From benidhar at rediffmail.com Sun Sep 2 12:50:37 2001 From: benidhar at rediffmail.com (benidhar ) Date: 2 Sep 2001 16:50:37 -0000 Subject: Coral diversity Message-ID: <20010902165037.12050.qmail@mailweb15.rediffmail.com> Hi All, Myself Benidhar Deshmukh, a geologist, currently exploring the potential of remote sensing for ecological and geomorpholgical studies of coral reefs. While recent survey to a reef I found that a perticular species of cora is not present at all which was the main reef builder once. The coral species diversity has been found to be decreasing world wide. I am working on the problem and trying to find out the posible reason behind it for my study area. I would like to recieve your comments on this and references. Thanking you Benidhar Deshmukh #4141, MWRG/RESA Space Applications Centre (ISRO) Ahmedabad -15 India ~~~~~~~ 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 Sun Sep 2 16:26:35 2001 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E Strong) Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2001 16:26:35 -0400 Subject: Palmyra Bleaching? Message-ID: <3B9295F7.75B1A2D@noaa.gov> SSTs appear to have risen dramatically in the vicinity of Palmyra over the past week or so and appear critical, if conditions persist, for a bleaching event as the overhead sun moves to the south. http://orbit-net.nesdis.noaa.gov/orad/sub/sst_series_palmyra_cur.html http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/dhw_news.html Feedback requested... Al Strong -- AES...<><.........<><.........<><.........<><........<><..........AES Alan E. Strong Acting Chief, ORAD 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 . From Mark.Spalding at unep-wcmc.org Mon Sep 3 09:26:15 2001 From: Mark.Spalding at unep-wcmc.org (Mark Spalding) Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 14:26:15 +0100 Subject: When was the first Marine Park/Reserve established Message-ID: I've been digging about on the WCPA database of marine protected areas. I think there are quite a few sites older than Fort Jefferson, but probably the majority of these are coastal and do not include significant areas of open sea. Good candidates for the first include: - Wilson's Promontory National Park, Australia. First reserved in 1898, NP status in 1905, with coastal waters added in in 1908. - Matang Hunting Reserve, Malaysia. First established in 1904 and incorporating large mangrove areas. - Breton National Wildlife Refuge, USA. First establish 1904. etc. It is difficult, with some of these, for me to chase up the boundary definitions of the original site. You might also argue that marine areas were not the primary object of protection, but I think you would certainly have to argue this for Fort Jefferson too! And of course the first real protected reefs were probably those set aside under traditional reef cultures, especially those of the Pacific Islands. __________________________________________ 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 >>> 08/31/01 08:38pm >>> The date of the Presidential Proclamation creating Fort Jefferson NM was January 4 1935 ! Tom Schmidt To: "jacob Dafni" 08/31/01 03:21 cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov PM EDT Subject: Re: When was the first Marine Park/Reserve established(Document link: Tom Schmidt) Jacob, According to the legislative history of Dry Tortugas National Park, (70 miles west of Key West, FL, USA), Fort Jefferson National Monument became the World's first marine protected area when Franklin Roosevelt signed Presidential Proclamation No. 21112 (Stat. 3430). The Monument name was changed to Dry Tortugas National Park in 1992 with management purposes to protect and interpret a "pristine subtropical marine ecosystem, with special attention to intact coral reef communities". Tom Schmidt Marine Biologist Everglades and Dry Tortugas National Parks Homestead, FL 33034 "jacob Dafni" on.net.il> cc: (bcc: Tom Schmidt/EVER/NPS) Subject: When was the first Marine 08/30/01 01:29 Park/Reserve established AM MDT Hi All listers For a forthcoming publication, I need the following piece of information: Which was the first Underwater marine park and/or coral nature reseve in the world, and when was it formally established? Thanks for your cooperation Jacob Dafni ~<~<~<~<~<~<~ Dr. Jacob Dafni P.O box 6469 Eilat Israel jdafni at netvision.net.il jdafni at hotmail.com http://www.come.to/jacob-dafni http://www.dafni.com/gulfsave ~<~<~<~<~<~<~
Hi All listers
 
For a forthcoming publication, I need the following piece of information:
 
Which was the first Underwater marine park and/or coral nature reseve in the world, and when was it formally established?
 
Thanks for your cooperation
 
Jacob Dafni
 
~<?))))><~<?))))><~<?))))><~<?))))> <~ <?))))><~<?))))><~
Dr. Jacob Dafni
P.O box 6469
Eilat
Israel
jdafni at netvision.net.il
jdafni at hotmail.com
http://www.come.to/jacob-dafni
http://www.dafni.com/gulfsave
~<? ))))><~<?))))><~<?))))><~<?))))>< ~<?))))> <~<?))))><~
 
Received: from coral.aoml.noaa.gov ([192.111.123.248]) by ccmail.itd.nps.gov with SMTP (IMA Internet Exchange 3.13) id 00D4E002; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:50:53 -0400 Received: (from majordom at localhost) by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (SGI-8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA07202 for coral-list-outgoing; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 03:21:47 GMT Received: from mailgw3.netvision.net.il (mailgw.netvision.net.il [194.90.1.11]) by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (SGI-8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA07154 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:21:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dafni (ras16-p16.rvt.netvision.net.il [62.0.135.145]) by mailgw3.netvision.net.il (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAA01975 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 06:19:31 +0300 (IDT) Message-ID: <005c01c1310b$a1f0d200$9187003e at dafni> From: "jacob Dafni" To: Subject: When was the first Marine Park/Reserve established Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 06:24:15 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. --------------------------------------------------------------- This E-mail and any attachments are private, intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, they have been sent to you in error: any use of information in them is strictly prohibited. The employer reserves the right to monitor the content of the message and any reply received. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From jdafni at netvision.net.il Mon Sep 3 13:58:40 2001 From: jdafni at netvision.net.il (jacob Dafni) Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 19:58:40 +0200 Subject: When was the first Marine Park/Reserve established Message-ID: <004201c134a7$fcdcdc00$9785003e@dafni> Hi All listers I thank all coral listers who bothered to search the various sources, and provide me with valuable information. Thanks for your cooperation Jacob Dafni ~<~<~<~<~<~<~ Dr. Jacob Dafni P.O box 6469 Eilat Israel jdafni at netvision.net.il jdafni at hotmail.com http://www.come.to/jacob-dafni http://www.dafni.com/gulfsave ~<~<~<~<~<~<~ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010903/4b95cf38/attachment.html From jporter at arches.uga.edu Mon Sep 3 13:54:23 2001 From: jporter at arches.uga.edu (James W. Porter) Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:54:23 -0400 Subject: Publication of book on coral diseases Message-ID: <002101c134a2$658054e0$4712c080@ecology.uga.edu> Dear Coral List-Server Member: I wish to announce the publication of my book on coral diseases, The Ecology and Etiology of Newly Emerging Marine Diseases, which will be published by Kluwer Academic Press in October of this year. This edited volume has 20 papers; the Table of Contents is listed below. The purchase price after October will be around $150.00, but Kluwer has graciously agreed to sell this book to Coral List Server members for $55.00 (the same price as for authors who have articles appearing in the book). Although the book will be shipped from The Netherlands, I have to collect the money from each pre-publication purchaser. They appear to be treating this almost as if it were a reprint order, with the reprint orders placed in advance of the publication date. If you are interested in getting a copy of this book, please e-mail your intent to purchase this book to Kluwer's Special Issues Coordinator, Ms. Cynthia de Jonge (cynthia.dejong at wkap.nl) and include your full mailing address for their shipping department. Please copy this e-mail to me (jporter at arches.uga.edu) and send a check or money order to: Dr. James W. Porter / Institute of Ecology / University of Georgia / Athens / GA / 30602 / USA. The money must be received by 15-October-2001; only books that have been pre-paid will be shipped from Holland. I truly apologize for this odd way of doing business, but these are their rules, and to take advantage of the reduced price, we have to abide by them. Sincerely, Jim Porter Table of Contents Chapter 1 Porter, Dustan, Jaap, Patterson, Kosmynin, Meier, Patterson, and Parsons. Patterns of spread of coral disease in the Florida Keys. Chapter 2 Aronson and Precht White-band and the changing face of Caribbean coral reefs Chapter 3 Santavy, Mueller, Peters, MacLaughlin, Porter, Patterson, and Campbell. Quantitative assessment of coral diseases in the Florida Keys: Strategy and methodology. Chapter 4 Cervino, Goreau, Nagelkerken, Smith, and Hayes. Yellow band and dark spot syndromes in Caribbean corals: Distribution, rate of spread, cytology, and effects on abundance and division rate of zooxanthellae. Chapter 5 Garzon-Ferreira, Gil-Agudelo, Barrios, and Zea . Stony coral diseases observed in southwestern Caribbean. Chapter 6 Richardson, Smith, Ritchie, and Carlton. Integrating microbiological, microsensor, molecular, and physiologic techniques in the study of coral disease. Chapter 7 Scully, Prappas and Ostrander. Laboratory models for the study of coral pathologies. Chapter 8 Harvell, Kim, Quirolo, Weir, and Smith. Coral bleaching and disease: Contributors to 1998 mass mortality in Briareum asbestinum (0ctocorallia, Gorgonacea). Chapter 9 Alker, Smith, and Kim. Characterization of Aspergillus sydowii (Thom et Church), a fungal pathogen of Caribbean sea fan corals. Chapter 10 Acosta. Disease in Zoanthids: dynamics in space and time. Chapter 11 Ritchie, Polson, and Smith. Microbial disease causation in marine invertebrates: Problems, practices, and future prospects. Chapter 12 Colwell and Huq Marine ecosystems and cholera. Chapter 13 Bouma and Pascual Seasonal and interannual cycles of endemic cholera in Bengal 1891-1940 in relation to climate and geography. Chapter 14 Jiang Vibrio cholerae in coastal waters of Southern California: Abundance, distribution and relationship to environmental conditions. Chapter 15 Lipp, Rodriguez-Palacios, and Rose. Occurrence and distribution of the human pathogen Vibrio vulnificus in a subtropical Gulf of Mexico estuary. Chapter 16 Noble and Fuhrman Enteroviruses detected by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction from the coastal waters of Santa Monica Bay, California: Low correlation to bacterial indicator levels. Chapter 17 Mallin, Ensign, McIver, Shank, and Fowler. Demographic, landscape, and meteorological factors controlling the microbial pollution of coastal waters. Chapter 18 Hofmann, Ford, Powell, and Klinck. Modeling studies of the effect of climate variability on MSX disease in eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) populations. Chapter 19 Hayes, Bonaventura, Mitchell, Prospero, Shinn, Van Dolah, and Barber. How are climate and marine biological outbreaks functionally linked? Chapter 20 Blaylock, Overstreet, and Klich. Mycoses in red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) caused by two deuteromycete fungi (Penicillium corylophilum and Cladosporium sphaerospermum). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010903/ad9964fb/attachment.html From chwkins at yahoo.com Mon Sep 3 16:52:51 2001 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:52:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: No subject Message-ID: <20010903205251.9285.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> Hello all, It is interesting to hear all of the answers to the question "When was the first marine park established?" I have always had difficulty with the semantics as far as MPA and marine park etc. The first true marine park as we know it today may well be the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park off Key Largo, Florida (as cited in several publications), December 1960. Though I suppose it depends on one's definition of 'marine park'. I doubt though that Ft. Jefferson or other early ones were MPAs or parks as we know them today, especially in light of how the rise of ecotourism has helped to catagorize many of them. Good luck! Christopher Hawkins Centre for Tropical Coastal Management Studies University of Newcastle UK __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.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 crcp at africaonline.co.ke Tue Sep 4 20:09:21 2001 From: crcp at africaonline.co.ke (CRCP) Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 03:09:21 +0300 Subject: References: <20010903205251.9285.qmail@web14506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3B956D30.D03B7A1B@africaonline.co.ke> Tsitiskamma National Park in South Africa may be one of oldest parks, although not a coral reef park. I have not been able to find its date of origin, but I think it may go back to the 1930s. The following are some interesting work done there, but donot gieve the dates of the park's origin. Buxton, C. D. 1993. Life-history changes in exploited reef fishes on the east coast of South Africa. Environmental Biology of Fishes 36:47-63. Buxton, C. D., and M. J. Smale. 1989. Abundance and distribution patterns of three temperate marine reef fish (Teleostei: Sparidae) in exploited and unexploited areas off the Southern Cape Coast. Journal of Applied Ecology 26:441-451. Christopher Hawkins wrote: > Hello all, > > It is interesting to hear all of the answers to the question > "When was the first marine park established?" I have always had > difficulty with the semantics as far as MPA and marine park etc. > The first true marine park as we know it today may well be the > John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park off Key Largo, Florida (as > cited in several publications), December 1960. Though I suppose > it depends on one's definition of 'marine park'. I doubt though > that Ft. Jefferson or other early ones were MPAs or parks as we > know them today, especially in light of how the rise of > ecotourism has helped to catagorize many of them. Good luck! > > Christopher Hawkins > Centre for Tropical Coastal Management Studies > University of Newcastle > UK > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger > http://im.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. -- 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 mbm4 at duke.edu Tue Sep 4 11:47:14 2001 From: mbm4 at duke.edu (Mike Mascia) Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2001 11:47:14 -0400 Subject: When was the first Marine Park/Reserve established In-Reply-To: <005c01c1310b$a1f0d200$9187003e@dafni> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.1.20010904104315.009fdc40@mail-mb.acpub.duke.edu> Jacob, You may wish to consider these other contenders for the "first" MPA: Middle Morant Caye Nature Reserve, Jamaica, established 1907, containing 200 km2 of coral reef, seagrass, and sandy bottom habitat (Source: unpublished data from my 1997 survey of MPA managers in the Wider Caribbean). The "Sea Garden" between Hog Island and Athol Island (Nassau, Bahamas), protected in 1892 by "An Act for the protection of the 'Sea Gardens'", containing an unspecified area of coral reef, within which it was illegal for anyone "to dredge for, remove, or take by away by any means whatsoever, from the bottom of the sea ... any coral, sea fan, or other marine product thereupon growing, lying, or being". The penalty for noncompliance was a fine of up to 5 pounds or up to 30 days imprisonment. (Source: Government of the Bahamas, Sea Gardens Protection Act, 1892.) I would also suggest that many of the customary marine tenure systems in the South Pacific and Oceania, which date back centuries, were (are) very similar in function to modern, government-established and managed MPAs. Hope this helps. Mike At 06:24 AM 8/30/2001, you wrote: >Hi All listers > >For a forthcoming publication, I need the following piece of information: > >Which was the first Underwater marine park and/or coral nature reseve in >the world, and when was it formally established? > >Thanks for your cooperation > >Jacob Dafni > Michael B. Mascia, Ph.D. Environmental Policy Consultant 223 Constitution Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 Phone: (202) 547-6516 Cell: (202) 257-2455 Email: Michael.Mascia at duke.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 Jones.Tim at EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV Tue Sep 4 10:45:40 2001 From: Jones.Tim at EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV (Jones.Tim at EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV) Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2001 10:45:40 -0400 Subject: open training position Message-ID: <200109041845.SAA03551@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> ----- Forwarded by Tim Jones/DC/USEPA/US on 09/04/2001 10:45 AM ----- Ginger Hinchcliff john_tyler at nps.gov, oceandec at gte.net, Tim Jones/DC/USEPA/US at EPA, nancy_streeter at fws.gov, 08/31/2001 03:12 caroline.kurrus at noaa.gov PM cc: Subject: open training position FYI, There is a Coastal Services Center position opening for a "Program Training Specialist (Coastal)". It is listed at a GS 12 (51-67K/year) at WWW.USAJOBS.OPM.GOV, announcement E-CSC-01310.SDT Its specific website is http://www.usajobs.opm.gov/wfjic/jobs/TM0771.HTM The position would be located in Charleston SC and will be a full-time federal position. It is open to anyone who qualifies. Our ideal canidate would be strong in process skills, a great trainer, and know coastal issues. The position closes Sept. 10, 2001. Please, pass this information on to your colleagues that are open to job opportunities. We are trying to announce it broadly so that we get a great applicant pool Thanks Ginger Hinchcliff Coastal Learning Services NOAA Coastal Services Center 2234 South Hobson Ave Charleston, SC 29405 (843) 740-1184 ~~~~~~~ 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 jporter at arches.uga.edu Tue Sep 4 15:42:10 2001 From: jporter at arches.uga.edu (James W. Porter) Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 15:42:10 -0400 Subject: Purchase of marine diseases book Message-ID: <003d01c13579$b03f54e0$4712c080@ecology.uga.edu> Dear List-Server Member: The correct e-mail address for notifying Kluwer Academic Press of your intent to purchase the coral disease book at the prepublication price of $55 is: cynthia.dejonge at wkap.nl The second "e" in her last name was inadvertantly dropped from her e-mail address. Please copy any correspondence to Kluwer to me ( jporter at arches.uga.edu ) as I have to collect the money for them. Sincerely Jim Porter -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010904/cea38b4b/attachment.html From fspsuva at is.com.fj Wed Sep 5 00:34:26 2001 From: fspsuva at is.com.fj (FSP Fiji - Suva Office) Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 16:34:26 +1200 Subject: When was the first Marine Park/Reserve established Message-ID: <01C13628.BCA360A0.fspsuva@is.com.fj> IO, Yes, the Pacific islanders invented the concept of "tabu", and had no-fishing areas and no-hunting areas as part of customary management, usually tied to their belief systems (Melanesia, Polynesia) or to sea burial sites (Chuuk, Micronesia). Only fairly recently opening the areas after becoming westernized/christianized, fortunately they are now recapturing their roots! We have four new Tabu areas in our Fiji sites, established by the reef owners, one is the re-establishment of a traditional Tabu around a "sacred point" area on Yanuca Island, Cuvu District... great fun! Vinaka vaka levu, Austin Coral Gardens Initiative Fiji -----Original Message----- From: Mike Mascia [SMTP:mbm4 at duke.edu] Sent: 05 September 2001 03:47 To: jacob Dafni Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: When was the first Marine Park/Reserve established Jacob, You may wish to consider these other contenders for the "first" MPA: Middle Morant Caye Nature Reserve, Jamaica, established 1907, containing 200 km2 of coral reef, seagrass, and sandy bottom habitat (Source: unpublished data from my 1997 survey of MPA managers in the Wider Caribbean). The "Sea Garden" between Hog Island and Athol Island (Nassau, Bahamas), protected in 1892 by "An Act for the protection of the 'Sea Gardens'", containing an unspecified area of coral reef, within which it was illegal for anyone "to dredge for, remove, or take by away by any means whatsoever, from the bottom of the sea ... any coral, sea fan, or other marine product thereupon growing, lying, or being". The penalty for noncompliance was a fine of up to 5 pounds or up to 30 days imprisonment. (Source: Government of the Bahamas, Sea Gardens Protection Act, 1892.) I would also suggest that many of the customary marine tenure systems in the South Pacific and Oceania, which date back centuries, were (are) very similar in function to modern, government-established and managed MPAs. Hope this helps. Mike At 06:24 AM 8/30/2001, you wrote: >Hi All listers > >For a forthcoming publication, I need the following piece of information: > >Which was the first Underwater marine park and/or coral nature reseve in >the world, and when was it formally established? > >Thanks for your cooperation > >Jacob Dafni > Michael B. Mascia, Ph.D. Environmental Policy Consultant 223 Constitution Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 Phone: (202) 547-6516 Cell: (202) 257-2455 Email: Michael.Mascia at duke.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. ~~~~~~~ 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 psakanan at ratree.psu.ac.th Wed Sep 5 05:59:30 2001 From: psakanan at ratree.psu.ac.th (psakanan at ratree.psu.ac.th) Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 16:59:30 +0700 (ICT) Subject: sponge preservation Message-ID: <999683970.3b95f7825a771@ratree.psu.ac.th> Dear coral list Could anyone suggest me the best method to preserve sponge for further idenfication? I help my friends collect sponge specimens for antibiotic test and he want to know its name. Therefore we need to keep these specimens in a good condition for further identifation. cheers! sakanan ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: ratree.psu.ac.th ~~~~~~~ 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 andrewbaird at ozemail.com.au Tue Sep 4 23:04:16 2001 From: andrewbaird at ozemail.com.au (andrew h baird) Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 04:04:16 +0100 (BST) Subject: international transport of live coral larvae Message-ID: <200109051113.LAA05000@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Greetings I am planning to transport live coral larvae from the Great Barrier Reef to Japan for a series of experiments on larval nutrition. Can anyone give me any advice concerning CITES or other regulations with which I will have to comply to transport live coral larvae between countries. ===== Andrew Baird Ph: (81) + 90 8291 0438 Visiting Researcher Fax: (81) + 98 895 8576 Department of Chemistry, Biology and Marine Sciences University of the Ryukyus Senbaru 1, Nishihara Email: andrewbaird at ozemail.com.au Okinawa 903-0123 JAPAN ____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie ~~~~~~~ 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 jeffmiller at islands.vi Wed Sep 5 09:23:14 2001 From: jeffmiller at islands.vi (Jeff Miller) Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 09:23:14 -0400 Subject: information regarding plague type II Message-ID: <200109051359.NAA01070@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hello, I recently recieved a message about a virulent outbreak of plague type II in Puerto Rico, and that message has prompted this response to let people know what we've seen and are doing here in St. John. Researchers at Virgin Islands National Park (VINP) and the US Geological Survey field station in St. John, USVI have been monitoring the presence and progress of the coral disease plague type II in St. John on a monthly basis since December 1997. (This work was recently presented in La Pagurea at the AMLC meeting, and a paper was submitted to Revista de Biologia Tropical as part of the proceedings to that meeting.) We have observed the more typical occurrences of plague type II characterized by the sharp line differentiating apparently healthy tissue from diseased tissue. In this form, the disease starts from the bottom of colonies, especially near sand or within depressions in corals (e.g., where sand and turf or macroalgae exist). We have also observed virulent form of the disease in which mortality seems to progress much faster, cover a much larger area, and not necessarily start near the bottom of the colony. This was observed in 1997 in a shallow (<10 feet) backreef environment, and also in 2000 on a reef slope (25-30 feet). Both sites are located in undeveloped watersheds, one within the boundaries of VINP and the other outside the park. The coral most commonly affected is Montastraea annularis (complex), although we've seen similar virulence in Colpophyllia natans where the disease races through the colony. The entire colony may be consumed or partial live coral may remain. Currently, we have a list of 14 species being affected by plague type II: Montastraea annularis (complex)*, Montastraea cavernosa*, Colpophyllia natans*, Siderastrea siderea*, Dendrogyra cylindrus*, Mycetophyllia lamarckiana, Agaricia agaricites, Eusmilia fastigiata, Madracis mirabilis, Madracis decactis, Porites porites, Porites astreoides, Leptoseris cucullata, and Stephanocoenia michelinii. We've observed the conventional signs of plague type II at depths ranging from <10 feet to >80 feet. Tissue samples were taken from five species (*) for lab analysis which verified the disease pathogen. We have also observed plague type II in the British Virgin Islands, and on Buck Island, near the island of St. Croix. In consultation with Dr. Laurie Richardson, we have conducted some in situ experiments to "smother" this aerobic bacteria by applying a two part epoxy to the margin between the apparently healthy and diseased tissue (extending about an inch into both sides). The disease line stopped advancing in 3 of 4 cases, but given the sporadic nature of the disease response, it is impossible to say whether the epoxy had any affect. (We plan to conduct more experiments along these lines.) There are photos depicting some of the effects that we have been observing at the following address: http://www.coral.noaa.gov/coral_list/coral_list_photo_legends.html Feel free to share this with anyone that might be interested, and I can be contacted by return e-mail or at 340-693-8950, ext 227. All the best, Jeff Miller ~~~~~~~ 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 collette.burke at wichita.edu Wed Sep 5 12:17:12 2001 From: collette.burke at wichita.edu (Collette Burke) Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 11:17:12 -0500 Subject: Carbonate Volume Studies Message-ID: <200109051656.QAA01542@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> I am grad student working on Carribean reefs. I am looking for papers = on carbonate volume or area studies of coral reefs. Specifically patch = reefs, if possible? Are any of you working on reef volume changes? = Does anyone know of any published or unpublished studies? =20 Also, I am looking for information on turf algae "eaters". Does anyone = know of any publications on algal herbivors that dine on turf algae? = Thanks for your help. Erin Huttig ~~~~~~~ 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 tlsnell at acsu.buffalo.edu Wed Sep 5 17:42:40 2001 From: tlsnell at acsu.buffalo.edu (Tonya L. Snell) Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 17:42:40 -0400 Subject: AAUS divers in TX and LA Message-ID: <3B969C4F.DD8FF2A@acsu.buffalo.edu> We are looking for 2-3 experienced AAUS- and nitrox-certified divers that are from the eastern Texas or Louisiana area to dive with us on a cruise to the Flower Garden Banks. The dates for the cruise are October 21-25. We will be collecting coral samples and recruitment plates from the East and West Banks. Any qualified divers from that area that are interested and available, please respond to tlsnell at buffalo.edu. Thank you for your time. Tonya Snell Dept. of Biological Sciences 109 Cooke Hall University at Buffalo Buffalo, NY 14260 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010905/ecffb016/attachment.html From js15 at buffalo.edu Wed Sep 5 19:09:16 2001 From: js15 at buffalo.edu (Juan A. Sanchez) Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 19:09:16 -0400 Subject: Renilla sample Message-ID: <000d01c1365f$c9ee1160$21e9cd80@bio.buffalo.edu> Dear coral-list members, I'm graduate student working on the evolution and dynamics of colony form in modular marine organisms, particularly gorgonian corals (Dr. Lasker lab). As part of my thesis, I'm recovering the phylogenetic relations of the shallow water Caribbean gorgonians, which are perhaps the most conspicuous inhabitants of Caribbean fore reefs nowadays. I have already sequenced several subunits of NADH dehydrogenase (ca 1500 bp), which have a great deal of phylogenetic signal/information. However, I've had slightly different outcomes when choosing outgroup among Briareum, Sarcophyton, Paragorgia, Iciligorgia or Ctenocella. Therefore, I would like to include a more reliable outgroup, which I think should be a pennatulacean octocoral such as Renilla. I would greatly appreciate if anyone from the coral-list could provide me a sample (1-2 cm of dry, DMSO, Acetone, or ETOH [hopefully > 90%] preserved) of Renilla (or any other pennatulacean). Thanking you in anticipation. Best regards, Juan Juan A. Sanchez Department of Biological Sciences 109 Cooke Hall SUNY at Buffalo, NY 14260, USA http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~js15/ ~~~~~~~ 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 JohnH at qm.qld.gov.au Thu Sep 6 01:07:03 2001 From: JohnH at qm.qld.gov.au (John Hooper) Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:07:03 +1000 Subject: coral-list-daily V2 #209 Message-ID: Response to psakanan at ratree.psu.ac.th regarding sponge preservation. Dear Coral Listeners There is a Guide to the classification of sponges (including collection, preservation, histology etc.) at the following URL (http://www.qmuseum.qld.gov.au/organisation/sections/SessileMarineInvertebra tes/index.asp) [scroll down the page until you come to "Download the Guide to ... etc" The document is in PDF format. Unfortunately this 'Sponguide' is now very much out of date, and will shortly be replaced by a 'Systema Porifera' (Hooper & Van Soest (eds), Plenum Press, New York) (probably in 2 volumes, and hopefully published mid-2002). Nevertheless, the 'Sponguide' should give you a window into the phylum - yes, there are other phyla living in coral reefs ! John Hooper ------------------------------------------------------- Dr John N.A. Hooper Director, Queensland Centre for Biodiversity Queensland Museum, , P.O. Box 3300 SOUTH BRISBANE, QLD, 4101, AUSTRALIA Associate Professor , Department of Zoology & Entomology The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld 4072 fax +61-7-3846-1226 or 3846-1918 phone +61-7-3840-7722 or 0412-695-592 email JohnH at qm.qld.gov.au http://www.qmuseum.qld.gov.au ------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010906/5a574517/attachment.html From earth1 at netspace.net.au Thu Sep 6 20:24:05 2001 From: earth1 at netspace.net.au (Eleanor Loudon) Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:24:05 +1000 Subject: Earthwatch: Divers needed! Message-ID: <200109071405.OAA01081@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Coral listers Earthwatch Institute offers scientific field research Expeditions that require SCUBA divers and/or experienced snorkelers to help collect data. Earthwatch Institute is a non-profit organization that funds scientific field research through volunteers' contributions. Volunteers pay a Share of Cost of the Research and join scientists in the field to help them collect data. Volunteers are trained on the methodologies and data collection techniques when in the field. Up-to-date open water certification is required to SCUBA dive. There is a growing demand for Earthwatch volunteers to help scientists collect data. Earthwatch supports research that investigates many aspects of coral reef ecology such as coral bleaching, diseases, coral reef fish mortality, coral reef light management, species diversity, and the importance of other ecosystems that surround coral reef communities. Earthwatch provides an opportunity for divers and snorkelers to use their much-needed skills while collecting important scientific data. The data that is collected could be used to create a management plan that may establish a marine reserve or to help define new species of octopi! SCUBA only Expeditions Jamaica's Coral Reefs- first EWI season in 2002 Expedition will be investigating the recruitment of hard corals in Discovery Bay, Jamaica. Volunteers will be collecting data on species numbers and diversity, morphological measurements, survival rates, and population size of different coral species. All volunteer tasks require SCUBA. March 25-April 3 2002 April 3-12 2002 April 12-21 2002 Principle Investigator - Dr. James Crabbe http://www.earthwatch.org/expeditions/crabbe.html Contact: Eleanor Loudon 61-3-9682 6828 earth at earthwatch.org Conserving Costa Rican Octopuses- 2nd EWI season in 2002 Biological survey of octopuses on west coast of Central America. Volunteers will be handling octopuses and observing their behavior. 2001 field season with EWI volunteers potentially found 2 new species! The island is remote and there will be no electricity. All volunteer tasks require SCUBA. May 30- June 6 2002 June 7-14 2002 Principle Investigator - Dr. John Cigliano http://www.earthwatch.org/expeditions/cigliano.html Contact: Eleanor Loudon 61-3-9682 6828 earth at earthwatch.org SCUBA and Advanced Snorkel Expeditions Luminous Life of the Great Barrier Reef- First EWI season 2002 Volunteers will assist in surveying and collection of fluorescent proteins to study light management of coral reefs. Fluorescent proteins that may prove to be useful tools for research on diseases will be cloned in the Lizard Island Marine Lab. Volunteers will be able to assist with all aspects of the research from underwater to in the lab! May 10-19 2002 May 19-28 2002 May 28-June 6 2002 Principle Investigator - Dr. Vincent Pieribone http://www.earthwatch.org/expeditions/pieribone.html Contact: Eleanor Loudon 61-3-9682 6828 earth at earthwatch.org Saving Philippine's Reefs- 9th EWI season Help Dr. White, a recent PEW fellow recipient, collect data for coral reef monitoring, surveys, and mapping in the Batangas area. The data collected has assisted in management efforts of the Tubbataha National Marine Park. Spring 2003 Principle Investigator - Dr. Alan White http://www.earthwatch.org/expeditions/white.html Contact: Eleanor Loudon 61-3-9682 6828 earth at earthwatch.org SCUBA and Snorkel Expeditions Damselfish of Barbados- 2nd EWI season in 2002 Studying the mortality rate of damselfish hatchlings by monitoring their nests. Eggs and hatchlings are "tracked" with a dye that permanently stains the otoliths (ear bones). Data collected will help support rationale for local marine reserves. June-August 2002 Principle Investigator - Dr. Suzanne Dorsey http://www.earthwatch.org/expeditions/dorsey.html Contact: Eleanor Loudon 61-3-9682 6828 earth at earthwatch.org Snorkel Only Expeditions Bahamian Reef Survey- 10th EWI season in 2002 Volunteers participate in research on coral bleaching episodes of patch reefs off the island of San Salvador. Volunteers will assist with monitoring the long-term health of the reefs and study emerging coral diseases. Strong swimmers and surface diving required. February 16-23 2002 June 26-July 6 2002 November 23-30 2002 PIs- Tom and Laura McGrath http://www.earthwatch.org/expeditions/mcgrath.html Contact: Eleanor Loudon 61-3-9682 6828 earth at earthwatch.org Coral Reefs of the Virgin Islands- First EWI season in 2002 Study effects of human disturbance on coral reefs and nearby communities such as mangroves, seagrass, and rocky intertidal zones. Strong swimmers and surface diving required. January 15-22 2002 January 24-31 2002 PIs- Dr. David Booth and Giglia Beretta http://www.earthwatch.org/expeditions/booth.html Contact: Eleanor Loudon 61-3-9682 6828 earth at earthwatch.org Manatees of Belize- 2nd EWI season Investigating the habitat and behavioral ecology of Antillian manatees in the Drowned Cayes area of Belize. Volunteer assignments are mostly boat based but include snorkeling for sea grass samples. June-August 2002 Co-PIs- Katherine LaCommare and Caryn Self Sullivan http://www.earthwatch.org/expeditions/lacommare.html Contact: Eleanor Loudon 61-3-9682 6828 earth at earthwatch.org Expeditions in the Pipeline Thailand's Island Reefs- First EWI season 2002 Purpose of study is to determine biodiversity baseline of marine invertebrates for coral reef management of the Andaman Sea. Volunteers will be surveying a total of ten islands off of Phuket Island. Snorklers must be strong swimmers and be able to dive at least 2meters. April 1-10 2002 April 15-25 2002 May 1-10 2002 Principle Investigator- Dr. Suchana Chavanich Contact: Eleanor Loudon 61-3-9682 6828 earth at earthwatch.org Underwater Archeology in Australia -SCUBA only -- Eleanor Loudon Supporter and Volunteer Programs Earthwatch Australia 126 Bank St South Melbourne VIC 3205 ph 61(0)3 9682 6828 fax 61 (0)3 9686 3652 www.earthwatch.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 hendee at aoml.noaa.gov Fri Sep 7 08:51:29 2001 From: hendee at aoml.noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 08:51:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: coral reefs doomed? Message-ID: Dear Coral Colleagues, I know I'll get raked over the coals on this (especially because I don't have all the literature at my fingertips), but the content and tone of the news article below is troublesome to me, even though such a tone helps to gain attention, as well as funding, so that we can more thoroughly study the problem of coral bleacing and global warming. Of course I respect our colleague's right to a viewpoint, but when I see this, I can't help but have these thoughts: Such a projection gives no "credit" to adapatation and natural selection, even though such adaptation would have to occur under a relatively short time span (50 years). I believe Ware et al (1996), among others, have addressed this. As Dr. Al Strong and I have discussed, and as alluded to but unfortunately not expanded upon in the last sentence of the article, if the seas are warming, then you might expect the zoogeography of corals to expand (relocate?) into the cooler areas, as long as the substrate, circulation, light and water quality regimes are conducive. (I would imagine some coral researchers have modeled these possibilities, and I apologize for not referencing your work.) Even though high sea temperatures are the primary cause and indicator of coral bleaching, that is not the only cause, and no credit is given to the evidence in the literature (e.g., Lesser 1996, among others) that high UV is also an agent in coral bleaching. Higher UV, especially in the tropics, is part of the problem as it relates to the earth's ozone layer. There is evidence that high sea temperatures that elicited coral bleaching at some localities in the past did not elicit coral bleaching during extended cloudy periods (Mumby et al, in press). (Perhaps the cooler areas mentioned in the above paragraph might also have lower UV?) There are other causes of coral bleaching (e.g., see Glynn 1993, 1996) and this manifestation of stress is complex and to my mind public statements on coral bleaching should emphasize this. Would an annual update to the ITMEMS statement on coral bleaching (http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/bulls/ITMEMS-bleach.html) be helpful for the public in this regard? It is my opinion that it would, that we should address the topics above (among others, e.g., coastal effects), and that it would behoove us to widely circulate the update among the press as a consensus opinion (if that is possible!). Just my two cents worth... Cheers, Jim Hendee NOAA/AOML Miami, FL Glynn, P. (1993). Coral reef bleaching: ecological perspectives. Coral Reefs 12, 1-17. Glynn, P. (1996). Coral reef bleaching: facts, hypotheses and implications. Global Change Biology 2, 495-509. Lesser, M.P. (1996). Elevated temperatures and ultraviolet radiation cause oxidative stress and inhibit photosynthesis in symbiotic dinoflagellates. Limnol Oceanogr. 41(2): 271-283. Mumby, P.J., Chisholm, J.R.M., Edwards, A.J., Andrefouet, S. & Jaubert, J. 2001. Cloudy weather may have saved Society Island reef corals during the 1998 ENSO event. Mar Ecol Prog Ser (in press). Ware, J.R., Fautin, D.G., & Buddemeier, R.W. (1996). Patterns of coral bleaching: modeling the adaptive bleaching hypothesis. Ecological Modelling 84, 199-214. -------- Original Message -------- World coral reefs to die by 2050, scientist warns By Ed Cropley, Reuters Thursday, September 06, 2001 GLASGOW, Scotland ? The world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them, a scientist warned Wednesday. "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most coral in most areas will be lost," Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, told a science conference. "We are looking at a loss which is equivalent to the tropical rain forests." Only the coral reefs in nontropical regions such as Egypt stand any chance of lasting beyond 2050, Ormond said, but even the days of the stunning marine parks of the Red Sea are numbered as sea temperatures continue to creep up. In the past, reefs have suffered from sediment buildup and the coral-eating crown-of-thorns starfish, whose numbers have exploded due to the over-fishing of their predators. Now the main threat to the delicate structures that harbor some of nature's most stunning creations comes from warmer seas, which cause coral bleaching. Microscopic algae that support the coral polyps cannot live in the warmer water, and the polyps, the tiny creatures who actually create the reefs, die off within weeks. Scientists agree the world's oceans are now warming at a rate of between one and two degrees Celsius every 100 years due to the increased amounts of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which trap the sun's rays. But even if humans stopped pumping out greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide tomorrow in a bid to halt the process, it would still be too late to save the reefs, Ormond said. "I don't know what can be done, given that there's a 50-year time lag between trying to limit carbon dioxide levels and any effect on ocean temperature," he told the conference, held by the British Association for the Advancement of Science. The implications stretch far beyond the death of the colorful coral structures themselves. The weird and wonderful eels and fish which inhabit the nooks and crannies will become homeless, and many species will die out. "We are looking at a gradual running down of the whole system. Over time, the diversity of coral fish will die," Ormond said. Humankind will also suffer directly as the dead reefs are eroded and shorelines that have been protected for the last 10,000 years face the wrath of the oceans without their natural defenses. In an age of relatively cheap scuba-diving holidays, this also means many developing countries in the tropics, such as Kenya or those in the Caribbean, face losing a major source of revenue. The only cause for optimism was that new coral reefs could start to emerge in colder waters such as the north Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. Copyright 2001 ? Reuters ~~~~~~~ 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 Sep 7 11:26:26 2001 From: hendee at aoml.noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 11:26:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: No subject Message-ID: Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 20:42:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Till To: coral-list Subject: research support The Dick Smith Foods Sponsored Ice-Ship "Sir Hubert Wilkins" has announced a 12 month voyage plan of Exploration, Discovery and Adventure including two Antarctic and one Great Barrier Reef Expedition. The ship's owners Don & Margie McIntyre are offering passenger berths on each voyage and limited opportunities for researchers to utilise the ship's logistic support capabilities. For worthwhile projects this support will be provided for a nominal bench fee. During the last Antarctic summer season the McIntyres, through Dick Smith Foods, were able to provide approximately $250,000 towards this program of supporting worthwhile research. Voyage I To the Kent group of Islands is supporting conservation efforts of the Australian Bush Heritage Fund and Coast Care Voyage II To Antarctica concentrates on the Commonwealth Bay, Dumont d'Urville area. Gadget Hut will be removed, efforts made to locate the anchors lost from Sir Douglas Mawson's support ship, the Aurora, divers will carry out an underwater clean up of Boat Harbour and visits made to the French base at Dumont d'Urville. Voyage III To the Ross Sea region of Antarctica. May include supporting climbers, divers, snowboarders and possibly transporting family and friends of victims from the Air New Zealand Mount Erebus crash disaster to the crash site. Discussions are currently underway with environmental groups and research organisations wishing to become involved with a planned 12 week Great Barrier Reef expedition (Jun/July/Aug 2002). Exciting opportunities are available for twenty two ships crew, staff, researchers and media travelling on board and another eight paying passengers.If you would like to join Sir Hubert Wilkins in any capacity (passenger, adventurer, researcher, crew), please check out the website www.oceanfrontiers.com.au . and please tell your friends and colleagues. Contact: Amanda Till Executive Co-ordinator Sir Hubert Wilkins "Ice-Ship Project" amanda at oceanfrontiers.com.au Ph: 61 2 9979 8530 Fax: 61 2 9979 8535 ~~~~~~~ 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 Sep 7 14:00:01 2001 From: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu (Bob Buddemeier) Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 13:00:01 -0500 Subject: coral reefs doomed? References: Message-ID: <3B990B21.E16856E8@kgs.ukans.edu> Jim, et al., Good questions, good points, -- and like it or not, a pretty good if disturbing article. On your question about range expansion to compensate for temperature increase and inhospitably hot tropics -- there are unfortunately 3 geographic factors that work against that. 1. The available shallow water benthic area decreases rather significantly as you move to higher latitudes (no atolls, narrower shelves, etc.) 2. Light -- see the Kleypas et al analysis -- Kleypas, J.A., McManus, J.W. and Menez, L.A.B., 1999. Environmental limits to coral reef development: Where do we draw the line? American Zoologist, 39(1): 146-159. Maximum reef depth shoals dramatically at higher latitudes, even within the thermal mixed layer. This presumably reflects light limitations due to sunangle and day lenght variations -- which aren't going to change. 3. Carbonate saturation state decrease is squeezing from the high latitude sides -- see the US National Assessment, http://www.cop.noaa.gov/pubs/coastalclimate.PDF, section 4.4. So there is little basis for optimism there. With acknowledgment of the terminological problems, some form of adaptation/acclimatization probably does have real potential to ensure the survival of corals , but not necessarily "reefs as we know them." The Ware et al article and its precursor, Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1993. Coral Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism: A Testable Hypothesis. BioScience, 43: 320-326, are looking more solid as experimental tests come in (Kinzie et al in Biol. Bull. earlier this year, Baker in Nature more recently), but for some reason this concept has been anathema to some reef cology and conservation types. (see also Buddemeier, R.W., Fautin, D.G. and Ware, J.R., 1997. Acclimation, Adaptation, and Algal Symbiosis in Reef-Building Scleractinian Corals. In: J.C. den Hartog (Editor), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Coelenterate Biology (16-21 July 1995, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands). National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, pp. 71-76 for a related issue). This may be because it is seen as diminishing the seriousness of the bleaching problem, but in my view your position is the more valid -- without some mechanistic reason to believe that corals CAN survive, there is very little justification for investing money in research and conservation. This also relates to my tired old hobby horse of the non-reef coral habitats -- I don't think we are getting the real picture, or doing ourselves any favors, by exclusive concentration on reefs; corals have survived many periods of non-reef-building, and we had better figure out how, why and where. Thanks for bringing this up. Bob Buddemeier Jim Hendee wrote: > Dear Coral Colleagues, > > I know I'll get raked over the coals on this (especially because I don't > have all the literature at my fingertips), but the content and tone of the > news article below is troublesome to me, even though such a tone helps to > gain attention, as well as funding, so that we can more thoroughly study > the problem of coral bleacing and global warming. Of course I respect our > colleague's right to a viewpoint, but when I see this, I can't help but > have these thoughts: > > Such a projection gives no "credit" to adapatation and natural selection, > even though such adaptation would have to occur under a relatively short > time span (50 years). I believe Ware et al (1996), among others, have > addressed this. > > As Dr. Al Strong and I have discussed, and as alluded to but unfortunately > not expanded upon in the last sentence of the article, if the seas are > warming, then you might expect the zoogeography of corals to expand > (relocate?) into the cooler areas, as long as the substrate, circulation, > light and water quality regimes are conducive. (I would imagine some > coral researchers have modeled these possibilities, and I apologize for > not referencing your work.) > > Even though high sea temperatures are the primary cause and indicator of > coral bleaching, that is not the only cause, and no credit is given to the > evidence in the literature (e.g., Lesser 1996, among others) that high UV > is also an agent in coral bleaching. Higher UV, especially in the > tropics, is part of the problem as it relates to the earth's ozone layer. > There is evidence that high sea temperatures that elicited coral bleaching > at some localities in the past did not elicit coral bleaching during > extended cloudy periods (Mumby et al, in press). (Perhaps the cooler areas > mentioned in the above paragraph might also have lower UV?) > > There are other causes of coral bleaching (e.g., see Glynn 1993, 1996) and > this manifestation of stress is complex and to my mind public statements > on coral bleaching should emphasize this. > > Would an annual update to the ITMEMS statement on coral bleaching > (http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/bulls/ITMEMS-bleach.html) be helpful for the > public in this regard? It is my opinion that it would, that we should > address the topics above (among others, e.g., coastal effects), and that > it would behoove us to widely circulate the update among the press as a > consensus opinion (if that is possible!). > > Just my two cents worth... > > Cheers, > > Jim Hendee > NOAA/AOML > Miami, FL > > Glynn, P. (1993). Coral reef bleaching: ecological perspectives. Coral > Reefs 12, 1-17. > > Glynn, P. (1996). Coral reef bleaching: facts, hypotheses and > implications. Global Change Biology 2, 495-509. > > Lesser, M.P. (1996). Elevated temperatures and ultraviolet radiation > cause oxidative stress and inhibit photosynthesis in symbiotic > dinoflagellates. Limnol Oceanogr. 41(2): 271-283. > > Mumby, P.J., Chisholm, J.R.M., Edwards, A.J., Andrefouet, S. & Jaubert, J. > 2001. Cloudy weather may have saved Society Island reef corals during the > 1998 ENSO event. Mar Ecol Prog Ser (in press). > > Ware, J.R., Fautin, D.G., & Buddemeier, R.W. (1996). Patterns of coral > bleaching: modeling the adaptive bleaching hypothesis. Ecological > Modelling 84, 199-214. > > -------- Original Message -------- > > World coral reefs to die by 2050, scientist warns > By Ed Cropley, Reuters > Thursday, September 06, 2001 > > GLASGOW, Scotland ? The world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years > because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them, a > scientist warned Wednesday. > > "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most coral in most areas will be > lost," Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, told a > science conference. "We are looking at a loss which is equivalent to the > tropical rain forests." > > Only the coral reefs in nontropical regions such as Egypt stand any chance > of lasting beyond 2050, Ormond said, but even the days of the stunning > marine parks of the Red Sea are numbered as sea temperatures continue to > creep up. > > In the past, reefs have suffered from sediment buildup and the coral-eating > crown-of-thorns starfish, whose numbers have exploded due to the > over-fishing of their predators. > > Now the main threat to the delicate structures that harbor some of nature's > most stunning creations comes from warmer seas, which cause coral bleaching. > > Microscopic algae that support the coral polyps cannot live in the warmer > water, and the polyps, the tiny creatures who actually create the reefs, die > off within weeks. > > Scientists agree the world's oceans are now warming at a rate of between one > and two degrees Celsius every 100 years due to the increased amounts of > greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which trap the sun's rays. > > But even if humans stopped pumping out greenhouse gases such as carbon > dioxide tomorrow in a bid to halt the process, it would still be too > late to > save the reefs, Ormond said. "I don't know what can be done, given that > there's a 50-year time lag between trying to limit carbon dioxide levels and > any effect on ocean temperature," he told the conference, held by the > British Association for the Advancement of Science. > > The implications stretch far beyond the death of the colorful coral > structures themselves. The weird and wonderful eels and fish which inhabit > the nooks and crannies will become homeless, and many species will die out. > "We are looking at a gradual running down of the whole system. Over time, > the diversity of coral fish will die," Ormond said. > > Humankind will also suffer directly as the dead reefs are eroded and > shorelines that have been protected for the last 10,000 years face the wrath > of the oceans without their natural defenses. > > In an age of relatively cheap scuba-diving holidays, this also means many > developing countries in the tropics, such as Kenya or those in the > Caribbean, face losing a major source of revenue. > > The only cause for optimism was that new coral reefs could start to emerge > in colder waters such as the north Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. > > Copyright 2001 ? Reuters > > ~~~~~~~ > 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 From abaco at soest.hawaii.edu Fri Sep 7 21:05:00 2001 From: abaco at soest.hawaii.edu (Amy Baco) Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:05:00 -1000 (HST) Subject: Benthic Hard-Substrate Diversity Message-ID: Aloha! I am looking for some recent references for coral and/or other shallow water hard substrate diversity. I am particularly interested in references which include a complete speices list for all taxa (not just sessile inverts. eg.) and number of individuals of each species. I have done a number of literature searches, but there seem to be few papers which include all taxa (and even fewer that include the data). The most recent reference I have for corals is Austin 1980. Any help would be greatly apprecaited! Thanks! -Amy Amy Baco-Taylor University of Hawaii Department of Oceanography 1000 Pope Road Honolulu, Hawaii 96822 Phone (808) 956-6050 FAX (808) 956-9516 abaco at iniki.soest.hawaii.edu ------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from marbio, please send this message: unsubscribe marbio to: majordomo at mote.org Please do not send this message to the list itself. Thank you. MARBIO originates at Mote Marine Laboratory, Sarasota, FL USA http://www.mote.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 abigailyacl at yahoo.com Fri Sep 7 22:31:10 2001 From: abigailyacl at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Abigail=20Moore?=) Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 03:31:10 +0100 (BST) Subject: Volunteer dive training assistant required In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20010908023110.31466.qmail@web10708.mail.yahoo.com> Dear Coral-listers We are looking for an assistant to help out in our training and survey programme - perhaps one of you may be interested or have a friend who is - brief details below, full details available from: Abigail Moore MSc abigailyacl at yahoo.com Yayasan Adi Citra Lestari Jl Setia Budi 14D Palu, Central Sulawesi Indonesia telp: +62 451 425284 fax: + 62 451 422811 The Organisation: Yayasan Adi Citra Lestari (YACL) is a local NGO in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. YACL is dedicated to the sustainable development of the region, in particular it's natural resources, which include a very extensive coastline - mainly fringed with coral reefs. The Programme: Data on the condition of the regions coral reefs (and other marine/coastal ecosystems) is very scarce. The human (and other) resources for data gathering and processing are also minimal. In order to begin to remedy these lacks, YACL is about to run a SCUBA and Marine Survey Traning Programme, with backing from: The David & Lucille Packard Foundation; UNEP EAS/RCU; PADI project Aware. The "Job": YACL has a PADI Instructor. However, for the duration of the initial training and if possible the first survey, YACL is seeking an assistant - Divemaster, Assistant Instructor, or Instructor. Duties: to assist in preparing (to a limited extent) and carrying out training to PADI Open Water level, plus simple survey skills, for two groups of 4 Indonesian people - most of whom will not speak English (at a pool near Palu, and in the Bay of Palu or the West Coast) and if possible to accompany the group on their first training survey, on YACL's dive boat, "Dolphins" (to Pulau Paoso, a protected area and turtle nesting ground on the West Coast, North of Palu). Timetable: Training takes place 8-18 October and 22 October-1 November 2001 Initial survey shortly thereafter, must be completed before 14th november latest. Required dates: arrive before 7th October (preferably around 1-6th October) and leave not before 2 Nov, preferably after survey (probably around 10-12th November) Remuneration: Travel to/from Palu to place of residence not covered - though a contribution might be possible On-site costs (food/accomodation, transport etc) covered by YACL Small fee - $50 per week Other considerations: This is essentially a volunteer position, and an opportunity to contribute to the long-term future of Central Sulawesi's marine environment, especially coral reefs and associated ecosystems. There would be opportunities for further involvement if desired. A working knowledge of the Indonesian (or Malay) language would be a big advantage. Experience in marine survey work (especially manta-tow and Reef Check) would be very useful. Preference will be given to female candidates, in order to promote the image of women as capable of involvement in marine/scientific activities, and as role model/encouragement for local young women. Visas: If a visa is necessary - ie if not Indonesian or an Indonesian resident - the necessary letters will be produced to obtain a Visa Sosial Budaya - a tourist visa is not suitable for this work. This visa costs around $50 (in local currency) from any Indonesian Embassy or Consulate, and the process generally takes between 1and 3 days. Two (or more) colour passport photos (on red background) are also usually required. ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From sjameson at coralseas.com Sat Sep 8 11:06:12 2001 From: sjameson at coralseas.com (Stephen C Jameson) Date: Sat, 8 Sep 01 11:06:12 -0400 Subject: coral reefs doomed? Message-ID: <20010908150718.UUPZ26373.dorsey@[216.25.202.150]> Dear Jim and Bob, Regarding Jim's: >Such a projection gives no "credit" to adapatation and natural selection, >even though such adaptation would have to occur under a relatively short >time span (50 years). In a nut shell, isn't the overriding problem (which Bob addressed in a plenary session at the NCRI symposium in Ft. Lauderdale) the fact that the increasing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is changing the pH of the ocean (making it more acidic) and reducing the ability of corals to calcify properly (Bob's point number 3 stated in brief and in relation to high latitude)? So, no matter where a coral goes - it is going to have problems surviving. Wasn't it also at the NCRI Symposium plenary session where Bob estimated coral reefs had only about 50 years to survive and this prediction was related to the change in pH not temperature (as stated in the press release)? Best regards, Dr. Stephen C. Jameson, President Coral Seas Inc. - Integrated Coastal Zone Management 4254 Hungry Run Road, The Plains, VA 20198-1715 USA Office: 703-754-8690, Fax: 703-754-9139 Email: sjameson at coralseas.com Web Site: www.coralseas.com From riskmj at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca Sat Sep 8 12:26:09 2001 From: riskmj at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Mike Risk) Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2001 12:26:09 -0400 Subject: coral reefs doomed? References: Message-ID: <015401c13883$b47c49c0$3c8dfea9@MyHost> Hi Jim. Although I share your concerns in general, the bad news is: the conclusion is probably correct. I don't read that as a funding ploy-Rupert clearly says there's stuff-all we can do about it, leading funding agencies to say why bother? Notwithstanding the recent stimulating work by Jackson et al on overfishing, the hard evidence from the 20th century (and this one, too) is that land-based sources of pollution have ineradicably slain more coral reefs than all other causes put together. The references on this are close to countless. This trend continues unabated, and science seems slow to respond. (I invite other readers, perhaps offended by this comment, to submit examples of coral reef monitoring programs that are linked to legislation and enforcement by a proper detection/identification/amelioration process.) Will reefs colonise new shelf areas? Sure. In fact, the rate at which this will occur may be estimated from the drilling work done long ago by Walter Adey, in the Virgin Islands. It takes the ocean about 1,000 years to clean up the shoreline and make it ready for new corals. Presumably, this same process in the future will take even longer, given the necessity for reworking condos and Hondas: plus, that ocean will not be nearly as clean as the advancing Holocene seas were. So: but don't hold your breath. For sure, it will happen after the next election. Concern about ocean warming is well-placed. One of the best references to this is by Francis Rougerie, in...1988?. This is in French, and hence not as widely read and cited as it should be. Quelle honte. Concern about oceanic pH is probably overblown: 1. we seem to have forgotten the seminal work of Sillen, in the 60's, showing that silicates, not carbonates, are the long-term oceanic buffers. Lord knows we have done lots to "protect" tropical coastlines from pH change by loading them with chemically-reactive silicates (feldspars, illite, montmorillonite, etc). Large quantities of these minerals are in fact bound up in coral skeletons, hence corals carry with them their own personal buffers (Cortes and Risk, 1985, BMS). 2. the pH of tropical coastlines will no doubt shift-after all the high-mag calcite has dissolved. As HMC makes up a large proportion of reef sediments, this may take some time. 3. as the climate changes and we shift to the other metastable condition of global climate, this will be accompanied by a fundamental reorganisation of the oceans. This will involve (far as we know) vertical mixing, which will put low-pH surface waters into contact with bottom sediments and bottom waters of higher pH. This process was outlined in Smith et al, 1997, April Nature. This process can occur within five years. None of the present ocean models allows for mixing on this vertical and temporal scale, hence all need recalibration. (Some of this work is under way now, using data from deep-water corals.) 4. McConnaughey and colleagues, and Barnes and colleagues, in separate publications within the last 12 months, have shown that corals calcify faster at elevated temps, and in the presence of fleshy algae. My prediction (Risk, 1999) was that coral reefs, as some of us knew them (and you were one, Jim), will be eradicated by land-based sources from most of the world's shelves long before pH shifts appreciably-in fact, my prediction was even more dismal than Rupert's. I think I said 2020. I am hesitant about statements, usually made (I'm afraid) by geologists, along the lines of "Corals have been around for a long time, they will survive." It's true, but misleading. Yes, coral relatives-burrowing sea anemones-are the oldest metazoan fossils yet found: Proterozoic, McKenzie Mountains, NWT. Such statements need to have appended to them the comment that large proportions of the geologic record are virtually barren of reefs, of any type. I consider these statements similar to: "The globe's been hot before, we survived", which we have also heard lately. The globe has been quite hot before, involving a fundamental rethinking of real estate values. Every North American Grade Six kid should do the exercise of drawing the +15-m sealevel contour onto the globe, and estimating the human population involved. Or perhaps we should start with those politicians whose development seems to have been arrested at Grade 6... It may very well be that some of those we refer to as "deep-water" corals may be a recolonisation/biodiversity resource-let us hope so. This has recently become an extremely productive area of research, and interested persons should log on to the coolcoral site, or contact me for preprints. This email is devoid of specific page #'s, etc, for refs: my office is being moved, I am fileless, and am celebrating by being a carpenter for a while. Another guy who tried it came back, so what have I got to lose? Yours in gloom: Mike ~~~~~~~ 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 Sat Sep 8 19:01:31 2001 From: oveh at uq.edu.au (Ove Hoegh-Guldberg) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 09:01:31 +1000 Subject: coral reefs doomed? In-Reply-To: <3B990B21.E16856E8@kgs.ukans.edu> Message-ID: <003c01c138ba$337eb920$7d6e6682@vsap.uq.edu.au> Dear Bob and others, I was triggered to respond by the inferences in your statement that some "reef ecology and conservation" types have trouble with the Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis. Any practicing experimental scientist would have an issue with the state of play regarding support for this hypothesis. The basic problem at this point is nothing to do with "culture" - it is more to do with hard evidence, which is almost completely lacking to support this still very soft and hypothetical explanation for why coral bleach. While experimental tests have been coming in, they have had serious problems in terms of design and the conclusions they draw. Us "reef ecology and conservation types" still wait for the definitive data that shows corals will bleach, get rid of one dinoflagellate genotype and adopt another WHILE the thermal (or other) stress is still being applied to the coral-dinoflagellate association. This has never been shown. Showing diversity in rDNA is interesting but irrelevant if diversity here does not relate to relevant physiological differences. The recent paper by Baker (whom I greatly respect), for example, used light and could not prove (using RFLPs) that his corals had changed from one dinoflagellate genotype to another (simply up-regulating one strain over another is not sufficient - that is acclimation and is not surprising). The experimental design was also confounded by the fact that stressed corals were placed in the two contrasting and confounding (for the experiment) habitats (one, the deeper site, was at the extreme depth limit of the species concerned while the other was clearly more optimal after photo acclimation). It is therefore not surprising that the corals died more at deeper site - which has nothing to do with the fact that they did not bleach!). Other issues abound and concern us "reef ecology and conservation types" - the idea of range of expansion is limited (as outlined by several people so far) by the fact that light may be a more important limiting than temperature. I also want to stress that the issue of the decline of reefs (as you, Bob, did state) has nothing to do with the extinction of corals. As the "geo types" (deliberate use here) tell us worse things have happened to corals and they have bounced back (but over thousands if not millions of years). The issue, however, is the current human dependency on coral reef ecosystems - reefs disappearing for even a few decades would present serious issues for several hundred million people. The idea of finding out how reefs survived major extinction events is interesting but largely irrelevant to the current discussion. So - out I come on my old hobby horse - we still have no evidence of unusual adaptive abilities of corals that will match the fast rate of change. Us reef ecology types keep looking. While looking for this evidence - perhaps we also need to focus on how reefs will change and how we can "adapt" as human societies to these changes. This research direction, if the projections of the future are correct, will assume a major significance as we enter the next few decades. 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/CMS_pro/www/staff.html -----Original Message----- From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Bob Buddemeier Sent: Saturday, 8 September 2001 4:00 AM To: Jim Hendee Cc: Coral-List Subject: Re: coral reefs doomed? Jim, et al., Good questions, good points, -- and like it or not, a pretty good if disturbing article. On your question about range expansion to compensate for temperature increase and inhospitably hot tropics -- there are unfortunately 3 geographic factors that work against that. 1. The available shallow water benthic area decreases rather significantly as you move to higher latitudes (no atolls, narrower shelves, etc.) 2. Light -- see the Kleypas et al analysis -- Kleypas, J.A., McManus, J.W. and Menez, L.A.B., 1999. Environmental limits to coral reef development: Where do we draw the line? American Zoologist, 39(1): 146-159. Maximum reef depth shoals dramatically at higher latitudes, even within the thermal mixed layer. This presumably reflects light limitations due to sunangle and day lenght variations -- which aren't going to change. 3. Carbonate saturation state decrease is squeezing from the high latitude sides -- see the US National Assessment, http://www.cop.noaa.gov/pubs/coastalclimate.PDF, section 4.4. So there is little basis for optimism there. With acknowledgment of the terminological problems, some form of adaptation/acclimatization probably does have real potential to ensure the survival of corals , but not necessarily "reefs as we know them." The Ware et al article and its precursor, Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1993. Coral Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism: A Testable Hypothesis. BioScience, 43: 320-326, are looking more solid as experimental tests come in (Kinzie et al in Biol. Bull. earlier this year, Baker in Nature more recently), but for some reason this concept has been anathema to some reef cology and conservation types. (see also Buddemeier, R.W., Fautin, D.G. and Ware, J.R., 1997. Acclimation, Adaptation, and Algal Symbiosis in Reef-Building Scleractinian Corals. In: J.C. den Hartog (Editor), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Coelenterate Biology (16-21 July 1995, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands). National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, pp. 71-76 for a related issue). This may be because it is seen as diminishing the seriousness of the bleaching problem, but in my view your position is the more valid -- without some mechanistic reason to believe that corals CAN survive, there is very little justification for investing money in research and conservation. This also relates to my tired old hobby horse of the non-reef coral habitats -- I don't think we are getting the real picture, or doing ourselves any favors, by exclusive concentration on reefs; corals have survived many periods of non-reef-building, and we had better figure out how, why and where. Thanks for bringing this up. Bob Buddemeier Jim Hendee wrote: > Dear Coral Colleagues, > > I know I'll get raked over the coals on this (especially because I don't > have all the literature at my fingertips), but the content and tone of the > news article below is troublesome to me, even though such a tone helps to > gain attention, as well as funding, so that we can more thoroughly study > the problem of coral bleacing and global warming. Of course I respect our > colleague's right to a viewpoint, but when I see this, I can't help but > have these thoughts: > > Such a projection gives no "credit" to adapatation and natural selection, > even though such adaptation would have to occur under a relatively short > time span (50 years). I believe Ware et al (1996), among others, have > addressed this. > > As Dr. Al Strong and I have discussed, and as alluded to but unfortunately > not expanded upon in the last sentence of the article, if the seas are > warming, then you might expect the zoogeography of corals to expand > (relocate?) into the cooler areas, as long as the substrate, circulation, > light and water quality regimes are conducive. (I would imagine some > coral researchers have modeled these possibilities, and I apologize for > not referencing your work.) > > Even though high sea temperatures are the primary cause and indicator of > coral bleaching, that is not the only cause, and no credit is given to the > evidence in the literature (e.g., Lesser 1996, among others) that high UV > is also an agent in coral bleaching. Higher UV, especially in the > tropics, is part of the problem as it relates to the earth's ozone layer. > There is evidence that high sea temperatures that elicited coral bleaching > at some localities in the past did not elicit coral bleaching during > extended cloudy periods (Mumby et al, in press). (Perhaps the cooler areas > mentioned in the above paragraph might also have lower UV?) > > There are other causes of coral bleaching (e.g., see Glynn 1993, 1996) and > this manifestation of stress is complex and to my mind public statements > on coral bleaching should emphasize this. > > Would an annual update to the ITMEMS statement on coral bleaching > (http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/bulls/ITMEMS-bleach.html) be helpful for the > public in this regard? It is my opinion that it would, that we should > address the topics above (among others, e.g., coastal effects), and that > it would behoove us to widely circulate the update among the press as a > consensus opinion (if that is possible!). > > Just my two cents worth... > > Cheers, > > Jim Hendee > NOAA/AOML > Miami, FL > > Glynn, P. (1993). Coral reef bleaching: ecological perspectives. Coral > Reefs 12, 1-17. > > Glynn, P. (1996). Coral reef bleaching: facts, hypotheses and > implications. Global Change Biology 2, 495-509. > > Lesser, M.P. (1996). Elevated temperatures and ultraviolet radiation > cause oxidative stress and inhibit photosynthesis in symbiotic > dinoflagellates. Limnol Oceanogr. 41(2): 271-283. > > Mumby, P.J., Chisholm, J.R.M., Edwards, A.J., Andrefouet, S. & Jaubert, J. > 2001. Cloudy weather may have saved Society Island reef corals during the > 1998 ENSO event. Mar Ecol Prog Ser (in press). > > Ware, J.R., Fautin, D.G., & Buddemeier, R.W. (1996). Patterns of coral > bleaching: modeling the adaptive bleaching hypothesis. Ecological > Modelling 84, 199-214. > > -------- Original Message -------- > > World coral reefs to die by 2050, scientist warns > By Ed Cropley, Reuters > Thursday, September 06, 2001 > > GLASGOW, Scotland ? The world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years > because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them, a > scientist warned Wednesday. > > "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most coral in most areas will be > lost," Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, told a > science conference. "We are looking at a loss which is equivalent to the > tropical rain forests." > > Only the coral reefs in nontropical regions such as Egypt stand any chance > of lasting beyond 2050, Ormond said, but even the days of the stunning > marine parks of the Red Sea are numbered as sea temperatures continue to > creep up. > > In the past, reefs have suffered from sediment buildup and the coral-eating > crown-of-thorns starfish, whose numbers have exploded due to the > over-fishing of their predators. > > Now the main threat to the delicate structures that harbor some of nature's > most stunning creations comes from warmer seas, which cause coral bleaching. > > Microscopic algae that support the coral polyps cannot live in the warmer > water, and the polyps, the tiny creatures who actually create the reefs, die > off within weeks. > > Scientists agree the world's oceans are now warming at a rate of between one > and two degrees Celsius every 100 years due to the increased amounts of > greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which trap the sun's rays. > > But even if humans stopped pumping out greenhouse gases such as carbon > dioxide tomorrow in a bid to halt the process, it would still be too > late to > save the reefs, Ormond said. "I don't know what can be done, given that > there's a 50-year time lag between trying to limit carbon dioxide levels and > any effect on ocean temperature," he told the conference, held by the > British Association for the Advancement of Science. > > The implications stretch far beyond the death of the colorful coral > structures themselves. The weird and wonderful eels and fish which inhabit > the nooks and crannies will become homeless, and many species will die out. > "We are looking at a gradual running down of the whole system. Over time, > the diversity of coral fish will die," Ormond said. > > Humankind will also suffer directly as the dead reefs are eroded and > shorelines that have been protected for the last 10,000 years face the wrath > of the oceans without their natural defenses. > > In an age of relatively cheap scuba-diving holidays, this also means many > developing countries in the tropics, such as Kenya or those in the > Caribbean, face losing a major source of revenue. > > The only cause for optimism was that new coral reefs could start to emerge > in colder waters such as the north Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. > > Copyright 2001 ? Reuters > > ~~~~~~~ > 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 jeffrey-low at mailhost.net Sat Sep 8 22:37:06 2001 From: jeffrey-low at mailhost.net (Jeffrey Low) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 10:37:06 +0800 Subject: coral reefs doomed? In-Reply-To: <003c01c138ba$337eb920$7d6e6682@vsap.uq.edu.au> Message-ID: Hi everyone, I hestitate to air my views in this forum, which will be read by the "greats" in coral reef research. However, I beg your indulgence to add my questions and comments to the debate on the destruction of coral reefs. Factors affecting coral reef survival. I think it is moot to say one factor overrides the other - unless we know ALL the factors, and how they relate to each other, even the "global" factors may only play a small part in coral survival in a specific regions, and at that point in time. Even then, these factors would probably change faster than science can determine to be of practical use. Pollution. I use the term liberally here, to include CO2, sediment, sewerage etc. Most, if not all, of the problems related to coral reefs are man-made. While I hear a lot about the biology of corals, their reaction to certain influences, what is being done to link the biology with the "pollution management" sciences? My meaning is that should more be done to address the question of how do we keep our environment cleaner? Conservation, preservation, protection. Are we trying to keep the coral reefs as they are? Even in the face of environmental change on a global scale? Maybe their "time" has come and we will be powerless to prevent it. Given that humans have caused premature termination of thousands of species, but species extinction has been going on for some time, no? Perhaps the overall degradation of the various ecosystems worldwide is an indication of the (eventual) demise of the human race as we know it. Population. I would class this as the ultimate source of all our problems (not just for coral reefs). To paraphrase from the movie "Godzilla" - size does matter. 6 billion people ... I can't even imagine what that number constitutes. And it is set to top 7 billion by 2050? How do you manage the waste produced by so many people? How do you prevent overfishing when fish may be the main (and sometimes only) source of protein. How do you prevent over-exploitation of the oceans resources? I recall a funny anecdote in the newspapers about someone who calculated that if everyone of earth passed gas at the same time, it would cause an explosion that would destroy the world. It seemed funny at the time .... Cheers, Jeffrey Low SINGAPORE jeffrey-low at mailhost.net ~~~~~~~ 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 Sep 9 02:47:45 2001 From: oveh at uq.edu.au (Ove Hoegh-Guldberg) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 16:47:45 +1000 Subject: coral reefs doomed? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000a01c138fb$55759300$7d6e6682@vsap.uq.edu.au> Hi Jeffrey, Let us hope synchrony in gas does not prevail! People are key to both the problem and the solution. The same mass scale efforts you refer to in terms of the negative also apply to the other side of the equation. If all of us planted a tree, there would be 6 billion new trees. If everyone in the rich developed countries insulated their homes rather than use heating or air-conditioning, we would have a dramatic decline in the greenhouse gas problem. So - six billion people does not have to be a negative (yes - I know - it rarely is) On the relative impacts of climate change versus "pollution". There has been a perception of a competition among us of "who has the worst factor for causing reef decline'. I find that silly. While the GCRMN data tend to indicate a dramatic impact of climate events like 1998 (16% loss of living coral in a single year), the truth is that the synergies and interactive effects are probably where the action is as opposed to an isolated and single factor. Cheers, Ove -----Original Message----- From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Jeffrey Low Sent: Sunday, 9 September 2001 12:37 PM To: 'Coral-List' Subject: RE: coral reefs doomed? Hi everyone, I hestitate to air my views in this forum, which will be read by the "greats" in coral reef research. However, I beg your indulgence to add my questions and comments to the debate on the destruction of coral reefs. Factors affecting coral reef survival. I think it is moot to say one factor overrides the other - unless we know ALL the factors, and how they relate to each other, even the "global" factors may only play a small part in coral survival in a specific regions, and at that point in time. Even then, these factors would probably change faster than science can determine to be of practical use. Pollution. I use the term liberally here, to include CO2, sediment, sewerage etc. Most, if not all, of the problems related to coral reefs are man-made. While I hear a lot about the biology of corals, their reaction to certain influences, what is being done to link the biology with the "pollution management" sciences? My meaning is that should more be done to address the question of how do we keep our environment cleaner? Conservation, preservation, protection. Are we trying to keep the coral reefs as they are? Even in the face of environmental change on a global scale? Maybe their "time" has come and we will be powerless to prevent it. Given that humans have caused premature termination of thousands of species, but species extinction has been going on for some time, no? Perhaps the overall degradation of the various ecosystems worldwide is an indication of the (eventual) demise of the human race as we know it. Population. I would class this as the ultimate source of all our problems (not just for coral reefs). To paraphrase from the movie "Godzilla" - size does matter. 6 billion people ... I can't even imagine what that number constitutes. And it is set to top 7 billion by 2050? How do you manage the waste produced by so many people? How do you prevent overfishing when fish may be the main (and sometimes only) source of protein. How do you prevent over-exploitation of the oceans resources? I recall a funny anecdote in the newspapers about someone who calculated that if everyone of earth passed gas at the same time, it would cause an explosion that would destroy the world. It seemed funny at the time .... Cheers, Jeffrey Low SINGAPORE jeffrey-low at mailhost.net ~~~~~~~ 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 Mark.Spalding at unep-wcmc.org Sun Sep 9 08:23:30 2001 From: Mark.Spalding at unep-wcmc.org (Mark Spalding) Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2001 13:23:30 +0100 Subject: Benthic Hard-Substrate Diversity Message-ID: Amy and others who may find this useful: In the new World Atlas of Coral Reefs we have two sets of figures for zooxanthellate scleractinian coral diversity by country which can be broadly termed "observed" and "expected". The former are derived from about 1000 different published sources compiled at UNEP-WCMC - species have only been included where they have actually been collected or observed in a country. The latter are based on the species range maps developed by JEN Veron in his three volume Corals of the World, with some minor modifications by the same author. These are interpolated ranges, hence may exaggerate the diversity in some countries. Spalding, MD, Ravilious C and Green EP (2001). World Atlas of Coral Reefs. University of California Press, Berkeley, USA. www.unep-wcmc.org/marine/coralatlas/ These same figures will be being incorporated into ReefBase in the coming months All best 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 >>> Amy Baco 09/08/01 02:05am >>> Aloha! I am looking for some recent references for coral and/or other shallow water hard substrate diversity. I am particularly interested in references which include a complete speices list for all taxa (not just sessile inverts. eg.) and number of individuals of each species. I have done a number of literature searches, but there seem to be few papers which include all taxa (and even fewer that include the data). The most recent reference I have for corals is Austin 1980. Any help would be greatly apprecaited! Thanks! -Amy Amy Baco-Taylor University of Hawaii Department of Oceanography 1000 Pope Road Honolulu, Hawaii 96822 Phone (808) 956-6050 FAX (808) 956-9516 abaco at iniki.soest.hawaii.edu ------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from marbio, please send this message: unsubscribe marbio to: majordomo at mote.org Please do not send this message to the list itself. Thank you. MARBIO originates at Mote Marine Laboratory, Sarasota, FL USA http://www.mote.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. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Mark.Spalding at unep-wcmc.org Sun Sep 9 09:32:09 2001 From: Mark.Spalding at unep-wcmc.org (Mark Spalding) Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2001 14:32:09 +0100 Subject: coral reefs doomed? Message-ID: Just a few quick thoughts on this, because tommorrow and Tuesday I'm going to be facing quite a bit of national and international press regarding the launch of the World Atlas of Coral Reefs. I'm quite expecting a question such as "We heard last week that coral reefs will all be dead within 50 years and there's nothing we can do about it, so why should be bother trying?" I think the answer is something like. 1 - this is a very extreme view, that is not to say impossible, but it lies at one end of a spectrum, while "no impact whatsoever lies at the other". The reality is somewhere in between 2 - We do not, therefore, give up while what we are talking about is still a remote chance. 3 - What can we do? Well perhaps we can ameliorate the impacts, for example by reducing the mix of other threats facing reefs. While this may not prevent coral death from bleaching, it seems highly likely that it would facilitate recovery. Detailed networks of protected areas may help, and more active management may become essential. For example, even the worst hit areas of the Indian Ocean showed very localised pockets of high survival. These may be critical for subsequent recovery of wider areas, and should be given high levels of protection following a bleaching event. Similarly overfishing of grazing fish may prevent coral settlement as algae grow up, so perhaps there are fisheries management controls we should consider. 4 - The jury is still out on the rates of adaptation of corals, given the timescales genetic adaptation may be out of the question (not completely), but there is also phenotypic plasticity. We need to watch, and to experiment. If the doomsday scenario really starts to look likely there may still be more active management measures we could take, and research needs to think about these. Cheers 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 jmk100 at york.ac.uk Sun Sep 9 12:37:09 2001 From: jmk100 at york.ac.uk (JM Kemp) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:37:09 +0100 (BST) Subject: coral reefs doomed? In-Reply-To: <000a01c138fb$55759300$7d6e6682@vsap.uq.edu.au> Message-ID: One small comment about range - expansion and survival of coral and other associated taxa in the face of climate change: Ignoring the details of arguments about acidity, etc, and just thinking geographically, if climate change does force those taxa away from the equator into higher latitudes, a quick look at any atlas shows that the 'range expansion' argument is invalid for some large parts of the GLobe. Although it may hold water in the Tropical Atlantic, parts of the Pacific, and the densely - packed archipelagos of the Indo-Malay region, in the Indian Ocean (especially the northern INdian Ocean), and other areas this is not the case. My own stamping ground of Arabia, including the Red Sea and the Arabian Sea, provides good examples: force the many hundreds of taxa endemic to that part of the world any further north and they'll have to develop legs and lungs (which may be taking the adaptation hypothesis a little too far): there's nowhere else for them to go except dry land. Similarly, any of the numerous reef-coral taxa endemic to remote islands or island chains in the tropics of any of the worlds oceans are likely to have nowhere to go, simply because they are unable to disperse and colonise areas away from their present home ranges. For poorly dispersing taxa the distance involved may not even have to be very large before it becomes insuperable. Just a thought. Jerry Kemp ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From hendee at aoml.noaa.gov Sun Sep 9 13:16:24 2001 From: hendee at aoml.noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 13:16:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: coral reefs doomed? In-Reply-To: <015401c13883$b47c49c0$3c8dfea9@MyHost> Message-ID: I need to make something clear about my original message in "coral reefs doomed?": I was NOT intimating that R. Ormond's statements were made as a "ploy" (ref: colleague M. Risk's post) to gain funding. I can see how one might draw that inference from what I said, but that was definitely not my intent. My overall intent in the message was that a more well-rounded statement on coral reef decline might be more helpful in public statements to the press. However, I am beginning to see that a consensus might be impossible, even if a desirable goal. Cheers, Jim ~~~~~~~ For directions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list or the digests, please visit www.coral.noaa.gov, click on Popular on the menu bar, then click on Coral-List Listserver. From riskmj at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca Sun Sep 9 17:29:06 2001 From: riskmj at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Mike Risk) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 17:29:06 -0400 Subject: coral reefs doomed? References: Message-ID: <026401c1397d$d2032040$3c8dfea9@MyHost> And, in turn, allow me to make myself clear. Jim Hendee was not one of the people I hoped would take offense at my posting. There has been more than a little game-playing by some reef scientists, re obtaining funding to save the world's reefs from disaster. Neither Jim nor I read Rupert's comments as pleas for more dough, but as the sad conclusions of an experienced scientist. I differ from those conclusions only in scale. ~~~~~~~ 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 BTyler3 at aol.com Sun Sep 9 20:18:34 2001 From: BTyler3 at aol.com (BTyler3 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 20:18:34 EDT Subject: coral reefs doomed? Message-ID: <7c.1b44097a.28cd60da@aol.com> Re: Mark Spalding's comments and others... <> I'd like to throw in my two cents worth about why bothering to study/protect coral reefs IF(??) they are actually on there way to widespread decline as is being discussed here. ?This probably seems obvious to biologists and managers, but not necessarily to politicians/reporters controlling/influencing the purse strings. ? There are other reasons to protect these areas and to maintain water quality in reef areas other than maintaining hard corals. ? What would be the effect of hard coral die-offs from many of the worlds coral reefs? ?No doubt there would be a change in structure, both physical and ecological. ?Coralline algae, sponges, and possibly soft corals, would likely become the dominant structure-forming organisms. ?This change in structural characteristics would lead to community changes in composition, diversity and abundance, but not necessarily complete elimination of important marine resources in these areas. ??? In the worst case scenario, there may eventually be complete erosion of wave-dissipating functions of the resulting reefs, but this may take much longer. ?But it seems to me that these altered reef areas would still be valuable marine resources worthy of protection for the future, if nothing else then to help put off the possibly inevitable breakdown of the entire reef structure. ??Good water quality and management practices should hopefully enhance whatever takes place over the long-term. ? Bill Dr. Bill Tyler Indian River Community College Ft. Pierce, FL 561-462-4885 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010909/8e0acd4d/attachment.html From greenforce at pd.jaring.my Sun Sep 9 22:45:45 2001 From: greenforce at pd.jaring.my (Greenforce Borneo) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:45:45 +0800 Subject: The Pulau Banggi Project for Coral Reef Biodiversity - 1st Annual Report Message-ID: <00d401c139af$5d212d80$0200a8c0@stingray> Dear All I have recently joined the Pulau Banggi Project for Coral Reef Biodiversity and have become an avid follower of the list! We thought that maybe a few of you might be interested in our first annual report presenting data collected by Greenforce on the status of coral reefs in the Banggi region of northern Sabah from July 1999 - September 2000. Greenforce UK, the NGO behind the project, is working in a tri-party agreement with Sabah Department of Fisheries and the Institute of Biodiversity and Environmental Conservation, University Malaysia Sarawak. Volunteer divers were used for the detailed underwater surveying of abundance and diversity of coral reef organisms, in order to collect data for the assessment of the status of coral reef habitats and marine resources currently available in the Banggi Region. This area has not been studied previously in any great detail and the aims of the project are to collect biodiversity data in order to assess the area's potential for a future management programme. Although indications of over-exploitation have been observed, the area has a high level of biodiversity. Should any of you wish to receive a copy of our first annual report, or any other information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Kindest regards Laura Laura Colombo Chief Scientist Greenforce Pulau Banggi Project for Coral Reef Biodiversity c/o Sri Mahiruddin, PO Box 526, 89508 Kudat, Sabah, Malaysia Tel. + 60 88 671 421 (18:00-22:00h GMT+8h) ~~~~~~~ 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 h.sweatman at aims.gov.au Mon Sep 10 01:50:38 2001 From: h.sweatman at aims.gov.au (Hugh Sweatman) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 15:50:38 +1000 Subject: Acanthaster control programs Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20010910153348.00a12510@email.aims.gov.au> Colleagues I am reviewing information related to crown-of-thorns starfish control programs and am interested in strategies, successes, failures, costs, etc. While I can search the mainstream literature, a lot of what gets written down about such programs is in very grey literature that is not always well referenced. I would be interested to hear from people involved in programs over the last 10-12 years (post-Birkeland and Lucas) and especially about any documentation. Please address replies to me (rather than clogging everyone's mailboxes) and I will post a summary on coral-list shortly. Hugh Sweatman Long Term Monitoring Program, Australian Institute of Marine Science, PMB3 Townsville MC, Qld 4810 Australia ph: (07) 4753 4470 / +61 747 534470 [GMT +10] faxes: (07) 4772 5852 / (07) 4753 4288 ~~~~~~~ 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 smp at unspoiledqueen.com Mon Sep 10 10:03:12 2001 From: smp at unspoiledqueen.com (Saba National Marine Park) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:03:12 -0400 Subject: manager looking for new position Message-ID: <00bd01c13a01$55a157e0$7da698d8@david> Dear readers, The manager of the Saba National Marine Park, David Kooistra, is looking for another position. His r?sum? can be found at www.sabapark.com/staff/cv-djk.htm If you happen to know an available position in this particular field, i.e. marine protected area management and coordination, please contact smp at unspoiledqueen.com David Kooistra Manager Saba Marine Park/Saba Hyperbaric Facility PO Box 18, The Bottom Saba, Netherlands Antilles Phone: 599 416 3295 Fax: 599 416 3435 Web-site: www.sabapark.com P.S. please note our new e-mail address smp at unspoiledqueen.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010910/46095a86/attachment.html From jmcmanus at rsmas.miami.edu Mon Sep 10 11:20:06 2001 From: jmcmanus at rsmas.miami.edu (John McManus) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:20:06 -0400 Subject: Benthic Hard-Substrate Diversity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: There are a lot of benthic surveys (several hundred) summarized on the ReefBase CD-ROM. If the data is too summarized for your purposes, you could find the original references there and track down the reports. Look for ordering details at www.reefbase.org, or contact the ReefBase team at ICLARM. John _________________________________________________________ John W. McManus, PhD Director, National Center for Caribbean Coral Reef Research (NCORE) Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences (RSMAS) University of Miami, 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway Miami, Florida 33149. jmcmanus at rsmas.miami.edu Tel. (305) 361-4814 Fax (305) 361-4600 www.ncoremiami.org -----Original Message----- From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Amy Baco Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 9:05 PM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Benthic Hard-Substrate Diversity Aloha! I am looking for some recent references for coral and/or other shallow water hard substrate diversity. I am particularly interested in references which include a complete speices list for all taxa (not just sessile inverts. eg.) and number of individuals of each species. I have done a number of literature searches, but there seem to be few papers which include all taxa (and even fewer that include the data). The most recent reference I have for corals is Austin 1980. Any help would be greatly apprecaited! Thanks! -Amy Amy Baco-Taylor University of Hawaii Department of Oceanography 1000 Pope Road Honolulu, Hawaii 96822 Phone (808) 956-6050 FAX (808) 956-9516 abaco at iniki.soest.hawaii.edu ------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from marbio, please send this message: unsubscribe marbio to: majordomo at mote.org Please do not send this message to the list itself. Thank you. MARBIO originates at Mote Marine Laboratory, Sarasota, FL USA http://www.mote.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. ~~~~~~~ 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 Mon Sep 10 13:59:40 2001 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E Strong) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:59:40 -0400 Subject: coral reefs doomed? References: Message-ID: <3B9CFF8C.B2CD30F4@noaa.gov> Dear Ove, Bob, and others, It seems about the right time to correct a misimpression that we spoke to at Bali last October. Our Bali paper noted that NOAA?s satellite SST data from around the tropics were believed to have been indicating an alarming increase (upward tendency ? hardly a ?trend?!) over the past two decades latitudinally as high as 0.5 deg C at 5 N latitude! A re-evaluation of these data, through a program sponsored by NASA and NOAA, called ?Pathfinder? has taken all the year-to-year improvements in making correct measurements over that time interval and reprocessed the data in an up-to-date and uniform fashion. More importantly, in-situ SST data from all the drifting and fixed buoys available were utilized to both validate and correct satellite calibrations on a regular basis. From Pathfinder we now believe that we have a more accurate set of NOAA satellite SST observations the best results for buoy comparisons are still seen when using only those Pathfinder satellite SSTs made at night. >From Pathfinder nighttime SST observations (Paper will be presented at the upcoming Ocean Sciences AGU) it is seen that SSTs through most of the tropical latitudes have not been rising but holding rather steady. In fact some regions have been showing steady DECLINES in SST. We still are finding greater declines in the southern hemisphere (reported at the Bali meeting) but even northern tropical locations show decreases: e.g., region around Midway; the region known as ?The Warm Pool? both continue to trend downward during the 80s and 90s. Even though much of the Indian Ocean experienced devastating bleaching from high SSTs in the late 90s, this area is basically experiencing a downward SST tendency. There are several regions that may be showing statistically significant increases, but this final say will not be official until the Feb 2002 Ocean Sciences meeting when we expect to have ?Pathfinder? 1999 and 2000 SST data fully incorporated. Regions that have been experiencing upward tendencies are: American Samoa ? Fiji ? Cook Islands; some regions of the Caribbean (especially eastern portions); Mexican?s Pacific coast; Red Sea; Arabian Sea/Persian Gulf; and possibly the extreme southern regions of GBR. There are other regions in the northern Atlantic and Pacific, outside areas of interest to coral folks, that show upward trends. These upward tendencies may be starting to show effects of climate increases that, from the oceans standpoint seem to be mostly noted at higher latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere .see you at Oceans Sciences. Footnote: A much scarier scenario is seen when the 1997/98 El Nino period is incorporated, a scenario we believe that will be largely eliminated with the addition of 1999 and 2000 SST data. Any trends ending during such a significant event are ?statistically flawed.? What some are concerned about for the future of coral reefs from the standpoint of temperature is what will El Ninos be like over the next 50 years So far I know of no reliable model with the answer to that question Cheers, Al > -------- Original Message -------- > > World coral reefs to die by 2050, scientist warns > By Ed Cropley, Reuters > Thursday, September 06, 2001 > > GLASGOW, Scotland ? The world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years > because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them, a > scientist warned Wednesday. > > "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most coral in most areas will be > lost," Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, told a > science conference. "We are looking at a loss which is equivalent to the > tropical rain forests." > > Only the coral reefs in nontropical regions such as Egypt stand any chance > of lasting beyond 2050, Ormond said, but even the days of the stunning > marine parks of the Red Sea are numbered as sea temperatures continue to > creep up. > > In the past, reefs have suffered from sediment buildup and the coral-eating > crown-of-thorns starfish, whose numbers have exploded due to the > over-fishing of their predators. > > Now the main threat to the delicate structures that harbor some of nature's > most stunning creations comes from warmer seas, which cause coral bleaching. > > Microscopic algae that support the coral polyps cannot live in the warmer > water, and the polyps, the tiny creatures who actually create the reefs, die > off within weeks. > > Scientists agree the world's oceans are now warming at a rate of between one > and two degrees Celsius every 100 years due to the increased amounts of > greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which trap the sun's rays. > > But even if humans stopped pumping out greenhouse gases such as carbon > dioxide tomorrow in a bid to halt the process, it would still be too > late to > save the reefs, Ormond said. "I don't know what can be done, given that > there's a 50-year time lag between trying to limit carbon dioxide levels and > any effect on ocean temperature," he told the conference, held by the > British Association for the Advancement of Science. > > The implications stretch far beyond the death of the colorful coral > structures themselves. The weird and wonderful eels and fish which inhabit > the nooks and crannies will become homeless, and many species will die out. > "We are looking at a gradual running down of the whole system. Over time, > the diversity of coral fish will die," Ormond said. > > Humankind will also suffer directly as the dead reefs are eroded and > shorelines that have been protected for the last 10,000 years face the wrath > of the oceans without their natural defenses. > > In an age of relatively cheap scuba-diving holidays, this also means many > developing countries in the tropics, such as Kenya or those in the > Caribbean, face losing a major source of revenue. > > The only cause for optimism was that new coral reefs could start to emerge > in colder waters such as the north Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. > > Copyright 2001 ? Reuters > > ~~~~~~~ > 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. -- **** <>< ******* <>< ******* <>< ******* <>< ******* Alan E. Strong Acting Chief, Oceanic Research & Applications Division Team Leader, Marine Applications Science Team (MAST) 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: 301-763-8572 http://orbit-net.nesdis.noaa.gov/orad -------------- 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/20010910/b6d4e2a2/attachment.vcf From osha at oshadavidson.com Mon Sep 10 20:45:49 2001 From: osha at oshadavidson.com (Osha Gray Davidson) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:45:49 -0500 Subject: Nitrates Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20010910193520.02b70a30@mail.oshadavidson.com> In an effort somewhat related to the recent thread about the fate of coral reefs and anthropogenic threats, I'm trying to compare the various N contributions (in the form of nitrate) of different states in the USA. I'm attempting to drive home the fact that we're ALL coastal states--because most of what we put into our rivers ends up in the ocean. I live in Iowa--about as far from the ocean as you can get in the US. Yet, Iowa contributes approx. 250,000 tons of nitrate/year flowing into the Gulf of Mexico. I'd like to put this in perspective, comparing Iowa's nitrate contribution to that of "truly" coastal states. Can anyone help with this? If you know the amount of NO3 coming from coastal states, could you please let me know? Or if anyone can tell me where that information can be found, just point me in the right direction. Thanks for any help. Cheers, Osha ================================ Osha Gray Davidson Home page: www.OshaDavidson.com 14 S. Governor St. Phone: 319-338-4778 Iowa City, IA 52240 E-Mail: osha at oshadavidson.com USA "Fire in the Turtle House: The Green Sea Turtle and the Fate of the Ocean" http://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/books/fire.html The Turtle House Foundation: www.turtlehousefoundation.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 szmanta at uncwil.edu Mon Sep 10 21:18:37 2001 From: szmanta at uncwil.edu (Alina M. Szmant) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:18:37 -0400 Subject: coral reefs doomed? In-Reply-To: <015401c13883$b47c49c0$3c8dfea9@MyHost> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010910210805.00ac4710@pop.uncwil.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010910/0657d36f/attachment.html From mfield at usgs.gov Mon Sep 10 16:05:55 2001 From: mfield at usgs.gov (Mike Field) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:05:55 -0700 Subject: Coral reef session at Ocean Sciences Meeting, Honolulu Message-ID: <200109111140.LAA11580@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> There will be a special session on coral reefs at the 2002 Ocean Sciences Meeting in Honolulu, Feb 11-15, 2002. We encourage colleagues to submit abstracts on their latest research results to Session OS 11, "CORAL REEF HABITATS : NEW INSIGHTS FROM INTEGRATED COASTAL SCIENCE". A description of the session is provided below. Important dates are: November 1, 2001 - Deadline for receipt of the Postal/Express Mail Abstracts November 8, 2001 at 1400 UTC - Deadline for receipt of the Electronic Abstract For more information, go to: http://www.agu.org/meetings/os02top.html#CusG SESSION OS11 DESCRIPTION During the past five years there has been an unprecedented explosion of scientific investigations to map, assess, monitor, and understand coral reef habitats. The driving impetus for the marked increase in studies was, and continues to be, the recognition that human activities are having a pronounced and measurable deleterious effect on reefs. Exacerbated coastal sedimentation and pollution, over-fishing, and ocean warming are but a few of the impacts leading to stress, increased disease, bleaching, and necrosis. The complexities of coral reef habitats and the threats that they face has led to studies that integrate science across a wide spectrum of disciplines. Geodesy, sediment dynamics, remote sensing, geochemistry, and coastal circulation are being joined with traditional disciplines in ecology, geology, and zoology to provide new perspectives and new answers. This session focuses on contributions about advancements in understanding coral reef habitats through the integration of coastal science. New methods and technologies for remote sensing and long term monitoring of coral reefs will be highlighted, as will new understanding of the controls on reef health and sustainability. CONVENORS: Michael Field, University of California, Santa Cruz, US Geological Survey Pacific Science Center 1156 High St, Santa Cruz, CA 94076 USA, email: mfield at usgs.gov, and Paul Jokiel, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology P.O.Box 1346 , Kaneohe, HI 96744 USA, email: jokiel at hawaii.edu ********************************************************* Michael E. Field US Geological Survey Pacific Science Center University of California Santa Cruz 1156 High St. Santa Cruz, CA 95064 (831) 459-3428; FAX: (831) 459-2336 Visit us at: http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/mamalabay/ ~~~~~~~ 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 Sep 11 08:29:43 2001 From: hendee at aoml.noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 08:29:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Nitrates In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20010910193520.02b70a30@mail.oshadavidson.com> Message-ID: NOAA's Nutrient Enhanced Coastal Ocean Productivity (NECOP) program collected a ton of data on the effects of the Mississippi River on the Northern Gulf of Mexico in the early 90s. Most of that data (including nitrate work) can be seen at: http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/ocd/necop Unfortunately, we've "misplaced" some of the data sets, however, and are in the process of restoring from backup. One of the best contacts you could find on the influence of the Mississippi River on the Gulf would be Dr. Nancy Rabalais of Lumcon. Cheers, Jim On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Osha Gray Davidson wrote: > In an effort somewhat related to the recent thread about the fate of coral > reefs and anthropogenic threats, I'm trying to compare the various N > contributions (in the form of nitrate) of different states in the USA. I'm > attempting to drive home the fact that we're ALL coastal states--because > most of what we put into our rivers ends up in the ocean. I live in > Iowa--about as far from the ocean as you can get in the US. Yet, Iowa > contributes approx. 250,000 tons of nitrate/year flowing into the Gulf of > Mexico. I'd like to put this in perspective, comparing Iowa's nitrate > contribution to that of "truly" coastal states. Can anyone help with this? > If you know the amount of NO3 coming from coastal states, could you please > let me know? Or if anyone can tell me where that information can be found, > just point me in the right direction. > > Thanks for any help. > Cheers, > Osha > > > ================================ > Osha Gray Davidson Home page: www.OshaDavidson.com > 14 S. Governor St. Phone: 319-338-4778 > Iowa City, IA 52240 E-Mail: osha at oshadavidson.com > USA > > "Fire in the Turtle House: The Green Sea Turtle and the Fate of the Ocean" > http://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/books/fire.html > > The Turtle House Foundation: www.turtlehousefoundation.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. > ~~~~~~~ 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.Eakin at noaa.gov Tue Sep 11 11:40:36 2001 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 09:40:36 -0600 Subject: Blood Donations Needed Message-ID: <117daef60.ef60117da@ngdc.noaa.gov> While I realize that this is not coral related, it seems an appropriate way to get out a good suggestion. In light of today's catastrophic events, I encourage all of you in the US, and are able to do so, to please donate blood today. The events in New York and Washington will have a tremendous effect on the nation's blood supply. ~~~~~~~ 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 jdafni at netvision.net.il Tue Sep 11 14:02:49 2001 From: jdafni at netvision.net.il (jacob Dafni) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:02:49 +0200 Subject: Our condolences and concern Message-ID: <002601c13aeb$fb58a220$6186003e@dafni> To all our American and nature lovers elsewhere Please accept our deepest concern and condolences, following the horrendous attack on common sense and human freedom. Your friends in Israel Dr. Jacob Dafni -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010911/d9387ee7/attachment.html From kstokesbury at conshelf.com Tue Sep 11 14:05:11 2001 From: kstokesbury at conshelf.com (Stokesbury, Karen) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:05:11 -0400 Subject: Two job listings Message-ID: <21210D756C55D3118EEC00C0F049A30E213393@NTFS2> Below are two job listings that we currently have available. DATA ANALYST/STATISTICIAN Continental Shelf Associates, Inc. is interested in hiring an individual with strong data/statistical analysis skills and a demonstrated background in marine environmental sciences. The successful applicant will participate in all phases of projects from experimental design through data management, data analysis, and report writing. The preferred qualifications are either 1) a graduate degree in marine biology, biological oceanography, or related field with a strong, demonstrated background in the application of univariate and multivariate statistics to ecological data or 2) a graduate degree in statistics with a strong, demonstrated background in the analysis of marine environmental data. Qualified applicants interested in working for small, dynamic marine sciences consulting firm located in southeastern Florida should submit a cover letter with CV/resume, three professional references, and salary requirements to kstokesbury at conshelf.com or K. Stokesbury, Continental Shelf Associates, Inc., 759 Parkway Street, Jupiter, FL 33477. MARINE BIOLOGIST/BIOLOGICAL OCEANOGRAPHER Continental Shelf Associates, Inc. is interested in adding a marine biologist/biological oceanographer to its staff. The successful candidate must have a thorough understanding of NEPA and the ESA and must have demonstrated experience in managing, writing, and editing technical documents for NEPA, ESA, and BA marine resource assessments. This individual also will be involved in project development, project management, technical support, literature reviews, and field studies to assess baseline conditions of marine habitats and potential project impacts of marine ecosystems and their components. An advanced degree (M.S. or Ph.D.) in marine biology, biological oceanography, or fisheries is required. Experimental design, statistical analysis, and supervisory experience with demonstrated writing ability is preferred. In addition, experience working with government agencies (DOD-Navy, Air Force; DOI-USFWS, MMS, NOAA/NMFS) is a plus. Consulting experience is preferred but not required. Qualified applicants interested in working for a small, dynamic marine sciences consulting firm located in southeastern Florida should submit a cover letter with CV/resume, three professional references, and salary requirements to kstokesbury at conshelf.com or K. Stokesbury, Continental Shelf Associates, Inc., 759 Parkway Street, Jupiter, FL 33477. ~~~~~~~ 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 Mon Sep 10 21:18:37 2001 From: szmanta at uncwil.edu (Alina M. Szmant) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 21:18:37 -0400 Subject: coral reefs doomed? In-Reply-To: <015401c13883$b47c49c0$3c8dfea9@MyHost> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20010910210805.00ac4710@pop.uncwil.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010910/0657d36f/attachment-0001.html From riskmj at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca Tue Sep 11 15:45:39 2001 From: riskmj at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Mike Risk) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:45:39 -0400 Subject: coral reefs doomed? Argh without refs Message-ID: <200109120020.AAA01321@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hi Alina. I always have an excuse for not doing homework. In this case, my wife = (Jodie Smith) is in surgery, I am taking a break to do email, but have = no intention of doing science for several days. (She's OK.) The largest problem here, as you are no doubt aware, is that, after 30 = years of using the same survey techniques: we have damn few long-term = records. So every argument that land-based sources cause stress may be = met with the counterargument, that you have no basis for concluding = that. (No matter that it's a BS argument-in these days of embracing = traditional knowledge, the one source we refuse to acknowledge is the = memory banks of aging reef scientists...) BUt here's a start. One of the best/worst places to see this is in SE = Asia. Tom Tomascik has documented disappearance of whole reefs in Pulau = Seribu (Thousand Islands), off Jakarta, within historical times-used old = data sets from the days of Umgrove. His work has appeared in various = iterations, including his book, and the Ginsburg Miami volume. Edinger = worked in several locations in Indonesia, with some of my other = students-published 2000 (?), Mar Poll Bull, plus several other summary = papers. The effect of a combo of sediments and sewage ranges from a = large drop in biodiversity and coral cover, to (most often) complete = extirpation. It classifies as a regional mass extinction: he estimated a = loss of (?) 40% of generic diversity of corals in the past 15 years. = Climate change had zip to do with it. Sri Lanka lost almost all of its reefs over the past decade... If I feel like doing science in a few weeks, I'll get back to you. = Promise. ~~~~~~~ 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 EdelaGuardia at nova.uh.cu Wed Sep 12 00:31:10 2001 From: EdelaGuardia at nova.uh.cu (Elena de la Guardia) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 23:31:10 -0500 Subject: coral reef in toronto Message-ID: <200109121201.MAA02474@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Coral listers I am looking for collaboration in coral ecology and/or coral diseases studies at some institution or Univesity in Toronto. - perhaps one of you may know a person working in that there- Or if anyone can tell me where that information can be found? Any help would be greatly apprecaited! Thank you very much, write directly to me. Elena de la Guardia centro de Investigaciones Marinas Universidad de la Habana. EdelaGuardia at nova.uh.cu ~~~~~~~ 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 rachel at holdsworth-associates.co.uk Wed Sep 12 09:55:56 2001 From: rachel at holdsworth-associates.co.uk (Holdsworth Associates) Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 13:55:56 GMT Subject: World Atlas of Coral Reefs Message-ID: <200109121355.NAA02750@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> LONDON, 11 September 2001 - Scientists who have compiled the most detailed assessment to date of coral reefs have shown that these precious marine ecosystems occupy a much smaller area of the planet than previously assumed. Although distributed in 101 countries and territories, where they are vital for fisheries, coastal protection, tourism and wildlife, they occupy less than one tenth of one percent of the oceans. The findings give new urgency to protect and conserve these important, valuable and seductively beautiful habitats which are under increasing threat from activities such as dynamite fishing, pollution, and climate change. For the first time ever we have a comprehensive assessment of where coral reefs are and what state they are in around the world. The World Atlas of Coral Reefs, prepared by the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) provides a new global estimate for coral reefs world-wide: 284 300 sq km, an area just half the size of France. For the first time, it also provides reef area estimates for individual countries (see note to editors) and includes detailed maps and statistics for all the world's coral reef nations. "Our new Atlas clearly shows that coral reefs are under assault," says Klaus Toepfer, UNEP Executive Director. "They are rapidly being degraded by human activities. They are over-fished, bombed and poisoned. They are smothered by sediment, and choked by algae growing on nutrient rich sewage and fertilizer run-off. They are damaged by irresponsible tourism and are being severely stressed by the warming of the world's oceans. Each of these pressures is bad enough in itself, but together, the cocktail is proving lethal." For editors: Press information: Rachel Holdsworth,PR consultant UNEP-WCMC, tel 01954 202789. rachel at holdsworth-associates.co.uk A full statement from UNEP, details of the Atlas and background information is available http://www.press-pack.com. You may also find some useful material on the web site that has been specially set up for the launch of the book http://www.unep-wcmc.org/marine/coralatlas/presspack/ This has some photos and maps that you may find useful. All the photos used in the book are available to be used but those not included on web site are subject to separate negotiation. further information is available at www.press-pack.com not the address given below ~~~~~~~ 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 eshinn at usgs.gov Wed Sep 12 11:43:27 2001 From: eshinn at usgs.gov (Gene Shinn) Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 11:43:27 -0400 Subject: Global warming/reefs and CO2 Message-ID: Those following the global warming and coral reefs issues might be interested in these websites. Gene http://www.co2science.org/edit/v4_edit/v4n37edit.htm http://www.co2science.org/subject/a/summaries/africaiceage.htm http://www.co2science.org ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- http://coastal.er.usgs.gov/african_dust/ | E. A. Shinn email eshinn at usgs.gov USGS Center for Coastal Geology | 600 4th St. South | voice (727) 803-8747 x3030 St.Petersburg, FL 33701 | fax (727) 803-2032 ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- ~~~~~~~ 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 Lindy.S.Johnson at noaa.gov Tue Sep 11 08:20:21 2001 From: Lindy.S.Johnson at noaa.gov (Lindy S Johnson) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 08:20:21 -0400 Subject: No Anchoring Area Message-ID: <200109121603.QAA01331@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> [Note: this was forwarded to coral-list as follow-up to original post] Mr. Hodgson--Hello! My name is Lindy Johnson and I work with NOAA General Counsel's Office of International Law. I would like to provide you some information regarding your email on no anchoring areas. I'm not sure if this directly responds to your request since your question appears to be aimed more at the marking of such an area with buoys and the type of buoys to be used rather than the actual establishment of the area. Therefore, if it is a type of buoy you are looking for, this information may not be relevant. I do not know whether there is any type of buoy that enjoys international recognition, I have copied some other folks on this email who may have a better idea about that issue. I am unclear from your email as to what type of vessel is actually causing the damage to your coral, whether it is from small boats or from large, commercial ships. If the damage is being caused by small ships, it sounds as if you need advice from someone on the types of buoys to put in to mark it. As I said above, if this is the case, it is not my area, so I will defer that question to others. You may also want to consider setting up mooring buoys in or beyond the no anchoring area to facilitate compliance with the prohibition. By the way, there was a speech on anchor damage given at the recent Coral Reef Symposium by Dinsdale E., Dinesen Z, Selecting Indicators to Assess Strategies to Control Anchor Damage on Fringing Reefs in the Whitsunday Region, Great Barrier Reef". You may want to check the proceedings to see if they submitted a paper and contact them. If the damage is being caused by large, commercial ships then you could also submit a proposal to the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to establish a "no anchoring area". IMO is a Specialized Agency of the United Nations that addresses international shipping issues. The ability to establish such areas was just created by IMO in December 2000. Such areas may, after submission to IMO, be established by a country in areas where anchoring is unsafe, unstable, or particularly hazardous or where anchoring could result in unacceptable damage to the marine environment. Although you could establish a no anchoring area in this bay purely as a matter of domestic law without going to IMO, IMO adoption of such an anchoring area will assist ships steer clear of these areas by requiring that all countries producing charts for international navigation mark such areas on their charts. The no anchoring area measure focuses on prevention, instead of enforcement and liability after the damage has already occurred. There is an international symbol to mark such areas on charts which has been developed by the International Hydrographic Office; generally speaking, this symbol is an anchor with an X through it. Finally, NOAA has agreed to act as lead country in preparing a guidance document for countries that will eventually be put up on the ICRI website on how to submit such a proposal to IMO. We are in the process of developing the first draft of that document now. If this is the mechanism that seems most appropriate, please let me know and we can talk further about it. I hope this information is useful to you. If you have any further questions for me, please do not hesitate to contact me. Lindy S. Johnson 202-482-5887 ~~~~~~~ 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 coral-list-owner at aoml.noaa.gov Wed Sep 12 21:45:08 2001 From: coral-list-owner at aoml.noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 01:45:08 GMT Subject: Spate of viruses Message-ID: <200109130145.BAA02244@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Ladies & Gentlemen, NOAA email is currently being beseiged by a virus. Until things cool down, coral-list will be temporarily shutdown in order to help keep from inadvertently helping to spread the virus. I apologize for the incovenience. Sincerely yours, 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 jim.hendee at noaa.gov Thu Sep 13 08:20:03 2001 From: jim.hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 08:20:03 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Terrorism, coral-list Message-ID: <200109131227.MAA03484@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Re: Spate of viruses: On second thought, I'm not going to let the dirty rotten scoundrels who write viruses e-Terrorize our great club of coral researchers and enthusiasts by shutting down coral-list, even temporarily--I believe I have enough protection installed to protect list subscribers (mainly through moderation of the list, which I will do temporarily), and I hope you have installed the latest virus checker on your computer. Please resume sending whatever coral news you feel is appropriate to the list. And in that spirit, I think I speak for all Americans in thanking our international colleagues who have sent us their messages of condolences during this enormous national tragedy, the massacre of thousands in our country at the hands of unconscionable zealots on September 11, 2001. This great nation and the freedom it stands for will not be intimidated, but will endure and triumph. I leave you with a quote (which I personally feel applies to the plight of corals, as well as to our national sadness) from Sir Winston Churchill, and a message from the Canadian broadcaster, Gordon Sinclair. ~~~~~~ "For myself, I am an optimist. It does not seem to be much use being anything else." -- Sir Winston Churchill ~~~~~~ From a Canadian newspaper some time ago: America: The Good Neighbor. Widespread but only partial news coverage was given recently to a remarkable editorial broadcast from Toronto by Gordon Sinclair, a Canadian television commentator. What follows is the full text of his trenchant remarks as printed in the Congressional Record: "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States. When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped. The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I'd like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon -! not once, but several times - and safely home again. You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here. When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those." Stand proud, America! ~~~~~~~ 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 howzit at turtles.org Thu Sep 13 10:17:14 2001 From: howzit at turtles.org (Ursula Keuper-Bennett) Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 10:17:14 -0400 Subject: Terrorism, coral-list Message-ID: <200109131430.OAA03769@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hi Jim (CORAL-Lers) The commentary by Canadian Gordon Sinclair, "American: The Good Neighbor" has been making the rounds. I note with interest the introduction, "From a Canadian newspaper some time ago". "some time ago" Jim turns out to be June 5, 1973. Please see the commentary in its entirety at: Canadian broadcast/journalist Gordon Sinclair died in 1984 at age 84. I believe he'd be gratified that the words he spoke in 1973 are giving comfort to Americans close to 30 years later. I'm Canadian also. (In fact my husband and I were on a flight from Hawaii back to Canada the night of September 10th. We arrived in Toronto about 6:30 am September 11th. Save but a few hours the other way and we'd have been stranded like so many others still are.) I just re-read Sinclair's comment and can only add one thing. As a Canadian I know what "United States" means. "United States" isn't just the prime defender (and sometimes it appears the sole defender) of democracy, but the best friend Canada has ever had. Lots of Canadians know this. Sinclair just said it best, that's all. Sweet and loud. Jim, I appreciate the work you put into keeping CORAL-L running. This is a wonderful mailing list --and community. Best wishes, Ursula TURTLE TRAX ------------------------------------------- At 08:20 AM 9/13/01 -0400, Jim Hendee wrote: >Re: Spate of viruses: > >On second thought, I'm not going to let the dirty rotten scoundrels who >write viruses e-Terrorize our great club of coral researchers and >enthusiasts by shutting down coral-list, even temporarily--I believe I >have enough protection installed to protect list subscribers (mainly >through moderation of the list, which I will do temporarily), and I hope >you have installed the latest virus checker on your computer. Please >resume sending whatever coral news you feel is appropriate to the list. > >And in that spirit, I think I speak for all Americans in thanking our >international colleagues who have sent us their messages of condolences >during this enormous national tragedy, the massacre of thousands in our >country at the hands of unconscionable zealots on September 11, 2001. This >great nation and the freedom it stands for will not be intimidated, but >will endure and triumph. > >I leave you with a quote (which I personally feel applies to the plight of >corals, as well as to our national sadness) from Sir Winston Churchill, >and a message from the Canadian broadcaster, Gordon Sinclair. > >~~~~~~ >"For myself, I am an optimist. It does not seem to be much use being >anything else." > -- Sir Winston Churchill >~~~~~~ > > From a Canadian newspaper some time ago: > > America: The Good Neighbor. > > Widespread but only partial news coverage was given > recently to a remarkable editorial broadcast from > Toronto by Gordon Sinclair, a Canadian television > commentator. What follows is the full text of his > trenchant remarks as printed in the Congressional Record: > "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the > Americans as the most generous and possibly the least > appreciated people on all the earth. ~~~~~~~ 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 tlsnell at acsu.buffalo.edu Fri Sep 14 05:51:57 2001 From: tlsnell at acsu.buffalo.edu (tlsnell at acsu.buffalo.edu) Date: Fri Sep 14 05:51:57 2001 Subject: Candelight vigil being planned Message-ID: <200109140959.JAA05557@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Friday Night at 7:00 p.m. EST (4:00 p.m. in California) step out of your door, stop your car, or step out of your establishment and light a candle. We will show the world that Americans are strong and united together against terrorism. The message: WE STAND UNITED - WE WILL NOT TOLERATE TERRORISM! ~~~~~~~ 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 jesmith at hawaii.edu Thu Sep 13 21:52:30 2001 From: jesmith at hawaii.edu (Jennifer E Smith) Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 15:52:30 -1000 (HST) Subject: Ocean Sciences 2002 Meeting Message-ID: <200109141001.KAA05552@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Friends and Colleagues, On behalf of myself, and John Runcie we would like to announce a special session that we are convening at the ASLO and AGU 2002 Ocean Sciences meeting this spring, Feb. 11-15th in Honolulu. We encourage you to submit abstracts on research conducted in any field/area related to nutrients and coastal ecosystems both tropical and temperate to session OS42: Nutrient Dynamics in Coastal Ecosystems: Linking Physical and Biological Processes (abstract follows). If you have any questions feel free to contact myself, or John. More information can be obtained on the following web page: http://www.agu.org/meetings/os02top.html Important Dates: November 1, 2001 - Deadline for receipt of the Postal/Express Mail Abstracts November 8, 2001 at 1400 UTC - Deadline for receipt of the Electronic Abstract January 11, 2002 - Deadline for pre-registration and housing February 11-15, 2002 - 2002 Ocean Sciences, Honolulu, Hawaii OS42 Nutrient Dynamics in Coastal Ecosystems: Linking Physical and Biological Processes Understanding the relative importance of natural and human-induced elevated-nutrient events on coastal ecosystems is an important global issue. As yet there are few clear answers. Considerable progress has been made in our understanding of the hydrology of coastal waters, the ecology of the organisms living in these waters and their physiology; nutrient dynamics have been an important component in many of these studies. Yet, of these studies, few cross the traditional lines of discipline. In temperate regions, upwelling and large scale physical processes have long been shown to deliver substantial levels of nutrients to coastal ecosytems, thereby supporting high biomass communities such as kelp forests. In contrast, tropical marine communities are generally considered to be nutrient limited where they exist on tightly recycled and newly generated nutrients. However, recent research has shown that not all tropical areas conform to this paradigm. The effects of localized and large scale physical processes on tropical benthic or pelagic communities remains largely unstudied. Anthropogenic nutrient imputs in both temperate and tropical regions have often been suggested as the primary cause of large scale phase shifts in benthic marine communities. The precise role of nutrients in these ecosystem-wide changes remains largely debated. This session is intended to be a forum where researchers from a variety of disciplines present their views of how best we can understand the real influence of elevated nutrients on coastal ecosystems. An integral part of the session is to open the floor for discussion in the form of open questions for any of the speakers in the session. We hope to break down some of the barriers between researchers traditionally working in separate fields. Conveners: Jennifer Smith, University of Hawaii Manoa, 3190 Maile Way, Honolulu, HI 96822 USA, Tel: (808) 956-3943, email: jesmith at hawaii.edu, and John Runcie, Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology, P.O. Box 1346, Kaneohe, HI 96744 USA, Tel: (808) 236 7477, Fax: (808) 236 7443, email: runcie at hawaii.edu ******************************************************************** Jennifer E. Smith Graduate Research Assistant Botany Department University of Hawaii Manoa 3190 Maile Way Honolulu HI 96822 office (808)956-3944 email: jesmith at hawaii.edu http://www.botany.hawaii.edu/GradStud/smith/JENHOME.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 rutabaga at pacwan.fr Fri Sep 14 12:29:58 2001 From: rutabaga at pacwan.fr (Jacques Laborel) Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 17:29:58 +0100 Subject: solidarity with the victims Message-ID: <200109141752.RAA06836@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear coral listers, As a frenchman I shall neverforget my emotion when I visited your country for the first time, when I read, on your memorial monuments, the lists of young americans that died for our freedon in 1918 and 1944. I feel a deep solidarity with American people, as well as a great concern for the future of the entire world. With all my sorrow and admiration for your courage and civic behaviour in these terrible circumstances. And I make the wish that terrorism will be fought and contained in all countries. Jacques Laborel 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 buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu Sat Sep 15 17:28:16 2001 From: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu (buddrw) Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 16:28:16 -0500 Subject: coral reefs doomed? Message-ID: <200109152352.XAA09476@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Ove, and others -- Part of the reason you are still waiting for hard experimental evidence regarding the ABH is that you consistently misstate and/or misunderstand what it is. Some specific examples: "the definitive data that shows corals will bleach, get rid of one dinoflagellate genotype and adopt another WHILE the thermal (or other) stress is still being applied to the coral-dinoflagellate association." This is part of the ABH only to the extent of requiring continuance of the stressful REGIME (e.g., frequency of high temperature excursions), not of the stressful bleaching-inducing CONDITION (e.g., continuous high temperature). It seems to me that you are attacking the latter proposition, which is NOT what we proposed or modeled (Ware et al). "used light and could not prove (using RFLPs) that his corals had changed from one dinoflagellate genotype to another (simply up-regulating one strain over another is not sufficient - that is acclimation and is not surprising)." Bleaching is a stress response, and we think that stress adaptation probably doesn't care that much about light, temperature or whatever -- besides which, there is certainly strong evidence for the synergism of light in temperature even in the bleaching episodes attributed primarily to temperature. Sorry if using light is a problem for you -- it's not for us. Further, we are willing to plead guilty to having accepted that which is not surprising -- what you refer to as 'up-regulation' we considered a shift in dominance or inertnal competitve abilities among the varieties of zoocxanthellae that could or did inhabit a host -- very much a part of ABH. Rather than go on and nit-pick your counter-arguments, I'd like to suggest that this is a good opportunity to set up and broaden the debate as a discussion thread -- with the proviso that we rely on direct quotes in context (since the subject is a bit complicated for one-line summaries) rather than on strawman revisions to discuss what the ABH actually is or isn't. Bob Buddemeier >===== Original Message From ===== >Dear Bob and others, > >I was triggered to respond by the inferences in your statement that some "reef >ecology and conservation" types have trouble with the Adaptive Bleaching >Hypothesis. Any practicing experimental scientist would have an issue with the >state of play regarding support for this hypothesis. The basic problem at this >point is nothing to do with "culture" - it is more to do with hard evidence, >which is almost completely lacking to support this still very soft and >hypothetical explanation for why coral bleach. While experimental tests have >been coming in, they have had serious problems in terms of design and the >conclusions they draw. Us "reef ecology and conservation types" still wait for >the definitive data that shows corals will bleach, get rid of one dinoflagellate >genotype and adopt another WHILE the thermal (or other) stress is still being >applied to the coral-dinoflagellate association. This has never been shown. >Showing diversity in rDNA is interesting but irrelevant if diversity here does >not relate to relevant physiological differences. The recent paper by Baker >(whom I greatly respect), for example, used light and could not prove (using >RFLPs) that his corals had changed from one dinoflagellate genotype to another >(simply up-regulating one strain over another is not sufficient - that is >acclimation and is not surprising). The experimental design was also confounded >by the fact that stressed corals were placed in the two contrasting and >confounding (for the experiment) habitats (one, the deeper site, was at the >extreme depth limit of the species concerned while the other was clearly more >optimal after photo acclimation). It is therefore not surprising that the corals >died more at deeper site - which has nothing to do with the fact that they did >not bleach!). > >Other issues abound and concern us "reef ecology and conservation types" - the >idea of range of expansion is limited (as outlined by several people so far) by >the fact that light may be a more important limiting than temperature. I also >want to stress that the issue of the decline of reefs (as you, Bob, did state) >has nothing to do with the extinction of corals. As the "geo types" (deliberate >use here) tell us worse things have happened to corals and they have bounced >back (but over thousands if not millions of years). The issue, however, is the >current human dependency on coral reef ecosystems - reefs disappearing for even >a few decades would present serious issues for several hundred million people. >The idea of finding out how reefs survived major extinction events is >interesting but largely irrelevant to the current discussion. > >So - out I come on my old hobby horse - we still have no evidence of unusual >adaptive abilities of corals that will match the fast rate of change. Us reef >ecology types keep looking. While looking for this evidence - perhaps we also >need to focus on how reefs will change and how we can "adapt" as human societies >to these changes. This research direction, if the projections of the future are >correct, will assume a major significance as we enter the next few decades. > >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/CMS_pro/www/staff.html > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >[mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Bob Buddemeier >Sent: Saturday, 8 September 2001 4:00 AM >To: Jim Hendee >Cc: Coral-List >Subject: Re: coral reefs doomed? > > >Jim, et al., > >Good questions, good points, -- and like it or not, a pretty good if disturbing >article. > >On your question about range expansion to compensate for temperature increase >and inhospitably hot tropics -- there are unfortunately 3 geographic factors >that work against that. >1. The available shallow water benthic area decreases rather significantly as >you move to higher latitudes (no atolls, narrower shelves, etc.) >2. Light -- see the Kleypas et al analysis -- Kleypas, J.A., McManus, J.W. and >Menez, L.A.B., 1999. Environmental limits to coral reef development: Where do we >draw the line? American Zoologist, 39(1): 146-159. Maximum reef depth shoals >dramatically at higher latitudes, even within the thermal mixed layer. This >presumably reflects light limitations due to sunangle and day lenght variations >-- which aren't going to change. >3. Carbonate saturation state decrease is squeezing from the high latitude >sides -- see the US National Assessment, >http://www.cop.noaa.gov/pubs/coastalclimate.PDF, section 4.4. > >So there is little basis for optimism there. > >With acknowledgment of the terminological problems, some form of >adaptation/acclimatization probably does have real potential to ensure the >survival of corals , but not necessarily "reefs as we know them." The Ware et >al article and its precursor, Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1993. Coral >Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism: A Testable Hypothesis. BioScience, 43: >320-326, are looking more solid as experimental tests come in (Kinzie et al in >Biol. Bull. earlier this year, Baker in Nature more recently), but for some >reason this concept has been anathema to some reef cology and conservation >types. (see also Buddemeier, R.W., Fautin, D.G. and Ware, J.R., 1997. >Acclimation, Adaptation, and Algal Symbiosis in Reef-Building Scleractinian >Corals. In: J.C. den Hartog (Editor), Proceedings of the 6th International >Conference on Coelenterate Biology (16-21 July 1995, Noordwijkerhout, The >Netherlands). National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, pp. 71-76 for a >related issue). This may be because it is seen as diminishing the seriousness >of the bleaching problem, but in my view your position is the more valid -- >without some mechanistic reason to believe that corals CAN survive, there is >very little justification for investing money in research and conservation. > >This also relates to my tired old hobby horse of the non-reef coral habitats -- >I don't think we are getting the real picture, or doing ourselves any favors, by >exclusive concentration on reefs; corals have survived many periods of >non-reef-building, and we had better figure out how, why and where. > >Thanks for bringing this up. > >Bob Buddemeier > > >Jim Hendee wrote: > >> Dear Coral Colleagues, >> >> I know I'll get raked over the coals on this (especially because I don't >> have all the literature at my fingertips), but the content and tone of the >> news article below is troublesome to me, even though such a tone helps to >> gain attention, as well as funding, so that we can more thoroughly study >> the problem of coral bleacing and global warming. Of course I respect our >> colleague's right to a viewpoint, but when I see this, I can't help but >> have these thoughts: >> >> Such a projection gives no "credit" to adapatation and natural selection, >> even though such adaptation would have to occur under a relatively short >> time span (50 years). I believe Ware et al (1996), among others, have >> addressed this. >> >> As Dr. Al Strong and I have discussed, and as alluded to but unfortunately >> not expanded upon in the last sentence of the article, if the seas are >> warming, then you might expect the zoogeography of corals to expand >> (relocate?) into the cooler areas, as long as the substrate, circulation, >> light and water quality regimes are conducive. (I would imagine some >> coral researchers have modeled these possibilities, and I apologize for >> not referencing your work.) >> >> Even though high sea temperatures are the primary cause and indicator of >> coral bleaching, that is not the only cause, and no credit is given to the >> evidence in the literature (e.g., Lesser 1996, among others) that high UV >> is also an agent in coral bleaching. Higher UV, especially in the >> tropics, is part of the problem as it relates to the earth's ozone layer. >> There is evidence that high sea temperatures that elicited coral bleaching >> at some localities in the past did not elicit coral bleaching during >> extended cloudy periods (Mumby et al, in press). (Perhaps the cooler areas >> mentioned in the above paragraph might also have lower UV?) >> >> There are other causes of coral bleaching (e.g., see Glynn 1993, 1996) and >> this manifestation of stress is complex and to my mind public statements >> on coral bleaching should emphasize this. >> >> Would an annual update to the ITMEMS statement on coral bleaching >> (http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/bulls/ITMEMS-bleach.html) be helpful for the >> public in this regard? It is my opinion that it would, that we should >> address the topics above (among others, e.g., coastal effects), and that >> it would behoove us to widely circulate the update among the press as a >> consensus opinion (if that is possible!). >> >> Just my two cents worth... >> >> Cheers, >> >> Jim Hendee >> NOAA/AOML >> Miami, FL >> >> Glynn, P. (1993). Coral reef bleaching: ecological perspectives. Coral >> Reefs 12, 1-17. >> >> Glynn, P. (1996). Coral reef bleaching: facts, hypotheses and >> implications. Global Change Biology 2, 495-509. >> >> Lesser, M.P. (1996). Elevated temperatures and ultraviolet radiation >> cause oxidative stress and inhibit photosynthesis in symbiotic >> dinoflagellates. Limnol Oceanogr. 41(2): 271-283. >> >> Mumby, P.J., Chisholm, J.R.M., Edwards, A.J., Andrefouet, S. & Jaubert, J. >> 2001. Cloudy weather may have saved Society Island reef corals during the >> 1998 ENSO event. Mar Ecol Prog Ser (in press). >> >> Ware, J.R., Fautin, D.G., & Buddemeier, R.W. (1996). Patterns of coral >> bleaching: modeling the adaptive bleaching hypothesis. Ecological >> Modelling 84, 199-214. >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> >> World coral reefs to die by 2050, scientist warns >> By Ed Cropley, Reuters >> Thursday, September 06, 2001 >> >> GLASGOW, Scotland ? The world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years >> because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them, a >> scientist warned Wednesday. >> >> "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most coral in most areas will be >> lost," Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, told a >> science conference. "We are looking at a loss which is equivalent to the >> tropical rain forests." >> >> Only the coral reefs in nontropical regions such as Egypt stand any chance >> of lasting beyond 2050, Ormond said, but even the days of the stunning >> marine parks of the Red Sea are numbered as sea temperatures continue to >> creep up. >> >> In the past, reefs have suffered from sediment buildup and the coral-eating >> crown-of-thorns starfish, whose numbers have exploded due to the >> over-fishing of their predators. >> >> Now the main threat to the delicate structures that harbor some of nature's >> most stunning creations comes from warmer seas, which cause coral bleaching. >> >> Microscopic algae that support the coral polyps cannot live in the warmer >> water, and the polyps, the tiny creatures who actually create the reefs, die >> off within weeks. >> >> Scientists agree the world's oceans are now warming at a rate of between one >> and two degrees Celsius every 100 years due to the increased amounts of >> greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which trap the sun's rays. >> >> But even if humans stopped pumping out greenhouse gases such as carbon >> dioxide tomorrow in a bid to halt the process, it would still be too >> late to >> save the reefs, Ormond said. "I don't know what can be done, given that >> there's a 50-year time lag between trying to limit carbon dioxide levels and >> any effect on ocean temperature," he told the conference, held by the >> British Association for the Advancement of Science. >> >> The implications stretch far beyond the death of the colorful coral >> structures themselves. The weird and wonderful eels and fish which inhabit >> the nooks and crannies will become homeless, and many species will die out. >> "We are looking at a gradual running down of the whole system. Over time, >> the diversity of coral fish will die," Ormond said. >> >> Humankind will also suffer directly as the dead reefs are eroded and >> shorelines that have been protected for the last 10,000 years face the wrath >> of the oceans without their natural defenses. >> >> In an age of relatively cheap scuba-diving holidays, this also means many >> developing countries in the tropics, such as Kenya or those in the >> Caribbean, face losing a major source of revenue. >> >> The only cause for optimism was that new coral reefs could start to emerge >> in colder waters such as the north Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. >> >> Copyright 2001 ? Reuters >> >> ~~~~~~~ >> 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. Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier Senior Scientist, Geohydrology Kansas Geological Survey University of Kansas 1930 Constant Avenue Lawrence, KS 66047 USA ph (785) 864-2112; fax (785) 864-5317 email: 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 buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu Sat Sep 15 17:10:42 2001 From: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu (buddrw) Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 16:10:42 -0500 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <200109152351.XAA09499@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> , Jim Hendee Subject: RE: coral reefs doomed? Sender: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov It's interesting, if mildly depressing, to see so many reasons for pessimism. I generally agree with most of Mike's points, but there are two that he raises that I think merit comment -- both related to the CO2 and saturation state issue, and both addressing issues of temporal scale and kinetics. First, Mike raises the question of 'long-term' silicate buffering. True enough -- in the very long term, none of this is an issue, and even on the thousands of years time scale we are dealing with ocean DIC content that overwhelms the size of the atmospheric reservoir(and essentially all others but the mineral). The critical issue is that we are not dealing with scales of this magnitude -- the anthropogenic CO2 input has been on the scale of a century (more if you count the beginning of the industrial revolution, less if you start from the rapid rise post-WWII). The mixed layer of the ocean, however, contains DIC in an amount comparable to the atmospheric reservoir with a probably turnover time of a few centuries (cf. many radiocarbon studies of marine apparent ages). For the purpose of considering presewnt problems, it is a reasonable first approximation to treat the mixed layer (which is where all of the reef-building corals live) as an isolated compartment, and on that scale the CO2 effect is clearly dominant. Second, the high-mag calcite issue -- I too am out of my office, but in 1986 June Oberdorfer and I published a chapter in Carbonate Diagensis book edited by Purser and Schroeder that pointed out that reef interstitial water is controlled at the saturation state of high-mag calcite. What is most definitely not true is that this has much effect on the saturation state of the overlying seawater. Here again, the issue is time scales -- in this case of advective open water exchange compared to the flushing of interstitial porewaters (see also the paper by same authors in the ICRS 6 proceedings). There are many orders of magnitude difference -- and in fact the possibility of equilibrating the sedimentary carbonate with the ocean water is on time scales equivalent to the silicate buffer controls, and basically insignificant on the 100 year scales dominated by gas and open water exchange reactions. A question, Mike -- I didn't understand your point about vertical mixing replacing high pH bottom water with low pH suface water -- did that refer to some particular locale? Certainly for most of the ocean saturation state, pH etc are lower at depth than at the surface. Bob Buddemeier >===== Original Message From "Mike Risk" ===== >Hi Jim. > >Although I share your concerns in general, the bad news is: the conclusion >is probably correct. I don't read that as a funding ploy-Rupert clearly says >there's stuff-all we can do about it, leading funding agencies to say why >bother? > >Notwithstanding the recent stimulating work by Jackson et al on overfishing, >the hard evidence from the 20th century (and this one, too) is that >land-based sources of pollution have ineradicably slain more coral reefs >than all other causes put together. The references on this are close to >countless. This trend continues unabated, and science seems slow to respond. >(I invite other readers, perhaps offended by this comment, to submit >examples of coral reef monitoring programs that are linked to legislation >and enforcement by a proper detection/identification/amelioration process.) > >Will reefs colonise new shelf areas? Sure. In fact, the rate at which this >will occur may be estimated from the drilling work done long ago by Walter >Adey, in the Virgin Islands. It takes the ocean about 1,000 years to clean >up the shoreline and make it ready for new corals. Presumably, this same >process in the future will take even longer, given the necessity for >reworking condos and Hondas: plus, that ocean will not be nearly as clean as >the advancing Holocene seas were. So: but don't hold your breath. For sure, >it will happen after the next election. > >Concern about ocean warming is well-placed. One of the best references to >this is by Francis Rougerie, in...1988?. This is in French, and hence not as >widely read and cited as it should be. Quelle honte. > >Concern about oceanic pH is probably overblown: > 1. we seem to have forgotten the seminal work of Sillen, in the 60's, >showing that silicates, not carbonates, are the long-term oceanic buffers. >Lord knows we have done lots to "protect" tropical coastlines from pH change >by loading them with chemically-reactive silicates (feldspars, illite, >montmorillonite, etc). Large quantities of these minerals are in fact bound >up in coral skeletons, hence corals carry with them their own personal >buffers (Cortes and Risk, 1985, BMS). > 2. the pH of tropical coastlines will no doubt shift-after all the >high-mag calcite has dissolved. As HMC makes up a large proportion of reef >sediments, this may take some time. > 3. as the climate changes and we shift to the other metastable condition >of global climate, this will be accompanied by a fundamental reorganisation >of the oceans. This will involve (far as we know) vertical mixing, which >will put low-pH surface waters into contact with bottom sediments and bottom >waters of higher pH. This process was outlined in Smith et al, 1997, April >Nature. This process can occur within five years. None of the present ocean >models allows for mixing on this vertical and temporal scale, hence all need >recalibration. (Some of this work is under way now, using data from >deep-water corals.) > 4. McConnaughey and colleagues, and Barnes and colleagues, in separate >publications within the last 12 months, have shown that corals calcify >faster at elevated temps, and in the presence of fleshy algae. > >My prediction (Risk, 1999) was that coral reefs, as some of us knew them >(and you were one, Jim), will be eradicated by land-based sources from most >of the world's shelves long before pH shifts appreciably-in fact, my >prediction was even more dismal than Rupert's. I think I said 2020. > >I am hesitant about statements, usually made (I'm afraid) by geologists, >along the lines of "Corals have been around for a long time, they will >survive." It's true, but misleading. Yes, coral relatives-burrowing sea >anemones-are the oldest metazoan fossils yet found: Proterozoic, McKenzie >Mountains, NWT. Such statements need to have appended to them the comment >that large proportions of the geologic record are virtually barren of reefs, >of any type. I consider these statements similar to: "The globe's been hot >before, we survived", which we have also heard lately. The globe has been >quite hot before, involving a fundamental rethinking of real estate values. >Every North American Grade Six kid should do the exercise of drawing the >+15-m sealevel contour onto the globe, and estimating the human population >involved. Or perhaps we should start with those politicians whose >development seems to have been arrested at Grade 6... > >It may very well be that some of those we refer to as "deep-water" corals >may be a recolonisation/biodiversity resource-let us hope so. This has >recently become an extremely productive area of research, and interested >persons should log on to the coolcoral site, or contact me for preprints. > >This email is devoid of specific page #'s, etc, for refs: my office is being >moved, I am fileless, and am celebrating by being a carpenter for a while. >Another guy who tried it came back, so what have I got to lose? > >Yours in gloom: Mike > >~~~~~~~ >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 Senior Scientist, Geohydrology Kansas Geological Survey University of Kansas 1930 Constant Avenue Lawrence, KS 66047 USA ph (785) 864-2112; fax (785) 864-5317 email: 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 akivab at earthlink.net Sat Sep 15 16:56:24 2001 From: akivab at earthlink.net (akivab at earthlink.net) Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 16:56:24 -0400 Subject: Walking forward Message-ID: <200109152348.XAA09420@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hi there coral list, I am forwarding a request - Mary Woltz is looking for partners for ademonstration walk for peac from New York city to Washington DC to plant a flag for peace in fron of the white house. if any of you interested to join her please contuct her directly at mgwoltz at earthlink.n -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.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 Bprecht at pbsj.com Mon Sep 17 10:56:27 2001 From: Bprecht at pbsj.com (Precht, Bill) Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 09:56:27 -0500 Subject: UNEP Report Message-ID: <200109171520.PAA07647@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Study: Reefs dying quicker By Elaine Kurtenbach The Associated Press September 12, 2001 HONG KONG ? Blasted by dynamite, contaminated with poisons and smothered by pollution, coral reefs are dying faster than previously thought, according to a study published Tuesday by the United Nations. The U.N. Environment Program's World Conservation Monitoring Center said it found that reefs worldwide occupy a much smaller area than previously thought and that virtually all of Southeast Asia's reefs were threatened. The world's reefs cover 113,720 square miles, about half the size of France and less than one-tenth of a percent of the oceans. They are spread among 101 countries and territories. The survey "clearly shows that coral reefs are under assault," said Klaus Toepfer, the U.N. Environment Program's executive director. "They are rapidly being degraded by human activities." The U.N. Environment Program's survey is one of the most detailed assessments of coral reefs and the first to document the size of reef areas in each country worldwide. Previous estimates of reef size were based on simpler maps and models and were up to 10 times larger than the new map, said Mark Spalding, lead author of the study. Reefs are deteriorating in almost every country, and marine conservation is failing to protect them, even in areas designated as protection zones, Spalding said. "One of the saddest facts about the demise of reefs is that it is utterly nonsensical," said Spalding. "Protecting and managing reefs is not just for the good of the fishes. In every case, it also leads to economic and social benefits for local communities." Toepfer said the United Nations was trying to coordinate international efforts to prevent damage to reefs caused by deforestation, urban development and intensive agriculture. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/search/sfl-areefs12sep12.story Also see: International Coral Reef Action Network http://www.unfoundation.org/grants/3_11_coralreefs.asp News Release: April 02, 2001 UN Foundation Announces Funding for International Coral Reef Action Network http://www.unfoundation.org/unfnews/press/2001/04/02/pr_16295.asp ~~~~~~~ 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 Tue Sep 18 01:58:14 2001 From: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu (buddrw) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 00:58:14 -0500 Subject: coral reefs doomed -- and the ABH Message-ID: <3BB23308@webmail.ku.edu> Coral-listers; I have received, in addition to this broadcast message from Ove, other personal communications that indicate that there is a fairly broad pool of misunderstanding about what the Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis is and isn't. The comments below address primarily things that it isn't, and I have sent messages to Ove and others on an individual basis to try to get this sorted out so that a productive discussion can ensue. In the meantime, I heartily recommend recourse to the original literature as a source of primary information -- I, Daphne Fautin, and John Ware will all be more than happy to answer questions or attempt to clear up confusion. Bob Buddemeier PS: I stand by my original statements. >===== Original Message From ===== >Dear Bob and others, > >I was triggered to respond by the inferences in your statement that some "reef >ecology and conservation" types have trouble with the Adaptive Bleaching >Hypothesis. Any practicing experimental scientist would have an issue with the >state of play regarding support for this hypothesis. The basic problem at this >point is nothing to do with "culture" - it is more to do with hard evidence, >which is almost completely lacking to support this still very soft and >hypothetical explanation for why coral bleach. While experimental tests have >been coming in, they have had serious problems in terms of design and the >conclusions they draw. Us "reef ecology and conservation types" still wait for >the definitive data that shows corals will bleach, get rid of one dinoflagellate >genotype and adopt another WHILE the thermal (or other) stress is still being >applied to the coral-dinoflagellate association. This has never been shown. >Showing diversity in rDNA is interesting but irrelevant if diversity here does >not relate to relevant physiological differences. The recent paper by Baker >(whom I greatly respect), for example, used light and could not prove (using >RFLPs) that his corals had changed from one dinoflagellate genotype to another >(simply up-regulating one strain over another is not sufficient - that is >acclimation and is not surprising). The experimental design was also confounded >by the fact that stressed corals were placed in the two contrasting and >confounding (for the experiment) habitats (one, the deeper site, was at the >extreme depth limit of the species concerned while the other was clearly more >optimal after photo acclimation). It is therefore not surprising that the corals >died more at deeper site - which has nothing to do with the fact that they did >not bleach!). > >Other issues abound and concern us "reef ecology and conservation types" - the >idea of range of expansion is limited (as outlined by several people so far) by >the fact that light may be a more important limiting than temperature. I also >want to stress that the issue of the decline of reefs (as you, Bob, did state) >has nothing to do with the extinction of corals. As the "geo types" (deliberate >use here) tell us worse things have happened to corals and they have bounced >back (but over thousands if not millions of years). The issue, however, is the >current human dependency on coral reef ecosystems - reefs disappearing for even >a few decades would present serious issues for several hundred million people. >The idea of finding out how reefs survived major extinction events is >interesting but largely irrelevant to the current discussion. > >So - out I come on my old hobby horse - we still have no evidence of unusual >adaptive abilities of corals that will match the fast rate of change. Us reef >ecology types keep looking. While looking for this evidence - perhaps we also >need to focus on how reefs will change and how we can "adapt" as human societies >to these changes. This research direction, if the projections of the future are >correct, will assume a major significance as we enter the next few decades. > >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/CMS_pro/www/staff.html > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >[mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Bob Buddemeier >Sent: Saturday, 8 September 2001 4:00 AM >To: Jim Hendee >Cc: Coral-List >Subject: Re: coral reefs doomed? > > >Jim, et al., > >Good questions, good points, -- and like it or not, a pretty good if disturbing >article. > >On your question about range expansion to compensate for temperature increase >and inhospitably hot tropics -- there are unfortunately 3 geographic factors >that work against that. >1. The available shallow water benthic area decreases rather significantly as >you move to higher latitudes (no atolls, narrower shelves, etc.) >2. Light -- see the Kleypas et al analysis -- Kleypas, J.A., McManus, J.W. and >Menez, L.A.B., 1999. Environmental limits to coral reef development: Where do we >draw the line? American Zoologist, 39(1): 146-159. Maximum reef depth shoals >dramatically at higher latitudes, even within the thermal mixed layer. This >presumably reflects light limitations due to sunangle and day lenght variations >-- which aren't going to change. >3. Carbonate saturation state decrease is squeezing from the high latitude >sides -- see the US National Assessment, >http://www.cop.noaa.gov/pubs/coastalclimate.PDF, section 4.4. > >So there is little basis for optimism there. > >With acknowledgment of the terminological problems, some form of >adaptation/acclimatization probably does have real potential to ensure the >survival of corals , but not necessarily "reefs as we know them." The Ware et >al article and its precursor, Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1993. Coral >Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism: A Testable Hypothesis. BioScience, 43: >320-326, are looking more solid as experimental tests come in (Kinzie et al in >Biol. Bull. earlier this year, Baker in Nature more recently), but for some >reason this concept has been anathema to some reef cology and conservation >types. (see also Buddemeier, R.W., Fautin, D.G. and Ware, J.R., 1997. >Acclimation, Adaptation, and Algal Symbiosis in Reef-Building Scleractinian >Corals. In: J.C. den Hartog (Editor), Proceedings of the 6th International >Conference on Coelenterate Biology (16-21 July 1995, Noordwijkerhout, The >Netherlands). National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, pp. 71-76 for a >related issue). This may be because it is seen as diminishing the seriousness >of the bleaching problem, but in my view your position is the more valid -- >without some mechanistic reason to believe that corals CAN survive, there is >very little justification for investing money in research and conservation. > >This also relates to my tired old hobby horse of the non-reef coral habitats -- >I don't think we are getting the real picture, or doing ourselves any favors, by >exclusive concentration on reefs; corals have survived many periods of >non-reef-building, and we had better figure out how, why and where. > >Thanks for bringing this up. > >Bob Buddemeier > > >Jim Hendee wrote: > >> Dear Coral Colleagues, >> >> I know I'll get raked over the coals on this (especially because I don't >> have all the literature at my fingertips), but the content and tone of the >> news article below is troublesome to me, even though such a tone helps to >> gain attention, as well as funding, so that we can more thoroughly study >> the problem of coral bleacing and global warming. Of course I respect our >> colleague's right to a viewpoint, but when I see this, I can't help but >> have these thoughts: >> >> Such a projection gives no "credit" to adapatation and natural selection, >> even though such adaptation would have to occur under a relatively short >> time span (50 years). I believe Ware et al (1996), among others, have >> addressed this. >> >> As Dr. Al Strong and I have discussed, and as alluded to but unfortunately >> not expanded upon in the last sentence of the article, if the seas are >> warming, then you might expect the zoogeography of corals to expand >> (relocate?) into the cooler areas, as long as the substrate, circulation, >> light and water quality regimes are conducive. (I would imagine some >> coral researchers have modeled these possibilities, and I apologize for >> not referencing your work.) >> >> Even though high sea temperatures are the primary cause and indicator of >> coral bleaching, that is not the only cause, and no credit is given to the >> evidence in the literature (e.g., Lesser 1996, among others) that high UV >> is also an agent in coral bleaching. Higher UV, especially in the >> tropics, is part of the problem as it relates to the earth's ozone layer. >> There is evidence that high sea temperatures that elicited coral bleaching >> at some localities in the past did not elicit coral bleaching during >> extended cloudy periods (Mumby et al, in press). (Perhaps the cooler areas >> mentioned in the above paragraph might also have lower UV?) >> >> There are other causes of coral bleaching (e.g., see Glynn 1993, 1996) and >> this manifestation of stress is complex and to my mind public statements >> on coral bleaching should emphasize this. >> >> Would an annual update to the ITMEMS statement on coral bleaching >> (http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/bulls/ITMEMS-bleach.html) be helpful for the >> public in this regard? It is my opinion that it would, that we should >> address the topics above (among others, e.g., coastal effects), and that >> it would behoove us to widely circulate the update among the press as a >> consensus opinion (if that is possible!). >> >> Just my two cents worth... >> >> Cheers, >> >> Jim Hendee >> NOAA/AOML >> Miami, FL >> >> Glynn, P. (1993). Coral reef bleaching: ecological perspectives. Coral >> Reefs 12, 1-17. >> >> Glynn, P. (1996). Coral reef bleaching: facts, hypotheses and >> implications. Global Change Biology 2, 495-509. >> >> Lesser, M.P. (1996). Elevated temperatures and ultraviolet radiation >> cause oxidative stress and inhibit photosynthesis in symbiotic >> dinoflagellates. Limnol Oceanogr. 41(2): 271-283. >> >> Mumby, P.J., Chisholm, J.R.M., Edwards, A.J., Andrefouet, S. & Jaubert, J. >> 2001. Cloudy weather may have saved Society Island reef corals during the >> 1998 ENSO event. Mar Ecol Prog Ser (in press). >> >> Ware, J.R., Fautin, D.G., & Buddemeier, R.W. (1996). Patterns of coral >> bleaching: modeling the adaptive bleaching hypothesis. Ecological >> Modelling 84, 199-214. >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> >> World coral reefs to die by 2050, scientist warns >> By Ed Cropley, Reuters >> Thursday, September 06, 2001 >> >> GLASGOW, Scotland ? The world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years >> because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them, a >> scientist warned Wednesday. >> >> "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most coral in most areas will be >> lost," Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, told a >> science conference. "We are looking at a loss which is equivalent to the >> tropical rain forests." >> >> Only the coral reefs in nontropical regions such as Egypt stand any chance >> of lasting beyond 2050, Ormond said, but even the days of the stunning >> marine parks of the Red Sea are numbered as sea temperatures continue to >> creep up. >> >> In the past, reefs have suffered from sediment buildup and the coral-eating >> crown-of-thorns starfish, whose numbers have exploded due to the >> over-fishing of their predators. >> >> Now the main threat to the delicate structures that harbor some of nature's >> most stunning creations comes from warmer seas, which cause coral bleaching. >> >> Microscopic algae that support the coral polyps cannot live in the warmer >> water, and the polyps, the tiny creatures who actually create the reefs, die >> off within weeks. >> >> Scientists agree the world's oceans are now warming at a rate of between one >> and two degrees Celsius every 100 years due to the increased amounts of >> greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which trap the sun's rays. >> >> But even if humans stopped pumping out greenhouse gases such as carbon >> dioxide tomorrow in a bid to halt the process, it would still be too >> late to >> save the reefs, Ormond said. "I don't know what can be done, given that >> there's a 50-year time lag between trying to limit carbon dioxide levels and >> any effect on ocean temperature," he told the conference, held by the >> British Association for the Advancement of Science. >> >> The implications stretch far beyond the death of the colorful coral >> structures themselves. The weird and wonderful eels and fish which inhabit >> the nooks and crannies will become homeless, and many species will die out. >> "We are looking at a gradual running down of the whole system. Over time, >> the diversity of coral fish will die," Ormond said. >> >> Humankind will also suffer directly as the dead reefs are eroded and >> shorelines that have been protected for the last 10,000 years face the wrath >> of the oceans without their natural defenses. >> >> In an age of relatively cheap scuba-diving holidays, this also means many >> developing countries in the tropics, such as Kenya or those in the >> Caribbean, face losing a major source of revenue. >> >> The only cause for optimism was that new coral reefs could start to emerge >> in colder waters such as the north Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. >> >> Copyright 2001 ? Reuters >> >> ~~~~~~~ >> 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. Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier Senior Scientist, Geohydrology Kansas Geological Survey University of Kansas 1930 Constant Avenue Lawrence, KS 66047 USA ph (785) 864-2112; fax (785) 864-5317 email: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu From Peter_Craig at nps.gov Tue Sep 18 08:59:20 2001 From: Peter_Craig at nps.gov (Peter Craig) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 12:59:20 GMT Subject: Monitoring for small MPAs Message-ID: <200109181259.MAA15615@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Report Available: monitoring coral reef in small MPAs. A workshop was convened to view coral reef monitoring from a small park perspective, where local resources are far fewer than occur in more developed states or countries with numerous management agencies and academic institutions. The workshop first identified who the monitoring program was for, and then examined what information was needed and why. Monitoring questions related to these needs were formulated, followed by a listing of indicators that would provide the desired information by tracking changes in reef condition over time. While the workshop report focuses specifically on American Samoa, it may be a useful approach elsewhere, because it provides a convenient way to identify and prioritize variables that should be included in a monitoring plan: "Developing a coral reef monitoring program for the National Park of American Samoa: a practical, management-driven approach for small marine protected areas". 2001. P.Craig and L.Basch For copies, contact: peter_craig at nps.gov National Park of American Samoa, Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799 ~~~~~~~ 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 Tue Sep 18 01:58:14 2001 From: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu (buddrw) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 00:58:14 -0500 Subject: coral reefs doomed -- and the ABH Message-ID: <200109181304.NAA15651@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Coral-listers; I have received, in addition to this broadcast message from Ove, other personal communications that indicate that there is a fairly broad pool of misunderstanding about what the Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis is and isn't. The comments below address primarily things that it isn't, and I have sent messages to Ove and others on an individual basis to try to get this sorted out so that a productive discussion can ensue. In the meantime, I heartily recommend recourse to the original literature as a source of primary information -- I, Daphne Fautin, and John Ware will all be more than happy to answer questions or attempt to clear up confusion. Bob Buddemeier PS: I stand by my original statements. >===== Original Message From ===== >Dear Bob and others, > >I was triggered to respond by the inferences in your statement that some "reef >ecology and conservation" types have trouble with the Adaptive Bleaching >Hypothesis. Any practicing experimental scientist would have an issue with the >state of play regarding support for this hypothesis. The basic problem at this >point is nothing to do with "culture" - it is more to do with hard evidence, >which is almost completely lacking to support this still very soft and >hypothetical explanation for why coral bleach. While experimental tests have >been coming in, they have had serious problems in terms of design and the >conclusions they draw. Us "reef ecology and conservation types" still wait for >the definitive data that shows corals will bleach, get rid of one dinoflagellate >genotype and adopt another WHILE the thermal (or other) stress is still being >applied to the coral-dinoflagellate association. This has never been shown. >Showing diversity in rDNA is interesting but irrelevant if diversity here does >not relate to relevant physiological differences. The recent paper by Baker >(whom I greatly respect), for example, used light and could not prove (using >RFLPs) that his corals had changed from one dinoflagellate genotype to another >(simply up-regulating one strain over another is not sufficient - that is >acclimation and is not surprising). The experimental design was also confounded >by the fact that stressed corals were placed in the two contrasting and >confounding (for the experiment) habitats (one, the deeper site, was at the >extreme depth limit of the species concerned while the other was clearly more >optimal after photo acclimation). It is therefore not surprising that the corals >died more at deeper site - which has nothing to do with the fact that they did >not bleach!). > >Other issues abound and concern us "reef ecology and conservation types" - the >idea of range of expansion is limited (as outlined by several people so far) by >the fact that light may be a more important limiting than temperature. I also >want to stress that the issue of the decline of reefs (as you, Bob, did state) >has nothing to do with the extinction of corals. As the "geo types" (deliberate >use here) tell us worse things have happened to corals and they have bounced >back (but over thousands if not millions of years). The issue, however, is the >current human dependency on coral reef ecosystems - reefs disappearing for even >a few decades would present serious issues for several hundred million people. >The idea of finding out how reefs survived major extinction events is >interesting but largely irrelevant to the current discussion. > >So - out I come on my old hobby horse - we still have no evidence of unusual >adaptive abilities of corals that will match the fast rate of change. Us reef >ecology types keep looking. While looking for this evidence - perhaps we also >need to focus on how reefs will change and how we can "adapt" as human societies >to these changes. This research direction, if the projections of the future are >correct, will assume a major significance as we enter the next few decades. > >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/CMS_pro/www/staff.html > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >[mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Bob Buddemeier >Sent: Saturday, 8 September 2001 4:00 AM >To: Jim Hendee >Cc: Coral-List >Subject: Re: coral reefs doomed? > > >Jim, et al., > >Good questions, good points, -- and like it or not, a pretty good if disturbing >article. > >On your question about range expansion to compensate for temperature increase >and inhospitably hot tropics -- there are unfortunately 3 geographic factors >that work against that. >1. The available shallow water benthic area decreases rather significantly as >you move to higher latitudes (no atolls, narrower shelves, etc.) >2. Light -- see the Kleypas et al analysis -- Kleypas, J.A., McManus, J.W. and >Menez, L.A.B., 1999. Environmental limits to coral reef development: Where do we >draw the line? American Zoologist, 39(1): 146-159. Maximum reef depth shoals >dramatically at higher latitudes, even within the thermal mixed layer. This >presumably reflects light limitations due to sunangle and day lenght variations >-- which aren't going to change. >3. Carbonate saturation state decrease is squeezing from the high latitude >sides -- see the US National Assessment, >http://www.cop.noaa.gov/pubs/coastalclimate.PDF, section 4.4. > >So there is little basis for optimism there. > >With acknowledgment of the terminological problems, some form of >adaptation/acclimatization probably does have real potential to ensure the >survival of corals , but not necessarily "reefs as we know them." The Ware et >al article and its precursor, Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1993. Coral >Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism: A Testable Hypothesis. BioScience, 43: >320-326, are looking more solid as experimental tests come in (Kinzie et al in >Biol. Bull. earlier this year, Baker in Nature more recently), but for some >reason this concept has been anathema to some reef cology and conservation >types. (see also Buddemeier, R.W., Fautin, D.G. and Ware, J.R., 1997. >Acclimation, Adaptation, and Algal Symbiosis in Reef-Building Scleractinian >Corals. In: J.C. den Hartog (Editor), Proceedings of the 6th International >Conference on Coelenterate Biology (16-21 July 1995, Noordwijkerhout, The >Netherlands). National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, pp. 71-76 for a >related issue). This may be because it is seen as diminishing the seriousness >of the bleaching problem, but in my view your position is the more valid -- >without some mechanistic reason to believe that corals CAN survive, there is >very little justification for investing money in research and conservation. > >This also relates to my tired old hobby horse of the non-reef coral habitats -- >I don't think we are getting the real picture, or doing ourselves any favors, by >exclusive concentration on reefs; corals have survived many periods of >non-reef-building, and we had better figure out how, why and where. > >Thanks for bringing this up. > >Bob Buddemeier > > >Jim Hendee wrote: > >> Dear Coral Colleagues, >> >> I know I'll get raked over the coals on this (especially because I don't >> have all the literature at my fingertips), but the content and tone of the >> news article below is troublesome to me, even though such a tone helps to >> gain attention, as well as funding, so that we can more thoroughly study >> the problem of coral bleacing and global warming. Of course I respect our >> colleague's right to a viewpoint, but when I see this, I can't help but >> have these thoughts: >> >> Such a projection gives no "credit" to adapatation and natural selection, >> even though such adaptation would have to occur under a relatively short >> time span (50 years). I believe Ware et al (1996), among others, have >> addressed this. >> >> As Dr. Al Strong and I have discussed, and as alluded to but unfortunately >> not expanded upon in the last sentence of the article, if the seas are >> warming, then you might expect the zoogeography of corals to expand >> (relocate?) into the cooler areas, as long as the substrate, circulation, >> light and water quality regimes are conducive. (I would imagine some >> coral researchers have modeled these possibilities, and I apologize for >> not referencing your work.) >> >> Even though high sea temperatures are the primary cause and indicator of >> coral bleaching, that is not the only cause, and no credit is given to the >> evidence in the literature (e.g., Lesser 1996, among others) that high UV >> is also an agent in coral bleaching. Higher UV, especially in the >> tropics, is part of the problem as it relates to the earth's ozone layer. >> There is evidence that high sea temperatures that elicited coral bleaching >> at some localities in the past did not elicit coral bleaching during >> extended cloudy periods (Mumby et al, in press). (Perhaps the cooler areas >> mentioned in the above paragraph might also have lower UV?) >> >> There are other causes of coral bleaching (e.g., see Glynn 1993, 1996) and >> this manifestation of stress is complex and to my mind public statements >> on coral bleaching should emphasize this. >> >> Would an annual update to the ITMEMS statement on coral bleaching >> (http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/bulls/ITMEMS-bleach.html) be helpful for the >> public in this regard? It is my opinion that it would, that we should >> address the topics above (among others, e.g., coastal effects), and that >> it would behoove us to widely circulate the update among the press as a >> consensus opinion (if that is possible!). >> >> Just my two cents worth... >> >> Cheers, >> >> Jim Hendee >> NOAA/AOML >> Miami, FL >> >> Glynn, P. (1993). Coral reef bleaching: ecological perspectives. Coral >> Reefs 12, 1-17. >> >> Glynn, P. (1996). Coral reef bleaching: facts, hypotheses and >> implications. Global Change Biology 2, 495-509. >> >> Lesser, M.P. (1996). Elevated temperatures and ultraviolet radiation >> cause oxidative stress and inhibit photosynthesis in symbiotic >> dinoflagellates. Limnol Oceanogr. 41(2): 271-283. >> >> Mumby, P.J., Chisholm, J.R.M., Edwards, A.J., Andrefouet, S. & Jaubert, J. >> 2001. Cloudy weather may have saved Society Island reef corals during the >> 1998 ENSO event. Mar Ecol Prog Ser (in press). >> >> Ware, J.R., Fautin, D.G., & Buddemeier, R.W. (1996). Patterns of coral >> bleaching: modeling the adaptive bleaching hypothesis. Ecological >> Modelling 84, 199-214. >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> >> World coral reefs to die by 2050, scientist warns >> By Ed Cropley, Reuters >> Thursday, September 06, 2001 >> >> GLASGOW, Scotland ? The world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years >> because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them, a >> scientist warned Wednesday. >> >> "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most coral in most areas will be >> lost," Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, told a >> science conference. "We are looking at a loss which is equivalent to the >> tropical rain forests." >> >> Only the coral reefs in nontropical regions such as Egypt stand any chance >> of lasting beyond 2050, Ormond said, but even the days of the stunning >> marine parks of the Red Sea are numbered as sea temperatures continue to >> creep up. >> >> In the past, reefs have suffered from sediment buildup and the coral-eating >> crown-of-thorns starfish, whose numbers have exploded due to the >> over-fishing of their predators. >> >> Now the main threat to the delicate structures that harbor some of nature's >> most stunning creations comes from warmer seas, which cause coral bleaching. >> >> Microscopic algae that support the coral polyps cannot live in the warmer >> water, and the polyps, the tiny creatures who actually create the reefs, die >> off within weeks. >> >> Scientists agree the world's oceans are now warming at a rate of between one >> and two degrees Celsius every 100 years due to the increased amounts of >> greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which trap the sun's rays. >> >> But even if humans stopped pumping out greenhouse gases such as carbon >> dioxide tomorrow in a bid to halt the process, it would still be too >> late to >> save the reefs, Ormond said. "I don't know what can be done, given that >> there's a 50-year time lag between trying to limit carbon dioxide levels and >> any effect on ocean temperature," he told the conference, held by the >> British Association for the Advancement of Science. >> >> The implications stretch far beyond the death of the colorful coral >> structures themselves. The weird and wonderful eels and fish which inhabit >> the nooks and crannies will become homeless, and many species will die out. >> "We are looking at a gradual running down of the whole system. Over time, >> the diversity of coral fish will die," Ormond said. >> >> Humankind will also suffer directly as the dead reefs are eroded and >> shorelines that have been protected for the last 10,000 years face the wrath >> of the oceans without their natural defenses. >> >> In an age of relatively cheap scuba-diving holidays, this also means many >> developing countries in the tropics, such as Kenya or those in the >> Caribbean, face losing a major source of revenue. >> >> The only cause for optimism was that new coral reefs could start to emerge >> in colder waters such as the north Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. >> >> Copyright 2001 ? Reuters >> >> ~~~~~~~ >> 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. Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier Senior Scientist, Geohydrology Kansas Geological Survey University of Kansas 1930 Constant Avenue Lawrence, KS 66047 USA ph (785) 864-2112; fax (785) 864-5317 email: 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 rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Tue Sep 18 16:37:27 2001 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 10:37:27 -1000 Subject: coral reefs doomed -- and the ABH and carbonate saturation Message-ID: <200109182101.VAA01597@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Bob, Thank you for shedding some more light on your adaptive bleaching hypothesis and as you point out, there is almost a complete absence of hard evidence either for or against the argument. In this regard, I don't have to remind you, that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (of coral's adaptive abilities). Also, in this regard, I think we can infer more from the fossil record than most of us seem now willing to accept even though the adaptive responses have the benefit of thousand or even millions of years. BUT, over the millenia, there must have been some rapid bursts of sudden change such as the K-T event itself. Stephen J. Gould's view of evolution by punctuated equilibrium is, in fact, based on such bursts of change. And yet, we don't see much extinction in corals at least at the generic or Family level (Re: Veron's work). Doesn't this imply high adaptive ability? Perhaps we need to revisit the fossil record more often and pull in the views of John Pandolfi and Charley Veron (where are you guys?). Also, while I am at it, let me ask you to shed some of your exceptional knowledge and experience in marine geo-chemistry on the problem of decreasing carbonate saturation state in the world's oceans as a result of increasing co2 globally. I think there is an equally broad pool of misunderstanding about the degree to which existing carbonate sediments in the world's oceans, can serve as a buffer to this effect??? I for one would appreciate hearing your insights on this question. Hope this question does not pose to great a burden but I'm sure the coral reef community will appreciate your views. Rick Grigg Dept. of Oceanography University of Hawaii At 12:58 AM 9/18/01 -0500, buddrw wrote: >Coral-listers; > >I have received, in addition to this broadcast message from Ove, other >personal communications that indicate that there is a fairly broad pool of >misunderstanding about what the Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis is and >isn't. The comments below address primarily things that it isn't, and I >have sent messages to Ove and others on an individual basis to try to get >this sorted out so that a productive discussion can ensue. > >In the meantime, I heartily recommend recourse to the original literature >as a source of primary information -- I, Daphne Fautin, and John Ware will >all be more than happy to answer questions or attempt to clear up >confusion. > >Bob Buddemeier > >PS: I stand by my original statements. > > >===== Original Message From ===== > >Dear Bob and others, > > > >I was triggered to respond by the inferences in your statement that some >"reef > >ecology and conservation" types have trouble with the Adaptive Bleaching > >Hypothesis. Any practicing experimental scientist would have an issue with >the > >state of play regarding support for this hypothesis. The basic problem at >this > >point is nothing to do with "culture" - it is more to do with hard evidence, > >which is almost completely lacking to support this still very soft and > >hypothetical explanation for why coral bleach. While experimental tests > have > >been coming in, they have had serious problems in terms of design and the > >conclusions they draw. Us "reef ecology and conservation types" still wait >for > >the definitive data that shows corals will bleach, get rid of one >dinoflagellate > >genotype and adopt another WHILE the thermal (or other) stress is still > being > >applied to the coral-dinoflagellate association. This has never been shown. > >Showing diversity in rDNA is interesting but irrelevant if diversity here >does > >not relate to relevant physiological differences. The recent paper by Baker > >(whom I greatly respect), for example, used light and could not prove (using > >RFLPs) that his corals had changed from one dinoflagellate genotype to >another > >(simply up-regulating one strain over another is not sufficient - that is > >acclimation and is not surprising). The experimental design was also >confounded > >by the fact that stressed corals were placed in the two contrasting and > >confounding (for the experiment) habitats (one, the deeper site, was at the > >extreme depth limit of the species concerned while the other was clearly > more > >optimal after photo acclimation). It is therefore not surprising that the >corals > >died more at deeper site - which has nothing to do with the fact that they >did > >not bleach!). > > > >Other issues abound and concern us "reef ecology and conservation types" - >the > >idea of range of expansion is limited (as outlined by several people so > far) >by > >the fact that light may be a more important limiting than temperature. I >also > >want to stress that the issue of the decline of reefs (as you, Bob, did >state) > >has nothing to do with the extinction of corals. As the "geo types" >(deliberate > >use here) tell us worse things have happened to corals and they have bounced > >back (but over thousands if not millions of years). The issue, however, is >the > >current human dependency on coral reef ecosystems - reefs disappearing for >even > >a few decades would present serious issues for several hundred million >people. > >The idea of finding out how reefs survived major extinction events is > >interesting but largely irrelevant to the current discussion. > > > >So - out I come on my old hobby horse - we still have no evidence of unusual > >adaptive abilities of corals that will match the fast rate of change. Us >reef > >ecology types keep looking. While looking for this evidence - perhaps we > also > >need to focus on how reefs will change and how we can "adapt" as human >societies > >to these changes. This research direction, if the projections of the > future >are > >correct, will assume a major significance as we enter the next few decades. > > > >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/CMS_pro/www/staff.html > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >[mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Bob Buddemeier > >Sent: Saturday, 8 September 2001 4:00 AM > >To: Jim Hendee > >Cc: Coral-List > >Subject: Re: coral reefs doomed? > > > > > >Jim, et al., > > > >Good questions, good points, -- and like it or not, a pretty good if >disturbing > >article. > > > >On your question about range expansion to compensate for temperature > increase > >and inhospitably hot tropics -- there are unfortunately 3 geographic factors > >that work against that. > >1. The available shallow water benthic area decreases rather significantly >as > >you move to higher latitudes (no atolls, narrower shelves, etc.) > >2. Light -- see the Kleypas et al analysis -- Kleypas, J.A., McManus, J.W. >and > >Menez, L.A.B., 1999. Environmental limits to coral reef development: > Where do >we > >draw the line? American Zoologist, 39(1): 146-159. Maximum reef depth > shoals > >dramatically at higher latitudes, even within the thermal mixed layer. This > >presumably reflects light limitations due to sunangle and day lenght >variations > >-- which aren't going to change. > >3. Carbonate saturation state decrease is squeezing from the high latitude > >sides -- see the US National Assessment, > >http://www.cop.noaa.gov/pubs/coastalclimate.PDF, section 4.4. > > > >So there is little basis for optimism there. > > > >With acknowledgment of the terminological problems, some form of > >adaptation/acclimatization probably does have real potential to ensure the > >survival of corals , but not necessarily "reefs as we know them." The > Ware >et > >al article and its precursor, Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1993. Coral > >Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism: A Testable Hypothesis. BioScience, 43: > >320-326, are looking more solid as experimental tests come in (Kinzie et al >in > >Biol. Bull. earlier this year, Baker in Nature more recently), but for some > >reason this concept has been anathema to some reef cology and conservation > >types. (see also Buddemeier, R.W., Fautin, D.G. and Ware, J.R., 1997. > >Acclimation, Adaptation, and Algal Symbiosis in Reef-Building Scleractinian > >Corals. In: J.C. den Hartog (Editor), Proceedings of the 6th International > >Conference on Coelenterate Biology (16-21 July 1995, Noordwijkerhout, The > >Netherlands). National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, pp. 71-76 for a > >related issue). This may be because it is seen as diminishing the >seriousness > >of the bleaching problem, but in my view your position is the more valid -- > >without some mechanistic reason to believe that corals CAN survive, there is > >very little justification for investing money in research and conservation. > > > >This also relates to my tired old hobby horse of the non-reef coral > habitats >-- > >I don't think we are getting the real picture, or doing ourselves any > favors, >by > >exclusive concentration on reefs; corals have survived many periods of > >non-reef-building, and we had better figure out how, why and where. > > > >Thanks for bringing this up. > > > >Bob Buddemeier > > > > > >Jim Hendee wrote: > > > >> Dear Coral Colleagues, > >> > >> I know I'll get raked over the coals on this (especially because I don't > >> have all the literature at my fingertips), but the content and tone of the > >> news article below is troublesome to me, even though such a tone helps to > >> gain attention, as well as funding, so that we can more thoroughly study > >> the problem of coral bleacing and global warming. Of course I respect our > >> colleague's right to a viewpoint, but when I see this, I can't help but > >> have these thoughts: > >> > >> Such a projection gives no "credit" to adapatation and natural selection, > >> even though such adaptation would have to occur under a relatively short > >> time span (50 years). I believe Ware et al (1996), among others, have > >> addressed this. > >> > >> As Dr. Al Strong and I have discussed, and as alluded to but unfortunately > >> not expanded upon in the last sentence of the article, if the seas are > >> warming, then you might expect the zoogeography of corals to expand > >> (relocate?) into the cooler areas, as long as the substrate, circulation, > >> light and water quality regimes are conducive. (I would imagine some > >> coral researchers have modeled these possibilities, and I apologize for > >> not referencing your work.) > >> > >> Even though high sea temperatures are the primary cause and indicator of > >> coral bleaching, that is not the only cause, and no credit is given to the > >> evidence in the literature (e.g., Lesser 1996, among others) that high UV > >> is also an agent in coral bleaching. Higher UV, especially in the > >> tropics, is part of the problem as it relates to the earth's ozone layer. > >> There is evidence that high sea temperatures that elicited coral bleaching > >> at some localities in the past did not elicit coral bleaching during > >> extended cloudy periods (Mumby et al, in press). (Perhaps the cooler areas > >> mentioned in the above paragraph might also have lower UV?) > >> > >> There are other causes of coral bleaching (e.g., see Glynn 1993, 1996) and > >> this manifestation of stress is complex and to my mind public statements > >> on coral bleaching should emphasize this. > >> > >> Would an annual update to the ITMEMS statement on coral bleaching > >> (http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/bulls/ITMEMS-bleach.html) be helpful for the > >> public in this regard? It is my opinion that it would, that we should > >> address the topics above (among others, e.g., coastal effects), and that > >> it would behoove us to widely circulate the update among the press as a > >> consensus opinion (if that is possible!). > >> > >> Just my two cents worth... > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> Jim Hendee > >> NOAA/AOML > >> Miami, FL > >> > >> Glynn, P. (1993). Coral reef bleaching: ecological perspectives. Coral > >> Reefs 12, 1-17. > >> > >> Glynn, P. (1996). Coral reef bleaching: facts, hypotheses and > >> implications. Global Change Biology 2, 495-509. > >> > >> Lesser, M.P. (1996). Elevated temperatures and ultraviolet radiation > >> cause oxidative stress and inhibit photosynthesis in symbiotic > >> dinoflagellates. Limnol Oceanogr. 41(2): 271-283. > >> > >> Mumby, P.J., Chisholm, J.R.M., Edwards, A.J., Andrefouet, S. & Jaubert, J. > >> 2001. Cloudy weather may have saved Society Island reef corals during the > >> 1998 ENSO event. Mar Ecol Prog Ser (in press). > >> > >> Ware, J.R., Fautin, D.G., & Buddemeier, R.W. (1996). Patterns of coral > >> bleaching: modeling the adaptive bleaching hypothesis. Ecological > >> Modelling 84, 199-214. > >> > >> -------- Original Message -------- > >> > >> World coral reefs to die by 2050, scientist warns > >> By Ed Cropley, Reuters > >> Thursday, September 06, 2001 > >> > >> GLASGOW, Scotland ? The world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years > >> because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them, a > >> scientist warned Wednesday. > >> > >> "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most coral in most areas will be > >> lost," Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, told a > >> science conference. "We are looking at a loss which is equivalent to the > >> tropical rain forests." > >> > >> Only the coral reefs in nontropical regions such as Egypt stand any chance > >> of lasting beyond 2050, Ormond said, but even the days of the stunning > >> marine parks of the Red Sea are numbered as sea temperatures continue to > >> creep up. > >> > >> In the past, reefs have suffered from sediment buildup and the > coral-eating > >> crown-of-thorns starfish, whose numbers have exploded due to the > >> over-fishing of their predators. > >> > >> Now the main threat to the delicate structures that harbor some of > nature's > >> most stunning creations comes from warmer seas, which cause coral >bleaching. > >> > >> Microscopic algae that support the coral polyps cannot live in the warmer > >> water, and the polyps, the tiny creatures who actually create the reefs, >die > >> off within weeks. > >> > >> Scientists agree the world's oceans are now warming at a rate of between >one > >> and two degrees Celsius every 100 years due to the increased amounts of > >> greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which trap the sun's rays. > >> > >> But even if humans stopped pumping out greenhouse gases such as carbon > >> dioxide tomorrow in a bid to halt the process, it would still be too > >> late to > >> save the reefs, Ormond said. "I don't know what can be done, given that > >> there's a 50-year time lag between trying to limit carbon dioxide levels >and > >> any effect on ocean temperature," he told the conference, held by the > >> British Association for the Advancement of Science. > >> > >> The implications stretch far beyond the death of the colorful coral > >> structures themselves. The weird and wonderful eels and fish which inhabit > >> the nooks and crannies will become homeless, and many species will die > out. > >> "We are looking at a gradual running down of the whole system. Over time, > >> the diversity of coral fish will die," Ormond said. > >> > >> Humankind will also suffer directly as the dead reefs are eroded and > >> shorelines that have been protected for the last 10,000 years face the >wrath > >> of the oceans without their natural defenses. > >> > >> In an age of relatively cheap scuba-diving holidays, this also means many > >> developing countries in the tropics, such as Kenya or those in the > >> Caribbean, face losing a major source of revenue. > >> > >> The only cause for optimism was that new coral reefs could start to emerge > >> in colder waters such as the north Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. > >> > >> Copyright 2001 ? Reuters > >> > >> ~~~~~~~ > >> 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. > >Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier >Senior Scientist, Geohydrology >Kansas Geological Survey >University of Kansas >1930 Constant Avenue >Lawrence, KS 66047 >USA >ph (785) 864-2112; fax (785) 864-5317 >email: 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. ~~~~~~~ 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 Bprecht at pbsj.com Tue Sep 18 18:11:18 2001 From: Bprecht at pbsj.com (Precht, Bill) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 17:11:18 -0500 Subject: coral reefs doomed -- and the ABH and carbonate saturation Message-ID: <200109191140.LAA02684@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Rick, Bob & the List: Food for thought... I had the great fortune to work for the late Ceseare Emiliani of the Univ. Miami about ten years ago... one of the topics we often discussed over a few cold ones was the impact of warm global temperatures on the survival of life in the oceans, especially in the topics... An interesting paper that may be germane to the argument is by Emiliani, Kraus & Shoemaker (1981) Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 55:317-334 - where they show that about 20% of the late Cretaceous reef-building coral genera survived an abrupt rise in temperature (about 10 degrees C in just a few MONTHS) that was related to the mass extinction at the K/T boundary. What is the important question here - the fact that 20% survived or that 80% went extinct?? All the best, Bill --------------------- William F. Precht Ecological Sciences Program Manager PBS&J Miami -----Original Message----- From: Richard Grigg [mailto:rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 4:37 PM To: buddrw; Coral-List; Jim Hendee Subject: RE: coral reefs doomed -- and the ABH and carbonate saturation Dear Bob, Thank you for shedding some more light on your adaptive bleaching hypothesis and as you point out, there is almost a complete absence of hard evidence either for or against the argument. In this regard, I don't have to remind you, that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (of coral's adaptive abilities). Also, in this regard, I think we can infer more from the fossil record than most of us seem now willing to accept even though the adaptive responses have the benefit of thousand or even millions of years. BUT, over the millenia, there must have been some rapid bursts of sudden change such as the K-T event itself. Stephen J. Gould's view of evolution by punctuated equilibrium is, in fact, based on such bursts of change. And yet, we don't see much extinction in corals at least at the generic or Family level (Re: Veron's work). Doesn't this imply high adaptive ability? Perhaps we need to revisit the fossil record more often and pull in the views of John Pandolfi and Charley Veron (where are you guys?). Also, while I am at it, let me ask you to shed some of your exceptional knowledge and experience in marine geo-chemistry on the problem of decreasing carbonate saturation state in the world's oceans as a result of increasing co2 globally. I think there is an equally broad pool of misunderstanding about the degree to which existing carbonate sediments in the world's oceans, can serve as a buffer to this effect??? I for one would appreciate hearing your insights on this question. Hope this question does not pose to great a burden but I'm sure the coral reef community will appreciate your views. Rick Grigg Dept. of Oceanography University of Hawaii At 12:58 AM 9/18/01 -0500, buddrw wrote: >Coral-listers; > >I have received, in addition to this broadcast message from Ove, other >personal communications that indicate that there is a fairly broad pool of >misunderstanding about what the Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis is and >isn't. The comments below address primarily things that it isn't, and I >have sent messages to Ove and others on an individual basis to try to get >this sorted out so that a productive discussion can ensue. > >In the meantime, I heartily recommend recourse to the original literature >as a source of primary information -- I, Daphne Fautin, and John Ware will >all be more than happy to answer questions or attempt to clear up >confusion. > >Bob Buddemeier > >PS: I stand by my original statements. > > >===== Original Message From ===== > >Dear Bob and others, > > > >I was triggered to respond by the inferences in your statement that some >"reef > >ecology and conservation" types have trouble with the Adaptive Bleaching > >Hypothesis. Any practicing experimental scientist would have an issue with >the > >state of play regarding support for this hypothesis. The basic problem at >this > >point is nothing to do with "culture" - it is more to do with hard evidence, > >which is almost completely lacking to support this still very soft and > >hypothetical explanation for why coral bleach. While experimental tests > have > >been coming in, they have had serious problems in terms of design and the > >conclusions they draw. Us "reef ecology and conservation types" still wait >for > >the definitive data that shows corals will bleach, get rid of one >dinoflagellate > >genotype and adopt another WHILE the thermal (or other) stress is still > being > >applied to the coral-dinoflagellate association. This has never been shown. > >Showing diversity in rDNA is interesting but irrelevant if diversity here >does > >not relate to relevant physiological differences. The recent paper by Baker > >(whom I greatly respect), for example, used light and could not prove (using > >RFLPs) that his corals had changed from one dinoflagellate genotype to >another > >(simply up-regulating one strain over another is not sufficient - that is > >acclimation and is not surprising). The experimental design was also >confounded > >by the fact that stressed corals were placed in the two contrasting and > >confounding (for the experiment) habitats (one, the deeper site, was at the > >extreme depth limit of the species concerned while the other was clearly > more > >optimal after photo acclimation). It is therefore not surprising that the >corals > >died more at deeper site - which has nothing to do with the fact that they >did > >not bleach!). > > > >Other issues abound and concern us "reef ecology and conservation types" - >the > >idea of range of expansion is limited (as outlined by several people so > far) >by > >the fact that light may be a more important limiting than temperature. I >also > >want to stress that the issue of the decline of reefs (as you, Bob, did >state) > >has nothing to do with the extinction of corals. As the "geo types" >(deliberate > >use here) tell us worse things have happened to corals and they have bounced > >back (but over thousands if not millions of years). The issue, however, is >the > >current human dependency on coral reef ecosystems - reefs disappearing for >even > >a few decades would present serious issues for several hundred million >people. > >The idea of finding out how reefs survived major extinction events is > >interesting but largely irrelevant to the current discussion. > > > >So - out I come on my old hobby horse - we still have no evidence of unusual > >adaptive abilities of corals that will match the fast rate of change. Us >reef > >ecology types keep looking. While looking for this evidence - perhaps we > also > >need to focus on how reefs will change and how we can "adapt" as human >societies > >to these changes. This research direction, if the projections of the > future >are > >correct, will assume a major significance as we enter the next few decades. > > > >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/CMS_pro/www/staff.html > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >[mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Bob Buddemeier > >Sent: Saturday, 8 September 2001 4:00 AM > >To: Jim Hendee > >Cc: Coral-List > >Subject: Re: coral reefs doomed? > > > > > >Jim, et al., > > > >Good questions, good points, -- and like it or not, a pretty good if >disturbing > >article. > > > >On your question about range expansion to compensate for temperature > increase > >and inhospitably hot tropics -- there are unfortunately 3 geographic factors > >that work against that. > >1. The available shallow water benthic area decreases rather significantly >as > >you move to higher latitudes (no atolls, narrower shelves, etc.) > >2. Light -- see the Kleypas et al analysis -- Kleypas, J.A., McManus, J.W. >and > >Menez, L.A.B., 1999. Environmental limits to coral reef development: > Where do >we > >draw the line? American Zoologist, 39(1): 146-159. Maximum reef depth > shoals > >dramatically at higher latitudes, even within the thermal mixed layer. This > >presumably reflects light limitations due to sunangle and day lenght >variations > >-- which aren't going to change. > >3. Carbonate saturation state decrease is squeezing from the high latitude > >sides -- see the US National Assessment, > >http://www.cop.noaa.gov/pubs/coastalclimate.PDF, section 4.4. > > > >So there is little basis for optimism there. > > > >With acknowledgment of the terminological problems, some form of > >adaptation/acclimatization probably does have real potential to ensure the > >survival of corals , but not necessarily "reefs as we know them." The > Ware >et > >al article and its precursor, Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1993. Coral > >Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism: A Testable Hypothesis. BioScience, 43: > >320-326, are looking more solid as experimental tests come in (Kinzie et al >in > >Biol. Bull. earlier this year, Baker in Nature more recently), but for some > >reason this concept has been anathema to some reef cology and conservation > >types. (see also Buddemeier, R.W., Fautin, D.G. and Ware, J.R., 1997. > >Acclimation, Adaptation, and Algal Symbiosis in Reef-Building Scleractinian > >Corals. In: J.C. den Hartog (Editor), Proceedings of the 6th International > >Conference on Coelenterate Biology (16-21 July 1995, Noordwijkerhout, The > >Netherlands). National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, pp. 71-76 for a > >related issue). This may be because it is seen as diminishing the >seriousness > >of the bleaching problem, but in my view your position is the more valid -- > >without some mechanistic reason to believe that corals CAN survive, there is > >very little justification for investing money in research and conservation. > > > >This also relates to my tired old hobby horse of the non-reef coral > habitats >-- > >I don't think we are getting the real picture, or doing ourselves any > favors, >by > >exclusive concentration on reefs; corals have survived many periods of > >non-reef-building, and we had better figure out how, why and where. > > > >Thanks for bringing this up. > > > >Bob Buddemeier > > > > > >Jim Hendee wrote: > > > >> Dear Coral Colleagues, > >> > >> I know I'll get raked over the coals on this (especially because I don't > >> have all the literature at my fingertips), but the content and tone of the > >> news article below is troublesome to me, even though such a tone helps to > >> gain attention, as well as funding, so that we can more thoroughly study > >> the problem of coral bleacing and global warming. Of course I respect our > >> colleague's right to a viewpoint, but when I see this, I can't help but > >> have these thoughts: > >> > >> Such a projection gives no "credit" to adapatation and natural selection, > >> even though such adaptation would have to occur under a relatively short > >> time span (50 years). I believe Ware et al (1996), among others, have > >> addressed this. > >> > >> As Dr. Al Strong and I have discussed, and as alluded to but unfortunately > >> not expanded upon in the last sentence of the article, if the seas are > >> warming, then you might expect the zoogeography of corals to expand > >> (relocate?) into the cooler areas, as long as the substrate, circulation, > >> light and water quality regimes are conducive. (I would imagine some > >> coral researchers have modeled these possibilities, and I apologize for > >> not referencing your work.) > >> > >> Even though high sea temperatures are the primary cause and indicator of > >> coral bleaching, that is not the only cause, and no credit is given to the > >> evidence in the literature (e.g., Lesser 1996, among others) that high UV > >> is also an agent in coral bleaching. Higher UV, especially in the > >> tropics, is part of the problem as it relates to the earth's ozone layer. > >> There is evidence that high sea temperatures that elicited coral bleaching > >> at some localities in the past did not elicit coral bleaching during > >> extended cloudy periods (Mumby et al, in press). (Perhaps the cooler areas > >> mentioned in the above paragraph might also have lower UV?) > >> > >> There are other causes of coral bleaching (e.g., see Glynn 1993, 1996) and > >> this manifestation of stress is complex and to my mind public statements > >> on coral bleaching should emphasize this. > >> > >> Would an annual update to the ITMEMS statement on coral bleaching > >> (http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/bulls/ITMEMS-bleach.html) be helpful for the > >> public in this regard? It is my opinion that it would, that we should > >> address the topics above (among others, e.g., coastal effects), and that > >> it would behoove us to widely circulate the update among the press as a > >> consensus opinion (if that is possible!). > >> > >> Just my two cents worth... > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> Jim Hendee > >> NOAA/AOML > >> Miami, FL > >> > >> Glynn, P. (1993). Coral reef bleaching: ecological perspectives. Coral > >> Reefs 12, 1-17. > >> > >> Glynn, P. (1996). Coral reef bleaching: facts, hypotheses and > >> implications. Global Change Biology 2, 495-509. > >> > >> Lesser, M.P. (1996). Elevated temperatures and ultraviolet radiation > >> cause oxidative stress and inhibit photosynthesis in symbiotic > >> dinoflagellates. Limnol Oceanogr. 41(2): 271-283. > >> > >> Mumby, P.J., Chisholm, J.R.M., Edwards, A.J., Andrefouet, S. & Jaubert, J. > >> 2001. Cloudy weather may have saved Society Island reef corals during the > >> 1998 ENSO event. Mar Ecol Prog Ser (in press). > >> > >> Ware, J.R., Fautin, D.G., & Buddemeier, R.W. (1996). Patterns of coral > >> bleaching: modeling the adaptive bleaching hypothesis. Ecological > >> Modelling 84, 199-214. > >> > >> -------- Original Message -------- > >> > >> World coral reefs to die by 2050, scientist warns > >> By Ed Cropley, Reuters > >> Thursday, September 06, 2001 > >> > >> GLASGOW, Scotland - The world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years > >> because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them, a > >> scientist warned Wednesday. > >> > >> "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most coral in most areas will be > >> lost," Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, told a > >> science conference. "We are looking at a loss which is equivalent to the > >> tropical rain forests." > >> > >> Only the coral reefs in nontropical regions such as Egypt stand any chance > >> of lasting beyond 2050, Ormond said, but even the days of the stunning > >> marine parks of the Red Sea are numbered as sea temperatures continue to > >> creep up. > >> > >> In the past, reefs have suffered from sediment buildup and the > coral-eating > >> crown-of-thorns starfish, whose numbers have exploded due to the > >> over-fishing of their predators. > >> > >> Now the main threat to the delicate structures that harbor some of > nature's > >> most stunning creations comes from warmer seas, which cause coral >bleaching. > >> > >> Microscopic algae that support the coral polyps cannot live in the warmer > >> water, and the polyps, the tiny creatures who actually create the reefs, >die > >> off within weeks. > >> > >> Scientists agree the world's oceans are now warming at a rate of between >one > >> and two degrees Celsius every 100 years due to the increased amounts of > >> greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which trap the sun's rays. > >> > >> But even if humans stopped pumping out greenhouse gases such as carbon > >> dioxide tomorrow in a bid to halt the process, it would still be too > >> late to > >> save the reefs, Ormond said. "I don't know what can be done, given that > >> there's a 50-year time lag between trying to limit carbon dioxide levels >and > >> any effect on ocean temperature," he told the conference, held by the > >> British Association for the Advancement of Science. > >> > >> The implications stretch far beyond the death of the colorful coral > >> structures themselves. The weird and wonderful eels and fish which inhabit > >> the nooks and crannies will become homeless, and many species will die > out. > >> "We are looking at a gradual running down of the whole system. Over time, > >> the diversity of coral fish will die," Ormond said. > >> > >> Humankind will also suffer directly as the dead reefs are eroded and > >> shorelines that have been protected for the last 10,000 years face the >wrath > >> of the oceans without their natural defenses. > >> > >> In an age of relatively cheap scuba-diving holidays, this also means many > >> developing countries in the tropics, such as Kenya or those in the > >> Caribbean, face losing a major source of revenue. > >> > >> The only cause for optimism was that new coral reefs could start to emerge > >> in colder waters such as the north Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. > >> > >> Copyright 2001 - Reuters > >> > >> ~~~~~~~ > >> 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. > >Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier >Senior Scientist, Geohydrology >Kansas Geological Survey >University of Kansas >1930 Constant Avenue >Lawrence, KS 66047 >USA >ph (785) 864-2112; fax (785) 864-5317 >email: 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. ~~~~~~~ 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 b984138 at sci.u-ryukyu.ac.jp Wed Sep 19 00:17:11 2001 From: b984138 at sci.u-ryukyu.ac.jp (Rob van Woesik) Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:17:11 +0900 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <200109191149.LAA02696@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear all, As a ISRS council member it is my responsibility to inform you all of my new permanent address. From October 1, 2001, please send all correspondence to Rob van Woesik to the address below. Thank you. Dr. Robert van Woesik Department of Biological Sciences, Florida Tech 150 West University Boulevard Melbourne Florida 32901-6988 USA Email: rvw at fit.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 jware at erols.com Wed Sep 19 08:32:34 2001 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 08:32:34 -0400 Subject: Coral reefs doomed?? Message-ID: <200109191246.MAA02906@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear List, For a quantitative view of the effect of acclimation (or adaptation or whatever), you might wish to consider the paper that I presented at the 8th ICRS, Vol 1:527-532; "The effect of global warming on coral reefs: acclimate or die". This was, I believe, the first attempt to quantify the effect of acclimation rate on the expected response of coral reefs. In fact, this might have been the first *quantitative* prediction of the effects of global warming on reefs. One major conclusion is that even with acclimation rates that would be considered long by human standards, say 25 - 50 yrs, the chances of survival of coral reefs are dramatically increased. Acclimation with such large time constants may not be detectable using currently available data or experimental methods. John (Note: Despite the rather melodramatic title, this paper has repeatedly been overlooked by even rather meticulous researchers such as Ove. Just my Cinderella complex showing. jrw) -- ************************************************************* * * * 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 Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Wed Sep 19 12:50:38 2001 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E Strong) Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 12:50:38 -0400 Subject: Coral reefs doomed?? Message-ID: <200109191810.SAA00888@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> John et al., Watch our WebSite tomorrow for recent report from Okinawa on 2001 bleaching (they are finally recovering from) and information relative to 1998 recovery from massive event that year. http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/climohot.html Cheers, Al John Ware wrote: > Dear List, > > For a quantitative view of the effect of acclimation (or adaptation or > whatever), you might wish to consider the paper that I presented at the > 8th ICRS, Vol 1:527-532; "The effect of global warming on coral reefs: > acclimate or die". This was, I believe, the first attempt to quantify > the effect of acclimation rate on the expected response of coral reefs. > In fact, this might have been the first *quantitative* prediction of the > effects of global warming on reefs. > > One major conclusion is that even with acclimation rates that would be > considered long by human standards, say 25 - 50 yrs, the chances of > survival of coral reefs are dramatically increased. Acclimation with > such large time constants may not be detectable using currently > available data or experimental methods. > > John > > (Note: Despite the rather melodramatic title, this paper has repeatedly > been overlooked by even rather meticulous researchers such as Ove. Just > my Cinderella complex showing. jrw) > > -- > ************************************************************* > * * > * 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. -- **** <>< ******* <>< ******* <>< ******* <>< ******* Alan E. Strong Acting Chief, Oceanic Research & Applications Division Team Leader, Marine Applications Science Team (MAST) 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: 301-763-8572 http://orbit-net.nesdis.noaa.gov/orad --------------A2A05418C882F469C84DA256 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="Alan.E.Strong.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Alan E. Strong Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Alan.E.Strong.vcf" begin:vcard n:Strong;Alan E. tel;cell:443-822-3668 tel;fax:301-763-8108 tel;work:301-763-8102 x170 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://orbit-net.nesdis.noaa.gov/orad/ org:NOAA/NESDIS/ORA;Oceanic Research & Applications Division version:2.1 email;internet:Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov title:Oceanographer/Team Leader adr;quoted-printable:;;NOAA Science Center=0D=0A5200 Auth Road;Camp Springs;MD;20746;USA fn:Alan E. Strong, Ph. D. end:vcard --------------A2A05418C882F469C84DA256-- ~~~~~~~ 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 Sep 19 23:37:00 2001 From: oveh at uq.edu.au (Ove Hoegh-Guldberg) Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 13:37:00 +1000 Subject: Climate and corals Message-ID: <200109200427.EAA01711@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear John, Thanks for reminding me (again) about your paper from the Panama meeting, which I have now read. As you know, I tried (in 1999) to go from speculation about climate by interacting with three premier climate modelling groups in Australia, Europe and the USA. This allowed me access to models that simulated important aspects within the climate change debate such as El Nino variability, the impact of aerosols and the forcing due to IS92a greenhouse scenarios. By using several models, I was able to draw on experts in simulating climates and was able reduce the problem of the bias of one model. As you know (somewhat depressingly), the scenarios for future patterns of bleaching did not different greatly between models. The issue of acclimation and adaptation is complex and I have a few comments that I will send through in a separate email. I feel this debate (as Bob has noted) is useful and will hopefully clear up some of the recent understandings. Regards, Ove -----Original Message----- From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of John Ware Sent: Wednesday, 19 September 2001 10:33 PM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Coral reefs doomed?? Dear List, For a quantitative view of the effect of acclimation (or adaptation or whatever), you might wish to consider the paper that I presented at the 8th ICRS, Vol 1:527-532; "The effect of global warming on coral reefs: acclimate or die". This was, I believe, the first attempt to quantify the effect of acclimation rate on the expected response of coral reefs. In fact, this might have been the first *quantitative* prediction of the effects of global warming on reefs. One major conclusion is that even with acclimation rates that would be considered long by human standards, say 25 - 50 yrs, the chances of survival of coral reefs are dramatically increased. Acclimation with such large time constants may not be detectable using currently available data or experimental methods. John (Note: Despite the rather melodramatic title, this paper has repeatedly been overlooked by even rather meticulous researchers such as Ove. Just my Cinderella complex showing. jrw) -- ************************************************************* * * * 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. ~~~~~~~ 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 riskmj at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca Thu Sep 20 09:44:22 2001 From: riskmj at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Mike Risk) Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 09:44:22 -0400 Subject: Fossil lessons Message-ID: <200109201440.OAA02649@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hi Rick (-list). It's hard to concentrate on academic debates with the world in disarray, my office in cardboard boxes, my wife in recovery and my department in ruins. But I will stop whining. Yes, I could not agree more-the fossil record has a great deal to say about survival and extinction. We hear a lot about how "resilient" corals are. They aren't. In general, Phyla are extremely robust. Now that Paleo has done the sensible thing and folded the Archeocyatha into the Porifera, we can observe that no phylum extant in the Cambrian has ever died out. So the trunks of the trees remain, while branches come and go. Corals have contributed to reefs in varying proportions, from the Ordovician on-but how many Rugosa and Tabulata have you seen on reefs? The real survivors among the Coelenterata are the gorgonians, virtually unchanged since the Ordovician. Along with nereid polychaetes. Perhaps the largest barrier reef in the history of the planet (Guadalupian, W. Texas) is virtually devoid of corals. Most of our view that corals are robust and omnipresent stems from our experience with Cenozoic reefs, which are well-exposed and preserved in many classical outcrops. Cenozoic reefs experienced three major extinction events: Eocene/Oligocene, Oligocene/Miocene, and Plio/Pleistocene. (See work by Stan Frost, Ann Budd, etc.) The Plio/Pleistocene event was a freeze-out, and not very relevant to what looms. Examination of the Oligo/Mio event, however, is illuminating. This extinction event was likely caused by a shelf-edge upwelling, bringing in conditions of turbid water and high nutrients. These are the conditions that reefs face now-and I point out that grazing in the Oligocene was unaffected by people. Not even Alley Oop. Half the corals in the Caribbean died (Edinger and Risk, 1994: PALAIOS 9: 576-598). Some other bad news: bioeroders, primarily filter-feeders, sailed through unchanged: so the balance was severely upset. (I have to point out here that any reef "model" that ignores bioerosion is dealing with less than 50% of the carbonate balance, and hence deserves less than 50% of our confidence.) I suggest that what we are seeing now precisely parallels what the record tells us: massive regional extinctions, shifting of the carbonate balance equation...This event remade the Caribbean coral fauna, reducing it to a fraction of previous biodiversity levels. Although Indo-Pacific representatives escaped the Caribbean event, they have yet to recolonise the Caribbean. So I suggest that the fossil record allows us to estimate recovery times of reef coral faunas: between 1,000 years (Adey) to >25 million years. You and I won't see it! Another view from SE Asia: Edinger et al., 2000: Diversity and Distributions 6: 113-127: "...land-based pollution was the primary determinant of coral species diversiity and species occufrrence on reefs." I continue to be pessimistic. I feel that present fixation of the biological research community is at least partly driven by a reluctance to deal with the real problems: coastal development associated with population increases. Mike ~~~~~~~ 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 fthomas20 at yahoo.com Thu Sep 20 10:36:35 2001 From: fthomas20 at yahoo.com (Florence Thomas) Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 07:36:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: physical processes in sub-tropical habitats Message-ID: <200109201448.OAA02661@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Research Fellowships available for competative students interested in pursuing a Ph.D. on the role of physical processes in sub-tropical habitats. The University of South Florida offers excellent support for highly competative graduate students. If you are interested please contact me Dr. Florence Thomas fthomas at chuma1.cas.usf.edu. I am also interested in attracting students interested in reproductive ecology of marine invertebrates. --------------------------------- Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help? Donate cash, emergency relief information inYahoo! News. ~~~~~~~ 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 jeffrey-low at mailhost.net Thu Sep 20 19:07:15 2001 From: jeffrey-low at mailhost.net (Jeffrey Low) Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 07:07:15 +0800 Subject: Fossil lessons Message-ID: <200109210849.IAA03971@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Mike, Sorry to hear about the disarray in your life .... hope things work out (eventually). I totally agree with you on your last point - in fact, I came across an article in the newspapers on two papers published in Science (Alroy and Roberts) that claim "humans more lethal than climate change". Of course, they were looking mostly at land extinctions caused by human migration in prehistoric times, but the present day loss of coral reefs (and other coastal habitats) are directly related to population growth. I would hazard a guess that if we (ie the human race) can get our population growth under control, much of the existing problems of overfishing, caostal degradation, pollution and greenhouse gases would be drastically reduced or not exist. What I don't hear much on this list are projects / research being done related to quantifying the human factor in the degradation. Not the blast fishing / cyanide problems, but more of the "if you have x% less people, then the damage will be y% less and restoration can proceed at z% rate". Perhaps some other list has this kind of on-going discussion? One final comment - all countries seem to run on the thoery that you need to have replacement rates higher than death rates (in the human population) so that (economic) growth can be sustained. Now, if that is the case, doesn't that mean that there is a never-ending spiral of population increase? If I remember my basic biology - this consitutes a positive feedback system .... which will ultimately result in the breakdown of the system (as opposed to a negative feedback, which keeps the system in balance). Before I end, let me just say that this is just my "coffe-shop" interpretation of the "big picture". I defer to more informaed minds on the subject, and would like to hear more on this. Thanks. Jeffrey Low SINGAPORE Email: jeffrey-low at mailhost.net -----Original Message----- From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Mike Risk Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 9:44 PM To: buddrw; Coral-List; Jim Hendee; Richard Grigg Subject: Re: Fossil lessons Hi Rick (-list). It's hard to concentrate on academic debates with the world in disarray, my office in cardboard boxes, my wife in recovery and my department in ruins. But I will stop whining. Yes, I could not agree more-the fossil record has a great deal to say about survival and extinction. We hear a lot about how "resilient" corals are. They aren't. In general, Phyla are extremely robust. Now that Paleo has done the sensible thing and folded the Archeocyatha into the Porifera, we can observe that no phylum extant in the Cambrian has ever died out. So the trunks of the trees remain, while branches come and go. Corals have contributed to reefs in varying proportions, from the Ordovician on-but how many Rugosa and Tabulata have you seen on reefs? The real survivors among the Coelenterata are the gorgonians, virtually unchanged since the Ordovician. Along with nereid polychaetes. Perhaps the largest barrier reef in the history of the planet (Guadalupian, W. Texas) is virtually devoid of corals. Most of our view that corals are robust and omnipresent stems from our experience with Cenozoic reefs, which are well-exposed and preserved in many classical outcrops. Cenozoic reefs experienced three major extinction events: Eocene/Oligocene, Oligocene/Miocene, and Plio/Pleistocene. (See work by Stan Frost, Ann Budd, etc.) The Plio/Pleistocene event was a freeze-out, and not very relevant to what looms. Examination of the Oligo/Mio event, however, is illuminating. This extinction event was likely caused by a shelf-edge upwelling, bringing in conditions of turbid water and high nutrients. These are the conditions that reefs face now-and I point out that grazing in the Oligocene was unaffected by people. Not even Alley Oop. Half the corals in the Caribbean died (Edinger and Risk, 1994: PALAIOS 9: 576-598). Some other bad news: bioeroders, primarily filter-feeders, sailed through unchanged: so the balance was severely upset. (I have to point out here that any reef "model" that ignores bioerosion is dealing with less than 50% of the carbonate balance, and hence deserves less than 50% of our confidence.) I suggest that what we are seeing now precisely parallels what the record tells us: massive regional extinctions, shifting of the carbonate balance equation...This event remade the Caribbean coral fauna, reducing it to a fraction of previous biodiversity levels. Although Indo-Pacific representatives escaped the Caribbean event, they have yet to recolonise the Caribbean. So I suggest that the fossil record allows us to estimate recovery times of reef coral faunas: between 1,000 years (Adey) to >25 million years. You and I won't see it! Another view from SE Asia: Edinger et al., 2000: Diversity and Distributions 6: 113-127: "...land-based pollution was the primary determinant of coral species diversiity and species occufrrence on reefs." I continue to be pessimistic. I feel that present fixation of the biological research community is at least partly driven by a reluctance to deal with the real problems: coastal development associated with population increases. Mike ~~~~~~~ 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 eshinn at usgs.gov Fri Sep 21 10:40:18 2001 From: eshinn at usgs.gov (Gene Shinn) Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 10:40:18 -0400 Subject: Conference on dust Message-ID: <200109211444.OAA04768@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> While Mike, Bob and Ove were presenting temperature/Co2 related arguments a workshop was held in St. Petersburg to discuss Yet another cause of reef demise. For a synopsis go to http://coastal.er.usgs.gov/conferences/dust2001/ For a new article published in Aerobiologica showing the number and kinds of microbes recently isolated from African dust in the Caribbean go to http://www.wkap.nl/article.pdf?355414 ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- http://coastal.er.usgs.gov/african_dust/ | E. A. Shinn email eshinn at usgs.gov USGS Center for Coastal Geology | 600 4th St. South | voice (727) 803-8747 x3030 St.Petersburg, FL 33701 | fax (727) 803-2032 ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- ~~~~~~~ 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 Fri Sep 21 19:41:51 2001 From: oveh at uq.edu.au (Ove Hoegh-Guldberg) Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 09:41:51 +1000 Subject: Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis (1) Message-ID: <200109221129.LAA01813@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Bob, With great respect to you and your colleagues, the effort to discuss the ABH should be seen not as an "attack" but as an attempt to clarify and expand on this interesting area (aka "spirit of debate"). My intention in responding to your broadcast message (Sep 16) was to also clarify the implication that the resistance to the ABH was somehow not on scientific terms. Given the interest in this area, I agree that it is important to keep the discussions open and visible on the coral-list forum. To begin with, let us put one assertion to rest. You suggest that I have "consistently misstated" your hypothesis. I understand the hypothesis as encapsulated in your own words (Ware, Fautin and Buddemeier 1996) as: "Buddemeier and Fautin (1993) proposed that bleaching is not merely pathological, but is also adaptive, providing an opportunity for recombining hosts and algae to form symbioses better suited to altered circumstances." To the first issue - recombination involves re-mixing as well as recombining. If part of the ABH involves shifts in the genotype frequencies of populations of pre-existing mixed dinoflagellate symbionts, then I would argue that "re-combining" as a term is not clear (and hence perhaps the greater confusion) and that "remixing" should be included in these descriptions of the ABH hypothesis. I spoke briefly (as I walked out of a talk in Bali) to Daphne about this distinction in regard to the "adaptation" versus "acclimation" (hence the recent reference to the re-mixing genotypes as "acclimation" not "adaptation"). By the way, this is the only time (prior to recent exchanges in September) that we (you, I or Daphne) have corresponded on this issue. I enjoyed the conversation and was unaware of any anxiety. Secondly, according to your recent email, I need to also recognise the expanded definition of "altered circumstances" to include a changed regime (more frequent and/or intense bleaching events) as opposed to an on-going stress. I have and have no problems with this. It does not remove the problems, however. More on this in a second email to the list. At the end of the day, however, we are left with a need (8 years after the ABH was first formulated) to go beyond the partial verification of assumptions and theoretical modelling (as per John Ware and co-authors) to the critical testing of this hypothesis. While there has been attempts to test the assumptions in at least one paper, the critical test for this hypothesis is that new combinations of host-symbiont genotypes with greater fitness arise from changed circumstances with respect to bleaching events (be that changing patterns of frequency and/or severity). "The key observations that corals, when heat stressed, expel one variety of zooxanthellae and take on another more heat-tolerant variety while the heat stress is still present, has never been made." (Hoegh-Guldberg 1999). That statement is still correct but does address a restricted set of ABH possibilities. This statement should be more inclusive given the above: "The key observation: that corals after heat stress or a changed sea temperature regime, shift toward more fit combinations of host-symbiont genotype combinations, has never been made." Unless I am mistaken, no observation like this has not been made. I suppose as a biologist, I would expect this to be a visible and obvious feature of coral-dinoflagellate symbioses, especially before and after the substantial selective pressure of recent bleaching events. In the spirit of scientific debate, I want to also discuss (in detail as you request) your broadcast proposition (Sep 8 2001) that "Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism: A Testable Hypothesis. BioScience, 43:320-326, are looking more solid as experimental tests come in (Kinzie et al in Biol. Bull. earlier this year, Baker in Nature more recently)." As requested, I will "rely on direct quotes in context" but will do this directly in a separate email to the list. All the best, Ove -----Original Message----- From: buddrw [mailto:buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu] Sent: Sunday, 16 September 2001 7:28 AM To: oveh at uq.edu.au; Jim Hendee Cc: Coral-List Subject: RE: coral reefs doomed? Ove, and others -- Part of the reason you are still waiting for hard experimental evidence regarding the ABH is that you consistently misstate and/or misunderstand what it is. Some specific examples: "the definitive data that shows corals will bleach, get rid of one dinoflagellate genotype and adopt another WHILE the thermal (or other) stress is still being applied to the coral-dinoflagellate association." This is part of the ABH only to the extent of requiring continuance of the stressful REGIME (e.g., frequency of high temperature excursions), not of the stressful bleaching-inducing CONDITION (e.g., continuous high temperature). It seems to me that you are attacking the latter proposition, which is NOT what we proposed or modeled (Ware et al). "used light and could not prove (using RFLPs) that his corals had changed from one dinoflagellate genotype to another (simply up-regulating one strain over another is not sufficient - that is acclimation and is not surprising)." Bleaching is a stress response, and we think that stress adaptation probably doesn't care that much about light, temperature or whatever -- besides which, there is certainly strong evidence for the synergism of light in temperature even in the bleaching episodes attributed primarily to temperature. Sorry if using light is a problem for you -- it's not for us. Further, we are willing to plead guilty to having accepted that which is not surprising -- what you refer to as 'up-regulation' we considered a shift in dominance or inertnal competitve abilities among the varieties of zoocxanthellae that could or did inhabit a host -- very much a part of ABH. Rather than go on and nit-pick your counter-arguments, I'd like to suggest that this is a good opportunity to set up and broaden the debate as a discussion thread -- with the proviso that we rely on direct quotes in context (since the subject is a bit complicated for one-line summaries) rather than on strawman revisions to discuss what the ABH actually is or isn't. Bob Buddemeier >===== Original Message From ===== >Dear Bob and others, > >I was triggered to respond by the inferences in your statement that some "reef >ecology and conservation" types have trouble with the Adaptive Bleaching >Hypothesis. Any practicing experimental scientist would have an issue with the >state of play regarding support for this hypothesis. The basic problem at this >point is nothing to do with "culture" - it is more to do with hard evidence, >which is almost completely lacking to support this still very soft and >hypothetical explanation for why coral bleach. While experimental tests have >been coming in, they have had serious problems in terms of design and the >conclusions they draw. Us "reef ecology and conservation types" still wait for >the definitive data that shows corals will bleach, get rid of one dinoflagellate >genotype and adopt another WHILE the thermal (or other) stress is still being >applied to the coral-dinoflagellate association. This has never been shown. >Showing diversity in rDNA is interesting but irrelevant if diversity here does >not relate to relevant physiological differences. The recent paper by Baker >(whom I greatly respect), for example, used light and could not prove (using >RFLPs) that his corals had changed from one dinoflagellate genotype to another >(simply up-regulating one strain over another is not sufficient - that is >acclimation and is not surprising). The experimental design was also confounded >by the fact that stressed corals were placed in the two contrasting and >confounding (for the experiment) habitats (one, the deeper site, was at the >extreme depth limit of the species concerned while the other was clearly more >optimal after photo acclimation). It is therefore not surprising that the corals >died more at deeper site - which has nothing to do with the fact that they did >not bleach!). > >Other issues abound and concern us "reef ecology and conservation types" - the >idea of range of expansion is limited (as outlined by several people so far) by >the fact that light may be a more important limiting than temperature. I also >want to stress that the issue of the decline of reefs (as you, Bob, did state) >has nothing to do with the extinction of corals. As the "geo types" (deliberate >use here) tell us worse things have happened to corals and they have bounced >back (but over thousands if not millions of years). The issue, however, is the >current human dependency on coral reef ecosystems - reefs disappearing for even >a few decades would present serious issues for several hundred million people. >The idea of finding out how reefs survived major extinction events is >interesting but largely irrelevant to the current discussion. > >So - out I come on my old hobby horse - we still have no evidence of unusual >adaptive abilities of corals that will match the fast rate of change. Us reef >ecology types keep looking. While looking for this evidence - perhaps we also >need to focus on how reefs will change and how we can "adapt" as human societies >to these changes. This research direction, if the projections of the future are >correct, will assume a major significance as we enter the next few decades. > >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/CMS_pro/www/staff.html > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >[mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Bob Buddemeier >Sent: Saturday, 8 September 2001 4:00 AM >To: Jim Hendee >Cc: Coral-List >Subject: Re: coral reefs doomed? > > >Jim, et al., > >Good questions, good points, -- and like it or not, a pretty good if disturbing >article. > >On your question about range expansion to compensate for temperature increase >and inhospitably hot tropics -- there are unfortunately 3 geographic factors >that work against that. >1. The available shallow water benthic area decreases rather significantly as >you move to higher latitudes (no atolls, narrower shelves, etc.) >2. Light -- see the Kleypas et al analysis -- Kleypas, J.A., McManus, J.W. and >Menez, L.A.B., 1999. Environmental limits to coral reef development: Where do we >draw the line? American Zoologist, 39(1): 146-159. Maximum reef depth shoals >dramatically at higher latitudes, even within the thermal mixed layer. This >presumably reflects light limitations due to sunangle and day lenght variations >-- which aren't going to change. >3. Carbonate saturation state decrease is squeezing from the high latitude >sides -- see the US National Assessment, >http://www.cop.noaa.gov/pubs/coastalclimate.PDF, section 4.4. > >So there is little basis for optimism there. > >With acknowledgment of the terminological problems, some form of >adaptation/acclimatization probably does have real potential to ensure the >survival of corals , but not necessarily "reefs as we know them." The Ware et >al article and its precursor, Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1993. Coral >Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism: A Testable Hypothesis. BioScience, 43: >320-326, are looking more solid as experimental tests come in (Kinzie et al in >Biol. Bull. earlier this year, Baker in Nature more recently), but for some >reason this concept has been anathema to some reef cology and conservation >types. (see also Buddemeier, R.W., Fautin, D.G. and Ware, J.R., 1997. >Acclimation, Adaptation, and Algal Symbiosis in Reef-Building Scleractinian >Corals. In: J.C. den Hartog (Editor), Proceedings of the 6th International >Conference on Coelenterate Biology (16-21 July 1995, Noordwijkerhout, The >Netherlands). National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, pp. 71-76 for a >related issue). This may be because it is seen as diminishing the seriousness >of the bleaching problem, but in my view your position is the more valid -- >without some mechanistic reason to believe that corals CAN survive, there is >very little justification for investing money in research and conservation. > >This also relates to my tired old hobby horse of the non-reef coral habitats -- >I don't think we are getting the real picture, or doing ourselves any favors, by >exclusive concentration on reefs; corals have survived many periods of >non-reef-building, and we had better figure out how, why and where. > >Thanks for bringing this up. > >Bob Buddemeier > > >Jim Hendee wrote: > >> Dear Coral Colleagues, >> >> I know I'll get raked over the coals on this (especially because I don't >> have all the literature at my fingertips), but the content and tone of the >> news article below is troublesome to me, even though such a tone helps to >> gain attention, as well as funding, so that we can more thoroughly study >> the problem of coral bleacing and global warming. Of course I respect our >> colleague's right to a viewpoint, but when I see this, I can't help but >> have these thoughts: >> >> Such a projection gives no "credit" to adapatation and natural selection, >> even though such adaptation would have to occur under a relatively short >> time span (50 years). I believe Ware et al (1996), among others, have >> addressed this. >> >> As Dr. Al Strong and I have discussed, and as alluded to but unfortunately >> not expanded upon in the last sentence of the article, if the seas are >> warming, then you might expect the zoogeography of corals to expand >> (relocate?) into the cooler areas, as long as the substrate, circulation, >> light and water quality regimes are conducive. (I would imagine some >> coral researchers have modeled these possibilities, and I apologize for >> not referencing your work.) >> >> Even though high sea temperatures are the primary cause and indicator of >> coral bleaching, that is not the only cause, and no credit is given to the >> evidence in the literature (e.g., Lesser 1996, among others) that high UV >> is also an agent in coral bleaching. Higher UV, especially in the >> tropics, is part of the problem as it relates to the earth's ozone layer. >> There is evidence that high sea temperatures that elicited coral bleaching >> at some localities in the past did not elicit coral bleaching during >> extended cloudy periods (Mumby et al, in press). (Perhaps the cooler areas >> mentioned in the above paragraph might also have lower UV?) >> >> There are other causes of coral bleaching (e.g., see Glynn 1993, 1996) and >> this manifestation of stress is complex and to my mind public statements >> on coral bleaching should emphasize this. >> >> Would an annual update to the ITMEMS statement on coral bleaching >> (http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/bulls/ITMEMS-bleach.html) be helpful for the >> public in this regard? It is my opinion that it would, that we should >> address the topics above (among others, e.g., coastal effects), and that >> it would behoove us to widely circulate the update among the press as a >> consensus opinion (if that is possible!). >> >> Just my two cents worth... >> >> Cheers, >> >> Jim Hendee >> NOAA/AOML >> Miami, FL >> >> Glynn, P. (1993). Coral reef bleaching: ecological perspectives. Coral >> Reefs 12, 1-17. >> >> Glynn, P. (1996). Coral reef bleaching: facts, hypotheses and >> implications. Global Change Biology 2, 495-509. >> >> Lesser, M.P. (1996). Elevated temperatures and ultraviolet radiation >> cause oxidative stress and inhibit photosynthesis in symbiotic >> dinoflagellates. Limnol Oceanogr. 41(2): 271-283. >> >> Mumby, P.J., Chisholm, J.R.M., Edwards, A.J., Andrefouet, S. & Jaubert, J. >> 2001. Cloudy weather may have saved Society Island reef corals during the >> 1998 ENSO event. Mar Ecol Prog Ser (in press). >> >> Ware, J.R., Fautin, D.G., & Buddemeier, R.W. (1996). Patterns of coral >> bleaching: modeling the adaptive bleaching hypothesis. Ecological >> Modelling 84, 199-214. >> >> -------- Original Message -------- >> >> World coral reefs to die by 2050, scientist warns >> By Ed Cropley, Reuters >> Thursday, September 06, 2001 >> >> GLASGOW, Scotland ? The world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years >> because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them, a >> scientist warned Wednesday. >> >> "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most coral in most areas will be >> lost," Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, told a >> science conference. "We are looking at a loss which is equivalent to the >> tropical rain forests." >> >> Only the coral reefs in nontropical regions such as Egypt stand any chance >> of lasting beyond 2050, Ormond said, but even the days of the stunning >> marine parks of the Red Sea are numbered as sea temperatures continue to >> creep up. >> >> In the past, reefs have suffered from sediment buildup and the coral-eating >> crown-of-thorns starfish, whose numbers have exploded due to the >> over-fishing of their predators. >> >> Now the main threat to the delicate structures that harbor some of nature's >> most stunning creations comes from warmer seas, which cause coral bleaching. >> >> Microscopic algae that support the coral polyps cannot live in the warmer >> water, and the polyps, the tiny creatures who actually create the reefs, die >> off within weeks. >> >> Scientists agree the world's oceans are now warming at a rate of between one >> and two degrees Celsius every 100 years due to the increased amounts of >> greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which trap the sun's rays. >> >> But even if humans stopped pumping out greenhouse gases such as carbon >> dioxide tomorrow in a bid to halt the process, it would still be too >> late to >> save the reefs, Ormond said. "I don't know what can be done, given that >> there's a 50-year time lag between trying to limit carbon dioxide levels and >> any effect on ocean temperature," he told the conference, held by the >> British Association for the Advancement of Science. >> >> The implications stretch far beyond the death of the colorful coral >> structures themselves. The weird and wonderful eels and fish which inhabit >> the nooks and crannies will become homeless, and many species will die out. >> "We are looking at a gradual running down of the whole system. Over time, >> the diversity of coral fish will die," Ormond said. >> >> Humankind will also suffer directly as the dead reefs are eroded and >> shorelines that have been protected for the last 10,000 years face the wrath >> of the oceans without their natural defenses. >> >> In an age of relatively cheap scuba-diving holidays, this also means many >> developing countries in the tropics, such as Kenya or those in the >> Caribbean, face losing a major source of revenue. >> >> The only cause for optimism was that new coral reefs could start to emerge >> in colder waters such as the north Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. >> >> Copyright 2001 ? Reuters >> >> ~~~~~~~ >> 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. Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier Senior Scientist, Geohydrology Kansas Geological Survey University of Kansas 1930 Constant Avenue Lawrence, KS 66047 USA ph (785) 864-2112; fax (785) 864-5317 email: 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 oveh at uq.edu.au Fri Sep 21 20:15:07 2001 From: oveh at uq.edu.au (Ove Hoegh-Guldberg) Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 10:15:07 +1000 Subject: Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis (2) Message-ID: <200109221135.LAA01822@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Coral-list, I hope that it is not inappropriate to provoke discussion about this much talked about topic. My sole intention is to explore this important issue. I have chosen to deal with it as a series of carefully defined steps. As will you see, while the theory may have logical appeal, the critical assumptions upon which it is based are either false or unsubstantiated. Before I begin, a clarification with respect to the biological terms "adaptation' and "acclimation". Adaptation is strictly used to describe genetic changes in a population that lead to genetically based characteristics of that population considered more optimal with respect to the local environment. Acclimation refers to phenotypic change whereby (through changes in gene expression and/or post-translational modification) the characteristics of an organism are made more optimal relative to the local environment. These definitions are held by most textbooks (e.g. Eckert and Randall etc) and are not mutable (as far as I know). The Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis (ABH) In order to proceed logically, exploring the assumptions of the hypothesis makes good sense. These are listed by Ware, Fautin and Buddemeier (1996; Patterns of coral bleaching: modelling the adaptive bleaching hypothesis", Ecol. Modelling 84:199-214). I find this paper useful because it lists the five critical assumptions of the ABH and then builds a logical model from this grounding, the behaviour of which can be compared to nature. As with any model, however, the assumptions (assuming correct logical deductive processes) are critical for the truth of a model (to state the obvious, if the assumptions are wrong, then the model or argument fails). Summary table (details below): a.. Assumption 1 = true b.. Assumption 2 = false at the time scale required c.. Assumption 3 = true d.. Assumption 4 = false e.. Assumption 5 = false if assumption 4 is false Conclusion (details below): Critical assumptions 2 and 4 (5 depends on 4) are not currently supported and available evidence (little evidence to the contrary) suggests that they are false. From this analysis, the only conclusion is that the ABH is false. Details: What are the assumptions of Ware, Fautin and Buddemeier (1996) and are they true or false? Assumption 1. "Multiple types of both zooxanthellae and host species commonly exist on a coral reef." This is true for corals and work by Trench, Rowan, Loh, Baker, Loi, Carter and others have shown that it is true for zooxanthellae (i.e. diversity is high among zooxanthellae). Assumption 2. 'Some types of zooxanthellae are able to live with more than one host species, and host species may form symbiotic relationships with more than one type of zooxanthella, either simultaneously or serially. The various combinations differ in their adaptation to the environment." As you will see from the following, this is false at the timescale required. Other critical pieces of evidence do not exist. What is true: Some types of zooxanthellae (distinguished via rDNA sequences - note - RFLPs do not have enough precision to distinguish species etc) appear in several corals while other coral species have their own dedicated zooxanthella type (Rowan, Wilcox, Baker, Loh and others, Loh et al. in press). Some hosts show several different rDNA sequences associated with their zooxanthellae (Rowan and Powers 1991, Rowan 1998). There is evidence that some zooxanthellae may specialise in high light or low light habitats (e.g. Rowan et al 1997, see also recent papers by K. Michalek-Wagner, A Banazak re: different zooxanthella biochemistries) - and it is likely that various combinations of host and symbiont differ in the type or quality of the environment that they are adapted for. Specific evidence about heat tolerance of different combinations is lacking although Kinzie et al 2001, Iglesias-Prieto and others have some evidence that different isolated zooxanthellae have different heat tolerances (but see Assumption 3 which states that the tolerance of the host-symbiont combination is all important). What is unknown: How mutable (changed) are these relationships? An important part of this assumption for the ABH is that new symbiotic relationships can form and disband over very short periods of time. Without this rapid, dynamic feature bleaching will not be important mechanism for the evolution of new combinations. If they are not easily mutable then the long-term performance of different strain and host combinations under new conditions and their impact on reproductive success of both partners etc. through reduced energy and other inputs will be more important. Evidence that this is assumption is largely untrue at the time scales needed: To my knowledge, no lab or field infection experiment using dinoflagellates from other hosts (like those of WK Fitt and others) have ever resulted in a new combination of symbiotic algae and host. In cases where foreign types of zooxanthellae were introduced, populations were eventually replaced by the original type of zooxanthella (see also Kinzie and partners 2001, who also obtained this result with field exposed, completely aposymbiotic anemones). Also - no one has seen a change in the types of zooxanthellae occupied by a coral following a bleaching event (i.e. new combinations arising from a bleaching event). Baker (2001)'s techniques do not have the necessary resolution to answer this question. He sees new bands arise within the zooxanthellae isolated within corals translocated to the shallows. However, he cannot say that the new bands are due to invasion of external zooxanthellae or a case of up-regulation of a small existing population of the particular type of zooxanthellae concerned (he would have to clone his PCR products and verify for a large number of transformed clones that there were no sequences - hence zooxanthellae cells - of the new RFLP band in his corals before treatment i.e. that the change is not a product of acclimation as opposed to adaptation). Implications: The process of symbiont switching operates at a longer time scale making bleaching irrelevant to the process. This is not surprising if the complex requirements of integrating two genomes into a symbiosis are considered. Research on what is required reveals complex self-non-self recognition (McNeil, P. L., T. Colley, Trench, Hohman, et al. (1981). J. Cell Sci. 52: 243-270, Muscatine, Hohman and others), metabolite transfer and the host of other specific lock-and-key biochemical and physiological interactions. We need to think of transferring zooxanthellae between hosts as partly akin to transplanting chloroplasts or mitochondria between plant species. Remember also that the types of zooxanthellae that occupy different corals are quite separate genetically and may represent different species or even genera (Trench, McNally et al. 1994 and others) - hence are likely to have a large suite of different requirements and features that have to be integrated (evolved) in order for a symbiosis to function. Adopting life within another cellular environment is not trivial and may involve many coordinated changes in genetic makeup (aka it is not simple to swap from one host to another - hence this process is likely to constrained in terms of evolutionary speed). If new zooxanthellae types cannot invade easily, then the ABH is restricted to the dynamics of the zooxanthella populations of a subset of corals which already have multiple strains of zooxanthellae in their tissues. That is, new combinations do not form "easily" (at the very least, they probably form over decades to centuries but not over the days and weeks required by the ABH). At this point, we are left with changes that occur in the relative frequency of existing genotypes within a coral. These are pre-existing genetic combinations. The question at this point becomes, is this "adaptation" or "acclimation"? At first cut - one might call this is "adaptation" because there is a change in the frequency of genotypes within the total zooxanthella population of an geographic area. This is wrong, however, as populations of zooxanthellae within a host are largely clonal (asexual) populations of single individuals. If this is the case, then a multi-strain coral host is really an association of three or more individuals (the coral host individual, and 2 or more zooxanthella individuals). The change in the relative proportions of one zooxanthellae individual over another within a host is then a matter of a change in the size of individuals. This then is a phenotypic (acclimatory) not genotypic (adaptive) change. Being multistrained and responding to changed circumstances, then, is no different to a association that having a set range of phenotypic responses with definite limits (there is no such thing as unlimited acclimation). Perhaps in evolutionary time (at least decades to centuries), the switching of symbionts may allow a certain flexibility that is not inherent within a single genome. But the time scale and process do not involve bleaching (adaptive or acclimatory). Assumption 3. "The upper temperature limit beyond which the symbiosis is disrupted is characteristic of the host-symbiont combination rather than of the host or symbiotic alga alone." This is probably true given the highly integrated nature of symbiosis. Specific thermal tolerances of corals/zooxanthellae associations and their variance with thermal regimes were largely first identified by Steve Coles and Paul Jokiel. Many recent studies (Goreau, Strong, Hayes, Brown) culminating in the SST and HotSpot work by NOAA and others. New work by Ray Berkelmans (in press) further confirms that thermal tolerances vary on a geographic basis with water temperature. Assumption 4. "Bleaching provides an opportunity for the host to be repopulated with a different type of partner." This is unproven and most evidence suggests that it is false. As I have repeatedly stated, we have yet to see a single experiment that shows that a bleaching event or set of disturbances results in a change of the type of symbiont with corals (during or after). No one has evidence of a more fit recombination of host and symbiont as a result of changed circumstances. Even the recent Kinzie el al (2001) study with aposymbionts of the sea anemone (Aiptasia) found that they did not take up new types of zooxanthellae. Apart from the problem of having very limited genetic resolution due to limitations of the RFLP technique (same problem as with AC Baker's 2001 study), Kinzie and co.'s aposymbiotic anemone hosts only became infected by the original type (B) of zooxanthella (To quote them: "All Aiptasia that became infected when exposed to natural seawater were found to harbour clade B, which is the zooxanthellar clade normally found in this anemone"). Unfortunately for the ABH, other observations militate against this assumption being true: Firstly, corals that appear totally white still have many zooxanthellae in their tissues (e.g. Hoegh-Guldberg and Salvat 1995 - bone white corals ranged as high as 1.0 x 104 cell/cm2). These are probably the source of repopulation of corals by zooxanthellae in the event of recovery after bleaching. If competition by the original zooxanthellae is so effective (i.e. "originals" win every time according to WK Fitt, D Schoenberg and others who have done the rigorous experiments in this regard), then it would appear that this is a major obstacle to the idea that "bleaching provides an opportunity for the host to be repopulated with a different type of partner." That is, bleaching does not make a coral or other cnidarian host an open slate. The inherent algae in recovering corals probably will always have the upper hand. Secondly, as stated above, no one has seen a single case of bleaching providing "an opportunity for the host to be repopulated with a different type of partner". If this were a major forcing function within the evolution of coral reefs, shouldn't we see large scale examples of this? William Loh from my lab has been searching for changes in rDNA sequence types of zooxanthellae with corals and reefs after bleaching events in Okinawa with his Japanese colleagues. What he has seen is potential selection against some zooxanthella genotypes and associations (their coral host species died out) but never the advent of a new association of host and symbiont. That is, on the short term scales of bleaching events, William has seen a diminishing not increasing stock of combinations (not good for adaptation as you will appreciate). At risk of repeating myself, the advent of new combinations probably requires a longer time period (because of the biochemical complexities of symbiosis) than the few generation times required. See above. An added assumption is added by the authors under assumption 4. They state: "We assume no mortality of bleached corals, regardless of the severity of bleaching or whether there is a zooxanthella type with which the coral is compatible under the existing temperature conditions." I assume that this addition is a condition for the computer model to work. In the face of overwhelming field evidence, this is simply false (GCRMN, Wilkinson and many others). A model that requires this falls over heavily at this point. Perhaps John can explain how critical this element is and how dependent the ABH is on it. Assumption 5. "Stress-sensitive combinations have competitive advantages in the absence of stress, which implies a reversion to stress-prone combinations under non-stressful conditions." This remains unknown. However, if we haven't seen assumption 4 holding true (i.e. that bleaching leads to new fitter combinations), then we obviously don't have assumption 5 (the reversion of these combinations in periods of non-stress) in the bag. In conclusion: The ABH has more than a few problems in terms of the stated assumptions and should be discarded. It was a "nice" idea but now is largely falsified through the fact that critical assumptions like 2 and 4 above are (at the very least) false. I hope that this helps progress the ABH debate in a positive way. I am very interested in engaging in discussions over the details above. Most of all - I want to strongly emphasize that this is not an attempt to denigrate the ABH authors but more an attempt to improve our understanding of mass bleaching by critically examining important ideas and suggestions. I am aware that coral-list members may have much to add and that I probably have not done justice to all authors (if there are critical pieces of literature, please bring them to the list's attention). Regards to all, 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/staff/ohg.html Great Barrier Reef Research Stations http://www.marine.uq.edu.au/stations.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 reefprj at tm.net.my Sat Sep 22 06:59:32 2001 From: reefprj at tm.net.my (The Reef Project) Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 18:59:32 +0800 Subject: reef wall survey Message-ID: <200109221143.LAA01849@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear all, I would like to know if the Line intercept Transect coral reef survey method adopted by English et.al '94 can be applied for reef wall survey. If not, what are the adopted methods for the Asian region. Many Thanks Wilson ~~~~~~~ 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 fautin at falcon.cc.ku.edu Sat Sep 22 21:48:36 2001 From: fautin at falcon.cc.ku.edu (FAUTIN DAPHNE G) Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 20:48:36 -0500 (CDT) Subject: The Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis Message-ID: <200109231344.NAA04411@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Coral-Listers, I am taking this opportunity to respond to several recent messages concerning the Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis (ABH) that was proposed by Bob Buddemeier and me, and then modeled by John Ware, with input from us. I helped formulate the ABH because I am eager to understand the symbioses. I am writing now because I perceive some of the recent exchanges ostensibly concerning the ABH deal with matters that are not part of the ABH and thus do not advance that understanding. The ABH was our deduction from experimental results and empirical observations that had been published at the time we developed it; those data and what they contributed to the ABH are detailed in our publications. Thus it is not true, as one lister recently asserted, that there is no evidence for the ABH. The writers of some recent messages seem to regard the ABH more as a law than a hypothesis. In framing it as "a testable hypothesis," we recognized that additional data could prove to be inconsistent with our inferences about the workings of zooxanthellae symbioses, entirely or in part. Thus, in the manner that science works, falsification would result in more refined hypotheses being advanced and tested, gradually improving our understanding of the symbioses. In a recent message in which he claimed falsification of some of the five critical assumptions of the ABH, Hoegh-Guldberg advocated "discarding" the ABH. What I seek in combination with data that are truly inconsistent with the ABH are second-generation hypotheses that take into account the new data - using the parts of the ABH that work, and substituting for the unworkable parts. More importantly at this juncture, I am not persuaded that those assumptions have been falsified. The ABH was not meant to apply to every instance of bleaching. By way of analogy, that natural selection is not the only selective force in evolution does not falsify natural selection. To take one clear example, some stresses that result in bleaching are lethal, to some or all the bleached corals, and so, obviously, the ABH is irrelevant in such instances. This is why we confined the models of Ware et al. to non-lethal stresses. (Hoegh-Guldberg correctly inferred this is not an assumption of the ABH but a condition under which the model was run, so I am puzzled why he even raised it; it is irrelevant to the substance of the ABH.) We did propose "that bleaching is not merely pathological, but is also adaptive, providing an opportunity for recombining hosts and algae to form symbioses better suited to altered circumstances" (Ware et al. 1996). We also recognized that the organisms might be unable to take advantage of such an opportunity. For example, even with sublethal stresses, in places with low zooxanthellae diversity, a new combination would be unlikely. And superior combinations might not form by chance, for the hypothesized recombination is a stochastic - not a deterministic - phenomenon. We also explicitly stated that the ABH applies to the level of bleaching under which the symbiosis evolved -- what has been considered "background" - and that a mechanism that evolved under that level may not be adaptive if what we are now experiencing is as unprecedentedly severe and widespread as some believe (which is consistent with what Hoegh-Guldberg reported has been found in Japan). The "replacement" zooxanthellae, according to the ABH, can be either exogenous or endogenous. At the time we formulated the ABH, an endogenous source was thought by many experts to be impossible, since it was then considered that any cnidarian polyp or colony would harbor only one "strain" of zooxanthellae. We inferred from the published literature that "strains" could coexist, and so saw a proliferation of one "strain" at the expense of another to be a possible response to altered circumstance. We now know that multiple "strains" can coexist. Thus the comment that "Baker (2001) cannot say that the new bands are due to invasion of external zooxanthellae or a case of up-regulation of a small existing population of the particular type of zooxanthellae concerned" is not germane to the ABH - either alternative supports it. The exogenous source is the surrounding water, and therefore ultimately are zooxanthellae in their free-living stage or those were released under stress. Whether those that leave in the bleaching process are viable, much less infective, was raised in the original publication as a matter to be investigated; it has not, to our knowledge, been resolved. Thus criticisms such as that of Hoegh-Guldberg (1999), "The key observations that corals, when heat stressed, expel one variety of zooxanthellae and take on another more heat-tolerant variety while the heat stress is still present, has never been made," misrepresent the ABH and thus do not test its tenets. The preceding quote and several recent list messages have focused on thermal bleaching. This is not a requirement of the ABH, which was proposed to operate as a result of any stress or combination of stresses that provoke bleaching. Hoegh-Guldberg began a recent message with 'a clarification with respect to the biological terms "adaptation" and "acclimation."' I am uncertain how this comment relates to the debate. We have tried to be consistent in application of those terms - see papers in the recent "American Zoologist" volume concerned with how coral reefs adapt, acclimate, and acclimatize (especially that of Gates). Hoegh-Guldberg's definition of adaptation as "genetic changes in a population that lead to genetically based characteristics of that population considered more optimal with respect to the local environment" is the sense in which we created the ABH. For we explicitly regard the zooxanthella-host complex as an ecological entity that is not the sum of its parts (an additive model was used by Ware et al. to be mathematically tractable, but its departure from our concept was made explicit). Thus, in the ABH, under identical circumstances, a species of coral with one "strain" of zooxanthellae might be maladapted but well adapted with another. This seems to be substantiated in patterns of "strains" of zooxanthellae that live in shaded and lighted portions of a single coral colony, and of "strains" of zooxanthellae that live in shallow and deep colonies of a single species of coral. Part of the decision on whether to use the pigeon-hole "adaptation" or "acclimation" that Hoegh-Guldberg raises may depend on one's concept of who is "in charge" in the symbiosis - if the animal is making a selection, it may be nearer the "acclimation" end, whereas if the zooxanthella is choosing a suitable home, it may be nearer the "adaptation" end. In his message, Hoegh-Guldberg disputed the mutability of host-zooxanthella combinations on the time scale required for the ABH to operate. Our inference that the change could happen was based on experiments such as those of Fitt cited by Hoegh-Guldberg, who stated "To my knowledge, no lab or field infection experiment using dinoflagellates from other hosts (like those of WK Fitt and others) have ever resulted in a new combination of symbiotic algae and host." In fact, we interpreted Fitt's data (and those of Kinzie and Chee) as showing that new combinations could be established in short order - although allochthonous zooxanthellae did not establish in all hosts, some did so temporarily, and others remained longer. Hoegh-Guldberg continued "In cases where foreign types of zooxanthellae were introduced, populations were eventually replaced by the original type of zooxanthellae." As we wrote in the original BioScience paper, because the scientists controlled conditions to minimize stress on their experimental subjects, those experiments were conducted under laboratory conditions that were known to be suitable for the subjects - which are those in which the "native" zooxanthellae-host combination is favored. Thus a reversion to the pre-existing combination is precisely what would be predicted by the ABH. The recently published experiment by Baker put corals into situations that persisted - and his results are also consistent with the ABH. Hoegh-Guldberg's comment "Also - no one has seen a change in the types of zooxanthellae occupied by a coral following a bleaching event (i.e. new combinations arising from a bleaching event)" is beside the point in the debate over the ABH for several reasons. I stated one above - unless the stress that produced the bleaching persists, the pre-existing combination will be favored, so no change is to be expected. A practical one is being able to know what the situation was before the stress and what it is afterward. For we are searching for changes in an entity that, until very recently, was viewed by most people as unitary (that is, there was one "strain" of zooxanthellae) and we do not yet know the extent of the diversity because we do not yet know what differences might exist. Part of our proposing the hypothesis was to encourage scientists to find ways to distinguish the members of this all-important symbiosis, individually and in combination. Moreover, the ABH does not require that every "strain" of zooxanthellae be capable of living in every host species - we explicitly modeled the ABH on there being generalists and specialists on both sides of the symbiosis (just as there are anemonefish and host sea anemones - in the former case belonging perhaps to two genera, in the latter certainly to three families). I, for one, do not "think of transferring zooxanthellae between hosts as partly akin to transplanting chloroplasts or mitochondria between plant species" - a bit of evidence that clearly shows zooxanthella symbiosis is a less well integrated one is the phenomenon of bleaching itself. The possibilities Hoegh-Guldberg raises with the comment "the types of zooxanthellae that occupy different corals are quite separate genetically and may represent different species or even genera (Trench, McNally et al. 1994 and others) - hence are likely to have a large suite of different requirements and features that have to be integrated (evolved) in order for a symbiosis to function. Adopting life within another cellular environment is not trivial and may involve many coordinated changes in genetic makeup" provide grist for investigation, but do not constitute falsification of the ABH. We inferred that "stress-sensitive combinations have competitive advantages in the absence of stress, which implies a reversion to stress-prone combinations under non-stressful conditions" to account for the continued existence of combinations that are vulnerable to conditions that recur (such as the annual bleaching Jokiel and others found in Hawaii, and that Fitt has more recently documented in Florida). Otherwise the system would be ratcheted to increasingly stress-resistant combinations with a time course that would seem too rapid for any other known mechanism. Using this assumption, Ware was able to create a model that bears remarkable resemblance to the time course of actual bleaching events. I look forward to advancing understanding of bleaching and its consequences though well-crafted experiments that are published in the peer-reviewed literature. Sincerely, Daphne G. Fautin Professor, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Curator, Natural History Museum and Biodiversity Research Center Haworth Hall University of Kansas 1200 Sunnyside Avenue Lawrence, Kansas 66045-7534 USA telephone 1-785-864-3062 fax 1-785-864-5321 for e-mail, please use fautin at ku.edu lab web page: www.nhm.ku.edu/~inverts direct to database of hexacorals, including sea anemones, released 12 July 2001 *** http://www.kgs.ku.edu/Hexacoral/Biodata/ *** ~~~~~~~ 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 gigi101 at bellsouth.net Fri Sep 21 13:54:35 2001 From: gigi101 at bellsouth.net (Trish Hunt) Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 13:54:35 -0400 Subject: What I have learned Message-ID: <200109231400.OAA04633@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hello again everyone. Where do I begin?In light of recent events on America, there is a part of me that feels like this fight was so insignificant now. But, since so many of you replied with supportive words to me on this issue as well as other issues, and I had even received some emails that educated me on the ?political? side of the scientists? community (with views about the particular individual in question) I felt that I should return the favor and make good on my promise to the list to let all of you know that I finally received a letter of response from Governor Jeb Bush?s office today in response to the letter I sent him on 25 June 2001. Below you will find a copy of this email and below that, you will find a copy of my letter to Governor Bush. Why this email has come to me now, so soon after the tragic events of last week, I don?t know. I would think that government officials in this country would have more important things going on than making sure that someone responds to an email that was sent nearly three months ago. It has since [my original letter] been announced that Janet Reno is indeed going to run for the position of Florida?s Governor. If she continues keeping the environment in the top 3 of her list of priorities for our state, I am still going to vote for her. It seems to me, in the reply below, that Governor Bush thinks that the entire state, (like his brother thinks the entire country) is worried about taxes being too high and we pay too much money to the government. I have always felt (perhaps because I have never known different) that our tax rate was fine. If protecting the environment means the government keeping the tax rate the same, then keep my money! If protecting our country means rescinding our income tax rebate, then take my family?s $600, if it will keep that disaster from ever happening again! Just because (in my opinion) the Bushes are particularly greedy (for the record, I do have a newfound respect for our President now), does not mean that the rest of the American citizens feel the same way. I do not want to sacrifice my freedom, security, or my environment just to keep a few dollars for myself. I just wish everyone did feel the same way. Perhaps we would already know more about our environment, perhaps coral reefs and other reef systems wouldn?t be in danger from dying for one reason or another, and perhaps the World Trade Center twin towers would still be standing, the Pentagon would not be damaged, and thousands of people would not be dead. As I am sure some of you will point out, I know there are a lot of other ?perhaps? that could go into that short list. Here is the response, and as always, I welcome any comments from any of you. I have learned so much from many of you over recent months and look forward to continuing that relationship. One day, I will have a title and/or acronyms behind my name like so many of you. Keep up the good work because each of you does make a difference in many ways. If you don?t believe that, then take to the bank that you have inspired me to follow my dreams. When you feel like your work is insignificant, keep in mind that there are others out there that read about the work you are doing and they are asking questions of their own. One day, there will be enough of us asking the right questions, coming up with right answers, and saving our underwater world, one organism at a time. Sincerely, Patricia Hunt -----Original Message----- From: Smith, Sandi [mailto:Sandi.Smith at LASPBS.STATE.FL.US] Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 1:11 PM To: 'gigi101 at bellsouth.net' Subject: RE: What I have learned Dear Ms. Hunt: Thank you for writing to Governor Jeb Bush to share your reaction to items in the General Appropriations Act. He appreciates hearing from you and has asked me to reply on his behalf. I apologize for the delay in responding. As you already know, Governor Bush vetoed the appropriation for the Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution when he signed Senate Bill 2000 into law on June 15, 2001. The Governor gave his approval to projects that meet priority needs, are funded from an appropriate source, and do not have unacceptable out-year costs. The projects he vetoed failed to meet these stated criteria. The Governor believes the Fiscal Year 2001-02 budget passed by the Florida Legislature accomplishes much for Florida. Working together, the state's top priorities have been met through this budget: education, protecting our most vulnerable citizens, the environment, tax relief for Florida families, public safety and election reform. Thanks to a visionary commitment by the Legislature, Florida is funding its critical needs while providing meaningful tax relief. Given the fiscal challenges we face, this achievement is remarkable. With these new investments and tax relief, Florida's promise now shines brighter than ever. While there is much in the budget of which to be proud, several items did not go through committee or statutory processes for inclusion in the budget. Governor Bush therefore used his line-item veto authority to save taxpayer money, eliminating more than $290 million statewide in special projects in the budget. The Governor is grateful to you for taking the time to let him know of your views on the state budget. He hopes you can understand that with limited fiscal resources and many spending needs, some worthy projects could not be afforded this year. Please contact him again on issues of importance to you. Sincerely, Sandi Smith Office of Policy and Budget Executive Office of the Governor Dear Mr. Governor, My name is Patricia Hunt and I live in Jacksonville, FL. I am just your average citizen. I am a 27-year-old wife and a mother of a 2 year old. I have served in the US Army for 4 years (Ft. Hood, TX) and other than those 4 years, I have lived here my whole life. As a child, my father took me fishing. We fished from beaches and from docks until he was able to afford a boat. I spent most summer weekends offshore from the age of 6 to 17. During those years on the water, my father taught me about safety and about conserving our resources. If we had no intentions of eating whatever fish we caught, we threw it back. If it was too tired to swim on its own, I watched my father get into the water with it (once, a 6? female tiger shark in addition to others) in order to assist its breathing until it could swim away on its own. I learned about the dangers of plastic bags floating in our waters and that sea turtles eat them ? mistaking them for jellyfish. I learned that the plastic rings that come around soda 6-packs can get caught around birds? and other animals? necks, strangling them to death ? so I rip them apart before throwing them away. I learned not to anchor on reefs because it tears them up, killing the very place that fish hide in, swim in, and feed in. I also watched my father capture a pelican that had a hook caught in its skin, just below its bill, so that we could take the hook (still attached to fishing line) out of him. From a very young age, a love for the marine environment has been instilled in me and nurtured. I may not have a boat yet, but when I do go to the beach with my husband and baby, I find myself picking up trash others have left behind. I want the marine environment to be healthy and enjoyable for my son when he is my age. If I am lucky, he will learn from my example to care for his environment the same way my father taught me. I cannot afford to get a diving certification yet, either. So instead, I have started up my very own marine aquarium. I want to one day keep corals and other invertebrates in my aquarium and have been doing a tremendous amount of research on the subject on the Internet. That is how I became a part of coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov . I am not a scientist nor am I even in any profession associated with the marine environment, but because I am fighting an algae bloom in my aquarium, I found a particular article from this list interesting. It spoke of an alleged algae bloom that is allegedly killing off some of Florida?s coral reefs and a possible reason behind the algae bloom. All that was needed was some more money from the state in order to research this reason. You vetoed this funding according to the article because the research wouldn ?t provide a statewide benefit. As a Florida resident and a registered voter, I am completely appalled with this decision. The last time that I checked, tourism is Florida?s number one industry and I am sorry to say, Mickey Mouse isn?t Florida?s only tourist attraction. Divers, snorkelers, fishermen, and tourists enjoy healthy reefs and the diverse population of fish and other marine life the reefs support. The reef-lovers buy dive and snorkel gear, rent boats, hire guides, stay in hotels, rent beach houses for weeks and months at a time, eat in restaurants, not to mention they spend money on their ?land-based? entertainment as well. Fishermen spend money on many of the same things. The ?snowbirds? spend their money in the winter; the rest of us spend our money in the summer months. If that is not ?statewide? enough to reconsider giving these scientists some funding to do their research on my behalf, your behalf, your family?s behalf, my son?s behalf, and his children?s behalf, then I truly don?t know where your priorities lie. You say it is on education. We live in Florida and I assure you most of our natural sciences curriculum in high school consists of knowledge of what is around us locally. I am still young enough to remember my high-school days and learning about turtle nests, manatees, fire coral, Portuguese-Man-O-Wars, and octopus. Helping to fund this research will be funding long term and real life education. If we don?t have much of a reef-ecosystem left later to educate our children or our grandchildren about, there goes most of my most memorable school lessons right out of the education system. If that happens, have we really done our job? Another thing, I cannot speak for the rest of the residents that enjoy nature in all forms, but after living in Killeen for 3 years I assure you I wanted nothing more than to come back to Florida when I got out of the service. I needed to be near the ocean. I have plans on diving in the future. If I don?t have anything to look at but dead stuff when I do finally get down there, I might have to move to Australia or something. If you don?t reconsider funding this research project, I assure you, if Janet Reno does run for your position, I will vote for her in a heartbeat. I am sorry this has turned out so long. I felt the need to fully explain my position and why I stand where I do. I would appreciate a response, even a short one; but please do not send me a typical form letter. Thank you for your time. Patricia Hunt Jacksonville, FL ~~~~~~~ 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 mrgassociates at earthlink.net Fri Sep 21 13:19:11 2001 From: mrgassociates at earthlink.net (Goldberg) Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 13:19:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Socio-Economic Manual Message-ID: <200109241125.LAA06586@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hello, I'm trying to find a document/manual I was told the Network put out. The title (I think) is "Socio-Economic Manual for Coral Reef Management." I don't see this on the web site nor do I see any contact (email address) for finding out. Can you direct me to a site or person who can assist me in finding this? Any assistance you can provide will be greatly appreciated (please respond directly to me). Thanks....Marshall ~~~~~~~ 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 Pandolfi.John at NMNH.SI.EDU Mon Sep 24 11:50:55 2001 From: Pandolfi.John at NMNH.SI.EDU (John Pandolfi) Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 11:50:55 -0400 Subject: Student Intern available - DC area Message-ID: Funding is available immediately for a student intern through a National Science Foundation project entitled "A long-term paleoecological record of coral reef communities". The student will work in the laboratory of Dr. John Pandolfi, Paleobiology Department, National Museum of Natural History, Washington DC. Work assignments include sorting and curation of Holocene corals, mollusks, calcareous algae and Foraminifers; maintenance of Holocene collections; sediment splitting; data entry; sample preparation, and other laboratory duties. Eligibility is confined to students (graduate or undergraduate) currently enrolled at an academic institution, and the work must be completed in house at the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC. Work schedule is flexible - there is up to $3000 available - representing about 400 hours of work. Work can be shared between two interns. The student(s) will take up the internship as soon as possible, but no later than mid-October 2001. Interested parties should contact John Pandolfi, Department of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C., U.S.A. Phone: 202 357 2406 FAX: 202 786 2832 e-mail: pandolfi.john at nmnh.si.edu ************************************************** John M. Pandolfi Department of Paleobiology National Museum of Natural History Smithsonian Institution Washington D.C. 20560-0121 U.S.A. Phone: + 1 202 357 2406 FAX: + 1 202 786 2832 ************************************************** ~~~~~~~ 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 lzhale at gsosun1.gso.uri.edu Mon Sep 24 12:58:30 2001 From: lzhale at gsosun1.gso.uri.edu (Lynne Hale) Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 12:58:30 -0400 Subject: Position Announcement Message-ID: <200109241729.RAA07352@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Colleagues: CRC is recruiting for a full time staff member to join our international team. A short description follows. I would appreciate your alerting qualified individuals to this opportunity. I apologize if you have received multiple versions of this. Many thanks, Lynne Coastal Resources Center University of Rhode Island Advancing Coastal Management Worldwide Marine Research Associate III - International Field Program The Coastal Resources Center at the University of Rhode Island is initiating a search for a Marine Research Associate III who will be responsible for providing substantial technical support and backstopping for CRC's Cooperative Agreement with USAID in Coastal Management, with emphasis on support to its programs in Asia, the Western Pacific and Mexico. The qualified Marine Research Associate candidate is required to possess: master's degree in a resource management-related discipline; minimum of three years professional experience in coastal management; excellent organizational, writing, computer and communication skills; willingness to travel internationally up to four months per year. In addition, the preferred candidate will possess: experience in community-based coastal management and/or marine protected area management; experience working in Asia/Western Pacific/and/or Latin America. For more information about the Coastal Resources Center, please visit our web site at: http://crc.uri.edu. Please submit letters of application and resume by September 28, 2001 to: Lynne Z. Hale, Search Coordinator, Log #091300, University of Rhode Island, Box G, Kingston, RI 02881 or lzhale at gsosun1.gso.uri.edu. The University of Rhode Island is an AA/EEO employer. Lynne Zeitlin Hale Associate Director University of Rhode Island Coastal Resources Center Graduate School of Oceanography Narragansett, RI 02882 USA Telephone: (401) 874-6224 Fax: (401) 789-4670 Email: lzhale at gso.uri.edu http://crc.uri.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 j.oliver at cgiar.org Wed Sep 26 05:37:19 2001 From: j.oliver at cgiar.org (Jamie Oliver) Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 02:37:19 -0700 Subject: Socio-Economic Manual Message-ID: Dear all, For any others that may be interested, The full text of the GCRMN SOCIOECONOMIC MANUAL FOR CORAL REEF MANAGEMENT by L. Bunce, P. Townsley, R. Pomeroy, R. Pollnac is now available for download in PDF format on ReefBase ( www.reefbase.org )on the home page. Its a big file (15Mb), so please only download this if you cannot access the hardcopy. In the near future we may be able to cut it up into chapters for individual download. Please let me know if this would be useful. Best Regards Jamie Oliver ReefBase Project Leader ============================================ Jamie Oliver Senior Scientist (Coral Reef Projects) ICLARM - The World Fish Center PH: 60 4 626 1606 Fax: 60 4 626 5530 email: J.Oliver at cgiar.org ============================================ -----Original Message----- From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Goldberg Sent: Saturday, 22 September 2001 1:19 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Socio-Economic Manual Hello, I'm trying to find a document/manual I was told the Network put out. The title (I think) is "Socio-Economic Manual for Coral Reef Management." I don't see this on the web site nor do I see any contact (email address) for finding out. Can you direct me to a site or person who can assist me in finding this? Any assistance you can provide will be greatly appreciated (please respond directly to me). Thanks....Marshall ~~~~~~~ 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 ic771inm at uic.asu.ru Mon Sep 24 23:59:05 2001 From: ic771inm at uic.asu.ru (Ivan Marin) Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 09:59:05 +0600 Subject: Request Message-ID: <200109261040.KAA11134@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Coral-lers, I have a problem with availability of some literature. I cann't = find following papers in libraries of my region and University. Our = libraries are not rich with foreign literature. I am interesting in Dr. P.W. Glynn investigation as I study = coral-associated Decapoda and very interested in their interrelations = with their host. As all of You study coral and coral communities, I hope = that it would be easy to help me, especially somebody can study this = phenomenon. I am looking for following papers: Glynn, P.W., 1976 Some physical and biological determinants of coral = community structure in the Eastern Pacific. Ecol. Monogr., 46: 431-456. Glynn, P.W., 1980. Defense by symbiotic crustacea of host corals = elicited by chemical cues from predator. Oecologia, 47: 287-290. Glynn, P.W., 1981. Acanthaster population regulation by a shrimps and = worms. PCRS-4, Vol. 2, p. 607-612. Glynn, P.W., 1983. Crustacean symbionts and defense of corals. = Coevolution. Chicago: Univ. Press. p. 111-178. Glynn, P.W., 1983 Increased survivorship in coral harboring crustacean = symbionts. Mar. Biol. Letters, 4. Glynn, P.W., M. Petez & S.L. Gilchrist, 1985. Lipid decline in stressed = corals and their crustacean symbionts. Biol. Bull, 168: 276-284. I couldn't find any reference of Glynn' pepers since 1985, can = anybody help me in this question too. =20 Thank You very much. I am looking for Your requests. Sincerely Yours, Marin Ivan Marin Ivan Zoological Department Biological Faculty Altay State University St.Lenina, 61 656099 Barnaul Russia It will be better if address is written so (in Russian by Latin = symbols): To Marin Ivan 771 gruppa Kafedra Zoologiy Biologicheskiy Facul'tet Altaiskiy Gosudarstvenny Universitet Prospect Lenina, 61 656099, Barnaul, Russia=20 Or I have my private post address: 656038, Barnaul-38, p/o box 75. Russia. ~~~~~~~ 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 bmiller-tipton at mail.ifas.ufl.edu Wed Sep 26 12:52:03 2001 From: bmiller-tipton at mail.ifas.ufl.edu (Miller-Tipton, Beth A.) Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 12:52:03 -0400 Subject: 2nd Inter Conf Marine Ornamentals Message-ID: <200109261744.RAA12245@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> ***************************************************************** The 2nd International Conference on Marine Ornamentals: Collection, Culture and Conservation, will DEFINITELY take place November 26-December 1, 2001 at the Wyndham Palace Resort and Spa in Walt Disney World, Lake Buena Vista, Florida, USA. Anyone who is ANYONE involved in Marine Ornamentals should be there. The DETAILED PROGRAM AGENDA has been finalized including all plenary and concurrent session presenters. It is a diverse yet comprehensive program and will benefit a wide audience of those involved in the industry. It is easiest to print out the FINAL ANNOUNCEMENT located at http://conference.ifas.ufl.edu/mo/marine.pdf and take a look at who's talking on the latest topics affecting marine ornamentals. EVERYTHING you need to know about the conference is posted on the MAIN conference website. Here is a link for your immediate convenience. http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~conferweb/MO Best wishes and we hope to see you in November! Sincerely, 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: mailto:bmiller-tipton at mail.ifas.ufl.edu Website: http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~conferweb/MO ~~~~~~~ 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 george.schmahl at noaa.gov Wed Sep 26 14:58:33 2001 From: george.schmahl at noaa.gov (G.P Schmahl) Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 13:58:33 -0500 Subject: Coral Spawning Flower Garden Banks Message-ID: <3BB22546.805DF516@noaa.gov> Apologies for the tardiness of this post, but the following are observations of coral spawning within the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary, northwestern Gulf of Mexico (approximately 27 degrees 56 minutes north latitude, 93 degrees 44 minutes west longitude). Two pronounced coral spawning events were witnessed this year, following the full moon of August and September. Observations in this report are by Sanctuary staff (G.P. Schmahl, Emma Hickerson, Jennifer DeBose, Kevin Buch), and Dr. Peter Vize (University of Calgary); with additional contributions by Eric Borneman (University of Houston) and James Wiseman. Times are given as local time - Central Daylight Time (CDT). August Full Moon: August 4, 2001, 12:56 am Observations were made on August 9, 10 and 11. August 9, 2001 Montastrea franksi: 9:40pm - 10:00pm (many colonies) Other observations: Unidentified brittlestar (Ophioderma sp.) - female releasing eggs August 10, 2001 Montastrea cavernosa males: 9:00pm - 9:35pm (a few colonies) Montastrea cavernosa females: 9:45pm (a few colonies) Diploria strigosa: 9:00pm - 10:30+pm (many colonies) Montastrea franksi: 9:45 pm - 10:30+pm (many colonies) Other observations: Spirobranchus giganteus (Christmas tree worm): 10:00pm - 10:18pm (few male and female) Eunicid polychaete worms (Lysidice ninetta) in water column. Collected specimens were full of gametes. August 11, 2001 Diploria strigosa: 10:30+pm (very few colonies) Montastrea franksi: 10:20pm - 10:50pm (many colonies) Stephanocoenia michelinii: 10:30pm (1 male only) Other observations: Ophioderma rubicundum: 9:00pm - 10:20pm (many observed, but few displaying female egg release behavior) September Full moon: September 2, 2001, 4:43 pm. Observations were made on September 9 and 10. September 8, 2001 - No spawning reported by divers on the Sea Searcher, a dive charter vessel with experienced coral observers from the Aquarium of the Americas aboard. September 9, 2001 Diploria strigosa: 9:05pm - 10:00+pm (many colonies) Montastrea franksi: 9:15pm - 10:00+pm (many colonies) Montastrea cavernosa males: 9:10pm - 9:15pm (2 colonies) Montastrea cavernosa females: 9:15pm - 9:30pm (2 colonies) Significant accumulation of coral gametes on the surface by 10:45pm September 10, 2001 Diploria strigosa: 9:15pm - 10:06pm (many colonies) Montastrea franksi: 9:17pm - 9:54pm (many colonies) Stephanocoenia michelinii: 10:15pm - 10:25pm (few colonies - male and female) Significant accumulation of coral gametes on the surface by 10:45pm No observations conducted on September 11. Notes: Very little spawning by Montastrea cavernosa in September. No spawning behavior observed by brittle stars or christmas tree worms in September. -- G.P. Schmahl Sanctuary Manager National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary 216 W. 26th Street, Suite 104 Bryan, TX 77803 (979) 779-2705 (979) 779-2334 (fax) george.schmahl at noaa.gov http://www.flowergarden.nos.noaa.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010926/0387ae46/attachment.html From buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu Wed Sep 26 18:01:03 2001 From: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu (Bob Buddemeier) Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 17:01:03 -0500 Subject: coral reefs doomed -- and the ABH and carbonate saturation Message-ID: <200109270025.AAA12823@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Rick and not-quite captive audience ? I?ll answer your questions/comments in reverse order. As far as I know there is no published/refereed statement of the putative effects of Mg-calcite on reef calcification, so it will have to be what I think about what I think it is. I. As I understand what I will call the Magnesium Salvation Theory (MST for a convenient shorthand), it goes something like this: 1. There is a lot of magnesian calcite in the (low-latitude) carbonate sediments of the world ocean. 2. High-Mg calcite is more soluble than aragonite. 3. As saturation state and pH of the surface ocean drop as a result of anthropogenic CO2 additions (or for any other reason), high-Mg calcite will dissolve before aragonite does, buffering the surface ocean carbonate saturation state. 4. Therefore concerns about the effects of lowered carbonate saturation state on calcification by corals and coralline algae are not warranted. Points 1-2 are valid, point 3 is valid in principle but questionable in practice, and the extension to point 4 isn?t valid. For the MST to work, two conditions would have to obtain: a. The saturation state at which the high-Mg calcite buffers the surface water would have be high enough to avoid negative calcification effects, and b. The equilibration (that is, dissolution kinetics) would have to be rapid on the 50-100 year time scale of anthropogenic CO2 additions. Neither of these two conditions will be met. Since Greek letters do not translate to text files, I use OM in place of Omega, the saturation index (where 1 = solid-solution equilibrium, larger numbers = supersaturation, and smaller numbers = undersaturation). OMh= saturation state of high-Mg calcite, OMa= saturation state of aragonite. OMc= saturation state of calcite. 1. Considering point a above: Aragonite is more soluble than calcite and the ratio of their saturation states is well-known: to 2 significant figures, OMc/OMa is 1.5. High-Mg calcite is a little less precisely definable because it is not a well defined molecule, but rather a range of solid solutions (0-30 mole % MgCO3 is stable, <8% has little or no effect on calcite solubility, 11% has approximately the same solubility as aragonite), we will be close enough to use the value of OMa/OMh = 1.3-1.5. Essentially by definition, chemical dissolution does not occur at all above a value of OM = 1. We can see that when high-Mg calcite would first start dissolving, OMa would be 1.3-1.5 or less. If we consider the modeled results of Kleypas, J.A. et al., 1999. Geochemical consequences of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide on coral reefs. Science, 284(2 April 1999): 118-120 (figure 1C), we see that the most extreme and extended prediction is for an average tropical surface ocean OMa of >1.5 in the year 2100. It is this prediction on which the predictions of calcification decline are based, and all of the projected calcification effects occur before there could be any large-scale dissolution of high-Mg calcite ? hence, no salvation by magnesium. 2. Relevant to both points a and b: Equilibrium is defined as the net balance between forward and back reactions (in this case precipitation and dissolution). Not only the fact that the surface oceans are strongly supersaturated with respect to calcite and aragonite, but also a great deal of experimental work testify to the extremely limited occurrence of inorganic (as opposed to biogenic) precipitation. Reaction kinetics are strongly hindered and absolute rates are very slow, almost certainly due to the occlusion of mineral surfaces by organics and/or less soluble mineral phases. Chemical symmetry raises the question of why we would expect the surface ocean saturation state to be controlled by mineral dissolution in the near future when it is not currently controlled by mineral precipitation This is probably the point to insert the qualifying comment that organisms are constrained by environmental chemistry, but not absolutely controlled at the rates and/or equilibria of inorganic chemistry (that is, they may be able to get around some aspects of thermodynamics, but they are stuck with ultimate conservation of mass and energy). The observations to date indicate that zooxanthellate corals and coralline algae exhibit high rates of calcification at OMa >4, and that most species show significant declines at levels that are still supersaturated but well above 1. 3. Relevant to point b: Apart from the micro-scale inhibition of dissolution and precipitation at the carbonate surface, there are macro-scale advective issues that reduce potential reaction rates. The large inventory of Mg-calcite in the world sediments is mostly buried. Only the top few cm (in high energy environments) or mm (in low-energy environments) is in any kind of well-exchanged contact with the overlying water. Below that, pore water residence times rise exponentially. Interstitial pore water in reef systems is normally (or at least often) controlled at the saturation state of high-Mg calcite, with the help of biogenically mediated solution or precipitation, but the volumetric exchange of this water with the overlying water is extremely slow compared to both surface layer mixing and the physical and biological processes acting in the open water and at the air-sea interface to maintain the (super)saturation state there. Empirical evidence for this is that the Holocene reef sediments (up to 8000 years in age) are neither flushed of high-Mg calcite by dissolution, nor totally locked up by diagenetic cement formation. And, there is no reason to expect a major change in pore water residence times in the near future. Another comment or two ? the one place in the ocean where you do see reasonably prompt responses of saturation equilibria is in the lysocline-carbonate compensation depth region. This is far below the mixed layer, and is driven by organic/carbonate ratios in the sedimentary rainout ? all of which, in the pelagic world, have much higher specific surface areas and therefore reaction rates than the big, organic-rich lumps on a reef. The reason that the surface ocean can maintain its saturation disequilibrium so well is that the mixed layer is rather strongly compartmentalized in terms of its dissolved constitutents (as opposed to particulates, which can fall through the pycnocline). And, since the exchangeable carbon inventories of the mixed layer and the atmosphere are similar in size, and air-sea exchange keeps them nearly in equilibrium, surface ocean response to CO2 input to the atmosphere is prompt and substantial. Recommended or suggested reading (sorry if this seems egocentric, but obviously it?s easiest for me to remember and judge relevance of what I?ve been involved in, so there are a thoroughly disproportionate number of Buddemeier things): Morse, J. W. and Mackenzie, F. T., 1990. Geochemistry of Sedimentary Carbonates. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 707 pp. Gattuso, J.P., Allemand, D. and Frankignoulle, M., 1999. Photosynthesis and calcification at cellular, organismal and community levels in coral reefs: A review on interactions and control by the carbonate chemistry. American Zoologist, 39(1): 160-183. Kleypas, J.A. et al., 1999a. Geochemical consequences of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide on coral reefs. Science, 284(2 April 1999): 118-120. Kleypas, J.A., Buddemeier, R.W. and Gattuso, J.-P., 2001. Defining 'coral reef' for the age of global change. International Journal of Earth Sciences, 90: 426-437. Kleypas, J.A., McManus, J.W. and Menez, L.A.B., 1999b. Environmental limits to coral reef development: Where do we draw the line? American Zoologist, 39(1): 146-159. Tribble, G.W., Sansone, F.J., Buddemeier, R.W. and Li, Y.-H., 1992. Hydraulic Exchange between a Coral Reef and Surface Seawater. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 104: 1280-1291. Buddemeier, R.W. and Oberdorfer, J.A., 1986. Internal Hydrology and Geochemistry of Coral Reefs and Atoll Islands: Key to Diagenetic Variations. In: J.H.S.a.B.H. Purser (Editor), Reef Diagenesis. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp. 91-111. Buddemeier, R.W. and Oberdorfer, J.A., 1988. Hydrogeology and Hydrodynamics of Coral Reef Pore Waters. In: J.H. Choate et al. (Editor), Proceedings, 6th Int. Coral Reef Symp., Townsville, Australia, pp. 485-490. Buddemeier, R.W., 1994. Symbiosis, calcification, and environmental Interactions. In: F. Doumenge (Editor), Past and Present Biomineralization Processes. Mus?e Oc?anographique, Monaco, pp. 119-137. Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1996a. Global CO2 and evolution among the Scleractinia. In: D. Allemand and J.-P. Cuif (Editors), Biomineralization '93, 7th International Symposium on Biomineralization. Bulletin de l'Institut oceanographique, Monaco, pp. 33-38. Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1996b. Saturation state and the evolution and biogeography of symbiotic calcification. In: D. Allemand and J.-P. Cuif (Editors), Biomineralization '93, 7th International Symposium on Biomineralization. Bulletin de l'Institute oceanographique, Monaco, Monaco, pp. 23-32. II. ABH ? I think, and sincerely hope, that Daphne?s recent response will have clarified the issues. Most of the so-called debate or criticism has consisted of other people redefining or misinterpreting our statements and then claiming that there is something wrong with the concept on the basis of their revision. Related to your comments ? one of reasons for proposing the existence of an adaptively flexible multilateral symbiosis was precisely the points you make ? long taxon lifetimes in both corals and algae, in combination with an obligately variable preferred habitat and no particular evidence of high extinction rates. The ecospecies concept preserves the benefits of very rapid adaptation (of the symbiotic combination) in the presence of the other features. I thought it might be good to get the idea as close to a one-liner as possible ? a brief synopsis: The question is: Can the application of stress (any stress or combination, not just warm water) that results in a diminution of the pre-existing population of endosymbionts (a.k.a. bleaching) lead to a change (from either endogenous or exogenous sources) in the balance or nature of the symbiont types that results in an increase in the fitness of the host-symbiont complex (ecospecies) with respect to environmental stresses? We hypothesized (on the basis of very real hard, if indirect evidence) that the answer is yes, and proposed some tests. We consider both the indirect and the direct evidence emerging since then to support, but certainly not to 'prove' the hypothesis. Bob Buddemeier Richard Grigg wrote: > Dear Bob, > > Thank you for shedding some more light on your adaptive bleaching > hypothesis and as you point out, there is almost a complete absence of hard > evidence either for or against the argument. In this regard, I don't have > to remind you, that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (of > coral's adaptive abilities). Also, in this regard, I think we can infer > more from the fossil record than most of us seem now willing to accept even > though the adaptive responses have the benefit of thousand or even millions > of years. BUT, over the millenia, there must have been some rapid bursts > of sudden change such as the K-T event itself. Stephen J. Gould's view of > evolution by punctuated equilibrium is, in fact, based on such bursts of > change. And yet, we don't see much extinction in corals at least at the > generic or Family level (Re: Veron's work). Doesn't this imply high > adaptive ability? Perhaps we need to revisit the fossil record more often > and pull in the views of John Pandolfi and Charley Veron (where are you > guys?). > > Also, while I am at it, let me ask you to shed some of your > exceptional knowledge and experience in marine geo-chemistry on the problem > of decreasing carbonate saturation state in the world's oceans as a result > of increasing co2 globally. I think there is an equally broad pool of > misunderstanding about the degree to which existing carbonate sediments in > the world's oceans, can serve as a buffer to this effect??? I for one > would appreciate hearing your insights on this question. Hope this > question does not pose to great a burden but I'm sure the coral reef > community will appreciate your views. > > Rick Grigg > Dept. of > Oceanography > University > of Hawaii > > At 12:58 AM 9/18/01 -0500, buddrw wrote: > >Coral-listers; > > > >I have received, in addition to this broadcast message from Ove, other > >personal communications that indicate that there is a fairly broad pool of > >misunderstanding about what the Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis is and > >isn't. The comments below address primarily things that it isn't, and I > >have sent messages to Ove and others on an individual basis to try to get > >this sorted out so that a productive discussion can ensue. > > > >In the meantime, I heartily recommend recourse to the original literature > >as a source of primary information -- I, Daphne Fautin, and John Ware will > >all be more than happy to answer questions or attempt to clear up > >confusion. > > > >Bob Buddemeier > > > >PS: I stand by my original statements. > > > > >===== Original Message From ===== > > >Dear Bob and others, > > > > > >I was triggered to respond by the inferences in your statement that some > >"reef > > >ecology and conservation" types have trouble with the Adaptive Bleaching > > >Hypothesis. Any practicing experimental scientist would have an issue with > >the > > >state of play regarding support for this hypothesis. The basic problem at > >this > > >point is nothing to do with "culture" - it is more to do with hard evidence, > > >which is almost completely lacking to support this still very soft and > > >hypothetical explanation for why coral bleach. While experimental tests > > have > > >been coming in, they have had serious problems in terms of design and the > > >conclusions they draw. Us "reef ecology and conservation types" still wait > >for > > >the definitive data that shows corals will bleach, get rid of one > >dinoflagellate > > >genotype and adopt another WHILE the thermal (or other) stress is still > > being > > >applied to the coral-dinoflagellate association. This has never been shown. > > >Showing diversity in rDNA is interesting but irrelevant if diversity here > >does > > >not relate to relevant physiological differences. The recent paper by Baker > > >(whom I greatly respect), for example, used light and could not prove (using > > >RFLPs) that his corals had changed from one dinoflagellate genotype to > >another > > >(simply up-regulating one strain over another is not sufficient - that is > > >acclimation and is not surprising). The experimental design was also > >confounded > > >by the fact that stressed corals were placed in the two contrasting and > > >confounding (for the experiment) habitats (one, the deeper site, was at the > > >extreme depth limit of the species concerned while the other was clearly > > more > > >optimal after photo acclimation). It is therefore not surprising that the > >corals > > >died more at deeper site - which has nothing to do with the fact that they > >did > > >not bleach!). > > > > > >Other issues abound and concern us "reef ecology and conservation types" - > >the > > >idea of range of expansion is limited (as outlined by several people so > > far) > >by > > >the fact that light may be a more important limiting than temperature. I > >also > > >want to stress that the issue of the decline of reefs (as you, Bob, did > >state) > > >has nothing to do with the extinction of corals. As the "geo types" > >(deliberate > > >use here) tell us worse things have happened to corals and they have bounced > > >back (but over thousands if not millions of years). The issue, however, is > >the > > >current human dependency on coral reef ecosystems - reefs disappearing for > >even > > >a few decades would present serious issues for several hundred million > >people. > > >The idea of finding out how reefs survived major extinction events is > > >interesting but largely irrelevant to the current discussion. > > > > > >So - out I come on my old hobby horse - we still have no evidence of unusual > > >adaptive abilities of corals that will match the fast rate of change. Us > >reef > > >ecology types keep looking. While looking for this evidence - perhaps we > > also > > >need to focus on how reefs will change and how we can "adapt" as human > >societies > > >to these changes. This research direction, if the projections of the > > future > >are > > >correct, will assume a major significance as we enter the next few decades. > > > > > >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/CMS_pro/www/staff.html > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > >[mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Bob Buddemeier > > >Sent: Saturday, 8 September 2001 4:00 AM > > >To: Jim Hendee > > >Cc: Coral-List > > >Subject: Re: coral reefs doomed? > > > > > > > > >Jim, et al., > > > > > >Good questions, good points, -- and like it or not, a pretty good if > >disturbing > > >article. > > > > > >On your question about range expansion to compensate for temperature > > increase > > >and inhospitably hot tropics -- there are unfortunately 3 geographic factors > > >that work against that. > > >1. The available shallow water benthic area decreases rather significantly > >as > > >you move to higher latitudes (no atolls, narrower shelves, etc.) > > >2. Light -- see the Kleypas et al analysis -- Kleypas, J.A., McManus, J.W. > >and > > >Menez, L.A.B., 1999. Environmental limits to coral reef development: > > Where do > >we > > >draw the line? American Zoologist, 39(1): 146-159. Maximum reef depth > > shoals > > >dramatically at higher latitudes, even within the thermal mixed layer. This > > >presumably reflects light limitations due to sunangle and day lenght > >variations > > >-- which aren't going to change. > > >3. Carbonate saturation state decrease is squeezing from the high latitude > > >sides -- see the US National Assessment, > > >http://www.cop.noaa.gov/pubs/coastalclimate.PDF, section 4.4. > > > > > >So there is little basis for optimism there. > > > > > >With acknowledgment of the terminological problems, some form of > > >adaptation/acclimatization probably does have real potential to ensure the > > >survival of corals , but not necessarily "reefs as we know them." The > > Ware > >et > > >al article and its precursor, Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1993. Coral > > >Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism: A Testable Hypothesis. BioScience, 43: > > >320-326, are looking more solid as experimental tests come in (Kinzie et al > >in > > >Biol. Bull. earlier this year, Baker in Nature more recently), but for some > > >reason this concept has been anathema to some reef cology and conservation > > >types. (see also Buddemeier, R.W., Fautin, D.G. and Ware, J.R., 1997. > > >Acclimation, Adaptation, and Algal Symbiosis in Reef-Building Scleractinian > > >Corals. In: J.C. den Hartog (Editor), Proceedings of the 6th International > > >Conference on Coelenterate Biology (16-21 July 1995, Noordwijkerhout, The > > >Netherlands). National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, pp. 71-76 for a > > >related issue). This may be because it is seen as diminishing the > >seriousness > > >of the bleaching problem, but in my view your position is the more valid -- > > >without some mechanistic reason to believe that corals CAN survive, there is > > >very little justification for investing money in research and conservation. > > > > > >This also relates to my tired old hobby horse of the non-reef coral > > habitats > >-- > > >I don't think we are getting the real picture, or doing ourselves any > > favors, > >by > > >exclusive concentration on reefs; corals have survived many periods of > > >non-reef-building, and we had better figure out how, why and where. > > > > > >Thanks for bringing this up. > > > > > >Bob Buddemeier > > > > > > > > >Jim Hendee wrote: > > > > > >> Dear Coral Colleagues, > > >> > > >> I know I'll get raked over the coals on this (especially because I don't > > >> have all the literature at my fingertips), but the content and tone of the > > >> news article below is troublesome to me, even though such a tone helps to > > >> gain attention, as well as funding, so that we can more thoroughly study > > >> the problem of coral bleacing and global warming. Of course I respect our > > >> colleague's right to a viewpoint, but when I see this, I can't help but > > >> have these thoughts: > > >> > > >> Such a projection gives no "credit" to adapatation and natural selection, > > >> even though such adaptation would have to occur under a relatively short > > >> time span (50 years). I believe Ware et al (1996), among others, have > > >> addressed this. > > >> > > >> As Dr. Al Strong and I have discussed, and as alluded to but unfortunately > > >> not expanded upon in the last sentence of the article, if the seas are > > >> warming, then you might expect the zoogeography of corals to expand > > >> (relocate?) into the cooler areas, as long as the substrate, circulation, > > >> light and water quality regimes are conducive. (I would imagine some > > >> coral researchers have modeled these possibilities, and I apologize for > > >> not referencing your work.) > > >> > > >> Even though high sea temperatures are the primary cause and indicator of > > >> coral bleaching, that is not the only cause, and no credit is given to the > > >> evidence in the literature (e.g., Lesser 1996, among others) that high UV > > >> is also an agent in coral bleaching. Higher UV, especially in the > > >> tropics, is part of the problem as it relates to the earth's ozone layer. > > >> There is evidence that high sea temperatures that elicited coral bleaching > > >> at some localities in the past did not elicit coral bleaching during > > >> extended cloudy periods (Mumby et al, in press). (Perhaps the cooler areas > > >> mentioned in the above paragraph might also have lower UV?) > > >> > > >> There are other causes of coral bleaching (e.g., see Glynn 1993, 1996) and > > >> this manifestation of stress is complex and to my mind public statements > > >> on coral bleaching should emphasize this. > > >> > > >> Would an annual update to the ITMEMS statement on coral bleaching > > >> (http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/bulls/ITMEMS-bleach.html) be helpful for the > > >> public in this regard? It is my opinion that it would, that we should > > >> address the topics above (among others, e.g., coastal effects), and that > > >> it would behoove us to widely circulate the update among the press as a > > >> consensus opinion (if that is possible!). > > >> > > >> Just my two cents worth... > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> > > >> Jim Hendee > > >> NOAA/AOML > > >> Miami, FL > > >> > > >> Glynn, P. (1993). Coral reef bleaching: ecological perspectives. Coral > > >> Reefs 12, 1-17. > > >> > > >> Glynn, P. (1996). Coral reef bleaching: facts, hypotheses and > > >> implications. Global Change Biology 2, 495-509. > > >> > > >> Lesser, M.P. (1996). Elevated temperatures and ultraviolet radiation > > >> cause oxidative stress and inhibit photosynthesis in symbiotic > > >> dinoflagellates. Limnol Oceanogr. 41(2): 271-283. > > >> > > >> Mumby, P.J., Chisholm, J.R.M., Edwards, A.J., Andrefouet, S. & Jaubert, J. > > >> 2001. Cloudy weather may have saved Society Island reef corals during the > > >> 1998 ENSO event. Mar Ecol Prog Ser (in press). > > >> > > >> Ware, J.R., Fautin, D.G., & Buddemeier, R.W. (1996). Patterns of coral > > >> bleaching: modeling the adaptive bleaching hypothesis. Ecological > > >> Modelling 84, 199-214. > > >> > > >> -------- Original Message -------- > > >> > > >> World coral reefs to die by 2050, scientist warns > > >> By Ed Cropley, Reuters > > >> Thursday, September 06, 2001 > > >> > > >> GLASGOW, Scotland ? The world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years > > >> because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them, a > > >> scientist warned Wednesday. > > >> > > >> "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most coral in most areas will be > > >> lost," Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, told a > > >> science conference. "We are looking at a loss which is equivalent to the > > >> tropical rain forests." > > >> > > >> Only the coral reefs in nontropical regions such as Egypt stand any chance > > >> of lasting beyond 2050, Ormond said, but even the days of the stunning > > >> marine parks of the Red Sea are numbered as sea temperatures continue to > > >> creep up. > > >> > > >> In the past, reefs have suffered from sediment buildup and the > > coral-eating > > >> crown-of-thorns starfish, whose numbers have exploded due to the > > >> over-fishing of their predators. > > >> > > >> Now the main threat to the delicate structures that harbor some of > > nature's > > >> most stunning creations comes from warmer seas, which cause coral > >bleaching. > > >> > > >> Microscopic algae that support the coral polyps cannot live in the warmer > > >> water, and the polyps, the tiny creatures who actually create the reefs, > >die > > >> off within weeks. > > >> > > >> Scientists agree the world's oceans are now warming at a rate of between > >one > > >> and two degrees Celsius every 100 years due to the increased amounts of > > >> greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which trap the sun's rays. > > >> > > >> But even if humans stopped pumping out greenhouse gases such as carbon > > >> dioxide tomorrow in a bid to halt the process, it would still be too > > >> late to > > >> save the reefs, Ormond said. "I don't know what can be done, given that > > >> there's a 50-year time lag between trying to limit carbon dioxide levels > >and > > >> any effect on ocean temperature," he told the conference, held by the > > >> British Association for the Advancement of Science. > > >> > > >> The implications stretch far beyond the death of the colorful coral > > >> structures themselves. The weird and wonderful eels and fish which inhabit > > >> the nooks and crannies will become homeless, and many species will die > > out. > > >> "We are looking at a gradual running down of the whole system. Over time, > > >> the diversity of coral fish will die," Ormond said. > > >> > > >> Humankind will also suffer directly as the dead reefs are eroded and > > >> shorelines that have been protected for the last 10,000 years face the > >wrath > > >> of the oceans without their natural defenses. > > >> > > >> In an age of relatively cheap scuba-diving holidays, this also means many > > >> developing countries in the tropics, such as Kenya or those in the > > >> Caribbean, face losing a major source of revenue. > > >> > > >> The only cause for optimism was that new coral reefs could start to emerge > > >> in colder waters such as the north Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. > > >> > > >> Copyright 2001 ? Reuters > > >> > > >> ~~~~~~~ > > >> 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. > > > >Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier > >Senior Scientist, Geohydrology > >Kansas Geological Survey > >University of Kansas > >1930 Constant Avenue > >Lawrence, KS 66047 > >USA > >ph (785) 864-2112; fax (785) 864-5317 > >email: 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. -- 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 --------------2FE0C695EAA40A357393030E Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Rick and not-quite captive audience ?

I?ll answer your questions/comments in reverse order.  As far as I know there is no published/refereed statement of the putative effects of Mg-calcite on reef calcification, so it will have to be what I think about what I think it is.

I.  As I understand what I will call the Magnesium Salvation Theory (MST for a convenient shorthand), it goes something like this:
1. There is a lot of magnesian calcite in the (low-latitude) carbonate sediments of the world ocean.
2. High-Mg calcite is more soluble than aragonite.
3. As saturation state and pH of the surface ocean drop as a result of anthropogenic CO2 additions (or for any other reason), high-Mg calcite will dissolve before aragonite does, buffering the surface ocean carbonate saturation state.
4. Therefore concerns about the effects of lowered carbonate saturation state on calcification by corals and coralline algae are not warranted.

Points 1-2 are valid, point 3 is valid in principle but questionable in practice, and the extension to point 4 isn?t valid.  For the MST to work, two conditions would have to obtain:
a. The saturation state at which the high-Mg calcite buffers the surface water would have be high enough to avoid negative calcification effects, and
b. The equilibration (that is, dissolution kinetics) would have to be rapid on the 50-100 year time scale of anthropogenic CO2 additions.
Neither of these two conditions will be met.

Since Greek letters do not translate to text files, I use OM in place of Omega, the saturation index (where 1 = solid-solution equilibrium, larger numbers = supersaturation, and smaller numbers = undersaturation).  OMh= saturation state of high-Mg calcite, OMa= saturation state of aragonite. OMc= saturation state of calcite.

1.  Considering point a above:

Aragonite is more soluble than calcite and the ratio of their saturation states is well-known: to 2 significant figures, OMc/OMa is 1.5.  High-Mg calcite is a little less precisely definable because it is not a well defined molecule, but rather a range of solid solutions (0-30 mole % MgCO3 is stable, <8% has little or no effect on calcite solubility, 11% has approximately the same solubility as aragonite), we will be close enough to use the value of OMa/OMh = 1.3-1.5.

Essentially by definition, chemical dissolution does not occur at all above a value of OM = 1.  We can see that when high-Mg calcite would first start dissolving, OMa would be 1.3-1.5 or less.  If we consider the modeled results of Kleypas, J.A. et al., 1999. Geochemical consequences of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide on coral reefs. Science, 284(2 April 1999): 118-120 (figure 1C), we see that the most extreme and extended prediction is for an average tropical surface ocean OMa of >1.5 in the year 2100.  It is this prediction on which the predictions of calcification decline are based, and all of the projected calcification effects occur before there could be any large-scale dissolution of high-Mg calcite ? hence, no salvation by magnesium.

2. Relevant to both points a and b:

Equilibrium is defined as the net balance between forward and back reactions (in this case precipitation and dissolution).  Not only the fact that the surface oceans are strongly supersaturated with respect to calcite and aragonite, but also a great deal of experimental work testify to the extremely limited occurrence of inorganic (as opposed to biogenic) precipitation.  Reaction kinetics are strongly hindered and absolute rates are very slow, almost certainly due to the occlusion of mineral surfaces by organics and/or less soluble mineral phases.  Chemical symmetry raises the question of why we would expect the surface ocean saturation state to be controlled by mineral dissolution in the near future when it is not currently controlled by mineral precipitation

This is probably the point to insert the qualifying comment that organisms are constrained by environmental chemistry, but not absolutely controlled at the rates and/or equilibria of inorganic chemistry (that is, they may be able to get around some aspects of thermodynamics, but they are stuck with ultimate conservation of mass and energy).  The observations to date indicate that zooxanthellate corals and coralline algae exhibit high rates of calcification at OMa >4, and that most species show significant declines at levels that are still supersaturated but well above 1.

3. Relevant to point b:

Apart from the micro-scale inhibition of dissolution and precipitation at the carbonate surface, there are macro-scale advective issues that reduce potential reaction rates.  The large inventory of Mg-calcite in the world sediments is mostly buried.  Only the top few cm (in high energy environments) or mm (in low-energy environments) is in any kind of well-exchanged contact with the overlying water.  Below that, pore water residence times rise exponentially.  Interstitial pore water in reef systems is normally (or at least often) controlled at the saturation state of high-Mg calcite, with the help of biogenically mediated solution or precipitation, but the volumetric exchange of this water with the overlying water is extremely slow compared to both surface layer mixing and the physical and biological processes acting in the open water and at the air-sea interface to maintain the (super)saturation state there.  Empirical evidence for this is that the Holocene reef sediments (up to 8000 years in age) are neither flushed of high-Mg calcite by dissolution, nor totally locked up by diagenetic cement formation.  And, there is no reason to expect a major change in pore water residence times in the near future.

Another comment or two ? the one place in the ocean where you do see reasonably prompt responses of saturation equilibria is in the lysocline-carbonate compensation depth region.  This is far below the mixed layer, and is driven by organic/carbonate ratios in the sedimentary rainout ? all of which, in the pelagic world, have much higher specific surface areas and therefore reaction rates than the big, organic-rich lumps on a reef.  The reason that the surface ocean can maintain its saturation disequilibrium so well is that the mixed layer is rather strongly compartmentalized in terms of its dissolved constitutents (as opposed to particulates, which can fall through the pycnocline).  And, since the exchangeable carbon inventories of the mixed layer and the atmosphere are similar in size, and air-sea exchange keeps them nearly in equilibrium, surface ocean response to CO2 input to the atmosphere is prompt and substantial.

Recommended or suggested reading (sorry if this seems egocentric, but obviously it?s easiest for me to remember and judge relevance of what I?ve been involved in, so there are a thoroughly disproportionate number of Buddemeier things):
 

Morse, J. W. and Mackenzie, F. T., 1990.  Geochemistry of Sedimentary Carbonates.  Elsevier, Amsterdam, 707 pp.
Gattuso, J.P., Allemand, D. and Frankignoulle, M., 1999. Photosynthesis and calcification at cellular, organismal and community levels in coral reefs: A review on interactions and control by the carbonate chemistry. American Zoologist, 39(1): 160-183.
Kleypas, J.A. et al., 1999a. Geochemical consequences of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide on coral reefs. Science, 284(2 April 1999): 118-120.
Kleypas, J.A., Buddemeier, R.W. and Gattuso, J.-P., 2001. Defining 'coral reef' for the age of global change. International Journal of Earth Sciences, 90: 426-437.
Kleypas, J.A., McManus, J.W. and Menez, L.A.B., 1999b. Environmental limits to coral reef development: Where do we draw the line? American Zoologist, 39(1): 146-159.
Tribble, G.W., Sansone, F.J., Buddemeier, R.W. and Li, Y.-H., 1992. Hydraulic Exchange between a Coral Reef and Surface Seawater. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 104: 1280-1291.
Buddemeier, R.W. and Oberdorfer, J.A., 1986. Internal Hydrology and Geochemistry of Coral Reefs and Atoll Islands:  Key to Diagenetic Variations. In: J.H.S.a.B.H. Purser (Editor), Reef Diagenesis. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp. 91-111.
Buddemeier, R.W. and Oberdorfer, J.A., 1988. Hydrogeology and Hydrodynamics of Coral Reef Pore Waters. In: J.H. Choate et al. (Editor), Proceedings, 6th Int. Coral Reef Symp., Townsville, Australia, pp. 485-490.
Buddemeier, R.W., 1994. Symbiosis, calcification, and environmental Interactions. In: F. Doumenge (Editor), Past and Present Biomineralization Processes. Musée Océanographique, Monaco, pp. 119-137.
Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1996a. Global CO2 and evolution among the Scleractinia. In: D. Allemand and J.-P. Cuif (Editors), Biomineralization '93, 7th International Symposium on Biomineralization. Bulletin de l'Institut oceanographique, Monaco, pp. 33-38.
Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1996b. Saturation state and the evolution and biogeography of symbiotic calcification. In: D. Allemand and J.-P. Cuif (Editors), Biomineralization '93, 7th International Symposium on Biomineralization. Bulletin de l'Institute oceanographique, Monaco, Monaco, pp. 23-32.
 

II.  ABH ?

I think, and sincerely hope, that Daphne?s recent response will have clarified the issues.  Most of the so-called debate or criticism has consisted of other people redefining or misinterpreting our statements and then claiming that there is something wrong with the concept on the basis of their revision.

Related to your comments ? one of reasons for proposing the existence of an adaptively flexible multilateral symbiosis was precisely the points you make ? long taxon lifetimes in both corals and algae, in combination with an obligately variable preferred habitat and no particular evidence of high extinction rates.  The ecospecies concept preserves the benefits of very rapid adaptation (of the symbiotic combination) in the presence of the other features.

I thought it might be good to get the idea as close to a one-liner as possible ? a brief synopsis:

The question is:  Can the application of stress (any stress or combination, not just warm water) that results in a diminution of the pre-existing population of endosymbionts (a.k.a. bleaching) lead to a change (from either endogenous or exogenous sources) in the balance or nature of the symbiont types that results in an increase in the fitness of the host-symbiont complex (ecospecies) with respect to environmental stresses?
We hypothesized (on the basis of very real hard, if indirect evidence) that the answer is yes, and proposed some tests.  We consider both the indirect and the direct evidence emerging since then to support, but certainly not to 'prove' the hypothesis.

Bob Buddemeier
 
 
 
 
 

Richard Grigg wrote:

Dear Bob,

         Thank you for shedding some more light on your adaptive bleaching
hypothesis and as you point out, there is almost a complete absence of hard
evidence either for or against the argument.  In this regard, I don't have
to remind you, that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (of
coral's adaptive abilities).  Also, in this regard, I think we can infer
more from the fossil record than most of us seem now willing to accept even
though the adaptive responses have the benefit of thousand or even millions
of years.  BUT, over the millenia, there must have been some rapid bursts
of sudden change such as the K-T event itself.  Stephen J. Gould's view of
evolution by punctuated equilibrium is, in fact, based on such bursts of
change.  And yet, we don't see much extinction in corals at least at the
generic or Family level (Re: Veron's work).  Doesn't this imply high
adaptive ability?  Perhaps we need to revisit the fossil record more often
and pull in the views of John Pandolfi and Charley Veron (where are you
guys?).

         Also, while I am at it, let me ask you to shed some of your
exceptional knowledge and experience in marine geo-chemistry on the problem
of decreasing carbonate saturation state in the world's oceans as a result
of increasing co2 globally.  I think there is an equally broad pool of
misunderstanding about the degree to which existing carbonate sediments in
the world's oceans, can serve as a buffer to this effect???  I for one
would appreciate hearing your insights on this question.  Hope this
question does not pose to great a burden but I'm sure the coral reef
community will appreciate your views.

                                                                 Rick Grigg
                                                                 Dept. of
Oceanography
                                                                 University
of Hawaii

At 12:58 AM 9/18/01 -0500, buddrw wrote:
>Coral-listers;
>
>I have received, in addition to this broadcast message from Ove, other
>personal communications that indicate that there is a fairly broad pool of
>misunderstanding about what the Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis is and
>isn't.  The comments below address primarily things that it isn't, and I
>have sent messages to Ove and others on an individual basis to try to get
>this sorted out so that a productive discussion can ensue.
>
>In the meantime, I heartily recommend recourse to the original literature
>as a source of primary information -- I, Daphne Fautin, and John Ware will
>all be more than happy to answer questions or attempt to clear up
>confusion.
>
>Bob Buddemeier
>
>PS:  I stand by my original statements.
>
> >===== Original Message From <oveh at uq.edu.au> =====
> >Dear Bob and others,
> >
> >I was triggered to respond by the inferences in your statement that some
>"reef
> >ecology and conservation" types have trouble with the Adaptive Bleaching
> >Hypothesis.  Any practicing experimental scientist would have an issue with
>the
> >state of play regarding support for this hypothesis. The basic problem at
>this
> >point is nothing to do with "culture" - it is more to do with hard evidence,
> >which is almost completely lacking to support this still very soft and
> >hypothetical explanation for why coral bleach.  While experimental tests
> have
> >been coming in, they have had serious problems in terms of design and the
> >conclusions they draw. Us "reef ecology and conservation types" still wait
>for
> >the definitive data that shows corals will bleach, get rid of one
>dinoflagellate
> >genotype and adopt another WHILE the thermal (or other) stress is still
> being
> >applied to the coral-dinoflagellate association.  This has never been shown.
> >Showing diversity in rDNA is interesting but irrelevant if diversity here
>does
> >not relate to relevant physiological differences.  The recent paper by Baker
> >(whom I greatly respect), for example, used light and could not prove (using
> >RFLPs) that his corals had changed from one dinoflagellate genotype to
>another
> >(simply up-regulating one strain over another is not sufficient - that is
> >acclimation and is not surprising).  The experimental design was also
>confounded
> >by the fact that stressed corals were placed in the two contrasting and
> >confounding (for the experiment) habitats (one, the deeper site, was at the
> >extreme depth limit of the species concerned while the other was clearly
> more
> >optimal after photo acclimation). It is therefore not surprising that the
>corals
> >died more at deeper site - which has nothing to do with the fact that they
>did
> >not bleach!).
> >
> >Other issues abound and concern us "reef ecology and conservation types" -
>the
> >idea of range of expansion is limited (as outlined by several people so
> far)
>by
> >the fact that light may be a more important limiting than temperature.  I
>also
> >want to stress that the issue of the decline of reefs (as you, Bob, did
>state)
> >has nothing to do with the extinction of corals.  As the "geo types"
>(deliberate
> >use here) tell us worse things have happened to corals and they have bounced
> >back (but over thousands if not millions of years).  The issue, however, is
>the
> >current human dependency on coral reef ecosystems - reefs disappearing for
>even
> >a few decades would present serious issues for several hundred million
>people.
> >The idea of finding out how reefs survived major extinction events is
> >interesting but largely irrelevant to the current discussion.
> >
> >So - out I come on my old hobby horse - we still have no evidence of unusual
> >adaptive abilities of corals that will match the fast rate of change.  Us
>reef
> >ecology types keep looking. While looking for this evidence - perhaps we
> also
> >need to focus on how reefs will change and how we can "adapt" as human
>societies
> >to these changes.  This research direction, if the projections of the
> future
>are
> >correct, will assume a major significance as we enter the next few decades.
> >
> >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/CMS_pro/www/staff.html
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> >[mailto:owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Bob Buddemeier
> >Sent: Saturday, 8 September 2001 4:00 AM
> >To: Jim Hendee
> >Cc: Coral-List
> >Subject: Re: coral reefs doomed?
> >
> >
> >Jim, et al.,
> >
> >Good questions, good points, -- and like it or not, a pretty good if
>disturbing
> >article.
> >
> >On your question about range expansion to compensate for temperature
> increase
> >and inhospitably hot tropics -- there are unfortunately 3 geographic factors
> >that work against that.
> >1.  The available shallow water benthic area decreases rather significantly
>as
> >you move to higher latitudes (no atolls, narrower shelves, etc.)
> >2.  Light -- see the Kleypas et al analysis -- Kleypas, J.A., McManus, J.W.
>and
> >Menez, L.A.B., 1999. Environmental limits to coral reef development:
> Where do
>we
> >draw the line? American Zoologist, 39(1): 146-159.  Maximum reef depth
> shoals
> >dramatically at higher latitudes, even within the thermal mixed layer.  This
> >presumably reflects light limitations due to sunangle and day lenght
>variations
> >-- which aren't going to change.
> >3.  Carbonate saturation state decrease is squeezing from the high latitude
> >sides -- see the US National Assessment,
> >http://www.cop.noaa.gov/pubs/coastalclimate.PDF, section 4.4.
> >
> >So there is little basis for optimism there.
> >
> >With acknowledgment of the terminological problems, some form of
> >adaptation/acclimatization probably does have real potential to ensure the
> >survival of corals , but not necessarily "reefs as we know them."   The
> Ware
>et
> >al article and its precursor, Buddemeier, R.W. and Fautin, D.G., 1993. Coral
> >Bleaching as an Adaptive Mechanism: A Testable Hypothesis. BioScience, 43:
> >320-326, are looking more solid as experimental tests come in (Kinzie et al
>in
> >Biol. Bull. earlier this year, Baker in Nature more recently), but for some
> >reason this concept has been anathema to some reef cology and conservation
> >types.  (see also Buddemeier, R.W., Fautin, D.G. and Ware, J.R., 1997.
> >Acclimation, Adaptation, and Algal Symbiosis in Reef-Building Scleractinian
> >Corals. In: J.C. den Hartog (Editor), Proceedings of the 6th International
> >Conference on Coelenterate Biology (16-21 July 1995, Noordwijkerhout, The
> >Netherlands). National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, pp. 71-76 for a
> >related issue).  This may be because it is seen as diminishing the
>seriousness
> >of the bleaching problem, but in my view your position is the more valid --
> >without some mechanistic reason to believe that corals CAN survive, there is
> >very little justification for investing money in research and conservation.
> >
> >This also relates to my tired old hobby horse of the non-reef coral
> habitats
>--
> >I don't think we are getting the real picture, or doing ourselves any
> favors,
>by
> >exclusive concentration on reefs; corals have survived many periods of
> >non-reef-building, and we had better figure out how, why and where.
> >
> >Thanks for bringing this up.
> >
> >Bob Buddemeier
> >
> >
> >Jim Hendee wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Coral Colleagues,
> >>
> >> I know I'll get raked over the coals on this (especially because I don't
> >> have all the literature at my fingertips), but the content and tone of the
> >> news article below is troublesome to me, even though such a tone helps to
> >> gain attention, as well as funding, so that we can more thoroughly study
> >> the problem of coral bleacing and global warming.  Of course I respect our
> >> colleague's right to a viewpoint, but when I see this, I can't help but
> >> have these thoughts:
> >>
> >> Such a projection gives no "credit" to adapatation and natural selection,
> >> even though such adaptation would have to occur under a relatively short
> >> time span (50 years).  I believe Ware et al (1996), among others, have
> >> addressed this.
> >>
> >> As Dr. Al Strong and I have discussed, and as alluded to but unfortunately
> >> not expanded upon in the last sentence of the article, if the seas are
> >> warming, then you might expect the zoogeography of corals to expand
> >> (relocate?) into the cooler areas, as long as the substrate, circulation,
> >> light and water quality regimes are conducive.  (I would imagine some
> >> coral researchers have modeled these possibilities, and I apologize for
> >> not referencing your work.)
> >>
> >> Even though high sea temperatures are the primary cause and indicator of
> >> coral bleaching, that is not the only cause, and no credit is given to the
> >> evidence in the literature (e.g., Lesser 1996, among others) that high UV
> >> is also an agent in coral bleaching.  Higher UV, especially in the
> >> tropics, is part of the problem as it relates to the earth's ozone layer.
> >> There is evidence that high sea temperatures that elicited coral bleaching
> >> at some localities in the past did not elicit coral bleaching during
> >> extended cloudy periods (Mumby et al, in press). (Perhaps the cooler areas
> >> mentioned in the above paragraph might also have lower UV?)
> >>
> >> There are other causes of coral bleaching (e.g., see Glynn 1993, 1996) and
> >> this manifestation of stress is complex and to my mind public statements
> >> on coral bleaching should emphasize this.
> >>
> >> Would an annual update to the ITMEMS statement on coral bleaching
> >> (http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/bulls/ITMEMS-bleach.html) be helpful for the
> >> public in this regard?  It is my opinion that it would, that we should
> >> address the topics above (among others, e.g., coastal effects), and that
> >> it would behoove us to widely circulate the update among the press as a
> >> consensus opinion (if that is possible!).
> >>
> >> Just my two cents worth...
> >>
> >>         Cheers,
> >>
> >>         Jim Hendee
> >>         NOAA/AOML
> >>         Miami, FL
> >>
> >> Glynn, P. (1993). Coral reef bleaching: ecological perspectives. Coral
> >> Reefs 12, 1-17.
> >>
> >> Glynn, P. (1996). Coral reef bleaching: facts, hypotheses and
> >> implications. Global Change Biology 2, 495-509.
> >>
> >> Lesser, M.P. (1996).  Elevated temperatures and ultraviolet radiation
> >> cause oxidative stress and inhibit photosynthesis in symbiotic
> >> dinoflagellates.  Limnol Oceanogr. 41(2): 271-283.
> >>
> >> Mumby, P.J., Chisholm, J.R.M., Edwards, A.J., Andrefouet, S. & Jaubert, J.
> >> 2001. Cloudy weather may have saved Society Island reef corals during the
> >> 1998 ENSO event.  Mar Ecol Prog Ser (in press).
> >>
> >> Ware, J.R., Fautin, D.G., & Buddemeier, R.W. (1996). Patterns of coral
> >> bleaching: modeling the adaptive bleaching hypothesis. Ecological
> >> Modelling 84, 199-214.
> >>
> >> -------- Original Message --------
> >>
> >> World coral reefs to die by 2050, scientist warns
> >> By Ed Cropley, Reuters
> >> Thursday, September 06, 2001
> >>
> >> GLASGOW, Scotland ? The world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years
> >> because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them, a
> >> scientist warned Wednesday.
> >>
> >> "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that most coral in most areas will be
> >> lost," Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, told a
> >> science conference. "We are looking at a loss which is equivalent to the
> >> tropical rain forests."
> >>
> >> Only the coral reefs in nontropical regions such as Egypt stand any chance
> >> of lasting beyond 2050, Ormond said, but even the days of the stunning
> >> marine parks of the Red Sea are numbered as sea temperatures continue to
> >> creep up.
> >>
> >> In the past, reefs have suffered from sediment buildup and the
> coral-eating
> >> crown-of-thorns starfish, whose numbers have exploded due to the
> >> over-fishing of their predators.
> >>
> >> Now the main threat to the delicate structures that harbor some of
> nature's
> >> most stunning creations comes from warmer seas, which cause coral
>bleaching.
> >>
> >> Microscopic algae that support the coral polyps cannot live in the warmer
> >> water, and the polyps, the tiny creatures who actually create the reefs,
>die
> >> off within weeks.
> >>
> >> Scientists agree the world's oceans are now warming at a rate of between
>one
> >> and two degrees Celsius every 100 years due to the increased amounts of
> >> greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which trap the sun's rays.
> >>
> >> But even if humans stopped pumping out greenhouse gases such as carbon
> >> dioxide tomorrow in a bid to halt the process, it would still be too
> >> late to
> >> save the reefs, Ormond said. "I don't know what can be done, given that
> >> there's a 50-year time lag between trying to limit carbon dioxide levels
>and
> >> any effect on ocean temperature," he told the conference, held by the
> >> British Association for the Advancement of Science.
> >>
> >> The implications stretch far beyond the death of the colorful coral
> >> structures themselves. The weird and wonderful eels and fish which inhabit
> >> the nooks and crannies will become homeless, and many species will die
> out.
> >> "We are looking at a gradual running down of the whole system. Over time,
> >> the diversity of coral fish will die," Ormond said.
> >>
> >> Humankind will also suffer directly as the dead reefs are eroded and
> >> shorelines that have been protected for the last 10,000 years face the
>wrath
> >> of the oceans without their natural defenses.
> >>
> >> In an age of relatively cheap scuba-diving holidays, this also means many
> >> developing countries in the tropics, such as Kenya or those in the
> >> Caribbean, face losing a major source of revenue.
> >>
> >> The only cause for optimism was that new coral reefs could start to emerge
> >> in colder waters such as the north Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea.
> >>
> >> Copyright 2001 ? Reuters
> >>
> >> ~~~~~~~
> >> 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.
>
>Dr. Robert W. Buddemeier
>Senior Scientist, Geohydrology
>Kansas Geological Survey
>University of Kansas
>1930 Constant Avenue
>Lawrence, KS 66047
>USA
>ph (785) 864-2112; fax (785) 864-5317
>email: 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.

--
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
  --------------2FE0C695EAA40A357393030E-- ~~~~~~~ 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 coastwatch at acadia.net Wed Sep 26 22:10:47 2001 From: coastwatch at acadia.net (coastwatch at acadia.net) Date: 26 Sep 2001 19:10:47 -0700 Subject: Deep sea coral pictures from recent Georges Bank submersible dive Message-ID: <20010927021047.2286.cpmta@c014.sfo.cp.net> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/20010926/cb93b76e/attachment.pl From riskmj at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca Thu Sep 27 22:02:02 2001 From: riskmj at mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Mike Risk) Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 22:02:02 -0400 Subject: coral reefs doomed for sure. References: <3BADCB97@webmail.ku.edu> Message-ID: <01d701c147c1$cbcc2b20$3c8dfea9@MyHost> Bob, List-Some comments re the general discussion of changes in alkalinity, dooming of reefs, etc. Some of the following builds on previous postings on this list, and some amounts to a Discussion of the Kleypas et al 1999 Science paper. I was going to write a formal Reply to this, never got around to it... In general, my reservations about some of your positions are based on my belief that there has been insufficient consideration of two of the big Bio's in reef science: bioturbation and bioerosion. In addition, I have reservations about some of the chemical models/assumptions. 1. Bioerosion. The first quantitative work on the importance of bioerosion was published so long ago only me and Hendee were alive. Since then, there have been several large, exhaustive and exhausting studies of this signal process, and they have all come up with the same answer: on "normal" reefs, bioerosion and calcification are in approximate balance. On most fringing reefs, subject to increasing terrestrial nutrient input, therefore, the balance has already been shifted towards destructive processes. I will cite no references here. Knowledge of bioerosion should be an integral part of every reef scientist's knowledge base. In short, looking at corals is way less than half the picture: you should all know this. Unfortunately, this field seems to have fallen off the radar screen in the past few years: in the Amer. Zool. 1999 volume, for example, the word does not appear once. (Stop for a moment, and think of the gaping hole in our understanding that this reflects...) If it weren't for the French, there would be virtually no ongoing research on this process. (Salud, mes amis...et amies.) Any "reef monitoring" program that does not include assessment of bioerosion is a colossal waste of money-and I know of only one that does. Not only does this ignore most of the action-it excludes some prime bioindicators. Any "reef model" that does not include it...it's hard to be polite, here. These models would better be termed "Less-than-half-of-the-reef models." 2. Bioturbation. Again, an exhaustive literature-lagoon and shelf sediments are vertically mixed on a timescale measured in months. Any number of critters involved here, of which the front-runners (in the Cenozoic) would be the thalassinid shrimp. 3. Oceanic/Climate Models. Notwithstanding their protestations to the contrary, I have found modellers to be resistant to data that upset their models, with that resistance being directly proportional to the amount of federal money invested to date. "One major problem with the current generation of GCM's is that the treatment of ocean circulation is still very crude." (Ruddiman, 2001: Earth's Climate). The implications of Smith et al, 1997, are that a meltwater pulse can divert or shut down the Gulf Stream in less than 5 years. To all of you out there: when the oceanic part of GCM's can model this, then start believing them-not before. The strong compartmentalisation of the mixed layer to which Bob refers is metastable, and temporary. 4. The Magnesium Salvation Theory-sort of reads like a cure for constipation, doesn't it? Stick to science, Mike. While I concur with some of what Bob says here, re porosity of reefs and reef sediments, I am not wholly persuaded: -"...high magnesian calcites are dissolved preferentially in these sediments, although the sediment contains a mixture of (all types of carbonates). In deposits composed primarily of red algae, this early diagenetic reaction has resulted in dissolution of 75% of the carbonate." (Morse and Mackenzie, 1990: Geochem of sedimentary carbonates). -"The data indicate that all samples are very close to equilibrium with Mg-calcite....alkalinity shifts relative to sea water indicate that initial precipitation may be followed by gradual dissolution in response to CO2 added..." (Buddemeier and Oberdorfer, 1986). -etc etc. And finally, Bob Halley and his USGS colleagues have done some very nice experimental work, some of which was reported in Bali, showing that, indeed, HMC dissolves. As far as the large inventory of HMC being buried-I think Callianassa and its cohorts have a great deal to say about that. Ain't going to happen. The sediments that reefs will produce in future, moreover, will likely be lower in relative concentration of HMC. The main contributors of HMC are the calcareous algae-CCA. As we eat the grazing fishes, and the urchins die off, and fleshy algae bloom in eutrophied coastal waters-reef seds will likely be higher in organics and lower in HMC. Some other points, perhaps more peripheral: high pH's have been recorded inside coral heads-indeed, pH's at which silicates are very unstable (Risk and Muller, Middle Holocene, Limnol. Oceanogr.-give me a break, I have only unpacked the first of 20 boxes of books). This will triggger dissolution of reactive silicates-in fact, the pH inside corals probably shifts 3-4 full units, making possible all sorts of neat chemistry. Don't forget, the sediments being delivered to the world's coastlines now are very different from pre-agricultural times. Now, we see reactive silicates-andesitic ash from 5-year-old falls, delivered to the coastline by rivers, may be seen hydrating and dissolving under 10-odd cm of carbonate sediments, at several locales in Indoensia. This is not a millenial timescale. So, in short, Kleypas et al: 1. depends on reef models that ignore >50% of the process 2. depends on outmoded oceanic circulation models 3. ignores some fundamental chemical questions. Other than that-we have to admit that it was an important paper, because it has stimulated a great deal of discussion. From that standpoint, congratulations to the authors. (Most of my papers disappear as neatly and as quickly-and as deeply- as Olympic springboard divers.) My main concern with that paper is that it may have diverted intellectual and financial resources from more pressing problems. Sure, changes in saturation state will eventually affect....what? What will be left, in say 100 years? pH changes in the ocean, in my opinion, don't make the Top Twenty Reef Threats. The rate of present destruction from land-based sources and overfishing simply dwarfs everything else. But we have three predictions running, now: I say (something like) "reefs, as some of us knew them, will be gone from most coastlines by 2020." Rupert Ormond says 50 years. Kleypas et al say a century. I hope to God they are right-but I don't think so. In fact, the reason I felt able to make that dire duo-decadal forecast is: it's already come true. I hesitate to enter the discussion about ABH-not because of ignorance (that has not worked in the past), but because Ove's doing a pretty good job stirring this pot. It seems to me that there might be some help, again, in the fossil record. One would assume that corals would adapt to rising temperatures (perhaps better than falling ones?). I am afraid, however, that my knowledge of the record isn't good enough, nor are the temperature data. Sea-surface temperatures are believed to have gone well above 30 in the Mid-Cretaceous, and mid-Cretaceous "reefs" (piles of rudists, really) are very low in corals...but this is far from conclusive. Perhaps one could look more closely at rudists, which had zooxanthellae, same as does Tridacna...corals, of course, have had zoox since the Paleozoic (Risk et al, Early Holocene, same excuse). The other problem with the record is the paleotemperatures. Planktonic forams give excellent results, for the open ocean. We really need shelf data-but many reports in the literature of paleotemperatures from benthic shelf critters are just not dependable. The problem is, the six people in the world who really understand KIE don't publish enough, and those that don't, publish too much. So this remains an open, and intriguing, question. On another note: I have to apologise to the List for exposing some of my personal affairs. That was forgivable only given my state of mind at the time. Nonetheless, several people whom I had never met sent condolences and best wishes! So-thank you, and it will never happen again. She has gone from liquid food-IV drip, to liquid food-juices, to solid food-mushy stuff, to liquid food-gin and tonics. So recovery is well under way. Mike From buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu Fri Sep 28 12:55:34 2001 From: buddrw at kgs.ukans.edu (Bob Buddemeier) Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 11:55:34 -0500 Subject: coral reefs doomed for sure. References: <3BADCB97@webmail.ku.edu> <01d701c147c1$cbcc2b20$3c8dfea9@MyHost> Message-ID: <3BB4AB86.CE5C8BB8@kgs.ukans.edu> Mike, Thanks very much -- you raise good points for discussion, and I think this is an area where real (as opposed to definitional) debate can and should be developed. You obviously feel about bioturbation and bioerosion much as I do about pore-water dynamics -- and clearly the two have to meet up somewhere at the budgetary scale. So, let's see if we can get there. But first, to aid in the determining just what the topic/discussion thread is -- you addressed issues related to my point #3 (heavily) and #2 (somewhat). However, if my point #1 is not in contention, then this is probably a new start and not part of the "are reefs doomed" thread -- that point stated that due to the solubility products/saturation indices of the various carbonate minerals, in combination with the observed effects of reduced saturation state on coral-algal calcification and the projected/modelled saturation state changes, the question of whether or not high-Mg calcite buffered the surface ocean would be moot, because any such buffering would be at a saturation state below that which would produce the projected calcification effects over the next century. So -- do you buy off on that? Or does anyone else in the audience have doubts/comments on that? That's probably the first point to dispose of; if that's not an issue we can move on to the sediment biogeochemstry questions as a separate topic. Bob Buddemeier Mike Risk wrote: > Bob, List-Some comments re the general discussion of changes in alkalinity, > dooming of reefs, etc. > > Some of the following builds on previous postings on this list, and some > amounts to a Discussion of the Kleypas et al 1999 Science paper. I was going > to write a formal Reply to this, never got around to it... > > In general, my reservations about some of your positions are based on my > belief that there has been insufficient consideration of two of the big > Bio's in reef science: bioturbation and bioerosion. In addition, I have > reservations about some of the chemical models/assumptions. > > 1. Bioerosion. The first quantitative work on the importance of bioerosion > was published so long ago only me and Hendee were alive. Since then, there > have been several large, exhaustive and exhausting studies of this signal > process, and they have all come up with the same answer: on "normal" reefs, > bioerosion and calcification are in approximate balance. On most fringing > reefs, subject to increasing terrestrial nutrient input, therefore, the > balance has already been shifted towards destructive processes. I will cite > no references here. Knowledge of bioerosion should be an integral part of > every reef scientist's knowledge base. In short, looking at corals is way > less than half the picture: you should all know this. > > Unfortunately, this field seems to have fallen off the radar screen in the > past few years: in the Amer. Zool. 1999 volume, for example, the word does > not appear once. (Stop for a moment, and think of the gaping hole in our > understanding that this reflects...) If it weren't for the French, there > would be virtually no ongoing research on this process. (Salud, mes > amis...et amies.) Any "reef monitoring" program that does not include > assessment of bioerosion is a colossal waste of money-and I know of only one > that does. Not only does this ignore most of the action-it excludes some > prime bioindicators. > > Any "reef model" that does not include it...it's hard to be polite, here. > These models would better be termed "Less-than-half-of-the-reef models." > > 2. Bioturbation. Again, an exhaustive literature-lagoon and shelf sediments > are vertically mixed on a timescale measured in months. Any number of > critters involved here, of which the front-runners (in the Cenozoic) would > be the thalassinid shrimp. > > 3. Oceanic/Climate Models. Notwithstanding their protestations to the > contrary, I have found modellers to be resistant to data that upset their > models, with that resistance being directly proportional to the amount of > federal money invested to date. "One major problem with the current > generation of GCM's is that the treatment of ocean circulation is still very > crude." (Ruddiman, 2001: Earth's Climate). > > The implications of Smith et al, 1997, are that a meltwater pulse can divert > or shut down the Gulf Stream in less than 5 years. To all of you out there: > when the oceanic part of GCM's can model this, then start believing them-not > before. The strong compartmentalisation of the mixed layer to which Bob > refers is metastable, and temporary. > > 4. The Magnesium Salvation Theory-sort of reads like a cure for > constipation, doesn't it? Stick to science, Mike. > > While I concur with some of what Bob says here, re porosity of reefs and > reef sediments, I am not wholly persuaded: > -"...high magnesian calcites are dissolved preferentially in these > sediments, although the sediment contains a mixture of (all types of > carbonates). In deposits composed primarily of red algae, this early > diagenetic reaction has resulted in dissolution of 75% of the carbonate." > (Morse and Mackenzie, 1990: Geochem of sedimentary carbonates). > -"The data indicate that all samples are very close to equilibrium with > Mg-calcite....alkalinity shifts relative to sea water indicate that initial > precipitation may be followed by gradual dissolution in response to CO2 > added..." (Buddemeier and Oberdorfer, 1986). > -etc etc. And finally, Bob Halley and his USGS colleagues have done some > very nice experimental work, some of which was reported in Bali, showing > that, indeed, HMC dissolves. > > As far as the large inventory of HMC being buried-I think Callianassa and > its cohorts have a great deal to say about that. Ain't going to happen. The > sediments that reefs will produce in future, moreover, will likely be lower > in relative concentration of HMC. The main contributors of HMC are the > calcareous algae-CCA. As we eat the grazing fishes, and the urchins die off, > and fleshy algae bloom in eutrophied coastal waters-reef seds will likely be > higher in organics and lower in HMC. > > Some other points, perhaps more peripheral: high pH's have been recorded > inside coral heads-indeed, pH's at which silicates are very unstable (Risk > and Muller, Middle Holocene, Limnol. Oceanogr.-give me a break, I have only > unpacked the first of 20 boxes of books). This will triggger dissolution of > reactive silicates-in fact, the pH inside corals probably shifts 3-4 full > units, making possible all sorts of neat chemistry. Don't forget, the > sediments being delivered to the world's coastlines now are very different > from pre-agricultural times. Now, we see reactive silicates-andesitic ash > from 5-year-old falls, delivered to the coastline by rivers, may be seen > hydrating and dissolving under 10-odd cm of carbonate sediments, at several > locales in Indoensia. This is not a millenial timescale. > > So, in short, Kleypas et al: > 1. depends on reef models that ignore >50% of the process > 2. depends on outmoded oceanic circulation models > 3. ignores some fundamental chemical questions. > > Other than that-we have to admit that it was an important paper, because it > has stimulated a great deal of discussion. From that standpoint, > congratulations to the authors. (Most of my papers disappear as neatly and > as quickly-and as deeply- as Olympic springboard divers.) > > My main concern with that paper is that it may have diverted intellectual > and financial resources from more pressing problems. Sure, changes in > saturation state will eventually affect....what? What will be left, in say > 100 years? pH changes in the ocean, in my opinion, don't make the Top Twenty > Reef Threats. The rate of present destruction from land-based sources and > overfishing simply dwarfs everything else. > > But we have three predictions running, now: I say (something like) "reefs, > as some of us knew them, will be gone from most coastlines by 2020." Rupert > Ormond says 50 years. Kleypas et al say a century. I hope to God they are > right-but I don't think so. In fact, the reason I felt able to make that > dire duo-decadal forecast is: it's already come true. > > I hesitate to enter the discussion about ABH-not because of ignorance (that > has not worked in the past), but because Ove's doing a pretty good job > stirring this pot. It seems to me that there might be some help, again, in > the fossil record. One would assume that corals would adapt to rising > temperatures (perhaps better than falling ones?). I am afraid, however, that > my knowledge of the record isn't good enough, nor are the temperature data. > Sea-surface temperatures are believed to have gone well above 30 in the > Mid-Cretaceous, and mid-Cretaceous "reefs" (piles of rudists, really) are > very low in corals...but this is far from conclusive. Perhaps one could look > more closely at rudists, which had zooxanthellae, same as does > Tridacna...corals, of course, have had zoox since the Paleozoic (Risk et al, > Early Holocene, same excuse). > > The other problem with the record is the paleotemperatures. Planktonic > forams give excellent results, for the open ocean. We really need shelf > data-but many reports in the literature of paleotemperatures from benthic > shelf critters are just not dependable. The problem is, the six people in > the world who really understand KIE don't publish enough, and those that > don't, publish too much. So this remains an open, and intriguing, question. > > On another note: I have to apologise to the List for exposing some of my > personal affairs. That was forgivable only given my state of mind at the > time. Nonetheless, several people whom I had never met sent condolences and > best wishes! So-thank you, and it will never happen again. > > She has gone from > liquid food-IV drip, to > liquid food-juices, to > solid food-mushy stuff, to > liquid food-gin and tonics. So recovery is well under way. > > Mike > > ~~~~~~~ > 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 From qaschuyler at hotmail.com Sat Sep 29 12:40:01 2001 From: qaschuyler at hotmail.com (Qamar Schuyler) Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2001 12:40:01 Subject: For inclusion on the coral list Message-ID: <200109301317.NAA05989@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> ? Coral list members, Sender: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov I graduated in 1997 with an undergraduate degree in Aquatic Biology from St. Mary's College of Maryland. I then spent two years living on a research vessel in Southeast Asia and the Pacific, coordinating volunteer research on coral reef health and vitality. During that time I witnessed a number of different human-induced stresses on reefs, including cyanide fishing, blast fishing, deforestation and runoff, and overfishing. Although my background is in formal biological research, I have become equally as interested in the social and cultural aspects of resource management, including incorporating traditional knowlege into management decisions. I would like to work on marine conservation issues with local communities in southeast asia and the pacific. I am currently enrolled in a M.S. in Environmental Studies Program at the College of Charleston, but I am looking for graduate programs that combine courses in marine ecology and conservation (most specifically coral reef ecology) with courses and/or research in cultural issues, traditional knowledge, and how these subjects relate to marine conservation and management.? I was wondering if any of the institutions you are affiliated with might offer such a program, or if you know of another institution that would. Thank you so much for your time and consideration, Qamar Schuyler ~~~~~~~ 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 gigi101 at bellsouth.net Sat Sep 29 14:00:30 2001 From: gigi101 at bellsouth.net (Trish Hunt) Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2001 14:00:30 -0400 Subject: A Touching Video Message-ID: <200110011539.PAA09000@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> I know the Coral List isn?t an outlet for current events unrelated to the natural sciences, but I was deeply moved by the citizens of other nations that post to this list. The posts of condolences for those touched by the recent events on the USA, the world in fact, have motivated me to pass along this link for a very touching video. A very thoughtful and talented individual from somewhere on our earth has apparently worked very hard to put something together that voices the gratitude and deep appreciation that, not only I, but our country as a whole, is feeling towards the rest of the world right now. Despite the disagreements and politically correct debating that takes place on this list server, I have come to know the people that post here as thoughtful, considerate, and very helpful people from all over. I never in my imagination thought I would have long conversations with people from Fiji, India, Australia, and South America. With so many people reading these posts from all over the world every day, I could think of no better place to pass this link along since the video is directed mostly to those of other nations that have stood by our sides through this tragedy. Please take into consideration that citizens of other nations were lost in these tragedies also, and there hasn?t been much word of this. If the video offends anyone or someone feels I shouldn?t have put it here, I do apologize; but as I said, when you are wanting to get a word of thanks to people from all over the world, I could think of no where else to go. Rest assured, I am not the type of person that ?spams? people to death with forwards so please know that I won?t post anything else like this again. I was moved to say thank you in my own little way, to the people I may one day call colleagues. Thank you for your understanding. Sincerely, Patricia Hunt http://www.auburn.edu/~peckrob/wtc_tribute.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.