A time series of cell abundances, as determined by microscopy, of major phytoplankton groups from 2002-2013 for four sites, two in an east-west transect in Amundsen Gulf, Beaufort Sea and two in an east-west transect in northern Baffin Bay. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/plankton" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 73 - Figure 3.2.4 A time series of cell abundances, as determined by microscopy, of major phytoplankton groups from 2002-2013 for four sites, 2 in the Beaufort Sea and 2 in northern Baffin Bay. Cell abundances are given as cells per liter. On most sampling dates, there is data from surface water and from the subsurface chlorophyll maximum (Cmax in the spreadsheet). Some additional information is included in the column headings, such as the percent of light at the sample depth; however, this should not be included in the figure. You may or may not want to include a map element in this figure, and rough coordinates of the sampling sites are included. The second sheet of the excel file presents the same data but at a finer scale of taxonomic resolution. It is the first sheet that should be used.

Trends and distribution of muskoxen populations based on Table 3-5. Modified from Cuyler et al. 2020. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 79 - Figure 3.30

Appendix 20. Arctic indigenous languages status and trends. Data used to compile the information for the table was collected from both census records and academic sources, each of the CAFF countries and indigenous peoples organizations (Permanent Participants to the Arctic Council) where possible also provided statistical information.

Spider species-level data collected from pan traps across four habitat types in Cambrige Bay Nunavut. Two wet habitat types and two dry habitat types were examined. Samples continuously taken from July 3rd to August 11th 2014, but broken down into sampling periods which are, on average, 6 days long.

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

The baseline survey and ongoing monitoring required to adequately describe Arctic arthropod biodiversity and to identify trends is largely lacking. Although some existing publications reporting long-term and extensive sampling exist, they are limited in species level information, taxonomic coverage and/or geographic location/extent (Figure 3-19) STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 44 - Figure 3.19

Trends in biomass of marine fish Focal Ecosystem Components across each Arctic Marine Area STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 4 - Page 180 - Figure 4.4

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 6-2 Current state of monitoring for river FECs in each Arctic country State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 6 - Page 94 - Figure 6-2

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

Alpha diversity (rarefied to 10 stations, with error bars indicating standard error) of littoral lake benthic macroinvertebrates plotted as a function of the average latitude of stations in each hydrobasin. Hydrobasins are coloured by country/region. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4- Page 68 - Figure 4-31