Coral Conundrum

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.
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.

 

I'm hopeful because of readers like you. Will you pitch in today?

We see the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled thanks to a $50,000 match. So when you make a donation, it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO

I'm hopeful because of readers like you. Will you pitch in today?

We see the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled thanks to a $50,000 match. So when you make a donation, it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO

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

INDEPENDENT. BECAUSE OF YOU.

Mother Jones has no billionaires calling the shots—just readers like you making fearless reporting possible

Donate