Dataset Information

Prioritizing land and sea conservation investments to protect coral reefs.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Coral reefs have exceptional biodiversity, support the livelihoods of millions of people, and are threatened by multiple human activities on land (e.g. farming) and in the sea (e.g. overfishing). Most conservation efforts occur at local scales and, when effective, can increase the resilience of coral reefs to global threats such as climate change (e.g. warming water and ocean acidification). Limited resources for conservation require that we efficiently prioritize where and how to best sustain coral reef ecosystems.

Methodology/principal findings

Here we develop the first prioritization approach that can guide regional-scale conservation investments in land- and sea-based conservation actions that cost-effectively mitigate threats to coral reefs, and apply it to the Coral Triangle, an area of significant global attention and funding. Using information on threats to marine ecosystems, effectiveness of management actions at abating threats, and the management and opportunity costs of actions, we calculate the rate of return on investment in two conservation actions in sixteen ecoregions. We discover that marine conservation almost always trumps terrestrial conservation within any ecoregion, but terrestrial conservation in one ecoregion can be a better investment than marine conservation in another. We show how these results could be used to allocate a limited budget for conservation and compare them to priorities based on individual criteria.

Conclusions/significance

Previous prioritization approaches do not consider both land and sea-based threats or the socioeconomic costs of conserving coral reefs. A simple and transparent approach like ours is essential to support effective coral reef conservation decisions in a large and diverse region like the Coral Triangle, but can be applied at any scale and to other marine ecosystems.

SUBMITTER: Klein CJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2930002 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prioritizing land and sea conservation investments to protect coral reefs.

Klein Carissa J CJ Ban Natalie C NC Halpern Benjamin S BS Beger Maria M Game Edward T ET Grantham Hedley S HS Green Alison A Klein Travis J TJ Kininmonth Stuart S Treml Eric E Wilson Kerrie K Possingham Hugh P HP

PloS one 20100830 8

<h4>Background</h4>Coral reefs have exceptional biodiversity, support the livelihoods of millions of people, and are threatened by multiple human activities on land (e.g. farming) and in the sea (e.g. overfishing). Most conservation efforts occur at local scales and, when effective, can increase the resilience of coral reefs to global threats such as climate change (e.g. warming water and ocean acidification). Limited resources for conservation require that we efficiently prioritize where and ho ...[more]

PMID: 20814570

Similar Datasets

Project description:Management authorities seldom have the capacity to comprehensively address the full suite of anthropogenic stressors, particularly in the coastal zone where numerous threats can act simultaneously to impact reefs and other ecosystems. This situation requires tools to prioritise management interventions that result in optimum ecological outcomes under a set of constraints. Here we develop one such tool, introducing a Bayesian Belief Network to model the ecological condition of inshore coral reefs in Moreton Bay (Australia) under a range of management actions. Empirical field data was used to model a suite of possible ecological responses of coral reef assemblages to five key management actions both in the sea (e.g. expansion of reserves, mangrove & seagrass restoration, fishing restrictions) and on land (e.g. lower inputs of sediment and sewage from treatment plants). Models show that expanding marine reserves (a 'marine action') and reducing sediment inputs from the catchments (a 'land action') were the most effective investments to achieve a better status of reefs in the Bay, with both having been included in >58% of scenarios with positive outcomes, and >98% of the most effective (5th percentile) scenarios. Heightened fishing restrictions, restoring habitats, and reducing nutrient discharges from wastewater treatment plants have additional, albeit smaller effects. There was no evidence that combining individual management actions would consistently produce sizeable synergistic until after maximum investment on both marine reserves (i.e. increasing reserve extent from 31 to 62% of reefs) and sediments (i.e. rehabilitating 6350 km of waterways within catchments to reduce sediment loads by 50%) were implemented. The method presented here provides a useful tool to prioritize environmental actions in situations where multiple competing management interventions exist for coral reefs and in other systems subjected to multiple stressor from the land and the sea.

Project description:Artificial reefs (ARs) have been used on coral reefs for ecological research, conservation, and socio-cultural purposes since the 1980s. We examined spatio-temporal patterns in AR deployment in tropical and subtropical coral reefs (up to 35° latitude) and evaluated their efficacy in meeting conservation objectives, using a systematic review of the scientific literature. Most deployments (136 studies) were in the North Atlantic and Central Indo-Pacific in 1980s - 2000s, with a pronounced shift to the Western Indo-Pacific in 2010s. Use of ARs in reef restoration or stressor mitigation increased markedly in response to accelerating coral decline over the last 2 decades. Studies that evaluated success in meeting conservation objectives (n = 51) commonly reported increasing fish abundance (55%), enhancing habitat quantity (31%) or coral cover (27%), and conserving target species (24%). Other objectives included stressor mitigation (22%), provision of coral nursery habitat (14%) or source populations (2%) and addressing socio-cultural and economic values (16%). Fish (55% of studies) and coral (53%) were the most commonly monitored taxa. Success in achieving conservation objectives was reported in 33 studies. Success rates were highest for provision of nursery habitat and increasing coral cover (each 71%). Increasing fish abundance or habitat quantity, mitigating environmental impacts, and attaining socio-cultural objectives were moderately successful (60-64%); conservation of target species was the least successful (42%). Failure in achieving objectives commonly was attributed to poor AR design or disruption by large-scale bleaching events. The scale of ARs generally was too small (m2 -10s m2) to address regional losses in coral cover, and study duration too short (< 5 years) to adequately assess ecologically relevant trends in coral cover and community composition. ARs are mostly likely to aid in reef conservation and restoration by providing nursery habitat for target species or recruitment substrate for corals and other organisms. Promoting local socio-cultural values also has potential for regional or global impact by increasing awareness of coral reef decline, if prioritized and properly monitored.

Dataset Information

Prioritizing land and sea conservation investments to protect coral reefs.

Background

Methodology/principal findings

Conclusions/significance

Publications

Prioritizing land and sea conservation investments to protect coral reefs.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets