FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2036299875> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2036299875 endingPage "R599" @default.
• W2036299875 startingPage "R598" @default.
• W2036299875 abstract "The crown-of-thorns starfish, Acanthaster planci, is a predator of corals that is a major management issue on coral reefs [1Birkeland C.E. Lucas J.S. Acanthaster planci: Major Management Problem of Coral Reefs. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL1990Google Scholar]. It occurs throughout the Indo–Pacific and shows boom–bust population dynamics with low background densities and intermittent outbreaks. Three waves of population outbreaks have affected Australia's Great Barrier Reef (GBR) since the 1960s. The waves of outbreaks appear to start ∼15°S [2Kenchington R.A. Growth and recruitment of Acanthaster planci (L.) on the Great Barrier Reef.Biol. Cons. 1977; 11: 103-118Crossref Scopus (64) Google Scholar] and progress southward through the central GBR (Figure 1A), causing major losses of living coral on many reefs across a large area and dwarfing losses from other disturbances such as storms or coral bleaching over the same period [3Sweatman H. Cheal A. Coleman G. Fitzpatrick B. Miller I. Ninio R. Page C. Ryan D. Thompson A. Tomkins P. Long-Term Monitoring of the Great Barrier Reef Status Report 4. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville, Australia2000Google Scholar]. Humans can potentially influence starfish population dynamics by exploiting predators, though evidence to date is circumstantial. Extensive surveys in the GBR Marine Park (GBRMP) show that protection from fishing affects the frequency of outbreaks: the relative frequency of outbreaks on reefs that were open to fishing was 3.75 times higher than that on no-take reefs in the mid-shelf region of the GBR, where most outbreaks occur, and seven times greater on open reefs if all reefs were included. Although exploited fishes are unlikely to prey on starfish directly, trophic cascades could favour invertebrates that prey on juvenile starfish. The crown-of-thorns starfish, Acanthaster planci, is a predator of corals that is a major management issue on coral reefs [1Birkeland C.E. Lucas J.S. Acanthaster planci: Major Management Problem of Coral Reefs. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL1990Google Scholar]. It occurs throughout the Indo–Pacific and shows boom–bust population dynamics with low background densities and intermittent outbreaks. Three waves of population outbreaks have affected Australia's Great Barrier Reef (GBR) since the 1960s. The waves of outbreaks appear to start ∼15°S [2Kenchington R.A. Growth and recruitment of Acanthaster planci (L.) on the Great Barrier Reef.Biol. Cons. 1977; 11: 103-118Crossref Scopus (64) Google Scholar] and progress southward through the central GBR (Figure 1A), causing major losses of living coral on many reefs across a large area and dwarfing losses from other disturbances such as storms or coral bleaching over the same period [3Sweatman H. Cheal A. Coleman G. Fitzpatrick B. Miller I. Ninio R. Page C. Ryan D. Thompson A. Tomkins P. Long-Term Monitoring of the Great Barrier Reef Status Report 4. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville, Australia2000Google Scholar]. Humans can potentially influence starfish population dynamics by exploiting predators, though evidence to date is circumstantial. Extensive surveys in the GBR Marine Park (GBRMP) show that protection from fishing affects the frequency of outbreaks: the relative frequency of outbreaks on reefs that were open to fishing was 3.75 times higher than that on no-take reefs in the mid-shelf region of the GBR, where most outbreaks occur, and seven times greater on open reefs if all reefs were included. Although exploited fishes are unlikely to prey on starfish directly, trophic cascades could favour invertebrates that prey on juvenile starfish. New starfish infestations arise through larval transport by the prevailing southward currents and outbreak populations die out after some years from starvation and disease [1Birkeland C.E. Lucas J.S. Acanthaster planci: Major Management Problem of Coral Reefs. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL1990Google Scholar]. Suggested (non-exclusive) causes of outbreaks [1Birkeland C.E. Lucas J.S. Acanthaster planci: Major Management Problem of Coral Reefs. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL1990Google Scholar] include greater survival of starfish larvae caused by phytoplankton blooms from nutrients in terrestrial runoff, and anthropogenic reduction of predator populations causing higher survival of juvenile and adult starfish. Two studies [4Ormond R. Bradbury R. Bainbridge S. Fabricius K. Keesing J. DeVantier L. Medlay P. Steven A. Test of a model of regulation of crown-of-thorns starfish by fish predators.in: Bradbury R.H. Acanthaster and the Coral Reef: A Theoretical Perspective. Springer, Berlin1990: 189-207Crossref Google Scholar, 5Dulvy N. Freckleton R. Polunin N. Coral reef cascades and the indirect effects of predator removal by exploitation.Ecol. Lett. 2004; 7: 410-416Crossref Scopus (330) Google Scholar] have found negative relationships between outbreaks and the abundances of possible fish predators of starfish, leading to the suggestion that marine protected areas (MPAs) might reduce outbreak occurrence [6ISRS (2004). Marine protected areas (MPAs) in management of coral reefs. Briefing Paper 1, International Society for Reef Studies.Google Scholar]. To address the question of whether MPAs provide protection from outbreaks of A. planci more directly, I compared the frequency of starfish outbreaks on no-take reefs and on reefs that were open to fishing on the GBR, based on results of an extensive monitoring program. The initial zoning plan for the GBRMP was fully implemented by 1989, with no-take zones covering 4.5% of the region [7Fernandes L. Day J. Lewis A. Slegers S. Kerrigan B. Breen D. Cameron D. Jago B. Hall J. Lowe D. et al.Establishing representative no-take areas in the Great Barrier Reef: large-scale implementation of theory on marine protected areas.Cons. Biol. 2005; 19: 1733-1744Crossref Scopus (443) Google Scholar]. Zoning largely followed existing uses. Where possible, significant areas for activities that did not remove natural resources were zoned ‘no-take’ and conflicting uses on individual reefs were resolved by split zoning [8GBRMPACairns Zoning Plan review: issues: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville, Australia1988Google Scholar]. The zoning of individual reefs was not affected by their history of starfish outbreaks (see Supplemental data available on-line with this issue). Because starfish outbreaks occur in waves, not all the reefs that were surveyed for A. planci in any year were equally likely to have outbreaks. For this reason, only reefs within the regions where outbreaks were present in each year were included in the analysis (see Supplemental data). There were fewer A. planci outbreaks in no-take zones. The majority of outbreaks occur on reefs in the mid-section of the continental shelf (Figure 1B); after allowing at least five years for zoning to take effect, surveys between mid-1994 and mid-2004 showed that proportionately fewer mid-shelf no-take reefs were affected by outbreaks of A. planci (20%), compared with mid-shelf reefs that were open to fishing (75%, Figure 1C). When all reefs were considered, the corresponding values were 8% and 57% (Figure 1D). The difference in frequency of outbreaks between no-take reefs and fished reefs is clear, but the ecological link between exploited fishes and A. planci remains uncertain. On the GBR, most outbreaks occur on mid-shelf and offshore reefs that are not accessible to most amateur fishers, while the primary target species of commercial fishers, coral trout (Plectropomus spp.), are specialized predators of fishes. The evidence that any exploited fishes are significant predators of A. planci is circumstantial or anecdotal. Fishing commonly removes large predators and has led to trophic cascades involving multiple trophic levels in other marine systems (for example [9Myers R.A. Baum J.K. Shepherd T.D. Powers S.P. Peterson C.H. Cascading effects of the loss of apex predatory sharks from a coastal ocean.Science. 2007; 315: 1846-1850Crossref PubMed Scopus (860) Google Scholar]). A study comparing near-shore fish communities in no-take and in fished areas on the GBR [10Graham N.A.J. Evans R.D. Russ G.R. The effects of marine reserve protection on the trophic relationships of reef fishes on the Great Barrier Reef.Env. Cons. 2003; 30: 200-208Crossref Scopus (157) Google Scholar] found that numbers of coral trout were higher in no-take areas, while a majority of likely prey species were less abundant, including the common benthic-feeding wrasse, Thalassoma lunare. A plausible positive link between commercially exploited fishes and predation on A. planci could involve higher numbers of large piscivores in no-take areas reducing densities of benthic carnivorous fishes such as wrasses, so causing ecological release of invertebrates that prey on very small A. planci. A. planci juveniles live hidden in rubble for 16–19 months after settlement [1Birkeland C.E. Lucas J.S. Acanthaster planci: Major Management Problem of Coral Reefs. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL1990Google Scholar] and have very high disappearance rates that are not due to emigration [11Keesing J.K. Wiedermeyer W.L. Okaji K. Halford A.R. Hall K.C. Cartwright C.M. Mortality rates of juvenile starfish Acanthaster planci and Nardoa spp. measured on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia and in Okinawa.Japan. Oceanol. Acta. 1996; 19: 441-448Google Scholar]. This implies that the invertebrate faunas in the rubble habitat of juvenile A. planci should also differ predictably between no-take and fished reefs. The GBRMP was re-zoned in mid-2004, increasing the no-take zones from 4.5% to 33% of the area of the park [7Fernandes L. Day J. Lewis A. Slegers S. Kerrigan B. Breen D. Cameron D. Jago B. Hall J. Lowe D. et al.Establishing representative no-take areas in the Great Barrier Reef: large-scale implementation of theory on marine protected areas.Cons. Biol. 2005; 19: 1733-1744Crossref Scopus (443) Google Scholar]. Whatever the underlying mechanism, this study suggests that this increase should reduce the overall impact of future waves of A. planci outbreaks. That effect may be amplified if fewer reefs with starfish outbreaks mean less effective propagation of outbreaks from reef to reef through the central GBR. More generally, the geographic range of A. planci includes the most biodiverse [12Roberts C.M. McClean C.J. Veron J.E.N. Hawkins J.P. Allen G.R. McAllister D.E. Mittermeier C.G. Schueler F.W. Spalding M. Wells F. et al.Marine biodiversity hotspots and conservation priorities for tropical reefs.Science. 2002; 295: 1280-1284Crossref PubMed Scopus (1032) Google Scholar] as well as some of the most threatened reefs [13Bryant D. Burke L. McManus J.W. Spalding M. Reefs at Risk. A Map Based Indicator of Threats to the World's Coral reefs. World Resources Institute, Washington DC1998Google Scholar] on earth; this study provides an additional argument for establishment of effective MPAs across the range [14Mora C. Andrefouet S. Costello M.J. Kranenburg C. Rollo A. Veron J. Gaston K.J. Myers R.A. Coral reefs and the global network of marine protected areas.Science. 2006; 312: 1750-1751Crossref PubMed Scopus (341) Google Scholar], as refuges from exploitation and other threats and as sources for recolonisation of damaged reefs to increase ecological resilience. This project was funded by the Australian Institute of Marine Science and the CRC Reef Research Centre. I thank GBRMPA library staff for their help, L. Castell and A. Dolman and two referees for helpful comments on the manuscript. Download .pdf (.02 MB) Help with pdf files Document S1. Supplemental Experimental Procedures and Supplemental References" @default.
• W2036299875 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2036299875 creator A5000204057 @default.
• W2036299875 date "2008-07-01" @default.
• W2036299875 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W2036299875 title "No-take reserves protect coral reefs from predatory starfish" @default.
• W2036299875 cites W1597583439 @default.
• W2036299875 cites W2027738172 @default.
• W2036299875 cites W2057695258 @default.
• W2036299875 cites W2060029670 @default.
• W2036299875 cites W2095229602 @default.
• W2036299875 cites W2149529243 @default.
• W2036299875 cites W2169389867 @default.
• W2036299875 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2008.05.033" @default.
• W2036299875 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18644332" @default.
• W2036299875 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W2036299875 type Work @default.
• W2036299875 sameAs 2036299875 @default.
• W2036299875 citedByCount "132" @default.
• W2036299875 countsByYear W20362998752012 @default.
• W2036299875 countsByYear W20362998752013 @default.
• W2036299875 countsByYear W20362998752014 @default.
• W2036299875 countsByYear W20362998752015 @default.
• W2036299875 countsByYear W20362998752016 @default.
• W2036299875 countsByYear W20362998752017 @default.
• W2036299875 countsByYear W20362998752018 @default.
• W2036299875 countsByYear W20362998752019 @default.
• W2036299875 countsByYear W20362998752020 @default.
• W2036299875 countsByYear W20362998752021 @default.
• W2036299875 countsByYear W20362998752022 @default.
• W2036299875 countsByYear W20362998752023 @default.
• W2036299875 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2036299875 hasAuthorship W2036299875A5000204057 @default.
• W2036299875 hasBestOaLocation W20362998751 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConcept C143020374 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConcept C18903297 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConcept C207769581 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConcept C2778175403 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConcept C2983338891 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConcept C505870484 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConcept C514101110 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConcept C77044568 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConcept C79367842 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConceptScore W2036299875C143020374 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConceptScore W2036299875C18903297 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConceptScore W2036299875C207769581 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConceptScore W2036299875C2778175403 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConceptScore W2036299875C2983338891 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConceptScore W2036299875C505870484 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConceptScore W2036299875C514101110 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConceptScore W2036299875C77044568 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConceptScore W2036299875C79367842 @default.
• W2036299875 hasConceptScore W2036299875C86803240 @default.
• W2036299875 hasIssue "14" @default.
• W2036299875 hasLocation W20362998751 @default.
• W2036299875 hasLocation W20362998752 @default.
• W2036299875 hasOpenAccess W2036299875 @default.
• W2036299875 hasPrimaryLocation W20362998751 @default.
• W2036299875 hasRelatedWork W1985115650 @default.
• W2036299875 hasRelatedWork W2009552301 @default.
• W2036299875 hasRelatedWork W2010916625 @default.
• W2036299875 hasRelatedWork W2014585495 @default.
• W2036299875 hasRelatedWork W2021324102 @default.
• W2036299875 hasRelatedWork W2026758819 @default.
• W2036299875 hasRelatedWork W2053091750 @default.
• W2036299875 hasRelatedWork W2128563033 @default.
• W2036299875 hasRelatedWork W2752870152 @default.
• W2036299875 hasRelatedWork W4206479614 @default.
• W2036299875 hasVolume "18" @default.
• W2036299875 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2036299875 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2036299875 magId "2036299875" @default.
• W2036299875 workType "article" @default.