Italian still life paintings as a resource for reconstructing past Mediterranean aquatic biodiversity

Abstract

Our study explores the use of Italian still-life paintings from the Early Modern Period (16^th-18^th centuries) as historical records of past Mediterranean aquatic biodiversity. Following an environmental history approach, we analysed taxonomic composition in paintings, first examining geographic and temporal variations shaped by technical and socio-cultural influences. After consideration of these factors, we performed a detailed ecological interpretation of depicted taxa. Our findings reveal a shift from freshwater to marine resource use, driven by evolving fishing practices and technological advances. Socio-cultural elements, such as culinary traditions, religion and aesthetics also strongly shaped species representation. We discuss ecological interpretation of the representation of vulnerable and emblematic Mediterranean species in light of climate change, overexploitation and species biogeography. Our research highlights the powerful role of paintings in reconstructing past exploited ecosystems, offering a unique perspective for informing contemporary conservation efforts.

Fig. 1. Frequencies of taxa from different environments represented in Italian paintings.

Relative abundance (in %) of paintings representing taxa from freshwater, anadromous, catadromous, marine, and all other mentioned associations according to the three studied geographic zones (inland localities, Adriatic Sea, Liguro-Tyrrhenian Sea) and from three time-periods ([1500–1650] [1650–1700] [1700–1800]).

Fig. 2. Pearson’s residuals of chi-squared tests for aquatic taxa across environments, habitats, geographic zones and time-periods.

Pearson’s residual values of chi-squared tests performed on the proportion (%) of taxa from a, b aquatic environments (freshwater, anadromous, catadromous, marine) and c, d habitats (pelagic, benthopelagic, benthic) across a–c geographic zones (X-squared = 71.60, p value < 0.001 and X-squared = 13.89, p value = 0.008, for environments and habitats, respectively) and b–d time-periods (X-squared = 13.95, p value = 0.03 and X-squared = 2.88, p value = 0.58, for environments and habitats, respectively). Residual values are indicated by the coloured scale bars, with positive (blue) and negative (red) associations between variables, and dot size indicates the strength of the relationship.

Fig. 3. Taxonomic classes distribution and indicator species across geographic zones.

a Distribution of the taxonomic classes represented in the paintings across the studied cities as grouped by geographic zones (inland localities, Adriatic Sea, Liguro-Tyrrhenian Sea) and b Indicator taxa identified in each geographic region by the Indicator Species Analysis, only taxa significantly associated to the geographic zones are displayed (Table S1). The average historical population of cities is given in Fig. S2a.

Fig. 4. Taxa diversity in relation to geographic zones.

Correspondence Analysis (CA) map of the taxa diversity represented in paintings from the Early Modern Period in relation to the three geographic zones (inland localities, Adriatic Sea, Liguro-Tyrrhenian Sea). The size of the dots corresponds to the contribution to the CA ordination. Only taxa with a cumulative contribution of 80% are labelled. Cypr, Cyprinus carpio; Sole, Solea solea; Ostr, Ostrea sp.; Esox, Esox spp.; Pleu, Pleuronectidae; Asta, Astacidae; Squi, Squilla mantis; Mull, Mullus sp.; Barb, Barbus spp.; Scor, Scorpaenidae; Cara, Carassius sp.; Vene, Veneridae; Homa, Homarus gammarus; Pali, Palinurus elephas; Chei, Cheilopogon heterurus; Lutr, Lutra lutra; Sepi, Sepia officinalis; Spon, Spondylus gaederopus; Para, Paracentrotus lividus; Spar, Sparus spp.; Engr, Engraulis sp.; Scom, Scomber spp.; Salt, Salmo trutta; Maja, Maja sp.; Cora, Corallium rubrum; Loli, Loligo sp.; Acip, Acipenser spp.; Lith, Lithognathus mormyrus; Abra, Abramis brama; Pect, Pecten maximus; Angu, Anguilla anguilla; Dipl, Diplodus spp.; Pate, Patella sp.; Ensi, Ensis siliqua.

Fig. 5. Taxa distribution according to fishing gear.

Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) based on the number of paintings in which taxa were identified according to fishing gear (bottom trawling, hand collection, hunting, line fishing, netting, fish pots) and grouped according to the studied time-periods in a Inland, b Adriatic and c Liguro-Tyrrhenian paintings. Percentages on the axes indicate percentages of inertia explained by each MCA dimension. Confidence ellipses are represented (90%) as well as the mean point of each time-period (diamonds).

Fig. 6. European painters’ relationships.

a Cities of birth of the studied artists, unstudied teachers/pupils, and their influences on the studied painters, and b connexions among the studied artists. The sizes of the circles correspond to the degree of connexion among artists. See Table S2 for painters’ information. The numbers (n) next to the artists’ names refer to how many of their paintings feature aquatic organisms. Source: topography data from SRTM (http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org).

Box Fig. 1 | Example of taxa identification. a Recco, Giuseppe [Naples, 1634 – Alicante, 1695], Natura morta con pesci e molluschi (1675–1680) (oil on canvas, 76 × 102 cm; Collezione Intesa Sanpaolo, Gallerie d’Italia (Naples); image courtesy of the Archivio Patrimonio Artistico Intesa Sanpaolo, photographic credit: Luciano Pedicini, Naples). b Same painting with highlights on the taxa identified: a piper gurnard (Trigla lyra), b mackerel (Scomber scombrus), c common cuttlefish (Sepia officinalis), d grey mullet (Mugilidae), e squid (Loligo sp.), f red mullet (Mullus sp.), g gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata).

Box Fig. 2 | Taxonomic richness in paintings. Randomized accumulation curves based on the interpolation (solid lines) and extrapolation (dotted lines) of taxonomic richness estimated with a 95% confidence interval (shaded regions) based on the number of paintings for a all paintings, b time-periods and c geographic zones.