1

OPERATION WALLACEA SOUTH BUTON MARINE SITE 2016 By: Alejandro Usobiaga

FIELD SITE 2016 SEASON REPORT

Operations Manager: Mohini Johnson

Diving Operations: Muslimin Kaimuddin

Monitoring Program Coordinator: Alejandro Usobiaga

Coral Reef Ecologist: Rebecca Diggins

Dissertation Students: Scott Burgan

Mathew Dryer Max Fursman Taylor Wilson

Research Assistants: Gene Kwong

Theresa Zeisner Andrew Baker

Jessica Menzies Hatty Darling

Jordanna Morrish Alec Atherton

Sudiar, Halim and Dicky Ellie Ward

Cameron Schuster Date: 22/11/16

2

CONTENTS

1. Introduction 4

1.1. Coral reefs and sustainable management 4 1.2. Coral Triangle and Indonesia 4 1.3. South East Sulawesi 4 1.4. Key Functional species 4 1.5. Global reliance on reefs 5 1.6. South Buton 5

2. Aims and Objectives 6

2.1. Monitoring program and fishing practices 6 2.2. Artificial Reef 6 2.3. Fish Market trips 7 2.4. Bubu trap impacts 7 2.5. Butterflyfish response to a changing environment 7 2.6. Nudibranch association with sponges 8 2.7. Nudibranch indicator of reef health 8

3. Methods and Materials 9

3.1. The study site 9 3.2. Monitoring program and fishing practices 10

3.2.1. As above listed order methods 10-13

4. Results 14 4.1. Monitoring program and fishing practices 14

4.1.1. Habitat Quality 14 4.1.2. Non-Coral invertebrate community composition 15 4.1.3. Fish Assemblage 16 4.1.4. Fishing practices 17

4.2. Artificial Reef 18 4.3. Fish Market trip 18 4.4. Dissertations 19-21

5. Discussion 22

5.1. Discussion 22-24 5.8. Conclusion 24

6. References 26

3

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

GBR Great Barrier Reef MPA Marine Protected Area EBFM Ecosystem-based Fisheries Management OPWALL Operation Wallacea GMAD Global Marine Aquarium Database FB Fish Base

SVS Stereo Video System EM EventMeasure GIS Geographic Information Systems WMNP Wakatobi Marine National Park COT Crown of Thorns Starfish CAD Computer aided design

4

1.0 INTRODUCTION Coral reefs are one of the most productive and diverse ecosystems on the planet holding over 25% of marine life within a 0.2% area (Hoegh-Guldberg 1999). They are home to a large variety of organisms (from planktonic organisms to marine mammals) and vary greatly in structure and composition. This diversity profile safeguards them from stressors such as overfishing (Jackson et al. 2001), climate change (Harvell et al. 2002) and disease impacts (Hughes et al. 2003). However, coral reef degradation and loss as a result of anthropogenic and natural stressors is a threat to the biological communities that depend upon them. With 30% of the worlds reefs now considered as severely damaged (Moberg and Folke 1999), studying the rate of change can serve as an important tool for reef managers. However, identifying anthropogenic stresses (such as fishing) in naturally stressed areas is becoming increasingly difficult and their impact on long-term reef health is relatively unknown. Estimations show that coral reefs provide US$30billion annually in support of global economies (Cesar et al. 2003). When coupled with areas such as the Coral Triangle in Southeast Asia (home to 75% of known coral species and over half of the world’s reefs) loss of such can spell disaster (Cesar et al. 2003). This area is recognized primarily for its high global biological productivity and diversity in reef structure (Geider et al. 2001). Furthermore countries situated within, such as Indonesia whose projections in fish catch will decrease 20% each year until 2055 (highest loss of marine fisheries globally) could lead to phase-shift phenomena’s in biological communities and loss of livelihoods for millions of people (Cheung et al. 2010). However, coral reef resources are dependent on reef condition for which little information can be found; in particular those in S.E. Sulawesi (situated at the center of the Coral Triangle). Reef condition, characterized by the biological functionality of the biota community, has mainly been assessed for the benthos of coral reefs, with scant attention to fish assemblages and invertebrate richness (Fox and Bellwood 2007). This is mainly attributed to corals reef building capabilities under which structural complexity is formed and positively correlated with fish biomass and density (who in turn use for refuge from predation) (Graham and Nash 2013). Therefore incorporating structural complexity into monitoring programs for its integral component in reef functionality is a must (Feary et al. 2007) This loss in marine environments, especially coastal, has influenced biological structures for thousands of years, and yet the gap of understanding how has only developed in the last century (Jackson et al. 2001).

Maintaining populations of key functional species such as herbivores increases the resilience of reefs to global climate change, and can reverse declining reefs back into more productive systems (Rasher et al. 2013, Rogers et al. 2014). On the other hand, herbivorous species may cause loss of habitat-forming organisms and therefore lead to a reduction in habitat heterogeneity and structural (or topographical) complexity. This habitat degradation manifests itself via overall poor reef health. For example, on reefs in the Indian Ocean, where fisheries target herbivores, the relatively low biomass of herbivores (177 kg ha-1) was the cause for a benthic phase shift occurring. The lack of herbivores lowered overall reef health such that macro-algal dominated reefs became more prevalent than coral dominated reefs (1,130kg/ha of macro-algae to 850kg/ha of coral) (McClanahan et al. 2011). In contrast, Seychelles reefs under marine reserve protection have enhanced herbivore biomass (2005 values: 279 kg ha-1 ± 21.5 s.e.) compared to fished areas (mean 163 kg ha−1 ± 58.6 s.e.) (Selig and Bruno 2010) with

5

positive effects on overall reef health. We can therefore see that fish assemblages have strong correlations to overall reef health and should be studied not only as a whole biomass indices but broken down into functional groups such as Herbivores, Coralivores, Piscivores etc. Finally with an estimated 100 million people globally relying on coral reefs for securing food, housing and revenue in the form of tourism and fisheries (McClanahan et al. 2011, Cinner et al. 2012, Cinner et al. 2013), we must incorporate social studies parallel to ecological ones. Recent studies are revealing that non-selective fishing methods have adverse impacts on reef associated communities such as by-catch (Zhou et al. 2010). In order to best apply an ecosystem approach management whereby both the fisheries and coral reef ecosystem thrive, we must adjacently conduct an investigation on the reef associated pressures (namely fishing) (Russ et al. 2004). By studying catch effort, gear and fishers characteristics, we attribute areas of reef to certain fishing practices. For example; where ecologically, a reef has high structural complexity indices; fishing practices that involve laying down traps are rare. In contrast, where a reef has degraded due to high environmental and anthropogenic stressors, fishing practices are less abundant. By overlaying social data with reef community functionality, we can holistically study reef health and reveal key information about areas of reef stress. This report studies a variety of features regarding reef community structure and fishing characteristics in the southern part of Buton Island, Sulawesi, Indonesia (figure 1). This is an area void of information regarding reef condition and fishing practices. To aid this endeavor, partnerships with multiple universities and high schools from around the globe were led by the organization Operation Wallacea (OpWall). A sister site to this one, in the Wakatobi National Park, has many years of experience using the methods outlined in this report, and provides the basis of the studies’ rationale for this site. Moreover, and for the first time, comparative studies between the two sites were implemented with the objective to compare differences in reef community structure between a protected and non-protected area. For this 2016 report, eight key studies were carried out across a variety of marine-related topics.

Figure 1: Site location of Buton Island in South East Sulawesi Topographic location map of S.E. Sulawesi. Created with SRTM

from publicly release SRTM data – Sadalmelik 2007

Location

6

2.0 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES The following research is a collation of various studies carried out by the monitoring program team and four distinguishable University undergraduates who were conducting research topics for their dissertation projects. All these studies have as a primary objective to serve as reference points so that future management endeavors can be applied. The eight studies conducted had the following aims and objectives:

2.1 Monitoring program and fishing practices: AIM:

1. To assess ecological state through community structures of spatially varying coral reefs and increase our understanding of relationships between the differing ecological communities.

Objectives:

a. Measure composition, cover, distribution, diversity, abundance, biomass and topographical complexity of benthic, fish and non-coral invertebrate community structure.

b. Investigate spatial difference between coral reefs community composition and the principal drivers for such differences.

2. To investigate the fishing practices occurring in the region and thereby assess the degree of

confluence between reef ecological state and fishing practice. Objectives:

a. Evaluate local fishing practices by measuring fishing areas, gear use, frequency, targeted species and catch rates of the local fishing community, including interactions among these aspects.

b. Explore correlations between fishing practices on reefs and associated ecological community structure.

2.2 Artificial Reef: AIM:

1. To accurately design in 3D the structure of Pantai Nirwana’s shallower artificial reef (~10m) and use as reference for future reef restoration studies.

Objectives:

a. Count and measure the steel beams that make up the configuration of the artificial reef.

b. Input data through a 3D modeling software (Google Sketchup and CAD).

7

2.3 Fish market trips: AIM:

1. To identify target species and discuss best practices for management of local fisheries. Objectives:

a. Quantify abundance and diversity of all species present in the market (including invertebrates).

b. Explore advantages and disadvantages of small-scale fisheries to a local resource-dependent community for sustainable management.

2.4 Assessing the impact of Bubu traps on Coral reefs in South Buton, Indonesia: AIM:

1. Assess fish catch composition by bubu trap method. Objectives:

a. Investigate fish species abundance caught by bubu traps via random sampling using video analysis.

b. Explore the relationship between bubu trap volume and catch effort. c. Determine whether placement of bubu traps on differing reef zones correlates

to catch effort. 2. Assess the impact on benthic composition where bubu traps are situated. Objectives:

a. Visually analyze the benthic composition / morphology of the substratum located directly under the traps.

b. Study the direction of placement for bubu traps in relation to land.

2.5 Butterflyfish response to a changing environment – South Buton: AIM:

1. To explore the relationship between the reef health status and Chaetodontidae spp.

Objectives: a. To determine the relationship between biomass of Chaetodontidae spp. and the

health status of the associated coral reef zone. b. Assess which Cheatodontidae spp. feeding guilds are most prevalent between

reefs of differing health status, using a predetermined scale

2. Increase our understanding of the relationships that exist between Chaetodontidae spp. diversity and benthic composition around South Buton

Objectives a. Assess the relationship between scleractinian coral cover, its morphology and

species to the diversity indices of Chaetodontidae spp. b. Investigate the change in abundance of to the associated benthic type.

8

2.6 Investigating the diversity, distribution and abundance of Nudibranchia and their association with sponges, along the reefs of Hoga and South Buton, Indonesia: AIM:

1. Study the food source abundance in the form of sponges surrounding Nudibranchia populations.

2. Examine whether there is a marked difference in abundance and distribution between a MPA and non-MPA

Objectives:

a. Examine whether, in sponge eating species, these abundances affects their distribution and diversity

b. Create a prediction model for nudi populations based on sponge cover c. Assess whether reef quality has an impact on this model.

2.7 Nudibranch diversity, distribution and abundance: A bio indicator of reef community structure for two locations within the Coral Triangle, Indonesia:

AIM:

1. To compare the effects of turbidity, sedimentation, and food availability on nudibranch diversity, distribution and abundance.

Objectives:

a. How does turbidity affect nudibranch composition? b. Does sediment deposition correlate to food availability for nudibranch species? c. Is food availability a driver of nudibranch assemblage?

2. To study how spatial variability (protected vs. non protected) affects diversity, distribution

and abundance.

Objectives:

a. Is species diversity indices the same amongst the two locations? b. Is nudibranch distribution reflective of coral reef protected status? c. Does nudibranch abundance increase amongst protected reefs?

9

3.0 METHODS AND MATERIAL 3.1 The study Site Sulawesi is the fourth largest island in Indonesia (area of 159,000 km2) and lies between Borneo to the west and the Mollucas Islands to the east. Sulawesi is also situated on the Wallacea Line, globally recognized for its distinct biodiversity, evolutionary biology and biogeography. These characteristics extend across its fauna and flora in Asia and Australia. This Operation Wallacea’s marine research program report is most concentrated around the southern Point of Buton Island, Kadatua and Siompu (herein referred to as the “study area” – Figure 2). For the most part, this region of South East Sulawesi remains understudied with most research focusing on terrestrial ecology such as bird studies in the local rainforest of Labundo (Martin and Blackburn 2014). This research therefore documents novel information concerning marine resources in the region, namely the coral reefs community’s structure. For the broader international scientific community, this research provides a reference point of ecological and social information about South Butons’ coral reefs, which can be used by the community stakeholders to design and implement reef management plans. This is driven by the on-site research organisation, Opwall, whose historical presence in the region has resulted in the creation of a number of nature parks and protected areas.

Start End

Pampanga S 5.521081 S 5.520276

E 122.560465 E 122.558504

Nirwana S 5.523540 S 5.525258 E 122.566023 E 122.567694

Moko S 5.528621 S 5.526733 E 122.570108 E 122.569220

Kadatua S 5.523983 S 5.527092 E 122.512599 E 122.510825

Snake Island S 5.594038 S 5.596823

E 122.499259 E 122.497295

Siumpu S 5.625238 S 5.623307 E 122.524936 E 122.523899

Figure 2: South Buton map depicting reef location (Marked X) created with Adobe Photoshop through trace and Google maps. Dotted lines represent reef crest and GPS points of transects.

Buton

10

3.2 Monitoring program and fishing practices Ecological surveys were carried out on 6 reefs across 4 nearby islands in South Buton (Buton, Siompu, Palau Ular, Kadatua); refer to figure 2 for clarification. These reefs represent a range in reef condition from healthy to impacted reefs (chosen reefs from pilot survey findings – refer to Monitoring program protocol for more information). Within the group, replication of typical reef zonation is included. 2 reefs are slowly sloping fringing reefs, 2 are moderately sloping with overhangs and 2 have sudden drop-offs (i.e. reef flat and walls, with no slope). At each site, surveys were conducted along the reef flat (0-5m), reef crest (5-10m) and reef slope (10-18m). The surveys took place on 4 replicate 50m transects (covering over 200m of reef) at each depth and location. Belt transects (50m long x 5m high x 5m wide) were used to assess fish and non-coral invertebrate community structure, and 50m line-intercept transects to assess the benthos. This will encompass a total of 216 surveys per annum (2015 and 2016). For further information regarding equipment, survey effort and variables please refer to the Bau Bau monitoring program protocol handbook. Social surveys regarding fishing practices were collected using a series of methods including semi-structured interviews with fisherfolk, participatory mapping and participant observation. Survey questions centered around geographical locations, gear types, frequency, targeted catch and fisherfolk characteristics. Interviews were carried out by local staff so as to avoid bias and miscommunication between western interviewer and fishers (Clifton et al. 2013). The primary goal of this survey was to identify through satellite imagery the typical fishing locations from fisherfolk and their frequency in accessing them. It is important to note, that this study focuses on local fishermen whose fishing practices are carried out on a daily basis and fishing vessels not equipped for overnight fishing; thereby relying on a daily catch. In March of 2016 and initial evaluation of active fishermen was carried out to assess the sample size of fishers in the area. Surveys were carried out in June-August 2016, encompassing a total of 65 surveys along the regency of Bau Bau, 32 for the regency of Siompu and 35 for the regency of Kadatua making a total of 132 interviewed fisherfolk. Lastly results of fishing habit data will be assessed geographically, to identify the most used sites and attain relative indices of fishing effort for the South Buton reef area. Social and ecological surveys will be compared using multivariate statistical analysis (Dendrograms produced by SPSS depicting linkages that reveal how closely correlated catch composition is to the survey results). GIS (Geographic information Systems) will aid to produce a map depicting attributes of fishing locations.

3.3 Artificial Reef: Pantai Nirwana, located 100m south of Nirwana Beach Villa (OpWall volunteers and staff reside during expedition in South Buton), has two artificial reefs as part of a local collaboration with the NGO for reef recovery initiatives. The two artificial reefs have differing depth for comparative assessment; shallower one (~10m), deeper one (~17m). The artificial reef explored in this study was the shallower one (~10m) as it is located in a more accessible location. Measuring tapes (0.5 m, 1 m and 2 m) were used by the Monitoring Programme Coordinator and four research assistants to accurately measure and depict the structure. All data were recorded on dive slates throughout a 50-minute dive and were later transcribed onto paper

11

back in the lab. Over the period of one week, the RAs input the measurements into 3D modeling software (Google Sketchup and CAD). 3.4 Fish market trips: Throughout the Introduction to Coral reefs course implemented for the High School program, students were required as part of the fisheries class, to participate in a fish market study that entailed; identifying commercial fish and discussing management of small-scale fisheries. Each week (total of seven weeks), different school groups made a trip to Wameo fish market in Bau Bau. In groups of four or five, the students surveyed the market by counting and identifying fish and non-coral invertebrate species with the aid of a local translator. Careful annotation was taken when “rare” or “endangered” species were observed. Students were not allowed to ask fishermen questions that may be offensive or insensitive. After surveying the market, students gathered outside to view the unloading of catch, and discuss amongst themselves small-scale fisheries management objectives that could be applied to the Wameo fish market.

3.5 Assessing the impact of Bubu traps on Coral reefs in South Buton, Indonesia: The surveys were carried out along the reef flat (0-5m), reef crest (5-10m), and the reef slope (10-15m). Each survey was undertaken through in situ scuba diving (twice a day, six days a week basis). All surveys were undertaken using random sampling within each dive site. 1) The volume (length, width and height) of each bubu trap was measured through the use of

a tape measure. 2) The material the trap was made out of (bamboo or metal) was noted down. 3) The catch effort of each trap was also determined through fish species identification using

video analysis by recording each traps catch on GoPro Hero 3+ Silver. 4) The benthic composition of the underlying substratum was visually analyzed during scuba

dives to assess what coral morphologies and species are being affected through this fishing method.

5) GPS coordinates were recorded at the location of each bubu trap to later be displayed on a GIS map.

6) The orientations of the traps were taken relative to that of the reef flat and shore to determine whether the ecology of fish influenced catch rates.

Data was also acquired from partnering scientist (Operation Wallacea 2016 - Alejandro Usobiaga Fabian); unpublished data, in order to assess the fishing demographics and characteristics of the fishermen in South Buton region, covering an area of Baubau, Kadatua, and Siompu regencies.

12

3.6 Butterfly fish response to a changing environment – South Buton: For this study multiple sites were used with differing levels of habitat alteration. These sites varied from healthy to highly altered, where the impacts of fishing and coral degradation were evident. At these sites three depths were measured: reef flat (0-5m), reef crest (5-10m), and the reef slope (10-15m). To collate data on the overall benthic composition and species on the reef, multiple transects of around 20m were laid out. Along these, video transects were conducted to account for benthic composition as well as the sites heterogeneity. For fish analyses, a stereo-video dual HD camera was used to survey along the transects. Furthermore, analyses of local fish markets were conducted in order to try and identify key target species for local fishermen, allowing for these to be monitored on the reef to look for relationships. Finally, for a one-week period the bite rate of Chaetodontidae spp. were measured via visual observation. These observations were taken twice a day between 09:00 and 11:00 and 15:00 – 17:00 to try and account for all diurnal feeding patters, however night dives were not able to be conducted. Once a species was found it was followed and recorded for three minutes using a GoPro. Each bite was counted and the food source it was feeding upon was later identified and logged, however, if the species was disturbed and began to flee or hide within the reef, the monitoring was aborted and a new individual was monitored. The choice of species was random with individuals being searched for on each dive.

3.7 Investigating the diversity, distribution and abundance of Nudibranchia and their association with sponges, along the reefs of Hoga and South Buton, Indonesia: The following plan was followed for collecting the data on each dive: 1) The buddy pair would descend to the predetermined depth and swim to a random location

at that depth. 2) A 50m transect tape was carefully laid out along the reef, using protruding features such a

rubble or dead massive coral, to secure it. The depth the tape was laid at was kept consistent throughout each survey.

3) The buddies would then swim back along the length of the tape, one on each side. A 1.5m area on either side of the tape was carefully examined by each buddy for Nudibranchia. This resulted in a 150m2 zone being searched. This search was always for a 20-minute duration, to ensure a consistent effort in surveying.

4) If a Nudibranchia was found, then the species and its location along the transect were recorded on an underwater slate. If it wasn’t immediately recognized then a description was recorded.

5) A 0.5m2 meter square was placed with the Nudibranchia in its center and a photo taken of the square for later analysis.

6) The Nudibranchia was then observed for a minute to record behavior. 7) Once the end of the transect tape was reached the buddy team then swam back along the

tape a second time, this time laying a 1m2 meter square on the transect tape every 5 meters. A photo of the square was then taken for later analysis.

13

8) Once the entire tape had been photographed in this manner it was then reeled in and the dive was ended.

All survey data was entered into an excel sheet upon reaching the shore and the photos uploaded to a laptop to be analyzed. Nudibranchia that weren’t immediately identifiable underwater were identified from the descriptions and photos using reference books by Debelius et al. (2007), Cobb and Mullins (2015) and Godliner et al. (2015) 3.8 Nudibranch diversity, distribution and abundance: A bio indicator of reef community structure for two locations within the Coral Triangle, Indonesia: This study took place at two study locations, both of which are islands in the Southeast province of Sulawesi, in the South East Asian country of Indonesia. The first study location was off the island of Hoga, within the Wakatobi Marine National Park; this area, in 2012, was designated as a Biosphere Reserve by the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Within this study location, three sites were studied, each of which was representative of different habitat quality. Pak Kasims (site 1) is characterized by a sloping fringing reef, with clear water visibility, low sedimentation and complex corals that cover 20-30% of the study site. Buoy 3 (site 2) is representative of a wall drop off, fringing reef, with low sedimentation but less light penetration and less complex coral that cover approximately 20-30% of the study site. The third study site for the Wakatobi region was Sampela, which is characterized as a reef flat. It is defined by high sedimentation retention and turbidity, and is located adjacent to a village, therefore exposed to many anthropogenic influences with low coral cover at approximately 5%. The second study location was off the coast of Bau Bau located in the Southern part of the southeastern Sulawesi region, the main city of Buton Island and bordered by the Buton Strait. A total of six sites were examined, two sites to represent each of the different habitat qualities. Snake Island and Kadatua (sites 1 & 2) are characterized by pristine corals, with high coral cover and structural complexity, with little to no human traffic. For Moko and Siompu (sites 3 & 4), little is known, but they are thought to be of intermediate impact. Nirwana and Pampanga (sites 5 & 6) are thought to be areas of high impact, potentially due to their easy accessibility to fisherman and exposure to human traffic. Transects, quadrats, and photographs were used at both study locations, at two different depth profiles and multiple study sites to analyze differences (if any) amongst nudibranch diversity, distribution and abundance of the two locations. Factors to be considered during the preliminary investigation were the effects turbidity, sedimentation, and food availability.

14

4.0 RESULTS To aid comparison between data collected in 2015 and 2016 (not yet fully analyzed), summary figures and projected results have been included. For more in-depth analyses on the studies depicted on this report, please refer to the finalized theses of the named authors. 4.1 Monitoring program and fishing practices 4.11 Habitat Quality

Figure 3. The percentage cover of three benthic compositions (abiotic, other live and coral cover) at 6 monitoring sites June-August 2015 and 2016 (n=9).

The 2015 coral surveys indicated that the majority of reef studies could be classified as good to very good (~55 – 80%). In contrast, reefs studied in 2016 showed a common trend in coral cover regression, leading them to be classified as average to good (~45 – 75%). Highest coral cover was generally determined for the reef crest habitat and was particularly high at Snake Island and Kadatua in both consecutive years. The lowest cover was found at Nirwana (~12-15%), previously studied for its high foot and boat traffic (please refer to the Bau Bau monitoring program protocol). The reef with the most significant coral loss was Siompu, losing 20% of coral over the span of one year.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016

Pampanga Nirwana Moko Kadatua Snake Island Siompu

%co

ver

Location

Benthic composition of reef crests along a 200m LIT

Total abioticcover

Total other livecover

Total Coral

15

2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016

Pampanga Nirwana Moko Kadatua Snake Island Siompu

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Location

avg.

co

un

t n

.

Invertebrate survey along a 200x50m belt transect at the reef crest

Tritons

Nudibranchs

Crown of thorns

Banded cleanershrimps

Sea cucumbers

4.12 Non-coral invertebrate community composition

Figure 4: The average count number of five reef health indicator invertebrate groups (tritons, nudibranchs, COTs, banded cleaner shrimp and sea cucumbers) at 6 monitoring sites June-August 2015 and 2016 (n=4). The 2016 surveys indicate a general increase in invertebrate abundance across sites (3 of 5 species groups). Most abundant invertebrate group was the banded cleaner shrimp avg. ~8 counts per site across all sites per annum. Least present groups were the Triton and COTs who on six occasions were not found on the reefs in both years (i.e. 0 = across 3 of 6 sites). Findings of COTs showed no correlation to benthic, fish or other invertebrate communities. This is also true for Sea cucumbers, with similar counts across all years and sites with the exception of 2015 in Nirwana (avg. ±10). Across all sites, invertebrate counts were most prominent along the reef crest or slope. Urchin counts (whose figures are not shown here) were the only group that thrived from flat associated environments (<150 in 2015 and <160 in 2016). This correlates with algal cover across the years. Pampanga remains across both years, the most invertebrate prone site across all reef zones, however suffered loss findings of one species group (Tritons).

16

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016

Pampanga Nirwana Moko Kadatua Snake Island Siompu

Re

lati

ve a

bu

nd

ance

%

Location

Relative abundace of fish related trophic guilds along a 200x50m belt transect

Corallivore

Piscivore

Invertivore

Herbivore

Detritivore

4.13 Fish assemblage

Figure 5: Relative abundance of the trophic guilds of the fish community associated with 6 coral reefs (Pampanga, Nirwana, Moko, Kadatua, Snake Island and Siompu) of South Buton (2015 and 2016 data, n=9).

The 2015 and 2016 surveys showed an overall decrease in relative fish biomass percentage (5 of 6 sites – avg. 12% reduction). For functional groups correlated to increased reef health, there was a decrease in relative abundance (Piscivores, Corallivores and Detritivores). Corallivorous fish showed the largest change over the one-year period with reductions as high as 17% (Kadatua reef). In contrast, Herbivores remained the most prominent functional group across most reefs. Lastly, for the 2016 surveys, Snake Island reef became the most fish abundant reef as Kadatua degraded significantly from the previous year. On the other hand, Nirwana reef saw an increase in overall relative fish biomass abundance (4% increase), primarily due to a significant increase in Invertivore group biomass.

17

Hook and Line Blast/poison

Other Gear

Gilnett

Bubu trap Purse siene

Gaff Compressor

Lamba nett

Overall, a pattern similar to the previous surveys (Benthic and Invertebrate), the reefs with highest structural complexity scores (refer to figure 6) correlate to least degraded spatially and temporally. Figure 6: Structural complexity scores of surveyed reefs along three differing reef zones in South Buton (n=2). 4.14 Fishing Practices Figure 7: Participatory map depicting areas where certain fishing practices take place across 4 islands in South Buton during June-August 2016 (n=136).

0

1

2

3

4

5

Co

mp

lexi

ty s

core

Locations

Structural complexity scores

Flat

Crest

Slope

18

0

3

6

9

12

15

Sharks Rays Turtle eggs

avg.

co

un

t p

er

4 w

ee

ks

species group

2015

2016

The 2016 fishing practices surveys showed that most fishing pressures are closely associated to the shore areas with the exception of purse seines and large nets carried out in more pelagic areas. Furthermore, no fishing occurs on the North Western side of Kadatua, or South side of Siompu where the shoreline is predominantly sea grass. Gear type use was predominantly Hook and line as it was carried out across all sites, covering the most area. Bubu trap use in contrast remained a specialized fishing practice carried out by closely associated community members (Silu village in Bau Bau n=14 and Malona village in Siompu n=7). The placement of the Bubu traps was also predominantly on reef flat zones for all surveys targeting fish such as Rabbitfish, Triggerfish, Surgeonfish and Parrotfish. 4.2 Artificial Reef Figure 8: 3D model of Pantai Nirwanas shallow artificial reef (~10m), rendered using Google Sketchup and Cad by 2016 research assistants Gene Kwong (and his parents for CAD rendering), Jessica Menzies, Andrew Baker and Theresa Zeisner. The artificial reef was placed by the local government as a tool for reef recovery, and over the 2015 and 2016 years it has attracted a wide array of marine life. The reef depicted in figure 8 showed early signs of scleractinian coral recruitment such as Acropora and Porites species. However, most surface area is either covered in Soft coral, Sponge or Macro algae groups. Vertebrate species such as turtles, barracuda schools and even local frogfish can be found using the structure as refuge.

4.3 Fish Market trips

19

Figure 9: Average count of 3 distinct species group per 4 weeks of surveys in Wameo Fish Market June-August 2016 (n=4) and image of “near threatened” spotted eagle ray – IUCN. Fisheries management discussions about Wameo Fish market identified three negative points: 1) no records of what is sold or brought in; 2) facilities lack adequate hygiene to avoid cross-contamination; and 3) lack of vendor management area. In contrast, three positive points were also identified: 1) little waste as all products are sold daily; 2) provides livelihoods for the local community; and 3) ensures continuation of traditional and cultural values. 4.4 Assessing the impact of Bubu traps on Coral reefs in South Buton, Indonesia: Figure 10: Average catch effort of Bubu trap in relation to volume size across six reefs in South Buton during June-August 2016 (n=98).

20

0

50

100

150

200

250

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

Biomass(KG)

ReefHAS

Chaetodon daefeedingguildresponsetoincreasingreefhealth.

Corallivores Herbivores Omnivores

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Hardcoralcover(%

)

Cheatodon daespp.biomass(kg)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0 50 100 150 200Numberofmorphologicalfeatures

Chaetodon daespp.biomass(kg)

Figure 11: Direction of Bubu trap openings relation to land and image of surveyor next to one. 2016 results show volume size of Bubu trap exponentially increases after 0.7m3 and begins to plateau at 1.3m3. Most catch (68%) is achieved within this range (0.7 – 1.3m3) and increasing the size (volume) of the Bubu trap shows little increase in catch effort (+10kg biomass). Placement of Bubu trap opening in relation to coastline has profound effect on catch effort too. Surveyed traps showed significant correlation in placement to shoreline (figure 11). With all but Kadatua Bubu traps being placed in the direction of the reef flat/shore. 4.5 Butterfly fish response to a changing environment – South Buton: Figure 12: Butterflyfish feeding guilds abundance (Biomass – kg) across differing reef health indices determined by a Habitat assessment score (HAS) in South Buton during June-August 2016 (n=219)

21

South Buton

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Ardeadorisegretta

Chromadorisannae

Chromadorislochi

Chromodorisdianae

Chromodoriselisabethina

Chromodorismagnifica

Chromodoriswillani

eggs

Goniobranchuskuniei

Goniobranchusreticulatus

Hypselodorisapolegma

Hypselodoristryoni

Phyllidiaelegans

Phyllidiamadangensis

Phyllidiaocellata

Phyllidiapicta

Phyllidiavaricosa

Phyllidiellapustulosa

Phyllidiopsisshireenae

Phyllidiopsisstriata

Pteraeolidiasemperi

Reticulidiafungia

Abundan

ce(#)

Species

n=112

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Chromodorisannae

Chromodorishamiltoni

Doriprismaticaatromarginata

eggs

Goniobranchusfidelis

Goniobranchusgeometricus

Goniobranchuskuniei

Goniobranchusleopardus

Goniobranchusreticulatus

Halgerdabatangas

Hypselodoristryoni

Jorunnafunebris

Nembrothakubaryana

Nembrothalineolata

Phyllidiellapustulosa

Phyllidiopsispipeki

Thuridillaundula

Abundan

ce(#

)

Species

n=43

Hoga SouthButon

Figure 13: Relationship between scleractinian coral cover, its morphology and species to the abundance of Chaetodontidae biomass (kg) in South Buton during June-August 2016 (n=219) 2016 surveys on Butterfly fish assemblages showed corallivores and herbivores had the strongest association to reef health. Coral reefs with high HAS scores (whereby scleractinian coral cover, complexity, visibility was high) had significantly more abundance (Biomass – kg) of corallivorous butterfly fish (~15kg for -4HAS reefs to ~240kg for +4HAS reefs). In contrast, Herbivorous fish abundance thrived on reefs with low HAS scores (~200kg for -4HAS reefs to ~20kg for +4HAS reefs). Results also showed Butterfly fish biomass positively correlated with Hard coral cover and coral morphological features (i.e. branching, tabulate). 4.6 Investigating the diversity, distribution and abundance of Nudibranchia and their association with sponges, along the reefs of Hoga and South Buton, Indonesia: Figure 14: Nudibranch distribution and abundance within a protected area (Hoga) and non-protected area (South Buton) during June-August of 2016. 2016 surveys showed similar families found in both regions (i.e. Chromodoris and Phylliidae). In contrast, some only found at one site (i.e. Polyceridae in South Buton). Sites showed trend in distribution for Chromodoris; found at all sites, in numbers higher than any other family. 4.7 Nudibranch diversity, distribution and abundance: A bio indicator of reef community structure for two locations within the Coral Triangle, Indonesia:

22

Figure 15: Nudibranch distribution and abundance indicating reef community structure within a protected area (Hoga) and non-protected area (South Buton) during June-August of 2016. Findings show Hoga (protected) has far greater overall abundance than South Buton (non-protected) even though there is 6 species that overlap between sites. 5.0 DISCUSSION 5.1. Ecological Surveys Habitat quality is the most important driver of species diversity, abundance and distribution (McMellor and Smith 2013). Much of it is measured by benthic composition (coral, other live, abiotic), most importantly, coral species diversity and abundance (Feary et al. 2007). Compared to data collected in 2015, coral cover has decreased across all sites for the study period of 2016. Many of the reasons for this decline can be attributed to climate change related issues (i.e. ocean acidification (Harvell et al. 2002)); however, little to no signs of bleaching were present across study sites. Anthropogenic impacts (i.e. pollution, fishing, coastal development) can influence habitat quality and therefore degenerate coral reefs(Pitcher 1996, Cruz-Trinidad et al. 2014). The coral reefs in Kadatua and Snake Island remained across both study periods the highest in habitat quality indices. This can be explained by the lack of fishing pressure(Butler et al. 1993, Boaden and Kingsford 2015, Langlois et al. 2015). Kadatua’s high cliffs and steep reef slopes deter certain fishing practices. Snake Island on the other hand, has easily accessible reefs; however, is further proximity from local communities. To put this into context, Siompu reef suffered the highest coral loss (20%) primarily due to its increasing boat traffic and new fishing gear material (bubu traps made of metal)(Graham et al. 2011). To further verify this point, Nirwana reef is the most degraded and devoid of coral and shares similar anthropogenic pressures as Siompu (high boat traffic and fishing pressure as well as pollution from local community). Non-coral invertebrate abundance generally increased across sites from 2015-2016; the most abundant of which was the banded cleaner shrimp. This can be explained by a 4-week algal bloom during the study period. COTs remain a non-significant threat to these reefs as their numbers for both 2015 and 2016 remained low across all sites. This is interesting as coral availability is high for most sites (Hughes et al. 2011). Urchin populations are mostly found on reef flats, likely due to presence of macro algae (O'Leary and McClanahan 2010). No one significant driver for invertebrate distribution can be found for all surveyed species. Each species group’s distribution is driven by individual parameters and life history traits. Fish assemblages, however, can be affected by single-cause effects (phase shifts, predator-prey relations, harmful fishing practices)(Russ and Alcala 1989, Hixon and Beets 1993, Booth and Beretta 2002, Boaden and Kingsford 2015). The 2016 study period showed an overall decrease

23

in fish biomass (12% reduction) compared to data from 2015. Because of a lack of studies related to fishing practices in 2015, we cannot for certain attribute this as a cause. However, other studies have shown links between decreased habitat quality and fishing practices, resulting in decreased fish biomass (Graham et al. 2015). 2016 data showed that functional groups closely related to high reef health indices (piscivores and corallivores) were most abundant in areas of low fishing pressure, which was supported by the assessment of fishing practices carried out in each site (n=136). Snake Island and Kadatua had a higher fish biomass, which correlates with their higher habitat quality indices as a result of high structural complexity scores (Beukers and Jones 1998, Graham and Nash 2013, Graham 2014). Studies have shown that reefs with high structural complexity offer protection to closely associated species. 5.2. Fishing practices Most fishing occurs close to the shore; from an aerial perspective, community proximity to reef positively correlates with fishing effort. This is true for most fishing methods that require no large-scale equipment (e.g. hook and line or bubu trap). To verify this, fishermen who use purse seines and large nets typically carry out their fishing practices in more pelagic regions, further from shore (Sudara and Patimanukasaem 1991). Shoreline proximity, however, is not sufficient reason due to the fact that most fish assemble on coral reefs. This is proven by the lack of fishing on the north-western Kadatua and south Siompu regions where seagrasses and rocky shores dominate. Hook and line is the most practiced fishing method due to its low cost and cultural and traditional significance; children as young as 5 years can be seen practicing by riverbanks or jetties (Cinner et al. 2013, Hicks et al. 2013). By contrast, fishing practices utilizing bubu traps are community and stakeholder-specific, where its use and development requires many years of experience. The cost of manufacturing a single bubu trap (bamboo) can range from 200,000 to 400,000 Indonesian Rupiah (approximately 15-30 USD) and can take up to 4 days. Placement of bubu traps therefore requires careful consideration. Results indicate that fisherfolk place bubu traps in areas of the reef where they can be easily retrieved (reef flat rather than slope). The reason is likely due to structural complexity in steep reef slopes increasing the chance of bubu trap loss (Beukers and Jones 1998). 5.3. Artificial reefs The artificial reefs were placed at Nirwana Beach by local government officials as a reef recovery initiative. The shallow artificial reef (6m) studied in 2016 showed strong signs of attracting marine life, such as turtles, barracuda, nudibranchs, and even frogfish. However, the structure remains a poor coral recruitment agent, likely due to a lack of coral colonies in the surrounding area. However, reef life thrives on the artificial reef, as its structure alone is sufficient for non-coral species to use as refuge (Baine 2001). 5.4. Fish market trips Species listed as endangered or threatened by the IUCN are not uncommonly found in Wameo fish market. These species provide important ecological roles within reef community structure and, as such, their extraction can lead to ecosystem-wide effects. In 2016, species such as an adult spotted eagle ray (figure 9) were seen during surveys. In order to decrease catch of ecologically important reef species, students suggested a need for improved fish market

24

management in the form of catch records and restrictions on fishing gear used. However, it is recognized that the lack of waste produced, community values, and provision of livelihoods are among the benefits of the local fishery. 5.5. Assessing the impact of Bubu traps on coral reefs in South Buton, Indonesia Bubu traps surveyed demonstrated a relationship between volume and catch effort; when the volume increased over 1.3 m3 findings showed a plateau in catch. Like fish fences, catch is required to be retrieved every 2-3 days as the fish already caught deter others from entering the trap. Therefore, volumes in the range of 0.7-1.3 m3 therefore optimize catch effort by ease of handling, reduced fish deterrence and overall manufacturing cost. Finally, bubu traps utilize fish diurnal migration habits for catch in the same regards as seen with fish fences along the shores of Kaladupa (WNP) (Exton).

5.6. Butterfly fish response to a changing environment – South Buton Butterflyfish have been used as reef health indicators in previous studies (Pratchett et al. 2006). By dividing them into functional groups, relationships between reef health and feeding guild emerge. Corralivores have a strong association with healthy reefs (determined by HAS) as their food security is determined through high coral cover indices. In contrast, herbivorous butterflyfish biomass increases when there is a phase shift from coral dominated to algal dominated reefs (Mumby et al. 2012, McClanahan et al. 2015). Therefore monitoring chaetodontidae species feeding guilds can serve as a proxy for phase shift occurrence. Furthermore, diversity and distribution can be affected by coral morphology; in other words, a coral reef with high coral cover but low morphological diversity can be devoid of butterflyfish species richness. 5.7. Nudibranch communities within protected and non-protected areas of SE Sulawesi Two studies aimed to show comparisons of nudibranch assemblage between WNP and South Buton, in relation to reef structure and food availability. Results showed that even though similar species diversity indices can be found in both sites, abundance of such was higher where reefs are protected. This is to be expected because protected status results in higher reef health and structural complexity, providing more habitat and food for nudibranch species (Bell 2007).

5.8 Conclusion These studies are all under development and final drafts will be available only through direct contact with the specific author. However, key information regarding ecological and social values is presented above with the hope to create a reference point from which future studies can build. The rate of degradation can only be assessed through long-term monitoring so this report serves to initialize that program. We cannot say for certain what the outcomes of South Buton’s coral reefs and socio-economic status will be but many warning signs are already present. It requires partnerships between scientific reef management and local communities to help conserve and sustain the highly valuable resources present in South Buton. Only by collaborating together can these targets be achieved.

25

Special thanks to the Bau Bau team for making conservation a possibility and not a dream

6.0 References Baine, M. 2001. Artificial reefs: a review of their design, application, management

and performance. Ocean & Coastal Management 44:241-259. Bell, J. J. 2007. Contrasting patterns of species and functional composition of

coral reef sponge assemblages. Marine Ecology Progress Series 339:73-81.

Beukers, J. S., and G. P. Jones. 1998. Habitat complexity modifies the impact of piscivores on a coral reef fish population. Oecologia 114:50-59.

Boaden, A. E., and M. J. Kingsford. 2015. Predators drive community structure in coral reef fish assemblages. Ecosphere 6.

Booth, D. J., and G. A. Beretta. 2002. Changes in a fish assemblage after a coral bleaching event. Marine Ecology Progress Series 245:205-212.

Butler, J. N., J. Burnett-Herkes, J. A. Barnes, and J. Ward. 1993. The Bermuda Fisheries A Tragedy of the Commons Averted? Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 35:6-33.

Cesar, H., L. Burke, and L. Pet-Soede. 2003. The economics of worldwide coral reef degradation.

Cheung, W. W. L., V. W. Y. Lam, J. L. Sarmiento, K. Kearney, R. E. G. Watson, D. Zeller, and D. Pauly. 2010. Large-scale redistribution of maximum fisheries catch potential in the global ocean under climate change. Global Change Biology 16:24-35.

Cinner, J. E., C. Huchery, E. S. Darling, A. T. Humphries, N. A. Graham, C. C. Hicks, N. Marshall, and T. R. McClanahan. 2013. Evaluating social and ecological vulnerability of coral reef fisheries to climate change. PLoS ONE 8.

Cinner, J. E., T. R. McClanahan, N. A. J. Graham, T. M. Daw, J. Maina, S. M. Stead, A. Wamukota, K. Brown, and O. Bodin. 2012. Vulnerability of coastal communities to key impacts of climate change on coral reef fisheries. Global Environmental Change 22:12-20.

Clifton, J., R. K. F. Unsworth, and D. J. Smith. 2013. Marine research and conservation in the Coral Triangle.

Cruz-Trinidad, A., P. M. Aliño, R. C. Geronimo, and R. B. Cabral. 2014. Linking Food Security with Coral Reefs and Fisheries in the Coral Triangle. Coastal Management 42:160-182.

Exton, D. A. 11 Nearshore fisheries of the Wakatobi. List of contributors Acknowledgements.

Feary, D. A., G. R. Almany, M. I. McCormick, and G. P. Jones. 2007. Habitat choice, recruitment and the response of coral reef fishes to coral degradation. Oecologia 153:727-737.

26

Fox, R. J., and D. R. Bellwood. 2007. Quantifying herbivory across a coral reef depth gradient. Marine Ecology Progress Series 339:49-59.

Geider, R. J., E. H. Delucia, P. G. Falkowski, A. C. Finzi, J. Philip Grime, J. Grace, T. M. Kana, J. La Roche, S. P. Long, B. A. Osborne, T. Platt, I. Colin Prentice, J. A. Raven, W. H. Schlesinger, V. Smetacek, V. Stuart, S. Sathyendranath, R. B. Thomas, T. C. Vogelmann, P. Williams, and F. Ian Woodward. 2001. Primary productivity of planet earth: Biological determinants and physical constraints in terrestrial and aquatic habitats. Global Change Biology 7:849-882.

Graham, N., and K. Nash. 2013. The importance of structural complexity in coral reef ecosystems. Coral Reefs 32:315-326.

Graham, N. A., P. Chabanet, R. D. Evans, S. Jennings, Y. Letourneur, M. Aaron MacNeil, T. R. McClanahan, M. C. Öhman, N. V. Polunin, and S. K. Wilson. 2011. Extinction vulnerability of coral reef fishes. Ecology Letters 14:341-348.

Graham, Nicholas A. J. 2014. Habitat Complexity: Coral Structural Loss Leads to Fisheries Declines. Current Biology 24:R359-R361.

Graham, N. A. J., S. Jennings, M. A. MacNeil, D. Mouillot, and S. K. Wilson. 2015. Predicting climate-driven regime shifts versus rebound potential in coral reefs. Nature 518:94-97.

Harvell, C. D., C. E. Mitchell, J. R. Ward, S. Altizer, A. P. Dobson, R. S. Ostfeld, and M. D. Samuel. 2002. Climate warming and disease risks for terrestrial and marine biota. Science 296:2158-2162.

Hicks, C. C., N. A. J. Graham, and J. E. Cinner. 2013. Synergies and tradeoffs in how managers, scientists, and fishers value coral reef ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change 23:1444-1453.

Hixon, M. A., and J. P. Beets. 1993. Predation, prey refuges, and the structure of coral-reef fish assemblages. Ecological Monographs 63:77-101.

Hoegh-Guldberg, O. 1999. Climate change, coral bleaching and the future of the world's coral reefs. Marine and Freshwater Research 50:839-866.

Hughes, T., D. Bellwood, A. Baird, J. Brodie, J. F. Bruno, and J. Pandolfi. 2011. Shifting base-lines, declining coral cover, and the erosion of reef resilience: comment on Sweatman et al.(2011). Coral Reefs 30:653-660.

Hughes, T. P., A. H. Baird, D. R. Bellwood, M. Card, S. R. Connolly, C. Folke, R. Grosberg, O. Hoegh-Guldberg, J. B. C. Jackson, J. Kleypas, J. M. Lough, P. Marshall, M. Nyström, S. R. Palumbi, J. M. Pandolfi, B. Rosen, and J. Roughgarden. 2003. Climate change, human impacts, and the resilience of coral reefs. Science 301:929-933.

Jackson, J. B. C., M. X. Kirby, W. H. Berger, K. A. Bjorndal, L. W. Botsford, B. J. Bourque, R. H. Bradbury, R. Cooke, J. Erlandson, J. A. Estes, T. P. Hughes, S. Kidwell, C. B. Lange, H. S. Lenihan, J. M. Pandolfi, C. H. Peterson, R. S. Steneck, M. J. Tegner, and R. R. Warner. 2001. Historical overfishing and the recent collapse of coastal ecosystems. Science 293:629-637.

Langlois, T. J., S. J. Newman, M. Cappo, E. S. Harvey, B. M. Rome, C. L. Skepper, and C. B. Wakefield. 2015. Length selectivity of commercial fish traps assessed from in situ comparisons with stereo-video: Is there evidence of sampling bias? Fisheries Research 161:145-155.

27

Martin, T. E., and G. A. Blackburn. 2014. Conservation value of secondary forest habitats for endemic birds, a perspective from two widely separated tropical ecosystems. Ecography 37:250-260.

McClanahan, T. R., N. A. Graham, M. A. MacNeil, N. A. Muthiga, J. E. Cinner, J. H. Bruggemann, and S. K. Wilson. 2011. Critical thresholds and tangible targets for ecosystem-based management of coral reef fisheries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108:17230-17233.

McClanahan, T. R., N. A. J. Graham, M. A. Macneil, and J. E. Cinner. 2015. Biomass-based targets and the management of multispecies coral reef fisheries. Conservation Biology 29:409-417.

McMellor, S., and D. J. Smith. 2013. Coral reefs of the Wakatobi: Abundance and biodiversity. Pages 11-26 Marine Research and Conservation in the Coral Triangle.

Moberg, F., and C. Folke. 1999. Ecological goods and services of coral reef ecosystems. Ecological economics 29:215-233.

Mumby, P. J., R. S. Steneck, A. J. Edwards, R. Ferrari, R. Coleman, A. R. Harborne, and J. P. Gibson. 2012. Fishing down a Caribbean food web relaxes trophic cascades. Marine Ecology Progress Series 445:13-24.

O'Leary, J. K., and T. R. McClanahan. 2010. Trophic cascades result in large-scale coralline algae loss through differential grazer effects. Ecology 91:3584-3597.

Pitcher, A. 1996. Reinventing fisheries management. Naga, the ICLARM Quarterly 19:15-17.

Pratchett, M., S. Wilson, and A. Baird. 2006. Declines in the abundance of Chaetodon butterflyfishes following extensive coral depletion. Journal of Fish Biology 69:1269-1280.

Rasher, D. B., A. S. Hoey, and M. E. Hay. 2013. Consumer diversity interacts with prey defenses to drive ecosystem function. Ecology 94:1347-1358.

Rogers, A., J. L. Blanchard, and P. J. Mumby. 2014. Vulnerability of coral reef fisheries to a loss of structural complexity. Current Biology 24:1000-1005.

Russ, G. R., and A. C. Alcala. 1989. Effects of intense fishing pressure on an assemblage of coral reef fishes. Marine ecology progress series. Oldendorf 56:13-27.

Russ, G. R., A. C. Alcala, A. P. Maypa, H. P. Calumpong, and A. T. White. 2004. Marine reserve benefits local fisheries. Ecological Applications 14:597-606.

Selig, E. R., and J. F. Bruno. 2010. A global analysis of the effectiveness of marine protected areas in preventing coral loss. PLoS ONE 5:e9278.

Sudara, S., and O. Patimanukasaem. 1991. Large-scale Anchovy Fishing in the Gulf of Thailand: A New Threat to Reef Fish Communities. Pages 581-583 in The Regional Symposium on Living Resources in Coastal Areas (Quezon City: Marine Science Institute, University of the Philippines, 1991).

Zhou, S., A. D. Smith, A. E. Punt, A. J. Richardson, M. Gibbs, E. A. Fulton, S. Pascoe, C. Bulman, P. Bayliss, and K. Sainsbury. 2010. Ecosystem-based fisheries management requires a change to the selective fishing philosophy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107:9485-9489.