Suchergebnisse

Biofouling and introduced species are one of the causes of a changing biodiversity in the marine environment. In this talk I will address the topic of hull fouling and introduced species i.e. species introduced by human activities beyond their native range into new areas. In their new habitat such species pose a threat to native biodiversity because they may alter local communities, and have unwanted economic effects. Hence the introduction of non-indigenous species is recognized as a major threat to the marine environment, and, for example tackled in EU legislation such as the MSFD.Shipping, with ballast water and hull fouling, is an important vector for species introductions into the marine environment and since the dawn of maritime transport hull fouling has remained an everlasting nuisance, not only because it reduces the ships' speed and clogs intakes and pipes, it also impacts marine biodiversity, for, as biofouling, species are transported all over the world's oceans and introduced into areas beyond their natural distribution.While ballast water is being tackled in various legislations and regulations, hull fouling remains an important cause of introductions, especially since the ban of the very effective anti-fouling agent TBT (Tributyltin). During the past decades the chances for species to survive their journey and ultimately to colonise areas beyond their natural distribution has greatly increased, because maritime transport has become increasingly faster and more intense. Moreover, the permanent establishment of migrants is aided by the growing availability of artificial hard substrata in coastal areas and climate change. Barnacles (Cirripedia), probably the most common fouling organisms, are a good illustration of the ongoing changes as many species have nowadays established populations far beyond their original distribution.

Subtidal natural hard substrates (SNHS) promote occupancy by rich benthic communities that provide irreplaceable and fundamental ecosystem functions, representing a global priority target for nature conservation and recognised in most European environmental legislation. However, scientifically validated methodologies for their quantitative spatial demarcation, including information on species occupancy and fine-scale environmental drivers (e.g., the effect of stone size on colonisation) are rare. This is, however, crucial information for sound ecological management. In this investigation, high-resolution (1 m) multibeam echosounder (MBES) depth and backscatter data and derivates, underwater imagery (UI) by video drop-frame, and grab sediment samples, all acquired within 32 km 2 of seafloor in offshore Belgian waters, were integrated to produce a random forest (RF) spatial model, predicting the continuous distribution of the seafloor areal cover/m 2 of the stones' grain sizes promoting colonisation by sessile epilithic organisms. A semi-automated UI acquisition, processing, and analytical workflow was set up to quantitatively study the colonisation proportion of different grain sizes, identifying the colonisation potential to begin at stones with grain sizes Ø ≥ 2 cm. This parameter (i.e., % areal cover of stones Ø ≥ 2 cm/m 2 ) was selected as the response variable for spatial predictive modelling. The model output is presented along with a protocol of error and uncertainty estimation. RF is confirmed as an accurate, versatile, and transferable mapping methodology, applicable to area-wide mapping of SNHS. UI is confirmed as an essential aid to acoustic seafloor classification, providing spatially representative numerical observations needed to carry out quantitative seafloor modelling of ecologically relevant parameters. This contribution sheds innovative insights into the ecologically relevant delineation of subtidal natural reef habitat, exploiting state-of-the-art underwater remote sensing and acoustic seafloor classification approaches.

The European Union (EU) has recently published its first list of invasive alien species (IAS) of EU concern to which current legislation must apply. The list comprises species known to pose great threats to biodiversity and needs to be maintained and updated. Horizon scanning is seen as critical to identify the most threatening potential IAS that do not yet occur in Europe to be subsequently risk assessed for future listing. Accordingly, we present a systematic consensus horizon scanning procedure to derive a ranked list of potential IAS likely to arrive, establish, spread and have an impact on biodiversity in the region over the next decade. The approach is unique in the continental scale examined, the breadth of taxonomic groups and environments considered, and the methods and data sources used. International experts were brought together to address five broad thematic groups of potential IAS. For each thematic group the experts first independently assembled lists of potential IAS not yet established in the EU but potentially threatening biodiversity if introduced. Experts were asked to score the species within their thematic group for their separate likelihoods of i) arrival, ii) establishment, iii) spread, and iv) magnitude of the potential negative impact on biodiversity within the EU. Experts then convened for a 2-day workshop applying consensus methods to compile a ranked list of potential IAS. From an initial working list of 329 species, a list of 66 species not yet established in the EU that were considered to be very high (8 species), high (40 species) or medium (18 species) risk species was derived. Here, we present these species highlighting the potential negative impacts and the most likely biogeographic regions to be affected by these potential IAS.

The European Union (EU) has recently published its first list of invasive alien species (IAS) of EU concern to which current legislation must apply. The list comprises species known to pose great threats to biodiversity and needs to be maintained and updated. Horizon scanning is seen as critical to identify the most threatening potential IAS that do not yet occur in Europe to be subsequently risk assessed for future listing. Accordingly, we present a systematic consensus horizon scanning procedure to derive a ranked list of potential IAS likely to arrive, establish, spread and have an impact on biodiversity in the region over the next decade. The approach is unique in the continental scale examined, the breadth of taxonomic groups and environments considered, and the methods and data sources used. International experts were brought together to address five broad thematic groups of potential IAS. For each thematic group the experts first independently assembled lists of potential IAS not yet established in the EU but potentially threatening biodiversity if introduced. Experts were asked to score the species within their thematic group for their separate likelihoods of i) arrival, ii) establishment, iii) spread, and iv) magnitude of the potential negative impact on biodiversity within the EU. Experts then convened for a 2‐day workshop applying consensus methods to compile a ranked list of potential IAS. From an initial working list of 329 species, a list of 66 species not yet established in the EU that were considered to be very high (8 species), high (40 species) or medium (18 species) risk species was derived. Here, we present these species highlighting the potential negative impacts and the most likely biogeographic regions to be affected by these potential IAS.

The European Union (EU) has recently published its first list of invasive alien species (IAS) of EU concern to which current legislation must apply. The list comprises species known to pose great threats to biodiversity and needs to be maintained and updated. Horizon scanning is seen as critical to identify the most threatening potential IAS that do not yet occur in Europe to be subsequently risk assessed for future listing. Accordingly, we present a systematic consensus horizon scanning procedure to derive a ranked list of potential IAS likely to arrive, establish, spread and have an impact on biodiversity in the region over the next decade. The approach is unique in the continental scale examined, the breadth of taxonomic groups and environments considered, and the methods and data sources used. International experts were brought together to address five broad thematic groups of potential IAS. For each thematic group the experts first independently assembled lists of potential IAS not yet established in the EU but potentially threatening biodiversity if introduced. Experts were asked to score the species within their thematic group for their separate likelihoods of i) arrival, ii) establishment, iii) spread, and iv) magnitude of the potential negative impact on biodiversity within the EU. Experts then convened for a 2-day workshop applying consensus methods to compile a ranked list of potential IAS. From an initial working list of 329 species, a list of 66 species not yet established in the EU that were considered to be very high (8 species), high (40 species) or medium (18 species) risk species was derived. Here, we present these species highlighting the potential negative impacts and the most likely biogeographic regions to be affected by these potential IAS.

Marine Non-Indigenous Species (NIS) are animals and plants introduced accidently or deliberately into the European seas, originating from other seas of the globe. About 800 marine non-indigenous species (NIS) currently occur in the European Union national marine waters, several of which have negative impacts on marine ecosystem services and biodiversity. Under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) Descriptor 2 (D2), EU Member States (MSs) need to consider NIS in their marine management strategies. The Descriptor D2 includes one primary criterion (D2C1: new NIS introductions), and two secondary criteria (D2C2 and D2C3). The D2 implementation is characterized by a number of issues and uncertainties which can be applicable to the Descriptor level (e.g. geographical unit of assessment, assessment period, phytoplanktonic, parasitic, oligohaline NIS, etc.), to the primary criterion D2C1 level (e.g. threshold values, cryptogenic, questionable species, etc), and to the secondary criteria D2C2 and D2C3. The current report tackles these issues and provides practical recommendations aiming at a smoother and more efficient implementation of D2 and its criteria at EU level. They constitute a solid operational output which can result in more comparable D2 assessments among MSs and MSFD regions/subregions. When it comes to the policy-side, the current report calls for a number of different categories of NIS to be reported in D2 assessments, pointing the need for the species to be labelled/categorised appropriately in the MSFD reporting by the MSs. These suggestions are proposed to be communicated to the MSFD Working Group of Good Environmental Status (GES) and subsequently to the Marine Strategy Coordination Group (MSCG) of MSFD. Moreover, they can serve as an input for revising the Art. 8 Guidelines.