DOCSLIB.ORG

Open Vanstone Gavin Poritesgradient.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Open Vanstone Gavin Poritesgradient.Pdf THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHREYER HONORS COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY THE EFFECT OF A NUTRIENT GRADIENT ON THE PORITES-LITHOPHAGA SYSTEM IN THE PHOENIX ISLANDS GAVIN VANSTONE SPRING 2017 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a baccalaureate degree in Biology with honors in Biology Reviewed and approved* by the following: Iliana Baums Associate Professor of Biology Thesis Supervisor Benoît Dayrat Associate Professor of Biology Honors Adviser * Signatures are on file in the Schreyer Honors College. i ABSTRACT Excess nutrients on coral reefs can lead to increased bioerosion by boring animals, such as mollusks and sponges. Bioerosion leads to weaker coral skeletons that are susceptible to fragmentation by both abiotic and biotic factors. The Phoenix Islands are an isolated archipelago found in the central Pacific Ocean in which the northern islands, Kanton and Enderbury, lie in the path of the Equatorial Undercurrent (EUC) creating periods of upwelling around the islands. This creates a nutrient gradient across the northern group and the southern group of islands. Two morphologically similar reef building corals, Porites evermanni and Porites lobata, were differentially susceptible to bioerosion by Lithophaga mussels, which can increase asexual reproduction rates by fragmentation. Nine of the ten islands studied here exhibited mainly sexual reproduction. Our results suggest a different trophic interaction in the Phoenix Islands than seen in the Eastern Tropical Pacific, where fragmentation by triggerfish leads to increased asexual reproduction. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................... iii INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1 MATERIALS AND METHODS ................................................................................. 4 Study Sites ........................................................................................................................ 4 Sampling Method ............................................................................................................. 4 Genotyping ....................................................................................................................... 5 Analysis of Multi-Locus Genotypes (MLGs) .................................................................. 6 Mussel Count Data ........................................................................................................... 7 Population Structure Analysis .......................................................................................... 8 RESULTS .................................................................................................................... 9 Species Identification ....................................................................................................... 9 Mussel Count Data ........................................................................................................... 9 Multi-Locus Genotype Data ............................................................................................. 10 Population Structure Data ................................................................................................ 11 DISCUSSION .............................................................................................................. 12 Appendix A Tables ..................................................................................................... 15 Appendix B Figures .................................................................................................... 21 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................ 26 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I would like to thank Dr. Iliana Baums for all her help and support through this entire project. I would not be the scientist I am today without her guidance. I would also like to thank Dr. Benoît Dayrat and Dr. Michael Axtell for acting as my honors advisors over the past two years. They provided valuable help throughout the entire process. Secondly, I would like to thank the rest of the members of Baums Lab. Meghann was an absolutely amazing resource and I would not have gotten this project done without her help. Andie was the perfect person to turn to whenever I had questions or needed direction. Thanks also to Sam and Sheila, who provided help when I had nowhere else to turn. Thanks also to Caitlyn Kupp who was responsible for helping calculate and assemble the mussel boring data. I also want to thank my family and friends who helped me get through the entire project. This project was possible because of Randi Rotjan and her leadership over the PIPA 2012 Research Expedition. Thank you to Jenny Boulay and Hanny Rivera for helping collect these samples on the expedition. Without funding from Penn State’s Eberly College of Science, this project would not have been possible. 1 INTRODUCTION Coral reefs are delicate ecosystems that thrive in nutrient poor tropical and subtropical environments. Even though corals are adapted to thrive under low nutrient concentrations, collectively they create the three-dimensional structure that provides for one of the most productive ecosystems in the world and can support a wide array of marine organisms (Hallock and Schlager, 1986). Unfortunately, small changes in nutrient availability can swing the equilibrium out of favor of corals into favor of other organisms. While there is evidence that increased nutrients could be beneficial to coral under certain conditions, increased nutrient concentrations often favor macroalgae and filter feeders (D’Angelo and Wiedenmann, 2014). Increased populations of filter feeders are especially threatening to coral reefs because it can lead to increased rates of bioerosion on the reef. Bioerosion occurs when the filter feeders, such as mussels, bore into the coral skeleton (Szmant-Froelich, 1983). Some amount of bioerosion is natural as it allows for another form of asexual reproduction called fragmentation. However, large populations of filter feeders can jeopardize the integrity of the reef by weakening the reef building corals, also known as hermatypic corals. Porites is one of the most common species of hermatypic corals throughout the Eastern and Central Tropical Pacific. The Phoenix Islands have two common Porites corals, P. lobata and P. evermanni. Both species are morphologically similar, but are genetically different (Boulay et al. 2013). Scott and Risk (1988) showed that P. lobata is among the weakest hermatypic corals and its skeleton is often heavily bored by Lithophaga mussels. In the Eastern Tropical Pacific (ETP), P. evermanni is also bored by Lithophaga mussels (Boulay et al. 2013). Boring by the mussels weakens the Porites already relatively weak skeleton. Reefs with 2 increased nutrient availability, either through natural or anthropogenic causes, have higher rates of bioerosion (D’Angelo and Wiedenmann, 2014). Lithophaga are preyed upon by triggerfish that fragments the coral when it consumes the bored mussel. This is a naturally occurring process and Porites fragments have a 30-50% chance of survival when fragmented from the parent colony (Guzmán and Cortés, 1989). However, excessive fragmentation can be detrimental to the long-term health of the reef due to a decrease in genetic diversity. Decreased diversity of foundation species can make reefs less resilient to changes in the environment, making them more susceptible to disease and disturbance (Reusch et al. 2005). The Phoenix Islands is an archipelago found in the south central Pacific Ocean. It consists of eight islands and two submerged reefs. The islands are spread over an area that covers more than 100,000 square kilometers of open ocean, meaning there is varying oceanic conditions at each island. The islands also create the Phoenix Island Protected Area (PIPA), which is the largest protected marine area in the world and has helped to limit the amount of local anthropogenic disturbances. Even though there are few local anthropogenic disturbances, the reefs in the Phoenix Islands still must deal with natural fluctuations in the environment. The Phoenix Islands lie at a similar latitude to Jarvis Island, which experiences large amounts of upwelling caused by the Equatorial Undercurrent (EUC) (Gove et al. 2006). This cold, nutrient rich and eastward flowing current creates a north to south nutrient gradient in the Phoenix Islands, where there are higher levels of nutrients in the northern Phoenix Islands compared to the southern Phoenix Islands. Due to natural upwelling events, we would predict a higher degree of Lithophaga boring and thus higher rates of asexual reproduction in the nutrient rich northern Phoenix Islands as compared to the southern Phoenix Islands. Based on previous work in the Eastern Tropical 3 Pacific (ETP), we would also predict that P. evermanni will experience higher rates of mussel boring and therefore higher rates of asexual reproduction as compared to P. lobata (Boulay et al. 2013). 4 MATERIALS AND METHODS Study Sites This study analyzed 193 samples collected in 2012 from the Phoenix Islands. There were 121 samples of P. lobata and 72 samples of P. evermanni. The Phoenix Islands are an archipelago found in the central Pacific Ocean containing eight islands and two submerged reefs. Five of the eight islands within the Phoenix Islands archipelago
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Shyama Pagad Programme Officer, IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group
    Final Report for the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Agricultural Development Compile and Review Invasive Alien Species Information Shyama Pagad Programme Officer, IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group 1 Table of Contents Glossary and Definitions ................................................................................................................. 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 4 SECTION 1 ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Alien and Invasive Species in Kiribati .............................................................................................. 7 Key Information Sources ................................................................................................................. 7 Results of information review ......................................................................................................... 8 SECTION 2 ..................................................................................................................................... 10 Pathways of introduction and spread of invasive alien species ................................................... 10 SECTION 3 ..................................................................................................................................... 12 Kiribati and its biodiversity ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Synopsis of Oral History Interviews at Rawaki Village And
    Preliminary Synopsis of Oral History Interviews at Rawaki Village and Nikumaroro Village Solomon Islands by The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery (TIGHAR) November 26, 2011 Nikumaroro Village Preliminary Synopsis of Oral History Interviews, Solomon Islands 2011 From August 20-30, 2011, John Clauss, Nancy Farrell, Karl Kern, Baoro Laxton Koraua and Gary F. Quigg, of The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery (TIGHAR) conducted a research expedition in the Solomon Islands consisting of oral history interviews with former residents of Nikumaroro Island (Kiribati) as well as a thorough examination of relevant archival materials in the Solomon Islands National Archives. This preliminary synopsis provides an initial overview of the research conducted by TIGHAR as a part of further testing the Earhart Project’s Nikumaroro Hypothesis. A more detailed report will follow, when the audio and video recordings have been completely transcribed and analyzed. Procedures Upon arrival in Honiara (Guadalcanal), Clauss, Farrell, Kern and Quigg were met by Koraua at the airport. Mr. Koraua is a resident of Honiara and the son of Paul Laxton. Mr. Laxton, who served as Assistant Lands Commissioner for the Gilbert and Ellice Islands Colony, was the British Colonial Service officer in charge of the settlement on Gardner Island (Nikumaroro Island) for several years following World War II. Born on Nikumaroro Island in 1960, Mr. Koraua was relocated to the Solomon Islands along with the entire population of the Nikumaroro Island colony in 1963. Mr. Koraua was crucial to the success of the expedition, acting as interpreter, logistics coordinator, ambassador and gracious host. Further, Mr. Koraua provided for our transportation between the outer islands of Kohinggo and Vaghena aboard his boat, the M/V Temauri.
    [Show full text]
  • Kiribati Fourth National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity
    KIRIBATI FOURTH NATIONAL REPORT TO THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY Aranuka Island (Gilbert Group) Picture by: Raitiata Cati Prepared by: Environment and Conservation Division - MELAD 20 th September 2010 1 Contents Acknowledgement ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Acronyms ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 1: OVERVIEW OF BIODIVERSITY, STATUS, TRENDS AND THREATS .................................................... 8 1.1 Geography and geological setting of Kiribati ......................................................................................... 8 1.2 Climate ................................................................................................................................................... 9 1.3 Status of Biodiversity ........................................................................................................................... 10 1.3.1 Soil ................................................................................................................................................. 12 1.3.2 Water Resources ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Participatory Diagnosis of Coastal Fisheries for North Tarawa And
    Photo credit: Front cover, Aurélie Delisle/ANCORS Aurélie cover, Front credit: Photo Participatory diagnosis of coastal fisheries for North Tarawa and Butaritari island communities in the Republic of Kiribati Participatory diagnosis of coastal fisheries for North Tarawa and Butaritari island communities in the Republic of Kiribati Authors Aurélie Delisle, Ben Namakin, Tarateiti Uriam, Brooke Campbell and Quentin Hanich Citation This publication should be cited as: Delisle A, Namakin B, Uriam T, Campbell B and Hanich Q. 2016. Participatory diagnosis of coastal fisheries for North Tarawa and Butaritari island communities in the Republic of Kiribati. Penang, Malaysia: WorldFish. Program Report: 2016-24. Acknowledgments We would like to thank the financial contribution of the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research through project FIS/2012/074. We would also like to thank the staff from the Secretariat of the Pacific Community and WorldFish for their support. A special thank you goes out to staff of the Kiribati’s Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources Development, Ministry of Internal Affairs, Ministry of Environment, Land and Agricultural Development and to members of the five pilot Community-Based Fisheries Management (CBFM) communities in Kiribati. 2 Contents Executive summary 4 Introduction 5 Methods 9 Diagnosis 12 Summary and entry points for CBFM 36 Notes 38 References 39 Appendices 42 3 Executive summary In support of the Kiribati National Fisheries Policy 2013–2025, the ACIAR project FIS/2012/074 Improving Community-Based
    [Show full text]
  • Earhart's Final Resting Place Believed Found
    Earhart's Final Resting Place Believed Found Legendary aviatrix Amelia Earhart most likely died on an uninhabited tropical island in the southwestern Pacific republic of Kiribati, according to researchers at The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery (TIGHAR). Tall, slender, blonde and brave, Earhart disappeared while flying over the Pacific Ocean on July 2, 1937 in a record attempt to fly around the world at the equator. Her final resting place has long been a mystery. For years, Richard Gillespie, TIGHAR's executive director and author of the book "Finding Amelia," and his crew have been searching the Nikumaroro island for evidence of Earhart. A tiny coral atoll, Nikumaroro was some 300 miles southeast of Earhart's target destination, Howland Island. A number of artifacts recovered by TIGHAR would suggest that Earhart and her navigator, Fred Noonan, made a forced landing on the island's smooth, flat coral reef. According to Gillespie, who is set to embark on a new $500,000 Nikumaroro expedition next summer, the two became castaways and eventually died there. "We know that in 1940 British Colonial Service officer Gerald Gallagher recovered a partial skeleton of a castaway on Nikumaroro. Unfortunately, those bones have now been lost," Gillespie said. The archival record by Gallagher suggests that the bones were found in a remote area of the island, in a place that was unlikely to have been seen during an aerial search. A woman's shoe, an empty bottle and a sextant box whose serial numbers are consistent with a type known to have been carried by Noonan were all found near the site where the bones were discovered.
    [Show full text]
  • CBD Strategy and Action Plan
    Kiribati National Biodiversity Strategies and Actions Plan 2005 NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY STRATEGIES AND ACTIONS PLAN (KIRITIMATI ISLAND 2005) PREPARED BY ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION DIVISION MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, LANDS AND AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT October, 2006. 1En vironment & Conservation Division- MELAD Kiribati National Biodiversity Strategies and Actions Plan 2005 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Biodiversity in this context means all terrestrial and marine ecosystems, all plants and animal species and varieties found in these ecosystems including the knowledge, uses, beliefs and language that the people of Kiribati have in relation to their ecosystems and species. Biodiversity Conservation is always considered along with sustainable use. It has been confirmed that the present state of biodiversity in the Republic of Kiribati is being degraded socially, economically, politically and even judicially. As a nation with very limited resources we just cannot afford to sit back and let this serious degradation continues. If the biodiversity is not conserved or used on a sustainable basis, and if traditional sustainable management practices, and the knowledge and relevant language are not maintained or strengthened then future development would not be able to sustain the people in the long term. The main key in the whole process is the resource owners and users at the community level who hold the long- lasting key to biodiversity conservation. The development of Kiribati National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (K-NBSAP) has been highly consultative. The process of collecting data and information has been guided by the Steering Committee, a multi-disciplinary committee that comprises of representatives from different stakeholders. The diverse representation of the Steering Committee and the collaborative incentive of the grassroots people reflected a shift towards a multi-sectoral collaboration and the need to establish stronger social and institutional infrastructure to make local community co-management actually work in practice.
    [Show full text]
  • Media and the Politics of Climate Change in Kiribati: a Case Study on Journalism in a “Disappearing Nation”
    Media and the politics of climate change in Kiribati: A case study on journalism in a “disappearing nation” Taberannang Korauaba February 28, 2012 Pacific Media Centre, School of Communications, AUT University A thesis submitted to Auckland University of Technology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Communication Studies. 1 Abstract __________________________________________________________________ Although the Pacific nation of Kiribati has been identified as one of the most vulnerable countries to the impact of climate change, little is known about the attitudes of the local media and the public toward this issue. This is in contrast to empirical studies‟ findings which have shown that the public and the media were aware of the threats posed by climate change. Aware of and concern about are very different from „we care and let‟s do something because it is our country‟. President Anote Tong and his growing focus on this issue – centred on his close relationship with the foreign news media – have increasingly cast his I-Kiribati people as the victims and thus further marginalised their ability to learn about climate change. Further to this, there is no connection with what Tong has declared overseas with his government‟s 2008-2011 Development Plan. This thesis argues that Kiribati is not united on climate change. Traditional, cultural and religious beliefs about land, environment and sea, and division among educated elites and political parties are some of the key barriers to communicating and receiving climate change stories. The government‟s closed door policy, top down approach and its one-way communication have restricted the media‟s access to information relating to climate change, and more importantly how 'climate funds' are distributed in the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Cepf Final Project Completion Report
    CEPF FINAL PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT Organization Legal Name: Pacific Expeditions Limited (plus Eco Oceania sub-grant) Habitat Restoration of priority islands in the Phoenix Islands Project Title: Protected Area (PIPA) Date of Report: 19 Feb 2013 Dr Graham Wragg (and Dr Ray Pierce) Report Author and Contact PO Box 3063, Rarotonga, Cook Islands Information Email: [email protected] CEPF Region: Polynesia-Micronesia Strategic Direction: 1. Prevent, control, and eradicate invasive species in key biodiversity areas Grant Amount $ 292,000 Project Dates : November 1, 2009 to December 31, 2012 Implementation Partners for this Project (please explain the level of involvement for each partner): Pacific Expeditions Ltd (Dr Graham Wragg): Overall financial responsibility and grant holder. Shared logistical planning with Eco Oceania. Eco Oceania (Dr Ray Pierce): Lead agency for Science, Liaison with Kiribati, Planning of Eradications in July 2011 and sourcing finance for future invasive species work at the Phoenix Islands. Conservation Impacts Please explain/describe how your project has contributed to the implementation of the CEPF ecosystem profile. Please summarize the overall results/impact of your project. Project Approach (500 words) Background The Phoenix Islands are a World Heritage Site and also have many other international designations including Key Biodiversity Area and Important Bird Area reflecting the exceptionally high diversity and abundance of marine and terrestrial biota. The terrestrial values include globally important seabird colonies spanning 19 species of petrels, storm-petrels, frigatebirds, boobies, tropicbirds and terns, including the Endangered Phoenix petrel and white-throated storm-petrel which are largely confined to Rawaki. However, a fundamental problem facing these seabirds (and terrestrial biodiversity in general) has been the presence of 1-3 invasive vertebrate species on each of the 8 islands, with only Rawaki not having been invaded by rats (Table 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Use and Status of the Bokikokiko Or Christmas Island Warbler (Acrocephalus Aequinoctialis)1
    Habitat Use and Status of the Bokikokiko or Christmas Island Warbler (Acrocephalus aequinoctialis)1 Eric A. VanderWerf,2,5 Ray Pierce,3 Ratita Bebe,4 and Katareti Taabu4 Abstract: The Bokikokiko or Christmas Island Warbler (Acrocephalus aequinoc­ tialis) is found only on Kiritimati (Christmas) and Teraina ( Washington) Islands in the Republic of Kiribati. The population on Kiritimati Island is threatened by habitat degradation, sea level rise, and predation from feral cats (Felis catus), Pa- cific rats Rattus( exulans), and recently arrived black rats (Rattus rattus). There is scant information about distribution and abundance of the Bokikokiko. From 2007 to 2012, we conducted surveys with song playbacks at 83 points on 12 tran- sects in the northern half of Kiritimati Island to measure abundance of the Bokikokiko and begin monitoring for possible declines associated with the spread of rats, and we collected habitat data to investigate factors that influenced Bokikokiko abundance. Song playbacks resulted in a 263% increase in detection rate over passive listening. We detected an average (±1 SE) of 0.63 ± 0.11 birds per point using playbacks. Average population density was 0.36 ± 0.06 birds per hectare, but abundance varied among regions, and no birds were detected in some areas with apparently suitable habitat. Range of the Bokikokiko encom- passed an area of 14,180 ha but was fragmented by many lagoons and bare ground, and only about half that area was actually occupied. Estimated popula- tion size was 2,550 ± 425 birds. Bokikokiko were more abundant in areas with taller Heliotropium trees and taller Scaevola shrubs, and less abundant in areas with more Suriana shrubs, bare ground, and grass.
    [Show full text]
  • Kiribati Background Information
    Contents Executive Summary......................................................................................................................................... i List of Acronyms ........................................................................................................................................... iii 1.0. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Kiribati Background Information ............................................................................................................. 2 3.0 Biodiversity in Kiribati ............................................................................................................................. 3 4.0 Analysis of the Causes and Consequences of Biodiversity Loss ............................................................. 6 4.1 Causes of Biodiversity Loss ................................................................................................................. 6 4.2 Consequences of Biodiversity Loss ...................................................................................................... 8 5.0 National, Constitutional, Legal and Institutional Framework .................................................................. 8 5.1 Legislation ............................................................................................................................................ 8 5.2 Relevant Policies and Plans ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sea Turtles of the Phoenix Islands, 2000-2002
    SEA TURTLES OF THE PHOENIX ISLANDS, 2000-2002 BY DAVID OBURA,1 SANGEETA MANGUBHAI,1 AND AUSTEN YOSHINAGA2 INTRODUCTION Balazs (1973) has written the only recent report on marine turtles of the Phoenix Islands, summarizing a small literature from observations in the 19th and 20th Century, his own observations on a 7-day trip to Kanton atoll in 1973 and anecdotal information from residents on Kanton Island. At that time only green turtles (listed as Chelonia sp.) were confirmed to be present in the Phoenix Islands with additional reports of a turtle “with distinct ridges on the carapace” which Balazs did not venture to name. Balazs notes that reviews at the time did not list the Phoenix Islands within the distribution records of turtles across the Pacific. Balasz summarized that marine turtles were seen commonly throughout the year in the Phoenix Islands, listed for various different islands by different references and observers including Enderbury, Orona, Manra, Nikumaroro, Birnie. He cited no reported turtle activity on Rawaki (Phoenix) and McKean. Nesting was noted to occur throughout the year with a peak of nesting in October and November and particularly high nesting activity was noted for November 1972 on Kanton. He documented old and new turtle tracks and nest pits and observed two females digging nests on one site on Kanton. In a week on Kanton, he identified four areas around the outer perimeter of the atoll rim between 0.5 to 2.2 km in length where nesting was concentrated. Not all apparently suitable beaches showed nesting activity tentatively related to surface alteration and construction during the Second World War.
    [Show full text]
  • Baseline Marine Biological Surveys of the Phoenix Islands, July 2000
    BASELINE MARINE BIOLOGICAL SURVEYS OF THE PHOENIX ISLANDS, JULY 2000 BY DAVID OBURA,1 GREGORY STONE,2 SANGEETA MANGUBHAI,4 STEVEN BAILEY,3 AUSTEN YOSHINAGA,3 CAT HOLLOWAY,5 ROBERT BARREL5 ABSTRACT Rapid assessment surveys were conducted during a 21-day marine biological expedition to the Phoenix Islands, Republic of Kiribati, from 29 June to 11 July 2000. This study includes new data on the biological diversity and abundance of the region and research and management recommendations. We conducted surveys and over 300 research SCUBA dives among the remote Phoenix Islands: Nikumaroro (Gardner), McKean, Manra (Sydney), Kanton (Aba-Riringa), Enderbury, Orona (Hull) and Rawaki (Phoenix), only excluding Birnie Island due to time limitations. Corals, benthic and mobile invertebrates, fishes, algae, sea turtles, sea birds, and marine mammals were surveyed at each site. Deep-sea life was sampled during seven deployments of an autonomous digital video camera system to 1,000 m depth at Kanton, Manra, and Orona. Coral reef and fish communities were surveyed using rapid assessment methods, small benthic fishes were collected using rotenone as a stunning agent, marine algae were collected by hand primarily during SCUBA dives, and a deep- drop collecting net was deployed to sample deep-sea animals. The reefs show evidence of the extreme isolation of these islands, pounded on three sides by the large ocean swells of the Pacific with only a narrow protected side to the west providing protection for anchorage. Coral species diversity of the islands was moderately high. While lacking in some corals dominant in other major reef areas, the reefs have interesting species assemblages, with prolific growth of some species normally subdominant in other reef areas.
    [Show full text]