CoralTransplantation

From coraldigest
Revision as of 15:48, 13 April 2013 by JMatos (talk | contribs) (→‎Methods)
Jump to: navigation, search

Coral Transplantation

What is coral transplantation?

  • Definition

Coral transplantation can be defined as the physical relocation of coral from a site of inhospitable conditions to where the coral is more likely to thrive.

  • Benefits and Disadvantages [1] [2]

Methods

  • Required conditions [3]
  • Guidelines and Procedure [4]

caption

Related studies

  • British Virgin Islands[5]
    • Elkhorn coral is a threatened species in the British Virgin Islands. A study took coral fragments that had been broken off by storms and transplanted them to a restoration site, where the coral fragments were then replanted to barren ground.
    • It was found that the corals reattached themselves after approximately 3 months, and became large adult corals after 4 years.
    • The methods described above required little training and could be done by recreational divers who volunteer.
  • Maldive Islands [6]
    • Several species in the Maldive Islands were transplanted and observed to compare growth rates and mortality rates. Whole coral colonies were transplanted and cemented into place on a reef flat that had been degraded due to coral mining.
      • Acropora hyacinthus had the highest mortality rates (50% in two years)
      • Porites lobata had the lowest mortality rates (2.8% in two years)
      • Acropora divaricata had a high growth rate with relatively low mortality.
    • The results concluded that the species transplanted needs to be selected with care. The results were compared to other studies as well, and it was concluded that whether fragments or whole colonies are transplanted influences survival. There is a higher mortality rate at higher energy sites. The success rates proved that coral transplantation should only be conducted when natural recovery is highly unlikely.
  • St. John [7]
    • A study conducted off of St. John Island (U.S.V.I) used storm-produced fragments of elkhorn, staghorn and finger corals. The fragments were moved from inhospitable habitats to other reefs. Cable ties were used to secure the fragments to the sea bottom of dead coral.
    • Survival rates were found to be low for all species. One-third died from bleaching, disease, and predators, while the other two-thirds died from physical displacement. This proved that cable ties were not the most effective method for reef reconstruction.
  • Phillipines (4) [8]
    • Whole coral colonies were taken from degraded sites to undisturbed sites. Most of the corals were attached to bare rock surfaces with cement. Some sites attached the coral with green plastic screens that the transplants were tied to. The changes in diversity of the sites were then studied.
    • The sites that used the plastic screens had in increase in the number of taxa present, and then began to decrease. The sites that used cement showed a small but steady increase in the number of taxa present. The study discouraged the movement of whole coral colonies, except in extreme cases where the coral will not rehabilitate on its own.

Sources

  1. Abelson, Avigdor. "Artificial Reefs vs Coral Transplantation as Restoration Tools for Mitigating Coral Reef Deterioration: Benefits, Concerns, and Proposed Guidelines." Bulletin of Marine Science 78 (2006): 151-56. Print.
  2. Edwards, Alasdair J., and Susan Clark. "Coral Transplantation: A Useful Management Tool or Misguided Meddling?" Marine Pollution Bulletin 37.8-12 (1999): 474-87.Science Direct. Web.
  3. [1]
  4. Abelson, Avigdor. "Artificial Reefs vs Coral Transplantation as Restoration Tools for Mitigating Coral Reef Deterioration: Benefits, Concerns, and Proposed Guidelines." Bulletin of Marine Science 78 (2006): 151-56. Print.
  5. [2]
  6. [3]
  7. [4]
  8. Yap, Ht. "Local Changes in Community Diversity after Coral Transplantation." Marine Ecology Progress Series 374 (2009): 33-41. Web.
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.