The rapid loss of reef-building corals owing to ocean warming is driving the development of interventions such as coral propagation and restoration, selective breeding and assisted gene flow. Many of these interventions target naturally heat-tolerant individuals to boost climate resilience, but the challenges of quickly and reliably quantifying heat tolerance and identifying thermotolerant individuals have hampered implementation. Here, we used coral bleaching automated stress systems to perform rapid, standardized heat tolerance assays on 229 colonies of Acropora cervicornis across six coral nurseries spanning Florida's Coral Reef, USA. Analysis of heat stress dose–response curves for each colony revealed a broad range in thermal tolerance among individuals (approx. 2.5°C range in F v /F m ED50), with highly reproducible rankings across independent tests ( r = 0.76). Most phenotypic variation occurred within nurseries rather than between them, pointing to a potentially dominant role of fixed genetic effects in setting thermal tolerance and widespread distribution of tolerant individuals throughout the population. The identification of tolerant individuals provides immediately actionable information to optimize nursery and restoration programmes for Florida's threatened staghorn corals. This work further provides a blueprint for future efforts to identify and source thermally tolerant corals for conservation interventions worldwide.

Coral restoration is rapidly becoming a mainstream strategic reef management response to address dramatic declines in coral cover worldwide. Restoration success can be defined as enhanced reef functions leading to improved ecosystem services, with multiple benefits at socio-ecological scales. However, there is often a mismatch between the objectives of coral restoration programs and the metrics used to assess their effectiveness. In particular, the scales of ecological benefits currently assessed are typically limited in both time and space, often being limited to short-term monitoring of the growth and survival of transplanted corals. In this paper, we explore reef-scale responses of coral assemblages to restoration practices applied in four well-established coral restoration programs. We found that hard coral cover and structural complexity were consistently greater at restored compared to unrestored (degraded) sites. However, patterns in coral diversity, coral recruitment, and coral health among restored, unrestored, and reference sites varied across locations, highlighting differences in methodologies among restoration programs. Altogether, differences in program objectives, methodologies, and the state of nearby coral communities were key drivers of variability in the responses of coral assemblages to restoration. The framework presented here provides guidance to improve qualitative and quantitative assessments of coral restoration efforts and can be applied to further understanding of the role of restoration within resilience-based reef management.

No abstract

Coral reef restoration is a rapidly growing movement galvanized by the accelerating degradation of the world's tropical coral reefs. The need for concerted and collaborative action focused on the recovery of coral reef ecosystems coalesced in the creation of the Coral Restoration Consortium (CRC) in 2017. In March 2020, the CRC leadership team met for a biennial review of international coral reef restoration efforts and a discussion of perceived knowledge and implementation bottlenecks that may impair scalability and efficacy. Herein we present six priorities wherein the CRC will foster scientific advancement and collaboration to: (1) increase restoration efficiency, focusing on scale and cost‐effectiveness of deployment; (2) scale up larval‐based coral restoration efforts, emphasizing recruit health, growth, and survival; (3) ensure restoration of threatened coral species proceeds within a population‐genetics management context; (4) support a holistic approach to coral reef ecosystem restoration; (5) develop and promote the use of standardized terms and metrics for coral reef restoration; and (6) support coral reef restoration practitioners working in diverse geographic locations. These priorities are not exhaustive nor do we imply that accomplishing these tasks alone will be sufficient to restore coral reefs globally; rather these are topics where we feel the CRC community of practice can make timely and significant contributions to facilitate the growth of coral reef restoration as a practical conservation strategy. The goal for these collective actions is to provide tangible, local‐scale advancements in reef condition that offset declines resulting from local and global stressors including climate change.

Significant population declines in Acropora cervicornis and A. palmata began in the 1970s and now exceed over 90%. The losses were caused by a combination of coral disease and bleaching, with possible contributions from other stressors, including pollution and predation. Reproduction in the wild by fragment regeneration and sexual recruitment is inadequate to offset population declines. Starting in 2007, the Coral Restoration Foundation™ evaluated the feasibility of outplanting A. cervicornis colonies to reefs in the Florida Keys to restore populations at sites where the species was previously abundant. Reported here are the results of 20 coral outplanting projects with each project defined as a cohort of colonies outplanted at the same time and location. Photogrammetric analysis and in situ monitoring (2007 to 2015) measured survivorship, growth, and condition of 2419 colonies. Survivorship was initially high but generally decreased after two years. Survivorship among projects based on colony counts ranged from 4% to 89% for seven cohorts monitored at least five years. Weibull survival models were used to estimate survivorship beyond the duration of the projects and ranged from approximately 0% to over 35% after five years and 0% to 10% after seven years. Growth rate averaged 10 cm/year during the first two years then plateaued in subsequent years. After four years, approximately one-third of surviving colonies were � 50 cm in maximum diameter. Projects used three to sixteen different genotypes and significant differences did not occur in survivorship, condition, or growth. Restoration times for three reefs were calculated based on NOAA Recovery Plan (NRP) metrics (colony abundance and size) and the findings from projects reported here. Results support NRP conclusions that reducing stressors is required before significant population growth and recovery will occur. Until then, outplanting protects against local extinction and helps to maintain genetic diversity in the wild.