Additionally, these lower-level species are commonly associated with high rates of population turnover and an unstable abundance [6]. The SBSTTA stressed the importance of MTI as a biodiversity indicator, claiming that MTI is, “considered a particularly effective indicator to assess sustainability of fishing and the integrity of marine ecosystems” [6]. For this

reason, researchers affiliated with the CBD agree that policy decisions relating to the management of a species must include consideration of trophically-linked species [6]. Since the 2006 agreement by the Conference of the Parties to the CBD, several states obligated to the agreement have undergone national reviews of the application of MTI. These analyses discuss the possible incorporation of

MTI into national fisheries management decisions. Much of the current research Selleck GKT137831 has been centered in the European Union (EU), likely because the EU was among the earliest groups to adopt CBD indicators for biodiversity monitoring. In the summer of 2004, the EU Environment Council adopted 15 of the biodiversity indicators highlighted by the CBD, including MTI [17]. By 2005, the indicators were also adopted by the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy Quizartinib [17]. The incorporation of MTI as a measure of diversity into two landmark Urease agreements in the European sphere represents a strong push toward sustainability on the European continent. In response to the continental push for MTI to be incorporated into fishery management decisions, pilot studies were performed by the British and Dutch in 2008 and 2007, respectively. In the United Kingdom (UK), significant effort has gone into the research and implementation of MTI into national policy decisions. The UK Biodiversity Partnership Standing Committee agreed upon 18 promising biodiversity indicators requiring additional follow-up to implement. Among the proposed indicators was MTI. In a 2008 report on the feasibility and accuracy of using MTI to estimate

ecosystem health in UK territorial waters, scientists concluded that the data needed to compute MTI was not available at a small-scale necessary to accurately predict MTI for the UK. Ultimately, the UK Committee recommended against the incorporation of an MTI indicator into management regimes, citing that, “data may not be representative of all trophic levels in UK waters, especially regionally” [18]. Similarly, a 2007 Dutch report was commissioned to examine the possibility of using MTI as an indicator for ecosystem health in the Netherlands territorial seas. The report identified MTI as offering, “the possibility to encapsulate data on fisheries landings in one figure, making changes in fisheries behavior visible in one glance” [17].