Page 1 - Rende_Bacci_alii_2011

Study of Macrophytes in WFD 2000/60/EC: the response of the adopted indices to

anthropogenic pressure along the Italian coast.

Rende F., Bacci T., Gennaro P., Penna M., Trabucco B., Austoni M., Giovanardi F., Cicero A.M.

ISPRA –Institute for Environmental Protection and Research, Via Vitaliano Brancati 48, Rome, Italy

INTRODUCTION CARLIT index

Angiosperms (i.e. Posidonia oceanica (L.) Delile) and Macroalgae seem to be reliable bioindicators due to their PREI index

wide distribution, reasonable size, sessile condition, easy collection, abundance and sensitivity to

modifications of the littoral zone (Boudouresque et al., 2009). All over the world the coastal zone is subject to

continuous population growth and increasing land use for agriculture, industry and urban activities, which

generate the increase of human impacts on shallow coastal waters. These three main drivers (agriculture,

industry and urban areas) are considered in the Land Use Simplified Index (LUSI, WFD-CIS phase II, Technical

paper) that is a specific method to evaluate the anthropogenic pressures influencing a coastal water body (Flo

et al., 2011). Water Framework Directive (WFD 2000/60/EC) considers Angiosperms and Macroalgae, among

others, as biological quality elements (BQEs) in the evaluation of the ecological status of coastal water bodies

(WBs) as regards the pressures insisting on the monitored coastal stretch. By means of the D.M. 260/2010,

Italy adopts the PREI (Posidonia Rapid Easy Index) (Gobert et al., 2009) and the CARLIT (Cartography Littoral

Zone) (Ballesteros et al., 2007) indices as the National official classification methods. The aims of this study are

to show the ecological classification results obtained for the Italian national sites through the P. oceanica and

Macroalgae BQEs, and to verify the sensitivity of PREI and CARLIT indices as to the anthropogenic pressures,

by testing a modified pressure indicator, named Ma - LUSI (Marine LUSI, WFD-CIS phase II, Technical paper),

which takes into account larger number of pressure drivers than LUSI (see Table 1).

1a 1b
MATERIAL AND METHODS

The PREI and CARLIT data managed by "Si.Di.Mar." database in the frame of the National Monitoring Program 1b

(L. 979/82) have been collected during the 2008-2009 biennium in 29 areas (for P.oceanica) and in 25 areas

(for Macroalgae) within the Italian Seas ( Fig.1a and Fig.1b). Table 1 shows variables considered in the Ma –

LUSI index, selected by data source . Fig 1a. – 29 Italian marine areas classified by PREI index; 1b – 25 Italian marine areas

classified by CARLIT index. (Unofficial Classification )

Data source: Corine land Cover 2006

Urban (codes 11)
Commersial & Industrial (codes 12, 13) RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Agriculture (codes 21-24) The highest EQR values of PREI and CARLIT stating the High Ecological Status of WBs have been identified in the Marine Protected Areas

Data source: Google Earth
(MPA), which are characterized by no or very low anthropogenic pressures (Fig.1a, Fig.1b and Tab. 2). Differently, the lowest values of PREI

Confinement Coastline (concave, convex, straight)
Mariculture and CARLIT have been calculated in areas where there are not optimal conditions for life of P. oceanica meadows and Cystoseira

Data source: Corine land Cover 2000 Coastline datasets macroalgae assemblages (e.g. high degree of urbanization, intensive industrial and agriculture activities). The pressures and impacts

Artificial beaches analysis highlighted a good correlation between the EQRs values of PREI and CARLIT vs the MA-LUSI index, showing a good sensitivity of

Artificial shoreline
Coastal embankments for construction purpose indices (PREI and CARLIT) vs pressures (Fig. 2a and 2b).
Eustary

Harbour areas Finally GIS analysis selected the lowest pressure areas defined “benchmark sites”: Asinara, Capo Carbonara, Punta Mesco Parco 5 Terre,
Material subject to erosion
Coastline made non cohesive sediments Carbonifera, Punta Tresino, Maraone-Egadi Islands (for the Angiosperms BQE) and Montecristo Island, Carbonara (Serpentara Island),

Data source: Corine land Cover Population density Favignana - Maraone Island (for the Macroalgae BQE) (Fig. 3).

Population density

Data source: National Monitoring Program (L.979/82)

stability of the water column
Background trophic status “BENCHMARK” SITES EQB ANGIOSPERMS

Sediment nutrient release

Data source: SINTAI and ISTAT Capo Carbonara Asinara Parco 5 Terre

Sewage outfall Relationships of PREI EQR vs LUSI Index
Irregular Fresh Water inputs 1,00 y = -0,0397x + 0,7741

0,90 R² = 0,6105
Tab.1 – pressure drivers (direct/indirect) adopted to 0,80 p < 0.01

MA – LUSI index 0,70

0,60
EQR 0,50

EQB Angiosperms 0,40

0,30
Region Site name Benchmark LUSI value EQR value
0,20
Liguria Cogoleto no 4 0,63

Liguria Punta Mesco - Parco 5 Terre (MPA) yes 2 0,71 0,10
Toscana Antignano no 5 0,60 0,00 EQR value: 0.881 EQR value: 0.680 EQR value:0.707
Toscana Carbonifera yes 3 0,63 0 2 4 6 8 10
Toscana Elba nord no 6 0,58 MA - LUSI Index Punta Tresino Maraone I. Egadi
Lazio Foce del Marta no 6 0,48 2a Carbonifera
Lazio Torre Paola no 5 0,59
Campania Camerota no 2 0,62
Campania Punta Tresino yes 2 0,61
Puglia Bari Trullo no 8 0,29 Relationships of CARLIT EQR vs LUSI Index
Puglia Porto Cesareo (MPA) no 5 0,58 1
Sicilia Maraone - Isole Egadi (MPA) yes 0 0,84 0,9 y = -0,084x + 0,992
Sicilia Golfo Castellamare-Trappeto no 5 0,47 R² = 0,666

Sicilia Ragusa - Fiume Irminio no 9 0,50 0,8 p < 0.01
Sicilia Siracusa -Plemmirio (MPA) no 5 0,66
Sardegna Olbia no 4 0,58 0,7
Sardegna Capo Carbonara (MPA) yes 0 0,88 0,6
Sardegna Cagliari no 5 0,61
Sardegna S. Antioco no 5 0,72 EQR 0,5
Sardegna Capo Rizzuto (MPA) no 4 0,63 0,4
Sardegna Vibo Marina no 6 0,6 EQR value:0.609 EQR value: 0.842 EQR value:0.626
Sardegna Asinara (MPA) yes 0 0,7 0,3

EQB Macroalgae 0,2 “BENCHMARK” SITES EQB MACROALGAE

0,1
Region Site name Benchmark Lusi value EQR value Isola di Montecristo Carbonara Isola Favignana - Maraone
0
Liguria Genova no 2 0,758 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Liguria Bocca di Magra no 4 0,482 MA - LUSI index
Liguria Capo Mortola no 2 1,079 2b
Toscana Romito no 2 0,744
Toscana Argentario no 2 1,059
Toscana Montecristo (MPA) yes 0 1,307
Campania Camerota no 1 0,806
Campania Tresino no 1 1,653
Calabria Crotone no 3 0,820 Blocchi metrici
Calabria Vibo Valenzia no 2 0,818
Puglia Porto Cesareo-Torre S.Isidoro (MPA) no 5 0,575 Falesia bassa
Puglia Bari Trullo no 7 0,376 Fig.2 – Relationships of EQRs PREI and CARLIT index vs LUSI index. Falesia bassa
Puglia Isole Tremiti (loc. S. Domino) (MPA) no 2 0,568 Falesia alta Falesia alta
Sicilia Trapani,Isole Egadi – Favignana (MPA) yes 0 1,174 EQV = 20 EQV = 20 EQV = 20
Sicilia Ragusa – Foce Fiume Irminio no 3 1,028 calc calc calc
Sicilia AMP Plemmirio no 4 1,275
Sicilia Golfo di Castellamare – Trapp no 6 0,512 EQR value: 1.0 EQR value: 1.0 EQR value: 0,9
Sicilia Golfo di Palermo – Vergine Mar no 2 1,103
Sardegna Cagliari no 5 0,626
Sardegna Carbonara (MPA) yes 0 1,205
Sardegna Arbatax no 3 0,827 Fig . 3 - Italian “benchmark” sites
Sardegna Olbia no 2 0,582
Sardegna Alghero no 4 0,739
Sardegna Oristano no 2 0,645
Sardegna Portoscuso ECOLOGICAL STATUS no 2 1,196
CONCLUSIONS
BAD POOR MODERATE GOOD HIGH

In general, PREI and CARLIT indices show a good sensitivity to anthropogenic disturbances and stress.

Tab.2 – 29 Italian marine areas classified by PREI index; Moreover, nationwide in most cases both indices classify the ecological status in the same way. Since data are

1b – 25 Italian marine areas classified by CARLIT index. still partial, in the near future a wider data-base will be useful to strengthen the effective comparability of

(Unofficial Classification)
ecological status classification between indices and to make possible improvements in the classification route.

This research was possible thanks to the data of the database Si.Di.Mar. funded by the Ministry of the Environment, Land and Sea.

REFERENCES

BALLESTEROS E., TORRAS X., PINEDO S, GARCÍA M., MANGIALAJO L., TORRES DE M., 2007. A new methodology based on littoral community cartography for the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 55: 172-180.

BOUDOURESQUE F.C., BERNARD G., PERGENT G., SHILI A., VERLAQUE M., 2009. Regression of Mediterranean seagrasses caused by natural processes and anthropogenic disturbances and stress: a critical review. Botanica Marina 52: 395-418.
FLO E., CAMP J., GARCÉS E., 2011. Assessment Pressure methodology, Land Uses Simplified Index (LUSI). (Personal communication WFD-CIS- phase II, Technical paper)

GOBERT S., SARTORETTO S., RICO-RAIMONDINO V., ANDRAL B., CHERY A., LEJEUNE P., BOISSERY P. (2009) - Assessment of the ecological status of Mediterranean French coastal waters as required by the Water Framework Directive using the Posidonia oceanica Rapid Easy Index: PREI. Marine

Pollution Bulletin, 58: 1727-1733.