Dataset Information

The diversity of coral reefs: what are we missing?

ABSTRACT: Tropical reefs shelter one quarter to one third of all marine species but one third of the coral species that construct reefs are now at risk of extinction. Because traditional methods for assessing reef diversity are extremely time consuming, taxonomic expertise for many groups is lacking, and marine organisms are thought to be less vulnerable to extinction, most discussions of reef conservation focus on maintenance of ecosystem services rather than biodiversity loss. In this study involving the three major oceans with reef growth, we provide new biodiversity estimates based on quantitative sampling and DNA barcoding. We focus on crustaceans, which are the second most diverse group of marine metazoans. We show exceptionally high numbers of crustacean species associated with coral reefs relative to sampling effort (525 species from a combined, globally distributed sample area of 6.3 m(2)). The high prevalence of rare species (38% encountered only once), the low level of spatial overlap (81% found in only one locality) and the biogeographic patterns of diversity detected (Indo-West Pacific>Central Pacific>Caribbean) are consistent with results from traditional survey methods, making this approach a reliable and efficient method for assessing and monitoring biodiversity. The finding of such large numbers of species in a small total area suggests that coral reef diversity is seriously under-detected using traditional survey methods, and by implication, underestimated.

SUBMITTER: Plaisance L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3192706 | biostudies-literature | 2011

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The diversity of coral reefs: what are we missing?

Plaisance Laetitia L Caley M Julian MJ Brainard Russell E RE Knowlton Nancy N

PloS one 20111013 10

Tropical reefs shelter one quarter to one third of all marine species but one third of the coral species that construct reefs are now at risk of extinction. Because traditional methods for assessing reef diversity are extremely time consuming, taxonomic expertise for many groups is lacking, and marine organisms are thought to be less vulnerable to extinction, most discussions of reef conservation focus on maintenance of ecosystem services rather than biodiversity loss. In this study involving th ...[more]

PMID: 22022371

Similar Datasets

Project description:Coral reefs sustain abundant and diverse macrocrustaceans that perform multiple ecological roles, but coral reefs are undergoing massive degradation that may be driving changes in the species composition and abundance of reef-associated macrocrustaceans. To provide insight into this issue, we used non-destructive visual census techniques to compare the diversity and abundance of conspicuous macrocrustaceans (i.e., those >1 cm and visible without disturbance) between two shallow Caribbean coral reefs similar in size (∼1.5 km in length) and close to each other, but one ("Limones") characterized by extensive stands of the branching coral Acropora palmata, and the other ("Bonanza") dominated by macroalgae and relic coral skeletons and rubble (i.e., degraded). We also assessed the structural complexity of each reef and the percent cover of various benthic community components. Given the type of growth of A. palmata, we expected to find a greater structural complexity, a higher cover of live coral, and a lower cover of macroalgae on Limones, and hence a more diverse and abundant macrocrustacean community on this reef compared with Bonanza. Overall, we identified 63 macrocrustacean species (61 Decapoda and two Stomatopoda). Contrary to our expectations, structural complexity did not differ significantly between the back-reef zones of these reefs but varied more broadly on Limones, and the diversity and abundance of macrocrustaceans were higher on Bonanza than on Limones despite live coral cover being higher on Limones and macroalgal cover higher on Bonanza. However, the use of various types of microhabitats by macrocrustaceans differed substantially between reefs. On both reefs, the dominant species were the clinging crab Mithraculus coryphe and the hermit crab Calcinus tibicen, but the former was more abundant on Bonanza and the latter on Limones. M. coryphe occupied a diverse array of microhabitats but mostly coral rubble and relic skeletons, whereas C. tibicen was often, but not always, found associated with colonies of Millepora spp. A small commensal crab of A. palmata, Domecia acanthophora, was far more abundant on Limones, emerging as the main discriminant species between reefs. Our results suggest that local diversity and abundance of reef-associated macrocrustaceans are partially modulated by habitat degradation, the diversity of microhabitat types, and the establishment of different commensal associations rather than by structural complexity alone.

Project description:Global climate change is leading to damage and loss of coral reef ecosystems. On subtropical Okinawa Island in southwestern Japan, the prefectural government is working on coral reef restoration by outplanting coral colonies from family Acroporidae back to reefs after initially farming colonies inside protected nurseries. In order to establish a baseline for future comparisons, in this study we documented the current status of reefs undergoing outplanting at Okinawa Island, and nearby locations where no human manipulation has occurred. We examined three sites on the coast of Onna Village on the west coast of the island; each site included an outplanted and control location. We used (1) coral rubble sampling to measure and compare abundance and diversity of rubble cryptofauna; and (2) coral reef monitoring using Line Intercept Transects to track live coral coverage. Results showed that rubble shape had a positive correlation with the numbers of animals found within rubble themselves and may therefore constitute a reliable abundance predictor. Each outplanted location did not show differences with the corresponding control location in terms of rubble cryptofauna abundance, but outplanted locations had significantly lower coral coverage. Overall, differences between sites (Maeganeku1, Maeganeku2 and Manza, each including both outplanted and control locations) were significant, for both rubble cryptofauna and coral coverage. We recommend (1) to outplant colonies from more stress-resistant genera in place of Acropora, and (2) to conduct regular surveys to monitor the situation closely. With a lack of baseline data preceding impacts, rigorous monitoring over time can highlight trends towards increases or decreases in evaluated variables, allowing to obtain a clearer idea of the effects of transplants and on the trajectory of impacts due to climate change and local stressors . Finally, we also recommend (3) to establish conservation and sustainable practices that could aid the ongoing restoration efforts such as installing anchoring buoys to reduce impacts from anchoring, which could reduce coral mortality of both outplanted and native coral colonies.

Dataset Information

The diversity of coral reefs: what are we missing?

Publications

The diversity of coral reefs: what are we missing?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets