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

Conceptual model of the FECs and processes mediated by more than 2,500 species of Arctic arthropods known from Greenland, Iceland, Svalbard, and Jan Mayen. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 37- Figure 3.7

Redundancy analysis of percentage species taxa share (taxa richness relative to richness of all taxa) among 5 FECs (phytoplankton, macrophytes, zooplankton, benthic macroinvertebrates and fish) in 13 Fennoscandian lakes (panels A and B) and among 3 FECs in 39 Fennoscandian lakes (panels C and D).The upper panels show lake ordinations, while the bottom panels show explanatory environmental variables (red arrows), as indicated by permutation tests (p < 0.05). Avg%Richness: average species taxa richness as a percentage of richness of all FECs (i.e., including benthic algae if present); %Richness BMI: relative taxa share in benthic macroinvertebrates; %EvergreenNLF: percentage cover of evergreen needle-leaf forests. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 5 - Page 87 - Figure 5-4

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

Distribution and observed trends of wild Rangifer populations throughout the circumpolar Arctic (from The Circum Arctic Rangifer Monitoring and Assessment Network, CARMA). Note: Wild boreal forest reindeer have not been mapped by CARMA and thus are not represented here. Published in the Arctic Biodiversity Trends 2010 - Selected indicators of change, INDICATOR #02 - released in 2010

We present the first digital seafloor geomorphic features map (GSFM) of the global ocean. The GSFM includes 131,192 separate polygons in 29 geomorphic feature categories, used here to assess differences between passive and active continental margins as well as between 8 major ocean regions (the Arctic, Indian, North Atlantic, North Pacific, South Atlantic, South Pacific and the Southern Oceans and the Mediterranean and Black Seas). The GSFM provides quantitative assessments of differences between passive and active margins: continental shelf width of passive margins (88 km) is nearly three times that of active margins (31 km); the average width of active slopes (36 km) is less than the average width of passive margin slopes (46 km); active margin slopes contain an area of 3.4 million km2 where the gradient exceeds 5°, compared with 1.3 million km2 on passive margin slopes; the continental rise covers 27 million km2 adjacent to passive margins and less than 2.3 million km2 adjacent to active margins. Examples of specific applications of the GSFM are presented to show that: 1) larger rift valley segments are generally associated with slow-spreading rates and smaller rift valley segments are associated with fast spreading; 2) polar submarine canyons are twice the average size of non-polar canyons and abyssal polar regions exhibit lower seafloor roughness than non-polar regions, expressed as spatially extensive fan, rise and abyssal plain sediment deposits – all of which are attributed here to the effects of continental glaciations; and 3) recognition of seamounts as a separate category of feature from ridges results in a lower estimate of seamount number compared with estimates of previous workers. Reference: Harris PT, Macmillan-Lawler M, Rupp J, Baker EK Geomorphology of the oceans. Marine Geology.

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

Study sites across the Arctic where phenological mismatches between timing of reproduction and peak abundance in food have been studied for terrestrial bird species. Grey symbols show study sites where this phenomenon has been studied for <10 years, light red symbols show sites with >10 years of data but no strong evidence of an increasing mismatch, and dark red symbols indicate sites with >10 years of data and strong evidence of an increasing mismatch. Circles indicate studies of shorebirds, squares for waterfowl and diamonds(triancle) for both shorebirds and passerines. Graphic: Thomas Lameris, adapted from Zhemchuzhnikov (submitted). STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 65 - Figure Box 3.3

Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) 2013. Figure 4.2. Major flyways of Arctic birds. Bird migration links Arctic breeding areas to all other parts of the globe (adapted from ACIA 2005). Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna, CAFF 2013 - Akureyri . Arctic Biodiversity Assessment. Status and Trends in Arctic biodiversity. - Birds(Chapter 4) page 146

Long-term monitoring programs on benthic fauna are missing for large areas of the Arctic. In areas where repeated monitoring has occurred, it is difficult to compare data due to different sampling approaches and different targets of monitoring efforts. There is a need for an international standardization of long- term benthic monitoring. The CBMP Benthos Expert Network has identified potential ways to improve benthic monitoring coverage, and has come up with a map showing a Pan Arctic station map.