Next Article in Journal
Survivors from a Pliocene Climatic Catastrophe: Gyrodactylus (Platyhelminthes, Monogenea) Parasites of the Relict Fishes in the Central Asian Internal Drainage Basin of Mongolia
Next Article in Special Issue
Quantifying Abundance and Mapping Distribution of Loggerhead Turtles in the Mediterranean Sea Using Aerial Surveys: Implications for Conservation
Previous Article in Journal
Multiple Chemical Signals in Male Rock Lizards: Femoral Gland Secretions and Feces May Provide Information on Body Size but Using Different Compounds
Previous Article in Special Issue
Monitoring Eurasian Woodcock (Scolopax rusticola) with Pointing Dogs in Italy to Inform Evidence-Based Management of a Migratory Game Species
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Diversity
Volume 15
Issue 7
10.3390/d15070859
diversity-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

A Review of Rhodolith/Maerl Beds of the Italian Seas

by
Michela Ingrassia
1,*,
Martina Pierdomenico
2,
Daniele Casalbore
1,3,
Francesco Giuseppe Falese
1 and
Francesco Latino Chiocci
1,3
1
Institute of Environmental Geology and Geoengineering, Italian National Research Council (IGAG-CNR), 00185 Rome, Italy
2
Institute for the Study of Anthropic Impact and Sustainability in the Marine Environment, Italian National Research Council (IAS-CNR), 00185 Rome, Italy
3
Department of Earth Sciences, Sapienza University, 00185 Rome, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diversity 2023, 15(7), 859; https://doi.org/10.3390/d15070859
Submission received: 25 May 2023 / Revised: 13 July 2023 / Accepted: 14 July 2023 / Published: 15 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biodiversity in Italy: Past and Future Perspectives)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Coralline algal beds are comprised of biogenic calcareous formations considered a habitat of high conservation interest, hosting a high great biodiversity. To assess the status of this habitat in the Italian seas, we report results from a systematic analysis of the available scientific literature. Italian rhodolith/maerl beds are reported on 31 Italian sites mostly located around islands, shoals, banks, terraces, and gentley sloping shelves, from 9 m to 130 m water depth (with a mean depth of about 56 m). The dominant species occurring in the Italian submarine sites are Phymatolithon calcareum and Lithothamnion corallioides, with a rich associated fauna including sponges, bryozoans, hydrozoans, polichaetes, molluscs, amphipods, gastropods, echinoderms. Despite the high biodiversity characterizing the Italian rhodolith/maerl beds, only seven submarine sites hosting this sensitive habitat are part of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). This evidence highlights the need for actions focused on the implementation of effective management and proper conservation measures to preserve such precious habitats. Protection of this habitat cannot be effectively provided without access to multidisciplinary data (e.g., geospatial, biological, geophysical, geomorphological data) capable of assessing its spatial distribution and biological characteristics over wide areas. An increased research effort to improve the production of fine-scale distribution maps and monitoring activities is therefore needed.

1. Introduction

Free living coralline algae (rhodolith or maerl) are distributed worldwide on the continental shelves [1] from tropical to polar [2,3,4] regions. The algae may form thick beds over sedimentary bottoms from the low intertidal zone to depths of over 250 m [5,6,7]. Rhodolith/maerl beds are an important hotspot for biodiversity [6,7] providing a three-dimensional setting for several species, also of commercial interest [8,9]. Specifically, the biodiversity associated with Mediterranean coralline algae beds is very high, with about 700 species recorded [10,11], making it one of the most important submarine Mediterranean ecosystems [12,13,14].
Free-living coralline algae, depending on the size, inner structure, external shape, algal growth forms, and taxonomic composition, are characterized by three different morphotypes: boxwork (usually large and vacuolar), praline (compact and nodular) and branches [15,16,17]. The main environmental factors controlling the development of coralline algae beds are light, temperature, nutrients, hydrodynamism (i.e., waves and currents), and bioturbation phenomena that avoid the coralline algae being buried by sediments [18,19,20,21,22]. Rhodolith/maerl beds may be considered as a non-renewable resource [7,16] and are in need of important protection and conservation actions. Consequently, the European Union (EU) developed a network of protected areas known as Natura 2000 sites at the end of the twentieth century. In addition, different national and international actions were developed, including the the “Action Plan for the Conservation of Coralligenous and other Mediterranean bioconstructions” (UNEP-MAP, 2008), and the “Good Environmental Status” in EU “Marine Strategy Framework Directive” (Council Directive, 2008/56/EC). In addition, the maerl-forming species Lithothamnion corallioides and Phymatolithon calcareum are included in Annex V of the European Community Habitats Directive 1992.
The knowledge regarding the distribution of Mediterranean rhodolith/maerl beds is still fragmented and incomplete [11], and wide-scale mapping initiatives are essential for their effective conservation. To this end, Mediterranean rhodolith/maerl beds were recently included among the habitats of special interest within the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD-2008/56/EC), aiming at achieving the “Good Environmental Status” (GES) of all marine waters by 2020. Monitoring protocols of rhodolith/maerl beds within the MSFD were also adopted by Italy.
The aim of this study was to summarize and update the current knowledge regarding the distribution of the Italian rhodolith/maerl beds, highlighting the urgent need for conservation strategies targeted at the protection of this sensitive habitat and its biodiversity. Finally, information regarding a new submarine site (the Costacuti Shoal, central Tyrrhenian Sea), characterized by the presence of rhodolith/maerl beds, is also presented.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Italian Dataset from Literature

From an historical point of view, the first record of rhodolith/maerl beds was reported by [23] in the Naples Gulf (central Tyrrhenian Sea), and since then, rhodolith/maerl beds have been identified in various locations of the Italian seas. The distribution of the Italian rhodolith/maerl beds herein reported (Table 1) is based on the available scientific literature from 1999 to 2023. For each site, the following information was extracted: site, Italian seas, region, setting, substrate, minimum depth, maximum depth, medium depth, algae morphotype (pralines, boxwork, branches), dominant coralline algae species, Marine Protected Area (MPA), and references.
All the sites reported in Table 1 were used to create the first distribution map of rhodolith/maerl beds in the Italian seas.

2.2. General Setting of the New Site and Data Available

The Costacuti Shoal (ID 27 in Table 1) is located on the Latium continental shelf about 40 km off Capo d’Anzio Promontory (central Tyrrhenian Sea). The shelf is affected by a microtidal regime [46] and sediments are mainly supplied from fluvial input and the reworking of relict sediments during the Holocene [5,47]. The Costacuti Shoal, located in a water depth ranging between 48 and 36 m, is elongated in a NW-SE direction and has a width of 250 m wide, a length of 1600 m, and a height of 10 m with respect to the surrounding seafloor. The shoal is characterized by the presence of Posidonia oceanica meadows and coralligenous reefs [48,49]. A heavily exploited trawling fishing ground is also observed offshore by the coasts of Anzio [50].

2.2.1. Geophysical Data

Geophysical data include both high-resolution multibeam bathymetry and side-scan sonar data collected through Reson SeaBat 8125 (working at a frequency of 455 kHz) data and Klein 3900 (working at a frequency of 455 kHz) systems, respectively. Data were acquired between December 2017 over an area of about 25 km2 surrounding the Costacuti Shoal. Processing of raw data was performed to produce a digital elevation model (DEM) with a cell size of 2 m (Figure 1) and a mosaic of backscatter intensity with 0.2 m resolution (Figure 1b). The analysis of geophysical data allowed for the identification of seafloor areas hosting rhodolith/maerl beds.

2.2.2. Ground-Truth Data

Ground-truth data included ROV videos and grab samples collected in January 2018 on board the small vessel “VegaUno”. The ROV, Pollux III (Global Electric Italiana), was equipped with a Sony CCD 1/3" navigation camera, a Sony HDRCX115E high-definition camera and a GoPro camera. The ROV was equipped with laser pointers (with a laser beam spacing of 20 cm) to provide references for scale and an ultra-short baseline positioning system (USBL) to provide a record of the navigation track.
Three video transects (Figure 1a and Table 2) were acquired on shelf sectors adjacent to the shoal. These were used to characterize the seafloor texture and the biological communities inhabiting the seafloor, and to assess their environmental status. In addition, the abundance percentage cover of the coralline algae cover was estimated along each track. Specifically, image frames were extracted every 30 s of the footage and percentage coverages were visually estimated for each frame, according to classes of percentage coverage (i.e., <15; 20; 30; 40; 50; >60%).
Nine grab samples (Figure 1a and Table 3) were collected with a 20 L Van Veen grab. Sediment samples were analyzed for grain size distribution, using dry sieving and a laser particle sizer (0.5 phi interval), and classified according to the Folk classification scheme [51]. Furthermore, the onboard analysis of grab samples allowed for defining the bed thickness.

3. Results

3.1. Coralline Algae Beds in the Italian Seas

This study shows the occurrence of rhodolith/maerl beds in 31 submarine Italian sites (Figure 2) from nine regions of Italy (Ligurian, Friuli Venezia Giulia, Veneto, Tuscany, Latium, Campanian, Apulia, Sicily, and Sardinia). The bathymetric distribution of rhodolith/maerl beds in the Italian seas range from 9 m to 130 m depth (average depth 56 m). The shallowest record (−9 m) was reported from the Trieste Gulf (Adriatic Sea) and the deepest one (−130 m) from the Linosa Island (Sicily Channel). Many of these sites are in the Sicily region (9 sites) followed by the Campania (6 sites), Tuscany and Apulia (4 sites), Latium (3), Sardinia and Liguria (2 sites), Friuli and Veneto (1 site).
The Italian rhodolith/maerl beds are represented by three morphotypes (pralines, boxwork, and branches) and these beds are located around islands, shoals, banks, terraces, and over open shelves (Table 1 and Figure 3a). Rhodolith/maerl beds have the widest distribution around islands. In detail, the pralines morphotype displays the widest distribution around islands, shoals, shelves, and terraces. The boxwork morphotype is distributed around islands, terraces, shoals, and shelves, with a maximum frequency in island settings. Branches morphotype is reported from islands, banks, terraces, shoals, and shelves, with a maximum frequency around island settings. The main sediment type associated with the Italian rhodolith/maerl beds is represented by coarse sediments but this habitat is associated with substrates ranging from rocky to fine sediments (Figure 3b). The pralines morphotype is associated with coarse sediment, biogenic gravelly sand, fine sediment, a detritic bottom, and a rock substrate. The boxwork morphotype is associated with rock, biogenic gravelly sand, sand, coarse and fine sediments. The branches morphotype is associated with biogenic gravelly sand, rock, a detritic bottom, and coarse and fine sediments.
The main Italian rhodolith/maerl species are represented by Lithothamnion corallioides (40%), Phymatolithon calcareum (27%), Lithothamnion minervae (15%), Lithophyllum racemus (9%), Lithothamnion valens (3%), Lithophyllum stictaeforme (3%), and Phymatolithon lenormandii (3%). In detail, the pralines morphotype includes the L. corallioides, P. calcareum, L. minervae, L. racemus, L. valens, P. lenormandii, and L. stictaeforme species. The boxwork morphotype includes the species L. corallioides, P. calcareum, L. minervae, L. stictaeforme and L. racemus. The branches morphotype is associated with L. corallioides, P. calcareum, L. minervae, L. stictaeforme, and L. racemus. The most associated fauna of the Italian calcareous algae beds include sponges, bryozoans, hydrozoans, polichaetes, molluscs, amphipods, gastropods, and echinoderms [24,25,28,29,30,31,35,36].
The analysis of all the reported sites (Table 1) has also permitted an assessment of the main anthropogenic impacts affecting the Italian sites hosting coralline algae beds [25,30,40,43,45]. These impacts are mainly represented by litter (plastic, grass, wood, and metal objects) and by evidence of fishing activities (trawl marks and ghost net, longlines, lines, ropes, other fishing-related debris). Finally, out of 31 identified sites, only 7 are included in MPAs (Ustica Island, Pelagie islands, Asinara Island, Capo Carbonara, Tremiti Islands, and Portofino marine protected areas).

3.2. Coralline Algae Beds at the Costacuti Shoal (Latium Region)

The seafloor surrounding the Costacuti Shoal, where rhodolith/maerl beds are observed, is characterized by depth values ranging from 45 m to 50 m and by slope values varying from 0 to 0.5°. Video data show that the seafloor along the transects is colonized by pralines, boxwork, and branches morphotypes (Figure 4 and Figure 5).
Rhodolith/maerl beds are present with coverage percentages varying from 15 to 60% (medium coverage percentage 30%), with maximum values observed in the northern sector of the Costacuti Shoal (Figure 5).
Video and grab samples analyses show that the predominant morphotype is represented by pralines. The sedimentological analysis reveals that the sediments associated with rhodolith/maerl beds are mainly composed of gravelly or muddy sand; the percentages of gravelly fractions (including pebbles) range from 3 to 12%, while percentages of mud reach values up to 40% (Table 4). The Costacuti rhodolith/maerl beds host an associated fauna mainly represented by sponges, echinoderms, polichaetes, and anthozoa (Supplementary Material S1). As regards the anthropogenic impacts, trawl marks over the soft bottom hosting coralline algae beds were observed both on the side-scan sonar mosaic and on ROV videos, where local accumulations of coralline algae inside the marks were sometimes observed (Figure 4c,d).

4. Discussion

4.1. Italian Coralline Algae Distribution

This study represents the first attempt to map the distribution of the Italian rhodolith/maerl beds, highlighting their occurrence in all the Italian seas, except for the Messina Strait, likely due to the complex geomorphological characteristics of its seafloor [52]. In the Italian seas, living rhodolith/maerl beds were found from the low intertidal zone to depths of about 130 m, which agrees with the worldwide rhodolith/maerl distributions [5,53]. As already suggested by [10], rhodolith/maerl beds are frequently located around islands and isolated shoals. These settings seem to favor their development due to the combination of both biotic (e.g., associated fauna, bioturbation) and abiotic (e.g., water current, nutrients, sediment input, light penetration, complexity of substrate) factors. The geomorphological characteristics associated with these settings seem to create very high morphological heterogeneity at a small spatial scale, combined with low sediment accumulation rates and enhanced bottom currents [32,54], which promote benthic biodiversity. Although Italian rhodolith/maerl beds over hard bottoms are rare but not absent, we confirmed that the most common substrate suitable for coralline algal development is represented by coarse sediments [5].
The dominant coralline algal species occurring in the Italian submarine sites, are represented by Phymatolithon calcareum and Lithothamnion corallioides, which are the two species included in the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC).
In the Mediterranean Sea, the benthic habitats characterized by the highest biodiversity are represented by coralligenous beds, Posidonia oceanica meadows [14,55], and rhodolith/maerl beds [10,11,56,57].
The knowledge linked to the latter habitat has only recently increased [1], and available data regarding their distribution, composition, structure, and natural variability, are still inadequate. To fulfill such knowledge gaps, remote-sensing techniques coupled with ground-truth data provide an effective tool for the large-scale assessment of coralline algae spatial distributions, as well as for other pristine benthic habitats e.g., [16,58,59]. Mapping the extent of rhodolith/maerl beds using information from full-area coverage geophysical data, coupled with ground-truth data, represents a first pivotal step for their effective management and conservation. This methodological approach has permitted us to obtain fine-scale information about the coralline algae occurrence at the Costacuti site (Figure 2b).
Overall, the determination of the composition and structure of rhodolith/maerl beds, and therefore of their heterogeneity, represents a crucial aspect of proposing a site as a candidate for conservation measures. Examples of other Italian studies based on the use of this type of approach are the Apulian Continental Shelf [39], the Campania coast [31], the southern coast of Sardinia [26], and off Lampedusa Island [59]. All these above-mentioned studies reiterate the importance of fine-scale distribution maps as an essential step in spatial planning management policy aimed at the conservation of this sensitive habitat. The use of a standard approach (e.g., monitoring protocol for deep Mediterranean RBs, developed within the Marine Strategy Framework Directive—MSFD-2008/56/EC) applied to several sites would allow us to compare all the environmental parameters, which can be considered as drivers in determining the presence of coralline algae beds.
This approach becomes even more relevant if we consider that the Italian seas are a good location for coralline algal growth, being represented by nine biogeographic sectors after [60], including most of the ecological conditions of both western and eastern Mediterranean basins [61], and are therefore characterized by a high ecological and environmental heterogeneity.

4.2. Threats and Conservation

Rhodolith/maerl beds are considered a non-renewable resource e.g., [7] because of their slow growth rate (1 mm/year) and their inability to sustain direct exploitation [6,62]. However, rhodolith/maerl beds are exploited as a source of calcium carbonate and used for a wide variety of economic applications e.g., [1,63,64]. In addition, this habitat can be affected by disturbances of natural (i.e., sediment dislodgment e.g., [65,66] or anthropogenic impacts such as the residuals of water-based drilling fluids discharging during drilling activities [67] and impacts linked to oil extraction activities [68,69].
These beds are also considered sensitive habitats due to their diversity and their potential importance as nurseries for other species [5]. The ongoing rise of water temperatures and ocean acidification act as barriers for the formation and maintenance of coralline algae [62,70], which can also be considered potential climate recorders [5]. These organisms have the potential to provide paleo-climatic records useful to assess the effects of concerning climate variability [71]. For all these reasons, destructive harvesting, and extraction activities by humans should be forbidden in areas hosting such important habitats [72,73]. The analysis of the available scientific literature highlights a lack of studies focused on the potential levels of human pressure affecting coralline algae beds. In fact, only ten studies report data regarding the presence or absence of different human impacts e.g., [25,30,40,43,45]. It is important to note that while the presence of litter and fishing-related debris may represent alternative substrates for algae growth, the secondary effects of marine litter (i.e., the release of compounds on coralline algae) are still largely unknown.
The high heterogeneity of the Italian submarine sites hosting rhodolith/maerl beds, makes the Italian seas a good model for testing different strategic protection initiatives. Despite this unique and high biodiversity, only seven Italian submarine sites are included in MPAs (i.e., Ustica Island, Pelagie islands, Asinara Island, Capo Carbonara, Tremiti Islands, and Portofino Marine Protected Areas).
The importance of coralline algae beds and their high vulnerability to human pressures have been documented worldwide [9,74,75], and today, several legal instruments have been adopted (i.e., Annex V of the Habitats Directive and Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD-2008/56/EC). This study updates the knowledge about coralline algal distributions along the Italian coasts and reports on the main characteristics associated with these sites, highlighting the need for further actions focused on the implementation of effective management and proper conservation measures to preserve this vulnerable habitat.

5. Conclusions

Despite rhodolith/maerl beds being considered hotspot sites of biodiversity that provide a suite of ecosystem goods and services, limited information is available regarding their distribution and ecological role, especially in the Italian seas. This study presents new insights on the coralline algal distributions along the Italian seas, providing information on the main characteristics associated with the Italian sites. The high heterogeneity of the Italian submarine sites makes the Italian seas a good model for the testing of different strategic protection initiatives that, today, are still scarce, as testified by the establishment of only seven Marine Protected Areas. The study also highlighted that the future implementation of effective management and conservation measures to preserve such a precious habitat cannot be effectively gained without access to multidisciplinary data capable of assessing its spatial distribution.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/d15070859/s1, Supplementary Material S1. The Costacuti rhodolith/maerl beds host an associated fauna mainly represented by echinoderm, anthozoa, sponge, and polichaetes.

Author Contributions

M.I.: Conceptualization, Methodology, Visualization, Writing of this article. M.P.: Formal analysis, Writing—review and editing. D.C.: Writing—review and editing. F.G.F.: Writing—review and editing. F.L.C.: Writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Editor and the anonymous reviewers for their useful comments which helped us to improve the final version of the manuscript. We also thank Andrea Bonifazi and Letizia Argenti for their support in sampling activities.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Riosmena-Rodríguez, R.; Nelson, W.; Aguirre, J. (Eds.) Rhodolith/Maërl Beds: A Global Perspective; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; p. 368. [Google Scholar]
  2. Amado-Filho, G.M.; Moura, R.L.; Bastos, A.C.; Salgado, L.T.; Sumida, P.Y.; Guth, A.Z.; Francini-Filho, R.B.; Pereira-Filho, G.H.; Abrantes, D.P.; Brasileiro, P.S.; et al. Rhodolith beds are major CaCO3 bio-factories in the tropical South West Atlantic. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e35171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Schwarz, A.; Hawes, I.; Andrew, N.; Mercer, S.; Cummings, V.; Thrush, S. Primary production potential of non-geniculate coralline algae at Cape Evans, Ross Sea, Antarctica. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2005, 294, 131–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Braga, J.C.; Bassi, D. Neogene history of Sporolithon Heydrich (Corallinales, Rhodophyta) in the Mediterranean region. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 2007, 243, 189–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Foster, M.S. Rhodoliths: Between rocks and soft places. J. Phycol. 2001, 37, 659–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Barbera, C.; Bordehore, C.; Borg, J.A.; Glémarec, M.; Grall, J.; Hall-Spencer, J.M.; de la Huz, C.; Lanfranco, E.; Lastra, M.; Moore, P.; et al. Conservation and management of northeast Atlantic and Mediterranean maerl beds. Aquat. Conserv. 2003, 13, S65–S76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Nelson, W.A. Calcified macroalgae—Critical to coastal ecosystems and vulnerable to change: A review. Mar. Freshw. Res. 2009, 60, 787–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Foster, M.S.; McConnico, L.M.; Lundsten, L.; Wadsworth, T.; Kimball, T.; Brooks, L.B.; Medina-Lopez, M.; Riosmena-Rodríguez, R.; Hernandez-Carmona, G.; Vásquez-Elizondo, R.M.; et al. The diversity and natural history of a Lithothamnion muelleri–Sargassum horridum community in the Gulf of California. Cienc. Mar. 2007, 33, 367–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Hall-Spencer, J.M.; Grall, J.; Moore, P.G.; Atkinson, R.J.A. Bivalve fishing and maerl-bed conservation in France and the UK—Retrospect and prospect. Aquat. Conserv. 2003, 13, S33–S41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ramos-Esplá, A.A.; Luque, A.A. Maerl beds: A fragile oasis of marine life. In The Seas of Spain; Ministerio de Medio Ambiente, Medio Rural y Marino: Madrid, Spain, 2008; pp. 273–290. [Google Scholar]
  11. Basso, D.; Babbini, L.; Ramos-Esplá, A.A.; Salomidi, M. Mediterranean rhodolith beds. In Rhodolith/Maërl Beds: A Global Perspective; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 281–298. [Google Scholar]
  12. Bracchi, V.A.; Basso, D.; Marchese, F.; Corselli, C.; Savini, A. Coralligenous morphotypes on subhorizontal substrate: A new categorization. Cont. Shelf Res. 2017, 144, 10–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Martin, C.S.; Giannoulaki, M.; De Leo, F.; Scardi, M.; Salomidi, M.; Knittweis, L.; Pace, M.L.; Garofalo, G.; Gristina, M.; Ballesteros, E.; et al. Coralligenous and maërl habitats: Predictive modelling to identify their spatial distributions across the Mediterranean Sea. Sci. Rep. 2014, 4, 5073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Ballesteros, E. Mediterranean coralligenous assemblages: A synthesis of present knowledge. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Annu. Rev. 2006, 44, 123–195. [Google Scholar]
  15. Bosence, D.W.J. Ecological studies on two unattached coralline algae from western Ireland. Palaeontology 1976, 19, 365–395. [Google Scholar]
  16. Basso, D.; Babbini, L.; Kaleb, S.; Bracchi, V.A.; Falace, A. Monitoring deep Mediterranean rhodolith beds. Aquat. Conserv. 2016, 26, 549–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Bracchi, V.A.; Caronni, S.; Meroni, A.N.; Burguett, E.G.; Atzori, F.; Cadoni, N.; Marchese, F.; Basso, D. Morphostructural Characterization of the Heterogeneous Rhodolith Bed at the Marine Protected Area “Capo Carbonara” (Italy) and Hydrodynamics. Diversity 2022, 14, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Jacquotte, R. Etude des fonds de maerl de Méditérranée. Recl. Trav. St. Mar. Endoume 1962, 26, 141–235. [Google Scholar]
  19. Birkett, D.; Maggs, C.; Dring, M.O. An overview of dynamic and sensitivity characteristics for conservation management of SACs. Scott. Assoc. Mar. Sci. 1998, 1–84. [Google Scholar]
  20. Marrack, E.C. The relationship between water motion and living rhodolith beds in the southwestern gulf of California, Mexico. Palaios 1999, 14, 159–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Carvalho, S.; Cunha, M.R.; Pereira, F.; Pousão-Ferreira, P.; Santos, M.N.; Gaspar, M.B. The effect of depth and sediment type on the spatial distribution of shallow soft-bottom amphipods along the southern Portuguese coast. Helgol. Mar. Res. 2012, 66, 489–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Gagnon, P.; Matheson, K.; Stapleton, M. Variation in rhodolith morphology and biogenic potential of newly discovered rhodolith beds in Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada). Bot. Mar. 2012, 55, 85–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Walther, J. Le alghe calcarifere litoproduttrici del Golfo di Napoli e l’origine di certi calcarei compatti. Boll. Del R. Com. Geol. D’italia 1885, 16, 360–369. [Google Scholar]
  24. Giaccone, T.; Giaccone, G.; Mannino, A.M. Deep rhodolith beds in the Ustica Island (Sicily, Southern Tyrrhenian Sea): A sedimentary and paleoecological approach. Geogr. Fis. Din. Quat. 2018, 41, 47–63. [Google Scholar]
  25. Longo, C.; Corriero, G.; Cardone, F.; Mercurio, M.; Pierri, C.; Marzano, C.N. Sponges from rhodolith beds surrounding Ustica Island marine protected area (southern Tyrrhenian Sea), with a comprehensive inventory of the island sponge fauna. Sci. Mar. 2020, 84, 297–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bracchi, V.A.; Angeletti, L.; Marchese, F.; Taviani, M.; Cardone, F.; Hajdas, I.; Grande, V.; Prampolini, M.; Caragnano, A.; Corselli, C.; et al. A resilient deep-water rhodolith bed off the Egadi Archipelago (Mediterranean Sea) and its actuopaleontological significance. AMQ 2019, 32, 131–150. [Google Scholar]
  27. Harriague, A.C.; Schiaparelli, S.; Panciroli, H.; Albertelli, G. Soft bottom mollusc communities of four south tyrrhenian archipelagos and Ustica Island (NW Mediterranean). AIOL 2005, 63, 63–74. [Google Scholar]
  28. Innangi, S.; Di Martino, G.; Romagnoli, C.; Tonielli, R. Seabed classification around lampione islet, Pelagie Islands Marine Protected area, Sicily channel, Mediterranean sea. J. Maps 2019, 15, 153–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Consoli, P.; Altobelli, C.; Perzia, P.; Bo, M.; Rosso, A.; Alongi, G.; Serio, D.; Canese, S.; Romeo, T.; Andaloro, F. Species and habitats of conservation interest in the Ecologically and Biologically Significant Area of the Strait of Sicily: A contribution towards the creation of a Specially Protected Areas of Mediterranean Importance. Mediterr. Mar. Sci. 2021, 22, 297–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Rendina, F.; Ferrigno, F.; Appolloni, L.; Donnarumma, L.; Sandulli, R.; Fulvio, G. Anthropic pressure due to lost fishing gears and marine litter on different rhodolith beds off the Campania Coast (Tyrrhenian Sea, Italy). Ecol. Quest. 2020, 31, 41–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Rendina, F.; Kaleb, S.; Caragnano, A.; Ferrigno, F.; Appolloni, L.; Donnarumma, L.; Russo, G.F.; Sandulli, R.; Roviello, V.; Falace, A. Distribution and characterization of deep rhodolith beds off the Campania coast (SW Italy, Mediterranean Sea). Plants 2020, 9, 985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Savini, A.; Basso, D.; Bracchi, V.A.; Corselli, C.; Pennetta, M. Maerl-bed mapping and carbonate quantification on submerged terraces offshore the Cilento peninsula (Tyrrhenian Sea, Italy). Geodiversitas 2012, 34, 77–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Toscano, F.; Vigliotti, M.; Simone, L. Variety of coralline algal deposits (rhodalgal facies) from the Bays of Naples and Pozzuoli (northern Tyrrhenian Sea, Italy). Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. 2006, 255, 85–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Basso, D.; Brusoni, F. The molluscan assemblage of a transitional environment: The Mediterranean maërl from off the Elba Island (Tuscan Archipelago, Tyrrhenian Sea). Boll. Malacol. 2004, 40, 37–45. [Google Scholar]
  35. Nitsch, F.; Nebelsick, J.H.; Bassi, D. Constructional and destructional patterns—Void classification of rhodoliths from Giglio Island, Italy rhodolith void classification. Palaios 2015, 30, 680–691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Piazzi, L.; Pardi, G.; Cinelli, F. Structure and temporal dynamics of a macroalgal assemblage associated with a rhodolith bed of the Tuscan archipelago (Tyrrhenian Sea). Atti Soc. Tosc. Sci. Nat. Mem. 2002, 109, 5–10. [Google Scholar]
  37. Cossu, A.V.L.; Gazale, V.; Orrù, P.; Pala, D.; Puddu, A. Lineamenti morfologici e cartografia dei popolamenti bentonici di Rada della Reale nell’isola dell’Asinara (Sardegna NW). Morphological elements and cartography of benthic community in Rada della Reale, Asinara Island (Sardinia NW). Biol. Mar. Mediterr. 2000, 7, 478–487. [Google Scholar]
  38. De Luca, M.; Pascucci, V.; Puccini, A.; Pireddu, L.; Santonastaso, A.; Stelletti, M.; Gazale, V.; Zanello, A. Sea Floor of the Marine Protected Area of the Asinara Island (Sardinia, Italy). J. Maps 2022, 18, 288–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Chimienti, G.; Rizzo, L.; Kaleb, S.; Falace, A.; Fraschetti, S.; De Giosa, F.; Tursi, A.; Barbone, E.; Ungaro, N.; Mastrototaro, F. Rhodolith Beds Heterogeneity along the Apulian Continental Shelf (Mediterranean Sea). J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2020, 8, 813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Hall-Spencer, J.M.; Froglia, C.; Atkinson, R.J.A.; Moore, P.G. The impact of Rapido trawling for scallops, Pecten jacobaeus (L.), on the benthos of the Gulf of Venice. ICES 1999, 56, 111–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Gordini, E.; Falace, A.; Kaleb, S.; Donda, F.; Marocco, R.; Tunis, G. Methane-related carbonate cementation of marine sediments and related macroalgal coralligenous assemblages in the Northern Adriatic Sea. In Seafloor Geomorphology as Benthic Habitat; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2012; pp. 185–200. [Google Scholar]
  42. Kaleb, S.; Falace, A.; Sartoni, G.; Woelkerling, W. Morphology-anatomy of Mesophyllum macroblastum (Hapalidiaceae, Corallinales, Rhodophyta) in the Northern Adriatic Sea and a key to Mediterranean species of the genus. Cryptogam. Algol. 2011, 32, 223–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. IIngrassia, M.; Martorelli, E.; Sañé, E.; Falese, F.; Bosman, A.; Bonifazi, A.; Argenti, L.; Chiocci, F.L. Coralline algae on hard and soft substrata of a temperate mixed siliciclastic-carbonatic platform: Sensitive assemblages in the Zannone area (western Pontine Archipelago; Tyrrhenian Sea). Mar. Environ. Res. 2019, 147, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Sañé, E.; Ingrassia, M.; Chiocci, F.L.; Argenti, L.; Martorelli, E. Characterization of rhodolith beds-related backscatter facies from the western Pontine Archipelago (Mediterranean Sea). Mar. Environ. Res. 2021, 169, 105339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Campostrini, P.; Manea, E.; Bassan, N.; Fabbri, F.; Farella, G.; Di Blasi, D.; Gissi, E. Supporting Implementation of Maritime Spatial Planning in the Western Mediterranean region. In Develop a Basin Scale Analysis/Initial Assessment Strongly MSP Oriented for the Western Mediterranean; CORILA: Venezia, Italy, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  46. Bartole, R. Geologic outline of the Tuscany–latium continental shelf (north Tyrrhenian Sea): Some geodynamics implications. Riv. Ital. Paleontol. Strat. 1990, 96, 309–336. [Google Scholar]
  47. Tortora, P.; Bellotti, P.; Valeri, P. Late-Pleistocene and Holocene deposition along the coasts and continental shelves of the Italian peninsula. Anatomy of an orogen: The Apennines and adjacent Mediterranean basins. In Anatomy of an Orogen: The Apennines and Adjacent Mediterranean Basins; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2001; pp. 455–477. [Google Scholar]
  48. Nicoletti, L.; Fanelli, E.; Lattanzi, L.; La Valle, P.; Gabellini, M.; Chimenz Gusso, C. Contribution to the knowledge of coastal detritic bottoms off Anzio (Central Tyrrhenian Sea). Biol. Mar. Mediterr. 2003, 10, 589–592. [Google Scholar]
  49. Pierdomenico, M.; Bonifazi, A.; Argenti, L.; Ingrassia, M.; Casalbore, D.; Aguzzi, L.; Viaggiu, E.; Le Foche, M.; Chiocci, F. Geomorphological characterization, spatial distribution and environmental status assessment of coralligenous reefs along the Latium continental shelf. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 131, 108219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Corsi, F. Spatial distribution of fishing effort: Modellisation through deductive modelling. In COPEMED Workshop on the Use of GIS as an Assistance Tool for Decision Makers in Fisheries Management; FAO: Rome, Italy, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  51. Folk, R.L.; Ward, W.M. Brazos River bar: A study in the significance of grain size parameters. J. Sediment. Petrol. 1957, 27, 3–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Martorelli, E.; Casalbore, D.; Falcini, F.; Bosman, A.; Falese, F.G.; Chiocci, F.L. Large-and medium-scale morphosedimentary features of the Messina Strait: Insights into bottom-current-controlled sedimentation and interaction with downslope processes. Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ. 2023, 523, SP523–SP2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Foster, M.S.; Amado Filho, G.M.; Kamenos, N.A.; Riosmena-Rodríguez, R.; Steller, D.L. Rhodoliths and rhodolith beds. In Research and Discoveries: The Revolution of Science through Scuba; Lang, M.A., Marinelli, R.L., Roberts, S.J., Taylor, P.R., Eds.; Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2019; pp. 143–155. [Google Scholar]
  54. Cau, A.; Follesa, M.C.; Moccia, D.; Alvito, A.; Bo, M.; Angiolillo, M.; Canese, S.; Paliaga, E.M.; Orrù, P.E.; Sacco, F.; et al. Deepwater corals biodiversity along roche du large ecosystems with different habitat complexity along the south Sardinia continental margin (CW Mediterranean Sea). Mar. Biol. 2015, 162, 1865–1878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Sciberras, M.; Rizzo, M.; Mifsud, J.R.; Camilleri, K.; Borg, J.A.; Lanfranco, E.; Schembri, P.J. Habitat structure and biological characteristics of a maerl bed off the northeastern coast of the Maltese Islands (central Mediterranean). Mar. Biodivers. 2009, 39, 251–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Georgiadis, M.; Papatheodorou, G.; Tzanatos, E.; Geraga, M.; Ramfos, A.; Koutsikopoulos, C.; Ferentinos, G. Coralligène formations in the eastern Mediterranean Sea: Morphology, distribution, mapping and relation to fisheries in the southern Aegean Sea (Greece) based on high-resolution acoustics. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2009, 368, 44–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Bressan, G.; Babbini, L. Corallinales del Mar Mediterraneo: Guida alla determinazione. Biol. Mar. Mediterr. 2003, 10, 1–237. [Google Scholar]
  58. Ingrassia, M.; Di Bella, L. Black coral distribution in the italian seas: A review. Diversity 2021, 13, 334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Maggio, T.; Perzia, P.; Pazzini, A.; Campagnuolo, S.; Falautano, M.; Mannino, A.M.; Allegra, A.; Castriota, L. Sneaking into a Hotspot of Biodiversity: Coverage and Integrity of a Rhodolith Bed in the Strait of Sicily (Central Mediterranean Sea). J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2022, 10, 1808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Bianchi, C.N. Proposta di suddivisione dei mari italiani in settori biogeografici. SIBM 2004, 46, 57–59. [Google Scholar]
  61. Danovaro, R.; Boero, F. Italian seas. In World Seas: An Environmental Evaluation; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019; pp. 283–306. [Google Scholar]
  62. Blake, C.; Maggs, C.A. Comparative growth rates and internal banding periodicity of maërl species (Corallinales, Rhodophyta) from northern Europe. Phycologia 2003, 42, 606–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Riul, P.; Targino, C.H.; Farias, J.D.N.; Visscher, P.T.; Horta, P.A. Decrease in Lithothamnion sp.(Rhodophyta) primary production due to the deposition of a thin sediment layer. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. 2008, 88, 17–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Paiva, S.V.; Carneiro, P.B.M.; Garcia, T.M.; Tavares, T.C.L.; de Souza Pinheiro, L.; Neto, A.R.X.; Soares, M.O. Marine carbonate mining in the Southwestern Atlantic: Current status, potential impacts, and conservation actions. Mar. Policy 2023, 148, 105435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Villas-Bôas, A.B.; Tâmega, F.T.D.S.; Andrade, M.; Coutinho, R.; Figueiredo, M.A.D.O. Experimental effects of sediment burial and light attenuation on two coralline algae of a deep water rhodolith bed in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Cryptogam. Algol. 2014, 35, 67–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Millar, K.R.; Gagnon, P. Mechanisms of stability of rhodolith beds: Sedimentological aspects. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2018, 594, 65–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Nilssen, I.; dos Santos, F.; Coutinho, R.; Gomes, N.; Cabral, M.M.; Eide, I.; Figueiredo, M.A.O.; Johnsen, G.; Johnsen, S. Assessing the potential impact of water-based drill cuttings on deep-water calcareous red algae using species specific impact categories and measured oceanographic and discharge data. Mar. Environ. Res. 2015, 112, 68–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Reynier, M.V.; Tâmega, F.T.S.; Daflon, S.D.A.; Santos, M.A.B.; Coutinho, R.; Figueiredo, M.A.O. Long- and short-term effects of smothering and burial by drill cuttings on calcareous algae in a static-renewal test. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2015, 34, 1572–1577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Sissini, M.N.; Berchez, F.; Hall-Spencer, J.; Ghilardi-Lopes, N.; Carvalho, V.F.; Schubert, N.; Koerich, G.; Diaz-Pulido, G.; Silva, J.; Serrão, E.; et al. Brazil oil spill response: Protect rhodolith beds. Science 2020, 367, 156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Martin, S.; Hall-Spencer, J.M. Effects of ocean warming and acidification on rhodolith/maërl beds. In Rhodolith/Maerl Beds: A Global Perspective; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 55–85. [Google Scholar]
  71. Grall, J.; Hall-Spencer, J.M. Problems facing maërl conservation in Brittany. Aquat. Conserv. 2003, 13, S55–S64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Hall-Spencer, J. Ban on maërl extraction. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2005, 50, 121. [Google Scholar]
  73. Aguirre, J.; Braga, J.C.; Bassi, D. The role of rhodoliths and rhodolith beds in the rock record and their use in palaeoenvironmental reconstructions. In Rhodolith/Maerl Beds: A Global Perspective; Riosmena-Rodriguez, R., Nelson, W., Aguirre, J., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 105–138. ISBN 3319293133/978-3319293134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Hall–Spencer, J.; Allain, V.; Fosså, J.H. Trawling damage to Northeast Atlantic ancient coral reefs. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 2002, 269, 507–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Hall-Spencer, J.; White, N.; Gillespie, E.; Gillham, K.; Foggo, A. Impact of fish farms on maerl beds in strongly tidal areas. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2006, 326, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Diversity 15 00859 g001 550
Figure 1. (a) Shaded relief map of the seafloor around the Costacuti Shoal showing the location of ROV transects and grab samples (insert with location of the new site, red dot); and (b) side-scan sonar mosaic of the Costacuti Shoal with location of video transects showing the percentage abundance of the coralline algae along the tracks.
Figure 1. (a) Shaded relief map of the seafloor around the Costacuti Shoal showing the location of ROV transects and grab samples (insert with location of the new site, red dot); and (b) side-scan sonar mosaic of the Costacuti Shoal with location of video transects showing the percentage abundance of the coralline algae along the tracks.
Diversity 15 00859 g001
Diversity 15 00859 g002 550
Figure 2. Distribution map of Italian rhodolith/maerl beds with their associated morphotypes (pralines, boxwork, and branches) (red lines: −50 m isobaths; grey lines: isobaths at 200 m interval after −50 m isobaths and at 10 m interval before −50 m isobaths). Numbers codes refer to the identification (ID) sites reported in Table 1.
Figure 2. Distribution map of Italian rhodolith/maerl beds with their associated morphotypes (pralines, boxwork, and branches) (red lines: −50 m isobaths; grey lines: isobaths at 200 m interval after −50 m isobaths and at 10 m interval before −50 m isobaths). Numbers codes refer to the identification (ID) sites reported in Table 1.
Diversity 15 00859 g002
Diversity 15 00859 g003 550
Figure 3. (a) Different geomorphological settings; and (b) substrate types associated with the different rhodolith/maerl morphotypes.
Figure 3. (a) Different geomorphological settings; and (b) substrate types associated with the different rhodolith/maerl morphotypes.
Diversity 15 00859 g003
Diversity 15 00859 g004 550
Figure 4. (a,b) ROV images showing examples of rhodolith/maerl beds observed around the Costacuti Shoal; and (c,d) ROV images showing occurrence of trawl marks over the soft bottom.
Figure 4. (a,b) ROV images showing examples of rhodolith/maerl beds observed around the Costacuti Shoal; and (c,d) ROV images showing occurrence of trawl marks over the soft bottom.
Diversity 15 00859 g004
Diversity 15 00859 g005 550
Figure 5. Examples of rhodolith/maerl grab samples recovered along the video transects.
Figure 5. Examples of rhodolith/maerl grab samples recovered along the video transects.
Diversity 15 00859 g005
Table
Table 1. Dataset of the Italian submarine sites hosting rhodolith/maerl beds reported in the available scientific literature. The Costacuti Shoal site (ID 27) is herein reported for the first time. Codes used for the Italian seas: STS (Southern Tyrrhenian Sea), SC (Sicily Channel), TS (Tyrrhenian Sea), AS (Adriatic Sea), IS (Ionian Sea), LS (Ligurian Sea). Codes used for the coralline algae species: Pc (Phymatolithon calcareum), Lc (Lithothamnion corallioides), Lm (Lithothamnion minervae), Lv (Lithothamnion valens), Pl (Phymatolithon lenormandii), Lr (Lithophyllumn racemus), Ls (Lithophyllum stictaeforme).
Table 1. Dataset of the Italian submarine sites hosting rhodolith/maerl beds reported in the available scientific literature. The Costacuti Shoal site (ID 27) is herein reported for the first time. Codes used for the Italian seas: STS (Southern Tyrrhenian Sea), SC (Sicily Channel), TS (Tyrrhenian Sea), AS (Adriatic Sea), IS (Ionian Sea), LS (Ligurian Sea). Codes used for the coralline algae species: Pc (Phymatolithon calcareum), Lc (Lithothamnion corallioides), Lm (Lithothamnion minervae), Lv (Lithothamnion valens), Pl (Phymatolithon lenormandii), Lr (Lithophyllumn racemus), Ls (Lithophyllum stictaeforme).
IDSiteItalian SeasRegionSettingSubstrateMin DepthMax DepthMedium DepthMorphotypeDominant SpeciesAnthropogenic ImpactMPAReference
1Ustica Island STSSicilyIslandBiogenic gravelly-sand7010085prâlines, boxwork, branchesLmFishing activity*[24,25]
2Marettimo, Egadi islandsSCSicilyIslandBiogenic gravelly-sand4646 prâlinesLv, Lm, Pl, n.d. [26,27]
3Lampione Islet, Pelagie islandsSCSicilyIslandSand and sandy mud456052.5n.d.n.d.n.d.*[28]
4Graham BankSCSicilyBankCoarse sand90120105n.d.Pc, Lcn.d. [29]
5Nereo BankSCSicilyBankDetritic bottom305040n.d.Pc, Lc n.d. [29]
6PantelleriaSCSicilyShoalDetritic bottom305040n.d.Pc, Lcn.d. [29]
7LinosaSCSicilyIslandCoarse sediments6013095prâlines, boxwork, branchesLsn.d.*[28]
8SalinaSTSSicilyIslandDetritic bottom484848n.d.n.d.n.d. [27]
9PanareaSTSSicilyIslandn.d.707070n.d.n.d.n.d. [27]
10IschiaTSCampanianIslandFine sediment507261prâlines, boxworkPc, LcLitter and Fishing activity [30,31]
11Cilento TSCampanianTerrace Fine and coarse sediments426553.5prâlines, branchesLc, Pc n.d. [30,31,32]
12Miseno Bank TSCampanianBankCoarse sediments355846.5branchesLcn.d. [33]
13SecchitielloTSCampanianShoalFine sediment687270prâlinesLcLitter and Fishing activity [30,31]
14Punta CampanellaTSCampanianShelfCoarse sediments526257prâlinesLmLitter and Fishing activity [30,31]
15CapriTSCampanianShelfCoarse sediments405949.5prâlinesLmLitter and Fishing activity [27,30,31]
16Elba TSTuscanyIslandDetritic bottom454545branchesLc, Pcn.d. [34]
17Giglio TSTuscanyIslandSand353535boxworkLcn.d. [35]
18GorgonaTSTuscanyIslandSand 4010070n.d.Lcn.d. [36]
19Asinara TSSardiniaShoalBiogenic sand303030prâlinesPcn.d.*[37,38]
20Capo CarbonaraTSSardiniaShoalCoarse sediments456052.5prâlines, boxworkn.d.n.d.*[17]
21Tremiti ASApuliaShelfRock154831.5prâlines, boxworkLr n.d.*[39]
22GallipoliISApuliaShelfRock364540.5branchesLrn.d. [39]
23Armeleia ISApuliaShoal 354138branchesLcn.d. [39]
24OtrantoASApulia n.d.384441branchesLrn.d. [39]
25Gulf of VeniceASVenetoShelfRock252525n.d.Lc, Pc, Lm, LrFishing activity [40,41]
26Gulf of TriesteASFriuli Venezia GiuliaShelfFine sediments92416.5branchesLrn.d. [41,42]
27Costacuti ShoalTSLatiumShoalSand455047.5prâlines, boxwork, branchesn.d.Fishing activity This study
28Western Pontine TSLatiumTerrace Coarse and fine sediments6513097.5prâlines, boxwork, branchesLr, Lc, Pc, Litter [43,44]
29Santo StefanoTSLatiumTerrace Coarse and fine sediments9410499n.d.n.d.n.d. [27]
30PortofinoLSLigurianShelfSand1610460n.d.n.d.n.d.*[45]
31La SpeziaLSLigurianShelfn.d.1610460n.d.n.d.Fishing activity [45]
Table
Table 2. List of ROV transects performed around the Costacuti Shoal with an indication of the transect code, length of transect, starting and ending coordinates of transects, and transect depth (m).
Table 2. List of ROV transects performed around the Costacuti Shoal with an indication of the transect code, length of transect, starting and ending coordinates of transects, and transect depth (m).
CodeLength (m)Latitude (Start)Longitude (Start)Latitude (End)Longitude (End)Depth (m, Start-End)
S155041.37071082°12.61497847°41.37256383°12.61105010°45–45
S221241.36361100°12.62258272°41.36334395°12.62184302°44–45
S326541.36537945°12.60748005°41.37068328°12.60282734° 50–49
Table
Table 3. List of grab samples, with an indication of the sampling site code, and the coordinates, and depth (m) from which grabs were made.
Table 3. List of grab samples, with an indication of the sampling site code, and the coordinates, and depth (m) from which grabs were made.
CodeLatitudeLongitudeDepth (m)
S1_B141.37129642°12.61459825°45
S1_B241.37238438°12.61393591°45
S1_B341.37241608°12.61206103°45
S2_B141.36367024°12.62238577°46
S2_B241.36595069° 12.62333410°45
S2_B341.36197936°12.62213928°49
S3_B141.36585067°12.60682600°50
S3_B241.36686492°12.60494024°49
S3_B341.36896419°12.60299915°49
Table
Table 4. Sediment composition of the grab samples recovered around the Costacuti Shoal. (s) slightly.
Table 4. Sediment composition of the grab samples recovered around the Costacuti Shoal. (s) slightly.
CodeDepth (m)%Pebbles%Gravel%Sand%SiltFolk Class
S1 B14503.7072.3823.92(s) gravelly muddy sand
S1 B24503.6270.2626.12(s) gravelly muddy sand
S1 B3454.423.555.0437.04Gravelly muddy sand
S2 B1465.636.9681.845.57Gravelly sand
S2 B2451.844.9783.939.26Gravelly sand
S2 B3492.443.782.2411.62Gravelly muddy sand
S3 B1505.302.8951.4840.33Gravelly muddy sand
S3 B2495.347.5150.1736.98Gravelly muddy sand
S3 B3491.553.2659.5435.65(s) gravelly muddy sand
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ingrassia, M.; Pierdomenico, M.; Casalbore, D.; Falese, F.G.; Chiocci, F.L. A Review of Rhodolith/Maerl Beds of the Italian Seas. Diversity 2023, 15, 859. https://doi.org/10.3390/d15070859

AMA Style

Ingrassia M, Pierdomenico M, Casalbore D, Falese FG, Chiocci FL. A Review of Rhodolith/Maerl Beds of the Italian Seas. Diversity. 2023; 15(7):859. https://doi.org/10.3390/d15070859

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ingrassia, Michela, Martina Pierdomenico, Daniele Casalbore, Francesco Giuseppe Falese, and Francesco Latino Chiocci. 2023. "A Review of Rhodolith/Maerl Beds of the Italian Seas" Diversity 15, no. 7: 859. https://doi.org/10.3390/d15070859

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop