Evaluation of the FORAM index in a case of conservation

Abstract

Localized and global impacts are responsible for driving the current decline in coral reef ecosystems. The worldwide debate over the efficacy of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) as a conservation measure for coral reefs highlights the importance of acquiring accurate indicators of reef resilience and recovery under stressful conditions. Marine benthic foraminifera, considered outstanding indicators for environmental changes, are unicellular eukaryotes that inhabit sandy sediments in coral reefs. There are three kinds of benthic foraminifera: symbiotic, opportunistic, and other small heterotrophic. Symbiosis with microalgae is not favorable under high nutrient conditions. This study compared the FORAM Index (FI) in different sites inside and outside MPAs. The index was also compared with coral and algae cover. High FI values are characteristic of healthy oligotrophic reefs whereas low values represent eutrophicated ecosystems. A community structure analysis was done in order to determine the compositional change of functional groups, and thus, to test spatially the index efficiency and performance. In general, MPA sites presented lower indexes compared to Non-MPA sites, probably due to the higher impact of tourism and agriculture in these areas. On the other hand, the index was not correlated with coral nor algae cover, even though positive and negative trends were found. Assemblage analyzes corroborated that the symbiotic foraminifers' high susceptibility is the main source for the index variation, which was independent of the substrate type from which it was sampled. Our results show both the efficiency of this index and the importance of its application for evaluating conservation strategies.

Evaluating Linked Social–Ecological Systems in Marine Protected Areas

“…) that lead to poorer water quality in areas inside the MPAs than outside (Velásquez et al . ). Algae‐dominated reefs have poor productivity and diversity, which translates into the loss of response diversity and functional redundancy vital for ecosystem recovery (Bellwood et al .…”

“…To determine water quality we used data from the FORAM index by Velazquez et al . (), where FI > 4 indicates an environment conducive to reef growth; 2 < FI < 4 represents the limit for coral growth and unsuitable for recovery; and FI < 2 indicates unfavorable conditions for coral growth (Hallock et al . ; Uthicke et al .…”

Assessing coral reef health in the North Ari Atoll (Maldives) using the FoRAM Index

“…Although the FI can vary with parameters such as distance from the coast (Narayan and Pandolfi, 2010), sediment texture, hydrodynamic regime and light penetration (Barbosa et al, 2009), several studies have demonstrated that the FI is primarily related to water quality (Uthicke and Nobes, 2008;Uthicke et al, 2010;Koukousioura et al, 2011;Velásquez et al, 2011;Reymond et al, 2012;Oliver et al, 2014).…”

“…Koukousioura et al (2011) documented the FI at sites in the Aegean Sea, reporting that the FI was 6.8-8.2 in pristine regions and 2.0-3.4 close to sewage outfalls. Velásquez et al (2011) enigmatically found that FIs in a Marine Protected Area (MPA) were lower than in the non-MPA areas sampled, but the difference was attributed to the intense tourism in protected areas. Emrich et al (2017), from work at Caye Caulker, Belize, reported a significant negative correlation between FI and fecal sterols, which they assessed as indicators of sewage pollution.…”

Growth strategies of an abundant reef-building coral in the southern Caribbean (Undaria tenuifolia)

“…As mentioned, U. tenuifolia face environmental stress factors such as high water temperatures or terrestrial run-offs from rivers such as Magdalena and Sinú (Restrepo et al, 2006;Velásquez et al, 2011). Previously, it has been considered that U. tenuifolia is a susceptible species to bleaching, exhibiting low or negligible recovery after a bleaching (---) P^ of Recruitment and Death.…”