Standardized metadata template, for identifying knowledge locations on Arctic Coastal Ecosystems applicable for different knowledge systems. This template was developed by the Nordic Coastal Group, composed of the Nordic representatives on CBMP Coastal. The template is intended to identify locations for Indigenous Knowledge, Scientific, Hunters Knowledge, Local Knowledge, and community-based monitoring. The template is composed of two files a Word document that provides the rationale and detailed description for the Excel sheet that allows for standardized data gathering

Data sets from Greenland, Iceland and Norway on coastal geomorphology has been used as basis for designating coastscapes and which data were used as basis for developing a map layer and analyses of the coastscape distributions for the three countries. In accordance with classifications provided in the CBMP Coastal Biodiversity Monitoring Plan (https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/2356)

Variation of average annual trawling activity (in hours) and macrobenthic biomass (g m-2), (a) and relationship of biomass with a four-year lag (mean value of time of the turnover in biomass value) to trawling activity, (b) along the Kola section of the Barents Sea during 1920-1997 (Denisenko 2001, 2013). STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/benthos" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 97 - Figure 3.3.5

Change in plant phenology over time based on published studies, ranging from 9 to 21 years of duration. The bars show the proportion of observations where timing of phenological events advanced (earlier) was stable or were delayed (later) over time. The darker portions of each bar represent visible decrease, stable state, or increase results, and lighter portions represent marginally significant change. The numbers above each bar indicate the number of observations in that group. Figure from Bjorkman et al. 2020. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 31- Figure 3.3

Figure 4 17 Results of circumpolar assessment of lake phytoplankton,(a) the location of phytoplankton stations, underlain by circumpolar ecoregions; (b) ecoregions with many phytoplankton stations, colored on the basis of alpha diversity rarefied to 35 stations; (c) all ecoregions with phytoplankton 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 56 - Figure 4-17

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

Breeding bird species in the different geographic zones of the low and high Arctic

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

Status of marine mammal Focal Ecosystem Component stocks by Arctic Marine Area. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/marine-mammals" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 157 - Figure 3.6.3

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