Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Springer logoLink to Springer
. 2025 Mar 22;55(2):31. doi: 10.1007/s12526-025-01505-4

Deep-sea ecosystems in the north-eastern Alboran Sea (western Mediterranean): quantifying assemblages and anthropogenic activity in the Seco de los Olivos Bank

Patricia Puerta 1,✉, Rosa M Cañedo-Apolaya 1,2, José L Rueda 3, Carlos Dominguez-Carrió 4,5, Javier Urra 3, Covadonga Orejas 6
PMCID: PMC11929697  PMID: 40129621

Abstract

Seafloor elevations (e.g., seamounts, banks, mounds) are essential underwater features for supporting and maintaining global marine biodiversity. Such geomorphological features might be of particular relevance to preserve biodiversity in the Mediterranean Sea, where a high number of anthropogenic impacts threaten deep-sea ecosystems. Using imagery from a remotely operated vehicle (ROV), deep-sea megabenthic and demersal fish assemblages were identified and quantified in some of the less studied areas of the Seco de los Olivos Bank (also known as Chella Bank), a seafloor elevation considered a hotspot of biodiversity in the Alboran Sea, Western Mediterranean. The 62 taxa identified were grouped into five well-defined benthic and demersal assemblages, mainly influenced by substrate type and typified by massive sponges, cold-water corals, sea pens, and ray-finned fishes. Nine taxa were identified as indicators of vulnerable marine ecosystems (VMEs) and/or endangered species. The heterogeneous distribution of substrate types plays a key role in assemblage composition, with hard substrates enhancing biodiversity at the local scale. A wide variety of indicators of anthropogenic activities were found, including bottom trawling marks, remains of fishing gears, and other types of marine litter, whose presence seemed to reduce the diversity of the observed assemblages. The results presented here improve the still scarce quantitative assessments of deep-sea benthic ecosystems to implement effective management measures in the framework of the main European policies (e.g., Habitats Directive, Marine Strategy Framework Directive) to reach 2030 conservation goals.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12526-025-01505-4.

Keywords: Benthic communities, Vulnerable marine ecosystems, Remotely operated vehicle, Marine litter

Introduction

Seamounts and other seafloor elevations are considered essential ecosystems worldwide for supporting and maintaining marine biodiversity (Clark et al. 2010b; Rowden et al. 2010; Würtz and Rovere 2015; Du et al. 2016; Watling and Auster 2017). They provide heterogeneous habitats and harbor rich and diverse biological communities (Clark et al. 2010a; McClain and Lundsten 2015; Rogers 2018; Victorero et al. 2018; Ramiro-Sánchez et al. 2019), including many vulnerable and threatened species (Davies et al. 2015; Ramos et al. 2016; Watling and Auster 2017; D’Onghia 2019). Nevertheless, these ecosystems have historically been exploited by commercial fisheries due to the associated richness and abundance of fish of high commercial value (Pitcher et al. 2007; Bergstad et al. 2012; Pham et al. 2015; Clark et al. 2016; D’Onghia 2019). New impacts derived from other increasing anthropogenic activities (Würtz and Rovere 2015; Rogers 2018) and the waste they generate (Pham et al. 2013; Woodall et al. 2015; Pierdomenico et al. 2019; Angiolillo and Fortibuoni 2020; Bo et al. 2021) also pose a challenge for the conservation of these ecosystems. More than 100 seamounts (and seafloor elevations) have been identified in the Mediterranean Sea (Morato et al. 2013; Würtz and Rovere 2015), which is one of the most threatened basins in terms of biodiversity loss and human impacts (Coll et al. 2010; Katsanevakis et al. 2014; Deudero and Alomar 2015; Moullec et al. 2019). All studies exploring Mediterranean seamounts and seafloor elevations agree on their key role for the biodiversity and functioning of the deep-sea benthic and demersal communities at local and regional scales (Danovaro et al. 2010; Morato et al. 2013; de la Torriente et al. 2018; Wienberg 2019; Bo et al. 2021; Massutí et al. 2022; Puerta et al. 2022).

Indeed, the conservation of vulnerable marine ecosystems (VMEs) in the deep sea has become an important concern for multiple international organizations (UNGA 2006; FAO 2009; ICES 2017; GFCM 2009), urging governments and Regional Fishery Management Organizations (RFMOs) to take action to prevent further damage on these fragile ecosystems. In this sense, the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) elaborated a list of VME indicator taxa and habitats, which included cold-water corals (CWCs; e.g., Desmophyllum pertusum Linnaeus, 1758, (synonym Lophelia pertusa), and Madrepora oculata Linnaeus, 1758) and octocorals (e.g., Funiculina quadrangularis Pallas, 1766), among others (GFCM 2017). Fishing activities frequently cause physical damage on these species, reducing the coverage/abundance of such habitat-structuring organisms and the associated demersal fish fauna (Bo et al. 2014; Clark et al. 2016; Pierdomenico et al. 2018; D’Onghia 2019 and references therein). Moreover, the accumulation of marine litter has been reported as an important source of impact for benthic organisms (Fabri et al. 2014; Vieira et al. 2015; Dominguez-Carrió et al. 2020; Grinyó et al. 2020). Thus, the characterization and mapping of deep-sea communities, and particularly of VME indicator taxa and habitats, in seamounts and seafloor elevations are of prime interest to devise appropriate measures for the management of marine biodiversity, for instance, through the establishment of closed areas for fishing (e.g., no-take zones, Fisheries Restricted Areas; FAO 2023; GFCM 2019).

Among the seafloor elevations known to date in the Alboran Sea (western Mediterranean Sea) (Würtz and Rovere 2015; Wienberg 2019), the Seco de los Olivos Bank (SdO; also known as Chella Bank) is considered a biodiversity hotspot (Lo Iacono et al. 2008, 2012; Pardo et al. 2011; de la Torriente et al. 2014, 2018). In 2014, it was established as a Site of Community Importance (SCI code ESZZ16003) of the Natura 2000 network of protected areas. This SCI harbors unique assemblages of habitat-forming benthic invertebrates, such as CWC reefs, coral gardens, or sponge aggregations (Lo Iacono et al. 2008, 2012; de la Torriente et al. 2014, 2018). Furthermore, it presents a relevant economic target for fisheries since it hosts commercial species such as the European hake Merluccius merluccius, the common octopus Octopus vulgaris, and the Norway lobster Nephrops norvegicus, being traditionally and currently subjected to fishing activities (Pardo et al. 2011; de la Torriente et al. 2014).

Despite the efforts of the aforementioned studies to characterize the diversity of deep-sea habitats and assemblages in SdO, there is still a paucity of quantitative information standardized to area coverage, as generally occurs for the deep sea (e.g., Corbera et al. 2019; Grinyó et al. 2020). Therefore, the aims of the present study are (1) to qualitatively and quantitatively characterize the composition and diversity of the deep-sea megabenthic and demersal fish assemblages in the less studied areas of the SdO (i.e., the western and eastern ridges) and (2) document the indicators of anthropogenic activity in these areas. Integrated studies considering different assemblages and components of the ecosystem, as well as the identification of VME indicators and actual human impacts at local scale, are key to understand ecosystem health and establish efficient measures for their management and conservation.

Material and methods

Study area

The Seco de los Olivos Bank (SdO) is a seafloor elevation of volcanic origin located in the north-eastern sector of the Alboran Sea, in the western Mediterranean (Fig. 1) (Lo Iacono et al. 2012). This bank is represented by long ridges and several seafloor elevations, spanning an area of approximately 100 km2 (Maldonado and Comas 1992; Coiras et al. 2011), characterized by a high topographical complexity, as well as by a wide range of substrates and habitats (Abad et al. 2007; de la Torriente et al. 2014). The bank consists of three geomorphological structures (Fig. 1). The main structure is a “guyot” that rises approximately from 400 to 600 m depth, with a flat, semi-circular summit at ~ 75 m depth (De Mol et al. 2012; Lo Iacono et al. 2012; de la Torriente et al. 2019). The other structures are two ridges located on both sides of the main seafloor elevation (Fig. 1). The western ridge covers a depth range of 160–420 m and exhibits a N-S orientation in its southernmost area (Lo Iacono et al. 2012). It is composed of peaks and crests, and its flanks display an average slope of 8° with a maximum value of 17° (Lo Iacono et al. 2012). At the base of the ridge, a mix of mud and fine sands with some areas of coarse sands has previously been documented (Lo Iacono et al. 2012). The eastern ridge covers a depth range of 140 to 480 m along a NW–SE orientation (Lo Iacono et al. 2012), where dense frameworks of dead CWCs have been observed (Lo Iacono et al. 2012; de la Torriente et al. 2014).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Location (inset map) and bathymetric map of the Seco de los Olivos Bank in the Alboran Sea, western Mediterranean. Depth isolines are shown in dark grey, while thick black lines represent the ROV transects performed during the MEDWAVES expedition. The purple polygon in the inset map indicates the limits of the Site of Community Importance of the Natura 2000 network Sur de Almería—Seco de los Olivos, where the study area is located (red dot)

The Alboran Sea is a transitional area where the Atlantic surficial inflow water and the Mediterranean deep-water mass flowing towards the Atlantic Ocean interact (Gascard and Richez 1985). The Modified Atlantic Water (MAW; 0–200 m depth) (Gascard and Richez 1985; Font et al. 1998; Millot 1999) mostly interacts with the summit of the guyot. At deeper layers, the Levantine Intermediate Water (LIW; 220–600 m depth) flows eastward throughout the Strait of Gibraltar, while the Western Mediterranean Deep Water (WMDW; > 600 m) (Gascard and Richez 1985; Parrilla et al. 1986) flows in the opposite direction.

Data collection

The present study investigated the less studied areas of the SdO, which were sampled during the multidisciplinary expedition “MEDiterranean outflow WAter and Vulnerable EcosystemS” (MEDWAVES) on board of the R/V Sarmiento de Gamboa in 2016 (Orejas et al. 2017). This expedition was part of the H2020 European project “A Trans-Atlantic assessment and Deep-Water Ecosystem-Based Spatial Management Plan for Europe” (ATLAS, www.eu-atlas.org). The characterization of the deep-sea fauna was based on six video transects (Fig. 1; Table 1) conducted with the Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) Liropus 2000. It was equipped with a Kongsberg HDTW color zoom video camera (OE14-502), a Kongsberg underwater photo still camera (OE14-408/408E), and three frontal flash LED Matrix lights. Furthermore, a high definition (HD) video camera was used to obtain high-quality video footage. A pair of parallel laser beams, separated by 10 cm, were mounted on the ROV to provide scale to determine the area of the seafloor surveyed and for measuring organisms. The positioning of the ROV was recorded continuously using a USBL transponder and the HYPACK software. Further technical details can be found in Orejas et al. (2017), Mosquera-Giménez et al. (2019), and Puerta et al. (2022). A total of 18 h of video footage were recorded, which covered approximately 7 linear km of seafloor (Table 1).

Table 1.

Specifications of the ROV video transects performed in the Seco de los Olivos Bank during the MEDWAVES expedition, including surveyed site, ROV transect according to the codes used in the MEDWAVES expedition (Orejas et al. 2017), date, geographical location (start and end latitude and longitude), duration of the video footage (hours, minutes, seconds), linear distance navigated in the transect (m), depth range (m), and orientation regarding the study area (flank). Sites include A, southern flank of the western ridge; B, middle portion of the eastern ridge; C, southeastern; and D, southwestern flanks of eastern ridge (as in Fig. 1)

Site ROV transect Date Location (lat; lon) Duration (hh:mm:ss) Distance (m) Depth range (m) Flank
Start End
A 19 23/10/2016 36° 7.98′ N; 2° 14.91′ W 36° 8.03′ N; 2° 14.88′ W 00:55:47 468 703–793 SE
21 23/10/2016 36° 8.03′ N; 2° 14.87′ W 36° 8.28′ N; 2° 14.83W 04:05:08 1948 325–693 N
B 22 24/10/2016 36° 9.10′ N; 2° 13.55′ W 36° 9′ N; 2° 13.68′ W 03:10:05 1299 250–384 W
23 24/10/2016 36° 9′ N; 2° 13.68′ W 36° 8.95′ N; 2° 13.67′ W 02:53:51 607 238–251 N
C 24 25/10/2016 36° 8.60′ N; 2° 13.23′ W 36° 8.68′ N; 2° 13.42′ W 03:32:18 1583 209–560 SE-W
D 25 25/10/2016 36° 8.55′ N; 2° 13.65′ W 36° 8.65′ N; 2° 13.62′ W 03:21:51 1125 282–446 N
Open in a new tab

According to the location of the video transects (Fig. 1), they were grouped into four different sites for their description and analysis. Site A includes transects 19 and 21 and is located on the southern flank of the western ridge. In contrast, Sites B, C, and D are located at the eastern ridge. Site B, in the middle portion, encompassing transects 22 and 23, while sites C and D in the southeast and southwest flanks of this ridge, respectively, account for only one transect each, numbers 24 and 25 (Fig. 1, Table 1).

ROV video analysis

Prior to the video analysis, the complete footage from all transects was visualized to identify and classify the observed substrate types (Fig. 2), fauna (Suppl. Table S1, (Cañedo-Apolaya et al. 2020), and indicators of anthropogenic activities (e.g., bottom trawling marks). Substrate type characterization was based on a similar methodology as used in previous studies (Purser et al. 2013; van den Beld et al. 2017; de la Torriente et al. 2018; Puerta et al. 2022) and defined by five main categories: rock, flagstone (not volcanic origin), coral framework, which encompassed hard bottoms, and detritic and mud that formed the soft bottoms (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Reference images of the different substrate types identified at the Seco de los Olivos Bank. a Rock: bedrocks or large boulder outcropping. The rock surface is commonly covered by fine sediment; b flagstone: compact and consolidated sediment forming platforms or slabs that define a hard substrate, cracks are frequently present; c coral framework: substrate formed from the three-dimensional dead coral framework and/or accumulation of large broken pieces (> 5 cm) of this framework; d detritic unconsolidated sediment with large (> 0.5 cm approximately) grain size and frequently with bioclastic components (e.g., shells, coral rubble); e mud: unconsolidated sediment with visually undistinguishable grains, sometimes bioturbated

The identification of deep-sea megabenthic and demersal fish fauna (Suppl. Table S1) (Cañedo-Apolaya et al. 2020) was solved to the lowest possible taxonomic level, using literature review (e.g., Xavier and Marzia 2017; Altuna and Poliseno 2019; Ordines et al. 2019; Rueda et al. 2019) and experts’ opinion. Some organisms could only be identified at high taxonomic levels (e.g., family, order) or as a descriptive morphotype (Cañedo-Apolaya et al. 2020). For these reasons, the Open Taxonomic Nomenclature described in Sigovini et al. (2016) and Horton et al. (2021) was used to name each taxon to the lowest possible taxonomical identification while indicating the level of uncertainty in such identification (Suppl. Table S1). No small encrusting organisms could be appropriately identified, and therefore, they were not included in the analyses.

The aim of the following analyses using ROV footage was to obtain standardized and comparable quantitative data across the sites surveyed to characterize the seafloor in terms of substrate type, megabenthic and demersal fish fauna, and anthropogenic impacts. For this purpose, video footage was processed following several steps: (1) selection of video material for standardized quantitative data and (2) annotations and quantification of substrate type, megabenthic fauna, and indicators of anthropogenic activity for the video material selected in the first step.

Selection of video material

For obtaining standardized quantitative data from the video material, the footage had to fulfill three criteria: (i) the ROV described (or navigated along) a linear path, (ii) image quality was good enough to clearly identify megabenthic and demersal fauna, and (iii) laser beams were clearly visible. The footage that met such requirements was retained for further analyses, with the remaining footage (e.g., ROV sampling, bad visibility, deployment, erratic movement) being discarded. From a total of 18 h of video footage, only 49% was selected for the subsequent analyses.

Video annotations

The video annotations recorded the presence of the different substrate types, organisms, or indicators of anthropogenic activity in relation to the position of the ROV and depth. Annotations were recorded using laser beams to define an (imaginary) horizontal reference line of 1 m width (see Suppl. Fig. S1). This width avoids using blurred edges of the video frames and allows the standardization of annotation to a given sampling area. This method was tested for bias in annotations by comparing records inside the reference line and in the full video frame (i.e., inside plus outside the reference line), showing no differences in the abundance and relative taxa composition patterns (Suppl. Fig. S2). All video annotations were performed using the Ocean Floor Observation Protocol (OFOP) v3.3.6 software, which links the position of the ROV with every second of the video footage. The georeferenced annotations for substrate coverage and fauna abundance logged per second were finally standardized to sampling units of 10 m2 (10.09 ± 0.49 m2).

First, video annotations for substrate types were performed on the selected video material described above. A maximum of two substrates were annotated at a time along the reference line. When a clear dominance of one substrate type was observed, a 100% coverage was assigned. The presence of a secondary substrate type was only annotated when it represented > 30% and ≤ 50%. However, to simplify and avoid complex substrate compositions, the annotation always assumed a fixed percentage of coverage (70% primary and 30% secondary) in the case that two substrate types were present.

Secondly, all organisms larger than 5 cm were identified and annotated (e.g., Puerta et al. 2022). The only exception to this criterion was Suberitidae gen. indet. (Suppl. Table S1) (Cañedo-Apolaya et al. 2020), which despite being sometimes smaller than 5 cm, it was always clearly identifiable, and hence annotated. Fauna annotations along the 1-m reference line were used for density calculations in sampling units of 10 m2, as individuals or colonies per square meter (ind·m−2) for each taxon.

Finally, the presence of items or indicators of anthropogenic activities was recorded. The abundance of indicators of anthropogenic activities was calculated as items per linear distance (km−1) as described in Angiolillo and Canese (2018) and grouped into four categories following the methods in Vieira et al. (2015): marine litter (e.g., cans, pieces of plastic), fishing remains (e.g., fishing lines, ropes, buoys, nets and traps), trawl marks, and other unidentified items.

Data analyses

Composition and structure of deep-sea megabenthic and demersal fish assemblages

The composition and structure of the deep-sea assemblages at the SdO were explored through a cluster analysis to identify groups of associated fauna, including megabenthic (sessile or low mobility) and demersal fish (mobile) fauna. Square root transformed density data and a Bray–Curtis similarity matrix were used to build a hierarchical dendrogram applying the pair-group method using arithmetic averages (UPGMA), using site and substrate type as factors defining the groupings (Clarke et al. 2008). A similarity of percentage (SIMPER) analysis was performed to identify the taxa that most contributed to the intra-group similarity and the inter-group dissimilarity (i.e., differences among assemblages) (Clarke 1993). Taxa annotated less than five times along whole video footage were removed from the analyses, as well as other five taxa suspected of possible underestimation due to their size, characteristics, or behavior (i.e., Munida spp. indet., Plesionika spp. indet., Paguridae spp. stet., Suberitidae gen. indet., and Hymenocephalus italicus). Therefore, a total of 41 taxa were considered for these statistical analyses, which were carried out using the software PRIMER v.6 (Clarke and Gorley 2006).

Spatial diversity

Diversity was quantified and compared across the four sites explored using Hill numbers (Chao et al. 2014a) and their corresponding rarefaction and extrapolation (R/E) curves (Chao et al. 2014b). Hill numbers are a mathematical family of diversity indices, which are expressed as effective numbers of species or taxa (i.e., the number of species that constitute a hypothetical perfectly even community that presents the same diversity than the studied community). All of them were calculated under the same mathematical function (Chao et al. 2014a) but differed in the order q, which is sensitive to the frequency of occurrence of the species (Budka et al. 2019). The three most common q values were used, which are equivalent to three widely used diversity indices: species richness (q = 0), Shannon–Wiener diversity (q = 1, i.e., the effective number of abundant species), and inverse Simpson diversity (q = 2, i.e., the effective number of highly abundant species). In addition, rarefaction and extrapolation methods allowed to standardize the diversity measures and compare datasets with uneven sample sizes (Chao et al. 2014b). Following the approach in (Colwell et al. 2012), the R/E curves and their 95% confidence intervals were extrapolated to double the sample size of each site respectively. All (61) taxa were included in these analyses, which were performed using the R package iNEXT (Hsieh et al. 2016).

Results

A total of 1744 organisms were annotated from the selected video material, belonging to 61 taxa (Suppl. Table S1). Porifera (25%), Cnidaria (20%), and fish (29%) were the dominant groups with similar overall contribution to the taxonomic composition (Fig. 3). Comparing the different sites explored, site A showed the highest number of taxonomic groups, while site B presented the highest number of taxa and occurrences. In contrast, site C contained the lowest number of taxa.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Open in a new tab

Taxonomic composition of the megabenthic and demersal fish fauna at each of the surveyed sites in the study area. Sites include A, southern flank of the western ridge; B, middle portion of the eastern ridge; C southeastern; and D, southwestern flanks of eastern ridge (as in Fig. 1)

The most frequent sponge taxa were Porifera fam. inc. sp.1 (255 organisms, 107 occurrences) and Porifera fam. inc. 1 (172 organisms, 114 occurrences). Among the diverse array of cnidarians, the gorgonian Acanthogorgia spp. indet. was the most abundant (135 colonies, 76 occurrences), followed by the black coral Parantipathes larix Esper, 1788 (82 colonies, 69 occurrences) and the stony coral Dendrophyllia cornigera Lamarck, 1816 (79 colonies, 58 occurrences). Regarding the ichthyofauna, the most frequent taxa were the blackbelly rosefish Helicolenus dactylopterus Delaroche, 1809 (94 individuals, 92 occurrences) and the slime-head fish Hoplostethus mediterraneus Cuvier, 1829 (72 individuals, 20 occurrences), which formed a large shoal at the western ridge.

Almost 98% of the footage analyzed was characterized by a unique dominant substrate type. Overall, soft substrates were widely distributed at all sites and depths, accounting for 84% of the bottom composition (Fig. 4). Hard substrates occurred in patches at sites B and D above 400 m depth. Coral framework was occasionally detected in the shallowest areas of sites A and B in (239–251 m depth) (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Open in a new tab

Characterization of substrate type and megabenthic and demersal fauna recorded along the ROV transects performed at the four studied sites in the Seco de los Olivos Bank. Panels a, b, c, d, represent the corresponding Sites A, B, C, D as in Fig. 1. At each panel, the upper plot shows substrate type along the transect depth profile, while the lower plot shows the density of organisms grouped by the main taxonomic groups along the distance navigated in the transect (m). Shadow grey areas denote parts of the transects that were not analyzed as did not meet selection criteria for quantitative analyses

Site A: southern flank of the western ridge

Site A was surveyed by ROV transects 19 and 21 (Table 1), covering the deepest areas (338–722 m depth), and located on the southern flank of the western ridge (Fig. 1). The seafloor was primarily characterized by mud, except in some sections of the shallowest part of the transect (~ 340–450 m depth), where detritic substrates occurred with some patches of coral framework (Fig. 4a). The megafauna was dominated by Porifera, Chordata (fish), and Cnidaria in terms of number of taxa. Sponges were distributed mostly along the shallowest part of the transect (350–500 m depth), with Porifera fam. inc. sp.1 being the most common taxa, mainly found on coral framework (0.32 ± 0.79 ind·m−2) and detritic (0.10 ± 0.57 ind·m−2) substrates. Cnidaria was the most common group below 500 m depth (Fig. 4a), with high densities reported for the seapens Kophobelemnon stelliferum and Pennatula cf. aculeata. Other invertebrates observed in the deepest section on soft substrates included decapod crustaceans (e.g., squat lobsters Munida spp. indet., pandalid shrimps Plesionika spp. indet, Suppl. Fig. S2) and echinoderms (Fig. 4a). Single observations of the echiurid (Polychaeta) Bonellia cf. viridis and the bivalve (Mollusca) Neopycnodonte zibrowii Gofas, C. Salas & Taviani, 2009, were registered. Ray-finned fishes were observed along the entire transect (Fig. 4a), while a large shoal of the slime-head fish H. mediterraneus was observed over small patches of coral framework. Other fish species such as the blackbelly rosefish H. dactylopterus and the macrurid Nezumia aequalis Günter, 1878, were commonly detected as solitary individuals along with sporadic sightings of other fishes (e.g., Capros aper Linnaeus, 1758, Hymenocephalus italicus Giglioli, 1884, Phycis blennoides Brünnich, 1768, and sharks of the genus Galeus).

Site B: middle portion of the eastern ridge

The ROV transects 22 and 23 (Table 1) were conducted at site B. This site is located in the middle portion of eastern ridge, which connects two small banks (Fig. 1). Transect 23 covered the shallowest sections (239–251 m depth) where hard substrates (i.e., coral framework, flagstone and rock) dominated (Fig. 4b). Downslope, transect 22 surveyed the deepest section (255–384 m depth), and was characterized by rocks that turned into soft bottoms with depth (Fig. 4b). This site presented the highest densities of habitat-forming taxa, such as sponges and corals, which usually co-occurred mainly associated with hard substrates (Fig. 4b). The sponges Porifera fam. inc. sp.1 (1.22 ± 2.27 ind·m−2 on coral framework) and Porifera fam. inc. 1 (0.12 ± 0.55 ind·m−2 on coral framework) were the most abundant among the 14 Porifera taxa observed. Other common sponges were Cladocroce spp. indet. (which probably includes Cladocroce fibrosa Topsent, 1890), Porifera fam. inc. sp.4 and Asconema setubalense Kent, 1870. The gorgonian Acanthogorgia spp. indet. was commonly found on all substrates except mud, reaching the highest densities on flagstone (0.62 ± 1.48 ind·m−2). The black coral P. larix and the stony coral D. cornigera occurred across all substrate types, with maximum densities observed on rocks (0.13 ± 0.42 col m−2) and coral framework (0.32 ± 0.72 col·m−2), respectively. A few observations of small scleractinian colonies (i.e., M. oculata D. pertusum), gorgonians (e.g., Savaglia savaglia Bertoloni, 1819, Callogorgia verticillata Pallas, 1766), and sea pens (e.g., F. quadrangularis) were also recorded. Among other invertebrates, the gastropod Ranella olearium Linnaeus, 1758, and the octopus Eledone cirrhosa Lamarck, 1798, were only found in this site. Fish were observed in low abundances across the entire transect, being H. dactylopterus the most frequent, followed by Gadiculus argenteus Guichenot, 1850, Anthias anthias Linnaeus, 1758, C. aper, Conger conger Linnaeus, 1758, and the sharks Galeus sp. indet. and Scyliorhinus canicula Linnaeus, 1758 (Fig. 4b).

Site C: southeastern flank of the astern ridge

At the southeast flank on the eastern ridge (228–560 m depth), ROV transect 24 (Table 1) was carried out to survey site C (Fig. 1). This site was mainly characterized by mud, with an area of detritic substrates in the shallowest section (~ 250–350 m depth) (Fig. 4c). This area presented the lowest densities of organisms (Fig. 4c), being Heteroscleromorpha fam. indet and ceriantharians (Cnidaria, Ceriantharia fam. indet) (Suppl. Fig. S2) the most common taxa. Other invertebrates such as pandalid shrimps or sea urchins (Suppl. Fig. S2) were occasionally observed. However, the number of fish taxa recorded was high (9 in total), being H. dactylopterus, Coelorinchus caelorinchus Risso, 1810, and H. italicus, the most frequent (Fig. 4c).

Site D: southeastern flank of the eastern ridge

Site D was explored by ROV transect 25 (290–445 m depth; Table 1) at the southwest flank of the astern ridge (Fig. 1). The substrate composition largely varied across the transect, being dominated by detritic substrates at the shallowest section (Fig. 4d), rocks between 330 and 400 m depth, and mud in the deepest section (Fig. 4d). The highest densities of fauna were mainly observed on rocky substrates in a similar depth range. The three main groups of fauna (Porifera, Cnidaria, and fish) were commonly detected, with several Porifera taxa, including A. setubalense (0.13 ± 0.41 ind·m−2) frequently found on rocks (Fig. 4d). Scattered colonies of Acanthogorgia spp. indet. and P. larix were also observed on hard bottoms. A smaller number of other invertebrates were registered compared to other sites, being the sea urchin Cidaridae spp. indet. the most abundant as in the rest of sites. Fish such as H. dactylopterus were widely distributed across site D, whereas the blue whiting Micromesistius poutassou Risso, 1827, was detected only on soft substrates (Fig. 4d).

Deep-sea megabenthic and demersal fish assemblages

The hierarchical cluster analysis identified five major benthic and demersal fish assemblages, mainly defined by species composition and related to substrate type (Fig. 5). The factor site displayed a minor effect in the groupings, and it was only detected through the scaling up of the dendrogram. Overall, sponges, cnidarians, and fishes were the most abundant groups in the analyses and, thus, the most representative taxa typifying each assemblage (Suppl. Table S2, Fig. S3). The geographical location of each assemblage along the video transects is shown in Fig. 6. In addition, the SIMPER analysis highlighted differences between these assemblages with high levels of dissimilarities, ranging from 93.2 to 99.8% (Suppl. Table S2). Within each assemblage, the average similarity showed low values (21.1–43.8%; Suppl. Table S2), and usually, one or two taxa explained more than 60% of the intra-group similarity (Suppl. Table S2).

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Open in a new tab

Hierarchical clustering for deep-sea megafauna of the Seco de los Olivos Bank. Black dashed line indicates the reference similarity percentage used to delimit the major assemblages. Each assemblage is labeled with As and number (e.g., Assemblage 1 = As1), depth range, dominant substrate, and the megafauna explaining at least 60% of the intragroup similarities

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6

Open in a new tab

Spatial distribution of the five deep-sea megafauna assemblages identified in the study area. a Site A, southern slope of the western ridge. b Included sites B, middle portion of the eastern ridge, C southeastern, and D, southwestern flanks of eastern ridge (as in Fig. 1). See Fig. S3 for the characterization of the assemblages

Assemblage 1 (As1: Muddy bottoms with cerianthids and sea pens) inhabited mud plains between 366 and 774 m depth, in sites A and C (Figs. 5 and 6, Suppl. Fig. S3). Two cnidaria, Ceriantharia fam. Indet. and K. stelliferum, which showed similar densities, explained almost 90% of the intra-group similarity (Suppl. Table S2). Assemblage 2 (As2: Soft bottoms dominated by G. argenteus) was mainly observed on soft substrates at sites A, B, and C, covering a bathymetric range of 343–757 m depth (Figs. 5 and 6, Suppl. Fig. S3). The total intra-group similarity of As2 (Suppl. Table S2) was explained by the presence of two ray-finned fishes, the silvery pout G. argenteus, and the blackspot seabream Pagellus bogaraveo Brünnich, 1768. Assemblage 3 (As3: Mixed assemblage of small sponges and Callionymidae on soft bottoms) occurred mainly on mud and detritic substrates between 231 and 629 m depth, but it was also observed sporadically on patches of rocks and coral framework. This assemblage was commonly found at sites B and C (Figs. 5 and 6, Suppl. Fig. S3), being the only dominated by both invertebrates and fish (Suppl. Table S2), including the sponge Heteroscleromorpha fam. indet. and fish from the family Callionymidae (Callionymidae spp. indet). Assemblage 4 (As4: Hard bottoms with habitat-forming Porifera and Cnidaria) mainly occurred on hard substrates at a depth of 239–672 m (Figs. 5 and 6, Suppl. Fig. S3). Multiple taxa typified this assemblage, with a majority of habitat-forming (Suppl. Table S2) such as Porifera, which explained 42.52% of the intra-group similarity, as well as different types of corals (e.g., P. larix, D. cornigera) that explained 19.36%. Massive sponges (Porifera fam. inc. 1, Porifera fam. inc. sp.1) formed dense aggregations only at site B and over coral framework. Finally, assemblage 5 (As5: Soft bottoms dominated by H. dactylopterus) was associated with soft substrates across all sites and distributed from 259 to 626 m depth (Figs. 5 and 6, Suppl. Fig. S3). This assemblage was primarily characterized by two ray-finned fishes, H. dactylopterus and C. caelorinchus, explaining almost all the intra-group similarities (Suppl. Table S2).

Spatial diversity

Comparisons of diversity indices based on R/E curves of Hill numbers at same number of sampling units indicates that site B was the most diverse in terms of species richness (q = 0), followed very closely by site A, which could even surpass it if extrapolated to larger number of sampling units (Fig. 7). By contrast, site C displayed the lowest diversity in all the indices (Fig. 7). It should be noticed that site B presented the highest (98.4%) sample coverage (i.e., more sample units than other sites but site A) and site C the lowest (90.1%) (Fig. 7). In addition, the asymptotic R/E curves did not completely stabilize at a fixed value of the corresponding diversity in all cases, which might indicate a low number of samples to calculate true diversity indices. Also, the R/E curves presented wide confidence intervals, which overlap among some of the sites, indicating non-significant differences in average diversity values among these sites. However, significant differences in the effective number of taxa became clearer beyond ~ 50 sampling units and mainly between the most (sites A and B) and the least (sites C and D) diverse sites (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7.

Fig. 7

Open in a new tab

Rarefaction (solid line)/extrapolation (dashed line) curves of diversity at the studied sites in the study area based on Hill numbers. a R/E curves based on most common Hill numbers calculated for order q = 0, 1, and 2; b total sample coverage curve against number of sampling units

Quantification and distribution of indicators of anthropogenic activities

Signs of anthropogenic activities were observed at the four sites explored in the SdO and across the complete bathymetrical range studied (Suppl. Fig. S4). Overall, remains of fishing gears (62 items in total) were the most commonly observed category (69% of the total; Table 2), mainly including remains of different fishing lines (Suppl. Fig. S4) and occasionally ropes, buoys, and a trap. The size of the fishing lines remains ranged from 50 cm to more than 1 m long. Bottom trawling marks (11 occurrences in total) were found on mixed and soft bottoms (sites B and C) as parallel lines marked on the substrate of approximately 15 cm wide each. Marine litter (14 items in total) mainly encompassed glass bottles followed by plastic objects and metal cans (Suppl. Fig. S4; Table 2). Very few signs of anthropogenic activities were observed at site A, while most occurred at sites D and B (29 and 39 items in total, respectively). Signs of anthropogenic activities were unevenly distributed among the megafauna assemblages previously identified (Table 2).

Table 2.

Quantification of indicators of anthropogenic activities (items·km−1) for each of the assemblages (see Fig. 5 for details) in the Seco de los Olivos Bank and the relative contribution (percentage, %) to the total observations

Anthropogenic impact As1 As2 As3 As4 As5 Overall Percent
Fishing remains Buoy 1.35 1.04 22.34 69.32
Line 1.35 20 27.27 39.58 13.64
Rope 2.08
Trap 1.52
Marine litter Glass 4.55 3.13 4.55 4.76 14.77
Metal 10 4.55 1.04 1.52
Plastic 1.35 1.04
Others 1.35 4.55 4.17 2.2 6.82
Trawl marks 20 9.09 6.06 2.93 9.09
Total 5.41 50 50 52.08 27.27
% 2.93 27.06 27.06 28.19 2.93
Open in a new tab

Thus, assemblages As2 and particularly As4 accounted for most of the indicators of anthropogenic activities (Table 2). A similar number of items were observed in the most impacted assemblages (as2, As3, As4), with the majority corresponding to remains of fishing gears. The presence of anthropogenic activities was highest in As4, with a large number of fishing lines (Table 2). Bottom trawling marks occurred in all assemblages dominated by fish species (As2, As3, As5).

Discussion

Despite the ecological importance and recognition of the SdO (also known as Chella Bank), the characterization and the functioning of this key area for marine biodiversity of the western Mediterranean has not been completely understood to date. The present work complements and updates the characterization of the deep-sea megafauna composition, structure, and diversity across some of the least explored areas within the SdO (de la Torriente et al. 2014, 2018, 2019, 2022), providing new quantitative data on some key deep-sea taxa. Still, less than 15% of Mediterranean seamounts have been biologically sampled or at least visited once (Morato et al. 2013; Würtz and Rovere 2015), and few studies reported quantitative data on deep-sea benthic communities (Orejas et al. 2009; Cau et al. 2015; Corbera et al. 2019; Enrichetti et al. 2019; Grinyó et al. 2020; Dominguez-Carrió et al. 2022) limiting the understanding and assessment of these ecosystems.

The 62 taxa identified in this study (Suppl. Table S1) were reported in previous works conducted in the study area (de la Torriente et al. 2014; Puerta et al. 2022) and other seafloor elevations in the surrounding areas of the Alboran Sea (Abad et al. 2007; Hebbeln et al. 2009; Pardo et al. 2011; Würtz and Rovere 2015; Corbera et al. 2019; Grinyó et al. 2020; Lo Iacono et al. 2020). Among these geomorphological features, SdO showed the highest taxa richness, even considering the differences in the surveyed area. Our results showed that taxa diversity, composition, and structure of deep-sea megafauna in SdO were strongly influenced by the patchy distribution of substrate types as previously reported (de la Torriente et al. 2018; Puerta et al. 2022) and also described in other seafloor elevations (Auster et al. 2011; Zeppilli et al. 2016; Ramalho et al. 2020; Urra et al. 2021). This high biodiversity has been related to the presence of dense colonies and coral framework of M. oculata and L. pertusa (Hebbeln et al. 2009; Pardo et al. 2011; De Mol et al. 2012; Corbera et al. 2019; Wienberg 2019; Ramalho et al. 2020) that colonize hard bottoms. This type of substrate was widely proven to be able to host higher biodiversity (e.g., Howell et al. 2010). In the present study sites, A and B were dominated by patches of different hard substrates (i.e., rock, flagstone, and coral framework), providing a more complex and heterogeneous three-dimensional structure of the physical habitat that can host higher diversity of species. Thus, these sites showed higher biodiversity than the southernmost location (site A) dominated by mud. However, the complex hydrodynamics, with strong currents, eddies, and upwelling process in the Alboran Sea (Vargas-Yáñez et al. 2020) that enhance food availability (Oguz et al. 2014; García-Martínez et al. 2019), are likely to be key to maintain these highly diverse ecosystems (Abad et al. 2007; De Mol et al. 2012; de la Torriente et al. 2019).

The five assemblages found and described here matched some of those previously described by (de la Torriente et al. 2014, 2018, 2019). However, the typifying taxa of each assemblage differ at low taxonomic levels. Such differences might be explained by the much larger sampling effort (55 ROV transects, 76–700 m depth) in previous studies (de la Torriente et al. 2014, 2018, 2019), which provided a comprehensive overview of the different habitats and the geomorphological structures at the bank and/or differences in the methodologies applied. In addition, both the previous and the present studies highlighted the difficulties in taxonomic identification using mainly imagery methods (Henry and Roberts 2014; Woodall et al. 2018; Howell et al. 2019). In this sense, the standardized Open Nomenclature (Sigovini et al. 2016; Horton et al. 2021) used in this study will facilitate comparability with existing and future studies and databases.

Despite potential methodological differences between studies, As1 detected in the present study clearly corresponds to “Habitat 10” described by de la Torriente et al. (2018, 2019), which was typified by the sea-pen K. stelliferum on mud. As4 characterized by high abundances of benthic suspension-feeding and habitat-forming organisms (mainly sponges, corals, and gorgonians) on hard substrates seems to be a counterpart of the “Habitat 8” (corals) and “Habitat 9” (gorgonians and sponges) detected in de la Torriente et al. (2018, 2019). Interestingly, the predicted distribution of “Habitats 8 and 9” (de la Torriente et al. 2019) is in agreement with the location of As4 in this study. This result further validates the outcomes of the predictive models in (de la Torriente et al. 2019) with independent data, highlighting the ability and utility of species distribution models for habitat mapping in unexplored or data-poor areas (Araújo et al. 2019), which is critical for the application of management and conservation initiatives (Davies and Guinotte 2011; Anderson et al. 2016; Standaert et al. 2023; Georges et al. 2024). Besides the main structuring species, no other typifying taxa of the assemblages identified here were representative in the habitats described by de la Torriente et al. (2018, 2019). However, the fishes G. argenteus and H. dactylopterus were also reported as very abundant among the ichthyofauna on coarse sandy areas of SdO along a wide bathymetric range (100–500 m and 100–700 m depth, respectively) (Abad et al. 2007; Pardo et al. 2011; de la Torriente et al. 2014). A clear and large variability was detected in the total length of H. dactylopterus (4.7–28.8 cm) across the observed organisms, which indicates the presence of small and large individuals (length at maturity ~ 14 cm) (Muñoz and Casadevall 2002). These observations highlight the role of SdO as a fish nursery area, as it was previously documented also for the species M. merluccius (Pardo et al. 2011; de la Torriente et al. 2014; Muñoz et al. 2018).

Nine taxa observed in this study (i.e., D. pertusum, M. oculata, Acanthogorgia spp. indet. D. cornigera, P. larix, K. stelliferum, A. setubalense, Phakellia sp., Malacalcyonacea spp. indet) were identified as VME indicator taxa (FAO 2009) and/or recognized as endangered species (i.e., F. quadrangularis, D. diantus) that require special protection by international agreements such as the EU Habitats Directive (92/43/CEE), the Barcelona Convention (UNEP/MAP-SPA/RAC 2018), the UICN (www.uicn.org, Suppl.  Table S1), or the Spanish law for conservation of the Natural Patrimony and Biodiversity (Law 42/2007). The defining characteristics of VME indicator taxa (FAO 2009), such as rarity, fragility, or importance for the ecosystem functioning, leave these organisms at significant risk from the impacts of human activities, including fisheries (FAO 2009), maritime traffic (de la Torriente et al. 2014; Coomber et al. 2016), or marine litter (Fabri et al. 2014; Angiolillo et al. 2015; Vieira et al. 2015; Pierdomenico et al. 2019).

For instance, Grinyó et al. (2020) reported a reduction in habitat complexity and local beta diversity caused by trawling in soft bottom areas of the Alboran Sea. As in other studies in the western Mediterranean (Fabri et al. 2014; Vieira et al. 2015; Pierdomenico et al. 2019; Dominguez-Carrió et al. 2020; Grinyó et al. 2020; Angiolillo et al. 2021), including SdO (De la Torriente et al. 2022), our results showed that anthropogenic impacts resulting from fishing activity were the most common, being present in all of sites and assemblages. The least diverse sites studied also accounted for the highest number of anthropogenic impacts.

Bottom trawling marks were mainly found in soft bottoms as this is the preferred substrate for this fishery. Indeed, soft bottom assemblages found here were mainly characterized by fish taxa. Therefore, the absence or low presence of sessile fauna in these bottoms suggests that bottom trawling could be removing and preventing the establishment of epibenthic megafauna. In contrast, habitat-forming assemblages showed the highest levels of disturbance due to the presence of fishing remains. Trawling and longlining have been strongly present in the SdO for several decades (de la Torriente et al. 2014, 2019, 2022; Samy-Kamal et al. 2014), with fishing fleets frequently operating in the SCI at least up to 2010 (De la Torriente et al. 2022). Trawling effort was mainly distributed north to the SdO and in the eastern ridge, while longlining was concentrated on the crests of both ridges (De la Torriente et al. 2022), coinciding with our observations of anthropogenic impacts. The damaging effects of fisheries and fishing remains are well known for benthic communities and particularly for habitat-forming species (e.g., D’Onghia et al. 2017; Pierdomenico et al. 2018; Angiolillo et al. 2021), which can even impact ecosystem functioning and productivity (Jennings et al. 2001) and also local fisheries (Victorero et al. 2018). The typical interactions between the anthropogenic remains and the megabenthic and demersal fauna (Pierdomenico et al. 2019; Angiolillo et al. 2021), such as large sponges over fishing lines, fish sheltering in litter or coral entangled by longlines (Suppl. Fig. S3), were observed also in this study. Nevertheless, it is very difficult to disentangle whether such interactions were recent or could indicate the recolonization of some organisms after an old impact event.

Under the SCI category, a preventive protection regime was established in SdO aiming to ensure no deterioration of the marine habitats. However, regulations of human activities are still pending. Efforts have been recently invested in the assessment of the “Good Environmental Status” of the Alboran Sea, including SdO under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC). However, these evaluations rarely apply to the deep-sea realm (Kazanidis et al. 2020; Orejas et al. 2020). Therefore, the present results contribute to assess and manage this key deep-sea ecosystem in the framework of the main European policies such as the Habitats Directive (92/43/CEE), the Marine Strategy Framework (2008/56/EC), and the Maritime Spatial Planning (2014/89/EU) Directives (Manea et al. 2020; De la Torriente et al. 2022), but also to advice international organisms such as the General Fisheries Commission of the Mediterranean to fulfill their aims of protecting sensitive habitats and species (GFCM 2009; 2019).

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOC 3297 KB) (3.2MB, doc)

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Ricardo Aguilar (OCEANA), Ana de la Torriente (IEO-CSIC), Lais Vieira Ramalho (UFRJ), and Xisco Ordines and Olga Reñones (IEO-CSIC) for their help with the taxonomic identification and the valuable comments on the manuscript. We also thank the Marine Geosciences Group (GEMAR, IEO-CSIC) for providing the high-resolution bathymetry of the study area.

Funding

Open Access funding provided thanks to the CRUE-CSIC agreement with Springer Nature. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 678760 (ATLAS). This output reflects only the author’s view and the European Union cannot be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. RMC-A was also supported by the Erasmus Mundus scholarship (EMJMD-scholarship-20162280). CD-C was supported by the FCT-IP Project UIDP/05634/2020. PP was partially funded by the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme “B-USEFUL” (ID: 101059823).

Declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

No animal testing was performed during this study.

Sampling and field studies

All necessary permits for sampling and observational field studies have been obtained by the authors from the competent authorities and are mentioned in the acknowledgements. The study is compliant with CBD and Nagoya protocols.

Data availability

The video annotation datasets can be downloaded from PANGEA at (currently in uploading and validation processes; link will be provided when available).

Author contribution

PP and CO designed the objectives and structure of the study. PP and RMC-A wrote the manuscript. PP and CO coordinated the work and the writing of the study. CO designed and led the oceanographic expedition. CO, JLR, and JU conducted the data collection during the oceanographic expedition. CDC, CO, and PP designed the video analysis protocol. RMC-A, JL, and JU lead the taxonomic identifications. RMC-A and PP performed all the video and statistical analyses. All authors were substantially involved in the taxonomic identification, literature search, and/or writing of the different sections of the manuscript, contributed to the final product in significant ways, and/or provided approval for publication.

Footnotes

This article is a contribution to the Topical Collection Seamounts and oceanic archipelagos and their role for the biodiversity, biogeography, and dispersal of marine organisms.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  1. Abad E, Preciado I, Serrano A, Baro J (2007) Demersal and epibenthic assemblages of trawlable grounds in the northern Alboran Sea (western Mediterranean). Sci Mar 71:513–524. 10.3989/scimar.2007.71n3513
  2. Altuna A, Poliseno A (2019) Taxonomy, genetics and biodiversity of Mediterranean deep-sea corals and cold-water corals. In: Orejas Covadonga, Jiménez Carlos (eds) Mediterranean cold-water corals: past, present and future. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 531–533 [Google Scholar]
  3. Anderson OF, Guinotte JM, Rowden AA et al (2016) Field validation of habitat suitability models for vulnerable marine ecosystems in the South Pacific Ocean: implications for the use of broad-scale models in fisheries management. Ocean Coast Manag 120:110–126. 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.11.025 [Google Scholar]
  4. Angiolillo M, Canese S (2018) Deep gorgonians and corals of the Mediterranean Sea. In: Duque C, Camacho ET (eds) Corals in a changing world. Rijeka, InTech [Google Scholar]
  5. Angiolillo M, Fortibuoni T (2020) Impacts of marine litter on Mediterranean reef systems: from shallow to deep waters. Front Mar Sci 7:826 [Google Scholar]
  6. Angiolillo M, Lorenzo B di, Farcomeni A et al (2015) Distribution and assessment of marine debris in the deep Tyrrhenian Sea (NW Mediterranean Sea, Italy). Mar Pollut Bull 92:149–159. 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.12.044 [DOI] [PubMed]
  7. Angiolillo M, La Mesa G, Giusti M et al (2021) New records of scleractinian cold-water coral (CWC) assemblages in the southern Tyrrhenian Sea (western Mediterranean Sea): human impacts and conservation prospects. Prog Oceanogr 197. 10.1016/j.pocean.2021.102656
  8. Araújo MB, Anderson RP, Barbosa AM et al (2019) Standards for distribution models in biodiversity assessments. Sci Adv 5. 10.1126/sciadv.aat4858 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  9. Auster PJ, Gjerde K, Heupel E et al (2011) Definition and detection of vulnerable marine ecosystems on the high seas: problems with the “move-on” rule. ICES J Mar Sci 68:254–264. 10.1093/icesjms/fsq074 [Google Scholar]
  10. van den Beld IMJ, Bourillet J-F, Arnaud-Haond S et al (2017) Cold-water coral habitats in submarine canyons of the bay of Biscay. Front Mar Sci 4. 10.3389/fmars.2017.00118
  11. Bergstad OA, Menezes GMM, Høines ÅS et al (2012) Patterns of distribution of deepwater demersal fishes of the North Atlantic mid-ocean ridge, continental slopes, islands and seamounts. Deep Res Part I Oceanogr Res 61:74–83. 10.1016/j.dsr.2011.12.002 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bo M, Bava S, Canese S et al (2014) Fishing impact on deep Mediterranean rocky habitats as revealed by ROV investigation. Biol Conserv 171:167–176. 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.01.011 [Google Scholar]
  13. Bo M, Coppari M, Betti F et al (2021) The high biodiversity and vulnerability of two Mediterranean bathyal seamounts support the need for creating offshore protected areas. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 31:543–566. 10.1002/aqc.3456 [Google Scholar]
  14. Budka A, Łacka A, Szoszkiewicz K (2019) The use of rarefaction and extrapolation as methods of estimating the effects of river eutrophication on macrophyte diversity. Biodivers Conserv 28:385–400. 10.1007/s10531-018-1662-3 [Google Scholar]
  15. Cañedo-Apolaya RML, Puerta P, Rueda JL et al (2020) Identification catalogue: macrobenthic fauna of El Seco de los Olivos. Available at: https://zenodo.org/records/3928205
  16. Cau A, Follesa MC, Moccia D et al (2015) Deepwater corals biodiversity along roche du large ecosystems with different habitat complexity along the south Sardinia continental margin (CW Mediterranean Sea). Mar Biol 162:1865–1878. 10.1007/s00227-015-2718-5 [Google Scholar]
  17. Chao A, Chiu CH, Jost L (2014a) Unifying species diversity, phylogenetic diversity, functional diversity, and related similarity and differentiation measures through hill numbers. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 45:297–324. 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091540 [Google Scholar]
  18. Chao A, Gotelli NJ, Hsieh TC et al (2014b) Rarefaction and extrapolation with Hill numbers: a framework for sampling and estimation in species diversity studies. Ecol Monogr 84:45–67. 10.1890/13-0133.1 [Google Scholar]
  19. Clark MR, Althaus F, Williams A et al (2010a) Are deep-sea demersal fish assemblages globally homogenous? Insights from seamounts. Mar Ecol 31:39–51. 10.1111/j.1439-0485.2010.00384.x [Google Scholar]
  20. Clark MR, Rowden AA, Schlacher T et al (2010b) The ecology of seamounts: structure, function, and human impacts. Ann Rev Mar Sci 2:253–278. 10.1146/annurev-marine-120308-081109 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Clark MR, Althaus F, Schlacher TA et al (2016) The impacts of deep-sea fisheries on benthic communities: a review. ICES J Mar Sci 73:i51–i69. 10.1093/icesjms/fsv123 [Google Scholar]
  22. Clarke KR (1993) Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Aust J Ecol 18:117–143. 10.1111/j.1442-9993.1993.tb00438.x [Google Scholar]
  23. Clarke KR, Somerfield PJ, Gorley RN (2008) Testing of null hypotheses in exploratory community analyses: similarity profiles and biota-environment linkage. J Exp Mar Bio Ecol 366:56–69. 10.1016/j.jembe.2008.07.009 [Google Scholar]
  24. Clarke KR, Gorley RN (2006) PRIMER v6: user manual/tutorial (Plymouth Routines in Multivariate Ecological Research). PRIMER-E, Plymouth [Google Scholar]
  25. Coiras E, Lo Iacono C, Gracia E et al (2011) Automatic segmentation of multi-beam data for predictive mapping of benthic habitats on the Chella Seamount (North-Eastern Alboran Sea, Western Mediterranean). IEEE J Sel Top Appl Earth Obs Remote Sens 4:809–813. 10.1109/JSTARS.2011.2123874 [Google Scholar]
  26. Coll M, Piroddi C, Steenbeek J et al (2010) The biodiversity of the Mediterranean Sea: estimates, patterns, and threats. PLoS One 5:e11842. 10.1371/journal.pone.0011842 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Colwell RK, Chao A, Gotelli NJ et al (2012) Models and estimators linking individual-based and sample-based rarefaction, extrapolation and comparison of assemblages. J Plant Ecol 5:3–21. 10.1093/jpe/rtr044 [Google Scholar]
  28. Coomber FG, D’Incà M, Rosso M et al (2016) Description of the vessel traffic within the north Pelagos Sanctuary: inputs for Marine Spatial Planning and management implications within an existing international Marine Protected Area. Mar Policy 69:102–113. 10.1016/j.marpol.2016.04.013 [Google Scholar]
  29. Corbera G, Lo Iacono C, Gràcia E et al (2019) Ecological characterisation of a Mediterranean cold-water coral reef: Cabliers Coral Mound Province (Alboran Sea, western Mediterranean). Prog Oceanogr 175:245–262. 10.1016/j.pocean.2019.04.010 [Google Scholar]
  30. D’Onghia G (2019) Cold-water corals as shelter, feeding and life-history critical habitats for fish species: ecological interactions and fishing impact BT - Mediterranean cold-water corals: past, present and future: understanding the deep-sea realms of coral. In: Orejas C, Jiménez C (eds) mediterranean cold-water corals: past, present and future. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 335–356 [Google Scholar]
  31. D’Onghia G, Calculli C, Capezzuto F et al (2017) Anthropogenic impact in the Santa Maria di Leuca cold-water coral province (Mediterranean Sea): observations and conservation straits. Deep Sea Res Part II Top Stud Oceanogr 145:87–101. 10.1016/j.dsr2.2016.02.012 [Google Scholar]
  32. Danovaro R, Batista Company J, Corinaldesi C et al (2010) Deep-sea biodiversity in the Mediterranean Sea: the known, the unknown, and the unknowable. PLoS One 5:e11832. 10.1371/journal.pone.0011832 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Davies AJ, Guinotte JM (2011) Global habitat suitability for framework-forming cold-water corals. PLoS One 6:e18483. 10.1371/journal.pone.0018483 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Davies JS, Stewart HA, Narayanaswamy BE et al (2015) Benthic assemblages of the Anton Dohrn Seamount (NE Atlantic): defining deep-sea biotopes to support habitat mapping and management efforts with a focus on vulnerable marine ecosystems. PLoS ONE 10:e0124815. 10.1371/journal.pone.0124815 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. de la Torriente A, Aguilar R, Serrano A et al (2014) Sur de Almería - Seco de los Olivos. Proyecto LIFE+ INDEMARES. Available at: https://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/321515/4/15%20INDEMARES%20Seco%20de%20los%20olivos.pdf. Accessed 28 Feb 2025
  36. de la Torriente A, Serrano A, Fernández-Salas LM et al (2018) Identifying epibenthic habitats on the Seco de los Olivos Seamount: species assemblages and environmental characteristics. Deep Res Part I Oceanogr Res 135:9–22. 10.1016/j.dsr.2018.03.015 [Google Scholar]
  37. de la Torriente A, González-Irusta JM, Aguilar R et al (2019) Benthic habitat modelling and mapping as a conservation tool for marine protected areas: a seamount in the western Mediterranean. Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 29:732–750. 10.1002/aqc.3075 [Google Scholar]
  38. De la Torriente A, González-Irusta JM, Serrano A et al (2022) Spatial assessment of benthic habitats vulnerability to bottom fishing in a Mediterranean seamount. Mar Policy 135. 10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104850
  39. De Mol B, Amblas D, Calafat A et al (2012) Cold-water coral colonization of alboran sea knolls, western Mediterranean Sea. In: Harris PT, Baker EKBT-SG as BH (eds) Seafloor Geomorphology as Benthic Habitat. Elsevier, London, pp 819–829
  40. Deudero S, Alomar C (2015) Mediterranean marine biodiversity under threat: reviewing influence of marine litter on species. Mar Pollut Bull 98:58–68. 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2015.07.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Dominguez-Carrió C, Sanchez-Vidal A, Estournel C et al (2020) Seafloor litter sorting in different domains of Cap de Creus continental shelf and submarine canyon (NW Mediterranean Sea). Mar Pollut Bull 161:111744. 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111744 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Dominguez-Carrió C, Riera JL, Robert K et al (2022) Diversity, structure and spatial distribution of megabenthic communities in Cap de Creus continental shelf and submarine canyon (NW Mediterranean). Prog Oceanogr 208:102877. 10.1016/j.pocean.2022.102877 [Google Scholar]
  43. Du PC, Curtis JMR, Clarke ME (2016) The structure and distribution of benthic communities on a shallow seamount (Cobb Seamount, Northeast Pacific Ocean). PLoS ONE 11:1–29. 10.1371/journal.pone.0165513 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Enrichetti F, Dominguez-Carrió C, Toma M et al (2019) Megabenthic communities of the Ligurian deep continental shelf and shelf break (NW Mediterranean Sea). PLoS ONE 14:e0223949 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Fabri M-C, Pedel L, Beuck L et al (2014) Megafauna of vulnerable marine ecosystems in French Mediterranean submarine canyons: spatial distribution and anthropogenic impacts. Deep Res Part II Top Stud Oceanogr 104:184–207 [Google Scholar]
  46. FAO (2009) International guidelines for the management of deep-sea fisheries in the high seas directives. Available at: http://www.fao.org/3/i0816t/I0816T.pdf. Accessed 28 Feb 2025
  47. FAO (2023) The state of mediterranean and black sea fisheries 2023. Rome. https://openknowledge.fao.org/handle/20.500.14283/cc8888en. Accessed 28 Feb 2025
  48. Font J, Millot C, Salas J et al (1998) The drift of modified atlantic water from the Alboran Sea to the eastern Mediterranean. Sci Mar 62:211–216. 10.3989/scimar.1998.62n3211
  49. García-Martínez MD, Vargas-Yáñez M, Moya F et al (2019) Spatial and temporal long-term patterns of phyto and zooplankton in the W-Mediterranean: RADMED Project. Water 11:534 [Google Scholar]
  50. Gascard JC, Richez C (1985) Water masses and circulation in the Western Alboran sea and in the Straits of Gibraltar. Prog Oceanogr 15:157–216. 10.1016/0079-6611(85)90031-X [Google Scholar]
  51. Georges V, Vaz S, Carbonara P et al (2024) Mapping the habitat refugia of Isidella elongata under climate change and trawling impacts to preserve Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems in the Mediterranean. Sci Rep 14:6246. 10.1038/s41598-024-56338-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. GFCM (2009) Criteria for the identification of sensitive habitats of relevance for the management of priority species. Meeting of the sub-committee on marine environment and ecosystems (SCMEE). Available at: http://gfcmsitestorage.blob.core.windows.net/documents/web/SAC/SCMEE/2009/Criteria_sensitive_habitat.pdf. Accessed 28 Feb 2025
  53. GFCM (2017) Report of the first meeting of the Working Group on Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (WGVME). Malaga, Spain. Available at: http://www.fao.org/gfcm/technical-meetings/detail/en/c/885358/. Accessed 28 Feb 2025
  54. GFCM (2019) Resolution GFCM/43/2019/6 on the establishment of a set of measures to protect vulnerable marine ecosystems formed by cnidarian (coral) communities in the Mediterranean Sea. Available at: https://gfcm.sharepoint.com/:b:/g/CoC/EURdoO76hH1Pja40fM6larcBIPrpYk0FQV1d4CubxyLmvg. Accessed 28 Feb 2025
  55. Grinyó J, Lo Iacono C, Pierdomenico M et al (2020) Evidences of human impact on megabenthic assemblages of bathyal sediments in the Alboran Sea (western Mediterranean). Deep Res Part I Oceanogr Res Pap 165. 10.1016/j.dsr.2020.103369
  56. Hebbeln D, Widenberg C, Beuck L et al (2009) Report and preliminary results of RV POSEIDON Cruise POS 385 “Cold-Water Corals of the Alboran Sea (western Mediterranean Sea), Faro - Toulon, May 29 - June 16, 2009. Berichte, Fachbereich Geowissenschaften, Universität Bremen, no. 273, p 79. Bremen. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44160691_Report_and_preliminary_results_of_RV_POSEIDON_Cruise_POS_385_Cold-Water_Corals_of_the_Alboran_Sea_western_Mediterranean_Sea_Faro_-_Toulon_May_29_-_June_16_2009
  57. Henry LA, Roberts JM (2014) Recommendations for best practice in deep-sea habitat classification: Bullimore et al. as a case study. ICES J Mar Sci 71:895–898 [Google Scholar]
  58. Horton T, Marsh L, Bett BJ et al (2021) Recommendations for the standardisation of open taxonomic nomenclature for image-based identifications. Front Mar Sci 8. 10.3389/fmars.2021.620702
  59. Howell KL, Davies JS, Louise Allcock A et al (2019) A framework for the development of a global standardised marine taxon reference image database (SMarTaR-ID) to support image-based analyses. bioRxiv 1–25. 10.1101/670786 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  60. Howell KL, Davies JS, Narayanaswamy BE (2010) Identifying deep-sea megafaunal epibenthic assemblages for use in habitat mapping and marine protected area network design. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 90:33–68. 10.1017/S0025315409991299
  61. Hsieh TC, Ma KH, Chao A (2016) iNEXT: an R package for rarefaction and extrapolation of species diversity (Hill numbers). Methods Ecol Evol 7:1451–1456. 10.1111/2041-210X.12613
  62. ICES (2017) EU request on indicators of the pressure and impact of bottom-contacting fishing gear on the seabed, and of trade-offs in the catch and the value of landings. ICES Spec Req Advice 1–29. Available at: https://ices-library.figshare.com/articles/report/EU_request_on_indicators_of_the_pressure_and_impact_of_bottom-contacting_fishing_gear_on_the_seabed_and_of_trade-offs_in_the_catch_and_the_value_of_landings/18630983?file=34105310. Accessed 28 Feb 2025
  63. Jennings S, Dinmore TA, Duplisea DE et al (2001) Trawling disturbance can modify benthic production processes. J Anim Ecol 70:459–475. 10.1046/j.1365-2656.2001.00504.x [Google Scholar]
  64. Katsanevakis S, Coll M, Piroddi C et al (2014) Invading the mediterranean sea: biodiversity patterns shaped by human activities. Front Mar Sci 1:32 [Google Scholar]
  65. Kazanidis G, Orejas C, Borja A et al (2020) Assessing the environmental status of selected North Atlantic deep-sea ecosystems. Ecol Indic 119:106624. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106624 [Google Scholar]
  66. Lo Iacono C, Gracia E, Diez S et al (2008) Seafloor characterization and backscatter variability of the Almeria Margin (Alboran Sea, SW Mediterranean) based on high-resolution acoustic data. Mar Geol 250:1–18. 10.1016/j.margeo.2007.11.004 [Google Scholar]
  67. Lo Iacono C, Gràcia E, Bartolomé R et al (2012) Habitats of the Chella Bank, Eastern Alboran Sea (Western Mediterranean). In: Harris PT, Baker EKBT-SG as BH (eds). Elsevier, London, pp 681–690
  68. Lo Iacono C, Grinyó J, Conlon S et al (2020) Near-pristine benthic habitats on the Francesc Pagès Bank, Alboran Sea, western Mediterranean. Seafloor Geomorphol as Benthic Habitat 889–901. 10.1016/b978-0-12-814960-7.00055-5
  69. Maldonado A, Comas MC (1992) Geology and geophysics of the Alboran Sea: an introduction. Geo-Marine Lett 12:61–65. 10.1007/BF02084913 [Google Scholar]
  70. Manea E, Bianchelli S, Fanelli E et al (2020) Towards an ecosystem-based marine spatial planning in the deep Mediterranean Sea. Sci Total Environ. 715 [DOI] [PubMed]
  71. Massutí E, Sánchez-Guillamón O, Farriols MT et al (2022) Improving scientific knowledge of Mallorca Channel Seamounts (Western Mediterranean) within the framework of Natura 2000 Network. Diversity 14. 10.3390/d14010004
  72. McClain CR, Lundsten L (2015) Assemblage structure is related to slope and depth on a deep offshore Pacific seamount chain. Mar Ecol 36:210–220. 10.1111/maec.12136
  73. Millot C (1999) Circulation in the Western Mediterranean Sea. J Mar Syst 20:423–442. 10.1016/S0924-7963(98)00078-5 [Google Scholar]
  74. Morato T, Kvile K, Taranto GH et al (2013) Seamount physiography and biology in the north-east Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea. Biogeosciences 10:3039–3054. 10.5194/bg-10-3039-2013 [Google Scholar]
  75. Mosquera-Giménez Á, Vélez-Belchí P, Rivera J et al (2019) Ocean circulation over North Atlantic underwater features in the path of the Mediterranean outflow water: the Ormonde and Formigas Seamounts, and the Gazul Mud Volcano. Front Mar Sci 6:1–18. 10.3389/fmars.2019.0070236817748 [Google Scholar]
  76. Moullec F, Velez L, Verley P et al (2019) Capturing the big picture of Mediterranean marine biodiversity with an end-to-end model of climate and fishing impacts. Prog Oceanogr 178:102179. 10.1016/j.pocean.2019.102179 [Google Scholar]
  77. Muñoz M, Casadevall M (2002) Reproductive indices and fecundity of Helicolenus dactylopterus dactylopterus (Teleostei: Scorpaenidae) in the Catalan Sea (western Mediterranean). J Mar Biol Assoc United Kingdom 82:995–1000. 10.1017/S0025315402006513 [Google Scholar]
  78. Muñoz M, Reul A, Gil de Sola L et al (2018) A spatial risk approach towards integrated marine spatial planning: a case study on European hake nursery areas in the North Alboran Sea. Mar Environ Res 142:190–207. 10.1016/j.marenvres.2018.10.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Oguz T, Macias D, Garcia-Lafuente J et al (2014) Fueling plankton production by a meandering frontal jet: a case study for the Alboran Sea (Western Mediterranean). PLoS ONE 9:e111482. 10.1371/journal.pone.0111482 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Ordines F, Ferriol P, Moya F et al (2019) First record of the sea cucumber Parastichopus tremulus (Gunnerus, 1767) (Echinodermata: Holothuroidea: Aspidochirotida) in the Mediterranean Sea (Alboran Sea, western Mediterranean). Cah Biol Mar 60:111–115. 10.21411/CBM.A.137C121D
  81. Orejas C, Addamo A, Alvarez M et al (2017) Cruise report MEDWAVES survey (mediterranean out flow water and vulnerable ecosystems). 10.5281/zenodo.556516
  82. Orejas C, Kenchington E, Rice J et al (2020) Towards a common approach to the assessment of the environmental status of deep-sea ecosystems in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Mar Policy 121:104182. 10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104182 [Google Scholar]
  83. Orejas C, Gori A, Madurell T et al (2009) Habitat features, spatial distribution and demography of the Madrepora oculata populations in the Cap de Creus Canyon (Northwestern Mediterranean). In: Deep sea coral symposium. Proceedings in Marine Ecology Progress Series. Faro, Portugal
  84. Pardo E, Aguilar R, García S, Ubero J (2011) Documentación de arrecifes de corales de agua fría en el Mediterráneo occidental (Mar de Alborán). Chron Nat 1:20–34 [Google Scholar]
  85. Parrilla G, Kinder TH, Preller RH (1986) Deep and intermediate Mediterranean water in the western Alboran Sea. Deep Sea Res Part A Oceanogr Res Pap 33:55–88. 10.1016/0198-0149(86)90108-1 [Google Scholar]
  86. Pham CK, Gomes-Pereira JN, Isidro EJ et al (2013) Abundance of litter on Condor seamount (Azores, Portugal, Northeast Atlantic). Deep Sea Res Part II Top Stud Oceanogr 98:204–208. 10.1016/j.dsr2.2013.01.011 [Google Scholar]
  87. Pham CK, Vandeperre F, Menezes G et al (2015) The importance of deep-sea vulnerable marine ecosystems for demersal fish in the Azores. Deep Res Part I Oceanogr Res 96:80–88. 10.1016/j.dsr.2014.11.004 [Google Scholar]
  88. Pierdomenico M, Russo T, Ambroso S et al (2018) Effects of trawling activity on the bamboo-coral Isidella elongata and the sea pen Funiculina quadrangularis along the Gioia Canyon (Western Mediterranean, southern Tyrrhenian Sea). Prog Oceanogr 169:214–226. 10.1016/j.pocean.2018.02.019 [Google Scholar]
  89. Pierdomenico M, Casalbore D, Chiocci FL (2019) Massive benthic litter funnelled to deep sea by flash-flood generated hyperpycnal flows. Sci Rep 9:1–10. 10.1038/s41598-019-41816-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  90. Pitcher T, Morato T, Hart PB et al (2007) Seamounts: ecology, fisheries & conservation. Blackwell Publising, pp. 523. Oxford. 10.1002/9780470691953
  91. Puerta P, Mosquera-Giménez Á, Reñones O et al (2022) Variability of deep-sea megabenthic assemblages along the western pathway of the Mediterranean outflow water. Deep Sea Res Part I Oceanogr Res Pap 185:103791. 10.1016/j.dsr.2022.103791 [Google Scholar]
  92. Purser A, Orejas C, Gori A et al (2013) Local variation in the distribution of benthic megafauna species associated with cold-water coral reefs on the Norwegian margin. Cont Shelf Res 54:37–51 [Google Scholar]
  93. Ramalho LV, Caballero-Herrera JA, Urra J, Rueda JL (2020) Bryozoans from Chella Bank (Seco de los Olivos), with the description of a new species and some new records for the Mediterranean Sea. Mar Biodivers 50:106. 10.1007/s12526-020-01119-y [Google Scholar]
  94. Ramiro-Sánchez B, González-Irusta JM, Henry L-A et al (2019) Characterization and mapping of a deep-sea sponge ground on the tropic seamount (Northeast Tropical Atlantic): implications for spatial management in the high seas. Front Mar Sci 6:1–19. 10.3389/fmars.2019.0027836817748 [Google Scholar]
  95. Ramos M, Calado G, Bertocci I et al (2016) Patterns in megabenthic assemblages on a seamount summit (Ormonde Peak, Gorringe Bank, Northeast Atlantic). Mar Ecol 37:1057–1072. 10.1111/maec.12353 [Google Scholar]
  96. Rogers AD (2018) The biology of seamounts: 25 years on. Adv Mar Biol 79:137–224. 10.1016/bs.amb.2018.06.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  97. Rowden AA, Dower JF, Schlacher TA et al (2010) Paradigms in seamount ecology: fact, fiction and future. Mar Ecol 31:226–241 [Google Scholar]
  98. Rueda JL, Urra J, Aguilar R et al (2019) Cold-water coral associated fauna in the Mediterranean Sea and adjacent areas. In: Mediterranean cold-water corals: past, present and future. Springer, Cham, pp 295–333. 10.1007/978-3-319-91608-8_29
  99. Samy-Kamal M, Forcada A, Sánchez-Lizaso JL (2014) Trawling fishery of the western Mediterranean Sea: Métiers identification, effort characteristics, landings and income profiles. Ocean Coast Manag 102:269–284. 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.10.005 [Google Scholar]
  100. Sigovini M, Keppel E, Tagliapietra D (2016) Open nomenclature in the biodiversity era. Methods Ecol Evol 7:1217–1225. 10.1111/2041-210X.12594 [Google Scholar]
  101. Standaert W, Puerta P, Mastrototaro F et al (2023) Habitat suitability models of a critically endangered cold-water coral, Isidella Elongata, in the Mallorca Channel. Thalassas. 10.1007/s41208-023-00531-y [Google Scholar]
  102. UNEP/MAP-SPA/RAC (2018) SAP/RAC: SPA-BD Protocol - Annex II: List of endangered or threatened species. Available at: https://www.rac-spa.org/sites/default/files/annex/annex_2_en_20182.pdf
  103. UNGA (2006) Resolution 61/105. Sustainable fisheries, including through the 1995 agreement for the implementation of the provisions of the United Nations convention on the law of the sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the conservation and management of straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks, and related instruments. Available at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/588357?ln=en&v=pdf. Accessed 28 Feb 2025
  104. Urra J, Palomino D, Lozano P et al (2021) Deep-sea habitat characterization using acoustic data and underwater imagery in Gazul mud volcano (Gulf of Cádiz, NE Atlantic). Deep Sea Res Part I Oceanogr Res Pap 169:103458. 10.1016/j.dsr.2020.103458 [Google Scholar]
  105. Vargas-Yáñez M, Giráldez A, Torres P et al (2020) Variability of oceanographic and meteorological conditions in the northern Alboran Sea at seasonal, inter-annual and long-term time scales and their influence on sardine (Sardina pilchardus Walbaum 1792) landings. Fish Oceanogr 29:367–380. 10.1111/fog.12477
  106. Victorero L, Robert K, Robinson LF et al (2018) Species replacement dominates megabenthos beta diversity in a remote seamount setting. Sci Rep 8:1–11. 10.1038/s41598-018-22296-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  107. Vieira RP, Raposo IP, Sobral P et al (2015) Lost fishing gear and litter at Gorringe Bank (NE Atlantic). J Sea Res 100:91–98. 10.1016/j.seares.2014.10.005 [Google Scholar]
  108. Watling L, Auster PJ (2017) Seamounts on the high seas should be managed as vulnerable marine ecosystems. Front Mar Sci 4:1–4. 10.3389/fmars.2017.00014 [Google Scholar]
  109. Wienberg C (2019) A deglacial cold-water coral boom in the Alborán Sea: from coral mounds and species dominance. In: Orejas C, Jiménez C (eds) Mediterranean cold-water corals: past, present and future. Coral Reefs of the World 9:57–60. Springer, Cham. 10.1007/978-3-319-91608-8_7
  110. Woodall LC, Robinson LF, Rogers AD et al (2015) Deep-sea litter: a comparison of seamounts, banks and a ridge in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans reveals both environmental and anthropogenic factors impact accumulation and composition. Front Mar Sci 2:3 [Google Scholar]
  111. Woodall LC, Andradi-Brown DA, Brierley AS et al (2018) A multidisciplinary approach for generating globally consistent data on mesophotic, deep-pelagic, and bathyal biological communities. Oceanography 31:76–89 [Google Scholar]
  112. Würtz M, Rovere M (2015) Atlas of the Mediterranean seamounts and seamount-like structures. IUCN, Gland [Google Scholar]
  113. Xavier JR, Marzia B (2017) Deep-sea sponges of the Mediterranean Sea. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317167250_Deep-sea_sponges_of_the_Mediterranean_Sea
  114. Zeppilli D, Pusceddu A, Trincardi F, Danovaro R (2016) Seafloor heterogeneity influences the biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships in the deep sea. Sci Rep 6:26352. 10.1038/srep26352 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary file1 (DOC 3297 KB) (3.2MB, doc)

Data Availability Statement

The video annotation datasets can be downloaded from PANGEA at (currently in uploading and validation processes; link will be provided when available).

Articles from Marine Biodiversity are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES