Ecosystem Production Units in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean
Pepin et al. (2014) stated that three nested spatial scales were identified as relevant for the development of ecosystem summaries and management plans: Bioregion, Ecosystem Production Unit (EPU), and Ecoregion. A bioregion is composed by one or more EPUs, while an EPU consists of a combination of ecoregions, which represent elements with different physical and biological characteristics based on the analytical criteria applied. Pepin et al. (2014) reported on the consolidation of data and analyses of ecoregion structure for the continental shelf areas from the Labrador Sea to the mid-Atlantic Bight and provided recommendations on the definition of EPUs in the NAFO Convention Area.
The results of two K-means clustering analyses (one geographically constrained and one un-constrained) and expert knowledge (including and considering location of ecoregions, knowledge of the distribution of major marine resources and fish stocks, and geographic proximity for delineation/definition of potential management units) served as guides for evaluation by NAFO’s (North Atlantic Fisheries Organization) working group on ecosystem science and assessments (WG-ESA). The final consensus from the discussions identified eight (8) major EPUs that can serve as practical candidate management units (from the 50 m isobaths, where research vessel data were available, seaward to the 1500 m isobaths) that consist of the Labrador Shelf (NAFO subareas 2GH), the northeast Newfoundland Shelf (subareas 2J3K), the Grand Banks (subareas 3LNO), Flemish Cap (subarea 3M), the Scotian Shelf (subareas 4VnsWX), Georges Bank (parts of subareas 5Ze and 5Zw), the Gulf of Maine (subarea 5Y and part of 5Ze) and the mid-Atlantic Bight (part of subarea 5Zw and subareas 6ABC). Southern Newfoundland (subarea 3Ps) was not included in the original analysis because fall survey data were unavailable. However, it was later added as an EPU after additional analysis of the fish community structure and trends using survey data from the spring, which indicated that this area is heavily influenced by the surrounding EPUs (NAFO 2015).
The proposed candidate management units correspond to the EPUs that define major areas within the bioregions which contain a reasonably well defined food web/production system. The working group noted that the consensus solution represents a compromise that aims to define management units based on the boundaries of existing NAFO subareas that are appropriate for estimation of ecosystem and fishery production.
References:
NAFO. 2015. Report of the 8th Meeting of the NAFO Scientific Council (SC) Working Group on Ecosystem Science and Assessment (WGESA). 17-26 November 2015, Dartmouth, Canada. NAFO SCS Doc. 15/19.
Pepin, P., Higdon, J., Koen-Alonso, M., Fogarty, M., and N. Ollerhead. 2014. Application of ecoregion analysis to the identification of Ecosystem Production Units (EPUs) in the NAFO Convention Area. NAFO SCR Doc. 14/069.
Datasets available for download
Additional Info
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Last Updated | October 20, 2025, 02:41 (UTC) |
| Created | October 20, 2025, 02:41 (UTC) |
|
Domain / Topic
Domain or topic of the dataset being cataloged.
|
Biota, Boundaries, Environment, Geoscientific Information, Oceans |
|
Title
Title for the Dataset.
|
Ecosystem Production Units in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean |
|
Description
A description of the dataset.
|
Pepin et al. (2014) stated that three nested spatial scales were identified as relevant for the development of ecosystem summaries and management plans: Bioregion, Ecosystem Production Unit (EPU), and Ecoregion. A bioregion is composed by one or more EPUs, while an EPU consists of a combination of ecoregions, which represent elements with different physical and biological characteristics based on the analytical criteria applied. Pepin et al. (2014) reported on the consolidation of data and analyses of ecoregion structure for the continental shelf areas from the Labrador Sea to the mid-Atlantic Bight and provided recommendations on the definition of EPUs in the NAFO Convention Area. The results of two K-means clustering analyses (one geographically constrained and one un-constrained) and expert knowledge (including and considering location of ecoregions, knowledge of the distribution of major marine resources and fish stocks, and geographic proximity for delineation/definition of potential management units) served as guides for evaluation by NAFO’s (North Atlantic Fisheries Organization) working group on ecosystem science and assessments (WG-ESA). The final consensus from the discussions identified eight (8) major EPUs that can serve as practical candidate management units (from the 50 m isobaths, where research vessel data were available, seaward to the 1500 m isobaths) that consist of the Labrador Shelf (NAFO subareas 2GH), the northeast Newfoundland Shelf (subareas 2J3K), the Grand Banks (subareas 3LNO), Flemish Cap (subarea 3M), the Scotian Shelf (subareas 4VnsWX), Georges Bank (parts of subareas 5Ze and 5Zw), the Gulf of Maine (subarea 5Y and part of 5Ze) and the mid-Atlantic Bight (part of subarea 5Zw and subareas 6ABC). Southern Newfoundland (subarea 3Ps) was not included in the original analysis because fall survey data were unavailable. However, it was later added as an EPU after additional analysis of the fish community structure and trends using survey data from the spring, which indicated that this area is heavily influenced by the surrounding EPUs (NAFO 2015). The proposed candidate management units correspond to the EPUs that define major areas within the bioregions which contain a reasonably well defined food web/production system. The working group noted that the consensus solution represents a compromise that aims to define management units based on the boundaries of existing NAFO subareas that are appropriate for estimation of ecosystem and fishery production. References: NAFO. 2015. Report of the 8th Meeting of the NAFO Scientific Council (SC) Working Group on Ecosystem Science and Assessment (WGESA). 17-26 November 2015, Dartmouth, Canada. NAFO SCS Doc. 15/19. Pepin, P., Higdon, J., Koen-Alonso, M., Fogarty, M., and N. Ollerhead. 2014. Application of ecoregion analysis to the identification of Ecosystem Production Units (EPUs) in the NAFO Convention Area. NAFO SCR Doc. 14/069. |
|
Tags / Keywords
Keywords/tags categorizing the dataset.
|
|
|
Format (CSV, XLS, TXT, PDF, etc)
File format of the dataset.
|
|
|
Dataset Size
Dataset size in megabytes.
|
|
|
Metadata Identifier
Metadata identifier – can be used as the unique identifier for catalogue entry
|
|
|
Published Date
Published date of the dataset.
|
2014-01-01 |
|
Time Period Data Span (start date)
Start date of the data in the dataset.
|
|
|
Time Period Data Span (end date)
End date of time data in the dataset.
|
|
|
GeoSpatial Area Data Span
A spatial region or named place the dataset covers.
|
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
|
Access category
Type of access granted for the dataset (open, closed, service, etc).
|
|
|
License
License used to access the dataset.
|
Open Government Licence - Canada |
|
Limits on use
Limits on use of data.
|
|
|
Location
Location of the dataset.
|
https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/9a515ef8-0e2a-479e-9b25-55658eae30be |
|
Data Service
Data service for accessing a dataset.
|
|
|
Owner
Owner of the dataset.
|
Fisheries and Oceans Canada | Pêches et Océans Canada |
|
Contact Point
Who to contact regarding access?
|
Government of Canada;Fisheries and Oceans Canada;Science, DFO.NLEcologicalSciences-SciencesecologiquesTNL.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca |
|
Contact Point Email
The email to contact regarding access?
|
|
|
Publisher
Publisher of the dataset.
|
|
|
Publisher Email
Email of the publisher.
|
[email protected] |
|
Author
Author of the dataset.
|
|
|
Author Email
Email of the author.
|
|
|
Accessed At
Date the data and metadata was accessed.
|
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
|
Identifier
Unique identifier for the dataset.
|
|
|
Language
Language(s) of the dataset
|
|
|
Link to dataset description
A URL to an external document describing the dataset.
|
|
|
Persistent Identifier
Data is identified by a persistent identifier.
|
|
|
Globally Unique Identifier
Data is identified by a persistent and globally unique identifier.
|
|
|
Contains data about individuals
Does the data hold data about individuals?
|
|
|
Contains data about identifiable individuals
Does the data hold identifiable data about individual?
|
|
|
Contains Indigenous Data
Does the data hold data about Indigenous communities?
|
|
|
Portal Type
Platform type of the source portal.
|
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
|
Version
Version of the datatset
|
None |
|
Source
Source of the dataset.
|
None |
|
Version notes
Version notes about the dataset.
|
|
|
Is version of another dataset
Link to dataset that it is a version of.
|
|
|
Other versions
Link to datasets that are versions of it.
|
|
|
Provenance Text
Provenance Text of the data.
|
|
|
Provenance URL
Provenance URL of the data.
|
|
|
Temporal resolution
Describes how granular the date/time data in the dataset is.
|
|
|
GeoSpatial resolution in meters
Describes how granular (in meters) geospatial data is in the dataset.
|
|
|
GeoSpatial resolution (in regions)
Describes how granular (in regions) geospatial data is in the dataset.
|
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
|
Indigenous Community Permission
Who holds the Indigenous Community Permission. Who to contact regarding access to a dataset that has data about Indigenous communities.
|
|
|
Community Permission
Community permission (who gave permission).
|
|
|
The Indigenous communities the dataset is about
Indigenous communities from which data is derived.
|
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
|
Number of data rows
If tabular dataset, total number of rows.
|
|
|
Number of data columns
If tabular dataset, total number of unique columns.
|
|
|
Number of data cells
If tabular dataset, total number of cells with data.
|
|
|
Number of data relations
If RDF dataset, total number of triples.
|
|
|
Number of entities
If RDF dataset, total number of entities.
|
|
|
Number of data properties
If RDF dataset, total number of unique properties used by the triples.
|
|
|
Data quality
Describes the quality of the data in the dataset.
|
|
|
Metric for data quality
A metric used to measure the quality of the data, such as missing values or invalid formats.
|
0 Comments