SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University Journal of Marine Sciences and Fisheries / 2022 / Cilt: 5 Sayı: 2

The Abundance of the Sea Urchin Paracentrotus lividus on the Coasts of Gökçeada

Deniz Kestanesi Paracentrotus lividus’un Gökçeada Kıyılarındaki Bolluğu

Herdem Aslan(Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi)0000-0002-0872-2919
Pages
143–149
Publication Date
2022-12-29
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

For an effective and sustainable sea urchin management plan, the stock status of the P. lividus species in Turkish waters should be determined immediately.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The demand for the roe of Paracentrotus lividus is increasing despite world-wide fisheries bans and the balance of marine ecosystems is disturbed due to this overexploitation.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study reports preliminary findings on the abundance of P. lividus on the coasts of Gökçeada by using the visual counting technique with SCUBA during the summer of 2012 and 2018.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:For an effective and sustainable sea urchin management plan, the stock status of the P. lividus species in Turkish waters should be determined immediately.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2012 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Paracentrotus lividus · Deniz kestanesi · Gökçeada

Abstract

The demand for the roe of Paracentrotus lividus is increasing despite world-wide fisheries bans and the balance of marine ecosystems is disturbed due to this overexploitation. Although not consumed locally, there has been fishing pressure on this species, due to the intense export demand in recent years. For an ecosystem-based sustainable fishery of P. lividus, it is very important to establish the stock status as well as the reproductive biology of this species in Turkish seas. However, studies on the stock information of the species are limited. This study reports preliminary findings on the abundance of P. lividus on the coasts of Gökçeada by using the visual counting technique with SCUBA during the summer of 2012 and 2018. In the study carried out with transects of different lengths, the highest number of individuals was observed on the rocky shores of Laz Bay in 2012 with 4 individuals m-2, between 112-120 m of the Kuzulimanı transect with 5 individuals m-2 in 2018, and between 0-52 m transect of Kokina III in 2018. According to the SACFOR scale, when P. lividus species was observed on the coasts of Gökçeada, it was either common or frequent in terms of abundant. For an effective and sustainable sea urchin management plan, the stock status of the P. lividus species in Turkish waters should be determined immediately.

Özet

Tüm dünyada uygulanan avcılık yasaklarına rağmen Paracentrotus lividus türünün gonadlarına olan rağbet her geçen gün artmakta ve doğal ortamlarından sömürülen kestaneler nedeniyle denizel ekosistemlerin dengesi bozulmaktadır. Ülkemizde yerel halk tarafından besin olarak tüketilmeyen bu tür üzerinde, son yıllarda yoğun ihracat talebi nedeniyle bir avcılık baskısı oluşmuştur. P. lividus türünün avcılığının ekosistem temelli sürdürülebilir olarak gerçekleştirilebilmesi için bu türün ülkemiz denizlerindeki üreme biyolojisinin yanında stok durumu gibi temel bilgilerin bilinmesi de çok önemlidir. Ancak türün stok bilgileri ile ilgili çalışmaları ülkemizde yetersizdir. Bu çalışma, 2012 ve 2018 yıllarının yaz mevsimlerinde SCUBA ile görsel sayım tekniği kullanılarak P. lividus türünün Gökçeada kıyılarındaki yoğunluğu hakkında bir ön araştırma niteliğindedir. Farklı uzunluktaki transektler ile gerçekleştirilen çalışmada en fazla birey 2012 yılında 4 birey m-2 ile Laz koyu’nun kayalık kıyılarında, 2018 yılında ise 5 birey m-2 ile Kuzulimanı transektinin 112-120 m arasındaki 5 m genişliğinde (40 m2), Kokina III transektinin 0-52 m arasındaki 10 m genişlikte (520 m2) gözlenmiştir. SACFOR ölçeğine göre Gökçeada kıyılarında eğer P. lividus türü gözlemleniyorsa da sadece yaygın ya da sık olarak bulunduğu saptanmıştır. Etkili ve sürdürülebilir bir deniz kestanesi yönetim planı için P. lividus türünün ülkemizde denizlerindeki stok durumu ivedilikle belirlenmelidir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Aslan, H. (2022). The Abundance of the Sea Urchin Paracentrotus lividus on the Coasts of Gökçeada. Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University Journal of Marine Sciences and Fisheries, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 2, 143–149. https://doi.org/10.46384/jmsf.1150718

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (25)

  1. Aslan, H. (2005). Bozcaada’nın Echinoderm faunası. Türk Sucul Yaşam Dergisi, In E. Düzgüneş, İ. Okumuş, H. Öğüt (Eds), Yıl: 3, Sayı: 4: 10-15
  2. Aslan-Cihangir, H. (2012). The Echinoderm Fauna of Gokceada Island (NE Aegean Sea). Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 11(1), 26-29. doi: 10.3923/javaa.2012.26.29
  3. Aslan Cihangir, H., & Pancucci Papadopoulou, M. A. (2012). Spatial and temporal variation of echinoderm assemblages from soft bottoms of the Canakkale Strait (Turkish Strait System) with a taxonomic key of the genus Amphiura (Echinodermata: Ophiuroidea). Turkish Journal of Zoology, 36(2),147-161. doi:10.3906/zoo-1008-20
  4. Aslan, H. 2022. Deniz kestanelerimiz de tehlikede. Herkese Bilim ve Teknoloji, Sayı: 320: 15
  5. Baião, L. F., Rocha, C., Lima, R. C., Marques, A., Valente, L. M., & Cunha, L. M. (2021). Sensory profiling, liking and acceptance of sea urchin gonads from the North Atlantic coast of Portugal, aiming future aquaculture applications. Food Research International, 140, 109873.
  6. Demir Sağlam, Y., Akyol, O., & Sağlam, C. (2013). Ayvalık (Ege Denizi) Kıyılarında Deniz kestanesi (Paracentrotus lividus) Avcılığı. Yunus Araştırma Bülteni, (4), 3-7.
  7. Farina, S., Baroli, M., Brundu, R., Conforti, A., Cucco, A., De Falco, G., Guala, I., Guerzoni, S., Massaro, G., Quattrocchi, G., Romagnoni, G., & Brambilla, W. (2020). The challenge of managing the commercial harvesting of the sea urchin Paracentrotus lividus: advanced approaches are required. PeerJ, 8:e10093. doi: 10.7717/peerj.10093
  8. Fernández-Boán, M., Fernández, L., Freire, J. (2012). History and management strategies of the sea urchin Paracentrotus lividus fishery in Galicia (NW Spain). Ocean & Coastal Management, 69, 265-272. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.07.032
  9. Filbee-Dexter, K., & Scheibling, R. E. (2014). Sea urchin barrens as alternative stable states of collapsed kelp ecosystems. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 495, 1-25. doi: 10.3354/meps10573
  10. Giakoumi, S., Cebrian, E., Kokkoris, G. D., Ballesteros, E., & Sala, E. (2012). Relationships between fish, sea urchins and macroalgae: The structure of shallow rocky sublittoral communities in the Cyclades, Eastern Mediterranean. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 109, 1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ecss.2011.06.004
  11. Guidetti, P., Terlizzi, A., & Boero, F. (2004). Effects of the edible sea urchin, Paracentrotus lividus, fishery along the Apulian rocky coast (SE Italy, Mediterranean Sea). Fisheries Research, 66(2-3), 287-297. doi: 10.1016/S0165-7836(03)00206-6
  12. Guidetti, P., Bussotti, S., & Boero, F. (2005). Evaluating the effects of protection on fish predators and sea urchins in shallow artificial rocky habitats: a case study in the northern Adriatic Sea. Marine Environmental Research, 59(4), 333–348. doi: 10.1016/j.marenvres.2004.05.008
  13. Guidetti, P., & Dulčić, J. (2007). Relationships among predatory fish, sea urchins and barrens in Mediterranean rocky reefs across a latitudinal gradient. Marine Environmental Research, 63(2), 168–184. doi: 10.1016/j.marenvres.2006.08.002
  14. Lawrence, J. M., & Sammarco, P. W. (1982). Effects of feeding on the environment: Echinoidea. In M. Jangoux, & J. M. Lawrence (Eds.), Echinoderm Nutrition (pp. 449-519). Rotterdam: Balkema.
  15. Öztoprak, B., Doğan, A., & Dağlı, E. (2014). Checklist of Echinodermata from the coasts of Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 38(6), 892-900. doi:10.3906/zoo-1405-82
  16. Pinna, S., Piazzi, L., Ceccherelli, G., Castelli, A., Costa, G., Curini-Galletti, M., Gianguzza, P., Langeneck, J., Manconi, R., Montefalcone, M., Pipitone, C., Rosso, A., & Bonaviri, C. (2020). Macroalgal forest vs sea urchin barren: Patterns of macro-zoobenthic diversity in a large-scale Mediterranean study. Marine Environmental Research, 159, 104955. doi: 10.1016/j.marenvres.2020.104955
  17. Rubilar, T., & Cardozo D. (2021). Blue Growth: sea urchin sustainable aquaculture, innovative approaches. Revista de Biologia Tropical, 69(S1), 474-486. doi: 10.15517/rbt.v69iSuppl.1.46388
  18. Sala, E., Boudouresque, C. F., & Harmelin-Vivien, M. (1998). Fishing, trophic cascades, and the structure of algal assemblages: evaluation of an old but untested paradigm. Oikos, 82(3), 425-439. doi: 10.2307/3546364
  19. Southward, E. C., & Campbell, A. C. (2006). Echinoderms: keys and notes for the identification of British species. Synopses of the British Fauna, N.S. 56. (272 p.). Shrewsbury: Field Studies Council.
  20. Stefánsson, G., Kristinsson, H., Ziemer, N., Hannon, C., & James, P. (2017). Markets for Sea Urchins: A Review of Global Supply and Markets. Technical Report.
  21. Strong, J. A., & Johnson, M. (2020). Converting SACFOR data for statistical analysis: validation, demonstration and further possibilities. Marine Biodiversity Records, 13(1). doi: 10.1186/s41200-020-0184-3
  22. TÜİK https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Su-Urunleri-2021-45745 Ulaşım tarihi: 10.12.2022
  23. Voulgaris, K., Varkoulis, A., Zaoutsos, S., Stratakis, A., & Vafidis, D. (2021). Mechanical defensive adaptations of three Mediterranean Sea urchin species. Ecology and Evolution, 11, 17734-17743. doi: 10.1002/ece3.8247
  24. Yeruham, E., Rilov, G., Shpigel, M., & Abelson, A. (2015). Collapse of the echinoid Paracentrotus lividus populations in the Eastern Mediterranean - result of climate change? Science Reports, 5, 13479. doi: 10.1038/srep13479
  25. Yokeş, B., & Galil, B.S. (2006). The first record of the needle-spined urchin Diadema setosum (Leske, 1778) (Echinodermata: Echinoidea: Diadematidae) from the Mediterranean Sea. Aquat. Invas. 1 (3): 188-190.