1. Reporting of chemical monitoring data to ICES Overview and way forward
Jørgen Nørrevang Jensen
ICES
Emphasize that this is a personal view not necessarily corresponding to the official ICES view!

2. What is ICES doing:
Promoting and coordinating marine science in the Northeast Atlantic (20 member countries, more than 100 working groups, and a network of around 1600 scientist)
Producing advice for client commissions (DG Fish, DG Env, OSPAR, HELCOM etc.)
Serves as a data centre for marine data

3. Types of data in the ICES Data Centre
Fish catch statistics data
Fish survey data
Oceanographic data
Data on contaminants in biota, sediment and seawater
Fish disease data
Data on biological effects of contaminants
Biological community data (phytoplankton, zooplankton, phytobenthos, and zoobenthos)

4. ICES serves as a data centre for:
HELCOM
OSPAR
AMAP
ETC water

5. The ideal situation
Well structured data in one defined format with a high level of QA at all levels
All the commission (HELCOM, OSPAR, AMAP, and EEA) data submitted in time
Not achievable with the present resources for data handling and the legal status of data submissions

6. The present procedure for submissions of contaminant data
Data are submitted in a defined format either in a fixed format (2.2) or in a CSV format (3.2)
Data are screened prior to the entry of data into the database
Data stored as flat ASCII files that are handled by SAS-software

7. The future procedure for submissions of contaminant data
Data are submitted in a defined format (3.2) (or in a free format ?)
Data are screened prior to the entry of data into the database
Data stored in a relational database (DOME)

8. Lack of submissions in space and time
Problems identified
Lack of submissions in space and time

9. Fake data and data-files
Problems identified
Fake data and data-files
EJ F75NBFDBLIMA LIM IJ TS F0RBOT N KO
13 cruise :
13 station :
I F O
13 probe: I01
I LI000285
I LICB101A 71 E-09L
I LICB105A 22 E-09L
I LICB118A 10 E-08L
2104CB zL48 E-09
2104CB zL46 E-09
2104CB zL57 E EJ F75NBFDBLIMA LIM IJ TS F0RBOT N KO
I F O
I LI000285
I LICB101A 71 E-09L
I LICB105A 22 E-09L
I LICB118A 10 E-08L

10. Errors/incomplete data:
Problems identified
Errors/incomplete data:
Errors in the national/regional database
Missing information in the data submitted (e.g. basis of determination: dry weight or wet weight)
Errors created in the transfer from national/regional databases to the ICES reporting format

11. A very detailed and cumbersome reporting format
Problems identified
A very detailed and cumbersome reporting format
The process of “learning” the ICES format takes quite an effort
If you are reporting only one data type a large amount of the fields are redundant
Errors are introduced in the process of transforming data from national databases to the ICES format

12. A very detailed and cumbersome reporting format
RECID 38 BIOLOGICAL COMMUNITY ABUNDANCE/BIOMASS RECORD
Problems identified
A very detailed and cumbersome reporting format

13. Problems identified
Some errors are only discovered when looking at the data – making assessments/data products
param=HCHG tissu=MU country=Sweden area=Kattegat N
MEDC
3.00E-09
4.00E-09
5.00E-09
6.00E-09
7.00E-09
8.00E-09
9.00E-09
1.00E-08
1.10E-08
1.20E-08
1.30E-08
1.40E-08
1.50E-08
1.60E-08
1.70E-08
1.80E-08
1.90E-08
2.00E-08
2.10E-08
2.20E-08
2.30E-08
2.40E-08
2.50E-08
2.60E-08
2.70E-08
2.80E-08
2.90E-08
3.00E-08
3.10E-08
3.20E-08
3.30E-08
year
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004

14. Problems identified
The QA data from e.g. QUASIMEME is not easy accessible for the assessments
The ideal solution having one file from QASIMEME with all the results (with anonymous lab codes) is not acceptable for QASIMEME
QA data received in a large number of files that can have been changed
The solution of letting submitters put in the QA results in the data submissions is not optimal because fake data can and have been entered

15. General considerations/assumptions:
The further away from the primary data sources you get the more difficult/costly it gets to correct errors in the data
The amount of resources allocated for data handling is very limited in comparison to the resource used for collecting the samples and making the chemical analyses
The people dealing with the reporting of data are not the same as those making the assessment

16. Improvements – the way forward
Introduction of a free format
The primary QA should be the responsibility of the submitting institute
The data checks in the ICES Data Centre should be focussed on structural things and data checks that are related to having the “whole” set of data
Eliminates the errors created by transforming national data to the ICES format
Eliminates the excuses for not submitting data

17. Improvements – the way forward
QA data should be directly available from e.g. QASIMEME
When the Marine Strategy is implemented as a directive there will be an legal enforcement to get the data into the ICES Data Centre
Extended use of the data will in the long run results in more and better data

18. In essence: The data should be used - a functional database rather than a data cemetery will encourage the submission of data and increase the quality of the data