MS/Art8/2018/D2/Portugal/NE Atlantic: Bay of Biscay & Iberian Coast

Member State report / Art8 / 2018 / D2 / Portugal / NE Atlantic: Bay of Biscay & Iberian Coast

Report type	Member State report to Commission
MSFD Article	Art. 8 Initial assessment (and Art. 17 updates)
Report due	2018-10-15
GES Descriptor	D2 Non-indigenous species
Member State	Portugal
Region/subregion	NE Atlantic: Bay of Biscay & Iberian Coast
Reported by	DGRM
Report date	2021-03-03
Report access	ART8_GES_PT_setembro2020.xml

Sub Part of territorial continental waters (ABI-PT-AA-CONT_D2A)

Simplified table

GES component	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2
Feature	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species
Element	Crepidula fornicata	Cynoscion regalis	Reptadeonella violacea	Acartia (Acanthacartia) tonsa	Amathia verticillata	Amphibalanus amphitrite	Ampithoe valida	Anguillicoloides crassus	Anotrichium furcellatum	Antithamnionella spirographidis	Antithamnionella ternifolia	Asparagopsis armata	Austrominius modestus	Bugula neritina	Chaetopleura angulata	Colpomenia peregrina	Corbicula fluminea	Corella eumyota	Crassostrea gigas	Cynoscion regalis	Dasya sessilis	Diamysis lagunaris	Eriocheir sinensis	Goniadella gracilis	Gracilaria vermiculophylla	Grateloupia turuturu	Gymnodinium catenatum	Gymnodinium microreticulatum	Isolda pulchella	Melanothamnus harveyi	Molgula manhattensis	Mya arenaria	Penaeus japonicus	Potamopyrgus antipodarum	Prionospio pulchra	Procambarus clarkii	Pseudodiaptomus marinus	Ruditapes philippinarum	Sargassum muticum	Styela clava	Symphyocladia marchantioides	Tricellaria inopinata	Ulva australis	Undaria pinnatifida	Acartia (Acanthacartia) tonsa	Amathia verticillata	Amphibalanus amphitrite	Ampithoe valida	Anguillicoloides crassus	Anotrichium furcellatum	Antithamnionella spirographidis	Antithamnionella ternifolia	Asparagopsis armata	Austrominius modestus	Bugula neritina	Chaetopleura angulata	Colpomenia peregrina	Corbicula fluminea	Corella eumyota	Crassostrea gigas	Cynoscion regalis	Dasya sessilis	Diamysis lagunaris	Eriocheir sinensis	Goniadella gracilis	Gracilaria vermiculophylla	Grateloupia turuturu	Gymnodinium catenatum	Gymnodinium microreticulatum	Isolda pulchella	Melanothamnus harveyi	Molgula manhattensis	Mya arenaria	Penaeus japonicus	Potamopyrgus antipodarum	Prionospio pulchra	Procambarus clarkii	Pseudodiaptomus marinus	Ruditapes philippinarum	Sargassum muticum	Styela clava	Symphyocladia marchantioides	Tricellaria inopinata	Ulva australis	Undaria pinnatifida
Element code	138963	159313	111061	345943	851581	421137	102005	458994	144505	144521	163275	144438	712167	111158	848025	145856	181580	173223	836033	159313	232221	430999	107451	130145	236157	295880	109784	232813	157441	1027787	103788	140430	210371	147123	558845	465540	360352	231750	494791	103929	144863	111254	660661	145721	345943	851581	421137	102005	458994	144505	144521	163275	144438	712167	111158	848025	145856	181580	173223	836033	159313	232221	430999	107451	130145	236157	295880	109784	232813	157441	1027787	103788	140430	210371	147123	558845	465540	360352	231750	494791	103929	144863	111254	660661	145721
Element code source	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	EU	Other	Other	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU
Criterion	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3
Parameter	Presence	Presence	Presence	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other
Parameter other				Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status
Threshold value upper
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.
Threshold value source
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper
Value achieved lower
Value unit	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species
Value unit other
Proportion threshold value
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit
Trend	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Description parameter	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.
Related indicator	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species
Criteria status	Good	Good	Good	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description criteria	Of the 105 species reported to mainland Portugal, about 15 were considered to be non-indigenous species recently introduced (period from 2012 to 2018), that is, species whose presence in the area was not known in the previous evaluation period. In MRU-A there are 3 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018: Reptadeonella violacea (population status: undetermined), Crepidula fornicata (population status: undetermined), and Cynoscion regalis (population status: established).	Of the 105 species reported to mainland Portugal, about 15 were considered to be non-indigenous species recently introduced (period from 2012 to 2018), that is, species whose presence in the area was not known in the previous evaluation period. In MRU-A there are 3 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018: Reptadeonella violacea (population status: undetermined), Crepidula fornicata (population status: undetermined), and Cynoscion regalis (population status: established).	Of the 105 species reported to mainland Portugal, about 15 were considered to be non-indigenous species recently introduced (period from 2012 to 2018), that is, species whose presence in the area was not known in the previous evaluation period. In MRU-A there are 3 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018: Reptadeonella violacea (population status: undetermined), Crepidula fornicata (population status: undetermined), and Cynoscion regalis (population status: established).	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.
Element status	Good	Good	Good	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Description element		Morais P., Teodósio M.A. (2016). The transatlantic introduction of weakfish Cynoscion regalis (Bloch & Schneider, 1801) (Sciaenidae, Pisces) into Europe. BioInvasions Records, Rapid Communication, 5, 2016 REABIC Open Access.	Souto J. (2016) Identification of non-indigenous briozoary species on the Portuguese coast. Project Biomar PT, course No 13, 120 p.			Carvalho S., Marques J.C., Banha M.M., Cancela-da-Fonseca L. (2003). Macrobenthic crustacea of the bay of S. Torpes Portugal. Revista de Biologia 21: 57-70.											C. fluminea invaded the water catchment area of the River Minho in 1989 and became the most abundant representative of benthic fauna in this system after some time (Rosa et al. 2011). Also in this basin, the presence of C. fluminea changed the trophic structure as well as the spatial distribution of the native Pisidium amnicum bivalve and occupied the freshwater mussel space in some freshwater mussel systems (Sousa 2008). References: Rosa I.C., Pereira J.L., Gomes J., Saraiva P.M., GonÃ§alves F., Costa R. (2011). The Asian clam Corbicula fluminea in the European freshwater-dependent industry: A latent threat or a friendly enemy? Ecological Economics 70: 1805-1813		Correct taxonomy in the EASIN database (figure as Magallana gigas)			Cunha M.R., Moreira M.H., Sorbe J.C. (1999). Diamysis bahirensis: a mysid species new to the Portuguese fauna and first record from the west European coast. Crustacean Issues 12: 139-152						Amorim A., Dale B., Godinho R., Brotas V. (2001). Gymnodinium catenatum-like (Dinophyceae) cysts in recent sediments from the coast of Portugal. Phycologia 40: 572-582		Araújo R., Barbara I., Tibaldo M., Berecibar E., Díaz Tapia P., Pereira R., Santos R.,Sousa-Pinto I. (2009). Checklist of benthic marine algae of northern Portugal. Botanica Marina 52: 24-46																	Carvalho S., Marques J.C., Banha M.M., Cancela-da-Fonseca L. (2003). Macrobenthic crustacea of the bay of S. Torpes Portugal. Revista de Biologia 21: 57-70.											C. fluminea invaded the water catchment area of the River Minho in 1989 and became the most abundant representative of benthic fauna in this system after some time (Rosa et al. 2011). Also in this basin, the presence of C. fluminea changed the trophic structure as well as the spatial distribution of the native Pisidium amnicum bivalve and occupied the freshwater mussel space in some freshwater mussel systems (Sousa 2008). References: Rosa I.C., Pereira J.L., Gomes J., Saraiva P.M., GonÃ§alves F., Costa R. (2011). The Asian clam Corbicula fluminea in the European freshwater-dependent industry: A latent threat or a friendly enemy? Ecological Economics 70: 1805-1813		Correct taxonomy in the EASIN database (figure as Magallana gigas)			Cunha M.R., Moreira M.H., Sorbe J.C. (1999). Diamysis bahirensis: a mysid species new to the Portuguese fauna and first record from the west European coast. Crustacean Issues 12: 139-152						Amorim A., Dale B., Godinho R., Brotas V. (2001). Gymnodinium catenatum-like (Dinophyceae) cysts in recent sediments from the coast of Portugal. Phycologia 40: 572-582		Araújo R., Barbara I., Tibaldo M., Berecibar E., Díaz Tapia P., Pereira R., Santos R.,Sousa-Pinto I. (2009). Checklist of benthic marine algae of northern Portugal. Botanica Marina 52: 24-46
Integration rule type parameter
Integration rule description parameter
Integration rule type criteria
Integration rule description criteria
GES extent threshold	15.00	15.00	15.00
GES extent achieved	3.00	3.00	3.00
GES extent unit	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species
GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description overall status	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, only 3 were reported in MRU-A. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: ?the threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year period?. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, only 3 were reported in MRU-A. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: ?the threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year period?. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, only 3 were reported in MRU-A. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: ?the threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year period?. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects were reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â.
Assessments period	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018
Related pressures	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species
Related targets	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont

Sub Part of territorial continental waters (ABI-PT-AA-CONT_D2B)

Simplified table

GES component	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2
Feature	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species
Element	Antithamnion amphigeneum	Antithamnion hubbsii	Asparagopsis armata	Asparagopsis taxiformis	Codium fragile subsp. Fragile	Colpomenia peregrina	Gymnodinium catenatum	Gymnodinium microreticulatum	Pyropia suborbiculata	Sargassum muticum	Undaria pinnatifida	Arcuatula senhousia	Balanus trigonus	Celleporaria brunnea	Cynoscion regalis	Distaplia corolla	Megabalanus tintinnabulum	Reptadeonella violacea	Schizoporella errata	Scytosiphon dotyi	Acartia (Acanthacartia) tonsa	Amathia verticillata	Amphibalanus amphitrite	Anguillicoloides crassus	Anotrichium furcellatum	Antithamnionella ternifolia	Austrominius modestus	Balanus trigonus	Blackfordia virginica	Botrylloides violaceus	Botryllus schlosseri	Bugula neritina	Bugulina fulva	Callinectes sapidus	Caprella scaura	Chaetopleura angulata	Corbicula fluminea	Cordylophora caspia	Corella eumyota	Crassostrea gigas	Cynoscion regalis	Dasya sessilis	Desdemona ornata	Eriocheir sinensis	Ficopomatus enigmaticus	Goniadella gracilis	Gracilaria vermiculophylla	Isolda pulchella	Lomentaria hakodatensis	Melanothamnus harveyi	Microcosmus squamiger	Molgula manhattensis	Mya arenaria	Ocinebrellus inornatus	Penaeus japonicus	Potamopyrgus antipodarum	Prionospio pulchra	Procambarus clarkii	Pseudopolydora paucibranchiata	Rhithropanopeus harrisii	Ruditapes philippinarum	Scageliopsis patens	Styela clava	Styela plicata	Symphyocladia marchantioides	Tonicia atrata	Tricellaria inopinata	Watersipora subtorquata	Acartia (Acanthacartia) tonsa	Amathia verticillata	Amphibalanus amphitrite	Anguillicoloides crassus	Anotrichium furcellatum	Antithamnionella ternifolia	Austrominius modestus	Balanus trigonus	Blackfordia virginica	Botrylloides violaceus	Botryllus schlosseri	Bugula neritina	Bugulina fulva	Callinectes sapidus	Caprella scaura	Chaetopleura angulata	Corbicula fluminea	Cordylophora caspia	Corella eumyota	Crassostrea gigas	Cynoscion regalis	Dasya sessilis	Desdemona ornata	Eriocheir sinensis	Ficopomatus enigmaticus	Goniadella gracilis	Gracilaria vermiculophylla	Isolda pulchella	Lomentaria hakodatensis	Melanothamnus harveyi	Microcosmus squamiger	Molgula manhattensis	Mya arenaria	Ocinebrellus inornatus	Penaeus japonicus	Potamopyrgus antipodarum	Prionospio pulchra	Procambarus clarkii	Pseudopolydora paucibranchiata	Rhithropanopeus harrisii	Ruditapes philippinarum	Scageliopsis patens	Styela clava	Styela plicata	Symphyocladia marchantioides	Tonicia atrata	Tricellaria inopinata	Watersipora subtorquata
Element code	494896	214070	144438	144439	145086	145856	109784	232813	699639	494791	145721	505946	106223	394868	159313	103606	106225	111061	111527	145868	345943	851581	421137	458994	144505	163275	712167	106223	117313	148715	103862	111158	834010	107379	236551	848025	181580	117428	173223	836033	159313	232221	130902	107451	130988	130145	236157	157441	232230	1027787	236666	103788	140430	578702	210371	147123	558845	465540	131168	107414	231750	144692	103929	103936	144863	386327	111254	111592	345943	851581	421137	458994	144505	163275	712167	106223	117313	148715	103862	111158	834010	107379	236551	848025	181580	117428	173223	836033	159313	232221	130902	107451	130988	130145	236157	157441	232230	1027787	236666	103788	140430	578702	210371	147123	558845	465540	131168	107414	231750	144692	103929	103936	144863	386327	111254	111592
Element code source	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	Other	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other
Criterion												D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3
Parameter												Presence	Presence	Presence	Presence	Presence	Presence	Presence	Presence	Presence	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other
Parameter other																					Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status
Threshold value upper
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative												Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.
Threshold value source
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper
Value achieved lower
Value unit												(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species
Value unit other
Proportion threshold value
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit
Trend												Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved												Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Description parameter												When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	Of the 105 species reported for mainland Portugal, some 15 were considered as newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period. In MRU- B, 9 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018 are distributed: Scytosiphon dotyi, Reptadeonella violacea, Schizoporella errata, Arcuatula senhousia, and Megabalanus tintinnabulum in an indefinite state	Of the 105 species reported for mainland Portugal, some 15 were considered as newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period. In MRU- B, 9 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018 are distributed: Scytosiphon dotyi, Reptadeonella violacea, Schizoporella errata, Arcuatula senhousia, and Megabalanus tintinnabulum in an indefinite state	Of the 105 species reported for mainland Portugal, some 15 were considered as newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period. In MRU- B, 9 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018 are distributed: Scytosiphon dotyi, Reptadeonella violacea, Schizoporella errata, Arcuatula senhousia, and Megabalanus tintinnabulum in an indefinite state	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.
Related indicator												Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species
Criteria status												Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description criteria												Of the 105 species reported for mainland Portugal, some 15 were considered as newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period. In MRU- B, 9 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018 are distributed: Scytosiphon dotyi, Reptadeonella violacea, Schizoporella errata, Arcuatula senhousia, and Megabalanus tintinnabulum in an indefinite state	Of the 105 species reported for mainland Portugal, some 15 were considered as newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period. In MRU- B, 9 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018 are distributed: Scytosiphon dotyi, Reptadeonella violacea, Schizoporella errata, Arcuatula senhousia, and Megabalanus tintinnabulum in an indefinite state	Of the 105 species reported for mainland Portugal, some 15 were considered as newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period. In MRU- B, 9 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018 are distributed: Scytosiphon dotyi, Reptadeonella violacea, Schizoporella errata, Arcuatula senhousia, and Megabalanus tintinnabulum in an indefinite state	Of the 105 species reported for mainland Portugal, some 15 were considered as newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period. In MRU- B, 9 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018 are distributed: Scytosiphon dotyi, Reptadeonella violacea, Schizoporella errata, Arcuatula senhousia, and Megabalanus tintinnabulum in an indefinite state	Of the 105 species reported for mainland Portugal, some 15 were considered as newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period. In MRU- B, 9 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018 are distributed: Scytosiphon dotyi, Reptadeonella violacea, Schizoporella errata, Arcuatula senhousia, and Megabalanus tintinnabulum in an indefinite state	Of the 105 species reported for mainland Portugal, some 15 were considered as newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period. In MRU- B, 9 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018 are distributed: Scytosiphon dotyi, Reptadeonella violacea, Schizoporella errata, Arcuatula senhousia, and Megabalanus tintinnabulum in an indefinite state	Of the 105 species reported for mainland Portugal, some 15 were considered as newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period. In MRU- B, 9 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018 are distributed: Scytosiphon dotyi, Reptadeonella violacea, Schizoporella errata, Arcuatula senhousia, and Megabalanus tintinnabulum in an indefinite state	Of the 105 species reported for mainland Portugal, some 15 were considered as newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period. In MRU- B, 9 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018 are distributed: Scytosiphon dotyi, Reptadeonella violacea, Schizoporella errata, Arcuatula senhousia, and Megabalanus tintinnabulum in an indefinite state	Of the 105 species reported for mainland Portugal, some 15 were considered as newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period. In MRU- B, 9 non-indigenous species registered in the period 2012-2018 are distributed: Scytosiphon dotyi, Reptadeonella violacea, Schizoporella errata, Arcuatula senhousia, and Megabalanus tintinnabulum in an indefinite state	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.
Element status	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Description element								Amorim A., Dale B., Godinho R., Brotas V. (2001). Gymnodinium catenatum-like (Dinophyceae) cysts in recent sediments from the coast of Portugal. Phycologia 40: 572-582							Morais P., Teodósio M.A. (2016). The transatlantic introduction of weakfish Cynoscion regalis (Bloch & Schneider, 1801) (Sciaenidae, Pisces) into Europe. BioInvasions Records, Rapid Communication, 5, 2016 REABIC Open Access.	Classes A. (2016). Identification of species of tunicates which are not indigenous to the Portuguese Coast. Project Biomar PT, course No 10, 144 p.		Souto J. (2016) Identification of non-indigenous briozoary species on the Portuguese coast. Project Biomar PT, course No 13, 120 p.					Carvalho S., Marques J.C., Banha M.M., Cancela-da-Fonseca L. (2003). Macrobenthic crustacea of the bay of S. Torpes Portugal. Revista de Biologia 21: 57-70.																	Correct taxonomy in the EASIN database (figure as Magallana gigas)										Araújo R., Barbara I., Tibaldo M., Berecibar E., Díaz Tapia P., Pereira R., Santos R., Sousa-Pinto I. (2009). Checklist of benthic marine algae of northern Portugal. Botanica Marina 52: 24-46.				Correct taxonomy in the EASIN database (figure as Ocenebra inornata)							The Japanese clam is a bivalve originally from Japan, and introduced in Europe in the early eighties, by aquaculture. In mainland Portugal, it is widely distributed, and appears to show an increase in abundance in the areas where it was introduced (Gaspar 2010). The commercial exploitation of this non-indigenous species proved to be important for the development of the national economy. In the Tagus River estuary, a demographic explosion of Japanese clam populations occurred from 2010, and this increase seems to have been associated with the decrease in the abundance of the native species Ruditapes decussatus, revealing the invasive character of that species (Gaspar et al. 2014). References: Gaspar M. (2010). Distribution, abundance and demographic structure of the Japanese clam (Ruditapes philippinarum) in the Tagus River. Report, IPIMAR, 7 p .; Gaspar M., Chainho P., Costa J.L. (2014). Distribution, abundance and demographic structure of the Japanese clam (Ruditapes philippinarum) in the Tagus River. Report, IPMA, Oceanography Center, 18 p.			Alert issued by IPMA on 21 September 2017 about the proliferation of specimens of Styela plicata with a potential negative impact on bivalve production in the Laagoa de Albufeira (Tuaty War 2017). Reference: Tuaty Guerra M.T. (2017). Styela plicata (LeSweur, 1823) an invasive AscÃdia with socio-economic impact. APA Informa 147: 5 â				Souto J., Reverter-Gil O., De Blauwe H., Fernández-Pulpeiro E. (2014). New records of Bryozoans from Portugal. Cahiers de Biologie Marine 55: 129-150.			Carvalho S., Marques J.C., Banha M.M., Cancela-da-Fonseca L. (2003). Macrobenthic crustacea of the bay of S. Torpes Portugal. Revista de Biologia 21: 57-70.																	Correct taxonomy in the EASIN database (figure as Magallana gigas)										Araújo R., Barbara I., Tibaldo M., Berecibar E., Díaz Tapia P., Pereira R., Santos R., Sousa-Pinto I. (2009). Checklist of benthic marine algae of northern Portugal. Botanica Marina 52: 24-46.				Correct taxonomy in the EASIN database (figure as Ocenebra inornata)							The Japanese clam is a bivalve originally from Japan, and introduced in Europe in the early eighties, by aquaculture. In mainland Portugal, it is widely distributed, and appears to show an increase in abundance in the areas where it was introduced (Gaspar 2010). The commercial exploitation of this non-indigenous species proved to be important for the development of the national economy. In the Tagus River estuary, a demographic explosion of Japanese clam populations occurred from 2010, and this increase seems to have been associated with the decrease in the abundance of the native species Ruditapes decussatus, revealing the invasive character of that species (Gaspar et al. 2014). References: Gaspar M. (2010). Distribution, abundance and demographic structure of the Japanese clam (Ruditapes philippinarum) in the Tagus River. Report, IPIMAR, 7 p .; Gaspar M., Chainho P., Costa J.L. (2014). Distribution, abundance and demographic structure of the Japanese clam (Ruditapes philippinarum) in the Tagus River. Report, IPMA, Oceanography Center, 18 p.			Alert issued by IPMA on 21 September 2017 about the proliferation of specimens of Styela plicata with a potential negative impact on bivalve production in the Laagoa de Albufeira (Tuaty War 2017). Reference: Tuaty Guerra M.T. (2017). Styela plicata (LeSweur, 1823) an invasive AscÃdia with socio-economic impact. APA Informa 147: 5 â				Souto J., Reverter-Gil O., De Blauwe H., Fernández-Pulpeiro E. (2014). New records of Bryozoans from Portugal. Cahiers de Biologie Marine 55: 129-150.
Integration rule type parameter
Integration rule description parameter
Integration rule type criteria
Integration rule description criteria
GES extent threshold												15.00	15.00	15.00	15.00	15.00	15.00	15.00	15.00	15.00
GES extent achieved												9.00	9.00	9.00	9.00	9.00	9.00	9.00	9.00	9.00
GES extent unit												Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species
GES achieved	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description overall status	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 9 were reported in MRU- B. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 9 were reported in MRU- B. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 9 were reported in MRU- B. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 9 were reported in MRU- B. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 9 were reported in MRU- B. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 9 were reported in MRU- B. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 9 were reported in MRU- B. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 9 were reported in MRU- B. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 9 were reported in MRU- B. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â
Assessments period	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018
Related pressures	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species
Related targets	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont

Sub Part of territorial continental waters (ABI-PT-AA-CONT_D2C)

Simplified table

GES component	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2	D2
Feature	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species	Established non-indigenous species
Element	Amphibalanus eburneus	Celleporaria brunnea	Cynoscion regalis	Didemnum vexillum	Hesperibalanus fallax	Molgula occidentalis	Schizoporella errata	Styela canopus	Acartia (Acanthacartia) tonsa	Amathia verticillata	Amphibalanus amphitrite	Anotrichium furcellatum	Antithamnion amphigeneum	Antithamnion densum	Antithamnion hubbsii	Antithamnionella spirographidis	Antithamnionella ternifolia	Asparagopsis armata	Asparagopsis taxiformis	Austrominius modestus	Blackfordia virginica	Bonnemaisonia hamifera	Botrylloides violaceus	Bugula neritina	Bugulina fulva	Callinectes sapidus	Caprella scaura	Chaetopleura angulata	Codium fragile subsp. fragile	Colpomenia peregrina	Corbicula fluminea	Cordylophora caspia	Crassostrea gigas	Cynoscion regalis	Dasya sessilis	Desdemona ornata	Fundulus heteroclitus	Goniadella gracilis	Gracilaria vermiculophylla	Gymnodinium catenatum	Gymnodinium microreticulatum	Isolda pulchella	Lomentaria hakodatensis	Melanothamnus harveyi	Microcosmus squamiger	Potamopyrgus antipodarum	Prionospio pulchra	Procambarus clarkii	Pyropia suborbiculata	Rhithropanopeus harrisii	Ruditapes philippinarum	Sargassum muticum	Scageliopsis patens	Styela plicata	Ulva australis	Watersipora subtorquata	Acartia (Acanthacartia) tonsa	Amathia verticillata	Amphibalanus amphitrite	Anotrichium furcellatum	Antithamnion amphigeneum	Antithamnion densum	Antithamnion hubbsii	Antithamnionella spirographidis	Antithamnionella ternifolia	Asparagopsis armata	Asparagopsis taxiformis	Austrominius modestus	Blackfordia virginica	Bonnemaisonia hamifera	Botrylloides violaceus	Bugula neritina	Bugulina fulva	Callinectes sapidus	Caprella scaura	Chaetopleura angulata	Codium fragile subsp. fragile	Colpomenia peregrina	Corbicula fluminea	Cordylophora caspia	Crassostrea gigas	Cynoscion regalis	Dasya sessilis	Desdemona ornata	Fundulus heteroclitus	Goniadella gracilis	Gracilaria vermiculophylla	Gymnodinium catenatum	Gymnodinium microreticulatum	Isolda pulchella	Lomentaria hakodatensis	Melanothamnus harveyi	Microcosmus squamiger	Potamopyrgus antipodarum	Prionospio pulchra	Procambarus clarkii	Pyropia suborbiculata	Rhithropanopeus harrisii	Ruditapes philippinarum	Sargassum muticum	Scageliopsis patens	Styela plicata	Ulva australis	Watersipora subtorquata
Element code	421138	394868	159313	250126	733520	103790	111527	103926	345943	851581	421137	144505	494896	144511	214070	144521	163275	144438	144439	712167	117313	144442	148715	111158	834010	107379	236551	848025	145086	145856	181580	117428	836033	159313	232221	130902	159306	130145	236157	109784	232813	157441	232230	1027787	236666	147123	558845	465540	699639	107414	231750	494791	144692	103936	660661	111592	345943	851581	421137	144505	494896	144511	214070	144521	163275	144438	144439	712167	117313	144442	148715	111158	834010	107379	236551	848025	145086	145856	181580	117428	836033	159313	232221	130902	159306	130145	236157	109784	232813	157441	232230	1027787	236666	147123	558845	465540	699639	107414	231750	494791	144692	103936	660661	111592
Element code source	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	EU	EU	Other	EU	Other	Other	EU	Other	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	Other	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	Other
Criterion	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C1	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C2	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3	D2C3
Parameter	Presence	Presence	Presence	Presence	Presence	Presence	Presence	Presence	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other
Parameter other									Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status	Population Status
Threshold value upper
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.	Basis for the assessment of primary criterion D2C1.
Threshold value source
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper
Value achieved lower
Value unit	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species	(number of) species
Value unit other
Proportion threshold value
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit
Trend	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Parameter achieved	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Description parameter	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.	When analyzing the evolution of the number of non-indigenous species in the continent subdivision, it was found that since 2000, 51% of the non-indigenous species in the subdivision of the continent of Portugal have been registered. If we consider the time interval corresponding to the present evaluation cycle, there is an increase of new occurrences of non-indigenous species of about 14%. Of the newly registered species, only 13% (2 species) are established, and none exhibited invasive behavior. In MRU-A, it was found that the species Cynoscion regalis is established.
Related indicator	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species	Non-indigenous species
Criteria status	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description criteria	And only Cynoscion regalis is already established.	And only Cynoscion regalis is already established.	And only Cynoscion regalis is already established.	And only Cynoscion regalis is already established.	And only Cynoscion regalis is already established.	And only Cynoscion regalis is already established.	And only Cynoscion regalis is already established.	And only Cynoscion regalis is already established.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.	The existing data is not sufficient to assess the environmental status of the marine environment and the transitional waters of mainland Portugal according to this criterion.
Element status	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Description element			Morais P., Teodósio M.A. (2016). The transatlantic introduction of weakfish Cynoscion regalis (Bloch & Schneider, 1801) (Sciaenidae, Pisces) into Europe. BioInvasions Records, Rapid Communication, 5, 2016 REABIC Open Access.		Tristancho Ruiz S. (2015). The status of the invasive sea squirts and barnacles found in the marinas and ports of Algarve, southern Portugal. Master thesis submitted for the partial fulfilment of the title of Master of Science in Marine Biology, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade do Algarve	Tristancho Ruiz S. (2015). The status of the invasive sea squirts and barnacles found in the marinas and ports of Algarve, southern Portugal. Master thesis submitted for the partial fulfilment of the title of Master of Science in Marine Biology, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade do Algarve.		Tristancho Ruiz S. (2015). The status of the invasive sea squirts and barnacles found in the marinas and ports of Algarve, southern Portugal. Master thesis submitted for the partial fulfilment of the title of Master of Science in Marine Biology, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade do Algarve.			Carvalho S., Marques J.C., Banha M.M., Cancela-da-Fonseca L. (2003). Macrobenthic crustacea of the bay of S. Torpes Portugal. Revista de Biologia 21: 57-70.																														Amorim A., Dale B., Godinho R., Brotas V. (2001). Gymnodinium catenatum-like (Dinophyceae) cysts in recent sediments from the coast of Portugal. Phycologia 40: 572-582			Araújo R., Barbara I., Tibaldo M., Berecibar E., Díaz Tapia P., Pereira R., Santos R., Sousa-Pinto I. (2009). Checklist of benthic marine algae of northern Portugal. Botanica Marina 52: 24-46.												Souto J., Reverter-Gil O., De Blauwe H., Fernández-Pulpeiro E. (2014). New records of Bryozoans from Portugal. Cahiers de Biologie Marine 55: 129-150.			Carvalho S., Marques J.C., Banha M.M., Cancela-da-Fonseca L. (2003). Macrobenthic crustacea of the bay of S. Torpes Portugal. Revista de Biologia 21: 57-70.																														Amorim A., Dale B., Godinho R., Brotas V. (2001). Gymnodinium catenatum-like (Dinophyceae) cysts in recent sediments from the coast of Portugal. Phycologia 40: 572-582			Araújo R., Barbara I., Tibaldo M., Berecibar E., Díaz Tapia P., Pereira R., Santos R., Sousa-Pinto I. (2009). Checklist of benthic marine algae of northern Portugal. Botanica Marina 52: 24-46.												Souto J., Reverter-Gil O., De Blauwe H., Fernández-Pulpeiro E. (2014). New records of Bryozoans from Portugal. Cahiers de Biologie Marine 55: 129-150.
Integration rule type parameter
Integration rule description parameter
Integration rule type criteria
Integration rule description criteria
GES extent threshold	15.00	15.00	15.00	15.00	15.00	15.00	15.00	15.00
GES extent achieved	8.00	8.00	8.00	8.00	8.00	8.00	8.00	8.00
GES extent unit	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species	Number of newly-introduced species
GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	GES achieved	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description overall status	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 8 were reported in MRU- C. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 8 were reported in MRU- C. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 8 were reported in MRU- C. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 8 were reported in MRU- C. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 8 were reported in MRU- C. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 8 were reported in MRU- C. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 8 were reported in MRU- C. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	Of the 105 reported non-indigenous species, around 15 were considered newly introduced non-indigenous species (from 2012-2018), i.e. species not known to be present in the area in the previous assessment period.Of these, 8 were reported in MRU- C. A threshold of 15 is considered because no thresholds are defined at sub-regional level, i.e. for this subdivision, it was decided that the most appropriate one would be to refer to the total number of new NIS registrations in mainland Portugal as a threshold. In an attempt to be consistent with the decision of a threshold for each sub-region, the reasoning made for the subdivision of the continent was: âthe threshold reflects the total number of new NIS registrations in each 6-year periodâ. In this second cycle of MSFD implementation, mainland Portugal included NIS present in transitional waters, which is why the number of NIS inventoried changed so much (from 38 in 2012 to 105 in 2018).	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â	However, for around 29Â % (31 species), the status of populations is indeterminate, and only 6Â % (6 species) have not been established. The 65Â % of non-indigenous species established in the mainland subdivision include some that may be invasive. There is no information available to assess criterion D2C3, and therefore no species is assessed according to criterion DC. Nevertheless, adverse effects have been reported for two species of bivalve Corbicula fluminea and Ruditapes philippinarum (adverse effects on native biodiversity as well as socio-economic impacts), and for the species of AscÃdia Styela plicata (adverse effects on bivalve production in a coastal lagoon)â
Assessments period	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018
Related pressures	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Established non-indigenous species Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species	Input of genetically modified species and translocation of native species Input of microbial pathogens Input or spread of non-indigenous species Loss of, or change to, natural biological communities due to cultivation of animal or plant species Newly-introduced non-indigenous species
Related targets	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont	ABIPT-T1-D2Cont ABIPT-T2-D2Cont