This document summarizes a project that tested the use of seaweeds as biofilters in land-based aquaculture systems. Seaweeds were able to effectively remove nutrients like ammonia, nitrates and phosphates from the aquaculture wastewater. Both Porphyra and Ulva seaweeds performed well as biofilters and their cultivation led to biomass yields that could potentially be used for applications in foods, feeds or pharmaceuticals. Initial results found that protein levels in the seaweeds increased compared to wild varieties, demonstrating nutrient uptake, and crude extracts showed antibacterial properties. The project demonstrated the viability of seaweed biofilters for improving the environmental sustainability of land-based aquaculture.

1. Aqua By-Products 1-04 AL
Joe McElwee
IFA Aquaculture

2. Aqua By-Products 1-04 AL
Joe McElwee
Partners IFA Aquaculture
Irish Farmers’ Association (IFA) Aquaculture – Lead
CIMA – Centro de Investigacions Marinas
NSL
Norsk Sjombedrifters Landsforening

3. Aqua By-Products 1-04 AL
Joe McElwee
Objectives IFA Aquaculture
To compile a databank of information on waste management suppliers,
facilities and consultants to provide an electronic ”one-stop shop” for
aquaculture and processing companies. to find appropriate outlets for by-
products of their business,within national and EU regulations. The project
aims to benefit both sectors by increasing awareness, communication and
networking possibilities through the Internet over an economically and
geographically diverse sector.
Objective and targets: To optimise the range and volume of by-products from the
aquaculture industry that are re-used or recycled by:
■ Increasing awareness among the industry of the potential outlets for its by-products
■ Increase awareness in the by-product processing sector of raw materials available
■ To encourage the development, improvement and dissemination of techniques and
technology to re-use and recycle by products
■ To develop a trans-national and inter-regional network of raw material and solution
suppliers via a central database which is updated regularly

4. www.aquabyproducts.com
“With the waste industry worth €1.2
!
Billion, coupled with new laws for recycling
and product development, we should
seriously examine all possible avenues of
waste disposal and recycling/regeneration,
including both Organic and Inorganic
waste items.”
Waste Meeting-Sunday Business Post -Jan 2006

5. www.aquabyproducts.com
“We have moved from a hump and dump
!
industry to huge investment in new
products, markets and technology. There is
an increasingly sophisticated and technical
approach to waste management, with a
focus on compliance and regulation”
Irish Waste Industry View Conference 2006

6. Has the website been successful !
Over 5,000 Hits Definite Irish Industry
! !
Interest
From all around the world
!
Quantification of Waste
!
Huge European Interest
!
necessary
New Technology &
!
Irish companies proposal
!
information becoming
for business with Partners
available
Government/Agency
!
New Grant Aid Schemes
!
support and vision
from Irish Government
Logistic’s & Management
!
of waste

7. www.aquabyproducts.com
The way forward!
Need to continue the successful web site
!
Assess and quantify Irish Production of Waste
!
This will require further significant funding for
!
Administration and Operation of website
Examine further “Partnership” projects/business with
!
industry Waste Companies in Ireland
Look at the future European developments in both
!
regulatory and monetary implications with regards to waste
Establish links with new industry/products that utilise our
!
waste, ie Cosmetics & Plastics

8. www.aquabyproducts.com
Assess a project with significant business potential
!
between the three partners
Entice & encourage Waste company participation
!
between the three partner countries
Use the geographical diversity to develop the
!
aquaculture waste byproduct industry
We have achieved exposure, divested much
!
knowledge, established many serious business
contacts…..so lets take it to the next step!

9. Business on a real
Scale

10. FORUM AquaReg May 2006
MODIFIED ATMOSPHERE PACKAGING FOR COLD CHAIN
MODIFIED ATMOSPHERE PACKAGING FOR COLD CHAIN
TRANSPORT OF FRESH MUSSEL OVER SHORT AND LONG
TRANSPORT OF FRESH MUSSEL OVER SHORT AND LONG
DISTANCES
DISTANCES
(Project ID: 2-05 AL, AquaGair)
Participants
Centro Tecnológico del Mar- Fundación CETMAR
Centro Tecnológico del Mar- Fundación CETMAR
(Galicia)
(Galicia)
Marine Research Institute IIM-CSIC (Galicia)
Marine Research IIM-CSIC (Galicia)
Letterkenny Institute of Technology LYIT (Ireland)
Letterkenny
Collaboration: OPMEGA (Galician Mussels Producers Association)
Collaboration: OPMEGA (Galician Mussels Producers Association)

11. 1. Project Aims
• Use of Modified Atmosphere Packaging (MAP) technologies to extend the shelf
life of fresh mussels in hermetic packaging.
•Design and optimization of in-pack gas atmosphere in order to obtain maximum
survival of packed mussels.
–active atmosphere modification, high barrier films, to achieve maximum
benefits in a short time.
–comparison of viability of MAP mussels to air packed mussels
–the effect of different in-pack oxygen concentrations on mussels survival and
determination of optimum in-pack gas concentrations
–the effect of temperature on mussel survival
•Transfer of optimised MAP system to other geographical varieties and to study
the effect of MAP in Galician mussel (Mytillus galloprovincialis) and Irish mussel
(Mytillus edulis), defining optimum survival conditions for both species.
•Determine the effect of different MAP conditions on Quality Indices
• Verify mussel survival rates and quality through the cold chain.

12. 2. Results: Effect of O2 concentration and temperature
60
50
% Mortality
65%
40
75%
30
85%
20 Air
10
0
1 3 6 8 10
Storage Time (Days)
Mortality rates of bottom mussels stored at 7-8°C
4
65%
% Mortality
3
75%
85%
2
Air Sample
1
0
1 3 6 8 10
Storage Time (Days)
Mortality rates of bottom mussels stored at 2-3°C

13. 2. Results: The effect of O2 concentration on rope mussels
6
65%
5
75%
% Mortality
4
85%
3
Air
2
1
0
2 5 7 9
Storage Tim e (days)
Mortality Rates of rope mussels stored at 2-3°C

14. 2. Results: The Effect of Cold Transport
Irish mussels
40
Air
35
MAP
30 Air transport
MAP transport
25
% mortality
20
Galician mussels 15
40 10
Air
35 5
MAP
Air transport
30 0
MAP transport 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
25 Days
% mortality
20
15
10
5
0
% mortality after cold
% mortality cold
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Days
transport (storage 2°C)
transport (storage 2°C)

15. 2. Results: The Effect of TemperatureTransport
35
Control w ithout transport 6ºC
Transport 3,5 ºC
30
Transport 10ºC
25
20
% mortality
15
10
1ºC
5
Galician mussels
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Days

16. 2. Results: Quality
Organoleptic Characteristics:
Mussels stored in high oxygen and low temperature performed better than mussels
stored in air and higher temperatures.
Microbiological Quality:
Tests: VRBA at 44°C and 32°C, PCA at 4°C and 35°C
In general microbiological quality seems to improve with MAP,
however results are inconclusive

17. 3. Conclusions:
•Mussels stored at lower temperatures have longer shelf lives.
•Mussels stored under high oxygen concentrations have a longer shelf
life than those stored in air, as reflected by better sensory ratings and
lower mortality rates.
•Mussels stored at 85% oxygen have a longer shelf life than those stored
at lower oxygen concentrations, as reflected by better sensory ratings
and lower mortality rates.
•Rope mussels react at least as well to high oxygen MAP as bottom
farmed mussels.
•Mussels stored under MAP conditions are suitable for cold-chain
transport
•Microbial analysis of high oxygen MAP mussels is inconclusive.

18. BIOPURALG: reducing the environmental
impact of land based aquaculture through
cultivation of seaweeds
Stefan Kraan
Irish Seaweed Centre, Martin Ryan Institute, National University of Ireland,
Galway, Ireland
SINTEF, Fisheries and Aquaculture, NO-7465 TRONDHEIM, Norway
Oyster Creek Seafoods Limited, Maree, Oranmore, County Galway, Ireland

19. Introduction
• Discharge of nutrients from land based finfish
and shellfish culitivation systems.
• Major concern everywhere.
• Marine algae can act as bio-filters and remove
pollutants producing a clean waste water
effluent.
• The principle is to direct effluent water from
rearing ponds into tanks in which unattached
seaweeds are maintained in permanent motion
using aeration.
• This allows for the production of value added
seaweed biomass
• Sources for cosmetics, pharmaceutical, fine
chemicals, biomedicines, food and animal feed

20. • Protein is the principal source of nitrogenous pollution in
fish and shellfish aquaculture, either from excess feed or
excretions and reaches the water, mainly as dissolved
ammonia
• The removal of this pollution is possible using marine
algae as bio-filters.
• The SME partners in this project is concerned of the levels
in his discharge water from the oyster holding units.
• Introduction of a seaweed bio-filter can resolve his
problem while producing another value added product,
i.e., seaweed biomass.

21. Main objectives
• Design and set up seaweed biofilter system for land based fin-
fish hatchery and for Oyster and mussel holding unit
• Optimum species evaluation
• Testing the ability of the chosen species to strip N and P from
(discharge) waters
• Measuring protein levels in cultivated species and comparisons
with similar species from pristine areas
• Measuring biomass of the cultivated seaweeds
• Screen cultivated seaweed species for bioactivity against fish
and human pathogens
• Explore applications of the harvestable algal biomass for the
development of food, animal feed and pharmaceuticals

22. What species?
• Choice of species
• 13 of 29 recent investigations have used Ulva as the
experimental seaweed in integrated systems. The only
commercial scale seaweed-based integrated fish & abalone
farm in operation uses Ulva as a biofilters to remove
nutrients from the water and also as feed for the Abalone.
However, other algae may be better candidates, both as
biofilters and as a value-added secondary product.
• Experience with Palmaria and Asparagopsis
• The red alga Porphyra was chosen for the first trials in
this project.

23. Pros and cons
Pros
• High production and nutrient accumulation
• Valuable pigments
• Excellent Abalone and Urchin feed
• Different species available at different times
Cons
• Seasonality
• Temperature sensitivity
• Loss of tissue with onset of reproduction

24. Methods
• Seaweed Biofilter system
• A cascading tank system (3m3 – 2m3 –
1m3) was supplied with UV-treated
effluent water from the fin-fish hatchery at
MRI Carna
• Seaweed tanks were stocked with field
collected Porphyra at a density of ~0.5 kg
m-³ (1.5, 1 and 0.5 kg resp.)
• Thalli were kept in motion by vigorous
aeration. Biomass was removed from the
tanks weekly and the wet weight
measured. Tanks were restocked at the
original stocking density after
measurement.
• Water temperature and light intensity were
continuously monitored using in-situ
dataloggers.
.

25. • A second larger system established at Oyster Creek
New design of Bio-filter tanks: Two tank-systems
installed
• Total capacity of biofilter 24 m3
• Header tank 120 m3
• Stocking densities 5,1.5 and 1 kg

26. Nutrient measurements
• Ammonia, Nitrate, Nitrite and Phosphate
• Chemical reaction and measured
spectrophotometrically
• Protein (Kjeldahl)

27. Antibacterial activity
• Antibacterial activity of biofilter species
• Bacterial inhibition was evaluated as growth inhibition of specific
test bacteria by the agar diffusion method.
• Two bacteria isolated from diseased cod juveniles; Listonella
anguillarum (HI610) and Marinomonas sp. Were used.
• Sterile 6 mm paper discs were treated with 2 x 25 µl of seaweed-
extract or solvent (negative control) and allowed to dry between
each addition.
• Discs were thereafter applied to agar plates seeded with 100 µl of 24
h culture of test bacteria and incubated (20°C). Inhibition zones
(radius from discs in mm) were registered after 24 hours.

28. Results
• Initial results have shown that Porphyra can be
used successfully as a biofilter for removing excess
nutrient from Irish land-based aquaculture
operations.
• A significant reduction in ammonia, phosphate and
nitrate has been achieved in the initial trial.
• Yields of up to 34 gFW m-2 day-1 were achieved
but this decreased as the temperature rose.
• Therefore over summer months Ulva as biofilter

30. Nutrient reduction in mg/l
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
NH4 in NH4 out NO2 in NO2 out NO3 in NO3 out PO4 PO4

31. -2 -1
Average Monthly Yield Ulva (gFW m day )
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
2
R = 0.3373
5.00
0.00
july aug sept oct nov

32. Tank 1 Tank 2 Tank 3

33. Nutrient reduction in mg/l
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
NH4 in NH4 out NO2 in NO2 out NO3 in NO3 out PO4 PO4

34. Average nutrient removal using
Porphyra and Ulva
100
Ulva
Porphyra
80
60
40
20
0
NH4 NO2 NO3 PO4

35. Average nutrient removal using
Porphyra and Ulva per unit yield of algae
7
Ulva
Porphyra
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
NH4 NO2 NO3 PO4

36. Bioactivity of crude extracts

37. Initial Protein results
• Protein levels increased slightly with an average of
5-10%
• Ulva around 30% of dry weight compared to 20-
25% in species from pristine sites
• Porphyra around 35% compared to 25-30% in wild
species
• More samples to be analysed

38. Other achieved outputs
• New linkages and enterprise contacts: Contact made with
other land-based aquaculture operations interested in the
technology
(e.g. Abalone producers)
• Planning for related proposal with current and other
international partners
• New design of Bio-filter tanks: Two tank-systems installed
and being tested
• New products :
! Bio-active compounds, Bioactive properties identified in
crude extracts
! High protein abalone and urchin feed

39. Major problems encountered
• Planning permission
– 1.6 year delay for Oyster Creek
• DHL
– Samples for Sintef
(frozen seaweeds) stuck in
customs. Happened twice
(10 days and 31 days) with
winter and spring samples

40. Conclusions
• Porphyra dioica is a suitable species for use as a biofilter under
Irish conditions
• A consistent harvest of excess material was obtained, although the
yield dropped as temperatures increased. This fall off in biomass
production would suggest that this species is not the most suitable
during the summer
• Trials using the green alga, Ulva lactuca, has proven to be suitable
over the summer and autumn period
• Ulva proved to be a good nutrient scrubber and a consistent harvest
of excess material was obtained. The potential benefits of using
other species is also being considered
• Cultivated seaweed biomass can be used for other products
• Ammonia and nitrate can be stripped from the water using the dual
species system at rates varying from 60% up to 90% of the nutrient
input and Phosphate at 40% removal

41. Conclusions
• Antibiotic activity against fish and human pathogens has
been observed in both Ulva, Palmaria and Porphyra
extracts.
• The results show that seaweed biofilters can be used in
land based aquaculture systems to clean waste water
streams while providing a value added product.
• Under Irish conditions it is suggested to use a biofilter
system with Porphyra from October to April and Ulva
from May to September for the highest rate of nutrient
removal from land-based aquaculture waste water streams.

42. Challenges
• Proving feasibility at commercial scale
• Ensuring economic viability of the technology
• To do this we need the opportunity to test the large
system at Oyster Creek (extension?)

43. Thank you for your attention

44. CARRASEA
Approach to a sustainable exploitation of carrageen
seaweed resources in Galicia and Ireland
Assesing the state of populations of the carrageenan producing red algae in Galicia and
Ireland comparing the population dynamics of exploited and unexploited populations
•LPP D.X .Recursos Mariños (Galicia)
•PP CETMAR (Galicia), USC (Galicia), Irish Seaweed Centre (MRI-NUIG) (BMW)
AQUALINK

45. Background
Similarities Galicia:
!Carrageenan extraction industry
!Carrageen industry
!Decline in harvest (1200 T in 70s
!Poor knowledge about resource to 225 T in 2005)
!Resources are under exploited
!Harvesting unchanged BMW:
!Decline in harvest !Health food markets and
!Demand higher than supply. seavegetable sector
!Decline in harvest (300 T in 60s to 40
!Sustainability??
T in 2005)
Main goal:
Development of resource management knowledge to support the
sustainable exploitation of carrageen moss.

46. Main activities:
!Assessment of the current state of the carrageen harvesting
sector in Ireland (Galway-BMW) and Galicia.
!Assessment of the impact of harvesting activity on the
population of seaweeds of interest (recovery and productivity).
!Study of the dynamics of the carrageenophyte populations.
!Quantitative and qualitative analysis of carrageen production.
!Study of the genetic variability.

47. Assessment of the current state of the carrageen harvesting sector
1) Carragen harvesting laws: BMW: Foreshore Act.
Galicia: Ley Pesca; Decreto 423.
2) Harvesting licence requirements: BMW: Seaweed harvesting- Foreshore licence (DoC,M&NR).
Galicia: “Explotation plain” (CPAM).
3) Profile of Harvesters: BMW: Mostly people over 40.
Galicia: Mostly people over 40.
4) Main activity of harvesters: BMW: farmers or inshore fishermen.
Galicia: shellfishers or farmers.
5) Harvesters number: BMW: 100?
Galicia: 500?
6) T/year harvested: BMW: 40 T/year DW (2005).
Galicia: 225 T/year DW (2005).
7) Main markets: BMW: Sea-vegetable / healthfood market, cosmetic.
Galicia: Carrageen extraction
8) Price/kg: BMW: 2.5 to 3.2 €/kg (DW).
Galicia: 0.75 €/kg (DW).
9) Level of organization: BMW: Individual and occasional activity,
co-op formation encouraged.
Galicia: Fishermen association and harvesters `
commissioned by processing industry

48. Threats
! Lack of harvesters.
! Lack of interest in younger generations.
! Lack of business diversity.
! Low price.
! Cheap imports and competition.
! Pollution.
! Impact of invasive species.

49. TARGET SPECIES
Common name: Irish/carrageen moss, “liquen”
Chondrus crispus Mastocarpus stellatus

50. Life cycle of Chondrus crispus
Carposoporphytes
Exploited phases:
Male
Gametophyte
Gametophytes and
Female
Tetrasporophytes.
Gametophyte
Carpospores
Tetraspores
Mastocarpus stellatus
Only gametophyte phase is
Tetrasporophyte
exploited. Tetrasporophyte is a
microscopic encrusting thallus.
Life cycle of Chondrus from Chen and Mc
Lachlan (1972)

51. SAMPLING AREAS
4 sites around Galway bay with different wave exposure. For 3 sites: on the North (Cantabric Sea),
each site, 2 spots, upper and lower shore. Middle (Costa da Morte) and South of
Galicia.

52. Assessment of the impact of harvesting activity on the
population of seaweeds of interest (recovery and productivity).
Chondrus crispus Laxe
Total
denudation
Cut
December 2004 before harvesting December 2004 after harvesting March 2005
June 2005 September 2005 January 2006

53. Time series of Finavarra Denude regrowth Jan 05-Jan 06
January 2005 March 2005 May 2005
September 2005 November 2005 January 2006

54. Successional studies related to exploitation techniques based on the percentage of
the plot area covered by carrageenan seaweeds
Chondrus crispus Mastocarpus stellatus
% %
100 100
80 80
60 60
MOUGÁS
40 40
20 20
0 0
N04 D J05 F M A M J J A S O N04 J06 N04 D J05 F M A M J J A S O N04 J06
%
%
100
100
Control
80
80
Pick up
60
60
LAXE
Cut
40 40
20
Denudation
20
0 0
N04 D J05 F M A M J J A S O N04 J06 N04 D J05 F M A M J J A S O N04 J06
% %
100 100
80
80
SAN ROMÁN
60
60
40
40
20
20
0
0
N04 D J05 F M A M J J A S O N04 J06
N04 D J05 F M A M J J A S O N04 J06

55. Assessment of the impact of harvesting activity on the
population of seaweeds of interest (recovery and
productivity): Galicia and BMW.
! After one year, the areas where the algae were hand picked or cut,
recovered their initial status for both species (C. crispus and M.
Stellatus), reaching values close to those of the control areas.
! In the case of total denudation, the rate of recovery was lower,
although differences related to the locations were observed.

56. Dynamics of the carragenophyte population analysis (size classes)

57. Sizing of Chondrus samples

58. Chondrus crispus recruitment
(% number of fronds < 5 cm)
Mougás Laxe San Román
100 100 100
90 < 5 cm
90 90
> 5 cm
80 80 80
70 70 70
60 60 60
50 50
50
40 40
40
30 30
30
20 20
20
10 10
10
0
0 0
De c _04 F e b_05 Apr J un Aug Oc t J a n_06
De c _04 F e b_05 Apr J un Aug Oc t J a n_06 De c _04 F e b_05 Apr J un Aug Oc t J a n_06

59. Seasonal changes of gametophytes and tetrasporophytes
in Chondrus crispus populations (% N)
Laxe (Galicia)
%
100
80
60
40
20
0
Dec Feb_05 Apr Jun Aug Oct Jan_06
Braizon (BMW)
90
80
% average for site
70
60
Gametophyte
50
Tetrasporophyte
40
30
20
10
0
5
5 05
5
5 05 5 05 06
5 5
5 5
l-0 g-0 p-0 ct-0
-0
-0 b-0 -0
r-0 pr- v- ec- an-
y n
n u
a a No
Ja Ju
Fe Au Se
J O
A J
M D
M

60. San Román (Galicia)
%
100
80
60
40
20
0
Dec Feb_05 Apr Jun Aug Oct Jan_06
Black Head (BMW)
90
80
% average for site
70
60
Gametophyte
50
Tetrasporophyte
40
30
20
10
0
5
5
5
5
5 5 6
5 5 5
5 5
5 -0
-0
-0
-0
-0 -0 -0
-0 -0 -0
-0 -0
-0
ul
pr ct ov
eb Mar ug
un
ay
an ec an
ep
J
J
J F A O J
N
A S D
M

61. Seasonal changes in fructified fronds of Chondrus crispus (% N )
Gametophyte Tetrasporophyte
% %
25 25
20 20 San Román
San Román
Laxe
Laxe
Mougás
15 15
Mougás
10 10
5 5
0 0
Dec_04 Feb_05 Apr Jun Aug Oct Jan_06 Dec_04 Feb_05 Apr Jun Aug Oct Jan_06

62. Dynamics of the carrageenophyte populations
!Recruitment of juvenile fronds was observed during the year for both species in the
two regions.
!Temporal and spatial variation in the recruitment rate were observed.
!The growth rate of the C. crispus fronds was more or less uniform along the year for
the three Galician sites. In BMW, some differences were recorded between sheltered
and exposed sites.
! Differences in the proportion of gametophytic and tetrasporophytic fronds of C.
crispus were observed among locations. Also, there were seasonal variations among
and between populations.
!The growth rate of the M. stellatus fronds reached the maximum values in summer for
the three Galician sites.
!The maximum percentages of fructified fronds were recorded in autumn and winter in
both regions.

63. Quantitative and qualitative carrageenan analysis.
Extraction Homogenization Concentration
and filtration Precipitation
Coagulation
Freeze dried
Crude
extracts
Filtration

64. Quantitative analysis of carrageenan production
Galicia
Chondrus crispus tetrasporophytes
% %
Chondrus crispus gam etophytes
70 Crude carrageenan content
Crude carrageenan content
70
60
60
50
50
40
40
30
30
20
San Román
20 San Román
Laxe Laxe
10 10
Mougás Mougás
0 0
DEC_ 0 4 FEB_ 0 5 APR_ 0 5 J UN_ 0 5 AUG_ 0 5 OCT_ 0 5 J AN_ 0 6 DEC_ 0 4 FEB_ 0 5 APR_ 0 5 J UN_ 0 5 AUG_ 0 5 OCT_ 0 5 J AN_ 0 6
M astocarpus stellatus gam etophytes
%
Crude carrageenan content
70
60
50
40
30
20 San Román
Laxe
10 Mougás
0
DEC_ 0 4 FEB_ 0 5 APR_ 0 5 J UN_ 0 5 AUG_ 0 5 OCT_ 0 5 J AN_ 0 6

65. M astocarpus stell atus gam etophytes
Crude carrageenan content
% DW
Galicia BMW
60,00
47,79
50,00
38,1
36,8 34,2
40,00 34,9
33,58
30,81
30,00
20,00
10,00
0,00
al
án
n
xe
ad
ra
s
o
gá
d
ar
La
om
he
iz
id
ou
av
ra
Sp
ck
R
nn
B
M
la
n
Fi
B
Sa

66. Qualitative carrageenan analysis
1H NMR spectra of commercial carrageenan
(Sigma – Aldrich)
λ-carrageenan
κ-carrageenan
ι-carrageenan
Chemical shifts referred to acetone 2.225 ppm

67. Qualitative carrageenan analysis
Seasonal changes in carrageenan composition of
Chondrus crispus gametophytes
%
80
70
60
ν
50
ι
µ
40
κ
30
20
10
0
12-04 03-05 06-05 09-05 12-04 03-05 06-05 09-05 12-04 03-05 06-05 09-05
Laxe Mougás San Román

68. Qualitative carrageenan analysis
Seasonal changes in carrageenan composition of
Mastocarpus stellatus gametophytes
%
80
70
60
ν
50
ι
µ
40
κ
30
20
10
0
12-04 03-05 06-05 09-05 12-04 03-05 06-05 09-05 12-04 03-05 06-05 09-05
Laxe Mougás San Román

69. Qualitative analysis of carrageenan production.
FT-IR carrageenan spectra
Ch. c. TEF
Ch.c. GF
M. s. GF

70. Quantitative and qualitative carrageenan analysis
!The crude carrageenan extracts for both species fluctuated between 20
and 50% of the dry weight in the two regions.
!The highest values of carrageenans for C. crispus and M stellatus
gametophytes were observed in San Román – Galicia (values higher than
60% were observed).
!Regarding the tetrasporophytes, differences among locations were not
observed.
!There were seasonal differences in carrageenans quantities:
•Maximum values in summer and minimum values in early spring in
Galicia (C. crispus and M. stellatus).
•Maximum values in late autumn and the minimum in summer in
BMW (M. stellatus).

71. RAPD comparison bettween individual and bulked methods
RAPD patterns obtained from individuals (lanes 1-10) and bulked genomic DNA samples (lane B),
with primer OPA-03 for Chondrus crispus and with primer OPA-10 for Mastocarpus stellatus
M 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 B M 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 B M 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 B
Chondrus crispus Mastocarpus stellatus Mastocarpus stellatus
San Román, Galicia, gametophytes Laxe, Galicia, gametophytes Spiddal, Co. Galway, gametophytes
M: molecular weight marker

72. Chondrus crispus gametophytes
Comparison among RAPD patterns obtained from bulked samples containing
genomic DNA from 10 individuals in four Galician populations
MWM SR L M PSP
MWM SR L M PSP
3000 bp
2000 bp
1000 bp
250 bp
OPA-03
OPA-02
MWM SR L M PSP MWM SR L M PSP
3000 bp
1000 bp
250 bp
OPA-13 OPA-19

73. Mastocarpus stellatus gametophytes
Comparison among RAPD patterns obtained from bulked samples containing genomic DNA
from 10 individuals in Galician populations and 8 individuals in Irish populations
SR L M B F S BR MWM
SR L M B F S BR MWM SR L M B F S BR MWM
OPA-03
OPA-02 OPA-04
MWM SR L M B F S BR MWM SR L M B F S BR SR L M B F S BR MWM
OPA-18 OPA-20
OPA-13
MWM: molecular weight marker
Galician populations- SR: San Román; L: Laxe; M: Mougás
Irish populations- B:Blackhead; F:Finavarra; S:Spiddal; BR:Brezon

74. Genetic variability
The results till now obtained show that:
! Strong genetic differences ocurred within Galician
Chondrus crispus populations
! Strong genetic differences ocurred within and
between Galician and Irish Mastocarpus stellatus
populations

75. www.carrasea.org

76. Recommendations
Future collaboration, exchange of information, and experience
between Galicia and BMW to foster development of LOW
VOLUME-HIGH VALUE SECTORS.
• Skills development / training.
• Marketing development and consumer awareness
• Results with potential use to provide scientific basis for
sustainable harvesting and resource management.
• Expansion of the sampling period is advised to clarify seasonal
variation of population dynamic and carrageenan content.
• R&D of aquaculture of carrageenophytes

77. Interreg Community
Initiative Programmes
AquaReg Forum,
Galway,
May 23rd 2006

78. Presentation overview
Interreg Programmes in Ireland
!
Features & Challenges of Interreg 2000-2006
!
Future of Interreg post 2006
!

79. Interreg Programmes 2000-2006
1. Interreg IIIA Cross Border
Ireland/Northern Ireland
Ireland/Wales
2. Interreg IIIB Transnational
Atlantic Area
North West Europe
3. Interreg IIIC Interregional

80. Cross Border regions of Europe

81. INTERREG IIIA CROSS BORDER PROGRAMMES IN
IRELAND
Ireland/Wales IIIA Programme Ireland/N.Ireland IIIA Programme

82. Interreg IIIB - Transnational

83. Interreg IIIC -
Interregional
North: Rostock, Germany
East: Vienna, Austria
South: Valencia, Spain
West: Lille, France
North
East
South
West

84. Interreg – Common themes
Polycentric development/Spatial Devlpt.
!
Accessibility & Transport infrastructure
!
ICT & the Knowledge Economy
!
The Environment, Maritime & Natural Resources
!
R & D, Innovation, Technology Transfer
!
Culture, Tourism & heritage
!
Business Linkages
!
Local development strategies
!

85. Main Beneficiaries
Universities & Research Centres
!
! Local & Regional Authorities
! Leader Groups
! Semi state bodies
! Community & Voluntary bodies
! BICs
! Private sector

86. What Interreg is worth to Ireland –
some examples
Interreg IIIA Ireland/Wales €28m
Interreg IIIB Atlantic Area €15m
Interreg IIIB North West Europe €17m
Interreg IIIC (All Zones) €7.4m

87. The BMW Regional Assembly & Interreg
National contact point for Interreg IIIB
!
Atlantic Area Programme
! Member of PSC and PMC of Atlantic Area
! PMC member of Interreg IIIA
Ireland/Northern Ireland Programme
! PSC & PMC member of Interreg IIIC
(West Zone) programme

88. Benefits of INTERREG Co-operation
The overall aim of the INTERREG initiatives has
!
been, and remains, that national borders should not be
a barrier to the balanced development and integration
of European territory.
Although the single market and EMU have been
!
strong catalysts for change, the scope for
strengthening co-operation to the mutual advantage of
border areas throughout the Community is
considerable.
The challenge is all the greater when the enlargement
!
of the Community is considered, as this has increased
the number of the EU’s internal borders and has
shifted the Community’s external borders eastwards

89. Benefits of INTERREG – contd.
INTERREG is seen to be making a significant
!
contribution towards balanced development and is
helping social and economic cohesion.
INTERREG is seen to be making a significant
!
contribution to domestic policies. It is also seen to be
a demonstration of the benefits of sharing experiences
and best practices.
Studies across the Community show respondents to
!
be keen about the added value from innovative
projects and joint investment.

90. Overall
INTERREG’s cross-border, transnational,
and inter-regional programmes are
perceived to be delivering added value
with potential for more.

91. Challenges for the future
Greater use of INTERAct by partners &
!
other EU technical support networks
! Greater State involvement in projects
! Financial Management of projects
! Greater Industry/Academia collaboration
! Greater private sector involvement
! More research by organisations into
potential partnerships
! Projects led from Ireland
! Greater sustainability of projects

92. Structural Funds Post 2006
In Dec 2005 in Brussels EU Leaders reached
!
agreement on an EU Budget of 1.045% of EU
GNI (€862 billion)
EU Leaders agreed a structural funds budget of
!
€308 billion for the 2007 – 2013 period.
Three priorities which will be funded through the
!
ERDF and the ESF.

93. Three Cohesion Policy Objectives
Objective 1 - Convergence
!
Objective 2 - Regional Competitiveness
!
and Employment
Objective 3 - Territorial Co-operation
!

94. Objective One : Convergence
This concerns Member States and regions whose per
!
capita GDP is less than 75% of the Community
average.
The key objective is to promote growth-enhancing
!
conditions and factors leading to real convergence.
Funding agreed of 81.9% or € 252 billion of
!
Structural Funds.
No Irish regions will be eligible
!

95. Objective Two : Regional
Competitiveness and employment
This will focus on the more developed Member States and
!
regions and will:
a. consist of development programmes designed to
!
help regions to anticipate and promote economic
change by strengthening their competitiveness and
attractiveness; and
b. interventions aimed at creating more and better jobs
!
by adapting the workforce to economic change.
Funding agreed of 15.7% or € 48.4 billion. Ireland’s indicative
!
allocation is €811m (which covers objectives 2 & 3)

96. Objective Three
European Territorial Co-operation.
This objective is intended to support co-
!
operation between regions at cross-border,
transnational, and inter-regional level in order
to further develop the harmonious and
balanced integration of the Union’s territory.
Funding agreed of €7.5bn
!

97. Objective 3
The ‘new’ INTERREG
INTERREG is to be an Objective in its own right.
!
It will have slightly increased funding as the
!
agreed allocation between 2007 - 2013 is €7.5bn
(2.4% ).
This compares to 2.5% or €5.8 billion of
!
Structural Funds in the current period.

98. Objective 3 - continued
Co-financing of 50% likely in most programmes
!
Decentralisation : there will be a stronger role
!
for the regions and local players
Legal Basis : there will be a new regulation –
!
the ‘European Grouping of Cross-Border Co-
operation’ ( EGCC)

99. Objective 3 – Eligibility & Priorities
! Eligibility will not be based on MS levels of GDP
! The whole of the European Union territory will be eligible
for financing of European co-operation and exchange
networks
! Priorities will be:
- Innovation, R & D, Technology Transfer
- Environment / risk prevention/ Maritime safety/coastal mgt
- Accessibility, ICT, Transport systems
- Culture, education

100. Objective 3 – Three Elements
Cross-border co-operation
!
Transnational co-operation
!
Programmes for networks and exchange of
!
experience

101. Objective 3 – Financial Allocations
(current)
Cross Border €5.8bn
!
Transnational €1.4bn
!
Interregional €300m
!

102. CROSS BORDER area
2007-2013

104. Irish participation in Interreg
2007-2013
Continuation of Ireland/Wales cross border
!
programme
Possible extension of Ireland/N. Ireland cross
!
border programme to include western Scotland
Atlantic Area Transnational continuation
!
NWE transnational continuation
!
Potential involvement in new Northern Periphery
!
programme
Interreg Interregional programme continuation
!

105. Contact Details
BMW Regional Assembly,
The Square,
Ballaghaderreen,
Co. Roscommon.
Phone: 094-9862970
Fax: 094-9862973
e-mail: info@bmwassembly.ie