EuropaBON WP3.1

You're not logged. You can see and visualize the entered data but you can't modify or create it.
If you want to suggest changes or enter missing initiatives, you can contact the WP3.1 coordinators and you will receive your login details.

Data Stream - modify

Tab created: 2022-01-14

Project

1) Data origin - from where is data coming from

Origin integration node

2) Data process - how is the data processed (if)? And how does it flow?

Data type data_stream_datatype_desc

Ebv ess type data_stream_ebv_ess_type_desc

Format data_process_format_desc

Method data_process_method_desc

Frequency data_process_frequency_desc

3) Data set - which dataset/integrated product is processed and how?

Name data_set_name_desc

Description

Datasets
Benthos data were supplied by Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, and processed by the Netherlands. For Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands it was assessed, based on expert judgement, that full areal coverage was obtained, for the United Kingdom it was assessed to be partial areal coverage, and no data from Denmark were available. A criterion for sufficient areal coverage had not been discussed and agreed at the time of writing but will be part of the further development of this indicator assessment. For the United Kingdom, some benthos data from assessment areas lying just north of the southern North Sea were assessed (Farnes East, North-East of Farnes Deep, Swallow Sand), in view of the limited data available. The assessment areas were combined with European Nature Information System (EUNIS) Level 3 habitat information (Sand, Mud, Coarse, Mixed), based on an average of 30 samples per area, per year. In addition, median depth data were collected for additional characterisation of the assessment area and reference value modelling. A more detailed characterisation of these data was given by Van Loon et al. (2017, Table 1).

Fisheries activity maps from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES; surface and sub-surface activity per grid cell of 0.05° × 0.05°) version January 2016 were used (Figure 1 for an example)(ICES, 2016). The ICES grid cell activity values were averaged per assessment area, for surface and sub-surface activity separately, in order to average out the spatial variation sufficiently, which improved the pressure-impact relationship considerably. It should be noted that the disturbance values being used for the assessment of physical damage on special and predominant habitats were not used for this assessment, but that the same abrasion pressure layer, derived from the ICES fisheries data, was used.

Index Calculation
The optimal benthic index for the southern North Sea, Margalef diversity, was calculated for all southern North Sea benthos samples using the BENMMI tool (benthos multi-metric data analysis software). For each assessment area, the annual average normalised value of Margalef diversity was calculated. The normalised index value is the Margalef diversity value of a sample divided by the reference value of Margalef diversity for the specific assessment area where the sample was taken. It should be noted that Margalef reference values are obtained using reference data from the North Sea (where available) or modelled reference values using least disturbed benthos data monitored by the same national laboratory. This favours good comparability of the reference and assessment Margalef diversity values.

Reference Value Estimation and Validation
An important step in getting realistic normalised Margalef diversity values is to estimate realistic Margalef diversity reference values for each assessment area, such as for the UK_SwallowSand-Sandy habitat. This was done by calculating the 99 (or in some case 95 and 75) percentile index value of a sufficiently large set of Margalef diversity values (with a minimum of 20) for the specific assessment area, as has been used for the European Union WFD by several countries (Van Loon et al., 2015). The use of the 99 or 95 percentile value as the average reference value accounts for a certain amount of index degradation. However, this percentile method was refined by allowing the use of lower percentile values, in case of lower assessment area degradation, as published by Hering et al. (2006). For example, in a pristine assessment area the 50 percentile Margalef diversity value would be the correct reference value. This estimation of lower assessment area degradation could be made using the fisheries activity data from ICES (2016) (see Datasets).

The following quality codes were assigned to the benthos datasets per assessment area: quality code 1 (one monitoring year and at least 20 samples); quality code 2: (two monitoring years and 30 or more samples); quality code 3: (three or more monitoring years and 50 or more samples) (Van Loon et al., 2017. Note that only estimated reference values with quality codes 2 and 3 were used for the Depth-Reference_Value model.

The reference period used per assessment area was in principle six consecutive years, in which the highest period average of the annual average value of Margalef diversity was found. This means that the least disturbed benthos dataset per assessment area is used, as recommended in the OSPAR manual on Biodiversity (OSPAR, 2012). The use of a six-year period appears to give stable reference values, in which temporal variation has been averaged out.

The obtained reference value estimates were validated using the depth model for Margalef diversity (Figure d1; Van Loon et al., 2017), and in some case corrected for better fit on this curve using an adjusted percentile value based on the available fisheries activity data. All Margalef diversity reference values showed a deviation of less than 10% from the depth model, which was considered useful precision.

Assessment of the Southern North Sea
The period average (2010–2015) of the normalised index values of Margalef diversity for each assessment area with at least 20 samples and one monitoring year are shown in Figure 2. The precision of the annual average normalised Margalef diversity (Dn) value per assessment area was calculated as the 90% confidence interval.

data_set_description_desc

Target biodiversity data bio_data_target_bio_data_desc

Taxonomy

Target taxa data_set_target_taxa_desc

data_stream_taxa_subset_desc

Target species bio_data_target_species_desc

Spatial scale

Spatial scale data_set_spatial_scale_desc

Resolution data_set_resolution_desc

Resolution units data_set_resolution_units_desc

4) Data destination - where does the data/product flow to?

Two options here:

a) The data flows into an upper-level integration node b) The data is a generated Product

Select the destination integration node

Dest integration node

Is the product generated used by policy - e.g. EBV, EESV, indicator?

Used by policy data_stream_user_by_policy_desc

Note here that some indicators might currently lack connection to policy but we want to capture them here too because of their potential to inform policy in the future.