In this unit we learned about the ocean. We learned about different parts of the ocean and about the chemicals that make up the ocean. We learned about the shapes in the ocean and how we can measure them. We discussed the struggles that affect the ocean and how we can improve the future of the ocean. We each did a literature review about a grand challenge. Mine was assessing marine ecosystems health in an integrative way. Throughout this project I really latched onto the accessibility of assessing marine health. The tools used can be incredibly expensive and unrealistic to get. In order to know what to change we have to understand what is going on with the marine environment.
The future of the ocean is unstable, we are at a point where we need to pick how to move forward. What we decide to do will have consequences, either good or bad. Something important is our ability to measure how dire the situation is. This is where assessing the marine ecosystem's health comes into play. We need to understand what is going on with the health of the ocean. This will determine how we react to problems.
Accessibility is a large issue when it comes to measuring the health of the oceans. When trying to analyze the health of an ecosystem often many samples are needed. Each sample has a cost to analyze and over time that adds up. "In 2006, the cost of DNA barcoding was estimated at about $5per sample (Cameron et al., 2006), including: DNA extraction,US$1.90; PCR, US$0.37; PCR purification, US$0.28; and Sanger sequencing, US $2.36, plus minor laboratory supplies such as buffers, gels, etc. Note that this does not include the collection or transport of the specimen or sample and it assumes that the species is already present in a reference library." (Sarah J. Bourlat et al., 2013). Accurate and trustworthy information can take hundreds or thousands of samples. The fewer the samples, the less accurate the information found is. One outlier could throw the entire data and conclusion off if there isn't the information to show that there is an outlier.
Often marine monitoring is based around a station and this means that as many separate places can be monitored. "Marine environmental monitoring is highly ‘station oriented’(focused on a few permanent/regular sampling sites) and usually limited to observations of specific groups of organisms (e.g. benthic macroinvertebrates, phytoplankton, or fish) with little consistency in observation methods across ecosystems (de Jonge et al., 2006;Elliott, 2011)." (Sarah J. Bourlat et al., 2013)
There are different tools being developed that could be more accessible than the traditional tools used for measuring marine health. Borja and others have a lot to say about one of these new tools. “Genomic tools are seen as a promising and emerging avenue to improve ecosystem monitoring, as these approaches have the potential to provide new, more accurate, and cost-effective measures. Several techniques have been identified as potential substitutes of traditional approaches for various applications (Bourlat et al., 2013), and some can even provide measurements that were not possible before the genomic era” (Borja A et al., 2016).
(figure 1 Borja A et al., 2016)
There are international guidelines for the health of the ocean but we have to measure what is going on to know if we are in those guidelines. This is what Mara Ntona and Elisa Morgera had to say about these goals. “Internationally agreed goals and targets are increasingly accepted as having a significant political and instrumental value, insofar as they provide a “globally shared normative framework” that complements international conventions and other tools of international law by catalysing action, mobilising stakeholders and fostering collaboration between the members of the international community [1, p. 9]. Based on this rationale [2], the outcome document of the 2012 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD or Rio + 20) called for an inclusive and transparent intergovernmental process for elaborating a set of action-oriented and universally applicable goals on sustainable development.” (Mara Ntona, Elisa Morgera, 2018) To have these goals be there we need to measure. Since measuring the oceans' health is expensive this may not be accessible to all. “By bringing marine ecosystem services and MSP into the discussion on SDG linkages, this article seeks to investigate the role of the ecosystem approach [19], and of fair and equitable benefit-sharing within it [20], in fostering participatory knowledge production, data-gathering and -sharing, mapping, strategic assessment and area-based management in the context of intensifying uses, multiple scales, needs and values around the marine environment. The article will assess to what extent MSP, building upon these tools and drawing on ecosystem services mapping, should be used to promote equity and prevent conflicts between stakeholders with contradictory demands for marine space and ecosystem services, with a view to enhancing synergies between SDG 14 and other SDGs.” (Mara Ntona, Elisa Morgera, 2018)
Author links open overlay panelSarah J.BourlataAngelBorjabJackGilbertcMartin I.TaylordNeilDaviesefStephen B.WeisberggJohn F.GriffithgTeresaLettierihDawnFieldfiJohnBenziejkFrank OliverGlöcknerlNaiaraRodríguez-EzpeletabDaniel P.FaithmTim P.BeannMatthiasObst, et al. “Genomics in Marine Monitoring: New Opportunities for Assessing Marine Health Status.” Marine Pollution Bulletin, Pergamon, 24 June 2013, reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0025326X13002890?token=07BB5EB67820F24B1A0BE287F9AA9D5E0F40A4D32F073624F888F6E303AB5829074FE9F0B989AE6D9EA9851C4B2296BD.
Borja, Angel, et al. “Overview of Integrative Assessment of Marine Systems: The Ecosystem Approach in Practice.” Frontiers, Frontiers, 15 Feb. 2016, www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2016.00020/full.
Marigómez, Ionan, et al. “Marine Ecosystem Health Status Assessment through Integrative Biomarker Indices: a Comparative Study after the Prestige Oil Spill ‘Mussel Watch.’” Ecotoxicology, Springer US, 23 Feb. 2013, link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10646-013-1042-4.
Bakker, Jonathan D. “Increasing the Utility of Indicator Species Analysis.” Besjournals, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 21 Oct. 2008, besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01571.x.
Dean, Harlan K. The Use of Polychaetes (Annelida) as Indicator Species of Marine Pollution: a Review. 2008, www.redalyc.org/pdf/449/44919934004.pdf. \
Ntona, Mara, and Elisa Morgera. “Connecting SDG 14 with the Other Sustainable Development Goals through Marine Spatial Planning.” Marine Policy, Pergamon, 12 July 2017, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X17300520?via=ihub.
Comments
Post a Comment