[Coral-List] (Coral-List) The Spread of SCTLD

[International Coral Reef Observatory]

Dear All,

Perhaps, when this message reaches you, it is already June, the first
#WorldReefDay. So I invite you to celebrate with us that we still have
coral reefs to talk about them!!

In Hawaii, DAR was also requiring a precautionary principle that applied to
restrict ships coming from the Caribbean Sea. DLNR asked the State to take
decisive action to reduce the risk of SCTLD entering Hawaii waters. DAR
said they were “proposing that vessels that have been to a SCTLD-affected
area within the last five ports, to not discharge ballast water within
State Waters and to also send prior notification of arrival with
information about the vessel’s biofouling prevention practices, so a risk
assessment may be conducted.”

https://www-khon2-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.khon2.com/local-news/insidious-new-disease-is-killing-coral-at-a-rapid-pace/amp/

Steve, we understand your concern about divers restrictions. But we can not
deny that to avoid contagion in a disease, the first scientific logical
approach is to avoid any direct contact to the sick individual (s). Most of
the coral listers have had microbiological classes and experimented on how
to cultivate bacteria in vitro: taking small samples and putting them in a
nurturing environment. So that would be a scientific fact that direct
contact serves to disperse the cause agent of a disease. There is already
scientific evidence that evaluated consistent bacteria associated with
SCTLD across disease zones (vulnerable, endemic, and epidemic), in corals,
seawater and sediment, which may be sources of SCTLD transmission.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s43705-023-00220-0 And the Chemical and
genomic characterization of a potential probiotic treatment for stony coral
tissue loss disease
https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-023-04590-y

When studying real case studies to evaluate management effectiveness or to
identify potential causation of negative impacts, social scientists aim to
take into account most of the possible variables that may cause an impact
on coral reefs. We can not wait to develop experiments and models to
understand the whole process (when environmentalists try to stop it). It is
urgent to analyze the real time changes in human activities that may help
to understand the negative impact that potentially has triggered or
assisted the coral reef degradation. Thus, correlation in social sciences is
 a statistical measure (expressed as a number) describing the size and
direction of a relationship between two or more variables. Therefore, when
one variable increases as the other variable increases or one variable
decreases while the other decreases can be an example of what is a social
(Human Activities occurring in the field) scientific correlation. According
to the amount of data, it can be qualitatively or quantitatively
analyzed. *Researchers
use correlations to see **if a relationship between two or more variables
exists.* Of course, the variables themselves are not under the control of
the researchers!!

Nohora Galvis
ICRS World Reef Award Winner
ICRO International Coral Reef Observatory
Follow us on Facebook ICROBSERVATORY
Instagram / Twitter/ YouTube ICR,_Observatory

El mié, 31 may 2023 a las 16:20, Steve Mussman via Coral-List (<
coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>) escribió:

>
>
> “In Steve's defense, I would point out that a correlation between
>
> the frequency of diving in an area and the amount of coral disease is just
>
> that, a correlation, and we know that correlation does not prove
>
> causation. Places that have huge amounts of diving also are highly likely
>
> to have other major damaging effects of development and human population,
>
> such as sewage discharges, etc,”
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> Apart from it not being established as a scientific fact, at least part of
> my resistance to the idea of divers being singled out with restrictions
> because they are suspected of being potential vectors of coral disease is
> the message (or misconception) that publicly disseminating such an edict
> conveys. There is something inadequate about issuing a statement
> proclaiming that there is an outbreak of a coral disease that threatens our
> coral reefs and then announcing that the primary action we have chosen to
> take in response is . . . to place restrictions on divers. Period. With no
> other remedial actions or contributing factors advanced.
>
> I agree with you, there should at least be a disclaimer that makes it
> clear that correlation does not prove causation. And how about advancing a
> more nuanced, comprehensive response that at least attempts to frame the
> outbreak of coral diseases in broader terms? Something along the lines of :
> “Coral disease outbreaks are now recognized as a significant factors in the
> accelerating degradation of coral reefs, and it is commonly accepted that a
> variety of human-related activities have altered environmental conditions,
> potentially impairing coral resistance to microbial infections or
> increasing pathogen virulence.” This could be followed by a more complete
> list of contributing factors reflecting whatever stressors are negatively
> impacting local coral reefs. What do you think? Am I asking too much?
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve
>
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list