Study

Evaluating the effects of protection on Paracentrotus lividus distribution in two contrasting habitats

  • Published source details Ceccherelli G., Pinna S. & Sechi N. (2009) Evaluating the effects of protection on Paracentrotus lividus distribution in two contrasting habitats. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 81, 59-64.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Designate a Marine Protected Area with a zonation system of activity restrictions

Action Link
Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Conservation
  1. Designate a Marine Protected Area with a zonation system of activity restrictions

    A site comparison study in 2006 of seven sites in a seagrass and rocky seabed area in the Mediterranean Sea, Sardinia, Italy (Ceccherelli et al. 2009) found that the effect of designating a marine protected area with a zonation system on purple sea urchin Paracentrotus lividus abundance and size varied with the level of restriction in place. Within the protected area after four years, fully protected no-take sites had similar abundances of urchin (2–5 individuals) compared to partially protected sites where some restricted urchin harvest occurred (1–12 individuals), and to unprotected fished sites outside the protected area (2–12 individuals). However, urchins were larger in no-take sites (57–62 mm), compared to partially protected (32–61 mm) and unprotected fished sites (24–50 mm). Capo Caccia–Isola Piana marine protected area was established in 2002 with varying levels of protection including a no-take zone and a partially protected zone where urchin harvest was formerly prohibited but reopened with restrictions in 2006 (see paper for details). Sampling took place in April–May 2006 after the harvest season at seven sites (200 m2 each) in 6–10 m water depth: one within the no-take zone, three within the partially protected zone, and three outside the marine protected area. At each site, urchins were counted inside 20 quadrats (1 × 1 m), and 20 urchins were measured (diameter without spines).

    (Summarised by: Anaëlle Lemasson & Laura Pettit)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust