From 1 - 10 / 70
  • Categories  

    In 2012 and 2013, Fisheries and Oceans Canada conducted benthic imagery surveys in the Davis Strait and Baffin Basin in two areas then closed to bottom fishing, the Hatton Basin Voluntary Closure (now the Hatton Basin Conservation Area) and the Narwhal Closure (now partially in the Disko Fan Conservation Area). The photo transects were established as long-term biodiversity monitoring sites to monitor the impact of human activity, including climate change, on the region’s benthic marine biota in accordance with the protocols of the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program established by the Council of Arctic Flora and Fauna. These images were analyzed in a techncial report that summarises the epibenthic megafauna found in seven image transects from the Disko Fan Conservation Area. A total of 480 taxa were found, 280 of which were identified as belonging to one of the following phyla: Annelida, Arthropoda, Brachiopoda, Bryozoa, Chordata, Cnidaria, Echinodermata, Mollusca, Nemertea, and Porifera. The remaining 200 taxa could not be assigned to a phylum and were categorised as Unidentified. Each taxon was identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level, typically class, order, or family. The summaries for each of the taxa include their identification numbers in the World Register of Marine Species and Integrated Taxonomic Information System’s databases, taxonomic hierarchies, images, and written descriptions. The report is intended to provide baseline documentation of the epibenthic megafauna in the Disko Fan Conservation Area, and serve as a taxonomic resource for future image analyses in the Arctic. Baker, E., Beazley, L., McMillan, A., Rowsell, J. and Kenchington, E. 2018. Epibenthic Megafauna of the Disko Fan Conservation Area in the Davis Strait (Eastern Arctic) Identified from In Situ Benthic Image Transects. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 3272: vi + 388 p.

  • Categories  

    Average September sea ice extent in 1979 (blue) compared with 2016 (white) and the median sea ice extent (yellow line) from 1981 to 2010 (Data: NSDIC 2016). STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/marine" target="_blank">Chapter 2</a> - Page 27 - Figure 2.4

  • Categories  

    Seasonal time series of the major zooplankton in Franklin Bay, Canada STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/plankton" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 78 - Figure 3.2.9 Mesozooplankton abundance, integrated from 10 m above the seafloor to the surface (ind m-2), in Franklin Bay during the CASES 2003-04 overwintering expedition. Most of the sampling was done at the overwintering station and a few stations were close to this site in autumn 2003 and summer 2004.

  • Categories  

    Assessment of monitoring implementation STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/marine-mammals" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 168 - Table 3.6.2

  • Categories  

    Abundance of the copepod Calanus glacialis in the Chukchi Sea, 1945-2012 (after Ershova et al. 2015b). STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/plankton" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 75 - Figure 3.2.6

  • Categories  

    Trends in abundance or diversity of sea ice biota Focal Ecosystem Components across each Arctic Marine Area. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 4 - Page 177 - Figure 4.1

  • Categories  

    Figure 3.2.1a: Map of high throughput sequencing records from the Arctic Marine Areas. Figure 3.2.1b: Map of records of phytoplankton taxa using microscopy from the Arctic Marine Areas. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/plankton" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 35 - Figure 3.2.1a and Figure 3.2.1b In terms of stations sampled, the greatest sampling effort of high-throughput sequencing in Arctic marine water columns, by far, has been in the Beaufort Sea/Amundsen Gulf region and around Svalbard. High through-put sequencing has also been used on samples from the Chukchi Sea, Canadian Arctic Archipelago, Baffin Bay, Hudson Bay, the Greenland Sea and Laptev Sea.

  • Categories  

    Benthic macro-infauna biomass in the northern Bering and Chukchi Seas from 1970 to 2012, displayed as decadal pattern Adapted from Grebmeier et al. (2015a) with permission from Elsevier. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/benthos" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 98 - Figure 3.3.6 Cumulative scores of benthos drivers for each of the 8 CAFF-AMAs. The cumulative scores are taken from the last column of Table 3.3.1. The flower chart/plot helps to visualize the data.

  • Categories  

    Ice algal community similarity of central Russian Arctic drifting stations from the 1980s to 2010s based on unpublished data by I.A. Melnikov, Shirshov Institute of Oceanology. The closer two samples (symbols) are to each other in this multi-dimensional scaling plot, the more similar their algal communities were, based on presence/absence of algal species. Samples from the same year tend to be similar and group together on the plot, with some exceptions. Dispersion across the plot suggests that community structure has changed over the decades, although sampling locations in the central Arctic have also shifted, thus introducing bias. An analysis of similarity (PRIMER version 6) with a high Global R=0.80 indicates strong community difference among decades (global R=0 indicates no difference, R=1 indicates complete dissimilarity). Regional differences were low (global R=0.26) and difference by ice type moderate (global R=0.38). Grey arrows point to the very different and only two samples from 2013. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/sea-ice-biota" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 47 - Figure 3.1.8 "For the analysis of possible interannual trends in the ice algal community, we used a data set from the Central Arctic, the area most consistently and frequently sampled (Melnikov 2002, I. Melnikov, Shirshov Institute, unpubl. data). Multivariate community structure was analysed based on a presence-absence matrix of cores from 1980 to 2013. The analysis is biased by the varying numbers of analysed cores taken per year ranging widely from 1 to 24, ice thickness between 0.6 and 4.2 m, and including both first-year as well as multiyear sea ice. Locations included were in a bounding box within 74.9 to 90.0 °N and 179.9°W to 176.6°E and varied among years."

  • Categories  

    Trends in kittiwake colonies 2001-2010, based on linear regression with year as the explanatory variable. Slope of the regression is red = negative trend, blue = positive trend; shaded circle = significant trend (at p<0.05), open circle = non-significant trend. Non-significant deviation from zero could imply a stable population, but in some cases was due to low sample size and low power. Provided with permission from Descamps et al. (in prep). STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/seabirds" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 135 - Figure 3.5.3 This figure is compiled from data from researchers working throughout circumpolar regions, primarily members of the Circumpolar Seabird Group, an EN of CAFF/seabirds. Dr. Sebastien Decamps conducted the analysis and produced the original figure; the full results will be available in an article in prep titled: “Descamps et al. in prep. Circumpolar dynamics of black-legged kittiwakes track large-scale environmental shifts and oceans' warming rate.” [expected submission spring 2016]. Colony population trends were analyzed using a linear regression with the year as explanatory variable. Based on slope of the regression (which cannot be exactly 0) colonies are either Declining (Slope of the regression <0) or Increasing (Slope of the regression >0). (Colonies may have had a negative but not significant slope, and could be stable but for some others, the slope is not significant due to small sample size / low power; thus we cannot say that all colonies with a non- significant slope are stable. The threshold was put at 5% to assess the significance of the trend.