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

Orgination of macrophyte data (axis labels should be changed from Dim1 to Axis I and from Dim2 to Axis II), with symbols/colours differing by region. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 3 - Page 55 - Figure 4-24

Circumpolar permafrost extent overlain on ecoregions used in SAFBR analysis, indicating continuous (90-100%), discontinuous (50-90%), sporadic (10-50%), and isolated (0-10%) permafrost extent. Source for permafrost layer: Brown et al. (2002). State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 5 - Page 89 - Figure 5-6

Figure 4 22 Results of circumpolar assessment of lake macrophytes, indicating (a) the location of macrophyte stations, underlain by circumpolar ecoregions; (b) ecoregions with many macrophyte stations, colored on the basis of alpha diversity rarefied to 70 stations; (c) all ecoregions with macrophyte 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 54 - Figure 4-22

Spatial distribution of hillslope thermokarst across the circumpolar area, overlain with ecoregions used in the SAFBR analysis, showing no, low, moderate, and high thermokarst. Source for thermokarst layer: Olefeldt et al. (2016) State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 90 - Figure 5-7

Summary of the taxa accounting for 85% of the lake littoral benthic macroinvertebrates collected in each of several highly-sampled geographic areas, with taxa grouped by order level or higher in pie charts placed spatially to indicate sampling area. Pie charts correspond to (1) Alaska, (2) Greenland low Arctic, (3) Iceland, and (4) Fennoscandia. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 69 - Figure 4-33

Summary of the taxa accounting for 85% of the river benthic macroinvertebrates collected in each of several highly-sampled geographic areas, with taxa grouped by order level or higher in pie charts placed spatially to indicate sampling area. Pie charts correspond to (1) Alaska, (2) western Canada, (3) southern Canada, south of Hudson Bay, (4) northern Labrador, (5) Baffin Island, (6) Ellesmere Island, (7) Greenland high Arctic, (8) Greenland low Arctic, (9) Iceland, (10) Svalbard, and (11) Fennoscandia. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 70 - Figure 4-34

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

Figure 2-2 Arctic freshwater boundaries from the Arctic Council’s Arctic Biodiversity Assessment developed by CAFF, showing the three sub-regions of the Arctic, namely the high (dark purple), low (purple) and sub-Arctic (light purple)

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