From 1 - 10 / 55
  • Categories      

    Phytoplankton species richness averaged by time periods ±SE in each Arctic region. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 49 - Figure 4-20

  • Categories      

    Alpha diversity (± standard error) of river (a) diatoms from benthic samples, (b) benthic macroinvertebrates, and (c) fish within hydrobasins in western and eastern North America plotted as a function of the average latitude in each hydrobasin. Alpha diversity is rarefied to 10 stations per hydrobasin, using size level 5 hydrobasins for all panels. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 5 - Page 85 - Figure 5-2

  • Categories      

    Results of circumpolar assessment of lake littoral benthic macroinvertebrates, indicating (a) the location of littoral benthic macroinvertebrate stations, underlain by circumpolar ecoregions; (b) ecoregions with many littoral benthic macroinvertebrate stations, colored on the basis of alpha diversity rarefied to 80 stations; (c) all ecoregions with littoral benthic macroinvertebrate stations, colored on the basis of alpha diversity rarefied to 10 stations; (d) ecoregions with at least two stations in a hydrobasin, colored on the basis of the dominant component of beta diversity (species turnover, nestedness, approximately equal contribution, or no diversity) when averaged across hydrobasins in each ecoregion. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 65 - Figure 4-29

  • Categories      

    Local diatom species richness of Arctic diatom assemblages from stream scrapes, showing (left) richness as a function of latitude, and (right) site-specific richness. A LOESS smoother (blue line) with a span of 0.75 and a 95% confidence interval (grey shading) was applied to the data (left) to better highlight the general trend. Coloured circles on the map indicate species richness at the sampling sites. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 37 - Figure 4-10

  • Categories      

    Figure 4 15 Comparison of the relative abundance of select diatom taxonomic groups between core bottoms (pre-industrial sediments; x- axis) and core tops (modern sediments; y-axis) with a 1:1 line to indicate whether there were higher abundances in fossil samples (below red line) or modern samples (above red line). State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 2 - Page 15 - Figure 2-1

  • Categories  

    Although the circumpolar countries endeavor to support monitoring programs that provide good coverage of Arctic and subarctic regions, this ideal is constrained by the high costs associated with repeated sampling of a large set of lakes and rivers in areas that often are very remote. Consequently, freshwater monitoring has sparse, spatial coverage in large parts of the Arctic, with only Fennoscandia and Iceland having extensive monitoring coverage of lakes and streams Figure 6-2 Current state of monitoring for river FECs in each Arctic country State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 6 - Page 94 - Figure 6-2

  • Categories      

    Figure 2-1 The CBMP takes an adaptive Integrated Ecosystem based Approach to monitoring and data creation. This figure illustrates how management questions, conceptual ecosystem models based on science and Traditional Knowledge (TK), and existing monitoring networks are designed to guide the four CBMP Steering Groups (marine, freshwater, terrestrial, and coastal) in their development. Monitoring outputs (data) are designed to feed into the assessment and decision-making processes (data, communication and reporting). The findings are then intended to feed back into the monitoring program. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 2 - Page 15 - Figure 2-1

  • Categories  

    Although the circumpolar countries endeavor to support monitoring programs that provide good coverage of Arctic and subarctic regions, this ideal is constrained by the high costs associated with repeated sampling of a large set of lakes and rivers in areas that often are very remote. Consequently, freshwater monitoring has sparse, spatial coverage in large parts of the Arctic, with only Fennoscandia and Iceland having extensive monitoring coverage of lakes and streams Figure 6-1 Current state of monitoring for lake FECs in each Arctic country. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 6 - Page 93 - Figure 6-1

  • Categories      

    Estimation of diatom assemblage changes over a period of about 200 years (top versus bottom sediment cores). State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 41 - Figure 4-14

  • Categories      

    Figure 4 17 Results of circumpolar assessment of lake phytoplankton,(a) the location of phytoplankton stations, underlain by circumpolar ecoregions; (b) ecoregions with many phytoplankton stations, colored on the basis of alpha diversity rarefied to 35 stations; (c) all ecoregions with phytoplankton stations, colored on the basis of alpha diversity rarefied to 10 stations; (d) ecoregions with at least two stations in a hydrobasin, colored on the basis of the dominant component of beta diversity (species turnover, nestedness, approximately equal contribution, or no diversity) when averaged across hydrobasins in each ecoregion. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 56 - Figure 4-17