Results of circumpolar assessment of lake zooplankton, focused just on crustaceans, and indicating (a) the location of crustacean zooplankton stations, underlain by circumpolar ecoregions; (b) ecoregions with many crustacean zooplankton stations, colored on the basis of alpha diversity rarefied to 25 stations; (c) all ecoregions with crustacean zooplankton 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 58 - Figure 4-25

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 4-1 A generic food web diagram for a lake or river, indicating the basic trophic levels (boxes) and energy flow (arrows) between those levels. Reproduced from Culp et al. (2012a). State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 25 - Figure 4-1

Benthic macro-infauna biomass in the northern Bering and Chukchi Seas from 1970 to 2012, displayed as decadal pattern Adapted from Grebmeier et al. (2015a) with permission from Elsevier. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/benthos" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 98 - Figure 3.3.6 Cumulative scores of benthos drivers for each of the 8 CAFF-AMAs. The cumulative scores are taken from the last column of Table 3.3.1. The flower chart/plot helps to visualize the data.

Figure 4-7 Circumpolar assessment of lake diatoms, indicating (a) the location of lake diatom stations, underlain by circumpolar ecoregions; (b) ecoregions with many lake diatom stations, colored on the basis of alpha diversity rarefied to 40 stations; (c) all ecoregions with lake diatom 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 (i.e. species turnover, nestedness, approximately equal contribution, or no diversity) when averaged across hydrobasins in each ecoregio. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 35 - Figure 4-7

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

Maximum LTA (long-term average) August air temperatures for the circumpolar region, with ecoregions used in the analysis of the SAFBR outlined in black. Source for temperature layer: Fick and Hijmans (2017). State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 5 - Page 89 - Figure 5-5

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

Change in forb, graminoid and shrub abundance by species or functional group over time based on local field studies across the Arctic, ranging from 5 to 43 years of duration. The bars show the proportion of observed decreasing, stable and increasing change in abundance, based on published studies. The darker portions of each bar represent a significant decrease, stable state, or increase, and lighter shading represents marginally significant change. The numbers above each bar indicate the number of observations in that group. Modified from Bjorkman et al. 2020. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 31- Figure 3.2