funded project
“Ecosystem-based approach for developing and
testing pelagic food web indicators”
Overview of current project status
Martina Kadin, Marian Torres, Michele Casini, Anna
Gårdmark, Magnus Huss, Ingo Fetzer, Thorsten
Blenckner & Saskia A. Otto
SwAM, Gothenburg, 01/10/2015
1
The team…
Marian
Torres
Martina
Kadin
Anna
Gårdmark
Saskia A.
Otto
Ingo
Fetzer
Michele
Casini
Thorsten
Blenckner
01/10/15
Magnus
Huss
2
Topics
Project status
• Concept and strategy  where are we now?
Indicators
• Presentation of selected zooplankton (ZPI) and
developed fish indicators (FI) used in the analysis
Two-trophic
• Selected results from food web indicator model
approaches
– Two-trophic-level set-up
– Three-trophic-level set-up
Three-trophic
• Scenario selection for model simulations
• Methodological workshop
• Deliverables of final results
01/10/15
3
Where are we now?
Project status
Objectives
Indicators
• develop D4 indicators for pelagic fish (piscivores and
planktivores)
Two-trophic
• test for single indicator responses in the pelagic food web to
single pressures and evaluate potential GES targets within
MSFD D4,
• test performance of single indicators and GES targets under
multiple interacting pressures,
01/10/15
Three-trophic
• quantitatively assess the risk of indicators being adversely
affected by combinations of external pressures and trophic
interactions and evaluate trade-offs of GES targets by
simulating different climate, eutrophication and fishing
scenarios for the near future.
4
Indicators
Scoping
Identify goals of EBM and
threats to achieving goals
Develop ecosystem indicators
and targets
Two-trophic
Adaptive
Management and
Monitoring
Integrated
ecosystem
assessment
cycle
Project status
It’s a continuous process ….
Risk Analysis
Three-trophic
Monitoring of
Ecosystem
Indicators
And Management
Effectiveness
Management Strategy
Evaluation
01/10/15
Implementation of
Management
Levin
et al. 2009 PLoS Biology
Action
5
It’s a continuous process ….
Project status
Develop ecosystem
Indicators and targets
Indicators
Monitoring
of
Ecosystem
Indicators
And
Management
Effectiveness
Identify potential food
web indicators
Test another
indicator or
develop new
one
Test indicators
Risk Analysis
Two-trophic
Adaptive
Management and
Monitoring
Scoping
Identify goals of EBM and
threats to achieving goals
Management Strategy
Evaluation
Meaningful indicator
Not so meaningful indicator
Three-trophic
Indicator
value
Levin et al. 2009 PLoS Biology
Pressure / Another indicator
01/10/15
6
Indicators
Project status
Study areas
Two-trophic
SD 25: Bornholm Basin (BB)
SD 28: Gotland Basin (GB)
Basin-scale:
• Climate variables
• Nutrients
01/10/15
Three-trophic
Baltic-wide:
• Fishing mortality
7
Project status
Overview of proposed indicators
Zooplankton indicators
Two-trophic
Indicators
Total ZP abundance (TZA)
Mean zooplankton size (MS) [MS = TZB/TZA)
Biomass of copepods
Biomass of microphageous zooplankton
Ratio zooplankton-phytoplankton biomass
Ratio cladoceran / copepod biomass (RCC)
Three-trophic






01/10/15
8
Project status
Overview of proposed indicators
Prey fish indicators
Indicators
 Abundance of sprat
 Abundance of herring
 Abundance of stickleback
Two-trophic
Predatory fish indicator
 Abundance of cod




01/10/15
Three-trophic
Size-based food-web indicators
Small prey fish (Biomass) Sprat + herring < 10 cm
Large predatory fish (Biomass) Cod > 37 cm
Large Fish Indicator
Mean Maximum Length
9
Three-trophic
Two-trophic
Indicators
Project status
Results from two-trophic-level set-up
01/10/15
10
Project status
Results from two-trophic-level set-up
Indicators
FISHING
CLIMATE
Three-trophic
Two-trophic
EUTROPHICATION
Modelling Approach:
Multivariate AutoRegressive State-Space
(MARSS)
01/10/15
11
Project status
Abundance-based indicator (Bornholm
Basin)
SAL
0.25*
AB_herring
0.45*
-0.23
SAL
0.23
Two-trophic
0.79*
-0.50*
DIP
-0.49*
DIN
AB_sprat
0.57*
0.06
*
Significant (CI, 95%)
Intra-specific interaction
Inter-specific interaction
Fishing
Eutrophication
01/10/15
Climate
12
Three-trophic
0.24*
F herr
Indicators
AB_cod
Project status
Abundance-based indicator (Bornholm
Basin)
SAL
Indicators
AB_cod
AB_sprat
DIP
*
SAL
Temp
Significant (CI, 95%)
Intra-specific interaction
Inter-specific interaction
Fishing
Eutrophication
01/10/15
Climate
13
Three-trophic
AB_herring
Two-trophic
F cod
F herr
Project status
Abundance-based indicator (Bornholm
Basin)
SAL
AB_sprat
DIP
*
SAL
Significant (CI, 95%)
Intra-specific interaction
Inter-specific interaction
Fishing
Eutrophication
01/10/15
Climate
14
Three-trophic
Two-trophic
DIN
F herr
AB_herring
Indicators
AB_cod
Project status
Size-based indicator (Bornholm Basin)
LPF
Indicators
0.75*
-0.10
+
SPF -0.33
-0.36*
DIN
Two-trophic
-0.04
0.39*
F s+h
*
Significant (CI, 95%)
Intra-specific interaction
Inter-specific interaction
Fishing
Eutrophication
Climate
01/10/15
15
Three-trophic
SAL
0.27*
Three-trophic
Two-trophic
Indicators
Project status
Results of three-trophic-level set-up
01/10/15
16
Climate
Fishing
Fishing
Climate
SPF
SPF
Fishing
Climate
Climate
TZA
MS
Chlorophyll α Climate Chlorophyll α Climate
Modelling Approach:
Generalized Additive Models
with and without Threshold-formulations
(GAMs & TGAMs)
01/10/15
Fishing
Cod
Climate
Stickleback
Sprat
Herring
Fishing
Climate
Climate
Fishing
Climate
ZPI
Chlorophyll α Climate
ZPI:
i. Total Zooplankton Abundance
- TZA
ii. Mean size - MS
iii.Ratio Cladocerans Copepods
17
Indicators
LPF
Two-trophic
LPF
Three-trophic
Fishing
Project status
Three-trophic-level indicator models
Climate
Stickleback
Sprat
Herring
Fishing
Climate
Climate
Fishing
Climate
ZPI
Chlorophyll α Climate
Step 2
• Coupling selected models
01/10/15
Indicators
Cod
Two-trophic
• Non-linear relationships
• With & without thresholds
• Selection of best model
Fishing
Three-trophic
Step 1
• Modelling of individual
indicators with pressures
• Using upper / lower trophic
level + competitors as
pressures as well
Project status
Three-trophic-level indicator models
ZPI:
i. Total Zooplankton Abundance
- TZA
ii. Mean size - MS
iii.Ratio Cladocerans Copepods
18
Project status
Selected results – Bornholm Basin
Fcod
Temp
Salinity
Indicators
Cod
Fsprat
Temp
Sprat
Herring
Stickleback
TZA
Three-trophic
Fsprat
Temp
Salinity
Chl a
01/10/15
Two-trophic
Cod –
Sprat – (Herring) – Stickleback –
Total Zooplankton Abundance
19
Selected results – Bornholm Basin
Indicators
10
Two-trophic
8
2
Three-trophic
4
6
Observed ln(Cod)
Simulated ln(Cod)
Observed ln(Sprat)
Simulated ln(Sprat)
Observed ln(TZA)
Simulated ln(TZA)
0
Observed and predicted (with 95% CI) time series
12
Project status
Cod –
Sprat – (Herring) – Stickleback
–
TZA
1980
01/10/15
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
20
Selected results – Bornholm Basin
Temp
Cod
Salinity
If TEMPsum ≤ r
If TEMPsum > r
01/10/15
ln.RCC ~ i1(TEMP.sum<=r) +
b1 * SALININTYwinter +
TEMPERATUREsummer +
Chlorophyll asummer + Sprat
ln.RCC ~ i2*(TEMP.sum>r)) +
b2 * SALININTYwinter +
TEMPERATUREsummer
Sprat
RCC
& GM/TGAM
ZPI Three-trophic
Temp
Two-trophic
Indicators
Cod – Sprat (Herring, Stickleback) –
Ratio Cladocerans Copepods
Project status
Fcod
Temp
Salinity
Chl a
21
Project status
Selected results – Bornholm Basin
Indicators
15
Two-trophic
10
5
1980
01/10/15
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
22
Three-trophic
0
-5
Observed ln(Cod)
Simulated ln(Cod)
Observed ln(Sprat)
Simulated ln(Sprat)
Observed ln(RCC)
Simulated ln(RCC)
-10
Observed and predicted (with 95% CI) time series
Cod – Sprat (Herring, Stickleback) –
Ratio Cladocerans Copepods
Conclusions at this point
• Single indicators often respond strongly to multiple
drivers
– Sub-basin-differences in several cases
– Suboptimal performance of some proposed indicators (e.g.
Copepod biomass, Microphageous ZP biomass)
• Species interactions are important in both two-trophic
and tri-trophic set-ups, both for abundance-based and
size-based indicators
– Although some indicators not related to any other 
Identification of poor D4 indicators (given a focus on the
monitored pelagic food-web)
01/10/15
23
Conclusions at this point
• Accounting for increasing complexity of species
interactions show varying robustness of driver influence
on indicators
– Some robust (e.g. salinity  cod)
– Others change (e.g. going from two-trophic to tri-trophic changes
the conclusion on herring or sprat as a useful D4 indicator, as
well as manageable drivers)
• Threshold-like relationships relevant
– Particularly important at lower trophic levels
– Not unexpected in a system that has experienced regime shifts
• Multiple drivers acting directly and indirectly on the foodweb are essential
01/10/15
24
Future steps
• Evaluate trade-offs  run simulations with
different climate, eutrophication and fishing
scenarios for the near future
• Workshop progressing D4 indicator
development, in spring
• Deliverables of final results
01/10/15
25
12
10
8
2
4
6
Observed ln(Cod)
Simulated ln(Cod)
Observed ln(Sprat)
Simulated ln(Sprat)
Observed ln(TZA)
Simulated ln(TZA)
0
best-case vs. worst-case scenario
Observed and predicted (with 95% CI) time series
Scenario selection for model
simulations
intermediate IPCC emission scenario (A1B)
nutrient decrease
(Baltic Sea Action
Plan)
nutrient increase
(“Business-AsUsual”)
Clupeid fishing:
=0.5*MSY
Clupeid fishing:
=2*MSY
Cod recovery plan
01/10/15
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
Past cod fishing mortality
26
2005
Stort tack!
01/10/15
27