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

Temporal patterns in % abundance of Atlantic salmon, brown trout, and anadromous Arctic charr from catch statistics in Iceland rivers monitored from 1992 to 2016, showing results from (a) west, (b) south, (c) north, and (d) east Iceland. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 81 - Figure 4-41

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

Fish species observations from Traditional Knowledge (TK ) literature, plotted in the approximate geographic location of observed record, with symbol colour indicating the number of fish species recorded and shape indicating the approximate time period of observation. Results are from a systematic literature search of TK sources from Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Fennoscandia, and Russia. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 75- Figure 4-37

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

Rarefied alpha diversity of river (a) diatoms from benthic samples, (b) benthic macroinvertebrates, and (c) fish in ecoregions across North America. State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 5- Page 84 - Figure 5-1

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

Estimation of diatom assemblage changes over a period of about 200 years (top versus bottom sediment cores). State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity Report - Chapter 4 - Page 41 - Figure 4-14

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

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