The use of ecological models to assess indicators in support of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive Chiara Piroddi
Brussels, 20-­‐‑21 January 2016
Background
*  EU FP7 project ‘Ocean of Tomorrow’: DEVelopment Of innovative Tools for understanding marine biodiversity and assessing Good Environmental Status (DEVOTES)
*  Goal: Study marine biodiversity and those components of marine food-­‐‑webs and seafloor integrity for the four EU Seas that relate to impacts of human activities and climate change
Paper aims
*  Review the current capabilities of the modelling community to inform on indicators outlined in the MSFD with a particular emphasis on biodiversity (D1), food webs (D4), non-­‐‑indigenous species (D2) and seafloor integrity (D6)
*  Assess which models are able to demonstrate the linkages between indicators and ecosystem structure/function and the impact of pressures on state and thus indicators
*  Report on gaps in model capability and suggest needs for development Catalogue Structure *  Model derived indicator (MDI)
*  Confidence/uncertainty *  MDI type: 1. Static; 2. Dynamic or 3. Spatial *  Source dynamic *  Model/MDI in relation to MSFD Descriptors *  State or pressure MDI
(D1–D11)
*  MDI target/reference values and unit *  Model/MDI correspondence with biodiversity *  MDI status of development: 1. Operational, components (e.g., phytoplankton and fish) 2. Under development; 3. Conceptual
*  Model/MDI coverage of specific habitat types and geographical range/scale *  Model name and type
*  Model/MDI relation to specific pressures
*  Data requirements Results: models *  Models: 44 identified *  Models types: Hydrodynamic-­‐‑biogeochemical (36%) End-­‐‑to-­‐‑end (18%)
Species distribution/habitat suitability (14%)
Bio-­‐‑optical (14%)
Multispecies (14%)
Biogeochemical (2%)
1/7. Biogeochemical and coupled physical–biogeochemical models; 2 and 3 multispecies Meta-­‐‑community (2%)
models (either at species or at food web level); 4. species distribution/Habitat Suitability; 5. meta-­‐‑community models and 6. bio-­‐‑optical models. E2E models encompass all of them.
Results: indicators *  Model Derived Indicators (MDI): 201 identified *  MDI types: Spatial dynamic (41%)
Static (40%)
Dynamic (19%)
*  MDI status of development
Operational (64%) Under-­‐‑development (33%)
Conceptual (3%)
MDI Major categories
Categories
1 Biomass
Example of MDI
%
57
2 Diversity indicators Trophic level of community 13
3 Physical, hydrological and chemical 4 Primary or secondary production
Phosphate concentration
12
9
5 Spatial distribution Zooplankton distribution range
6
6 Ecological Network Analysis
Finn’s cycle index
2
7 Species life-­‐‑history
Species mean length and weight
1
Results Models in relation to MSFD descriptors
Models/MDI in relation to biodiversity components
1. Ammonium concentration
19. Phytoplankton distributional range
Biogeochemical
Bio-­‐optical
Meta-­‐community
Multispecies
Hydrodynamic-­‐ biogeochemical E2E
SDM / Habitat Suitability
No MDI
Presence MDI
High Majority MDI
Energy/Noise
D6 D7 D8 2. Bacteria
D9 D10 D11
3. Bacteria distributional range
4. Biomass and production of zooplankton
5. Biomass of fodder zooplankton 6. Chlorophyll-­‐‑a concentration
7. Current
8. Denitrification layer depth (bed)
9. Eastward_sea_water_velocity
10. Nitrate concentration
11. Nutrient concentration variability
12. Oxygen
13. Oxygen penetration depth (bed)
14. pH
15. Phosphate concentration
16. Phytoplankton biomass
17. Phytoplankton biomasss:-­‐‑ diatoms
18. Phytoplankton biomasss:-­‐‑ dinoflagellates Seafloor integrity
Hydrological alteration
Contaminants
Contaminants in food
Marine litter
D5
Human induced eutrophication
Food webs
D2 D3 D4
Non-­‐indigenous species
Commercial fish
Model type
Biological diversity
D1
20. Phytoplankton functional types (Diatoms, Pico, Nano, Flagellates)
21. Population size:-­‐‑ Mnemioplsis leidyi (biomass) 22. Population size:-­‐‑ Aurelia aurita ( biomass) 23. Population size:-­‐‑ Noctiluca scinitillans, (biomass) 24. Primary production
25. Ratio fodder zoo/jelly (biomass) 26. Salinity
27. Sea water salinity
28. Sea water temperature
29. Sea_surface_height_above_sea_level
30. Silicate concentration
31. Suspended sediment concentration
32. Temperature
33. Total benthic oxic respiration
34. Zoobenthos biomass
35. Zooplankton functional types (Meso, Micro, Het. Flagellates)
36. Zooplnkton distributional range
Results Models geographical distribution/ spatial coverage
# Model capabilities to address pressures
Conclusions: gaps and development needs *  Strong presence of certain models/areas targeted by DEVOTES partners (e.g., Dynamic Energy Budget models not included)
*  Regarding the DEVOTES Biodiversity related descriptors, D2 is the least assessed and D6 lacks indicators on biogenic substrate/seabed extent
*  D8, D9, D10, D11 are not addressed by any models
*  Under development models/indicators are still quite numerous
*  Not all the models are able to address uncertainty
*  Target seiings and/or reference values unclear to model developers
*  Of the existing models, urge the need to improve species diversity (e.g., increase or refine species selections in models) , spatial resolutions of selected species/taxa (e.g., spatial coverage not available or still under development for species/taxa), linkages between pressures and ecosystem function
*  Of the pressures: underwater noise, marine liier, contamination by microbial pathogens and by radionuclides require further development
*  Data availability is a constraint Current project II Current project I III IV Hindcasting the Mediterranean marine ecosystem using the software Ecopath with Ecosim and Ecospace
100+ functional groups, assigned to the 4 MSFD zones
Time frame 1950 – 2010
Entire basin at 0.1 dd grid
Piroddi et al. Modelling the Mediterranean marine ecosystem as a whole: addressing the challenge of complexity. 2015. MEPS 533: 47-­‐‑65
Ecopath for the Med 1.  Piscivores cetaceans; 2.  Other cetaceans; 3.  Pinnipeds; 4.  Seabirds;
5.  Seaturtles;
6.  Large pelagics;
7.  Medium pelagics;
8.  European pilchard;
9.  European anchovy;
10.  Other small pelagics;
11.  Large demersals;
12.  European hake;
13.  Medium demersals; 14.  Small demersals; 15.  Deep fish; 16.  Sharks; 17.  Rays and skates;
18.  Benthopelagic cephalopods;
19.  Benthic cephalopods;
20.  Bivalves and gastropods;
21.  Crustaceans; 22.  Jellyfish; 23.  Benthos; 24.  Zooplankton;
25.  Phytoplankton;
26.  Seagrass;
27.  Detritus; 28.  Discards
Hindcast: Ecosim
Observed biomass data
Drivers •  Fish stocks: MEDITS, MEDIAS
•  Reconstructed fishing effort (1950-­‐‑2010; •  Pinnipeds: few data points for 1960s, 1970s,1980s and 1990s
•  Sea turtles from 1985 onwards
•  Deep fish and benthic inv.: few data point from 1990s (Wei et al., 2010)
FISHSTAT, GFCM, Sea Around Us Project)
•  Primary production: -­‐‑  1960-­‐‑2010 (GETM-­‐‑ERGOM, JRC)
-­‐‑  1990-­‐‑2010 (POM-­‐‑ERSEM, HCMR)
Modelling the historical impact of environmental and fisheries drivers on the Mediterranean marine ecosystem: an ecosystem based management approach. In prep
O_PI.W
P_PI.W
O_PI.A
P_PI.A
O_PI.E
P_PI.E
O_PI.I
P_PI.I
Biomass (tons*km2)
O_ST
P_ST
O_LP
P_LP
1
Hindcast: Ecosim W
2
Year
A
Year
I
Year
E
3
4
5
Year
6
Year
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Years
Year
Hindcast: Ecospace
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
Layers: 1. Depth; 2. Salinity surface and boiom; 3. SST and boiom; 4. Substratum
Constraint: MSFD areas
Fishing effort, PP and trophic interactions
Entire basin at 0.1 dd grid
Modelling the historical impact of environmental and fisheries drivers on the Mediterranean marine ecosystem: an ecosystem based management approach. In prep
Environmental responses: Aquamap Environmental responses: GAM Temperature and Salinity: European pilchard and European anchovy Giannoulaki et al 2013. Mediterranean Sensitive Habitats. DG MARE Specific Contract SI2.600741, Final Report, 557 p. e.g., Whales
Computed habitat capacity
Whale abundance and distribution
MSFD indicators
Potential MSFD indicators
30°0'0"E
0.00016
0.00014
40°0'0"N
0.00012
PrB
20°0'0"E
.
Top predators/Tot B
High : 0.00016
0.00010
30°0'0"N
Low : 0.0001
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
Species diversity
2000
2010
0°0'0"
Years
10°0'0"E
20°0'0"E
30°0'0"E
.
11
12
50°0'0"N
40°0'0"N
K
Keystone index
Phytoplankton biomass
PP
Catch/biomass
Biomass commercial species
PPR
Discards/landings
TL of catch
10°0'0"E
10
Species distribution
Species biomass
Community distribution
Community biomass
TL of community
Alien species distribution
Alien species biomass
Prop. Large predatory fish
Prop. Piscivorous
Top predators/tot biomass
Ratio invertebrates/fish
Species diversity
0°0'0"
Tot Predators/Tot B
Species diversity
High : 13
30°0'0"N
9
Food webs
Human ind. eutrophication
Commercial fish
Indicators
Non-­‐indigenous species
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5
Biological diversity
MSFD descriptors
Using EwE to support MSFD and EU Biodiversity Strategy 1950
1960
1970
1980
Years
1990
2000
Low : 8
2010
Piroddi t al. An ecosystem-­‐based approach for the Mediterranean Sea in support of the EU Biodiversity Strategy and the Marine Strategy Piroddi et al. An ecosystem-­‐‑
beased approach for the Mediterranean Sea in support of the EU Biodiversity Strategy and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive. In preparation Framework Directive. In preparation