Interim report of the HELCOM CORESET project

More documents

Recommendations

Info

218 Table 5.4. Monitoring of HCB, HCHs and DDTs in the Baltic Sea. Compound/-group Member Compartment Hexachlorobenhexachloro-cyclohex- DDT and Metabolites State zene (HCB) ane (HCH)-isomers DDD (TDE) and DDE DK Biota u u u Sediment Seawater u k u k DE Biota u u u Sediment j j k k Seawater u u k u PL Biota u u u k Sediment k k Seawater k LIT Biota k Sediment u k u k Seawater j u k u LAT Biota Sediment u u u k Seawater j k u EST Biota Sediment Seawater u u u k RUS Biota Sediment Seawater No information No information No information FIN Biota u u x u k Sediment k k Seawater k SWE Biota x k Sediment k k Seawater k – j indicated in ICES EcoSystemData maps, only 1 time within the period 2004-2009 – u indicated in ICES EcoSystemData maps, more than 1 time within the period 2004-2009 – k indicated in maps of report “Hazardous Substances in the Baltic Sea”, HELCOM BSEP 120B – part of National Monitoring Programme as committed for Combine to HELCOM (Manual D.13) – x published in HELCOM Indicator Fact Sheets Gaps in the monitoring of the compound This paragraph needs further investigation, as no actual overview is available. There has been no compliance check been performed by HELCOM MONAS the last years, to which degree contracting parties have fulfi lled their commitments.
Present status assessments Known temporal trends (also from sediment core profi les) With some exceptions particularly from coastal sites, HCB, HCHs (alpha and gamma) and DDTs show distinct decreasing trends in biota within the last two decades (chapter 2.2.5 BSEP 120 B). In the last time, concentrations have reached a relatively low level, and a small resulting trend may be masked by the within- and between-year variability of the data. No suffi cient information on sediment time series found! Water is only analysed offi cially by two member states. Spatial gradients (incl. sources) For DDE in 1995 a spatial gradient from the northern to the southern Baltic Sea is obvious with increasing concentrations by a factor of about seven, in principle sill remaining also 2005, but the factor has decreased to only half (3.6) of that ten years before. For gamma-HCH, in 1995 also an increasing gradient from north to south with a ratio of 3 can be observed, but in 2005 concentrations in all areas are at an comparable level and no gradient occurs any longer. Table 5.5. Spatial and temporal trends of DDE and gamma-HCH (lindane). DDE 1995 DDE 2005 Gamma-HCH 1995 Gamma-HCH 2005 Bothnian Bay: 80 μg/kg lw 40 μg/kg lw 10 μg/kg lw < 5 μg/kg lw Bothnian Sea 150 μg/kg lw 70 μg/kg lw 12 μg/kg lw < 5 μg/kg lw Gulf of Finland 4 μg/kg ww 1 μg/kg ww North. Baltic Proper: 22μg/kg lw 5 μg/kg lw Arkona Basin 570 μg/kg lw 143 μg/kg lw 29 μg/kg lw 6.3 μg/kg lw 4.1 μg/kg lw (in 2009) The data in BSEP 120 B in fi g. 2.19 and 2.20 are displayed on a different basis. In 1995 (and following years) the small herring samples from the Arkona Sea had extractable lipids in muscle between 3-4% . Calculating on lipid basis and compared with the other areas would result in the estimate sshown in this table. Recommendation Recommended matrices (in order of priority): 1. Biota: HCH (alpha-, beta- and gamma-) and 4,4’-DDE, 4,4-DDD and 4,4’-DDT, (HCB only where of local relevance) 2. Water: HCH (alpha-, beta- and gamma-), 4,4’-DDE, 4,4-DDD and 4,4’-DDT 3. Sediment: 4,4’-DDE, 4,4-DDD and 4,4’-DDT For HCHs and DDTs the relative pattern within each group is indicating local differences as well as changes due to recent inputs or remobilization. HCB is relatively uniform distributed, so that it may be less suitable for geographical differentiation. 219
Page 1:
Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings
Page 4 and 5:
2 Helsinki Commission Katajanokanla
Page 6 and 7:
4 4.16. Cumulative impact on benthi
Page 8 and 9:
6 descriptions of the indicators. T
Page 10 and 11:
8 The CORESET expert group on biodi
Page 12 and 13:
10 fi sh stocks and change in diet,
Page 14 and 15:
12 Figure 2.3. The prevalence of pr
Page 16 and 17:
14 Seasonal changes in blubber thic
Page 18 and 19:
16 Blubber thickness suggestions Bl
Page 20 and 21:
18 Weaknesses/gaps Monitoring of th
Page 22 and 23:
20 2.3. Population growth rate of m
Page 24 and 25:
22 Annual adult survival 1 0,95 0,9
Page 26 and 27:
24 Existing monitoring data Informa
Page 28 and 29:
26 References Bäcklin, B. M. 2011.
Page 30 and 31:
28 Reproduction in the Baltic eagle
Page 32 and 33:
30 Breeding success The proportion
Page 34 and 35:
32 of the real number of nestlings
Page 36 and 37:
34 Gaps and weaknesses Minimum dete
Page 38 and 39:
36 2.5. Abundance of wintering popu
Page 40 and 41:
38 Table 2.10. Pressures affecting
Page 42 and 43:
40 Refrences Skov et al. (2000) Bir
Page 44 and 45:
42 termined by application of the 7
Page 46 and 47:
44 Approach for defi ning GES All s
Page 48 and 49:
46 Sampling It is suggested to incl
Page 50 and 51:
48 2.7. Fish population abundance 2
Page 52 and 53:
50 Coastal Fish - Community Abundan
Page 54 and 55:
52 When a reference data set cannot
Page 56 and 57:
54 well, but were not included in t
Page 58 and 59:
56 Weighting For Nordic Costal mult
Page 60 and 61:
58 12. Current monitoring Monitored
Page 62 and 63:
60 Błeńska M., Osowiecki A., Kra
Page 64 and 65:
62 10. Spatial considerations Fucus
Page 66 and 67:
64 2.15. Trend in the arrival of ne
Page 68 and 69:
66 jectives is to reach “No intro
Page 70 and 71:
68 Sweden Figure 2.23 shows the rat
Page 72 and 73:
70 Strengths and weaknesses of data
Page 74 and 75:
72 need to be revisited in light of
Page 76 and 77:
74 Considering the data set availab
Page 78 and 79:
76 In Denmark, the highest contamin
Page 80 and 81:
78 Status of a compound on internat
Page 82 and 83:
80 A temporal analysis (EU-RAR 2006
Page 84 and 85:
82 Pathways of PFOS to the Baltic e
Page 86 and 87:
84 In regions less affected by anth
Page 88 and 89:
86 3.4. Polychlorinated biphenyls a
Page 90 and 91:
88 actions related to the environme
Page 92 and 93:
90 The CORESET expert group decided
Page 94 and 95:
92 pheric deposition pattern (lowes
Page 96 and 97:
94 3.5. Polyaromatic hydrocarbons (
Page 98 and 99:
96 GES boundaries and matrix Existi
Page 100 and 101:
98 Quality Assurance of PAH metabol
Page 102 and 103:
100 Ariese F, Burgers I, Oudhoff K,
Page 104 and 105:
102 GES boundaries and matrices Exi
Page 106 and 107:
104 3.7. Cesium-137 Authors: Jürge
Page 108 and 109:
106 Figure 3.5. Average surface lev
Page 110 and 111:
108 Temporal trends in concentratio
Page 112 and 113:
110 Other important sources are glo
Page 114 and 115:
112 Conceptual model of the sources
Page 116 and 117:
114 3.8 Tributyltin (TBT) and the i
Page 118 and 119:
116 GES boundaries and matrix Exist
Page 120 and 121:
118 Monitoring the compound Status
Page 122 and 123:
120 Recommendation TBT measurements
Page 124 and 125:
122 3. Frogs have been shown to app
Page 126 and 127:
124 not fi sh (Köhler et al. 2002;
Page 128 and 129:
126 The use of different fi sh spec
Page 130 and 131:
128 Kirchin, M.A. Moore, M.N. Dean,
Page 132 and 133:
130 3.11. Fish Disease Index: Exter
Page 134 and 135:
132 Confounding factors The multifa
Page 136 and 137:
134 analyses ICES data from various
Page 138 and 139:
136 An EAC is the threshold beyond
Page 140 and 141:
138 3.12. Micronucleus test Authors
Page 142 and 143:
140 main nuclei were not counted as
Page 144 and 145:
142 ing national data sets. Note: t
Page 146 and 147:
144 Baršienė J. Rybakovas A. 2006
Page 148 and 149:
146 3.13 A. Reproductive disorders
Page 150 and 151:
148 dead larvae can be induced by s
Page 152 and 153:
150 Strand, J, Dahllöf, I. (2005).
Page 154 and 155:
152 of contaminants in sediments wi
Page 156 and 157:
154 Eriksson Wiklund, A-K., and Sun
Page 158 and 159:
156 4. Candidate indicators for bio
Page 160 and 161:
158 Zooplankton-phytoplankton bioma
Page 162 and 163:
160 4.2. By-catch of marine mammals
Page 164 and 165:
162 4.3. Impacts of anthropogenic u
Page 166 and 167:
164 4.4. Fatty-acid composition of
Page 168 and 169:
166 7. Use of the indicator in prev
Page 170 and 171: 168 10. Spatial considerations Balt
Page 172 and 173: 170 4.10. Large fi sh individuals f
Page 174 and 175: 172 11. Temporal considerations Sam
Page 176 and 177: 174 7. Use of the indicator in prev
Page 178 and 179: 176 7. Use of the indicator in prev
Page 180 and 181: 178 A proposal for an approach to a
Page 182 and 183: 180 Technical data Metadata This is
Page 184 and 185: 182 F igure 4.1. Map showing the cu
Page 186 and 187: 184 4.17. Biomass of copepods 1. Wo
Page 188 and 189: 186 4.19. Zooplankton species diver
Page 190 and 191: 188 indirectly impacted by eutrophi
Page 192 and 193: 190 Notes for the GES boundary The
Page 194 and 195: 192 Step 3: Prepare a list of speci
Page 196 and 197: 194 4.22. Phytoplankton diversity 1
Page 198 and 199: 196 4. Policy relevance Nonylphenol
Page 200 and 201: 198 among different studies/measure
Page 202 and 203: 200 4.27. EROD/CYP1A induction The
Page 204 and 205: 202 5.1. Summary of all supplementa
Page 206 and 207: 204 Table 5.1. (continues) Suppleme
Page 208 and 209: 206 5.5. Biopollution level index 1
Page 210 and 211: 208 NIS for aquaculture purposes. O
Page 212 and 213: 210 Balanus improvisus Baltic Katte
Page 214 and 215: 212 Figure 5.3. The scheme for asse
Page 216 and 217: 214 5.6. Organochlorine compounds G
Page 218 and 219: 216 EU Directive 2008/105/ EC Daugh
Page 222: www.helcom.fi
show all

Interim report of the HELCOM CORESET project

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?