Junling Zhang , Jingzhao Ke , Xiangbo Liu , He Zhao , Wentao Zhu , Baruch Rinkevich , Shai Shafir , Aimin Wang , Xiubao Li
{"title":"Survival and growth of “branches of opportunity” from ten coral species outplanted on framed reef modules","authors":"Junling Zhang , Jingzhao Ke , Xiangbo Liu , He Zhao , Wentao Zhu , Baruch Rinkevich , Shai Shafir , Aimin Wang , Xiubao Li","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoleng.2025.107529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>To reveal local coral species aptness for reef restoration, 30 “framed reef modules” (FRMs) were deployed in a degraded coral reef area at the northern part of Wuzhizhou Island, Hainan Island, South China Sea. Fragments of opportunity from 10 coral species (8 branching, 1 foliose, 1 encrusting) were collected and outplanted on the FRMs. Measurements of growth rates, survival, and physiological indexes were then taken at 30, 120, 210 and 360 days after transplantation. The results showed that <em>Acropora microphthalma</em>, <em>Acropora austera</em>, <em>Hydnophora rigida</em> and <em>Montipora foliosa</em> showed fast growth rates (>2.87 cm<sup>2</sup>·month<sup>−1</sup>) and high one-year survival rates (>80 %). <em>Acropora hyacinthus</em> and <em>Montipora digitata,</em> while exhibiting faster growth rates (4.95 ± 0.31 and 4.85 ± 0.41 cm<sup>2</sup>·month<sup>−1</sup>, respectively), revealed lower one-year survival rates (ca. 50 %). <em>Psammocora contigua</em> and <em>Porites cylindrica</em> showed lower growth rates (1.50 ± 0.14 and 1.96 ± 0.19 cm<sup>2</sup>·month<sup>−1</sup>, respectively), yet presented 100 % survival rates. <em>Pocillopora damicornis</em> and <em>Echinopora gemmacea</em> exhibited the lowest growth rates (1.01 ± 0.14 and 1.73 ± 0.21 cm<sup>2</sup>·month<sup>−1</sup>, respectively) and 86.2 % and 93.1 % survivals. There are differences in growth and survival among different types of corals, which are closely related to their physiological characteristics. The biomasses of <em>P. contigua</em>, <em>P. cylindrica</em>, and <em>M. foliosa</em> were the highest, >10 mg·cm<sup>−2</sup>, while for the remaining 7 species values were > 8 mg·cm<sup>−2</sup>. The highest photosynthesis rates were recorded in <em>P. contigua</em>, <em>P. cylindrica</em>, <em>A. austera</em>, and <em>M. digitata</em>, while the lowest were in <em>P. damicornis</em> and <em>H. rigida</em>. These results demonstrate significant interspecific differences in survival and growth patterns, highlighting the importance of species-specific restoration strategies. The present transplantation method supports restoration approaches that combine different coral species in a single transplantation action.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11490,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Engineering","volume":"212 ","pages":"Article 107529"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857425000175","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
To reveal local coral species aptness for reef restoration, 30 “framed reef modules” (FRMs) were deployed in a degraded coral reef area at the northern part of Wuzhizhou Island, Hainan Island, South China Sea. Fragments of opportunity from 10 coral species (8 branching, 1 foliose, 1 encrusting) were collected and outplanted on the FRMs. Measurements of growth rates, survival, and physiological indexes were then taken at 30, 120, 210 and 360 days after transplantation. The results showed that Acropora microphthalma, Acropora austera, Hydnophora rigida and Montipora foliosa showed fast growth rates (>2.87 cm2·month−1) and high one-year survival rates (>80 %). Acropora hyacinthus and Montipora digitata, while exhibiting faster growth rates (4.95 ± 0.31 and 4.85 ± 0.41 cm2·month−1, respectively), revealed lower one-year survival rates (ca. 50 %). Psammocora contigua and Porites cylindrica showed lower growth rates (1.50 ± 0.14 and 1.96 ± 0.19 cm2·month−1, respectively), yet presented 100 % survival rates. Pocillopora damicornis and Echinopora gemmacea exhibited the lowest growth rates (1.01 ± 0.14 and 1.73 ± 0.21 cm2·month−1, respectively) and 86.2 % and 93.1 % survivals. There are differences in growth and survival among different types of corals, which are closely related to their physiological characteristics. The biomasses of P. contigua, P. cylindrica, and M. foliosa were the highest, >10 mg·cm−2, while for the remaining 7 species values were > 8 mg·cm−2. The highest photosynthesis rates were recorded in P. contigua, P. cylindrica, A. austera, and M. digitata, while the lowest were in P. damicornis and H. rigida. These results demonstrate significant interspecific differences in survival and growth patterns, highlighting the importance of species-specific restoration strategies. The present transplantation method supports restoration approaches that combine different coral species in a single transplantation action.
期刊介绍:
Ecological engineering has been defined as the design of ecosystems for the mutual benefit of humans and nature. The journal is meant for ecologists who, because of their research interests or occupation, are involved in designing, monitoring, or restoring ecosystems, and can serve as a bridge between ecologists and engineers.
Specific topics covered in the journal include: habitat reconstruction; ecotechnology; synthetic ecology; bioengineering; restoration ecology; ecology conservation; ecosystem rehabilitation; stream and river restoration; reclamation ecology; non-renewable resource conservation. Descriptions of specific applications of ecological engineering are acceptable only when situated within context of adding novelty to current research and emphasizing ecosystem restoration. We do not accept purely descriptive reports on ecosystem structures (such as vegetation surveys), purely physical assessment of materials that can be used for ecological restoration, small-model studies carried out in the laboratory or greenhouse with artificial (waste)water or crop studies, or case studies on conventional wastewater treatment and eutrophication that do not offer an ecosystem restoration approach within the paper.