Search

This study assessed the ecological health of waters within the Saudi Arabian Exclusive Economic Zone, by utilizing benthic biotic indices with a marine monitoring dataset covering the years 2013 to 2018. This comprehensive evaluation covered a vast expanse, encompassing 67 distinctive sampling locations characterized by a wide range of depth and salinity gradients. The study examined spatial fluctuations in the benthic community and assessed potential correlations with environmental variables, including salinity, depth, sediment texture, total organic carbon, and other relevant factors. The macrobenthic density varied across the study sites, with an average density of 566 ± 120 ind.m−2. The Shannon diversity index ranged from 3.21 and 5.90, with an average of 4.70 ± 0.52. Based on the average AMBI values, all the locations were categorized as either slightly disturbed or undisturbed. Additionally, the M-AMBI analysis indicated that 95.5 % sites were in good or high ecological status. • Studied 67 locations in the Arabian Gulf from 2013 to 2018, varying in depth and salinity, to assess benthic community changes. • Average macrobenthic density in the Arabian Gulf from 2013 to 2018 was 566 ± 120 ind.m², with a Shannon index of 4.70 ± 0.52. • AMBI values suggest slight disturbance or undisturbed conditions observed during the study period from 2013 to 2018. • M-AMBI analysis shows 95.5% of sites in the study areas are in good or high ecological status based on data from 2013 to 2018. • Continuous benthic monitoring is crucial due to the 'Shifting Baseline' trend, ensuring effective ecosystem management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2000, the AZTI's Marine Biotic Index (AMBI) was published and was one of a number of marine benthic indices development to assess the ecological status of soft-bottom macroinvertebrates. This index, and its derivatives, has been very successful in its application to different geographical areas, across the world, as well as to different environments, from the intertidal to the abyssal, or from tidal freshwater to offshore habitats. In this review, we explain the story behind the AMBI development, and look for an explanation of the index's success. For doing that, we comment on the current practicalities of the index, we present the new AMBI species list, with 9251 taxa, we dismantle six myths around this index, and examine the past and the future of the index. We show that the solid ecological roots of the index make it a robust tool to assess the status of marine benthic communities, at any time and environment. Hence, we think that it will be 'forever young' helping managers in taking informed decisions to improve benthic marine systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Water Framework Directive requires that European Union (EU) Member States ensure that their surface waters are in at least good ecological status by 2015 or at the latest by 2027. The good ecological status objective has been described and operationally defined in the Water Framework Directive. Member States develop their own ecological assessment methods but they must demonstrate that their methods and resulting classifications are comparable to other Member States across the EU. Comparability of assessment results is determined through an intercalibration exercise, the subject of this article. In 2013 The European Commission issued an updated Commission Decision on the results of intercalibration of assessment results across Europe. We present an overview of the process, discuss critical issues and good practices, and recommend approaches for a successful completion of the exercise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Water Framework and Marine Strategy Directives relate to the assessment of ecological quality, within estuarine and coastal systems. This legislation requires quality to be defined in an integrative way, using several biological elements (phytoplankton, benthos, algae, phanerogams, and fishes), together with physico-chemical elements (including pollutants). This contribution describes a methodology that integrates all of this information into a unique quality assessment for 51 stations from 18 water bodies, within the Basque Country. These water bodies are distributed into four typologies, including soft-bottom coastal areas and three types of estuaries. For each station, decision trees were used to integrate (i) water, sediment and biomonitor chemical data to achieve an integrated physico-chemical assessment and (ii) multiple biological ecosystem elements into an integrated biological assessment. Depending on the availability of ecological quality ratios or global quality values, different integration schemes were used to combine station assessments into water body assessments on a single scale. Several examples from each element have been selected, to illustrate their responses to different pressures; likewise, to establish how the assessed integrated quality has changed, over time. The results made biological and ecological sense and physico-chemical improvements were often correlated with improvements in the quality of benthos and fishes. These tools permit policy makers and managers to take decisions, based upon scientific knowledge, in water management, regarding the mitigation of human pressures and associated recovery processes. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The use of AMBI and M-AMBI in benthic quality assessments, within the European Water Framework Directive (WFD), has increased dramatically in recent years. M-AMBI is a multivariate tool, which incorporates AMBI, richness and Shannon diversity within the assessment. The response of this approach to different human pressures in coastal and estuarine waters has been investigated for the Basque Country (Northern Spain). In this contribution, several paradigmatic examples of these applications to different water bodies are presented. The time-series extend to samples collected between 1995 and 2007, showing the evolution of M-AMBI values under different pressures, i.e. urban and industrial discharges, dredging and disposal of sediments, and engineering works (such as land reclamation or marina construction), and, in addition, for illustrating the benthic quality recovery after positive actions have been undertaken, i.e. the removal of point-source discharges or water treatment programmes. In most cases, M-AMBI responds to these pressures as expected, with decreases in the ecological status immediately following the pressure. Conversely, when a pressure is removed, the recovery takes between 2 and 15 years, depending upon the intensity of the pressure and the characteristics of the water body. M-AMBI has been intercalibrated previously in coastal waters. After intercalibration in transitional waters, M-AMBI will be able to be used in the integrative quality assessment of European water bodies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Marine legislation world-wide has, as a recent final objective, the maintenance of a good environmental or ecological status for marine waters, habitats and resources. The concept of environmental status takes into account the structure, function and processes of marine ecosystems, bringing together physical, chemical, physiographic, geographic and climatic factors: subsequently, integrating such conditions, with anthropogenic impacts and activities undertaken in the area concerned. Such an approach is intended to permit an assessment of the environmental status at the ecosystem level, i.e. ‘ecosystem-based approach’, or ‘ecosystem-based management’. Such legislation emphasises the need for the development of methodologies, to assess environmental status. As such the knowledge acquired within Regional Seas, discussed at International Symposia and, finally, published as Special Issues, can serve as the basis for a regional ecosystem-based approach to management and the integrative assessment of marine systems. Hence, the Bay of Biscay is used in this contribution, as an example, to show past and present research, together with perspectives for the future. It is concluded that collaboration between institutions (marine research institutes, universities) and countries (France, Spain, Portugal, the United Kingdom and Ireland) could result in an interesting ‘case-study’, for the further implementation of the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive, at the level of this particular Regional Sea. In this way, the experience gained in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive within the ecoregion, together with the information collated in the eleven International Symposia of Oceanography of the Bay of Biscay, celebrated until now, can be very useful, for an ecosystem-based management approach for this Regional Sea. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Validation of the AZTI''s Fish Index (AFI), proposed for the Basque Country (northern Spain), in assessing fish quality within the Water Framework Directive (WFD), is undertaken. The response to anthropogenic pressure is investigated, in setting the boundaries between the different quality status classes. Hence, 12 estuaries were sampled, at different frequencies, between 1989 and 2007, by means of a beam trawl. Significant (p <0.0001) correlations were found between the AFI and oxygen saturation and ammonia. Oxygen quality standards are used to set boundaries between quality classes. Then, the AFIs obtained are compared with different anthropogenic pressures, including urban and industrial discharges, engineering works and dredging. The effects of the removal of some of these pressures are also studied. The total number of pressures within an estuary shows significant (p <0.009) negative correlation with AFI, explaining between 51 and 62% of the variability in fish quality. The impact of pressures upon fish and demersal assemblages is detected as required by the WFD. Nonetheless, further investigation and intercalibration of the methods used, are necessary. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

In recent years, several sets of legislation worldwide (Oceans Act in USA, Australia or Canada; Water Framework Directive or Marine Strategy in Europe, National Water Act in South Africa, etc.) have been developed in order to address ecological quality or integrity, within estuarine and coastal systems. Most such legislation seeks to define quality in an integrative way, by using several biological elements, together with physico-chemical and pollution elements. Such an approach allows assessment of ecological status at the ecosystem level (‘ecosystem approach’ or ‘holistic approach’ methodologies), rather than at species level (e.g. mussel biomonitoring or Mussel Watch) or just at chemical level (i.e. quality objectives) alone. Increasing attention has been paid to the development of tools for different physico-chemical or biological (phytoplankton, zooplankton, benthos, algae, phanerogams, fishes) elements of the ecosystems. However, few methodologies integrate all the elements into a single evaluation of a water body. The need for such integrative tools to assess ecosystem quality is very important, both from a scientific and stakeholder point of view. Politicians and managers need information from simple and pragmatic, but scientifically sound methodologies, in order to show to society the evolution of a zone (estuary, coastal area, etc.), taking into account human pressures or recovery processes. These approaches include: (i) multidisciplinarity, inherent in the teams involved in their implementation; (ii) integration of biotic and abiotic factors; (iii) accurate and validated methods in determining ecological integrity; and (iv) adequate indicators to follow the evolution of the monitored ecosystems. While some countries increasingly use the establishment of marine parks to conserve marine biodiversity and ecological integrity, there is awareness (e.g. in Australia) that conservation and management of marine ecosystems cannot be restricted to Marine Protected Areas but must include areas outside such reserves. This contribution reviews the current situation of integrative ecological assessment worldwide, by presenting several examples from each of the continents: Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe and North America. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Water resources globally are affected by a complex mixture of stressors resulting from a range of drivers, including urban and agricultural land use, hydropower generation and climate change. Understanding how stressors interfere and impact upon ecological status and ecosystem services is essential for developing effective River Basin Management Plans and shaping future environmental policy. This paper details the nature of these problems for Europe's water resources and the need to find solutions at a range of spatial scales. In terms of the latter, we describe the aims and approaches of the EU-funded project MARS (Managing Aquatic ecosystems and water Resources under multiple Stress) and the conceptual and analytical framework that it is adopting to provide this knowledge, understanding and tools needed to address multiple stressors. MARS is operating at three scales: At the water body scale, the mechanistic understanding of stressor interactions and their impact upon water resources, ecological status and ecosystem services will be examined through multi-factorial experiments and the analysis of long time-series. At the river basin scale, modelling and empirical approaches will be adopted to characterise relationships between multiple stressors and ecological responses, functions, services and water resources. The effects of future land use and mitigation scenarios in 16 European river basins will be assessed. At the European scale, large-scale spatial analysis will be carried out to identify the relationships amongst stress intensity, ecological status and service provision, with a special focus on large transboundary rivers, lakes and fish. The project will support managers and policy makers in the practical implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), of related legislation and of the Blueprint to Safeguard Europe's Water Resources by advising the 3rd River Basin Management Planning cycle, the revision of the WFD and by developing new tools for diagnosing and predicting multiple stressors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union has embarked on a policy which aims to achieve good ecological status in all surface waters (i.e. rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal waters). In theory, ecological status assessment methods should address the effects of all relevant human pressures. In this study, we analyze the degree to which methods European countries use to assess ecological status tackle various pressures affecting European waters. Nutrient pollution is by far the best-covered pressure for all four water categories. Out of total of 423 assessment methods, 370 assess eutrophication and pressure-specific relationships have been demonstrated for 212 of these. "General degradation" is addressed by 238 methods, mostly validated by relationships to combined pressure indices. Other major pressures have received significantly less effort: hydromorphological degradation is assessed by 160 methods and pressure-specific relationships have been demonstrated for just 40 of these. Hydromorphological pressures are addressed (at least by one BQE) only by 25% countries for coastal waters and 70–80% for lakes and transitional waters. Specific diagnostic tools (i.e. single-pressure relationships) for hydromorphology have only been developed by a few countries: only 20% countries have such methods for lakes, coastal and transitional waters and less than half for rivers. Toxic contamination is addressed by 90 methods; however, pressure-specific relationships have been demonstrated for just eight of these. Only two countries have demonstrated pressure-specific acidification methods for rivers, and three for lakes. In summary, methods currently in use mostly address eutrophication and/or general degradation, but there is not much evidence that they reliably pick up the effects of other significant pressures such as hydromorphology or toxic contamination. Therefore, we recommend that countries re-examine: (1) those pressures which affect different water categories in the country; (2) relevant assessment methods to tackle those pressures; (3) whether pressure-response relationships have been developed for each of these. Unlabelled Image • Large number of aquatic biological assessment methods (423) used in EU member states • Not all major pressures are addressed by biological assessment systems. • Eutrophication is best-covered (370 methods) with pressure-response well documented. • Lack of assessment systems addressing hydromorphological alterations and toxic contamination • The capacity of assessment systems to diagnose the cause of degradation is limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]