Skip to content

Perspective

Frontiers in Ocean Sustainability ·

Volume 4 - 2026 | https://doi.org/10.3389/focsu.2026.1820124

Using embryonic morphometrics to diagnose developmental stress and target sustainable management of sea turtle nesting in Malta

  • Isaak Koroma1
  • Adriana Vella1*corresponding author
  1. Conservation Biology Research Group, Department of Biology, University of Malta, Msida, Malta
Article metrics0 viewsView details

Abstract

As the nesting of loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta) expands into the central and western Mediterranean, assessing the sustainability of emergent nesting beaches is critical. In Malta, high-traffic sandy beaches, which account for only 2.4% of the coastline, serve as high-stakes reproductive zones. This perspective synthesizes a 6-year morphometric dataset (2020–2025) of embryos to evaluate potential impacts of anthropogenic factors on their natural incubation success. We argue that embryonic morphometrics serve as a “biological ledger,” recording the physiological impacts of human disturbances often missed by binary hatching success percentages. Our analysis identifies late-stage developmental arrest (stages 26–31), which may be linked to relocation events, substrate compaction, and chronic noise pollution. We also highlight emerging conservation concerns, such as the theoretical “geomagnetic mismatch” caused by coastal armoring. By applying the “science integration” framework, we demonstrate how transdisciplinary data spanning conservation biology, coastal physics, and policy can address these challenges. We conclude by proposing a shift toward process-oriented management strategies that empower Early-Career Marine Conservation Professionals (ECMCPs) to lead Malta's transition from an opportunistic nesting site to a stable, resilient regional rookery.

Keywords

1 Introduction

Across the Mediterranean, sea turtle nesting increasingly occurs on beaches subject to intense human use and rapid coastal development (Mazaris et al., 2017; Casale et al., 2018). The western and central Mediterranean basins are currently experiencing an unprecedented, climate-driven geographical expansion of loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta) nesting (Casale and Tucker, 2017; Carreras et al., 2018; Hochscheid et al., 2022). This “secondary colonization” is likely a response to warming sea surface temperatures, pushing nesting activity into higher latitudes (Bentivegna et al., 2010; Mancino et al., 2022; Luna-Ortiz et al., 2024). Small island systems, such as Malta, represent a microcosm of the challenges associated with this expansion. In this study, limited beach width and high recreational demand create a literal “coastal squeeze” (Vousdoukas et al., 2020). In these settings, fragmented management frameworks often compress nesting activity into narrow, suboptimal zones (Zammit, 2020). The limited sandy beaches, comprising only 2.4% of Maltese coastline (Costa et al., 2024), highlights research and conservation needs of this habitat.

While nesting density in the Maltese Islands remains low relative to major rookeries in Greece or Türkiye (Casale et al., 2018), the 2020–2025 period confirms that the islands function as an emergent nesting area (Hochscheid et al., 2022). In marginal systems, individual nest failures require close examination, as each clutch constitutes a substantial fraction of the yearly reproductive yield (Wallace et al., 2011). Traditionally, conservation efforts have concentrated on post-emergence hazards, particularly light pollution (Hamann et al., 2010; Kamrowski et al., 2012; Witherington et al., 2014). However, the principal constraint on sustainability often arises during incubation, when the embryos are highly vulnerable to persistent alterations in the sand's physical, chemical, and thermal characteristics (Ackerman, 1977, 1997; Howard et al., 2014; Staines et al., 2019).

Embryonic development is a delicate metabolic process that is sensitive to subterranean oxygen availability, temperature, and moisture (Bladow and Milton, 2019; Booth et al., 2020; Gravelle and Wyneken, 2022). As embryos reach the final third of their incubation, their metabolic rates and oxygen demands increase exponentially, making them susceptible to “metabolic heating” and hypoxic stress (Ackerman, 1977; Bladow and Milton, 2019; Booth et al., 2020; Gammon et al., 2020). During this stage, embryos are highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, as rising sand temperatures can reach lethal limits and significantly decrease overall hatching success (Fuentes et al., 2011; Howard et al., 2014). Climate change is therefore significantly altering loggerhead nesting dynamics in the Mediterranean, driving both a spatial westward and northward expansion into new nesting habitats (Mancino et al., 2022; Ceolotto et al., 2025) and a temporal shift toward earlier breeding seasons (Patel et al., 2016), both of which would benefit from an assessment of embryonic development and hatching success. To resolve these bottlenecks, we argue that embryonic morphometrics can serve as a diagnostic tool, providing a “biological ledger” of the nesting environment (García-Grajales et al., 2021). By dismantling the barriers between embryonic development (biology), coastal geomorphology (physics), and beach management (social science), we can formulate hypotheses about nest failure and apply the “science integration” framework proposed by Vozzo et al. (2025)) to mitigate such failures. This viewpoint uses a causal framework to assess nesting outcomes: Bay Characteristics to Incubation Environment to Embryonic Development to Nest Outcome, proposing that unhatched embryos provide critical data for future conservation strategies. The approach is important for the conservation of this globally vulnerable turtle species (Casale and Tucker, 2017—IUCN Red List), which has received increasing conservation efforts, particularly in the Mediterranean region.

2 Bay characteristics and environmental pressures

Loggerhead turtle nesting studies in the Maltese Islands commenced in 2020 (Koroma and Vella, 2024). Over a 6-year period, nesting was recorded across 23 nests on 6 principal Maltese beaches: Ramla tal-Mixquqa (Golden Bay), Ghajn Tuffieha Bay (Riviera), Gnejna, Ramla l-Hamra (Gozo), Ghadira, and Fajtata [Environment and Resources Authority (ERA), 2025]. These locations vary significantly in their levels of protection and human activity.

The data reveal a “protection gap,” whereby Natura 2000 status does not inherently guarantee high incubation success. While Ramla l-Hamra achieved high hatching success, nests at Ghajn Tuffieha, also a protected site, had to be relocated each time due to beach narrowness and the imminent threat of inundation. This highlights the fact that protection designations alone cannot mitigate the physical limitations posed by rising sea levels and storm surges (Pike, 2013; Katselidis et al., 2014).

The 2020 nesting event at Ghadira Bay offers a compelling observational context regarding the impact of human disturbance. Occurring during the COVID-19 lockdowns, this event coincided with a period of “anthropogenic silence,” characterized by a drastic, albeit temporary, reduction in marine traffic and coastal activity. While our study did not encompass continuous acoustic or photic data logging, this unique period provides anecdotal support for the impacts of sensory barriers. Late-stage aquatic testudine embryos are highly sensitive to substrate-borne vibrational cues, on which they rely to synchronize hatching (Doody et al., 2012; Clabough et al., 2022). Consequently, there is growing concern that anthropogenic vibrations—such as low-frequency vessel noise propagating efficiently through sandy coastal substrates—could mask these natural cues and disrupt embryonic development and hatching synchrony (Peng et al., 2015; Clabough et al., 2022). Furthermore, the general reduction in artificial light at night (ALAN) during the lockdown period aligns with the broader hypothesis that chronic sensory disturbance can deter successful oviposition in female sea turtles (Mazaris et al., 2017), a concern underscored by high-resolution photometric mapping of sky brightness across the Maltese archipelago (Caruana et al., 2020). Observations from such anomalous environmental baselines reinforce the need for strict coastal regulations, such as regional guidelines recommending maintaining beach illumination below 0.1 lux to prevent both adult deterrence and hatchling disorientation (Tuxbury and Salmon, 2005; Witherington et al., 2014; Simantiris et al., 2025). Similarly, on urbanized pocket beaches such as Fajtata, human activities such as trampling and mechanical grooming disproportionately alter the microclimate. We hypothesize that the low hatching success (29.2%) observed at this site may be associated with substrate compaction, which impedes the gas exchange required for late-stage embryonic respiration, effectively suffocating high-metabolism, late-stage embryos (Ackerman, 1980). Therefore, while it is vital to consider changes in natural environmental factors, such as temperature and extreme wave events, it is also important to consider anthropogenic factors, such as coastal urbanization, disturbances, and marine traffic, to understand how different factors may synergistically stress turtle embryonic development and consequent hatching success or failure (Ceolotto et al., 2025).

3 Morphometrics as a diagnostic ledger

Standard hatching success percentages are binary (live vs. dead). In contrast, morphometric analysis of unhatched embryos provides insight into the timing of developmental failure (Miller, 1985; Kaska and Downie, 1999). To establish an evidentiary basis for our conceptual arguments, we analyzed a dataset of 122 unhatched embryo specimens collected from 14 viable nest remains (with specimens that could be measured), out of the 23 naturally incubated nests recorded between 2020 and 2025. These specimens were examined following standard post-emergence necropsy protocols described by Koroma and Vella (2024)). We individually assigned developmental stages to these embryos, referencing standard staging criteria established by Miller (1985)) and applied by Kaska and Downie (1999)) in the Mediterranean. The sampled population's mean straight carapace length (SCL) of 33.45 ± 5.08 mm (Table 1) aligns with stages 28 to 29, indicating that the majority of embryonic mortality across the dataset occurred during the final third of incubation. This is a critical developmental period for loggerhead embryos, as indicated above.

Table 1. Mean and standard deviation of morphometric measures of unhatched embryos (n = 122) in the period 2020–2025.

MeasurementMean ±SD
SCL33.45 ± 5.08
SCW26.73 ± 4.79
HL17.99 ± 2.04
HW13.07 ± 1.87
BL10.82 ± 1.65
FL28.51 ± 4.90
HIL17.99 ± 3.01

Mean morphometric measurements (±standard deviation) of unhatched Caretta caretta embryos (2020–2025). Measurements are in millimeters (mm) unless otherwise noted. SCL, straight carapace length; SCW, straight carapace width; HL, head length; HW, head width; BL, body length; FL, forelimb (front flipper) length; HIL, hindlimb (hind flipper) length.

3.1 Developmental arrest and relocation hypotheses

Translating raw morphometrics into developmental milestones reveals a clear bottleneck. The observed mean straight carapace length (SCL) of 33.45 ± 5.08 mm, alongside a mean head length (HL) of 17.99 ± 2.04 mm, corresponds strictly to stages 28–29 of the loggerhead turtle's embryological development index (Miller, 1985; Kaska and Downie, 1999). This finding indicates that development likely did not fail post-oviposition but instead stopped during the final third of incubation—a phase during which late-stage embryos are exceptionally sensitive to hypoxia, substrate compaction, and vibrational stress from relocation. Relocation is a sensitive intervention (Abella et al., 2007; Candan, 2018). Our data compare naturally incubated nests with those relocated due to imminent threats. While natural nests averaged 64% success, relocation introduced variability. In 2022, an artificial incubation event resulted in zero success, with embryos arresting at stages 26–29. This stage corresponds to the “critical period” where oxygen demand peaks (Ahles and Milton, 2016). Even in natural relocation settings, success is contingent on environmental stability. The failure of the October 2024 nest highlights the risks of late-season storm events. However, other failures point to potential handling stress. Relocation should therefore ideally occur within the first 12 h (Abella et al., 2007; Limpus et al., 1979). Any rotation after this period risks detaching the vitelline membrane, leading to the late-stage developmental arrest observed in our dataset (Limpus et al., 1979; Miller, 1985). Therefore, in conservation practice, if a nest must be moved due to an emergency contingency more than 24 h after the female adult turtle has laid it, the eggs must be kept perfectly upright in their original orientation. However, even with extreme care, the vibration and movement associated with relocation at that stage often lead to the late-stage developmental arrest, as recorded in our Maltese dead turtle embryo dataset. While our environmental correlations remain conceptual, the morphometric data strongly support the hypothesis that the physical stress of relocation may contribute to late-stage developmental arrest in this emerging loggerhead turtle rookery.

4 Regional context and pathogens

As indicated earlier, recent years have observed an unprecedented, exponential increase in loggerhead nesting across the Western Mediterranean, particularly in Italy, Spain, and France (Legambiente, 2024; Mancusi et al., 2024; Hochscheid et al., 2022), driven by climate-induced range expansion (Mancino et al., 2022; Luna-Ortiz et al., 2024). However, this expansion brings new risks. For instance, nests expanding into new northern territories such as Veneto, Italy, have exhibited high embryo mortality due to Sea Turtle Egg Fusariosis (STEF) (Pietroluongo et al., 2023). This pathogen (Fusarium solani species complex) thrives in substrates with high organic loads and specific clay/silt content, highlighting the need for integrated sediment management to prevent beach conditions that exacerbate the disease (Sarmiento-Ramírez et al., 2014).

5 Emerging conservation concerns: the geomagnetic mismatch

Looking ahead, the sustainability of these recent turtle nesting grounds faces a concerning challenge: the geomagnetic mismatch. Sea turtles imprint the magnetic signature of their natal beach (Lohmann et al., 2013; Brothers and Lohmann, 2015). However, under a “coastal squeeze,” the physical beach may disappear due to sea-level rise or be replaced by hard infrastructure (sea walls), while the magnetic coordinates remain. Hatchlings internalize both the magnetic inclination and the intensity of the specific beach. As coastlines retreat due to sea-level rise, the specific isolines on which the turtles are imprinted remain at fixed GPS coordinates, assuming minimal shifts in the Earth's magnetic field; however, those coordinates may sit on top of concrete structures in the future. Furthermore, standard coastal armoring utilizes ferromagnetic materials (e.g., steel rebar) that create local magnetic anomalies, distorting the geomagnetic signatures turtles rely on (Irwin and Lohmann, 2003; Putman et al., 2014). While not directly measured in our current dataset, this phenomenon represents an evolutionary trap whereby future turtles may be guided to “empty” paved coordinates. In highly developed small island states such as Malta, recognizing this as an emerging hypothesis is vital for long-term coastal planning.

6 Discussion: advancing sustainability through science integration

The challenges identified above cannot be solved by biology alone. Advancing ocean sustainability requires a paradigm shift toward better science integration, valuing diverse knowledge systems as advocated by Vozzo et al. (2025)). In Malta, “beach management” is often siloed as a tourism issue, while “nesting” is treated as strictly biological. Our morphometric “ledger” bridges this gap by converting biological outcomes (e.g., arrested embryos) into indicators of physical beach quality. This technique allows conservationists to speak the language of planners: sediment quality and acoustic zoning.

Postgraduate research students and volunteers, referred to as the “leaders of tomorrow” and identified by Vozzo et al. (2025)), largely drove the collection of this 6-year dataset. These early-career marine conservation professionals are in a unique position to move between field necropsies and policy advocacy in a smooth and easy way. Formalizing their role in Malta's management strategy ensures that “intergenerational knowledge transfer” (a key Ocean Decade goal) occurs alongside data collection.

To avoid the “protection gap” (Table 2), data can be shared and promoted. Following Vozzo et al.'s (2025)) recommendation for “active and transparent data sharing,” this morphometric dataset acts as an open-access baseline. Integrating these data into unified, cross-border repositories such as the MEDTURTLE database, developed under the LIFE MEDTURTLES framework, allows regional managers to track emergent populations (LIFE MEDTURTLES, 2024). This ensures that local conservation efforts align with the broader RAC/SPA guidelines for Mediterranean sea turtle protection (UNEP/MAP RAC/SPA, 2004).

Table 2. Loggerhead turtle nesting frequency and nest success rates by locations in the Maltese Islands (2020–2025).

Nesting BayFrequency (n)Mean % nest success (if n > 1)Std. deviation
Ramla Bay1174.3930.31
Mixquqa Bay560.1234.36
Ghadira Bay340.8835.09
Gnejna Bay359.4722.50
Fajtata Bay129.201N/A
Ghajn Tuffieha Bay3Relocated to Mixquqa<sup>2</sup>N/A

1 For Fajtata Bay (n = 1), the value represents the absolute success rate of the single recorded nest.

2The three nest clutches laid at Ghajn Tuffieha were relocated to Mixquqa Bay due to the risk of inundation.

7 Limitations

It is important to acknowledge the limitations of the current perspective. The relationships proposed between environmental pressures (e.g., coastal noise and substrate compaction) and late-stage developmental arrest are currently discussed at a conceptual level and are supported by broader literature rather than by direct, localized quantitative logging. Our study did not utilize acoustic sensors or soil penetrometers alongside the nests. Future transdisciplinary research should aim to pair morphometric biological data with continuous microclimate and environmental logging to explicitly test these correlations and, when possible, increase sample size. The dead loggerhead turtle embryo specimens collected from the Maltese turtle nests throughout the 6 years of research constituted the total possible sample size (n = 122 from 14 nests). Future research efforts may compare and corroborate the results obtained in this study.

8 Conclusion and management recommendations

Embryonic morphometrics provide a diagnostic tool that goes beyond “nest success vs. failure.” However, applying this tool requires an integrated approach, as advocated by Vozzo et al. (2025)). To transition from opportunistic nesting to a stable rookery, Malta would benefit from the implementation of evidence-based, process-oriented management. We suggest the following specific actions:

  • Establish zonal sensory corridors with measurable thresholds: it was proposed that persistent low-light and low-noise corridors be maintained during the approximately 50-day incubation period. Rather than establishing general “quiet zones,” policies should establish precise thresholds, such as restricting artificial light at night (ALAN) below 0.1 lux at the sand surface. The targeted use of low-pressure sodium lamps, amber LED shielding, or strictly enforced curfews on beachfront commercial lighting during the 50-day window may be viable solutions. Low-frequency vessel noise propagates through the substrate and may intensify vibrational stress on late-stage embryos. Therefore, “No-wake” marine acoustic zones should be implemented to mitigate this. Essential natural buffer zones and coastal geomorphology, such as dunes, should also be preserved.
  • Implement rigorous, biologically informed relocation protocols: relocation should be regarded as a last resort. In order to prevent late-stage developmental cessation, the Environment and Resources Authority (ERA) must mandate that relocation occur exclusively within 12 h of oviposition, prior to the vitelline membrane's attachment to the inner shell membrane. In order to prevent embryonic shearing, eggs must be transported in containers that are firm and vibration-dampening for a period of up to 24 h. Additionally, they must be maintained in their exact original vertical orientation.
  • Institutionalize conservation leadership: early-career marine conservation professionals (ECMCPs) need to be involved in Environment and Resources Authority (ERA) consultations and decision-making committees. This guarantees that management adheres to the criteria of the Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas (RAC/SPA) and presents innovative, transdisciplinary perspectives on local policy.
  • Open-source the “biological ledger”: post-hatching necropsy techniques and Miller's (1985)) staging criteria should be standardized. In addition, it was proposed that annual morphometric evaluations of unhatched eggs to open-access regional databases, such as MEDTURTLE, be disseminated. This approach aligns with the goals of the UN Ocean Decade by enabling cross-border comparisons of subterranean microclimates and “incubation health” in the Mediterranean region.
  • Spatial planning to address the geomagnetic discrepancy: it was proposed that Geographic Information Systems (GIS) be implemented to establish historical magnetic inclination and intensity isolines in relation to contemporary urban infrastructure and coastal erosion forecasts. This proactive approach is expected to address the evolutionary challenge of the geomagnetic discrepancy. ECMCPs, coastal planners and authorities, such as the Environment and Resources Authority (ERA), the Planning Authority (PA), and Transport Malta (TM), can work together to pinpoint the precise surface or degraded coordinates where future turtles are physiologically predisposed to arrive by superimposing these records. This would allow for best management practices and development to be effectively coordinated.

By treating the unhatched embryo as a data-rich ledger and integrating this biological data with policy and physical environmental parameters, we can secure a sustainable future for our shared coastlines that conserves protected species, such as loggerhead sea turtles.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Footnotes

Edited by: Samantha Farquhar, United States Coast Guard Academy, United States

Reviewed by: Luca Ceolotto, University of Padua, Italy

Statements

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Funding

The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. The authors declare that this work received open access publication funding from the Environment and Resources Authority (ERA) Malta, Malta Enterprise and the Parliamentary Secretariat for Youth, Research and innovation of the Government of Malta as support to promote the outputs of the University of Malta UMP's international conference on Marine and Maritime Sustainable Developments: Research and Applications.

Data availability

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Ethics approval

The animal study was approved by the University of Malta Research Ethics and Data Protection. The study was conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements.

Author contributions

IK: Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. AV: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

References

  1. Abella E., Marco A., López-Jurado L. F. (2007). Success of delayed translocation of loggerhead turtle nests. J. Wildl. Manage. 71, 2290 – 2296. doi: doi:10.2193/2006-512
  2. Ackerman R. A. (1977). The respiratory gas exchange of sea turtle nests (Chelonia, Caretta). Respir. Physiol. 31, 19 – 38. doi: doi:10.1016/0034-5687(77)90062-7
  3. Ackerman R. A. (1980). Physiological and ecological aspects of gas exchange by sea turtle eggs. Am. Zool. 20, 575 – 583. doi: doi:10.1093/icb/20.3.575
  4. Ackerman R. A. (1997). “The nest environment and the embryonic development of sea turtles,” in The Biology of Sea Turtles, Vol. 1, eds. P. L. Lutz, and J. A. Musick (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press), 83 – 106.
  5. Ahles N. H., Milton S. L. (2016). Mid-incubation relocation and embryonic survival in loggerhead sea turtle eggs. J. Wildl. Manage. 80, 430 – 437. doi: doi:10.1002/jwmg.1023
  6. Bentivegna F., Rasotto M. B., de Lucia G. A., Secci E., Massaro G., Panzera S.. (2010). Loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta) nests at high latitudes in italy: a call for vigilance in the western Mediterranean. Chelonian Conserv. Biol. 9, 283 – 289. doi: doi:10.2744/CCB-0862.1
  7. Bladow R. A., Milton S. L. (2019). Embryonic mortality in green (Chelonia mydas) and loggerhead (Caretta caretta) sea turtle nests increases with cumulative exposure to elevated temperatures. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 528: 151180. doi: doi:10.1016/j.jembe.2019.151180
  8. Booth D. T., Archibald-Binge A., Limpus C. J. (2020). The effect of respiratory gases and incubation temperature on early stage embryonic development in sea turtles. PLoS ONE 15: e0233580. doi: doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0233580
  9. Brothers J. R., Lohmann K. J. (2015). Evidence for geomagnetic imprinting and magnetic navigation in the natal homing of sea turtles. Curr. Biol. 25, 392 – 396. doi: doi:10.1016/j.cub.2014.12.035
  10. Candan O. (2018). Impact of nest relocation on the reproductive success of loggerhead turtles in the Göksu Delta, Turkey. Zool. Middle East 64, 38 – 46. doi: doi:10.1080/09397140.2017.1414978
  11. Carreras C., Pascual M., Tomás J., Marco A., Hochscheid S. Castillo. (2018). Sporadic nesting reveals long distance colonisation in the philopatric loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta). Sci. Rep. 8: 1435. doi: doi:10.1038/s41598-018-19887-w
  12. Caruana J., Vella R., Spiteri D., Nolle M., Fenech S., Aquilina N. J. (2020). A photometric mapping of the night sky brightness of the Maltese islands. J. Environ. Manage. 261: 110196. doi: doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110196
  13. Casale P., Broderick A. C., Camiñas J. A., Cardona L., Carreras C., Demetropoulos A.. (2018). Mediterranean sea turtles: current knowledge and priorities for conservation and research. Endanger. Species Res. 36, 229 – 267. doi: doi:10.3354/esr00901
  14. Casale P., Tucker A. D. (2017). Caretta caretta (amended version of 2015 assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: Available online at: (Accessed February 20, 2026).
  15. Ceolotto L., Mazzariol S., Pietroluongo G., Centelleghe C., Mazzoldi C., Barausse A. (2025). Modeling the impacts of natural and human factors on the hatching success of the loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta along the coasts of Italy. PLoS One 20: e0320733. doi: doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0320733
  16. Clabough E. B. D., Kaplan E., Hermeyer D., Zimmerman T., Chamberlin J., Wantman S. (2022). The secret life of baby turtles: a novel system to predict hatchling emergence and monitor nests. PLoS One 17: e0275088. doi: doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0275088
  17. Costa C., Lia F., Sinagra E. (2024). Seasonal and spatial discrimination of sandy beaches using energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy analysis: a comparative study of Maltese bays. Environments 11: 299. doi: doi:10.3390/environments11120299
  18. Doody J. S., Stewart B., Camacho C., Christian K. (2012). Good vibrations? Sibling embryos expedite hatching in a turtle. Anim. Behav. 83, 645 – 651. doi: doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.12.006
  19. Environment and Resources Authority (ERA) (2025). Annual Monitoring Reports on Loggerhead Sea Turtle Nesting Activity in the Maltese Islands (2023-2025). ERA, Malta. Available online at: (Accessed January 15, 2026).
  20. Fuentes M., Limpus C., Hamann M. (2011). Vulnerability of sea turtle nesting grounds to climate change. Glob. Change Biol. 17. 140–153. doi: doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02192.x
  21. Gammon M., Fossette S., McGrath G., Mitchell N. (2020) A systematic review of metabolic heat in sea turtle nests methods to model its impact on hatching success. Front. Ecol. Evol. 8:556379. doi: doi:10.3389/fevo.2020.556379
  22. García-Grajales J., Meraz-Hernando J. F., Arcos García J. L. Ramírez-Fuentes, E. (2021). Influence of nest temperature on morphology of Leatherback Turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) hatchlings incubated in hatcheries in Oaxaca, Mexico. Can. J. Zool. 99: 369 – 379. doi: doi:10.1139/cjz-2020-0083
  23. Gravelle J., Wyneken J. (2022) Resilient eggs: highly successful loggerhead sea turtle nesting sites vary in their characteristics. Front. Ecol. Evol. 10: 853835. doi: doi:10.3389/fevo.2022.853835
  24. Hamann M., Godfrey M. H., Seminoff J. A., Arthur K., Barata P. C., Bjorndal K. A.. (2010). Global research priorities for sea turtles: informing management and conservation in the 21st century. Endanger. Species Res. 11, 245 – 269. doi: doi:10.3354/esr00279
  25. Hochscheid S., Maffucci F., Abella E., Bradai M. N., Camedda A., Carreras C.. (2022). Nesting range expansion of loggerhead turtles in the Mediterranean: phenology, spatial distribution, and conservation implications. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 38: e02194. doi: doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2022.e02194
  26. Howard R., Bell I., Pike D. (2014). Thermal tolerances of sea turtle embryos: current understanding and future directions. Endanger. Species Res. 26, 75 – 86. doi: doi:10.3354/esr00636
  27. Irwin W. P., Lohmann K. J. (2003). Magnet-induced disorientation in hatchling loggerhead sea turtles. J. Exp. Biol. 206, 497 – 501. doi: doi:10.1242/jeb.00108
  28. Kamrowski R., Limpus C., Moloney J., Hamann M. (2012). Coastal light pollution and marine turtles: assessing the magnitude of the problem. Endanger. Species Res. 19, 85 – 98. doi: doi:10.3354/esr00462
  29. Kaska Y., Downie R. (1999). Embryological development of sea turtles in the Mediterranean. Zool. Middle East 19, 55 – 69. doi: doi:10.1080/09397140.1999.10637796
  30. Katselidis K. A. Schofield G Stamou G Dimopoulos P Pantis J. D. (2014). Employing sea-level rise scenarios to strategically select sea turtle nesting habitat important for long-term management at a temperate breeding area. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 450, 47 – 54. doi: doi:10.1016/j.jembe.2013.10.017
  31. Koroma I., Vella A. (2024). Caretta caretta embryo development and nest success rate study. Nat. Eng. Sci. 9, 24 – 39. doi: doi:10.28978/nesciences.1577019
  32. Legambiente (2024). Tartarughe Marine: Record di nidi in Italia. Available online at: (Accessed February 20, 2026).
  33. LIFE MEDTURTLES (2024). Collective Actions for Improving the Conservation Status of the EU Sea Turtle Populations: Bordering Areas (LIFE18 NAT/IT/000103). Brussels: European Commission LIFE Public Database.
  34. Limpus C. J., Baker V., Miller J. D. (1979). Movement induced mortality of loggerhead eggs. Herpetologica 35, 335 – 338.
  35. Lohmann K. J., Putman N. F., Lohmann C. M. F. (2013). “Natal homing and imprinting in sea turtles,” in The Biology of Sea Turtles, Vol. III, eds. J. Wyneken, K. J. Lohmann, and J. A. Musick (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press), 59 – 78. doi: doi:10.1201/b13895
  36. Luna-Ortiz A., Revuelta O., Domènech F., Tomás J. (2024). New colonisers drive the increase of the emerging loggerhead turtle nesting. Sci. Rep. 14: 1506. doi: doi:10.1038/s41598-024-51664-w
  37. Mancino C., Canestrelli D., Maiorano L. (2022). Going west: Range expansion for loggerhead sea turtles in the Mediterranean Sea under climate change. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 38: e02264. doi: doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2022.e02264
  38. Mancusi C., Caruso C., Terracciano G., Raimondi G., Venturi L., Tonelli L.. (2024). Nesting of Caretta caretta in Tuscany area (north-western Mediterranean Sea): insights of a recent colonisation phenomenon. Herpetol. J. 34, 68 – 74. doi: doi:10.33256/34.2.6874
  39. Mazaris A. D., Alkindi G., Bjorndal K. A., Bolten A. B., Esteban N., Foley A. M.. (2017). Global sea turtle conservation successes. Sci. Adv. 3: e1600730. doi: doi:10.1126/sciadv.1600730
  40. Miller J. D. (1985). “Embryology of marine turtles”. in Biology of the Reptilia, Vol. 14, eds. C. Gans, F. Billett, and P. F. A. Maderson (New York: John Wiley and Sons), 269 – 328.
  41. Patel S. H., Morreale S. J., Saba V. S., Panagopoulou A., Margaritoulis D., Spotila J. R. (2016). Climate impacts on sea turtle breeding phenology in Greece and associated foraging habitats in the wider Mediterranean region. PLoS One 11: e0157170. doi: doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0157170
  42. Peng C., Zhao X., Liu G. (2015). Noise in the sea and its impacts on marine organisms. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 12, 12304 – 12323. doi: doi:10.3390/ijerph121012304
  43. Pietroluongo G., Centelleghe C., Sciancalepore G., Ceolotto L., Danesi P., Pedrotti D.. (2023). Environmental and pathological factors affecting the hatching success of the two northernmost loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) nests. Sci. Rep. 13: 2938. doi: doi:10.1038/s41598-023-30211-z
  44. Pike D. A. (2013). Climate influences the global distribution of sea turtle nesting. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 22, 555 – 566. doi: doi:10.1111/geb.12025
  45. Putman N. F., Meinke A. M., Noakes D. L. G. (2014). Rearing in a distorted magnetic field disrupts the ‘map sense' of juvenile steelhead trout. Biol. Lett. 10: 20140169. doi: doi:10.1098/rsbl.2014.0169
  46. Sarmiento-Ramírez J. M., Abella-Pérez E, Phillott A. D, Sim J, van West P, Martín M. P.. (2014). Global distribution of two fungal pathogens threatening endangered sea turtles. PLoS One 9: e85853. doi: doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0085853
  47. Simantiris N., Vardaki M. Z., Dimitriadis C., Netzipi O., Malaperdas G. (2025). Assessing light pollution exposure for the most important sea turtle nesting area in the mediterranean region. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 13: 2020. doi: doi:10.3390/jmse13102020
  48. Staines M. N., Booth D. T., Limpus C. J. (2019). Microclimatic effects on the incubation success, hatchling morphology and locomotor performance of marine turtles. Acta Oecol. 97, 49 – 56. doi: doi:10.1016/j.actao.2019.04.008
  49. Tuxbury S. M., Salmon M. (2005). Competitive interactions between artificial lighting and natural cues during seafinding by hatchling marine turtles. Biol. Conserv. 121, 311 – 316. doi: doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2004.04.022
  50. UNEP/MAP RAC/SPA (2004). Guidelines to improve the involvement of marine rescue centres for marine turtles. Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas, Tunis. Available online at: (Accessed February 20, 2026).
  51. Vousdoukas M. I., Ranasinghe R., Mentaschi L., Plomaritis T. A., Athanasiou P. Luijendijk. (2020). Sandy coastlines under threat of erosion. Nat. Clim. Chang. 10, 260 – 263. doi: doi:10.1038/s41558-020-0697-0
  52. Vozzo M. L. Christofidis M Griffiths L Kelly R Manion M. L Barmand S.. (2025). Advancing ocean sustainability through better science integration: perspectives of Early Career Ocean Professionals. Front. Ocean Sustain. 2: 1526776. doi: doi:10.3389/focsu.2024.1526776
  53. Wallace B. P., DiMatteo A. D., Bolten A. B., Chaloupka M. Y., Hutchinson B. J., Abreu-Grobois A. F.. (2011). Global conservation priorities for marine turtles. PLoS One 6: e24510. doi: doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0024510
  54. Witherington B. E., Martin R. E., Trindell R. N. (2014). Understanding and Resolving Light-Pollution Problems on Sea Turtle Beaches, FWRI Technical Report TR-2, Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute.
  55. Zammit M. L. (2020). A Critical Analysis of Beach Management Systems on the Maltese Islands (PhD Thesis). Portsmouth: University of Portsmouth.

Citation

Koroma, I. & Vella, A. (2026). Using embryonic morphometrics to diagnose developmental stress and target sustainable management of sea turtle nesting in Malta. Frontiers in Ocean Sustainability, Volume 4. https://doi.org/
Received
Accepted
Published
Volume
4 - 2026

Copyright

Copyright © 2026 Koroma and Vella.

License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

*Correspondence: Adriana Vella

Article metrics

Views
0
Downloads
0
Citations
0
Shares
0