DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and Final Supplemental Management Plan for the Tortugas Ecological Reserve

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and Final Supplemental Management Plan for the Tortugas Ecological Reserve Strategy for Stewardship Tortugas Ecological Reserve U.S. Department of Commerce Final Supplemental National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Environmental National Ocean Service Impact Statement/ Office of National Marine Sanctuaries Final Supplemental Management Plan Florida Keys Final Supplemental National Environmental Marine Impact Statement/ Final Supplemental Sanctuary Management Plan November 2000 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Acknowledgements The FKNMS staff wish to thank everyone who has participated in the development of the Tortugas Ecological Reserve proposal, especially members of the public who gave of their time to offer objective and useful input during the Sanctuary Advisory Council meetings, Working Group meetings and public scoping meetings. Special thanks go to the members of the Tortugas 2000 Working Group for their major contribution to the design of the ecological reserve and their diligent work. List of Preparers • Benjamin D. Haskell, Science Coordinator, FKNMS • Vernon R. Leeworthy, Chief Economist, NOAA National Ocean Service • Peter C. Wiley, Economist, NOAA National Ocean Service • Theodore M. Beuttler, Attorney-Advisor, NOAA Office of General Counsel • Mark R. Haflich, Senior Regulatory Counsel, Department of Commerce • Joanne Delaney, Research Interpreter, FKNMS • Benjamin L. Richards, Research Assistant, FKNMS • Erik Franklin, GIS analyst, FKNMS i TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................. I LIST OF PREPARERS .................................................................................................................................. I TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................... II LIST OF FIGURES ...........................................................................................................................................VI LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................................................IX EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................................................XI PROTECTING OCEAN WILDERNESS ........................................................................................................XI NO-TAKE AREAS IN THE FLORIDA KEYS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY........................................XII THE COLLABORATIVE PROCESS ...........................................................................................................XIII THE TORTUGAS ECOLOGICAL RESERVE PROPOSAL CONTAINED IN THE DSEIS ISSUED IN MAY 2000 ................................................................................................................................................XIII THE TORTUGAS ECOLOGICAL RESERVE PROPOSAL CONTAINED IN THE FSEIS................................ XIV COMMENTING ON THE PROPOSAL ....................................................................................................... XVI ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................... XVII PART I: NEED FOR AND PURPOSE OF THE ACTION ........................................................................... 1 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANNING EFFORTS FOR THE TORTUGAS ...................................................... 4 PART II: ECOLOGICAL RESERVES AS A MANAGEMENT TOOL..................................................... 6 HISTORY AND PERFORMANCE OF NO-TAKE AREAS IN THE FKNMS....................................................... 7 Goals 7 Objectives ................................................................................................................................. 8 PART III: DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE ASSESSMENT REPORT .................................................................................................................. 13 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 13 Geology 15 Physical oceanography and recruitment pathways .............................................................. 19 Benthic Habitats..................................................................................................................... 24 Dry Tortugas National Park (DRTO).................................................................................... 24 Algal Communities................................................................................................................. 26 Seagrasses .............................................................................................................................. 27 Sponges 28 Coral Habitats........................................................................................................................ 29 Benthic habitats outside of the DRTO................................................................................... 35 Essential Fish Habitat............................................................................................................ 38 Fish Communities and Fisheries ........................................................................................... 38 Reef Fish Biogeography, Trophic Structure, and Species Diversity.................................... 39 Reproduction, larval transport, and recruitment.................................................................. 40 ii Status of Fishes and Fisheries ............................................................................................... 42 Highly Migratory Fish Species.............................................................................................. 43 Seabirds 46 Marine reptiles and mammals ............................................................................................... 47 Submerged Cultural Resources ............................................................................................. 49 Human Activities .................................................................................................................... 49 Human Uses ........................................................................................................................... 51 Commercial Fisheries............................................................................................................54 Tourism 58 Commercial Shipping.............................................................................................................58 PART IV: ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PREFERRED .............................................................. 63 INTRODUCTION TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF BOUNDARY AND REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES ............. 63 Chronology of the Process..................................................................................................... 63 Site Characterization and Geographic Information Systems............................................... 65 Building Consensus................................................................................................................ 66 Sanctuary Advisory Council Recommendation..................................................................... 71 DEVELOPMENT OF BOUNDARY ALTERNATIVES BY NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE STAFF .................... 71 Boundary Expansion..............................................................................................................77 Development and Description of Regulatory Alternatives................................................... 78 Preferred Alternative ............................................................................................................. 84 PART V: ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF BOUNDARY AND REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES....................................................................................... 87 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ....................................................................................................... 87 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF BOUNDARY AND REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES ................... 94 Background............................................................................................................................. 94 Statement of Need................................................................................................................... 95 Goals, Objectives and Legal Basis........................................................................................ 95 Discussion of all Relevant State and Federal Rules Which May Duplicate, Overlap or Conflict with the Regulations.................................................................................. 95 Description of the Projected Reporting, Record Keeping and Other Compliance Requirements of the Regulations, Including an Estimate of the Classes of Small Entities that Will be Subject to These Requirements and the Type of Professional Skills Necessary to Prepare Any Required Report or Record............................... 96 Approach to the Analysis ....................................................................................................... 97 Boundary Alternatives.......................................................................................................... 100 No-take Regulations............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Checklist of Fish and Invertebrates Listed in the CITES Appendices
    JOINTS NATURE \=^ CONSERVATION COMMITTEE Checklist of fish and mvertebrates Usted in the CITES appendices JNCC REPORT (SSN0963-«OStl JOINT NATURE CONSERVATION COMMITTEE Report distribution Report Number: No. 238 Contract Number/JNCC project number: F7 1-12-332 Date received: 9 June 1995 Report tide: Checklist of fish and invertebrates listed in the CITES appendices Contract tide: Revised Checklists of CITES species database Contractor: World Conservation Monitoring Centre 219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, CB3 ODL Comments: A further fish and invertebrate edition in the Checklist series begun by NCC in 1979, revised and brought up to date with current CITES listings Restrictions: Distribution: JNCC report collection 2 copies Nature Conservancy Council for England, HQ, Library 1 copy Scottish Natural Heritage, HQ, Library 1 copy Countryside Council for Wales, HQ, Library 1 copy A T Smail, Copyright Libraries Agent, 100 Euston Road, London, NWl 2HQ 5 copies British Library, Legal Deposit Office, Boston Spa, Wetherby, West Yorkshire, LS23 7BQ 1 copy Chadwick-Healey Ltd, Cambridge Place, Cambridge, CB2 INR 1 copy BIOSIS UK, Garforth House, 54 Michlegate, York, YOl ILF 1 copy CITES Management and Scientific Authorities of EC Member States total 30 copies CITES Authorities, UK Dependencies total 13 copies CITES Secretariat 5 copies CITES Animals Committee chairman 1 copy European Commission DG Xl/D/2 1 copy World Conservation Monitoring Centre 20 copies TRAFFIC International 5 copies Animal Quarantine Station, Heathrow 1 copy Department of the Environment (GWD) 5 copies Foreign & Commonwealth Office (ESED) 1 copy HM Customs & Excise 3 copies M Bradley Taylor (ACPO) 1 copy ^\(\\ Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the Identification of Precious and Semi-Precious Corals in Commercial Trade
    'l'llA FFIC YvALE ,.._,..---...- guide to the identification of precious and semi-precious corals in commercial trade Ernest W.T. Cooper, Susan J. Torntore, Angela S.M. Leung, Tanya Shadbolt and Carolyn Dawe September 2011 © 2011 World Wildlife Fund and TRAFFIC. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-0-9693730-3-2 Reproduction and distribution for resale by any means photographic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or information storage and retrieval systems of any parts of this book, illustrations or texts is prohibited without prior written consent from World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Reproduction for CITES enforcement or educational and other non-commercial purposes by CITES Authorities and the CITES Secretariat is authorized without prior written permission, provided the source is fully acknowledged. Any reproduction, in full or in part, of this publication must credit WWF and TRAFFIC North America. The views of the authors expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the TRAFFIC network, WWF, or the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The designation of geographical entities in this publication and the presentation of the material do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of WWF, TRAFFIC, or IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The TRAFFIC symbol copyright and Registered Trademark ownership are held by WWF. TRAFFIC is a joint program of WWF and IUCN. Suggested citation: Cooper, E.W.T., Torntore, S.J., Leung, A.S.M, Shadbolt, T. and Dawe, C.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 2. Animals
    AC20 Doc. 8.5 Annex (English only/Seulement en anglais/Únicamente en inglés) REVIEW OF SIGNIFICANT TRADE ANALYSIS OF TRADE TRENDS WITH NOTES ON THE CONSERVATION STATUS OF SELECTED SPECIES Volume 2. Animals Prepared for the CITES Animals Committee, CITES Secretariat by the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre JANUARY 2004 AC20 Doc. 8.5 – p. 3 Prepared and produced by: UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, UK UNEP WORLD CONSERVATION MONITORING CENTRE (UNEP-WCMC) www.unep-wcmc.org The UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre is the biodiversity assessment and policy implementation arm of the United Nations Environment Programme, the world’s foremost intergovernmental environmental organisation. UNEP-WCMC aims to help decision-makers recognise the value of biodiversity to people everywhere, and to apply this knowledge to all that they do. The Centre’s challenge is to transform complex data into policy-relevant information, to build tools and systems for analysis and integration, and to support the needs of nations and the international community as they engage in joint programmes of action. UNEP-WCMC provides objective, scientifically rigorous products and services that include ecosystem assessments, support for implementation of environmental agreements, regional and global biodiversity information, research on threats and impacts, and development of future scenarios for the living world. Prepared for: The CITES Secretariat, Geneva A contribution to UNEP - The United Nations Environment Programme Printed by: UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre 219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 0DL, UK © Copyright: UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre/CITES Secretariat The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNEP or contributory organisations.
    [Show full text]
  • CARIBE MEXICANO Abril 2016
    ESTUDIO PREVIO JUSTIFICATIVO PARA EL ESTABLECIMIENTOaccchinchorro DEL ÁREA NATURAL PROTEGIDA RESERVA DE LA BIOSFERA CARIBE MEXICANO Abril 2016 Reserva de la Biosfera Caribe Mexicano D I R E C T O R I O Ing. Rafael Pacchiano Alamán Secretario de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales Cítese: Lic. Alejandro Del Mazo Maza Comisionado Nacional de Áreas Naturales Protegidas Comisión Nacional de Áreas Naturales Biól. David Gutiérrez Carbonell Protegidas. 2016. Estudio Previo Encargado de la Dirección General de Conservación Justificativo para la declaratoria de la para el Desarrollo Reserva de la Biosfera Caribe Mexicano, Quintana Roo. 305 páginas. Incluyendo tres Biól. Francisco Ricardo Gómez Lozano anexos. Director Regional Península de Yucatán y Caribe Mexicano Biól. César Sánchez Ibarra Director de Representatividad y Creación de Nuevas Áreas Naturales Protegidas INTEGRÓ Con fundamento en los artículos 19 fracción III y 43 último párrafo del Reglamento Interior de la SEMARNAT, publicado en Diario Oficial de la Federación el 26 de noviembre de 2012. ___________________________ Biól. César Sánchez Ibarra Director de Representatividad y Creación de Nuevas Áreas Naturales Protegidas SUPERVISÓ Con fundamento en los artículos 19 fracción III, 43 último párrafo y 75 del Reglamento Interior de la SEMARNAT, publicado en Diario Oficial de la Federación el 26 de noviembre de 2012. ___________________________ Biól. David Gutiérrez Carbonell Encargado de la Dirección General de Conservación para el Desarrollo Estudio Previo Justificativo para el establecimiento del área natural protegida 1 Reserva de la Biosfera Caribe Mexicano CONTENIDO I. INFORMACIÓN GENERAL ............................................................................................................................. 10 a) Nombre del área propuesta ........................................................................................................................ 10 b) Entidades federativas y municipios en donde se localiza el área ..............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Effecten Van Fosfaat Addities
    The potential Outstanding Universal Value and natural heritage values of Bonaire National Marine Park: an ecological perspective I.J.M. van Beek, J.S.M. Cremer, H.W.G. Meesters, L.E. Becking, J. M. Langley (consultant) Report number C145/14 IMARES Wageningen UR (IMARES - Institute for Marine Resources & Ecosystem Studies) Client: Ministry of Economic Affairs Postbus 20401 2500 EK Den Haag BAS code: BO-11-011.05-037 Publication date: October 2014 IMARES vision: ‘To explore the potential of marine nature to improve the quality of life’. IMARES mission: To conduct research with the aim of acquiring knowledge and offering advice on the sustainable management and use of marine and coastal areas. IMARES is: An independent, leading scientific research institute. P.O. Box 68 P.O. Box 77 P.O. Box 57 P.O. Box 167 1970 AB IJmuiden 4400 AB Yerseke 1780 AB Den Helder 1790 AD Den Burg Texel Phone: +31 (0)317 48 09 00 Phone: +31 (0)317 48 09 00 Phone: +31 (0)317 48 09 00 Phone: +31 (0)317 48 09 00 Fax: +31 (0)317 48 73 26 Fax: +31 (0)317 48 73 59 Fax: +31 (0)223 63 06 87 Fax: +31 (0)317 48 73 62 E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] www.imares.wur.nl www.imares.wur.nl www.imares.wur.nl www.imares.wur.nl © 2013 IMARES Wageningen UR IMARES, institute of Stichting DLO The Management of IMARES is not responsible for resulting is registered in the Dutch trade damage, as well as for damage resulting from the application of record nr.
    [Show full text]
  • Sexual Reproduction in the Caribbean Coral Genus Isophyllia (Scleractinia: Mussidae)
    Sexual reproduction in the Caribbean coral genus Isophyllia (Scleractinia: Mussidae) Derek Soto and Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Science, Universidad de Puerto Rico, Recinto de Mayagu¨ez, Mayagu¨ez, Puerto Rico, United States ABSTRACT The sexual pattern, reproductive mode, and timing of reproduction of Isophyllia sinuosa and Isophyllia rigida, two Caribbean Mussids, were assessed by histological analysis of specimens collected monthly during 2000–2001. Both species are simultaneous hermaphroditic brooders characterized by a single annual gametogenetic cycle. Spermatocytes and oocytes of different stages were found to develop within the same mesentery indicating sequential maturation for extended planulation. Oogenesis took place during May through April in I. sinuosa and from August through June in I. rigida. Oocytes began development 7–8 months prior to spermaries but both sexes matured simultaneously. Zooxanthellate planulae were observed in I. sinuosa during April and in I. rigida from June through September. Higher polyp and mesenterial fecundity were found in I. rigida compared to I. sinuosa. Larger oocyte sizes were found in I. sinuosa than in I. rigida, however larger planula sizes were found in I. rigida. Hermaphroditism is the exclusive sexual pattern within the Mussidae while brooding has been documented within the related genera Mussa, Scolymia and Mycetophyllia. This study represents the first description of the sexual characteristics of I. rigida and provides an updated description of I. sinuosa. Subjects Developmental Biology, Marine Biology, Zoology Keywords Caribbean, Mussidae, Coral reproduction, Hermaphroditic, Brooder Submitted 5 October 2015 INTRODUCTION Accepted 7 October 2016 Published 10 November 2016 Reproduction in corals consists of a sequence of events which include: gametogenesis, Corresponding author spawning (broadcasters), fertilization, embryogenesis, planulation (brooders), dispersal, Derek Soto, [email protected] settlement and recruitment (Harrison & Wallace, 1990).
    [Show full text]
  • Tortugas Ecological Reserve
    Strategy for Stewardship Tortugas Ecological Reserve U.S. Department of Commerce DraftSupplemental National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Environmental National Ocean Service ImpactStatement/ Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management DraftSupplemental Marine Sanctuaries Division ManagementPlan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS), working in cooperation with the State of Florida, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, and the National Marine Fisheries Service, proposes to establish a 151 square nautical mile “no- take” ecological reserve to protect the critical coral reef ecosystem of the Tortugas, a remote area in the western part of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. The reserve would consist of two sections, Tortugas North and Tortugas South, and would require an expansion of Sanctuary boundaries to protect important coral reef resources in the areas of Sherwood Forest and Riley’s Hump. An ecological reserve in the Tortugas will preserve the richness of species and health of fish stocks in the Tortugas and throughout the Florida Keys, helping to ensure the stability of commercial and recreational fisheries. The reserve will protect important spawning areas for snapper and grouper, as well as valuable deepwater habitat for other commercial species. Restrictions on vessel discharge and anchoring will protect water quality and habitat complexity. The proposed reserve’s geographical isolation will help scientists distinguish between natural and human-caused changes to the coral reef environment. Protecting Ocean Wilderness Creating an ecological reserve in the Tortugas will protect some of the most productive and unique marine resources of the Sanctuary. Because of its remote location 70 miles west of Key West and more than 140 miles from mainland Florida, the Tortugas region has the best water quality in the Sanctuary.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Theecological Systemsof Puerto Rico
    United States Department of Agriculture Guide to the Forest Service Ecological Systems International Institute of Tropical Forestry of Puerto Rico General Technical Report IITF-GTR-35 June 2009 Gary L. Miller and Ariel E. Lugo The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the National Forests and national grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Authors Gary L. Miller is a professor, University of North Carolina, Environmental Studies, One University Heights, Asheville, NC 28804-3299.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolutionary Trends in the Epithecate Scleractinian Corals
    Evolutionary trends in the epithecate scleractinian corals EWA RONIEWICZ and JAROSEAW STOLARSKI Roniewicz, E. & Stolarski, J. 1999. Evolutionary trends in the epithecate scleractinian corals. -Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 44,2, 131-166. Adult stages of wall ontogeny of fossil and Recent scleractinians show that epitheca was the prevailing type of wall in Triassic and Jurassic corals. Since the Late Cretaceous the fre- quency of epithecal walls during adult stages has decreased. In the ontogeny of Recent epithecate corals, epitheca either persists from the protocorallite to the adult stage, or is re- placed in post-initial stages by trabecular walls that are often accompanied by extra- -calicular skeletal elements. The former condition means that the polyp initially lacks the edge zone, the latter condition means that the edge zone develops later in coral ontogeny. Five principal patterns in wall ontogeny of fossil and Recent Scleractinia are distinguished and provide the framework for discrimination of the four main stages (grades) of evolu- tionary development of the edge-zone. The trend of increasing the edge-zone and reduction of the epitheca is particularly well represented in the history of caryophylliine corals. We suggest that development of the edge-zone is an evolutionary response to changing envi- ronment, mainly to increasing bioerosion in the Mesozoic shallow-water environments. A glossary is given of microstructural and skeletal terms used in this paper. Key words : Scleractinia, microstructure, thecal structures, epitheca, phylogeny. Ewa Roniewicz [[email protected]]and Jarostaw Stolarski [[email protected]], Instytut Paleobiologii PAN, ul. Twarda 51/55, PL-00-818 Warszawa, Poland. In Memory of Gabriel A.
    [Show full text]
  • Barcoding Corals: Limited by Interspecific Divergence, Not Intraspecific Variation
    Molecular Ecology Resources (2008) 8, 247–255 doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01996.x DNABlackwell Publishing Ltd BARCODING Barcoding corals: limited by interspecific divergence, not intraspecific variation T. L. SHEARER* and M. A. COFFROTH† *School of Biology, Georgia Institute of Technology, 310 Ferst Dr., Atlanta, GA 30332-0230, USA, †Department of Geology, State University of New York at Buffalo, 109 Cooke Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260, USA Abstract The expanding use of DNA barcoding as a tool to identify species and assess biodiversity has recently attracted much attention. An attractive aspect of a barcoding method to iden- tify scleractinian species is that it can be utilized on any life stage (larva, juvenile or adult) and is not influenced by phenotypic plasticity unlike morphological methods of species identification. It has been unclear whether the standard DNA barcoding system, based on cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (COI), is suitable for species identification of scleractinian corals. Levels of intra- and interspecific genetic variation of the scleractinian COI gene were investigated to determine whether threshold values could be implemented to discriminate conspecifics from other taxa. Overlap between intraspecific variation and interspecific diver- gence due to low genetic divergence among species (0% in many cases), rather than high levels of intraspecific variation, resulted in the inability to establish appropriate threshold values specific for scleractinians; thus, it was impossible to discern most scleractinian species using this gene. Keywords: COI, DNA barcoding, interspecific divergence, intraspecific variation, scleractinian coral, species identification Received 24 January 2007; revision accepted 15 August 2007 DNA barcoding has become an attractive, yet controversial et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Bulletin of the United States Fish Commission
    THE STONY CORALS OE THE PORTO RICAN WATERS. BY T: WAYLAND VAUGHAN. CONTENTS. Page. Page. Introduction 291 Discussion of Species—Continued. Table of Species 291 Class Anthozoa—Continued. Discussion of Species 292-318 Order Actiniae—Continued. Class Anthozoa 292 Family Favidae—Continued. Order Actiniae 292 Genus Manicina 305 Family Caryophyllidae 292 Manieina areolata 305 Genus Caryophyllia 292 Genus Platygyra 305,306 Caryophyllia berteriana? 292 Platygyra viridis 306-308 Genus Paracyathus 292 Family Agaricidse 309 Paracyathus de filippii 292 Genus Siderastrea 309 Genus Oyathoceras 293 Siderastrea radians 309 Cyathoceras portoricensis 293 Siderastrea siderea 309, 310 Genus Deltocyathus 293 Genus Agaricia 310 Deltocyathus italicus 293 Agaricia elephantotus 310 Agaricia sp 310, 311 Family Oculinidae 294 Agaricia cailleti 311 Genus Oculina 294 Genus Diaseris 311 Oculina diffusa? var 294 “ Diaseris ” crispa 311 Family Stylophoridse 294 Family Isoporidae 312 Genus Axhelia 294 Genus Isopora 312 Axhelia asperula 294 Isopora muricata 312, 313 Axhelia mirabilis 295 Isopora muricata ss. (== cervicornis) 313 Family Eusmilidae 295 Isopora muricata forma prolifera 313 Genus Meandrina 295 Isopora muricata forma palmata 313, 314 Meandrina maeandrites 296,297 Family Poritidae 314 Family Astrangidae 298 Genus Porites 314 Genus Cladocora 298 Porites porites 314-316 Cladocora arbuscula 298 Porites porites forma clavaria 316 Cladocora debilis 298 Porites porites forma furcata 316 Genus Astrangia 298 Porites porites forma divaricata 316 Astrangia solitaria? var. portoricensis 298,299 Porites astreoides 317 Astrangia astreiformis 300 Porites astreoides forma a 317 Family Orbicellidae 300 Porites astreoides forma /3 318 Genus Orbicella 300 Class Hydrozoa 318 Orbicella acropora var 301 Order Hydrocoral linse 318 Family Favidae 302 Family Milleporidae 318 Genus Favia 303 Genus Millepora 318 Favia fragum 303, 304 Millepora alcicornis 318 290 .
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity, Phylogeography, and Taxonomy of Hard-Corals in the Genus Porites from the Arabian Peninsula
    Diversity, Phylogeography, and Taxonomy of Hard-Corals in the Genus Porites from the Arabian Peninsula Dissertation by Tullia Isotta Terraneo In partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Thuwal, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia © December, 2019 Tullia Isotta Terraneo All rights reserved 2 EXAMINATION COMMITTEE PAGE The dissertation of Tullia Isotta Terraneo is approved by the examination committee. Committee Chairperson: Prof. Michael L. Berumen Committee Co-Chair: Prof. Andrew H. Baird Committee Members: Prof. Christian R. Voolstra, Prof. Mark Tester External Examiner: Prof. James D. Reimer 3 ABSTRACT Diversity, Phylogeography and Evolution of Hard-Corals in the genus Porites from the Arabian Peninsula Tullia Isotta Terraneo The genus Porites is one of the most important scleractinian genera in terms of species diversity and panmictic tropical distribution. However, Porites is notorious for challenging taxonomic identification based on colony gross morphology, micromorphology, and single gene analyses, suggesting that the current classification poorly represents real evolutionary relationships. This research integrates skeletal morphology data and single locus genetic evidence with genome-wide analyses and alternative line of evidence to taxonomy (i.e. symbiotic association data), with the aim of clarifying biodiversity, biogeography, and taxonomy of Porites from the Arabian Peninsula. In this dissertation, I evaluated the diversity of Porites in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, providing a basic morpho-molecular background to the taxonomy of Porites in the region, and highlighting that a) the current taxonomic and phylogenetic position of 15 Porites morphological species needs to be reassessed, and that b) coral biodiversity in the Arabian region needs to be re-evaluated.
    [Show full text]