ICES WGHABD REPORT 2014 SCICOM STEERING GROUP ON ECOSYSTEM PROCESSES AND DYNAMICS ICES CM 2014/SSGHIE:12 REF. SCICOM Report of the ICES - IOC Working Group on Harmful Algal Bloom Dynamics (WGHABD) 28 April - 2 May 2014 Haarlem, the Netherlands International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Conseil International pour l’Exploration de la Mer H. C. Andersens Boulevard 44–46 DK-1553 Copenhagen V Denmark Telephone (+45) 33 38 67 00 Telefax (+45) 33 93 42 15 www.ices.dk [email protected] Recommended format for purposes of citation: ICES. 2015. Report of the ICES - IOC Working Group on Harmful Algal Bloom Dy- namics (WGHABD), 28 April – 2 May 2014, Haarlem, the Netherlands. ICES CM 2014/SSGHIE:12. 87 pp. For permission to reproduce material from this publication, please apply to the Gen- eral Secretary. The document is a report of an Expert Group under the auspices of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea and does not necessarily represent the views of the Council. © 2015 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea ICES WGHABD REPORT 2014 | i Contents Executive summary ................................................................................................................ 3 1 Opening of the meeting ................................................................................................ 5 2 Adoption of the agenda ................................................................................................ 5 3 Terms of reference A – New findings ........................................................................ 5 3.1 Diarrheic shellfish poisoning incident in the UK, summer 2013 .................... 5 3.2 The first association of domoic acid production with Pseudo- nitzschia pseudodelicatissima -complex in Scottish waters ................................. 8 3.3 A Degree-Day approach to understanding Alexandrium fundyense bloom dynamics .................................................................................................... 9 3.4 A study of cyanobacteria blooms in the Baltic Sea using novel methods ................................................................................................................ 12 3.5 DYMAPHY .......................................................................................................... 15 3.6 PHYCOTOX ........................................................................................................ 15 4 Terms of reference B – National reports .................................................................. 15 4.1 A note about national reports ........................................................................... 15 4.2 Canada National Report 2011–2013 ................................................................. 15 4.3 Denmark National Report 2013 ........................................................................ 21 4.4 France National Report 2011–2013 ................................................................... 21 4.5 Germany National Report 2011–2013 .............................................................. 24 4.6 The Netherlands National Report 2011–2013 ................................................. 26 4.7 Poland National Report 2011–2013 .................................................................. 31 4.8 Portugal National Report 2011–2013 ................................................................ 32 4.9 Spain National Report 2011–2013 ..................................................................... 36 4.10 Sweden National Report 2011–2013 ................................................................. 46 4.11 UK National Report 2011–2013 ......................................................................... 51 4.12 US National Report 2011–2013 .......................................................................... 53 5 Terms of reference C and D– HAEDAT and summarize HAB events ............... 66 6 Terms of reference E – automated observation systems ....................................... 67 6.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 67 6.2 Autonomous HAB sampling systems – the ESP and the IFCB .................... 67 6.3 Smart Observations of HABs by remotely piloted vehicles .......................... 71 7 Terms of reference F – Review fish killing algae .................................................. 74 8 Terms of reference G – ICES ASC session on Harmful Algal Blooms .............. 75 9 Terms of reference H – Symposium on HABs and climate change .................... 76 ii | ICES WGHABD REPORT 2014 10 Terms of reference I – the Global Harmful Algal Bloom Status Report ........... 76 Annex 1: List of participants............................................................................................... 77 Annex 2: Agenda ................................................................................................................... 79 Annex 3: WGHABD draft terms of reference for the next three year period ............ 82 Annex 4: Group photo 2014 ................................................................................................ 87 ICES WGHABD REPORT 2014 | 3 Executive summary The ICES-IOC Working Group on Harmful Algal Bloom Dynamics (WGHABD), chaired by Bengt Karlson, Sweden, met in Haarlem, the Netherlands 28 April to 2 May 2014. Fif- teen scientists from ten countries attended. This includes a participant representing the IOC. Previously WGHABD reported results and activities yearly. This report is the first three year report; it includes national HAB-reports for the period 2011 to 2013. WGHABD is in the process of adapting to the novel three year ICES reporting format. • WGHABD have terms of references from and report to both to Scientific Committee, SCICOM, ICES, through the Scientific Steering Group on Ecosys- tem Processes and Dynamics, SSGEPD and the Intergovernmental Panel on Harmful Algal Blooms, Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of the UNESCO. • Format of work: Yearly meetings and work in between meetings. On occasion special o workshops are arranged. Collect data on HAB and effects of HAB crossing national borders o  HAB-organisms  Effects of HABs, e.g. toxins in shellfish Dynamics of bloom development o  Modelling and physical oceanogaphy  Auto ecology of HAB organisms  Biological interactions  Influence of riverine inputs etc. New findings, e.g. special HAB event, novel methods o • HABs remain a serious problem for the aquaculture industry in most ICES countries. Algal toxins accumulating in shellfish is one concern and direct ef- fects on fish in farms is another. • HAB species and HAB events are observed in new geographic areas. This is likely to be an effect of changed environmental conditions, e.g. warming. Also the spreading of organisms through ballast water etc. may contribute. • Benthic harmful algal blooms include benthic dinoflagellates causing ciguatera have been observed e.g. in the Azores, Canary Islands and in Madeira. • Algal toxins in aerosols on beaches may cause breathing problems. • Cyanobacteria blooms in the Baltic Sea remain a problem. • WGHABD will contribute to a Global Harmful Algal Bloom Status Report which the UNESCO-IOC Intergovernmental Panel on Harmful Algal Blooms is to produce. It is an opportunity for further collaboration ICES-IOC. • Examples of time series data on harmful algae and algal toxins were present- ed. Datasets were based on the Harmful Algal Event database http://haedat.iode.org • The HAB session at the 2014 ICES ASC in La Coruna was presented. 4 | ICES WGHABD REPORT 2014 • The plans for a scientific symposium on Climate change and Harmful Algal Blooms in 2015 in Gothenburg, Sweden, was discussed. • New findings were reported. One example is a bloom Dinophysis, producing diarrhetic shellfish toxins, at the Shetland Islands. Here the effects of physical transport were evident. A conclusion is that there is a need to combine high frequency observations of HAB-species with modelling to be able to predict bloom events. • A session on Automated Harmful Algal Bloom in situ observations Systems was held in 2013. A conclusion is that in situ Imaging Flow Cytometry is now a viable tool for studying HAB-dynamics and for monitoring of some HAB or- ganisms. Three different instruments are available commercially. Automated sampling and automated analysis of phytoplankton composition and abun- dance twice an hour is feasible. • A review of fish killing algae is in production. • Draft terms of references for the period 2015–2017 were produced. The WGHABD plan to meet in Lisbon, Portugal, 13–17 April 2015. ICES WGHABD REPORT 2014 | 5 1 Opening of the meeting The chair Bengt Karlson, opened the meeting that was arranged in Haarlem, the Nether- lands. The local host, Marnix Poelman, welcomed the participants. Altogether fifteen par- ticipants from ten countries participated. In addition Harry Koos, an invited guest from the Dutch company CytoSense participated during the session on automated in situ ob- servation systems. 2 Adoption of the agenda The agenda was adopted. 3 Terms of reference A – New findings Report on new findings in the area of harmful algal bloom dynamics 3.1 Diarrheic shellfish poisoning incident in the UK, summer 2013 Presented by Keith Davidson During July 2013 approximately 70 people in south east England reported symptoms consistent with diarrhetic shellfish poisoning. The vast majority of cases occurred be- tween 13 and 15 July. The cases were linked to the consumption of mussels originating from a particular har- vesting area in the Shetland Isles Scotland. After these mussels were harvested, an unusually high toxin level was detected by the regulatory weekly monitoring programme. The negative publicity for the shellfish industry from this event was significant, with news reports on the BBC and other outlets reducing consumer confidence. The biotoxin event was linked to an exceptionally rapid increase in the abundance of Di- nophysis sp. in west coast Shetland waters, with cell abundances reaching ~ 8000 cells L-1 at some sites with associated high shellfish toxicity. The speed of increase in cell numbers a was such that toxicity increased from sub threshold to high levels (~1500 ug/kg) in a time scale less than the 1 week resolution of regulatory sampling. 6 | ICES WGHABD REPORT 2014 Figure 1: Dinophysis abundance and shellfish toxicity at the Seggi Bight site from which the affected mussels were harvested. Yellow hatching: Dinophysis, Circles: shellfish toxicity, green – below regula- tory threshold, red above regulatory threshold. Subsequent to the event the industry expressed a desire for methods of providing early warning of exceptional blooms to minimise the likelihood of supplying contaminated product to market. As a result the abundance of Dinophysis in the Shetland Isles over the period of high fre- quency regulatory monitoring (2006–13) was analysis in relation to potential environ- mental drivers of the bloom. Using a chi squared test it was demonstrated that statistically significantly higher Di- nophysis abundance on the west coast off Shetland occurred during 2013 and 2006. Analysis of wind direction indicated that the prevailing wind in the region is SE. Howev- er, in both 2013 and 2006, during the months of high Dinophysis abundance (June– August) winds blew primarily from the SW. ICES WGHABD REPORT 2014 | 7 Figure 2: Wind rose for 2006–12 A, C, E and 2013 B,C,D for June (top), July (middle), August (Bottom) We therefore hypothesise that the rapid increase in Dinophysis was due to wind driven advection of offshore Dinophysis to the fjords of the west coast of Shetland where shellfish aquaculture is sited. This is consistent with the aquaculture sites on the east coast not ex- periencing the rapid increases seen in the west. Analysis of expected in situ growth rates, based on literature estimates of maximum Di- nophysis growth rates, indicated that in situ growth was incapable of generating the ob- served increase in Dinophysis further strengthening the advection hypothesis. Weekly bulletins of harmful algal risk are being generated in the Shetland Isles now in- corporating wind roses to assess wind advected Dinophysis risk. 8 | ICES WGHABD REPORT 2014 Figure 3: example weekly bulletin outlining risk of wind advected Dinophysis. 3.2 The first association of domoic acid production with Pseudo-nitzschia pseudodelicatissima -complex in Scottish waters Eileen Bresnan, Jean-Pierre Lacaze and Kathryn Cook, Marine Scotland Science Marine Scotland Science operate a coastal ecosystem monitoring programme 5 km off- shore from the village of Stonehaven in the North East of Scotland (56º 57.8´ N, 02 º 06.2´ W). Temperature, salinity, nutrients, phytoplankton and zooplankton have been sampled at this site since 1997 on a weekly basis (weather permitting). Data from this site is being used to fulfil the monitoring requirements of the Water Framework Directive and Marine Strategy Framework Directive. From June to Sept 2008, copepods sampled at this site were analysed for the presence of algal toxins. Domoic acid was recorded in copepods collected on 20 different sampling occasions between June and October. Concentrations ranged from 1–19 ρg domoic acid per copepod. The highest concentration (19 ρg domoic acid per copepod) was associated with a bloom of P. delicatissima type cells as identified using light microscopy (diameter < 3µm). This bloom reached a maximum cell density of 130 000 cells L-1. Analysis using transmission electron microscopy (TEM) revealed that the morphology of the Pseudo-nitzschia cells in this bloom were similar to an undescribed species of Pseudo-nitzschia within the Pseudo-nitzschia pseudodelicatissima complex reported from the Bay of Fundy (P. pseudodelicatissima BOF, Kaczmarska et al., 2005), the Gulf of Maine ( P. sp. GOM, Fernandes et al., 2014), the Spanish Atlantic coast (P. sp. Ner-D6, Orive et al., 2010) and Australia (P. sp. Hobart5, Lundholm et al., 2003). Morphometrics recorded from the Scottish cells include length (68µm), width (1.2–1.5µm), Central Inter-