# European Red List of Habitats Table

Habitat Type Name:
A5.15 Atlantic lower circalittoral coarse sediment

Habitat Description:
This habitat is present in offshore circalittoral coarse sands and gravel or shell gravel, typically in depths of over 20m. There are relatively little quantitative data available, but it is thought to cover large areas of the offshore continental shelf. It is generally characterised by robust infaunal polychaete and bivalve species and is relatively diverse. The characteristic species depend on the fraction of coarse and finder sediments. In some areas settlement of Modiolus modiolus larvae may occur and consequently these habitats may occasionally have large numbers of juvenile M. modiolus. In areas where the mussels reach maturity their byssus threads bind the sediment together, increasing stability and allowing an increased deposition of silt.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
These include Modiolus modiolus, Glycera lapidum, Thyasira spp. and Amythasides macroglossus in offshore gravelly sand; and  Hesionura elongata and Protodorvillea kefersteini in offshore coarse sand.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4.  A sub habitat of ‘Atlantic circalittoral coarse sediment’ (A5.1).
 
Annex 1:
No relationship
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral coarse sediment
 
EUSeaMap:
Shelf coarse or mixed sediments
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy

Trends in Quantity:
It is difficult to establish the quantity of this habitat as it often has a patchy distribution, grading into other soft sediment habitats, or interspersed amongst rocky areas. Even where the extent of this habitat or its associated biotopes has been mapped in detail (e.g. as part of resource assessments for sand and gravel extraction or within marine protected areas) there is a lack of information on trends. 
Overall there is insufficient information to determine any historical or recent trends in the quantity of this habitat. Future trends have not been estimated.

Trends in Quality:
The substantial extent of the likely impact of bottom fishing gears on this habitat throughout the North East Atlantic region is apparent from many studies including analyses which have combined VMS data with sensitivity maps of benthic habitats and disturbance caused by surface abrasion for the continental shelf area of the North East Atlantic. Qualitative observations have revealed trends in the relative abundance of common species and changes in the associated communities from some locations. Off the coast of Belgium, for example, parts of areas first surveyed in the 1920s have experienced a shift from typical gravel epifauna toward a more typical sand bottom epifauna. In the Kattegat, around 50% of coarse sediment habitats were trawled over during a 3 year study period but with a low intensity. As most was fished less than twice a year it was considered to have a high recoverability from associated impacts in this area.
Most recently, an analysis of the fishing intensity of EU trawlers (bottom otter, beam and mid-water trawls) using Automatic Identification System (AIS) ship tracking data over one year (2013/2014) shows high coverage in all European coastal waters and over the continental shelf. When combined with the modelled distribution of EUNIS marine habitat types it is possible to examine the extent of likely impact on a particular benthic habitat. For example, over this time period over 70% of the area of lower circalittoral coarse sediment habitat was subject to such fishing pressure in the North Sea and Celtic Sea. Scientific evidence, supplemented with expert judgement to develop fisheries measures in protected areas for the Dutch sector of the North Sea, indicated that the most significant threat to the conservation status of the Dogger Bank comes from bottom gear, notably from beam trawling with tickler chains. The main effect is on abiotic conditions, hence on structure and function, which results in reduction of the abundance of typical species. This initial effect is greater in sandy then muddy bottom however this is compensated somewhat by shorter recovery times where the seabed is predominantly sandy.
More information is available where this habitat coincides with aggregate dredging sites. In such situations there have been changes in community composition and degradation of habitat quality but also recovery when areas are left undisturbed. For example, a ten year study of the physical and biological impact of aggregate dredging along the French coast of the Eastern English Channel reported a change in the structure of the community from one of coarse sands with Branchiostoma lanceolatum to one of fine sands with Ophelia borealis, Nephtys cirrosa, and Spiophanes bombyx, with local dominance of the opportunistic, sessile Pomatoceros triqueter on bare shingles. Species richness was fully restored after 16 months although the community structure differed from the initial one corresponding to the new type of sediment.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat has a widespread distribution in the North East Atlantic with EOO >50,000km2.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat has a widespread distribution in the North East Atlantic with EOO >50,000km2.

Pressures and Threats:
This habitat is vulnerable to disturbance or loss of seabed sediments, for example through dermersal fishing activity or aggregate dredging which can both dislodge or remove the infauna and sessile epifauna associated with this habitat or affect the species richness because of associated changes in sediment character, primarily by re-suspending and preventing deposition of finer particles and creating a high sediment mobility.

Conservation and Management:
Beneficial management measures include the control of demersal fishing activity and the regulation of activities which damage or disturb seabed communities such as aggregate dredging and offshore construction work. Establishing undisturbed areas may also be beneficial by helping to facilitate the recolonisation of previously degraded areas.

Conservation Status:
This habitat does not correspond directly to any Annex 1 type according to the Habitats Directive although it may be present in shallow inlets and bays (1160).

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Studies on the recovery of coarse sediment habitats following aggregate dredging indicate that the tidal stress regime is an important consideration in recovery times. In highly energetic conditions recovery may take less than 2 years but under other conditions recovery may take more than 20 years. If the sediment composition is altered the species composition may be different to that which existed before the habtiat was damaged. Recovery from damage associated with demersal trawling will also depend on the frequency of disturbance.

Summary:
This habitat has a widespread distribution. It is characterised by coarse sand and gravel or shell gravel in depths of over 20m. In the North Sea it may cover large areas of the offshore continental shelf. There is relatively little quantitative data available for this habitat but it is generally characterised by robust infaunal polychaete and bivalve species.
The habitat is intolerant to substratum disturbance and loss caused by demersal fishing activities and aggregate extraction although recovery may take place over various timescales depending on the prevaling conditons.  As well as direct removal, these activities can alter the sediment characteristics of the habitat and the associated species. Changes in water flow and wave exposure can also affect species richness when it results in high sediment mobility, rendering the sediment less suitable for burrowing deposit feeders. Beneficial management and conservation measures for this habitat include the regulation of fishing activities and dredging which damage, or disturb seabed communities.

References:
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Availiable at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
Desprez, M. 2000. Physical and biological impact of marine aggregate extraction along the French coast of the Eastern English Channel: short- and long-term post-dredging restoration. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57(5): 1428-1438.
European Environment Agency. 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed: 22/08/2014). 
Eigaard Ole R. et al. “Estimating seabed pressure from demersal trawls, seines, and dredges based on gear design and dimensions” ICES J. Mar. Sci., doi = 10.1093/icesjms/fsv099.
Fodder,J., Rogers, S.I and Jones, I.P. 2009. Recovery rates of UK seabed habitats after cessation of aggregate extraction. Marine Ecology Progress Series 390: 15 –26.
ICES. 2011. Fisheries Measures in Protected Areas (FIMPAS) within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the Dutch part of the North Sea: areas outside the 12 nautical miles zone: Proposals, Dates, Venue. FIMPAS Steering Group. 35 pp. 
MarLIN (Marine Life Information Network) .2015. MarLIN - The Marine Life Information Network. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesfullreview.php. (Accessed: 18/11/2015).
Tempera, F. 2015. Bringing together harmonized EUNIS seabed habitat geospatial information for the European Seas. JRC Technical report. EUR 27237.
Vespe M, Gibin M, Alessandrini A, Natale F, Mazzarella F, & Osio G. in press. Mapping EU fishing activities using ship tracking data – accepted for publication, Journal of Maps – available at http://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.03826

Criterion A Text:
Some localised changes in extent of this habitat have been recorded but there is insufficient information to determine any overall trends in quantity of this habitat in the North East Atlantic. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under criterion A for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion C/D Text:
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activity in the last 100 years and this remains a significant pressure. Mobile demersal fishing gears such as otter trawls and beam trawls, disturb the upper layers of the sediment and damage both the associated eipfauna and shallow infaunal communities . Associated increases in suspended sediments may also have a smothering effect on filter feeders. The degree of any damage will depend on the gear, frequency of use and species present. A recent analysis of the fishing intensity of EU trawlers (bottom otter, beam and midwater trawls) using Automatic Identification System (AIS) ship tracking data over one year (2013/2014) shows high coverage in all European coastal waters and over the continental shelf. When combined with the modelled distribution of EUNIS marine habitat types it is possible to examine the extent of likely impact on a particular benthic habitat. For example, over this time period over 70% of the estimated area of upper circalittoral coarse sediment was subject to such fishing pressure in the North Sea and Celtic Sea. Coarse sediment communities have greater resilience and faster recovery rates that those in fine sediments but given that this is based on a single year of data and that this type of pressure has been taking place for decades it is likely to be an underestimate of the total area of this habitat which has been affected. Aggregate extraction also has a localised effect on this habitat with the longevity of the effect depending on the local conditions and timescale.
Expert opinion is that there is likely to have been a substantial reduction in quality of this habitat - an intermediate decline in quality affecting more than 50% of this habitat in the North East Atlantic region although it is also possible that more than 30% has been subject to a severe decline. This will depend on factors such as the intensity and frequency of disturbance. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Vulnerable under criteria C/D for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Synthesis:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic. A combination of survey data and modelling indicates that it does not have a restricted geographical distribution nor occur in only a few locations in the North East Atlantic and therefore qualifies as Least Concern under criterion B. Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities, particularly bottom trawls and dredging, in the last 100 years and this habitat remains under fishing pressure and subject to aggregate extraction. Data for 2013/2014 has revealed that over 70% of this habitat in the North Sea and Celtic Sea was subject to fishing pressure by bottom otter, beam and mid-water trawls. Coarse sediment communities have greater resilience and faster recovery rates that those in fine sediments but given that this is based on a single year of data and that this type of pressure has been taking place for decades it is likely to be an underestimate of the total area of this habitat which has been subject to such pressure.
Expert opinion is that there has been a substantial reduction in quality of this habitat, most likely an intermediate decline affecting more than 50% of its extent although in some locations there may have been a severe decline. The severity will depend on factors such as the intensity and frequency of disturbance. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Vulnerable for both the EU 28 and EU 28+ because of both past and likely continuing declines in quality.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.22 Estuarine Atlantic sublittoral sand

Habitat Description:
This habitat is characterised by clean sands that occur in the upper reaches of marine inlets, especially estuaries, where water movement is moderately strong, allowing the deposition of sand, but not the finer silt fraction. The habitat typically lacks a significant seaweed component and is characterised by brackish-water tolerant fauna, particularly amphipods, polychaetes and mysid shrimps.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
Many indicators of quality have been used for this habitat with particular parameters set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis. Indicators of quality of this habitat are frequently linked to those for the whole estuarine environment and therefore include morphological and physical characteristics, carrying capacity and water quality parameters. For the mudflat itself benthic indices, contaminant levels and productivity are some of the frequently used measures of quality.
Indices developed to assess the ecological status of coastal waters, including estuaries, according to the Water Framework Directive, include physical indicators, water quality indicators and measures of benthic diversity, species richness and abundance. The latter group, which is particularly relevant to benthic habitats, includes a Benthic Quality Index, an Infaunal Trophic Index, a Marine Biotic index based on ecological groups, and the Benthic Opportunistic Polychaetes/Amphipods Index.
Characteristic species:
Nephtys cirrosa and Macoma balthica in variable salinity infralittoral mobile sand; Neomysis integer and Gammarus spp. in fluctuating low salinity infralittoral mobile sand. Also Crangon crangon, Macoma calcarea, Mya truncata, Astarte spp. Spisula spp. Capitella capitata and Eurydice pulchra.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic shallow infralittoral sand’ (A5.2).
 
Annex 1:
1130 Estuaries
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal  
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sand
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow sands
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Whilst estuaries are typical of the North East Atlantic region it is unclear whether the associated sandy sediment habitat  can be considered typical.

Trends in Quantity:
The extent of this habitat has been mapped in detail in some parts of its range (e.g Danish estuaries and rias in north western Spain) however there is insufficient information to determine any historical or recent trends in quantity. Future trends have not been estimated.

Trends in Quality:
There is insufficient information to determine any historical or recent trends in quality. Future trends have not been estimated.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat does not have a small natural range as EOO>50,000km2.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat does not have a small natural range as EOO>50,000km2 although intrinsically restricted to estuarine situations.

Pressures and Threats:
This habitat is vulnerable to capital dredging operations that may result in direct habitat removal or in changes to sediment and hydrological regimes. Coastal development works that cause an increase in water flow rate, may lead to changes in granulometry and subsequent shifts in infaunal community structure.
Localised water temperature changes, caused by discharges from industrial processes can disrupt the breeding cycles of some infaunal species which are sometimes unable to adapt to these temperature changes. In addition, this habitat may be subjected to a range of toxic compounds from anthropogenic discharges, run-off and maintainance activities. Contaminants may include heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)and hydrocarbon (oil) spills. The crustacean component of the habitat community, in particularly is susceptible to these toxic agents. Moreover, the toxicity of these substances may be enhanced by changes in the water temperature and salinity.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management schemes to benefit estuarine habitats have been applied at a number of scales ranging from whole estuary systems to small areas within an estuary. They include the removal of dykes, and water quality improvement programmes to reduce the risk of toxic contamination or nutrient inputs leading to eutrophication.
Spatial management including zoning of activities as part of Integrated Coastal Zone Management Schemes and Marine Protected Areas that cover the entire estuary complex, as well as management of water quality throughout the surrounding catchment.

Summary:
This habitat consists of clean sands, that occur in the upper reaches of marine inlets, especially estuaries, where water movement is moderately strong, allowing the sedimentation of sand, but not the finer silt fraction. The habitat typically lacks a significant seaweed component and is characterised by brackish-water tolerant fauna, particularly amphipods, polychaetes and mysid shrimps.
Significant threats to this habitat include capital dredging, and coastal development or shoreline reinforcement which results in either direct habitat removal or changes in sediment and hydrological regimes. In addition, chemical contamination, and discharges of water of significantly higher or lower temperature will have a serious impact on the associated fauna, in particular crustaceans and amphipods. Conservation and management schemes to benefit estuarine habitats have been applied at a number of scales ranging from whole estuary systems to small areas within an estuary. They include the removal of dykes, and water quality improvement programmes to reduce the risk of toxic contamination or nutrient inputs leading to eutrophication. Furthermore, spatial management, including zoning of activities as part of Integrated Coastal Zone Management Schemes and Marine Protected Areas, that cover the entire estuary complex are beneficial.

References:
Borja, A., Franco, J. & Perez, V 2000. A Marine biotic index to establish the ecological quality of soft-bottom benthos within European estuarine and coastal environments. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 40(12):1100-1114.
Conley, D.J., Kass, H., Møhlenberg, F. et al. 2000. Characteristics of Danish Estuaries. Estuaries. 23(6):820-837.
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Availiable at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
European Environment Agency. 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed: 22/08/2014). 
HELCOM.  AA.I3O AA.J3L10 Baltic photic sand dominated by multiple infaunal bivalve species: Macoma calcarea, Mya truncata, Astarte spp., Spisula spp. Availiable at: http://helcom.fi/baltic-sea-trends/biodiversity/helcom-hub/hub/aa-j3l10. (Accessed: 21/12/2015)
MarLIN (Marine Life Information Network) .2015. MarLIN - The Marine Life Information Network. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesfullreview.php. (Accessed: 18/11/2015).
Muxika, I., Borga, A. & Bald, J. 2007. Using historical data, expert judgement and multivariate analysis in assessing reference conditions and benthic ecological status according to the European Water Framework Directive. Marine Pollution Bulletin 55:16-29.
Vilas, F., Bernabeu, A.M. & Méndez, G. 2005 Sediment distribution pattern in the Rias Baixas (NW Spain): main facies and hydrodynamic dependence. Journal of Marine Systems. 54:261-276.

Criterion A Text:
There are insufficient data for an assessment of criterion A. This habitat is therefore considered to be Data Deficient under criterion A for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion B Text:
The available information on the occurrence of this habitat is known to be substantially incomplete. The existing data obtained from EMODnet would suggest that this habitat could potentially be considered as Vulnerable under Criterion B (AOO<50) if there were grounds for believing that this habitat was undergoing a decline in extent or quality. There are, however, no data on the present status of this habitat and trends, and the accuracy of the mapping data cannot be verified at this time. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under criteria B for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion E Text:
There is no quantitative analysis available tot estimate the probability of collapse of this habitat type.

Synthesis:
There is a lack of quantitative data on extent and condition of this habitat therefore no assessment of trends in quantity and quality can be made at the present time.  The small AOO suggests this habitat could be Endangered under criterion B however given the lack of information on its trends in quantity and quality and because the distribution data not comprehensive, expert opinion is this habitat should be considered Data Deficient for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Contributors:
C. Karamita, North East Atlantic Working Group: S. Gubbay, G. Saunders, H. Tyler-Walters, N. Dankers, F.Otero-Ferrer, J. Forde, K. Fürhaupter, R. Haroun Tabraue, N. Sanders.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.23 Marine Atlantic infralittoral fine sand

Habitat Description:
This habitat is found in clean sands which occur in the shallow sublittoral to at least 30m depth either on the open coast or in tide-swept channels of marine inlets. The substratum may be formed into dunes on exposed or tide-swept coasts, and may be interspersed with cobbles and pebbles in some situations. The habitat includes areas of well-sorted medium and find sands subject to physical disturbance as a result of wave action and occasionally strong tidal streams. It can extend over large areas, for example being found in a wide stretch adjacent to the coast of the Netherlands to depths of 15-20m. The epifauna are necessarily tolerant to scour by sand. The habitat is characterised by a range of taxa including polychaetes, bivalve molluscs and amphipods. 
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
The habitat typically lacks a significant seaweed component and is characterised by robust fauna, particularly amphipods (Bathyporeia) and robust polychaetes including Nephtys cirrosa and Lanice  conchilega. Where there are cobbles and pebbles there may be conspicuous colonies of hydroids particularly Hydrallmania falcta and to a lesser extent Sertularia cupressina and S.argentea. The magelonid polychaete Magelona mirabilis may be frequent in more sheltered, less tides-wept areas, whilst in coarser sediments the opportunistic polychaete Chaetozone setosa may be commonly found. In locations with large populations of semi-permanent tube-building amphipods and polychaetes such as in moderately exposed or sheltered inlets and voes in shallow water, the fauna is typically dominated by Corophium crassicorne and other amphipods such as Ampelisca spp. can be common. Mobile species which may be present include Pagurus bernhardus, Cancer pagurus, sand eels Ammodytes sp.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic shallow/infralittoral sand’ (A5.2).
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered by seawater all the time
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sand
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow sands
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
There are extensive areas of infralittoral sand habitat in the North East Atlantic region and it can also cover extensive areas where it occurs.

Trends in Quantity:
It is difficult to establish the quantity of this habitat as it often has a patchy distribution, grading into other soft sediment habitats, or interspersed amongst rocky areas. There are numerous small scale documented changes associated with coastal developments and coast protection schemes. For example loss of shallow sand habitat off the Netherlands coast associated with the Maasvlakte 2 project, and addition of sand off the coast of Zuid-Holland as part of coast protection works. 
Even where the extent of this habitat or its associated biotopes has been mapped in detail (e.g. as part of resource assessments for sand and gravel extraction or within marine protected areas) there is a lack of information on trends.

Trends in Quality:
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe are believed to have been modified by fishing activities, particularly bottom trawls and dredging, in the last 100 years, however there is insufficient information to determine historical trends specifically for this habitat type. This habitat is present in the North Sea which is one of the best studied marine systems in the World, yet for the benthos there are no available data to truly assess the pre-fishing state. There are some time-series on marine benthos but they are very localised in their spatial coverage. There is also a small amount of quantitative historic data dating back to the 1920s from the central North Sea. However, mechanised fishing has been developed in this area for at least the past 80 years and it is possible that communities were already disturbed in the 1920s. Fishing continues to be a threat to this habitat however it is difficult to determine overall current trends for the North East Atlantic. 
Changes in species composition associated with this habitat can be an indication of changes in quality but any trends need to distinguish such changes from natural events such as changes due to seasonal variations in faunal abundance which typically occur due to variations in recruitment events, as well as seasonal changes in the levels of plankton production in surface waters which affects the food supply of the benthos in this habitat.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat does not have a small natural range as EOO>50,000km2 or an intrinsically restricted area as it develop under a variety of conditions.

Pressures and Threats:
Commercial shell and fin-fisheries can potentially have a large effect on the integrity of infralittoral sand. The affects of fishing will depend on the type of gear used with demersal fisheries having the most direct effect. Megafaunal species are in general more vulnerable to fishing affects than macrofaunal species because they are slow growing and thus slowly recover from disturbance. Removal of non-commercial-sized fish can affect the nursery function of the habitat. Dredging of sand will disturb the benthic community and possibly reduce the number and diversity of benthic species and affect larval recruitment. 
Infralittoral sediments will be less at risk from oil spills than intertidal sediments unless dispersants are used in clean-up operations or if wave action allows sediment mobility and thus oil to be incorporated into the sediments.

Conservation and Management:
Beneficial management measures for this habitat include the regulation of fishing methods which damage or disturb seabed communities. More general protection measures include pollution control and regulation, construction development control and contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident. Lastly, measures to reduce the impact of climate change, such as changing wave climate, should also be considered.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The life history characteristics of the species, particularly the polychaetes, suggest that the associated communities would probably recovery fairly rapidly. For instance, settlement of Lanice conchilega which has been reported to be more successful in areas with existent adults than areas without, have been observed to re-establish mature populations in three years. Reproductive data concerning Magelona mirabilis  is scarce but it displays characteristics typical of an r-selected species, i.e. high reproductive rate, short life span and high dispersal potential.

Summary:
This habitat consists of clean sands, where water movement is moderately strong, allowing the sedimentation of sand, but not the finer silt fraction. The habitat typically lacks a significant seaweed component and is characterised by a range of taxa including polychaetes, bivalve molluscs and amphipods. The epifauna are necessarily tolerant to scour by sand. 
Disturbance of the substratum by demersal fishing gears and dredging activities may damage or modify infaunal communities, and loss of substrate is likely to be detrimental where the majority of the characterising species are interstitial polychaetes. Polluted sediments may  cause a change in the species composition. Beneficial management measures for this habitat include the regulation of fishing methods which damage or disturb seabed communities. More general protection measures include pollution control and regulation, construction development control and contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident. Lastly, measures to reduce the impact of climate change, such as changing wave climate, should also be considered.

References:
Airoldi, L. and Beck, M. W. 2007. Loss, status and trends for coastal marine habitats of Europe. Oceanography and Marine Biology; An annual Review 45: 345-405.
Ball, B. J., Fox, G. and Munday, B. W. 2000. Long- and short-term consequences of a Nephrops trawl fishery on the benthos and environment of the Irish Sea. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 1315-1320
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Availiable at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
European Environment Agency. 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp (Accessed: 23/15/2015).
Frid, C. L. J., Harwood, K. G., Hall, S. J. and Hall, J. A. 2000. Long-term changes in the benthic communities on North Sea fishing grounds. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 1303-1309.
MarLIN (Marine Life Information Network) .2015. MarLIN - The Marine Life Information Network. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesfullreview.php. (Accessed: 18/11/2015).
Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment/Ministry of Economic Affairs 2012. Marine Strategy for the Netherlands part of the North Sea 2012-2020, Part 1. 136pp. The Hague, Netherlands. 
Nilsson, P. & Ziegler, F. 2006. Spatial distribution of fishing effort in relation to seafloor habitats in the Kattegat, a GIS analysis. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.17(4):421-440.
Robinson, L. A. and Frid, C. L. J.  2008. Historical marine ecology: examining the role of fisheries in changes in North Sea. BenthosAmbio 37: 362-371.
Tempera, F., Atchoi, E., Amorim, P., Gomes-Pereira, J., and Gonçalves, J. 2013. Atlantic Area Marine Habitats. Adding new Macaronesian habitat types from the Azores to the EUNIS Habitat Classification. Horta: MeshAtlantic, IMAR/DOP-UAç, p.126.
Tempera, F. 2015. Bringing together harmonized EUNIS seabed habitat geospatial information for the European Seas. JRC Technical report. EUR 27237.

Synthesis:
Survey information confirms that this habitat has a widespread distribution in the North East Atlantic. There are documented changes in the quality of this habitat and ongoing pressures associated with demersal fisheries and aggregate extraction, but insufficient information to determine the overall trend for the regional sea.
This habitat has a large EOO and AOO, and therefore qualifies as Least Concern under criterion B. However the habitat is assessed as Data Deficient both at the EU 28 and EU 28+ levels because of the lack of information on any overall trends in quantity and quality.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.24 Marine Atlantic infralittoral muddy sand

Habitat Description:
This habitat is typically on a substrate of non-cohesive muddy sand (with 5% to 20% silt/clay). It occurs in the infralittoral zone, extending from the extreme lower shore down to more stable circalittoral zone at about 15-20 m. The habitat develops on sheltered shores in fully marine conditions, or occasionally in areas subject to variable salinity. The habitat supports a variety of animal-dominated communities, particularly polychaetes,  bivalves and the urchin Echinocardium cordatum depending on the sediment characteristics and the degree of shelter.  In stable, fine, compacted sands and slightly muddy sands in the infralittoral and littoral fringe, communities occur that are dominated by venerid bivalves. 
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Polychaetes (Magelona mirabilis, Spiophanes bombyx and Chaetozone setosa), bivalves (Fabulina fibula and Chamelea gallina) and the urchin Echinocardium cordatum. In sheltered areas that support populations of E.cordatum and the razor shell Ensis silique or E.ensis other notable taxa within the biotope include occasional Lanice conchilega, Pagurus and Liocarcinus spp. and Asterias rubens, venerid bivalves such as Chamelea gallina and depending on the biotopes a prevalence of Fabulina fabula and Magelona mirabilis or other species of Magelona (e.g. M. filiformis). Other taxa, including the amphipod Bathyporeia spp. and polychaetes such as Chaetozone setosa, Spiophanes bombyx and Nephtys spp. are also commonly recorded and low numbers of the bivalve Spisula elliptica. Also the polychaete Arenicola marina, Spisula subtruncata and Nephtys hombergii, Turritella or Ervillia castanea.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic shallow/infralittoral sand’ (A5.2).
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered by seawater
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sand
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow sands
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This habitat is widespread and common in the North East Atlantic region.

Comment EU28:
The area estimate for this habitat has been derived from a synthesis of EUNIS seabed habitat geospatial information for the European Seas but is recognised as being an underestimate

Trends in Quantity:
There is likely to have been some natural variation in the physical extent of infralittoral muddy sand habitat in the North East Atlantic. Some small localised losses have been reported (e.g. in sheltered locations) but overall the changes in extent are unknown.

Trends in Quality:
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities, particularly bottom trawls and dredging, in the last 100 yr. Decline is therefore apparent over historical time periods and in more recent time even in sheltered inlets (used as fishing areas during bad weather conditions). These pressures continue therefore the current trend is considered to be a decline in quality.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic (EOO >50,000km2).

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic (EOO >50,000km2).

Pressures and Threats:
Abrasion, physical disturbance and substratum loss of this habitat occur because of fishing activities, particularly through the use of beam trawls, and scallop dredging. It had been shown that these activities affect large infaunal and epifaunal species, and cause a decrease in sessile polychaetes.
Discharges of waste water and solid waste from aquaculture may increase the organic content and can result in significant change in the community of sedimentary habitats.
The fauna associated with this habitat have a high intolerance to synthetic compounds and hydrocarbon contamination and there is likely to be a major decline in species richness in this habitat where this pressure occurs. Moreover changes in the water flow rate resulting from construction and coastal modification will change the sediment structure and have subsequent effects on the biological community.

Conservation and Management:
Beneficial management measures for this habitat include the regulation of fishing activity which damage or disturb seabed communities, including through the estabishment of marine protected areas. Additionally, appropriate regulation and control of aquaculture effluent and chemical discharges, as well as development control and contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1:
1110: MATL U2,  MMAC U1
1160: MATL U2 , MMAC FV

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Meta-analysis of data on fishing impacts on muddy sand communities indicate that the recovery of biota can be measured in years.

Summary:
This habitat is found in areas sheltered from wave and tidal action and is typically present where the sediment is non-cohesive muddy sand. It extends from the lower shore down to the circalittoral at 15-20 m depth. Studies of the habitat in different parts of its geographical range, reveal seasonal cycles and responses to long-term fluctuations in ambient temperatures across the range as well as responses to small scale local phenomena such as pollution incidents.
Fishing activities, particularly the use of beam trawls, and scallop dredging are a serious threat to this habitat, because they damage and kill large infaunal and epifaunal species, and can cause a decrease in sessile polychaetes. In addition, discharges of waste water and solid waste from aquaculture, synthetic compound contamination and hydrocarbon contamination are likely to lead in a decline in species richness. Moreover changes in the water flow rate will change the sediment structure and have subsequent effects on the community.
Beneficial management and conservation measures for this habitat include: protection within marine protected areas, integrated coastal management, regulation of fishing activity which damage, or disturb seabed communities, water quality improvement programmes, control of discharges, regulation of dredging and the regulation and control of coastal development and the construction of hard coastal defence structures.

References:
Airoldi, L. and Beck, M. W. 2007. Loss, status and trends for coastal marine habitats of Europe. Oceanography and Marine Biology; An annual Review 45: 345-405.
Ball, B. J., Fox, G. and Munday, B. W. 2000. Long- and short-term consequences of a Nephrops trawl fishery on the benthos and environment of the Irish Sea. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 1315–1320.
Conley, D.J., Kass, H., Møhlenberg, F. et al. 2000. Characteristics of Danish Estuaries. Estuaries. 23(6):820-837.
European Environment Agency, 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed: 22/08/2014). 
Frid, C. L. J., Harwood, K. G., Hall, S. J. and Hall, J. A. 2000. Long-term changes in the benthic communities on North Sea fishing grounds. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 1303–1309.
Kaiser, M.J., Clarke, K.R., Hinz, H. et al. 2006. Global analysis of response and recovery of benthic biota to fishing. Marine Ecology Progress Series 311:1-14.
MarLIN (Marine Life Information Network) .2015. MarLIN - The Marine Life Information Network. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesfullreview.php. (Accessed: 18/11/2015).
Nilsson, P. & Ziegler, F. 2006. Spatial distribution of fishing effort in relation to seafloor habitats in the Kattegat, a GIS analysis. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.17(4):421-440.
Souprayen, J., Dauvin, J. C., Ibáñez, F., López-Jamar-Martínez, E. (Eduardo), O'Connor, B., and Pearson, T. H. 1992. Long term trends of subtidal macrobenthic communities: numerical analysis of four north-western European Sites. Keegan, B.F. (Ed) Space and Time Series Data Analysis in Coastal Benthic Ecology. Commission of the European Communities: An analytical exercise organised within the framework of the COST 647 Project on Coastal Benthic Ecology: 265-438. 
Tempera, F., Atchoi, E., Amorim, P., Gomes-Pereira, J., and Gonçalves, J. 2013. Atlantic Area Marine Habitats. Adding new Macaronesian habitat types from the Azores to the EUNIS Habitat Classification. Horta: MeshAtlantic, IMAR/DOP-UAç, p.126.
Tempera, F. 2015. Bringing together harmonized EUNIS seabed habitat geospatial information for the European SeasJRC Technical report.EUR 27237.
Vilas, F., Bernabeu, A.M. & Méndez, G. 2005. Sediment distribution pattern in the Rias Baixas (NW Spain): main facies and hydrodynamic dependence. Journal of Marine Systems. 54:261-276.

Criterion A Text:
Estimates of the area and extent of this habitat show considerable variation and are recognised as being biased and an underestimate. No assessment of trends in quantity have therefore been made. This habitat is therefore  Data Deficient under criteria A for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region. The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000 km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. There has been a decline in the biotic quality of this habitat and the major threat (demersal fisheries) is likely to cause continuing declines in quality within the next 20 years, however, the distribution of the habitat is such that the identified threats are
unlikely to affect all localities at once. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criterion B for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion C/D Text:
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities, particularly bottom trawls and dredging, in the last 100 years. Declines in quality are therefore likely and expert opinion is that this may be fairly substantial. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Near Threatened under criteria C/D for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Synthesis:
This habitat has a widespread distribution. There are no precise figures on its extent of however a combination of survey data and modelling indicates that it does not have a restricted geographical distribution or occur in only a few locations in the North East Atlantic. Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities, particularly bottom trawls and dredging, in the last 100 years and this habitat remains under fishing pressure. There are signficant data deficiencies however expert opinion is that this habitat should be assesssed as Near Threatened for both the EU 28 and EU 28+ because of both past and likely future declines in quality.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.25 Atlantic upper circalittoral fine sand

Habitat Description:
This habitat consists of clean fine sands with less than 5% silt/clay in deeper water in tide-swept channels of marine inlets or on the open coast, extending offshore in depths of over 15-20 m. Off the coast of Portugal it has been reported in depths of 20-37m in areas of moderately strong current. It is characterised by a wide range of echinoderms as well as polychaetes and bivalves. Frequently occurring species include the brittlestar Amphiura filiformis, Ophiura albida and O.ophiura, the anemone Cerianthus lloydii, and polychaete worms such as Lanice conchilega.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis. Examples of indicators of "naturalness" that are potential indicators for quality identified for offshore sands are; typical populations of bivalves and epifaunal brittlestars; maintained presence of substratum; lack of smothering; typically diverse communities with no increase in hardy or opportunistic species; and maintenance of sediment characteristics with typical levels of diversity.
Characteristic species:
Echinocardium cordatum and in deeper water the pea urchin Echinocyamus pusillus, the brittlestar Amphiura filiformis, Ophiura albida and O.ophiura, the anemone Cerianthus lloydii, and polychaete worms such as Lanice conchilega . In some locations the community is characterised by the bivalve Abra prismatica, the amphipod Bathyporeia elegans and polychaetes such as Scoloplos armiger, Spiophanes bombyx, Aonides paucibranchiata, Chaetozone setosa, Ophelia borealis and Nephtys longosetosa. Off the coast of mainland Portugal characteristic species are the sea urchin Echinocardium cordatum, bivalve Mactra stultorum, polychaetes Magelona johnstoni, Mediomastus fragilis, Owenia fusiformis and Spiophanes bombyx. More mobile species reported from this habitat are Pagurus bernhardus and Asterias rubens.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic circalittoral sand’ (A5.2).
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sand
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow sands
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy

Trends in Quality:
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities in the last 100 years, particularly by bottom trawls and dredging. Scientific evidence,supplemented with expert judgement to develop fisheries measures in protected areas for the Dutch sector of the North Sea, for example indicated that the most significant threat to the conservation status of the Dogger Bank comes from bottom gear, notably from beam trawling with tickler chains. The main effect
is on abiotic conditions, hence on structure and function, which results in reduction of the abundance of typical species. This initial effect is greater in sandy than muddy bottom however this is compensated somewhat by shorter recovery times where the seabed is predominantly sandy.
An analysis of the fishing intensity of EU trawlers (bottom otter, beam and mid-water trawls) using Automatic Identification System (AIS) ship tracking data over one year (2013/2014) shows high coverage in all European coastal waters and over the continental shelf. When combined with the modelled distribution of EUNIS marine habitat types it is possible to examine the extent of likely impact on a particular benthic habitat. For example, over this time period more than 40% of circalittoral fine sands and muddy sand were subject to trawling fishing pressure in the North Sea, with over 10% of this being interpreted a high or moderate pressure. When combining data for the North Sea and Celtic Sea more than 80% of this habitat type is considered to have been subject to such fishing pressure. Given that this is based on a single year of data and that this type of pressure has been taking place for decades it is likely to be an underestimate of the total area of this habitat affected by mobile demersal fishing gears.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
This habitat occurs in the EU 28+ (e.g. Norway, Isle of Man, Channel Islands). Percentage hosted by EU 28 is therefore less than 100% but there is insufficient information to establish the proportion.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat has a widespread distribution in the North East Atlantic with the EOO >50,000km2.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat has a widespread distribution in the North East Atlantic with the EOO >50,000km2â€‹.

Pressures and Threats:
Disurbance of the substratum due to intensive fishing activities using bottom trawls or dredges may damage or modify infaunal communities, with burrowing echinoderms and bivalves being  particularly vulnerable. Loss of substrate is likely to be detrimental to some biotopes where the majority of the characterising species are interstitial polychaetes. Smothering is not likely to cause considerable mortality to the species associated with the biotopes comprising this habitat type as most are able to reposition themselves at their preferred depth relatively quickly or are infaunal species. Polluted sediments may however cause a change in the species composition through changes in the sedimentary environment. Inshore dredging or construction works can cause changes to sediments through altered hydrodynamics or sedimentary processes, resulting in an altered community structure. In addition, synthetic and non-synthetic compound contamination from dumped dredge spoil and local discharges is also a possible threat that could cause a decline in the species richness within this habitat.
Brittlestars associated with this habitat, O. fusiformis and A. filiformis are likely to benefit from the increased plankton production that occurs in areas of increased nutrient concentration, however, if enrichment leads to anoxia then reductions in growth rate and mass mortality may occur.

Conservation and Management:
This habitat is afforded some protection within Marine Protected Areas. Beneficial management measures for this habitat include control of any kind of activity which damages or disturb seabed communities such as demersal fishing, dredging and offshore construction works. The regulation of effluent discharges can also support the conservation of this habitat.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Large bodied, slow growing fauna such as bivalves which are associated with this habitat are sensitive to fishing disturbances and their populations may be slow to recover. Areas that are heavily fished may never fully recover because the seabed is re-disturbed before recovery has taken place. The timescales for recovery will depend on the individual area and the community present, bivalves of the genus Thyasira occur in isolated populations, and due to the lack of a dispersing larval stage, and are unlikely to recover if lost.
Thyasirids, small burrowing bivalves which live in fine sediments, are thought to be fairly slow growing and recovery of a damaged population is likely to take up to 5 years and depends on direct recruitment from the same population due to the low dispersal potential of these species. Where they occur in isolated poulations they are therefore unlikely to recover if lost. In comparison, the high fecundity and larval dispersal potential of many of the polychaetes associated with this habitat is likely to result in a population recovering quite quickly - in less than a year for O. fusiformis and in approximately 5-6 years for A. filiformis due to the later age at which it reaches sexual maturity

Summary:
This habitat consists of clean fine sands with less than 5% silt/clay in deeper water in tide-swept channels of marine inlets or on the open coast, extending offshore in depths of over 15-20 m. It is characterised by a wide range of echinoderms as well as polychaetes and bivalves. Frequently occurring species include the brittlestars Amphiura filiformis, Ophiura albida and O.ophiura, the anemone Cerianthus lloydii, and polychaete worms such as Lanice conchilega.
Disurbance of the substratum due to intensive fishing activities using bottom trawls or dredges may damage or modify infaunal communities.  Smothering is not likely to cause considerable mortality to the associated species, however polluted sediments may lead to a change in the species composition by altering the sedimentary environment. Inshore dredging or construction works can also change the sediment structure and therefore community structure, by affecting  the hydrodynamics or sedimentary processes. In addition, synthetic and non-synthetic compound contamination from dumped dredge spoil and local discharges could cause a decline in the species richness within this habitat. Beneficial management measures include  control and restrictions on mobile demersal fishing, dredging and offshore construction works. The regulation of effluent discharges can also support the conservation of this habitat.

References:
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Availiable at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
Eigaard Ole R. et al. “Estimating seabed pressure from demersal trawls, seines, and dredges based ongear design and dimensions” ICES J. Mar. Sci., doi = 10.1093/icesjms/fsv099.
Eleftheriou, A. and Basford, D. J. 1989. The macrobenthic infauna of the offshore northern North Sea. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the U.K 69(1): 123-143.
European Environment Agency 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed: 22/08/2014). 
Hill, J. & Wilson, E. 2008. Amphiura filiformis. A brittlestar. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. [online] Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesbenchmarks.php?speciesID=2503. (Accessed 22/08/2014). 
ICES. 2011. Fisheries Measures in Protected Areas (FIMPAS) within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the Dutch part of the North Sea: areas outside the 12 nautical miles zone: Proposals, Dates, Venue. FIMPAS Steering Group. 35 pp.
Lancaster, J. (Ed.), McCallum, S., Lowe A. C., Taylor, E., Chapman A. and Pomfret, J. 2014. Development of detailed ecological guidance to support the application of the Scottish MPA selection guidelines in Scotland’s seas. Inverness: Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No.491. Offshore Subtidal Sands and Gravels – supplementary document. Available at: http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A1211261.pdf. (Accessed: 10/10/2014). 
Neal, K. & Avant, P. 2008. Owenia fusiformis. A tubeworm. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. [online] Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesbenchmarks.php?speciesID=4001. (Accessed: 10/10/2015). 
Nilsson, P. & Ziegler, F. Spatial distribution of fishing effort in relation to seafloor habitats in the Kattegat, a
GIS analysis. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. 17(4):421-440.
Rayment, W. J. 2008. Venerid bivalves in circalittoral coarse sand or gravel. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Available at:http://www.marlin.ac.uk/habitatsensitivity. php?habitatid=63&code=1997. (Accessed: 30/08/2014). 
Tempera, F., E. Atchoi, P. Amorim, J. Gomes-Pereira and Gonçalves, J. 2013. Atlantic Area Marine Habitats. Adding new Macaronesian habitat types from the Azores to the EUNIS Habitat Classification. Technica.

Criterion A Text:
There are some estimates of the area of this habitat but insufficient information to determine overall trends in the quantity. It has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under criterion A for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region. The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000 km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. There has been a decline in the biotic quality of this habitat and the major threat (mobile demersal fisheries) is likely to cause continuing declines in quality within the next 20 years, however the distribution of the habitat is such that the identified threats are unlikely to affect all localities at once. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criterion B.

Criterion C/D Text:
Substantial reductions in quality in at least some parts of this habitat are known to have occurred and
continue to take place (as revealed by fishing distribution and intensity maps).
An analysis of the fishing intensity of EU trawlers (bottom otter, beam and mid-water trawls) using Automatic Identification System (AIS) ship tracking data over one year (2013/2014) shows high coverage in all European coastal waters and over the continental shelf. When combined with the modelled distribution of EUNIS marine habitat types it is possible to examine the extent of likely impact on a particular benthic habitat. For example, over this time period more than 40% of circalittoral fine sands and muddy sand were subject to trawling fishing pressure in the North Sea, with over 10% of this being interpreted a high or moderate pressure. When combining data for the North Sea and Celtic Sea more than 80% of this habitat type is considered to have been subject to such fishing pressure. Given that this is based on a single year of data, and that this type of pressure has been taking place for decades, it is likely to be an underestimate of the total area of this habitat which has been subject to such pressure.
Expert opinion is that there is likely to have been a very substantial reduction in quality of this habitat - an intermediate decline in quality affecting more than 80% of this habitat in the North East Atlantic region although it is also possible that more than 30% has been subject to a severe decline. This will depend on factors such as the intensity and frequency of disturbance. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Endangered under criteria C/D for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Synthesis:
This habitat is relatively common and has a considerable natural range in the North East Atlantic although a patchy distribution. 
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe are believed to have been modified by fishing activities in the last 100 years, particularly by mobile demersal gears, and this habitat remains under fishing pressure. Data from a single year, 2013/2014, has revealed that than 40% of circalittoral fine sands and muddy sand were subject to trawling fishing pressure in the North Sea, with over 10% of this being interpreted a high or moderate pressure. When combining data for the North Sea and Celtic Sea more than 80% of this habitat type is considered to have been subject to such fishing pressure. Given that this is based on a single year of data, and that this type of pressure has been taking place for decades, it is likely to be an underestimate of the total area of this habitat which has been subject to such pressure. Disturbance of the substratum due to intensive fishing activities using bottom trawls or dredges can damage or modify infaunal communities, with burrowing echinoderms and bivalves being particularly vulnerable and therefore affect habitat quality. 
Expert opinion is that there has been a very substantial reduction in quality of this habitat, most likely an intermediate decline affecting more than 80% of its extent although it is clear that in some locations there has also been a severe decline. The severity will depend on factors such as the intensity and frequency of disturbance. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Endangered for both the EU 28 and EU 28+ because of both past and likely continuing declines in quality.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.26 Atlantic upper circalittoral muddy sand

Habitat Description:
This habitat comprises circalittoral non-cohesive muddy sands with the silt content of the substratum typically ranging from 5% to 20%. It is generally found in water depths of over 15-20 m. These circalittoral habitats tend to be more stable than their infralittoral counterparts and as such support a richer infaunal community. This habitat supports animal-dominated communities characterised by a wide variety of polychaetes, bivalves and echinoderms.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Bivalves such as Abra alba and Nucula nitidosa, echinoderms such as Amphiura spp. (e.g. A.brachiata), Ophiura spp. (e.g. O.albida, O.ophiura), and Astropecten irregularis. Other common or frequently occurring species include Cerianthus lloydii, Nephtys hombregii, Scoloplos armiger, Spiophanes bombyx, Ghaetozone setosa, Pagurus bernhardus, Nucula nitidosa, Fabulina fabula, and Asterias rubens. Off the coast of Portugal this habitat is characterised by polychaetes Chaetozone gibber, Galathowenia oculata, Spiophanes bombyx, Prionospio fallax, Spiophanes kroyeri, Pectinaria koreni, Myriochele danielsseni, Lumbrineris lusitanica, Nephtys hombergii, Paradoneis ilvana, Phyllodoce rosea and the amphipod Harpinia antennaria.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic circalittoral sand’ (A5.2). 
 
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sand
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow sands
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
There are extensive areas of circalittoral sand habitat in the offshore areas of the North East Atlantic.

Trends in Quantity:
It is difficult to establish the quantity of this habitat as it often has a patchy distribution, grading into other soft sediment habitats, or interspersed amongst rocky areas. There is insufficient information to determine historical and current trends in quantity. Future trends have not been estimated.

Trends in Quality:
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities in the last 100 years, particularly by bottom trawls and dredging. Scientific evidence,supplemented with expert judgement to develop fisheries measures in protected areas for the Dutch sector of the North Sea, for example indicated that the most significant threat to the conservation status of the Dogger Bank comes from bottom gear, notably from beam trawling with tickler chains. The main effect is on abiotic conditions, hence on structure and function, which results in reduction of the abundance of typical species. This initial effect is greater in where the seabed is sandy rather tha muddy however this is compensated somewhat by shorter recovery times where the seabed is predominantly sandy.
An analysis of the fishing intensity of EU trawlers (bottom otter, beam and mid-water trawls) using Automatic Identification System (AIS) ship tracking data over one year (2013/2014) shows high coverage in all European coastal waters and over the continental shelf. When combined with the modelled distribution of EUNIS marine habitat types it is possible to examine the extent of likely impact on a particular benthic habitat. For example, over this time period more than 40% of circalittoral fine sands and
muddy sand were subject to trawling fishing pressure in the North Sea, with over 10% of this being interpreted a high or moderate pressure. When combining data for the North Sea and Celtic Sea more than 80% of this habitat type is considered to have been subject to such fishing pressure. Given that this is based on a single year of data and that this type of pressure has been taking place for decades it is likely to be an underestimate of the total area of this habitat affected by mobile demersal fishing gears.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat has a widespread distribution in the North East Atlantic.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat has a widespread distribution in the North East Atlantic.

Pressures and Threats:
The biota of muddy sand communities are known to  be vulnerable to beam trawling, otter trawling and scallop dredges with initial impacts most severe and recovery time in the order of years. Signficant effects have also been observed in response to long-term chronic disturbance from otter trawling, for example, with negative effects on benthic infauna abundance, biomass and species 1 richness with clear changes in community composition. There is also some evidence that shifts in community structure of the benthos having occurred in the North Sea corresponding to more widespread climatic changes.
Synthetic compound contamination is also a physical factor that could cause a decline in the species richness as deposit feeding may be a particularly important route for exposure to synthetic chemicals.

Conservation and Management:
Beneficial management measures for this habitat include the regulation of fishing activity which damage or disturb seabed communities including through the establishment of marine protected areas. Additionally, appropriate regulation and control of chemical discharges from outfalls to reduce the levels entering into, and being retained by, muddy sediments.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
This habitat is naturally subject to disturbance therefore likely to recover character and functionality relatively quickly if the substrate and hydrographic conditions are the same. For example meta-analysis of data on fishing impacts on muddy sand communities indicate that the recovery of biota can be measured in years.

Summary:
This habitat comprises circalittoral non-cohesive muddy sands (silt content from 5% to 20%), generally found in water depths of over 15-20m in the North East Atlantic region, where they support rich infaunal communities. Off the coast of mainland Portugal, however, their presence has been reported in depths of 44-77 m in areas of weak current with a high silt content. This habitat supports animal-dominated communities characterised by a wide variety of polychaetes, bivalves and echinoderms.
The biota of muddy sand communities are known to be particularly vulnerable to beam trawling, otter trawling and scallop dredges with initial impacts most severe and recovery time in the order of years. There is also evidence that shifts in community structure of the benthos have occurred in the North Sea corresponding to more widespread climatic changes.
Beneficial management measures for this habitat include regulation of fishing methods which damage or disturb seabed communities including the establishment of marine protected areas  to safeguard these habitats and their associated biodiversity. Additionally, appropriate regulation and control of chemical discharges from outfalls to reduce the levels entering into, and being retained by, muddy sediments and measures to reduce run off from sewage outfalls and agricultural land to the marine environment can be used to avoid eutrophication effects associated with nutrient enrichment.

References:
Airoldi, L. and Beck, M. W. 2007. Loss, status and trends for coastal marine habitats of Europe. Oceanography and Marine Biology; An annual Review 45:345-405.
Ball, B. J., Fox, G. and Munday, B. W. 2000. Long- and short-term consequences of a Nephrops trawl fishery on the benthos and environment of the Irish Sea. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 1315–1320
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Availiable at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
Eigaard Ole R. et al. “Estimating seabed pressure from demersal trawls, seines, and dredges based on gear design and dimensions” ICES J. Mar. Sci., doi = 10.1093/icesjms/fsv099.
European Environment Agency. 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed: 21/12/2015)
Frid, C. L. J., Harwood, K. G., Hall, S. J. and Hall, J. A. 2000. Long-term changes in the benthic communities on North Sea fishing grounds. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 1303–1309.
Hinz, H., Prieto, V & Kaser, M.J. 2009. Trawl disturbance on benthic communities: chronic effects and experimental predictions. Ecological Applications 19(3):761-773. 
Gray, J.S. & Elliott, M.  2009. Ecology of Marine Sediments. From Science to Management. Oxford University Press. 233pp.
ICES. 2011. Fisheries Measures in Protected Areas (FIMPAS) within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the Dutch part of the North Sea: areas outside the 12 nautical miles zone: Proposals, Dates, Venue. FIMPAS Steering Group. 35 pp.
Kaiser, M.J., Clarke, K.R., Hinz, H. et al. 2006. Global analysis of response and recovery of benthic biota to fishing. Marine Ecology Progress Series 311:1-14.
MarLIN (Marine Life Information Network) .2015. MarLIN - The Marine Life Information Network. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesfullreview.php. (Accessed: 18/11/2015).
Nilsson, P. & Ziegler, F. 2006. Spatial distribution of fishing effort in relation to seafloor habitats in the Kattegat, a GIS analysis. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.17(4):421-440.
Robinson, L. A. and Frid, C. L. J. 2008. Historical marine ecology: examining the role of fisheries in changes in North Sea Benthos. Ambio 37: 362-371.
Tempera, F. 2015. Bringing together harmonized EUNIS seabed habitat geospatial information for the European Seas. JRC Technical report. EUR 27237.
Vespe M, Gibin M, Alessandrini A, Natale F, Mazzarella F, & Osio G. in press. Mapping EU fishing activities using ship tracking data – accepted for publication, Journal of Maps – available at http://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.03826

Criterion A Text:
Estimates of the area and extent of this habitat show considerable variation and are recognised as being biased and an underestimate. No assessment of trends in quantity have therefore been made. This habitat is Data Deficient under criteria A.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region. The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000 km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. There has been a decline in the biotic quality of this habitat and the major threat (demersal fisheries) is likely to cause continuing declines in quality within the next 20 years, however, the distribution of the habitat is such that the identified threats are unlikely to affect all localities at once. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criterion B.

Criterion C/D Text:
Substantial reductions in quality in at least some parts of this habitat are known to have occurred and continue to take place (as revealed by fishing distribution and intensity maps).
An analysis of the fishing intensity of EU trawlers (bottom otter, beam and mid-water trawls) using Automatic Identification System (AIS) ship tracking data over one year (2013/2014) shows high coverage in all European coastal waters and over the continental shelf. When combined with the modelled distribution of EUNIS marine habitat types it is possible to examine the extent of likely impact on a particular benthic habitat. For example, over this time period more than 40% of circalittoral fine sands and muddy sand were subject to trawling fishing pressure in the North Sea, with over 10% of this being interpreted a high or moderate pressure. When combining data for the North Sea and Celtic Sea more than 80% of this habitat type is considered to have been subject to such fishing pressure. Given that this is  based on a single year of data, and that this type of pressure has been taking place for decades, it is likely to be an underestimate of the total area of this habitat which has been subject to such pressure.
Expert opinion is that there is likely to have been a very substantial reduction in quality of this habitat - an intermediate decline in quality affecting more than 80% of this habitat in the North East Atlantic region although it is also possible that more than 30% has been subject to a severe decline. This will depend on factors such as the intensity and frequency of disturbance. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Endangered under criteria C/D for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Synthesis:
This habitat is relatively common and has a considerable natural range in the North East Atlantic although a patchy distribution. 
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe are believed to have been modified by fishing activities in the last 100 years, particularly by mobile demersal gears, and this habitat remains under fishing pressure. Data from a single year, 2013/2014, has revealed that than 40% of circalittoral fine sands and muddy sand were subject to trawling fishing pressure in the North Sea, with over 10% of this being interpreted a high or moderate pressure. When combining data for the North Sea and Celtic Sea more than 80% of this habitat type is considered to have been subject to such fishing pressure. Given that this is based on a single year of data, and that this type of pressure has been taking place for decades, it is likely to be an underestimate of the total area of this habitat which has been subject to such pressure. Disturbance of the substratum due to intensive fishing activities using bottom trawls or dredges can damage or modify infaunal communities, with burrowing echinoderms and bivalves being particularly vulnerable and therefore affect habitat quality.
Expert opinion is that there has been a very substantial reduction in quality of this habitat, most likely an intermediate decline affecting more than 80% of its extent although it is clear that in some locations there has also been a severe decline. The severity will depend on factors such as the intensity and frequency of disturbance. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Endangered for both the EU 28 and EU 28+ because of both past and likely continuing declines in quality.


Habitat Description:
This habitat occurs in offshore circalittoral habitats with fine sands or non-cohesive muddy sands. They include areas in the Celtic Sea and areas of the Irish Sea, north of the Isle of Man, in Liverpool Bay and Cardigan Bay and also in St. George’s Channel.  The sediments are likely to be more stable than similar shallower counterparts and the associated communities are characterised by a diverse range of polychaetes, crustaceans, bivalves and echinoderms. In deep offshore sand or non-cohesive muddy sand dense populations of maldanid polychaetes such as Maldane sarsi as well as the cumacean Eudorellopsis deformis may be found.  Accompanying these species are abundant ophiuroids, the amphipod Harpinia antennaria and the bivalves Nuculoma tenuis and Parvicardium minimum. Areas of slightly muddy sand may be characterised by high numbers of the tube building polychaete Owenia fusiformis often with the brittlestar Amphiura filiformis.  
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
Examples of indicators of "naturalness" that are potential indicators of quality for offshore sand habitats such as this are; typical populations of bivalves and epifaunal brittlestars; maintained presence of substratum; lack of smothering; typically diverse communities with no increase in hardy or opportunistic species; and maintenance of sediment characteristics with typical levels of diversity.
Characteristic species:
Maldane sarsi, Eudorellopsis deformis, Amphiura filiformis, polychaetes such as Terebellidae sp., Chaetozone setosa, Levinsenia gracilis, Scoloplos armiger, the amphipod Harpinia antennaria and the bivalves Nuculoma tenuis and Parvicardium minimum, the tube building polychaete Owenia fusiformis often with the brittlestar Amphiura filiformis, the polychaetes Goniada maculata, Pholoe inornata, Diplocirrus glaucus, Chaetozone setosa and Spiophanes kroyeri with occasional bivalves such as Timoclea ovata and Thyasira equalis, the sea cucumber Labidoplax buski and the cumacean Eudorella truncatula.  In the Kattegat infaunal bivalves achieve the highest biomass, with infaunal polychaetes, crustaceans and insect larvae less dominant. Characteristic species are Macoma balthica Arctica islandica, Cerastoderma spp., Mya arenaria, Astarte borealis, Macoma calcarea, Mya truncata, Astarte spp., Spisula spp, Chamelea gallina.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405).:
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic circalittoral sand’ (A5.2).
 
Annex 1:
No relationship
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sand
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow sands
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This habitat is common and widespread in the North East Atlantic region.

Trends in Quality:
The substantial extent of the likely impact of bottom fishing gears on this habitat throughout the North East Atlantic region is apparent from many studies including analyses which have combined Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS) data with sensitivity maps of benthic habitats and disturbance caused by surface abrasion for the continental shelf area of the North East Atlantic. Scientific evidence, supplemented with expert judgement to develop fisheries measures in protected areas for the Dutch sector of the North Sea, for example indicated that the most significant threat to the conservation status of the Dogger Bank comes from bottom gear, notably from beam trawling with tickler chains. The main effect is on abiotic conditions, hence on structure and function, which results in reduction of the abundance of typical species. This initial effect is greater in sandy then muddy bottom however this is compensated somewhat by shorter recovery times where the seabed is predominantly sandy. 
Most recently, an analysis of the fishing intensity of EU trawlers (bottom otter, beam and mid-water trawls) using Automatic Identification System (AIS) ship tracking data over one year (September 2013 -2014) shows high coverage in all European coastal waters and over the continental shelf. When combined with the modelled distribution of EUNIS marine habitat types it is possible to examine the extent of likely impact on a particular benthic habitat. For example, over this time period more than 30% of lower circalittoral sand habitat was subject to trawling fishing pressure in the North Sea. When combining data for the North Sea and Celtic Sea just over 80% of this habitat type is considered to have been subject to such fishing pressure. Given that this is based on a single year of data and that this type of pressure has been taking place for decades it is likely to be an underestimate of the total area of this habitat affected by mobile demersal fishing gears.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
This habitat occurs in the EU 28+ (e.g. Norway, Isle of Man, Channel Islands). The percentage hosted by EU 28 is therefore less than 100% but there is insufficient information to establish the proportion

Pressures and Threats:
Disurbance of the substratum due to intensive fishing activities using bottom trawls or dredges can damage or modify infaunal communities, with burrowing echinoderms and bivalves being particularly vulnerable. Loss of substrate is also likely to be detrimental particularly where the majority of the characterising species are interstitial polychaetes. Smothering is not likely to cause considerable mortality as most of the associated species are able to reposition themselves at their preferred depth relatively quickly or are infaunal species.
Polluted sediments may cause a change in the species composition through changes in the sedimentary environment. Inshore dredging or construction works can cause changes to sediments through altered hydrodynamics or sedimentary processes, resulting in an altered community structure. In addition, synthetic and non-synthetic compound contamination from dumped dredge spoil and local discharges is 5 also a possible threat that could cause a decline in the species richness within this habitat.
Brittlestars associated with this habitat, O. fusiformis and A. filiformis are likely to benefit from the increased plankton production that occurs in areas of increased nutrient concentration, however, if enrichment leads to anoxia then reductions in growth rate and mass mortality may occur.

Conservation and Management:
Beneficial management measures for this habitat include control or restriction of activities which damage or disturb seabed communities such as mobile demersal fishing, dredging and offshore construction works. The regulation of effluent discharge can also support the conservation of this habitat.

Conservation Status:
This habitat does not correspond directly to any Annex 1 type according to the Habitats Directive.

Summary:
This habitat occurs in offshore (deep) circalittoral habitats with fine sands or non-cohesive muddy sands. It is more stable than areas of similar seabed sediments in shallow waters and is characterised by a diverse range of polychaetes, crustaceans, bivalves and echinoderms. These include dense populations of maldanid polychaetes, abundant ophiuroids and, in areas of slightly muddy sand  high numbers of the tube building polychaete Owenia fusiformis often with the brittlestar Amphiura filiformis.  
This habitat is vulnerable to mobile demersal fishing and other activities which can directly damage or remove epifauna and infauna or change the sediment structure and associated communities by altering hydrological conditions or sedimentary processes. These include dredging, dumping and offshore construction works.  In addition, synthetic and non-synthetic compound contamination from dumped dredge spoil and local discharges could cause a decline in the species richness within this habitat. Beneficial management measures include control and restrictions on demersal fishing, dredging and offshore construction works. The regulation of effluent discharges can also support the conservation of this habitat.

References:
Airoldi, L. and Beck, M. W. 2007. Loss, status and trends for coastal marine habitats of Europe.  Oceanography and Marine Biology; An annual Review 45: 345-405.
Ball, B. J., Fox, G. and Munday, B. W. 2000. Long- and short-term consequences of a Nephrops trawl fishery on the benthos and environment of the Irish Sea. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 1315–1320
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Availiable at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
Dales, R. P. 1957. The feeding mechanism and structure of the gut of Owenia fusiformis Delle Chiaje. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 36: 81-89.
Dauvin, J. C. 1998. The fine sand Abra alba community of the Bay of Morlaix twenty years after the Amoco Cadiz oil spill. Marine Pollution Bulletin 36: 669-676.
Eigaard Ole R. et al. “Estimating seabed pressure from demersal trawls, seines, and dredges based on gear design and dimensions” ICES J. Mar. Sci., doi = 10.1093/icesjms/fsv099.
Eleftheriou, A. & Basford, D. J. 1989. The macrobenthic infauna of the offshore northern North Sea. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the U.K 69(1): 123-143.
European Environment Agency. 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed: 21/12/2015).
Frid, C. L. J., Harwood, K. G., Hall, S. J. and Hall, J. A. 2000. Long-term changes in the benthic communities on North Sea fishing grounds. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 1303–1309.
HELCOM AB.J3L Baltic aphotic sand characterized by infaunal bivalves. Available at: http://helcom.fi/baltic-sea-trends/biodiversity/helcom-hub/hub/ab-j3l. (Accessed: 21/12/2015).
Hill, J. and Wilson, E. 2008. Amphiura filiformis. A brittlestar. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. [online] Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesbenchmarks.php?speciesID=2503. Accessed (10/10/2014). 
ICES. 2011. Fisheries Measures in Protected Areas (FIMPAS) within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of
the Dutch part of the North Sea: areas outside the 12 nautical miles zone: Proposals, Dates, Venue. FIMPAS
Steering Group. 35 pp.
Lancaster, J. (Ed.), McCallum, S., Lowe A. C., Taylor, E., Chapman A. and Pomfret, J. 2014. Development of detailed ecological guidance to support the application of the Scottish MPA selection guidelines in Scotland’s seas. Inverness: Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No.491. Offshore Subtidal Sands and Gravels – supplementary document.
MarLIN (Marine Life Information Network) .2015. MarLIN - The Marine Life Information Network. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesfullreview.php. (Accessed: 18/11/2015).
Menard, F., Gentil, F. and Dauvin, J. C., 1990. Population dynamics and secondary production of Owenia fusiformis Delle Chiaje (Polychaeta) from the Bay of Seine (eastern English Channel). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 133: 151-167.
Neal, K. & Avant, P. 2008. Owenia fusiformis. A tubeworm. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. [online] Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesbenchmarks.php?speciesID=4001. (Accessed 22/08/2014). 
Nilsson, P. & Ziegler, F. 2006. Spatial distribution of fishing effort in relation to seafloor habitats in the Kattegat, a GIS analysis. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.17(4):421-440.
Vespe M, Gibin M, Alessandrini A, Natale F, Mazzarella F, & Osio G. in press. Mapping EU fishing activities using ship tracking data – accepted for publication, Journal of Maps – available at http://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.03826

Criterion A Text:
There is insufficient information to determine overall trends in the quantity of this habitat. It has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under criterion A.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region. The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000 km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution.  There has been a decline in the biotic quality of this habitat and the major threat (mobile demersal fisheries) is likely to cause continuing declines in quality within the next 20 years, however the distribution of the habitat is such that the identified threats are unlikely to affect all localities at once. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criterion B.

Criterion C/D Text:
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities, particularly bottom trawls and dredging, in the last 100 years. For example, an analysis of the fishing intensity of EU trawlers (bottom otter, beam and mid-water trawls) using Automatic Identification System (AIS) ship tracking data over one year (2103/2014) shows high coverage in all European coastal waters and over the continental shelf. Over this time period more than 30% of lower circalittoral sand habitat was subject to trawling fishing pressure in the North Sea. When combining data for the North Sea and Celtic Sea just over 80% of this habitat type is considered to have been subject to such fishing pressure. Given that this is based on a single year of data, and that this type of pressure has been taking place for decades, it is likely to be an underestimate of the total area of this habitat which has been subject to such pressure. 
Expert opinion is that there is likely to have been a very substantial reduction in quality of this habitat -  an intermediate decline in quality affecting more than 80% of this habitat in the North East Atlantic region although it is also possible that more than 30% has been subject to a severe decline. This will depend on factors such as the intensity and frequency of disturbance. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Endangered under criteria C/D for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Synthesis:
This habitat has a widespread distribution. There are no precise figures on its extent of however a combination of survey data and modelling indicates that it does not have a restricted geographical distribution or occur in only a few locations in the North East Atlantic.
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities in the last 100 years, particularly by mobile demersal gears, and this habitat remains under fishing pressure. Disturbance of the substratum due to intensive fishing activities using bottom trawls or dredges can damage or modify infaunal communities, with burrowing echinoderms and bivalves being particularly vulnerable. Loss of substrate is also likely to be detrimental particularly where the majority of the characterising species are interstitial polychaetes. Recent data for a single year (2013/2014) has revealed that over 80% of the estimated area of lower circalittoral sand habitat in the North Sea and Celtic Sea was subject to to fishing pressure by bottom otter, beam and mid-water trawls. Much the same footprint of activity is likely each year and as this type of fishing pressure has been ongoing for many decades, there has most likely been a cumulative impact on habitat quality.
Expert opinion is that there has been a very substantial reduction in quality of this habitat, most likely an intermediate decline affecting more than 80% of its extent although it is clear that in some locations there has also been a severe decline. The severity will depend on factors such as the intensity and frequency of disturbance. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Endangered for both the EU 28 and EU 28+ because of both past and likely continuing declines in quality.

Assessors:
North East Atlantic Working Group: S. Gubbay, G. Saunders, H. Tyler-Walters, N. Dankers, F. Otero, J. Forde, K. Fürhaupter, R. Haroun, N. Sanders

Contributors:
C. Karamita and the North East Atlantic Working Group: S. Gubbay, G. Saunders, H. Tyler-Walters, N. Dankers, F. Otero, J. Forde, K. Fürhaupter, R. Haroun, N. Sanders


Habitat Type Name:
A5.33 Marine Atlantic infralittoral sandy mud

Habitat Description:
Infralittoral, cohesive sandy mud, typically with over 20% silt/clay, in depths of less than 15-20 m. This habitat is generally found in sheltered bays or marine inlets and along sheltered areas of open coast. Tidal streams can vary from negligible to moderately strong (1-3kn). Six associated biotopes have been identified dominated by different species. 
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species (especially those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face), water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. 
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Key driving influences and output processes of shallow sublittoral mud habitats that are likely to be sensitive to pressures and may be useful for monitoring to identify anthropogenic causes of change include habitat structure changes, removal of particular species such as those which are key in bioturbation and biodeposition, or nutrient and biogeochemical cycling, changes in siltation rates and organic enrichment.
Characteristic species:
Typical species include a rich variety of polychaetes including Melinna palmate, tube building amphipods (Ampelisca spp.) and deposit feeding bivalves such as Macoma balthica and Mysella bidentata. Sea pens such as Virgularia mirabilis and brittlestars such as Amphiura spp. may be present but not in the same abundances as found in deeper circalittoral waters. Other species which may be abundant or frequent include Scoloplos armiger, Chaetozone gibber, Capitella capitata, Euclyene oerstedii, Melinna palmate, Ampelisca brevicornis, A.teuicornis, and Ascidiella aspersa. Mobile species include Pagurus bernhardus, Liocarcinus depurator, Carcinus maenas, and Nucula nitidosa.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic shallow/infralittoral mud’ (A5.3).
 
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral mud
 
EUSeaMap :
Shallow mud
 
IUCN:
9.6 Subtidal muddy

Trends in Quantity:
Estimates of the area and extent of this habitat show considerable variation and are recognised as being biased and an underestimate. Trends in quantity cannot be determined with any accuracy at the present time.

Trends in Quality:
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities in the last 100 years, particularly by bottom trawls and dredging/ In the German part of the Greater North Sea, more than 80% of the extent of this habitat is believed to have suffered an intermediate decline over the last 50 years. In the Kattegat, 38% of the area of  "combination sediments" was affected by trawling over a 3 year study period but mostly trawled less than twice a year and considered to have a high recoverablity. 41% of the area of muddy sediments was trawled and considered to be permanently disturbed. The North Sea and Celtic Sea are likely to have been subject to similar pressures and threats over the same time period, it is likely that there has also been a decline in quality in these locations.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic (>50,000km2)

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic (>50,000km2)

Pressures and Threats:
Dermesal fishing activity is the main pressure and threat to this benthic habitat. Generally, studies have found that long-living, sessile and suspension-feeding organisms show the greatest declines in response to a given type and frequency of trawl disturbance while opportunistic species, e.g. short-living polychaetes, are less affected. The response of a benthic community to trawling will also depend on the pre-fished composition of the community which is largely affected by the degree of natural disturbance, due to currents, waves or storms.
Near the coast marine fish farms may have direct effects on sandy mud communities, including smothering and increasing the Biological Oxygen Demand of the mud. Additional effects may result from the discharges of chemicals, some of which are especially toxic to crustaceans.The construction of roads, bridges and barrages may affect the local hydrodynamic and sediment transport regimes of inshore enclosed areas and consequently affect the substratum. Nutrient enrichment leading to eutrophication can lead to changes in the structure and composition of the associated communities.

Conservation and Management:
This habitat can benefit from the regulation of the use of fishing gears that damage or disturb seabed communities. This may be achieved by spatial and temporal controls as well as gear design and deployment using fisheries management measures as well as conservation legislation in marine protected areas. Spatial planning (including zoning) can be used to address potential threats from coastal development and fish farming and the regulation of discharges and run off from agricultural land to the marine environment can be used to avoid eutrophication effects associated with nutrient enrichment.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Timescale between incidents of damaging activity, the type of damaging activity and the predominant species, influences recovery. Studies have shown that recovery times following dredging were significantly shorter for short-lived species (<1 – 3 years), free-living and tube-dwelling species and for scavenging or opportunistic species, than for medium-lived species (3 – 10 years), burrow-dwelling species and suspension feeders. In trawled areas, recovery times were significantly shorter for free-living species, species covered by an exoskeleton or a hard tunic and species that produce pelagic or benthic eggs than for epiphytic/zoic species, species that grow attached to the substratum and have an erect or stalked body form, and species that reproduce asexually. Areas with high levels of natural disturbance have community compositions and functions that are more resilient than those found in areas with less natural disturbance.
Recovery times following oxygen depletion and pollution has been investigated in several studies of the Gullmarsfjord, Sweden showing and reported to be between 2-8 years. Differences in the recoverability of different species groups following fishing may result in changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning over the long term.

Summary:
This habitat is generally found in sheltered bays or marine inlets and along sheltered areas of open coast. Typical it supports a rich variety of polychaetes, tube building amphipods and deposit feeding bivalves. Sea pens may be present but not in the same abundances as found in deeper circalittoral waters.
The main pressures and threats to this habitat are associated with demersal fisheries, aquaculture, coastal constructions such as bridges and barrages that can may affect the local hydrodynamic and sediment transport regimes. Nutrient enrichment leading to eutrophication can lead to changes in the structure and composition of the associated communities.
This habitat can benefit from the regulation of the use of fishing gears that damage or disturb seabed communities. This may be spatial and temporal controls as well as regulation of gear design and deployment. Marine Protected Areas and spatial planning (including zoning) can be used to address potential threats from coastal development and fish farming, while the regulation of discharges and run off from agricultural land to the marine environment can be used to avoid eutrophication effects associated with nutrient enrichment.

References:
Airoldi, L. & Beck, M. W. 2007. Loss, status and trends for coastal marine habitats of Europe. Oceanography and Marine Biology; An annual Review 45: 345-405.
Ball, B. J., Fox, G. & Munday, B. W. 2000. Long- and short-term consequences of a Nephrops trawl fishery on the benthos and environment of the Irish Sea. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 1315-1320
Budd, G. C. 2007. Macoma balthica and Abra alba in infralittoral muddy sand or mud.Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Availiable at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/habitats/detail/62/abra_alba_and_nucula_nitidosa_in_circalittoral_muddy_sand_or_slightly_mixed_sediment. (Accessed: 11/11/15). 
Coates, D. A., Alexander,D., Stafford, R., & Herbert, R. J. H. 2015. Conceptual Ecological Modelling of Shallow Sublittoral Mud Habitats to Inform Indicator Selection. Peterborough: Marine Ecological Surveys Ltd - A report for the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, JNCC Report No.557.
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Availiable at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
European Environment Agency. 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed 23/12/2015).
Frid, C. L. J., Harwood, K. G., Hall, S. J. & Hall, J. A. 2000. Long-term changes in the benthic communities on North Sea fishing grounds. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 1303-1309.
Hill, J. & Bilewitch, J. 2009. Capitella capitata in enriched sublittoral muddy sediments. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Availiable at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/habitats/habitat/47/subtidal_muds. (Accessed: 20/10/2015). 
Nilsson, P. & Ziegler, F. 2006. Spatial distribution of fishing effort in relation to seafloor habitats in the Kattegat, a GIS analysis. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.17(4):421-440.
Tempera, F. 2015. Bringing together harmonized EUNIS seabed habitat geospatial information for the European SeasJRC Technical report. EUR 27237.

Criterion A Text:
Estimates of the area and extent of this habitat show considerable variation and are recognised as being biased and an underestimate. No asssessment of trends in quantity have therefore been made. This habitat is assessed as Data Deficient under criteria A for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region and is not present at a limited number of locations. Athough the extent of decline in quality cannot be quantified it is known to have occurred and the major threat (demersal fisheries) is likely to continue in the near future. The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criteria B.

Criterion C/D Text:
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities in the last 100 years.In the German part of the Greater North Sea, more than 80% of the extent of this habitat is believed to have suffered an intermediate decline over the last 50 years. No assessments have been made in other parts of this regional sea but as at least the North Sea and Celtic Sea are likely to have been subject to similar pressures and threats over the same time period, it is likely that there has also been a decline in quality in these locations. Overall the decline is estimated to be fairly substantial but likely affecting less than 30% of the habitat. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Near Threatened under criteria C/D1 for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Synthesis:
This habitat has a widespread distribution. There are no precise figures on its extent of however a combination of survey data and modelling indicates that it cannot be considered to have a restricted geographical distribution nor to occur in only a few locations in the North East Atlantic.
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities in the last 100 years and this pressure continues today. There is a lack of comprehensive data however expert opinion is that this habitat should be assesssed as Near Threatened for both the EU 28 and EU 28+ because of  both past and likely future declines in quality.

Contributors:
P. Somerfield, E. Bastos and the North East Atlantic Working Group: S. Gubbay, G. Saunders, H. Tyler-Walters, N. Dankers, F. Otero, J. Forde, K. Fürhaupter, R. Haroun, N. Sanders.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.34: Marine Atlantic infralittoral fine mud

Habitat Description:
Shallow sublittoral muds, extending from the extreme lower shore to about 15-20 m depth in fully marine or near marine conditions, predominantly in extremely sheltered areas with very weak tidal currents. Such habitats are found in sealochs and some rias and harbours. In very shallow extremely sheltered very soft muds the lugworm Arenicola marina may form very conspicuous mounds and casts. At such sites, high densities of synaptid holothurians such as Labidoplax media and Leptosynapta bergensis occur. The sediment surfaces may become covered by a diatom film at certain times of the year. Mobile species are opportunistic scavengers and predators and include starfish (e.g. Asterias rubens), crabs and hermit crabs (e.g. Carcinus maenas and Pagurus bernhardus), flatfish and gobies (e.g. Pomatoschistus minutus). 
Sheltered sediments such as these are characterized by fine grain size, low porosity, generally low permeability (and hence high water content), high sediment stability (due to cohesion), a low oxygen content and highly reducing conditions. The mud surface is oxygenated. However, in fine muds, the anoxic reducing layer is likely to be very close to the surface, often less than 1cm. Bioturbation by burrowing species, results in mobilisation of the sediment and nutrients from deeper sediment to the surface, making nutrients available to surface dwelling organisms. In addition, continued irrigation of their burrows by Arenicola marina and Leptosynata sp. transports oxygenated water into the sediment, resulting in oxygenated micro-environments in the vicinity of their burrows.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indiceswhich describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis. Key driving influences and output processes of shallow sublittoral mud habitats that are likely to be sensitive to pressures and may be useful for monitoring to identify anthropogenic causes of change include habitat structure changes, removal of particular species such as those which are key in bioturbation and biodeposition, or nutrient and biogeochemical cycling, changes in siltation rates and organic enrichment.
Characteristic species:
Populations of the lugworm Arenicola marina may be dense, with anemones, the opisthobranch Philine aperta and synaptid holothurians also characteristic in some areas. Other species which may frequently occur include Ophiodromus flexuosus, Aphelochaeta marioni, Caulleriella caputesocis, Hydrobia ulvae, Cerastoderma edule, Abra nitida , Asterias rubens, as well as the crustaceans Pagurus bernhardus, Liocarcinus depurator, and Carcinus maenas.The extent of the oxidised layer may be shallow with some areas being periodically or permanently anoxic. In these areas bacterial mats may develop on the sediment surface. In areas of soft stable mud Philine aperta and Virgularia mirabilis are characteristic whereas Ocnus planci aggregations may be present on sheltered sublittoral muddy sediment and oligochaetes in mobile mud.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic shallow infralittoral mud’ (A5.3).
 
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral mud
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow mud
 
IUCN:
9.6 Subtidal muddy

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This habitat type is present in sheltered coastal waters as well as further offshore across the North East Atlantic region. It is common and widespread in the regional sea.

Trends in Quantity:
Estimates of the area and extent of this habitat show considerable variation and are recognised as being biased and an underestimate. Trends in quantity cannot be determined with any accuracy although some habitat loss may have occurred as a result of changes in the sediment type e.g. the shift to a less muddy substrate in the Grande Vasiere, Bay of Biscay. Changes in the distribution of fine muds have been reported (e.g. over a 100 year period off the coast of Belgium) but not changes in the habitat.

Trends in Quality:
Whilst the physical habitat is unlikely to decline, the biotopes that characterise the habitat are believed to have been substantially changed by fishing activities. Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities in the last 100 years. In the southern North Sea fishing is thought to have long been the main ecological structuring force on the benthos. Generally, studies have found that long-living, sessile and suspension-feeding organisms show the greatest declines in response to a given type and frequency of trawl disturbance while opportunistic species, e.g. short-living polychaetes, are less affected. The response of a benthic community to trawling will also depend on the pre-fished composition of the community which is largely affected by the degree of natural disturbance, due to currents, waves or storms. Various analysis of the extent of disturbance over different sediment types provide more detail. In the Kattegat, for example 41% of the area of muddy sediments was trawled over a three year study period and considered to be permanently disturbed. 
Salmon farming facilities have also led to degradation of mud habitats in sheltered locations. This has been extensively studied in Scottish sea lochs revealing marked changes in species number, species diversity, faunal abundance, and biomass of the benthic fauna. The most severely affected areas are directly beneath the cages, where an azoic zone may develop. Two other zones of effect have also been described with increasing distance from fish farm cages;  a highly enriched zone, dominated by Capitella capitata and Scolelepis fuliginosa and a slightly enriched ″transitional ″ zone.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region with examples as widely separated as off the Atlantic coast of southern Spain, west of the British Isles and the North Sea.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region with examples as widely separated as off the Atlantic coast of southern Spain, west of the British Isles and the North Sea.

Pressures and Threats:
Physical disturbance and direct removal on sediment, infauna and eipfauna by bottom trawls and dredging, have the most effect on long-living, sessile and suspension-feeding organisms with the  response depending on the type and frequency of trawl disturbance while opportunistic species, e.g. short-living polychaetes, are less affected. Marine fish farms may have direct effects on infralittoral fine mud communities, including smothering and increasing the Biological Oxygen Demand of the mud. Additional effects may result from the discharges of chemicals, some of which are especially toxic to crustaceans. Near the coast the construction of roads, bridges and barrages may affect the local hydrodynamic and sediment transport regimes of inshore enclosed areas and consequently affect the substratum. Nutrient enrichment leading to eutrophication can lead to changes in the structure and composition of the associated communities and there is evidence that shifts in community structure of the benthos have occurred in the North Sea corresponding with more widespread climatic changes.

Conservation and Management:
This habitat can benefit from the regulation of the use of fishing gears that damage or disturb seabed communities. This may be achieved by spatial and temporal controls as well as gear design and deployment using fisheries management measures as well as conservation legislation in marine protected areas. Spatial planning (including zoning) can be used to address potential threats from dredging, coastal development, and fish farming. The regulation of discharges and run off from agricultural land to the marine environment can be used to avoid eutrophication effects associated with nutrient enrichment.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Timescale between incidents of damaging activity, the type of damaging activity and the predominant species, influences recovery. Studies have shown that recovery times following dredging were significantly shorter for short-lived species (<1 – 3 years), free-living and tube-dwelling species and for scavenging or opportunistic species, than for medium-lived species (3 – 10 years), burrow-dwelling species and suspension feeders. In trawled areas, recovery times were significantly shorter for free-living species, species covered by an exoskeleton or a hard tunic and species that produce pelagic or benthic eggs than for epiphytic/zoic species, species that grow attached to the substratum and have an erect or stalked body form, and species that reproduce asexually. Areas with high levels of natural disturbance have community compositions and functions that are more resilient than those found in areas with less natural disturbance.
Recovery times following oxygen depletion and pollution has been investigated in several studies of the Gullmarsfjord, Sweden and reported to be between 2-8 years. Isolation is also a factor. Recruitment to isolated habitats, such as sea lochs, from outside the area may take some time and be dependant on sporadic events such as storms.
Differences in the recoverability of different species groups following fishing may result in changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning over the long term.

Summary:
This habitat occurs in extremely sheltered areas with weak tidal currents such as  sealochs and some rias and harbours, typically found in shallow sublittoral muds, extending from the extreme lower shore to about 15-20 m. Significant  pressures and threats are associated with demersal fisheries. Closer inshore marine fish farms may have direct effects on mud communities, including smothering and increasing the Biological Oxygen Demand of the mud. Additional negative effects may result from the discharges of chemicals, some of which are especially toxic to crustaceans. Near the coast the construction of roads, bridges and barrages may affect the local hydrodynamic and sediment transport regimes of inshore enclosed areas and consequently affect the substratum. Nutrient enrichment leading to eutrophication can lead to changes in the structure and composition of the associated communities and there is evidence that shifts in community structure of the benthos have occurred in the North Sea corresponding with more widespread climatic changes.
This habitat can benefit from the regulation of the use of fishing gears that damage or disturb seabed communities. This may be achieved by spatial and temporal controls as well as gear design and deployment using fisheries management measures as well as conservation legislation in marine protected areas. Spatial planning (including zoning) can be used to address potential threats from coastal development and fish farming and the regulation of discharges and run off from agricultural land to the marine environment can be used to avoid eutrophication effects associated with nutrient enrichment.

References:
Brown, J.R., Gowen, R.J. & McLuskie, D.S. 1987. The effect of salmon farming on the benthos of a Scottish sea loch. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology. 109, 39–51.
Coates, D. A., Alexander, D., Stafford, R. & Herbert, R. J. H. 2015. Conceptual Ecological Modelling of Shallow Sublittoral Mud Habitats to Inform Indicator Selection. Peterborough: Marine Ecological Surveys Ltd - A report for the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, JNCC Report No: 557.
Collie J. S, Hall S. J, Kaiser M. J, Poiner I. R. 2000. A quantitative analysis of fishing impacts on shelf-sea benthos. Journal Animal Ecology 69: 785-798
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Availiable at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
Deaniel van Denderen, P., Bolam,  S. G., Hiddink, J. G., Jennings, S., Kenny, A., Rijnsdorpp, A. D. & van Kooten, T. 2015. Similar effects of bottom trawling and natural disturbance on composition and function of benthic communities across habitats. Marine Ecology Progress Series 541: 31-43.
Fettweis, M., Housiaux, J-F, Du Four, I., et al. 2009. Long-term influence of maritime access works on the distribution of cohesive sediments:analysis of historical and recent data from the Belgian nearshore area (southern North Sea). Geo-Marine Letters 29: 321-330.
Hill, J. M. 2002. Beggiatoa spp. on anoxic sublittoral mud.Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Availiable at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/habitats/detail/181/beggiatoa_spp_on_anoxic_sublittoral_mud. (Accessed: 10/10/2015).
Hill, J. M. & Wilson, E. 2005. Philine aperta and Virgularia mirabilis in soft stable infralittoral mud. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Availiable at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/habitats/detail/202/philine_aperta_and_virgularia_mirabilis_in_soft_stable_infralittoral_mud. (Accessed: 12/10/20125). 
Kaiser, M. J., Spencer, B. E. 1996. The effects of beam-trawl disturbance on infaunal communities in different habitats. Journal Animal Ecology 65: 348−358.
Kaiser, M. J, Collie, J. S, Hall, S. J, Jennings, S., Poiner, I.R. 2002. Modification of marine habitats by trawling activities: prognosis and solutions. Fish 3: 114−136.
Kaiser, M. J., Clarke, K. R., Hinz, H., Austen, M. C. V., Somerfield, P. J., Karakassis, I. 2006 Global analysis of response and recovery of benthic biota to fishing. Marine Ecology Progress Series 311: 1−14
Lambert, G. I, Jennings, S., Kaiser, M. J., Davies, T. W., Hiddink, J. G. 2014. Quantifying recovery rates and resilience of sea -bed habitats impacted by bottom fishing. Journal Applied Ecology 51: 1326-1336
Tempera, F. 2015. Bringing together harmonized EUNIS seabed habitat geospatial information for the European Seas. JRC Technical report. EUR 27237.
Tillin, H. M., Hiddink, J. G., Jennings, S., Kaiser, M. J. 2006. Chronic bottom trawling alters the functional composition of benthic invertebrate communities on a sea-basin scale. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 318:31-45.
Tuck, I.D., Hall, S.J. Robertson, M.R. et al. 1998. Effects of physical trawling disturbance in a previously unfished sheltered Scottish sea loch. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 162:272-242.
Tyler-Walters, H. 2001. Arenicola marina and synaptid holothurians in extremely shallow soft mud. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Availiable at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/habitats/detail/108. (Accessed: 10/11/2015). 
Tyler-Walters, H. 2002. Ocnus planci aggregations on sheltered sublittoral muddy sediment. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Availiable at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/habitats/detail/325/ocnus_planci_aggregations_on_sheltered_sublittoral_muddy_sediment. (Accessed: 11/11/2015).

Criterion A Text:
Estimates of the area and extent of this habitat show considerable variation and are recognised as being biased and an underestimate. No asssessment of trends in quantity have therefore been made. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under criteria A for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region and is not present at a limited number of locations. Athough the extent of decline in quality cannot be quantified it is known to have occurred and the major threats are likely to continue in the near future.  The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criterion B for both the EU 28 and EU 28+..

Criterion C/D Text:
There is a lack of quantitative data to be able to calculate percentage change in abiotic and/or biotic quality however reductions in quality in at least some parts of this habitat are known to have occurred. Expert opinion is that this may be less than 30%. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Near Threatened under criteria C/D1 for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Synthesis:
This habitat is present across the region in shallow basins and sheltered inlets. There are no precise figures on its extent of however a combination of survey data and modelling indicates that it cannot be considered to have a restricted geographical distribution nor to occur in only a few locations in the North East Atlantic.  Expert opinion is that there has been a decline in quality as exemplified by changes in species composition. There is a lack of comprehensive data however, expert opinion is that this habitat should be assesssed as Near Threatened for both the EU 28 and EU 28+ because of both past and likely future declines in quality.

Contributors:
North East Atlantic Working Group: S. Gubbay, G. Saunders, H. Tyler-Walters, N. Dankers, F. Otero, J. Forde, K. Fürhaupter, R. Haroun, N. Sanders


Habitat Type Name:
A5.36: Atlantic upper circalittoral fine mud

Habitat Description:
Sublittoral muds, typically occurring in moderate depths of (10-50m), either on the open coast or in marine inlets such as sealochs. These may be in fully saline conditions or variability salinity (18-35ppt), moderately to extremely sheltered from wave exposure, and where there are weak or negligible tidal streams. The epifauna may be sparse and scattered with mounds, burrows, and tubes indicating the presence of infauna.  Associated biotopes are characterised by seapens and burrowing megafauna, burrowing megafauna and Maxmuelleria lankesteri, and by the heart urchin Brissopsis lyrifera and brittlestar Amphiura chiajei.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis. Examples of indicators of damage and naturalness have been proposed for offshore deep sea muds include; the presence of typical benthic invertebrate communities and other large burrowing megafauna, the sediment composition or sedimentation rates/disturbance, the presence of the climax community including crustacean and polychaetes populations, and an absence of Beggiatoa mats. A reduction in the abundance of less sessile and fragile species and an increase in more carnivorous and scavenging species are potential indicators of disturbance.
Characteristic species:
The seapens Virgularia mirabilis and Pennatula phosphorea are characteristic of this habitat type together with the burrowing anemone Cerianthus lloydii and the ophiuroid Amphiura spp. (e.g. A.chiajei & A.filiformis). The relatively stable conditions often lead to the establishment of communities of burrowing megafaunal species, such as Nephrops norvegicus. Other species which may frequently be present and/or in moderate abundance include Funiculina quadrangularis, Nephtys hystericis, Chaetozone setosa, Pagurus bernhardus, Liocarcinus depurator, Munida rugosa and Asterias rubens.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic circalittoral mud’ (A5.3)
 
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES: 
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral mud
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow mud
 
IUCN: 
9.6 Subtidal muddy

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
There are extensive areas of fine mud habitat in circalittoral zones in both sheltered inlets and the deeper offshore regions of the North East Atlantic.

Trends in Quantity:
There are some estimates of the extent of this habitat in the North East Atlantic derived from modelling studies, but no widely agreed figures. Trends in quantity cannot be determined with any accuracy although some habitat loss is known to have occurred in some locations such as the shift to a less muddy substrate in the Grande Vasiere, in the Bay of Biscay.

Trends in Quality:
The communities that characterise this habitat are believed to have been substantially changed by demersal fishing activities, especially those which target the Norway lobster Nephrops norvegicus. Intensively trawled sites have been documented with lower species richness and with the negative effects worst in relatively species rich, deep areas with fine grained sediments. One example, reported from an area circalittoral mud habitat in the Irish Sea, is a change in dominant species, from the brittle star A.filiformis whose growth is known to be inhibited by large quantities of suspended sediments such as those generated by trawling, to the less affected burrowing shrimps such as Callianassa subterranea.In the central and eastern parts of the Kattegat, for example, where the seabed is predominantly muddy and an important fishing area for Nephrops, an estimated 70-80% of the muddy seabed is affected by fisheries each year.  Furthermore an estimated 41% of this is being affected by fishing gear more than twice a year and therefore considered to remain in a disturbed condition.  A review of fishing intensity data over one year (2013/2014) has indicated that more than 30% of this habitat type was subject to trawling fishing pressure in the North Sea, with over 10% of this being interpreted a high or moderate pressure. When combining data for the North Sea and Celtic Sea, over 50% of this habitat type is considered to have been subject to such fishing pressure. Given the evidence that the passage of the first trawls are the most damaging for epifauna, and that, depending on the frequency of demersal trawling and environmental conditions, shifts from benthic communities with large slowly reproducing species to small species with a high reproductive rate (e.g. polychaetes), have been reported several times independently, this is likely to have been a substantial decline in quality of this habitat over at least the last 50 years.  Signficant negative effects have also been observed in response to long-term chronic disturbance, for example from otter trawling. A study of otter trawl disturbance in Irish Sea,revealed negative effects on benthic infauna abundance, biomass and species richness with clear changes in community composition and possible far reaching implications for the integrity of marine food webs. 
Decline in quality has also been attributed to other factors. For example, the dramatic decline of the biodiversity of soft substrates in open Danish waters observed in Kattegat between the midâ€‘1990s and the end of the 2000s has been linked to 8-10 week period of low bottom water oxygen concentration. This is compared to the more typical short term periods of anoxia in that area.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic which includes the Atlantic coast of Portugal, sea lochs on the west coast of Ireland and around Scotland, and in the central North Sea.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic which includes the Atlantic coast of Portugal, sea lochs on the west coast of Ireland and around Scotland, and in the central North Sea.

Pressures and Threats:
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities in the last 100 years, particularly by bottom trawls and dredging. In the southern North Sea fishing is thought to have long been the main ecological structuring force on the benthos. More stable habitats which are not subject to a high levels of natural variation such as muds are more sensitive to benthic fishing disturbance.
Demersal fishing principally for Nephrops norvegicus is a significant threat to this habitat as the use of benthic trawls both in terms of its extent and frequeny. This can result in the removal of non-target species and disturbance to the seabed. Offshore oil rigs and other oil installations can cause a variety of disturbance effects such as smothering due to disposal of drill cuttings, localised disturbance of sediments by offshore construction, anchoring and  trench digging for pipelines.
Closer inshore marine fish farms may have direct effects on mud communities, including smothering and increasing the Biological Oxygen Demand of the mud. Additional effects may result from the discharges of chemicals, some of which are especially toxic to crustaceans. Near the coast the construction of roads, bridges and barrages may affect the local hydrodynamic and sediment transport regimes of inshore enclosed areas and consequently affect the substratum. 
Nutrient enrichment leading to eutrophication can lead to changes in the structure and composition of the associated communities and there is evidence that shifts in community structure of the benthos have occurred in the North Sea corresponding with more widespread climatic changes.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1:
1160: MATL U2,  MMAC FV.
Seapens and burrowing megafauna is listed as a threatened and/or declining habitat by OSPAR for Regions II and III (North Sea and Celtic Sea).

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The frequency of incidents of damaging activity, the type of damaging activity and the predominant species, influences recovery. Studies have shown that recovery times following dredging were significantly shorter for short-lived species (<1 – 3 years), free-living and tube-dwelling species and for scavenging or opportunistic species, than for medium-lived species (3 – 10 years), burrow-dwelling species and suspension feeders. Free living species are also likely to recolonise areas more quicky that those that grow attached to the substratum and have an erect or stalked body form such as seapens. Differences in the recoverability of different species groups following fishing may result in changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning over the long term.

Summary:
Sublittoral muds, typically occurring in moderate depths of (10-50m), either on the open coast or in marine inlets such as sealochs. The epifauna may be sparse and scattered with mounds, burrows, and tubes indicating the presence of infauna.  Associated biotopes are characterised by seapens and burrowing megafauna  such as the deep burrowing echiuran Maxmuelleria lankesteri as well as echinoderms like the heart urchin Brissopsis lyrifera, and brittlestar Amphiura chiajei. 
Demersal fishing with mobile gears is a significant widespread threat to this habitat both in terms of extent and frequency of disturbance. The passage of the first trawls are the most damaging for epifauna and, depending on the frequency of demersal trawling and environmental conditions, shifts from benthic communities with large slowly reproducing species to small species with a high reproductive rate (e.g. polychaetes), is one of the reported effects. The construction and operation of offshore oil rigs and other oil installations can also cause a variety of disturbance effects such as smothering due to disposal of drill cuttings and localised disturbance of sediments. Closer inshore marine fish farms can have direct effects on mud communities, including smothering and increasing the Biological Oxygen Demand, while coastal construction of roads, bridges and barrages may affect the local hydrodynamic and sediment transport regimes of inshore enclosed areas. Nutrient enrichment leading to eutrophication can lead to changes in the structure and composition of the associated communities. There is also some evidence that shifts in community structure of the benthos have occurred in the North Sea corresponding with more widespread climatic changes.
This habitat can benefit from the regulation of the use of fishing gears that damage or disturb seabed communities. This may be achieved by spatial and temporal controls as well as gear design and deployment  using fisheries management measures as well as conservation legislation in marine protected areas. Spatial planning (including zoning) can be used to address potential threats from coastal development and fish farming and the regulation of discharges and run off from agricultural land to the marine environment can be used to avoid eutrophication effects associated with nutrient enrichment.

References:
Airoldi, L. & Beck, M. W. 2007. Loss, status and trends for coastal marine habitats of Europe. Oceanography and Marine Biology; An annual Review 45: 345-405.
Ball, B. J., Fox, G. & Munday, B. W. 2000. Long- and short-term consequences of a Nephrops trawl fishery on the benthos and environment of the Irish Sea. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 1315-1320
Connor, D. W. Allen, J. H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC, Peterborough. ISBN 1 861 07561 8.
Deaniel van Denderen, P., Bolam, S. G., Hiddink,J. G., Jennints, S., Kenny, A., Rijnsdorpp, A. D. & van Kooten, T. 2015. Similar effects of bottom trawling and natural disturbance on composition and function of benthic communities across habitats. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 541: 31-43.
Eigaard Ole R. et al. “Estimating seabed pressure from demersal trawls, seines, and dredges based on gear design and dimensions” ICES J. Mar. Sci., doi = 10.1093/icesjms/fsv099.
European Environment Agency. 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed: 23/12/2015).
Frid, C. L. J., Harwood, K. G., Hall, S. J. & Hall, J. A. 2000. Long-term changes in the benthic communities on North Sea fishing grounds. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 1303-1309.
Gonzalez-Mirelis, G., Lundalv, T, JOnsson, L. et al. 2012. Seabed Mapping and Marine Spatial Planning: A Case Study from a Swedish Marine Protected Area. in. Cruzado (Ed) Marine Ecosystems.  
Hinz, H., Prieto, V & Kaser, M.J. 2009. Trawl disturbance on benthic communities: chronic effects and experimental predictions. Ecological Applications 19(3):761-773.
Kaiser M. J., Spencer B. E. 1996. The effects of beam-trawl disturbance on infaunal communities in different habitats. Journal Animal Ecology 65: 348-358.
Kaiser M. J, Collie J. S, Hall S. J, Jennings S., Poiner I. R. 2002. Modification of marine habitats by trawling activities: prognosis and solutions. Fish 3: 114-136.
Kaiser M. J., Clarke K. R., Hinz H., Austen M. C. V., Somerfield P. J., Karakassis I. 2006 Global analysis of response and recovery of benthic biota to fishing. Marine Ecology Progress Series 311: 1-14.
Nilsson, P. & Ziegler, F. Spatial distribution of fishing effort in relation to seafloor habitats in the Kattegat, a GIS analysis. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. 17(4):421-440.
Robinson, L. A. & Frid, C. L. J. 2008. Historical marine ecology: examining the role of fisheries in changes in North Sea Benthos. Ambio 37(5): 362-371.
Schiberras, M., Parker, R., Powell, C.F. & Hiddink, J.G. in press. Impacts of bottom fishing on the sediment infaunal community and biogeochemistry of cohesive and non-cohesive sediments. Limnology and Oceanography.
Tempera, F. 2015. Bringing together harmonized EUNIS seabed habitat geospatial information for the European Seas. JRC Technical report. EUR 27237.
Tillin, H. M., Hiddink J. G., Jennings S., Kaiser M. J. 2006. Chronic bottom trawling alters the functional composition of benthic invertebrate communities on a sea-basin scale. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 318: 31−45.
Vespe M, Gibin M, Alessandrini A, Natale F, Mazzarella F, & Osio G. in press. Mapping EU fishing activities using ship tracking data – accepted for publication, Journal of Maps – available at http://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.03826

Criterion A Text:
Estimates of the area and extent of this habitat show considerable variation and are recognised as being biased and an underestimate. No assessment of trends in quantity have therefore been made. This habitat is Data Deficient under criteria A for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region. The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. There has been a decline in the biotic quality of this habitat and the major threat (demersal fisheries) is likely to cause continuing declines in quality within the next 20 years, however, the distribution of the habitat is such that the identified threats are unlikely to affect all localities at one. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criterion B for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion C/D Text:
Substantial reductions in quality in at least some parts of this habitat are known to have occurred and continue to take place  (as revealed by fishing distribution and intensity maps). These effects may be apparent as changes in the associated species, biomass and abundance as well as some modification of the biogeochemistry of the sediments.
An analysis of the fishing intensity of EU trawlers (bottom otter, beam and mid-water trawls) using Automatic Identification System (AIS) ship tracking data over one year (2013/2014) shows high coverage in all European coastal waters and over the continental shelf. When combined with the modelled distribution of EUNIS marine habitat types it is possible to examine the extent of likely impact on a particular benthic habitat. For example, over this time period more than 30% of circalittoral fine mud was subject to trawling fishing pressure in the North Sea, with over 10% of this being interpreted a high or moderate pressure. When combining data for the North Sea and Celtic Sea just over 50% of this habitat type is considered to have been subject to such fishing pressure.   Given that this is based on a single year of data, and that this type of pressure has been taking place for decades, it is likely to be an underestimate of the total area of this habitat which has been subject to such pressure. Signficant effects have also been observed in response to long-term chronic disturbance, for example from otter trawling with negative effects on benthic infauna abundance, biomass and species richness with clear changes in community composition. 
Expert opinion is that there is likely to have been a very substantial reduction in quality of this habitat - an intermediate decline in quality affecting more than 80% of this habitat in the North East Atlantic region although it is also possible that more than 30% has been subject to a severe decline. This will depend on factors such as the intensity and frequency of disturbance. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Endangered under criteria C/D for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Synthesis:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region being reported on the Atlantic coast of Portugal, in sealochs on the west coast of Ireland and around Scotland, as well as in the central North Sea. Some decline in habitat quantity (as a result of shifts to different sediment composition) have been recorded and there are many well documented examples of decline in quality.
Most sedimentary benthic systems on the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activities in the last 100 years, particularly by mobile demersal gears, and this habitat remains under fishing pressure. Disturbance of the substratum due to intensive fishing activities using bottom trawls or dredges can damage or modify infaunal communities, with burrowing echinoderms and bivalves being particularly vulnerable.  Research suggests that some gears may also be modifying the biogeochemistry of the sediments by affecting organic matter remineralization and nutrient cycling through sediment resuspension and burial of organic matter to depth. Analysis by ICES (for the period 2009-2012) shows considerable overlap of this habitat with fishing intensity by gears which are known to have damaging effects on the epifauna and shallow infauna. More recent data for a single year (2013/2014), has revealed that just over 50% of the estimated circalittoral fine mud habitat was subject to trawling fishing pressure in the North Sea and Celtic Sea and more than 80% of the circalittoral fine mud across the North East Atlantic shelf area was likely subject to abrasion disturbance. Much the same footprint of activity is likely each year and as this type of fishing pressure has been ongoing for many decades, there has most likely been a cumulative impact on habitat quality.  Signficant effects have been observed in response to long-term chronic disturbance from otter trawling, for example, with negative effects on benthic infauna abundance, biomass and species richness with clear changes in community composition that may have far-reaching implications for the integrity of marine food webs.
Expert opinion is that there has been a very substantial reduction in quality of this habitat, most likely an intermediate decline affecting more than 80% of its extent although it is clear that in some locations there has also been a severe decline. The severity will depend on factors such as the intensity and frequency of disturbance. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Endangered for both the EU 28 and EU 28+ because of both past and likely continuing declines in quality.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
A5.361 Seapens and  burrowing megafauna in circalittoral fine mud.

Assessors:
North East Atlantic Working Group: S. Gubbay, G. Saunders, H. Tyler-Walters, N. Dankers, F. Otero-Ferrer, J. Forde, K. Fürhaupter, R. Haroun Tabraue, N. Sanders.

Contributors:
North East Atlantic Working Group: S. Gubbay, G. Saunders, H. Tyler-Walters, N. Dankers, F. Otero-Ferrer, J. Forde, K. Fürhaupter, R. Haroun Tabraue, N. Sanders.


Habitat Type Name:
A3.1x Mytilid-dominated Pontic exposed upper infralittoral rock with Fucales

Habitat Description:
Rocky habitats in the infralittoral zone subject to strong wave action. Rocks are typically covered with Fucales communities. Cystoseria species are the most common species encountered. Mytilids are a constant component. These habitats occur on very exposed rocky coasts, from low water up to depths of 5m. Winter storms may cause changes to species compositions and coverage.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Characteristic species include: Mytilus galloprincialis, Mytilaster lineatus, Cystoseira bosphorica, Cystoseira barbata – Cladostephus spongiosus – Corallina elongata, Cystoseira crinita – Dictyota fasciola, Cystoseira crinita + Cystoseira barbata – Polysiphonia subulifera + Ulva rigida.

Classification:
EUNIS (1405):
Level 4. A sub habitat of 'Pontic infralittoral rock' (A3.1).
 
Annex 1: 
1130 Estuaries
1150 Coastal lagoons
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat is known to occur in the Black Sea but there is insufficient data to accurately calculate EOO and AOO. There is insufficient data to accurately assess whether the habitat has undergone a significant decline (>25% of extent) in the l

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
Coastal development is a threat of current and future importance. This can lead to habitat destruction and siltation. This is a threat in all parts of the Black Sea.
Chemical pollution creates conditions which are unfavorable to rock borers.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat includes implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, coastal development controls, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, survey and monitoring programmes, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability, and measures to reduce global warming and sea level rise.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1:
1130: MBLS U1
1160: MBLS U1
1170: MBLS U1

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on soft substrate in the infralittoral zone.
Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: coastal development, chemical pollution increased water temperatures due to climate change.
Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, coastal development controls, contingency plans in case of pollution events, survey and monitoring programs, raised public awareness and measures to climate change.

References:
Afanasiev D. F., Korpakova I. G. 2008. Macrophytobenthos Russian Azov-Black Sea., Rostov-on-Don: FGUP AzNIIRH.
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Dimitrova-Konaklieva, S. 2000. Flora of the Marine Algae of Bulgaria (Rhodophyta, Phaeophyta, Chlorophyta). Pensoft, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1970. The composition and distribution of benthic vegetation in the south-eastern part of the Black Sea. Ecological and morphological studies of benthic organisms. Kiev: Naukova Dumka, p. 185- 202.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1975. Phytobenthos of Black Sea, Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 275 p.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA
Kostenko, N. S. 2003. Some trends of the succsecion of bottom vegatation in the Karadag area. Proc. Sciences. Rec. NaUKMA, Ser. "BÑ–ologÑ–ya and ekologÑ–ya": 429-432.
Lisovskaya O.A., Stepanyan O.V. 2009. A variety of coastal macroalgae Taman Peninsula (Russia) in summer., Algology 19(4): 341-348.
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter 7:26-28.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat
Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Morozova-Vodyanitskaya N. V. 1959. Bottom vegetation of the Black Sea. Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station 11: 3 – 28.
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Teyubova V. F. 2005. Features interannual dynamics species composition and structure macrophytobenthos in the Bay of Novorossiysk (Black sea). Ekologiya Morya 69: 53 – 57.
Teyubova V.F. 2012. The diversity and ecological features macrophytobenthos the Russian sector of the Black Sea., Dissertation on competition degree of candidate of biological sciences, 280 pp.
Tkachenko, F. P., Kovtun O. O. 2014. Contemporary condition of seaweeds flora of Zmeiny  island  Ñostal zone  (Black  Sea). Chornomors’k. bot. z. 10(1): 37-47.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V. E., Boltachev A. R., Zuev G. V., Kovalev A. V., Milchakova N. A., Sergeeva N. G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Description:
In mud and cohesive sandy mud in the offshore circalittoral zone, typically below 50-70m, a variety of faunal communities may develop, depending upon the level of silt/clay and organic matter in the sediment. The relatively stable conditions associated with deep mud habitats often lead to the establishment of communities of burrowing megafaunal species where bathyal species may occur together with coastal species. The burrowing megafaunal species include burrowing crustaceans such as Nephrops norvegicus and Callianassa subterranea. The mud habitats in deep water can also support seapen populations and communities with Amphiura spp. The bioturbating activities of the infauna present in these biotopes are particularly important in controlling chemical, physical and biological processes, especially when the influences of physical disturbances such as wave action or strong currents are minimised (owing to their depth). The presence of burrowing fauna such as polychaetes significantly influence nutrient fluxes of nitrogen and phosphorus at the sediment-water interface, as their burrowing activity promotes oxygenation of the substrata. The organisms in these biotopes, particularly polychaetes and foraminiferans, are an important food source for higher trophic levels, particularly demersal fish and other benthic macrofauna. As such, the species characteristic of this habitat represent an important bentho-pelagic link increasing the overall biodiversity and ecological value of the habitat.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis. Examples of indicators of damage and naturalness have been proposed for offshore deep sea muds include; the presence of typical benthic invertebrate communities and other large burrowing megafauna, the sediment composition or sedimentation rates/disturbance, the presence of the climax community including crustacean and polychaetes populations, and an absence of Beggiatoa mats. A reduction in the abundance of less sessile and fragile species and an increase in more carnivorous and scavenging species are potential indicators of disturbance.
Characteristic species:
Communities are typically dominated by polychaetes but often with high numbers of bivalves such as Thyasira spp., echinoderms and foraminifera. Offshore mud habitats can be characterised by the burrowing urchin Brissopsis lyrifera, the brittlestar Amphiura chiajei and the Norway lobster N. norvegicus. In water deeper than 100 m, the soft muds are dominated by a community of foraminiferans (e.g. Saccammina, Psammosphaera, Haplophragmoides, Crithionina and Astorhiza) and hatchet shells Thyasira spp. with polychaete worms such as Paraonis gracilis, Myriochele heeri, Spiophanes kroyeri, Tharyx sp., Lumbrineris tetraura. There can be thousands of dead foraminiferan tests per square metre. Seven associated biotopes have been described for this habitat the rarest being the deep mud biotope which is notable for the very high density of the rare sea squirt Styela gelatinosa.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic circalittoral mud’ (A5.3).
 
Annex 1:
No relationship
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
Marine - Shelf
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral mud
Shelf sublittoral mud
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow mud
Shelf muds
 
IUCN:
9.6 Subtidal muddy

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This habitat is present in across the North East Atlantic, most especially in deep basins as well as in deep sheltered inlets.

Map Description:
There are insufficient data to provide a comprehensive and accurate map of the distribution of this habitat.This map has been generated using EMODnet data from modelled/surveyed records for the North East Atlantic (and supplemented with expert opinion where applicable) (EMODnet 2010). EOO and AOO have been calculated on the available data presented in this map however these should be treated with caution as expert opinion is that this is not the full distribution of the habitat.

Trends in Quality:
The communities that characterise this habitat are believed to have been substantially changed by demersal fishing activities, especially those which target the Norway lobster Nephrops norvegicus. Intensively trawled sites have been documented with lower species richness and with the negative effects worst in relatively species rich, deep areas with fine grained sediments. One example, reported from an area circalittoral mud habitat in the Irish Sea, is a change in dominant species, from the brittle star A.filiformis whose growth is known to be inhibited by large quantities of suspended sediments such as those generated by trawling, to the less affected burrowing shrimps such as Callianassa subterranea. In the central and eastern parts of the Kattegat, for example, where the seabed is predominantly muddy and an important fishing area for Nephrops, an estimated 70-80% is affected by fisheries each year. Furthermore an estimated 41% of this is being affected by fishing gear more than twice a year and therefore considered to remain in a disturbed condition. It is a similar picture for pressures on this habitat across the North East Atlantic shelf. A single year of data for 2013/2014 has indicated that more than 80% of the lower circalittoral mud habitat is subject to abrasion disturbance from mobile demersal fishing gears. This type of pressure is not unsual and has been taking place for decades.  Frequent trawling across this habitat type is well documented known to lead to a permanently altered community dominiated by fast-growing scavenger/predator species. Signficant negative effects have also been observed in response to long-term chronic disturbance, for example from otter trawling. A study of otter trawl disturbance  in Irish Sea, for example revealed negative effects on  benthic infauna abundance, biomass and species richness with clear changes in community composition and possible far reaching implications for the integrity of marine food webs. 
Decline in quality has also been attributed to other factors. For example, the dramatic decline of the biodiversity of sof t substrates in open Danish waters observed in Kattegat between the midâ€‘1990s and the end of the 2000s has been linked to 8-10 week period of low bottom water oxygen concentration. This is compared to the more typical short term periods of anoxia in that area.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
This habitat occurs in Norway therefore the percentage hosted by EU 28 is less than 100%. The proportion cannot be estimated as detailed distribution of this habitat is unknown.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat does not have a small natural range. It is widespread, being found as far east as the Kattegat trench, as far west as the edge of the continental shelf of Ireland, and south into the Bay of Biscay.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat does not have a small natural range. It is widespread, being found as far east as the Kattegat trench, as far west as the edge of the continental shelf of Ireland, and south into the Bay of Biscay.

Pressures and Threats:
Demersal fishing gears (such as otter trawls, beam trawls) disturb the upper layers of the sediment and damage both the associated epifauna and shallow infaunal communities. Associated increases in suspended sediments may also have a smothering effect on filter feeders. The degree of any damage will depend on the gear, frequency of use and species present. Mapping of the fishing intensity of these gears by ICES (for the period 2009-2012) shows a clear overlap with this habitat type, for example in the northern Celtic Sea and in the coastal waters of the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark and "La Grande Vasiere" in the Bay of Biscay. Frequent trawling may lead to a permanently altered community dominated by fast growing scavenger/predator species. 
Nutrient enrichment leading to significant periods of reduced bottom water oxygen concentrations has also changed the character of associated biotopes and can be severe enough to cause the community to collapse. Infrastructure development may affect the local hydrodynamic and sediment transport regime where this habitat occurs close to the coastline. On a longer timescale it is possible that climate change could lead to variable recruitment through changes in mortality rates of early life stages of some of the characteristic species e.g. of larval Nephrops.

Conservation and Management:
The regulation of the use of fishing gears  that damage or disturb seabed communities is key to the conservation of this habitat. This may be achieved by spatial and temporal controls as well as gear design and deployment regulations using fisheries management measures as well as conservation legislation in marine protected areas. Identification in Biodiversity Action Plans (e.g. as priority features) is also being used to raise awareness of pressures and threats to this habitat and the need for conservation measures.

Conservation Status:
This habitat does not correspond directly to any Annex 1 habitat type.
Sea pen and burrowing megafauna communities are on the list of OSPAR threatened and/or declining habitats.  
This habitat is present in the Kattegat and corres

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Timescale between incidents of damaging activity, the type of damaging activity and the predominant species, influences recovery. Studies have shown that recovery times following dredging were significantly shorter for short-lived species (<1 – 3 years), free-living and tube-dwelling species and for scavenging or opportunistic species, than for medium-lived species (3 – 10 years), burrow-dwelling species and suspension feeders. Free living species are also likely to recolonise areas more quicky that those that grow attached to the substratum and have an erect or stalked body form such as seapens. Recovery times of communities in deep circalittoral mud habitats following oxygen depletion and pollution has been investigated in several studies of the Gullmarsfjord, Sweden where they reported to be between 2-8 years.
Differences in the recoverability of different species groups following fishing may result in changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning over the long term.

Summary:
This habitat typically occurs below 50m (although shallower in very sheltered areas). The relatively stable conditions often lead to the establishment of communities of burrowing megafaunal species where bathyal species may occur together with coastal species. The burrowing megafaunal species include crustaceans such as the Norway lobster Nephrops norvegicus and Callianassa subterranea. The mud habitats in deep water can also support seapen populations and communities with Amphiura spp. The bioturbating activities of the infauna are particularly important in controlling chemical, physical and biological processes, especially when the influences of physical disturbances such as wave action or strong currents are minimised (owing to their depth).
The most significant and widespead effect on this habitat is believed to have been caused by demersal fishing, especially trawling for the Norway lobster Nephrops norvegicus. Studies show that epifaunal species are particularly adversely affected and that intensively trawled sites have a lower species richness than untrawled areas. The negative effects are most severe in relatively species rich, deep areas of the sea with fine grained sediments. Decline in quality has also been attributed to other factors (oxygen depletion of bottom waters in the Kattegat, drilling and dredging). The main approachs to the conservation and management of this habitat are spatial and temporal controls as well as gear design and deployment regulations on fishing methods that damage or disturb seabed communities. Identification in Biodiversity Action Plans (e.g. as priority features) is also being used to raise awareness of pressures and threats to this habitat and the need for conservation measures.

References:
Bajjouk, T., Guillaumont, B., Michez, N., Benoît, T., Chantal, C., Jacques, P., Justine, L. G., Vincent, G., Claire, C., Julie, T. and Dominique, H. 2015. Classification EUNIS, Système d’information européen sur la nature : Traduction française des habitats benthiques des Régions Atlantique et Méditerranée. Habitats subtidaux & complexes d’habitats. Available at: Http://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00271/38222/. (Accessed: 12/11/2014). 
Bourillet, J-F., Jouanneau, J-M, Macher., Le Hir, P., Naughton, F. 2006. "La Grande Vasiere" mid-shelf mud belt:  Holocene sedimentary structure, natural and anthropogenic impacts. X International Symposium on Oceanography of the Bay of Biscay, April 19-21, 2006. Vigo Galicia Spain. Available at:  http://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/2006/acte-6243.pdf. (Accessed: 13/08/2015).
Buzas, M. A. 1978. Foraminifera as prey for benthic deposit feeders: results of predator exclusion experiments. Journal of Marine Research 36, 617-625.
Conley, D. J., Carstensen, J., Ærtebjerg, G., Christensen, P. B., Dalsgaard, T., Hansen, J. L. S., Josefson, A. B. 2007. Long-term changes and impacts of hypoxia in Danish coastal waters. Ecological Applications 17(5): 165-184.
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Available at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
Deaniel van Denderen, P., Bolam, S.G., Hiddink,J.G., Jennings, S., Kenny, A., Rijnsdorpp, A.D. & van Kooten,T. 2015. Similar effects of bottom trawling and natural disturbance on composition and function of benthic communities across habitats. Marine Ecology Progress Series 541:31-43.
Eigaard Ole R. et al. “Estimating seabed pressure from demersal trawls, seines, and dredges based on gear design and dimensions” ICES J. Mar. Sci., doi = 10.1093/icesjms/fsv099.
European Environment Agency, 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed: 13/08/2015).
HELCOM. 2013. Baltic aphotic muddy sediment characterized by sea-pens AB.H2T1, Biotope Information Sheets. Avaiable at: http://www.helcom.fi/Documents/Ministerial2013/Associated%20documents/Background/HELCOM%20Red%20List%20Biotope%20Information%20Sheets%20(BIS).pdf.(Accessed: 13/08/2015).
HELCOM. 2013. AB.H2T1 Baltic aphotic muddy sediment dominated by sea pens. Available at: http://helcom.fi/baltic-sea-trends/biodiversity/helcom-hub/hub/ab-h2t1â€‹. (Accessed: 13/08/2015).
HELCOM. 2013. AB.H3O Baltic aphotic muddy sediment characterized by infaunal echinoderms. Available at: http://helcom.fi/baltic-sea-trends/biodiversity/helcom-hub/hub/ab-h3o (Accessed: 13/08/2015).   
Hinz, H., Prieto, V & Kaser, M.J. 2009. Trawl disturbance on benthic communities: chronic effects and experimental predictions. Ecological Applications 19(3):761-773.
Hiscock, K. & Jones, H. 2004. Testing criteria for assessing the 'national importance' of marine  species, biotopes (habitats) and landscapes. Report to the Joint Nature Conservation Committee from the Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN). Plymouth, Marine Biological Association of the UK. [JNCC Contract no. F90-01-681].
Kaiser, M. J. & Spencer, B. E. 1996. The effects of beam-trawl disturbance on infaunal communities in different habitats. Journal of Animal Ecology 6: 348-358.
Kaiser M.J, Collie J.S, Hall S.J, Jennings S., Poiner I.R. 2002. Modification of marine habitats by trawling activities: prognosis and solutions. Fish Fish 3: 114−136.
Kaiser M.J., Clarke K.R., Hinz H., Austen M.C.V., Somerfield P.J., Karakassis I. 2006 Global analysis of response and recovery of benthic biota to fishing. Marine Ecological Progress Series 311: 1−14.
Lambert G.I, Jennings S., Kaiser M.J., Davies T.W., Hiddink J.G. 2014 Quantifying recovery rates and resilience of sea -bed habitats impacted by bottom fishing. Journal Applied Ecology 51: 1326−1336.
Lancaster, J., McCallum, S., Lowe A.C., Taylor, E., Chapman A. & Pomfret, J. 2014. Development of detailed ecological guidance to support the application of the Scottish MPA selection guidelines in Scotland’s seas. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No.491.
Le Loc'h, F. & Hily, C  2005. How has trawling activity affected habitat and associated communities of the Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus) fisheries  of the North Bay of Biscay, NE Atlantic? Presentation at the 8th International Conference on Shellfish Restoration. Enhancement and sustainability of shellfish resources. Available at: http://www.ifremer.fr/icsr05/communications/meridienne/Mon%20pm/icsr05-leloch-and-Hily.pdf. (Accessed: 13/08/2015).
MarLIN Sensitivity Assessments http://www.marlin.ac.uk/species/MarLIN-sensitivity-methods (Accessed: 13/08/2015)
Nilsson, P. & Ziegler, F. Spatial distribution of fishing effort in relation to seafloor habitats in the Kattegat, a GIS analysis. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.17(4):421-440.
Northern Ireland Environment Agency. 2005. Northern Ireland Habitat Action Plan- Mud Habitats in Deep Water. Available at: http://www.doeni.gov.uk/niea/mudindeepwater-4.pdf. (Accessed: 13/08/2015).
OSPAR Commision. 2010. Background document for Seapen and burrowing megafauna communities. Biodiversity Series. Available at: http://qsr2010.ospar.org/media/assessments/Species/P00481_Seapen_and_burrowing_megafauna.pdf. (Accessed: 13/08/2015).
Paulomäki, H., Abel, C., Aguilar, R. 2011. Conservation proposals for ecologically important areas in the Baltic Sea. Madina, M. (Ed). Copenhagen, Denmark.
Riley, K. 2008. Foraminiferans and Thyasira sp. in deep circalittoral soft mud. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/habitatreproduction.php?habitatid=215&code=1997.  (Accessed: 13/08/2015).
Rosenberg, R.,  Agrenius, S.,Hellman, B. et al., (2002)  Recovery of marine benthic habitats and fauna in a Swedish fjord following improved oxygen conditions. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 234;43-53.
Sciberras, M., Hiddink, J.G., Hughes, K. M., Kneafsey, B. M., Kaiser, M. J., Bolam, S., Eggleton, J. 2014. Predicting the effects of trawling based on biological traits of organisms and functional  correlates of these traits to predict which functions may be disproportionally affected. Benthic Ecosystem Fisheries Impact Study. Deliverable 4.3. EC Seventh Framework Programme.
Schiberras, M., Parker, R., Powell, C.F. & Hiddink, J.G. in press. Impacts of bottom fishing on the sediment infaunal community and biogeochemistry of cohesive and non-cohesive sediments. Limnology and Oceanography.
Tempera, F. 2015. Bringing together harmonised EUNIS seabed habitat geospatial information for the European Seas. European Commission JRC Technical Report. Available at: http://mcc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/201506030954.pdf. (Accessed: 13/08/2015).
Tillin, H.M., Hiddink J.G., Jennings S., Kaiser M.J. (2006) Chronic bottom trawling alters the functional composition of benthic invertebrate communities on a sea-basin scale. Marine Ecological Progress Series 318: 31−45.
Tyler-Walters, H., Lear, D. B. and Hiscock, K. 2003. Irish Sea Pilot – Mapping Sensitivity within Marine Landscapes. Report to English Nature and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee from the Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN). Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the UK. [Contract no. F90-01-639].
UK Biodiversity Action Plan. 2008. UK Biodiversity Action Plan Priority Habitat Descriptions- Mud Habitats in Deep Water. Available at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/UKBAP_BAPHabitats-37-MudHabitatsDeepWater.pdf. (Accessed: 13/08/2015).
Vespe M, Gibin M, Alessandrini A, Natale F, Mazzarella F, & Osio G. in press. Mapping EU fishing activities using ship tracking data – accepted for publication, Journal of Maps – available at http://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.03826 
Widdicombe, S., Austen, M. C. 1998. Experimental evidence for the role of Brissopsis lyrifera (Forbes, 1841) as a critical species in the maintenance of benthic diversity and the modification of sediment chemistry. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 228: 241–255.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region. The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000 km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. There has been a decline in the biotic quality of this habitat and the major threat (demersal fisheries) is likely to cause continuing declines in quality within the next 20 years, however, the distribution of the habitat is such that the identified threats are unlikely to affect all localities at one. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criterion B for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion C/D Text:
Substantial reductions in quality in at least some parts of this habitat are known to have occurred and continue to take place (as revealed by fishing distribution and intensity maps). Disturbance of the substratum due to intensive fishing activities using bottom trawls or dredges can damage or modify infaunal communities, with burrowing echinoderms and bivalves being particularly vulnerable. Research suggests that some gears may also be modifying the biogeochemistry of the sediments by affecting organic matter remineralization and nutrient cycling through sediment resuspension and burial of organic matter to depth. An analysis of the fishing intensity of EU trawlers (bottom otter, beam and mid-water trawls) using Automatic Identification System (AIS) ship tracking data over one year (2013/2014) shows high coverage in all European coastal waters and over the continental shelf. When combined with the modelled distribution of EUNIS marine habitat types it is possible to examine the extent of likely impact on a particular benthic habitat. For example, over this time period more than 60% of deep circalittoral mud was subject to trawling fishing pressure in the North Sea with over 15% of this being interpreted as a high or moderate pressure. When combining data for the North Sea and Celtic Sea more than 95% of this habitat type is considered to have been subject to such fishing pressure. The extent of the likely impact of bottom fishing gears on this habitat throughout the North East Atlantic region is also apparent from other analyses which have combined VMS data with sensitivity maps of benthic habitats and disturbance caused by surface abrasion for the continental shelf area of the North East Atlantic. In the case of deep mud habitats for just 2013 this has shown that more than 80% of its occurrence across the shelf area has been subject to abrasion disturbance.Given that this is based on a single year of data, and that this type of pressure has been taking place for decades, it is likely to be an underestimate of the total area of this habitat which has been subject to such pressure.  Signficant negative effects have also been observed in response to long-term chronic disturbance, for example from otter trawling with negative effects on  benthic infauna abundance, biomass and species richness with clear changes in community composition.
Expert opinion is that there is likely to have been a very substantial reduction in quality of this habitat - an intermediate decline in quality affecting more than 80% of this habitat in the North East Atlantic region although it is also possible that more than 30% has been subject to a severe decline. This will depend on factors such as the intensity and frequency of disturbance. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Endangered under criteria C/D for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Synthesis:
This habitat is present across the region in deep basins as well as deep sheltered inlets. There are well known extensive and well-developed deep water mud basins in the North East Atlantic in the Kattegat, the Grand Vasiere off Gascony, France and to the west of Ireland. This habitat is also present in deep, sheltered inlets such as some of the Scottish sea lochs.  Some declines in habitat quantity (as a result of shifts to different sediment composition) have been recorded and there are many well documented examples of decline in quality.
Most sedimentary benthic systems of the continental shelf of Europe have been modified by fishing activity in the last 100 years, particularly by mobile demersal gears, and this remains a significant pressure. Disturbance of the substratum due to intensive fishing activities using bottom trawls or dredges can damage or modify infaunal communities, with burrowing echinoderms and bivalves being particularly vulnerable.research suggests that some gears may also be modifying the biogeochemistry of the sediments by affecting organic matter remineralization and nutrient cycling through sediment resuspension and burial of organic matter to depth. Analysis by ICES (for the period 2009-2012) shows considerable overlap of this habitat with fishing intensity by gears which are known to have damaging effects on the epifauna and shallow infauna. More recent data for a single year (2013/2014) have revealed that more than 95% of modelled area of deep circalittoral mud across in the North Sea and Celtic Sea is considered to have been subject to fishing pressure by EU trawlers (bottom otter, beam and mid-water trawls) and that more than 80% of the deep circalittoral mud habitat across the North East Atlantic shelf area has been subject to abrasion disturbance. There are also regional studies, such as in the Kattegat, which show a similar pattern of overlap of this habitat type with the use of bottom gears that are known to alter the quality and take place at a frequency which maintains a disturbed condition. Much the same footprint of activity is likely each year and as this type of fishing pressure has been ongoing for many decades, there has most likely been a cumulative impact on habitat quality. Signficant effects have been observed in response to long-term chronic disturbance from otter trawling, for example, with negative effects on  benthic infauna abundance, biomass and species richness with clear changes in community composition that may have far-reaching implications for the integrity of marine food webs.
Expert opinion is that there has been a very substantial reduction in quality of this habitat, most likely an intermediate decline affecting more than 80% of its extent although it is clear that in some locations there has also been a severe decline. The severity will depend on factors such as the intensity and frequency of disturbance. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Endangered for both the EU 28 and EU 28+ because of both past and likely continuing declines in quality.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
A5.373 Styela gelatinosa, Pseudamussium septemradiatum and solitary ascidians on sheltered deep circalittoral muddy sediment.

Contributors:
E. Bastos and the North East Atlantic Working Group: S. Gubbay, G. Saunders, H. Tyler-Walters, N. Dankers, F. Otero-Ferrer, J. Forde, K. Fürhaupter, R. Haroun Tabraue, N. Sanders.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.42 Estuarine Atlantic sublittoral mixed sediment

Habitat Description:
This habitat comprises shallow sublittoral mixed sediments in estuarine conditions (18-35ppt), often with surface shells or stones, enabling the development of diverse epifaunal communities. There may be moderately strong (1-3kn) to negligible tidal streams. Wave exposure can vary from sheltered to extremely sheltered. This habitat typically occurs to depths of 10m. This habitat type is quite species rich, compared with more homogeneous sediments.
Indicators of quality:
Long term studies of many estuaries typically focus on the physical, biological and chemical characteristics. Indicators of quality of this habitat are frequently linked to those for the whole estuarine environment and therefore include morphological and physical characteristics, carrying capacity and water quality parameters. For the specific habitat, benthic indices, contaminant levels and productivity are some of the frequently used measures of quality.
Indices developed to assess the ecological status of coastal waters, including estuaries, according to the Water Framework Directive, include physical indicators, water quality indicators and measures of benthic diversity, species richness and abundance. The latter group, which is particularly relevant to benthic habitats, includes a Benthic Quality Index, an Infaunal Trophic Index, a Marine Biotic index based on ecological groups, and the Benthic Opportunistic Polychaetes/Amphipods Index.
Characteristic species:
Species which may frequently be present in moderate abundance, include Crepidula fornicata, Nephtys hombergii, Aphelochaeta marioni, Mediomastus fragilis, Exogone naidina, Polydora ciliate, Caulleriella zetlandica, Capitella capitata, Melinna palmate, Tubificoides benedii, T.swirencoides, Abra alba and A.nitida.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405:
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic shallow/infralittoral mixed sediment’ (A5.4).
 
Annex 1:
1130 Estuaries
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD: 
Shallow sublittoral mixed sediment
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow coarse or mixed sediments
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy
9.5 Subtidal sandy-mud
9.6 Subtidal muddy

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Estuaries are a characteristic coastal habitat of the North East Atlantic. They are present in all the subbasins of this regional sea, except for Macaronesia, and are common because of the numerous rivers which discharge to the sea in a region where there is a significant tidal range (over 12 m). The sublittoral areas are usually soft sediments including areas where the substrate is mixed.

Map Description:
This map has been generated using EMODnet data from modelled/surveyed records for the North East Atlantic (and supplemented with expert opinion where applicable) (EMODnet 2010). There are insufficient data to provide a comprehensive and accurate map of the distribution of this habitat or for calculation of
EOO and AOO.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
Survey records from EMODnet suggest that the EOO is less than 50,000km2 however this data set is believed to be substantially incomplete. There is no information on trends.

Justification of Restricted Area:
Survey records from EMODnet suggest that the EOO is less than 50,000km2 however this data set is believed to be substantially incomplete. Within its range the habitat is limited naturally to the transition area betwe

Pressures and Threats:
This habitat is sensitive to substratum loss, mainly deriving from activities such as coastal protection, barrages, impoundment dredging and spoil disposal. Apart from direct habitat removal there can be indirect effects, through changes in sediment and hydrological regimes. In addition, dredging may increase water flow rate and wave exposure, which in turn will alter the sediment granulometric characteristics, washing away fine silts and muds, resulting in a possible change in community structure. Coastal construction and coast protection works can also cause an increase in water flow rate leading shifts in infaunal community structure.
Many estuaries in the North East Atlantic have had a long history of receiving pollution for example as effluents from heavy industry.The combination of fine sediments and estuarine salinity gradients produce favourable conditions for the binding, deposition and accumulation of toxic contaminants within the muddy substrate. An accumulation of discharged toxic compounds, together with hydrocarbon contamination incidents, such as oil spills, can therefore have significant impacts on this habitat type, either immediately or by remobilisation after storms, dredging or changes in currents. Some oligochaete and polychaete species may be particularly susceptible to synthetic chemicals that bind to sediments, thus synthetic compound contamination would cause a decline in species richness.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management schemes to benefit estuarine habitats have been applied at a number of scales ranging from whole estuary systems to small areas within an estuary. They include the removal of dykes, and water quality improvement programmes to reduce the risk of toxic contamination and to reduce nutrient inputs leading to eutrophication.
Spatial management including zoning of activities as part of Integrated Coastal Zone Management Schemes and Marine Protected Areas that cover the entire estuary complex, as well as water shed management, are beneficial.

Summary:
This habitat typically occurs to depths of 10 m and comprises shallow sublittoral mixed sediments in estuarine conditions (18-35ppt), often with surface shells or stones, enabling the development of diverse epifaunal communities.
The most significant pressures and threats that the habitat faces include substratum loss, mainly deriving from activities such as coastal protection, barrages, impoundment and dredging. These activities could also change the abiotic conditions of the habitat such as wave exposure and water flow. Additionally, synthetic compound contamination would cause a decline in some characteristic species of the habitat, which are very intolerant to such toxic substances. Nutrient enrichment/eutrophication has been a major pressures on estuarine habitats, including sublittoral muds. Whilst this may increase the food supply to the benthos it can also lead to changes in species composition and numbers, increased biomass, changes in community structure and an impoverishment of benthic communities due to anoxia.
Conservation and management schemes to benefit estuarine habitats have been applied at a number of scales ranging from whole estuary systems to small areas within an estuary. They include the removal of dykes, and water quality improvement programmes to reduce the risk of toxic contamination or nutrient inputs leading to eutrophication. Furthermore, spatial management, including zoning of activities as part of Integrated Coastal Zone Management Schemes and Marine Protected Areas, that cover the entire estuary complex, as well as water quality management throughout the watershed, are beneficial.

References:
Borja, A., Franco, J. & Perez, V 2000. A Marine biotic index to establish the ecological quality of soft-bottom benthos within European estuarine and coastal environments. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 40(12):1100-1114.
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Available at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
European Environment Agency 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed:  05/01/2016).
MarLIN (Marine Life Information Network) .2015. MarLIN - The Marine Life Information Network. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesfullreview.php. (Accessed: 18/11/2015).
Muxika, I., Borga, A. & Bald, J. 2007. Using historical data, expert judgement and multivariate analysis in assessing reference conditions and benthic ecological status according to the European Water Framework Directive. Marine Pollution Bulletin 55:16-29.

Criterion A Text:
There is insufficient information to determine the extent any trends in quantity of this habitat at the present. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under criterion A.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.43 Marine Atlantic infralittoral mixed sediments

Habitat Description:
This habitat comprises mixed (heterogeneous) sediments in fully marine or near fully marine conditions, supporting various animal-dominated communities, with relatively low proportions of seaweeds even though it is an infralittoral habitat. The sediment  may include well-mixed muddy gravelly sands or very poorly sorted mosaics of shell, cobbles and pebbles embedded in mud, sand or gravel. Due to the range of the sediment types that support this habitat, the  communities may vary considerably, including those characterised by bivalves, polychaetes and file shells. The very varied sediment composition also means  that the species diversity and biomass can be high. This has resulted in many species being described as characteristic of this habitat type, but most, in general contribute only a small proportion of the overall similarity.  Where the sediment is unstable, most of the fauna are mobile such as hermit crabs, netted dogwhelks and gobies. However, there may also be the dahlia anemones partially buried in the sediments  as well as cobbles or pebble with encrustations of keelworrns.
Indicators of Quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of particular species, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Common and abundant species reported from this habitat include: Anaitides mucosa, Syllidia armata, Aphelochaeta marioni, Mediomastus fragilis, Notomastus latericeus, Melinna palmate, Tubificoides benedii, Gammarella fucicola, Gammarella fucicola, Corophium sextonae, Janira maculosa,  Apseudes latreillii ,Calyptraea chinensis, Tellimya ferruginosa and Venerupis senegalensis.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic circalittoral mixed sediment’ (A5.4).
 
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral mixed sediment
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow coarse or mixed sediments
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy
9.5 Subtidal sandy-mud
9.6 Subtidal muddy

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This habitat type does occur in other regional seas although the associated characteristic species may vary.

Trends in Quantity:
It is difficult to establish the quantity of this habitat as it often has a patchy distribution, grading into other soft sediment habitats, or interspersed amongst rocky areas. Even where the extent of this habitat or its associated biotopes has been mapped in detail (e.g. within marine protected areas) there is a lack of information on trends. There have been some changes to the sediment characteristics in particular locations and losses reported. In the Netherlands sector of the North Sea, for example the stones in the Texelse Stenen have been dredged up or disappeared under the sand. Some of the associated biotopes (Limaria hians beds, and Ostrea edulis beds) have suffered substantial historical declines in quantity and remain under threat today.

Trends in Quality:
There is insufficient information to determine historical and current trends in quality of this habitat although localised degradation will have occured in areas where activities such as demersal fishing and offshore construction have disturbed or removed the seabed sediments. Some of the associated biotopes (Limaria hians beds, and Ostrea edulis beds) have suffered substantial historical declines in quality and remain under threat today.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
This habitat occurs in the EU 28+ (e.g. Norway, Channel Islands). The percentage hosted by the EU 28 is likely to be between 85-90% but there is insufficient information to establish the exact figure.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat has a large natural range and within sites the area can be extensive.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat has a large natural range and does not occur in a very limited area within this range.

Pressures and Threats:
This habitat is vulnerable to abrasion from bottom towed fishing gears and the associated loss of extracted target and non-target species. In addition, maintenance and capital dredging operations may result in direct habitat removal, or may have indirect impacts, through changes in sediment and hydrological regimes. A change in hydrological regime may increase the water flow rate and wave exposure, which, could subsequently modify sedimentcharacter leading to changes in community structure.
Similarly, nearby coastal construction or coastal reinforcement work could result in downstream substrate modification or loss, or may result in the introduction and bioaccumulation of synthetic compounds.
Moreover, the introduction of non-native species is also constitutes a threat for some species components of this habitat.

Conservation and Management:
Beneficial management measures for this habitat include the regulation of fishing activities which damage or disturb seabed communities, the regulation and control of coastal developments and of the construction of hard coastal defence structures. In some instances such measures are part of the mangement of Marine Protected Areas. In addition, the regulation of chemical discharges from outfalls,  measures to reduce and mitigate against climate change and sea level rise, and and strategies to prevent the introduction of invasive species may also benefit this habitat.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Timescale between incidents of damaging activity, the type of damaging activity and the predominant species, influences recovery. Studies have shown that recovery times following dredging were significantly shorter for short-lived species (<1 – 3 years), free-living and tube-dwelling species and for scavenging or opportunistic species, than for medium-lived species (3 – 10 years), burrow-dwelling species and suspension feeders. Free living species are also likely to recolonise areas more quicky that those that grow attached to the substratum and have an erect or stalked body form such as seapens. Differences in the
recoverability of different species groups following fishing may result in changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning over the long term.

Summary:
This habitat consists of shallow mixed (heterogeneous) sediments in fully marine or near fully marine conditions, supporting various animal-dominated communities, with relatively low proportions of seaweeds. It may also include well-mixed muddy gravelly sands or very poorly sorted mosaics of shell, cobbles and pebbles embedded in mud, sand or gravel. It occurs in all the regional sea sub-basins in shallower depths (typically less than 40m) where sufficient light penetrates for the growth of algae. Due to the range of the sediment types that support this habitat, the communities may vary considerably, including those characterised by bivalves, polychaetes and file shells. 
Abrasion from bottom towed gears, maintenance and capital dredging operations and change in the hydrological regimes are pressures that threaten the structure and functioning of this habitat. In addition, coastal construction and protection, hydrocarbon contamination incidents, such as oil spills, may lead to substratum loss and bio-accumulation of synthetic compounds. Moreover, the introduction of non-native species and the extraction of some species are also significant threats for some species components of this habitat. 
Beneficial management measures for this habitat include the regulation of fishing activities which damage or disturb seabed communities, management and control of coastal developments and the construction of hard coastal defence structures. In addition control of chemical discharges may be important for future prospects, together with prevention measures on the introduction of non-indigenous invasive species. Some of these measures have been introduced through management schemes in Marine Protected Areas.

References:
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Available at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
European Environment Agency. 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed: 05/01/2016).
Tempera, F. 2015. Bringing together harmonized EUNIS seabed habitat geospatial information for the European SeasJRC Technical report. EUR 27237.

Criterion A Text:
It is difficult to establish the quantity of this habitat as it often has a patchy distribution, grading into other soft sediment habitats, or interspersed amongst rocky areas. Although there may have been some changes to the sediment characteristics in particular locations overall trends are unknown. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under criteria A1 for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region. The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. Trends are unknown. The distribution of the habitat is such that the identified threats are unlikely to affect all localities at once. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criteria B1(c) and B3 and Data Deficient for all other criteria for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion C/D Text:
There is insufficient information to determine historical and current trends in quality of this habitat although localised degradation will have occured in areas where activities such as demersal fishing and offshore construction have disturbed or removed the seabed sediments. This habitat has been assessed as Data Deficient under criteria C/D1.

Synthesis:
Survey information confirms that this habitat has a widespread distribution in the North East Atlantic. There are documented changes in the quality of this habitat and some of the associated biotopes are known to have suffered substantial declines in quality and quantity. Nevertheless there is insufficient information to determine the overall trend for the North East Atlantic.
This habitat has a large EOO and AOO, and therefore qualifies as Least Concern under criterion B. However the habitat is assessed as Data Deficient both at the EU 28 and EU 28+ levels because of lack of information on its area and any trends in quantity and quality.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Sub-types which may require further analysis are 5.434 Limaria hians beds in tide-swept sublittoral muddy mixed sediment 5.435 Ostrea edulis beds on shallow sublittoral muddy mixed sediment.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.52 Kelp and seaweed communities on Atlantic infralittoral mixed sediment

Habitat Description:
Shallow sublittoral mixed sediments consisting of hard substrate components (cobbles, pebbles, gravel and shells) in various densities which support seaweed communities, typically including the kelp Saccharina latissima the bootlace weed Chorda filum and various red and brown seaweeds, particularly filamentous types. The environmental conditions also dictate the typical seaweed communities present. In areas where winter storms are common, seaweed cover will be more ephemeral and fragmented, due to high mortality rates from damage and detachment; whilst in more sheltered areas, long term attachment to smaller cobbles/pebbles is possible. Loose mats may be present in the most sheltered environments. The strength of tidal flow and type of substrate also influence the community type.
A diverse array of animals is associated with these kelps and seaweeds, including burrowing polychaete worms and bivalves, scavenging hermit crabs, crabs, starfish, fish and grazing top shells. Kelps and seaweeds growing on sediment greatly increase the primary production of an area and create a more diverse habitat. Gastropods, amphipods, sea urchins and fish graze the seaweeds; starfish, urchins, hermit crabs and crabs are scavengers; crabs and fish are opportunistic predators; and a mixed infauna of deposit feeders and suspension feeders develops, depending on sediment type. Various biotopes have been described associated with this habitat characteristised by Saccharina.latissima, Chorda.filum and red seaweeds on sheltered muddy sediments as well as mats of  Trailliella on muddy gravel  and  loose-lying mats of Phyllophora crispa on muddy sediment.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis. The depth limit of kelp and/or red seaweeds is used in some countries as a Water Framework Directive parameter for assessing ecological status.
Characteristic species:
Saccharina latissima, Chorda filum various red seaweeds like Phycodrys rubens. Zoobenthos reported at a high frequency and/or abundance include Mediomastus fragilis, Ampelisca brevicornis, Capitella capitata, Heterochaeta costata, Tubificoides benedii, Mysella bidentata, Pagurus bernhardus, Liocarcinus depurator, Asterias rubens,

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic shallow/infralittoral coarse sediment’ (A5.5).
 
Annex
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral mixed sediment
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow coarse or mixed sediments #
 
IUCN:
9.3 Subtidal loose rock/pebble/gravel
9.7 Macroalgal/Kelp
9.10 Estuaries

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Mixed substrates dominated by S. saccharina, Chorda filum or other red and brown seaweeds are characteristic for several regional seas.

Trends in Quantity:
There is insufficient information to determine whether there have been any historical, recent and possible future trends in quantity of this habitat.

Trends in Quality:
There is insufficient information to determine whether there have been any historical, recent and possible future trends in quality of this habitat.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
This habitat occurs in the EU 28+ (e.g. Norway). The percentage hosted by EU 28 is therefore less than 100% but there is insufficient information to establish the proportion.

Pressures and Threats:
This habitat is vulnerable to inshore fishing activity where trawls, dredges or the laying and recovery of shellfish creels/pots may disturb damage or remove the epibiota, in particular the characterising seaweed species. Disturbance or removal of the substratum, together with an associated increase in sediment loading resulting from dredging activities, will pose a serious threat to the habitat biota, by reducing critical light penetration to seaweeds and providing a competitive advantage to filter feeding fauna which compete with the algal species for space.
Kelps are fairly tolerant of hydrocarbon pollution and have a high recovery potential due to its ability to produce protective mucus secretions. Other typical species associated with this habitat are, however, considerably more sensitive and so a decline in species richness can be expected where spillages occur. In addition, a slight increase in nutrients from agricultural run-off, aquaculture activities or storm drain or domestic discharges may enhance the growth of S. latissima, but higher levels, may, however, stimulate dominance and over-growth of ephemeral green algae.

Conservation and Management:
This habitat is afforded some protection within some Marine Protected Areas. Beneficial management measures  include the control of bottom-contact fishing activity, the regulation of dredging, aquaculture and the construction of hard coastal defence structures. Additionally, water quality improvement programmes to reduce the risk of toxic contamination or nutrient inputs leading to eutrophication should also be considered.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Removal of the substratum will remove most of the key species of this feature, although if suitable substratum remains, recovery is likely to be rapid as most of the epibiota species are known to be rapid colonizers and fast growing. Sediment infauna are probably slower to re-colonise and develop into a stable community. Some species such as Cerianthus lloydii may be very slow to re-establish after disturbance. Overall, because of the dominance of rapid settling and fast growing species, such as S.latissima and C.filum, some of the elements can recover rapidly but establishment of a community containing the range of characteristic species associated with an undisturbed and mature community may take several years.

Summary:
This habitat consists of shallow sublittoral mixed sediments including larger stones and pebbles, which support seaweed communities, typically including the kelp Saccharina latissima the bootlace weed Chorda filum and various red and brown seaweeds, particularly filamentous types.
This habitat is vulnerable to inshore fishing activity where trawls, dredges or the laying and recovery of creels may disturb, damage or remove the epibiota, in particular the characterising seaweed species. Disturbance or removal of the substratum together with an associated increase in sediment loading resulting from dredging activities, is a serious threat to the habitat biota, by reducing critical light penetration to seaweeds and providing a competitive advantage to filter feeding fauna which compete with the algal species for space. In addition, pollution and nutrient enrichment is a significant pressure that can lead to declines in species richness.
Beneficial management and conservation measures for this habitat include: protection within Marine Protected Areas, regulation of nutrient discharges, the regulation of fishing methods which damage, or disturb seabed communities, the control of dredging activity, coastal development and the construction of hard coastal defence structures.

References:
European Environment Agency 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed: 21/12/2015)
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Available at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
Hiscock, K. 2008. Saccharina latissima, Chorda filum and filamentous red seaweeds on sheltered infralittoral sediment. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub- programme. [online] Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Available at: http://192.171.193.127/habitatreproduction.php?habitatid=58&code=&code=. (Accessed: 21/12/2015).
Lancaster, J. (Ed.), McCallum, S., Lowe A. C., Taylor, E., Chapman A. and Pomfret, J. 2014. Development of detailed ecological guidance to support the application of the Scottish MPA selection guidelines in Scotland’s seas. Inverness: Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No.491.
MarLIN (Marine Life Information Network) .2015. MarLIN - The Marine Life Information Network. Available at: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesfullreview.php. (Accessed: 18/11/2015).

Criterion C/D Text:
Experts consider there to be insufficient data on which to assess criteria C/D. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under criteria C/D1.

Synthesis:
Survey information confirms that this habitat has a widespread distribution in the North East Atlantic. It has been studied in detail in some localities however there is insufficient information to determine whether there have been any historical, recent and trends in quantity or quality.
This habitat has a large EOO and AOO, and therefore qualifies as Least Concern under criterion B. However the habitat is assessed as Data Deficient both at the EU 28 and EU 28+ levels because of the lack of information on area and any trends in quantity and quality.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Loose-lying mats of Phyllophora crispa on infralittoral muddy sediment.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.61 Polychaete worm reefs on sublittoral sediment

Habitat Description:
Sublittoral reefs of polychaete worms in mixed sediments are found in a variety of hydrographic conditions. Such habitats may range from extensive structures of tightly packed tubes to loose agglomerations of tubes. Patchiness can be a feature of this habitat with the reef structures interspersed with areas of sediment.They often play an important role in the structural composition or stability of the seabed and provide a wide range of niches for other species to inhabit. Consequently polychaete worm reefs often support a diverse flora and fauna. Three biotopes associated with this habitat have been described with different species of polychaete dominating: Sabellaria spinulosa on stable circalittoral mixed sediment,  Sabellaria alveolata on variable salinity sublittoral mixed sediment and Serpula vermicularis reefs on very sheltered circalittoral muddy sand.
Indicators of Quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
The overall quality and continued occurrence of this habitat is, largely dependent on the presence of tubeworms which creates the biogenic structural complexity on which the characteristic associated communities depend. The density and the maintenance of a viable population of this species is a key indicator of habitat quality, together with the visual evidence of presence or absence of physical damage.
Characteristic species:
Reef forming polychaetes: Sabellaria spinulosa Sabellaria alveolata and Serpula vermicularis. Nemertesia antennina, Harmothoe impar, Eulalia tripunctata, Eumida sanguinea,Nereis longissima, Scoloplos armiger,Mediomastus fragilis, Lanice conchilega, Pomatocerostriqueter,  Pagurus bernhardus, Gibbula cineraria, Buccinum undatum, Abra alba, Flustra foliacea, Asterias rubens, Ophiothrix fragilis, Psammechinus miliaris, Ascidia mentula, and Dendrodoa grossularis.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Sublittoral biogenic reefs’ (A5.6).
 
Annex 1:
1170 Reefs
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy
9.5 Subtidal sandy-mud
9.6 Subtidal muddy

Trends in Quantity:
S.spinulosa reefs are the most abundant of the three biotopes associated with this habitat. They have been seriously degraded and reduced in the German Wadden Sea (by around 85%) over the last century. Over the last decade a further decline of around 33% is considered to have occurred. Remnant reef areas are present in the Dutch Waddden Sea and they appear to be quite common on the border of UK/Germany in the North Sea. In the UK increases have been reported from the 1980's to the 2000's in the western North Sea with new reefs located off the southern North Sea in 2009. There are also localities where they have disappeared (e.g. approach channels to Morecambe Bay).
Serpula vermicularis reefs are rare, have only been reported from the UK and Ireland and appear to be declining. Sabellaria alveolata reefs more typically occur in the intertidal zone but they do extend into the sublittoral where they can form significant structures (e.g. the Severn Estuary, UK).

Trends in Quality:
Determining change in condition is problematic. Detailed, repeat assessments of S. spinulosa reef structures are rare. Where a particular reef has been repeatedly sampled, assessing temporal change is complicated by the patch dynamics of the reef system. Perceived changes may, for instance, simply result from differences in the position of samples between surveys, coupled with a naturally patchy distribution. Even where there is reasonable evidence of a change in reef condition the assessments focus on individual reef structures. The apparently ephemeral nature of S. spinulosa reefs is such that the condition of S. spinulosa reef habitat should be considered at a wider scale than individual reefs, though data are currently lacking in this regard. Trends in quality of subittoral S.alveolata reefs are also largely unknown whilst the quality of S.vermicularis appears to have declined substantially.  As the most abundant and extensive examples of this habitat are the reefs of S.spinulosa, the overall trend in quality of this habitat is unknown.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
Unknown but as the main areas of distribution are in the southern North Sea, Channel and Irish Sea it is likely to be a high proportion.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The species S. spinulosa is widely distributed although the density of worms is typically low. Densely aggregated reef structures are relatively rare, and are typically restricted to areas with high levels of suspended sediment.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The species S. spinulosa is widely distributed although the density of worms is typically low. Densely aggregated reef structures are relatively rare, and are typically restricted to areas with high levels of suspended

Pressures and Threats:
The greatest impact on polychaete reefs is considered to be physical disturbance. The dwelling tubes constructed by S. spinulosa are relatively fragile and therefore susceptible to damage from direct physical impacts such as demersal fishing gears and aggregate dredging. If the individual worms themselves escape direct injury, they may still be left vulnerable to predation. Such impacts can also break the reef habitats down into smaller fragments, thus making them more vulnerable to further damage and changing the habitat for the associated fauna. 
S. spinulosa is generally considered tolerant of chemical contamination and has been found to thrive in polluted areas. Despite this, pollution has been considered a major threat to S. spinulosa in the Wadden Sea where an increase in coastal eutrophication is thought to have favoured Mytilus edulis and Bathyporei spp. Altered hydrodynamics (e.g. due to coastal engineering works) and the installation of infrastructure such as pipelines and offshore wind turbines may also have a detrimental effect.

Conservation and Management:
Protected areas and management measures include the regulation of fisheries and, waste water treatment (to reduce the risk of eutrophication) and reduction in suspended sediments can benefit this habitat. Proactive protection may be achieved through Environmental Impact studies prior to offshore developments or activities such as sand and gravel extraction that can damage this habitat type.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Given the apparent the ephemeral nature of the most abundant and widespread polychaete worm reefs (i.e. those created by S.spinulosa) reef structures which have some capacity to regenerate after natural collapse events through the settlement and growth of new individuals the timescale is likely to be short.

Summary:
Sublittoral reefs of polychaete worms in mixed sediments are found in a variety of hydrographic conditions. The habitats take a range of forms from extensive structures of tightly packed tubes to loose agglomerations of tubes. Three reef biotopes have been described with different species of polychaete dominating. The most extensive and abundant subtidal reefs are formed by Sabellaria spinulosa. Sabellaria alveolata reefs more typically occur in the intertidal zone but do extend into the sublittoral. Sabellaria alveolata can form significant structures of tubes in tightly packed masses with a distinctive honeycomb-like appearance. These reefs can be up to 30 or even 50 cm thick and take the form of hummocks, sheets or more massive formations (e.g. the Severn Estuary, UK).  The third reef forming polychaete is Serpula vemicularis which form calcareous reef structures. S. vemicularis reefs are relatively rare and have been only recorded in sea lochs/loughs of the west coasts of Scotland and Ireland.
The greatest impact on polychaete reefs is considered to be physical disturbance, for example from demersal fishing gears and aggregate dredging. Such impacts can break once extensive reef habitats down into smaller fragments. This habitat fragmentation, tmakes the habitats more vulnerable to further damage and changes the habitat for the associated fauna. Pollution has been considered a major threat to S. spinulosa in the Wadden Sea where an increase in coastal eutrophication is thought to have favoured the proliferation of Mytilus edulis and gammerids. Altered hydrodynamics (e.g. due to coastal engineering works) and the installation of infrastructure such as pipelines and offshore wind turbines may also have a detrimental effect. Management measures for this habitat have been directed at activities which disturb the seabed and/or break up reef structures. They have included recommendations or requirements to avoid areas where reef structures are present for example when routing offshore pipelines. Other measures include micrositing individual offshore wind turbines, establishing fishing exclusions zone and controls on vessel moorings.

References:
Anon. 2013. Diving Salt Lake. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJ2ONxU9CRk. (Accessed: 23/11/2015).
Benson, A., Foster-Smith, B., Gubbay, S., Hendrick, V. 2013. Background Document for Sabellaria spinulosa reefs. OSPAR’s vision of a clean, healthy and biological diverse North-east Atlantic used sustainably. Southampton: OSPAR Commission Report. 
Boscence, D. W. J.1979. The factors leading to aggregation and reef formation in Serpula vermicularis L. Biology and Systematics of Colonial Organisms. Larwood, G. & Rosen, B.R., eds 299-318. Academic Press.
Bush, L.E.Personal Observation
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Available at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
Covey, R., Emblow, C. 1992. Littoral survey of the inner Solway Firth and additional sites in Dumfries and Galloway. Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report (MNCR Report No. MNCR/SR/20).33127
De Grave, S., Whitaker, A. 1997. The Occurrence of a Subtidal Sabellaria alveolata(L.) Reef off Wicklow Head, Irish Sea. The Irish Naturalists' Journal 25(11/12): 416-418.
European Environment Agency. 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed: 24/11/2015).
Hammond, N. 2000. S. alveolata report: Solway Firth. Hull: Solway Firth Partnership.
Holt, R. 2005. Marine Life News. Available at: http://www.glaucus.org.uk/News2005Summer.htm. (Accessed 24/11/2015).
Hughes, D. J. 2011. Where’s the ‘reef’? A five year study of serpulid tube bioerosion in a Scottish sea loch. Marine Ecology Progress Series 430: 273-280.
ICES 2007. Section 6 and Annex 1. 254 ICES Advisory Committee on Ecosystems
Mettam, C., Conneely, M. E., White, S. J. 1994. Benthic macrofauna and sediments in the Severn Estuary. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 51: 71-81
Moore, C. G., Saunders, G. R. & Harries, D. B. 1998. The status and ecology of reefs of Serpula vermicularis L. (Polychaeta: Serpulidae) in Scotland. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 8: 645-656.
Moore, C. G., Saunders, G. R., Harries, D. B., Mair, J. M., Bates, C. R. & Lydon, A. R. 2006. The establishment of site condition monitoring of the subtidal reefs of Loch Creran Special Area of Conservation. Inverness: Scottish Natural Heritage.
Moran, B. 2011. Clifden 2011 Underwater, Salt Lake, Galway, Ireland by Brendan Moran. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKqkzJNHL0Q. (Accessed 24/11/2015).
National Biodiversity Networkaccessed. 2013. Available at: https://data.nbn.org.uk/. (Accessed 24/11/2015).
OSPAR. 2013. Background document on Sabellaria spinulosa reefs. Southampton: OSPAR Commission, Biodiversity Series. 
Pearce, B., Fariñas-Franco, J. M., Wilson, C., Pitts, J., deBurgh, A., Somerfield, P. J. 2014. Repeated mapping of reefs constructed by Sabellaria spinulosa Leuckart 1849 at an offshore wind farm site. Geoscience and Habitat Mapping for Marine Renewable Energy 83: 3-13. 
Perkins, E. J. 1986. The Ecology of Scar Grounds in the Solway Firth. Transactions of Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society 6: 14-19
Pinnion, J., Mackie, A. S. Y., Somerfield, P. J., Warwick, R. M. 2007. Synthesis of Information on the Benthos of Area SEA. Department of Trade and Industry 8: 94.
Purchon, R. D. 1948. Studies on the biology of the Bristol Channel. XVII. The littoral and sublittoral fauna of the northern shores near Cardiff. Proceedings of the Bristol Naturalists Society 27: 285-310.
Reise, K. (1989) Historical changes in the benthos of the Wadden Sea around the island of Sylt in the North Sea. Helgoland Marine Research 43: 417-433.
Smith W. A. 1887. Loch Creran: Notes From The West Highlands. Alexander Gardner: 155-156
Taylor, P. M., Parker, J. G. 1993. An Environmental Appraisal: The Coast of North Wales and North West England. Hamilton Oil Company Ltd, p.80. 
Warwick, R. M., Uncles, R. J. 1980. Distribution of benthic macrofauna associations in the Bristol Channel in relation to tidal stress. Marine Ecology Progress Series 3: 97-103.
Warwick, R. M. 1984. The benthic ecology of the Bristol Channel. Marine Pollution Bulletin 15(2): 70-76
Warwick, R., Henderson, P. A., Fleming, J. M. & Somes, J. R. 2001. The impoverished fauna of the deep water channel and marginal areas between Flatholm island and King Road, Severn Estuary. Report to the Bristol Port Company, p.21.

Criterion A Text:
There have been substantial historical losses of this habitat in the southern North Sea. Large subtidal S.spinulosa reefs that were common along the slopes of the northern tidal inlets of the German Wadden Sea in the 1920's are now largely lost, including once extensive reefs around the island of Sylt. Furthermore off the west coast of Schleswig-Holstein only three living reefs were found during surveys in the early 1990's compared to 24 during the 19th century. The few examples of S.vermicularis reefs that are known have declined in recent years whilst the situation for sublittoral S.alveolata reefs is unknown.
Although historical losses are known to have been substantial, it is not possible to determine whether these losses exceeded the threshold for Red Listing (loss of more than 40% of the extent of this habitat since 1750).This habitat has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under criterion A.

Criterion B Text:
The species S. spinulosa is widely distributed although the density of worms is typically low. Densely aggregated reef structures in contrast are relatively rare, and are typically restricted to areas with high levels of suspended sediment. 
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region. The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000 km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. There have been substantial historical declines in extent. Current trends are unknown but the distribution of the habitat is such that the identified threats are unlikely to affect all localities at one. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criteria B1, B2 & B3.

Criterion C/D Text:
Experts consider there to be insufficient data on which to assess criteria C/D. THis habitat has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under criteria C/D1.

Synthesis:
This habitat does not have a restricted geographical distribution however determining its extent and any trends in quantity and quality is problematic not only because patchiness is a feature of this habitat, with the reef structures interspersed with areas of sediment, but also because of the apparently ephemeral nature of the most abundant and widespread polychaete worm reefs (i.e. those created by S.spinulosa).
While detailed, repeat assessments of S. spinulosa reef structures are rare S.spinulosa reefs are known to have been seriously degraded and reduced in the German Waddensea (by around 85%) over the last century. Over the last decade a further decline of around 33% is considered to have occurred. In the UK there are some localities where reefs are no longer present. Records indicate increases from the 1980's to the 2000's in the western North Sea with new reefs located off the southern North Sea in 2009. Trends in quality of subittoral S.alveolata reefs are also largely unknown whilst those of S.vermicularis appear to have shown substantial degradation.  As the most abundant and extensive examples of this habitat are the reefs of S.spinulosa, the overall current trend in quantity and quality of this habitat is unknown.
Historical losses are known to have been substantial however it is not possible to determine whether these losses exceeded the threshold for Red Listing (loss of more than 40% of the extent of this habitat since 1750). 
This habitat has a large EOO and AOO, and therefore qualifies as Least Concern under criterion B. However the habitat is assessed as Data Deficient both at the EU 28 and EU 28+ levels given the lack of information on its trends in quantity and quality and the fact that its overall distribution is unknown.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
A5.613 Serpula vermicularis reefs on very sheltered circalittoral muddy sand.
Habitat A5.613 has been assessed separately because it exists at very few locations has a small Area of Occupancy and is capable of becoming Critically En

Contributors:
North East Atlantic Working Group: N. Sanders, N. Dankers, J. Forde, K. Fürhaupter, S. Gubbay, R. Haroun Tabraue, F. Otero-Ferrer, G. Saunders and H. Tyler-Walters.
 L.Bush & A.Davies.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.62: Mussel beds Modiolus modiolus on Atlantic sublittoral sediment

Habitat Description:
Modiolus modiolus is an Arctic-Boreal species, with a distribution ranging from the seas around Scandinavia (including Skagerrak & Kattegat) and Iceland south to the Bay of Biscay. Beds of M. modiolus occur with a patchy distribution in the colder waters of the North-East Atlantic, with a range that extends from Russia in the southern parts of the Barents and White Seas, off Norway and down to Sweden (the Sound and Kattegat) and off the UK, in the southern North Sea and Irish Sea. Beds are also known to occur around Iceland and the Faeroes.
Modiolus beds form when horse mussels (Modiolus modiolus) aggregate together by attaching to each other and the substratum with byssal threads. The degree of aggregation at which individuals are considered to be sufficiently dense to constitute a “bed” has been determined to be >30% cover. The depth range over which M.modiolus forms beds is unknown, but they typically occur from the lower shore to about 70 m, with clumps found below 100 m in the Irish Sea. Off the Faeroes, they occur to about 200m depth, being most dense between 65-95 m. The majority of beds are located in current- swept fully-saline locations, although some can be found in sheltered bays, fjords or lochs, with some beds restricted to depths below haloclines.
Modiolus beds occur on a range of substrata, most often on cobbles through to muddy gravels but have also been found on bedrock. Beds are often persistent features which build up through accumulating faecal pellets, shell and trapped sand, so that they may become de-coupled from the substratum on which they were originally founded. They can be self-sustaining to the extent that spat survival is greatest in the crevices amongst the byssal threads of the mature clumps. A diverse range of epibiota and infauna often exists in these communities including hydroids, red seaweeds, solitary ascidians and bivalves such as Aequipecten opercularis and Chlamys varia. The clumping of the byssus threads of the M. modiolus creates a stable habitat that also attracts a very rich infaunal community including areas with a high density of polychaete species. 
 
Indicators of quality:
The condition of Modiolus beds may be judged in several different ways:
- Spatial integrity, such as whether fishing gear tracks cut across a bed.
- Topographic integrity, such as the continued presence of ridges, mounds and other biogenic relief.
- The size distributions of the mussels and whether the populations are being adequately renewed by successful spat settlement and juvenile survival through the first years when they are most vulnerable to predation.
- The abundance, composition, condition and diversity of the associated biota.
For physical disturbance impacts, changes in soft epifauna are more likely. Some of the vagile epifauna, such as brittlestars (e.g. Ophiothrix fragilis) are known to fluctuate markedly in abundance, so caution is needed when interpreting change. Damage also leads to increased abundance of scavengers, which are attracted to disturbed areas.
Characteristic species:
The dominant species and main components vary depending on the associated biotope, four of which have been described for this habitat: In areas of open coast and tide-swept channels an abundance of hydroids and red seaweeds characterises a biotope with Ophiothrix fragilis often common, along with the calcareous tubes of Spirobranchus triqueter, anemones such as Alcyonium digitatum and Urticina felina and hydroids such as Abietinaria abietina and Sertularia argentea. Buccinum undatum may also be important and in some areas the clam Chlamys varia may be frequent. Where there is a rich infaunal community this can comprise a high density of polychaete species including Glycera lapidum, Paradoneis lyra, Aonides paucibranchiata, Laonice bahusiensis, Protomystides bidentata, Lumbrineris spp., Mediomastus fragilis and syllids such as Exogone spp. and Sphaerosyllis spp. Bivalves such as Spisula elliptica, Timoclea ovata and other venerid species are also common and brittlestars such as Amphipholis squamata.
Where the conditions are very sheltered brittlestars Ophiothrix fragilis and Ophiocomina nigra, as well as Ophiopholis aculeata are often frequent, sometimes forming a dense bed. The queen scallop Aequipecten opercularis is often present in moderate abundances. Large solitary ascidians (Ascidiella aspersa, Corella parallelogramma, Dendrodoa grossularia) and fine hydroids (e.g. Kirchenpaueria pinnata) are present, attached to the mussel shells. Decapods such as hermit crabs (Pagurus bernhardus) and spider crabs (Hyas araneus) are typically present. Coralline algal crusts may be found on the mussel shells, with some red seaweeds in shallower water such as Phycodrys rubens.
In a biotope that develops in tide swept sheltered conditions, the variable scallop (Chlamys varia) may be present in large numbers amongst the Modiolus shells. Hydroids such as Halecium spp. and Kirchenpaueria pinnata and ascidians such as Ascidiella aspersa, Corella parallelogramma and Ciona intestinalis may be found attached to pebbles or mussel shells. The echinoderms Ophiothrix fragilis and Antedon bifida are often frequent in this biotope as is the encrusting polychaete Spirobranchus triqueter.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic circalittoral biogenic habitat’ (A5.6).
 
Annex 1:
1170 Reefs
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
Shallow sublittoral coarse sediment and shallow sublittoral mixed sediment
Shallow sublittoral sand Shallow sublittoral mud
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow sands
Shallow muds
Shallow coarse or mixed sediments
 
IUCN:
9.5 Subtidal sandy mud

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Modiolus beds may have been more widespread in the past and could therefore have been historically characteristic of the region.

Trends in Quantity:
This habitat is thought to have been decreasing in the Celtic Seas over the last 50 years, but the extent of this decline is unknown. Some notable events have, however, been observed; for example, severe declines or complete losses have been reported for Strangford Lough, Northern Ireland, to the south of the Isle of Man and off North Anglesey, Wales. Under current climate change scenarios, there are considerable concerns for the viability of the habitat, particularly for beds at the southern limit of the range.

Trends in Quality:
Historic studies have reported severe degradation of beds in the Celtic Seas (e.g. south of Isle of Man, in Strangford Lough, Northern Ireland, and off the Lleyn peninsula, Wales). A small number of M. modiolus beds occur off the Swedish west coast fronting the Kattegat and there are some indications of degradation of the associated fauna due to eutrophication.
A small number of M. modiolus beds occur off the Swedish west coast fronting the Kattegat and there are some indications of degradation of the fauna associated with these beds due to eutrophication. In the UK,  although the use of bottom towed fishing gear has been banned in a small number of sites within the last 15 years,  there is likely to have been a reduction in the quality of beds exposed to bottom trawling.
The habitat quality of beds exposed to bottom towed fishing gear is predicted to reduce in the future. Under current climate change scenarios, the viability of this habitat, particularly of beds at the southern limit of its range is considered to be under serious threat.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
Partly as a result of the patchy distribution of this biogenic habitat and uncertainty about whether records refer to individuals or beds, detailed up-to-date information on distribution is lacking over significant parts of the range. Without such information, it is not possible to provide estimates of the area covered by the M.modiolus bed habitat or the proportion hosted by EU 28. This habitat does occur in Norway, but there is insufficient information to provide estimates of the area covered.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat does not have a small natural range as EOO > 50,000 km2.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat does not have a small natural range as EOO > 50,000 km2.

Pressures and Threats:
The threats and impacts on M. modiolus beds have been fairly well studied. Bottom-towed fishing gear causes rapid and severe damage to beds, both in terms of quantity and quality. The integrity of the often rich associated communities living on and within the beds may be susceptible to human-induced eutrophication events. Climate change may be a future threat forcing a northward shift in the distribution of Modiolus modiolus.

Conservation and Management:
The most effective conservation and management measure for this habitat is the restriction and control of activities that physically damage  the bed structure. This would include regulation of demersal fisheries and shell fisheries, including exclusion of these activities from areas where this habitat occurs, both within and outside marine protected areas. This will also be important to enabling the recovery of this habitat in degraded areas.   Mapping as well as long-term monitoring is needed to assess the condition of this habitat.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1:
1170: MATL U2,  MMAC FV
 
OSPAR threatened and declining habitat
HELCOM have conferred Red List status to the species and assessed it as “Vulnerable”, but have not considered the Modiolus

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
M.modiolus is a long-lived species and individuals within beds studied around the UK are frequently 25 or more years old. The species is considered to be highly intolerant to substratum loss, abrasion and physical damage. As recruitment is sporadic, varying with season, annually, with location, and hydrographic regime and is generally of low intensity, it may take many years for a population to recover from damage, if at all. Recovery has not been recorded from any damaged beds that have been studied. Efforts to restore beds through relocation have not been successful to date.

Summary:
Modiolus beds form when horse mussels (Modiolus modiolus) aggregate together by attaching to each other and the substratum with byssal threads. The degree of aggregation at which individuals are considered to be sufficiently dense to constitute a “bed” has been determined to be >30% cover. The depth range over which M.modiolus forms beds is unknown, but they typically occur at depths from the lower shore to about 70 m. The majority of beds are located in current- swept fully-saline locations, in the open coast as well as sheltered bays, fjords or lochs. They develop on a range of substrata, most often on cobbles through to muddy gravels, but have also been found on bedrock.
Beds are often persistent features which build up through accumulating faecal pellets, shell and trapped sand, so that they may become de-coupled from the substratum on which they were originally founded. Communities associated with M.modiolus beds are diverse, with a wide range of epibiota and infauna being recorded, including hydroids, red seaweeds, solitary ascidians and bivalves such as Aequipecten opercularis and Chlamys varia. The dominant species and main components vary depending on the biotope, four of which have been described for this habitat. Where they occur M. modiolus beds contribute significantly to benthic productivity. They support associated communities of high biodiversity and may be locally important in providing both refugia and feeding opportunities for young fish. 
Bottom-towed fishing gear currently represents the greatest pressure for Modiolus beds, while climate change, specifically sea temperature rise, may also be a considerable future threat to the maintenance of the range of M. modiolus, which is a strictly cold-water species. Modiolus beds are best protected by regulation of fisheries and shell fisheries including exclusion of bottom contact fishing gear from areas where this habitat occurs.

References:
Callaway, R., Engelhard, G. H., Dann, J, Cotter, J., and  Rumhor, H. 2007. A century of North Sea epibenthos and trawling comparisons between 1902-1912, 1982-1895 and 2000. Marine Ecology Progress Series 346: 27-43
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Available at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
Cook, R. L., Fariñas Franco, J. M., Gell, F. R., Holt, R. H. F., Holt, T., Lindenbaum, C., Porter, J. S., Seed, R., Skates, L. R., Stringell, T. B. and Sanderson, W. G. 2014. The substantial first impact of bottom fishing on rare biodiversity hotspots: a dilemma for evidence-based conservation. PLoS ONE 8.
European Environment Agency. 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp. (Accessed: 07/05/2015).
Gormley, K. S. G., Porter, J. S., Bell, M. C., Hull, A. D. and Sanderson, W. G. 2013. Predictive habitat modelling as a tool to assess the change in distribution and extent of an OSPAR priority habitat under an increased ocean temperature scenario: consequences for marine protected area networks and management. PLoS ONE 8.
HELCOM Species Information Sheet. Modiolus modiolus.  http://helcom.fi/Red%20List%20Species%20Information%20Sheet/HELCOM%20Red%20List%20Modiolus%20modiolus.pdf  (Accessed: 07/05/2015).
Hirst, N. E., Cook, R. L., James, B., Kent, F. E. A., Loxton, J. L., Porter, J. S. and Sanderson, W. G. 2012. The distribution of Priority Marine Features and MPA search features in Orkney waters: Rousay to Copinsay including Eday Sound and points in Scapa Flow. Scottish Natural Heritage Report. No 509.
Hirst, N. E., Clark, L. and Sanderson, W. G. 2012. The distribution of selected MPA search features and Priority. Marine Features off the NE coast of Scotland. Perth: Scottish Natural Heritage Report. No 500.
Hirst, N. E., Kamphausen, L. M., Cook, R. L., Porter, J. S., Sanderson, W. G. 2013. Distribution and status of proposed protected fres in the Fetlar to Haroldswick MPA proposal. Perth: Scottish Natural Heritage Report. No. 599.
Lindenbaum, C., Bennell, J. D., Rees, E. I. S., McClean, D., Cook, W., Wheeler, A. J. and Sanderson, W. G. 2008. Small- scale variation within a Modiolus modiolus (Mollusca: Bivalvia) reef in the Irish Sea: I. Seabed mapping and reef morphology. Journal of the Marine Biological Association UK 88: 133-141.
Maddock, A. (Ed) 2008. Horse Mussel Beds. UK Biodiversity Action Plan Priority Habitat Descriptions. Available at: http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-5155. (Accessed: 12/05/2015). 
Mair, J. M., Moore, C. G., Kingston, P. F. and Harries, D. B. 2000. A review of the status, ecology and conservation of horse mussel Modiolus modiolus beds in Scotland. Scottish Natural Heritage Report F99PA08.
Mair, J.M., Lyndon, A.R., Moore, C.G. and Sotheron, I.S. 2009. Site Condition Monitoring of the Sullom Voe Special Area of Conservation. Scottish Natural Heritage Report. No 350.
Moore, C. G., Harries, D. B. and Trigg, C. 2012. The distribution of selected MPA search features within Lochs Linnhe, Etive and Eil: A broadscale validation survey. Scottish Natural Heritage Report. No 502.
OSPAR Commission 2009. Background document for Modiolus modiolus beds. Southampton: OSPAR Commission Biodiversity Series.
Roberts, D., Allcock, A. L., Fariñas Franco, J. M., Gorman, E., Maggs, C. A., Mahon, A. M., Smyth, D., Strain, E., and Wilson, C. D. 2011. Modiolus Restoration Research Projectâ€¯: Final Report and Recommendations. Queens University Belfast.
Sanderson, W. G., Hirst, N. E., Fariñas Franco, J. M., Grieve, R. C., Mair, J. M., Porter, J. S. and Stirling, D. A. 2014. North Cava Island and Karlsruhe horse mussel bed assessment. Scottish Natural Heritage Report.
Service, M., & Magorrian, B. H. 1997. The extent and temporal variation of disturbance of epibenthic communities in Strangford Lough, Northern Ireland. Journal of the Marine Biological Association UK 77: 1151-1164.
Strain, E. M. A., Allcock, A. L., Goodwin, C. E., Maggs, C. A., Picton, B. E., and Roberts, D. 2012. The long-term impacts of fisheries on epifaunal assemblage function and structure, in a Special Area of Conservation Journal of Sea Research 67: 58-68.
Veale, L. O., Hill, A. S., Hawkins, S. J. and Brand, A.R. 2000. Effects of long-term physical disturbances by commercial scallop fishing on subtidal epifaunal assemblages and habitats. Marine Biology 137: 325-337.
INPN. 2015. Observatoire pour la conservation et l'étude des animaux et milieux marins (OCEAMM). Paris: INPN, SPN-MNHN, p.11. Available at: http://inpn.mnhn.fr/zone/znieffMer/31M000004.pdf (Accessed: 11/05/2015).

Criterion A Text:
There are data from selected locations that have been well-studied.  A single location has reported a 100% loss, while other beds have been observed to be severely damaged. Overall there are insufficient quantitative data for a reliable estimate the historical or recent decline. 
Future decline has been predicted due to continuing impact from demersal fisheries, and under various scenarios of climate change where modelling work indicates that  the areas suitable for M.modiolus beds around the British Isles will decrease and  that a loss of 100% of the “most suitable” habitat was likely to occur by 2080. Beds may extend further north but this will be  outside the EU28+ area.
OSPAR have identified this habitat as being under threat  and/or declining in the all parts of the OSPAR area where it occurs. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Near Threatened under criteria A2.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000 km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. Some future decline has been predicted but the distribution of the habitat is such that the identified threats are unlikely to affect all localities at once. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criteria B1, B2 and B3.

Criterion C/D Text:
Historic studies have reported severe degradation of beds in the Celtic Seas (e.g. south of Isle of Man, in Strangford Lough, Northern Ireland, and off the Lleyn peninsula, Wales). A small number of M. modiolus beds occur off the Swedish west coast fronting the Kattegat and there are some indications of degradation of the associated fauna due to eutrophication.
The habitat quality of beds exposed to bottom towed fishing gear is predicted to reduce in the future. Furthermore, under current climate change scenarios, the viability of this habitat, particularly of beds at the southern limit of the range of  M.modiolus, is considered to be under serious threat. Beds may extend further north but this will be outside the EU28+ area.
OSPAR have identified this habitat as being under threat  and/or declining in the all parts of the OSPAR area where it occurs. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Near Threatened under criteria C/D2.

Criterion E Text:
Maxent modelling and GIS environmental envelope analysis of Modiolus modiolus beds was carried out by Gormley et al (2013) The extent of “most suitable”, “less suitable” and “unsuitable” habitat was calculated for UK waters for the baseline year (2009) and for projected increased ocean temperature scenarios extending to 2030, 2050, 2080 and 2100. The steepest decline was predicted for between 2050 and 2080 and the authors concluded that a loss of 100% of the “most suitable” habitat was likely to occur by 2080.

Synthesis:
Modiolus modiolus is an Arctic-Boreal species, with a distribution ranging from the seas around Scandinavia (including Skagerrak & Kattegat) and Iceland south to the Bay of Biscay. Beds of M. modiolus occur with a patchy distribution in the colder waters of the North East Atlantic, with a range that extends from Russia in the southern parts of the Barents and White Seas, off Norway and down to Sweden (the Sound and Kattegat) and off the UK, in the southern North Sea and Irish Sea. Beds are also known to occur around Iceland and the Faeroes.
While some beds are well known previously unknown small beds of M. modiolus continue to be found even in areas where the distribution of coarse-scale benthic habitats is considered to be well documented. Maps have been produced for several countries and regions, but there remains uncertainty over the extent and occurrence of this habitat. Available evidence indicates that fully developed “beds”, where the mussels cover most of the sea floor creating biogenic reef structures, are scarce.
Very few individual beds have been studied over decadal time periods, so there is little firm evidence for decline across the entire habitat range. There are, however, clear instances where severe local declines have been caused by physical damage from trawling. There is also some evidence to suggest that the quality of Modiolus beds have declined over both historical and shorter timescales and that they continue to be vulnerable to human activities, particularly demersal fishing activity, but there are insufficient reliable data to quantify trends. OSPAR have identified this habitat as being under threat  and/or declining in the all parts of the OSPAR area where it occurs and Modiolus modiolus is assessed as Vulnerable under the HELCOM species red list.
This habitat has been assessed as Near Threatened in both the EU 28 and EU 28+  because of recent and future threats.

Contributors:
R. Cook and the North East Atlantic Working Group. S. Gubbay, G. Saunders, H. Tyler-Walters, N. Dankers, F. Otero-Ferrer, J. Forde, K. Fürhaupter, R. Haroun Tabraue, N. Sanders.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.62 Mussel beds (Mytilis edulis) on Atlantic sublittoral sediment

Habitat Description:
Sublittoral mussel beds of the common mussel Mytilus edulis may be sublittoral extensions of littoral reefs or exist independently. They beds are found in a variety of situations ranging from sheltered estuaries and marine inlets to open coasts and offshore areas, in fully marine or sometimes variable salinity conditions in the outer regions of estuaries. They may occupy a range of substrata, although due to the accumulating and stabilising effect such communities have on the substratum muddy mixed sediments are typical. There are three distinct  habitat components: the interstices withn the mussel matrix; the biodeposits beneath the bed; and the substratum afforded by the mussel shells themselves. 
All three components often contain a diverse range of epibiota and infauna. The mussel matrix may support sea cucumbers, anemones, boring clionid sponges, ascidians, crabs, nemerteans, errant polychaetes and flatworms. The biodeposits attract infauna such as sediment dwelling sipunculids, oligochaetes, and polychaetes while epizoans may use the mussels shells themselves as substrata.
Indicators of Quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
The overall quality and continued occurrence of this habitat is, however, largely dependent on the presence of Mytilus edulis which creates the biogenic structural complexity on which the characteristic associated communities depend. The density and the maintenance of a viable population of this species is a key indicator of habitat quality, together with the visual evidence of presence or absence of physical damage. Monitoring programmes may include measures of biomass, coverage, length frequency distribution, a condition index for the mussels (a ratio between biomass versus shell length) and descriptions of the structure of a bed including vertical height profile, thickness and type of accumulated sediment, coverage and biomass of macroalgae.
Characteristic species:
Characterised by Mytilus edulis. In the subtidal, dense mussel beds can form on the upper faces of tide-swept sediment dominated substrates, to the exclusion of almost all other species compared to the surrounding sediments. The common starfish Asterias rubens is often locally abundant as it feeds on mussels, along with other predators such as the crabs Necora puber, Carcinus maenas, Maja squinado and Cancer pagurus. Anemones such as Sagartiogeton undatus, the dahlia anemone Urticina equine and the daisy anemone Cereus pedunculatus can be found on gravel patches and amongst the mussels themselves. The hydroid Kirchenpaueria pinnata and others characteristic of strong tides and a little scour, such as Sertularia argentea and Tubularia indivisa, may also be present. Ascidians such as Molgula manhattensis and Polycarpa spp. can also feature on subtidal mussel beds, particularly in silty conditions. Other characterising infaunal species may include the amphipod Gammarus salinus and oligochaetes of the genus Tubificoides. The polychaetes Harmothoe spp., Kefersteinia cirrata and Heteromastus filiformis are also important. Epifaunal species in addition to the M. edulis include the whelks Nucella lapillus and Buccinum undatum, the common starfish Asterias rubens the spider crab Maja squinado and the anemone Urticina felina.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Atlantic circalittoral biogenic habitat’ (A5.6).
 
Annex 1:
1170 Reefs
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
Shallow sublittoral coarse sediment and shallow sublittoral mixed sediment
Shallow sublittoral sand
Shallow sublittoral mud
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow sands
Shallow muds
Shallow coarse or mixed sediments
 
IUCN: 
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs
9.5 Subtidal sandy mud

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Mussel (M.edulis) beds are widely distributed across the North East Atlantic region but tend to be scared on subtidal sediment. This habitat - mussel beds on sublittoral sediment - is therefore unusual and is thus not considered an outstanding example of the typical characteristics of the North East Atlantic region.

Trends in Quantity:
There can be very large annual variations in the extent of this habitat as a result of the success of spatfalls, and according to weather conditions such as storm events. Dramatic declines in this habitat can also occur as a result of starfish predation which can rapidly wipe out subtidal mussel beds. Such variations are well illustrated by historical records and also 20 years of survey data for the Wadden Sea which show changing patterns and abundance of the sublittoral mussel beds.
An analysis of trends in this habitat should distinguish between naturally occurring and cultivated beds but data are typically from the latter which are commercially exploited. In Germany there has been  an estimated decline of between 30-70% in the sublittoral Wadden Sea beds.  In the Netherlands 80% of the sublittoral beds are removed each year, typically mussels that have had 2 years growth  for commercial fisheries which are therefore the main impact. There is a lack of data on  trends in the  extent of this habitat elsewhere.
Given the reported decrease in recruitment (spat falls) across Europe since the 1980s and that the largest extent of this habitat is in the southern North Sea where there have been substantial losses, the data suggest that overall the extent of this habitat is decreasing.

Trends in Quality:
An analysis of trends in this habitat should distinguish between naturally occurring and cultivated beds as there are distinct differences in density, total biomass and species richness of  the macrozoobenthos communities, but data are typically from the latter which are commercially exploited.
Changes in species composition within the habitat over the last 50 years have been identified in the Netherlands, (western Wadden Sea) for example. Here species such as the non-native oyster (C.gigas), Ensis, Mya and Marenzelleria, which were not present in 1982 were recorded when beds were re-surveyed in 2008 and there were also changes in the abundance of deposit feeders such as Macoma balthica and Peringia ulvae. However in spite of these relatively large shifts in community composition in terms of individual species, there was no indication of change in the community composition in terms of feeding group biomass.
Wild beds have more soft substrate species compared with cultured beds which have more hard substrate species. Commercial mussel fisheries have had an extremely heavy impact on spat, and decreased habitat structure and density of mussels directly, with the density in fished plots remaining lower when resurveyed after one year.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat does not have a small natural range being reported from locations as widely separated as southern Ireland and the Wadden Sea.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat does not have a small natural range being reported from locations as widely separated as southern Ireland and the Wadden Sea.

Pressures and Threats:
The main pressures and threats to this habitat are from the targeted mussel  fisheries but damage is also caused by shrimp fisheries, invasive species, and effects associated with climate change such as the timing of spat falls and survivability of predators. Mussel seed is collected from wild sublittoral beds by bottom dredging, and this activity has both a direct and indirect effect.  The cohesion of mussel beds depends directly on the attachment strength of the mussel byssal threads. When byssal thread attachments are disrupted, individuals or groups of mussels from the matrix are dislodged and disturbance gaps are formed. Subsequent expansion of this disruption may result from a variety of factors including both physical and biological processes.

Conservation and Management:
Management of the wild commercial mussel fishery is key to the conservation of this habitat. This includes controls on the removal of seed stock, the level of fishing effort and locations where fisheries are permitted. In the Netherlands and Germany efforts are also underway to switch from collection of spat by dredging to use of seed collectors (ropes, nets, poles), with the aim of eliminating the bottom fishery within the next 10 years. In France and Spain the use of seed collectors has been standard practice for decades. Closures of collecting areas to enable recovery of stocks and the associated habitat are also needed, as well as regulation of discharges to the marine environment which result in nutrient enrichment that affects the condition and viability of this habitat.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
There is a good capacity for this habitat to recover following damage. The time taken will depend on the occurence and frequency of  good spatfalls and natural events such as storm damage and the presence of predators. 
Blue mussels are sessile, attached organisms that are unable to repair significant damage to individuals. They do not reproduce asexually and therefore the only mechanism for recovery from significant impacts is larval recruitment to the bed or the area where previously a bed existed. Recruitment is often sporadic, occurring in unpredictable pulses, but persistent mussel beds can be maintained by sporadic or relatively low levels of  recruitment.

Summary:
Sublittoral mussel beds of the common mussel Mytilus edulis are found in a variety of situations ranging from sheltered estuaries and marine inlets to open coasts and offshore areas, in fully marine or sometimes variable salinity conditions in the outer regions of estuaries. It has a wide geographical range extending from the Atlantic coast of Ireland to the southern North Sea. There are three distinct habitat components: the interstices withn the mussel matrix; the biodeposits beneath the bed; and the substratum afforded by the mussel shells themselves. All three components often contain a diverse range of epibiota and infauna. 
The main pressures and threats to this habitat are from the targeted mussel  fisheries but damage is also caused by shrimp fisheries, invasive species, and effects associated with climate change such as the timing of spat falls and survivability of predators. Mussel seed collected from wild sublittoral beds by bottom dredging, also has both a direct and indirect effect.  
Management of the wild commercial mussel fishery is key to the conservation of this habitat. This includes controls on the removal of seed stock, the level of fishing effort and locations where fisheries are permitted. Regulation of discharges to the marine environment which result in nutrient enrichment that affects the condition and viability of this habitat is also a beneficial management tool.

References:
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N. et al. 2004. The Marine Habitat Classification for Britain and Ireland Version 04.05 JNCC. [online] Peterborough: ISBN 1 861 07561 8. Available at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/04_05_introduction.pdf. (Accessed: 30/08/2014).
Drent, J. & Dekker, R. 2013. How different are subtidal Mytilus edulis L. communities of natural mussel beds and mussel culture plots in the western Dutch Wadden Sea? NIOZ Report, IMARES, p.90.
Dekker, R. & Drent, J.2013. The macrozoobenthos in the subtidal of the western Dutch wadden Sea in 2008 and a comparison with 1981-82. NIOZâ€Report, IMARES. 
European Environment Agency. 2014. EUNIS habitat type hierarchical view. Available at: http://eunis.eea.europa.eu/habitats-code-browser.jsp (accessed 07/042015).
Hiscock, K., Harris, R. & Lukey, J. 2006. Nationally Important Marine Features and Biodiversity. Action Plan Marine Priority Habitats and Species. Report to the Joint Nature Conservation. Committee from the Marine Biological Association. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association. JNCC Contract F90-01-892.Peterborough, Joint Nature Conservation Committee, JNCC Report No. 506.
Holt, T. J., Rees, E. I., Hawkins, S. J. & Seed, R. 1998. Biogenic reefs (Volume IX). An overview of dynamic and sensitivity characteristics for conservation management of marine SACs. Liverpool: UK Marine SACs. 
Kennedy, R. 2008. Benthic Biotope classification of subtidal sedimentary habitats in the Lower River Suir candidate Special Area of Conservation and the River Nore and River Barrow candidate Special Area of Conservation (July 2008). Available at: http://www.npws.ie/sites/default/files/publications/pdf/Kennedy_2008_NPWS_Subtidal_Surveys.pdf. (Accessed: 07/04/2015). 
Maddock, A. (Ed) 2008. Blue Mussel beds on sediment. UK Biodiversity Action Plan Priority Habitat Descriptions.Available at: http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-5155. (Accessed: 07/04/2015). 
Mainwaring, K., Tillin, H. & Tyler-Walters, H. 2014. Assessing the sensitivity of blue mussel beds to pressures associated with human activities. Peterborough: Joint Nature Conservation Committee, JNCC Report No. 506.
Smaal, A., Graeymeersch, J., Jansen, J. et al. 2012. Sublittoral mussel beds in the Dutch Wadden Sea; natural dynamics, fishery impacts and options for restoration. Available at: http://www.waddenacademie.nl/fileadmin/inhoud/pdf/01-Waddenacademie/symposium_november_2012/presentations_22_november_2012/Smaal_22-11-2012_ISWSS_Leeuwarden.pdf. (Accessed: 07/05/2015).

Criterion A Text:
A substantial decline in the extent of this habitat has been reported from some areas (e.g. between 30-70% in the German Wadden Sea). Excluding changes in managed beds from this analysis, the expert opinion is that overall this habitat has probably declined by at least 25% over the last 50 years. The habitat is therefore assessed as Near Threatened under criteria A for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the North East Atlantic region The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000 km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution.This habitat is subject to a continuing decline in its spatial extent but its distribution is such that the identified threats are unlikely to affect all localities at one. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criterion B for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Criterion C/D Text:
This habitat has declined in quality in some parts of its range over the last 50 years but the overall situation is unclear. For example a substantial reduction of more than 80% of beds with more than 50% collapsed has been reported for the German Wadden Sea. In the Dutch Wadden Sea non-native species that were not present in 1982 have subsequently been reported in mussel beds although in terms of overall biomass there was no significant change in the main feeding groups. Spat collection from subtidal beds to support commercial mussel fisheries has also been shown to affect density and structure even though the mussel bed may subsequently recover. This habitat has been assessed as Data Deficient under criteria C/D.

Synthesis:
This habitat has a wide geographical distribution and is not limited to a few locations. Trends can be difficult to distinguish as there can be very large annual variations influenced by the success of spatfalls, and weather conditions such as storm events and starfish predation which can rapidly wipe out subtidal mussel beds. An analysis of trends in this habitat should distinguish between naturally occurring and cultivated beds but data are typically from the latter which are commercially exploited.
Given the reported decrease in recruitment (spat falls) across Europe since the 1980s and that the largest extent of this habitat is in the southern North Sea where there have been substantial losses, the data suggest that overall the extent of this habitat is decreasing.  
This habitat has declined in quality in some parts of its range over the last 50 years but the overall situation is unclear. For example, there has been an extremely heavy impact on spat from commercial fishing which decreases habitat structure and density directly, and also causes changes in the species composition to include the non-native oyster (C.gigas), Ensis, Mya and Marenzelleria, but this is not the case throughout the range of this habitat in the North East Atlantic region.  
The overall assessment is that this habitat is Near Threatened for both the EU 28 and EU 28+ on the basis of decline in quantity over the last 50 years.

Assessors:
North East Atlantic Working Group: S. Gubbay, N. Dankers, K. Fürhaupter, G. Saunders, H. Tyler-Walters, F. Otero-Ferrer, J. Forde, R. Haroun Tabraue, N. Sanders

Contributors:
E. Bastos and the North East Atlantic Working Group: S. Gubbay, N. Dankers, K. Fürhaupter, G. Saunders, H. Tyler-Walters, , F. Otero-Ferrer, J. Forde, R. Haroun, N. Sanders.


Habitat Type Name:
F5.1 Mediterranean maquis and arborescent matorral

Habitat Description:
This habitat includes the evergreen sclerophyllous or lauriphyllous shrub vegetation with a more or less closed canopy structure (maquis), the low, sparse, garrigue-like silicicolous maquis of western Mediterranean, as well as the communities of low arborescent cover and with a usually thick, high evergreen shrub stratum, occurring in the Mediterranean biogeographical zone. Maquis and arborescent matorral may represent pre-forest communities, replacement stages of the climax forests, or permanent communities on xeric sites. High maquis includes scrub of Arbutus spp., Erica spp., Juniperus spp., Phillyrea spp. and low maquis includes communities of Cistus spp., Erica spp., Genista spp., Lavandula spp. Primary matorral occurs on ecologically marginal sites, but more often this habitat is derived from degraded broad-leaved evergreen, thermophillous deciduous or conifer forests. Juniperus spp., Ziziphus spp., Laurus nobilis and Quercus coccifera may codominate. The habitat includes a broad variety of plant communities and so, it does not exhibit any specific ecological preference. It mostly occurs in the thermo- to meso-Mediterranean belts but it extends from the intermediate between tropical and Mediterranean zones (scrub steppes of the arid Iberian, North Africa, Anatolia and central Cyprus) to the supra-Mediterranean zone (Cistus ladanifer shrublands of the Iberian peninsula and southern France). The habitat does not show any relationship with one specific substrate and it is found on acid (e.g. Ericion arboreae; Arbuto unedonis-Laurion nobilis), decalcified (e.g. Cistus laurifolius maquis) and alkaline soils. Grazing and fire are two of the most influential factors shaping the habitat’s physiognomy, acting at varying and usually contradictive ways. Cistus monspeliensis maquis can be favoured from fire events and may dominate the landscape after fires. On the other hand, fire in Juniperus ssp. arborescent matorrals can be a big threat to the habitat due to the low resistance to and poor recovery from fire of Juniperus species. With increasing summer aridity and human pressure, maquis resembles to garrigues as they become low and sparse. Moreover low, garrigues-like maquis are rather frequent in fire-prone regions. This habitat, besides the primary, edaphic- or climatic-controlled stands at marginal sites, has a strong plagioclimax character and so, its occurrence and quality mainly depends on the occurrence of low to intermediate disturbances at an acceptable periodicity.
Indicators of quality:
Dense horizontal and vertical vegetation structure
No indication of overgrazing 
Absence of active secondary succession towards forest ecosystems (absence of trees)
Absence of grass encroachment
Species richness of the stands
Absence of invasive species
Absence or low cover of ruderal species

Low levels of soil compactness, well developed Ah soil horizon and  are good indicators of absence of over grazing that can result to degradation towards garrigues. On the other hand, the level of tree and grass encroachment and, generally, presence and abundance of a given set of typical species or functional traits (i.e. morphological, physiological and life history characteristics) can be used as proxy indicators of biodiversity levels and succession stage. Absence of invasive and/or ruderal taxa should be also considered as indication of good habitat quality.
Characteristic species:
Acacia albida, Arbutus unedo, Calluna vulgaris, Ceratonia siliqua, Cistus albidus, C. crispus, C. incanus, C. ladanifer, C. laurifolius, C. monspeliensis, C. populifolius, C. psilosepalus, C. salvifolius, Cupressus sempervirens, Erica arborea, E. cinerea, E. lusitanica, E. scoparia, J. oxycedrus, J. phoenicea, J. thurifera, Laurus nobilis, Lavandula stoechas subsp. luisieri, L. stoechas subsp. pedemontana, L. stoechas subsp. stoechas, Myrtus communis, Olea europaea subsp. cerasiformis, O. europaea var. sylvestris, Phillyrea angustifolia, P. latifolia, Pistacia lentiscus, Quercus coccifera, Q. faginea, Q. ilex, Q. pyrenaica, Q. rotundifolia, Q. suber, Rhamnus alaternus, Tetraclinis articulata, Viburnum tinus, Zelkova abelicea, Ziziphus lotus and Z. spina-christi.

Classification:
EUNIS:
F5.1 Arborescent matorral
F5.2 Maquis
EuroVegChecklist:
Acero sempervirentis-Cupression sempervirentis Barbero et Quézel ex Quézel et al. 1993
Arbuto andrachnae-Quercion cocciferae Barbero et Quézel 1979
Arbuto unedonis-Laurion nobilis Rivas-Mart., Fernández-González et Loidi 1999
Asparago albi-Rhamnion oleoidis Rivas Goday ex Rivas-Mart. 1975
Ceratonio-Pistacion lentisci Zohary ex Zohary et Orshan 1959
Ericion arboreae (Rivas-Mart. ex Rivas-Mart. et al. 1986) Rivas-Mart. 1987
Erico-Quercion ilicis S. Brullo et al. 1977
Juniperion turbinatae Rivas-Mart. 1975 corr. 1987
Oleo-Ceratonion siliquae Br.-Bl. ex Guinochet et Drouineau 1944
Periplocion angustifoliae Rivas-Mart. 1975
Pistacio terebinthi-Rhamnion alaterni Barbero et Quézel ex Quézel et al. 1992
Quercion alnifoliae Barbero & Quézel 1979
Quercion broteroi Br.-Bl. et al. 1956 corr. Rivas-Mart. 1972
Quercion calliprini Zohary ex Quézel et al. 1992
Quercion ilicis Br.-Bl. ex Molinier 1934
Oleo sylvestris-Quercion rotundifoliae Barbero, Quézel et Rivas-Mart. in Rivas-Mart. et al. 1986 nom. invers. propos.
Rhamno lycioidis-Quercion cocciferae Rivas Goday ex Rivas-Mart. 1975
Annex I:
5210 Arborescent matorral with Juniperus spp.
5230 Arborescent matorral with Laurus nobilis
5310 Laurus nobilis thickets
5330 Thermo-Mediterranean and pre-desert scrub
9390 *Scrub & low forest vegetation with Quercus alnifolia
Emerald:
F5.13 Juniper matorral
F5.18 Laurus nobilis matorral
F5.516 Laurus thickets
MAES:
Heathland and shrub
IUCN:
3.8 Mediterranean-type Shrubby Vegetation
Other relationships:
5340 a Greek habitat type which includes maquis, garrigues and similar vegetation other than phrygana and pseudomaquis

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The evergreen sclerophyllous or lauriphyllous scrubs included in this habitat represent the typical and most widespread vegetation type of the Mediterranean basin; different subtypes of this habitat either with a more or less closed canopy structure (maquis) or low, sparse, garrigue-like silicicolous maquis of western Mediterranean, or low arborescent cover and with a usually thick, high evergreen shrub stratum, occur exclusively in the Mediterranean zone.

Map Description:
The map is rather complete for EU28, but has data gaps outside the European Union, like in the coastal regions of the Balkan countries. Data sources: Art17, EVA.

Comment EU28:
Based on the existing data provided from EU Member States. This number is partially representing the current actual total area.

Comment EU28+:
No quantitative data exist for the EU 28+ countries. We have only the current estimated area in Bosnia & Herzegovina

Trends in Quantity:
Out of the nine countries that have provided territorial data, 5 countries (Spain, France, Italy, Greece, Cyprus) report a stable quantity, 2 countries (Bosnia/Herzegovina and Portugal) report a slight decrease, and 2 countries (Bulgaria, Croatia) report a slight increase to the extent of the habitat.

Trends in Quality:
Of the 9 countries for which territorial data are available, only few quantitative data have been provided on trends in quality. The recent trend in quality is given mostly as experts opinion, either as stable (5 of the 9 countries) or increasing (2 of the 9 countries) to decreasing (1 of the 9 countries) and unknown (1 of the 9 countries). The European trend has been calculated although with  many data gaps. Overall its is assessed that there is a stable to positive trend (increasing) with slight severity of degradation in the past.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
About 90% of its total Mediterranean distribution area lies within the EU 28.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat occurs most often in extensive stands and the various vegetation types of the maquis and the arborescent matorral are typical and the most widespread vegetation occurring in the Mediterranean basin.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat is distributed across the entire Mediterranean biogeographical zone (including not only EU 28 and EU 28+ countries) but also in Turkey, Northern Africa, etc.

Pressures and Threats:
The main pressures, which might become threats in the future, affecting the quality (structural elements) of the habitat are related to quality indicators of the habitat: intensive grazing (overgrazing can result to degradation towards garrigues), forest clearance and fires, as well as the biocoenotic evolution and succession (absence of active secondary succession towards forest ecosystems is also a good quality indicator for the habitat). The intensity of the pressures vary throughout the  Mediterranean distribution area of the habitat.

Conservation and Management:
In most cases no management measures are needed or (to be accurate) is possible to be implemented. However, especially when the habitat occurs within a protected area of the Natura 2000 network or under another designated protection status, it would be possible to monitor and control the grazing intensity, as well as the cutting of shrubs and low trees (for fire wood) and in some cases the forest clearance. The level of tree and grass penetration and, generally, the presence and abundance of a given set of typical species or functional traits (i.e. morphological, physiological and life history characteristics) that can be used as proxy indicators of biodiversity levels and succession stage could be set as conservation objectives and certain measures to restore or improve these tall scrub habitats could be designed and implemented.

Conservation Status:
Only for the Mediterranean Biogeographical region where the herein defined habitat F 5.1 (related partly or fully with the Annex I of the Dir. 92/43/EC habitat types (5230, 6310) occurs.
5230 U1
6310 U2

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The habitat can restore naturally without any human intervention, even in short time periods.

Summary:
This habitat includes evergreen sclerophyllous or lauriphyllous maquis vegetation with a more or less closed canopy structure, but also the low, sparse, garrigue-like siliceous scrub of the western Mediterranean and low matorral with a tree cover and usually tall and thick evergreen understorey occurring through the Mediterranean zone. Such vegetation occurs on a wide variety of substrates, with diverse associated floras, and may represent pre-forest communities, replacement stages of the climax forests, or permanent communities on xeric sites. Natural succession, intensive grazing, forest clearance and fires are major threats.  Controlling such processes and interventions aid conservation.

References:
Costa, José Carlos, Carlos Neto, Carlos Aguiar, Jorge Capelo, Maria Dalila Espírito Santo, João Honrado, Carlos Pinto-Gomes, Tiago Monteiro-Henriques, Miguel Sequeira and Mario Lousã. "Vascular Plant Communities in Portugal (Continental, the Azores and Madeira)." Global Geobotany 2, no. 1 (2012): 1-180.
Rivas-Martínez, Salvador, Thomas E. Díaz, Federico Fernández-González, Jesús Izco, Javier Loidi, Mario Lousã and Ángel Penas. "Vascular Plant Communities of Spain and Portugal." Itinera Geobotanica 15,  (2002): 1-922.
Tsiourlis, Georgios, Pavlos Konstantinidis and Pantelis Xofis. "Syntaxonomy and Synecology of Quercus Coccifera Mediterranean Shrublands in Greece." Journal of Plant Biology 52, no. 5 (2009): 433-447.
http://www.prodromo-vegetazione-italia.org (access: 19-Sep-2014)

Criterion A Text:
The estimation of the decline in quantity is based on the territorial data provided by 7 of the 8 EU28 countries and shows a slight reduction in quantity the last 50 years. From the EU28+ countries, quantitative data were provided only by Bosnia & Herzegovina.

Criterion B Text:
The EOO, AOO and number of locations are all much higher than the thresholds under criterion B.

Criterion C/D Text:
Both biotic and abiotic quality of the habitat have not substantially reduced the last 50 years. Decline in quality has been summarized on the basis of the national experts assessments. From the calculations of the trend in quality, it is evident that the last 50 years only a slight decline in quality (extent of degradation equals 8.9% with severity 25%) has occurred.

Synthesis:
The habitat qualifies for the Least Concern (LC) category because it has an extensive distribution across the Mediterranean biogeographical zones, the reduction in quantity over the past 50 years has been very small (in fact in most areas the habitat area has been stable), and the decline in quality over the same period was slight to moderate affecting only a small part (9%) of the extent.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Several geographically differentiated sub-types may be distinguished. Such subtypes should be monitored in relation to the neighbouring vegetation communities in the succession line, because this habitat includes maquis and arborescent matorral that ma

Contributors:
Type description: F. Xystrakis
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, O. Argagnon, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, J.Capelo, L. Casella, P. Dimopoulos, D. EspÃ­rito-Santo, C. Giancola, D. Gigante, G. Giusso del Galdo, Ch. Gussev, J. Loidi, C. MarcenÃ², G. Pezzi, S. Sciandrello, Å kvorc , V. Stupar,Â D. Viciani
Working Group Heathland & Scrub: M. Aronsson, F. Bioret, C. Bita-Nicolae, J. Capelo, A. ÄŒarni, P. Dimopoulos, J. Janssen, J. Loidi


Habitat Description:
Alluvial Mediterranean tamarisk (Tamarix spp), oleander (Nerium oleander), and chaste tree (Vitex agnus-castus ) galleries and thickets, and similar low ligneous formations living in irregularly flooded environments. In climates with severe seasonal drought, such as the Mediterranean, streams can be intensely fluctuant and even temporary; often the flooding temporal pattern is extremely irregular. This can leave riverbeds (or large portions of them) completely dry for long periods, in which often salinity increases during the drought. The hydric requirements of the scrub in such river beds are much lower than those of the willow, poplar or alder riparian forests (habitat G1.3). Under even more extreme conditions pioneer communities of habitat C3.5e are found.
These scrub and thickets are frequent in the areas where summer drought is long and severe, i.e. the thermo- and meso-Mediterranean belts of southern Europe (central and southern Iberia, southern Italy and southern Greece) and the Canary Islands, expanding in North Africa and Middle East along the Saharo-Arabian and Irano-Turanian regions. They include formations of Tamarix ramossissima of stream sides and coastal localities of the Pontic and Steppic areas of the Black Sea shores in SE Europe.
This habitat is rarely forming a dense shrubland due to disturbance regime determined by the floods. The best examples are found in uncontrolled stretches of mature rivers, rivulets or depressions.
Indicators of good quality:
periodically inundated with flood waters
bushes distributed scattered, sometimes closing in a more dense thicket
no signal of timber or firewood exploitation
no sign of eutrophication due to anthropogenically polluted or enriched flood-waters, with appearance of nitrophilic herbs
no sign of non-native invaders

Characteristic species:
Vascular plants: Flueggea tinctoria (= Rhamnus tinctoria; Rhamnus saxatilis subsp. tinctorius), Lonicera biflora, Nerium oleander, Polygonum equisetiforme, Prunus lusitanica, Rubus bollei, Rubus ulmifolius, Tamarix africana, Tamarix arborea, Tamarix boveana, Tamarix canariensis, Tamarix gallica, Tamarix dalmatica, Tamarix hampeana, Tamarix mascatensis, Tamarix ramossisima, Tamarix tetrandra, Vitex agnus-castus.

Classification:
EUNIS:
F9.3 Mediterranean riparian scrub       
EuroVegChecklist:
Rubio periclymeni-Rubion ulmifolii Oberd. ex Rivas-Mart. et al. 1993
Tamaricion africanae Br.-Bl. et O. de Bolòs 1958
Tamaricion boveano-canariensis Izco et al. 1984
Rubo ulmifolii-Nerion oleandri O. de Bolòs 1958
Flueggion tinctoriaea Rivas Goday ex Lopez Saenz et Velasco 1995 nom. mut.
Tamaricion parviflorae I. Kárpáti et V. Kárpáti 1961
Rubo sancti-Nerion oleandri Brullo et al. 2004
Artemisio scopariae-Tamaricion ramosissimae Simon et Dihoru 1963
Agropyro fragilis-Tamaricion ramosissimae Golub et Kuzmina 1996
Galio humifusi-Tamaricion ramosissimae Golub et Kuzmina 1996
Annex 1:
92D0 Southern riparian galleries and thickets (Nerio-Tamaricetea and Securinegion tinctoriae)
Emerald:
F9.3 Southern riparian galleries and thickets
MAES-2:
Heathland and shrub
IUCN:
3.8.  Mediterranean-type Shrubby Vegetation
5.2. Seasonal/Intermittent/Irregular Rivers/Streams/Creeks

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This is a characteristic habitat for the azonal streams and rivers in the Mediterranean climatic regions.

Trends in Quantity:
Overall an average trend of -12.7% over about 50 years within the EU28 countries was calculated from the territorial data. No data for the EU28+ is available. Long term trends may be slightly higher, but quantitative data were only reported from Spain (15-20% decrease).

Trends in Quality:
On average there is a decrease in quality, although Greece, Cyprus and Croatia reported stable conditions. No data from outside the EU28+ was received.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
The range of the habitat covers the Mediterranean parts of the EU and EU28+, but exceeds into Turkey,the Middle-East and Northern Africa. It is roughly estimated that about 50% of the habitat occurs within the EU.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat has a wide range, covering large parts of the Mediterranean region in Europe, Asia and Northern Africa.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat may occur as small stands, sometimes associated with other habitats, but in other cases it may form larger, linear stands along the borders or rivers.

Pressures and Threats:
The habitat suffers from human induced changes in hydrological conditions in rivers, including canalisation of rivers and the use of water for agricultural purposes. Other problems are pollution (including the use of pesicides), planting of trees (forestry), removal of shrubs for agricultural land (cultivation) and urbanisation, and too intensive grazing.

Conservation and Management:
In natural functioning rivers, extreme dynamics (temporary flooding, strong periodical drought) cause regularly development of new habitat and at the same time prevent succession of the habitat into alluvial forest at large scale. In these situation no management is needed. However, where the hydrological conditions have been altered, restoration practices should be applied, focussing on restoration of the hydrological functioning of rivers and coastal sites. In this way the habitat will develop spontaneously.

Conservation Status:
Annex I:
92D0: BLS U1, CON U1, MAC U1, MED U1, STE U1

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
When the hydrological functioning of rivers (and coastal sites) is being restored through intervention, the habitat will develop naturally within a short time frame. Therefore restoration is a combination of intevention (first) and spontaneous development (next).

Summary:
This riparian scrub is an azonal habitat of irregularly flooded environments in a warm Mediterranean climate, occurring mainly along the beds of uncontrolled rivers but also in relatively fresh or brackish coastal sites. Summer drought is long and severe and, even inland, salinisation is possible. The habitat is threatened by changes in the hydrology of rivers to maintain water supplies and also by pollution, afforestation, removal of shrubs for cultivation and intensive grazing and urbanisation.

References:
Bacchetta G., Biondi E., Farris E., Filigheddu R., Mossa L. 2004. A phytosociological study of the deciduous oak woods of Sardinia (Italy). Fitosociologia 41(1): 53-64.
Biondi E., Vagge I., Fogu M.C., Mossa L., 1995. La vegetazione del letto ciottoloso dei fiumi della Sardegna meridionale (Italia).  Coll. Phytosoc. 24: 213-285.

Criterion A Text:
Territorial data on trends in area over about the last 50 years were reported from EU28 countries only. The trend data covers more than 80% of the reported surface data, with by far the largest area in Spain. Overall an average trend of -12.7% over about 50 years was calculated. No data from EU28+ countries is available, but it may be assumed that the status is similar or better in the additional countries Albania and Montenegro. The presence in Bosnia & Herzegovina is unknown. Based on these calculations, the assessment results in the category Least Concern for criterion A1. For the long term trend only data from Spain was reported, indicating a negative trend of 10-20%. Some other countries reported long-term decreases but no quantitative data was provided.

Criterion B Text:
The EOO and AOO are far beyond the thresholds for criteria under B, while the habitat is present in mnay locations. Therefore the assessment of criteria B leads to the conclusion Least Concern (LC).

Criterion C/D Text:
On average there is a decrease in quality affecting 20% of the surface with an average severity of 49%, based on more than 95% of the reported surface. The values are too low to meet the thresholds for the Vulnerable category, and that far from the thresholds that the conclusion leads to Least Concern (LC). The average data is strongly affected by the data reported for Spain, as the surface of Spain covers about 60% of the area in the EU. No data was reported from EU28+ countries; it is expected that the situation in these countries is similar to that within the EU28. Decrease in quality relates both to biotic and abiotic conditions and processes, therefore no split into criteria C and D could be made.

Synthesis:
The overall decrease in quantity is relatively low (-12%), resulting in the category Least Concern (LC). The quality shows a slight negative trend affecting on average 20% of the surface with a moderately high severity (49%). Also these values lead to the conclusion Least Concern.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
The Mediterranean riparian scrub is defined to include some coastal scrub on the Black Sea shores. This subhabitat differs from the core of the habitat definition, which relates to Mediterranean alluvial scrub, and may be considered as a separate habit

Contributors:
Habitat definition: J. Loidi
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, O. Argagnon, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, C. Bita-Nicolae, J.Capelo, L. Casella, P. Dimopoulos, D. Espírito-Santo, C. Giancola, D. Gigante, C. Gussev, G. Giusso del Galdo, J. Loidi, C. Marcenò, S. Sciandrello, Z. Škvorc, D. Viciani
Working Group Heathland & Scrub: M. Aronsson, F. Bioret, C. Bita-Nicolae, J. Capelo, A. ÄŒarni, P. Dimopoulos, J. Janssen, J. Loidi


Habitat Description:
Heaths dominated by sub-shrubs of the genera Erica, Calluna, Vaccinium and Daboecia, with some species of woody, often spiny, legumes of the genera Ulex and Genista, grasses and other ligneous plants, occurring on siliceous soils, often podsolised but rarely or never waterlogged. This habitat has its main distribution in Atlantic Europe, a region of oceanic climate with high precipitation and a low continentality, with some extensions towards interior areas of the continent in some siliceous mountains and on sandy plains. To the north, where it extends to the western coasts of Norway, it behaves like a thermophilic unit under the warming effect of the Gulf Stream and, in the south, like a montane high moisture-demanding vegetation. Its optimum, in terms of floristic richness, is probably related with glacial refugia and is in SW Atlantic Europe, particularly in the northern and western Iberian Peninsula, areas from which the habitat has extended outwards. From NW Morocco, where it is found in the rainy areas of the western Rif, its range encompasses western and northern Iberia, western France, British Isles, Belgium, The Netherlands, NW Germany, Denmark, and SW Sweden, with some important occurrences in the inner Central European siliceous mountain systems. These heaths are transitional to subalpine and boreal heathlands of the Vaccinio-Piceetea (type F2.2a), common in northern Scotland and Scandinavia, while in the south there are transitions to the Mediterranean siliceous scrubs of the Cisto-Lavanduletea. In Central Europe (Czech Republic, Hungary) several pannonic species are associated with this habitat.
In most situations out of its primary stations, this habitat is associated with a particular well-defined and intense disturbance regime. Since early times (probably since the Neolithic), mowing, burning and grazing have been the main practices carried out by humans on heathlands and nowadays rural abandonment and the relaxation of such activities have triggered secondary succession and led to its disappearance in many locations. Many of the areas formerly and nowadays still covered by heaths are secondary stands resultong from such human interventions. Primary stations of this habitat type are most probably linked to the coastal cliffs of Atlantic SW Europe, where shallow soils in the rocky habitats provide the adequate conditions for preventing succession and even an adequate refuge for survival during Pleistocenic ice ages. Dry heaths form dense sub-scrubs in which dominance is dependent on the type of management: high fire frequency combined with grazing leads to the dominance of graminoids, even to a sort of grassland with small heaths; regular mowing without grazing leads to the dominance of heathers, gorses and ferns (particularly Pteridium aquilinum), in a treatment much oriented to obtaining large quantities of vegetative material for cattle bedding and for manuring. The model of management is particular for each of the regions involved and adapted to the natural conditions and to the associations present in those places.
In the vast range through which dry heaths develop, there can be quartzic coastal non-dune sands with Calluna vulgaris and Empetrum nigrum in northern Europe, mesophile or xerophile heaths on siliceous, podsolic soils in moist Atlantic and sub-Atlantic climates of plains and low mountains of Southern, Western, Central and Northern Europe and true coastal heaths occurring on maritime cliff tops where they survive under the strong wind conditions, low salt spray and low temperature oscillation regime determined by the proximity to the sea, originating typical prostrate maritime formations.
Indicators of good quality:
dense scrubs with many herbaceous plants: ferns, grasses, etc, without having a clear dominance of one particular species, nor heathers neither gorses or grasses.
evenness in the species populations, especially characteristic fauna, depending on microclimate and horizontal and vertical structure
presence of rare and/or threatened species
Absence of exotic species
Absence of nitrophilous species
Absence of trees and tall shrubs invading with lack of management
Presence of lichens and/or bryophytes
Presence of old Calluna shrubs with cycles of regeneration
Signs of traditional management including a low frequency fire, mowing, grazing, etc.

Characteristic species:
Vascular plants: Agrostis curtisii, Allium ericetorum, Avenula lodunensis, Avenula sulcata, Calluna vulgaris, Carex asturica, Cistus psilosepalus, Cistus salviifolius, Cytisus lotoides, Daboecia cantabrica, Drosophyllum lusitanicum, Empetrum nigrum, Erica andevalensis, Erica australis subsp. australis, Erica australis subsp. aragonensis, Erica cinerea, Erica ciliaris, Erica mackaiana, Erica scoparia, Erica umbellata, Erica vagans, Erythronium dens-canis, Genista anglica, Genista germanica, Genista pilosa, Genista triacanthos, Genista tridens, Halimium alyssoides, Halimium ocymoides, Halimium umbellatum, Hypericum linariifolium, Lavandula viridis, Lithodora prostrata, Luzula lactea, Pedicularis lusitanica, Polygala microphylla, Pseudarrehnatherum longifolium, Pteridium aquilinum, Pterospartum tridentatum subsp.cantabricum, Pterospartum tridentatum subsp. lasianthum, Pterospartum tridentatum subsp. tridentatum, Satureja salzmanii, Scorzonera humilis, Serratula tinctorea, Simethis matthiazii, Stauracanthus boivinii, Stauracanthus vicentinus, Thymelaea coridifolia, Thymelaea dendrobryum, Thymus villosus, Tuberaria globulariifolia, Tuberaria lignosa, Tuberaria major, Ulex airiensis, Ulex europaeus, Ulex galli subsp. gallii, Ulex gallii subsp. breoganii, Ulex gallii var. humilis, Ulex jussiaei, Ulex micranthus, Ulex minor, Vaccinium myrtillus, Vaccinium vitis-idaea, Viola lactea.
Bryophytes: Hylocomium splendens, Pleurozium schreberi, Hypnum jutlandicum
Lichens: Cladonia spp, Cladina spp, Cetraria spp.
Birds: Caprimulgus europaeus, Sylvia undata
Reptiles: Coronella austriaca, Lacerta schreiberi

Classification:
EUNIS:
F4.2 Dry heath
EuroVegChecklist:
Daboecion cantabricae (Dupont ex Rivas-Mart. 1979) Rivas-Mart. et al. in Loidi et al.1997
Ericion cinereae Böcher 1940
Ericion umbellatae Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et al. 1952
Stauracanthion boivinii (Rivas-Mart. 1979) Rivas-Mart., Fernández-González et Loidi 1999
Ulicion minoris Malcuit 1929
Genisto pilosae-Vaccinion Br.-Bl. 1926
Annex I:
2310 Dry sand heaths with Calluna and Genista
2320 Dry sand heaths with Calluna and Empetrum nigrum
4030 European dry heaths
4040* Dry Atlantic coastal heaths with Erica vagans
(a very small part overlaps with a part of 5140 *Cistus palhinhae formations on maritime wet heaths)
Emerald:
F4.2 Dry heaths
MAES-2:
Heathland and shrub
IUCN:
3.4 Temperate shrubland

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This habitat is highly characteristic of the Atlantic region with its mild, moist climate.

Map Description:
This habitat is largely confined to the Atlantic region with more limited and localised occurrence further east. The map is complete for the EU, but data gaps exist for Norway. Data sources: Art17, EVA.

Comment EU28+:
Insufficient data for an accurate calculation

Trends in Quantity:
Although the habitat remains widespread in the Atlantic region and in many cases occurring in large areas, the general trend is decreasing.

Trends in Quality:
Almost everywhere a decrease in quality is recorded.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat is widespread in the Atlantic region and in many cases occurring in large areas.

Pressures and Threats:
The main threats are shrub encroachment due to abandonment or decrease of traditional uses such as mowing and grazing, intensification of agriculture and related nutrient enrichment, airborne pollution, plantation of exotic trees, and fire.

Conservation and Management:
Although protected areas and regulatory instruments allow this kind of heath to be protected, extensive agricultural practises are essential to maintain it in good condition.

Conservation Status:
4030: ATL U2, BLS U1, BOR U2, CON U2, MED U1, PAN U2
2310: ATL U2, CON U1
2320: ATL U2, BOR U2, CON U2
4040: ATL:U1

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
This habitat can recover in about less than 10 years provided traditional management techniques are included.

Summary:
This dry heath of ericoid and genistoid sub-shrubs, grasses and herbs is characteristic of the mild, moist climate of the Atlantic region of Europe occurring on siliceous soils, often podsolised but rarely or never waterlogged. This habitat has its main distribution in Atlantic Europe, a region of oceanic climate with high precipitation and a low continentality, with some extensions towards interior areas of the continent in some siliceous mountains and on sandy plains. It has been traditionally maintained by grazing, brush-cutting and burning within wide  landscapes in mosaics with other wetter heaths and grasslands. Almost everywhere the habitat is under threat from a decline in traditional management and land-use change, particularly afforestation. Legal protection also need extensive agricultural practises to maintain the habitat in good condition.

References:
Gorissen, I. 2004. Dwarf shrub heaths of Europe - from Atlantic to Caucasus and Ural. Verlag Ingmar Gorissen, Siegburg.
Géhu J.-M., 1975 - Essai pour un système de classification phytosociologique des landes atlantiques françaises. Coll. Phytosoc., II, La végétation des landes d'Europe occidentale, Lille 1973 : 361-377.
Haaland, S. (2002). Fem tusen år med flammer, Det europeiske lungheilandskapet. Fagbokforlaget Vigmostad & Bjørke As. (Dutch edition: De Blust, G., H. Diemont & J. Jansen, 2004. Het paarse landschap. KNNV Uitgeverij Utrecht/Mechelen).
Loidi, J., Biurrun, I., Campos, J.A., García-Mijangos, I. & Herrera, M. 2010. A biogeographical analysis of the European Atlantic lowland heathlands. Journal of Vegetation Science 21(5): 832-842.
Rivas-Martínez, S. 1979. Brezales y jarales de Europa occidental (Revisión fitosociológica de las clases Calluno-Ulicetea y Cisto-Lavanduletea). Lazaroa 1: 5-127.

Criterion A Text:
There has been very widespread decrease in extent in recent historic time across the EU28, with especially substantial losses (60-90%) in Germany, Finland, Sweden, Hungary, Czech Republic and Croatia. However, smaller losses have been reported from some countries covering largest area of the habitat, like Spain (-20%), UK (-10%) and France (-37%). Lacking data for Norway make a calculation of loss for EU28+ more uncertain. On average the trend over the last 50 years, using data from 21 countries, is a decline of -20% for EU28 and EU28+, ranging up to -24% if reported maximum values are used. Long term trends reported from some countries are more than 90% declines. Although there is incomplete data for the whole of Europe, it is estimated that on average the European trend is more than 50% decline over a long-term period.

Criterion B Text:
The habitat is widespread in EU28: EOO is larger than  50,000 km2 and AOO is larger than than 50 km2. Also the number of locations is relatively high.

Criterion C/D Text:
Large declines in quality affecting more than 80% of the extent occurred in Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Croatia, Netherlands, Slovenia and Finland. However, lower values have been reported for especially France and the UK, resulting in an average negative trend in quality of 40% extent with 52% severity. This results in a Near Threatened (NT) status. The used data covers about 48% of the area, and the main data gap on quality trends is for Spain, which covers about 50% of the area.

Synthesis:
Recent losses in quality over the last 50 years indicate a category Near Threatened (NT), based on data with important gaps for Spain. At the same time a substantial decline in quantity occurred (-20%), but not large enough to meet the Near Threatened threshold. However, long-term trends indicate a much larger decline over 250 years, leading to the conclusion Vulnerable (VU) for criterion A3.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
There are distinctive dry heath types throughout the range, characteristic of regional and local environmental conditions, and these may be differently threatened. One specific type with a likely higher degree of threat is coastal dry heath.

Contributors:
Habitat definition: J. Janssen
Territorial experts: I. Alonso, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, R.-J. Bijlsma, C. Bita-Nicolae, G. Buffa, J. Capelo, J. ÄŒarni, M. Chytrý, D. Espírito-Santo, A. Jacobson, S. De Saeger, L.-M. Delescaille, P. Finck, D. Gigante, C. Gussev, G. Király, T. Kontula, W. Van Landuyt, J. Loidi, A. Mikolajczak, D. MilanoviÄ‡, D. Paelinckx, P. Perrin, G. Pezzi, U. Raths, V. RašomaviÄius, U. Riecken, Z. Škvorc, J. Šibík, A. Ssymank, D. Viciani
Working Group Heathland & Scrub: M. Aronsson, F. Bioret, C. Bita-Nicolae, J. Capelo, A. ÄŒarni, P. Dimopoulos, J. Janssen, J. Loidi


Habitat Description:
Very wet mires with poor fen vegetation. Quaking mires include mires formed by terrestrialization of water bodies which involves formation of floating rafts of peat, typically proceeding from marginal areas towards basin centre, where primary open water pools can remain. Also included in this type are mires without neighbouring water bodies layer but similarly high water saturation leading to quaking conditions occurring in high water throughput percolation mires. The mire basin is always fed by minerotrophic ground water from the catchment area. There is no regular surface patterning connected to water flow. Water quality varies from acidic to moderately acidic. Vegetation is minerotrophic poor fen vegetation including intermediate fen communities (pH below 7). The lack of raised peat domes separate quaking mires from D1.1 Raised bogs, the lack of string patterning and slope from D3.2 Aapa mires and the lack of true rich fen indicator species (Scorpidium spp. et al.) from D4.1c Calcareous quaking mires.
Non-calcareous quaking mires are characterized by poor fen to medium rich vegetation including Calla palustris, Carex limosa, Carex rostrata, Carex aquatilis, Eriophorum angustifolium, Equisetum fluviatile, Menyanthes trifoliata, Potentilla palustris, Rhynchospora alba, Scheuchzeria palustris and Utricularia intermedia among vascular plants. Sphagnum cuspidatum, Sphagnum platyphyllum, Sphagnum subsecundum, Sphagnum majus and Warnstofia spp. are characteristic among bryophytes. Hepatics are sometimes abundant, most typically Cladopodiella fluitans. Floating peat rafts may also form surfaces elevated from water level with for example Sphagnum fallax and Eriophorum vaginatum or Molinia caerulea. When the floating peat raft becomes thick enough nearly ombrotrophic hummock like surfaces with e.g. Sphagnum magellanicum, Andromeda polifolia and Vaccinium oxycoccos can occurr. Even in such cases deep-rooted minerotrophic vascular plants like Menyanthes trifoliata can be found. Excluded are stands of vegetation fringing water bodies (see C3.2) unless the vegetation raft is sufficiently extensive to count as a habitat in its own right.
Indicators of good quality:
water table always at surface; it can always be readily observed

packing density of peat is low, walk-on leads to characteristic yielding (quaking)

drainage ditches may affect quaking mires by lowering water level either permanently or increasing fluctuation and, thus, the likeliness of temporal drought or flooding with polluted water

deteriorating quality is indicated by loss of wet mire area associated species e.g. among birds, increase of trees and bushes, and of hummock vegetation


Characteristic species :
Vascular plants: Andromeda polifolia, Calla palustris, Carex appropinquata, Carex chordorrhiza, Carex diandra, Carex lasiocarpa, Carex limosa, Carex pauciflora, Carex lepidocarpa, Carex vesicaria, Cicuta virosa, Drosera longifolia, Drosera intermedia, Drosera rotundifolia, Eriophorum angustifolium, Eriophorum gracile, Eriophorum vaginatum, Equisetum fluviatile, Hydrocotyle vulgaris, Menyanthes trifoliata, Molinia caerulea, Nuphar lutea, Pedicularis palustris, Potentilla palustris, Rhynchospora alba, Rhynchospora fusca, Rubus chamaemorus, Scheuchzeria palustris, Typha latifolia, Utricularia intermedia, Utricularia minor, Utricularia vulgaris, Vaccinium oxycoccos, Vaccinium uliginosum
Bryophytes: Calliergon cordifolium, Calliergon richardsonii, Calliergon giganteum, Calliergonella cuspidata, Scorpidium revolvens, Scorpidium scorpioides, Sphagnum angustifolium, Sphagnum fallax, Sphagnum denticulatum, Sphagnum cuspidatum, Sphagnum lindbergii, Sphagnum majus, Sphagnum rubellum, Sphagnum magellanicum, Sphagnum platyphyllum, Sphagnum riparium, Sphagnum pulchrum, Sphagnum squarrosum, Sphagnum subsecundum, Sphagnum teres, Straminergon stramineum, Warnstorfia exannulata, Warnstorfia fluitans
Birds: Tringa glareola

Classification:
EUNIS:
D2.3 Transition mires and quaking bogs
EuroVegChecklist:
Sphagno-Caricion canescentis (Syn: Rhynchosporion albae auct. p.p. - typo excl.; Caricion lasiocarpae auct. p.p. – typo excl.)
Caricion fuscae p.p. (marginally – only quaking habitats)
Sphagnion medii Kästner et Flössner 1933 (marginally)
Sphagno-Utricularion T. Müller et Görs 1960 (marginally - in mire complexes only)
Annex 1:
7140 Transition mires and quaking bogs
Emerald:
D2.3 Transition mires and quaking bogs
MAES-2:
Wetlands
IUCN:
5.4. Bogs, Marshes, Swamps, Fens, Peatlands

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
It is widespread in Europe and occurs in many biogeographical regions. Compared to Poor fens it usually occurs at a smaller scale. The habitat is far more frequent in the North of Europe than in the South. The largest areas are found in Scandinavia and Ireland.

Map Description:
The map is rather incomplete, but the potential distribution is given for the EU28 based on HT7140 distribution. Data from Norway is missing. Data sources: EVA, ART17.

Trends in Quantity:
The area of non-calcareous quaking fens decreased dramatically in the last 50 years, especially in Central Europe. Territorial data suggest an increase in the Netherlands due to acidification and succession of calcareous quaking mires (becoming more rain water influenced). Even slight drainage of this mire type will lead to a habitat change towards D 2.2 Poor fen.

Trends in Quality:
Even slight drainage leads soon to a transformation into other habitats. If the water saturation lowers only for a short time in summer, the peat density will grow and the yielding on walk-on will vanish. If the peat gets in contact to oxygen, decomposition will soon permanently hinder new peat expansion.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
Due to the holarctic distribution and the huge mire areas in Eurasia, Europe contains less than 10% of the world distribution.

Justification of Restricted Area:
In most sites it occurs in rather small areas, due to specific conditions required.

Pressures and Threats:
The main threat for non-calcareous quaking mires is drainage.

Conservation and Management:
Efforts have been undertaken in the last decades to restore the hydrological systems of the respective mires. Floating vegetation mats directly depend on water level and water quality of their lake. Under optimal conditions mats of floating sphagnum mosses can grow rapidly. However, quaking areas in percolation mires (with much higher species richness) will need a very long time to regenerate after rewetting if the regulatory mechanism of the peat body has been destroyed by drainage.

Conservation Status:
Annex I:
7140: ALP FV, ATL U2, BOR U1, CON U1, MAC U1, MED U1, PAN U2

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Floating vegetation mats directly depend on water level and water quality of their lake and can be relatively easy be restored, if water chemistry and water level of the lake is restored. Quaking areas in percolation mires will need a very long time to regenerate after rewetting if the regulatory mechanism of the peat body are destroyed by drainage.

Summary:
This habitat develops by terrestrialisation of open water through the outgrowth of sodden floating rafts of vegetation and accumulating peat from the margins of acidic lakes and ponds, the whole forming a flat quaking surface. It is widely distributed through Europe, though usually highly localised, with the largest areas reported from the Nordic countries. On the matted carpets of sedges and other vascular plants typical of minerotrophic situations, Sphagna, other mosses and often abundant liverworts develop, thicker stretches sometimes forming irregular ombrotrophic hummocks. The main threat for such mires is drainage, leading quickly and often irreversibly to the development of other habitats, like poor fens. Quaking areas in percolation mires (which have a much higher species richness) need a very long time to regenerate after rewetting if the regulatory mechanism of the peat body has been destroyed by drainage.

References:
Peterka, T. (in prep.). Formalized classification of European fens at the alliances level. Applied Vegetation Science.

Criterion A Text:
An average trend of -20% (-19% for EU28+) in area over the last 50 years has been calculated from quantitative data provided by 18 countries. In Central European countries like Poland, Germany, Switzerland and Hungary the loss has been much higher (up to 90%), but the weighted average of decline is dominated strongly by Scandinavian countries, especially Sweden, with still large remaining areas of non-calcareous quaking mires and negative trends in the order of 20%. The average trend leads to the conclusion Least Concern for both EU28 and EU28+. Reported long-term historical losses are even larger, but too few countries reported these values for calculating average European trends.

Criterion B Text:
The habitat is widespread with an EOO, AOO and nimber of locations much larger than the thresholds for criterion B. Therefore the assessment of this criterion leads to the conclusion Least Concern.

Criterion C/D Text:
The average European degradation in quality (in terms of extent affected, and severity of degradation) has been calculated using quantitative data from 16 countries (2 non-EU). The calculation was also here strongly dominated by Sweden, leading to an average area of 66% negatively affected, with 50% (moderate) severity. The EU28+ value is almost the same. These values lead to the conclusion Vulnerable (VU) for this criterion.

Synthesis:
There is a strong negative trend in large parts of Europe, especially in Central Europe, but this negative trend is overshadowed by a smaller trend and much larger remaining areas in the boreal countries. Although an assessment for Central Europe would possibly lead to the category Endangered, the average decline in Europe leads to the conclusion Least Concern. However, the trend in quality (assessed under criterion C/D1) is large in Sweden as well, leading to an overall conclusion of Vulnerable (VU) . Eutrophication of water bodys and drainage are the main threats to this habitat type.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Non-calcareous quaking mires are widely distributed in Europe and are due to their extreme conditions a relatively homogeneous habitat throughout Europe. Several transitions to calcareous quaking mires and poor fens exist. An assessment on a regional s

Contributors:
Habitat definition: T. Tahvanainen
Territorial data: S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, L. AuniÅ†a, C. Bita-Nicolae, G. Buffa, J. Capelo, A. ÄŒarni, D. Espírito-Santo, M. Hájek, R. Delarze, P. Finck, P. Frankard, P. Ivanov, J. Janssen, Z. KÄ…cki, G. Király, T. Kontula, E. Leibak, D. MilanoviÄ‡, F. Millaku, A. Mikolajczak, J.A. Molina, B. Nygaard, J. Paal, D. Paternoster, D. Paelinckx, P. Perrin, U. Raths, V. RašomaviÄius, J. Šibík, A. Ssymank, T. Tahvanainen, U. Riecken, E. Weeda
Working Group Mires & Bogs: C. Bita-Nicolae, F. Jansen, M. Hajek, T. Tahvanainen


Habitat Type Name:
H3.2b Temperate high-mountain base-rich inland cliff

Habitat Description:
This habitat comprises calcareous or base-rich rock faces and crevices in at high altitudes of European mountain ranges in the temperate bioclimatic region. The chasmophytes, dwarf- and cushion-formed chamaephytes and hemicryptophytes, and numerous fern species and mosses, are very well adapted to the extreme habitat conditions, like strong solar radiation, a low water content, high day/night and seasonal temperature fluctuations, strong winds, and the absence of snow cover protection. The soil is in general very poorly developed, but in the crevices a small amount of fine soil may accumulate. Due to geographical isolation and variety in site conditions numerous relict, endemic, rare and protected species can be found on these cliffs.
Also the variation in species composition is high, resulting in a large number of alliances. In this habitat type we can find alliances from three orders. The Potentilletalia caulescentis comprises alliances of sunny rock faces and crevices. In the Central and Eastern Alps and in the Western Carpathians we find the alliance Potentillion caulescentis, in the Southern Alps the Phyteumato-Saxifragion petraeae, in the Maritime Alps the Saxifragion lingulatae, and in the Southern and Eastern Carpathians the Gypsophilion petraeae. On the Iberian Peninsula occur the alliances Saxifragion mediae, Sedo albi-Seslerion hispanicae, Asplenio celtiberici-Saxifragion cuneatae, Jasionion foliosae and Saxifragion camposii, in the Apennines the Saxifragion australis and on the Balkan Peninsula the alliances Micromerion croaticae and Edraiantho graminifolii-Erysimion comati. The order Violo biflorae-Cystopteridetalia alpinae comprises chasmophytic communities on shaded calcareous rock faces and crevices. Here the variation is much less, and only the alliance Amphoricarpion neumayeri is included, occurring in the central and south-eastern Dinarides. Other alliances of this order are found in lower altitudes (habitat H3.2c). In the alpine belt of the south-central Balkan mountain ranges we can find chasmophytic vegetation of the alliance Ramondion nathaliae from order Potentilletalia speciosae.
Many endemic and legally protected species occur in this habitat. The main threats are air pollution, exploitation of limestone, intensive tourism (climbing), grazing, collecting of flowers, erosion, and natural destruction of the rocks.
Indicators of good quality:
•    natural erosion processes,
•    species richness of the cliffs and presence of the characteristic species,
•    presence of habitat rare species, relict species and endemics.
Characteristic species:
Flora: Achillea schurii, Agrostis schleicheri, Androsace cylindrica, A. helvetica, A. lactea, A. pubescens, Arabis serpyllifolia, A. stellulata, Artemisia eriantha, Asperula hirta, Asplenium celtibericum, A. viride, Athamantha cretensis, Avena setacea, Ballota frutescens, Bupleurum petraeum, Campanula cochleariifolia, C. tanfanii, Cystopteris fragilis, Draba aizoides, D. kotschyi, D. norvegica, D. sauteri, D. tomentosa, Festuca stenantha, Gypsophila petraea, Hieracium humile, Kernera saxatilis, Minuartia rupestris, Phyteuma charmelii, P. cordatum, Potentilla alchimilloides, P. caulescens, P. nebrodensis, P. nitida, P. nivalis, P. saxifraga, Primula allionii, P. latifolia, P. marginata, Ptilotrichum pyrenaicum, Ramonda myconi, Rhamnus pumila, Saxifraga aretioides, S. australis, S. callosae ssp. lingulata, S. longifolia, S. marginata ssp. rocheliana, S. media, S. moschata, S. mutata spp. demissa, Silene campanula, Silene pusilla, Thymus pulcherrimus, Trisetum bertolonii.

Classification:
EUNIS:
H3.2 Basic and ultra-basic inland cliffs
EuroVegChecklist:
Potentilletalia caulescentis Br.-Bl. in Br.-Bl. et Jenny 1926
Asplenio celtiberici-Saxifragion cuneatae Rivas-Mart. in Loidi et Fernández Prieto 1986
Edraiantho graminifolii-Erysimion comati Mucina et al. 1990
Gypsophilion petraeae Borhidi et Pócs in Borhidi 1957
Jasionion foliosae O. de Bolòs 1957
Micromerion croaticae Horvat, Glavac et Ellenberg 1974
Phyteumato-Saxifragion petraeae Mucina in Mucina et al. 2012
Potentillion caulescentis Br.-Bl. In Br.-Bl. et Jenny 1926
Saxifragion australis Biondi et Ballelli ex S. Brullo 1984
Saxifragion camposii Cuatrecasas ex Quézel 1953
Saxifragion lingulatae (Rioux et Quézel 1949) Quézel 1950
Saxifragion mediae Br.-Bl. in Meier et Br.-Bl. 1934
Sedo albi-Seslerion hispanicae Br.-Bl. 1966
Violo biflorae-Cystopteridetalia alpinae Fernandez Casas 1970
Amphoricarpion neumayeri LakušiÄ‡ 1968
Potentilletalia speciosae Quézel 1964
Ramondion nathaliae Horvat ex Simon 1958
Annex 1:
8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation
Emerald:
H3.2 Basic and ultra-basic inland cliff
MAES-2:
Sparsely vegetated land
IUCN: 
6 Rocky areas [e.g. inland cliffs, mountain peaks]

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Yes. This habitat type is a typical landscape feature of calcareous high mountains. It hosts a highly specialized biota adapted to harsh conditions (cf. habitat description above). A high level of endemism is found across most regions and mountain ranges.

Map Description:
The map is incomplete for Switzerland and the Balkan. Data sources: Art17.

Comment EU28:
Greece and Bosnia-Herzegovinia are not included in the current area due to the late arrival of data.

Trends in Quantity:
This habitat type shows a nearly stable trend in quantity over the last 50 years. The average trend is -1.1% and – 0.5% respectively for EUR28+ and EUR28. Some countries have reported a more significant decrease like Germany (-5%) or Switzerland (-2.5%). This trend reflects the destruction of cliffs by the quarrying of limestone cliffs and also the complete degradation of limestone cliffs which become devoid of plant and animal biota after cleaning and securing for rock-climbing and mountaineering. Italy didn’t report any trend in quantity.

Trends in Quality:
This habitat type shows a nearly stable trend in quality over the last 50 years. The trend is 2.8% extent/30% severity and 3.4% extent/30% severity for EUR28 and EUR28+. France, Switzerland and Germany have reported a more significant extent of around 5% affected by a decrease in quality. Quality is reduced mainly by rock-climbing and mountaineering which cause disturbances both to plants and animals by cleaning and securing cliffs. Climbers and hikers on trails close to cliffs may also disturb animals during critical periods of time (breeding and chicks seasons). Vicinity to ski resorts may also reduce quality for the same reason (hindering animal behaviour). The values above were calculated on a small subset of countries.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
95 %. Plant species occurring in this habitat type show a high rate of endemism to mountain ranges with few widely distributed species. Only a small part small part of the Eastern Carpathians in Ukraine and most of the Dinaric Alps (Bosnia, …) are outside EUR28.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
No. EOO is well above the 50,000 Km² threshold and no important decline has occurred during the last 50 years.

Pressures and Threats:
Threats affecting this habitat type are rather weak and scattered across its distribution. The main threat are recreational activities, such as rock-climbing and mountaineering. Rock-climbing routes are often cleaned and secured (removal of plants and unstable rock parts). Rock-climbing it-self, especially in well frequented areas disturb the animal biota (e.g. birds). This threat affects more Western European countries (France, Switzerland and Austria) where rock-climbing and mountaineering communities are active and influential. Limestone quarrying rarely occurs in high mountain areas. The construction and development of ski resorts may also cause this habitat to decrease in quantity (works on small cliffs) and in quality (disturbance to animal biota). Climate change and air pollution (acidification) are also likely to affect habitat quality.

Conservation and Management:
This habitat stays without any human intervention. It is best protected from human disturbance inside protected areas like in Bulgaria, where it lies almost fully inside national parks. France is another instance. Outer calcareous French Alps are very well covered by either big Natural Reserves, Natura 2000 sites or Natural Regional Parks. Site managers seek cooperation and prevention with other stakeholders such as climbers and gliders to better control these activities and make people aware of the disturbances they may cause to plants and animals.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1:
8210: ALP FV, ATL XX, BLS U1, BOR U1, CON U1, MED XX, PAN FV

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
At least for plants, natural recovery of this habitat is rather fast when it is not isolated from habitats of the same type. Return of specialized nesting birds after strong disturbances is less easy.

Summary:
This habitat comprises calcareous or base-rich rock faces and crevices in at high altitudes of European mountain ranges in the temperate region. The chasmophytes, dwarf- and cushion-formed chamaephytes and hemicryptophytes, and numerous fern species and mosses, are very well adapted to the extreme habitat conditions, like strong solar radiation, a low water content, high day/night and seasonal temperature fluctuations, strong winds, and the absence of snow cover protection. The soil is in general very poorly developed, but can accumulate in crevices. Variation in the vascular flora is high across the continent and due to geographical isolation and variety in site conditions numerous relict, endemic, rare and protected species can be found on these cliffs. Damage is caused mainly by leisure activities such as rock-climbing and mountaineering that often go with the cleaning and securing of cliffs and the proximity of ski-resorts and other infrastructure. Those activities also affect the behaviour of typical breeding birds. Limestone quarrying occurs locally in high mountains.

References:
Horvat, I., GlavaÄ, V., Ellenberg, H. 1974. Vegetation Südosteuropas. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart. pp. 595-600.
Mucina, L. 1993. Asplenietea trichomanis. In: Mucina, L., Grabherr, G., (eds.), Die Pflanzengesellschaften Österreichs. Teil II. Natürliche  waldfreieVegetation. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena. pp. 241-275.
Oberdorfer, E., 1977. Süddeutsche Pflanzgesellschaften.Teil I. 2. Aufl. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena. pp. 23-38.

Criterion A Text:
The values given above were calculated with the territorial data only.

Criterion B Text:
Sub-criteria of B1 and B2 are not evaluated because the values for EOO and AOO are well above the thresholds.

Criterion C/D Text:
The values were calculated with the territorial data of a small subset of countries which provided data of redaction in quality.

Synthesis:
This habitat type qualifies for a Least Concern Red List status. Despite a lack of data, the decrease in quantity over the last 50 years is calculated with a sufficient number of countries to give a realistic picture. Assessment the decrease in quality is less reliable because values of extent and severity are based on a subset of only six countries’ data.

Contributors:
Habitat definition: N. Juvan & A. ÄŒarni
Territorial data: C. Gussev, M. ValachoviÄ, A. Ssymank, P. Finck, U. Raths, U. Riecken, A. Mikolajczak, J. Loidi, D. Paternoster, R. Delarze, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, G. Buffa, V. Matevski
Working Group Sparsely Vegetated Habitats: F. Essl, G. Giusso Del Galdo, A. Mikolajczak, D. Paternoster, M. ValachoviÄ, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
H3.2g  Mediterranean ultramafic inland cliff

Habitat Description:
Ultramafic (igneous and mostly igneous-metamorphic rock with high magnesium and iron content) rocks and cliffs in the Mediterranean with few vascular plant species and cryptogams growing in rock fissures and crevices. The cliffs may be textured as ophiolite or like a breccia. Many ophiolites are built of ultramafic rocks such as peridotite and, after transformation, serpentinite. The high magnesium and iron content, and the frequently elevated amounts of chromium and nickel are toxic to most plants. Due to this unmitigated toxic effect only few adapted plants are able to grow on ultramafic cliffs.
The vegetation is mainly composed of small ferns of the genera Allosorus and Asplenium, together with Paragymnopteris marantae and others. The plant composition is unique. It consists of highly specialised species and rare ecotypes of more common and widespread species. Plant cover is low.
Mediterranean ultramafic cliffs, though widely distributed, are local phenomena and occur in restricted hilly and mountainous areas of the Iberian Peninsula, southern France, Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Italian Peninsula, western and southern Balkans, Aegean, Cyprus, Mediterranean Turkey (Anatolia) and northern Africa (Cyrenaica, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco).
Indicators of quality:
The vegetation of Mediterranean ultramafic cliffs consists chiefly of highly specialised ferns and other plants (serpentinophytes). Any of these, and sometimes their hybrids, indicate favourable habitat quality. Although cliff habitats generally enjoy protection through inaccessibility, quarrying destroys the habitat and its populations of specialised plants. While most serpentinophytes are restricted largely to primary cliff habitats, some, such as Paragymnopteris marantae and a few bryophytes, occur occasionally on abandoned gravel heaps. The following characteristics may be used as indicators of favourable quality:
Occurrence of rare species, in particular serpentinophytes,
Presence of different aspects of rock walls, different exposure, moisture and rock structures such as rock shelters and ledges
Contact with natural habitats such as serpentine screes and dry metal-rich grasslands
Absence of mining and quarrying
Absence of rock control structures and garbage dumping

Characteristic species:
Vascular plants: Allosorus guanchicus, Allosorus pteridioides, Asplenium balearicum, Asplenium foreziense, Asplenium obovatum, Cosentinia vellea, Paragymnopteris marantae, Pellaea calomelanos, Rosularia serpentinica, Viola sandrasica
Bryophytes: Coscinodon cribrosus, Mielichhoferia mielichhoferiana
Lichens: Acarospora sinopica, Lecanora (epanora, handelii, subaurea), Lecidea silacea, Rhizocarpon (furfurosum, oederi, ridescens), Scoliciosporum umbrinum, Stereocaulon nanodes

Classification:
EUNIS:
H3.2 Basic and ultra-basic inland cliffs
EuroVegChecklist:
Phagnalo saxatilis-Cheilanthion maderensis Loisel 1970 corr. Pérez-Carro et al. 1989
Annex 1:
8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation
Emerald:
H3.2 Basic and ultra-basic inland cliff
MAES-2:
Sparsely or unvegetated land
IUCN:
6 Rocky areas

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat represents an outstanding example for the Mediterranean biogeographic region for the occurrence of a pool of species, mostly endemic, characterized by a high ecological specialization and a remarkable phytogeographical value.

Map Description:
The map gives an underestimate of the distribution due to data gaps. Data sources: EVA, Art17, GBIF.

Comment EU28:
Data have many gaps and inconsistencies among countries

Comment EU28+:
Data have many gaps and inconsistencies among countries

Trends in Quantity:
Based on the provided data, the extent of this habitat type over the last 50 years is increased (EU28: +25,5%; EU28+: +25,5%). But this figure is not realistic at all, since most of the data are missing, figures (when provided) are very small (thus any evaluation is untrustworthy), and many inconsistencies among countries are occurring. No figure or estimation is provided for the future trends.

Trends in Quality:
Based on the provided data, quality of this habitat type cannot be evaluated. In particular, most of the data are missing, figures (when provided) are rather unreliable, and many inconsistencies among countries do occur.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
Based on the provided data, no decline occurred over the last 50 years.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat cannot occur  everywhere, since its establishment requires very specific geo-pedological features (i.e. ultramafic rocks). Given that, the total area occupied is naturally extremely small.

Pressures and Threats:
This habitat type is slightly affected by human activities, especially on mountain stands or rather inaccessible sites. Despite this, some disturbance may be caused by mining and quarrying (at lower elevations) and/or infrastructures (e.g. road, motorways, etc.),

Conservation and Management:
The best management for this highly natural habitat is to leave it simply untouched, just avoiding any human interference with its natural processes. Increase public awareness about the biological relevance of such apparently inhospitable environments is important in order to make more effective conservation efforts. Some very peculiar taxa exclusively linked to this habitat type should be protected, through specific actions aiming at their preservation.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Unless physically destroyed, recover of ultramafic cliff is possible provided that it is potentially connected with similar environments. But, given the very small area occupied and very scattered distribution, this sounds very unlikely without human intervention (e.g. species reintroduction).

Summary:
Ultramafic rocks and cliffs away from the coast in the Mediterranean have a very scattered distribution and sustain a sparse but highly distinctive flora of a few ferns, vascular plants and cryptogams especially adapted for growing in the fissures and crevices of this specialised substrate. This habitat type is only slightly affected by human activities, especially on mountain stands or rather inaccessible sites but some disturbance may be caused by mining and quarrying (at lower elevations), and/or transport infrastructures. Knowledge and scientifically-based management of this habitat type is needed.

References:
Pérez-Alberti, A., and López-Bedoya, J. 2009. 8220 Laderas y salientes rocosos silíceos con vegetación casmofítica. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente, y Medio Rural y Marino, Madrid, SPAIN
Pérez-Carro, F.J., Díaz González, T E., Fernández Areces, M. P. & Salvo, E. 1989. Comunidades rupícolas de la Cheilanthetalia maranto-maderensis y Androsacetalia vandellii en la Peninsula Ibérica. Acta Bot. Malacitana 14: 171-191.

Criterion A Text:
Based on the limited provided territorial data, average European reduction in quantity cannot be evaluated.

Criterion B Text:
Both EOO and AOO are well above the thresholds. AOO is not far above the 50 grid cell threshold, but the calculated value of 96 is likely to be an underestimate, with real values higher than 100 (and therefore not potentially qualifying for Near Threatened).

Criterion C/D Text:
Past, historical and future trends cannot be estimated due to the lacking of data/information.

Synthesis:
Both quantity and quality (past, historical and future) cannot be estimated due to the lacking of territorial data and other information, as well as inconsistencies and uncertainties in data provided by countries. Therefore, this habitat type is classified as Data Deficient (DD). Improved knowledge and information (both qualitative and quantitative) is extremely needed, since this habitat type is very rare in Europe.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
No subhabitats for further analysis have been distinguished.

Contributors:
Type description: E. Bergmeier, G. Giusso del Galdo
Territorial data: J. Loidi, J. Capelo, D. Espírito-Santo, D. Viciani.
Working Group Sparsely Vegetated Habitats: F. Essl, G. Giusso del Galdo, A. Mikolajczak, D. Paternoster, M. Valachovic, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
I1.3 Arable land with unmixed crops grown by low-intensity agricultural methods

Habitat Description:
This habitat includes arable fields managed using low-intensity agricultural techniques with occurrence of rare native or archaeophyte weed species, survivors of a farming style that has existed in Europe since the Neolithic. The most common crops of such fields have been cereals including Avena sativa, Hordeum vulgare, Triticum aestivum, T. turgidum and Secale cereale, managed without herbicides, without application of non-organic fertilizers and often without irrigation systems. They were originally sown manually, which resulted in more patchy distribution of crop plants than when mechanical sowing is used, thus leaving space for the development of weeds and the crop seeds were often contaminated with weed seed.
Traditionally managed rain-fed fields have been preserved especially in the mountainous areas of the Mediterranean and although they are no longer profitable for corn production, they are still used locally for planting winter cereals as a source of fodder for livestock. Wheat is the most common crop but rotation with other cereals is common. Such fields are small in size, often located on terraces and are ploughed and sown in autumn and, when the crop biomass increases, they are either grazed or mown for hay. The fields are rich in low-competitive winter-annual weed species which reach their peak of biomass development in spring. Their species composition differs considerably from the irrigated Mediterranean fields, which are rich in weeds that germinate only in warmer periods in spring and reach their phenological optimum in summer or autumn. The latter also contain many more neophytes.
Outside the Mediterranean, the traditionally managed low-intensity fields are much rarer . They occur locally especially on soils with limited water-storage capacity such as on limestone slopes or on sandy plains but most arable fields in such unproductive environments have been abandoned during the last decades. Also here, cereals are the most common crop in such low-intensity farming systems as survive. Wherever low site fertility does not allow the development of dense stands of the crop and the use of herbicides is limited, species-rich weed communities including several archaeophytes of the Mediterranean and Near East origin may develop. Some of these weed species were relatively common until the first half of the 20th century, but they declined dramatically due to agricultural intensification including the use of herbicides, chemical fertilizers, improved seed-cleaning methods, sowing highly productive and competitive varieties of cereals, and removal of refugial habitats in the landscape due to merging of small fields into large ones. Nowadays in many cases, species-rich weed communities only occur in narrow stripes along field margins that are not treated with herbicides or in restoration initiatives.
Indicators of good quality:
·      Occurrence of rare or declining, native or archaeophytic weed species
·      Low incidence of neophytic weeds
·      No use of mineral fertilizers
·      No or limited use of herbicides
·      No irrigation in dryland areas
Characteristic species:
Vascular plants: Adonis aestivalis, A. flammea, Agrostemma githago, Ajuga chamaepitys, Allium nigrum, Alopecurus myosuroides, Anagallis arvensis, Anthemis altissima, Aphanes arvensis, A. australis, Arnoseris minima, Asperula arvensis, Bifora radians, B. testiculata, Bupleurum rotundifolium, Caucalis platycarpos, Centaurea cyanus, Chrysanthemum segetum, Conringia orientalis, Euphorbia exigua, Galium tricornutum, G. verrucosum, Gladiolus italicus, Hypecoum procumbens, Hypochaeris glabra, Legousia speculum-veneris, Lilium bulbiferum, Lithospermum arvense, Lolium rigidum, L. temulentum, Medicago polymorpha, Muscari comosum, Nigella arvensis, Papaver argemone, P. hybridum, P. rhoeas, Ranunculus arvensis, Raphanus raphanistrum, Reseda phyteuma, Rhagadiolus stellatus, Roemeria hybrida, Scandix pecten-veneris, Silene gallica, Stachys annua, Teesdalia nudicaulis, Thymelaea passerina, Turgenia latifolia, Veronica agrestis, V. triloba, Vicia sativa

Classification:
EUNIS:
I1.3 Arable land with unmixed crops grown by low-intensity agricultural methods
EuroVegChecklist:
Lolio remoti-Linion J.Tx. 1966
Spergulo arvensis-Erodion cicutariae J.Tx. in Passarge 1964
Scleranthion annui (Kruseman et Vlieger 1939) Sissingh in Westhoff et al. 1946
Oxalidion europeae Passarge 1978
Rumicion bucephalophori Nezadal 1989
Anthemido ruthenicae-Sisymbrion orientalis Solomakha 1990
Caucalidion von Rochow 1951
Veronico agrestis-Euphorbion pepli Sissingh ex Passarge 1964
Trifolio-Medicaginion sativae Balázs 1944
Ridolfion segeti Nègre ex Rivas-Mart., Fernández-González et Loidi 1999
Roemerion hybridae Rivas-Mart.,Fernández-González et Loidi 1999
Vicio narbonensis-Milion vernalis Ferro et Scammacca 1985
Fumarion wirtgenii-agrariae S. Brullo in S. Brullo et Marcenó 1985
Eragrostion cilianensis-minoris Tx. ex Oberd. 1954
Cerintho majoris-Fedion cornucopiae Rivas-Mart. et Izco ex Peinado et al. 1986
Annex 1:
No relationship
Emerald:
No relationship
MAES-2:
Sparsely vegetated land
 IUCN:
14.1.  Arable Land

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat type occurs in almost all EU28+countries except Iceland and probably Norway and Cyprus but has been best preserved in the mountainous areas of the Mediterranean region.

Map Description:
The provided map has many gaps and reflects the availability of EVA data. Missing countries: Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Macedonia, Albania, Kosovo, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia, Romania, Greece, Latvia, Malta, Russia (Kaliningrad), Sweden, Austria, Hungary, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and too few occurrences in: Bulgaria, Germany, Spain, Croatia, Czech Republic, France, Italy, Portugal. Data source: EVA.

Comment EU28:
no data from Greece, Cyprus, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, Sweden

Comment EU28+:
no data from Greece, Cyprus, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, Sweden, Norway, Albania, Kosovo, Montenegro, Kaliningrad, Serbia

Trends in Quantity:
The quantification of long historical trends is difficult, but it is assumed that almost all arable land around 1850 was extensively managed and of relatively high ecological interest. Since the intensification of agricultural practices in the middle of the 20th century, a significant decrease of traditionally managed agricultural area has occurred. The calculated overall trend for the last approximately 50 years both for EU28 and EU28+ countries is a decrease of 70% (EU28: 70.5%; EU28+ 70.2%). Most of the countries, except Italy (-20% to -40%) and Switzerland (-37.5%), have reported moderate to severe decreases (-50 to -99%) in quantity. As far as the trend at the moment is concerned, the vast majority of both EU28 and EU28+ countries have reported on an ongoing decrease, which is expected to continue in the future.

Trends in Quality:
There is very little arable land left in Europe that has not been affected by the agricultural intensification that has occurred particularly since the middle of the 20th century. According to the calculated trends, an intermediate decline in quality has occurred over the last 50 years, affecting more than 50% of the total area (EU28: 50.2%; EU28+: 51.0%) with a severity of degradation of 67%. The decline in quality is expected to continue in the future due to ongoing intensification of agricultural practices. Seed banks have been destroyed to a large extent and some characteristic archaeophytic species have become very rare and are threatened with extinction in some areas. The potential for recovery of these habitats is subject to much uncertainty.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
Though the habitat has undergone an important decline during the last 50 years, the habitat is still widely distributed across Europe. The EOO is larger than 50000 km².

Justification of Restricted Area:
The geographical range (EOO) of the habitat type is very wide and the underlying factors for its occurence are not restricted to small areas.

Pressures and Threats:
The major threats are related to agricultural intensification. The use of herbicide, insecticide and other agrochemicals, the large-scale removal of field boundaries, mechanisation, adoption of highly-yielding crop varieties and heavy fertiliser use, have resulted in massive losses of farmland birds and plants and less well-understood declines of other typical organisms of this habitat. Much of this shift in management has been encouraged and subsidised by the Common Agricultural Policy and other national agri-environment funding. The remaining sites of biodiverse, non-intensively-farmed, less profitable arable land are threatened by abandonment and conversion to other land-uses (e. g. improved grassland, urbanised areas, solar arrays).

Conservation and Management:
A large-scale improvement regarding quantity and quality of this habitat type may require a revision of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and agri-environment funding schemes.  Additionally, exemplary sites of this habitat type can be preserved as open-air museums in protected areas.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1 types:
No related Annex 1 types available.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
There is much uncertainty about population dynamics and recovery potential of rare native and archaeophytic weed communities. It is assumed that the seed banks have been destroyed to a large extent. If a characteristic seed bank is still available, the regeneration may happen comparatively quick, but requires waiving of herbicide, biocide and excessive use of chemical fertilizers. If the characteristic seed bank has already been destroyed, the recovery will take a longer time unless restoration involves the addition of seed from elsewhere. The capacity to recover also depends on the degree of fragmentation.

Summary:
Species-rich arable weed vegetation, characterised by now rare native and archaeophyte annual plants, is a survivor of ancient low-intensity agriculture and widely distributed across Europe but survives in abundance only in the mountainous areas of the Mediterranean region, particularly Italy. Since the intensification of agricultural practices in the middle of the 20th century, much of it subsidised by agri-environment funding, a significant decrease both in quantity and quality has been observed caused by excessive use of herbicides, biocides, and chemical fertilizers, improved seed-cleaning methods, sowing highly productive and competitive varieties of cereals, and removal of refugial habitats in the landscape due to merging of small fields into large ones. Such threats continue in many places, especially threatening surviving outliers. A large scale improvement of quantity and quality may require a revision of Common Agricultural Policy and agri-environment funding schemes and promotion of restoration initiatives.

References:
Bergmeier, E. 2006. The diversity of segetal weeds in Crete (Greece) at species and community level. Annali di Botanica, N.S. 6: 53–64.
Cirujeda, A., Aibar, J., & Zaragoza, C. 2011. Remarkable changes of weed species in Spanish cereal fields from 1976 to 2007. Agronomy and Sustainable Development 31: 675–688.
Lososová Z. 2003. Estimating past distribution of vanishing weed vegetation in South Moravia. Preslia, 75: 71–79.
Meyer, S., Wesche, K., Krause, B., & Leuschner, C. 2013. Dramatic losses of specialist arable plants in Central Germany since the 1950s/60s – a cross-regional analysis. Diversity and Distributions 19: 1175–1187.

Criterion A Text:
The figures for A1 were calculated by using the territorial data sheets. The calculated trend in the last 50 years is a decrease of 70.5% (EU28) and 70.2% (EU28+), which leads to category Endangered. All other countries except Italy (-20% to -40%) and Switzerland (-37.5%) reported a decrease in area between -50% and -99%. If the the Italian and Swiss data were neglected, the overall assessment would result in the category Critically Endangered. The calculated long historical trend (A3) is a reduction of 95%, that would result in category Critically Endangered but due to a lack of data from important countries (e. g. Germany, Poland, Italy, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Spain) the calculated long historical trend is not absolutely reliable. Therefore, criterion A3 is evaluated as Data Deficient. No data (%) available or unsufficient data for A2a, A2b.

Criterion B Text:
No data have been provided for EOO and AOO until now.

Criterion C/D Text:
The values for C/D1 were calculated by using the territorial data sheets. The calculated figures result in category Vulnerable. No reliable data (%) available for C/D2, C/D3, C1, C2, C3, D1, D2 and D3.

Synthesis:
Despite variable data quality, a lack of data from several countries and different interpretations of the habitat definition, the decreases in quantity and quality have been calculated using the territorial data from a sufficient number of countries to build an overall European average. Due to a large decrease in area over the last 50 years, the habitat qualifies for category Endangered under criterion A1. All countries except Italy (-20% to -40%) and Switzerland (-37.5%) reported a decrease in area between -50% and -99%. If the Italian and Swiss data were neglected, the overall assessment would result in category Critically Endangered. It would also be worth improving the data on long historical trends in quantity because this habitat type would possibly qualify for category Critically Endangered under criterion A3.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Various regional weed communities have been defined that could be differently threatened: in Central Europe arable land on dry soils, rich in carbonate and on saline soils; in the UK.: arable land on freely-draining acidic or sand-enriched soils i

Contributors:
Habitat definition: M. Chytrý
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, C. Bita-Nicolae, G. Buffa, J.Capelo, A. ÄŒarni, L. Casella, M. Chytrý, R. Delarze, L. M. Delescaille, S. De Saeger, D. Espírito-Santo, P. Finck, C. Giancola, D. Gigante, J. Janssen, N. Juvan, Z. KÄ…cki, T. Kontula, J. Loidi, C. Marcenò, V. Matevski, D. MilanoviÄ‡, Z. Molnár, F. O'Neill, G. Pezzi, V. RašomaviÄius, U. Raths, U. Riecken, E. Roosaluste, V. Rusakova, S. Sciandrello, A. Ssymank, W. Van Landuyt, D. Viciani, E. Weeda, P. Wilson, Z. Škvorc
Working Group Sparsely Vegetated Habitats: F. Essl, G. Giusso Del Galdo, A. Mikolajczak, D. Paternoster, M. ValachoviÄ, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
H3.2f Temperate ultramafic inland cliffs

Habitat Description:
This habitat occurs on southern, south-eastern and south-western slopes, from lowland to alpine belts, on bare ultramafic (e.g. serpentine) cliffs and rocks covered by shallow soil. The ultramafic rocks are ophiolitic, the content of calcium and silica is very low, but they contain high concentrations of aluminium, iron, magnesium, nickel, cobalt and chromium. The pH varies from basic to ultra-basic (5.5-8). The fluctuation of temperature, heat and drought is an important ecological factor.
The vegetation cover is low, consisting mainly of annuals, grasses and several fern species, which are adapted to the ultramafic conditions. The flora contains some rare and endemic species. The communities of this habitat are classified within the alliance Asplenion serpentini (order Asplenietalia septentrionalis) in Central Europe, and Ramondion nathaliae (Potentilletalia speciosae) in the south-central Balkan. The endemic and relict species Ramonda nathaliae is a typical chasmophyte which primarily grows on limestone rocks, but in the central part of Macedonia it can be found also on serpentine and siliceous rocks.
Communities on ophiolitic rocks are also found in the Western Alps (France, Italy and Switzerland) and in the Apennines. Ophiolitic cliffs are local phenomena and occur in restricted mountainous areas of those regions. Carex fimbriata, Noccaea alpestris subsp. sylvium, and Cardamine plumieri are three species occurring almost exclusively in sub- and alpine communities on ophiolitic substratum (cliffs, rock outcrops and open grasslands). Carex fimbriata is endemic to the Western Alps and the Apennines. Those communities have not been distinguished from other sub- and alpine alliances (cliffs: Potentillion caulescentis, Violo-Cystopteridion or Androsacion vandelii). 
The main threats of the ultramafic rocks are mining, erosion processes, grazing, and fires.
Indicators of quality:
species richness of the cliffs and presence of the characteristic species,
presence of rare and endemic species.

Characteristic species:
Flora
Vascular plants: Asplenium adulterinum, A. alternifolium, A. cuneifolium, A. trichomanes, A. septentrionale, Alysum murale, Asyneuma limonifolium, Campanula rotundifolia, Cardamine plumieri, Carex fimbriata, Cistus incanus, Dorycnium herbaceum, Festuca pallens, Halacsya sendtneri, Minuartia hybrida, M. viscose, Noccaea alpestris subsp. sylvium, Notholaena marantae, Onosma echioides, Polypodium vulgare, Potentilla mollis, Silene flavescens, Thlaspi praecox.
Mosses: Brachythecium velutinum, Frullania dilatata, Homalothecium sericeum, Hypnum cupressiforme, Polytrichum piliferum

Classification:
EUNIS:
H3.2 Basic and ultra-basic inland cliffs
EuroVegChecklist:
Asplenion serpentini Br.-Bl. et Tx. ex Eggler 1955
Ramondion nathaliae Horvat ex Simon 1958
Annex 1:
8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation
Emerald :
H3.2 Basic and ultra-basic inland cliff
MAES-2 :
Sparsely vegetated land
IUCN :
6 Rocky area

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Ultramafic outcrops are scattered across Europe according to the presence of ophiolitic rocks. They occur more within- and around the alpine biogeographical region.

Map Description:
The map is very incomplete and underestimates the distribution due to data gaps. All alpine locations in France, Italy and Switzerland are missing. Data sources: EVA, GBIF.

Trends in Quantity:
No trend at the European scale can be estimated for this habitat type because of three problems: a lot of missing data, possible overlaps between H3.2e-f-g definitions, and some uncertain data (when provided). Based on existing reliable data, however, the recent decrease should be slightly decreasing in Western Europe and more stable elsewhere. Germany has reported quite a significant historical decrease, between 30 and 50 %. There is also a big difference of context between low-land and high-mountain occurrences.

Trends in Quality:
No trend at the European scale can be estimated for this habitat type because of three problems: a lot of missing data, possible overlaps between H3.2e-f-g definitions, and some uncertain data (when provided). Based on existing reliable data, however, a recent decrease in quality has occurred in many countries with extent affected up to 30 % and level of severity up to 50% in Western Europe (Italy, Switzerland and Germany). There is also a big difference of context between low-land and high-mountain occurrences.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
About 90 %. Excepting Asplenium adulterinum many characteristic plants of this habitat type are endemic or limited to sub-parts of Europe.

Justification of Restricted Area:
Yes. Ophiolitic cliffs and rock outcrops always occur on restricted areas (small spots) within a larger landscape.

Pressures and Threats:
Among the main threats is quarrying, which is scattered across the habitat range. Another threat is biological succession and the change of species linked to natural (and artificial) afforestation that causes rocks cliffs and outcrops to become more shaded, which favours shade-tolerant species (many bryophytes) at the expense of full-light species.

Conservation and Management:
This habitat type benefits mainly from the conservation of some emblematic - and often protected - species, like Asplenium cuneifolium (protected in France) or Asplenium adulterinum (Annex II Natura 2000). This kind of conservation usually takes place in ‘older’ and lower mountain ranges within which the habitat occurs on small and well-known spots (Central Massif in France, Bohemian Massif in Czech Republic). There, conservation usually consists of protecting the species and habitat from degradations and in restoring proper habitat conditions (e.g. cutting surrounding trees). In the Alps, conservation depends on the presence of protected areas. The knowledge of this habitat and associated plant species in the Alps should also be improved. A legal protection should be attributed to Carex fimbriata and Ramonda nathaliae.

Conservation Status:
Annex I:
8210: ALP FV, ATL XX, BLS U1, BOR U1, CON U1, MED XX, PAN FV

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The highly scattered distribution of the habitat makes any natural recovery very slow, even impossible without human intervention (species reintroduction).

Summary:
This habitat occurs in very local situations on warmer south-facing cliffs of ultramafic rocks from the lowlands to the alpine belt of the temperate zone.  It has an open cover of a distinctive crevice-rooting flora, mostly annuals, grasses and certain ferns, specialised for the mineral content of the shallow soils, and supports some endemics.  It is endangered by the kinds of threats common to many inland cliffs: natural erosion, slow succession, grazing and fires with quarrying for the bedrock.

References:
D’Amico, M. E., & Previtali, F. 2012. Edaphic influences of ophiolitic substrates on vegetation in the Western Italian Alps. Plant and soil, 351(1-2), 73-95.
LakušiÄ‡, D., KaradÅ¾iÄ‡, B. 2010. New associations of serpentine chasmophitic vegetation (Asplenietea trichomanis Br.-Bl. 1934 corr. oberd. 1977) on Kopaonik Mt in Serbia. Botanica Serbica 34(1): 67-79.
Mucina, L. 1993. Asplenietea trichomanis. In: Mucina, L., Grabherr, G., (eds.), Die Pflanzengesellschaften Österreichs. Teil II. Natürliche  waldfreieVegetation. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena. pp. 241-275.
Oberdorfer, E., 1977. Süddeutsche Pflanzgesellschaften.Teil I. 2. Aufl. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena. pp. 23-38.
Richard, J. L. 1985. Observations sur la sociologie et l'écologie de Carex fimbriata SCHKUHR dans les alpes. Botanica helvetica, 95(2), 157-164.
StevanoviÄ‡, V., JakovljeviÄ‡, K., Matevski, V. 2014. Chasmophytic communities of endemic and relict species Ramonda nathaliae PanÄiÄ‡ & PetroviÄ‡ on ophiolithic substrate in Republic of Macedonia. Botanica Serbica 38(1): 81-90.
Verger, J. P. 1993. Note sur la répartition et l'écologie de Carex fimbriata Schkuhr au Queyras et dans les Alpes. Acta Botanica Gallica, 140(1), 63-68.
Verger, J. P., Varese, P., & Pascal, R. 1998. The serpentinic associations with Carex fimbriata in Val Pellice (Cottiens Alps, Italy). Acta Botanica Gallica, 145(2), 109-120.

Criterion A Text:
The recent trend in quantity cannot be estimated because of missing or inconsistent data, and overlaps in distribution data of similar types (H3.2e and H3.2g).

Criterion B Text:
The AOO and EOO are larger than the thresholds for criterion B1 and B2, and also the number of locations is high. The calculated AOO in the EU28 is only slightly higher than 50, but it is likely that the distribution map is far from complete, and in reality the AOO value is higher than 100.

Criterion C/D Text:
The average trend in quality for Europe cannot be estimated because of missing or inconsistent data, and overlap in data of similar types (H3.2e and H3.2g).

Synthesis:
Because of important data gaps and large uncertainties in reported data no Red List criteria could be evaluated, except those under B, due to the relatively wide distribution. Therefore this habitat type is labelled as Data Deficient (DD). It is worth improving the data because this habitat type possibly qualifies for the ‘Near Threatened’ category at the European scale.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Low altitude communities from ‘older’ mountain ranges may be assessed separately from high altitude communities (subalpine and alpine).

Contributors:
Habitat definition: N. Juvan & A. ÄŒarni
Territorial data: A. ÄŒarni, M. Chytrý, R. Delarze, P. Dimopoulos, W. Eide, P. Finck, C. Gussev, N. Juvan, V. Matevski, Ä. MilanoviÄ‡, U. Raths, U. Riecken, Z. Škvorc, A. Ssymank, D. Viciani
Working Group Sparsely Vegetated Habitats: F. Essl, G. Giusso Del Galdo, A. Mikolajczak, D. Paternoster, M. ValachoviÄ, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
A1.14: Communities of exposed Mediterranean lower mediolittoral rock

Habitat Description:
This habitat develops on the lower horizon of the mediolittoral rock. Although never completely submerged for long periods of time, the rock surfaces are kept moist by spray from wave action. It occupies a zone of variable extent, generally immediately above mean sea level. The hard surfaces are colonised by encrusting and erect epifauna with the dominant species depending on the wave exposure and shape different associated biotopes which are dominated by encrusting species. The mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis may be frequent, especially where there are high levels of organic matter. Encrusting coralline algae (Lithophyllum spp.) are also characteristic of this habitat with different species dominating depending on the rock type and geographical area.
Indicators of quality.
Some of the coralline algae associated with this habitat may be potential indicators of pollution (e.g. Lithophyllum byssoides) and the abundance of Mytilus galloprovincialis can be linked to decrease in environmental quality. An quality index based on the presence and abundance of macroalgal communities is being used in Spanish Atlantic waters to report on similar habitats (CRF Index).
Characteristic species
Rhodophyta (red algae)-Lithophyllum byssoides, Lithophyllum cf. vickersiae, Corallina elongata, Hypnea musciformis, Callithamnion granulatum, Ceramium diaphanum, Lithophyllum incrustans, Callithamnion granulatum, Polysiphonia tripinnata, Boergeseniella fruticulosa, Polysiphonia sertularioides, Lithophyllum
papillosum, Acrochaetium duboscqii, Ceramium virgatum, Ceramium ciliatum, Gelidium pusillum, Osmundea verlaquei, Palisada tenerrima, Laurencia glandulifera, Laurencia pyramidalis, Rissoella verruculosa,
Phaeophyta (brown algae)-Pseudolithoderma adriaticum, Ralfsia verrucosa, Nemoderma tingitanum.
Chlorophyta (green algae)-Chaetomorpha mediterranea v. crispa, Bryopsis muscosa, Cladophora spp., Ulva compressa, Ulva rigida, Ulva fasciata, Patella ulyssiponensis, Patella ferruginea.
Bivalvia-Mytilus galloprovincialis, Lasaea adansoni, Mytilaster minimus,
Cirripedia-Perforatus perforatus, Chthamalus stellatus, Chthamalus montagui.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405)
Level 4. A sub-habitat of A1.1 High energy littoral rock.
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
 
MAES:
Marine - inlets and transitional waters
Marine – Coastal
MSFD:
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
IUCN:
12.1. Rocky shoreline
Barcelona Convention (RAC/SPA):
II. 4. 2. Biocenosis of the lower mediolittoral rock

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Exposed rocky shores are common and widespread throughout the Mediterranean.

Trends in Quantity:
An estimated 54% of the Mediterranean coastline is occupied by rocky mediolittoral environments. Although this habitat is common and widely distributed around the Mediterranean there are few monitoring sites and no data on extent and trends in quantity from individual countries. Based on information provided by the European Environment Agency for 2006 on the extent of built up coastline (2,622 km of the EU 28 in the Mediterranean) this habitat is believed to have declined by around 25% representing a change from being present along at least 5,528 km of coast to 4,112 km. The associated biotope formed by the mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis might have increased in extent but the overall trend is decreasing.
The decrease is associated with coastal development and other construction works such as breakwaters, harbours, jetties and seawalls and has been particularly apparent in the second half of the 20th century, both within and outside the EU 28 countries of the Mediterranean.

Trends in Quality:
Biotopes dominated by pollution sensitive communities such as those characterised by Lithophyllum cf. vickersiae or the coralline alga Lithophyllum byssoides are believed to have shown some decline in quality in some locations however this is insufficiently documented. Overall trends in quality are therefore unknown at the present time.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat does not have a small natural range as the EOO is larger than 50,000 km2.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat does not have a small natural range as the EOO is larger than 50,000 km2 nor does it have an intrinsincally restricted area.

Pressures and Threats:
This habitat is vulnerable to coastal development and particularly to schemes which modify the coastline or the hydrographic conditions immediately offshore. Nutrient enrichment from discharges and run-off is another pressure, affecting the habitat by changing the composition and abundance of associated species. For example it can lead to an increased in the abundance of green algae (Cladophora and Ulva spp.) and of turfs of Corallina elongata as well as increasing the density and size of Mytilus galloprovincialis.

Conservation and Management:
This habitat is widespread and common and therefore likely to be present within some protected areas although it may not be subject to specific conservation measures. Beneficial actions include those which improve water quality, the regulation of coastal development in order to avoid both direct and indirect damage, and controls on the harvesting of the mussel Mytilus galloprovincialis.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Many of the species associated with this habitat are robust and can recolonise rapidly.

Summary:
This habitat develops on the lower horizon of the mediolittoral rock. It occupies a zone of variable extent, generally immediately above mean sea level. The hard surfaces are colonised by encrusting and erect epifauna with the dominant species depending on the wave exposure. It is vulnerable to coastal development and particularly to schemes which modify the coastline or the hydrographic conditions immediately offshore as well as to poor water quality, particularly nutrient enrichment, which alters the composition and abundance of associated species. Conservation measures are generally not specific to this habitat. Those which are likely to be of benefit include establishment of protected areas, regulation of coastal development and measures to improve or maintain good water quality.

References:
Ballesteros, E. 1984. Els estatges supralitoral i mediolitoral de les Illes Medes. In: Els sistemes naturals de les Illes Medes (eds. J. Ros, I.â€¯Olivella & J.M. Gili). Arxius Secció Ciències, 73: 647-659. IEC. Barcelona.
Ballesteros, E. 1992. Els vegetals i la zonació litoral: espècies, comunitats i factors que influeixen en la seva distribució. Arxius Secció Ciències, 101. Institut d'Estudis Catalans. Barcelona. 616 pp. 
Ballesteros, E., S. Mariani, M.E. Cefalì, M. Terradas & E. Chappuis. 2014. Manual dels hàbitats litorals a Catalunya. Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Territori i Sostenibilitat, Barcelona. 251 pp.
Ballesteros, E. & J. Romero. 1988. Zonation patterns in tideless environments (Northwestern Mediterranean): looking for discontinuities in species distributions. Investigación Pesquera, 52(4): 595-616.
Boudouresque, C. F. 1971. Contribution à l’étude phytosociologique des peuplements algaux des côtes varoises. Vegetatio, 22: 83-184.
Chappuis, E., M. Terradas, M.E. Cefali, S. Mariani & E. Ballesteros. 2014. Vertical zonation is the main distribution pattern of littoral assemblages on rocky shores at a regional scale. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 147: 113-122.
Curcó, A., A. Ferré, J. Font, J. Gesti, L. Vilar & E. Ballesteros. 2008. Manual dels Hàbitats de Catalunya. Vol II. 1 Ambients litorals i salins. (Eds. J. Vigo, J. Carreras & A. Ferré). Departament de Medi Ambient i Habitatge. Generalitat de Catalunya. Barcelona. 312 pp.
EEA, 1999. State and pressures of the marine and coastal Mediterranean environment. ISBN: 92-9167-187-8. 43pp.
Feldmann, J. 1937. Recherches sur la végétation marine de la Méditerranée: la côte des Albères. Revue Algologique, 10: 1-339.
Giaccone, G., G. Alongi, A. Cossu, R. Di Geronimo & D. Serio 1993. La vegetazione marina bentonica del Mediterraneo: I. Sopralitorale e mesolitorale. Proposte di aggiornamento. Bollettino delle sedute della Accademia Gioenia di Scienze Naturali in Catania, 26 (341): 145-172. 
Molinier, R. 1960. Étude des biocoenoses marines du Cap Corse. Vegetatio, 9: 120-192.
Pérès, J.M. & J. Picard. 1964. Nouveau manuel de bionomie benthique de la Mer Méditerranée. Recueil des Travaux Statione Marine d’Endoume, 31(47): 3-137.
Piante C., Ody D.,2015. Blue Growth in the Mediterranean Sea: the Challenge of Good Environmental Status. MedTrends Project. WWF-France. 192 pages
Templado, J., E. Ballesteros, I. Galparsoro, A. Borja, A. Serrano, L. Marín & A. Brito. 2012. Guía interpretativa: Inventario español de hábitats marinos. Inventario español de hábitats y especies marinos. Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente. 229 pp.
UNEP/MAP, 2012. State of the Mediterranean Marine and Coastal Environment, UNEP/MAP – Barcelona Convention, Athens.

Criterion A Text:
Coastal development has been the most severe threat to this habitat and is estimated to have resulted in a decline in extent of around 25% over the last 50 years for the EU 28. Trends for the EU 28+ cannot be quantified at the present time. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Near Threatened under criteria A1 for the EU 28 and Data Deficient for the EU 28+.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the Eastern and Western Mediterranean. It has declined in quantity and as the same pressures still exist it is likely to continue to decline. The distribution of the habitat is such that the identified threats are unlikely to affect all localities at once. As EOO >50,000km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criteria B for the EU 28 and under criteria B1c, B2c and B3 for the EU 28+ . It is Data Deficient under all other criteria.

Criterion C/D Text:
The assessment of reduction in abiotic and/or biotic quality is not possible due to the lack of studies and data on past state conditions although the increasing urbanization of the Mediterranean coast is believed likely to continue to have a slight to moderate impact of this habitat although the extent affected is unknown. Since there are no studies available on the past and current conditions to calculate the reductions in abiotic and/or biotic quality, the habitat type is assessed as Data Deficient under Criterion C/D, C and D for both the EU 28 and EU 28+.

Synthesis:
Despite most of the Mediterranean coast being rocky, studies on quantitative data are scarce. Nonetheless, given the past development of harbours, dikes and others coastal structures, and the known distribution of this habitat along the EU coastline, at estimated 25 % has been lost over the last 50 years. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Near Threatened under criterion A1 for the EU 28. For EU 28+, the habitat has a large EOO, and therefore it qualifies as Least Concern under Criterion B. However, the habitat is assessed as Data Deficient at EU 28+ level given the lack of information on its trends in quantity and quality and the fact that its overall distribution is unknown.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Exposed, lower mediolitoral rocks with Lithophyllum byssoides and with Lithophyllum cf. vickersiae becuase of its sensitivity to pollution.


Habitat Type Name:
A2.7x Biogenic habitats of Mediterranean mediolittoral rock

Habitat Description:
This habitat is formed by the biogenic, tridimensional, hard structures built by either the red algae Lithophyllum byssoides or the red algae Neogoniolithon brassica-florida associated with the gastropod Dendropoma cristatum (in the central Mediterranean) or D. petraeum. The rims of L. byssoides are generally found just above the mean sea level, in the mesolittoral zone, where waves break. They can reach more than one metre of vertical thickness. For this reason, the habitat is host to different assemblages from its upper portion, which is situated in the lower mediolittoral zone, to the lower, submerged one. The development of this type of habitat in specific areas of the Mediterranean depends on several climatic, hydrological and sedimentary conditions. It seems to develop better over calcareous rocks, on steep shores in areas with strong hydrodynamism and where the temperature of surface coastal waters is no lower than 14°C in the winter. Under these environmental conditions, the L. byssoides rims are more frequent in the northwestern Mediterranean, but they can also be found in Sicily and the Adriatic Sea. Mediterranean bioconcretions composed of N. brassica- florida and D. petraeum may grow for thousands of years forming huge structures of several metres wide.
These reefs are host to many species, which distribute differently over the bioconcretion depending on wave action and the position on the reef. In the seaward part of the reef, the reef crest, the concretion is made of shells of Dendropoma actively growing while Neogoniolithon cements the reef and triggers the vermetid settlement. Behind the reef crest, a shallow lagoon covered by photophilic algal communities develops. This part ends close to the shore, where Neogoniolithon and Dendropoma dominate again. Neogoniolithon-Dendropoma reefs better develop in southern Mediterranean areas although tiny reefs can be found across 40º N latitudes at their northern limit.
Indicators of quality:
The Lithophyllum byssoides rims are particularly vulnerable to physical impacts and trampling, and they seem to be very sensitive to environmental stresses related to water quality. Rims are very sensitive to the increase or decrease of the water level. The amount of dead L. byssoides thalli in the upper part of the reef can be used as a health indicator. Both reefs represent unique archives to reconstruct past Mediterranean climate and especially sea level oscillations.
Characteristic species:
Phaeophyta (brown algae): Ralfsia verrucosa, Cystoseira compressa.
Chlorophyta (green algae): Cladophora laetevirens, Bryopsis muscosa, Chaetomorpha capillaris var. crispa, Chaetomorpha aérea.
Cnidaria: Actinia equina.
Polyplacophora: Acanthochitona fascicularis, Lepidochitona corrugata.
Bivalvia: Mytilus galloprovincialis, Lasaea adansoni, Mytilaster minimus.
Gastropoda: Patella rustica, Patella ulyssiponensis, Dendropoma petraeum, Purpura haemastoma, Onchidella celtica.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. Sub-habitat of A2.7 Littoral biogenic reefs
 
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
 
MAES:
Marine – Coastal 
Marine - Inlets and transitional waters
 
MSFD:
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Not mapped
 
IUCN:
12.1 Rocky shoreline

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This habitat type is composed of unique bioconcretions that develop only in specific areas of the Mediterranean depending on climatic, hydrological and sedimentary conditions.

Map Description:
This map has been generated using data from IUCN and the European Environment Agency (EEA), and supplemented with expert opinion. EOO and AOO have been calculated on the available data presented in this map however these should be treated with caution as expert opinion is that this may not indicate the full distribution of the habitat .

Trends in Quantity:
The few reports of trends in quantity of this habitat from the western Mediterranean seem to indicate that it has experienced either a slight decline or remained stable. In the eastern Mediterranean (mostly outside of the EU 28+), the habitat seems to have suffered large losses over the last 50 years. In the central Mediterranean (Sicily), the habitat has also disappeared at some sites, while the trend in other sites is unknown.
A reduction in quantity reaching 25-30% in the EU 28 is inferred, based on the few existing reports where losses of more than 60% have been reported, and on the basis of expert opinion. Considering a 50-year period including the last decade and the next 40 years a continuing decrease is predicted given the potential impact of sea level rise and the current and ongoing pressures for the Mediterranean region.

Trends in Quality:
This habitat is believed to be decreasing in quality in the Mediterranean both within the EU and beyond. In Sicily, for example, the presence of a small port seems to have reduced the density of living reef-building organism together with the complexity of the substratum. Outside the EU 28+ (Lebanon) it is estimated that only 4-5% of the reefs remained in pristine condition and 35% are seriously degraded by algal growth, invasive species, runoff, and human trampling.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
In the Mediterranean Sea, the distribution of vermetid reefs composed by Dendropoma petraeum in association with some coralline algae such as Neogoniolithon brassica-florida, is restricted to the warmest part of the basin, with the largest formations generally found off the coasts of Israel and Lebanon; although they have also been reported from Turkey, Crete, continental Spain and the Balearic Islands, Algeria, Morocco, and along Maltese and Italian shores. In the Spanish region, for instance, well-developed reefs of D. petraeum and N. brassica-florida are only found in its warmest regions between La Nao cape and Gata Cape as well as Pitiusas islands (Ibiza and Formentera), while other sides further north or south of these limits develop structures that are more disperse and less complex. More than 60% of its known distribution is considered likely to be in the EU 28. Spain (29 reefs) and Italy (20 reefs) are the coastal countries with the most conspicuous number of vermetid reefs, while in the Levantine Sea (29 reefs) and the Tyrrhenian Sea (26 reefs), these reefs have less representation.

Justification of Restricted Area:
Vermetid reefs develop in the tidal zone exclusively on rocky coasts with an abrasion platform, wave exposure, and a certain degree of slope. As a consequence, these bioconstructions are restricted to only a few localities in the Mediter

Pressures and Threats:
Lithophyllum byssoides rims are particularly vulnerable to physical impacts, such as coastal developments and trampling, and they seem to be very sensitive to environmental stresses related to water quality. Rims are also very sensitive to changes in sea level as they develop above the belt of photophilous seaweeds and these can partially or fully cover the rims. Observations of this phenomenon have already been reported at few sites in the Spanish Mediterranean coast. The increase of ocean acidification which has been predicted to occur during the 21st century impairs recruitment success and causes shell dissolution, as well as altering the shell mineralogy of the reef-building gastropod Dendropoma petraeum. Dendropoma species could also be vulnerable to surface pollution because of their position on the shore.

Conservation and Management:
There are no specific conservation actions in place for this habitat at the present time although more than 50% of the habitat is thought likely to be present within Mediterranean Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and Natura 2000 sites. No reefs are protected in Cyprus, while Turkey protects less than 20% of their reefs. Regulation of coastal development and measures to minimise potential environmental threats, such as those associated with water quality and trampling would benefit this habitat. Better knowledge about this habitat is also needed to determine appropriate conservation measures.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1
1160: MMED XX
1170: MMED XX

Lithophyllum byssoides and the gastropod Dendropoma petraeum are listed in Annex II to the Protocol concerning Specially Protected Areas and Biological Diversity in t

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Since the ability of the components of this habitat to disperse is very limited and the habitat is largely affected by water acidification and sea level rise, recovery is likely to be over a long time scale. It is worthy to note that the growth of the main engineering species is very slow and therefore its recovery capacity very limited. The search for intervention activities that could also include transplantations of the three different species that inhabit this habitat type are needed.

Summary:
Biogenic concretions such as those of Lithophyllum byssoides and platforms formed by the algae Neogoniolithon brassica-florida and the vermetid Dendropoma petraeum have been described from only a few locations along the Mediterranean coastline, and their distribution is restricted to the warmest part of the basin. Both reefs and rims represent unique archives to reconstruct past Mediterranean climate and especially sea level oscillations and play an important role in preventing or slowing down the rock erosive processes. Where these reefs are well developed they increase complexity and enhance the associated biodiversity on the narrow Mediterranean intertidal fringe.
This habitat is vulnerable to physical impacts, such as coastal developments and trampling, and very sensitive to environmental stresses related to water quality and changes in sea level as they develop. Ocean acidification is predicted to be one of the consequenes of climate change, impairs recruitment success and causes shell dissolution, as well as altering the shell mineralogy of the reef-building gastropod Dendropoma petraeum. There are no specific conservation actions in place for this habitat at the present time although some are within protected areas. Regulation of coastal development and measures to minimise potential environmental threats, such as those associated with water quality and trampling would benefit this habitat. Better knowledge about this habitat is also needed to determine appropriate conservation measures.

References:
Azzopardi, L. and Schembri, P. J. 1997. [Published 2000] Vermetid crusts from the Maltese Islands (Central Mediterranean). Marine Life 7(1-2): 7-16.
Ballesteros, E. 1984. Els estatges supralitoral i mediolitoral de les Illes Medes. In: Els sistemes naturals de les Illes Medes (eds. J. Ros, I.â€¯Olivella & J.M. Gili). Arxius Secció Ciències, 73: 647-659. IEC. Barcelona.
Ballesteros, E. 1992. Els vegetals i la zonació litoral: espècies, comunitats i factors que influeixen en la seva distribució. Arxius Secció Ciències, 101. Institut d'Estudis Catalans. Barcelona. 616 pp. 
Balistreri, P., Chemello, R. and Mannino, A. M. 2015. First assessment of the vermetid reefs along the coasts of Favignana Island (Southern Tyrrhenian Sea). Biodiversity Journal 6 (1): 371–376.
Ballesteros, E., S. Mariani, M. E. Cefalì, M. Terradas and Chappuis, E. 2014. Manual dels hàbitats litorals a Catalunya. Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Territori i Sostenibilitat, Barcelona. 251 pp.
Ballesteros, E. and Templado, J. 2013. Les cornises litorals. In: Atles d’ecosistemes dels Països Catalans (dir. D. Bueno): 80-81. Enciclopèdia Catalana, Barcelona. 
Calvo, M., Templado, J., Oliverio, M. and Machordom, A. 2009. Sea Hidden Mediterranean biodiversity: molecular evidence for a cryptic species complex within the reef building gastropod Dendropoma petraeum (Mollusca: Caenogastropoda). Biological Journal of The Linnean Society 96 (4): 898-912.
Chemello, R. and Silenzi, S. 2011. Vermetid reefs in the Mediterranean Sea as archives of sea-level and surface temperature changes. Chemistry and Ecology, 27: 121-127.
Chemello, R et al. 2014. Distribution and conservation needs of a neglected ecosystem: the mediterranean vermetid reef. 2nd Mediterranean Symposium on the conservation of Coralligenous & other Calcareous Bio-Concretions (PortoroÅ¾, Slovenia, 29-30 October 2014).
Di Franco, A., Graziano, M., Franzitta, G., Felline, S., Chemello, R. and Milazzo, M. 2011. Do small marinas drive habitat specific impacts? A case study from Mediterranean Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin 62: 926– 933.
Kallouche, M., Bouras, D.K. and Hussein, B. 2014. Faunal composition, distribution and richness of the Oran’s intertidal coastal zone (Mediterranean Sea, Algeria). Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences, Vol. 5, No. 4, p. 122-132.
Galil, B. 2013. Going, going, gone: the loss of a reef building gastropod (Mollusca: Caenogastropoda: Vermetidae) in the southeast Mediterranean Sea. Zoology in the Middle East 59 (2): 179-182.
Junta de Andalucia. 2014.  Informe final de resultados. Año 2014 programa de gestión sostenible del medio marino andaluz consejería de medio ambiente y ordenación del territorio junta de andalucia. http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/medioambiente/portal_web/web/temas_ambientales/biodiversidad/1_medio_marino/informes_anuales/Informe_anual_medio_marino_2014.pdf
Feldmann, J. 1937. Recherches sur la végétation marine de la Méditerranée: la côte des Albères. Revue Algologique, 10: 1-339.
Milazzo, M., Rodolfo-Metalpa, R. Cha, B.S., Fine, M. and Alessis, C, 2014. Ocean acidification impairs vermetid reef recruitment. Scientific Reports, 4: 4189.
Molinier, R., 1960. Étude des biocoenoses marines du Cap Corse. Vegetation, 9: 120-192.
Péres, J.M. and Picard, J. 1964. Nouveau manuel de bionomie benthique de la Mer Méditerranée. Recueil des Travaux Statione Marine d’Endoume, 31(47): 3-137.
Ramos, A., Vázquez, M., Izquierdo A. and Antón, I. 2008. Cartografía de las formaciones de vermétidos: Dendropoma petraeum en la comunidad Valenciana y evaluación de su estado de conservación. Servicio de conservación de la biodiversidad (Generalitat Valenciana) y Universidad de Alicante, 117 pp. (inédito)
Templado, J., Ballesteros, E., Galparsoro, I., Borja, A. Serrano, A. Marín, L. and Brito, A. 2012. Guía interpretativa: Inventario español de hábitats marinos. Inventario español de hábitats y especies marinos. Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente. 229 pp.
Templado, J., Richter, A. and Calvo, M., 2016. Reef building Mediterranean vermetid gastropods: disentangling the Dendropoma petraeum species complex. Mediterranean Marine Science, 17/1, 13-31.
Templado, J. Calvo, M., Guallart, J., Acevedo, I. and Machordom, A. 2008. Tipificación de las formaciones de la especie Dendropoma petraeum en el archipiélago de las Islas Chafarinas. MAGRAMA report. 82 pages.  http://www.magrama.gob.es/es/parques-nacionales-oapn/centros-fincas/chafarinas/2008_dendropoma-petraeum-chafarinas_-templado_tcm7-365140.pdf
Templado, J., Templado, D. and Calvo, M. 1992. The formations of the vermetid gastropod Dendropoma petraeum (Monterosato, 1884) on the coast of the Iberian Peninsula. pp. 514-515. In: Abstracts of the 11 th. International Malacological Congress. Giusti, F., Manganelli, G. (Eds.). Siena.

Criterion A Text:
The few reports from the western Mediterranean seem to indicate that the habitat has experienced a slight decline in extent or remained stable. However, in the eastern Mediterranean (mostly outside of the EU 28+), the habitat seems to have suffered large losses in the last 50 years. In the central Mediterranean (Sicily), the habitat has also disappeared at some sites, while the trend in other sites is unknown.
A reduction in quantity of between 25-30% in the EU28 is inferred, based on the few existing reports where losses of more than 60% have been reported, and on the basis of expert opinion. Considering a 50-year period including the last decade and the next 40 years a continuing decrease is predicted given the potential impact of sea level rise and the current and ongoing pressures for the Mediterranean region.
This habitat has therefore been assessed as Near Threatened under Criteria A2b for EU 28 and Data Deficient for EU 28+ .

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a restricted distribution (AOO <50), there are continuing declines in its spatial extent and biotic quality and there is a threatening process that is likely to cause a continuing decline in the quantity and/or quality within the next 20 years, given its vulnerability to current impacts such as pollution and sea level rise. It has therefore been assessed as Vulnerable at both EU 28 and EU 28+ levels under Criterion B. This impact will affect the habitat over its whole distribution in the Mediterranean, although it is certain that some areas will be more resilient than others. The current threats are likely to result in heavy losses in the habitat in the eastern Mediterranean.

Criterion C/D Text:
Although there are no estimates on the percentage of change in community composition in this habitat, based on a decrease on the biotic quality (increase of green algae growth) and abiotic quality (pollution) that is affecting widely all the reefs and rims, it is inferred that a severe decline affecting more than 30% of the habitat from the past 20 years to the future 30 years is likely at the EU 28+ level. At the EU 28 level a slight decline in quality is suspected. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Vulnerable at the EU 28+ level and as Least Concern at the EU 28 level under Criterion C/D2.

Criterion E Text:
There is no quantitative analysis available that estimates the probability of collapse of this habitat type. Therefore, it is assessed as Data Deficient under Criterion E.

Synthesis:
The habitat type is assessed as Vulnerable both at the EU 28 and at the EU 28+ levels in view of its restricted Area of Occupancy (AOO) (less than 50) and the fact that it is experiencing a continuing decline in spatial extent and biotic quality as a result of water discharge, pollution, trampling and climate change. There is also considered likely to be a severe quality decline affecting 30% of the habitat in a period from the past 20 years to the future 30 years in the EU 28+.

Contributors:
Galil, B., Bariche, M., Mariani, S., Ballesteros, E., Elena Cefalì, M. and Templado, J.


Habitat Type Name:
A1.41: Communities of Mediterranean mediolittoral rockpools

Habitat Description:
Rockpools occur where the topography of the shore allows seawater to be retained within depressions in the bedrock. As the associated communities are permanently submerged they are not directly affected by height on the shore and normal rocky shore zonation patterns do not apply. Factors such as pool depth, surface area, volume, orientation to sunlight, shading, internal topography, sediment content and type, together with wave exposure, shore height, and hence flushing rate, and the presence of absence of freshwater runoff, results in large spatial variation in community structure, even between adjacent pools at
the same shore height. 
The provision of seawater to this habitat can be completely interrupted during long periods of calm sea conditions. In these cases, the habitat may face important changes in temperature, pH, salinity and oxygen concentration. Nitrogen concentration is very often high and seasonal changes more abrupt than
in the adjacent, regularly swashed communities. In these conditions, the development of macroalgal communities is hindered and green algae can dominate. Large numbers of benthic species and juvenile stages of some commercial species of fish may be present in rockpools.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species as well as those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure, and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. 
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis. Most of the associated species are opportunistic and show high turnover however changes in species richness and percent algae cover could indicate changes in the quality of the environment.
Characteristic species:
Rhodophyta (red algae): Ceramium ciliatum, Gelidium pusillum, Ellisolandia elongata, Polysiphonia sertularioides, Hildenbrandia rubra, Neogoniolithon brassica-florida, Lithophyllum incrustans.
Phaeophyta (brown algae): Scytosiphon lomentaria, Petalonia fascia, Sphacelaria cirrosa, Cystoseira compressa.
Chlorophyta (green algae): Cladophora vagabunda, Chaetomorpha aerea, Ulva rigida, Ulva compressa, Ulva fasciata, Cladophora albida, Cladophora laetevirens, Cladophora dalmatica. 
Cyanophyta (blue-green algae): Calotrix crustacea.
Gastropoda: Echinolittorina puncatata, Melaraphe neritoides, Phorcus turbinatus, Patella rustica.
Cirripedia: Chthamalus montagui.
Decapoda: Pachygrapsus marmoratus.
Echinodermata: Paracentrotus lividus, Arbaxia lixula

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of A1.4 Features of littoral rock.
 
Annex 1:

1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
 
MAES:
Marine - Coastal
Marine - inlets and transitional waters
 
MSFD:
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Not mapped
 
IUCN:
12.1 Rocky shoreline
 
Barcelona Convention (RAC/SPA):
I. 4. 1. Biocenosis of supralittoral rock

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Rock pools are widespread and common on rocky shores however as there is a limited tidal range in the Mediterranean they are perhaps not typical of the biogeographical region.

Map Description:
This map has been generated using data from IUCN and the European Environment Agency (EEA), and supplemented with expert opinion (Bernhard Lehner and Petra Doell. World Wildlife Fund US, Washington DC, USA. Center for Environmental Systems Research, University of Kassel, Germany). EOO and AOO have been calculated on the available data presented in this map however these should be treated with caution as expert opinion is that this may not indicate the full distribution of the habitat.

Trends in Quantity:
There is a lack of information on the extent and trends in the quantity of this habitat. Given the scale of coastal development and the numerous waterfront developments along the Mediterranean coast, it can be inferred that some losses of this habitat has occured in the past. However, information to estimate these losses with the current and more precise distribution of this habitat is not available.

Trends in Quality:
There are a few site-specific studies on trends in the quality of this habitat but insufficient information to determine overall trends in quality in the Mediterranean region.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat does not have a small natural range as the EOO is larger than 50,000 km2 .

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat does have an intrinsically restricted area but does not have a small natural range as the EOO is larger than 50,000 km2 .

Pressures and Threats:
The habitat is very unstable as it faces severe natural changes in environmental conditions. As a consequence most of the associated species are opportunistic and show a high turnover. The isolation from nearby seawater over long periods may cause strong evaporation, anoxia and salinity increments which could get worse with changes due to climate change and pollution. Recreational activities particularly during the summer season affect this habitat with the pressure on use on some sites and often the disposal of litter on the shore.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat are mostly general rather than specific measures. They include pollution control and regulation, development control and contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident and measures to reduce global warming and sea level rise. Beneficial actions include mapping of the distribution of this habitat in the Mediterranean and the associated species, monitoring representative sites to examine trends in quantity and quality and further evaluation of the main pressures and required conservation actions to safeguard and restore this habitat where it has been degraded.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1
1160: MMED XX
1170: MMED XX
This habitat does not have a particular status under the Barcelona Convention. It is listed as an Endangered habitat type under the Annex I of Convention on the Conservation of Europe

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The heterogeneity of this habitat in terms of rock pool size, shape, assemblage composition and hervibores determine its recovery capacity. If conditions reverse, the habitat might be able to recover relatively quickly but this is largely dependant on the previous conditions and their effects.

Summary:
This habitat is found in the intertidal zone and forms discrete patches along the Mediterranean coast. It is structured by a complex set of physical and biological factors that create great variability of rockpools. Information of its distribution in the Mediterranean is scarce with only a few studies providing data on the
structure of assemblages in this habitat. 
Although the habitat might be impacted by anthropogenic impacts in the intertidal and shallow coastal region, the communities are adapted to rapidly changing conditions and could be fairly resilient to such impacts. Nonetheless, their recover capacity depends on the characteristics of the different rockpools. The main pressures are pollution from marine and terrestrial activities and habitat modification from coastal development. Because rockpools lie at the land and sea interface, the macroalgal assemblages are also expected to be strongly influenced by climate change and the combined effects of elevated CO2  and temperature. Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat are mostly general rather than specific measures. They include pollution control and regulation, development control.Further work is needed to know its complete distribution and its conservation status in the Mediterranean.

References:
Ballesteros, E., Mariani, S., Cefalì, M.E., Terradas, M. and Chappuis, E. 2014. Manual dels hàbitats litorals a Catalunya. Generalitat de Catalunya. Departament de Territori i Sostenibilitat, Barcelona. 251 pp.
Benedetti-Cecchi, L., Bulleri, F. and Cinelli, F. 2000. The interplay of physical and biological factors in maintaining mid-shore and low-shore assemblages on rocky coasts in the northwest Mediterranean. Oecologia 123: 406–417.
Benedetti-Cecchi, L. and Cinelli, F. 1996. Patterns of disturbance and recovery in littoral rock pools: nonhierarchical competition and spatial variability in secondary succession. Marine Ecology Progression Series Vol., 135, 145-161.
Feldmann, J. 1937. Recherches sur la végétation marine de la Méditerranée: la côte des Albères. Revue Algologique, 10: 1-339.
Meinesz, A., J. R. Lefevre, J. M. Astier. 1991.  Impact of coastal development on the infralittoral zone along the southeastern Mediterranean shore of continental France. Marine Pollution Bulletin 23: 43-347.
Olabarria, C., Arenas, F., Viejo, R.M., Gestosa, I., et al. in press. Response of macroalgal assemblages from rockpools to climate change: effects of persistent increase in temperature and CO. Oikos, 2012, doi:10.1111/j.1600-0706.2012.20825.x.
Pérès, J.M. and Picard, J. 1964. Nouveau manuel de bionomie benthique de la Mer Méditerranée. Recueil des Travaux Statione Marine d’Endoume 31(47): 3-137.
Templado, J., Ballesteros, E., Galparsoro, I., Borja, A., Serrano, A., Marín, L. and Brito, A. 2012. Guía interpretativa: Inventario español de hábitats marinos. Inventario español de hábitats y especies marinos. Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente. 229 pp.

Criterion A Text:
There is no country specific data on the quanity of this habitat and insufficient information to determine overall trends. This habitat ha therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under Criterion A.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat has a large natural range in the western and eastern Mediterranean. The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000km2 and AOO >50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. Trends are unknown. The distribution of the habitat is such that the identified threats are unlikely to affect all localities at once. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criteria B1(c) B2 (c) and B3 and Data Deficient for all other criteria.

Criterion C/D Text:
The assessment of reduction in abiotic and/or biotic quality is difficult due to the lack of studies and data on past and present state conditions of rockpool habitats for the Mediterranean. At present, it is not possible to calculate the reductions in abiotic and/or biotic quality, although slight changes have been reported in the abiotic conditions of this habitat at several sites. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under Criterion C/D1 both at EU 28 and EU 28+ levels.

Synthesis:
There is a lack of published data on trends of this habitat and very little available information about its extent of occurrence or its area of occupancy. There have been no quantitative analyses examining the probability of extinction of the rockpools and the pressures affecting their quality. This habitat has a large EOO and AOO, and therefore qualifies as Least Concern under criterion B. However the habitat is assessed as Data Deficient both at the EU 28 and EU 28+ levels because of a lack of information on any trends in quantity and quality.


