4.7 Article

A Dendrophyllia ramea Population in the Ionian Sea (Central Mediterranean Sea) Threatened by Anthropogenic Impacts

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MARINE SCIENCE
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2022.838274

关键词

scleractinian corals; Dendrophyllia ramea; fishing impact; Mediterranean Sea; ROV imaging; MPAs

资金

  1. Italian Ministry of the Ecological Transition (MITE) [PR ISPRA X0SM0001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study is the first to quantitatively describe a population of Dendrophyllia ramea on the Apollo bank, which was discovered during a ROV survey in the Ionian Sea in summer 2021. The study assesses the habitat description, bathymetric distribution, population density, and structure of the species through image analysis. The findings reveal a well-developed population of D. ramea on boulders at a depth of 70-80 m, with varying densities and negative impacts from deepwater fishing activities.
This study reports the first attempt to quantitatively describe a Dendrophyllia ramea population on the Apollo bank (Ionian Sea), revealed in summer 2021 through a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) survey. The habitat description, bathymetric distribution, population density, and structure of the species were assessed by image analysis. A well-developed population of D. ramea, located on boulders on a sedimentary plateau at 70-80 m depth, was observed. The density ranged on average between 0.17 +/- 0.04 and 0.8 +/- 2.4 colonies m(-2) with dense patches up to 8 colonies m(-2). The population consisted primarily of many isolated single corallites and colonies of various sizes, some of which reached a maximum height of more than 40 cm. Deepwater fishing activities, primarily longline fishing, negatively affected this species. The newly collected data add knowledge about this vulnerable scleractinian coral. The documented negative effect of fishing activities on vulnerable marine ecosystem (VME) species further highlights the need for urgent conservation measures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据