Coral reefs are highly endangered ecosystems. The identification and quantification of potential stress factors are essential to protect them. UV filters from sunscreens that are introduced to coral reef areas are considered as one of these stressors and their impact on corals needs to be further investigated. Even though UV filters are functionally similar, their structural features are very diverse. Their impact on limnic organisms have also been shown to be highly variable ranging from no or low to high toxicity. It is therefore to be expected that their effect on corals also differs significantly and that each compound has to be evaluated individually. The demand for conclusive benchmarks and guidelines from policy makers and the public over the past years shows the necessity for an objective literature review on the effects of various UV filters on scleractinian corals. Here, we review the present literature, summarize the data on the different UV filters and discuss the different approaches, advantages and limitations of the studies. However, the methods used in the latter studies vary greatly. They differ in many aspects such as species and life stage used, field and laboratory approaches, with exposure times ranging from hours to weeks. Some studies include analytics and measure the actual test concentration, others only provide nominal concentrations. The lack of standardized methods renders comparisons between studies futile. Additionally, most UV filters have only been investigated in a single or a few studies of different quality. Reliable thresholds are therefore impossible to draw on the basis of currently available studies. Nevertheless, certain UV filters repeatedly showed comparable toxicity in both freshwater and marine species tested. Yet, existing differences in results from coral tests emphasize the need for a standardized testing method comparable to those established for other aquatic organisms in order to allow for a more conclusive assessment. In this review, we describe what a scientifically sound testing proposal should include in order to obtain reliable and reproducible data, which ultimately should result in an internationally organized standardized ring test trial. Such standardized toxicity tests would enable validation of coral toxicity data related to UV filters, but also testing of other types of compounds that are known to be introduced and effect coral reefs, thus helping to identify significant stressors and enabling objective policy decisions.

Background Tropical coral reefs have been recognized for their significant ecological and economical value. However, increasing anthropogenic disturbances have led to progressively declining coral reef ecosystems on a global scale. More recently, several studies implicated UV filters used in sunscreen products to negatively affect corals and possibly contribute to regional trends in coral decline. Following a public debate, bans were implemented on several organic UV filters and sunscreen products in different locations including Hawaii, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Palau. This included banning the widely used oxybenzone and octinoxate, while promoting the use of inorganic filters such as zinc oxide even although their toxicity towards aquatic organisms had been documented previously. The bans of organic UV filters were based on preliminary scientific studies that showed several weaknesses as there is to this point no standardized testing scheme for scleractinian corals. Despite the lack of sound scientific proof, the latter controversial bans have already resulted in the emergence of a new sunscreen market for products claimed to be ‘reef safe’ (or similar). Thus, a market analysis of ‘reef safe’ sunscreen products was conducted to assess relevant environmental safety aspects of approved UV filters, especially for coral reefs. Further, a scientifically sound decision-making process in a regulatory context is proposed. Results Our market analysis revealed that about 80% of surveyed sunscreens contained inorganic UV filters and that there is a variety of unregulated claims being used in the marketing of ‘reef safe’ products with ‘reef friendly’ being the most frequently used term. Predominantly, four organic UV filters are used in ‘reef safe’ sunscreens in the absence of the banned filters oxybenzone and octinoxate. Analysis of safe threshold concentrations for marine water retrieved from existing REACH registration dossiers could currently also safeguard corals. Conclusion There is a substantial discrepancy of treatments of organic versus inorganic UV filters in politics as well as in the ‘reef safe’ sunscreen market, which to this point is not scientifically justified. Thus, a risk-based approach with equal consideration of organic and inorganic UV filters is recommended for future regulatory measures as well as a clear definition and regulation of the ‘reef safe’ terminology.

Sponges and other sessile invertebrates are lacking behavioural escape or defense mechanisms and rely therefore on morphological or chemical defenses. Studies from terrestrial systems and marine algae demonstrated facultative defenses like induction and activation to be common, suggesting that sessile marine organisms also evolved mechanisms to increase the efficiency of their chemical defense. However, inducible defenses in sponges have not been investigated so far and studies on activated defenses are rare. We investigated whether tropical sponge species induce defenses in response to artificial predation and whether wounding triggers defense activation. Additionally, we tested if these mechanisms are also used to boost antimicrobial activity to avoid bacterial infection. Laboratory experiments with eight pacific sponge species showed that 87% of the tested species were chemically defended. Two species, Stylissa massa and Melophlus sarasinorum, induced defenses in response to simulated predation, which is the first demonstration of induced antipredatory defenses in marine sponges. One species, M. sarasinorum, also showed activated defense in response to wounding. Interestingly, 50% of the tested sponge species demonstrated induced antimicrobial defense. Simulated predation increased the antimicrobial defenses in Aplysinella sp., Cacospongia sp., M. sarasinorum, and S. massa. Our results suggest that wounding selects for induced antimicrobial defenses to protect sponges from pathogens that could otherwise invade the sponge tissue via feeding scars.

Sexually produced larvae are used in various fields of coral research. Because the vast majority of scleractinians reproduces only on one or few occasions per year through simultaneous release of gametes, and because an ex situ spawning induction is still very hard to achieve, great efforts are required to obtain planula larvae. Brooding corals have been used to harvest planulae although their larvae often differ in various traits from most spawning corals, e.g., in settlement behavior. Other cnidarians, such as Aiptasia spp., have been substituting for scleractinians in many aspects of coral research. However, organisms such as Aiptasia differ strongly from scleractinians, thus limiting the transferability of obtained results. This study examines the potential of Leptastrea purpurea as a reliable source of larvae for coral research. Larval output as well as settlement behavior of planulae was investigated. Our results show that colonies of L. purpurea released a daily average of 3.7 (±0.2) larvae during a period of 65 days, thus allowing continual access to planula larvae. We collected a total of 58127 larvae from our broodstock of 243 colonies. Larval settlement is induced by the same and/or similar cues as in many spawning species which increases the transferability of conclusions. We discuss the utility of L. purpurea for research on scleractinian physiology, ecology and larval settlement and conclude that L. purpurea is a well-suited organism to accelerate progress in many fields of coral research.

Settlement of pelagic coral larvae is commonly induced by chemical cues that originate from biofilms and coralline algae. These natural settlement cues initiate signal pathways leading to attachment and metamorphosis of the coral larva. In order to investigate the settlement process and its natural inducers, it is necessary to gain a better understanding of these signal pathways. At present, the pathways and neurotransmitters involved in this signal transduction are still widely unknown. In this study, we exposed larvae of the brooding coral Leptastrea purpurea to five neuroactive compounds known to be present in cnidarians, and K+ Ions. All compounds were applied at different dilutions and settlement behavior of the larvae was documented over 48 h. Dopamine, glutamic acid and epinephrine significantly induced settlement in the coral larvae. The highest observed metamorphosis response was 54% in 10−5 M dopamine. Serotonin, L-DOPA and K+ ions did not have an influence on settlement behavior in our experiments. Exposing larvae to settlement-inducing neurotransmitters and thus bypassing the initial induction could be utilized in coral aquaculture. The active neurotransmitters should be used to further study the settlement process in L. purpurea in greater detail. Their role and relevance should also be assessed for other coral species as they may represent or reveal a universal inducer for coral settlement.