I Theme

Biodiversity Interactions and Community Structure in a Changing Oceans

How do different sensibilities towards OA play a roles at common, speciation andtraspecific ( endogenetic states, genotypes) levels? Is there any property resulting from the interaction with the body that is not apparent from the study of a particular specie alone? As a result of Open Access, will the EU structural framework be changed and how will changes in the competitiveness of Bethlehem and Celagic organisations impact on the EU structural framework?

How do OA-induced changes in dietary changes in nutritional qualities and quantities affect higher level trophies in primarily producing foods? How will the energetic transition between lower and higher trophies evolve due to changes in competition and/or the nutritional context? Low pH and/or high CO2 effect observations are mostly due to experimentation with individual types.

Therefore, not much is known about how these determinants influence the interaction between different types of organisms and thus between different societies. In fact, the predicted shift of pH and pH in many types of organisms often has only a minor effect on the power and health of a particular type, and many trials find responses in individual type tests only with very high CO2 levels or at unrealistic low pH (e.g. Mayor et al. 2007).

As shown for other stressor types (Christensen et al. 2006), however, changes in type response may significantly increase or buffers the initial stressful response (Wahl 2008). The extent to which changes in membership and social behaviour cause the spread of environment stresses within a society is still very open. Thus theme 4 is the consequential expansion of these experiments, which places the reactions of single organism to OA in a communal and eco-system contexts.

It is expected that we will find impacts of Open Access on fellowship structures and fellowship dynamics that are not apparent in the study of individual responses of the body. Therefore, we will concentrate on changes in competition and Trophic and on the joint structures. Consequently, formerly dominant rivals may be undermined, as is the case with scaling and non-calcifying wildlife reciprocal impacts (e.g. Kuffner et al. 2007), or there may be a shift in predator vulnerability (Swanson & Fox 2007).

In addition, there may be severe pressure within specimens if the vulnerability to stresses varies between different types of genotype or between different phases of ontogenetics. For multi-cellular types, the most vulnerable on-togenetic stage will govern survival, and biodiversity may govern the destiny of a OA populations. Changes in speciation structure at one tropic plane will obviously impact the transmission of energies and materials to higher tropic planes.

A changing speciation at the bottom of the feed supply may constitute different types of feed of high nutritional value for carnivores, which may lead to a full reorganisation of the tropical network. Even immediate impacts of enhanced CO2 abundance can alter the nutritional value of an organism for higher tropic plains. On the one side this is connected with a reduced toxicity of some dosoflagellates (Parkhill & Cembella 1999), with the possibility of a higher tastiness of previously harmful seaweed, but on the other side also with a decline in nutritional value for higher trophies (Malzahn et al. 2007).

So if we want to grasp the impact of Open Access on the structures and functions of eco-systems, it is imperative to grasp the changes in modes of interactions or strengths (Tortell et al. 2002), because the typically non-linearity of the resulting impacts has the capacity to cause changes in regimes in ocean eco-systems.