Sandy coastlines are sensitive ecosystems where human activities can have considerable negative impacts. In particular, trampling by beach visitors is a disturbance that affects dune vegetation both at the species and community level. In this study we assess the effects of the limitation of human trampling on dune vegetation in a coastal protected area of Central Italy. We compare plant species diversity in two recently fenced sectors with that of an unfenced area (and therefore subject to human trampling) using rarefaction curves and a diversity/dominance approach during a two year study period. Our results indicate that limiting human trampling seems to be a key factor in driving changes in the plant diversity of dune systems. In 2007 the regression lines of species abundance as a function of rank showed steep slopes and high Y-intercept values in all sectors, indicating a comparable level of stress and dominance across the entire study site. On the contrary, in 2009 the regression lines of the two fenced sectors clearly diverge from that of the open sector, showing less steep slopes. This change in the slopes of the tendency lines, evidenced by the diversity/dominance diagrams and related to an increase in species diversity, suggests the recovery of plant communities in the two fences between 2007 and 2009. In general, plant communities subject to trampling tended to be poorer in species and less structured, since only dominant and tolerant plant species persisted. Furthermore, limiting trampling appears to have produced positive changes in the dune vegetation assemblage after a period of only two years. These results are encouraging for the management of coastal dune systems. They highlight how a simple and cost-effective management strategy, based on passive recovery conservation measures (i.e., fence building), can be a quick (1–2 years) and effective method for improving and safeguarding the diversity of dune plant communities.

Aim Habitat loss and fragmentation are amongst the greatest threats to biodiversity world-wide. However, there is still little evidence on the relative influence of these two distinct processes on biodiversity, and no study, to date, has investigated the independent contribution of structural connectivity in addition to habitat loss and fragmentation. The aim of this study is to evaluate the independent effects of habitat loss (the decrease in total amount of habitat), habitat fragmentation per se (habitat subdivision) and structural connectivity (in the form of hedgerow networks) on the distribution of seven resident forest-dependent birds in central Italy. Location Central Italy. Methods We strategically selected 30 landscapes (each of 16 km2 in size) with decreasing total amount of forest cover and with contrasting configuration of patches and contrasting lengths of hedgerow networks. Presence/absence of birds in each landscape unit was studied through point counts. Results The amount of forest cover in the landscape had the strongest relative influence on birds' occupancy, whilst habitat subdivision played a negligible role. Structural connectivity and the geographic position of the landscape unit played a relatively important role for four species. Main conclusions Our study shows the importance of disentangling the contribution of different landscape properties in determining distribution patterns. Our results are consistent with the fact that halting habitat loss and carrying out habitat restoration should be conservation priorities, since habitat loss is the main factor affecting the distribution of the target species; implementation of structural connectivity through hedgerows, instead, should be evaluated with caution since its contribution is secondary to the predominant role of habitat loss

No abstract

Naming, listing and measuring human-induced threats in protected areas are crucial in conservation. Here, we defined a check-list of direct threats in a Mediterranean remnant wetland (central Italy), managed as nature reserve, grouping them according to a taxonomically-oriented nomenclature. We assessed three regime parameters (scope, severity, and magnitude) applying an experience-based method, then comparing the assessments obtained from two different level of expertise: a panel of independent people, upper level ''university students'' in an applied ecology class; and a panel of ''experts'' as nature reserve biologists and managers. Despite observing a significant correlation among values assigned from students and experts for each regime parameter, students underestimated the scope of feral dogs, the severity of fires and the magnitude of feral dogs and water stress. Considering only the magnitude values (sum of scope and severity), students assigned the higher values to alien species, antropophilous species, aircraft, and pollution, while the experts assigned the higher values to antropophilous species, aircraft, alien species, and water stress. In an order of priority, there was an agreement between students and experts with a coincidence for three threats out of four. We suppose that a panel of students with a short academic training could be useful to a get a first order of priority in regard to a set of local selected threats, with much similarity to the assessment obtained from a panel of experts. When threat metrics are difficult to compare, experience-based approach obtained from technicians trained ad hoc (''students'') could be useful to define priorities for management strategies in nature reserves, but data obtained should be

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract