Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
2010 Arctic Species Trend Index Tracking Trends in Arctic Wildlife CAFF CBMP Report No. 20 ARCTIC COUNCIL discover the arctic species trend index: www.asti.is Acknowledgements CAFF Designated Agencies: DirectorateforNatureManagement,Trondheim,Norway EnvironmentCanada,Ottawa,Canada FaroeseMuseumof NaturalHistory,Tórshavn,FaroeIslands(Kingdomof Denmark) FinnishMinistryoftheEnvironment,Helsinki,Finland IcelandicInstituteof NaturalHistory,Reykjavik,Iceland TheMinistryofInfrastructureandEnvironment,theEnvironmentalAgency,theGovernmentof Greenland • RussianFederationMinistryofNaturalResources,Moscow,Russia • SwedishEnvironmentalProtectionAgency,Stockholm,Sweden • UnitedStatesDepartmentof theInterior,FishandWildlifeService,Anchorage,Alaska Arctic Species Trend Index • • • • • • CAFF Permanent Participant Organisations: • • • • • • AleutInternationalAssociation(AIA) ArcticAthabaskanCouncil(AAC) Gwich’inCouncilInternational(GCI) InuitCircumpolarConference(ICC)Greenland,AlaskaandCanada RussianIndigenousPeoplesof theNorth(RAIPON) TheSaamiCouncil Thispublicationshouldbecitedas:LouiseMcRae,ChristophZöckler,MichaelGill,JonathanLoh, JuliaLatham,NicolaHarrison,JennyMartinandBenCollen.2010. Arctic Species Trend Index 2010: Tracking Trends in Arctic Wildlife. CAFFCBMPReportNo.20,CAFFInternationalSecretariat, Akureyri,Iceland. Formoreinformationpleasecontact: CAFFInternationalSecretariat Borgir,Nordurslod 600Akureyri,Iceland Phone:+354462-3350 Fax:+354462-3390 Email:[email protected] Website:www.caff.is Design&Layout:LilyGontard Coverphotocourtesyof JoelleTaillon. March2010 ___ CAFFDesignatedArea Report Authors: LouiseMcRae,ChristophZöckler,MichaelGill,JonathanLoh,JuliaLatham,NicolaHarrison,Jenny MartinandBenCollen ThisreportwascommissionedbytheCircumpolarBiodiversityMonitoringProgram(CBMP)with fundingprovidedbytheGovernmentof Canada.The2010BiodiversityIndicatorsPartnershipprovidedfundingtoassistintheprintingof thereport. 3 Content 5 Foreword 6 Summary 7 Introduction 7 Monitoring Arctic biodiversity 8 Figure 1: Arctic boundaries 9 Data Coverage 9 Figure 2: Data Coverage by Taxonomic Class 9 Trends in sample populations of selected species 10 Figure 3: Sample Populations 15 Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI) 15 Figure 4: Arctic Species Trend Index for all species 16 Regional results: Arctic boundaries 16 F igure 5: Arctic Species Trend Index for all Arctic species disaggregated into High Arctic species, Low Arctic species and Sub Arctic species 17 Figure 6: Trends in Arctic summer sea-ice extent 18 Box 1: Sea-ice-associated species 18 Figure 7: Trends in the Western Hudson Bay Polar Bear populations 19 System Results 19 Overview 19 Figure 8: Index of terrestrial species disaggregated by Arctic boundary 20 F igure 9: Overall index of marine species and index of north Pacific Ocean species 20 Trophic Level 21 F igure 10: Indices of all herbivore species and all herbivores excluding the waterbird species 21 Box 2: Caribou/reindeer 22 F igure 11: Indices for all Caribou (Rangifer tarandus) populations, disaggregated into North American and European populations 22 Taxonomic Results 22 Overview 23 Figure 12: Index of ASTI species disaggregated by taxonomic class 23 Birds 23 F igure 13: Index of all bird species disaggregated into indices of freshwater, marine and terrestrial birds 4 24 F igure 14: Index of all terrestrial birds disaggregated into an index without goose species and an index of goose species alone 24 Box 3: Terrestrial birds 24 Migratory birds 25 F igure 15: Index of all bird species disaggregated into indices of migrant and non-migrant bird populations 26 ASTI in the Global Context 26 F igure 16: Global Living Planet Index (LPI) disaggregated into temperate and tropical indices and the Arctic Species Trend Index Arctic Species Trend Index 27 Discussion 29 Acknowledgements 30 References 34 Appendix I: Technical Notes 34 Arctic Species Trend Index 34 Data tagging 34 Figure 17: Hierarchy of indices within the Arctic Species Trend Index 35 Appendix II: Species and Population Numbers in the ASTI Dataset 35 CAFF boundary 35 High/Low/Sub Arctic boundaries combined 36 High/Low/Sub Arctic disaggregated by class 36 High/Low/Sub Arctic disaggregated by system 36 Marine oceans by class 37 Regions (Greenland and North America) 35 Appendix III: Index and Confidence Interval Values for Each of the Indices 5 Foreword ManypeopleviewtheArcticasavastandbarrenexpanse—an intimidatingandhostileenvironmentdevoidof wildlifeandpeople. Fortunatelythismythisbeingdispelledwiththegrowingvoiceof Arcticindigenouspeoplesandotherresidents,andthegrowingfocus onsuchissuesasclimatechangeanditsdisproportionateimpacton high-latituderegions.TheArcticnotonlyisahighlyproductivesystemthatplayshosttoavastarrayandabundanceof uniquewildlife, butitactsasacriticalcomponentintheEarth’sphysical,chemical andbiologicalregulatorysystem.Perturbationstothissystemare expectedtonotonlyhaveconsequencesfortheArcticitself,butwill befeltglobally. tom barry Arcticresidentsinparticular,butalsotheworldatlarge,have beenincreasinglydemandingtimelyandaccurateinformationon howtheArcticisrespondingtopressuressuchasclimatechange. Untilnow,thesedemandshavelargelybeenmetwithsilence.To date,wehavemostlyreliedonclimateinformationandsea-iceextent asindicatorsof howtheArcticischanging.Butwhatofthewildlife thatinhabitstheArctic?Howaretheyrespondingtothesepressures? WiththeArcticSpeciesTrendIndex(ASTI)wecannowbeginto trackhowtheArctic’secosystemsandthelivingresourcesdependent uponthemarerespondingtochange.Almost1,000datasetsforthe pastfourdecadesrepresenting35%of allknownArcticvertebrate speciesarefoundintheASTI—asignificantaccomplishmentand recognitionof thesustainedeffortanddedicationof Arcticresearchersandcommunitieswhohavebeentrackingwildlifepopulationsinaremoteandchallengingenvironment. WhilethedatafoundintheASTIareimpressive,moreare neededtounderstandhowtheArctic’secosystemsandtheliving resourcestheysupportarerespondingandwillrespondtogrowing andcumulativepressures.Informationoninvertebratesisparticularly scarce,asisthetrackingof large-scalevegetationchanges.Agrowing awarenessthatchangesareoccurringfasterthanmodelledpredictionsremindsusthatminimaldatasetscanhavelimitedvalue.An enhancedeffortisneededfromallArcticcountriestofurtherinvest inmonitoringandassociatedresearch.TheresultshavetobeeffectivelydeliveredtoArcticresidents,governmentsandtheworldin ordertohelpusconservetheArctic’slivingresourcesandadaptto changestotheseresourcesinachangingworld. Dr.AevarPetersen Chair,ArcticCouncilConservationof ArcticFloraandFauna (CAFF)WorkingGroup We can now begin to track how the Arctic’s ecosystems and the living resources dependent upon them are responding to change 6 Summary Arctic Species Trend Index joelle taillon Thecontributionof Arcticwildlifetoglobalbiodiversityissubstantial.Theregionsupportsgloballysignificantpopulationsof birds,mammalsandfish.Forexample,overhalfoftheworld’s shorebirdsand80%of theglobalgoosepopulationbreedinArctic andSubArcticregions.Dramaticchanges(e.g.,sea-iceloss)inthe Arctic’secosystemsarepredictedtooccuroverthenextcentury. Arcticspeciesthathaveadaptedtotheseextremeenvironmentsare expectedtobedisplacedbytheencroachmentof moresoutherly (SubArctic)speciesandecosystems.Continued,rapidchangein theArcticecosystemswillhaveglobalrepercussionsaffectingthe planet’sbiodiversityasawhole.UnderstandinghowtheArctic’s livingresources,includingitsvertebratespecies,arerespondingto thesechangesisessentialinordertodevelopeffectiveconservation andadaptationstrategies. Inthisreport,vertebratepopulation-abundancedatawereused toproduceanindicatorof thetrendsinArcticbiodiversityoverthe past34years(1970asthebaseline1).Thisindextracks965populationsof 306species,representing35%of allknownvertebrate speciesfoundintheArctic.VertebrateabundanceinHighArctic speciesdeclined26%between1970and2004.LowandSubArctic specieshavefaredbetteroverthistimeperiod:LowArcticspecies experiencedincreasingabundanceandSubArcticspeciesshoweda declinesincethemid-1980s,butnooverallchangeoverthe34-year period.Theseobservedtrendsarelargelyconsistentwithcurrent predictionsregardingtheresponseof Arcticwildlifetoclimate changeandexpectedincreasesinpreviouslyover-harvestedspecies, andsuggestthathuman-inducedchangesinArcticecosystemsare alreadyresultinginwinnersandlosers.Dramaticgrowthofcertain populationsof migratoryArctic-nestinggeesespecies,forinstance, showsacontrastwithasteadydeclineinotherherbivorousspecies, mostof whicharenotmigratory. Whilethisreporthighlightstrendsseenover34years,further workisneededtoproduceamorerobustindexthatadequatelyrepresentsalltaxa,biomesandregionsandtodevelopabetterunderstandingof howtheArctic’swildlifeisrespondingtobothnatural andhuman-inducedchanges.Theremotenessof theregionmeans certainspeciesandpopulations(e.g.,fishpopulationsandHigh Arcticpopulations)havelimiteddatacoverage.Currentresearch andmonitoringeffortsareinsufficient,limitingourabilitytodetect andunderstandchangesinpopulationabundance.Betterdesigned, morewidelydistributedandmoreintegratedresearchandmonitoringschemesneedtobeimplemented.Theresultinginformation mustbedeliveredusingeffectiveformatstodecision-makersatall levels(national,regionalandlocalauthorities)inordertofacilitate moreeffectiveandtimelyconservationandadaptationresponsesin arapidlychangingsystem. 1. 1970 was used as the baseline as pre-1970 data in the ASTI was limited making trend results uncertain for years preceding 1970. Likewise, 2004 was used as the cut-off year as sample size declined dramatically after 2004 due to recent, updated datasets not yet being available. 7 Introduction Monitoring Arctic biodiversity Thisyear,allsignatorynationswillbereportingtotheConvention onBiologicalDiversity(CBD)ontheirprogresstowardsthe2010 targetof reducingtherateof biodiversityloss.Biodiversityindicatorshavebeendevelopedtoassesswhetherornotthistargethas beenmetandtodemonstratethechangingstateof natureovertime. TotrackstatusandtrendsinArcticbiodiversityforthe2010target, theCircumpolarBiodiversityMonitoringProgram(CBMP)has identifiedanumberof indicesandindicators,oneof whichisthe ArcticSpeciesTrendIndex(ASTI).Thisindex,liketheglobalLiving PlanetIndex(LPI),illustratesoverallvertebratepopulationtrends byintegratingvertebratepopulationtrenddataof anappropriate standard[1]fromacrosstheArcticandoverthelast34years.An increasingindexindicatesthat,overall,morevertebratepopulations intheArcticareincreasingthandecreasing.Whereasadecreasing index,indicatestheoppositesituation.Thisindexnotonlyallows foracompositemeasureoftheoveralltrajectoryofArcticvertebrate populations,butcanbedisaggregatedtodisplaytrendsbasedon taxonomy,ecosystem,region,timeperiodandothercategories. MeasuringchangeinArcticbiodiversityisallthemorepertinent givenevidenceemergingof Arcticecosystemsalreadyresponding,in somecasesquitedramatically,toclimaticchanges[2,3].Predictions areof substantialshiftsinthisenvironmentinthenearfuture(e.g., encroachmentof moresoutherlyspeciesandecosystems)[4,5]and recentchangesinphysicalelementssuchasseaicehaveoutpaced predictedchanges[6].LimitedfunctionalredundancyinArctic ecosystemsposesaparticularriskasthelossof asinglespecies couldhavedramaticandcascadingeffectsonanecosystem’sstate andfunction[3].Ourcurrent,mostly,single-speciesapproachto monitoringwithabiastowardscharismaticspeciesoverfunctional specieslimitsourabilitytodetectandunderstandcriticalchangesin theArctic’secosystems.Abroaderandmoreintegratedapproachis neededtofacilitateabetterunderstandingof howtheArctic’sliving resources,includingitsvertebratespecies,arerespondingtoachangingArcticandhowthesechangesmightreflectorcounterglobal biodiversitytrends.Thisinformationisessentialinordertodevelop effectiveconservationandadaptationstrategies. Resultspresentedinthisreportfromtheanalysisof ArcticvertebratepopulationdataareusedtoexamineoveralltrendsinpopulationabundanceinachangingArcticecosystem.AnoverallASTI ispresentedasanindicatorof Arcticbiodiversityattheecosystem level,followedbyanumberof species-andsystem-basedthemes illustratedtorevealtrendsinabundanceatsmallerscales.ThesedisaggregationsidentifypatternsinArcticvertebratepopulationtrends, carsten egevang This information is essential in order to develop effective conservation and adaptation strategies. 8 therebyfacilitatingagreaterunderstandingof thepotentialdriversof thesetrends.Overtime,trackingthisindexwillhelpreveal patternsinArcticwildliferesponsetogrowingpressures,thereby facilitatingabetterpredictiveabilityonthetrajectoryofArctic ecosystems. Arctic Species Trend Index carsten egevang Figure 1: Arctic boundaries The Arctic as defined by the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna [7] and the High, Low and Sub Arctic regions according to floristic boundaries [8]. The red dots represent vertebrate populations included in the ASTI data analysis. 9 Data Coverage Thedelineationof theHigh,LowandSubArcticboundarieswas usedtoclassifyArcticpopulations(Figure1)givingatotalof 965 timeseriesfor306speciesof birds,mammalsandfish.Thetotal numberof speciesintheASTIrepresents35%of theknownArctic vertebratespeciesandtheproportionof eachtaxonomicclassrepresentedisshowninFigure2.Representativecoveragewasgoodfor birdspecies,moderateformammalsandpoorforfish. peter e. steenstra/usfws 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Birds Mammals Fishes Taxonomic class Figure 2: Data Coverage by Taxonomic Class. The coverage of species represented in the ASTI. Black bars represent proportion of Arctic species in each class for which there are population data available. White bars are the proportion of Arctic species with no available population-trend data. DatawerecollatedfromacrosstheArcticrepresentingcontributionsfromvariousindividualsand organizations(seeAcknowledgements)inalleightArcticnationsandfrommarine,terrestrialand freshwatersystems(seeAppendixII).Afewexamplesofthecompositionof theASTIdatasetare onthefollowingpages.Thetrendsinabundanceineachsubsetof datawereaveragedtoproducethe resultsthatfollow. Trends in sample populations of selected species Thepopulationtrendsforthe10terrestrial,marineandfreshwaterspeciesshowninFigure3illustrate thekindsof datathathavebeenusedtocalculatetheArcticSpeciesTrendIndex.Theexamplesetspans arangeof classes,locationsandArcticregionstoillustratehowdifferentpopulationsarefaringacross theArcticregion,butdoesnotnecessarilyrepresentthepictureforanentirespeciesorregion. Somepopulationsareeitherstableorincreasing,representingconservationsuccessessuchasthe AlaskanBowheadWhalepopulationthatisbenefittingfromtheremovalofhuntingpressure.GreenlandCodthatdeclinedtoaverylowlevelbytheearly1990sduetodeteriorationof theenvironmental conditionsandhighfishingmortality,showsindicationsof improving,withinfluxof codfromIcelandicwatersasonecontributingfactor. 10 No. of Individuals 12000 ansgar walk 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Bowhead Whale (Balaena mysticetus) Spawning stock Biomass (T) 1200000 0 1970 1975 1980 susan daly Pollock (Pollachius virens) Figure 3: Sample Populations 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 11 Thousand individuals 3 matthias hillebrand 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1990 1995 2000 2005 Wolverine (Gulo gulo) Tracks per km2 25 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 2000 2005 carsten egevang Arctic Hare (Lepus timidus) 12 Est. no. of occupied nests 250 carsten egevang 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 1995 2000 2005 Atlantic Puffin (Fratercula artica) No. of Fish 400000 ruth foster 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 Chum Salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) Continued ... Figure 3: Sample Populations 13 Breeding pairs 80 0 1970 mike brown 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2000 2005 White-Tailed Eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) Spawning stock Biomass (T) 500000 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 Greenland Cod (Gadus morhua) 1990 1995 hans-petter fjeld/wikipedia 14 Thousand individuals 8 malene thyssen/wikipedia 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 1990 1995 2000 2005 Brown Bear (Ursus arctos) Individuals pr 100m2 80 peter e. steenstra/usfws 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) Continued ... Figure 3: Sample Populations 2005 15 Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI) Theaveragetrendin965populationsof 306Arcticvertebratespecies indicatesanincreaseinabundancefrom1970until1984,thentheindexremainsrelativelystableupto2004(Figure4).Overall,theindex hasincreasedby16%overthetimeperiod(1970-2004).Theconfidenceintervals2 showthattheoverallincreaseinvertebrateabundance wasbetween2and32%.Thenumberof Arcticpopulationscontributingtotheindexoverthe34yearsrangedfrom266to666timeseries forasingleyear.Thenumberof populationshasincreasedsteadilyup until1998indicatingthatdataavailabilityhasimprovedeitherasa resultof moremonitoringschemes,orbydatabecomingmorewidely available,orboth.Declinesinsamplesizeinrecentyearsisthoughtto beduetonewdatanotyetbeingavailable,ratherthanrepresentingareductioninmonitoringeffort. PopulationtrendswithintheArcticboundaryasdefinedbyCAFF(seeFigure1)werealmostidentical tothoseof theArcticboundariesusedinthisanalysis.AlthoughtheCAFFdatasetcontains133fewer populations,therewasonlyonespeciesdifferencebetweenthetwoindices,sotheyarequalitativelyvery similar(seeAppendixIIandIII). usfws AlthoughtheoverallASTIisincreasing,thefollowingsub-indicesrevealthatthesametrendisnot consistentamongallregions,systemsorgroupsof species.2 2 700 1.8 500 1.4 1.2 400 1 300 0.8 0.6 0.4 Number of populations Index value (mean annual rate of change) 600 1.6 200 Arctic Species Trend Index N Values 100 0.2 0 1970 0 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Figure 4: Arctic Species Trend Index (with 95% confidence intervals) for all species within the Arctic boundaries and total population (N) values for that year, for the period 1970-2004. (ASTI, n=306 species, 965 populations). 2. Confidence intervals were generated for each index and the values are found in Appendix III of this report. They are not displayed in most figures in order to maintain the clarity of the graphs. 16 Regional results: Arctic boundaries PopulationsintheHigh,LowandSubArcticboundariesshow markedlydifferenttrends(Figure5).HighArcticspeciesshow anoveralldeclineinabundanceof26%withpopulationslevelling offinthemid-1990s.Similarly,afteraninitialgrowthperiod, SubArcticspeciesappeartohavedeclinedinabundancefrom aroundthemid1980s(overalldeclineof 3%).LowArcticspecies ontheotherhandhaveincreasedbyanaverageof46%overthe sametimeperiod. usfws 2 Index Value (mean annual rate of change) 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 High Arctic Low Arctic 0.4 0.2 0 1970 Sub Arctic ASTI 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Figure 5: Arctic Species Trend Index for all Arctic species (black line) disaggregated into High Arctic species, Low Arctic species and Sub Arctic species for the period 19702005. (All species, n =306 species, 965 populations; High Arctic, n =47 species, 114 populations; Low Arctic, n=194 species, 545 populations; Sub Arctic n=155 species, 306 populations.) TheHighArcticindexcombinestrendsin47speciesandincludessea-ice-associatedspecies,such asnarwhalandpolarbear.Thisregionof theArctichasexperiencedthelargestincreaseintemperature changetodate[5]andhasalreadyexperienceddramaticreductionsinsea-iceextent(Figure6)withfurthercontractionof seaicepredictedinthenearfuture[9].Reductioninsea-iceextentlimitsthehabitat availableformanysea-icedependentHighArcticspeciesandthesespeciesareexpectedtodeclinewith decliningsea-icecover[10].However,weareunabletoascertaintheextenttowhichsea-iceassociated species,suchaspolarbear,havealreadybeenaffectedbythesechanges.ThetrenddataformostHigh Arcticspeciesareavailableforonlyafewselectedpopulations(seeBox1)andthereareotherfactors influencingspeciesabundance(e.g.,naturalcycles)thatneedtobeconsidered.Forexample,someterrestrialmammalpopulationsareknowntocyclenaturallyandsomeof thesepopulationshaverecently beenexperiencingaperiodof decline(e.g.,BrownandCollaredLemmingpopulationsinGreenland andCanada;CariboupopulationsfromthenorthernterritoriesinCanada).Theserecentdeclinesare thoughttobepartofanaturalcycleandarecontributingtothedecreasingHighArcticindex. 17 TheSubArcticareapredominantlycoversterrestrialandfreshwatersystemswithveryfewcoastalandnomarinepopulations.This isthemostaccessibleregionintheArctic,andconsequentlyhumanimpactandland-usechangehavebeengreaterthanintheHigh Arctic,althoughstillrelativelylowcomparedtonon-Arcticregions. Withclimatechangeandincreasedresourcedevelopmentcoupled withinvasivespecies,contaminantsandpossibleoverharvesting, theSubArcticmayfaceincreasing,cumulativepressuresthatresult innegativeimpactsonwildlifepopulations.However,itisunclear atthistimewhatmightbedrivingthesteadydeclineinvertebrate abundancesince1986. TheindexofLowArcticspeciesispredominantlyareflectionof themarineenvironmentandshowsanaverageincreaseinabundanceoverthetimeperiod.Thespecies includedinthisdatasetareprimarilymarinefish,someofwhich(suchasPollock)changeinabundance inaccordancewithsea-temperaturefluctuations[11],andmarinemammalspecies(manyofwhichhave shownrecoveriesfrompreviouslyhighlevelsof exploitation[12]).Theseincreasesarelargelyfoundin thePacificwatersof theLowArcticintheEasternBeringSea,thusdemonstratingtheneedforcareful interpretationof theLowArcticindex.Theyalsorevealtheshortcomingsthatarestrictedtimeline of biodiversitychangepresents.If populationshadbeenmonitoredsincetheearly1900s,thesmall recoveryinsomeof thelargemarine-mammalspeciesoverthepastfewdecadeswouldbedwarfedby theextensivedeclinesthatmarkedthedecadespreceding1970. Figure 6: Trends in Arctic summer sea-ice extent. Comparison between 1979 to 2000 average, 2007 and 2009 (up to August 31). Source: National Snow and Ice Data Center. Digital media. usfws 18 Arcticsummersea-iceextentreachedarecordminimum(seeFigure6)in2007(39%belowthe 1979to2000average)and2008wasthesecond-lowestrecord(reaching34%belowaverage).In conjunctionwiththesesurprisinglossesinsea-iceextentisthelossof multi-yearicewhichmakesthe currentthinner,single-yearicemuchmorevulnerabletofurtherreductionsinextent.Itiswellestablishedthatfurtherlossesinsea-iceextentaretobeexpectedoverthecomingdecades[9].Howthis lossof seaicewillimpactmarinespeciesislessclear.NotallHighArcticspeciesareequallyreliant onthisrapidlychanginghabitat,sothestrengthof thisrelationshipandtheplasticityof thespecies willdictatetheabilityof anygivenspeciestoadapttofuturechangesinthedistributionof seaice [10].Theicerepresentsahabitatthatmanyspeciesdependon,fromPolarBearstoRingedSeals,seabirdstofish,andevenalgaeandinvertebratesdirectlyassociatedwithmulti-yearice.Speciessuchas thePolarBear,NarwhalandRingedSealarehighlyadaptedtothishabitatforforaging,birthingor predatorevasion[13].PolarBears,forexample,relyalmostentirelyonthemarinesea-iceenvironment fortheirsurvival,thereforelarge-scalechangesintheirhabitatareexpectedtohavedramaticimpacts onpopulationsizes[14].Inthecaseof theWesternHudsonBayPolarBearpopulation,theincreasinglylongice-freeseasonisdirectlycorrelatedwithreducedbodyconditionof PolarBearsinthis population,therebyinitiatingtheobservedpopulationdeclines[14,15].However,thelackof alinear relationshipbetweenthischanginghabitatandpopulationabundancemakesitdifficulttopredictexacteffects.Theextenttowhichthemajorityof speciescanadapttothelossof seaiceandassociated preyspeciesremainslargelyunclear[10].Thereisgreatuncertaintyinhowspeciesinteractionswill beaffectedbythesedramaticchangesandevenbaselinedataonpopulationsizeinsea-ice-dependent speciesislargelylacking. 1400 1200 1000 Individuals Arctic Species Trend Index Box 1: Sea-ice-associated species 800 600 400 200 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 Figure 7: Trends in the Western Hudson Bay Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus) populations [15]. 2000 2005 19 System Results Overview Divergentpatternsarealsoobservedbetweenthedifferentsystems (marine,freshwaterandterrestrial).Whereasthefreshwaterand marineindicesincreaseoverthetimeperiod(52%and53%respectively),theterrestrialindexshowsanoveralldeclineof 10%,despite increasinginthelate1970stomid-1980s(Figure8).However,the databehindthefreshwaterindexiscurrentlytoosparse(51species; 132populations)tofullyreflectthecircumpolarfreshwatersituation.Themarineindexisrobust(107species;390populations),but hannes grobe/awi/wikipedia itislargelydriven,asistheLowArcticindex,byanoverweightingof populationdatafromtheeasternBeringSea.Morerobustandbalanceddatasets areneededforthesesystems.Theterrestrialindex,however,doeshaverelativelybalancedanddecent dataanditcomprisesthelargestdatasetwith46%of thetotalnumberof ASTIpopulationscompared tomarine(40%)andfreshwaterwithonly14%. Figure 8: Index of terrestrial species disaggregated by Arctic boundary for the period 1970-2004 (High Arctic, n=25 species, 73 populations; Low Arctic, n=66 species, 166 populations; Sub Arctic, n=102 species, 204 populations.) Theterrestrialindexisfairlystableuntiltheearly1990s,afterwhichthereisasteadydecline,despitean overalldramaticincreaseingoosepopulationsoverthesametimeperiod(Figure8).Theoverallmoderate declineintheterrestrialindexislargelyareflectionof declines(-28%)interrestrialHighArcticpopulations(mostlyherbivores,e.g.,caribou,lemmings),whereasterrestrialLowArcticpopulations(e.g.,Lesser SnowGeese[16])haveincreasedby7%andSubArcticpopulationshavedeclined(-5%)slightly(Figure 8).TheincreaseintheLowArcticis,inpart,duetothestrongincreaseof goosepopulations.Itcould alsoreflectecologicalresponsestoclimaticchangeswherebyspecieswithmoresoutherlydistributionshave movednorthandarenowthriving,whilethenorthernmosttypicalHighArcticspecieshavenowhereto moveto.However,evidenceforthisisnotconclusiveandcumulativefactorsmightbeinvolved. 20 Index value (mean annual rate of change) Arctic Species Trend Index 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Marine Pacific ocean 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Figure 9: Overall index of marine species and index of north Pacific Ocean species for the period 1970-2004. (Marine, n=107 species, 390 populations; Pacific, n=69 species, 176 populations.) Asmentioned,themarineindexwasoverweightedbypopulationdatafromtheeasternBeringSea. TheincreasingtrendfoundinFigure9forPacificmarinepopulations,islargelydrivenbymammaland fishpopulations.Thisdramaticallyincreasingtrendislargelydrivingtheoverallmarineindex.Many marinevertebratepopulations(e.g.,marinemammals)intheBeringSeaarerecoveringfromhistorical overharvesting[17],aswellasfromrecentchangesinenvironmentalconditions(e.g.,BeringSeaPollock [18])resultingindramaticincreasesinsomespecies’populations. Furtheranalysiswasconductedfortheterrestrialsystemduetothelargerdatacollections.These smallerscaleindicesthatresultrevealintriguingunderlyingtrendswithintheterrestrialsystem. Trophic Level AllspeciesintheASTIwereassignedacategoryaccordingtotheirtrophiclevel:primaryconsumer (herbivores),secondaryconsumer(carnivorespreyingoninvertebrates,fish,smallbirdsand/ormammals)ortertiaryconsumers(toppredators).Figure10illustratesthetrendsinabundancefortheprimaryconsumers,85%of whichareterrestrial.Substantialincreasesinsomepopulationsof theAnatidae family(geese,ducksandswans)havebeenobserved[19],sotrendsinprimaryconsumerswereanalysed withandwithoutspeciesfromtheAnatidaefamily.Whileherbivoresasawholeincreasedslowlyin abundancefrom1970to1990,mostof theincreasewasduetolargeincreasesinAnatidaepopulations. Byremovingtheducks,geeseandswansitcanbeseenthattherewasanoveralldownwardtrendinother primaryconsumersby30%between1984and2004.Thereasonsforthisdeclinearenotknownand maybedue,inpart,tothecyclicalnatureofsomespeciesandpopulations(e.g.,BarrenGroundCaribou).Itmay,however,bealsoattributedtochangingconditionsintundravegetationandmorevariable springweatherconditions.InmanypartsoftheArctic,shrubshaveincreasedinabundanceandcover intundrasystemsastheclimatehaswarmedandtheadjacentsea-icecoverhasdeclined[20][21][22]. Experimentalwarmingof vegetationplotsintundrasystemshasshownthesameeffectwithacorre- 21 spondingdecreaseinlichenandbryophytebiomass[23].Thesechangesareexpectedtobeunfavourable formanyexistingtundraherbivorousspeciessuchasBarrenGroundCaribou[24].Also,theincidence of icingeventsduetospringrainfallorincreasedfreeze-thawcyclesarethoughttobeontheriseand representanegativeimpactonArcticherbivoresastheicemakesitmoredifficultforgrazerstoaccess foragewithpotentiallycatastrophicresults.Forexample,duringtwowintersinthe1990s,thePeary CariboupopulationinthewesternQueenElizabethIslandswasreducedbymorethan95%.Thiswas duetoheavysnowconditionsandthepresenceof icelayersinthesnowthatmadeitdifficultforthe Cariboutoreachgroundforage[25]. 2 Index value (mean annual rate of change) 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 Herbivores Herbivores (minus Anatidae) 0.2 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Figure 10: Indices of all herbivore species and all herbivores excluding the waterbird species (ducks, geese and swans) for the period 1970-2004. (All herbivores, n=66 species, 220 populations; herbivores minus waterbird species, n=55 species, 182 populations.) Box 2: Caribou/reindeer HumanshavehadarelationshipwithCariboustretchingbacktoUpperPalaeolithictimes,asthe 20,000-year-oldcavepaintingsinCantabria,northernSpain,testify.Europewasinthegripof thelast glacialperiod,thelandscapeof northernSpainandsouthernFrancewasborealtundra,Mammothsand WoollyRhinoceroswereabundant,andReindeerwereamongthemostimportantfoodspeciesforthe Cro-Magnonhunter-gathererpeoplewholivedthere.TodaythatrelationshipcontinuesintheArctic andSubArcticregions,whereindigenouspeoplessuchastheSaamiof ScandinaviaandtheInuitin Canadadependondomesticatedandwildherdsformeat,milkandhides. Figure11showsaveragetrendsin25NorthAmericanand21EurasianCaribou/Reindeerpopulations,andtheaveragetrendacrossall46populations.Thetotalpopulationof wildherdspeakedat about5.6millionintheearly1990sand2000s,andsincethendeclinedbyaboutathirdoverall[26]. ThelargestherdinRussia,theTaimyr,peakedataroundonemillionanimalsin2000.Althoughrecent declinesarepartof anaturalcycle,thereisgrowingconcernaboutthecurrentimpactsofglobalchange onRangiferpopulations[27].Threefactorsdifferentiatetherecentperiodof lowabundancefrom previousdeclinesinpopulations:climatechange,increasedindustrialdevelopmentandmoreefficient harvesting.Geographicallyvariableclimate-changetrendsandcharacteristicextremesinweatherpatternshavedirectimpacts,bothpositiveandnegative,onbirthandsurvivalrates,andultimatelyonherd 22 productivity.IncreasedindustrialdevelopmentintheNorthalters activityanddistributionpatterns.Greateraccesstocaribouand improvedmobilityof huntersresultsinconsistentlyhighharvests evenwhenpopulationnumbersarelow.Allthreefactorshavethe potentialtoaffectcurrentdeclinesandprolongrecoverytimes.It willbeimportanttounderstandwhatdriversareresponsiblefor populationdeclinesandtomonitortheoutcomeof recoverystrategies[27]. 2 1.8 Index value (mean annual rate of change) Arctic Species Trend Index joelle taillon ThepopulationtrendsshowninFigure11areclearlycyclicalandalsoshowstrikingsimilaritiesbetweenEurasiaandNorth America,suggestingthattheremaybecircumpolarfactorsunderlyingthesetrends.Althoughthecyclicalpatternshavebeen attributedtoclimaticpatternsinsomepopulations[28],therelationshipbetweenclimateandRangifer abundanceiscomplex.Ratherthanhavingadirectcausaleffect,decadalvariationinclimateislikely tohaveacumulativeinfluenceonabundancethroughsuccessivegenerationsbyaffectingextrinsicand intrinsicfactorssuchasforageavailabilityandfecundity[29].Recentadvancesinestimatinglong-term trendsinBarrenGroundCaribouabundance[30]mayhelptoshedsomemorelightonthesecomplex interactions. 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 1970 Caribou - all Caribou - North America (25 pops) Caribou - Scandinavia and Russia (21 pops) 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Figure 11: Indices for all Caribou (Rangifer tarandus) populations, disaggregated into North American and European populations. (All Caribou populations=46, North America=25, Scandinavia and Russia=21). Taxonomic Results Overview Likethesystems,theanalysisof theASTIbytaxonomicclassalsorevealscontrastingtrendsbetween eachspeciesgroup.Birdscomprise52%of theASTIpopulationsandshowaflattrendoverallwith aslightdeclineinlateryears,until2004.Mammalpopulationsincreased,onaverage,overthe34-year period.Thefluctuationsduringthemid-1980sareduetorapidchangesinabundanceof asmallsetof marine-mammalpopulationsintheArcticOcean(Killer,Sperm,FinandHumpbackwhales).Thisis mostlyareflectionof alimitednumberof datasetswithlimitedtime-seriesdataratherthananaccuratedepictionaslarge-bodiedmarinemammalsgenerallydon’texhibitsuchmarkedannualchangesin populationsize.Thefishindexisnotshownasitisheavilyskewedbymarinefishpopulationsfromthe BeringSea,aneffectwhichhasbeendiscussedinthesystemssection(p.19)of thisreport. 23 Index value (mean annual rate of change) 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Birds Mammals 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Figure 12: Index of ASTI species disaggregated by taxonomic class for the period 19702004. (Birds, n=190 species, 503 populations; mammals, n=53 species, 275 populations.) Birdsarethebeststudiedof thetaxonomicclasses,coveringalargenumberof species,populations andgeographicareasoverrelativelylongtimeperiods,thusallowingformoredetailedanalysestobe conducted. Birds 2 Index value (mean annual rate of change) 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 Birds Freshwater birds Marine birds 0.2 0 1970 Terrestrial birds 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Figure 13: Index of all bird species disaggregated into indices of freshwater, marine and terrestrial birds for the period 1970-2004. (All birds, n=190 species, 503 populations; freshwater, n=35 species, 54 populations; marine, n=37 species, 214 populations; terrestrial, n=118 species, 235 populations.) 24 Ananalysisof Arcticbirdtrendsbybiome(Figure13)showsthattherelativelystablepatternis somewhatconsistentinbothmarine-andterrestrial-birdpopulationstherebyreinforcingthetrendseen intheoverallArcticbirdindex.Freshwater-birdpopulationshaveincreasedoverallbetween1970and 2004.Thispositivetrendinabundanceinmanyofthefreshwater-birdpopulations,andparticularly inthecaseof someduckspecies,couldreflecttheimplementationof stricterhuntingregulationsand more-abundantwintering-groundfoodsourcesthathaveallowedthesespeciestoincreaseinnumber [19]. Index Value (mean annual rate of change) Arctic Species Trend Index 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Geese All other birds Terrestrial birds 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Figure 14: Index of all terrestrial birds disaggregated into an index without goose species and an index of goose species alone. (All terrestrial birds, n=122 species, 236 populations; Anatidae only, n=13 species, 46 populations; non-Anatidae, n=109 species, 190.) Box 3: Terrestrial birds Figure 14 shows trends in geese compared to other terrestrial birds. Many goose populations have benefited from both a reduction in the level of hunting and also land-use changes on overwintering sites which has provided better forage. These sometimes rapidly increasing populations are driving the goose index in Figure 14. However, this is not a uniform trend across all species of geese. A recent synthesis of Arcticbreeding geese monitoring suggests that 23% of these populations are actually in decline [19]. Migratory birds Millionsof birdsmigratefromaroundtheEarthtobreedintheArcticeachyear.Atotalof over450 birdspeciesareknowntobreedinArcticandSubArcticareas.Of these,395speciesregularlymigrate outsidetheArcticandSubArctic,linkingtheseregionswithalmostallareasof theplanet(exceptinlandAntarctica)viatheirmigratoryroute.Fourspeciesmigratewithintheregion[31].Morethanhalf of theworld’sshorebirdsandalmost80%of theworld’sgeesebreedintheArcticandSubArctic[32] [19].Theindicesabove(Figure15)indicateanoverallincreaseinnon-migrantpopulations,whereas migratorypopulationsslightlydecreased(-6%).Butthereisnosignificantdifferencebetweenthe trendsinthetwogroups(seeAppendixIII).Thedeclineinmigratorybirdpopulationswouldbemore 25 pronouncedif theincreasinggeeseshowninFigure14arenotincluded. Aswell,long-termmonitoringof Arcticmigrantstakesplaceacross theEarthatwinteringandstagingsites.Althoughthemigratoryindex involves170speciescomprising424populations,manyshorebirddata frommonitoringstationsoutsidetheArctic(themajorityof whichare declining[33])havenotyetbeenincluded. Unlikeresidentspecies,populationsizesof migratoryspeciescanbe influencedbyconditionsatanystageof migrationwithimpactsonly becomingapparentaftermonitoringatsubsequentstages[34].Many wadersorshorebirdsareindecline,butthereasonsarenotfullyunderstood([35][36][33]).AlthoughchangesintheArctic,suchassnow cover,humidityandincreasingshrubcovermayimpactshorebirds[37], donna dewhurst/usfws therearemanyotherfactorsinside(e.g.,changingdistributionandextent of tundrawetlands)andoutsidetheArctictoconsiderinexplainingthe trends.Forexample,pre-nestingandegg-layingperiodsaremajorenergeticbottlenecksacrosstheentire Arcticregion[38].Warmertemperaturesinspringandsummeroverlargepartsof theArctictundra canbelargelybeneficialforshorebirdpopulations,however,therecentobserveddeclinesaremostly attributedtothreatsoutsidetheArcticregion.Changesinhabitatandfoodavailabilityonkeystopover sitesarecrucialforthesurvivalof shorebirdpopulations. 2 Index Value (mean annual rate of change) 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 Migrant birds Nonmigrant birds 0.2 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Figure 15: Index of all bird species disaggregated into indices of migrant and non-migrant bird populations for the period 1970-2004. (All birds, n=190 species, 503 populations; migrants, n=170 species, 424 populations; non-migrants, n=29 species, 79 populations.) 26 ASTI in the Global Context 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 Index Value Arctic Species Trend Index usfws TheLivingPlanetIndex(LPI),whichprovidesameasureof the trendsinvertebrateabundanceacrosstheglobe,hasbeensteadily decliningsincetheearly1980s.ThedifferencebetweentheGlobal LPIandtheASTIislargelyduetorecentdeclinesinthetropics. ThetemperateLPIshowsaverysimilartrendtotheArcticSpecies TrendIndexwithanoverallincreaseof almost20%since1970. Thesevaryingregionaltrajectoriesarethoughttobeareflection ofrecenthuman-useanddevelopmentpatterns.Tropicalregions priorto1970experiencedrelativelylittledevelopmentpressures. Sincetheearly1960s,thisregionhasexperiencedrapidlyincreasingdevelopmentpressureslargelyresultinginlarge-scalehabitat conversionandloss.Incontrast,themajorityof large-scalehabitatlossandconversionintemperate regionstookplacepriorto1950,withconversiontoagricultureamongthemaindrivers.Theincreasing trendinthetemperateLPIislikelytoreflectrecoveryofsometemperatevertebratespeciesfromthese historicalpressuresandincreasingabundanceof speciesbenefittingfromtheseland-usechanges.While mostof theArctichasnotexperiencedlarge-scalehabitatconversionorloss,theincreaseintheASTI isthoughttobepartlyduetotherecoveryofsomevertebratepopulations(e.g.,marinemammalsand geese)fromhistoricaloverharvesting,aswellasincreasesinsomefishpopulations,particularlyinthe BeringSea.ThedeclineintheHighArcticindex,wheredevelopmentandharvestingpressuresarevirtuallynon-existentisaconcernandcouldbeanearlyindicationof theresponseof HighArcticvertebrate populationstoachangingclimateanditsconsequentchanges,suchasinthephysicalstructureofHigh Arctichabitats(e.g.,seaice). 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 Arctic Species Trend Index Global LPI Temperate LPI Tropical LPI 0.2 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Year Figure 16: Global Living Planet Index (LPI) disaggregated into temperate and tropical indices and the Arctic Species Trend Index for the period 1970-2004. (Global LPI, n=2093 species, 6,433 populations; temperate LPI, n=1,329 species, 4,638 populations; tropical LPI, n=858 species, 1,795 populations; ASTI, n=306 species, 965 populations.) 27 Discussion Thisreportdescribestheaveragetrendsin965populationsof 306 vertebratespeciestogiveaninitialindicatorof changesinArctic biodiversityover34years.Therewasameanoverallincreasein abundancebetween1970and2004.Thisincreasingtrend,however, isnotconsistentacrossallspecies,systemsorregions.Declineswere evidentintheHighArcticamongterrestrialpopulationsandherbivores(excludingwaterbirds). Thetaxonomicspreadof dataintheASTI(formammalsand birds)setsaverygoodbaselinewithpopulationsfrom35%of all knownArcticvertebratespeciesrepresented.However,spatialand temporalcoveragevarieswidelyandamorecomprehensivedataset isneededinordertoreducebiasandtoallowforfiner-scaleanalysis.Wherethereisanimbalancein coverageinasubsetof data,theresultingtrendsmaybedrivenbythedominantregionorspecies.For example,theincreaseinthemarineindexisskewedtowardstrendsfromAlaskanwaterswheremonitoringeffortshaveyieldedfarmoredatathaninotherArcticseas.Therefore,cautiousinterpretationof theresultsisrequired.Itisanticipatedthat,withgreaterdatacontributions,futureASTIreportswillbe abletoprovideamorerobustandaccuratedepictionof overallandregionaltrends. Theseinitialresultssuggestthatimpactsof changinglanduse,climatechange,invasivespeciesand exploitationhavenotnegativelyimpactedoverallvertebrateabundanceintheArcticduringthepast34 years.However,theoverallincreaseinvertebrateabundancemasksunderlyingtrendswheresomespecies andpopulationsduringthisperiodhavethrivedorremainedrelativelyflatwhileothershavedeclined, possiblyinresponsetohuman-inducedchanges.Inparticular,theHighArcticandterrestrialtrends areof concernastheymayreflectearlyresponsetoexpectedchangesintheseecosystems.Indeed,the observeddecliningtrendsinthesesystemsarebroadlyconsistentwithpredictedecosystemandwildlife responsetoclimatechange.Thesepredictionsincludereductionsinabundanceof HighArcticspecies dependentonseaice,reductionsinextentof HighArcticterrestrialecosystems(e.g.,tundra)andincreasedoverallabundanceof SubArcticwildlifeasmoresoutherlydistributedspeciesmovenorthwards [5].Futureanalysesmustpaycloseattentiontothesesystems.Despitethisoveralltrend,accelerating changesintheArctic’sphysicalsystemlargelyattributedtoclimatechangeareexpectedtocausefundamentalchangestotheArctic’secosystemsandthebiodiversitythesesupport.Increasingandacceleratingpressureshighlighttheimportanceof enhancingcurrentmonitoringprograms,integratingthese programstoresearchandexpandingcoveragetolesswell-coveredspeciesandregions.Certainregions, suchastheHighArctic,areshowingpopulationsalreadyindecline.Climaticchangesalreadyoccurring intheArcticarelikelytobeoneof theprocessesbehindthesedeclines,butfurtherresearchisneeded toestablishtheprecisemechanismormechanismsinforceandtheirrelativeinfluenceonthesedeclining trends.MonitoringspeciesabundanceintheremoteArcticenvironmentpresentsanumberof logisticalobstaclesthatneedtobeovercome.Thisiscriticalforgroupssuchassea-ice-associatedspecies,for whichobtainingregularpopulation-trenddatawillbeof paramountimportanceastheregionwarms [39]. TheArcticisanenvironmentwherepronounced,prolongedandoftensynchronouspopulationcyclesareanaturalphenomena—insomecasesassociatedwithnaturalclimatefluctuations[28].Thiscan makedirectinterpretationdifficultwhenlookingattrendsamonggroupsof speciesandoveralimited time-frame(34years).Butwithacomprehensivedatasetthatisbroadintaxonomic,geographicand temporalscope,theindexcanbedisaggregatedtohelpelucidatepatternsoutsideof naturalvariation. Thesepatternscanshedlightuponpossiblecasualmechanismsandtheirrelativeinfluence.Thisreport hasillustratedmanyofthesepatternsandhighlightstheopportunitiesforenhancedunderstandingthat futureanalysiscanprovide. usfws 28 AswithotherArcticenvironmentalindices(e.g.,sea-icecover),theASTIrepresentsanimportant indicatorof thestateof theArctic.Withincreasingdatacoverage,itisexpectedtoprovideanearly warningsystemfortheworldwithregardtotheimpactsof climatechangeandotherhumanstressorsonbiodiversity.ArobustASTIwillbeabletodepictatanearlystagesystemresponses,ecological regimeshiftsandsubtlechangesintheArcticenvironmentthatwouldotherwisenotbenoticed.Its abilitytoserveasanearlywarningsystemverymuchdependsonthenumberof participatingmonitoringnetworksandadequatedatacoverage. 29 Acknowledgements WewouldliketothankForeignAffairsandInternationalTradeCanadaandEnvironmentCanadafor providingthefundingforthisproject.We’dalsoliketothankallCAFFcountryrepresentativesfortheir helpinfacilitatingthedeliveryofdatatomaketheArcticSpeciesTrendIndexmorerobust.Inparticularwe’dliketothankTomBarryfromtheCAFFsecretariat,AevarPetersen(Iceland)andSuneSohlberg (Sweden)fortheiractiveroleinprovidingdatafortheASTI.Thisreportandtheindexwouldnothave beenpossibletocompilewithoutnumerouscontributors.Weareextremelygratefultothefollowing organizationsandindividualsthathelpedandcontributedwithpublishedandunpublisheddataandin manycasescommentsonthedraftreport. UnitedStates:SueMoore,TimRagen,ScottSchliebe,SimonTokumine,VernonByrd,JenniferBoldt, DonDragoo,DavidIronsandRichardLanctot Canada:VillyChristensen,KathyDickson,GillesGauthier,GrantGilchrist,AnneGunn,TrishHayes, CharlesKrebs,GuyMorrison,DaveMossop,JimReist,DonRussell,RickWardandDirkZeller Russia:AlexanderKondratiev,ElenaLappo,MikhailSolovievandVassilySpiridonov Greenland:JannikHansen,FlemmingMerkelandHansMeltofte Norway:PerArneberg,SteinNilsen,KnutSunnanaaandDagVongraven Sweden:JohanBodegardandRobertFranzen Finland:JaakoErkinaro Germany:HelmutKruckenberg 30 References 1. Collen,B.,J.Loh,S.Whitmee,L.McRae,R.Amin,andJ.E.M.Baillie.“Monitoring changeinvertebrateabundance:theLivingPlanetIndex”.ConservationBiology23(2) 2009:p.317-327. 2. Hinzman,L.D.,NeilD.Bettez,W.RobertBolton,F.StuartChapin,MarkB.Dyurgerov, ChrisL.Fastie,BradGriffith,RobertD.Hollister,AllenHope,HenryP.Huntington, AnneM.Jensen,GensuoJ.Jia,TorreJorgenson,DouglasL.Kane,DavidR.Klein,Gary Kofinas,AmandaH.Lynch,AndreaH.Lloyd,A.DavidMcguire,FrederickE.Nelson, WalterC.Oechel,ThomasE.Osterkamp,CharlesH.Racine,VladimirE.Romanovsky, RobertS.Stone,DouglasA.Stow,MatthewSturm,CraigE.Tweedie,GeorgeL.Vourlitis, MarilynD.Walker,DonaldA.Walker,PatrickJ.Webber,J.M.Welker,K.S.Winker,andK. Yoshikawa.“EvidenceAndImplicationsOf RecentClimateChangeInNorthernAlaska AndOtherArcticRegions”.ClimateChange722005:p.251-298. 3. Post,E.,M.C.Forchhammer,M.S.Bret-Harte,T.V.Callaghan,T.R.Christensen,B.Elberling,A.D.Fox,O.Gilg,D.S.Hik,T.T.Hoye,R.A.Ims,E.Jeppesen,D.R.Klein,J.Madsen,A.D.McGuire,S.Rysgaard,D.E.Schindler,I.Stirling,M.P.Tamstorf,N.J.C.Tyler,R. vanderWal,J.Welker,P.A.Wookey,N.M.Schmidt,andP.Aastrup.“Ecologicaldynamics acrosstheArcticassociatedwithrecentclimatechange”.Science3252009:p.13551358. 4. IPCC.CambridgeUniversityPress,Ed.“FourthAssessmentReportof theIntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange,IPCC(WGI&II)”.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press,2007. 5. ACIA.ArcticClimateImpactAssessment.Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress:, 2005.Page1042. 6. Stroeve,J.,M.M.Holland,W.Meier,T.Scambos,andM.Serreze,“ArcticSeaIceDecline: Fasterthan forecast”.GeophysicalResearchLetters34(L09501)2007. 7. CAFFInternationalSecretariat.“ArcticFloraandFauna:StatusandConservation”in Chapter9StatusandTrendsinSpeciesandPopulations.2005. 8. AMAP.“AMAPAssessmentReport:ArcticPollutionIssues”.ArcticMonitoringandAssessmentProgramme(AMAP):Oslo,Norway.1998.Pages.Xii+859. 9. Holland,M.M.,C.M.Bitz,andB.Tremblay.“FutureAbruptReductionsintheSummer ArcticSeaIce”.GeophysicalResearchLetters33(L23503)2006. 10. Moore,S.E.andH.P.Huntington.“ArcticMarineMammalsandClimateChange:ImpactsandResilience”.EcologicalApplications.200818(sp2).PagesS157-S165. 11. NPFMC.“NorthPacificFisheryManagementCounci,EcosystemConsiderationsfor 2009”.JointInstitutefortheStudyoftheAtmosphereandOcean(JISAO)andthe Schoolof AquaticandFishery2008.Pages77-80. 12. Reeves,R.R.,B.D.Smith,E.A.Crespo,andG.NotarbartolodiSciara.I.S.C.S.Group,ed. Dolphins,WhalesandPorpoises:2002–2010ConservationActionPlanfortheWorld’s Cetaceans.Gland,Switzerland&Cambridge,UK,2003.Pagesix+139. 13. Laidre,K.L.,I.Stirling,L.F.Lowry,O.Wiig,M.P.Heide-Jorgensen,andS.H.Ferguson, “QuantifyingTheSensitivityofArcticMarineMammalstoClimate-InducedHabitat Change”.EcologicalApplications.18.2(2008):S97-S125. 31 14. Stirling,I.,N.J.Lunn,andJ.Iacozza,“Long-TermTrendsinthePopulationEcologyof PolarBearsinWesternHudsonBayinRelationtoClimaticChange”.Arctic,1999.52(3): p.294-306. 15. Aars,J.,N.J.Lunn,andA.E.Derocher.“PolarBears:Proceedingsof the14thWorking Meetingof theIUCN/SSCPolarBearSpecialistGroup”.2005.Seattle,Washington, USA:IUCN,Gland,SwitzerlandandCambridge,UK. 16. Abraham,K.F.andR.L.Jefferies.1997.“HighGoosePopulations:Causes,Impactsand Implications”.Batt,B.(Ed.),“ArcticEcosystemsinPeril:Reportof theArcticGoose HabitatWorkingGroup”,ArcticGooseJointVentureSpecialPublication,U.S.Fishand WildlifeService,WashingtonDCandCanadianWildlifeService,Ottawa,Ontario,pp. 7–72. 17. George,J.C.,J.Zeh,R.Suydam,andC.Clark.“AbundanceandPopulationTrendof WesternArcticBowheadWhalesSurveyedNearBarrow,Alaska”.2006.MarineMammal Science.20(4):p.755-773. 18. Overland,J.2008.“FisheriesintheBeringSea”.InJ.Richter-Menge,J.Overland,M. Svoboda,J.Box,M.J.J.E.Loonen,A.Proshutinsky,V.Romanovsky,D.Russell,C.D. Sawatzky,M.Simpkins,R.Armstrong,I.Ashik,L.-S.Bai,D.Bromwich,J.Cappelen,E. Carmack,J.Comiso,B.Ebbinge,I.Frolov,J.C.Gascard,M.Itoh,G.J.Jia,R.Krishfield, F.McLaughlin,W.Meier,N.Mikkelsen,J.Morison,T.Mote,S.Nghiem,D.Perovich,I. Polyakov,J.D.Reist,B.Rudels,U.Schauer,A.Shiklomanov,K.Shimada,V.Sokolov,M. Steele,M.-L.Timmermans,J.Toole,B.Veenhuis,D.Walker,J.Walsh,M.Wang,A.Weidick,C.Zöckler(2008).“ArcticReportCard2008”. 19. Zöckler,C.,“TheRoleof theGooseSpecialistGroupintheCircumpolarBiodiversity MonitoringProgramme(CBMP)”.Vogelwelt,2008.129:p.127-130. 20. Lantz,T.C.andS.V.Kokelj,“IncreasingRatesof RetrogressiveThawSlumpActivityin theMackenzieDeltaRegion,NWT,Canada”.GeophysicalResearchLetters,2008.35. 21. Sturm,M.,CharlesRacine,andK.Tape,“ClimateChange:IncreasingShrubAbundance intheArctic”.Nature,2001.411:p.546-547. 22. Wahren,C.-H.A.,M.D.Walker,andM.S.Bret-Harte,VegetationResponsesinAlaskan ArcticTundraAfter8Yearsof aSummerWarmingandWinterSnowManipulationExperiment.GlobalChangeBiology,2005.11:p.537–552. 23. Arft,A.M.,M.D.Walker,J.Gurevitch,J.M.Alatalo,M.S.Bret-Harte,M.Dale,M.Diemer,F.Gugerli,G.H.R.Henry,M.H.Jones,R.D.Hollister,I.S.Jonsdottir,K.Laine,E. Levesque,G.M.Marion,U.Molau,P.Molgaard,U.Nordenhall,V.Raszhivin,C.H.Robinson,G.Starr,A.Stenstrom,M.Stenstrom,O.Totland,P.L.Turner,L.J.Walker,P.J.Webber,J.M.Welker,andP.A.Wookey,Responsesof TundraPlantstoExperimentalWarming: Meta-AnalysisoftheInternationalTundraExperiment.EcologicalMonographs,1999. 69(4):p.491-511. 24. Rees,W.G.,F.M.Stammler,F.S.Danks,andP.Vitebsky,Vulnerabilityof EuropeanReindeerHusbandrytoGlobalChange.ClimateChange,2007.87(1-2):p.199-217. 25. Miller,F.L.andA.Gunn,“CatastrophicDie-offofPearyCaribouontheWesternQueen ElizabethIslands,CanadianHighArctic”.Arctic,2003.56:p.686-702. 26. Russell,D.andA.Gunn,“2010BiodiversityIndicator—WildReindeerandCaribou. 2009:CoordinatorCircumArcticRangiferMonitoringandAssessmentNetwork(CARMA)”,NorthernResearchInstitute,YukonCollege,Yukon,Canada. 32 27. Gunn,A.,DonRussell,RobertG.WhiteandGaryKofinas.2009.“Facingafutureof change:Wildmigratorycaribouandreindeer”.Arctic.Vol.62,No.3(September2009)P. iii–vi. 28. Aanes,R.,B.-E.Saether,F.M.Smith,E.J.Cooper,P.A.Wookey,andN.A.Oritsland,“The ArcticOscillationPredictsEffectsofClimateChangeinTwoTrophicLevelsinaHigh ArcticEcosystem”.EcologyLetters,2002.5(3):p.445-453. 29. Gunn,A.,“Voles,LemmingsandCaribou—PopulationCyclesRevisited?”Rangifer, 2003.14:p.105-111. 30. Zalatan,R.,A.Gunn,andG.H.R.Henry,“Long-TermAbundancePatternsof BarrenGroundCaribouUsingTramplingScarsonRootsof PiceaMarianaintheNorthwest Territories,Canada”.Arctic,AntArctic,andAlpineResearch,2006.38(4):p.624-630. 31. Scott,D.,“GlobalOverviewof theConservationof MigratoryArcticBreedingBirds OutsidetheArctic”,in“CAFFTechRep.No.4”.1998.p.133p. 32. Delany,S.andD.Scott,WaterbirdPopulationEstimatesFourthEdition.2006:Wetlands International,Wageningen.239p. 33. Stroud,D.A.,A.Baker,D.E.Blanco,N.C.Davidson,S.Delany,B.Ganter,R.Gill,P. González,L.Haanstra,R.I.G.Morrison,T.Piersma,D.A.Scott,O.Thorup,R.West,J. Wilson,andC.Zöckler,“TheConservationandPopulationStatusof theWorld’sWad ersattheTurnof theMillennium”,inWaterbirdsAroundtheWorld,G.C.Boere,C.A. Galbraith,andD.A.Stroud,Editors.2006,TheStationeryOffice,Edinburgh,UK.p.pp. 643-648. 34. Newton,I.,“PopulationLimitationinMigrants”.Ibis,2004.146:p.197-226. 35. Morrison,G.R.I.,Y.Aubry,R.W.Butler,G.W.Beyresbergen,G.M.Donaldson,C.L. Gratto-Trevor,P.W.Hicklin,V.H.Johnston,andR.K.Ross,“DeclinesinNorthAmerican ShorebirdPopulations”.“WaderStudyGroupBulletin”,2001.94:p.34-38. 36. Zöckler,C.,S.Delany,andW.Hagemeijer,“WaderPopulationsAreDeclining—How WillWeElucidatetheReasons?”.“WaderStudyGroupBulletin”,2003.100:p.202211. 37. Johnson,J.A.,R.B.Lanctot,B.A.Andres,J.R.Bart,S.C.Brown,S.J.Kendall,andD.C. Payer,“Distributionof BreedingShorebirdsontheArcticCoastalPlainof Alaska”.Arctic,2007.60(3):p.277-293. 38. Meltofte,H.,T.Piersma,H.Boyd,B.Mccaffery,B.Ganter,V.V.Golovnyuk,K.Graham, T.Gratto-,C.L,R.I.G.Morrison,E.Nol,H.-U.Rösner,D.Schamel,H.Schekkerman, M.Y.Soloviev,P.S.Tomkovich,D.M.Tracy,I.Tulp,andL.Wennerberg,“EffectsofClimateVariationintheBreedingEcologyofArcticShorebirds”.MoGBioscience,2007.59: p.48p. 39. Simpkins,M.,K.M.Kovacs,K.Laidre,andL.Lowry,“AFrameworkforMonitoring ArcticMarineMammals—Findingsof aWorkshopSponsoredbytheU.S.MarineMammalCommissionandU.S.FishandWildlifeService”,Valencia,March2007,in“CAFF CBMPReportNo.16”.2007,CAFFInternationalSecretariat. 40. Loh,J.,R.E.Green,T.Ricketts,J.F.Lamoreux,M.Jenkins,V.Kapos,andJ.Randers,“The LivingPlanetIndex:UsingSpeciesPopulationTimeSeriesToTrackTrendsinBiodiversity”.PhilosophicalTransactionsof theRoyalSocietyof LondonB,2005.360:p.289295. 33 41. InternationalHydrographicOrganisation,Limitsof theOceansandSeas,3rdEdition,in SpecialPublicationno.23.1953,InternationalHydrographicorganization:Monte-Carlo. p.1-42. 42. FisheriesCentre,“SeaAroundUs,2009.Aglobaldatabaseonmarinefisheriesandecosystems”.2009,FisheriesCentre,Universityof BritishColumbia,Vancouver. 34 Appendix I: Technical Notes Arctic Species Trend Index ThespeciespopulationdatausedtocalculatetheArcticindicesaregatheredfromavarietyof sources primarilypublishedinscientificjournals,butalsofromgreyliteraturewherestudiesmeettheappropriatestandard[1].Alldatausedinconstructingtheindicesaretimeseriesof eitherpopulationsize,density,abundanceoraproxyof abundance.Theperiodcoveredbythedatarunsbetween1950and2004. Annualdatapointswereinterpolatedfortimeserieswithsixormoredatapointsusingageneralized additivemodellingframeworkorbyassumingaconstantannualrateof changefortimeserieswithless thansixdatapoints[1][40].Theaveragerateofchangeineachyearacrossallspecieswascalculated. Theaverageannualratesof changeinsuccessiveyearswerechainedtogethertomakeanindex,withthe indexvaluein1970setto1.Weusedabootstrapre-samplingtechniquetogenerateconfidencelimits aroundtheindexvalues;thesearenotshowntoavoidover-complicatingthefigure.Theindiceswere aggregatedaccordingtothehierarchyofindicesshowninFigure17.Methodsaredescribedindetailed inCollenetal.(2009)[1]andLohetal.(2005)[40]. Data tagging Arcticlocation Each species population was assigned to a division of the Arctic system depending on its geographic location. The Arctic system was classified into two divisions: CAFF boundary and Arctic boundaries (see Figure 1). The Arctic region was subdivided into three further divisions of High, Low and Sub Arctic based on floristic boundaries [8]. A species population could be assigned to a single division or both, i.e., a species population may be present within an Arctic boundary and the CAFF boundary or in one or the other. Arctic division indices were calculated giving equal weight to each species. System Each species population was classified as being terrestrial, freshwater or marine, according to which system it is most dependent on for survival and reproduction. Populations were divided by the ocean basin (Arctic, Atlantic, Pacific) they inhabit for the marine analysis. The divisions for these were based on the boundary of the Arctic Ocean [41]. Trophic level Each species was assigned to a trophic level: primary consumers, secondary consumers and tertiary consumers. Marine fish species were categorised based on the trophic level assigned for the Marine Trophic Index [42]. Arctic Species Trend Index Species 1 Population 1 Species 2 Species 3 Population 2 Figure 17: Hierarchy of indices within the Arctic Species Trend Index. Each population carries equal weight within each species and each species carries equal weight within the Arctic Species Trend Index. 35 Appendix II: Species and Population Numbers in the ASTI Dataset CAFF boundary 1. Populations FRESHWATER MARINE TERRESTRIAL TOTAL FISH 60 94 AMPHIBIAN 3 BIRD MAMMAL TOTAL 57 3 123 188 54 336 233 140 373 478 197 832 FRESHWATER MARINE TERRESTRIAL TOTAL 13 2 34 1 50 48 118 30 148 61 2 189 53 305 TERRESTRIAL TOTAL 154 3 2. Species FISH AMPHIBIAN BIRD MAMMAL TOTAL 37 22 107 High/Low/Sub Arctic boundaries combined 3. Populations FISH AMPHIBIAN BIRD MAMMAL TOTAL FRESHWATER MARINE 72 3 54 3 132 112 214 64 390 235 208 443 184 3 503 275 965 FRESHWATER MARINE TERRESTRIAL TOTAL 13 2 35 1 51 48 118 30 148 61 2 190 53 306 4. Species FISH AMPHIBIAN BIRD MAMMAL TOTAL 37 22 107 36 High/Low/Sub Arctic disaggregated by class 5. Populations FISH AMPHIBIAN BIRD MAMMAL TOTAL HIGH ARCTIC LOW ARCTIC SUB ARCTIC 3 81 30 114 158 1 243 143 545 23 2 179 102 306 HIGH ARCTIC LOW ARCTIC SUB ARCTIC 3 58 1 88 47 194 10 1 122 22 155 6. Species FISH AMPHIBIAN BIRD MAMMAL TOTAL 36 8 47 High/Low/Sub Arctic disaggregated by system 7. Populations FRESHWATER MARINE TERRESTRIAL TOTAL HIGH ARCTIC LOW ARCTIC SUB ARCTIC 8 33 73 114 68 311 166 545 56 46 204 306 HIGH ARCTIC LOW ARCTIC SUB ARCTIC 6 16 25 47 27 101 66 194 35 18 102 155 8. Species FRESHWATER MARINE TERRESTRIAL TOTAL 37 Marine oceans by class 9. Populations FISH BIRD MAMMAL TOTAL ARCTIC ATLANTIC PACIFIC TOTAL 18 112 29 159 21 31 3 55 73 71 32 176 112 214 64 390 ARCTIC ATLANTIC PACIFIC TOTAL 11 28 16 55 7 13 2 22 37 18 14 69 55 59 32 146 10. Species FISH BIRD MAMMAL TOTAL Regions (Greenland and North America) 11. Populations NORTH AMERICA EUROPE/ASIA HIGH ARCTIC LOW ARCTIC SUB ARCTIC TOTAL 98 282 112 492 16 263 194 473 NORTH AMERICA EUROPE/ASIA 45 118 88 251 10 117 72 199 12. Species HIGH ARCTIC LOW ARCTIC SUB ARCTIC TOTAL 38 Appendix III: Index and Confidence Interval Values for Each of the Indices Index ASTI CAFF Boundary High Arctic Low Arctic Sub Arctic Marine Terrestrial Freshwater Birds Fishes Mammals Arctic Ocean Atlantic Ocean Pacific Ocean Terrestrial Birds Terrestrial Mammals Terrestrial High Arctic Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. 1970 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1975 1.04 0.98 1.11 1.04 0.98 1.11 0.91 0.80 1.01 1.04 0.93 1.17 1.04 0.98 1.13 1.06 0.94 1.20 1.00 0.94 1.07 1.19 0.91 1.60 1.00 0.96 1.05 1.16 0.87 1.59 1.05 0.84 1.28 1.10 0.99 1.23 1.22 0.85 1.83 0.93 0.79 1.10 1.00 0.94 1.07 1.00 0.75 1.30 1980 1.13 1.05 1.22 1.13 1.05 1.21 0.87 0.76 0.98 1.18 1.03 1.35 1.11 1.02 1.22 1.23 1.06 1.45 1.05 0.97 1.14 1.28 0.95 1.76 1.06 1.00 1.13 1.35 0.99 1.89 1.18 0.90 1.53 1.07 0.91 1.23 1.15 0.77 1.83 1.24 1.01 1.54 1.07 0.99 1.15 0.96 0.69 1.31 1985 1.20 1.10 1.31 1.18 1.08 1.29 0.77 0.65 0.89 1.31 1.11 1.53 1.17 1.06 1.29 1.45 1.21 1.75 1.06 0.96 1.17 1.31 0.96 1.81 1.08 0.99 1.18 1.70 1.20 2.44 1.29 0.96 1.71 0.94 0.77 1.13 1.13 0.74 1.81 1.77 1.39 2.26 1.05 0.96 1.17 1.09 0.76 1.52 1990 1.20 1.08 1.33 1.18 1.06 1.31 0.74 0.60 0.90 1.35 1.12 1.62 1.12 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.23 1.86 1.03 0.92 1.15 1.31 0.95 1.85 1.07 0.96 1.17 1.88 1.30 2.77 1.23 0.87 1.74 0.89 0.67 1.16 1.04 0.67 1.66 2.01 1.53 2.63 1.02 0.91 1.17 1.08 0.75 1.51 1995 1.20 1.07 1.35 1.19 1.07 1.34 0.72 0.58 0.91 1.45 1.16 1.78 1.05 0.93 1.18 1.60 1.27 2.00 0.97 0.85 1.11 1.43 1.02 2.07 1.04 0.93 1.17 1.93 1.32 2.86 1.33 0.93 1.92 1.03 0.76 1.39 1.00 0.64 1.62 1.98 1.50 2.65 0.98 0.84 1.14 0.94 0.65 1.33 2000 1.14 1.01 1.28 1.14 1.01 1.29 0.73 0.57 0.94 1.33 1.07 1.66 1.00 0.89 1.14 1.51 1.19 1.89 0.93 0.81 1.08 1.25 0.87 1.83 0.99 0.88 1.12 1.68 1.12 2.56 1.31 0.90 1.90 1.07 0.78 1.47 0.97 0.61 1.59 1.67 1.24 2.30 0.94 0.80 1.11 0.94 0.64 1.38 2004 1.16 1.02 1.32 1.17 1.03 1.33 0.74 0.57 0.96 1.46 1.15 1.83 0.97 0.85 1.11 1.53 1.19 1.96 0.90 0.78 1.05 1.52 1.03 2.26 0.98 0.86 1.11 1.96 1.28 3.01 1.33 0.91 1.93 1.07 0.77 1.48 0.96 0.60 1.58 1.66 1.19 2.30 0.90 0.76 1.07 0.98 0.66 1.44 Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.80 1.02 0.91 0.79 1.02 0.91 0.78 1.02 0.91 0.77 1.04 0.79 0.66 0.93 0.73 0.60 0.88 0.72 0.58 0.87 39 Terrestrial Low Arctic Terrestrial Sub Arctic Herbivores Herbivores (Minus Anatidae) Freshwater Birds Marine Birds Terrestrial Birds Terrestrial Geese Terrestrial Birds (Minus Geese) Migrant Birds Non-Migrant Birds Caribou Nearctic Caribou Palearctic Caribou Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.78 1.14 1.04 0.97 1.11 1.03 0.94 1.12 1.00 0.79 1.28 1.08 0.99 1.17 1.11 1.02 1.23 1.02 0.72 1.44 1.10 1.00 1.20 1.17 1.06 1.32 1.03 0.66 1.62 1.07 0.96 1.18 1.17 1.04 1.33 1.09 0.64 1.86 0.99 0.89 1.10 1.08 0.94 1.25 1.01 0.57 1.76 1.01 0.89 1.14 1.08 0.93 1.27 1.07 0.59 1.87 0.95 0.84 1.09 1.08 0.92 1.28 Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 0.95 1.12 1.03 0.81 1.33 0.99 0.92 1.06 1.00 0.94 1.07 0.87 0.60 1.19 1.02 0.93 1.13 1.07 0.82 1.39 1.04 0.94 1.15 1.07 0.99 1.15 1.24 0.82 1.78 1.04 0.94 1.17 1.13 0.84 1.55 1.15 1.00 1.32 1.05 0.96 1.17 1.49 0.99 2.11 0.97 0.85 1.10 1.23 0.91 1.71 1.09 0.93 1.32 1.02 0.91 1.17 1.80 1.15 2.66 0.83 0.72 0.97 1.28 0.93 1.80 1.11 0.88 1.40 0.98 0.84 1.14 1.92 1.26 2.92 0.78 0.66 0.92 1.22 0.88 1.72 1.03 0.81 1.34 0.94 0.80 1.11 2.47 1.55 4.02 0.75 0.63 0.90 1.43 0.99 2.06 0.96 0.72 1.27 0.90 0.76 1.07 2.12 1.30 3.53 Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. Index Lower C.L. Upper C.L. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.02 0.97 1.07 0.98 0.93 1.04 1.08 1.01 1.15 0.71 1.05 0.99 1.12 1.04 0.97 1.12 1.14 1.06 1.23 0.91 1.02 0.92 1.13 1.06 0.97 1.16 1.19 1.09 1.30 1.37 0.97 0.86 1.10 1.02 0.92 1.14 1.30 1.16 1.47 1.64 0.93 0.79 1.09 0.98 0.86 1.12 1.34 1.11 1.64 1.56 0.87 0.74 1.03 0.94 0.82 1.08 1.25 1.03 1.56 1.29 0.85 0.71 1.01 0.94 0.81 1.09 1.20 0.96 1.51 0.90 1.00 0.63 0.80 1.25 1.52 1.48 1.05 0.68 1.00 0.82 1.05 1.51 1.75 1.59 1.66 1.20