INTRODUCTIONTop

Seagrass meadows perform essential ecosystem functions and services at a global scale; seagrasses sink C and support food webs (Duarte et al. 2008Duarte C.M., Dennison W.C., Orth R.J., et al. 2008. The charisma of coastal ecosystems. Est. Coasts 31: 233-238.), provide shelter for associated fauna (Pollard 1984Pollard D.A. 1984. A review of ecological studies on seagrass fish communities, with particular reference to recent studies in Australia. Aquat. Bot. 18: 3-42., Bell and Pollard 1989Bell J.D., Pollard D.A. 1989. Ecology of fish assemblages and fisheries associated with seagrasses. In: McComb A.J., Larkum A.W.D., Shepherd S.A. (eds), The biology of seagrasses: an Australian perspective. Elsevier, pp. 565-609., Espino et al. 2011Espino E., Tuya F., Brito A., et al. 2011. Ichthyofauna associated with Cymodocea nodosa meadows in the Canarian Archipelago (central eastern Atlantic): community structure and nursery role. Cienc. Mar. 37: 157-174.), produce O₂ (Peduzzi and Vukovic 1990Peduzzi P., Vukovic A. 1990. Primary production of Cymodocea nodosa in the Gulf of Trieste (Northern Adriatic Sea): a comparison of methods. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 64: 197-207.), stabilize sediments and protect coastlines from turbulence (Hemminga and Nieuwenhuize 1990Hemminga M.A., Nieuwenhuize J. 1990. Seagrass wrack-induced dune formation on a tropical coast (Banc d’Arguin, Mauritania). Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 31: 499-502., Cabaço et al. 2010Cabaço S., Ferreira O., Santos R. 2010. Population dynamics of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa in Ria Formosa lagoon following inlet artificial relocation. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 87: 510-516.). However, seagrass meadows are experiencing a rapid decline worldwide (Orth et al. 2006Orth R.J., Carruthers T.J.B., Dennison W.C., et al. 2006. A global crisis for seagrass ecosystems. Biosciences 56: 987-996.). Waycott et al. (2009)Waycott M., Duarte C.M., Carruthers T.J.B., et al. 2009. Accelerating loss of seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106: 12377-12381. estimated a global loss of 29% of their coverage between 1879 and 2006, with an increasing trend of annual loss of 7% since 1990. The function of seagrasses as habitat-formers or ecological engineers (sensu Jones et al. 1994Jones C.V., Lawton J.H., Shachak, M. 1994. Organisms as Ecosystem Engineers. Oikos 69: 373-386.) suggests that their conservation is a primary issue for preserving a healthy marine environment.

Coastal ecosystems are among those subjected to the largest human pressures in the world (9 et al. 2008Halpern B.S., Walbridge S., Selkoe K.A., et al. 2008. A global map of human impacts on marine ecosystems. Science 319: 948-52.). Anthropogenic pressures on the coast are a fundamental reason for the global deterioration of seagrasses (Orth et al. 2006Orth R.J., Carruthers T.J.B., Dennison W.C., et al. 2006. A global crisis for seagrass ecosystems. Biosciences 56: 987-996., Waycott et al. 2009Waycott M., Duarte C.M., Carruthers T.J.B., et al. 2009. Accelerating loss of seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106: 12377-12381.). Human activities are responsible for many disturbances of seagrass meadows, such as water contamination (Waycott et al. 2009Waycott M., Duarte C.M., Carruthers T.J.B., et al. 2009. Accelerating loss of seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106: 12377-12381.), increased turbidity and eutrophication (Burkholder et al. 2007Burkholder J.M., Tomasko D.A., Touchette B.W. 2007. Seagrasses and eutrophication. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 350: 46-72.), mechanical damages on the seabed (Francour et al. 1999Francour P., Ganteaume A., Poulain M. 1999. Effects of boat anchoring in Posidonia oceanica beds in the Port-Cross National Park (north-western Mediterranean Sea). Aquat. Cons. 9: 391-400., Milazzo et al. 2004Milazzo M., Badalamenti F., Ceccherelli G., et al. 2004. Boat anchoring on Posidonia oceanica beds in a marine protected area (Italy, Western Mediterranean): effect of anchor types in different anchoring stages. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 299: 51-62., Ceccherelli et al. 2007Ceccherelli G., Campo D., Milazzo M. 2007. Short-term response of the slow growing seagrass Posidonia oceanica to simulated anchor impact. Mar. Environ. Res. 63: 341-349.), including boat anchoring (Montefalcone et al. 2008Montefalcone M., Chiantore M., Lanzone A., et al. 2008. BACI design reveals the decline of the seagrass Posidonia oceanica induced by anchoring. Mar. Poll. Bull. 56: 1637-1645.), and alterations of the habitat due to coastal works (Pérez-Ruzafa et al. 1991Pérez-Ruzafa A., Marcos C., Ros, J. 1991. Environmental and Biological changes related to recent human activities in the Mar Menor. Mar. Poll. Bull. 23: 747-751.).

Cymodocea nodosa (Ucria) Ascherson is a seagrass distributed across the Mediterranean Sea and along the nearby eastern Atlantic coasts, including the Macaronesian oceanic archipelagos of Madeira and the Canary Islands (Mascaró et al. 2009Mascaró O., Oliva S., Pérez M., et al. 2009. Spatial variability in ecological attributes of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa. Bot. Mar. 52: 5-429., Oliva et al. 2012Oliva S., Mascaró O., Llagostera I., et al. 2012. Selection of metrics based on the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa and development of a biotic index (CYMOX) for assessing ecological status of coastal and transitional waters. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 114: 7-17.). This marine spermatophyte plays a fundamental role as a result of its function as ‘habitat engineer’, particularly in the Canary Islands (Reyes et al. 1995Reyes J., Sansón M., Afonso-Carrillo J. 1995. Leaf phenology, growth and production of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa at El Médano (South of Tenerife, Canary Islands). Bot. Mar. 38: 457-465., Tuya et al. 2014aTuya F., Ribeiro-Leite L., Arto-Cuesta N., et al. 2014a. Decadal changes in the structure of Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadows: Natural vs. human influences. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 137: 41-49., bTuya F., Png-Gonzalez L., Riera R., et al. 2014b. Ecological structure and function differs between habitats dominated by seagrasses and green seaweeds. Marine Environ. Res. 98: 1-13.). It is generally located along the eastern and southern coasts of the islands, sheltered from the dominant oceanic swells from the north and northwest (Reyes et al. 1995Reyes J., Sansón M., Afonso-Carrillo J. 1995. Leaf phenology, growth and production of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa at El Médano (South of Tenerife, Canary Islands). Bot. Mar. 38: 457-465., Pavón-Salas et al. 2000Pavón-Salas N., Herrera R., Hernández-Guerra A., et al. 2000. Distributional patterns of seagrasses in the Canary Islands (Central - East Atlantic Ocean). J. Coast. Res. 16: 328-335.). This seagrass forms extensive, but often fragmented, subtidal meadows (Barberá et al. 2005Barberá C., Tuya F., Boyra A., et al. 2005. Spatial variation in the structural parameters of Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadows in the Canary Islands: a multiscaled approach. Bot. Mar. 48: 122-126., Espino et al. 2008Espino F., Tuya F., Blanch I., et al. 2008. Los Sebadales en Canarias. Praderas de fanerógamas marinas. BIOGES, Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canarias, 68 pp., Tuya et al. 2013aTuya F., Hernandez-Zerpa H., Espino F., et al. 2013a. Drastic decadal decline of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa at Gran Canaria (eastern Atlantic): Interactions with the green algae Caulerpa prolifera. Aquat. Bot. 105: 1-6.). In the Canary Islands, C. nodosa shows a seasonal pattern in vitality, with a summer peak in shoot density and biomass (Reyes et al. 1995Reyes J., Sansón M., Afonso-Carrillo J. 1995. Leaf phenology, growth and production of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa at El Médano (South of Tenerife, Canary Islands). Bot. Mar. 38: 457-465., Tuya et al. 2006Tuya F., Martín J.A., Luque A. 2006. Seasonal cycle of a Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadow and of the associated ichthyofauna at Playa Dorada (Lanzarote, Canary Islands, eastern Atlantic). Cienc. Mar. 32: 695-704., 2013aTuya F., Hernandez-Zerpa H., Espino F., et al. 2013a. Drastic decadal decline of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa at Gran Canaria (eastern Atlantic): Interactions with the green algae Caulerpa prolifera. Aquat. Bot. 105: 1-6.), similar to what has been observed for the Mediterranean Sea (Terrados and Ros 1993Terrados J., Ros J.D. 1993. Limitación por nutrientes del crecimiento de Cymodocea nodosa (Ucria) Ascherson en sedimentos carbonatados en el Mar Menor, Murcia, SE de España. Publ. Esp. Inst. Esp. Oceanogr. 11: 9-14., Rismondo et al. 1997Rismondo A., Curiel D., Marzocchi M., et al. 1997. Seasonal pattern of Cymodocea nodosa biomass and production in the Lagoon of Venice. Aquat. Bot. 58: 55-64.).

Two previous studies have reported a declining trend of Cymodocea nodosa meadows at Gran Canaria Island (Tuya et al. 2013aTuya F., Hernandez-Zerpa H., Espino F., et al. 2013a. Drastic decadal decline of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa at Gran Canaria (eastern Atlantic): Interactions with the green algae Caulerpa prolifera. Aquat. Bot. 105: 1-6., 2014aTuya F., Ribeiro-Leite L., Arto-Cuesta N., et al. 2014a. Decadal changes in the structure of Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadows: Natural vs. human influences. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 137: 41-49.). The present study aims to extend the results of these studies by determining the temporal trends (from 1991 to 2013) of C. nodosa meadows across the entire Canary Islands archipelago through the analysis of three structural (demographic) descriptors of C. nodosa meadows: seagrass shoot density, coverage and leaf length. This study is important from a conservation perspective. The Canary Islands autonomous Government recently introduced a new environmental law that reduced the protection status of C. nodosa (BOC nº 112, Law 4/2010 of the Canary Islands Catalogue of Protected Species) to the category: “species of interest for Canarian ecosystems”. At present, this seagrass is only protected within marine protected areas, i.e. “Areas of Special Conservation” under the EU ‘Natura 2000’ network. Our analysis therefore contributes to a critical appraisal of this recent legislative decision.

MATERIALS AND METHODSTop

Data source

We compiled all published data including any of the following three seagrass structural descriptors: seagrass shoot density, cover and leaf length of Cymodocea nodosa at any place in the Canary Islands between 1991 (first record) and 2013 (last record). A variety of sources were used, including scientific publications and above all grey literature, mainly reports carried out by local environmental and public bodies (see Supplementary material, Table S1). Each datum corresponded to a sampling within a particular geo-referenced area at a specific depth and time. Coverage was estimated as the percentage of the area in which the presence of C. nodosa was detected, typically through 25- or 50-m-long transects. Shoot density was expressed as number of shoots per area (m²). Leaf length corresponds to the mean height (in cm) of leaves. It is worth noting that for each data source the available records did not always include the three demographic descriptors.

Data analysis

Collected data were analysed at three different spatial scales: “island”, “island sector” and “meadow”. Firstly, data were temporally analysed separately for each island, resulting in 6 data sets: El Hierro, La Gomera, Tenerife, Gran Canaria, Fuerteventura and Lanzarote (including meadows around La Graciosa Islet as well). La Palma was excluded due to the lack of records of Cymodocea nodosa after the renovation of the Santa Cruz port, the only location on the island where the presence of C. nodosa was recorded (Pavón-Salas et al. 2000Pavón-Salas N., Herrera R., Hernández-Guerra A., et al. 2000. Distributional patterns of seagrasses in the Canary Islands (Central - East Atlantic Ocean). J. Coast. Res. 16: 328-335.). This corresponds to the analysis at the scale of islands by pooling all data within each island according to the date (year) of collection.

Secondly, the coastal perimeter of each island was divided according to its geographic orientation (Fig. 1); data sets were therefore temporally analysed independently for each sector within each island, excluding El Hierro, where the presence of C. nodosa was recorded only to the northeast of the island. It should be noted that in several cases entire areas of the coastal perimeter were excluded from the study due to the absence of records. This represents the “island sector scale” analysis.

Thirdly, meadows with the largest time data sets at each island were analysed separately. The meadows included had to meet at least one of the following two criteria: the presence of records collected over more than 3 years and a total amount of at least 20 records over time. Following this criterion, 3 meadows were selected for Tenerife (Granadilla, El Médano and Igueste), 5 for Gran Canaria (Pasito Blanco, Maspalomas, Playa del Inglés, Gando and Arinaga) and 2 for both Fuerteventura (Gran Tarajal and Playa Blanca) and Lanzarote (Playa Quemada and Guasimeta). In El Hierro and La Gomera, no meadows met these criteria, so no analysis was carried out. A total of 12 meadows were thus examined.

Since data sets were recorded at different annual seasons and Cymodocea nodosa naturally shows maximum vitality and senescence seasons during spring/summer and autumn/winter, respectively (Reyes et al. 1995Reyes J., Sansón M., Afonso-Carrillo J. 1995. Leaf phenology, growth and production of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa at El Médano (South of Tenerife, Canary Islands). Bot. Mar. 38: 457-465., Tuya et al. 2006Tuya F., Martín J.A., Luque A. 2006. Seasonal cycle of a Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadow and of the associated ichthyofauna at Playa Dorada (Lanzarote, Canary Islands, eastern Atlantic). Cienc. Mar. 32: 695-704.), data were standardized to prevent potential confounding seasonal changes from influencing the results. Data from two studies describing the intra-annual monthly variation in the vitality of C. nodosa, Tuya et al. (2006)Tuya F., Martín J.A., Luque A. 2006. Seasonal cycle of a Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadow and of the associated ichthyofauna at Playa Dorada (Lanzarote, Canary Islands, eastern Atlantic). Cienc. Mar. 32: 695-704. and Reyes et al. (1995)Reyes J., Sansón M., Afonso-Carrillo J. 1995. Leaf phenology, growth and production of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa at El Médano (South of Tenerife, Canary Islands). Bot. Mar. 38: 457-465., were used for this purpose: the former reported seasonal patterns of shoot density and leaf length in a meadow from Lanzarote Island, while the latter reported annual patterns of shoot density in a meadow from Tenerife Island. The patterns identified by Tuya et al. (2006) Tuya F., Martín J.A., Luque A. 2006. Seasonal cycle of a Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadow and of the associated ichthyofauna at Playa Dorada (Lanzarote, Canary Islands, eastern Atlantic). Cienc. Mar. 32: 695-704.were used to standardize data from the eastern islands (Gran Canaria, Fuerteventura and Lanzarote), while the patterns by Reyes et al. (1995)Reyes J., Sansón M., Afonso-Carrillo J. 1995. Leaf phenology, growth and production of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa at El Médano (South of Tenerife, Canary Islands). Bot. Mar. 38: 457-465. were used to standardize data from the western islands (Tenerife, La Gomera, El Hierro). For each structural descriptor, a relative value on a scale from 0 to 1 was established for each month, assigning 1 to the month with the highest value and, subsequently, attributing a proportional value to the remaining months. To standardize descriptors for a given meadow according to the month of collection, each datum was then multiplied by the corresponding relative value (0-1). For the three seagrass structural descriptors, at each of the three spatial scales a regression line was adjusted to statistically test the trends over time (i.e. over the last two decades).

RESULTSTop

The analysis compiled 684 records from 49 studies carried out during a period of 23 years, between 1991 and 2013. A total of 87 meadows at 6 islands of the Canarian Archipelago were considered (Table 1 and Supplementary material Table S1).

Island scale

The linear regressions that tested the significance of the temporal trends of the three structural descriptors at each island indicated that linear adjustments were statistically significant in 9 of the 18 cases (Fig. 2). For these 9 significant cases, 2 corresponded to increasing trends over time, while 7 corresponded to decreasing trends over time.

At El Hierro, all regressions were statistically non-significant (Figs 2A, B, C), i.e. no temporal pattern was evidenced. For La Gomera, shoot density (Fig. 2D) and coverage (Fig. 2E) showed no particular trend, i.e. regressions were statistically non-significant, while leaf length (Fig. 2F) showed an overall increase over time. At Tenerife, both seagrass shoot density (Fig. 2G) and coverage (Fig. 2H) were found to be decreasing over time, while leaf length (Fig. 2I) showed a statistically non-significant pattern. At Gran Canaria, seagrass shoot density (Fig. 2L) decreased over time, while leaf length (Fig. 2N) increased; seagrass coverage (Fig. 2M) showed no significant trend. At both Fuerteventura and Lanzarote, seagrass shoot density and coverage (Fig. 2O, P, R, S, respectively) decreased significantly over time, while leaf length (Fig. 2Q, T, respectively) showed no statistically significant temporal pattern.

Island sector scale

Of the 20 sectors examined at 5 of the 6 islands (Table 2), seagrass shoot density was found to be significantly decreasing in 7 cases, increasing in 3, and not showing any trend in 10 cases; seagrass coverage was found to be significantly decreasing in 4 cases, increasing in 1 case and not showing any trend in 15. Leaf length was found to be significantly decreasing in 1 case, increasing in 2, and not showing any trend in 17 cases.

Meadow scale

Of the 12 meadows examined at 4 of the 6 islands (Table 3), seagrass shoot density was found to be significantly decreasing at 4 meadows and not showing any trend at 8 meadows. Seagrass coverage was found to be significantly decreasing at 2 meadows and not showing any trend at 10 meadows; leaf length was found to be significantly decreasing and increasing at only 1 meadow, and not showing any trend at 10 meadows.

DISCUSSIONTop

Our results identified important changes in the demographic structure of Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadows in the Canary Islands over the last 23 years. Specifically, we have identified a prevalence of decreasing trends in the overall state of C. nodosa meadows in the Canary Islands by considering several structural descriptors of seagrass abundance. These results somehow support previous observations of many other studies worldwide (Orth et al. 2006Orth R.J., Carruthers T.J.B., Dennison W.C., et al. 2006. A global crisis for seagrass ecosystems. Biosciences 56: 987-996., Waycott et al. 2009Waycott M., Duarte C.M., Carruthers T.J.B., et al. 2009. Accelerating loss of seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106: 12377-12381., Short et al. 2011Short F.T., Polidoro B., Livingstone S.R., et al. 2011. Extinction risk assessment of the world’s seagrass species. Biol. Conserv. 144: 1961-1971.) that point towards a deterioration in the state of conservation of seagrass meadows. In addition, these results are in concordance with temporal patterns observed for C. nodosa meadows at some of the Canary islands, such as Gran Canaria (Tuya et al. 2013aTuya F., Hernandez-Zerpa H., Espino F., et al. 2013a. Drastic decadal decline of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa at Gran Canaria (eastern Atlantic): Interactions with the green algae Caulerpa prolifera. Aquat. Bot. 105: 1- 6., 2014aTuya F., Ribeiro-Leite L., Arto-Cuesta N., et al. 2014a. Decadal changes in the structure of Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadows: Natural vs. human influences. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 137: 41-49.), where a decline in the vitality of C. nodosa has been demonstrated in the last decade.

It is worth noting, however, that the capacity to reveal ecological trends considerably differed among the three structural descriptors that we selected to describe temporal changes in the structure of Cymodocea nodosa meadows. In turn, we believe there are noteworthy differences in the ability of each descriptor to reflect the status of C. nodosa seagrass meadows, in particular between seagrass shoot density and the other two, coverage and leaf length. First of all, seagrass coverage and leaf length can largely vary in the way data are gathered from study to study, while shoot density, on the other hand, is often taken following more standard procedures, i.e. by deploying a quadrat on the marine bottom and counting the number of shoots within. Seagrass coverage corresponds to the percentage of the bottom covered by C. nodosa, normally taken along 25-m transects, so it does not take into account the density of seagrass shoots and, most importantly, the overall area occupied by the seagrass. In other words, this descriptor measures the percentage of surface covered by the seagrass, but not the state of the meadow, a condition that, at least in the particular case of C. nodosa, is better explained by shoot density (Oliva et al. 2012Oliva S., Mascaró O., Llagostera I., et al. 2012. Selection of metrics based on the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa and development of a biotic index (CYMOX) for assessing ecological status of coastal and transitional waters. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 114: 7-17., Tuya et al. 2014aTuya F., Ribeiro-Leite L., Arto-Cuesta N., et al. 2014a. Decadal changes in the structure of Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadows: Natural vs. human influences. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 137: 41-49.). Consequently, even if a meadow has undergone regression by reducing its overall area and shoot density and then its integrity, this may not be revealed by the analysis of the coverage. With respect to the leaf length, this biometrical attribute represents a morphological response to prevailing environmental conditions (i.e. water turbidity and hydrodynamics); this parameter can change considerably regardless of a deterioration or improvement of meadow conditions. For example, under increased turbidity and sedimentation, C. nodosa may experience a temporal increase in leaf length (Tuya et al. 2002Tuya F., Martín J.A., Luque A. 2002. Impact of a marina construction on a seagrass bed at Lanzarote (Canary Islands). J. Coast. Conserv. 8: 157-162., Tuya et al. 2013bTuya F., Espino F., Terrados J. 2013b. Preservation of seagrass clonal integration buffers against burial stress. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 439: 42-46.). At Gran Canaria, a densely populated island of the archipelago, seagrass shoot density decreased over time, whereas leaf length increased; this disparity shows the different response of these two descriptors to environmental variability. As a result, at local scales, the most representative structural attribute of C. nodosa to describe seagrass meadow integrity, at least from the perspective of temporal variation, is seagrass shoot density. This result apparently contrasts with those obtained by Oliva et al. (2012)Oliva S., Mascaró O., Llagostera I., et al. 2012. Selection of metrics based on the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa and development of a biotic index (CYMOX) for assessing ecological status of coastal and transitional waters. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 114: 7-17., who selected alternative structural descriptors of C. nodosa to assess the quality of coastal waters. However, the scale of both studies is different. On the one hand, Oliva et al. (2012)Oliva S., Mascaró O., Llagostera I., et al. 2012. Selection of metrics based on the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa and development of a biotic index (CYMOX) for assessing ecological status of coastal and transitional waters. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 114: 7-17. aimed at selecting seagrass structural attributes across spatial gradients in coastal water quality. The effect of pollution was better predicted by structural attributes that reflect the consequences of pollution, e.g. above to below-ground ratios). Our study, on the other hand, focused on long-term tendencies, which seemed to be better predicted by seagrass shoot density.

The Canary Islands are densely populated (over 2 million inhabitants [www.ine.es]), including a large tourist pressure (ca. 10 million tourists per year, www.gobiernodecanarias.org/istac/temas_estadisticos/sectorservicios/hosteleriayturismo/demanda). The largest decreases in seagrass shoot density and coverage were observed at Gran Canaria, Tenerife, Lanzarote and Fuerteventura, i.e. the most populated islands of the archipelago, with more than 90% of the overall population. In contrast, the islands with the lowest population density (El Hierro and La Gomera) showed stable temporal patterns for all seagrass structural descriptors. Somehow, this outcome points out towards a connection between human pressure and seagrass meadow vitality, as previously reported for Gran Canaria (Tuya et al. 2014aTuya F., Ribeiro-Leite L., Arto-Cuesta N., et al. 2014a. Decadal changes in the structure of Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadows: Natural vs. human influences. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 137: 41-49., bTuya F., Png-Gonzalez L., Riera R., et al. 2014b. Ecological structure and function differs between habitats dominated by seagrasses and green seaweeds. Marine Environ. Res. 98: 1-13.). The correspondence between highly populated islands of the Canarian Archipelago and decreased shoot density of the meadows over time strengthens or, at least, does not disprove the observation already indicated by other studies (Orth et al. 2006Orth R.J., Carruthers T.J.B., Dennison W.C., et al. 2006. A global crisis for seagrass ecosystems. Biosciences 56: 987-996., Duarte et al. 2008Duarte C.M., Dennison W.C., Orth R.J., et al. 2008. The charisma of coastal ecosystems. Est. Coasts 31: 233-238., Waycott et al. 2009Waycott M., Duarte C.M., Carruthers T.J.B., et al. 2009. Accelerating loss of seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106: 12377-12381., Short et al. 2011Short F.T., Polidoro B., Livingstone S.R., et al. 2011. Extinction risk assessment of the world’s seagrass species. Biol. Conserv. 144: 1961-1971.) of a negative correlation between the intensity of environmental pressures and seagrass conservation. In the particular case of Gran Canaria, the main human-mediated impacts that correlated with seagrass meadow deterioration were the number of outfalls (mainly sewage discharges) and ports (Tuya et al. 2014aTuya F., Ribeiro-Leite L., Arto-Cuesta N., et al. 2014a. Decadal changes in the structure of Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadows: Natural vs. human influences. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 137: 41-49.). Moreover, in the last years, blooms of the cyanobacteria Lyngbya majuscula have been frequently observed in seagrasses to the south of Gran Canaria, Fuerteventura and Lanzarote (Martín-García et al. 2014Martín-García L., Herrera R., Moro-Abad L., et al. 2014. Predicting the potential habitat of the harmful cyanobacteria Lyngbya majuscula in the Canary Islands (Spain). Harmful Algae 34: 76-86.). Lyngbya is considered an important risk for seagrasses due to its epiphytic growth on seagrass leaves and the production of allopathic substances. Hence, negative interactions between C. nodosa and L. majuscula should be considered with caution, particularly within the framework of eutrophized environments.

While the analysis at the island scale somehow revealed clear temporal trends, the analyses at the sector and meadow scales showed a large number of statistically non-significant results. This is most likely connected with the replication level of the analyses at the three scales: larger data availability at the island scale lead to higher statistical power for detecting significant patterns. At the sector and meadow scales, however, the smaller amount of data corresponds with a lower statistical power. Despite this, significant patterns had a prevalence of decreasing trends over time at both the sector and meadow scales. These results reinforce the impression of a prevalence of negative trends of Cymodocea nodosa in the Canary Islands. The dimension of this study, including a large data set of records (684), different sources (49), and the temporal scale (over two decades), support the reliability of our interpretations. The overall decline experienced by C. nodosa meadows represents a further warning and an incentive to encourage research on C. nodosa conservation, particularly as a result of the importance of this species as a ‘habitat engineer’ and its sensitivity to deteriorating environmental conditions, which may be indicative of the state of the marine environment (Oliva et al. 2012Oliva S., Mascaró O., Llagostera I., et al. 2012. Selection of metrics based on the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa and development of a biotic index (CYMOX) for assessing ecological status of coastal and transitional waters. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 114: 7-17.).

In summary, this work is another step towards filling the somehow sparse information about seagrass distribution and their temporal patterns, particularly on the western coast of Africa. The deterioration of Cymodocea nodosa, the main seagrass species in the study area, that we have reported herein is further evidence of the urgent need for better management of the coastal areas.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSTop

We appreciate the time and effort of the researchers and volunteers who helped to collect the large amount of data we compiled in this study. Two reviewers provided positive criticism in a previous draft.

REFERENCESTop

Barberá C., Tuya F., Boyra A., et al. 2005. Spatial variation in the structural parameters of Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadows in the Canary Islands: a multiscaled approach. Bot. Mar. 48: 122-126.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/BOT.2005.021

Bell J.D., Pollard D.A. 1989. Ecology of fish assemblages and fisheries associated with seagrasses. In: McComb A.J., Larkum A.W.D., Shepherd S.A. (eds), The biology of seagrasses: an Australian perspective. Elsevier, pp. 565-609.

Burkholder J.M., Tomasko D.A., Touchette B.W. 2007. Seagrasses and eutrophication. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 350: 46-72.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2007.06.024

Cabaço S., Ferreira O., Santos R. 2010. Population dynamics of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa in Ria Formosa lagoon following inlet artificial relocation. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 87: 510-516.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2010.02.002

Ceccherelli G., Campo D., Milazzo M. 2007. Short-term response of the slow growing seagrass Posidonia oceanica to simulated anchor impact. Mar. Environ. Res. 63: 341-349.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2006.10.004

Duarte C.M., Dennison W.C., Orth R.J., et al. 2008. The charisma of coastal ecosystems. Est. Coasts 31: 233-238.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12237-008-9042-y

Espino F., Tuya F., Blanch I., et al. 2008. Los Sebadales en Canarias. Praderas de fanerógamas marinas. BIOGES, Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canarias, 68 pp.

Espino E., Tuya F., Brito A., et al. 2011. Ichthyofauna associated with Cymodocea nodosa meadows in the Canarian Archipelago (central eastern Atlantic): community structure and nursery role. Cienc. Mar. 37: 157-174.
http://dx.doi.org/10.7773/cm.v37i2.1720

Francour P., Ganteaume A., Poulain M. 1999. Effects of boat anchoring in Posidonia oceanica beds in the Port-Cross National Park (north-western Mediterranean Sea). Aquat. Cons. 9: 391-400.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0755(199907/08)9:4<391::AID-AQC356>3.0.CO;2-8

Halpern B.S., Walbridge S., Selkoe K.A., et al. 2008. A global map of human impacts on marine ecosystems. Science 319: 948-952.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1149345

Hemminga M.A., Nieuwenhuize J. 1990. Seagrass wrack-induced dune formation on a tropical coast (Banc d’Arguin, Mauritania). Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 31: 499-502.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0272-7714(90)90040-X

Jones C.V., Lawton J.H., Shachak, M. 1994. Organisms as Ecosystem Engineers. Oikos 69: 373-386.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3545850

Martín-García L., Herrera R., Moro-Abad L., et al. 2014. Predicting the potential habitat of the harmful cyanobacteria Lyngbya majuscula in the Canary Islands (Spain). Harmful Algae 34: 76-86.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hal.2014.02.008

Mascaró O., Oliva S., Pérez M., et al. 2009. Spatial variability in ecological attributes of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa. Bot. Mar. 52: 429-438.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/BOT.2009.055

Milazzo M., Badalamenti F., Ceccherelli G., et al. 2004. Boat anchoring on Posidonia oceanica beds in a marine protected area (Italy, Western Mediterranean): effect of anchor types in different anchoring stages. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 299: 51-62.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2003.09.003

Montefalcone M., Chiantore M., Lanzone A., et al. 2008. BACI design reveals the decline of the seagrass Posidonia oceanica induced by anchoring. Mar. Poll. Bull. 56: 1637-1645.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2008.05.013

Oliva S., Mascaró O., Llagostera I., et al. 2012. Selection of metrics based on the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa and development of a biotic index (CYMOX) for assessing ecological status of coastal and transitional waters. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 114: 7-17.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2011.08.022

Orth R.J., Carruthers T.J.B., Dennison W.C., et al. 2006. A global crisis for seagrass ecosystems. Biosciences 56: 987-996.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2006)56[987:AGCFSE]2.0.CO;2

Pavón-Salas N., Herrera R., Hernández-Guerra A., et al. 2000. Distributional patterns of seagrasses in the Canary Islands (Central - East Atlantic Ocean). J. Coast. Res. 16: 328-335.

Peduzzi P., Vukovic A. 1990. Primary production of Cymodocea nodosa in the Gulf of Trieste (Northern Adriatic Sea): a comparison of methods. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 64: 197-207.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3354/meps064197

Pérez-Ruzafa A., Marcos C., Ros J. 1991. Environmental and Biological changes related to recent human activities in the Mar Menor. Mar. Poll. Bull. 23: 747-751.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0025-326X(91)90774-M

Pollard D.A. 1984. A review of ecological studies on seagrass fish communities, with particular reference to recent studies in Australia. Aquat. Bot. 18: 3-42.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-3770(84)90079-2

Reyes J., Sansón M., Afonso-Carrillo J. 1995. Leaf phenology, growth and production of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa at El Médano (South of Tenerife, Canary Islands). Bot. Mar. 38: 457-465.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/botm.1995.38.1-6.457

Rismondo A., Curiel D., Marzocchi M., et al. 1997. Seasonal pattern of Cymodocea nodosa biomass and production in the Lagoon of Venice. Aquat. Bot. 58: 55-64.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3770(96)01116-3

Short F.T., Polidoro B., Livingstone S.R., et al. 2011. Extinction risk assessment of the world’s seagrass species. Biol. Conserv. 144: 1961-1971.

Terrados J., Ros J.D. 1993. Limitación por nutrientes del crecimiento de Cymodocea nodosa (Ucria) Ascherson en sedimentos carbonatados en el Mar Menor, Murcia, SE de España. Publ. Esp. Inst. Esp. Oceanogr. 11: 9-14.

Tuya F., Martín J.A., Luque A. 2002. Impact of a marina construction on a seagrass bed at Lanzarote (Canary Islands). J. Coast. Conserv. 8: 157-162.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1652/1400-0350(2002)008[0157:IOAMCO]2.0.CO;2

Tuya F., Martín J.A., Luque A. 2006. Seasonal cycle of a Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadow and of the associated ichthyofauna at Playa Dorada (Lanzarote, Canary Islands, eastern Atlantic). Cienc. Mar. 32: 695-704.

Tuya F., Hernandez-Zerpa H., Espino F., et al. 2013a. Drastic decadal decline of the seagrass Cymodocea nodosa at Gran Canaria (eastern Atlantic): Interactions with the green algae Caulerpa prolifera. Aquat. Bot. 105: 1-6.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aquabot.2012.10.006

Tuya F., Espino F., Terrados J. 2013b. Preservation of seagrass clonal integration buffers against burial stress. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 439: 42-46
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2012.10.015

Tuya F., Ribeiro-Leite L., Arto-Cuesta N., et al. 2014a. Decadal changes in the structure of Cymodocea nodosa seagrass meadows: Natural vs. human influences. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 137: 41-49.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2013.11.026

Tuya F., Png-Gonzalez L., Riera R., et al. 2014b. Ecological structure and function differs between habitats dominated by seagrasses and green seaweeds. Marine Environ. Res. 98: 1-13.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2014.03.015

Waycott M., Duarte C.M., Carruthers T.J.B., et al. 2009. Accelerating loss of seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106: 12377-12381.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0905620106

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL

The following material is available through the online version of this article and at the following link:
http://www.icm.csic.es/scimar/supplm/sm04165esm.pdf

Table S1. – Compiled demographic data of C. nodosa at each meadow and island, including shoot density, coverage and leaf length. The name of the study/project correspond to the official name, while the name of the enterprise/Admistration that provided the data is in parenthesis, whenever appropiate.