Study

Protection changes the relevancy of scales of variability in coralligenous assemblages

  • Published source details Piazzi L., La M.G., Cecchi E., Serena F. & Ceccherelli G. (2016) Protection changes the relevancy of scales of variability in coralligenous assemblages. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 175, 62-69.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Designate a Marine Protected Area and introduce some fishing restrictions (types unspecified)

Action Link
Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation

Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit some fishing and collection (including where restrictions are unspecified)

Action Link
Coral Conservation
  1. Designate a Marine Protected Area and introduce some fishing restrictions (types unspecified)

    A replicated, site comparison study (year unspecified) of 28 sites across 14 rocky reef areas in the western Mediterranean Sea, Italy (Piazzi et al. 2016) found that protected areas with ‘low human pressures’ (restrictions unspecified) had similar overall invertebrate and algae community composition to unprotected areas with ‘high human pressures’, and similar invertebrate abundance. Community composition data were presented as graphical analyses. Percent cover of invertebrates was similar in protected (6.2%) and unprotected areas (3.7%). Invertebrates and algae were surveyed at two sites inside each of seven marine protected areas (fishing restrictions unspecified) and seven unprotected areas. All protected areas were established between 1997 and 1999 and reported to “preserve reefs from all human activities”. At 30–40 m depth, 10 plots (0.2 m2) were photographed at three 10 m2 locations/site. Invertebrates and algae species were identified and their % cover estimated from each photograph. Date of study unspecified.

    (Summarised by: Anaëlle Lemasson & Laura Pettit)

  2. Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit some fishing and collection (including where restrictions are unspecified)

    A replicated, site comparison study [year not specified] at 14 areas of coralligenous habitat off western Italy (Piazzi et al. 2016) found that protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection had similar community assemblages (including corals) compared to unprotected areas but showed different patterns of spatial variability. Average invertebrate cover (including corals) was 6% in protected areas and 4% in unprotected areas (result not tested for statistical significance). Overall, community assemblages were similar in protected areas and unprotected areas, but communities in protected and unprotected areas varied at different spatial scales (data reported as statistical model results). Protected areas had higher variation at the smallest spatial scale (individual survey plots) than unprotected areas, but lower variation at the largest spatial scale (the study areas) than unprotected areas (reported as pseudo-variance). Variation in the abundance of each species was also dependent on the spatial scale considered. Seven Marine Protected Areas and seven unprotected areas were chosen (10s of km apart), with two sites/area and three 10 m2 locations/site selected for sampling. Ten survey plots/location (40 × 50 cm plots) were randomly sampled in June and July using photographs (60 images/protected or unprotected area) to assess cover by different species (including corals).

    (Summarised by: William Morgan)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 22

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the Evidence Champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust