# European Red List of Habitats Table

Habitat Description:
Submediterranean pseudomaquis are distributed at the southern part of Europe and especially in its eastern part. They comprise transition vegetation between Mediterranean evergreen maquis scrub and continental deciduous schibljak scrub (Mucina et al. 2014) and they are characterized by the co-occurrence of evergreen and deciduous woody species (e.g. AdamoviÄ‡ 1906, Horvat et al. 1974). The former species are more thermophilous and tolerant to drought, while the latter are more demanding in soil moisture and nutrients, but also more frost tolerant. Pseudomaquis are distinguished mainly on the basis of their physiognomy (mixed scrub formations with evergreen and deciduous species) and they correspond to different plant communities (Bergmeier 1990), which have been classified within different orders, such as Quercetalia ilicis, Fraxino orni-Cotinetalia, Quercetalia pubescenti-petraeae and Prunetalia spinosae (Rodwell et al. 2002). However, they are usually characterized by the occurrence of the evergreen species Quercus coccifera, Juniperus oxycedrus, Phillyrea latifolia and Buxus sempervirens, and the one of the deciduous species Carpinus orientalis, Ostrya carpinifolia, Fraxinus ornus, Quercus pubescens and Acer monspessulanum. Furthermore, the herb flora of pseudomaquis is usually characterized by the occurrence and high frequency and cover of deciduous forests species (e.g. species of Quercion frainetto).
In most cases, the occurrence of pseudomaquis is not considered as climax vegetation, but the result of degradation of deciduous, broadleaved forests, because of disturbances like fire, grazing and unregulated logging or clear cuttings. Although pseudomaquis are more often found on calcareous substrates, they occur also on siliceous ones. The soil, regardless the substrate, is usually rocky and of small depth. They occur in low altitudes (e.g. 100 m), but more often are found within the lower part of mountain belts (e.g. 500-800 m).
Indicators of good quality:
No fragmented canopy of the shrub layer;

Regeneration of the dominant woody species;

Herb layer composed mainly of species of forest habitats;

Absence or low cover of ruderal or light-loving species;

Low levels of soil compactness, absence of trampling and erosion (especially in the form of rills and gullies), high cover of litter and well developed Ah horizon.


Characteristic species:
Acer campestre, Acer monspessulanum, Asparagus acutifolius, Brachypodium sylvaticum, Buxus sempervirens, Campanula trachelium, Carpinus orientalis, Cornus mas, Cotinus coggygria, Crepis fraasii, Fraxinus ornus, Hedera helix, Helleborus cyclophyllus, Hippocrepis emerus, Juniperus communis¸ Juniperus oxycedrus, Lathyrus laxiflorus, Ligustrum vulgare, Lithospermum purpurocaeruleum, Melica uniflora, Ostrya carpinifolia, Paliurus spina-christi, Phillyrea latifolia, Physospermum cornubiense, Pistacia terebinthus, Potentilla micrantha, Quercus cerris, Quercus coccifera, Quercus pubescens, Rosa arvensis, Ruscus aculeatus, Stipa bromoides, Syringa vulgaris, Viola alba.

Classification:
EUNIS:
F5.3 Submediterranean pseudomaquis
EuroVegChecklist (alliances):
Carpinion orientalis Horvat 1958
Berberido creticae-Prunion cocomiliae Bergmeier 1990
Syringo-Carpinion orientalis Jakucs (1959) 1960
Jasmino-Juniperion excelsae Didukh et al. in Didukh 1996
Fraxino orni-Ostryion TomaÅ¾iÄ 1940
Oleo sylvestris-Quercion rotundifoliae Barbero, Quézel et Rivas-Mart. in Rivas-Mart. et al. 1986 nom. invers. propos.
Annex 1:
5110 Stable xerothermophilous formations with Buxus sempervirens on rock slopes (Berberidion pp)
Emerald:
F3.12 Buxus sempervirens thickets
F3.245 Eastern Mediterranean deciduous thickets
MAES-2:
Heathland and shrub
IUCN:
3.8 Mediterranean-type Shrubby Vegetation

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Submediterranan maquis appear in areas with mild climate that allow the occurrence of evergreen and deciduous species. That means that the climatic conditions during winter should allow evergreen vegetation to survive the cold period and on the other hand the summer drought should not be too pronounced so that deciduous species can grow.

Map Description:
The map provides a good indication of the range, maybe spreading slightly too much northwards (for example in Bulgaria). Distribution may be overestimated in Spain and France, while data gaps exist for the Balkan and possibly for Romania, that reported a huge area. Data sources: Art17, NAT.

Trends in Quantity:
The habitat is in the slight decrease of 10% in EU 28, the same is valid (8.3%) also for EU 28+. The data are rather unhomogeneous. An increase has been reported from France, Bosnia & Herzegovina and the Republic of Macedonia (cf. ÄŒarni & Matevski 2015), a decrease in Bulgaria and Romania, and in other countries the habitat area is rather stable. According to this data we could estimate that the decease is the most pronounced in the eastern part of the Balkan, but we can detect the stable situation or increase in the rest of the area.

Trends in Quality:
On average, the habitat is slightly degraded in EU28 and slightly to moderate degraded in EU28+.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
About 70% of the surface lies within the EU28 and 80% within EU28+. Additional area of this habitat can be found on the limit from Mediterranean to continental climate around the Mediterranean Sea.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat can be found in the Atlantic region, as well as at the border between Mediterranean and continental regions.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat is widely distributed in the EU28 and EU28+.

Pressures and Threats:
There are several pressures on this habitat. As this habitat does not represent the potential vegetation in most cases, natural succession can lead to its replacement by forest. Overgrazing (especially by goats) can degrade the habitat significantly. Fire comprises also a possible threat for the habitat. In some cases the habitat has been destroyed because of the establishment of tree plantations and the construction of infrastructure (e.g. roads, railways). As the habitat develops in transitional climatic areas, climate change may negatively affect it in a very large area of its distribution.

Conservation and Management:
Management of the habitat should aim at the prevention of natural succession of the habitat to forest. However, no urgent conservation measures are needed if site conditions prevent a fast development of thermophilous deciduous forests. Overgrazing and fires could destroy this habitat in a relatively short period of time and thus should be avoided.

Conservation Status:
Annex I:
5110: ALP U1, ATL U1, CON FV, MED XX

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
This habitat can recover relatively fast, if the subsoil is not destroyed or removed and connectivityis not significantly damaged; in such cases it may recover in 10 years.

Summary:
Submediterranean pseudomaquis with both evergreen and deciduous woody species occurs in the lowlands and submontane belt of southern Europe, especially to the east and it represents a transition between Mediterranean evergreen maquis and continental deciduous schibljak. In most cases, it has developed through degradation of deciduous, broadleaved forests by fire, grazing and unregulated logging or clear cutting and the assoiated flora is of herbs from such forests. Substrates are mostly calcareous and the soils are shallow and rocky. The main pressure is abandonment allowing reversion to forest though fortunately, the extreme climate means that succession is rather slow. Overgrazing (especially by goats) and fires, urbanization and infrastructure developments also threaten. Management means maintaining the successional stage through continuance of traditional activities.

References:
AdamoviÄ‡ L (1906). Über eine bischer nicht unterschiedene Vegetationsform der Balkanhalbinsel, die Pseudomacchie. Verh. Zool-Bot. Ges. Wien 56: 355-360.
Bergmeier E (1990). Wälder und Gebüsche des Niederen Olymp (Kato Olimbos, NO-Thessalien). Ein Beitrag zur systematischen und orographischen Vegetationsgliederung Griechenlands. Phytocoenologia 18:161–342.
ÄŒarni A, Matevski V (2015). Imact of climate change on mountain flora and vegetation in the Republic of Macedonia (central part of the Balkan peninsula). In: Öztürk M Climate change impact on high-altitude ecosystems. Springer,
Horvat I, GlavaÄ V,  Ellenberg H (1974). Vegetation Südosteuropas. Stuttgart: G. Fischer.
Jasprica N, Škvorc Å½, Dolina K, RušÄiÄ‡ M, KovaÄiÄ S, FranjiÄ‡ J (2015). Composition and ecology of the Quercus coccifera communities along eastern Adriatic ciast (NR Mediterranean). Plant Biosystems DOI: 10.1080/11263504.2014.1001461.

Criterion A Text:
The most pronounced decrease has been detected in the eastern part of the Balkan Peninsula; in other parts of Europe no decrease in quantity has been recorded or the decrease is very small. On average the decline is about 10% for EU28, and slightly smaller for EU28+.

Criterion B Text:
The habitat is widely distributed in EU28 and EU28+ with a large EOO and AOO, and it occurs at many locations.

Criterion C/D Text:
Based on quantitative territorial data from 5 countries the overall trend is a relatively small decrease in quality.

Synthesis:
The habitat is assessed as Least Concern (LC), as it is widespread and showed only small declines in quality and quantity. It is found in a large geographical range with many local appearances and the provided data and trends vary a lot between countries. The habitat presents secondary vegetation and therefore in the future further development towards forest may be expected, causing declines. No quantitative data on this process exist, however, and other pressures (like overgrazing) may cause opposite trends.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
This type is quite diverse through the range. It contains Buxus stands that have been distinguished as a separate habitat under the Habitats Directive.

Contributors:
Habitat descrpiton:  I. Tsiripidis & P. Dimopoulos
Territorial data providers: E. Agrillo, F. Attorre, O. Argagnon, C. Bita-Nicolae, L. Casella, P. Dimopoulos. C. Giancola, D. Gigante, G. Giusso del Galdo, C. Gussev, K.J.  Kirby, J. Loidi, C. Marcenò, V. Matevski, S. Sciandrello, V. Stupar, Å½. Škvorc, N. Velkovski, D. Viciani, L. Wibail
Working Group Heathland & Scrub: M. Aronsson, F. Bioret, C. Bita-Nicolae, J. Capelo, A. ÄŒarni, P. Dimopoulos, J. Janssen, J. Loidi


Habitat Type Name:
C1.2b Mesotrophic to eutrophic waterbody with angiosperms

Habitat Description:
This habitat type includes lakes, pools and stretches of rivers and broad streams with very slow-flowing water, which are naturally mesotrophic to eutrophic. The water is usually clear or brown (humic) with low to moderate concentration of chlorophyll and sediments suspended in the water column. The water is normally buffered to highly buffered and rich in basic ions with a pH typically circumneutral to basic. The sediment is rich in nutrients and might be partially organic and muddy. The habitat supports dense beds of aquatic macrophytes more or less rich in species. Macrophytes can disappear when pollution causes nutrient levels to rise further and the system enters the hypertrophic state. Aquatic macrophyte growth forms include floating and submerged forms. Depending on the water depth, the successional stage and the trophic status these waters can be colonized by communities dominated by nymphaeid species (such as Nymphaea spp., Nuphar lutea, Nymphoides peltata), rooted hydrophytes (Potamogeton spp., Myriphyllum spp., Najas spp., Vallisneria spiralis), freely floating hydrophytes (Ceratophyllum spp., Utricularia spp., Hydrocharis morsus-ranae, Stratiotes aloides and Lemna spp.). Typical of pools and shallow waters are the communities dominated by aquatic species of the genus Ranunculus (syn. Batrachium) and Callitriche.
Most of the species populating this habitat type are critical to phosphorus concentrations in the water. Optimal conditions of this habitat are represented by a high nutrient content in the sediment (in the mesotrophic to eutrophic range) and a low nutrient content in the overlying water (with optimal values of phosphorus below 1 µmol/L over the growing season).
Beds of Nymphaea lotus var. thermalis in their natural distribution area are also part of this habitat. Nymphaea lotus is an East-African and Southeast-Asian species, however N. lotus var. thermalis is endemic to the thermal water of PeÅ£a River in Transylvania, Romenia.
Temporary flooded shores and emergent macrophytes stands are excluded from this habitat type and are instead included in other habitats C3.5a (Periodically exposed shores with stable, mainly eutrophic sediments with pioneer and ephemeral vegetation), C3.5b (Periodically exposed shores with stable, mainly mesotrophic sediments with pioneer and ephemeral vegetation) and C5.1a (Tall helophyte dominated freshwater vegetation), C5.1b (Small helophyte dominated freshwater vegetation).
Indicators of good quality:
Dense beds of submerged and floating macrophytes
Relatively high species diversity of submerged and floating macrophytes
Absence or very low abundance of floating and submerged algae beds (FLAB)
Low abundance of emergent species indicators of a process of succession or eutrophication (e.g. Phragmites australis, Typha spp., Sparganium spp., Glyceria maxima, Schoenoplectus spp., etc.)
Concentrations of nutrients and chlorophyll naturally in the range of mesotrophy and eutrophy (approximately P 20-100 μg/L and chlorophyll 5-40 μg/L)
Absence or very low abundance of exotic invasive species
Absence or very low abundance of species indicators of hypertrophic conditions (e.g. Lemna gibba, L. minor, Spirodela polyrhiza, etc.)
Not excessive turbidity of the water due to high chlorophyll concentrations and suspended detritus and sediments in the water column
pH weakly acid, to circumneutral to alkalinic (usually pH 6-8)
No excessive accumulation of organic mud and sediments. Occasionally a layer of detritus may occur in stands with Nymphaeid plants.

Note: Chemical and physical parameters are only indicative, they may change in different geographical area and climatic conditions.
Characteristic species:
Vascular plants: Stratiotes aloides, Utricularia vulgaris, U. australis, Stuckenia pectinata, Potamogeton spp. (e.g. Potamogeton natans, P. coloratus, P. compressus, P. crispus, P. perfoliatus, P. pusillus, P. lucens,  P. acutifolius, P. berchtoldii, P. alpinus, P. friesii, P. obtusifolius, P. trichoides, P. nodosus, P. praelongus, etc.), Nymphaea alba, N. pumila, N. lotus var. thermalis (only in Romania), Nuphar lutea, N. pumila, Nymphoides peltata, Hydrocharis morsus-ranae, Ranunculus spp. (Ranunculus  circinatus, R. aquatilis, R. baudotii, etc.), Myriophyllum spicatum, M. verticillatum, M. sybiricum, Ceratophyllum demersum, Trapa natans, Najas marina, N. minor, N. flexilis, Groenlandia densa, Callitriche spp. (e.g. Callitriche palustris, C. stagnalis, C. hermaphroditica, etc.), Hottonia palustris, Wolffia arrhiza. Rare plant species are Aldrovanda vesiculosa, Caldesia parnassifolia, Luronium natans, Potamogeton rutilus, Najas tenuissima
Bryophytes: Riccia fluitans, R. rhenanan, Ricciocarpus natans
Macroinvertebrates: This habitat hosts a very high diversity of macroinvertebrates (insects, crustaceans, worms , etc.), the most typical groups are Odonata, Diptera, Decapoda, Amphipoda, Isopoda, Hemiptera, Bivalvia, Gasteropoda, Coleoptera, Tricladida, Hirudinea, Oligochaeta.
Vertebrates: mammals: Lutra lutra; reptiles: Natrix spp. (N. maura, N. megalocephala, N. natrix, N. tessellate), Emys orbicularis (includes several endemic subspecies); amphibian: Rana spp., Pelophylax spp., Bufo bufo, B. viridis; birds: Aythya ferina, A. fuligula, A. nyroca, Netta rufina, Anas strepera, A. platyrhynchos, Chlidonias hybrida, Larus ridibundus, L. minutus, Podiceps nigricollis, P. auritus, P. grisegena, P. cristatus, Tachybaptus rufficollis, Fulica atra, Himantopus himantopus, Galinulla chloropus, Cygnus olor, C. bewickii, C. colombianus, Ardea alba, A. cinerea, A. purpurea, A. ralloides, Phalacrocorax carbo, etc.

Classification:
EUNIS:
C1.2 Permanent mesotrophic lakes, ponds and pools
C1.3 Permanent eutrophic lakes, ponds and pools
EuroVegChecklist:
Lemnion minoris O. de Bolòs et Masclans 1955
Utricularion vulgaris Passarge 1964
Hydrocharition morsus-ranae (Passarge 1964) Westhoff et Den Held 1969
Potamogetonion Libbert 1931
Nymphaeion albae Oberd. 1957
Nelumboion nuciferae Losev et Golub in Golub et al. 1991
Ranunculion aquatilis Passarge 1964
Annex 1:
3150 Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition -type vegetation
31A0 Transylvanian hot-spring lotus beds
Emerald:
C1.222 Floating Hydrocharis morsus-ranae rafts
C1.223 Floating Stratiotes aloides rafts
C1.224 Floating Utricularia australis and Utricularia vulgaris colonies
C1.225 Floating Salvinia natans mats
C1.226 Floating Aldrovanda vesiculosa communities
C1.2416 Nelumbo nucifera beds
C1.24113 Transylvanian hot-spring lotus beds
C1.32 Free-floating vegetation of eutrophic waterbodies
C1.33 Rooted submerged vegetation of eutrophic waterbodies
C1.3411 Ranunculus communities in shallow water
C1.3413 Hottonia palustris beds in shallow water
MAES-2:
Fresh water, Rivers and lakes
IUCN:
5.5.  Permanent Freshwater Lakes [over 8 ha]
5.7.  Permanent Freshwater Marshes/Pools [under 8 ha]
Water Framework Directive:
201, 301a, LCB1

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat is not limited to one or few geographical regions.

Map Description:
The map is rather complete for EU28, but data gaps exist outside EU28 in the Balkan, Norway and Switzerland. Data sources: Art17, EVA, GBIF.

Comment EU28+:
The main contribution of EU28+ is from Norway

Trends in Quantity:
The trends in quantity most often vary from stable to decreasing for both EU 28 and EU 28+ countries. However few countries reported an increasing trend. This apparently positive trend is due to eutrophication processes of oligotrophic to mesotrophic lakes and mesotrophic to eutrophic lakes.

Trends in Quality:
The overall trend in biotic and abiotic quality is currently decreasing for both EU 28 and EU 28+, only few countries reported stable conditions.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
The percentage of the habitat type in the EU 28 is (very roughly) estimated to be about 10-20%, based on an assumed Eurasian distribution of the habitat worldwide. In Europe 50-60% of this habitat type lies within the EU 28. The rest is across EU 28+ countries. However the same or very similar habitat type (with the same genera but partially or totally different species can be found in whole Northern Hemisphere.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat does not have a small natural range, instead it occurrs over a large area of Europe.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat does not have a small natural range, instead it occurrs over a large area of Europe.

Pressures and Threats:
The main pressures reported by countries are eutrophication due to agricultural and forestry activities, pollution, modification of hydrographic functioning and human induced changes in hydraulic conditions. Sometimes land use and problematic non-native species are reported. Hydrological changes include water level regulation and, especially in the past, draining of lakes. Climate change is predicted to exacerbate the issues associated with eutrophication.

Conservation and Management:
The main current approaches to conservation, management and restoration of this habitat are: 1. Restoring the hydrology, included the influence of the groundwater system; 2. Limiting the nutrient input from the surrounding agricultural areas; eutrophication need to be prevented from both surface water and ground water input; 3. Allowing the ecosystems to build up autochthonous organic material and development of succession stages in the vegetation.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1:
3150: ALP U2, ATL U2, BLS U1, BOR U2, CON U1, MAC XX, MED U1, PAN U1, STE FV
31A0: PAN FV

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Experience from North-Western Atlantic and Central Europe shows that aquatic vegetation types occurring in late successional stages are difficult to recreate, and when it is possible it is a long-term effort.

Summary:
This habitat includes permanent, standing or sluggish, mesotrophic to eutrophic waters in lakes, pools and mature rivers and slow streams, mainly now in central Europe. The sediments especially are nutrient-rich, sometimes partly organic and muddy, and the habitat supports dense beds of submerged and/or floating macrophytes. Diversity of all biota is relatively high. Anthropogenic hyper-eutrophication is the main threat. Restoration measures include the restoration of the hydrological regime and the prevention of nutrient inputs from agricultural and forestry activities through drainage of superficial and ground water.

References:
Berg, C., Dengler, J., Abdank, A. and Isermann, M, 2004. De Pflanzengesellschaften Mecklenburg-Vorpommerns un ihre Gefährdung. Textband. 606 pages. Landesamt für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Geologie Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Weissdorn-Verlag Jena.
ChytryÌ, M. (ed.) 2011. Vegetace ÄŒeské republiky 3. Vodní a mokÅ™adní vegetace. [Vegetation of the Czech Republic 3. Aquatic and wetland vegetation]. Academia, Praha, CZ.
Smolders, A.J.P., Lamers, L.P.M., Lucassen, E.C.H.E.T., Van der Velde, G. and Roelofs, J.G.M., 2006. Internal eutrophication: 'How it works and what to do about it', a review. Chemistry and Ecology 22: 93-111.

Criterion A Text:
The calculated trend in quantity of the habitat resulted in a low reduction of 13-16% during the last 50 years that corresponds to the category Least Concern according to criterion A1. Only 7 countries (around 20%) provided data concerning the historical trend. However it is reliable to suppose that a similar or stable trend affected also the other European countries leading to a high historic negative trend since 1750 of 64-68%. This score would lead to assess this habitat as Vulnerable according to criterion A3, however considering the few data available it was preferred to assign the habitat to the category Near Threatened.

Criterion B Text:
The habitat is largely extended in Europe therefore both EOO and AOO are far from the thresholds required by criterion B to consider the habitat threatened. However spatial extent, biotic and abiotic quality of the habitat are continuing to decline.

Criterion C/D Text:
The decrease of quality have the same severity score (43), while the extent affected in EU 28+ (42%) is slightly smaller than that one in EU 28 (56%). The assessment according criterion C/D1 is Near Threatened for both EU 28 and EU28+.

Criterion E Text:
No quantitative calculation of habitat collapse could be performed.

Synthesis:
This habitat reaches the qualification of Near Threatened both in EU 28 and EU 28+, because of its reduction in quality over the last 50 years on a relatively high extent of the habitat (Criterion C/D1). Also the reduction in quantity in historic time (criterion A3) results in Near Threatened. In this assessment data from Poland are missing, which is considered an important part data gap.

Contributors:
Type description: G. Arts, F. Landucci, J.A. Molina, B. Poulin, H. Toivonen
Territorial data: E. Agrillo, S. Armiraglio, S. Assini, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, S. Bell, C. Bita-Nicolae, J. Brophy, G. Buffa, J. Capelo, A. ÄŒarni, L. Casella, R. Delarze, L. Denys, P. Dimopoulos, D. Espírito-Santo, P. Finck, C. Giancola, D. Gigante, G. Giusso del Galdo, R. Hall, P. Ivanov, N. Juvan, K. Keulen, G. Király, T. Kontula, H. Mäemets, C. Marcenò, V. Matevski, A. Mikolajczak, Ä. MilanoviÄ‡, M. Mjelde, J.A. Molina, J. Packet, D. Paelinckx, D. Paternoster, G. Pezzi, V. RašomaviÄius, U. Raths, U. Riecken, S. Sciandrello, J. Šibík, Å½. Škvorc, A. Ssymank, K. Šumberová, W. van Landuyt, R. Venanzoni, D. Viciani, E. von Wachenfeldt, E. Weeda
Working Group Freshwater Habitats: G. Arts, F. Landucci, J.A. Molina, B. Poulin, H. Toivonen


Habitat Description:
Canarian high-mountain volcanic semi-desert scrub, restricted to the subalpine zone of Tenerife and La Palma. The main occurrence of this rare and unique habitat type concerns the Cañadas del Teide on Tenerife, where it covers several square kilometers of the comparatively flat bottom of this huge caldera, one of the largest in the world. The dominant shrub species here is the striking hemispherical ‘hedgehog’ species Cytisus supranubius (up to 2 m), accompanied by a set of smaller species from different plant families showing a similar growth form, e.g. Nepeta teydea (Lamiaceae), Pterocephalus lasiospermus (Dipsacaceae) and Descurainea bourgeana (Brassicaceae). Every year, during its flowering period in May, Cytisus supranubius is painting the lava landscape in a bright white, in honor of its Spanish name ‘retama blanca’. Another prominent species in this open habitat is the pillar-shaped Echium wildpretii, which appearance reminds us of the Senecio and Lobelia communities in the arid belt of East-African tropical mountains above the timber line. The caldera is situated above 2,000 m and almost never gets any precipitation. It is thought that the dead remains of the flower stalks of the various species are able to catch and transport water during periods with fog. In addition to the limited supply of water, the extreme soil conditions strongly determine plant growth in this bare volcanic landscape.
The habitat type further comprises two scree communities at the summits of the Canaries, one on Tenerife and one on La Palma. On Tenerife, Viola cheiranthifolia is found on the flanks of the Teide, above the caldera, and on La Palma, Viola palmensis is growing in the highest parts of the island. Both the hedgehog and the scree communities are permanent natural vegetation.
This mountain habitat type is of particular conservation value as it houses a set of endemic and extremely rare species, which even do not (or hardly) occur outside the range of the habitat. Another conspicuous feature is that these communities do not support the occurrence of more widespread species, as is the case in other endemic ecosystems. Where the endemic habitat types of the Canary Islands at lower altitude are generally accompanied by many mediterranean species, this is not the case in these high-altitude hedgehog and scree communities. As a consequence, the habitat type is rather poor in species (5-10 species in general).
Indicators of good quality:
Presence of rare and endemic species.
Absence of ruderal, often more nutrient-demanding species.
Absence of alien species (grasses and shrubs).
Long-term habitat stability, with no successional trends.

Characteristic species:
Vascular plants: Adenocarpus viscosus var. spartioides (dom), Adenocarpus viscosus var. viscosus (dom), Argyranthemum teneriffae, Arrhenatherum calderae, Bencomia exstipulata, Cheirolophus teydis (= Cheirolophus argutus), Cytisus supranubius (= Spartocytisus supranubius; dom). Descurainea bourgeana, Descurainea gilva, Echium auberianum, Echium gentianoides, Echium wildpretii, Erisymum scoparium, Genista benehoavensis (= Teline benehoavenensis), Micromeria lasiophylla ssp. Palmensis, Nepeta teydea, Pimpinella cumbrae, Plantago webbii, Pterocephalus lasiospermus, Pterocephalus porphyranthus, Scrophularia glabrata, Sideritis oriocephala, Silene nocteolens, Stemmacantha cynaroides, Viola cheiranthifolia, Viola palmensis.

Classification:
EUNIS:
F7.4 Hedgehog heath
EuroVegChecklist:
Spartocytision nubigeni Oberd. Ex Esteve 1972
Violion cheiranthifoliae Voggenreiter ex Martín Osorio, Wildpret et Rivas-Mart. in Martín Osorio et al. 2007
Annex 1:
4090 Endemic oro-Mediterranean heaths with gorse
Emerald:
-
MAES-2:
Heathland and shrub
IUCN:
3.7. Subtropical/Tropical High Altitude shrubland

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This is an extremely localized habitat, found in lava fields above 2.200 m of altitude around the Teide Mountain on Tenerife, and on the highest volcano of La Palma (Canary Islands, Spain). It includes canarian endemics and La Palma and Tenerife endemics, including a monospecific genus (Spartocytisus supranubius) which is restricted to this habitat.

Map Description:
The map provides the complete distribution of the habitat. Data sources: Art17.

Trends in Quantity:
As no agricultural or urban relevant activities exist, the area is a protected area, and human pressure from touristic activity is low on the lava fields, the habitat trends are stable.

Trends in Quality:
The habitat is well-preserved and probably accounts, in most of its area, for the complete set of characteristic plants. There are no relevant changes in the environmental conditions, like any significant disturbance, that would reduce species number or relevant structural changes.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The range is extreme small, but the area and range of the habitat are stable.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The most characteristic aspect of the habitat is a broom scrub dominated by the endemic Spartocytisus supranubius, of which the whole area is restricted to the Teide mountain and immediate surroundings. Besides it includes two scree communitie

Pressures and Threats:
Low intensity pressures could be expected from visitors, trekking and other mountain activities activities. Punctual presence of alien species has been reported. As it is a protected area these activities are under control. Climate change may lead to altitudinal range shifts that may eventually reduce the area of the habitat.

Conservation and Management:
Keeping local, regional, national and EU conservation regulations as well as keeping the actual protected areas will guarantee habitat type persistence.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The habitat type is permanent vegetation and probably does not depend on sucessional processes to establish. Colonization by seed from nearby sites containing the component species will be sufficient if disturbances disappear.

Summary:
This endemic habitat characterised by hedgehog cushion plants is confined to a volcanic caldera and summit screes in the Canaries, with extreme substrates and fog the only source of moisture. The flora is species-poor but consists almost entirely of endemic or very rare plants.The only threat is low intensity trampling from trekking and mountain activities by visitors, but the impact of climate change is uncertain.

References:
Oberdorfer, E. (1965). Pflanzensoziologische Studien auf Teneriffa und Gomera (Kanarische Inseln). Beitr. Naturk. Forsch. SW-Deutschland 24: 47-104.
Rivas Martínez, S., W. Wildpret de la Torre, M.J. del Arco Aguilar, O. Rodríguez Delgado, P.L. Pérez de Paz, A. García Gallo, J.R. Acebes Ginovés, T.E. Díaz González, F. Fernández González (1993). Las comunidades vegetales de la Isla de Tenerife (Islas Canarias). Itinera Geobotanica 7: 169-374.
Santos, A. (1983). Vegetacion y flora de La Palma. Ed. Interinsular Canaria, Santa Cruz de Tenerife.
Schaminée, J.H.J. & A.H.F. Stortelder (1987; eds.). Plantengroei op Tenerife. Verslag van een botanische excursie, april 1986. Rapport 485, De Dorschkamp, Wageningen. 126 pp.

Criterion A Text:
There is no evidence that the habitat area has significantly reduced or increased over the last 50 years.

Criterion B Text:
The AOO and EOO are very small, and therefore any threat would immediately lead to an assessment of Endangered (EN). However, presently no threats are known. It has to be monitored what the effects of climate change will be for this habitat, as it may lead to negative trends in the near future.

Criterion C/D Text:
No or very small negative trends in quality have been reported for this habitat, leading to the conclusion Least Concern.

Synthesis:
In spite of its very restricted geographical area, the habitat is assessed as Least Concern, because of stable trends in quantity and quality. It may become endangered (EN) in the future however, if negative effects will occur from climate change.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
A possible separation in subtypes would be between broom communities and scree communities with Viola cheiranthifolia and Viola palmensis, but spatially the two are intermingled and usefulness of such further split is doubtful.

Contributors:
Habitat description: J. Schaminée
Territorial data: J. Loidi
Working Group Heathlands & Scrub: M. Aronsson, F. Bioret, C. Bita-Nicolae, J. Capelo, A. Carni, P. Dimopulos, J. Janssen, J. Loidi.


Habitat Type Name:
F7.4b Central Mediterranean mountain hedgehog-heath

Habitat Description:
This habitat includes high-mountain thorny-cushion dwarf scrub in the Central Mediterranean region. In terms of structure and ecology it is similar to the hedgehog heaths from the West-Mediterranean (F7.4a) and the East-Mediterranean (F7.4c). It is however distinguished as a separate, vicariant type, because of its different species composition, with many endemics. The dominant species are chamaephytes, morphologically similar to those in the West and East Mediterranean hedgehog heath. In the Central Mediterranean region the characteristic shrubs belong to the genera Aspalathus, Genista or Armeria. Central Mediterranean hedgehog heath is found in the supra-mediterranean and oro-mediteranean belts of the islands of Elba, Sardegna and Sicily and of the Southern Apennines and Cantabrian mountains. It is found both on acidic and calcareous soils, mainly on very windy sites that are exposed to an intense solar radiation.
Spiny Astragalus-species dominate primary stations above or near the timberline. Due to deforestation or grazing, such communities may have a downslope expansion. In lower altitudes they also grow on rocky ridges that are free of trees. In the Central Mediterranean the following Astragalus species are important in the mountain hedgehog heath: Astragalus calabrus in the Sila Massive of Calabria, Astragalus gennargenteus on Mount Gennargentu (Sardinia) and in the mountains of Corse, Astragalus nebrodensis (= Astragalus siculus subsp. nebrodensis) in the Madonie mountain chain of Sicily, Astragalus siculus on Mount Etna (Sicily), and relict stands of Astragalus sirinicus in the southern Appennines. These Astragalus-communities contain a high amount of endemic vascular plants, amongst which several species of Viola. In the Central Mediterranean region only the Mount Etna is sufficiently high to allow an optimal development of the thorny Astragalus dominated belt. In the other mountain groups the Astragalus-associations occur rather localized near the top of the mountains.
Genista dominated hedgehog-heath occurs mainly below the timberline, and in most cases is considered a secondary habitat, although it may form the climax vegetation on strongly wind-swept locations. In general such communities have a lower percentage of endemics than the Astragalus-communities, and a higher frequency of broader Mediterranean species, amongst which many therophytes. Examples of characteristic species are Genista salzmannii on Sardegna and Corse, Genista desoleana on Elba and Genista cupanii on Sicily. Genista-dominated scrub forms transitions towards Juniperus communis ssp. nana (Corse) or Juniperus hemisphaerica (Sicily) dominated dwarf scrub (F2.2b), in general found on deeper and more humid soils. Berberis aetnensis is a common species of both the Juniperus-dominated and the Genista-dominated dwarf scrub. On Sardegna and Corse mountain hedgehog heath is often found in mosaic with patches of oro-mediterranean grassland (E1.5c).
In Calabria spiny heaths are found on Mont Aspromonte, dominated by Armeria aspromontana, Potentilla calabra and Centaurea poltiana. Armeria nebrodensis is one of the dominant species in hedgehog heath on acidic soils in the Madonie mountains of Sicily.
Spiny scrub communities in the warmer parts of the Alps and Pyrenees, like those dominated by Astragalus sempervirens subsp. sempervirens, Genista lobelii or Genista hispanica, are not included in this habitat, but in F6.3 (supra-mediterranean garrigues). Spiny heathlands in the warmer parts of the Alps, like those dominated by Genista lobelii and Genista pulchella ssp. villarsii (alliance Genistion lobelii) or by Astragalus sempervirens (alliance Ononidion cenisiae = Avenion sempervirentis) are considered part of F6.6.
Indicators of good quality:
In good condition the habitat has a low structure and is rather open, forming mosaics with bare soil or grassland types. Indicators of good quality are:
·     No or little presence of trees,
·     Low hedgehog-like vegetation structure,
·     Forming landscape mosaics with grasslands or bare soil.
Characteristic species:
Flora
Vascular plants: Alyssum robertianum, Anthyllis hermanniae, Armeria aspromontana, Armeria brutia, Armeria canescens, Armeria multiceps,  Armeria nebrodensis, Armeria sardoa, Astragalus calabrus, Astragalus genargenteus (= A. sirinicus ssp. gennargenteus), Astragalus nebrodensis, Astragalus siculus, Berberis aetnensis, Centaurea poltiana, Centaurea sarfattiana, Cerastium boisserianum, Genista corsica, Genista cupanii, Genista desoleana, Genista lobelioides (= G. lobelii var. lobelioides), Genista salzmannii (= Genista lobelii var. salzmannii), Helichrysum italicum ssp. italicum, Juniperus communis, Plantago humilis, Plantago subulata, Plantago serpentina, Potentilla calabra, Prunus spinosa, Rosa seraphini, Rumex aetnensis,Ruta corsica, Scleranthus vulcanicus, Senecio aetnensis, Teucrium marum, Thymus herba-barona, Viola aethnensis, Viola corsica, Viola nebrodensis.

Classification:
EUNIS
F7.4 Hedgehog-heaths
EuroVegChecklist (alliances)
Berberidion aetnensis S. Brullo et al. 2001 (marginal)
Anthyllidion hermanniae Klein 1972
Rumici-Astragalion siculi Poli 1965
Cerastio-Astragalion nebrodensis Pignatti et Nimis ex S. Brullo 1984
Armerion nebrodensis S. Brullo 1984
Armerion aspromontanae S. Brullo et al. 2001
Koelerio brutiae-Astragalion calabrici Giacomini et Gentile ex S. Brullo in S. Brullo et al. 2005
Annex 1:
4090 Endemic oro-Mediterranean heaths with gorse
Emerald:
F7 Spiny Mediterranean heaths (phrygana, hedgehog-heaths and related coastal cliff vegetation)
MAES-2:
Heathland and shrub
IUCN:
3.8. Mediterranean-type Shrubby Vegetation

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
This hedgehog heath is a typical habitat of the highest belts of the Central Mediterranean mountains. It is present in Corsica, Elba, Sardinia, north-east of Sicily, and some moutains in the center and south of continental Italy.

Map Description:
The map seems complete. Data sources: Art17.

Trends in Quantity:
In Italy the trend is stable to increasings, while in France a negative trend over the lats 50 years has been reported. Overall the trend is about 20% decline.

Trends in Quality:
In Italy the trend in quality is slightly decreasing, while for France a stable status has been reported.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
100%. The habitat is restricted to the EU28 (France and Italy).

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat is restricted to the moutains of the Central Mediterranean and there has been a decline in area, but the range is a bit too large to meet the criteria under B.

Justification of Restricted Area:
This habitat is limited to some moutains of Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily and continental Italy, where it is widespread.

Pressures and Threats:
The most significant threats affecting this habitat are linked to the reduction or abandonment of sheep and goat grazing in moutain areas.

Conservation and Management:
The hedgehog heath of the central Mediterranean are grazed in summer by goats and sheep. This type of pastoralism maintains the habitat. This habitat does'nt need any reglementary protection measures, except the continuation of the traditional sheep and goat grazing.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Only in case of destruction of the habitat connectivity.

Summary:
This habitat, with vegetation dominated by low spiny cushion plants occurs in high mountains of the Central Mediterranean region, in very windy situations exposed to intense sunshine. It is found on both acidic and base-rich soils with a rich flora including many endemics, different species dominating according to region and altitude. A natural habitat above the timberline, grazing can extend its cover to lower altitudes and less exposed situations and there sheep and goat pastoralism may be essential for its conservation. However, over-grazing can be damaging.

References:
Biondi, E. (1997). Syntaxonomy of the Mediterranean Chamaephytic and Nanophanerophytic vegetation in Italy. Coll. Phytosoc. 27: 123-145.
Brullo, S., A. Cormaci, G. Giusso del Galdo, R. Guarino, P. Minissale, G. Siracusa, G. Spampinato (2005). A Syntaxonomical survey of the Sicilian dwarf shrub vegetation belonging to the class Rumici-Astragaletea siculi. Annali di Botanica N.S. V : 103-150.
Gamisans. J. (1977). La végétation des montagnes corses. II. Phytocoenologia 4(1) : 35-13
Pignatti E. & S., Avanzini A. & P.L. Nimis (1977). Die klimatisch bedingte Dornpolster-Vegetation der Gebirge Süditaliens, Siziliens und Sardiniens. In H. Dierschke (ed.). Vegetation und Klima. Berichte  Int. Symp. Vegetat. Rinteln. Cramer Vaduz. pp 373-390.
Pignatti, E., P.L. Nimis & A. Avanzini (1980). La vegetazione ad arbusti spinosi emisferici: contributo alla interpretazione delle fasce di vegetazione delle alte montagne dell'Italia mediterranea. C.N.R. Coll. Progr. Final. Promozione della qualità dell'ambiente. AQ/1/79. Roma.
Poli, E. (1965). La Vegetazione altomontana dell'Etna. Milano.

Criterion A Text:
An overall reduction in quantity of about 20% has been calculated from the data of Italy and France, leading to the conclusion Least Concern.

Criterion B Text:
Despite the fact that the habitat is localised in the central Mediterranean mountains of Corsica, Elba, Sardinia, Sicily and continental Italy, the EOO and AOO and number of locations are larger than the thresholds for criterion B. The conclusion is therefore Least Concern (LC).

Criterion C/D Text:
The average reduction in quality is slight, both in terms of extend and severity, leading to the conclusion Least Concern (LC) for criterion C/D1.

Synthesis:
The habitat qualifies for a Least Concern (LC) status, due to a limited (-20%) decrease in area over the last 50 years, linked to a reduction of summer grazing, and a slightly decreasing quality over the same period. The habitat occurs very localised, but values for distribution and range do not meet the thresholds of the restricted geography criterion.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Due to high floristic endemism, the hedgehog heath habitats from Corsica, Elba, Sardinia and Sicily could be considered as subtypes.

Contributors:
Habitat description: J. Janssen
Territorial data : E. Agrillo, F. Attorre, S. Bagella, F. Bioret, L. Casella, D. Gigante, G. Giusso Del Galdo, C. Marcenò, C. Panaïotis, S. Sciandrello, D. Viciani.
Working Group Heathland & Scrub: M. Aronsson, F. Bioret, C. Bita-Nicolae, J. Capelo, A. Carni, J. Janssen, P. Dimopoulos, J. Loidi


Habitat Description:
This habitat occurs on mountain summits, ridges and slopes of the mountains in the boreal zone. Herb layer is sparse and short, including graminoids such as Carex bigelowii, Deschampsia flexuosa, Festuca ovina agg. and Juncus trifidus, dicot herbs Hieracium alpinum agg. and Lychnis alpina, and dwarf shrubs such as Arctostaphylos alpina, A. uva-ursi, Empetrum nigrum agg. and Loiseleuria procumbens. The vegetation is dominated by fruticose lichens, especially those of the genera Cladonia (Cladina) and Cetraria (incl. Flavocetraria), and bryophytes.
This vegetation is distributed in the alpine belt of the Scandinavian mountains and also at lower altitudes in northern Scandinavia and Scotland. It is confined to convex landforms affected by strong winds, which blow off snow and fine soil particles. Therefore the vegetation is exposed to winter climatic extremes, which are tolerated only by arctic-alpine cryptograms and a few adapted species of vascular plants. Soils are shallow, stony and often affected by cryoturbation. They are drier than soils in other landforms of arctic and alpine landscapes, poor in nutrients, with low microbial activity, and usually – but not always – acidic.
Compared to the polar deserts (type H5.1b) the summer temperatures on fjell fields are higher. The volcanic sparsely vegetated ash fields of Iceland are included as a separate, somewhat similar type as well (habitat H5.1c). Besides, similarities exist with tundra vegetation dominated by Racomitrium species in the arctic region. In the temperate mountains of Europe this kind of sparsely-vegetated summits in most cases are part of the mountain grassland communities on siliceous substrates (habitat E4.3b) or calcareous substrates (habitat E4.4a, E4.4b), or may be considered under limestone pavements (habitat H3.5a).
Indicators of good quality:
This is natural vegetation occurring mostly in remote areas which are under limited human influence. It is generally rather stable. Locally these habitats can be overgrazed by reindeer. The following characteristics can be considered as indicators of good quality:
No signs of overgrazing
No disturbance by man
Presence of thick lichen carpets

Characteristic species:
Vascular plants: Antennaria alpina subsp. borealis, Arctostaphylos alpinus, A. uva-ursi, Carex bigelowii, Deschampsia flexuosa, Diapensia lapponica, Empetrum nigrum agg., Festuca ovina agg., Hieracium alpinum agg., Juncus trifidus, Loiseleuria procumbens, Luzula spicata, Lychnis alpina
Bryophytes: Dicranum elongatum, D. fuscescens, Gymnomitrion coralloides, Polytrichum juniperinum, P. piliferum, Prasanthus suecicus, Racomitrium lanuginosum 
Lichens: Alectoria ochroleuca, A. nigricans, Bryocaulon divergens, Cetraria cucullata, C. islandica, C. nivalis, Cladonia amaurocraea, C. coccifera, C. gracilis, C. mitis, C. rangiferina, C. stellaris, C. uncialis, Stereocaulon paschale, Thamnolia vermicularis

Classification:
EUNIS:
E4.2 Moss and lichen dominated mountain summits, ridges and exposed slopes (fjell fields)
H5.1 Fjell fields and other freeze-thaw features with very sparse or no vegetation
EuroVeg Checklist (alliances):
Carici-Juncion trifidi Nordhagen 1943
Cladonio-Viscarion alpinae Daniëls 1982
Kobresio-Dryadion Nordhagen 1943
Cochleariopsion groenlandicae HadaÄ 1989
Luzulion arcuatae Elvebakk 1985 (is incl. in Ranunculo-Oxyrion didynae Nordhagen 1943)
Annex 1:
--
Emerald:
--
MAES-2:
Sparsely or unvegetated land
IUCN:
6 Rocky areas

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat is restricted to alpine mountains in the boreal region.

Map Description:
The map may provide an overestimate, but lacks data from Finland. Data sources: BOHN.

Comment EU28:
Finland data includes wind-exposed heath

Trends in Quantity:
The trend in quantity is difficult to estimate. The experts from UK and Finland consider the trend as stable and we interpolate this opinion to the whole habitat.

Trends in Quality:
The trends in quality are more difficult to estimate than the trends in quantity. Both the UK and Finland report a negative trend, where in Finland "wind exposed heath" is included. This sub-habitat has the largest area and most severe decrease in quality due to reindeer grazing. The average results in a large decrease, however it is not 100% certain that this subtype should be included in the habitat. For the EU28+ the situation is likely to be better, as no or little negative changes have to be expected from Norway (which covers by far the largest area).

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
About 25%. In the EU28 the habitat occurs only in Finland, Sweden and the northern UK. In the EU28+ the habitat is mainly found in Norway, and outside Europe in Greenland (DK).

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The geographical range of the habitat (EOO) is wide in the boreal biogeographical region.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat occurs in large patches in the boreal mountains.

Pressures and Threats:
The habitat without impact of human and animals showed relatively stable status. The main significant pressures are (1) Intensive grazing and trampling of wind-exposed mountain heaths by reindeers (and other animals, e.g. sheeps), (2) airborne nitrogen pollution, but also probably eutrophication from sheep urine/droppings, (3) outdoor sports and leisure activities, recreational activities, and (4) climate change.

Conservation and Management:
For this habitats it is the best regime to control intensity of pasture (reindeer, etc.) and frequency of people inputs. The fjell fields are relatively stable habitats when the climatic conditions do not change and human activities are under control.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The natural recovery of habitats with sparse vegetation is very slow. It can even be lower than in the related mountain heath or birch forest due to hard environmental (soil, temperature) conditions and available amount of propagules (e.g. seeds). This process requires a lot of time, it is a long-term process.

Summary:
Fjell field occurs on very exposed summits, ridges and slopes of mountains in the boreal and arctic zones, blown clear of snow in winter and with shallow stony soils, nutrient-poor and usually acidic, that are susceptible to freeze-thaw and sorting. The vegetation is determined by the strong winds and cold and dominated by bryophytes and fruticose lichens. The habitat is generally beyond the limit of pastoral farming but can be grazed by wild herbivores. These sometimes cause excessive trampling but bigger threats come from skiing developments, other mountain recreation, air pollution and climatic warming.

References:
Averis, A., Averis, B., Birks, J., Horsfield, D., Thompson, D. and Yeo, M. 2004. An Illustrated Guide to British Upland Vegetation. Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Peterborough. 454 p.
Daniëls, F. J. A. 1982. Vegetation of the Angmagssalik District, Southeast Greenland, IV. Shrub, dwarf shrub, and terricolous lichens. Meddelelser om Grønland. Bioscience 10: 1-78.
Dierssen, K. 1996. Vegetation Nordeuropas. Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart. 832 p.
Nordhagen, R. 1943. Sikilsdalen og Norges fjellbeiter. En plantesosiologisk monografi. Bergens Museums Skrifter 22: 1-607.
Norokorpi, Y., Eeronheimo, H., Eurola, S., Heikkinen, R., Johansson, P., Kumpula, J., Mäkelä, K., Neuvonen, S., Sihvo, J., Tynys, S. and Virtanen, R. 2008. Tunturit Suomen luontotyyppien uhanalaisuus (Assessment of Threatened Habitat Types in Finland), pp. 467-541. In: Raunio, A., Schulman, A. and Kontula, T. eds. Suomen luontotyyppien uhanalaisuus: Osa 2: Luontotyyppien kuvaukset. Suomen ympäristökeskus, Helsink,Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinky, 572 p.
Rodwell, J.S. 1992 ed. British Plant Communities, Vol. 2, Mires and Heaths. Cambridge University Press, 628 p.

Criterion A Text:
The average EU28 rate of decline has been calculated using data from the UK and Finland. The EU28+ is expected to be close to zero, due to the large (mainly unaffected) area in Norway. Some decline is expected in future, mainly as a result of climate change and increased nitrogen pollution, but the amount cannot be quantified.

Criterion B Text:
The AOO and EOO and number of location largely exceed the thresholds for criteria under B, leading to the conclusion Least Concern.

Criterion C/D Text:
The territorial data from the UK and Finland resulted in an average negatively affected area of 52% with 30% severity, leading to the conclusion Vulnerable (VU) for criterion C/D1. The decline in quality relates to both abiotic (UK) and biotic (Finland) changes, and therefore no split for C or D has been made. Future or long-term historical declines in quality are unknown. It is likely that for EU28+ (where a much larger amount of the habitat is present) the situation is better, leading to the expert conclusion of Least Concern (LC).
There is some uncertainty about the calculated trend in quality for the EU28, as Finland reported mainly negative trends for "wind exposed mountain heath" (it is not 100% certain that this subhabitat should be included under "Fjell fields") and UK based the data on the broader defined Annex 1-type 6150. Therefore the overall confidence in the assessment is low.

Synthesis:
The habitat has been assessed as Near Threatened (NT) for the EU28 based on large declines in quality, mostly resulting from intensive grazing of wind-exposed mountain heaths by reindeer, nitrogen pollution and (more generally) climate change. The assessment has a large amount of uncertainty, however, due to uncertainties in the provided data. For the EU28+ (where a much larger amount of the habitat occurs in Norway) the situation is expected to be relatively better, leading to the conclusion Least Concern (LC).

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
Moss and lichen dominated mountain summits, ridges and exposed slopes (fjell fields) have many subtypes in the area of distribution due to the relatively broad habitat definition. In the UK it varies from habitats with extensive mats of Racomitrium

Contributors:
Type description: M. Chytrý
Territorial data: A. Averis, B. Averis, T. Kontula
Working Group Sparsely Vegetated Habitats: G. Giusso Del Galdo, F. Essl, A. Mikolajczak, D. Paternoster, M. ValachoviÄ, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Description:
The habitat covers sparsely vegetated volcanic areas in subarctic and arctic regions of Europe. It includes active volcanos, recently formed lava streams, and older lava fields and rocks, as well as volcanic slopes and plains with sparse vegetation. It is a relatively broad defined type, but in its distribution it is rather limited to a small part of Northern Europe. The habitat is found on large parts of the central highland of Iceland, almost everywhere where the volcanos and rocks are not covered by glaciers, and also in lowlands. Besides it covers small parts of the Norwegian arctic island Jan Mayen, in places where lava fields have been only sparsely colonized.
The central Icelandic highland has a naturally sparse vegetation cover, due to erosion by wind and rain. Here, on old lava soils, sparsely vegetated fields dominate with stony, gravelly, coarse-sandy, sometimes slightly loamy black soil, with spread pebbles and rocks. These gravel fields are called melar in Icelandic. They are well-drained, nutrient-poor and desiccate quickly due to wind and strong heat on sunny days. The dry conditions in these ‘edaphic deserts’ cause erosion of soil by wind, which prevents development of higher vegetation cover. Only few vascular plants are resistant to the harsh environment, mainly hemicryptophytic species. Examples are Silene acaulis, Armeria maritima, Agrostis vinealis, Cerastium alpinum, Thymus arcticus, Festuca pruinosa (= F. rubra s.l.), Poa glauca and Cardaminopsis petraea. Cryptogams are relatively rare and occur with low cover. Snow cover on wind-exposed fields is low, but in sheltered depressions transitions to snow beds occur, with higher vegetation cover and species of the alliance Salicion herbacea. Where soils are more stabilised lichens and mosses have higher cover and transitions towards heathlands occur. The typical plant community on these gravel fields is the association Armerio-Silenetum acaulis, which is classified in the alliance Veronico-Poion glaucae. This alliance is sometimes placed in the grassland class Koelerio-Corynephoretea, sometimes under the Sedo-Scleranthetea.
Relatively recent lava fields are colonized by lichens only, including species of Stereocaulon (S. denudatum), Pletigera malacea, Cladonia spp (C. mitis, C. rangiformis, C. uncialis, C. coccifera) and Alectoria ochroleuca. Further succession leads to Racomitrium dominated habitats, included under Moss and lichen tundra (F1.2).
Habitat H5.1c is also related to Fjell fields (H5.1a), which is also a sparsely vegetated habitat. This however is a (sub)alpine temperate and boreal mountain habitat, found in most cases on siliceous bedrock (acidic soil). In most Fjell fields lichens and mosses play an important role.
Indicators of good quality:
Long-term stability of patches with extreme low vegetation cover
No dominance of mosses
Low cover of pioneer lichens

Characteristic species:
Flora, Vascular plants: Agrostis vinealis, Arenaria norvegica, Armeria maritima, Cardaminopsis petraea, Cerastium alpinum, Luzula spicata, Lychnis alpina, Oxyria digyna, Poa glauca, Saxifraga oppositifolia, Silene acaulis, Thymus arcticus.

Classification:
EUNIS:
H5.1 Fjell fields and other freeze-thaw features with very sparse or no vegetation
EuroVegChecklist (alliances):
Veronico-Poion glaucae Nordhagen 1943
Annex I:
8320 Fields of lava and natural excavations
Emerald:
H6 Recent volcanic features
MAES-2:
Sparsely or unvegetated land
IUCN ecosystems:
8.3 Cold desert

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat is restricted to volcanic areas in arctic and subarctic regions. In the EU28+ it is restricted to Iceland and the island of Jan Mayen.

Map Description:
The map provides a good overview of the range but is not very precise in its detail, due to lack of good data. Data sources: LIT.

Trends in Quantity:
There is no quantitative data on the habitat at all, but there is no indication of negative trends or severe threats either. Therefore it is estimated that trends in area are more or less stable.

Trends in Quality:
There is no data at all about trends in quality. There is no indication of negative trends, but maybe some changes can be expected in future due to global warming.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
0%. Within the geographical scope of the Red list project the habitat is restricted to the EU28+ (Iceland, Jan Mayen Island).

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat has a relatively large range, even if it is restricted to Iceland and Jan Mayen.

Justification of Restricted Area:
On Iceland the habitat covers extreme large areas, including most of the upland area outside the glaciers.

Pressures and Threats:
This is natural vegetation occurring in remote areas which are under limited human influence. It is generally rather stable, but may be threatened by global warming. Of course, severe disturbances may be caused by natural volcanic activity.

Conservation and Management:
This is natural vegetation occurring in remote areas for which no management is needed.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Yes, but only natural. As ecological processes occur very slow in the arctic, recovery will take a long time.

Summary:
This habitat comprises sparsely vegetated volcanic features such as active volcanos, recently formed lava streams, and older lava fields and rocks, as well as volcanic slopes and plains in the subarctic and arctic regions of Europe, mostly on Iceland and parts of Jan Mayen. The rock surfaces and volcanic soils are only slowly colonised, are nutrient-poor and subject to continuing effects of wind erosion and desiccation. Vascular plants and few and cryptogams are generally sparse but accumulating soil and deptressions benefiting from snow-lie may sustain more extensive vegetation.  Generally very remote from human activity, the habitat suffers little direct anthropogenic influence, though climate warming may be threatening and, where volcanic activity continues, ther can be more catastrophic effects.

References:
Dierssen, K. 1996. Vegetation Nordeuropas. Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart.
HadaÄ, E. (1972). Fell-field and heath communities of Reykjanes peninsula, SW Iceland. Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 7: 349-380.
Gunnlaugsdóttir, E. (1985). Composition and dynamical status of heathland communities in Iceland in relation to recovery measures. Acta Phytogeographica Suecica 75, Uppsala, 84 pp.

Criterion A Text:
There is no quantitative information on trends in area, but there are also no indications of severe threats or negative trends. Therefore the trend is indicated to be stable over the last 50 years, leading to a Least Concern assessment.

Criterion B Text:
There is no indication of negative trends or severe threats, while the AOO, EOO and number of locations are relatively high. Therefore the habitat is assessed as Least Concern under criterion B.

Criterion C/D Text:
There is no quantitative information on trends in area, but there are also no indications of severe threats or negative trends.

Synthesis:
No data on trends in the habitat are available, but there are also no indoications of negative trends or severe threats. For the future climate change may cause changes in quality of the habitat, but presently the habitat is assessed as Least Concern, with data gaps (Data Deficient) for relatively many criteria.

Sub-habitats in Need of Examination:
The habitat may be split in a upload subhabitat, with edaphic desert conditions, and a lowland type with different ecology.

Contributors:
Habitat definition: J. Janssen
Territorial data: --
Working Group Sparsely Vegetated Habitats: G. Giusso Del Galdo, F. Essl, A. Mikolajczak, D. Paternoster, M. ValachoviÄ, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
H3.2a Boreal and arctic base-rich inland cliff

Habitat Description:
These are vegetated cliffs of calcareous and other base-rich rocks found in the boreal and arctic biogeographical regions, in Iceland, Svalbard, the North Sea Island groups of the Hebrides, Shetlands and Faroes, Fennoscandia, and further in northern Russia. As extensive limestone mountains are almost absent in Northern Europe, base-rich cliff habitats are confined to areas of igneous bedrock and, locally, dolomitic rocks or calcareous siltstone and beyond, though the habitat type has a circumpolar distribution in the northern Palaearctic, it is fragmented for geological reasons.  It does not include cliffs in the immediate sea spray zone (in B3.1a) or ultramafic cliffs (in H3.2e).
Boreal and arctic base-rich cliffs are important habitats for low-competitive bryophytes, lichens and specialist vascular plants and from a phytogeographic and evolutionary point of view the boreal mountains and the arctic share interesting relict Arctic-alpine plants with the Alps and the Carpathians. Nordic cliffs are poor in vascular plants but species of the genera Asplenium, Draba and Saxifraga may be gregarious in sheltered humid places, the latter especially in the alpine belt. Regional and altitudinal variation in species composition is high but among vascular plants, Asplenium viride, Woodsia glabella and Saxifraga nivalis may be regarded as characteristic for the base-rich boreal cliffs of northern and eastern Fennoscandia, although A. viride also occurs in ultrabasic cliffs. 
The bryophyte component of the vegetation may be species-rich particularly in sun-averted crevices and on damp rock and is best developed in oceanic areas such as in southwestern Norway and Iceland. Numerous acrocarpous moss genera and hepatics are represented, among others Anoectangium, Didymodon, Encalypta, Grimmia, Gymnostomum, Gyroweisia, Leiocolea, Orthotrichum, Schistidium, Tortella, and Tortula and among the most abundant and widespread bryophytes are Distichium capillaceum, Ditrichum flexicaule, Encalypta streptocarpa and Tortella tortuosa. Exposed rock faces may be covered by crustose lichens (e.g. Acarospora, Caloplaca, Collema, Farnoldia, Thelidium, Polyblastia, Protoblastenia and Verrucaria) and other epilithic organisms.
Indicators of good quality
Occurrence of rare species of bryophytes, lichens and phytogeographically significant vascular plants, 
Presence of sizeable open exposed rock with species-rich bryophyte carpets and lichen crusts 
Variety of aspects of rock walls, exposure to insolation, moisture and rock structures such as overhangs, cavities, rock shelters, ledges
Contact with natural habitats such as screes, boulder fields and pioneer grasslands 
Absence of quarrying and control structures 
Absence of garbage dumping and anthropogenic nutrient input from above the cliff
Absence of rock climbing facilities
Absence of alien species

Characteristic species
Vascular plants: Arabidopsis petraea, Arabis alpina, Arenaria norvegica subsp. norvegica, Asplenium ruta-muraria, A. scolopendrium, A. trichomanes subsp. quadrivalens, A. viride), Campanula rotundifolia, Cystopteris fragilis (subsp. fragilis, subsp. alpina, subsp. dickieana), Draba fladnizensis, D. incana, Poa glauca, Polypodium vulgare, Potentilla crantzii, Rhodiola rosea, Saxifraga adscendens subsp. adscendens, S. nivalis, S. paniculata, S. rivularis, Sedum spp., Viscaria alpina, Woodsia alpina.
Bryophytes: Anoectangium aestivum, Anomodon spp., Barbula convoluta, Brachythecium glareosum, Bryoeryhtrophyllum recurvirostrum, Campyliadelphus chrysophyllus, Cnestrum alpestre, Conocephalum conicum, Ctenidium molluscum (esp. in the west), Didymodon icmadophilus, Distichium capillaceum, Ditrichum flexicaule, Encalypta affinis, Encalypta streptocarpa, Grimmia anodon, Gymnostomum aeruginosum, Gyroweisia tenuis, Homalothecium sericeum, Hypnum recurvatum, Isopterygiopsis pulchella, Leiocolea bantriensis, Leiocolea collaris, Leiocolea heterocolpos, Lophozia gillmanii, Lophozia heterocolpos, Mnium stellare, Myurella julacea, Neckera crispa, Orthothecium strictum, Orthotrichum anomalum, Plagiopus oederiana, Pohlia cruda, Preissia quadrata, Rhytidium rugosum, Saelania glaucescens, Sauteria alpina, Schistidium spp., Timmia austriaca, Timmia comata, Tortella tortuosa 
Lichens: Aspicilia calcarea, Aspicilia contorta, Acarospora heppii, Acarospora glaucocarpa, Acarospora macrospora, Caloplaca citrina, Caloplaca ruderum, Caloplaca saxicola, Collema cristatum, Farnoldia jurana, Farnoldia micropis, Farnoldia similigena, Gyalecta jenensis, Lecanora albescens, Lecanora dispersa, Lecanora crenulata, Lecidella stigmatea, Lepraria crassissima, Phaeophyscia nigricans, Physcia caesia, Protoblastenia calva, Protoblastenia incrustans, Rhizocarpon umbilicatum, Rinodina bischoffii, Sarcogyne pruinosa, Squamarina lentigera, Thelidium decipiens, Thelidium incurvatum, Thelidium papulare, Thelidium pyrenophorum, Toninia alutacea, Toninia candida, Verrucaria calciseda, Verrucaria nigrescens, Verrucaria foveolata.

Classification:
EUNIS:
H3.2 Basic and ultra-basic inland cliffs
EuroVegChecklist:
Cymbalario-Asplenion Segal 1969
Violo biflorae-Cystopteridion alpinae Fernandez Casas 1970
Annex 1:
8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation is geographically much wider circumscribed than H3.2a but includes a subtype corresponding to H3.2a (Subtype 62.1C - Boreal communities with Asplenium viride, Woodsia glabella).
Emerald:
H3.2 Basic and ultra-basic inland cliffs
MAES-2:
Sparsely vegetated land
IUCN:
6. Rocky area

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Base-rich cliffs and rocks outcrops are widely represented in Europe but this type is characteristic of the arctic and boreal regions.

Map Description:
The map is incomplete for Norway (incl. Svalbard) and (possibly) Iceland. Data sources: Art17.

Trends in Quantity:
Finland has reported a moderate decline between -5 and -20 % in relation to vegetation overgrowth, mining and construction projects. No other country in the arctic ad boreal regions has reported data for this habitat type and it is not possible to extrapolate to these countries without at least data from Sweden or Norway, which have this habitat in a very different context, further north and higher in altitude, than southern Finland.

Trends in Quality:
Finland, the only source of data, has reported a moderate decrease in quality (50 % severity) over quite a large extent (40-60% extent) because of overgrowth of open habitats, related to the lack of fires, atmospheric nitrogen-input, species composition change with succession and also forest planting on open ground. It is not possible to extrapolate to these countries without at least data from Sweden or Norway, which have this habitat in a very different context, further north and higher in altitude, than southern Finland.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
About 50%. Following the description, this habitat type is found across the entire boreal zone in the northern hemisphere. We assume a reasonable proportion to be located in the EU28 because there are many mountainous areas.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
This habitat occurs in small stands but is widely distributed with an EOO >50.000 km².

Justification of Restricted Area:
Despite a relatively widespread distribution in southern Finland and northern Sweden, this habitat type occurs naturally only a small spots, when habitat conditions are appropriate. Consequently, it does have an intrinsically restricted area

Pressures and Threats:
Based on Finnish data only: the main threat is overgrowth of vegetation in relation to the lack of fires, the higher atmospheric nitrogen-inputs, the species composition changes (succession). Forest plantations on open ground, construction of dispersed habitations are of lesser concern.

Conservation and Management:
As a highly natural habitat this habitat type has no specific management requirement to remain but leaving it undisturbed and undestroyed. Conservation is then effective when free evolution is possible, like within protected areas. ‘Manage landscape features’ refers to the need to better protect this kind of habitats with a high degree of naturalness in land-use planning, especially when no specific regulation can be applied (no protected species or habitat, outside a protected area, outside a N2000 site).

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
At least for generalist rock plants, the natural recovery of this habitat is possible and fast when it is not isolated from habitats of the same type. The return of specialized nesting birds after strong disturbances is less easy for example. The same applies to specialist plants of rock micro-habitats.

Summary:
These vegetated cliffs on base-rich (not ultramafic or salt-sprayed) bedrocks, comprise a highly natural habitat type scattered across the boreal region, including Scotland and maybe Iceland. They are often rich in ferns, crustose lichens and, in sunless, damp situations, particularly in more oceanic areas, bryophytes. They have been much destroyed by mining, afforestation on open ground and dispersed urbanization and quality altered by the overgrowth of open habitats through lack of fires, atmospheric nitrogen-inputs and also succession to scrub and woodland.

References:
Dierssen, K. 1996. Vegetation Nordeuropas. Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart. 832 p.
Lindgaard, A. &Henriksen, S. 2011 (eds). The 2011 Norwegian Red list for ecosystems and habiat types. Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre, Trondheim. 124 p.

Criterion A Text:
The data refer only to Finland. As no data from other countries is available, the average European trend cannot be calculated in a reliable way.

Criterion C/D Text:
The data refer only to Finland. As no data from other countries is available, the average European trend cannot be calculated in a reliable way.

Synthesis:
Despite the very good quality of Finnish data it is not possible to extrapolate them to other countries without data from at least one other country from the boreal region to get a more complete picture. Therefore this habitat type is labelled as Data Deficient (DD).

Contributors:
Habitat description: Tytti Kontula & Erwin Bergmeier
Territorial data: Tytti Kontula
Working Group Sparsely Vegetated Habitats: F. Essl, G. Giusso Del Galdo, A. Mikolajczak, D. Paternoster, M. ValachoviÄ, M. Valderrabano


Habitat Type Name:
A3.3y Pontic sheltered, shaded upper infralittoral rock, with sciaphilic algae

Habitat Description:
Present in the upper infralittoral zone in areas sheltered from wave action and currents, as well as where light levels may be low. Algal cover is limited and patchy and includes species tolerant of low light levels but with weak attachment and which therefore cannot survive in wave exposed conditons. These sciaphilic algae generally form diffuse communities with low coverage.
Indicators of quality:
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Peyssonnelia squamaria, Phyllophora crispa and, Delesseria ruscifolia.

Classification:
EUNIS (2004):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'pnotic infralittoral rock' (A3.3)
 
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non
EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water
Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is sensitive and vulnerable to chemical pollution which at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, survey and monitoring programmes, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of shaded upper infralittoral rock. It is not present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: chemical pollution. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programmes, raised public awareness, enhanced legal protection, measures to reduce global warming.

References:
Afanasiev D. F., Korpakova I. G. 2008. Macrophytobenthos Russian Azov-Black Sea., Rostov-on-Don: FGUP AzNIIRH
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Dimitrova-Konaklieva, S. 2000. Flora of the Marine Algae of Bulgaria (Rhodophyta, Phaeophyta, Chlorophyta). Pensoft, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1970. The composition and distribution of benthic vegetation in the south-eastern part of the Black Sea. Ecological and morphological studies of benthic organisms. Kiev: Naukova Dumka, p. 185- 202.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1975. Phytobenthos of Black Sea, Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 275 p.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kostenko, N. S. 2003. Some trends of the succsecion of bottom vegatation in the Karadag area. Proc. Sciences. Rec. NaUKMA, Ser. "BÑ–ologÑ–ya and ekologÑ–ya": 429-432.
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter 7:26-28.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Morozova-Vodyanitskaya N. V. 1959. Bottom vegetation of the Black Sea. Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station 11: 3 – 28.
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Teyubova V. F. 2005. Features interannual dynamics species composition and structure macrophytobenthos in the Bay of Novorossiysk (Black sea). Ekologiya Morya 69: 53 – 57.
Teyubova V.F. 2012. The diversity and ecological features macrophytobenthos the Russian sector of the Black Sea., Dissertation on competition degree of candidate of biological sciences, 280 pp.
Tkachenko, F. P., Kovtun O. O. 2014. Contemporary condition of seaweeds flora of Zmeiny  island  Ñostal zone  (Black  Sea). Chornomors’k. bot. z. 10(1): 37-47.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V. E., Boltachev A. R., Zuev G. V., Kovalev A. V., Milchakova N. A., Sergeeva N. G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37- 44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.

Contributors:
S. Beal, E. Chernysheva, G. Komakhidze, D. Micu, V. Mihneva, N. Milchakova, B. Yokes


Habitat Type Name:
A5.22 Estuarine Pontic infralittoral sand

Habitat Description:
Estuarine infralittoral sands in front of the large rivers in the north-west Black Sea form an important habitat type. The largest river estuaries in the Black Sea are the Dniepro-Bugsky estuary in Ukraine and the estuarine waters of the Danube pro-Delta in Romania. Here numerous individual river mouths form a transition between the Danube Delta and the Black Sea. Underwater hydraulic dunes in the ‘Danube mouths’ are an important feature in this area. These are areas with reduced salinity, infauna abundance/diversity, feeding grounds for juvenile fish, birds, a naturally mobile habitat.  Smaller locations are the coastal zone of Kinburnskaya spit (Tendrovsky Bay), Grigorievsky, Tiligulsky, Berezansky, Kiziltakskiy estuaries.
Indicators of quality:
Biomass of infauna is one possible parameter that could be used to indicate quality of this habitat. At the mouth of Dniepro-Bugsky estuary average density of macrozoobenthos on sands is 80 ind/m-2, biomass – 11,28 g/ m-2, in the semi open estuaries with significant influence of the fresh waters the level of biomass of macrozoobenthos on the sands are higher (255 – 439,9 g/ m-2) due to the distribution of bivalve mollusks.
Characteristic species:
Mostly euryhaline species: - Gammarus marinus, Idothea tricuspidata, Dikerogammarus haemobaphes, Palaemon adspersus, Cerastoderma glaucum, Bittium reticulatum are common. The biocenosis of sands with Cerastoderma and Monodacna is typical for Grigorievsky, Tiligulsky and Berezansky estuaries.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of A5.2 - Shallow Sublittoral/infralittoral sand
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
1130 Estuaries
 
MAES:
Marine- Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine- Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow coarse or mixed sediments
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy

Trends in Quantity:
There is in sufficient data to accurately assess changes in quantity of the habitat

Trends in Quality:
There is in sufficient data to accurately assess changes in quality of the habitat

Pressures and Threats:
Estuarine infralittoral sands in front of the large rivers in the north-west Black Sea form an important habitat type. The largest river estuaries in the Black Sea are the Dniepro-Bugsky estuary in Ukraine and the estuarine waters of the Danube pro-Delta in Romania. Here numerous individual river mouths form a transition between the Danube Delta and the Black Sea. Underwater hydraulic dunes in the ‘Danube mouths’ are an important feature in this area. These are areas with reduced salinity, infauna abundance/diversity, feeding grounds for juvenile fish, birds, a naturally mobile habitat.  Smaller locations are the coastal zone of Kinburnskaya spit (Tendrovsky Bay), Grigorievsky, Tiligulsky, Berezansky, Kiziltakskiy estuaries.
Indicators of quality:
Biomass of infauna is one possible parameter that could be used to indicate quality of this habitat. At the mouth of Dniepro-Bugsky estuary average density of macrozoobenthos on sands is 80 ind/m-2, biomass – 11,28 g/ m-2, in the semi open estuaries with significant influence of the fresh waters the level of biomass of macrozoobenthos on the sands are higher (255 – 439,9 g/ m-2) due to the distribution of bivalve mollusks.
Characteristic species:
Mostly euryhaline species: - Gammarus marinus, Idothea tricuspidata, Dikerogammarus haemobaphes, Palaemon adspersus, Cerastoderma glaucum, Bittium reticulatum are common. The biocenosis of sands with Cerastoderma and Monodacna is typical for Grigorievsky, Tiligulsky and Berezansky estuaries.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including control and regulation of discharges to the marine environment, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, coastal development controls, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability of the habitat.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the north-west Black Sea at the mouths of large rivers such as the Dniepro-Bugsky and the Danube. It is not present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: coastal protection, sand extraction and chemical pollution. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies and raised public awareness.

References:
Alekseev, R. P., Synegub I. A. 1992. Macrozoobenthos and benthic biocoenoses of the Black Sea shelf in the Caucasus, the Crimea and Bulgaria Ecology of the coastal zone of the Black Sea Sat. scientific. papers of Russian Scientific Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography: 218- 234.
Anistratenko, V. V., Vasilevskaya, O. V., Barschavskaya, N. N. 2011. Some invertebrates macrobenthos (Gastropoda, Arthropoda) of the estuaries of Northern Black Sea: review of the fauna and ecological and geographical characteristics. Vestnik zoologii, Vol. 45(5): 393-403 (in Rus).
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp. Borisenko Ð. Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Grinbart, S. B. 1967. Zoobenthos of estuaries of northwest Black Sea and the adjacent areas of the sea. Abstract dissertation for the degree of candidate of Biological Sciences. Odessa, 51 p. (in Rus.)
Kiseleva, M. I. 1974. Modiolus phaseolinus off the coasts of the Caucasus biological productivity of the Southern Seas Publishing house.  Kiev: Naukova dumka: 70-80.
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Kiseleva, M. I. 2004. Polychaete worms (Polychaeta) Black and Azov Seas. - Apatity: Kolskiy Scientific Center: 409.
Kopiy, V. G. 2011. Macrozoobenthos coastal bays of Sevastopol (Crimea Black Sea coast). More. Ecol. Zhurnal 2: 43-48.
Kopiy, V. G. Bondarenko, L. V. 2012. The community of the macrozoobenthos of mediolittoral zone of Western Crimea. Biodiversity and sustainable development: Abstracts of the II Intern. scientific and practic Conf., Simferopol: 189-192.
Losovskaya, G. V. 1960. Distribution and quantitative development of benthic fauna of the Black Sea near Karadag. Proceedings of Biol. Station 16: 16-29.
Losovskaya, G. V. 1977. Ecology of polychaetes of the Black Sea. Kiev: Naukova dumka: 92.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973-751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Mihailova, T. V. 1992. Macrobenthos of Donuzlav lake. Ecology sea 42: 16-20.
Milovidova, N. Yu. 1979. Quantity characteristic of the macrozoobenthos of the Black Sea near Karadag. Hydrobiol. zhurnal 15(16): 21-24.
Mironov O. G. 2003. Sanitary and biological aspects of the ecology of the Sevastopol Bays in the 20th century / Mironov O.G., Kiryukhina L.N., Alemov S.V. Sevastopol: EKOSI-Hydrophysika: 185.
Mokievskiy, O. B. 1949. Flora of the soil littoral substrate of the west coast of Crimea. Proceedings of the Institute of Oceanology: 124-159.
Sinegub, I. A. 2009. Community Terebellides stroemi sars (Polychaeta) on the Black Sea shelf of Caucasus and Crimea. Ecological safety of coastal and shelf zones and complex use of shelf resources. - Sevastopol 17: 371-377.

Contributors:
S. Beal, G. Komakhidze, D. Korolesova, D. Micu, V. Mihneva, N. Milchakova, K. Vera, B. Yokes


Habitat Type Name:
A5.xZ Pontic circalittoral terrigenous muds

Habitat Description:
Terrigenous sediments are those derived from the weathering and erosion of rocks on land; thus they are derived from terrestrial rather than marine environments. The sediments generally consist of sand, mud and silt carried to the sea by watercourses, and their composition is usually related to their source material. Depending on the mechanism and rapidity of deposition of the sediments, the habitat comprises more or less firm muddy facies which are favoured by certain species.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Abra alba , Acanthocardium paucicostatum and Plagiocardium papillosum

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405): 
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Circalittoral mud' (A5.3)
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
1130 Estuaries
 
MAES:
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow muds
 
IUCN:
9.6 Subtidal muddy

Map Description:
There is insufficient data to produce a map of the distribution of this habitat. However the sub-basins of which this habitat is likely to occur in have been indicated.

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is likely to be sensitive to:
Trawling  is a current and future threat to the habitat causing deterioration and habitat destruction by damaging benthic communities both directly and indirectly through effects such as smothering and altering the sediment characteristics. Demersal trawling is prohibited in some states. However, illegal trawling is still an issue in these areas.
Chemical pollution is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.
Mobile demersal dredging and trawling is a threat of current and future importance. This causes habitat destruction leading to in a reduction in extent and quality.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation; improvement of water quality management outside EU member states; contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident; and raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of terrigenous muds in the circalittoral zone. The sediments generally consist of sand, mud and silt carried to the sea by watercourses, and their composition is usually related to their source material The depth at which it occurs (20-100m) means little to no light and sheltered conditions. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat, which although the situation has improved due to pollution controls, eutrophication is still a pressure and will likely be in the future as well.
Additional pressures include: trawling, chemical pollution and other anthropogenic disturbances. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programs and raised public awareness.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Arnoldi, L. V. 1949. Materials on the quantitative study of the Black Sea zoobenthos. II Karkinitsky Bay (in Russian). Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station: 8.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Borisenko Ð. Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8, MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A3.74 Caves, overhangs and surge gullies in Pontic infralittoral rock

Habitat Description:
Caves and overhangs in the infralittoral zone are completely submerged at all states of the tide. Light conditions are generally poor which influences the species that can occur in these situations. As a result communities of sciaphillic algae, sponges and mussels are commonly present. Information on the biodiversity of sublittoral caves in the Black Sea is extremely fragmentary but some studies have been undertaken. e.g. describing the dominating sponge communities  in the  shallow semi-submerged karst caves on the Tarhankut peninsula, Crimea.
 
The habitat includes a range of situations including: vertical walls under overhangs, semi-dark tunnels and walls and floors of semi dark tunnels. Each of these may contain its own unique diagnostic communities which are also influenced by the rock type and the size of the cave - most semi-submerged caves from the Tarkhankut peninsula are small (5-10m) but the longest Kapchik-2 is 250m in length. Studies of caves in the Tarkhankut peninsula indicate a faunal zonation with depth into the cave.
The habitat is dominated by filter feeders in the surge gullies, robust species able to cope with the heavy wave action.
 
 
Indicators of quality:
 
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Phyllophora nervosa, Lomentaria clavellosa, Hildenbrandia rubra, Zanardinia typus, Mytilus galloprovincialis, erect sponges Halichondria panicea , Haliclona simulans, Dysidea fragilis, Dysidea pallescens or thin crust sponges like Antho involvens, Haliclona flavescens , Haliclona cinerea, Suberites prototypus, Clathria cleistocheila depending on current intensity, anemones Actinia equina, red mysid shrimp Hemimysis pontica, Hemimysis serrata., and turf hydrozoans.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Pontic infralittoral rock' (A3.7)
 
Annex 1:
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Trends in Quality:
There is insufficient data to accurately assess changes in quantity of the habitat.
The first data on invertebrates of marine caves of the Black Sea are from the beginning of the 20th century when some easily accessible marine karst caves were investigated and both vagile and sessile species described. There have been more studies since the 1970s but it remains difficult to give an overview of the quality and any trends in this habitat over the last 50 years.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
This habitat occurs in the EU28+ e.g. Crimea, Turkey, therefore the percentage hosted by EU28 is less than 100%. The proportion within EU28 cannot be estimated as the full extent of this habitat is unknown.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat is known to occur in the Black Sea but there is insufficient data to accurately calculate EOO and AOO. There is insufficient data to accurately assess whether the habitat has undergone a significant decline (>25% of extent) in the last 5

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is vulnerable and sensitive to:
- Siltation. This is a current and future threat to the habitat. The resettling of suspended sediment can smother filter feeding organisms as well as inhibiting the growth of some species. Siltation is typically caused by dredging, trawling and other activities which disturb bottom sediments.
- Chemical pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.
- Marine litter that tends to accumulate in caves. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can lead to mortality. Large floating objects that accumulate in caves will damage the sessile fauna on the walls. Micro particles of plastic can be ingested by faunal species resulting in reduction in quality.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, survey and monitoring programs, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability, enhanced legal protection for occurrences of the habitat and key species (e.g. establish a unified list of Black Sea species and habitats requiring conservation measures, etc.), and the designation of MPAs with actual measures that will protect this habitat

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of infralittoral rock. It is not present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: siltation, chemical pollution and plastic pollution. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programmes and raised public awareness.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Ereskovsky A.V., Kovtun O.A., Pronin K.K., 2016. Marine cave biota of the Tarkhankut Peninsula (Black Sea, Crimea), with emphasis on sponge taxonomic composition, spatial distribution and ecological particularities. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 96(2): 391–406. doi:10.1017/S0025315415001071
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A3.23 Corallinales on moderately exposed Pontic upper infralittoral rock

Habitat Description:
Present in the upper infralittoral zone on hard rocks. Corallinales are the dominate species and are found in high densities on the rock surface. In moderately exposed and shaded upper infralittoral rock Corallina elongate is the dominant species. 
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Corallina elongata

Classification:
EUNIS (2004):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Pontic infralittoral rock' (A3.2)
 
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Trends in Quantity:
There is in sufficient data to accurately assess changes in quantity of the habitat.

Trends in Quality:
There is in sufficient data to accurately assess changes in quality of the habitat.

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in faunal communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is also likely to be sensitive to:
Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defences. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Chemical pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include enhanced legal protection for occurrences of the habitat and key species (e.g. additions to the EU Habitats Directive, establish a unified list of Black Sea species and habitats requiring conservation measures, etc.), coastal development controls, survey and monitoring programmes and increased public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability.
Measures to maintain physical and biological integrity would benefit this habitat. These include pollution control and regulation (and creation of contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident) and the improvement of water quality management outside EU member states.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1:
1160: MBLS U1, MMED XX
1170: MBLS U1, MMED XX

Summary:
The habitat is present throughout the Black Sea on moderately exposed upper infralittoral rock. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: Coastal development and chemical pollution. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain biological and physical integrity, improved water quality, coastal development controls, survey and monitoring, pollution event response strategies, raised public awareness and enhanced protection of species.

References:
Afanasiev D. F., Korpakova I. G. 2008. Macrophytobenthos Russian Azov-Black Sea., Rostov-on-Don: FGUP AzNIIRH.
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Borisenko Ð. Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve.
Dimitrova-Konaklieva, S. 2000. Flora of the Marine Algae of Bulgaria (Rhodophyta, Phaeophyta, Chlorophyta). Pensoft, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1970. The composition and distribution of benthic vegetation in the south-eastern part of the Black Sea. Ecological and morphological studies of benthic organisms. Kiev: Naukova Dumka, p. 185- 202.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1975. Phytobenthos of Black Sea, Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 275 p. Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kostenko, N. S. 2003. Some trends of the succsecion of bottom vegatation in the Karadag area. Proc. Sciences. Rec. NaUKMA, Ser. "BÑ–ologÑ–ya and ekologÑ–ya": 429-432.
Micu, D., Micu, S. 2006. Recent records and proposed IUCN status of Donacilla cornea (Poli, 1795) (Bivalvia: Veneroida: Mesodesmatidae) in the Romanian Black Sea. Cercet Mar 36: 117-132.
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter 7:26-28.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Morozova-Vodyanitskaya N. V. 1959. Bottom vegetation of the Black Sea. Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station 11: 3 – 28.
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Teyubova V. F. 2005. Features interannual dynamics species composition and structure macrophytobenthos in the Bay of Novorossiysk (Black sea). Ekologiya Morya 69: 53 – 57.
Teyubova V.F. 2012. The diversity and ecological features macrophytobenthos the Russian sector of the
Black Sea., Dissertation on competition degree of candidate of biological sciences, 280 pp.
Tkachenko, F. P., Kovtun O. O. 2014. Contemporary condition of seaweeds flora of Zmeiny  island  Ñostal zone  (Black  Sea). Chornomors’k. bot. z. 10(1): 37-47.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A3.13 Exposed Pontic upper infralittoral rock with turf of Corallinales

Habitat Description:
Rocky habitats in the infralittoral zone exposed to wave action. Rocks, boulders and blocks are typically covered with a dense turf of articulated corallines and/or crustose corallines. These habitats occur on exposed rocky coasts, from low water up to depths of 3m.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include the presence of characteristic species and species sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Articulated corallines (Corallina elongata, Corallina officinalis) and crustose corallines (Lithothamnion spp, Lithophyllum spp.).

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Pontic infralittoral rock' (A3.1)
 
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is impacted by coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, navigation channel dredging, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defenses. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Chemical pollution is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in high levels of species mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in community extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect growth rate and size of some fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include pollution control and regulation (and the development of contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident) and the improvement of water quality management outside EU member states. In addition, survey and monitoring programmes and coastal development controls could be developed.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on exposed upper infralittoral rock. Typically these are high energy environments. The main historic pressures impacting this habitat include eutrophication, coastal development and chemical pollution. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality management outside of the EU, coastal development controls, contingency plans in the event of pollution incidents and survey and monitoring programs.

References:
Afanasiev D. F., Korpakova I. G. 2008. Macrophytobenthos Russian Azov-Black Sea., Rostov-on-Don: FGUP AzNIIRH.
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Dimitrova-Konaklieva, S. 2000. Flora of the Marine Algae of Bulgaria (Rhodophyta, Phaeophyta, Chlorophyta). Pensoft, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1970. The composition and distribution of benthic vegetation in the south-eastern part of the Black Sea. Ecological and morphological studies of benthic organisms. Kiev: Naukova Dumka, p. 185- 202.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1975. Phytobenthos of Black Sea, Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 275 p. Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kostenko, N. S. 2003. Some trends of the succesion of bottom vegetation in the Karadag area. Proc. Sciences. Rec. NaUKMA, Ser. "BÑ–ologÑ–ya and ekologÑ–ya": 429-432.
Lisovskaya O.A., Stepanyan O.V. 2009. A variety of coastal macroalgae Taman Peninsula (Russia) in summer., Algology 19(4): 341-348.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Morozova-Vodyanitskaya N. V. 1959. Bottom vegetation of the Black Sea. Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station 11: 3 – 28.
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Prodanov, B., Kotsev, I., Keremedichiev, S., Todorova, V., Dimitrov, L. 2013. Initial assessment of the technogenic pressure in the mediolittoral zone of the bulgarian black sea coast. Second European SCGIS Conference “Conservation of Natural and Cultural Heritage for Sustainable Development: GIS-Based Approach”, 2013: 4-13.
Teyubova V. F. 2005. Features interannual dynamics species composition and structure macrophytobenthos in the Bay of Novorossiysk (Black sea). Ekologiya Morya 69: 53 – 57.
Teyubova V.F. 2012. The diversity and ecological features macrophytobenthos the Russian sector of the Black Sea., Dissertation on competition degree of candidate of biological sciences, 280 pp.
Tkachenko, F. P., Kovtun O. O. 2014. Contemporary condition of seaweeds flora of Zmeiny island Ñoastal zone (Black  Sea). Chornomors’k. bot. z. 10(1): 37-47.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V. E., Boltachev A. R., Zuev G. V., Kovalev A. V., Milchakova N. A., Sergeeva N. G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.a Fauna-dominated Pontic infralittoral cobbles and gravels

Habitat Description:
This habitat is defined by faunal communities present in infralittoral coarse sediments including pebbles, cobbles, fine gravels, coarse sands and shell hash. The habitat comprises a diverse range of communities which include: sparse fauna on pebbles and gravels, environments beneath cobbles and gravels and shell hash with well defined characteristic species (Branchiostoma lanceolatum - Protodorvillea kefersteini - Ophelia limacina).  This biotope is found in coastal surge zones, as well as on wave lashed bottoms in open coast environments and deposits affected by unidirectional currents. Typical characterising species in coarse sand and shell gravel environments include the lancelet Branchiostoma lanceolatum and polychaetes Protodorvillea kefersteini and Ophelia limacina.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and species sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Spirobranchus triqueter, Branchiostoma lanceolatum, Protodorvillea kefersteini, Ophelia limacina, Flexopecten glaber ponticus and Polititapes aureus.

Classification:
EUNIS: (v1405)
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Pontic shallow/ infralittoral coarse sediment' (A5.5)
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow coarse or mixed sediments
 
IUCN:
9.3 Subtidal loose rock/ pebble/ gravel

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
Demersal trawling and dredging by commercial fisheries is a current and future threat to the habitat. Trawling and dredging can damage the habitat and associated benthic communities both directly and indirectly. Trawl and dredge gear can directly impact the habitat by damaging and/or removing species. Trawling can also act directly to reduce the complexity of the habitat, smoothing out microhabitats, and thereby reducing biodiversity. Indirect impacts of trawling include smothering and alteration of sediment characteristics. Demersal trawling and dredging is prohibited in some states, however, illegal demersal fishing is still an issue in these areas.
Siltation is a current and future threat to the habitat. The resettling of suspended sediment can smother filter feeding organisms as well as inhibit the growth of some species. Siltation is typically caused by navigation channel dredging, demersal trawl and dredge fishing and other activities which disturb bottom sediments.
Chemical pollution is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in high levels of species mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in habitat/community extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect growth rate and size of some fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include survey and monitoring programmes, measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea and the Sea of Marmara on areas of infralittoral cobbles and gravels. The main pressures impacting this habitat include eutrophication,  chemical pollution, physical disturbance from dredging and trawling and siltation. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality and pollution event response strategies.

References:
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973-751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.


Habitat Type Name:
A3.3x Foliose algae, other than Fucales on Pontic sheltered upper infralittoral rock, well illuminated

Habitat Description:
Present in shallow sheltered waters, such as semi-enclosed bays on rocky substrates. Reported at depths from 1 up to 14m although known to occur in deeper waters in the pre-eutrophication period in the early 1980s. The presence of light is a key environmental factor, as the sheltered nature of the rocky habitat. In more high energy environments the algal communities are scoured by wave action, preventing the characteristic species from colonising. The habitat is analogous to the Cystoseria canopies with the important distinction that Fucales are not present. Communities are typically comprised of Ulvaceae, Laurencia coronopus, Corralines, Ceramium spp. and Scytosiphon lomentaria.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Ulva intestinalis, Ceramium virgatum, Callithamnion corymbosum, Laurencia coronopus, Corallina elongata and Ceramium spp., Ulvaceae and Scytosiphon lomentaria.

Classification:
EUNIS (2004):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Pontic infralittoral rock' (A3.3)
 
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
 
MAES:
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reefs
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Reduced light penetration due to eutrophication caused declines in extent and quality of the habitat. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is likely to be sensitive to:
- Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defences. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
-Siltation. This is a current and future threat to the habitat. The resettling of suspended sediment can smother filter feeding organisms as well as inhibiting the growth of some species. Siltation is typically caused by dredging, trawling and other activities which disturb bottom sediments.
- Chemical pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, coastal development controls, survey and monitoring programmes, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability, enhanced legal protection for occurrences of the habitat and key species (e.g. additions to the EU Habitats Directive, establish a unified list of Black Sea species and habitats requiring conservation measures, etc.), designation of MPAs.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea in shallow, sheltered waters on rocky substrates. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: coastal development, siltation and chemical pollution. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: maintaining the biological and physical integrity of the habitat, improvements in water quality, coastal development controls, survey and monitoring programmes, raised public awareness and increased legal protection.

References:
Afanasiev D. F., Korpakova I. G. 2008. Macrophytobenthos Russian Azov-Black Sea., Rostov-on-Don: FGUP AzNIIRH.
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve.
Dimitrova-Konaklieva, S. 2000. Flora of the Marine Algae of Bulgaria (Rhodophyta, Phaeophyta, Chlorophyta). Pensoft, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1970. The composition and distribution of benthic vegetation in the south-eastern part of the Black Sea. Ecological and morphological studies of benthic organisms. Kiev: Naukova Dumka, p. 185- 202.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1975. Phytobenthos of Black Sea, Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 275 p.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kostenko, N. S. 2003. Some trends of the succsecion of bottom vegatation in the Karadag area. Proc. Sciences. Rec. NaUKMA, Ser. "BÑ–ologÑ–ya and ekologÑ–ya": 429-432.
Lisovskaya O.A., Stepanyan O.V. 2009. A variety of coastal macroalgae Taman Peninsula (Russia) in summer., Algology 19(4): 341-348.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Morozova-Vodyanitskaya N. V. 1959. Bottom vegetation of the Black Sea. Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station 11: 3 – 28
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Teyubova V. F. 2005. Features interannual dynamics species composition and structure macrophytobenthos in the Bay of Novorossiysk (Black sea). Ekologiya Morya 69: 53 – 57.
Teyubova V.F. 2012. The diversity and ecological features macrophytobenthos the Russian sector of the Black Sea., Dissertation on competition degree of candidate of biological sciences, 280 pp.
Tkachenko, F. P., Kovtun O. O. 2014. Contemporary condition of seaweeds flora of Zmeiny  island  Ñostal zone  (Black  Sea). Chornomors’k. bot. z. 10(1): 37-47.
Todorova, V., Panayotova, M. 2011. Black mussels and/or barnacle communities on mediolittoral rocks. Red book of Republic of Bulgaria, Vol. III, Natural habitats, Eds. BAS & MOEW. [ISBN 978-9549746-23-5].
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V. E., Boltachev A. R., Zuev G. V., Kovalev A. V., Milchakova N. A., Sergeeva N. G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A1.16 Invertebrate-dominated exposed Pontic mediolittoral rock

Habitat Description:
This habitat, which occurs in the exposed mediolittoral rock zone  in the microtidal Black Sea (tide range approx. 0.3 m), is limited to a narrow strip which receives regular but not continuous submersion. In such situations the abiotic conditions (i.e. waves, variations in atmospheric pressure and variations in wind) define the species composition. These conditions mean that there are few associated species and those which are present are typically encrusting, tolerant to desiccation, and capable of very firm attachment. They include barnacles, lichens and small mussels. Crabs may be found in sheltered crevices.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure, as well as more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Four distinct biotopes comprising different assemblages of invertebrates occur in the mediolittoral rock zone. 
1. Chthamalus stellatus, Melaraphe neritoides, Ligia italica, Mytilaster lineatus occurs in exposed conditions on tall rocky coasts made up of volcanic or metamorphic rock, mostly on the Southern Bulgarian and Caucasus coasts.
2. Diadumene lineata and barnacles (Chthamalus stellatus, Amphibalanus improvisus ) is  the one most commonly occurring all around the Black Sea, on all types of rocky coasts.
3.Patella spp. occurs only on the Turkish coast of the Black Sea due to the somewhat higher salinity that can be found here.
4. Encrusting corallines (Lithothamnion, Lithophyllum) and Lepidochitona caprearum are characteristic of rocky coasts made of sedimentary rock (limestone, calcarenite), especially in shaded conditions.

Classification:
EUNIS:(v1405)
Level 4. A sub habitat of 'Pontic littoral rock' (A1.1
 
Annex 1:
1130 Estuaries
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Not mapped
 
IUCN:
12.1 Rocky shorelines

Trends in Quality:
There is insufficient data to describe or determine any changes in quality of the habitat.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat is known to occur in the Black Sea but there is insufficient data to accurately calculate EOO and AOO. There is insufficient data to accurately assess whether the habitat has undergone any decline in the last 50 years.

Justification of Restricted Area:
There is insufficient knowledge on this habitat to state whether it has a small natural range by reason of an intrinsically restricted area.

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P, and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on this habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in faunal communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced due to the prevalence of EC directives throughout the River Danube Basin, it is still a threat. This is especially true in non-EU countries surrounding the Black Sea as they are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is likely to be sensitive to:
- Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments, and sea defenses. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
- Chemical pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.

Conservation and Management:
In order to maintain physical and biological integrity, conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management, and controls on coastal development.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1-type:
1160: MBLS U1
1170: MBLS U1

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas with rocky shores. There are few species associated with this habitat, and those which are present are typically encrusting, tolerant to dessication, and capable of firm attachment. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure affecting this habitat. Additional pressures include coastal development and chemical pollution. Conservation and management measures relevant for this habitat include: controls on coastal development to maintain physical and biological integrity, and improvement of water quality.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Arnoldi, L. V. 1949. Materials on the quantitative study of the Black Sea zoobenthos. II Karkinitsky Bay (in Russian). Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station: 8.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Borisenko Ð. Ðœ1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve.
Culha, M. & Bat, L. 2010. Visible decline of limpet Patella caerulea Linnaeus, 1758, a biomonitor species, at the sinop peninsula and vicinity (the southern Black sea, Turkey). Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology 11(3): 1024-1029.
Çulha, M., Bat, L., Türk Çulha, S. & Çelik, M.Y. 2010. Benthic mollusk composition of some facies in the upper-infralittoral zone of the southern Black Sea, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology 34: 523-532.
Gönlügür Demirci, G. 2005. Sinop YarÄ±madasÄ±nÄ±n (Orta Karadeniz) Mollusca FaunasÄ±. Science and Engineering Journal of FÄ±rat University17(3): 565-572.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kopiy, V. G. Bondarenko, L. V. 2012. The community of the macrozoobenthos of mediolittoral zone of Western Crimea. Biodiversity and sustainable development: Abstracts of the II Intern. scientific and practic Conf., Simferopol: 189-192.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter 7:26-28.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Prodanov, B., Kotsev, I., Keremedichiev, S., Todorova, V., Dimitrov, L. 2013. Initial assessment of the technogenic pressure in the mediolittoral zone of the bulgarian black sea coast. Second European SCGIS Conference “Conservation of Natural and Cultural Heritage for Sustainable Development: GIS-Based Approach”, 2013: 4-13.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Terentyev, A. S. 2011. Macrozoobenthos of coastal part of the Kerch Bay (summer, 2009). Ecology of cities and recreational areas.  All Ukrainian Scientific Conference Proceedings of Articles: 261-263.
Todorova, V., Panayotova, M. 2011. Black mussels and/or barnacle communities on mediolittoral rocks. Red book of Republic of Bulgaria, Vol. III, Natural habitats, Eds. BAS & MOEW. [ISBN 978-9549746-23-5].
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.

Criterion A Text:
There is insufficient data on changes in quantity of this habitat. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under criterion A.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat occurs in the Black Sea but there is insufficient data to calculate EOO and AOO. It has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient under criterion B.

Synthesis:
Detailed information on the abundance and extent of this habitat is lacking. Information on the quantity and quality of this habitat, including historical or recent trends is unknown. For the purposes of Red List assessment this habitat is considered to be Data Deficient.

Assessors:
Beal, S., Komakhidze, G., Micu, D., Mihneva, V., Milchakova, N., and Yokes, B.

Contributors:
Beal, S., Komakhidze, G., Micu, D., Mihneva, V., Milchakova, N., and Yokes, B.


Habitat Type Name:
A1.1xx Invertebrate-dominated moderately exposed Pontic mediolittoral rock

Habitat Description:
These communities are located in the moderately exposed mediolittoral rock zone. They result from a combination of moderate waves, variations in atmospheric pressure, and variations in wind.
This habitat is comprised of all invertebrate communities found in the moderately exposed mediolittoral rock zone. 
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Mytilids (Mytilus galloprovincialis, Mytilaster lineatus), barnacles (Chthamalus stellatus, Amphibalanus improvisus), Actinia equina, bryozoans, crust sponges and articulated corallines (Corallina elongata, C. officinalis).

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Pontic littoral rock' (A1.1).
 
Annex 1: 
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES: 
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Not mapped
 
IUCN:
12.1 Rocky shoreline

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
It is unknown how much of this habitat is hosted by the EU28 in the Black Sea

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in faunal communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is also likely to be sensitive to:
- Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defenses. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
- Chemical pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, development of controls and contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, survey and monitoring programmes, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of moderately exposed mediolittoral rock. It is not present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the most significant historical pressure on the habitat. It is also sensitive to coastal development and chemical pollution. The habitat can benefit from future conservation measures including: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation; Improvement of water quality management outside EU member states; development controls and contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident; survey and monitoring programmes and raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971.. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp.
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Çulha, M. & Bat, L. 2010. Visible decline of limpet Patella caerulea Linnaeus, 1758, a biomonitor species, at the Sinop Peninsula and vicinity (the southern Black sea, Turkey).  Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology 11(3): 1024-1029.
Dimitrova-Konaklieva, S. 2000. Flora of the Marine Algae of Bulgaria (Rhodophyta, Phaeophyta, Chlorophyta). Pensoft, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1970. The composition and distribution of benthic vegetation in the south-eastern part of the Black Sea. Ecological and morphological studies of benthic organisms. Kiev: Naukova Dumka, p. 185- 202.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1975. Phytobenthos of Black Sea, Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 275 p.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kopiy, V. G. Bondarenko, L. V. 2012. The community of the macrozoobenthos of mediolittoral zone of Western Crimea. Biodiversity and sustainable development: Abstracts of the II Intern. scientific and practic Conf., Simferopol: 189-192.
Kostenko, N. S. 2003. Some trends of the succsecion of bottom vegatation in the Karadag area. Proc. Sciences. Rec. NaUKMA, Ser. "BÑ–ologÑ–ya and ekologÑ–ya": 429-432.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.)  Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Prodanov, B., Kotsev, I., Keremedichiev, S., Todorova, V., Dimitrov, L. 2013. Initial assessment of the technogenic pressure in the mediolittoral zone of the Bulgarian black sea coast. Second European SCGIS Conference “Conservation of Natural and Cultural Heritage for Sustainable Development: GIS-Based Approach”, 2013: 4-13.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Terentyev, A. S. 2011. Macrozoobenthos of coastal part of the Kerch Bay (summer, 2009). Ecology of cities and recreational areas. / All_Ukrainian Scientific Conference Proceedings of articles: 261-263.
Todorova, V., Panayotova, M. 2011. Black mussels and/or barnacle communities on mediolittoral rocks. Red book of Republic of Bulgaria, Vol. III, Natural habitats, Eds. BAS & MOEW. [ISBN 978-9549746-23-5].
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V. E., Boltachev A. R., Zuev G. V., Kovalev A. V., Milchakova N. A., Sergeeva N. G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A3.3w Invertebrate-dominated Pontic lower infralittoral rock

Habitat Description:
Present in the lower infralittoral zone of rocky reefs. Dominated by invertebrates, although there is still some light that would allow algae to develop. Several subtypes have been described:
-A3.3wa Lower infralittoral rock dominated by Mytilus galloprovincialis
-A3.3wb Lower infralittoral rock covered by crusts of colonial ascidians (Botryllus schlosseri), hydrozoans, bryozoans and sponges
-A3.3wc Lower infralittoral rock with colonies of erect sponges (Halichondria spp., Haliclona spp.)
-A3.3wd Lower infralittoral rock with extensive hydrozoan (Obelia longissima) canopies
-A3.3we Lower infralittoral soft rock with Pholadidae
-A3.3wf Lower infralittoral rock dominated by solitary ascidians (Molgula manhattensis)
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Mytilus galloprovincialis, colonial ascidians (Botryllus schlosseri), hydrozoans, bryozoans and sponges, colonies of erect sponges (Halichondria spp., Haliclona spp.), large hydrozoan (Obelia longissima) canopies, Pholadidae and solitary ascidians (Molgula manhattensis).

Classification:
EUNIS (2004):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of A3- Infralittoral rock
 
Annex 1: 
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reefs 
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea but it remains a threat. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is sensitive and vulnerable to:
- Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defences. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
- Siltation. The resettling of suspended sediment can smother filter feeding organisms as well as inhibiting the growth of some species. Siltation is typically caused by dredging, trawling and other activities which disturb bottom sediments.
- Chemical pollution at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.
- Plastic pollution at its most severe can lead to mortality. Micro particles of plastic can be ingested by faunal species resulting in illness, functional impairment or death of the animals, producing a  reduction in habitat quality.
- Mobile demersal dredging and trawling. This causes habitat destruction leading to in a reduction in extent and quality.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include the implementation of measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, coastal development controls, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of lower infralittoral rock. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. This habitat includes areas of both hard and soft rocky substrates in low light, sheltered by wave action due to the depth, but may be exposed to strong currents. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: coastal development, siltation, chemical pollution, plastic pollution and disturbance from human activities. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, coastal development controls and raised public awareness.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter 7:26-28.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V. E., Boltachev A. R., Zuev G. V., Kovalev A. V., Milchakova N. A., Sergeeva N. G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37- 44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
AA.XY Invertebrate-dominated Pontic other hard substrata

Habitat Description:
Sunken logs are often present along forested coasts and in estuaries, where they are brought as a result of river  floods or violent storms in coastal forests. They are inhabited by shipworms  (wood-boring bivalves) Teredo navalis.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Teredo navalis

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Infralittoral rock' (A3)
 
Annex 1:
1130 Estuaries
1150 Coastal lagoons
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Pressures and Threats:
No pressures or threats have been identified for this habitat. It must be stated that the shipworm is not regarded as a pest in the Black Sea. The use of wooden boats and structures has long been abandoned in the area. Furthermore, the species is not present in areas shallower than 10m.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea along forested coasts and estuaries. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara as a result of sunken hard substrata caused by earthquakes (e.g. Izmit 1999). No pressures or threats have been identified for this habitat. No current or future conservation measures have been identified for this habitat.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Arnoldi, L. V. 1949. Materials on the quantitative study of the Black Sea zoobenthos. II Karkinitsky Bay (in Russian). Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station: 8.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Borisenko Ð. Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve
Çulha, M., Bat, L., Türk Çulha, S. & Çelik, M. Y. 2010. Benthic mollusk composition of some facies in the upper-infralittoral zone of the southern Black Sea, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology 34: 523-532.
Gönlügür Demirci, G. 2005. Sinop YarÄ±madasÄ±nÄ±n (Orta Karadeniz) Mollusca FaunasÄ±. Science and Engineering Journal of FÄ±rat University17(3): 565-572.
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter No 7, pp 26-28.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Prodanov, B., Kotsev, I., Keremedichiev, S., Todorova, V., Dimitrov, L. 2013. Initial assessment of the technogenic pressure in the mediolittoral zone of the bulgarian black sea coast. Second European SCGIS Conference “Conservation of Natural and Cultural Heritage for Sustainable Development: GIS-Based Approach”, 2013: 4-13.


Habitat Type Name:
A4.AA Invertebrate-dominated Marmara circalittoral rock

Habitat Description:
Circalittoral rock starts at the lower limit of distribution of photophilic algae. In the Sea of Maramara a number of unique communities occur due to the high organic load characteristic of this region. In the upper levels (10-30 m) of outflowing Black Sea waters  a thick layer of Ophiurids occurs. In the lower levels (30-50 m) of inflowing Mediterranean waters a thick layer of Crinoids occurs. Throughout all depths (2 – 60m) a fragile layer of tubeworms (Serpulid polychaetes) can be found attached to rock faces.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Serpulid polychaetes, Crinoids and Ophiurids.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Circalittoral rock' (A4)
 
Annex 1:
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Shelf
 
MSFD:
Shelf sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shelf rock or migenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The Sea of Marmara has distinct environmental conditions compared to the Black Sea, with conditions more similar to those of the Mediterranean Sea. As such this habitat does not represent an outstanding example of the typical characteristics of the Black Sea region.

Map Description:
There is insufficient data to produce a map of the distribution of this habitat. However the sub-basins of which this habitat is likely to occur have been indicated.

Comment EU28:
This habitat is only present in the Sea of Marmara therefore it does not occur in the EU28

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
None of this habitat is hosted by the EU 28 in the Black Sea; it occurs only in the Sea of Marmara.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat is known to occur in the Sea of Marmara but there is insufficient data to accurately calculate EOO and AOO. There is insufficient data to accurately assess whether the habitat has undergone an important decline in the last 50 years. </

Pressures and Threats:
No pressures of threats have been identified for this habitat

Summary:
This habitat occurs in the Sea of Marmara only. Circalittoral rock starts at the lower limit of distribution of photophilic algae. In the Sea of Marmara, a number of unique communities occur due to the high organic load characteristic of this region. In the upper levels (10-30 m) of outflowing Black Sea waters a thick layer of Ophiurids occurs. In the lower levels (30-50 m) of inflowing Mediterranean waters a thick layer of Crinoids occurs. Throughout all depths (2 – 60m) a fragile layer of tubeworms (Serpulid polychaetes) can be found attached to rock faces. No pressures or threats have been identified for this habitat. No current or future conservation measures have been identified for this habitat.

References:
There are no references available relating to this habitat.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.62 Musselbeds in the Pontic infralittoral zone

Habitat Description:
Found in a variety of habitats ranging from sheltered estuaries and marine inlets to open coasts and offshore areas they may occupy a range of substrata, although due to the stabilising effect such communities have on the substratum muddy mixed sediments are typical. A diverse range of epibiota and infauna often exists in these communities.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species, and species sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Mytilus galloprovincialis.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Pontic circalittoral biogenic habitat' (A5.6)
 
Annex 1:
1130 Estuaries
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock abd biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.5 Subtidal mud

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. This has caused hypoxia events which have decreased the extent and quality of the habitat. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
Demersal trawling and dredging by commercial fisheries is a current and future threat to the habitat. Trawling and dredging can damage the habitat and associated benthic communities both directly and indirectly. Trawl and dredge gear can directly impact the habitat by damaging and/or removing species. Trawling can also act directly to reduce the complexity of the habitat, smoothing out microhabitats, and thereby reducing biodiversity. Indirect impacts of trawling include smothering and alteration of sediment characteristics. Demersal trawling and dredging is prohibited in some states, however, illegal demersal fishing is still an issue in these areas.
Siltation is a current and future threat to the habitat. The resettling of suspended sediment can smother filter feeding organisms as well as inhibit the growth of some species. Siltation is typically caused by navigation channel dredging, demersal trawl and dredge fishing and other activities which disturb bottom sediments.

Conservation and Management:
Currently measures have been put in place to ban bottom trawling across the Black Sea. River inputs are being managed in order to improve the water quality of the Black Sea. For EU states this is achieved through the Water Framework Directive (WFD). Desired measures for the future include regulations surrounding ballast control, water quality control for Turkey (especially Istanbul), and non EU Black Sea states.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of infralittoral sedimentary substrate. The main pressures impacting this habitat include: trawling and anthropogenic disturbance. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programmes, raised public awareness and regulation of bottom fishing activities.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Arnoldi, L. V. 1949. Materials on the quantitative study of the Black Sea zoobenthos. II Karkinitsky Bay (in Russian). Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station: 8.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Borisenko Ð. Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Terentyev, A. S. 2002. State of of the bottom community of the sandy bottom in Opuksky Nature Reserve. Reserves of Crimea. Biodiversity in the priority areas: 5 years after Gurzuf. / Materials of II scientific conference: 250-253.
Terentyev, A. S. 2011. Macrozoobenthos of coastal part of the Kerch Bay (summer, 2009). Ecology of cities and recreational areas. / All_Ukrainian Scientific Conference Proceedings of articles: 261-263.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V.E., Boltachev A.R., Zuev G.V., Kovalev A.V., Milchakova N.A., Sergeeva N.G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A3.2x Mytilid-dominated Pontic moderately exposed upper infralittoral rock, blocks and boulders with Fucales

Habitat Description:
Rocky habitats in the infralittoral zone subject to moderately exposed wave action. This habitat includes a range of rock sizes, from complete uninterrupted bedrock to fragmented rocks and boulder fields. Rocks are typically covered with Fucales. Cystoseria species are the most common species encountered; Mytilids are a constant component and Corrallines are also occasionally present. The habitat occurs from low water depths, where illumination is a key environmental factor. The moderately exposed nature of the habitat allows species less tolerant of high energy environments to colonise and become established.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe habitat quality including: the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure; and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Mytilus galloprovincialis, Mytilaster lineatus, Cystoseira barbata f. hoppii, Ulva rigida, Polysiphonia subulifera / P.opaca, Cystoseira crinita, and Cladostephus spongiosus – Corallina elongata communities.

Classification:
EUNIS (2004):
Level 4. A sub-tidal habitat of 'Pontic infralittoral rock' (A3.2)
 
Annex 1:
1130 Estuarie
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partically submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine- Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine- Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reefs
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) was the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Between the mid-1970s and the mid 1980s, widespread and severe eutrophication occurred in the Black Sea, especially on the north-west shelf, caused by agricultural run-off to rivers entering the sea, and coastal industrial development. Reduced light penetration due to eutrophication caused declines in extent and quality of the fucales component of the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions also caused mortalities of the mytilid element of the habitat. After peaking in the 1980s, eutrophication has since reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea as well as industrial decline after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. However, this pressure remains a threat in the current and future periods, especially along coastal parts of non-EU countries which are not bound by legislation such as the Water Framework Directive or Marine Strategy Framework Directive.  
Coastal developments, including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defences, may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Changes in temperature are a threat to the habitat of current and future importance. Extreme temperatures in both summer and winter can cause die back of Cystoseria sp. canopies (Berov, 2010). Due to the slow growth rate and colonisation of the key species this can result in long-term declines.
Chemical pollution is a further threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in high mortality rates of key species and a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction of habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation; improvement of water quality management outside EU member states; coastal development controls; contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident; survey and monitoring programmes; raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability; measures to reduce global warming and sea level rise; enhanced legal protection for occurrences of the habitat and key species (e.g. additions to the EU Habitats Directive, establish a unified list of Black Sea species and habitats requiring conservation measures, etc.)

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea, as well as the Sea of Marmara on rocky habitats in the infralittoral zone subject to moderately exposed wave action, typically covered in Fucales. Eutrophication was the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: coastal development and changes in sea temperature (due to climate change and coastal development). Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: maintaining physical and biological integrity, improving water quality, coastal development controls, pollution event response plans, survey and monitoring programs, public awareness, protection of habitats and species and designation of MPAs.

References:
Afanasiev D. F., Korpakova I. G. 2008. Macrophytobenthos Russian Azov-Black Sea., Rostov-on-Don: FGUP AzNIIRH.
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Arnoldi, L. V. 1949. Materials on the quantitative study of the Black Sea zoobenthos. II Karkinitsky Bay (in Russian). Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station: 8.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Bezuglova M. A. 2012. Seasonal changes in shellfish species of the storm emission of Odessa Bay. Scientific notes of the Ternopil National Pedagogical University. Series Biology 2(51): 33-36.
Borisenko Ð. Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve.
 
Culha, M. & Bat, L. 2010. Visible decline of limpet Patella caerulea Linnaeus, 1758, a biomonitor species, at the sinop peninsula and vicinity (the southern Black sea, Turkey). Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology 11(3): 1024-1029.
Çulha, M., Bat, L., Türk Çulha, S. & Çelik, M.Y. 2010. Benthic mollusk composition of some facies in the upper-infralittoral zone of the southern Black Sea, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology 34: 523-532.
Dimitrova-Konaklieva, S. 2000. Flora of the Marine Algae of Bulgaria (Rhodophyta, Phaeophyta, Chlorophyta). Pensoft, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Gönlügür Demirci, G. 2005. Sinop YarÄ±madasÄ±nÄ±n (Orta Karadeniz) Mollusca FaunasÄ±. Science and Engineering Journal of FÄ±rat University17(3): 565-572.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1970. The composition and distribution of benthic vegetation in the south-eastern part of the Black Sea. Ecological and morphological studies of benthic organisms. Kiev: Naukova Dumka, p. 185- 202.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1975. Phytobenthos of Black Sea, Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 275 p.
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kopiy, V. G, Bondarenko, L. V. 2009. Benthos of sand habitat near splash zone of Karadag. Proc. of the V Intern. scient-pract. conf. (Simferopol): 294-298.
Kopiy, V. G. Bondarenko, L. V. 2012. The community of the macrozoobenthos of mediolittoral zone of Western Crimea. Biodiversity and sustainable development: Abstracts of the II Intern. scientific and practic Conf., Simferopol: 189-192.
Kostenko, N. S. 2003. Some trends of the succsecion of bottom vegatation in the Karadag area. Proc. Sciences. Rec. NaUKMA, Ser. "BÑ–ologÑ–ya and ekologÑ–ya": 429-432.
Lisovskaya O.A., Stepanyan O.V. 2009. A variety of coastal macroalgae Taman Peninsula (Russia) in summer., Algology 19(4): 341-348.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D., Micu, S. 2006. Recent records and proposed IUCN status of Donacilla cornea (Poli, 1795) (Bivalvia: Veneroida: Mesodesmatidae) in the Romanian Black Sea. Cercet Mar 36: 117-132.
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter 7:26-28.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973-751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Mokievskiy, O.B. 1949. Flora of the soil littoral substrate of the west coast of Crimea. Proceedings of the Institute of Oceanology: 124-159.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Morozova-Vodyanitskaya N. V. 1959. Bottom vegetation of the Black Sea. Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station 11: 3 – 28.
Pereladov M.V., 2005. Modern status of the Black Sea Oyster population. Coastal hydrobiological investigations. VNIRO Proceedings, 144: 254-273.
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Prodanov, B., Kotsev, I., Keremedichiev, S., Todorova, V., Dimitrov, L. 2013. Initial assessment of the technogenic pressure in the mediolittoral zone of the bulgarian black sea coast. Second European SCGIS Conference “Conservation of Natural and Cultural Heritage for Sustainable Development: GIS-Based Approach”, 2013: 4-13.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Terentyev, A. S. 2002. State of of the bottom community of the sandy bottom in Opuksky Nature Reserve. Reserves of Crimea. Biodiversity in the priority areas: 5 years after Gurzuf. / Materials of II scientific conference: 250-253.
Terentyev, A. S. 2011. Macrozoobenthos of coastal part of the Kerch Bay (summer, 2009). Ecology of cities and recreational areas. / All_Ukrainian Scientific Conference Proceedings of articles: 261-263.
Teyubova V. F. 2005. Features interannual dynamics species composition and structure macrophytobenthos in the Bay of Novorossiysk (Black sea). Ekologiya Morya 69: 53 – 57.
Teyubova V.F. 2012. The diversity and ecological features macrophytobenthos the Russian sector of the Black Sea., Dissertation on competition degree of candidate of biological sciences, 280 pp.
Tkachenko, F. P., Kovtun O. O. 2014. Contemporary condition of seaweeds flora of Zmeiny  island  Ñostal  zone  (Black  Sea). Chornomors’k. bot. z. 10(1): 37-47.
Todorova, V., Panayotova, M. 2011. Black mussels and/or barnacle communities on mediolittoral rocks. Red book of Republic of Bulgaria, Vol. III, Natural habitats, Eds. BAS & MOEW. [ISBN 978-9549746-23-5].
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V. E., Boltachev A. R., Zuev G. V., Kovalev A. V., Milchakova N. A., Sergeeva N. G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A3.2x Mytilid-dominated Pontic moderately exposed upper infralittoral rock, blocks and boulders, with foliose algae (other than Fucales)

Habitat Description:
Rocky habitats in the infralittoral zone exposed to wave action. Rocks are typically covered by foliose algal communities. Mytilids are a constant component. These habitats occur on exposed rocky coasts, from low water up to depths of 10m. Winter storms may cause changes to species compositions and coverage.
Indicators of quality:
A set of categories common to the habitat indicating good biotic and abiotic quality. These indicators will be used, together with the general “Stages of Quality Decline” (applicable for all terrestrial and marine habitats), to assess the severity of quality decline over a certain time frame on a country/regional scale and for EU28 and EU28+.
Characteristic species:
Characteristic species includes: Mytilus galloprovincialis, Mytilaster lineatus, Lophosiphonia obscura, Ceramium ciliatum, Padina pavonica, Grateloupia dichotoma, Dilophus fasciola, F. repens, Polysiphonia opaca, Ceramium ciliatum, Ulva compressa, Ulva intestinalis, Ulva linza.

Classification:
EUNIS (2004):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Pontic infralittoral rock' (A3.1)
 
Annex 1:
1130 Estuaries
1160 Large swallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defences. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Chemical pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, coastal development controls, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on moderately exposed upper infralittoral rock. It is not present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: coastal development and chemical pollution. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, coastal development controls, contingency plans in case of pollution events and raised public awareness.

References:
Afanasiev D. F., Korpakova I. G. 2008. Macrophytobenthos Russian Azov-Black Sea., Rostov-on-Don: FGUP AzNIIRH.
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve.
Çulha, M., Bat, L., Türk Çulha, S. & Çelik, M.Y. 2010. Benthic mollusk composition of some facies in the upper-infralittoral zone of the southern Black Sea, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology 34: 523-532.
Dimitrova-Konaklieva, S. 2000. Flora of the Marine Algae of Bulgaria (Rhodophyta, Phaeophyta, Chlorophyta). Pensoft, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1970. The composition and distribution of benthic vegetation in the south-eastern part of the Black Sea. Ecological and morphological studies of benthic organisms. Kiev: Naukova Dumka, p. 185- 202.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1975. Phytobenthos of Black Sea, Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 275 p. Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kostenko, N. S. 2003. Some trends of the succsecion of bottom vegatation in the Karadag area. Proc. Sciences. Rec. NaUKMA, Ser. "BÑ–ologÑ–ya and ekologÑ–ya": 429-432.
Lisovskaya O.A., Stepanyan O.V. 2009. A variety of coastal macroalgae Taman Peninsula (Russia) in summer., Algology 19(4): 341-348.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D., Micu, S. 2006. Recent records and proposed IUCN status of Donacilla cornea (Poli, 1795) (Bivalvia: Veneroida: Mesodesmatidae) in the Romanian Black Sea. Cercet Mar 36: 117-132.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Morozova-Vodyanitskaya N. V. 1959. Bottom vegetation of the Black Sea. Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station 11: 3 – 28.
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Teyubova V. F. 2005. Features interannual dynamics species composition and structure macrophytobenthos in the Bay of Novorossiysk (Black sea). Ekologiya Morya 69: 53 – 57.
Teyubova V.F. 2012. The diversity and ecological features macrophytobenthos the Russian sector of the Black Sea., Dissertation on competition degree of candidate of biological sciences, 280 pp.
Tkachenko, F. P., Kovtun O. O. 2014. Contemporary condition of seaweeds flora of Zmeiny  island  Ñostal zone  (Black  Sea). Chornomors’k. bot. z. 10(1): 37-47.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V. E., Boltachev A. R., Zuev G. V., Kovalev A. V., Milchakova N. A., Sergeeva N. G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A3.15 Mytilid-dominated Pontic exposed upper infralittoral rock with foliose algae (other than Fucales)

Habitat Description:
Rocky habitats in the infralittoral zone exposed to wave action. Rocks are typically covered foliose algal communities. Mytilids are a constant component. These habitats occur on exposed rocky coasts, from low water up to depths of 10m. Winter storms may cause changes to species compositions and coverage.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Characteristic species includes: Mytilus galloprovincialis, Mytilaster lineatus, Lophosiphonia obscura, Ceramium ciliatum, Padina pavonica, Grateloupia dichotoma, Dilophus fasciola, F. repens, Polysiphonia opaca, Ceramium ciliatum, Ulva compressa, Ulva intestinalis, Ulva linza.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Pontic infralittoral rock' (A3.1).
 
Annex 1:
1130 Estuaries
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef.
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defenses. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Chemical pollution is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on infralittoral rock. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: coastal development and chemical pollution. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, coastal development controls, contingency plans in case of pollution events and raised public awareness.

References:
Afanasiev D. F., Korpakova I. G. 2008. Macrophytobenthos Russian Azov-Black Sea., Rostov-on-Don: FGUP AzNIIRH.
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Çulha, M., Bat, L., Türk Çulha, S. & Çelik, M. Y. 2010. Benthic mollusk composition of some facies in the upper-infralittoral zone of the southern Black Sea, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology 34: 523-532.
Gönlügür Demirci, G. 2005. Sinop YarÄ±madasÄ±nÄ±n (Orta Karadeniz) Mollusca FaunasÄ±. Science and Engineering Journal of FÄ±rat University17(3): 565-572.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kostenko, N. S. 2003. Some trends of the succsecion of bottom vegatation in the Karadag area. Proc. Sciences. Rec. NaUKMA, Ser. "BÑ–ologÑ–ya and ekologÑ–ya": 429-432.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Morozova-Vodyanitskaya N. V., 1959. Bottom vegetation of the Black Sea, Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station, 11, p. 3 – 28.
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA. Reserves of Crimea. Biodiversity in the priority areas: 5 years after Gurzuf. / Materials of II scientific conference: 250-253.
Teyubova V. F, 2005. Features interannual dynamics species composition and structure macrophytobenthos in the Bay of Novorossiysk (Black sea), Ekologiya Morya, (69), p. 53 – 57.
Teyubova V. F. 2012. The diversity and ecological features macrophytobenthos the Russian sector of the Black Sea., Dissertation on competition degree of candidate of biological sciences, 280 pp.
Tkachenko, F. P., Kovtun O. O. 2014. Contemporary condition of seaweeds flora of Zmeiny  island  Ñostal zone  (Black  Sea). Chornomors’k. bot. z. 10(1): 37-47.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V.E., Boltachev A.R., Zuev G.V., Kovalev A.V., Milchakova N.A., Sergeeva N.G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.64 Oyster reefs on Pontic lower infralittoral rock

Habitat Description:
Small oyster reefs occur as oyster clumps (5-10 oysters) on rocky outcrops. The reefs occur along theTurkish Black sea coast in the rocky infralittoral at depths of 10-20m.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and species sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species: Ostrea edulis.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of infralittoral biogenic habitats (A5.6)
 
Annex 1:
1170 Reefs
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Shelf
 
MSFD:
Shelf sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shelf rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is likely to be sensitive to coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defences. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Demersal trawling and dredging by commercial fisheries is a current and future threat to the habitat. Trawling and dredging can damage the habitat and associated benthic communities both directly and indirectly. Trawl and dredge gear can directly impact the habitat by damaging and/or removing species. Trawling can also act directly to reduce the complexity of the habitat, smoothing out microhabitats, and thereby reducing biodiversity. Indirect impacts of trawling include smothering and alteration of sediment characteristics. Demersal trawling and dredging is prohibited in some states, however, illegal demersal fishing is still an issue in these areas.
Siltation is a current and future threat to the habitat. The resettling of suspended sediment can smother filter feeding organisms as well as inhibit the growth of some species. Siltation is typically caused by navigation channel dredging, demersal trawl and dredge fishing and other activities which disturb bottom sediments.
Chemical pollution is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in high levels of species mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in habitat/community extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect growth rate and size of some fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, survey and monitoring programmes, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability, enhanced legal protection for occurrences of the habitat and key species (e.g. additions to the EU Habitats Directive, establish a unified list of Black Sea species and habitats requiring conservation measures, etc.), designation of MPAs.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on lower infralittoral rock. The main pressures impacting this habitat include eutrophication, coastal development, trawling, siltation, chemical pollution and anthropogenic disturbance. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programs, raised public awareness, enhanced legal protection and regulation of bottom fishing activities.

References:
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter No 7, pp 26-28.
Pereladov M. V., 2005. Modern status of the Black Sea Oyster population. Coastal hydrobiological investigations. VNIRO Proceedings, 144: 254-273.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.46. Communities of Mediterranean upper circalittoral coastal detritic bottoms

Habitat Description:
This habitat occurs in big bays and opens seas, on a substratum whose nature varies widely and depends largely on the typology of the nearby coast and of nearby infralittoral rock formations. It occurs on terrigenous and organogenous sediment: gravel with a sandy-muddy filling originating from predominant local rocks, sometimes shell debris from various molluscs, debris from big calcified bryozoans, tests of echinoderms or of some dead melobesies (coralline red algae Melobesiae spp). The interstices between these various components of coarse sands and gravel are partially filled by a greater or lesser proportion of sand and mud. The muddy portion is usually less than 20%, but various more or less muddy types exist.
It develops at depths of between 30 and 100 metres, usually as an extension at depth of the biocenosis of well sorted fine sands. Some facies with epiflora and epifauna may present, depending on certain currents. These may be characterised  by brittlestars, colonial ascidians and by big colonies of arborescent bryozoans, unattached or fixed to small substrata.
Indicators of quality:
Some species are indicators of more particular environmental conditions such as the echinoderms (Echinocyamus pusillus, Spatangus purpureus, Astarte fusca), the bivalves (Cardium minimum, Venus ovata, Dentalium inaequicostatum), the  opisthobranch mollusc Philine aperta, or species with a wide ecological distribution in loose substrata.
Characteristic species:
Phytobenthos: Cryptonemia tunaeformis, the many-branched calcareous rhodophytes (Phymatholithon calcareum, Mesophyllum coralloides, Lithothamnion fruticulosum), Peyssonnelia spp.
Zoobenthos: Bubaris vermiculata, Suberites domuncula (sponges): Sarcodyctyon catenatum (cnidarians); Astropecten irregularis, Anseropoda placenta, Genocidaris maculata, Luidia ciliaris, Ophioconis forbesi, Psammechinus microtuberculatus, Paracucumaria hyndmani (echinoderms); Limea loscombei, Propeamussium incomparabile, Chlamys flexuosa, Laevicardium oblungum, Cardium deshayesi, Tellina donacina, Eulima polita, Turitella triplicata (molluscs); Hermione hystrix, Petta pusilla (polychaetes); Conilera cylindracea, Paguristes oculatus, Anapagurus laevis, Ebalia tuberosa, Ebalia edwardsi (crustaceans); Molgula oculata, Microcosmus vulgaris, Polycarpia pomaria, Polycarpia gracilis (ascidians).

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of ‘Mediterranean circalittoral mixed sediment’ (A5.4). 
 
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow sands
Shallow muds
Shallow coarse or mixed sediments
 
IUCN:
9.3 Subtidal loose rock/ pebble/ gravel 
9.4 Subtidal sandy
9.6 Subtidal sandy-mud
 
Barcelona code:
IV.2.2. Biocenosis of the coastal detritic
and the different facies :
•IV.2.2.8. Facies with Ophiura texturata
•IV.2.2.9. Facies with Synascidies
•IV.2.2.10. Facies with large bryozoans

Map Description:
There are insufficient data to provide a comprehensive and accurate map of the distribution of this habitat. This map has been generated by IUCN using EMODnet data from modelled/surveyed records from the Mediterranean (and supplemented with expert opinion where applicable) (EMODnet, 2015). EOO and AOO have been calculated on the available data presented in this map however these should be treated with caution as expert opinion is that this is not the full distribution of the habitat.

Trends in Quantity:
The extent of this habitat is still poorly known, and the studies conducted have mostly focused on the description of the benthic assemblages in relation to sediment characteristics.

Trends in Quality:
There are no available studies that evaluate the trends in quality over the last 50 years, and no information regarding trends has been provided by territorial experts for a good part of its range. For the western and central Mediterranean expert opinion is that this habitat is stable.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
This habitat occurs in the EU 28+. The percentage hosted by the EU 28 is therefore less than 100% but there is insufficient information to establish the proportion.

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat is widespread and present along the Mediterranean coast.

Pressures and Threats:
Coastal activities such as urban wastewater discharge, pollutants and marine-coastal infrastructures can increase sedimentation (brought down in the rivers and other human activities) and potentially degrade the habitat by increasing the mud fraction. Moreover, it can cause some sub-habitats or facies to disappear (e.g. Lithothamnia, big bryozoans, ascidian beds), decrease diversity and productivity (including of commercial species) and change the faunal and floral composition.

Conservation and Management:
Basic knowledge on the habitat and the distribution of this habitat in the Mediterranean, as well as on the associated assemblages, and species biology (distribution, abundance, habitat preferences, life-cycles), as well as monitoring data on trends is needed to determine the most useful conservation measures. 
In areas where the habitat is affected, it is recommended to reduce anthropogenic waste, particularly domestic and industrial wastewater that is still loaded with fine matter, pollutants and organic matter. The designation of protected areas can provide a local focus for such action as well as for monitoring and investigation programmes relating to this habitat.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The increase of fine terrigenous-origin particles can change the composition of flora and fauna and shift the habitat and the dominant facies, if any, to other types. It is unknown how easily these communities can recover, but a reduction of the impact should allow some recovery to previous conditions.

Summary:
This habitat occupies a considerable area of the Eastern and Western Mediterranean. It occurs in the coastal detritic bottom of large bays and open seas on terrigenous and organogenous gravel at 30-100 metres of depth. Depending of the hydrodynamics and environmental conditions some particular facies or dominance of species may develop. The main pressures on this habitat are the increase of fine sedimentation and pollution that can produce changes in the associated communities, the lost of diversity and a shift to a different habitat dominated by more tolerant species. Ensuring a reduction of inputs such as fine matter, pollutants and organic matter, which affect the water quality, designating Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) where this habitat occurs and increasing the knowledge and monitoring of its distribution and ecology will assist to conserve and evaluate appropriate conservation measures for the future.

References:
RAC/SPA , 2002. Handbook for interpreting types of marine habitat for the selection of sites to be included in the national inventories of natural sites of conservation interest. COMPILED BY: G. Pergant, D. Bellan-Santini, G. Bellan And J. G. Harmelin, 217.
Bellan, G. 1985. Effects of pollution and man-made modifications on marine benthic communities: A Review: 163-194 In: Moraitou-Apostolopoulou, M. and Kiortsis, V. (eds). Mediterranean marine ecosystems, NATO Conference series, 1: Ecology :1-407.
Bellan, G. 1994. Destructuration et restructuration des peuplements et populations soumises à des actions anthropiques. Biologia Marina Mediterranea, 1(1): 151-158.
Bellan-Santini, D. 1985. The Mediterranean Benthos: reflections and problems raised by a classification of the benthic Assemblages: 19-46. In: Moraitou-Apostolopoulou, M. and Kiortsis, V. (eds). Mediterranean marine ecosystems, NATO Conference series, 1: Ecology.
Bellan-Santini, D. and Bellan, G. 2000. Distribution and Pecularities of Mediterrnean marineBiocenosis. Biologia Marina Mediterranea, 7 (3): 67-80.
Bellan-Santini, D., Lacaze, J.C. and Poizat, C. 1994. Les biocénoses marines et littorales de Méditerranée, synthèse, menaces et perspectives. Collection Patrimoines Naturels. Secrétariat de la Faune et de la Flore/M.N.H.N., 19 : 1-246.
Blandin, P. and Bellan, G. 1994. Les systèmes écologiques littoraux et marins : fondements conceptuels pour une gestion intégrée. 10-19. In: Bellan-Santini, D., Lacaze, J.C. & Poizat, C. (eds). Les biocénoses marines et littorales de Méditerranée, synthèse, menaces et perspectives. Collection Patrimoines Naturels, Secrétariat Faune et Flore, M.N.H.N., Paris. 246 p.
Bourcier, M. 1982. Evolution au cours des quinze dernières années, des biocoenoses benthiques et de leurs faciès dans une baie méditerranéenne soumise à l’action lointaine de deux émissaires urbains. Tethys, 10 (4): 303-313.
Crema, R., Castelli, A. and Prevedelli, D. 1991. Long term eutrophication effects on macrofaunal Communities in Northern Adriatic Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 22(10): 503-508.
Dauvin, J.C., Bellan, G., Bellan-Santini, D., Castric, A., Comolet-Tirman, J., Francour, P., Gentil, F., Girard, A., Gofas, S., Mahe, C., Noël, P. and De Reviers, B. 1994. Typologie des ZNIEFF-mer, liste des paramètres et des biocénoses des côtes françaises métropolitaines. 2ème Edition. Collection Patrimoines Naturels. Secrétariat de la Faune et la Flore/M.N.H.N., 12 : 1-64.
Drago, D., Mannino, A.M. and Sortini, S. 1997. La vegetazione sommersa dei mari siciliani. Mediterraneo, Guide naturalistiche 7. L’EPOS : 117 p.
Gamulin-Brida, H. 1967. The benthic Fauna of the Adriatic Sea. Oceanography and Marine Biology, Ann. Revue, 5:535-568.
Giaccone G., Alongi G., Pizzuto F. and Cossu A. 1994. La vegetazione marine bentonica del Mediterraneo : II. Infralittorale e Circalittorale. Bollettino dell'Accademia Gioenia di Scienze Naturali, 27 (346) : 111-157.
Giaccone G., Alongi G., Pizzuto F. and Cossu A., 1994. La vegetazione marine bentonica del Mediterraneo : III. Infralittorale e Circalittorale. Bollettino dell'Accademia Gioenia di Scienze Naturali, 27 (346) : 201-227.
Guille, A. 1970. Bionomie benthique du plateau cntinental de la côte catalane française. II. Les Communautés de la macrofaune. Vie et Milieu, 21 (1B) :149-280.
Margalef, R. 1985. Introduction to the Mediterranean :11-16. In: Western Mediterranean, Margalef, R. Ed. Pergamon Press.
Molinier, R. 1960. Étude des biocénoses marines du Cap Corse (France). Vegetatio, 9:121-312.
Moraitou-Apostolopoulou M. and Kiortsis V. 1985. Mediterranean marine ecosystems, NATO Conference series , 1: Ecology :1-407.
Orel, G., Marocco, R., Vio, E., Del Piero. D. and Della Seta, G. 1987. Sedimenti e biocenosi bentoniche tra la foce del Po ed il golfo di Trieste (Alto Adriatico). Bulletin d'Écologie, 18(2) : 229-241.
Peres, J. M., 1967. The Mediterranean benthos. Oceanogr. Marine Biology Annual Review. 5. 449-533.
Peres, J. M., Picard, J. 1964. Nouveau manuel de bionomie benthique de la Méditerranée. Recueil des Travaux de la Station Marine d'Endoume, 31 (47) : 1-137.
Picard, J. 1965. Recherches qualitatives sur les biocoenoses marines des substrats meubles dragables de la région marseillaise. Recueil des Travaux de la Station Marine d'Endoume, 52 (36), :1-160, 10
Riedl, R. 1966. Biologie des Meereshohlen. Paul Parey, Hamburg und Berlin.
Ros, J.-D., Olivella, I. and Gili, J.-M. 1984. Els sistemes naturals de les illes Medes. Institut d'Estudits catalans. Barcelona.
Ros, J. D., Romero, J., Ballesteros, E. and Gili, J.M. 1984. Diving in blue water. The benthos : 233-295 in MARGALEF R. ed., Western Mediterranean. Oxford, Pergamon Press, 363p.
Simboura, N., Zenetos, A., Thessalou-Legaki, M., Pancucci, M.A. and Nicolaidou, A. 1995. Benthic communities of the Infralittoral in the N. Sporades (Aegean Sea): a variety of biotops encountered and analysed. P.S.Z.N.I. Marine Ecology, 16(4):283-306.
Zenetos, A. 1996. Classification and interpretation of the established Mediterranean biocoenoses based solely on bivalve molluscs. J.M.B.A. U.K., 76:403-416.
Zenetos, A., Panayotidis, P. and Symboura, N., 1990. Étude des peuplements benthiques de substrat meuble au large du débouché en mer du grand collecteur d'Athènes. Revue internationale d'océanographie médicale, 97-98:55-70.
Zenetos, A., Papathanassiou, E. and Van Aartsen, J.J. 1991. Analysis of Benthic Communities in the Cyclades Plateau (Agean Sea) using ecological and paleoecological data sets. P.S.Z.N.I. Marine Ecology, 12(2):123-137.

Criterion A Text:
The current trend in quantity is unknown, and there is insufficient information on past or future reductions in quantity for this habitat.  It is therefore assessed as Data Deficient under Criterion A.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat is present in the Eastern and Western Mediterranean basins. The precise extent is unknown however as EOO >50,000km2 and AOO>50, this exceeds the thresholds for a threatened category on the basis of restricted geographic distribution. There is insufficient information to determine any trends in spatial extent, abiotic and biotic quality. The nature and size of threats to this habitat and the distribution data which are available suggest that no known threats are unlikely to affect all localities at once. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Least Concern under criteria B1c, B2c and B3, and Datat Deficient for all other criteria.

Criterion C/D Text:
There is insufficient data from different Mediterranean regions on which to assess criteria C/D and to ascertain if there is a substantial or slight reduction in the abiotic or biotic quality of the habitat. Expert opinion believed the quality of the habitat is stable along part of its range. Therefore, the habitat type is assessed as Data Deficient under Criterion C/D.

Synthesis:
This is a very poorly studied habitat type and only a few reports exist regarding its distribution. The trends in quantity and quality in the past 50 years are unknown, and there is no information on historic or future trends. Moreover, quantitative data on quality or quantity is lacking and the territorial data does not provide information for most Mediterranean countries. It has a large Extent of Occurrence (EOO) and  Area of Occupancy (AOO), and therefore it qualifies as Least Concern under Criterion B. However, the habitat is assessed as Data Deficient both at the EU 28 and the EU 28+ levels because of the lack of information on its trends in quantity and quality.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.61 Polychaete worm reefs in the Pontic infralittoral zone

Habitat Description:
A variety of polychaete worm reefs occur in the Black Sea. The habitat forming species are dependent on two variables: depth and exposure to wave action. In more sheltered and freshwater-influenced environments the non-native serpulid tubeworm Ficopomatus enigmaticus is the most common reef building species. In moderately exposed environments reefs formed by the serpulid Vermiliopsis infundibulum are present. Finally, on lower infralittoral rock serpulids form massive reefs in collaboration with bivalves (i.e. Ostrea edulis, Mytilus galloprovincialis). These reefs are an important component of the Black Sea ecosystem and are characterised by high biodiversity and fulfill important water filtration role.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species, species sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressures as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Ficopomatus enigmaticus, Vermiliopsis infundibulum and serpulids.

Classification:
EUNIS (2004):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Infralittoral biogenic habitat' (A5.6)
 
Annex 1:
1130 Estuaries
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves 
 
MAES:
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock of biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs
 
Other relationships:
Equivalents in other regional seas include-
Polychaete worm reefs in the Atlantic infralittoral zone
Polychaete worm reefs in the Mediterranean infralittoral zone

Pressures and Threats:
Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, navigation channel dredging, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defences. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Demersal trawling and dredging by commercial fisheries is a current and future threat to the habitat. Trawling and dredging can damage the habitat and associated benthic communities both directly and indirectly. Trawl and dredge gear can directly impact the habitat by damaging and/or removing species. Trawling can also act directly to reduce the complexity of the habitat, smoothing out microhabitats, and thereby reducing biodiversity. Indirect impacts of trawling include smothering and alteration of sediment characteristics. Demersal trawling and dredging is prohibited in some states, however, illegal demersal fishing is still an issue in these areas.
Siltation is a current and future threat to the habitat. The resettling of suspended sediment can smother filter feeding organisms as well as inhibit the growth of some species. Siltation is typically caused by navigation channel dredging, demersal trawl and dredge fishing and other activities which disturb bottom sediments.
Chemical pollution is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in high levels of species mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in habitat/community extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect growth rate and size of some fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, coastal development controls, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, survey and monitoring programmes, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability, enhanced legal protection for occurrences of the habitat and key species (e.g. additions to the EU Habitats Directive, establish a unified list of Black Sea species and habitats requiring conservation measures, etc.), and the designation of MPAs.

Summary:
This biogenic reef habitat is present in the Black Sea and the Sea of Marmara on areas with rocky or mixed sediment substrate. The main pressures impacting this habitat include eutrophication, chemical pollution, siltation, coastal developments, bottom trawling and dredging. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity , improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programs, raised public awareness, enhanced legal protection, measures to reduce global warming.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Borisenko Ð. Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter No 7, pp 26-28.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973-751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Todorova V., Micu D., Klissurov L., 2009. Unique oyster reefs discovered in the Bulgarian Black Sea. Comptes rendus de l’Académie bulgare des Sciences 62(7): 871-874. ISSN 1310-1331.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8, 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Pereladov M. V., 2005. Modern status of the Black Sea Oyster population. Coastal hydrobiological investigations. VNIRO Proceedings, 144: 254-273.
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Terentyev, A. S. 2011. Macrozoobenthos of coastal part of the Kerch Bay (summer, 2009). Ecology of cities and recreational areas. / All_Ukrainian Scientific Conference Proceedings of articles: 261-263.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V.E., Boltachev A.R., Zuev G.V., Kovalev A.V., Milchakova N.A., Sergeeva N.G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Description:
Circalittoral rock starts at the lower limit of distribution of photophilic algae (which may be as shallow a 10 m on the north-western Black Sea shelf and much deeper in Crimea or Turkey) and ends where the circalittoral rocky substrate gives way to sediments. This habitat is characterised by a complete lack of algal and faunal species.
Indicators of quality:
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat.
Characteristic species:
As this is a barren habitat, there are no characteristic species.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Circalittoral rock' (A4)
 
Annex 1:
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Coastal
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Shelf
 
MSFD:
Shelf sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shelf rock or biogenic reefs
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Map Description:
There is insufficient data to produce a map of the distribution of this habitat. Howveer the sub-basisn of which this habitat is likely to occur in have been indicated.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat concern maintaining physical integrity, including pollution control and regulation.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
Given its nature, this habitat is unlikely to suffer severe damage except by removal or smothering. In either case, prospects for recovery are either impossible or difficult to predict.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea and perhaps in the Sea of Marmara. The circalittoral rock starts at the lower limit of the distribution of photophilic algae and ends where the circalittoral rocky substrate gives way to sediments. This habitat is characterised by a complete lack of algal and faunal species. No pressures or threats have been identified for this habitat. No current conservation measures have been identified for this habitat. Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat concern maintaining physical integrity, including pollution control and regulation.


Habitat Type Name:
A3.3q Pontic barren lower infralittoral rock

Habitat Description:
Lower infralittoral rock in the Black Sea occurs between depths of 10 and 18m. These areas are low energy and poorly illuminated which limits the species suited to the situation. Barren lower infralittoral rock in these areas are devoid of species and communities. It is still unclear what are the causes.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Due to the barren nature of this habitat no characteristic species are present.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Pontic infralittoral rock' (A3.3)
 
Annex 1:
1160  Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on lower infra littoral rock. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. No pressures or threats have been identified for this habitat. No current or future conservation measures have been identified for this habitat.


Habitat Type Name:
A4.71 Pontic circalittoral dark caves and tunnels

Habitat Description:
Caves and overhangs in the circalittoral zone are characterised by a lack of light. This is reflected in the species composition. The amount of wave surge influences the species composition of individual caves. All around the Black Sea this habitat type occurs in Sarmatian limestone cliffs in Russia, Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey. It may also occur in volcanic and metamorphic rocks, like in Bulgaria (Maslen Nos Cape).
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Turf hydrozoans, thin crust sponges like Antho involvens, Haliclona flavescens , Haliclona cinerea, Suberites prototypus, Clathria cleistocheila depending on current intensity, anemones Actinia equina, red mysid shrimp Hemimysis pontica, Hemimysis serrata., and rare shrimp species Palaemon serratus and Lysmata seticaudata

Classification:
EUNIS (2004):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of level A4- Circalittoral rock
 
Annex 1:
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shelf sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
This habitat occurs in the EU 28+ e.g. Ukraine, Russia, Turkey, therefore the percentage hosted by EU 28 is less than 100%. The proportion within EU 28 cannot be estimated as the full extent of this habitat is unknown.

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is likely to be vulnerable and sensitive to:
Siltation. The resettling of suspended sediment can smother filter feeding organisms as well as inhibiting the growth of some species. Siltation is typically caused by dredging, trawling and other activities which disturb bottom sediments.
Chemical pollution at its most severe can result in species mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.
Marine litter that tends to accumulate in caves. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can lead to mortality. Large floating objects that accumulate in caves will damage the sessile fauna on the walls. Micro particles of plastic can be ingested by faunal species resulting in reduction in quality.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability, enhanced legal protection for occurrences of the habitat and key species (e.g. establish a unified list of Black Sea species and habitats requiring conservation measures, etc.), and the designation of MPAs with actual measures that will protect this habitat.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of circalittoral rock. It is not present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: siltation, chemical pollution and plastic pollution. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, and raised public awareness.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Ereskovsky A.V., Kovtun O.A., Pronin K.K., 2016. Marine cave biota of the Tarkhankut Peninsula (Black Sea, Crimea), with emphasis on sponge taxonomic composition, spatial distribution and ecological particularities. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 96(2): 391–406. doi:10.1017/S0025315415001071
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973-751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Description:
Non-cohesive muddy sand (with 20% to 80% silt/clay) in the circalittoral zone. The habitat is characterised by low light and low energy conditions. Species present typically belong to the bivalve and polychaete worm groups.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Mya arenaria, Cerastoderma glaucum, Abra alba, Parvicardium exiguum, Spisula subtruncatra, Pitar rudis and Aricidea claudiae.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Circalittoral sand' (A5.2)
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
1130 Estuaries
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow sands
Shallow muds
 
IUCN:
9.5 Subtidal sandy-mud

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is sensitive and vulnerable to:
Trawling is causing deterioration and habitat destruction by damaging benthic communities both directly and indirectly through effects such as smothering and altering the sediment characteristics.
Sand extraction can lead to habitat destruction. Marine sand is an important building material in the Black Sea therefore sand extraction is considered likely to increase in tandem with other development pressures in the region.
Mobile demersal dredging and trawling. This is a threat of current and future importance. This causes habitat destruction leading to in a reduction in extent and quality.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including control and regulation of sand extraction and prohibition of bottom trawling and dredging, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, survey and monitoring programmes, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of circalittoral muddy sand substrate below 20m depth. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: trawling, sand extraction and disturbance from other anthropogenic activities. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programs and raised public awareness of the habitats’ ecological role and vulnerability.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Arnoldi, L. V. 1949. Materials on the quantitative study of the Black Sea zoobenthos. II Karkinitsky Bay (in Russian). Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station: 8.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Borisenko Ð. Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter No 7, pp 26-28.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973-751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto,S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Terentyev, A. S. 2002. State of of the bottom community of the sandy bottom in Opuksky Nature Reserve. Reserves of Crimea. Biodiversity in the priority areas: 5 years after Gurzuf. / Materials of II scientific conference: 250-253.
Terentyev, A. S. 2011. Macrozoobenthos of coastal part of the Kerch Bay (summer, 2009). Ecology of cities and recreational areas. / All_Ukrainian Scientific Conference Proceedings of articles: 261-263.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V.E., Boltachev A.R., Zuev G.V., Kovalev A.V., Milchakova N.A., Sergeeva N.G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A4.2x Pontic circalittoral rock affected by sedimentation

Habitat Description:
Circalittoral rock starts at the lower limit of distribution of photophilic algae (which may be as shallow as 10 m on the north-western Black Sea shelf and much deeper in Crimea or Turkey) and ends where the circalittoral rocky substrate gives way to sediments. Where sedimentation occurs the habitat is characterised by lower levels of biodiversity. The biodiversity of the habitat consists of faunal species which include polychaete worms, sponges and solitary ascidians.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Spirobranchus triqueter, sponges, solitary ascidians and Actinothoe clavata.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Circalittoral rock' (A4)
 
Annex 1:
1130 Estuaries
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
8830 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
Marine - Shelf
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
Shelf rock or biogenic reefs
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
Shelf sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Not mapped
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Pressures and Threats:
From the 1970s, the most significant pressure was eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter). Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. After peaking in the 1980s, eutrophication has since reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea as well as industrial decline after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Whilst this pressure is now reduced, it remains a threat in the current and future periods, especially along coastal parts of non-EU countries which are not bound by legislation such as the Water Framework Directive or Marine Strategy Framework Directive.
In addition, the habitat is likely to be sensitive to:
Trawling is a current and future threat to the habitat causing deterioration and habitat destruction by damaging benthic communities both directly and indirectly through effects such as smothering and altering the sediment characteristics. Demersal trawling is prohibited in some states. However, illegal trawling is still an issue in these areas.
Siltation is a current and future threat to the habitat. The resettling of suspended sediment can smother filter feeding organisms as well as inhibiting the growth of some species. Siltation is typically caused by dredging, trawling and other activities which disturb bottom sediments.
Chemical pollution is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in high mortality rates of key species and a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction of habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.
Plastic pollution is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can lead to mortality. Micro-particles of plastic can be ingested by faunal species resulting in reduction in quality.
Mobile demersal dredging and trawling is a threat of current and future importance. This causes habitat destruction leading to in a reduction in extent and quality.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation and the improvement of water quality management outside EU member states.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea and perhaps the Sea of Marmara on circalittoral rock, characterised by lower levels of biodiversity. Eutrophication was the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: trawling, siltation, chemical pollution, plastic pollution and disturbance by anthropogenic activities. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality and pollution event response strategies.


Habitat Type Name:
A3.1x Pontic exposed upper infralittoral rock with rock borers

Habitat Description:
Soft rocks (limestone) occurring in the infralittoral zone in areas of low to moderate exposure. The softer nature of limestone rocks makes them suitable for rock boring species such as Petricola lithophaga, which are the diagnostic feature of this habitat.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Petricola lithophaga.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Pontic infralittoral rock' (A3.1)
 
Annex 1:
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
 
MAES:
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat is known to occur in the Black Sea but there is insufficient data to accurately calculate EOO and AOO. There is insufficient data to accurately assess whether the habitat has undergone a significant decline in the last 50 years.

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication, as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Since the 1990s, this pressure has declined due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
Coastal development both now and in the future are a pressure on this habitat. These include: the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defenses. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Chemical pollution is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation; improvement of water quality management outside EU member states; coastal development controls; contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident; survey and monitoring programmes; raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability; and implementing measures to reduce global warming and sea level rise.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on limestone in the upper infralittoral zone in areas of low to moderate exposure and is characterized by rock boring species such as Petricola lithophaga. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: coastal development, chemical pollution and although pollution has been reduced, eutrophication is still an existing threat and one that could re-emerge in the future. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, coastal development controls, contingency plans in case of pollution events, survey and monitoring programs, raised public awareness of the habitat’s ecological value and vulnerability.

References:
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Çulha, M., Bat, L., Türk Çulha, S. & Çelik, M.Y. 2010. Benthic mollusk composition of some facies in the upper-infralittoral zone of the southern Black Sea, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology 34: 523-532.
Gönlügür Demirci, G. 2005. Sinop YarÄ±madasÄ±nÄ±n (Orta Karadeniz) Mollusca FaunasÄ±. Science and Engineering Journal of FÄ±rat University17(3): 565-572.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter 7:26-28.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Teyubova V.F. 2012. The diversity and ecological features macrophytobenthos the Russian sector of the Black Sea., Dissertation on competition degree of candidate of biological sciences, 280 pp.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Description:
These fine muddy habitats are situated in the lower infralittoral zone at the fronts formed by the mouths of large rivers (Danube, Dnepr, Bug)discharging onto the Northwestern Black Sea shelf . These fine muds mixed with terrestrial and freshwater detritus form soft, unstable deposits. Where the sediment content is lower in detritic organic particles terrigenous muds are more stable and sticky. In both zones the habitat is populated by bivalve molluscs and polychaete worms adapted to living in very soft substrata with high organic content.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Neanthes succinea, Nephthys hombergii , Abra prismatica, Mysella bidentata, Abra alba and Acanthocardium paucicostatum,

Classification:
EUNIS:
Level 4 of the EUNIS classification (v1405). A sub-habitat of 'Infralittoral mud' (A5.3)
 
Annex 1:
1130 Estuaries
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow muds
 
IUCN:
9.6 Subtidal muddy

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is likely to be sensitive to:
Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and breakwaters. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Chemical pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.
Plastic pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can lead to mortality. Micro particles of plastic can be ingested by faunal species resulting in reduction in quality.
Bottom dredging and trawling. This is a threat of current and future importance. This causes habitat destruction leading to in a reduction in extent and quality.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of infralittoral muddy sand substrate. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: trawling, chemical pollution and disturbance from anthropogenic activities. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programmes and raised public awareness.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M.C., Muller, G.I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu, M. 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva, S., Todorova, V. (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Terentyev, A. S. 2011. Macrozoobenthos of coastal part of the Kerch Bay (summer, 2009). Ecology of cities and recreational areas. / All_Ukrainian Scientific Conference Proceedings of articles: 261-263.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika, V.E., Boltachev, A.R., Zuev, G.V., Kovalev, A.V., Milchakova,  N.A., Sergeeva, N.G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y.P., Alexandrov, B.G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.13 Pontic infralittoral mixed substrata

Habitat Description:
This habitat comprises mixed substrate in the infralittoral zone. The substrate is often patchy and is comprised of a mix of cobbles, pebbles, shelly gravels and silted cobbles. The effects of currents and wave action are varied, and influences the type of substrate present and whether it is overlain by any silt. These different substrates can support a diverse range of faunal communities. These include spirorbid worms, crustaceans and ascidians. Floral communities are not a diagnostic feature.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
These include: encrusting spirorbid worms, Amphibalanus improvisus, Actinia aequina, Mytilus galloprovincialis and Pisidia longicornis.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4 . A sub-habitat of 'Shallow sublittoral/ infralittoral mixed sediments' (A5.4)
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slighlty covered all the time
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow coarse or mixed sediments
 
IUCN:
9.3 Subtidal loose rock/ pebble/ gravel

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
It is unknown how much of this habitat is hosted by the EU28 in the Black Sea,

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is sensitive and vulnerable to:
Trawling causing deterioration and habitat destruction by damaging benthic communities both directly and indirectly through effects such as smothering and altering the sediment characteristics.
Siltation. This is a current and future threat to the habitat. The resettling of suspended sediment can smother filter feeding organisms as well as inhibiting the growth of some species. Siltation is typically caused by dredging, trawling and other activities which disturb bottom sediments.
Chemical pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, prohibition of all forms of benthic trawling and dredging in the EU member states and outside, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1:
1110: MBLS U1, MMED XX
1160: MBLS U1, MMED XX

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas infralittoral mixed substrate. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: trawling, siltation, chemical pollution, plastic pollution and disturbance from other anthropogenic activities. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality and raised public awareness.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Arnoldi, L. V. 1949. Materials on the quantitative study of the Black Sea zoobenthos. II Karkinitsky Bay (in Russian). Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station: 8.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Borisenko Ð. Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve
Çulha, M., Bat, L., Türk Çulha, S. & Çelik, M. Y. 2010. Benthic mollusk composition of some facies in the upper-infralittoral zone of the southern Black Sea, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology 34: 523-532.
Gönlügür Demirci, G. 2005. Sinop YarÄ±madasÄ±nÄ±n (Orta Karadeniz) Mollusca FaunasÄ±. Science and Engineering Journal of FÄ±rat University17(3): 565-572.
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973-751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Mokievskiy, O. B. 1949. Flora of the soil littoral substrate of the west coast of Crimea. Proceedings of the Institute of Oceanology: 124-159.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Terentyev, A. S. 2002. State of of the bottom community of the sandy bottom in Opuksky Nature Reserve Reserves of Crimea. Biodiversity in the priority areas: 5 years after Gurzuf. / Materials of II scientific conference: 250-253.
Terentyev, A. S. 2011. Macrozoobenthos of coastal part of the Kerch Bay (summer, 2009). Ecology of cities and recreational areas. / All_Ukrainian Scientific Conference Proceedings of articles: 261-263.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V.E., Boltachev A.R., Zuev G.V., Kovalev A.V., Milchakova N.A., Sergeeva N.G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Description:
Non-cohesive muddy sand (with 5% to 20% silt/clay) in the lower infralittoral zone. The habitat is dominated by faunal species including ghost shrimps and bivalves.  
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Upogebia pusilla, Mya arenaria, Anadara inaequivalvis, Abra alba,  Spisula subtruncata and Pitar rudis.

Classification:
EUNIS (2004):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Shallow sublittoral/ infralittoral sand' (A5.52)
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
1120 Posidonia beds
1130 Estuaries
1150 Coastal lagoons
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sediment (coarse, snad, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow sands
Shallow muds
 
IUCN:
9.5 Subtidal sandy mud
 
Other relationships:
No relationships

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is likely to be sensitive to:
Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defences. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Trawling. This is a current and future threat to the habitat causing deterioration and habitat destruction by damaging benthic communities both directly and indirectly through effects such as smothering and altering the sediment characteristics. Demersal trawling is prohibited in some states. However, illegal trawling is still an issue in these areas.
Sand extraction. This is a threat of current and future importance which can lead to habitat destruction. Marine sand is an important building material in the Black Sea therefore sand extraction is considered likely to increase in tandem with other development pressures in the region.
Mobile demersal dredging and trawling. This is a threat of current and future importance. This causes habitat destruction leading to in a reduction in extent and quality.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include:
-Measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation
-Improvement of water quality management outside EU member states
-Coastal development controls
-Contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident
-Survey and monitoring programmes
-Raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of infralittoral muddy sand substrate. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: coastal development, trawling, sand extraction and disturbance from anthropogenic activities. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programmes and raised public awareness.

References:
Afanasiev D. F., Korpakova I. G. 2008. Macrophytobenthos Russian Azov-Black Sea., Rostov-on-Don: FGUP AzNIIRH.
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Arnoldi, L. V. 1949. Materials on the quantitative study of the Black Sea zoobenthos. II Karkinitsky Bay (in Russian). Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station: 8.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Bezuglova M.A. 2012. Seasonal changes in shellfish species of the storm emission of Odessa Bay. Scientific notes of the Ternopil National Pedagogical University. Series Biology 2(51): 33-36.
Borisenko Ð. Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve
Culha, M. & Bat, L. 2010. Visible decline of limpet Patella caerulea Linnaeus, 1758, a biomonitor species, at the sinop peninsula and vicinity (the southern Black sea, Turkey). Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology 11(3): 1024-1029.
Çulha, M., Bat, L., Türk Çulha, S. & Çelik, M. Y. 2010. Benthic mollusk composition of some facies in the upper-infralittoral zone of the southern Black Sea, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology 34: 523-532.
Dimitrova-Konaklieva, S. 2000. Flora of the Marine Algae of Bulgaria (Rhodophyta, Phaeophyta, Chlorophyta). Pensoft, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Gönlügür Demirci, G. 2005. Sinop YarÄ±madasÄ±nÄ±n (Orta Karadeniz) Mollusca FaunasÄ±. Science and Engineering Journal of FÄ±rat University17(3): 565-572.
Kalugina-Gutnik A. A. 1970. The composition and distribution of benthic vegetation in the south-eastern part of the Black Sea. Ecological and morphological studies of benthic organisms. Kiev: Naukova Dumka, p. 185- 202.
Kalugina-Gutnik A. A. 1975. Phytobenthos of Black Sea, Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 275 p.
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kopiy, V. G, Bondarenko, L.V. 2009. Benthos of sand habitat near splash zone of Karadag. Proc. of the V Intern. scient-pract. conf. (Simferopol): 294-298.
Kopiy, V. G. Bondarenko, L. V. 2012. The community of the macrozoobenthos of mediolittoral zone of Western Crimea. Biodiversity and sustainable development: Abstracts of the II Intern. scientific and practic Conf., Simferopol: 189-192.
Kostenko, N. S. 2003. Some trends of the succsecion of bottom vegatation in the Karadag area. Proc. Sciences. Rec. NaUKMA, Ser. "BÑ–ologÑ–ya and ekologÑ–ya": 429-432.
Lisovskaya O. A., Stepanyan O. V. 2009. A variety of coastal macroalgae Taman Peninsula (Russia) in summer., Algology V.19, N4, Ñ€. 341-348.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D., Micu, S. 2006. Recent records and proposed IUCN status of Donacilla cornea (Poli, 1795) (Bivalvia: Veneroida: Mesodesmatidae) in the Romanian Black Sea. Cercet Mar 36: 117-132.
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter No 7, pp 26-28.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973-751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Mokievskiy, O. B. 1949. Flora of the soil littoral substrate of the west coast of Crimea. Proceedings of the Institute of Oceanology: 124-159.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Morozova-Vodyanitskaya N. V., 1959. Bottom vegetation of the Black Sea, Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station, 11, p. 3 – 28.
Pereladov M. V., 2005. Modern status of the Black Sea Oyster population. Coastal hydrobiological investigations. VNIRO Proceedings, 144: 254-273.
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Prodanov, B., Kotsev, I., Keremedichiev, S., Todorova, V., Dimitrov, L. 2013. Initial assessment of the technogenic pressure in the mediolittoral zone of the bulgarian black sea coast. Second European SCGIS Conference “Conservation of Natural and Cultural Heritage for Sustainable Development: GIS-Based Approach”, 2013: 4-13.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Terentyev, A. S. 2002. State of of the bottom community of the sandy bottom in Opuksky Nature Reserve. Reserves of Crimea. Biodiversity in the priority areas: 5 years after Gurzuf. / Materials of II scientific conference: 250-253.
Terentyev, A. S. 2011. Macrozoobenthos of coastal part of the Kerch Bay (summer, 2009). Ecology of cities and recreational areas. / All_Ukrainian Scientific Conference Proceedings of articles: 261-263.
 
Teyubova V. F, 2005. Features interannual dynamics species composition and structure macrophytobenthos in the Bay of Novorossiysk (Black sea), Ekologiya Morya, (69), p. 53 – 57.
Teyubova V. F. 2012. The diversity and ecological features macrophytobenthos the Russian sector of the Black Sea., Dissertation on competition degree of candidate of biological sciences, 280 pp.
Tkachenko, F. P., Kovtun O. O. 2014. Contemporary condition of seaweeds flora of Zmeiny  island  Ñostal  zone  (Black  Sea). Chornomors’k. bot. z. 10(1): 37-47.
Todorova, V., Panayotova, M. 2011. Black mussels and/or barnacle communities on mediolittoral rocks. Red book of Republic of Bulgaria, Vol. III, Natural habitats, Eds. BAS & MOEW. [ISBN 978-9549746-23-5].
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V.E., Boltachev A.R., Zuev G.V., Kovalev A.V., Milchakova N.A., Sergeeva N.G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.bb Pontic infralittoral sands and muddy sands with annual algae

Habitat Description:
Infralittoral sands and muddy sands in the Black Sea are typically found in sheltered environments close to the coast. Most commonly these are in deltas, bays, estuaries or lagoons. Due to the low energy environments algal species are able to form stands on the sediment surface. These algal stand are typically characterised by lamina green algae species of the genus Ulva and Cladophora.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and species sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Ulva spp. and Cladophora spp.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of Shallow Sublittoral/infralittoral sand (A5.2)
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered by seawater all the time
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine- Marine inlets and transitional waters
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittorial sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow coarse or mixed sediments
 
IUCN:
9.5 Subtidal sandy-mud

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Reduced light penetration due to eutrophication caused declines in extent and quality of the habitat. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is likely to be sensitive to:
Coastal development including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defences. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which is important for the habitat.
Siltation. This is a current and future threat to the habitat. The resettling of suspended sediment can cause smothering. This inhibits the growth of habitat forming species. Siltation is typically caused by dredging, trawling and other activities which disturb bottom sediments.
Sand extraction. This is a threat of current and future importance. This can lead to habitat destruction. Sand is an important building resource in the Black Sea. Sand extraction is likely to increase alongside development pressures in the region.
Chemical pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance. These can lead to mortality of faunal species. If mortality rate is high this can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of individuals.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include:
-Measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation
-Improvement of water quality management outside EU member states
-Coastal development controls
-Contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident
-Raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability

Conservation Status:
Annex 1-type
1110: MATL U2, MBAL U1, MBLS U1, MMAC U1, MMED U1
1120: MMED U1
1130: MATL U2, MBAL U2, MBLS U1, MMED U2
1150: MATL U1, MBLS U1, MMAC U2, MMED U2
1160: MATL U2, MBAL U2, MBLS U1, MMAC FV, MMED XX

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of infralittoral sand and muddy sand. It is not present in the Sea of Marmara. The pressures and threats that likely to affect the habitat are eutrophication, coastal development, chemical pollution and siltation. The conservation and management measures which would benefit the habitat include maintaining physical and biological integrity, improving water quality, coastal development controls, pollution event response plans, survey and monitoring programs, public awareness, protection of habitats and species, and designation of MPAs.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.aa Pontic infralittoral sands and muddy sands with stable aggregations of perennial unattached macroalgae

Habitat Description:
This habitat occurs in infralittoral sands and muddy sands. It is most easily identified and defined by the presence of unattached forms of macroalgae, in particular the ball-like form of the red alga Phyllophora crispa var. sphaerica. The classic example of this habitat is the Small Phyllophora field (SPF) National Botanical Reserve, which lies in shallow water (less than 16 m) on sand with shells in Karkinitsky Bay, Ukraine and occupies some 300-400 km2. Smaller Phyllophora aggregations occur in shallow water (mostly 3-5 m) in Yagorlytsky, Dzharylgachsky, Tendrovsky and Yarylgachsky Bays, and near Cape Evpatoriysky.  Between 1938 and 1994, a shift in communities was observed in the SPF: the Phyllophora – oyster Ostrea edulis community was replaced by Mytilus galloprovincialis – Phyllophora, and the dominant species changed. From the 1970s, the most significant pressure was eutrophication which probably caused the greatest reductions in quantity and quality. After peaking in the 1980s, eutrophication has since reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea as well as industrial decline after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
Indicators of quality:
Several elements of the “quality” of Phyllophora beds have been studied, including time series data comparing 3 patches of the SPF with regard to depth of occurrence, thickness of seaweed layers, biomass, and area covered, as well as the species composition of the benthic community.
Characteristic species:
Macrophyte species diversity is not high, comprising about 20 species, chiefly Zostera noltii and P. crispa. The Phyllophora beds support a specialized fauna of more than 110 species of invertebrates and 47 species of fish that use the alga for breeding, food and shelter (many even having a reddish colouration). The main groups of macrozoobenthos recorded from the SPF in 2000 in terms of number of species, abundance and biomass were molluscs, polychaetes and crustaceans, with the most common species (with occurrence >60%) being: Mytilaster linneatus, Bittium reticulatum, Harmothoe reticulata, Nereis zonata, and Synisoma capito.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Shallow infralittoral sand' (A5.2).
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral coarse sediment
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow coarse or mixed sediments
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
The habitat only occurs in a few locations in the Black Sea. It fulfils an important ecological role. In terms of biomass, primary production and species associations it is one of the most ecologically rich habitats in the Black Sea. Additionally, the spherical unattatched Phyllophora crispa is unique to this habitat.

Comment EU28:
This habitat is only present along the coast of Ukraine therefore it does not occur in the EU 28

Comment EU28+:
The current area of the habitat is approximately 400kmÂ². Due to fragmentation and difficulties in accurately estimating all patches this figure should be treated with caution.

Trends in Quantity:
In the historic period the habitat quantity is believed to have been stable based on expert opinion of the pressures and threats present during this period. No quantitative data are available to support this opinion. The largest area of the habitat is in Karkinitsky Bay, where it is commonly known as the Small Phyllophora Field (SPF) and is considered to have existed since at least 1908.
The most detailed quantitative data on habitat extent in the recent past (1965 to present day) deals specifically with the SPF. In 1965 it consisted of three distinct patches: (a) the inner bay east of Bakalsky bank (total area 165km2); (b) beside and west of Bakalsky spit (approximately 99 km2); and (c) to the north of Kamenniy Cape. Surveys conducted in 1986 recorded a decrease in extent. In Patch B the area had decreased by approx. 65%. In Patch C only small and fragmented aggregations were found. By 1994 Phyllophora was only present in Patch A .
In 2008 the SPF consisted of two distinct areas: a small area west of Bakalsky spit and a larger area east of Bakalsky spit, equating equate to Patches B and C of 1965.. In 2008, the total area of the SPF was estimated at about 350 km2,  comparable to the area in the 1970s before the eutrophication period.
Other areas where the habitat is known to occur are: Cape Evpatoriysky, Yarylgachskaya Bay, Yagorlitsky Bay, Tendrovsky Bay and Dzharylgachsky Bay.
An area covering 30 km2 was first discovered at Evpatoriysky Cape in 1965. The current area is unknown but algal communities in the area are generally in good condition. This is a potential proxy indicator for the condition of this habitat. An area covering 28 km2 was also discovered at Yarylgachskaya Bay in 1965. In 2008 Phyllophora was only found at 2 out of 11 stations surveyed, with a total area estimated at 5 – 6 km2.
No area estimates are available for Yagorlitsky Bay, Tendrovsky Bay or Dzharylgachsky Bay. However the habitat is no longer known to occur at Tendrovsky Bay or Dzharylgachsky Bay. In the future the habitat is expected to continue showing signs of recovery providing the current conditions remain stable.

Trends in Quality:
In the historic period (pre-1965) there are no quantitative data on habitat quality. However the quality is believed to have been stable, based on expert opinion of the known pressures and threats present during the period.
Quantitative data are available for quality trends in the recent past (1965 to present day) for the SPF and other localities. Between 1938 and 1994 a change in communities was observed in the SPF, where the Phyllophora - Ostrea edulis community was replaced by Mytilus galloprovincialis – Phyllophora. Pilumnus hirtellus and Upogebia pusilla also became less common during this period.
Changes in Phyllophora biomass have also been observed in the SPF. A significant decrease occurred between 1964 and 1986. In 1964 its biomass varied mostly from 85 to 5,000 g/m2 and reached a maximum of 14,000 g/m2. In 1977 it had decreased on average by half to a range of 21 to 3,596 g/m2 and in 1986 to a range of 14 to 1,984 g/m2. The most significant measured decline occurred at Kamenniy Cape (Patch C) where the biomass dropped from 4,200 to 25 g/m2. The decline in Patch B was comparable, dropping from 2,000g/m2 in 1977 to 108 g/m2 in 1986. However, in Patch A a different pattern took place: in 1965 the biomass was estimated at 326,500 tons; in 1994 the estimate was a similar 329,000 tons; but by 2008 the total biomass had grown to about 750,000 tons (around 2.1 kg/m2), indicating there had been significant recovery since the1980s.
At Cape Evpatoriysky the Phyllophora biomass recorded in 1964 was 2,500 g/m2; in 2013 it was 3,800-6,800 g/m2. No data are available for the intervening years but it appears there has been an increase in quality.
At Yarylgachskaya Bay the Phyllophora biomass was recorded at 2,000 g/m2 in 1964. In 1986, two stations recorded Phyllophora biomass as 108 g/m2, while 9 other stations recorded no biomass. However, in 2008 a positive trend in species composition was observed indicating a possible recovery of the Phyllophora community.
At Yagorlitsky Bay in the 1960s – 70s the Phyllophora cover and biomass was noted to be increasing, the latter reaching a maximum of 115,000 tons. However, in the 1980s a deterioration in the condition of the algal communities was recorded.  No data are available after 1995.
In the future period the habitat quality is expected to remain stable providing the current environmental conditions are maintained.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
0%. The habitat is only present in the territorial waters of Ukraine and Crimea

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The EOO is <50,000 km2. The habitat has undergone an important decline in the last 50 years (particularly between 1965 and 1986). However, since 1986 a recovery has occurred in the largest locality (the SPF) and its extent is now believed

Justification of Restricted Area:
The habitat can only occur in sheltered, low energy environments (e.g. bays). The key characteristic of the habitat is the unattached, spherical Phyllophora crispa sphaerica. High energy environments prevent aggregations of the species from fo

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Reduced light penetration due to eutrophication caused declines in extent and quality of the habitat. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced, it remains a threat in the current and future periods, especially along coastal parts of non-EU countries which are not bound by legislation such as the Water Framework Directive or Marine Strategy Framework Directive.
Trawling is a current and future threat to the habitat. This causes habitat destruction by scraping away the benthic communities. The activity is at present unregulated in Ukraine.
Disturbance from gas exploration activities and offshore wind farm installations are a future threat to this habitat.
Siltation is a current and future threat to the habitat. The resettling of suspended sediment can cause smothering. This inhibits the growth of habitat forming species. Siltation is typically caused by dredging, trawling and other activities which disturbed bottom sediments.
Historically Phyllophora crispa was harvested for agar, which contributed to the declines in the past 50 years. However, extraction has been prohibited since 1996.

Conservation and Management:
The SPF is listed a protected area Harvesting Phyllophora crispa is prohibited Phylophorra crispa is listed in the Ukraine and Black Sea Red Data Books.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
The habitat cannot recover through intervention. It can recover naturally providing pressures are relieved. The amount of time required depends on the availability of source populations. If the habitat has declined in extent but is still present at a locality then it can recover within decades. If it has collapsed and is no longer present at a locality the recovery may take longer. If source populations are not available recovery may not be possible.

Summary:
The habitat is only present in territorial waters of Ukraine in sheltered areas in infralittoral sands and muddy sands. It is most easily identified and defined by the presence of unattached forms of macroalgae, in particular the ball-like form of the red alga Phyllophora crispa var. sphaerica. From the 1970s, the most significant pressure was eutrophication which probably caused the greatest reductions in quantity and quality. After peaking in the 1980s, eutrophication has since reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea as well as industrial decline after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Historically the habitat also experienced pressure from harvesting Phylophorra crispa for agar, which was prohibited in 1996. Currently the harvesting of the Phylophorra crispa is prohibtied throughout the Black Sea.

References:
Alexandrov B. G., Boltacheva N. A., Bushuyev S. G. et al. 2008. Specification of the habitat "Small Phyllophora Field in Karkinitsky Gulf of the Black Sea". Report of the EU prolect.
Aleksandrov, B. G., Boltacheva, N. A., Bushuyiv, S. G., Kolesnikova, E. A., Litvinenko  N. M., Milchakova, N. A., Minicheva, G. G., Synegub, I. O., Terentyev A. S. 2009. Establishment of Small Phyllophora Field Marine Protected Area, Ukraine. In Goriup, P. (Ed) The Small Phyllophora Field in Karkinitsky Bay, Black Sea, Ukraine. Background Information for the Establishment of a Marine Protected Area Euroconsult/Report by EU project.
Borisenko, A. M. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay. Karadag 201.
Chernyakov, D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendrovsky and Yagorlycky bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Researves. The dissertation on competition degree of candidate of geographical sciences.
Chernyakov, D. A. 2000. General characteristics of benthos and state of benthos. Dzharylgach Biodiversity: current status and way of preservation. 41-43.
Eremenko, T. I., Minicheva, G. G. 1992. Structural and functional characterisation of bottom vegetation in Yagorlytsky Bay. Natural complexes of the Black Sea State Biosphere Researve: 48-55.
Goriup, P. (Unpublished) Preliminary Management Plan for the Small Phyllophora Field Marine Protected Area Karkinitsky Bay. Prepared for EuropeAid/120117/C/SV/Multi; Contract No. 111779.
Kaminer, K. M. 1981. Phyllophora and Zostera in bays of north-western part of the Black Sea. Commercial algae and their use. Proceedings of the All-Union Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography 81-87.
Kalugina-Gutnik A. A. 1967. Qualitative composition and quantitative distribution of phytobenthos in Karkinitsky Gulf. Bottom biocenoses and biology of benthic organisms of the Black Sea. 28-51.
Kalugina-Gutnik, A. A., Kulikova, N. M. 1974. Bottom vegetation of the western coast of Crimea. Biologiya Morya 32: 111-129.
Kalugina-Gutnik A. A. 1975. Phytobenthos of the Black Sea. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka. 247 p.
Kalugina-Gutnik A. A., Evstigneyeva I. K. 1993. Changes in species composition and quantitative distribution of phytobenthos in Karkinitsky Gulf over the period 1964-1986. Ekologiya Morya 43: 98-105.
Kostylev, E. F., Tkachenko, F. P., & Tretiak, I. P. 2010. Establishment of “Zernov’s Phyllophora field” marine reserve: protection and restoration of a unique ecosystem. Ocean & Coastal Management 53(5-6): 203-208.
Lisovskiy, R., Bratchenko, O, Gavrilova, T., & Goriup, P. GIS database as the basis for establishment of a Marine Protected Area (MPA). The Small Phyllophora Field in Karkinits’ka Gulf, Black Sea, Ukraine.
Milchakova, N. A. 2011. Marine plants of the Black Sea. An illustrated field guide. Sevastopol: Digit Print, 144.
Michakova, N. A., Alexandrov, V. V., Mironova, N. V., Ryanbogina, V. G., Shakhmatova, O. A. 2012. Patterns and causes of long-term changes of the key macrophytobenthos elements in the Ukraine’s Black Sea shelf. Final report on the project “Integrated environmental, hydro-biological and biotechnological research to solve dundamental and applied problems of continous use of the resource potential, restoration and conservation of marine biodiversity and the quality of the marine environment of the Azov-Black Sea region.
Milchakova, N. A., Alexandrov, V. V. 2013. Current state of macrophytobenthos of the Zernov Phyllophora field (NWBS) in autumn. Scientific report on biological, biophysical and radiochemical research during the 70th cruise of the R/V Prof. Vodyanitsky.
Minicheva, G. G., Kosenko, M. N., Shvets, A. V. 2009. Phytobenthos of the Large and Small Phyllophora Fields as a reflection of the current ecological status of the north-western part of the Black Sea. Marine Ecological Journal 8(4): 24-40.
Morozova-Vodyanitskaya N. 1936. Phytobenthos of Karkinisky Bay. Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station 5: 219-232.
Pogrebnyak, I. I., Pashkovskaya, N. M. 1966. The bottom vegetation of Yagorlitsky Bay of the Black Sea. Abstracts of scientific conference of the biological and geographical faculty of OSU. Odessa. 
Pogrebnyak, I. I., Ostrovchuk, P. P. 1973. Phytocenosises of soft soils of north-western part of the Black Sea.  Materials of All-Union symposium on the study of the Black and Mediterranean seas, use and protection of their resources. 145-147.
Rubinstein I. G. 1990. Biocenological zoning of the Egorlytsky Bay. Manuscript YugNIRO 47.
Rubinstein, I. G. 1991. Report on research work Fisheries Section Feasibility of protection of the Black Sea bays against Pollution ICE and sewage in the area of Krasnoznamyanskoy irrigation systems Kherson region
Tkachenko, F. P., Tretiak, I. P. & Kostilev, E. F. 2009. Macrophytobenthos of the Sernov Phyllophora Field in present conditions (the Black Sea, Ukraine). International Journal on Algae. 11(1); 64-72

Criterion B Text:
This habitat is only known to occur at very few locations along the coast of Ukraine and Crimea. Therefore due to this habitats restricted AOO and EOO this habitat has been assesed as Endangered using criteria B1c and B2c.

Criterion C/D Text:
As there has been a slight decline over alarge extent of the quality of this habtiat, it has been assessed as Vulnerable using criteria C/D1.

Synthesis:
The habitat is not present in the EU. Therefore it has been classified as ‘Not Assessed’ for this region.
In the EU28+ the habitat has been assessed as Endangered under Criteria B1c and B2c due to its restricted distribution along the Ukrainian coast. Despite its restricted distribution the quality and quantity of this habitat has remained relatively stable over the last 50 years, and is expected to remain stable or increase in the near future.

Contributors:
D. Micu, S. Beal, V. V. Alexandrov, D. Korolesova, N. A. Milchakova, N. V. Mironova,


Habitat Type Name:
A5.237 Pontic infralittoral sands and muddy sands without macroalgae

Habitat Description:
This habitat includes all sandy habitats dominated by faunal species occurring in the infralittoral zone down to 20m depth and comprises many different Level 5 habitats. This ranges from medium to coarse grained sands on exposed beaches to off-shore infralittoral fine sand banks and includes many types of surface features at different scales (banks, ripples, mounds and burrows of infauna). The depth and waves or current exposure are important elements in defining the species composition.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Donax trunculus, Upogebia pusilla, Lentidium mediterraneum, Cerastoderma glaucum, Mya arenaria, Chamelea gallina, Tellina tenuis, Anadara inaequivalvis, Cyclope neritea, Arenicola marina, Callianassidae, Gouldia minima, Donax semistriatus, Modiolus adriaticus, Solen marginatus amphipods and Aonides ornatus.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Shallow sublittoral/ infralittoral sand' (A5.52)
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
1130 Estuaries
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow sands
Shallow muds
 
IUCN:
9.5 Subtidal sandy mud

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a threat. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is sensitive and vulnerable to:
Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defenses. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Trawling is causing deterioration and habitat destruction by damaging benthic communities both directly and indirectly through effects such as smothering and altering the sediment characteristics.
Sand extraction can lead to habitat destruction. Marine sand is an important building material in the Black Sea therefore sand extraction is considered likely to increase in tandem with other development pressures in the region.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including sand extraction control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, coastal development controls, prohibition of bottom trawling, survey and monitoring programmes, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability of the habitat.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of sandy infralittoral substrate. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: coastal development, trawling, sand extraction and disturbance from anthropogenic activities. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programs and raised public awareness.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Arnoldi, L. V. 1949. Materials on the quantitative study of the Black Sea zoobenthos. II Karkinitsky Bay (in Russian). Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station: 8.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Borisenko Ð. Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kopiy, V. G, Bondarenko, L.V. 2009. Benthos of sand habitat near splash zone of Karadag. Proc. of the V Intern. scient-pract. conf. (Simferopol): 294-298.
Kopiy, V. G. Bondarenko, L. V. 2012. The community of the macrozoobenthos of mediolittoral zone of Western Crimea. Biodiversity and sustainable development: Abstracts of the II Intern. scientific and practic Conf., Simferopol: 189-192.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter No 7, pp 26-28.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973-751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.33 Pontic infralittoral terrigenous muds

Habitat Description:
Infralittoral coastal terrigenous muds are characterized by mud and sandy mud and the presence of faunal species. There are two distinct sub habitats which are characterized by the dominant faunal communities. The first is dominated by polychaets, whilst the second is dominated by mussels (this one does not occur in Marmara Sea).
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Melinna palmata, Heteromastus filiformis, Aricidea claudiae, Mytilus galloprovincialis and Mytilaster lineatus.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of infralittoral mud (A5.3)
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
1130 Estuaries
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal.
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow muds
 
IUCN:
9.6 Subtidal muddy

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is likely to be sensitive to:
Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defences. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Chemical pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.
Plastic pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can lead to mortality. Micro particles of plastic can be ingested by faunal species resulting in reduction in quality.
Bottom dredging and trawling. This is a threat of current and future importance. This causes habitat destruction leading to  a reduction in extent and quality.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of infralittoral terrigenous muds. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: coastal development, chemical pollution, plastic pollution and disturbance caused by anthropogenic activities. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, and raised public awareness.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Arnoldi, L.V. 1949. Materials on the quantitative study of the Black Sea zoobenthos. II Karkinitsky Bay (in Russian). Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station: 8.
Bacescu, M.C., Muller, G.I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu, M. 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Borisenko, Ð.Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov, D.A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve
Gönlügür- Demirci, G. 2005. Sinop YarÄ±madasÄ±nÄ±n (Orta Karadeniz) Mollusca FaunasÄ±. Science and Engineering Journal of FÄ±rat University17(3): 565-572.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva, S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika, V.E., Boltachev, A.R., Zuev,  G.V., Kovalev,  A.V., Milchakova,  N.A., Sergeeva, N.G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998,  Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y.P., Alexandrov, B.G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Description:
It occurs at depths 60-180m. The sediment type varies between terrigenous muds, calcareous muds and biogenic detritic bottoms. There is no light influence at this depth. The benthic fauna is dominated by bean mussels Modiolula phaseolina, polychaetes and solitary ascidians. At the greatest depths the environment becomes hypoxic. Here the sediment consists of periazoic calcareous white muds and faunal communities become impoverished.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include the presence of characteristic species and species sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Modiolula phaseolina, Amphiura stepanovi, Terebellides stroemi, Pachycerianthus solitarius, solitary ascidians (Ascidiella aspersa, Ciona intestinalis, Eugyra), hydrozoans (Bougainvillia ramosa), nematodes and oligochaetes.

Classification:
EUNIS:
Level 4 of the EUNIS classification (v1405). A sub-habitat of 'Circalittoral mud' (A5.3)
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shelf sublittoral sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shelf muds
 
IUCN:
9.6 Subtidal muddy

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is likely to be sensitive to chemical pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in high level of species mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent of characterizing communities. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect growth rate and size of some fauna.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea and the Sea of Marmara on areas of infralittoral mud and muddy sand substrate. The main pressures impacting this habitat include eutrophication, chemical pollution and disturbance from bottom trawling. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programs and raised public awareness.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Culha, M. & Bat, L. 2010. Visible decline of limpet Patella caerulea Linnaeus, 1758, a biomonitor species, at the sinop peninsula and vicinity (the southern Black sea, Turkey). Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology 11(3): 1024-1029.
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V.E., Boltachev A.R., Zuev G.V., Kovalev A.V., Milchakova N.A., Sergeeva N.G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44. 
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A3.3z Pontic lower infralittoral rock, with siginificant cover of sciaphilic algae

Habitat Description:
Rocky habitat in the lower infralittoral zone characterised by low light conditions. Sciaphilic algae dominate this habitat where they form significant cover on the rocks.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Phyllophora crispa, Apoglossum ruscifolium, Gelidium spinosum, Zanardinia typus, Polysiphonia elongata, Antithamniom cruciatum, Lomentaria clavellosa, Nereia filiformis, Ectocarpus spp., encrusting algae (Hildenbrandia spp., Lithothamnion spp., Lithophyllum spp.) and the gastropod Gibbula sp.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of A3.3 - wave sheltered infralittoral rock
 
Annex 1:
1170 Reefs
8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves 
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
Shallow aphotic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
9.2 Subtidal rock and rocky reefs

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a threat. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is likely to be sensitive to:
Chemical pollution which at its most severe can result in species mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.
Turbity, which prevents sufficient light penetration for the development of the characteristic perennial algal cover. This is directly related to eutrophication.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include: implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, survey and monitoring programs, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of shaded upper infralittoral rock. It is not present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: chemical pollution. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programs, raised public awareness, enhanced legal protection, measures to reduce global warming.

References:
Afanasiev D. F., Korpakova I. G. 2008. Macrophytobenthos Russian Azov-Black Sea., Rostov-on-Don: FGUP AzNIIRH.
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Dimitrova-Konaklieva, S. 2000. Flora of the Marine Algae of Bulgaria (Rhodophyta, Phaeophyta, Chlorophyta). Pensoft, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1970. The composition and distribution of benthic vegetation in the south-eastern part of the Black Sea. Ecological and morphological studies of benthic organisms. Kiev: Naukova Dumka, p. 185- 202.
Kalugina-Gutnik A.A. 1975. Phytobenthos of Black Sea, Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 275 p.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kostenko, N. S. 2003. Some trends of the succesion of bottom vegatation in the Karadag area. Proc. Sciences. Rec. NaUKMA, Ser. "BÑ–ologÑ–ya and ekologÑ–ya": 429-432Lisovskaya O.A., Stepanyan O.V. 2009. A variety of coastal macroalgae Taman Peninsula (Russia) in summer., Algology 19(4): 341-348.
Micu D, Todorova V., 2007. A fresh look at the western Black Sea biodiversity. MarBEF Newsletter 7:26-28.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Morozova-Vodyanitskaya N. V. 1959. Bottom vegetation of the Black Sea. Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station 11: 3 – 28.
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Teyubova V. F. 2005. Features interannual dynamics species composition and structure macrophytobenthos in the Bay of Novorossiysk (Black sea). Ekologiya Morya 69: 53 – 57.
Teyubova V.F. 2012. The diversity and ecological features macrophytobenthos the Russian sector of theBlack Sea., Dissertation on competition degree of candidate of biological sciences, 280 pp.
Tkachenko, F. P., Kovtun O. O. 2014. Contemporary condition of seaweeds flora of Zmeiny  island  Ñostal zone  (Black  Sea). Chornomors’k. bot. z. 10(1): 37-47.
Todorova, V., Panayotova, M. 2011. Black mussels and/or barnacle communities on mediolittoral rocks. Red book of Republic of Bulgaria, Vol. III, Natural habitats, Eds. BAS & MOEW. [ISBN 978-9549746-23-5].
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V. E., Boltachev A. R., Zuev G. V., Kovalev A. V., Milchakova N. A., Sergeeva N. G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37- 44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Description:
This habitat occurs in the mediolittoral zone in areas of coarse, medium and fine sands. It is typically exposed, moderately exposed or sheltered from wave action.
The dominant environmental conditions which define the sediment characteristic and species composition are high levels of physical disturbance from wave action, wide temperature variability, and periods of desiccation. In the microtidal Black Sea (tidal range of about 0.3 m) this habitat is limited to narrow beach strip covered by the swash. 
Community composition depends on grain size and origin of sand (siliceous/calcareous, biogenic/abiogenic) with three associated biotopes distinguished. Diversity is usually low due to high physical disturbance from wave action but abundances may be high.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include: the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face; water quality parameters; levels of exposure to particular pressure as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time.
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
The biotope associated with coarse and medium sands of exposed to moderately exposed beaches is inhabited by large numbers of the burrowing wedge clam Donacilla cornea,  Donacilla distribution is normally strictly limited to the beach strip covered by the swash and only exceptionally it may extend towards the infralittoral to an approximate depth of 3 m – an area usually inhabited by Donax trunculus. Another characteristic species is the infaunal polychaete Ophelia bicornis which occupies the upper swash zone and the mysid shrimp Gastrosaccus sanctus. Typical interstitial species are the crustaceans Eurydice dolfusi, Gastrosaccus sanctus, and the polychaetes Nerine cirratulus, Saccocirrus papillocercus, Pisione remota, Hesionides arenaria.
A second biotope occurs on the sheltered shores of lagoons and estuaries from Crimea and Taman peninsula, where Donacilla occurs in a very narrow swash zone in muddy sands with significant organic load, together with polychaetes like Hediste diversicolor and Alitta succinea.
A third biotope occurs in marine situations in fine siliceous sands (freshwater-influenced) where the amphipod Pontogammarus maeoticus is highly abundant, while Donacilla and Ophelia disappear.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 5. A sub-habitat of Pontic littoral sand (A2.2).
 
Annex 1:
1130 Estuaries
1140 Mudflats & sandflats not covered by water at low tide
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Littoral sediment
 
EUSeaMap:
Not mapped
 
IUCN:
12.2 Sandy shorelines
12.4 Mud shoreline and intertidal mudflats

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
It is unknown how much of this habitat is hosted by the EU 28 in the Black Sea, but its presence is known from all countires around the Black Sea.

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on this habitat. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
Coastal development and coastal protection works which alter the beach dynamics are a threat of current and future importance and can result in direct removal as well as indirect impacts.  This habitat is also highly sensitive to sand extraction and trampling by beach users.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management, control and regulation of coastal development, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, and survey and monitoring programmes. 
Raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability of the habitat, enhanced legal protection for the habitat and key species (such as additions to the EU Habitats Directive), establishment of a unified list of Black Sea species and habitats requiring conservation measures), and designation or extension of MPAs which can provide an additional legal framework to support delivery of conservation objectives.

Conservation Status:
Annex 1:
1140  MBLS U1
Some of the characteristic species O.bicornis, H.arenarius and D.cornea are listed as endangered in the Black Sea Red Data Book.

Summary:
This habitat occurs in the mediolittoral zone in areas of coarse, medium and fine sands. It is typically exposed, moderately exposed or sheltered from wave action.. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: coastal development, sand extraction and trampling caused by beach users. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programs, raised public awareness and enhanced legal protection.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Arnoldi, L. V. 1949. Materials on the quantitative study of the Black Sea zoobenthos. II Karkinitsky Bay (in Russian). Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station: 8.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. . Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Borisenko Ð. Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve.
Gönlügür Demirci, G. 2005. Sinop YarÄ±madasÄ±nÄ±n (Orta Karadeniz) Mollusca FaunasÄ±. Science and Engineering Journal of FÄ±rat University17(3): 565-572.
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kopiy, V. G, Bondarenko, L. V. 2009. Benthos of sand habitat near splash zone of Karadag. Proc. of the V Intern. scient-pract. conf. (Simferopol): 294-298.
Kopiy, V. G. Bondarenko, L. V. 2012. The community of the macrozoobenthos of mediolittoral zone of Western Crimea. Biodiversity and sustainable development: Abstracts of the II Intern. scientific and practic Conf., Simferopol: 189-192.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D., Micu, S. 2006. Recent records and proposed IUCN status of Donacilla cornea (Poli, 1795) (Bivalvia: Veneroida: Mesodesmatidae) in the Romanian Black Sea. Cercet Mar 36: 117-132.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Mokievskiy, O.B. 1949. Flora of the soil littoral substrate of the west coast of Crimea. Proceedings of the Institute of Oceanology: 124-159.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Prodanov, B., Kotsev, I., Keremedichiev, S., Todorova, V., Dimitrov, L. 2013. Initial assessment of the technogenic pressure in the mediolittoral zone of the bulgarian black sea coast. Second European SCGIS Conference “Conservation of Natural and Cultural Heritage for Sustainable Development: GIS-Based Approach”, 2013: 4-13.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Terentyev, A. S. 2002. State of of the bottom community of the sandy bottom in Opuksky Nature Reserve. Reserves of Crimea. Biodiversity in the priority areas: 5 years after Gurzuf. / Materials of II scientific conference: 250-253.
Terentyev, A. S. 2011. Macrozoobenthos of coastal part of the Kerch Bay (summer, 2009). Ecology of cities and recreational areas. / All_Ukrainian Scientific Conference Proceedings of articles: 261-263.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.

Criterion A Text:
There is insufficient data on changes in quantity of this habitat to undertake an assessment. This habitat is therefore Data Deficient under criterion A.

Criterion B Text:
This habitat occurs in the Black Sea but there is insufficient data to calculate EOO and AOO. This habitat is therefore Data Deficient under Criterion B.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.36 Pontic upper circalittoral fine mud

Habitat Description:
This habitat consists of fine muds in the upper circalittoral zone. It is found below the photic zone at depths between 20 and 50 meters. The habitat is characterised by faunal communities dominated by bivalves and polychaete worms.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include the presence of characteristic species and species sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Mya arenaria, Spisula subtruncata, Melinna palmata, Heteromastus filiformis and Aricidea claudiae.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Circalittoral mud' (A5.3)
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow muds
 
IUCN:
9.6 Subtidal muddy

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
Demersal trawling and dredging by commercial fisheries is a current and future threat to the habitat. Trawling and dredging can damage the habitat and associated benthic communities both directly and indirectly. Trawl and dredge gear can directly impact the habitat by damaging and/or removing species. Trawling can also act directly to reduce the complexity of the habitat, smoothing out microhabitats, and thereby reducing biodiversity. Indirect impacts of trawling include smothering and alteration of sediment characteristics. Demersal trawling and dredging is prohibited in some states, however, illegal demersal fishing is still an issue in these areas.
Chemical pollution is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in high levels of species mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in habitat/community extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect growth rate and size of some fauna.

Conservation and Management:
Conservation and management measures which would benefit this habitat include: implementing measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, including pollution control and regulation, improvement of water quality management outside EU member states, contingency plans to be followed in the event of a major pollution incident, survey and monitoring programmes, raised public awareness of ecological value and vulnerability.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea and Sea of Marmara in areas of infralittoral mud, sandy mud and muddy sand substrates. The main pressures impacting this habitat include trawling, eutrophication, chemical pollution and disturbance from bottom trawling. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programs and raised public awareness.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Bacescu, M. C., Muller G. I., Gomoiu, M T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Kiseleva, M. I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973-751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva. S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Vershinin, A. 2007. Life in the Black Sea. Maccentr, Moscow, Russia.
Zaika V.E., Boltachev A.R., Zuev G.V., Kovalev A.V., Milchakova N.A., Sergeeva N.G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.5w Seagrass meadows in Pontic lower infralittoral sands

Habitat Description:
Seagrass beds are found on sandy and sandy-muddy bottoms in sheltered habitats with sufficient lighting. Maximum development is in the summer. The habitat occurs all around the Black Sea as small and fragmented meadows. Its distribution is well documented in Russia, Ukraine, Romania and Bulgaria, while for Turkey it is mostly unknown. Off the coast of Georgia sparse eelgrass meadows are known to occur at Cape Souk-Sou (after Cystoseira communities at a depth of 6-10 m), in the Gulf of Skurge at a depth of 4-6 m. This habitat contains communities in both the upper and lower infralittoral sands with different dominant eelgrass species:
The habitat occurs in the deeper infralittoral zone, most typically where the sediment is silty sand and in the 10 m depth range. The meadows are found in sea water with salinity varying between 11 and 19 psu. Six species of seagrass may be present in this habitat but Zostera marina is generally dominant. There are also algae living on the eelgrass blades, mostly red algae. Species diversity develops two peaks, one in spring and the other in autumn. Seasonal dynamics of the biomass and density are less pronounced due to the depth. The communities of Z. marina display greatest diversity in the Kerch Strait with its special hydrological and hydrochemical conditions.
Indicators of quality:
Leaf length, biomass, shoot density have all been identified has indicators of quality. However, thresholds have not been set and these can and will vary between countries.
Characteristic species:
Zostera marina is the dominant seagrass species. It may form pure stands or be found in association with Zostera noltei, Cystoseira barbata and Gracilaria gracilis. 115 macroalgal species have been recorded in this habitat type in the Black Sea. Typical genera are: Ceramium, Cladophora, Kylinia, Laurencia, Melobesia and Polysiphonia, green and red algae prevail.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Pontic Sublittoral macrophyte-dominated sediment' (A5.5)
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sand
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow sands
 
IUCN:
9.4 Subtidal sandy
9.9 Seagrass (submerged)

Justification Outstanding Example of Biogeographical Region:
Sublittoral Zostera noltei beds are not typical for the other regional seas (NEA: only intertidal, Western Baltic Sea: in areas falling dry wind induced, Mediterranean )

Comment EU28:
EOO and AOO have been calculated on the available data.

Comment EU28+:
EOO and AOO have been calculated on the available data.

Trends in Quantity:
In the historical period (pre-1960s) the habitat has generally decreased in quantity. This is due to wasting disease (caused by Labyrinthula sp.) effecting Zostera marina. This trend was recorded at a few locations in the Black Sea (e.g. Chernomorskaya Bay and Yarylgachskaya Bay). The trend has been extrapolated for the rest of the Black Sea based on the known impacts of the disease throughout Europe and America. Furthermore, at locations where the habitat has been studied in detail during the historic period it was noted to grow at shallower depths. At sites in the Russian Federation the depth of the habitat shifted from 11 to6 m between 1938 and 1965.
During the period up to the 1990s widespread and severe eutrophication occurred in the Black Sea. This was most notable in the western Black Sea. This caused a significant reduction in extent. In the 1980s around Romania, Bulgaria and the Kerch Strait this habitat was near collapse. In Romania the reduction in extent is estimated at 95%. At Tendrovsky Bay in Ukraine losses of between 70 and 80% have been recorded. A similar trend is also seen along the Sevastopol coast in Crimea where between 40 and 80% of the habitat has been lost. There has been recovery since 2000 but not in deeper areas due to a continued lack of water clarity caused by eutrophication. The quantity of the habitat is now increasing but is yet to reach previous levels. This recovery has not been experienced around Crimea, largely due to the continued development in the area. Coastal development (i.e. hydrotechnical works) have further contributed to these losses in Romania. This has led to a total loss of large areas of meadows in the Razim-Sinoe lagoons. Major losses of shallow meadows have also occurred along the coast due to coastal protection and harbour building works.
Turkish data on this habitat is sparse. However, there are three bays with the habitat in western Turkey which have been well studied. In these locations the habitat has remained stable in extent since 1992. Little data exists on the extent of this habitat along Turkey’s eastern coastline except Sinop area. However, it could be speculated that there has been a decline due to the development of a coastal road in the area. There is no data on the effect of eutrophication in this area.
As a whole there has been an increase in biomass of Zostera noltei. The species has now begun to expand into areas previously occupied by Zostera marina. This is probably because Z. marina has a lower recoverability like in other regional seas
Losses of extent due to eutrophication have been more pronounced in the west close to the source of the pollution. Since this pressure has begun to ease stability and slow recovery has been seen. Whilst losses of extent due to eutrophication have occurred in the eastern Black Sea this was less severe. Coastal development continues to put pressure on this habitat across the entire Black Sea. This has been particularly noted at certain sites in Crimea which have experienced large losses due to dredging activities (e.g. Sevastopol coast and Balaklava Bay).

Trends in Quality:
In the historic period (pre-1960s) the habitat has decreased in quality. This is due to wasting disease (caused by Labyrinthula sp.) effecting Zostera marina. This trend was recorded at a few locations in the Black Sea (e.g. Chernomorskaya Bay and Yarylgachskaya Bay). The trend has been extrapolated for the rest of the Black Sea based on the known impacts of the disease throughout Europe and America.
In the last 50 years (1965 to present day) the quality has decreased in Romania and Bulgaria. This has been witnessed since 1980s due to the effects of eutrophication. The decline in quality has been experienced in parallel with the decline in quantity. The reduction in quality has been defined by: meadow fragmentation, reduced depth distribution, reduced cover and leaf length, reduced diversity of associated communities, anthropogenic substrate degradation. In Ukraine and Crimea there is a general trend of decline and recovery. For instance, data from Tendrovsky Bay has seen biomass decrease from 3,728 to 456.5 g/m2 between 1973 and 1990. Where more recent data is available (e.g. Sevastopol coast) biomass has increased between 1984 and 2008. It has now recovered to levels seen in 1972. There is no quality data available from Turkey.
In the last 10 years it has been recorded that Z. marina is no longer producing seeds and only expanding due to vegetative growth. This reliance on vegetative, clonal growth can be considered as a decrease in quality as it is more susceptible to fungal diseases. Z. noltei has seen the opposite occur, with less vegetative growth, but more reproductive growth. Due to Z. noltei’s smaller leaf size compared to Z. marina the overall biomass in the Black Sea is decreasing. Species, which prefer habitats with Z. marina compared to Z. noltei have been observed as declining. Whilst the overall biomass has decreased as a whole in the Black Sea, biomass has increased in the Kerch Strait and Kartinitski Bay.

% of Distribution of the Habitat Type within the EU 28:
Around 9% of this habitat is estimated to be hosted by EU 28 in the Black Sea.

Justification of Small Range/Regression:
The habitat has a small range following regression in the EU countries only. In the EU 28+ the EOO exceeds 50,000 km².The habitat has undergone an important decline in the last 50 years. This is especially true to the western Black Sea (see Trends

Justification of Restricted Area:
As the habitat requires sandy, sheltered waters. These conditions have a limited distribution and cannot evolve naturally.

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Reduced light penetration due to eutrophication caused declines in extent and quality of the habitat. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non-EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
Coastal development is a threat of current and future importance. This can lead to habitat destruction and siltation. Seagrasses are not tolerant to smothering by mud or other sediments. This is a threat in all parts of the Black Sea. In Romania, Bulgaria, Crimea and the Caucasus intensive hotel development and the creation of artificial beaches are a threat to the underlying substrate. In Turkey proposed road developments also threaten the substrate.
Seagrass rhizomes are sensitive. The leaves can easily be damaged by motor boats and boat moorings. Meadows in shallow waters are also at risk of disturbance due to bait digging and trampling.

Conservation and Management:
The habitat is a characteristic feature of several habitat types listed in Annex 1 of the Habitats Directive like 1130 Estuaries or 1160 Large shallow inlets and bays. Areas of this habitat in Romania and Bulgaria all occur in Natura 2000 protected areas. Around the Crimean region all seagrass meadows are included in a local Red List. Many meadows are present in marine reserves. Turkey has limited bait dredging to >30 m. Collection of Z. noltei is banned. Additional actions needed: Prohibit bait dredging over the entire Black Sea; Improve enforcement of MPAs; explore habitat restoration (i.e. translocation of sea grasses. This has yet to be tested in the Black Sea), improve water quality.

Capacity to Recover its Typical Character and Functionality?:
If only quality degradation occurs then it is possible to recover naturally within 50 years if pollution pressures are removed. In case of strong habitat fragmentation or loss of whole meadows recovery may take much longer or even never occur.

Summary:
The habitat is present throughout the Black Sea on areas of  sandy and sandy-muddy bottoms in sheltered habitats with sufficient lighting. Six species of seagrass may be present in this habitat but Zostera marina is generally dominant. Historically the most significant pressure has been eutrophication. This has caused the greatest reductions in quantity and quality. This was most acutely experienced in the north-west Black Sea where there are high riverine inputs. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union transboundary pollution measures have been implemented and improved. This has led to a reduction in the pressure. Currently this habitat is present within marine researves around crimea. However prhibiting bait dredging is necessary to protect locations around Turkey. Measures to improve water quality are also needed to protect this habitat.

Criterion B Text:
The AOO and EOO are intrinsically small for the EU states. Declines in spatial extent, abiotic and biotic quality have halted. A decline in extent is likely to be caused in the next 20 years due to coastal development. This is based on expert opinion. This habitat is therefore assessed as being Endangered using criteria B1b and B2b in the EU 28.

Criterion C/D Text:
In the EU states there has been a slight decline affecting >80% extent. This has occurred within the last 50 years. This has affected both biotic and abiotic factors. It is not possible to decouple these. This is mostly based on expert opinion. Quantitative data is only available for sites in Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Crimea and Russia. The results have been extrapolated and combined with expert opinion.
In the EU 28+ there has been a slight decline affecting >80%. This has affected both biotic and abiotic factors. It is not possible to decouple these. This is mostly based on expert opinion. Quantitative data is only available for sites in Ukraine, Crimea and Russia. The results have been extrapolated.

Synthesis:
Due to this habitats restricted distribution and continued decline this habitat has been assessed as Endangered in the EU 28. Due to the overall slight decline in quality, this habtitat has been assessed as Vulnerable in the EU 28+. The threat is plausible based on losses caused in the recent past and plans to continue coastal development and protection works in both the EU 28 and the EU 28+.


Habitat Type Name:
A1.3x Sheltered Pontic mediolittoral rock

Habitat Description:
The habitat is located at 0-0.5 m deep on soft rocks (such aschalk,  marl and hard clay) into which habitat forming species can burrow. Empty burrows are often utilized by other invertebrate and fish species. This habitat occurs in sheltered situations.
Indicators of quality:
There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Piddock (Pholas dactylus) beds

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4 . A sub-habitat of 'Pontic littoral rock' (A1.3)
 
Annex 1:
1160 Large shallow inlets and bays
1170 Reefs
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Marine coastal
 
MSFD:
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Not mapped
 
IUCN:
No relationship

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Pholas dactylus and Barnea candida cannot survive in anoxic or hypoxic conditions caused by eutrophication. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on  pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
Coastal developments including the construction of marinas and slipways, sediment extraction, the widening and dredging of channels, creation of artificial beaches, road developments and sea defences. These activities may alter the hydrological regime which will in turn affect the character and viability of the habitat.
Chemical pollution. This is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.
Increased water temperatures from climate change may affect the habitat in the future. Pholas dactylus require soft rocks in to which they can burrow. In warm waters softs rocks (such as clay) can harden preventing the key species from forming burrows.

Conservation and Management:
Pholas dactylus is protected species under the Bern Convention. It is also listed as threatened in the Red Data Book for Ukraine. In some localities (e.g. Crimea) the habitat is protected by protected areas. Controls on water quality are now present in the western Black Sea (e.g. WFD).
Adopting the following conservation and management actions will benefit the habitat in the future: such as the designation of additional protected areas, improvement of water quality controls for non EU states, installation of artificial reefs may provide habitat situations for recolonization.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on soft sheltered mediolittoral substrate. It is not present in the Sea of Marmara. The main pressures effecting this habitat are eutrophication, coastal development, chemical pollution and increased water temperatures due to climate change. The habitat engineering species Pholas dactylus is protected under the Bern and Barcelona Conventions (Appendix II). It is also listed in regional and national Red Data Lists. The habitat could be protected in the future by designating additional MPAs, improving water quality and installing artificial reefs.

References:
Anistratenko, V., 1999 . Description of rare mollusc species. In: Zagorodniuk I.V. (Editor), 1999. Invertebrates of Ukraine protected by the Bern Convention: 49-50. Omega-L Press, Kiev 1999, 60 pp.
Bacescu, M.C., Muller, G.I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp.
Bacescu, M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Gönlügür Demirci, G. 2005. Sinop YarÄ±madasÄ±nÄ±n (Orta Karadeniz) Mollusca FaunasÄ±. Science and Engineering Journal of FÄ±rat University17(3): 565-572.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Kopiy, V.G. Bondarenko, L. V. 2012. The community of the macrozoobenthos of mediolittoral zone of Western Crimea. Biodiversity and sustainable development: Abstracts of the II Intern. scientific and practic Conf., Simferopol: 189-192.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D. 2007. Recent Records of Pholas dactylus (Bivalvia: Myoida: Pholadidae) from the Romanian Black Sea, with considerations on its habitat and proposed IUCN regional status. Acta zool. bulg., 59 (3): 267-273.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct
Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973- 751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva, S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Öztürk, B., Oral, M., TopaloÄŸlu, B., Bat, L.,Okudan Arslan, E.Åž., Özgür Özbek, E., Sezgin, M., Tonay, A.M., Amaha Öztürk, A., Ä°sfendiyaroÄŸlu, S., Uysal, Ä°. (2013). Red Data Book Black Sea, Turkey. Published by Turkish Research Foundation (TUDAV), Istanbul, TURKEY. Publication number 38, 323 p.
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Prodanov, B., Kotsev, I., Keremedichiev, S., Todorova, V., Dimitrov, L. 2013. Initial assessment of the technogenic pressure in the mediolittoral zone of the Bulgarian Black Sea coast. Second European SCGIS Conference “Conservation of Natural and Cultural Heritage for Sustainable Development: GIS-Based Approach”, 2013: 4-13.
Terentyev, A. S. 2011. Macrozoobenthos of coastal part of the Kerch Bay (summer, 2009). Ecology of cities and recreational areas. / All_Ukrainian Scientific Conference Proceedings of articles: 261-263.
Zaitsev, Y. P., Alexandrov, B. G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.

Synthesis:
Detailed information on the abundance and extent of this habitat is lacking this species is rare. Information on the quantity and quality of this habitat including historical or recent trends is unknown. This habitat has therefore been assessed as Data Deficient.


Habitat Type Name:
A4.26 Marmara coralligenous communities moderately exposed circalittoral rock

Habitat Description:
Coralligenous habitats are hard bottoms of biogenic origin mainly produced by the accumulation of calcareous encrusting algae growing in dim light conditions. Although more widespread in the circalittoral zone, they can also develop in the infralittoral zone, provided that light is dim enough to allow growth of the coralline algae that produce the build-up; therefore, infralittoral coralligenous concretions always develop in almost vertical walls, deep channels, or overhangs, and occupy reduced surfaces. Coralligenous bioconcretions are always very complex in structure allowing the development of several kinds of communities including those dominated by living algae (on the upper part of the concretions), suspension feeders (upper and lower part of the concretions, wall cavities, and overhangs of the build-up), borers (inside the concretions), and even soft-bottom fauna (in the sediment deposited in cavities and holes). This is a highly variable habitat that can be subdivided into different sub-habitats.
Indicators of quality:
Several indicators have been proposed to assess the health of coralligenous habitats based on the composition and abundance of species (biotic cover and conspicuous species richness), including the percent cover of different benthic assemblages (encrusting calcified Rhodophyta, non-calcified encrusting algae and fauna, turf forming algae, and sediment), boring species marks, percent cover of each species and the percentage of necrosis, Bryozoa percent cover, sludge percent cover and the builder species percent cover. Pollution has a severe impact on coralligenous outcrops where coralline algae are substituted first by Mesophyllum alternanas and latterly by Peyssonnelia rosa-marina. High water turbidity decreases diversity, especially of Bryozoans, Crustaceans and Echinoderms. However the amount of bioeroders increases, i.e. Sipunculids and boring sponges (Cliona), along with more generalist species. Mechanical disturbance and breaks of the bioconstruction with increases of turbidity and sedimentation can also be observed. Fishing can affect the abundance of certain target species  and high sedimentation rates result in overgrowth and invasion by exotic algae, altering assemblage composition.
Characteristic species
Rhodophyta (red algae) - Mesophyllum expansum, Mesophyllum alternans, Mesophyllum macedonis, Lithophyllum stictaeforme, Lithophyllum cabiochiae, Neogoniolithon mamillosum, Peyssonnelia rosa marina, Peyssonnelia rubra, Peyssonnelia harveyana, Peyssonnelia bornetii, Amphiroa beauvoisii, Aglaothamnion tripinnatum, Seirospora giraudyi, Gulsonia nodulosa, Balliella cladoderma, Eupogodon planus, Acrosorium ciliolatum, Erythroglossum balearicum, Erythroglossum sandrianum, Myriogramme tristromatica, Rodriguezella pinnata, Rodriguezella bornetii, Rodriguezella strafforelloi, Gloiocladia furcata, Gloiocladia microspora, Gloiocladia repens, Leptofauchea coralligena, Lomentaria subdichotoma, Botryocladia chiajeana, Sebdenia monardiana, Sebdenia rodrigueziana, Aeodes marginata, Halymenia floresii, Predaea ollivieri, Platoma cyclocolpum, Bonnemaisonia asparagoides, Schmitzia neapolitana, Neurocaulon foliosum, Kallymenia feldmannii, Kallymenia lacerata, Kallymenia patens, Kallymenia requienii, Sphaerococcus rhizophylloides, Ptilophora mediterranea
Phaeophyta - Halopteris filicina, Nereia filiformis,
Chlorophyta (green algae) - Palmophyllum crassum, Codium coralloides, Valonia macrophysa,
Sponges - Agelas oroides, Axinella cannabina, Axinella damicornis, Axinella polypoides, Axinella

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habtiat of- 'Mediterranean corraligenous communities moderately exposed to hydrodynamic action' (A4.26) and 'Mediterranean corraligenous communities sheltered from hydrodynamic action' (A4.32)
 
Annex 1:
1170 Reefs
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral rock and biogenic reef
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow photic rock or biogenic reef
 
IUCN:
10.1 Epipelagic

Comment EU28+:
This habitat is only present in the Sea of Marmara therefore it does not occur in the EU28

Pressures and Threats:
The principle threats to this habitat comprise: pollution, high water turbidity, mechanical disturbance and breakage of the bioconstruction, fishing, high sedimentation rates and climate-related water quality changes.

Conservation and Management:
This habitat is not addressed by any legislation or management aimed at its conservation. Direct engagement of scientists and conservationists in the planning of the management process, analysis of social and economic costs and benefits of different management options, and involvement of diverse stakeholders will be essential to successful implementation of conservation actions.

Summary:
The habitat is found in the Sea of Marmara only, and is closely related to Mediterranean types. Coralligenous habitats are hard bottoms of biogenic origin mainly produced by the accumulation of calcareous encrusting algae growing in dim light conditions. Although more typical of the circalittoral zone, they can also develop to some extent in dimly-lit infralittoral zones such as vertical walls, deep channels, or overhangs. The principle threats to this habitat comprise: pollution, high water turbidity, mechanical disturbance and breakage of the bioconstruction, fishing, high sedimentation rates and climate-related water quality changes. No current or future conservation measures have been identified for this habitat.

References:
Augier, H., Boudouresque, C. F., Laborel, J. 1971. Végétation marine de l'île de Port-Cros (Parc National). VII.- Les peuplements sciaphiles profonds sur substrat dur. Bulletin Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle de Marseille, 20: 149-168.
Ballesteros, E. 1992. Els vegetals i la zonació litoral: espècies, comunitats i factors que influeixen en la seva distribució. Arxius Secció Ciències, 101. Institut d'Estudis Catalans. Barcelona. 616 pp.
Ballesteros, E. 2006. Mediterranean coralligenous assemblages: a synthesis of the present knowledge. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review 44: 123-195.
Ballesteros, E. 2007. Proposal of a Work Programme on protecting the coralligenous and other calcareous bioconcretions in the Mediterranean. United Nations Environmental Programme, Mediterranean Action Plan. UNEP(DEC)/MED WG 308/9: 1-18. Tunis.
Claudet, J., Fraschetti, S. 2010. Human-driven impacts on marine habitats: A regional meta-analysis in the Mediterranean Sea. Biological Conservation 143(9): 2195-2206.
Curcó, A., Ferré, A., Font, J., Gesti, J., Vilar, L., Ballesteros, E. 2008. Manual dels Hàbitats de Catalunya. Vol II. 1 Ambients litorals i salins. (Eds. J. Vigo, J. Carreras & A. Ferré). Departament de Medi Ambient i Habitatge. Generalitat de Catalunya. Barcelona. 312 pp.
Gamulin-Brida, H. 1965. Contribution aux recherches bionomiques sur les fonds coralligènes au large de l'Adriatique moyenne. Rapports et Procés-Verbaux des Réunions CIESMM, 18(2): 69-74.
Giaccone, G. 2007. Coralligenous assemblage as underwater seascape: distribution off Italian coasts. Biol. Mar. Medit. 14(2): 124-141.
Giaccone, G., Alongi, G., Pizzuto, F., Cossu, A. 1994. La vegetazione marina bentonica sciafila del Mediterraneo: III Infralittorale e Circalittorale. Proposte di aggiornamento. Boll. Accad. Gioenia Sci. Nat. Catania, 27: 201-227.
Gatti, G., Bianchi, C. N, Morri, C., Montefalcone, M., Sartoretto, S. 2015. Coralligenous reefs state along anthropized coasts: Application and validation of the COARSE index, based on a rapid visual assessment (RVA) approach. Ecological Indicators 52: 567-576.
Deter, J., Descamp, P., Ballesta, L., Boissery, P., Holon, F. 2012. A preliminary study toward an index based on coralligenous assemblages for the ecological status assessment of Meditteranean French coastal waters. Ecological Indicators 20: 345-352.
Hong, J. S. 1980. Étude faunistique d'un fond de concrétionnement de type coralligène soumis à un gradient de pollution en Méditerranée nord-occidentale (Golfe de Fos). Thèse de Doctorat . Université d'Aix-Marseille II. 134pp.
Laborel, J. 1960. Contribution à l'étude directe des peuplements benthiques sciaphiles sur substrat rocheux en Méditerranée. Recueil Travaux Station Marine Endoume 33(20): 117-174.
Laborel, J. 1961. Le concretionnement algal "coralligène" et son importance géomorphologique en Méditerranée. Recueil Travaux Station Marine d'Endoume, 23: 37-60.
Laubier, L. 1966. Le coralligène des Albères: monographie biocénotique. Annales Institut Océanographique de Monaco, 43: 139-316.
Martin, C. S., Giannoulaki, M., De Leo, F., Scardi, M., Salomidi, M., Knitweiss, L., Pace, M. L., Garofalo, G., Gristina, M., Ballesteros, E., Bavestrello, G., Belluscio, A., Cebrian, E., Gerakaris, V., Pergent, E., Pergent-Martini, C., Schembri, P. J., Terribile, K., Rizzo, L., Ben Souissi, J., Bonacorsi, M., Guarnieri, G., Krzejl, M., Macic, V., Punzo, E., Valavanis, V., Fraschetti, S. 2014. Coralligenous and maërl habitats: predictive modelling to identify their spatial distributions across the Mediterranean Sea. Scientific Reports, 4: 5073.
Molinier, R. (1960). Étude des biocoenoses marines du Cap Corse. Vegetatio, 9: 120-192.
Pérès, J. M., Picard, J. 1951. Notes sur les fonds coralligènes de la région de Marseille. Archives de Zoologie Expérimentale et Générale, 88: 24-38.
Pérès, J. M., Picard, J. 1952. Les corniches calcaires d'origine biologique en Méditerranée Occidentale. Recueil Travaux Station Marine d'Endoume, 4: 2-33.
Pérès, J. M., Picard, J. 1958. Recherches sur les peuplements benthiques de la Méditerranée nord-orientale. Annales Institut Océanographique de Monaco, 34: 213-291.
Pérès, J. M., Picard, J. 1964. Nouveau manuel de bionomie benthique de la Mer Méditerranée. Recueil des Travaux Statione Marine d’Endoume, 31(47): 3-137.
Sarà, M. 1969. Research on coralligenous formation: problems and perspectives. Pubblicazione Stazione Zoologiche di Napoli, 37: 124-134.
Sartoretto, S. 1996. Vitesse de croissance et bioérosion des concrétionnements "coralligènes" de Méditerranée nord-occidentale. Rapport avec les variations Holocènes du niveau marin. Thèse Doctorat d'Écologie, Université d'Aix-Marseille, II. 194 pp.
Sartoretto, S. et al. 2014. An integrated approach to evaluate and monitor conservation state of coralligenous bottoms: The Inter-cor method.  2nd Mediterranean Symposium on the conservation of coralligenous habitats and other bioconcretions, Portorov, Slovenia.
Templado, J., Ballesteros, E., Galparsoro, I, Borja, A., Serrano, A., Marín L., Brito, A. 2012. Guía interpretativa: Inventario español de hábitats marinos. Inventario español de hábitats y especies marinos. Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente. 229 pp.


Habitat Type Name:
A5.35 Pontic upper circalittoral sandy mud

Habitat Description:
This habitat consists of sandy muds in the upper circalittoral zone. It is found all around the Black Sea coast. There is no light influence. The habitat is characterised by faunal communities dominated by bivalve molluscs and polychaete worms.
Indicators of quality:
Both biotic and abiotic indicators have been used to describe marine habitat quality. These include; the presence of characteristic species and those which are sensitive to the pressures the habitat may face, water quality parameters, levels of exposure to particular pressure as well as and more integrated indices which describe habitat structure and function, such as trophic index, or successional stages of development in habitats that have a natural cycle of change over time. There are no commonly agreed indicators of quality for this habitat, although particular parameters may have been set in certain situations e.g. protected features within Natura 2000 sites, where reference values have been determined and applied on a location-specific basis.
Characteristic species:
Heteromastus filiformis, Dipolydora quadrilobata, Nephthys hombergii and Spisula subtruncata.

Classification:
EUNIS (v1405):
Level 4. A sub-habitat of 'Circalittoral mud' (A5.3)
 
Annex 1:
1110 Sandbanks slightly covered all the time
1130 Estuaries
 
MAES:
Marine - Marine inlets and transitional waters
Marine - Coastal
 
MSFD:
Shallow sublittoral sediment (coarse, sand, mud, mixed)
 
EUSeaMap:
Shallow sands
Shallow muds
 
IUCN:
9.5 Subtidal sandy mud

Pressures and Threats:
Eutrophication as a result of nutrient enrichment (N, P and organic matter) is the most significant historic pressure on the habitat. Anoxic and hypoxic conditions due to eutrophication caused mass mortalities in benthic communities. Since the 1990s this pressure has reduced due to tighter controls on pollution in the catchment of the Danube and other rivers which enter the north-west Black Sea. Whilst this pressure is now reduced it is still a continuing threat in the current and future periods. This is especially true for non EU countries surrounding the Black Sea which are not bound by the agreements such as the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
The habitat is likely to be sensitive to:
Trawling is a current and future threat to the habitat causing deterioration and habitat destruction by damaging benthic communities both directly and indirectly through effects such as smothering and altering the sediment characteristics. Demersal trawling is prohibited in some states. However, illegal trawling is still an issue in these areas.
Chemical pollution is a threat of current and future importance which at its most severe can result in species can lead to mortality. High mortality rates can lead to a reduction in extent. Lower mortality rates will result in a reduction in habitat quality. Chemical pollution may also affect the size and growth rate of some of the associated fauna.
Bottom dredging and trawling is a threat of current and future importance. This causes habitat destruction leading to in a reduction in extent and quality.

Summary:
The habitat is present in the Black Sea on areas of infralittoral muddy sand substrate. It is also present in the Sea of Marmara. Eutrophication is the main historic pressure on this habitat. Additional pressures include: trawling, chemical pollution and disturbance from anthropogenic activities. Conservation and management measures relevant to this habitat include: measures to maintain physical and biological integrity, improvement of water quality, pollution event response strategies, survey and monitoring programs and raised public awareness.

References:
Anon. 2006. The northwestern part of the Black Sea: biology and ecology. Kiev: Naukova Dumka. 701pp.
Arnoldi, L.V. 1949. Materials on the quantitative study of the Black Sea zoobenthos. II Karkinitsky Bay (in Russian). Proceedings of the Sevastopol Biological Station: 8.
Bacescu, M.C., Muller, G.I., Gomoiu, M-T. 1971. Cercetari de ecologie bentica in Marea Neagra (analiza cantitativa, calitativa si comparata a faunei bentice pontice). Ecologie Marina vol. IV. Editura Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, 357 pp..
Bacescu, M., 1977. Les biocenoses benthiques de la Mer Noire.  Biologie des eaux saumatres de la Mer Noire, Premiere partie: 128-134.
Borisenko, Ð.Ðœ. 1946. Quantitative accounting of benthic fauna of the Tendra Bay, Kara Dag. 201p
Chernyakov, D. A. 1995. Natural-aquatic landscape complexes of the Tendra and Egorlyk bays and monitoring of their state in Black Sea Biosphere Reserve
Kiseleva, M.I. 1981. Benthos of Black Sea mobile substrates. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp 165.
Konsulov, A. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Bulgaria. Volume 5 of Black Sea environmental series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Marinov, T. 1990. The zoobenthos from the Bulgarian Sector of the Black Sea. Publishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, pp 195 (in Bulgarian).
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V., NiÅ£Äƒ, V. 2007. Romanian Marine Habitats of European Interest. Punct Ochit Publishers, ConstanÅ£a, Romania.
Micu, D. 2008. Open Sea and Tidal Areas. In: Gafta D. and Mountford J.O. (eds.) Natura 2000 Habitat Interpretation Manual for Romania. EU publication no. EuropeAid/121260/D/SV/RO, 101pp. ISBN 978-973-751-697-8.
Micu, D., Zaharia, T., Todorova, V. 2008. Natura 2000 habitat types from the Romanian Black Sea. In: Zaharia T, Micu D, Todorova V, Maximov V, NiÅ£Äƒ V. The development of an indicative ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas in Romania. Romart Design Publishing, Constanta, Romania.
Moncheva, S., Todorova, V., (eds). 2013. Initial assessment of the marine environment. Article 8,  MSFD 2008/56/EC and NOOSMV (2010). 500p
Petranu, A. 1997. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Romania. Volume 4 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.
Revkov, N., Abaza, V., Dumitrache, C., Todorova, Konsulova, T., Mickashavidze, E., Varshanidze, M., Sezgin, M., Ozturk, B., Chikina, M.V., Kucheruk, N.V. 2008. The State of Zoobenthos. In: State of the Environment of the Black Sea (2001-2006/7) Ed.(Temel OÄŸuz) Publications of the Comission on hte Protection of the Black Sea Against Pollution (BSC), 2008-3, Istanbul, Turkey, 448 p.
Salomidi, M., Katsanevakis, S., Damalas, D., Mifsud, R., Todorova, V., Pipitone, C., Fernandez, T. V., Mirto, S., Galparsoro, I., Pascual, M., Borja, Á., Rabaut, M., Braeckman, U. 2010. Monitoring and Evaluation of Spatially Managed Areas. Catalogue of European seabed biotopes. Deliverable 1.2. Available at: http://www.mesma.org/default.asp?ZNT=S0T1O-1P24. (Accessed: 19/08/2015).
Terentyev, A. S. 2002. State of of the bottom community of the sandy bottom in Opuksky Nature Reserve.eserves of Crimea. Biodiversity in the priority areas: 5 years after Gurzuf. / Materials of II scientific conference: 250-253.
Terentyev, A. S. 2011. Macrozoobenthos of coastal part of the Kerch Bay (summer, 2009). Ecology of cities and recreational areas. / All_Ukrainian Scientific Conference Proceedings of articles: 261-263.
Zaika, V.E., Boltachev, A.R., Zuev, G.V., Kovalev, A.V., Milchakova, N.A., Sergeeva, N.G. 2004. Floristic and faunistic changes in the Crimean Black Sea shelf after 1995 – 1998, Marine Ecological Journal, 3(2), p. 37-44.
Zaitsev, Y.P., Alexandrov, B.G. 1998. Black Sea Biological Diversity: Ukraine. Volume 7 of the Black Sea Environmental Series. United Nations Publications, New York, USA.


