From anya at emu.usyd.edu.au Tue May 1 03:04:40 2001 From: anya at emu.usyd.edu.au (Anya) Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 17:04:40 +1000 Subject: Color Differences Within Species Message-ID: Dear Tom Coral colours are mainly due to tissue pigments - the greens, white, yellow and red colours are from UV fluorescent pigment proteins; blues, pinks and some reds are due to related non fluorescent pigments. A good web site on coral fluorescent pigmentation and relevant references is by Charles Mazel at http://www.nightsea.com. I and my collegues recently showed that fluorescent pigmentation in corals can protect them from excessive sunlight, results described in paper "Fluorescent pigments in corals are photoprotective" Nature, DEC 14 2000; 408 (6814) : 850-853. Given that light is important in the way corals are affected by many stresses, pigmented morphs which can screen themselves and their photosynthetic symbionts from excessive sunlight are less susceptible to various stresses eg. during mass coral bleaching we found that fluorescent corals bleached less than non fluorescent morphs. My surveys on Australian reefs showed that almost all coral species have several colour morphs, either visibly or fluorescently pigmented, or both, but we are only beginning to understand the function and causes of such high polymorphism on reefs. There is a probably a higher metabolic cost associated with production of pigments, and these morphs are slower growing, but pigmentation affords them higher protection during stressful conditions. their non pigmented conspecifics may be more competitive by growing faster when conditions are stable but are more susceptible during stressful events. Anya Salih >Greetings- > I am a graduate student at Texas A&M at Corpus Christi. I plan to >complete an internship for a M.S. degree in Mariculture this summer. I >have a question concerning color of corals. Why do corals within the >same species have different colors? For example, variations of Sinularia >sp. or Sarcophyton sp. are commonly observed to be green, brown, white, >yellow or many other colors. > Any feedback would be greatly appreciated! > >Thanks >Tom Gray >~~~~~~~ >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. Anya Salih Email: anya at emu.usyd.edu.au Electron Microscope Unit Telephone: 02-93517540 Madsen Building FO9 Facsimile: 02-93517682 The University of Sydney Sydney, 2006, AUSTRALIA ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From hendee at aoml.noaa.gov Sun May 6 12:16:24 2001 From: hendee at aoml.noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 12:16:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Contact details for Paul Mapson (fwd) Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 19:01:25 +0100 From: Lisa Browning To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Contact details for Paul Mapson Does anyone have contact details for Paul Mapson, a participant in the 1997 Reefs of Massawa expedition? Many thanks, Lisa Browning Reefology UK From jww10 at cornell.edu Wed May 2 09:14:06 2001 From: jww10 at cornell.edu (Jennifer Whiteis) Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 09:14:06 -0400 Subject: virus Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.20010502091406.0128de80@postoffice2.mail.cornell.edu> Just wanted to let you guys know I received an email from Lisa Browning with a virus attached. (The Kak worm virus) Luckily,my anti virus software detected it but others may not be so lucky... "It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it." ...Governor George W. Bush, Jr. ======================================================= OCEAN RESOURCES AND ECOSYSTEMS PROGRAM Jenn Whiteis e-mail:jww10 at cornell.edu Research Support phone:(607)255-5449 2154 Snee Hall fax: (607)254-4780 Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 ======================================================== ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From matz at whitney.ufl.edu Wed May 2 02:02:37 2001 From: matz at whitney.ufl.edu (Mike Matz) Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 10:02:37 +0400 Subject: Color Differences Within Species References: <20010427.141524.-152935.0.Reef-Art@juno.com> Message-ID: <3AEFA2FD.C54B8EAC@whitney.ufl.edu> ? Hello Tom, Origins and maintenance of color polymorphism in corals is precisely what I am studying now. However, I am only studying colors determined by GFP-like fluorescent proteins, because in this case the tools of molecular evolution are easily applicable. Of course there are lot more things determining the coral color? (by the way, I always have trouble with this expression when I give talks, because these two words always mix up, and I don't know how to say it otherwise, your suggestion would be most welcome) - OK, there are lot more colorful things in corals except GFP-like proteins, pigments of symbiotic zooxantellae? for one - these which make the coral look a more or less uniformly brownish.? If? zooxantellae are expelled from the coral tissue due to some environmental stress, most corals appear dull white ("bleached"). Carotenoids in the host tissues may be responsible for more or less uniform yellow-orange hues, like in many sea anemonies. However, it is with GFP-like proteins where you can see the greatest color variations. They may determine green, yellow, orange and red fluorescent colors and purple to blue non-fluorescent color in hard corals and sea anemonies, and the intra-specific variations may include specimens having any of these or combining any of these. We still don't quite know what is the function of proteins of different colors, and even less (nothing, basically) is known about forces maintaining such a polymorphism. As for the function, a good case has been made for green fluorescent colors - see Salih et al, 2000, Nature v 14, p 850-3 - that they are serving as a reflection mirror for zooxantellae: position them above the zooxantellae level, and you get protection from excessive light, position them below - and you get a reflection screen for enhancing photosynthesis in the low-light conditions. Things are less clear for orange and red colors - they cannot be nearly as good for this function as greens since their excitation/emission range lies rather outside of the? action spectrum of zooxantellae photosynthesis; and totally unclear is the function of non-fluorescent purples and blues found in tentacles of sea anemonies which in some cases don't even have zooxantellae. ? So, after writing all this, I have to answer your question - I don't know. Sorry. I am working on this. Mike -- Mikhail V. Matz, Ph.D. Whitney Laboratory University of Florida 9505 Ocean Shore blvd St Augustine FL 32080-8610, USA phone +1 904 461 4044 fax +1 801 849 5388 ? ? tom h gray wrote: > Greetings- > ??????? I am a graduate student at Texas A&M at Corpus Christi.? I plan to > complete an internship for a M.S. degree in Mariculture this summer.? I > have a question concerning color of corals.? Why do corals within the > same species have different colors?? For example, variations of Sinularia > sp. or Sarcophyton sp. are commonly observed to be green, brown, white, > yellow or many other colors. > ??????? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated! > > Thanks > Tom Gray > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. -- Mikhail V. Matz, Ph.D. Whitney Laboratory University of Florida 9505 Ocean Shore blvd St Augustine FL 32080-8610, USA phone +1 904 461 4044 fax +1 801 849 5388 ? ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From kevdone at home.com Wed May 2 12:49:44 2001 From: kevdone at home.com (Kevin Done) Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 12:49:44 -0400 Subject: Contact details for Paul Mapson References: <020a01c0d19f$ccd091c0$2ca926d4@mark> Message-ID: <3AF03AA8.CC8D3EBF@home.com> Lisa, Please see below. This resulted from a message you sent to the coral-list. Lisa Browning wrote: > > This file: "Unknown08b6.data" was infected with the: > "WScript.KakWorm.dr" virus. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From jekstrom at coral.org Wed May 2 15:08:59 2001 From: jekstrom at coral.org (Julie Ekstrom) Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 12:08:59 -0700 Subject: CORAL job announcement Message-ID: Coral Reef Alliance (CORAL) Position Description Title: Executive Director Status: Full Time Reports to: CORAL Board of Directors Experience: Over 4 years experience in environmental policy, outreach and/or management, with experience in marine protection issues strongly preferred. Salary: Competitive salary commensurate with experience. Location: Berkeley, California Coral Reef Alliance: Founded in 1994, the Coral Reef Alliance (CORAL) is one of the fastest growing environmental organizations in the world. It is a member-supported, non-profit organization dedicated to keeping coral reefs alive around the world. With assistance from over 10,000 supporters, CORAL promotes coral reef conservation by working with the dive industry, governments, local communities and other organizations to protect and manage coral reefs, fund conservation efforts and raise public awareness. Specific programs include the Coral Reef Parks Program, the recently established International Coral Reef Action Network (ICRAN) public education campaign, the Dive Operators Certification Program, the Microgrants Program, the Bonaire Dive Festival, Dive In To Earth Day, and maintaining the International Coral Reef NGO Directory. Headquartered in Berkeley, California, CORAL also has a satellite office in Bonaire. Visit CORAL's award-winning website at www.coral.org. Description: The CORAL Executive Director (ED) position is an excellent opportunity to provide global leadership in protecting one of the planet's most precious natural wonders, coral reef ecosystems. The ED is the Chief Executive Officer of this dynamic organization and reports to the Board of Directors. S/he is responsible for achieving CORAL's vital mission of reef conservation through the leadership of this fast growing non-profit, including leadership of the management team and the oversight of CORAL's talented staff of thirteen. The ED will be responsible for leading ongoing strategic planning and refining the vision and direction of the organization, and will serve as the primary spokesperson for the organization. Working with the Managing Director, s/he will oversee the budgeting process and ensure the organization is fiscally sound. Fundraising, with an emphasis on the development of foundation and large donors will be a critical aspect of the ED's job. The ED will work closely with the Board of Directors and will lead Board development efforts. During the first year the ED will: ? Become familiar with all aspects of CORAL's operations, including programs, fundraising, communications, and management; ? Review, refine and implement the fundraising plan; ? Work with program directors, as well as staff when appropriate, to plan and implement CORAL programs and projects; ? Work with the Board of Directors in finalizing the strategic plan and use this process to shape his/her vision for CORAL's growth in the next five years; ? Review existing strategic partnerships and identify new opportunities; ? Solidify the management team approach and address any staffing needs. Qualifications: Over 4 years in a senior position, preferably with a non-profit environmental organization; Ability to lead the management team: providing vision, staff empowerment, strategic planning, and fiscal management required; Excellent oral and written communication skills, strong interpersonal skills required; Knowledge of coral reef related issues a strong plus, and experience with marine issues necessary; Fundraising skills with experience in grant seeking and/or large donor fundraising required; Ability to thrive in a non-profit organization that values teamwork, cooperation and communication; sense of humor a plus; Ability to travel internationally (3-4 weeks a year) and nationally important; Ability to build and develop strong partnerships among key constituencies, including conservationists, members of the dive industry, government officials, and international institutions desired; External affairs experience including public speaking and outreach, international policy development, and/or experience in building strategic partnerships required; Experience in communications campaign design a plus; Being a certified scuba-diver or willingness to become certified strongly preferred. Interested applicants should send a letter or email including resume, salary requirements, and a list of at least 3 professional references to the following address by May 25, 2001, or e-mail to edrecruit at coral.org. No telephone inquiries, please. Attn: CORAL ED Search Committee P.O. Box 4145 River Edge, NJ 07661-9886 -- Julie Ekstrom Administrative Assistant The Coral Reef Alliance (CORAL) jekstrom at coral.org http://www.coral.org/ tel: 510-848-0110 fax: 510-848-3720 "Working together to keep coral reefs alive." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010502/7fb41781/attachment.html From Rcheck at ucla.edu Thu May 3 13:05:45 2001 From: Rcheck at ucla.edu (Reef Check Headquarters) Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 10:05:45 -0700 Subject: Reef Check May Update Message-ID: Reef Check May Update 1. New RC Web Site -- update your bookmarks! 2. New senior staff 3. New coordinators! 4. Dive In To Earth Day Activities 5. Regional Training Workshops --Thailand and St Lucia 6. Send us press clips, photos, video 7. Coral Trade Workshop 8. Thanks 1. New Website The new Reef Check website is up. The text address is unchanged (www.ReefCheck.org) but the numbers behind it (IP address) are different. To see the new site, you must hit "refresh/reload" if you have the site bookmarked. Available on the new site are the 2001 data forms, and the instruction manual in English and Indonesian, and coming soon -- Spanish. Please send us your best RC photos for the photo gallery (coming soon!). 2. New Senior Staff Ms. Jarrett Smith has joined Reef Check as the Director of Institutional Advancement. Jarrett is an experienced fund-raiser and scuba diver and is helping us establish our board of directors and administrative structure. 3. New coordinators! Welcome Yael Rogel Hava, , a graduate student in Marine Biology at Tel Aviv University, the new coordinator in Israel, and Silvia Pinca, A Caribbean Regional RC Training will be held in St Lucia Soufriere, St. Lucia, 11-13 July 2001. Contact Allan Smith 6. Press Coverage, Photos, Video Reef Check HQ would like copies of press coverage of Reef Check activities in ANY language. Please mail a copy to: Reef Check, Institute of the Environment, 1652 Hershey Hall, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-4985, USA. We use these for press events and to show our sponsors what great work you are all doing! 7. Reef Check, MAC and NOAA Reef Check Director Gregor Hodgson helped with the monitoring design portion of the NOAA International Coral Trade Workshop April 8-13, 2001, Jakarta, Indonesia organized by Dr. Andy Bruckner. A detailed monitoring program was designed that will be used to provide independent tracking of the marine aquarium trade. 8. Thanks We are updating the sponsors page on our website. If you would like to thank your local sponsors, please send us their name and website so that we can add this information. 2001 data have been coming in fast. Thanks for all the hard work! Special thanks to Jim Hendee and Clarke Jeffris at NOAA Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory Ocean Chemistry Division for hosting our website. Thanks also to Jeff Jeffords and Niki Papakonstantinou for their generous donation of several photographs. You can see more of Jeff?s work at www.divegallery.com and more of Niki?s work at www.Ilkonproductions.com. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Reef Check Headquarters Rcheck at ucla.edu http://www.reefcheck.org Institute of the Environment 1652 Hershey Hall UCLA Los Angeles, CA 90095-1496 1-310-794-4985 (phone) 1-310-825-0758 (fax) ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From kat1003 at cus.cam.ac.uk Fri May 4 09:24:48 2001 From: kat1003 at cus.cam.ac.uk (K.A. Teleki) Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 14:24:48 +0100 (BST) Subject: Reef Encounter - Call For Contributions In-Reply-To: <551304929.975508881@cugd-pc-176.geog.cam.ac.uk> Message-ID: NEWSLETTER OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR REEF STUDIES News, Views and Reviews REEF ENCOUNTER No. 30 CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS Reef Encounter is looking for articles for the next issue (due out in September 2001). We welcome contributions from 300 - 1200 words on any aspect of reef studies, including news, comments, short reviews (but not original scientific data) and also illustrations/cartoons. Our final deadline is 1st July, but we appreciate receiving early contributions. Please send your ideas for articles and the articles themselves to our email address ReefEncounter at bigfoot.com. You will receive an email acknowledgment from one of the editors within a couple of days (if you don't please check back!). Illustrations and hard copy can be mailed to the following address: Kristian Teleki Department of Geography University of Cambridge Cambridge CB2 3EN United Kingdom If you need style guidelines, take a look at recent back issues at the society's webpage www.uncwil.edu/isrs. Thank you! Maggie Watson Kristian Teleki Maria Joao Rodrigues Karenne Tunne If you are interested in joining the society and receiving Reef Encounter and the journal Coral Reefs, you can find more details on the web page. www.uncwil.edu/isrs ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From jekstrom at coral.org Fri May 4 13:01:13 2001 From: jekstrom at coral.org (Julie Ekstrom) Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:01:13 -0700 Subject: CORAL job, coral listserve Message-ID: Sorry for the reposting, The email contact was incorrect on the original announcement. The correct email contact is jobs at coral.org. Coral Reef Alliance (CORAL) Position Description Title: Executive Director Status: Full Time Reports to: CORAL Board of Directors Experience: Over 4 years experience in environmental policy, outreach and/or management, with experience in marine protection issues strongly preferred. Salary: Competitive salary commensurate with experience. Location: Berkeley, California Coral Reef Alliance: Founded in 1994, the Coral Reef Alliance (CORAL) is one of the fastest growing environmental organizations in the world. It is a member-supported, non-profit organization dedicated to keeping coral reefs alive around the world. With assistance from over 10,000 supporters, CORAL promotes coral reef conservation by working with the dive industry, governments, local communities and other organizations to protect and manage coral reefs, fund conservation efforts and raise public awareness. Specific programs include the Coral Reef Parks Program, the recently established International Coral Reef Action Network (ICRAN) public education campaign, the Dive Operators Certification Program, the Microgrants Program, the Bonaire Dive Festival, Dive In To Earth Day, and maintaining the International Coral Reef NGO Directory. Headquartered in Berkeley, California, CORAL also has a satellite office in Bonaire. Visit CORAL's award-winning website at www.coral.org. Description: The CORAL Executive Director (ED) position is an excellent opportunity to provide global leadership in protecting one of the planet's most precious natural wonders, coral reef ecosystems. The ED is the Chief Executive Officer of this dynamic organization and reports to the Board of Directors. S/he is responsible for achieving CORAL's vital mission of reef conservation through the leadership of this fast growing non-profit, including leadership of the management team and the oversight of CORAL's talented staff of thirteen. The ED will be responsible for leading ongoing strategic planning and refining the vision and direction of the organization, and will serve as the primary spokesperson for the organization. Working with the Managing Director, s/he will oversee the budgeting process and ensure the organization is fiscally sound. Fundraising, with an emphasis on the development of foundation and large donors will be a critical aspect of the ED's job. The ED will work closely with the Board of Directors and will lead Board development efforts. During the first year the ED will: ? Become familiar with all aspects of CORAL's operations, including programs, fundraising, communications, and management; ? Review, refine and implement the fundraising plan; ? Work with program directors, as well as staff when appropriate, to plan and implement CORAL programs and projects; ? Work with the Board of Directors in finalizing the strategic plan and use this process to shape his/her vision for CORAL's growth in the next five years; ? Review existing strategic partnerships and identify new opportunities; ? Solidify the management team approach and address any staffing needs. Qualifications: Over 4 years in a senior position, preferably with a non-profit environmental organization; Ability to lead the management team: providing vision, staff empowerment, strategic planning, and fiscal management required; Excellent oral and written communication skills, strong interpersonal skills required; Knowledge of coral reef related issues a strong plus, and experience with marine issues necessary; Fundraising skills with experience in grant seeking and/or large donor fundraising required; Ability to thrive in a non-profit organization that values teamwork, cooperation and communication; sense of humor a plus; Ability to travel internationally (3-4 weeks a year) and nationally important; Ability to build and develop strong partnerships among key constituencies, including conservationists, members of the dive industry, government officials, and international institutions desired; External affairs experience including public speaking and outreach, international policy development, and/or experience in building strategic partnerships required; Experience in communications campaign design a plus; Being a certified scuba-diver or willingness to become certified strongly preferred. Interested applicants should send a letter or email including resume, salary requirements, and a list of at least 3 professional references to the following address by May 25, 2001, or e-mail to jobs at coral.org. No telephone inquiries, please. Attn: CORAL ED Search Committee P.O. Box 4145 River Edge, NJ 07661-9886 -- Julie Ekstrom Administrative Assistant The Coral Reef Alliance (CORAL) jekstrom at coral.org http://www.coral.org/ tel: 510-848-0110 fax: 510-848-3720 "Working together to keep coral reefs alive." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010504/d5d91eaa/attachment.html From kenyon_b_mobley at gasou.edu Wed May 2 15:50:55 2001 From: kenyon_b_mobley at gasou.edu (kenyon mobley) Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 15:50:55 -0400 Subject: Ocean Challenge Message-ID: <200105071143.LAA01197@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> This is a forwarded message please do not respond to sender. Attention Graduates and Undergraduates of Ocean Science > > OCEAN CHALLENGE > > James Cameron and Jean-Michel Cousteau are looking for researchers > and explorers to join them on a two-and-a-half year television > expedition to image as many of the ocean's treasures as possible, from > the North Pole to Antarctica, from intertidal to abyssal depths and > every region in between. If you are passionate about what you do and > communicate that passion effectively, we strongly encourage you to > apply. > > Preliminary Applications are due May 11, 2001. > > Call > (866)605-5670 > or visit > www.ocean-challenge.net Kenyon B. Mobley Georgia Southern University Department of Biology Statesboro, GA 30460-8042 http://www.bio.gasou.edu/bio-home/GRADS/kenyonwebpage/kmhome.html Office (912) 681-5963 Fax: (912) 681-0845 ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From bowdenkerby at is.com.fj Sat May 5 17:41:04 2001 From: bowdenkerby at is.com.fj (Bowden-Kerby) Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 09:41:04 +1200 Subject: Fw: fisher training Message-ID: <200105071146.LAA01205@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Tracy, We are developing such training materials for use with communities here = in Fiji and Solomons. The materials are very rough at this point, not = ready yet for sharing, but we have hopes on publishing something = eventually. Rather than reinventing the wheel (if it already is = rolling), we would certainly appreciate any other resources, if you have = found anything good for community awareness raising and understanding = MPA function, etc... anything helping support commmunity-based = management of tropical marine resources.=20 Thanks, Austin Bowden-Kerby Coral Gardens Initiative Foundation for the Peoples of the South Pacific -----Original Message----- From: FSP Fiji - Suva Office To: 'Austin Bowden-Kerby' Date: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 9:53 AM Subject: FW: fisher training -----Original Message----- From: Dr Tracy Clark SMTP:tclark at intnet.mu=20 ] Sent: 24 April 2001 21:41 To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: fisher training I am trying to get in touch with Liana McManus as I believe she=20 successfully developed fisher training prior to the creation of a marine = park at Bolanao, Philippines. (This lead was given to me by Brad Opdyke = at=20 ANU). Further to that, we are developing a programme of fisher training on the = Mauritian Island of Rodrigues which will be designed to include=20 introductions to lagoon, fish and fisheries ecology as well as the = theories=20 behind marine reserves and other management measures. I would be very grateful if we could be recommended publications, = training=20 manuals or anyone who has previous experience in this area in order for = us=20 to develop a programme which can benefit from this. Many thanks, Tracy Clark ------=_NextPart_000_0027_01C0D610.AAE30780 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear = Tracy,
 
We are developing such = training=20 materials for use with communities here in Fiji and Solomons.  The=20 materials are very rough at this point, not ready yet for sharing, but = we have=20 hopes on publishing something eventually.  Rather than reinventing = the=20 wheel (if it already is rolling), we would certainly appreciate any = other=20 resources, if you have found anything good for community awareness = raising and=20 understanding MPA function, etc... anything helping support = commmunity-based=20 management of tropical marine resources.
 
Thanks,
 
Austin = Bowden-Kerby
Coral Gardens = Initiative
Foundation for the Peoples = of the South=20 Pacific
-----Original = Message-----
From:=20 FSP Fiji - Suva Office <fspsuva at is.com.fj>
To: = 'Austin=20 Bowden-Kerby' <bowdenkerby at is.com.fj>
Date:=20 Wednesday, April 25, 2001 9:53 AM
Subject: FW: fisher=20 training



-----Original Message-----
From: = Dr=20 Tracy Clark SMTP:tclark at intnet.mu ]
Sent: 24 April 2001 = 21:41
To:=20 coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa= .gov
Subject:=20 fisher training

I am trying to get in touch with Liana McManus as = I=20 believe she
successfully developed fisher training prior to the = creation of=20 a marine
park at Bolanao, Philippines. (This lead was given to me by = Brad=20 Opdyke at
ANU).

Further to that, we are developing a = programme of=20 fisher training on the
Mauritian Island of Rodrigues which will be = designed=20 to include
introductions to lagoon, fish and fisheries ecology as = well as=20 the theories
behind marine reserves and other management = measures.

I=20 would be very grateful if we could be recommended publications, training =
manuals or anyone who has previous experience in this area in order = for us=20
to develop a programme which can benefit from this.

Many=20 thanks,

Tracy Clark


------=_NextPart_000_0027_01C0D610.AAE30780-- ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From debimack at auracom.com Mon May 7 13:21:20 2001 From: debimack at auracom.com (Debbie MacKenzie) Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 14:21:20 -0300 Subject: Bleaching corals - are they food-starved? Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20010507142120.00848e70@auracom.com> Hi coral researchers, Do you see a clear difference between what is happening with the "mass coral bleaching" and what you would expect to see if the corals were nutrient-starved? It looks very similar to me. Might the patchy availability of food for reef corals help explain the oft-noted "patchiness" of bleaching episodes? Lowering of the tolerance thresholds for light and heat (the thing that appears to be happening?) is an expected result of food-starvation. As is lowered immunity to infectious diseases. Do you suspect malnutrition as a common underlying cause? Have you considered fishing as an independent risk factor in mass bleaching events (and emerging coral diseases)? Might fishing have had the cumulative result of lowering the total biomass available for recycling, and therefore ultimately caused food-starvation in corals? I've just posted a fairly lengthy discussion of this issue on my website at http://www.fisherycrisis.com/coral1.html and would greatly appreciate feedback from any of you. The wider theme of the site, the possibility of an overall "starving marine ecosystem," is summarized on the main page: http://www.fisherycrisis.com Thanks, Debbie MacKenzie ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From paul.holthus at aquariumcouncil.org Mon May 7 17:14:34 2001 From: paul.holthus at aquariumcouncil.org (Paul Holthus) Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 11:14:34 -1000 Subject: 2nd Int'l Conference on Marine Ornamentals Message-ID: <200105072123.LAA24655@phoenix.pixi.com> Second International Conference on Marine Ornamentals Collection, Culture & Conservation November 26 - December 1, 2001 Wyndham Palace Resort and Spa in Walt Disney World? Resort Lake Buena Vista, Florida, USA You're Invited to Join Us! Here are the conference details at-a-glance. Call for Abstracts ABSTRACTS DUE JUNE 1, 2001 All individuals involved in the marine ornamentals industry are strongly encouraged to submit an abstract for consideration as an oral or poster presentation. Special consideration will be given to work that synthesizes across disciplines. Abstract submissions will be used to identify oral presentations, and ALL abstracts, both oral and poster, will be published in the conference book of extended abstracts. If you wish to make an oral presentation or present a poster, please submit an abstract no later than June 1, 2001. Abstracts MUST be submitted electronically following the detailed format specification outlined in the Call for Abstracts section of the conference web site located at: Conference Goal This conference is designed to contribute to the worldwide goal of creating an economically and environmentally viable future for the dynamic marine ornamentals industry and its diverse clientele through: * Improvements in the methods for the collection and distribution of wild marine ornamental species * Increases in the variety, quantity and availability of cultured marine ornamental species * Outreach activities in the conservation and husbandry of marine ornamental species Programmatic Themes The conference will focus on the direction of the marine ornamentals industry in the next century and will feature keynote speakers from organizations around the world. Topics will include a wide arrange of subject matters within the following topical categories: * Global/Cross-cutting Issues * * Habitat, Fisheries and Collection * Aquaculture * Export and Import Issues Who Should Attend? * Participation will be open to all those interested in addressing the problems caused by the increasing exploitation of these marine resources. Conference participants will come from: * aquafarms * university & private research institutions * federal, state and regional governments * international assistance organizations with conservation responsibilities * pet store dealers and wholesalers * commercial collectors * equipment manufacturers * aquarium media * feed suppliers * importers/exporters of ornamental fish hobbyists * commercial fish growers * environmental organizations with fish conservation concerns * aquatic health practitioners * public and private aquaria * students & faculty * aquaculture program administrators * investors and potential investors in aquaculture businesses * regulators of imported aquarium species at federal and state levels Trade Show Exposition A trade show featuring products, equipment and techniques used in the aquaculture industry is being planned in conjunction with the conference. The educational agenda coupled with an effective and diverse trade show has become an eagerly anticipated event. Whether you come as an exhibitor or attendee, the International Marine Ornamentals Conference and Trade Show will help you: * Find valuable production, processing and marketing information to build your business * Stay on the cutting edge of the latest industry research, developments and technology * Discover solutions to challenging problems * Learn about government regulations and legislative trends which affect the industry * Be part of the network and shape the future of marine ornamentals * Establish profitable connections with new business contacts * Present your company to hundreds of qualified attendees * Find supplies and services designed to help you in your operation * Enhance your company's visibility through promotional and sponsorship opportunities For More Information, Visit the Conference Web Site or Contact: Ms. Beth Miller-Tipton, CMP, Director Office of Conferences and Institutes (OCI) Marine Ornamentals '01 - Conference Coordinator University of Florida Leadership and Education Foundation, Inc. (UFLEF) Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) PO Box 110750 Building 639, Mowry Road Gainesville, FL 32611-0750 PHONE: 1-352-392-5930 / FAX 1-352-392-9734 EMAIL: Website: Paul Holthus Executive Director, Marine Aquarium Council 923 Nu'uanu Ave., Honolulu, Hawaii USA 96817 Phone: (+1 808) 550-8217 Fax: (+1 808) 550-8317 Email: paul.holthus at aquariumcouncil.org Website: www.aquariumcouncil.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010507/b8fe0d83/attachment.html From hendee at aoml.noaa.gov Mon May 7 21:26:11 2001 From: hendee at aoml.noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 21:26:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: virus alert: Snow White Message-ID: If you get a message that says Snow White on it, be careful, it's probably a virus. Someone tried posting it to coral-list, so it may come your way, too. cheers, Jim coral-list admin ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From acohen at whoi.edu Wed May 9 12:19:00 2001 From: acohen at whoi.edu (Anne Cohen) Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 12:19:00 -0400 Subject: skeletal growth of Astrangia poculata Message-ID: <3AF96DF4.344AAA68@whoi.edu> Hi All I am interested in obtaining references to skeletal architecture and growth (including growth rates) of Astrangia poculata (=danae), if indeed any exist. I have done a literature search by subject and admittedly found very little about the species and almost nothing about its skeleton. I would appreciate hearing from you if you can help, Many thanks, Anne. -- Dr A.L. Cohen Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Geology and Geophysics, ms#23 Woods Hole MA 02543 USA T: 508 289 2958 F: 508 457 2175 ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From matz at whitney.ufl.edu Wed May 9 05:11:58 2001 From: matz at whitney.ufl.edu (Mike Matz) Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 13:11:58 +0400 Subject: looking for collaborators Message-ID: <3AF909DD.286AB3A4@whitney.ufl.edu> Hello coral-listers, I am looking for the coral ecology-devoted lab to collaborate on the project tentatively entitled "Origins and maintenance of color variety in Anthozoa". This has to do with colors determined by GFP-like proteins. My group is good in cloning and handling the proteins and doing phylogenetic analysis on their sequences. By that we can point out the functional significance of particular color and determine weither all the colors have separate functional assignments or not, and if not, how they group with respect to function. We can also infer when the need for separate colors appeared in? Anthozoa evolution, and maybe suggest how the existing color polymorphism may be maintained. However, this study cannot be completed without validating our suggestions by quantitative data from real reefs, basically concerning distribution of various color morphs. Being molecular people, we definitely cannot do that on our own. So, would anybody like to join? I am presently preparing an NSF proposal on that, and would be happy to include an ecologist co-PI. Mike -- Mikhail V. Matz, Ph.D. Whitney Laboratory University of Florida 9505 Ocean Shore blvd St Augustine FL 32080-8610, USA phone +1 904 461 4044 fax +1 801 849 5388 ? ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From catherinecrabb at hotmail.com Tue May 8 18:27:38 2001 From: catherinecrabb at hotmail.com (catherine crabb) Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 18:27:38 Subject: coral spawning Message-ID: <200105091758.RAA01619@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> When is coral spawning off Grand Cayman Island expected occur? ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From jo_lopez at rumac.uprm.edu Wed May 9 07:17:33 2001 From: jo_lopez at rumac.uprm.edu (jo_lopez) Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 08:17:33 -0300 Subject: Battered reefs Message-ID: <200105091801.SAA01656@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Vieques Libre - http://www.viequeslibre.org --------------------------- ListBot Sponsor -------------------------- Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com/links/joinlb ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Battered reefs blamed on Navy Michele Salcedo South Florida Sun-Sentinel Posted May 6, 2001 Sixty years of bombing and gunfire training have taken a severe toll on one of the most exquisite coral reefs in the Caribbean, a preliminary study by a University of Georgia ecologist and marine biologist has found. ?Each bomb dropped on, and each shell fired at Vieques creates an imminent and substantial risk of irreparable harm to the coral reefs,? James Porter wrote in a report prepared in 1999 for the government of Puerto Rico. Porter headed a team of three researchers that took nine samples from five sites, three in Bahia Salina del Sur and three from Bahia Icacos within the Navy's bombing and gunfire range on the eastern third of the island. The Navy has used that area of the 126-square-mile island off the eastern coast of Puerto Rico for live bombing and artillery training since 1941. Puerto Ricans have long been unhappy with the arrangement, but when a civilian guard was killed in April 1999 by an errant bomb, the call for the Navy to leave became stronger. The government commissioned the report as it prepared to file a lawsuit against the Navy. Instead, an agreement was reached last year with the Clinton administration that allowed the Navy to resume exercises until 2004. The report was never used. Vieques fishermen have long maintained that the bombing was causing damage to the reef and unexploded ordnance was leaking toxins into the water. But Porter's study, a copy of which was obtained by the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, is the first scientific look at the environmental damage to the reefs since the death of the guard. Among evidence of ?serious unnatural disturbances? to reefs: Unexploded bombs, artillery shells and shell cases on the coral reef and in the adjacent sea-grass bed. Parachutes from flares and cluster-bomb fragments draped over corals and other reef flora and fauna. Unexploded bombs leaking materials into the coral reef and creating a limited dead zone around the bombs. ?There is a statistically significant inverse correlation between the density of military ordnance and several measures of reef health, including the number of coral species, the number of coral colonies, and the coral species diversity,? Porter wrote. ?Reefs with the highest concentrations of bombs and bomb fragments have the lowest health indices and the lowest species diversity.? Lt. Jeff Gordon, a spokesman for Roosevelt Roads Naval Station, could not be reached for comment. But the deputy chief of naval operations, Vice Adm. James Amerault, testified before a U.S. Senate subcommittee last month that the Navy removes unexploded ordnance on active and inactive ranges ?by performing surface sweeps.? ?There is increasing pressure to regulate UXO [unexploded ordnance] on ranges more stringently than in the past,? Amerault told the subcommittee. ?We are committed to ensuring that active range operations do not present a threat to human health or the environment off-range and see no compelling reason to regulate munitions when used on range for their intended purpose.? Michele Salcedo can be reached at msalcedo at sun-sentinel.com. ______________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe, write to viequeslibre-unsubscribe at listbot.com ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From oveh at uq.edu.au Wed May 9 18:05:01 2001 From: oveh at uq.edu.au (Ove Hoegh-Guldberg) Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 08:05:01 +1000 Subject: Perhaps you need to do a bit more reading ... In-Reply-To: <57.a8afe53.26dd72dd@aol.com> Message-ID: <003701c0d8d4$18b2a0c0$7d6e6682@vsap.uq.edu.au> Dear Debbie, Much though I was amused by your article and proposal (that the "seas are starving" and this is why reefs are experiencing mass bleaching), I feel that you need to do a little more reading in the area of mass coral bleaching to correct the many errors. My feeling is that you need to do more reading - a fact indicated by your reference list - I feel this probably underpins why you came to such odd conclusions. In contrast - extensive experimental and field evidence (as opposed to weakly based conjecture) exists of temperature as the primary factor (and light as an important secondary factor). Note that use of word "secondary carefully" - it is just one of many errors you have made in article posted to the web site: http://www.fisherycrisis.com/coral1.html. I have sent you a copy of reviewed material that should help you in your research. Perhaps this will help you understand the errors you have made. Till then - feel free to come back to me with any questions you might have. Best wishes, Ove Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg Director, Centre for Marine Studies University of Queensland St Lucia, 4072, QLD Phone: +61 07 3365 4333 Fax: +61 07 3365 4755 Email: oveh at uq.edu.au http://www.marine.uq.edu.au/ohg/index.htm ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Thu May 10 09:55:42 2001 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E Strong) Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 09:55:42 -0400 Subject: ORAD Chief Position References: <3AF9AE5C.19D52429@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <3AFA9DDE.7C3CB86C@noaa.gov> Just announced: NOAA Job Announcement for the Chief of the Oceanic Research & Applications Division (ORAD). ORAD is within NESDIS' Office of Research & Applications (ORA) located in Camp Springs, Maryland. http://www.usajobs.opm.gov/wfjic/jobs/BW9406.HTM Please visit ORAD's WebPage at: http://orbit-net.nesdis.noaa.gov/orad/ AE Strong Team Leader: Marine Science Applications Team Coral Reef Watch (Co-ordinator) -- **** <>< ******* <>< ******* <>< ******* <>< ******* Alan E. Strong Phys Scientist/Oceanographer NOAA/NESDIS/ORA/ORAD -- E/RA3 NOAA Science Center -- RM 711W 5200 Auth Road Camp Springs, MD 20746-4304 Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov 301-763-8102 x170 FAX: 301-763-8108 http://orbit-net.nesdis.noaa.gov/orad -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010510/11f2941b/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Alan.E.Strong.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 433 bytes Desc: Card for Alan E. Strong Url : http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010510/11f2941b/attachment.vcf From debimack at auracom.com Thu May 10 11:03:22 2001 From: debimack at auracom.com (Debbie MacKenzie) Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 12:03:22 -0300 Subject: Perhaps you need to do a bit more reading ... Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20010510120322.00856a80@auracom.com> Hi Ove, Thanks for responding to my post. Glad you were amused! At 08:05 AM 5/10/01 +1000, you wrote: >Dear Debbie, > >Much though I was amused by your article and proposal (that the "seas are >starving" and this is why reefs are experiencing mass bleaching), I feel that >you need to do a little more reading in the area of mass coral bleaching to >correct the many errors. My feeling is that you need to do more reading - a >fact indicated by your reference list - I feel this probably underpins why you >came to such odd conclusions. The length of my reference list? Since when has that been the measure of whether or not an idea is interesting and well thought out? I've read umpteen things on the declining "condition"(fat content), and growth rates of marine life overall, everything from marine mammals to all-groundfish, large pelagics, small pelagics, etc. - and I obviously didn't list them all there - but that's the pattern. (And it looks like the corals may be developing the same problem.) Declining abundance and condition factor simultaneously - contrary to "expectations" based on previous "knowledge" (in fish, the one used to predictably go up when the other went down, now they both go down together.) It all points to the very real likelihood that the overall marine biomass has been depleted (and not entirely by "warm water" ;>) "The many errors?" - I wish you'd been more precise. Is it an error by definition to ask new questions? - to make new observations or interpretations? What I would like to read, but have been unable to find - maybe you can help me - is research done on the possibility of undernutrition as a contributing factor in mass coral bleaching. Experiments that provide supplemental feeding to test corals, to check whether or not the possession of increased stored reserves confers any advantage in resisting "warm water coral bleaching." Has this been done? And how do you explain the "patchiness" of bleaching occurring on a given reef? Relating it to feeding success is maybe a plausible idea, since corals are immobile and at the mercy of the random availability of the "patchy" food that may come their way - all similar corals will therefore not necessarily have equal feeding success or energy stores for the lean (warm) times. In contrast - extensive experimental and field >evidence (as opposed to weakly based conjecture) exists of temperature as the >primary factor (and light as an important secondary factor). Yes, believe it or not I've read a fair amount of that. The fact that bleaching is strongly associated with warm water spells is not inconsistent with the idea that an important factor could be low nutritional stores. The predominance of events in warmer water would be expected. It's all in where your suspicions lie - and there's been a lot of attention to the suspicion of warm water as cause - but, as they say, "you'll find what you look for," which is true to quite an extent, and you won't find what you don't look for. If you're going to cover all the bases in making the complete correct diagnosis, you need to consider the possibility of food-starvation. It should be relatively easy to rule out - no? Maybe it's an unnecessary test, but it's in the best interest of the patient to run all the tests anyhow, "just in case." "Unlikely" maybe, but I thnk it's best to rule it out, and I've yet to see where it has been considered. >I have sent you a copy of reviewed material that should help you in your >research. Perhaps this will help you understand the errors you have made. Till >then - feel free to come back to me with any questions you might have. > Yes, thanks, I've read it already. And I have another question. Figure 10, your long-term sea surface temp data, shows the thermal thresholds for corals in the 3 regions of the Great BArrier Reef : south approx 28.2 C, central approx 29.2, and north approx 30. And corals in all three areas have been recently affected by the warm-water bleaching, the difference in their tolerances is due to each being acclimatized to the normal temps where they are. It looks like the mean temp in the central area has recently risen from about 27 to almost 28, and that area is not hitting the "30 threshold" at all, the temp limit that the northern cousins can't take. But the northern ones lived quite comfortably in the past at a mean temp of 28. Have you tried transplanting any corals to more southerly locations, where conditions might now match what they were used to for so long? It would be interesting to see if the naturally more heat acclimatized ones would have better survival these days if moved a bit south. If so, it strengthens the "temp threshold" theory, you've spared them from the temp peak that they cannot tolerate...if not, it might point to the possibility of the "starvation" theory. Earlier you wrote: >I find the idea pretty hard to rationalise over the extent of areas seen in the >1997-98 bleaching cycle. While it may contribute to a varying threshold like >other factors, I doubt whether it is the cause. Warming oceans is the main >factor. > > "Doubt?" "hard to rationalize?" -- OK, sure, it's hard to "get your head around the possibility" -- but it's not something that will be particularly hard to test for. The temperature-based research was probably stimulated by an observation like "There seems to be a lot of unusually high temperatures lately, it's getting warmer, I wonder if that's hurting these corals." Where I'm "coming from," however, is noting what looks like poor feeding, slowed growth and reduced fat content and reproductive success in a very wide range of organisms throughout the ailing ocean -- so for me, coral bleaching prompted the question "I wonder if the sick corals are experiencing feeding difficulties as well?" Another question: Do you believe that the sewage, etc., that we've poured into the rivers literally serves as an effective replacement, nutrient-wise, for the fish that we've removed? Or, do you think that it doesn't matter...that "there's lots of other fish in the sea?" And one of my other "odd conclusions" - "the importance of solid vs liquid nutrients" - what do you think about that one? I think that the reefs cannot tolerate high levels of "liquid nutrient," but clearly tolerated high levels of "solid nutrient" prior to fishing...and would incorporate solid nutrients into their food web today in a non-damaging way, if such nutrients were made available. Cheers, Debbie MacKenzie http://www.fisherycrisis.com ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From EricHugo at aol.com Thu May 10 13:28:10 2001 From: EricHugo at aol.com (EricHugo at aol.com) Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 13:28:10 EDT Subject: Perhaps you need to do a bit more reading ... Message-ID: <27.154c3e9f.282c29aa@aol.com> Hi Debbie and list: I read your post, your paper, and Ove's comments. I must say I question your choice to take on Ove in this, of all, subjects ;-) But if I might offer a few comments? I trust the list members will correct me if I am mistaken, as I am not actually pulling the many papers from which the following are drawn: First, the lipid content of coral mesenteries can vary greatly not only because of environmental conditions, but also due to species physiology (mesentery size, respiration rate, etc.), with some corals able to exist on stored lipid content up to 100 days, if I recall correctly. Second, warming water tends to encourage reproduction, and spawnings happen during the warmer months...this includes many animals forming the plankton that corals feed on...Much, if not most, of the plankton on coral reefs is produced and dwells in, and migrates upward nightly on the reef, and is not pelagic. The pelagic plankton is a component, but probably is significantly lost by fish grazing on the fore-reef slope. Other planktonic inputs come from nearshore areas being flushed outward by tidal changes. Corals are also mixotrophic (polytrophic) and do not depend on single heterotrophic sources. They can absorb significant amounts of DOM ("liquid nutrients" as you put it). Further, many feed on detritus (coral mucus, algal debris, bacteria, agglomerations of other microorganism, etc.) This is a rich food source well documented in the literature. Some corals may even obtain their largest percentage of energy obtained by feeding from this source, including the soft corals that also bleach. In the absence of one food source, they can shift to obtaining required energy from other food sources. Detritus, being formed of such material, especially N-rich bacteria and coral mucus, would, if anything, increase during warmer months. Also, the energy obtained by light and zooxanthellae is carbon rich, mostly lost as mucus, whereas heterotrophic acquisition tends to be more weighted toward N and contributes towards growth and reproduction. If anything, high N would allow more to be excreted or to be present in a non-limiting N environment, perhaps even allowing the zooxanthellae to slow their synthesis and translocation of glycerol and other photosynthate and using it to produce proteins, resulting in unbalanced growth, and perhaps even exacerbating a potential bleaching situation by overly high densities within the gastrodermis. Also, your understanding of the bleaching mechanism, literature on the subject, and the results of free oxygen, peroxide, etc. in the bleaching response are not shown by your web page. In terms of growth, warmer temps increase calcification up to point, and corals live optimally up to near a few degrees of their upper thermal limit, So reduced growth is not really the case. Also, warming waters are involved in coral spawning and gonad maturation, so the comment on decreased reproduction is not quite right either. The patchiness of bleaching was discussed on the list a while back, and stagnant areas due to flow dynamics even around a coral colony can result in local conditions that exacerbate bleaching. Finally, the web page sort of reads in a sensationalist manner, in my opinion, that I don't think adds to its credibility. Just my thoughts, Eric Borneman ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From EricHugo at aol.com Thu May 10 13:28:10 2001 From: EricHugo at aol.com (EricHugo at aol.com) Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 13:28:10 EDT Subject: Perhaps you need to do a bit more reading ... Message-ID: <27.154c3e9f.282c29aa@aol.com> Hi Debbie and list: I read your post, your paper, and Ove's comments. I must say I question your choice to take on Ove in this, of all, subjects ;-) But if I might offer a few comments? I trust the list members will correct me if I am mistaken, as I am not actually pulling the many papers from which the following are drawn: First, the lipid content of coral mesenteries can vary greatly not only because of environmental conditions, but also due to species physiology (mesentery size, respiration rate, etc.), with some corals able to exist on stored lipid content up to 100 days, if I recall correctly. Second, warming water tends to encourage reproduction, and spawnings happen during the warmer months...this includes many animals forming the plankton that corals feed on...Much, if not most, of the plankton on coral reefs is produced and dwells in, and migrates upward nightly on the reef, and is not pelagic. The pelagic plankton is a component, but probably is significantly lost by fish grazing on the fore-reef slope. Other planktonic inputs come from nearshore areas being flushed outward by tidal changes. Corals are also mixotrophic (polytrophic) and do not depend on single heterotrophic sources. They can absorb significant amounts of DOM ("liquid nutrients" as you put it). Further, many feed on detritus (coral mucus, algal debris, bacteria, agglomerations of other microorganism, etc.) This is a rich food source well documented in the literature. Some corals may even obtain their largest percentage of energy obtained by feeding from this source, including the soft corals that also bleach. In the absence of one food source, they can shift to obtaining required energy from other food sources. Detritus, being formed of such material, especially N-rich bacteria and coral mucus, would, if anything, increase during warmer months. Also, the energy obtained by light and zooxanthellae is carbon rich, mostly lost as mucus, whereas heterotrophic acquisition tends to be more weighted toward N and contributes towards growth and reproduction. If anything, high N would allow more to be excreted or to be present in a non-limiting N environment, perhaps even allowing the zooxanthellae to slow their synthesis and translocation of glycerol and other photosynthate and using it to produce proteins, resulting in unbalanced growth, and perhaps even exacerbating a potential bleaching situation by overly high densities within the gastrodermis. Also, your understanding of the bleaching mechanism, literature on the subject, and the results of free oxygen, peroxide, etc. in the bleaching response are not shown by your web page. In terms of growth, warmer temps increase calcification up to point, and corals live optimally up to near a few degrees of their upper thermal limit, So reduced growth is not really the case. Also, warming waters are involved in coral spawning and gonad maturation, so the comment on decreased reproduction is not quite right either. The patchiness of bleaching was discussed on the list a while back, and stagnant areas due to flow dynamics even around a coral colony can result in local conditions that exacerbate bleaching. Finally, the web page sort of reads in a sensationalist manner, in my opinion, that I don't think adds to its credibility. Just my thoughts, Eric Borneman ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From christine.schoenberg at mail.uni-oldenburg.de Thu May 10 13:48:07 2001 From: christine.schoenberg at mail.uni-oldenburg.de (christine.schoenberg) Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:48:07 +0200 Subject: nutrient deficiency and bleaching Message-ID: Dear Debbie, a compliment up front: I like the way you defend your idea. We always need to ask new questions, sometimes daring ones. The most difficult paths to follow are against well-trodden ones, i.e. the ones everybody believes in. However, we need to test the merit of such new ideas. I have some thoughts re your question whether bleaching could be caused by nutrient depletion, however, I am afraid they take Ove's side. How come that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore, where nutrients are enhanced to levels, which in turn can become detrimental to many coral reef organisms, which are highly adapted to exist in oligotrophic conditions? Could that maybe relate to some patchiness, too: too much 'food' and maybe toxic substances? You reason that corals may not think that the stuff we pour into the seas are edible. But some species certainly benefit from our disposals (see eg. KRN Anthony 1999. Coral suspension feeding on fine particulate matter. JEMBE 232: 85-106 and KRN Anthony 1999. A tank system for studying benthic aquartic organisms at predictable levels of turbidity and sedimentation: case study examining coral growth. Limnol Oceanogr 44(6): 1415-1422.). I have another angle to look at your question: a different organism group. I work on bioeroding sponges, some of which also contain zooxanthellae. Sponges have been shown to be great biomonitors for nutrient conditions and some species just love human waste materials and especially the bacteria growing on them. The bioeroding sponge I worked with bleached under nutrient-rich conditions, but did very well in less rich environments. Sorry to be a spoil-sport... Cheers, Christine Dr. Christine Sch?nberg, PhD Dept. of Zoosystematics & Morphology Fachbereich 7 - Biology, Geo- & Environmental Sciences Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg 26111 OLDENBURG GERMANY ph +49-441-7983373 fax +49-441-7983162 email christine.schoenberg at mail.uni-oldenburg.de internet http://www.uni-oldenburg.de/zoomorphology/Whoiswho.html ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From wshepherd at calacademy.org Fri May 11 17:36:52 2001 From: wshepherd at calacademy.org (Bart Shepherd) Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 14:36:52 -0700 Subject: stock footage- damaged reefs Message-ID: <3AFC5B73.4AEDD25C@calacademy.org> Greetings- As part of an educational production for a local cable access station, we are looking for any stock video footage that could be used to augment reef aquarium scenes. In particular, we are hoping to get some shots of damage to coral reefs. If anyone is aware of any sources for free video footage, please email me directly. Thank you, Bart -- ><((((?>..><((((?>..><((((?>..><((((?>..><((((?>..><((((?>..><((((?> Bart Shepherd Senior Aquatic Biologist Steinhart Aquarium, California Academy of Sciences Golden Gate Park San Francisco CA 94118 tel (415) 750 7289 fax (415) 750 7269 ><((((?>..><((((?>..><((((?>..><((((?>..><((((?>..><((((?>..><((((?> ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From crcp at africaonline.co.ke Sat May 12 03:40:30 2001 From: crcp at africaonline.co.ke (CRCP) Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 10:40:30 +0300 Subject: WCS JOB ANNOUNCEMENT Message-ID: <3AFCE8ED.65D0537C@africaonline.co.ke> THE WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY JOB ANNOUNCEMENT- CORAL REEF ECOLOGISTS AND FISHERIES COMMUNITY SCIENTISTS The Wildlife Conservation Society is developing a coral reef research and conservation program for the countries of Papua New Guinea and Indonesia. The initial part of this program will include a broad scale survey of 16 protected areas in these two countries. The ecology and cultural institutions associated with coral reefs in and out of protected areas will be surveyed. The primary goal is to determine the factors that influence the effectiveness of marine protected areas (MPAs) and other management institutions. WCS will conduct a comparative study of reef conditions and management systems to determine: 1) the ecological status of coral reefs in the region, looking for indicators (the status of key resources, pests, pollution, coral bleaching and fishing regimes) that directly impinge on or measure reef health; 2) the management approaches of the institutions, both national and small-scale socio-cultural organizations, associated with marine parks and fisheries policies in the two countries; 3) the relationship between coral reef ecology, fishing restrictions imposed by socio-cultural institutions, and measures of resource extraction and sustainability with respect to reef health; and 4) socio-cultural factors (indigenous etiologies and behaviors) and institutional structures that can help to promote (or degrade) conservation and sustainability of coral reefs. To undertake this study WCS is organizing a small team of field scientists to survey reefs, MPAs and cultural institutions. Applicants should have a Ph.D. or a Masters degree and equivalent field experience. Experience in the region, the fauna and languages will be considered an asset. This team will work with a team of national collaborators to help with the field program and will provide training to the national team members. The team will also work with WCS country program personnel in developing the survey. The positions will be held for a minimum of 18 months and hold the title of "Associate Research Scientist". The work will include extensive travelling in the two countries and living under field conditions. These positions can lead to long-term appointments with WCS. One of the team members will be named as the project leader and will be given a coordinating role with appropriate compensation. Annual salaries will be commensurate with experience and salary history. In addition, to salaries, a major portion of living expenses incurred during the field survey will be covered. The three positions and their major responsibilities are: Coral Reef Fish Ecologist ? Undertake visual counts of coral reef fish in and out of managed areas using standard belt transects. Use time-sampling procedures to develop species richness estimates for each study site. Undertake assays of herbivory and predation on invertebrates. Train national collaborators in the field methods. Assists with data collection of general environmental parameters, assist the invertebrate ecologist with transects and fish landing data collected by the Fisheries Community Specialist. Perform data analysis and prepare publications from the field study. Coordinate and share data with other team members to develop a holistic view of reef ecology and human influences. Actively share findings and information with collaborating governmental and non-governmental organizations. Coral Reef Invertebrate Ecologist ? Undertake line and belt transects of hard coral and sessile invertebrates including sea urchins, starfish, sea cucumbers and coral-eating snails. Undertake time-sampling procedures for developing species richness estimates at each site. Train national collaborators in the field methods. Assist with data collection of general environmental parameters; assist the fish ecologist with transects and fish landing data collected by the Fisheries Community Specialist. Perform data analysis and publications from field study. Coordinate and share data with other team members to develop publications and a holistic view of reef ecology and human influences. Actively share findings and information with collaborating governmental and non-governmental organizations. Fisheries Community Specialist ? This investigator will work with a national collaborator and they will attempt to uncover the means by which fishing regulations are established and enforced. This will include direct observation of fishing practices; structured and more informal individual and focus group interviews with fishers, fish marketers, park and fisheries department personnel; in-depth interviews with community leaders and elders; and review of any relevant secondary sources. In addition they will collect basic socio-economic data for each study site based on the "Rapid Assessment of Management Parameters for Coral Reefs" (RAMP) which has been developed by the University of Rhode Island's Coastal Resources Center (CRC). They will gather basic fisheries statistics on the number of fishers using the landing site, the locations and estimated sizes of the fishing grounds, and direct weight measurements of fish and resources at the landing. In addition they will examine and compare these data with national fisheries statistics and national fisheries policies. Actively share findings and information with collaborating governmental and non-governmental organizations. Interested individuals should submit a cover letter and full curriculum vitae to Dr. T.R. McClanahan and copy the application to L. Lauck . The application should be sent as a single Word 98 email attachment with the applicants name as the file name. The first two pages should be the cover letter followed by the curriculum vitae that should not exceed six pages. The cover letter should briefly state the job of interest, describe the applicants past history, experience relating to this work, interest and availability in undertaking this study. The curriculum vitae should contain past educational, work and research experience, including a list of publications. The application period will end July 30th and the work will begin in October 2001. For more information on WCS go to http://www.wcs.org/wild/ then follow links to Worldwide Programs and Marine Conservation. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010512/ce1d4476/attachment.html From debimack at auracom.com Sat May 12 12:06:51 2001 From: debimack at auracom.com (Debbie MacKenzie) Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 13:06:51 -0300 Subject: nutrient deficiency and bleaching -and- Perhaps you need to do a bit more reading ... Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20010512130651.0085a650@auracom.com> Hi Christine, Eric, coral-list, Christine, you wrote: >I have some thoughts >re your question whether bleaching could be caused by nutrient depletion, >however, I am afraid they take Ove's side. > I would just like to clarify exactly what it is that Ove and I seem to disagree on. It certainly is not the obvious fact that the majority of coral bleaching events are "thermally induced," or at least are strongly associated with times of warmer water. Regarding whether thermally induced bleaching "could be caused by nutrient depletion" - my impression was that Ove agreed with me that it could, he just thinks it's unlikely. He certainly did not claim to have disproved it. So if we disagree, I'm thinking it's basically on the importance of this particular idea, and whether or not it warrants investigation. Considering the shocking extent of the coral bleaching problem and the dire predictions that are being made for their future by scientists like Ove, I think that any possibility, however remote, ought to be fully investigated. also: >How come that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore, where nutrients >are enhanced to levels, which in turn can become detrimental to many coral >reef organisms, which are highly adapted to exist in oligotrophic >conditions? Could that maybe relate to some patchiness, too: too much >'food' and maybe toxic substances? > It's my impression that "thermal stress" is apt to be higher nearshore. But you are right that those kinds of pictures are complicated by the effects of multiple stressors, heat, pollution and fishing, so it's very difficult, maybe impossible, to pinpoint the exact effects of each. That's why I think that their relative impacts will be best sorted out in areas not receiving terrestrial runoff. Especially if one wants to isolate the effects of fishing/biomass removal alone on the health of corals. But before you investigate the effects of too-low "nutrient" levels on corals, I think you need to re-examine the meaning of the word "nutrient." I discussed this in a fair amount of detail in my (admittedly too long) essay ( http://www.fisherycrisis.com/coral1.html ). In the oligotrophic waters that are normally found on coral reefs, the absolute level of dissolved nutrients found there only represents the limit of the efficiency of the organisms in removing them from the water. The nutrient recycling patterns on the reefs (and elsewhere in aquatic systems, although to varying degrees) conserve the nutrients in solid form and many circular routes can be completed without the individual nutrients passing through the "dissolved" stage. Fishing removals can therefore result in the effects of "nutrient" depletion being felt despite apparently unchanging absolute levels of nutrients in dissolved form. >From "Life and Death of Coral Reefs" Birkeland (ed), 1997, a snapshot of the (underrated in my opinion) "downside" of the food web: "Fish feces have been observed to be fed upon by corals (McCloskey and Chesher, 1971) and Tovertson (1982) deduced that some fecal material from fishes may be eaten and recycled through five fishes before it reaches the seafloor to be consumed by corals or other invertebrates." (p 416) ....and "corals or other invertebrates" are consumed by reef fish, some portion of "nutrients" therefore coming full circle without passing through the "liquid" phase. So, your measurements and thinking on "nutrient levels" needs to be expanded somehow to reflect the presence or absence of FISH, IMO. >From the same source, p 415, "On coral reefs...the movements of fishes may cause enough movement of nutrients in coral-reef ecosystems to influence the growth of corals (Meyer et al 1983), and overfishing can have large-scale ecosystem-level effects." Unfortunately, however, chap 10, "Effects of Reef Fishes on Corals and Algae" notes that "the role of fish feces fertilizing the reef" represents a "potentially important interaction between fishes and reefs" but the author omits it from the discussion. Beyond fish feces, ammonia excreted from the gills of fish is available for uptake and use by corals. One person commented to me off-list: "Ove can tell you that following bleaching a good blast of N & P will help stimulate recovery." A "blast of N & P" helps corals recover? No surprise...but might that "blast" have been given naturally when standing stocks of reef fish were higher? And the starved state of the bleached corals is not unexpected since we know that they lost their main food-providers when the zooks left -- but it would be very interesting to see whether or not a "blast of N & P" given prophylactically might help. Could the susceptibility to bleaching be lessened in this way? Maybe when the Hotspot program indicates that bleaching risk is rising, experimental "blasts" of N & P could be tried here and there to see if the availability of these nutrients might prevent the expulsion of the zooks in the first place. Eric wrote: >The patchiness of bleaching was discussed on the list a while back, and >stagnant areas due to flow dynamics even around a coral colony can result in >local conditions that exacerbate bleaching. > That sounds reasonable, but which feature of "local conditions" is most affected by stagnant flow, "nutrient" levels or water temperature? My hunch is that still water would be more prone to becoming extremely nutrient-depleted rather than extremely warm, but I DO NOT KNOW! Do you? >Finally, the web page sort of reads in a sensationalist manner, in my >opinion, that I don't think adds to its credibility. > I realize that, it's because "you can't please all of the people all of the time." I have been trying to discuss this issue with scientists, but at the same time I try to write so that my fisherman-neighbours and the general public just might get interested and be able to plough through an article. Sorry, but most of your scientific literature is essentially unavailable to them, they just can't read it. And Ove chose to rename this discussion "Perhaps you need to do a bit more reading..." That's OK, of course I will, but I'll never know half of what this group knows about corals. But I would like to point out that I MAY have done "a bit more reading" than many in this group on the finer points of other marine-ecosystems-in-trouble. The declining abundance and stunted growth of fish everywhere is very worrisome. In some places the declining productivity is blamed on decreased top-to-bottom mixing patterns - yet we have a large area in the Northwest Atlantic (Bay of Fundy, Georges Bank) that is constantly mixed by TIDAL action - which has not changed - but the "productivity" and growth of fish is way down. And the certainty that fish were in trouble solely because of changes in water temperature - that's appealing, but it's falling apart in a lot of instances. For example, a decade ago in Atlantic Canada we had unusually cold water which caused our cod to feed poorly and grow very slowly (all cod papers predicted that when the water warmed up the fish would feed better and grow more quickly). However, in recent years the water has warmed to a point above the long-term mean...and growth of cod is still inexplicably dropping. And declining growth has been noted in our deep water fish stocks, living down on the "slope" where temperature variations are in hundredths of degrees rather than tenths...and no-one tries to stretch it far enough to blame the slow down of those fish (exploited and unexploited) on water temperature. It's recognized as "biomass depletion" in that case - fishing resulting in food shortage for marine life. I'm concerned that the coral scientists as well will belatedly discover that the problems are not solely driven by the effects of changing water temperature - I'm convinced that there is an "environmental impact" of fishing that's not been recognized, and it's a generalized food shortage. What concerns me is not just coral bleaching or coral diseases, but the larger diagnostic problem of a whole ocean in trouble. I see a theme, a generalized slowing of feeding and growth, and suspect it's because of fishing-induced biomass depletion. The possibility of fishing removals adversely impacting the "base" of the food web is adamantly denied by (most) scientists I've corresponded with regarding the northern fish....they try to reassure me with measurements of chlorophyll levels....but if the corals turn out to be "hungry" because of fishing-induced biomass depletion, it really strengthens my argument. It's rather a huge topic though, very hard to pull it all together in one piece of work (and I've found that most scientists are very specialized, struggling with only one piece of the overall puzzle - that adds to the frustration). For a bit more detail on some of the things that I have read, and emerging themes that I think I see, check out "The Marine Nutrient Cycle" http://www.fisherycrisis.com/motherocean.html Thanks for your interest, Debbie MacKenzie http://www.fisherycrisis.com ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From szmanta at uncwil.edu Sat May 12 16:11:11 2001 From: szmanta at uncwil.edu (Alina M. Szmant) Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 16:11:11 -0400 Subject: nutrient deficiency and bleaching In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20010512130651.0085a650@auracom.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20010512161111.0073ed18@pop.uncwil.edu> Hello Debbie and others: I have been following with interest the debate about whether bleaching in reef corals could be at least partially due to coral starvation that could result from ovrefishing. I guess I'd like to add my 2 cents to the argument. I've had a chance to scan thru your web papers, and I want to add my voice to those of others concerned about the VERY serious effect overfishing is having on coral reef health. This has become my "band-wagon" as of late (as some of you know), and is also expressed in my Panama Symp paper (Szmant, A.M. 1997. Nutrient effects on coral reefs: the importance of topographic and trophic complexity on nutrient dynamics. Proc. 8th Internat. Coral Reef Symp., Panama, June 1996. Vol. 2: 1527-1532), in which in fact I express concern for the effects of overfshing on coral reef trophic dynamics and nutrient cycling. There is no doubt that fish excretion and defecation is important to nutrient cycling on coral reefs (Szmant-Froelich, A. 1983. Functional aspects of nutrient cycling on coral reefs. In: The Ecology of Deep and Shallow Coral Reefs. Symp. Ser. Undersea Res. NOAA Undersea Res. Prog., Vol. 1: 133-139.) just as similar activities by larger vertebrates are important to trophic dynamics and nutrient cycling in terrestrial systems. However, I do not think that it is a factor in coral bleaching. I have done experiments in which I starved corals in the lab for weeks and months and did not observe any change in zooxanthellae density. I did however induce severe bleaching of corals in the lab of corals maintained for only 2-3 weeks at 30 oC while controls at 28 oC were fine. And while I do not have any data to support or refute that coral nutrition is or is not affected by overfishing, I do think that the nutrient-related effects of overfishing are happening more at other levels (effects on algal dynamics, lack of herbivory, population explosions of corallivores, etc). Further, in comparing tissue biochemical characteristics (C, N, C/N ratios etc) of corals from reefs with more and fewer fishes (e.g. Glovers Reef and Bahamas back in the '80s before bleaching was such a problem) we did not find any difference that correlated with fish communities (we were looking for differences associated with nutrient environment). But I also agree with your statements about the important of "solid" nutrients (see Szmant 1997), and have played around with corals eating fish feces (they do if they are from planktivores but not herbivores). But Florida corals have bleached and died just as much as Caribbean corals that are much more overfished, and Florida corals have a high tissue N content compared to some other areas where fish are more depleted. I do not think that Florida reefs are anthropogenically nutrified (Szmant, A.M. and A. Forrester. 1996. Water column and sediment nitrogen and phosphorus distribution patterns in the Florida Keys, and potential relationships to past and present coral reef development. Coral Reefs. 15: 21-41.) but but there is plenty of particulate matter in the water there has been no consistent difference between the bleaching of corals offshore (lower nutrients, more fishes) and closer to shore (more nutrients and particulates, fewer fishes). And my best set of evidence for disbelieving the fish presence-nutrition-bleaching hypothesis you propose is that some of the most bleached corals in the Florida Keys during the 1998 bleaching event were on a nearshore patch reef where the snappers and grunts literally formed a think layer over the corals all day long (little other shelter around) and the corals (other than bleached) appeared to be very healthy. This patch reef had an incredible amount of algae on any non-coral substrate wherever the fishes hung out (few herbivores on this reef), which I attributed to the fish excretion. The corals recovered very well from the bleaching as soon as the water temperatures started to drop in late summer. Thus, high fish abundance and fish excretion and defecation did not prevent these corals from suffering from bleaching when temperatures exceeded 30 oC, but who knows, they may have helped the corals recover quicker. Thank you for initiating an interesting debate. Over-fishing is a terrible thing for coral reefs, and in fact, we don't know all the ways its effects can cascade down thru the reef community. I do not doubt that coral nutrition is affected at some level, but in my opinion not enough to be a contributor to bleaching. Alina Szmant ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From McCarty_and_Peters at compuserve.com Sat May 12 21:32:00 2001 From: McCarty_and_Peters at compuserve.com (McCarty and Peters) Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 21:32:00 -0400 Subject: skeletal growth of Astrangia poculata Message-ID: <200105122132_MC2-D0C6-68F8@compuserve.com> Dear Dr. Cohen, Two suggestions: First, the vast majority of all of the work on Astrangia was cited in the paper that resulted in the reversion of the species name, i.e.: Peters, E.C., S.D. Cairns, M.E.Q. Pilson, J.W. Wells, W.C. Jaap, J.C. Lang, C.E. (Cummings) Vasleski, and L.S. Gollahon. 1988. Nomenclature and biology of Astrangia poculata ( = A. danae, = A. astreiformis) (Cnidaria: Anthozoa). Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 101: 234-250. Much of the work was down at URI. I suspect that Thierry Jacques had the most data on skeletal architecture and growth. Whether or not it was published in a journal article, I do not recall. I can also check my personal copy of Carol Cummings' dissertation, but that will take a few days too find. Therefore, my second suggestion is that since you are in the Hole, drive down to GSO and check out the various dissertations cited in the article above at the Pell Library. They are all in the stacks there. OK, its a 1.5 hour drive probably, but its the best way to get the data in one shot. Just my two cents worth. Chip McCarty ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From crcp at africaonline.co.ke Sun May 13 03:41:27 2001 From: crcp at africaonline.co.ke (CRCP) Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:41:27 +0300 Subject: Nutrient deficiency and bleaching References: <3.0.1.32.20010512161111.0073ed18@pop.uncwil.edu> Message-ID: <3AFE3AA7.F7E164A5@africaonline.co.ke> Debbie, Alina and co. One interesting observation of the 98 bleaching in western Indian Ocean was that the marine parks, which have a high biomass of fish, experienced the highest mortality through bleaching (McClanahan et al. 2001). This is largely attributable to the fact that Acropora is more abundant in the parks where as it seems to be damaged by nets, coral collection and other things outside of the park. Also the the very pristine and unfished Maldives and Chagos Islands experienced terrible bleaching in 98 (Goreau et al. 2000, McClanahan 2000, Sheppard 1999). So, these findings would support Alina's contention that fishing and bleaching effects are not influenced by fish abundance through any nutrient interactions, but that fishing does affect coral abudance through direct damage (breaking, collecting..) but also through predator-prey interactions that influence bleaching by influencing the abundance of bleaching and non-bleaching sensitive corals. Branching corals are most susceptible to bleaching and also from damage and collection, consequently parks can increase the abundance of these species and produce the most dramatic losses when bleaching occurs. Goreau, T., T. McClanahan, R. Hayes, and A. Strong. 2000. Conservation of coral reefs after the 1998 global bleaching event. Conservation Biology 14:5-15. McClanahan, T.R. 2000. Bleaching damage and recovery potential of Maldivian coral reefs. Marine Pollution Bulletin 40:587-597. McClanahan, T.R., Muthiga, N.A., Mangi, S. 2001. Coral and algal changes after the 1998 coral bleaching and mortality: interaction with reef management and herbivores on Kenyan reefs. Coral Reefs 19: 380-391 Sheppard, C.R.C. 1999. Coral decline and weather patterns over 20 years in the Chagos Archipelago, Central Indian Ocean. Ambio 28:472-478. Tim McClanahan Coral Reef Conservation Project The Wildlife Conservation Society Kibaki Flats #12 Kenyatta Beach, Bamburi P.O. Box 99470 Mombasa, Kenya email: crcp at africaonline.co.ke Tel O: 254 11 485570 Tel H: 486549 ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From lesk at bu.edu Sat May 12 15:26:15 2001 From: lesk at bu.edu (Les Kaufman) Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 15:26:15 -0400 Subject: nutrient deficiency and bleaching -and- Perhaps you needto do a bit more reading ... Message-ID: <200105132156.VAA11852@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Debbie, I suspect you might find that nutrient pulses aid reef recovery where herbivore densities are still adequate to offset macrophyte growth. In other words, on a reef thick with macrophytes and/or thin on herbivorous fishes, urchins, etc. (arthropods and molluscs are "etc."), macrophytes might flush from the nutrients and cause problems for the corals. On a well-grazed reef, the corals will get the bennies without the bullying. It might appear, however, that the removal of the fishes compromised the resiliency of the reef for reasons other than some of them being herbivores: i.e., your hypothesis about nutrient limitation. Of course, even this is a bit simplistic. Some folks think that the very high densities achieved by Diadema antillarum on some Caribbean reefs were the result of low predation by fishes (porgies, hogfishes, and queen triggerfish are similarly delicious to people). Via that route, overfishing could actually help the corals. Of course, the urchin plague took care of that for a while in the west Atlantic, but things are turning around a bit now. You want to see all the possibilities, and then judge which is the most likely (and worth actually testing) for any given place or situation. On the whole yes, reefs are in trouble in many places. If we were to stop overfishing it would probably help. If we were to stem runoff and eutrophication, that would probably help too. Debbie MacKenzie wrote: > > Hi Christine, Eric, coral-list, > > Christine, you wrote: > > >I have some thoughts > >re your question whether bleaching could be caused by nutrient depletion, > >however, I am afraid they take Ove's side. > > > > I would just like to clarify exactly what it is that Ove and I seem to > disagree on. It certainly is not the obvious fact that the majority of > coral bleaching events are "thermally induced," or at least are strongly > associated with times of warmer water. Regarding whether thermally induced > bleaching "could be caused by nutrient depletion" - my impression was that > Ove agreed with me that it could, he just thinks it's unlikely. He > certainly did not claim to have disproved it. So if we disagree, I'm > thinking it's basically on the importance of this particular idea, and > whether or not it warrants investigation. Considering the shocking extent > of the coral bleaching problem and the dire predictions that are being made > for their future by scientists like Ove, I think that any possibility, > however remote, ought to be fully investigated. > > also: > > >How come that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore, where nutrients > >are enhanced to levels, which in turn can become detrimental to many coral > >reef organisms, which are highly adapted to exist in oligotrophic > >conditions? Could that maybe relate to some patchiness, too: too much > >'food' and maybe toxic substances? > > > > It's my impression that "thermal stress" is apt to be higher nearshore. But > you are right that those kinds of pictures are complicated by the effects > of multiple stressors, heat, pollution and fishing, so it's very difficult, > maybe impossible, to pinpoint the exact effects of each. That's why I think > that their relative impacts will be best sorted out in areas not receiving > terrestrial runoff. Especially if one wants to isolate the effects of > fishing/biomass removal alone on the health of corals. > > But before you investigate the effects of too-low "nutrient" levels on > corals, I think you need to re-examine the meaning of the word "nutrient." > I discussed this in a fair amount of detail in my (admittedly too long) > essay ( http://www.fisherycrisis.com/coral1.html ). In the oligotrophic > waters that are normally found on coral reefs, the absolute level of > dissolved nutrients found there only represents the limit of the efficiency > of the organisms in removing them from the water. The nutrient recycling > patterns on the reefs (and elsewhere in aquatic systems, although to > varying degrees) conserve the nutrients in solid form and many circular > routes can be completed without the individual nutrients passing through > the "dissolved" stage. Fishing removals can therefore result in the effects > of "nutrient" depletion being felt despite apparently unchanging absolute > levels of nutrients in dissolved form. > > >From "Life and Death of Coral Reefs" Birkeland (ed), 1997, a snapshot of > the (underrated in my opinion) "downside" of the food web: > > "Fish feces have been observed to be fed upon by corals (McCloskey and > Chesher, 1971) and Tovertson (1982) deduced that some fecal material from > fishes may be eaten and recycled through five fishes before it reaches the > seafloor to be consumed by corals or other invertebrates." (p 416) > > ....and "corals or other invertebrates" are consumed by reef fish, some > portion of "nutrients" therefore coming full circle without passing through > the "liquid" phase. So, your measurements and thinking on "nutrient levels" > needs to be expanded somehow to reflect the presence or absence of FISH, IMO. > > >From the same source, p 415, > > "On coral reefs...the movements of fishes may cause enough movement of > nutrients in coral-reef ecosystems to influence the growth of corals (Meyer > et al 1983), and overfishing can have large-scale ecosystem-level effects." > > Unfortunately, however, chap 10, "Effects of Reef Fishes on Corals and > Algae" notes that "the role of fish feces fertilizing the reef" represents > a "potentially important interaction between fishes and reefs" but the > author omits it from the discussion. Beyond fish feces, ammonia excreted > from the gills of fish is available for uptake and use by corals. > > One person commented to me off-list: "Ove can tell you that following > bleaching a good blast of N & P will help stimulate recovery." A "blast > of N & P" helps corals recover? No surprise...but might that "blast" have > been given naturally when standing stocks of reef fish were higher? And the > starved state of the bleached corals is not unexpected since we know that > they lost their main food-providers when the zooks left -- but it would be > very interesting to see whether or not a "blast of N & P" given > prophylactically might help. Could the susceptibility to bleaching be > lessened in this way? Maybe when the Hotspot program indicates that > bleaching risk is rising, experimental "blasts" of N & P could be tried > here and there to see if the availability of these nutrients might prevent > the expulsion of the zooks in the first place. > > Eric wrote: > > >The patchiness of bleaching was discussed on the list a while back, and > >stagnant areas due to flow dynamics even around a coral colony can result > in > >local conditions that exacerbate bleaching. > > > > That sounds reasonable, but which feature of "local conditions" is most > affected by stagnant flow, "nutrient" levels or water temperature? My hunch > is that still water would be more prone to becoming extremely > nutrient-depleted rather than extremely warm, but I DO NOT KNOW! Do you? > > >Finally, the web page sort of reads in a sensationalist manner, in my > >opinion, that I don't think adds to its credibility. > > > > I realize that, it's because "you can't please all of the people all of the > time." I have been trying to discuss this issue with scientists, but at the > same time I try to write so that my fisherman-neighbours and the general > public just might get interested and be able to plough through an article. > Sorry, but most of your scientific literature is essentially unavailable to > them, they just can't read it. > > And Ove chose to rename this discussion "Perhaps you need to do a bit more > reading..." > > That's OK, of course I will, but I'll never know half of what this group > knows about corals. But I would like to point out that I MAY have done "a > bit more reading" than many in this group on the finer points of other > marine-ecosystems-in-trouble. The declining abundance and stunted growth of > fish everywhere is very worrisome. In some places the declining > productivity is blamed on decreased top-to-bottom mixing patterns - yet we > have a large area in the Northwest Atlantic (Bay of Fundy, Georges Bank) > that is constantly mixed by TIDAL action - which has not changed - but the > "productivity" and growth of fish is way down. And the certainty that fish > were in trouble solely because of changes in water temperature - that's > appealing, but it's falling apart in a lot of instances. For example, a > decade ago in Atlantic Canada we had unusually cold water which caused our > cod to feed poorly and grow very slowly (all cod papers predicted that when > the water warmed up the fish would feed better and grow more quickly). > However, in recent years the water has warmed to a point above the > long-term mean...and growth of cod is still inexplicably dropping. And > declining growth has been noted in our deep water fish stocks, living down > on the "slope" where temperature variations are in hundredths of degrees > rather than tenths...and no-one tries to stretch it far enough to blame the > slow down of those fish (exploited and unexploited) on water temperature. > It's recognized as "biomass depletion" in that case - fishing resulting in > food shortage for marine life. > > I'm concerned that the coral scientists as well will belatedly discover > that the problems are not solely driven by the effects of changing water > temperature - I'm convinced that there is an "environmental impact" of > fishing that's not been recognized, and it's a generalized food shortage. > > What concerns me is not just coral bleaching or coral diseases, but the > larger diagnostic problem of a whole ocean in trouble. I see a theme, a > generalized slowing of feeding and growth, and suspect it's because of > fishing-induced biomass depletion. The possibility of fishing removals > adversely impacting the "base" of the food web is adamantly denied by > (most) scientists I've corresponded with regarding the northern > fish....they try to reassure me with measurements of chlorophyll > levels....but if the corals turn out to be "hungry" because of > fishing-induced biomass depletion, it really strengthens my argument. It's > rather a huge topic though, very hard to pull it all together in one piece > of work (and I've found that most scientists are very specialized, > struggling with only one piece of the overall puzzle - that adds to the > frustration). For a bit more detail on some of the things that I have read, > and emerging themes that I think I see, check out "The Marine Nutrient > Cycle" http://www.fisherycrisis.com/motherocean.html > > Thanks for your interest, > Debbie MacKenzie > http://www.fisherycrisis.com > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. -- Les Kaufman Biology Department Boston University 5 Cummington St. Boston, MA 02215 schwartz at bu.edu 617-353-5560 office 617-353-6965 lab 617-353-6340 fax and BUMP 7 MBL St. Woods Hole, MA 02543 508-289-7579 office 508-289-7950 fax ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From silvinha at c4.com Sun May 13 19:28:37 2001 From: silvinha at c4.com (silvia pinca) Date: 13 May 2001 23:28:37 -0000 Subject: shark finning Message-ID: <20010513232837.13934.qmail@viebrock.chek.com> Hello coral-listers, I have been just informed that an agency on the Marshall Islands where I live and work has approved an agreement with a foreign company to allow shark fin fishing in local waters. The news are even more frightening and disappointing than what this sounds since the agency that signed the agreement is in charge of the marine resources in the Country. Evidently, in charge of depleting and destroying them more than protecting and managing them. Only a couple of months ago we also received information regarding another agreement between the same agency and a private investor for live rock collection. Fortunately for side reasons, the collection of corals never started and the project aborted. I address my cry of disappointment and ask for help to the coral reef scientists and marine conservationists to have help, support and suggestion on how to fight this absurd new agreement and this sure promise of depletion of the shark communities. I am sure that some of you had to face a similar problem somewhere else and some of you found a solution already. I thank you for your advice and support, Silvia Pinca, College of the Marshall Islands P.O. Box 1258 Majuro, Republic of the Marshall Islands MH 96960 Ph: 692-625-5903 e-mail: -------------------------------------------------- Totally Amazing Search Results - Just C4 Yourself! http://www.C4.com - Total Search Technology ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From BobFenner at aol.com Mon May 14 11:39:28 2001 From: BobFenner at aol.com (BobFenner at aol.com) Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:39:28 EDT Subject: shark finning Message-ID: In a message dated 5/13/01 4:32:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time, silvinha at c4.com writes: > Only a couple of months ago we also received information > regarding another agreement between the same agency and a > private investor for live rock collection. Fortunately for > side reasons, the collection of corals never started and > the project aborted. > Live rock collection does not equate to collection of corals... the few countries where this practice is licensed, particularly Fiji, utilize otherwise wasted return air freight, local labor and enjoy considerable hard currency income from this industry... Further, the awareness that captive husbandry of ornamental aquatics brings to the world is significant "fuel to the fire" in awareness of environmental issues... Both promote the "payment" for research and education. Robert Fenner (who wishes Ed Lovell's work in Fiji on "live rock" was in print) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010514/e9412760/attachment.html From debimack at auracom.com Mon May 14 22:43:10 2001 From: debimack at auracom.com (Debbie MacKenzie) Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 23:43:10 -0300 Subject: Nutrient deficiency and bleaching Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20010514234310.0085f9d0@auracom.com> Hi Coral-list, Thanks very much for your feedback. You are convincing me that, in all likelihood, no simple correlation exists between standing stock of reef fish and susceptibility of corals to bleaching. (Although it's possible that the presence of fish might aid recovery, according to Alina's example - but, maybe, maybe not?) Tim wrote: >One interesting observation of the 98 bleaching in western Indian Ocean was >that the marine parks, which have a high biomass of fish, experienced the >highest mortality through bleaching (McClanahan et al. 2001). This is largely >attributable to the fact that Acropora is more abundant in the parks where as >it seems to be damaged by nets, coral collection and other things outside of >the park. Also the the very pristine and unfished Maldives and Chagos Islands >experienced terrible bleaching in 98 (Goreau et al. 2000, McClanahan 2000, >Sheppard 1999). So, these findings would support Alina's contention that >fishing and bleaching effects are not influenced by fish abundance through any >nutrient interactions, Ove wrote: >Both fished and non-fished areas bleached extensive in 1997-98. One Tree >Island (a total preserve - not ever fished) bleached a greater levels than other >non-fished areas. > Mark wrote: >I studied the reef fish populations in the southern Seychelles during the bleaching in 1998, and have just returned from the Chagos Archipelago. In both places (representing over 2% of the world's coral reefs) 80-90% of the coral died from the bleaching. These also represent reefs with remarkably low levels of fishing (or other environmental impacts), they had, and actually still have, abundant and diverse reef fish populations. This would appear to counter any corellation between nutrient mining and the impacts of the bleaching. While you might choose to link it to a "wider ocean in trouble" scenario, Chagos in particular is thought to have existed in considerable isolation and with highly oligotrophic waters all around over considerable timescales. > 80-90% mortality!? - That must be very depressing to witness. And of course severe bleaching also occurred in areas where standing stocks of reef fish were very low. So, I guess that's not it. "While you might choose to link it to a 'wider ocean in trouble' scenario.." Well, that actually is my concern, since the "wider ocean" does appear to be in trouble by all indications. Steep drops in zooplankton levels have been documented in some open ocean areas. One Pacific study recorded a 70% drop since 1950. In the Bering Sea, a study on the baleen of (plankton-feeding) bowhead whales indicates that they have been experiencing a steadily decreasing rate of feeding success over the last 40 years. In the Northwest Atlantic, records also indicate a significant decline in zooplankton over the last 40 years. For some reason there seems to be less krill in the waters of Antarctica, and minke whales are getting thinner. This leaves me wondering about the zooplankton levels in the tropical waters - do you have any time-series data on the abundance of those? What is the cause of these declines in other areas of the world ocean? If it's "nutrient mining"/fishing, or some other environmental factor...might it not be affecting the tropical ocean as well? After all, the currents in the "wider ocean" range pretty far... "If" the tropical open ocean zooplankton levels are also significantly less than they once were, what effect would you expect that to have on the coral reefs? I've read repeatedly that corals consume zooplankton washed over the reef by ocean water (in addition to consuming the resident type), and that a certain amount of dissolved nutrient is unavoidably lost by the reef to the ocean water as well. What is the actual magnitude of these sorts of exchanges? The impression I've gotten from what I've read is that the zooplankton input from the open ocean represents a net nutrient gain for the coral reef. But that would depend on the abundance of the zooplankton - obviously it could potentially drop below a point where the contribution of nutrients was outweighed by the dissolved nutrients that are washed off the reef. (The latter would not change since the same volume of water could be expected to pass over - so if zooplankton drop below a certain threshold the balance will be tipped, and being bathed in open ocean water, normally a benefit to the corals, could turn into a liability.) Alina expressed the opinion that "overfishing" is having a very serious effect on coral reef health. She recognizes the importance of fish in nutrient recycling - yet she's not getting the impression that fishing as such on an individual reef, is having the kind of direct detrimental nutrient impact that I suspected. There's got to be a good reason for her conclusion. It seems that the consensus here is that coral bleaching is being induced by something "environmental," a feature of the seawater itself - and temperature appears to be blatantly obvious as the #1 enviro-trigger. But is there another one? The lack of "fishing effect on coral nutrition" on the local scale of a given reef -- really should not surprise me, it's reminiscent of the lack of "fishing effect" elsewhere on individual fish stocks. Downturns in fisheries everywhere are frequently giving the impression that they are being caused by environmental factors - factors that invariably cause decreased growth, but also there are dramatic species shifts - and changing temperatures alone cannot possibly explain all these. (Nor can pollution, nutrient or chemical.) The changes give the impression that they are being driven by something affecting the whole ecosystem - my question is "could that 'something' be overall biomass depletion?" Could that be a systemic effect of fishing? I have another question regarding the bleached corals -- Why do you suppose that the faster growing species are the most susceptible to the bleaching? (Of course, my simplistic view is that faster growing ones need more food to be available, therefore they feel the pinch first. But maybe there's something else about their metabolism that makes them more susceptible to higher temperatures. Have you investigated this question?) Now I'm repeating myself, but a couple of days ago I wrote: >Eric wrote: > >>The patchiness of bleaching was discussed on the list a while back, and >>stagnant areas due to flow dynamics even around a coral colony can result in >>local conditions that exacerbate bleaching. >> > >That sounds reasonable, but which feature of "local conditions" is most affected by stagnant flow, "nutrient" levels or water temperature? My hunch is that still water would be more prone to becoming extremely nutrient-depleted rather than extremely warm, but I DO NOT KNOW! Do you? > > I'd like to read your discussion of the reasons for the patchiness of bleaching, but couldn't locate it in the list archives. When was it, and are the messages sorted by thread anywhere? It seems to me that there has to be a very important clue in the details of the "patchy" pattern, and also in the order in which corals fall ill during the course of a bleaching event. What is it that allows some coral colonies to resist the effects of warmer water longer than others? Alina wrote: >I have >done experiments in which I starved corals in the lab for weeks and months >and did not observe any change in zooxanthellae density. I did however >induce severe bleaching of corals in the lab of corals maintained for only >2-3 weeks at 30 oC while controls at 28 oC were fine. > Did you starve them till the point of death? I've read that food starvation does cause loss of zooxanthellae in similar manner to what is observed in mass bleaching events (as do several other stressors, of which you all know more than I do...my only point being that simple food starvation is one thing that "could" cause the observed phenomenon, including reduced thermal threshold.) And if you starve them in an aquarium, do you change the water, to simulate the washing away of nutrients that occurs on the reefs? If not, maybe they'll last a lot longer in your experiment than they will in the wild. And the bleaching that occurred at 30 C after 2-3 weeks, did you get the impression that they had run out of fuel? Or what? - what changed? How could they tolerate the elevated temperature for a few weeks, if it's a temperature that they cannot stand? What allowed them to survive it for as long as they did? Technically, I doubt if it could be called "heatstroke," which would normally cause organisms to sicken in hours rather than weeks. Have you tried varying the amount of food available to the corals undergoing these temperature trials? I realize that if it helped at all, food could only do so much to raise the thermal threshold, these organisms obviously have a temperature ceiling that's getting them in trouble (...but I'm still bugged by the question of whether or not they're feeling the added effects of a nutritional threshold as well...do any of you get the impression that their heat tolerance must have been higher in the past?) And I asked Ove the other day if he'd considered transplanting some corals on the Great Barrier Reef to slightly higher latitudes where today's temperatures might match their normals of a couple of decades ago - I think that could be an interesting test also, it might help reveal what, if any, other secondary environmental factors are at play. Debbie MacKenzie http://www.fisherycrisis.com ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From adjeroud at gala.univ-perp.fr Mon May 14 08:25:26 2001 From: adjeroud at gala.univ-perp.fr (adjeroud at gala.univ-perp.fr) Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 14:25:26 +0200 Subject: E. Meesters email address Message-ID: Dear Coral Listers, Does anyone have the email address of Dr Erik Meesters? Thanks Mehdi Adjeroud ------------------------------------------------------ Dr. Mehdi ADJEROUD Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, ESA CNRS 8046 Laboratoire de Biologie Marine et Malacologie Universite de Perpignan 66860 Perpignan Cedex FRANCE Tel : (33) 4 68 66 20 55 Fax : (33) 4 68 50 36 86 Email : adjeroud at univ-perp.fr ------------------------------------------------------ ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From gregorh at ucla.edu Tue May 15 01:46:01 2001 From: gregorh at ucla.edu (Gregor Hodgson) Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 22:46:01 -0700 Subject: Bleaching, nutrients and recovery References: <3.0.6.32.20010512130651.0085a650@auracom.com> Message-ID: <3B00C299.A7612DB8@ucla.edu> Debbie, I bet you are correct that nutrients will be more important than suspected so far in the bleaching/mortality/recovery story, but maybe not in the bleaching end as you first suggested. A search for an important role of nutrients might be more likely to bear fruit if it were aimed at the post-bleaching mortality and/or recovery processes and focused on the interactions among nutrient availability, bacterial activity on dying corals, hypoxia, algal recruitment and growth, the ability of damaged coral tissue to recover and new larvae to settle. Michael Risk and colleagues have made interesting discoveries about the synergistic effects of nutrients and sediment. Since 1997, the results of Reef Check have clearly confirmed on a pan-tropical basis what John Munro suspected in the late 1950s in Jamaica and Tim McClanahan showed experimentally in the 1990s in Kenya -- that overfishing on reefs (and not just of fish) is one of the most serious threats to their health. On the other hand, observations of bleaching events around the world suggest that the "fish poop theory" will not be supported the data. To confirm this, the results of Reef Check and other datasets such as the AIMS long-term monitoring program could be used to show that reefs with high populations of various guilds of reef fish were often more heavily bleached than reefs with lower populations -- as noted by Alina and others. Good examples for this lack of correlation may be found by comparing well-managed, no-take MPAs such as reefs at Orpheus Island, Australia with fished reefs nearby which bleached equally or less badly in 1998. The pattern of bleaching follows a consistent trend globally that suggests that following bleaching events, reefs located in areas with less water column mixing are usually the worst affected. Typically these are inshore reefs where both nutrient flux and absolute levels of nutrients are likely higher than outer reefs. Obvious large scale examples are Australia (GBR), Fiji, Okinawa. One reason that the Acropora go first is simply that the water usually heats from shallow to deep, thus it is the common shallow water corals that get nailed first -- such as Acropora. Experiments in the early 20th century in Australia, Hawaii and Japan also have documented species-specific tolerance levels for a variety of physical stressors including hot water. No doubt if more people looked at the starving basking shark story at the bottom of your homepage http://www.fisherycrisis.com, they would better understand your views. Greg McClanahan, T. R. 1995. A coral reef ecosystem-fisheries model: Impacts of fishing intensity and catch selection on reef structure and processes. Ecological Modeling 80(1):1. Hodgson, G. 1999. A global assessment of human effects on coral reefs. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 38 (5) 345-355. Edinger, E. N., Limmon, G. V., Jompa, J. Widjatmoko, W., Risk, M. J. The Janus effect: are coral growth rates good indicators of healthy coral reefs? Coral Reefs. (in press) -- Gregor Hodgson, PhD Director, Reef Check Foundation Professor (Visiting), Institute of the Environment 1652 Hershey Hall 149607 University of California at Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90095-1496 USA Office Tel: 310-794-4985 Fax: 310-825-0758 or 310-825-9663 Email: gregorh at ucla.edu Web: www.ReefCheck.org ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From jware at erols.com Tue May 15 09:21:46 2001 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 09:21:46 -0400 Subject: International Society for Reef Studies. Message-ID: <3B012D6A.A0D467D0@erols.com> Dear List, On the assumption that many of the members of the International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) also read this list, please be aware of the following: - As of January 1, 2001, Daphne Fautin is no longer the person to whom questions with regard to membership in ISRS or the journal Coral Reefs should be addressed. Daphne did a fantastic job handling all the problems for eight years and enough is enough! Please, in the future address problems to the undersigned. - Many folks out there joined ISRS in Bali or have since joined for 2001 and have not received any issues of the journal for 2001. Please be patient. Coral Reefs consists of four issues per year and we have not yet published issue number 4 for 2000. Terry Done and Dick Dodge are working with Springer-Verlag to bring Coral Reefs back on time. Thanks for your support, John Ware Treasurer, ISRS -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886 * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Undersea Technology for the 21st Century \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************** ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From hendee at aoml.noaa.gov Tue May 15 09:56:12 2001 From: hendee at aoml.noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 09:56:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Nutrient deficiency and bleaching In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20010514234310.0085f9d0@auracom.com> Message-ID: Debbie, In response to your question concerning list threads, I'm compiling the thread that has developed from your original question, and there are threads for other subjects (see the CHAMP page for these threads, currently at http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/themes/themes.html, but soon to be moved to the coral-list archives area). In response to your question regarding other causes for coral bleaching, as you are by now no doubt aware, coral bleaching is a response to stress of many different types. In addition to high sea temperatures, you may want to investigate the effect of ultraviolet in the works of M. Lesser, G. Wellington, S. Coles and P. Jokiel, among others. As you can imagine, it is a complex phenomenon. Here are some good starting refs which also of course have good literature citations therein: Coles, S.L. & Jokiel, P.L. (1978). Synergistic effects of temperature, salinity and light on the hermatypic coral Montipora verrucosa. Marine Biology 49: 187-195. Gleason, D.F. & Wellington, G.M. (1993). Ultraviolet radiation and coral bleaching. Nature 365: 837-838. Gleason, D.F. & Wellington, G.M. (1995). Variation in UVB sensitivity of planula larvae of the coral Agaricia agaricites along a depth gradient. Marine Biology 123: 693-703. Lesser, M.P. (2000). Depth-dependent photoacclimatization to solar ultraviolet radiation in teh Caribbean coral Montastraea faveolata. Mar Ecol Prog Series 192: 137-151. Lesser, M.P.; Stochaj, W.R.; Tapley, D.W. & Shick, J.M. (1990). Bleaching in coral reef anthozoans: effects of irradiance, ultraviolet radiation, and temperature on the activities of protective enzymes against active oxygen. Coral Reefs 8: 225-232. ~~~~~~~ You may also want to visit the online coral literature abstracts on the CHAMP site for other references pertaining to bleaching. Cheers, Jim ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From Mark.Spalding at unep-wcmc.org Mon May 14 04:59:08 2001 From: Mark.Spalding at unep-wcmc.org (Mark Spalding) Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 09:59:08 +0100 Subject: Nutrient deficiency and bleaching Message-ID: I'm not going to claim high expertise in all the critical areas of energy flow and coral nutrition, but (aside from points already mentioned) I would also have one fairly practical objection, to your proposal, which applies at the macro scale. I studied the reef fish populations in the southern Seychelles during the bleaching in 1998, and have just returned from the Chagos Archipelago. In both places (representing over 2% of the world's coral reefs) 80-90% of the coral died from the bleaching. These also represent reefs with remarkably low levels of fishing (or other environmental impacts), they had, and actually still have, abundant and diverse reef fish populations. This would appear to counter any corellation between nutrient mining and the impacts of the bleaching. While you might choose to link it to a "wider ocean in trouble" scenario, Chagos in particular is thought to have existed in considerable isolation and with highly oligotrophic waters all around over considerable timescales. Best wishes Mark __________________________________________ Mark Spalding, PhD Senior Marine Ecologist UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre www.unep-wcmc.org 219 Huntingdon Road Tel: +44 (0)1223 277314 Cambridge, CB3 0DL Fax: +44 (0)1223 277136 UK e-mail:mark.spalding at unep-wcmc.org or Research Associate Cambridge Coastal Research Unit Department of Geography Downing St Cambridge UK --------------------------------------------------------------- This E-mail and any attachments are private, intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, they have been sent to you in error: any use of information in them is strictly prohibited. The employer reserves the right to monitor the content of the message and any reply received. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From cdahlgren at cmrc.org Tue May 15 11:43:40 2001 From: cdahlgren at cmrc.org (Craig Dahlgren) Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 11:43:40 -0400 Subject: 2002 Funding Opportunity in Caribbean Message-ID: <005901c0dd55$d2eb79a0$6500010a@LSILAPTOP1> Final reminder... Please distribute to interested parties. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ANNOUNCEMENT The Caribbean Marine Research Center at the Perry Institute for Marine Science announces its funding opportunity for research projects for FY2002 as part of NOAA's National Undersea Research Program. The RFP is for collaborative research in the marine sciences that contributes to the research theme identified in the announcement and addresses priority topics identified for NOAA programmatic goals in the Caribbean. Pre-proposals are due by May 18, 2001. Further details are available in the RFP on CMRC's website: http://www.cmrc.org/funding.htm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010515/209aae05/attachment.html From jware at erols.com Tue May 15 13:09:14 2001 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 13:09:14 -0400 Subject: Causes of bleaching Message-ID: <3B0162BA.F010DB46@erols.com> Dear List and Debbie, As long as we're talking about causes of bleaching, I am surprised that nobody has mentioned disease as a possible causative or contributive factor: Kushmaro,A; Loya,Y; Fine,M; Rosenberg,E (1996): Bacterial infection and coral bleaching. Nature 380, 396. Rosenberg,E; Loya,Y (1999): Vibrio shiloi is the etiological (causative) agent of Oculina patagonica bleaching: general implications. Reef Encounter. 25(July), 8-10. John -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886 * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Undersea Technology for the 21st Century \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************** ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From McCarty_and_Peters at compuserve.com Tue May 15 22:37:40 2001 From: McCarty_and_Peters at compuserve.com (McCarty and Peters) Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 22:37:40 -0400 Subject: More Bleaching Agents Message-ID: <200105152238_MC2-D130-7F6@compuserve.com> Dear All, In addition to increases in temperature, UV, and vibrios (bacteria, see also K.B. Ritchie and G.W. Smith, 1998, Type II white band disease, Rev. Trop. Biol. 46 Suppl. 5:199-203), bleaching of reef corals has also been associated with (citing only a few studies): Cold water Steen, R.G., and L. Muscatine. 1987. Low temperature evokes rapid exocytosis of symbiotic algae by a sea anemone. Biol. Bull. 172:246-263. Turbidity and sedimentation Rogers, C.S. 1979. The effect of shading on coral reef structure and function. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 41:269-288. Rogers, C.S. 1983. Sublethal and lethal effects of sediments applied to common Caribbean reef corals in the field. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 14:378-382. Reduced salinity Goreau, T.F. 1964. Mass expulsion of zooxanthellae from Jamaican reef communities after Hurricane Flora. Science 145:383-386. and Protozoan infections Upton, S.J. and E.C. Peters. 1986. A new and unusual species of coccidium (Apicomplexa: Agammococcidorida) from Caribbean scleractinian corals. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 47:184-193. [And continuing unpublished observations] Bleaching might be the result of exposure to extreme physical conditions, pollutants, parasites, or pathogens, in which the symbiotic relationship is disturbed and the algae are released from the gastrodermal cells by exocytosis or the algal pigments are damaged in situ. Bleaching might also occur by sloughing of the gastrodermal epithelium, as observed in: Gates, R.D., G. Baghdasarian, and L. Muscatine. 1992. Temperature stress causes host cell detachment in symbiotic cnidarians: implications for coral bleaching. Biol. Bull. 182:324-332. Each case of bleaching should be evaluated to determine which causal agent and mechanism is affecting the condition of the host. Esther Peters ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From McCarty_and_Peters at compuserve.com Tue May 15 22:37:40 2001 From: McCarty_and_Peters at compuserve.com (McCarty and Peters) Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 22:37:40 -0400 Subject: More Bleaching Agents Message-ID: <200105152238_MC2-D130-7F6@compuserve.com> Dear All, In addition to increases in temperature, UV, and vibrios (bacteria, see also K.B. Ritchie and G.W. Smith, 1998, Type II white band disease, Rev. Trop. Biol. 46 Suppl. 5:199-203), bleaching of reef corals has also been associated with (citing only a few studies): Cold water Steen, R.G., and L. Muscatine. 1987. Low temperature evokes rapid exocytosis of symbiotic algae by a sea anemone. Biol. Bull. 172:246-263. Turbidity and sedimentation Rogers, C.S. 1979. The effect of shading on coral reef structure and function. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 41:269-288. Rogers, C.S. 1983. Sublethal and lethal effects of sediments applied to common Caribbean reef corals in the field. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 14:378-382. Reduced salinity Goreau, T.F. 1964. Mass expulsion of zooxanthellae from Jamaican reef communities after Hurricane Flora. Science 145:383-386. and Protozoan infections Upton, S.J. and E.C. Peters. 1986. A new and unusual species of coccidium (Apicomplexa: Agammococcidorida) from Caribbean scleractinian corals. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 47:184-193. [And continuing unpublished observations] Bleaching might be the result of exposure to extreme physical conditions, pollutants, parasites, or pathogens, in which the symbiotic relationship is disturbed and the algae are released from the gastrodermal cells by exocytosis or the algal pigments are damaged in situ. Bleaching might also occur by sloughing of the gastrodermal epithelium, as observed in: Gates, R.D., G. Baghdasarian, and L. Muscatine. 1992. Temperature stress causes host cell detachment in symbiotic cnidarians: implications for coral bleaching. Biol. Bull. 182:324-332. Each case of bleaching should be evaluated to determine which causal agent and mechanism is affecting the condition of the host. Esther Peters ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From oveh at uq.edu.au Wed May 16 00:35:34 2001 From: oveh at uq.edu.au (Ove Hoegh-Guldberg) Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 14:35:34 +1000 Subject: More Bleaching Agents In-Reply-To: <200105152238_MC2-D130-7F6@compuserve.com> Message-ID: <009d01c0ddc1$a659bf20$7d6e6682@vsap.uq.edu.au> Good discussion so far. Can I suggest we also keep distinct agents that cause "bleaching" (many) and agents that cause "mass coral bleaching" (a subset of the former)? We should also keep in mind the distinction between primary agents (directly causal) and those that are secondary (aggravating). In this way, thermal events (primary) that trigger mass coral bleaching events are often aggravated by secondary factors like high PAR light, UVR, hypoxia due to reduced water movement, perhaps starvation and other factors that might not have been the primary trigger. Congratulations Debbie - a useful thread has developed. Cheers, Ove Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg Director, Centre for Marine Studies University of Queensland St Lucia, 4072, QLD Phone: +61 07 3365 4333 Fax: +61 07 3365 4755 Email: oveh at uq.edu.au http://www.marine.uq.edu.au/ohg/index.htm -----Original Message----- From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of McCarty and Peters Sent: Wednesday, 16 May 2001 12:38 PM To: Coral Reef List Server Subject: More Bleaching Agents Dear All, In addition to increases in temperature, UV, and vibrios (bacteria, see also K.B. Ritchie and G.W. Smith, 1998, Type II white band disease, Rev. Trop. Biol. 46 Suppl. 5:199-203), bleaching of reef corals has also been associated with (citing only a few studies): Cold water Steen, R.G., and L. Muscatine. 1987. Low temperature evokes rapid exocytosis of symbiotic algae by a sea anemone. Biol. Bull. 172:246-263. Turbidity and sedimentation Rogers, C.S. 1979. The effect of shading on coral reef structure and function. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 41:269-288. Rogers, C.S. 1983. Sublethal and lethal effects of sediments applied to common Caribbean reef corals in the field. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 14:378-382. Reduced salinity Goreau, T.F. 1964. Mass expulsion of zooxanthellae from Jamaican reef communities after Hurricane Flora. Science 145:383-386. and Protozoan infections Upton, S.J. and E.C. Peters. 1986. A new and unusual species of coccidium (Apicomplexa: Agammococcidorida) from Caribbean scleractinian corals. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 47:184-193. [And continuing unpublished observations] Bleaching might be the result of exposure to extreme physical conditions, pollutants, parasites, or pathogens, in which the symbiotic relationship is disturbed and the algae are released from the gastrodermal cells by exocytosis or the algal pigments are damaged in situ. Bleaching might also occur by sloughing of the gastrodermal epithelium, as observed in: Gates, R.D., G. Baghdasarian, and L. Muscatine. 1992. Temperature stress causes host cell detachment in symbiotic cnidarians: implications for coral bleaching. Biol. Bull. 182:324-332. Each case of bleaching should be evaluated to determine which causal agent and mechanism is affecting the condition of the host. Esther Peters ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From scip7318 at nus.edu.sg Wed May 16 03:10:58 2001 From: scip7318 at nus.edu.sg (Angela Dikou) Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 15:10:58 +0800 Subject: Merulina growth... Message-ID: <415039BB7DE8D011BC4600805F311E1606B72C04@exs25.ex.nus.edu.sg> Hello everybody, this info is mainly for Victor. Fan and Dai (1998) Sexual reproduction of the scleractinian coral Merulina ampliata in Southern Taiwan" Bull. Mar. Sci 62(3): 897-904, state that "...Colony size at sexual maturity was 5.0-10.0 cm in diameter...". Hope this helps. All the best Angela ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From Bernard.Thomassin at com.univ-mrs.fr Wed May 16 11:33:43 2001 From: Bernard.Thomassin at com.univ-mrs.fr (Bernard THOMASSIN) Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 12:33:43 -0300 Subject: nutrient deficiency and bleaching -and- Perhaps you need to do a bit more reading ... Message-ID: <200105161307.NAA02497@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> To: Debbie MacKenzie < From: Bernard THOMASSIN < Subject: Re: nutrient deficiency and bleaching -and- Perhaps you need =20 to do a bit more reading ... Dear Debbie and all colleagues interested by coral bleaching, To the comment: > How come that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore, where > nutrients are enhanced to levels, which in turn can become detrimental > to many coral reef organisms, which are highly adapted to exist in > oligotrophic conditions? Could that maybe relate to some patchiness, > too: too much 'food' and maybe toxic substances? I don't agree with this opinion taking as example that occured around Mayotte Island in the North of the Mozambique Channel, SW Indian Ocean, where I studied since 1983 several bleachings of various intensity. Here the huge bleaching event of the April-June 1998 (when an warmer mass of oceanic seawater coming from the North reached this SW Indian Oc. area) -the bleaching was undubfully caused by the seawater temperature increase : T=B0 C reached up to 32=B0 C in ocean open sea and stayed as during near 3 months, it was the corals from the outer slopes of the barrier reefs (187 km long) that bleached and then died, mainly in the shallow depths (3m down to 15-20m - but encrusting corals at down 30m also bleached -) : all the tabular and branched Acroporids, all the Pocillopora, some Diploastrea, some massive Porites (but on some of them parts were kept alive, if most of the colonies died). Even Sarcophyton and Sinularia bleached, as well as the large sea-anemones as Heterotactis magnifica, and some Tridacnids. So, consequently, the barrier reef slope coral communities were destroyed at more than 85 percent. On the slopes of lagoonal reefs, as well as on the slope of the fringing reefs, also the bleaching occured, but on the fringing reefs in muddy environments of deep coastal bays, most of the corals survived. My opinion (exposed in one of our Bali's Conf. posters) is that corals living in clear oceanic waters on the barrier reef slopes or lagoonal reef slopes near large passages, live in oceanic seawaters showing more constant parameters (according to the seawater temperature they are more "stenothermes"). In contrary, corals living in nearshore environments where seawater parameters are more variable (increase of temperature due to closed environments, or decrease of temperature due to cool groundwater seepages ; salinity variations due to rainfalls and river flows ; variation of the turbidity due to alluvial inputs associated with rainfalls or to phytoplankton blooms ; bacterial attacks from terrigeneous materials ; etc...).=20 In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in more stable and constant seawater conditions. In this conditions I disagree with your opinion. But be very carefull with the biology/physiology of corals. I begin to believe that the same species of corals have not the same biology (and physiology) in region located fare away. So extrapolations of results from one area to another one are not possible. This is true for the biologists and ecologists, but also for our paleo-geologist colleagues. This can explain the opposite views between different researchers! Have a good day. Sincerely yours. Bernard Bernard A. THOMASSIN CNRS-UMR 6540 "Dimar", Centre d'Oc=E9anologie de Marseille, Station marine d'Endoume, Chemin de la batterie des Lions, 13007 Marseille, France (33) 04 91 04 16 17 (ligne directe) (33) 04 91 04 16 00 (standart) mobile (33) 06 63 14 91 78 fax (33) 04 91 04 16 35 (=E0 l'attention de....) ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From hendee at aoml.noaa.gov Wed May 16 09:36:05 2001 From: hendee at aoml.noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 09:36:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: UN Global Coral Reef Project Message-ID: This message may be interest, esp. concerning "UN foundation Supports Global Coral Reef Project": ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 13:56:03 +0200 From: p.pissierssens at unesco.org Subject: IOC NEWS! OCEAN DATA AND INFORMATION NETWORK FOR AFRICA (ODINAFRICA) WEB SITE LAUNCHED! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paris, 5/16/01,2:02 PM ODINAFRICA web site: http://odinafrica.org We are pleased to announce to you the launching of the ODINAFRICA web site. ODINAFRICA stands for 'Ocean data and information network for Africa', a project involving 20 African coastal states. Between the years 2000 and 2003 the ODINAFRICA project will build ocean data and information centres throughout coastal Africa and provide valuable information and data services to ocean scientists and other experts in Africa. The ODINAFRICA web site will inform you on the many valuable services and products developed or available from this network of ocean data centres! As an ocean researcher or expert involved in the African oceans yourself we therefore hope the ODINAFRICA products and services will be of great use to you. All ODINAFRICA products and services are free. Here is s short summary of what we can offer you today: - DOCUMENT DELIVERY SERVICE: copies of scientific journal articles (for non-profit institutions in developing countries in Africa) - BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE OF AFRICAN OCEAN PUBLICATIONS: find rare documents published by African ocean experts - BIBLIOGRAPHIC SEARCH SERVICE: we can find wha has been published on an issue important to you and your research - DIRECTORY OF AFRICAN OCEAN EXPERTS: find fellow researchers or experts needed for your issue. You are an entrepreneur and need scientific expertise? Check out what is available in your own country - SCIENTIFIC DATABASES: eg MASDEA (Marine Species Database for Eastern Africa) - CALENDAR OF OCEAN EVENTS: find events of your interest - MONTHLY E-ZINE: our montly electronic newsletter will inform you on what is new in Africa related to the oceans. You are organizing an event, starting a project or wish to share something with the world? You can send it to the editors and they will publish it online and/or in the printed version WINDOW (also available free of charge) SOON TO COME - DIRECTORY OF OCEAN INSTITUTIONS IN AFRICA: find out more about the expertise available in African ocean research institutions. You are an entrepreneur and need scientific expertise? Check out what is available in your own country. - METADATABASE OF OCEAN DATASETS AVAILABLE IN AFRICA - DATA HOLDINGS OF AFRICAN OCEAN INSTITUTIONS Many other services will or can be developed based on your feedback. The ODINAFRICA project, its services and products is there for you. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THIS MONTH'S HEADLINES: - Opening session of the ODINAFRICA National Workshop held in Lome, Togo on 28 March 2001. - 25/4/2001: Republic of Namibia becomes IOC Member State New - World Wide Fund (WWF) East African Marine Eco-region Workshop, Mombasa , Kenya 23-27 April, 2001 New - PACEM in Maribus Conference, Dakar, Senegal, November 2001 New - UN foundation Supports Global Coral Reef Project New - Regional Consultative Meeting on Municipal Wastewater in the Eastern Africa region,June 2001 New - The second WIOMSA scientific symposium, 22-26 October 2001 - Earth Summit comes to Africa - ACOPS launches coastal management initiative for Africa - Giant Clams in the Western Indian Ocean: Biology and Prospects for Aquaculture So visit the ODINAFRICA web site. If you agree then we will send you a short update of the ODINAFRICA web site headlines every month. If you do not like to receive these messages then simply email cmigosi at recoscix.com and you will be removed from the mailing list. However, we do hope to count you among our increasing 'family' of readers! Whereas the site is currently available in English only, a french version will be available as from June 2001! Thanks you for your attention. The ODINAFRICA web team ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From carlson at waquarium.org Wed May 16 15:20:34 2001 From: carlson at waquarium.org (Bruce Carlson) Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 09:20:34 -1000 Subject: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching In-Reply-To: <200105161307.NAA02497@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010516084714.01605630@mail.waquarium.org> RE: Offshore vs nearshore bleaching Bernard Thomassin disagreed with the general statement that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore. I concur. The other day, Gregor posted a message that "The pattern of bleaching follows a consistent trend globally that suggests that following bleaching events, reefs located in areas with less water column mixing are usually the worst affected. Typically these are inshore reefs where both nutrient flux and absolute levels of nutrients are likely higher than outer reefs." I wrote to Gregor saying that my data indicate that both nearshore and offshore reefs in Fiji (south of Viti Levu) suffered significant bleaching last year. When I revisited my transects this year I found that both areas suffered high mortality (>95% Acropora dead), but I also found significant regrowth ("phoenix" corals) and significant recruitment in the lagoons (Acropora spp.), whereas the remote offshore barrier reef showed virturally no survival and no new recruitment (the "virtually" means that whereas last year I counted on average over 100 acroporid colonies per 30 x 1 meter belt transect, this year I found only one tiny survivor on one transect and one tiny recruit on the other transect). The nearshore patchreefs and barrier reef where recovery is good, are located near the mouth of a large river and the water in this lagoon area is typically turbid most of the time. The remote barrier reef is typically in a pristine ocean environment, often crystal clear, and subjected to large open ocean swells much of the year. Gregor wrote back to me and qualified his statement: "What I was referring to was that in "moderate" bleaching events, when there was less than say 50% mortality, the inner reefs typically showed higher mortality than the outer reefs due to mixing at the outer reefs..... When it is a" bad" event there is little difference as you have seen in mortality. But your observations of faster recovery on the inner reefs are interesting and one wonders if this has more to do with a higher number of nearby parent colonies, water retention in those areas which facilitated recruitment, rather than with the nutrients being a beneficial stimulus. But all these are open questions deserving of more research." So what is the "global trend"? Do nearshore reefs or remote barrier reefs suffer higher mortality and lower recovery rates? Or should we even try to make such a generalization with so many unique factors at each locality? Aloha Bruce At 12:33 PM 5/16/2001 -0300, Bernard THOMASSIN wrote: >To: Debbie MacKenzie < >From: Bernard THOMASSIN < >Subject: Re: nutrient deficiency and bleaching -and- Perhaps you need =20 >to do a bit more reading ... > >Dear Debbie and all colleagues interested by coral bleaching, > >To the comment: > > > How come that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore, where > > nutrients are enhanced to levels, which in turn can become detrimental > > to many coral reef organisms, which are highly adapted to exist in > > oligotrophic conditions? Could that maybe relate to some patchiness, > > too: too much 'food' and maybe toxic substances? > >I don't agree with this opinion taking as example that occured around >Mayotte Island in the North of the Mozambique Channel, SW Indian Ocean, >where I studied since 1983 several bleachings of various intensity. > >Here the huge bleaching event of the April-June 1998 (when an warmer >mass of oceanic seawater coming from the North reached this SW Indian >Oc. area) -the bleaching was undubfully caused by the seawater >temperature increase : T=B0 C reached up to 32=B0 C in ocean open sea and >stayed as during near 3 months, it was the corals from the outer slopes >of the barrier reefs (187 km long) that bleached and then died, mainly >in the shallow depths (3m down to 15-20m - but encrusting corals at >down 30m also bleached -) : all the tabular and branched Acroporids, >all the Pocillopora, some Diploastrea, some massive Porites (but on >some of them parts were kept alive, if most of the colonies died). Even >Sarcophyton and Sinularia bleached, as well as the large sea-anemones >as Heterotactis magnifica, and some Tridacnids. So, consequently, the >barrier reef slope coral communities were destroyed at more than 85 >percent. > >On the slopes of lagoonal reefs, as well as on the slope of the >fringing reefs, also the bleaching occured, but on the fringing reefs >in muddy environments of deep coastal bays, most of the corals >survived. > >My opinion (exposed in one of our Bali's Conf. posters) is that corals >living in clear oceanic waters on the barrier reef slopes or lagoonal >reef slopes near large passages, live in oceanic seawaters showing more >constant parameters (according to the seawater temperature they are >more "stenothermes"). In contrary, corals living in nearshore >environments where seawater parameters are more variable (increase of >temperature due to closed environments, or decrease of temperature due >to cool groundwater seepages ; salinity variations due to rainfalls and >river flows ; variation of the turbidity due to alluvial inputs >associated with rainfalls or to phytoplankton blooms ; bacterial >attacks from terrigeneous materials ; etc...).=20 > >In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more >resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in >more stable and constant seawater conditions. > >In this conditions I disagree with your opinion. > >But be very carefull with the biology/physiology of corals. I begin to >believe that the same species of corals have not the same biology (and >physiology) in region located fare away. So extrapolations of results >from one area to another one are not possible. This is true for the >biologists and ecologists, but also for our paleo-geologist >colleagues. > >This can explain the opposite views between different researchers! > >Have a good day. > >Sincerely yours. > >Bernard > >Bernard A. THOMASSIN >CNRS-UMR 6540 "Dimar", >Centre d'Oc=E9anologie de Marseille, >Station marine d'Endoume, >Chemin de la batterie des Lions, >13007 Marseille, >France > >(33) 04 91 04 16 17 (ligne directe) >(33) 04 91 04 16 00 (standart) >mobile (33) 06 63 14 91 78 >fax (33) 04 91 04 16 35 (=E0 l'attention de....) > >~~~~~~~ >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From John.Naughton at noaa.gov Wed May 16 17:02:31 2001 From: John.Naughton at noaa.gov (John Naughton) Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 11:02:31 -1000 Subject: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010516084714.01605630@mail.waquarium.org> Message-ID: <3B02EAE7.213AD3FA@noaa.gov> To add to the mix, I concur with Bruce's statements below. During the recent severe bleaching event in Palau, we noted that corals in the lagoon close to the main island of Babeldaob were basically not impacted, while much of the coral (particularly Acropora) on the barrier reef was hammered. Could this be attributed to the possible lowering of nearshore water temps from runoff? Mahalo, John John Naughton NMFS, Pacific Islands Area Office Honolulu, HI Bruce Carlson wrote: > RE: Offshore vs nearshore bleaching > > Bernard Thomassin disagreed with the general statement that bleaching is > usually more severe nearshore. I concur. > > The other day, Gregor posted a message that "The pattern of bleaching > follows a consistent trend globally that suggests that following bleaching > events, reefs located in areas with less water column mixing are usually > the worst affected. Typically these are inshore reefs where both nutrient > flux and absolute levels of nutrients are likely higher than outer reefs." > > I wrote to Gregor saying that my data indicate that both nearshore and > offshore reefs in Fiji (south of Viti Levu) suffered significant bleaching > last year. When I revisited my transects this year I found that both areas > suffered high mortality (>95% Acropora dead), but I also found significant > regrowth ("phoenix" corals) and significant recruitment in the lagoons > (Acropora spp.), whereas the remote offshore barrier reef showed virturally > no survival and no new recruitment (the "virtually" means that whereas last > year I counted on average over 100 acroporid colonies per 30 x 1 meter belt > transect, this year I found only one tiny survivor on one transect and one > tiny recruit on the other transect). The nearshore patchreefs and barrier > reef where recovery is good, are located near the mouth of a large river > and the water in this lagoon area is typically turbid most of the > time. The remote barrier reef is typically in a pristine ocean > environment, often crystal clear, and subjected to large open ocean swells > much of the year. > > Gregor wrote back to me and qualified his statement: > > "What I was referring to was that in "moderate" bleaching events, when > there was less than say 50% mortality, the inner reefs typically showed > higher mortality than the outer reefs due to mixing at the outer reefs..... > When it is a" bad" event there is little difference as you have seen in > mortality. But your observations of faster recovery on the inner reefs are > interesting and one wonders if this has more to do with a higher number of > nearby parent colonies, water retention in those areas which facilitated > recruitment, rather than with the nutrients being a beneficial stimulus. > But all these are open questions deserving of more research." > > So what is the "global trend"? Do nearshore reefs or remote barrier reefs > suffer higher mortality and lower recovery rates? Or should we even try to > make such a generalization with so many unique factors at each locality? > > Aloha > Bruce > > At 12:33 PM 5/16/2001 -0300, Bernard THOMASSIN wrote: > >To: Debbie MacKenzie < > >From: Bernard THOMASSIN < > >Subject: Re: nutrient deficiency and bleaching -and- Perhaps you need =20 > >to do a bit more reading ... > > > >Dear Debbie and all colleagues interested by coral bleaching, > > > >To the comment: > > > > > How come that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore, where > > > nutrients are enhanced to levels, which in turn can become detrimental > > > to many coral reef organisms, which are highly adapted to exist in > > > oligotrophic conditions? Could that maybe relate to some patchiness, > > > too: too much 'food' and maybe toxic substances? > > > >I don't agree with this opinion taking as example that occured around > >Mayotte Island in the North of the Mozambique Channel, SW Indian Ocean, > >where I studied since 1983 several bleachings of various intensity. > > > >Here the huge bleaching event of the April-June 1998 (when an warmer > >mass of oceanic seawater coming from the North reached this SW Indian > >Oc. area) -the bleaching was undubfully caused by the seawater > >temperature increase : T=B0 C reached up to 32=B0 C in ocean open sea and > >stayed as during near 3 months, it was the corals from the outer slopes > >of the barrier reefs (187 km long) that bleached and then died, mainly > >in the shallow depths (3m down to 15-20m - but encrusting corals at > >down 30m also bleached -) : all the tabular and branched Acroporids, > >all the Pocillopora, some Diploastrea, some massive Porites (but on > >some of them parts were kept alive, if most of the colonies died). Even > >Sarcophyton and Sinularia bleached, as well as the large sea-anemones > >as Heterotactis magnifica, and some Tridacnids. So, consequently, the > >barrier reef slope coral communities were destroyed at more than 85 > >percent. > > > >On the slopes of lagoonal reefs, as well as on the slope of the > >fringing reefs, also the bleaching occured, but on the fringing reefs > >in muddy environments of deep coastal bays, most of the corals > >survived. > > > >My opinion (exposed in one of our Bali's Conf. posters) is that corals > >living in clear oceanic waters on the barrier reef slopes or lagoonal > >reef slopes near large passages, live in oceanic seawaters showing more > >constant parameters (according to the seawater temperature they are > >more "stenothermes"). In contrary, corals living in nearshore > >environments where seawater parameters are more variable (increase of > >temperature due to closed environments, or decrease of temperature due > >to cool groundwater seepages ; salinity variations due to rainfalls and > >river flows ; variation of the turbidity due to alluvial inputs > >associated with rainfalls or to phytoplankton blooms ; bacterial > >attacks from terrigeneous materials ; etc...).=20 > > > >In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more > >resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in > >more stable and constant seawater conditions. > > > >In this conditions I disagree with your opinion. > > > >But be very carefull with the biology/physiology of corals. I begin to > >believe that the same species of corals have not the same biology (and > >physiology) in region located fare away. So extrapolations of results > >from one area to another one are not possible. This is true for the > >biologists and ecologists, but also for our paleo-geologist > >colleagues. > > > >This can explain the opposite views between different researchers! > > > >Have a good day. > > > >Sincerely yours. > > > >Bernard > > > >Bernard A. THOMASSIN > >CNRS-UMR 6540 "Dimar", > >Centre d'Oc=E9anologie de Marseille, > >Station marine d'Endoume, > >Chemin de la batterie des Lions, > >13007 Marseille, > >France > > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 17 (ligne directe) > >(33) 04 91 04 16 00 (standart) > >mobile (33) 06 63 14 91 78 > >fax (33) 04 91 04 16 35 (=E0 l'attention de....) > > > >~~~~~~~ > >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu Wed May 16 18:36:50 2001 From: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu (Bob Buddemeier) Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 17:36:50 -0500 Subject: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010516084714.01605630@mail.waquarium.org> <3B02EAE7.213AD3FA@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <3B030102.EF0A2D1D@kgs.ukans.edu> On the basis of evidence available at the time we (Buddemeier, R. W. and Fautin, D. G., 1993, Coral Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism, Bioscience 43:320-326) observed that: "There are consistent habitat differences in bleaching resistance at a given locale; corals in habitats that are more variable or more prone to stresses of various sorts, including thermal (such as shallow water or fringing reefs), tend to be less bleached than those in more normally equable environments." Apparently the field observational patterns are more consistent than attention to the literature. The reasons can be described as aclimatization, adaptation, or different 'ecospecies' occupying the different habitat niches, but they all boil down to the fact that both 'corals' and their microenvironments exhibit systematic differences over rather small scales. Bob Buddemeier John Naughton wrote: > To add to the mix, I concur with Bruce's statements below. During the recent > severe bleaching event in Palau, we noted that corals in the lagoon close to > the main island of Babeldaob were basically not impacted, while much of the > coral (particularly Acropora) on the barrier reef was hammered. Could this be > attributed to the possible lowering of nearshore water temps from runoff? > > Mahalo, John > > John Naughton > NMFS, Pacific Islands Area Office > Honolulu, HI > > Bruce Carlson wrote: > > > RE: Offshore vs nearshore bleaching > > > > Bernard Thomassin disagreed with the general statement that bleaching is > > usually more severe nearshore. I concur. > > > > The other day, Gregor posted a message that "The pattern of bleaching > > follows a consistent trend globally that suggests that following bleaching > > events, reefs located in areas with less water column mixing are usually > > the worst affected. Typically these are inshore reefs where both nutrient > > flux and absolute levels of nutrients are likely higher than outer reefs." > > > > I wrote to Gregor saying that my data indicate that both nearshore and > > offshore reefs in Fiji (south of Viti Levu) suffered significant bleaching > > last year. When I revisited my transects this year I found that both areas > > suffered high mortality (>95% Acropora dead), but I also found significant > > regrowth ("phoenix" corals) and significant recruitment in the lagoons > > (Acropora spp.), whereas the remote offshore barrier reef showed virturally > > no survival and no new recruitment (the "virtually" means that whereas last > > year I counted on average over 100 acroporid colonies per 30 x 1 meter belt > > transect, this year I found only one tiny survivor on one transect and one > > tiny recruit on the other transect). The nearshore patchreefs and barrier > > reef where recovery is good, are located near the mouth of a large river > > and the water in this lagoon area is typically turbid most of the > > time. The remote barrier reef is typically in a pristine ocean > > environment, often crystal clear, and subjected to large open ocean swells > > much of the year. > > > > Gregor wrote back to me and qualified his statement: > > > > "What I was referring to was that in "moderate" bleaching events, when > > there was less than say 50% mortality, the inner reefs typically showed > > higher mortality than the outer reefs due to mixing at the outer reefs..... > > When it is a" bad" event there is little difference as you have seen in > > mortality. But your observations of faster recovery on the inner reefs are > > interesting and one wonders if this has more to do with a higher number of > > nearby parent colonies, water retention in those areas which facilitated > > recruitment, rather than with the nutrients being a beneficial stimulus. > > But all these are open questions deserving of more research." > > > > So what is the "global trend"? Do nearshore reefs or remote barrier reefs > > suffer higher mortality and lower recovery rates? Or should we even try to > > make such a generalization with so many unique factors at each locality? > > > > Aloha > > Bruce > > > > At 12:33 PM 5/16/2001 -0300, Bernard THOMASSIN wrote: > > >To: Debbie MacKenzie < > > >From: Bernard THOMASSIN < > > >Subject: Re: nutrient deficiency and bleaching -and- Perhaps you need =20 > > >to do a bit more reading ... > > > > > >Dear Debbie and all colleagues interested by coral bleaching, > > > > > >To the comment: > > > > > > > How come that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore, where > > > > nutrients are enhanced to levels, which in turn can become detrimental > > > > to many coral reef organisms, which are highly adapted to exist in > > > > oligotrophic conditions? Could that maybe relate to some patchiness, > > > > too: too much 'food' and maybe toxic substances? > > > > > >I don't agree with this opinion taking as example that occured around > > >Mayotte Island in the North of the Mozambique Channel, SW Indian Ocean, > > >where I studied since 1983 several bleachings of various intensity. > > > > > >Here the huge bleaching event of the April-June 1998 (when an warmer > > >mass of oceanic seawater coming from the North reached this SW Indian > > >Oc. area) -the bleaching was undubfully caused by the seawater > > >temperature increase : T=B0 C reached up to 32=B0 C in ocean open sea and > > >stayed as during near 3 months, it was the corals from the outer slopes > > >of the barrier reefs (187 km long) that bleached and then died, mainly > > >in the shallow depths (3m down to 15-20m - but encrusting corals at > > >down 30m also bleached -) : all the tabular and branched Acroporids, > > >all the Pocillopora, some Diploastrea, some massive Porites (but on > > >some of them parts were kept alive, if most of the colonies died). Even > > >Sarcophyton and Sinularia bleached, as well as the large sea-anemones > > >as Heterotactis magnifica, and some Tridacnids. So, consequently, the > > >barrier reef slope coral communities were destroyed at more than 85 > > >percent. > > > > > >On the slopes of lagoonal reefs, as well as on the slope of the > > >fringing reefs, also the bleaching occured, but on the fringing reefs > > >in muddy environments of deep coastal bays, most of the corals > > >survived. > > > > > >My opinion (exposed in one of our Bali's Conf. posters) is that corals > > >living in clear oceanic waters on the barrier reef slopes or lagoonal > > >reef slopes near large passages, live in oceanic seawaters showing more > > >constant parameters (according to the seawater temperature they are > > >more "stenothermes"). In contrary, corals living in nearshore > > >environments where seawater parameters are more variable (increase of > > >temperature due to closed environments, or decrease of temperature due > > >to cool groundwater seepages ; salinity variations due to rainfalls and > > >river flows ; variation of the turbidity due to alluvial inputs > > >associated with rainfalls or to phytoplankton blooms ; bacterial > > >attacks from terrigeneous materials ; etc...).=20 > > > > > >In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more > > >resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in > > >more stable and constant seawater conditions. > > > > > >In this conditions I disagree with your opinion. > > > > > >But be very carefull with the biology/physiology of corals. I begin to > > >believe that the same species of corals have not the same biology (and > > >physiology) in region located fare away. So extrapolations of results > > >from one area to another one are not possible. This is true for the > > >biologists and ecologists, but also for our paleo-geologist > > >colleagues. > > > > > >This can explain the opposite views between different researchers! > > > > > >Have a good day. > > > > > >Sincerely yours. > > > > > >Bernard > > > > > >Bernard A. THOMASSIN > > >CNRS-UMR 6540 "Dimar", > > >Centre d'Oc=E9anologie de Marseille, > > >Station marine d'Endoume, > > >Chemin de la batterie des Lions, > > >13007 Marseille, > > >France > > > > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 17 (ligne directe) > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 00 (standart) > > >mobile (33) 06 63 14 91 78 > > >fax (33) 04 91 04 16 35 (=E0 l'attention de....) > > > > > >~~~~~~~ > > >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > > ~~~~~~~ > > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. -- Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier Kansas Geological Survey University of Kansas 1930 Constant Avenue Lawrence, KS 66047 USA Ph (1) (785) 864-2112 Fax (1) (785) 864-5317 e-mail: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From p_houk at hotmail.com Thu May 17 01:09:27 2001 From: p_houk at hotmail.com (peter Houk) Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 01:09:27 Subject: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching Message-ID: Dear All, I was finishing up field work on my M.S. thesis at the time of the bleaching event in Palau. My work was conducted in the Iwayama Bay, secluded lagoon waters nearshore Koror. I noticed that the large beds of Anacropora were not impacted nearly as much if they were situated along a channel (where runoff enters). My data shows this as well. Best Regards, Peter Houk CNMI DEQ Office >From: "John Naughton" >To: Bruce Carlson >CC: Bernard THOMASSIN , >coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching >Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 11:02:31 -1000 > >To add to the mix, I concur with Bruce's statements below. During the >recent >severe bleaching event in Palau, we noted that corals in the lagoon close >to >the main island of Babeldaob were basically not impacted, while much of the >coral (particularly Acropora) on the barrier reef was hammered. Could this >be >attributed to the possible lowering of nearshore water temps from runoff? > >Mahalo, John > >John Naughton >NMFS, Pacific Islands Area Office >Honolulu, HI > > > >Bruce Carlson wrote: > > > RE: Offshore vs nearshore bleaching > > > > Bernard Thomassin disagreed with the general statement that bleaching is > > usually more severe nearshore. I concur. > > > > The other day, Gregor posted a message that "The pattern of bleaching > > follows a consistent trend globally that suggests that following >bleaching > > events, reefs located in areas with less water column mixing are usually > > the worst affected. Typically these are inshore reefs where both >nutrient > > flux and absolute levels of nutrients are likely higher than outer >reefs." > > > > I wrote to Gregor saying that my data indicate that both nearshore and > > offshore reefs in Fiji (south of Viti Levu) suffered significant >bleaching > > last year. When I revisited my transects this year I found that both >areas > > suffered high mortality (>95% Acropora dead), but I also found >significant > > regrowth ("phoenix" corals) and significant recruitment in the lagoons > > (Acropora spp.), whereas the remote offshore barrier reef showed >virturally > > no survival and no new recruitment (the "virtually" means that whereas >last > > year I counted on average over 100 acroporid colonies per 30 x 1 meter >belt > > transect, this year I found only one tiny survivor on one transect and >one > > tiny recruit on the other transect). The nearshore patchreefs and >barrier > > reef where recovery is good, are located near the mouth of a large river > > and the water in this lagoon area is typically turbid most of the > > time. The remote barrier reef is typically in a pristine ocean > > environment, often crystal clear, and subjected to large open ocean >swells > > much of the year. > > > > Gregor wrote back to me and qualified his statement: > > > > "What I was referring to was that in "moderate" bleaching events, when > > there was less than say 50% mortality, the inner reefs typically showed > > higher mortality than the outer reefs due to mixing at the outer >reefs..... > > When it is a" bad" event there is little difference as you have seen in > > mortality. But your observations of faster recovery on the inner reefs >are > > interesting and one wonders if this has more to do with a higher number >of > > nearby parent colonies, water retention in those areas which facilitated > > recruitment, rather than with the nutrients being a beneficial stimulus. > > But all these are open questions deserving of more research." > > > > So what is the "global trend"? Do nearshore reefs or remote barrier >reefs > > suffer higher mortality and lower recovery rates? Or should we even try >to > > make such a generalization with so many unique factors at each locality? > > > > Aloha > > Bruce > > > > At 12:33 PM 5/16/2001 -0300, Bernard THOMASSIN wrote: > > >To: Debbie MacKenzie < > > >From: Bernard THOMASSIN < > > >Subject: Re: nutrient deficiency and bleaching -and- Perhaps you need >=20 > > >to do a bit more reading ... > > > > > >Dear Debbie and all colleagues interested by coral bleaching, > > > > > >To the comment: > > > > > > > How come that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore, where > > > > nutrients are enhanced to levels, which in turn can become >detrimental > > > > to many coral reef organisms, which are highly adapted to exist in > > > > oligotrophic conditions? Could that maybe relate to some patchiness, > > > > too: too much 'food' and maybe toxic substances? > > > > > >I don't agree with this opinion taking as example that occured around > > >Mayotte Island in the North of the Mozambique Channel, SW Indian Ocean, > > >where I studied since 1983 several bleachings of various intensity. > > > > > >Here the huge bleaching event of the April-June 1998 (when an warmer > > >mass of oceanic seawater coming from the North reached this SW Indian > > >Oc. area) -the bleaching was undubfully caused by the seawater > > >temperature increase : T=B0 C reached up to 32=B0 C in ocean open sea >and > > >stayed as during near 3 months, it was the corals from the outer slopes > > >of the barrier reefs (187 km long) that bleached and then died, mainly > > >in the shallow depths (3m down to 15-20m - but encrusting corals at > > >down 30m also bleached -) : all the tabular and branched Acroporids, > > >all the Pocillopora, some Diploastrea, some massive Porites (but on > > >some of them parts were kept alive, if most of the colonies died). Even > > >Sarcophyton and Sinularia bleached, as well as the large sea-anemones > > >as Heterotactis magnifica, and some Tridacnids. So, consequently, the > > >barrier reef slope coral communities were destroyed at more than 85 > > >percent. > > > > > >On the slopes of lagoonal reefs, as well as on the slope of the > > >fringing reefs, also the bleaching occured, but on the fringing reefs > > >in muddy environments of deep coastal bays, most of the corals > > >survived. > > > > > >My opinion (exposed in one of our Bali's Conf. posters) is that corals > > >living in clear oceanic waters on the barrier reef slopes or lagoonal > > >reef slopes near large passages, live in oceanic seawaters showing more > > >constant parameters (according to the seawater temperature they are > > >more "stenothermes"). In contrary, corals living in nearshore > > >environments where seawater parameters are more variable (increase of > > >temperature due to closed environments, or decrease of temperature due > > >to cool groundwater seepages ; salinity variations due to rainfalls and > > >river flows ; variation of the turbidity due to alluvial inputs > > >associated with rainfalls or to phytoplankton blooms ; bacterial > > >attacks from terrigeneous materials ; etc...).=20 > > > > > >In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more > > >resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in > > >more stable and constant seawater conditions. > > > > > >In this conditions I disagree with your opinion. > > > > > >But be very carefull with the biology/physiology of corals. I begin to > > >believe that the same species of corals have not the same biology (and > > >physiology) in region located fare away. So extrapolations of results > > >from one area to another one are not possible. This is true for the > > >biologists and ecologists, but also for our paleo-geologist > > >colleagues. > > > > > >This can explain the opposite views between different researchers! > > > > > >Have a good day. > > > > > >Sincerely yours. > > > > > >Bernard > > > > > >Bernard A. THOMASSIN > > >CNRS-UMR 6540 "Dimar", > > >Centre d'Oc=E9anologie de Marseille, > > >Station marine d'Endoume, > > >Chemin de la batterie des Lions, > > >13007 Marseille, > > >France > > > > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 17 (ligne directe) > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 00 (standart) > > >mobile (33) 06 63 14 91 78 > > >fax (33) 04 91 04 16 35 (=E0 l'attention de....) > > > > > >~~~~~~~ > > >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > > ~~~~~~~ > > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > >~~~~~~~ >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From blanchon at mar.icmyl.unam.mx Wed May 16 15:01:26 2001 From: blanchon at mar.icmyl.unam.mx (Paul Blanchon) Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 15:01:26 -0400 Subject: call for book contributions Message-ID: <200105170114.BAA01769@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Final call for contributions: Reef response to rapid environmental change during the late Pleistocene. Blanchon P., Dullo, C and Montaggioni L. (Editors). SPRINGER VERLAG (Edited Book) Due to limited space in the ICRS Proceedings, we have arranged for a book to be published with Springer Verlag. All Bali attendees, as well as others interested in the impact of climate and sea-level change on coral-reef systems are encouraged to submit a manuscript for inclusion in this book. Authors may have up to 20 printed pages for their paper including tables, figs. and graphs. This space equals 35 pages double spaced in Times Roman 12. Please use a similar format as the journal Coral Reefs. Formatting instructions for Coral Reefs can be found at the following web site: <>link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00338/instr.htm The DEADLINE for manuscripts to arrive at the editorial office is 30 JUNE 20= 01 To submit a manuscript for the book, do either of the following: 1. preferably, send it as an attachment to e-mail as a pdf file (Adobe Acrobat ) or as a rtf file (rich text format) in MS-Word with diagrams as low-quality JPEGS. In this digital format, the review process will be much quicker. (No need to send paper copies if you choose digital submission). Send it to the following e-mail: blanchon at icmyl.unam.mx OR 2. if you have to send it by surface mail, please use DHL or other courier services because the surface mail slows the process down considerably. Send 3 copies to the following address: Dr. Paul Blanchon Unidad Academica Pto. Morelos Inst. de Ciencias del Mar y Limnologia (ICML) Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (UNAM) Ap. Postal 1152, CP 77500 Canc=FAn, Q. Roo, MEXICO Tel. (987) 10219, Fax: (987) 10138 Sincerely, Paul Blanchon Chris Dullo Lucien Montaggioni ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Wed May 16 22:32:41 2001 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E Strong) Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 22:32:41 -0400 Subject: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching References: Message-ID: <3B033847.4B96122@noaa.gov> ...and tidal currents are stronger promoting increased mixing.... Cheers, Al Strong peter Houk wrote: > Dear All, > I was finishing up field work on my M.S. thesis at the time of the > bleaching event in Palau. My work was conducted in the Iwayama Bay, > secluded lagoon waters nearshore Koror. I noticed that the large beds of > Anacropora were not impacted nearly as much if they were situated along a > channel (where runoff enters). My data shows this as well. > > Best Regards, > Peter Houk > CNMI DEQ Office > > >From: "John Naughton" > >To: Bruce Carlson > >CC: Bernard THOMASSIN , > >coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >Subject: Re: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching > >Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 11:02:31 -1000 > > > >To add to the mix, I concur with Bruce's statements below. During the > >recent > >severe bleaching event in Palau, we noted that corals in the lagoon close > >to > >the main island of Babeldaob were basically not impacted, while much of the > >coral (particularly Acropora) on the barrier reef was hammered. Could this > >be > >attributed to the possible lowering of nearshore water temps from runoff? > > > >Mahalo, John > > > >John Naughton > >NMFS, Pacific Islands Area Office > >Honolulu, HI > > > > > > > >Bruce Carlson wrote: > > > > > RE: Offshore vs nearshore bleaching > > > > > > Bernard Thomassin disagreed with the general statement that bleaching is > > > usually more severe nearshore. I concur. > > > > > > The other day, Gregor posted a message that "The pattern of bleaching > > > follows a consistent trend globally that suggests that following > >bleaching > > > events, reefs located in areas with less water column mixing are usually > > > the worst affected. Typically these are inshore reefs where both > >nutrient > > > flux and absolute levels of nutrients are likely higher than outer > >reefs." > > > > > > I wrote to Gregor saying that my data indicate that both nearshore and > > > offshore reefs in Fiji (south of Viti Levu) suffered significant > >bleaching > > > last year. When I revisited my transects this year I found that both > >areas > > > suffered high mortality (>95% Acropora dead), but I also found > >significant > > > regrowth ("phoenix" corals) and significant recruitment in the lagoons > > > (Acropora spp.), whereas the remote offshore barrier reef showed > >virturally > > > no survival and no new recruitment (the "virtually" means that whereas > >last > > > year I counted on average over 100 acroporid colonies per 30 x 1 meter > >belt > > > transect, this year I found only one tiny survivor on one transect and > >one > > > tiny recruit on the other transect). The nearshore patchreefs and > >barrier > > > reef where recovery is good, are located near the mouth of a large river > > > and the water in this lagoon area is typically turbid most of the > > > time. The remote barrier reef is typically in a pristine ocean > > > environment, often crystal clear, and subjected to large open ocean > >swells > > > much of the year. > > > > > > Gregor wrote back to me and qualified his statement: > > > > > > "What I was referring to was that in "moderate" bleaching events, when > > > there was less than say 50% mortality, the inner reefs typically showed > > > higher mortality than the outer reefs due to mixing at the outer > >reefs..... > > > When it is a" bad" event there is little difference as you have seen in > > > mortality. But your observations of faster recovery on the inner reefs > >are > > > interesting and one wonders if this has more to do with a higher number > >of > > > nearby parent colonies, water retention in those areas which facilitated > > > recruitment, rather than with the nutrients being a beneficial stimulus. > > > But all these are open questions deserving of more research." > > > > > > So what is the "global trend"? Do nearshore reefs or remote barrier > >reefs > > > suffer higher mortality and lower recovery rates? Or should we even try > >to > > > make such a generalization with so many unique factors at each locality? > > > > > > Aloha > > > Bruce > > > > > > At 12:33 PM 5/16/2001 -0300, Bernard THOMASSIN wrote: > > > >To: Debbie MacKenzie < > > > >From: Bernard THOMASSIN < > > > >Subject: Re: nutrient deficiency and bleaching -and- Perhaps you need > >=20 > > > >to do a bit more reading ... > > > > > > > >Dear Debbie and all colleagues interested by coral bleaching, > > > > > > > >To the comment: > > > > > > > > > How come that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore, where > > > > > nutrients are enhanced to levels, which in turn can become > >detrimental > > > > > to many coral reef organisms, which are highly adapted to exist in > > > > > oligotrophic conditions? Could that maybe relate to some patchiness, > > > > > too: too much 'food' and maybe toxic substances? > > > > > > > >I don't agree with this opinion taking as example that occured around > > > >Mayotte Island in the North of the Mozambique Channel, SW Indian Ocean, > > > >where I studied since 1983 several bleachings of various intensity. > > > > > > > >Here the huge bleaching event of the April-June 1998 (when an warmer > > > >mass of oceanic seawater coming from the North reached this SW Indian > > > >Oc. area) -the bleaching was undubfully caused by the seawater > > > >temperature increase : T=B0 C reached up to 32=B0 C in ocean open sea > >and > > > >stayed as during near 3 months, it was the corals from the outer slopes > > > >of the barrier reefs (187 km long) that bleached and then died, mainly > > > >in the shallow depths (3m down to 15-20m - but encrusting corals at > > > >down 30m also bleached -) : all the tabular and branched Acroporids, > > > >all the Pocillopora, some Diploastrea, some massive Porites (but on > > > >some of them parts were kept alive, if most of the colonies died). Even > > > >Sarcophyton and Sinularia bleached, as well as the large sea-anemones > > > >as Heterotactis magnifica, and some Tridacnids. So, consequently, the > > > >barrier reef slope coral communities were destroyed at more than 85 > > > >percent. > > > > > > > >On the slopes of lagoonal reefs, as well as on the slope of the > > > >fringing reefs, also the bleaching occured, but on the fringing reefs > > > >in muddy environments of deep coastal bays, most of the corals > > > >survived. > > > > > > > >My opinion (exposed in one of our Bali's Conf. posters) is that corals > > > >living in clear oceanic waters on the barrier reef slopes or lagoonal > > > >reef slopes near large passages, live in oceanic seawaters showing more > > > >constant parameters (according to the seawater temperature they are > > > >more "stenothermes"). In contrary, corals living in nearshore > > > >environments where seawater parameters are more variable (increase of > > > >temperature due to closed environments, or decrease of temperature due > > > >to cool groundwater seepages ; salinity variations due to rainfalls and > > > >river flows ; variation of the turbidity due to alluvial inputs > > > >associated with rainfalls or to phytoplankton blooms ; bacterial > > > >attacks from terrigeneous materials ; etc...).=20 > > > > > > > >In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more > > > >resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in > > > >more stable and constant seawater conditions. > > > > > > > >In this conditions I disagree with your opinion. > > > > > > > >But be very carefull with the biology/physiology of corals. I begin to > > > >believe that the same species of corals have not the same biology (and > > > >physiology) in region located fare away. So extrapolations of results > > > >from one area to another one are not possible. This is true for the > > > >biologists and ecologists, but also for our paleo-geologist > > > >colleagues. > > > > > > > >This can explain the opposite views between different researchers! > > > > > > > >Have a good day. > > > > > > > >Sincerely yours. > > > > > > > >Bernard > > > > > > > >Bernard A. THOMASSIN > > > >CNRS-UMR 6540 "Dimar", > > > >Centre d'Oc=E9anologie de Marseille, > > > >Station marine d'Endoume, > > > >Chemin de la batterie des Lions, > > > >13007 Marseille, > > > >France > > > > > > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 17 (ligne directe) > > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 00 (standart) > > > >mobile (33) 06 63 14 91 78 > > > >fax (33) 04 91 04 16 35 (=E0 l'attention de....) > > > > > > > >~~~~~~~ > > > >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > > >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > > >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~ > > > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > >~~~~~~~ > >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > > _________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. -- AES...<><.........<><.........<><.........<><........<><..........AES Alan E. Strong Physical Oceanographer & Team Leader NOAA/NESDIS/ORA Oceanic Research & Applications Division (ORAD) Marine Applications Science Team NOAA Science Center -- Rm 711 5200 Auth Road Camp Springs, MD 20746 Phone: 301-763-8102 x170 FAX: 301-763-8108 Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov http://orbit-net.nesdis.noaa.gov/orad AES...<><.........<><.........<><.........<><........<><..........AES . ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From rutabaga at pacwan.fr Thu May 17 06:12:57 2001 From: rutabaga at pacwan.fr (Jacques Laborel) Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 11:12:57 +0100 Subject: bleaching and erosion Message-ID: Dear coral listers I follow with great interest the debate upon coral bleaching. Last october I could survey Gaidoo atoll, one of the innumerable "virgin" maldivian atolls that was more or less completely destroyed by the 1998 event. Like Bernard Thomassin and others I found that bleaching had been more severe on the outer ocean facing subvertical slope of the reef (about 100% from surface down to about 35 metres deep) than in the lagoon. In fact the less affected zone we observed was a wide patch reef between 3 and 15 m deep in the shallower part of the lagoon with "only" 50 to 60% destruction. This was the only place on that atoll where Mussids and some Faviids were still alive. In fact the place were young colonies were more abundant were small reefs near the city-island of Mal?, and subject to pollution and man disturbance...In Gaidoo, however, all branching species had beeen wiped out. More resistant genus were Goniopora and Diploastrea. This is already well known. But there is something that stunned me : it was the absence of sea urchins, either out on the reef or hiding in coral thickets: during our three week stay I saw exactly 3 Diadema !. I had already surveyed sea-urchin depleted reefs in the carribean during the big Diadema disease of 1984-85 and had been struck by the immediate development of brown algae, Sargassum, Turbinaria and the like, immediately capping coral colonies; but here, there were NO macrophytes at all (the only Caulerpas found were on sand). Filamentous algae were abundant on dead coral inside the lagoon but the outer slope was a white graveyard of coral colonies, gouged and abraded by what seemed to be parrotfish action. Some branches of Acropora palifera had lost about 6 cm in two years (raw evaluation) and appeared pure white except for a small development of Corallines on their base. This seemed to me a perfect example of overgrazing. Unfortunately no night dives were possible. I am afraid fish fauna is beginning to suffer from the disappearing of corals. Best wishes to all Jacques Laborel La Ciotat France Jacques & Francoise Laborel Chemin des grands Bassins,13600 La Ciotat, France tel. (33) 04 42 83 60 32 fax. (33) 04 42 71 81 68 e-mail : rutabaga at pacwan.fr visitez nous sur http://www.jardinesperance.org ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From matz at whitney.ufl.edu Thu May 17 01:54:38 2001 From: matz at whitney.ufl.edu (Mike Matz) Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:54:38 +0400 Subject: thanks for replying to collaborations call! Message-ID: <3B03679E.D170F6C6@whitney.ufl.edu> Hello everybody, I really did not expect receiving such a huge feedback to my posting "looking for collaborations"! I want to thank everybody who replied, and to whom I was unable to get back personally - thanks very much indeed! Your emails have been put into a nice database - "helpful coral people around the world" - it's great to know you're out there! great job, coral-list!!! Mike -- Mikhail V. Matz, Ph.D. Whitney Laboratory University of Florida 9505 Ocean Shore blvd St Augustine FL 32080-8610, USA phone +1 904 461 4044 fax +1 801 849 5388 ? ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From james at winmarconsulting.com Thu May 17 11:52:24 2001 From: james at winmarconsulting.com (James Wiseman) Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 10:52:24 -0500 Subject: Nearshore bleaching photos - Fiji Message-ID: <9187DAFC4EB1D21196B50008C733ED9111FFDC@WCS> Ladies and gentlemen, I have posted some photos of nearshore bleaching from a recent trip to Fiji. I decided to post them to a webpage yesterday as I think they are worth discussing as part of this recent "Factors in coral bleaching - nearshore vs. offshore reefs" discussion. The website (It is NOT commercial) shows ONLY the pictures and location map and some of my comments (temperature, some observations, etc). Here is the URL: http://www.reefhabilitation.com/fiji/bleaching/index.htm Of particular interest to me are some of the photos showing "unusual" bleaching patterns. Any feedback on these is much appreciated - as I would like to better understand coral bleaching. For example: Photo 1596 shows an Acropora sp. bleaching from the center out. Why is this? Photos 1594 and 1595 show a monospecific stand of acropora. I would expect either the whole colony to bleach, or perhaps the tops of branches - however the coral is only bleached in large "patches." Why is this? Some of the photos show many different colonies in one patch reef. Why is one coral bleached, and it appears that an identical species next to it is not (1599 and 1600). Why did one coral bleach, and the other did not? The areas I dove in Fiji were in the North (Somosomo Straits and reefs around Savusavu and Namenala Isl.) and I did not observe any bleaching below 20 foot water depth. Please feel free to use these photos for non-commercial use and high resolution digital photos are available upon request. James Wiseman Project Engineer Winmar Consulting Services www.winmarconsulting.com ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From andy at andy-hipkiss.co.uk Thu May 17 13:51:19 2001 From: andy at andy-hipkiss.co.uk (Andy Hipkiss) Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 18:51:19 +0100 Subject: Nearshore bleaching photos - Fiji In-Reply-To: <9187DAFC4EB1D21196B50008C733ED9111FFDC@WCS> Message-ID: James, Another non-technical viewpoint ... but my divemaster whilst in the Maldives "drift diving", noted that in '98, what WAS a drift dive in previous years became the hardest drifting he'd ever done! Even at 30m he was getting little flow and temperatures of 30-31C. The question is, did the temperature cause the shift in flow patterns or vice versa? I mention this in relation to your centre out bleaching photo ... the inner areas of the colony would be even more affected by decreased flow than the outer margins I would presume. Cheers Andy -- http://www.andy-hipkiss.co.uk -----Original Message----- From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of James Wiseman Sent: 17 May 2001 16:52 To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Nearshore bleaching photos - Fiji Ladies and gentlemen, I have posted some photos of nearshore bleaching from a recent trip to Fiji. I decided to post them to a webpage yesterday as I think they are worth discussing as part of this recent "Factors in coral bleaching - nearshore vs. offshore reefs" discussion. The website (It is NOT commercial) shows ONLY the pictures and location map and some of my comments (temperature, some observations, etc). Here is the URL: http://www.reefhabilitation.com/fiji/bleaching/index.htm Of particular interest to me are some of the photos showing "unusual" bleaching patterns. Any feedback on these is much appreciated - as I would like to better understand coral bleaching. For example: Photo 1596 shows an Acropora sp. bleaching from the center out. Why is this? ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From Pmarv627 at aol.com Thu May 17 14:58:23 2001 From: Pmarv627 at aol.com (Pam Hoffman) Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 18:58:23 GMT Subject: Virgin Gorda and dock Message-ID: <200105171858.SAA03616@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> I am concerned about the coral reefs off the coast of Virgin Gorda. I was informed that there is nothing I can do as the BVI does not have ecology laws. Is this true? A group led by a man named Ajit George is planning to erect a large dock off the coast into this beautiful area of coral reefs. What can I do? ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From deevon at bellsouth.net Thu May 17 18:10:57 2001 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (Deevon Quirolo) Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 18:10:57 -0400 Subject: Press Release: Reef Awareness Week Message-ID: <200105180001.AAA04086@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Mark your calendar July 22-28, 2001 Reef Awareness Week Celebrates Reef Relief?s 15th Year Join Reef Relief in the Florida Keys during the week of July 22-28th, 2001, or join the online community at www.reefrelief.org, for Reef Awareness Week, celebrating the non-profit group?s 15th year of grassroots efforts to protect coral reefs. Reef Awareness Week is an annual celebration of coral reefs that features online events as well as activities throughout the Florida Keys, including Reef Relief?s Annual Membership Meeting, book signings, a film festival, a mooring buoy splicing party, children?s events, interpretive tours of the coral reef, panel discussions and a luncheon featuring coral reef scientists and experts, and this year, a gala Reef Ball fundraising event featuring music and dancing on Saturday, July 28th in Key West. ?Coral reefs are home to more kinds of life than any other ocean environment, yet they disappearing at an alarming rate due to a combination of impacts that include water quality decline, habitat loss, pollution, overuse, and destructive fishing activities. Reef Relief is a non-profit membership organization dedicated to protecting coral reefs through local, regional and international efforts. Our programs combine direct action marine projects such as coral nurseries, surveys and installation of reef mooring buoys with environmental education and policy guidance. Be a Sea Fan! Join Reef Relief for Reef Awareness Week!? noted DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief?s Executive Director. For more information or to get involved as a volunteer or a sponsor, contact Reef Relief at (305) 294-3100, email reef at bellsouth.net or online at www.reefrelief.org. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From b984138 at sci.u-ryukyu.ac.jp Fri May 18 00:12:14 2001 From: b984138 at sci.u-ryukyu.ac.jp (Rob van Woesik) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 13:12:14 +0900 Subject: Coral bleaching and flow Message-ID: <3B04A11E.8AA5E09F@sci.u-ryukyu.ac.jp> Dear all, indeed, water-flow rates influence the extent of coral bleaching. Increases in water-flow speed enhances the shear stress on a benthic organism by its square. Shear stress in turn allows the passive diffusion (i.e., not involving energy) of metabolites (i.e., mass transfer) or heat across the boundary between the organism and the ambient environment. As the shear stress increases, resistance to passive diffusion progressively decreases; thus forced convection enhances mass transfer. Below, gives reference to a recent paper where we outline this theory and test whether coral colonies growing in high-flow habitats are more resistant to high SSTs than colonies in low-flow habitats. Field evidence, as many of you have also found, shows higher survival on reefs, or in habitats, with strong currents. We argue that this is because flow rate will determine the rate of removal of photosynethic byproducts, or heat, that accumulate under stress (i.e., during high SSTs). Obviously, these ideas need further experiments, but the biophysics and what saw happen on the reefs in 1998 agree. See Marine Ecology Progress Series 212: 301-304 Nakamura T and Van Woesik R (2001) Water-flow rates and passive diffusion partially explain differential survival of corals during the 1998 bleaching event. To download a PDF version see: http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/meps/v212/index.html Best Regards Rob van Woesik ******************************************* Dr. Robert van Woesik Associate Professor Department of Marine Sciences University of the Ryukyus Nishihara, Okinawa 903-0123 JAPAN E-mail: b984138 at sci.u-ryukyu.ac.jp Website: http://www.cc.u-ryukyu.ac.jp/~b984138/ Ph: (81) 098 895 8564 Fax: (81) 098 895 8552 ****************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010518/e1031aea/attachment.html From oveh at uq.edu.au Thu May 17 16:26:51 2001 From: oveh at uq.edu.au (Ove Hoegh-Guldberg) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 06:26:51 +1000 Subject: Nearshore bleaching photos - Fiji In-Reply-To: <9187DAFC4EB1D21196B50008C733ED9111FFDC@WCS> Message-ID: <002001c0df0f$b6041c00$7d6e6682@vsap.uq.edu.au> Dear James, Interesting, useful photos. Without knowing the precise oceanographic conditions of the area at the time, the suggestions below will be speculations at best. But, however, here goes (my two cents worth): Your question - Photo 1596 shows an Acropora sp. bleaching from the center out. Why is this? I would suspect that the secondary variables light and flow (perhaps trapped by the morphology of this flat Acropora colony) have conspired to increased the effect of the warmer than normal conditions. We should also be mindful that most of the growth occurs on the outer edges (that are less affected), and that the number of zooxanthellae are lower there as well. The latter might mean less oxidative stress per host cell and hence less bleaching. Photos 1594 and 1595 show a monospecific stand of Acropora. I would expect either the whole colony to bleach, or perhaps the tops of branches - however the coral is only bleached in large "patches." Why is this? Two interpretations: (1) One is that there are clonal (genetic) differences either in the host or the zooxanthellae that create slightly different temperature thresholds for bleaching stress (see paper by Pete Edmunds) OR (2) slight variations in flow have interacted with the effects of temperature - producing different patches. Some of the photos show many different colonies in one patch reef. Why is one coral bleached, and it appears that an identical species next to it is not (1599 and 1600). Why did one coral bleach, and the other did not? As above: Either it is genetics or it is local secondary factors that vary across the reef. History - feeding, reproductive condition, interspecies aggression etc) might also play a role in determining behaviour under thermal stress. Cheers, Ove Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg Director, Centre for Marine Studies University of Queensland St Lucia, 4072, QLD Phone: +61 07 3365 4333 Fax: +61 07 3365 4755 Email: oveh at uq.edu.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010518/55eb2db1/attachment.html From oveh at uq.edu.au Thu May 17 16:26:51 2001 From: oveh at uq.edu.au (Ove Hoegh-Guldberg) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 06:26:51 +1000 Subject: Nearshore bleaching photos - Fiji In-Reply-To: <9187DAFC4EB1D21196B50008C733ED9111FFDC@WCS> Message-ID: <002001c0df0f$b6041c00$7d6e6682@vsap.uq.edu.au> Dear James, Interesting, useful photos. Without knowing the precise oceanographic conditions of the area at the time, the suggestions below will be speculations at best. But, however, here goes (my two cents worth): Your question - Photo 1596 shows an Acropora sp. bleaching from the center out. Why is this? I would suspect that the secondary variables light and flow (perhaps trapped by the morphology of this flat Acropora colony) have conspired to increased the effect of the warmer than normal conditions. We should also be mindful that most of the growth occurs on the outer edges (that are less affected), and that the number of zooxanthellae are lower there as well. The latter might mean less oxidative stress per host cell and hence less bleaching. Photos 1594 and 1595 show a monospecific stand of Acropora. I would expect either the whole colony to bleach, or perhaps the tops of branches - however the coral is only bleached in large "patches." Why is this? Two interpretations: (1) One is that there are clonal (genetic) differences either in the host or the zooxanthellae that create slightly different temperature thresholds for bleaching stress (see paper by Pete Edmunds) OR (2) slight variations in flow have interacted with the effects of temperature - producing different patches. Some of the photos show many different colonies in one patch reef. Why is one coral bleached, and it appears that an identical species next to it is not (1599 and 1600). Why did one coral bleach, and the other did not? As above: Either it is genetics or it is local secondary factors that vary across the reef. History - feeding, reproductive condition, interspecies aggression etc) might also play a role in determining behaviour under thermal stress. Cheers, Ove Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg Director, Centre for Marine Studies University of Queensland St Lucia, 4072, QLD Phone: +61 07 3365 4333 Fax: +61 07 3365 4755 Email: oveh at uq.edu.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010518/55eb2db1/attachment-0001.html From rhinde at bio.usyd.edu.au Fri May 18 03:38:24 2001 From: rhinde at bio.usyd.edu.au (Rosalind Hinde) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 17:38:24 +1000 Subject: Lectureship, University of Sydney Message-ID: <4.1.20010518173343.00989580@Linnaeus.bio.usyd.edu.au> The School of Biological Sciences at the University of Sydney, Australia, seeks to appoint a marine biologist to a full-time, tenurable lectureship, to teach intermediate and senior marine biology, and invertebrate biology at intermediate and senior levels. S/he will also be expected to teach general biology at the introductory level. Essential requirements are a PhD in marine biology or other relevant area, with a minimum of 3 years? teaching experience in a tertiary institution and/or a strong research record. The successful candidate will be expected to establish an independent research program and to supervise Honours and postgraduate students; there are also excellent opportunities for collaboration within the University and with other institutions. Marine research is one of the University?s recognized institutional strengths, involving several Faculties. The School of Biological Sciences has aquarium facilities, culture rooms, boats and access to a variety of temperate field sites and to the One Tree Island Research Station on the Great Barrier Reef, as well as a range of general and molecular biological laboratories. Information about the School can be found on the School?s web site at http://www.bio.usyd.edu.au/, and information about the University?s Marine Studies Centre is available at http://www.usyd.edu.au/su/marine/msweb.html. For further information contact: A/Professor Rosalind Hinde, telephone (02) 9351 2277, e-mail: rhinde at bio.usyd.edu.au *************************************************************************** *********** Associate Professor Rosalind Hinde, Head of School, School of Biological Sciences, A08, email: rhinde at bio.usyd.edu.au University of Sydney, N.S.W. 2006, tel. : +612-9351-2277 Australia. fax : +612-9351-4119 **************************************************************************** *********" IMPORTANT The contents of this E-mail message, and any documents attached to it, may be privileged and confidential. Any unauthorized use is strictly prohibited. If you receive this electronic mail in error, please accept my apologies and delete it. Thank you. Email is a document as defined by the NSW Freedom of Information Act Sect. 6 (1). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010518/c93d1be8/attachment.html From debimack at auracom.com Thu May 17 12:03:45 2001 From: debimack at auracom.com (Debbie MacKenzie) Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 13:03:45 -0300 Subject: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20010517130345.00865540@auracom.com> Dear Coral-list, Here's what I'm thinking now: To be healthy corals need access to their normal supply of zooplankton from open ocean water. Without it, they'll live for a while, but their resistance to an array of malnutrition-aggravated conditions drops. Corals can derive limited benefit from land-source nutrient input and fish poop, but all will feel the ill effects of a dropping supply of oceanic zooplankton...."IF" this is now a fact of their existence. This may help explain why corals have done so badly in some of the pristine open ocean locations. In addition to missing the open ocean zooplankton, they are deprived of any benefit they might have derived from land source nutrients, so their position becomes doubly precarious (and possibly worse yet again if the fish poop feeding option has also been removed...although Alina made an interesting observation that corals prefer to consume the feces of planktivores vs. herbivores...plankton clearly still being on the the "keys.") If you will permit me to compare codfish and corals briefly, I'd like to point out that the "better inshore/worse offshore" trend in nutritional success is predicted by the "overall marine biomass depletion" theory, and is very well demonstrated in the condition of Canadian groundfish stocks and other marine animals. It is a common theme that I've noted repeatedly in the "starving ocean," and it pops up quite often on my website. Basically, natural processes in the sea do not work quickly enough to counteract the nutrient loss incurred by fishing, so input sources from outside the system become increasingly important. Nutrients in terrestrial runoff provide only low-grade nourishment for the coastal system, but this does confer a survival advantage (when it does not kill). The other coastal nutritional advantage is in the productivity that occurs in the intertidal zone - might that help explain the slight advantage enjoyed by the corals inside the lagoons? - and, doesn't the water actually get hotter in the lagoons? I guess, I don't know.) Your detailed observations of the coral bleaching pattern are very interesting. It seems to me that they might be reasonably consistent with my interpretation - what do you think? Bernard concluded that: >In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in more stable and constant seawater conditions. > (The same is clearly true for our groundfish stocks, their resiliency to various stressors, i.e. fishing pressure and climate change, is much higher when they are located nearer to outflows of major rivers or mainland shorelines. So is their growth rates, this is well documented...the connection to enhanced feeding opportunities is rather hard to deny.) Bruce wrote: >my data indicate that both nearshore and >offshore reefs in Fiji (south of Viti Levu) suffered significant bleaching >last year. When I revisited my transects this year I found that both areas >suffered high mortality (>95% Acropora dead), but I also found significant >regrowth ("phoenix" corals) and significant recruitment in the lagoons >(Acropora spp.), whereas the remote offshore barrier reef showed virturally >no survival and no new recruitment (the "virtually" means that whereas last >year I counted on average over 100 acroporid colonies per 30 x 1 meter belt >transect, this year I found only one tiny survivor on one transect and one >tiny recruit on the other transect). The nearshore patchreefs and barrier >reef where recovery is good, are located near the mouth of a large river >and the water in this lagoon area is typically turbid most of the >time. The remote barrier reef is typically in a pristine ocean >environment, often crystal clear, and subjected to large open ocean swells >much of the year. > As I mentioned a few days ago, lacking the normal degree of zooplankton contribution, "large ocean swells" would become a nutritional liability to corals, as dissolved nutrients would continue to be washed away. Might the water have become "too clean?" John wrote: >During the recent >severe bleaching event in Palau, we noted that corals in the lagoon close to >the main island of Babeldaob were basically not impacted, while much of the >coral (particularly Acropora) on the barrier reef was hammered. Could this be >attributed to the possible lowering of nearshore water temps from runoff? > Does runoff have the effect of lowering the water temperature? I don't know, but it does have the unarguable effect of raising the level of dissolved and particulate "nutrients" in the water - no? Bob wrote: >"There are consistent habitat differences in bleaching resistance at a given >locale; corals in habitats that are more variable or more prone to stresses of >various sorts, including thermal (such as shallow water or fringing reefs), tend >to be less bleached than those in more normally equable environments." > ...which sounds like the shallows are warmer. Thermal stress higher, yet resistance to bleaching higher also?? Peter wrote: >My work was conducted in the Iwayama Bay, >> secluded lagoon waters nearshore Koror. I noticed that the large beds of >> Anacropora were not impacted nearly as much if they were situated along a >> channel (where runoff enters). Jacques wrote: >Like Bernard Thomassin and others I found that bleaching had been >more severe on the outer ocean facing subvertical slope of the reef (about >100% from surface down to about 35 metres deep) than in the lagoon. In fact >the less affected zone we observed was a wide patch reef between 3 and 15 >m deep in the shallower part of the lagoon with "only" 50 to 60% >destruction. This was the only place on that atoll where Mussids and some >Faviids were still alive. >In fact the place were young colonies were more abundant were small reefs >near the city-island of Mal?, and subject to pollution and man >disturbance...In Gaidoo, however, all branching species had beeen wiped >out. For corals, the best survival odds were nearer the source of pollution? And the worse were facing the open ocean? As I have repeatedly pointed out (to others) regarding the groundfish picture, a decreasing survival gradient as one moves away from the shoreline seems to reflect the disadvantage associated with decreasing availability of coastal-source nutrients much better than a temperature gradient. I'm also interested in the reason for the heightened susceptibility of the branching corals (they have also been heavily impacted by infectious diseases as well as bleaching, have they not?) Gregor wrote: >One >reason that the Acropora go first is simply that the water usually heats from >shallow to deep, thus it is the common shallow water corals that get nailed first >-- such as Acropora. Does the water usually heat from shallow to deep? The temperature connection can get confusing. Does Acropora typically live in the warmest spots? Or is their vulnerability related to the possibility that they naturally rely more heavily on the zooplankton nutrition provided by the seawater? Looking at pictures of Acropora, the branching design seems to be meant to maximize the feeding benefit derived from the passing seawater, since contact with the water seems to be maximized. If the passing water didn't contribute the usual amount of zooplankton, yet washed away the usual amount of nutrients, the fast-growing, branching coral might find itself in the worst trouble. Their strategy of maximizing exposure to the passing water, one that previously allowed their dominance - has it lately backfired? Have you considered the problem from this angle? So, bottom line, last question: where are the time-series data on tropical ocean zooplankton levels? Debbie MacKenzie http://www.fisherycrisis.com ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From Bernard.Thomassin at com.univ-mrs.fr Fri May 18 11:42:01 2001 From: Bernard.Thomassin at com.univ-mrs.fr (Bernard THOMASSIN) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:42:01 -0300 Subject: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching Message-ID: <200105181101.LAA05143@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> >Debbie and all interested colleagues >Taking in account my remark : > >In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more >resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in >more stable and constant seawater conditions. > > You say : >(The same is clearly true for our groundfish stocks, their resiliency to >various stressors, i.e. fishing pressure and climate change, is much higher >when they are located nearer to outflows of major rivers or mainland >shorelines. So is their growth rates, this is well documented...the >connection to enhanced feeding opportunities is rather hard to deny.) > > >About growth rates from massive corals (Porites lutea, and P. >lobata) our idea is supported also by results about the coral >calcification from Mayotte I. and SW Madagascar area (Tulear), both >sites being in the Mozambique Channel but separated by about 10 >latitudinal degrees (13? S for Mayotte, 23? S for Tulear region) >(results from Kathrin PRIESS thesis, see PRIESS et al., 1997 ; from >TESTREEF Program with W.C. DULLO, L. MONTAGGIONI, T. EISENHAUER, G. >HEISS, etc..): massive Porites living: - in "oceanic" waters on outer barrier reef slopes, or near large passages, growth more quickly but with a less dense skeleton, - those living in coastal "neritic" waters grow more slowly but with a more dense skeleton than the first. Unfortunatly we have not yet results for the metabolism rates and feeding rates. Interesting debate you opened. this is Science. Cheers, Bernard Bernard A. THOMASSIN Dir. recherches CNRS Centre d'Oc?anologie de Marseille, Station marine d'Endoume, Chemin de la batterie des Lions, 13007 Marseille, France & G.I.S. "LAG-MAY" "Environnement marin & littoral de l'?le de Mayotte" t?l. (33) 04 91 04 16 17 (ligne directe) (33) 04 91 04 16 00 (standart) mobile (33) 06 63 14 91 78 fax (33) 04 91 04 16 35 (? l'attention de....) ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From jpcarri at ecosur-qroo.mx Fri May 18 10:22:46 2001 From: jpcarri at ecosur-qroo.mx (Juan P. Carricart-Ganivet) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 09:22:46 -0500 Subject: [Fwd: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching] Message-ID: <200105181502.PAA05552@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear all, About inshore-offshore changes in density, calcification rate and extension rate in Montastraea annularis skeletons we observed that, as corals experience a harsher environment, they respond by extending their skeletons more using the same or less calcium carbonate (lower calcification rate), with a concomitant reduction on skeletal density (the same as Bernard for massive Porites). For more information, you can see Carricart-Ganivet and Merino. 2001. Growth responses of the reef-building coral Montastraea annularis along a gradient of continental influence in the southern Gulf of Mexico. Bull. Mar. Sci. 68(1): 145. Please, if you reply this message, send me a copy , since I?m not in the list (my wife forwarded me the original message). Best wishes, Juan Pablo > Subject: Re: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching > Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:42:01 -0300 > From: Bernard THOMASSIN > To: debimack at auracom.com, coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > >Debbie and all interested colleagues > > >Taking in account my remark : > > >In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more > >resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in > >more stable and constant seawater conditions. > > > > > You say : > > >(The same is clearly true for our groundfish stocks, their resiliency to > >various stressors, i.e. fishing pressure and climate change, is much higher > >when they are located nearer to outflows of major rivers or mainland > >shorelines. So is their growth rates, this is well documented...the > >connection to enhanced feeding opportunities is rather hard to deny.) > > > > > >About growth rates from massive corals (Porites lutea, and P. > >lobata) our idea is supported also by results about the coral > >calcification from Mayotte I. and SW Madagascar area (Tulear), both > >sites being in the Mozambique Channel but separated by about 10 > >latitudinal degrees (13? S for Mayotte, 23? S for Tulear region) > >(results from Kathrin PRIESS thesis, see PRIESS et al., 1997 ; from > >TESTREEF Program with W.C. DULLO, L. MONTAGGIONI, T. EISENHAUER, G. > >HEISS, etc..): > > massive Porites living: > - in "oceanic" waters on outer barrier reef slopes, or near large > passages, growth more quickly but with a less dense skeleton, > - those living in coastal "neritic" waters grow more slowly but with > a more dense skeleton than the first. > > Unfortunatly we have not yet results for the metabolism rates and > feeding rates. > > Interesting debate you opened. this is Science. > > Cheers, > > Bernard > > Bernard A. THOMASSIN > Dir. recherches CNRS > Centre d'Oc?anologie de Marseille, > Station marine d'Endoume, > Chemin de la batterie des Lions, > 13007 Marseille, > France > & > G.I.S. "LAG-MAY" > "Environnement marin & littoral de > l'?le de Mayotte" > t?l. (33) 04 91 04 16 17 (ligne directe) > (33) 04 91 04 16 00 (standart) > mobile (33) 06 63 14 91 78 > fax (33) 04 91 04 16 35 (? l'attention de....) > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. -- ************************************************* Dr. Juan P. Carricart-Ganivet El Colegio de la Frontera Sur Carretera Chetumal-Bacalar km 2, Zona Industrial No. 2 Apdo. Postal 424. Chetumal, Q. Roo. 77000. M?XICO Tel: (9) 8321666 ext. 286 Fax: (9) 8320447 ext. 240 E-mail: jpcarri at ecosur-qroo.mx --------------B3E18D0814A2AF276D310291 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear all,

About inshore-offshore changes in density, calcification rate and extension rate in Montastraea annularis skeletons we observed that, as corals experience a harsher environment, they respond by extending their skeletons more using the same or less calcium carbonate (lower calcification rate), with a concomitant reduction on skeletal density (the same as Bernard for massive Porites). For more information, you can see Carricart-Ganivet and Merino. 2001. Growth responses of the reef-building coral Montastraea annularis along a gradient of continental influence in the southern Gulf of Mexico. Bull. Mar. Sci. 68(1): 145.

Please, if you reply this message, send me a copy <jpcarri at ecosur-qroo.mx>, since I´m not in the list (my wife forwarded me the original message).

Best wishes,

Juan Pablo
 

Subject: Re: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 12:42:01 -0300
From: Bernard THOMASSIN <Bernard.Thomassin at com.univ-mrs.fr>
To: debimack at auracom.com, coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov

>Debbie and all interested colleagues

>Taking in account my remark :
> >In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more
>resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in
>more stable and constant seawater conditions.
> >

You say :

>(The same is clearly true for our groundfish stocks, their resiliency to
>various stressors, i.e. fishing pressure and climate change, is much higher
>when they are located nearer to outflows of major rivers or mainland
>shorelines. So is their growth rates, this is well documented...the
>connection to enhanced feeding opportunities is rather hard to deny.)
>
>
>About growth rates from massive corals (Porites lutea, and P.
>lobata) our idea is supported also by results about the coral
>calcification from Mayotte I. and SW Madagascar area (Tulear), both
>sites being in the Mozambique Channel but separated by about 10
>latitudinal degrees (13° S for Mayotte, 23° S for Tulear region)
>(results from Kathrin PRIESS thesis, see PRIESS et al., 1997 ;  from
>TESTREEF Program with W.C. DULLO, L. MONTAGGIONI, T. EISENHAUER, G.
>HEISS, etc..):

massive Porites living:
- in "oceanic" waters on outer barrier reef slopes, or near large
passages, growth more quickly but with a less dense skeleton,
- those living in coastal "neritic" waters grow more slowly but with
a more dense skeleton than the first.

Unfortunatly we have not yet results for the metabolism rates and
feeding rates.

Interesting debate you opened. this is Science.

Cheers,

Bernard

Bernard A. THOMASSIN
Dir. recherches CNRS
Centre d'Océanologie de Marseille,
Station marine d'Endoume,
Chemin de la batterie des Lions,
13007 Marseille,
France
&
G.I.S. "LAG-MAY"
"Environnement marin & littoral de
l'île de Mayotte"
tél. (33) 04 91 04 16 17 (ligne directe)
     (33) 04 91 04 16 00 (standart)
mobile (33) 06 63 14 91 78
fax  (33) 04 91 04 16 35 (à l'attention de....)

~~~~~~~
For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the
digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the
menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver.

--
 
 

*************************************************
Dr. Juan P. Carricart-Ganivet
El Colegio de la Frontera Sur
Carretera Chetumal-Bacalar km 2, Zona Industrial No. 2
Apdo. Postal 424. Chetumal, Q. Roo. 77000.
MÉXICO

Tel: (9) 8321666 ext. 286
Fax: (9) 8320447 ext. 240
E-mail: jpcarri at ecosur-qroo.mx
  --------------B3E18D0814A2AF276D310291-- ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From hendee at aoml.noaa.gov Fri May 18 11:01:07 2001 From: hendee at aoml.noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 11:01:07 -0400 (EDT) Subject: your REAL email address Message-ID: <200105181514.PAA05662@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Greetings, Coral-Listers, I have been forwarding bounced messages to the list because the sender's new email address is different than what it was when he/she originally subscribed. If you think your address is now different, please either subscribe under the new address and unsubscribe from the old one, or let me know and I'll help. Since I'll actually be out looking at reefs next week, instead of a computer screen, I may not be able to (remotely) forward any messages that bounce and come to the administrator (me) for disposition. So if you try to post something, but then it doesn't show up, you'll know why! Cheers, Jim coral-list administrator ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From Billy.Causey at noaa.gov Fri May 18 11:16:38 2001 From: Billy.Causey at noaa.gov (Billy Causey) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 11:16:38 -0400 Subject: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching References: <3B033847.4B96122@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <3B053CD5.1C3449B6@noaa.gov> Al, Our field observations and monitoring supports your comments and Peter's observations. Water movement and circulation seems to play a major role in the intensification of the bleaching event in specific areas. Billy Alan E Strong wrote: > ...and tidal currents are stronger promoting increased mixing.... > > Cheers, > Al Strong > > peter Houk wrote: > > > Dear All, > > I was finishing up field work on my M.S. thesis at the time of the > > bleaching event in Palau. My work was conducted in the Iwayama Bay, > > secluded lagoon waters nearshore Koror. I noticed that the large beds of > > Anacropora were not impacted nearly as much if they were situated along a > > channel (where runoff enters). My data shows this as well. > > > > Best Regards, > > Peter Houk > > CNMI DEQ Office > > > > >From: "John Naughton" > > >To: Bruce Carlson > > >CC: Bernard THOMASSIN , > > >coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > >Subject: Re: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching > > >Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 11:02:31 -1000 > > > > > >To add to the mix, I concur with Bruce's statements below. During the > > >recent > > >severe bleaching event in Palau, we noted that corals in the lagoon close > > >to > > >the main island of Babeldaob were basically not impacted, while much of the > > >coral (particularly Acropora) on the barrier reef was hammered. Could this > > >be > > >attributed to the possible lowering of nearshore water temps from runoff? > > > > > >Mahalo, John > > > > > >John Naughton > > >NMFS, Pacific Islands Area Office > > >Honolulu, HI > > > > > > > > > > > >Bruce Carlson wrote: > > > > > > > RE: Offshore vs nearshore bleaching > > > > > > > > Bernard Thomassin disagreed with the general statement that bleaching is > > > > usually more severe nearshore. I concur. > > > > > > > > The other day, Gregor posted a message that "The pattern of bleaching > > > > follows a consistent trend globally that suggests that following > > >bleaching > > > > events, reefs located in areas with less water column mixing are usually > > > > the worst affected. Typically these are inshore reefs where both > > >nutrient > > > > flux and absolute levels of nutrients are likely higher than outer > > >reefs." > > > > > > > > I wrote to Gregor saying that my data indicate that both nearshore and > > > > offshore reefs in Fiji (south of Viti Levu) suffered significant > > >bleaching > > > > last year. When I revisited my transects this year I found that both > > >areas > > > > suffered high mortality (>95% Acropora dead), but I also found > > >significant > > > > regrowth ("phoenix" corals) and significant recruitment in the lagoons > > > > (Acropora spp.), whereas the remote offshore barrier reef showed > > >virturally > > > > no survival and no new recruitment (the "virtually" means that whereas > > >last > > > > year I counted on average over 100 acroporid colonies per 30 x 1 meter > > >belt > > > > transect, this year I found only one tiny survivor on one transect and > > >one > > > > tiny recruit on the other transect). The nearshore patchreefs and > > >barrier > > > > reef where recovery is good, are located near the mouth of a large river > > > > and the water in this lagoon area is typically turbid most of the > > > > time. The remote barrier reef is typically in a pristine ocean > > > > environment, often crystal clear, and subjected to large open ocean > > >swells > > > > much of the year. > > > > > > > > Gregor wrote back to me and qualified his statement: > > > > > > > > "What I was referring to was that in "moderate" bleaching events, when > > > > there was less than say 50% mortality, the inner reefs typically showed > > > > higher mortality than the outer reefs due to mixing at the outer > > >reefs..... > > > > When it is a" bad" event there is little difference as you have seen in > > > > mortality. But your observations of faster recovery on the inner reefs > > >are > > > > interesting and one wonders if this has more to do with a higher number > > >of > > > > nearby parent colonies, water retention in those areas which facilitated > > > > recruitment, rather than with the nutrients being a beneficial stimulus. > > > > But all these are open questions deserving of more research." > > > > > > > > So what is the "global trend"? Do nearshore reefs or remote barrier > > >reefs > > > > suffer higher mortality and lower recovery rates? Or should we even try > > >to > > > > make such a generalization with so many unique factors at each locality? > > > > > > > > Aloha > > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > At 12:33 PM 5/16/2001 -0300, Bernard THOMASSIN wrote: > > > > >To: Debbie MacKenzie < > > > > >From: Bernard THOMASSIN < > > > > >Subject: Re: nutrient deficiency and bleaching -and- Perhaps you need > > >=20 > > > > >to do a bit more reading ... > > > > > > > > > >Dear Debbie and all colleagues interested by coral bleaching, > > > > > > > > > >To the comment: > > > > > > > > > > > How come that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore, where > > > > > > nutrients are enhanced to levels, which in turn can become > > >detrimental > > > > > > to many coral reef organisms, which are highly adapted to exist in > > > > > > oligotrophic conditions? Could that maybe relate to some patchiness, > > > > > > too: too much 'food' and maybe toxic substances? > > > > > > > > > >I don't agree with this opinion taking as example that occured around > > > > >Mayotte Island in the North of the Mozambique Channel, SW Indian Ocean, > > > > >where I studied since 1983 several bleachings of various intensity. > > > > > > > > > >Here the huge bleaching event of the April-June 1998 (when an warmer > > > > >mass of oceanic seawater coming from the North reached this SW Indian > > > > >Oc. area) -the bleaching was undubfully caused by the seawater > > > > >temperature increase : T=B0 C reached up to 32=B0 C in ocean open sea > > >and > > > > >stayed as during near 3 months, it was the corals from the outer slopes > > > > >of the barrier reefs (187 km long) that bleached and then died, mainly > > > > >in the shallow depths (3m down to 15-20m - but encrusting corals at > > > > >down 30m also bleached -) : all the tabular and branched Acroporids, > > > > >all the Pocillopora, some Diploastrea, some massive Porites (but on > > > > >some of them parts were kept alive, if most of the colonies died). Even > > > > >Sarcophyton and Sinularia bleached, as well as the large sea-anemones > > > > >as Heterotactis magnifica, and some Tridacnids. So, consequently, the > > > > >barrier reef slope coral communities were destroyed at more than 85 > > > > >percent. > > > > > > > > > >On the slopes of lagoonal reefs, as well as on the slope of the > > > > >fringing reefs, also the bleaching occured, but on the fringing reefs > > > > >in muddy environments of deep coastal bays, most of the corals > > > > >survived. > > > > > > > > > >My opinion (exposed in one of our Bali's Conf. posters) is that corals > > > > >living in clear oceanic waters on the barrier reef slopes or lagoonal > > > > >reef slopes near large passages, live in oceanic seawaters showing more > > > > >constant parameters (according to the seawater temperature they are > > > > >more "stenothermes"). In contrary, corals living in nearshore > > > > >environments where seawater parameters are more variable (increase of > > > > >temperature due to closed environments, or decrease of temperature due > > > > >to cool groundwater seepages ; salinity variations due to rainfalls and > > > > >river flows ; variation of the turbidity due to alluvial inputs > > > > >associated with rainfalls or to phytoplankton blooms ; bacterial > > > > >attacks from terrigeneous materials ; etc...).=20 > > > > > > > > > >In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more > > > > >resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in > > > > >more stable and constant seawater conditions. > > > > > > > > > >In this conditions I disagree with your opinion. > > > > > > > > > >But be very carefull with the biology/physiology of corals. I begin to > > > > >believe that the same species of corals have not the same biology (and > > > > >physiology) in region located fare away. So extrapolations of results > > > > >from one area to another one are not possible. This is true for the > > > > >biologists and ecologists, but also for our paleo-geologist > > > > >colleagues. > > > > > > > > > >This can explain the opposite views between different researchers! > > > > > > > > > >Have a good day. > > > > > > > > > >Sincerely yours. > > > > > > > > > >Bernard > > > > > > > > > >Bernard A. THOMASSIN > > > > >CNRS-UMR 6540 "Dimar", > > > > >Centre d'Oc=E9anologie de Marseille, > > > > >Station marine d'Endoume, > > > > >Chemin de la batterie des Lions, > > > > >13007 Marseille, > > > > >France > > > > > > > > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 17 (ligne directe) > > > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 00 (standart) > > > > >mobile (33) 06 63 14 91 78 > > > > >fax (33) 04 91 04 16 35 (=E0 l'attention de....) > > > > > > > > > >~~~~~~~ > > > > >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > > > >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > > > >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~ > > > > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > > > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > > > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > > > >~~~~~~~ > > >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________________ > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > > > > ~~~~~~~ > > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > -- > AES...<><.........<><.........<><.........<><........<><..........AES > Alan E. Strong > Physical Oceanographer & Team Leader > NOAA/NESDIS/ORA > Oceanic Research & Applications Division (ORAD) > Marine Applications Science Team > NOAA Science Center -- Rm 711 > 5200 Auth Road > Camp Springs, MD 20746 > Phone: 301-763-8102 x170 > FAX: 301-763-8108 > Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov > http://orbit-net.nesdis.noaa.gov/orad > AES...<><.........<><.........<><.........<><........<><..........AES > . > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From gregorh at ucla.edu Fri May 18 13:52:56 2001 From: gregorh at ucla.edu (Gregor Hodgson) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:52:56 -0700 Subject: Monitoring Live Food Fish Trade? Message-ID: <3B056177.5B61D4A2@ucla.edu> The Reef Check monitoring protocols were designed to include several key indicator species to assess impacts of the live food fish trade on reefs including the Maori (humphead) wrasse (Cheilinus undulatus), bumphead parrotfish, (Bolbometopon muricatum), Barramundi cod (Cromileptes altivelis) and the families Sweetlips (Haemulidae e.g. Plectorhincus spp) and coral trout (grouper). Reef Check also includes invertebrates collected live for food such as lobster. Thus, standard Reef Check methods are a good starting point for monitoring the live food fish (and shellfish) trade, but may be supplemented as needed with additional species, and of course multiple temporal and spatial replicates as desribed in: Hodgson, G. and C.M. Stepath. 1999. Using Reef Check for long-term coral reef monitoring in Hawaii. p. 173-184. In: Maragos JE, Grober-Dunsmore R (eds). Proceedings of the Hawaii Coral Reef Monitoring Workshop, June 8-11, 1998. Department of Land and Natural Resources and East-West Center for Development, Honolulu, HI, USA. 334 pages. (available at www.ReefCheck.org under "Publications") More recently, Reef Check and Marine Aquarium Council have collaborated on the design of a more intensive protocol (MAT Monitoring) to independently monitor the effects on reefs of collection of reef organisms for the marine aquarium trade. As William knows (since he helped), this latter protocol was reviewed at the NOAA Workshop in Jakarta last month and suggestions were made on additional protocols that would be helpful to provide more complete coverage for aquarium trade organisms. The final MAT protocols are currently being edited and will be tested later this summer in the Philippines and Indonesia. The monitoring philosophy and suite of techniques reviewed and selected at the Jakarta Workshop would be a useful starting point for those interested in monitoring the live food fish trade. For info about the NOAA Workshop, please contact Andy Bruckner For info about Reef Check or the MAT protocols, contact RC Program Manager, Jennifer Liebeler, at -- Gregor Hodgson, PhD Director, Reef Check Foundation Professor (Visiting), Institute of the Environment 1652 Hershey Hall 149607 University of California at Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90095-1496 USA Office Tel: 310-794-4985 Fax: 310-825-0758 or 310-825-9663 Email: gregorh at ucla.edu Web: www.ReefCheck.org ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From sre at caribsurf.com Fri May 18 17:14:03 2001 From: sre at caribsurf.com (Kurt Cordice) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 17:14:03 -0400 Subject: Monitoring of reefs for night species Message-ID: <000001c0dfeb$5676aaa0$25cdd6cd@oemcomputer> My name is Ryan Loeding, a student from the University of Northern Arizona, and currently assisting with some field monitoring in the Caribbean. I am interested in exploring the use reef monitoring during the night, and would be interested to hear from anyone who might know of and/or conduct such night time monitoring. At present, I do not have consistent access to the web and/or research facilities, so responses from the list regarding information and references would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks for you time.. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010518/06a73b2b/attachment.html From Billy.Causey at noaa.gov Fri May 18 19:16:24 2001 From: Billy.Causey at noaa.gov (Billy Causey) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 19:16:24 -0400 Subject: bleaching and erosion References: Message-ID: <3B05AD48.5865926B@noaa.gov> Dear Jacques, Thank you for sharing these observations of coral bleaching. For some time now I have suspected and have been reporting at some meetings, that I have observed a steady intensification of coral bleaching in the Florida Keys since 1980 (minor event) until the more recent 1997-98 back-to-back coral bleaching events when our reefs remained in some degree of bleaching from July 1997 to the winter of 1998. While the bleaching was originally restricted to the outer reefs (1983 and 1987).... coral bleaching began to occur in the shallow, nearshore waters affecting the nearshore patch reefs and isolated coral formations (1990, 1997, and 1998). Soon, I hope we will have the water temperature data compiled from 27 thermographs installed by Sanctuary Biologists Harold Hudson and Bill Goodwin throughout the FKNMS that will show the pattern. However, at this time I suspect we have seen the inshore coral that had historically acclimated to a broader range of physical parameters (i.e. water temperature) now being pushed to the upper limit or threshold of their tolerance to warm or hot water temperatures. Whereas, during the earlier bleaching episodes (1980, 83, and 87) ... the outer reefs, which had previously existed in a more narrower range of physical conditions were first pushed to their upper threshold of tolerance. But let me stress, I am by no means promoting temperature as the sole causative factor of bleaching. So .... I suggest you watch the corals in the lagoon and see if they bleach in future episodes. Cheers, Billy Jacques Laborel wrote: > Dear coral listers > I follow with great interest the debate upon coral bleaching. > Last october I could survey Gaidoo atoll, one of the innumerable "virgin" > maldivian atolls that was more or less completely destroyed by the 1998 > event. Like Bernard Thomassin and others I found that bleaching had been > more severe on the outer ocean facing subvertical slope of the reef (about > 100% from surface down to about 35 metres deep) than in the lagoon. In fact > the less affected zone we observed was a wide patch reef between 3 and 15 > m deep in the shallower part of the lagoon with "only" 50 to 60% > destruction. This was the only place on that atoll where Mussids and some > Faviids were still alive. > In fact the place were young colonies were more abundant were small reefs > near the city-island of Mal?, and subject to pollution and man > disturbance...In Gaidoo, however, all branching species had beeen wiped > out. More resistant genus were Goniopora and Diploastrea. > This is already well known. But there is something that stunned me : it > was the absence of sea urchins, either out on the reef or hiding in coral > thickets: during our three week stay I saw exactly 3 Diadema !. > I had already surveyed sea-urchin depleted reefs in the carribean during > the big Diadema disease of 1984-85 and had been struck by the immediate > development of brown algae, Sargassum, Turbinaria and the like, immediately > capping coral colonies; but here, there were NO macrophytes at all (the > only Caulerpas found were on sand). Filamentous algae were abundant on > dead coral inside the lagoon but the outer slope was a white graveyard of > coral colonies, gouged and abraded by what seemed to be parrotfish action. > Some branches of Acropora palifera had lost about 6 cm in two years (raw > evaluation) and appeared pure white except for a small development of > Corallines on their base. This seemed to me a perfect example of > overgrazing. Unfortunately no night dives were possible. I am afraid fish > fauna is beginning to suffer from the disappearing of corals. > Best wishes to all > > Jacques Laborel > La Ciotat France > > Jacques & Francoise Laborel > Chemin des grands Bassins,13600 La Ciotat, France > tel. (33) 04 42 83 60 32 > fax. (33) 04 42 71 81 68 > e-mail : rutabaga at pacwan.fr > visitez nous sur > http://www.jardinesperance.org > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. -- Billy D. Causey, Superintendent Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary PO Box 500368 Marathon, FL 33050 (305) 743-2437 phone (305) 743-2357 Fax billy.causey at noaa.gov http://www.fknms.nos.noaa.gov/ ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From kamlaruby at intnet.mu Sat May 19 04:43:42 2001 From: kamlaruby at intnet.mu (Kamla Ruby) Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 12:43:42 +0400 Subject: Coral tumour?? Message-ID: <002001c0e040$0b91b0c0$be0c7bca@m8p9v3> Hi all I noticed recently one tabular coral with strange outgrowths on the upper surface. In fact these outgrowths varied in size and had unusual number of corallites and tentacles. Are corals prone to tumours? if so, is it due to some endogenous factors? any literature i could refer to? Thank you very much Best regards Ruby -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010519/eb8d7d9f/attachment.html From victor.gomelyuk at PLMBAY.PWCNT.NT.GOV.AU Sat May 19 05:47:26 2001 From: victor.gomelyuk at PLMBAY.PWCNT.NT.GOV.AU (Gomelyuk, Victor) Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 19:17:26 +0930 Subject: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of change Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, I would like to find if anyone is using Butterflyfishes as Indicators of coral reefs conditions?: Re: Crosby, M.P. and E.S.Reese. 1996 A Manual for Monitoring Coral Reefs With Indicator Species: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of Change on Indo Pacific Reefs. Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, NOAA, Silver Spring, MD. 45 pp. Your feedback will be greatly appreciated. Regards, Dr Victor E. Gomelyuk Marine Scientist Cobourg Marine Park PO Box 496 PALMERSTON NT 0831 AUSTRALIA phone 61 (08) 8979 0244 FAX 61 (08) 8979 0246 ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From 106422.2221 at compuserve.com Sat May 19 07:49:18 2001 From: 106422.2221 at compuserve.com (Simon Wilson) Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 07:49:18 -0400 Subject: Coral tumour Message-ID: <200105190749_MC2-D18F-6909@compuserve.com> Kamla Your observation about coral tumours on Acropora are interesting. Tumours have been reported from Acropora in Oman (see p 93 of Corals of Oman by S L Coles which has just been posted on the web http://www.bishopmuseum.org/bishop/PBS/Oman-coral-book/ ). I have also seen abnormal growths in Porites colonies in the Muscat area which to my eye look cancerous. I would also be keen to make contact with researchers who have been investigating tumours in corals. Simon *********************************************************** Simon Wilson PO Box 2531 CPO 111 SEEB Sultanate of OMAN Tel & Fax: 00 968 736260 Mobile: 00 968 9358053 E-mail: 106422.2221 at compuserve.com *********************************************************** ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From McCarty_and_Peters at compuserve.com Sat May 19 10:51:49 2001 From: McCarty_and_Peters at compuserve.com (McCarty and Peters) Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 10:51:49 -0400 Subject: Tumors on corals Message-ID: <200105191052_MC2-D19C-FFB9@compuserve.com> Dear Ruby, Simon, and others In addition to the tumors found by Steve Coles in Oman, several examples of other types of skeletal abnormalities have been observed. They can be divided into hyperplasms and neoplasms (cancerous tumors). We have a section on skeletal abnormalities on The Coral Disease Page at: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/mccarty_and_peters/coraldis.htm The following paper reviewed the literature and documented the kinds of tumors recognized through the mid-1980s: Peters, E.C., J.C. Halas, and H.B. McCarty. 1986. Calicoblastic neoplasms in Acropora palmata with a review of reports of anomalies of growth and form in corals. J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 76(5):895-912. Coles and colleagues investigated UV-radiation as a possible causal agent of acroporid tumors in: Coles, S.L., and D.G. Seapy. 1998. Ultra-violet absorbing compounds and tumorous growths on acroporid corals from Bandar Khayran, Gulf of Oman, Indian Ocean. Coral Reefs 17:195-198. More recently, calicoblastic epitheliomas have been found in Montipora: Yamashiro, H., M. Yamamoto, and R. van Woesik. 2000. Tumor formation on the coral Montipora informis. Dis. Aquat. Org. 41:211-217. Hyperplasms in several species of corals are currently being investigated by researchers on reefs of the eastern Pacific, Hawaii, Red Sea, and other areas. This condition is characterized by more rapid skeletal deposition and tissue hypertrophy compared to surrounding polyps and might be what Ruby has found. More detailed description of these and the tumorous growths Simon has seen are needed. Examples of both kinds of coral tumors and tissue sections, as well as reprints of pertinent papers, are archived at the Registry of Tumors in Lower Animals (RTLA), Department of Pathology, George Washington University Medical Center, Washington, DC. The RTLA is interested in documenting additional reports of these lesions (contact: John Harshbarger, Director, e-mail: patjch at gwumc.edu; or Esther Peters). Hope this helps! Chip McCarty and Esther Peters ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From arnfried.antonius at univie.ac.at Sat May 19 11:21:07 2001 From: arnfried.antonius at univie.ac.at (Arnfried Antonius) Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 17:21:07 +0200 Subject: Nearshore bleaching photos - Fiji In-Reply-To: <9187DAFC4EB1D21196B50008C733ED9111FFDC@WCS> References: <9187DAFC4EB1D21196B50008C733ED9111FFDC@WCS> Message-ID: Dear James, you already got useful suggestions to the Fiji bleaching problem. Let me add one more: over at least 2 decades I have observed blue-green algae to trigger White Band Disease (e.g. Proc. 4th Int. Coral Reef Symp., 2: 7-14 (1981). P.S.Z.N.I: Marine Ecology, 6(3):197-218 (1985). Proc. 6th Int. Cor.Reef Symp.2: 293-298 (1988)). I think its quite possible that cyanophytes could also play a role in bleaching. Perhaps they can trigger the process, or enhance it when conditions are right. (there is considerable algal overgrowth visible in some of your fotos: 1578, 1583, 85, 86, 87, 93, etc.) Thus, patchiness of occurrence of cyanophytes might account for patchiness of bleaching. In foto 1596, bleaching has apparently (and typically!) crept up from the base of the colony where cyanophytes lurk. This explains why the center is bleached but the margins not (yet). Very nice photographs you made. Good luck for future work ! Arnfried ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From p.j.mumby at ncl.ac.uk Fri May 18 19:05:57 2001 From: p.j.mumby at ncl.ac.uk (Peter J Mumby) Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 00:05:57 +0100 Subject: bleaching and cloud cover Message-ID: <200105191637.QAA03102@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Following the interesting discussion on spatial patterns of bleaching, I = thought I'd mention our observations from the Society Islands, French = Polynesia. In 1998, the incidence of mass bleaching was patchy at scales = of 10s - 100s km. Interestingly, bleaching was minor in Tahiti and = Moorea despite positive SST anomalies being of similar magnitude and = duration to previous years in which mass bleaching occurred. = Meteorological data also revealed that wind speeds were exceedingly low = which is usually consistent with the onset of mass bleaching. However, = although sea temperatures were elevated and the conditions were calm, = cloud cover was very significantly greater than that associated with = mass bleaching events (or other years for that matter). We used data on = SST, wind speed and cloud cover to create a discriminant function that = hindcasted the onset of mass bleaching in the area. Predictions for 1998 = (i.e. minor bleaching) were only correct if cloud cover was explicitly = incorporated into the analysis (i.e. in addition to temperature).=20 =20 Laboratory studies have shown that bleaching can occur on a scale of = seconds or minutes under conditions of solar stress, but how do such = responses reconcile with the large spatial scale of mass bleaching = events? Although high cloud cover reduced overall levels of solar = radiation at a large (island) scale, we have no biophysical = understanding of the interaction between solar irradiance, cloud cover = and bleaching. Measurements of cloud cover are unable to reveal the = intensity and duration of incident irradiance so if high cloud cover did = help prevent bleaching, we don't know whether it was because overall = light budgets were reduced or whether the frequency of intense episodic = bursts of irradiance was reduced. Anyway, food for thought... More details are available in Mumby PJ, Chisholm JRM, Edwards AJ, = Andrefouet S, Jaubert J (2001) Cloudy weather may have saved Society = Island reef corals during the 1998 ENSO event. Marine Ecology Progress = Series (in press) Sorry if this was a bit long.=20 Cheers Pete =20 Dr Peter J. Mumby Royal Society University Research Fellow Centre for Tropical Coastal Management Studies Department of Marine Science and Coastal Management Ridley Building The University Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU UK tel: +44 (0)191 222 6228 fax: +44 (0)191 222 7891 email: p.j.mumby at ncl.ac.uk http://www.ncl.ac.uk/tcmweb/ctcms/mumby.shtml ------=_NextPart_000_003A_01C0DFF7.7ACF5C60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear all,
 
Following the interesting discussion on = spatial=20 patterns of bleaching, I thought I'd mention our observations from the = Society=20 Islands, French Polynesia. In 1998, the incidence of mass bleaching was = patchy=20 at scales of 10s - 100s km. Interestingly, bleaching was minor in = Tahiti=20 and Moorea despite positive SST anomalies being of similar magnitude and = duration to previous years in which mass bleaching occurred. = Meteorological data=20 also revealed that wind speeds were exceedingly low  which is = usually=20 consistent with the onset of mass bleaching. However, although sea = temperatures=20 were elevated and the conditions were calm, cloud cover was very = significantly=20 greater than that associated with mass bleaching events (or other years = for that=20 matter). We used data on SST, wind speed and cloud cover to create a=20 discriminant function that hindcasted the onset of mass bleaching in the = area.=20 Predictions for 1998 (i.e. minor bleaching) were only correct if cloud = cover was=20 explicitly incorporated into the analysis (i.e. in addition to = temperature).=20
 
Laboratory studies have shown that = bleaching can=20 occur on a scale of seconds or minutes under conditions of solar stress, = but how=20 do such responses reconcile with the large spatial scale of mass = bleaching=20 events? Although high cloud cover reduced overall levels of = solar=20 radiation at a large (island) scale, we have no biophysical = understanding of the=20 interaction between solar irradiance, cloud cover and = bleaching.=20 Measurements of cloud cover are unable to reveal the intensity and = duration of=20 incident irradiance so if high cloud cover did help prevent bleaching, = we don't=20 know whether it was because overall light budgets were reduced or = whether the=20 frequency of intense episodic bursts of irradiance was reduced. Anyway, = food for=20 thought...
 
More details are available in Mumby PJ, = Chisholm=20 JRM, Edwards AJ, Andrefouet S, Jaubert J (2001) Cloudy weather may have = saved=20 Society Island reef corals during the 1998 ENSO event. Marine Ecology = Progress=20 Series (in press)
 
Sorry if this was a bit long. =
 
Cheers
 
Pete
 
 
Dr Peter J. Mumby
Royal Society = University=20 Research Fellow
 
Centre for Tropical Coastal Management=20 Studies
Department of Marine Science and Coastal Management
Ridley = Building
The University
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 = 7RU
UK
tel: +44=20 (0)191 222 6228
fax: +44 (0)191 222 7891
email: p.j.mumby at ncl.ac.uk
http://www.ncl.ac.= uk/tcmweb/ctcms/mumby.shtml
------=_NextPart_000_003A_01C0DFF7.7ACF5C60-- ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From Billy.Causey at noaa.gov Sat May 19 15:51:47 2001 From: Billy.Causey at noaa.gov (Billy Causey) Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:51:47 -0400 Subject: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010516084714.01605630@mail.waquarium.org> <3B02EAE7.213AD3FA@noaa.gov> <3B030102.EF0A2D1D@kgs.ukans.edu> Message-ID: <3B06CED2.4E0F854D@noaa.gov> Bob, I wish I had seen your excellent response before I sent mine yesterday. Unfortunately I am making my way down a list of hundreds of back-logged messages and just came to your comments. Excellent! Billy Bob Buddemeier wrote: > On the basis of evidence available at the time we (Buddemeier, R. W. and Fautin, > D. G., 1993, Coral Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism, Bioscience 43:320-326) > observed that: > "There are consistent habitat differences in bleaching resistance at a given > locale; corals in habitats that are more variable or more prone to stresses of > various sorts, including thermal (such as shallow water or fringing reefs), tend > to be less bleached than those in more normally equable environments." > > Apparently the field observational patterns are more consistent than attention to > the literature. > > The reasons can be described as aclimatization, adaptation, or different > 'ecospecies' occupying the different habitat niches, but they all boil down to the > fact that both 'corals' and their microenvironments exhibit systematic differences > over rather small scales. > > Bob Buddemeier > > John Naughton wrote: > > > To add to the mix, I concur with Bruce's statements below. During the recent > > severe bleaching event in Palau, we noted that corals in the lagoon close to > > the main island of Babeldaob were basically not impacted, while much of the > > coral (particularly Acropora) on the barrier reef was hammered. Could this be > > attributed to the possible lowering of nearshore water temps from runoff? > > > > Mahalo, John > > > > John Naughton > > NMFS, Pacific Islands Area Office > > Honolulu, HI > > > > Bruce Carlson wrote: > > > > > RE: Offshore vs nearshore bleaching > > > > > > Bernard Thomassin disagreed with the general statement that bleaching is > > > usually more severe nearshore. I concur. > > > > > > The other day, Gregor posted a message that "The pattern of bleaching > > > follows a consistent trend globally that suggests that following bleaching > > > events, reefs located in areas with less water column mixing are usually > > > the worst affected. Typically these are inshore reefs where both nutrient > > > flux and absolute levels of nutrients are likely higher than outer reefs." > > > > > > I wrote to Gregor saying that my data indicate that both nearshore and > > > offshore reefs in Fiji (south of Viti Levu) suffered significant bleaching > > > last year. When I revisited my transects this year I found that both areas > > > suffered high mortality (>95% Acropora dead), but I also found significant > > > regrowth ("phoenix" corals) and significant recruitment in the lagoons > > > (Acropora spp.), whereas the remote offshore barrier reef showed virturally > > > no survival and no new recruitment (the "virtually" means that whereas last > > > year I counted on average over 100 acroporid colonies per 30 x 1 meter belt > > > transect, this year I found only one tiny survivor on one transect and one > > > tiny recruit on the other transect). The nearshore patchreefs and barrier > > > reef where recovery is good, are located near the mouth of a large river > > > and the water in this lagoon area is typically turbid most of the > > > time. The remote barrier reef is typically in a pristine ocean > > > environment, often crystal clear, and subjected to large open ocean swells > > > much of the year. > > > > > > Gregor wrote back to me and qualified his statement: > > > > > > "What I was referring to was that in "moderate" bleaching events, when > > > there was less than say 50% mortality, the inner reefs typically showed > > > higher mortality than the outer reefs due to mixing at the outer reefs..... > > > When it is a" bad" event there is little difference as you have seen in > > > mortality. But your observations of faster recovery on the inner reefs are > > > interesting and one wonders if this has more to do with a higher number of > > > nearby parent colonies, water retention in those areas which facilitated > > > recruitment, rather than with the nutrients being a beneficial stimulus. > > > But all these are open questions deserving of more research." > > > > > > So what is the "global trend"? Do nearshore reefs or remote barrier reefs > > > suffer higher mortality and lower recovery rates? Or should we even try to > > > make such a generalization with so many unique factors at each locality? > > > > > > Aloha > > > Bruce > > > > > > At 12:33 PM 5/16/2001 -0300, Bernard THOMASSIN wrote: > > > >To: Debbie MacKenzie < > > > >From: Bernard THOMASSIN < > > > >Subject: Re: nutrient deficiency and bleaching -and- Perhaps you need =20 > > > >to do a bit more reading ... > > > > > > > >Dear Debbie and all colleagues interested by coral bleaching, > > > > > > > >To the comment: > > > > > > > > > How come that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore, where > > > > > nutrients are enhanced to levels, which in turn can become detrimental > > > > > to many coral reef organisms, which are highly adapted to exist in > > > > > oligotrophic conditions? Could that maybe relate to some patchiness, > > > > > too: too much 'food' and maybe toxic substances? > > > > > > > >I don't agree with this opinion taking as example that occured around > > > >Mayotte Island in the North of the Mozambique Channel, SW Indian Ocean, > > > >where I studied since 1983 several bleachings of various intensity. > > > > > > > >Here the huge bleaching event of the April-June 1998 (when an warmer > > > >mass of oceanic seawater coming from the North reached this SW Indian > > > >Oc. area) -the bleaching was undubfully caused by the seawater > > > >temperature increase : T=B0 C reached up to 32=B0 C in ocean open sea and > > > >stayed as during near 3 months, it was the corals from the outer slopes > > > >of the barrier reefs (187 km long) that bleached and then died, mainly > > > >in the shallow depths (3m down to 15-20m - but encrusting corals at > > > >down 30m also bleached -) : all the tabular and branched Acroporids, > > > >all the Pocillopora, some Diploastrea, some massive Porites (but on > > > >some of them parts were kept alive, if most of the colonies died). Even > > > >Sarcophyton and Sinularia bleached, as well as the large sea-anemones > > > >as Heterotactis magnifica, and some Tridacnids. So, consequently, the > > > >barrier reef slope coral communities were destroyed at more than 85 > > > >percent. > > > > > > > >On the slopes of lagoonal reefs, as well as on the slope of the > > > >fringing reefs, also the bleaching occured, but on the fringing reefs > > > >in muddy environments of deep coastal bays, most of the corals > > > >survived. > > > > > > > >My opinion (exposed in one of our Bali's Conf. posters) is that corals > > > >living in clear oceanic waters on the barrier reef slopes or lagoonal > > > >reef slopes near large passages, live in oceanic seawaters showing more > > > >constant parameters (according to the seawater temperature they are > > > >more "stenothermes"). In contrary, corals living in nearshore > > > >environments where seawater parameters are more variable (increase of > > > >temperature due to closed environments, or decrease of temperature due > > > >to cool groundwater seepages ; salinity variations due to rainfalls and > > > >river flows ; variation of the turbidity due to alluvial inputs > > > >associated with rainfalls or to phytoplankton blooms ; bacterial > > > >attacks from terrigeneous materials ; etc...).=20 > > > > > > > >In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more > > > >resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in > > > >more stable and constant seawater conditions. > > > > > > > >In this conditions I disagree with your opinion. > > > > > > > >But be very carefull with the biology/physiology of corals. I begin to > > > >believe that the same species of corals have not the same biology (and > > > >physiology) in region located fare away. So extrapolations of results > > > >from one area to another one are not possible. This is true for the > > > >biologists and ecologists, but also for our paleo-geologist > > > >colleagues. > > > > > > > >This can explain the opposite views between different researchers! > > > > > > > >Have a good day. > > > > > > > >Sincerely yours. > > > > > > > >Bernard > > > > > > > >Bernard A. THOMASSIN > > > >CNRS-UMR 6540 "Dimar", > > > >Centre d'Oc=E9anologie de Marseille, > > > >Station marine d'Endoume, > > > >Chemin de la batterie des Lions, > > > >13007 Marseille, > > > >France > > > > > > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 17 (ligne directe) > > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 00 (standart) > > > >mobile (33) 06 63 14 91 78 > > > >fax (33) 04 91 04 16 35 (=E0 l'attention de....) > > > > > > > >~~~~~~~ > > > >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > > >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > > >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~ > > > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > > ~~~~~~~ > > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > -- > Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier > Kansas Geological Survey > University of Kansas > 1930 Constant Avenue > Lawrence, KS 66047 USA > Ph (1) (785) 864-2112 > Fax (1) (785) 864-5317 > e-mail: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. -- Billy D. Causey, Superintendent Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary PO Box 500368 Marathon, FL 33050 (305) 743-2437 phone (305) 743-2357 Fax billy.causey at noaa.gov http://www.fknms.nos.noaa.gov/ ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From Curran at altc.freeserve.co.uk Sat May 19 16:13:18 2001 From: Curran at altc.freeserve.co.uk (Sarah Curran) Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 21:13:18 +0100 Subject: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of change References: Message-ID: <000f01c0e0a0$8b0dcae0$e3cc193e@pbncomputer> Dear Victor , Myself and several honours students tested some of the methods in this manual in Sulawesi. We had four main focus areas for the studies (in brief) 1. Correlating rates of feeding and reef habitat (Ch. trifasciatus-redfins) 2. Which (if any) provided a closer correlation with habitat; using total number of chaetodonts along transects (abundance and species) or selected obligate corralivores 3.The incidence/rate of aggressive/submissive interactions of Ch. Trifasciatus (intra and inter specific) and correlations with reef habitat 4.Investigating habitat preferences in pristine and degraded habitats (Redfins) The data is still being worked up. What particular aspect are you interested in? Sarah Sarah Curran Science Co-ordinator Operation Wallacea Priory Lodge Spilsby Lincolnshire PE23 4BP UK Work email: science at opwall.com Home email: curran at altc.freeserve.co.uk Mob:07714 305528 Website: www.opwall.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Gomelyuk, Victor To: Sent: 19 May 2001 10:47 Subject: RE: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of change > > Dear Colleagues, > > I would like to find if anyone is using Butterflyfishes as Indicators of > coral reefs conditions?: > Re: Crosby, M.P. and E.S.Reese. 1996 A Manual for Monitoring Coral Reefs > With Indicator Species: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of Change on Indo > Pacific Reefs. Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, NOAA, Silver > Spring, MD. 45 pp. > > Your feedback will be greatly appreciated. > > > Regards, > > Dr Victor E. Gomelyuk > Marine Scientist > Cobourg Marine Park > PO Box 496 PALMERSTON NT 0831 AUSTRALIA > phone 61 (08) 8979 0244 > FAX 61 (08) 8979 0246 > > > > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From ichthio at yahoo.com Sat May 19 21:11:12 2001 From: ichthio at yahoo.com (Anthony Mazeroll) Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 18:11:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of change In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20010520011112.21856.qmail@web12002.mail.yahoo.com> Victor: I was past of a team that was using this technique in Fiji. We have also used it in the Red Sea. The PI on the project was Dr. Denis Goutel. He is at the University of Mississippi. E-mail me privately for his e-mail address. This technique is a good one except you must know something about the feeding biology of the butterflyfish in the area to use as a baseline. Without that, it has some drawbacks. ===== <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> Anthony I. Mazeroll, Ph.D. School of Biological Sciences The University of California, Irvine <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From oveh at uq.edu.au Sun May 20 18:49:45 2001 From: oveh at uq.edu.au (Ove Hoegh-Guldberg) Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 08:49:45 +1000 Subject: bleaching and cloud cover In-Reply-To: <200105191637.QAA03102@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: <003501c0e17f$2b389ac0$7d6e6682@vsap.uq.edu.au> A great case of secondary factors affecting the outcome of a primary factor. Supported by the observation that the initial impact on photosynthesis is damage to the dark reactions of photosynthesis. Decreasing light levels decrease the impact. Ove -----Original Message----- From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Peter J Mumby Sent: Saturday, 19 May 2001 9:06 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: bleaching and cloud cover Following the interesting discussion on spatial patterns of bleaching, I = thought I'd mention our observations from the Society Islands, French = Polynesia. In 1998, the incidence of mass bleaching was patchy at scales = of 10s - 100s km. Interestingly, bleaching was minor in Tahiti and = Moorea despite positive SST anomalies being of similar magnitude and = duration to previous years in which mass bleaching occurred. = Meteorological data also revealed that wind speeds were exceedingly low = which is usually consistent with the onset of mass bleaching. However, = although sea temperatures were elevated and the conditions were calm, = cloud cover was very significantly greater than that associated with = mass bleaching events (or other years for that matter). We used data on = SST, wind speed and cloud cover to create a discriminant function that = hindcasted the onset of mass bleaching in the area. Predictions for 1998 = (i.e. minor bleaching) were only correct if cloud cover was explicitly = incorporated into the analysis (i.e. in addition to temperature).=20 =20 Laboratory studies have shown that bleaching can occur on a scale of = seconds or minutes under conditions of solar stress, but how do such = responses reconcile with the large spatial scale of mass bleaching = events? Although high cloud cover reduced overall levels of solar = radiation at a large (island) scale, we have no biophysical = understanding of the interaction between solar irradiance, cloud cover = and bleaching. Measurements of cloud cover are unable to reveal the = intensity and duration of incident irradiance so if high cloud cover did = help prevent bleaching, we don't know whether it was because overall = light budgets were reduced or whether the frequency of intense episodic = bursts of irradiance was reduced. Anyway, food for thought... More details are available in Mumby PJ, Chisholm JRM, Edwards AJ, = Andrefouet S, Jaubert J (2001) Cloudy weather may have saved Society = Island reef corals during the 1998 ENSO event. Marine Ecology Progress = Series (in press) Sorry if this was a bit long.=20 Cheers Pete =20 Dr Peter J. Mumby Royal Society University Research Fellow Centre for Tropical Coastal Management Studies Department of Marine Science and Coastal Management Ridley Building The University Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU UK tel: +44 (0)191 222 6228 fax: +44 (0)191 222 7891 email: p.j.mumby at ncl.ac.uk http://www.ncl.ac.uk/tcmweb/ctcms/mumby.shtml ------=_NextPart_000_003A_01C0DFF7.7ACF5C60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear all,
 
Following the interesting discussion on = spatial=20 patterns of bleaching, I thought I'd mention our observations from the = Society=20 Islands, French Polynesia. In 1998, the incidence of mass bleaching was = patchy=20 at scales of 10s - 100s km. Interestingly, bleaching was minor in = Tahiti=20 and Moorea despite positive SST anomalies being of similar magnitude and = duration to previous years in which mass bleaching occurred. = Meteorological data=20 also revealed that wind speeds were exceedingly low  which is = usually=20 consistent with the onset of mass bleaching. However, although sea = temperatures=20 were elevated and the conditions were calm, cloud cover was very = significantly=20 greater than that associated with mass bleaching events (or other years = for that=20 matter). We used data on SST, wind speed and cloud cover to create a=20 discriminant function that hindcasted the onset of mass bleaching in the = area.=20 Predictions for 1998 (i.e. minor bleaching) were only correct if cloud = cover was=20 explicitly incorporated into the analysis (i.e. in addition to = temperature).=20
 
Laboratory studies have shown that = bleaching can=20 occur on a scale of seconds or minutes under conditions of solar stress, = but how=20 do such responses reconcile with the large spatial scale of mass = bleaching=20 events? Although high cloud cover reduced overall levels of = solar=20 radiation at a large (island) scale, we have no biophysical = understanding of the=20 interaction between solar irradiance, cloud cover and = bleaching.=20 Measurements of cloud cover are unable to reveal the intensity and = duration of=20 incident irradiance so if high cloud cover did help prevent bleaching, = we don't=20 know whether it was because overall light budgets were reduced or = whether the=20 frequency of intense episodic bursts of irradiance was reduced. Anyway, = food for=20 thought...
 
More details are available in Mumby PJ, = Chisholm=20 JRM, Edwards AJ, Andrefouet S, Jaubert J (2001) Cloudy weather may have = saved=20 Society Island reef corals during the 1998 ENSO event. Marine Ecology = Progress=20 Series (in press)
 
Sorry if this was a bit long. =
 
Cheers
 
Pete
 
 
Dr Peter J. Mumby
Royal Society = University=20 Research Fellow
 
Centre for Tropical Coastal Management=20 Studies
Department of Marine Science and Coastal Management
Ridley = Building
The University
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 = 7RU
UK
tel: +44=20 (0)191 222 6228
fax: +44 (0)191 222 7891
email: p.j.mumby at ncl.ac.uk
http://www.ncl.ac.= uk/tcmweb/ctcms/mumby.shtml
------=_NextPart_000_003A_01C0DFF7.7ACF5C60-- ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From oveh at uq.edu.au Sun May 20 18:46:47 2001 From: oveh at uq.edu.au (Ove Hoegh-Guldberg) Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 08:46:47 +1000 Subject: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching In-Reply-To: <3B06CED2.4E0F854D@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <003401c0e17e$c0fcdd60$7d6e6682@vsap.uq.edu.au> Bob B and co are probably correct in saying that "both 'corals' and their microenvironments exhibit systematic differences over rather small scales." I suspect that we differ in how certain we would be of the causes of these differences (real?, genetic?, phenotypic?). There are many observations that would also seemingly contrast conclusions that inshore, presumably more stressed corals bleach less (e.g. HG and Salvat 1995, Berkelmann and Oliver 1999 - just two off the cuff cases in which inshore sites were more than often more bleached in 1998 etc. ... from the literature too!) As many have been indicating, much is speculative and little is locked down at this point. I still feel that we have to be very careful in distinguishing between good, untested ideas (that should be tested) and ideas that have been verified by solid experimental methods and field observations etc. The former category (no criticism intended) would characterise much of our discussion so far. The latter category has few lines to it. Ove -----Original Message----- From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Billy Causey Sent: Sunday, 20 May 2001 5:52 AM To: Bob Buddemeier; coral list Subject: Re: Nearshore vs. offshore bleaching Bob, I wish I had seen your excellent response before I sent mine yesterday. Unfortunately I am making my way down a list of hundreds of back-logged messages and just came to your comments. Excellent! Billy Bob Buddemeier wrote: > On the basis of evidence available at the time we (Buddemeier, R. W. and Fautin, > D. G., 1993, Coral Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism, Bioscience 43:320-326) > observed that: > "There are consistent habitat differences in bleaching resistance at a given > locale; corals in habitats that are more variable or more prone to stresses of > various sorts, including thermal (such as shallow water or fringing reefs), tend > to be less bleached than those in more normally equable environments." > > Apparently the field observational patterns are more consistent than attention to > the literature. > > The reasons can be described as aclimatization, adaptation, or different > 'ecospecies' occupying the different habitat niches, but they all boil down to the > fact that both 'corals' and their microenvironments exhibit systematic differences > over rather small scales. > > Bob Buddemeier > > John Naughton wrote: > > > To add to the mix, I concur with Bruce's statements below. During the recent > > severe bleaching event in Palau, we noted that corals in the lagoon close to > > the main island of Babeldaob were basically not impacted, while much of the > > coral (particularly Acropora) on the barrier reef was hammered. Could this be > > attributed to the possible lowering of nearshore water temps from runoff? > > > > Mahalo, John > > > > John Naughton > > NMFS, Pacific Islands Area Office > > Honolulu, HI > > > > Bruce Carlson wrote: > > > > > RE: Offshore vs nearshore bleaching > > > > > > Bernard Thomassin disagreed with the general statement that bleaching is > > > usually more severe nearshore. I concur. > > > > > > The other day, Gregor posted a message that "The pattern of bleaching > > > follows a consistent trend globally that suggests that following bleaching > > > events, reefs located in areas with less water column mixing are usually > > > the worst affected. Typically these are inshore reefs where both nutrient > > > flux and absolute levels of nutrients are likely higher than outer reefs." > > > > > > I wrote to Gregor saying that my data indicate that both nearshore and > > > offshore reefs in Fiji (south of Viti Levu) suffered significant bleaching > > > last year. When I revisited my transects this year I found that both areas > > > suffered high mortality (>95% Acropora dead), but I also found significant > > > regrowth ("phoenix" corals) and significant recruitment in the lagoons > > > (Acropora spp.), whereas the remote offshore barrier reef showed virturally > > > no survival and no new recruitment (the "virtually" means that whereas last > > > year I counted on average over 100 acroporid colonies per 30 x 1 meter belt > > > transect, this year I found only one tiny survivor on one transect and one > > > tiny recruit on the other transect). The nearshore patchreefs and barrier > > > reef where recovery is good, are located near the mouth of a large river > > > and the water in this lagoon area is typically turbid most of the > > > time. The remote barrier reef is typically in a pristine ocean > > > environment, often crystal clear, and subjected to large open ocean swells > > > much of the year. > > > > > > Gregor wrote back to me and qualified his statement: > > > > > > "What I was referring to was that in "moderate" bleaching events, when > > > there was less than say 50% mortality, the inner reefs typically showed > > > higher mortality than the outer reefs due to mixing at the outer reefs..... > > > When it is a" bad" event there is little difference as you have seen in > > > mortality. But your observations of faster recovery on the inner reefs are > > > interesting and one wonders if this has more to do with a higher number of > > > nearby parent colonies, water retention in those areas which facilitated > > > recruitment, rather than with the nutrients being a beneficial stimulus. > > > But all these are open questions deserving of more research." > > > > > > So what is the "global trend"? Do nearshore reefs or remote barrier reefs > > > suffer higher mortality and lower recovery rates? Or should we even try to > > > make such a generalization with so many unique factors at each locality? > > > > > > Aloha > > > Bruce > > > > > > At 12:33 PM 5/16/2001 -0300, Bernard THOMASSIN wrote: > > > >To: Debbie MacKenzie < > > > >From: Bernard THOMASSIN < > > > >Subject: Re: nutrient deficiency and bleaching -and- Perhaps you need =20 > > > >to do a bit more reading ... > > > > > > > >Dear Debbie and all colleagues interested by coral bleaching, > > > > > > > >To the comment: > > > > > > > > > How come that bleaching is usually more severe nearshore, where > > > > > nutrients are enhanced to levels, which in turn can become detrimental > > > > > to many coral reef organisms, which are highly adapted to exist in > > > > > oligotrophic conditions? Could that maybe relate to some patchiness, > > > > > too: too much 'food' and maybe toxic substances? > > > > > > > >I don't agree with this opinion taking as example that occured around > > > >Mayotte Island in the North of the Mozambique Channel, SW Indian Ocean, > > > >where I studied since 1983 several bleachings of various intensity. > > > > > > > >Here the huge bleaching event of the April-June 1998 (when an warmer > > > >mass of oceanic seawater coming from the North reached this SW Indian > > > >Oc. area) -the bleaching was undubfully caused by the seawater > > > >temperature increase : T=B0 C reached up to 32=B0 C in ocean open sea and > > > >stayed as during near 3 months, it was the corals from the outer slopes > > > >of the barrier reefs (187 km long) that bleached and then died, mainly > > > >in the shallow depths (3m down to 15-20m - but encrusting corals at > > > >down 30m also bleached -) : all the tabular and branched Acroporids, > > > >all the Pocillopora, some Diploastrea, some massive Porites (but on > > > >some of them parts were kept alive, if most of the colonies died). Even > > > >Sarcophyton and Sinularia bleached, as well as the large sea-anemones > > > >as Heterotactis magnifica, and some Tridacnids. So, consequently, the > > > >barrier reef slope coral communities were destroyed at more than 85 > > > >percent. > > > > > > > >On the slopes of lagoonal reefs, as well as on the slope of the > > > >fringing reefs, also the bleaching occured, but on the fringing reefs > > > >in muddy environments of deep coastal bays, most of the corals > > > >survived. > > > > > > > >My opinion (exposed in one of our Bali's Conf. posters) is that corals > > > >living in clear oceanic waters on the barrier reef slopes or lagoonal > > > >reef slopes near large passages, live in oceanic seawaters showing more > > > >constant parameters (according to the seawater temperature they are > > > >more "stenothermes"). In contrary, corals living in nearshore > > > >environments where seawater parameters are more variable (increase of > > > >temperature due to closed environments, or decrease of temperature due > > > >to cool groundwater seepages ; salinity variations due to rainfalls and > > > >river flows ; variation of the turbidity due to alluvial inputs > > > >associated with rainfalls or to phytoplankton blooms ; bacterial > > > >attacks from terrigeneous materials ; etc...).=20 > > > > > > > >In fact coastal populations of corals (for the same species) are more > > > >resistant to all the possible stresses that coral populations living in > > > >more stable and constant seawater conditions. > > > > > > > >In this conditions I disagree with your opinion. > > > > > > > >But be very carefull with the biology/physiology of corals. I begin to > > > >believe that the same species of corals have not the same biology (and > > > >physiology) in region located fare away. So extrapolations of results > > > >from one area to another one are not possible. This is true for the > > > >biologists and ecologists, but also for our paleo-geologist > > > >colleagues. > > > > > > > >This can explain the opposite views between different researchers! > > > > > > > >Have a good day. > > > > > > > >Sincerely yours. > > > > > > > >Bernard > > > > > > > >Bernard A. THOMASSIN > > > >CNRS-UMR 6540 "Dimar", > > > >Centre d'Oc=E9anologie de Marseille, > > > >Station marine d'Endoume, > > > >Chemin de la batterie des Lions, > > > >13007 Marseille, > > > >France > > > > > > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 17 (ligne directe) > > > >(33) 04 91 04 16 00 (standart) > > > >mobile (33) 06 63 14 91 78 > > > >fax (33) 04 91 04 16 35 (=E0 l'attention de....) > > > > > > > >~~~~~~~ > > > >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > > >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > > >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~ > > > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > > ~~~~~~~ > > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > -- > Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier > Kansas Geological Survey > University of Kansas > 1930 Constant Avenue > Lawrence, KS 66047 USA > Ph (1) (785) 864-2112 > Fax (1) (785) 864-5317 > e-mail: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. -- Billy D. Causey, Superintendent Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary PO Box 500368 Marathon, FL 33050 (305) 743-2437 phone (305) 743-2357 Fax billy.causey at noaa.gov http://www.fknms.nos.noaa.gov/ ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From p_houk at hotmail.com Mon May 21 00:17:40 2001 From: p_houk at hotmail.com (peter Houk) Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 00:17:40 Subject: Tumors on corals Message-ID: Dear All, During recent inner lagoon surveys completed in Saipan Lagoon, CNMI, my colleague and I have observed and photographed what appeared to be a coral tumor on a Astreopora myriophthalma colony. I have this location in my GPS unit and if desired I can collect a sample or the colony. Interesting topic, I look forward to reviewing the web site listed. Peter Houk CNMI Division of Environmental Quality Saipan, MP. 96950 >Dear Ruby, Simon, and others > >In addition to the tumors found by Steve Coles in Oman, several examples of >other types of skeletal abnormalities have been observed. They can be >divided into hyperplasms and neoplasms (cancerous tumors). > >We have a section on skeletal abnormalities on The Coral Disease Page at: > >http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/mccarty_and_peters/coraldis.htm > >The following paper reviewed the literature and documented the kinds of >tumors recognized through the mid-1980s: > >Peters, E.C., J.C. Halas, and H.B. McCarty. 1986. Calicoblastic neoplasms >in Acropora palmata with a review of reports of anomalies of growth and >form in corals. J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 76(5):895-912. > >Coles and colleagues investigated UV-radiation as a possible causal agent >of acroporid tumors in: > >Coles, S.L., and D.G. Seapy. 1998. Ultra-violet absorbing compounds and >tumorous growths on acroporid corals from Bandar Khayran, Gulf of Oman, >Indian Ocean. Coral Reefs 17:195-198. > >More recently, calicoblastic epitheliomas have been found in Montipora: > >Yamashiro, H., M. Yamamoto, and R. van Woesik. 2000. Tumor formation on >the coral Montipora informis. Dis. Aquat. Org. 41:211-217. > >Hyperplasms in several species of corals are currently being investigated >by researchers on reefs of the eastern Pacific, Hawaii, Red Sea, and other >areas. This condition is characterized by more rapid skeletal deposition >and tissue hypertrophy compared to surrounding polyps and might be what >Ruby has found. More detailed description of these and the tumorous >growths Simon has seen are needed. > >Examples of both kinds of coral tumors and tissue sections, as well as >reprints of pertinent papers, are archived at the Registry of Tumors in >Lower Animals (RTLA), Department of Pathology, George Washington University >Medical Center, Washington, DC. The RTLA is interested in documenting >additional reports of these lesions (contact: John Harshbarger, Director, >e-mail: patjch at gwumc.edu; or Esther Peters). > >Hope this helps! > >Chip McCarty and Esther Peters >~~~~~~~ >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From Peter_Craig at nps.gov Sat May 19 09:43:30 2001 From: Peter_Craig at nps.gov (Peter Craig) Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 09:43:30 -0400 Subject: Bleaching & dissolved oxygen Message-ID: <00B0A310.C22031@nps.gov> Coral list, In discussions of bleaching, low levels of dissolved oxygen (DO) are occasionally mentioned, but I have been surprised by the tolerance of some nearshore corals in American Samoa to extreme ranges of DO. At one site, a diverse and healthy-looking assemblage of 52 coral species tolerated DO's ranging from 15 to 233% saturation, with negligible bleaching (about 1%). (The DO instrument was still in calibration after these measurements were taken and the data were similar to those of a second instrument.) The study site is a large and 'pristine' backreef moat on a fringing reef. At low tide, the 1-meter deep moat is isolated from ocean flushing, thus it is subject to wide daily fluctuations in temperature, brief exposures (hours) to very high temperatures, extreme fluctuations in DO saturation (15% at night, 233% daytime), and changes in pH (7.9-8.5). During the daytime, steady streams of oxygen bubbles float to the surface (so some supersaturation seems reasonable) although there is little macroalgae present. I am aware of only a little literature on naturally occurring DO levels in tropical reefs (eg, Kinsey & Kinsey 1977, Tytler & Davis 1984), or its relationship to bleaching or effects on coral reef organisms, so comments would be welcome. Peter Craig National Park of American Samoa ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From jnorris at catalina.ucsd.edu Fri May 18 19:11:19 2001 From: jnorris at catalina.ucsd.edu (Joel Norris) Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 16:11:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: coral proxy for surface solar radiation? Message-ID: <200105210029.AAA06412@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hello all, I'm a physical scientist interested in the role of clouds in the climate system and recently came across an article by Anne Cohen and coauthors describing impacts of photosynthesis on calcification rate (she suggested I contact this email list). That got me wondering if there was any way to infer past variations in surface solar radiation using a coral proxy. That would be a very useful piece of information to have for understanding past climate variability. Is there a workable relationship between calcification, photosynthesis, and broadband insolation, or perhaps some other method? Joel -- Joel Norris Assistant Professor of Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Scripps Institution of Oceanography email: jrnorris at ucsd.edu University of California, San Diego phone: (858) 822-4420 9500 Gilman Drive DEPT 0224 fax: (858) 534-8561 La Jolla, CA 92093-0224 http://meteora.ucsd.edu/~jnorris/ Delivery Address: Scripps Institution of Oceanography 8810 Shellback Way Room 440, Nierenberg Hall La Jolla, CA 92037 ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From anya at emu.usyd.edu.au Mon May 21 02:09:09 2001 From: anya at emu.usyd.edu.au (Anya Salih) Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 14:09:09 +0800 Subject: Nearshore bleaching photos - Fiji Message-ID: James, Had a look at your excellent photos and here's another possible difference for the observed inter- and intraspecific variation in coral bleaching so far not mentioned in the feedback - the degree of fluorescent pigmentation in sp and morphs of the same species. For several years now I have been researching the function of fluorescent pigmentation in corals and have accumulated a lot of experimental and ecological evidence for at least one function being that of photoprotection. Given that temperature related bleaching involves light, corals with sunscreening fluorescent pigmentation can be more resistant to bleaching. I found this to be so in experiments where fluorescent and non fluorescent species were exposed to high light and temperature, as well as when temperature-induced bleaching of fluro- and non-fluorescent morphs of the same species was compared. Similarly, during 1998 mass bleaching on Great Barrier Reef in the majority of cases fluorescent morphs were unbleached or partially bleached, while non fluorescent ones growing near-by, were completely bleached (Salih et al 2000, Fluorescent pigments in corals are photoprotective, Nature 408: 850-853). >Photo 1596 shows an Acropora sp. bleaching from the center out. Why is >this? The distribution of fluorescent pigmentation in any one colony is often uneven; frequently the edges of colonies are more pigmented than the center. This may be one reason for the observed difference in your photo >Photos 1594 and 1595 show a monospecific stand of acropora. I would expect >either the whole colony to bleach, or perhaps the tops of branches - however >the coral is only bleached in large "patches." Why is this? I found that monospecific stands of Acropora are frequently composed of patches of fluorescent and non-fluorescent morphs eg intertidal lagoon, reef front and slope of Heron and One Tree Islands, mid-shelf reefs such as Cayley, Feather, Coats of Great Barrier Reef and also Red Sea reefs in Hurghada, Egypt. In all these sites, patchy distribution of bleaching as shown in your photos was correlated with concentration of fluorescent pigmentation in Acropora colonies. >Some of the photos show many different colonies in one patch reef. Why is >one coral bleached, and it appears that an identical species next to it is >not (1599 and 1600). Why did one coral bleach, and the other did not? Similarly, some of the species in your photo may be fluorescently pigmented while others are not. The easiest way to find out whether or not corals are fluorescent is to look for the greenish tinge in their coloration. However fluoresce is not always apparent in daylight. A reliable quick method is to illuminate them with UV or blue light at night, for example using Charlie Mazel's underwater torches (mentioned previously on this list) or more simply, by covering a torch with a blue plastic filter. At present I am conducting large scale surveys of distribution of fluorescent pigmented corals on Great Barrier Reef and found them to be very abundant, in some reef parts being more common than non fluorescent corals. It may be speculated that reefs with highly fluorescent corals may be on the whole much less susceptible than reefs with largely non fluorescent morphs. I will be very interested to hear how these observations compare to records of coral bleaching elsewhere. regards Anya Salih Anya Salih Email: anya at emu.usyd.edu.au Electron Microscope Unit Telephone: 02-93517540 Madsen Building FO9 Facsimile: 02-93517682 The University of Sydney Sydney, 2006, AUSTRALIA >Ladies and gentlemen, > >I have posted some photos of nearshore bleaching from a recent trip to Fiji. >I decided to post them to a webpage yesterday as I think they are worth >discussing as part of this recent "Factors in coral bleaching - nearshore >vs. offshore reefs" discussion. > >The website (It is NOT commercial) shows ONLY the pictures and location map >and some of my comments (temperature, some observations, etc). Here is the >URL: > >http://www.reefhabilitation.com/fiji/bleaching/index.htm > > >Of particular interest to me are some of the photos showing "unusual" >bleaching patterns. Any feedback on these is much appreciated - as I would >like to better understand coral bleaching. > >For example: >Photo 1596 shows an Acropora sp. bleaching from the center out. Why is >this? >Photos 1594 and 1595 show a monospecific stand of acropora. I would expect >either the whole colony to bleach, or perhaps the tops of branches - however >the coral is only bleached in large "patches." Why is this? >Some of the photos show many different colonies in one patch reef. Why is >one coral bleached, and it appears that an identical species next to it is >not (1599 and 1600). Why did one coral bleach, and the other did not? > >The areas I dove in Fiji were in the North (Somosomo Straits and reefs >around Savusavu and Namenala Isl.) and I did not observe any bleaching below >20 foot water depth. > >Please feel free to use these photos for non-commercial use and high >resolution digital photos are available upon request. > >James Wiseman >Project Engineer >Winmar Consulting Services >www.winmarconsulting.com > > >~~~~~~~ >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. Anya Salih Email: anya at emu.usyd.edu.au Electron Microscope Unit Telephone: 02-93517540 Madsen Building FO9 Facsimile: 02-93517682 The University of Sydney Sydney, 2006, AUSTRALIA ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From martinlangevoord at hotmail.com Mon May 21 06:29:27 2001 From: martinlangevoord at hotmail.com (Martin Langevoord) Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 06:29:27 Subject: coral spawning in the Philippines Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010521/63182491/attachment.html From kochzius at uni-bremen.de Mon May 21 03:58:42 2001 From: kochzius at uni-bremen.de (kochzius at uni-bremen.de) Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 09:58:42 +0200 Subject: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of change In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.0.20010521093501.00ade630@pop.zfn.uni-bremen.de> Hi Victor! The indicator hypothesis of Chaetodontidae to asses the "health" of a coral reef is still under debate. There are many studies that faild to find a relationship, whereas other found a strong one. From my experience in fish community analysis on coral reefs and the literature of that field, I would state that simply counting Chaetodontidae will not give an indication about the reef "health". There are several points that should be considered: 1. What will be the definition of reef "health"? 2. There are several chaetodontid species that do not feed on corals at all or feed on corals and other benthic invertebrates > as Anthony Mazeroll already mentioned, you need to know about the diet of the species you count. The focus should be on obligate corallivores. 3. It might be better to consider corallivorous fishes rather than Chaetodontidae (there are several species of other families that feed on corals) 4. In my data analysis I found a stronger correlation of corallivorous fishes to live hard coral cover than of Chaetodontidae to live hard coral cover. 5. Impact of fishing might be a problem as well. I heared from a colleague that Chaetodontidae tend to enter bamboo traps that are used to catch fusiliers (Caesionidae). However, as far as I know there is no publication on this topic. As other authors already mentioned, ther are to many uncertainties in the use of butterflyfishes as indicators. The intention of indicator species is to have a rapid method for the assesment of the environment of this species. From my point of view a proper assesment of the abundance and behaviour (you need to study this as well) of Chaetodontidae is as time consuming as a detailed survey of the benthic habitat (corals). Best fishes Marc At 19:17 19.05.01 +0930, you wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > >I would like to find if anyone is using Butterflyfishes as Indicators of >coral reefs conditions?: >Re: Crosby, M.P. and E.S.Reese. 1996 A Manual for Monitoring Coral Reefs >With Indicator Species: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of Change on Indo >Pacific Reefs. Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, NOAA, Silver >Spring, MD. 45 pp. > >Your feedback will be greatly appreciated. > > >Regards, > >Dr Victor E. Gomelyuk >Marine Scientist >Cobourg Marine Park >PO Box 496 PALMERSTON NT 0831 AUSTRALIA >phone 61 (08) 8979 0244 >FAX 61 (08) 8979 0246 > > > > >~~~~~~~ >For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the >digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the >menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From 106422.2221 at compuserve.com Mon May 21 09:12:04 2001 From: 106422.2221 at compuserve.com (Simon Wilson) Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 09:12:04 -0400 Subject: Bleaching & dissolved oxygen Message-ID: <200105210912_MC2-D188-4DAC@compuserve.com> Dear Peter Corals in Oman also experience low oxygen concentrations periodically, not caused by respiration at night but because of upwelling of water that contains very little oxygen. So far oxygen concentrations can only be inferred from open water oceanographic measurements, but I would expect values of less than 0.2mg/l at times. I saw the effect on the benthos of a strong upwelling in the Gulf of Oman last year that killed several hundred tons of fish. Mortality to invertebrates in reef areas was also high, particularly for worms, sipunculids, gastropods and echinoderms. Hard corals were more resiliant than soft corals, but they were also killed. The tissue of hard coral became necrotic and then sloughed off revealing white skeleton underneath, but I didn't see any signs of bleaching then or on subsequent days. Any references on the tolerance of coral to low oxygen concentrations would be welcome. All the best Simon *********************************************************** Simon Wilson PO Box 2531 CPO 111 SEEB Sultanate of OMAN Tel & Fax: 00 968 736260 Mobile: 00 968 9358053 E-mail: 106422.2221 at compuserve.com *********************************************************** ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu Mon May 21 13:30:16 2001 From: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu (Bob Buddemeier) Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 12:30:16 -0500 Subject: coral proxy for surface solar radiation? References: <200105210029.AAA06412@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: <3B0950A8.F9673F0C@kgs.ukans.edu> Joel, Nice idea, but I think unlikely to pan out. One of the things that the coral-algal symbiosis does is adjust the population -- and in some cases the identity -- of the photosynthesizers as a function of light level, so there is a significant amount of feedback between the insolation and the response or sensitivity of what we think of as the sensor. And that is all within a single host species, of which there are many.... So qualitatively and in the very big picture there is a relationship, but nothing likely to satisfy a physical scientist*. Bob *PS: I am (or was) one. Joel Norris wrote: > Hello all, > > I'm a physical scientist interested in the role of clouds in the climate > system and recently came across an article by Anne Cohen and coauthors > describing impacts of photosynthesis on calcification rate (she suggested > I contact this email list). That got me wondering if there was any way to > infer past variations in surface solar radiation using a coral proxy. > That would be a very useful piece of information to have for understanding > past climate variability. Is there a workable relationship between > calcification, photosynthesis, and broadband insolation, or perhaps some > other method? > > Joel > > -- > Joel Norris Assistant Professor of Climate and Atmospheric Sciences > > Scripps Institution of Oceanography email: jrnorris at ucsd.edu > University of California, San Diego phone: (858) 822-4420 > 9500 Gilman Drive DEPT 0224 fax: (858) 534-8561 > La Jolla, CA 92093-0224 http://meteora.ucsd.edu/~jnorris/ > > Delivery Address: Scripps Institution of Oceanography > 8810 Shellback Way > Room 440, Nierenberg Hall > La Jolla, CA 92037 > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. -- Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier Kansas Geological Survey University of Kansas 1930 Constant Avenue Lawrence, KS 66047 USA Ph (1) (785) 864-2112 Fax (1) (785) 864-5317 e-mail: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From ewood at globalnet.co.uk Tue May 22 09:28:12 2001 From: ewood at globalnet.co.uk (Elizabeth Wood) Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:28:12 +0100 Subject: Marine aquarium fish report Message-ID: <003001c0e2c4$473818e0$abe993c3@ewood> Hello coral listers, This message is for those of you interested in the trade in marine ornamentals - if you would like a copy of the final draft of a new MCS report entitled 'Collection of coral reef fish for aquaria: global trade, conservation issues and management strategies' please drop me a line and I will send you the .pdf files. We are hoping for feed-back especially for individual country details, so look forward to hearing from you. Best wishes, Liz Wood Dr Elizabeth Wood, Coral Reef Conservation Officer, Marine Conservation Society, Hollybush, Chequers Lane, Eversley, Hook, Hants RG27 ONY, UK Tel 01189 734127 Fax 01189 731832 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010522/2b6e57e3/attachment.html From Tracy.Gill at noaa.gov Wed May 23 10:53:51 2001 From: Tracy.Gill at noaa.gov (Tracy Gill) Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:53:51 -0400 Subject: Voluntary Black Out June 21 7-10pm Message-ID: <3B0BCEED.6502DC2B@noaa.gov> ROLL YOUR OWN BLACK OUT THE FIRST DAY OF SUMMER JUNE 21, 2001 THURS EVE, 7-10pm worldwide, all time zones --------------------------------------------------- In protest of George W. Bush's energy policies and lack of emphasis on efficiency, conservation and alternative fuels, there will be a voluntary rolling blackout on the first day of summer, June 21 at 7pm - 10pm in any time zone (this will roll it across the planet). Its a simple protest and a symbolic act. Turn out your lights from 7pm-10pm on June 21. Unplug whatever you can unplug in your house-- do something instead of watching television, light candles, have fun in the dark. Forward this email as widely as possible, to your government representatives and environmental contacts. Let them know we want global education, participation and funding in conservation, efficiency and alternative fuel efforts -- and an end to over exploitation and misuse of the earth's resources. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010523/371ac260/attachment.html From kochzius at uni-bremen.de Wed May 23 11:08:23 2001 From: kochzius at uni-bremen.de (kochzius at uni-bremen.de) Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 17:08:23 +0200 Subject: Butterflyfishes and fishing Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.0.20010523170247.0238dc10@pop.zfn.uni-bremen.de> Hi coral listers! Here is a interesting reply from Andy. I would be interested if other people made a similar experience and if there is any study about fishing pressure on butterfly fishes. Beside small scale fishery in developing countries I also would expect that collecting for aquarium fishes will have a negative impact on the population of butterflyfishes in certain areas. Best fishes Marc >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 07:23:26 -0700 (PDT) >From: andy cornish >Subject: RE: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of change >To: kochzius at uni-bremen.de > >Dear Marc and Victor, > >I was interested to see that Marc had mentioned the >fishing as a potential problem with using >butterflyfishes as indicators of coral health. >Regardless of the other problems with this approach, >the impact of fishing would certainly prevent these >fishes being used here in Hong Kong, for example. We >have small coral communities (up to 70% cover) that >are legally fished with chicken-wire cage traps and >gill/trammel nets. The cage traps occasionally catch >butterflyfishes while the nets (down to just 2 cm >square mesh size) are particularly effective at >catching butterflyfishes, I even used them myself to >obtain specimens. In localities where similar gears >are used in coral environments, I doubt very much >whether you could separate the effects of fishing from >those related to coral health. > >Regards, > >Andy Cornish Ph.D >University of Hong Kong > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices >http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From Curran at altc.freeserve.co.uk Wed May 23 11:50:22 2001 From: Curran at altc.freeserve.co.uk (Sarah Curran) Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:50:22 +0100 Subject: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of change References: Message-ID: <002801c0e3a0$2769ede0$4ee2883e@pbncomputer> Hi Victor, As I said I have yet to work the data up, but on general observations I would say that if a correlation does exist between agonsitc respones and coral habitat it will prove at this stage to be a weak one. I did find that the redfins interacted with a large number of other reef fish, often for no apparant food resource related reason. I would agree that the method in the manual is not appropriate for use as monitoring of coral habitat degradation as the effects on these sorts of behaviour are likely to be much more complex, and the sample size that is involved in this sort of monitoring (using behaviour) are likely to be outside most low key monitoring programmes. There are too many factors that are apparant in the field to alter/effect agonistic/submissive responses. On a related note, perhaps you and others may be interested in some behaviour we recorded whilst studying feeding rates; any comments much appreciated.The feeding study did turn up some interesting things such as in heavily silted sites redfins were observed several times clearly "blowing" silt from corals before eating....I haven't found this in the literature, perhaps I just haven't looked hard enough though. In the same heavily degraded sites they took nips from corraline algae in areas where there was very little live coral available (my own observations, not analysed). At one site that was dominated by tubastrea they spent large amounts of time clearly nipping at the tubastrea in preference to available porites colonies close to them. In all our samples from this site I'd say more than 60% of the time was spent on Tubastrea. Can anyone shed light on this for me? I am away in the field from Early June and will get only infrequent email access so am off the list for a while. Can anyone who has comments or takes this discussion further please send to my email address too...Cheers I would be interested to hear if anyone else has tried to use the manual in the field and how useful they found it. Sarah ----- Original Message ----- From: Gomelyuk, Victor To: Sarah Curran Sent: 20 May 2001 09:04 Subject: RE: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of change > Dear Sarah, > > Thank you so much for your respond. I am interested in: > > 3.The incidence/rate of aggressive/submissive interactions of Ch. > Trifasciatus (intra and inter specific) and correlations with reef habitat > > You see, abundance and species is obviously very reliable indices for coral > environment monitoring. As for behaviour (feeding and agonistic (aggressive) > interactions... You see, I have ethological background ~ 10 years of > agonistic and feeding behaviour studies and I'm pretty aware that feeding > and agonistic behaviour can be affected by variety of external/internal > factors from fish physiological condition to presence of territorial > competitors (both inter- and intraspecific). What is important - these > changes occur in very stable environment. Aquarium experiments proved that. > And still in the "Manual..." it is suggested that changes in > feeding/aggressive behaviour are triggered mainly by changes in coral > polyps condition. I am afraid it's a bit too simple. It is possible to > measure fish behaviour in the field, but it is extremely difficult task due > to the high variability. Particularly statistical differences assessment. > > > Regards, > > Victor Gomelyuk > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sarah Curran [SMTP:Curran at altc.freeserve.co.uk] > > Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 5:43 AM > > To: Gomelyuk, Victor > > Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > Subject: Re: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of change > > > > Dear Victor , > > > > Myself and several honours students tested some of the methods in this > > manual in Sulawesi. > > We had four main focus areas for the studies (in brief) > > 1. Correlating rates of feeding and reef habitat (Ch. > > trifasciatus-redfins) > > 2. Which (if any) provided a closer correlation with habitat; using total > > number of chaetodonts along transects (abundance and species) or selected > > obligate corralivores > > 3.The incidence/rate of aggressive/submissive interactions of Ch. > > Trifasciatus (intra and inter specific) and correlations with reef habitat > > 4.Investigating habitat preferences in pristine and degraded habitats > > (Redfins) > > > > The data is still being worked up. What particular aspect are you > > interested > > in? > > > > Sarah > > > > > > Sarah Curran > > Science Co-ordinator > > Operation Wallacea > > Priory Lodge > > Spilsby > > Lincolnshire > > PE23 4BP > > UK > > Work email: science at opwall.com > > Home email: curran at altc.freeserve.co.uk > > Mob:07714 305528 > > Website: www.opwall.com > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Gomelyuk, Victor > > To: > > Sent: 19 May 2001 10:47 > > Subject: RE: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of change > > > > > > > > > > Dear Colleagues, > > > > > > I would like to find if anyone is using Butterflyfishes as Indicators of > > > coral reefs conditions?: > > > Re: Crosby, M.P. and E.S.Reese. 1996 A Manual for Monitoring Coral Reefs > > > With Indicator Species: Butterflyfishes as Indicators of Change on Indo > > > Pacific Reefs. Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, NOAA, > > Silver > > > Spring, MD. 45 pp. > > > > > > Your feedback will be greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Dr Victor E. Gomelyuk > > > Marine Scientist > > > Cobourg Marine Park > > > PO Box 496 PALMERSTON NT 0831 AUSTRALIA > > > phone 61 (08) 8979 0244 > > > FAX 61 (08) 8979 0246 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~ > > > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > > > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > > > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From j.oliver at cgiar.org Tue May 22 02:32:03 2001 From: j.oliver at cgiar.org (Jamie Oliver) Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:32:03 +0800 Subject: Status Reports available on ReefBase Message-ID: <200105231646.QAA12804@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Coral-Listers, This is to inform you that this month we have added new links to coral reef status reports for the following countries on the ReefBase website ( http://www.reefbase.org ): This now brings us up to a total of 50 countries for which we can provide information on reef status. Some of these reports are a bit dated, however, so if any of you are aware of more recent or comprehensive documents which we could either link to or provide directly from our site, please let us know. In the next few months we are planing to make significant additions to both the range of information available on ReefBase (monitoring locations, bleaching records)and the mode of access (interactive GIS maps). As we implement these new additions and plan for other ones, we would welcome your feedback and suggestions and contributions. We would like to thank Bernard Salvat, David Gulko, Nicolas Pilcher, Priscilla Billig and Richard Grigg for their help in providing access to the several of the reports below. Regards Jamie Oliver Marco Noordeloos ReefBase Project Leader ReefBase Manager To access any of these reports, please visit the Reef Status Summaries section on our website: http://www.reefbase.org/summaries Country Status Reports: Australia Bahamas Belize Cayman Islands Clipperton Island Cuba French Indian Ocean Territories French Polynesia Guadeloupe Hawaii Honduras Indonesia Jamaica Japan - Okinawa Martinique Mayotte Mexico Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia Northern Marianas Oman Philippines Reunion St Vincent Taiwan Thailand Turks & Caicos Islands US Virgin Islands Venezuela Wallis and Futuna Regional Status Reports: Middle East Pacific Central-Pacific East Pacific To access any of these reports, please visit the Reef Status Summaries section on our website: http://www.reefbase.org/summaries Jamie Oliver Senior Scientist (Coral Reef Projects) ICLARM - The World Fish Center PO Box 500, Penang 10670 Phone: (604) 641 4623 Fax: (604) 643 4463 email: J.Oliver at cgiar.org ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C0E2CB.F8FC59E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear Coral-Listers,

 

This is = to inform you that this month we have added new links to coral reef status = reports for the following countries on the ReefBase website (http://www.reefbase.org ): This = now brings us up to a total of 50 countries for which we can provide information on = reef status.  Some of these = reports are a bit dated, however, so if any of you are aware of more recent or comprehensive documents which we could either link to or provide = directly from our site, please let us know. In the next few months we are planing to = make significant additions to both the range of information available on = ReefBase (monitoring locations, bleaching records)and the mode of access = (interactive GIS maps). As we implement these new additions and plan for other ones, = we would welcome your feedback and suggestions and = contributions.

 

 

 =

We would = like to thank Bernard Salvat, David Gulko, Nicolas Pilcher, Priscilla Billig and Richard Grigg for their help in providing access to the several of the = reports below.

 

Regards

 

 

Jamie Oliver           &n= bsp;         Marco Noordeloos

ReefBase = Project Leader          = ReefBase Manager

 

 

 

To access = any of these reports, please visit the Reef Status Summaries

section = on our website: http://www.reefbase.org/summar= ies

 

Country Status Reports:<= /o:p>

Australia =

Bahamas

Belize =

Cayman = Islands

Clipperton Island

Cuba

French = Indian Ocean Territories

French = Polynesia

Guadeloupe

Hawaii

Honduras

Indonesia

Jamaica =

Japan - = Okinawa

Martinique

Mayotte

Mexico =

Netherlands Antilles

New = Caledonia

Northern Marianas

Oman

Philippines

Reunion

St = Vincent

Taiwan

Thailand

Turks = & Caicos Islands

US Virgin Islands

Venezuela

Wallis = and Futuna

 

Regional Status Reports:<= /o:p>

Middle = East

Pacific

Central-Pacific

East = Pacific

 

To access = any of these reports, please visit the Reef Status Summaries

section = on our website: http://www.reefbase.org/summar= ies

 

 

 

 

 

Jamie Oliver

Senior Scientist = (Coral Reef Projects)

ICLARM - The World = Fish Center<= /p>

PO Box 500, Penang = 10670<= /p>

 <= /p>

Phone: (604) 641 = 4623<= /p>

Fax: (604) 643 = 4463<= /p>

 <= /p>

email:  J.Oliver at cgiar.org

 <= /p>

------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C0E2CB.F8FC59E0-- ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From SMHoke at aol.com Tue May 22 20:20:11 2001 From: SMHoke at aol.com (SMHoke at aol.com) Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 20:20:11 EDT Subject: Mark Chiappone's E-mail Message-ID: Dear Coral Listers: One of our students here at Nova Southeastern University (Ray Wolcott) is rather urgently in need of Mark Chiappone's e-mail address. I'm sure Dr. Joshua Feingold has that address, but I'm equally as sure he is aboard a research vessel in the Galapagos at the moment, and therefore more than a little difficult to catch up with for now. So, if any of you happens to know Mark Chiappone's e-mail address, please forward same to Ray Wolcott at: wolcott at nova.edu Thanks for your help. Regards, S. Michael Hoke Graduate Student - Marine Biology Nova Southeastern University - USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010522/c807bf58/attachment.html From pottst at uncwil.edu Tue May 22 15:26:26 2001 From: pottst at uncwil.edu (Thomas Potts) Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 15:26:26 -0400 Subject: Request for proposals Message-ID: <005401c0e2f5$18804be0$0a151498@cmsr.uncwil.edu> REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS NOAA?s National Undersea Research Center at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington seeks proposals for undersea research off the southeast U.S. from North Carolina to Texas. For 2002, the center will focus support on two primary initiatives: Ocean Exploration Initiative The center will partner with NOAA?s new office of ocean exploration to support submersible (<3000 fsw) and ROV projects that address key Ocean Exploration objectives in the South Atlantic Bight and Gulf of Mexico. II. Core Center Initiatives Research themes identified in this announcement address NOAA programmatic goals in the southeast and Gulf of Mexico regions. Projects that require decompression diving down to 300 fsw, including development and use of new technologies such as rebreathers, are especially encouraged. Full details are available on the center?s website: http://www.uncwil.edu/nurc/proposals/resopp_2002.htm ----- Thomas A. Potts Science Director NOAA National Undersea Research Center University of North Carolina at Wilmington 5600 Marvin K. Moss Lane Wilmington, NC 28409 PH: 910-962-2442 FAX: 910-962-2444 ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From nimrod at ocean.org.il Wed May 23 09:18:46 2001 From: nimrod at ocean.org.il (Nimrod Epstein) Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 15:18:46 +0200 Subject: No subject Message-ID: Dear listers Was there a message sent to the list just a while ago regarding the establishment of a new journal on the subject of ecological restoration? thanks for your time nimrod epstein -------------------------------------------- Phd student Israel Oceanographic and Limn. research. Tel Shikmona, P.O.B 8030, Haifa 31080 tel: 972-4- 8515202 fax: - " - 8511911 nimrod at ocean.org.il -------------------------------------------- ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From matz at whitney.ufl.edu Wed May 23 08:16:05 2001 From: matz at whitney.ufl.edu (Mike Matz) Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:16:05 +0400 Subject: looking for R.C.Babcock and Craig Mundy Message-ID: <3B0BAA05.F83F1557@whitney.ufl.edu> Hello all, does anybody know email addesses of R.C.Babcock and/or Craig Mundy, both listed as affiliated with? Australian Institute of Marine Science?.. I need to ask them a couple of questions about their studies on coral settlement and post-settlement mortality. Mike -- Mikhail V. Matz, Ph.D. Whitney Laboratory University of Florida 9505 Ocean Shore blvd St Augustine FL 32080-8610, USA phone +1 904 461 4044 fax +1 801 849 5388 ? ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From adaley at coral.org Thu May 24 14:51:30 2001 From: adaley at coral.org (Anita Daley) Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 11:51:30 -0700 Subject: how many sq. kilometers of corals are in Oman? Message-ID: Hello. The National Geographic Channel called me to get the number of square kilometers of coral reefs there are in Oman. The only figure they have is "less than 625". If you can confirm this or provide a more specific figure, I would very much appreciate it. Thank you, Anita -- Anita Daley International Coral Reef Information Network Coordinator The Coral Reef Alliance 2014 Shattuck Avenue Berkeley, CA 94704 (510) 848-0110 ext. 313 (510) 848-3720 fax http://www.coral.org "Working together to keep coral reefs alive." ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From olof at timmermon.se Fri May 25 11:19:16 2001 From: olof at timmermon.se (Olof Linden) Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 17:19:16 +0200 Subject: announcement Message-ID: <004801c0e52e$10e6ee80$7c3cfcc3@oloflinden> ICRI and CORDIO wishes to announce their next meetings to be held in Maputo in November 2001. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010525/a0697afa/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Wkshp & CPC Announcement_Africa.doc Type: application/msword Size: 26112 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010525/a0697afa/attachment.doc From debimack at auracom.com Fri May 25 16:01:52 2001 From: debimack at auracom.com (Debbie MacKenzie) Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 17:01:52 -0300 Subject: Biomass depletion in the big picture Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20010525170152.0085d100@auracom.com> Hi Coral-list, The discussion on the causes of mass coral bleaching has been very interesting, thanks, but I've still not gotten answers to two of my main questions: Do you see a physical difference between what happens in mass bleaching events and what you would expect to see in food starvation? - and - Do you have any time-series data on the abundance of tropical ocean zooplankton? A strong case can be made that fishing has made a large contribution to the rise in atmospheric CO2. http://www.fisherycrisis.com/strangelove.html Sincerely, Debbie MacKenzie ABSTRACT: An increase in atmospheric CO2 is an expected consequence of removal of the marine biota. It is demonstrated that the progressive fishing-induced biomass depletion of the world?s ocean is a more plausible explanation for what has triggered the rising CO2 in the atmosphere, than is our more recent history of burning fossil fuels. Proof for the long-term trend in biomass depletion is found by examining the contrasting pictures of abundant marine species pre-fishing and the life-depleted status of the world?s ocean today. The realization that biomass depletion has ?bottom-up? effects as well as ?top-down? ones leads to the inevitable conclusion that marine primary productivity is functioning at a significantly lower level now than it did in the past, when the ocean-atmosphere maintained a steady carbon balance. Humans cannot remember the great abundance of sea life that existed even 500 years ago...but the ocean can. Deep water circulation patterns today bring carbon to the surface in ocean upwelling areas, in the same manner and quantity as they always have. This carbon is ?exhaled? to the atmosphere in a process known as ?outgassing.? What comes out of the sea is ?very old? carbon, the memory of marine primary production that took place centuries ago. The deep water contains a vast pool of carbon, and it circulates only very slowly; the average turnover time may be about 1000 years. For many thousands of years the ocean and atmosphere maintained a carbon balance, and atmospheric levels were steady, but no longer. ?New? carbon cycled into the deep water annually balanced the amount that was cycled out...but a rather long lag time exists between the two. Due to the drop in marine primary productivity, todays carbon input to the deep water falls significantly short of what is required to balance the amount that the ocean sends out via ?outgassing.? Due to the 1000 year lag time between the input and output ends of the cycle, readjustment will take a while. The ocean and atmosphere are seeking a new state of carbon balance. The amount of CO2 exhaled annually by the ocean today represents the average amount of carbon put into the deep pool on a yearly basis over the last 1000 years. Due to the fishing-induced imbalance, CO2 levels in the atmosphere are rising. For the past two centuries the sea has ?exhaled? larger amounts of CO2 than it has ?inhaled.? This is an unrecognized consequence of human fishing, and continued fishing will only exacerbate the situation. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu Fri May 25 18:34:49 2001 From: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu (Bob Buddemeier) Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 17:34:49 -0500 Subject: Biomass depletion in the big picture References: <3.0.6.32.20010525170152.0085d100@auracom.com> Message-ID: <3B0EDE09.A4641652@kgs.ukans.edu> 1. Fossil fuel emissions: "Since 1751 over 270 billion tons of carbon have been released to the atmosphere from the consumption of fossil fuels and cement production. Half of these emissions have occurred since the mid 1970s. The 1997 estimate for global CO2 emissions, 6601 million metric tons of carbon, is the highest fossil-fuel emission estimate ever." (http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/emis/tre_glob.htm) 2. Global fishery production is cited by McGinn (1998) in Worldwatch Paper 142 as rising from 20 million tons in 1950 to about 120 million tons in the mid 1990s. This is in tons of wet weight biomass, which is typically on the order of 1% carbon. Even with a generous estimate of 5% C/wet weight, annual fishery removal from the sea is <0.1% of the annual fossil fuel input to the atmosphere. 3. If one assumes that most of the biomass extraction is at least two steps up the food chain from the primary producers, the "factor of 10 per trophic level" rule of thumb suggests that fisheries deplete total marine biomass by no more than 1%. This is probably a significant overestimate. 4. Human acceleration of nutrient cycles has led to major eutrophication in many coastal areas (which are disproportionately important to the total marine productivity) -- this is production of EXCESS marine biomass at the most basic and quantitatively dominant level. 5. A review of the carbon cycle literature shows that the biggest scientific challenge is the identity of a "missing" carbon sink. If fishery depletion were actually making an unrecognized contribution to the atmospheric CO2, this would be a missing source, not a sink. >From all of the above, I conclude that "a strong case" CANNOT be made that "fishing has made a large contribution to the rise in atmmospheric CO2." I hope that counterarguments will be put forward quantitatively, in terms of the extensive literature on global carbon inventories and dynamics. Bob Buddemeier Debbie MacKenzie wrote: > Hi Coral-list, > > The discussion on the causes of mass coral bleaching has been very > interesting, thanks, but I've still not gotten answers to two of my main > questions: Do you see a physical difference between what happens in mass > bleaching events and what you would expect to see in food starvation? - and > - Do you have any time-series data on the abundance of tropical ocean > zooplankton? A strong case can be made that fishing has made a large > contribution to the rise in atmospheric CO2. > http://www.fisherycrisis.com/strangelove.html > > Sincerely, > Debbie MacKenzie > > ABSTRACT: > > An increase in atmospheric CO2 is an expected consequence of removal of the > marine biota. It is demonstrated that the progressive fishing-induced > biomass depletion of the world?s ocean is a more plausible explanation for > what has triggered the rising CO2 in the atmosphere, than is our more > recent history of burning fossil fuels. Proof for the long-term trend in > biomass depletion is found by examining the contrasting pictures of > abundant marine species pre-fishing and the life-depleted status of the > world?s ocean today. The realization that biomass depletion has ?bottom-up? > effects as well as ?top-down? ones leads to the inevitable conclusion that > marine primary productivity is functioning at a significantly lower level > now than it did in the past, when the ocean-atmosphere maintained a steady > carbon balance. > > Humans cannot remember the great abundance of sea life that existed even > 500 years ago...but the ocean can. Deep water circulation patterns today > bring carbon to the surface in ocean upwelling areas, in the same manner > and quantity as they always have. This carbon is ?exhaled? to the > atmosphere in a process known as ?outgassing.? What comes out of the sea is > ?very old? carbon, the memory of marine primary production that took place > centuries ago. The deep water contains a vast pool of carbon, and it > circulates only very slowly; the average turnover time may be about 1000 > years. For many thousands of years the ocean and atmosphere maintained a > carbon balance, and atmospheric levels were steady, but no longer. ?New? > carbon cycled into the deep water annually balanced the amount that was > cycled out...but a rather long lag time exists between the two. Due to the > drop in marine primary productivity, todays carbon input to the deep water > falls significantly short of what is required to balance the amount that > the ocean sends out via ?outgassing.? Due to the 1000 year lag time between > the input and output ends of the cycle, readjustment will take a while. The > ocean and atmosphere are seeking a new state of carbon balance. The amount > of CO2 exhaled annually by the ocean today represents the average amount of > carbon put into the deep pool on a yearly basis over the last 1000 years. > Due to the fishing-induced imbalance, CO2 levels in the atmosphere are > rising. For the past two centuries the sea has ?exhaled? larger amounts of > CO2 than it has ?inhaled.? This is an unrecognized consequence of human > fishing, and continued fishing will only exacerbate the situation. > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. -- Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier Kansas Geological Survey University of Kansas 1930 Constant Avenue Lawrence, KS 66047 USA Ph (1) (785) 864-2112 Fax (1) (785) 864-5317 e-mail: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From tdone at aims.gov.au Sat May 26 07:38:42 2001 From: tdone at aims.gov.au (Terry Done) Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 21:38:42 +1000 Subject: Additional Info: 9ICRS Proceedings: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010526213137.00c3d690@email.aims.gov.au> Please note I have added information from Dr Moosa about margins, indents, spacing between columns etc. to the bottom of the Proceedings layout document on www.nova.edu/ocean/9icrs (2nd button on front page) My apologies that this was incomplete first time around. Best wishes, Terry Done Dr Terry Done Leader Sustaining Living Marine Resources Project Australian Institute of Marine Science PMB #3 Mail Centre, Townsville Qld 4810 Australia Phone 61 7 47 534 344 Fax 61 7 47 725 852 email: tdone at aims.gov.au WEBSITE for 9th International Coral Reef Symposium www.nova.edu/ocean/9icrs ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From csheppard at bio.warwick.ac.uk Fri May 25 14:13:35 2001 From: csheppard at bio.warwick.ac.uk (Charles Sheppard) Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 19:13:35 +0100 Subject: coral reprints Message-ID: <200105262154.VAA19942@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> For those who have asked in recent months for a reprint of: Sheppard CRC and Sheppard ALS 1991. Corals and coral communities of = Arabia, 200 pp, 100 colour illustrations, 200 b/w (approx) and who I told I had run out, I have obtained another batch of copies. There is a small cost to cover the reprint and mail, I'm afraid... Charles Sheppard Dept Biological Sciences Warwick University Coventry CV4 7AL, UK ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From reef-art at juno.com Sun May 27 02:33:33 2001 From: reef-art at juno.com (tom h gray) Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 01:33:33 -0500 Subject: Growth Rates for Sinularia & Sarcophyton Message-ID: <20010527.013336.-480549.1.Reef-Art@juno.com> Greetings all- I have a question regarding the mean growth rate of Sarcohphyton sp. and Sarcophyton sp. I grow these and other corals in captivity for my company, Reef-Art. At present I am doing graduate research for TAMUCC regarding growth rates for these species in captivity under several different light conditions. What is the mean growth rate in the wild for Sarcophyton sp. and Sinularia sp.? Is there a difference in growth rates for Sinularia sp. (green variety) vs. Sinularia sp. (brown variety). Is there any documented growth rates out there for these corals grown in captivity? Thanks in advance for your response, Tom Gray ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From lesk at bu.edu Sun May 27 11:00:16 2001 From: lesk at bu.edu (Les Kaufman) Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 11:00:16 -0400 Subject: Measuring growth of shape in stony corals Message-ID: <200105271623.QAA21871@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Many of us face the problem of quantifying changes in both size and shape of corals as they grow. What computational approaches are folks currently using for the latter, the measuring of changes in colony form, for ramose/branching species like finger and staghorn corals? -- Les Kaufman Biology Department Boston University 5 Cummington St. Boston, MA 02215 lesk at bu.edu 617-353-5560 office 617-353-6965 lab 617-353-6340 fax and BUMP 7 MBL St. Woods Hole, MA 02543 508-289-7579 office 508-289-7950 fax ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From reef-art at juno.com Sun May 27 18:02:06 2001 From: reef-art at juno.com (tom h gray) Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:02:06 -0500 Subject: Growth Rates Message-ID: <20010527.170209.-158777.1.Reef-Art@juno.com> Greetings coral watchers- To correct previous mistake, I am interested in mean growth rates of Sarcophyton sp. and Sinularia sp. in the wild. Are there growth rate differences in green and brown varieties of Sinularia sp? Are there any documented growth rates out there for these corals grown in captivity? My previous note mentioned Sarcophyton sp. twice instead of including Sinularia sp. Sorry! That's what I get for working 34 hours without sleeping. Thanks in advance for your response, Tom Gray ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From debimack at auracom.com Mon May 28 12:07:12 2001 From: debimack at auracom.com (Debbie MacKenzie) Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:07:12 -0300 Subject: Biomass depletion in the big picture In-Reply-To: <3B0EDE09.A4641652@kgs.ukans.edu> References: <3.0.6.32.20010525170152.0085d100@auracom.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20010528130712.008551d0@auracom.com> Hi Bob, Thanks for your reply. At 05:34 PM 5/25/01 -0500, you wrote: >1. Fossil fuel emissions: >"Since 1751 over 270 billion tons of carbon have been released to the >atmosphere from the consumption of fossil fuels and cement production. Half of >these emissions have occurred since the mid 1970s. The 1997 estimate for global >CO2 emissions, 6601 million metric tons of carbon, is >the highest fossil-fuel emission estimate ever." >(http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/emis/tre_glob.htm) > Yes, very big numbers, which may or may not be accurate. Regardless, they are not particularly useful as long as the other half of the terrestrial carbon equation remains unknown. The capacity of terrestrial systems to act as carbon sinks is just starting to be realized. http://www.eurekalert.org/releases/cu-naacda.html And the very fact of the "missing sink" - approx. 30% of the carbon "airborne fraction" going "missing" - this reflects the crudeness of our understanding and probably our calculations. All of this obviously has a huge margin of error. Also, why was not "the highest fossil-fuel emission estimate ever" accompanied by the "highest jump in global CO2 ever?" (And why did not "half of the CO2 rise" also occur since the mid 1970s, if that's the time period during which "half of these emissions" occurred? These observations weaken the direct cause and effect that is commonly believed: "rising emissions = rising CO2 levels") >2. Global fishery production is cited by McGinn (1998) in Worldwatch Paper 142 >as rising from 20 million tons in 1950 to about 120 million tons in the mid >1990s. This is in tons of wet weight biomass, which is typically on the order >of 1% carbon. Even with a generous estimate of 5% C/wet weight, annual fishery >removal from the sea is <0.1% of the annual fossil fuel input to the >atmosphere. > 120 million tons - that's including aquaculture production - for the farm fish that are fed fish meal are you counting the same wild fish twice? One when you caught him and then again after he was incorporated into the flesh of the farm fish? Regardless, annual wild fishery yields rose for a long time but stabilized in the vicinity of 90 million tons about a decade ago. And the average trophic level of what makes up the 90 million tons is dropping...contrary to the expectations of "conventional wisdom" which hold that as the trophic level drops in the system, the overall biomass at those levels should increase significantly. (Some thinking has it increasing by a factor of 10 for each trophic level dropped.) Why has the yield not increased as the trophic level has dropped? It's because one key ingredient for building fish is in short supply - fixed Nitrogen. It's not clear to me why you would compare the carbon content of fishery removals with that in fossil fuel emissions. Carbon does not appear to be in short supply. It's the link between the carbon and nitrogen cycles that is most important in assessing the effect of fishing on CO2. And a simple calculation of tonnage is unlikely to tell the tale. As you know, fixed nitrogen is (most times) the limiting nutrient in marine ecosystems. (Actually another scientist did the math for me one time - dry weight of nitrogen removed by fisheries is only a small fraction of the nitrogen "put back" by humans via nutrient-enriched terrestrial runoff. However, the sea knows how to get rid of that - sedimentation, denitrification...and therefore very little becomes incorporated into the living web, since it's "given back" in inappropriate form, amount and location. Stunted growth of fish in an "overnourished" ocean presents a bizarre paradox, IMO.) Nitrogen is the limiting nutrient factor in marine food webs, therefore the availability of nitrogen determines the strength of the biological pump. The "biological pump" contains two sections, each of which relies on the presence of nitrogen, but in slightly different ways. The "organic pump" delivers carbon to the deep water by sinking organic particles, and nitrogen is a necessary part of their makeup. Therefore, it's via the "limiting nutrient" route that nitrogen affects the strength of the organic pump. The other part of the biological pump, however, the "carbonate pump," may be the more significant side, since besides consigning carbon to the deep carbonate pool, it sequesters it in sediment, sand, limestone, skeletons of coral reefs, seashells, etc. Nitrogen functions as a "catalyst" rather than a key participating element in the carbonate pump. It allows the reaction to proceed without being consumed by the reaction itself. Visualize a scenario: phytoplankton uses ammonia from seawater as the critical N source for production/carbon fixation -> a shell-forming marine organism consumes the phytoplankton, incorporating 10% of the nitrogen into its flesh and excreting 90% back into the seawater in a form usable by the phytoplankton -> a small fish consumes the shell-former, the fish also keeps 10% and excretes 90% of the N (in two short steps, 99% of the N has therefore been returned to the phytoplankton), the fish excretes the carbonate shell since it's nutrient content is too low and its indigestible (it's mineral, ends up making sand)... This cycle goes round and round, efficiently recycling the N but constantly shunting more C into long-term storage in mineral and deep sea carbonate pools. Building the shells uses only minute amounts of N, but N is the "catalyst" for shell formation since the living shell-building organisms will not exist without it. No molluscs and corals -> no shells...no N -> no molluscs and corals... Therefore, although N is not a catalyst in the chemical sense for the carbonate pump, it is so in the functional sense. So how could you calculate the effect on the carbon cycle of removing one mole of N from the marine ecosystem? From the "biological pump" point of view you've not only removed a building block, but an essential catalyst as well. (The math will be very tough, a far cry from a linear relationship...) >3. If one assumes that most of the biomass extraction is at least two steps up >the food chain from the primary producers, the "factor of 10 per trophic level" >rule of thumb suggests that fisheries deplete total marine biomass by no more >than 1%. This is probably a significant overestimate. > As suggested above, that rule of thumb seems not to be working in the real world. "When theory conflicts with reality, reality always wins" - no? >4. Human acceleration of nutrient cycles has led to major eutrophication in >many coastal areas (which are disproportionately important to the total marine >productivity) -- this is production of EXCESS marine biomass at the most basic >and quantitatively dominant level. > Now this is a dangerous myth. EXCESS phytoplankton in polluted estuaries maybe, but this does not translate into EXCESS marine biomass. Ask any fisherman...or any fish. We've made some very crude adjustments to what was once a finely balanced system...Polluting the water does not produce fish, it produces what you said, "major eutrophication." That means that the waterway is now functioning as a septic system, accelerated sedimentation and denitrification are the main things going on there. >5. A review of the carbon cycle literature shows that the biggest scientific >challenge is the identity of a "missing" carbon sink. If fishery depletion >were actually making an unrecognized contribution to the atmospheric CO2, this >would be a missing source, not a sink. > You've got it! >I hope that counterarguments will be put forward quantitatively, in terms of >the extensive literature on global carbon inventories and dynamics. > OK, sure, so do I. BTW, did you read my article: http://www.fisherycrisis.com/strangelove.html , or did you just react to the abstract that I posted? Debbie MacKenzie ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu Mon May 28 23:06:45 2001 From: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu (Bob Buddemeier) Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 22:06:45 -0500 Subject: Biomass depletion in the big picture References: <3.0.6.32.20010525170152.0085d100@auracom.com> <3.0.6.32.20010528130712.008551d0@auracom.com> Message-ID: <003701c0e7ec$66301860$ac8ced81@oemcomputer> Debbie, I will resume the discussion when you can come up with a testable hypothesis that is based on: 1. valid biogeochemical equations; 2. valid mass-balance algebraic equations; 3. supporting citations from the peer-reviewed scientific literature; and/or 4. data or well-formulated logical arguments refuting the published findings you wish to ignore. In the meantime, recommended reading: Field, C.B., Behrenfeld, M.J., Randerson, J.T., and Falkowski, P., 1998, Primary production of the biosphere: Integrating terrestrial and oceanic components: Science, v. 281, p. 237-240. --- Message -- Oceanic net primary production is approx 50 PgC/yr, (=5E16 g) phytoplankton turnover time is 2-6 days, so standing biomass averages about 5E14gC. Annual fisheries harvest is around 5E11 gC (as previously discussed), or 0.1% of primary producer (not total) biomass. Whether expressed as C or N, this extraction is trivial compared to the overall inventory, the measurement uncertainties, and both intra-annual and interannual natural fluctuations. Pahlow, M., and Riebesell, U., 2000, Temporal trends in deep ocean Redfield ratios: Science, v. 287, p. 831-833. --- Message -- Measurements of deepwater chemistry over time show a rising N:P ratio in the N. Atlantic, and increased export production in the N. Pacific (which incidentally, is identified as Fe- rather than N-limited). Neither lends much support to the idea of productivity limitation by N reduction. Keeling, C.D., Whorf, T.P., Wahlen, M., and van der Plicht, J., 1995, Interannual extremes in the rate of rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide: Nature, v. 375, p. 666-670. --- Message -- Compare curves of atmospheric CO2 and fossil fuel emissions (over nearly half a century). Not only is there a correspondence that defies classification as coincidence, but the anomalies show that biotic effects have also been quite consistent , and rather minor in variability (certainly with no evidence for a systematically increasing offset as fisheries harvest increased). Kleypas, J.A., Buddemeier, R.W., Archer, D., Gattuso, J.-P., Langdon, C., and Opdyke, B.N., 1999, Geochemical consequences of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide on coral reefs: Science, v. 284, p. 118-120. And Ware, J.R., Smith, S.V., and Reaka-Kudla, M.L., 1992, Coral reefs: sources or sinks of atmospheric CO2?: Coral Reefs, v. 11, p. 127-130. --- Message -- Calcium carbonate production is a sink for carbon (extracted from the marine DIC reservoir) but a source of atmospheric CO2. And, for obligate shallow-water calcifiers, carbonate ion may be or soon become a limiting nutrient. Moffat, A.S., 1998, Global nitrogen overload problem grows critical: Science, v. 279, p. 988-989. --- Message -- (with references) Mobilization of fixed N to the ocean has dramatically increased, particularly in coastal regions (which supply most of the world fisheries harvest). Bob Buddemeier ----- Original Message ----- From: Debbie MacKenzie To: Cc: Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 11:07 Subject: Re: Biomass depletion in the big picture > Hi Bob, > > Thanks for your reply. > > At 05:34 PM 5/25/01 -0500, you wrote: > >1. Fossil fuel emissions: > >"Since 1751 over 270 billion tons of carbon have been released to the > >atmosphere from the consumption of fossil fuels and cement production. > Half of > >these emissions have occurred since the mid 1970s. The 1997 estimate for > global > >CO2 emissions, 6601 million metric tons of carbon, is > >the highest fossil-fuel emission estimate ever." > >(http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/emis/tre_glob.htm) > > > > Yes, very big numbers, which may or may not be accurate. Regardless, they > are not particularly useful as long as the other half of the terrestrial > carbon equation remains unknown. The capacity of terrestrial systems to act > as carbon sinks is just starting to be realized. > http://www.eurekalert.org/releases/cu-naacda.html > And the very fact of the "missing sink" - approx. 30% of the carbon > "airborne fraction" going "missing" - this reflects the crudeness of our > understanding and probably our calculations. All of this obviously has a > huge margin of error. > > Also, why was not "the highest fossil-fuel emission estimate ever" > accompanied by the "highest jump in global CO2 ever?" (And why did not > "half of the CO2 rise" also occur since the mid 1970s, if that's the time > period during which "half of these emissions" occurred? These observations > weaken the direct cause and effect that is commonly believed: "rising > emissions = rising CO2 levels") > > >2. Global fishery production is cited by McGinn (1998) in Worldwatch > Paper 142 > >as rising from 20 million tons in 1950 to about 120 million tons in the mid > >1990s. This is in tons of wet weight biomass, which is typically on the > order > >of 1% carbon. Even with a generous estimate of 5% C/wet weight, annual > fishery > >removal from the sea is <0.1% of the annual fossil fuel input to the > >atmosphere. > > > > 120 million tons - that's including aquaculture production - for the farm > fish that are fed fish meal are you counting the same wild fish twice? One > when you caught him and then again after he was incorporated into the flesh > of the farm fish? Regardless, annual wild fishery yields rose for a long > time but stabilized in the vicinity of 90 million tons about a decade ago. > And the average trophic level of what makes up the 90 million tons is > dropping...contrary to the expectations of "conventional wisdom" which hold > that as the trophic level drops in the system, the overall biomass at those > levels should increase significantly. (Some thinking has it increasing by a > factor of 10 for each trophic level dropped.) Why has the yield not > increased as the trophic level has dropped? It's because one key ingredient > for building fish is in short supply - fixed Nitrogen. > > It's not clear to me why you would compare the carbon content of fishery > removals with that in fossil fuel emissions. Carbon does not appear to be > in short supply. It's the link between the carbon and nitrogen cycles that > is most important in assessing the effect of fishing on CO2. > > And a simple calculation of tonnage is unlikely to tell the tale. As you > know, fixed nitrogen is (most times) the limiting nutrient in marine > ecosystems. (Actually another scientist did the math for me one time - dry > weight of nitrogen removed by fisheries is only a small fraction of the > nitrogen "put back" by humans via nutrient-enriched terrestrial runoff. > However, the sea knows how to get rid of that - sedimentation, > denitrification...and therefore very little becomes incorporated into the > living web, since it's "given back" in inappropriate form, amount and > location. Stunted growth of fish in an "overnourished" ocean presents a > bizarre paradox, IMO.) > > Nitrogen is the limiting nutrient factor in marine food webs, therefore the > availability of nitrogen determines the strength of the biological pump. > The "biological pump" contains two sections, each of which relies on the > presence of nitrogen, but in slightly different ways. The "organic pump" > delivers carbon to the deep water by sinking organic particles, and > nitrogen is a necessary part of their makeup. Therefore, it's via the > "limiting nutrient" route that nitrogen affects the strength of the organic > pump. > > The other part of the biological pump, however, the "carbonate pump," may > be the more significant side, since besides consigning carbon to the deep > carbonate pool, it sequesters it in sediment, sand, limestone, skeletons of > coral reefs, seashells, etc. Nitrogen functions as a "catalyst" rather than > a key participating element in the carbonate pump. It allows the reaction > to proceed without being consumed by the reaction itself. > > Visualize a scenario: > > phytoplankton uses ammonia from seawater as the critical N source for > production/carbon fixation -> a shell-forming marine organism consumes the > phytoplankton, incorporating 10% of the nitrogen into its flesh and > excreting 90% back into the seawater in a form usable by the phytoplankton > -> a small fish consumes the shell-former, the fish also keeps 10% and > excretes 90% of the N (in two short steps, 99% of the N has therefore been > returned to the phytoplankton), the fish excretes the carbonate shell since > it's nutrient content is too low and its indigestible (it's mineral, ends > up making sand)... > > This cycle goes round and round, efficiently recycling the N but constantly > shunting more C into long-term storage in mineral and deep sea carbonate > pools. Building the shells uses only minute amounts of N, but N is the > "catalyst" for shell formation since the living shell-building organisms > will not exist without it. No molluscs and corals -> no shells...no N -> no > molluscs and corals... Therefore, although N is not a catalyst in the > chemical sense for the carbonate pump, it is so in the functional sense. > > So how could you calculate the effect on the carbon cycle of removing one > mole of N from the marine ecosystem? From the "biological pump" point of > view you've not only removed a building block, but an essential catalyst as > well. (The math will be very tough, a far cry from a linear relationship...) > > >3. If one assumes that most of the biomass extraction is at least two > steps up > >the food chain from the primary producers, the "factor of 10 per trophic > level" > >rule of thumb suggests that fisheries deplete total marine biomass by no more > >than 1%. This is probably a significant overestimate. > > > > As suggested above, that rule of thumb seems not to be working in the real > world. "When theory conflicts with reality, reality always wins" - no? > > >4. Human acceleration of nutrient cycles has led to major eutrophication in > >many coastal areas (which are disproportionately important to the total > marine > >productivity) -- this is production of EXCESS marine biomass at the most > basic > >and quantitatively dominant level. > > > > Now this is a dangerous myth. EXCESS phytoplankton in polluted estuaries > maybe, but this does not translate into EXCESS marine biomass. Ask any > fisherman...or any fish. We've made some very crude adjustments to what was > once a finely balanced system...Polluting the water does not produce fish, > it produces what you said, "major eutrophication." That means that the > waterway is now functioning as a septic system, accelerated sedimentation > and denitrification are the main things going on there. > > >5. A review of the carbon cycle literature shows that the biggest scientific > >challenge is the identity of a "missing" carbon sink. If fishery depletion > >were actually making an unrecognized contribution to the atmospheric CO2, > this > >would be a missing source, not a sink. > > > > You've got it! > > >I hope that counterarguments will be put forward quantitatively, in terms of > >the extensive literature on global carbon inventories and dynamics. > > > > OK, sure, so do I. BTW, did you read my article: > http://www.fisherycrisis.com/strangelove.html , or did you just react to > the abstract that I posted? > > Debbie MacKenzie > > > > > > ~~~~~~~ > For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the > digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the > menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. > > ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From wff at duke.edu Mon May 21 14:24:34 2001 From: wff at duke.edu (William Figueira) Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 14:24:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: boat rentals for research in Key West Message-ID: <200105291359.NAA25837@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> I am conducting research on the reef off of Key West, Florida USA and am seeking advice on boat rental opportunities (shops, individuals...) in and around Key West. We are looking for a 22-26 foot center consol boat to support dive activities for a total of about 7 weeks. Any local knowledge or past experience with such endevors would be much appreciated. Thank you in advance for your help. Will ____________________________________________________________________ Will Figueira email: wff at duke.edu Ph.D. Candidate Duke University Marine Lab phone: (252)504-7572 135 Duke Marine Lab Rd fax : (252)504-7648 Beaufort, NC 28516 USA http://www.env.duke.edu/marinelab/marine/ ____________________________________________________________________ ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From hendee at aoml.noaa.gov Tue May 29 10:14:33 2001 From: hendee at aoml.noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 10:14:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: CREWS/Bahamas deployment Message-ID: Greetings, It is our great pleasure to announce that the first CREWS (Coral Reef Early Warning System) station has been installed near Rainbow Gardens Reef, just north of the Caribbean Marine Research Center (CMRC, on Lee Stocking Island, Bahamas), with funding (via NOAA/NOS and NOAA/NMFS) for NOAA's Coral Reef Watch program (NOAA/OAR and NOAA/NESDIS collaborative). The station was cooperatively deployed by NOAA's Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory, CMRC (a NOAA/National Undersea Research Program affiliate), the Florida Institute of Oceanography (FIO), the University of South Florida (Dep. Marine Science), and Captain Skeet Perry of Miami, Florida. This station is the first of many to be deployed in the years to come, and is patterned after the SEAKEYS network of the Florida Keys, originally developed and currently maintained by FIO. The CREWS network of stations is being developed in response to the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force Monitoring Group's recommendation and goal to monitor all major U.S. coral reefs by 2007. Other coral reef areas will be monitored by CREWS stations wherever possible. The station is currently monitoring wind speed, wind direction, air temperature, barometric pressure, sea temperature, salinity, photosynthetically active radiation (PAR, above and 1 m below water), and ultraviolet-B (UV-B, above and 1 m below water). The data are collected at six minute intervals, averaged, and sent on the hour, every hour, via a GOES satellite to a processing workstation, then posted on the Web (see http://www.coral.noaa.gov/crw/bahamas.html, then click on "Hourly raw data report" near the bottom). These data are provisional at this time, due to some inevitable debugging, calibration and instrumentation problems for this very recent deployment. Further information will be posted at the Web site in the near future. This initial station has several purposes. First, it will model conditions thought to be conducive to coral bleaching, utilizing uniquely developed marine environmental monitoring software (for further explanation, see http://www.coral.noaa.gov/crw/crews_layman.pdf). It will also serve as a sea temperature ground-truthing station for the NOAA/NESDIS HotSpot algorithms. Additionally, it will serve as a "test-bed" station for the development and eventual deployment of other oceanographic instruments useful in monitoring coral reef ecosystem dynamics (e.g., carbon dioxide, transmissometry and fluorometry). Finally, through its continuous monitoring of a pristine coral reef environment, it will serve as a physical environmental information infrastructure for current and future coral reef studies at Rainbow Gardens Reef (see http://www.cmrc.org). The first coral bleaching conditions to be monitored and modeled will be high sea temperature alone vs. high sea temperature plus light (UV-B, PAR). This experiment will be conducted in cooperation with Michael Lesser of the University of New Hampshire, Ray Berkelmans of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority and the Australian Institute of Marine Science, Peter Glynn of the University of Miami, and other coral reef scientists. For further information, please see these Web links: NOAA's Coral Reef Watch Program http://www.coral.noaa.gov/crw Caribbean Marine Research Center http://www.cmrc.org CMRC Study Sites http://www.coral.noaa.gov/crw/bahamas_field_maps.html NOAA/NESDIS HotSpots http://orbit-net.nesdis.noaa.gov/orad/sub/sst_hl_2m.html Cheers, Jim Hendee (jim.hendee at noaa.gov) Coral Health and Monitoring Program NOAA/AOML John Marr (jmarr at cmrc.org), Director Caribbean Marine Research Center Al Strong (alan.e.strong at noaa.gov) Office of Research and Applications NOAA/NESDIS ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From jware at erols.com Wed May 30 07:35:39 2001 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 07:35:39 -0400 Subject: Other sources of atmospheric CO2 Message-ID: <3B14DB0B.79FC822E@erols.com> Dear List, All the discussion between Bob B. and Debbie McK. reminded me of an almost totall ignored source of atmospheric CO2. We have ~5 billion people on Earth inhaling O2 at 21% and exhaling it at 16%. At the same time they inhale CO2 at about 365 ppm while the exhalant contains thousands of ppm of CO2 (I think about 50,000 ppm). Why don't we eliminate this source of CO2??? John P.S. I should have sent this out on April 1. I hope everyone gets the joke! -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886 * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Undersea Technology for the 21st Century \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************** ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From debimack at auracom.com Wed May 30 13:45:06 2001 From: debimack at auracom.com (Debbie MacKenzie) Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 14:45:06 -0300 Subject: Biomass depletion in the big picture Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20010530144506.00857300@auracom.com> Bob, At 10:06 PM 5/28/01 -0500, you wrote: > >Debbie, > >I will resume the discussion when you can come up with a testable hypothesis >that is based on: >1. valid biogeochemical equations; >2. valid mass-balance algebraic equations; >3. supporting citations from the peer-reviewed scientific literature; >and/or >4. data or well-formulated logical arguments refuting the published >findings you wish to ignore. > Your third and fourth conditions are the ones that I thought that I had met in my article: http://www.fisherycrisis.com/strangelove Have you taken the time to read it yet? What do you make of the concidental timing of the CO2 rise and the progression of the fishing industry? And the theory that supports the contention that a decrease in marine biota will cause an ocean-atmosphere readjustment involving an increase in atmospheric CO2? (not my idea, backed up by published, peer-reviewed references, if you read it.) Also, the key question that the whole theory hinges on, is whether or not the total marine biomass has been diminished over the course of the history of human fishing. The references that you pointed me to do not address this question, and this question is critical. To disprove my hypothesis, there needs to be evidence somewhere that the overall marine productivity has NOT been falling. I offered published evidence that it has been dropping, for instance the record from the baleen of the bowhead whales. >In the meantime, recommended reading: > >Field, C.B., Behrenfeld, M.J., Randerson, J.T., and Falkowski, P., 1998, >Primary production of the biosphere: Integrating terrestrial and oceanic >components: Science, v. 281, p. 237-240. >--- Message -- Oceanic net primary production is approx 50 PgC/yr, (=5E16 >g) phytoplankton turnover time is 2-6 days, so standing biomass averages >about 5E14gC. Annual fisheries harvest is around 5E11 gC (as previously >discussed), or 0.1% of primary producer (not total) biomass. Whether >expressed as C or N, this extraction is trivial compared to the overall >inventory, the measurement uncertainties, and both intra-annual and >interannual natural fluctuations. > A quote from the article: "Our results based on time-averaged data are likely to charcterize typical NPP from this time period but certainly miss key anomalies such as ENSO, as well as progressive global changes." Therefore no trend in NPP has been revealed in this work. Here are 2 more quotes from that article: "In terrestrial ecosystems, it is relatively straightforward, in principle, to determine NPP from incremental increases in biomass..." "Because of the rapid turnover of oceanic plant biomass, even large increases in ocean NPP will not result in substantial carbon storage through changes in phytoplankton standing stock." They measure accumulation of plant tissue (trunks, branches, roots) that are not involved in photosynthesis, when trying to determine terrestrial NPP. And this is considered a valid approach. Yet when assessing the marine system, they only look at the phytoplankton segment/biomass, since that represents "the plants." They are looking for phytoplankton to accomplish "carbon storage" by amassing more phytoplankton. However, the phytoplankton are analogous only to the leaves on the terrestrial trees (the actual photosynthesizing units), the analogy to growth of trunks, roots, etc., in the sea is the accumulation of standing stocks of fish. That's where the photosynthesizing units in the sea store their carbon...as opposed to the treetrunks on land. And I do not see where those authors tried to compare their NPP estimates to a mass-balance with fisheries removals. And regarding your mass-balance observation, what did you think of my comments to the effect that nitrogen functions as building block and catalyst both for the organic pump? >Pahlow, M., and Riebesell, U., 2000, Temporal trends in deep ocean Redfield >ratios: Science, v. 287, p. 831-833. >--- Message -- Measurements of deepwater chemistry over time show a rising >N:P ratio in the N. Atlantic, and increased export production in the N. >Pacific (which incidentally, is identified as Fe- rather than N-limited). >Neither lends much support to the idea of productivity limitation by N >reduction. > One key message from this work: "These findings imply that the biological part of the marine carbon cycle currently is NOT in steady state." (consistent with my points - no? Today's carbon cycle models assume the opposite, that it IS in a steady state.) Also, the possible reasons for the rising N:P ratio (without increasing AOU, "apparent oxygen utilization," which would be expected if enhanced N-fertilized primary productivity was the cause), in the North Atlantic Ocean included "any process weakening export production, such as reduced nutrient transport to the surface ocean due to declining vertical mixing..." (the development of the open ocean N-shortage that I suspect, would predictably "weaken export production") I can imagine that the N:P ratio could rise as a result of fishing depletion since fishing removes both N and P. The ocean has an active mechanism, albeit slow, to restore N (nitrogen-fixation), but no means to actively restore P ... therefore rising N:P ratio is quite plausibe and consistent with my ideas, it seems to me. This study did NOT report rising N-CONTENT in the deep ocean. >Keeling, C.D., Whorf, T.P., Wahlen, M., and van der Plicht, J., 1995, >Interannual extremes in the rate of rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide: >Nature, v. 375, p. 666-670. >--- Message -- Compare curves of atmospheric CO2 and fossil fuel emissions >(over nearly half a century). Not only is there a correspondence that >defies classification as coincidence, but the anomalies show that biotic >effects have also been quite consistent , and rather minor in variability >(certainly with no evidence for a systematically increasing offset as >fisheries harvest increased). > This requires a convoluted explanation to account for the fact that the first 20 years of the data fit with the fossil fuel emission data in one way (seemingly 55.9% of airborne CO2 fraction accumulated in the atmosphere each year)..and the second 20 years did not. "Our double-deconvolution calculation suggests that the oceans typically are a larger sink for atmospheric CO2 during El Nino event than otherwise..." This agrees with my statements that the atmosphere is acutely sensitive to changes in ocean currents and accompanying "outgassing" of CO2. Regarding the ocean becoming a "larger sink" during El Nino...that's strange because it's rather well known that fish production tends to drop at those times. Rather than becoming a "larger sink" the ocean more likely becomes a "smaller source" during El Ninos. "In summary, the slowing down of the rate of rise of atmospheric CO2 from 1989 to 1993, seen in our data and confirmed by other measurements, is partially explained (about 30%) by the reduction in growth rate of industrial CO2 emissions that occurred after 1979. We further propose that warming of surface water in advance of this slowdown caused an anomalous rise in atmospheric CO2, accentuating the subsequent slowdown, while the terrestrial biosphere, perhaps by sequestering carbon in a delayed response to the same warming, caused most of the slowdown itself." This is what I mean by a "convoluted explanation." There are some large lag times between cause and effect there, for example 10 years between reducing the growth rate of emissions and slowing the rise rate of CO2. Also the warming that caused a see-saw (first caused CO2 to go up, then a delayed reaction by terr. plants brought it down) is a bit of a stretch. My take on it: the rate of rise in atmospheric CO2 slowed down beginning in 1989 - the same year that wild fishery yields peaked (and have stabilized thereafter) - so the slowdown in rate of marine biomass removal nicely coincides with the slowdown in rising atmospheric CO2 levels. >Kleypas, J.A., Buddemeier, R.W., Archer, D., Gattuso, J.-P., Langdon, C., >and Opdyke, B.N., 1999, Geochemical consequences of increased atmospheric >carbon dioxide on coral reefs: Science, v. 284, p. 118-120. >And >Ware, J.R., Smith, S.V., and Reaka-Kudla, M.L., 1992, Coral reefs: sources >or sinks of atmospheric CO2?: Coral Reefs, v. 11, p. 127-130. >--- Message -- Calcium carbonate production is a sink for carbon (extracted >from the marine DIC reservoir) but a source of atmospheric CO2. And, for >obligate shallow-water calcifiers, carbonate ion may be or soon become a >limiting nutrient. > These concerns about the effects of rising CO2 on seawater pH, carbonate saturation, and ease of calcification for marine organisms....I do not dispute. This work still does not question the SOURCE of the rising CO2, which is what I'm trying to get at. These scenarios would be the same whether the CO2 came from terrestrial emissions or ocean-atmosphere carbon imbalance, IMO. >Moffat, A.S., 1998, Global nitrogen overload problem grows critical: >Science, v. 279, p. 988-989. >--- Message -- (with references) Mobilization of fixed N to the ocean has >dramatically increased, particularly in coastal regions (which supply most >of the world fisheries harvest). > A brief intro, really, to this work that Moffat recommends: Human Alteration of the Global Nitrogen Cycle: Causes and Consequence. by Peter M. Vitousek, Chair, John Aber, Robert W. Howarth, Gene E. Likens, Pamela A. Matson, David W. Schindler, William H. Schlesinger, and G. David Tilman online at: http://esa.sdsc.edu/tilman.htm >From Vitousek et al. "In large river basins, the majority of nitrogen that arrives is probably broken down by denitrifying bacteria and released to the atmosphere as nitrogen gas or nitrous oxide." (i.e. it doesn't translate into more fish) Also, this is another nice one: Oceanic Sources and Sinks (Fred Mackenzie, Karen von Damm, Dave DeMaster, Tom Church, Billy Moore) http://www.joss.ucar.edu/joss_psg/project/oce_workshop/focus/progress/paper_ two.html >From this article: "Water flux times the riverine composition cannot be simply translated into net oceanic source terms without intimate knowledge of biogeochemical and exchange reactions either at the transient saline boundary of a river plume, or within the more permanent mixing zone of a confined estuary and attendant sinks." And this intimate knowledge is seriously lacking. Another interesting observation from Fred Mackenzie et at. "The Atlantic Ocean accumulates much more calcium carbonate than the Pacific because the Atlantic deep waters have a higher pH (i.e. less corrosive to CaCO3) than those in the Pacific..." (That helps to convince me that the cessation of North Atlantic fishing during WWII allowed a partial recovery of the marine biota, and consequently a significant global CO2 drawdown. Perhaps the Atlantic marine biota represents a stronger "biological carbon pump" than the Pacific?) Debbie MacKenzie ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From hendee at aoml.noaa.gov Wed May 30 13:38:22 2001 From: hendee at aoml.noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 13:38:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: ICRI Regional and CPC Meeting In-Reply-To: <004801c0e52e$10e6ee80$7c3cfcc3@oloflinden> Message-ID: For those of you who were unable to translate the recent Word document posting of Olof Linden, here's the announcement in ASCII: ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Next ICRI Regional Workshop and CPC Meeting to be held in Maputo, Mozambique on November 26 - 30, 2001 The next International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI) Regional Workshop and Coordination and Planning Committee (CPC) Meeting will be held in Maputo, Mozambique on the 26th to the 30th of November, 2001. The Regional Workshop will be focusing on the reefs of the Indian Ocean. The Workshop and CPC Meeting will be held in conjunction with the Annual Meeting of the CORDIO Program - Research for Management of Coral Reefs of the Indian Ocean. Experts involved in reef-related research and management in the Western Indian Ocean are invited to the Workshop to discuss work done, plan future activities and prepare a series of recommendations for consideration by the ICRI CPC. In addition, the Third Conference of the Parties to the Nairobi Convention will be held the following week (December 5 - 7). The timing of the Workshop provides an excellent opportunity for reef researchers and managers to prepare recommendations for the Nairobi Convention Meeting. Furthermore, Country Status Reports and Action Plans will be fed into the Second International Tropical Marine Ecosystems Management Symposium (ITMEMS 2) scheduled to be held in the Philippines next year, and the ICRI Report to the RIO+10 Conference. The organization of the Workshop will be undertaken through these offices: UNEP-EAF/RCU Rolph Antoine Payet, Interim Coordinator PO Box 677, Victoria, Mahe, Seychelles Tel: (248) 224644/225672 Fax: (248) 322945 E-mail: rolphap at seychelles.net CORDIO East Africa Coordination Office David Obura, Regional Coordinator PO Box 10135, Bamburi, Mombasa, Kenya Tel: (254) 11 486473 E-mail: dobura at africaonline.co.ke or dobura at hotmail.com Rolph and David are looking for reef experts and organizations in the region to provide inputs to the meeting. Those wishing to assist in the Workshop should contact them. Further details will be posted on the ICRI (www.icriforum.org) and CORDIO (www.cordio.org) websites. We look forward to your active participation in this very important regional conference. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From cnidaria at pop.earthlink.net Wed May 30 21:37:44 2001 From: cnidaria at pop.earthlink.net (James M. Cervino) Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:37:44 -0400 Subject: Carbon Dioxide: The Plot Thickens. Message-ID: Hi Debbie, Here are some other helpful sources: 1) Falkowski, P. R.J. Scholes, E. Boyle, J. Canadell, D. Canfield, J. Elser, N. Gruber, K. Hibbard, P.Hogberg, S. Linder. F.T.Mackenzie, B. MooreIII, T. Pendersen, Y. Rosenthal, S. Seitzinger, V. Smetacek, W.Steffen, The Global Carbon Cycle: A Test of Our Knowledge of Earth as a System 2000 Oct. 13 Science Vol 290, pp 291-295. Farooq Azam, 1998, Microbial Control of Oceanic Carbon Flux: The Plot Thickens. Science Vol. 280 pp. 694-696. An Introduction To The Chemistry Of The Sea, Michael E. Pilson Prentice Hall Inc. Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-13-258971-0. Pilson is at the Graduate School Of Oceanography University of Rode Island Narragansett, RI. Also an interesting article in Oceanus The Rain of Ocean Particles and the Earths Carbon Cycle. 1997,Fall/Winter by Susumu Honjo. James -- ************************************ James M Cervino PhD. Candidate Marine Science Dept. University of South Carolina (803) 996-6470 e-mail:cnidaria at earthlink.net ************************************* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010530/d77bf578/attachment.html From jekstrom at coral.org Wed May 30 20:17:26 2001 From: jekstrom at coral.org (Julie Ekstrom) Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:17:26 -0700 Subject: creole wrasse, coral reef mass spawnings Message-ID: >Hi Coral list, >I have two questions: > >1. Does anyone know why the Creole wrasse (Clepticus parrae) school >over the reefs at dusk in Bonaire, Dutch Caribbean? I haven't been >able to find the reason for this behavior (feeding I assume but if >that is the case then why don't all wrasses do this everywhere?) >and, as far as I know, it does not happen everywhere in the >Caribbean. > >2. I am looking for specific mass spawning dates for coral reefs >around the world. I would like to know whether synchronized coral >spawning occurs in the following places and if so, when it occurs: > Great Barrier Reef > Caribbean > Indian Ocean > Red Sea > Southeast Asia/Indonesia > Polynesia, Melanesia, Micronesia > Hawaii > Cocos Island > >I would really appreciate any help or guidance in finding my answers. > >Thank you, > >Julie > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010530/3da85e33/attachment.html From cnidaria at pop.earthlink.net Wed May 30 21:19:53 2001 From: cnidaria at pop.earthlink.net (James M. Cervino) Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:19:53 -0400 Subject: Carbon Dioxide: The Plot Thickens. Message-ID: Hi Debbie, Here are some other helpful sources: 1) Falkowski, P. R.J. Scholes, E. Boyle, J. Canadell, D. Canfield, J. Elser, N. Gruber, K. Hibbard, P.Hogberg, S. Linder. F.T.Mackenzie, B. MooreIII, T. Pendersen, Y. Rosenthal, S. Seitzinger, V. Smetacek, W.Steffen, The Global Carbon Cycle: A Test of Our Knowledge of Earth as a System 2000 Oct. 13 Science Vol 290, pp 291-295. Farooq Azam, 1998, Microbial Control of Oceanic Carbon Flux: The Plot Thickens. Science Vol. 280 pp. 694-696. An Introduction To The Chemistry Of The Sea, Michael E. Pilson Prentice Hall Inc. Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-13-258971-0. Pilson is at the Graduate School Of Oceanography University of Rode Island Narragansett, RI. Also an interesting article in Oceanus The Rain of Ocean Particles and the Earths Carbon Cycle. 1997,Fall/Winter by Susumu Honjo. James -- ************************************ James M Cervino PhD. Candidate Marine Science Dept. University of South Carolina (803) 996-6470 e-mail:cnidaria at earthlink.net ************************************* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010530/b5991d71/attachment.html From debimack at auracom.com Wed May 30 17:40:40 2001 From: debimack at auracom.com (Debbie MacKenzie) Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 18:40:40 -0300 Subject: Biomass depletion in the big picture Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20010530184040.0085bce0@auracom.com> Coral list, Very sorry, typed the URL into my last post minus-".html" oops :>( Here it is: http://www.fisherycrisis.com/strangelove.html Debbie MacKenize ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From miles.k at actionasia.com Thu May 31 03:34:36 2001 From: miles.k at actionasia.com (Miles Kendall) Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 15:34:36 +0800 Subject: Maldives bleaching latest Message-ID: <200105311131.LAA01174@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hello, I am a journalist researching a feature on coral bleaching in the Maldives and am seeking an objective summary of the current situation. If anyone could briefly tell me how bad the damage was, how the recovery is progressing and what the future holds I would be very grateful. Please reply to me at this email address. Many thanks in advance. Yours faithfully, Miles Kendall Deputy Editor Action Asia Magazine Tel: (852) 2165 2820 Fax: (852) 2868 1799 www.actionasia.com 23/F, 133 Wan Chai Road, Hong Kong. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From reefkeeper at earthlink.net Thu May 31 09:24:31 2001 From: reefkeeper at earthlink.net (Alexander Stone) Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 09:24:31 -0400 Subject: Ft Lauderdale Sun Sentinel MPA Article Message-ID: <3B16460E.4BD@earthlink.net> -------------------- U.S. announces proposed no-fishing zones along Florida's east coast -------------------- By David Fleshler Sun-Sentinel May 30, 2001 In a massive effort to restore ocean environments off the southeastern United States, the federal government has released a list of dozens of sites in which fishing and other activities may be sharply restricted. The list names about a dozen sites on the east coast of Florida, including popular fishing grounds off Islamorada, Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach. These sites would be designated marine protected areas, conservation zones in which human activities would be limited. Certain to generate opposition, the proposal is intended to protect the 72 species of snapper and grouper -- big, long-lived reef fish that have experienced sharp declines in the past several years. Having tried traditional management methods, such as bag and size limits, fishery managers now plan to designate certain areas as limited-fishing or no-fishing zones. Several proposed sites also are intended to protect other species or ecosystems, such as rare Oculina coral. The list of potential protected areas was prepared for the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, which controls fishing up to 200 miles off the coast from Florida to North Carolina. The list includes the Islamorada Hump, popular for amberjack and blackfin tuna; the area of Biscayne National Park south of Fowey Rocks, a prime spot for sailfish; and reefs off Palm Beach and Broward counties. The list is highly tentative. It is the result of suggestions by the public and an advisory panel of fishermen, scientists and environmentalists. None of the proposed sites has been endorsed by the council. But the list provides the framework for discussions, hearings and analysis intended to produce a series of protected areas by the end of next year. And now that specific sites are on the table, opposition is likely to grow. "It's vastly overkill," said Mike Leech, president of the International Game Fish Association, based in Dania Beach. "It's an invasion of the public's right to fish." He said marine protected areas were a crude management tool that would punish sportsmen who had nothing to do with the decline of grouper or other species. To Leech, the single biggest menace to a sustainable fish population is commercial fishing, with longlines, gill nets and other gear that indiscriminately sweep fish from the ocean. "If they're worried about snapper, then close the areas during spawning time," he said. "Don't make it a no-take zone for everybody and everything." But John Jolley, president of the West Palm Beach Fishing Club, said that a network of protected areas may turn out to be the right way to restore depleted fisheries. "I think it's probably a useful tool," he said. "We hate to see more regulation. But there are always more people and more fishing. Hopefully, it won't shut everything down. It might be an interesting concept to try for a few years and see what happens." At Bud and Mary's marina in Islamorada, owner Richard Stanczyk worried about what the restrictions could do to his business and to the 45 charter captains who work out of his marina. But he said he understood the need for the Islamorada Hump to be on the list, now that amberjack has become a popular commercial fish. "They've just been battered to no end," he said. "They're a rather stupid fish, not a hard fish to catch. The technological advances, the sophisticated depth-finders and radars, have put pressure on fish, and amberjacks have suffered. If it were just the Hump, we could probably live with that. I would sooner see it closed down than desecrate it to the point where there were no fish. But if they close the whole reef, we should all just pack up and leave." The list also includes the reefs off Palm Beach County, where a lack of restrictions has allowed fishing boats to cause great harm to the ecosystem, said Robert Rowe, a recreational fisherman who serves on the council's Marine Protected Area Advisory Panel. "There are unique reefs there," he said. "Right now you have boats anchoring and bottom fishing and tearing the reefs up." And it includes the area along the south jetty of the Lake Worth inlet, where fishermen have learned to wait for the cold-weather arrival of gag grouper. "Boats are there day and night, wanting to get the last grouper," Rowe said. "About 200 will congregate, and they'll all get caught." This area is in state-controlled waters, although it is on the list released this week. Several sites on the list are actually in state, not federal, waters. In these cases, the council could only request that state officials designate them as protected areas. David White, regional director of the Center for Marine Conservation, which has strongly supported the council's plans, said the ideal result would be a network of restricted areas that would protect a variety of marine environments. "We need some near shore, some off shore, some in deep water, some in shallow water," he said. "We need to make sure that all types of habitat -- sea grasses, coral reefs, hard bottom -- are represented, and that they're large enough to adequately enforce." While it has been known for months that the council was exploring the idea of marine protected areas, the release of a list of specific sites is likely to sharpen the debate. The actual designation of protected areas will take more than a year. The council's advisory committee on marine protected areas will meet to discuss them June 21 in St. Augustine. The council will select certain areas for further analysis, reviewing the scientific, economic and social issues of each area. David Fleshler can be reached at dfleshler at sun-sentinel.com or 954-356-4535 Copyright (c) 2001, South Florida Sun-Sentinel Visit Sun-Sentinel.com ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From carlson at waquarium.org Thu May 31 19:19:48 2001 From: carlson at waquarium.org (Bruce Carlson) Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 13:19:48 -1000 Subject: creole wrasse, coral reef mass spawnings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010531131156.0170ac90@mail.waquarium.org> I haven't read any other replies to your query re: Creole wrasse "schooling" at night so here are some observations: I have also seen the "parading" behavior you mention at Bonaire. It looks to me very much like the parading behavior of yellow tangs here in Hawaii (and other species in other locales). These parades form in the late afternoon through twilight as the fish (often hundreds or thousands) move from daytime feeding areas to nighttime resting areas. Spawning is usually associated with these parades (at least it is with yellow tangs; I didn't observe Creole wrasse spawning at Bonaire). Dr. William J. Walsh in Hawaii described this behavior for Hawaiian yellow tangs and I'm sure there are other references for other species. Aloha Bruce Carlson Waikiki Aquarium At 05:17 PM 5/30/2001 -0700, Julie Ekstrom wrote: >>Hi Coral list, > > >>I have two questions: >> >>1. Does anyone know why the Creole wrasse (Clepticus parrae) school over >>the reefs at dusk in Bonaire, Dutch Caribbean? I haven't been able to >>find the reason for this behavior (feeding I assume but if that is the >>case then why don't all wrasses do this everywhere?) and, as far as I >>know, it does not happen everywhere in the Caribbean. >> >>2. I am looking for specific mass spawning dates for coral reefs around >>the world. I would like to know whether synchronized coral spawning >>occurs in the following places and if so, when it occurs: >> Great Barrier Reef >> Caribbean >> Indian Ocean >> Red Sea >> Southeast Asia/Indonesia >> Polynesia, Melanesia, Micronesia >> Hawaii >> Cocos Island >> >>I would really appreciate any help or guidance in finding my answers. >> >>Thank you, >> >>Julie >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver.