Gravity of human impacts mediates coral reef conservation gains

• Joshua E. Cinner
• Eva Maire
• Cindy Huchery
• M. Aaron MacNeil
• Nicholas A. J. Graham
• Camilo Mora
• Tim R. McClanahan
• Michele L. Barnes
• John N. Kittinger
• Christina C. Hicks
• Stephanie D’Agata
• Andrew S. Hoey
• Georgina G. Gurney
• David A. Feary
• Ivor D. Williams
• Michel Kulbicki
• Laurent Vigliola
• Laurent Wantiez
• Graham J. Edgar
• Rick D. Stuart-Smith
• Stuart A. Sandin
• Alison Green
• Marah J. Hardt
• Maria Beger
• Alan M. Friedlander
• Shaun K. Wilson
• Eran Brokovich
• Andrew J. Brooks
• Juan J. Cruz-Motta
• David J. Booth
• Pascale Chabanet
• Charlotte Gough
• Mark Tupper
• Sebastian Ferse
• U. Rashid Sumaila
• Shinta Pardede
• David Mouillot

Departments

Societal Impact

Abstract

Coral reefs provide ecosystem goods and services for millions of people in the tropics, but reef conditions are declining worldwide. Effective solutions to the crisis facing coral reefs depend in part on understanding the context under which different types of conservation benefits can be maximized. Our global analysis of nearly 1,800 tropical reefs reveals how the intensity of human impacts in the surrounding seascape, measured as a function of human population size and accessibility to reefs (“gravity”), diminishes the effectiveness of marine reserves at sustaining reef fish biomass and the presence of top predators, even where compliance with reserve rules is high. Critically, fish biomass in high-compliance marine reserves located where human impacts were intensive tended to be less than a quarter that of reserves where human impacts were low. Similarly, the probability of encountering top predators on reefs with high human impacts was close to zero, even in high-compliance marine reserves. However, we find that the relative difference between openly fished sites and reserves (what we refer to as conservation gains) are highest for fish biomass (excluding predators) where human impacts are moderate and for top predators where human impacts are low. Our results illustrate critical ecological trade-offs in meeting key conservation objectives: reserves placed where there are moderate-to-high human impacts can provide substantial conservation gains for fish biomass, yet they are unlikely to support key ecosystem functions like higher-order predation, which is more prevalent in reserve locations with low human impacts.

• DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1708001115

Cite this activity

@article{Cinner2018,
  Title = {Gravity of human impacts mediates coral reef conservation gains},
  Author = {Cinner, Joshua E. and Maire, Eva and Huchery, Cindy and MacNeil, M. Aaron and Graham, Nicholas A. J. and Mora, Camilo and McClanahan, Tim R. and Barnes, Michele L. and Kittinger, John N. and Hicks, Christina C. and D’Agata, Stephanie and Hoey, Andrew S. and Gurney, Georgina G. and Feary, David A. and Williams, Ivor D. and Kulbicki, Michel and Vigliola, Laurent and Wantiez, Laurent and Edgar, Graham J. and Stuart-Smith, Rick D. and Sandin, Stuart A. and Green, Alison and Hardt, Marah J. and Beger, Maria and Friedlander, Alan M. and Wilson, Shaun K. and Brokovich, Eran and Brooks, Andrew J. and Cruz-Motta, Juan J. and Booth, David J. and Chabanet, Pascale and Gough, Charlotte and Tupper, Mark and Ferse, Sebastian and Sumaila, U. Rashid and Pardede, Shinta and Mouillot, David},
  Editor = {},
  Journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences},
  Year = {2018},
  Pages = {E6116-E6125},
  Volume = {115},
  Doi = {10.1073/pnas.1708001115},
  Abstract = {Coral reefs provide ecosystem goods and services for millions of people in the tropics, but reef conditions are declining worldwide. Effective solutions to the crisis facing coral reefs depend in part on understanding the context under which different types of conservation benefits can be maximized. Our global analysis of nearly 1,800 tropical reefs reveals how the intensity of human impacts in the surrounding seascape, measured as a function of human population size and accessibility to reefs (“gravity”), diminishes the effectiveness of marine reserves at sustaining reef fish biomass and the presence of top predators, even where compliance with reserve rules is high. Critically, fish biomass in high-compliance marine reserves located where human impacts were intensive tended to be less than a quarter that of reserves where human impacts were low. Similarly, the probability of encountering top predators on reefs with high human impacts was close to zero, even in high-compliance marine reserves. However, we find that the relative difference between openly fished sites and reserves (what we refer to as conservation gains) are highest for fish biomass (excluding predators) where human impacts are moderate and for top predators where human impacts are low. Our results illustrate critical ecological trade-offs in meeting key conservation objectives: reserves placed where there are moderate-to-high human impacts can provide substantial conservation gains for fish biomass, yet they are unlikely to support key ecosystem functions like higher-order predation, which is more prevalent in reserve locations with low human impacts.},
}

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Cinner, Joshua E.
AU  - Maire, Eva
AU  - Huchery, Cindy
AU  - MacNeil, M. Aaron
AU  - Graham, Nicholas A. J.
AU  - Mora, Camilo
AU  - McClanahan, Tim R.
AU  - Barnes, Michele L.
AU  - Kittinger, John N.
AU  - Hicks, Christina C.
AU  - D’Agata, Stephanie
AU  - Hoey, Andrew S.
AU  - Gurney, Georgina G.
AU  - Feary, David A.
AU  - Williams, Ivor D.
AU  - Kulbicki, Michel
AU  - Vigliola, Laurent
AU  - Wantiez, Laurent
AU  - Edgar, Graham J.
AU  - Stuart-Smith, Rick D.
AU  - Sandin, Stuart A.
AU  - Green, Alison
AU  - Hardt, Marah J.
AU  - Beger, Maria
AU  - Friedlander, Alan M.
AU  - Wilson, Shaun K.
AU  - Brokovich, Eran
AU  - Brooks, Andrew J.
AU  - Cruz-Motta, Juan J.
AU  - Booth, David J.
AU  - Chabanet, Pascale
AU  - Gough, Charlotte
AU  - Tupper, Mark
AU  - Ferse, Sebastian
AU  - Sumaila, U. Rashid
AU  - Pardede, Shinta
AU  - Mouillot, David
TI  - Gravity of human impacts mediates coral reef conservation gains
T2  - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
PY  - 2018
SP  - E6116-E6125
VL  - 115
DO  - 10.1073/pnas.1708001115
AB  - Coral reefs provide ecosystem goods and services for millions of people in the tropics, but reef conditions are declining worldwide. Effective solutions to the crisis facing coral reefs depend in part on understanding the context under which different types of conservation benefits can be maximized. Our global analysis of nearly 1,800 tropical reefs reveals how the intensity of human impacts in the surrounding seascape, measured as a function of human population size and accessibility to reefs (“gravity”), diminishes the effectiveness of marine reserves at sustaining reef fish biomass and the presence of top predators, even where compliance with reserve rules is high. Critically, fish biomass in high-compliance marine reserves located where human impacts were intensive tended to be less than a quarter that of reserves where human impacts were low. Similarly, the probability of encountering top predators on reefs with high human impacts was close to zero, even in high-compliance marine reserves. However, we find that the relative difference between openly fished sites and reserves (what we refer to as conservation gains) are highest for fish biomass (excluding predators) where human impacts are moderate and for top predators where human impacts are low. Our results illustrate critical ecological trade-offs in meeting key conservation objectives: reserves placed where there are moderate-to-high human impacts can provide substantial conservation gains for fish biomass, yet they are unlikely to support key ecosystem functions like higher-order predation, which is more prevalent in reserve locations with low human impacts.
ER  - 

Details

Research Spectrum