Resolving threats to widely distributed marine megafauna requires definition of the geographic distributions of both the threats as well as the population unit(s) of interest. In turn, because individual threats can operate on varying spatial scales, their impacts can affect different segments of a population of the same species. Therefore, integration of multiple tools and techniques — including site-based monitoring, genetic analyses, mark-recapture studies and telemetry — can facilitate robust definitions of population segments at multiple biological and spatial scales to address different management and research challenges. To address these issues for marine turtles, we collated all available studies on marine turtle biogeography, including nesting sites, population abundances and trends, population genetics, and satellite telemetry. We georeferenced this information to generate separate layers for nesting sites, genetic stocks, and core distributions of population segments of all marine turtle species. We then spatially integrated this information from fine- to coarse-spatial scales to develop nested envelope models, or Regional Management Units (RMUs), for marine turtles globally. The RMU framework is a solution to the challenge of how to organize marine turtles into units of protection above the level of nesting populations, but below the level of species, within regional entities that might be on independent evolutionary trajectories. Among many potential applications, RMUs provide a framework for identifying data gaps, assessing high diversity areas for multiple species and genetic stocks, and evaluating conservation status of marine turtles. Furthermore, RMUs allow for identification of geographic barriers to gene flow, and can provide valuable guidance to marine spatial planning initiatives that integrate spatial distributions of protected species and human activities. In addition, the RMU framework — including maps and supporting metadata — will be an iterative, user-driven tool made publicly available in an online application for comments, improvements, download and analysis.

Over the past 3 decades, the status of sea turtles and the need for their protection to aid population recovery have increasingly captured the interest of government agencies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the general public worldwide. This interest has been matched by increased research attention, focusing on a wide variety of topics relating to sea turtle biology and ecology, together with the interrelations of sea turtles with the physical and natural environments. Although sea turtles have been better studied than most other marine fauna, management actions and their evaluation are often hindered by the lack of data on turtle biology, human-turtle interactions, turtle population status and threats. In an effort to inform effective sea turtle conservation a list of priority research questions was assembled based on the opinions of 35 sea turtle researchers from 13 nations working in fields related to turtle biology and/or conservation. The combined experience of the contributing researchers spanned the globe as well as many relevant disciplines involved in conservation research. An initial list of more than 200 questions gathered from respondents was condensed into 20 metaquestions and classified under 5 categories: reproductive biology, biogeography, population ecology, threats and conservation strategies. © Inter-Research 2010

Where conservation resources are limited and conservation targets are diverse, robust yet flexible priority-setting frameworks are vital. Priority-setting is especially important for geographically widespread species with distinct populations subject to multiple threats that operate on different spatial and temporal scales. Marine turtles are widely distributed and exhibit intra-specific variations in population sizes and trends, as well as reproduction and morphology. However, current global extinction risk assessment frameworks do not assess conservation status of spatially and biologically distinct marine turtle Regional Management Units (RMUs), and thus do not capture variations in population trends, impacts of threats, or necessary conservation actions across individual populations. To address this issue, we developed a new assessment framework that allowed us to evaluate, compare and organize marine turtle RMUs according to status and threats criteria. Because conservation priorities can vary widely (i.e. from avoiding imminent extinction to maintaining long-term monitoring efforts) we developed a “conservation priorities portfolio” system using categories of paired risk and threats scores for all RMUs (n = 58). We performed these assessments and rankings globally, by species, by ocean basin, and by recognized geopolitical bodies to identify patterns in risk, threats, and data gaps at different scales. This process resulted in characterization of risk and threats to all marine turtle RMUs, including identification of the world's 11 most endangered marine turtle RMUs based on highest risk and threats scores. This system also highlighted important gaps in available information that is crucial for accurate conservation assessments. Overall, this priority-setting framework can provide guidance for research and conservation priorities at multiple relevant scales, and should serve as a model for conservation status assessments and priority-setting for widespread, long-lived taxa.

In the central Mediterranean Sea, gut contents and feces of 95 turtles captured by bottom trawlers and pelagic longliners fishing in neritic and oceanic areas, respectively, were examined. Benthic prey were more abundant than pelagic, a probable bias due to the higher digestibility of the latter. Animal and plant taxa belonging to 12 Phyla and 20 Classes were observed, with 63 new records of prey species, and Malacostraca, Gastropoda, and Echinoidea were the most commonly occurring animal classes. Results showed a highly opportunistic foraging behavior by the turtles on both live and dead material in the epipelagic zone as well as on all types of seafloor. Benthic taxa were found in turtles as small as 26 cm curved carapace length (CCL), indicating an early use of benthic resources, and also among turtles over a wide size range caught by pelagic longliners. The lack of evidence of a strict oceanic/pelagic stage and of a clear habitat shift in the observed size range (25 to 80.3 cm CCL), when considered together with other recent findings, challenges the current ontogenetic model of life history for the species. A relaxed model is proposed, with an early short obligate epipelagic stage due to limited diving capacity, followed by the main opportunistic amphi-habitat stage, with a tendency to prefer benthic prey as turtles grow and their benthic foraging efficiency improves. Under this model, temporary or permanent association or fidelity to specific oceanic or neritic zones would vary among individuals or populations according to food availability and oceanographic features in the foraging or migratory areas. © Inter-Research 2008