- Page 1: Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings
- Page 5 and 6: Content 1. Introduction . . . . . .
- Page 7 and 8: 1. Introduction This report is Part
- Page 9 and 10: 2. Proposed core indicators for bio
- Page 11 and 12: 8. Link to anthropogenic pressures
- Page 13 and 14: % 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
- Page 15 and 16: Table 2.2. Calculated % blubber (LM
- Page 17 and 18: Table 2.4. Summary of the geometric
- Page 19 and 20: Using proposed GES boundaries for g
- Page 21 and 22: Helle E., Olsson M. & Jensen S. 197
- Page 23 and 24: Introduction Several international
- Page 25 and 26: Harbour seals mature about one year
- Page 27 and 28: Sampling Monitoring of marine mamma
- Page 29 and 30: 2.4. Productivity of white-tailed e
- Page 31 and 32: Temporal development and current st
- Page 33 and 34: Nestling brood size The mean number
- Page 35 and 36: Monitoring In Sweden, surveys of br
- Page 37 and 38: Herrmann, C., O. Krone, T. Stjernbe
- Page 39 and 40: Policy relevance The seabirds have
- Page 41 and 42: The policy decisions under differen
- Page 43 and 44: 12. Current monitoring SOWBAS, nati
- Page 45 and 46: esults from the new SOWBAS report h
- Page 47 and 48: (a) Common Eider (b) Long-tailed Du
- Page 49 and 50: Lewis S., T.N. Sherratt, K.C. Hamer
- Page 51 and 52: areas where the index does not sign
- Page 53 and 54:
combination with expert judgments p
- Page 55 and 56:
Community Diversity Index Community
- Page 57 and 58:
with one net for one night. A minim
- Page 59 and 60:
2.13. Multimetric macrozoobenthic i
- Page 61 and 62:
sitive, large-sized and long-lived
- Page 63 and 64:
2.14. Lower depth distribution limi
- Page 65 and 66:
Finland: - Bladderwrack lower depth
- Page 67 and 68:
Introduction Draft Example for Germ
- Page 69 and 70:
Temporal trends in arrival of non-i
- Page 71 and 72:
The indicator requires an estimatio
- Page 73 and 74:
3. Proposed core indicators for haz
- Page 75 and 76:
Overall, measured BCF values for BD
- Page 77 and 78:
Monitoring the compound Status of m
- Page 79 and 80:
3.2. Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD)
- Page 81 and 82:
Preferred matrix Sediment and biota
- Page 83 and 84:
3.3. Perfl uorooctane sulphonate (P
- Page 85 and 86:
Present status assessments Concentr
- Page 87 and 88:
References Berger, U., A. Glynn, K.
- Page 89 and 90:
adverse behavioral effects, as well
- Page 91 and 92:
Table 3.7. Existing quantitative ta
- Page 93 and 94:
Present status assessments Known te
- Page 95 and 96:
HELCOM, 2010. Implementing HELCOM
- Page 97 and 98:
For US EPA it is the list of 16 pri
- Page 99 and 100:
differences. If BAC should be devel
- Page 101 and 102:
the threshold values. In bivalves a
- Page 103 and 104:
3.6. Lead, Cadmium and Mercury in f
- Page 105 and 106:
Monitoring the parameter Status of
- Page 107 and 108:
137 Cs concentration above target v
- Page 109 and 110:
Authors HELCOM Monitoring of Radioa
- Page 111 and 112:
© National Land Survey, Finland 81
- Page 113 and 114:
term, 137 Cs time trends in biota c
- Page 115 and 116:
Spatial and temporal coverage Herri
- Page 117 and 118:
Tributyltin compounds (TBT-ion) are
- Page 119 and 120:
Biological effects assessment class
- Page 121 and 122:
Gaps in the monitoring of the compo
- Page 123 and 124:
3.9. Pharmaceuticals: Diclofenac an
- Page 125 and 126:
3.10. Lysosomal membrane stability
- Page 127 and 128:
damage to LMS (Köhler 1990, 1991).
- Page 129 and 130:
BEEP 2004.Biological Effects of Env
- Page 131 and 132:
Moore, M.N. Allen, J.I. and Somerfi
- Page 133 and 134:
Baltic Sea countries running fi sh
- Page 135 and 136:
Fish diseases may act at the indivi
- Page 137 and 138:
on which region-specifi c assessmen
- Page 139 and 140:
ICES. 2009a. Report of the Working
- Page 141 and 142:
The majority of studies to date hav
- Page 143 and 144:
etween MN formation and effects on
- Page 145 and 146:
in ecosystem assessments. NRC estab
- Page 147 and 148:
Hagger J.A. Depledge M.H. Galloway
- Page 149 and 150:
There is in some countries restrict
- Page 151 and 152:
that the derivation of the backgrou
- Page 153 and 154:
3.13 B. Reproductive disorders in f
- Page 155 and 156:
criteria have only recently been de
- Page 157 and 158:
Sundelin, B. 1989. Ecological effec
- Page 159 and 160:
The candidate indictors are listed
- Page 161 and 162:
9. Pressure(s) that the indicator r
- Page 163 and 164:
11. Temporal considerations Harbour
- Page 165 and 166:
8. Link to anthropogenic pressures
- Page 167 and 168:
11. Temporal considerations Frequen
- Page 169 and 170:
4.8. Status of salmon smolt product
- Page 171 and 172:
7. Use of the indicator in previous
- Page 173 and 174:
4.11. Abundance of Cyprinids in arc
- Page 175 and 176:
9. Pressure(s) that the indicator r
- Page 177 and 178:
8. Link to anthropogenic pressures
- Page 179 and 180:
7. Use of the indicator in previous
- Page 181 and 182:
mean impact means that there are ei
- Page 183 and 184:
Methodology of data analyses - The
- Page 185 and 186:
Fi gure 4.2. Extent of infralittora
- Page 187 and 188:
4.18. Biomass of microphageous meso
- Page 189 and 190:
4.20. Mean zooplankton size The ind
- Page 191 and 192:
ard deviation (SD) was calculated u
- Page 193 and 194:
Different sampling/analysis methods
- Page 195 and 196:
Casini M, Cardinale M, Hjelm J (200
- Page 197 and 198:
4.23. Seasonal succession of phytop
- Page 199 and 200:
4.26. Acetylcholinesterase (AChE) G
- Page 201 and 202:
Table 4.5. Overview of the use, mon
- Page 203 and 204:
5. Supplementary indicators for env
- Page 205 and 206:
Table 5.1. (continues) Supplementar
- Page 207 and 208:
References Alheit J, Möllmann C, D
- Page 209 and 210:
Introduction Introductions of non-i
- Page 211 and 212:
Figure 5.1. Biopollution level in t
- Page 213 and 214:
GES and classifi cation method A pr
- Page 215 and 216:
Existing monitoring There is no mon
- Page 217 and 218:
Table 5.2. Occurrence of HCB, HCHs
- Page 219 and 220:
GES boundaries and matrix Existing
- Page 221 and 222:
Present status assessments Known te