Page 2 - MedSens_index_2021

Ecological Indicators 122 (2021) 107296
E. Turicchia et al.
1. Introduction 2. Materials and methods

Community-based environmental monitoring (CBM) is a participa- 2.1. The Reef Check Mediterranean U-CEM protocol
tory approach to engage citizen volunteers, through citizen science (CS)
programs, to enhance the ability of decision-makers and non- The RCMed volunteers (mainly scuba divers, but also free divers and
government organisations to monitor and manage natural resources, snorkelers; EcoDivers hereafter) collect data on the abundances of
track at-risk species, and protect biodiversity (Chandler et al., 2017; selected taxa according to the U-CEM protocol (Cerrano et al., 2017).
Conrad and Hilchey, 2011). Thus, CBM involves citizens and other After a short training course and the verification of their learning and
stakeholders in the ecosystem-based management (EBM) of natural abilities, EcoDivers can make independent observations along random
heritage, aiming to conserve ecological goods and services by recog- swim (Hill and Wilkinson, 2004). The taxa were selected from a com-
nising their interactions within an ecosystem (Alexander et al., 2019; bination of criteria, including ease of identification and being a key
Freiwald et al., 2018; Keough and Blahna, 2006). Marine citizen science indicator of shifts in the Mediterranean subtidal habitats. Before starting
(MCS) may represent a valuable contribution to CBM in marine envi- the data recording, each EcoDiver have to choose some of the 43 taxa
ronments, given the vastness of the oceans and the world’s coastlines included in the protocol as search targets, according to the expected
and the diversity of their habitats, communities, and species (Garcia- habitat typology and personal motivations. This freedom of choice en-
Soto et al., 2017; Thiel et al., 2014). By engaging millions of people sures greater attention and accuracy by the participants. The EcoDivers
around the world, MCS programs are becoming increasingly important select species based on confidence (thereby reducing identification er-
to conservation science by influencing and improving the management rors), personal interest (increasing satisfaction), and the number of
of marine protected areas (MPAs) and fishery resources (Freiwald et al., species they feel able to handle (to reduce psychological stress during
2018). MCS programs also increase observation capacities (Hodgson, dive). However, this generates skewed distribution efforts among the
2001; Pattengill-Semmens and Semmens, 2003; Sully et al., 2019). taxa. The most-searched taxa are attractive and iconic species, such as
Despite a worldwide increase in the number and extent of MCS programs the red coral Corallium rubrum and sea fans Paramuricea clavata and
(Thiel et al., 2014), the collected information is rarely used for institu- Eunicella cavolini. Less conspicuous but highly concerning species, such
tional monitoring programs or to inform decision-making processes in as invasive algae in the genus Caulerpa, are also frequently surveyed
marine conservation (Conrad and Hilchey, 2011). This disconnect is (Cerrano et al., 2017).
partially due to persisting scepticism of the reliability of data collected EcoDivers record the abundance (using numerical or descriptive
from volunteers (Burgess et al., 2017) and to a co-creation approach that classes according to the countability of organisms) and observed depth
is still not well-integrated in CS processes (Bonney et al., 2015). If the ranges of the searched taxa, along with the prevalent habitat type. Not
results of a CS project answer research questions that are of low interest encountered but actively searched taxa are recorded as absent. The
to decision-makers, it will inevitably be difficult to integrate the CS data diving sites are localised by global positioning system (GPS) receivers,
into management strategies. However, many studies demonstrate that nautical charts, or known points (e.g. mooring buoys at MPAs).
well-trained citizens can provide valuable data on marine environ- Geographical coordinates (WGS84) are recorded with ± 6 arc-seconds (i.
mental issues and that suitable protocols for volunteer projects can e. 185 m in latitude) accuracy, the usual distance range explored by
provide results that are consistent with the methods used by professional EcoDivers.
researchers (e.g. Done et al., 2017; Forrester et al., 2015; Holt et al., Recorded observations, including absence, site name, geographic
2013). Still, there are limits to accessing the data, which are not always coordinates, date and time, underwater visibility, survey depth range
well-organised and readily available according to the FAIR (findable, (min and max), and observation effort in terms of time dedicated are
2
accessible, interoperable, and reusable) data principles (Wilkinson et al., uploaded to the online database through an internet form or a dedi-
2016). Also, there is a lack of simple analysis tools and indices to sum- cated app for Android smartphones (‘Reef Check Med’ app).
marise the data and extract relevant information for management pur- Recorded data are subjected to quality assurance and control (QA/
poses at the proper spatial and temporal scales. QC) procedures, based on automatic filters (e.g. consistency among
This study aims to provide a biotic index to environmental managers survey and observation depth ranges) and on manual checks (e.g.
and decision-makers – the RCMed species sensitivity (MedSens) index, matching between the site name and geographic coordinates), and made
3
based on open data collected under the Reef Check Mediterranean Un- freely available on a web-based GIS .
derwater Coastal Environment Monitoring (RCMed U-CEM) protocol
(www.reefcheckmed.org; Cerrano et al., 2017). The MedSens index is 2.2. Species sensitivity assessment
not purport to replace detailed studies and the indices applied by pro-
fessional researchers, such as the Coralligenous Assemblage Index (CAI;
The marine evidence-based sensitivity assessment (MarESA; Tyler-
Deter et al., 2012), the Coralligenous Assessment by Reef Scape Estimate Walters et al., 2018) has been conducted for 25 taxa inhabiting the
index (COARSE; Gatti et al., 2015), the Ecological Status of Cor-
Mediterranean subtidal rocky bottoms, especially the coralligenous
alligenous Assemblages index (ESCA; Piazzi et al., 2017), the Index habitats (Ingrosso et al., 2018), and included in the RCMed U-CEM
Coralligenous approach (INDEX-COR; Sartoretto et al., 2017), the
protocol (Supporting Information S1: Table S1.1). The species assess-
Standardized Coralligenous Evaluation procedure (STAR; Piazzi et al., ment is based on evidence from a literature review, complemented by
2019), and the 3D-complexity index (Valisano et al., 2019). The MedSens
expert judgement, for the possible effects of physical, chemical, and
index is intended to integrate the assessment of the environmental status biological pressures listed in the MSFD Annex III (Supporting Informa-
of coastal Mediterranean areas threatened by multiple stressors (Micheli tion S1: Table S1.2). For each taxon and pressure, resistance (none, low,
et al., 2013) while considering the protected and sensitive species and medium, high, or not relevant) and resilience ranks (very low, low,
adhering to the requests of the European Union’s Habitat Directive (92/ medium, high, or not relevant) were assigned according to the MarESA
43/EEC) and Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD, 2008/56/ standard benchmarks. The quality and applicability of the evidences
EC; Borja et al., 2010). A plugin has been specifically developed for the were also assessed according to the MarESA principles. The species
open-source geographic information system QGIS (QGIS Development
Team, 2019), allowing index calculations for the areas and time frames
of interest. 2 https://www.reefcheckmed.org/english/underwater-monitoring-protoco
l/upload-your-data/
3
https://www.reefcheckmed.org/english/underwater-monitoring-protoco
l/webgis-map/
2