Use of biodiversity hotspots for conservation of Marine Molluscs: a regional approach

Bedulli, Daniele; Bassignani, Filippo; Bruschi, Antonello

doi:10.12681/mms.250

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The dataset for Modern communities was derived from a compilation of marine benthic surveys of the northern Adriatic [22]. These data were restricted to samples that match the environmental and bathymetric range estimated for the fossil dataset derived from cores.…”

Section: (B) Sample Processing and Data Filteringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential responses of marine communities to natural and anthropogenic changes

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responses of ecosystems to environmental changes vary greatly across habitats, organisms and observational scales. The Quaternary fossil record of the Po Basin demonstrates that marine communities of the northern Adriatic reemerged unchanged following the most recent glaciation, which lasted approximately 100 000 years. The Late Pleistocene and Holocene interglacial ecosystems were both dominated by the same species, species turnover rates approximated predictions of resampling models of a homogeneous system, and comparable bathymetric gradients in species composition, sample-level diversity, dominance and specimen abundance were observed in both time intervals. The interglacial Adriatic ecosystems appear to have been impervious to natural climate change either owing to their persistence during those long-term perturbations or their resilient recovery during interglacial phases of climate oscillations. By contrast, present-day communities of the northern Adriatic differ notably from their Holocene counterparts. The recent ecosystem shift stands in contrast to the long-term endurance of interglacial communities in face of climate-driven environmental changes.

show abstract

Section: (B) Sample Processing and Data Filteringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential responses of marine communities to natural and anthropogenic changes

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They have become key for data integration and synthesis to inform decision-making in a variety of contexts (Costello, 2014); in a meta-analysis of marine conservation planning approaches, Leslie (2005) identified that 24 of the 27 cases examined used maps to make decisions. Biodiversity hotspots Bedulli et al, 2002;Allen, 2008 Ecosystem services Galparsoro et al, 2014;Outeiro et al, 2015 Uses of marine resources Buhl-Mortensen et al, 2015;Hossain et al, 2016 Threats to biodiversity Andersen et al, 2004;Harris, 2012 While the ability of maps and models to communicate relevant information about current and predicted states of the environment makes them ideal candidates in any attempt to (re)connect decision-making with science, how do we know that these spatial decision-support tools are conveying the right information? In fact, maps and models have downsides and their use in conservation and policy-making should be carefully examined (Reiss et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Use of Maps and Models in Conservation and Resource Management (Warning: Results May Vary)

Lecours

2017

Front. Mar. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation planning and management typically require accurate and spatially explicit data at scales that are relevant for conservation objectives. In marine conservation, these data are often combined with spatial analytical techniques to produce marine habitat maps. While marine habitat mapping is increasingly used to inform conservation efforts, this field is still relatively young and its methods are rapidly evolving. Because conservation efforts do not always specify standards or guidelines for the production of habitat maps, results can vary dramatically. As representations of real environmental characteristics, habitat maps are highly sensitive to how they are produced. In this review paper, I present four concepts that are known to cause variation in spatial representation and prediction of habitats: the methodology used, the quality and scale of the data, and the choice of variables in regards to fitness for use. I then discuss the potential antinomy associated with the use of habitat maps in conservation: while habitat maps have become an invaluable tool to inform and assist decision-making, maps of the same area built using different methods and data may provide dissimilar representations, thus providing different information and possibly leading to different decisions. Exploring the theories and methods that have proved effective in terrestrial conservation and the spatial sciences, and how they can be integrated in marine habitat mapping practices, could help improve maps used to support marine conservation efforts and result in more reliable products to inform conservation decisions. Having a strong, consistent, transparent, repeatable, and science-based protocol for data collection and mapping is essential for effectively supporting decision-makers in developing conservation and management plans. The development of user-friendly tools to assist in the application of such protocol is crucial to a widespread improvement in practices. I discuss the potential to use interactive and collaborative Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to encourage the conservation and management community, from data collectors and mapmakers to decision-makers, to move toward a digital resilience and to develop such science-based protocol. Until standards and protocols are developed, habitat maps should always be interpreted with care, and the methods and metadata associated with their production should always be explicitly stated.

show abstract

“…They have a quite complete record allowing comparisons with neighbouring areas and are considered to be an 'appropriate indicator group' for rapid assessment of diversity inhabiting a particular area (Bedulli et al 2002, Gladstone 2002, Smith 2005. Moreover, information on molluscs of the Alboran Sea is generally more detailed for infralittoral and circalittoral habitats (Gofas et al 2011) than for bathyal ones.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mollusca from a species-rich deep-water <em>Leptometra</em> community in the Alboran Sea

Gofas¹,

Salas²,

Rueda³

et al. 2014

Sci. Mar.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary: An exceptional species richness for Mollusca was found on Avempace bank (349-365 m), Djibouti group, Alboran Sea, where the most abundant species was the crinoid Leptometra phalangium. A sample of sediment sieved on a 0.5-mm mesh yielded 156 species of molluscs (83 live-taken, 1772 specimens) with a high Shannon-Wiener diversity index (H' (log2) =3.60). The dominant mollusc was Limopsis aurita and the six most common species accounted for 77% of the specimens. On the other hand, 42 species were represented by only one or two specimens. Two species are described as new, three more are first findings in the Mediterranean and two are first findings in Iberian waters. One-third of the species have not been reported from the neighbouring, well-explored Alboran Island platform. There is a considerable balance between the trophic groups, denoting a stable and structured community. Most of the species have an extensive Atlantic range, and most have a planktonic larval stage. Therefore, it can be hypothesized that the fauna benefits from a diverse influx of larvae carried in by the more superficial incoming Atlantic current. Because of its exceptional richness, this type of bathyal community with Leptometra and Limopsis should be considered a high priority for habitat conservation in the Mediterranean deep sea.Keywords: species diversity; taxonomy; dominant species; trophic structure; geographical distribution; bathyal zone; Leptometra phalangium; marine molluscs. Moluscos de una comunidad profunda de Leptometra rica en especies en el mar de AlboránResumen: Se encontró una excepcional riqueza específica de moluscos en el banco Avempace (349-365 m), grupo de Djibouti, mar de Alborán, donde la especie más abundante fue el crinoideo Leptometra phalangium. En una muestra de sedimento tamizada sobre una malla de 0.5 mm se hallaron 156 especies de moluscos (83 con ejemplares vivos) y 1772 ejemplares, con un alto valor del índice de diversidad Shannon-Wiener (H' (log2) =3.60). El molusco dominante era Limopsis aurita y las seis especies más comunes eran el 77% de los ejemplares. Por otro lado, 42 especies estuvieron representadas únicamente por uno o dos ejemplares. Dos especies se describen como nuevas; tres más son primera cita para el Mediterráneo y dos son primera cita en aguas ibéricas. Un tercio de las especies no están citadas en la plataforma de la vecina isla de Alborán, por su parte bastante estudiada. La representación de los distintos grupos tróficos es equilibrada, denotando una comunidad estable y estructurada. La mayoría de las especies tienen una amplia distribución en el Atlántico y una fase larvaria planctónica. Por lo tanto se supone que la fauna se beneficia de un aporte diverso de larvas por la corriente superficial que entra desde el Atlántico. Por su excepcional riqueza, este tipo de comunidad batial con Leptometra y Limopsis merece considerarse prioritaria para la conservación de hábitats profundos del mar Mediterráneo.Palabras clave: diversidad especifica; taxonomía; especies dominantes; estruc...

show abstract

Use of biodiversity hotspots for conservation of Marine Molluscs: a regional approach

Cited by 9 publications

References 4 publications

Differential responses of marine communities to natural and anthropogenic changes

Differential responses of marine communities to natural and anthropogenic changes

On the Use of Maps and Models in Conservation and Resource Management (Warning: Results May Vary)

Mollusca from a species-rich deep-water <em>Leptometra</em> community in the Alboran Sea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About