Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T19:30:48.235Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A global approach to hierarchical classification of coastal waters at different spatial scales: the NEA case

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 June 2016

José A. Juanes ,
Araceli Puente Open the ORCID record for Araceli Puente [Opens in a new window]  and
Elvira Ramos
José A. Juanes*
Affiliation:
Environmental Hydraulics Institute (IHCantabria), Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain
Araceli Puente
Affiliation:
Environmental Hydraulics Institute (IHCantabria), Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain
Elvira Ramos
Affiliation:
Environmental Hydraulics Institute (IHCantabria), Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: J.A. Juanes, Environmental Hydraulics Institute (IHCantabria), Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ecological classification of coastal waters has become increasingly important as one of the basic issues in the biology of conservation. Management and protection of coastal areas take place at different spatial scales. Thus, proper classification schemes should integrate equivalent information at various levels of definition in order to show its feasibility as a useful tool for assessment of coastal environments at the required scales. In this work, a global approach applied to the classification of the NE Atlantic coast is analysed in order to discuss pros and cons regarding different conceptual and technical issues for effective implementation of such a management tool. Using the hierarchical system applied at three different geographic scales: Biogeographic (NE Atlantic coast), Regional (Bay of Biscay) and Local (Cantabria region), five different topics were considered for debating strengths and weaknesses of the methodological alternatives at those spatial scales, using for validation the rocky shore macroalgae as a representative biological element of benthic communities. These included: (i) the spatial scales; (ii) the physical variables and indicators; (iii) the classification methodologies; (iv) the biological information; and (v) the validation procedure. Based on that analysis, the hierarchical support system summarized in this paper provides a management framework for classification of coastal systems at the most appropriate resolution, applicable to a wide range of coastal areas. Further applications of the physical classification for management of biodiversity in different environmental scenarios are also analysed.

Keywords

coastal classificationhierarchicalscalesphysical variablesintertidal macroalgaeNE Atlanticcoastal managementecological regions
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 97 , Special Issue 3: European Marine Biology Symposium , May 2017 , pp. 465 - 476
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allee, R.J., Kurtz, J., Gould, R.W. Jr., Ko, D.S., Finkbeiner, M. and Goodin, K. (2014) Application of the coastal and marine ecological classification standard using satellite-derived and modeled data products for pelagic habitats in the Northern Gulf of Mexico. Ocean & Coastal Management 88, 13–20.Google Scholar
Bermejo, R., Ramírez-Romero, E., Vergara, J.J. and Hernández, I. (2015) Spatial patterns of macrophyte composition and landscape along the rocky shores of the Mediterranean Atlantic transition region (northern Alboran Sea). Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 155, 17–28.Google Scholar
Bianchi, C., Parravicini, V., Montefalcone, M., Rovere, A. and Morri, C. (2012) The challenge of managing marine biodiversity: a practical toolkit for a cartographic, territorial approach. Diversity 4, 419–452.Google Scholar
Boyer, T.P., Antonov, J.I., Garcia, H.E., Johnson, D.R., Locarnini, R.A., Mishonov, A.V., Pitcher, M.T., Baranova, O.K. and Smolyar, I.V. (2006) World ocean database 2005. In Levitus, S. (ed.) NOAA Atlas NESDIS 60. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 182 pp.Google Scholar
Breeman, A.M. (1988) Relative importance of temperature and other factors in determining geographic boundaries of seaweeds: experimental and phonological evidence. Helgoländer Meeresunters 42, 199–241.Google Scholar
Briceño, H.O., Boyer, J.N., Castro, J. and Harlem, P. (2013) Biogeochemical classification of South Florida's estuarine and coastal waters. Marine Pollution Bulletin 75, 187–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burrows, M. (2012) Influences of wave fetch, tidal flow and ocean colour on subtidal rocky communities. Marine Ecology Progress Series 445, 193–207.Google Scholar
Burrows, M., Harvey, R., Robb, L., Poloczanska, E.S., Mieszkowska, N., Moore, P., Leaper, R., Hawkins, S.J. and Benedetti-Cecchi, L. (2009) Spatial scales of variance in abundance of intertidal species: effects of region, dispersal mode and trophic level. Ecology 90, 1242–1254.Google Scholar
Camus, P., Mendez, F.J., Medina, R., Tomas, A. and Izaguirre, C. (2013) High resolution downscaled ocean waves (DOW) reanalysis in coastal areas. Coastal Engineering 72, 56–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Céréghino, R., Santoul, F., Compin, A. and Mastrorillo, S. (2005) Using self-organizing maps to investigate spatial patterns of non-native species. Biological Conservation 125, 459–465. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2005.04.018.Google Scholar
Chapman, M.G. (1999) Improving sampling designs for measuring restoration in aquatic habitats. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Stress and Recovery 6, 235–251.Google Scholar
Chappuis, E., Terradas, M., Cefalí, M.E., Mariani, S. and Ballesteros, E. (2014) Vertical zonation is the main distribution pattern of littoral assemblages on rocky shores at a regional scale. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 147, 113–122.Google Scholar
Cheung, W.W.L., Lam, V.W.Y., Sarmiento, J.L., Kearney, K., Watson, R. and Pauly, D. (2009) Projecting global marine biodiversity impacts under climate change scenarios. Fish and Fisheries 10, 235–251. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-2979.2008.00315.x.Google Scholar
Commission of the European Communities (1991) CORINE biotopes. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities for Commission of the European Communities.Google Scholar
Connor, D.W., Allen, J.H., Golding, N., Howell, K.L., Lieberknecht, L.M., Northen, K.O. and Reker, J.B. (2004) The marine habitat classification for Britain and Ireland. Version 04.05. Peterborough: Joint Nature Conservation Committee.Google Scholar
Connor, D.W., Brazier, D.P., Hill, T.O. and Northen, K.O. (1997) Marine nature conservation review: marine biotope classification for Britain and Ireland, Volume 1. Littoral biotopes. Version 97.06. Report No. 229. Peterborough: Joint Nature Conservation Committee.Google Scholar
Davies, C.E., Moss, D. and Hill, M.O. (2004) EUNIS habitat classification revised 2004. Report to the European Topic Centre on Nature Protection and Biodiversity. European Environment Agency.Google Scholar
Devilliers, P. and Devilliers-Terschuren, J. (1996) A classification of Palaearctic habitats. Nature and Environment, No. 78. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.Google Scholar
Díez-Tapia, P., Bárbara, I. and Díez, I. (2013) Multi-scale spatial variability in intertidal benthic assemblages: differences between sand-free and sand-covered rocky habitats. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 133, 97–108.Google Scholar
Díez, I., Muguerza, N., Santolaria, A., Ganzedo, U. and Gorostiaga, J.M. (2012) Seaweed assemblage changes in the eastern Cantabrian Sea and their potential relationship to climate change. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 99, 108–120.Google Scholar
Díez, I., Santolaria, A. and Gorostiaga, J.M. (2003) The relationship of environmental factors to the structure and distribution of subtidal seaweed vegetation of the western Basque coast (N Spain). Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 56, 1041–1054.Google Scholar
Dinter, W.P. (2001) Biogeography of the OSPAR Maritime Area. Bonn: German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation.Google Scholar
Douvere, F. and Ehler, C.N. (2009) New perspectives on sea use management: initial findings from European experience with marine spatial planning. Journal of Environmental Management 90, 77–88.Google Scholar
Duarte, L., Viejo, R.M., Martínez, B., deCastro, M., Gómez-Gesteira, M. and Gallardo, T. (2013) Recent and historical range shifts of two canopy-forming seaweeds in North Spain and the link with trends in sea surface temperature. Acta Oecologica 51, 1–10.Google Scholar
ESRI (2002) Digital chart of the world. Redlands, CA: Environmental Systems Research Institute. http://www.esri.com Google Scholar
European Commission (2009) WFD Intercalibration Phase 2: Milestone 2 Report. European Commission (for ECOSTAT meeting 8–9 April 2009). European Commission.Google Scholar
European Commission (2013) Commission Decision 2013/480/EU, of 20 September 2012 establishing, pursuant to Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, the values of the Member State monitoring system classifications as a result of. European Commission.Google Scholar
Fernández, C. (2011) The retreat of large brown seaweeds on the north coast of Spain: the case of Saccorhiza polyschides . European Journal of Phycology 46, 352–360.Google Scholar
Gaylord, B. (1999) Detailing agents of physical disturbance: wave-induced velocities and accelerations on a rocky shore. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 239, 85–124.Google Scholar
Gilliland, P.M. and Laffoley, D. (2008) Key elements and steps in the process of developing ecosystem-based marine spatial planning. Marine Pollution Bulletin 32, 787–796.Google Scholar
Gregr, E.J. and Bodtker, K.M. (2007) Adaptive classification of marine ecosystems: identifying biologically meaningful regions in the marine environment. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 54, 385–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guanche, Y., Mínguez, R. and Méndez, F.J. (2013) Climate-based Monte Carlo simulation of trivariate sea states. Coastal Engineering 80, 107–121.Google Scholar
Guinda, X., Juanes, J.A. and Puente, A. (2014) The Quality of Rocky Bottoms index (CFR): a validated method for the assessment of macroalgae according to the European Water Framework Directive. Marine Environmental Research 102, 3–10.Google Scholar
Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R. and Friedman, J. (2001) The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference, and prediction. New York, NY: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Hering, D., Borja, A., Carstensen, J., Carvalho, L., Elliott, M., Feld, C.K., Heiskanen, A.-S., Johnson, R.K., Moe, J., Pont, D., Solheim, A.L. and de Bund, W.V. (2010) The European Water Framework Directive at the age of 10: a critical review of the achievements with recommendations for the future. Science of the Total Environmental Management 408, 4007–4019.Google Scholar
Jordà, G., Marbà, N. and Duarte, C.M. (2012) Mediterranean seagrass vulnerable to regional climate warming. Nature Climate Change 2, 821–824. doi: 10.1038/nclimate1533.Google Scholar
Juanes, J.A., Guinda, X., Puente, A. and Revilla, J.A. (2008) Macroalgae, a suitable indicator of the ecological status of coastal rocky communities in the NE Atlantic. Ecological Indicators 8, 351–359.Google Scholar
Kautsky, H. and van der Maarel, E. (1990) Multivariate approaches to the variation in phytobenthic communities and environmental vectors in the Baltic Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series 60, 169–184.Google Scholar
Kohonen, T. (2001) Self-organizing maps, 3rd edition. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Laruelle, G.G., Dürr, H.H., Slomp, C.P. and Borges, A.V. (2010) Evaluation of sinks and sources of CO2 in the global coastal ocean using a spatially-explicit typology of estuaries and continental shelves. Geophysical Research Letters 37, 1–6.Google Scholar
Legendre, P. and Legendre, L. (1998) Numerical ecology, 2nd English edition. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science BV.Google Scholar
Levin, S.A. (1992) The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology 73, 1943–1967.Google Scholar
Lewis, J.R. (1964) The ecology of rocky shores. London: English Universities Press.Google Scholar
Lubchenco, J., Olson, A., Brubaker, L., Carpenter, S.R. and Holland, M.M. (1991) The sustainable biosphere initiative: an ecological research agenda. Ecology 72, 371–412.Google Scholar
Lüning, K. (1990) Seaweeds: their environment, biogeography, and ecophysiology. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Madden, C.J., Goodin, K., Allee, R.J., Cicchetti, G., Moses, C., Finkbeiner, M. and Bamford, D. (2009) Coastal and marine ecological classification standard, Version III. Arlington, VA: NOAA and NatureServe.Google Scholar
Martín-García, L., González-Lorenzo, G., Brito-Izquierdo, I.T. and Barquín-Diez, J. (2013) Use of topographic predictors for macrobenthic community mapping in the Marine Reserve of La Palma (Canary Islands, Spain). Ecological Modelling 263, 19–31.Google Scholar
McArthur, M.A., Brooke, B.P., Przeslawski, R., Ryan, D.A., Lucieer, V.L., Nichol, S., McCallum, A.W., Mellin, C., Cresswell, I.D. and Radke, L.C. (2010) On the use of abiotic surrogates to describe marine benthic biodiversity. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 88, 21–32.Google Scholar
Mount, R., Bricher, P. and Newton, J. (2007) National Intertidal/Subtidal Benthic (NISB) Habitat Classification Scheme. Australian Greenhouse Office; National Land & Water Resources Audit; School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart.Google Scholar
Negnevitsky, M. (2002) Artificial intelligence: a guide to intelligent systems. Harlow: Addison-Wesley/Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Parravicini, V., Morri, C., Ciribilli, G., Montefalcone, M., Albertelli, G. and Bianchi, C.N. (2009) Size matters more than method: visual quadrats vs photography in measuring human impact on Mediterranean rocky reef communities. Estuarine , Coastal and Shelf Science 81, 359–367.Google Scholar
Pittman, S.J., Connor, D.W., Radke, L., and Wright, D.J. (2011) Application of estuarine and coastal classifications in marine spatial management. In Wolanski, E. and McLusky, D.S. (eds) Treatise on estuarine and coastal science, Volume 1. Waltham: Academic Press, pp. 163–205.Google Scholar
Ramos, E. (2015a) Physical classification of the intertidal rocky shore and distribution of macroalgae at different spatial scales along the NE Atlantic . PhD thesis. Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain.Google Scholar
Ramos, E., Díaz de Terán, J.R., Puente, A. and Juanes, J. (2015b) The role of geomorphology in the distribution of intertidal rocky macroalgae in the NE Atlantic region. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science. doi 10.1016/j.ecss.2015.10.007.Google Scholar
Ramos, E., Juanes, J.A., Galván, C., Neto, J.M., Melo, R., Pedersen, A., Scanlan, C., Wilkes, R., van den Bergh, E., Blomqvist, M., Karup, H.P., Heiber, W., Reitsma, J.M., Ximenes, M.C., Silió, A., Méndez, F. and González, B. (2012) Coastal waters classification based on physical attributes along the NE Atlantic region. An approach for rocky macroalgae potential distribution. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 112, 105–114.Google Scholar
Ramos, E., Puente, A. and Juanes, J. (2016) An ecological classification of rocky shores at a regional scale: a predictive tool for management of conservation values. Marine Ecology 37, 311–328. doi: 10.1111/maec.12280.Google Scholar
Ramos, E., Puente, A., Guinda, X. and Juanes, J.A. (in press) A hierarchical classification system along the NE Atlantic coast: focusing on the local scale (Cantabria, N Spain). European Journal of Phycology.Google Scholar
Ramos, E., Puente, A., Juanes, J.A., Neto, J.M., Pedersen, A., Bartsch, I., Scanlan, C., Wilkes, R., van den Bergh, E., Ar Gall, E. and Melo, R. (2014) Biological validation of physical coastal waters classification along the NE Atlantic region based on rocky macroalgae distribution. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 147, 103–112.Google Scholar
Reguero, B.G., Menéndez, M., Méndez, F.J., Mínguez, R. and Losada, I.J. (2012) A Global Ocean Wave (GOW) calibrated reanalysis from 1948 onwards. Coastal Engineering 65, 38–55.Google Scholar
Reis, J. (2014) Introduction to systems approaches in coastal management – the legacy of the SPICOSA project. Marine Policy 43, 1–2.Google Scholar
Rice, J., Gjerde, K.M., Ardron, J., Arico, S., Cresswell, I., Escobar, E., Grant, S. and Vierros, M. (2011) Policy relevance of biogeographic classification for conservation and management of marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction, and the GOODS biogeographic classification. Ocean and Coastal Management 54, 110–122.Google Scholar
Roff, J.C. and Taylor, M.E. (2000) National frameworks for marine conservation – a hierarchical geophysical approach. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 10, 209–223.Google Scholar
Sales, M. and Ballesteros, E. (2009) Shallow Cystoseira (Fucales: Ochrophyta) assemblages thriving in sheltered areas from Menorca (NW Mediterranean): relationships with environmental factors and anthropogenic pressures. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 84, 476–482.Google Scholar
Schoch, G.C. and Dethier, M.N. (1996) Scaling up: the statistical linkage between organismal abundance and geomorphology on rocky intertidal shorelines. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 201, 37–72.Google Scholar
Sherman, K. (1986) Introduction to parts one and two: large marine ecosystems as tractable entities for measurement and management. In Sherman, K. and Alexander, L.M. (eds) Variability and management of large marine ecosystems. AAAS Selected Symposium 99. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp. 3–7.Google Scholar
Snelder, T., Leathwick, J., Dey, K., Rowden, A., Weatherhead, M., Fenwick, G., Francis, M., Gorman, R., Grieve, J., Hadfield, M., Hewitt, J., Richardson, K., Uddstrom, M. and Zeldis, J. (2007) Development of an Ecologic Marine Classification in the New Zealand Region. Environmental Management 39, 12–29.Google Scholar
Solidoro, C., Bandelj, V., Barbieri, P., Cossarini, G. and Umani, S.F. (2007) Understanding dynamic of biogeochemical properties in the northern Adriatic Sea by using self-organizing maps and k-means clustering. Journal of Geophysical Research 112, C07S90. doi: 10.1029/2006JC003553.Google Scholar
Sousa, W.P. (1984) The role of disturbance in natural communities. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 15, 353–391.Google Scholar
Swaney, D.P., Humborg, C., Emeis, K., Kannen, A., Silvert, W., Tett, P., Pastres, R., Solidoro, C., Yamamuro, M., Hénocque, Y. and Nicholls, R. (2012) Five critical questions of scale for the coastal zone. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 96, 9–21. doi: 10.1016/j.ecss.2011.04.010.Google Scholar
Valentine, P.C., Todd, B.J. and Kostylev, V.E. (2005) Classification of marine sublittoral habitats, with application to the northeastern North America region. American Fisheries Society Symposium 41, 183–200.Google Scholar
Van den Hoek, C. (1982) The distribution of benthic marine algae in relation to the temperature regulation of their life histories. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 18, 81–144.Google Scholar
Verfaillie, E., Degraer, S., Schelfaut, K., Willems, W. and Van Lancker, V. (2009) A protocol for classifying ecologically relevant marine zones, a statistical approach. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 83, 175–185.Google Scholar
Vesanto, J. (1999) SOM-based data visualization methods. Intelligent Data Analysis 3, 111–126.Google Scholar
Vesanto, J., Himberg, J., Alhoniemi, E. and Parhankangas, J. (2000) SOM Toolbox for Matlab 5, Technical Report A57. Helsinki: University of Technology, Neural Networks Research Centre.Google Scholar
Voerman, S.E., Llera, E. and Rico, J.M. (2013) Climate driven changes in subtidal kelp forest communities in NW Spain. Marine Environmental Research 90, 119–127.Google Scholar
Ysebaert, T.J., Meire, P., Herman, P.M.J. and Verbeek, H. (2002) Macrobenthic species response surfaces along estuarine gradients: prediction by logistic regression. Marine Ecology Progress Series 225, 79–95. doi: dx.doi.org/ 10.3354/meps225079.Google Scholar
Zacharias, M.A. and Roff, J.C. (2000) A hierarchical ecological approach to conserving marine biodiversity. Conservation Biology 14, 1327–1334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar