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

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

Figure 4 9 Local diatom species richness of Arctic lake surface sediments, showing (left) richness as a function of latitude, and (right) site-specific richness. A LOESS smoother (blue line) with a span of 0.75 and a 95% confidence interval (grey shading) was applied to the data (left) to better highlight the general trend. Coloured circles on the map indicate the species richness at the sampling sites. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 37 - Figure 4-9

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

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

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

Temporal patterns in % abundance of Atlantic salmon, brown trout, and anadromous Arctic charr from catch statistics in northern Norway rivers monitored from 1993 to 2016, including basins dominated by (a) rivers and (b) lakes. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 81- Figure 4-42

Figure 3-6. The hypothesized effects of rising mean water temperature on biodiversity (as total species number) of Arctic freshwater ecosystems. A pulsed increase in gamma biodiversity (a) results from the combination of high eurythermal invasion and establishment and low stenothermic loss with increasing water temperature. A pulsed decrease in gamma biodiversity (b) results from the combination of low eurythermal invasion and establishment and high stenothermic loss. Rapid increases (c) and slow increases (d) in species diversity occur, respectively, with high eurythermal invasion and establishment coupled with high stenothermic loss or low eurythermal invasion and establishment and low stenothermic loss as temperatures increase. For simplification, barriers to dispersal have been assumed to be limited in these models. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 3 - Page 23 - Figure 3-6

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

Provides richness estimates and 95% confidence bounds for five ecoregions. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 77 - Figure 4-38