Preprint volume - SIBM

Pre-print Volume – Posters
Topic 3: INTEGRATED COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT
C. MANCUSI, E. CECCHI, L. PIAZZI*, M. RIA, R. SILVESTRI*
ARPAT – Area Mare, Via Marradi, 114 – 57124 Livorno, Italia.
c.mancusi@arpat.toscana.it
* CIBM - Centro Interuniversitario di Biologia Marina, Livorno, Italia.
THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ECOLOGICAL QUALITY
OF COASTAL WATER THROUGH THE CONCURRENT USE
OF DIFFERENT BIOLOGICAL INDICATORS
LA VALUTAZIONE DELLA QUALITÀ ECOLOGICA
DELLE ACQUE COSTIERE ATTRAVERSO L’UTILIZZO CONTEMPORANEO
DI DIFFERENTI INDICATORI BIOLOGICI
Abstract – The paper aimed to compare values of ecological quality of coastal water obtained for 3
locations sited along the Tuscany coasts through the concurrent use of different biological indicators.
Results showed that Monte Argentario resulted in high condition, while the other locations resulted in good
condition. An interesting result of the study was a general correspondence among values of different
indicators.
Key-words: biological indicator, monitoring, environmental quality, Tuscany.
Introduction – The assessment of the ecological quality of coastal water, such as
required by the European Framework Directive 60/2000, implies the use of different
biological indicators. The ecological status has to be evaluated as ratio (Ecological
Quality Ratio, EQR) between values of biological elements observed in a determinate
water body and reference values. Five classis of ecological status have to correspond to
intervals of this ratio (high, good, moderate, poor, bad). Several studies has been
carried out to test methods used for particular habitats (Mangalajo et al., 2007; Lopez y
Rojo et al., 2010).
In this paper, we compared values of EQR obtained for 3 locations sited along the
Tuscany coasts through the concurrent use of different biological indicators.
Materials and methods – The data used for comparison were obtained from
samplings carried out by ARPAT in 3 locations along the coast of Tuscany: Livorno,
Piombino and Monte Argentario. Both CARLIT approach for rocky shore macroalgal
assemblages (Ballesteros et al., 2007) and BiPo approach for Posidonia oceanica (L.)
Delile meadows (Lopez y Rojo et al., 2010) were used. Moreover, a new proposed
approach for coralligenous assemblages was added (Cecchi et al., 2010). Reference
values to calculate EQR were those suggested by Ballesteros et al. (2007) and Lopez y
Royo et al. (2010) for CARLIT and BiPo respectively; values detected at Montecristo
Island were used as reference values for coralligenous assemblages. The EQR for each
location was calculated as the mean of EQR obtained from all the habitats present in
the location and reported to an arbitrary scale with class ranges of 0.2 (0-0.2 bad, 0.2-
0.4 poor, 0.4-0.6 moderate, 0.6-0.8 good, 0.8-1 high).
Results – Values of EQR of Posidonia oceanica meadows are reported in Tab. 1. In
Tab. 2 are shown the EQR values calculated as a mean among EQR of the three
habitats. The use of different biological indicators showed that Monte Argentario
resulted in high condition, while the other locations resulted in good condition (Tab. 2).
41 st S.I.B.M. CONGRESS Rapallo (GE), 7-11 June 2010
178