Conservation of Mediterranean seascapes: analyses of existing protection schemes

Fraschetti, Simonetta; Terlizzi, Antonio; Bussotti, Simona; Guarnieri, Giuseppe; D’Ambrosio, Paolo; Boero, Ferdinando

doi:10.1016/j.marenvres.2004.05.007

Cited by 65 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 67 publications

(78 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The identification of relevant scales of variation of natural populations and assemblages is essential to design protection schemes suitable to guarantee the protection of their responsible processes [10,31]. The implementation of local strategies intended to conserve reef fish assemblages, for instance, is likely to fail if their patterns of distribution, abundance and diversity are mainly shaped by larger-scale (e.g., regional) drivers.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This characteristic is crucial for a number of basic and applied ecological issues, including the notion that, since different processes are likely to operate differently in space and time, the identification of relevant scales of variation is essential to propose and then test their potential explanatory models [5,6]. For example, such an identification may be important to assess and predict the effects of anthropogenic disturbances operating at a hierarchy of spatial scales [7] and to support decisions about the design and management of effective protected areas [8][9][10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spatial variation of reef fishes and the relative influence of biotic and abiotic habitat traits

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patterns of distribution of reef fishes were examined across three spatial scales and related to habitat traits along 25 km of the northern Portuguese coast. Response variables included the multivariate assemblage structure, the total number of taxa and individuals, and the abundance of single groups categorized according to their preference for the benthic, proximo-benthic or pelagic environment, feeding and reproductive behaviour. Habitat traits included topographic elements (small and large 'drops' like cracks and crevices) and the extent of dominant morpho-functional types of macroalgae (kelp, large foliose, small erect, turf-forming filamentous, and encrusting). All fish responses were characterized by the largest variance at the smallest scale (among transects tens m apart), followed by that among reefs (hundreds m to 1 km apart) and almost null variance among sites (some km apart). Small and large 'drops' of the substratum explained, respectively, considerable variation of assemblage structure and the total abundance of individuals, while the extent of bare rock influenced the richness of taxa and that of benthic fishes, fishes feeding on sessile invertebrates and fishes laying benthic eggs or having nesting behaviour. Combinations of abiotic and biotic structural attributes of reefs influenced proximo-benthic fishes, the predators of mobile animals and fishes releasing pelagic eggs. The here reported associations between patterns of distribution of reef fishes and habitat traits have implications for the design of future protection schemes suitable to guarantee the conservation of reef fish communities and of the processes responsible for their variation. Within the SLOSS (single-large vs. several-small) debate in the design of marine reserves, for example, effective protection to the studied reef fishes would be provided by a set of small reserves, rather than a single large which might be appropriate for fishes having wider home ranges.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial variation of reef fishes and the relative influence of biotic and abiotic habitat traits

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In particular, amphipod assemblages varied most at the meter scale in the macrophyte Sargassum stenophyllum (Tanaka and Leite, 2003) and in soft bottoms (Fernandez-Gonzalez et al, 2013). Processes potentially involved in such patterns include complex sets of local physical and biological interactions (Anderson et al, 2005;Fraschetti et al, 2005).…”

Section: Small Scale Spatial Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Natural populations are patchy at multiple spatial and temporal scales (Dayton and Tegner, 1984;Schneider, 1994), with greater fluctuation at some scales than others (Fraschetti et al, 2005;García-Charton et al, 2004). Accordingly, variability in the structure of assemblages appears more evident at some scales (Underwood and Chapman, 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Accordingly, variability in the structure of assemblages appears more evident at some scales (Underwood and Chapman, 1996). This variability, especially at small scales, should not be disregarded as a bias or an impediment, but as valuable information in understanding ecosystems (Coleman, 2002;Fraschetti et al, 2005). The study of spatial patterns is crucial in order to elucidate processes that determine the distribution and abundance of organisms, and provides a basis for management and conservation (Levin, 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multiscale variability of amphipod assemblages in Posidonia oceanica meadows

Sturaro

Lepoint

Vermeulen

et al. 2015

Journal of Sea Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of spatial patterns is important in understanding the causes of the distribution and abundance of organisms, and it also provides a valuable basis for management and conservation. Amphipod crustaceans are key organisms in seagrass ecosystems. However, little attention has been paid to the spatial scales at which amphipod assemblages may vary. We examined variability patterns of amphipod populations inhabiting Posidonia oceanica meadows, over spatial scales spanning four orders of magnitude (1 to 1000 meters) and for two consecutive years. This study reports the scales that contributed most to spatial variation of amphipod assemblages and explores the potential processes driving the observed patterns, with particular emphasis on habitat features. The number of species, the diversity, and the density of some species varied substantially across years. For most species the highest spatial variation in density and biomass occurred at small scales (1 and 10 meters). Based on density data, the structure of amphipod assemblages did not differ at any scales investigated. The patchiness that occurred at small scales may have been related to habitat features, but only weakly. Instead, we postulate that amphipod behavioral processes likely represent good explanatory factors. Although, small-scale spatial variability can be an important feature of amphipod assemblages in P. oceanica meadows, some patterns may have gone undetected because they occur at scales smaller than those investigated.

show abstract