1. CoML beyond 2010: Science Council Established in Auckland, New Zealand, November 2007 In NZ there was consensus: An overarching program should continue beyond 2010 CoML Responsible for planning and implementing a follow-up program to CoML in 2010-2020 International composition: SSC, Census projects and NRICs 1 st formal meeting Valencia Spain November 2008 Following SSC meeting, Marine Biodiversity Conference 2 nd ad hoc meeting February 2009

2. Barb Block, Stanford Univ Antje Boetius, Germany (ChEss CoML) Lucia Campos, Brazil (Deep Sea & Antarctic CoML) Dan Costa, UCSC Chair Roberto Danovaro, Italy (EuroCoML) Kats Fujikura, Japan (Japan CoML) John Gunn, Australia (Technology, TOPP) Brian MacKenzie, Denmark (HMAP) Ian Poiner, Australia (CoML) Mike Sinclair, Canada (CoML, ICES) Sun Song, China (China CoML) Patricia Miloslavich, Venezuela (All CoML) Ed Urban, USA (SCOR) Enric Sala, USA/Spain (National Geo.) Shubha Sathyendranath, Canada/India (POGO) Isabel Sousa-Pinto, Portugal (EuroCoML) Tonny Wagey, Indonesia (Indonesia CoML & Coral Triangle Initiative) Ed Urban, USA (SCOR)

3. CoML II program: CoML 2000-2010: Focused on the known, unknown and unknowable: created a baseline of information on what lives in the ocean CoML 2010-2020: Focus on unknown from perspective of unexplored and unexplained: provide an integrated view of marine environment, from a single snapshot to a dynamic view of marine biodiversity Provide a better understanding of how marine biodiversity is maintained and can be protected

4. CoML II program: 1) Build on success of first CoML and apply knowledge and understanding to resources and management 2) Maintain the CoML structure that was so successful and facilitated interactions and conclusions 3) Continuation and enhancement of the communication networks that have been established for program management and conveying international discoveries

5. CoML II program cont: 4) Communication network also to reach out educational organizations and governments 5) Importance of focusing on climate change and supplying biological components to the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) and the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS)

6. Main challenges: How to continue the efforts started under the CoML and to capitalize on what we've learned to move us forward into a second decade of the program Develop a science plan that is compelling and exciting Develop a strategy to acquire the necessary funding to maintain the overarching infrastructure (social and administrative networks) required to maintain such an integrated program.

7. Question 1: Does your Census project have funding beyond 2010? 4 projects without funding beyond 2010 14 projects science will continue but as a series of loosely affiliated efforts Question 1: How many projects are planning or attempting to obtain some organizational support beyond 2010?

8. Question 2: What specific geographic locations & sub-habitats (e.g., more specific than chemosynthetic ecosystem or near-shore) did you cover in your first Census project? How might you want to expand this scope under a second Census?

9. Question 3: Are there any technologies you are NOT currently using in your Census project that would be useful for future studies? ROVs and AUVs Functional genomics Integrated electronic tags Imaging tools Better infrastructure Teleconferencing to increase efficiency and reduce carbon footprint.

10. Question 4: What were the most valuable benefits of participating in the first Census program that should be maintained in a new program after 2010 Fostering new collaborations across international boundaries Exposure to the diversity of research Assistance with or creating Education and Outreach materials

11. Question 4: What could be done better? Greater emphasis on cross-cutting themes Earlier emphasis on collaboration and coordination More effective use of teleconferencing to reduce travel Better language support for non-English speaking countries especially for press releases, brochures, etc, Improved emphasis on CoML’s power to open doors Reduction in administrative loads such as reports, and better timetables for reporting More financial support Better explanation of and/or use of NRIC’s with possibly more responsibility Improved support for sample collection and storage.

12. . What do you see as important overarching science issues that can be addressed through a follow-on program to the Census? What new views of marine biodiversity should be further explored or verified in a follow-on program? Can the experiences you’ve had in the Census (personally and within your project’s scope) contribute to that? Question 5:

13. 9 Yes, 5 Maybe, 4 No Agreed it would facilitate CoML researchers to maintain contact and/or collaboration. Often get lost in existing meetings (ASLO; Ocean Sciences etc) An excellent way to continue support for the topic and to generate and/or continue the media attention on this topic Yes but make it every other year to avoid meeting overload Question 6: S ustain the Census network by establishing a new interdisciplinary professional society focused on marine biodiversity. Would you join such a society?

14. Duplicative effort, such professional societies already exist It depended on the cost to join and the benefits gained Not be enough ‘glue’ to keep the Census going, collaborations require more than an annual meeting Interest in a journal on the topic, but concern that there are journals that have specific sections related to this topic (e.g. the journal Marine Biodiversity). Where would the funding come from? Could this be done within an existing society? Question 6: Would you be interested in joining a new interdisciplinary professional society focused on marine biodiversity?

15. Question 7: Comment on the name Biodiversity in a Changing Ocean: Beyond the Census of Marine Life Some liked the name, most thought it too long A good slogan, but not a name Acronym like CoML needed for better appeal and marketing ‘Beyond’ could convey negative that there was something wrong with CoML I

16. Life in a Changing Ocean Looking forward from the 2010 baseline

17. Outline Science Plan Mission Statement: The need for the new program (Why now? Why us?) Science Goals: What are the new questions to answer and how will we do it? Organizational Structure: Preliminary thoughts on how to manage the program

18. Mission Statement: The need for the new program (Why now? Why us?) What are the major drivers that control /determine: Abundance Distribution Movements What factors drive the connectivity and interactions between marine organisms Social networking of marine organisms Making the Ocean transparent CoML 2010 was a snapshot, CoML 2020 will be a video

19. Mission Statement: The need for the new program (Why now? Why us?) Renewed informed discovery and exploration Lacked expertise Lacked resources Lacked technology Needed to identify the gaps The first CoML has generated lots of surprises We now need models and predictions Now poised to make connections to societal issues

20. Mission Statement: The need for the new program (Why now? Why us?) What do we need to know to address what is changing ? What are the responses from a human and marine organism perspective? Connectivity and productivity- chains of change What are the boundaries and connections of marine organisms and/or habitats?

21. Science Goals: What are the new questions to answer and how will we do it? The Census has the technology and expertise to study from microbes, prey & predators Look for projects that are linked across the CoML Employ experimental approach Synchronicity Int’l Quiet Ocean Experiment 4 hrs of quiet and observe change in animal behavior Nighttime illumination of ocean and its effect?

22. Science Goals: What are the new questions to answer and how will we do it? Does biodiversity follow through the water column? Or is the water column decoupled? Is the new biogeography of the ocean correct? Requires modeling and allows predictions and hypothesis testing Can tell us what and where the gaps are Provides guidance for informed exploration What are the boundaries and connections of marine organisms and/or habitats?

23. Preliminary thoughts on how to manage the program? Optimistic Similar level of support Secretariat-SSC Education & Outreach Support for Core efforts of programs Consider reorganization /consolidation of programs based on realms Deep sea, Coastal zone, Open-ocean, ice-oceans, Distribution, OBIS, F/HMAP

24. Preliminary thoughts on how to manage the program. Pessimistic Find countries or Institutes that would be willing to host: Secretariat Each core program Support Int’l office with funds from core programs ($5-40K per program or nation) Secretariat Rotates every 3 yrs like InterRidge Program Could PICES/ICES host components of CoML 2020?

25. Preliminary thoughts on how to manage the program Government, Foundations, Oil & Gas Industry 2 day Symposium in London 2010 Kick off CoML 2020 with Open Science Meeting in 2011 Followed by a workshop or series of workshops