Earlier today, WUWT carried a story about a coral reef that was presumed dead in 2003, is now teeming with life. Jim Steele adds to this below. – Anthony
Guest essay by Jim Steele
Director emeritus Sierra Nevada Field Campus, San Francisco State University and author of Landscapes & Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism
In my essay, The Coral Bleaching Debate: Is Bleaching the Legacy of a Marvelous Adaptation Mechanism or A Prelude to Extirpation? I presented evidence from a synthesis of the most recent peer reviewed science that demonstrated coral reefs can be very resilient and the gloom and doom claim of climate alarmist Hoegh-Guldberg that “as much as 95% [of the world’s coral] may be in danger of being lost by mid-century.” is most likely biased fear mongering.
The literature review suggested coral should be very resilient to climate change because: 1) Coral had previoously adapted to warmer ocean waters than they now experience in the present and survived more frequent El Ninos over the past 6000 years. 2) Storms render the greatest mortality but coral quickly recover via “re-sheeting” also known as the Phoenix effect. 3) Coral adapt rapidly to climate change by shifting and shuffling their symbionts, acquiring new symbionts better adapted to the new conditions. 4) Much like trees and shrubs devastated by a fire, where new growth from protected buds can relatively quickly restore the forest; likewise coral can rebound from “cryptic polyps”.
While the Australian reported a balanced article comparing Hoegh-Guldberg’s gloom and doom to my more optimistic interpretations, the Australian Broadcasting Company’s Media Watch decided despite all the evidence for a more optimistic outlook, such an interpretation needed to be attacked. To protect Hoegh-Guldberg’s more catastrophic illusions, they dismissed my analyses, NOT with evidence, but via a “shoot the messenger” tactic. (Media Watch’s tactics were demolished here.) But now, as before, researchers are re-visiting what they thought were previously “dead reefs”, and they continue to find coral reefs are indeed highly resilient.
A recent NY Times article Coral Reef in Protected Area Shows New Signs of Life discusses the unpredicted rebound of Kiribati’s Phoenix Islands reef and Coral Castles.
“Everything looked just magnificent,” said Jan Witting, the expedition’s chief scientist and a researcher at Sea Education Association, based in Woods Hole, Mass.
“Last year, the whole place was holding its breath,” Dr. Witting said. This summer, it has sprung to life with plankton visible everywhere, he said, comparing it to a garden that is six times as productive as usual. “The whole ocean’s in bloom this year.”
Such reports are inspiring given researchers had declared Coral Castles dead in 2003. “On the floor of a remote island lagoon halfway between Hawaii and Fiji, the giant reef site had been devastated by unusually warm water. Its remains looked like a pile of drab dinner plates tossed into the sea. Research dives in 2009 and 2012 had shown little improvement in the coral colonies.”
But in 2015 it was “once again teeming with life.”
Researchers have been reporting similar recovery in reefs that were mistakenly thought to be dead or dying. At Northwest Australia’s Scott Reef, the upper 3 meters had lost 80 to 90% of its living coral and the disappearance of half of the coral genera. Yet researchers observed, “within 12 years coral cover, recruitment, generic diversity, and community structure were again similar to the pre-bleaching years.”
A similar long-term study in the Maldives observed a dramatic loss of coral during the 1998 El Nino but by 2013 the reefs also had returned to “pre-bleaching values”.
Similarly in a June 2016 article Great Barrier Reef: Survey off Townsville finds increase in coral despite recent bleaching they report on surveys of reefs near Townsville in the Great Barrier Reef’s central sector. Here NOAA estimated 33% of the reefs had suffered severe bleaching and only 10% of the reefs experienced no bleaching in 2015. This sector’s reefs had also suffered greatly from cyclone Yasi in 2011, yet “[s]cientists also found coral cover on seven of the reefs were at its highest levels since they were first surveyed 30 years ago.”
They concluded, “If reefs are not disturbed by anything then they do recover and we have seen that in the southern parts of the GBR [Great Barrier Reef].”
Indeed, in contrast to claims that global warming and ocean acidification are the biggest threat to coral, more optimistic evidence continues to mount. If undisturbed by destructive human practices, coral reefs are thriving despite climate change. Research published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B show that coral reefs surrounding remote islands were dramatically healthier than those in populated areas that were subject to a variety of human impacts. The lead author of that research was encouraged to state, “There are still coral reefs on this planet that are incredibly healthy and probably look the way they did 1,000 years ago.”
Concerned with the El Nino induced bleaching event, Dr. Smith more recently reported protected reefs on “Palmyra did bleach in 2015, revealing haunting white landscapes”. But when an expedition returned to assess mortality and recovery in May 2016 she reported, “We sent team of 8 scientists to Palmyra for 6 days to assess the recovery of Palmyra’s coral reefs to the current warm water impacts of El Nino. On the first dive, it was hard to remember where the bleaching had been. The corals were full of color.” Although she warns this doesn’t necessarily mean Palmyra’s reefs are immune from future warming, “we are excited to learn from Palmyra’s reef communities to understand how the rates and patterns of regrowth and recovery influence resilience.”
Such resilience is exactly what the adaptive bleaching hypothesis would predict.
Jim Steele is author of Landscapes & Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism
Jim Steele, WUWT – great.
Coral reef resistance is seen at Bikini Atoll. After the coral was vaporized at 50,000 degrees by nuclear bomb and three islands wiped off the face of the earth back in the early 1950s. The coral has grown back and is now in pristine condition and growing like a forest.
Jim. I’m in no way shape or form a biologist, but the whole coral reef thing seems to me to be terribly ad hoc and lacking in rigor. If the seas were to warm substantially, wouldn’t the coral reefs and their ecosystems expand poleward? And how about corals in the Red Sea? Don’t they do pretty well in often substantially elevated temperatures–34C? e.g. http://www.coral-reef-info.com/red-sea-coral-reefs.html And what does X% bleaching mean really? Does it mean that a large, randomly selected, area of reef surface was gridded and compared to recent photos and X% of the area was bleached? Or does it mean that someone looked around and made an estimate? Are there areas of coral that have been dead for centuries that are counted as bleached? etc, etc, etc.
“Dissolution of CaCO3 in equatorial Pacific sediments has intensified during the late Holocene, having now reached an intensity that is comparable to that which occurred during the onset of each of the late-Pleistocene periods of glaciation. Extrapolating from the robust relationship that has characterized at least the past 500 kyr, we conclude that the ocean’s carbonate chemistry has already made the transition that would lead into the next period of continental ice sheet growth.”
Modern CaCO3 preservation in equatorial Pacific sediments in the context of late-Pleistocene glacial cycles, R.F. Anderson, M.Q. Fleisher, Y. Lao and G. Winckler
Marine Chemistry xx (2007) xxx–xxx
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~winckler/Publications_files/Anderson_et_al_mar_chem_2007.pdf
In the words of Inigo Montoya, regarding the word “dead”: “you keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.”
inconceivable!
I still believe that there is more to ‘coral bleaching’ in the GBR than is being considered. If it was simply a temperature issue, I would expect the bleaching to align closely with isotherms. Instead the southern part of the GBR seems little affected, as does the northernmost (warmest!) end, and the most heavily affected areas are also (coincidentally?, I think not) bathed by the current that crosses the Coral Sea from the gap between Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands – a VERY active seismic area, especially along the South Solomon Trench. Anything being injected into the sea at this location (such as volcanic acids, heavy metals, etc.) would be carried by the currents directly to the GBR.
Life finds a way.
The Anthozoa were practically wiped out in the Permian-Triassic mass extinction event, aka “The Great Dying”, but the modern coral orders promptly evolved in the wake of this “Mother of All MEEs”, 252 million years ago.
And of course also survived the two previous (Ordovician-Silurian and Late Devonian) and two subsequent (Triassic-Jurassic and Cretaceous-Paleogene) MEEs during their at least 570 million-year history.
The Devonian extinction hit reef-building organisms hard, which at that time included corals. It’s also associated with the evolution of tetrapods, ie creatures like us, with four limbs, from our lobe-fin fish ancestors.
In the end-Cretaceous event, along with almost all the large vertebrates, on land, at sea and in the air (ie, all dinosaurs, plesiosaurs, mosasaurs, and pterosaurs, but not all crocodilians), most plankton and many tropical invertebrates, especially reef-dwellers, suddenly became extinct. Many land plants were also hammered hard.
There was a high mortality bleaching event on the southern end of the GBR in 2006. (The typically coolest part over its DJF-Summer range of about 3 C, and BTW unaffected by the mass high mortalities reported mostly more than 1500 Km nearer the equator in 2016). However, 3 years later there was this report (extracts) citing a prominent coral researcher Dr Berkelmans:
And:
Ove Hoegh-Guldberg gets a mention
Whoops,
The link: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/scientists-crying-wolf-over-coral/story-e6frg6xf-1225811910634
Just look at the geologic record. Coral has been around for 500 million years. One coral extinction was blamed on FALLING CO2 levels. That isn’t a joke.