Intercalibration in transitional waters (TW) Phase 2: Milestone 4 Reports (M4R) Presented by Nikolaos Zampoukas Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability

Contents of the presentation Fact sheets for each important topic in the intercalibration process: Responsibilities Participation Availability and status of national methods Feasibility (incl. typology, pressures & assessment concepts) Dataset collection IC procedure progress (choice of option) Common metrics development Worries emerging from reports and conclusions

Biological Quality Elements (BQEs) for TW Phytoplankton Angiosperms Macroalgae Benthic invertebrate fauna Fish

IC organisation Baltic Sea DK Henning Karup NEA UK Peter Holmes MED IT Franco Giovanardi Phytoplankton No lead Mike Best ES Inmaculada Romero Gil Macroalgae Karsten Dahl IE Robert Wilkes (opportunistic macroalgae) GR Sotiris Orfanidis Angiosperms DK Dorte Krause-Jensen PT Joao Neto (seagrasses) BE Erika van den Bergh (Angiosperms in saltmarshes) Benthic invertebrate fauna DE Torsten Berg ES: Angel Borja ES Isabel Pardo Fish No lead, no M4R no activity (almost), no experts Steve Coates FR Mario Lepage

Problems in participation Baltic Sea NEA MED Phytoplankton All MSs are participating GR did not sent info for the report. Macroalgae ES: initial participation with a method for HMWB and decided not to proceed. What about natural WB? Angiosperms Benthic invertebrate fauna Poland is not currently participating Fish No lead, no experts, no activity

Methods Baltic Sea NEA MED Phytoplankton Only for Chla Finalized for all MSs but not for all parameters Finalized only for IT FR, ES under development GR no method Macroalgae No common types No method for SE, DE, BE, ES, NL Are there macrolalgae in their WB? IT, FR, GR finalized Angiosperms No method for SE Benthic invertebrate fauna Probably no common types All finalized except 1 All finalized Fish No activity – maybe no common types Under development: FR, IT, GR. ES has no method but may adopt another MSs method.

Feasibility in terms of typology Baltic Sea NEA MED Phytoplankton One possible common type shared by PL & LT Probably one common type 4 common types according to salinity and restriction Macroalgae & Angiosperms No common types Feasible, one common type. Benthic invertebrate fauna Probably no common types six common types but data available only for four Feasible. Four common types. Fish No activity – maybe no common type Probably four common types, according to size. No consideration of types yet – focus on data collection

Is IC feasible in the Stetting Lagoon (Baltic Sea) ? DE: Natural CW due to non significant influence of fresh water Currently in poor status. According to DE: IC not meaningful with the Polish WB as they are designated in different water categories PL: HMTW Ecological status not known

Feasibility in terms of pressures Baltic Sea NEA MED Phytoplankton Feasible for Chla Feasible Macroalgae & Angiosperms --------------------- Check ongoing Benthic invertebrate fauna Fish Probably feasible

Feasibility in terms of assessment concept Baltic Sea NEA MED Phytoplankton Feasible for Chla Feasible Check ongoing Macroalgae & Angiosperms ------------------ Probably feasible Benthic invertebrate fauna Different sampling zones & devices – under consideration Fish

IC dataset collection Baltic Sea NEA MED Phytoplankton LT & PL submitted data All MSs provided data IT, ES & FR OK GR no data Macroalgae Only from IE, UK, FR and PT Angiosperms ---------------------- Not started Benthic invertebrate fauna Data collected from all MSs exept IE Fish UK & PT national data + data from common sampling Ongoing

Data acceptance check Baltic Sea NEA MED Phytoplankton Ongoing Macroalgae & Angiosperms ----------------- OK for FR, IT & GR Benthic invertebrate fauna Fish

Selection of IC option Baltic Sea NEA MED Phytoplankton Not decided Probably 1 or 3 supported by common metrics Macroalgae & Angiosperms ------------------ 3 Benthic invertebrate fauna ------------------- Fish Probably 2

Development of IC common metric(s) Baltic Sea NEA MED Phytoplankton No consideration Under consideration Chla Macroalgae & Angiosperms --------------------- SPA (a relevant transformed PCA) Benthic invertebrate fauna Under discussion Not started Fish Consideration on using an abiotic (pressure) common metric

What’s new in M4R? Baltic Sea NEA MED Phytoplankton Finalized method and data from IT/ Considerations on pressure index for benchmarking Macroalgae & Angiosperms New leads. Dataset collection from macroalgae started. Benthic invertebrate fauna Dataset collected Fish Considerations on pressure index and abiotic common metric 15

Conclusions According to the guidance document no 14 there should already be preliminary IC results by now. For many BQEs/GIGs there are still major gaps in methods and data! However for most BQEs/GIGs there is hope for results by October 2011 (new extended deadline)

Situation Oct 2010 Baltic NEA MED Phytoplankton Macroalgae & Angiosperms Benthic invertebrate fauna Fish

Current focus of IC efforts Baltic NEA MED Phytoplankton 1type (PL, LT) Estuaries (UK, IE, PT, FR & ES) 4 types of coastal lagoons (ES, IT & FR) Macroalgae & Angiosperms Estuaries ( IE, UK, BE, DE, FR, ES & PT) Meso-poly-euhaline coastal lagoons (IT, FR & GR) Benthic invertebrate fauna 4 types of estuaries: (BE, FR, ES, PT, SE, NL, UK, DE) 4 types of coastal lagoons (GR, ES, IT & FR) Fish 4 types of estuaries: (BE, FR, ES, PT, NL, UK, DE) Most probably not in 2011. Focus on methods development and collection of data

Thank you for your time and attention