AQUACOSM: Network of Leading European Connecting … › download › deliverables › D2.1... ·...

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 731065

No 2.1 Review of present conceptual state, capabilities and limitations of aquatic mesocosm facilities

Project Title: AQUACOSM: Network of Leading European AQUAtic MesoCOSM Facilities

Connecting Mountains to Oceans from the Arctic to the Mediterranean

Project number: 731065

Project Acronym: AQUACOSM

Proposal full title: Network of Leading European AQUAtic MesoCOSM Facilities

Connecting Mountains to Oceans from the Arctic to the Mediterranean

Type: Research and innovation actions

Work program topics addressed:

H2020-INFRAIA-2016-2017: Integrating and opening research infrastructures of European interest

Due date of deliverable:

30 June 2018

Actual submission date:

29 Aug 2018

Version: V1

Main Authors: Jens Christian Nejstgaard


Project ref. number 731065

Project title

AQUACOSM: NETWORK OF LEADING EUROPEAN AQUATIC MESOCOSM FACILITIES CONNECTING MOUNTAINS TO OCEANS FROM THE ARCTIC TO THE MEDITERRANEAN

Deliverable title Review of present conceptual state, capabilities and limitations of aquatic mesocosm facilities

Deliverable number D2.1

Deliverable version Version 1.0

Contractual date of delivery 30 Jun 2018

Actual date of delivery 29 Aug 2018

Document status FINAL

Document version 1.0

Online access Yes

Diffusion Public

Nature of deliverable R: Report

Workpackage WP2

Partner responsible FvB-IGB

Authors Jens Christian Nejstgaard, Lisette de Senerpont Domis

Editor Katharina Makower

Approved by Jens C Nejstgaard

EC Project Officer Agnès Robin

Abstract To get an overview of the present conceptual state, capabilities and limitations of aquatic mesocosm facilities internationally, AQUACOSM have during the first 18 months continued to develop the open virtual global network of aquatic mesocosm facilities beyond the AQUACOSM consortia (www.mesocosm.eu) and conducted web based questionnaires. In summary, the results so far suggest two major conclusions: 1) the geographical distribution of significant facilities is strongly skewed towards Europe and to some extent North America. While the European Research Area has an international stronghold and leading know-how in this field, we suggest it would be beneficial for global science and readiness for the future global challenges to capitalize on this knowledge and support establishments of wider international networks, beyond EU. Although global networks have been initiated by a few research groups within the AQUACOSM and

http://www.mesocosm.eu/


mesocosm.eu networks, they yet only cover a few specific environments, leaving potential still severely underused. 2) There is still a large heterogeneity in how the mesocosm science is conducted, limiting the present ability to compare experiments between facilities. AQUACOSM aims to ameliorate this by originally planned activities (including this Task/Deliverable), but also by new activities not originally planned such as compiling a best practice web-handbook in mesocosm science to be freely available on the internet.

However, we conclude that further activities such as sustained network building and collaboration on international level, beyond AQUACOSM will still be needed to better explore the potential and interest for sustained international collaboration revealed by the questionnaire.

Keywords International collaboration, Capability of facilities, Experimental design, Standard Operating Procedures, Dissemination of Best Practice and know how, Stakeholder interaction.

<D2.1 Review of present conceptual state, capabilities and limitations of aquatic mesocosm facilities

AQUACOSM – INFRA-01-2016-2017- N. 732065 of 23

Co-funded by the European Union

1. Table of Contents

1. Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................. 4

2. Definitions and Terms .......................................................................................................................................... 5

3. Executive summary .............................................................................................................................................. 6

4. Present capabilities and limitations of aquatic mesocosm facilities ................................................................... 7

4.1 On the methods of data collection .......................................................................................................... 7

4.2 Global mesocosm-science hampered by skewed international facility distribution ............................... 9

4.3 European aquatic mesocosm science in leading position internationally ............................................. 10

4.3.1 Technical and scientific strongholds in international aquatic mesocosm science ........................... 11

5. Interaction with stakeholders outside the traditional scientific world ............................................................. 13

6. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................................... 15

6.1 Appendix I .............................................................................................................................................. 15

6.2 Appendix II ............................................................................................................................................. 19

7. References ......................................................................................................................................................... 23




2. Definitions and Terms

(Listed when not immediately explained in text, tables or figures)

AnaEE: Analysis and Experimentation on Ecosystems (https://anaee.com)

DANUBIUS-RI: The International Centre for Advanced Studies on River-Sea Systems (http://www.danubius-ri.eu)

ENVRIplus: a Horizon 2020 project bringing together Environmental and Earth System Research Infrastructures

ERA: European Research Area

GDP: Gross domestic product

eLTER: H2020 project, Integrated European Long-Term Ecosystem & Socio-Ecological Research Infrastructure

(www.lter-europe.net/elter)

MEERC: Multiscale Experimental Ecosystem Research Center at University Of Maryland Center For Environmental

Science, Horn Point Laboratory, MD, USA

MERL: University of Rhode Island, Graduate School of Oceanography, Marine Ecosystems Research Laboratory, RI,

USA (http://www.gso.uri.edu/merl/merl.html)

RI: Research Infrastructure

SOP: Standard Operating Procedure.

TA: Transnational Access.

TERENO: Terrestrial Environmental Observatories (http://teodoor.icg.kfa-juelich.de/overview-en)

WS: Workshop

http://www.gso.uri.edu/merl/merl.html




3. Executive summary

This deliverable summarizes the AQUACOSM activities conducted to date under task 2.1. An overall aim for the AQUACOSM project, specifically addressed in this Task 2.1/D2.1 is to assess present capabilities and limitations of aquatic mesocosm facilities worldwide, both their ability to conduct fundamental science addressing present predictions and models and to what extent the facilities interact with stakeholders outside the traditional scientific world. To gather updated in-depth knowledge on a range of leading facilities we have conducted two series of web-questionnaires, the first series in 2017 was conducted on the AQUACOSM partner facilities and was combined with WP 3 and 4 to develop the AQUACOSM Factsheet template (D3.1), Standardised protocols (SOPs) on data collection, data quality and assurances and processing (D4.1), and Guidelines on database management (D4.3). Based on the experience of the first series of web-questionnaires, a single shortened version was developed to lower the barriers for completing the surveys for mesocosm facilities outside the consortium. Using the virtual globally open aquatic network www.mesocosm.eu we circulated this questionnaire to all aquatic mesocosm facilities we are aware of, in May 2018. The mesocosm.eu-network was initiated under the FP7 network MESOAQUA, and has expanded considerably through the stewardship of AQUACOSM. After various efforts including WS on multiple international venues (several listed at http://www.aquacosm.eu/events/), aiming to gain knowledge about, and recruit more members to the network it now covers ca. 50 sites (and growing). However despite active search for facilities globally, it is still dominated by facilities in Europe and North America. We propose this reflect the skew global distribution of aquatic mesocosm facilities, and that this may hamper global aquatic sciences. The information gathered will contribute to develop a common science strategy for AQUACOSM (task 2.2, Month 12-42) and as input to the assessment of the innovation potential and support for long-term sustainability of the European integrated infrastructure (task 2.3, Month 6-42). To further support this development the AQUACOSM consortium have decided to edit a publication tentatively as a publicly available web-handbook in mesocosm science, where these questionnaires will be used in depth and further reviews will be conducted, during the remaining project period. Here we summarize the activities conducted so far and report the first general findings therefrom. The full data from the questionnaire is collected into two excel sheets that will be made publicly available at the AQUACOSM web site (https://www.aquacosm.eu/project-information/deliverables/).

http://www.mesocosm.eu/

http://www.aquacosm.eu/events/




4. Present capabilities and limitations of aquatic mesocosm facilities

4.1 On the methods of data collection

This report is based on several activities: I) an initial survey that all AQUACOSM facilities (19 facilities, 37 individual sites) answered May-Jun 2017, II) a revised survey broadcasted to all non-AQUACOSM members of the mesocosm.eu network by individual mails May 2018 was completed by 14 additional facilities, representing 21 sites, by end June 2018, Table 1), III) use of the information contained in the www.mesocosm.eu portal (Fig. 1) on each facility, IV) by Interaction with Research Infrastructure providers on workshops hosted by ENVRIplus, and V) workshops held in combination with the AQUACOSM Kickoff meeting (Jan 2017, Zeuthen, Germany, Fig. 1A), the first best practice-workshop (Evora, Portugal, Dec 2017, Fig. 1B), at the General assembly (Montpellier, France, Mar 2018, Fig. 1C), as well as at several international meetings (listed at www.aquacosm.eu/events/), fulfilling the original plans. The AQUACOSM WS were attended by invited experts and AQUACOSM consortium members.

Figure 1, AQUACOSM workshops and meetings where Task 2.1 (leading to D2.1) was specifically discussed. Panel A: Kickoff meeting Jan 2017, Panel B: A Evora Best Practice WS Dec 2017, and Panel C: General Assembly in Montpellier Mar 2018.

The rationale for basing this activity on in-depth surveys rather than reviewing published literature, is that much of the info on present limitations, future goals as well as activity outside classical academic fora, is often not communicated in the classic literature. A comprehensive overview of classical scientific reviews on this field is e.g. listed at www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/mesocosm.

A

B C

http://www.aquacosm.eu/events/

http://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/mesocosm




Although this literature is not included in this report, it will be used in addition to the results reported here, to build a common science strategy for AQUACOSM (task 2.2, Month 12-42), to assess the innovation potential of the European integrated infrastructure (task 2.3, Month 6-42), and will be thoroughly reviewed in the newly planned AQUACOSM web-handbook in mesocosm science

Table 1. Non-AQUACOSM facilities within the www.mesocosm.eu network (Fig. 1) completing the 2018 Surveymonkey questionnaire on international mesocosm science. Institutional name (Affiliation) and names and numbers of mesocosm facilities are listed separately. Note, all participants are listed below as they responded yes to the first question: “Do you wish to have your facility listed as contributor to the survey?” (see Appendix II).

Institution/Affiliation Number of Institutions

Name of mesocosm facility Number of sites

CCMAR - Centre of Marine Sciences, Portugal 1 Marine Plant Mesocosm System

1

Uppsala University, Gothenburg University, Swedish Agricultural University (SLU), Sweden Water Research

4 SITES AquaNET 5

University of Birmingham, UK 1 Birmingham Mesocosm Facility 1

Eawag, Switzerland 1 Experimental ponds 1

Research Institute gaiac, Germany 1 Mesocosm facility gaiac 2

ECIMAT - University of Vigo, Spain 1 ECIMAT 1

Queen Mary University of London, UK 1 The River Laboratory 1

Center for Advanced Studies of Blanes (CEAB-CSIC), Spain

1 Urban River Laboratory (URL) 1

Catalan Institute for Water Research, Spain 1 Experimental Streams Facility 1

IMDEA Water Institute (Instituto Madrileno De Estudios Avanzado), Spain

1 IMDEA Mesocosms 1

Trinity College Dublin, The University of Dublin, Ireland, New Zeeland, Japan, Germany, China

1 ExStream System Facility 6

Sum Institutions 14 Sum individual mesocosm sites 21

A complete overview of the questions asked in the two sets of surveys is given in Appendix I and II, at the end of this document. To maximise the participation of non-AQUACOSM facilities in the second questionnaire we revised the most important questions into a single survey (65 questions, Appendix II). In total 14 institutions listing 21 individual non-AQUACOSM aquatic mesocosm facilities responded, each using 30-60 min to complete the survey (Table 1).

The most pertinent results are summarized below. To support an effective development of future individual facilities we focus on the clearest strengths and weaknesses shared by most of the aquatic mesocosm facilities, as well as the information on present interaction with stakeholders. The full content of the survey can be publicly access as MS Excel-sheets on the following address. The full data set will be further analysed during upcoming AQUACOSM workshops and publication activities, including the second best practice WS to be held in Kiel, Germany, 18-21 Sep 2018.




Figure 1. Distribution of active facilities registered to date in the mesocosm.eu network. The network was initiated by the FP7 project MESOAQUA and is under development within AQUACOSM.

4.2 Global mesocosm-science hampered by skewed international facility distribution

The distribution of presently operating aquatic mesocosm facilities is strongly skewed towards Europe and to some extent North America. This is also supported by the distribution of the facilities so far registered in the mesocosm.eu network (Fig. 1). This may be explained by the first development on aquatic mesocosm systems in the 1960-1970 being almost equally driven by European and North American institutions (see www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/mesocosm for ample documentation). However, since the beginning of the new millennium, much of the large-scale multi-PI funding in USA and Canada have been drastically reduced and we have been been informed that this have contributed to discontinuation of previously internationally leading mesocosm institutions, such as e.g. MERL and MEERC (Candace Oviat and Michael Kemp pers. comn. 2009) as well as several smaller North American facilities. On the positive side, during recent years a few new facilities have been established on the US East Coast (Fig. 1), and the significant effort by the AQUACOSM consortium to look for aquatic mesocm facilities outside the European Research Area (ERA) have bore some (limited) fruit and a few new members from Asia and New Zeeland will be added to the MESOCOM.eu before end of 2018. The AQUACOSM consortium members are also aware of plans to start new facilities in e.g. China. Further, the AQUACOSM delegates to the 2018 Aug 19-24 SIL meeting in Nanjing, China noted interest from new facilities to become members of the mesocosm.eu. This may ameliorate the skewed global distribution somewhat, but the main problem remains.

The strongly skewed distribution is however not surprising, since it is known that the global distribution of scientific institutions are closely connected to national wealth (GDP) and other socio-economical and political questions, see for instance the global distribution of biological field stations (Tydecks et al. 2016), or in e.g. recorded biodiversity (Tydecks et al. 2018). Further, advanced scientific installations such as large mesocosm facilities often demands more resources and know-how than other activities such as

http://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/mesocosm




basic fields stations included in reviews by Tydecks and colleagues. This may explain the even greater apparent imbalance between coverage of aquatic mesocosm facilities around the globe. Thus available information gives little “hope“ to be able to include significant amounts of Non-European mesocosm facilities in the network, in the near future.

Instead, as this very skewed global distribution of aquatic mesocosm facilities may not support an effective development of global understanding of our aquatic systems, AQUACOSM suggests that increased national and European support of strategically placed European lead “sister facilities” around the globe may be the most effective way to develop mesocosm based process studied effectively contributing better understanding about underlying mechanisms, needed to tackle the great challenges for aquatic systems, in the near future. To help this process AQUACSM is already developing standard mesocosms (WP7) and a few facilities and outside AQUACOSM are already developing specialised networks. We suggest to build on these activities the next section

4.3 European aquatic mesocosm science in leading position internationally

While the distribution of aquatic mesocosm facilities worldwide is far from optimal, the overall distribution of European aquatic mesocosm facilities reflects the wide diversity of aquatic environments on the European continent, from the highly saline hyper-oligotrophic sub-tropic of the SE Mediterranean to Arctic conditions (Fig. 1). Also for the freshwater and brackish water environments, a range of conditions is presently covered from lowland to high mountain on the Iberian peninsula, pre-alpine, temperate and boreal systems.

The AQUACOSM network have been carefully chosen to represent key facilities throughout these contrasting environments, and includes world leading facilities such as the only open ocean capable facility (www.aquacosm.eu/mesocosm/kosmos), the worlds largest highly instrumented and replicated lake mesocosm (www.aquacosm.eu/mesocosm/igb-lakelab), the worlds longest running freshwater ecosystem warming experiment (www.aquacosm.eu/mesocosm/au), and the world longest operated marine mesocosm facility (www.aquacosm.eu/mesocosm/uib). Nevertheless, for obvious reasons the present 19 partners cannot cover all combinations from rivers to lakes, estuaries and open-ocean in all European areas. AQUACOSM therefore strive to establish closer collaboration with strategically complimentary facilities either through the mesocosm.eu and/or direct collaboration such as with the individual SITES AquaNET (http://www.fieldsites.se) and the international ExStream System Facilities (http://mesocosm.eu/mesocosm/exstream-system-ireland). An extended future collaboration with such networks could greatly increase the overall output from both networks – especially in new internationally coordinated science activities (such as being pilot tested in AQUACOSM WP 9).

However, even within the ERA there is a lack of East European members, due to the lack of established advanced aquatic mesocosm facilities in these areas. To help spark development of such units in this area through spread of experience and new networks, AQUACOSM have focused on recruiting applicants to the TA activities from these target countries. This specifically included holding a AQUACOSM networking and TA application WS at the 2017 SEFS meeting in Olomuc, Czech Republic (http://www.sefs10.cz/workshops-information). This resulted in several applicants already at the first 2017 application deadline, and many expected for the 2018 deadline. To help this development we suggest that lack of know-how can be circumvented by using the freely available information that AQUACOSM will provide for functional moderately priced but advanced mesocosm technologies presently developed in AQUACOSM WP7, or for standardised effective aquatic sensors (WP8). In addition new users could copy the low cost solutions used already successfully by the AQUACOSM partners LMU,

http://www.aquacosm.eu/mesocosm/kosmos

http://www.aquacosm.eu/mesocosm/igb-lakelab

http://www.aquacosm.eu/mesocosm/au

http://www.aquacosm.eu/mesocosm/uib

http://www.fieldsites.se/

http://mesocosm.eu/mesocosm/exstream-system-ireland

http://www.sefs10.cz/workshops-information




METU, CIBIO-UE and IMPERIAL, or outside the consortium, e.g. SITES AquaNET and ExStream System Facilities (Table 1).

In conclusion, AQUACOSM suggests that other possible future European measures to ameliorate the lack of aquatic mesocosm facilities in Eastern Europe should include targeted calls to build such institutions, perhaps in direct collaboration with the globally relevant network eLTER and including e.g. TERENO, AnaEE and DANUBIUS-RI. The rationale for the direct collaboration with these networks is to make use of existing, or establish new mesocosm facilities in strategic LTER-sites to enable more effective use of already existing long-term data series and direct testing of the predictions done to date. Establishment of such strategic “Super Sites” would enable a new level of science based fully on all three scientific pillars: 1) long-term data, 2) modelling and forecasting, and now 3) experimental testing of the predicted model forecasts.

4.3.1 Technical and scientific strongholds in international aquatic mesocosm science

The development of high-resolution in situ instrumentation, global use of “Big-Data” and the associated international standardization of data handling the last decade is expected to increase scientific output (as well as economical and societal benefits: http://www.big-data-value.eu/ecosystem/), and increase quality and inter-comparability in environmental sciences in the coming decades. This has been driven by the development of accessible big-data computation and have especially supported bioinformatics and image analysis to reach a level that starts to rival human abilities in pure detection (Jones 2014), and several orders of magnitude ahead in terms of enumeration, sizing and counting compared to e.g. classical plankton sample analyses (Bochinski et al. 2018). We expect that this trend will be at least as important for driving the development of science based on aquatic mesocosms, of several reasons. Besides benefitting from the general advances in increased spatial and temporal resolution, mesocosm science has a specific limitation that will be particularly alleviated by development non-invasive methods which do not involve removing or killing organisms during the experimental period. This is because the volumes of mesocosms are per definition limited, and thus do not allow combination of long time experiments and substantial invasive sampling over time. In addition, most organisms studied in aquatic mesocosms are small often single-celled organisms, with high turnover times in order of hours or days. Thus capturing ecological processes at relevant time scales have been a significant limitation. Thus, we expect that these new high frequency, often fully automated methods, may spark a revolution in studies of microbial systems, especially in complex a large mesocosms.

Thus, the AQUACOSM consortium suggest that effective inter-comparable development of non-destructive high resolution approaches such as fully automatic probes based on e.g. optical and other electronic sensor systems, will be especially critical for development of aquatic mesocosm science to deliver highly resolved data towards testing present models and predictions on the key environmental (Grand) challenges, i.e. impacts of climate changes and effects of contaminants on aquatic ecosystem function and services.

The questionnaires revealed that many facilities already have a relative high access to automated instrumentation (Fig. 2), while there is still some room for standardisation between facilities to increase the scope for interoperability. The SOPs developed by AQUACOSM will also be tools to increase the degree of interoperability between aquatic mesocosm facilities in the future.

http://www.big-data-value.eu/ecosystem/




Figure 2. Rate of access to various automated measuring and logging sensor systems at the AQUACOSM and non-AQUACOSM facilities (MESOCOSM.EU).

Figure 3. Experimental parameters that can be controlled automatically in the mesocosms. The category “Other” includes: Nutrients, conductivity, contaminants, water chemistry, slope and water level (rivers), mixing regime and light at night (a.k.a.“skyglow”).




The questionnaires also revealed a wide range of scientific capabilities between all facilities. The range of specific parameters that can be automatically controlled are showed in Fig. 3, while the wide range of scientific experimental experience and know-how is not listed here for brevity but will be available at www.aquacosm.eu/project-information/deliverables/ .

While the survey indicates a relatively high degree of automation at the various facilities, it also shows the heterogeneity between the controlled parameters. Thus it underscores the urgent need to address the key objectives of the AQUACOSM project to share expertise, develop interoperability and comparability of data between aquatic mesocosm facilities internationally. AQUACOSM therefore have prioritized development of Standard Operation Protocols (SOP) in aquatic mesocosm science. This process builds on already available SOPs from other networks and institutions. The overall aim is to standardise, and enable direct comparison of scientific data, not only within aquatic sciences, but also with adjacent sciences, such as atmospheric, and terrestrial earth sciences.

In addition, members of the AQUACOSM consortium develop leading approaches on fields such as highly accurate (> 90%) self learning optical systems for plankton recognition both in situ and in the laboratory (Bochinski et al. 2018). These activities aim to increase the critical set of non-invasive approaches mentioned above. As soon as they reach a technological readiness that it can be generally deployed, they will be included in the AQUACOSM SOP and deployed on the cross facility experiments.

An additional outcome of the increased international technical collaborations has been an increased awareness about apparent systematic errors in certain sensor systems. This is presently being evaluated and may have significant impact on interpretation of previous data, as well as for future aquatic monitoring and experimentation.

5. Interaction with stakeholders outside the traditional scientific world

To our knowledge, it seems to be a notion among representatives of European RIs, in general, that we have not yet explored the full potential for interactions with stakeholders outside the traditional scientific world. For the scientific institutions within AQUACOSM this is no exception (se however below for the German Environment Agency). Consequently, limited collaboration with non-scientific stakeholders (often despite various attempts to increase this) is a concern shared by many Research Infrastructures (RI). On the other side, our experience from personal interactions with stakeholders outside traditional academic institutions are that they generally have limited time and capacity to do research, and thus would rather outsource research. A possible solution to the present lack of direct stakeholder participation in projects and other activities at mesocosm facilities could be that some of the future mesocosm based research targets questions that are raised by stakeholders, and that we enable co-design and co-development of mesocosm experiments, even if there would only involve limited physical presence of the external stakeholders at the RI site.

Further, in response to these obstacles mentioned above, several European cross-RI activities have been conducted the last years to reach a significant momentum in order to turn this trend. The AQUACOSM consortium actively contributed to several such activities, including the ENVRIplus European Innovation Partnering Forum, Grenoble 18–19 May 2017 (http://www.envriplus.eu/2017/01/26/1st-eu-environmental-ris-industry-forum).

The notion of limited interactions with stakeholders outside the traditional academic fora was also supported by the outcome of the questionnaires. In addition, the response-rate to date was limited (Table 1) and activities to ameliorate this shortcoming needs to be intensified to reach the full goals of the

http://www.aquacosm.eu/project-information/deliverables/

http://www.envriplus.eu/2017/01/26/1st-eu-environmental-ris-industry-forum

http://www.envriplus.eu/2017/01/26/1st-eu-environmental-ris-industry-forum




AQUACOSM project (see conclusion). Further, several facilities outside AQUACOSM (Table 1) responded that they have conducted applied research themes, such as: 1) pesticide and biocide risk assessment, fate and effect of new chemicals and emergent contaminants in aquatic ecosystems receiving effluents from waste water treatment plants (WWTP), 2) assessment of aquatic plants in restoration projects on solute removal from WWTP inputs, and development of strategies to reduce the effects of point source inputs from WWTP on stream water quality an ecosystem function in regions where scarce water availability. However, none of the facilities reported activities in collaboration with stakeholders outside the academia.

It should be noted that organisations outside the traditional academia, such as the German Environment Agency (UBA) (www.umweltbundesamt.de/en/topics/chemicals/chemical-research-at-uba/artificial-stream-pond-system) actively develop and use of aquatic mesocosms systems. Studies conduced at these institutions are generally focused on high immediate relevance for society, rather than curiosity-driven basic research as in the traditional academia. However, there have been relatively limited collaboration between traditional academia and these institutions to date, both in terms of direct collaborative experimentation, as well as in terms of know-how and data flow. Thus, there already exists a significant but little explored potential for immediate active collaboration between academia and such organisations with well-developed channels to policymakers and managers societal relevance. The AQUACOSM consortium plans to effectively explore this potential by targeted contributions from the UBA partner (www.aquacosm.eu/partner/umweltbundesamt). Regrettably this has been hampered during the first report period due to serious illness among the key personnel.

We further suggest that one way to ameliorate the problems with underexplored stakeholder participation is to include more stakeholders on activities that take less time than participation in practical activities such as experiments. Instead we suggest including more stakeholders on advisory boards and organize more targeted workshops with stakeholders. Several stakeholder groups we have been in contact with show a general interest for such activities, rather than direct practical participation.

In conclusion, interactions between traditional academic institutions and non-academic stakeholders are still limited for many RI’s including aquatic mesocosm facilities. As the present activities in this field have not yet yielded the results we aimed for (to be reported in D5.3), developing effective strategies and activities to increase these activities within the AQUACOSM consortium and beyond, will be a major focus for the AQUACOSM project during the second report phase Mon 19-36.

http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/en/topics/chemicals/chemical-research-at-uba/artificial-stream-pond-system

http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/en/topics/chemicals/chemical-research-at-uba/artificial-stream-pond-system

http://www.aquacosm.eu/partner/umweltbundesamt




6. Appendices

6.1 Appendix I

Overview of questions asked in four Web questionnaires to the AQUACOSM project network members during May-Jun 2017. The first 2 questions in all four questionnaire served to identify the respondents, and were thus identical in all four questionnaires (Questions ASD 1-2, ATA 1-2, AMS 1-2, DAT 1-2). The Surveymonkey web platform was used for the questionnaire (www.surveymonkey.com).

The answers to the questions are freely available for sharing, please contact the AQUACOSM Project Office (www.aquacosm.eu/project-information/coordination-team/) for further info.

Question/naire Question

Questionnaire 1 AQUACOSM survey on site documentation questions. Questions marked ASD

Section: Required site info(=Site documentation in mesocosm.eu)

ASD 1

What is the affiliation of your aquatic mesocosm facility (Institute/University name)?

ASD 2 What is the name of your aquatic mesocosm facility?

Section: Survey on site documentation questions (ASD)

ASD 3

Provide the XY coordinates of your mesocosm in decimal degrees or degree, minutes and seconds

ASD 4

What type of water system is model for your mesocosm? Multiple answers possible...

ASD 5

In what climatic zone (Köppen climate classification) is your facility located? Multiple answers possible...

ASD 6 Are your mesocosms placed on land or in the water or both?

ASD 7 Are your mesocosms indoor, outdoor or both?

ASD 8 How many mecososm units are available?

ASD 9

What are the dimensions of your mesocosms units (in meters) and the volume of each unit (m3)

ASD 10 Can your mesocosms contain sediment?

ASD 11 Can the sediment be natural, artificial or both?

ASD 12

What types of parameters can be manipulated automatically? With this we mean that some form of automatic regulation is in place. Multiple answers possible...

ASD 13

Can you manipulate any of the following in your mesocosm? Multiple answers possible...

ASD 14 If so, please specify

ASD 15

What, if any of the following substances have so far been used in your mesocosm facility?

ASD 16 For in-situ facilities (mesocosms installed on the lake/coastal site):

ASD 17

For land based mesocosms: Which sites are available as source locations? (e.g. plankton inoculum) AND/OR Briefly describe nutrient status/habitat type




ASD 18 How would you describe the research performed at your facility

ASD 19

Is your mesocosm contributing to development and/or testing of new technologies

ASD 20 Do you provide mesocosm facility provide services to the private sector?

ASD 21 If yes, please specify

ASD 22

Does your mesocosm facility provide products (data, information, analysis, etc.) to the private or public sector?

ASD 23 If yes, please specify

ASD 24

What type of services could be potentially provided by your mesocosm facility? Multiple answers possible...

Section: Instruments/sensor/equipment available

ASD 25

What kind of sensor and probes can be deployed manually at your mesocosm facility? Multiple answers possible...

ASD 26

What kind of sensor and probes are available for automated measurements and logging? Multiple answers possible...

ASD 27

Could you briefly describe how you check the precision and accuracy of your equipment’s for AUTOMATED sampling and measuring physical and chemical variables? If you follow a specific guideline please state so

ASD 28

What type of equipment is available for measuring biological variables? Multiple answers possible...

ASD 29

Could you briefly describe how you check the accuracy of your sampling procedures for biotic data (phyto, zoop, fish etc...)? If you follow a specific guideline, please state so

ASD 30

What type of equipment is available for measuring chemical variables? Multiple answers possible...

ASD 31

Could you briefly describe how you check the precision and accuracy of your equipment’s for MANUAL sampling and measuring physical and chemical variables? If you follow a specific guideline, please state so

ASD 32 What species of carbon can you measure (e.g. doc, dic, tic, toc etc.)

ASD 33

What species of nitrogen can you measure (e.g. TN, ammonium, nitrate, nitrite , etc.)?

ASD 34

What species of phosphorus can your measure (e.g. total phosphorus, soluble reactive phosphorus, etc.)?

ASD 35 What other chemical variables do you measure (silicate, ferrous iron etc.)?

ASD 36 Which organism groups do you sample? Multiple answers possible

ASD 37 Briefly describe how you measure the abundance of biota

ASD 38 Is there a possibility to work with isotopes at your mesocosm facility?

ASD 39 If so, is a license needed?

Questionnaire 2 AQUACOSM survey on transnational access. Questions marked ATA

Section: Reqired site info(=Site documentation in mesocosm.eu)

ATA 1


ATA 2 What is the name of your aquatic mesocosm facility?




Section: Transnational access

ATA 3 Can you briefly describe how to access your mesocom facility?

ATA 4 Is it allowed to use any of the substances in experimental treatments? Multiple answers possible...

ATA 5 Do you need to acquire permission from local/regional or national authorities for carrying out experiments in your mesocosms?

ATA 6 Are there personal health/work hazards associated with operating your mesocosms?

ATA 7 Are there environmental hazards associated with operating your mesocosms (e.g. flooding)

ATA 8 Can you briefly describe what type of personal assistance is available for carrying out experiments?

ATA 9 Are there specific regulations regarding operating your mesocosms?

ATA 10 How far is the mesocosm facility located from shops?

ATA 11 How far is the mesocosm facility located from accommodation?

ATA 12 How far is the mesocosm facility located from bars/restaurants?

ATA 13 How far is the mesocosm facility located from public transport?

ATA 14 How far is the mesocosm facility located from sports/leisure centres?

Questionnaire 3 AQUACOSM mesocosm science questions. Questions marked AMS


AMS 1


AMS 2 What is the name of your aquatic mesocosm facility?

Section: Mesocosm science questions

AMS 3

Briefly describe for what type(s) of scientific topics/experiments the mesocosm facility was constructed

AMS 4

If the facilities were significantly modified since initial construction: for what type of scientific topics/experiments have they been (later)redesigned? (If not, please answer N/A)

AMS 5

Briefly describe for what type of experiments the facilities have been mostly used

AMS 6

Briefly describe what is the presently most important scientific question to be challenged using the facility in foreseeable time (e.g. within presently running projects)

AMS 7

Briefly describe what type of important scientific (aquatic) questions that you would like to investigate cannot possibly be investigated in your present facility?

AMS 8

Briefly describe what type of important scientific (aquatic) questions that you would like to investigate cannot possibly be investigated in ANY present facility you are aware of?

AMS 9

What technical limitation(s) would have to be overcome to possibly allow to investigate scientific (aquatic) questions that you would like to investigate




AMS 10

What key environmental challenges could (at least theoretically) be better addressed through the AQUACOSM network, compared to before?

AMS 11

What (if any) other conceptual/scientific challenges could (at least theoretically) be better addressed/explored through the AQUACOSM network, compared to before?

AMS 12

What technical and/or methodological limitation(s) challenges do you expect to be better addressed through the AQUACOSM network, compared to before?

Questionnaire 4

AQUACOSM survey on data sharing, harmonization, and management. Questions marked DAT


DAT 1


DAT 2 What is the name of your aquatic mesocosm facility?

Section: Data sharing, harmonization, and management

DAT 3 What are the contact details of the owners of the data: DAT 4 Is use of the experimental data: (multiple answers possible)

DAT 5 Where are data stored? Multiple answers possible...

DAT 6 How is data managed?

DAT 7 What are the data quality assurance and control procedures (multiple answers possible):

DAT 8 Can you describe your quality assurance procedures briefly?

DAT 9 Can you describe your quality control procedures briefly?

DAT 10 Briefly describe which software you use for processing data

DAT 11 Briefly describe which software you use for mid-and long term data storage

DAT 12 Briefly describe what metadata you have available

DAT 13 Briefly describe where your metadata is stored.

DAT 14 Briefly describe where your metadata is stored.

DAT 15 Would you be willing to share your quality assurance and control procedures with AQUACOSM?

DAT 16 What is the temporal resolution of your physical-chemical data? Multiple answers possible

DAT 17 What is the temporal resolution of your biological data? Multiple answers possible...

DAT 18 What is the taxonomic resolution of your biological data (multiple answers possible)

DAT 19 What is/are your final output data format(s)?

DAT 20 Would you be willing to adopt a standardized metadata format? (e.g. ecological metadata language)

DAT 21 Would you be willing to publish your metadata in an EU portal?

DAT 22 Is your data available in EU portals?

DAT 23 Would you be willing to publish your data in an EU portal?




6.2 Appendix II

Overview of questions asked in an updated single Web questionnaire to the wider mesocosm facilities outside the AQUACOSM network. Answers were received during Jun 2018. The Surveymonkey web platform was used for the questionnaire (www.surveymonkey.com).

The answers to the questions are freely available for sharing, please contact the AQUACOSM Project Office (www.aquacosm.eu/project-information/coordination-team/) for further info.

Question # Question

Section: Site documentation

Q 1

Do you wish to have your facility listed as contributor to the survey? Please check YES if you do, and NO if you do not wish to have your facility listed as contributor to the questionnaire. In any case your answers will be treated anonymously.

Q 2


Q 3

What is the name of your aquatic mesocosm facility? PLEASE NOTE: only include one type of facility per questionnaire (e.g. one general facility with up to several different mesocosm types at one site, or e.g. a distributed facility with similar mesocosms over several sites). If you answer for several different non-connected facilities, please answer for only one unit, or set of connected units, in each questionnaire.

Q 4

Provide the XY coordinates of your mesocosm in Google Earth annotation (e.g. 51°59'14.68"N; 5°40'5.01"O). If your mesocosm facility is located at more than one site, please fill in the location for each separate site.

Q 5

How many mesocosm units are available? If multiple types at one site please specify. If located at more than one site, please give numbers per site, numbered as question 4.

Q 6

What are the dimensions of your mesocosms units (in meters) and the volume of each unit (m3). Wen more than one type please indicate the different sizes separated by a dash "-"

Q 7 What type of water system is model for your mesocosm?

Q 8

In what climatic zone (Köppen climate classification) are your facility located? Multiple answers possible...

Q 9 Are your mesocosms placed on land or in the water or both?

Q 10 Are your mesocosms indoor, outdoor or both?

Q 11 Can your mesocosms contain sediment?

Q 12 Can the sediment be natural, artificial or both?

Q 13

What types of parameters can be controlled in your mesocosm? With controlled we mean that some form of automatic regulation is in place. Multiple answers possible...

Q 14

Can you manipulate any of the following in your mesocosm? Multiple answers possible...

Q 15

Is it allowed to use any of the following substances in experimental treatments? Multiple answers possible




Q 16

Do you need to acquire permission from local/regional or national authorities for carrying out experiments in your mesocosms?

Q 17 If so, please specify

Section: Instruments/sensor/equipment available

Q 18

What kind of sensors and probes are available for MANUAL measurements? Multiple answers possible...

Q 19

What kind of sensors and probes are available for AUTOMATED measurements and logging? Multiple answers possible...

Q 20

What type of equipment is available for collecting data on taxon composition? Multiple answers possible...

Q 21

What type of equipment is available for measuring chemical elements? Multiple answers possible...

Q 22 What form of carbon can you measure (e.g. DOC, DIC, TIC, TOC etc.)

Q 23

What form of nitrogen can you measure (e.g. TN, ammonium, nitrate, nitrite , etc.)?

Q 24

What form of phosphorus can your measure (e.g. total phosphorus, soluble reactive phosphorus, etc.)?

Q 25 What (form of) other elements do you measure (silicate, ferrous iron etc.)?

Q 26 Which organism groups do you sample? Multiple answers possible

Q 27 Briefly describe how you measure the abundance of biota

Section: Access to your facility and potential support to guests

Q 28 Have your facility provided national or international access?

Q 29

How many experiments have been conducted at your facility WITHOUT participants from institutions outside your country?

Q 30

How many experiments have been conducted at your facility WITH participants from institutions outside your country?

Q 31

How many experiments have been conducted at your facility with funding from within your country alone?

Q 32

How many experiments have been conducted at your facility including funding from EU?

Q 33

How many experiments have been conducted at your facility including funding from counties outside EU?

Q 34

Have you conducted experiments aimed for direct comparison between more than one site?

Q 35

Can you describe what type of personal assistance is available for carrying out experiments?

Q 36 How far is the mesocosm facility located from accomodation?

Q 37 How far is the mesocosm facility located from shops?

Q 38 Are there specific regulations for operating your mesocosms?

Q 39 Are there environmental hazards associated with operating your mesocosms?

Section: Mesocosm science

Q 40

Briefly describe for what type(s) of scientific topics/experiments the mesocosm facility was constructed




Q 41

If the facilities were significantly modified since initial construction: for what type of scientific topics/experiments have they been (later)redesigned? (If not, please answer N/A)

Q 42

Briefly describe for what type of experiments the facilities have been mostly used

Q 43

Briefly describe what is the presently most important scientific question to be challenged using the facility in foreseeable time (e.g. within presently running projects)

Q 44

Briefly describe what type of important scientific (aquatic) questions that you would like to investigate cannot possibly be investigated in your present facility?

Q 45

Briefly describe what type of important scientific (aquatic) questions that you would like to investigate cannot possibly be investigated in ANY present facility you are aware of?

Q 46

What technical limitation(s) would have to be overcome to possibly allow to investigate scientific (aquatic) questions that you would like to investigate

Q 47

What key environmental challenges could (at least theoretically) be better addressed through an open international coordination (of nationally funded) mesocosm facilities?

Q 48

What (if any) other challenges could (at least theoretically) be better addressed/explored through a wider EU-funded network, compared to presently?

Section: Data

Q 49

Who are the owners of the experimental data collected in the mesocosm experiments?

Q 50 Who is the contact for data provision?

Q 51 Is use of the experimental data: (multiple answers possible)

Q 52 Where are data stored? Multiple answers possible...

Q 53 How is data managed?

Q 54

What are the data quality assurance and control procedures (multiple answers possible):

Q 55 Can you describe your quality assurance procedures briefly?

Q 56 Can you describe your quality control procedures briefly?

Q 57

Briefly describe what metadata you have available, where it is stored and what standards does it follow

Q 58

What is the temporal resolution of your physical-chemical data? Multiple answers possible

Q 59

What is the temporal resolution of your biological data? Multiple answers possible...

Q 60

What is the taxonomic resolution of your biological data (multiple answers possible)

Q 61

Would you be willing to share your quality assurance and control procedures within an international network?

Q 62

Would you be willing to adopt a standardized metadata format? (e.g. ecological metadata language)

Q 63 Would you be willing to publish your METAdata in an EU portal?




Q 64 Is your DATA available in EU portals?

Q 65 Would you be willing to publish your DATA in an EU portal?




7. References

Bochinski E, Bacha G, Eiselein V, Walles TJW, Nejstgaard JC, Sikora T (2018) Deep Active Learning for In Situ Plankton Classification. 24th International Conference on Pattern Recognition in Beijing, China, 20-24 August 2018

Jones N (2014) Computer science: The learning machines. Nature 505:146–148 Tydecks L, Bremerich V, Jentschke I, Likens GE, Tockner K (2016) Biological Field Stations: A Global Infrastructure

for Research, Education, and Public Engagement. BioScience 66:164-171 Tydecks L, Jeschke JM, Wolf M, Singer G, Tockner K (2018) Spatial and topical imbalances in biodiversity research.

PLOS ONE 13:e0199327

AQUACOSM: Network of Leading European Connecting … › download › deliverables › D2.1... ·...

Documents

Transcript of AQUACOSM: Network of Leading European Connecting … › download › deliverables › D2.1... ·...