Coral Conundrum

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
Photograph of Acropora pulchra by Albert Kok at nl.wikipedia, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.Photograph of Acropora pulchra by Albert Kok at nl.wikipedia, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.
 

I had the good fortune to meet Greta Aeby last April at her lab on Hawaii’s Coconut Island—that tiny gem in Kaneohe Bay that was filmed for the show open of Gilligan’s Island—now home to the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology. I was planning to write about Greta’s work on coral diseases for a new MoJo article. Then the Deepwater Horizon rearranged the known world and I never got to write that piece. 

Now I see that Greta is lead author of a new paper in PLoS ONE, assessing the causes of tumorlike diseases afflicting corals in the Indian and Pacific Oceans. Coral cover in those waters has declined  by about 1 percent per year for the last 20 years, increasing to 2 percent between 1997 and 2003.

So what’s doing that? This paper outlines the first broad-scale assessment of how nine “predictors of interest” correlate with tumorlike diseases. The predictors fall into three broad categories:

  • biological factors: population abundance of affected corals
  • human factors: human population
  • environmental factors: warming waters, surface ultra-violet radiation

 

Credit: Andy Collins, NOAA.Credit: Andy Collins, NOAA.

 

Statistical models were developed to examine the prevalence of two coral diseasesAcropora growth anomalies and Porites growth anomalies. These diseases manifest like tumors. They’re easy to identify in the field and not easily confused with anything else.

The team surveyed for growth anomaly diseases on 937 reefs from 13 regions across the Indo-Pacific between 2002 and 2008. They examined corals at the genus level. The results:

  • The Acropora growth anomaly was most associated with Acropora abundance—that is, the more Acropora corals, the more Acropora disease too
  • The Porites growth anomaly was associated with Porites abundance, but also with nearby human populations—that is, the more people, the more disease too

 

Survey sites. Image: PLoS ONE DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0016887Survey sites. Image: PLoS ONE DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0016887

 

Which basically means that the growth anomaly diseases are likely communicable, and the the Porites version is also likely related in some fashion to an environmental co-factor or two: pollution, eutrophication, habitat fragmentation, and/or direct introduction of novel pathogens into the ecosystems.

Is there a similar correlation for human health, I wonder?

Meantime, the heavily populated coasts suffering the most Porites growth anomalies are also home to many of the 500 million people most immediately dependent on coral reefs. The authors note:

As human densities and environmental degradation increase globally, the prevalence of coral diseases like [Porites growth anomalies] could increase accordingly, halted only perhaps by declines in host density below thresholds required for disease establishment.

 

 

Finally, for your enjoyment, an incredibly gorgeous video of captive corals. Though the porno soundtrack is a puzzler.

The paper:

  • Aeby GS, et al. 2011 Growth Anomalies on the Coral Genera Acropora and Porites Are Strongly Associated with Host Density and Human Population Size across the Indo-Pacific. PLoS ONE 6(2): e16887. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016887

Crossposted from Deep Blue Home.

 

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate