Data

A comparison of in situ and on-vessel larval rearing for coral seeding

Australian Institute of Marine Science
Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS)
Viewed: [[ro.stat.viewed]] Cited: [[ro.stat.cited]] Accessed: [[ro.stat.accessed]]
ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Adc&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2FANDS&rft_id=https://apps.aims.gov.au/metadata/view/cfc60d0b-8c0c-4bfd-a8a9-b7e6e7ebad49&rft.title=A comparison of in situ and on-vessel larval rearing for coral seeding&rft.identifier=https://apps.aims.gov.au/metadata/view/cfc60d0b-8c0c-4bfd-a8a9-b7e6e7ebad49&rft.publisher=Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS)&rft.description=Coral sexual recruitment is critical to reef recovery yet often fails on degraded reefs. Coral seeding is one approach to artificially increase the densities of coral settlers on reefs and can be applied in many ways. A thorough comparison of seeding-method performance is needed to inform restoration decisions yet is difficult to undertake given the cost and complexities around employing multiple methods simultaneously. Here, we first designed a vessel-based coral-spawning aquaculture system. Then we undertook an experimental comparison of the performance of larvae reared in the on-vessel system with those reared in in situ rearing pools (SECORE coral rearing in situ basins [CRIBs]). We parameterized survival estimates and assessed post-deployment survival of spat generated using each method. We also quantified survival of spat reared in situ and deployed across six sites on an inshore reef system of the Great Barrier Reef. Larval survival was lower when rearing in situ than on the vessel (3.8 vs. 66.1%, respectively), but settlement behavior and post-settlement survival were comparable between rearing treatments, with yield averaging 66 and 72% after 3 months of deployment, from CRIBs and culture tanks, respectively. Spat survival was also comparable across treatments, averaging 5 ± 8%. On-vessel rearing was more costly but supported higher survival, increased portability, and enabled more control and manipulation of rearing conditions. By contrast, in situ methods were low-cost, deployable from shore, and low-maintenance. Armed with this information, managers and practitioners can determine the most appropriate method(s) for a given restoration project.The data within this record support the publication.Maintenance and Update Frequency: notPlanned&rft.creator=Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) &rft.date=2025&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.971467; southlimit=-23.201733; eastlimit=150.971467; northlimit=-23.201733&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.971467; southlimit=-23.201733; eastlimit=150.971467; northlimit=-23.201733&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.9077; southlimit=-23.08675; eastlimit=150.9077; northlimit=-23.08675&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.9077; southlimit=-23.08675; eastlimit=150.9077; northlimit=-23.08675&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.9353; southlimit=-23.190767; eastlimit=150.9353; northlimit=-23.190767&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.9353; southlimit=-23.190767; eastlimit=150.9353; northlimit=-23.190767&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.896417; southlimit=-23.085933; eastlimit=150.896417; northlimit=-23.085933&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.896417; southlimit=-23.085933; eastlimit=150.896417; northlimit=-23.085933&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.969883; southlimit=-23.2008; eastlimit=150.969883; northlimit=-23.2008&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.969883; southlimit=-23.2008; eastlimit=150.969883; northlimit=-23.2008&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.902583; southlimit=-23.09195; eastlimit=150.902583; northlimit=-23.09195&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.902583; southlimit=-23.09195; eastlimit=150.902583; northlimit=-23.09195&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.933733; southlimit=-23.188383; eastlimit=150.933733; northlimit=-23.188383&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.933733; southlimit=-23.188383; eastlimit=150.933733; northlimit=-23.188383&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.903167; southlimit=-23.08555; eastlimit=150.903167; northlimit=-23.08555&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.903167; southlimit=-23.08555; eastlimit=150.903167; northlimit=-23.08555&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.966167; southlimit=-23.2113; eastlimit=150.966167; northlimit=-23.2113&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.966167; southlimit=-23.2113; eastlimit=150.966167; northlimit=-23.2113&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.884633; southlimit=-23.0828; eastlimit=150.884633; northlimit=-23.0828&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.884633; southlimit=-23.0828; eastlimit=150.884633; northlimit=-23.0828&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.974083; southlimit=-23.18645; eastlimit=150.974083; northlimit=-23.18645&rft.coverage=westlimit=150.974083; southlimit=-23.18645; eastlimit=150.974083; northlimit=-23.18645&rft_rights=Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Australia License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/au/&rft_rights=Use Limitation: All AIMS data, products and services are provided as is and AIMS does not warrant their fitness for a particular purpose or non-infringement. While AIMS has made every reasonable effort to ensure high quality of the data, products and services, to the extent permitted by law the data, products and services are provided without any warranties of any kind, either expressed or implied, including without limitation any implied warranties of title, merchantability, and fitness for a particular purpose or non-infringement. AIMS make no representation or warranty that the data, products and services are accurate, complete, reliable or current. To the extent permitted by law, AIMS exclude all liability to any person arising directly or indirectly from the use of the data, products and services.&rft_rights=Attribution: Format for citation of metadata sourced from Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) in a list of reference is as follows: Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS). (2025). A comparison of in situ and on-vessel larval rearing for coral seeding. https://apps.aims.gov.au/metadata/view/cfc60d0b-8c0c-4bfd-a8a9-b7e6e7ebad49, accessed[date-of-access].&rft_subject=oceans&rft.type=dataset&rft.language=English Access the data
Cite Saved to MyRDA Save to MyRDA

Licence & Rights:

Other view details
Unknown

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Australia License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/au/

Use Limitation: All AIMS data, products and services are provided "as is" and AIMS does not warrant their fitness for a particular purpose or non-infringement. While AIMS has made every reasonable effort to ensure high quality of the data, products and services, to the extent permitted by law the data, products and services are provided without any warranties of any kind, either expressed or implied, including without limitation any implied warranties of title, merchantability, and fitness for a particular purpose or non-infringement. AIMS make no representation or warranty that the data, products and services are accurate, complete, reliable or current. To the extent permitted by law, AIMS exclude all liability to any person arising directly or indirectly from the use of the data, products and services.

Attribution: Format for citation of metadata sourced from Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) in a list of reference is as follows: "Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS). (2025). A comparison of in situ and on-vessel larval rearing for coral seeding. https://apps.aims.gov.au/metadata/view/cfc60d0b-8c0c-4bfd-a8a9-b7e6e7ebad49, accessed[date-of-access]".

Access:

Other

Full description

Coral sexual recruitment is critical to reef recovery yet often fails on degraded reefs. Coral seeding is one approach to artificially increase the densities of coral settlers on reefs and can be applied in many ways. A thorough comparison of seeding-method performance is needed to inform restoration decisions yet is difficult to undertake given the cost and complexities around employing multiple methods simultaneously. Here, we first designed a vessel-based coral-spawning aquaculture system. Then we undertook an experimental comparison of the performance of larvae reared in the on-vessel system with those reared in in situ rearing pools (SECORE coral rearing in situ basins [CRIBs]). We parameterized survival estimates and assessed post-deployment survival of spat generated using each method. We also quantified survival of spat reared in situ and deployed across six sites on an inshore reef system of the Great Barrier Reef. Larval survival was lower when rearing in situ than on the vessel (3.8 vs. 66.1%, respectively), but settlement behavior and post-settlement survival were comparable between rearing treatments, with yield averaging 66 and 72% after 3 months of deployment, from CRIBs and culture tanks, respectively. Spat survival was also comparable across treatments, averaging 5 ± 8%. On-vessel rearing was more costly but supported higher survival, increased portability, and enabled more control and manipulation of rearing conditions. By contrast, in situ methods were low-cost, deployable from shore, and low-maintenance. Armed with this information, managers and practitioners can determine the most appropriate method(s) for a given restoration project.


The data within this record support the publication.

Lineage

Maintenance and Update Frequency: notPlanned

Modified: 19 09 2025

This dataset is part of a larger collection

Click to explore relationships graph
Help

Related People

150.97147,-23.20173

150.971467,-23.201733

150.9077,-23.08675

150.9077,-23.08675

150.9353,-23.19077

150.9353,-23.190767

150.89642,-23.08593

150.896417,-23.085933

150.96988,-23.2008

150.969883,-23.2008

150.90258,-23.09195

150.902583,-23.09195

150.93373,-23.18838

150.933733,-23.188383

150.90317,-23.08555

150.903167,-23.08555

150.96617,-23.2113

150.966167,-23.2113

150.88463,-23.0828

150.884633,-23.0828

150.97408,-23.18645

150.974083,-23.18645

text: westlimit=150.971467; southlimit=-23.201733; eastlimit=150.971467; northlimit=-23.201733

text: westlimit=150.9077; southlimit=-23.08675; eastlimit=150.9077; northlimit=-23.08675

text: westlimit=150.9353; southlimit=-23.190767; eastlimit=150.9353; northlimit=-23.190767

text: westlimit=150.896417; southlimit=-23.085933; eastlimit=150.896417; northlimit=-23.085933

text: westlimit=150.969883; southlimit=-23.2008; eastlimit=150.969883; northlimit=-23.2008

text: westlimit=150.902583; southlimit=-23.09195; eastlimit=150.902583; northlimit=-23.09195

text: westlimit=150.933733; southlimit=-23.188383; eastlimit=150.933733; northlimit=-23.188383

text: westlimit=150.903167; southlimit=-23.08555; eastlimit=150.903167; northlimit=-23.08555

text: westlimit=150.966167; southlimit=-23.2113; eastlimit=150.966167; northlimit=-23.2113

text: westlimit=150.884633; southlimit=-23.0828; eastlimit=150.884633; northlimit=-23.0828

text: westlimit=150.974083; southlimit=-23.18645; eastlimit=150.974083; northlimit=-23.18645

Subjects
oceans |

User Contributed Tags    

Login to tag this record with meaningful keywords to make it easier to discover

Other Information
Raw data

uri : https://api.aims.gov.au/data-v2.0/cfc60d0b-8c0c-4bfd-a8a9-b7e6e7ebad49/files/Randall_etal_2025_raw data.xlsx

Randall, C.J., Chamberland, V.F., Giuliano, C., Page, C.A., Allen, K., Briggs, N., Cornish, R., Bickel, A. and Severati, A. (2025), A comparison of in situ and on-vessel larval rearing for coral seeding. Restor Ecol e70001. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.70001

doi : https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.70001

Identifiers
  • global : cfc60d0b-8c0c-4bfd-a8a9-b7e6e7ebad49