HELSINKI COMMISION HELCOM RED LIST BIOTOPES 9/2013 RED LIST Biotope Expert Team Ninth Meeting Helsinki, Finland, February 2013

Transcription

1 HELSINKI COMMISION HEOM RED LIST BIOTOPES 9/01 RED LIST Biotope Expert Team Ninth Meeting Helsinki, Finland, 19-1 February 01 TABLE OF CONTENTS MINUTES OF THE NINTH MEETING OF RED LIST BIOTOPE EXPERT TEAM (HEOM RED LIST BIOTOPES)... Introduction... Agenda Item 1 Adoption of agenda... Agenda Item Information by the Secretariat... Agenda Item Preparation of threat assessments of biotopes... Agenda Item 4 Biotope/habitat classification... 4 Agenda Item 5 Future work... 5 Agenda Item 6 Any other business... 6 Agenda Item 7 Outcome of the Meeting... 6 Annex 1. List of Participants... 7 Annex. Conversion table for biotope classification systems... 9 Annex. The Red List criterion that can be used for rare biotopes...4 Annex 4. Initial Red List assessments biotopes...5 Page 1 of 4

2 MINUTES OF THE NINTH MEETING OF RED LIST BIOTOPE EXPERT TEAM (HEOM RED LIST BIOTOPES) INTRODUCTION 0.1 With reference to the Minutes of the 9 th Meeting of the HEOM Heads of Delegations (paragraph.9, LD 117) and the Fourth Steering Group meeting of the Project for Completing the HEOM Red List of Species and Habitats/Biotopes (HEOM RED LIST 4/01), Paragraph 6.5, the Ninth Workshop of the Red List Biotope Experts (HEOM RED LIST BIOTOPES 9/01) was held in Helsinki, Finland, at the premises of the HEOM Secretariat (Katajanokanlaituri 6 B, Helsinki), on 19-1 February The main objective of the Meeting was to prepare initial threat assessments of biotopes, using the answers of the biotope questionnaire and other supporting materials as background data for the assessments. The Meeting was also to plan and structure the future work needed to complete the threat assessments of biotopes and the technical report describing the biotope classification, bearing in mind the need to deliver these products by the 01 HEOM Ministerial Meeting. 0. The Meeting was chaired by Mr. Michael Haldin, Finland, Chair of HEOM RED LIST BIOTOPES. Ms. Tytti Kontula, Project Manager of HEOM RED LIST, and Ms. Lena Avellan, Project Officer of HEOM RED LIST, acted as Secretaries of the Meeting assisted by Ms. Petra Kääriä, Assisting Professional Secretary. 0.4 Representatives from all Contracting Parties except Denmark, Estonia, European Commission, Latvia Lithuania and Russia attended the Meeting. The List of Participants is contained in Annex 1 to these Minutes. 0.5 Mr. Michael Haldin, Chair of the HEOM RED LIST BIOTOPES, welcomed the participants to the HEOM Secretariat and Tytti Kontula, Project Manager of HEOM RED LIST, introduced the new Project Officer Ms. Lena Avellan, who will be working in the project full time until the end of September. Agenda Item 1 Adoption of agenda Documents: 1/1 1.1 The Meeting adopted the Agenda as contained in document 1/1. Agenda Item Information by the Secretariat Documents: /1, /.1 The Meeting took note of the information given by Ms. Kontula on the outcome of the HEOM Workshop on region climate change and its implications held on 5-6 February in Warnemünde, Germany and the HEOM eutrophication status targets endorsed by HOD 9/01 and agreed to consider the conclusion of the workshop and the status targets when making the biotope threat assessments. Agenda Item Preparation of threat assessments of biotopes.1 The Meeting took note of the presentation by Lena Avellan, Project Officer of HEOM RED LIST, on the results of the biotope questionnaire and on the comments concerning the questionnaire, assessment and classification (Presentation 1).. The Meeting discussed the problems related to filling in the questionnaire, such as the complexity and the level of detail of the questionnaire and the general lack of data, Page of 4

3 resources and time for answering it. The Meeting emphasized that, taking into account these difficulties, it is important to state the level of confidence for the assessments and to make it clear also in the end products that there are no actual monitoring data for most of the biotopes.. The Meeting took note of the suggestions by respondents on how the questionnaire could have been organized better, e.g. that regional workshops would have been a good way of collecting the answers or that instead of asking for absolute area estimates some simple classification for commonness could have been used. The Meeting also welcomed the willingness of some respondents to actually start using the classification in order to gain data on biotopes for future assessments..4 The Meeting considered the amount and quality of answers for the questionnaire, as summarized by Ms. Avellan. The Meeting noted that most of the biotopes received at least some answers but that in many cases the answers were e.g. simply presence/absence information without comments on any trends. The Meeting discussed the few biotopes for which there were answers from several countries, including also estimates on quantity and/or quality declines: biotopes Fucus, Zostera, Mytilus or corticated red algae. The Meeting regretted the scarcity of answers and the large geographical gaps that occur even in these rather well-known biotopes..5 In regard to the biotope information presented by Ms. Avellan for the above mentioned biotopes, the Meeting pointed out that species distribution maps do not necessarily apply for corresponding biotopes..6 The Meeting took note of the conversion table prepared and presented by Mr. Boedeker (Germany) on the relationships between the current biotope classification, the 1998 HEOM biotope classification and the German Red List of biotopes (Annex )..7 The Meeting considered the different background data sets prepared by the Secretariat: benthic maps of the BALANCE project were considered too coarse to give much support for the assessment work (e.g. large areas of photic sand were missing from the map), and also the eutrophication indicator maps were not regarded very useful (too sparse data behind the interpolation). However, the Meeting was of the opinion that the graphs showing the trends in Secchi depths in different areas, the CORESET pressure index data, and the data on oxygen should be taken into account when considering the threat statuses for the biotopes..8 The Meeting took note of the list of potentially (Least Concern) biotopes, compiled and introduced by Ms. Avellan, on the basis of the questionnaire answers. As a next step, the Meeting considered separately each candidate and excluded from the provisional list all biotopes that were regarded potentially threatened at least in some region..9 The Meeting considered the list of biotopes that had received neither change estimates, nor statements in the answers of the questionnaire, and assigned some of them to the category and the rest with the candidate biotopes that need to be considered..10 The Meeting checked and discussed the list of biotopes classified as rare in the questionnaire answers and picked up the biotopes to be further considered..11 To start the assessments of potentially threatened biotopes, the Meeting discussed thoroughly the status of hard bottom and mixed Fucus biotopes in different regions, and agreed to give them an initial assignment to the category, despite the fact that the biotope has declined in many regions and acknowledging the Swedish expert opinions that on the Swedish coastline, which constitutes the majority of the distribution area, the status has improved recently so much that no or little net loss is left when compared to the situation in the 1940s (data from the Åland Sea)..1 The Meeting emphasized that it is important to prepare Biotope Information Sheets not only for the red-listed biotopes but also for such biotopes that (i) have reduced regionally, (ii) are included in the old red lists, or (iii) have a national threat classification. Page of 4

4 .1 The Meeting discussed about how to take into account in the assessments the invasion of Marenzelleria spp. to the. The Meeting took note of the information given by Mr. Jan Warzocha (Poland) that, for example, for the chironomid biotope, the appearance of Marenzelleria has not been a negative change and the biomass of the chironomids has not decreased. The Meeting also took note of the information by Mr. Johan Näslund (Sweden) that likely Marenzelleria is not competing with native species at the beginning of its colonization but when the organic matter is consumed from the deeper layers, it moves upwards and may start competing with, e.g. Monoporeia affinis..14 The Meeting discussed about Kattegat biotopes, e.g. kelp biotopes, and about the general status of coastal habitats in that region. The Meeting decided to leave most of the assessments for Kattegat biotopes open, and asked the Swedish experts to get comments from Kattegat experts for the biotopes that occur only or mainly in the Kattegat region..15 The Meeting discussed about the principle of assigning Red List categories on different levels in the classification hierarchy, and agreed that level 5 biotopes are not to be assessed if assessments can be done on level 6. The Meeting also agreed that for some biotope classes, e.g. the ones with special s (maerl, peat etc.), the assessments can be done also on level or The Meeting discussed about how to take into account rareness in the threat assessments and decided that the IUCN proposal for the B criterion could be used to evaluate threat categories (Annex )..17 The Meeting considered all the biotopes marked as candidates in the previous steps and gave an initial Red List category assignment for them, taking into account the answers for the questionnaire and their own data and expertise, and accompanied all assignments with a range of plausible categories that indicate the level of uncertainty of the assessment (Annex 4). Agenda Item 4 Biotope/habitat classification 4.1 The Meeting considered the comments concerning the biotope classification received from the respondents of the questionnaire. 4. The Meeting decided to revise the classification so that it handles and sessile epi equally on the level 4 ( 10% or sessile epi). 4. The Meeting discussed about the applicability of biovolume and agreed that it makes sense to use it but acknowledged that only few experts/organizations have ever collected the data needed for estimating biovolumes. The Meeting asked the Secretariat to provide the tables of species-specific heights that have been used in the biotope analyses for building the classification in the first place. The Meeting was also of the opinion that each region should use the best available region-specific estimates for heights of full-grown but if no such estimates exist then to use the same estimates that were used in the biotope analyses by the consultants. 4.4 The Meeting revised the split rules for soft types so that the 90% coverage rule was excluded, and replaced with a rule that it should have the largest proportion of the soft s. 4.5 The Meeting changed the cut-off percentages for in classes on level 5 from 10% to dominant. 4.6 The Meeting discussed about the class nectobenthic and decided to exclude it from the classification as it is not clear for the expert team whether this is a biotope or not. The Meeting took note of the information given by Mr. Michael Haldin (Finland) that large areas of unvegetated sand bottoms in the Bothnian Bay may be dominated by these crustaceans that are mobile and live probably near or on the bottom. The Meeting was also of the opinion that the areas where nectobenthic animals are Page 4 of 4

5 abundant most likely represent one of the biotopes meio (at least in the Bothnian Bay) in the revised classification system. 4.7 The Meeting emphasized in relation to inl biotopes that no biotope should ever be determined on the basis of single samples. In regard to minimum size of a biotope, the Meeting reiterated the earlier decision to define that a biotope should be large enough to function as a biotope and asked the Secretariat to prepare a short explanation on the issue of scale in relation to mapping of biotopes. 4.8 The Meeting took note of the comment by Germany that the biotope AA.J18 (Zostera noltii biotope) should be completely deleted and included to the description with the Zannichellia and Ruppia and decided to delete the biotope. 4.9 The Meeting regarded the special unattached form of Fucus vesiculosus, the form pygmaea which is known from Germany and Sweden and has existed also in Poland. The Meeting decided to separate the pygmaea biotope from the biotope the normal unattached form of Fucus spp., as the plant itself is completely different and it forms a different habitat for The Meeting took note of the information by Mr. Kautsky on special rolling forms (about a size of a football) of F. vesiculosus, discussed about it and agreed that it should not be handled as a biotope but, if necessary, it can be taken into account as a special biotope element in certain biotopes The Meeting agreed that photic Haploops biotope should be excluded from the classification. 4.1 The Meeting decided to divide the bryozoan biotope (AB.A117) into two separate biotopes (Flustra and Electra biotopes) and possibly utilize level 7 for doing that. 4.1 The Meeting agreed to use biomass instead of shell-free biomass in the split rules of the classification The Meeting decided to combine the biotopes AB.J1 and AB.J, i.e. the biotopes dominated by Monoporeia affinis and Pontoporeia femorata The Meeting pointed out that the classification still includes many parts and details that are difficult to grasp from excel files and emphasized that it is very important to prepare proper flow charts with complete split rules for the classification The Meeting considered the list of biotope complexes which in practice are the same as Habitats Directive habitat types and pointed out that one type is missing from the list and should be added: Mud flats and sand flats not covered by seawater at low tide (1140). Agenda Item 5 Future work 5.1 The Meeting took note of the information given by Ms. Tytti Kontula about the general timetable of the Red List project: in order to be able to present the final outcome in the HEOM Ministerial Meeting on rd October 01, the project should provide finalized drafts of the biotope reports in the HOD meeting in mid September and before that the materials should be considered also by the HABITAT group (possibly by consultation). 5. The Meeting asked the German experts to send the suggestions regarding the level 6 e.g. for biotope classes to be revised to Ms. Lena Avellan by 6 th February The Meeting instructed the Secretariat to merge the revised classification and the initial assessments into one document, to prepare the flow charts including all split rules and other necessary specifications for the classification, and to circulate those materials first within the Biotope Expert Team, and later on (at the beginning of April at the latest) as a widely distributed questionnaire. Page 5 of 4

6 5.4 The Meeting pointed out that in this second round of questionnaire distributional information should be collected for the initially red-listed biotopes to get at least presence/absence data on the level of countries and subbasins. 5.5 The Meeting considered the date of the next meeting and decided to postpone it to get more time for preparation of necessary materials and also a long enough time for running the second questionnaire. The Meeting welcomed the offer of Finland to organize the next meeting in Helsinki (Finnish Environment Institute) on 4-5 April 01. Agenda Item 6 Any other business Documents: None 6.1 The Meeting did not consider any other business. Agenda Item 7 Outcome of the Meeting Documents: 7/1 7.1 The Meeting adopted the draft Minutes of the HEOM RED LIST BIOTOPES 9/01 (document 7/1). The Minutes of the Meeting will be finalized by the Secretariat in consultation with the Chair of the Meeting and made available in the HEOM Meeting Portal, together with the presentations given during the Meeting. The Meeting Portal can be accessed either directly at or via HEOM web site => Meetings and Documents, Meeting Portal : under Nature Protection and Biodiversity Group (HEOM HABITAT) => RED LIST => folder RED LIST BIOTOPES 9/01. Page 6 of 4

7 ANNEX 1. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS PARTICIPANTS Mr. Michael Haldin CHAIRMAN Metsähallitus Natural Heritage Services Wolffintie 6 F1 P.O. Box 475 Vaasa Dir.Phone: Fax: michael.haldin@metsa.fi Ville Karvinen FINLAND The Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) Mechelininkatu 4a P.O.Box 140 Helsinki Dir.Phone: Fax: Ville.Karvinen@ymparisto.fi Mr. Dieter Boedeker GERMANY German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation Isle of Vilm D Putbus Dir.Phone: Fax: dieter.boedeker@bfn-vilm.de Mr. Alexander Darr Ms. Karin Fürhaupter Leibniz Institute for Research Seestrasse 15 D Rostock Company for Aquatic Research GmbH Heinrich-Wöhlk-Str. 14 DE-4 Schönkirchen Germany Dir.Phone: Fax: alexander.darr@iowarnemuende.de Dir. Phone: Fax: fuerhaupter@marilim.de Mr. Jan Warzocha POLAND National Marine Fisheries Research Institute Kollataja Str. 1 PL-81 Gdynia Dir.Phone: Fax: janw@mir.gdynia.pl Ms. Mona Johansson Mr. Hans Kautsky SWEDEN ArtDatabanken, SLU Swedish Species Information Centre Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences P.O.Box 7007 Uppsala Systems Ecology Stockholm University SE Stockholm Dir.Phone: Fax: mona.johansson@artdata.slu.se Dir.Phone: Fax: hassek@ecology.su.se Mr. Jouni Leinikki CONSULTANTS Alleco Ltd Veneentekijäntie 4 Dir.Phone: Fax: Page 7 of 4

8 Mr. Johan Näslund Helsinki Aquabiota Water Research Löjtnantsgatan 5 Stockholm jouni.leinikki@alleco.fi Dir.Phone: Fax: johan.naslund@aquabiota.se Ms. Lena Avellan Project Officer Ms. Tytti Kontula Project Manager Ms. Petra Kääriä Assisting Professional Secretary HEOM SECRETARIAT Helsinki Commission Katajanokanlaituri 6 B FI Helsinki Helsinki Commission Katajanokanlaituri 6 B FI Helsinki Helsinki Commission Katajanokanlaituri 6 B FI Helsinki Dir.Phone: Fax: lena.avellan@helcom.fi Dir.Phone: Fax: tytti.kontula@helcom.fi Dir.Phone: Fax: petra.kaaria@helcom.fi Page 8 of 4

9 ANNEX. CONVERSION TABLE FOR BIOTOPE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS Conversion table prepared and presented by Mr. Boedeker (Germany) on the relationships between the current biotope classification, the 1998 HEOM biotope classification and the German Red List of biotopes. Baltic EUNIS compatible Code Name of biotope type HEOM Red List 1998 if threat categories other than, full name and code Baltic German Red List: code, name and overall threat of corresponding German Baltic biotope types at different levels OFFSHORE COASTAL WATERS (bodden including the Schlei inlet, haffs and estuaries) HYDROLITTORAL of offshore and coastal 01 Threat (Boe) Area/Quality AA.A1 AA.A Photic rock and boulders 10 % of Characterized by ( 10 %) <10 % of Not Characterized by (<10 % ) VU/EN NT/VU AA.A11 AA.A1 AA.A1 AA.A14 AA.A1 Photic rock and boulders perennial algae or moss Photic rock and boulders soft crustose algae Photic rock and boulders annual algae Photic rock and boulders mixed Photic rock and boulders Shallow, natural hard offshore, rich in, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow natural hard habitats in Baltic, rich in??? Shallow, natural hard offshore, rich in, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow, natural hard offshore, rich in, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow, natural hard offshore, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk Shallow natural hard habitats in Baltic, rich in Shallow natural hard habitats in Baltic, rich in Shallow natural hard Shallow hydrolittoral zone with stony (stones and boulders), rich in Shallow hydrolittoral zone with stony (stones and boulders), rich in Shallow hydrolittoral zone with stony (stones and boulders), rich in Shallow hydrolittoral zone with stony (stones and boulders) Page 9 of 4

10 AA.A AA.A Photic rock and boulders with sparse epibenthic communities Photic rock and boulders without characteristic epibenthic flora or and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow, natural hard offshore, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow, natural hard offshore, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow natural hard Shallow natural hard Shallow hydrolittoral zone with stony (stones and boulders) Shallow hydrolittoral zone with stony (stones and boulders) - Photic mixed hard and soft 10 % of AA.B1 Characterized by <10 % of AA.B Not Characterized by NT/VU /NT AA.B11 AA.B1 AA.B1 AA.B1 AA.B14 Photic mixed hard and soft emergent Photic mixed hard and soft submerged rooted plants Baltic photic mixed dominated by common eelgrass (Zostera marina) Photic mixed hard and soft perennial algae or moss Photic mixed hard and soft soft crustose algae with mixed, rich in macropytes Eelgrass bed offshore Eelgrass bed offshore Fine habitat in, with mixed (mosaics and mixtures of silt and sand, in some cases associated with gravel and stones) not assessed with mixed, rich in macropytes not assessed with mixed, rich in macropytes? not assessed? EN/EN EN/EN EN/EN Page 10 of 4

11 AA.B15 AA.B16 AA.B17 AA.B1 AA.B Photic hard clay AA.C11 AA.C1 Photic mixed hard and soft dominated by stable aggregations of unattached perennial Photic mixed hard and soft annual algae Photic mixed hard and soft mixed Photic mixed s Photic mixed hard and soft with sparse epibenthic communities Photic hard clay with epibenthic Photic hard clay without Fine habitat in, with mixed (mosaics and mixtures of silt and sand, in some cases associated with gravel and stones) Fine habitat in, with mixed (mosaics and mixtures of silt and sand, in some cases associated with gravel and stones) Fine habitat in, with mixed (mosaics and mixtures of silt and sand, in some cases associated with gravel and stones) Fine habitat in, with mixed (mosaics and mixtures of silt and sand, in some cases associated with gravel and stones) Fine habitat in, with mixed (mosaics and mixtures of silt and sand, in some cases associated with gravel and stones) AA.C1 Not Characterized by Shallow, natural hard offshore, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow, natural hard offshore, with hard loamy and stony not assessed with mixed, rich in macropytes not assessed with mixed, rich in macropytes not assessed with mixed, rich in macropytes not assessed with mixed - not assessed with mixed Shallow natural hard Shallow natural hard Shallow hydrolittoral zone with stony (stones and boulders) Shallow hydrolittoral zone with stony (stones NT/VU Page 11 of 4

12 s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts - and boulders) - Photic marl AA.D1 NT AA.D11 Photic marl (marlstone rock) Shallow, natural hard offshore, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow natural hard Shallow hydrolittoral zone with stony (stones and boulders) - Photic maerl beds AA.E11 Photic maerl beds (unattached particles of coralline red algae) AA.E1 not occurring Photic shell gravel 10 % of AA.F1 Characterized by AA.F11 AA.F1 Photic concretion bottoms AA.G11 Photic shell gravel Photic shell gravel Photic concretion bottom <10 % of AA.F Shell debris offshore Shell debris offshore [ Shell debris habitat in Baltic Sea offshore (highly exposed/nonshifting) R Shell debris habitat in Baltic Sea offshore (littleexposed/temporary) ] AA.G1 Not Characterized by Shell debris habitat in R Shell debris habitat in R / not occurring Photic peat bottoms AA.H1 VU/ AA.H11 Photic peat bottom Hydrolittoral Peat Bottoms (.11.) Peat habitat offshore Peat habitat in Baltic Page 1 of 4

13 R R with peat (generally free of or low in ) Photic anthropogenically created s AA.I1 not assessed Photic muddy AA.J11 AA.J1 AA.J17 AA.J18 AA.J1 AA.J14 AA.J15 AA.J1 AA.J Photic muddy emergent Photic muddy submerged rooted plants Baltic photic muddy dominated by common eelgrass (Zostera marina) Baltic photic muddy dominated by dwarf eelgrass (Zostera noltii) Photic muddy stable aggregations of unattached perennial Photic photic muddy annual algae Photic muddy mixed Photic muddy Photic muddy 10 % of AA.J1 Characterized by <10 % of AA.J Not Characterized by not occurrring not occurrring with mud, rich in Eelgrass bed offshore Eelgrass bed offshore Eelgrass bed offshore Fine habitat in, with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine, rich in Fine, rich in??? Fine habitat in, with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine habitat in, with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine habitat in Fine, rich in Fine Fine with mud, rich in with mud, rich in with mud, rich in?? /EN /VU EN/EN EN/EN EN/EN Page 1 of 4

14 AA.J AA.J4 AA.J5 AA.J6 AA.J7 AA.J8 Photic coarse AA.K11 AA.K1 AA.K1 inl bivalves Photic muddy inl polychaetes Photic muddy inl crustaceans Photic muddy inl echinoderms Photic muddy inl insect larvae Photic muddy nectobenthic Photic muddy without characteristic flora or Photic coarse emergent Photic coarse submerged rooted plants Baltic photic coarse dominated by common eelgrass (Zostera marina), with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine habitat in, with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine habitat in, with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine habitat in, with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine habitat in, with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine habitat in, with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine Fine -???? Fine Fine -??? 10 % of AA.K1 Characterized by (>10 %) <10 % of AA.K Not Characterized by (<10 % ) with gravelly, rich in Gravel? habitat offshore Eelgrass bed offshore Gravel habitats in, rich in?? VU/VU VU/VU EN/EN Page 14 of 4

15 AA.K1 AA.K14 AA.K15 AA.K16 AA.K1 AA.K AA.K Photic coarse perennial algae or moss Photic coarse stable aggregations of unattached perennial Photic coarse annual algae Photic coarse mixed Photic coarse Photic coarse with sparse or no Photic coarse without characteristic flora or Gravel habitat offshore Gravel habitat offshore Gravel habitat offshore Gravel habitat offshore Gravel habitat offshore Gravel habitat offshore Gravel habitat offshore Gravel habitats in, rich in Gravel habitats in, rich in Gravel habitats in, rich in Gravel habitats in, rich in Gravel habitats in Baltic Gravel habitats in Baltic Gravel habitats in Baltic with gravelly, rich in? with gravelly, rich in with gravelly, rich in 06.0 with gravelly 06.0 with gravelly 06.0 with gravelly Photic sand 10 % of AA.L1 Characterized by EN/EN AA.L11 AA.L1 <10 % of AA.L Not Characterized by Photic sand with sand emergent, rich in Sublittoral Eelgrass bed level sandy offshore Shallow sand bottoms habitat in Baltic dominated by with sand Photic sand macrophyte, rich in, rich in submerged (.5..) (predominantly rooted plants freshwater or brackish water species, e.g. charales and / EN/EN Page 15 of 4

16 pondweeds) AA.L11 AA.L1 AA.L14 AA.L15 AA.L1 AA.L AA.L Baltic photic sand dominated by common eelgrass (Zostera marina) Photic sand stable aggregations of unattached perennial Photic sand annual algae Photic sand mixed Photic sand Photic sand inl bivalves Photic sand inl polychaetes Sublittoral level sandy bottoms dominated by macrophyte (.5..) Sublittoral level sandy bottoms dominated by macrophyte (.5..) Eelgrass bed offshore Level sand offshore Level coarse sand habitat in Level medium to fine sand habitat offshore Shallow sand habitat in Baltic, rich in (predominantly freshwater or brackish water species, e.g. charales and pondweeds)??? Level sand offshore Level coarse sand habitat in Level medium to fine sand habitat offshore Shallow sand habitat in Baltic, rich in (predominantly freshwater or brackish water species, e.g. charales and pondweeds)??? Level sand offshore Level coarse sand habitat in Level medium to fine sand habitat offshore Level sand offshore Level Shallow sand habitats in : Sha llow coarse sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow medium to fine sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow sand habitats in :? with sand, rich in 06.0 with sand 06.0 with sand EN/EN Page 16 of 4

17 AA.L4 AA.L5 AA.L6 AA.L7 Photic sand inl crustaceans Photic sand inl insect larvae Photic sand nectobenthic Photic sand without characteristic flora or coarse sand habitat in Level medium to fine sand habitat offshore Level sand offshore Level coarse sand habitat in Level medium to fine sand habitat offshore Sha llow coarse sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow medium to fine sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow sand habitats in : Sha llow coarse sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow medium to fine sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in??? Level sand offshore Level coarse sand habitat in Level medium to fine sand habitat offshore Level sand offshore Level coarse sand habitat in Level medium to fine sand habitat offshore Shallow sand habitats in : Sha llow coarse sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow medium to fine sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow sand habitats in : Sha llow coarse sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow medium to 06.0 with sand 06.0 with sand Farbstreifenwatt of the hydrolittoral zone with sand 1?/? Page 17 of 4

18 fine sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Aphotic rock and boulders 10 % of epibenthic <10 % of epibenthic AB.A1 AB.A Characterized by epibenthic ( 10 % cover) Not Characterized by epibenthic (<10 % cover) /VU AB.A11 AB.A1 AB.A Aphotic mixed hard and soft AB.B11 AB.B1 AB.B Aphotic rock and boulders Aphotic rock and boulders with sparse epibenthic communities Aphotic rock and boulders without characteristic Aphotic mixed hard and soft Aphotic mixed hard and soft with sparse Aphotic mixed hard and soft without 10 % of epibenthic <10 % of epibenthic Shallow, natural hard offshore, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow, natural hard offshore, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow natural hard Shallow natural hard -?? AB.B1 AB.B Fine habitat in, with mixed (mosaics and mixtures of silt and sand, in some cases associated with gravel and stones) Fine habitat in, with mixed (mosaics and mixtures of silt and sand, in some cases associated with gravel and stones) Fine habitat in, with mixed Characterized by ( 10 % cover) Not Characterized by epibenthic (<10 % cover) not assessed not assessed not assessed /VU Page 18 of 4

19 characteristic (mosaics and mixtures of silt and sand, in some cases associated with gravel and stones) Aphotic hard clay Epibenthic AB.C1 With No AB.C Without? AB.C11 AB.C1 Aphotic hard clay with Aphotic hard clay without Shallow, natural hard offshore, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow, natural hard offshore, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow natural hard Shallow natural hard - Aphotic marl (marlstone rock) AB.D1 /VU AB.D11 Aphotic marl (marlstone rock) Shallow, natural hard offshore, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Shallow natural hard - Aphotic maerl beds AB.E11 Aphotic maerl beds (unattached particles of coralline red algae) AB.E1 not occurring Aphotic shell gravel AB.F1 / AB.F11 Aphotic shell gravel Shell debris offshore [ Shell debris habitat in Baltic Sea offshore (highly exposed/non Shell debris habitat in R Page 19 of 4

20 shifting) R Shell debris habitat in Baltic Sea offshore (littleexposed/temporary) ] Aphotic concretion bottoms AB.G11 Aphotic anthropogenically created s Aphotic muddy AB.J11 AB.J1 AB.J AB.J AB.J4 AB.J5 AB.J6 Aphotic concretion bottom Aphotic muddy Aphotic muddy inl bivalves Aphotic muddy inl polychaetes Aphotic muddy inl crustaceans Aphotic muddy inl echinoderms Aphotic muddy inl insect larvae Aphotic muddy nectobenthic 10 % of epibenthic <10 % of epibenthic AB.G1 AB.I1 AB.J1 Characterized by epibenthic ( 10 % cover) Not Characterized by AB.J (<10 % cover) Fine? habitat in, with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine Fine habitat in, with mud (dominated - by silt and clay) Fine habitat in, with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine habitat in, with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine habitat in, with mud (dominated by silt and clay) Fine Fine -?? Fine -?? not occurring not assessed? Page 0 of 4

21 AB.J7 Aphotic coarse AB.K11 AB.K AB.K Aphotic Sand AB.L11 AB.L1 AB.L Aphotic muddy without characteristic 10 % of epibenthic <10 % of epibenthic Aphotic coarse Aphotic coarse sparse Aphotic coarse without characteristic 10 % of epibenthic Aphotic sand Aphotic sand inl bivalves Aphotic sand inl polychaetes <10 % of epibenthic?? Characterized by epibenthic AB.K1 ( 10 % cover) Not Characterized by AB.K (<10 % cover) Gravel Gravel habitat habitats in Baltic offshore Gravel habitat offshore Gravel habitats in Baltic?? AB.L1 AB.L Characterized by epibenthic ( 10 % cover) Not Characterized by (<10 % cover) Shallow sand habitats in : Level sand offshore Level coarse sand habitat in Level medium to fine sand habitat offshore Level sand offshore Level coarse sand habitat in Level medium to fine sand habitat offshore Level sand offshore Sha llow coarse sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow medium to fine sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow sand habitats in : Sha llow coarse sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow medium to fine sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow sand habitats in : EN/EN? Page 1 of 4

22 AB.L AB.L4 AB.L5 AB.L6 AD AE Aphotic sand inl crustacea Aphotic sand inl insect larvae Aphotic sand nectobenthic Aphotic sand without characteristic pelagic system above or without halocline pelagic system in or below halocline Level coarse sand habitat in Level medium to fine sand habitat offshore Level sand offshore Level coarse sand habitat in Level medium to fine sand habitat offshore Sha llow coarse sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow medium to fine sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow sand habitats in : Sha llow coarse sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow medium to fine sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in?? Level sand offshore Level coarse sand habitat in Level medium to fine sand habitat offshore Shallow sand habitats in : Sha llow coarse sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in Shallow medium to fine sand habitat in Baltic, free of or low in?? Pelagic zone offshore above the halocline Offshore (deep) below the halocline Pelagic zone offshore below the halocline Pelagic zone Page of 4

23 (1.1.) Biotope Complexes X0 X6 Coastal lagoons Sand banks Lagoons including Bodden, barrier lagoons, and Fladas (G) Sandbank in (including megaripple fields) Sandbank in? /EN /NT X7 Estuaries /EN X8 Large shallow inlets and bays /VU X9 X40 Reefs Submarine structures made by leaking gases: (Bubbling reefs & pockmarks) Bubbling reefs (.10) R Hard reefs in, with hard loamy and stony s (e.g. chalk and marl, generally with stones and boulders), in some cases moraine relicts Biogenic reef offshore (blue mussel bed) Hard reefs in? Biogenic reefs Stony reef NT/VU not occurring Those threat evaluations with an asterisk are due to the rarity of this biotope in German. Page of 4

24 ANNEX. THE RED LIST CRITERION THAT CAN BE USED FOR RARE BIOTOPES (according to the IUCN proposal 01). B. Geographic distribution is restricted, as indicated by either: 1. The extent of a minimum convex polygon or similar boundary enclosing all occurrences (Extent of occurrence EOO) estimated to be,000 km CR 0,000 km EN 50,000 km VU 55,000 km NT AND at least one of the following: (a) An observed or inferred continuing decline in i. a measure of spatial extent appropriate to the ecosystem; or ii. a measure of environmental quality appropriate to the characteristic biota of the ecosystem; or iii. a measure of disruption to biotic interactions appropriate to the characteristic biota of the ecosystem; (b) Observed or inferred threatening processes that are likely to cause continuing declines in either geographic distribution, environmental quality or biotic interactions within the next 0 years; (c) Ecosystem exists at (i) only a single location if EOO,000 km (ii) 5 or fewer locations if EOO 0,000 km (iii) 10 or fewer locations if EOO 50,000 km ; OR. The number of km grid cells occupied (Area of occupancy AOO) estimated to be CR 0 EN 50 VU 55 NT AND at least one of the following: (a) An observed or inferred continuing decline in i. a measure of spatial extent appropriate to the ecosystem; or ii. a measure of environmental quality appropriate to the characteristic biota of the ecosystem; or iii. a measure of disruption to biotic interactions appropriate to the characteristic biota of the ecosystem; (b) Observed or inferred threatening processes that are likely to cause continuing declines in either geographic distribution, environmental quality or biotic interactions within the next 0 years; (c) Ecosystem exists at (i) only a single location if AOO grid cells (10 10 km) (ii) 5 or fewer locations if AOO 0 grid cells (10 10 km) (iii) 10 or fewer locations if AOO 50 grid cells (10 10 km); OR. A very small number of locations (generally fewer than 5) AND prone to the effects of human activities or stochastic events within a very short time period in an uncertain future, and thus capable of collapse or becoming CR within a very short time period VU Page 4 of 4

25 Annex 4. Initial Red List assessments biotopes Initial Red List Category BIOTOPES (based on the classification version 18 December 01) RL Min. RL Max. Criteria for rare biotopes NE AA.A11 Baltic photic rock and boulders perennial algae or moss Ger AA.A111 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by Fucus spp. NT Ger, Fin AA.A11 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by perennial non-filamentous corticated red algae NT Ger, Fin AA.A11 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by perennial foliose red algae x AA.A114 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by kelp Kattegat experts? AA.A115 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by perennial filamentous algae AA.A116 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by aquatic mosses (Bryophyta) AA.A1 Baltic photic rock and boulders soft crustose algae AA.A1 Baltic photic rock and boulders annual algae AA.A14 Baltic photic rock and boulders mixed NE AA.A1 Baltic photic rock and boulders Ger AA.A11 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by Mytilidae AA.A1 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by Zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) x AA.A1 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by sea squirts (Ascidiacea) Kattegat experts? AA.A14 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by hydroids (Hydrozoa) AA.A15 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by moss animals (Bryozoa) AA.A16 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by barnacles (Balanidae) AA.A17 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by sponges (Porifera) AA.A Baltic photic rock and boulders with sparse epibenthic communities NE AA.A Baltic photic rock and boulders without characteristic epibenthic flora or AA.A1 Baltic photic rock and boulders dominated by microphytobenthic organisms and grazing snails NE AA.B11 Baltic photic mixed hard and soft emergent AA.B111 Baltic photic mixed dominated by common reed (Phragmites australis) AA.B11 Baltic photic mixed dominated by sedges (Cyperaceae) NE AA.B1 Baltic photic mixed hard and soft submerged rooted plants AA.B11 Baltic photic mixed dominated by pond weed (Potamogeton perfoliatus and/or Stuckenia pectinata). AA.B1 Baltic photic mixed dominated by Zannichellia spp. and/or Ruppia spp. and/or Zostera noltii NT AA.B1 Baltic photic mixed dominated by common eelgrass (Zostera marina) VU Fin, Ger, Pol National concern Comment

26 AA.B14 Baltic photic mixed dominated by watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum and/or Myriophyllum sibiricum) NT AA.B15 Baltic photic mixed dominated by Charales VU Estonian and Polish data needed NE AA.B1 Baltic photic mixed hard and soft perennial algae or moss AA.B11 Baltic photic mixed dominated by Fucus spp. NT Ger, Fin AA.B1 Baltic photic mixed dominated by perennial non-filamentous corticated red algae NT Ger, Fin AA.B1 Baltic photic mixed dominated by perennial foliose red algae x AA.B14 Baltic photic mixed dominated by kelp Kattegat experts? AA.B15 Baltic photic mixed dominated by perennial filamentous algae AA.B16 Baltic photic mixed dominated by aquatic mosses (Bryophyta) AA.B14 Baltic photic mixed hard and soft soft crustose algae NE AA.B15 Baltic photic mixed hard and soft dominated by stable aggregations of unattached perennial AA.B151 Baltic photic mixed dominated by stable aggregations of unattached Ceratophyllum demersum AA.B15 Baltic photic mixed dominated by stable aggregations of unattached Fucus spp. (normal form) Estonian data needed EN AA.B15 Baltic photic mixed dominated by stable aggregations of unattached Fucus spp. (dwarf form) VU EN Note New AA.B15 Baltic photic mixed dominated by stable aggregations of unattached Furcellaria lumbricalis Estonian data needed NE AA.B16 Baltic photic mixed hard and soft annual algae AA.B161 Baltic photic mixed dominated by filamentous annual algae AA.B16 Baltic photic mixed dominated by Chorda filum and/or Halosiphon tomentosus AA.B17 Baltic photic mixed hard and soft mixed NE AA.B1 Baltic photic mixed s AA.B11 Baltic photic mixed s dominated by Mytilidae AA.B1 Baltic photic mixed s dominated by Zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) NE AA.B1 Baltic photic mixed s dominated by sea squirts (Ascidiacea) Kattegat experts? AA.B14 Baltic photic mixed s dominated by hydroids (Hydrozoa) AA.B15 Baltic photic mixed s dominated by moss animals (Bryozoa) AA.B16 Baltic photic mixed s dominated by barnacles (Balanidae) AA.B17 Baltic photic mixed s dominated by sponges (Porifera) AA.B Baltic photic mixed hard and soft with sparse epibenthic communities AA.B Baltic photic mixed hard and soft without characteristic epibenthic flora or NE AA.C11 Baltic photic hard clay with AA.C111 Baltic photic hard clay dominated by Mytilidae AA.C1 Baltic photic hard clay without

27 AA.D11 Baltic photic marl (marlstone rock) To be assessed at level EN AA.E11 Baltic photic maerl beds (unattached particles of coralline red algae) B1+a(ii) To be assessed at level VU AA.F11 Baltic photic shell gravel Ba(ii) To be assessed at level NE K AA.F111 Baltic photic shell gravel dominated by kelp Kattegat experts? VU AA.F1 Baltic photic shell gravel Ba(ii) To be assessed at level NE AA.F11 Baltic photic shell gravel dominated by Mytilidae not evaluated NE AA.F1 Baltic photic shell gravel dominated by vase tunicate (Ciona intestinalis) not evaluated NE AA.F1 Baltic photic shell gravel dominated by in communities not evaluated AA.G11 Baltic photic concretion bottom To be assessed at level VU AA.H11 Baltic photic peat bottom Bb To be assessed at level AA.I11 Baltic photic anthropogenically created benthic habitats AA.J11 Baltic photic muddy emergent AA.J111 Baltic photic muddy dominated by common reed (Phragmites australis) NT AA.J11 Baltic photic muddy dominated by sedges (Cyperaceae) NE AA.J1 Baltic photic muddy submerged rooted plants AA.J11 Baltic photic muddy dominated by pondweed (Potamogeton perfoliatus and/or Stuckenia pectinata) AA.J1 Baltic photic muddy dominated by Zannichellia spp. and/or Ruppia spp. and/or Zostera noltii AA.J1 Baltic photic muddy dominated by watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum and/or Myriophyllum sibiricum) NT AA.J14 Baltic photic muddy dominated by Charales NT VU NT AA.J15 Baltic photic muddy dominated by spiny naiad (Najas marina) NT VU AA.J16 Baltic photic muddy dominated by Ranunculus spp. NT AA.J17 Baltic photic muddy dominated by common eelgrass (Zostera marina) VU Fin, Ger, Pol AA.J18 Baltic photic muddy dominated by dwarf eelgrass (Zostera noltii) AA.J19 Baltic photic muddy dominated by spikerush (Eleocharisn spp.) NE AA.J1 Baltic photic muddy stable aggregations of unattached perennial To be excluded AA.J11 Baltic photic muddy dominated by stable unattached aggregations of Fucus spp. (normal form) Estonian data needed EN AA.J11 Baltic photic mixed dominated by stable aggregations of unattached Fucus spp. (dwarf form) VU EN Note, new class AA.J1 Baltic photic muddy dominated by stable unattached aggregations of Furcellaria lumbricalis Estonian data needed AA.J1 Baltic photic muddy dominated by stable unattached aggregations of rigid hornwort (Ceratophyllum demersum) AA.J14 Baltic photic muddy dominated by stable unattached aggregations of lake ball (Aegagropila linnaei) NE AA.J14 Baltic photic photic muddy annual algae AA.J141 Baltic photic photic muddy dominated by Vaucheria spp.

28 AA.J15 Baltic photic photic muddy mixed NE AA.J1 Baltic photic muddy AA.J11 Baltic photic muddy dominated by Mytilidae AA.J1 Baltic photic muddy dominated by Zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) AA.J1 Baltic photic muddy dominated by various tube building polychaetes AA.J14 Baltic photic muddy dominated by Haploops spp. AA.J Baltic photic muddy inl bivalves AA.J1 Baltic photic muddy dominated by Baltic tellin (Macoma balthica) NT AA.J Baltic photic muddy dominated by ocean quahog (Arctica islandica) NT To be excluded NT AA.J Baltic photic muddy dominated by Unionidae NT Polish and Lithuanian data needed NE AA.J Baltic photic muddy inl polychaetes AA.J1 Baltic photic muddy dominated by Marenzelleria spp. AA.J Baltic photic muddy dominated by various opportunistic polychaetes NE AA.J4 Baltic photic muddy inl crustaceans AA.J41 Baltic photic muddy dominated by Monoporeia affinis AA.J4 Baltic photic muddy dominated by mud shrimps (Corophiidae) AA.J5 Baltic photic muddy inl echinoderms Kattegat experts? NE AA.J6 Baltic photic muddy inl insect larvae AA.J61 Baltic photic muddy dominated by midge larvae (Chironomidae) AA.J7 Baltic photic muddy nectobenthic To be excluded NE AA.J8 Baltic photic muddy without characteristic flora or AA.J81 Baltic photic muddy dominated by meio (Oligochaeta, Ostracoda, Nematoda) VU Lithuania - Ostracod-biotope NE AA.K11 Baltic photic coarse emergent AA.K111 Baltic photic coarse dominated by common reed (Phragmites australis) AA.K11 Baltic photic coarse dominated by sedges (Cyperaceae) NE AA.K1 Baltic photic coarse submerged rooted plants AA.K11 Baltic photic coarse dominated by pondweed (Potamogeton perfoliatus and/or Stuckenia pectinata) AA.K1 Baltic photic coarse dominated by Zannichellia spp. and/or Ruppia spp. and/or Zostera noltii NT AA.K1 Baltic photic coarse dominated by common eelgrass (Zostera marina) VU Fin, Ger, Pol NT AA.K14 Baltic photic coarse dominated by Charales VU Estonian and Polish data needed NE AA.K1 Baltic photic coarse perennial algae or moss AA.K11 Baltic photic coarse dominated by Fucus spp. NT Ger, Fin AA.K1 Baltic photic coarse dominated by perennial non-filamentous corticated red algae NT Ger, Fin

29 AA.K1 Baltic photic coarse dominated by perennial foliose red algae x K AA.K14 Baltic photic coarse dominated by kelp Kattegat experts? AA.K15 Baltic photic coarse dominated by perennial filamentous algae AA.K16 Baltic photic coarse dominated by aquatic mosses (Bryophyta) NE AA.K14 Baltic photic coarse stable aggregations of unattached perennial AA.K141 Baltic photic coarse dominated by stable aggregations of unattached Fucus spp. (normal form) Estonian data needed EN AA.K141 Baltic photic coarse dominated by stable aggregations of unattached Fucus spp. (dwarf form) VU EN Note, new biotope AA.K14 Baltic photic coarse dominated by stable aggregations of unattached Furcellaria lumbricalis Estonian data needed NE AA.K15 Baltic photic coarse annual algae AA.K151 Baltic photic coarse dominated by Chorda filum and/or Halosiphon tomentosus AA.K16 Baltic photic coarse mixed NE AA.K1 Baltic photic coarse AA.K11 Baltic photic coarse dominated by Mytilidae NE AA.K Baltic photic coarse with sparse or no NT AA.K1 Baltic photic coarse dominated by multiple inl bivalve species NT VU NT AA.K Baltic photic coarse dominated by multiple inl polychaete species including Ophelia spp. NT VU AA.K Baltic photic coarse dominated by sand digger shrimp (Bathyporeia pilosa) AA.K4 Baltic photic coarse dominated by dominated by microphytobenthic organisms and grazing snails AA.K5 Baltic photic coarse with no clear dominance (Macoma balthica, Marenzelleria spp., Gammarus spp., Hediste diversicolor) AA.K Baltic photic coarse without characteristic flora or NE AA.L11 Baltic photic sand emergent AA.L111 Baltic photic sand dominated by common reed (Phragmites australis) AA.L11 Baltic photic sand dominated by sedges (Cyperaceae) NE AA.L1 Baltic photic sand submerged rooted plants NT AA.L11 Baltic photic sand dominated by common eelgrass (Zostera marina) VU Fin, Ger, Pol AA.L1 Baltic photic sand dominated by pondweed (Potamogeton perfoliatus and/or Stuckenia pectinata) AA.L1 Baltic photic sand dominated by Zannichellia spp. and/or Ruppia spp. and/or Zostera noltii AA.L14 Baltic photic sand dominated by watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum and/or Myriophyllum sibiricum) NT AA.L15 Baltic photic sand dominated by Charales VU Estonian and Polish data needed NT AA.L16 Baltic photic sand dominated by spiny naiad (Najas marina) NT AA.L17 Baltic photic sand dominated by Ranunculus spp. AA.L18 Baltic photic sand dominated by spikerush (Eleocharis spp.)