Benthic cover and fish density estimates for fringing reef monitoring sites in the Keppel Island group 2015 (NESP TWQ 2.1, JCU)

Brief description

This dataset consists of site and zone means of the percent cover of major benthic categories and the density of fish functional groups on fringing coral reefs of the Keppel Island group, as a result of monitoring surveys carried out in 2015. This data extract summarises the results of the October 2015 survey of reef communities in the Keppel Island group. The data is a component of a long-term monitoring project that assesses the effects of no-take marine reserve zoning on inshore reefs of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Spatial zoning for multiple-use is the cornerstone of management for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (GBRMP). Multiple-use zoning was first implemented widely in the GBRMP in the late 1980s and this original zoning plan was in place until 2004, when the marine park was completely rezoned under the Representative Areas Program (RAP). The overall proportion of the marine park area assigned into NTRs was increased from around 5% (~ 25% of the coral reefs) to 33.4%. The need to objectively assess the ecological consequences of zoning management has attracted an increasing amount of research effort in recent years. Critical knowledge gaps still remain however, and research is required to determine how and to what extent NTR networks may help to protect biodiversity, sustain stocks of fished species and increase ecosystem resilience. This monitoring project was established in 1999 and expanded in 2004, with the primary objective of providing a robust assessment of the ecological effects of multiple-use zoning on inshore coral reefs of the GBRMP. The project uses underwater visual census (UVC) to provide a spatially and temporally replicated assessment of fish and benthic communities and will include concurrent surveys of coral health within no-take (Green) and fished (Blue) zones on high-use inshore reefs. It is one of the few long-term monitoring projects specifically assessing the effects of zoning management within the GBRMP and the only one with a solid baseline data set that was established prior to the implementation of the 2004 zoning management plan. Methods: Underwater visual census (UVC) was used to survey reef fish and benthic communities on fringing coral reefs of the Keppel Island group during October 2015. Sites are evenly distributed between zones that have remained open to fishing (General Use and Conservation Park zones), NTRs that were closed to fishing in 1987, and NTRs that were established in 2004 (Marine National Park zones) (Figure 1). Within each site UVC surveys were conducted using 5 replicate transects (50m x 6m, 300m2 survey area). Transects were deployed on the reef slope between approximately 4 and 12 metres depth. Using SCUBA, two observers recorded approximately 190 species of fish from 15 Families (Acanthuridae, Balistidae, Chaetodontidae, Haemulidae, Labridae, Lethrinidae, Lutjanidae, Mullidae, Nemipteridae, Pomacanthidae, Pomacentridae, Scaridae, Serranidae, Siganidae and Zanclidae). A third diver (observer 3) swam directly behind observers one and two, deploying the transect tapes. This UVC technique reduces diver avoidance or attraction behaviour of the surveyed fish species. To increase accuracy of the fish counts, the species list was divided between the two fish observers. Observer one surveyed the fish families Haemulidae, Lethrinidae, Lutjanidae, Mullidae, Nemipteridae, Serranidae and the larger species of Labridae targeted by fishers. Observer two surveyed the families Acanthuridae, Balistidae, Chaetodontidae, Pomacanthidae, Pomacentridae, Scaridae, Siganidae, Zanclidae and small ‘non-targeted’ species of Labridae. Pomacentrids and small labrids were recorded by observer two during return transect swims within a 2m band (1m either side of the tape, 100m2 survey area). Broad-scale structural complexity of the reef habitat was estimated by observer one using a simple method that applied a rank (1-5) to both the angle of the reef slope and the rugosity for each ten-metre section of each transect. Observer three utilised a line intercept survey method to record a benthic point sample every metre along each transect tape (50 samples per transect).Benthos sampled in the benthic survey was live and dead hard coral within morphological categories (branching, plate, solitary, tabular, massive, foliose, encrusting) live soft coral, sponges, clams (Tridacna spp.), other invertebrates (such as ascidians and anemones), macro-algae, coral reef pavement, rock, rubble and sand. Format: The data are contained within three worksheets of an Excel file. All benthic data is in % cover, and fish data are in density (individuals per 1000m2). Sheet 1: Benthic and fish data averaged for each reef slope site Sheet 2: Benthic and fish data averaged for each reef flat site Sheet 3: Monitoring site coordinates References: 1. Lamb J.B., Wenger A.S., Devlin M.J., Ceccarelli D.M., Williamson D.H., Willis B.L. (in press). Reserves as tools for alleviating impacts of marine disease. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0210 2. Wen C.K.C., Bonin M.C., Harrison H.B., Williamson D.H., Jones G.P. (in press). Dietary shift in juvenile coral trout (Plectropomus maculatus) following coral reef degradation from a flood plume disturbance. Coral Reefs 3. Bonin M. C., Harrison H. B., Williamson D. H., Frisch A. J., Saenz-Agudelo P., Berumen M. L., Jones G.P. (2016). The role of marine reserves in the replenishment of a locally impacted population of anemonefish on the Great Barrier Reef. Molecular Ecology 25: 487–499. 4. Emslie M.J., Logan M., Williamson D.H., Ayling A., MacNeil M.A., Ceccarelli D.M., Cheal A.J., Evans R.D., Johns K.A., Jonker M.J., Miller I.R., Osborne K., Russ G.R., Sweatman H.P.A. (2015). Expectations and outcomes of reserve network performance following re-zoning of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Current Biology 25: 983–992. 5. Hopf J.K., Williamson D.H., Jones G.P., Connolly S.R. (2015). Fishery consequences of marine reserves: short-term pain for longer-term gain. Ecological Applications 6. Lamb J.B., Williamson D.H., Russ G.R., Willis B.L. (2015). Protected areas mitigate diseases of reef-building corals by reducing damage from fishing. Ecology, 96(9): 2555–2567. 7. Wenger A.S., Williamson D.H., da Silva E.T., Ceccarelli D.M., Browne N., Petus C., Devlin M.J. (2015). The limitations of no-take marine reserves in protecting coral reefs from reduced water quality. Conservation Biology 30(1): 142 – 53. 8. Williamson D.H., Ceccarelli D.M., Evans R.D., Hill J.K., Russ G.R (2014). Derelict fishing line provides a useful proxy for estimating levels of non-compliance with no-take marine reserves. PLoS ONE 9(12): e114395. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0114395 9. Williamson D.H., Ceccarelli D.M., Evans, R.D., Jones, G.P., Russ, G.R. (2014). Habitat dynamics, marine reserve status, and the decline and recovery of coral reef fish communities. Ecology & Evolution 4: 337-354. 10. Wen C.K., Almany G.R., Williamson D.H., Pratchett M.S., Mannering T.D., Evans R.D., Leis J.M., Srinivasan M., Jones G.P. (2013). Recruitment hotspots boost the effectiveness of no-take marine reserves. Biological Conservation 166: 124-131. 11. Wen C.K., Almany G.R., Williamson D.H., Pratchett M.S., Jones G.P. (2012). Evaluating the effects of marine reserves on diet, prey availability and prey selection by juvenile predatory fishes. Marine Ecology Progress Series 469: 133-144. 12. Harrison H.B., Williamson D.H., Evans R.D., Almany G.R., Thorrold S.R., Russ G.R., Feldheim K.A., van Herwerden L., Planes S., Srinivasan M., Berumen M.L., Jones G.P. (2012). Larval Export From Marine Reserves and the Recruitment Benefit for Fish and Fisheries. Current Biology 22: 1023-1028. 13. McCook L.J., Ayling A.M., Cappo M., Choat J.H., Evans R.D., De Freitas D.M., Heupel M., Hughes T.P., Jones G.P., Mapstone B., Marsh H., Mills M., Molloy F., Pitcher C.R., Pressey R.L., Russ G.R., Sutton S., Sweatman H., Tobin R., Wachenfeld D.R., Williamson D.H. (2010). Adaptive management of the Great Barrier Reef: A globally significant demonstration of the benefits of networks of marine reserves. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS) 107: 18278-18285. 14. Diaz-Pulido G., McCook L.J., Dove S., Berkelmans R., Roff G., Kline D.I., Weeks S., Evans R., Williamson D.H., Hoegh-Guldberg O. (2009). Doom and Boom on a Resilient Reef: Climate Change, Algal Overgrowth and Coral Recovery. PLoS ONE 4: e5239. 15. Russ G.R., Cheal A.J., Dolman A.M., Emslie M.J., Evans R.D., Miller I., Sweatman H., Williamson D.H. (2008). Rapid increase in fish numbers follows creation of world's largest marine reserve network. Current Biology 18: 514-515. 16. Williamson D.H., Evans R.D., Russ G.R. (2006). Monitoring the ecological effects of management zoning: Initial surveys of reef fish and benthic communities on reefs in the Townsville and Cairns regions of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Report to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) 67pp. Data Location: This dataset is saved in the eAtlas enduring data repository at: data\custodian\2015-2016-NESP-TWQ-1\2.1_Inshore-reef-refuges