| Literature DB >> 35205192 |
Cataldo Pierri1, Tamara Lazic1, Michele Gristina2, Giuseppe Corriero1, Mauro Sinopoli3.
Abstract
Human pressures on marine ecosystems have caused extensive degradation of marine habitats and several local extinctions. Overexploitation and destructive fishing practices are responsible for biodiversity loss in many coastal ecosystems. The definition of conservation programs in marine fish requires comprehensive knowledge on large-scale geographical distribution, while considering distribution/abundance patterns in relation to key environmental variables. Due to their life-cycle traits, the two European seahorses (Hippocampus guttulatus and H. hippocampus), as with other congeneric species, are particularly sensitive to the effects of anthropogenic activities and habitat changes. However, information on the ecological distribution of these two species is scattered, patchy, and mainly focused on small-scale studies. In this paper, we followed an international standard protocol for systematic reviews (the PRISMA protocol) to provide a detailed assessment of the two species' geographical distribution in relation to the environmental characteristics. According to the 134 analyzed studies, Hippocampus guttulatus is more common in confined areas, while H. hippocampus is found in marine shelf waters. With several interspecific differences, seagrasses were the most used holdfasts of both species. The EUNIS codes (European nature information system) referring to a specific and unique habitat were discussed as a potential tool for defining the ecological distribution of the two species. The obtained results and their future implementation could help plan conservation actions.Entities:
Keywords: Hippocampus distribution; PRISMA; ecological assessment; long-snouted seahorse; short-snouted seahorse; syngnathids
Year: 2022 PMID: 35205192 PMCID: PMC8869150 DOI: 10.3390/biology11020325
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biology (Basel) ISSN: 2079-7737
Figure 1Flow chart detailing the process of identification, screening, and eligibility of references for the systematic review.
Figure 2(a) The number of publications on H. guttulatus (in blue) and H. hippocampus (in orange) per year. (b) The number of publications on H. guttulatus and H. hippocampus per research topic. (c) The number of publications on H. guttulatus and H. hippocampus per publication type.
Occurrence (and co-occurrence) sites of the two species in the Northern Atlantic Ocean (the English Channel and the North Sea), Mediterranean Sea, and the Black Sea according to PRISMA (n = 167) and alternative search engines (n = 9).
|
|
| Both Species | |
|---|---|---|---|
| English Channel and North Sea | 5 | 23 | 6 |
| Atlantic Ocean | 17 | 4 | 12 |
| Mediterranean Sea | 28 | 25 | 38 |
| Black Sea | 13 | 3 | 2 |
Figure 3Distribution map of seahorse species. White symbols indicate sites found following the PRISMA strategy. Black symbols indicate sites found through alternative search engines. Gray symbols indicate the presence of seahorses without a clear indication on the exact position.
Figure 4Percentage distribution of seahorses concerning geographical area and the degree of confinement for (a) H. guttulatus and (b) H. hippocampus. EC&NS = English Channel and the North Sea.
Figure 5Percentage depth ranges (meter) of the two species in confined (a) and marine shelf (b) environments.
Figure 6Percentage distribution of the two species among habitats in confined (a) and marine shelf environments (b).
Figure 7Distribution of the two species among the habitats classified according to the EUNIS (European Nature Information System) classification system.