==== Front PeerJ PeerJ PeerJ PeerJ 2167-8359 PeerJ Inc. San Diego, USA 15541 10.7717/peerj.15541 Biodiversity Ecology Marine Biology Multi-benthic size approach to unveil different environmental conditions in a Mediterranean harbor area (Ancona, Adriatic Sea, Italy) Baldrighi Elisa 12elisa.baldrighi@irbim.cnr.it http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6330-152X Pizzini Sarah 13 Punzo Elisa 1 Santelli Angela 1 Strafella Pierluigi 1 Scirocco Tommaso 4 Manini Elena 1 http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5847-4722 Fattorini Daniele 56 http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5381-6690 Vasapollo Claudio 1claudio.vasapollo@cnr.it 1 Institute for Biological Resources and Marine Biotechnologies—IRBIM, National Research Council—CNR, Italy, Ancona, Marche, Italy 2 Department of Biology, University of Nevada-Reno, Reno, Nevada, USA 3 Fano Marine Center, The Inter-Institute Center for Research on Marine Biodiversity, Resources and Biotechnologies, Fano, Italy 4 Institute for Biological Resources and Marine Biotechnologies—IRBIM, National Research Council—CNR, Italy, Lesina, Italy 5 Dipartimento di Scienze della Vita e dell’Ambiente (Disva), Università Politecnica delle Marche (Univpm), Ancona, Italy 6 Consorzio Nazionale Interuniversitario per le Scienze del Mare (Conisma), Unità di Ricerca di Ancona (Italy), Ancona, Marche, Italy Corte Guilherme 28 6 2023 2023 11 e1554111 1 2023 21 5 2023 © 2023 Baldrighi et al. 2023 Baldrighi et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited. Harbors are hubs of human activity and are subject to the continuous discharge and release of industrial, agricultural, and municipal waste and contaminants. Benthic organisms are largely known to reflect environmental conditions they live in. Despite meio- and macrofauna interacting within the benthic system, they are ecologically distinct components of the benthos and as such may not necessarily respond to environmental conditions and/or disturbances in the same way. However, in a few field studies the spatial patterns of meio- and macrofauna have been simultaneously compared. In the present study, we assess the response and patterns in the abundance, diversity, and distribution of the two benthic size classes to the different environmental conditions they live in (i.e., sediment concentrations of selected trace metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); organic matter contents and grain size) characterizing the Ancona Harbor (Adriatic Sea). Meio- and macrofauna provided partially similar types of information depending on the indices used (univariate measures or community structure/species composition) and the different ‘response-to-stress’. The community structure (i.e., taxa composition) of both benthic size components clearly showed differences among sampling stations located from inside to outside the harbor, reflecting the marked environmental heterogeneity and disturbance typically characterizing these systems. Notwithstanding, the univariate measures (i.e., meio- and macrofauna total abundance, diversity indices and equitability) didn’t show similar spatial patterns. Meiofauna were likely to be more sensitive to the effects of environmental features and contaminants than macrofauna. Overall, trace metals and PAHs affected the community composition of the two benthic components, but only the meiofauna abundance and diversity were related to the environmental variables considered (i.e., quantity and quality of organic matter). Our results pinpoint the importance of studying both meio- and macrofauna communities, which could provide greater insight into the processes affecting the investigated area and reveal different aspects of the benthic ecosystems in response to harbor conditions. Meiofauna Macrofauna Adriatic sea Harbor Contaminants Benthic size Mediterranean IPA Adriatic Cross-Border Cooperation ProgramBallast Water Management System for Adriatic Sea Protection (BALMAS)IPA Adriatic Cross-Border Cooperation Program AuthoritiesThis publication has been produced with the financial assistance of the IPA Adriatic Cross-Border Cooperation Program—strategic project Ballast Water Management System for Adriatic Sea Protection (BALMAS). The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of authors and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the IPA Adriatic Cross-Border Cooperation Program Authorities. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. ==== Body pmcIntroduction Coastal waters are widely recognized as marine areas of high ecological and economic value, but also as highly threatened zone, exposed to multiple human activities (e.g., harbors) and their negative impacts (Travizi et al., 2019). Harbors are essential to the economic growth of coastal regions, where maritime traffic, shipping, international trade, and fishing are continuously increasing (Simonini et al., 2005; Franzo et al., 2022). Harbors are usually characterized by high sediment pollution levels due to heavy metals and hydrocarbons caused by intense maritime traffic and huge organic matter loads (Covazzi Harriague et al., 2007; Baldrighi et al., 2019). The high concentrations of contaminants and the relevant inputs of organic matter represent a persistent and ongoing threat, especially for the biota living in the sediment (Travizi et al., 2019; Franzo et al., 2022). In addition, the exposure of the innermost part of harbors to both wind and waves is limited and may create conditions of reduced water circulation, favoring sedimentation processes, anoxia, and trapping pollutants (Guerra-García & García-Gómez, 2004a; Spagnolo, Scarcella & Sarappa, 2011). The EU Water Framework Directive (WFD; Directive 2000/60/EC; European Communities (EC), 2000) considers harbors as ‘heavily modified water bodies’, which cannot meet the common criteria of good ecological quality status. Therefore, their effective management is crucial for the sustainable use of these maritime spaces and for the protection of the adjacent coastal habitats (Chatzinikolaou et al., 2018; Franzo et al., 2022). Benthic organisms are largely known to reflect environmental conditions they live in. Among benthic components, species of meio- and macrofauna are widely recognized as good ecological indicators (Schratzberger et al., 2003; Patrício et al., 2012). Benthic meiofaunal and macrofaunal communities are regularly utilized in impact assessment, but very few studies are carried out taking into account both communities (Whomersley et al., 2009; Frontalini et al., 2011; Covazzi Harriague, Albertelli & Misic, 2012; Xu, Cheung & Shin, 2014). The meio- and macrofauna are ecologically distinct components of the benthos and as such may not necessarily respond to environmental conditions and/or disturbances in the same way (Schratzberger et al., 2003; Patrício et al., 2012). Aside from differences in body size, meio- and macrobenthos each have a series of distinctive ecological and evolutionary characteristics supporting an expectation of differences in their response to environmental conditions. Meiofauna is characterized by small size, high abundance in marine sediments, ubiquitous distribution, rapid generation times (i.e., months), fast metabolic rates, and absence of a planktonic phase, resulting in a short response time and high sensitivity to different environmental conditions and certain types of disturbance (Giere, 2009). Meiofauna are often classified as permanent (species spending their whole lives as meiofauna) or temporary (animals that start off as meiofauna but grow into macrofauna) (Giere, 2009). In some environments (e.g., open slope systems), temporary meiofauna (e.g., Bivalvia, Oligochaeta, Amphipoda, Nemertea, Priapulida, Holothuroidea, Ascidiacea Cnidaria and Decapoda larvae) have been found to constitute a high percentage of the meiobenthic community (Bianchelli et al., 2010). All these organisms are expected to grow into macrofauna and become part of the macrobenthic population of the slope systems. According to modern phylogenetic approaches, seven phyla belong exclusively to meiofauna, while seventeen phyla are accommodated between meio- and macrofauna (Giere & Schratzberger, 2023). Meiobenthic organisms cover different ecological roles according to their trophic group, living mode, locomotion adaptation to move and digging in different kind of sediment grains and they comprise both unicellular (e.g., Foraminifera, Ciliata) a metazoan organism (Giere, 2009). Moreover, because of their high density even small volumes of samples can be analyzed to assess meiofaunal changes over different spatial scales and environmental conditions (e.g., Schratzberger & Ingels, 2018; Ridall & Ingels, 2021). Consequently, meiofaunal communities have generated considerable interest as potential indicators of anthropogenic disturbances in aquatic ecosystems (e.g., Ridall & Ingels, 2021; Semprucci, Grassi & Balsamo, 2022). There are some advantages in using macrofauna, strictly linked to the functional traits of this group: (1) relative longevity, with many species having life spans in excess of 2 yr, allows the macrofauna to integrate responses to environmental pressures over extended time periods (Simboura & Zenetos, 2002); (2) sedentary or sessile mode of life, therefore organisms are not able to escape stress and integrate the environmental quality in a given area; (3) relatively easy to sample quantitatively, even if larger amount of sediment are needed compared to the meiofauna; (4) relatively easy taxonomic identification and available taxonomic keys for most groups and (5) well-documented and predictive response to a number of environmental stressors (thus, community changes can be interpreted with a degree of confidence) (Gray et al., 1988; Somerfield et al., 2006; Todorova, Doncheva & Trifonova, 2020). Meio- and macrofauna are ecologically distinct components of the benthos, however both benthic size classes are highly influenced by some main sediment features such as the grain size (Moreno et al., 2008b; Pereira et al., 2018a), the quantity and quality of organic matter (Vezzulli et al., 2003; Papageorgiou, Kalantzi & Karakassis, 2010) and presence of pollutants (McCready, Birch & Long, 2006; Dauvin et al., 2017). Macrobenthic invertebrates have been identified by the EU WFD as key biological components to assess the ecological status of aquatic ecosystems, due to their important role in ecosystem functioning and to their involvement in food-web nutrient recycling (Punzo et al., 2017). The complementary use of two sets of faunistic groups with contrasting ecological characteristics could provide greater insight into the processes affecting such an area (Austen, Warwick & Rosado, 1989). Up to now, field studies where the spatial patterns of meio- and macrofauna have been simultaneously compared, changes in both assemblages as a response to natural gradients were found to be scattered across habitats (Somerfield et al., 2006; Papageorgiou, Kalantzi & Karakassis, 2010; Patrício et al., 2012). These investigations have demonstrated the fundamental advantage of a multi-species approach, with the inclusion of many taxonomic and functional groups that have a broad range of sensitivities to any given environmental regime (e.g., Frontalini et al., 2011). The Adriatic Sea ecosystem is negatively affected by many kinds of biological and ecological threats e.g., eutrophication, pollution, fragmentation of benthic habitats, invasion of alien species (Katsanevakis et al., 2011; Pećarević et al., 2013; Corriero et al., 2016). In the regional perspective the basin is highly positioned on the list of ‘Priority issues in the Mediterranean environment’ drawn up by the European Environment Agency (EEA), with 20 (15%) out of the 131 hotspot pollution sites identified along the Mediterranean coastline in the frame of the Strategic Action Programme (SAP) of the United Nations Environment Programme (EEA & UNEP, 2006), including many harbors such as the Ancona one (Travizi et al., 2019). Since previous works published on Ancona Harbor have always treated the different benthic components separately (Mirto & Danovaro, 2004; Spagnolo, Scarcella & Sarappa, 2011; Spagnolo et al., 2019; Baldrighi et al., 2019; Travizi et al., 2019; Franzo et al., 2022), the aim of the present work is to test whether meio- and macrofaunal assemblages could provide a comparable and/or complementary assessment of its ecological conditions. In the present study, we characterized the meio- and macrofaunal communities (i.e., abundance, diversity, and distribution patterns) in relation to the environmental conditions they live in (i.e., concentration of selected heavy metals (HMs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); organic matter contents into the sediment and grain size) characterizing the Ancona Harbor. We hypothesized that the analysis of two different benthic components may give us more comprehensive information on the environmental features of the harbor, instead of a single benthic size component as is usually done (Xu, Cheung & Shin, 2014). In a future perspective, this multi-size approach should be highly recommended in coastal monitoring and management plans. Materials and Methods Sampling area and sampling strategy The Ancona Harbor (water depth range, 4–15 m) is located in the western coast of central Adriatic Sea (Fig. 1), it has a water sheet of 700,000 m2 and 5,400 m of docks (Spagnolo, Scarcella & Sarappa, 2011). The harbor is one of the most important of the Adriatic Sea, with intense ferryboat and merchant ship activity. Previous investigations reported that the area is subjected to organic waste dumping derived from fishing boats and is also affected by a strong industrial pollution due to the presence of shipyards. Consequently, a huge organic matter load and high heavy metal and hydrocarbon concentrations are present inside the harbor area (Mirto & Danovaro, 2004; Bianchelli et al., 2016). 10.7717/peerj.15541/fig-1 Figure 1 Map of the sampling area (Ancona Harbor) and location of the five sampling stations. The pink rectangle indicates the geographical position of the Ancona Harbor, Italy. In the present study, sediment samples were collected in winter 2015 from five sampling stations located from inside to outside the Ancona Harbor (Fig. 1). The five sampling stations were chosen according to the different environmental features and anthropogenic activities present in the area: the MAN station was located in the inner part of the harbor where small fishing boats dock; the PORT station was located in a transition area where work ships are berthed; the DS and LR stations were located in a more external position, nearby shipping facilities such as active berths; the API station was located outside the harbor where no activity takes place. At each station, sediment samples for characterizing the benthic fauna (meio- and macrofauna) and environmental features were collected with a box-corer (40 cm × 30 cm wide and 50 cm high) in three independent replicates (i.e., box-corer deployments), processed and preserved differently according to the analysis to be performed (see below). At all stations, the temperature and salinity at the sea bottom were measured using CTD (Conductivity, Temperature, and Depth) probe equipped with previously calibrated sensors. Environmental variables and microbial component The content of each box-corer was sub-sampled with PVC corers (inner diameter, 4.5 cm) to assess the biochemical composition of the organic matter and grain size. The top 3 cm of sediment from three independent replicates for each parameter were frozen at −20 °C, except for the grain size determination, for which samples were kept at in situ temperature in single replicate until brought to the laboratory. The biochemical composition of the organic matter (total protein, carbohydrate, and lipid concentration) and chloroplastic pigments (chlorophyll-a (Chl-a) and phaeopigment (Phaeo) concentration) were determined by standard techniques (Danovaro, 2010). Concentrations were calculated using standard curves and normalized to sediment dry weight after desiccation (60 °C, 24 h). Biopolymeric organic carbon (BPC) was calculated as the sum of the carbon equivalents of carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids (Fabiano, Danovaro & Fraschetti, 1995) and was used as a proxy for the available trophic resources. The value of the protein to carbohydrate ratio (PRT/CHO) was utilized as descriptor of the nutritional quality of organic matter in the sediment, with a PRT/CHO ratio >1.0 indicating relatively high quality and high food availability (Pusceddu et al., 2010). For grain size determination, aliquots of fresh sediment were sieved over a 63 μm mesh. The two fractions (>63 μm, sand; <63 μm, silt/mud) were dried in an oven at 60 °C and weighed. Data were expressed as a percentage of sediment total dry weight (Pusceddu et al., 2010). Contaminants into the sediment Concentration of selected HMs and PAHs was determined in the surface sediment (0–3 cm) collected at each sampling station and frozen at −20 °C. Analyses were conducted following previous validated methods, fully described in Benedetti et al. (2014) and Etiope et al. (2014). In brief, HMs were determined after digestion under pressure with nitric acid and hydrogen peroxide (7:1), using a Mars 6 Microwave Digestion System (CEM Corporation, Charlotte, NC, USA). As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb, V, and Zn were analyzed by Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (AAS), with flame (SpectrAA 220FS Spectrometer, Varian Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA) and flameless atomization (240Z AA Spectrometer, Agilent Technologies Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA), while the Hg content was quantified by Cold Vapor Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (CVAAS; QuickTrace M-6100 Mercury Analyzer, Teledyne CETAC Technologies Ltd., Omaha, NE, USA). PAHs were determined after KOH-methanol extraction with a Mars 6 Microwave Digestion System (CEM Corporation). Extracts were concentrated using a RC 10.09 Vacuum Concentration System (Jouan SA, Saint-Herblain, France) and purified by J.T.Baker™ BAKERBOND™ Octadecyl (C18) Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) cartridges (Avantor Inc., Radnor, PA, USA). PAHs were analyzed by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) using both Fluorimetric (FLD) and (UV) Diode Array Detection (DAD) (Infinity 1260 Series, Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA). For both HMs and PAHs, appropriated blank solutions and the Standard Reference Material (SRM) 1944: New York/New Jersey Waterway Sediment (NIST–National Institute of Standards and Technology), digested as samples, were used to check for accuracy, precision, and recoveries of the employed analytical methodologies; concentrations obtained from SRM analyses were always within the 95% confidence intervals of the NIST certified values. The results obtained in this study were compared with threshold values for chemicals specified in the Ministerial Decree 173/2016, the Italian normative that rules the management of dredged sediments and sets out their quality. Only those values exceeding the upper thresholds values (L2) are defined as alerting values (Table 1, Ministerial Decree 173/2016). 10.7717/peerj.15541/table-1 Table 1 Permutational multivariate analysis of variance (PERMANOVA) and pairwise test and results on total meiofaunal community composition. In bold significant values are reported. Permanova Source d.f. SS MS Pseudo-F value P (perm) Unique permutations Stations 4 7,315.80 1,829 38.0437 0.001 9,915 Residuals 10 480.84 48.084 Total 14 7,796.70 Pairwise test Groups t value P (perm) P (MC) MAN vs. PORT 7.39 0.103 <0.001 MAN vs. LR 8.21 0.099 <0.001 MAN vs. DS 4.86 0.099 0.004 MAN vs. API 6.12 0.099 0.002 PORT vs. LR 8.23 0.095 <0.001 PORT vs. DS 6.44 0.101 <0.001 PORT vs. API 5.35 0.098 0.002 LR vs. DS 2.95 0.101 0.016 LR vs. API 5.20 0.101 0.002 DS vs. API 3.98 0.098 0.005 Note: d.f., degrees of freedom; SS, Sum of Squares; MS, Mean Square; P (perm), Permutation p-value; P (MC), Monte Carlo p-value. Meiofauna and macrofauna For meiofauna samples, the content of each box-corer (three independent replicates) was sub-sampled with PVC corers (inner diameter, 4.5 cm). The top 3 cm of sediment, where meiofaunal organisms are typically more abundant, were preserved in 4% buffered formaldehyde. For meiofaunal extraction, sediment samples were sieved through a 500 μm mesh; a 32 μm mesh was used to retain the smallest metazoan organisms. The latter fraction was centrifuged 3 times with LUDOX® HS-40 colloidal silica (diluted with water to a final density of 1.18 g cm−3) and stained with Rose Bengal (0.5 g L−1; Heip, Vincx & Vranken, 1985). Meiofaunal organisms were counted (no. of individuals 10 cm−2) and identified to the higher taxonomic level (i.e., Order and Class) under a Leica S8APO stereomicroscope. For macrofauna samples, the first 20 cm of three independent box-corer deployments were sieved in situ using a 500 µm mesh and all organisms retained were preserved in 5% buffered formaldehyde. Macrofauna was sorted in laboratory using a Leica S8APO stereomicroscope and a Leica DM2500 binocular microscope, identified and classified to the lowest possible taxonomic level, and quantified (no. of individuals m−2). The data collected was subjected to a control and validation process and organized in a dedicated database. The nomenclature of the species was verified and validated using the web portal https://www.marinespecies.org/ and the ‘WoRMS Taxon Match Tool’ (WoRMS Editorial Board, 2022). Taxon richness (i.e., Orders or Classes and species for meio- and macrofauna, respectively; S), total number of individuals per taxon/species (N), Shannon’s diversity index (H’, based on log2; Shannon & Weaver, 1949), and Pielou’s equitability index (J’; Pielou, 1969) of benthic communities were calculated. Statistical analysis To assess differences in benthic communities among the sampling stations a Permutational Multivariate Analysis of Variance (PERMANOVA; 9,999, number of random unrestricted permutations of raw data) was used (Anderson, 2001). The design included one factor: the sampling station (five levels, fixed). The analysis was based on Bray-Curtis’ similarity of previously fourth root transformed meio- and macrofaunal data. In case of significant differences obtained by the main test, the pairwise test was performed and, as there was a limited number of unique permutations, the p values were obtained from Monte Carlo tests (Anderson & Robinson, 2003). Permutational Multivariate Analysis of Dispersion (PERMDISP) test was applied to assess if differences among the sampling stations (between-group) were due to real differences in benthic community composition and not to differences in the multivariate dispersion of replicates (within-group) among their respective centroids. A non-metric multidimensional scaling (nMDS) ordination was carried out to visualize similarities among the sampling stations. Similarity percentages (SIMPER) analysis (cut-off, 90%) was used to identify the meio- and macrofaunal taxa that contributed to the dissimilarity among the sampling stations. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to explore differences among the sampling stations for organic matter content and microbial component, total abundance, diversity, and equitability indices in meio- and macrofaunal benthic communities. The ANOVA assumptions were tested graphically plotting residuals vs. fitted values, normality of residuals and residuals vs. covariate (factor station) to assess the variance homogeneity (Zuur & Ieno, 2016). When ANOVA showed significant differences, the Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) test was performed to find significant effects between different levels. Since environmental variables have been processed in single replicates, a value of 1σ (corresponding to the 70% of data around the mean in a normal standard curve; Quinn & Keough, 2002) has been subtracted and added to create the missing replicates for which the mean correspond to the original value. Two more values have been created, one lower and one higher than the actual value, and the average of the three values given exactly the observed value. The number of environmental and pollutant-related variables were separated in two groups: pollutants (comprising HMs and PAHs) and environmental variables (comprising the organic matter compounds and silt/mud percentage). Since many compounds had linked each other, multicollinearity (cut-off at Spearman’s correlation = |0.8|) among variables was assessed to reduce the dataset and avoid problems in the analysis algorithms. In case of multicollinearity, the variables with a more stringent biological or environmental value were retained acting as proxy for the omitted collinear ones. A summary of the collinear variable and which ones have been chosen is given in Table S1. After normalization, both type of variables was used to characterize the study area by means of a principal component analysis (PCA). Spearman’s rank correlation analysis was performed to test relationships between meio- and macrofauna total abundance, taxon richness, Shannon’s diversity (Shannon & Weaver, 1949) and Pieolu’s equitability (Pielou, 1966) indices, and the environmental features considered. In order to verify the existence of a significant relation between the benthos data matrix and the environmental data (pollutants and environmental variables), the distance-based linear modeling (DistLM) procedure was utilized with a backward selection of the variables, and each model assessed by means of the Akaike’s Information Criterion corrected for small samples (AICc; Anderson, Gorley & Clarke, 2008). Since the environmental and pollutant variables were too numerous (even after multicollinearity assessment) respect to the meio- and macrofaunal ones, to further reduce their number, both type of variables was analyzed (separately) by means of another (PCA) to identify groups with similar variability. Only those principal components showing eigenvalues >1 (Kaiser-Guttman criterion; Zwick & Velicer, 1986) were considered. To obtain a better insight into the output loadings, the orthogonal varimax rotation of extracted PCA components was performed. After a varimax rotation, each original variable tends to be associated with one (or a small number) of PCA axis. By doing so, groups of variables were created each of which represented by a single PCA score, and all the scores obtained were used as covariates in the above DistLM analysis to assess the relations between faunal communities and the environmental features. A distance-based redundancy analysis (dbRDA) was then applied to visually investigate the relationship between the community assemblages and the environmental data (Anderson, Gorley & Clarke, 2008). All the above statistical tests were considered significant at α = 0.05. Moreover, the RELATE routine (a Mantel test like analysis) was used to search for cross-taxon correlations between meio- and macrofaunal similarity matrices. The PERMANOVA, PERMDISP, nMDS, SIMPER, PCA, RELATE and DistLM procedures were performed with PRIMER™ and PERMANOVA+ ecological software (Clarke & Gorley, 2006; Anderson, Gorley & Clarke, 2008); the ANOVA, the Tukey’s test and the VARIMAX procedures were performed using the free software R (R Core Team, 2018; v. 4.1.3). Results Environmental features and contamination levels in the Ancona Harbor Bottom water temperature reported a mean value of 10.3 °C ± 0.2 °C and salinity ranged from a minimum of 31.3 (at LR station) to a maximum of 37.6 PSU (at API station). The sandy fraction (>63 μm) characterized stations located outside the harbor (DS, LR, and API stations), while the silty muddy fraction (<63 μm) was predominant in the inner stations MAN and PORT (Table S2). Chl-a and organic matter contents into the sediments showed significantly (F4, 10 = 12.97, p = 0.001) higher values of ‘fresh’ material (i.e., Chl-a) at MAN and DS stations, while the BPC significantly (F4,10 = 22.21, p = 0.001) decreased from inside to outside the harbor (Table S2). The significant (F4,10 = 12.61, p = 0.001) highest value in the quality of organic matter (i.e. PRT/CHO) was reported at PORT station (Table S2), due to a particularly low concentration of CHO into the sediment of this station (Table S3). Analyses aimed at determining HM concentrations in the sediment of the Ancona Harbor have highlighted a general decrease of contamination values moving from the innermost sampling station (MAN) to those one more external (Table S4). MAN station turned out to be affected by pollution levels 3–4 times higher than those detected at API station, reaching even Cu and Zn concentrations 13 and 6 times higher, respectively. Just these two elements, Cu and Zn, were the only exceeding the threshold limits imposed by the Ministerial Decree 173/2016 (46.31 µg g−1 of Cu detected at MAN station; 297.2 and 114.9 µg g−1 of Zn detected at MAN and PORT stations, respectively). In the remaining sampling stations, there were no overruns (Table S4). The concentration levels of Σ19 PAHs ranged from 73.38 to 213.4 µg g−1 following, although not linearly, the same pattern highlighted for HMs, with higher values in the innermost sampling station (MAN), decreasing towards outer ones (Table S4). All the sediment samples showed a distinct predominance of low molecular weight PAHs, mainly driven by the Naphthalene concentration (exceeding the legislative thresholds at MAN, DS, and LR stations), which averagely accounted for 37% of the Σ19 PAHs, followed by its methylated isomers: 1- and 2-Methylnaphtalene (24% and 22%, respectively). A prevalence of volatile with 2–3 aromatic rings was reported at all stations (Fig. 2A) (for wind direction and speed on the Ancona Harbor area during February 2015, please see Fig. S1). Excluding Naphthalene and its related compounds, the PAH residual contamination was mainly ascribable to Phenanthrene and Fluoranthene (Table S4), and the principal PAH diagnostic ratios (Tobiszewski & Namieśnik, 2012), commonly used as a tool to discriminate the analyte origin and sources (Giuliani et al., 2019; Pizzini et al., 2021), indicated a petrogenic origin (Fig. 2B). 10.7717/peerj.15541/fig-2 Figure 2 (A) Distribution pattern and (B) origin of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) characterizing the sediment at the investigated sampling stations. Σ LMW = sum of low molecular weight compounds (Naphthalene, 1-Methylnaphtalene, 2-Methylnaphtalene, Acenaphthylene, Acenaphthene, Fluorene, Phenanthrene, Anthracene); Σ HMW = sum of high molecular weight compounds (Fluoranthene, Pyrene, Benz[a]anthracene, Chrysene, Benzo[b]fluoranthene, Benzo[k]fluoranthene, Benzo[a]pyrene, 7,12-Dimethylbenz[a]anthracene, Benzo[ghi]perylene, Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene, Dibenz[a,h]anthracene); Σ COMB = sum of 9 non-alkylated PAHs (Fluoranthene, Pyrene, Benz[a]anthracene, Chrysene, Benzo[b]fluoranthene, Benzo[k]fluoranthene, Benzo[a]pyrene, Benzo[ghi]perylene, Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene). The results from PCA plot considering the environmental variables, summarized the differences among the sampling stations (Fig. 3). In details, MAN station clearly separated from the other stations being characterized by higher values in pollutants, food sources and mud content into the sediment. This explained the variability along the first axis (41.8% of variation). The variability along the second axis (23% of variation) was mainly explained by the contrast between the DS and LR stations and all the others, the latter characterized by the lowest values in mud content and Fluoranthene into the sediments and by intermediate values between the innermost stations and the outermost station for most of the pollutants and environmental variables considered. 10.7717/peerj.15541/fig-3 Figure 3 Principal component analysis (PCA) with environmental variables. BPC, Biopolymeric organic carbon; CPE, Chloroplastic pigment equivalent; BPER, Benzo[ghi]perylene; BAP, Benzo[a]pyrene; FLU, Fluorene; ANT/PHE, Anthracene/Phenanthrene; FLT/PYR, Fluoranthene/Pyrene. Meiobenthic assemblages A total of 12 taxa were identified with Nematoda representing the dominant taxon at all sampling stations, with a percentage ranging from 75% to 95% (Fig. 4A). The second most represented taxon was Copepoda with their nauplii; among less represented taxa (i.e., others) Bivalvia, Ciliata, Foraminifera, Kinorhyncha, Oligochaeta, Ostracoda, Platyhelminthes, Polychaeta, Sipuncula, and Tardigrada constituted from 3% to 15% of the meiobenthic community (Fig. 4B). Meiofauna abundance and values of its diversity indices are reported in Table S5 and represented in Fig. 5. The ANOVA tests detected significant differences among all the sampling stations for taxa richness (N; Table 2), with the highest value reported at DS station (Fig. 5A). The ANOVA tests reported significant differences among the sampling stations also for all diversity and equitability indices (Table 2 and Table S5). Regarding the number of taxa, PORT station showed a significantly lower value on average compared to all the other sampling stations (Fig. 5B). Shannon’s diversity and Pielou’s equitability indices showed both similar patterns, with MAN station presenting the highest value (Figs. 5C and 5D). 10.7717/peerj.15541/fig-4 Figure 4 (A) Meiofaunal community structure and (B) contribution of taxa others at each sampling station. Mean values of replicated samples (n = 3) are shown. Bold values reported inside the bars are total abundances (ind.10 cm−2) of meiofauna (4A) and others (4B). 10.7717/peerj.15541/fig-5 Figure 5 Meiofaunal univariate measures. (A) Meiofauna abundance (N = no. of individuals 10 cm−2) and its diversity indices: (B) meiofauna taxa richness (S), (C) Shannon’s diversity index (H’, based on log2), and (D) Pielou’s equitability index (J’). Bars represent 95% confidence intervals. 10.7717/peerj.15541/table-2 Table 2 One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) results on total meiofauna and macrofauna abundance (N) and their diversity indices. Number of taxa (S), Shannon’s diversity index (H’, based on log2), and Pielou’s equitability index (J’), characterizing the sediment at the investigated sampling stations. In bold significant p values. Meiofauna Index d.f. F value p value Tukey’s HSD post hoc test N Stations 4 714.30 <0.001 DS>LR>MAN>API>PORT Residuals 10 S Stations 4 11.30 <0.001 PORTPORT>API=LR(=DS)>DS Residuals 10 J’ Stations 4 41.60 <0.001 MAN>PORT=API=LR(=DS)>DS Residuals 10 Macrofauna N Stations 4 10.60 0.002 LR>API=DS=MAN=PORT Residuals 10 S Stations 4 3.80 0.041 MAN4 mg g−1) with the exception of the API station, ranked as eutrophic (PRT ≈ 4 mg g−1). However, in terms of CHO content, Ancona Harbor should be ranked as meso-oligotrophic system (CHO <5 mg g−1). Pusceddu et al. (2009, 2011) identified as eutrophic systems those characterized by BPC concentration >3 mgC g−1, as found at MAN, PORT, LR, and DS stations, and as mesotrophic systems those characterized by BPC concentration in the range 1–3 mgC g−1, as in the case of the API station. In Ancona Harbor, the PRT/CHO ratio resulted always >1, indicating a great input of recent production’s material and highlighting the good trophic quality of the organic matter (Pusceddu et al., 2009). Increasing of organic loads in the sediment have been usually reported from other harbor areas, especially from the innermost zones (Danulat et al., 2002; Covazzi Harriague, Albertelli & Misic, 2012; Xu, Cheung & Shin, 2014; Rebai et al., 2022). Concentrations of Chl-a here reported were extremely high if compared to those reported in February in a previous study conducted along the Adriatic coasts (0.11–0.23 µg g−1; Bianchelli et al., 2016), indicating the presence of ‘fresh’ primary organic matter. However, similar results in Chl-a concentrations were reported from Tunisian harbors (Rebai et al., 2022) along with high level of organic matter. The PCA on measured environmental variables indicated the presence of a clear spatial heterogeneity among the sampling stations and a separation between innermost stations and outermost ones due to higher organic matter and contaminant loads inside the harbor basin, as previously reported in the same study area (Spagnolo, Scarcella & Sarappa, 2011; Baldrighi et al., 2019) and in other enclosed systems (Guerra-García, Corzo & García-Gómez, 2003; Vezzulli et al., 2003; Losi et al., 2013; Dauvin et al., 2017; Mehlhorn et al., 2021). This marked environmental variability in harbors is a common feature. Indeed, environmental disturbance within harbors may change rapidly over spatial scales of a few meters, depending on various factors like the localization and magnitude of pollution sources, allochthonous inputs of different nature, tidal regime, water circulation, harbor position, shape, and size (McCready, Birch & Long, 2006; Vassallo et al., 2006; Xu, Cheung & Shin, 2014). Meiofaunal response to harbor environmental conditions In Ancona Harbor, the meiofaunal total abundance, community structure and, for a lesser extent, univariate measures (i.e., diversity and equitability indices) reflected the marked spatial heterogeneity showed by the PCA and the clear separation both between inner and outer sampling stations and among the sampling stations themselves (MAN vs. PORT vs. DS + LR vs. API). Meiofaunal abundance was in the range of values reported by Baldrighi et al. (2019) for Ancona Harbor (i.e. from 912 ± 404 to 2,512 ± 717 ind.10 cm−2) with lower values characterizing the outermost station and for other harbors and coastal areas affected by pollution and/or high organic matter loads (Vezzulli et al., 2003; Veiga, Rubal & Besteiro, 2009; Pusceddu et al., 2011; Dal Zotto et al., 2016; Semprucci, Balsamo & Sandulli, 2016; Sedano Vera, Marquina & Espinosa Torre, 2014; Kulakova, 2022). The only exception was represented by the paucity of meiofaunal organisms found at PORT station. Considering that total meiofaunal abundance was positively linked to products derived from primary production (Chl-a, Phaeo, and chloroplast pigment equivalents−CPE), its low abundance at PORT station could be partially justified by the lowest detected value of ‘fresh’ material (Chl-a) and/or other factors known to regulate the coexistence of different organisms such as competition for resources and predation (Schratzberger et al., 2003, 2008). Moreover, given its small size, low mobility, and lack of dispersive life stages (Giere, 2009), meiofauna is more susceptible to within-habitat physical variability and environmental disturbances than larger, more mobile, and potentially more highly dispersed members of the macrofauna (Austen & Widdicombe, 2006; Schratzberger et al., 2008). This would explain the drop in meiofauna abundance, not reported for the macrofauna, at that sampling station. A total of 12 meiofauna taxa (Orders or Classes) were identified and in four sampling stations out of five the majority of taxa were represented. The measures of diversity (i.e., S, H’, and J’) were comparable to the values reported in harbor areas (e.g., Moreno et al., 2008a, 2008b; Sedano Vera, Marquina & Espinosa Torre, 2014; Kulakova, 2022) and in enclosed/transitional systems in the Adriatic Sea (e.g., Pusceddu et al., 2007, 2011; Frontalini et al., 2014; Covazzi Harriague, Albertelli & Misic, 2012). However, the strong dominance of Nematoda justified the low values reported for the Pielou’s equitability index, particularly at LR and DS stations. The dominance of the most resistant and adaptable group is a peculiarity of more stressed, less stable environments and characterized by fine sediment fraction, such as harbors (Semprucci et al., 2015). Abundance and diversity indices were correlated to different proxies of food sources (quantity and quality) into the sediment and to its grain size, confirming the effect of these environmental variables on meiofaunal populations (Balsamo et al., 2010). The dissimilarity among the sampling stations was mainly due to some less abundant and more sensitive taxa, not present in the innermost stations. Usually, organisms that can cope with unfavorable conditions take over (e.g., Nematoda), whereas more sensitive taxa disappear or become rare (Mirto et al., 2014; Zeppilli et al., 2015). In the case of Ancona Harbor, Bivalvia, Kinorhyncha, Platyhelminthes, and Tardigrada were found only at the outermost stations (LR, DS, and API) being identified as less tolerant taxa (Baldrighi et al., 2019 and literature therein). Conversely, the more tolerant and widespread groups of Ciliata, Oligochaeta, and Polychaeta (Pusceddu et al., 2007; Moreno et al., 2008a, 2008b; Semprucci et al., 2015) characterized the innermost stations, along with a non-negligible presence (from 34% to 80% among other taxa, Fig. 4B) of soft-shelled Foraminifera inhabiting the sediment at all the investigated sampling stations. Soft-shelled monothalamous Foraminifera are an important component living in the sediment and populating the Adriatic Sea (Sabbatini et al., 2013), but most of the time this component is overlooked in meiofauna studies. The high presence of this group has been found to be associate to high values of Chl-a, eutrophic conditions, and high variability of environmental parameters (e.g., organic matter loads, salinity, temperature, oxygen content; Sabbatini et al., 2013). The strong tolerance and positive response of some monothalamous species to environmental stress (Sabbatini et al., 2010) may justify their presence in the Ancona Harbor. A further identification of the species characterizing these sediments will be necessary, in any case, to confirm our hypothesis. Changes in the community structure were supported by DistLM analysis, which revealed that pollutants and, secondly, the grain size could explain the variability in the meiofaunal composition. Food sources did not have any effect on the meiobenthic community. According to Dell’Anno et al. (2002) and Pusceddu et al. (2009), the system of Ancona Harbor can be ranked as eutrophic (inside)—mesotrophic (outside) with high quality of organic matter. Thus, food sources did not constitute a limiting factor for the meiofaunal community (Muniz & Pires-Vanin, 2005; Covazzi Harriague, Albertelli & Misic, 2012; Dal Zotto et al., 2016), as reported instead for oligotrophic systems (e.g., Covazzi Harriague et al., 2013). Same results were reported in Franzo et al. (2022) analyzing the nematode communities inhabiting different Adriatic harbors, including that of Ancona. Authors showed that the main environmental factor that shaped the nematode assemblages in all harbors were the PAH concentration levels, while food sources and the grain size were much less relevant. Interestingly, some positive correlations between HMs and meiofaunal abundance and its related univariate measures were reported in the present study, as elsewhere (Schratzberger et al., 2003; Xu, Cheung & Shin, 2014). In the study conducted by Cibic et al. (2017), authors pinpointed as heavy metal content may influence meiofaunal abundance and its composition. The positive nature of the correlation could be the result of a meiobenthic community well adapted to permanent stress conditions (Cibic et al., 2017). Macrofaunal response to harbor environmental conditions In the present study, total macrofaunal abundance and its measures of diversity (i.e., S, H’, and J’), fell within the range of values reported by Spagnolo, Scarcella & Sarappa (2011) and Travizi et al. (2019) for Ancona Harbor and from other ports worldwide (e.g., Gusmao et al., 2016; Dauvin et al., 2017; Li et al., 2017; Rebai et al., 2022). Results here reported showed an overall increasing trend in macrofaunal abundance and species richness from inside to outside the study area, however, LR station significantly differed from the other sampling stations when univariate measures were considered. The low values of the Shannon’s diversity and of the Pielou’s equitability indices detected at LR station pointed to the presence of few dominant species such as Mytilus galloprovincialis and Capitella capitata. Regarding the community structure, species composition differed moving from inside to outside the harbor, overall reporting high percentages of dissimilarity among stations (SIMPER analysis, Table S9). The macrobenthic community was mostly composed by the dominant groups of Annelida, Mollusca, and Crustacea, as usually reported from enclosed environments impacted by pollutants and characterized by high organic matter loads (Guerra-García & García-Gómez, 2004b; Spagnolo, Scarcella & Sarappa, 2011; Travizi et al., 2019). Among the group of Annelida, the Oligochaeta species T. swirencoides was identified for the first time in Ancona Harbor and it was found to be particularly abundant in all the sampling stations and even dominant at LR station. Only at API station the species was absent. Tubificid oligochaetes, also called sludge worms, are very common in high polluted areas (Brusca & Brusca, 2003) and they are recognized as a pollution-tolerant taxon (Pelletier et al., 2010). Thus, T. swirencoides was the species most responsible for the difference between the innermost sampling stations and the outermost one (SIMPER analysis, Table S9). Species composition may be affected by pollutant concentrations and high levels of organic matter, through a decrease in diversity and abundance of sensitive species (Callier et al., 2009). Most of the species found inhabiting the Ancona Harbor sediments were typically soft-bottom species and belonged to the ecological groups of disturbance-tolerant, second- and first-order opportunistic species (Borja, Franco & Perez, 2000). Polychaeta, along with the tubificid oligochaeta T. swirencoides, were the taxa most represented and diversified. Many Polychaeta species have a high level of tolerance to adverse effects such as pollution and natural perturbations (Borja, Franco & Perez, 2000), and for this reason they usually constitute the majority of benthic organisms living in harbor systems (Guerra-García & García-Gómez, 2004b). Usually, Polychaeta species richness and their diversity inside of harbor areas are low because of high pollution levels and the lack of oxygen in the water column (Estacio et al., 1997; Dhainaut-Courtois, Pruvot & Baudet, 2000). The same trend of increasing Polychaeta diversity moving outside the harbor area was also reported in the present study, with tolerant and opportunistic species such as Capitella capitata, C. caputesocis, H. filiformis, Sternaspis scutata and Streblospio sp. (Borja, Franco & Perez, 2000) particularly abundant in the innermost sampling stations. The species Prionospio cirrifera, mainly recorded outside the harbor (API station), is traditionally identified as an opportunistic spionid living in silty-clay sediments with high organic content (Borja, Franco & Perez, 2000; Simonini et al., 2004). Spagnolo, Scarcella & Sarappa (2011) reported the same finding and authors explained this as a result of a scarce tolerance of P. cirrifera to copper, detected at a concentration 9 times higher at the innermost MAN station compared to the average concentration detected at all the other sampling stations. A similar consideration could arise for the high abundance of the opportunistic species S. bombyx at API station. Polychaeta species ranked as disturbance-sensitive (Borja, Franco & Perez, 2000), such as Aricidea fragilis, Glycera capitata, Paradoneis armata, and Paraonis fulgens have also been found inhabiting the most impacted sampling stations inside the harbor but in lower abundances compared to the opportunistic species. This leads us to think about a certain kind of adaptation of these species to cope with less favorable conditions, but this aspect needs further investigation. Due to their economic and ecological importance, as well as their sedentary life, Mollusca has assumed a major role in monitoring contaminants worldwide (Pizzini et al., 2015, 2017; Grotti et al., 2016). Kurtiella bidentata, M. galloprovincialis, and Nucula nitidosa are defined as disturbance-tolerant species and they tended to dominate the innermost sampling stations in Ancona Harbor, with the only exception for K. bidentata, particularly abundant at API station. Abra alba characterized LR and DS stations, confirming its preference for sandy sediments with medium-high levels of organic matter quantity and quality (Guerra-García & García-Gómez, 2004b). This species has been reported to abound in harbors affected by heavy metal pollution (Dhainaut-Courtois, Pruvot & Baudet, 2000). LR station was characterized by a conspicuous presence of the nonindigenous species (NIS) bivalve Anadara transversa, bivalve of Indo-Pacific origin (Streftaris & Zenetos, 2006) belonging to the family Arcidae. Members of this family have a red color blood due to a high consistent level of hemoglobin in their bodies, allowing them to colonize habitats with low oxygen concentrations (e.g., Zenetos, 1994; Morello et al., 2004). A large number of crustaceans (Amphipoda, Isopoda, Tanaidacea) have been categorized as pollution-sensitive taxa, especially compared to Polychaeta (Pelletier et al., 2010). Crustacean communities have been considered to be among the most sensitive to changes in environmental variables (Gómez-Gesteira & Dauvin, 2000), and for this reason crustacean species richness and diversity inside harbors are generally considerably low (Estacio et al., 1997; Dhainaut-Courtois, Pruvot & Baudet, 2000). Three abundant species characterized the innermost sampling stations in Ancona Harbor: the Amphipoda Leptocheirus pilosus, the Caprellida Phtisica marina, and the Tanaidacea Apseudopsis latreillii. P. marina and A. latreillii have been reported in high number in sediments containing less sand and high concentrations of N, P, Cu, and organic matter (Guerra-García & García-Gómez, 2004a). A. latreillii belongs to the group of species that may occur under normal conditions, but whose populations are stimulated by organic enrichment, while P. marina belongs to the group of species very sensitive to organic enrichment. According to the present study and the results of other previous investigations (Conradi et al., 2000; Guerra-García & García-Gómez, 2001, 2004a) this species is able to live even in impacted habitats with moderate-high levels of heavy metals and PAHs. Conversely, the more sensitive Amphipoda Ampelisca diadema dominated the crustacean assemblages at API station. As for the meiofauna, pollutant content and the different sediment texture inside and outside the Ancona Harbor affected the macrofaunal composition, as previously reported (Guerra-García & García-Gómez, 2001, 2004a, 2004b; Spagnolo, Scarcella & Sarappa, 2011; Travizi et al., 2019). Univariate descriptors as well as the analysis of species characterizing the benthic communities indicated the presence of modified, but quite diverse and presumably well-established soft-bottom communities in all the investigated sampling stations. This might reflect the successful adaptation of many pollution-tolerant species to the long-term pollution and unstable environmental conditions of Ancona Harbor (Travizi et al., 2019). Meiofauna and macrofauna comparison Meio- and macrofauna can co-vary, even if the contrasting ecology of these two benthic components can give us different information on the environment where they live in (Austen, Warwick & Rosado, 1989; Schratzberger et al., 2003; Patrício et al., 2012). When compared together, both taxonomical groups inhabiting Ancona Harbor showed weak but significant relationship (Table S10), as also evident from the nMDS (Fig. 6). The weakness was likely due to the different response of meiofauna to the PORT conditions, characterized by an extreme paucity in this smaller benthic component. However, with the only exception for PORT station, all the other stations followed the same distributions for both benthic component, notwithstanding the different intra-replica variability. This suggest that, even if the two faunal categories respond differently to the environmental and pollutant variables (or at least with different intensity), both capture and highlight the disturbances affecting the harbor area. This result, enforce the concept of cross-taxon congruence (i.e., an interoperability among groups of organisms that respond as a unique community, although both conserving their peculiarities) (Su et al., 2004). Similar congruence between meiofauna and macrofauna groups was described by, e.g., Corte et al. (2017), Cronin-O’Reilly et al. (2018). Notwithstanding, this result should be taken with caution as the relations between different groups of organisms could be weak, as it is in the present case, to provide reliable predictions of biodiversity in impacted areas (Heino, 2010), thus more data are needed to confirm or definitely discard the usability of cross-taxon congruence. Conclusions In considering two benthic size components at the same time (meio- and macrofauna), we were provided by a broader response to environmental conditions in the Ancona Harbor. The following considerations emerged: - The meiofauna was affected by the quality and quantity of organic matter, suggesting that meiobenthic assemblages were more receptive to within-habitat food variability than macrofauna. - Both invertebrate groups were characterized by distinctive assemblages across the harbor, particularly evident for the meiofauna, consistent with changes detected for environmental features. - The present investigation confirmed the fundamental advantage of a multi-benthic size approach, with the inclusion of different taxonomical groups considered to cover a broader range of functions into the ecosystem. Optimally, both groups should be used in marine pollution monitoring programs included in the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD, 2008; Directive 2008/56/EC) in the context of its Descriptor 1 ‘maintenance of biodiversity’ and Descriptor 6 ‘sea floor integrity’. Supplemental Information 10.7717/peerj.15541/supp-1 Supplemental Information 1 Biochemical composition of the sediment samples. The raw data shows environmental parameters and benthic fauna measurements, as well as statistical analysis results. Phaeo, Phaeopigment concentration; CPE, chloroplast pigment equivalents; PRT, Protein concentration; CHO, Carbohydrate concentration; LIP, Lipid concentration. Mean values ± standard deviation are reported. Click here for additional data file. 10.7717/peerj.15541/supp-2 Supplemental Information 2 Frequency percentage wind roses for (A) the sampling day and (B) the week before the sampling day. Data retrieved from Ancona Harbor station (Latitude 43°36.579 N, Longitude 13°28.912 E) of the ISPRA (Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research) national tide gauge network (Rete Mareografica Nazionale). Click here for additional data file. 10.7717/peerj.15541/supp-3 Supplemental Information 3 Distance-based Redundancy Analysis (dbRDA) on benthic communities. Distance-based Redundancy Analysis (dbRDA) graphs on (A) meiofauna and (B) macrofauna compositions, showing the sampling station distribution according to selected environmental variables. The first two axes explain (A) the 91.8% of the variability and (B) the 100% of the variability. Variables are coded after Varimax Rotated PCA Axis as follow: ARCx = Pollutant variables associated to the rotated axis (x indicates the number of the axis). For a complete list of the variables refers to the text. Click here for additional data file. The first author is very grateful to Dr. Jaques Grall and Vincent Le Garrec (UBO) for the long time spent on the identification of macrofaunal organisms. The authors are grateful to the crews of the boat Tecnopesca that was employed in sampling operations. Additional Information and Declarations Competing Interests Author Contributions Data Availability Claudio Vasapollo is an Academic Editor for PeerJ. Elisa Baldrighi conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the article, and approved the final draft. Sarah Pizzini analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the article, and approved the final draft. Elisa Punzo analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the article, and approved the final draft. Angela Santelli analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the article, and approved the final draft. Pierluigi Strafella analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the article, and approved the final draft. Tommaso Scirocco analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the article, and approved the final draft. Elena Manini conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the article, and approved the final draft. Daniele Fattorini performed the experiments, analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the article, and approved the final draft. Claudio Vasapollo conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the article, and approved the final draft. The following information was supplied regarding data availability: The raw measurements are available in the Supplemental Files. ==== Refs References Anderson (2001) Anderson MJ Permutation tests for univariate or multivariate analysis of variance and regression Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 2001 58 3 626 639 10.1139/f01-004 Anderson, Gorley & Clarke (2008) Anderson M Gorley R Clarke K PERMANOVA+ for PRIMER: guide to software and statistical methods 2008 Plymouth, UK PRIMER-e Anderson & Robinson (2003) Anderson MJ Robinson J Generalized discriminant analysis based on distances Australian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics 2003 45 3 301 318 10.1111/1467-842X.00285 Austen, Warwick & Rosado (1989) Austen MC Warwick RM Rosado MC Meiobenthic and macrobenthic community structure along a putative pollution gradient in southern Portugal Marine Pollution Bulletin 1989 20 8 398 405 10.1016/0025-326X(89)90318-4 Austen & Widdicombe (2006) Austen MC Widdicombe S Comparison of the response of meio-and macrobenthos to disturbance and organic enrichment Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 2006 330 1 96 104 10.1016/j.jembe.2005.12.019 Baldrighi et al. (2019) Baldrighi E Semprucci F Franzo A Cvitkovic I Bogner D Despalatovic M Berto D Malgozata Formalewicz M Scarpato A Frapiccini E Marini M Grego M Meiofaunal communities in four adriatic ports: baseline data for risk assessment in ballast water management Marine Pollution Bulletin 2019 147 8 171 184 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.06.056 29960722 Balsamo et al. (2010) Balsamo M Albertelli G Ceccherelli VU Coccioni R Colangelo MA Curini-Galletti M Danovaro R D’Addabbo R De Leonardis C Fabiano M Frontalini F Gallo M Gambi C Guidi L Moreno M Pusceddu A Sandulli R Semprucci F Todaro MA Tongiorgi P Meiofauna of the Adriatic Sea: current state of knowledge and future perspective Chemistry and Ecology 2010 26 suppl. 1 45 63 10.1080/02757541003705492 Benedetti et al. (2014) Benedetti M Gorbi S Fattorini D D’Errico G Piva F Pacitti D Regoli F Environmental hazards from natural hydrocarbons seepage: integrated classification of risk from sediment chemistry, bioavailability and biomarkers responses in sentinel species Environmental Pollution 2014 185 116 126 10.1016/j.envpol.2013.10.023 24246782 Bianchelli et al. (2010) Bianchelli S Gambi C Zeppilli D Danovaro R Metazoan meiofauna in deep-sea canyons and adjacent open slopes: a large-scale comparison with focus on the rare taxa Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 2010 57 3 420 433 10.1016/j.dsr.2009.12.001 Bianchelli et al. (2016) Bianchelli S Pusceddu A Buschi E Danovaro R Trophic status and meiofauna biodiversity in the Northern Adriatic Sea: insights for the assessment of good environmental status Marine Environmental Research 2016 113 6 18 30 10.1016/j.marenvres.2015.10.010 26562451 Borja, Franco & Perez (2000) Borja A Franco J Perez V A marine biotic index to establish the ecological quality of soft-bottom benthos within European estuarine and coastal environments Marine Pollution Bulletin 2000 40 12 1100 1114 10.1016/S0025-326X(00)00061-8 Brusca & Brusca (2003) Brusca RC Brusca GJ Invertebrates 2003 Sunderland, MA Sinauer Associates 936 Callier et al. (2009) Callier MD Fletcher RL Thorp CH Fichet D Macrofaunal community responses to marina-related pollution on the South coast of England and west coast of France Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2009 89 1 19 29 10.1017/S002531540800235X Chatzinikolaou et al. (2018) Chatzinikolaou E Mandalakis M Damianidis P Dailianis T Gambineri S Rossano C Scapini F Carucci A Arvanitidis C Spatio-temporal benthic biodiversity patterns and pollution pressure in three Mediterranean touristic ports Science of the Total Environment 2018 624 1–4 648 660 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.12.111 29272834 Cibic et al. (2017) Cibic T Franzo A Nasi F Auriemma R Del Negro P The port of trieste (northern Adriatic Sea)—A case study of the “ecosystem approach to management” Frontiers in Marine Science 2017 4 336 10.3389/fmars.2017.00336 Clarke & Gorley (2006) Clarke KR Gorley RN Primer 2006 Plymouth PRIMER-e 866 Conradi et al. (2000) Conradi M Lòpez-González PJ Cervera JL García-Gómez JC Seasonality and spatial distribution of peracarids associated with the bryozoan Bugula neritina in Algeciras Bay Spain Journal of Crustacean Biology 2000 20 126 141 10.1163/20021975-99990045 Corriero et al. (2016) Corriero G Pierri C Accoroni S Alabiso G Bavestrello G Barbone E Bastianini M Bazzoni AM Bernardi Aubry F Boero F Buia MC Cabrini M Camatti E Cardone F Cataletto B Cattaneo Vietti R Cecere E Cibic T Colangelo P De Olazabal A D’onghia G Finotto S Fiore N Fornasaro D Fraschetti S Gambi MC Giangrande A Gravili C Guglielmo R Longo C Lorenti M Luglie A Maiorano P Mazzocchi MG Mercurio M Mastrototaro F Mistri M Monti M Munari C Musco L Nonnis-Marzano C Padedda BM Patti FP Petrocelli A Piraino S Portacci G Pugnetti A Pulina S Romagnoli T Rosati I Sarno D Satta CT Sechi N Schiaparelli S Scipione B Sion L Terlizzi A Tirelli V Totti C Tursi A Ungaro N Zingone A Zupo V Basset A Ecosystem vulnerability to alien and invasive species: a case study on marine habitats along the Italian coast Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 2016 26 2 392 409 10.1002/aqc.2550 Corte et al. (2017) Corte GN Checon HH Fonseca G Vieira DC Gallucci F Domenico MD Amaral ACZ Cross-taxon congruence in benthic communities: searching for surrogates in marine sediments Ecological Indicators 2017 78 6 173 182 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.03.031 Costa et al. (2016) Costa LDF Mirlean N Wasserman JC Wallner-Kersanach M Variability of labile metals in estuarine sediments in areas under the influence of antifouling paints, southern Brazil Environmental Earth Sciences 2016 75 7 580 10.1007/s12665-016-5355-5 Covazzi Harriague, Albertelli & Misic (2012) Covazzi Harriague A Albertelli G Misic C Macro-and meiofaunal community features in the critical environmental system of a tourist harbour (Rapallo, Ligurian Sea, NW Mediterranean) Marine Environmental Research 2012 74 4 64 72 10.1016/j.marenvres.2011.12.005 22225861 Covazzi Harriague et al. (2007) Covazzi Harriague A Misic C Petrillo M Albertelli G Stressors affecting the macrobenthic community in Rapallo harbour (Ligurian Sea, Italy) Scientia Marina 2007 71 4 705 714 10.3989/scimar.2007.71n4705 Covazzi Harriague et al. (2013) Covazzi Harriague A Misic C Valentini I Polidori E Albertelli G Pusceddu A Meio- and macrofauna communities in three sandy beaches of the northern Adriatic Sea protected by artificial reefs Chemistry and Ecology 2013 29 2 181 195 10.1080/02757540.2012.704911 Cronin-O’Reilly et al. (2018) Cronin-O’Reilly S Taylor JD Jermyn I Allcock AL Cunliffe M Johnson MP Limited congruence exhibited across microbial, meiofaunal and macrofaunal benthic assemblages in a heterogeneous coastal environment Scientific Reports 2018 8 1 679 10.1038/s41598-018-33799-9 29330439 Dal Zotto et al. (2016) Dal Zotto M Santulli A Simonini R Todaro MA Organic enrichment effects on a marine meiofauna community, with focus on Kinorhyncha Zoologischer Anzeiger 2016 265 25 127 140 10.1016/j.jcz.2016.03.013 Danovaro (2010) Danovaro R Methods for the study of deep-sea sediments, their functioning and biodiversity 2010 Boca Raton CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group Danulat et al. (2002) Danulat E Muniz P Garcia-Alonso J Yannicelli B First assessment of the highly contaminated harbour of Montevideo Uruguay Marine Pollution Bulletin 2002 44 6 551 576 10.1016/S0025-326X(02)00086-3 Dauvin et al. (2017) Dauvin JC Bakalem A Baffreau A Grimes S Benthic ecological status of Algerian harbours Marine Pollution Bulletin 2017 125 1–2 378 388 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.09.049 28967413 Dell’Anno et al. (2002) Dell’Anno A Mei ML Pusceddu A Danovaro R Assessing the trophic state and eutrophication of coastal marine systems: a new approach based on the biochemical composition of sediment organic matter Marine Pollution Bulletin 2002 44 7 611 622 10.1016/S0025-326X(01)00302-2 12222884 Dhainaut-Courtois, Pruvot & Baudet (2000) Dhainaut-Courtois NC Pruvot A Baudet EK Les peuplements macrozoobenthiques indicateurs des qualités physico-chimiques et chimiques des sédiments portuaires– exemple du port de boulogne-sur-mer (Manche) Bulletin de la Société Zoologique de France 2000 125 49 62 EEA & UNEP (2006) EEA UNEP Priority issues in the mediterranean environment. European environment agency, Copenhage 2006 https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/eea_report_2006_4 El Nemr, Khaled & El Sikaily (2006) El Nemr A Khaled A El Sikaily A Distribution and statistical analysis of leachable and total heavy metals in the sediments of the suez gulf Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 2006 118 1–3 89 112 10.1007/s10661-006-0985-9 16897536 Estacio et al. (1997) Estacio FJ García-Adiego EM Fa DA García-Gómez JC Daza JL Hortas F Gómez-Ariza JL Ecological analysis in a polluted area of Algeciras Bay (southern Spain): external ‘versus’ internal outfalls and environmental implications Marine Pollution Bulletin 1997 34 10 780 793 10.1016/S0025-326X(97)00046-5 Etiope et al. (2014) Etiope G Panieri G Fattorini D Regoli F Vannoli P Italiano F Locritani M Carmisciano CA Thermogenic hydrocarbon seep in shallow Adriatic Sea (Italy): gas origin, sediment contamination and benthic foraminifera Marine and Petroleum Geology 2014 57 2 283 293 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2014.06.006 European Communities (EC) (2000) European Communities (EC) Directive of the European parliament and of the council 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy 2000 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:5c835afb-2ec6-4577-bdf8-756d3d694eeb.0004.02/DOC_1&format=PDF Fabiano, Danovaro & Fraschetti (1995) Fabiano M Danovaro R Fraschetti S A three-year time series of elemental and biochemical composition of organic matter in subtidal sandy sediments of the Ligurian Sea (Northwestern Mediterranean) Continental Shelf Research 1995 15 1453 1469 10.1016/0278-4343(94)00088-5 Foti et al. (2014) Foti A Fenzi GA Di Pippo F Gravina MF Magni P Testing the saprobity hypothesis in a Mediterranean lagoon: effects of confinement and organic enrichment on benthic communities Marine Environmental Research 2014 99 Suppl. 1 85 94 10.1016/j.marenvres.2014.04.004 24838081 Franzo et al. (2022) Franzo A Baldrighi E Grassi E Grego M Balsamo M Basili M Semprucci F Free-living nematodes of mediterranean ports: a mandatory contribution for their use in ecological quality assessment Marine Pollution Bulletin 2022 180 6 113814 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.113814 35679809 Frontalini et al. (2014) Frontalini F Semprucci F Armynot du Châtelet E Francescangeli F Margaritelli G Rettori R Spagnoli F Balsamo M Coccioni R Biodiversity trends of the meiofauna and foraminifera assemblages of Lake Varano (southern Italy) Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 2014 127 1 7 22 10.2988/0006-324X-127.1.7 Frontalini et al. (2011) Frontalini F Semprucci F Coccioni R Balsamo M Bittoni P Covazzi-Harriague A On the quantitative distribution and community structure of the meio and macrofaunal communities in the coastal area of the Central Adriatic Sea (Italy) Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 2011 180 1–4 325 344 10.1007/s10661-010-1791-y 21120690 Giere (2009) Giere O Meiobenthology: the microscopic motile fauna of aquatic sediments 2009 Second Edition Cham Springer-Verlag 527 Giere & Schratzberger (2023) Giere O Schratzberger M New horizons in meiobenthos research profiles, patterns and potentials 2023 Cham Springer International Publishing 407 Giuliani et al. (2019) Giuliani S Romanelli M Piazza R Vecchiato M Pizzini S Tranchida G D’Agostino F Romano S Bellucci LG When research meets NGOs: the GVC-UCODEP project in the Bắc Giang Province and Cầu River (Northern Vietnam) and its feedback on national monitoring programs Environmental Science & Policy 2019 101 279 290 10.1016/j.envsci.2019.09.004 Gómez-Gesteira & Dauvin (2000) Gómez-Gesteira JL Dauvin JC Amphipods are good bioindicators of the impact of oil spills on soft-bottom macrobenthic communities Marine Pollution Bulletin 2000 40 1017 1027 10.1016/S0025-326X(00)00046-1 Gray et al. (1988) Gray JS Aschan M Carr MR Clarke KR Green RH Pearson TH Rosenberg R Warwick RM Analysis of community attributes of the benthic macrofauna of Frierfjord/Langesundfjord and in a mesocosm experiment Marine Ecology Progress Series 1988 46 151 165 10.3354/meps046151 Grotti et al. (2016) Grotti M Pizzini S Abelmoschi ML Cozzi G Piazza R Soggia F Retrospective biomonitoring of chemical contamination in the marine coastal environment of Terra Nova Bay (Ross Sea, Antarctica) by environmental specimen banking Chemosphere 2016 165 418 426 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.09.049 27668719 Guerra-García, Corzo & García-Gómez (2003) Guerra-García JM Corzo J García-Gómez CJ Short-term benthic recolonization after dredging in the harbour of Ceuta, North Africa Marine Ecology 2003 24 217 229 10.1046/j.0173-9565.2003.00810.x Guerra-García & García-Gómez (2004b) Guerra-García JM García-Gómez JC Soft bottom mollusc assemblages and pollution in a harbour with two opposing entrances Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Marine Science 2004b 60 2 273 283 10.1016/j.ecss.2004.01.004 Guerra-García & García-Gómez (2001) Guerra-García JM García-Gómez JC The spatial distribution of Caprellidea (Crustacea: Amphipoda): a stress bioindicator in Ceuta (North Africa, Gibraltar area) Marine Ecology 2001 22 4 357 367 10.1046/j.1439-0485.2001.01757.x Guerra-García & García-Gómez (2004a) Guerra-García JM García-Gómez JC Polychaete assemblages and sediment pollution in a harbour with two opposing entrances Helgoland Marine Research 2004a 58 3 183 191 10.1007/s10152-004-0184-4 Gusmao et al. (2016) Gusmao JB Brauko KM Eriksson BK Lana PC Functional diversity of macrobenthic assemblages decreases in response to sewage discharges Ecological Indicators 2016 66 65 75 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.01.003 Heino (2010) Heino J Are indicator groups and cross-taxon congruence useful for predicting biodiversity in aquatic ecosystems? Ecological Indicators 2010 10 2 112 117 10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.04.013 Heip, Vincx & Vranken (1985) Heip C Vincx M Vranken G The ecology of marine nematodes Oceanography and Marine Biology—An Annual Review 1985 23 399 489 Katsanevakis et al. (2011) Katsanevakis S Zenetos A Mačić V Beqiraj S Poursanidis D Kashta L Invading the Adriatic: spatial patterns of marine alien species across the Ionian-Adriatic boundary Aquatic Biology 2011 13 2 107 118 10.3354/ab00357 Kulakova (2022) Kulakova I Assessment of the ecological state of the Danube delta coastal area (northwestern part of the Black Sea) based on meiobenthos and nematode assemblages Geo-Eco-Marina 2022 28 21 39 Li et al. (2017) Li B Li X Bouma TJ Soissons LM Cozzoli F Wang Q Zhou Z Chen L Analysis of macrobenthic assemblages and ecological health of Yellow River Delta, China, using AMBI & M-AMBI assessment method Marine Pollution Bulletin 2017 119 2 23 32 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.03.044 Losi et al. (2013) Losi V Ferrero TJ Moreno M Gaozza L Rovere A Firpo M Marques JC Albertelli G The use of nematodes in assessing ecological conditions in shallow waters surrounding a Mediterranean harbour facility Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 2013 130 3 209 221 10.1016/j.ecss.2013.02.017 Losi et al. (2021) Losi V Grassi E Balsamo M Rocchi M Gaozza L Semprucci F Changes in taxonomic structure and functional traits of nematodes as tools in the assessment of port impact Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 2021 260 2 107524 10.1016/j.ecss.2021.107524 McCready, Birch & Long (2006) McCready S Birch GF Long ER Metallic and organic contaminants in sediments of Sydney Harbour, Australia and vicinity—a chemical dataset for evaluating sediment quality guidelines Environment International 2006 32 4 455 465 10.1016/j.envint.2005.10.006 16337000 Mehlhorn et al. (2021) Mehlhorn P Viehberg F Kirsten K Newman B Frenzel P Gildeeva O Green A Hahn A Haberzett T Spatial distribution and consequences of contaminants in harbour sediments-a case study from Richards Bay Harbour, South Africa Marine Pollution Bulletin 2021 172 4 112764 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112764 34425363 Mirto et al. (2014) Mirto S Arigò C Genovese L Pusceddu A Gambi C Danovaro R Nematode assemblage response to fish-farm impact in vegetated (Posidonia oceanica) and non vegetated habitats Aquaculture Environment Interaction 2014 5 1 17 28 10.3354/aei00091 Mirto & Danovaro (2004) Mirto S Danovaro R Meiofaunal colonisation on artificial substrates: a tool for biomonitoring the environmental quality on coastal marine systems Marine Pollution Bulletin 2004 48 9–10 919 926 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2003.11.016 15111039 Morello et al. (2004) Morello E Solustri C Antolini B Froglia C On the distribution of the allochthonous bivalves Anadara inaequivalvis (Bruguière, 1789), Anadara demiri (Piani, 1981) and Musculista senhousia (Benson in Cantor, 1842) in the Adriatic Sea, Italy Biogeographia-the Journal of Integrative Biogeography 2004 25 1 65 72 10.21426/B6110041 Moreno et al. (2008a) Moreno M Ferrero TJ Gallizia I Vezzulli L Albertelli G Fabiano M An assessment of the spatial heterogeneity of environmental disturbance within an enclosed harbour through the analysis of meiofauna and nematode assemblages Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 2008a 77 4 565 576 10.1016/j.ecss.2007.10.016 Moreno et al. (2008b) Moreno M Vezzulli L Marin V Laconi P Albertelli G Fabiano M The use of meiofauna diversity as an indicator of pollution in harbours ICES Journal of Marine Science 2008b 65 8 1428 1435 10.1093/icesjms/fsn116 MSFD (2008) MSFD Marine strategy framework directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the council of 17 june 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy 2008 1 22 https://www.eea.europa.eu/policy-documents/2008-56-ec Muniz & Pires-Vanin (2005) Muniz P Pires-Vanin AM More about taxonomic sufficiency: a case study using polychaete communities in a subtropical bay moderately affected by urban sewage Ocean Science Journal 2005 40 3 17 33 10.1007/BF03022607 Papageorgiou, Kalantzi & Karakassis (2010) Papageorgiou N Kalantzi I Karakassis I Effects of fish farming on the biological and geochemical properties of muddy and sandy sediments in the Mediterranean Sea Marine Environmental Research 2010 69 5 326 336 10.1016/j.marenvres.2009.12.007 20085847 Patrício et al. (2012) Patrício J Adão H Neto JM Alves AS Traunspurger W Marques JC Do nematode and macrofauna assemblages provide similar ecological assessment information? Ecological Indicators 2012 14 1 124 137 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.027 Pelletier et al. (2010) Pelletier MC Gold AJ Heltshe JF Buffum HW A method to identify estuarine macroinvertebrate pollution indicator species in the Virginian Biogeographic Province Ecological Indicators 2010 10 5 1037 1048 10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.03.005 Pereira et al. (2018a) Pereira TJ Gingold R Villegas ADM Rocha-Olivares A Patterns of spatial variation of meiofauna in sandy beaches of northwestern Mexico with contrasting levels of disturbance Thalassas: An International Journal of Marine Science 2018a 34 1 53 63 10.1007/s41208-017-0038-x Pereira et al. (2018b) Pereira TL Wallner-Kersanach M Costa LDF Costa DP Baisch PRM Nickel, vanadium, and lead as indicators of sediment contamination of marina, refinery, and shipyard areas Environmental Science and Pollution Research 2018b 25 2 1719 1730 10.1007/s11356-017-0503-3 29101697 Pećarević et al. (2013) Pećarević M Mikuš J Bratoš-Cetinić A Dulčić J Čalić M Introduced marine species in Croatian waters (Eastern Adriatic Sea) Mediterranean Marine Science 2013 14 1 224 237 10.12681/mms.383 Pielou (1966) Pielou E Shannon’s formula as a measure of specific diversity: its use and misuse The American Naturalist 1966 118 914 463 465 10.1086/282439 Pielou (1969) Pielou EC An introduction to mathematical ecology 1969 New York Wiley-Interscience 286 Pizzini et al. (2015) Pizzini S Marchiori E Piazza R Cozzi G Barbante C Determination by HRGC/HRMS of PBDE levels in edible Mediterranean bivalves collected from north-western Adriatic coasts Microchemical Journal 2015 121 184 191 10.1016/j.microc.2015.03.010 Pizzini et al. (2021) Pizzini S Morabito E Gregoris E Vecchiato M Corami F Piazza R Gambaro A Occurrence and source apportionment of organic pollutants in deep sediment cores of the Venice Lagoon Marine Pollution Bulletin 2021 164 11 112053 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112053 33548807 Pizzini et al. (2017) Pizzini S Sbicego C Corami F Grotti M Magi E Bonato T Cozzi G Barbante C Piazza R 3,3′-dichlorobiphenyl (non-Aroclor PCB-11) as a marker of non-legacy PCB contamination in marine species: comparison between Antarctic and Mediterranean bivalves Chemosphere 2017 175 28 35 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.02.023 28211332 Punzo et al. (2017) Punzo E Gomiero A Tassetti AN Strafella P Santelli A Salvalaggio V Spagnolo A Scarcella G De Biasi AM Kozinkova L Fabi G Environmental impact of offshore gas activities on the benthic environment: a case study Environmental Management 2017 60 2 340 356 10.1007/s00267-017-0886-4 28488088 Pusceddu et al. (2011) Pusceddu A Bianchelli S Gambi C Danovaro R Assessment of benthic trophic status of marine coastal ecosystems: significance of meiofaunal rare taxa Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 2011 93 4 420 430 10.1016/j.ecss.2011.05.012 Pusceddu et al. (2010) Pusceddu A Bianchelli S Sanchez Vidal A Canals M Durrieu De Madron X Heussner S Lykousis V de Stigter H Trincardi F Danovaro R Organic matter in sediments of canyons and open slopes of the Portuguese, Catalan, Southern Adriatic and Cretan Sea margins Deep Sea Research I 2010 57 3 441 457 10.1016/j.dsr.2009.11.008 Pusceddu et al. (2009) Pusceddu A Dell’Anno A Fabiano M Danovaro R Quantity and bioavailability of sediment organic matter as signatures of benthic trophic status Marine Ecology Progress Series 2009 375 41 52 10.3354/meps07735 Pusceddu et al. (2007) Pusceddu A Gambi C Manini E Danovaro R Trophic state, ecosystem efficiency and biodiversity of transitional aquatic ecosystems: analysis of environmental quality based on different benthic indicators Chemical Ecology 2007 23 6 505 515 10.1080/02757540701760494 Quinn & Keough (2002) Quinn G Keough M Experimental design and data analysis for biologists 2002 Cambridge Cambridge University Press R Core Team (2018) R Core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing 2018 Vienna R Foundation for Statistical Computing http://www.R-project.org/ Rebai et al. (2022) Rebai N Mosbahi N Dauvin JC Neifar L Ecological risk assessment of heavy metals and environmental quality of tunisian harbours Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 2022 10 11 1625 10.3390/jmse10111625 Ridall & Ingels (2021) Ridall A Ingels J Suitability of free-living marine nematodes as bioindicators: status and future considerations Frontiers in Marine Science 2021 8 685327 10.3389/fmars.2021.685327 Sabbatini et al. (2010) Sabbatini A Bonatto S Gooday AJ Morigi C Pancotti I Pucci F Negri A Modern benthic foraminifers at Northern shallow sites of Adriatic Sea and soft-walled, monothalamous taxa: a brief overview Micropaleontology 2010 56 3–4 359 376 10.47894/mpal.56.3.07 Sabbatini et al. (2013) Sabbatini A Nardelli MP Morigi C Negri A Contribution of soft-shelled monothalamous taxa to foraminiferal assemblages in the Adriatic Sea Acta Protozoologica 2013 52 3 181 192 10.4467/16890027AP.13.0016.1113 Schratzberger et al. (2003) Schratzberger M Daniel F Wall CM Kilbride R Macnaughton SJ Boyd SE Rees HL Lee K Swannell RPJ Response of estuarine meio- and macrofauna to in situ bioremediation of oil-contaminated sediment Marine Pollution Bulletin 2003 46 4 430 443 10.1016/S0025-326X(02)00465-4 12705916 Schratzberger & Ingels (2018) Schratzberger M Ingels J Meiofauna matters: the roles of meiofauna in benthic ecosystems Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 2018 502 2 12 25 10.1016/j.jembe.2017.01.007 Schratzberger et al. (2008) Schratzberger M Maxwell TAD Warr K Ellis JR Rogers SI Spatial variability of infaunal nematode and polychaete assemblages in two muddy subtidal habitats Marine Biology 2008 153 4 621 642 10.1007/s00227-007-0836-4 Sedano Vera, Marquina & Espinosa Torre (2014) Sedano Vera F Marquina D Espinosa Torre F Usefulness of meiofauna at high taxonomic levels as a tool to assess harbor quality status. Marina del Este Harbor (Granada, Spain) as a case study Revista Ciencias Marinas y Costeras 2014 6 103 113 10.15359/revmar.6.7 Semprucci, Balsamo & Sandulli (2016) Semprucci F Balsamo M Sandulli R Assessment of the ecological quality (EcoQ) of the Venice lagoon using the structure and biodiversity of the meiofaunal assemblages Ecological Indicators 2016 67 451 457 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.03.014 Semprucci et al. (2015) Semprucci F Frontalini F Sbrocca C Armynot du Châtelet E Bout-Roumazeilles V Coccioni R Balsamo M Meiobenthos and free-living nematodes as tools for biomonitoring environments affected by riverine impact Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 2015 187 5 251 10.1007/s10661-015-4493-7 25877645 Semprucci, Grassi & Balsamo (2022) Semprucci F Grassi E Balsamo M Simple is the best: an alternative method for the analysis of free-living nematode assemblage structure Water 2022 14 7 1114 10.3390/w14071114 Shannon & Weaver (1949) Shannon C Weaver W The mathematical theory of communication 1949 Urbana, US University of Illinois Press Simboura & Zenetos (2002) Simboura N Zenetos A Benthic indicators to use in ecological quality classification of Mediterranean soft bottom marine ecosystems, including a new biotic index Mediterranean Marine Science 2002 3 2 77 111 10.12681/mms.249 Simonini et al. (2004) Simonini R Ansaloni I Bonvicini Pagliai AM Prevedelli D Organic enrichment and structure of the macrozoobenthic community in the northern Adriatic Sea in an area facing Adige and Po mouths ICES Journal of Marine Science 2004 61 6 871 881 10.1016/j.icesjms.2004.06.018 Simonini et al. (2005) Simonini R Ansaloni I Cavallini F Graziosi F Iotti M N’siala GM Mauri M Montanari G Preti M Prevedelli D Effects of long-term dumping of harbor-dredged material on macrozoobenthos at four disposal sites along the Emilia-Romagna coast (Northern Adriatic Sea, Italy) Marine Pollution Bulletin 2005 50 12 1595 1605 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2005.06.031 16054163 Somerfield et al. (2006) Somerfield PJ Cochrane SJ Dahle S Pearson TH Free-living nematodes and macrobenthos in a high-latitude glacial fjord Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 2006 330 1 284 296 10.1016/j.jembe.2005.12.034 Spagnolo et al. (2019) Spagnolo A Cuicchi C De Biasi AM Ferrà C Montagnini L Punzo E Salvalaggio V Santelli A Strafella P Fabi G Effects of the installation of offshore pipelines on macrozoobenthic communities (northern and central Adriatic Sea) Marine Pollution Bulletin 2019 138 8 534 544 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.12.003 30660304 Spagnolo, Scarcella & Sarappa (2011) Spagnolo A Scarcella G Sarappa A Benthic community response to sediment features in Ancona harbour (Northern Adriatic Sea, Italy) Vie Milieu 2011 61 119 128 Streftaris & Zenetos (2006) Streftaris N Zenetos A Alien marine species in the Mediterranean-the 100 ‘Worst Invasives’ and their impact Mediterranean Marine Science 2006 7 1 87 118 10.12681/mms.180 Su et al. (2004) Su CJ Debinski DM Jakubauskas ME Kindscher K Beyond species richness: community similarity as a measure of cross-taxon congruence for coarse-filter conservation Conservation Biology 2004 18 1 167 173 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00337.x Tobiszewski & Namieśnik (2012) Tobiszewski M Namieśnik J PAH diagnostic ratios for the identification of pollution emission sources Environmental Pollution 2012 162 110 119 10.1016/j.envpol.2011.10.025 22243855 Todorova, Doncheva & Trifonova (2020) Todorova VR Doncheva VG Trifonova EV First implementation of marine strategy framework directive for benthic habitats assessment in the Bulgarian Black Sea. Ecologia Balkanica 2020 http://web.uni-plovdiv.bg/mollov/EB/2020_SE3/247-256_eb.20SE327.pdf Travizi et al. (2019) Travizi A Balković I Bacci T Bertasi F Cuicchi C Flander-Putrle V Grati F Grossi L Jaklin A Lipej L Mavrič B Mikac B Marusso V Montagnini L Nerlović V Penna P Salvalaggio V Santelli A Scirocco T Spagnolo A Trabucco B Vani D Macrozoobenthos in the Adriatic Sea ports: soft-bottom communities with an overview of non-indigenous species Marine Pollution Bulletin 2019 147 5 159 170 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.01.016 30824304 Vassallo et al. (2006) Vassallo P Fabiano M Vezzulli L Sandulli R Marques JC Jørgensen SE Assessing the health of coastal marine ecosystems: a holistic approach based on sediment micro and meio-benthic measures Ecological Indicators 2006 6 3 525 542 10.1016/j.ecolind.2005.07.003 Veiga, Rubal & Besteiro (2009) Veiga P Rubal M Besteiro C Shallow sublittoral meiofauna communities and sediment polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) content on the Galician coast (NW Spain), six months after the prestige oil spill Marine Pollution Bulletin 2009 58 4 581 588 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2008.11.002 19091356 Vezzulli & Fabiano (2006) Vezzulli L Fabiano M Sediment biochemical and microbial variables for the evaluation of trophic status along the Italian and Albanian continental shelves Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2006 86 27 37 10.1017/S0025315406012823 Vezzulli et al. (2003) Vezzulli L Marrale D Moreno M Fabiano M Sediment organic matter and meiofauna community response to long-term fish-farm impact in the Ligurian Sea (Western Mediterranean) Chemistry and Ecology 2003 19 6 431 440 10.1080/02757540310001609361 Viana et al. (2014) Viana M Hammingh P Colette A Querol X Degraeuwe B de Vlieger I van Aardenne J Impact of maritime transport emissions on coastal air quality in Europe Atmospheric Environment 2014 90 96 105 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.03.046 Whomersley et al. (2009) Whomersley P Huxham M Schratzberger M Bolam S Differential response of meio-and macrofauna to in situ burial Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2009 89 6 1091 1098 10.1017/S0025315409000344 WoRMS Editorial Board (2022) WoRMS Editorial Board World register of marine species 2022 https://www.marinespecies.org Xu, Cheung & Shin (2014) Xu WZ Cheung SG Shin PK Structure and taxonomic composition of free-living nematode and macrofaunal assemblages in a eutrophic subtropical harbour, Hong Kong Marine Pollution Bulletin 2014 85 2 764 773 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.01.023 24467853 Zenetos (1994) Zenetos A Scapharca demiri (Piani, 1981): primo ritrovamento nel nord Egeo La Conchiglia 1994 271 37 38 Zeppilli et al. (2015) Zeppilli D Sarrazin J Leduc D Arbizu PM Fontaneto D Fontanier C Gooday AJ Kristensen RM Ivanenko VN Sorensen MV Vanreusel A Thébault J Mea M Allio N Andro T Arvigo A Castrec J Danielo M Foulon V Fumeron R Hermabessiere L Hulot V James T Langonne-Augen R Le Bot T Long M Mahabror D Morel Q Pantalos M Pouplard E Raimondeau L Rio-Cabello A Seite S Traisnel G Urvoy K Van Der Stegen T Weyand M Fernandes D Is the meiofauna a good indicator for climate change and anthropogenic impacts? Marine Biodiversity 2015 45 3 505 535 10.1007/s12526-015-0359-z Zuur & Ieno (2016) Zuur AF Ieno EN A protocol for conducting and presenting results of regression-type analyses Methods in Ecology and Evolution 2016 7 6 636 645 10.1111/2041-210X.12577 Zwick & Velicer (1986) Zwick WR Velicer WF Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain Psychological Bulletin 1986 99 3 432 442 10.1037/0033-2909.99.3.432