Principles for coral reef restoration in the anthropocene

Hughes, Terry P.; Baird, Andrew H.; Morrison, Tiffany H.; Torda, Gergely

doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2023.04.008

Cited by 39 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 97 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…If the patterns observed in this study persist in response to continued removal events (even if only reducing macroalgal per cent cover by half), the trajectory of the reef community at Yunbenun has the potential to breach a theoretical biotic barrier to coral recovery, re-establishing the historical coral dominated state. Importantly, there was some natural recovery of coral cover observed in control plots (though not nearly the recovery observed in removal plots), which highlights the need for robust experimental design including longterm monitoring of intervention-free, control reef areas (Hughes et al, 2023). While the increases in coral cover achieved were rapid and significant, it remains unclear if these increases represent successfully 'restored' reef areas, since we did not explicitly set any restoration goal that would consistute 'success' of the method.…”

Section: Startmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…per hectare per removal event (Data S1). In comparison with other reef restoration projects, which have a median cost of $400,000 USD/ha (range $6000-$4,000,000/ha, inclusion of labour costs not known; Bayraktarov et al, 2019), the sea-weeding method is reasonably cost-effective, requires little training or skill to implement and upscale, and importantly, is not coral species-specific in providing benefits (Hughes et al, 2023). Because the cost of materials and particularly labour varies significantly worldwide (The World Bank, 2023b), and the starting condition of the reef will dictate the magnitude of efforts required, it is difficult to extrapolate costs for other reef regions.…”

Section: Startmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sea‐weeding: Manual removal of macroalgae facilitates rapid coral recovery

Smith,

Fulton,

McLeod

et al. 2023

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coral reef ecosystems globally are under threat, leading to declining coral cover and macroalgal proliferation. Manually removing macroalgae (i.e. ‘sea‐weeding’) may promote local‐scale coral recovery by reducing a biological barrier, though the impact of removal on community composition of benthic reef organisms has not been quantified. In this three‐year study (2018–2021), fleshy macroalgae (predominantly Sargassum spp.) were periodically removed from 25 m2 experimental plots on two inshore fringing reefs of Yunbenun (Magnetic Island) in the central Great Barrier Reef. By the end of the study, coral cover in removal plots (n = 12 plots) assessed through in‐field transects increased by at least 47% (2019 mean: 25.5%, 2021 mean: 37.4%), and macroalgal cover decreased by more than half. In contrast, in control plots (n = 12 plots), there was no change in macroalgal cover while coral cover remained stable (2019 mean: 16.4%, 2021 mean: 13.6%). Changes in benthic cover were supported by photoquadrat data, with Bayesian probability modelling indicating a 100% likelihood that coral cover more than doubled in removal plots over the study period, compared to only a 29% chance of increased coral cover in control plots. Synthesis and applications. Manual macroalgal removal can provide rapid benefits and enhance inshore coral reef recovery. Through involvement of community groups and citizen scientists, larger scale removal of macroalgae is a low‐tech, high‐impact, and achievable method for local reef management.

show abstract

Section: Startmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Startmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sea‐weeding: Manual removal of macroalgae facilitates rapid coral recovery

Smith,

Fulton,

McLeod

et al. 2023

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, facilitation of natural recovery is widely recognised as a key factor determining the success, or failure, of forest restoration initiatives (Clewell & McDonald, 2009;Higgs et al, 2018;Shono et al, 2007). Thus, careful consideration of the appropriate scales of the interventions, as well as their location, has been identified as crucial for effective restoration efforts on coral reefs (Hughes et al, 2023;Madin et al, 2023;Quigley et al, 2022;Vardi et al, 2021). Indeed, in many cases, a spatial-temporal mismatch exists between the stressors acting on coral reef ecosystems that reduce coral cover (e.g.…”

Section: Restoration Initiatives and Recovery Debtmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…marine heatwaves, crown of thorns starfish outbreaks, cyclones) and restoration actions (Bellwood et al, 2019). It is often not logistically or economically feasible to restore corals at large scales, although restoration could make a contribution at small scales, especially on high-value reefs (Hughes et al, 2023). In this endeavour, quantitative criteria may be important in determining the suitability of restoration interventions in different areas.…”

Section: Restoration Initiatives and Recovery Debtmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Coral reef restoration is increasingly viewed as a promising tool to enhance coral reef resilience (McLeod et al, 2022). However, coral restoration can be expensive (Hughes et al, 2023), with the median cost per hectare for coral gardening estimated to be over 60 times higher than intertidal mangrove restoration and over 90 times greater than for sea grasses (Bayraktarov et al, 2016). Interestingly, in the last 2 years since the last major coral mortality event, some regions of the Great Barrier Reef are showing signs of extensive, natural recovery of coral cover, driven primarily by Acropora spp.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Natural recovery of corals after severe disturbance

Morais,

Tebbett,

Morais

et al. 2023

Ecology Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystem recovery from human‐induced disturbances, whether through natural processes or restoration, is occurring worldwide. Yet, recovery dynamics, and their implications for broader ecosystem management, remain unclear. We explored recovery dynamics using coral reefs as a case study. We tracked the fate of 809 individual coral recruits that settled after a severe bleaching event at Lizard Island, Great Barrier Reef. Recruited Acropora corals, first detected in 2020, grew to coral cover levels that were equivalent to global average coral cover within just 2 years. Furthermore, we found that just 11.5 Acropora recruits per square meter were sufficient to reach this cover within 2 years. However, wave exposure, growth form and colony density had a marked effect on recovery rates. Our results underscore the importance of considering natural recovery in management and restoration and highlight how lessons learnt from reef recovery can inform our understanding of recovery dynamics in high‐diversity climate‐disturbed ecosystems.

show abstract

Decadal‐scale time series highlight the role of chronic disturbances in driving ecosystem collapse in the Anthropocene

Edmunds

2024

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biome degradation characterizes the Anthropocene Epoch, and modern ecology is deeply involved with describing the changes underway. Most research has focused on the role of acute disturbances in causing conspicuous changes in ecosystem structure, which leads to an underappreciation of the chronic effects causing large changes through the cumulative effects of small perturbations over decades. Coral reefs epitomize this trend, because the changes in community structure are profound, yet the data to quantify these effects are usually insufficient to evaluate the relative roles of different disturbance types. Here, four decades of surveys from two coral reefs (9 and 14 m depth) off St. John, US Virgin Islands, are used to quantify the associations of acute and chronic events with the changes in benthic community structure. These reefs profoundly changed over 36 years, with coral death altering species assemblages to depress abundances of the ecologically important coral Orbicella spp. and elevating the coverage of macroalgae and crustose coralline algae/turf/bare space (CTB). Linear mixed models revealed the prominent role of chronic variation in temperature in accounting for changes in coverage of corals, macroalgae, and CTB, with rising temperature associated with increases in coral cover on the deep reef, and declines on the shallow reef. Hurricanes were also associated with declines in coral cover on the shallow reef, and increases on the deep reef. Multivariate analyses revealed strong associations between community structure and temperature, but weaker associations with hurricanes, bleaching, and diseases. These results highlight the overwhelming importance of chronically increasing temperature in altering the benthic community structure of Caribbean reefs.

show abstract

Principles for coral reef restoration in the anthropocene

Cited by 39 publications

References 97 publications

Sea‐weeding: Manual removal of macroalgae facilitates rapid coral recovery

Sea‐weeding: Manual removal of macroalgae facilitates rapid coral recovery

Natural recovery of corals after severe disturbance

Decadal‐scale time series highlight the role of chronic disturbances in driving ecosystem collapse in the Anthropocene

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About