Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
ecoop-eurodess:s9.2.5_-_ecosystem_health_in_the_baltic_sea [2009-06-23 10:24:26] aleksi.nummelin@fmi.fi |
ecoop-eurodess:s9.2.5_-_ecosystem_health_in_the_baltic_sea [2022-05-31 09:29:32] (current) |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
=== Products === | === Products === | ||
- | * Maps describing the current and forecasted state of the ecosystem health in the Baltic | + | * Maps describing the current and forecasted state of the ecosystem health in the Baltic |
- | * Maps describing the ecosystem health in the Baltic | + | * Maps describing the ecosystem health in the Baltic |
- | To be able to describe the state of the ecosystem health we will use ecological quality ratio (EQR), which will be determined by comparing different indicators to the " | + | To be able to describe the state of the ecosystem health we will use ecological quality ratio (EQR), which will be determined by comparing different indicators |
===== Users ===== | ===== Users ===== | ||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
* representatives of the media around the Baltic. | * representatives of the media around the Baltic. | ||
+ | ===== Demonstration ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Ecosystem health in the Baltic Sea - Ecological quality ratio=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Ecological quality ratio, EQR, is a simple quantity representing the state of the ecosystem, thus (mainly) concentrating into the surface layer. It is the ratio between parameter’s actual and reference condition. It is constructed of three different variables; phosphate, nitrate and chlorophyll-a. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | {{: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Figure 1 30 day average (17.10-17.11.2009) of EQR | ||
+ | |||
+ | As the demonstration is placed on the late autumn and since it is averaged over rather short period of time it should be taken only as an example which is still settling to its right value. It is clear from the ecosystem’s time scales that the relevant time period that should be taken account is at least two to four months long, maybe even an half of year. Since EQR has been calculated in FMI only for short time (1.5 months) and it did start after the cyanobacterial bloom it is not surprising that the EQR is higher than expected. Especially the Gulf of Finland seems to be in better condition than it should be, this can be however explained by the ecosystem and model dynamics. Phytoplankton uses most of the nutrients during spring and summer blooming and the surface nutrient concentration doesn' |