{"help":"Return the metadata of a dataset (package) and its resources. :param id: the id or name of the dataset :type id: string","success":true,"result":[{"id":"83c03fdf-217f-47d6-9237-6b289dfda071","name":"2022-csemp-assessment-contaminant-and-biological-effect-data-1999-2021","title":"2022 CSEMP assessment of contaminant and biological effect data (1999-2021)","author_email":"marinedirectorate@gov.scot","maintainer":"Scottish Government - Marine Directorate Data Publications","maintainer_email":"marinedirectorate@gov.scot","notes":"\u003Cp\u003EThe 2022 assessment of the UK\u0027s Clean Seas Environment Monitoring Programme described the status and trends of contaminant concentrations and biological effects measurements in biota and sediment at monitoring stations in waters around the UK. Assessments were made for a large number of time series, typically each of a single contaminant in a single species and tissue (biota) at a single monitoring station. The results of the individual time series at coastal and offshore stations were synthesised to assess status and trends at the biogeographic regional level. These form the basis for nine Descriptor 8 Indicators in the UK\u0027s 2025 Marine Strategy Assessment.\u003C\/p\u003E\n","url":"https:\/\/data.marine.gov.scot\/dataset\/2022-csemp-assessment-contaminant-and-biological-effect-data-1999-2021","state":"Active","log_message":"Update to resource 2022 CSEMP Sediment regional data","private":true,"revision_timestamp":"Tue, 06\/03\/2025 - 14:22","metadata_created":"Fri, 05\/23\/2025 - 14:42","metadata_modified":"Tue, 06\/03\/2025 - 14:22","creator_user_id":"ef1d5231-9817-4ea3-875e-aadc55addee0","type":"Dataset","resources":[{"id":"9476da57-de1c-49bf-bcb2-03ff75d32ec9","revision_id":"","url":"https:\/\/data.marine.gov.scot\/sites\/default\/files\/\/12541_biota_data_0.csv","description":"\u003Cp\u003EThe file biota_data.csv contains the contaminant and biological effect data in biota used in the 2022 assessment of the UK\u0027s Clean Seas Environment Monitoring Programme (CSEMP). The data are a cleaned and processed subset of the data extracted from the MERMAN database on 11 January 2023 (supplemented by micronucleated cell and fish disease index data provided by the Marine Directorate of the Scottish Government and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science).\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe data form the basis for the biota component of the following Descriptor 8 Indicators in the UK\u0027s 2025 Marine Strategy Assessment:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Metals (including lead, cadmium and mercury) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends in Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polybrominated Diphenylethers (PBDEs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends in the Levels of Imposex in Marine Gastropods\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Biological effects (EROD enzyme activity) in fish\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Biological effects (micronucleus) of contaminants in fish\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* External Fish Disease\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Chemicals (excluding metals, PAHs, PCBs and PBDEs) in Water, Biota and Sediment\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe file is UTF-8-BOM encoded so can be read directly into Excel, or into R using the function read.csv with the argument  fileEncoding = \u201cUTF-8-BOM\u201d.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe variables in the file are:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eseries\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: timeseries identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 5644\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: identifies the data (typically a station \/ contaminant \/ species \/ matrix combination) that were grouped together into a timeseries and modelled to assess status and trends\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EMSFD_subregion\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: Marine Strategy Framework Directive subregion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: in the \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003Emap of biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E the Greater North Sea comprises the Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, and Eastern Channel, whilst the Celtic Seas comprises the Western Channel and Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches and Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf, and Atlantic North-West Approaches.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: biogeographic region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, Eastern Channel, Western Channel \u0026amp; Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches \u0026amp; Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   regional assessments are conducted at the biogeographic regional scale\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003E8 biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E but only 7 with data\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECSEMP_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: CSEMP monitoring region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 18\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/CSEMP_regions.pdf\u0022\u003E22 monitoring regions in the CSEMP\u003C\/a\u003E but only 18 with data\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the CSEMP regions are aggregated into 8 biogeographic regions for regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECSEMP_stratum\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: subdivision of the CSEMP monitoring region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 118\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: there are 818 CSEMP strata, most of which are WFD water bodies, but only 118 with data\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_governance\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: organisation responsible for the monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: CEFAS, DAERA, EANat, MDSG, NRW, SEPA\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Environment Agency (EANat)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Marine Directorate of the Scottish Government (MDSG)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Natural Resources Wales (NRW)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_code\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: monitoring station identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 197\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_name\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: name associated with the monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 197\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_latitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station latitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 50.08, 60.78\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is a nominal position: sampling occurs in a pre-defined area broadly centred on this position\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_longitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station longitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -7.11,  2.90\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is a nominal position: sampling occurs in a pre-defined area broadly centred on this position\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: type of monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: B, RH, IH\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: baseline (B), reference (RH) or impacted (IH)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ewaterbody_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station typography\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Estuary, Coast, Open Sea\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: only coastal and open sea stations are used in regional assessments, apart for the imposex regional assessment where estuarine stations are also used\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Emonitoring_year\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: monitoring year\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1999, 2021\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: for some organisations, monitoring is in winter and e.g. sampling in December 2020 and January 2021 would be regarded as having come from the same monitoring year\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esample_id\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sample identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 23562\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esample_date\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sampling date\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1999-01-05, 2021-09-15\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esample_time\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sampling time\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 00:00:00, 23:29:00\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esample_latitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sampling latitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 50.08, 60.79\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esample_longitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sampling longitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -7.11,  2.91\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Especies\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: species\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 6\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Limanda limanda:    AphiaID = 127139\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Merlangius merlangus:   AphiaID = 126438\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Mytilus edulis:     AphiaID = 140480\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Nucella lapillus:   AphiaID = 140403\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Platichthys flesus: AphiaID = 127141\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Pleuronectes platessa:  AphiaID = 127143\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esex\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sex\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: F, I, M, X\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=45\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for SEXCO\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ematrix\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sample matrix\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: BI, ER, HML, LI, LIS9, MU, SB, WO\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=55\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for MATRX\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand_group\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant or biological effect group\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Metals, Organotins, PAH parent compounds, PAH alkylated compounds, PAH metabolites, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers, Organobromines (other), Organofluorines, Polychlorinated biphenyls, Organochlorines (other), Imposex, Biological effects (other)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant or biological effect\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 98\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=37\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for PARAM\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   data submitted as CHRTR and VDSI have been relabelled as CHR and VDS respectively\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   SBDE6 is the code used for the sum of BDE28, BDE47, BDE99, BD100, BD153 and BD154\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   FDI is the code used for the fish disease index\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Emethod_analysis\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: method of chemical analysis\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 24\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=173\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for METOA\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebasis\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: basis on which the measurement is expressed\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: dry weight (D), lipid weight (L) or wet weight (W)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eunit\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: unit of the concentration measurement and its uncertainty\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: %, d, idx, mins, nmol\/min\/mg protein, nr\/1000 cells, pmol\/min\/mg protein, st, ug\/kg, ug\/ml\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Econcentration\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: concentration of contaminant or equivalent for biological effects\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -0.57, 5600000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ecensoring\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: less-than qualifier for the concentration measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: \u0022\u0022, D, Q, \u0026lt;\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0022\u0022 (a blank or missing value) indicates a non-censored measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   D indicates the measurement is left-censored at the limit of detection; i.e. the measurement is below the limit of detection, but it is not known by how much; the limit of detection is given in the concentration column\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Q indicates the measurement is left-censored at the limit of quantification; i.e. the measurement is below the limit of quantification, but it is not known by how much; the limit of quantification is given in the concentration column\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0026lt; indicates the measurement is left-censored by an unspecified censoring criterion (which could be the limit of detection or quantification); the value of the censoring criterion is given in the concentration column\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Euncertainty\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: uncertainty in the concentration measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.0001, 920099\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: analytical uncertainty expressed as the standard deviation; not applicable to some biological effects measurements\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ELNMEA\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: mean length\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: cm\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.1, 103\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: length of monitoring organism, or mean length if several individuals were pooled; \u003Cstrong\u003Ethere are unit errors in these data, so the data should be used with caution\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EDRYWT\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: dry weight of the sample\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: %\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 2.46, 91.6\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: all values are above the limit of detection\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EDRYWT_uncertainty\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: uncertainty in the dry weight measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: %\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.029, 12.4\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: analytical uncertainty expressed as the standard deviation\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ELIPIDWT\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: lipid weight of the sample\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: %\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.12, 81.4\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ELIPIDWT_censoring\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: less-than qualifier for the lipid weight measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: \u0022\u0022, D\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Cem\u003Ecensoring\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ELIPIDWT_uncertainty\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: uncertainty in the lipid weight measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: %\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.03, 10.1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: analytical uncertainty expressed as the standard deviation\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003En_individual\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: number of individuals pooled in the sample\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: nr\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1, 318\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EFEMALEPOP\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: % of the sample that are females\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: %\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 17, 100\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: used to model imposex data when submitted as a pooled sample\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECMTQCNR\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: Comet assay cells screened\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: nr\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 41, 168\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: used to model Comet assay (%DNATAIL) data\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EMNCQCNR\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: Micronucleus assay cells screened\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: nr\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1000, 5000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: used to model Micronucleus assay (MNC) data\u003C\/p\u003E\n","format":"csv","state":"Active","revision_timestamp":"Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 16:17","name":"2022 CSEMP contaminant and biological effect data","mimetype":"text\/csv","size":"43.94 MB","created":"Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 15:32","resource_group_id":"f96d4bd9-9492-4e8a-b459-d66dfec8d920","last_modified":"Date changed  Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 16:17"},{"id":"929edf38-74b3-4d4c-813b-eeabf47f576c","revision_id":"","url":"https:\/\/data.marine.gov.scot\/sites\/default\/files\/\/biota_regional_data_1.csv","description":"\u003Cp\u003EThe file biota_regional_data.csv contains the summary measures used to make regional assessments of status and trends in contaminants and biological effects in biota in the 2022 assessment of the UK\u0027s Clean Seas Environment Monitoring Programme (CSEMP). The summary measures are obtained from timeseries models fitted to the contaminant and biological effect data in biota_data.csv which in turn are based on data extracted from the MERMAN database on 11 January 2023 (supplemented by micronucleated cell and fish disease index data provided by the Marine Directorate of the Scottish Government and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science). Details of the modelling procedures can be found in the method help files for \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_methods_biota_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Econtaminants\u003C\/a\u003E, \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_methods_biota_metabolites.html\u0022\u003EPAH metabolites\u003C\/a\u003E, \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_methods_biota_imposex.html\u0022\u003Eimposex\u003C\/a\u003E and \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_methods_biota_effects.html\u0022\u003Eother biological effects\u003C\/a\u003E.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe regional assessments are the basis for the biota component of the following Descriptor 8 Indicators in the UK\u0027s 2025 Marine Strategy Assessment:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Metals (including lead, cadmium and mercury) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends in Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polybrominated Diphenylethers (PBDEs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends in the Levels of Imposex in Marine Gastropods\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Biological effects (EROD enzyme activity) in fish\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Biological effects (micronucleus) of contaminants in fish\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* External Fish Disease\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EFor biota, there are regional assessments using environmental thresholds for metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), PAH metabolites, imposex, EROD, micronucleated cells, and external fish disease. Full details of these regional assessments can be found in the links below:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_metals.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of metal concentrations in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_pahs.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PAH concentrations in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_pcbs.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PCB concentrations in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_pbdes.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PBDE concentrations in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_metabolites.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PAH metabolite concentrations in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_imposex.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of imposex in whelks\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_erod.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of EROD activity in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_mnc.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of micronucleated cell prevalence in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_fdi.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of external fish disease\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThere are also regional assessments using human health thresholds for metals, PAHs, PCBs and PBDEs. Full details can be found in the links below:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_metals_health.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of metal concentrations in biota (health)\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_pahs_health.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PAH concentrations in biota (health)\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_pcbs_health.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PCB concentrations in biota (health)\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_pbdes_health.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PBDE concentrations in biota (health)\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe file biota_regional_data.csv is UTF-8-BOM encoded so can be read directly into Excel, or into R using the function read.csv with the argument  fileEncoding = \u201cUTF-8-BOM\u201d.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe data mostly relate to chemical concentrations and the variable descriptions are written with that in mind. Any differences are usually related to imposex time series and these are detailed in the notes accompanying each variable.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe variables in the file are:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eseries\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: timeseries identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 1945\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: links to the timeseries data in biota_data.csv\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EMSFD_subregion\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: Marine Strategy Framework Directive subregion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: in the \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003Emap of biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E the Greater North Sea comprises the Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, and Eastern Channel, whilst the Celtic Seas comprises the Western Channel and Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches and Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf, and Atlantic North-West Approaches.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: biogeographic region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, Eastern Channel, Western Channel \u0026amp; Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches \u0026amp; Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   regional assessments are conducted at the biogeographic regional scale\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003E8 biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E but only 7 with results that feed into regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECSEMP_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: CSEMP region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 17\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/CSEMP_regions.pdf\u0022\u003E22 monitoring regions in the CSEMP\u003C\/a\u003E but only 17 with results that feed into regional assessments\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the CSEMP regions are aggregated into 8 biogeographic regions for regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECSEMP_stratum\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: subdivision of the CSEMP region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 84\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: there are 818 CSEMP strata, most of which are WFD water bodies, but only 84 with results that feed into regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_governance\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: organisation responsible for the monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: CEFAS, DAERA, EANat, MDSG, SEPA\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Environment Agency (EANat)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Marine Directorate of the Scottish Government (MDSG)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_code\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: monitoring station identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 142\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_name\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: name associated with the monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 142\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_latitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station latitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 50.08, 60.78\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is a nominal position: sampling occurs in a pre-defined area broadly centred on this position\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_longitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station longitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -7.11,  2.90\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is a nominal position: sampling occurs in a pre-defined area broadly centred on this position\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: type of monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: RH, IH\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: reference (RH) or impacted (IH)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ewaterbody_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station typography\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Estuary, Coast, Open Sea\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: only coastal and open sea stations are used in regional assessments, apart for the imposex regional assessment where estuarine stations are also used\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand_group\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant or biological effect group\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Metals, PAH parent compounds, PAH metabolites, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers, Polychlorinated biphenyls, Imposex, Biological effects (other)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant or biological effect\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 50\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   See \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=37\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for PARAM\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   SBDE6 is the code used for the sum of BDE28, BDE47, BDE99, BD100, BD153 and BD154\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   FDI is the code used for the fish disease index\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Especies\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: species\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 6\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Limanda limanda:    AphiaID = 127139\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Merlangius merlangus:   AphiaID = 126438\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Mytilus edulis:     AphiaID = 140480\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Nucella lapillus:   AphiaID = 140403\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Platichthys flesus: AphiaID = 127141\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Pleuronectes platessa:  AphiaID = 127143\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ematrix\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sample matrix (tissue)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: BI, ER, LI, LIS9, MU, SB, WO\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=55\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for MATRX\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebasis\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: basis of the assessment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: dry weight (D), lipid weight (L) or wet weight (W)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eunit\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: unit of measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: idx, nr\/1000 cells, pmol\/min\/mg protein, st, ug\/kg, ug\/ml\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esex\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sex\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: F, M\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: only provided for EROD where separate time series are assessed for females (F) and males (M)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Emethod_analysis\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: method of chemical analysis\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: FLM-SS\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=173\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for METOA\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   only provided for PAH metabolites where the assessment concentrations depend on the method of analysis\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Elast_year\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: last year of the timeseries\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 2016, 2021\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: only timeseries with some data in the last six monitoring years are included in the assessment (i.e. 2016-2021 for the 2022 assessment)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the fitted mean concentration (or equivalent for biological effects) in \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -0.46, 172939\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the name of the Background Assessment Concentration (BAC) or equivalent\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: BAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_value\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the value of the BAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.0054, 63000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: more details can be found in the help files on assessment criteria for \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_biota_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Econtaminants in biota\u003C\/a\u003E and \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_biota_metabolites.html\u0022\u003Ebiological effects\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_BAC\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the log ratio of \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E to the BAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: dimensionless\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -3.2, 7.27\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants, PAH metabolites, EROD and micronucleated cells: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC\u003C\/em\u003E = log(\u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \/ \u003Cem\u003EBAC_value\u003C\/em\u003E), with a value above \/ below 0 indicating that the fitted mean concentration in the last monitoring year is above \/ below the BAC; the standard error is given by \u003Cem\u003Estatus_se\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   fish disease index: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC\u003C\/em\u003E = \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E - \u003Cem\u003EBAC_value\u003C\/em\u003E, with a value above \/ below 0 indicating that the fitted mean index in the last monitoring year is above \/ below the BAC; the standard error is given by \u003Cem\u003Estatus_se\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   imposex: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC\u003C\/em\u003E = sqrt(\u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \/ \u003Cem\u003EBAC_value\u003C\/em\u003E), with a value above \/ below 1 indicating that the estimated mean VDS in the last monitoring year is above \/ below the BAC; the standard error is given by \u003Cem\u003Estatus_se\u003C\/em\u003E \/ sqrt(\u003Cem\u003EBAC_value\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the name of the Environmenal Assessment Criterion (EAC) or equivalent\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: EAC, FEQG, QSsp\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   EAC = Environmental Assessment Criterion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   FEQG = Federal Environmental Quality Guideline\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   QSsp = Quality Standard secondary poisoning\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_value\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the value of the EAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1.67, 2400\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: more details can be found in the help files on assessment criteria for \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_biota_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Econtaminants in biota\u003C\/a\u003E and \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_biota_metabolites.html\u0022\u003Ebiological effects\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_EAC\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the log ratio of \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E to the EAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: dimensionless\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -10, 2.6\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants, PAH metabolites, EROD and micronucleated cells: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC\u003C\/em\u003E = log(\u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \/ \u003Cem\u003EEAC_value\u003C\/em\u003E), with a value above \/ below 0 indicating that the fitted mean concentration in the last monitoring year is above \/ below the EAC; the standard error is given by \u003Cem\u003Estatus_se\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   fish disease index: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC\u003C\/em\u003E = \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E - \u003Cem\u003EEAC_value\u003C\/em\u003E, with a value above \/ below 0 indicating that the fitted mean concentration in the last monitoring year is above \/ below the EAC; the standard error is given by \u003Cem\u003Estatus_se\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   imposex: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC\u003C\/em\u003E = sqrt(\u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \/ \u003Cem\u003EEAC_value\u003C\/em\u003E), with a value above \/ below 1 indicating that the estimated mean VDS in the last monitoring year is above \/ below the EAC; the standard error is given by \u003Cem\u003Estatus_se\u003C\/em\u003E \/ sqrt(\u003Cem\u003EEAC_value\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EHAC_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the name of the (human) Health Assessment Criterion (HAC)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: MPC, QShh\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   MPC = Maximum Permissible Concentration\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   QShh = Quality Standard human health\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are no HAC for biological effects (as one might expect)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EHAC_value\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the value of the HAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see unit column\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.052, 9146\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: more details can be found in the help file on \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_biota_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Eassessment criteria for contaminants in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_HAC\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the log ratio of \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E to the HAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: dimensionless\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -5.4, 4.4\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_HAC\u003C\/em\u003E = log(\u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \/ \u003Cem\u003EHAC_value\u003C\/em\u003E), with a value above \/ below 0 indicating that the fitted mean concentration in the last monitoring year is above \/ below the HAC; the standard error is given by \u003Cem\u003Estatus_se\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_profile\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the log of \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E standardised to a common basis\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: log \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -4.5, 6.44\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: these values are used to investigate concentration profiles of selected PAH parent compounds, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers and Polychlorinated biphenyls, and have been standardised to the basis given in \u003Cem\u003Ebasis_profile\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebasis_profile\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the basis of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_profile\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: dry weight (D) or lipid weight (L)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_se\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the standard error of log \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.017, 2.06\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants, PAH metabolites, EROD and micronucleated cells: this is the also the standard error of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC\u003C\/em\u003E, \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC\u003C\/em\u003E, \u003Cem\u003Estatus_HAC\u003C\/em\u003E and \u003Cem\u003Estatus_profile\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   fish disease index: this is the standard error of \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   imposex: this is the standard error of sqrt(\u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimated yearly change in log concentration in the last 20 years, multiplied by 100\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -59, 29.6\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants, PAH metabolites, EROD and micronucleated cells: \u003Cem\u003Etrend\u003C\/em\u003E can loosely be interpreted as the percentage yearly change in concentration in the last 20 years assuming the trend in concentration is log-linear; values below \/ above 0 indicate a decreasing \/ increasing trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   fish disease index: \u003Cem\u003Etrend\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated yearly change in index in the last 20 years assuming the change in index is linear\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   imposex: \u003Cem\u003Etrend\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated odds ratio of the VDS of an individual being above the EAC in one year relative to the previous year; values below \/ above 1 indicate a decreasing \/ increasing trend\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend_se\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the standard error of \u003Cem\u003Etrend\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.021, 33.3\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n","format":"csv","state":"Active","revision_timestamp":"Tue, 06\/03\/2025 - 14:13","name":"2022 CSEMP Biota regional data","mimetype":"text\/csv","size":"652.86 KB","created":"Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 15:37","resource_group_id":"f96d4bd9-9492-4e8a-b459-d66dfec8d920","last_modified":"Date changed  Tue, 06\/03\/2025 - 14:13"},{"id":"24240147-a310-4f14-9c0d-071a77235c7e","revision_id":"","url":"https:\/\/data.marine.gov.scot\/sites\/default\/files\/\/biota_regional_results.csv","description":"\u003Cp\u003EThe file biota_regional_results.csv contains the results of the regional assessments of status and trends in contaminants and biological effects in biota in the 2022 assessment of the UK\u0027s Clean Seas Environment Monitoring Programme (CSEMP). The results are based on summary measures of trend and stutus from individual timeseries models which can be found in biota_regional_data.csv. These in turn are based on data extracted from the MERMAN database on 11 January 2023 (supplemented by micronucleated cell and fish disease index data provided by the Marine Directorate of the Scottish Government and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science). Details of the modelling procedures can be found in the regional assessment reports listed below.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe regional assessments are the basis for the biota component of the following Descriptor 8 Indicators in the UK\u0027s 2025 Marine Strategy Assessment:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Metals (including lead, cadmium and mercury) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends in Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polybrominated Diphenylethers (PBDEs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends in the Levels of Imposex in Marine Gastropods\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Biological effects (EROD enzyme activity) in fish\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Biological effects (micronucleus) of contaminants in fish\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* External Fish Disease\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EFor biota, there are regional assessments using environmental thresholds for metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), PAH metabolites, imposex, EROD, micronucleated cells, and external fish disease. Full details of these regional assessments can be found in the links below:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_metals.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of metal concentrations in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_pahs.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PAH concentrations in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_pcbs.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PCB concentrations in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_pbdes.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PBDE concentrations in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_metabolites.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PAH metabolite concentrations in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_imposex.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of imposex in whelks\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_erod.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of EROD activity in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_mnc.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of micronucleated cell prevalence in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_fdi.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of external fish disease\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThere are also regional assessments using human health thresholds for metals, PAHs, PCBs and PBDEs. Full details can be found in the links below:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_metals_health.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of metal concentrations in biota (health)\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_pahs_health.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PAH concentrations in biota (health)\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_pcbs_health.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PCB concentrations in biota (health)\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_biota_pbdes_health.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PBDE concentrations in biota (health)\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe file biota_regional_results.csv is UTF-8-BOM encoded so can be read directly into Excel, or into R using the function read.csv with the argument fileEncoding = \u201cUTF-8-BOM\u201d.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe data mostly relate to chemical concentrations and the variable descriptions are written with that in mind. Any differences are usually related to imposex time series and these are detailed in the notes accompanying each variable.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe variables in the file are:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EMSFD_subregion\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: Marine Strategy Framework Directive subregion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: in the \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003Emap of biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E the Greater North Sea comprises the Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, and Eastern Channel, whilst the Celtic Seas comprises the Western Channel and Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches and Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf, and Atlantic North-West Approaches.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: biogeographic region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, Eastern Channel, Western Channel \u0026amp; Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches \u0026amp; Western Scotland\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   regional assessments are conducted at the biogeographic regional scale\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003E8 biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E but only 6 with sufficient data for regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand_group\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant or biological effect group\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Metals, PAH parent compounds, PAH metabolites, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers, Polychlorinated biphenyls, Imposex, Biological effects (other)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant or biological effect\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 46\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=37\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for PARAM\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   PAH is the code used for the regional assessment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, based on NAP, ACNLE, ACNE, FLE, PA, ANT, DBT, FLU, PYR, BAA, CHR, BAP, BEP, BBKF, DBAHA, PER, BGHIP and ICDP\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   np_PCB is the code used for the regional assessment of non-planar polychlorinated biphenyls, based on CB28, CB52, CB101, CB138, CB153 and CB180\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   PBDE is the code used for the regional assessment of polybrominated diphenyl ethers, based on BDE28, BDE47, BDE66, BDE85, BDE99, BD100, BD153, BD154 and BD183\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   SBDE6 is the code used for the sum of BDE28, BDE47, BDE99, BD100, BD153 and BD154\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   FDI is the code used for the fish disease index\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimate of the regional trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -18, 7.51\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants, PAH metabolites, EROD and micronucleated cells: \u003Cem\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional yearly change in log concentration in the last 20 years, multiplied by 100; it can loosely be interpreted as the percentage yearly change in concentration in the last 20 years; values below \/ above 0 indicate a decreasing \/ increasing trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   fish disease index: \u003Cem\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional yearly change in index in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   imposex: \u003Cem\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional odds ratio of the VDS of an individual being above the EAC in one year relative to the previous year; values below \/ above 1 indicate a decreasing \/ increasing trend\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend_se\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the standard error of \u003Cem\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.05, 4.14\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend_lcl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the lower (two-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -23, 4.15\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend_ucl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper (two-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -14, 11.3\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: a summary of the regional trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: up, down, stable\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   up: significant (p \u0026lt; 0.05) increase in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   down: significant (p \u0026lt; 0.05) decrease in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   stable: no significant (p \u0026gt; 0.05) change in concentration in the last 20 years\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_BAC_est\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimate of regional status compared to the Background Assessment Concentration (BAC)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: dimensionless\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -1.9, 5.1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants, PAH metabolites, EROD and micronucleated cells: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated mean log(concentration \/ BAC) in the \u003Cem\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/em\u003E in the most recent monitoring year (2021); a value above \/ below 0 indicates that the mean concentration in the biogeographic_region* is above \/ below the BAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   fish disease index: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated mean (index - BAC) in the \u003Cem\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/em\u003E in the most recent monitoring year (2021); a value above \/ below 0 indicates that the mean concentration in the biogeographic_region* is above \/ below the BAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   imposex: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated mean sqrt(VDS \/ BAC) in the \u003Cem\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/em\u003E in the most recent monitoring year (2021); a value above \/ below 1 indicates that the mean VDS in the biogeographic_region* is above \/ below the BAC\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_BAC_se\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the standard error of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_se\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.13, 0.99\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_BAC_ucl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper (one-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -1.4, 5.96\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECR_BAC_est\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimate of the regional BAC contaminant ratio\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.16, 164\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants, PAH metabolites, EROD and micronucleated cells: \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional mean concentration relative to the BAC, given by exp(\u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   fish disease index: \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional mean index relative to the BAC, given by (\u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E \/ BAC) + 1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   imposex: \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional mean VDS relative to the BAC, given by \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E$^2$\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECR_BAC_ucl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper (one-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.25, 388\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants, PAH metabolites, EROD and micronucleated cells: \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E = exp(\u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   fish disease index: \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E = (\u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E \/ BAC) + 1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   imposex: \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E = \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E$^2$\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E is used for the formal assessment of regional environmental status (see \u003Cem\u003Estatus_env\u003C\/em\u003E); if \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E is below 1, concentrations in the region are said to be at background levels.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_EAC_est\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimate of regional status compared to the Environmental Assessment Criterion (EAC) or equivalent\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: dimensionless\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -9.3, 1.92\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants, PAH metabolites, EROD and micronucleated cells: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated mean log(concentration \/ EAC) in the \u003Cem\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/em\u003E in the most recent monitoring year (2021); a value above \/ below 0 indicates that the mean concentration in the biogeographic_region* is above \/ below the EAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   fish disease index: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated mean (index - EAC) in the \u003Cem\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/em\u003E in the most recent monitoring year (2021); a value above \/ below 0 indicates that the mean concentration in the biogeographic_region* is above \/ below the EAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   imposex: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated mean sqrt(VDS \/ EAC) in the \u003Cem\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/em\u003E in the most recent monitoring year (2021); a value above \/ below 1 indicates that the mean VDS in the biogeographic_region* is above \/ below the EAC\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_EAC_se\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the standard error of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_se\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.062, 1.03\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_EAC_ucl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper (one-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -8.9, 2.1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECR_EAC_est\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimate of the regional EAC contaminant ratio\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.000088, 6.83\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants, PAH metabolites, EROD and micronucleated cells: \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional mean concentration relative to the EAC, given by exp(\u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   fish disease index: \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional mean index relative to the EAC, given by (\u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E \/ EAC) + 1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   imposex: \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional mean VDS relative to the EAC, given by \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E$^2$\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the value passed into the CHASE integrated assessment (see \u003Cem\u003ECHASE\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECR_EAC_ucl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper (one-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.00013, 8.18\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants, PAH metabolites, EROD and micronucleated cells: \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E = exp(\u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   fish disease index: \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E = (\u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E \/ EAC) + 1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   imposex: \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E = \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E$^2$\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E is used for the formal assessment of regional environmental status (see \u003Cem\u003Estatus_env\u003C\/em\u003E); if \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E is below 1, concentrations in the region are said to be at acceptable environmental levels\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_HAC_est\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimate of regional status compared to the human Health Assessment Criterion (HAC)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: dimensionless\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -3.4, 2.77\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_HAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated mean log(concentration \/ HAC) in the \u003Cem\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/em\u003E in the most recent monitoring year (2021); a value above \/ below 0 indicates that the mean concentration in the biogeographic_region* is above \/ below the HAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   PAH metabolites, EROD, micronucleated cells, fish disease index and imposex: there are no HAC\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_HAC_se\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the standard error of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_HAC_se\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.14, 0.59\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_HAC_ucl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper (one-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_HAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -3.1, 3.15\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECR_HAC_est\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimate of the regional HAC contaminant ratio\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.032, 16\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants: \u003Cem\u003ECR_HAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional mean concentration relative to the HAC, given by exp(\u003Cem\u003Estatus_HAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   PAH metabolites, EROD, micronucleated cells, fish disease index and imposex: there are no HAC\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECR_HAC_ucl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper (one-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003ECR_HAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.047, 23.4\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   contaminants: \u003Cem\u003ECR_HAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E = exp(\u003Cem\u003Estatus_HAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   PAH metabolites, EROD, micronucleated cells, fish disease index and imposex: there are no HAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003ECR_HAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E is used for the formal assessment of regional health status (see \u003Cem\u003Estatus_health\u003C\/em\u003E); if \u003Cem\u003ECR_HAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E is below 1, concentrations in the region are said to be at acceptable levels for human health\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_env\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: a summary of the regional environmental status\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: blue, green, red, orange\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   blue: the regional BAC contaminant ratio is significantly below 1 (p \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   green: the regional EAC contaminant ratio is significantly below 1 (p \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   red: the regional EAC contaminant ratio is not significantly below 1 (p \u0026gt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   orange: the regional BAC contaminant ratio is not significantly below 1 (p \u0026gt; 0.05) and there is no EAC or equivalent\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_health\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: a summary of the regional health status\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: green, red\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   green: the regional HAC contaminant ratio is significantly below 1 (p \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   red: the regional HAC contaminant ratio is not significantly below 1 (p \u0026gt; 0.05)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECHASE\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: whether \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E contributes to the CHASE integrated assessment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: no, yes\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see details of the \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_CHASE.html\u0022\u003ECHASE integrated assessment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n","format":"csv","state":"Active","revision_timestamp":"Tue, 06\/03\/2025 - 14:08","name":"2022 CSEMP Biota Regional Results","mimetype":"text\/csv","size":"49.03 KB","created":"Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 15:39","resource_group_id":"f96d4bd9-9492-4e8a-b459-d66dfec8d920","last_modified":"Date changed  Tue, 06\/03\/2025 - 14:08"},{"id":"5b6e9a5f-6dc5-4997-bd95-fc9c61c52f03","revision_id":"","url":"https:\/\/data.marine.gov.scot\/sites\/default\/files\/\/biota_results.csv","description":"\u003Cp\u003EThe file biota_results.csv summarises the assessment results for each timeseries of contaminants and biological effects in biota in the 2022 assessment of the UK\u0027s Clean Seas Environment Monitoring Programme (CSEMP). The results come from timeseries models fitted to the contaminant and biological effect data in biota_data.csv which in turn are based on data extracted from the MERMAN database on 11 January 2023 (supplemented by micronucleated cell and fish disease index data provided by the Marine Directorate of the Scottish Government and the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science). Details of the modelling procedures can be found in the method help files for \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_methods_biota_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Econtaminants\u003C\/a\u003E, \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_methods_biota_metabolites.html\u0022\u003EPAH metabolites\u003C\/a\u003E, \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_methods_biota_imposex.html\u0022\u003Eimposex\u003C\/a\u003E and \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_methods_biota_effects.html\u0022\u003Eother biological effects\u003C\/a\u003E.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe results form the basis for the biota component of the following Descriptor 8 Indicators in the UK\u0027s 2025 Marine Strategy Assessment:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Metals (including lead, cadmium and mercury) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends in Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polybrominated Diphenylethers (PBDEs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends in the Levels of Imposex in Marine Gastropods\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Biological effects (EROD enzyme activity) in fish\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Biological effects (micronucleus) of contaminants in fish\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* External Fish Disease\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Chemicals (excluding metals, PAHs, PCBs and PBDEs) in Water, Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nThe Indicators only use results from coastal and offshore stations (estuarine stations are excluded using the variable \u003Cem\u003Ewaterbody_type\u003C\/em\u003E) and from \u0027medium\u0027 and \u0027long\u0027 timeseries (\u0027short\u0027 timeseries are excluded using the variable \u003Cem\u003Eshape\u003C\/em\u003E). There are two exceptions: the imposex Indicator also uses results from estuarine stations and the Indicator for \u0027other chemicals\u0027 also uses \u0027short\u0027 timeseries.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe file biota_results.csv is UTF-8-BOM encoded so can be read directly into Excel, or into R using the function read.csv with the argument  fileEncoding = \u201cUTF-8-BOM\u201d.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe data mostly relate to chemical concentrations and the variable descriptions are written with that in mind. In particular, \u0027concentration\u0027 is used to describe the measurement in all time series including biological effects. However, there are some important differences for time series of imposex, ACHE, fish disease index, neural red retention time, and stress on stress and these are described in the footnotes at the bottom of the document.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe variables in the file are:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eseries\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: timeseries identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 5644\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: links to the timeseries data in biota_data.csv\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EMSFD_subregion\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: Marine Strategy Framework Directive subregion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: in the \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003Emap of biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E the Greater North Sea comprises the Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, and Eastern Channel, whilst the Celtic Seas comprises the Western Channel and Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches and Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf, and Atlantic North-West Approaches.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: biogeographic region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, Eastern Channel, Western Channel \u0026amp; Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches \u0026amp; Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   regional assessments are conducted at the biogeographic regional scale\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003E8 biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E but only 7 with data\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECSEMP_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: CSEMP region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 18\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/CSEMP_regions.pdf\u0022\u003E22 monitoring regions in the CSEMP\u003C\/a\u003E but only 18 with data\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the CSEMP regions are aggregated into 8 biogeographic regions for regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECSEMP_stratum\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: subdivision of the CSEMP region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 118\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: there are 818 CSEMP strata, most of which are WFD water bodies, but only 118 with data\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_governance\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: organisation responsible for the monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: CEFAS, DAERA, EANat, MDSG, NRW, SEPA\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Environment Agency (EANat)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Marine Directorate of the Scottish Government (MDSG)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Natural Resources Wales (NRW)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_code\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: monitoring station identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 197\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_name\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: name associated with the monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 197\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_latitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station latitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 50.08, 60.78\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is a nominal position: sampling occurs in a pre-defined area broadly centred on this position\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_longitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station longitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -7.11,  2.90\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is a nominal position: sampling occurs in a pre-defined area broadly centred on this position\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: type of monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: B, RH, IH\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: baseline (B), reference (RH) or impacted (IH)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ewaterbody_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station typography\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Estuary, Coast, Open Sea\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: only coastal and open sea stations are used in regional assessments, apart for the imposex regional assessment where estuarine stations are also used\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant or biological effect\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 98\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=37\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for PARAM\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   SBDE6 is the code used for the sum of BDE28, BDE47, BDE99, BD100, BD153 and BD154\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   FDI is the code used for the fish disease index\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand_group\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant or biological effect group\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Metals, Organotins, PAH parent compounds, PAH alkylated compounds, PAH metabolites, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers, Organobromines (other), Organofluorines, Polychlorinated biphenyls, Organochlorines (other), Imposex, Biological effects (other)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Especies\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: species\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 6\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Limanda limanda:    AphiaID = 127139\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Merlangius merlangus:   AphiaID = 126438\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Mytilus edulis:     AphiaID = 140480\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Nucella lapillus:   AphiaID = 140403\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Platichthys flesus: AphiaID = 127141\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Pleuronectes platessa:  AphiaID = 127143\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ematrix\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sample matrix (tissue)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: BI, ER, HML, LI, LIS9, MU, SB, WO\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=55\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for MATRX\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebasis\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: basis of the assessment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: dry weight (D), lipid weight (L) or wet weight (W)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eunit\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: unit of measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: %, d, idx, mins, nmol\/min\/mg protein, nr\/1000 cells, pmol\/min\/mg protein, st, ug\/kg, ug\/ml\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esex\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sex\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: F, M\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: only provided for EROD where separate time series are assessed for females (F) and males (M)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Emethod_analysis\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: method of chemical analysis\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: FLM-SS\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=173\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for METOA\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   only provided for PAH metabolites where the assessment concentrations depend on the method of analysis\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eshape_env\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the symbol used to summarise the fitted trend when using environmental thresholds\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: upward_triangle, downward_triangle, large_filled_circle, small_filled_circle, small_open_circle\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   upward_triangle: significant (p \u0026lt; 0.05) increase in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   downward_triangle: significant (p \u0026lt; 0.05) decrease in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   large_filled_circle: no significant (p \u0026gt; 0.05) change in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   small_filled_circle: insufficient years of data to test for trends\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   small_open_circle: only 1-2 years of data (or a time series dominated by less-than values for which no assessment criteria is available)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the relevant significance level is given in \u003Cem\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0027short\u0027 timeseries are those with a small_open_circle and are excluded from all Indicator assessments apart from that for \u0027other chemicals\u0027\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0027medium\u0027 timeseries are those with a small-filled circle\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0027long\u0027 timeseries are those where a trend can be fitted (upward_triangle, downward_triangle or large_filled_circle)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ecolour_env\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the colour used to summarise the status assessment when using environmental thresholds\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: blue, green, red, orange, black\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   blue: the mean concentration is significantly below the Background Assessment Concentration (BAC) or equivalent (p \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   green: the mean concentration is significantly below the Environmental Assessment Criterion (EAC) or equivalent (p \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   red: the mean concentration is not significantly below the EAC or equivalent (p \u0026gt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   orange: the mean concentration is not significantly below the BAC or equivalent (p \u0026gt; 0.05) and there is no EAC or equivalent\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   black: no assessment critieria\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eshape_health\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the symbol used to summarise the fitted trend when using human health thresholds\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: upward_triangle, downward_triangle, large_filled_circle, small_filled_circle, small_open_circle\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   upward_triangle: significant (p \u0026lt; 0.05) increase in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   downward_triangle: significant (p \u0026lt; 0.05) decrease in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   large_filled_circle: no significant (p \u0026gt; 0.05) change in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   small_filled_circle: insufficient years of data to test for trends\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   small_open_circle: only 1-2 years of data (or a time series dominated by less-than values for which no assessment criteria is available)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the relevant significance level is given in \u003Cem\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0027short\u0027 timeseries are those with a small_open_circle and are excluded from all Indicator assessments apart from that for \u0027other chemicals\u0027\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0027medium\u0027 timeseries are those with a small-filled circle\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0027long\u0027 timeseries are those where a trend can be fitted (upward_triangle, downward_triangle or large_filled_circle)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ecolour_health\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the colour used to summarise the status assessment when using human health thresholds\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: green, red, black\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   green: the mean concentration is significantly below the human Health Assessment Criterion (HAC) (p \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   red: the mean concentration is not significantly below the HAC (p \u0026gt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   black: no assessment critierion\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003En_year_all\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: number of years with data\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1, 21\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003En_year_fit\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: number of years included in the statistical analysis\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1, 21\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: some early years might be excluded because they are separated from the bulk of the data by large gaps in time, or because they are dominated by \u0027less-than\u0027 values\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003En_year_positive\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: number of years included in the analysis that have at least one concentation measurement above the limit of detection\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0, 21\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Efirst_year_all\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: first year with data\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1999, 2021\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: first year included in the statistical analysis\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1999, 2021\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Cem\u003En_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E for explanation\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Elast_year\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: last year of data\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 2016, 2021\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the last year is always included in the statistical analysis\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   only timeseries with some data in the last six monitoring years are included in the assessment (i.e. 2016-2021 for the 2022 assessment)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ep_nonlinear\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the significance of the nonlinear component of the trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0, 0.051\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   this assesses whether log concentrations changed nonlinearly over the monitoring period\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   it is based on a likelihood ratio test comparing the smooth model with a linear model and is only given if a smooth model is selected by AICc\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ep_linear\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the significance of the linear component of the trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0, 1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   this test only has a simple interpretation when the trend is linear (rather than smooth) in which case it assesses whether concentrations changed (log-linearly) over the monitoring period\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   it is based on a likelihood ratio test comparing the linear model with the null model (in which only an intercept if fitted)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   for smooth models, the terms \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E and \u003Cem\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E are more relevant\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ep_overall\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the overall significance of the trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0, 1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   this assesses whether mean concentrations changed over the monitoring period\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   it is based on a likelihood ratio test comparing the fitted model (smooth or linear) with the null model\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Ep_overall\u003C\/em\u003E is identical to \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear\u003C\/em\u003E if the fitted model is linear\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ep_linear_trend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: a test of whether the mean concentrations at the start and end of the monitoring period are the same\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0, 1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   for linear models, \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is identical to \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   for smooth models, \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is based on a Wald test that compares the fitted values at the start and end of the monitoring period\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E can be non-significant even if \u003Cem\u003Ep_overall\u003C\/em\u003E is highly signficant; for example, if concentrations have increased and then decreased by the same amount\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Elinear_trend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: an estimate of the change in mean concentration between the start and end of the monitoring period\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -44, 29.6\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   loosely, \u003Cem\u003Elinear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E can be interpreted as the percentage yearly change in concentration between \u003Cem\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E and \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E assuming the trend in concentration is log-linear\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   formally, \u003Cem\u003Elinear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is 100 times the difference in log concentration between \u003Cem\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E and \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E divided by the difference in years; if the trend in log concentration is linear, this is equivalent to 100 times the yearly change in log concentration\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: a test of whether the mean concentrations 20 years ago is the same as it is today\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0, 1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E assesses whether the mean concentration in 2002 (or \u003Cem\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E whichever is later) is the same as the mean concentration in 2021 (or \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E whichever is earlier)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   for linear models, \u003Cem\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is identical to \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   for smooth models, \u003Cem\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is based on a Wald test that compares the fitted values in 2002 (or \u003Cem\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E) and 2021 (or \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: an estimate of the change in mean concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -44, 29.6\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   loosely, \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E can be interpreted as the percentage yearly change in concentration in the last 20 years assuming the trend in concentration is log-linear\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   formally, \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is 100 times the difference in log concentration between 2002 (or \u003Cem\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E whichever is later) and 2021 (or \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E whichever is earlier) divided by the difference in years; if the trend in log concentration is linear, this is equivalent to 100 times the yearly change in log concentration\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   for linear models, \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is identical to \u003Cem\u003Elinear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edetectable_trend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: a measure of the power of the time series to detect changes over time\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1.7, 136\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the yearly change in log concentration (multiplied by 100) that would be detected with 90% power based on a (two-sided) test at the 5% significance level given 10 years of annual monitoring and variability typical of the time series\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   loosely, \u003Cem\u003Edetectable_trend\u003C\/em\u003E can be interpreted as the percentage yearly change in concentration detectable with 90% power in 10 years of annual monitoring\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the fitted mean concentration in \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -0.46, 317511\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: the single negative value is for FDI (fish disease index), which can be negative\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eclimit_last_year\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper one-sided 95% confidence limit on the fitted mean concentration in \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.000000000000028, 423064\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the name of the Background Assessment Concentration (BAC) or equivalent\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: BAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_value\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the value of the BAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.0054, 63000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: more details can be found in the help files on assessment criteria for \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_biota_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Econtaminants in biota\u003C\/a\u003E and \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_biota_metabolites.html\u0022\u003Ebiological effects\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_diff\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the difference between \u003Cem\u003Eclimit_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E and the BAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -2175, 360064\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: a negative value means that the mean concentration in the final monitoring year is significantly (p \u0026lt; 0.05) below the BAC\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_achieved\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the first year (moving forward) in which the mean concentration is predicted to be below the BAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 2016, 3000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes: there are four cases\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026amp;le BAC: the mean concentration is already below the BAC and \u003Cem\u003EBAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is set to \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; BAC and \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026lt; 0: concentrations are predicted to decrease and \u003Cem\u003EBAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is set to the first year that the predicted concentration is below the BAC, assuming the rate of decrease is given by \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E; the year is truncated at 3000 to prevent values getting silly\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; BAC and \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026amp;ge 0: concentrations are predicted to increase and the mean concentration will never be below the BAC, so \u003Cem\u003EBAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is arbitrarily set to 3000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; BAC and no trend is estimated: \u003Cem\u003EBAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is left blank\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_below\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the result of a non-parametric test of whether mean concentrations are below the BAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: above, below\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   a one-sided sign-text, based on the last five monitoring years, is used to test whether mean concentrations are below the BAC; this provides a non-parametric alternative to the parametric test of status based on \u003Cem\u003Ecl_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E, and is useful when the data are dominated by less-than measurements\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the status of the time series (\u003Cem\u003Ecolour\u003C\/em\u003E) is determined by \u003Cem\u003EBAC_diff\u003C\/em\u003E if a parametric model has been fitted, and by \u003Cem\u003EBAC_below\u003C\/em\u003E otherwise\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the name of the Environmenal Assessment Criterion (EAC) or equivalent\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: EAC, FEQG, QSsp\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   EAC = Environmental Assessment Criterion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   FEQG = Federal Environmental Quality Guideline\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   QSsp = Quality Standard secondary poisoning\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_value\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the value of the EAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1.67, 3340\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: more details can be found in the help files on assessment criteria for \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_biota_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Econtaminants in biota\u003C\/a\u003E and \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_biota_metabolites.html\u0022\u003Ebiological effects\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_diff\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the difference between \u003Cem\u003Eclimit_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E and the EAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -3340, 22428\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: a negative value means that the mean concentration in the final monitoring year is significantly (p \u0026lt; 0.05) below the EAC\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_achieved\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the first year (moving forward) in which the mean concentration is predicted to be below the EAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 2016, 3000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes: there are four cases\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026amp;le EAC: the mean concentration is already below the EAC and \u003Cem\u003EEAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is set to \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; EAC and \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026lt; 0: concentrations are predicted to decrease and \u003Cem\u003EEAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is set to the first year that the predicted concentration is below the EAC, assuming the rate of decrease is given by \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E; the year is truncated at 3000 to prevent values getting silly\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; EAC and \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026amp;ge 0: concentrations are predicted to increase and the mean concentration will never be below the EAC, so \u003Cem\u003EEAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is arbitrarily set to 3000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; EAC and no trend is estimated: \u003Cem\u003EEAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is left blank\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_below\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the result of a non-parametric test of whether mean concentrations are below the EAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: above, below\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   a one-sided sign-text, based on the last five monitoring years, is used to test whether mean concentrations are below the EAC; this provides a non-parametric alternative to the parametric test of status based on \u003Cem\u003Ecl_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E, and is useful when the data are dominated by less-than measurements\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the status of the time series (\u003Cem\u003Ecolour\u003C\/em\u003E) is determined by \u003Cem\u003EEAC_diff\u003C\/em\u003E if a parametric model has been fitted, and by \u003Cem\u003EEAC_below\u003C\/em\u003E otherwise\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EHAC_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the name of the (human) Health Assessment Criterion (HAC)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: MPC, QShh\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   MPC = Maximum Permissible Concentration\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   QShh = Quality Standard human health\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are no HAC for biological effects (as one might expect)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EHAC_value\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the value of the HAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.052, 9146\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: more details can be found in the help file on \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_biota_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Eassessment criteria for contaminants in biota\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EHAC_diff\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the difference between \u003Cem\u003Eclimit_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E and the HAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -8771, 12300\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: a negative value means that the mean concentration in the final monitoring year is significantly (p \u0026lt; 0.05) below the HAC\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EHAC_achieved\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the first year (moving forward) in which the mean concentration is predicted to be below the HAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 2016, 3000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes: there are four cases\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026amp;le HAC: the mean concentration is already below the HAC and \u003Cem\u003EHAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is set to \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; HAC and \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026lt; 0: concentrations are predicted to decrease and \u003Cem\u003EHAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is set to the first year that the predicted concentration is below the HAC, assuming the rate of decrease is given by \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E; the year is truncated at 3000 to prevent values getting silly\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; HAC and \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026amp;ge 0: concentrations are predicted to increase and the mean concentration will never be below the HAC, so \u003Cem\u003EHAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is arbitrarily set to 3000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; HAC and no trend is estimated: \u003Cem\u003EHAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is left blank\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EHAC_below\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the result of a non-parametric test of whether mean concentrations are below the HAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: above, below\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   a one-sided sign-text, based on the last five monitoring years, is used to test whether mean concentrations are below the HAC; this provides a non-parametric alternative to the parametric test of status based on \u003Cem\u003Ecl_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E, and is useful when the data are dominated by less-than measurements\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the status of the time series (\u003Cem\u003Ecolour\u003C\/em\u003E) is determined by \u003Cem\u003EHAC_diff\u003C\/em\u003E if a parametric model has been fitted, and by \u003Cem\u003EHAC_below\u003C\/em\u003E otherwise\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eimposex_class\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDefinition: an alternative classification of imposex status\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: A, B, C\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EDifferences for some biological effects\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EFor imposex, \u003Cem\u003Elinear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E and \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E are the estimated log odds ratio of the VDS (or INTS) of an individual exceeding any given value in one year relative to the previous year.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EFor ACHE, neural red retention time, and stress on stress, low values indicate unhealthy organisms. Consequently,\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Ecolour_env\u003C\/em\u003E is e.g. blue if the mean concentration is significantly above the BAC (p \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Eclimit_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E is the lower one-sided 95% confidence limit on the fitted mean concentration in last_year\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   a positive value of \u003Cem\u003EBAC_diff\u003C\/em\u003E means that the mean concentration in the final monitoring year is significantly above the BAC (p \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nand so on.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EFDI (fish disease index) is modelled on the untransformed scale (i.e. not log transformed) to deal with negative indices. Consequently,\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Elinear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is the difference in FDI between \u003Cem\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E and \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E divided by the difference in years; if the trend in FDI is linear, this is equivalent to the yearly change in FDI\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is the difference in FDI between 2002 (or \u003Cem\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E whichever is later) and 2021 (or \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E whichever is earlier) divided by the difference in years; if the trend in FDI is linear, this is equivalent to the yearly change in FDI\u003C\/p\u003E\n","format":"csv","state":"Active","revision_timestamp":"Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 16:17","name":"2022 CSEMP Biota Results","mimetype":"text\/csv","size":"2.15 MB","created":"Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 15:40","resource_group_id":"f96d4bd9-9492-4e8a-b459-d66dfec8d920","last_modified":"Date changed  Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 16:17"},{"id":"65d6d0ee-92fe-4646-8105-2ccac87312de","revision_id":"","url":"https:\/\/data.marine.gov.scot\/sites\/default\/files\/\/sediment_data_10.csv","description":"\u003Cp\u003EThe file sediment_data.csv contains the contaminant data in sediment used in the 2022 assessment of the UK\u0027s Clean Seas Environment Monitoring Programme (CSEMP). The data are a cleaned and processed subset of the data extracted from the MERMAN database on 11 January 2023.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe data form the basis for the sediment component of the following Descriptor 8 Indicators in the UK\u0027s 2025 Marine Strategy Assessment:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Metals (including lead, cadmium and mercury) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends in Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polybrominated Diphenylethers (PBDEs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Chemicals (excluding metals, PAHs, PCBs and PBDEs) in Water, Biota and Sediment\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe file is UTF-8-BOM encoded so can be read directly into Excel, or into R using the function read.csv with the argument  fileEncoding = \u201cUTF-8-BOM\u201d.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe variables in the file are:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eseries\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: timeseries identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 5313\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: identifies the data (a station \/ contaminant combination) that were grouped together into a timeseries and modelled to assess status and trends\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EMSFD_subregion\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: Marine Strategy Framework Directive subregion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: in the \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003Emap of biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E the Greater North Sea comprises the Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, and Eastern Channel, whilst the Celtic Seas comprises the Western Channel and Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches and Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf, and Atlantic North-West Approaches.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: biogeographic region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, Eastern Channel, Western Channel \u0026amp; Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches \u0026amp; Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   regional assessments are conducted at the biogeographic regional scale\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003E8 biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E but only 7 with data\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECSEMP_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: CSEMP monitoring region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 17\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/CSEMP_regions.pdf\u0022\u003E22 monitoring regions in the CSEMP\u003C\/a\u003E but only 17 with data\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the CSEMP regions are aggregated into 8 biogeographic regions for regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECSEMP_stratum\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: subdivision of the CSEMP monitoring region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 53\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: there are 818 CSEMP strata, most of which are WFD water bodies, but only 53 with data\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_governance\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: organisation responsible for the monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: CEFAS, DAERA, MDSG, NRW, SEPA\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Marine Directorate of the Scottish Government (MDSG)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Natural Resources Wales (NRW)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_code\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: monitoring station identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 94\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_name\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: name associated with the monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 87\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_latitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station latitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 49.97, 61.03\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is a nominal position: sampling occurs in a pre-defined area broadly centred on this position\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_longitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station longitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -8.58,  2.33\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is a nominal position: sampling occurs in a pre-defined area broadly centred on this position\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: type of monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: B, RH, IH\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: baseline (B), reference (RH) or impacted (IH)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ewaterbody_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station typography\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Estuary, Coast, Open Sea\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: only coastal and open sea stations are used in regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Emonitoring_year\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: monitoring year\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1999, 2021\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: for some organisations, monitoring is in winter and e.g. sampling in December 2020 and January 2021 would be regarded as having come from the same monitoring year\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esample_id\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sample identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 3836\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esample_date\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sampling date\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1999-01-18, 2021-05-15\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esample_time\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sampling time\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 00:00:00, 23:59:00\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esample_latitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sampling latitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 49.97, 61.03\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esample_longitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sampling longitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -8.78,  2.58\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Esample_depth\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: depth of sediment sample\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: m\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.01, 0.5\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: all samples are surface samples and this is the lowest depth sampled\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ematrix\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: sample matrix\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: SED63, SEDTOT\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=55\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for MATRX\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand_group\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant group\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Metals, Organotins, PAH parent compounds, PAH alkylated compounds, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers, Organobromines (other), Polychlorinated biphenyls, Organochlorines (other)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 71\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=37\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for PARAM\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   data submitted as CHRTR have been relabelled as CHR\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Emethod_analysis\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: method of chemical analysis\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 16\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=173\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for METOA\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebasis\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: basis on which the measurement is expressed\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: dry weight (D)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eunit\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: unit of the concentration measurement and its uncertainty\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: mg\/kg, ug\/kg\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Econcentration\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: concentration of contaminant\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.0015, 22000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ecensoring\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: less-than qualifier for the concentration measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: \u0022\u0022, D, Q, \u0026lt;\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0022\u0022 (a blank or missing value) indicates a non-censored measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   D indicates the measurement is left-censored at the limit of detection; i.e. the measurement is below the limit of detection, but it is not known by how much; the limit of detection is given in the concentration column\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Q indicates the measurement is left-censored at the limit of quantification; i.e. the measurement is below the limit of quantification, but it is not known by how much; the limit of quantification is given in the concentration column\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0026lt; indicates the measurement is left-censored by an unspecified censoring criterion (which could be the limit of detection or quantification); the value of the censoring criterion is given in the concentration column\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Euncertainty\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: uncertainty in the concentration measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.0000035, 1017\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: analytical uncertainty expressed as the standard deviation\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Econcentration_norm\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: normalised concentration of contaminant\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.002, 87057\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the concentration normalised to 5% aluminium (metals) or 2.5% organic carbon (organics)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the normalisation process is explained \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_methods_sediment_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Ehere\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   some normalised concentrations are \u2018missing\u2019 because the normaliser (aluminium or organic carbon) concentration was not reported or because the uncertainty in the normalised concentration was greater than the normalised concentration\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ecensoring_norm\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: less-than qualifier for the normalised measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: \u0022\u0022, D, Q, \u0026lt;\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Cem\u003Ecensoring\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Euncertainty_norm\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: uncertainty in the normalised measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.0000099, 62953\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: analytical uncertainty expressed as the standard deviation\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EAL\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: aluminium concentration\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: %\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.013, 48.2\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: all values are above the limit of detection\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EAL_uncertainty\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: uncertainty in the aluminium measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: %\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.0005, 3.06\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: analytical uncertainty expressed as the standard deviation\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ELI\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: lithium concentration\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: mg\/kg\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.48, 233\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: all values are above the limit of detection\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ELI_uncertainty\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: uncertainty in the lithium measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: mg\/kg\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.025, 49.4\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: analytical uncertainty expressed as the standard deviation\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECORG\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: organic carbon concentration\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: %\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.03, 9.2\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECORG_censoring\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: less-than qualifier for the organic carbon measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: \u0022\u0022, D, \u0026lt;\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Cem\u003Ecensoring\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECORG_uncertainty\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: uncertainty in the organic carbon measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: %\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.003, 2.86\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: analytical uncertainty expressed as the standard deviation\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EDRYWT\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: dry weight of the sample\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: %\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 5.76, 93.3\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: all values are above the limit of detection\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EDRYWT_uncertainty\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: uncertainty in the dry weight measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: %\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.025, 3.29\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: analytical uncertainty expressed as the standard deviation\u003C\/p\u003E\n","format":"csv","state":"Active","revision_timestamp":"Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 16:17","name":"2022 CSEMP Sediment data","mimetype":"text\/csv","size":"43.14 MB","created":"Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 15:41","resource_group_id":"f96d4bd9-9492-4e8a-b459-d66dfec8d920","last_modified":"Date changed  Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 16:17"},{"id":"5001f0d8-0b2e-4cf3-94f2-e2ebdc852c64","revision_id":"","url":"https:\/\/data.marine.gov.scot\/sites\/default\/files\/\/sediment_regional_data_1.csv","description":"\u003Cp\u003EThe file sediment_regional_data.csv contains the summary measures used to make regional assessments of status and trends in contaminants in sediment in the 2022 assessment of the UK\u0027s Clean Seas Environment Monitoring Programme (CSEMP). The summary measures are obtained from timeseries models fitted to the contaminant data in sediment_data.csv which in turn are based on data extracted from the MERMAN database on 11 January 2023. Details of the modelling procedures can be found \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_methods_sediment_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Ehere\u003C\/a\u003E.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe regional assessments are the basis for the sediment component of the following Descriptor 8 Indicators in the UK\u0027s 2025 Marine Strategy Assessment:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Metals (including lead, cadmium and mercury) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends in Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polybrominated Diphenylethers (PBDEs) in Biota and Sediment\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EA full description of the sediment regional assessments can be found in the links below:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_sediment_metals.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of metal concentrations in sediment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_sediment_pahs.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PAH concentrations in sediment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_sediment_pcbs.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PCB concentrations in sediment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_sediment_pbdes.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PBDE concentrations in sediment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe file sediment_regional_data.csv is UTF-8-BOM encoded so can be read directly into Excel, or into R using the function read.csv with the argument  fileEncoding = \u201cUTF-8-BOM\u201d.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe variables in the file are:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eseries\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: timeseries identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 1913\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: links to the timeseries data in sediment_data.csv\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EMSFD_subregion\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: Marine Strategy Framework Directive subregion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: in the \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003Emap of biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E the Greater North Sea comprises the Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, and Eastern Channel, whilst the Celtic Seas comprises the Western Channel and Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches and Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf, and Atlantic North-West Approaches.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: biogeographic region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, Eastern Channel, Western Channel \u0026amp; Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches \u0026amp; Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   regional assessments are conducted at the biogeographic regional scale\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003E8 biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E but only 7 with results that feed into regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECSEMP_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: CSEMP region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 16\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/CSEMP_regions.pdf\u0022\u003E22 monitoring regions in the CSEMP\u003C\/a\u003E but only 16 with results that feed into regional assessments\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the CSEMP regions are aggregated into 8 biogeographic regions for regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECSEMP_stratum\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: subdivision of the CSEMP region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 44\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: there are 818 CSEMP strata, most of which are WFD water bodies, but only 44 with results that feed into regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_governance\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: organisation responsible for the monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: CEFAS, DAERA, MDSG, SEPA\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Marine Directorate of the Scottish Government (MDSG)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_code\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: monitoring station identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 60\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_name\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: name associated with the monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 54\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_latitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station latitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 50.30, 61.03\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is a nominal position: sampling occurs in a pre-defined area broadly centred on this position\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_longitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station longitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -8.58,  2.33\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is a nominal position: sampling occurs in a pre-defined area broadly centred on this position\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: type of monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: B, RH, IH\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: baseline (B), reference (RH) or impacted (IH)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ewaterbody_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station typography\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Coast, Open Sea\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: only coastal and open sea stations are used in regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand_group\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant group\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Metals, PAH parent compounds, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers, Polychlorinated biphenyls\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 43\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=37\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for PARAM\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebasis\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: basis of the assessment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: dry weight (D)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eunit\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: unit of measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: mg\/kg, ug\/kg\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Elast_year\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: last year of the timeseries\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 2016, 2021\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: only timeseries with some data in the last six monitoring years are included in the assessment (i.e. 2016-2021 for the 2022 assessment)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the fitted mean concentration in \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.0044, 940\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the name of the Background Assessment Concentration (BAC) or equivalent\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: BAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_value\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the value of the BAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.05, 122\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: more details can be found in the help file on \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_sediment_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Eassessment criteria for contaminants in sediment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_BAC\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the log ratio of \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E to the BAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: dimensionless\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -3.9, 8.72\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC\u003C\/em\u003E = log(\u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \/ \u003Cem\u003EBAC_value\u003C\/em\u003E), with a value above \/ below 0 indicating that the fitted mean concentration in the last monitoring year is above \/ below the BAC; the standard error is given by \u003Cem\u003Estatus_se\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the name of the Environmenal Assessment Criterion (EAC) or equivalent\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: EAC, ERL, FEQG\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   EAC = Environmental Assessment Criterion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   ERL = Effects Range Low\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   FEQG = Federal Environmental Quality Guideline\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_value\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the value of the EAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.15, 14000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: more details can be found in the help file on \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_sediment_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Eassessment criteria for contaminants in sediment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_EAC\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the log ratio of \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E to the EAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: dimensionless\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -15, 1.86\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC\u003C\/em\u003E = log(\u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \/ \u003Cem\u003EEAC_value\u003C\/em\u003E), with a value above \/ below 0 indicating that the fitted mean concentration in the last monitoring year is above \/ below the EAC; the standard error is given by \u003Cem\u003Estatus_se\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_profile\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the log of \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E standardised to a common basis\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: log \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -5.4, 6.85\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: these values are used to investigate concentration profiles of selected PAH parent compounds, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers and Polychlorinated biphenyls, and have been standardised to the basis given in \u003Cem\u003Ebasis_profile\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebasis_profile\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the basis of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_profile\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: dry weight (D)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_se\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the standard error of log \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.0023, 2.25\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is the also the standard error of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC\u003C\/em\u003E, \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC\u003C\/em\u003E and \u003Cem\u003Estatus_profile\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimated yearly change in log concentration in the last 20 years, multiplied by 100\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -29, 18.5\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: \u003Cem\u003Etrend\u003C\/em\u003E can loosely be interpreted as the percentage yearly change in concentration in the last 20 years assuming the trend in concentration is log-linear; values below \/ above 0 indicate a decreasing \/ increasing trend\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend_se\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the standard error of \u003Cem\u003Etrend\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.38, 25.3\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n","format":"csv","state":"Active","revision_timestamp":"Tue, 06\/03\/2025 - 14:22","name":"2022 CSEMP Sediment regional data","mimetype":"text\/csv","size":"597.46 KB","created":"Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 15:42","resource_group_id":"f96d4bd9-9492-4e8a-b459-d66dfec8d920","last_modified":"Date changed  Tue, 06\/03\/2025 - 14:22"},{"id":"055a2503-f328-4073-a5cb-1d9d02fdca95","revision_id":"","url":"https:\/\/data.marine.gov.scot\/sites\/default\/files\/\/sediment_regional_results.csv","description":"\u003Cp\u003EThe file sediment_regional_results.csv contains the results of the regional assessments of status and trends in contaminants in sediment in the 2022 assessment of the UK\u0027s Clean Seas Environment Monitoring Programme (CSEMP). The results are based on summary measures of trend and stutus from individual timeseries models which can be found in sediment_regional_data.csv. These in turn are based on data extracted from the MERMAN database on 11 January 2023. Details of the modelling procedures can be found in the regional assessment reports listed below.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe regional assessments are the basis for the sediment component of the following Descriptor 8 Indicators in the UK\u0027s 2025 Marine Strategy Assessment:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Metals (including lead, cadmium and mercury) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends in Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polybrominated Diphenylethers (PBDEs) in Biota and Sediment\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EA full description of the sediment regional assessments can be found in the links below:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_sediment_metals.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of metal concentrations in sediment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_sediment_pahs.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PAH concentrations in sediment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_sediment_pcbs.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PCB concentrations in sediment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_sediment_pbdes.html\u0022\u003Eregional assessment of PBDE concentrations in sediment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe file sediment_regional_results.csv is UTF-8-BOM encoded so can be read directly into Excel, or into R using the function read.csv with the argument fileEncoding = \u201cUTF-8-BOM\u201d.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe variables in the file are:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EMSFD_subregion\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: Marine Strategy Framework Directive subregion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: in the \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003Emap of biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E the Greater North Sea comprises the Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, and Eastern Channel, whilst the Celtic Seas comprises the Western Channel and Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches and Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf, and Atlantic North-West Approaches.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: biogeographic region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, Irish Sea, Minches \u0026amp; Western Scotland\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   regional assessments are conducted at the biogeographic regional scale\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003E8 biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E but only 4 with sufficient data for regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand_group\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant group\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Metals, PAH parent compounds, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers, Polychlorinated biphenyls\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 46\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=37\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for PARAM\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   PAH is the code used for the regional assessment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, based on NAP, ACNLE, ACNE, FLE, PA, ANT, DBT, FLU, PYR, BAA, CHR, BAP, BEP, BBKF, DBAHA, PER, BGHIP and ICDP\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   np_PCB is the code used for the regional assessment of non-planar polychlorinated biphenyls, based on CB28, CB52, CB101, CB138, CB153 and CB180\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   PBDE is the code used for the regional assessment of polybrominated diphenyl ethers, based on BDE28, BDE47, BDE66, BDE85, BDE99, BD100, BD153, BD154, BD183 and BD209\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimate of the regional trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -6.2, 4.81\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional yearly change in log concentration in the last 20 years, multiplied by 100\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/em\u003E can loosely be interpreted as the percentage yearly change in concentration in the last 20 years; values below \/ above 0 indicate a decreasing \/ increasing trend\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend_se\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the standard error of \u003Cem\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.64, 3.96\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend_lcl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the lower (two-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -9.1, 1.49\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend_ucl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper (two-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003Etrend_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -3.3, 8.12\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Etrend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: a summary of the regional trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: up, down, stable\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   up: significant (p \u0026lt; 0.05) increase in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   down: significant (p \u0026lt; 0.05) decrease in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   stable: no significant (p \u0026gt; 0.05) change in concentration in the last 20 years\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_BAC_est\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimate of regional status compared to the Background Assessment Concentration (BAC)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: dimensionless\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -1.2, 6.92\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated mean log(concentration \/ BAC) in the \u003Cem\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/em\u003E in the most recent monitoring year (2021); a value above \/ below 0 indicates that the mean concentration in the biogeographic_region* is above \/ below the BAC\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_BAC_se\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the standard error of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_se\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.15, 0.75\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_BAC_ucl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper (one-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -0.76, 7.29\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECR_BAC_est\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimate of the regional BAC contaminant ratio\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.3, 1012\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional mean concentration relative to the BAC, given by exp(\u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECR_BAC_ucl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper (one-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.47, 1467\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E = exp(\u003Cem\u003Estatus_BAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E is used for the formal assessment of regional status (see \u003Cem\u003Estatus\u003C\/em\u003E); if \u003Cem\u003ECR_BAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E is below 1, concentrations in the region are said to be at background levels\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_EAC_est\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimate of regional status compared to the Environmental Assessment Criterion (EAC) or equivalent\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: dimensionless\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -13, 0.47\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated mean log(concentration \/ EAC) in the \u003Cem\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/em\u003E in the most recent monitoring year (2021); a value above \/ below 0 indicates that the mean concentration in the biogeographic_region* is above \/ below the EAC\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_EAC_se\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the standard error of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_se\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.15, 1.29\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus_EAC_ucl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper (one-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -12, 0.8\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECR_EAC_est\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the estimate of the regional EAC contaminant ratio\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.0000026, 1.6\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the estimated regional mean concentration relative to the EAC, given by exp(\u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E is the value passed into the CHASE integrated assessment (see \u003Cem\u003ECHASE\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECR_EAC_ucl\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper (one-sided) 95% confidence limit of \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.0000043, 2.23\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E = exp(\u003Cem\u003Estatus_EAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E is used for the formal assessment of regional status (see \u003Cem\u003Estatus\u003C\/em\u003E); if \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_ucl\u003C\/em\u003E is below 1, concentrations in the region are said to be at acceptable levels.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estatus\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: a summary of the regional status\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: blue, green, red, orange\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   blue: the regional BAC contaminant ratio is significantly below 1 (p \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   green: the regional EAC contaminant ratio is significantly below 1 (p \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   red: the regional EAC contaminant ratio is not significantly below 1 (p \u0026gt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   orange: the regional BAC contaminant ratio is not significantly below 1 (p \u0026gt; 0.05) and there is no EAC or equivalent\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECHASE\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: whether \u003Cem\u003ECR_EAC_est\u003C\/em\u003E contributes to the CHASE integrated assessment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: no, yes\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see details of the \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/regional_assessment_CHASE.html\u0022\u003ECHASE integrated assessment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n","format":"csv","state":"Active","revision_timestamp":"Tue, 06\/03\/2025 - 09:43","name":"2022 CSEMP Sediement regional results","mimetype":"text\/csv","size":"53.3 KB","created":"Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 15:43","resource_group_id":"f96d4bd9-9492-4e8a-b459-d66dfec8d920","last_modified":"Date changed  Tue, 06\/03\/2025 - 09:43"},{"id":"ce491d73-88f3-45d4-91f8-6129340666e0","revision_id":"","url":"https:\/\/data.marine.gov.scot\/sites\/default\/files\/\/sediment_results.csv","description":"\u003Cp\u003EThe file sediment_results.csv summarises the assessment results for each timeseries of contaminants in sediment in the 2022 assessment of the UK\u0027s Clean Seas Environment Monitoring Programme (CSEMP). The results come from timeseries models fitted to the contaminant data in sediment_data.csv which in turn are based on data extracted from the MERMAN database on 11 January 2023. Details of the modelling procedures can be found \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_methods_sediment_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Ehere\u003C\/a\u003E.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe results form the basis for the sediment component of the following Descriptor 8 Indicators in the UK\u0027s 2025 Marine Strategy Assessment:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Metals (including lead, cadmium and mercury) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends in Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Polybrominated Diphenylethers (PBDEs) in Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n* Status and Trends of Chemicals (excluding metals, PAHs, PCBs and PBDEs) in Water, Biota and Sediment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nThe Indicators only use results from coastal and offshore stations (estuarine stations are excluded using the variable \u003Cem\u003Ewaterbody_type\u003C\/em\u003E) and from \u0027medium\u0027 and \u0027long\u0027 timeseries (\u0027short\u0027 timeseries are excluded using the variable \u003Cem\u003Eshape\u003C\/em\u003E). There is one exception: the Indicator for \u0027other chemicals\u0027 also uses \u0027short\u0027 timeseries.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe file sediment_results.csv is UTF-8-BOM encoded so can be read directly into Excel, or into R using the function read.csv with the argument  fileEncoding = \u201cUTF-8-BOM\u201d.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThe variables in the file are:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eseries\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: timeseries identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 5313\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: links to the timeseries data in sediment_data.csv\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EMSFD_subregion\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: Marine Strategy Framework Directive subregion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: in the \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003Emap of biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E the Greater North Sea comprises the Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, and Eastern Channel, whilst the Celtic Seas comprises the Western Channel and Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches and Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf, and Atlantic North-West Approaches.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebiogeographic_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: biogeographic region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Northern North Sea, Southern North Sea, Eastern Channel, Western Channel \u0026amp; Celtic Sea, Irish Sea, Minches \u0026amp; Western Scotland, Scottish Continental Shelf\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   regional assessments are conducted at the biogeographic regional scale\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/20141203172025\/http:\/chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk\/regional-basis-charting-progress-2\u0022\u003E8 biogeographic regions\u003C\/a\u003E but only 7 with data\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECSEMP_region\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: CSEMP region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 17\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   there are \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/marine.gov.scot\/datafiles\/csseg_assessment\/2022\/CSEMP_regions.pdf\u0022\u003E22 monitoring regions in the CSEMP\u003C\/a\u003E but only 17 with data\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the CSEMP regions are aggregated into 8 biogeographic regions for regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ECSEMP_stratum\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: subdivision of the CSEMP region\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 53\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: there are 818 CSEMP strata, most of which are WFD water bodies, but only 53 with data\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_governance\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: organisation responsible for the monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: CEFAS, DAERA, MDSG, NRW, SEPA\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Marine Directorate of the Scottish Government (MDSG)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Natural Resources Wales (NRW)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_code\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: monitoring station identifier\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 94\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_name\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: name associated with the monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 87\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_latitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station latitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 49.97, 61.03\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is a nominal position: sampling occurs in a pre-defined area broadly centred on this position\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_longitude\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station longitude\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: decimal degrees\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -8.58,  2.33\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: this is a nominal position: sampling occurs in a pre-defined area broadly centred on this position\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Estation_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: type of monitoring station\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: B, RH, IH\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: baseline (B), reference (RH) or impacted (IH)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ewaterbody_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: station typography\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Estuary, Coast, Open Sea\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: only coastal and open sea stations are used in regional assessments\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: 71\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/vocab.ices.dk\/?ref=37\u0022\u003EICES reference codes for PARAM\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edeterminand_group\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: contaminant group\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: Metals, Organotins, PAH parent compounds, PAH alkylated compounds, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers, Organobromines (other), Polychlorinated biphenyls, Organochlorines (other)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ebasis\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: basis of the assessment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: dry weight (D)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eunit\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: unit of measurement\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: mg\/kg, ug\/kg\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eshape\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the symbol used to summarise the fitted trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: upward_triangle, downward_triangle, large_filled_circle, small_filled_circle, small_open_circle\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   upward_triangle: significant (p \u0026lt; 0.05) increase in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   downward_triangle: significant (p \u0026lt; 0.05) decrease in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   large_filled_circle: no significant (p \u0026gt; 0.05) change in concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   small_filled_circle: insufficient years of data to test for trends\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   small_open_circle: only 1-2 years of data (or a time series dominated by less-than values for which no assessment criteria is available)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the relevant significance level is given in \u003Cem\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0027short\u0027 timeseries are those with a small_open_circle and are excluded from all Indicator assessments apart from that for \u0027other chemicals\u0027\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0027medium\u0027 timeseries are those with a small-filled circle\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u0027long\u0027 timeseries are those where a trend can be fitted (upward_triangle, downward_triangle or large_filled_circle)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ecolour\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the colour used to summarise the status assessment\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: blue, green, red, orange, black\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   blue: the mean concentration is significantly below the Background Assessment Concentration (BAC) or equivalent (p \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   green: the mean concentration is significantly below the Environmental Assessment Criterion (EAC) or equivalent (p \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   red: the mean concentration is not significantly below the EAC or equivalent (p \u0026gt; 0.05)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   orange: the mean concentration is not significantly below the BAC or equivalent (p \u0026gt; 0.05) and there is no EAC or equivalent\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   black: no assessment critieria\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003En_year_all\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: number of years with data\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1, 22\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003En_year_fit\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: number of years included in the statistical analysis\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1, 21\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: some early years might be excluded because they are separated from the bulk of the data by large gaps in time, or because they are dominated by \u0027less-than\u0027 values\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003En_year_positive\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: number of years included in the analysis that have at least one concentation measurement above the limit of detection\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0, 21\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Efirst_year_all\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: first year with data\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1999, 2021\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: first year included in the statistical analysis\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1999, 2021\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: see \u003Cem\u003En_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E for explanation\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Elast_year\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: last year of data\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: discrete\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 2016, 2021\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the last year is always included in the statistical analysis\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   only timeseries with some data in the last six monitoring years are included in the assessment (i.e. 2016-2021 for the 2022 assessment)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ep_nonlinear\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the significance of the nonlinear component of the trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0, 0.072\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   this assesses whether log concentrations changed nonlinearly over the monitoring period\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   it is based on a likelihood ratio test comparing the smooth model with a linear model and is only given if a smooth model is selected by AICc\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ep_linear\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the significance of the linear component of the trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0, 1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   this test only has a simple interpretation when the trend is linear (rather than smooth) in which case it assesses whether concentrations changed (log-linearly) over the monitoring period\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   it is based on a likelihood ratio test comparing the linear model with the null model (in which only an intercept if fitted)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   for smooth models, the terms \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E and \u003Cem\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E are more relevant\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ep_overall\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the overall significance of the trend\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0, 1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   this assesses whether mean concentrations changed over the monitoring period\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   it is based on a likelihood ratio test comparing the fitted model (smooth or linear) with the null model\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Ep_overall\u003C\/em\u003E is identical to \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear\u003C\/em\u003E if the fitted model is linear\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ep_linear_trend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: a test of whether the mean concentrations at the start and end of the monitoring period are the same\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0, 1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   for linear models, \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is identical to \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   for smooth models, \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is based on a Wald test that compares the fitted values at the start and end of the monitoring period\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E can be non-significant even if \u003Cem\u003Ep_overall\u003C\/em\u003E is highly signficant; for example, if concentrations have increased and then decreased by the same amount\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Elinear_trend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: an estimate of the change in mean concentration between the start and end of the monitoring period\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -29, 20\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   loosely, \u003Cem\u003Elinear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E can be interpreted as the percentage yearly change in concentration between \u003Cem\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E and \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E assuming the trend in concentration is log-linear\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   formally, \u003Cem\u003Elinear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is 100 times the difference in log concentration between \u003Cem\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E and \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E divided by the difference in years; if the trend in log concentration is linear, this is equivalent to 100 times the yearly change in log concentration\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: a test of whether the mean concentrations 20 years ago is the same as it is today\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0, 1\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E assesses whether the mean concentration in 2002 (or \u003Cem\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E whichever is later) is the same as the mean concentration in 2021 (or \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E whichever is earlier)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   for linear models, \u003Cem\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is identical to \u003Cem\u003Ep_linear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   for smooth models, \u003Cem\u003Ep_recent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is based on a Wald test that compares the fitted values in 2002 (or \u003Cem\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E) and 2021 (or \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E)\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: an estimate of the change in mean concentration in the last 20 years\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -29, 20\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   loosely, \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E can be interpreted as the percentage yearly change in concentration in the last 20 years assuming the trend in concentration is log-linear\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   formally, \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is 100 times the difference in log concentration between 2002 (or \u003Cem\u003Efirst_year_fit\u003C\/em\u003E whichever is later) and 2021 (or \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E whichever is earlier) divided by the difference in years; if the trend in log concentration is linear, this is equivalent to 100 times the yearly change in log concentration\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   for linear models, \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E is identical to \u003Cem\u003Elinear_trend\u003C\/em\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Edetectable_trend\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: a measure of the power of the time series to detect changes over time\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 1.9, 153\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the yearly change in log concentration (multiplied by 100) that would be detected with 90% power based on a (two-sided) test at the 5% significance level given 10 years of annual monitoring and variability typical of the time series\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   loosely, \u003Cem\u003Edetectable_trend\u003C\/em\u003E can be interpreted as the percentage yearly change in concentration detectable with 90% power in 10 years of annual monitoring\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the fitted mean concentration in \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.0044, 2490\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003Eclimit_last_year\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the upper one-sided 95% confidence limit on the fitted mean concentration in \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.014, 2145471\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the name of the Background Assessment Concentration (BAC) or equivalent\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: BAC\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_value\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the value of the BAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.05, 122\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: more details can be found in the help file on \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_sediment_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Eassessment criteria for contaminants in sediment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_diff\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the difference between \u003Cem\u003Eclimit_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E and the BAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -97, 37940\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: a negative value means that the mean concentration in the final monitoring year is significantly (p \u0026lt; 0.05) below the BAC\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_achieved\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the first year (moving forward) in which the mean concentration is predicted to be below the BAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 2016, 3000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes: there are four cases\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026amp;le BAC: the mean concentration is already below the BAC and \u003Cem\u003EBAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is set to \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; BAC and \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026lt; 0: concentrations are predicted to decrease and \u003Cem\u003EBAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is set to the first year that the predicted concentration is below the BAC, assuming the rate of decrease is given by \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E; the year is truncated at 3000 to prevent values getting silly\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; BAC and \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026amp;ge 0: concentrations are predicted to increase and the mean concentration will never be below the BAC, so \u003Cem\u003EBAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is arbitrarily set to 3000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; BAC and no trend is estimated: \u003Cem\u003EBAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is left blank\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBAC_below\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the result of a non-parametric test of whether mean concentrations are below the BAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: above, below\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   a one-sided sign-text, based on the last five monitoring years, is used to test whether mean concentrations are below the BAC; this provides a non-parametric alternative to the parametric test of status based on \u003Cem\u003Ecl_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E, and is useful when the data are dominated by less-than measurements\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the status of the time series (\u003Cem\u003Ecolour\u003C\/em\u003E) is determined by \u003Cem\u003EBAC_diff\u003C\/em\u003E if a parametric model has been fitted, and by \u003Cem\u003EBAC_below\u003C\/em\u003E otherwise\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_type\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the name of the Environmenal Assessment Criterion (EAC) or equivalent\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: EAC, EQS, ERL, FEQG\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   EAC = Environmental Assessment Criterion\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   EQS = Environmental Quality Standard\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   ERL = Effects Range Low\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   FEQG = Federal Environmental Quality Guideline\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_value\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the value of the EAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 0.15, 14000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: more details can be found in the help file on \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/dome.ices.dk\/ohat\/trDocuments\/2023\/help_ac_sediment_contaminants.html\u0022\u003Eassessment criteria for contaminants in sediment\u003C\/a\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_diff\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the difference between \u003Cem\u003Eclimit_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E and the EAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: see \u003Cem\u003Eunit\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: continuous\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: -14000, 37860\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNote: a negative value means that the mean concentration in the final monitoring year is significantly (p \u0026lt; 0.05) below the EAC\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_achieved\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the first year (moving forward) in which the mean concentration is predicted to be below the EAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit: y\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: integer\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nRange: 2016, 3000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes: there are four cases\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026amp;le EAC: the mean concentration is already below the EAC and \u003Cem\u003EEAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is set to \u003Cem\u003Elast_year\u003C\/em\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; EAC and \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026lt; 0: concentrations are predicted to decrease and \u003Cem\u003EEAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is set to the first year that the predicted concentration is below the EAC, assuming the rate of decrease is given by \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E; the year is truncated at 3000 to prevent values getting silly\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; EAC and \u003Cem\u003Erecent_trend\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026amp;ge 0: concentrations are predicted to increase and the mean concentration will never be below the EAC, so \u003Cem\u003EEAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is arbitrarily set to 3000\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   \u003Cem\u003Emean_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E \u0026gt; EAC and no trend is estimated: \u003Cem\u003EEAC_achieved\u003C\/em\u003E is left blank\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EEAC_below\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nDescription: the result of a non-parametric test of whether mean concentrations are below the EAC (or equivalent)\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nUnit:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nType: categorical\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nLevels: above, below\u003Cbr \/\u003E\nNotes:\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   a one-sided sign-text, based on the last five monitoring years, is used to test whether mean concentrations are below the EAC; this provides a non-parametric alternative to the parametric test of status based on \u003Cem\u003Ecl_last_year\u003C\/em\u003E, and is useful when the data are dominated by less-than measurements\u003Cbr \/\u003E\n*   the status of the time series (\u003Cem\u003Ecolour\u003C\/em\u003E) is determined by \u003Cem\u003EEAC_diff\u003C\/em\u003E if a parametric model has been fitted, and by \u003Cem\u003EEAC_below\u003C\/em\u003E otherwise\u003C\/p\u003E\n","format":"csv","state":"Active","revision_timestamp":"Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 16:17","name":"2022 CSEMP Sediment results","mimetype":"text\/csv","size":"1.71 MB","created":"Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 15:44","resource_group_id":"f96d4bd9-9492-4e8a-b459-d66dfec8d920","last_modified":"Date changed  Mon, 06\/02\/2025 - 16:17"}],"tags":[{"id":"321a6ac7-732d-4e22-8b59-a779e87973a8","vocabulary_id":"2","name":"Metal concentrations in fish"},{"id":"c3b6532d-53f4-4507-9d3b-191cfd2f2e5f","vocabulary_id":"2","name":"shellfish and surface sediments"},{"id":"9ddb0e6b-2c72-4eb9-95f5-811be5fc5839","vocabulary_id":"2","name":"Organic contaminant concentrations in fish"},{"id":"c004bb54-9b06-490a-8528-c2b25c009c3f","vocabulary_id":"2","name":"biological effects"},{"id":"60601f25-be36-46e4-bed0-1153e2e7a11e","vocabulary_id":"2","name":"Biological effect measurements"},{"id":"0542aac6-b13c-4812-bbfb-fdd0857377c4","vocabulary_id":"2","name":"2025 UK Marine Strategy Assessment Descriptor 8"}],"groups":[{"description":"\u003Cp\u003EMarine Directorate undertakes a wide range of monitoring covering many aspects of the Scottish marine ecosystem.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EMonitoring is undertaken in Scottish Inshore Waters, using networks of volunteers and automatic recording equipment, as well as in Scottish Offshore Waters, using the MSS research vessels MRV Alba na Mara and MRV Scotia.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EMarine Scotland Science also participates national monitoring programmes, such as:\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cul\u003E\n\u003Cli\u003EUK Marine Monitoring and Assessment Strategy (UKMMAS)\u003C\/li\u003E\n\u003Cli\u003EUK Marine Environmental Change Network (MECN)\u003C\/li\u003E\n\u003Cli\u003EUK Marine Environmental Data and Information Network (MEDIN)\u003C\/li\u003E\n\u003C\/ul\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EThis group provides published data from monitoring these activities. For many activities, there are national or international standards for how the monitoring is undertaken.\u003C\/p\u003E\n","id":"f96d4bd9-9492-4e8a-b459-d66dfec8d920","image_display_url":"https:\/\/data.marine.gov.scot\/sites\/default\/files\/\/button%20220%20_1-02_1.png","title":"Monitoring","name":"group\/monitoring"}]}]}