scholarly journals Coral size, health and structural complexity: effects on the ecology of a coral reef damselfish

2012 ◽  
Vol 456 ◽  
pp. 127-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
SHC Noonan ◽  
GP Jones ◽  
MS Pratchett
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 172226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Vercelloni ◽  
Sam Clifford ◽  
M. Julian Caley ◽  
Alan R. Pearse ◽  
Ross Brown ◽  
...  

Aesthetic value, or beauty, is important to the relationship between humans and natural environments and is, therefore, a fundamental socio-economic attribute of conservation alongside other ecosystem services. However, beauty is difficult to quantify and is not estimated well using traditional approaches to monitoring coral-reef aesthetics. To improve the estimation of ecosystem aesthetic values, we developed and implemented a novel framework used to quantify features of coral-reef aesthetics based on people's perceptions of beauty. Three observer groups with different experience to reef environments (Marine Scientist, Experienced Diver and Citizen) were virtually immersed in Australian's Great Barrier Reef (GBR) using 360° images. Perceptions of beauty and observations were used to assess the importance of eight potential attributes of reef-aesthetic value. Among these, heterogeneity, defined by structural complexity and colour diversity, was positively associated with coral-reef-aesthetic values. There were no group-level differences in the way the observer groups perceived reef aesthetics suggesting that past experiences with coral reefs do not necessarily influence the perception of beauty by the observer. The framework developed here provides a generic tool to help identify indicators of aesthetic value applicable to a wide variety of natural systems. The ability to estimate aesthetic values robustly adds an important dimension to the holistic conservation of the GBR, coral reefs worldwide and other natural ecosystems.


Coral Reefs ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 1007-1021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Price ◽  
Katleen Robert ◽  
Alexander Callaway ◽  
Claudio Lo lacono ◽  
Rob A. Hall ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. González-Rivero ◽  
A. R. Harborne ◽  
A. Herrera-Reveles ◽  
Y.-M. Bozec ◽  
A. Rogers ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. e38396 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernhard M. Riegl ◽  
Andrew W. Bruckner ◽  
Gwilym P. Rowlands ◽  
Sam J. Purkis ◽  
Philip Renaud
Keyword(s):  
Red Sea ◽  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. e17115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriana Vergés ◽  
Mathew A. Vanderklift ◽  
Christopher Doropoulos ◽  
Glenn A. Hyndes

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (9) ◽  
pp. 1000-1005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Rogers ◽  
Julia L. Blanchard ◽  
Peter J. Mumby

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabel Urbina-Barreto ◽  
Rémi Garnier ◽  
Simon Elise ◽  
Romain Pinel ◽  
Pascal Dumas ◽  
...  

The choice of ecological monitoring methods and descriptors determines the effectiveness of a program designed to assess the state of coral reef ecosystems. Here, we comparer the relative performance of the traditional Line Intercept Transect (LIT) method with three methods derived from underwater photogrammetry: LIT on orthomosaics, photoquadrats from orthomosaics, and surface analyses on orthomosaics. The data were acquired at Reunion Island on five outer reef slopes and two coral communities on underwater lava-flows. Coral cover was estimated in situ using the LIT method and with LITs and photoquadrats digitized on orthomosaic. Surface analyses were done on the same orthomosaics. Structural complexity of the surveyed sites was calculated from digital elevation models using three physical descriptors (fractal dimension, slope, surface complexity), and used to explore their possible influence in coral cover estimates. We also compared the methods in terms of scientific outputs, the human expertise and time required. Coral cover estimates obtained with in situ LITs were higher than those obtained with digitized LITs and photoquadrats. Surfaces analyses on orthomosaics yielded the lowest but most the precise cover estimates (i.e., lowest sample dispersion). Sites with the highest coral cover also had the highest structural complexity. Finally, when we added scientific outputs, and requirements for human expertise and time to our comparisons between methods, we found that surface analysis on the orthomosaics was the most efficient method. Photoquadrats were more time-consuming than both in situ and digitized LITs, even though they provided coral cover estimates similar to those of digitized LITs and yielded more than one descriptor. The LIT in situ method remains the least time-consuming and most effective for species-level taxonomic identifications but is the most limited method in terms of data outputs and representativeness of the ecosystem.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document