Biodiversity Monitoring Along the Israeli Coast of the Mediterranean - Activities and Accumulated Data Israel Oceanographic and Limnological Research Contribution

Biodiversity monitoring along the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean - activities and accumulated data Israel Oceanographic and Limnological Research contribution

Israel Oceanographic and Limnological Research (IOLR) חקר ימים ואגמים לישראל IOLR report H19/2013 חקר ימים ואגמים לישראל בע"מ .Israel Oceanographic & Limnological Research Ltd תל-שקמונה, ת"ד 8030, חיפה Tel-Shikmona, P.O.B. 8030, Haifa 31080 פקס : Fax: 972-4-8511911 טלפון : Tel: 972-4-8565200 http://www.ocean.org.il

Biodiversity monitoring along the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean - IOLR’s activities and accumulated data

IOLR Report H19/2013

By (alphabetic order)

Galil Bella, Gertman Isaac, Gordon Nurit, Herut Barak, Israel Alvaro, Lubinevsky Hadas, Rilov Gil, Rinkevich Buki, Tibor Gideon and Tom Moshe

April 2013

חקר ימים ואגמים לישראל בע"מ .Israel Oceanographic & Limnological Research Ltd תל-שקמונה, ת"ד 8030, חיפה Tel-Shikmona, P.O.B. 8030, Haifa 31080 פקס : Fax: 972-4-8511911 טלפון : Tel: 972-4-8565200 http://www.ocean.org.il

Executive summary

This report summarizes IOLR’s contribution to monitoring the biodiversity of the Mediterranean marine environment neighboring the Israeli coastline. The report is aimed at outlining the scope of activities that were carried out at IOLR during the last two decades in the contest of the biodiversity in the Mediterranean coast of Israel. These activities are ongoing at present resulting with data and organized datasets, as well as scientific publications. Above 600 scientific papers related to the issue were published in the last 120 years (many by non-Israeli scientists), about 240 of them with the participation of IOLR and the former Sea Fisheries Research Station scientists. The status and trends of biodiversity along the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean is out of the scope of this report. The accomplishment and further development of the bioecological database would enable comprehensive long-term biodiversity analysis.

The biotic composition along the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean has experienced continuous radical alterations in the last three centuries resulting from ecological and bio-geographic changes caused by intensive anthropogenic interference, radically affecting biodiversity, in addition to natural, not necessarily identified causes. The opening of the Suez Canal, the damming of the Nile River and the fast urbanization along the Mediterranean coast of Israel, has been affecting immensely the local biota. Major terrestrial-borne stressors involved the heedless development along the coast, including industrial and domestic sewage outflow and industrial installations. Intensive fishing is another major culprit for the changes in species diversity and abundance. Recently, deep-water drilling for oil and gas has been started, having their potential impact on the deep water biota. For the coming years it is envisaged that anthropogenic activities in the Israeli Mediterranean marine realm may intensify the detrimental impacts.

Continuous multi-annual biotic and oceanographic monitoring is an absolute necessity for identifying these major changes in biodiversity, understanding their reasons and implementing preventive measures, when necessary. During the last 23 years, in the framework of compliance and targeted projects, IOLR has made continuous biotic monitoring efforts, pursued by ecological analyses and experimentation. Changes in the biotic composition and ecological trends have been observed and documented, efforts that are being continued and intensified at present. Better methodologies that are being constantly developed or introduced from external sources, aim at

3 improving the data acquisition and analytical systems. In view of the planned anthropogenic activities, the outcome of past studies and on-going research activities are being integrated into a framework, which would permit multi-annual comparisons and better prediction of future changes, for improved marine governance. The effects of global changes will be analyzed as well. Future policies will also be conforming to the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD; DIRECTIVE 2008/56/EC) and the Barcelona convention-related protocol.

Observations and studies on biodiversity along the Mediterranean coasts of Israel have initiated during the 1890s, broadened by numerous studies of Israeli scientists as well as by scientists from abroad. Many of the earliest ecological studies related to the various Israeli Mediterranean habitats were conducted in Israeli universities. However, the major contribution to the biodiversity state-of- the-art in the Israeli Mediterranean Sea has been performed by scientists from the Fisheries Research Station at Haifa, founded by the Jewish Agency, later appended to the Israeli Ministry of Agriculture, and lastly became the IOLR.

From its foundation (1967) and primarily in the last 23 years, much work has been performed at IOLR on the Israeli Mediterranean biodiversity (see summarizing table). Hundreds of publications (scientific articles, dissertations and IOLR reports) have been archived at IOLR library including very rare ones. This report summarizes this contribution according to three major habitats: benthic soft substrates biota, benthic hard substrates biota and plankton. Cross-habitat activities are the development of molecular taxonomy tools to enable easier monitoring of the ever-changing biotic composition and the construction of a bio-geographical-ecological web-connected database. A scientific topic of importance in the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean is the bio-invasion which got specific attention.

IOLR’s activities, abilities and available data are detailed in the full report below. An important aspect of the studies done by IOLR is continuity. Being a governmental entity we are committed to a multi-annual and continuous investigation of biodiversity along the coasts of Israel.

Biodiversity monitoring – summary of activities accomplished by IOLR in the last 23 years

Infauna soft Epifauna soft Tidal Rocky Parameters Plankton substrate substrate platforms reefs

Years 1992-2013 1991-2013 2009-2013 2010-2013 2002-2013

Water depth range [m] 1-1500 5-1570 Tidal zone 2-34 3-60

No. of sampled sites 1078 299 11 9 312

*No. of sampled taxa a 310 a 203 72 b 50; c 172 d 540

Indices of activity e 3,336,542 e 295,665 f 3893 g 255 capacity *General comment: not all specimens were identified to the species level (see Barcoding section for more detailed discussion). a No. of taxa sampled from soft substrate, b No. of sampled “live” rocks, c No. of taxa identified from the “live” rocks, d No. of sampled plankton species. Specimens < 15 um were not identified, e No. of sampled specimens, f No. of intertidal quadrants, g No. of sub-tidal transects accomplished through diving.

Soft bottom – The soft substrate monitoring consists of intensive sampling and analysis over more than twenty years across depths ranging from coastal waters to the abyss. Two highlights of this activity are: (a) the long-term novel investigation of the abyssal benthos, accomplished by a special deep water trawl, has revolutionized the perception of the deep water fauna of the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean. (2) The multi-annual sampling of infauna, a faunal component which had been studied very little along our Mediterranean coasts and offshore waters. Prominent part of the faunistic aspects of these studies had already been published but a considerable body of crude data is still archived in IOLR.

Hard bottom – The hard bottom of the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean is located in the intertidal zone or completely submerged in waters of various depths. The intertidal plates were studied during the last decades of the 20th century, while the submerged reefs have been poorly explored, with the exception of several intensively studied species. Since 2009, the ongoing intensive research on both types of substrates, has already amassed remarkable body of data and analyses .The relative complexity of this habitat and its various morphological appearances required the development and implementation of a variety of evaluation methods aimed at specific fractions of the biota. These included counting of biotic species along transects in quadrants, visual inspection of more motile species while moving along larger areas assisted by scooters, sampling of hard substrate, and 5 analyzing it in the laboratory. A variety of methods and facilities have been employed, including manual counting, photography, and several technical sampling procedures for chiseling rocks assisted by pneumatic equipment. Study of the submerged reefs was done through diving. The highlights of this study are the multi-annual monitoring and ecological study of the intertidal zone, better documentation of the biota, ecological insight into the recently occurring habitat changes and laying the foundation for better follow-up of future changes. The second topic has been the study on the submerged reefs, down to 35 m depth. Most of the study has been carried out in Haifa Bay with its two types of hard substrate, the Carmel limestone and the sandstone (kurkar) ridges. This study has resulted in a much broader inventory of the biota and its spatial and temporal distribution, which is being analyzed at present (see relationships with the molecular taxonomy below).

Plankton - mainly phytoplankton has been studied since 2001 on annual basis, aiming at identifying algal species associated with harmful blooms and algal responses to eutrophication, used as biomarkers of anthropogenic nutrient overload. This monitoring is composed of sampling at sea and remote sensing. The highlights of the plankton studies, besides a considerable broadening of the floral inventory are: (a) identifying algal blooms and other indications of high nutrient load in Haifa Bay and (b) establishing the Satellite Information System on Coastal Area and Lakes (SISCAL) remote system, providing more immediate alert on plumes of increasing chlorophyll levels along our coasts, indicating their point of origin.

Cross-habitat activities Molecular taxonomy – The species and its sub-populations are major measurement units in bio- geography and population ecology. Therefore taxonomy, namely, species identification and variants evaluation is an important tool in this context. It has been based for more than two centuries on morphology and anatomy of the identified species, requiring a great deal of taxon- related specialization. Morpho-anatomical taxonomy has three disadvantages, a technical one, the scarcity of able taxonomists for many groups of organisms, and two substantial ones: its difficulty to assign different life stages to their parent species, an important ability in marine environments, and its difficulty to distinguish accurately sub-populations of the same species. With the advance of molecular tools, species and population-specific DNA sequences have been employed in taxonomy and population ecology designated barcoding. This system has recently been established by IOLR and is currently used intensively to better distinguish and identify the existing biota along the Israeli coasts. Our first barcoding project has been the identification of the fauna and flora of the submerged hard substrate and that of the epibenthos of sandy substrate. A second project is the 6 identification of new Indo-pacific immigrants to the Mediterranean. The achievements include the documentation of more than 350 species-specific DNA sequences. In addition, long term ecological research on the bio-geography and ecological changes, including population genetics were performed on selective species (both invasive and native species).

Bio-geographic and ecological computerized database – scientifically documented biodiversity material related to the Mediterranean adjacent to Israel has been systematically acquired since the 1890s. The ability to analyze this long term data and its exposed trends would be of great importance to the long term ecological study of the Israeli Mediterranean environment. A considerable part of this documentation, emphasizing relatively old and rare documents, but extremely important in terms of long term ecological study is archived in the IOLR library. Consequently, a construction of a database aiming at computerized archiving of all the documentation has been launched at the beginning of 2013. More important, the documented data is extracted into the database in a normalized manner, enabling comparative spatial and temporal evaluations and analyses of long term status and trends of marine biodiversity. More than 160 documents have already been registered in the database and their contents are extracted into the database. The database is using generic database platforms, at present Microsoft Access and if needed, Microsoft SQL would be applied.

Bio-invasion – A natural and widespread phenomenon occurs worldwide. However, along the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean, this dominating bio-geographical and ecological phenomenon is globally unique in its intensity. It has been occurring in relatively shallow waters since the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869. This depth range includes most hard and soft bottom habitats. It is a huge “ecological experiment” of species introduction into a new environment, reaching at present several hundreds of species and demonstrating diverse harmful but also beneficial effects. This invasion has implications on the environmental policy of the relevant Israeli authorities and its status and trends has to be carefully examined. Consequently, all studies and developed research tools described above are involved in bio-invasion research. It should be noted that some bio- invasions from other origins have been occurring as well, much inferior to the Indo-pacific ones in terms of number of species but affecting considerably the marine environment here and in other Mediterranean regions.

All our studies and analyses have been supported by established marine research platforms and facilities, enabling activities from the intertidal zone to the abyssal (see map below).

Table of contents

1. Introduction ...... 12 2. The National Monitoring Program of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters ...... 13 3. The Israel Marine Data Center (ISRAMAR) ...... 14 3.1. Fields of activity ...... 14 3.2. Types of marine data and information in ISRAMAR ...... 14 3.3. Elements of the ISRAMAR infrastructure ...... 15 3.4. Processing and Presentation of near real time data ...... 17 3.5. International Activity ...... 18 3.6. Visiting statistics of the ISRAMAR web site ...... 21 4. Studied habitats ...... 23 4.1 Benthos - Soft bottom ...... 23 4.1.1 Deep sea ...... 23 4.2 Benthos - Hard bottom ...... 31 4.2.1 Rocky shore (intertidal rocky bottom)...... 31 4.2.2 Rocky reefs ...... 35 4.2.2.1 Benthic fish community structure and biodiversity ...... 37 4.2.2.2 Percent cover of macroalgae and encrusting invertebrates ...... 38 4.2.2.3 Invertebrate density ...... 38 4.2.2.4 Live rock biodiversity and biomass ...... 38 4.3 Plankton ...... 47 4.3.1 Microplanktonic algae ...... 47 5. Alien species off the Mediterranean coast of Israel ...... 53 5.1 Soft bottom and open waters ...... 53 5.2 Hard substrate ...... 54 6. Barcoding ...... 55 7. Bio-geographic and ecological database ...... 57 8. References ...... 59

List of Tables Table 1: The contents of the ISRAMAR database at the end of 2012. Table 2: Distribution of visitors in the ISRAMAR site according to different web pages of the site. Table 3: A summary of the number of transects or samples of live rock taken during the surveys conducted by IOLR during 2010-2012 in the three major study areas.

List of figures Fig. 1: Yearly amount of oceanographic parameter profiles in Cast database carried out by Israel research vessels. Fig. 2: Spatial distribution of oceanographic stations sampled by Israeli research vessels. Fig. 3: On-line interface for selection and downloading datasets from ISRAMAR. Fig. 4: On-line interface of the current oceanographic database. Fig. 5: Graphical presentation of near real time sea state data from Hadera Station. Fig. 6: New on-line interface to the Cast database developed in the framework of PERSEUS project. Fig. 7: Distribution of visitors in ISRAMR by country. Fig 8: Locations sampled for infauna along the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean using a bottom. grab in IOLR cruises. The various projects are labeled by different markers. Fig 9: Locations sampled for infauna in Haifa Bay using a bottom grab in IOLR cruises. The various projects are labeled by different markers. Fig 10: Locations sampled for infauna along the central part of the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean using a bottom grab in IOLR cruises. The various projects are labeled by different markers. Fig 11: Ashdod area locations sampled for infauna using a bottom grab in IOLR cruises. The various projects are labeled by different markers. Fig 12: Infaunal individuals sampled and sorted from IOLR cruises using a bottom grab (2000- 2011). Fig 13: Infaunal species sampled and sorted from IOLR cruises using a bottom grab (2000-2011). Fig 14: Epifaunal species sampled and sorted from IOLR cruises using towed nets (2000-2011). Fig 15: Epifaunal individuals sampled and sorted from IOLR cruises (2001-2011). Fig 16: Epifaunal sampled and sorted species from IOLR cruises (2000-2011). Fig. 17: Study sites along the coast (core sites in red, right map) and an illustration of the four different transects run perpendicular to the shore. Fig. 18: Total number of quadrats sampled on the vermetid reefs per sample per transect.

Fig. 19: Number of transects where each taxa was observed during the pilot study period per intertidal zone, separately for animals (top) and seaweeds (bottom). Fig. 20: Taxa richness in the 11 vermetid reef study sites in the fall season of 3 years of the pilot monitoring program. Fig. 21: Seascape of subtidal rocky ridges. Right – General view, Left – Close up view. Fig. 22: study areas in the north of Israel marked in red ovals on a multibeam bathymetric map. Fig. 23: Location of all rocky reef macrobenthos ecological survey diving sites (2010-2012) in three regions: (a) the Rosh-Hanikra Akhziv islets, (b) Haifa Bay and Head, (c) the deep Nitzanim reef. The different symbols designate different projects. Fig. 24: The diversity revealed in the community on the “live rocks” collected in Haifa Bay during the laboratory work under the dissecting microscope. Visible are macroalgae, a coral, a brittle star, ascidians, worms, bivalves, a snail, and crabs. Fig. 25: The diversity revealed while working on the vermetid reefs and during diving on the rocky reefs. Visible are macroalgae, sponges, ascidians, a crab, a sea anemone, fish and sea slugs. Fig. 26: The percent cover of the 10 most dominant species on the Haifa Bay rocky reefs during fall 2011 (data calculated from the photo-quadrant surveys). Fig.27: Locations of plankton sampling stations: (A) Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters Program (NMP) stations. (B) Haifa Bay NMP (red) and ALA stations (yellow). (C) Southern stations, NMP, Agan (AG), Matash (MA), and three desalination programs DA, SO and VM. Fig. 28: Satellite non-calibrated imaging of ChlA distribution in Haifa Bay in different seasons during 2010. Fig. 29: Average Chla concentrations in Haifa Bay and along the coast stations during 2002-2011. Fig.30: Average counts of microalgae during 2003-2011. Fig. 31: Average microalgal biomass from surface water 2002-2011. Fig. 32: Average number of species along stations during 2003-2011. Fig. 34: Total no. of species in each year from 2003 – 2011. Fig 35: Alien species elucidated between 2000-2011 at IOLR.

Fig. 36: Ratio of align to local species in grab infaunal samples along the coast of Israel during the years 2004-2011. Fig. 37: The relative abundance of species in three taxonomic groups on rocky reefs in the Haifa Bay area. Warm colors in the pie charts indicated non-indigenous (invasive) species. Fig. 38: The structure of the Bio-geographic and ecological database ISRAMAR-BIO.

1. Introduction

This report is aimed at outlining the scope of activities that were carried out at IOLR during the last two decades in the contest of the biodiversity in the Mediterranean coast of Israel. These activities are ongoing at present resulting with data and organized datasets, as well as scientific publications. Above 600 scientific papers related to the issue were published in the last 120 years (many by non- Israeli scientists), about 240 of them with the participation of IOLR and the former Sea Fisheries Research Station scientists. The status and trends of biodiversity along the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean is out of the scope of this report. The accomplishment and further development of the bioecological database would enable comprehensive long-term biodiversity analysis. The Israeli coast of the Mediterranean has experienced significant ecological and bio-geographic changes in the last three centuries, caused primarily by intensive anthropogenic activities. Events like the opening of the Suez Canal, damming the Nile River and the fast urban development along the Mediterranean coast of Israel, immensely affected local biota. Major terrestrial-borne stressors involved heedless development along the coast, including industrial and domestic sewage outflow and industrial installations. Intensive fishery is another major culprit for the changes in species diversity and abundance. Recently, deep water activities related to the oil and gas drillings has started. Continuous biotic monitoring followed by ecological analyses and experimentation are needed to detect changes and ecological trends occurring along the Israeli coast and to respond to them through knowledge-based environmental policies or to envisage future trends. In addition to future monitoring, the relevant studies accomplished in the past have to be combined into a comparable framework enabling better understanding of potential future changes. A future policy has also to conform to the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), (Directive 2008/56/EC, 2008) and the Barcelona convention-related Protocol concerning specially protected areas and biological diversity in the Mediterranean (Anonymous, 1996). Scientifically documented biological observations along the Mediterranean coast of Israel are available from the last decade of the 19th century, done by occasional international cruises that visited this coast and broadened later by Israeli and international studies. During the years, many ecological studies related to Israeli Mediterranean habitats were conducted in Israeli universities. However, the major contribution emerged from the pioneering work of the scientists of the Fisheries Research Station founded by the Jewish agency, moved to the Israeli Ministry of Agriculture, and ended in the IOLR.

2. The National Monitoring Program of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters

IOLR scientists carry out the National Monitoring Program (NMP). The overall aim of the NMP is to provide a scientific basis for decision making with regard to protection of the marine environment, including enforcement of relevant national legislation and international conventions. More specifically it enables assessment of pollution sources, status and trends, diagnostic and predictive capabilities to assess potential effects, scientific knowledge to support effective coastal management and decision making. The NMP is funded mainly by the Ministry of Environmental Protection (represented by the Marine and Coastal Environment Division) with contribution of the Ministry of Energy and Water. At present the NMP includes the following components: • Monitoring of heavy metals in the coastal waters (carried out since 1978); • Monitoring of the introduction of nutrients and particulate metals into the coastal waters through coastal rivers (since 1990); • Monitoring of the atmospheric fluxes of nutrients and heavy metals into the coastal waters (since 1996); • Monitoring of nutrient levels and algal populations in the coastal waters (since 2000); • Monitoring of benthic communities along the coastline (since 2005); • Monitoring of biological effects of pollution ('biomarkers') (since 2005); • Environmental mapping of the coastal waters area based on satellite data (since 2005); • Ecological monitoring at the rocky shoreline (since 2010); • Estimation of the overall pollution load introduced into the coastal waters derived from a database on point sources of pollution (since 2002).

The NMP principals of operation: • National mission; • Long-term monitoring, sampling at fixed stations; • Quality assurance (QA)/Quality control (QC); • In agreement with international conventions; • Data archiving and distribution - Marine Data Center data; • Reporting and public awareness.

The last annual NMP report (Herut et al., 2012) contains evaluation of pollution pressures, including toxins and organic and nutrient loads, biotic information of both soft and hard bottom habitats and evaluations of planktonic abundance and chlorophyll levels, obtained from both

13 sampling at sea and satellite spectrum analysis. The chemical information obtained by the survey is already deposited in Israel Marine Data Center (ISRAMAR), IOLR, and our aim is to add to this also the biological information through the new biological database, ISRAMAR-BIO.

3. The Israel Marine Data Center (ISRAMAR)

ISRAMAR is not a biological repository. However, it provides biologists a background Oceanographic data and presents our ability to build and maintain a database of marine data. It was established in 2001 at IOLR as the national repository for oceanographic data. The establishment of ISRAMAR was due to accelerated industrial activity and significant increase in anthropogenic load on the marine environment which gave rise to demand for marine information. ISRAMAR acquires, archives and distributes data on Israel's marine environment for the benefit of civilian, governmental, and academic users. ISRAMAR is a member of the International Oceanographic Data and Information Exchange (IODE) network and is a participant in several international data management projects (SeaDataNet, MyOcean, SESAME, PERSEUS). ISRAMAR promotes the use of international standards of marine data acquisition and processing.

3.1 Fields of activity  Collection of marine data from all available national data providers and archiving of the data.  Organization of the data in databases allowing effective data access in a timely manner.  Operational running of numerical marine forecasting models, dissemination of the forecasts.  Statistical processing of archived parameters, estimating climatological values and variability.  Assimilation and further dissemination of marine data standards regarding acquisition, quality control and processing.  Establish and support interconnection with other marine data centers.  Represent Israel in the IODE network.

3.2 Types of marine data and information in ISRAMAR The center collects and archives data representing physical, chemical, and biological parameters regarding the marine environment of the Mediterranean and the Dead Sea. The data originates from cruises of research vessels, permanent coastal or open sea stations, autonomous observation floats and remote sensing systems. The corresponding metadata is collected according to international standards. The marine information produced by the center is: 14

 Access to historical data.  Statistical parameters of climatological marine state.  Near real time sea state parameters.  Operational forecast of marine state parameters.

3.3 Elements of the ISRAMAR infrastructure To process data, maintain databases and disseminate products, the center uses the following computer system:  Three internet servers, located in external company providing internet service (NetVision). The severs hosts: o The main web site of the ISRAMAR. o Major historical databases. o Major forecasting numerical models.  Three workstations are used for download different relative coarse forecasts from external operational centers to force local nested numerical forecasting models. All models run on these stations in parallel to the models running on the NetVision server, increasing the reliability of the forecasting system.  Two computers which receive and accumulate data from IOLR permanent stations.  Six computers and workstations for software development.  Two Network-Attached Storage (NAS) which backup forcing fields for use by the forecasting models. Two internet servers using WINDOWS Server operational system with databases working in MICROSOFT SQL SERVER and MICROSOFT ACCESS environment. The numerical models server uses LINUX operational system. Historical databases - The center has been developing and maintaining databases with historical data. Cast database - contains vertical profiles of physical, chemical and biological parameters observed from research vessels and autonomous platform in the Mediterranean and the Black Seas. Initially, the database contained data collected in the framework of MEDAR/MEDATLAS II project. It was extended by including additional profiles from publically available databases (MATER, CIESM, WOD, CORIOLIS, ICES, IMS, and DYFAMED) (Table 1). Israeli data (mostly IOLR observations) are imported regularly after submission of the new data to ISRAMAR (Figs 1 and 2). New data from other countries usually becomes available for ISRAMAR before its submission into international datacenters when IOLR participated in international projects like SESAME and

PERSEUS. An on-line GIS like interface to the Cast database (Fig. 3) allows selection of data according to metadata limitations. Download of cruise datasets in ODV format is permitted according to predefined level of access. There three levels of dataset availability are: o Public data is available to all registered users. o Partner only data is available to predefined group of particular project partners only. o Originator only data can be requested by E-mail to the data originator. The level of the data availability is defined by the scientist responsible for submitting the dataset to the ISRAMAR.

Table 1: The contents of the ISRAMAR database at the end of 2012 Israel Contribution Total in Cast DB Number of Profiles Number of Cruises Number of Profiles Number of Cruises 5496 330 166,175 4,226

Fig. 1: Yearly amount of oceanographic parameter in Cast database carried out by Israel research vessels.

42.0

40.0

38.0

36.0

34.0

32.0

30.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0

Fig. 2: Spatial distribution of oceanographic stations sampled by Israeli research vessels.

Current database - contains time series of observed currents on the Israel shelf from moored stations. Access to time and space distributions of observations is also available on-line (Fig. 4). Statistical processing of available data can be requested by a user via e-mail communication. In a similar manner, ISRAMAR supports databases of concentration of heavy metals in organism and sediments on the Israel shelf.

3.4 Processing and Presentation of near real time data Permanent marine and coastal stations, maintained by IOLR, generate data which is transferred automatically to the ISRAMAR server, accumulated in databases and made available in graphical form on the center’s web site within an hour from observation (Fig. 5). On the end of the 2012 the following stations are active: Hadera station : measures wave height and period, sea surface level, sea currents, water temperature, water salinity, oxygen concentration, chlorophyll concentration and turbidity. Ashqelon station: measures wave height and period, sea surface level, sea currents, water temperature, water salinity, oxygen concentration, chlorophyll concentration and turbidity. Ashdod station: measures sea surface level, water temperature.

Eilat station: measures sea surface level, water temperature. Shikmona station: measures wind, air temperature, air humidity, air pressure, short wave radiation. Dead Sea open sea and coastal stations: measures wind, air temperature, air humidity, air pressure, short wave radiation, sea water temperature in upper 40 m layer.

Fig. 3: On-line interface for selection and downloading datasets from ISRAMAR.

3.5 International Activity During the last 5 years ISRAMAR has been participating in the following projects supported by the European Commission: SEADATANET – Pan-European infrastructure for Ocean & Marine Data Management (first stage 2006-2011, second stage 2011-2015). The main target of the project is the development and establishment of efficient distributed Marine Data Management Infrastructure for the management of large and diverse sets of data derived from in situ and remote observation of the seas and oceans. Professional data centers active in data collection, constitute a Pan-European network providing on- line integrated databases of standardized quality. SESAME - Southern European Seas: Assessing and Modeling Ecosystem changes. (2006-2012). In the framework the project, historical and current datasets (gathered through multidisciplinary,

18 multiship oceanographic cruises across the Mediterranean and Black Sea) were collected in order to assess the signals of environmental changes in the past as well as to validate the model used for hindcasting simulations. ISRAMAR was responsible for the management of oceanographic data. During 2013 the SESAME databases and on line interfaces are hosted on the ISRAMAR server. PERSEUS - Policy-oriented marine Environmental Research for the Southern EUropean Seas. (2012-2016). In the framework of the PERSEUS project, the center continues activity which started in the SESAME project. The multidisciplinary Cast database undergoes significant renovation in order to become compatible with new oceanographic data vocabularies developed in the SeaDataNet project. Much more efficient on-line interface was developed and lunched (Fig. 6).

Fig. 4: On-line interface of the current oceanographic database.

Fig. 5: Graphical presentation of near real time sea state data from Hadera Station.

Fig. 6: New on-line interface to the Cast database developed in the framework PERSEUS project.

3.6 Visiting statistics of the ISRAMAR web site During 2012, the ISRAMAR web site was visited approximately 1,486,300 times. Their distribution according to countries is depicted in Fig. 7 and according to visited web pages in Table 2.

Country (top 10) Visits

Israel 448,071 Italy 36,462 Unknown 31,292 Lebanon 17,383 Turkey 14,065 Cyprus 12,407 Greece 11,411

Algeria 7,098 Tunisia 5,374 United States 4,700

Fig. 7: Distribution of visitors in ISRAMR by country.

Table 2: Distribution of visitors in the ISRAMAR site according to different web pages of the site Forecast Page views Total for Wave Model Pages (86% of total website views) 753,413 Mediterranean Wave Forecast (WAM) 457,099 Levantine Basin 39,739 Israeli Coast 128,805 Haifa 7,971

Currents, temperature and salinity forecast for the Israeli shelf 3,806 Israeli Mediterranean coast tide forecast 14,871 Aqaba/Elat gulf tide forecast 2,662 Near Real Time Page‐views Shikmona Weather station 8,223 Central Israeli Mediterranean coast sea‐state data 15,438 Ashkelon Oceanographic data 1,565 Aqaba/Elat gulf meteoceanographic data 458 SISCAL 1,555 Dead Sea Data 1,496 Historical Data Page views Mediterranean cruises 1,772 Heavy Metals in Organisms 114 Gulf of Eilat 137

4. Studied habitats 4.1 Benthos - Soft bottom Continental shelf - The biota of the soft bottom, sand and mud along the Israeli coast were studied from the 50th of the 20th century by the scientists of the Fisheries Research station (Gilat, 1959, 1964; Edelstein, 1960) and by IOLR scientists (Tom, 1976; Galil, 1978; Galil and Lewinsohn, 1981; Tom and Galil, 1991). A comprehensive sampling effort of epifauna and infauna was accomplished in IOLR from 1991. This sampling effort which was mainly performed in the framework of environmental surveys and part of its faunistic results were published. However, annual and seasonal results are mostly unpublished. It is archived in IOLR and will be published later by the relevant scientist or will be combined in the new ISRAMAR-BIO database taking into account intellectual property rights.

4.1.1 Deep sea Few attempts of deep sea samplings were conducted during the 19th and 20th centuries in the Levantine basin summarized in Galil and Goren (1994). These studies led to the conclusion that a low diversity and density prevail in this habitat. However, a series of sampling cruises conducted between 1988 and 2011 by IOLR off the coast of Israel, supplemented by recent photographic surveys accomplished by the submarine NAUTILUS (2010, 2011) have provided evidence of a surprisingly rich and diverse biota. This biota is associated with canyons, seamounts, cold seep zones and methane-rich sediments. A considerable number of species inhabits the Levantine cold seep environments. Herms of methanogenous bivalves and communities of siboglinid tube worms which form dense aggregations were observed, accompanied by associated endemic fauna. The isolation of the Levantine seeps led to the development of unique communities, which differ in composition and structure from similar habitats elsewhere. Some of the findings resulted from the recent IOLR surveys were: the easternmost record of the deep water coral Caryophyllia calveri in the Mediterranean and the first confirmed record of live specimens from a depth of 800 m, a few hundred meters deeper than previously known, and the deepest record of live Desmophyllum dianthus in the Mediterranean and the first one of live specimens in the Levant. The studies of the deep Levantine biota resulted in description of a genus and species previously unknown to science and 60 species of fish, crustaceans, echinoderms and mollusks newly recorded for the Levant Sea, published in a variety of scientific articles. The growing list of bathybenthic species, owing to expanding research efforts, challenges the conventional view of the Levant deep-sea biodiversity. Part of the results of these deep sea surveys,

23 mainly the annual quantitative results of the samples are still not published and are archived at IOLR. The sites and dates as well as the statistics of soft bottom sampling according to sampling sites and date are presented in Figs 8-16.

Fig 8: Locations sampled for infauna along the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean using a bottom grab in IOLR cruises. The various projects are labeled by different markers.

Fig 9: Locations sampled for infauna in Haifa Bay using a bottom grab in IOLR cruises. The various projects are labeled by different markers.

Fig 10: Locations sampled for infauna along the central part of the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean using a bottom grab in IOLR cruises. The various projects are labeled by different markers.

Fig 11: Ashdod area locations sampled for infauna using a bottom grab in IOLR cruises. The various projects are labeled by different markers.

Fig 12: Infaunal individuals sampled and sorted from IOLR cruises using a bottom grab (2000-

2011).

Fig 13: Infaunal species sampled and sorted from IOLR cruises using a bottom grab (2000- 2011).

Fig 14: Epifaunal species sampled and sorted from IOLR cruises using towed nets (2000- 2011).

Fig 15: Epifaunal individuals sampled and sorted from IOLR cruises (2001-2011).

Fig 16: Epifaunal sampled and sorted species from IOLR cruises (2000-2011).

4.2 Benthos - Hard bottom (reported together fauna and flora) 4.2.1 Rocky shore (intertidal rocky bottom) Vermetid reefs occupy about 10% of the shoreline, mostly in north Israel, and are the most dominant rocky formation along the coast. Vermetid reefs are an ecosystem unique to warm temperate seas and are therefore restricted to very specific regions of the word (Safriel 1974, Chemello and Silenzi, 2011). Although they are a unique ecosystem globally, very few studies have investigated their ecology and communities, especially quantitatively. A vermatid platform is a rocky intertidal ecosystem that, like coral reefs, is shaped by the structure of living organsims. Species of sedentary, agregative vermetid gastropods from the genus Dendropoma - form a hard, thick, crust with their tubes that according to theory hult the erosion of the softer rock (usually sandstone or limestone) beneath them and thus create wide, flat, intertidal habitats at mean sea level, usually in regions with a highly limited tide. In November 2009, IOLR started a pilot monitoring program aimed at systematically study the spatio-temporal patterns of intertidal ecological communities on vermetid platforms. This program includes both ecological sampling of the major components of space occupiers on top of the platforms at several zones as well as bio-physical data. There are 4 core sites where all types of data are sampled seasonally monthly or continuously, and 7 additional sites that are sampled only ecologically and once a year. The overall design of the program is shown in figs 17 and 18. The vermetid reefs are sampled along four 50m transect lines at the platform edge (where the D. petraeum rim is found), at the platform center and at its back (mid-midshore, and high-midshore levels). Along each transect line fifteen 50x50 cm quadrats are randomly deployed and surveyed by a thorough visual examination in the field during calm sea conditions. Unidentified organisms are brought to the lab for further examination. In each quadrat, the percent coverage of macroalgae and sessile invertebrates, as well as count of mobile invertebrates, is documented. Scoring of the surface verticality and roughness as well as its sand cover is also performed to assess substrate properties. In the four core sites, temperature loggers were deployed at three locations: underwater at half a meter depth (measuring sub surface temperature), on the platform (measuring temperature during both emersion and immersion), and above the tide and splash line (measuring air temperature). Biophysical data is also taken in the core sites on a monthly basis. This includes sampling of water properties with a multiprobe (temperature, salinity, pH, dissolved oxygen), and water sampling for analysis in the lab of alkalinity, chlorophyll a and nutrients (nitrite, nitrate, ammonia, phosphorus, silica). A summary of the total number of quadrats sampled to date (November 2012) is given in Fig. 18. Overall, 3893 quadrats were sampled.

Fig. 17: Study sites along the coast (core sites in red, right map) and an illustration of the four different transects run perpendicular to the shore.

חוף הבונים

This data set already revealed a considerable spatial variation among sites along the coast, and a strong seasonal signal in the core sites. So far, 72 taxa were recorded and identified on the platform (not including small cryptic species and small epibenthos species that cannot be counted or identified in the field and are not in the scope of this type of monitoring), as well as highly mobile species or species inside tidepools). The frequency of observing each taxon along the transects over the 3 year period per zone, separately for animals and seaweeds is presented in Fig. 19.

Fig. 18: Total number of quadrats sampled on the vermetid reefs per

sample per transect.

Fig. 19: Number of transects where each taxa was observed during the pilot study period per intertidal zone, separately for animals (top) and seaweeds (bottom).

Major findings 1) High spatiotemporal variability in community structure. There was a high degree of variation in the number of taxa among sites along the coast, especially in the platform center (see Fig. 19). 2) Collapse of populations of key species. Some of the most striking documented findings are the deterioration of both the vermetid Dendropoma petraeum and the whelk Stramonita 33

haemastoma mentioned above, for which we have previously obtained data from the 1990s and are completely absent in all the transects for the entire sampling period. This suggests that their populations have collapsed in the past decade or two, leading to a regional extinction. Furthermore, many animal species (mostly mollusks) that were once described in the literature as abundant are also rare or completely absent at present. 3) High but patchy domination of an invasive species The data also demonstrates the dominance of the invasive mussel Brachidontes pharaonis in the macrobenthic cover on the rocks in several sites along the coast. These last two findings suggest that a major biotic community shift may be occurring in this system where native species are being lost and invasive ones established.

Fig. 20: Taxa richness in the 11 vermetid reef study sites in the fall season of 3 years of the pilot 4.2.2 Rocky reefs monitoring program. Platform edge which generally had higher richness values compared to the center but lower variability among sites.

4.2.2 Rocky Reefs In the sub-tidal continental shelf, apart from the underwater portion of the man-made structures, there are two major forms of natural reefs: one is the eolianite (kurkar) ridges (ancient dunes that were formed on the shoreline during periods when the sea level was lower) that run parallel to the shoreline, and the other is the submerged portion of terrestrial mountains in the north of Israel, Mount Carmel Head and the Rosh Hanikra Head, both are mostly made of limestone. Hard bottom subtidal environments, or rocky reefs, are considered highly diverse ecosystems due to their high structural complexity that offers a multitude of habitats and microniches (see for example the complex seascape in the Haifa Bay area and close-up view of some organisms, Fig. 21). This

Fig. 21: Seascape of subtidal rocky ridges. Right – General view, Left – Close up view. habitat is well studied in many regions worldwide including the western Mediterranean and a few northern parts of the eastern Mediterranean, (e.g., Dayton 1985, Bulleri et al. 2002, Micheli et al. 2005, Witman et al. 2010, Sala et al. 2012). However, in the southeastern part of the Levant (including Israel), this ecosystem has, until recently, been seriously understudied with very few local, short or anecdotal investigations resulting in very limited quantitative data that could allow comparison between areas along the coast or tracking of changes through time. Species identification for most taxonomic groups is limited, due to shortage of taxonomic expertise. This fact makes it a challenging task to comprehensively describe the communities and their biodiversity trends in space and time. Along the northern coast of Israel, rocky reefs are dominating the shallow continental shelf area while further south this ecosystem is patchier. Most of the rocky substrate is covered with complex biogenic structures made of shells of organisms and macroalgal crusts. This ecosystem suffers from a multitude of stressors, including overfishing (mostly gillnets, trammel nets, longlines, and spearfishing but recently also trawling), and the invasion of mostly Indo-Pacific species and probably also climate change. Surprisingly, as mentioned above, although this ecosystem is so dominant and relatively easily accessible, apart from one master thesis that quantified mostly 35 sessile invertebrates and sea urchins in one area around the Rosh Hanikra islets (Dothan, 1977), the only quantitative surveys were of fish in shallow waters near the vermetid reefs at different sites (in north Israel) and times over the past 3 decades. These surveys indicated that the benthic fish community is mostly dominated, in biomass terms, by invasive species, but the small and more cryptic species (e.g., blennies and gobies) are all native to the region (Diamant et al. 1986, Spanier et al. 1989, Goren and Galil, 2001, Golani et al. 2007). There were no systematic surveys or monitoring of macroinvertabrates or macroalgae and no extensive spatio-temporal study of benthic fish as well. During 2010-12, several extensive project-based surveys that were conducted by IOLR, mainly in the north of Israel, were aimed to create a baseline for the benthic community structure on shallow rocky reefs of the Israeli Mediterranean coast. Near Haifa, the surveys were conducted in the Haifa Bay area on two kurkar ridges, on the Carmel Head and in the Shikmona marine reserve at depths ranging from 2-21 m. Surveys were also conducted around the isles of Rosh Hanikra-Akhziv inside and outside the marine reserve at depth range of 3-24 m (Fig. 22). One short survey was also conducted on the deeper reef of Nitzanim in 2012 at depths of 30-34 m.

Fig. 22: study areas in the north of Israel marked in red ovals on a multibeam bathymetric map. In yellow squares are the approximate area of the Rosh Hanikra protected area and the Shikmona un- enforced marine reserve.

A details description off all survey dive sites on rocky reefs between 2010-12 is shown in Fig. 23.

Fig. 23: Location of all rocky reef macrobenthos ecological survey diving sites (2010-2012) in three regions: (a) the Rosh- Hanikra Akhziv islets, (b) Haifa Bay and Head, (c) the deep Nitzanim reef. The different symbols designate different projects.

These underwater surveys have used multiple methods (shortly described here) to capture different aspects\assemblages of the macrobenthos on the rocks as follows. 4.2.2.1 Benthic fish community structure and biodiversity - benthic fish community structure was evaluated from fish counts using the common method of visual surveys with SCUBA (e.g., Nunez-Lara et al. 2005). The survey was conducted along 2x30x2 meter transects during daytime

37 and from some distance from the bottom. This non-destructive method has its limitation because the more cryptic and small species as well as nocturnal species are greatly underestimated. Using SCUBA gear also affects fish behavior and may deter some species. For this reason, the data gained is useful only for a subset of the full fish community on the rocks and does not include the full range of fish biodiversity. 4.2.2.2 Percent cover of macroalgae and encrusting invertebrates - To estimate the percent cover of macroalgae and sessile (mostly encrusting) invertebrates per site, 15 random 50x50 cm photoquadrats were taken along a 30 m transect. Then they were analyzed with a CPCE software, and percent cover of different taxa (species when possible and lower taxonomic levels or functional groups when species cannot be identified) as well as bare substrate were calculated. Functional groups here mostly refer to structural forms and are mostly presented for macroalgae or sponges that cannot be identified from the photos but their appearance is obvious and can be used to distinguish between different cover types. 4.2.2.3 Invertebrate density - to estimate the density of invertebrate species that are either mobile, very patchy or heavily fouled (e.g., the oyster-like bivalves Spondylus spinosus, and Chama pacifica), and are therefore mostly missed or highly underestimated using the photoquadrat method, such species were counted along the main 30 m transect within a 1 m wide belt. Those species were mainly bivalves, gastropods, sea cucumbers, large polychaetes (including tubeworms), large hydrozoans, corals, and large solitary ascidians. 4.2.2.4 Live rock biodiversity and biomass - When conducting the visual surveys in the field or the photoquadrat analysis in the lab there is a great deal of “hidden” diversity that is missed in areas of high structural complexity, mostly that of cryptic and encrusting animals (species that are found in shaded or sheltered areas), and macrofauna that live inside the rocks (especially when it is porous and biogenic like much of the substrate of the kurkar ridges). This diversity is very difficult to assess and quantify even in the lab because of the complexity of the substrate, the size and form of the organisms, and because most of the organisms there, are difficult to identify to the species or even the family level without expert taxonomic knowledge that is badly missing for many of the groups occupying the rocks. To evaluate this biodiversity and its biomass, pieces of rocks (about a liter in volume) were broken-off the substrate with a chisel and hammer in areas that were characterized by high structural complexity. These rocks were brought live to the laboratory for processing which involved several steps: (1) rock weight and volume calculations; (2) Photographing of 4-6 faces of the rocks for area cover and biomass calculations of the different organisms; (3) removal of individual organisms by carefully braking the rocks to pieces with a chisel and hammer. The isolated specimens were photographed and identified; (4) weighing of samples for biomass analysis; (5) taking tissue samples for molecular identification; (6) creating a 38 database and from it calculating percent coverage, biomass and density per rock surface or volume of all observed taxa. Rock sampling, which is highly time and resource consuming was done in only several sites in Haifa Bay and Carmel Head during fall 2011 and spring 2012. A summary of the sampling effort on rocky reefs is shown in Table 3.

Table 3: A summary of the number of transects or samples of live rock taken during the surveys conducted by IOLR during 2010-2012 in the three major study areas Number of transects Fish Invertebrate Rock cover Live rocks Region abundance abundance Rosh Hanikra Isles 77 25 72 Haifa Area 293 146 144 40 Nitzanim reef 8 10

Till now, each project was analyzed and summarized separately. Next year, a dataset from all these baseline surveys will be complied to allow a fuller analysis.

Major findings Following is a summary list of the major ecological findings for the rocky reef macrobenthos. High diversity - Relatively high diversity of organisms was found in all the sampled biotic assemblages (fish, invertebrates, and macroalgae), and it varied among habitats, depths and seasons. Much of this diversity is found in the highly biogenic substrate characterizing the Israeli rocky reefs, as revealed in the “live rock” sampling, although most of the taxa found on and inside the rocks still need to be identified to the genus and species levels using expert taxonomists and molecular tools. Table 4 and Figs 24 and 25 show this diversity.

Table 4: The macrobenthos taxa covering the live rocks (averages of all rocks) listed from most to least abundant based on frequency of appearance (percent of the total of 24 rocks sampled in this study in each season) during the fall 2011 and spring surveys (FA). Given also is their average (AVG) maximum (MAX) and minimum (MIN) biomass in grams per 1 m2 rock surface. The taxonomic classification is to the level that could be identified at present. Color scale is based on FA to help identify pronounced differences between seasons. Fall 2011 Spring 2012 Phylum Taxa or functional group AVG MAX MIN FA AVG MAX MIN FA Turf 1037 1485 446 100 906 2189 1.05 100 Mollusca Lithophaga lithophaga 13.8 116.0 0 67 24.16 108.63 0 71 Rhodophyta Red crustose A 34.8 265.1 0 63 29.88 268.38 0 71 Mollusca Striarca lactea 0.48 2.92 0 63 3.52 18.32 0 79 Porifera Porifera 3 19.3 327.4 0 54 25.35 317.91 0 38 Rhodophyta Amphiroa rigida 10.7 99.6 0 46 12.37 185.68 0 29 Mollusca Malvufundus regula 0.71 6.13 0 46 1.53 20.52 0 42 Mollusca Chama pacifica 25.4 210.0 0 46 58.02 489.03 0 71 Rhodophyta Red crustose B 107.6 930.5 0 42 33.94 233.61 0 67 Rhodophyta Chondracanthus acicularis 39.3 930.5 0 42 4.17 63.11 0 29 Sipuncula Phascolosomatida spp. 0.45 2.84 0 42 0.75 6.27 0 38 Chordata Ascidiacea 1 1.11 8.79 0 38 1.23 15.99 0 33 Chordata Cystodytes sp.3 3.17 33.71 0 38 0.44 5.00 0 13 Chordata Ascidiacea 4 17.67 270.41 0 33 5.00 62.71 0 21 Polysiphonia/Neosiphonia Rhodophyta complex 0.37 2.88 0 29 0 0 0 0 Rhodophyta Galaxaura rugoza 3.31 36.16 0 29 93.23 15230 0 58 Porifera Porifera 2 3.24 20.51 0 29 5.99 85.95 0 21 Porifera Crambe Crambe 17.2 359.8 0 29 0.51 11.30 0 8 Mollusca Brachidontes pharaonis 3.58 34.0 0 29 4.08 57.44 0 21 Arthropoda Alpheidae 0.72 5.35 0 29 1.36 13.20 0 21 Rhodophyta Rhodymenia ardissonei 1.72 36.81 0 25 0 0 0 0 Porifera Porifera 4 0.35 2.33 0 25 3.24 20.73 0 46 Porifera Plocamionida sp. 4.18 45.0 0 21 0 0 0 0 Bryozoa Bryozoa 6 0.10 1.14 0 21 0.68 9.40 0 33 Annelida Annelida 0 0.88 9.66 0 21 0.60 9.61 0 21 Annelida Nereididae 0.24 2.09 0 21 0.64 2.82 0 54

Sipuncula Aspidosiphonida 0.12 1.41 0 21 0.86 10.67 0 42 Chlorophyta Codium spp. 0.04 0.36 0 17 0.30 7.08 0 8 Rhodophyta Jania rubens 39.92 930.5 0 17 0.95 6.27 0 38 Rhodophyta Gelidium pusillum 0.52 9.34 0 17 0 0 0 0 Porifera Porifera 1.17 24.34 0 17 0.55 12.70 0 8 Mollusca Septifer forskali 0.11 1.87 0 17 1.05 10.54 0 46 Mollusca Spondylus spinosus 49.06 439.0 0 17 0 0 0 0 Mollusca Pinctada imbricata radiata 0.90 6.71 0 17 0 0 0 0 Mollusca Chama asperasa 0.57 12.41 0 17 2.21 34.19 0 42 Annelida Polychaeta 3 0.20 2.39 0 17 0 0 0 0 Chordata Ascidiacea 9 4.30 71.35 0 17 1.80 17.47 0 17 Chordata Cystodytes sp.1 0.98 15.26 0 17 0.04 1.02 0 4 Cladophoropsis Chlorophyta membranacea 1.47 34.94 0 13 0 0 0 0 Chlorophyta Cladophora sp. 0.02 0.30 0 13 0 0 0 0 Rhodophyta Laurencia obtusa 0.03 0.35 0 13 0 0 0 0 Rhodophyta Pterocladiella capillacea 0.10 1.95 0 13 0.51 6.87 0 17 Porifera Porifera 1 2.38 43.68 0 13 2.95 37.2 0 21 Cnidaria Hydrozoa 1 0.03 0.60 0 13 0 0 0 0 Bryozoa Bryozoa 7 2.91 36.92 0 13 1.16 19.27 0 38 Bryozoa Schizorella sp.1 1.02 14.72 0 13 0 0 0 0 Annelida Eunicidae 0.48 5.05 0 13 0.34 4.46 0 13 Annelida Serpulidae 0.13 1.74 0 13 0.10 1.89 0 8 Arthropoda Upogebia sp. 0.13 2.11 0 13 1.16 5.79 0 42 Arthropoda Balanus trigonus 0.06 0.76 0 13 0.82 7.99 0 46 Chordata Didemnum sp.2 0.78 16.97 0 13 1.23 24.23 0 17 Ochrophyta Stypopodium schimperi 0.05 1.18 0 8 0 0 0 0 Rhodophyta Dasya sp. 0.04 0.90 0 8 0 0 0 0 Porifera Porifera 18 0.14 2.44 0 8 0 0 0 0 Bryozoa Bryozoa 2 0.32 5.40 0 8 1.28 20.00 0 21 Bryozoa Bryozoa 8 1.22 27.33 0 8 0.51 7.34 0 25 Mollusca Vermetus rugulosus 0.07 1.11 0 8 0.83 11.96 0 17 Mollusca Hypselodoris infucata 0.01 0.12 0 8 0 0 0 0 Mollusca Alectryonella crenulifera 0.14 1.67 0 8 7.97 64.08 0 42 Annelida Polynoidae 0.00 0.04 0 8 0.38 6.81 0 8 Chordata Ascidiacea 0.13 2.08 0 8 0 0 0 0 Chordata Ascidiacea 3 0.77 15.08 0 8 0 0 0 0 41

Chordata Didemnum sp.1 0.12 1.88 0 8 1.65 25.00 0 29 Macroalgae unknown Algae 0.00 0.03 0 4 0 0 0 0 Ochrophyta Dictyota dichotoma 0.06 1.47 0 4 0 0 0 0 Ochrophyta Lobophora variegata 0.17 4.15 0 4 0 0 0 0 Porifera Porifera 7 16.6 399.2 0 4 0 0 0 0 Porifera Porifera 11 0.20 4.79 0 4 0.88 9.3 0 13 Porifera Porifera 13 0.49 11.76 0 4 4.2 53.5 0 42 Porifera Porifera 15 0.19 4.66 0 4 0 0 0 0 Porifera Porifera 16 0.01 0.15 0 4 0 0 0 0 Porifera Porifera 17 0.03 0.80 0 4 0 0 0 0 Porifera Porifera 19 2.41 57.72 0 4 0.01 0.33 0 4 Porifera Spirastrella cunctatrix 0.30 7.29 0 4 0 0 0 0 Porifera Monanchora sp. 0.01 0.31 0 4 0 0 0 0 Porifera Oscarella lobularis 0.03 0.75 0 4 0.98 17.10 0 8 Cnidaria Actiniaria 1 0.27 6.48 0 4 0 0 0 0 Cnidaria Oculina patagonica 3.25 78.05 0 4 2.83 66.26 0 8 Cnidaria Madracis pharensis 1.08 25.89 0 4 0 0 0 0 Bryozoa Bryozoa 4.26 102.18 0 4 28.5 134.9 0 54 Bryozoa Bryozoa 1 0.73 17.57 0 4 2.0 44.2 0 25 Bryozoa Bryozoa 10 0.07 1.58 0 4 0 0 0 0 Mollusca Gastropoda 0.04 0.87 0 4 0 0 0 0 Mollusca Diodora rueppellii 0.09 2.09 0 4 0.02 0.51 0 4 Mollusca Vermetus triqueter 0.01 0.16 0 4 0.44 5.76 0 8 Mollusca Bivalvia 0.06 1.49 0 4 0 0 0 0 Mollusca Spondylus nicobaricus 0.03 0.62 0 4 0.09 2.07 0 4 Annelida Polychaeta 6 0.00 0.12 0 4 0 0 0 0 Annelida Amphionmidae 0.05 1.12 0 4 0.13 2.83 0 13 Annelida Oenonidae 0.11 2.76 0 4 0.94 6.97 0 29 Annelida Phyllodocidae 0.03 0.66 0 4 0 0 0 0 Annelida Sigalionidae 0.00 0.01 0 4 0.04 0.98 0 4 Arthropoda Alpheus sp. 0.17 4.17 0 4 0.57 5.18 0 25 Arthropoda Synalpheus sp. 0.07 1.58 0 4 0.32 7.67 0 4 Arthropoda Palaemon sp. 0.00 0.07 0 4 0.25 3.72 0 17 Arthropoda Upogebia pusilla 0.03 0.76 0 4 0.04 1.00 0 4 Arthropoda Xanthidae 0.03 0.78 0 4 0.29 6.95 0 4 Arthropoda Isopoda 1 0.00 0.04 0 4 0.09 1.06 0 17 42

Arthropoda Amphipoda 2 0.00 0.07 0 4 0 0 0 0 Chordata Ascidiacea 2 0.24 5.69 0 4 0.42 8.28 0 8 Chordata Ascidiacea 6 0.03 0.61 0 4 0 0 0 0 Chordata Ascidiacea 8 0.13 3.17 0 4 0.42 9.99 0 4 Chordata Cystodytes sp.2 0.05 1.22 0 4 2.21 26.69 0 25 Chordata Pseudodistoma sp. 0.03 0.77 0 4 0.03 0.61 0 4 Unknown 1 0.02 0.48 0 4 0 0 0 0 Unknown 2 3.08 73.97 0 4 0 0 0 0 Unknown 3 0.06 1.35 0 4 0 0 0 0 Unknown 4 0.19 4.61 0 4 0 0 0 0 Unknown 5 0.12 2.78 0 4 0 0 0 0 Unknown 8 0.22 5.37 0 4 0 0 0 0 Macroalgae unknown Algae 1 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.53 0 8 Rhodophyta Liagora sp. 0 0 0 0 0.27 6.57 0 4 Porifera Porifera 5 0 0 0 0 9.99 236.49 0 8 Porifera Porifera 6 0 0 0 0 0.41 6.92 0 21 Porifera Porifera 20 0 0 0 0 2.83 53.77 0 13 Porifera Porifera 21 0 0 0 0 2.76 30.64 0 13 Porifera Porifera 22 0 0 0 0 0.59 8.77 0 13 Porifera Porifera 23 0 0 0 0 2.06 49.48 0 4 Porifera Porifera 25 0 0 0 0 0.18 4.23 0 4 Porifera Sponge orange crust 0 0 0 0 7.45 63.96 0 46 Porifera Sponge red crust 0 0 0 0 1.05 8.00 0 38 Porifera Chelonaplysilla erecta 0 0 0 0 0.08 1.04 0 8 Porifera Haliclona simulans 0 0 0 0 0.10 2.37 0 4 Porifera Cinachyrella levantinensis 0 0 0 0 30.45 646.0 0 8 Cnidaria Hydrozoa 3 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.51 0 4 Platyhelminthes Turbellaria 1 0 0 0 0 0.63 15.07 0 4 Bryozoa Bryozoa 3 0 0 0 0 0.15 3.38 0 8 Bryozoa Bryozoa 5 0 0 0 0 0.26 5.76 0 8 Bryozoa Bryozoa 11 0 0 0 0 22.76 331.7 0 25 Bryozoa Bryozoa 12 0 0 0 0 0.22 3.86 0 13 Mollusca Cerithium Scabridum 0 0 0 0 0.20 4.72 0 4 Mollusca Ergalatax junionae 0 0 0 0 0.28 4.06 0 8 Mollusca Bivalvia 1 0 0 0 0 0.30 2.37 0 21 Annelida Annelida 1 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.28 0 4 43

Annelida Annelida 2 0 0 0 0 0.11 2.59 0 4 Annelida Oligochaeta 0 0 0 0 0.15 2.93 0 13 Annelida Polychaeta 1 0 0 0 0 0.14 3.40 0 4 Annelida Polychaeta 2 0 0 0 0 0.09 1.66 0 8 Annelida Polychaeta 4 0 0 0 0 0.91 4.70 0 50 Annelida Polychaeta 5 0 0 0 0 0.35 6.02 0 17 Annelida Polychaeta 8 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.22 0 4 Annelida Polychaeta 9 0 0 0 0 0.07 1.12 0 13 Annelida Polychaeta 11 0 0 0 0 0.20 2.62 0 13 Annelida Polychaeta 12 0 0 0 0 0.11 2.59 0 4 Annelida Polychaeta 13 0 0 0 0 0.33 5.45 0 8 Annelida Lanice conchilega 0 0 0 0 0.06 1.35 0 4 Arthropoda Paguroidea 0 0 0 0 0.23 4.47 0 8 Arthropoda Decapoda 2 0 0 0 0 0.10 2.33 0 4 Arthropoda Decapoda 3 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.77 0 4 Arthropoda Decapoda 4 0 0 0 0 0.22 5.36 0 4 Arthropoda Decapoda 5 0 0 0 0 2.16 29.28 0 13 Arthropoda Decapoda 6 0 0 0 0 2.38 57.00 0 4 Arthropoda Decapoda 7 0 0 0 0 0.07 1.64 0 4 Arthropoda Calcinus Tubularis 0 0 0 0 0.12 1.69 0 8 Arthropoda Galathera Squa mitera 0 0 0 0 0.49 6.44 0 8 Arthropoda Pilumnus Hirtellus 0 0 0 0 0.52 7.58 0 13 Arthropoda Atergatis roseus 0 0 0 0 46.8 1123.0 0 4 Arthropoda Cirripedia 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.40 0 21 Arthropoda Balanus amphitrite 0 0 0 0 0.09 0.83 0 21 Echinodermata Ophiuroidae 0 0 0 0 0.65 5.72 0 17 Chordata Ascidiacea 11 0 0 0 0 2.16 18.60 0 25 Chordata Ascidiacea 12 0 0 0 0 0.07 1.68 0 4 Chordata Eudistoma sp. 0 0 0 0 0.29 5.08 0 8 Chordata Microcosmus claudicans 0 0 0 0 1.33 32.01 0 4 Unknown 7 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.44 0 8 Unknown 10 0 0 0 0 2.24 53.85 0 4 Unknown 11 0 0 0 0 1.61 36.67 0 8 Unknown 12 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.59 0 4 Unknown 13 0 0 0 0 0.50 11.97 0 4 Unknown 14 0 0 0 0 0.53 12.77 0 4

Fig. 24: The diversity revealed in the community on the “live rocks” collected in Haifa Bay during the laboratory work under the dissecting microscope. Visible are macroalgae, a coral, a brittle star, ascidians, worms, bivalves, a snail, and crabs.

Fig. 25: The diversity revealed while working on the vermetid reefs and during diving on the rocky reefs. Visible are macroalgae, sponges, ascidians, a crab, a sea anemone, fish and sea slugs.

Rock cover was dominated almost everywhere by short turf and encrusting red algal forms (Fig. 26), while flashy canopy macroalgae, such as large brown algae, had very low cover except for a few shallow transects (mostly during the spring) on the Carmel Head, and in the shallow areas of the Rosh Hanikra reserve. Fig. 26: The percent cover of the 10 most dominant species on Low-laying turf dominance may be the Haifa Bay rocky reefs during fall 2011 (data calculated partly due to (a) the generally low from the photoquadrat surveys). nutrient levels in the Levant basin, and (b) high grazing pressure by the two invasive herbivore siganid fishes, as was found in an experiment in Turkey where turf barrens were also present (Sala et al. 2011), and in current experiments on the Israeli coast (unpublished data).

4.3 Plankton 4.3.1 Microplanktonic algae Microplanktonic algae are regularly sampled along the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean Sea in several projects since 2001 (Fig. 27). One of the major projects is an annual project: Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters (Fig. 27A), other projects include background monitoring for several desalination programs in Ashdod region (DA, SO, VM) and fish recruitment area (RF) or monitoring industrial effluents locations as Agan chemicals (AG) or domestic treated effluents like Matash (MA) (Fig. 27B). Additional projects in the northern part of the coast include location of treated industrial effluents in Haifa Bay (ALA) and at site near the Electricity Company, Orot Rabin (OR) (Fig. 27C). The sampling stations and dates of sampling along the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean, in different projects during 2002-2011 is summarized in Table 5. During the annual project: Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters, microplankton was being monitored in Haifa Bay and along the Mediterranean coast and the results were presented in Herut et al. (2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011). The annual monitoring of microplanktonic algae is performed to identify harmful algal blooms and situations of eutrophication and to achieve a comparable database for future research and analysis of algal population as well as for biodiversity purposes. Surface water samples were taken from 5 stations in Haifa Bay (Fig. 27B) and from 6 stations along the coast, from Hof Dado to Ashqelon, at 47 sites with 10 m and 30 m water columns (Fig. 27A). The sampled microalgae were divided into two sub groups, cells < 5 μm, which includes cyanobacteria and small eukaryotic algae, and nano- and microplankton cells > 5 μm, including mostly dinoflagellates and diatoms. The sampled microalgae were identified, counted and their biomass was calculated using their cell volume as measurement unit (Strathmann, 1967, Li et al., 1992). The sampled community was characterized by its cell number, biomass, Chla concentration (evaluated both through sampling and by satellite monitoring), number of species and by the “diversity index” which is the number of species/square root of the biomass based on Menhinick's index (Karydis and Tsirtsis, 1996). In Haifa Bay, the impact of the nutrient load originating from the Qishon River can be clearly recognized in the example satellite images of chlorophyll-A (Fig. 28) and from chlorophyll –A extracts (Fig. 29). In accordance, cell abundance/L was highest near the outlet of the highly polluted Qishon River (Fig. 30). The same pattern was observed with algal biomass (Fig. 31). Species number was lowest near the outlet of the Qishon River (Fig. 32) and the same was observed for the diversity index (Fig. 33). In the shallow stations along the coast, cell counts, biomass and chlorophyll-A were higher than in deep stations (Fig. 29-30). Diversity index was lower in shallow stations (Fig. 32). Microscopic examination revealed potentially harmful species such as Prorocentrum minimum, Akashiwo sanguina, Karenia brevis, Dinophysis caudata, Pseudonitzschia spp. and Heterosigma akashiwo in higher concentrations generally at shallow stations, and in some years in a bloom near the Qishon River. Our results point to a state of eutrophication related to land-based activities in waters closest to the coast, particularly near to river outlets. Total species numbers found increased during the last four years (Fig. 34).

Fig.27: Locations of sampling stations: (A) Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters Program (NMP) stations. (B) Haifa Bay NMP (red) and ALA stations (yellow). (C) Southern stations, NMP, Agan (AG), Matash (MA), and three desalination programs DA, SO and VM.

Table 5: Sampling Stations, and dates of sampling along the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean, in different projects during 2002-2011

Area/Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Station Aug Aug Aug May Sep Aug May Sep Aug May Sep Aug May Sep Aug May Sep Aug May Sep Aug May Sep Aug May Sep Haifa BayQishonxxxxxxxxxx HB5xxxxxxxxxx HB4xxxxxxxxxx HB2xxxxxxxxxx HB1xxxxxxxxxx

Program Hof DadoH4xxxxxxxxxx H1xxxxxxxxxx TaninimH8xxxxxxxxxx H5xxxxxxxxxx AlexanderH12xxxxxxxxxx Monitoring H9xxxxxxxxxx YarqonH17xxxxxxxxxx H14xxxxxxxxxx National Soreq H18xxxxxxxxxx H21xxxxxxxxxx H29H26xxxxxxxxxx AganAG1 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx AG5 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx AG10 xx xx xx xx xx xx xx ALA ALA1 xx xx

Effluents ALA2 xx xx ALA4 xx xx

Orot Rabin OR1 x x xx xx OR4 x x xx xx Elect. comp. OR7 x x xx xx Royal Fish RF1 x x x x

RF2 x x x x

Fish farm RF3 x x x x Soreq SO5 xx desalination SO10 xx SO16 xx Mekorot DA3 x x desalination DA19 x x Via Maris VM‐1xx

Desalination VM‐5xx

50 Fig. 28: Satellite non-calibrated imaging of ChlA distribution in Haifa Bay in different seasons during 2010.

Chla Haifa Bay Chla µg/L Along coast stations µg/L 1.8 30.0 1.6 25.0 1.4 20.0 1.2 1.0 15.0 0.8 10.0 0.6 0.4 5.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 HB5 HB4 HB2 HB1 Deep Deep Deep Deep Deep Deep

Qishon Haifa Bay Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Dado Taninnim Alexander Yarqon Soreq Ashqelon Fig. 29: Average Chla concentrations in Haifa Bay and along the coast stations during 2002- 2011.

Counts 2003‐2011 Millions Cells/L 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 5 4 2 1 4 1 8 5 2 9 7 4 8 1 9 6 B B B B H H H H 1 H 1 1 1 2 2 2 H H H H w p w p H p H H H H H H o e o e w e w p w p w p l e l e o e o e o e o e a D a D l D l e l e l e Sh Sh a a D a D a D Sh Sh Sh Sh Qishon Haifa Bay Hof Dado Taninnim Alexander Yarqon Soreq Ashqelon Stations Fig.30: Average counts of microalgae during 2003-2011.

µgC/L Biomass 2002‐2011 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 5 4 2 1 4 1 8 5 2 9 7 4 8 1 9 6 B B B B H H H H 1 H 1 1 1 2 2 2 H H H H w p w p H p H H H H H H lo e lo e w e w ep w ep w ep al D al D lo D lo e lo e lo e Sh Sh a a D a D a D Sh Sh Sh Sh Qishon Haifa Bay Hof Dado Taninim Alexander Yarqon Soreq Ashqelon Station

Fig. 31: Average microalgal biomass from surface water 2002-2011.

Species No. Species 2003‐2011 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 5 4 2 1 4 1 8 5 2 9 7 4 8 1 9 6 B B B B H H H H 1 H 1 1 1 2 2 2 H H H H p p H p H H H H H H w e w e e p p w p lo e lo e w e w e ow e o e l D l D lo D lo e l e l e a a l D a D a D Sh Sh a ha h h Sh S S S Qishon Haifa Bay Hof Dado Taninnim Alexander Yarqon Soreq Ashqelon

Fig. 32: Average number of species along stations during 2003-2011.

Diversity 2003‐2011 Diversity Index 25.0

20.0

15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 4 2 1 4 1 8 5 2 9 7 4 8 1 9 6 B B B H H H H 1 H 1 1 1 2 2 2 H H H p p H p H H H H H H w e w e e p p w p lo e lo e w e w e ow e o e al D al D lo D lo e l e l e h h a a D a D a D S S Sh Sh Sh Sh Qishon HB5 Hof Dado Taninim Alexander Yarqon Soreq Ashqelon

Fig. 33: Average diversity index along stations during the years 2003-2011. 52

Tot al species 2003‐2011 Species No. 300

250

200

150 100 50 0 2003Fig. 34: 2004 Total 2005 no. of 2006species 2007 in each 2008 year from 2009 2003 2010 – 2011 2011

Years

5. Alien species off the Mediterranean coast of Israel

5.1 Soft bottom and open waters. From the late 19th century decades, marine species originated from the Indo-Pacific bio-geographic region were recorded to migrate into the Mediterranean through the opened Suez Canal. The major migration route via the Mediterranean coast of Israel was and still is the focal point of this unique phenomenon which changed dramatically the composition of the biotic community in Israeli coastal waters (Galil, 2008). The aliens migrated from the Egyptian coasts toward the coasts of Israel and the number of identified migrant species and their numbers was increased along the Israeli coast side by side with the increasing sampling effort and research. Fig. 35 presents the migrants mainly of soft bottom and in open waters identified at IOLR and Fig. 36 presents the ratio of align to local species in infaunal samples along the Israeli coast.

of No. Species

Year Fig 35: Alien species elucidated between53 2000-2011 at IOLR.

Noticeable are the increases of migrant jellyfish outbreaks. The Levantine basin is unique in hosting four alien scyphozoan jellyfish, of which two species are new to science, Rhopilema nomadica and Marivagia stellata, and a third is a first record in the Mediterranean Sea, Phylorhiza punctata (Galil et al, 1990). Two invasive Ctenophora (comb jellys) species were also reported for the first time along the Mediterranean coast of Israel, Beroe ovata and Mnemiopsis leidyi (Galil et al. 2009, 2011). The latter species set in motion a dramatic chain of events that culminated in a collapse of the major fishery and massive economic losses in the Black Sea.

Fig. 36: Ratio of align to local species in grab infaunal samples along the coast of Israel during the years 2004-2011.

5.2 Hard substrate In the rocky bottom, the dominance of the new Indo-Pacific invaders is clearly demonstrated. This was especially evident in epibenthic gastropods and bivalves, but invasive fish were also very abundant and in some areas patches of invasive macroalgae dominated the substrate. Within the macro-invertebrates, the two large rock-attached invasive oysters, Spondylus spinosus and Chama pacifica, contributed most to both rock cover (photoquadrats) and biomass (live rock samples). These two species must have profound effects as ecosystem engineers by both providing three dimensional habitat and probably increased benthos filtration rates on phytoplankton. The prevalence of invasive species is exemplified from bivalves, gastropods and fish from the dataset 54 collected in the Haifa Bay area (Fig. 37). The complete domination of invasive bivalves and gastropods highlighted the rarity or complete absence of once-abundant native species. This was also true for sea urchins that were once abundant on rocky reefs in the Israeli Mediterranean but were absent in the surveys including the marine protected area. Only very few individuals were seen during three years of diving on the Israeli coast.

Fig. 37: The relative abundance of species in three taxonomic groups on rocky reefs in the Haifa Bay area. Warm colors in the pie charts indicated non-indigenous (invasive) species. The share of invasive species for all species together in each groups is: Bivalves:99.9%, Gastropods: 95.5% and Fish: 30- 70%.

6. Barcoding

Taxonomic identification depends on the taxa-expertize specialists, not always available. A new approach was recently introduced to this field, rendering identification more accessible to the ecological and bio-geographical community, termed barcoding. It adds species-specific DNA sequences as an efficient identifying feature, supporting the long-time used morphological features. Its main advantages are its generic nature, as there is no need for a taxon-related expertise. Another advantage is the disconnection between identification and morphology, enabling to assign several morphologically different life stages, to one species. Barcoding conventions and rules are 55 internationally established through the Consortium for the Barcode of Life (CBOL; http://www.barcoding.si.edu; the Barcode of Life Data Systems (http://www.boldsystems.org) and the International Barcode of Life Project (iBOL; http://www.ibolproject.org). Our aim is to intensify the barcoding identification of the biota of the Mediterranean coast of Israel and to add it to the ISRAMAR-BIO, enabling fast and relatively simple monitoring of status and trends of biotic communities along our coast. The need for barcoding biodiversity in the Levant is connected with the rationale and objectives of the Census of Marine Life (CoML), international initiative dedicated to documenting the diversity, distribution and abundance of past and present life in the world’s oceans. The need for barcoding of the marine biota of the Levant stands also from the unique situation of this area being a hot spot for bio-invasion, a phenomenon that change dramatically the eastern Mediterranean shallow water biotic composition. There is no available barcoding list for the Levant or the Mediterranean Israeli coast that includes indigenous and non-indigenous species. To establish such a list, we have started to compile and assemble, from all public web sites and published materials, a list of organisms on which barcoding data has been generated. To help in bioinformatics data analysis, Singer and Hajibabaei (2009) have developed a web-based suite of tools to help the DNA barcode researchers analyze their vast datasets (http://www.ibarcode.org). These tools allow the user to manage barcode datasets, cull out non-unique sequences, identify haplotypes within a species, and examine the within- to between- species divergences. The DNA Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD; http://www.boldsystems.org; Ratnasingham and Hebert, 2007) further provides a unifying protocol and an informatics workbench aiding the acquisition, storage, analysis and publication of DNA barcode records. By providing specialized services, it aids the assembly of records that meet the standards needed to gain barcode designation in the global sequence databases. We already have established the expertise for barcoding biodiversity by using two molecular markers the COI (5’end of the mitochondrial gene cox1) used for identifying animals and the RuBisCo large subunit fragment used for plants (e.g., barcoding of a new invaded medusa species into the Levant coasts; Galil et al., 2010 and barcoding of a new invaded alga, Israel et al., 2010). Toward this goal, we have started in sampling algae, invertebrates and fish along the Mediterranean coast of Israel. To make this work more efficient, macrophytes, macro invertebrates on soft/hard substrates and large open water organisms (fish, medusas, etc.,) are served as the first target groups. The processing of each species includes: collection with depicted coordinates of the sampling, traditional identification when feasible, sampling of tissue for DNA extraction, digital photographing, PCR to amplify the barcode DNA fragments and DNA sequencing. When possible, at least 5 specimens are taken from each species to elucidate polymorphism. Five samples/species become voucher specimen and will be stored in one of the Israeli National Museums (Tel Aviv 56

University, the Hebrew University). Using BOLD (barcode of life data base), cluster analyses of the DNA-barcode will be performed to assess species assignments. At present the barcode of around 360 species was documented divided into:

Taxa No. of DNA-barcode Fishes >150 Bivalvia ~20 Algae 30 Annelida 23 Tunicates 30 Bryozoa 10 Cnidaria 4 Crustacea 39 Echinodermata 3 Gastropdoa 10 Sponges 34

7. Bio-geographic and ecological database

The bio-geographic data which was collected along the Mediterranean coast of Israel during the last 120 years and documented is spread in different locations, and much of it is not readily available to researchers. Bio-geographic and ecological research, which examines long term changes, requires an efficient computerized tool which would enable the multi annual analysis of accumulated data and rendering the relatively rare publications and reports accessible to the interested researchers. Therefore, few months ago IOLR launched a bio-geographic and population ecology database of the Mediterranean coast of Israel, which is in a process of construction. It is designated ISRAMAR- BIO and it is planned to be integrated in the IOLR database system together with the oceanographic ISRAMAR database and the barcoding database. It is operated at present through Microsoft ACCESS platform and it is fully compatible with international databases. It has three compartments: 1) database of publications of interest in terms of species bio-geography and ecology of the Israeli coast of the Mediterranean. The documents are archived as PDF files. This compartment takes advantage of the big collection of rare publications related to the Mediterranean coast of Israel found in IOLR library. 2) Species database, which include the bio-geographic and ecological data on species inhabiting our Mediterranean coast, with the aim to cover all reported species and all their documented sampling records. An important part of this compartment will be its connection to the molecular barcoding database. 3) Habitat compartment, which would include raw data and analyses of sampled data, aimed at monitoring and detecting changes in the community structure along our Mediterranean coasts (fig. 38). More than 160 publications including articles, reports and dissertations are already found in the PDF branch of the database and 57

an increasing number or single records in time and location, originating from them is added to the database every working day.

Zoological/Botanical Literature PDF (1) Museums Input

Species sheets (2) Ecosystems/ Habitat sheets (3) Name Study events analyzed to Synonyms describe biotic communities at Date /site Records of collection specific dates and habitats along the Israeli coast Barcoding information Picture Inquiry tools (1‐3) Analysis of ad hoc scientific questions BOLD format Species sheets

Fig. 38: The structure of the Bio-geographic and ecological database ISRAMAR-BIO. The compartments depicted in the text are similarly numbered in this flow chart. The inquiry tool is a synthetic part oif the database. It is provided by the database software and aimed at multi-annual cross studies ecological and bio-geographic analyses. Museums may provide record information but will also host the vauchers of species barcoding. The BOLD format sheets are aimed at deposition of the barcoding information in the BOLD database.

8. References

Anonymous. 1996. Protocol concerning specially protected areas and biological diversity in the Mediterranean. 30 pp. Bulleri, F., I. Bertocci, and F. Micheli. 2002. Interplay of encrusting coralline algae and sea urchins in maintaining alternative habitats. Mar. Ecol.-Prog. Ser. 243: 101-109. Chemello, R. C. R., and S. Silenzi. 2011. Vermetid reefs in the Mediterranean Sea as archives of sea-level and surface temperature changes. Chem. Ecol. 27: 121-127. Dayton, P. K. 1985. Ecology of kelp communities. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 16: 215-245. Diamant, A., A. Bentuvia, A. Baranes, and D. Golani. 1986. An analysis of rocky coastal eastern Mediterranean fish assemblages and a comparison with an adjacent small artificial reef. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 97: 269-285. Dothan, A. 1977. Communities of sessile animals in the region of Shahaf and Nachliely Islands. M.Sc. thesis submitted to Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv. Galil B. 1978. Macrobenthal Communities of Palmahim - Nizanim area (Israel). M.Sc. Thesis submitted to the Tel - Aviv University. 69 pp. Galil B.S., Lewinsohn, Ch. 1981. Macrobenthic communities of the eastern Mediterranean continental shelf. Mar. Ecol. 2: 343-352. Galil BS, Spanier, E., Ferguson, W. 1990. The Scyphomedusae of the Israeli Mediterranean coast, including two lessepsian migrants to the Mediterranean. Zool. Meded. 64(7): 95-105. Galil B.S., Goren, M. 1994. The deep sea Levantine fauna - new records and rare occurrences. Sencken. Marit. 25: 41-52. Galil BS 2008. Alien species in the Mediterranean Sea – which, when, where, why? Hydrobiologia 606(1): 105-116. Galil BS, Gevili, R. Shiganova T. 2011. Not far behind: First record of Beroe ovata Mayer 1912 (Ctenophora; Beroida; Beroidae) off the Mediterranean coast of Israel. Aquat. Invasions 6: Supplement 1: S89–S90. Galil BS, Kress N., Shiganova T. 2009. First record of Mnemiopsis leidyi A. Agassiz, 1865 (Ctenophora; Lobata; Mnemiidae) off the Mediterranean coast of Israel. Aquatic. Invasions 4: 356- 362. Galil, B.S., Gershwin, L.A., Douek, J., Rinkevich, B. 2010. Marivagia stellata gen. et sp. nov. (Scyphozoa: Rhizostomeae: Cepheidae), another alien jellyfish from the Mediterranean coast of Israel. Aquatic Invasions.

GILAT, E. 1964. The macrobenthonic invertebrate communities on the Mediterranean Continental shelf of Israel, Bull. Inst. oceanogr. Monaco 62 1290: 46 pp. Golani, D., R. Reef-Motro, S. Ekshtein, A. Baranes, Diamant. A. 2007. Ichthyofauna of the rocky coastal littoral of the Israeli Mediterranean, with reference to the paucity of Red Sea (Lessepsian) migrants in this habitat. Mar. Biol. Res. 3: 333-341. Goren, M., Galil. B.S. 2001. Fish biodiversity in the vermetid reef of Shiqmona (Israel). Mar. Ecol. Pubblicazioni Della Stazione Zoologica Di Napoli I 22: 369-378. Gottlieb, E. 1959. Study of the benthos in haifa bay. Ecology and Zoogeography of invertebrates. Ph.D thesis, submitted to the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. 134 pp. Singer G.A.C., Hajibabaei, M. 2009. iBarcode.org: web-based molecular biodiversity analysis. BMC Bioinformatics 10 Suppl 6: S14. Herut B., Shefer E., Cohen, Y. 2002. Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters in 2001, IOLR Report H29/2002. Herut B., Shefer E., Cohen, Y. 2003. Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters in 2002, IOLR Report H39/2002. Herut B., Shefer E., Cohen, Y. 2004. Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters in 2003, IOLR Report H23/2004. Herut B., Shefer E., Cohen, Y. 2005. Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters in 2004, IOLR Report H34/2005. Herut B., Cohen, Y. 2006. Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters in 2005, IOLR Report H25/2006. Herut B. Shefer E., Gordon N., Galil B., Tibor G. 2007. Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters in 2006, IOLR Report H49/2007. Herut B., Shefer E., Gordon N., Galil B., Tibor G. and Tom M. 2008. Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters in 2007, IOLR Report H52/2008. Herut B., Shefer E., Gordon N., Galil B., Tibor G. and Tom M. 2009. Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters in 2008, IOLR Report H77/2009. Herut B., Shefer E., Gordon N., Galil B., Tibor G., Tom M. and Rilov G. Silverman J. 2010. Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters in 2009, IOLR Report H64/2010. Herut B., Shefer E., Gordon N., Galil B., Tibor G., Tom M., Rilov G. and Silverman J. 2011. Environmental quality of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters in 2010, IOLR Report H68/2011. Herut B., Shefer E., Gordon N., Galil B., Tibor G., Tom M., Rilov G. and Silverman J. 2012. The National Monitoring Program of Israel's Mediterranean coastal waters – Scientific Report for 2011, IOLR Report H78/2012.

Israel, A., Einav, R., Silva, P.C., Paz, G., Chacana, M.E., Douek, J. 2010. First report of the seaweed Codium parvulum (Chlorophyta) in Mediterranean waters: recent blooms on the northern shores of Israel. Phycologia 49: 107-112. Karydis, M. and Tsirtsis, G. 1996. Ecological indices: a biometric approach for assessing eutrophication levels in marine environment. Sci. Total Envir. 186: 209-219. Li, W.K.W., Dickie, P.M., Irwin, B.D. Wood, A.M. 1992. Biomass of bacteria, cyanobacteria, prochlorophytes and photosynthetic eukaryotes in the Sargasso Sea. Deep Sea Res. 39: 501-519. Micheli, F., L. Benedetti-Cecchi, S. Gambaccini, I. Bertocci, C. Borsini, G. C. Osio, Roman. F. 2005. Cascading human impacts, marine protected areas, and the structure of Mediterranean reef assemblages. Ecological Monographs 75: 81-102. Directive 2008/56/Ec of The European parliament and of The Council. 2008. establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive).

Ratnasingham, S., Hebert P.D.N. 2007. BOLD: The Barcode of Life Data System http://www.barcodinglife.org) Molec. Ecol. Notes 7: 355–364. Safriel, U. N. 1974. Vermetid gastropods and intertidal reefs in Israel and Bermuda. Science 186: 1113-1115. Sala, E., E. Ballesteros, P. Dendrinos, A. Di Franco, F. Ferretti, D. Foley, S. Fraschetti, A. Friedlander, J. Garrabou, H. Guclusoy, P. Guidetti, B. S. Halpern, B. Hereu, A. A. Karamanlidis, Z. Kizilkaya, E. Macpherson, L. Mangialajo, S. Mariani, F. Micheli, A. Pais, K. Riser, A. A. Rosenberg, M. Sales, K. A. Selkoe, R. Starr, F. Tomas, and M. Zabala. 2012. The Structure of Mediterranean Rocky Reef Ecosystems across Environmental and Human Gradients, and Conservation Implications. Plos ONE 7. Spanier, E., S. Pisanty, M. Tom, Almog-shtayer. G. 1989. The fish assemblage on a coralligenous shallow shelf off the Mediterranean coast of northern Israel. J. Fish Biol. 35:641-649. Strathman, R.R. 1967. Estimating the organic carbon content of phytoplankton from cell volume or plasma volume. Limnol .Oceanogr. 12: 411-418. Tom, M. 1976. The benthic faunal associations of Haifa Bay. M.Sc. Thesis submitted to the Tel- Aviv University. 117 pp. Tom, M., Galil BS. 1991. The faunal associations of Haifa Bay, Mediterranean coast of Israel. P.S.Z.N. I: Mar. Ecol. 12(1): 75-86. Witman, J. D., M. Brandt, and F. Smith. 2010. Coupling between subtidal prey and consumers along a mesoscale upwelling gradient in the Galapagos Islands. Ecol. Monographs 80: 153-177.