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

Fish species observations from Traditional Knowledge (TK ) literature, plotted in the approximate geographic location of observed record, with symbol colour indicating the number of fish species recorded and shape indicating the approximate time period of observation. Results are from a systematic literature search of TK sources from Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Fennoscandia, and Russia. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 75- Figure 4-37

Average relative abundance of the main zooplankton groups (calanoid copepods, cyclopoid copepods, cladocerans) for the sub-Arctic (n=150), low- Arctic (n=154), and high-Arctic (n=55) regions. Samples with a single taxon have been excluded. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 61 - Figure 4-28

Fish diversity characteristics in three geographical regions: Alaska, Iceland, and Fennoscandia. Gamma diversity is based the total number of species sampled in hydrobasins of each ecoregion. Alpha diversity shows the mean basin species richness (95% confidence interval) and beta diversity shows the component of beta diversity, nestedness or turnover, that dominated within each of the ecoregions; gamma, alpha, and beta diversity estimates were based on a subset of basins where a minimum of 10 stations were sampled. All maps are drawn to the same scale. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 77 - Figure 4-39

Figure 4-5 Terrestrial ecoregions that are included within the circumpolar region within the CAFF boundary and/or the ABA boundaries. Source: Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World (TEOW; Olson et al. 2001). State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 28 - Figure 4-5

Circumpolar Arctic distribution of Cyanophyceae using presence- absence data from all sites sampled between 1980-2015. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 50 - Figure 4-21

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

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

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

30-year trends in alpha diversity of benthic macroinvertebrates in the stony littoral zones (1 m depth) of two Scandinavian Arctic/alpine lakes: Lake Abiskojaure (upper panel) and Lake Stor-Tjulträsk (lower panel). State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 71- Figure 4-35