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.

Pressure layer combines all human activities that cause changes to hydrological conditions. The human activities were presented as point data which were given spatial extents (given below). The pressure value was given as the proportion of the grid cell under the pressure. The following human activities were combined into the changes to hydrological conditions layer; - Hydropower dams (a 1km2 grid cell in the river estuary was selected) - Water course modification (1 km) - Wind turbines (operational, 0.3 km, linear decline) - Oil platforms (0.5 km, linear decline) The human activity datasets were first processed separately covering the whole Baltic Sea and then summed together and overlapping areas were dissolved to remove double counting. Attenuation gradients are assigned to each layer as described above. Area effected decreases when distance from avtivity increases. Layer was normalized.

Concentration of nitrogen pressure layer is interpolated from annual seasonal average of total nitrogen concentrations from surface waters (0-10 m) extracted from ICES’s oceanographic database, database of Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute, EEA’s Eionet database and Data from Gulf of Finland year 2014. The points were interpolated to cover the entire Baltic Sea with Spline with barriers interpolation method. Values were log-transformed and normalised (more detailed description below).

This dataset is built from following Human activities datasets: • http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/81c917ea-492d-48e2-9f00-e1bb7fe3e4fc • http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/4fcd51dd-b8be-4e83-8cad-37c566782e8f The game hunting of seabirds data (see separate metadata): The total number of hunted seabirds were averaged over 2011-2015 (number of hunted seabirds / year). The area of the reporting unit was used to calculate the number of hunted seabirds / km2 and the data was converted to 1km x 1km grid. The predator control of seabirds data (see separate metadata): The total number of hunted cormorants were averaged over 2011-2015 (number of hunted cormorants / year). The area of the reporting unit was used to calculate the number of hunted cormorants / km2 and the data was converted to 1km x 1km grid. The two datasets were first separately log transformed and then summed, to get the total value for each grid cell. Zero values were given to all grid cells with no reported seabird hunting activity. The layer was normalized.

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.

Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide (according to Habitats Directive Annex I) are often devoid of vascular plants, usually coated by blue algae and diatoms. They are of particular importance as feeding grounds for wildfowl and waders. The distribution map is based on data submission by HELCOM contracting parties. Only Denmark, Germany and Estonia reported occurrences of mudflats and sandflats. Most of the submitted data is based on modelling and/or GIS analysis. Data coverage, accuracy and the methods in obtaining the data vary between countries.

Distribution of Furcellaria lumbricalis based on data submission by HELCOM contracting parties. Mainly pointwise occurrences of Furcellaria 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. For Poland, only confirmed occurrence of Furcellaria were included (Slupsk bansk, Rowy reef and reef at Orlowo cliff). All data (Furcellaria points and the raster presenting predicted presence of Furcellaria) 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.

The map of sprat relative abundance is mainly based on Baltic International acoustic surveys (BIAS), years 2011-2016, (ICES WGBIFS reports), reported as millions of sprat per ICES rectangle. The BIAS surveys cover almost the whole area where sprat is commonly encountered. Outside BIAS area, sprat landings data was used to complement the data. For ICES rectangles surveyed by BIAS, values shown are the mean values per ICES rectangle based on BIAS data, average for 2011-2016. For ICES rectangles not surveyed by BIAS, 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 2011-2015). MAX-value = millions of sprat according to BIAS in the ICES rectangle with highest landings. ICES rectangles outside the BIAS survey area with no reported sprat landings were given the value 0. The abundance values / ICES rectangle were divided by the area of the rectangle to obtain values per 1km2, and then converted to 1 km x 1km grid cells. Values were first log transformed and then normalised.

The map of herring relative abundance is mainly based on Baltic International acoustic surveys (BIAS), years 2011-2016 (ICES WGBIFS reports), reported as millions of herring / ICES rectangle. Also herring landings data were used to complement the data. For ICES rectangles surveyed by BIAS, values shown are the mean values per ICES rectangle based on BIAS data, average for 2011-2016. For ICES rectangles not surveyed by BIAS, 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 = millions of herring according to BIAS in the ICES rectangle with highest landings. ICES rectangles outside the BIAS survey area with no reported herring landings were given the value 0. The relative abundance values in each ICES rectangle were divided by the area of the rectangle to obtain values per 1km2. If the values in small coastal ICES rectangles (outside BIAS area) became unrealistically large due to high herring landings, the value of the neighboring rectangle was given. The final layer was converted to 1 km x 1km grid cells. Values were first log transformed and normalized.