Figure 4 -36 Freshwater fish sampling stations (A), ecoregion alpha diversity in each of the sampled ecoregions, as quantified by estimates of species richness from reference texts (Muus and Dahlstrøm 1971, Scott and Crossman 1973, Mecklenburg et al. 2002) and expert knowledge (academic and government scientists and traditional knowledge) (B), and ecoregion beta diversity (C) characterized according to components of beta diversity as either nestedness, turnover, no diversity (none, beta = 0), or similar nestedness and turnover (nestedness ~ turnover) in the circumpolar Arctic. Ecoregions are shown only where sampling stations occur. Fish sampling stations included in this study assessed complete fish assemblages at each location. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 74 - Figure 4-36

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 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

Critical to the successful implementation of EBM in the Arctic is the existence of a cohesive circumpolar approach to the collection and management of data and the application of compatible frameworks, standards and protocols that this entails. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/marine" target="_blank">Chapter 2</a> - Page 29 - Box Figure 2.2

The Arctic territory is roughly subdivided along two main axes in latitudinal subzones (Fig. 9.1) and longitudinal floristic provinces (Fig. 9.2). The latitudinal northsouth axis mainly reflects the present climate gradient divided into five different subzones, which are separated according to climate and vegetation in the lowlands of each zone. Published in the Arctic Biodiversity Assessment, Chapter 9 - released in 2013

Map of Arctic Marine Areas as defined by the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program (CBMP), with one sample finding from each area.

Appendix 9.5 The assignment of liverwort genera of Arctic Russia to families after Konstantinova et al. (2009) and Damsholt (2002)

Appendix 10.2. Data on diversity of lichens and lichenicolous fungi in the Arctic and separately for the sectors of the Arctic (Beringia, Canada, North Atlantic, European Russia, W and E Siberia) and the single floristic provinces: numbers of species, numbers of species in the low and high Arctic, percentage of species with respective growth form (crustose, squamulose, foliose, fruticose), the estimated number of missing crustose lichen species (explanations below), percentage of species on the respective substrate on which the lichen species grow, and rarity of species within and outside the Arctic.

In 2017 the SAMBR synthesized data about biodiversity in Arctic marine ecosystems around the circumpolar Arctic.. SAMBR highlighted observed changes and relevant monitoring gaps. This 2021 update provides information on the status of marine mammals in the Arctic from 2015–2020: More detail can be found in the Marine Mammals 2021 Technical report. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT

Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs) are regions of ocean space encompassing coastal areas from river basins and estuaries to the seaward boundary of continental shelves and the seaward margins of coastal current systems. Fifty of them have been identified. They are relatively large regions (200 000 km2 or more) characterized by distinct bathymetry, hydrography, productivity and trophically dependent populations. The LME approach uses five modules: 1. productivity module considers the oceanic variability and its effect on the production of phyto and zooplankton 2. fish and fishery module concerned with the sustainability of individual species and the maintenance of biodiversity 3. pollution and ecosystem health module examines health indices, eutrophication, biotoxins, pathology and emerging diseases 4. socio-economic module integrates assessments of human forcing and the long-term sustainability and associated socio-economic benefits of various management measures, and 5. governance module involves adaptive management and stakeholder participation.” Source: http://www.fao.org/fishery/topic/3440/en Reference: Sherman, K. and Hempel, G. (Editors) 2009. The UNEP Large Marine Ecosystem Report: A perspective on changing conditions in LMEs of the world’s Regional Seas. UNEP Regional Seas Report and Studies No. 182. United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi, Kenya. Data available from: http://lme.edc.uri.edu/ - LMEs of the world Updated shape file - 2014