M1, from September 1972–1993. Sampling consists of five 0.1 m2 grab samples collected each March and September. (a) Mean number of individuals (per m2). (b) Number of genera recovered from 5 grabs. (c) MDS ordination of Genera Composition (mean of 5 samples) for March 1973–2005 with years coded by decades. ▲ 1970s x 1980s 1990s • 2000s.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 35 Distribution
The benthos of the North Sea has been sampled in extensive spatial surveys on four occasions; in the period 1915–1920 by Davis, by the ICES 1986 benthic survey, in the ICES (repeat) survey of 2000–02, and sampling by the EC MAFCONS project in 2003–04. The two ICES surveys will allow a full comparison of data, as methods have been standardised, but represent two snapshots 15 years apart. While Davis used a grab sampler his data are not easily compared with more recent surveys, but with care comparisons can be made (e.g. Frid et al., 2000). Some data sets in national benthic monitoring programmes may also yield useful information to address changes in spatial distribution if brought together into a meta-analysis. Comparisons based on a greater temporal separation may be more informative than those made with the ICES surveys which have an interval of only 15 years.
Commentary
The initial work by WGECO shows effects of environmental change on several benthic taxa. There should be an opportunity to examine a range of data sets and temporal periods in order to obtain as clear an indication as possible of the changes occurring in benthic systems.
Working Group on Fish Ecology (WGFE)
WGFE undertook a number of analyses. For their first analysis WGFE used two data sets in order to evaluate the relationship between interannual and seasonal variability in species distribution and thermal conditions: • monthly averages of SST over the entire North Sea for the period 1960–2005 from the Comprehensive Ocean Atmosphere Data Set (COADS) for the North and Barents Seas; • bottom temperature readings for the North Atlantic extracted from the ICES Oceanographic database for 1977–2006. Fish distribution data were obtained from the following research surveys: Barents Sea, DATRAS, IBTS (North, Irish, Celtic, Cantabrian), and the west coast of Norway. Because of differences in gear the Barents Sea and the west coast of Norway surveys are at different scales of fish density than the surveys in the North Sea and areas to the west and south. Nevertheless, comparisons between time periods and quarters could still be made within each of the two areas. Twenty- two pelagic (5) and demersal (17) species were selected for the temporal-spatial analysis.
The analysis was carried out in 3 steps and the results are summarized in Table Annex I-1: • Monthly temperature anomalies were calculated, and then averaged by quarter and standardised. A dissimilarity matrix was prepared and used as input to a multidimensional scaling analysis (MDS). The results are presented as an MDS plot and a time-series of annual temperature anomalies. • Interannual and seasonal variability in species distribution relative to bottom temperature was evaluated and mapped in SPANS (Geomatica, 2006) for each of three periods that were identified as having different temperature conditions and using 14 categories of density (Kulka and Pitcher, 1999). • Quotient plot analysis was carried out following the method described by van der Lingen et al. (2004) to examine fish distribution relative to bottom temperature. This calculates the ratio of mean fish abundance for a given temperature range, over the mean fish abundance for all temperatures. A ratio of one signifies ‘no preference’ for a given temperature range. A ratio above one means preference, and a ratio below one means avoidance of a given temperature range.
36 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Table Annex I-1 List of 5 pelagic and 17 demersal species selected for analysis. Maximum density refers to the median number of fish per tow in the highest category of fish density. The column “Distribution Changes” summarizes increases and decreases in range and density of fish between periods (P1=1977–89, P2=1990–99, P3=2000–2005) examined. NC= no change, I=increase, D=decrease. Species are organized by first pelagic then demersal, and by least change to greatest change observed.
SPECIES (LEAST TO MOST CHANGE) WITH THE AREA OF CHANGE DISTRIBUTION MAXIMUM DENSITY CHANGES P1-P2 P2-P3 Pelagic – minimal change 1 Sprattus sprattus (sprat) NC NC 12 565
Pelagic – significant change 1 Clupea harengus (herring) in the Barents Sea* D D 7 227 2 Trachurus trachurus (horse mackerel) in the North Sea I NC 5 952 3 Sardina pilchardus (sardine) in all areas I I 300 4 Engraulis encrasicolus (anchovy) in the North Sea I I 46 850
Demersal – minimal change 1 Capros asper (boarfish) NC NC 9 102 2 Pleuronectes platessa (European plaice**) NC NC 400 3 Melanogrammus aeglefinus (haddock) NC NC 1 967 4 Merlangius merlangus (whiting), NC NC 3 000 5 Solea solea (sole) NC NC 60 6 Pollachius virens (saithe) NC NC 600
Demersal – significant change 1 Merluccius merluccius (hake) North Sea to Cantabrian Sea I I 240 2 Amblyraja radiata (starry ray) North Sea to Barents Sea I I 15 3 Mullus surmuletus (striped red mullet) in the North Sea I I 11 4 Lophius piscatorius (anglerfish) North Sea to Cantabrian Sea I I 6 5 Zeus faber (John Dory) North Sea to Cantabrian Sea I I 10 6 Scyliorhinus canicula (lesser spotted dogfish) North Sea to I I 100 Cantabrian Sea 7 Trisopterus luscus (bib) in the North Sea D D 1 000 8 Gadus morhua (Atlantic cod) North Sea to Barents Sea D D 554 9 Squalus acanthias (spurdog) North Sea to Barents Sea D D 15 10 Raja clavata (thornback ray) North Sea to Barents Sea D D 3 11 Helicolenus dactylopterus (bluemouth redfish) North Sea to I D 25 Cantabrian Sea *ICES could not determine which Barents Sea surveys had been used by WGFE in compiling this table. The table does not reflect general knowledge of this species in the Barents Sea. The Barents Sea is a nursery area for Norwegian spring-spawning herring and the abundance of herring in this sea is highly variable due to recruitment variation. ** corrected from “American plaice” by WGECO.
A second analysis carried out was a case study looking at anchovy, sprat, and red mullet in the North Sea where the mechanism for expansion in spatial distribution was examined. They recognized that temperature is an important explanatory environmental parameter that is implicated in many biological processes. They summarised the factors affecting habitat occupation, type of habitat change, and the data and tools necessary to identify habitat change. The changes in fish spatial distribution related to temperature are expected to be: • recruitment pulses and increases in occupancy resulting from density-dependence and habitat suitability; • changes in adult migration timing; • major forcing on habitat suitability modifying adult distribution (El Niño type of forcing).
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 37 Nevertheless, temperature may not always convey the appropriate signal of environmental forcing. Depending on the ecosystem, river discharge or oxygen could be more appropriate proxies.
They then assessed whether the observed change in abundance of the three considered species were due to immigration from southern populations or from pulses of North Sea relict populations that already had their life cycles in the North Sea. All three species chosen are short-lived, with fast growth, high mortality, and high fecundity. Anchovy and sprat are pelagic, whereas red mullet is demersal.
Anchovy were present in the North Sea in the 1970s, disappeared in the 1980s, and reappeared in the mid-1990s. Anchovy abundance in the North Sea is driven by local recruitment pulses. Red mullet distribution is strongly linked to areas with warmer waters than used to occur in the North Sea. The first red mullets observed in the North Sea were small fish; since then recruitment pulses have maintained a North Sea population. Sprat have shown consistent spatial distribution over the years.
The next step taken by WGFE was to model the conditions potentially suitable for anchovy spawning, based on multiannual (2000–2005) records of anchovy eggs and hydrographic conditions in the Bay of Biscay and around the Iberian Peninsula, using a technique based on quantile regression smoothers and derived from the ICES SGRESP report from 2006. This technique provides estimates of the potential spawning maximum under given environmental conditions. The model fitted to observations south of 49oN was then used to predict the potential for spawning of anchovy in other regions, given the surface temperature, surface salinity, and bottom depth. The model does not predict spawning but predicts whether the environmental conditions are limiting or not for spawning. WGFE then plotted the modelled potential for spawning of anchovy during the 2nd and 3rd quarters for the three temperature periods (1977– 1988, 1989–1998, and 1999–2005) using the ICES hydrology database. From these analyses, it would appear that the potentially suitable habitat for anchovy spawning has increased in the North Sea over the three periods.
Another consideration WGFE took into account was the potential relationship between fish condition and water temperature. Based on the methods used by Rätz and Lloret (2003) they calculated Fulton’s condition index (K=100*W/L3) for seven species in the North Sea. However, due to the short time-series available to them (3 years), they were not able to draw any conclusions. They suggest this work should be continued by countries with longer time- series.
The final case study presented by WGFE was an analysis to determine which North Sea species have shown a shift in geographical distribution in response to climate variability (temperature and hydrography) and which measures of climate variability are most tightly linked to changing fish distributions.
North Sea English groundfish survey data were used to assess changes in fish abundance and distribution. The distributions of 35 species were analysed. These species were considered representative of the breadth of morphology, life histories, ecology, and taxonomic diversity of the bottom-dwelling and pelagic fishes sampled by the English groundfish survey in the North Sea. Species distributions were described using seven measures: average latitude, maximum and minimum latitudes, mean and maximum depth and occupancy, while the biogeographic affinities of each species were derived from the primary literature (Yang, 1982). Six indices of climatic variation were considered: average sea bottom temperature across the North Sea, sea bottom temperature anomalies in each rectangle, average annual North Atlantic Oscillation index (NAO), winter NAO index, North Sea inflow data, and the Gulf Stream Index. The relationship between year-by-year climate variation and species distribution was assessed by fitting linear models using robust regression (Fox, 1997; Venables and Ripley, 2002).
The classification showed that most species were generalists, occurring in both warm and cold waters (in relation to the North Sea) with 12 and 15 preferring cold and warm waters. Five species (wolffish, silvery pout, witch, anglerfish, and spurdog) were cold specialists and three species (megrim, cuckoo ray, and lesser spotted dogfish) were warm specialists.
The species with the strongest climate-biogeography relationships were herring, wolffish, and Norway pout, which all exhibit boreal cold temperature distributions. When the relationship between body size and climate-distribution was assessed it was seen that smaller species spread out in warmer years, exhibiting positive annual temperature and occupancy relationships, while larger species retract. The slope of the relationship between the annual NAO index and occupancy was positive for all but one species, suggesting that species tend to spread out when the average annual NAO index is positive.
Thus it was concluded that species habitat occupancy and latitudinal and depth distributions are moving in response to interannual variation in climate-change driven variability in a range of hydrodynamics and sea temperatures. However, WGFE concluded there is no single biogeographical measure that consistently responds to a single measure of hydrodynamics or temperature across the ranges of all species. There is considerable heterogeneity in the species’ response to the range of measures of climate variability. Although there is scope to determine the underlying ecological
38 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 factors, such as lifestyle (pelagic/demersal), trophic level, and particularly body size, associated with the strength of response to environmental variation, comparative studies highlight a substantial proportion of species that do not appear to change distribution in response to climate variability. This raises two questions: • What other aspects of their population biology may be responding to climate variation, such as population growth or mortality (Blanchard et al., 2005; Kell et al., 2005)? – and • To what degree are species’ distributional responses to climate variability constrained by strong habitat associations, say for a benthic habitat which may not be present further north or in greater depths?
On a similar note WGFE emphasized that the effects of a temperature increase will have not only direct effects on fish populations, but also indirect effects, such as the availability of plankton influencing trophic interactions.
Commentary on potential uses of this information
WGFE carried out extensive analyses, and the results are informative and scientifically sound. However, the analyses are not yet complete in terms of area coverage, most are based on limited datasets, and often they do not address both changes in abundance and changes in distribution.
Working Group on Seabird Ecology (WGSE)
Seabirds appear to react to climate change and variability in a variety of ways: • In some circumstances, a warming trend advances timing of breeding and in others breeding is retarded; • Seabirds show some flexibility in dealing with climate change in this regard but are ultimately constrained because of the finite (and often lengthy) time required to complete the breeding cycle; • Because they are long-lived, seabirds are often able to “buffer” short-term (<10 years) environmental variability, especially at the population level; and • Seabirds are vulnerable to both spatial and temporal mismatches in prey availability, especially when breeding at fixed colony sites with the foraging constraints that these entail.
As classic K–strategists, birds possess strategies to survive short-term variability in the environment (e.g. body fat reserves). Sustained changes in the environment, which result in non-optimum conditions for a seabird species over a prolonged period, also result in changes in population dynamics, e.g. through a decrease in fecundity or survivorship (Ashmole, 1971; Jouventin and Mougin, 1981).
In contrast, Irons et al. (in press) studying reproductive success of guillemots illustrated that there is evidence that the magnitude of a shift in sea surface temperature, regardless of whether the temperature changes were positive or negative, are more important than direction. ‘Extreme events’ and their effects, especially long-term effects, on seabirds (and other functional groups) need to be assessed.
Many factors influence range expansions, and while some changes in distributions have been identified, e.g. changes in breeding distribution in a few species (e.g. lesser black-backed gull), it is not clear how changes in hydrodynamics and sea temperature are involved, but it is presumed to be an contributing factor (Mitchell et al., 2004; Nisbet et al., ms; Wernham et al., 2002).
Commentary on potential uses of this information
Change in temperature and hydrodynamics are known to affect sea birds directly and indirectly, through for example prey abundance and distribution. However, the extent of climate variability and how it affects prey abundance and distribution can be difficult to disentangle from other effects on seabirds such as fisheries effects (e.g. changes in discard patterns). The approach remains mainly correlative and without a robust model for driver and responses. The assumption must therefore be that these are spurious correlations and are only indicative of causation.
Working Group on Marine Mammal Ecology (WGMME)
The main identified marine mammal ecological indicator species predominantly include those in close association with Arctic sea ice/cold temperature-to-polar seas influenced by sea ice. They are: polar bear, ringed seal, hooded seal, harp seal, bearded seal, beluga whale, bowhead whale, and narwhal). Those species which undertake large scale migrations (sperm whale and baleen whales) are also considered to be possible indicator species (Learmonth et al., 2006; Simmonds and Isaac, 2007).
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 39 WGMME summary: • Apart from ice-dependent species, where climate change may show a disruption to breeding, feeding habitat, and food availability, most other species should show fairly plastic responses, as they are long- lived and are likely to show some degree of adaptation to slowly developing change; • A decline in reproductive output and body mass in polar bears in Svalbard, Norway, between 1988 and 2002, was linked to both large-scale climatic variation (Arctic Oscillation index) and the upper trophic level changes in the Arctic marine ecosystem. This has also been observed in other areas in the Arctic (Derocher et al,. 2004, 2005; Learmonth et al., 2006); • Within the OSPAR area, long-term changes in large-scale distribution in the bottlenose dolphin, common dolphin, and the white-beaked dolphin populations over the last 100 years may have occurred. These may be a result of changes in sea surface temperature (and linked with changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation index); • Changes in the distribution of harbour porpoises have been reported in the last 10 years in the North Sea and English Channel, although the reasons for the southern shift in their distribution have not been fully investigated (Camphuysen, 2004; Kiszka et al, 2004); • Apart from this, no other published studies have found any relationship between changes in distribution, abundance, or condition and climate change, within the OSPAR area; and • For most Arctic animals and baleen whales it is not known how they will adapt. However, as relative population sizes are at low levels due to earlier exploitation, they may be more susceptible to climate change (Caswell et al., 1999; Green and Pershing, 2004).
For the majority of the species within the OSPAR region, especially the non-Arctic species, it is very difficult to demonstrate relationships between changes in distribution, abundance, or condition and climate change/variation, due to both a lack of baseline data and a lack of relevant long-term datasets.
Changes in distribution and abundance are considered to be driven by bottom-up effects (prey organism abundance and distributions affected by changes in hydrodynamics and temperature). The effects of changes in phenology in prey species (plankton and fish) are unquantified. Additionally in the case of the Arctic species (both permanent residents and visitors whose life cycle is linked to the higher latitudes), loss of habitat, i.e. extent and duration of ice coverage (Heide-Jørgensen and Lydersen, 1998; Härkönen et al., 1998; Stirling et al., 1999) is considered important, but again this is difficult to quantify.
Commentary on potential uses of this information
Population genetics models generally show that small populations often have little ability to adapt to changing external conditions such as those caused by climate change, particularly when their abundances have been greatly reduced from historically larger sizes. Such effects would be manifest over relatively long time periods (generations). In contrast, reduced populations are likely to be restricted to the core, optimal habitat. In such cases decreased habitat suitability, for example through warming, of large areas of the original range may not be apparent in the size of the population. However, once the area of suitable habitat loss increases to such an extent that it intersects the range of the small population then the decline will be catastrophic and rapid. These two scenarios have different management implications.
WGMME will face particular challenges in quantifying these relationships because it will often be analysing and censusing small populations.
Working Group on Biological Effects of Contaminants (WGBEC)
The WGBEC open their report stating that the request is only peripherally linked to the remit of the group. Thus, they do not feel in a position to provide in-depth assessment on the role of contaminants as additional drivers for observed changes in species distributions for the entire OSPAR area in retrospective (e.g. covering the past 50 years or even the last 10–15 years with an appropriate spatial coverage). However, they believe sufficient data should be available to test the effect of temperature increase during the past 20 years relative to fish diseases (by the Working Group on Pathology and Diseases of Marine Organisms (WGPDMO)), imposex, and 7–ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) activity in dab (North Sea) and perch (Baltic Sea). It should, however, be noted that the Baltic is not part of the OSPAR area.
An important factor emphasized in the report is that a change in temperature will not act in isolation, and other factors, such as chemical pollution will increase stress on biota (Wood and McDonald, 1997; Lanning et al., 2006). For example, it has been shown that at the southern distribution of the clam Macoma balthica the species can cope with pollution caused by, for example trace metals (Hummel et al., 2000), but there is some indication that with increasing temperatures during recent years, this species is losing its ability to survive at the uppermost limit of their southern distribution (Jansen et al., 2007). According to the report this shows a clear link between pollution and climate change,
40 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 with increasing temperature and decreasing pH or salinity (as predicted for the Baltic Sea) or UV radiation possibly acting as additional or synergistic stressors.
Another indirect effect of increased temperature will be changes in contaminant exposure, distribution and effects, related to shifts in land use and agricultural distribution/practices. Not only will accumulated pollutants presently stored in waste dumps, behind dams and in sediments be eroded and washed to coastal zones, but also new contaminants will be produced and released. Thus WGBEC believes that changes in climate variables are also likely to alter the transport, transfer, deposition, and fate of contaminants. Bioavailability, metabolism, and toxicity will also be affected. They feel that more research is required to evaluate the interactions between climate change and contaminants to better understand and predict how ongoing and future climate changes may interact with anthropogenic impacts (e.g. chemical pollution). This will include experimental studies and modelling efforts to test various scenarios concerning transport, transfer, and cycling of chemical pollutants and to assess the counteracting effects on important species including the impact on their well-being/fitness, and the potential effects on populations/ecosystems.
Commentary on potential uses of this information
This report summarizes the interactions between contaminants and climate change, but does not provide quantitative analysis.
Working Group on the Pathology and Diseases of Marine Organisms (WGPDMO)
Long-term climate change will have an effect on the spatial distribution and prevalence of disease in fish and shellfish. Increases in stressors on hosts are an inevitable consequence of climate changes. Increased stress is known to lead to increases in parasite-induced host mortality, so in effect hosts (and ultimately ecosystems) may well be unduly affected by climate change in ways that are not yet understood. There has been little study of this in the OSPAR region, but some examples exist.
ICES holds large amounts of data on a number of diseases of dab Limanda limanda that provide an excellent opportunity to investigate the interrelationships between a number of factors, particularly since disease data exist for several regions in the North Sea from 1980. Such analyses have been attempted with some success and statistical correlations between disease prevalence and contaminants and other factors have been demonstrated (Wosniok et al., 2000). However, correlations between temperature and disease prevalence over a period of decades have not yet been made.
Fish are poikilotherms whose immune system is influenced by ambient temperature and with seasonal increase in temperature there is a balance between the ability of some pathogens to reproduce more rapidly and the ability of the fishes’ immune system to counteract this threat. The prevalence of external ulceration in dab from the North and Irish Seas shows fluctuation over time but a clear seasonal difference between winter and summer where, during the latter period the prevalence is higher (Feist and Stentiford, 2005). It can therefore be postulated that an increase in temperature may increase the prevalence of ulceration in dab, and possibly in other fish species. The concentration of dissolved oxygen has also been correlated with increased prevalence of ulcerations (Mellergaard and Nielsen, 1995).
Over the last decade there has been a statistically significant increase in prevalence of hyperpigmentation in dab in the southern North Sea in particular. The cause of this condition, which is characterized by a hyperplasia of the pigment cells (melanocytes and iridophores) on both the upper and lower surface of affected fish is not known, but conceivably could be caused by changes in water conditions. The condition was only rarely reported during the 1980s and was largely absent in the Irish Sea.
Infectious Pancreatic Necrosis Virus (IPNV) is an important disease problem in salmonid aquaculture in Norway and Scotland. In 2002, exceptionally high water temperatures in late summer and early autumn resulted in reduced growth and health-related problems in the farming of salmonids in Norway. Some regions (Trøndelag) have experienced a significant increase in the number of reported cases associated with first-feeding salmon fry. The mortality was variable, but in some cases, the losses have been very high. There are indications that high density, increased use of oxygenation, and a low water flow may increase losses in post smolts (ICES, 2003).
In Scotland, 20 farms rearing Atlantic salmon reported losses in 2002 due to jellyfish swarming against the cages and several farms in Norway experienced losses due to the jellyfish Muggiaea atlantica. This problem may have been caused by the exceptionally high water temperatures in late summer and early autumn in that year (ICES, 2003). Furthermore, the mass mortality recorded in farmed salmon in Ireland in 2003 was believed to be initiated by an insult caused by jellyfish/siphonophores and simultaneous high water temperatures (Cronin et al., 2004).
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 41 Commentary on potential uses of this information
This report provides limited commentary or analyses on the interactions between disease/parasites and climate change. There is a growing literature on this topic and the economic implications could be significant. The ecological consequences could be significant as well, and warrant more focused attention.
42 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Annex II – Conclusions and recommendations
This Section contains conclusions and recommendations from three study groups/workshops that focused specifically on quantifying possible effects of hydrographic factors on life history processes, distribution, and/or abundance of selected groups of species. These illustrate the types of integrated interpretations that can be produced when the necessary data extraction, statistical analyses, and modeling efforts are combined.
Conclusions of the Workshop on Life-Cycle and Ecology of Small Pelagics (WGLESP)
WGLESP concentrated on the following items: • characterize the colonization of North Sea habitats since the late 1990s by southern-like short- lived species, anchovy and red mullet, and compare their distributions and recruitment dynamics to that of sprat, which is a resident species; • apply to the North Sea a new version of a potential spawning model for anchovy in Biscay; • identify periods in the ICES hydrography database to characterize warming since the 1960s; • apply the quotient plot method to all species considered by WGFE to quantitatively characterize the temperature range of the species and to summarize the interaction in the fish and temperature distributions; • report on the mechanisms which drive changes in the spatial distributions of fish. The outcomes of that work can be summarized as follows. Different factors will affect life cycle spatial organization which can be grouped into two categories. External factors like hydro-climate will act as forcing conditions on the suitability of the habitats. Internal factors to the population such as demography and behaviour will determine the capability of the population to effectively occupy all its potential habitats. Finally, the actual distribution in a given year will result from the interaction between external and internal factors. Changes in spatial distributions can then occur because the distribution of potential habitats changed under climate change, or it changed under demographic change because of the population’s internal behaviour.
Changes in spatial distributions can be analysed, modelled, and predicted with a variety of approaches, data, and tools. Potential habitats as well as population behaviour were here addressed using long-term series of fisheries survey data.
Potentiality in habitat suitability for a given species’ life stage was estimated by statistically analyzing, in a large number of realised yearly distributions, the range of hydro-climatic characteristics that recurrently correlated with zero as well as with high abundance.
The behaviours of populations when colonizing novel habitats were tentatively analysed. During the past decade southern-like species have colonized North Sea habitats. The analysis was performed on short-lived species: anchovy and red mullet for the pelagic and demersal domains. Being resident in the North Sea, sprat was considered as a reference short-lived species for the area.
North Sea sprat showed no change in its spatial distribution, but additional recruitment windows were observed with two waves of recruitment in certain years. In both the anchovy and red mullet cases the first colonizers observed were small fish. But the two species showed differences. North Sea colonization by the red mullet was progressive while it was immediately complete for anchovy. In addition, all length classes were tracked seasonally for anchovy while this was not possible for red mullet. The expansion of anchovy in the North Sea was therefore understood as recruitment pulses of low abundant resident populations. In contrast, the red mullet in the North Sea was thought to come from English Channel populations and keep connections with them via movements of the larger fish.
In the Northeast Atlantic, the analysis of the ICES hydrographic database since 1960 showed three periods, 1960–1988, 1989–1998, and 1999–2005 in which warming was evident. The last period is a warmer period than the others while the second period is more variable as if it was a transitory period.
Pelagic fish showed a consistent seasonal difference in their temperature range greater than 5°C between the first and third quarter of the year. It was thought that species can adapt to change in temperature, depending on other factors being in their correct range of values. To calculate the direct impact of temperature on changes in spatial distributions, an appropriate methodological approach could be that of limiting factors.
Conclusions of the Study Group on Recruitment Variation in North Sea Planktivorous Fish (SGRECVAP)
The residuals from the stock–recruitment curves for Norway pout and herring expressed similar trends despite the recent better recruitment in Norway pout, whilst there was no trend in the residuals of sandeel. A detectable change in
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 43 the recruitment of herring and Norway pout in the North Sea was either caused by a reduction in productivity in the early 2000s or by a longer cycle of decline since the 1980s (which could also be described as a period of large positive residuals, then a period of small residuals followed in turn by a period of large negative residuals). There was only a biomass signal on the recruitment of sandeel. The productivity of all three stocks is low at present.
The lack of any properly funded research project on the recruitment of planktivorous fish in the North Sea meant that SGRECVAP was limited to list potential hypotheses, stimulate further investigations, and carry out preliminary analyses.
A change in the North Sea environment has occurred at the same time as the poor recruitment in herring and the downward trend in Norway pout. In the spawning areas of herring and Norway pout (in the central and northern North Sea) the sea temperatures have increased markedly, with a commensurate reduction in water density. This may affect frontal development. The trend in herring recruitment since 1998 is similar to the trend in declining water density at the main herring spawning sites. The warming of the northern North Sea is associated with warmer Atlantic water and less cooling over winter.
As mentioned in SGRECVAP 2006 there has been a broad gradual change in the zooplankton community in the North Sea (ICES, 2006). SGRECVAP 2007 looked more specifically at areas of importance to larvae herring production, and probable Norway pout spawning. Overall from 1950 to the present, only the central North Sea shows large variability in the zooplankton community and the standing stock of chlorophyll. In the northern North Sea only the abundance of Calanus sp. copepodites showed a declining trend. However, in the central North Sea, the total abundance of copepods, the abundance of adult Calanus sp. and Calanus copepodites all showed declining trends. The timing of the changes in zooplankton was similar to those in the recruitment residuals of the fish (i.e. the late 1980s and around 2000). There was a reduction in chaetognath abundance since the 1950s, with a slight increase in recent years, particularly in autumn. The well known shift from Calanus finmarchicus to C. helgolandicus was clearly seen, but process studies are required to determine whether this is important for the productivity of planktivorous fish in terms of the quality of food or phenology (timing).
There has been a recent increase in mackerel, horse mackerel, sardine, and anchovy in the North Sea. Preliminary investigations suggest that mackerel and horse mackerel are not the cause of the poor recruitment as they do not overlap spatially and temporally with the larvae of herring or Norway pout. Spatial data on anchovy and sardine were not available to SGRECVAP, so this needs further exploration. Parasites or anthropogenically produced toxins may also affect planktivorous fish recruitment.
Suitable coupled bio-physical models are not currently available for North Sea herring, sandeel, and Norway pout. Their development should be encouraged to investigate the mechanisms that determine year-class strength and explain the commensurate signals seen in the environmental time-series.
Whilst the impact of toxins, parasites, and maternal effects were not considered in detail, these factors may be playing a role in the serial poor recruitment of North Sea herring.
The investigations are not far enough advanced to be able to recommend any indices as predictors for trends in productivity, but hydrography and zooplankton show potential and should be further investigated. As SGRECVAP could not predict trends in recruitment and there is no evidence to suggest that the current trend will change, the assumption that poor recruitment will continue is valid within the precautionary approach. Therefore stock projections should assume that the period of poor recruitment will continue.
Conclusions of the ICES/GLOBEC Workshop on long-term variability in southwestern Europe (WKLTVSWE)
The results of the global case study for the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Sea region indicate significant interannual trends in climatic, oceanographic, and ecosystem variables related to global warming in the region since ca. 1950. Quasi- decadal scales are characteristic of climatic, oceanographic, and fish abundance indices, but plankton indices display shorter periods. Sardine and anchovy showed synchrony in positive and negative phases up to 1978, increasing and decreasing simultaneously. This pattern was broken and moved to asynchrony thereafter, when sardine and anchovy have opposite phases. The Portuguese case study shows that sardine catches are negatively correlated with northwesterly winds and these are strongly and positively correlated with NAO. Sardine catches showed a periodicity of 20–29 years, and 10 years of cyclic variation. The Bay of Biscay case study showed that anchovy recruitment is significantly correlated with local downwelling and upwelling events that can be measured at 45ºN and 2ºW and follow a seasonal pattern: During winter the water column has almost no stratification, due to convergence and downwelling from western poleward currents bringing warmer and saltier water of sub-tropical origin. During summer the water column stratification increases when northern winds dominate and mechanisms of divergence and stable stratification prevail, bringing colder and less saline water of sub-polar origin to the Bay of Biscay. This weak upwelling gives a
44 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 stable stratification that favours good recruitment. Nevertheless, if spring–summer northern winds induce gales and storms disrupting the stable stratification this is detrimental for anchovy success. A general mechanism emerges: there is an alternation of periodical quasi-decadal dominance of boreal fresher and colder water and sub-tropical warmer and saltier water, and in accordance with the biogeography of the region, this will favour the productivity of each species’ life-traits differently.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 45 Annex III – A workplan and timetable for addressing the request from OSPAR
In order to integrate ‘the assessment of changes in the distribution and abundance of marine species in the OSPAR maritime area in relation to changes in hydrodynamics and sea temperature’ a common background and structure is desirable.
Part 1 – Developing a common framework for hydrographic conditions
The first step is to have more consistent indicators of past changes in hydrographic conditions. As explained in Section 2, sound indicators of changes in at least temperature and salinity, sea ice, and in transport and mixing at regional or OSPAR-wide scales should be established by WGOH before mid-January 2008. These results should then be passed to the biological expert groups before they begin their work so they can form a common framework for their work. The list of indicators would provide a common description of the “changes in hydrodynamics and sea temperature” against which the changes in distribution and abundance are to be assessed for as many biotic components as possible.
Part II – Developing a common framework for assessing changes in distribution and abundance
The next step is to have more consistency in the methods used to identify trends in distribution and abundance across taxa, and to relate those trends to the hydrographic information. This will require a “methods workshop” where the sensitivity and statistical power of alternative analytical methods for these tasks are evaluated and guidelines for “best practices” are provided. These guidelines for “best practices” do not imply that a single analysis method would be applied to all data sets. However, they would imply consistency in the treatment of information that was similar, and that analytical methods would be adapted in appropriate ways to differences in the information available for different taxa or regions. Furthermore, the guidelines should consider in a consistent way the differences in life cycles and population dynamics that would influence spatial and temporal responsiveness at different trophic levels. These guidelines would also provide some consistency in the interpretation of results, such that OSPAR could understand fully how ICES was dealing with the difficult interpretational challenges discussed in Section 4.2.
ICES will organize a Study Group or Workshop to review the methods used for quantifying trends in abundance and distribution of species, and for quantifying relationships between these trends and the trends in environmental attributes. Guidelines on “best practices” for expert groups to use in their analyses would be provided by January 2008.
Part III – Developing a common framework for interpreting results
In order to assess changes in the distribution and abundance in relation to changes in hydrodynamics and sea temperature it is necessary to be able to avoid incorrect attribution of cause with effect. As explained in Section 4.2.1, this is not simple. This unavoidable difficulty was amplified in the work done by the expert groups separately, because they employed a diversity of analytical approaches on similar data sets to investigate basically the same question (Annex I). The guidelines on “best practices” for the analyses will contribute to reducing inconsistencies. However, considerably more power is added if one has specific hypotheses of the mechanisms and can use them to generate (model) predictions for specific regions or species. Sometimes it is possible to find different predictions about changes in abundance and distribution arising from hypotheses about different mechanisms linking the hydrographic features to the populations. In such cases, appropriate analyses of changes in abundance and distribution can sometimes shed light on the mechanisms mediating those changes.
For example, recent critiques of the bioclimate envelope models raised concerns over (i) biotic interactions (predation, competition, mutualism, pathogens), (ii) adaptive genetic variation (edge populations may be better adapted to extreme conditions, but are also more vulnerable), (iii) dispersal limitation, and (iv) model validation. Taking these in turn: • Distributions within fish and shellfish communities can be expected to change due to exploitation and the effects may be indirect (e.g. could the observed population explosion of snake pipefish be due to fishing down a pelagic predator, rather than to climate?). WGSE has ascribed a number of observed changes to changes in forage fish which are heavily exploited. • Fishing has been held responsible for inducing adaptive change in Canadian and other cod stocks. This has potential impacts on the surplus production and future abundance of these populations, but it is not yet clear whether the changes in ocean climate and the existing geographic variability in maturation have been fully taken into account. • The marine environment has in general been thought to present fewer barriers to dispersal than terrestrial systems, but there may be hydrodynamic requirements for life history closure which impose restrictions. This issue may also interrelate with adaptive genetic variation and also with the issue of model validation.
46 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 There are likely to be many more examples that could be developed into suites of predictions based on the various mechanisms thought to link or buffer the response of species to changes in their environment.
A study group will work by correspondence to develop a suite of hypotheses for the main mechanisms by which changes in hydrographic conditions could affect the distribution and abundance of species. The objective is to provide specific predictions that might be tested with the available information, particularly for the species chosen. These hypotheses could be complemented by a set of questions concerning the interpretation of changes in distribution and abundance which could be addressed to the extent possible for all taxa examined.
Timelines 1 June/July 07 Locate experts for ad hoc expert groups on: Hydrographic attributes Trend analyses & quantifying relationships Formulating hypotheses and predictions about mechanisms Selecting species for more intensive investigations 2 July–Sept 07 Ad hoc expert groups work by correspondence 3 Sept 07 Joint discussion of ad hoc expert groups, ACE, and expert group Chairs as interested at ASC, regarding progress and intended recommendation on practice 4 Sept 07 Assign specific terms of reference to ICES expert groups 5 Sept/Oct 07 ICES consults with OSPAR on results of (2) and (3) 6 Sept–Dec 07 4 ad hoc expert groups (and others as agreed at ASC) work by correspondence 7 Dec 07 Ad hoc Group on Hydrographic Attributes produces files of recommended time-series Ad hoc Group on Analytical Methods provides recommended analysis methods and pointers to suitable software Ad hoc Group on Hypotheses provides a suite of hypotheses, as well as guidance for their use in specific applications and for interpretation of results Ad hoc Group on Species provides a list of species for intensive study, and pointers to best data sources 8 Dec 07 ACE (and ACFM as appropriate) considers outputs from (7) 9 Jan–April 08 Expert groups discharge terms of reference as assigned (4) following guidance from study groups (7) and ACE (8) 10 April 08 WGECO synthesizes results of (6) and (8) 11 May 08 Advisory process prepares advice for OSPAR
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 47 Annex IV – Sources of information
Allain, G., Petitgas, P., and Lazure, P. 2001. The influence of mesoscale ocean processes on anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) recruitment in the Bay of Biscay, estimated with a three-dimensional hydrodynamic model. Fisheries Oceanography, 10: 151–163. Anon. 2006. Nytjastofnar sjávar 2005/2006, aflahorfur fiskveiðiárið 2006/2007 (State of marine fish stocks in Icelandic waters 2005/2006, prospects for the quota year 2006/2007). Hafrannsoknastofnunin Fjolrit 126, 190 pp. (In Icelandic, English summary). Ashmole, N. P. 1971. Seabird ecology and the marine environment. In: Avian Biology, 1. Farner, D., King, J., and Parkes, K. eds. New York, Academic Press. 1: 224–286. Astthorsson, O. S., and Palsson, J. 2006. New fish records and records of rare southern species in Icelandic water in the warm period 1996–2005. ICES CM 2006/C:20. Astthorsson, O. S., Gislason, A., and Jonsson, S. 2007. Climatic variability and the Icelandic marine ecosystem. Deep- Sea Research II. In press. Beare, D., Burns, F., Greig, A., Jones, E. G., Peach, K., Kienzle, M., McKenzie, E., and Reid, D. G. 2004. Long-term increases in prevalence of North Sea fishes having southern biogeographic affinities. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 284: 269–278. Beaugrand, G. and Reid, P. C. 2003. Long-term changes in phytoplankton, zooplankton and salmon related to climate. Global change Biology, 9: 801–817. Beaugrand, G., Brander, K. M., Lindley, J. A., Souissi, S., and Reid, P. C. 2003. Plankton effect on cod recruitment in the North Sea. Nature, 426: 661–664. Beaugrand, G., Reid, P. C., Ibanez, F., Lindley, J. A., and Edwards, M. 2002. Reorganization of North Atlantic Marine Copepod Biodiversity and Climate. Science 296: 1692–1694. Berghahn, R., Bullock, A. M., and Karakirir, M. 1993. Effects of solar radiation on the population dynamics of juvenile flatfish in the shallows of the Wadden Sea. Journal of Fish Biology 42, 329–345. Beukema, J. J. 1992. Expected changes in the Wadden Sea benthos in a warmer world-Lessons from periods with mild winters. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research 30, 73–79. Björnsson, B., Steinarsson, A., and Oddgeirsson, M. 2001. Optimal temperature for growth and feed conversion of immature cod (Gadus morhua L.). ICES Journal of Marine Science 58: 29–38. Blanchard, J. L., Mills, C., Jennings, S., Fox, C. J., Rackham, B. D., Eastwood, P. D., and O'Brien, C. M. 2005. Distribution-abundance relationships for North Sea Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua): Observation versus theory. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 62:2001–2009. Buchanan, J. B. and Moore, J. J. 1986. Long-Term Studies at a Benthic Station Off the Coast of Northumberland. Hydrobiologia 142:121–127. Camphuysen, C. J. (K.) 2004. The return of the harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) in Dutch coastal waters. Lutra 47:135–144. Caswell, H., Fujiwara, M., and Brault, S. 1999. Declining survival probability threatens the North Atlantic right whale. Proc Natl Acad Sci 96:3308–3313. Cronin, M., Cusack, C., Geoghegan, F., Jackson, D., McGovern, E., McMahon, T., O’Beirn, F., Cinneide, M. Ó., and Silke, J. 2004. Salmon mortalities at Inver Bay and McSwynes’s Bay finfish farms, County Donegal, Ireland during 2003. Marine Environment and Health Series, No. 15, 2004. Dekker, R. and Beukema, J. J. 1999. Relations of summer and winter temperatures with dynamics and growth of two bivalves, Tellina tenuis and Abra tenuis, on the northern edge of their intertidal distribution. Journal of Sea Research 42, 207–220. Derocher, A. E., Lunn, N. J., and Stirling, I. 2004. Polar bears in a warming climate. Integrative and Comparative Biology 44:163–176. Edwards, M. 2000. Large-scale temporal and spatial patterns of marine phytoplankton in the north-east Atlantic. PHD University of Plymouth, 243 pp. Edwards, M., Reid, P. C., and Planque, B. 2001. Long-term and regional variability of phytoplankton biomass in the Northeast Atlantic (1960–1995). ICES Journal of Marine Science, 58: 39–49. Edwards, M. and Richardson, A. J. 2004. Impact of climate change on marine pelagic phenology and trophic mismatch. Nature, 430 (7002): 881–884. Edwards, M., Johns, D. G., Licandro, P., John, A. W. G., and Stevens, D. P. 2006. Ecological Status Report: results from the CPR survey 2004/2005. SAHFOS Technical Report, 3: 1-8. Plymouth, U.K. ISSN 1744–0750. Edwards, M., Johns, D. G., Licandro, P., John, A. W. G., and Stevens, D. P. 2007. Ecological Status Report: results from the CPR survey 2005/2006. SAHFOS Technical Report, 4: 1–8. Plymouth, U.K. ISSN. Fox, J. 1997. Applied Regression Analysis, Linear Models, and Related Methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. 597 pp. Frederiksen, M., Edwards, M., Richardson, A. J., Halliday, N. C., and Wanless, S. 2006. From plankton to top predators: bottom-up control of a marine food web across four trophic levels. Journal of Animal Ecology: 1–10. Frid, C. L. J., Harwood, K. G., Hall, S. J., and Hall, J. A. 2000. Long-term changes in the benthic communities on North Sea fishing grounds. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57:1303–1309.
48 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Frid, C. L. J., Garwood, P. R., and Robinson, L. A. (in review). Observing change in a North Sea benthic system: A 33 year time series. J. Mar. Systems. Gillett, N. P., Graf, H. F., and Osborn, T. J. 2003. Climate change and the North Atlantic Oscillation. In: Hurrell, J. W., Kushnir, Y., Ottersen, G., and Visbeck, M. (eds). The North Atlantic Oscillation: climatic significance and environmental impact. American Geophysical Union, Washington DC, p 193–209 Guisande, C., Vergara, A. R., Riveiro, I., and Cabanas, J. M. 2004. Climate change and abundanceof the Atlantic- Iberian sardine (Sardina pilchardus). Fisheries Oceanography 13 (2), 91–101. Greene, C. H., and Pershing, A. J. 2004. Climate and the conservation biology of North Atlantic right whales: the right whale at the wrong time? Front Ecol Environ 2:29–34. Hamre, J. 1994. Biodiversity and Exploitation of the Main Fish Stocks in the Norwegian - Barents Sea Ecosystem. Biodiversity and Conservation 3: 473–492. Härkönen, T., Stenman, O., Jüssi, M., Jüssi, I., Sagitov, R., and Verevkin, M. 1998. Population size and distribution of the Baltic ringed seal (Phoca hispida botnica). NAMMCO Sci Publ 1: 167–180. Heath, M. R. 2005. Regional variability in the trophic requirements of shelf sea fisheries in the northeast Atlantic, 1973- 2000. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 62: 1233–1244. Heath, M. 2007. Responses of cod to climate change in the North Sea and implications for management. ICES WGECO working document. Heath, M. R., Backhaus, J. O., Richardson, K., McKenzie, E., Slagstad, D., Beare, D., Dunn, J., Fraser, J. G., Gallego, A., Hainbucher, D., Hay, S., Jónasdóttir, S., Madden, H., Mardaljevic, J., and Schacht, A. 1999. Climate fluctuations and the spring invasion of the North Sea by Calanus finmarchicus. Fisheries Oceanography, 8 (suppl.1): 163–176. Heide-Jørgensen, M. P. and Lydersen, C. (eds). 1998. Ringed seals in the North Atlantic. North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission, NAMMCO Scientific Publications. Vol. 1. Heinz-Dieter, F., and Gutow, L. 2004. Long-term changes in the macrozoobenthos around the rocky island of Helgoland (German Bight, North Sea). Helgol. Mar. Res. 58:303–310. Herbert, R. J. H., Hawkins, S. J., Sheader, M., and Southward, A. J. 2003. Range extension and reproduction of the barnacle Balanus perforatus in the Easter English Channel. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 83:72–82. Hiscock, K., Southward, A. J., Tittley, I., and Hawkins, S. J. 2004. Effects of changing temperature on benthic marine life in Britain and Ireland. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 14:333–362. Hofmann, E., Ford, S., Powell, E., and Klinck, J. 2001. Modelling studies of the effect of climate variability on MSX disease in eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) populations. Hydrobiologia 460, 195–212. Horwood, J. W. and Millner, R. S. 1998. Cold induced abnormal catches of sole. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 78, 345–347. Hummel, H., Bogaards, R. H., Bachelet, G., Caron, F., Sola, J. C., and Amiard-Triquet, C. 2000. The respiratory performance and survival of the bivalve Macoma balthica (L.) at the southern limit of its distribution area: a translocation experiment. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 251:85–102. ICES. 2002. Report of the ICES/GLOBEC Workshop on the Dynamics of Growth in Cod. ICES Cooperative Research Report. No 252. ISSN 1017–6195 ICES. 2003. Report of the Working Group on Pathology and Diseases of Marine Organisms, Aberdeen, UK. 11–15 March 2003. Mariculture Committee ICES CM 2003/F:03 ICES. 2006a. Zooplankton monitoring results in the ICES area, Summary Status Report 2004/2005. ICES Cooperative Research Report, No. 281. 43 pp.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 49 Kiszka, J. J., Hassani, S., and Pezeril, S. 2004. Distribution and status of small cetaceans along the French Channel coasts: using opportunistic records for a preliminary assessment. Lutra 47:33–46. Kulka, D. W. and Pitcher, D. A. 2001. "Spatial and Temporal Patterns in Trawling Activity in the Canadian Atlantic and Pacific." ICES CM 2001/R:02. Kurihara, H., Shimode, S., and Shirayama, Y. 2004. Effects of raised CO2 concentration on the egg production rate and early development of two marine copepods (Acartia steueri and Acartia erythraea). Marine Pollution Bulletin 49: 721–727. Lanning, G., Cherkasiv, A. S., and Sokolova, I. M. 2006. Temperature-dependent effects of cadmium on mitochondrial and whole-organism bioenergetics in oysters. Marine Environmental Research 62:S79–82. Learmonth, J. A., MacLeod, C. D., Santos, M. B., Pierce, G. J., Crick, H. Q. P., and Robinson, R. A. 2006. Potential effects of climate change on marine mammals. Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review 44:431– 464. Mellergaard, S. and Nielsen, E. 1995. Impact of oxygen deficiency on the disease status of common dab Limanda limanda. Dis. Aquat Orgs 22:101–114. Mitchell, P. I., Newton, S. F., Ratcliffe, N., and Dunn, T. E. 2004. Seabird Populations of Britain and Ireland. T & A D Poyser; London. Niizuma, Y., Takagi, M., Senda, M., Chochi, M., and Watanuki, Y. 2005. Incubation capacity limits maximum clutch size in black-tailed gulls Larus crassirostris. Journal of Avian Biology 36: 421–427. Nisbet, I. C. T., Veit, R. R., and Auer, S. A. ms. Status of seabirds of the Atlantic coast of the United States. Nuttall Publication Series. Neat, F. and Righton, D. 2007. Warm water occupancy by North Sea cod. Proceedings of the Royal Society B- Biological Sciences 274: 789–798. Pörtner, H. and Knust, R. 2007. Climate change affects marine fishes through the oxygen limitation of thermal tolerance. Science 315, 95–97. Rätz, H. J., and Lloret, J. 2003. Variation in fish condition between Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) stocks, the effect on their productivity and management implications. Fisheries Research 60:369–380. Reid, P. C., Edwards, M., Hunt, H. G., and Warner, A. J. 1998. Phytoplankton change in the North Atlantic. Nature, 391: 546. Richardson, A. J. and Schoeman, D. S. 2004. Climate impact on plankton ecosystems in the Northeast Atlantic. Science, 305 (5690): 1609–1612. Sánchez, F. and Serrano, A. 2003. Variability of groundfish communities of the Cantabrian Sea during the 1990s. ICES Marine Science Symposia, 219: 249–260. Santos, M. B. and Pierce, G. J. 2003. The diet of harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) in the northeast Atlantic: a review. Oceanography and Marine Biology 41: 355–390. Simmonds, M. and Isaac, S. J. 2007. The impacts of climate change on marine mammals: early signs of significant problems. Oryx 41:19–26. Southern Salmon Fishery Post Season Review, 2005. Fraser River Sockeye Report. Fisheries and Ocean, Canada. DFO report. Southward, A. J., Boalch, G. T., and Maddock, L. 1988. Fluctuations in the herring and pilchard fisheries of Devon and Cornwall linked to change in climate since the 16th Century. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 68:423–445. Southward, A. J., Hiscock, K., Kerckhof, F., Moyse, J., and Elfimov, A. S. 2004. Habitat and distribution of the warm- water barnacle Solidobalanus fallax (Crustacea:Cirripedia). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 84:4734/4731–4739. Stachowicz, J. J., Terwin, J. R., Whitlatch, R. B., and Osman, R. W. 2002. Linking climate change and biological invasions: ocean warming facilitates nonindigenous species invasions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99:15497–15500. Steele, J. H. 2006. Are there eco-metrics for fisheries? Fisheries Research 77, 1-3. Stige, L. C., Ottersen, G., Brander, K., Chan, K-S., and Stenseth, N. C. 2006. Cod and climate: effect of the North Atlantic Oscillation on recruitment in the North Atlantic. Marine Ecology Progress Series 325: 227–241. Stirling, I., Lunn, N. J., and Iacozza, J. 1999. Long-term trends in the population ecology of polar bears in western Hudson Bay in relation to climate change. Arctic 52:294–306. Thyen, S. and Becker, P. H. 2006. Effects of individual life-history traits and weather on reproductive output of Black- headed Gulls Larus ridibundus breeding in the Wadden Sea, 1991-97. Bird Study 53: 132–141. van der Lingen, C. D., Castro, L. L. D., and Checkley, D. 2004. Report on the GLOBEC/SPACC Workshop on characterizing and comparing the spawning habitats of small pelagic fish, 12–13 January 2004. Concepción, Chile. Van Keeken, O., Van Hoppe, M., Grift, R. E., and Rijnsdorp, A. D. 2007. Changes in the spatial distribution of North Sea plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) and implications for fisheries management. Journal of Sea Research 57, 187– 197. Venables, W. N., and Ripley, B. D. 2002. Modern and applied statistics. Springer-Verlag, New York. 495 pp. Wang, T. and Overgaard, J. 2007. The heartbreak of adapting to global warming. Science 315, 49–50.
50 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Watanabe, Y., Yamaguchi, A., Ishidai, H., Harimoto, T., Suzuki, S., Sekido, Y., Ikeda, T., Shirayama, Y., Mac Takashi, M., Ohsumi, T., and Ishizaka, J. 2006. Lethality of increasing CO2 levels on deep-sea copepods in the western North Pacific. Journal of Oceanography 62: 185–196. Wanless, S., Wright, P. J., Harris, M. P., and Elston, D. A. 2004. Evidence for decrease in size of lesser sandeels Ammodytes marinus in a North Sea aggregation over a 30–yr period. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 279: 237– 246. Wernham, C. V., Toms, P. M., Marchant, J. H., Clark, J. A., Siriwardena, G. M., and Baillie, S. R. eds. 2002. The migration atlas: movements of the birds of Britain & Ireland. T & AD Poyser, London. Wood, C. M., and McDonald, D. G. 1997. Global warming–implications for freshwater and marine fish. Cambridge University Press. 441 pp. Wosniok, W., Lang, T., Dethlefsen, V., Feist, S. W., McVicar, A. H., Mellergaard, S., and Vethaak, A. D. 2000. Analysis of ICES long-term data on diseases of North Sea dab (Limanda limanda) in relation to contaminants and other environmental factors. ICES CM 2000/S:12–15pp. Yang, J. 1982. The dominant fish fauna in the North Sea and its determination. Journal of Fish Biology 20:635–643.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 51 1.5.5.3 Scoping of an assessment of the environmental impact of fisheries
Request by OSPAR
OSPAR requested ICES to prepare an initial scoping report on the content and methods for developing an assessment of the environmental impact of marine fisheries by 2008, as a contribution to the OSPAR Quality Status Report (QSR) 2010.
Recommendations and advice
In early 2007, OSPAR prepared a draft document (OSPAR MAQ(1) 07/4/2-Add.1) on the assessment of the impacts of fisheries on the marine environment as part of the JAMP BA–5 assessment and as a contribution to QSR 2010. This document contained an “Outline of the JAMP BA–5 assessment” which, together with an Annex, provides an outline of the different sections of the assessment and an overview of the sources and material to take into account. This document was used by ICES as the basis for the preparation of a scoping report on the content and methods for developing an assessment of the environmental impact of marine fisheries.
The outline proposed in the OSPAR document was considered appropriate, but was slightly rephrased and restructured into the following outline, which is considered to be more comprehensive and conceptually clearer:
1) Introduction 2) The development of fisheries management and policy since 1998 3) Fishing activities in the OSPAR maritime area 4) Impacts of fisheries on the ecosystem 5) Assessment of fisheries measures and their effectiveness 6) Conclusions and priorities for action
Given the geographical variation in fisheries, in the ecosystem, and therefore in the effects on the ecosystem, ICES suggests that information should be presented on a regional basis. In an OSPAR context, the suitable approach might be to use OSPAR regions, as suggested by OSPAR. It would also be advantageous to consider presenting information divided by each of the Regional Advisory Council (RAC) areas (with additions to cover OSPAR waters not covered by EU fisheries management) relevant to OSPAR.
More detailed advice on the suggested contents of OSPAR’s assessment for each of the headings above are given in the next sections of this report. It contains suggestions on methods of developing it, on aspects to take care of, and on possible sources of information.
Scoping of the content and methods for developing an assessment of the environmental impact of marine fisheries
This document contains proposals for the different sections of the assessment of the environmental impact of fisheries, as a contribution to the OSPAR QSR 2010. The proposals include content of these sections, suggestions of methods to be used, aspects to consider and possible sources of information.
Where relevant, the work of OSPAR in the field of habitat mapping, threatened and declining species and habitats, and EcoQOs should be combined with information on fishing pressure.
Introduction
This section should set the scene for the assessment by explaining OSPAR’s mandate in relation to the protection of the marine environment and to fisheries issues. It should briefly describe fisheries management mechanisms in the OSPAR area. These include the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), the Norwegian, Icelandic, Greenlandic, and Faroese fisheries policies, and the mechanisms of the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC) and the International Council for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT). If marine mammal hunting issues are to be considered as fisheries, then the roles of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Organisation (NAMMCO) will need to be covered. In the text below marine mammal hunting issues are in square brackets.
Global policy drivers from UN or its subsidiary bodies should be described, including WSSD, FAO, CMS, and CBD. There should also be a description of the relevant aspects of the European Habitats and Birds Directives.
52 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 The role of ICES in providing scientific advice on many fisheries and ecosystem issues throughout the OSPAR area should be described. The most important issues related to fisheries, as identified by the QSR 2000, should be recalled here:
a ) excessive fishing effort and overcapacity in the fishing fleet in some regions; b ) lack of precautionary reference points for the biomass and mortality of some commercially exploited stocks; c ) how to address the particular vulnerability of deep-sea species; d ) the risks posed to certain ecosystems and habitats, for example, seamounts, hydrothermal vents, sponge associations, and deepwater coral communities; e ) adverse environmental impacts of certain fishing gear, especially those leading to excessive catches of non-target organisms and habitat disturbance; and f ) the benefits to fisheries and/or the marine environment by the temporary or permanent closure or other protection of certain areas.
ICES notes that some of these issues relate to fisheries management, while others relate to the impact of fisheries on the environment. These should be covered in different sections of the QSR 2010.
The development of fisheries management and policy since 1998
In this section an overview of the main developments in fisheries management policy since 1998 should be given, with an emphasis on changes made to address the issues identified in QSR 2000.
This section should include:
• the reform of the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP); • developments in Norwegian, Icelandic, Greenlandic, and Faroese fisheries; • developments in NEAFC and ICCAT; • [developments in the IWC and NAMMCO].
The increasing influence of the European Birds and Habitats Directives, especially relating to the establishment of the Natura 2000 network in part of the OSPAR area, and the obligation for member states to prepare management plans for Natura 2000 sites should be mentioned here.
In this overview it is relevant to make the distinction between legal instruments and management tools.
Fishing activities in the OSPAR maritime area
This section should describe fishing activities in the OSPAR area, where possible by OSPAR region, and provide an overview of evolutions and developments since 1998 of: 1) The main driving forces for fishing, including statistical information on, e.g. the demand for marine-food production, fish meal and fish oil, the trends in the price of fish, etc. 2) The extent, duration, and intensity of fishing pressure on the marine environment, including statistical information on: • fleet capacity and fishing effort by fishing gear; • landings of fish; • extent of IUU (illegal, unregulated, and unreported catch); • recreational fishing; • [hunting (whaling)]. Where relevant and possible, information should be presented by métier (defined by target species, fishing gear used, and area visited; Laurec et al., 1991). It will not be straightforward to ensure consistent data are used in the assessment of fishing pressure and impact. This is caused by:
• differences between data collection systems of OSPAR Contracting Parties; • spatial and temporal resolution; • representativity;
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 53 • comprehensiveness; • reliability of the data. Some examples are provided below.
The data collection requirements for EU Member States are defined by Regulation (Council Regulation 1543/2000 as applied by Commission Regulations 1639/2001 and 1581/2004). These Regulations are being updated (see e.g., SEC 2004(892)). Collation of consistent international data may be further hampered by differences between the Member States. This may be due to variation in: • Units reported (e.g. days-at-sea, kW×days-at-sea, or hours fished); • Definition of métiers. A suggestion for improving and simplifying the definition of the métiers has been provided by the EC Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) sub-group on fleet segmentation (EC, 2006), but these suggestions have yet to be taken up. It is not clear how well this simplified list of métiers can be applied to the fisheries of non-EU countries; • Access to data. Even though most fisheries in the OSPAR area use satellite vessel monitoring systems (VMS), access to the data from these systems may differ due to differences between legislation in countries.
There are various sources of information to describe fishing pressure (e.g. fleet size, hours fished, fishing-induced mortality). The relevance of this type of information follows from the paradigm that Pressure needs to be managed in order to meet an objective that is set for the State of the resource. From this follows that the usefulness of the Pressure information is determined by the tightness of the link with State. For example, fishing-induced mortality is more useful in managing the state of a population than fleet capacity; or an index of the proportion of a habitat fished with a specific frequency is more useful to manage the state of the habitat than just an index of fishing effort (e.g. Piet et al., 2006).
VMS information covers only larger vessels and other measures of effort need to be used for fleets of small boats, including those of recreational fisheries. Fleets of small vessels are highly dynamic in character, particularly due to market-induced variability in gear, target species, fishing grounds, etc. Small vessel fisheries can have significant effects on the marine environment, especially in the coastal zone.
Impacts of fisheries on the ecosystem
A framework for an impact assessment (IA) is presented by WGECO 2006 (ICES, 2006a). It includes a list of ecosystem components (state variables) likely to be most affected by fishing. It also lists key pressures related to fishing activities and includes indicators to describe the relationship between Pressure, State, and Response. This IA framework can be used to address the topics specified by OSPAR to be considered in the QSR 2010 (i–v below). Recent results of scientific research indicate that fishing may also have profound effects on the genetic structure of fish populations, and/or on their phenotype (e.g. age and size at maturity). ICES therefore suggests adding these topics to the list (vi):
i. trends in spawning stock biomass of commercial fish stocks; ii. bycatch of target and non-target species, including marine mammals and seabirds; iii. physical disturbance of the seabed and related impacts on benthic communities and habitats; iv. shifts in community structure; v. indirect effects on the food web; vi. genetic effects and effects on the phenotype. Where possible, information should be included on the potential impact, the actual impact, trends over time and effects on the wider quality status.
In the following paragraphs, the topics will be briefly discussed and some suggestions for contents and sources of information are proposed. i. Trends in spawning stock biomass of commercial fish stocks. Stock assessments of commercial stocks to estimate trends in spawning stock biomass are based on landing statistics that are readily available. For a number of stocks, additional data are available on catches that are discarded at sea based on observer programmes. The appropriate level of resolution for this topic is the management areas and annual time steps. Reference should be made to the EcoQO on commercial fish species. ii. Bycatch of target and non-target species, including marine mammals and seabirds. Information on bycatch of target and non-target species is available from discard observer programmes. National sampling programmes have been running for only a few fisheries for more than a decade. The discard sampling
54 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 programme has, however been greatly extended since 2000 as it was included in the data requirement programme of the EU (Council Regulations 1543/2000, 1639/2001, and 1581/2004). iii. Physical disturbance of the seabed and related impacts on benthic communities and habitats. This topic has been dealt with extensively by ICES WGECO. A review for the North Sea is given in their 2006 report (ICES, 2006a). It is noted that this topic should be dealt with at the appropriate resolution, both temporal and spatial. ICES WGECO 2007 (ICES, 2007a) demonstrated that the choice of the resolution may influence the assessment and perception of fishing impact. This section should not only deal with the physical disturbance of the seabed and the related direct impact on benthic organisms, but should also contain information on the state of other ecosystem components that are likely to be directly or indirectly affected. This includes substratum loss, smothering, changes in sediment in suspension, resuspension of dinoflagellate cysts, changes in turbidity, changes in heavy metal contamination, nutrient levels, and oxygenation due to resuspension of sediments, etc. iv. Shifts in community structure. Fishing effects on the community structure include shifts in the size spectrum across ecosystems, changes in the species composition (e.g. a shift towards smaller, fast-growing, and rapidly reproducing opportunistic species), and declines in the populations of slowly reproducing and vulnerable species (e.g. most elasmobranchs). In this section reference should be made to the EcoQO on fish communities (proportion of large fish). v. Indirect effects on the food web. Fishing will indirectly affect the functioning of the ecosystem by altering the relationships between the organisms in the food web through the following routes:
• changes in the size structure and the proportional representation of the functional groups of the fish assemblage; • changes in the size structure and species composition of benthic invertebrates; • direct competition for food between fishers and fish consumers such as certain seabirds; • production of discards and offal as food for scavengers.
Reference should be made to the marine trophic index (Pauly and Watson, 2005 and see ICES, 2006a). Genetic effects and effects on the phenotype. There is amounting evidence that fishing affects the genetics of populations (ICES, 2002, 2007b). Fishing may result in genetic erosion (Kenchington, 2003; Kenchington et al., 2003) and may lead to fisheries-induced evolution in heritable traits (Law, 2000). Genetic erosion can occur at different levels as fishing may lead to the extinction of genetically distinct local stocks, reduce the genetic variability within populations or reduce the individual genetic variability (inbreeding). Fisheries-induced evolutionary effects have been reported for a number of fish stocks, in particular in the onset of sexual maturity, although the speed of fisheries-induced evolution is still debated (Dieckmann and Heino, 2007; Law, 2007; Marshall and Browman, 2007). Two expert groups in ICES (ICES 2006b; 2007b) are dealing with these questions. These could provide the relevant input for the QSR 2010. Information of life history changes, such as age and size at maturity, should also be included.
Assessment of fisheries measures and their effectiveness
Based on the information in the previous sections, conclusions should be drawn, if possible, on the effectiveness of the measures taken in addressing the threats from, and impacts of, fishing and in relation to the objectives of the OSPAR Biodiversity Strategy. Conclusions should be drawn for each of the OSPAR [RAC] regions.
Conclusions and priorities for action
In the conclusions the issues raised in the QSR 2000 should be recalled and assessed, and possible new issues can be raised.
Priorities for future action should be identified, taking account of the outcome of the North Sea Ministerial Meeting on the environmental impact of fishing and shipping, held in Göteborg in May 2006. Gaps in knowledge of the environmental impact of fisheries on the marine environment should be identified.
Source of information
Dieckmann, U., and Heino, M. 2007. Probabilistic maturation reaction norms: their history, strengths, and limitations. MEPS 335:253–269. EC. 2006. Commission Staff Working Paper: Report of the Ad Hoc Meeting of independent experts on Fleet-Fishery based sampling. Nantes, 12–16 June 2006. ICES. 2002. Report of the Working Group on the Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 55 ICES. 2006a. Report of the Working Group on the Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities. ICES CM/ACE:05. ICES. 2006b. Report of the Working Group on the Application of Genetics to Fisheries and Mariculture. ICES CM 2006/MCC:04. ICES. 2007a. Report of the Working Group on the Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities. ICES CM 2007/ACE:04. ICES. 2007b. Report of the Study Group on Fisheries-Induced Adaptive Change (SGFIAC), 26 February–2 March 2007. Lisbon, Portugal. Kenchington, E. 2003. The effects of fishing on species and genetic diversity. In: M. Sinclair & G. Valdimarson (eds.). Responsible fisheries in the marine ecosystem. Chapter 14: pp. 235–253. CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK, 448 pp. Kenchington, E., Heino, M., and Nielsen, E. E. 2003. Managing marine genetic diversity: time for action? ICES Journal of Marine Science 60:1172–1176. Laurec, A., Biseau, A., and Charuau, A. 1991. Modelling technical interactions. In: Proceedings of the Conference on multispecies models relevant to management of living resources, The Hague, The Netherlands, 2–4 October 1989, pp. 225–236. Law, R. 2000. Fishing, selection and phenotypic evolution. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57:659–668. Law, R. 2007. Fisheries-induced evolution: present status and future directions. MEPS 335:271–277. Marshall, C. T., and Browman, H. I. 2007. Disentangling the causes of maturation trends in exploited fish populations. MEPS 335:249–251. OSPAR MAQ(1) 07/4/2-Add.1 Pauly, D., and Watson, R. 2005. Background and interpretation of the marine trophic index as a measure of biodiversity. Philosophical Transactions Royal Society B 360:415–423. Piet, G. J., Quirijns, F. J., Robinson, L., and Greenstreet, S.P.R. 2006. Potential pressure indicators for fishing, and their data requirements. ICES Journal of Marine Science 64:110–121.
Additional sources of information to consider
Table 1.5.5.3.1 gives an overview of the sources of information other than the references in peer-reviewed literature referred to in the text (e.g. data, policy documents or reports of ICES working groups).
56 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1
Table 1.5.5.3.1 Sources and material to take into account when preparing a scoping report on the assessment of the environmental impact of marine fisheries. The outline of the table is according to the different (sub-) sections of the scoping report. Much of the material of the ICES working groups can be found on www.ices.dk
SECTION / SUB-SECTION SOURCES/MATERIAL TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT OSPAR Convention (especially Annex V); Common Fisheries Policy, NEAFC Convention, Norwegian Fisheries Ministry; Icelandic 1. Introduction Fisheries Ministry, Bergen Ministerial Statement, UN, FAO
572. The development of 2002 reform of the CFP; 2006 Update of the NEAFC Convention; developments in Norway and Iceland, fisheries management and Technical Measures policy since 1998 3. Fishing activities in the Report to the North Sea Ministerial Meeting on environmental impacts of fishing and shipping OSPAR Maritime Area 3.1 fleet capacity and Information based on logbooks filled in by fishers is available by EU member state. EC Statistical bulletin on the Community fishing fleet fishing effort (http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/statistics_cfp_en.htm) EC Statistical bulletin on the Community fishing fleet (http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/statistics_cfp_en.htm); NEAFC data; Norwegian 3.2 landings of fish Ministry of Fisheries (http://odin.dep.no/fkd/english/); Icelandic Ministry of Fisheries (http://eng.sjavarutvegsraduneyti.is/) 3.3 extent of IUU (Illegal, unregulated and ICES Study Group on Unaccounted Fishing Mortality (SGUFM) unreported catch) 3.4 hunting ICES 2001, ICES 2005; www.iwcoffice.org; www.nammco.org Pawson, M. G. Tingley, D. Padda, G, and Glenn H. 2004. EU contract on “Sport Fisheries” (or Marine Recreational Fisheries) in the EU. 3.5 recreational fishing FISH/2004/011 4. Impacts of fisheries on the Report to the North Sea Ministerial Meeting on environmental impacts of fishing and shipping ecosystem 4.1. bycatch of non-target species, discards and Annual ICES Advice on Fisheries Management (www.ices.dk), Anon. 2004., Brown et al. (2005), CEC 2002a, CEC 2002b, CEC 2005, non-catch mortality FAO 1999. (e.g. ghost-fishing) 4.2. physical disturbance to the seabed and benthic Vessel Monitoring by Satellite (VMS) data exist by EU member state. habitats
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1
58
4.3 Fish ICES ACFM 4.4 Cephalopods ICES WGCEPH 4.5 Benthos ICES SGSOBS, ICES BEWG, ICES WGCRAN 4.6 Macrophytes www.algaebase.org 4.7 Zooplankton ICES WGZE 4.8 Phytoplankton ICES WKEUT (2006) 4.9 Seabirds ICES WGSE, EcoQO assessment 4.10 Marine mammals ICES WGMME, EcoQO assessment (taking in reporting under ASCOBANS No 812/2004) 4.11 Marine reptiles WGRED 4.12 Water column and ICES WGMHM biochemical habitat 4.13 Physical habitat ICES WGMHM 4.14 Impacts from fishing ICES WGECO 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, ICES WGFTFB 4.15 Genetic effects and effects on the ICES SGFIAC, WGAGFM, WGECO 2002, 2003 phenotype 5. Assessment of fisheries measures and their effectiveness 6. Conclusions and priorities
for action
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.5.5.4 Development of EcoQO on changes in the proportion of large fish and evaluation of size-based indicators
Request
This advice is a continuation of advice given in 2006 based on the OSPAR request for: “further development of the EcoQO on changes in the proportions of large fish and hence the average weight and average maximum length of the fish community” (ICES, 2006a).
Summary
In response to the OSPAR request, ICES in 2006 (ICES, 2006a) suggested that the goal for the North Sea fish community should be:
1) to halt as rapidly as possible, and begin to reverse by 2010, both the decline in the mean weight 2) and the decline in the proportion of large fish 3) and that the short-term operational targets should be:
• Based on survey catches: Halt the decline in the proportion of fish greater than 30 cm in length as rapidly as possible. • Based on survey estimates: Halt the decline in the mean weight of fish as rapidly as possible.
ICES work on the fish length and weight indicators in 2007 concentrated on three issues:
1) The indicators in the form proposed by ICES in 2006 (ICES, 2006a) are clearly sensitive to environment- related variations, i.e. trends due to high fishing pressure may be lost or obscured. A reformulation of the ‘Proportion of Large Fish’ indicator is therefore proposed by ICES, to make it less responsive to individual recruitment events and more responsive to fishing pressure.
2) Much of the analytical work that forms the basis for these indicators has been carried out in the 70-year Scottish August Groundfish Survey (SAGFS), which was discontinued in 1997. ICES proposes that future monitoring of the indicators should be based on the ICES Quarter 1 International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS).
3) The formulation of targets for the indicators referring to a historical period when fishing was sustainable was discussed, and a target value was proposed for the ‘Proportion of Large Fish’ indicator, corresponding to the 1983 level of the indicator derived from the IBTS survey. ICES further proposes that a target value for the ‘Mean Weight of Fish’, in addition to the ‘Proportion of Large Fish’ indicator, is not necessary.
Recommendations and advice
ICES recommends that:
• the EcoQO for restoration/conservation of the size-structure of the fish community of the North Sea should be “The proportion (by weight) of fish greater than 40 cm in length should be greater than 0.3”, in the ICES Q1 IBTS survey series. • no EcoQO needs to be set for the ‘Mean Weight of Fish’ indicator in the North Sea.
The ‘Proportion of Large Fish’ indicator
In a sustainably exploited fish community, large individuals and species with large Linfinity should be well represented. Indicators should capture well any effects of fishing on the larger component of the community without being obscured by variability in the number of small individuals, specifically related to recruitment variability. If designed correctly, the size-based indicators will capture trends in the size structure of the community without bias caused by the interannual variability in the abundance of small individuals.
One of the consequences of overfishing is that large individuals, and species with large Linfinity, are disproportionately reduced in the community (Jennings et al., 1998, 1999). The purpose of size-based community indicators is to track this effect of fishing. Another consequence of overfishing is that recruits, and species with small Linfinity (and usually shorter lifespans) comprise an increasingly large portion of the fish community, which makes interannual variability in
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 59 recruitment an increasingly dominant pattern in the community size dynamics, and makes any trend due to fishing an increasingly weak component of the overall patterns in size (Ricker, 1995; Ottersen and Loeng, 2000; Badalamenti et. al., 2002; Lekve et. al., 2002; Wilderbuer et. al., 2002).
Interannual variation around trends in the size-based indicators can reduce the signal-to-noise ratio to the point where trends become non-significant, and can lead to the conclusion that an anthropogenic activity, such as fishing, has not actually impacted the state of the community. In addition, where detrimental changes in size structure have been demonstrated, interannual variation in recruitment can wrongly suggest that remedial management actions have been ineffective or effective. Furthermore, the greater the noise around indicator trends, the more difficult it becomes to set the EcoQO (ICES, 2007b). ICES (ICES, 2007a) identified individual recruitment events as a major source of interannual variation. Specifically, they demonstrated that a strong year class of haddock in the North Sea had a pronounced effect on both of the size-based indicators previously proposed (ICES, 2006a). These abundant haddock recruits initially drove down the indicator (the proportion of large fish in the community decreased) and then subsequently pushed the indicator up (the proportion of large fish in the community increased as the fish in the strong year class grew larger).
ICES work in 2007 determined that the ‘large’ fish threshold of 30 cm set in 2006 (ICES, 2006a) was susceptible to the effects of the strong year class of haddock, particularly once this year class exceeded 30 cm in length. This threshold was set because it represented the top five-percentile of all the demersal fish sampled by the Scottish August Groundfish Survey (SAGFS) over the full 70-year duration of the survey. However, several of the more abundant species present in the North Sea, for example cod, haddock, and whiting, can reach this body length in two or three years, rendering the metric based on a 30-cm threshold sensitive to environment-related recruitment events that affect these species. Following the criteria laid down by ICES (2001), this is not a satisfactory property for an indicator whose purpose it is to demonstrate anthropogenic (fishing) impacts on the state of the fish community. Increasing the ‘large’ fish threshold to 40 cm addresses this issue to some extent due to the impact of fishing pressure while growing from 30 to 40 cm. The influence of recruitment events on the indicator is therefore lessened.
With a 40-cm threshold, there is no indication that stochastic sampling issues will unduly affect performance of the redefined indicator. Between 1 000 and 8 800 individual fish >40 cm were sampled in each of the individual SAGFS year group periods, and across the entire time-series fish >40 cm in length represented over 1.5% of the total number of fish sampled. In the IBTS data set, between 5 800 and 25 000 fish >40 cm were sampled each year and across the whole time-series fish over 40 cm represented more than 0.5% of the total number of fish sampled.
Using weight of fish greater than 40 cm rather than number of fish greater than 40 cm makes the indicator even less sensitive to environmental effects and more sensitive to fishing effects (ICES, 2007b). This is explicitly demonstrated in Figure 1.5.5.4.1 in which the available data from both North Sea time-series since 1970 are analysed. The diagrams demonstrate that, for both data sets, increasing the large fish threshold from 30 cm to 40 cm improved the linear fits. Changing the threshold and calculating the proportion of large fish on the basis of weight rather than numbers further improved the linear fits in both time-series and reduced the sensitivity of the indicator to an exceptionally strong environmentally driven recruitment event (ICES, 2007b).
60 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 >30cm by number >30cm by weight >40cm by number >40cm by weight R2 = 0.164 R2 = 0.607 R2 = 0.557 R2 = 0.783 0.2 0.7 0.04 0.5
0.16 0.6 0.03 0.4 SAGFS ge fish ge r 0.12 0.5 0.02 0.3 0.08 0.4 tion of la of tion r 0.01 0.2
opo 0.04 0.3 r P
0 0.2 0 0.1
1970 1980 1990 2000 1970 1980 1990 2000 1970 1980 1990 2000 1970 1980 1990 2000
>30cm by number >30cm by weight >40cm by number >40cm by weight R2 = 0.546 R2 = 0.631 R2 = 0.641 R2 = 0.704 0.12 0.6 0.016 0.4
0.5 0.012 0.3 IBTS ge fish ge
r 0.08 0.4 0.008 0.2 0.3 tion of la of tion
r 0.04 0.004 0.1
opo 0.2 r P
0 0.1 0 0
1980 1990 2000 2010 1980 1990 2000 2010 1980 1990 2000 2010 1980 1990 2000 2010 Year Year Year Year Figure 1.5.5.4.1 Temporal trends in the North Sea ’Proportion of Large Fish’ indicator calculated from both the SAGFS and the IBTS data sets, where the threshold defining large fish is either >30 cm or >40 cm, and where the proportion has been calculated on the basis of numbers or biomass. The solid line in the IBTS plots shows the linear fit to the time period 1983 to 2001, excluding the strong 1999 haddock cohort recruitment event. The correlation coefficients shown refer to this fit. The dashed lines show the linear fit to the entire IBTS time-series.
The next step is defining a reference time period to determine a target for the ‘Proportion (by weight) of Large Fish’ indicator. Two reference time periods for target setting have been suggested: the early 1980s on the basis that this was the period when fisheries advice was generally considered to maintain status quo (ICES, 2006b), and the early 1970s when stock biomasses were above Bpa, and fishing mortality was below Fpa (ICES, 2007a). It has always been recognised that if the reference period identified for setting EcoQO targets was earlier than the 1980s, then only one data set, the SAGFS, would be available. However, since this particular survey stopped in 1997, an alternative data set will have to be used to monitor the progress and effectiveness of management action. ICES chose to be pragmatic in setting a target value for the ‘Proportion of Large Fish’ indicator and suggested using the early 1980s as the basis, because this is the most recent period when fisheries advice was generally considered to maintain status quo, and because the earliest year from which IBTS survey data are available is 1983.
This pragmatic choice is supported by the general concordance between the SAGFS and the IBTS as well as the long- term consistency of this indicator in the longer SAGFS time-series (ICES, 2007b). The ‘Proportion of Large Fish’ indicator calculated from the two datasets shows similar temporal trends (Figure 1.5.5.4.2 a,b) and the correlations between the two data sets are high (Figure 1.5.5.4.3 a,b). The correlation coefficient is highest when the proportion of fish >40 cm is calculated based on weight rather than on numbers.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 61 Proportion Fish Proportion Fish Mean >40cm (N) >40cm (W) Weight (g) SAGFS SAGFS SAGFS 0.04 IBTS 0.016 0.4 IBTS 0.35 200 IBTS 100
0.35 90 0.3 0.03 160 0.012 0.3 80 IBTS IBTS IBTS
0.25
0.02 0.25 120 70 GFS
A 0.008
S SAGFS 0.2 SAGFS 0.2 60 0.01 80 0.15 0.004 0.15 50
0 0.1 0.1 40 40
1984 1988 1992 1996 1984 1988 1992 1996 1984 1988 1992 1996 Year Year Year Figure 1.5.5.4.2 Temporal trends in the ’Proportion of Large Fish’ (>40 cm by number and by weight) and ’Mean Fish Weight’ indicators calculated for both the SAGFS and the Q1 IBTS for the period where the two surveys overlapped.
Proportion (N) >40cm Proportion (W) >40cm Mean Weight
IBTS = 0.2832SAGFS + 0.00322 IBTS = 0.5904SAGFS + 0.05509 IBTS = 0.2588SAGFS + 48.4336 N = 14 N = 14 N = 14 R2 = 0.678 R2 = 0.767 R2 = 0.320 0.016 0.35 100
90 0.3 0.012 80 0.25
0.008 70 IBTS 0.2 60 0.004 0.15 50
0 0.1 40
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 40 80 120 160 200 SAGFS SAGFS SAGFS Figure 1.5.5.4.3 Between survey correlations in the ’Proportion of Large Fish’ (>40 cm by number and by weight) and ’Mean Fish Weight’ indicators calculated for both the SAGFS and the Q1 IBTS for the period where the two surveys overlapped.
Based on these analyses, ICES defines the ‘Proportion of Large Fish’ indicator as the proportion by weight of fish >40 cm in length in the IBTS survey. Its value in the years 1983–1985 varies between 0.24 and 0.30 (ICES, 2007b), with the highest value in 1983.
ICES advises that:
• the EcoQO for restoration/conservation of the size-structure of the fish community of the North Sea should be ‘The proportion (by weight) for fish greater than 40 cm in length should be greater than 0.3’, in the ICES Q1 IBTS survey series.
Current levels of the metric are about half of the advised EcoQO. To develop specific management measures to move the indicator from current levels towards the advised EcoQO target, additional modelling is required. ICES stresses that progress towards the target requires, as a minimum, a reduction in fishing mortality to below Fpa. However, until the appropriate modelling is undertaken, it is not possible to say with any confidence what level of fishing mortality is likely to result in achieving targets for the large fish indicator within given time frames. This additional modelling should provide a matrix of ‘target’ by ‘management action’ by ‘time scale to achieve target’, and reflect the inherent high variability in the metric (ICES, 2007b).
62 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 ICES recommends that when calculating the ‘Proportion of Large Fish’ indicator, significant changes in fish community composition should be reported. Such changes could influence interpretation of the indicator (e.g. two very different communities–one dominated by groundfish versus one dominated by elasmobranches–could have a similar ‘Proportion of Large Fish’ indicator).
ICES also cautions that the analysis presented here to identify the most appropriate length threshold for defining a ‘large fish’ is specific to the North Sea. ICES recognises that the threshold of 40 cm may be entirely inappropriate for fish communities resident in other marine regions and subject to different fisheries regimes and environmental conditions. If a similar indicator is required for other fish communities, then an analytical procedure similar to the one followed here will be needed to identify appropriate length thresholds.
The ‘Mean Weight of Fish’ indicator
The ‘Mean Weight of Fish’ indicator was developed because the information it conveyed to managers and other stakeholders was clear and readily comprehensible without the need for a scientific background. Calculation of the indicator requires only survey data that provide total catch weights and a count of the fish in the catch.
Analyses conducted by ICES in 2007 show that this indicator is immediately influenced by environmental conditions that give rise to strong recruitment events (ICES, 2007b). Consequently, temporal trends in this indicator are far more affected by interannual variation than the “Proportion of Large Fish” indicator (ICES, 2007b). There is little that can be done to reduce the sensitivity of the “Mean Weight of Fish” indicator to environmental influence. The loss of large fish from the community resulting from high levels of fishing mortality is the main issue of concern and is explicitly mapped by the “Proportion of Large Fish” indicator as proposed above. The “Mean Weight of Fish” indicator was strongly correlated with the “Proportion of Large Fish” indicator as it was originally defined (proportion by number >30 cm), but with each change to reduce the sensitivity of the latter indicator to environmental influence, the correlation between the two indicators was reduced (Figure 1.5.5.4.4).
>30cm by number >30cm by weight >40cm by number >40cm by weight R2 = 0.923 R2 = 0.673 R2 = 0.578 R2 = 0.365 160 160 160 160
140 140 140 140
120 120 120 120
100 100 100 100 Mean Weight (g) Weight Mean 80 80 80 80 SAGFS
60 60 60 60
0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 0.010.020.030.04 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
>30cm by number >30cm by weight >40cm by number >40cm by weight R2 = 0.717 R2 = 0.360 R2 = 0.535 R2 = 0.092 120 120 120 120
100 100 100 100
80 80 80 80
60 60 60 60 Mean Weight (g) Weight Mean 40 40 40 40 IBTS
20 20 20 20
0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0 0.004 0.008 0.012 0.016 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Proportion of Large Fish Proportion of Large Fish Proportion of Large Fish Proportion of Large Fish Figure 1.5.5.4.4. Relationships between the “Mean Weight of Fish” and the “Proportion of Large Fish” indicators where large fish are defined as either >30 cm or >40 cm, and where proportions are calculated on the basis of numbers or of weight.
Almost all surveys undertaken in the North Sea provide numbers- and weight-at-length data for all the species sampled, allowing the “Proportion of Large Fish” indicator to be calculated in addition to the “Mean Weight of Fish” indicator. Considering that the “Mean Weight of Fish” indicator is sensitive to environmental influence, while the “Proportion of Large Fish” indicator can be tailored so that it is primarily sensitive to the anthropogenic activity that is subject to management, an EcoQO target need only be set for the latter indicator. Hence ICES recommends that
• no EcoQO needs to be set for the “Mean Weight of Fish” indicator in the North Sea.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 63 However, the “Mean Weight of Fish” EcoQ metric reflects important fish community properties such as recruitment events and should be retained. The metric should be monitored over time to reflect the general effect of environmental conditions on the fish community.
Source of information
Badalamenti, G., Anna, G. D., Pinnegar, J. K., and Polunin, N. V. C. 2002. Size-related trophodynamic changes in three target fish species recovering from intensive trawling. Marine Biology, 141, 561–570. ICES. 2001. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Ecosystems. ICES Cooperative Research Report, 249, 75. ICES. 2006a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, 2006. ICES Advice 2006. ICES. 2006b. Report of the Working Group on Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities (WGECO). ICES CM 2006/ACE:05. ICES. 2007a. Report of the Working Group on Fish Ecology (WGFE). ICES CM 2007/LRC:03. ICES. 2007b. Report on the Working Group on Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities (WGECO). ICES CM 2007/ACE:04. Jennings, S., Reynolds, J. D., and Mills, S. C. 1998. Life history correlates of responses to fisheries exploitation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 265, 1–7. Jennings, S., Greenstreet, S. P. R., and Reynolds, J. 1999. Structural change in an exploited fish community: a consequence of differential fishing effects on species with contrasting life histories. Journal of Animal Ecology, 68, 617–27. Lekve, K., Ottersen, G., Stenseth, N. C., and Gjösæter, J. 2002. Length dynamics in juvenile coastal Skagerrak cod: effects of biotic and abiotic factors. Ecology, 86, 1676–1688. Ottersen, G., and Loeng, H. 2000. Covariability in early growth and year class strength of Barents Sea cod, haddock, and herring: the environmental link. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57, 339–348. Ricker, W. E. 1995. Trends in the average size of Pacific salmon in Canadian catches. In Climate Change and Northern Fish Populations (ed R. J. Beamish), pp. 593–602. Wilderbuer, T. K., Hollowed, A. B., Ingraham, W. J., Spencer, P. D., Connors, M. E., Bond, N. A., and Walters, G. E. 2002. Flatfish recruitment response to decadal climatic variability and ocean conditions in the eastern Bering Sea. Progress in Oceanography, 55, 235–247.
64 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.5.5.5 An integrated framework for ecosystem advice in European Seas
ACE has, as a recurring exercise, continued to ‘Develop and report on an integrated framework for the further provision of ecosystem advice in European Seas drawing on existing experience with implementing the OSPAR EcoQO framework, the implementation of an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management, and proposals for the European Marine Strategy’. This information is presented in an extract form and readers should refer to the report of the Working Group on Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities for more detailed information.
Preamble
ICES continued to review and refine the development of an integrated framework for the provision of ecosystem advice. This overview broadly summarises the different examples of work towards the end and identifies some pertinent issues applicable to all of the approaches. In addition, ICES has endeavoured to further develop the framework and specifically advise upon the OSPAR framework. Of particular interest have been efforts at identifying synergies among the different approaches. Consequently, a plausible way to move forward is suggested which allows all these policy activities to draw on a single unified methodology or framework with which to apply the ecosystem assessment. To this end, ICES has continued to assess the key pressures on marine ecosystems (linked to human activities), identify the principle ecosystem components and latterly, provide a weighting of the significance of the interactions between the pressures and the ecosystem components.
Introduction
It is fully appreciated that the ecosystem approach to the management of human activities requires an awareness of the scales and impacts of a range of human activities on components of the ecosystem. To be fully effective, criteria for a useful management framework should also demonstrate the interaction between pressures and ecosystem components and also inform managers on those management options that are most likely to be needed. The metrics, indicators, data series, and reference levels that could be used to monitor these key pressures are therefore fundamental to the success of this framework. As a consequence, there has recently been increased interest in the development of practical methods for linking ecosystem components together to provide management advice. In four recent examples with broadly similar intentions, similar approaches were adopted with varying degrees of completion. These examples are based on the needs for broad-scale ecosystem assessment, planning future requirements of monitoring and assessment programmes, and their use for provision of ecosystem advice in a management context. These four approaches are as follows:
1 ) ICES has developed a framework to link manageable human activities with the pressures they cause in the marine ecosystem (ICES, 2005, 2006). This task was driven by the request from the EU to provide integrated and ecosystem advice. To this end, ICES has developed a two-table matrix to link individual ecosystem components with specific pressures (and with associated activities). Selecting indicators for the parts of the matrix where key interactions occurred would provide a clear starting point for prioritising management actions. 2 ) OSPAR has also developed a pressure/component matrix which also links human activities with relevant pressures. It has demonstrated how EcoQOs developed to date can provide information on specific parts of the ecosystem to support management action. 3 ) The EU Marine Strategy Directive will require the achievement of good ecological status at a regional level, with the establishment of clear environmental targets and monitoring programmes. Initially, Member States will be required to assess the status of the essential characteristics of the environment in addition to analysing the predominant pressures of human activities. 4 ) Combination of these variables in a matrix format will allow Member States to select priority pressures and components that require further monitoring, assessment and management. 5 ) The European Environment Agency (EEA) used the list of ecosystem components and human pressures from the Marine Strategy Directive to develop an inventory of indicators for each marine region and undertake a preliminary assessment of gaps where there are no indicators. In terms of regional coverage, the majority of potential indicators were either not available at the regional level or were available only in some regions. 1) A process which identified those ecosystem components that were of highest priority for future indicator development was not available to EEA, but could be based on the same matrix approach described earlier.
Of the four approaches described, only the methodologies developed by OSPAR and ICES have prepared a matrix describing pressures against ecosystem components. Both are ecosystem assessments, and not integrated ecosystem assessments. Work within EEA has to date focussed on deriving comprehensive lists of indicators and a process for their further development and implementation in the context of pan-European assessment. The Marine Strategy Directive, although agreed in draft by Ministers, has yet to be completed. Annexes to the Directive list pressures and
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 65 impacts of human activities together with comprehensive categories of ecosystem components which may require management actions. No integrated framework has been suggested which brings these tabulations together for the benefit of management.
Issues arising
A number of issues have emerged in the process of resolving the different frameworks.
Definitions and terminology
There is a growing problem with the terminology used to refer to the different types of assessments that are being conducted. The types of assessments are diversifying, and the scientific community as a whole has not converged on a single set of terms to differentiate the various types of assessments. For example, when referring to an ‘integrated framework’, does OSPAR want to integrate impacts across multiple components within a single activity or does it want to conduct an integrated planning of multiple activities?
Sector-specific and multi-sector integrated ecosystem assessments both have valuable uses, and again there is no established terminology for differentiating among them. It would be useful to establish such terminology, as well as terminology to clarify whether an integrated ecosystem assessment is intended to produce estimates of Pressure and Response indicators directly, or simply to support their estimation outside the assessment. Without clear language on these issues, confusion and sometimes misunderstandings about what will or will not be done in different assessments can be expected to arise with increasing frequency.
The establishment of terminological standards for the entire discipline of ecosystem assessments is not easily achieved and is beyond the current remit of ICES. However, ICES does provide a set of descriptions of the types of assessments, and a clarification of its own terminology, to guide interpretation of its own reports now and in the future (WGECO, 2007).
It is clear that in the absence of a unified terminology among the agencies implementing ecosystem assessments, it is imperative that those purporting to carry out ecosystem assessments must clearly define the components of the assessment as well as their goals so that there are no ambiguities when interpreting outputs. As an example, when ICES refers to plans to conduct or use results from an “ecosystem assessment” or an “integrated assessment”, ICES should specify exactly:
• what components of the ecosystem and human activities were included? • which values were specifically estimated as part of the assessment, or were they derived independently? • What is the balance of the professional experts and stakeholders and was the assessment carried out by an independent scientific body, government agency, and/or industry sector?
Otherwise misunderstandings resulting from misinterpretation of the results and outputs are likely to occur.
Scope of ecosystem assessments
The framework developed by ICES (ICES 2006) applied only to a fully marine offshore environment, although the group recognised that some ecosystem components will spend periods of time in the coastal zone (e.g. seabirds at nesting sites, seals at haul-outs). Thus, a particular ecosystem component may only be affected by a specified pressure in the coastal zone, suggesting that a fully comprehensive integrated assessment should ultimately take into account pressures and impacts acting in offshore, coastal, and terrestrial systems, where relevant.
Modifications to the OSPAR approach
It is important to note that the process developed by OSPAR was designed primarily to identify priorities for monitoring and assessment, based on a broad overview of the ecosystem and all relevant pressures on it. Nevertheless, the identification of some important pressure/component interactions, and the identification of the OSPAR EcoQOs for these interactions, does provide the opportunity for this approach to be developed further. In particular, it could be used for the provision of advice based on the reference points of the indicators and other relevant EcoQOs. Consequently, ICES has taken the OSPAR framework and suggests modifications which may allow it to be used for ecosystem assessment. Initial efforts at this task are described below.
66 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Ecosystem components (columns)
Ecosystem components provide a set of ‘descriptive components’ of the ecosystem (based on the main phyla for the pelagic/mobile species and the major habitat types for the seabed). The basis for the ecosystem components in the OSPAR paper (Table 1.5.5.5.1) was the original set of OSPAR ‘EcoQO elements’ and the ‘ecosystem characteristics’ set out in Annex II of the draft Marine Strategy Directive (EC, 2005). Some modifications were made, for example the EcoQO elements benthic communities and habitats were combined and then subdivided into intertidal, subtidal, and deepwater habitats to reflect differences in pressures.
Ideally the selection of ecosystem components will reflect all major aspects of the system, rather than being rigidly based on a phylogenetic or taxonomic hierarchy that is applied equally across all taxa. For example, it might be acceptable to have a single category ‘seabirds’, and yet combine all marine teleosts and elasmobranchs into ‘deep-sea fish’, ‘pelagic fish’, and ‘demersal fish’. Whatever the categorisation, it is necessary that monitoring activity within an ecosystem component is sufficiently comprehensive to assess structural and functional attributes of key fauna, i.e. individual components are either identified as separate column headers themselves or within an aggregated column as separate monitoring programmes and/or indicators.
In the absence of clear rules as to how ecosystem components are selected, then a set which would be appropriate for the main policy drivers listed in the introduction could be closely based on the OSPAR set. The following changes to the column headers in Table 1.5.5.5.1 are proposed:
• Divide Plankton into Phytoplankton and Zooplankton, to reflect their different biology and response to stressors and also the interests of the Marine Strategy Directive. • There was some merit in retaining the deep-sea fish category as it represented an important component of the marine ecosystem that was under considerable pressure. Although the deep-sea fish category suggested by OSPAR could be included in the demersal fish category, it was recognised that separate indicators would then be needed to reflect the differing fishing industries and geographical/habitat differences between deep-sea and shelf sea fish communities.
ICES acknowledges the important role of micro-zooplankton and bacteria in regulating processes in the marine environment; however, insufficient information was available to include it as a separate component in the matrix. If specific information were to become available in the future it might warrant consideration for inclusion. The components describing seabed habitat can also be categorised in a number of ways. WGECO (ICES, 2006) selected only ‘water column and biochemical habitat’ and ‘physical habitat’, whereas OSPAR identified six habitat categories (Table 1.5.5.5.1). This greater degree of subdivision is appropriate for the OSPAR Strategies and the Marine Strategy Directive, however it was noted that neither matrix reflects ‘functional components’, such as primary producers, secondary producers, and top predators particularly well. It was considered important to reflect ecosystem functioning within the framework, but there were different ways this might be achieved. The following points were noted:
• A full set of ecosystem functions was not yet available, because the science was still in a developmental stage and their use as the primary basis for the structure of the matrix (columns) therefore had some risks. • The main pressures on the ecosystem are monitored more clearly from distinct types of species or major habitats rather than from their effects on ecosystem function. Some pressures (e.g. chemical contaminants) could act on multiple functional components (primary producers, predators).
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 67 Table 1.5.5.5.1 Column headers used in the OSPAR matrix to categorise all ecosystem components.
Marine Strategy Ecosystem OSPAR OSPAR EcoQ Directive Annex II themes & Detailed Component element: Strategy: characteristics: components: Plankton Phytoplankton & Plankton communities zooplankton Commercial fish, Fish - pelagic Fish - demersal, Fish Fish populations Biodiversity Mobile/pelagic benthic & coastal communities Strategy species Fish - deep sea Marine Cetaceans Marine mammals mammals Seals Seabirds Seabirds Seabirds Reptiles Turtles Intertidal rock Topography & Intertidal sediment & bathymetry of biogenic reef seabed; Seabed Benthic Seabed habitats, Coastal subtidal rock Biodiversity habitats & biological communities, communities communities & Coastal subtidal Strategy Habitats (angiosperms, species sediment & biogenic macroalgae & reef invertebrate bottom Shelf seabed fauna) (~50-200m) Deep seabed
Nutrient budgets Nutrients (DIN, Nutrient levels & Eutrophication & production TN,DIP, TP, TOC) balance (N/P) Strategy Oxygen Oxygen levels in Oxygen consumption water & sediment Hazardous Water quality Synthetic compound Substances Strategy levels
Offshore oil & gas Hydro-carbon levels industry Strategy Radioactive Radioactivity levels Substances Strategy
Currents, upwelling, mixing, residence Ocean currents time Wave action & storm Wave exposure frequency Annual & seaonal No specific temperature regime, Ocean processes Temperature regimes OSPAR Strategy ice cover Spatial & temporal distribution of Salinity regimes salinity
Whatever the final selection of components, they should collectively take account of the entire marine ecosystem and those elements known to be affected by specific activities. Furthermore, when the suite of components are assessed and found to be in a favourable condition, then the marine ecosystem as a whole (i.e. the sum of the components) should be considered to have reached a good status.
We therefore suggest that the precise categorisation of components can be matched to the needs of the policy customer, and that there is unlikely to be a single, agreed set of ecosystem categories which will be appropriate everywhere. There have been several recent examples where matrices of human pressures and ecosystem components have been used as part of ecosystem assessments. The interactions in the matrix are coloured according to the perceived importance of the individual interaction to create an overall visual effect. Such ‘traffic light’ presentations are strongly influenced by the number of rows and columns. For example, a subdivision of the fish component into four categories, all of which are closely linked to the pressure of fishing activity, will be visually more compelling than if only one fish category was used.
68 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Including considerations of ecosystem function as an ecosystem component
While not explicitly part of the review of the approaches taken to provide ecosystem advice for OSPAR, ICES is aware of the development of a methodology for incorporating ecological structure and functioning into the designation of Special Areas of Conservation (Bremner et. al., 2006). These included the identification of 10 key aspects of ecosystem functioning:
Energy and elemental cycling (carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulphur) PHYSICAL PROCESSES Silicon cycling Calcium carbonate cycling Modification of physical processes Food supply/export Productivity Habitat/refugia provision BIOLOGICAL PROCESSES Temporal pattern (population variability, community resistance, and resilience) Propagule supply/export (e.g., larvae) Adult immigration/emigration
Conceptually, a matrix of these 10 functional aspects against a suite of anthropogenic pressures (‘function × pressure matrix) could be produced, similar in concept to the text table above. Such a matrix would quickly identify potentially disruptive practices to ecosystem function and the functional aspects most concerned, and allow for mitigative measures to be put in place, while remaining sufficiently generic to be adaptable to any ecosystem. However, for many of these components, some difficult work will be needed to develop specific ecosystem objectives and indicators. It is important to note that this approach also does not directly identify loss of species and indeed, provided that the function of the species is replaced, species can disappear entirely in this scheme.
ICES acknowledges that this approach might not be consistent with the specific goals outlined by OSPAR, but it does represent an alternative approach to populating a matrix. Notwithstanding the difficulties mentioned above in developing specific ecosystem function objectives and indicators, it does highlight the flexibility of the framework that has been developed and how this might be used to fulfil multiple management objectives.
Including genetic diversity as an ecosystem component
Within the broader concept of monitoring and maintenance of biodiversity across ecosystems it is of paramount importance to account for genetic diversity for the different ecosystem components under consideration (Kenchington, 2003; Kenchington et. al., 2003). Metrics should, wherever possible, be used to quantify genetic diversity of components. WGECO was tasked in 2002 and 2003 with developing advisory forms appropriate to the preservation of genetic diversity from detrimental impacts of fishing (ICES, 2002, 2003). Nielsen and Kenchington (2001) grouped marine organisms into five categories based on life-history characteristics and population dynamics which are important to the conservation of genetic diversity and suggested management objectives for each.
In the context of biodiversity processes and food web complexity (Bascompte et. al., 2005), recent work points out the need to relate community structure and co-evolutionary interactions and how these are related to biodiversity processes (Bascompte et. al., 2006). This conceptual approach will promote the need to address the problem of maintaining genetic diversity and develop management tools toward preserving natural genetic diversity in marine ecosystems and fisheries management (Conover and Munch, 2002).
Main human activities and their key impacts (rows)
The work of WGECO (ICES, 2005b, 2006) noted that ecosystem components responded to the pressures exerted by human activities, rather than to the activities themselves, and so used these in their assessment matrix. A separate table was developed which cross-referenced these pressures to the human activities that were responsible for them. This method reduced the size of the matrix and simplified the format. The set of human activities and their main impacts in the OSPAR framework had been developed from lists used in OSPAR MPA management papers and the Marine Strategy Directive. The framework had organised these against the generic set of impacts given in Annex II of the MSD. The format used in the OSPAR work referenced both the pressure and the activity in the row header. This had the disadvantage of including many more rows in the matrix, but meant that all the necessary information was available in one place.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 69 WGECO examined the list of human activities and their key impacts and considered the list to offer a reasonably comprehensive set that covered the issues defined in the MSD. Should specific issues arise further types of activity and impact could readily be added to the matrix. There should be a balance between developing exhaustive lists of activities and their impacts, and keeping the matrix to a manageable size to identify the key issues of concern at a regional sea scale.
Assessment ratings to show the importance of each interaction (cell)
There is a growing tendency to use scale-based systems to rank individual cells within a matrix and generate a ‘traffic light’ effect. This occurs at three levels: 1) determining the colour or rank of individual cells; 2) determining the cumulative affects on a single component across activities for a single component, or across components within an activity; 3) integrated across the whole matrix.
The first is relatively straightforward and we compare and contrast the OSPAR and WGECO approaches. The second is more difficult as it requires determination of a scoring system that can combine multiple effects on a single ecosystem component, in a way that is equitable between many components. For example a score of 3 on a scale of 0–10 might result in unacceptably high mortality for one component, but be within the tolerance range of another. Closely related ecosystem components (for example amongst different types of seabirds) may be more similar in this regard; however, moving across component groups (for example between birds and benthos) for multiple pressures of human activities will provide major challenges. Until this can be resolved WGECO is reluctant to advise on an integrated ecosystem assessment framework based upon such a traffic light approach; however, we do discuss the first steps of a rating process.
Determining the colour or rank of individual cells
The OSPAR framework defined three levels of interactions in their matrix (as described in ICES 2007), namely: a ) No impact, b ) Possible impact, c ) Likely impact and then applied one of three colours to each cell in the matrix to reflect these categories. The resultant colour coded matrix provides an easily understandable view of which ecosystem components are being most affected by which human activities. The OSPAR paper acknowledged that the assessments had been undertaken rapidly to gain an initial overview and would benefit from a more structured methodology for the assessments.
WGECO applied a very similar approach in 2005, but in 2006 chose an alternative approach which considered two aspects, namely the extent of impact (widespread or local) and the intensity of the pressure (chronic or acute) and applied these to the tables, relating types of impact to ecosystem components (Table 4.2.5.1 in ICES, 2005). Widespread and acute (WA) interactions are considered to highlight the most important pressures because they will cause a large and rapid change in an ecosystem component over a significant extent of the area being assessed.
We applied the WGECO rating scheme to a subset of the OSPAR table which included the Mobile Pelagic Ecosystem Components (see Table 1.5.5.5.1) and the complete array of stressors (Figure 1.5.5.5.1). Plankton was separated into phytoplankton and zooplankton, and activities that were not scored directly in our 2006 report were rated using the same system. Interestingly, the two systems did not agree well with one another. For the OSPAR grey cells which indicated no impact, the WGECO framework identified some degree of impact in 58% of the cells, with about half being acute effects either local or widespread (Table 1.5.5.5.2). For the OSPAR tan colour-code the WGECO system failed to identify 9% of the cells and the greatest percentage of cells were classed as Locally Chronic. This is consistent with an intermediate designation. Only for the OSPAR yellow-code (likely impact) did the two systems concur somewhat with both identifying some type of impact in all cells. However, WGECO viewed the Widespread Acute cells to be the most important, and these were found in only 43.5% of the OSPAR yellow-coloured cells. The OSPAR yellow-coloured cells included the whole spectrum of WGECO impact levels with the lowest level (Local Chronic) being the second most common. This illustrates the importance of identifying a consistent coding approach.
70 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Table 1.5.5.5.2 Percent of individual cells within each WGECO effect category for each of the three OSPAR matrix colour codes.
OSPAR LOCAL EFFECTS WIDESPREAD EFFECTS MATRIX UNKNOWN CHRONIC ACUTE CHRONIC ACUTE NO EFFECT COLOUR-CODE Grey 0.07% 22.4% 14.4% 3.5% 11.5% 41.5% (No impact) Tan 5.7% 30.2% 18.9% 11.3% 24.5% 9.4% (Possible impact) Yellow 0 30.4% 8.7% 17.4% 43.5% 0 (Likely impact)
In Figure 1.5.5.5.1 we present part of the OSPAR matrix but modified to separate the Plankton ecosystem component into Phytoplankton and Zooplankton. To follow the approach developed by WGECO (ICES, 2006), we scored all cells in the OSPAR matrix using the WGECO spatial/intensity classification system, and included indicators generated by the EU STECF exercise to identify ecosystem indicators for fisheries (EU, 2007).
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 71 72 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1
72 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1
73
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 73
Figure 1.5.5.5.1 Part of the OSPAR matrix showing a complete list of human pressures (rows) and a partial selection of ecological components (columns) relating only to species and habitats. Plankton was split into Zooplankton and Phytoplankton but otherwise no changes were made to the original columns. Grey cells describe where an impact is considered unlikely or not significant, orange cells are those where an impact is possible and/or reasonably significant, and yellow cells are those where an impact is likely or significant. Text within cells describe the best location for OSPAR EcoQO (red text), OSPAR threatened and declining species (black text), and recommended STECF indicators to support the environmental integration in fisheries (italic text). The interaction between specific pressures and individual ecosystem components used by WGECO is applied to the cells. LC = locally chronic; LA = locally acute; WC = widespread chronic; WA = widespread acute; U = unknown; N =none or negligible effect (strongest WA>LA, A>C, WC>LC weakest). Note: the table is in 2 parts with the column and row headers repeated on each part for convenience. Footnotes refer to the last column in the figure: 1. impact of dredging here includes spoil disposal; 2. chronic, but time limited; 3. depends on the pathogens; 4. impacts from slipped catches on seabed; 5. on deep-sea bed linked to Lophelia.
Indicators in cells
Indicators which are specific to a manageable activity, and which reflect trends in a specific component of the ecosystem, will be important to ensure that ecosystem goals are achieved. Prioritisation to highlight the most important interactions between pressures and components (ICES 2007) will ensure that limited monitoring and assessment resources are allocated to the most important areas for management action. Key interactions may require several indicators of state, attribute, and pressure to ensure that sufficient data are available for managers. The OSPAR framework has illustrated this process by populating the cells of the matrix with two datasets that the Biodiversity Committee considers to be of great policy interest – these are the developed set of Ecological Quality Objectives, and the initial list of threatened and declining species (Figure 1.5.5.5.1). WGECO added to this set by incorporating STECF indicators for ecosystem considerations in fisheries management (EC, 2007). Further attention should be paid to this process, particularly to include the large number of physical and contaminant monitoring datasets and indicators that contribute to the OSPAR Joint Assessment and Monitoring Programme (JAMP).
Number of indicators per cell and Pressure-State-Response relationship
Row headers define the anthropogenic activities, but the processes by which particular activities impinge on different ecosystem components vary. Thus fishing activity affects benthic habitats by removing physical components and fish populations by increasing mortality among the larger sized individuals. The proportion of the area fished might be considered to be an appropriate pressure indicator for the former, and fishing mortality better for the latter. At each intersection of the rows (anthropogenic activities) and columns (ecosystem components), the most appropriate indicator of the ‘pressure’ imposed by each specific anthropogenic activity on each particular ecosystem component needs to be identified.
Similarly, each ecosystem component may be affected differently by different anthropogenic activities. Thus seals are likely to be affected quite differently by fishing activity and heavy metal contamination. For the former, population size might constitute the appropriate indicator of state, while for the latter, contaminant levels in blubber samples would better convey the changes in component state resulting from the activity. So for each component, several state indicators might be required to take account of all possible aspects of changing state, given the range of different anthropogenic activities likely to influence the component. At each cell, the most appropriate indicator of state can be inserted such that the indicator demonstrates the impact of the activity in question on the ecosystem component concerned. Following this approach, the pressure and state indicators at each cell location should be tightly linked through a strong ‘cause and effect’ relationship. This is important if these tables are used for advice on appropriate management to mitigate the impacts of particular anthropogenic activities on ecosystem components. At each cell location, the management action could be quantified through the application of a response indicator, such that the ‘Pressure–State–Response’ (PSR) management framework could be applied.
Other issues
Some other aspects relating to ecosystem assessment addressed by ICES were considered beyond the scope of the specific advice request. Questions relating to actual assessment methodology and scoring of impacts were highlighted with specific reference to assessing cumulative impacts and highlighting the sensitivity of scoring systems. The problems selecting a realistic and appropriately sensitive scoring system were highlighted but not progressed further.
74 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1
Conclusions and recommendations
As ICES continues to give advice on human activities affecting marine ecosystems it is important that this advice is underpinned by sound and credible science. It is important to point out that any information feeding into the development of ecosystem assessment frameworks and subsequent actions resulting as a consequence (e.g. decision support systems and management, see Appendix 1 for examples) must similarly be based upon sound scientific method and output.
Work on this integration exercise has shown that it is possible to bring together existing approaches in an improved methodology to identify priorities for monitoring and assessment. Combining the three-colour impact scale of OSPAR with the WGECO spatial scale and impact scoring system has been successful, yet requires further work to synchronise the results where there are differences in interpretation. This is not a fundamental problem and it is likely that a number of iterations will be required before a satisfactory product is obtained. We have concentrated on the biotic components of the ecosystem, but recognise that the physical, chemical, and contaminant components need to be dealt with in the same way. This is also a manageable process that could be achieved by working closely with relevant ICES experts and those responsible for the OSPAR Joint Assessment and Monitoring Programme. More work will also be needed to populate the cells in the assessment matrix with the best indicators, both making use of those under development in the EEA, and EU, and adding new indicators for state or pressure. This will be a useful contribution to the further development of the OSPAR EcoQO framework.
Sources of Information
Bascompte, J., Jordano, P., and Olsen, J. M. 2006. Asymetric coevolutionary networks facilitate biodiversity maintenance. Science, 312:431–433. Bascompte, J., Melian, C. J., and Sala, E. 2005. Interaction strength combinations and the overfishing of a marine food web. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 102:5443–5447. Bremner, J., Paramor, O. A. L., and Frid, C. L. J. 2006. Developing a methodology for incorporating ecological structure and functioning into designation of Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) in the 0–12 nautical mile zone. A Report from the University of Liverpool to English Nature. Conover, D. O. and Munch, S. B. 2002. Sustaining fisheries yields over evolutionary time scales. Science, 297:94–96. EC. 2005. Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Framework for Community Action in the field of Marine Environmental Policy (Marine Strategy Directive) [SEC (2005) 1290], Brussels. EU. 2007. Report of the STECF-SGRN-06-01: Data Collection Regulation Review. Brussels 19–23 June, 2006. Commission staff working paper. 88 pp. ICES. 2002. Report of the Working Group on the Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities. ICES, Copenhagen. ICES CM 2002/ACE:03 Ref. D, E, G. ICES. 2003. Report of the Working Group on Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities (WGECO). WGECO Report 2003 ICES Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, ACE:05. ICES. 2005. Report of the Working Group on Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities (WGECO). WGECO Report 2005 ICES Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, ACE:04, 146 pp. ICES. 2006. Report of the Working Group on Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities (WGECO). WGECO Report 2006 ICES Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, ACE:05, 179 pp. ICES. 2007. Report of the Working Group on Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities (WGECO). WGECO Report 2007 ICES Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, ACE:04. Kenchington, E. 2003. The effects of fishing on species and genetic diversity. In: M. Sinclair and G. Valdimarson (eds.). Responsible fisheries in the marine ecosystem. Chapter 14, pp. 235–253. CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK, 448 pp. Kenchington, E., Heino, M., and Nielsen, E. Eg. 2003. Managing marine genetic diversity: Time for action? ICES Journal of Marine Science 60:1172–1176. Nielsen, E. E., and Kenchington, E. 2001. Prioritising marine fish and shellfish populations for conservation: A useful concept? Fish and Fisheries 2 328–343.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 75
Annex 1: Ecosystem Advice - Examples of where science is applied to decision-making and management processes
Example 1: Applying ecosystem assessments to management
As a mechanism to introduce ecosystem assessments, ICES has for the past few years been requested to provide fisheries advice while taking cognisance of ecosystem characteristics. In earlier forms of advice this has taken the form of a chapter in the advice giving an overview on the principle ecosystem components – this practice has continued to this day and generally takes the form of a summary of ecosystem components and the major environmental influences on ecosystem dynamics, as well as an overview of human impacts of the ecosystem and specifically a commentary on the fishery effects on benthos and fish communities.
To progress this ICES has built on its past work with Ecosystem Objectives, Indicators, and Reference Points to provide a small number of promising ecosystem indicators for use in management, and to test performance when used with the “classic 3-stage model” for harvest control rules. ICES considers this general framework for placing indices of ecosystem properties into the accepted three-stage model for management advice within a precautionary approach to be a sound and practical way forward. Several aspects of the framework require further development, but some of the more important tasks are also considered to be tractable. Two priority activities for further development of the framework would be:
As soon as the system for evaluating the performance of ecosystem indicators in the three-stage model is available, ICES should use it for testing the performance of the indicators that it has considered promising in past deliberations, and other indicators promoted for use by various bodies;
Examine evidence from a range of ecosystem indicators, to see if it is indeed possible to assign them to one of the small number of categories of recoverability.
ICES also notes the need to commence dialogue on some points about implementing this (or any other) framework for using ecosystem indicators to guide management. Points that require further dialogue include:
Society can choose to use reference points as triggers for maximally restrictive management, if it wishes. However, where it has been possible for science advisors to estimate these limit reference points, science advisors should respect them in science advice, even if society has not chosen to respect the limits in management;
This framework has been developed assuming that it will always be clear on what constitutes an “improvement” in an indicator (this does not assume that all indicators have to increase in numerical value, just that the direction of “improvement” is known). However, the value of “improvements” in some of the more integrative ecosystem indicators may not be clear to society, even if the value is obvious to scientists. If the indicators are going to function effectively in rule-based management, the ecosystem value of the indicator needs to be communicated to those implementing the “control rules”, and those whose behaviours are to be controlled by the rules;
In any particular case the framework does not indicate what human activities would need to be managed, nor with what tools.
76 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1
Example 2 - Applying an argumentation analysis framework for a management-related participatory process
Incorporating ecosystem elements either quantitatively or qualitatively into science-based advice is discussed in example 1.
However, while the science framework is the foundation for the advice, how it is developed and by whom is also a matter of concern in an ecosystem approach. Industry and other stakeholders involvement in the development of ecosystem-based advice, and in the decisions for associated trade-offs is considered a precondition for successful implementation of the proposed (and agreed) measures.
Using Community legislation as an example, Member States will be ensuring that all interested parties are given early and effective opportunities to participate in the implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Directive. This participatory process as a part-integrated framework for ecosystem-based advice has not attracted much attention so far. In European Seas, the involvement of the fishing industry and other stakeholders can partly be achieved through dialogue with the RACs. The fisheries advisory process is well into developing this process. Fisheries scientific advice is followed by a negotiation process which results in management conclusions that deviate from ICES advice, (Aps et al., 2007).
The concept of a good environmental status (e.g. in the EU Marine Strategy Directive) is used as a basis for: (1) development and implementation of the science and monitoring programmes (knowledge production), (2) justification of environmental targets based on knowledge and other objectives, and (3) development and implementation of programmes of corresponding measures. Rahwan et. al., 2006 provides an analytical framework “Argumentation Analysis” to understand these processes which are at least partly based on negotiations and dialogue, i.e. argumentation and recognise three distinct argumentation frameworks (1) knowledge (beliefs)–is it true and relevant, (2) what objectives should be adopted and how they are justified, and (3) what actions should be adopted in order to achieve the objectives.
The science advice is a knowledge producing step and should be as objective as possible. The “agreeing management measure process” includes dialogue and negotiations among management and stakeholders. This negotiation process is particular cumbersome where stakeholders have conflicting interests but still wish to cooperate.
In this context, the main purpose of science advice is to establish an undisputed basis of knowledge. The consequences of the scientific advice (knowledge) in terms of “What to do” is discussed based on objectives and plans (non- propositional attitudes, Rahwan et. al., 2006). Argumentation analysis may help in understanding the nature of conflicts and how marine management decisions are reached.
Source of Information
Aps, R.., Kell, L. T., Lassen, H., and Liiv, I. 2007. Negotiation framework for Baltic fisheries management: striking the balance of interest. ICES Journal of Marine Science 2007; doi: 10.1093/icesjms/fsl038.
Rahwan, I., and Amgoud, L. 2006. An Argumentation based Approach for Practical Reasoning. AAMAS'06 May 8.12 2006, Hakodate, Hokkaido, Japan.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 77 1.5.5.6 Development of JAMP Monitoring Guidelines
Request This work was initiated by OSPAR for the purpose of developing JAMP Guidelines for monitoring Contaminants in Sediments (OSPAR agreement 2002–16) and JAMP Guidelines for monitoring Contaminants in Biota (OSPAR agreement 1999–2) to ensure that monitoring guidance is in place to support a revised Co-ordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme. OSPAR requested specific advice on the following issues:- a) develop draft technical annexes on monitoring of polybrominated diphenyl ethers and hexabromocyclododecane in sediments and biota following the structure of the existing technical annexes. SIME 2007 clarified the congeners and compartments that are relevant for the development of monitoring guidance for brominated flame retardants. b) review the existing technical annexes on PAHs to see whether they are adequate for monitoring of the alkylated PAHs and, as appropriate, prepare advice on any revisions that are necessary. c) to develop a draft technical annex on monitoring of TBT and its breakdown products in biota.
Recommendations and advice
Monitoring of polybrominated diphenyl ethers in sediments and biota
ICES recommends to OSPAR the use of the guidelines on the determination of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in marine sediments provided in Annex 1.
ICES recommends to OSPAR the use of the guidelines on the determination of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in biota provided in Annex 2.
Monitoring of hexabromocyclododecane in sediments and biota
ICES recommends to OSPAR the use of the guidelines on the determination of hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) in marine sediments provided in Annex 3.
ICES recommends to OSPAR the use of the guidelines on the determination of hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) in biota provided in Annex 4.
ICES recommends that, wherever possible, HBCD should be determined on a diastereoisomer – specific basis using LC-MS or LC-MS/MS.
Monitoring of the alkylated PAHs
ICES partially reviewed the existing draft Technical Annex for the determination of Alkylated PAHs to see whether they are adequate for monitoring of the alkylated PAHs in sediments. No recommendations are available for this issue at the present but arrangements are in place to complete the review and bring forward comments on the Technical Annexes for the analysis of alkylated polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) in biota and sediment for 2008.
Monitoring of TBT
There was insufficient expertise present in the working group to develop a new technical annex during the meeting. No recommendation is available for this issue at the present but enquires are made to continue this work intersessionally before next meeting in 2008.
Summary
Detailed guidelines are available for the monitoring of polybrominated diphenyl ethers and hexabromocyclododecane in sediments and biota and are available at Annex 1, 2, 3 and 4 of this advice.
Source of information
The 2007 reports of the Working Group on Marine Sediments in Relation to Pollution (WGMS) and the Marine Chemistry Working Group (MCWG) were the main source of information for this advice. WGBEC also address the issue. In addition the documents from OSPAR Working Group on Concentrations, Trends and Effects of Substances in the Marine Environment (SIME) were used.
78 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Annex 1 - Technical Annex on the determination of PBDEs in sediment
1 Introduction
This annex provides advice on polybrominated diphenyl ether (PBDE) analysis for sediment. The analysis of PBDEs in sediment generally involves extraction with organic solvents, clean-up and gas chromatographic separation with mass- spectrometric detection. All stages of the procedure are susceptible to insufficient recovery and/or contamination. Where possible, quality control procedures are recommended in order to check the method’s performance. These guidelines are intended to encourage and assist analytical chemists to reconsider their methods and to improve their procedures and/or the associated quality control measures where necessary.
Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) constitute a group of additive flame retardants that are predominately found in electrical equipment, textiles and furniture. PBDEs are used as additives to polymers and resins and are thought to be more easily released to the environment compared to reactive flame retardants. PBDEs consist of two phenyl rings, connected by an ether bridge, each ring containing up to 5 bromine atoms. There are a possible 209 PBDE congeners depending on the position and number of bromines, with molecular weights ranging from 249 to 960 daltons. Congeners are named according to the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUAPAC) numbering format developed for chlorobiphenyl (CB) congeners. However, PBDE technical mixtures used as flame retardants contain only a limited number of these congeners (~20). Commercial PBDE mixtures are classified according to the degree of bromination. The penta mix contains mainly tetra- to hexa-BDEs, the octa mix mainly hexa- to octa-BDEs and the deca mix containing mainly deca-BDE. Penta-BDE is primarily used in furniture and upholstery, octa-BDE in plastics, and deca-PBDEs in textiles and polymers. In the EU, a restriction on the use of the penta and octa technical mixture was put in place on 15 August 2004, restricting the use of the penta and the octa technical mixtures to a limit of 0.1% by mass for all articles placed in the market according to the European Directive 2003/11/EC¹, 24 th amendment of 76/769/EEC.
PBDEs can be released to the environment during their production, while manufacturing other products, and during disposal of products containing these chemicals. In addition, PBDEs may continue to leak out of treated material and constitute a diffuse source of these compounds to the environment. Atmospheric transportation is a major pathway for PBDEs into the marine environment. Other possible pathways include direct discharge from point sources such as storm waters and waste water.
Due to the similarity in structure between PBDEs and CBs, PBDEs are expected to persist in the marine environment and exhibit similar toxic properties. PBDEs have high (Log Kow >4) octanol water partition coefficients ranging from 4.3 for di-BDE to 10.33 for deca-BDE (Table 1). PBDEs are hydrophobic and therefore tend to associate with particulate material and will accumulate in sediment particularly if it has a high organic carbon content.
2 Sampling and short-term storage
Plastic materials must not be used for sampling due to the possible absorption of PBDEs by the container material (Hard polyethylene (HPE), Polypropylene(PP) or polytetrafluorethene can only be applied for a short time period, few days, or when in frozen condition i.e. −20°C). Samples should be stored in solvent washed aluminium cans or glass jars. Aluminium cars are better as glass jars are more susceptible to breakage. All glassware should be pre-baked before use (heat at 450oC overnight). Samples should be transported in closed containers; a temperature of 25°C should not be exceeded. If samples are not analysed within 48 h after sampling, they must be stored in the short term at 4°C. Storage over several months is only possible for frozen (<−20°C) and dried samples.
3 Pretreatment and long-term Storage
To increase comparability of data, samples can be wet sieved to reduce the variation of grain size distribution. This is particularly important for samples with less than 0.5% organic carbon. PBDEs can be extracted from wet or dried samples, although storage, homogenisation and extraction are much easier when the samples are dry. Drying the samples however may alter the concentrations, e.g. by the loss of compounds through evaporation or by contamination. Losses and contamination during drying must be shown to be insignificant.
Chemical drying can be performed by grinding with Na2SO4 or MgSO4 until the sample reaches a free-flowing consistency. It is essential that there are at least several hours between grinding and extraction to allow for complete dehydration of the sample; residual water will decrease the extraction efficiency. A parallel determination of dry weight should be performed to allow recalculation to dry weight. A further representative subsample should be used for determination of organic carbon to allow normalisation of data.
Freeze-drying is a popular technique, although its application should be carefully considered. Possible losses or contamination must be checked. Losses through evaporation are diminished by keeping the temperature in the
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 79 evaporation chamber below 0°C. Contamination during freeze-drying is reduced by putting a lid, with a hole of about 3 mm in diameter, on the sample container.
Typically, the dry intake mass for PBDE analysis is between 10 and 100g, depending on the extraction method and the expected concentrations. Before taking a subsample for analysis, the samples should be sufficiently homogenised. Freeze dried samples can be stored at room temperature and wet sediment frozen, at −20°C or below.
More information is provided in the JAMP guidelines for monitoring contaminants in sediment
4 Analysis
4.1 Precautionary Measures
Special precautions are required in the laboratory when analysing PBDEs due to their sensitivity to UV light. PBDEs are prone to photolytic degradation; if exposed to UV light debromination can occur, especially for BDE209 (Covaci et al., 2003; de Boer and Wells, 2006). Therefore, incoming light to the laboratory should be minimised by placing UV filters on the windows and over fluorescent lightings, or by not using any artificial lighting within the laboratory. It is recommended that all calibration and spiking standards are prepared and stored in amber glassware.
The use of plastics should be avoided as they can contain PBDEs. BDE209 can adsorb to dust particles and can be a source of contamination in the laboratory. Therefore, it is recommended that an ioniser be placed in the laboratory and the laboratory kept as dust free as possible. Heating of glassware in an oven (e.g. at 450°C overnight) can also be useful for removing PBDE contamination. In addition, all glassware should be covered with solvent-washed aluminium foil to keep out any dust. The degree of contamination, and its sources, will vary between laboratories. Blanks should be significantly lower than the concentrations found in field samples. In practice, analysts should adopt a methodical approach to precautionary measures against contamination to determine the measures that are necessary in their particular circumstances to reduce blanks to acceptably low values, of acceptable variance.
4.2 Solvent Purity and Blanks
PBDEs, and especially BDE209, can stick to glassware (or any other materials with suitable sorption characteristics). This can result in contamination of glassware. For work at low concentrations, the use of high-purity solvents is essential, particularly when large solvent volumes are being used for column clean-up. All batches of solvents should be checked for purity by concentration of an aliquot of solvent by at least the same volume factor as used in the overall analytical procedure. Batches which show significant contamination, so as to interfere with analysis, should be rejected. All glassware should be solvent-rinsed immediately prior to use as it will collect contamination from the laboratory atmosphere during storage. Pre-cleaning of all reagents (alumina, silica, sodium sulphate, hydromatrix etc) is essential.
4.3 Preparation of materials
Solvents, reagents and adsorptive materials must be ‘free’ of PBDEs and other interfering compounds. If not, then they must be purified using appropriate methods. Reagents and absorptive materials should be purified by solvent extraction and/or by heating in a muffle oven as appropriate. Glass fibre materials (e.g. Soxhlet thimbles and filter papers used in Pressurised Liquid Extraction (PLE)) should be cleaned by solvent extraction or pre-baked at 450oC overnight. It should be borne in mind that clean materials can be re-contaminated by exposure to laboratory air, particularly in urban locations, and so the method of storage after cleaning is of critical importance. Ideally, materials should be prepared immediately before use, but if they are to be stored, then the conditions should be considered critically. All containers which come into contact with the sample should be made of glass or aluminium, and should be pre-cleaned before use. Appropriate cleaning methods would include washing with detergents, rinsing with water of known quality, and finally solvent rinsing immediately before use. This method should also be used for the first step of cleaning of PLE cells which should be further washed through a complete cycle of extraction using the PLE. Heating of glassware in an oven (e.g. at 400°C for 24 hours) can also be useful for removing PBDE contamination.
4.4 Extraction and clean-up
The similarity in structure of the PBDEs to CBs means that techniques used for the analysis of CBs may also be applied to the analysis of PBDEs (de Boer et al., 2001). PBDEs are hydrophobic and will have an affinity for particles and therefore can accumulate in sediment particularly if it has a high organic carbon content. A range of extraction methods have been used for the extraction of PBDEs from sediment. These include the more traditional methods such as Soxhlet and the newer automated methods such as Pressurised Liquid Extraction (PLE), Supercritical fluid extraction (SFE) has also been applied to PBDE extractions, although reproducibility was poor compared to Soxhlet (Covaci et al., 2003). However, most laboratories are still using the traditional Soxhlet extraction. For soxhlets, hexane/acetone or other mixtures such as pentane/dichloromethane have been used for the extraction of PBDEs combined with an extraction
80 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 time of between 6 and 24 h. Hexane/acetone mixtures are also used with PLE (if no fat retainers used) with an extraction time of ~ 10 min per sample. Other solvents such as dichloromethane or toluene may be used for PLE. PLE or soxhlet are therefore the preferred methods with PLE having the advantage of using less solvent, being fully automated and taking less time than Soxhlet. All glassware should be cleaned as indicated above, and septa replaced each time.
Sediment extracts will always contain many compounds other than PBDEs, and a suitable clean up is necessary to remove those compounds which may interfere with the subsequent analysis. Different techniques may be used, either singly or in combination, and the choice will be influenced by the selectivity and sensitivity of the final measurement technique and also by the extraction method employed. The most commonly used clean-up methods involve the use of alumina or silica adsorption chromatography, but gel permeation chromatography (GPC) is also employed, and is particularly effective at removing sulphur, which must be removed from the extract. Iso-hexane can be used elute alumina or silica columns. However, whatever method and solvent is used, the elution pattern of PBDEs should be determined and carefully checked, particularly for BDE209. When applying gel permeation chromatography (GPC), two serial columns are sometimes used to remove potentially interfering substances. Solvent mixtures such as dichloromethane/hexane or cyclohexane/ethyl acetate can be used as eluents for GPC. However, a second clean-up step is often required to separate the PBDEs from other organohalogenated compounds. One advantage of GPC is that it can also be used to remove sulphur from the extracts. When silica columns are used, the PBDEs will elute in the second, more polar, fraction (along with the organochlorine pesticides). However, this will be dependent on the solvents used and the adsorbents and the degree of deactivation. PBDEs are stable under acid conditions; therefore treatment with sulphuric acid or acid impregnated silica columns may be used in the clean-up.
One advantage of using PLE extraction is that it is possible to combine the clean up with the extraction, especially where mass spectrometry will be used as the detection method. Methods have been developed by Lund University for online clean-up and fractionation of dioxins, furans and PCBs with PLE for food, feed and environmental samples (Sporring et al., 2003). The first method utilises a fat retainer for the on-line clean-up of fat. Silica impregnated with sulphuric acid, alumina and florisil have all been used as fat retainers. A non-polar extraction solvent such as hexane should be used if fat retainers are used during PLE. This method can also be applied to the extraction of PBDEs in sediment as well as biota. However, problems have been highlighted with BDE209 which can be lost during PLE extraction through adsorption on to the extraction system tubing. However, with careful optimisation it is possible to use PLE for BDE209. Losses of BDE209 may be accounted for by using labeled 13C BDE209 as an internal standard. For GC/MS analysis, sulphur should be removed from the extracts in order to protect the detector. This can be achieved by the addition of copper powder, wire or gauze during or after Soxhlet extraction. Ultrasonic treatment might improve the removal of sulphur. As an alternative to copper, other methods can be used (Smedes and de Boer, 1997).
4.5 Pre-concentration
Samples can safely be concentrated using a Kuderna Danish system. Alternatively more modern Turbo-vap sample concentrators can be used to reduce solvent volume. This is a rapid technique, but needs to be carefully optimised and monitored to prevent both losses (both of volatiles and solvent aerosols) and cross-contamination. The use of rotary- film evaporators is more time consuming but more controllable. However, evaporation of solvents using this technique should be performed at low temperature (water bath temperature of ≤ 30°C) and under controlled pressure conditions, in order to prevent losses of the more volatile PBDEs. For the same reasons, evaporation to dryness should be avoided at all costs. Syncore systems are also more controllable but as rapid as Turbo-vaps and have the advantage of automatically rinsing down the sides of the vial (if the flushback module fitted) while concentrating. Again water-bath temperatures should be minimised to prevent losses. When reducing the sample to the required final volume, solvents can be removed by a stream of clean nitrogen gas. Suitable solvents for injection into the gas chromatograph (GC) include hexane, heptane, toluene and iso-octane.
4.6 Selection of PBDEs to be determined
PBDE technical mixtures used as flame retardants contain only a limited number of the possible 209 congeners (~20). The penta mix contains mainly tetra- to hexa-BDEs, the octa mix mainly hexa- to octa-BDEs and the deca mix containing mainly deca-BDE. Nine BDE congeners have been detected in the penta mix, the major ones being BDE47 (37%) and BDE99 (35%). The octa mix contains hexa- to octa-brominated congeners, with the main congener being BDE183, a hepta-brominated congener. The deca mix contains 98% decaBDE (BDE209).
Concentrations of PBDE congeners currently analysed vary considerably, however the congener pattern found in environmental samples is relatively consistent. Most laboratories analyse for the penta-mix compounds, tetra- to hexa- BDEs. In addition, these congeners are thought to be the most toxic and likely to bioaccumulate. In sediment BDE28, 47, 85, 99, 100, 153, 154 are normally found. BDE183 is occasionally found but as a representative of the octa-mix should also be included in any congener list. Other BDE congeners also measured and occasionally found include BDE66 and 85, a tetra- and penta-BDE, respectively. BDE 209 is less frequently measured, due to the analytical
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 81 difficulties, but when it is it can often be the dominant congener in sediment. Law et al. (2006) proposed a minimum congener set for use when determining BDEs to cover all three technical mixtures and what is commonly found in biota and sediment. This list consisted of BDE28, BDE47, BDE99, BDE100, BDE153, BDE154, BDE183 and BDE209. This list is consistent with the congeners required by the QUASIMEME Scheme for both biota and sediment and are routinely measured by the majority of laboratories. However, it is apparent that other congeners are found in marine samples (e.g. BDE 66 and 85) and so should also be analysed.
Standards are available for all these congeners. Table 1 lists the PBDEs most commonly monitored Table 1 Congeners commonly monitored in environmental samples along with their degree of bromination, chemical name and the octanol water partition coefficient (Log KOW), where available (Braekevelt et al., 2003).
PBDE CONGENER NUMBER OF BR NAME LOG KOW BDE17 3 22’,4-tribromodiphenyl ether 5.74 BDE28* 3 2, 44’-tribromodiphenyl ether 5.94 BDE75 4 2, 44’, 6-tetrabromodiphenyl ether BDE49 4 2, 34, 5’-tetrabromodiphenyl ether BDE71 4 2, 3’, 4’, 6-tetrabromodiphenyl ether BDE47* 4 2, 2’,4, 4’-tetrabromodiphenyl ether 6.81 BDE66 4 2, 3’,4, 4’-tetrabromodiphenyl ether BDE77 4 3, 3’,4, 4’-tetrabromodiphenyl ether BDE100* 5 2, 2’,4, 4’, 6-pentabromodiphenyl ether 7.24 BDE119 5 2, 3’,4, 4’, 6-pentabromodiphenyl ether BDE99* 5 2, 2’,4, 4’, 5-pentabromodiphenyl ether 7.32 BDE85 5 2, 2’,3, 4, 4’-pentabromodiphenyl ether 7.37 BDE154* 6 2, 2’,4, 4’, 5, 6’-hexabromodiphenyl ether 7.82 BDE153* 6 2, 2’,4, 4’, 5, 5’-hexabromodiphenyl ether 7.90 BDE138 6 2, 2’,3, 4, 4’, 5’-hexabromodiphenyl ether BDE190 7 23 3’,44’,56-heptabromodiphenyl ether BDE183* 7 22',34 4',5',6-heptabromodipheny l ether 8.27 BDE209* 10 Decabromodiphenyl ether 10.33 * Congeners proposed by Law et al. as a minimum congener set for use when determining BDEs; they are also included in the QUASIMEME scheme
4.7 Instrumental determination of PBDEs
Splitless, pulsed-splitless, programmed temperature vaporiser (PTV) and on-column injectors have been used for the determination of PBDEs, all of which are capable of yielding good results if optimised. Automatic sample injection should be used wherever possible to improve the reproducibility of injection and the precision of the overall method. For PBDE analysis, the cleanliness of the liner is very important if adsorption effects and discrimination are to be avoided, and the analytical column should not contain active sites to which PBDEs, particularly BDE209, can be adsorbed. Helium is the preferred carrier gas, and only capillary columns should be used. Mainly non-polar columns are used, e.g. HT-8, DB1701, DB5 and STX-500 (DB1 is usually used for BDE209) Korytar et al. (2005) provide comprehensive information on various capillary columns used for PBDE analysis. Baseline separation should be achievable for all BDEs listed in Table 1. However, BDE31 may coelute with BDE28. Because of the wide boiling range of the PBDEs to be determined and the surface-active properties of the higher PBDEs, the preferred column length is 25–50 m, with an internal diameter of 0.1 mm to 0.3 mm. Film thicknesses around 0.2 µm are generally used.
BDE209 can be measured in the same run but will give a smaller and broader peak compared to other PBDEs. Detection limits will be approximately 10 fold higher for BDE209. Since the retention time is long, the determination of BDE209 is often done separately using thinner films (0.1 µm) and/or a shorter column, both of which have been found to improve the detection of BDE209.
82 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 4.8 Detection Methods
4.8.1 General
Either gas chromatography- mass spectrometry (GC-MS) or GC- MS-MS (ion trap or triple quadropole) should be used. Both high and low resolution GC-MS can be used in conjunction with either electron ionisation (EI) or electron capture negative ionisation (ECNI). Although gas chromatography-high resolution mass spectrometry with electron impact ionisation (GC-HRMS) is the best method to unambiguously identify and quantify PBDEs in environmental samples, the expense and limited availability means that most laboratories use low resolution GC-MS normally in ECNI mode. Lower brominated PBDEs (mono- and di-BDEs) show better sensitivity in EI mode. However, the higher brominated PBDEs (>3 bromines) give better sensitivity using the ECNI mode; limits of detection for these congeners are approximately 10 fold lower in ECNI compared to EI. ECNI shows improved sensitivity compared to positive impact chemical ionisation (PCI). Therefore, GC-ECNIMS is used most frequently for the analysis of PBDEs in environmental samples. Either ammonia or methane may be used as the reagent gas when using chemical ionisation.
4.8.2 GC-MS
The base ions detected using ECNI are the bromine ions (m/z = 79/81) for the tri- to hepta-BDEs. BDE congeners show the typical 79Br (50.5%) and 81Br (49.5%) isotope distribution pattern. One of the drawbacks of the CI mode is that isotopically labelled standards (13C) cannot be used as internal standards for quantification purposes when only the bromide ions are monitored. However, mono fluorinated BDEs may be used as internal standards. Alternatively using GC-ECNI-MS a recovery standard can be added prior to extraction. CB198 and other halogenated compounds not present in environmental samples can be used as recovery standards. Larger fragment ions, necessary for confirmation, are only found for BDE209. These are formed by the cleavage of the ether bond to give the pentabromo phenoxy ion (m/z = 484/486). In general an internal standard method should be used for the quantification of PBDEs.
One advantage of using EI is that 13C labelled internal standards may be used. The major ions formed in EI mode are the molecular ions which can be used for identification and quantification purposes. Other fragment ions are also formed in EI mode which can be used as confirmatory ions.
4.8.3 Possible pitfalls and solutions
Degradation of PBDEs, particularly BDE209, can occur on the GC. The presence of a hump or rising baseline before BDE209 is an indication of degradation during injection, whereas the presence of lower brominated BDE (nona-, octa- and eventually other lower brominated BDEs) indicates possible degradation during extraction and clean-up. To minimise this, the GC liners and injection syringe should be changed regularly. Silanising both the syringe and liner may help. When using on-column injection, the choice of retention gap can also have an effect on the degradation of BDE209 during analysis. Deactivated fused silica retention gaps are often used. The QUASIMEME (Quality Assurance of Information for Marine Environmental Monitoring) external quality assurance scheme has also highlighted the difficulties with the analysis of BDE209 with CV% for this congener ranging from 40 – 256%. As a result, many laboratories do not analyse for BDE209.
5 Calibration and Quantification
5.1 Standards
Standard solutions of known purity should be used for the preparation of calibration standards. Contaminants in the standard must not interfere with determination of any of the target analytes. If the quality of the standard materials is not guaranteed by the producer or supplier (as for certified reference materials), then it should be checked by GC-MS analysis. Solid standards should be weighed to a precision of 0.1–0.5%. In addition, certified standard solutions are available from QUASIMEME and other suppliers for cross-checking. Calibration standards should be stored in the dark because some PBDEs are photosensitive, and ideally solutions to be stored should be sealed in amber, glass ampoules. Otherwise, they can be stored in a refrigerator in stoppered measuring cylinders or flasks that are gas tight to avoid evaporation of the solvent during storage.
Ideally, internal standards should fall within the range of the compounds to be determined, and should not include compounds which may be present in the samples. A range of 13C-labelled PBDEs are available for use as internal standards in PBDE analysis using GC-EIMS. However, when using GC-ECNIMS these are of little value as, for the majority of congeners, only the bromine ions can be monitored. For BDE209 a high molecular weight fragment is formed during GC-ECNIMS and, therefore, 13C labelled BDE209 should be used. When GC-ECNIMS is used mono fluorinated BDEs may be used as internal standards or a recovery standard added to each sample prior to extraction and the recovery calculated as a check on the method.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 83 5.2 Calibration
Multilevel calibration with at least five calibration levels is preferred to adequately define the calibration curve. In general, GC-MS calibration is linear over a considerable concentration range but exhibits non-linear behaviour when the mass of a compound injected is low due to adsorption. The use of a syringe standard is recommended, for example BDE190. Quantification should be conducted in the linear region of the calibration curve, or the non-linear region must be well characterised during the calibration procedure. Internal standardisation should be used for the quantification of PBDEs. Linearity of response in samples may be controlled using further internal standards at different concentrations, or a standard addition technique can be used.
6 Analytical Quality Control
Planners of monitoring programmes must decide on the accuracy, precision, repeatability, and limits of detection and determinaton which they consider acceptable. Minimum achievable limits of determination for each individual component should be as follows: • for GC-ECNIMS measurements: 0.05 μg kg−1 dry weight for tri- to hepta-BDE and 0.50 μg kg−1 dry weight for BDE209; Often lower LOD could be achieved : 0.005 to 0.05 µg kg–1 dry weight (BDE209 0.01 to 0.12 µg kg–1; • for GC-EIMS: 0.5 μg kg−1 dry weight. A procedural blank should be measured with each batch of samples, and should be prepared simultaneously using the same chemical reagents and solvents as for the samples. Its purpose is to indicate sample contamination by interfering compounds, which will result in errors in quantification. Recoveries should be checked for all samples using selected recovery internal standards. A second confirmation of recovery may be obtained by passing a standard through the whole analytical procedure Recoveries should be between 70 and 120%; if not analyses should be repeated. The procedural blank is also very important in the calculation of limits of detection and limits of quantification for the analytical method. In addition, a laboratory reference material (LRM) should be analysed within each sample batch. No certified reference materials are available for sediment. The LRM must be homogeneous and well-characterised for the determinands of interest within the analytical laboratory. Ideally the LRM determinand concentrations should be in the same range as those in the samples. The data produced for the LRM in successive sample batches should be used to prepare control charts. It is also useful to analyse the LRM in duplicate from time to time to check within-batch analytical variability. The analysis of an LRM is primarily intended as a check that the analytical method is under control and yields acceptable precision. At regular intervals, the laboratory should participate in an intercomparison or proficiency exercise in which samples are circulated without knowledge of the determinand concentrations, in order to provide an independent check on performance.
7 Data Reporting
The calculation of results and the reporting of data can represent major sources of error. Control procedures should be established in order to ensure that data are correct and to obviate transcription errors. Data stored on databases should be checked and validated, and checks are also necessary when data are transferred between databases. If possible data should be reported in accordance with the latest ICES reporting formats.
8 References de Boer, J., Allchin, C. R., Zegers B., and Boon J. P. 2001. Method for the analysis of polybrominated diphenyl ethers, Trends in Anal. Chem., 20: 591–599. de Boer, J., and Wells, D. E. 2006, Pitfalls in the analysis of brominated flame retardants in environmental, human and food samples- including results of three international interlaboratory studies, Trends in Anal. Chem., 25: 364– 572. Braekevelt, E., Tittlelier, S. A., Tomy, G. 2003, Direct measurement of octanol-water partition coefficients of some environmentally relevant brominated diphenyl ether congeners, Chemosphere, 51: 563–567. Covaci, A., Voorspoels, S., and de Boer, J. 2003. Determination of brominated flame retardants, with emphasis on polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in environmental and human samples- a review, Environ. Int., 29: 735–756. Korytár, P., Covaci, A., de Boer, J., Gelbin, A., and Brinkman, U. A.Th. 2005. Retention-time database of 126 polybrominated diphenyl ether congeners and two Bromkal technical mixtures on seven capillary gas chromatographic columns. Journal of Chromatography A, 1065: 239–249. Law, R. J., Allchin, C. R., deBoer J., Covaci, A.., Herzke, D., Lepom, P., Morris, S., Tronczynski, J., and deWit, C. A. 2006. Levels and trends of brominated flame retardants in the European environment, Chemosphere, 64: 187– 208. OSPAR Commission. 1999. JAMP Guidelines for Monitoring Contaminants in Sediment.
84 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Smedes, F., and de Boer, J. 1997. Chlorobiphenyls in marine sediments: guidelines for determination. ICES Techniques in Marine Environmental Sciences, No. 21. Sporring, S., Wiberg, K., Bjorklund, E., and Haglund, P. 2003. Combined extraction/Clean-up strategies for fast determination of PCDD/Fs and WHO PCBs in food and feed samples using accelerated solvent extraction, Organohalogen Compounds, 60–65, Dioxin 2003, Boston.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 85 Annex 2 - Technical Annex: PBDEs in biota
1 Introduction
This annex provides advice on polybrominated diphenyl ether (PBDE) analysis for biota. The analysis of PBDEs in biota generally involves extraction with organic solvents, clean-up (removal of lipid) and gas chromatographic separation with mass-spectrometric detection. All stages of the procedure are susceptible to insufficient recovery and/or contamination. Where possible, quality control procedures are recommended in order to check the method’s performance. These guidelines are intended to encourage and assist analytical chemists to reconsider their methods and to improve their procedures and/or the associated quality control measures where necessary.
Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) constitute a group of additive flame retardants that are predominately found in electrical equipment, textiles and furniture. PBDEs are used as additives to polymers and resins and are thought to be more easily released to the environment compared to reactive flame retardants. PBDEs consist of two phenyl rings, connected by an ether bridge, each ring containing up to 5 bromine atoms. There are a possible 209 PBDE congeners depending on the position and number of bromines, with molecular weights ranging from 249 to 960 daltons. Congeners are named according to the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUAPAC) numbering format developed for chlorobiphenyl (CB) congeners. However, PBDE technical mixtures used as flame retardants contain only a limited number of these congeners (~20). Commercial PBDE mixtures are classified according to the degree of bromination. The penta mix contains mainly tetra- to hexa-BDEs, the octa mix mainly hexa- to octa-BDEs and the deca mix containing mainly deca-BDE. Penta-BDE is primarily used in furniture and upholstery, octa-BDE in plastics, and deca-PBDEs in textiles and polymers. In the EU, a restriction on the use of the penta and octa technical mixture was put in place on 15 August 2004, restricting the use of the penta and the octa technical mixtures to a limit of 0.1% by mass for all articles placed in the market according to the European Directive 2003/11/EC¹, 24 th amendment of 76/769/EEC.
PBDEs can be released to the environment during their production, while manufacturing other products, and during disposal of products containing these chemicals. In addition, PBDEs may continue to leak out of treated material and constitute a diffuse source of these compounds to the environment. Atmospheric transportation is a major pathway for PBDEs into the marine environment. Other possible pathways include direct discharge from point sources such as storm waters and waste water. PBDEs have been found to concentrate in the Arctic and bioaccumulate in native animals and humans.
Due to the similarity in structure between PBDEs and CBs, PBDEs are expected to persist in the marine environment and exhibit similar toxic properties. PBDEs have high (Log Kow >4) octanol water partition coefficients ranging from 4.3 for di-BDE to 10.33 for deca-BDE (Table 1). PBDEs are readily taken up by marine animals both across gill surfaces and from their diet, and may bioaccumulate.
2 Appropriate Species for Analysis of PBDEs
Guidance on the selection of appropriate species for contaminant monitoring is given in the JAMP guidelines. Other species such as sole, hake and oysters may also be appropriate. Existing data indicates that PBDE concentrations for shellfish are very low and, therefore, detecting long term trends may be difficult using these species. High trophic level organisms and lipid rich tissue will accumulate higher levels of PBDEs and, therefore, may be more suitable for temporal trend monitoring.
3 Transportation
Fish samples should be kept cool or frozen (-20°C or lower) as soon as possible after collection. Live mussels should be transported in closed containers at temperatures between 5°C and 10°C, but preferably below 10°C. For live animals it is important that the transport time is short and controlled (e.g. maximum of 24 hours). Frozen fish samples should be transported in closed metal or glass (cleaned and pre-baked) containers at temperatures below -20°C.
4 Pretreatment and Storage
4.1 Contamination
Sample contamination may occur during sampling, sample handling, pre-treatment and analysis, due to the environment, the containers or packing materials used, the instruments used during sample preparation, and from the solvents and reagents used during the analytical procedures. Controlled conditions are therefore required for all procedures, including the dissection of fish organs on-board ship. It is important that the likely sources of contamination are identified and steps taken to preclude sample handling in areas where contamination can occur. A ship is a working vessel and there can always be procedures occurring as a result of the day-to-day operations (deck cleaning, automatic
86 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 overboard bilge discharges, etc.) which could affect the sampling process. One way of minimising the risk is to conduct dissection in a clean area, such as within a laminar-flow hood away from the deck areas of the vessel.
4.2 Shellfish
4.2.1 Depuration
Depending upon the situation, it may be desirable to depurate shellfish so as to void the gut contents and any associated contaminants before freezing or sample preparation. This is usually applied close to point sources, where the gut contents may contain significant quantities of PBDEs associated with food and sediment particles which are not truly assimilated into the tissues of the mussels. Depuration should be undertaken in controlled conditions and in filtered water taken from the sampling site; depuration over a period of 24 hours is usually sufficient. The aquarium should be aerated.
4.2.2 Dissection and storage
Mussels should be shucked live and opened with minimal tissue damage by detaching the adductor muscles from the interior of at least one valve. The soft tissues should be removed and homogenised as soon as possible, and frozen in glass jars (pre-baked at 450oC) or aluminium tins at -20°C until analysis. When samples are processed, both at sea and onshore, the dissection must be undertaken by trained personnel on a clean bench wearing clean gloves and using clean stainless steel knives and scalpels. Stainless steel tweezers are recommended for holding tissues during dissection. After each sample has been prepared, all tools and equipment (such as homogenisers) should be cleaned by wiping down with tissue and solvent washed. Knives should only be sharpened using steel to prevent contamination of the blade from the oils used to lubricate sharpening blocks.
4.3 Fish
4.3.1 Dissection and storage
Ungutted fish should be wrapped separately in suitable material (e.g. solvent washed aluminium foil) and stored at < - 20°C. If plastic bags or boxes are used, then they should be used as outer containers only, and should not come into contact with tissues. Organ samples (e.g. liver) should be stored in solvent washed containers made of glass, stainless steel or aluminium, or should be wrapped in solvent washed aluminium foil. In the latter case, care should be taken that the capacity of the freezer is not exceeded. Cold air should be able to circulate between the samples in order that the minimum freezing time can be attained (maximum 12 hours). The individual samples should be clearly and indelibly labelled and stored together in a suitable container at a temperature of -20°C ± 5ºC until analysis. If the samples are to be transported during this period (e.g. from the ship to the laboratory), then arrangements must be made which ensure that the samples do not thaw out during transport.
When samples are processed, both at sea and onshore, the dissection must be undertaken by trained personnel on a bench previously washed with detergent (e.g. Decon 90) wearing clean gloves and using solvent washed stainless steel knives and scalpels. Stainless steel tweezers are recommended for holding tissues during dissection. After each sample has been prepared, all tools and equipment (such as homogenisers) should be cleaned by wiping with tissue and rinsing with solvent.
4.3.2 Sub-sampling
When sampling fish muscle, care should be taken to avoid including any epidermis or subcutaneous fatty tissue in the sample. Samples should be taken underneath the red muscle layer. In order to ensure uniformity, the right side dorso- lateral muscle should be sampled. If possible, the entire right side dorsal lateral fillet should be homogenised and sub- samples taken for replicate PBDE determinations. If, however, the amount of material to be homogenised is too large, a specific portion of the dorsal musculature should be chosen. It is recommended that the portion of the muscle lying directly under the first dorsal fin is used in this case.
When dissecting the liver, care should be taken to avoid contamination from the other organs. If bile samples are to be taken then they should be collected first. If the whole liver is not to be homogenised, a specific portion should be chosen in order to ensure comparability.
When pooling of tissues (e.g. liver or muscle) is necessary, an equivalent quantity of tissue should be taken from each fish, e.g., 10% from each whole fillet.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 87 5 Analysis
5.1 Precautionary Measures
Special precautions are required in the laboratory when analysing PBDEs due to their sensitivity to UV light. PBDEs are prone to photolytic degradation; if exposed to UV light debromination can occur, especially for BDE209 (Covaci et al., 2003; de Boer and Wells, 2006). Therefore, incoming light to the laboratory should be minimised by placing UV filters on the windows and over fluorescent lightings, or by not using any artificial lighting within the laboratory. It is recommended that all calibration and spiking standards are prepared and stored in amber glassware.
The use of plastics, in the laboratory as well as during sampling, should be avoided as they can contain PBDEs. BDE209 can adsorb to dust particles and can be a source of contamination in the laboratory. Therefore, it is recommended that an ioniser be placed in the laboratory and the laboratory kept as dust free as possible. Heating of glassware in an oven (e.g. at 450°C overnight) can also be useful for removing PBDE contamination. In addition all glassware should be covered with aluminium foil to keep out any dust.
5.2 Solvent Purity and Blanks
BDE209 can stick to glassware (or any other chemically active sites). This can result in contamination of glassware. For work at low concentrations, the use of high-purity solvents is essential, particularly when large solvent volumes are being used for column clean-up. All batches of solvents should be checked for purity by concentration of an aliquot of solvent by at least the same volume factor as used in the overall analytical procedure. Batches which show significant contamination, so as to interfere with analysis, should be rejected. All glassware should be solvent-rinsed immediately prior to use as it will collect contamination from the laboratory atmosphere during storage. Pre-cleaning of all reagents (alumina, silica, sodium sulphate, hydromatrix etc) is essential.
5.3 Preparation of materials
Solvents, reagents and adsorptive materials must be ‘free’ of PBDEs and other interfering compounds. If not, then they must be purified using appropriate methods. Reagents and absorptive materials should be purified by solvent extraction and/or by heating in a muffle oven as appropriate. Glass fibre materials (e.g. Soxhlet thimbles and filter papers used in pressurised liquid extraction (PLE)) should be cleaned by solvent extraction or pre-baked at 450oC overnight. It should be borne in mind that clean materials can be re-contaminated by exposure to laboratory air, particularly in urban locations, and so the method of storage after cleaning is of critical importance. Ideally, materials should be prepared immediately before use, but if they are to be stored, then the conditions should be considered critically. All containers which come into contact with the sample should be made of glass or aluminium, and should be pre-cleaned before use. Appropriate cleaning methods would include washing with detergents, rinsing with water of known quality, and finally solvent rinsing immediately before use.
5.4 Lipid determination
The determination of the lipid content of tissues can be of use in characterising the samples. This will enable reporting concentrations on a wet weight or lipid weight basis. The lipid content should be determined on a separate subsample of the tissue homogenate, as some of the extraction techniques used routinely for PBDE determination (e.g., PLE with fat retainers, alkaline saponification) destroy or remove lipid materials. The total lipid content of fish or shellfish should be determined using the method of Bligh and Dyer (1959) as modified by Hanson and Olley (1963) or an equivalent method such as Smedes (1999). Extractable lipid may be used, particularly if the sample size is small and lipid content is high. It has been shown that if the lipid content is high (>5%) then this will be comparable to the total lipid.
5.5 Dry weight Determination
The dry weight of samples should be determined gravimetrically so that concentrations can also be expressed on a dry weight basis.
5.6 Extraction and clean-up
The similarity in structure of the PBDEs to CBs means that techniques used for the analysis of CBs may also be applied to the analysis of PBDEs (de Boer et al., 2001). PBDEs are lipophilic and so are concentrated in the lipids of an organism. A range of extraction methods have been used for the extraction of PBDEs from biota. These include the more traditional methods such as Soxhlet and the newer automated methods such as pressurised liquid extraction (PLE). Supercritical fluid extraction (SFE) has also been applied to PBDE extractions, although reproducibility was poor compared to Soxhlet (Covaci et al., 2003). However, most laboratories are still using the traditional Soxhlet extraction. For soxhlets, hexane/acetone mixtures or toluene (particularly for BDE209) have been shown to give the best recoveries
88 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 for the extraction of PBDEs combined with an extraction time of between 6 and 24 h. Hexane/acetone mixtures or toluene are also used with PLE (if no fat retainers used) with an extraction time of ~ 10 min per sample. PLE or soxhlet are therefore the preferred methods with PLE having the advantage of using less solvent, being fully automated and taking less time than Soxhlet.
Tissue extracts will always contain many compounds other than PBDEs, and a suitable clean up is necessary to remove those compounds which may interfere with the subsequent analysis. Different techniques may be used, either singly or in combination, and the choice will be influenced by the selectivity and sensitivity of the final measurement technique and also by the extraction method employed. PBDEs are stable under acid conditions; therefore treatment with sulphuric acid or acid impregnated silica columns may be used in the clean-up. If Soxhlet extraction is used, then there is a much greater quantity of residual lipid to be removed before the analytical determination can be made than in the case of alkaline digestion. An additional clean-up stage may therefore be necessary. The most commonly used clean-up methods involve the use of alumina or silica adsorption chromatography, but gel permeation chromatography (GPC) is also employed. When using GPC the elution of PBDEs should be carefully checked particularly for BDE209. Destructive methods for lipid removal such as saponification have also been investigated; however this method can result in the degradation of the higher brominated PBDEs and, therefore is not recommended. When applying gel permeation chromatography (GPC), two serial columns are often used for improved lipid separation. Solvent mixtures such as dichloromethane/hexane or cyclohexane/ethyl acetate can be used as eluents for GPC. However, a second clean- up step is often required to separate the PBDEs from other orgnaohalogenated compounds. When silica columns are used, the PBDEs will elute in the second, more polar, fraction (along with the organochlorine pesticides). However, this will be dependent on the solvents used and the adsorbents and the degree of deactivation.
One advantage of using PLE extraction is that it is possible to combine the clean up with the extraction, especially where mass spectrometry will be used as the detection method. Methods have been developed by Lund University for online clean-up and fractionation of dioxins, furans and PCBs with PLE for food, feed and environmental samples (Sporring et al., 2003). The first method utilises a fat retainer for the on-line clean-up of fat. Silica impregnated with sulphuric acid, alumina and florisil have all been used as fat retainers. A non-polar extraction solvent such as hexane should be used if fat retainers are used during PLE. This method can also be applied to the extraction of PBDEs. However, problems have been highlighted with BDE209 which can be lost during PLE extraction through adsorption on to the extraction system tubing. However, with careful optimisation it is possible to use PLE for BDE209. Losses of BDE209 may be accounted for by using labeled BDE209 as an internal standard.
5.7 Pre-concentration
Turbo-vap sample concentrators can be used to reduce solvent volume. This is a rapid technique, but needs to be carefully optimised and monitored to prevent both losses (both of volatiles and solvent aerosols) and cross- contamination. The use of rotary-film evaporators is more time consuming but more controllable However, evaporation of solvents using this technique should be performed at low temperature (water bath temperature of ≤ 30°C) and under controlled pressure conditions, in order to prevent losses of the more volatile PBDEs. For the same reasons, evaporation to dryness should be avoided at all costs. Syncore systems are also more controllable but as rapid as Turbo-vaps and have the advantage of automatically rinsing down the sides of the vial (if the flushback module fitted) while concentrating. Again water-bath temperatures should be minimised to prevent losses. When reducing the sample to the required final volume, solvents can be removed by a stream of clean nitrogen gas. Suitable solvents for injection into the gas chromatograph (GC) include hexane, heptane, toluene and iso-octane.
5.8 Selection of PBDEs to be determined
PBDE technical mixtures used as flame retardants contain only a limited number of the possible 209 congeners (~20). The penta mix contains mainly tetra- to hexa-BDEs, the octa mix mainly hexa- to octa-BDEs and the deca mix containing mainly deca-BDE. Nine BDE congeners have been detected in the penta mix, the major ones being BDE47 (37%) and BDE99 (35%). The octa mix contains hexa- to octa-brominated congeners, with the main congener being BDE183, a hepta-brominated congener. The deca mix contains 98% decaBDE (BDE209).
PBDE congeners currently analysed vary considerably, however the congeners found in environmental samples are relatively consistent. Most laboratories analyse for the penta-mix compounds, tetra- to hexa-BDEs. In addition, these congeners are thought to be the most toxic and likely to bioaccumulate. In biota the dominant congeners are normally BDE47, 99, 100, 153 and 154. BDE 209 is less frequently measured, due to the analytical difficulties. It is rarely found in biota, but can degrade to lower brominated BDEs. Law et al. (2006) proposed a minimum congener set for use when determining BDEs to cover all three technical mixtures and what is commonly found in biota and sediment. This list consisted of BDE28, BDE47, BDE99, BDE100, BDE153, BDE154, BDE183 and BDE209. This list is consistent with the congeners required by the QUASIMEME Scheme for biota and are routinely measured by the majority of laboratories. However, it is apparent that other congeners are found in marine samples (e.g. BDE 66 and 85) and so should also be analysed.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 89 Standards are available for all these congeners. Table 1 lists the PBDEs most commonly monitored Table 1 Congeners commonly monitored in environmental samples along with their degree of bromination, chemical name and the octanol water partition coefficient (Log KOW), where available (Braekevelt et al.).
PBDE CONGENER NUMBER OF BR NAME LOG KOW BDE17 3 22’,4-tribromodiphenyl ether 5.74 BDE28* 3 2, 44’-tribromodiphenyl ether 5.94 BDE75 4 2, 44’, 6-tetrabromodiphenyl ether BDE49 4 2, 34, 5’-tetrabromodiphenyl ether BDE71 4 2, 3’, 4’, 6-tetrabromodiphenyl ether BDE47* 4 2, 2’,4, 4’-tetrabromodiphenyl ether 6.81 BDE66 4 2, 3’,4, 4’-tetrabromodiphenyl ether BDE77 4 3, 3’,4, 4’-tetrabromodiphenyl ether BDE100* 5 2, 2’,4, 4’, 6-pentabromodiphenyl ether 7.24 BDE119 5 2, 3’,4, 4’, 6-pentabromodiphenyl ether BDE99* 5 2, 2’,4, 4’, 5-pentabromodiphenyl ether 7.32 BDE85 5 2, 2’,3, 4, 4’-pentabromodiphenyl ether 7.37 BDE154* 6 2, 2’,4, 4’, 5, 6’-hexabromodiphenyl ether 7.82 BDE153* 6 2, 2’,4, 4’, 5, 5’-hexabromodiphenyl ether 7.90 BDE138 6 2, 2’,3, 4, 4’, 5’-hexabromodiphenyl ether BDE190 7 23 3’,44’,56-heptabromodiphenyl ether BDE183* 7 22',34 4',5',6-heptabromodipheny l ether 8.27 BDE209* 10 Decabromodiphenyl ether 10.33 * Congeners proposed by Law et al. as a minimum congener set for use when determining BDEs; they are also included in the QUASIMEME scheme
5.9 Instrumental determination of PBDEs
Splitless, pulsed-splitless, programmed temperature vaporiser (PTV) and on-column injectors have been used for the determination of PBDEs, all of which are capable of yielding good results. Automatic sample injection should be used wherever possible to improve the reproducibility of injection and the precision of the overall method. For PBDE analysis, the cleanliness of the liner is very important if adsorption effects and discrimination are to be avoided, and the analytical column should not contain active sites to which PBDEs, particularly BDE209, can be adsorbed. Helium is the preferred carrier gas, and only capillary columns should be used. Mainly non-polar columns are used eg. HT-8, DB1701 and STX-500 (DB1 is usually used for BDE209) Korytar et al. (2005) provide comprehensive information on various capillary columns used for PBDE analysis. Baseline separation should be achievable for all BDEs listed in Table 1. However, BDE31 may coelute with BDE28. Because of the wide boiling range of the PBDEs to be determined and the surface-active properties of the higher PBDEs, the preferred column length is 25–50 m, with an internal diameter of 0.1 mm to 0.3 mm. Film thicknesses around 0.2 µm are generally used.
BDE209 can be measured in the same run but will give a smaller and broader peak compared to other PBDEs. Detection limits will be approximately 10 fold higher for BDE209. Since the retention time is long, the determination of BDE209 is often done separately using thinner films (0.1 µm) and/or a shorter column, both of which have been found to improve the detection of BDE209.
5.9.1 Detection Methods
Either gas chromatography- mass spectrometry (GC-MS) or GC- MS-MS (ion trap or triple quadropole) should be used. GC-ECD is rarely used due to the limited linear range, and lack of selectivity. If GC-ECD is used then the clean-up will need to separate out all other organohalogenated compounds which may give co-elution problems. Both high and low resolution GC-MS can be used in conjunction with either electron ionisation (EI) or electron capture negative ionisation (ECNI). Although gas chromatography-high resolution mass spectrometry with electron impact ionisation (GC-HRMS) is the best method to unambiguously identify and quantify PBDEs in environmental samples, the expense and limited availability means that most laboratories use low resolution GC-MS normally in ECNI mode. Lower brominated PBDEs (mono- and di-BDEs) show better sensitivity in EI mode. However, the higher brominated PBDEs (>3
90 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 bromines) give better sensitivity using the ECNI mode; limits of detection for these congeners are approximately 10 fold lower in ECNI compared to EI. ECNI shows improved sensitivity compared to positive impact chemical ionisation (PCI). Therefore, GC-ECNI-MS is used most frequently for the analysis of PBDEs in environmental samples. Either ammonia or methane may be used as the reagent gas when using chemical ionisation.
5.9.2 GC-MS
The base ions detected using NCI are the bromine ions (m/z = 79/81) for the tri- to hepta-BDEs. BDE congeners show the typical 79Br (50.5%) and 81Br (49.5%) isotope distribution pattern. One of the drawbacks of the CI mode is that isotopically labelled standards (13C) cannot be used as internal standards for quantification purposes when only the bromide ions are monitored. However, mono fluorinated BDEs may be used as internal standards. Alternatively using GC-ECNI-MS a recovery standard can be added prior to extraction. CB198 and other halogenated compounds not present in environmental samples can be used as recovery standards. Larger fragment ions, necessary for confirmation, are only found for BDE209. These are formed by the cleavage of the ether bond to give the pentabromo phenoxy ion (m/z = 484/486). In general an internal standard method should be used for the quantification of PBDEs.
One advantage of using EI is that 13C labelled internal standards may be used. The major ions formed in EI mode are the molecular ions which can be used for identification and quantification purposes. Other fragment ions are also formed in EI mode which can be used as confirmatory ions.
5.9.3 Possible pitfalls and solutions
Degradation of PBDEs, particularly BDE209, can occur on the GC. The presence of a hump or rising baseline before BDE209 is an indication of degradation during injection, whereas the presence of lower brominated BDE (nona-, octa- and eventually other lower brominated BDEs) indicates possible degradation during extraction and clean-up. To minimise this, the GC liners and injection syringe should be changed regularly. Silanising both the syringe and liner may help. When using on-column injection, the choice of retention gap can also have an effect on the degradation of BDE209 during analysis. Deactivated fused silica retention gaps are often used. The QUASIMEME (Quality Assurance of Information for Marine Environmental Monitoring) external quality assurance scheme has also highlighted the difficulties with the analysis of BDE209 with CV% for this congener ranging from 40 – 256%. As a result, many laboratories do not analyse for BDE209.
6 Calibration and Quantification
6.1 Standards
Standard solutions of known purity should be used for the preparation of calibration standards. If the quality of the standard materials is not guaranteed by the producer or supplier (as for certified reference materials), then it should be checked by GC-MS analysis. In addition, certified standard solutions are available from QUASIMEME and other suppliers for cross-checking. Calibration standards should be stored in the dark because some PBDEs are photosensitive, and ideally solutions to be stored should be sealed in amber, glass ampoules. Otherwise, they can be stored in a refrigerator in stoppered measuring cylinders or flasks that are gas tight to avoid evaporation of the solvent during storage.
Ideally, internal standards should fall within the range of the compounds to be determined, and should not include compounds which may be present in the samples. A range of 13C-labelled PBDEs are available for use as internal standards in PBDE analysis using GC-EIMS. However, when using GC-ECNI-MS these are of little value as, for the majority of congeners, only the bromine ions can be monitored. For BDE209 a high molecular weight fragment is formed during GC-ECNI-MS and, therefore, 13C labelled BDE209 should be used. When GC-ECNIMS is used mono fluorinated BDEs may be used as internal standards or a recovery standard added to each sample prior to extraction and the recovery calculated as a check on the method.
6.2 Calibration
Multilevel calibration with at least five calibration levels is preferred to adequately define the calibration curve. In general, GC-MS calibration is linear over a considerable concentration range but exhibits non-linear behaviour when the mass of a compound injected is low due to adsorption. The use of a syringe standard is recommended, for example BDE190. Quantification should be conducted in the linear region of the calibration curve, or the non-linear region must be well characterised during the calibration procedure. Internal standardisation should be used for the quantification of PBDEs.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 91 7 Analytical Quality Control
Planners of monitoring programmes must decide on the accuracy, precision, repeatability, and limits of detection and determination which they consider acceptable. Achievable limits of determination for each individual component are as follows: • for GC-ECNI-MS measurements: 0.05 μg kg−1 wet weight for tri- to hepta-BDEs and 0.50 μg kg−1 wet weight for BDE209; • for GC-EIMS: 0.5 μg kg−1 wet weight. • for high resolution GC-MS: 0.02 ng kg−1 wet weight for tri- to hepta-BDEs and 0.5 ng kg−1 wet weight for BDE209. A procedural blank should be measured with each batch of samples, and should be prepared simultaneously using the same chemical reagents and solvents as for the samples. Its purpose is to indicate sample contamination by interfering compounds, which will result in errors in quantification. Recoveries should be checked for all samples. Recoveries should be between 70 and 120% if not samples should be repeated. The procedural blank is also very important in the calculation of limits of detection and limits of quantification for the analytical method. In addition, a laboratory reference material (LRM) or certified reference material (CRM) should be analysed within each sample batch. The LRM must be homogeneous and well-characterised for the determinands of interest within the analytical laboratory. Ideally the LRM or CRM should be of the same matrix type (e.g., liver, muscle, mussel tissue) as the samples, and the determinand concentrations should be in the same range as those in the samples. The data produced for the LRM or CRM in successive sample batches should be used to prepare control charts. It is also useful to analyse the LRM or CRM in duplicate from time to time to check within-batch analytical variability. The analysis of an LRM is primarily intended as a check that the analytical method is under control and yields acceptable precision. A CRM may be analysed periodically in order to check the method bias. CRMs certified for PBDEs are available (Wise et al.). At regular intervals, the laboratory should participate in an intercomparison or proficiency exercise in which samples are circulated without knowledge of the determinand concentrations, in order to provide an independent check on performance.
8 Data Reporting
The calculation of results and the reporting of data can represent major sources of error. Control procedures should be established in order to ensure that data are correct and to obviate transcription errors. Data stored on databases should be checked and validated, and checks are also necessary when data are transferred between databases. If possible data should be reported in accordance with the latest ICES reporting formats.
9 References
Bligh, E. G., and Dyer, W. J. 1959. A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification. Canadian Journal of Biochemistry and Physiology. 37: 911–917. de Boer, J., Allchin, C. R., Zegers B., and Boon J. P. 2001. Method for the analysis of polybrominated diphenyl ethers, Trends in Anal. Chem., 20: 591 – 599. de Boer, J., and Wells, D. E. 2006, Pitfalls in the analysis of brominated flame retardants in environmental, human and food samples- including results of three international interlaboratory studies, Trends in Anal. Chem., 25: 364 – 572. Braekevelt, E., Tittlelier, S. A., Tomy, G. 2003, Direct measurement of octanol-water partition coefficients of some environmentally relevant brominated diphenyl ether congeners, Chemosphere, 51: 563 – 567. Covaci, A., Voorspoels, S., and de Boer, J. 2003. Determination of brominated flame retardants, with emphasis on polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in environmental and human samples- a review, Environ. Int., 29: 735 – 756. Hanson, S. W. F., and Olley, J. 1963. Application of the Bligh and Dyer method of lipid extraction to tissue homogenates. Biochem. J., 89: 101 102. Korytár, P., Covaci, A., de Boer, J., Gelbin, A., and Brinkman, U. A.Th. 2005. Retention-time database of 126 polybrominated diphenyl ether congeners and two Bromkal technical mixtures on seven capillary gas chromatographic columns. Journal of Chromatography A 1065: 239–249. Law, Allchin, R. J., C. R. deBoer J., Covaci, A.., Herzke, D., Lepom, P., Morris, S., Tronczynski, J., and deWit, C. A. 2006. Levels and trends of brominated flame retardants in the European environment, Chemosphere, 64: 187 – 208. OSPAR Commission, 1999. JAMP Guidelines for Monitoring Contaminants in Biota. Smedes, F. 1999. Determination of total lipid using non-chlorinated solvents. Analyst, 124: 1711–1718. Sporring, S., Wiberg, K., Bjorklund, E., and Haglund, P. 2003. Combined extraction/Clean-up strategies for fast determination of PCDD/Fs and WHO PCBs in food and feed samples using accelerated solvent extraction, Organohalogen Compounds, 60–65, Dioxin 2003, Boston.
92 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Wise, S. A., Poster, D. L., Kucklick, J. R., Keller, J. M., VanderPol, S. S., Sander, L. C., and Schantz, M. M., 2006. Standard reference materials (SRMs) for determination of organic contaminants in environmental samples, Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, 386: 1153–1190.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 93 Annex 3 -Technical Annex: Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) in sediment
1 Introduction
This annex provides advice on hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) analysis for sediment. The analysis of HBCD in sediment generally involves extraction with organic solvents, clean-up and either gas chromatographic separation with mass-spectrometric (MS) detection or liquid chromatography with MS detection. All stages of the procedure are susceptible to insufficient recovery and/or contamination. Where possible, quality control procedures are recommended in order to check the method’s performance. These guidelines are intended to encourage and assist analytical chemists to reconsider their methods and to improve their procedures and/or the associated quality control measures where necessary.
HBCD is produced by the bromination of cycldodec-15 9-triene and has been used since the late 1970s. HBCD is an additive flame retardant that is predominately used in foams and expanded polystyrene and in textile back coatings. HBCD can be released to the environment during its production and while manufacturing other products, and during disposal of products containing this chemical. In addition, HBCD may continue to leak out of treated material and constitute a diffuse source of this compound to the environment. Atmospheric transportation is thought to be a major pathway for HBCD into the marine environment; HBCD has been found in remote areas of Sweden and Finland and in the Arctic.
Theoretically, there are sixteen possible stereoisomers of HBCD; 6 enantiomeric pairs and 4 meso forms. However, in technical HBCD mixtures mainly three of the 6 enatiomeric pairs are found, namely α-, β- and γ-HBCD, with the dominant isomer being γ-HBCD (Law et al., 2005). In sediment the γ- isomer also dominates but in biota the major isomer is α-HBCD. β-HBCD is always a minor component. HBCD has a high octanol water partition coefficient (Log Kow = 5.8). HBCD is hydrophobic and therefore will tend to associate with particulate material and will accumulate in sediment particularly if it has a high organic carbon content.
2 Sampling and short-term storage
Sample contamination may occur during sampling, sample handling, pre-treatment and analysis, due to the environment, the containers or packing materials used, the instruments used during sample preparation, and from the solvents and reagents used during the analytical procedures. Controlled conditions are therefore required for all procedures on-board ship. It is important that the likely sources of contamination are identified and steps taken to preclude sample handling in areas where contamination can occur. A ship is a working vessel and there can always be procedures occurring as a result of the day-to-day operations (deck cleaning, automatic overboard bilge discharges, etc.) which could affect the sampling process. One way of minimising the risk is to conduct any sample manipulation in a clean area, such as within a laminar-flow hood, away from the deck areas of the vessel. Plastic materials must not be used for sampling due to the possible absorption of contaminants by the container material (if not avoidable hard polyethylene (HPE), Polypropylene(PP) or polytetrafluorethene can only be applied for a short time period, few days, or when in frozen condition, i.e. −20°C). Samples should be stored in solvent washed aluminium cans or glass jars. Aluminium cans are better as glass jars are more susceptible to breakage. Samples should be transported in closed containers; a temperature of 25°C should not be exceeded. If samples are not analysed within 48 h after sampling, they must be stored in the short term at 4°C. Storage over several months is only possible for frozen (<-20°C) and dried samples.
3 Pre-treatment and long term Storage
To increase comparability of data, samples can be wet sieved to reduce the variation of grain size distribution. This is particularly important for samples with less than 0.5% organic carbon. HBCD can be extracted from wet or dried samples, although storage, homogenisation and extraction are much easier when the samples are dry. Drying the samples however may alter the concentrations e.g. by the loss of compounds through evaporation or by contamination. Losses and contamination during drying must be shown to be insignificant. Chemical drying can be performed by grinding with Na2SO4 or MgSO4 until the sample reaches a free-flowing consistency. It is essential that there are at least several hours between grinding and extraction to allow for complete dehydration of the sample; residual water will decrease extraction efficiency. A parallel determination of dry weight should be performed to allow recalculation of analytical results to a dry weight basis. A further representative subsample should be used for determination of organic carbon to allow normalisation of data.
Freeze-drying is a popular technique, although its application should be carefully considered. Possible losses or contamination must be checked. Losses through evaporation are diminished by keeping the temperature in the evaporation chamber below 0°C. Contamination during freeze-drying is reduced by putting a lid, with a hole of about 3 mm in diameter, on the sample container.
94 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Before taking a subsample for analysis, the samples should be sufficiently homogenised. Freeze dried samples should be stored at room temperature and wet sediment frozen, at -20°C or below.
More information is provided in the JAMP guidelines for monitoring contaminants in sediment.
4 Analysis
4.1 Solvent Purity and Blanks
For work at low concentrations, the use of high-purity solvents is essential and particularly when large solvent volumes are being used for extraction and column clean-up. All batches of solvents should be checked for purity by concentration of an aliquot of solvent by at least the same volume factor as used in the overall analytical procedure. Batches which show significant contamination, which will interfere with analysis, should be rejected. All glassware should be solvent-rinsed immediately prior to use as it will collect contamination from the laboratory atmosphere during storage. Heating of glassware in an oven (e.g. at 450°C for 24 hours) can also be useful in removing contamination. Pre- cleaning of all reagents (alumina, silica, sodium sulphate, hydromatrix, etc.) is essential.
4.2 Preparation of materials
Solvents, reagents and adsorptive materials must be free of HBCD and other interfering compounds. If not, then they must be purified using appropriate methods. Reagents and absorptive materials should be purified by solvent extraction and/or by heating in a muffle oven as appropriate. Glass fibre materials (e.g. Soxhlet thimbles and filter papers used in pressurised liquid extraction (PLE)) should be cleaned by solvent extraction or pre-baked at 450oC overnight. It should be borne in mind that clean materials can be re-contaminated by exposure to laboratory air, particularly in urban locations, and so storage after cleaning is of critical importance. Ideally, materials should be prepared immediately before use, but if they are to be stored, then the conditions should be considered critically. All containers which come into contact with the sample should be made of glass or aluminium, and should be pre-cleaned before use. Appropriate cleaning methods would include washing with detergents, rinsing with water and finally solvent rinsing immediately before use. This method should also be used for the first step of cleaning of PLE cells which should be further washed through a complete cycle of extraction using the PLE.
4.3 Extraction and clean-up
HBCD is hydrophobic and will have an affinity for particles and therefore can accumulate in sediment particularly if it has a high organic carbon content. HBCD can be extracted using extraction techniques used for other lipophilic, non- polar compounds such as CBs and PBDEs (Morris et al., 2006). A range of extraction methods have been used for the extraction of HBCD from sediment. These include the more traditional methods such as Soxhlet or Ultra Turrax homogenisation and newer automated methods such as pressurised liquid extraction (PLE). However, most laboratories are still using the traditional Soxhlet extraction. For Soxhlets, hexane/acetone mixtures are commonly used combined with an extraction time of between 6 and 24 hrs. Hexane/acetone mixtures are also used with PLE (if no fat retainers used) with an extraction time of ~ 10 min per sample. PLE or Soxhlet are therefore the preferred methods with PLE having the advantage of using less solvent, being fully automated and taking less time than Soxhlet.
Sediment extracts will always contain many compounds other than HBCD, and a suitable clean up is necessary to remove those compounds which may interfere with the subsequent analysis. Different techniques may be used, either singly or in combination, and the choice will be influenced by the selectivity and sensitivity of the final measurement technique and also by the extraction method employed. The most commonly used clean-up methods involve the use of alumina or silica adsorption chromatography, but gel permeation chromatography (GPC) can also be employed. For GPC, two serial columns are often used. Solvent mixtures such as dichloromethane/hexane or cyclohexane/ethyl acetate can be used as eluents for GPC. Depending on the detection method being used it may be necessary to use a second clean-up step to separate HBCD from other orgnaohalogenated compounds. This is especially critical when using electron capture detection (ECD). HBCD is stable under acid conditions; therefore treatment with sulphuric acid or acid impregnated silica columns may be used in the clean-up.
One advantage of using pressurised liquid extraction (PLE) is that it is possible to combine the clean up with the extraction, especially where mass spectrometry is being used as the detection method. Methods have been developed by Lund University for online clean-up and fractionation of dioxins, furans and PCBs with PLE for food, feed and environmental samples (Sporring et al. 2003). The first method utilises a fat retainer for the on-line clean-up of fat. Silica impregnated with sulphuric acid, alumina and florisil have all been used as fat retainers. A non-polar extraction solvent such as hexane should be used if fat retainers are used during PLE. This method can also be applied to the extraction of HBCD in sediment as well as biota. However, if tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBP-A) is also to be extracted, this method is not possible due to retention on the fat retainer.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 95 For GC/MS analysis, sulphur should be removed from the extracts in order to protect the detector. This can be achieved by the addition of copper powder, wire or gauze during or after Soxhlet extraction. Ultrasonic treatment might improve the removal of sulphur. As an alternative to copper, other methods can be used (Smedes and de Boer, 1997).
4.4 Pre-concentration
Turbo-vap sample concentrators can be used to reduce solvent volume. The use of rotary-film evaporators is more time consuming but more controllable. Buchi Syncore systems are also more controllable and are as rapid as Turbo-vaps and have the advantage of automatically rinsing down the sides of the vial (if flushback module fitted) while concentrating. In contrast to PBDEs and CBs where the evaporation steps have to be carefully optimised to avoid losses of the lower brominated/chlorinated compounds, loss of HBCD during concentrations is not an issue. When reducing the sample to final a volume, solvents can be removed by a stream of clean nitrogen gas. Suitable solvents for injection into the gas chromatograph (GC) include pentane, hexane, heptane and iso-octane. For analysis by LC-MS samples are normally taken to dryness and reconstituted in methanol.
4.5 Instrumental determination of HBCD
Analysis of HBCD is less straightforward than the analyses of PBDEs and a different approach is normally required. HBCD can be determined by gas chromatography- mass spectrometry (GC-MS), but the analysis can be problematic. The uncertainty is greater than for PBDEs analysed using the same method (Covaci et al., 2003). In addition, the three main HBCD diastereoisomers found in technical mixtures cannot be separated by GC and a total concentration only can be determined. A liquid chromatography (LC) method is required to separate the three diastereoisomers, with separation of enantiomers being possible with a chiral HPLC column.
4.5.1 GC-MS
Few publications analyse HBCD along with the PBDEs by GC-MS, although it has been done using both GC-electron capture negative ionisation (ECNI) and high resolution GC-MS. GC-electron capture detection (ECD) is rarely used due to the limited linear range, and lack of selectivity. If GC-ECD is used then the clean-up will need to separate out all other organohalogenated compounds which may give co-elution problems. Splitless, pulsed-splitless, programmed temperature vaporiser (PTV) and on-column injectors have been used for the determination of HBCD. Automatic sample injection should be used wherever possible to improve the reproducibility of injection and the precision of the overall method. Mainly non-polar columns are used with the most commonly used columns being HT-8, DB1701, STX- 500 and DB1. Both high and low resolution GC-MS can be used in conjunction with either electron ionisation (EI) or ENCI. Most laboratories using GC for HBCD use low resolution GC-MS normally in ENCI mode. ENCI shows improved sensitivity compared to EI or positive impact chemical ionisation (PCI). When GC-ENCIMS is used, the bromide ion is monitored. One of the drawbacks of the CI mode is that isotopically labelled standards (13C) cannot be used as internal standards for quantification purposes when only the bromide ions are monitored. Larger fragment ions, required for structural confirmation are not formed in ENCI mode. Either ammonia or methane may be used as the reagent gas when using chemical ionisation.
HBCD isomers interconvert at temperatures >160oC, therefore the three HBCD diastereoisomers cannot be separated and a broad hump is obtained in the GC chromatogram. In addition, the three diastereoisomers will have different response factors and, therefore, the concentration of HBCD cannot be determined accurately by GC-MS (Wells and de Boer, 2006). Furthermore HBCD degrades at 240oC, therefore, there may be significant losses of HBCD during GC analysis. Cold on-column injection, short GC columns and thin stationary films can minimise the degradation of HBCD. When analysing for HBCD by GC-MS, the liner should be changed after each batch of samples to keep it as clean as possible. Co-elution of HBCD with certain PBDEs can also be a problem.
4.5.2 LC-MS
A reverse phase column should be used for analysis of HBCD by LC-MS. The three diastereoisomers found in the technical mixture should separate easily using a column such as a C18 and either methanol/water or acetonitrile/water, normally buffered with ammonium acetate (10 mM), as the mobile phase. Typically the flow rate will be around 250 µl min-1 and a gradient programme will be required. HPLC with chiral columns such as permethylated β-cyclodextrin columns can also be used to separate the enantiomers of the α, β, γ-HBCD diastereoisomers. Either electrospray or atmospheric pressure chemical ionisation (APCI) can be used. However, electrospray is more sensitive and is therefore recommended. Clean-up of the samples before analysis is important to avoid matrix effects and ion suppression. The deprotonated molecular ion (m/z = 640.7) should be the major ion, fragment ions may also be identified to be used as qualifier ions. LC-MS has been reported to have poorer detection limits compared to GC-MS, with the sensitivity being approximately 10 times less than that of the GC-ENCIMS method. Using LC-MS and with an injection volume of ~15 μl, it should be possible to detect around 0.5 ng on column (Morris et al., 2004).
96 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 5 Calibration and Quantification
5.1 Standards
Crystalline HBCD standard solutions for each of the three major stereoisomers (α-, β- and γ-HBCD) of known purity should be used for the preparation of calibration standards. If the quality of the standard materials is not guaranteed by the producer or supplier (as for certified reference materials), then it should be checked by GC-MS analysis. In addition, certified standard solutions are available from QUASIMEME and other suppliers for cross-checking. Calibration standards should be stored in the dark, and ideally solutions to be stored should be stored in sealed amber glass ampoules. Otherwise, they can be stored in a refrigerator in stoppered measuring cylinders or flasks that are gas tight to avoid evaporation of the solvent during storage.
Ideally, internal standards should fall within the range of the compounds to be determined, and should not include compounds which may be present in the samples. Deuterated and 13C-labelled HBCD standards are available for the three major diastereoisomers for use as internal standards in HBCD analysis using GC-EIMS or LC-MS. However, deuterated standards are less expensive and are therefore the preferred option. As HBCD is prone to ion suppression it is recommended that a labelled standard should be used for each isomer being analysed by LC-MS. When using GC- ENCIMS these are of little value as only the bromine ions can be monitored. When GC-ENCIMS is used for the analysis a recovery standard should be added to each sample prior to extraction and the recovery calculated as a check on the method.
5.2 Calibration
Multilevel calibration with at least five calibration levels is preferred to adequately define the calibration curve. In general, GC-MS or LC-MS calibration is linear over a considerable concentration range but exhibits non-linear behaviour when the mass of a compound injected is low due to adsorption. Quantification should be conducted in the linear region of the calibration curve, or the non-linear region must be well characterised during the calibration procedure. External standardisation is used for HBCD with GC-ENCIMS as the bromine ions only are monitored. An internal standard method may be used when GC-EIMS or LC-MS is used.
6 Analytical Quality Control
Planners of monitoring programmes must decide on the accuracy, precision, repeatability, and limits of detection and determination which they consider acceptable. Achievable limits of determination for each individual component are as follows: • for GC-ENCIMS: 0.05 μg kg−1 wet weight • for LC-MS: 0.5 μg kg−1 wet weight. • for LC-MS/MS: 0.05μg kg−1 wet weight
A procedural blank should be measured with each batch of samples, and should be prepared simultaneously using the same chemical reagents and solvents as for the samples. Its purpose is to indicate sample contamination by interfering compounds, which will result in errors in quantification. The procedural blank is also very important in the calculation of limits of detection and limits of quantification for the analytical method. For GC-EIMS or LC-MS analysis, labelled standards can be added after or prior to extraction, whilst those from which the absolute recovery will be assessed are added prior to GC-MS injection. This ensures that the calculated HBCD concentrations are corrected for the recovery obtained in each case. For GC-ECNI-MS, recovery of HBCD should be checked and reported. In the case of GC-ECNI- MS a recovery standard such as CB198 should be added prior to extraction and the recovery calculated for each sample, by reference to an external standard.
In addition, a laboratory reference material (LRM) or certified reference material (CRM) should be analysed within each sample batch if available. The LRM must be homogeneous and well-characterised for the determinands of interest within the analytical laboratory. Ideally the LRM or CRM should be of the same matrix type (e.g., liver, muscle, mussel tissue) as the samples, and the determinand concentrations should be in the same range as those in the samples. The data produced for the LRM or CRM in successive sample batches should be used to prepare control charts. It is also useful to analyse the LRM or CRM in duplicate from time to time to check within-batch analytical variability. The analysis of an LRM is primarily intended as a check that the analytical method is under control and yields acceptable precision. A CRM may be analysed periodically in order to check the method bias. The availability of biota CRMs certified for HBCD is very limited. At regular intervals, the laboratory should participate in an intercomparison or proficiency exercise in which samples are circulated without knowledge of the determinand concentrations, in order to provide an independent check on performance.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 97 7 Data Reporting
The calculation of results and the reporting of data can represent major sources of error. Control procedures should be established in order to ensure that data are correct and to obviate transcription errors. Data stored on databases should be checked and validated, and checks are also necessary when data are transferred between databases. If possible data should be reported in accordance with the latest ICES reporting formats.
8 References
De Boer, J., and Wells, D. E. 2006, Pitfalls in the analysis of brominated flame retardants in environmental, human and food samples- including results of three international interlaboratory studies, Trends in Anal. Chem., 25: 364– 572. Covaci, A., Voorspoels, S., and de Boer, J. 2003. Determination of brominated flame retardants, with emphasis on polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in environmental and human samples- a review, Environ. Int., 29: 735–756. Law, R. J., Kohler, M., Heeb, N. V., Gerecke, A. C., Schmid, P., Voorspoels, S., Covaci, A., Becher, G., Janak, K., and Thomsen, C., 2005. Hexabromocyclododecane challenges scientists and regulators, July 1, 281A–287A. Morris, S., Allchin, C. R., Zegers, B. N., Haftka, J. H.., Boon, J. P, Belpaire, C., Leonards, P. E. G., Van Leeuwen , S. P. J., and d e Boer, J. 2004. Distribution and fate of HBCD and TBBP-A brominated flame retardants in North Sea estuaries and aquatic food webs, Environ. Sci. Technol., 38: 5497–5504. Morris, S., Bersuder, P., Allchin, C. R., Zegers, B., Boon, J. P., Leonards, E. G., and de Boer, J. 2006. Determination of the brominated flame retardant, hexabromocyclododecane, in sediments and biota by liquid chromatography- electrospray ionisation mass spectrometry, Trends in Anal. Chem., 25: 343–349. OSPAR Commission, 1999. JAMP Guidelines for Monitoring Contaminants in Sediment. Sporring, S., Wiberg, K., Bjorklund, E., and Haglund, P. 2003. Combined extraction/Clean-up strategies for fast determination of PCDD/Fs and WHO PCBs in food and feed samples using accelerated solvent extraction, Organohalogen Compounds, 60–65, Dioxin 2003, Boston.
98 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Annex 4 - Technical Annex: Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) in biota
1 Introduction
This annex provides advice on hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) analysis for biota. The analysis of HBCD in biota generally involves extraction with organic solvents, clean-up (removal of lipid) and either gas chromatographic separation with mass-spectrometric (MS) detection or liquid chromatography with MS detection. All stages of the procedure are susceptible to insufficient recovery and/or contamination. Where possible, quality control procedures are recommended in order to check the method’s performance. These guidelines are intended to encourage and assist analytical chemists to reconsider their methods and to improve their procedures and/or the associated quality control measures where necessary.
HBCD is produced by the bromination of cycldodec-15 9-triene and has been used since the late 1970s. HBCD is an additive flame retardant that is predominately used in foams and expanded polystyrene and in textile back coatings. HBCD can be released to the environment during its production and while manufacturing other products, and during disposal of products containing this chemical. In addition, HBCD may continue to leak out of treated material and constitute a diffuse source of this compound to the environment. Atmospheric transportation is thought to be a major pathway for HBCD into the marine environment; in addition, point sources may exist. HBCD has been found in remote areas of Sweden and Finland and in the Arctic.
Theoretically, there are sixteen possible stereoisomers of HBCD; 6 enantiomeric pairs and 4 meso forms. However, in technical HBCD mixtures mainly three of the 6 enatiomeric pairs are found, namely α-, β- and γ-HBCD, with the dominant isomer being γ-HBCD (Law et al., 2005). In sediment the γ- isomer also dominates but in biota the major isomer is α-HBCD. β-HBCD is always a minor component. HBCD has a high octanol water partition coefficient (Log
Kow = 5.8) and, the potential to bioaccumulate.
2 Appropriate Species for Analysis of HBCD
Guidance on the selection of appropriate species for contaminant monitoring is given in the JAMP guidelines. Other species such as sole, hake and oysters may also be appropriate. Existing data indicates that HBCD concentrations for shellfish are very low and, therefore, detecting long term trends may be difficult using these species. High trophic level organisms and lipid rich tissue will accumulate higher levels of HBCD and, therefore, may be more suitable for temporal trend monitoring.
3 Transportation
Fish samples should be kept cool or frozen (at a temperature of -20°C or lower) as soon as possible after collection. Live mussels should be transported in closed containers at temperatures between 5°C and 10°C. For live animals it is important that the transport time is short and controlled (e.g. maximum of 24 hours). Frozen fish samples should be transported in closed metal or glass (cleaned and pre-baked) containers at temperatures below -20°C.
4 Pre-treatment and Storage
4.1 Contamination
Sample contamination may occur during sampling, sample handling, pre-treatment and analysis, due to the environment, the containers or packing materials used, the instruments used during sample preparation, and from the equipment, solvents and reagents used during the analytical procedures. Controlled conditions are therefore required for all procedures, including the dissection of fish on-board ship. It is important that the likely sources of contamination are identified and steps taken to preclude sample handling in areas where contamination can occur. A ship is a working vessel and there can always be procedures occurring as a result of the day-to-day operations (deck cleaning, automatic overboard bilge discharges, etc.) which could affect the sampling process. One way of minimising the risk is to conduct dissection in a clean area, such as within a laminar-flow hood, away from the deck areas of the vessel.
4.2 Shellfish
4.2.1 Depuration
Depending upon the situation, it may be desirable to depurate shellfish so as to void the gut contents and any associated contaminants before freezing or sample preparation. This is usually applied close to point sources, where the gut contents may contain significant quantities of HBCD associated with food and sediment particles which are not truly assimilated into the tissues of the mussels. Depuration should be undertaken in controlled conditions and in filtered
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 99 water taken from the sampling site; depuration over a period of 24 hours is usually sufficient. The aquarium should be aerated and temperature controlled?
4.2.2 Dissection and storage
Mussels should be shucked live and opened with minimal tissue damage by detaching the adductor muscles from the interior of at least one valve. The soft tissues should be removed and homogenised as soon as possible, and frozen in solvent washed glass jars (pre-baked at 450oC) or aluminium tins at -20°C until analysis.
When samples are processed, both at sea and onshore, the dissection must be undertaken by trained personnel on a clean bench wearing clean gloves and using clean stainless steel knives and scalpels. Stainless steel tweezers are recommended for holding tissues during dissection. After each sample has been prepared, all tools and equipment (such as homogenisers) should be cleaned by wiping down with tissue and solvent washed. Knives should only be sharpened using steel to prevent contamination of the blade from the oils used to lubricate sharpening blocks.
4.3 Fish
4.3.1 Dissection and storage
Ungutted fish should be wrapped separately in suitable material (e.g. aluminium foil) and frozen. If plastic bags or boxes are used, then they should be used as outer containers only, and should not come into contact with tissues. Organ samples (e.g. livers) should be stored in solvent washed containers, made of glass, stainless steel or aluminium, or should be wrapped in pre-cleaned aluminium foil. Cold air should be able to circulate between the samples in order that the minimum freezing time can be attained (maximum 12 hours). The individual samples should be clearly and indelibly labelled and stored together in a suitable container at a temperature of -20°C until analysis. If the samples are to be transported during this period (e.g. from the ship to the laboratory), then arrangements must be made which ensure that the samples do not thaw out during transport.
When samples are processed, both at sea and onshore, the dissection must be undertaken by trained personnel on a bench previously washed with detergent (e.g. Decon 90) wearing clean gloves and using solvent washed stainless steel knives and scalpels. Stainless steel tweezers are recommended for holding tissues during dissection. After each sample has been prepared, all tools and equipment (such as homogenisers) should be cleaned by wiping with tissue and rinsing with solvent.
4.3.2 Subsampling
When sampling fish muscle, care should be taken to avoid including any epidermis or subcutaneous fatty tissue in the sample. Samples should be taken underneath the red muscle layer. In order to ensure uniformity, the right side dorso- lateral muscle should be sampled. If possible, the entire right side dorsal lateral fillet should be homogenised and sub- samples taken for replicate HBCD determinations. If, however, the amount of material to be homogenised is too large, a specific portion of the dorsal musculature should be chosen. It is recommended that the portion of the muscle lying directly under the first dorsal fin is used in this case.
When dissecting the liver, care should be taken to avoid contamination from the other organs. If bile samples are to be taken then they should be collected first. If the whole liver is not to be homogenised, a specific portion should be chosen in order to ensure comparability. When pooling of tissues is necessary, an equivalent quantity of tissue should be taken from each fish, e.g. 10 % from each whole fillet.
5 Analysis
5.1 Solvent Purity and Blanks
For work at low concentrations, the use of high-purity solvents is essential and particularly when large solvent volumes are being used for extraction and column clean-up. All batches of solvents should be checked for purity by concentration of an aliquot of solvent by at least the same volume factor as used in the overall analytical procedure. Batches which show significant contamination, which will interfere with analysis, should be rejected. All glassware should be solvent-rinsed immediately prior to use as it will collect contamination from the laboratory atmosphere during storage. Heating of glassware in an oven (e.g. at 450°C for 24 hours) can also be useful in removing contamination. Pre- cleaning of all reagents (alumina, silica, sodium sulphate, hydromatrix etc) is essential.
100 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 5.2 Preparation of materials
Solvents, reagents and adsorptive materials must be free of HBCD and other interfering compounds. If not, then they must be purified using appropriate methods. Reagents and absorptive materials should be purified by solvent extraction and/or by heating in a muffle oven as appropriate. Glass fibre materials (e.g. Soxhlet thimbles and filter papers used in pressurised extraction (PLE)) should be cleaned by solvent extraction and/or pre-baked at 450oC overnight. It should be borne in mind that clean materials can be re-contaminated by exposure to laboratory air, particularly in urban locations, and so storage after cleaning is of critical importance. Ideally, materials should be prepared immediately before use, but if they are to be stored, then the conditions should be considered critically. All containers which come into contact with the sample should be made of glass or aluminium, and should be pre-cleaned before use. Appropriate cleaning methods would include washing with detergents, rinsing with water and finally solvent rinsing immediately before use.
5.3 Lipid determination
The determination of the lipid content of tissues can be of use in characterising the samples. This will enable reporting concentrations on a wet weight or lipid weight basis. The lipid content should be determined on a separate subsample of the tissue homogenate, as some of the extraction techniques used routinely for HBCD determination (e.g. PLE with fat retainers) destroy or remove lipid materials. The total lipid should be determined using the method of Bligh and Dyer (1959) as modified by Hanson and Olley (1963) or an equivalent method such as Smedes (1999). Extractable lipid may be used, particularly if the sample size is small and lipid content is high. It has been shown that if the lipid content is high (>5%) then this will be comparable to the total lipid. Gravimetric determination of the dry matter content of the sample is recommended.
5.4 Extraction and clean-up
HBCD is lipophilic and, therefore, can concentrate in the lipids of an organism. HBCD can be extracted using extraction techniques used for other lipophilic, non-polar compounds such as CBs and PBDEs (Morris et al., 2006). A range of extraction methods have been used for the extraction of HBCD from biota. These include the more traditional methods such as Soxhlet or Ultra Turrax homogenisation and newer automated methods such as pressurised liquid extraction (PLE). However, most laboratories are still using the traditional Soxhlet extraction. For Soxhlets, hexane/acetone mixtures are commonly used combined with an extraction time of between 6 and 24 hrs. Hexane/acetone mixtures are also used with PLE (if no fat retainers are used) with an extraction time of ~ 10 min per sample. PLE or Soxhlet are therefore the preferred methods with PLE having the advantage of using less solvent, being fully automated and taking less time than Soxhlet.
Tissue extracts will always contain many compounds other than HBCD, and a suitable clean up is necessary to remove those compounds which may interfere with the subsequent analysis. Different techniques may be used, either singly or in combination, and the choice will be influenced by the selectivity and sensitivity of the final measurement technique and also by the extraction method employed. If Soxhlet extraction is used, then there is a much greater quantity of residual lipid to be removed before the analytical determination can be made. The most commonly used clean-up methods involve the use of alumina or silica adsorption chromatography, but gel permeation chromatography (GPC) can also be employed. For GPC, two serial columns are often used for improved lipid separation. Solvent mixtures such as dichloromethane/hexane or cyclohexane/ethyl acetate can be used as eluents for GPC. Depending on the detection method being used and the lipid content of the sample it may be necessary to use a second clean-up step to separate HBCD from other interfering compounds. HBCD is stable under acid conditions; therefore treatment with sulphuric acid or acid impregnated silica columns may be used in the clean-up.
One advantage of using PLE extraction is that it is possible to combine the clean up with the extraction, especially where mass spectrometry is being used as the detection method. Methods have been developed by Lund University for online clean-up and fractionation of dioxins, furans and PCBs with PLE for food, feed and environmental samples (Sporring et al. 2003). The first method utilises a fat retainer for the on-line clean-up of fat. Silica impregnated with sulphuric acid, alumina and florisil have all been used as fat retainers. A non-polar extraction solvent such as hexane should be used if fat retainers are used during PLE. This method can also be applied to the extraction of HBCD. However, if tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBP-A) is also to be extracted, this method is not possible due to retention on the fat retainer.
5.5 Pre-concentration
Turbo-vap sample concentrators can be used to reduce solvent volume. The use of rotary-film evaporators is more time consuming but more controllable. Buchi Syncore systems are also more controllable and are as rapid as Turbo-vaps and have the advantage of automatically rinsing down the sides of the vial (if flushback module fitted) while concentrating. In contrast to PBDEs and CBs where the evaporation steps have to be carefully optimised to avoid losses of the lower brominated/chlorinated compounds, loss of HBCD during concentrations is not an issue. When reducing the sample to a
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 101 final volume, solvents can be removed by a stream of clean nitrogen gas. Suitable solvents for injection into the gas chromatograph (GC) include pentane, hexane, heptane and iso-octane. For analysis by LC-MS samples are normally taken to dryness and reconstituted in methanol.
5.6 Instrumental determination of HBCD
Analysis of HBCD is less straightforward than the analyses of PBDEs and a different approach is normally required. HBCD can be determined by gas chromatography- mass spectrometry (GC-MS), but the analysis can be problematic. The uncertainty is greater than for PBDEs analysed using the same method (Covaci et al., 2003). In addition, the three main HBCD diastereoisomers found in technical mixtures cannot be separated by GC and a total concentration only can be determined. A liquid chromatography (LC) method is required to separate the three diastereoisomers, with separation of enantiomers being possible with a chiral HPLC column.
5.6.1 GC-MS
Few publications analyse HBCD along with the PBDEs by GC-MS, although it has been done using both GC- electron capture negative ionisation (ECNI) and high resolution GC-MS. GC-electron capture detection (ECD) is rarely used due to the limited linear range, and lack of selectivity. If GC-ECD is used then the clean-up will need to separate out all other organohalgenated compounds which may give co-elution problems. Splitless, pulsed-splitless, programmed temperature vaporiser (PTV) and on-column injectors have been used for the determination of HBCD. Automatic sample injection should be used wherever possible to improve the reproducibility of injection and the precision of the overall method. Mainly non-polar columns are used, for example HT-8, DB-5, STX-500. Both high and low resolution GC-MS can be used in conjunction with either electron ionisation (EI) or ECNI. Most laboratories using GC for HBCD use low resolution GC-MS normally in ECNI mode. ECNI shows improved sensitivity compared to EI or positive impact chemical ionisation (PCI). When GC-ECNI-MS is used, the bromine ion is monitored. One of the drawbacks of the CI mode is that isotopically labelled standards (13C) cannot be used as internal standards for quantification purposes when only the bromine ions are monitored. Larger fragment ions, required for structural confirmation are not formed in ECNI mode. Either ammonia or methane may be used as the reagent gas when using chemical ionisation.
HBCD isomers interconvert at temperatures >160oC, therefore the three HBCD diastereoisomers cannot be separated and a broad hump is obtained in the GC chromatogram. In addition, the three diastereoisomers will have different response factors and, therefore, the concentration of HBCD cannot be determined accurately by GC-MS (Wells and de Boer, 2006). Furthermore HBCD degrades at 240oC, therefore, there may be significant losses of HBCD during GC analysis. Cold on-column injection, short GC columns and thin stationary films can minimise the degradation of HBCD. When analysing for HBCD by GC-MS the liner should be changed after each batch of samples to keep it as clean as possible. Co-elution of HBCD with certain PBDEs can also be a problem.
5.6.2 LC-MS
A reverse phase column should be used for analysis of HBCD by LC-MS. The three diastereoisomers found in the technical mixture should separate easily using a column such as a C18 and either methanol/water or acetonitrile/water, normally with ammonium acetate (10 mM), as the mobile phase. Typically the flow rate will be around 250 µl min-1 and a gradient programme will be required. HPLC with chiral columns such as permethylated β-cyclodextrin columns can also be used to separate the enantiomers of the α, β, γ-HBCD diastereoisomers. Either electrospray or atmospheric pressure chemical ionisation (APCI) can be used. However, electrospray is more sensitive and is therefore recommended. Clean-up of the samples before analysis is important to avoid matrix effects and ion suppression. The deprotonated molecular ion (m/z = 640.7) should be the major ion, fragment ions may also be identified to be used as qualifier ions. LC-MS has been reported to have poorer detection limits compared to GC-MS, with the sensitivity being approximately 10 times less than that of the GC-NCIMS method. Using LC-MS and with an injection volume of ~15 μl, it should be possible to detect around 0.5 ng on column (Morris et al., 2004). LC-MS-MS can usually overcome the problem of higher detection limits.
6 Calibration and Quantification
6.1 Standards
HBCD standard solutions for each of the three major stereoisomers (α-, β- and γ-HBCD) of known purity should be used for the preparation of calibration standards. If the quality of the standard materials is not guaranteed by the producer or supplier (as for certified reference materials), then it should be checked by GC-MS analysis. In addition, certified standard solutions are available from QUASIMEME and other suppliers for cross-checking. Calibration standards should be stored in sealed amber glass ampoules. Otherwise, they can be stored in a refrigerator in stoppered measuring cylinders or flasks that are gas tight to avoid evaporation of the solvent during storage.
102 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Ideally, internal standards should fall within the range of the compounds to be determined, and should not include compounds which may be present in the samples. Deuterated and 13C-labelled HBCD standards are available for the three major diastereoisomers for use as internal standards in HBCD analysis using GC-EIMS or LC-MS. However, deuterated standards are less expensive and are therefore the preferred option. As HBCD is prone to ion suppression it is recommended that a labelled standard should be used for each isomer being analysed by LC-MS. When using GC- ECNI-MS these are of little value as only the bromine ions can be monitored. When GC-ECNI-MS is used for the analysis a recovery standard should be added to each sample prior to extraction and the recovery calculated as a check on the method.
6.2 Calibration
Multilevel calibration with at least five calibration levels is preferred to adequately define the calibration curve. In general, GC-MS calibration is linear over a considerable concentration range but exhibits non-linear behaviour when the mass of a compound injected is low due to adsorption. Quantification should be conducted in the linear region of the calibration curve, or the non-linear region must be well characterised during the calibration procedure. External standardisation is used for HBCD with GC-ECNI-MS as the bromine ions only are monitored. An internal standard method may be used when GC-EIMS or LC-MS is used.
7 Analytical Quality Control
Planners of monitoring programmes must decide on the accuracy, precision, repeatability, and limits of detection and determination which they consider acceptable. Achievable limits of determination for each individual component are as follows: • for GC-ECNI-MS: 0.05 μg kg−1 wet weight • for LC-MS: 0.5 μg kg−1 wet weight. • for LC-MS/MS: 0.05μg kg−1 wet weight
A procedural blank should be measured with each batch of samples, and should be prepared simultaneously using the same chemical reagents and solvents as for the samples. Its purpose is to indicate sample contamination by interfering compounds, which will result in errors in quantification. The procedural blank is also very important in the calculation of limits of detection and limits of quantification for the analytical method. For GC-EIMS or LC-MS analysis, labelled standards can be added after or prior to extraction, whilst those from which the absolute recovery will be assessed are added prior to GC-MS injection. This ensures that the calculated HBCD concentrations are corrected for the recovery obtained in each case. For GC-ECNI-MS, recovery of HBCD should be checked and reported. In the case of GC-ECNI- MS a recovery standard such as CB198 should be added prior to extraction and the recovery calculated for each sample, by reference to an external standard.
In addition, a laboratory reference material (LRM) or certified reference material (CRM) should be analysed within each sample batch if available. The LRM must be homogeneous and well-characterised for the determinands of interest within the analytical laboratory. Ideally the LRM or CRM should be of the same matrix type (e.g., liver, muscle, mussel tissue) as the samples, and the determinand concentrations should be in the same range as those in the samples. The data produced for the LRM or CRM in successive sample batches should be used to prepare control charts. It is also useful to analyse the LRM or CRM in duplicate from time to time to check within-batch analytical variability. The analysis of an LRM is primarily intended as a check that the analytical method is under control and yields acceptable precision. A CRM may be analysed periodically in order to check the method bias. The availability of biota CRMs certified for HBCD is very limited. At regular intervals, the laboratory should participate in an intercomparison or proficiency exercise in which samples are circulated without knowledge of the determinand concentrations, in order to provide an independent check on performance.
8 Data Reporting
The calculation of results and the reporting of data can represent major sources of error. Control procedures should be established in order to ensure that data are correct and to obviate transcription errors. Data stored on databases should be checked and validated, and checks are also necessary when data are transferred between databases. If possible data should be reported in accordance with the latest ICES reporting formats.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 103 9 References
Bligh, E. G., and Dyer, W. J. 1959. A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification. Canadian Journal of Biochemistry and Physiology. 37: 911–917. De Boer, J., and Wells, D. E. 2006, Pitfalls in the analysis of brominated flame retardants in environmental, human and food samples- including results of three international interlaboratory studies, Trends in Anal. Chem., 25: 364 – 572. Covaci, A., Voorspoels, S., and de Boer, J. 2003. Determination of brominated flame retardants, with emphasis on polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in environmental and human samples- a review, Environ. Int., 29: 735 – 756. Hanson, S. W. F., and Olley, J. 1963. Application of the Bligh and Dyer method of lipid extraction to tissue homogenates. Biochem. J., 89: 101 102. Law, R. J., Kohler, M., Heeb, N. V., Gerecke, A. C., Schmid, P., Voorspoels, S., Covaci, A., Becher, G., Janak, K., and Thomsen, C., 2005. Hexabromocyclododecane challenges scientists and regulators, July 1, 281A – 287A. S. Morris, Allchin, C. R., Zegers, B. N., Haftka, J. H., Boon, J. P., C. Belpaire, P. Leonards, E. G., S. P. J. Van Leeuwen and J. d e Boer, 2004. Distribution and fate of HBCD and TBBP-A brominated flame retardants in North Sea estuaries and aquatic food webs, Environ. Sci. Technol., 38: 5497 – 5504. Morris, S., Bersuder, P. , Allchin, C. R., Zegers, B., Boon, J. P., Leonards, E. G and de Boer, J., 2006. Determination of the brominated flame retardant, hexabromocyclododecane, in sediments and biota by liquid chromatography- electrospray ionisation mass spectrometry, Trends in Anal. Chem., 25: 343 – 349. Smedes, F. 1999. Determination of total lipid using non-chlorinated solvents. Analyst, 124: 1711–1718. Sporring, S., Wiberg, K., Bjorklund, E., and Haglund, P. 2003. Combined extraction/Clean-up strategies for fast determination of PCDD/Fs and WHO PCBs in food and feed samples using accelerated solvent extraction, Organohalogen Compounds, 60–65, Dioxin 2003, Boston.
104 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.5.5.7 OSPAR OECD Test Protocols for EDCs
Request
In 2005, OSPAR requested advice regarding endocrine disruptors. ICES responded in Section 2.2.7.6 of the 2005 ICES Advisory Report, but OSPAR HSC felt that further information, detail and clarification was needed in order to fully address the question. OSPAR and ICES agreed on the following request, specifically these are:
1) to consider the adequacy of the OECD test protocols and their applicability for marine species, and 2) to specify proposals for a test programme for marine species in case OECD freshwater model species on scientific grounds are deemed not suitable for testing the effect of endocrine disrupting compounds in the marine environment
Recommendations and advice
ICES informs OSPAR that at present there exists too much uncertainty on the extrapolation of fresh water endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) ecotoxicity data to salt water species to simply justify the applicability of OECD test protocols for protection of the marine environment.
In face of the above-mentioned uncertainty and to further clarify the need for marine test models in OECD test protocols for EDCs, ICES recommends to OSPAR:
a) that a first assessment should be done using the data available on fish and invertebrate species, with the caution that this data has been produced for the testing of chemicals specifically for regulatory purposes. b) in the short term to continue work with stickleback, but consideration should be given to other marine fish species as models. A current UK protocol of the stickleback test exists and can be elaborated for endocrine effects. c) with the current lack of EDC specific endpoints, invertebrate models should primarily focus on full life cycle tests with endpoints such as growth, development and reproduction. d) to stimulate specific research for certain invertebrate groups with particular relevance for the marine environment, especially echinoderms, possibly polychaetes or gastropods, as these may hold promise for future test development.
Summary
ICES reviewed progress in current validation status of test methods for endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) under preparation in the OECD. These include 21-day fish screening assay, the stickleback assay, a fish sexual development test and several invertebrate tests. At the moment, the representativity of marine species in EDC OECD test methods is poor or non-existing. Using this information and the available data from the literature it is inferred that too much uncertainty exists on the extrapolation of fresh water endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) ecotoxicity data to salt water species to simply justify the applicability of OECD test protocols for protection of the marine environment. Uncertainty exists in the area of bioavailability and possibly differential uptake of EDCs by marine and euryhaline species - as compared to fresh water species. As such, endocrine disrupting chemicals in freshwater may have effects in fish other than estuarine or marine ones and tests with freshwater species will be inadequate to fully protect the marine environment. The same may be true for invertebrates including phyla exclusive to the marine environment. To justify the use of marine tests an assessment of comparable data on relevant EDC sensitivity distributions between freshwater and marine animals should be made. If sufficient evidence exists that differences in sensitivity between marine and fresh water animals exceeds one order of magnitude, testing of additional estuarine or marine species may be then required. A first assessment should be done using the data available on species such as stickleback (androgen- associated) and flounder (estrogen associated). A similar assessment should be done for invertebrates. There is, however, a general need for more high quality data on the effects of a wide range of EDCs to both freshwater and saltwater organisms.
Proposals for a test programme for marine species are presented. In the short term, work with stickleback should be continued, but consideration should be given to other marine fish species as models. A current UK protocol of the stickleback test exists and can be elaborated for endocrine effects. With the current lack of EDC specific endpoints, invertebrate models should primarily focus on full life cycle tests with endpoints such as growth, development and reproduction. For certain invertebrate groups with particular relevance for the marine environment, especially echinoderms, possibly polychaetes or gastropods, ICES recommends to stimulate specific research as these may hold promise for future test development.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 105 Scientific background
To consider the adequacy of the OECD test protocols and their applicability for marine species
Information has been gathered on the test methods under preparation in the OECD and the status of their development. The OECD Secretariat established a Validation Management Group for Ecotoxicological Test Methods for Endocrine Disrupters (VMG- Eco); with the remit to oversee the work on validation of EDC fish tests as well as tests using other taxa such as amphibians, birds, and certain invertebrates. It is important to note that the OECD tests are being developed specifically for screening and testing chemicals for endocrine disruption activity, not as bioassays for testing environmental samples. In some cases however it may be possible to adapt them for use as bioassays. The current validation status of the fish and invertebrate tests are described below:
21-day fish screening assay
A short-term (21-day) fish screening assay test guideline is being validated using three core species: Fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas), Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes) and zebrafish (Danio rerio). Two phases of validation have been completed and a third is underway, with completion expected March/April 2007. Phase 1A tested a potent estrogen (17β oestradiol) and androgen (trenbolone); phase 1B tested a weak estrogen (4-tert pentylphenol), an aromatase inhibitor (prochloraz) and an anti-androgen (flutamide). Phase 2 addressed testing of negative substances, and potassium permanganate and n-octanol were chosen for this purpose. Phase 3 involves further testing with fathead minnow and zebrafish (on the recommendation of the EDTA) with a weak estrogen (4-tert-octylphenol), a weak androgen (androstenedione) and a “difficult” negative (pentachlorophenol). Although initially intended as a screen to detect estrogenic, androgenic, anti-androgenic and aromatase activity, the results from the core species thus far demonstrate that there is a lack of a relevant and reliable endpoint for anti-androgens. Furthermore, one of the proposed endpoints for androgenic activity is a decrease in vitellogenin in females; however, the underlying mechanism is not well understood or documented as yet and therefore the biological relevance is not established. The primary objective of the screen as it stands at the moment therefore is to detect estrogenic and androgenic agonists and aromatase inhibiting substances using two core endpoints – vitellogenin and secondary sex characteristics (nuptial tubercles in female fatheads and anal fin papillary processes in female medaka, exposed to androgens). The VMG-Eco is of the opinion that these endpoints have been sufficiently validated for the Japanese medaka and that preparations for the peer-review of the assay and Test Guideline development can proceed on these for this species. On completion of Phase 3 work with fathead minnow and zebrafish, the peer-review process for these will be initiated. A guideline could therefore be in place by 2008.
Other endpoints initially included in the assay i.e. gonad histology and fecundity have not yet been validated, due to lack of reproducibility (histopathology) and its non-specific role and interpretation in an ED screening context (fecundity). Both require further work in order to be included in a future test guideline and the VMG-Eco have recommended that guidance documents (note not guidelines as such) be prepared addressing measurement, test design, techniques and interpretation of these endpoints, as well as including information on the limitations and advantages of these and the core endpoints for detecting a range of endocrine activities. The EDTA has clarified the purpose of the assay as an endocrine disrupters screen as opposed to a reproductive screen; the latter remains a possibility for a revised or more generic Test Guideline. Some issues remain with the current protocol: (a) acceptability criteria for the endpoints (e.g. VTG level in control males and females for each species); (b) replication (2 vs 4 replicates per treatment). These are being considered further and will be reflected in the future Test Guideline.
Validation of the stickleback assay
Following initial isolation and identification of the protein by a Swedish research group (ref), research under the UK Endocrine Disruption in the Marine Environment (EDMAR) programme developed an androgen-specific biomarker using the three-spined stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus. This biomarker is spiggin, a proteinaceous glue produced by the kidneys of males in response to endogenous androgens and used for constructing nests during the breeding season. Spiggin is also produced by females exposed to exogenous androgens since they also have the androgen receptor (i.e. analogous to male fish producing VTG in response to exogenous estrogens). This work was advanced further by the development of a specific and sensitive biomarker of estrogenic exposure in male stickleback i.e. VTG induction. Due to the fact that none of the core species are indigenous to Europe, they lack any specific endpoint for androgens and, furthermore, a suitable endpoint for anti-androgenic activity, it has been proposed to the OECD that there is now a possible additional/alternative test species which could be included in the ED fish screening assay guideline, which is ecologically relevant for European waters and, more importantly, now has appropriate endpoints for both (anti) estrogens (VTG) and (anti) androgens (spiggin). The ability to measure both endpoints potentially allows simultaneous testing for (anti) estrogenic and (anti) androgenic properties of compounds, thereby reducing the number of fish required in experiments. A proposal to consider inclusion of the stickleback in the ED screen was presented to the VMG-Eco in 2003, which agreed that a small intercalibration exercise should be carried out to evaluate the feasibility of the OECD fish screening assay, adapted for stickleback, and generate data on the reproducibility of the stickleback
106 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 spiggin and VTG assays, thus bringing information on the stickleback into line with that on the core species. This was duly carried out in 2004 and biomarker endpoints of VTG in males and spiggin in females were shown to be both relevant and reproducible, being able to reliably detect the potent estrogen E2 and the potent androgen trenbolone. The results of this first intercalibration were presented to the OECD VMG-Eco. The group approved the findings and requested that the UK organise and lead on a second intercalibration to mimic Phase 1b, which assessed core species responses to the weak estrogen 4-tert-pentylphenol, the anti-androgen flutamide and the aromatase inhibitor prochloraz. This is currently underway. Although 6-7 laboratories from Sweden, Finland, Canada, Netherlands, Norway and France expressed an interest in participating in this second intercalibration, only 3 laboratories took part, therefore further validation may be required to satisfy the requirements of the VMG-Eco and EDTA. VMG-Eco has expressed continuing support for these studies, given that no other protocol has shown sensitivity to anti-androgens. It is hoped that the results will continue to demonstrate that the stickleback shows potential as a test species and facilitate its inclusion in the final Test Guideline.
Validation of a fish sexual development test
As a second tier in the risk assessment of endocrine disrupting chemicals, a Scandinavian working group has developed a protocol for a fish sexual development test. The protocol is in principle an enhanced version of OECD Test Guideline 210 “Fish Early Life Stage Toxicity Test”. This assay is intended to detect chemicals with androgenic or estrogenic properties as well as anti-androgenic, anti-estrogenic and aromatase inhibiting properties. The protocol is based on chemical exposure during the sex labile period in which the fish is expected to be most sensitive towards endocrine disrupting chemicals. Four core biomarker endpoints are measured as indicators of developmental or endocrine aberrations, namely: i) gross morphology (e.g. secondary sexual characteristics); ii) vitellogenin levels iii) gonadal histology and iv) sex ratios. The test is initiated with newly fertilised eggs and monitoring continues for up to 60-days post hatch (dph) and includes hatching rate, development, survival, growth (total length and body weight), sexual differentiation, secondary sex characteristics, gonadal development, gonadal histology and VTG levels. Phase 1 of the validation using fathead minnow and zebrafish is underway with results anticipated by mid 2007. The two test substances are 4-TPP (4-tert pentylphenol; weak estrogen) and prochloraz (aromatase inhibitor). The results from one of the participating laboratories so far shows that the sex ratio becomes biased towards females on exposure to 4-TPP and towards males on exposure to prochloraz, and the thresholds for these effects are significantly lower than those found for VTG induction/reduction in the 21 day fish screening assay. Phase 2 is being planned, testing a weak androgen and a negative substance. There is scope for deploying the stickleback in this test procedure, but no OECD-sponsored work is currently underway with this species.
In addition, Germany, the US and Japan are conducting pre-validation studies with 1- and 2-generation full life cycle test protocols, using medaka and zebrafish for application in higher tier risk assessments.
Validation of invertebrate tests
At the moment there are no internationally harmonised chronic toxicity test methods for marine invertebrates. Therefore the development and validation of a test assessing reproduction and development of marine copepods has been added to the work plan of the OECD Test Guideline programme. The copepod life-cycle test is urgently needed in several multi- national regulatory programmes (e.g. REACH) and will facilitate harmonisation of hazard and risk assessments. Two common and regularly used species in toxicity tests were originally proposed – Nitocra spinipes and Tisbe battagliai. A further harpacticoid copepod species Amphiascus tenuiremis and the calanoid copepod Acartia tonsa were included. It should be noted that the endocrine system for copepods is completely different from vertebrates. The knowledge about crustacean endocrine systems is lower than for fish but this group is comparatively well studied due to the close relationship to insects where the information is needed and used to control noxious insects. However, it is not known if male crustaceans induce VTG, but the most useful endpoint seems to be ecdysteroid concentrations (the hormone that regulates reproduction and growth). Of the methods available HPLC techniques would appear to be the most promising and sensitive. The proposed guidelines (one for harpacticoids and one for the calanoids listed above) are intended for evaluation of adverse long-term effects of various types of chemicals e.g. industrial chemicals, pesticides and pharmaceuticals as well as compounds used in the offshore oil and gas industry. Although these guidelines are intended to include endocrine disruptive effects it is currently not possible to definitively attribute observed effects to this mechanism of toxicity, due to the paucity of knowledge on the endocrine systems of these species and the “non- specific” nature of the endpoints i.e. unlike VTG induction in fish they are not diagnostic and can be attributed to other modes of action. Ring-tests with Nitocra, Amphiascus and Acartia took place in 2006, using 3,5-dichlorophenol as the single reference substance. Results in terms of developmental and reproductive endpoints were consistent among species. Recommendations made for future validation work were: (a) if all species are to be included in a multi species testing system then a partial life cycle test, focussing on the developmental stages, would be a better alternative if data comparability across all species is critical; (b) if however the OECD considers that there is a greater regulatory need for a full life cycle test, then Amphiascus should be used as a single test species, owing to the significantly shorter test duration (25 opposed to 40 days) and better reproductive output and success resulting in greater statistical power; (c)
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 107 other reference chemicals should be used; (d) more laboratories should participate to strengthen the dataset and minimise random errors etc.
An enhanced Daphnia reproduction test is also being ring-tested, based on OECD 202, using an additional endpoint of offspring sex ratio to detect juvenile hormone agonists. The results of this have yet to be fully analysed.
Some limited progress is also being made with a variant of the Daphnia 3-week reproduction assay, and with an Americamysis bahia life cycle assay, but inevitably it will be some years before these have been properly evaluated.
The extrapolation of fresh water EDC ecotoxicity data to salt water species
To date, there exists too much uncertainty on the extrapolation of fresh water EDC ecotoxicity data to salt water species to simply justify the applicability of OECD test protocols for protection of the marine environment. There are generally less toxicity data available for saltwater species than for freshwater ones, especially in relation to organic compounds and several organic endocrine disrupting chemicals, such as alkylphenols, phthalates and brominated flame retardants. Although phylogenetically there is reason to assume that freshwater fish respond similarly to marine fish, and that the distributions of the sensitivities of the two groups of species are identical, these assumptions remain largely untested (and have led to proposals to add an additional safety factor of 10 to marine risk assessments based upon freshwater data (see paper by Wheeler et al., 2002)).
Uncertainty exists in the area of bioavailability and possibly differential uptake of EDCs by marine and euryhaline species - in marine and especially estuarine conditions - as compared to fresh water species. As such, endocrine disrupting chemicals in freshwater may have effects in fish other than estuarine or marine ones and tests with freshwater species will be inadequate to fully protect the marine environment. The same may be true for invertebrates including phyla exclusive to the marine environment. To justify the use of marine tests an assessment of comparable data on relevant EDC sensitivity distributions between freshwater and marine animals should be made. If sufficient evidence exists and sensitivity between marine and fresh water animals exceeds one order of magnitude, testing of additional estuarine or marine species may be then required. Therefore we recommend that a first assessment should be done using the data available on species such as stickleback (androgen-associated) and flounder (estrogen associated). A similar assessment should be done for invertebrates There is a however a general need for more high quality data on the effects of a wide range of EDCs to both freshwater and saltwater organisms.
In addition to the sensitivity and extrapolation issue (above) another argument relates to the representivity in terms of taxa/phyla. Will freshwater vertebrate and invertebrate models including marine copepods and crustaceans adequately protect the marine environment? The current lack of marine invertebrate ED tests generally is mainly due to lack of knowledge and the problems to differentiate between general/reproductive toxicity and the modulation of complex endocrine mechanisms of biological regulation. Most invertebrates rely on a totally different set of hormones than those commonly studied in vertebrate models. Most of the available invertebrate tests are not designed to identify an endocrine disruptor, but they merely yield apical endpoints such as reproduction, development and offspring sex ratios that included influences on the hormone systems and can be used in an environmental risk assessment (see special issue on EDC in invertebrates in ecotoxicology 2007). The justification to include more marine invertebrate species in OECD EDC screening and test development and regulatory frame works is of a complex nature and requires more studies and time. However, it is important to include invertebrates to increase the possibility to detect all kinds of EDC. For the near future OECD should focus on the development of full life cycle tests representing a variety of invertebrate phyla exclusive to the marine environment such as Echinoderms that are widely distributed in all coastal waters. This phylum deserves much more attention. For example, reproductive and regenerative phenomena of echinoderms can be considered possible models for studies on EDC effects. Some studies confirm that these compounds interfere with fundamental physiological processes including growth, development and reproductive competence. Other promising species could include nematodes, cnidaria and tunicates but only if it could be demonstrated that they are more sensitive to new types of endocrine action, or if they provide a substitute for estrogen/androgen-sensitive vertebrates (for ethical reasons).
To specify proposals for a test programme for marine species in case OECD freshwater model species on scientific grounds are deemed not suitable for testing the effect of endocrine disrupting compounds in the marine environment
Fish protocols
The fish screening assay focuses at the moment on freshwater systems and via exposure in the water column. None of the core species are adaptable to salt water. Although the stickleback validation work described above has also been carried out in a freshwater test system, it does have the advantage of significant potential to be used in a marine screening system, whereby a “parallel” guideline could be developed for screening ED effects in the marine environment. If however, there is scientific evidence to support the proposition that freshwater ED effects data are
108 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 related to saltwater ED effects in a systematic and predictable way, the former can be used to predict the latter and thus nullifying the need for a marine screen. This potential for extrapolation from fresh to salt water has been investigated for acute toxicity, using species sensitivity distributions; the degree of similarity between responses in freshwater and marine test organisms was dependent upon the chemical studied (i.e. the chemical behaved differently between the two systems and therefore mode of action/bioavailability was different) and the parity and representativeness of the species in the dataset. Due to a paucity of comparative data, both in terms of fate of EDCs and ED endpoints, it cannot be concluded with any certainty that the ED effects thresholds (and thus “safe” levels in the form of PNECS) in freshwater fish tests can be extrapolated to marine fish. It may be the case that freshwater PNECS would not be adequately protective for marine species, or conversely, be over-protective. It should also be noted that there are substantial species differences even between freshwater species. It is therefore not straightforward to extrapolate between species, be freshwater or marine.
Before any decisions are made on proposing estuarine/marine ED fish tests, it would be useful to conduct a comparative exercise on the small dataset that does exist exposing freshwater and marine fish to a range of known endocrine disrupters in the laboratory. Certainly some studies have been conducted exposing stickleback to the same EDC in fresh and salt water (studies at Cefas, UK using estrogen and methyltestosterone) and it would be interesting to compare the responses. The same can be done using available UK and Dutch field data of euryhaline species such as flounder.
If it is decided that a marine fish screen needs to be developed, several species have the potential to be the test organism of choice. Flounder (Platichthys flesus), Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua), sand goby (Pomatoschistus minutus), viviparous blenny (Zoarces viviparus) and 3-spined stickleback have all been used in laboratory tests with EDCs and have RIA/ELISAs or mRNA probe for VTG. Other species, such as dab (Limanda limanda), may also be relevant if a VTG assay is developed. The stickleback, however, has several advantages over other marine species: (a) it is already some way through the validation process as a freshwater species, although further work with more laboratories is essential, thus a guideline could be available in a much shorter time frame than any other screen which would have to start from scratch; (b) a screen for this species would be equally applicable for freshwater and marine water thus allowing direct comparison of threshold effects; (c) currently, the stickleback is the only species that can be used in marine waters which has validated endpoints for (anti) estrogens and (anti) androgens. During the first phase of validation of the fish screen, the assay changed from being a straightforward adult non-spawning assay, to a screen where spawning status has to be demonstrated (albeit only for quality assurance purposes and not as an ED endpoint). Whilst this was not a particular problem for stickleback, the test design being amended to allow the complex behaviours to take place which are essential for pre-spawning, it would pose a problem if this species were put forward for an equivalent marine screen, since although gonad maturation takes place in salt water, it is not clear if the pre-spawning behaviours would be induced. Demonstrating spawning in any other species e.g. cod, flounder etc may be even more problematic. If, on the other hand, this QA endpoint were waived then the stickleback would again be the favoured candidate.
The fish sexual development test draft protocol could include stickleback and although initially intended as an additional freshwater species, there is significant scope for the protocol to be adapted (as a separate guideline) for exposure in salt water. There may also be scope for including other marine fish species in this type of protocol, such as goby and viviparous blenny. All would need to begin the validation from scratch (although the UK were very interested in taking part in the FSDT intercalibration using stickleback, no funds were available and there was a lack of uptake to this species from other OECD member countries); therefore a useable guideline would not be available for several years.
Although several species may be used for this purpose, stickleback and goby have the advantages of being relatively small species with relatively short life spans and are culturable in the lab. The androgen stickleback bioassay can be easily adapted as an androgen and estrogen screen. The same species might be good candidates to screen or test for thyroid hormone disruptive chemical by including suitable biomarkers (f.e. plasma T3/T4 levels) in these species, but this will require further work.
Invertebrate protocols
The protocols being validated for the marine copepods are not ED specific and therefore if OSPAR requires invertebrate tests that are designed to screen and test for this class of compounds, then alternatives must be developed with species for which endpoints that are diagnostic of an endocrine mediated effect exist.
Work on development and (sexual) reproduction of aquatic invertebrates by OECD is currently underway. However, so far they include few marine invertebrate species, e.g. potentially only harpacticoid and mysid crustaceans. Chronic test developments with marine copepods and Mysids (see text above) should be further implemented/encouraged. Testing protocols published by Verslycke et al. 2007 on the use of estuarine Mysid crustaceans as standard models for the screening and testing of endocrine disrupting chemicals are very much in the focus for guideline development.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 109 Further consideration should be given to a standard (marine) molluscan test. The fresh water model described by Duft et al (2006) should be compared to available marine molluscan models for the same reason as given for fish (see above; speciation and bioavailability of TBT in marine waters/organisms differ from those in fresh water/organisms). Small molluscan species such as Nassarius and Bittium could be good candidates and deserve more attention. Much more research is however needed to conclude this. OSPAR/OECD should consider the strategic advantages of testing animals different from vertebrates, whose employment is often restricted by ethical and practical reasons. There is increasing hope that prosobranch snails can be used as possible surrogates for fish. Several animal groups can be valuable and useful model species for ecotoxicological tests assessing the effects of EDCs. However, development of such test models will require considerable research and time.
Source of information
2007 report of the Working Group on Biological Effects of Contaminants (WGBEC) subject to an external peer review and ACME deliberations.
110 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.5.5.8 Background Concentrations of Contaminants in Biota and Sediments
Request
OSPAR requested information from ICES regarding background concentrations of contaminants in biota and sediments. Specifically OSPAR asked to:
• revisit the current accepted background concentrations (BCs) for biota; • evaluate the methodology that was used to derive them; • develop proposals for deriving BCs in biota, with priority given to metals in fish and shellfish within the wider OSPAR area; • identify those parts of the OSPAR maritime area for which the proposed BCs in biota may not be applicable so that this can be taken into account during the assessments; • for the parts of the OSPAR maritime area identified, determine how assessments of whether concentrations are of at or near background should be prepared; and • to develop background concentrations for alkylated PAHs (C1-C3 naphtalenes, C1-C3 phenantrenes, C1-C3 dibenzothiophenes and the parent compound dibenzothiophene) in sediments and biota.
Development of BCs is useful in terms of monitoring programmes on contaminants in marine environment. The issue of background concentrations (BCs) in biota and sediments has been examined by ICES in 2004 and 2005 plus 2007. The ICES ACME report of 2004 described a wide array of tools to calculate background concentrations.
Recommendations and advice
• ICES recommends that OSPAR continue work on defining tools and methodologies for establishing background concentrations. Work to date has focused on mussels, however other species particularly fish should be examined. Existing data should be compiled in order to facilitate this work. • ICES recommends that OSPAR further examine the suitability of bioconcentration models as described in Annex 1, and other mathematical (statistical) methodologies proposed. It should be kept in mind that there are local differences in environmental conditions such as geochemistry and physico-chemical conditions. • Determination of alkylated PAHs is demanding and data available on these compounds are limited. ICES recommends that OSPAR:
1) examine availability of additional data; 2) review quality and statistical processing of data available; and 3) pursue setting up harmonised approaches for deriving BCs for alkylated PAHs.
• ICES recommends that OSPAR use on a trial basis the background concentrations as noted below for alkylated PAHs in sediments in assessments. ICES recognizes that these background concentrations have been derived from a limited data set, and for this reason they are proposed on a trial basis only. • ICES recommends that priority be given to contaminants with highest environmental risk (e.g. based on TEQ values).
Summary
ICES recognises that there has been some progress in developing methods for establishing background concentrations. Background concentrations are valuable in work relating to monitoring of contaminants in marine environment.
Setting up background concentrations for contaminants is important since these concentrations can be used as a reference in monitoring work. When reliable background levels are available, deviations from a good (pristine-like) environmental status can be evaluated. It is however a very challenging task to define these background concentrations. First of all, there are no globally constant background concentrations for any given substance. There are spatial differences and temporal changes. Instead of a fixed background concentration, a range (upper and lower limit) of concentrations may be more appropriate than a fixed value.
The methods that have been used lately to define background concentrations include 1) statistical approaches (e.g. use of median, median of median and percentiles), 2) models based on bioconcentration – these rely on data on
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 111 contaminants in sediment cores which in turn is used to calculate concentrations of contaminants in biota. In general, the methods seem promising but have been applied to very limited sets of data (limited geographical coverage) and limited number of contaminants. In terms of defining reliable background concentrations for alkylated PAHs the analytical detection methods are not yet fully developed and certainly not available for the majority of laboratories.
ICES recommends that OSPAR use on a trial basis the background concentrations in Table 1 for alkylated PAHs in sediments in assessments. ICES recognizes that these background concentrations have been derived from a limited data set, and for this reason are proposed on a trial basis only. Table 1 Proposed background concentrations for alkylated PAHs in sediments, expressed as concentrations normalized to 2.5% organic carbon (WGMS 2007 report).
PARAMETER CONCENTRATION (UG/KG DRY WEIGHT)
C1-naphthalenes 1.7
C2-naphthalenes 2.3
C3-naphthalenes 5.0
C1-phenanthrenes/anthracenes 4.5
C2-phenanthrenes/anthracenes 8.3
C3-phenanthrenes/anthracenes 9.9 dibenzothiophene 1.3
C1-Dibenzothiophenes 2.3
C2-Dibenzothiophenes 5.0
C3-Dibenzothiophenes 4.8
ICES recognises that the question of deriving background concentrations is very broad and complex. It is also important to recognise that there are no pristine marine areas. However, setting appropriate background concentrations is important in evaluating deviations from natural conditions. To achieve a pragmatic approach, it may be worthwhile to examine area-specific background concentration ranges instead of OSPAR-wide fixed values. ICES recognizes that current limits adopted for background levels [SIME 07/5/4] should be updated. Methodologies can be developed to establish area-specific background concentrations, or background concentration ranges that could be applicable for any OSPAR area. No advice has been prepared for on how to develop background concentrations for dibenzothiophenes.
Scientific Background
There are extensive details in the MCWG and WGMS reports from 2004, 2005 and 2007.
Source of information
The 2007 reports of the Marine Chemistry Working Group (MCWG) and the Working Group on Marine Sediments in Relation to Pollution (WGMS), OSPAR SIME document 07/5/4-E, and ACME deliberations.
112 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Annex 1- Estimation of Background Concentration in Mussels using Sediment Core Data – Example Calculation
During MCWG 2007 one proposal for estimating pre-industrial or Background Concentrations (BC) of PAH and metals in biota was to calculate enrichment factors in sediments from pre-industrial times to the present using sediment core data. Thus, the enrichment factors are calculated by dividing present day ambient concentrations of specific substance in the surface sediments in a specific area by background pre-industrial concentrations of this substance in the dated sediment core layer of pre-industrial times. These enrichment factors may be used to estimate background concentrations in biota (e.g. mussels) by dividing the current concentrations in biota (e.g. mussels) by the calculated enrichment factor for a given parameter. This needs to be done on an area-by-area basis by using present day mussels and surface sediment data from each area and only selected background concentrations from representative dated sediment cores. The estimates of background concentrations in biota assume that sediment and mussels reflect ambient concentrations and make assumptions that bioavailability and partitioning into these compartments has not substantially altered. The errors from such assumptions are probably low in regards to uncertainty of estimating background concentrations of contaminants from the present day data in biota.
BC in biota ≅ Cbiota-parameter/ EFparameter = Cbiota-parameter/(Csed current/ Csed pre-ind)
Example
In this example the present day concentrations of PAHs in mussels, in the surface sediments and in the dated sediment core, all from same area in Vilaine bay (Biscay Bay, Atlantic, OSPAR zone IV), were used to estimate background concentrations in mussels. The BCs were calculated for unsubstituted PAHs (table 1) and alkyl substituted PAHs (table 2). In this example the enrichment factor was calculated for summed concentrations of both groups of PAHs. Table 1
Determined concentrations in μg kg-1 of wet weight tissue for selected unsubstituted polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in marine molluscs tissue (mussel Mytilus edulis); station Pen Bé mean of five determination of the samples collected in Novemeber/ December 1999 (pre T/V Erika oil-spill) and one determination in November 2005.
Recalculated background concentrations of same PAH compounds in mussels, based on the background (pre- industrial)/surface concentrations ratio in the dated sediment core from the same geographical area. In this case an indicative enrichment ratio of 30 was used (for summed concentrations of parent PAH).
STATION Taxon: Mytilus edulis Present day Bc recalculated Parent pahs 1999 2005 1999 2005 μg/kg w.w. μg/kg w.w. μg/kg w.w. μg/kg w.w. Naphthalene 0,28 0,01 Phenanthrene 1,52 1,88 0,05 0,06 Anthracene 0,18 0,01 Fluoranthene 4,32 6,62 0,14 0,22 Pyrene 3,60 7,82 0,12 0,26 Benz(a) Anthracene 0,82 1,86 0,03 0,06 Chrysene/triphenylene 2,61 4,08 0,09 0,14 Benzo(e)pyrene 2,23 4,21 0,07 0,14 Benzo(a)pyrene 0,21 0,88 0,01 0,03 Indeno(12 3, cd)pyrene 0,52 0,77 0,02 0,03 Dibenz(ah)anthracene 0,21 0,01 Benzo(ghi)perylene 0,75 1,25 0,03 0,04
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 113 Table 2
Determined concentrations in μg kg-1 of wet weight tissue for selected alkyl substituted polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (C-PAHs) in marine molluscs tissue (mussel Mytilus edulis); station Pen Bé November 2005.
Recalculated background concentrations of same PAH compounds in mussels, based on the background/surface concentrations ratio in the dated sediment core from the same geographical area. Sulphur heterocycle compounds were below detection limit in the deep pre-industrial layer of the dated sediment core.
ALKYLATED PAHS PRESENT DAY 2005 RECALCULATED BC* μg/kg w.w. μg/kg w.w. C1-N 0,30 0,02 C2-N 0,23 0,01 C3-N 0,37 0,02
C1-P 6,66 0,37 C2-P 15,19 0,84 C3-P 19,21 1,07 *) An indicative enrichment factor of 18 is based on summed concentrations of alkylated PAH.
114 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.5.6 Additional Advice
1.5.6.1 Progress on Integrated Chemical Biological Effects Monitoring (WKIMON III) Request
OSPAR 2007/5 requested ICES to follow up on the third OSPAR/ICES workshop on Integrated Monitoring of Contaminants and their Effects in Coastal and Open-Sea Areas (WKIMON III)
Recommendations and advice
ICES recommends to OSPAR that it makes available on their website the background documents on biological effect techniques, produced by WKIMON. However, most documents still contain preliminary assessment criteria that will require an update.
ICES recommends to OSPAR that it is essential to put in place a regular review and update of the background documents.
ICES recommends to OSPAR that the work on integrated monitoring of contaminants and their effects be continued, preferably by a continuation of the WKIMON-workshops. The objectives of the workshop should include:
• the development of methodology for integrated assessment of the three proposed ecosystem components, viz. water, sediment and biota. Separate indices should be developed for the three compartments, much as outlined in the UK Fullmonti framework. Work on this framework needs to consider whether partial assessment can be acceptable. • the development of scenarios for a monitoring design strategy (number of sites, occasions, selection of species, etc). • clarification of linkages between the chemical and biological effects monitoring techniques and development of packages for contaminants specific integrated monitoring.
ICES recommends to OSPAR to consider the method Stress-on-Stress for future inclusion in the WKIMON guidelines.
ICES recommends that OSPAR supports the ICON workshop initiative as an instrumental activity in demonstrating the application of integrated chemical-biological effects monitoring and its contribution to QSR 2010.
Summary
Conclusions
ICES recognizes the progress that was made on the preparation of WKIMON-guidelines but emphasized that further work is essential since: • all established assessment criteria must be seen as very provisional until final consideration. • there is a need for a regular update of the assessment criteria for all methods. • there is a need to develop assessment criteria for a number of bioassay and biomarker techniques. • assessment criteria will have to be developed for appropriate species. Fish species to be considered include dab (Limanda limanda), flounder (Platichthys flesus) and cod (Gadus morhua). For the ICON demonstration programme (see annex 7 of the 2007 ICES WGBEC report), it is suggested that haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus) replaces cod and long rough dab (Hippoglossoides platessoides) will be included to cover deep waters in the North Sea. • there is a need to develop a methodology for integrated assessments for inclusion in the guidelines (e.g. via optimized existing integrated assessment systems, i.e. Fullmonti) • there is a need for quality assurance procedures to be put in place for the activities as it is to be expected that more than one group will be analysing for any given technique. ICES suggests that this be handled through BEQUALM in contact with MEDPOL. • there is a need for regular updates of the background documents. • there is a need for brief background documents and technical documentation (protocols) for some methods. • the acceptability of partial assessments should be considered (i.e. only sediment-related or only mussels, not fish)
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 115 • a link to the WFD should be established (e.g. by inclusion of passive samplers) in the WKIMON guidelines in combination with bioassays. • the method Stress-on-Stress should be considered for inclusion in the WKIMON guidelines.
As part of the follow-up work in relation to WKIMON, ICES recommends that the work be continued preferably by a continuation of the WKIMON-workshops. ICES is aware this is not consistent with the OSPAR SIME viewpoint that the work is close to finalization.
ICES notes that, in support of the ICON demonstration programme, necessary additional background information, protocols and assessment criteria should be available in due course and emphasized that optimized integrated assessment systems should be equally ready.
Scientific background
ICES reviewed the progress made by the ICES / OSPAR WKIMON III meeting on the preparation of guidelines for the integration of chemical–biological effects techniques with special emphasis on those parameters that became mandatory under the OSPAR CEMP, and took into account the considerations and remarks made by OSPAR SIME in March 2007.
Major achievements noted were the production of background documents for a number of OSPAR JAMP biological effect responses, the estimation of assessment criteria (background levels/responses) from existing national data sets and data sets present in the ices database, the production of a position paper on the use of biological effects techniques for integrated chemical – biological effects monitoring and the Norwegian initiative to organize an Integrated assessment of contaminant impacts on the North Sea (ICON) demonstration programme for integrated chemical and biological monitoring guidelines.
ICES recognizes that a lot of progress has been made since the last WKIMON meeting but it is of the opinion that the work is not final and should be continued. In order to speed up the process on the preparation of the guidelines, ICES invited national experts to perform intersessional work on the preparation of a number of documents, protocols and/or assessment criteria that still need to be established for the following techniques and species: Scope-for-Growth, Condition Index, histopathology, micronucleus formation, AchE-inhibition and Stress-on-Stress in mussel, and GSI, LSI, Fish Disease Index, PAH-metabolites, EROD, VTG, lysosomal stability, DNA-adducts and AchE-inhibition in dab, flounder, haddock and long rough dab. A number of experts accepted this invitation.
ICES notes that background documents are now in place for the following biological effects responses: EROD, PAH- bile metabolites, DNA-adducts, fish diseases including histopathology, VTG, ALA-D, metalothionein, reproductive success in fish, water bioassays, sediment bioassays, lysosomal stability and Scope-for-Growth in mussels.
The background documents on biological effects responses are needed to provide information on: • an assessment of the applicability of the biological effect technique across the OSPAR area • a review of the environmental variables that influence the biological effect • an assessment of the thresholds when the response of a biological effect technique can be considered to be of concern and/or require a response • proposals for assessment criteria • status of quality assurance techniques
Several of these techniques are useful for monitoring purposes and international intercalibration has indicated that these measurements can be performed within acceptable limits.
Assessment criteria–background levels / responses
ICES expressed concern that it did not come across clearly in the WKIMON III report that assessment criteria, produced during WKIMON III, are very preliminary and basically an exercise to indicate the direction in which the work is going. The preliminary assessment criteria need to be revised and augmented with a level to differentiate moderately and highly contaminated areas. In some cases only tentative background responses were derived. Response levels above background for EROD, bile metabolites, DNA adducts and VTG have yet to be determined.
ICES has identified several errors, especially in the expressed units for the assessment criteria that need to be corrected (e.g. units for VTG and EROD).
116 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Provisional assessment criteria for PAH metabolites are further seen as uncertain due to differences in standardization procedures and DNA-adducts needed further work due to the use of different units (a limited dataset was used for the derivation of the current values).
The assessment criteria for Scope-for-Growth also needs to be revised. ICES notes that the revisions were completed at the WGBEC 2007 meeting and that the results were conveyed to the OSPAR secretariat by the Chair of ICES WGBEC.
ICES also decided that assessment criteria should be developed for whole sediment bioassays, sediment pore water bioassays, sediment sea water elutriates, water bioassays, reproductive success, DNA adducts, EROD and vitellogenin as well as for other methods. This work should also preferably be done intersessionally. It was pointed out that it might be important to develop standard cultivated strains for species to be used in sediment toxicity testing.
The ICON demonstration programme
ICES notes the initiative by Norway to organize the ICON demonstration programme for an integrated chemical and biological monitoring guideline. The objective of the ICON project is to assess the health of North Sea ecosystems with regards to anthropogenic contaminants and their biological effects by applying an integrated approach. This will be achieved through a stepwise process involving an international expert meeting with prospective project participants (May 15–16th 2007), a compilation of relevant data existing in national and international databases (autumn 2007) and field studies carried out in representative North Sea areas and in reference areas outside the North Sea in 2008–2009. The field studies will include methods put forward through the guidelines for integrated monitoring and assessment of contaminants and their effects developed at OSPAR/ICES WKIMON I-III. New methods will be developed and applied in an integrated risk assessment framework to indicate ecosystem health status with respect to hazardous substances. The results from a programme such as that indicated here, i.e. the use of integrated chemical and biological effect methods to develop ecosystem indicators, will be important to OSPAR CEMP activities and might be equally useful under the forthcoming EU marine strategy.
ICES fully supports the initiative by Norway to organize the ICON workshop for an integrated chemical and biological monitoring guideline and highly encourages ICES and OSPAR MS to participate in this activity. The ICON workshop will play an instrumental role in a successful implementation of the integrated guidelines. At the same time it will provide an initial assessment of the contaminant impacts on the North Sea and will be an important contribution to QSR 2010. The potential role for passive samplers (of a variety of types) in the ICON demonstration programme should be considered.
Source of information
The 2007 reports of the OSPAR/ICES workshop on Integrated Monitoring of Contaminants and their Effects in Coastal and Open-Sea Areas (WKIMON III), the Working Group on Biological Effects of Contaminants (WGBEC) and ACME deliberations.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 117 1.5.6.2 Progress in the BEQUALM Programme
Request
This is part of continuing ICES work to review activities aiming at Quality Assurance of biological effects techniques. Information presented is of relevance particularly to OSPAR.
Recommendations and advice
ICES recommends that OSPAR takes note of the current developments within BEQUALM.
ICES strongly recommends that institutes involved in monitoring biological effects of contaminants by using techniques covered in BEQUALM take part in the relevant BEQUALM components. Member Countries are urged to provide the funding required to pay the BEQUALM fee. AQC data is important to allow for the co-ordinated assessment of data across the OSPAR Maritime Area, and should accompany all data submitted to the ICES database. It is important that AQC procedures are therefore harmonised, in place and used by Contracting Parties. Failure to use AQC schemes downgrades the use of the data for assessment.
Summary
The Biological Effects Quality Assurance in Monitoring Programmes (BEQUALM) is a self-funding quality assurance (QA) scheme for marine biological effects monitoring techniques. BEQUALM was developed under an EU research programme; it was completed in April 2002 and in September 2004 became a self-funding scheme. One of the main purposes of BEQUALM is to provide a Quality Assurance framework for biological effects techniques within the OSPAR CEMP and permit the holistic assessment of data from contracting parties across the OSPAR area. In addition, data submitted to the ICES database should be accompanied by appropriate QA through BEQUALM. This report gives information on progress made in the BEQUALM programme.
Scientific background
BEQUALM components
The BEQUALM self-funded scheme comprises three components: • Whole Organism (bioassays and fish disease)–led by the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), UK • Biomarkers – led by the Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA) • Community Analysis–led by the UK National Marine Biological Analytical Quality Control Scheme (NMBAQC).
The BEQUALM Project Office (Cefas) acts as the overall administrative and co-ordinating centre for the whole scheme.
In Year 1 of the self-funded scheme the Project Office was established using pump prime funding by Cefas, from internal resources. This was used to set up and maintain a website (www.bequalm.org) and produce the necessary legal documentation (e.g. agreements between participants and lead laboratories, special terms and conditions of sale).
In year 2, Project Office costs were recovered by a combination of: a) Cefas internal resources (seedcorn), b) levy on Year 1 registration fees, c) levy on assays in Year 2 and d) contributions from other lead laboratories in the scheme. In Year 1, the Whole Organism component achieved surplus income, due to greater than forecast participant numbers for some of the bioassays. This surplus was channelled into marketing and promotional activities.
The programme is currently in its third year and Project Office costs must be fully recovered from within the scheme, by contributions from lead laboratories (including Cefas) via levies on registration fees. The project office levy charged is negotiated between the PO and the Lead Laboratory and is primarily determined by the services the PO provides to the lead laboratory, and takes account of the total number of assays forecast for that work stream.
118 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Activities in years 1–3
Year 1 • Whole Organism (Bioassays); 4 assays offered– two water column bioassays using the marine copepod Tisbe battagliai and the freshwater cladoceran Daphnia magna, two whole sediment bioassays using the amphipod Corophium volutator and the polychaete Arenicola marina. Total of 28 laboratories across all assays participated (Table 1). • Whole organism (fish disease); 6 laboratories took part in liver and external disease intercalibration exercises, using slides and photographs. • Biomarker; intercalibrations conducted for EROD, CYP1A, VTG and protein analysis. Total of 32 participants across all assays.
Year 2 • Whole Organism (bioassays) – portfolio of assays expanded to 6, to include the PARCOM tests using the marine alga Skeletonema costatum and the copepod Acartia tonsa – perceived to be a gap in availability of external QA/QC for these regulatory tests. Total of 33 laboratories participated (Table 1) – uptake to the marine algae test was good. Acartia however was not taken forward due to lack of uptake (only 2 laboratories expressing an interest). • Whole Organism (luminescent bacteria) – luminescent bacteria introduced to the whole organism portfolio, offered to participants in UK and Europe (outside Spain) via a new Lead Laboratory (University of Catalunya (UPC), Spain). 6 laboratories participated through BEQUALM, with a further 20+ from Spain (the latter has been running since 1994, organised by the UPC) • Whole organism (fish disease); fish disease workshop held at Cefas Weymouth Laboratory, incorporating elements of training and wash-up exercises from Year 1 activities. 25 attendees. • Biomarker; no intercalibration organised, data assessment and development of more appropriate reference materials progressed. • Community (Phytoplankton)–intercalibration conducted for UK/Eire participants under auspices of NMBAQC and BEQUALM, with the Marine Institute, Galway as the Lead Laboratory.
Year 3 • Whole Organism (bioassays)–5 assays offered: Daphnia, Tisbe, Skeletonema, Corophium, Arenicola and fish disease. Corophium assay and luminescent bacteria only conducted due to lack of uptake for the others. 9 participants for Corophium. • Whole organism (fish disease) – second round of intercalibrations for liver histopathology (using new “virtual slide” technology) and external disease organised. 6 participants registered. • Whole Organism (luminescent bacteria) – continuing as previous year; anticipated greater number of UK/Europe participants registering via BEQUALM but same number (6) obtained. • Community (Phytoplankton) – Phytoplankton assemblage analysis second intercalibration conducted. Relationship with BEQUALM strengthened through formation of agreement between MI and Cefas (CTL) for financial management of the intercalibration. 18 participants registered, wash-up workshop scheduled for early March. • Biomarker – NIVA to plan to offer EROD, protein, Mt and vtg but will not progress unless there is sufficient uptake.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 119 The number of registrations for each assay in each year are presented in Table 1. Table 1 Number of participants for each BEQUALM component and activity years 1 to 3.
COMPONENT ACTIVITY YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 Whole Organism Corophium 10 7 9 Arenicola 7 5 3 Daphnia 4 8 1 Tisbe 7 5 2 Marine algae __ 8 2 Acartia __ 2 __ Fish disease 6 25 6 Luminescent bacteria __ 6 6 Biomarker VTG 5 __ ? CYP1a 5 __ ? EROD 13 __ ? Protein 9 __ ? Community Phytoplankton assemblage __ 16 18 Figures in red denote that the intercalibration for that assay did not proceed due to less than optimal participant numbers Issues a ) Declining interest in bioassays and requirement to cancel the majority of intercalibrations in Year 3. Participant numbers between years 1 and 2 declined slightly for 3 of the assays – Corophium, Arenicola and Tisbe (i.e. the JAMP recommended assays); for the Daphnia assay numbers doubled and a good response was obtained for the newly introduced marine algae assay, which is part of the PARCOM suite of toxicity tests. The PARCOM marine copepod test using Acartia received a poor response and was not taken forward for intercalibration. In this third year of the scheme, response to the call for registrations has been very poor all round, despite several emails to previous participants and potential new participants. The result is that only the Corophium assay is proceeding for Year 3. Reasons for declining numbers, as fed back from previous participants, are varied and include price, availability of resources and time to conduct QA/QC, lack of specific drivers requiring QA/QC and availability of other schemes for achieving external QA. The latter include such schemes as Aquacheck in the UK, which offers QA for the Daphnia assay at a significantly lower price than BEQUALM, and a new proficiency testing scheme for laboratories that conduct toxicity testing as part of the UK Direct Toxicity Assessment (DTA) of effluents as part of IPPC legislation. There is significant overlap between this scheme and BEQUALM in the assays that are offered, including Daphnia, Tisbe and marine algae. The scheme is being run free of charge by the UK Environment Agency. This has meant that regulatory laboratories who previously obtained their external QA/QC from BEQUALM can achieve the same outcome by participating in an alternative, more relevant and cost free scheme and have thus withdrawn from BEQUALM. BEQUALM was set up primarily to provide a framework for QA/QC for laboratories submitting monitoring data to OSPAR via ICES. Currently, only the UK labs that submit data for the National Monitoring Programme regularly participate in the relevant assays. It would seem that, outside of the UK, there is a distinct lack of uptake by equivalent laboratories. b ) Lack of response to expression of interest for new assays In an attempt to address perceived gaps in availability of QA/QC for (a) JAMP and CEMP assays that were included in the BEQUALM research phase and (b) new GMO assays, a call for expressions of interest was put on the website and also potential participants emailed. The assays proposed were the Yeast oestrogen screen, lysosomal fragility, DNA adducts and acetylcholinesterase activity. The response to this call was nil with the exception of one positive response for lysosomal fragility. Again, this is very disappointing as it is recognised by the ICES that there is a need within OSPAR for contracting parties to submit this type of data, particularly DNA adducts which are part of the CEMP. c ) Failure to progress with Biomarker component beyond Year 1 NIVA suffered a 5K loss in Year 1 as a result of high set-up costs with regards to dosing fish in real time and preparing homogenous tissues (i.e. reference materials). Since then NIVA have experienced internal changes and have been unable to secure funding to maintain the biomarker programme. Participant numbers for all assays, particularly the EROD and protein, were encouraging and demonstrate that the interest and need for QA/QC for these exists. An alternative approach to producing the reference material has been sought to keep Lead Laboratory costs to the minimum. The current situation is that NIVA will offer in year three, protein, EROD, and vtg.
120 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 d ) Failure to extend Benthic Community analysis outside UK The NMBAQC has continued to operate as normal within the UK but has not been able to expand the programme to the rest of Europe. In Year 1 of BEQUALM, the NMBAQC extended the UK scheme into Europe by inviting organisations to participate in 2 of the 5 components offered. Uptake from Europe has been very disappointing, with only one laboratory, from Germany, participating in the first year and one from Eire in 2005. (It should be noted that 20 laboratories throughout Europe took part in the EU BEQUALM development programme). Each year, around 20 organisations from the UK participate in this scheme. Despite the OSPAR requirement for AQC for benthic analyses across the convention, laboratories are not signing up to the scheme. The reasons for this were not clear. To help address this issue, a member of the Project Office attended the ICES STGQAB in February 2006 to give an overview of the scheme and obtain feedback on the views of European laboratories. Disappointingly there was no representative from OSPAR at this meeting, the majority of attendees being affiliated with HELCOM. Some useful feedback was received from the German laboratory that participated in Year 1. The main problems that were encountered, which could be applicable to a large proportion of European participants, included the lack of available “own samples” for submission to the scheme for checking, unfamiliarity with some of the species that formed part of the ring test (although it was highlighted that the NMBQAC do not fail a laboratory if samples cannot be identified or are identified incorrectly; this part of the scheme is considered to be a training exercise and allows taxonomists to broaden their skills and become familiar with species that they may come across on rare occasions) and the cost of participating, not just in terms of the registration fee to be paid but the time resource required to conduct the QA. If a laboratory is participating in national, regional and international QA programmes then potentially a substantial amount of time will be taken up with these exercises and this is not sustainable. The STGQAB recommended that NMBAQC/BEQUALM further develop and take forward a questionnaire that was produced by the SGQAB in 2005, which would gather information from laboratories on their required level of participation in QA exercises and more specifically what is involved in each. This would allow NMBAQC/BEQUALM to explore ways to harmonise QA activities, in order to reduce the workload for a single laboratory and also develop mechanisms to overcome the problems of regionality.
Despite being unable to generate interest in benthos AQC outside the UK, the NMBAQC is continuing to extend its remit, taking forward AQC requirements under the WFD by organizing ring tests for juvenile fish and macro algae and planning and conducting workshops on transitional fish identification and epibiota.
Conclusions
Each Lead Laboratory has yearly fixed costs associated with organising and running each intercalibration; these costs determine the registration fee; the greater the number of participants the lower the per-participant fee. This also applies to the Project Office levy on a Component basis. The downturn in participant numbers for the JAMP bioassays, together with lack of progression with the biomarker and benthic community components is clearly a situation that cannot be considered financially sustainable. No Project Office contributions have been received from either the Biomarker or benthic community components and thus effort into taking the scheme forward in these areas has had to cease. In addition, the Project Office staff resource associated with the whole organism component has been significantly reduced (since numbers have declined and not increased as anticipated), to minimise the levy on bioassays and fish disease registration fees.
All biological effects data submitted to the OSPAR database should have accompanying AQC provided by BEQUALM or QUASIMEME in order to permit the holistic assessment of data across the OSPAR maritime area. OSPAR should note the current position that if circumstances do not change then BEQUALM may no longer be a financially viable organisation and hence QA/QC for OSPAR biological effects measurements will be in jeopardy.
Source of information
The 2007 reports of the Working Group on Biological Effects of Contaminants (WGBEC), the Working Group on Pathology and Diseases of Marine Organisms (WGPDMO) and ACME deliberations.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 121 1.5.6.3 Integrated Methods for Assessments of Effects on Biota from Flame Retardants
Request
This advice is a response to a request from the joint OSPAR/ICES Workshop WKIMON III.
Recommendations and Advice
ICES advises OSPAR that to date there is no direct link to biomarker application and/or useful endpoints in fish which would allow integrated assessment of effects on biota due to BFRs and therefore further studies of long-term, low-dose effects of flame retardants, especially for invertebrates should be initiated.
Summary
The current knowledge concerning effects of BFRs on mammals and aquatic organisms is limited. Nonetheless, a number of relevant fish studies (notably from the EU-FIRE project) have recently become available. For fish, there appears to be little risk from environmental exposure to BFRs and there is no direct link to biomarker application and/or useful endpoints in fish. The combined application of in vitro assays for ecdysteroid antagonistic activity and subchronic developmental test with crustacean species may hold promise for a rapid and cost-effective tool when screening for sublethal effects of BFRs (and other chemicals), but this requires further study. In general, there is a need for further studies of long-term, low-dose effects of flame retardants, especially for invertebrates.
Scientific background
Toxicity studies with BFRs point to neurobehavioral and developmental effects in mammals and reproductive developmental toxicity in fish and invertebrates (see Kuiper, 2006). Laboratory studies have shown that a number of BFRs and BFR-metabolites can interfere with thyroid and (sex) steroid hormone function (endocrine disruption) (Hamers et al., 2006). Further, there is evidence for weak ecdysteroid antagonistic activity of some pentabrominated diphenyl ethers in crustaceans (Wollenberger et al., 2005). Some recent relevant studies are presented below in more detail.
Long term studies with flounder (Platichthys flesus) and zebrafish (Danio rerio) exposed to the most frequently found BFRs: tetrabromobisphenol-A (TBBPA), hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD), and a brominated diphenylether mixture (PentaBDE) were carried out in the Netherlands within the framework of the EU FIRE project (Wester et al., in press; Kuiper, 2007; Kuiper et al., in press). Juvenile flounders were exposed to TBBPA for 105 days via the water, and to HBCD and PentaBDE (78 and 101 days, respectively) via food and/or sediment. Zebrafish were exposed to the test substances via the water in a partial life cycle test. Exposed fish were examined macroscopically and histologically with emphasis on reproductive and endocrine organs. Plasma thyroid hormone (T3 and T4) concentrations were determined in all flounder studies and in zebrafish exposed to PentaBDE. Cytochrome P4501A (CYP1A) activity (EROD) was determined in livers from flounder as a possible indication of dioxin-like effects. Activities of the steroidogenic enzyme CYP19 (aromatase) were determined in flounder gonads, and production of vitellogenin (VTG) was determined in plasma from flounder exposed to TBBPA. Concentrations of BFRs in tissue from exposed fish were evaluated to provide a dose background for risk assessment. All exposures resulted in a linear increase of internal BFR concentrations with exposure concentrations. Whereas the concentrations in zebrafish were generally higher, the range in flounder included environmentally relevant concentrations. Exposure of flounder to TBBP-A resulted in an increase in the concentration of thyroid hormone T4 in plasma and a mild increase of aromatase activity in testes. In zebrafish, egg production and juvenile survival were reduced. Significant effects occurred at internal concentrations that were at least 10 times the highest levels observed in fish in the environment. Exposure to HBCD did not result in adverse effects in either flounder or zebrafish. Exposure to PentaBDE resulted in juvenile mortality in zebrafish at the highest concentrations, and a mild decrease of aromatase activity in ovaries, and plasma T4 concentrations in flounder. In general, the studies presented in this thesis show minimal indications of endocrine effects of exposure to BFRs in fish at concentrations observed in the environment.
In the study of Ronisz et al., 2004, a screening of selected biomarkers in juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and feral eelpout (Zoarces viviparus) was performed after exposure (i.p. injection) to HBCDD and TBBPA. Two out of four short-term experiments with HBCDD showed an increase in the activity of catalase. A 40% increase in liver somatic index (LSI) could be observed after 28 days. HBCDD did also seem to have an inhibitory effect on CYP1A’s activity (EROD). HBCDD did not seem to be estrogenic or genotoxic. TBBPA increased the activity of glutathione reductase (GR) in rainbow trout suggesting a possible role of this compound in inducing oxidative stress. The compound did not seem to be estrogenic. TBBPA seemed to compete with the artificial substrate ethoxyresorufin in
122 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 vitro, during the EROD assay. In eelpout, only one 5 days in vivo experiment was performed. Neither of the compounds gave rise to any effect in this fish.
Subchronic effects of TBBPA, tribromophenol (TBP), and four polybrominated diphenyl ethers (BDE-28, BDE-47, BDE-99, and BDE-100) on larval development of the marine copepod Acartia tonsa were studied by Wollenberger et al., 2005. For TBBPA and TBP 5-d effective median concentration (EC50) values for inhibition of the larval development rate were 125 and 810 microg/L, respectively, whereas the PBDEs were much more potent with 5-d EC50 in the low microg/L range (for example 1.2 microg/L for BDE-100 and 13 microg/L for BDE-47). These concentrations were up to two orders of magnitude below the 48-h LC50 for acute adult toxicity. To distinguish between general toxicological and endocrine-mediated toxic effects, the BFRs were assessed in vitro for ecdysteroid agonistic/antagonistic activity with the ecdysteroid-responsive Drosophila melanogaster B (II)-cell line. The pentabrominated diphenyl ethers BDE-99 and BDE-100 showed weak ecdysteroid antagonistic activity. Thus, these PBDEs may be regarded as potential endocrine disrupters in invertebrates.
A full life-cycle (< or =26 days exposure) ecotoxicity test with the particle-feeding copepod Nitocra spinipes was used to study effects of BDE-47, -99 and -100 on larval development rate (LDR) and population growth rate (r (m)) (Breitholtz and Wollenberger, 2003). LDR significantly decreased in copepods exposed for 6 days to nominal concentrations > or =0.013 mg/l BDE-47 and > or =0.03 mg/l BDE-99. Large concentration ratios (< or =338) between adult acute and juvenile subchronic endpoints were observed. Exposure over the full life cycle showed that r (m) in general was a less sensitive endpoint than LDR. Still, the r (m) in copepods exposed to 0.04 mg/l BDE-47 was significantly reduced compared to the controls (***P<0.001). The findings indicate that development and reproduction in N. spinipes are sensitive to the tested PBDEs.
The objective of the study by Kallqvist et al. 2006 was to determine the toxic effects of 24 2’,4’-tetrabromodiphenyl ether (BDE47) on the growth of the marine diatom Skeletonema costatum and on the parthogenetic reproduction and filtering activity of the freshwater crustacean Daphnia magna. The results showed that BDE47 caused growth inhibition in S. costatum (NOEC, 6.6 microg/L) and depressed the reproductive output of D. magna (NOEC, 14 microg/L). No effects were seen on the filtering rate of D. magna at any of the concentrations tested. Although sublethal toxicity was observed at low-microg/L levels, documented environmental water concentrations are many orders of magnitude lower, thus suggesting that BDE 47 is of minor risk to these organisms through direct water exposure.
Conclusion
The available studies on fish indicate little risk from environmental exposure to BFRs and provide no direct clue for biomarker application and / or useful endpoints in fish. However, transcription studies underway in the UK hope to determine whether PDBE exposure in flounder causes diagnostic changes in gene expression profiles. The combined application of in vitro assays for ecdysteroid antagonistic activity and subchronic developmental test with crustacean species may hold promise for a rapid and cost-effective tool when screening for sublethal effects of BFRs (and other chemicals), but this requires further study. In general there is a need for further studies of long-term, low-dose effects of flame retardants especially for invertebrates.
References
Breitholtz, M. Wollenberger, L. 2003. Effects of three PBDEs on development, reproduction and population growth of the harpacticoid copepod Nitocra spinipes. Aquat. Toxicol. 64: 85–96. Hamers, T., Kamstra, J. H., Sonneveld, E., Murk, A. J., Kester, M. H.A., Andersson, P. L., Legler, J. & Brouwer, A. 2006. In vitro profiling of the endocrine disrupting potency of brominated flame retardants. Toxicological Sciences: 92(1):157–173. Kallqvist, T., Grung, M., Tollefsen, K. E. 2006. Chronic toxicity of 24 2’,4’-tetrabromodiphenyl ether on the marine alga Skeletonema costatum and the crustacean Daphnia magna. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 25: 1657–62. Kuiper, R. V., Cantón, R. F., Leonards, P. E.G., Jenssen, B. M., Dubbeldam, M., Wester, P. W., van den Berg, M., Vos, J. G., and Vethaak, A. D. 2007. Long-term exposure of European flounder (Platichthys flesus) to the flame- retardants tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) and hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD). Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, In Press, Available online 26 January 2007. Kuiper, Raoul 2007. Toxicity of brominated flame retardants in fish, with emphasis on endocrine effects and reproduction. Academic thesis. Utrecht University http://www.igitur.uu.nl/igiturarchief/arch_works.php?author=Kuiper%2C+R. Law, R. J., Kohler, M., Heeb, N. V., Gerecke, A. C., Schmid, P., Voorspoels, S., Covaci, A., Becher, G., Janák, K., and Thomsen, C. 2006. Response to “HBCD: Facts and insinuations”. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40: 2. Ronisz, D., Finne, E. F., Karlsson, H., and Forlin, L. 2004. Effects of the brominated flame retardants hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD), and tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA), on hepatic enzymes and other biomarkers in juvenile rainbow trout and feral eelpout. Aquat. Toxicol. 69: 229–245.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 123 Wester, P. W., Kuiper, R. V., Fernandez-Cantón, R., Jenssen, B. M., Leonards, P. E.G., Vethaak, A. D. 2006. Brominated flame retardants in environmentally relevant test setup: No major endocrine effects found in fish. Organohal. Comp.Volume 68 (in press). Wollenberger, L., Dinan, L., Breitholz, M. 2005. Brominated flame retardants: activities in a crustacean development test and in an ecdysteroid screening assay. Environ Toxicol Chem. 24: 400–7.
Source of information
The 2007 report of the Working Group on Biological Effects of Contaminants (WGBEC) and ACME deliberations.
124 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.5.6.4 Harmonization of Biological Effects Methods in the EU
Request
This advice concerns the status and progress made on biological effect monitoring within the frame work of the Barcelona Conventions (MEDPOL) and also relates to HELCOM and presents opportunities to use biological effects methods in EU-legislation, i.e. Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the future Marine Strategy Directive. The advice comes from the ongoing work of the ICES and is considered to be of relevance to OSPAR, HELCOM, MEDPOL and the EU.
Recommendations and advice
ICES recommends to OSPAR, HELCOM, MEDPOL and the European Commission: • to take note and advantage of the existing integrated chemical-biological effect methods and integrated assessment approaches developed by OSPAR with reference to their potential value in the monitoring and assessment strategy for the EU Marine Strategy Directive; • to promote the additional value of bioassays and passive samplers in the WFD and their potential role as connective link between the WFD and the Marine Strategy Directive; • to take note and advantage of the joint plans by ICES, OSPAR, MEDPOL and HELCOM for future workshops/activities for biological effect monitoring, integrated assessment methods, intercalibration and harmonization of biological effect techniques that are used in all three convention areas and which will largely fall under the Marine Strategy Directive.
Summary
The status and progress made in biological effects monitoring by the Barcelona Convention (MEDPOL) programmes was reviewed. Various areas of commonality between OSPAR and MEDPOL programmes were determined. These include an overlap in the use of chemical and biological effects methods and assessment approaches, the need for intercalibration and harmonization of jointly applied methods. The high levels of QA for biological effects methods established by MEDPOL were noted. It was also noted that HELCOM and Baltic Sea countries develop plans to initially assess the ecosystem health of the Gulf of Finland using amongst others biological effects methods.
There will be advantages to unify approaches and account for EU legislation, e.g. Marine Strategy Directive (e.g. ecosystem health assessment).
Although biological effects methods are not prescribed in the EU WFD guidelines, opportunities are proposed for use of bioassays in WFD monitoring.
Since the Marine Strategy Directive aims at an assessment of the ecosystem as a whole, integrated chemical biological effect techniques will be instrumental in assessing the impact of hazardous substances on ecosystem health. In addition, biological effects monitoring assessments including passive samplers can bridge the gap between the WFD and the Marine Strategy Directive in estuaries and coastal zones.
OSPAR should take proactive steps towards the application of biological effect methods in monitoring activities related to the future Marine Strategy Directive.
Scientific background
Activities within MEDPOL
The Contracting Parties to the Barcelona Convention have most recently decided to introduce monitoring of biological effects in the MEDPOL Phase II. This was considered to be not possible unless reliable and routine techniques were available. To address this concern, a manual on the biomarkers recommended for the MEDPOL biomonitoring programme was generated (UNEP/RAMOGE, 1999). Biomarkers in this manual comprised: Stress on stress, lysosomal membrane stability and metallothioneins in mussels, genotoxic damages in mussels and fish and EROD activity in fish. During the MEDPOL Phase III (1996–2005), biological effects techniques (only with biomarkers) were included in the monitoring programmes as a pilot activity to test the methodologies to be used as early-warning tools to detect any damage to organisms from pollutants. Since then, the reference laboratory of Prof Aldo Viarengo has organized various biomarker quality assurance exercises within the framework of the MEDPOL. The high levels of QA were noted by ICES. So far, biological effects methods or/and biomonitoring programmes have been carried out by several Mediterranean countries (Spain, France, Italy, Croatia, Greece, Slovenia, Morocco, Syria and Tunisia). The Contracting
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 125 Parties to the Barcelona Convention in their MEDPOL National Coordinators Meeting held in Barcelona, in May 2005, adopted the “Strategy for the development of Mediterranean pollution indicators” (MPIs) to be considered as the basis for the preparation of marine environment assessments in a manner which could facilitate the development of policy for the protection and conservation of the Mediterranean Sea and coastal areas and track its implementation. The MPIs techniques include: • Acetylcholinesterase activity in mollusc cells • EROD activity in fish • Frequency of micronuclei in molluscs and fish cells • Lipofuscin lysosomal accumulation in molluscs and fish cells • Lysosomal membrane stability in molluscs and fish cells • Metallothionein in molluscs cells • Biomarker for the evaluation of DNA damage in mollusc and fish cells • Neutral lipid lysosomal accumulation in molluscs and fish cells • Peroxisome proliferation • Stress on stress (survival in air) in molluscs
For monitoring of biological effects in Phase IV, a two-tier approach has been proposed which considers Lysosomal Membrane Stability (LMS), stress on stress and mortality as core biomarkers than can be easily applied by any MEDPOL laboratory. This will be supplemented by a battery of biomarkers to be analysed by competent labs in the region.
The proposed 2-tier approach for wide-scale biomonitoring in the Mediterranean using caged organisms (mussels or fish). An “early warning”, highly sensitive, low-cost biomarker is employed in tier 1 (i.e. lysosomal membrane stability (LMS) and survival rate, a marker for highly polluted sites). Tier 2 (involving a battery of biomarkers) is used only for animals sampled at sites in which LMS changes are evident and where there is no mortality. This will then provide a comprehensive assessment of pollutant-induced stress. Possible approaches to integrate the biomarker data into a synthesised index were presented, along with proposals to use a recently developed Expert System. The latter system allows a correct selection of biomarkers at different levels of biological organisation (molecular/cellular/tissue/organism), taking into account trends in pollutant-induced biomarker changes (e.g. increasing, decreasing or bell-shaped) (Viarengo et al., in press).
Actvities related to WFD
Under the Water Framework Directive, monitoring will be an extremely important tool to achieve “good ecological and chemical status” by 2015 in inland, transitional and coastal waters. One of the main benefits of the WFD and its monitoring programme is the use of both chemical and ecological parameters. The subsequent challenges for the monitoring programme are to integrate the chemical and ecological information into an overall insight into the quality of individual water bodies and to meet the monitoring requirements in a cost-effective and cost-efficient way. Although biological effects methods are not prescribed in the WFD guidelines, opportunities can be seen in all three types of WFD monitoring. Two preferred applications of bioassays were proposed:
Eco-assays: the use of tests as a tool to determine the causes of below-standard ecological status of water bodies. Eco- assays can be used as part of a diagnostic system to identify or confirm chemical, ecological or hydro-morphological pressures. They can also be used to prioritize measures to be taken to improve ecological status, or to demonstrate the effectiveness of measures taken (Van den Heuvel-Greve et al., 2004).
Bio-analyses: the use of bioassays to partially replace chemical analyses of priority pollutants or other relevant compounds in chemical monitoring. The purpose here is to reduce monitoring costs and to generate a more comprehensive assessment of chemical water quality. The goal is not an extended analysis of water quality, but a better indication of hazard. In practice, a few selected bioassays should be sufficient to provide a sound hazard indication. In this respect, it is important that the judgement of bioassay results should be transparent, in order to prevent confusion in decision-making. Several selected bio-analyses are sensitive enough to measure effects of priority pollutants. Effects in bio-analyses were demonstrated in an artificial sample composed of the 33 priority pollutants at their maximum permissible level. The most important effects were caused by PAHs, herbicides and insecticides. Field samples containing priority pollutants in low concentrations showed the same or greater effects. The effects in the field are mainly caused by pollutants other than those on the priority list. Bio-analyses do not directly provide information on the compounds causing the measured effect. Any severe increase in toxicity identified by bio-analysis should trigger an investigation to identify the causes of toxicity (e.g. TIE or Effect-Directed Analysis (EDA)) in order to take appropriate management measures. TIE and EDA are very promising tools for the identification of organic toxicants in complex
126 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 mixtures). In surveillance monitoring, currently there is no legal scope for the replacement of chemical analyses. There are, however, opportunities for bio-analysis in the:
• identification of relevant compounds • assessment of trends in toxicology • assessment of effects of other relevant compounds, such as endocrine disrupters.
The highest cost-efficiency may be achieved in operational monitoring if expensive high resolution chemical analyses can be focussed and their frequency reduced. Several scenarios can be envisaged for the partial replacement of chemical analyses. Cost reductions of 30% should be feasible. In addition to generally being less expensive than chemical analyses, bio-analyses enable the effects of compounds other than the selected priority pollutants to be monitored to identify sources, assess risk relating to incidents and establish a relationship between pollutants and ecological effects. In connection with this, ICES acknowledged the advantages of combining the use of passive samplers and bioanalyses as an important linkage between the WFD and EU Marine Strategy Directive. One drawback relates to the physico- chemical and sorbing compatibility of the contaminants and the selected phase.
Areas of commonality in OSPAR, MEDPOL and WFD programmes
The following common interests promoting joint activities between MEDPOL and OSPAR on the use and application of integrated chemical-biological methods included:
• Both OSPAR and MEDPOL use chemical and biological effects monitoring methods and assessment approaches. These overlap. • The integrated monitoring and assessment methods used/underway to be implemented by OSPAR and the Barcelona Convention will be important in ecosystem health assessment as a whole (e.g. in the EU-Marine Strategy Directive) • Slightly different assessment approaches with biomarkers and assays are carried out in OSPAR and the Barcelona Convention areas. There will be advantages to unify approaches and account for EU legislation, e.g. Marine Strategy Directive. • BEC monitoring assessments including passive samplers can bridge the gap between WFD and Marine Strategy Directive in estuaries and coastal zones.
Activites by HELCOM
HELCOM and partner Baltic Sea countries plan to organise a joint international demonstration project in 2009 on the Ecosystem Health of the Gulf of Finland (“ICES/BSRP and HELCOM Sea-going Demonstration Project on Integrated Multidisciplinary Assessment of the Ecosystem Health of the Gulf of Finland”). Activities carried out during the Gulf of Finland sea-going workshop are intended to be harmonised with the ICON workshop to be carried out in the North Sea in 2008–2009. Possibilities for intercalibration workshops with MEDPOL will also be examined.
Conclusion
ICES supports the following activities:
In relation to the North Sea ICES/OSPAR ICON Workshop: • to organize a parallel activity in the Mediterranean with MEDPOL in 2008/9 using the 2-tiered approach (to be initiated/coordinated by Italy, to be confirmed). • to link to the ICES/BSRP/HELCOM seagoing workshop that aims at an integrated assessment of the Gulf of Finland ecosystem. The above-mentioned workshops/activities should serve as a European platform: • for harmonization and intercalibration exercises of biological effect techniques that are used in all three convention areas and which will largely fall under the EU Marine Strategy Directive . The intercalibration of biomarkers in MEDPOL is well subscribed. This contrasts OSPAR and HELCOM where the uptake of BEC methods in BEQUALM is poor or nonexistent. These intercalibrations could be combined and support each other. In the first instance, the members will be invited to the ICON WS, and subsequent exercises proposed at this WS will be discussed at OSPAR, MEDPOL and HELCOM to take them forward. • to organize shared workshops to exchange knowledge (e.g. methods applied, new techniques, etc) and assessment approaches (learning by sharing) and to discuss intercalibrations. These workshops should be
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 127 held in 2008–2010 under the umbrella of OSPAR, MEDPOL and HELCOM. They should ideally be initiated through the ICON Workshop scientific group in collaboration with MEDPOL and HELCOM representatives. In order to achieve this it is proposed that MEDPOL and HELCOM representatives will be included in the ICON steering group. • to obtain funding from organizations such as the EU through 7 th FW Programme and training networks, UNEP, BONUS (Baltic Sea), etc.
References Maas, J. L., and van den Heuvel-Greve, M. J., with contributions from Rotteveel, S., Roex, E., Gerritsen, A., Ferdinandy, M., Vethaak, D., Klamer, H., Bakker, J., and Schipper, C. 2005. Opportunities for bio-analysis in WFD chemical monitoring using bioassays. RIZA working document: 2005.053X. Van den Heuvel-Greve, J. L., Maas, and Vethaak, A. D. 2004. Eco-assay verkenning; de mogelijke toepassing van eco- assays binnen de Kader Richtlijn Water. Internal report national Institute for Coastal and Marine Management/RIKZ, The Hague. RIKZ/OS/2004.827X. Viarengo, A., Lowe, D., Bolognesi, C., Fabbri, E., and Koehler, A. 2007.The use of biomarkers in biomonitoring: a 2- tiered approach assessing the level of pollutant-induced stress syndrome in sentinel organisms. Comp Biochem Phys. Accepted.
Source of information
The 2007 report of the Working Group on Biological Effects of Contaminants, (WGBEC) and ACME deliberations.
128 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.5.6.5 Update on Methods for Biological Effects Monitoring
Request
This is an update of material presented in the 2004 ACME Report and is part of the continuing ICES work to develop and review techniques for monitoring and assessment of biological effects of contaminants. Information provided is of relevance to Member Countries and to OSPAR and HELCOM monitoring and assessment programmes.
Recommendations and advice
ICES recommends that OSPAR, HELCOM and ICES Member Countries take note of the revised table of biological effects techniques recommended or regarded as promising for national and international monitoring programmes.
Summary
The ACME reviewed work carried out by WGBEC on the tables for biological effects techniques. WGBEC discussed and amended the tables with ‘promising’ and ‘recommended’ monitoring techniques that had been last updated in 2004 (ICES 2004). The objective of preparing the tables is to provide information to ICES Member Countries and Regulatory Commissions on the status of methods to monitor contaminant effects in marine ecosystems.
Scientific background
Review criteria and update tables for recommended and promising methods for biological effects monitoring.
The WGBEC discussed the ‘promising’ and ‘recommended’ monitoring techniques that had been last updated in 2004 (ICES 2004). The objective of preparing the tables is to provide information on the status of methods to assess contaminant effects in marine ecosystems.
During the 2007 meeting the WGBEC confirmed that recommended methods for monitoring programmes should conform to the following criteria:
• A recommended method needs to be an established technique that is available as a published method in the TIMES series or elsewhere. • A recommended method (or combination of methods) should have been shown to respond to contaminant exposure in the field. • A recommended method (or combination of methods) should be able to differentiate the effects of contaminant from natural background variability.
Changes to the Tables
Three methods 1) Apoptosis in fish cells, 2) AChE inhibition in other invertebrates and 3) delayed reproduction/gonadal maturation were considered by WGBEC to be no longer promising for use in the ICES maritime area and were removed from the lists. They were placed into Table 4 (Biological effects methods that would require further development/application to be considered promising for use in the ICES area) alongside oncogenes in fish and DNA adducts by ELISA. Shell thickening in oysters was completely removed from all lists as being redundant for the ICES/OSPAR areas.
The YES and YAS reporter gene assays were promoted from promising (Table 3 Promising biological effects monitoring methods that require further research before they can be recommended for monitoring–Bioassays and methods for specific matrices) to the recommended table (Table 1c Recommended techniques for biological monitoring programmes at the national or international level–Bioassays and methods for specific matrices).
Two new methods were introduced to the promising list (Table 2 Promising biological effects monitoring methods that require further research before they can be recommended for monitoring, both fish and invertebrates). These were alkylphenol bile metabolites and cellular energy allocation.
Ampelisca brevicornis was added along side Corophium and Arenicola as a recommended species for use in whole sediment bioassays in Table 1c (Recommended techniques for biological monitoring programmes at the national or international level–Bioassays and methods for specific matrices).
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 129 The prefixes DR, ER and AR were dropped from the CALUX assays to avoid the assumption that you had to deploy the patented and trademarked versions of the assay. The type of assay to be used (e.g. Oestrogen receptor-active compounds) is now described in the “Issues addressed” column of the table.
Where appropriate, references supporting recommended and promising techniques have been updated to reflect current literature.
Other points arising
The group discussed the potential application and use of genomics techniques in marine monitoring programmes. At present multi-gene microarrays are being developed for European flounder (The Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) Post Genomics and Proteomics (PG&P) research programme) and Mytilus sp. Furthermore, it is known that similar platforms are planned for other species relevant to the OSPAR maritime area, including the viviparous blenny (otherwise known as the eelpout) (Zoarces viviparus). The field of genomics as a whole is moving towards standardised methods for collecting and reporting data. Peer reviewed journals are now requesting that all studies follow guidelines and strategy detailed in the MIAME (Minimum Information About a Microarray Experiment) database (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/miamexpress/). At present WGBEC acknowledges that genomic platforms (as well as developments in the field of proteomics and metabolomics) represent an extremely powerful and promising tool set for biological effects research. The WGBEC will continue to keep a watching brief on developments within the field and will review the area further following the publication of the NERC thematic funded European flounder microarray project in 2008–09.
130 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Table 1a Recommended techniques for biological monitoring programmes at the national or international level - methods for fish.
BIOLOGICAL METHOD ORGANISM INTERCALIBRATION ISSUES ADDRESSED SIGNIFICANCE REFERENCES
Bulky DNA Fish B PAHs; other Measures genotoxic 1–6 adduct synthetic organics, effects. Possible predictor formation e.g., nitro-organics, of pathology through amino triazine mechanistic links. pesticides (triazines) Sensitive indicator of past and present exposure. AChE Fish O Organophosphates Measures exposure. 7–10 inhibition and carbamates or similar molecules Metallothionein Fish B Measures induction Measures exposure and 11–15 induction of metallothionein disturbance of copper and protein by certain zinc metabolism. metals (e.g., Zn, Cu, Cd, Hg) EROD or Fish B Measures induction Possible predictor of 16–23 P4501A of enzymes which pathology through induction metabolize planar mechanistic links. organic contaminants Sensitive indicator of past (e.g., PAHs, planar and present exposure. PCBs, dioxins) ALA-D Fish B Lead Index of exposure. 24–25 inhibition PAH bile Fish Q PAHs Measures exposure to and 26–27 metabolites metabolism of PAHs. Lysosomal Fish B Not contaminant- Measures cellular damage 28–31 stability specific but responds and is a good predictor of to a wide variety of pathology. Provides a link xenobiotic between exposure and contaminants and pathological endpoints. metals Possibly, a tool for immunosuppression studies in white blood cells. Externally Limanda B Responds to a wide Integrative response; 43–44 visible diseases limanda, variety of measures general fish Platichthys environmental health; elevated flesus, Gadus contaminants and prevalence may indicate morhua non-specific stressors exposure to contaminants. Macroscopic Limanda B Effects of Indicative of liver neoplasms limanda, carcinogenic contaminant-associated 152–153 Platichthys flesus substances liver carcinogenesis Liver Limanda B Effects of Indicative of non-specific 153–154 histopathology limanda, carcinogenic and and specific contaminant Platichthys flesus non-carcinogenic effects at cellular or tissue contaminants level Vitellogenin Male and B Oestrogenic Measures feminization of 45-48 induction juvenile fish substances male fish and reproductive impairment. Intersex Male flounder Oestrogenic Measures feminization of 49-50 substances male fish and reproductive impairment. Reproductive Zoarces Measures reproductive 51 success in viviparous output and survival of Zoarces eggs and fry in relation to viviparus contaminants. Restricted to period when young are carried by female viviparous fish. B: BEQUALM; Q: QUASIMEME
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 131
Table 1b Recommended techniques for biological monitoring programmes at the national or international level - methods for invertebrates.
BIOLOGICAL METHOD ORGANISM QA ISSUE ADDRESSED SIGNIFICANCE REFERENCES
AChE inhibition Molluscs and O Organophosphates Measures exposure to a 52–53 crustaceans and carbamates or wide range of similar molecules compounds and a marker of stress. Possibly algal toxins Metallothionein induction Mytilus O Measures induction Measures exposure and 54–55 of metallothionein disturbance of copper protein by certain and zinc metabolism. metals (e.g., Zn, Cu, Cd, Hg) Lysosomal stability (including Mytilus. Oyster O/B/U Not contaminant- Measures cellular 56–70 NRR) specific, but responds damage and is a good to a wide variety of predictor of pathology. xenobiotic Provides a link between contaminants and exposure and metals pathological endpoints. Possibly, a tool for immunosuppression studies in white blood cells. Scope for growth Bivalve O Responds to a wide Integrative response, a 71–72 molluscs, variety of sensitive sub-lethal e.g.,Mytilus spp. contaminants measure of energy and oysters available for growth. Imposex Neogastropod Q Specific to organotins Reproductive 73–82 molluscs interference (Nucella Estuarine and coastal lapillus, littoral waters (Nucella) Buccinum and offshore waters undatum, Hinia (Buccinum). reticulata, Neptunea antiqua) Intersex Littorina littorea B Specific to Reproductive 83 reproductive effects interference in coastal of organotins (littoral) waters. Induction/inhibition of Mytilus edulis Multiple Adaptation/inhibition in 84–89 Multidrug/multixenobiotic contaminants response to xenobiotic resistance (MDR/MXR) (organics and metals) stress. Histopathology Blue mussels Not contaminant- General responses 90–91 specific Embryo aberrations in field- Amphipods Contaminant-specific Measures frequency of 92–96 collected amphipod different types of lethal crustaceans embryo aberrations; allows for separating effects of contaminants and environmental climate variables B: BEQUALM; Q: QUASIMEME; U: UNEP MEDPOL
132 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Table 1c Recommended techniques for biological monitoring programmes at the national or international level - Bioassays and methods for specific matrices.
BIOLOGICAL METHOD ORGANISM QA ISSUE ADDRESSED SIGNIFICANCE REFERENCES
Benthic Macro-, meio-, and B Responds to a wide Ecosystem level. 97–102 community epibenthos variety of Retrospective. analysis contaminants, particularly those Particularly useful for resulting in organic point sources. Most enrichment appropriate for deployment when other monitoring methods indicate that a problem may exist. Whole sediment Corophium B Not contaminant- Acute/lethal and 103, 142–143 bioassays Arenicola, Ampelisca specific, will respond acute/sub-lethal toxicity brevicornis to a wide range of only at present. May environmental enable retrospective contaminants in interpretation of sediments community changes Bioassays of Bivalve embryo Will respond to a wide Acute and sub-lethal 104 sediment pore Acartia range of environmental toxicity, including waters, sea water contaminants, genotoxicity, etc. Toxicity elutriates, sea Useful for dredge of hydrophobic water samples spoils, sediments liable contaminants might be to re-suspension underestimated in pore water assays. CALUX Reporter gene assay Ah receptor-active Predictor of dioxin like 105 compounds toxicity YES Reporter gene assay Oestrogen receptor- Potential endocrine 135–136 (yeast) active compounds disruption YAS Reporter gene assay Androgen receptor- Potential endocrine 137–138 (yeast) active compounds disruption B: BEQUALM; Q: QUASIMEME
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 133
Table 2 Promising biological effects monitoring methods that require further research before they can be recommended for monitoring (both fish, and invertebrates).
Reference Method Organism Issue addressed Biological significance s Pre-neoplastic and Fish PAHs, other synthetic Diagnosis of pathological changes 32–42 neoplastic liver lesions organics, e.g., nitro- and enzymatic markers of by NADPH-producing organics, amino triazine carcinogenesis associated with enzymes pesticides (triazines) exposure to genotoxic and non- genotoxic carcinogens. DNA strand breaks Fish, mussels, cells Not contaminant-specific, Measures genotoxic effects, but is 106–108, including Comet assay will respond to a wide also extremely sensitive to other 145 range of environmental environmental parameters. contaminants BaP Hydroxylase -like Invertebrates Induced enzyme response Measures exposure to organic 109–110 enzymes to PAHs, planar PCBs, contaminants. dioxins and/or furans Induction/inhibition of Fish and invertebrates Multiple contaminants Adaptation/inhibition in response 110–116 Multidrug/multixenobi other than Mytilus (organics and metals) to xenobiotic stress. otic resistance (MDR/MXR) Glutathion-S- Fish, molluscs Predominantly organic Measures exposure and the 117–119, transferase(s) (GST) xenobiotics capacity of the major group of 144 phase II enzymes. Considered most promising for isoenzyme- specific measurements Oxidative stress Fish, invertebrates Not contaminant-specific, Measures the presence of free 120–123, will respond to a wide radicals. 144 range of environmental contaminants Immunocompetence Fish, invertebrates Not contaminant-specific, Measures factors that influence 124 will respond to a wide susceptibility to disease. range of environmental contaminants On-line monitoring Mussels and crabs Not contaminant-specific, Measures the effects of chemicals 125 will respond to a wide on heart rate using a simple and range of environmental inexpensive remote biosensor. contaminants Gives an integrated response. Abnormalities in wild Fish, including demersal Not linked unequivocally Measures frequency of probably 126–127, fish embryos and and pelagic species to contaminants lethal abnormalities in fish larvae. larvae Mutagenic, teratogenic. Bulky DNA adduct Mussels, invertebrates PAHs, other synthetic Measures genotoxic effects 128–131 formation organics Gene arrays Fish, mussels Various Combined responses from various 132–133 biomarkers Histopathology Invertebrates (other than Not contaminant-specific General responses Awaiting Mytilus) publicatio ns Spiggin Three-spined stickleback Androgens Measures environmental 134 androgens Micronuclei Fish, bivalve molluscs Not contaminant-specific Exposure to aneugenic and 150–151 clastogenic Peroxisomal Fish and invertebrates Contaminant-specific Potential alterations in lipid 146–148 proliferation (enzyme metabolism, non-genotoxic assays) carcinogenesis Alkylphenol- bile Fish (cod) Alkyl phenols Measures exposure to and Awaiting metabolites metabolism of Alkylated phenols publicatio ns Cellular Energy Invertebrates and small Wide range of stressors Changes in metabolic turnover and 149 Allocation fish specific allocations will be linked to effects at higher levels of ecological organization
134 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Table 3 Promising biological effects monitoring methods that require further research before they can be recommended for monitoring - Bioassays and methods for specific matrices.
METHOD ORGANISM ISSUE ADDRESSED BIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE REFERENCES
CALUX Reporter gene assay Oestrogen receptor- Potential endocrine 139 active compounds disruption. CALUX Reporter gene assay Androgen receptor- Potential endocrine active compounds disruption. Chronic whole Invertebrates Responds to a wide Measurements such as sediment bioassays range of contaminants growth and reproduction, coupled to biomarker responses, which will give a measure of the bioavailability and chronic toxicity in whole sediments. Pollution-induced Microalgae, bacteria Specific contaminants Measure of degree of 140–141 community tolerance can be tested adaptation to specific (PICT) water bioassay pollutants. Not yet widely tested; retrospective.
Table .4 Biological effects methods that would require further development/application to be considered promising for use in the ICES area.
METHOD ORGANISM ISSUE ADDRESSED BIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Oncogenes Fish PAHs Other synthetic organics, Activation of oncogenes (ras) or e.g., nitro-organics, amino triazine damage to tumour-suppressor pesticides (triazines) genes (p53). Measures genotoxic effects leading to carcinogenesis. ELISA for DNA adducts Fish Not contaminant-specific Genotoxic effects Apoptosis Fish cells Responds to a wide range of General response. contaminants AChE inhibition Other invertebrates Organophosphates and carbamates Measures exposure or similar molecules. Possibly algal toxins Delayed reproduction/ gonadal Fish Not contaminant-specific Reproductive disruption maturation Aromatase Fish In assessing the potential ecological risk of CYP19 inhibitors, in particular in the context of relating alterations in subcellular indicators of endocrine function
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 135
References
Dunn, B.P., Black, J.J., and Maccubbin, A. 1987.32P-postlabelling analysis of aromatic DNA adducts in fish from polluted areas. Cancer Research, 47: 6543–6548. Varanasi, U., Reichert, W.L., and Stein, J.E. 1989. 32P-postlabelling analysis of DNA adducts in liver of wild English sole (Parophrys vetulus) and winter flounder (Pseudopleuronectes americanus). Cancer Research, 49: 1171– 1177. Varanasi, U., Reichert, W. L., Eberhart, B.-T., and Stein, J. E. 1989. Formation of benzo[a]pyrene-diolepoxide-DNA adducts in liver of English sole (Parophrys vetulus). Chemico-biological Interactions, 69: 203–216. Maccubbin, A. E., and Black, J. J. 1990. 32P-postlabelling detection of DNA adducts in fish from chemically contaminated waterways. Science of the Total Environment, 94: 89–104. Lyons, B. P., Stentiford, G. D., Green, M., Bignell, J., Bateman, K., Feist, S. W., Goodsir, F. Reynolds, W. J., and Thain, J. E. 2004b. DNA adduct analysis and histopathological biomarkers in European flounder (Platichthys flesus) sampled from UK estuaries. Mutation Research, 552: 177–186. Stein, J. E., Collier, T. K., Reichert, W. L., Casillas, E., Hom, T., and Varanasi, U. 1991. Bioindicators of contaminant exposure and sublethal effects: studies with benthic fish in Puget Sound, Washington. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 11: 701–704. Kirby, M. F., Morris, S., Hurst, M., Kirby, S. J., Neall, P., Tylor, T., and Fagg, A. 2000. The use of cholinesterase activity in flounder (Platychthys flesus) muscle tissue as a biomarker of neurotoxic contamination in UK estuaries. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 40(9): 780–791. Finlayson, B. L., and Rudnicki, R. A. 1985. Storage and handling as a source of error in measuring fish acetylcholinesterase activity. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 35: 790–795. Burgeot, T., Bocquené, G., Truquet, P., Le Dean, L., Poulard, J.C., Dorel, D., Souplet, A., and Galgani, F. 1993. The Dragonet (Callionymus lyra), a target species used for evaluation of the biological effects of chemical contaminants on French coasts. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 97: 309–316. Galgani, F., Bocquené, G., and Cadiou, Y. 1992. Evidence of variation in cholinesterase activity in fish along a pollution gradient in the North Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 91: 77–82. Hogstrand, C., and Haux, C. 1990. A radioimmunoassay for perch (Perca fluviatilis) metallothionein. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 103: 56–65. Hogstrand, C., and Haux, C. 1992. Evaluation of differential pulse polarography for the quantification of metallothionein—a comparison with RIA. Analytical Biochemistry, 200: 388–392. Killie, P., Kay, J., Leaver, M., and George, S. 1992. Induction of piscine metallothionein as a primary response to heavy metal pollutants: applicability of new sensitive molecular probes. Aquatic Toxicology, 22: 279–286. Chan, K. M., Davidson, W. S., Hew, C. L., and Flecher, G. L. 1989. Molecular cloning of metallothionein cDNA and analysis of metallothionein gene expression in winter flounder tissues. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 67: 2520– 2529. Hylland, K. 1999. Biological effects of contaminants: Quantification of metallothionein (MT) in fish liver tissue. ICES Techniques in Marine Environmental Sciences, No. 26. 18 pp. Burke, M. D., and Mayer, R. T. 1974. Ethoxyresorufin: Direct fluorimetric assay of a microsomal O-dealkylationwhich is preferentially inducible by 3-methylcholanthrene. Drug Metabolism and Disposition, 2: 583–588. Eggens, M. L., and Galgani, F. 1992. Ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) activity in flatfish: Fast determination with a fluorescence plate-reader. Marine Environmental Research, 33: 213. Galgani, F., and Payne, J.F. 1991. Biological effects of contaminants: Microplate method for measurement of ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) in fish. Techniques in Marine Environmental Sciences, No. 13. 11 pp. Courtenay, S., Grunwald, C., Kraemer, G.L., Alexander, R., and Wirgin, I. 1993. Induction and clearance of cytochrome P4501A mRNA in Atlantic tomeod caged in bleached kraft mill effluent in the Miramichi River. Aquatic Toxicology, 27: 225–244. Stagg, R., and McIntosh, A. 1998. Biological effects of contaminants: Determination of CYP1A-dependent mono- oxygenase activity in dab by fluorimetric measurement of EROD activity. ICES Techniques in Marine Environmental Sciences, No. 23. 16 pp. Kraemer, G. L., Squibb, K., Gioelli, D., Garte, S. J., and Wirgin, I. 1991. Cytochrome P4501A1 mRNA expression in feral Hudson River tomeod. Environmental Research, 55: 64–78. Belliaeff, B., and Burgeot, T. 1997. Sampling design optimization for EROD measurements in fish. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 153: 239–246. Martínez-Gómez C., Campillo, J. A., Benedicto J., Fernández B., Valdés J., García, I., and Sánchez, F. 2006. Monitoring biomarkers in fish (Lepidorhombus boscii and Callionymus lyra) from the Northern Iberian shelf after the Prestige oil spill. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 53(5–7): 305–314.
136 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Hodson, P. V. 1976. D-Aminolevulinic acid dehydratase activity of fish blood as an indicator of a harmful exposure to lead. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 33: 268–271. Schmitt, C. J., Dwyer, F. J., and Finger, S. E. 1984. Bioavailability of Pb and Zn from mine tailings as indicated by erythrocyte D-aminolevulinic acid dehydratase (ALA-D) activity in suckers (Pisces: Catostomidae). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science, 41: 1030–1040. Ariese, F., Kok, S. J., Verkaik, M., Gooijer, C., Velthorst, N. H., and Hofstraat, J. W. 1993. Polycyclic aromatic compounds. In PAH: Synthesis, Properties, Analysis, Occurrence and Biological Effects, pp. 1013–1020. Ed. by P. Garrigues and M. Lamotte. Gordon and Breach, London. Stein, J. E., Collier, T. K., Reichert, W. L., Casillas, E., Hom, T., and Varanasi, U. 1993. Bioindicators of contaminant exposure and sublethal effects in benthic fish from Puget Sound. Marine Environmental Research, 35(1–2): 95– 100. Köhler, A. 1991. Lysosomal perturbations in fish liver as indicators for toxic effects of environmental pollution. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 100C(1/2): 123–127. Lowe, D. M., Moore, M. N., and Evans, B. M. 1992. Contaminant impact on interactions of molecular probes with lysosomes in living hepatocytes from dab Limanda limanda. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 91: 135–140. Broeg, K., Köhler, A., and Von Westernhagen, H. 2002. Disorder and recovery of environmental health monitored by means of lysosomal stability in liver of European flounder (Platichthys flexus L.), Marine Environmental Research, 54(3–5): 569–573. Köhler, A., Söffker, K., and Wahl, E. 2002. Functional and morphological changes of lysosomes as prognostic biomarker of toxic injury in a marine flatfish Platichthys flesus (L.). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 21: 2434–2444. Köhler, A. 1990. Identification of contaminant-induced cellular and subcellular lesions in the liver of flounder (Platichthys flesus) caught at differently polluted estuaries. Aquatic Toxicology, 16: 271–294. Malins, D. C., McCain, B. B., Landahl, J. T., Myers, M. S., Krahn, M. M., Brown, D. W., Chan, S. L., and Roubal, W. T. 1988. Neoplastic and other diseases in fish in relation to toxic chemicals: An overview. Aquatic Toxicology, 11: 43–67. Feist, S. W., Lang, T., Stentiford, G. D., and Koehler, A. 2004. Use of liver pathology of the European flatfish dab (Limanda limanda L.) and flounder (Platichthys flesus L.) for monitoring. ICES Techniques in Marine Environmental Sciences 38. 42 pp Myers, M. S., Olson, O. P., Johnson, L. L., Stehr, C. S., Hom, T., and Varanasi, U. 1992. Hepatic lesions other than neoplasms in subadult flatfish from Puget Sound, Washington: Relationships with indices of contaminant exposure Marine Environmental Research, 34: 45–51. Myers, M. S., Stehr, C. S., Olson, O. P., Johnston, L. L., McCain, B. B., Chan, S. L., and Varanasi, U. 1994. Relationships between toxicopathic lesions and exposure to chemical contaminants in English sole (Pleuronectes vetulus), starry flounder (Platichthys stellatus) and white croaker (Genyonemus lineatus) from selected marine sites on the Pacific Coast, U.S.A. Environmental Health Perspectives, 102: 200–215. Vethaak, A. D., Jol, J. G., Meijboom, A., Eggens, M. L., ap Rheinallt, T., Wester, P.W., van de Zande, T., Bergman, A., Dankers, N., Ariese, F., Baan, R. A., Everts, J. M., Opperhuizen, A., and Marquenie, J. M. 1996. Skin and liver diseases induced in flounder (Platichthys flesus) after longterm exposure to contaminated sediments in large-scale mesocosms. Environmental Health Perspectives, 104: 1218–1229. Vethaak, A. D., and Wester, P. W. 1996. Diseases of flounder (Platichthys flesus) in Dutch coastal waters, with particular reference to environmental stress factors. Part 2. Liver histopathology. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 26: 99–116. Stentiford, G. D, Longshaw, M., Lyons, B. P., Jones, G., Green, M., and Feist, S. W. 2003. Histopathological biomarkers in estuarine fish species for the assessment of biological effects of contaminants. Marine Environmental Research, 55: 137–159. Köhler, A., and Van Noorden, C. J. F. 1998. Initial velocities of G6PDH and PGDH in situ and the expression of proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) are sensitive diagnostic markers during environmental hepatocellular carcinogenesis in marine flatfish. Aquatic Toxicology, 40: 233–252. Köhler, A., and Van Noorden, C. J. F. 2003. NADPH and the higher incidence of pollution induced liver cancer in female flounder. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 22: 2703–2710. Köhler, A., and Pluta, H. J. 1995. Lysosomal injury and MFO activity in the liver of flounder (Platichthys flesusL.) in relation to histopathology of hepatic degeneration and carcinogenesis. Marine Environmental Research, 39: 255–260. Bucke, D., Vethaak, D., Lang, T., and Mellergaard, S. 1996. Common diseases and parasites of fish in the North Atlantic: Training guide for identification. ICES Techniques in Marine Environmental Sciences, No. 19, 27 pp.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 137
Vethaak, A. D., Bucke, D., Lang, T., Wester, P. W., Jol, J., and Carr, M. 1992. Fish disease monitoring along a pollution transect: A case study using dab Limanda limanda in the German Bight. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 91: 173–192. Jobling, S., and Sumpter, J. P. 1993. Detergent components in sewage effluent are weakly oestrogenic to fish: in vivo study using rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) hepatocytes. Aquatic Toxicology, 27: 361–372. Tyler, C. R., and Sumpter, J. P. 1990. The development of a radioimmunoassay for carp, Cyprinus carpio, vitellogenin. Fish Physiology and Biochemistry, 8: 129–140. Lazier, C. L., and MacKay, M. E. 1993. Vitellogenin gene expression in teleost fish. In Biochemistry and Molecular Biology of Fishes, Vol. 2, pp. 391–405. Ed. by P.W. Hochachka and T.P. Momsen. Elsevier Science Publications, Amsterdam. Pelisso, C, and Sumpter, J. P. 1992. Steroids and 'steroid-like' substances in fish diets. Aquaculture, 107: 283–301. Matthiessen, P., Allen, Y. T., Allchin, C. R., Feist, S. W., Kirby, M. F., Law, R. J., Scott, A. P., Thain, J. E., and Thomas, K. V. 1998. Oestrogenic endocrine disruption in flounder (Platichthys flesus L.) from United Kingdom estuarine and marine waters. Science Series Technical Report, No. 107, Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Lowestoft, UK. 48 pp. Gercken, J., and Sordyl, H. 2002. Intersex in feral marine and freshwater fish from northeastern Germany. Marine Environmental; Research, 54: 651–655. Jacobsson, A., Neuman, E., and Thoresson, G. 1986. The viviparous blenny as an indicator of environmental effects of harmful substances. Ambio, 15: 236–238. Bocquené, G., Bellanger, C, Cadiou, Y., and Galgani, F. 1995. Joint action of combinations of pollutants on the acetylcholinesterase activity of several marine species. Ecotoxicology, 4: 266–279 Rickwood, C. J., and Galloway, T. S. 2004. Acetylcholinesterase inhibition as a biomarker of adverse effect. A study of Mytilus edulis exposed to the priority pollutant chlorfenvinphos. Aquatic Toxicology, 67: 45–56. Roesijadi, G., Unger, M. E., and Morris, J. E. 1988 Immunochemical quantification of metallothioneins of a marine mollusc. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 45: 1257–1263. Viarengo, A., Ponzano, E., Dondero, F., and Fabbri, R. 1997. A simple spectrophotometric method for metallothionein evaluation in marine organisms: an application to Mediterranean and Antarctic molluscs. Marine Environmental Research, 44: 69–84. Ringwood, A. H., Conners, D. E., and Keppler, C.J. 1999. Cellular responses of oysters, Crassostrea virginica, to metal-contaminated sediments. Marine Environmental Research, 48: 427–437. Ringwood, A.H., Conners, D.E., and Hoguet, J. 1998. Effects of natural and anthropogenic stressors on lysosomal destabilization in oysters Crassostrea virginica. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 166: 163–171. Cajaraville, M.P., Abascal, I., Etxeberria, M., and Marigomez, I. 1995. Lysosomes as cellular markers of environmental pollution time-dependent and dose-dependent responses of the digestive lysosomal system of mussels after petroleum hydrocarbon exposure. Environmental Toxicology and Water Quality, 10: 1–8. Cheung, V. V., Wedderburn, R. J., and Depledge, M. H. 1998. Molluscan lysosomal responses as a diagnostic tool for detection of a pollution gradient in Tolo Harbour, Hong Kong. Marine Environmental Research, 46: 237–241. Etxeberria, M., Cajaraville, M. P., and Marigomez, I. 1995. Changes in digestive cell lysosomal structure in mussels as biomarkers of environmental stress in the Urdaibai Estuary (Biscay Coast, Iberian Peninsula). Marine Pollution Bulletin, 30: 599–603. Fernley, P. W., Moore, M. N., Lowe, D. M., Donkin, P., and Evans, S. 2000. Impact of the Sea Empress oil spill on lysosomal stability in mussel blood cells. Marine Environmental Research, 50: 451–455. Lin, S. Y., and Steichen, D. J. 1994. A method for determining the stability of lysosomal membranes in the digestive cells of Mytilus edulis. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 115: 237–241. Lowe, D. M., and Fossato, V. U. 2000. The influence of environmental contaminants on lysosomal activity in the digestive cells of mussels (Mytilus galloprovincialis) from the Venice Lagoon. Aquatic Toxicology, 48: 75–85. Lowe, D. M., Soverchia, C, and Moore, M. N. 1995. Lysosomal membrane responses in the blood and digestive cells of mussels experimentally exposed to fluoranthene. Aquatic Toxicology, 33: 105–112. Marigomez, I., and Baybay-Villacorta, L. 2003. Pollutant-specific and general lysosomal responses in digestive cells of mussels exposed to model organic chemicals. Aquatic Toxicology, 64: 235–257. Regoli, F. 1992. Lysosomal responses as a sensitive stress index in biomonitoring heavy-metal pollution. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 84: 63–69. Ringwood, A. H., Conners, D. E., and Di Novo, A. 1998. The effects of copper exposures on cellular responses in oysters. Marine Environmental Research, 46: 591–595. Ringwood, A. H., Connors, D. E., and Hoguet, J. 1998. Effects of natural and anthropogenic stressors on lysosomal destabilisation in oysters, Crassostrea virginica. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 166: 163–171.
138 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Svendseb, C, and Weeks, J. M. 1995. The use of a lysosome assay for the rapid assessment of cellular stress from copper to the freshwater snail Viviparus contectus (Millet). Marine Pollution Bulletin, 31: 139–42. Tremblay, R., Myrand, B., and Guderley, H. 1998. Temporal variation of lysosomal capacities in relation to susceptibility of mussels, Mytilus edulis, to summer mortality. Marine Biology, 132: 641–649. Widdows, J., and Salkeld, P. 1992. Practical procedures for the measurement of scope for growth. MAP Technical Reports Series, 71: 147–172. Widdows, J., and Johnson, D. 1988. Physiological energetics of Mytilus edulis: Scope for growth. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 46(1–3): 113–121. Bryan, G. W., Gibbs, P. E., Hummerstone, L. G., and Burt, G. R. 1986. The decline of the gastropod Nucella lapillus around southwest England: Evidence for the effect of tributyltin from antifouling paints. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 66: 611–640. Bryan, G. W., Gibbs, P. E., Burt, G. R., and Hummerstone, L. G. 1987. The effects of tributyltin (TBT) accumulation on adult dogwhelks, Nucella lapillus: Long-term field and laboratory experiments (Southwest England and Isles of Scilly). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 67: 525–544. Bryan, G. W., Gibbs, P. E., and Burt, G. R. 1988. A comparison of the effectiveness of tri-n-butyltin chloride and five other organotin compounds in promoting the development of imposex in the dogwhelk. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 68: 733–745. Fiorini, P., Oehlmann, J., and Stroben, E. 1991. The pseudohermaphroditism of prosobranchs: morphological aspects. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 226: 1–26. Stroben, E., Oehlmann, J., and Fioroni, P. 1992. The morphological expression of imposex in Hinia reticulata (Gastropoda, Buccinidae) – a potential indicator of tributyltin pollution. Marine Biology, 113(4): 625–636. Stroben, E., Schulte-Oehlmann, U., Fioroni, P., and Oehlmann, J. 1995. A comparative method for easy assessment of coastal TBT pollution by the degree of imposex in prosobranch species. Haliotis, 24: 1–12. Barreiro, R., González, R., Quintela, M., and Ruiz, J. M. 2001. Imposex, organotin bioaccumulation and sterility of female Nassarius reticulatus in polluted areas of NW Spain. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 218: 203–212. Poloczanska, E. S., and Ansell, A. D. 1999. Imposex in the whelks Buccinum undatum and Neptunea antiqua from the west coast of Scotland. Marine Environmental Research, 47(2): 203–212. Strand, J., and Jacobsen, J. A. 2002. Imposex in two sublittoral neogastropods from the Kattegat and Skagerrak: the common whelk Buccinum undatum and the red whelk Neptunea antiqua. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 244: 171–177. OSPAR. 2002. Proposed amendments to the current OSPAR Guidelines on TBT-specific effects monitoring Working Group on Monitoring (MON 02/4/1) OSPAR Commission, London. Bauer, B., Fiorini, P., Ide, I., Liebe, S., Oehlmann, J., Stroben, E., and Watermann, B. 1995. TBT effects on the female genital system of Littorina littorea, possible indicator of tributyltin pollution. Hydrobiologia, 309: 15–27. Kurelec, B., and Pivcevic, B. 1991. Evidence for a multixenobiotic resistance mechanism in the mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis. Aquatic Toxicology, 19: 291–302. Kurelec, B. 1992. The multixenobiotic resistance mechanism in aquatic organisms. Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 22(1): 23–43. Luedeking, A., and Koehler, A. 2002. Identification of six mRNA sequences of genes biotransformation in Mytilus edulis. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 115–124. Minier, C., Eufemia, F., and Epel, D.E. 1999. The multixenobiotic resistance phenotype as a tool to biomonitor the environment. Biomarkers, 4: 442–454. Minier, C., Lelong, C., Djemel, N., Rodet, F., Tutundjian, R., Favrel, P., Mathieu, M., and Leboulenger, F. 2002. Expression and activity of a Multixenobiotic resistance systemin the Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas. Marine Environmental Research, 54: 455–459. Smital, T., Sauerborn, R., Pivcevic, B., Krca, S., and Kurelec B 2000. Interspecies differences in p-glycoprotein mediated activity of multixenobiotic resistance mechanism in several marine and freshwater invertebrates. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 126C, 175–186. Cajaraville, M. P., Díez, G., Marigómez, J. A., and Angulo, E. 1990. Responses of the basophilic cells of the digestive gland of mussels to petroleum hydrocarbon exposure. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 9: 221–228. Cajaraville, M. P., Marigómez, J. A., Díez, G., and Angulo, E. 1992. Comparative effects of the WAF of three oils on mussels. 2. Quantitative alterations in the structure of the digestive tubules. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 102C(1): 113–123. Sundelin, B. 1983. Effects of cadmiun on Pontoporeia affinis (Crustacea, Amphipoda) in a soft-bottom microcosm. Marine Biology, 74: 203–212. Elmgren, R., Hansson, S., Larsson, U., Sundelin, B., and Boeh, P. 1983. The “Thesis oil spill”: Acute and long-term impact on the benthos. Marine Biology, 73: 51–65.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 139
Sundelin, B., and Eriksson, A-K. 1998. Malformations in embryos of the deposit-feeding amphipod Monoporeia afffinis in the Baltic Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 171: 165–180. Sundelin, B., Ryk, C., and Malmberg, G. 2000. Effects on the sexual maturation of the sediment-living amphipod Monoporeia affinis. Environmental Toxicology, 15: 518–526. Eriksson-Wiklund, A.-K., and Sundelin, B. 2001. Impaired reproduction of the amphipods Monoporeia affinis and Pontoporeia femorata as a result of moderate hypoxia and increased temperature. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 171: 165–180. ICES. 1988. Procedures for the monitoring of benthic communities around point-source discharges. In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Marine Pollution, 1988. Cooperative Research Report, 160: 285. ICES. 1989. Examples of the application of ICES guidelines for the monitoring of benthic communities around point- source discharges. In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Marine Pollution, 1989. Cooperative Research Report, 167: 150–164. PARCOM. 1989. Guidelines for monitoring methods to be used in the vicinity of platforms in the North Sea. Paris Commission, London. Rees, H. L., Heip, C, Vincx, M., and Parker, M. M. 1991. Benthic communities: Use in monitoring point-source discharges. Techniques in Marine Environmental Sciences, No. 16. 70 pp. ICES. 1994. Report of the ICES/HELCOM Workshop on Quality Assurance of Benthic Measurements in the Baltic Sea. ICES CM 1994/E:10. Rumohr, H. 1999. Soft bottom macrofauna: Collection and treatment of samples. Techniques in Marine Environmental Sciences, No. 27. 18 pp. PARCOM. 1993. Report of the Paris Commission sediment reworker ring test. Oslo and Paris Commissions, London Thain, J. E. 1991. Biological effects of contaminants: Oyster (Crassostrea gigas) embryo bioassay. Techniques in Marine Environmental Sciences, No. 11. 12 pp. Murk, A. J., Legler, J., Denison, M. S., Giesy, J. P., van de Guchte, C., and Brouwer, A. 1996. Chemical-activated luciferase gene expression (CALUX): a novel in vitro bioassay for Ah receptor active compounds in sediment and pore water. Fundamental and Applied Toxicology, 33: 149–160. Kammann, U., Bunke, M., Steinhart, H., and Theobald, N. 2001 A permanent fish cell line (EPC) for genotoxicity testing of marine sediments with the comet assay. Mutatation Research, 498(1–2): 67–77. Belpaeme, K., Cooreman, K., and Kirsch-Volders, M. 1998. Development and validation of the in vivo alkaline comet assay for detecting genomic damage in marine flatfish. Mutation Research, 415: 167–184. Lacorn, M., Piechotta, G., Wosniok, W., Simat, T.J., Kammann, U., Lang, T., Müller, W. E. G., Schröder, H. C., Jenke, H.S., and Steinhart, H. 2001. Annual cycles of apoptosis, DNA strand breaks, heat shock proteins, and metallothionein isoforms in dab (Limanda limanda): influences of natural factors and consequences for biological effect monitoring. Biomarkers, 6(2): 108–126. Livingstone, D. R. 1991. Organic xenobiotic metabolism in marine invertebrates. Advances in Comparative and Environmental Physiology, 7: 145–213. Suteau, P., Daubeze, M., Miguad, M. L., and Naibonne, J. F. 1988. PAH-metabolising enzymes in whole mussels as biochemical tests for chemical pollution monitoring. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 46, 45–49. Köhler, A., Lauritzen, B., Bahns, S., George, S. G., Förlin, L., and van Noorden, C. J. F. 1998. Clonal adaptation of cancer cells in flatfish to environmental contamination by changes in expression of P-gp related MXR, CYP450, GST-A and G6PDH activity. Marine Environmental Research, 46(1–5): 191–195. Köhler, A., Lauritzen, B., Janssen, D., Böttcher, P., Tegoliwa, L., Krüner, G., and Broeg, K. 1998. Detection of P- glycoprotein mediated MDR/MXR in Carcinus maenas hepatopancreas by Immuno-Gold-Silver labeling. Marine Environmental Research, 46(1–5): 411–414. Hemmer, M. J., Courtney, L. A., and Ortego, L. S. 1995. Immunohistochemical detection of P-glycoprotein in teleost tissue using mammalian polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies. Journal of Experimental Zoology, 272(1): 69– 77. Smital, T., Sauerborn, R., Pivcevic, B., Krca, S., and Kurelec, B. 2000. Interspecies differences in p-glycoprotein mediated activity of multixenobiotic resistance mechanism in several marine and freshwater invertebrates. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 126C: 175–186. Tutundjian, R., Cachot, J., Leboulenger, F. and Minier, C. 2002. Genetic and immunological characterisation of a multixenobiotic resistance system in the turbot (Scophthalmus maximus). Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 132B: 463–471. Tutundjian, R., Minier, C, LeFoll, F., and Leboulenger, F. 2002. Rhodamine exclusion activity in primary cultured Turbot (Scophthalmus maximus) hepatocytes. Marine Environmental Research, 54: 443–447.
140 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 George, S.G. 1994. Biochemistry and molecular biology of phase II xenobiotic-conjugating enzymes in fish. In Aquatic toxicology: Molecular, biochemical and cellular perspectives, pp. 37–85. Ed. by D.C. Malins and G.K. Ostrander. Lewis Publications, Searcy, Arkansas. Scott, K., Leaver, M. J., and George, S. G., 1992. Regulation of hepatic glutathione S-transferase expression in flounder. Marine Environmental Research, 233–236. Gowland, B. T. G., McIntosh, A. D., Davies, I. M., and Moffat, C. 2002. Glutathione S-transferase activity in mussels, Mytilus edulis, exposed to discharges from an aluminium smelter. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 69: 147–154. Regoli, F. 2000. Total oxyradical scavenging capacity (TOSC) in polluted and tranlocated mussels: a predictive biomarker of oxidative stress. Aquatic Toxicology, 50: 351–361. Livingstone, D. R., Garcia Martinez, P., Michel, X., Narbonne, J. F., O'Hara, S. C. M., Ribera, D., and Winston, G. W. 1990. Oxyradical production as a pollution-mediated mechanism of toxicity in the common mussel, Mytilus edulis L., and other molluscs. Functional Ecology, 4: 415–424. Livingstone, D. R., Lemaire, P., Matthews, A., Peters, L., Bucke, D., and Law, R. J. 1993. Pro-oxidant, antioxidant and 7-ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) activity responses in liver of dab (Limanda limanda) exposed to sediment contaminated with hydrocarbons and other chemicals. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 26(11): 602–606. Winston, G. W., and Di Giulio, R. T. 1991. Pro-oxidant and antioxidant mechanisms in aquatic organisms. Aquatic Toxicology, 19: 137–161. Dean, J. H., Laster, M. I., and Boorman, G. A. 1982. Methods and approaches for assessing immunotoxicity: An overview. Environmental Health Perspectives, 43: 27–29. Agaard, A., Andersen, B. B., and Depledge, M. H. 1991. Simultaneous monitoring of physiological and behavioural activity in marine organisms using non-invasive, computer-aided techniques. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 73 277–282. Cameron, P., and Berg, J. 1992. Morphological and chromosomal aberrations during embryonic development in dab Limanda limanda. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 91: 163–169. Klumpp, D. W., and von Westernhagen, H. 1995. Biological effects of pollutants in Australian tropical coastal waters: Embryonic malformations and chromosomal abberations in developing fish eggs. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 30(2): 158–165. Ackha, F., Izuel, C., Venier, P., Budzinski, H., Burgeot, T., and Narbonne, J.F. 2000. Enzymatic biomarker measurement and study of DNA adduct formation in B[a]P-contaminated mussels, Mytilus galloprovincialis. Aquatic Toxicology, 49 (4): 269–287. Ackha, F., Ruiz, S., Zamperon, C, Venier, P., Burgeot, T., Cadet, J., and Narbonne, J. F. 2000. Benzo[a]pyrene- induced DNA damage in Mytilus galloprovincialis. Measurement of bulky DNA adducts and DNA oxidative damage in term of 8-oxo-7,8-dihydro-2'-deoxyguanosine. Biomarkers, 5: 355–367. Akcha, F., Burgeot, T., Venier, P., and Narbonne, J. F. 1999. Relation between kinetics of benzo[a]pyrene bioaccumulatuion and DNA binding in the mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 62: 455–462. Ackha, F., Burgeot, T., Leskowicz, A., Budzinski, H., and Narbonne, J. F. 2000. Induction and removal of bulky B[a]P- related DNA adducts and 8-oxodGuo in mussels Mytilus galloprovincialis exposed in vivo to B[a]P- contaminated feed. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 205: 195–206. Gracey, A. Y., Troll, J. V., and Somero, G. N. 2001. Hypoxia-induced gene expression profiling in the euryoxic fish Gillichthys mirabilis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 98: 1993–1998 Williams, T. D., Gensberg, K., Minchin, S. D., and Chipman, J. K. 2003. A DNA expression array to detect toxic stress response in European flounder (Platichthys flesus). Aquatic Toxicology, 65: 141–157. Katsiadaki, I., Scott, A. P., Hurst, M. R., Matthiessen, P., and Mayer, I. 2002. Detection of environmental androgens: a novel method based on enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay of spiggin, the stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) glue protein. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 21: 1946–1954. Routledge, E. J., and Sumpter, J. P. 1996. Estrogenic activity of surfactants and some of their degradation products assessed using a recombinant yeast screen. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 15: 241–248. Thomas, K. V., Hurst, M. R., Matthiessen, P., and Waldock, M. J. 2001. Identification of oestrogenic compounds in surface and sediment pore water samples collected from industrialised UK estuaries. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 20(10): 2165–2170. 145. Thomas, K. V., Hurst, M. R., Matthiessen, P., McHugh, M., Smith, A., and Waldock, M. J. 2002. An assessment of in vitro androgenic activity and the identification of environmental androgen in United Kingdom estuaries. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 21: 1456–1461. Sohoni, P. and Sumpter, J. P. 1998. Several environmental oestrogens are also anti-androgens. Journal of Endocrinology, 158: 327–39.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 141
Legler, J, van den Brink, C. E., Brouwer, A., Murk, T., van der Saag, P. T., Vethaak, A.D., and van der Burg, B.1999. Development of a stably transfected estrogen receptor-mediated luciferase reporter gene assay in the human T47-D breast cancer cell line. Toxicological Sciences, 48: 55–66. Blanck, H., and Wängberg, S.-Å. 1988. Validity of an ecotoxicological test system: Short-term and long-term effects of arsenate on marine periphyton communities in laboratory systems. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 45: 1807–1815. Molander, S., Dahl, B., Blanck, H., Jonsson, J., and Sjöström, M. 1992. Combined effects of tri-n-butyltin (TBT) and diuron (DCMU) on marine periphytoa communities detected as pollution-induced community tolerance (PICT). Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 22: 419–427. I. Riba., T. A., J. M. Forja., A. Gómez-Parra. 2003. Comparative toxicity of contaminanted sediment from a mining spill using two amphipodos species: Corophium volutator (Palllas, 1976) and Ampelisca brevicornis (A. Costa, 1853). Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 71:1061–1068 Beiras, R. and Saco Alvarez, L. 2006. Toxicity of seawater and sand affected by the Prestige fuel-oil using bivalve and sea urchin embryogenesis bioassays. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution. 177(1–4): 457–466. Martínez-Gómez C., Campillo J. A., Benedicto J., Fernández B., Valdés J., García, I., and Sánchez F. 2006. Monitoring biomarkers in fish (Lepidorhombus boscii and Callionymus lyra) from the Northern Iberian shelf after the Prestige oil spill. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 53(5–7): 305–314. Lee, F. R., Steinert, S. 2003. Use of the single cell gel electrophoresis/comet assay for detecting DNA damage in aquatic (marine and freshwater) animals. Mutation Research, 544, 43–64. Cajaraville M. P., Garmendia L., Orbea A., Werding R., Gómez-Mendiuka A., Izaguirre U., Soto M and Marigómez I. 2006. Signs of recovery of mussels health two years after the Prestige oil spill. Mar. Environ. Res. 62 Suppl:S337–341. Cancio I., Ibabe A., Cajaraville M. P. 1999. Seasonal variation of peroxisomal enzyme activities and peroxisomal structure in mussels Mytilus galloprovincialis and its relationship with the lipid content. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 123, 135–144. Orbea A., and Cajaraville, M. P. 2006. Peroxisome proliferation and antioxidant enzymes in transplanted mussels of four Basque estuaries with different levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon and polychlorinated biphenyl pollution. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 25, 1616–1626. Smolders, R., Bervoets, L., De Coen W., and Blust, R. 2004. Changes in cellular energy allocation in zebra mussels exposed along a pollution gradient: linking cellular effects to higher levels of biological organization. Environmental Pollution 129: 99–112. Al-Sabti, K., and Metcalfe, C. 1995. Fish micronuclei for assessing genotoxicity in water. Mutat Res, 343:121–135. Grisolia, C. K., and Cordeiro, C. M. T. 2000. Variability in micronucleus induction with different mutagens applied to several species of fish. Genetics and Molecular Biology, 23(1):235–239. Bucke, D., Vethaak, A. D., Lang, T. and Mellergaard, S. 1996. Common diseases and parasites of fish in the North Atlantic: Training guide for identification. ICES Techniques in Marine Environmental Sciences, 19, 27 pp. Feist, S. W.; Lang, T., Stentiford, G. D., and Köhler, A. 2004. Biological effects of contaminants: Use of liver pathology of the European flatfish dab (Limanda limanda L.) and flounder (Platichthys flesus L.) for monitoring. ICES Techniques in Marine Environmental Sciences 38, 42 pp. Lang, T.; Wosniok, W.; Barsiene, J.; Broeg, K.; Kopecka, J.; Parkkonen, J. 2006. Liver histopathology in Baltic flounder (Platichthys flesus) as indicator of biological effects of contaminants. Marine Pollution Bulletin 53: 488–496
Source of information
The 2007 report of the Working Group on Biological Effects of Contaminants (WGBEC) and ACME deliberations.
142 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 1.5.6.6 Fish Disease Index - An Assessment Tool
Request
This is part of continuing ICES work to consider new information on the development of tools for biological effects monitoring and ecosystem health assessment.
Recommendations and advice
ICES recommends that OSPAR, HELCOM and ICES Member Countries take note of the progress achieved in relation to the Fish Disease Index (FDI) and the related assessment criteria.
Summary
ICES continued to develop a Fish Disease Index (FDI), the aim of which is to summarise information on the health status of individual fish into one robust and easy-to-understand numeric figure. By applying defined assessment criteria and appropriate statistics, the FDI can be used to assess temporal changes in the health status of fish populations and can, thus, serve as a tool for the assessment of the ecosystem health of the marine environment, e.g. related to the effects of anthropogenic and natural stressors.
The development of the FDI and related assessment criteria is of particular relevance since fish disease monitoring is part of the OSPAR CEMP and since the FDI approach has been adopted in the WKIMON process as component of integrated monitoring and assessment. Furthermore, HELCOM is developing indicators of ecological quality and related targets for the Baltic Sea Action Plan and resulting monitoring and assessment activities and has requested to develop a fish disease indicator to be used in the Baltic Sea in relation to the assessment of effects of hazardous substances.
Scientific background
A summary of the construction of a Fish Disease Index is provided in Annex 11 of the 2007 WGPDMO Report.
The FDI (primarily developed for dab, Limanda limanda, from the North Sea and adjacent areas but also applicable to other species and geographical areas after modification) consists of the following components.
• data on the presence or absence of a range of externally visible diseases and parasites, macroscopic liver neoplasms and liver histopathology; • data on the severity of the diseases (disease grades); • disease-specific weighting factors assigned on the basis of the effects of the diseases on the host; • adjustment factors for confounding entities (length, sex and season).
The calculations involved result in scores for each of the diseases considered which are summarised into the final FDI for an individual fish. This score already contains adjustments for length and sex as well as a weighting scheme for disease severity. From these individual FDIs, mean values in a population in a given sampling area can be calculated and appropriate statistical analyses can be conducted.
The FDI constructed was applied on empirical data derived from fish disease surveys carried out in the North Sea and adjacent areas. Using the common dab in the North Sea as a model, the externally visible lesions of the following diseases were used to illustrate the FDI: lymphocystis, epidermal hyperplasia/papilloma, acute/healing ulceration, X- cell gill disease, hyperpigmentation, acute/healing fin rot/erosion, and the parasites Stephanostomum baccatum, Acanthochondria cornuta, and Lepeophtheirus pectoralis. Macroscopic liver neoplasms and histopathological liver lesions were not considered but will be added at a later stage.
For trend assessment, mean FDI values are adjusted for the season of data collection, additionally to the previous adjustment for sex and length. From these values an assessment statistic is calculated, which jointly accounts for the FDI level and trend. The level component of the statistic is obtained by dividing the FDI range into three equally sized intervals, using tertiles (the 33% and 66% percentile) as cutpoints. FDI means are weighted by -1, 0, +1, according to their position in the lower, middle and upper interval, respectively. The sum of these weights, scaled to lie in the range (-1, +1), serves as the level component of the test statistic. For the trend component of the statistic, a scaled version of the Mann-Kendall trend test statistic is used. The scaled version has values in the range (-1, +1), as the level component. Then the FDI assessment statistic is calculated as (0.5*level component + 0.5*trend component). The factor 0.5 is introduced only to arrive at test statistic with values in the interval (-1,+1), i.e. for aesthetical reasons. More important is
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 143 the fact that here both summands have equal weight, expressing that level and trend component are considered as equally important. Small values of the assessment statistic signal small disease prevalence together with a decreasing trend, high values indicate high prevalence and increasing trend. The statistical distribution of the assessment statistic is obtained by simulation under the null hypothesis of a constant mean prevalence overtime with purely random fluctuation around the mean, i.e. no trend. According to the p value of the assessment statistic, different “smiley faces” were assigned to individual ICES regions. A p < 0.025 resulted in a "green smiley face"; 0.025 < p < 0.975 in a "yellow indifferent face"; and p > 0.975, a "red frowny face". These faces, placed on a chart of the ICES statistical rectangles in the North Sea provide a visual general assessment of levels and trends in overall disease severity.
By applying the FDI to the German data set on diseases of North Sea dab (Limanda limanda) in the period January 2000 – December 2005, the following features were observed:
• long-term temporal trends in the FDI exist; • seasonal patterns in the FDI exist; • the total level of the FDI , long-term trend and seasonal pattern depend on area; • after adjustment for sex, length and season, similar shapes in many of the FDI time series were apparent, however, with level shifts against another; • the FDI assessment statistic shows significant developments (beyond random fluctuation) of the FDI in recent years, In 5 of 11 ICES statistical rectangles that qualified for assessment, there was a development in an undesirable direction (see Fig. 1).
E6 E7 E8 E9 F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 60 °N 48
47 59 °N 46
45 58 °N 44
43 57 °N ☺ 42 41 56 °N 40 39 55 °N 38 37 54 °N 36 35 53 °N 34
33 52 °N 4 °W 2 °W 0 ° 2 °E 4 °E 6 °E 8 °E 10 °E WGPDMO 2007 Figure 1: Representation of recent Fish Disease Index (FDI) trends in North Sea dab (Limanda limanda) by smiley symbols. Green, yellow and red symbols indicate a good, moderate or bad health status, resp., since January 1, 2000. The FDI trend is assessed with respect to trend direction and also to FDI level.
144 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 ICES concludes that:
• the Fish Disease Index (FDI) summarises and visually presents information on trends in the prevalence and severity of disease in wild fish populations; • since assessment criteria for the FDI have been developed, changes in the FDI can serve as an alarm bell that signals undesired developments in fish health, relevant for monitoring and assessment purposes; • its design principle allows the FDI to be applied to other species with other sets of diseases. Therefore, the FDI approach is applicable for wider geographical areas, e.g., as part of the convention-wide OSPAR monitoring and assessment programme;
Source of the information
The 2007 reports of the Working Group on Pathology and Diseases of Marine Organisms (WGPDMO), the Working Group on Biological Effects of Contaminants (WGBEC), the 3rd ICES/OSPAR Workshop on Integrated Assessment of Contaminants and their Effects in Coastal and Open-sea Areas (WKIMON III) and ACME deliberations.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 145 1.5.6.7 New Disease Trends in Wild and Cultured Fish and Shellfish
Request
This is part of continuing ICES work to consider information on new developments with regard to fish and shellfish diseases that is disseminated to ICES Member Countries and relevant organisations in order to inform them of present and potential future problems.
Recommendations and advice
ICES recommends that Member Countries and relevant organisations take note of the information on new disease trends in wild and cultured fish, molluscs and crustaceans.
ICES further recommends that ICES Member Countries continue funding fish disease monitoring programmes to sustain fish health surveillance of wild stocks. Information obtained is of vital importance to integrated assessments of the health of marine ecosystems and will provide useful baseline data, e.g., to serve as a reference prior to establishing the culture of non-salmonid marine species. In addition, fish disease monitoring data will be useful in evaluating the effects of climate change on fish health and provide better understanding of pathogen interactions between wild and farmed fish.
ICES recommends that laboratories running fish disease monitoring programmes participate in the BEQUALM programme in order to achieve implementation of quality assurance procedures needed for acceptance of data for international monitoring and assessment programmes. Member Countries are urged to provide funding for BEQUALM membership fees for participating laboratories.
Based on the review of new developments regarding diseases of wild and farmed fish and shellfish, ICES recommends that Member Countries support further studies on the following specific issues of concern:
• the status of Proliferative Kidney Disease epidemics caused by Tetracapsuloides bryosalmonae in wild freshwater salmonid populations; • causes and effects of the hyperpigmentation observed in North Sea dab (Limanda limanda); • a comparison between Francisella sp. infections in farmed cod (Gadus morhua) and the visceral granulomatous condition in farmed cod and the potential for disease interaction between wild and farmed cod; • increased tolerance by Lepeophtheirus salmonis to chemotherapeutants; • the significance of the newly described picorna-like virus in clam (Ruditapes decussates); • Candidatus xenohaliotis californiensis infection in European abalone (Haliotis tuberculata) in Europe; • gonadal tissue lesions in Pacific oyster (Crassostrea gigas) associated with summer mortalities in Germany, including transmission electron microscopy examination; • gill epithelial cell nuclear virus in soft clams (Mya arenaria).
Summary
This section summarises the most recent information on outbreaks and new disease trends in wild and farmed fish and shellfish (molluscs and crustaceans) submitted by Member Countries.
Information is provided on viral and bacterial diseases as well as on diseases caused by fungi, parasites and other diseases. New findings considered of particular importance are:
146 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Wild Fish • There is a concern that the rapid spread of a new sub-group of VHS virus (IVb) among 40 species of fish that has occurred in the Great Lakes may have a significant impact to the ecology of fishes in the region. • Herpesvirus anguillae, identified for the first time in European eels (Anguilla anguilla) in Sweden and Spain, raises concern that this is an emerging threat. • Francisella sp. associated with visceral granulomatosis was confirmed in Swedish cod (Gadus morhua) for the first time and points to the potential for wild and farmed cod interactions. • There is a potential for significant impact on the striped bass (Morone saxatilis) population in the Chesapeake Bay (USA) due to the high prevalence of visceral mycobacteriosis. • Severe PKD (caused by Tetracapsuloides bryosalmonae) resulting in mass mortality of yearling freshwater Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brown trout (Salmo trutta) in Norway was noted in association with increased temperature, raising concern for the sustainability of wild salmonid populations. • A declining trend of Lepeophtheirus salmonis observed in British Columbia on juvenile pink (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) and chum (O. keta) salmon may be associated with chemotherapeutant treatment of adjacent farm populations. • The prevalence of Anisakis simplex larvae in Baltic herring (Clupea harengus membras) continued to decline since 1997. • Hyperpigmentation in North Sea dab (Limanda limanda) is one of the most prevalent anomalies observed and continues to increase in prevalence in some areas. • Laboratory exposures of mummichogs (Fundulus heteroclitus) to creosote, conducted under environmentally realistic conditions, produced hepatic neoplasms similar to those found in wild mummichogs collected from creosote contaminated sites.
Farmed Fish
• Heart and skeletal muscle inflammation (HSMI) and cardiomyopathy syndrome (CMS) are of concern for the fish farming industries of Norway and Scotland. • New diseases or new biotypes are emerging, including Edwardsiella in turbot (Scophthalmus maximus), Francisella in cod (Gadus morhua), amoebic gill disease in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and Vibrio vulnificus in eel (Anguilla anguilla). • There is circumstantial evidence of increased tolerance by Lepeophtheirus salmonis to chemotherapeutants.
Wild and Farmed Shellfish
• An enzootic Bonamia sp. parasitising the non-commercial native crested oyster (Osteola equestris) and first identified in South Carolina, USA, in 2004 during testing of the non-native Asian oyster (Crassostrea ariakensis), was detected in crested oysters at a new site, 500 km south of the original site, indicating its endemic status over a wider range than previously known. • The only known spore-forming species of Bonamia (B. perspora) has been described from the crested oyster (Ostreola equestris) from South Carolina, USA. • Bonamia ostreae was diagnosed for the first time in flat oyster (Ostrea edulis) from Scotland and Wales. • Up to 85% prevalence of virus infections in the nucleus of gill epithelial cells of the soft clam (Mya arenaria) have been detected for the past three years (2004–2006) in Chesapeake Bay (USA). An identical condition was first described from M. arenaria in Massachusetts, USA, in 1972 but has not been reported since. • Abnormally large basophilic cells in gonadal tissues that resemble cells characteristic of ovocystis disease (Viral Gametocytic Hypertrophy) were reported for the first time in Pacific oyster (Crassostrea gigas) in Germany (German Wadden Sea). • Picorna-like virus particles were described for the first time in European clams (Ruditapes decussatus) originating from a hatchery located in southern England with the absence of clinical signs and mortality. • Candidatus xenohaliotis californiensis, the causative agent of Withering Syndrome was detected in European abalone (Haliotis tuberculata) for the first time in four Irish hatcheries with the absence of clinical signs. • The first case of haematopoietic neoplasia was reported in a hard clam (Mercenaria mercenaria) from waters near New York City, USA.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 147 Scientific background
The distribution and prevalence of the diseases in wild and farmed fish and shellfish is monitored closely by ICES Member Countries with special attention to those listed below. The update presented in the following section is based on national reports for 2006 submitted to the ICES by Canada, Denmark, England and Wales, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Latvia, Norway, Poland, Russian, Scotland, Spain, Sweden, The Netherlands, and USA. It documents significant observations and highlights the major trends in newly emerging diseases and in those identified as being important in previous years.
Common and Scientific Names of Host Fish and Shellfish Species Reported
Asian oyster (Crassostrea ariakensis) Hermit crab (common) (Pagurus bernhardus) Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) Japanese carpet clam (Ruditapes phillipinarum) Baltic herring (Clupea harengus membras) Largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) Baltic macoma clam (Macoma balthica) Mummichog (Fundulus heteroclitus) Blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis) Northern abalone (Haliotis kamtschatkana) Bream (Abramis brama) Norwegian lobster (Nephrops norvegicus) Brown trout (Salmo trutta) Pacific oyster (Crassostrea gigas) Capelin (Mallotus villosus) Pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) Chinese mitten crab (Eriochier sinensis) Pollack (Pollachius pollachius) Chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) Red fish (Sebastes mentella) Cod (Gadus morhua) Red king crab (Paralithodes camtschaticus) Crested oyster (Ostreola equestris) Red turban snail (Astraea gibberosa) Dab (Limanda limanda) Sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) Eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) Seabream (Pagellus bogaraveo) European abalone (Haliotis tuberculata) Soft shell clam (Mya arenaria) European clam (Ruditapes decussatus) Sole (Solea senegalensis) European edible crab (Cancer pagurus) Spot (Leiostomus xanthurus) European eel (Anguilla anguilla) Striped bass (Morone saxatilis) European flounder (Platichthys flesus) Striped killifish (Fundulus majalis) European lobster (Homarus gammarus) Turbot (Scophthalmus maximus) Flat oyster (Ostrea edulis) Tusk (Brosme brosme) Fourbeard rockling (Enchelyopus cimbrius) Weakfish (Cynoscion regalis) Great scallop (Pecten maximus) White perch (Morone americana) Haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus) Whiting (Merlangius merlangus) Halibut (Hippoglossus hippoglossus) Winter flounder (Pseudopleuronectes Hard clam (Mercenaria mercenaria) americanus)
Wild Fish
Viruses
Viral Haemorrhagic Septicaemia Virus (VHSV) – The virus has spread rapidly further in the Great Lakes (USA and Canada) and was detected in Lake Erie, Lake Ontario, Lake St. Clair, the St. Lawrence River and most recently in Lake Huron. Mortalities have been reported in 15 fish species and the virus has been isolated from more than 40 species in the Great Lakes. Genotyping indicates this pathogen should be considered sublineage IVb, distinct from the other North American types (IVa).
Lymphocystis - The prevalence of lymphocystis in dab in the German Bight, North Sea, continued to be low. The prevalence of 2.7% recorded in Aug./Sept. 2006 was among the lowest ever recorded (since 1981). German Bight data suggested the prevalence of lymphocystis is higher in winter compared to summer. In European flounder from the Polish EEZ of the Baltic Sea the prevalence of lymphocystis increased only in subdivision 25 compared to previous years. In Baltic herring from Polish waters the prevalence decreased to a very low level (0.05%).
Herpesvirus anguillae (HVA) - HVA was isolated from diseased European eel in Lake Mälaren. This represents the first isolation of HVA from Sweden. The virus was also found in wild eels one month after capture on the Mediterranean Spanish coast. This is the first isolation of HVA in Spain.
148 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Bacteria
Acute/healing skin ulcerations – Russian data showed the prevalence of ulcers in European flounder collected in March was 0.3% from the Russian EEZ (ICES Subdivision 26) and 1.7% from the Polish EEZ (ICES Subdivision 26). Polish data collected between November and February confirmed the low prevalence of skin ulcers in flounder sampled in ICES Subdivision 25 and 26 (0.26%).
The prevalence in dab from the German Bight, the Firth of Forth (North Sea, Scotland) and Rye Bay has decreased compared to 2005. In dab at West Dogger Bank, an increase has been observed (6.2% to 13.0%). A prevalence of 4.7% in dab at Flamborough was the highest observed since 1993.
The prevalence in Baltic cod from the Russian EEZ was 2.2%, 2.3% and 1.4% in March, August and October, respectively. The prevalence in the Polish EEZ (ICES Subdivision 26) was 2.6% in March and 0.85% in October. Polish surveys revealed an increasing trend from 2004 to 2006. The highest prevalence of 5% was observed in Subdivision 26.
Francisella sp. - A Francisella sp. has been confirmed in cod collected from the Skagerrak on the west coast of Sweden in 2004 and stored frozen. The genetic sequence of the Swedish isolate was almost identical to a Norwegian isolate. Clinical signs included external skin lesions and whitish granulomas in many internal organs. This represents the first isolate from Sweden. Koch’s postulates were established using Swedish isolates in an experimental study with Atlantic cod in Scotland. Joint work between FRS, Aberdeen, and the National Veterinary Institute, Sweden, is being planned to develop diagnostic methods. Cases of a similar but undiagnosed visceral granulomatosis, were reported in 2006 in juvenile cod angled off the Norfolk coast (UK). The potential for infections in the mid-1980s is being assessed through analysis of archived tissues from wild cod that exhibited visceral granulomatosis.
Mycobacterium spp. - Approximately 15 Mycobacterium spp. have been reported from diseased striped bass collected from the Chesapeake Bay, Maryland, USA. The predominant isolate belongs to the M. chesapeakii-shotsii- pseudoshottsii complex. The infection and disease in Chesapeake Bay striped bass are age dependent with prevalence up to 80% in age-6 fish. The most severe disease occurs in the late summer and fall. Vertical transmission is suggested by the isolation of mycobacteria from reproductive fluids. Mycobacteria have also been identified in blueback herring, winter flounder, striped killifish, mummichog, largemouth bass, weakfish, spot and white perch from Chesapeake Bay. The disease occurs as either visceral granulomatous lesions or skin lesions. Skin pathology may be a non-lethal indicator of overall disease and a predictor of visceral lesions. The impact of mycobacteriosis on populations of striped bass in Chesapeake Bay is unclear. Results of a recent workshop on Mycobacteriosis were compiled and published online (http://www.nccos.noaa.gov/documents/SIR2006-5214-complete.pdf).
Vibrio vulnificus – The bacterium was isolated from eels from coastal areas in southern Zealand, Denmark. High mortalities were observed and clinical signs included widespread external haemorrhages. The bacterium was also isolated from the water and these observations have been linked to unusually high water temperatures.
Parasites
Diplomonadida
Spironucleus torosa - Identified in three gadoid species: tusk, whiting, and fourbeard rockling. The whiting and fourbeard rockling were caught in the southern Baltic Sea. The tusk was caught in the Northern Oslo Fjord.
Myxozoa
Tetracapsuloides bryosalmonae – Proliferative kidney disease (PKD) was identified for the first time in yearling Atlantic salmon and brown trout experiencing significant mortalities in two Norwegian rivers, concurrent with increased water temperature.
Trematoda
Data from bream from the Russian EEZ of the Curonian Lagoon (Baltic Sea) revealed the prevalence of “black spot” (metacercaria of Posthodiplostomum cuticola) was 7.0% in May, 43.0% in July and 25.0% in October. The prevalences of parasitic cataracts caused by metaceracariae of Diplostomum spathaceum and Tylodelphys clavata, and of gross external parasites were low (< 2%).
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 149 Nematoda
Anisakis simplex (larvae) – A long-term decreasing trend in prevalence of infection of A. simplex among Baltic herring in the Polish and Russian EEZs continued. As previously reported, the prevalence remained negatively correlated with the mean mass of individual herring. Since 2004 in the Barents Sea, prevalences greater than 85% have been observed in cod, redfish and haddock. However, in those species there was a trend of increasing parasite abundance. The abundance increased in cod from approximately 10 to 30; in redfish from 4 to 16.7 and in haddock from 10.3 to 24.4. In contrast, prevalence and abundance in capelin both increased during this period from 24% to 54% and from 0.4 to 0.9, respectively.
Pseudoterranova decipiens (larvae) – A decreasing trend in prevalence (40% to 0%) was observed in cod from the Barents Sea between 2003 and 2006.
Philometra ovata – The prevalence in bream from the Curonian Lagoon (Baltic Sea) ranged from 14.5% in July to 1.2 % in October.
Crustacea
Lepeophtheirus salmonis – There was a declining trend in the prevalence and intensity of salmon lice on early marine phase pink and chum salmon in British Columbia. Since 2004 the prevalence has dropped from 63% to 14% and abundance has dropped from 2.6 lice per pink salmon and 7.1 lice per chum salmon to 0.2 lice per fish of both species.
Lepeophtheirus pectoralis - The prevalence in dab from hot spot areas of the North Sea (German Bight, Dogger Bank) has decreased since 2004 but still seems to be elevated compared to the long-term average.
Other diseases
Hyperpigmentation – The prevalence in North Sea dab remained high in the majority of examined areas (German Bight, Dogger Bank and Firth of Forth). A prevalence of 53% was observed in the German Bight, the highest ever recorded in this area. This is consistent with long-term data showing a dramatic increase over the past 20 years.
Liver nodules – The prevalence in dab increased, especially in the German Bight, North Sea, and in some areas of the Irish Sea. A similar trend was recorded in flounder from the German Bight.
Hepatic neoplasia - Recorded in mummichogs from creosote-contaminated sites in the USA. Laboratory exposures of mummichogs to creosote conducted under environmentally realistic conditions produced similar hepatic neoplasms.
Epidermal hyperplasia and skin papilloma – The prevalence of these conditions in bream from the Russian EEZ of the Curonian Lagoon (Baltic Sea) was highest in May (28% epidermal hyperplasia; 34% skin papilloma).
Toxic algae - Aphanizomenon flosaquae and Microcystis aeruginosa were found in the Curonian Lagoon (Russian EEZ of the Baltic). Widespread tissue damage in visceral organs of bream was associated with the algae.
A metal-containing exotoxin produced by Pfiesteria piscicida was recently identified during experimental studies conducted in the USA. The toxin required specific environmental conditions for production and rapidly degraded into lethal free radicals.
M74 Syndrome – An increasing trend in Atlantic salmon fry was recorded in Sweden between 2004 and 2006 (3% to 18%).
Farmed Fish
Viruses
Heart and skeletal muscle inflammation (HSMI) – An increase in HSMI is reported from Norwegian marine farms rearing Atlantic salmon, from 54 cases in 2004 to 94 in 2006.
Infectious Pancreatic Necrosis Virus (IPNV) –IPNV in Ireland has caused low level losses in Atlantic salmon marine sites. However, more serious problems were encountered in the freshwater phase of production with losses up to 30%
Infectious Salmon Anaemia Virus (ISAV) – The number of Atlantic salmon farms in Norway with ISA has declined from 12 to 4 between 2005 and 2006. There are no new trends in Canada, although ISA is still present in the Bay of
150 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Fundy. The USA and Canada have implemented a single bay management area for ISA that covers all Maine and New Brunswick sites in Cobscook and Passamaquoddy Bays.
Salmonid Alphavirus (also known as Salmon Pancreas Disease Virus) – An increase in occurrence of pancreas disease (PD) in farmed Atlantic salmon is reported in Norway. PD also causes serious problems for Atlantic salmon in Ireland, although losses appear to have stabilised in 2006.
Viral Nervous Necrosis Virus (VNNV) – VNNV was observed for the first time in farmed cod in Norway. Sequenced PCR products show similarity to virus causing VNN in halibut. Nodavirus also was detected for the first time in turbot in Spain with prevalence less than 5% in asymptomatic carriers.
Viral Haemorrhagic Septicaemia Virus (VHSV) – VHSV was detected in sole in Spain for the first time, with no associated mortality.
Bacteria
Aeromonas salmonicida and Tenacibaculum maritimum – Despite the use of vaccines and the concomitant decrease in outbreaks, significant losses continue in turbot in Spain due to these two bacterial species.
Edwardsiella tarda – The strains isolated from turbot in Spain belong to a new serotype and hence are different from those reported in other fish species. An experimental vaccine gave good protection (better than 80%) but the duration of immunity requires further work.
Francisella – Francisella is one of the main bacterial infections of cod in Norway. Six cod culture sites in Norway were diagnosed with francisellosis and there are strong indications that more cases occurred. Significant problems with francisellosis have been reported, with some affected stocks being destroyed. Information for early 2007 indicates that this trend is continuing.
Photobacterium damsela subsp. piscicida (Pasteurellosis) – Incidence was greater than 45% in seabream from the Canary Islands.
Listonella (Vibrio) anguillarum - During routine analysis the serotype O2 was isolated from asymptomatic pollack in Spain. L. anguillarum is a significant problem of cod in Norway.
Vibrio vulnificus biotype 2, serotype A - Reported from eel farmed on the Spanish Mediterranean coast. This is a new serotype for this area and rarely reported from farmed fish.
Vibrio sp. - Feed strategies in sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) culture have resulted in a fatty liver syndrome and secondary Vibrio infections in The Netherlands.
Parasites
Protista
Amoebic gill disease (AGD) - The first occurrence of AGD (Neoparamoeba) in Scotland was reported from farmed Atlantic salmon in October. Stress during well boat transfer probably resulted in increased infestation and consequent gill pathology.
Cestoda
Eubothrium sp. – The prevalence of this cestode is declining in Norway, but the parasite caused significant losses in marine Atlantic salmon and rainbow trout farms due to reduced growth and is becoming resistant to therapeutic treatment (Praziquantel).
Myxozoa
Enteromyxum scophthalmi - Infection resulted in reduced growth in juvenile turbot in Spain.
Monogenea
Gyrodactylus marinus – Gill infestations have resulted in mortality in cod in Norway.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 151 Ciliophora
Miamiensis avidus (Philasterides dicentrarchi) – Infection by this ciliate has continued to result in significant mortality of turbot in Spain, increasing by 10-20% over a 2 year period.
Crustacea
Sea lice – Infestation by Caligus elongatus and C. curtus are increasing in farmed cod in Norway, whereas Atlantic salmon sea lice numbers are kept low through the use of wrasse and emamectin benzoate. Lepeophtheirus salmonis in Ireland is proving increasingly difficult to control as lice appear to be tolerant to authorised chemotherapeutants.
Other diseases
Cardiomyopathy syndrome (CMS) – Cardiac lesions attributed to CMS result in significant losses in some Atlantic salmon in Norway, particularly large salmon that are ready for market.
Gill disorders – These represent a growing problem and the most significant losses (1% to 80%) of Atlantic salmon in Ireland. Further studies are planned in relation to epidemiology, challenge experiments and dietary supplements. Neoparamoeba sp. is considered to be a secondary invader.
Algal blooms - Losses of farmed Atlantic salmon attributed to Karenia mikimotoi coupled with other factors including high stocking densities and losses due to jellyfish, including Lions mane (Cyanea capillata), occurred in Scotland. Biomass loss amounted to 109.7 tons between August and October.
Wild And Farmed Molluscs And Crustaceans
Viruses
Herpesviruses in bivalves - No change reported in France and no new information from the USA.
Viral gametocytic hypertrophy - Continued to be rare in Pacific oysters in France. Histological examination of Pacific oysters in Germany (German Wadden Sea) revealed cases of abnormally large basophilic cells in gonadal tissues that resemble cells characteristic of ovocystis disease (viral gametocytic hypertrophy). However, the viral aetiology has not yet been demonstrated.
Picorna-like virus - Following mortalities of stock exported to France, samples of juvenile European clams from the source hatchery in southern England were analysed. Using transmission electron microscopy, these were found to contain picorna-like virus particles in their connective tissue cells. Mortalities were not experienced in the hatchery. Moreover, amplicons were obtained using primers targeting picornavirus for PCR analysis of animals collected during the mortality outbreak occurring in France. The finding needs to be verified using complementary molecular analyses.
Gill Epithelial Cell Nuclear Virus – Non-enveloped viral particles were reported among soft clam samples collected in 2006 from Chesapeake Bay, USA, suffering from a condition first noted in 2004 as gill lesions including intranuclear inclusions. The prevalence of this viral infection is high (85%). Similar viral lesions were previously described in the literature in soft clams collected during 1972 from Massachusetts.
White Spot Syndrome Virus - No new information from the USA.
Bacteria
Nocardiosis - No new trend in Canada and no new information from the USA. Nocardia crassostreae was isolated for the first time from Pacific oysters during mortalities in August 2006 in Lake Grevelingen, the Netherlands. Nocardia- like infections have been observed in routine monitoring for shellfish diseases since 2003 in Pacific oysters as well as flat oysters in the Dutch estuaries. Primary cause of the mortalities in 2006 was thought to be prolonged high water temperatures and low oxygen.
Withering syndrome – No new information from the USA. Candidatus xenohaliotis californiensis, the causative agent of Withering Syndrome was detected in moribund European abalone in Spain among animals exported from Ireland. A follow-up investigation indicated that the pathogen is present in four Irish hatcheries but in each case, the infection was sub-clinical.
Vibrio tapetis - Positive PCR results were obtained for Vibrio tapetis from two sites growing Japanese crested clams in Ireland while the brown ring disease was not observed.
152 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 Vibrio spp. - In France some isolates of V. splendidus were reported in association with mortality of spat of great scallops. Norwegian lobsters landed in Skagen (Denmark) in February 2006 had lesions penetrating through the shell that appeared similar to “shell disease”. The bacteria isolated from the lesions of five lobsters were identified as Vibrio spp.
Juvenile oyster disease (JOD) – A JOD outbreak, diagnosed by PCR detection of Roseovarius crassostreae, occurred in an Eastern oyster hatchery in Connecticut, USA. The occurrence was the first for this hatchery. JOD continues to be a problem on Martha’s Vineyard, off of Massachusetts, USA. Outbreaks are variable from year to year in Massachusetts but tend to recur in the same locations.
Rickettsia - Rickettsia-like organisms were associated with abnormal mortality in spat of great scallops in France.
Gaffkaemia - Gaffkaemia (Aerococcus viridans) was confirmed in European lobsters held at a storage facility in South Wales (UK) following reports of mortalities at this facility. Haemolymph smears and culture were also undertaken on lobsters from a storage facility in North Yorkshire (UK), following reports of Gaffkaemia at the receiving storage site in France. All these tests were negative. Further investigations into the outbreak in Wales are planned. Gaffkaemia was also recorded in September 2006 in Scotland from a batch of lobsters destined for export. The consignment was destroyed. This is the first occurrence of gaffkaemia in Scotland since 1991.
Fungal Infections
Cladosporium herbarum (Hyphomycetes) - The fungus was isolated from ulcers and hemolymph of diseased and moribund red king crab in the Barents Sea (Russian EEZ).
Parasites
Protista
Bonamia ostreae - Bonamia ostreae was detected in flat oysters for the first time in Lough Swilly (NW Ireland) in 2006 associated with significant mortalities. This is the nearest bay to L. Foyle which was found to be infected in 2005. The parasite has spread despite movement restrictions and an epidemiological investigation is ongoing.
B. ostreae was confirmed in native flat oysters in Loch Sunart in south west Lochaber (Scotland) in April 2006. This represents the first occurrence of this parasite in Scotland and was found during routine statutory monitoring. It is not known how or when the disease was introduced to Loch Sunart. The parasite was also detected for the first time in Wales (UK) during 2006. The original positive sample was taken from a natural bed of native flat oysters in the River Cleddau. Results from further sampling have shown that the disease organism is present at a low level of prevalence throughout the fishery areas in Milford Haven (south Wales).
Overall the prevalence of infection of B. ostreae in native flat oysters at farm sites and in fisheries in England and Wales increased during 2006 compared with 2005. The mean prevalence of infection in fisheries was the highest recorded in 14 years of sampling. The average for all fishery sites was 7.3%, compared with 4.5% the previous year and a ten-year average of 4.5%. Some east-coast fishery sites showed high levels of infection, boosting the average figure. This area has seen good natural recruitment in recent years and it may be that these increased levels of infection were a response to increasing densities of oysters on the bottom.
No change was found in France and Spain.
Bonamia perspora - A description of this unique spore-forming Bonamia species, known only from the crested oyster in South Carolina, USA, was published in 2006. There were no changes in its activity or distribution.
Bonamia sp. - The Bonamia sp. in the experimentally introduced Asian oyster was also found in the native crested oyster from southern South Carolina, USA. PCR prevalence was 2/55 (3.6%), and Bonamia sp. cells were confirmed histologically. This finding expands the known range of this parasite by 500 km south of the site where it was originally found and confirms its status as an enzootic parasite.
Haplosporidium nelsoni – Haplosporidium nelsoni (MSX) in eastern oysters in the Bras d’Or Lakes, Nova Scotia, Canada has persisted in that location and expanded its range since 2002 to three new sites within the Lakes. In 2005, MSX was confirmed outside of the Bras d’Or Lakes and in 2006 a second site was confirmed on the north shore of Cape Breton. Both locations had historic oyster transfers from the Bras d’Or Lakes prior to 2002. Active surveillance of a buffer area around Cape Breton and oysters in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence is ongoing. No evidence has been found to date of the presence of H. nelsoni (or H. costale) in historic samples from within the Bras d’Or Lakes.
ICES Advice 2007, Book 1 153 Severe infections of H. nelsoni in eastern oysters, which resulted in heavy mortality, were recorded in 80 to 100% of 2- year old oysters collected from 5 different leases on the north side of Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA in late autumn 2006. H. nelsoni infection levels were low and caused no apparent problems elsewhere in its range along the east coast of the USA.
Haplosporidium sp. – A Haplosporidium sp. was detected during monitoring of local populations of European abalone in Spain but was not associated with disease. This is the first discovery of Haplosporidium sp. since monitoring began more than a year ago, after Haplosporidium was discovered in abalone transported to Spain from Ireland.
Microsporidia - A new genus and species has been described from the European edible crab (Cancer pagurus) and the common hermit crab captured in the UK. The new genus, Enterospora, is an intranuclear parasite and the first of its type described in an invertebrate host. No data is available on the impact of this pathogen on host populations. Another microsporidian parasite has been described infecting Chinese mitten crabs captured from the River Thames, UK, at up to 60% prevalence. The parasite is likely to be the same as that recently described during 2006 from the Chinese mitten crab from their native habitat in Asia, suggesting that the invasion of UK rivers by this crab species has also introduced an exotic microsporidian pathogen. No studies have been carried out on the transmission of this pathogen to other hosts or on the effect of the pathogen on populations of mitten crabs.
Kidney coccidian - A kidney coccidian, morphologically similar to Margolisiella (=Pseudoklossia) haliotis, was found in cultured northern abalone in British Columbia, Canada. Affected animals were considered as 'runts' (3 year old) and had a prevalence of 91%. Morphologically similar coccidia were detected at low levels in the kidney of red turban snails adjacent to the abalone hatchery effluent outlet. Subsequently, kidney coccidia were found in red turban snails over a wide distribution in BC. Research to identify the genetic relationship between the coccidia in the abalone and red turban snails is in progress.
Hematodinium - Hematodinium sp. was detected in 8.9% of male and 4.1% in female Norwegian lobsters from the Swedish west coast during July and August 2006, respectively, this being the highest prevalence recorded for five years. The infection was found in trawl-caught animals but not in those collected by trapping.
Crustacea
Parasite-associated mortality - Mortalities were investigated in lobsters in two on-growing facilities in Ireland. Gill damage associated with the copepod Nicothoe astaci was identified in each case.
Other diseases
Summer Mortality - As in the summer of 2005, considerable mortalities of Pacific oysters were noted at stations along the German coast of Lower Saxony (Wadden Sea) in July and in November 2006 (an exceptionally warm autumn). Juveniles were more frequently affected than adults and mortality was more severe in inner harbour areas as compared to outer areas. Histopathological changes in gonads, digestive tract and gill tissues have been reported for the 2005 samples; 2006 samples are still under investigation and a viral aetiology is suspected.
Neoplasms - Disseminated neoplasia occurring in the Baltic macoma clam continues to be a serious problem in the low biodiversity ecosystem of the Gulf of Gdańsk, Poland, with an average prevalence of 18%. Prevalences of disseminated neoplasia were low in samples of soft clams collected from the Chesapeake Bay, USA, during 2006. A single hard clam collected from waters near New York City was diagnosed with haematopoietic neoplasia. This condition has not previously been described in hard clams.
Source of the information
The 2007 report of the ICES Working Group on Pathology and Diseases of Marine Organisms (WGPDMO) and ACME deliberations
154 ICES Advice 2007, Book 1