Distribution of Charophytes (Chara spp., Nitella spp., Nitellopsis spp., Tolypella spp.) mainly based on data submission by HELCOM contracting parties. Submitted point data was originally gathered in national mapping and monitoring campaigns, or for scientific research. Also scientific publications were used to complement the data (in Curonian, Vistula and Szczechin lagoons, see reference list). Polygon data from Poland was digitized based on Polish Marine Atlas. From Estonian waters, a predictive model was used (200m resolution), that was converted to presence/absence using minimized difference threshold (MDT) criteria. All data (points, polygon and the raster presenting predicted presence of Charophytes) were generalized to 5km x 5km grid cells.

Distribution of Fucus sp. based on data submission by HELCOM contracting parties. Mainly pointwise occurrences of Fucus were submitted, originally gathered in national mapping and monitoring campaigns, or for scientific research purposes. From Estonian waters, a predictive model was used (200m resolution), that was converted to presence/absence using minimized difference threshold (MDT) criteria. All data (Fucus points and the raster presenting predicted presence of Fucus) were generalized to 5km x 5km grid cells.

Input of hazardous substances pressure layer is interpolated from CHASE Assessment tool concentration component. The contamination ratio values were calculated with CHASE Assessment tool for hazardous substances monitored in water, sediment and biota. Classified mean contamination ratio was used in the interpolation. Classification is based on the http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/about-helcom-and-the-assessment/downloads-and-data/. The points were interpolated to cover the entire Baltic Sea with Spline with barriers interpolation method. Please see "lineage" section below for further details on attributes, data source, data processing, etc.

Baltic International Trawl Survey (BITS) data (2011-2016) from ICES DATRAS database was used as a base to create a map of cod relative abundance (quarter 1 data, CPUE values per ICES subdivision). Cod = 30cm was included. For ICES rectangles surveyed by BITS, values shown are the mean CPUE per ICES subdivision based on BITS data, average for 2011-2016. For ICES rectangles not surveyed by BITS, values are calculated as: MAX-value x Weighting factor. The weighting factor is specific to each ICES rectangle, calculated as the ratio between the commercial landings in that rectangle and the commercial landings in the ICES rectangle with highest landings (based on averages for 2011-2016). MAX-value = CPUE according to BITS in the ICES rectangle with highest landings. ICES rectangles outside the BITS survey area with no reported cod landings were given the value 0. Values were first log transformed and then normalized.

Broad-scale habitat maps for the Baltic Sea have been produced in the EUSeaMap project in 2016. For German and Estonian marine areas, national (more accurate) datasets were used. German data included both substrate and light information (division into infralittoral/circalittoral). Estonian data included only substrate and the division into light regimes was obtained from the EuSeaMap data. Here, the habitat class “infralittoral hard substrate” includes classes “Rock and other hard substrate” and “Coarse substrate” of the original data, in the infralittoral zone. The original polygon maps have been converted to 1 km x 1 km grid. The scale of the substrate data used in broad-scale habitat maps varies from 1:250 000 to 1:1M (data from EMODnet Geology). Coarser resolution data has been used in areas, where 1: 250 000 substrate data has not been available. Due to different scales used, the habitat classes may show different sized patterns in different areas.

This map shows the distribution and abundance of harbour porpoise across the Baltic Sea. The abundance of harbour porpoise is presented using 4 abundance classes. The classification is based on expert consultation and information from scientific literature (e.g. Sveegaard et al. 2011, Viquerat et al. 2014). The class borders are defined by expert opinion and generalizing the data gathered and modelled in SAMBAH project. For the Baltic Proper the SAMBAH results have been used to delineate the class borders: 20% probability of detection during May-October has been used to define the area of “common occurrence and reproduction”, and the 20% probability of detection during November-April has been used to define the “regular occurrence, no regular reproduction” area. Please note: The applied spatial scale includes lagoons and estuaries of the inner coastal waters (e.g. Szczecin Lagoon, Jasmund lagoon) where harbour porpoises do not or only exceptionally occur unlike the map suggests.

The extraction of cod pressure layer is based on two datasets: 1. http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/7a1389b3-382a-487f-8888-ac45c94c5a97 for years 2011-2016 reported per ICES statistical rectangles (tonnes / ICES rectangle). 2. http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/debeafcd-948b-4455-88ae-7a3d1618f5a8 from ICES recreational fisheries reports for 2011-2016, reported per country (only coastal areas included). Landing values were redistributed within each ICES rectangle by the c-square fishing effort data provided by ICES (all gears, 2011-2013). Tonnes / km² were calculated for both data sets and the results were converted to 1 km x 1 km grid cells. The layers were summed together, log-transformed and normalised to produce the final pressure layer on extraction of cod. Please see "lineage" section below for further details on attributes, data source, data processing, etc.

The occurrence of suitable nursery habitats is crucial for maintaining fish populations (Sundblad et al. 2013). Species distribution modelling studies have shown the importance of suitable environmental conditions for pikeperch recruitment. Due to lack of coherent data on pikeperch spawning and nursery areas across the Baltic Sea countries, environmental variables were used in delineating potential recruitment areas for pikeperch. The pikeperch recruitment area presented on the map is mainly delineated by selecting areas where depth < 5 m, logged exposure < 5, salinity < 7 PSU, Secchi depth < 2 m and distance to deep (10m) water < 4km. The threshold values have been obtained from literature (Veneranta et al. 2011, Bergström et al. 2013, Sundblad et al. 2013, Kallasvuo et al. 2016). Temperature, although important for pikeperch, was left out due to high variation in timing of suitable spawning temperatures across the Baltic Sea. In Finnish coastal waters, a national pikeperch model (Kallasvuo et al. 2016) has been used, with very suitable areas for pikeperch generalized to 1 km grid. In Sweden, the areas delineated by environmental variables have been complemented with information from national interview survey (Gunnartz et al. 2011) as well as expert opinion.

Physical loss pressure layer combines all human activities that cause physical loss of seabed. The pressure is given as area lost in each cell (km2). For the polygon datasets the area was assumed to be the lost area. For line and point datasets spatial extents were calculated with buffers (below in brackets). If no buffer extent is indicated, the data was reported as polygon. The human activities used for the physical loss pressure: - Bridges (2 m) - Cables (operational; 1,5 m) - Coastal defence and flood protection (area of polygon, 50 m for lines) - Dredging (capital dredging, Area of polygon or a 25/50 m buffer for <5000 m3 / >5000m3 points) - Extraction of sand and gravel - Finfish mariculture (150 m) - Harbours (polygon with 200 m buffer) - Land claim (area of polygon, 30m buffer for lines) - Marinas and leisure harbours (200 m) - Oil platforms (25 m) - Oil terminals and refineries (200 m) - Pipelines (operational; 15 m) - Shellfish mariculture (area of polygon, 150 m points) - Watercourse modification (50 m) - Wind turbines (operational; 30m point location of turbine) The datasets were first processed separately covering the whole Baltic Sea and then merged into one uniform data layer and minimizing the effect of overlapping areas. Polygon areas were clipped with coastline to remove buffered areas that reached to land.

This map shows the distribution and abundance of ringed seals across the Baltic Sea. The map was originally created for HELCOM Red list assessment of the Baltic Sea, using seal expert consultation. For the Baltic Sea Impact Index, the map was modified to represent four abundance classes, based on expert consultation. The map has been updated from the 1st version of HOLASII, based on expert consultation (HELCOM Seal EG).