unknown
Type of resources
Available actions
Topics
Keywords
Contact for the resource
Provided by
Years
Formats
Representation types
Update frequencies
status
Scale
-
Phytoplankton percent composition by dominant classes across the three Arctic regions, using relative presence across stations calculated from from presence – absence data. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 48 - Figure 4-19
-
Trends in abundance of seabird Focal Ecosystem Components across each Arctic Marine Area. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 4 - Page 181 - Figure 4.5
-
Trends in abundance of marine mammal Focal Ecosystem Components across each Arctic Marine Area. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 4 - Page 182 - Figure 4.6
-
Box plot represents the homogeneity of assemblages in high Arctic (n=190), low Arctic (n=370) and sub-Arctic lakes (n=1151), i.e., the distance of individual lake phytoplankton assemblages to the group centroid in multivariate space. The mean distance to the centroid for each of the regions can be seen as an estimated of beta diversity, with increasing distance equating to greater differences among assemblages. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 48 - Figure 4-18
-
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
-
Maximum LTA (long-term average) August air temperatures for the circumpolar region, with ecoregions used in the analysis of the SAFBR outlined in black. Source for temperature layer: Fick and Hijmans (2017). State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 5 - Page 89 - Figure 5-5
-
Figure 4-16 Map showing the magnitude of change in diatom assemblages for downcore samples, with beta diversity used as a measure of the compositional differences between samples at different depths along the core. Boundaries for the beta diversity categories are based on distribution quartiles (0-0.1, 0.1-1.24, 1.24-1.5, >1.5), where the lowest values (blue dots) represent the lowest degree of change in diatom assemblage composition along the length of the core in each lake. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 2 - Page 15 - Figure 2-1
-
Boundaries of the 22 ecoregions (grey lines) as defined in the CSMP (Irons et al. 2015) and the Arctic Marine Areas (colored polygons with names in legend). Filled circles show locations of seabird colony sites recommended for monitoring (‘key sites’). The current level of monitoring plan implementation are green = fully implemented, amber = partially implemented, red = not implemented. The CSMP provides implementation maps for each forage guild. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/seabirds" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 132 - Figure 3.5.1 This graphic displays the status of seabird monitoring at key sites in CBMP areas across the Arctic.
-
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
-
Current state of monitoring for Arctic terrestrial biodiversity FECs in each Arctic state. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 4 - Page 102 - Figure 4.1