OCS Study

MMS 2006-035

Long-Term Monitoring at the

East and West Flower Garden Banks

National Marine Sanctuary, 2002-2003

Final Report

U.S. Department of the Interior

Minerals Management Service

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region
U.S. Department of the Interior

Minerals Management Service

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region

OCS Study

MMS 2006-035

Long-Term Monitoring at the

East and West Flower Garden Banks

National Marine Sanctuary, 2002-2003

Final Report

Authors

William F. Precht

Richard B. Aronson

Kenneth J. P. Deslarzes

Martha L. Robbart

Thaddeus J. T. Murdoch

Adam Gelber

David J. Evans

Bob Gearheart

Beth Zimmer

Prepared under MMS Contract

1435-01-02-CT-85088

by

PBS&J

2001 NW 107

th Avenue

Miami, Florida 33172

Published by

New Orleans

September 2006
iii

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared under contract between the Minerals Management Service (MMS), the National

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and PBS&J Ecological Services, Miami, Florida, USA.

This report has been technically reviewed by MMS and NOAA and has been approved for publication.

Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of MMS and NOAA,

nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation

for use. It is, however, exempt from review and compliance with MMS editorial standards.

REPORT AVAILABILITY

Extra copies of this report may be obtained from the Public Information Office (Mail Stop 5034) at the

following address:

U.S. Department of the Interior

Minerals Management Service

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region

Public Information Office (MS 5034)

1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard

New Orleans, Louisiana 70123-2394

Telephone: (504) 736-2519 or

1-800-200-GULF

CITATION

Suggested citation:

Precht, W.F., R.B. Aronson, K.J.P. Deslarzes, M.L. Robbart, T.J.T. Murdoch, A. Gelber, D.J. Evans, B.

Gearheart, and B. Zimmer. 2006. Long-term monitoring at the East and West Flower Garden

Banks, 2002-2003: Final report. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of

Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, Louisiana. OCS Study MMS 2006-035. 182pp.
v

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................................... ix

LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................. xi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................................... xiii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................................... xv

1.0 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Flower Garden Banks in the Gulf of Mexico.................................................................... 1

1.1.1 Habitat Description......................................................................................... 1

1.1.2 East and West Banks..................................................................................... 1

1.2 MMS and FGBNMS Protective Measures......................................................................... 4

1.3 Flower Garden Banks Coral Reef Monitoring.................................................................... 5

2.0 METHODS........................................................................................................................................ 7

2.1 Study Sites........................................................................................................................ 7

2.2 Random Transects............................................................................................................ 8

2.2.1 Methodological Rationale.................................................................................. 8

2.2.2 Positioning of the Transects.............................................................................. 13

2.2.3 Still Photography............................................................................................... 14

2.2.4 Videography...................................................................................................... 15

2.2.5 Linear Point-Intercept Estimates....................................................................... 16

2.2.6 Statistical Analysis of the Transect Data........................................................... 16

2.3 Sclerochronology............................................................................................................... 17

2.3.1 Methodological Rationale.................................................................................. 17

2.3.2 Field Methods.................................................................................................... 17

2.3.3 Laboratory Methods........................................................................................... 18

2.3.4 Data Presentation and Statistical Analysis........................................................ 18

2.4 Lateral Growth................................................................................................................... 18

2.4.1 Methodological Rationale.................................................................................... 18

2.4.2 Field Methods.................................................................................................... 18

2.4.3 Image Analysis of Lateral Growth...................................................................... 19

2.4.4 Data Presentation and Statistical Analysis of Lateral Growth Stations............. 19

2.5 Repetitive Quadrats........................................................................................................... 20

2.5.1 Methodological Rationale.................................................................................. 20

2.5.2 Field Methods.................................................................................................... 20

2.5.3 Image Analysis of Repetitive Quadrats............................................................. 20

2.5.4 Data Presentation and Statistical Analysis of Repetitive Quadrats................... 21
vi

2.6 Perimeter Videography...................................................................................................... 21

2.6.1 Methodological Rationale.................................................................................. 21

2.6.2 Field Methods.................................................................................................... 22

2.6.3 Laboratory Methods.......................................................................................... 22

2.7 Water Quality...................................................................................................................... 22

2.7.1 Methodological Rationale.................................................................................. 22

2.7.2 Field Methods – YSI Datasondes...................................................................... 22

2.7.3 Field Methods – HoboTemp Thermographs...................................................... 24

2.7.4 Field Methods – Chlorophyll a, Nutrients, and Trace Metals............................. 24

2.8 Fish Surveys....................................................................................................................... 25

2.8.1 Methodological Rationale.................................................................................. 25

2.8.2 Field Methods.................................................................................................... 26

2.8.3 Analysis and Statistical Methods....................................................................... 26

2.9 Sea Urchin and Lobster Surveys....................................................................................... 27

2.9.1 Methodological Rationale.................................................................................. 27

2.9.2 Field Methods.................................................................................................... 27

2.9.3 Statistical Methods............................................................................................ 27

2.10 Mapping of the Flower Garden Banks............................................................................ 27

2.10.1 Methodological Rationale................................................................................ 27

2.10.2 Sonar Technology........................................................................................... 27

2.10.3 Sector-Scan Sonar Methods........................................................................... 28

2.10.4 Side-Scan Sonar Methods.............................................................................. 29

3.0 RESULTS........................................................................................................................................ 31

3.1 Random Transects............................................................................................................ 31

3.1.1 Comparison of Methods.................................................................................... 35

3.1.2 Univariate Analysis............................................................................................ 39

3.1.3 Minimum Detectable Difference........................................................................ 39

3.1.4 Multivariate Analysis.......................................................................................... 40

3.2 Sclerochronology............................................................................................................... 43

3.2.1 East Bank Cores............................................................................................... 43

3.2.2 West Bank Cores.............................................................................................. 44

3.2.3 Analysis............................................................................................................. 44

3.3 Lateral Growth.................................................................................................................. 44

3.3.1 Quantitative Planimetry Analysis....................................................................... 44
vii

3.4 Repetitive Quadrats.......................................................................................................... 45

3.4.1 Repetitive Quadrat Percent Cover Analysis...................................................... 46

3.4.2 Repetitive Quadrat Quantitative Planimetry Analysis ....................................... 49

3.4.3 Deep Repetitive Quadrat Planimetry Analysis.................................................. 50

3.5 Video Perimeter................................................................................................................ 53

3.5.1 East Bank Perimeter Lines................................................................................ 53

3.5.2 East Bank 360o Panoramic Views..................................................................... 56

3.5.3 West Bank Perimeter Lines............................................................................... 56

3.5.4 West Bank 360o Panoramic View...................................................................... 57

3.6 Water Quality.................................................................................................................... 58

3.6.1 YSI Water Quality.............................................................................................. 58

3.6.2 HoboTemp Temperature................................................................................... 61

3.6.3 Water Samples - Chlorophyll a......................................................................... 62

3.6.4 Water Samples - Nutrients................................................................................ 62

3.6.5 Water Samples - Trace Metals.......................................................................... 63

3.7 Fish Surveys.................................................................................................................... 64

3.8 Sea Urchin Surveys......................................................................................................... 69

3.9 Mapping Results.............................................................................................................. 70

4.0 DISCUSSION................................................................................................................................... 75

4.1 Coral.................................................................................................................................. 75

4.1.1 General............................................................................................................. 75

4.1.2 Random Transects............................................................................................ 76

4.1.3 Sclerochronology............................................................................................... 82

4.1.4 Lateral Growth................................................................................................... 82

4.1.5 Repetitive 8m

2 Quadrats................................................................................... 83

4.1.6 Perimeter Videography..................................................................................... 84

4.1.7 Disease and Bleaching at the FGB................................................................... 85

4.1.8 Other Coral Mortality Factors at the FGB.......................................................... 86

4.2 Water Quality Parameters................................................................................................ 86

4.2.1 Physical Parameters.........................................................................................

86

4.2.2 Biological Parameters........................................................................................ 94

4.2.3 Chemical Parameters........................................................................................ 95

4.3 Fish................................................................................................................................... 96

4.4 Mapping............................................................................................................................ 98

5.0 LITERATURE CITED.................................................................................................................... 101
viii

6.0 APPENDICES............................................................................................................................... 109

Appendix 1A Percent Cover Data for Random Transect Still Photographs........................ 109

Appendix 1B Percent Cover Data for Random Transect Videography............................... 115

Appendix 1C Point Counts for LPI Data.............................................................................. 119

Appendix 2 Sclerochronology: East and West Bank 1998-2003......................................... 123

Appendix 3 Diploria strigosa Lateral Growth........................................................ ... 125

Appendix 4 Repetitive 8m

2 Quadrat Proportional Change for Selected Coral Heads........ 129

Appendix 5 Water Quality Data........................................................................................... 137

Appendix 6 Fish Survey, East and West Flower Garden Banks, 2002 and 2003............... 177

Appendix 7 Coral Disease................................................................................................... 179
ix

LIST OF FIGURES Page

1.1.1 Location map of the East and West Flower Garden Banks in relation to the TexasLouisiana continental shelf and other topographic features of the northwestern Gulf of

Mexico......................................................................................................... 2

1.1.2 Topographic contour map of the East Bank (Gardner et al. 1998)................................ 3

1.1.3 Topographic contour map of the West Bank (Gardner et al. 1998) ........................... 4

2.1.1 East Bank topographic map.............................................................................. 9

2.1.2 West Bank topographic map.............................................................................. 10

2.1.3 Location of monitoring stations at East Bank, 2003. .............................................. 11

2.1.4 Location of monitoring stations at West Bank, 2003. ............................................. 12

2.1.5 Bathymetric map with the deep repetitive quadrat stations in relation to the permanent

study site at the East Bank (32-40 m), established in 2003. Contour lines at 20, 30 and

40 m............................................................................................................. 13

2.2.3 Random still photographs being taken in October 2002 at the FGB. ......................... 14

2.2.5 Line point intercept data collection in progress along random transects at the FGB. .... 16

2.3.2 Montastraea faveolata coring 2003 at the FGB. ................................................... 18

2.4.2 Image for analysis of Diploria strigosa lateral growth station at the East Bank, showing

2001 and 2002 comparison, using Adobe Photoshop. .................................................. 19

3.1.1 Relative dominance of coral species at East Bank in 2002 and 2003 expressed as

percent cover with ± SE. ................................................................................. 33

3.1.2 Relative dominance of coral species at West Bank in 2002 and 2003 expressed as

percent cover with ± SE. ................................................................................. 34

3.1.3 Relative dominance of Montastraea annularis, M. faveolata, and M. franksi (lumped)

at East and West Bank 2002 and 2003. .............................................................. 35

3.1.4 Percent cover (± SE) of four functional categories of sessile benthos at the FGB in

2002 and 2003. ............................................................................................. 42

3.1.5 Two-dimensional MDS plot based on square-root-transformed Bray-Curtis

dissimilarities, comparing multivariate coral cover from video transects between the

FGB and three Fully Protected Zones (FPZs) in the Florida Keys National Marine

Sanctuary (FKNMS). ...................................................................................... 43

3.2.3 X-ray image of Montastraea faveolata from East and West Banks showing an

interruption in accretionary growth sometime in 1998-1999. ................................... 44

3.3.1 Percent change (± SE) in Diploria strigosa colonies at East and West Banks between

2001 and 2002 and between 2002 and 2003. ...................................................... 45

3.4.1 Relative dominance of coral species at East Bank in repetitive quadrats, expressed as

percent cover, including ± SE. .......................................................................... 47

3.4.2 Relative dominance of coral species at West Bank in repetitive quadrats, expressed

as percent cover, including ± SE. ..................................................................... 47

3.4.3 Percent change (±SE) in Montastraea annularis species complex colonies from repetitive

quadrats planimetry results between 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 at East and West Banks. 50

3.4.4 Percent cover (±SE) data for six benthic categories in the EFGB deep repetitive

quadrats in 2003. .......................................................................................... 51

3.4.5 Relative dominance (±SE) of coral species at East Bank deep repetitive quadrats in

2003. .......................................................................................................... 52

3.4.6 Deep repetitive 8 m

2

quadrat at East Bank in August 2003. .................................... 53

3.6.1 YSI datasonde records of mean daily temperature on the East Bank reef cap from

October 2002 to October 2003. ........................................................................ 60

3.6.2 YSI datasonde records of mean daily temperature on the West Bank reef cap from

October 2002 to March 2004. ........................................................................... 61

3.6.3 Mean daily temperature as measured on the East Bank reef cap using a HoboTemp

thermograph. ................................................................................................ 61
x

3.6.4 Mean daily temperature as measured on the West Bank reef cap using a HoboTemp

thermograph. ................................................................................................ 62

3.7.1-A-D Fish size distributions at the FGB in 2002 and 2003: EB carnivores, EB herbivores,

WB carnivores, and WB herbivores. .................................................................. 67

3.9.1 East Flower Bank Garden sector-scan sonar mosaic in 2003. ................................. 71

3.9.2 East Flower Bank Garden side-scan sonar mosaic in 2003. ................................... 72

3.9.3 West Flower Bank Garden side-scan sonar mosaic in 2003. ...................................... 73

4.1.2 Percent cover of Montastraea annularis complex, algae, and reef rock categories from

1992-2003: East Bank and West Bank. .............................................................. 79

4.1.3 Mean percent coral cover at the Flower Garden Banks over time, showing the

consistently high coral cover. ........................................................................... 81

4.2.1 Reef cap seawater temperature recorded at the East Bank from 1990-1997 and

during this study in 2002, 2003, and 2004. ......................................................... 88

4.2.2 Reef cap seawater temperature recorded at the West Bank from 1990-1997 and

during this study in 2002, 2003, and 2004. ......................................................... 89

4.2.3 Sea surface temperature at the C-MAN Buoy 42019 and East Bank reef cap

temperature (HoboTemp) in 2002, 2003, and 2004. ............................................. 90

4.2.4 Sea surface temperature at the C-MAN Buoy 42019 and West Bank reef cap

temperature (HoboTemp) in 2002, 2003, and 2004. ............................................. 90

4.2.5 Comparison of significant wave height at C-MAN Buoy 42019 and turbidity measured

on the reef cap at the East Bank and West Bank in 2002 and 2003. ........................ 91

4.2.6 Comparison of significant wave height at C-MAN Buoy 42019 and PAR levels

measured on the reef cap at the East Bank and West Bank in 2002 and 2003. .......... 93

4.2.7 Significant wave height at C-MAN Buoy 42019 and incidences of tropical storms and

hurricanes. ................................................................................................... 94
xi

LIST OF TABLES Page

2.1.1 GPS coordinates for East and West Bank study site corner markers. ...................... 7

2.5.3 Coral species in repetitive quadrat growth comparison analysis. ............................. 21

2.7.2 Schedule of YSI water quality datasonde deployments, change outs, and retrievals

at the East Bank and West Bank in 2002 and 2003. ................................................ 24

2.7.3 Schedule of HoboTemp thermograph deployments, change outs, and retrievals at

the East Bank and West Bank in 2002 and 2003. .................................................... 24

2.7.4 Water sampling schedule and depth, and number of samples taken at the FGB

from August 2002 to March 2004. .................................................................. 25

2.7.5 Standard U.S. Environmental Protection Agency methods used to analyze water

samples taken at the FGB from August 2002 to March 2004. .............................. 25

3.1.1 Random transect coral cover by species, macroalgae, CTB (crustose coralline, turf,

and bare rock, sponge, and sand cover categories at the East and West Bank in

2002 and 2003. ......................................................................................... 32

3.1.2 Proportional cover estimates for three substratum categories, as estimated by three

methods. ..................................................................................................... 36

3.1.3 Results of randomized complete-block ANOVAs comparing proportional coverage

estimates using the three methods. ............................................................... 38

3.1.5 Results of two-way ANOVAs on proportional cover estimates from the random

video transects taken at the East and West Flower Gardens in 2002 and 2003. ...... 41

3.2.1 Mean annual growth (mm) (±SE) of four Montastraea faveolata cores from East

and West Banks, August 2003. ..................................................................... 44

3.4.1 Percent coral, algae and bare cover categories at 8m

2

repetitive quadrats at the

FGB in 2002 and 2003. ............................................................................... 46

3.4.2 Percent paling, bleaching, concentrated fish biting, isolated fish biting and disease

± SE in repetitive 8m

2

quadrats at the East and West Banks, 2002 and 2003. ........ 48

3.4.3. Frequency of paling, bleaching, concentrated fish biting, isolated fish biting and

disease at East and West Banks, 2002 and 2003. ............................................ 48

3.5.1 Comparison of observations of the condition of individual coral colonies at East

Bank between 2002 and 2003. ..................................................................... 54

3.5.2 Fish species composition and individual counts for the East Bank and West Bank in

2002 and 2003 along perimeter lines and 360

o

circular panoramic views at corner

markers. ............................................................................................................. 55

3.5.3 Comparison of observations of the condition of individual coral colonies at West

Bank between 2002 and 2003. ..................................................................... 57

3.6.1 Summary of results of YSI water quality parameters: mean daily depth,

temperature, salinity, pH, dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity, and photosynthetically

active radiation collected at the East Bank from October 2002 to November 2003. .. 60

3.6.2 Summary of results of YSI water quality parameters: mean daily depth,

temperature, salinity, pH, dissolve oxygen (DO), turbidity, and photosynthetically

active radiation collected at the West Bank from October 2002 to March 2004........ 60

3.6.3 Chlorophyll a concentrations in water samples taken at the East Bank and West

Bank during 2002 through 2004. ........................................................................... 62

3.6.4 Nutrient (ammonia, nitrate and nitrite, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, and Phosphorus)

concentrations in water samples taken at East Bank and West Bank between 2002

and 2004. .............................................................................................................. 63

3.7.1 Shannon-Weiner diversity index (H’) and Evenness (J’) values for fish populations

at East and West Flower Garden Banks 2002-2003. ................................................. 64

3.7.2 Densities of fishes at the FGB in 2002 and 2003. ............................................. 66

3.7.3 Species list of fishes recorded in stationary visual surveys conducted at the East

and West Flower Garden Banks in October 2002 and August 2003. ..................... 66

4.1.1 Percent coral cover (±SE) at both banks for both sampling years from random

transects videography data. ......................................................................... 76

4.1.2 East and West Bank random transect data for predominant cover categories from

1992-2003. .............................................................................................................. 78
xii

4.2.1 Calendar dates of reef cap (YSI and HoboTemp) and sea surface (C-MAN Buoy

42019; National Data Buoy Center 2004) temperature data used in this study from

2002 to 2004. ............................................................................................................. 87

4.2.2.-A Reef cap seawater temperature statistics at the East Bank: 1990 to 1997................. 87

4.2.2.-B Reef cap seawater temperature statistics at the West Bank: 1990 to 1997................ 87

4.2.2.-C Sea surface temperature statistics at the C-MAN Buoy 42019 located 152 km west

of the FGB for 2002, 2003, and 2004. ............................................................ 87

4.2.3 List of tropical storms that occurred in the Gulf of Mexico region in 2002 and 2003... 94

4.3.1 Percentage of fishes observed in the listed families at reefs around the Gulf of

Mexico and the Caribbean Sea. .............................................................................. 98
xiii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to thank the many individuals who contributed their time, talents, and expertise to make

this monitoring effort successful, they are listed below. We would also like to thank MMS and NOAA for

their invaluable institutional knowledge, and in particular would like to thank the MMS Contracting

Officer’s Technical Representative, Greg Boland for his ongoing support and enthusiasm. We would like

to thank Florida International University and Nova Southeastern University for their support in facilitating

the coral core processing and analysis.

Project personnel and their major responsibilities:

1. William F. Precht Project Manager, Co-Principal Investigator/Data Analysis

2. Richard B. Aronson Scientist, Co-Principal Investigator/Data Analysis

3. Kenneth J. P. Deslarzes Scientist, Co-Principal Investigator/Data Analysis

4. Martha L. Robbart Scientist/Data Analysis

5. Thaddeus J. T. Murdoch Scientist/Data Analysis

6. Adam Gelber Scientist/Logistics/Field Management

7. David J. Evans Scientist/Data Analysis

8. Beth Zimmer Scientist/Data Analysis

Project Divers

Richard B.

Aronson

Bob

Gearhart

Eric

Hendra

Thaddeus

Murdoch

Martha

Robbart

Lisa

Vitalle

Don Deis

Peter

Gehring

Mark

Henry

Robert

Nawojchik

David

Roberts

Bob

Woithe

Ken Deslarzes

Adam

Gelber

Doug

Jones

William Precht

Stacey

Roberts

Beth

Zimmer

David Evans

Marty

Heaney

Ray Kurz Melisa Reiter

Patrick

Sipple

Individual authors/contributors and the tasks they performed are listed below.

Task/Analysis Author/Contributor

Project Management, Discussion,

Conclusions, Recommendations,

Editorial Management

William F. Precht

Richard B. Aronson

Kenneth J. P. Deslarzes

Executive Summary, Introduction,

Study Site, Methods, Discussion

Martha L. Robbart

Random Photographic Transects Thaddeus J. T. Murdoch, Martha L.

Robbart, Richard B. Aronson

L.P.I. William F. Precht, Martha L. Robbart

Encrusting Growth Stations Martha L. Robbart, Beth Zimmer, Richard

B. Aronson

Repetitive Quadrats Martha L. Robbart, Thaddeus J. T.

Murdoch, Richard B. Aronson

Sclerochronology Martha L. Robbart, Mark Henry

Water Chemistry Kenneth J. P. Deslarzes, Bob Woithe,

Marty Heaney

Insolation Kenneth J. P. Deslarzes, Bob Woithe,

Marty Heaney

Temperature Kenneth J. P. Deslarzes, Bob Woithe,

Marty Heaney

Urchin Surveys Martha L. Robbart

LONG-TERM

MONITORING

AT THE EAST

AND WEST

FLOWER

GARDEN

BANKS, 2002-

2003

(MMS/NOAA

FUNDED

PROJECT)

Report Layout & Preparation Martha L. Robbart
xv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Flower Garden Banks (FGB), remotely located on the continental shelf in the Gulf of Mexico, are

afforded a certain measure of protection due to their geographic distance from land. Problems that affect

coral reefs throughout the region, including land-based sources of pollution and coral disease have not

had a measurable effect at the FGB. In addition to their relative isolation, the depth of these reefs, 18-48

m, has protected corals from bleaching events that have had devastating effects on most western Atlantic

reefs.

Monitoring results for 2002-2003 highlighted the continued health of these reefs, expressed as

consistently high coral cover, with a mean of 56.43% ± 2.36 at the East Bank in 2002, 53.20% ± 3.01 in

2003, 49.67% ± 3.35 at the West Bank in 2002 and 57.13% ± 3.81 in 2003. The continuing trend of coral

growth is also apparent in repetitive quadrat stations and lateral growth of individual colonies of the brain

coral Diploria strigosa. Robust fish populations and oligotrophic water conditions persisted while

occurrences of disease and bleaching were low, 0.004% and 0.002%, respectively - averaged for both

banks in both years. Sea urchins continued to occur at low densities, averaging 0.01/m

2

(both banks,

both years); however, herbivorous fishes appear to keep algal cover under control as they represented

the largest fish guild on both banks for both years.

Random transect results revealed high coral cover at both banks, consistent with previous monitoring

results, with 53.05% ± 2.11 (SE) coral cover in 2002 and 55.16% ± 2.41 coral cover in 2003. Macroalgal

cover was also stable at 11.60% ± 1.65 and 12.58% ± 1.45, but showed a significant site X year

interaction (P<0.0005). Crustose corallines, turf and bare (CTB), the largest cover category after coral

cover, was at 32.35% ± 2.22 and 29.87% ± 1.83 for 2002 and 2003, and also showed a significant site X

year interaction (P=0.023). Macroalgae and CTB were inversely related at both banks in both years.

The Montastraea annularis complex was the predominant component of coral cover at both banks in both

years, with 33.59 ± 3.86% and 28.47 ± 2.98% cover at East Bank in 2002 and 2003 and 31.73 ± 3.57%

and 33.80 ± 4.31% at the West Bank in 2002 and 2003. Due to difficulty in differentiating the three

species of the complex in the videographic images, M. annularis, M. faveolata and M. franksi were

combined. Diploria strigosa was the next most abundant species, ranging from 3.20 ± 0.91% at the West

Bank in 2002 to 9.04 ± 2.68% in 2003. The East Bank estimates were 6.96 ± 1.69% and 6.19 ± 1.55% in

2002 and 2003.

Videographic transects, still photographs and linear-point-intercept (LPI) transects, used as redundant

measures to estimate coral coverage along fourteen random transects, produced coral cover estimates

within 3.5% of each other and were not significantly different (P=0.564).

The Shannon-Weiner diversity index, H’, was calculated from species-specific coral-cover data from each

video transect. H’ ranged from a low of 1.35 at the West Bank in 2003 to a high of 1.51 at the East Bank

in 2003, H’ = 1.37 was calculated for the West Bank in 2002 and H’ = 1.45 at the East Bank. A two-way

ANOVA showed no significant effect of year or site, and the site×year interaction was also not significant.

Repetitive quadrats were photographed to monitor 8-m

2

areas and their coral communities over time.

Repetitive quadrats showed changes in coral species cover and coral condition (disease, paling,

bleaching, and fish biting) from 2002 to 2003 (20 pairs at East Bank, 31 pairs at West Bank). The

incidence of disease, paling and bleaching were low at both banks in both years; none of these metrics

was above 0.61%, and there was no evidence of disease in any of the repetitive quadrats analyzed.

Planimetry results of select colonies within repetitive quadrats showed a percent cover increase from

2001-2002 and from 2002-2003 at both banks. Percent cover increase of all colonies and the

Montastraea annularis complex showed greater percentage increases at the East Bank than the West

Bank.

Nine deep repetitive quadrats (32-40 m depth) were established on the East Bank in April 2003 and

photographed in August 2003. Coral cover was high, at 75.14% overall. The Montastraea annularis
xvi

complex (42.37%) and M. cavernosa (14.74%) were the dominant species at these sites. Algae cover

was relatively low (12.20%) and 91% of algae was CTB.

Lateral growth stations were monitored to measure changes in Diploria strigosa colonies. Diploria strigosa

is important at the FGB because it is the second largest contributor to coral cover within the 100-m

2

monitoring sites. In April 2003, 60 new stations were established on each bank, because of this a limited

number of temporal comparisons were made between 2001-2002 and 2002-2003. Overall there was a 3-

5% increase in Diploria strigosa margins from 2001-2002, but the sample size for the 2002-2003

comparison was not sufficient to draw conclusions.

Sclerochronology was used to measure the accretionary growth rates of Montastraea faveolata. Cores

taken at both banks revealed annual growth bands spanning 1997-2003. Yearly growth rates ranged

from 7.3 to 10.7 mm and differed significantly (P=0.02) between banks. Interestingly, a disruption in

accretion was seen in one quarter of the samples from both banks within the 1997-1998 (the year of

widespread bleaching throughout western Atlantic coral reefs) growth band.

Water quality parameters including photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), turbidity, temperature,

salinity, pH, and dissolved oxygen were recorded using YSI datasondes. Chlorophyll a, as well as

nutrients and trace metals, were recorded using water samples. No anomalous water quality parameters

were measured during the study period. However, YSI datasondes failed post-deployment calibration

after each deployment period and/or were not recording valid measurements at the end of their

deployment periods.

Fish surveys were conducted using the Bohnsack and Bannerot (1986) method. A mean of 51 fish

species were observed per bank per year in 2002 and 2003. Herbivores were the dominant fish guild,

with Scaridae (parrotfish) and Acanthuridae (surgeonfish) representing the largest portion of these. Bellshaped size distribution curves suggest that herbivore populations are healthy with the largest proportion

of fish being in the 11-20 cm range at both banks in both years. Carnivorous fish were represented by

fewer families than herbivores and were comprised mainly of Serranidae and Lutjanidae. While

Sphyraenidae and Carrangidae species were present, their abundance was comparatively low. Sixty

percent or more of carnivores were estimated to be above 21 cm, suggesting a robust population of

carnivores at both banks.

Urchin surveys documented low densities of Diadema antillarum at both banks in both years. Density

ranged from 0 - 0.014 individuals/m

2

. Only one Panulirus argus (lobster) was documented along

transects at the East Bank in 2002.

The FGB coral reefs remain in good condition and productive in comparison to reefs throughout the

region. This may be due in part to their remote location. Continued monitoring of these reefs will

document their long-term condition and be useful for studies focused on the dynamics of the robust

benthic communities and the fish populations they support. The following are recommendations for the

improvement of the monitoring protocol:

 Monitor areas outside of the 100-m

2

study sites. In particular, Madracis mirabilis

field located near the southeast corner of the East Bank study site should be

cored to chronicle environmental disturbances, such as hurricanes.

 Replace YSI datasondes or datasonde sensors to obtain more consistent and

accurate results for water quality parameters.

 We recommend that the YSI datasondes be mounted on the reef cap to more

accurately measure water quality parameters in the reef community. Remove YSI

datasondes from sand flats, where they are currently located. Certain

parameters, in particular, PAR and turbidity, may be affected by the sandflat

environment, where sedimentation and reflectance influence these parameters.

Furthermore, dissolved oxygen is potentially greater on the sand flats.
xvii

 Increase YSI changeouts to 5-8 times per year, to more precisely monitor water

quality parameters.

 Monitor the concentration of trace metals in bivalves to evaluate the

bioavailability of trace metals at the FGB. Filter-feeders are known to concentrate

the heavy metals they ingest from surrounding waters.
1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 FLOWER GARDEN BANKS IN THE GULF OF MEXICO

1.1.1 Habitat Description

The Flower Garden Banks (FGB) are located in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico and form part of a

discontinuous arc of reef environments along the outer continental shelf (Rezak et al. 1985) (Figure

1.1.1). These coral reef banks are the largest charted calcareous banks in the northwestern Gulf of

Mexico (Bright et al. 1985) and are the northernmost coral reefs on the continental shelf of North America

(Bright et al. 1984). Although coral and non-coral communities exist on neighboring banks (e.g. Sonnier

Bank, Stetson Bank), the reefs at Cabo Rojo, Mexico and Middle Grounds, Florida, are the closest

developed coral reefs in the Gulf of Mexico.

The topographic features of the FGB were created by salt diapirs of Jurassic Louann origin and the

consequent uplifting of sedimentary rocks (Rezak 1981). The caps of these salt domes extend into the

photic zone in clear oceanic water where conditions are ideal for colonization by coralline algae,

hermatypic corals, invertebrates and fish species typical of Caribbean basin coral reefs. Though coral

species richness is more depauperate at the FGB than that of Caribbean reefs, 21 species of

scleractinian corals and 177 species of tropical Atlantic fish are present at the banks (Pattengill-Semmens

and Gittings 2003). Oceanic salinity conditions prevail at FGB and range from 34 to 36 PSU, with water

temperatures ranging from 18°C (mid-February) to ~ 32°C (August). Water clarity at the Banks is

excellent, commonly 30 m or more, providing light to photosynthesizing organisms.

1.1.2 East and West Banks

The East Bank (27o 54.5’ N, 93o 36.0’ W) is located approximately 193 km southeast of Galveston, Texas.

East Bank encompasses 67 km

2

, sloping from the shallowest point at 20 m to the terrigenous mud

seafloor at a depth of 100-120 m. The eastern and southern edges of the bank slope steeply whereas

the northern and western edges slope more gently (Figure 1.1.2). The West Bank (27o 52.4’ N, 93o 48.8’

W) is located 20 km west of East Bank, is located 172 km southeast of Galveston and is more than twice

as large (137 km

2

) as the East Bank (Figure 1.1.3). The three peaks that comprise the East Bank are

aligned along an east-west axis. The middle high rises from a depth of 100-150 m to within 18 m of the

surface and supports coral reef habitat from 18 - 48 m. Coral species diversity at both banks is low, with

21 species from 12 genera represented (Bright et al. 1984), compared to 67 species found on some

Caribbean reefs (Goreau and Wells 1967). Shallow-water corals, including gorgonians and acroporids

were not found in the past. Notably, one colony of Acropora palmata was discovered in 2001 at the West

Bank and was still present and growing at the time of this writing.

In the past, three biological zones were described at the FGB: the Montastraea-Diploria-Porites Zone (<

36 m), the Stephanocoenia-Millepora Zone (36-52 m), and the algal-sponge zone (46-88 m) (Rezak et al.

1985). All monitoring at both banks is conducted within the Montastraea-Diploria-Porites Zone, except for

the deep stations at the East Bank (32-40 m), which were established in 2003. In contrast to the previous

descriptions of species dominance in the Stephanocoenia-Millepora Zone, these new deep stations are

dominated by the M. annularis species complex (M. annularis, M. faveolata, and M. franksi) and M.

cavernosa. The difference in coral dominance at these newly established deep sites illustrates the high

degree of variability at small spatial scales.
2

Figure 1.1.1. Location map of the East and West Flower Garden Banks in relation to the Texas-Louisiana conti

other topographic features of the northwestern Gulf of Mexico (map courtesy of Ken Deslarzes).
3

Figure 1.1.2. Topographic contour map of the East Bank (Gardner et al. 1998).
4

Figure 1.1.3. Topographic contour map of the West Bank (Gardner et al. 1998).

1.2 MMS AND FGBNMS PROTECTIVE MEASURES

Oil and gas activity in the vicinity of the FGB has been ongoing since the 1970s. The Minerals

Management Service (MMS), under the U.S. Department of Interior (USDOI), has regulated the

development of the oil and gas industry within the Gulf of Mexico outer continental shelf. In addition,

MMS has, since 1973, conducted a program of protective activities at the FGB coral reefs. The
5

topographic features stipulation (since 1973) as applied to the FGB was designed to protect sensitive

biological resources from the adverse effects of routine oil and gas activities (MMS 2002). The stipulation

specifically protects the biota of the FGB from physical damage associated with oil and gas activities

including anchoring, rig emplacement and potential toxic and smothering effects from drilling muds and

cuttings discharges (MMS 2002). The stipulation defines a No Activity Zone (NAZ) around each of the

banks. The boundary of the NAZ overlaps the 100-120 m isobaths at the West Bank and the 100-130 m

isobaths at the East Bank. No oil or gas structures, drilling rigs, pipelines, or anchoring are allowed within

the NAZ. The stipulation also defines a “4-Mile Zone” outside the No Activity Zone within which operators

are to shunt all drill cuttings and drilling fluids to within 10 m of the seafloor.

In addition to the protective measures provided by MMS, the FGB were designated as a United States

National Marine Sanctuary in 1992 (Code of Federal Regulations, 15 CFR Part 992, Subpart L Section

922.120). The Sanctuary regulates, restricts ands/or prohibits:

(1) Anchoring or mooring of all vessels within the Sanctuary boundaries

(2) Discharge of any material or matter within the Sanctuary boundaries

(3) Any alteration of the seabed within the Sanctuary boundaries

(4) Any injury or removal or attempt of injury or removal of any living or non-living Sanctuary resource,

(5) Taking of marine mammals and sea turtles

(6) Possessing or using within the Sanctuary boundaries any fishing gear except conventional hook and

line gear

(7) Possessing or using explosives within the Sanctuary boundaries or releasing electrical charges within

the Sanctuary boundaries

From 1988 to 1992, the MMS had the FGB coral reefs monitored on an annual basis to detect any

incipient changes that may be caused by oil and gas activities, as well as by any other disturbances that

may occur (Gittings et al. 1992; Gittings 1998). Starting in 1996, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary (FGBNMS) and the MMS partnered to

continue the long-term monitoring at the FGB.

1.3 FLOWER GARDEN BANKS CORAL REEF MONITORING

Remarkably, no significant long-term changes have been detected in coral reef populations, cover, or

diversity at the FGB since quantitative surveys of the reefs began in 1988. These reefs presently have

among the highest estimated live coral cover in the western Atlantic (Pattengill-Semmens and Gittings

2003). Monitoring results and other studies (Gittings et al. 1992; CSA 1996; Dokken et al. 1999, 2001,

2003; Pattengill-Semmens and Gittings 2003) have shown that the assemblages on East Bank and West

Bank are low-diversity, high-coral cover and low-algal cover communities, with robust fish assemblages

including representation of all fish guilds (Pattengill-Semmens and Gittings 2003).

Gittings et al. (1992) established 10000-m

2

study sites at the East and West Banks to monitor benthic

community structure from 1988 to 1991—measured by coral cover, relative dominance, diversity,

evenness, and accretionary and encrusting growth rates—as well as water quality parameters.

Comparisons between the 1988-1991 results and those of previous studies from 1978 - 1982 showed no

significant differences in any of the parameters, indicating ecological stability at the FGB over the period

examined. Coral cover was ~50% and dominated by the Montastraea annularis species complex and

Diploria strigosa at ~25% and ~8% cover, respectively (Gittings et al. 1992). Gittings et al. (1992)

considered spills from oil tankers, leaking mud and drill cuttings from oil and gas operations, seismic

activity due to oil and gas exploration and platform accidents to hold the greatest threat of reef

degradation.

No long-term changes in coral community structure were reported by CSA (1996). However, variation in

individual coral species was detected between banks and between the sampling years, which were 1992,

1994 and 1995. Bleaching in corals was documented in 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1995 when water

temperatures rose above 30°C (Hagman and Gittings 1992; Dokken et al. 1999, 2001, 2003).

Montastraea cavernosa and Millepora alcicornis were the species most affected by bleaching, but postbleaching mortality rates were low at 0.2%-2.8% from 1992-1995 and occurred patchily. Although small-
6

scale spatial variation exists at the FGB, as it does on other coral reefs, it is apparent that at the larger

scale of the reef landscape (km), the biota exhibit relative stability.

Dokken et al. (1999, 2003) continued the monitoring effort from 1996-2001 and documented no significant

changes in coral growth or condition. Biodiversity inventories were conducted for algae and mollusks: 73

species of algae were documented as well as over 230 species of mollusks (Dokken et al. 2001, 2003).

Fish assemblages were also studied in detail (Pattengill 1998).

Using the AGRRA protocol in 1999, Pattengill-Semmens and Gittings (2003) showed high coral cover,

~50% at 20-28 m, dominated by large (mean diameter 81-93 cm) head corals with a partial coral colony

mortality (recent and long-dead) of only 13%. In concordance with former findings, turf was the

predominant algal group, whereas macroalgae accounted for less than 10% cover (Pattengill-Semmens

and Gittings 2003).

Monitoring results for 2002-2003 highlighted the continued health of these reefs, expressed as

consistently high coral cover, with a mean of 56.43% ± 2.36 at the East Bank in 2002, 53.20% ± 3.01 in

2003, 49.67% ± 3.35 at the West Bank in 2002 and 57.13% ± 3.81 in 2003. The continuing trend of coral

growth is also apparent in repetitive quadrat stations and lateral growth of individual colonies of the brain

coral Diploria strigosa. As repetitive quadrat and lateral growth (Diploria strigosa) stations were missing

markers, displaced, or otherwise degraded in 2002, a site rehabilitation cruise was completed in April

2003. The goal of this cruise was to reestablish the initial sample size of forty repetitive quadrat stations

and sixty lateral growth stations on the East and West Banks. A new numbering system was established

and old stations were refurbished with new pins and tags, while a small number of new stations were

established at each bank. At the East Bank thirty-one old stations were refurbished and 9 new stations were

installed, for a total of 40 repetitive quadrat stations. At the West Bank thirty-six stations were refurbished and

4 new stations were installed, for a total of 40 repetitive quadrat stations. The lateral growth stations were

also refurbished and new stations were established to return the sample size to 60 on each bank. At the

East Bank forty-eight old lateral growth stations were refurbished and 12 new stations were established, for a

total of 60 lateral growth stations. At the West Bank forty-three lateral growth stations were refurbished and

17 new stations were installed, for a total of 60 lateral growth stations. Since the majority of stations were

refurbished, the long-term dataset should not be affected for either the repetitive quadrat or lateral growth

stations. The robust fish populations and oligotrophic water conditions persisted while occurrences of

disease and bleaching in corals were low. Sea urchins continued to occur at low densities; while

herbivorous fishes kept algal cover under control as they represented the largest fish guild on both banks.

In nearly 15 years of continuous monitoring, the coral reefs of the FGB have maintained high levels of

coral cover, suffered minimally from bleaching and disease, and supported diverse and abundant fish

populations as well as other vertebrate and invertebrate species. While the rest of the Caribbean has

experienced a decline in coral cover, subsequent increases in macroalgal cover, and decreased fish

stocks due to overfishing, the FGB remain a stable coral reef system in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico.

As such, these reefs are potentially excellent study sites for understanding the causes of stability and change

in reef systems through time and space.
7

2.0 METHODS

The FGB being roughly 190 kilometers (km) offshore submerged in more than 18 meters (m) of water, the

monitoring effort had to be conducted from a dive vessel that remained at each bank for about two days. The

benthos (with an emphasis on corals) was examined along visual, photographic and videographic transects,

and in stationary repetitive photographs. Fish surveys were conducted at haphazardly located stations.

Urchins and lobsters were surveyed on perimeter lines. Sclerochronology was used to document the

accretionary growth of corals, and photography was done at permanent stations to monitor the lateral growth

of corals. Water quality was assessed to characterize the FGB reef cap and water column environment.

2.1 STUDY SITES

All data were collected within the established 100m x 100m site at East Bank and West Bank in October

2002 and August 2003, except for a set of deep repetitive quadrats at East Bank, which were established in

April 2003. The general locations of the study sites are marked by permanent mooring buoys: FGBNMS

permanent mooring number 2 at the East Bank (27°53’ 35.80” N, 93°38’ 23.90” W) and mooring number 5

at the West Bank (27° 52’ 50.86” N, 93° 52’ 25.34” W) (Figures 2.1.1 and 2.1.2). Subsurface buoys were

installed at the corners of the sites to facilitate underwater relocation. Geographical Positioning System

(GPS) positions taken of the site corners in 2002 allowed for quick site relocation and initial mapping of the

four corners (Table 2.1.1) and (Figures 2.1.1. and 2.1.2). Buoys were dropped from a launch to visually mark

the corners from the surface and for quick location by divers. Divers used polypropylene lines to temporarily

mark the perimeters of the study sites and the north/south and east/west center lines (commonly referred to

as “cross-hairs”). Establishment of the perimeter and crosshairs subdivided each site into four quadrants.

They also aided divers in orientation and to complete monitoring tasks efficiently. Each dive team was

supplied with detailed underwater maps of the study sites. Additionally, master maps were updated on the

dive vessel with new data on station numbers, locations, replacements and revisions. These revisions are

reflected in the current site maps (Figures 2.1.3 and 2.1.4).

Table 2.1.1.

GPS coordinates for East and West Bank study site corner markers.

East Bank West Bank

Corner North West Corner North West

NE 27o54'32.8 93o35'48.1 NE 27o52'31.8 93o48'53.6

NW 27o54'32.2 93o35'51.6 NW 27o52'31.5 93o48'56.9

SE 27o54'29.6 93o35'48.6 SE 27o52'28.7 93o48'53.2

SW 27o54'30.1 93o35'52.1 SW 27o52'28.5 93o48'56.8

Metal rods were previously installed in the reef to demarcate monitoring stations. There were two types of

permanent monitoring stations: (1) lateral growth stations on Diploria strigosa colonies marked by two short

rods per station, and (2) 8m

2

repetitive quadrats, the centers of which were marked by a tall rod (0.5 m long).

Due to the poor condition of many of the existing rods, a site-rehabilitation was conducted in April 2003. At

the East Bank, 60 lateral growth station pins were installed, 48 of these were replacements for existing pins

and 12 were new stations. At the West Bank, 60 lateral growth station pins were installed and 43 of these

were replacement pins, while 17 were new station pins. Forty repetitive quadrat station pins were installed at

the East Bank in April 2003 and 31 of these were replacements for existing pins. At the West Bank, 40

repetitive quadrat station pins were installed and 36 of these were replacement pins, while 4 new repetitive

quadrat pins were installed. A new numbering system was assigned to the new rods. Eighty new repetitive

quadrats (Station numbers 1-40 at East Bank and 41-80 at West Bank) and 120 new lateral growth stations

(1-60 at East Bank, 61-120 at West Bank) were established. Additionally, in April 2003 nine deep repetitive
8

quadrat stations (station numbers 81-89) were established at East Bank in 33-40 m water depth (Figure

2.1.5).

2.2 RANDOM TRANSECTS

2.2.1 Methodological Rationale

To estimate the areal coverage of benthic components such as corals and macroalgae, fourteen 10-m

long fiberglass surveyor’s tapes were positioned at each study site. Coverage was estimated from these

transects in three ways: still photography (the method used in previous monitoring studies at the FGB),

videography, and visual assessment in the field. The Scope of Work in the contract for this study

expressed a well-founded desire to move away from still photography for recording the 14 transects at

each site. Digital videography provides a logistically simpler and more reliable alternative. In addition to

continuing the long-term record of transect assessment at the study sites, this component of the project

was intended to assess the utility of videography for surveying transects at the FGB and the comparability

of video to still photography. The linear-point intercept (LPI) (see Section 2.2.5) method was used as

well, to ascertain whether data recorded directly in situ (i.e., on the reef) were different than data derived

from either of the photographic methods (stills or videos).
9

Figure 2.1.1. East Bank topographic map. The inset shows the locations of the study site corners.
10

Figure 2.1.2. West Bank topographic map. The inset shows the locations of the study site corners.
11

Figure 2.1.3. Locations of monitoring stations at East Bank, 2003.
12

Figure 2.1.4. Locations of monitoring stations at West Bank, 2003.
13

Figure 2.1.5. Bathymetric map with the deep repetitive quadrat stations in relation to the permanent study

site at the East Bank (32-40 m), established in 2003. Contour lines at 20, 30 and 40 m.

(Courtesy of Doug Weaver, NOAA/FGBNMS).

Data collected using video transects, still photography, and LPI transects were categorized as follows.

Corals were identified to species; sponges were combined into a single group; macroalgae were identified

to species where possible and included anything longer than ~3 mm; crustose coralline algae turfs, fine

turfs and bare rock were grouped as “CTB.” These components are difficult to distinguish visually in still

photographs and video transects. All three connote high levels of physical disturbance and/or herbivory,

and so it is reasonable to combine them (Aronson and Precht 2000). These methods are a refinement of

past methods at the FGB and have been used successfully in a separate, NOAA-funded study comparing

Fully Protected Zones (FPZs) and reference sites within the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary

(Murdoch and Aronson 1999).

2.2.2 Positioning of the Transects

Due to time constraints on diver bottom time, transects were placed haphazardly rather than randomly (e.g.,

Aronson and Swanson 1997). It was essential for divers to be able to move easily between transects, quickly

locating each after sampling the previous one. In addition, previous investigators avoided large areas of sand

within the study sites, because the sand microhabitat was of less interest than hard substratum; the present

study adopted this constraint as well, to assure comparability with the earlier data.
14

The transects in this study were laid haphazardly in a trapline pattern. The first transect was positioned at

random within one quadrant of the study site and laid in a randomly chosen compass heading. Each end of

the transect was marked with a subsurface buoy so that it could be located easily by divers. The beginning of

the next transect was positioned approximately 10 m from the end of the first and laid haphazardly at an

obtuse angle to the direction of the first. The third transect was laid in the same manner relative to the

second, and so on. If a transect reached the border of the study site, it was reflected off the border and

continued as a “bent” line.

The patterns of transects that were generated covered all four quadrants of the study areas and sampled

them with approximately equal intensity. This outcome was considered more desirable than the sparse

sampling of areas that sometimes occurs when transects are positioned at random. Regardless, there was

no expectation that benthic components were distributed in any sort of regular pattern, so the placement of

transects in a pattern that was more even than a truly random pattern was not considered biased.

2.2.3 Still Photography

The first method of estimating benthic coverage, still photography, involved using a Nikonos V camera

equipped with a 28-mm lens and dual strobes, mounted on an aluminum framer, that allowed the camera

lens to be 1.0 m above the substratum. The bottom of the framer was wrapped in foam to protect the reef

from damage. Cameras were loaded with Kodak Ektachrome EliteChrome 200 ASA 36-exposure color slide

film and set to f11 and a distance of 0.8 m. One strobe was set on TTL and the other on slave. Seventeen

photographs were taken on the right side of the transect in a consecutive, non-overlapping fashion along

each transect at each site (Figure 2.2.3). Earlier reports reported that each photograph captured 44 x 63

centimeters (cm) of the benthos (2772 cm

2

). Through visual assessment of the photographs in 2002 and

2003, we noted that the foam edge of the framer appeared along one or more edges of the photograph in

some instances. With the framer measurements and information on the camera lens, we determined that

each photograph in fact covered an area of 78 x 52 cm (4056 cm

2

) using the factory lens information from

Nikonos. Since coral cover was calculated as percent cover, a relative measure, this did not affect results

except for the total area surveyed.

Figure 2.2.3. Random still photographs being taken in October 2002 at the FGB.

Still photographs were analyzed using planimetry (Sigma Scan Pro®) to obtain estimates of the coverage of

benthic components. The three sibling species of the Montastraea annularis complex were analyzed

separately using the judgement of the trained analyzer. For statistical purposes the three species were
15

combined in analysis. Data from the photographs were pooled within transects to provide one estimate of

each parameter per transect (i.e., n=14 per site per survey). Pooling the data in this way obviates any

concerns about the positions at which the photographs were taken along the transects, and more general

concerns that subsamples along transects may not be independent.

2.2.4 Videography

The second method, digital videography provides a logistically simpler and more reliable alternative to still

photography. In the videographic protocol, a diver swam slowly along each transect, videotaping at a height

of 40 cm from the substratum, using a digital video camera in an underwater housing fitted with a wide-angle

lens and underwater video lights. A depth gauge and scaling bar were attached to an aluminum bar that

projected forward from the video housing. The gauge and bar ensured that the camera remained a constant

distance from the bottom. By holding the video camera perpendicular to the substratum and swimming

slowly along the transect it was possible to produce clear stop-action images for analysis (Aronson et al.

1994; Murdoch and Aronson 1999).

The video frames covered a 40-cm wide swath along each of the 10-m transects, for a total area of 4 m

2

per

transect, or 56 m

2

videotaped per site per year. Each video frame was 40 x 27 cm, or 1080 cm

2

. These

dimensions were smaller than those of the still photographs. The reason for the difference is that the

videographic technique is designed to enable investigators to identify corals and many other sessile

invertebrates to species down to a colony size of approximately 3 cm. This level of precision is not currently

possible using video frames that record larger areas of the substratum.

Data from the digital videotapes were collected and analyzed according to the Murdoch Automated Video

Analysis method, as follows. A set of 42 video frames was captured from each video transect using a

Macintosh PowerBook G4 with the software Adobe Photoshop

®

version 6.02 and the PhotoDV image capture

plug-in software produced by Radius

®

. The time taken to film each transect was measured and divided into

42 equal time divisions and rounded down to the nearest 1/60

th

second time interval. Once the software

captured each set of frames for each transect, a series of digital filters was applied to each image to enhance

image quality. Substrate cover was assessed from the 20 evenly numbered, non-overlapping frames from

the set of 42 images. Odd-numbered frames were intentionally captured so as to overlap even-numbered

frames. Odd frames were only used to allow the researcher to obtain an alternate view of the area around

objects in the analyzed frames when objects were obstructed or unclear in the even frames. Otherwise, oddnumbered frames were not used in the analysis. Unused odd frames were deleted from the digital image set

after analysis.

After image capture and enhancement, the image frames from each site had an image of a randomly placed

set of 25 dots added as a separate layer. In the 2002 analysis the dot images added to the captured video

frames were selected at random from a previously produced batch of 100 random-dot images. A program

developed by Murdoch automatically carried out the process of randomly selecting each image of random

dots and placing it on each frame of the entire data-set for each reef site. In 2003, unique random-dot

images were generated and pasted automatically to each video frame after capture using a new program.

After random-dot placement the image files from each transect were visually assessed and the data entered

into project-specific Microsoft Excel spreadsheets.

Quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) for the video method consisted of multiple, trained individuals

(Aronson, Precht and Murdoch) diving together on the study sites and identifying corals and other taxa.

Captured video frames were then examined to ensure that (1) they agreed on species identifications

(particularly an issue with respect to the Montastraea annularis species complex) and (2) the taxa were

recognizeable on the frames. Previous QA/QC exercises indicated that data derived from the video transects

by Murdoch are of high quality, with <1% error in the identification of corals to species and similar errors in

the assignment of benthic components to their correct categories.
16

2.2.5 Linear Point-Intercept Estimates

The third method of assessment, visual estimation, consisted of a diver swimming along each transect,

recording the substratum component underlying each 10-cm mark along the tape, for a total of 100 points

recorded per transect. The linear point-intercept (LPI) method has proven effective at estimating areal

coverage of benthic components on coral reefs, particularly where the diversity of corals and other taxa is low

(Ohlhorst et al. 1988; Rogers et al. 1994; Aronson and Precht 1995, 1997), as it is at the FGB (Figure 2.2.5).

Figure 2.2.5. Linear-point intercept data collection in progress along random transects at the FGB.

2.2.6 Statistical Analysis of the Transect Data

Each transect was treated as a replicate at the scale of the study site, yielding an estimate of coral cover and

the cover of other benthic categories. Percent covers were calculated for each transect from the resulting set

of 500 points. Data were collected on the point-counts of each coral species; sponges as a group;

macroalgae to species; turf (>3 mm), fine turf, crustose coralline algae and bare rock as a single category,

“CTB”; and sand and other inanimate categories of substrate. Graphs were produced to allow the

comparison of each reef in the average percent cover of major substrate types, coral species, coral functional

types and algal functional types. Previous examination of means and variances, using different numbers of

random dots, suggested that 500 dots per transect provide accurate and precise estimates of the coverage of

benthic components, regardless of the length of the transects (Aronson et al. 1994; Carleton and Done 1995).

Analyses of Variance (ANOVAs) were performed to test the null hypothesis that the two reefs did not

differ in each type of univariate substratum cover. After tests for normality and homogeneity ANOVAs

were calculated for each substratum variable with the statistical software Systat

®

5.0., only the data on

macroalgae had to be transformed, using the arcsine transformation. Multivariate statistical techniques

were used to compare how the two banks differed in coral species composition using the software

package PRIMER

®

5.0.

To place the data on coral cover in a regional context, we analyzed the species-specific coral cover data

using multidimensional scaling (MDS). We pooled the species-specific point-count data for hard corals

from the 14 transects from each survey at a site in one year. Square-root-transformed Bray-Curtis

dissimilarity matrices were calculated from the vectors representing species-specific point-count values

from the pooled transect data. Dendrograms and multidimensional scaling (MDS) plots were produced.

Additionally the similarity matrices were analyzed to detect multidimensional differences between the two

reefs using the non-parametric Analysis of Similarity ANOSIM (PRIMER

®

5.0). We included in the
17

analysis pooled point-count data from random transects videotaped in three fully-protected zones (FPZs)

of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary during the same period (10, 25-m transects per site per

year; 13.5-17.4 m depth; 50 frames analyzed per transect using 10 point-counts per frame; from separate

work by Aronson, Murdoch and colleagues.

The three methods of estimating of areal coverage (still photography, videography, and LPI) were compared

using a randomized complete-block (repeated-measures) ANOVA design. The transects were the blocks,

and the three estimates of coral cover from a given transect were treated as repeated measures. Transects

from both banks in both years were pooled for this analysis.

The random sampling approach to videography has provided sufficient statistical power to test hypotheses of

change in community composition in previous studies in Florida and the Caribbean. Differences on the order

of 3-5% in univariate coral cover were detectable at the 5% level (i.e., at P<0.05) with 80% power (Aronson et

al. 1994; Murdoch and Aronson 1999). The technique has also performed well in multivariate analyses

(Aronson and Swanson 1997). Power analysis was conducted to compare the performance of the

videographic approach to its performance elsewhere in the western Atlantic.

2.3 SCLEROCHRONOLOGY

2.3.1 Methodological Rationale

Sclerochronology is the determination of annual growth rates through the measurement of accretionary

growth bands in coral core samples taken perpendicular to coral growth. The area between two sequential

high-density growth bands was considered an annual growth increment, and measurement of linear

extension can be compared within the same coral, between corals, and between banks. Skipped or stressed

bands are commonly observed during years of significant coral bleaching or other stresses (including cold air

outbreaks, freshwater pulses, damselfish territories) (Wells, 1963; Kaufman 1977; Buddemeier et al. 1974;

Dodge, 1975; Hudson et al. 1976; Highsmith 1979; Dodge 1980; Hudson 1981a, 1981b; Hudson et al. 1989;

Smith et al. 1989; Heiss 1996; Insalaco 1996).

2.3.2 Field Methods

Four cores were extracted from Montastraea faveolata colonies at each bank during the 2003 monitoring

cruise. A SCUBA tank-powered pneumatic drill, fitted with a diamond tipped 7.62-cm lapidary bit, was used

to extract cores from the center of large M. faveolata heads. Cores were 30 millimeters (mm) in diameter and

50 mm long, providing seven years of growth. The hole left from core extraction was filled with a preformed

limestone plug inscribed with the date of core extraction (Figure 2.3.2).
18

Figure 2.3.2. Montastraea faveolata coring 2003 at the FGB.

2.3.3 Laboratory Methods

Cores were longitudinally sectioned into 3- to 4-mm thick slabs using a single-blade diamond impregnated

rock saw. Coral slabs were arranged on Kodak brand Industrix 400 x-ray film and exposed to x-rays (70kV

15ma with an exposure time of 7 sec) to reveal annual density bands.

Growth of the Montastraea faveolata colonies sampled was determined directly by measuring distances from

high density to high density band. Three measurements were made along a single growth band and

averaged for an estimate of growth rate per year.

2.3.4. Data Presentation and Statistical Analysis

Overall mean growth rates with standard errors were calculated for each bank and year (1997-2003) from the

four cores at each bank. Data are presented for each year by bank in tabular form. A t-test assuming

unequal variance was completed comparing East and West Bank growth rates.

2.4 LATERAL GROWTH

2.4.1 Methodological Rationale

Diploria strigosa is the second largest contributor to coral cover at the FGB (Bright et al. 1984). For this

reason D. strigosa lateral growth margins are monitored to detect changes, either as retreat or growth of

margins.

2.4.2 Field Methods

In 2002, 54 and 43 lateral growth stations were photographed at the East Bank and West Bank, respectively.

During the site rehabilitation cruise in April 2003 sixty lateral growth stations were refurbished and/or installed

on each bank. At the East Bank 12 new stations were established and 48 old lateral growth stations were

refurbished with new pins and tags, for a total of 60 lateral growth stations, numbered 1-60. At the West Bank

17 new stations were installed, while 43 old lateral growth station pins were refurbished with new pins and

tags, for a total of 60 new lateral growth stations, numbered 60-120. Divers tagged and photographed all

lateral growth stations that they saw in August 2003, even if they did not have a new tag, therefore the

number of photographed lateral growth stations exceeded 60 at each bank in 2003, and included new

stations, refurbished stations as well as old untagged stations. Sixty-two colonies of Diploria strigosa on East
19

Bank and 64 colonies on West Bank were photographed to assess coral margin growth rates in August

2003.

Divers were equipped with a Nikonos V camera with a 28 mm lens (underwater application, 144x216 mm

field, 1/6 reproduction ratio), Nikonos close-up kit and strobe. The camera was set at f22 and a distance of

infinity, and the strobe set to TTL. This produced 13.3 x 19.7-cm (262.01-cm

2

) photographic images (Figure

2.4.2). The framer was placed on corner pins at each station, ensuring a repeated image of the station.

Many stations had missing station identification tags. Those stations that did have tags were photographed

with the tag in the frame. For stations without tags, the current photographs were matched with past

photographs using the ridge patterns of the Diploria colonies.

Figure 2.4.2. Image for analysis of Diploria strigosa lateral growth station at the East Bank, showing 2001

(red line) and 2002 (green line) comparison, using Adobe Photoshop.

2.4.3 Image Analysis of Lateral Growth

Images corresponding to a specific lateral growth station were compared for consecutive years. Specifically,

comparisons were made between the 2001 and 2002 images, and between the 2002 and 2003 images.

Lateral changes in the margins of the Diploria strigosa colonies were evaluated by overlaying the photograph

pairs and calculating the area of advance or retreat laterally, using Sigma Scan Pro 5

®

. Successive

photographs of a given colony were lined up using the colony’s ridge patterns.

Comparisons between 2001 and 2002 lateral growth stations resulted in 18 matches at the East Bank and 11

matches at the West Bank. Comparisons between 2002 and 2003 photographs resulted in eight matches at

the East Bank and four matches at the West Bank. The lower number of matches in 2002-2003 was the

result of unanalyzable slides, which were too dark in 2002 and the fact that many of the photographs taken

were new stations in 2003. New stations established in 2003 were not included in the analysis, because they

were photographed only once, but these will contribute to the analysis in the future and should result in a

more robust dataset.

2.4.4 Data Presentation and Statistical Analysis of Lateral Growth Stations

Two-tailed binomial probability tests were conducted to test the null hypothesis that lateral accretion (+) or

loss (-) of tissue were equally likely in Diploria strigosa at East Bank and West Bank from 2001-2002 and

2002-2003. P-values were calculated for each bank in 2001-2002, and for pooled data from both banks for

2002-2003 due to low sample size at each bank individually. Proportional annual changes in growth of the
20

individual Diploria colonies, whether positive or negative, were examined by site (East Bank and West

Bank) and by year (2001-2002 and 2002-2003) using non-parametric statistical tests.

2.5 REPETITIVE QUADRATS

2.5.1 Methodological Rationale

To monitor changes in coral reef community structure, repetitive 8m

2

quadrats were photographed and

analyzed in two ways. The first method of analysis measured percent benthic cover components in 2002 and

2003 using random dot analysis. To determine whether specific coral colonies grew or lost tissue laterally,

selected corals within repetitive quadrats were analyzed using planimetry to measure growth or loss of tissue

of available matches between 2001, 2002, and 2003. Due to the variability from year to year in photographs,

dominant frame building corals that predominate the FGB (Montastraea spp., Diploria strigosa, Colpophyllia

natans) were selected based on their visible margins, these corals tended to be closer to the center of the

photograph.

2.5.2 Field Methods

In 2002, 31 and 34 repetitive quadrat stations were photographed at East Bank and West Bank respectively.

In April 2003 during the site-rehabilitation cruise pins and tags were refurbished for established repetitive

quadrat stations, as well as the installation of new stations to return the sample size to 40 repetitive quadrats

at each bank. At the East Bank thirty-one existing repetitive quadrat stations were refurbished and 9 new

stations were installed, for a total of 40 repetitive quadrat stations, numbered 1-40. At the West Bank thirty-six

stations were refurbished and 4 new stations were installed, for a total of 40 repetitive quadrat stations,

numbered 40-80. Because divers tagged and photographed all repetitive quadrat stations they saw, whether

they had a new tag or not, the number of stations photographed in 2003 exceeded 40 at each bank, these

included refurbished stations, old non-refurbished stations and newly established stations. In 2003, 41 and 44

repetitive quadrats were photographed at East Bank and West Bank, to track changes of 8m

2

repetitive

quadrats over time.

Twenty image pairs for the East Bank and 31 image pairs for the West Bank were analyzed between 2002-

2003. Less than forty quadrats were analyzed at each bank because the rehabilitation cruise replaced old

pins as well as establishing new pins, therefore the same 40 repetitive quadrats were not necessarily

photographed between 2002 and 2003. The rehabilitation cruise has corrected this for future analysis.

Stations were photographed using a T-bar camera frame with a Nikonos V camera mounted in the middle,

loaded with Kodak Ektachrome EliteChrome 200 ASA, 36-exposure slide film and a 15mm lens (distance = 2

m, f-stop = 8). Two Ikelite 225 watt-second strobes were mounted on the ends of the T-bar and set on TTL

and slave (Gittings et al. 1992). The camera was positioned in a due north direction to ensure repetitive

photographs from year to year. The consistent orientation of the camera was achieved with a compass and a

bubble level.

Nine additional deep stations at 32-40 m depth were established at East Bank by MMS and NOAA in April

2003 and photographed in August 2003 using the technique described above. The first comparison data will

be available in 2005. The deep repetitive quadrat pins were mapped in relation to each other and in relation

to the U-bolt at the base of FGBNMS mooring number 2, for ease of location. Depths were recorded for each

pin, while distances were not measured and remain relative.

2.5.3 Image Analysis of Repetitive Quadrats

Study Site Quadrats. Percent cover of coral species and other benthic components including, coral species,

algae, bleaching, paling, concentrated fish biting or isolated fish biting and disease were determined by

overlaying 300 random dots on each photograph with CPCe point count software, with Excel extensions.

Percent coverage data was calculated from 2002 and 2003 images. Twenty image pairs were analyzed for

the East Bank and 31 image pairs were analyzed for the West Bank.
21

Planimetry was used to measure change between select coral colonies within quadrat matches between

2001 and 2002 and between 2002 and 2003. Four to six coral colonies were chosen within each repetitive

quadrat, colonies were chosen based on the ability to decipher boundaries and importance to reef accretion

(i.e. frame builders such as Montastraea annularis spp., Diploria strigosa, Colpophyllia natans). Seven

matches were made at the East Bank for 2001-2002 and nine matches were made at the West Bank. For

the 2002-2003 comparison 16 matches were compared at the East Bank and 27 comparisons were made

for the West Bank. Areal measurements were created using Sigma Scan Pro 5 planimetry software in each

year (2001, 2002, 2003) for matched coral colonies (Appendix 4).

Table 2.5.3.

Coral species in repetitive quadrat growth comparison analysis.

Coral Species

Montastraea annularis spp. complex

Diploria strigosa

Porites astreoides

Madracis mirabilis

Montastraea cavernosa

Colpophyllia natans

Siderastrea siderea

Mussa angulosa

Millepora alcicornis

Deep Station Quadrats. Deep stations percent cover of coral species and other benthic components

including, coral species, algae, bleaching, paling, concentrated fish biting or isolated fish biting and disease

were determined by overlaying 250 random dots on each photograph with CPCe point count software, with

Excel extensions. Percent coverage data was calculated from 2003 images. Species richness curves

flattened out after 225 dots to characterize species composition at the deep stations. In this way 250 dots

were sufficient to accurately describe species composition at the deep stations. The Montastraea sibling

species were combined for analysis.

2.5.4. Data Presentation and Statistical Analysis of Repetitive Quadrats

Mean percent coral, algae, bleaching, disease and fish-biting cover were calculated for each species or

category of benthic cover using random-dot analysis with CPCe

®

software. Because the Montastraea

annularis species complex was the dominant substratum occupant in the repetitive quadrats, the cover of

this taxon (planimetry measurements) was compared between banks and through time using both

parametric and nonparametric approaches.

2.6 PERIMETER VIDEOGRAPHY

2.6.1 Methodological Rationale

Perimeter lines were videotaped each year to document change at known locations along the perimeter

and within the study site. A general sense of coral condition and fish populations is obtained and

compared year to year.
22

2.6.2 Field Methods

Divers videotaped two 100 m segments of the perimeter lines at the East (north and east) and West Bank

(south and west) in 2002 and 2003. At the East Bank, divers started at the NW corner and videotaped the

north line to the NE corner, then swam the east line to the SE corner. At the West Bank, divers captured

footage of the south and west lines, starting at the SE corner and ending at the NW corner. The

videographer maintained ~2 m distance above the benthos using a weighted line, attached to the video

housing. The camera was held at a 45° angle to capture the substratum. At each corner divers recorded a

360° panoramic view of the reef before continuing on to video the line.

2.6.3 Laboratory Methods

The video footage was reviewed to record the general condition of coral health and fish populations along

the perimeter of the study sites using IMovie (Macintosh software). Individual coral heads displaying

disease, bleaching, paling, and tissue loss due to fish biting were identified and recorded. Analysis

categories were as follows: bleaching, paling, healthy colony, concentrated fish biting, isolated fish biting

(damselfish territory), increased tissue loss due to concentrated fish biting, increased tissue loss due

isolated fish biting, growth infilling (tissue regrowth), new incident of concentrated fish biting, surface

replaced by turf algae, and unchanged. Concentrated fish biting (CFB) is the concentrated biting which

removes the coral polyps completely from an affected area, and may be due to activity of the parrotfish,

Sparisoma viride. Isolated fish biting describes less dense and smaller scale fish biting, typically

representative of damselfish territories. No disease was documented and therefore was not

characterized. Affected coral colonies were compared between 2002 and 2003, and changes in their

condition were recorded. In addition, coral species composition and fish counts were documented. These

analyses were qualitative and therefore no statistical analyses were conducted.

2.7 WATER QUALITY

2.7.1 Methodological Rationale

Physical and chemical characteristics of the seawater recorded over the reef cap and in the vicinity of the

FGB characterize local water quality (Gittings et al. 1992; CSA 1996; Nowlin et al. 1998; Dokken et al. 1999;

Dokken et al. 2003; this study). From October 2002 to March 2004, the water quality overlying the reef caps

at the FGB was assessed by monitoring temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, pH, turbidity, and content in

chlorophyll a, dissolved inorganic nitrogen (ammonia [NH4

+

and NH3], nitrate [NO3

-

], and nitrite [NO2

-

]),

dissolved organic nitrogen (Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen [TKN]), inorganic phosphorous (soluble reactive

phosphorous, a soluble inorganic form of phosphorous directly taken up by plant cells), and trace metals

(chromium, mercury). These water quality parameters were selected to characterize the environmental

background in which the FGB coral reef resources exist. As well as serving as a valuable record of

environmental parameters, any changes in coral reef biota which may be linked to water quality changes,

could be verified by looking at the water quality data.

2.7.2 Field Methods - YSI Datasondes

The FGBNMS provided PBS&J with the YSI 6600 series datasondes required to record water quality at the

FGB. The YSI 6600 Series datasondes recorded the following parameters: temperature, depth, pH, dissolved

oxygen, specific conductance, turbidity, and photosynthetically active radiation. The sondes typically have up

to a 75-day battery life (at 15-min sampling intervals) and store 150,000 individual parameter readings. The

sondes are 51.8 cm long (20.4 in) and have a 8.9 cm (3.5 in) diameter. The sondes are internally powered by

eight, C-size, alkaline batteries. The following were the datasonde measurement methods used in this

analysis:

Specific Conductance. The sondes utilize a cell with four nickel electrodes to measure conductance. Two of

the electrodes are current driven, and two are used to measure the voltage drop. The measured voltage drop

is then converted into a conductance value in milli-Siemens (millimhos). The sonde records the conductance
23

value as specific conductance, a calculated value that corrects for the effect of temperature. The reported

salinity values are also calculated values. The values are calculated from the conductivity and temperature

readings according to accepted algorithms and reported as Practical Salinity Units (PSU).

Temperature. The sondes utilize a thermistor of sintered metallic oxide that changes predictably in

resistance with temperature variation. The algorithm for conversion of resistance to temperature is built into

the sonde software, and accurate temperature readings in degrees Celsius, Kelvin, or Fahrenheit are

provided automatically. No user calibration or maintenance of the temperature sensor is possible.

pH. The sondes employ a field replaceable pH electrode for the determination of hydrogen ion concentration.

The probe is a combination electrode consisting of a proton selective glass reservoir filled with buffer at

approximately pH 7 and a Ag/AgCl reference electrode that utilizes electrolyte that is gelled. A silver wire

coated with AgCl is immersed in the buffer reservoir. Protons (H+ ions) on both sides of the glass (media and

buffer reservoir) selectively interact with the glass, setting up a potential gradient across the glass membrane.

Depth. The sondes are equipped with depth sensors which measure depth by non-vented methods. The

sensor uses a differential strain gauge transducer to measure pressure with one side of the transducer

exposed to the water and the other side of the transducer is exposed to a vacuum.

Dissolved Oxygen. The sondes employ a proprietary YSI Rapid Pulse system for the measurement of

dissolved oxygen (DO). The Rapid Pulse system utilizes a Clark-type sensor that is similar to other

membrane-covered steady-state dissolved oxygen probes. The system measures the current associated with

the reduction of oxygen which diffuses through a Teflon membrane. This current is still proportional to the

partial pressure (not the concentration) of oxygen in the solution being evaluated. The membrane isolates the

electrodes necessary for this reduction from the external media, encloses the thin layer of electrolyte required

for current flow, and prevents other non-gaseous, electrochemically active chemical species from interfering

with the measurement.

Turbidity. Turbidity is the measurement of the content of suspended solids (cloudiness) in water and is

typically determined by shining a light beam into the sample solution and then measuring the light that is

scattered off of the particles which are present. For turbidity systems capable of field deployment (including

YSI), the usual light source is a light emitting diode (LED) which produces radiation in the near infrared region

of the spectrum. The YSI turbidity system sondes consist of a probe which conforms to ISO

recommendations. The output of the sonde turbidity sensor is processed via the sonde software to provide

readings in nephelometric turbidity units (NTUs).

One YSI datasonde was deployed at the East Bank (23 m water depth) and one at the West Bank (27 m

water depth). Sandflats were used as deployment locations to accommodate the secure attachment of the

datasondes to iron train wheels. Water quality data were gathered every 30 min to every 1.5 hours [hr]

depending on battery life. The deployment schedule of the YSI datasondes is shown in Table 2.7.2. There

were large gaps (3 months or more) in the data sets because of YSI logging failures, or the data collected

were determined to be invalid measurements.

YSI data sonde maintenance was scheduled on a quarterly basis. The quarterly retrieval schedule was

met with the exception of one cruise, which was rescheduled due to inclement weather conditions. YSI

data sondes under marine conditions such as those encountered at the FGB need to be changed out on

a more frequent basis (2-4 weeks) in order to ensure consistent accurate data quality. When datasondes

are retrieved on a quarterly basis there is a substantial portion of data that is unusable due to heavy

biofouling and subsequent hardware failures. Prolonged exposure to open-ocean conditions are not

suitable for this type of water quality recording equipment used here. Once datasondes are retrieved and

data is processed, decisions on what to analyze must be made by a qualified analyst. Sometimes there

is a clear point at which sondes have started to fail to collect accurate data, and sometimes this line is

unclear. Data presented here are the best estimation of the analyst as to what constituted usable

accurate data. To obtain accurate consistent water quality data for the FGB on a long-term basis requires

more frequent changes of YSI datasondes or alternative hardware considerations.
24

Table 2.7.2.

Schedule of YSI water quality datasonde deployments, change outs, and retrievals at the

East Bank and West Bank in 2002 and 2003.

East Bank Deployment West Bank Deployment

10/29/2002-02/18/2003 1 10/30/2002-02/01/2003 1

02/18/2003-5/14/2003 2 02/01/2003-05/16/2003 2

5/14/2003-8/26/2003 3 5/16/2003-8/28/2003 3

8/26/2003-11/03/2003 4 08/28/2003-03/11/2004 4

2.7.3. Field Methods - HoboTemp Thermographs

A HoboTemp thermograph was attached to each of the YSI instruments as a backup recorder of water

temperature. HoboTemp recorders have an accuracy of plus or minus two degrees Celsius (°C). Resolution

is 0.02 at 25°C. The HoboTemp recorders were deployed in water depth of 23 m at the East Bank and in a 27

m water depth at the West Bank. Temperature was recorded every hour. The HoboTemp deployment

schedule is presented in Table 2.7.3. HoboTemp temperature records were continual at the West Bank

(February 2003 to March 2004). At the East Bank, HoboTemp temperature records were gathered from

October 2002 to March 2004 with a prolonged interruption lasting from May to August 2003. This interruption

was due to loss of the HoboTemp unit at East Bank during deployment.

Table 2.7.3.

Schedule of HoboTemp thermograph deployments, change outs, and retrievals at the

East Bank and West Bank in 2002 and 2003.

East Bank Deployment West Bank Deployment

10/29/2002-02/18/2003 1 02/01/2003-05/16/2003 1

02/18/2003-05/14/2003 2 05/16/2003-03/11/2004 2

05/14/2003-8/26/2003 3

08/26/2003-03/11/2004 4

2.7.4. Field Methods - Chlorophyll a, Nutrients, and Trace Metals

Surface (< 1 m), midwater (~ 9 m), and near bottom (~ 18 m) water samples were acquired at five different

times at the East Bank and West Bank from August 2002 to March 2004 (Table 2.7.4). During each sampling

event, water was sampled twice at each sampling depth using a vertical sampling bottle (Wildco®). Samples

were taken off the bow of the dive vessel while the vessel was moored over the monitoring site. Water

samples were immediately transferred into pre-cleaned polyethylene containers (tested monthly using

nanopure water) provided by an independent, EPA-certified analytical laboratory (Anacon, Inc.). Cholorophyll

a water samples were collected in 1000 ml containers with no preservatives, while reactive phosphorus (no

preservative) and Total P, Hg, and Cr (HNO3 preservative) samples were collected in 250 ml bottles. Total

Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN), ammonia, nitrate and nitrite were collected in 1000 ml containers with H2SO4 as

preservative. During each water sampling effort, one blind duplicate water sample was taken at one of the

sampling depths on one of the banks. Within minutes of sampling, labeled containers were stored in an icedcooler at 4 °C and a chain of custody record was initiated. Once back onshore the water samples were sent

to the laboratory for analyses. Water samples were analyzed using standard USEPA methods (Table 2.7.5)

to assess concentrations of chlorophyll a, nutrients (ammonia, nitrate and nitrite, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen

[TKN], soluble reactive phosphorous), and trace metals (chromium and mercury).
25

Table 2.7.4.

Water sampling schedule and depth, and number of samples taken at the FGB from

August 2002 to March 2004.

East Bank West Bank

Sampling Date Depth Samples Sampling Date Depth Samples

10/29/02 < 1 m 4 10/30/02 < 1 m 4

10/29/02 ~ 9 m 4 10/30/02 ~ 9 m 4

10/29/02 ~ 18 m 4 10/30/02 ~ 18 m 4

02/18/03 < 1 m 4 2/19/03 < 1 m 4

02/18/03 ~ 9 m 4 2/19/03 ~ 9 m 4

02/18/03 ~ 18 m 4 2/19/03 ~ 18 m 4

05/14/03 < 1 m 4 05/16/03 < 1 m 4

05/14/03 ~ 9 m 4 05/16/03 ~ 9 m 4

05/14/03 ~ 18 m 4 05/16/03 ~ 18 m 4

08/26/03 < 1 m 4 08/28/02 < 1 m 4

08/26/03 ~ 9 m 4 08/28/02 ~ 9 m 4

08/26/03 ~ 18 m 4 08/28/02 ~ 18 m 4

03/11/04 < 1 m 4 03/11/04 < 1 m 4

03/11/04 ~ 9 m 4 03/11/04 ~ 9 m 4

03/11/04 ~ 18 m 4 03/11/04 ~ 18 m 4

Table 2.7.5.

Standard U.S. Environmental Protection Agency methods used to analyze water samples taken at the FGB

from August 2002 to March 2004.

Parameter Method Detection Limit

Chlorophyll a 10200H 1 mg/m

3

Ammonia (as nitrogen) 350.3 0.20 mg/l (10/02, 2/03, 5/03, 8/03)

0.03 mg/l (3/04)

Nitrate and nitrite (Total) 353.3 0.15 mg/l

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 351.3 0.10 mg/l

Soluble reactive phosphorous 300.0 0.40 mg/l

Chromium 200.8 1 g/l

Mercury 200.8 30 g/l

2.8. FISH SURVEY

2.8.1 Methodological Rationale

Surveys of fish assemblages have been conducted at the FGB since at least the 1980’s (Boland et al. 1983;

Rezak et al. 1985; Dennis and Bright 1988; Pattengill 1998). Generally, the fish assemblage of the coral reef

zone at the FGB is composed of Caribbean reef fishes; however, the total number of species is reduced and

certain families such as the Lutjanidae and Haemulidae are underrepresented or absent at the banks (Jones

and Clark 1981; Lukens 1981; Rezak et al. 1985). The influence of offshore gas and petroleum production

platforms has been and is continuing to be investigated (Rooker et al. 1997). Continued monitoring of the

FGB is vital to increase and continue the understanding of this unique habitat in light of ongoing, as well as

changing, natural and anthropogenic pressures on fish populations. Stationary visual fish surveys were

conducted at the FGB at both East Bank and West Bank in October of 2002 and August of 2003.
26

2.8.2 Field Methods

Reef-fish surveys were conducted in October of 2002 and August of 2003. Fishes were visually assessed

using SCUBA and a stationary visual census technique (Bohnsack and Bannerot 1986). Observations of

fishes were restricted to an imaginary cylinder with a radius and height of 7.5 m from the diver. All fish

species observed within the first five minutes of the survey were recorded. Immediately following, additional

time was used to record abundance (number of individuals per species) and total length (cm) (minimum,

maximum, and average) of those species noted in the first five minutes. Surveys lasted from 10 to 15

minutes. When necessary, species identifications were verified using Humann (1994) and Humann and

DeLoach (2002). Depth, visibility, temperature, and survey location were also recorded.

An average of 16 surveys each were performed at East and West Banks in 2002 and 2003. The fewest

surveys (14) occurred at the East Bank in year two. Survey dives began in the early morning, before other

dive activities were started, generally between 0700 and 0900, and were repeated by two to three divers

throughout the day until dusk. Two days were spent surveying each bank, except at the West Bank in year

one (2002), in which all 16 surveys were completed in one day. Individual survey locations were spread

evenly within the 100m x 100-m study site to achieve maximum coverage of the reef habitat while excluding

sand patches. The visibility for all surveys was greater than 10 m, with 25 to 30 m being most common in

year one and 20 m being the average in year two. Survey depths ranged from 19 to 25 m at the West Bank

and 16 to 23 m at the East Bank.

2.8.3 Analysis and Statistical Methods

Fish densities are expressed as the number of fish per 100-m

2

horizontal area. For each bank and year,

densities were calculated as the mean number of individuals recorded per species, with each diver survey

acting as a replicate, divided by the horizontal area of the survey cylinder (176.7 m

2

).

Relative abundance for each species is expressed as the percentage of the total number of times the species

was recorded out of the total number of surveys for the site (bank and year). Species richness is the

expression of the total number of species for each site (bank and year).

Size frequency distributions for two trophic guilds, herbivores and carnivores, were calculated as the

proportion of the total number of herbivores or carnivores and represented as a percentage of individuals in

the guild falling within different size categories (0-5 cm, 6-10 cm, 11-20 cm, 21-30 cm, 31-40 cm, and >40

cm), based on average fish lengths recorded during the surveys. Parrotfishes (Scaridae), surgeonfishes

(Acanthuridae), and yellowtail damselfish (Microspathodon chrysurus) comprised the herbivore guild, while

snappers (Lutjanidae) and select groupers (Serranidae) comprised the demersal carnivore guild. The select

groupers of the carnivore guild included yellowmouth grouper (Mycteroperca interstitialis), tiger grouper (M.

tigris), graysby (Epinephelus cruentatus), and coney (E. fluvus) (Claro and Cantelar Ramos 2003; PattengillSemmens and Gittings 2003).

Diversity was calculated using the Shannon-Wiener diversity index and from it, species evenness for each

site and year was determined. The Shannon-Wiener diversity index,H’, was calculated as:

i

k

i

H' pilog p

1

=

= −

where k was the number of species present and pi was the proportion (ni/N) of the i-th species. Evenness (J’)

was calculated as:

max

'

'

'

H

H

J =
27

where H’max was the maximum possible diversity (H’max = log k, with k=number of data categories).

To allow the valid application of parametric analyses of variance, fish abundances were log10+1

transformed to make them normal, homoscedastic, and additive (Zar 1984; Aronson et al. 1994; Edmunds

and Carpenter 2001). Two-sample t-tests (two-tailed) were used to compare the fish densities and species

richness by bank and sampling year.

2.9 SEA URCHIN AND LOBSTER SURVEYS

2.9.1 Methodological Rationale

Sea urchins, specifically Diadema antillarum, were important herbivores on coral reefs throughout the

Caribbean until 1983-84. At that time, an unknown pathogen decimated populations throughout the region,

including at the FGB. Their recovery has been documented in the Caribbean (Edmunds and Carpenter

2001). D. antillarum populations at the FGB pre-1984 were near 1 individual/m

2

(Gittings et al. 1992).

Lobsters are commercially important but their population dynamics at the FGB are not well understood.

2.9.2 Field Methods

The sea urchin Diadema antillarum and the spiny lobster Panulirus argus were surveyed at night, at least 1.5

hours after sundown. Two belt transects were surveyed along the northern and western boundaries in 2002

and the southern and eastern boundaries in 2003 at the East and West Bank. Each belt transect was 100 m

long and 1 meter wide for a total of 200 m

2

surveyed along site boundaries each year. Additional sea urchin

and spiny lobster surveys were conducted along the 14 random transects (140 m

2

), for a total of 340 m

2

surveyed per bank per year.

2.9.3 Statistical Methods

Due to low sample numbers, only qualitative analyses were possible for the sea urchin and lobster surveys.

2.10 MAPPING OF THE FLOWER GARDEN BANKS

2.10.1 Methodological Rationale

Accurate maps showing individual coral heads and sand patches of the FGB monitoring sites were deemed

necessary for use in the field as well as for long-term analysis. Once a more detailed and accurate map is

established the individual station markers (repetitive quadrat and lateral growth stations) can be

georeferenced using GPS. Two mapping techniques, sector-scan and side-scan sonar were tested to

produce the best quality map of the study sites at FGB.

Sector-scan sonar relies on a mechanically rotated transducer, mounted on a tripod at a fixed position above

the seabed, to produce an acoustic image of an area surrounding the sensor. Side-scan sonar involves

towing a sensor (towfish) behind a moving boat. The towfish contains two transducers, which scan opposite

sides of the towfish path through the water column.

2.10.2 Sonar Technology

Sonar technology relies on acoustic energy transmitted at specific frequencies and intervals from a

transducer, which in turn makes contact with the seabed where portions of the energy are reflected back to

the transducer and interpreted into a visual display. The amplitude of the returning acoustic signal is a

function of the contrast between the seabed and the water column and depends on factors such as the

composition of the seabed and the angle of incidence between the sound waves and the seabed. The
28

amplitude of the acoustic signal reflected from the seabed is, therefore, dependent upon factors affecting

density and phase velocity of the seabed, such as porosity, water content, compaction and degree of

lithification. Soft sediments produce low-amplitude return signals. Hard materials, including coral and

exposed rock, return high-amplitude acoustic signals to the transducer. Air bubbles, such as found in the air

bladders of fish, also return high amplitude signals because of the high contrast between air and water in

both density and sound velocity.

Returning acoustic signals are converted in the transducer to analogue electrical waveforms and digitally

sampled at a rapid rate. Each cycle of acoustic transmission and reception is referred to as a ping. Each

returning ping is subdivided into samples, each of which is represented by a single pixel when the data are

displayed at their highest screen resolution. Data acquisition software assigns screen coordinates to the

discrete digital samples of each returning wave. The signal amplitude (i.e., voltage) at each point sampled

along a return wave determines pixel color. Geographic coordinates are assigned to pixels by estimating the

position of the transducer at the moment each acoustic wave is received, then by calculating the lateral offset

of the sample from the transducer based on the transducer heading and the two-way travel time of the

sample from the transducer to the seabed and back. The offset distance calculation for each sample

assumes a constant velocity of sound in seawater. The role that angle of incidence plays in determining the

returning signal amplitude is analogous to sunlight illumination of a land surface. Low angles of light or sound

reflect less energy than do high angles, while areas blocked by vertical relief are left in shadow. These are

the characteristics that give sonar data its strong resemblance to aerial photography.

2.10.3 Sector-Scan Sonar Methods

Sector-scan sonar was deployed only at East Bank in August 2003. The MS1000 sonar (Kongsberg Simrad

Mesotech, Ltd.), and the MS1000 acquisition software were employed and sonar images displayed on the

computer screen in a radial pattern, resembling radar. The software stored images as bitmaps, so image

quality adjustments were made prior to capturing the screen display. Resolution was dependent upon the

scan speed selected in the acquisition software and on the physical specifications of the sonar head. The

slowest scan speed (X1) correlated with the highest screen resolution and was used for data acquisition at

East Bank.

A model 1071-series high-resolution sonar head (P/N 974-23030000), was deployed at the East Bank. This

transducer operated at an acoustic frequency of 675 kHz and rotated mechanically at intervals of 0.225

degrees. It has a horizontal beam width of 0.9 degrees and a vertical beam width of 30 degrees. The

MS1000 data acquisition software was set to image the seabed out to a range of 40 m from the transducer,

so the entire East Bank study site could be recorded by four overlapping scans. A full rotation of the

transducer lasted 1.5 minutes. At this range each screen pixel represents a geographic area measuring 0.17

by 0.17 m; however, the circumferential resolution ranges from 0.17 (equivalent to the beam width at a range

of 10.8 m) to 0.63 m at the maximum range of 40 m. This resulted in resolution degradation beyond a range

of 10.8 m.

The transducer head was deployed at an approximate height of 2.1-2.4 m above the seabed using an

aluminum tripod with adjustable legs. Two divers deployed the tripod using a lift bag for assistance. Tripod

legs were padded to minimize damage to substratum. The tripod was positioned near the center of each

study quadrant prior to recording each series of scans. The tripod was oriented using a magnetic compass

so that the top of each image would be directed toward magnetic north. Diver air bubbles marked the

location of the nearest study site corner pin as quadrants were scanned, since the geographic positions of

these corners had been previously mapped using GPS. Knowing the orientation of each image and having

one known geographic location marked in each image would allow scans to be overlaid on the study area

boundary. Balloons were partially inflated by divers and suspended above each monitoring pin prior to

recording images. Since air produces strong acoustic reflections, it was hypothesized that these balloons

would be visible in the images against the background of coral, revealing the exact position of markers

(repetitive quadrat pins).
29

2.10.4 Side-Scan Sonar Methods

Side-scan sonar was used to map both East Bank and West Bank. The side-scan towfish (Edgetech

DF1000) operated at a frequency of 500 kHz, with a horizontal beam width of 0.5 degrees and a vertical

beam width of 50 degrees tilted down 20 degrees from horizontal. The DF1000 sampled an analogue signal

and transmitted a digital data stream through the tow cable. This process eliminated signal attenuation due

to the length of the cable and reduced disruption by electrical noise on board the survey vessel. The towfish

was deployed from a 50 m length of cable off the starboard stern. The towpoint at the stern was locating 2.5

m above the water and 13.4 m directly aft of the GPS antenna. The horizontal layback distance of the towfish

behind the stern varied with vessel speed from 47.9 to 48.9 m, averaging 48.4 m, as the towfish ranged in

depth beneath the surface from about 8 to 12 m.

The towfish was powered and controlled by an Edgetech Digital Control Unit (DCU). The DCU controls the

range of the towfish, its operating voltage and the timing of the pings. The digital signal received from the

towfish was converted back to an analogue waveform by the DCU in preparation for transmission to the data

acquisition computer. A Coda Model DA75 computer, running Coda Geosurvey software, was used to

display and record the raw sonar data arriving from the towfish via the DCU. The DCU and Coda software

were set to a 50 m range. Range refers to the maximum distance recorded by the sonar relative to the

transducer positions. The complete data record, including the entire range of return signal voltage, was

digitally recorded directly to DVD disks, allowing adjustment of image quality at any time during or following

data acquisition.

Vessel positions were provided by a Trimble Ag132 GPS system receiving differential corrections from the

U.S. Coast Guard. Vessel navigation along desired tracks was accomplished using a HydroPro Version 2.1

by Trimble. HydroPro was also used to record the position of the GPS antenna and to estimate the towfish

position at one-second intervals. Towfish position estimates were exported in real time to the Coda sonar

acquisition computer where they were integrated with the raw sonar record.

Resolution of raw side-scan sonar data has two independent components: range and azimuthal resolution.

The number of samples digitized per ping limits the range (across-track) resolution of the raw data. The

Coda DA75 computer (set to a 50-m range) produced 2560 geo-referenced pings per transducer, resulting in

an across-track pixel dimension of 0.021 m. The azimuthal (along-track) resolution is limited by the beam

width of the sonar transducers. The DF1000 transducers produce tightly focused waveforms with the peak

energy concentrated within a 0.5-degree horizontal beam width. The minimum resolvable dimension

increases as the distance from the transducer increases. For example, at a slant range of 10 m (the average

towfish altitude for this survey) the beam width (along-track resolution) would be 0.087 m. The beam width at

a slant range of 25 m would be 0.218 m, and the width at a range of 50 m would be 0.436 m. It is important

to remember that the minimum along-track pixel dimension of the raw sonar data (0.09 m) is not

representative of the along-track resolution except at a slant range of 10 m. The accuracy of sonar imagery

is perhaps more important than its resolution. Accuracy refers to how closely the image represents reality.

While resolution is a component of accuracy, more important factors include towfish position and heading

estimates.
31

3.0 RESULTS

3.1. RANDOM TRANSECTS

The random transects were analyzed using both univariate and multivariate statistical techniques.

Emphasis was placed on the videographic records of the transects, because the intent was to test

videography as a replacement technology for still photograph transects in the long-term monitoring at the

Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary.

In general, random transect results revealed high coral cover, relatively low macroaglae cover, high levels

of CTB (crustose corallines, fine turf, and bare rock) and low coverage of sponges, consistent with past

monitoring results (Table 3.1.1).

At the East Bank coral cover remained stable from 2002 to 2003 (56.43% ± 2.36 to 53.20% ± 3.01), while

macroalgae increased and CTB decreased. Sponge cover remained low for both years. Macroalgae

(mainly Dictyota and Lobophora spp.) was low in 2002 (4.06% ± 0.75 SE) and increased in 2003 (16.74%

± 2.04), and the site X year interaction was significant (Table 3.1.3.C). The Montastraea annularis

complex continued to dominate the East Bank in 2002 (33.59% ± 3.86) and 2003 (28.47% ± 2.98).

Diploria strigosa (6.96% ± 1.69 and 6.19% ± 1.55 in 2002 and 2003, respectively) and the brooding coral

Porites astreoides (6.79% ± 0.83 in 2002 and 5.69% ± 0.98 in 2003) were the next most abundant

species (Table 3.1.1. and Figure 3.1.1). The remaining coral cover was made up of eleven separate

species, none of which exceeded more than 5% individually in either 2002 or 2003 (Table 3.1.1).

Shannon-Weiner diversity values were highest at the East Bank (H’=1.45 and H’=1.51 in 2002 and 2003,

respectively). No disease or bleaching was noted in the random transect footage.

The West Bank random transect data revealed an increase in coral cover from 2002 to 2003 (49.67% ±

3.35 to 57.13% ± 3.81) over the two year sampling period, a decrease in macroalgae from 2002 to 2003

and an increase in CTB over the same period, while sponge cover was low (Table 3.1.1). The dominant

corals were the Montastraea annularis complex in 2002 (31.73% ± 3.57) and 2003 (33.80% ± 4.31).

Porites astreoides (3.44% ± 0.74) and Diploria strigosa (3.20% ± 0.91) made up the next largest

percentages of coral cover in 2002, while D. strigosa (9.04% ± 2.68) increased in 2003 and P. astreoides

(3.77% ± 0.46) remained stable. The increase in D. strigosa from 2002 to 2003 and the small increase in

M. annularis complex from 2002 to 2003 account for the overall increase in coral cover for the sampling

period at the West Bank. Of the remaining eleven coral species that made up the remaining coral cover,

no individual species accounted for more than 4% coral cover in either year. Relative dominance of the

ten most common species at the West Bank shows the predominance of the Montastraea annularis

complex (Figure 3.1.2). Shannon Weiner diversity Indices values (H’) were lower at the West Bank

overall, (H’=1.37 and H’=1.35) in 2002 and 2003 respectively. Bleaching and disease were not noted in

the random transects.

The Montastraea annularis species complex (M. annularis, M. faveolata, and M. franksi) has been difficult

to differentiate in the field and even more so in photographic and videographic techniques (Dokken et al.

1999; 2003; this study). As part of the comparison of the three methods of data analysis (still

photography, videography, and linear-point intercept [LPI], the relative abundance of the three species

are presented here as a result of the LPI transect results, whose species determinations were made in

the field (Figure 3.1.3). M. faveolata and franksi were combined because their differentiation continues to

be problematic. The results show M. annularis to be the least represented species of the complex. M.

annularis appears to be more abundant at the West Bank.
32

Table 3.1.1.

Random transect coral cover by species, macroalgae, CTB (crustose coralline, turf, and bare rock),

sponge, and sand cover categories at the East and West Bank in 2002 and 2003. Values are expressed

as percent cover ± SE. Values are calculated from videography.

Cover category East Bank East Bank West Bank West Bank

2002 2003 2002 2003

Agaricia agaricites 0.53 ± 0.15 0.33 ± 0.11 0.43 ± 0.11 0.24 ± 0.08

Agaricia fragilis 0 0.01 ± 0.01 0 0

Colpophyllia natans 0.57 ± 0.39 3.29 ± 1.40 1.67 ± 1.21 2.17 ± 0.84

Diploria strigosa 6.96 ± 1.69 6.19 ± 1.55 3.2 ± 0.91 9.04 ± 2.68

Madracis decactis 0.66 ± 0.41 0.82 ± 0.34 0.7 ± 0.47 0.37 ± 0.29

Millepora alcicornis 2.19 ± 0.56 2.23 ± 0.43 2.16 ± 0.70 1.94 ± 0.54

Montastraea annularis complex 33.59 ± 3.86 28.47 ± 2.98 31.73 ± 3.57 33.8 ± 4.31

Montastraea cavernosa 3.9 ± 1.08 4.24 ± 1.41 2.74 ± 1.16 2.67 ± 1.10

Mussa angulosa 0.37 ± 0.16 0 0.29 ± 0.16 0.07 ± 0.04

Porites astreoides 6.79 ± 0.83 5.69 ± 0.98 3.44 ± 0.74 3.77 ± 0.46

Porites porites forma furcata 0.06 ± 0.04 0 0.01 ± 0.01 0

Scolymia cubensis 0 0.01 ± 0.01 0 0.04 ± 0.03

Siderastrea siderea 0.44 ± 0.25 0 1.9 ± 1.08 2.04 ± 1.10

Stephanocoenia intersepta 0.31 ± 0.13 0.76 ± 0.32 1.39 ± 0.36 0.96 ± 0.45

Total Coral 56.43 ± 2.36 53.20 ± 3.01 49.67 ± 3.35 57.13 ± 3.81

Macroalgae 4.06 ± 0.75 16.74 ± 2.05 19.14 ± 1.4 8.41 ± 1.41

CTB 37.07 ± 2.69 28.12 ± 2.05 27.63 ± 3.14 31.63 ± 3.04

Sponge 0.79 ± 0.36 1.54 ± 0.4 1.31 ± 0.32 1.56 ± 0.38

Sand 1.57 ± 0.58 0.33 ± 0.17 2.19 ± 0.1 1.23 ± 0.61
33

Relative dominance of Coral Species at East Bank 2002, 2003

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Agaricia agaricites

Colpophyllia natans

Diploria strigosa

Madracis decactis

Millepora sp.

Montastraea annularis complex

Montastraea cavernosa

Porites astreoides

Stephanocoenia intersepta

Coral Species

Percent Cover

2002

2003

Figure 3.1.1. Relative dominance of coral species at East Bank in 2002 and 2003, expressed as

percent cover with ± SE. Values are calculated from random transect videography.
34

Relative dominance of Coral Species at West Bank 2002, 2003

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Agaricia agaricites

Colpophyllia natans

Diploria strigosa

Madracis decactis

Millepora sp.

Montastraea annularis complex

Montastraea cavernosa

Porites astreoides

Siderastrea siderea

Stephanocoenia intersepta

Coral Species

Percent Cover

2002

2003

Figure 3.1.2. Relative dominance of coral species at West Bank in 2002 and 2003, expressed as

percent cover with ± SE. Values are calculated from random transect videography.
35

Relative dominance of Montastraea annularis sibling species at East and West Bank 2002

and 2003

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

East Bank 2002 East Bank 2003 West Bank 2002 West Bank 2003

Bank and Year

Percent Cover

Montastraea annularis

Montastraea faveolata/franksi

Figure 3.1.3. Relative dominance of Montastraea annularis, M. faveolata, and M. franksi (combined) at

East and West Bank 2002 and 2003. Values are calculated from Linear-Point-Intercept

data (± SE).

3.1.1. Comparison of Methods for Estimating Coral Cover

In addition to the point counts from the video transects, coral cover was estimated by two other methods:

the linear point-intercept (LPI) method (Rogers et al. 1994; Ohlhorst et al. 1988), which was used to

assess coral cover during the 1970s and 1980s (Gittings et al. 1992); and planimetry of digitized still

photographs, which was used during the period 1988-2002 (Gittings et al. 1992, CSA 1996, Dokken et al.

1999, 2003). In the LPI method, a diver swam along each 10-m transect and recorded the substratum

component under each 10-cm mark, for a total of 100 point counts per transect. The diver was William F.

Precht, who has many years of training and experience in identifying benthic organisms on coral reefs.

For the still photographs, 17 non-overlapping photographs were taken along each transect at each site.

These photographs were digitized and estimates of substratum cover were computed from the digital images

using planimetry. Because survey techniques evolve over time, it is critical that their comparability be

assessed. In the context of monitoring at the FGB, statistical scrutiny is required especially to justify the

transition to videography from still photography, which was used to capture most of the historical data that we

have available.

The three methods were compared using a randomized complete-block (i.e., repeated-measures)

ANOVA design, in which the transects were the blocks. Still photographs were not available for 8 of the

56 transects due to the loss of film when cameras flooded; this left 48 transects for which coverage

estimates were available for all three survey methods. We compared the three methods for three benthic

categories that differed markedly in percent cover: the total cover of hard corals (Scleractinia and

Milleporina), which was a common category at >50% cover; the cover of Montastraea annularis species
36

complex, an intermediate-abundance category at approximately 30% cover; and Diploria strigosa, a rare

category at approximately 7% cover. The coverage estimates from the individual transects were

expressed as proportions for analysis, and it is immediately obvious from Table 3.1.2 that the means and

standard errors are remarkably similar within categories and across methods (See Appendix 1A, B, and C

for complete datasets for all three methods).

Table 3.1.2.

Proportional percent cover estimates for three substratum categories, as estimated by three methods at

the EFG and WFG during 2002 and 2003. Means are tabulated ± standard error (SE).

Category Videography Still Photography Visual LPI

Total Coral Cover 0.542 ± 0.018 0.521 ± 0.015 0.563 ± 0.013

Montastraea annularis complex 0.318 ± 0.020 0.284 ± 0.019 0.325 ± 0.017

Diploria strigosa 0.065 ± 0.010 0.072 ± 0.011 0.071 ± 0.010

For total coral cover, Anderson-Darling tests revealed the (untransformed) proportional coverage data to

be normally distributed for all three methods (P>0.13 in all cases). Tests for homogeneity of variances,

however, gave equivocal results: Bartlett’s test, which assumes normal distributions, yielded P=0.077;

and Levene’s test, which is valid for any continuous distribution, yielded P=0.095. When the data were

arcsine-transformed, both tests for homogeneity of variances were non-significant (P>0.06 in both tests),

and the normality assumption again was not violated (P>0.14 in all cases). Pairwise F-tests on the

untransformed data revealed only one significant difference: the LPI data were significantly less variable

than the videographic data (P=0.028). P=0.37 for comparison of variances between videography and still

photography, and P=0.19 for comparison of still photography and LPI. ANOVA is robust to minor

violations of the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances, and the randomized-block

ANOVA was run on both the transformed and untransformed data.

The ANOVA results were virtually identical for the untransformed and arcsine-transformed data (Table

3.1.3A). There was a significant block effect, meaning that there was variability among transects that was

consistent across methods. There was also a significant effect of method. A posteriori Tukey

simultaneous tests showed that the LPI method gave a significantly higher estimate of total coral cover

than still photography, but that the videographic estimates were not significantly different from either the

LPI or the still-photography estimates. For both the untransformed and transformed cases, Tukey

comparison showed the photographic and videographic differences to be non-significant at P=0.39. The

actual difference in mean percent-cover estimates between the LPI and photographic methods was only

4%, which cannot be considered biologically meaningful (Aronson et al. 2005; Section 3.1.3).

For the Montastraea annularis species complex, Anderson-Darling tests revealed the (untransformed)

proportional coverage data to be normally distributed for all three methods (P>0.10 in all cases). Both

Bartlett’s and Levene’s tests showed the variances to be homogeneous (P>0.40 in both tests), and

homogeneity was further confirmed by pairwise F-tests (P>0.35 in all cases). Randomized complete-block

ANOVA on the untransformed data again showed a significant block effect, and the estimates from the

three methods were marginally non-significant at P=0.056 (Table 3.1.3B). Tukey comparisons showed no

significant pairwise differences of course, and the videographic and photographic differences were nonsignificant at P=0.13. Arcsine transformation had no effect on the conformity of the data to the

assumptions of parametric statistics. ANOVA on the transformed data yielded a significant block effect

and a significant effect of method. Tukey comparisons showed that the LPI method gave a significantly

higher estimate of total coral cover than still photography, but that the videographic estimates were not

significantly different from either the LPI or the still-photography estimates. The videographic and

photographic differences were non-significant at P=0.096. As for total coral cover, the actual difference in

mean percent-cover estimates between the LPI and photographic methods was only 4%.
37

For Diploria strigosa, Anderson-Darling tests revealed the (untransformed) proportional coverage data to

be non-normally distributed for all three methods (P<0.005 in all cases). Both Bartlett’s and Levene’s tests

showed the variances of the untransformed data to be homogeneous (P>0.98 in both tests), and

homogeneity was further confirmed by pairwise F-tests (P>0.80 in all cases). Arcsine transformation

corrected the normality problem for all but the still-photography data (P=0.014 for the still-photography

data; P>0.20 for the other two transformed data sets), and the variances remained homogeneous after

transformation (P>0.75 for both tests). Randomized-block ANOVAs gave virtually identical results for the

untransformed and transformed data: a significant block effect and no effect of method (Table 3.1.3C).

The maximum difference in mean percent-cover estimates was <1%.

From these analyses, it is clear on statistical grounds that estimates of substratum cover based on pointcount data from videographic transects are interchangeable with estimates based on planimetry of still

photographs. The LPI method yielded slightly higher estimates of percent cover for the high- and

intermediate-cover categories, but those differences were smaller than the 5–10% changes in coral cover

considered to be biologically meaningful, and the differences were also smaller than the minimum

detectable difference using the videographic method (Aronson et al. 2005; Section 3.1.3). Methodological

changes in the long-term monitoring program from visual LPI assessment, to planimetry of still

photographs, and then to videography (for which the analysis is far less labor-intensive than planimetry)

are entirely justified and will not compromise the utility of previous years’ data. On the contrary, it is

legitimate to compare estimates of coral cover from 2002 to 2003 and future video transects to existing

records, without concern that methodological considerations are confounding our understanding of

benthic dynamics at the FGB.
38

Table 3.1.3.

Results of randomized complete-block ANOVAs comparing proportional coverage estimates at the EFG

and WFG in 2002 and 2003 using the three methods. The blocks are the transects.

A. Total Coral Cover

Untransformed Data

Source df Sum of Squares Mean Square F P

Block 47 1.0754 0.0229 3.8000 <0.0005

Method 2 0.0423 0.0211 3.5100 0.0340

Error 94 0.5664 0.0060

Total 143 1.6841

Arcsine-transformed Data

Source df Sum of Squares Mean Square F P

Block 47 1.1276 0.0240 3.8000 <0.0005

Method 2 0.0432 0.0216 3.4200 0.0370

Error 94 0.5933 0.0063

Total 143 1.7642

B. Montastraea annularis species complex

Untransformed data

Source df Sum of Squares Mean Square F P

Block 47 1.6910 0.0360 4.8600 <0.0005

Method 2 0.0440 0.0220 2.9700 0.0560

Error 94 0.6957 0.0074

Total 143 2.4308

Arcsine-transformed Data

Source df Sum of Squares Mean Square F P

Block 47 2.2828 0.0486 4.8400 <0.0005

Method 2 0.0692 0.0346 3.4500 0.0370

Error 94 0.9430 0.0100

Total 143 3.2950

C. Diploria strigosa

Untransformed data

Source df Sum of Squares Mean Square F P

Block 47 0.5669 0.0121 6.6500 <0.0005

Method 2 0.0012 0.0006 0.3300 0.7230

Error 94 0.1704 0.0018

Total 143 0.7384

Arcsine-transformed Data

Source df Sum of Squares Mean Square F P

Block 47 1.6885 0.3593 3.9700 <0.0005

Method 2 0.0090 0.0045 0.5000 0.6090

Error 94 0.8508 0.0091

Total 143 2.5483
39

3.1.2 Univariate Analysis

The point counts from the video transects taken in 2002 and 2003 were grouped into major functional

categories and expressed as percent covers. Examination of Figure 3.1.4 suggests that there were no

systematic differences in the percent cover of these categories, either between the East Bank and the

West Bank or from 2002 to 2003. The univariate data were expressed as proportions and analyzed by

two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), with site and year as fixed factors. Prior to ANOVA, the data were

tested for conformity to the parametric assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances, using the

Lilliefors and Fmax tests, respectively.

The data on proportional cover of all living hard corals (Scleractinia and Milleporina) conformed to the

assumptions of parametric statistics, so the data were not transformed. A two-way ANOVA showed no

significant effect of either site or year, and the site X year interaction was also not significant (Table

3.1.5.A). ANOVA using arcsine-transformed, proportional cover data yielded virtually identical results.

The data on proportional cover of sponges satisfied the assumption of homogeneity of variances, and all

but one of the four data sets (two banks in two years) were normally distributed. Arcsine transformation of

the data corrected the normality problem. A two-way ANOVA showed no significant effect of site and no

significant site X year interaction (Table 3.1.5.B). There was an increase in sponge cover from 2002 to

2003 that was non-significant at P=0.06, but with five ANOVAs in Table 3.1.5, adjustment of  to maintain

an overall experimentwise error rate of 0.05 makes this result decidedly non-significant rather than

marginally so.

The data on proportional cover of macroalgae were normally distributed, but the variances were not

homogeneous. Arcsine transformation homogenized the variances. A two-way ANOVA revealed a highly

significant site X year interaction (Table 3.1.5.C). That interaction is clearly visible in Figure 3.1.5:

macroalgal cover increased at the East Bank from 2002 to 2003 and decreased at the West Bank during

the same period. The significant interaction makes it difficult to interpret the significant effect of site.

The fourth univariate cover category that was analyzed combined crustose coralline algae, fine algal turfs

and bare rock (abbreviated CTB). The CTB data conformed to the assumptions of normality and

homogeneity of variances and were not transformed. A two-way ANOVA revealed a marginally significant

site X year interaction (Table 3.1.5.D), in the opposite direction from that in macroalgal cover: for CTB,

cover declined at the East Bank and increased at the West Bank from 2002 to 2003.

Finally, the Shannon-Wiener diversity index H’ was calculated from the species-specific coral cover data

from each video transect. Mean H’ ranged from a low of 1.35 at the West Bank in 2003 to a high of 1.51

at the East Bank in 2003 (the means were 1.37 at the West Bank and 1.45 at the East Bank in 2002). The

data conformed to the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances. A two-way ANOVA

showed no significant effect of either site or year, and the site X year interaction was also not significant

(Table 3.1.5.E).

In summary, coral cover exceeded 50% at the two banks in both years. These values are consistent with

measurements of coral cover in previous years (Dokken et al. 2003) and they are high compared to other

western Atlantic reefs (e.g., Aronson et al. 1994; Gardner et al. 2003). The CTB category was the next

most abundant category in terms of cover, indicating high levels of herbivory and a generally healthy reef

ecosystem. Macroalgal cover and the cover of CTB fluctuated in a reciprocal fashion. The cover of

sponges was extremely low.

3.1.3 Minimum Detectable Difference

The goal of the video transecting methodology is to be able to detect the smallest biologically meaningful

changes in percent coral cover with high power at the standard type-I error rate. We consider a change of

5-10% coral cover to be biologically meaningful, which is stricter than the 10-20% figure obtained by Risk

and Risk (1997) in a poll of reef scientists.
40

The minimum detectable difference, , was calculated for the two-way ANOVA on proportional coral

cover from the video transects, following Zar (1984). The significance level was set at the conventional

=0.05 and the desired power at the conventional (1-)=0.80. For videographic surveys of two sites over

two years, with 14 transects per site per year, =0.074. In other words, we can expect to be able to detect

a 7.4% change in coral cover between any two years at the Flower Garden Banks, or a 7.4% difference in

cover between the East and West Banks in a two-year study.

3.1.4 Multivariate Analysis

The point counts falling on hard corals in the videotapes of the random transects were further analyzed by

species using multivariate techniques. Multivariate coral cover was compared between sites and years

using analysis of similarity (ANOSIM). There were no significant differences between either sites (Global

R=0.026, P=0.19) or years (Global R=0.033, P = 0.15). A single-factor ANOSIM on the four sets of 14

transects also showed no significant differences (Global R=0.04, P=0.07), meaning that there was no

multivariate interaction; this conclusion was borne out by pairwise ANOSIM tests on the four sets of

transects (see Clarke and Gorley 2001). As in previous surveys at the Flower Garden Banks, the

dominant species were Montastraea faveolata (mean cover 21.46%; this is the mean in the 56 transects

from both sites in both years), M. franksi (mean cover 9.55%), Diploria strigosa (mean cover 6.35%),

Porites astreoides (mean cover 4.92%) and M. cavernosa (mean cover 3.39%).

The Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) analysis placed the data from the Flower Garden Banks in a tight

group, well-separated from the FPZs in the Florida Keys, for which one site, South Carysfort Reef, clearly

separated from the rest (Figure 3.1.5). The stress level of the MDS was low at 0.01, indicating high

confidence in the pattern displayed. These results agree with the observation that, from reef to reef, coral

cover at the Flower Gardens is much higher and much more uniform in terms of species composition than

coral cover on the reefs of Florida (e.g., Murdoch and Aronson 1999). The mean cover of hard corals

ranged from 1.00 to 7.10% in the six data sets of transects from Florida in Figure 3.1.6.

There is one caveat that applies in interpreting these multivariate patterns, as well as in the analysis of H’

in section 3.1.2. It proved difficult to distinguish Montastraea faveolata from M. franksi in the video

transects from the Flower Gardens. Aronson and Murdoch have also become progressively less confident

in the prospects for separating those two species in videotaped transects from the FPZs in Florida. It

should be noted, however, that reanalyzing the multivariate and H’ data with M. faveolata and M. franksi

combined did not appreciably alter the quantitative results or the conclusions drawn from those results.
41

Table 3.1.5.

Results of two-way ANOVAs on proportional cover estimates from the random video transects taken at

the East and West Flower Gardens in 2002 and 2003.

A. Hard Corals (untransformed)

Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-ratio P value

Site 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.20 0.66

Year 0.01 1.00 0.01 0.44 0.51

Site*Year 0.04 1.00 0.04 2.83 0.10

Error 0.73 52.00 0.01

B. Sponges (arcsine transformed)

Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-ratio P value

Site 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.18 0.28

Year 0.01 1.00 0.01 3.71 0.06

Site*Year 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.97 0.33

Error 0.02 52.00 0.00

C. Macroalgae (arcsine transformed)

Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-ratio P value

Site 0.05 1.00 0.05 6.63 0.01

Year 0.01 1.00 0.01 1.09 0.30

Site*Year 0.55 1.00 0.55 668.01 <0.005

Error 0.43 52.00 0.01

D. CTB (untransformed)

Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-ratio P value

Site 0.01 1.00 0.01 1.16 0.29

Year 0.01 1.00 0.01 0.80 0.38

Site*Year 0.06 1.00 0.06 5.49 0.02

Error 0.56 52.00 0.01

E. Shannon-Wiener Diversity, H' (untransformed)

Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-ratio P value

Site 0.20 1.00 0.10 1.85 0.18

Year 0.01 1.00 0.01 0.07 0.79

Site*Year 0.02 1.00 0.02 0.18 0.68

Error 5.50 52.00 0.11
42

Figure 3.1.4. Percent cover (± SE) of four functional categories of sessile benthos at the FGB in 2002

and 2003. Error bars represent standard errors. Abbreviations: EB, East Bank; WB, West

Bank; CTB, crustose coralline algae and bare rock. Values are calculated from

videography data.
43

Figure 3.1.5. Two-dimensional MDS plot based on square-root-transformed Bray-Curtis dissimilarities,

comparing multivariate coral cover from video transects between the FGB and three Fully

Protected Zones (FPZs) in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS). The

video transects were shot in 2002 and 2003. Coral cover is low and species composition is

more variable at the FKNMS sites. The FGBNMS sites form a discrete, tight cluster of

points well away from the Florida sites, reflecting high coral cover and low variability in

species composition. Abbreviations: EB, East Flower Garden Bank; WB, West Flower

Garden Bank; SC, South Carysfort Reef FPZ; WS, Western Sambo Reef FPZ; ES, Eastern

Sambo Reef FPZ.

3.2 SCLEROCHRONOLOGY

Eight cores were taken from separate Montastraea faveolata colonies at both the East Bank (4 cores) and

West Banks (4 cores) in August 2003. Cores were longitudinally sectioned to reveal accretionary growth

bands. The distance between low density (light colored) and high density (dark colored) bands are

considered a single growth increment (one year) and were measured for the years 1997-2003. See

Appendix 2 for a complete list of growth rates for all eight cores at both banks.

3.2.1 East Bank Cores

Four cores of Montastraea faveolata were removed from the East Bank in August 2003. Estimated

annual growth ranged from 7.7-10.7 mm year

-1

from 1997-2003, with an overall mean of 9.2 mm ± 1.1

SE at the East Bank. The highest growth rate occurred between 1999-2000 and the lowest occurring in

2002-2003 (Table 3.2.1). One core showed a partial mortality line in 1999; however growth was

reestablished by surrounding polyps (Figure 3.2.3).
44

Table 3.2.1.

Mean annual growth (mm) (± SE) of four Montastraea faveolata cores from

East and West Banks, August 2003.

Growth year East Bank West Bank

2002-2003 7.7± 2.9 6.3 ± 1.0

2001-2002 10.1 ± 2.7 7.8 ± 1.5

2000-2001 8.3 ± 2.2 7.3 ± 1.5

1999-2000 10.7 ± 2.7 8.5 ± 1.3

1998-1999 9.3 ± 3.3 8.0 ± 0.5

1997-1998 8.3 ± 0.3 8.3 ± 0.3

3.2.2 West Bank Cores

Four cores were taken from Montastraea faveolata heads on the west bank in August 2003. Estimated

growth ranged from 6.3-8.5 mm year

-1

, with an overall mean of 7.6 mm ± 1.02 at the West Bank. The

highest mean growth rate occurred in 1999 and the lowest in 2002, the same as found for East Bank

cores (Table 3.2.1). Like the East Bank, one core showed partial mortality in 1999, and subsequent

recovery in later years (Figure 3.2.3).

3.2.3 Analysis

A Student t-test was performed to compare East and West Bank growth rates from 1997-2003. East Bank

growth rates were significantly higher than West Bank growth rates for the period of comparison (t=2.38,

df=6, P=0.02).

Figure 3.2.3. X-ray image of Montastraea faveolata from East (left) and West (right) Banks showing an

interruption (arrow) in accretionary growth sometime in 1998-1999.

3.3 LATERAL GROWTH

3.3.1 Quantitative Planimetry Analysis

Proportional annual changes in lateral growth of the individual Diploria colonies, whether positive or

negative, were examined by site (East Bank and West Bank) and by year (2001-2002 and 2002-2003).
45

Due to a low sample size from 2001-2003 a repeated-measures analysis with sufficient power was not

possible for the entire time span. Instead, we used a factorial design to compare the two banks in terms

of the 2001-2002 data and, separately, in terms of the 2002-2003 data. Figure 3.3.1 indicates an overall

3–5% increase in colony area at both banks from 2001-2002. Anderson-Darling tests showed the data

from 2001-2002 to be normally distributed (P=0.582 for the East Bank and P=0.318 for the West Bank).

An F-test revealed no significant difference in the variances of the two groups (F17,10=0.200). A twosample t-test revealed no significant difference in Diploria growth between the East and West Banks

(t=0.740, df=27, P=0.468). A non-parametric Mann-Whitney U-test led to the same conclusion (U=113.5,

P>0.20).

The 2002-2003 data set was quite different from the previous year’s data set. The two banks appeared

very different as well (Figure 3.3.1), and generalizations are not possible with a sample size of only four

from the West Bank. This data set could not be analyzed using parametric tests. The Anderson-Darling

test showed that the four data from the West Bank were not normally distributed (P=0.020). Levene’s test

detected no significant difference in the variances (P=0.186), despite the large variance in the data from

the West Bank caused by the low sample size. The normality problem could not be corrected by

transformation. A Mann-Whitney U-test again detected no significant difference in Diploria growth

between the two Banks (U=22.0, P>0.20).

Percent Change in Diploria strigosa colonies between 2001-2002 and 2002-2003

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

2001-2002 2002-2003

Percent Change

East Bank

West Bank

Figure 3.3.1. Percent change (± SE) in Diploria strigosa colonies at East and West Bank between 2001

and 2002 and between 2002 and 2003. Sample size for East Bank 2001-02, n=18; West

Bank 2001-02, n=11; East Bank 2002-03, n= 8; West Bank 2002-03, n= 4.

3.4. REPETITIVE QUADRATS

To measure benthic cover components a total of 51 quadrats pairs were analyzed for 2002 and 2003: 20

from the East Bank and 31 from the West Bank. These photographs were analyzed for benthic

community structure using random dots to determine cover estimates, including benthic cover, bleaching,

disease and fish biting.
46

Planimetry was used to quantify change between select coral colonies within quadrat matches between

2001 and 2002 and between 2002 and 2003. Four to six coral colonies were chosen within each repetitive

quadrat match, colonies were chosen based on the ability to decipher boundaries and importance to reef

accretion (i.e. frame builders such as Montastraea annularis spp., Diploria strigosa, Colpophyllia natans).

Seven matches were made at the East Bank for 2001-2002 and 9 matches were made at the West Bank.

For the 2002-2003 comparison 16 matches were compared at the East Bank and 27 comparisons were

made for the West Bank (see Appendix 4 for complete dataset).

3.4.1. Repetitive Quadrat Percent Cover Analysis

In both 2002 and 2003 coral cover was high (Figure 3.4.1). The incidences of bleaching, disease, paling

and mortality from fish bites were low (Table 3.4.2). In both 2002 and 2003 the dominant species in the

repetitive quadrats were the Montastraea annularis species complex, Diploria strigosa and M. cavernosa

(Figures 3.4.1 and 3.4.2). Due to the scale of photographs and the difficulty of accurately identifying the

separate Montastraea annularis sibling species from photographs in general, the Montastraea annularis

complex was combined for analysis.

Table 3.4.1.

Percent coral, algae and bare cover categories at 8 m

2

repetitive quadrats at the FGB

in 2002 and 2003 (random dot analysis).

2002 2003

Benthic Cover Type

EFG WFG EFG WFG

Corals 72.9 70.3 71.1 68.6

Algae (macro, filamentous, turf and calcareous) 10.7 13.5 19.6 9.6

CTB (crustose, corallines, turfs, bare rock) 14.9 15.4 5.8 20.1
47

Relative dominance of Coral Species at East Bank in 2002, 2003

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Colpophyllia

natans

Diploria strigosa Madracis

decactis

Millepora

alcicornis

Montastraea

annularis

complex

Montastraea

cavernosa

Porites

astreoides

Coral Species

Percent Cover

2002

2003

Figure 3.4.1. Relative dominance of coral species at East Bank in repetitive quadrats, expressed as

percent cover, including ± SE (random dot analysis).

Relative dominance of Coral Species at West Bank 2002, 2003

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Colpophyllia natans Diploria strigosa Montastraea

annularis complex

Montastraea

cavernosa

Porites astreoides Siderastrea siderea

Coral Species

Percent Cover

2002

2003

Figure 3.4.2. Relative dominance of coral species at West Bank in repetitive quadrats, expressed as

percent cover, including ± SE (random dot analysis).
48

Coral disease was absent from analyzed photographs at both banks in both years (Table 3.4.2). Paling

and bleaching were extremely low at both banks, ranging from 0.05-0.61% (Table 3.4.2). Concentrated

fish biting and isolated fish biting were similarly low at each bank, ranging from 0.34-0.61% in both years

(Table 3.4.2). Bleaching occurred most frequently on colonies of Millepora alcicornis at the East Bank in

2003 (Table 3.4.3), while paling showed no pattern and occurred less frequently. Fish biting occurred

primarily on the M. annularis complex, and appeared to be more common at the West Bank in both years

(Table 3.4.3).

Table 3.4.2.

Percent paling, bleaching, concentrated fish biting, isolated fish biting and disease ± SE, in

8 m

2

repetitive quadrats at the East and West Banks, 2002 and 2003 (random dot analysis).

Observation

East Bank

2002

East Bank

2003

West Bank

2002

West Bank

2003

Paling 0.14 ± 0.11 0.11 ± 0.02 0.02 ± 0.02 0.05 ± 0.02

Bleaching 0.14 ± 0.10 0.61 ± 0.10 0.10 ± 0.06 0.16 ± 0.08

Concentrated Fish Biting 0.34 ± 0.12 0.36 ± 0.06 0.41 ± 0.15 0.41 ± 0.11

Isolated Fish Biting 0.41 ± 0.21 0.38 ± 0.06 0.61 ± 0.23 0.35 ± 0.10

Disease 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Table 3.4.3.

Frequency of paling, bleaching, concentrated fish biting, isolated fish biting and disease at East and West

Banks, 2002 and 2003. IFB= isolated fish biting, CFB= concentrated fish biting, P= paling, BL= bleaching,

East Bank 2002 and 2003 n= 6000, West Bank 2002 and 2003 n = 9300

(random dot analysis).

East Bank

October 2002

East Bank

August 2003

West Bank

October 2002

West Bank

August 2003

Observation

IFB CFB P BL IFB CFB P BL IFB CFB P BL IFB CFB P BL

Unidentified

coral

species 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 1

Colpophyllia

natans 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

Diploria

strigosa 1 3 1 0 4 1 3 0 6 1 1 0 1 0 1 0

Montastraea

annularis

complex 20 11 0 0 14 18 2 1 40 29 1 3 27 26 0 7

Montastraea

cavernosa 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 2 0 0 2 3 1 1

Madracis

decactis 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0

Millipora

alcicornis 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5

Porites

astreoides 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 4 0 1 1 0
49

3.4.2 Repetitive Quadrat Quantitative Planimetry Analysis

Because the Montastraea annularis species complex was the dominant substratum occupant in the

repetitive quadrats, we compared the cover of this taxon between banks and through time (Figure 3.4.3).

For each repetitively-photographed quadrat that contained one or more colonies of M. annularis species

complex, we calculated the average proportional change in planar area for the colonies that were

measured. For change from 2001–2002, this procedure yielded seven quadrats from the East Bank and

nine quadrats from the West Bank. For change from 2002–2003, there were 16 quadrats for the East

Bank and 27 for the West Bank. Due to logistical problems, only five quadrats from the East Bank and

eight quadrats from the West Bank were photographed in 2001, 2002 and 2003; therefore, in the interest

of maximizing sample sizes, we compared the two one-year intervals separately. Given sufficient sample

sizes, multi-year comparisons should be possible in the future.

For the 2001–2002 quadrats, the Anderson-Darling test showed that the data violated the normality

assumption for the West Bank (P<0.005), although not for the East Bank (P=0.329). In addition, Levene’s

test showed that the variances for the two banks were heterogeneous (P=0.016). Arcsine transformation

was not an option because some of the data were negative values. The normality problem could not be

corrected by logarithmic transformation (Anderson-Darling test, P=0.013 for the West Bank and P=0.360

for the East Bank), although logarithmic transformation homogenized the variances (Levene’s test,

P=0.223). A two-sample t-test detected no significant difference between the banks (t=0.08, df=14,

P=0.940). Likewise, the less powerful, non-parametric Mann-Whitney U-test detected no significant

difference between the banks (U=49.9, 0.10<P<0.05).

For the 2002–2003 quadrats, the Anderson-Darling test again showed that the data violated the normality

assumption for the West Bank (P<0.005), although not for the East Bank (P=0.205). In addition, Levene’s

test showed that the variances for the two banks were homogeneous (P=0.678). Logarithmic

transformation decreased the departure of the West Bank data from normality, although those data still

departed significantly from normality (Anderson-Darling test, P=0.043 for the West Bank and P=0.160 for

the East Bank). The variances of the log-transfomed data were homogeneous (Levene’s test, P=0.589). A

two-sample t-test detected no significant difference between the banks (t=1.14, df=41, P=0.260). A MannWhitney U-test detected no significant difference between the banks (U=285.5, 0.10<P<0.05).

The two banks appear uniform with respect to change in the cover of colonies of Montastraea annularis

species complex. The cover of Montastraea in the quadrats increased at both banks in both years. In both

of these respects, the results from the repetitive quadrats mirrored the results of the lateral growth study

with Diploria strigosa (section 3.3). Although the M. annularis complex increased in both 2001-2002 and

2002-2003, the amount of increase decreased in 2002-2003 (Figure 3.4.3). The Diploria in the lateral

growth study showed a similar trend, although sample size was a problem, as mentioned in section 3.3.2.

Comparison with data from future years will reveal whether or not this reduction in growth rate is cause for

concern.
50

Percent Change in Montastraea annularis spp. colonies between 2001-2002 and 2002-2003

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2001-2002 2002-2003

Percent Cover

East Bank

West Bank

Figure 3.4.3. Percent change ± SE in Montastraea annularis species complex colonies from repetitive

quadrats planimetry results between 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 at East and West Banks.

3.4.3. Deep Repetitive Quadrat Planimetry Analysis

The deep stations were analyzed for benthic cover type using random dot analysis (Figure 3.4.4). Coral

cover was high at the deep stations, while algal cover was low and consisted mostly of CTB. The

Montastraea annularis species complex was combined for analysis, but was the predominant coral group

in addition to M. cavernosa. Diploria strigosa was not as prevalent as in the shallow sites (Figure 3.4.5).

An example of a deep station repetitive quadrat is shown in Figure 3.4.6.
51

Deep Station Mean % Cover

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Coral Macroalgae CTB Sponge Unknown Sand

Benthic Cover category

Mean % cover

Figure 3.4.4. Percent cover (± SE) data for six benthic categories in the EFGB deep repetitive quadrats

in 2003 (random dot analysis).
52

Relative Dominance of Coral Species at East Bank Deep Stations

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Colpophyllia natans

Diploria strigosa

Madracis mirabilis

Millepora alcicornis

Montastraea spp.

Montastraea cavernosa

Mussa angulosa

Porites astreoides

Stephanocoenia intersepta

Coral species

Percent Cover

Figure 3.4.5. Relative dominance (± SE) of coral species at East Bank deep repetitive quadrats in 2003

(random dot analysis).
53

Figure 3.4.6. Deep repetitive 8 m

2

quadrat at East Bank in August 2003.

3.5. VIDEO PERIMETER

Overall, the coral condition and fish population levels along the perimeters of the East and West Bank in

2002 and 2003 were good. These areas displayed low levels of stress, high levels of coral cover, and

were comparable to random transect footage, although no statistical comparisons were made. Most

distressed corals were affected by fish biting, with only a few incidences of paling and bleaching, these

results reflect the trend found in the repetitive quadrat data. Furthermore, no evidence of disease was

observed at either bank during 2002 or 2003. No other invertebrates were observed along the perimeter

of either bank.

3.5.1 East Bank Perimeter Lines

No incidences of disease or bleaching were observed at the East Bank in 2002. Concentrated fish biting

was documented on 21 colonies, isolated fish biting on 16 colonies, and paling of five colonies was seen

along the East Bank north and east perimeter lines in 2002. Montastraea faveolata and Montastraea

franksi were the most impacted coral species. The most abundant fish species were Creole wrasse,

bluehead wrasse, and blue chromis. All values in parantheses refer to number of colonies affected by a

particular stress, which could include bleaching, paling, concentrated fish biting, or isolated fish biting.

In 2003 no incidences of disease were observed. Stresses included concentrated fish biting (27), isolated

fish biting (11), paling (7), and bleaching (2). Montastraea faveolata and Montastraea franksi were the two

most affected coral species. A comparison of corals affected by fish biting, paling, and bleaching in 2002

and 2003 at the East Bank is shown in Table 3.5.1. Fish populations were similar in 2002 and 2003 video

footage, with the most abundant fish species being brown chromis, Creole wrasse, and blue chromis.

However, the East Bank in 2003 had the highest number of fish (901 individuals) recorded at either bank

during the monitoring period (Table 3.5.2).
54

Table 3.5.1.

Comparison of observations of the condition of individual coral colonies at East Bank between 2002 and

2003 (CFB= Concentrated fish biting, IFB= Isolated fish biting, B= Bleaching, P= Paling, H= Healthy

colony, ICFB= Increased tissue loss due to concentrated fish biting, IIFB= Increased tissue loss due to

isolated fish biting, GI= Growth in filling [tissue regrowth], new CFB= new incident of CFB, U= Unchanged

condition, T= Surfaced replaced by turf algae).

Number of

Colonies

Coral Species

East Bank

2002

East Bank

2003

1 Diploria strigosa CFB ICFB

1 Diploria strigosa CFB GI

1 Montastraea annularis H CFB

1 Montastraea annularis IFB IIFB

1 Montastraea annularis IFB U

1 Montastraea annularis CFB New CFB

1 Montastraea cavernosa P U

1 Montastraea cavernosa H CFB

2 Montastraea faveolata CFB ICFB

1 Montastraea faveolata IFB GI

3 Montastraea faveolata H CFB

1 Montastraea faveolata IFB IIFB

1 Montastraea faveolata CFB GI

1 Montastraea faveolata CFB U

1 Montastraea faveolata CFB New CFB

1 Montastraea faveolata IFB U

1 Montastraea franksi H CFB

2 Montastraea franksi CFB GI

1 Montastraea franksi CFB ICFB

1 Porites asteroides IFB IIFB

1 Porites asteroides H CFB

1 Siderastrea siderea CFB T

1 Siderastrea siderea H CFB
55

Table 3.5.2.

Fish species composition and individual counts for the East Bank and West Bank in 2002 and 2003 along

perimeter lines and 360° circular panoramic views at corner markers. Some individuals belonging to the

Labridae (1 individual), Pomacentridae (55), Scaridae (14), and Serranidae (10) could only be identified to

the family level.

Species Common Name

East

Bank

2002

East

Bank

2003

West

Bank

2002

West

Bank

2003

Acanthurus bahianus Ocean surgeonfish 6 13 0 7

Acanthurus chirurgus Doctorfish 0 0 1 0

Acanthurus coeruleus Blue tang 5 11 7 6

Canthidermis

sufflamen Ocean triggerfish 4 0 0 0

Melichthys niger Black durgon 3 2 3 9

Caranx ruber Bar jack 0 1 0 0

Chaetodon aculeatus Longsnout butterfly 0 1 0 1

Chaetodon ocellatus Spotfin butterfly 2 8 5 5

Chaetodon sedentarius Reef butterfly 5 0 0 0

Diodon hystrix Porcupinefish 0 1 0 0

Kyphosus

sectatrix/incisor

Bermuda/Yellow

Chub 6 4 0 3

Bodianus rufus Spanish hogfish 11 3 6 4

Clepticus parrae Creole wrasse 225 172 32 26

Halichoeres

cyanocephalus Yellowcheek wrasse 0 7 0 0

Halichoeres garnoti Yellowhead wrasse 0 2 0 0

Halichoeres radiatus Puddingwife 0 0 2 0

Thalassoma

bifasciatum Bluehead wrasse 179 89 252 51

Ocyurus chrysurus Yellowtail snapper 0 0 0 1

Mulloidichthys

martinicus Yellow goatfish 0 0 0 1

Lactophrys triqueter Smooth trunkfish 0 1 1 0

Holacanthus ciliaris Queen angelfish 1 1 0 0

Holacanthus tricolor Rock beauty 0 0 1 1

Pomacanthus paru French angelfish 1 0 0 0

Abudefduf saxatilis Sergeant major 0 4 0 0

Chromis cyanea Blue chromis 75 158 65 154

Chromis multilineata Brown chromis 47 209 78 66

Microspathodon

chrysurus

Yellowtail

damselfish 7 3 5 3

Stegastes partitus Bicolor damsel 20 49 7 19

Stegastes planifrons

Threespot

damselfish 7 1 7 2

Stegastes variabilis Cocoa damselfish 19 8 3 7

Scarus croicensis Striped parrotfish 0 0 0 2

Scarus taeniopterus Princess parrotfish 0 3 1 3

Scarus vetula Queen parrotfish 11 10 7 20

Sparisoma viride Stoplight parrotfish 1 4 4 5

Mycteroperca bonaci Black grouper 2 1 1 1

Mycteroperca

microlepis Gag 0 1 0 0

Mycteroperca tigris Tiger grouper 0 1 0 0

Paranthias furcifer Creole fish 25 98 12 25

Sphyraena barracuda Great barracuda 4 2 5 3

Canthigaster rostrata Sharpnose puffer 3 1 2 0

Labridae Wrasses 0 0 0 1
56

Species Common Name

East

Bank

2002

East

Bank

2003

West

Bank

2002

West

Bank

2003

Pomacentridae Damselfishes 9 27 9 10

Scaridae Parrotfishes 4 2 5 3

Serranidae Sea Basses 4 3 2 1

Total 686 901 523 440

3.5.2 East Bank 360° Panoramic Views

At the northwest corner corals were in good condition in both 2002 and 2003. In 2003 there were four

new Montastraea spp. colonies where tissue loss occurred due to concentrated fish biting. The fish

populations were similar from 2002 to 2003, and included ocean triggerfish, Creole fish, barracuda, black

durgon and schools of brown chromis and Creole wrasse. Noticeably, in 2003 no ocean triggerfish were

present, and the number of fish increased, especially of schooling fish (Table 3.5.2).

At the northeast corner the only signs of stress that appeared in 2003 were three new incidences of

concentrated fish biting on colonies of Montastraea faveolata. The relative size and composition of fish

populations were similar between years and included Creole wrasse, Creole fish, jacks and barracuda.

At the southeast corner there were no conspicuous signs of stress in either year. The fish populations

were similar between years and included Creole wrasse, Creole fish, jacks and barracuda. In 2003 the

number of Creole wrasse and other schooling fish increased (Table 3.5.2).

3.5.3 West Bank Perimeter Lines

During 2002 no incidences of disease were observed at the West Bank. Colonies were most impacted by

concentrated fish biting (16), isolated fish biting (13), paling (5), and bleaching (1). Montastraea faveolata

and Diploria strigosa were the two most affected corals. The most abundant fish species were bluehead

wrasse, brown and blue chromis.

No colonies showed disease during 2003 at the West Bank. Colonies were most effected by

concentrated fish biting (19), isolated fish biting (3), paling (2), and bleaching (1). Montastraea faveolata

and Diploria strigosa were the two most impaired corals. Comparisons of maladied coral colonies at the

West Bank are shown in Table 3.5.3. Fish populations were similar in 2003, with blue and brown chromis

and bluehead wrasse representing the majority of fish recorded.
57

Table 3.5.3.

Comparison of observations of the condition of individual coral colonies at West Bank between 2002 and

2003 (Abbreviations are as follows: CFB= Condensed fish biting, IFB= Isolated fish biting, B= Bleaching,

P= Paling, H= Healthy colony, ICFB=Increased tissue lost to concentrated fish biting, IIFB= Increased

tissue lost to isolated fish biting, GI=Growth in filling [tissue regrowth], new CFB= new incident of CFB,

U=Unchanged condition, T=Surfaced replaced by turf algae).

Number of

Colonies

Species

West Bank

2002

West Bank

2003

1 Diploria strigosa CFB U

1 Diploria strigosa P U

1 Diploria strigosa CFB GI

1 Diploria strigosa CFB T

1 Diploria strigosa IFB CFB

1 Diploria strigosa CFB ICFB

1 Diploria strigosa H B

1 Diploria strigosa IFB T

1 Montastraea annularis IFB GI

1 Montastraea cavernosa H CFB

1 Montastraea cavernosa P H

1 Montastraea cavernosa CFB T

2 Montastraea faveolata CFB ICFB

1 Montastraea faveolata CFB T

3 Montastraea faveolata IFB GI

1 Montastraea faveolata CFB U

4 Montastraea faveolata H CFB

1 Montastraea franksi P H

1 Montastraea franksi IFB U

1 Montastraea franksi IFB IIFB

1 Montastraea franksi CFB T

1 Siderastrea siderea CFB GI

3.5.4 West Bank 360° Panoramic Views

The northwest corner coral health was good during 2002 and 2003, only one conspicuous coral head had

concentrated fish biting in 2002. The fish populations were also similar in both years, consisting of Creole

wrasse, black durgon, chromis and Creole fish.

The southeast corner coral condition was good from 2002 to 2003, with only one Montastraea faveolata

colony showing new tissue loss due to concentrated fish biting in 2003. The fish populations were also

similar from year to year, with relatively small schools of Creole wrasse, chromis, and the occasional

black durgon and Creole fish.

The southwest corner coral health was relatively stable from 2002 to 2003, with only two Montastraea

faveolata colonies showing new tissue loss due to concentrated fish biting in 2003. The fish populations

were also similar from year to year, with relatively small schools of Creole wrasse, chromis, as well as the

occasional black durgon and Creole fish.
58

3.6. WATER QUALITY

3.6.1 YSI Water Quality

The YSI datasondes deployed at the FGB failed post-deployment calibration after each of the deployment

periods. The sensors were not recording valid measurements at the end of their deployment period. As a

result, there are large amounts of invalid data within each of the datasets. The YSI datasonde uses

readings from the conductivity-temperature sensor to calculate other measurements such as dissolved

oxygen concentrations. Thus, failure of the conductivity-temperature sensor results in erroneous

readings by other sensors, even when these other sensors are otherwise functioning correctly. These

factors contributed to the difficulty of assessing the validity of each of the datasets. Since there were no

obvious breakpoints within the data separating the credible from the erroneous data, we reviewed and

validated the data using published values of each water quality parameter (Pickard and Emery 1982;

Valiela 1984; Gittings et al. 1992; Sorokin 1995; Lugo-Fernández 1998; Nowlin et al. 1998; Dokken et al.

2003).

YSI sonde data that appeared acceptable are presented in Tables 3.6.1., 3.6.2., Figure 3.6.1., 3.6.2 and

in Appendix 5. Figures for parameters other than temperature are not presented due to lack of reliable

data. In addition to the analysis herein, raw data were provided to MMS and NOAA as they were

retrieved. Out of the 371 total calendar days of deployment at the East Bank, the YSI sonde was able to

acquire useful data from 2 to 219 days (Table 3.6.1). The longest data records were for temperature,

turbidity, and photosynthetically active radiation (PAR). Few data were gathered for salinity, pH, and

dissolved oxygen. All water quality data can be seen in Appendix 5.

Depth. In-situ sea surface height at the FGB can be estimated from the depth sensors on the YSI

instruments since they record ambient pressure every half hour, these results are presented in Table

3.6.1. and 3.6.2. Yet, remote sensing using altimetry satellites, is a preferred method to document local

and regional changes in sea surface height in offshore areas since in the nearshore altimetry sensors

have problems detecting accurate sea surface heights (Carton and Chao 1999; CCAR 2005). Sea

surface height at the FGB is influenced by several factors including gravity, seafloor topography, tides,

wind patterns, eddies (Loop Current eddies, slope and cyclonic eddies with smaller spatial scales),

seasonal changes of seawater density, evaporation and precipitation, and river runoff (Pickard and Emery

1982; Lugo-Fernández 1998; Nowlin et al. 1998). Of particular interest in the upper slope region (offshore

of the shelf break) of the northwestern GOMEX is the influence of Loop Current (LC) and smaller eddies

on sea surface height and shelf edge circulation (Lugo-Fernández 1998; Nowlin et al. 1998; Sturges and

Leben 2000). LC eddies are anticyclonic vortices that can be up to 400 km in diameter (Nowlin et al.

1998). While these eddies generally move in a southwesterly direction, some travel near the shelf edge

where they influence sea surface circulation. It takes approximately one year for eddies to decay

sufficiently from the time they are shed from the LC. Altimetry shows elevated sea surface height toward

the center of LC eddies since this is where warm water is accumulated and acts like a high pressure

center. Currents at the shelf edge are heavily influenced by small eddies (anticyclonic and cyclonic).

These eddies cause highly variable sea surface currents at and near the FGB (Lugo-Fernández 1998;

Nowlin et al. 1998).

Temperature. The YSI datasonde recorded a range of temperature values from 18.94 to 31.18 °C at the

East Bank and 19.24 to 29.94 °C at the West Bank (Figures 3.6.1.-A and 3.6.2.-A; Appendix 5). A

sudden increase in temperature from 23.13 to 31.18 °C was recorded at the East Bank in mid-December

2002 (12/10-12/13/02), but was likely a glitch in the temperature probe (Figure 3.6.1.-A; Appendix 5).

Around the same time, temperature increased at the West Bank from 22.4 to 25.5 °C. Although this would

be an anomaly, because the YSI sondes at both banks almost simultaneously recorded an increase in

temperature, the FGB reef caps may have been exposed to a brief episode of unusually warm water.

Unfortunately, no HoboTemp data is available for this time period to further verify. Temperature rose

again at the West Bank in late January 2002 (1/20-1/27/02; 21.3-24.2 °C; Appendix 5) but did not at the

East Bank. YSI temperature records after 8/25/03 appear to be more consistent between banks (Figures

3.6.1.-A and 3.6.2.-A).
59

Salinity. Salinity data at the East Bank were too few (16 mean daily values) to characterize the East

Bank reef cap environment. The data collected at the East Bank during those 16 days do, however,

appear to be within accepted limits of salinity for coral reefs of the Western Atlantic (31-38 ppt; Coles and

Jokiel 1992). At the West Bank, salinity averaged 36.48 ppt (± 0.04 SE) (Table 3.6.2). There was one

anomaly during the 134 days of salinity data collection. On 4/30/03, salinity dropped from 37 to 35 ppt

and then returned to 37 ppt the following day (Appendix 5).

pH. Hydrogen ion concentration (pH) in seawater typically ranges from 7.5 to 8.4 (Sverdrup et al. 1970).

At the East Bank, two days of pH data yielded a mean value of 8.3 (Table 3.6.1). West Bank pH data

collected during 107 days varied very little from the daily mean of 8.24 (± 0.01 SE) (Table 3.6.2).

Dissolved Oxygen. The few dissolved oxygen (DO) data collected at the East Bank averaged 6.64 mg/l

(± 0.05 SE) (Table 3.6.1., Appendix 5). At the West Bank, mean DO was 6.18 mg/l (± 0.14 SE). The West

Bank DO data collected from October to December 2002 ranged from 0.78 to 5.81 mg/l and seemed

unusually low and erratic compared to the East Bank 2002 values (Appendix 5), the 4.94-7.78 ml/l DO

range reported by Gittings et al. (1992), and bottle DO of 5 ml/l Nowlin et al. (1998) found at 20 m in the

vicinity of the FGB (LATEX A hydrographic station 90) in spring, summer and fall. The DO data we

collected in 2003 from February to mid-May ranged from 3.51 to 8.94 mg/l but were for the most part

close to 7 mg/l. On February 12 and 13, DO dropped from 7 mg/l to 4 mg/l and then went back up to 6

mg/l on February 14 and on to 7 mg/l on February 15.

Turbidity. The turbidity data collected at the East Bank from October 2002 to April 2003 resemble those

collected at the West Bank during the same time. On November 27, at the West Bank turbidity rose from

8 to 13 NTU and then back down to 5 NTU the next day. Further, turbidity rose sharply from 6 to 30 NTU

around February 9-11, 2003 and dropped to 6 NTU for the rest of the 2003 record. At the West Bank,

turbidity was a steady 8 NTU for most of October 2002 to March 2003, and then a steady 6 NTU from

August through November 2003. The constantly low turbidity at the West Bank was interrupted by two

events of brief increases in turbidity. On December 4, turbidity rose from 8 to 40 NTU and went back

down to 8 NTU on December 8. On January 25 and 26, turbidity went from 8 to 24 NTU and then back

down to 8 NTU. The zigzagged turbidity data taken at the East Bank from September through October

2003 (range: 0-79 NTU) are probably flawed considering the stability of turbidity at the West Bank

(Appendix 5).

Photosynthetically Active Radiation. Mean daily photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) on the East

Bank, PAR = 26.36 μmoles/m

2

/sec (± 1.55 SE), was similar to what was found on the West Bank, PAR =

20.14 μmoles/m

2

/sec *m

2

(± 1.07 SE) (Table 3.6.2). The PAR data had similar trends on both banks for

the October 2002 through March 2003 period (Figures 3.6.1.-F and 3.6.2.-F). The PAR values declined

from October to January (approximately 60 to 10 μmoles/m

2

/sec) and then rose again to 50

μmoles/m

2

/sec by mid-February. Dokken et al. (2003) recorded a similar trend during three consecutive

years (1997-2000) at the West Bank. The PAR data collected at the West Bank from the end of August

2002 through November 2003 probably started off with a false peak (185 μmoles/m

2

/sec). The PAR

values following this peak appear to be in line with what was collected before in 2002 and 2003.
60

Table 3.6.1.

Summary of results of YSI water quality parameters: mean daily depth, temperature, salinity, pH,

dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity, and photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) collected at the East Bank

from October 2002 to November 2003.

Statistic

Depth

(m)

Temperature

(°C)

Salinity

(ppt)

pH

Dissolved

oxygen

(mg/l)

Turbidity

(NTU)

PAR

(μmoles/m

2

/sec)

Minimum 22.96 18.94 35.46 8.26 6.13 0.03 2.73

Maximum 23.89 31.18 35.89 8.27 7.32 79.02 72.44

Mean 23.23 23.64 35.76 8.26 6.64 11.39 26.36

SE 0.01 0.21 0.03 0.00 0.05 0.94 1.55

n 219 219 16 2 32 218 149

A

18.0

20.0

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

10/29/02

11/13/02

11/28/02

12/13/02

12/28/02

1/12/03

1/27/03

2/11/03

2/26/03

3/13/03

3/28/03

4/12/03

4/27/03

5/12/03

5/27/03

6/11/03

6/26/03

7/11/03

7/26/03

8/10/03

8/25/03

9/9/03

9/24/03

10/9/03

10/24/03

Date

T

e

m

p

erature (°C)

Figure 3.6.1. YSI datasonde records of mean daily temperature (A) on the East Bank reef cap from

October 2002 to October 2003.

Table 3.6.2.

Summary of results of YSI water quality parameters: mean daily depth, temperature, salinity, pH,

dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity, and photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) collected at

the West Bank from October 2002 to March 2004.

Statistic

Depth

(m)

Temperature

(°C)

Salinity

(ppt)

pH

Dissolved

oxygen

(mg/l)

Turbidity

(NTU)

PAR

(μmoles/m

2

/sec)

Minimum 25.29 19.24 35.02 7.92 0.78 3.79 1.06

Maximum 28.43 29.94 37.01 8.30 8.94 39.98 185.03

Mean 27.36 23.43 36.48 8.24 6.18 7.29 20.14

SE 0.03 0.15 0.04 0.01 0.14 0.20 1.07

n 396 395 134 107 157 290 290
61

A

18.0

20.0

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

10/30/02

11/14/02

11/29/02

12/14/02

12/29/02

1/13/03

1/28/03

2/12/03

2/27/03

3/14/03

3/29/03

4/13/03

4/28/03

5/13/03

5/28/03

6/12/03

6/27/03

7/12/03

7/27/03

8/11/03

8/26/03

9/10/03

9/25/03

10/10/03

10/25/03

11/9/03

11/24/03

12/9/03

12/24/03

1/8/04

1/23/04

2/7/04

2/22/04

3/8/04

Date

Temperature(°C)

Figure 3.6.2. YSI datasonde records of mean daily temperature (A) at the West Bank from October 2002

to March 2004.

3.6.2 HoboTemp Temperature

A HoboTemp thermograph was used to record temperature at the East Bank from 10/29/02 to 2/12/04.

The seawater temperature records were incomplete with a gap in recording time from 5/15/03 to 8/25/03

(Table 3.6.3, Figure 3.6.3). During the remainder of the time 10/29/02 - 5/15/03 and 8/25/03 – 2/12/04,

minimum mean daily temperature was 19.30 °C (1/24/03) and maximum mean daily temperature was

29.97 °C (8/26/03). Mean daily seawater temperature on the reef cap over the entire period was 23.05 °C

(± 0.15 SE; n = 397). During two weeks (8/26/03-9/11/03) water temperature on the reef cap was greater

than 29.5°C and therefore close to the 30 °C coral bleaching threshold at the FGB (Hagman and Gittings

1992).

18.0

20.0

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

10/29/0211/28/0212/28/02

1/27/032/26/033/28/034/27/035/27/036/26/037/26/038/25/039/24/03

10/24/0311/23/0312/23/03

1/22/042/21/04

Date

T

e

m

p

erature (°C)

Figure 3.6.3. Mean daily temperature as measured on the East Bank reef cap using a HoboTemp

thermograph.

For the West Bank HoboTemp thermographs recorded temperature data from 2/1/03 to 3/11/04. The

mean daily water temperature at the West Bank ranged from 19.34 to 29.86 °C over this time period.

Mean water temperature was 23.82 °C (± 0.17 SE; n = 405) (Table 3.6.2., Figure 3.6.4). Minimum mean

daily water temperature at the West Bank was 19.34 °C (2/23/04) and maximum mean daily temperature

was 29.86 °C (8/30/03). During the seasonal warming of the water column (April-September), a sudden
62

drop in temperature (~3.5 °C) occurred in mid-July and it lasted for about a week. Very much like at the

East Bank, summer water temperature exceeded 29.5 °C for two weeks.

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

2/1/03

2/16/03 3/3/03

3/18/03

4/2/03 4/17/03

5/2/03

5/17/03

6/1/03 6/16/03

7/1/03 7/16/03

7/31/03

8/15/03

8/30/03 9/14/03 9/29/03

10/14/03 10/29/03

11/13/03

11/28/03 12/13/03

12/28/03

1/12/04

1/27/04 2/11/04

2/26/04

Date

T

e

m

p

erature (°C)

Figure 3.6.4. Mean daily temperature as measured on the West Bank reef cap using a HoboTemp

thermograph.

3.6.3 Water Samples - Chlorophyll a

Ninety percent of the water samples collected contained concentrations of chlorophyll a that were below

detectable limits (< 1 mg/m

3

). The only samples containing detectable concentrations of chlorophyll a

were those collected at the East Bank in February and May 2003 immediately above the reef (~ 18 m)

and at the West Bank in May 2003 near the sea surface. Each of these samples contained 1.07 mg/m

3

(1070 ng/l) of chlorophyll a (Table 3.6.3).

Table 3.6.3.

Chlorophyll a concentrations in water samples taken at the East Bank and West Bank during 2002

through 2004. Highlighted values were above detection limits.

Chlorophyll a (mg/m

3

) 10/29/2002 2/18/2003 5/16/2003 8/26/2003 3/11/2004

East Bank Surface < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1

East Bank Midwater < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1

East Bank Bottom < 1 1.07 1.07 < 1 < 1

West Bank Surface < 1 < 1 1.07 < 1 < 1

West Bank Midwater < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1

West Bank Bottom < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1

3.6.4. Water Samples - Nutrients

All samples except those collected in March 2004 contained ammonia levels below detection limits.

Ammonia was detected in all March 2004 samples (range: 0.10-0.26 mg/l) and not in any of the other

samples for two reasons: (1) Samples collected in March 2004 were analyzed using the same EPA

method but with a lower detection limit (0.03 mg/l as opposed to 0.10 mg/l), and (2) ammonia

concentrations were in fact higher at the East Bank in March 2004 compared with all other samples

(Table 3.6.4). In ninety percent of the water samples, the nitrate and nitrite concentration was lower than
63

0.15 mg/l. The only samples that contained detectable levels of nitrate and nitrite were those collected in

February 2003 at the East Bank (midwater) and West Bank (midwater and bottom) (Table 3.6.4). The

total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) was measurable in almost all samples except for those collected in May

2003 (Table 3.6.4). The TKN level in the surface water sample collected at the East Bank in February

2003 (1.23 mg/l) was more than 1.8 times higher than in any other sample. Soluble reactive phosphorous

concentrations were below detectable limits in all samples (Table 3.6.4).

Table 3.6.4.

Nutrient (ammonia, nitrate and nitrite, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, and phosphorous) concentrations in water

samples taken at the East Bank and West Bank between 2002 and 2004. Highlighted values were above

detection limits.

Ammonia (mg/l) 10/29/2002 2/18/2003 5/16/2003 8/26/2003 3/11/2004

East Bank Surface < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 0.26

East Bank Midwater < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 0.25

East Bank Bottom < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 0.16

West Bank Surface < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 0.13

West Bank Midwater < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 0.10

West Bank Bottom < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 0.12

Nitrate and Nitrite (mg/l) 10/29/2002 2/18/2003 5/16/2003 8/26/2003 3/11/2004

East Bank Surface < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15

East Bank Midwater < 0.15 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15

East Bank Bottom < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15

West Bank Surface < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15

West Bank Midwater < 0.15 0.22 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15

West Bank Bottom < 0.15 0.18 < 0.15 < 0.15 < 0.15

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/l) 10/29/2002 2/18/2003 5/16/2003 8/26/2003 3/11/2004

East Bank Surface 0.56 1.23 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.42

East Bank Midwater 0.22 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.51

East Bank Bottom 0.56 0.11 < 0.10 0.28 0.37

West Bank Surface 0.34 0.22 < 0.10 0.28 0.19

West Bank Midwater < 0.10 0.22 < 0.10 0.28 < 0.10

West Bank Bottom 0.67 0.11 < 0.10 0.28 0.19

Phosphorous (g/l) 10/29/2002 2/18/2003 5/16/2003 8/26/2003 3/11/2004

East Bank Surface < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40

East Bank Midwater < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40

East Bank Bottom < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40

West Bank Surface < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40

West Bank Midwater < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40

West Bank Bottom < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40 < 0.40

3.6.5. Water Samples - Trace Metals

Concentrations of chromium or mercury were undetectable in all water samples collected at East and

West Banks between October 2002 and March 2004. Water samples were collected from surface,

midwater and bottom water at each bank on 10/29/02, 2/18/03, 5/16/03, 8/26/03 and 3/11/04. The

concentrations of chromium for all samples was less 30.0 g/l, while mercury levels were less than 1.00

g/l for the entire sampling period.
64

3.7. FISH SURVEYS

A mean of 51 fish species (± 3.5 SD) per bank and year were observed in 2002 and 2003. Fish

abundances showed no significant differences between banks and years (Table 3.7.3). The mean

species richness per diver survey was significantly different (t=2.308, df=63, P=0.0243) between the East

Bank (16.72 species per diver survey) and the West Bank (18.55 species per diver survey). Only surveys

at the West Bank proved to be significantly different (t=2.338, df=31, P=0.026) between years with 19.71

species per diver survey in 2003 and 15.72 species per diver survey in 2002. The observed species

richness values in 2002 at the East Bank and West Bank were 54 and 53, respectively, and in 2003 were

46 and 52, respectively. Fish data can be seen in Appendix 6.

Shannon-Weiner diversity indices were very similar between banks and years. The highest value was for

West Bank in 2003 (1.19) and lowest for East Bank in 2003 (0.90). Diversity indices for 2002 were 1.14

and 1.16 for West Bank and East Bank respectively (Table 3.7.1).

Table 3.7.1.

Shannon-Weiner diversity index (H’) and Evenness (J’) values for fish populations at East and West

Flower Garden Banks 2002-2003.

2002 2003

Index

East Bank West Bank East Bank West Bank

Diversity (H’) 1.16 1.14 0.90 1.19

Evenness (J’) 0.67 0.66 0.54 0.69

Expressed as density values, overall fish abundance values for the East Bank and West Bank in 2002

were 82.78 and 73.29 per 100 m

2

, respectively, and in 2003 were 157.53 (East Bank) and 84.62 (West

Bank) (Table 3.7.2). The high density at the East Bank in 2003 was attributed to the abundance of

Clepticus parrae (63.66 per 100 m

2

) and Chromis multilineata (32.94 per 100 m

2

). This contrasts with the

observed density of Clepticus parrae at the West Bank in 2003 and at the East Bank and West Bank in

2002 (7.19, 14.59, and 9.02 per 100 m

2

respectively); and the observed density of Chromis multilineata at

the West Bank in 2003 and at the East Bank and West Bank in 2002 (14.35, 5.50, and 8.45 per 100m

2

respectively). Thalassoma bifasciatum, Clepticus parrae, and Paranthias furcifer were consistently among

the top five most abundant fishes. Also among the most abundant fishes regularly encountered in diver

surveys were Chromis cyanea, C. multilineata, Stegastes planifrons, and S. partitus.

A mean of 21 fish families (± 0.82 SD) were recorded. Labridae, Pomacentridae, and Serranidae were

consistently the three most abundant families observed at the FGB, with densities ranging from 6.92

serranids per 100m

2

at the East Bank in 2002 to 70.74 labrids per 100 m

2

at the East Bank in 2003.

Pomacentrids, Serranids, and Labrids are also the three best represented families with 12, 10, and 6

species having been recorded for each respectively. The labrids are represented primarily by Clepticus

parrae and Thalassoma bifasciatum. The pomacentrids are represented by Chromis multilineata and C.

cyanea as well as the damselfish species Stegastes partitus and S. planifrons and to a much lesser

degree other species of Stegastes as well as Microspathodon chrysurus and Abudefduf saxatilis.

Paranthias furcifer was the serranid species that by far accounted for the Serranidae ranking in the top

three most abundant families at the FGB, ranging from 6.35 to 16.23 per 100m

2

. Other serranids

observed were at much lower densities (e.g., 0.0666 to 0.17 per 100 m

2

), including Cephalopholis

cruentata, C. fulva, Epinephelus adscensionis, E. guttatus, Mycteroperca interstitialis, M. tigris, M.

venenosa, Dermatolepis inermis, and Serranus phoebe.

Observed at moderate densities (1.38 to 7.32 per 100m

2

) were members of the families Scaridae,

Kyphosidae, Inermiidae, and Acanthuridae. Scarus taeniopterus, S. vetula, and Sparisoma viride were

the most abundant scarid species observed on diver surveys at the FGB. The family Kyphosidae was

represented by the indistinguishable species Kyphosus sectator/incisor. The Inermiidae, represented
65

singly by Inermia vittata, were not frequently encountered (sighting frequencies of 5.56% and 17.65%)

and not recorded at all at the West Bank in 2002 or at the East Bank in 2003. The high abundance and

low sighting frequencies of Inermia vittata were attributable to the schooling behavior of this species.

Acanthurid densities were consistent at both banks in each year, varying between 1.38 per 100 m

2

at the

West Bank in 2002 and 1.80 per 100 m

2

at the West Bank in 2003. Their densities recorded at the East

Bank in 2002 and 2003 remained constant at 1.73 per 100 m

2

. Acanthurus coeruleus was the most

abundant Acanthurid species recorded; however the family was also represented by Acanthurus

bahianus and A. chirurgus.

Sighting frequencies varied between banks and years, but seven species remained consistently in the 50-

100% range and ranked at least once in the 90-100% range: Stegastes partitus, S. planifrons, Paranthias

furcifer, Bodianus rufus, Thalassoma bifasciatum, Acanthurus coeruleus, and Scarus vetula. Sphyraena

barracuda was consistently sighted on at least 50% of the diver surveys at both banks and in each year

and was sighted on 75% of the surveys at the West Bank in 2002 and on 82% of the surveys in 2003.

Canthigaster rostrata and Melichthys niger were also consistently in the 50-100% sighting range.

Species in the families Acanthuridae and Scaridae as well as the Pomacentridae species Microspathodon

chrysurus are grouped here in an herbivore category comprised of scraping/denuding algae consumers

(after Steneck 1988 and Pattengill-Semmens and Gittings 2003). Fish census techniques included

juveniles in the counts of these herbivore species (and all fish species). As noted above, three species of

acanthurids were recorded in the surveys and five species of scarids were recorded to make a total of

nine species in this herbivore group. The mean richness of these herbivore species was 3.6 per diver

survey (± 1.5 SD). No significant difference was found in herbivore richness between banks (t=1.858,

df=63, P=0.068) or between years (t=1.622, df=63, P=0.110). Densities of the herbivore group ranged

from 3.96 per 100 m

2

at the East Bank in 2002 and 4.56 per 100 m

2

at the West Bank in 2002 to 4.89 per

100 m

2

at the West Bank in 2003 and 5.46 per 100 m

2

at East Bank in 2003(Table 3.7.2). No significant

difference was found in herbivore densities between banks (t=0.848, df=63, P=0.400) or between years

(t=1.483, df=63, P=0.143). The most abundant scarid as noted above was Scarus vetula with densities

ranging from 1.10 to 1.53 per 100 m

2

(sighting frequencies of 72 to 86%). The most abundant acanthurid

was Acanthurus coeruleus with densities ranging from 0.66 to 1.60 per 100 m

2

(sighting frequencies of 61

to 100%). Microspathodon chrysurus densities ranged from 0.20 to 0.71 per 100 m

2

(sighting frequencies

of 22 to 50%).

Sizes of herbivorous fishes observed at the FGB exhibited a normal distribution curve. Few fish (0-2%)

fell in the 0-5cm size range and a little more (1-11%) fell in the greater than 40cm category. Most

herbivorous fishes (60-80%) fell in a midsize range of 11-30cm (Figure 3.7.1).

Select carnivore species were grouped and included serranids (Epinephelus spp., Cephalopholis spp.

and Mycteroperca) and all lutjanids (after Claro and Cantelar Ramos 2003 and Pattengill-Semmens and

Gittings 2003). A total of nine species were observed at the FGB in this carnivore group: two lutjanids and

seven serranids. A significant difference was found in carnivore species richness at the FGB between

2002 and 2003 (t=2.022, df=63, P=0.047). The mean species richness of this carnivore group recorded in

2002 was 0.82 carnivore species per diver survey (± 0.72 SD). The richness recorded in 2003 was 0.48

carnivore species per diver survey (± 0.63 SD). The densities recorded for this carnivore group ranged

from 0.28 per 100 m

2

at East Bank and 0.30 per 100 m

2

at West Bank in 2003 to 0.42 per 100 m

2

at West

Bank and 0.66 per 100 m

2

at East Bank in 2002. A significant difference (t=2.138, df=63, P=0.036) in

carnivore densities was found to exist between 2002 (2.02 per 100m

2

) and 2003 (1.42 per 100 m

2

).

Epinephelus adscensionis was the most abundant serranid (densities from 0.067 to 0.17 per 100 m

2

) and

also most commonly seen serranid (sighting frequencies of 12-28%). Lutjanids were rarely recorded at

the FGB (only recorded in 2002). Lutjanus jocu density between the East Bank and West Bank in 2002

ranged from 0.03 to 0.13 per 100 m

2

and sighting frequency was constant at 6%.

The size distribution of carnivores at the FGB did not consistently exhibit a normal curve. Most fishes (60-

100%) were recorded as 21 cm or greater. Many of these fishes (20-50%) fell in the greater than 40 cm

category. The next most abundant category was the 21- to 30-cm size range (14-60%) (Figure 3.7.1).
66

Analysis of selected species showed some significant differences in abundances between banks and

years. Observed Sphyraena barracuda abundances show significant difference (t0.05(2),63=3.054, P=0.003)

between East Bank (1.68 per 100 m

2

) and West Bank (3.93 per 100m

2

); however, no significant

difference in abundance was found between 2002 and 2003 at either bank. The difference in observed

abundance of Kyphosus sectator/incisor was found to be significant (t=3.869, df=63, P=0.0003) between

East Bank (13.19 per 100 m

2

) and West Bank (2.64 per 100 m

2

); however, no significant difference was

found between 2002 and 2003. Examination of the abundance of garden-tending damselfishes showed

no significant difference between banks; however, significant difference (t=2.211, df=63, P=0.031) was

found between 2002 (5.04 per 100 m

2

) and 2003 (5.99 per 100 m

2

). Damselfishes included in this gardentending group include species from Stegastes, Pomacentrus, Eupomacentrus, and Microspathodon

(Steneck 1988; DeLoach 1999).

Table 3.7.2.

Densities of fishes at the FGB in 2002 and 2003 (Densities in number of fish per 100 m

2

).

2002 2003

Category

East Bank West Bank East Bank West Bank

Herbivores 3.96 4.56 5.46 4.89

Carnivores 0.66 0.42 0.28 0.30

Garden Tending Damselfishes 4.87 5.23 5.82 6.13

Sphyraena baraccuda 0.47 1.20 0.57 1.20

All Fishes 82.78 73.29 157.53 84.62
6

7

West Bank Carnivore Size Frequency Distribution

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0-5 6-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 >40

Size Category (cm)

20022003

West Bank Herbivore Size Frequency 

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0-5 6-10 11-20 21-30 

Size Category (cm)

East Bank Carnivore Size Frequency Distribution

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0-5 6-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 >40

Size Category (cm)

East Bank Herbivore Size Frequency 

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0-5 6-10 11-20 21-30 

Size Category (cm)

Figure 3.7.1. Fish size distributions at the FGB in 2002 and 2003: East Bank carnivores (A), East Bank herbivore

carnivores (C), and West Bank herbivores (D).

AC 
68

Table 3.7.3.

Species list of fishes recorded in stationary visual surveys conducted at the East and West Flower

Garden Banks in October 2002 and August 2003. Trophic Guild indicates selected species as defined

in the text.

Fish Species Fish Common Name Family Name Trophic Guild

Acanthurus bahianus Ocean surgeonfish Acanthuridae Herbivore

Acanthurus chirurgus Doctorfish Acanthuridae Herbivore

Acanthurus coeruleus Blue tang Acanthuridae Herbivore

Atherinidae Silversides Atherinidae

Aulostomus maculatus Trumpetfish Aulostomidae

Canthidermis sufflamen Ocean triggerfish Balistidae

Melichthys niger Black durgon Balistidae

Malacoctenus triangulatus Saddled blenny Blenniidae

Ophioblennius atlanticus Redlip blenny Blenniidae

Caranx crysos Blue runner Carangidae

Caranx hippos Crevalle jack Carangidae

Caranx latus Horse-eye jack Carangidae

Caranx lugubris Black jack Carangidae

Caranx ruber Bar jack Carangidae

Elagatis bipinnulata Rainbow runner Carangidae

Chaetodon aculeatus Longsnout butterflyfish Chaetodontidae

Chaetodon ocellatus Spotfin butterflyfish Chaetodontidae

Chaetodon sedentarius Reef butterflyfish Chaetodontidae

Chaetodon striatus Banded butterflyfish Chaetodontidae

Amblycirrhitus pinos Redspotted hawkfish Cirrhitidae

Diodon holocanthus Balloonfish Diodontidae

Diodon hystrix Porcupinefish Diodontidae

Gnatholepis thompsoni Goldspot goby Gobiidae

Gobiosoma oceanops Neon goby Gobiidae

Holocentrus adscensionis Squirrelfish Holocentridae

Holocentrus rufus Longspine squirrelfish Holocentridae

Myripristis jacobus Blackbar soldierfish Holocentridae

Inermia vittata Boga Inermiidae

Kyphosus sectator/incisor Chub, Bermuda/Yellow Kyphosidae

Bodianus rufus Spanish hogfish Labridae

Clepticus parrae Creole wrasse Labridae

Halichoeres garnoti Yellowhead wrasse Labridae

Halichoeres maculipinna Clown wrasse Labridae

Halichoeres radiatus Puddingwife Labridae

Thalassoma bifasciatum Bluehead Labridae

Lutjanus griseus Gray snapper Lutjanidae Carnivore

Lutjanus jocu Dog snapper Lutjanidae Carnivore

Cantherhines macrocerus Whitespotted filefish Monocanthidae

Cantherhines pullus Orangespotted filefish Monocanthidae

Mulloidichthys martinicus Yellow goatfish Mullidae
69

Fish Species Fish Common Name Family Name Trophic Guild

Gymnothorax moringa Spotted moray Muraenidae

Lactophrys bicaudalis Spotted trunkfish Ostraciidae

Acanthostracion

polygonius Honeycomb cowfish Ostraciidae

Lactophrys triqueter Smooth trunkfish Ostraciidae

Holacanthus ciliaris Queen angelfish Pomacanthidae

Holacanthus tricolor Rock beauty Pomacanthidae

Pomacanthus paru French angelfish Pomacanthidae

Abudefduf saxatilis Sergeant major Pomacentridae

Chromis cyanea Blue chromis Pomacentridae

Chromis insolata Sunshinefish Pomacentridae

Chromis multilineata Brown chromis Pomacentridae

Chromis scotti Purple reeffish Pomacentridae

Microspathodon chrysurusYellowtail damselfish Pomacentridae Herbivore

Stegastes diencaeus Longfin damselfish Pomacentridae

Stegastes adustes Dusky damselfish Pomacentridae

Stegastes leucostictus Beaugregory Pomacentridae

Stegastes partitus Bicolor damselfish Pomacentridae

Stegastes planifrons Threespot damselfish Pomacentridae

Stegastes variabilis Cocoa damselfish Pomacentridae

Scarus iseri Striped parrotfish Scaridae Herbivore

Scarus taeniopterus Princess parrotfish Scaridae Herbivore

Scarus vetula Queen parrotfish Scaridae Herbivore

Sparisoma aurofrenatum Redband parrotfish Scaridae Herbivore

Sparisoma viride Stoplight parrotfish Scaridae Herbivore

Cephalopholis cruentata Graysby Serranidae Carnivore

Cephalopholis fulva Coney Serranidae Carnivore

Dermatolepis inermis Marbled grouper Serranidae

Epinephelus adscensionis Rock hind Serranidae Carnivore

Epinephelus guttatus Red hind Serranidae Carnivore

Mycteroperca interstitialis Yellowmouth grouper Serranidae Carnivore

Mycteroperca tigris Tiger grouper Serranidae Carnivore

Mycteroperca venenosa Yellowfin grouper Serranidae Carnivore

Paranthias furcifer Creole-fish Serranidae

Serranus phoebe Tattler bass Serranidae

Sphyraena barracuda Barracuda, great Sphyraenidae

Canthigaster rostrata Sharpnose puffer Tetraodontidae

3.8 SEA URCHIN SURVEYS

In 2003 no Diadema antillarum were documented on the two perimeter lines sampled at East Bank or

along random transect lines; however one Echinometra viridis was recorded along the random transects.

Three juvenile Diadema antillarum were recorded along perimeter lines at West Bank, for a density of

0.008 individuals/m

2

at the West Bank. Two Diadema antillarum and one Panulirus argus were

documented at random transects at East Bank in 2002, for a density of 0.005 individuals/m

2

. Five D.

antillarum were found along random transects at West Bank in 2002, for a density of 0.014 individuals/m

2

.
70

D. antillarum populations at the FGB pre-1983 were between 0.54 and 1.63/m

2 while post-1984 urchin

densities dropped to 0 individuals/m

2

(Gittings and Bright 1987). No statistical analyses were carried out

due to low sample size.

3.9 MAPPING RESULTS

The primary objective of the mapping effort was to produce monitoring site maps that could be used by

divers to aid in the location of station markers. The existing study site maps (Figures 2.1.1 and 2.1.2)

show the approximate locations of pins, marking lateral growth and repetitive quadrat stations, within the

four quadrants of the 100 X 100 m study sites. Very few landmarks and no coral structures are included

on these maps, so divers experienced difficulty in finding specific pins. The time spent by divers

searching for station markers impinged upon bottom time available for conducting scientific investigations.

Bitmap images of the study site maps were geo-referenced in Microstation (Version 8) using the

differential GPS positions (from buoys) for the corner markers. It was necessary to warp the shape of the

study site maps so they would conform as closely as possible to their actual shapes on the seabed. This

was accomplished using the Warp function (Affine method) in Microstation Raster Manager. Once the

approximate station locations were geo-referenced, they were overlaid on sonar imagery.

Two types of sonar, side-scan and sector-scan, were utilized in PBS&J's efforts to map the FGB study

sites (see Section 2.9). Mosaic images of the two FGB study sites and of a portion of Stetson Bank are

illustrated in Figures 3.9.1 (East Bank sector-scan images), 3.9.2 (East Bank side-scan) and 3.9.3 (West

Bank side-scan). Side-scan sonar proved to be the better of the two tools for mapping the areas of dense

coral formations and high topographic relief on the FGB. It quickly became apparent that the side-scan

sonar produced superior imagery of the reef, thus use of the sector-scan sonar was discontinued once

work was completed at the East Bank study site.
71

Figure 3.9.1. East Flower Garden Bank sector-scan sonar mosaic in 2003.
72

Figure 3.9.2. East Flower Garden Bank side-scan sonar mosaic in 2003.
73

Figure 3.9.3. West Flower Garden Bank side-scan sonar mosaic in 2003.
75

4.0 DISCUSSION

4.1. CORAL

4.1.1. General

The East and West Flower Garden Banks, located 193 km and 172 km offshore from Galveston, Texas

are reef communities situated at the northernmost range of Atlantic coral reefs. The first coral reef

assessment of the FGB took place at the West Bank in 1972 (Bright and Pequegnat 1974). In 1973, the

MMS (then Bureau of Land Management) instituted a Topographic Features Stipulation to protect

topographic features in the NWGOM such as the FGB, from oil and gas activities (exploration and

development) and in particular from the discharge of drilling effluents. The stipulations developed for the

FGB consist of a No Activity Zone outside of the 100 m isobath based on the 1⁄4, 1⁄4, 1⁄4, system (MMS

1998). Additionally, a 4-Mile Zone was implemented around the East and West Bank, such that shunting

of drilling effluents is restricted to within 10 m of the seafloor. In 1978, exploratory drilling began 1.7 km

southeast of the East Bank (Gittings 1998). As a result, the MMS required that the benthic communities of

East Bank be formally surveyed and monitored. Monitoring at the East Bank lasted until 1983. In 1983,

NOAA funded a survey of anchoring damage at the East Bank (Gittings and Bright 1986). From 1988 to

1995, the MMS funded the annual monitoring of the East and West Flower Gardens. After the National

Marine Sanctuary designation of the FGB in 1992, NOAA and MMS co-funded the annual monitoring of

the FGB beginning in 1996. Since 1988, the FGB coral reefs have changed little in terms of coral cover,

dominance and diversity, prevalence of coral disease, condition of water quality, and fish population

dynamics. Results from the 2002-2003 monitoring data indicate continuation of that stability.

The FGB coral reefs exhibited high coral cover during the 2002-2003 monitoring period (Table 4.1.1.).

The Montastraea annularis complex and Diploria strigosa continued to be the dominant coral species at

both banks. Crustose coralline, fine turf, and bare rock (CTB) was the most abundant non-coral cover

type. Crustose coralline algae, a component of CTB, is thought to be a cue for settlement of coral recruits

(Morse et al. 1988). Macroalgae was less abundant, ranging from ~4-20%, with an increase from 2002 to

2003 at the East Bank and a decrease for the same time period at the West Bank (Figure 3.1.4). Low

levels of macroalgae also indicate moderate to high levels of herbivory. High levels of herbivory are

known to occur at the FGB, with robust herbivorous fish populations and the occurrence of fish biting on

hard corals. Disease and bleaching were not detected in random transect videography, and the repetitive

quadrat data also showed extremely low levels of bleaching (<0.61%) and disease (0%) for both years.

Low levels of macroalgae, high cover of CTB, high coral cover, and low levels of coral disease and

bleaching are all attributes of the excellent condition of the coral reefs at the FGB. Newly established

deep repetitive quadrats at the East Bank (32-40 m depth) revealed high coral cover (mean 75.14%), with

different species abundance patterns than at the shallower sites: M. annularis complex spp. and M.

cavernosa were the top contributors to coral cover.

Coral accretion is measured through the coring of M. faveolata at the FGB. Sclerochronology results

revealed growth rates comparable to growth rates of past observations at both banks (Dokken et al.

2003). One out of four cores at each bank showed an interruption in linear extension in 1997-1998, a year

known for bleaching-related stress and mortality worldwide. To study the lateral growth of an important

contributor to coral cover at the banks, the margins of colonies of D. strigosa were photographed.

Photographs of Diploria strigosa showed lateral growth from 2001 to 2002, whereas comparisons made

from 2002 to 2003 showed approximately equal extensions and retreats for a net zero gain.

Water quality parameters indicated good water quality when measurements were valid. Numerous

problems occurred with YSI datasondes failing, creating uncertainty in the quality of data. We

recommend refurbishing datasondes and or datasonde probes as well as using technology other than

YSI.

Fish surveys showed robust fish assemblages, that were dominated by herbivorous fish and included

healthy carnivore populations. Urchin surveys detected low densities of Diadema antillarum at both banks
76

in both years. These populations have not recovered to pre-1984 levels, which ranged from 0.54-1.63

individuals/m

2

between 1970 and 1983 (Bright and Pequegnat 1974; CSA 1984).

Mapping efforts resulted in the mapping of coral heads at each of the banks. More information is needed

to map individual station markers to particular coral heads. GIS based maps using the four known

geographic corner locations of the study sites at East and West Bank are being developed. Using

photographs of the repetitive quadrat markers and lateral growth station markers and their known relative

positions we are creating a photomosaic for each site. This photomosaic will have considerable gaps

between photostations, but each successive year can be added to the map and in this way a user can

see a map of the repetitive and lateral growth stations for any given year. Eventually, each repetitive and

lateral station may be mapped using GPS to obtain the exact and true geographic location. It is possible

to georeference random transects (although it is costly), and in this way gradually develop a complete

visual map of the coral reefs within the 100 m

2

at East and West Bank.

Table 4.1.1.

Percent coral cover (± SE) at both banks for both sampling years from random transect videography data.

East Bank 2002 East Bank 2003 West Bank 2002 West Bank 2003

56.43 ± 2.36 53.20 ± 3.01 49.67 ± 3.35 57.13 ± 3.81

4.1.2 Random Transects

East Bank Comparison 2002-2003. The random transect data for the East Bank in 2002 and 2003

showed similar values for all parameters measured, except for macroalgae and CTB categories (Table

3.1.1). Macroalgae increased from 4.05% to 16.74% from 2002 to 2003 [the site X year interaction was

significant (P= <0.0005)], while CTB decreased from 37.07% to 28.12% from 2002 to 2003. While

macroalgae and CTB changed during the monitoring period, this did not appear to have an effect on coral

cover during the sampling period, which remained stable from 2002 to 2003 (56.43% to 53.20%) [the site

X year interaction was not significant (P= 0.099)].

All coral species, including the Montastraea annularis complex, remained stable from 2002 to 2003 at the

East Bank (Table 3.1.1). In 2003, Colpophyllia natans increased slightly; however, this is most likely due

to transect placement and may or may not reflect an increase in C. natans cover at the FGB overall. Past

studies have shown similar variations in relative abundance from year to year (Dokken et al. 2003, 1999).

These variations are believed to reflect the placement of transects and not be a true increase in the

relative abundance of particular species. Diversity (H’) did not change significantly at the East Bank

during the sampling period. H’ is low at the East Flower Garden Bank due to the low species richness

values and the dominance of a few species, namely the M. annularis complex and Diploria strigosa.

West Bank Comparison 2002-2003. Percent cover data for random transects at the West Bank in 2002

and 2003 showed similar values for all parameters overall. Macroalgae decreased in transects from

19.14% to 8.41% from 2002 to 2003 [the site X year interaction was significant (P= <0.0005)], so the

effect of site is difficult to interpret. The opposite trend was true for CTB at the West Bank, during the

2002-2003 sampling period. This inverse relationship at both the West Bank and the East Bank may be

expected since these two components make up the majority of non-coral substratum at the FGB.

Coral cover increased slightly at the West Bank from 2002 to 2003 according to random transect data

(Table 4.1.1). The dominance of the Montastraea annularis complex continued through this monitoring

period. LPI data showed that M. annularis was more prevalent at the West Bank, compared to the East

Bank (3-5% vs. 1-2%) (Figure 3.1.3). Diploria strigosa increased slightly during this period at random

transects and accounted for the overall increase in coral cover (Table 3.1.1). Like C. natans at the East

Bank, this increase may or may not represent an actual increase in dominance of D. strigosa, an answer

that only future monitoring will reveal. Diversity (H’) at the West Bank was lower than measured at the
77

East Bank and the relatively low diversity is due to low species richness and dominance of a few coral

species.

Qualitative Comparison of Random Transect Results from 1992-2003 for Selected Parameters. A

qualitative comparison of the dominant cover components from random transects at the East and West

Flower Garden Banks showed interesting results for several cover categories. It should be noted that the

data analyzed herein were collected by three different groups: Continental Shelf Associates, Inc. from

1992 to 1995, Dokken et al. from 1996 to 2001, and PBS&J from 2002 to 2003 (Table 4.1.2). The algae

category from 1992 to 2003 were roughly equivalent to macroalgae analyzed in 2002-2003. The reef rock

category from 1992 to 1995 and 1998-2001 included bare substrate. In 1996 and 1997 no data were

recorded for the reef rock category. In 2002-2003 the reef rock category is included in the CTB category.

The Montastraea annularis complex, showed an overall increase in cover during the period 1992-2003 at

the West Bank, while the complex has decreased in the last two years at the East Bank (Table 4.1.2). At

the East Bank the M. annularis complex ranged from 21.3% to 44.8% cover between 1992 and 2003.

The values calculated from the random transect data in 2002 and 2003 were 33.59% ± 3.86 and 28.47%±

2.98, respectively. At the West Bank, the M. annularis complex ranged from 23.02 to 35.1% from 1992 to

2003, and transect values were 31.73% ± 3.57 SE and 33.8% ± 4.31 for the complex in 2002 and 2003,

which continue the increasing trend for the complex. Interestingly, there were slight decreases in the M.

annularis complex cover in 1999 at the East Bank and in 2000 at the West Bank. These decreases

coincide with increases in the algal component and decreases in the reef rock category. However, the

upward trend was reestablished after one year of decreasing cover at both banks (Figure 4.1.2.A, B).

Diploria strigosa, important as the second most common species at the FGB, showed variation over time,

but never decreased below 4.69% in 1992 or exceeded 12.4%, measured in 1999 at the East Bank. In

2002 and 2003 D. strigosa cover was ~6-7% for both years at the East Bank and ranged from ~3-9% at

the West Bank (Table 4.1.2).

Porites astreoides, the smallest contributor to percent cover analyzed was lowest at the West Bank and

showed no change in relation to other coral species, algae or reef rock categories at either bank. It has

increased slightly since 2001 at the East Bank (Table 4.1.2).

The change over time among algae, reef rock and the dominant corals of the Montastraea annularis

complex showed interesting patterns (Figure 4.1.2). The influence of season on algal cover must be

considered and therefore timing of monitoring events is important. Algae tend to be ephemeral, with

different species abundant under different seasonal conditions. With this in mind we looked at algal cover

data collected throughout the monitoring period 1992-2003. Monitoring events for the time period 1992-

2003 have taken part for the most part in the fall. The monitoring events in 1992 and 1995 took place in

late August. In 1993 no monitoring took place. Cruises for 1994 and 1996-2003 took place from

September to October, after the warmest part of the year. Because monitoring for the time period

analyzed was conducted at similar times of year, we can surmise that seasonal fluctuations were not

influential in interpreting patterns of algae abundance from 1992-2003.

Algal cover, here taken to mean macroalgae, remained relatively low from 1992 to 1998, never reaching

more than 4.78% at either bank until it increased dramatically in 1999 at both banks (Table 4.1.2). While

algae increased, reef rock declined (Figure 4.1.2). Concurrent with the increase in algae, the reef rock

category declined from ~27% to 11% at the East Bank in 1999, and from ~21% to 8% in 2000 at the West

Bank. In 2001 the reef rock category began an increasing trend at both the East and West Banks, while

algae began to decline. At the same time that algae increased and reef rock decreased, the Montastraea

annularis complex decreased slightly in 1999 (East Bank) and 2000 (West Bank), but continued to trend

upward a year later (Figure 4.1.2). The timing of the shifts in algae, M. annularis complex and reef rock

coincide with the aftermath of the strong ENSO event of 1998, which caused widespread bleaching

throughout the Caribbean. Many areas affected by severe bleaching and hurricane events have

experienced partial mortality and increased turf and macroalgae cover, and a subsequent decline in live

coral cover in the weeks and months proceeding the event (McField 2000; Ostrander et al. 2000). At

Mexico Rocks in Belize six months after the 1995 bleaching event, corals that had paled recovered their
78

zooxanthellae, while dead substrate covered by turf and macroalgae increased significantly, due to coral

mortality (Burke et al. 1996). A significant increase in dead substrate (turf and macroalgae covered) at

Mexico Rocks was also seen after the 1993 bleaching event and the 1997 bleaching event, decreasing

coral cover overall after each event, resulting in an eventual degradation of the reef framework (Burke et

al. 1996). In contrast to these events, the FGB saw a dip in cover of the M. annularis complex,

concurrent with the increase in algae and a return to an increasing trend in coral cover. Such trends have

not been documented at other reefs in the Caribbean/western Atlantic region to the knowledge of the

authors at this time. These slight shifts in community dynamics continue to be an interesting avenue of

research and the coral reef system of the FGB continues to be one of the most dynamic places to study

the subtleties of these patterns.

Table 4.1.2.

East and West Bank random transect data for predominant cover categories including, Montastraea

annularis complex, Diploria strigosa, Montastraea cavernosa, Porites astreoides, Algae, and Reef Rock

as reported in CSA (1996) for data from 1992-1995 and Dokken et al. (2003) for data from 1996-2001. No

standard deviations were presented for data from 1992-1995. Standard deviations are shown in

parentheses for 1996-2001 and standard errors are shown for 2002 and 2003. Different data analysis

teams are connoted as follows:*** = CSA, ** = Dokken, * = PBS&J. Algae and reef rock are defined in

section 4.1.2.

East Bank 1992 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

M. annularis

spp. complex 24.12 26.93 35.65

21.3

(14.2)

21.6

(8.1)

30.4

(11.1)

28.2

(11.7)

39.5

(9.6)

44.8

(12.9)

33.59

(3.86)

28.47

(2.98)

Diploria

strigosa 4.69 8.92 7.92

10.1

(7.1)

5.1

(4.4)

8.3

(3.7)

12.4

(6.0)

6.2

(2.8)

3.9

(4.1)

6.96

(1.69)

6.19

(1.55)

Montastraea

cavernosa 1.49 4.80 3.20

3.7

(5.3)

4.7

(4.9)

3.5

(2.9)

2.4

(2.8)

4.8

(5.7)

3.6

(5.0)

3.9

(1.08)

4.24

(1.41)

Porites

astreoides 4.57 3.89 2.71

3.6

(1.5)

5.3

(3.0)

4.2

(3.0)

3.4

(1.7)

2.6

(1.7)

4.6

(2.7)

6.79

(0.83)

5.69

(0.98)

Total Coral 34.87 44.54 49.48 38.7 36.7 46.4 46.4 53.1 56.9 51.24 44.59

Algae 4.78*** 0.29*** 0.57***

6.1**

(5.2)

0.5**

(0.6)

3.2**

(2.6)

24.7**

(13.2)

17.3**

(4.9)

14.9**

(5.6)

4.06

(0.75)*

16.74

(2.05)*

Reef Rock 54.46*** 47.31*** 42.15*** - -

27.6**

(5.9)

11.1**

(8.2)

4.3**

(1.7)

5.7**

(3.6)

37.07

(2.69)*

28.12

(2.05)*

West Bank 1992 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

M. annularis

spp. complex 23.02 24.95 31.00

27.2

(8.3)

27.7

(9.9)

28.4

(11.9)

31.7

(8.6)

30.9

(11.6)

35.1

(12.0)

31.73

(3.57)

33.8

(4.31)

Diploria

strigosa 6.15 10.15 6.66

7.9

(3.5)

9.1

(5.9)

9.6

(4.8)

10.9

(7.8)

8.1

(6.7)

9.5

(5.8)

3.2

(0.91)

9.04

(2.68)

Montastraea

cavernosa 0.87 3.15 2.33

1.5

(2.2)

4.3

(4.2)

2.6

(2.4)

2.4

(3.5)

5.8

(11.7)

2.1

(3.7)

2.74

(1.16)

2.67

(1.10)

Porites

astreoides 1.49 2.55 2.44

2.5

(1.4)

2.7

(2.3)

2.4

(2.0)

2.7

(1.9)

2.5

(1.6)

2.0

(0.9)

3.44

(0.74)

3.77

(0.46)

Total Coral 31.53 40.8 42.43 39.1 43.8 43.0 47.7 47.3 48.7 41.11 49.28

Algae 4.45*** 0.42*** 2.7***

4.5**

(2.9)

0.1**

(0.1)

2.3

(1.3)**

18.8 **

(6.2)

22.6**

(14.0)

25.4 **

(7.3)

19.14*

(1.4)

8.41*

(1.41)

Reef Rock 56.56*** 51.08*** 45.85*** - -

20.7 **

(11.2)

21.1**

(9.8)

8.5**

(3.7)

4.6 **

(2.9)

27.63*

(3.14)

31.63*

(3.04)
79

East Bank Percent Cover of Montastraea annularis complex, Algae and Reef Rock

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1992 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Year

Percent cover

Montastraea annularis species complex Algae Reef Rock

A

West Bank Percent Cover of Montastraea annularis complex, Algae and Reef Rock

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1992 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Years

Percent cover

Montastraea annularis species complex Algae Reef Rock

B

Figure 4.1.2. Percent cover of Montastraea annularis complex, algae, and reef rock from 1992-2003:

East Bank and West Bank.

Random Transect Data. The statistical comparison of the methods of random transect data collection

was an important component of the work performed. To address this, comparisons of random transect

data collected using three methods, videography (point count), still photography (planimetry), and linear

point-intercept methods were conducted. Three categories including total coral cover, the Montastraea

annularis complex, and Diploria strigosa, were chosen to represent common, medium, and rare cover

categories at the FGB.
80

Total Coral Cover. All three methods showed a normal distribution for total coral cover, revealed by

Anderson-Darling (P>0.13 in all cases). Pairwise F-tests on the untransformed data revealed only one

significant difference: the LPI data were significantly less variable than the videographic data (P=0.028).

Comparisons of variances between videography and still photography was not significant (P=0.37).

The ANOVA results were virtually identical for the untransformed and arcsine-transformed data (Table

3.1.3A). There was a significant block effect, meaning that there was variability among transects that was

consistent across methods. There was also a significant effect of method. A posteriori Tukey

simultaneous tests showed that the LPI method gave a significantly higher estimate of total coral cover

than still photography, but that the videographic estimates were not significantly different from either the

LPI or the still-photography estimates. For both the untransformed and transformed cases, Tukey

comparison showed the photographic and videographic differences to be non-significant at P=0.39. The

actual difference in mean percent-cover estimates between the LPI and photographic methods was only

4%, which cannot be considered biologically meaningful (Aronson et al. 2005; Section 3.1.3).

Montastraea annularis complex cover. For the Montastraea annularis species complex, AndersonDarling tests revealed the (untransformed) proportional coverage data to be normally distributed for all

three methods (P>0.10 in all cases). Tukey comparisons on the untransformed data showed no

significant pairwise differences between the videographic and photographic techniques for cover of the

Montastraea annularis complex P=0.13.

Diploria strigosa cover. For Diploria strigosa the randomized-block ANOVAs gave virtually identical

results for the untransformed and transformed data: a significant block effect and no effect of method

(Table 3.1.3C). The maximum difference in mean percent-cover estimates was <1%.

Considering these results, it is reasonable to switch permanently to video transects using point count

analysis for future FGB monitoring. Importantly, these results show that statistical comparisons of data

from previous photographic records can be made to current and future video images. Now that results

have shown that still photographs and video frames along transects produced statistically

indistinguishable results, we recommend the permanent move to videography as the preferred method of

data collection along random transects.

As part of the monitoring protocol, the goal of the random video transects was to detect the smallest

biologically meaningful changes in coral cover at the FGB. A change of 5-10% coral cover is considered

biologically meaningful and is more conservative than the 10-20% change that Risk and Risk (1997)

published from a poll of reef scientists. The minimum detectable difference () was calculated for the two

way ANOVA on proportional coral cover for the video transects for two banks during two years (2002-

2003), following Zar (1984). The analysis for 14 transects each year at each bank (56) revealed =

0.074, which represents a detectable difference of 7.4% change in coral cover between any two years or

between two banks in a two-year study. In this way, biologically significant changes within 7.4% coral

cover can be detected using the video transect methodology. This level of detection is better than the

10% change which is considered biologically significant (Risk and Risk 1997). Aronson et al. (1994)

calculated similar  values (5.2-9.8%) for four sites in the Caribbean and Florida that ranged in coral

cover from 3-21% coral cover. The FGB results are slightly higher than results obtained for a comparison

of three sites in the Florida Keys (2.4-3.8%); however, these sites contained 30 transects per site with low

coral cover, which reduced the error variance and therefore the  value (Murdoch and Aronson 1999).

Univariate analysis of the random transect data revealed that coral cover at the East Bank and West

Bank remained stable in 2002 and 2003 (Figure 3.1.4). Percent cover for the East Bank was 56.43% and

53.2% in 2002 and 2003 respectively, while the West Bank had 59.67% and 57.13% coral cover in 2002

and 2003. Percent coral cover for this time period compared with previous studies (Dokken et al. 2001,

Dokken et al. 1999, CSA 1996, Gittings et al. 1992) revealed the stability over time of the coral

community at the FGB (Figure 4.1.3). Coral cover varied from year to year, however over time it did not

vary more than ~20% among banks or years. It is not clear what the reason for this difference is,

however, if anything, coral cover may be increasing (Figure 4.1.3). The lowest coral cover recorded at the

banks by random transect methods was 37.2% at the West Bank in 1992, while the highest occurred in
81

2001 at the East Bank (Figure 4.1.3). Additionally, the FGB continue to have high coral cover compared

to other reefs of the western Atlantic (Gardner et al. 2003; Aronson et al. 1994).

Mean Coral Cover at the FGB

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1978-

19821

1988-

19912

19923 19933 19943 19953 1996* 1997* 1998* 1999* 2000* 2001* 2002** 2003**

Year

Mean Percent Cover

East Bank

West Bank

7

Figure 4.1.3. Mean percent coral cover at the FGB over time (± SE), showing the consistently high

coral cover. In 1993 there was no percent cover data reported. Data from historical

monitoring data as follows: 11978-82 from Gittings et al. 1992 (Monitoring report for 1989-

1991) who reported data from Kraemer 1982 (Master's thesis Texas A&M). 21988-1991

from Gittings et al. 1992 (Monitoring report for 1989-1991). 3 1992-1995 from MMS et al.

1996 (Monitoring report prepared by CSA 1992-1995). *1996-2001 from Dokken et al.

2003 (Monitoring report for 1998-2001). **2002-2003 from the current monitoring period,

performed by PBS&J.

Macroalgae and CTB (crustose coralline algae, fine turfs, and bare rock) were inversely related for the

sampling period 2002-2003. Macroalgae increased at East Bank from 2002 to 2003, while decreasing at

the West Bank for the same time interval [the site X year interaction was significant (P= <0.0005)]. The

CTB category was the second highest cover category after coral, connoting high rates of herbivory and

an overall healthy reef system (the site X year interaction here was also significant [P= 0.023]). Crustose

coralline (CC) algae, a large component of the CTB, has been shown to be a settling cue for coral spat

(Morse et al. 1988). Whether or not years with higher levels of CC than macroalgae may have higher

coral recruitment is a possible direction for future study.

The FGB coral reefs were distinct from other protected reefs as shown by multi-dimensional scaling

(MDS) (Figure 3.1.5). Species specific random transect data was pooled and compared to three other

fully protected reef zones (FPZ) within the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary: South Carysfort reef,

Western Sambo reef, and Eastern Sambo reef. Two-dimensional MDS showed the Flower Garden East

and West Bank 2002 and 2003 data grouped tightly, reflecting high coral cover and low variability in

species composition, while the three Florida reefs showed lower coral cover and higher variability in coral

species composition. Significantly, coral cover was eight to ten times higher at the FGB than at any of the
82

protected reefs in Florida. This contrast in coral cover of these two protected reef areas does not reflect

upon their management. Causes of coral decline such as cold water events, bleaching, and coral

disease have affected the reefs of the Florida Keys at a level not seen at the FGB.

4.1.3 Sclerochronology

Coral growth rates are known to vary due to depth, salinity, temperature, and light, and relative position

along the coral colony as well as genetic factors (Knutson et al. 1972; Weber and White 1977; Highsmith

1979; Hudson 1981a; Hudson et al. 1989; Smith et al. 1989). Accretionary growth rates of Montastraea

annularis were documented over a wide geographic range of reefs throughout the Caribbean and varied

from 3-12 mm/yr (Weber and White 1977). Growth rates were shown to vary with depth, with faster

growth rates occurring in shallower water (Weber and White 1977). Differentiation between the three

possible sibling species, M. annularis, M. faveolata, and M. franksi were not made at the time of these

studies and thus it is not known which Hudson (1981a) reported growth rates of M. annularis in the

Florida Keys to be 6.3 mm/yr at offshore reefs and 8.2 mm/yr at mid-reef from 1928-1978. The

accretionary growth of M. annularis at the FGB was documented by Hudson and Robbin (1980), with

estimated average annual growth rate of 8.46 mm/yr and a range of 7.15-10.58 mm/yr from 1887 to 1979.

These colonies were likely M. faveolata and agree with more recent estimates of coral accretion

measured from M. faveolata. Dokken et al. (2001) showed a lower growth rate for the period 1985-1999,

with an average of 6.80 mm/yr at the East Bank and 5.13 mm/yr at the West Bank. The shorter sampling

period was offered as an explanation for the observed differences. However, Dodge and Lang (1983)

used data from Hudson and Robbin (1980) to correlate growth rates at the FGB to temperature and

discharge from the Atchafalaya River. They found an overall decline in temperature and growth rates

from 1950 to 1960 and variable growth values from the early 1960s to 1979, which were lower than pre1957 rates (Dodge and Lang 1983).

For the 2003 sampling period, M. faveolata growth ranged from 7.7 to 10.7 mm/yr at the East Bank and

6.3 mm/yr to 8.5 mm/yr at the West Bank for the time period 1997-2003. Cores at the East Bank revealed

a significantly higher growth rate on average than the West Bank (9.0 mm/yr versus 7.7 mm/yr [P=0.02]).

These results differed slightly from the growth rates reported by Dokken et al (2003), who reported a

wider range of growth rates at East and West banks. As mentioned earlier coral growth rates vary

depending on environmental conditions. Dokken et al. (1999) took cores from the sides of M. faveolata

colonies, rather than from the apex at the East and West Bank in 1997. These four coral cores (2 at each

bank) showed lower rates of growth (2.76-6.56 mm/yr), which may be due to different environmental

conditions experienced at the margins of the coral colony as opposed to the peaks of colonies. Growth

rates for M. faveolata at the East Bank, and less so at the West Bank, continued to be in the middle to

upper range of FGB growth rates as recorded by Hudson and Robbin (1980). One out of four cores at

each bank showed a break in continuous accretion within the 1997-1998 growth band. This discontinuity

may be a sign of stress or partial mortality which the colonies subsequently recovered from. Stress or

partial mortality may have been caused by bleaching which was prevalent throughout the Caribbean

region, and present at the FGB in 1997-1998 or fish biting (Dokken et al. 2001, 2003).

The current sampling protocol which calls for four cores to be taken from each bank every other year is

useful for tracking the short-term growth rates (~10 years) of large Montastraea faveolata heads and

monitoring physical changes within the cores. Long-term growth rates (10+ years) or information that

might be gleaned from them are not possible to obtain using this method. Longer cores on which stable

isotope analysis can be conducted, such as the ones taken by Amy Bratcher at the Texas A&M

University, Department of Oceanography, will show salinity and temperature data over time. This

information will be a valuable addition and reveal regional influences, such as the Mississippi river output,

on water quality affecting the coral reefs at the FGB.

4.1.4 Lateral Growth

Lateral growth measurements have been used for much of the monitoring history of the FGB and results

have shown lateral extension or growth of monitored margins overall, with high variability among

individual colonies (Dokken et al. 2001, 2003, this study). Lateral growth measurements do not take into
83

account the fact that individual corals may grow at different rates along different margins. While some

margins may be advancing, others on the same colony may be retreating, potentially altering the overall

picture of lateral change in a given colony and by extension a given bank and year. Additionally, lateral

growth measurements do not take into account the height extension of D. strigosa, which is also an

indicator of growth or recession of a colony and is not accounted for using the current methodology.

Overall Diploria strigosa colonies showed a 3–5% increase in colony area at both banks from 2001-2002.

The 2002-2003 data set was quite different and the two banks appeared very different as well (Figure

3.3.1). The East Bank appeared to be stable, with a possible increase, but generalizations are not

possible for the West Bank with a sample size of only 4. The low sample size was due in part to dark

slides that were not analyzable. During the site rehabilitation sixty lateral growth stations were refurbished

and/or newly established on each bank. At the East Bank 12 new stations were established and 48 old

lateral growth stations were refurbished with new pins and tags, for a total of 60 lateral growth stations. At the

West Bank 17 new stations were installed, while 43 old lateral growth stations were refurbished, for a total of

60 lateral growth station pins. The added stations will not compromise the integrity of the long-term

dataset, as most of the existing stations are the original (pre-2002) stations. As pins are removed and

degraded over time they will need to be rehabilitated periodically. D. strigosa colonies appeared to be

stable or increasing at both banks from 2001-2003.

4.1.5 Repetitive 8 m

2 Quadrats

Study Site Quadrats. Repetitive 8 m

2

quadrats were analyzed for percent cover of benthic components,

including percent coral species cover, algae, and coral health indicators (bleaching, paling, concentrated

fish biting, isolated fish biting, and disease), and were compared for 2002-2003. Fifty-one photographs

were analyzed in 2002 and 2003 (20 pairs at the East Bank and 31 pairs at the West Bank). Forty stations

were refurbished or established on both banks during the site-rehabilitation in April 2003, with the goal of

restoring the initial sample size of 40 on each bank. At the East Bank thirty-one repetitive quadrat stations

were refurbished and 9 new stations were installed, for a total of 40 repetitive quadrat stations. At the West

Bank thirty-six repetitive quadrat stations were replaced and 4 new stations were installed, for a total of 40

repetitive quadrat stations. The added stations will not compromise the integrity of the long-term dataset,

as most of the existing stations are the original (pre-2002) stations. As pins are removed and degraded

over time they will need to be rehabilitated periodically. Coral cover from the repetitive quadrats was

higher than that calculated using the random transect methodology (an average of 59.62% versus

54.10%, respectively, at both banks in both years). The reasons for this difference is not clear, however,

higher percent coral cover at repetitive quadrats relative to random transects was also documented in

previous reports (Dokken et al. 2003). One potential reason for this difference is the placement of

repetitive quadrat markers, which are placed in areas with large coral heads in a non-random fashion.

Species distribution was similar to random transect findings, with the predominant corals being

Montastraea annularis complex, Diploria strigosa, and Montastraea cavernosa. The M. annularis

complex had higher cover estimates at the repetitive quadrats (East Bank average from 2000-2003:

40.02% and West Bank average for same time period: 36.5%) than random transect estimates. Porites

astreoides and M. cavernosa are roughly equivalent, but M. cavernosa is consistently higher than P.

astreoides in repetitive quadrat estimates, which is the opposite of trends in the random transect data

(Dokken et al. 2003, this study). These differences may be small and caused by an artifact of the

methodologies employed.

Coral disease was absent from analyzed quadrats at both banks in both years (Table 3.4.2). This appears

to signify a decrease in disease from past monitoring, when disease levels were found to be low (West

Bank 2000-2001: 0.3-0.4%) (Dokken et al. 2003). This difference is likely due to the inclusion of fish

biting as part of the disease estimates by past authors. Fish biting is not included in the disease section

here and is instead considered separately. It should also be noted that disease identification from

photographs is problematic (Zimmer pers. comm.). Paling and bleaching were extremely low at both

banks, ranging from 0.5-0.61% and these values are similar to findings from previous investigators

(Dokken et al. 2003). Bleaching occurred most frequently on colonies of Millepora alcicornis at the East

Bank in 2003 (Table 3.4.3), while paling showed no pattern and occurred less frequently. Concentrated
84

fish biting and isolated fish biting were similarly low between banks, ranging from 0.34-0.61% in both

years (Table 3.4.2). It should be noted that fish biting is more prevalent at the FGB than at other coral

reefs in the region (pers. Comm. G.P. Schmahl). Fish biting occurred primarily on the M. annularis

complex, and appeared to be more common at the West Bank in both years (Table 3.4.3).

To document the dynamics of particular coral colonies at the FGB, repetitive quadrats were analyzed

quantitatively using planimetry. Four to six coral colonies from frame building corals, whose margins were

clearly defined were chosen for analysis. The Montastraea annularis species complex, the main

contributor to coral cover at the FGB appeared to increase from 2001 to 2002 and from 2002 to 2003 at

both banks, with no significant differences between banks (2001-2002: t=0.08, df=14, P=0.940; 2002-

2003: t=1.14, df=41, P=0.260). When considered together, the East and West Banks showed a net

growth of the M. annularis complex similar to the Diploria strigosa colonies documented at the lateral

growth stations.

Deep Station Quadrats. At the East Bank, nine deep stations (32-40 m) were established in April 2003

and eight of them were photographed in August 2003. While temporal comparisons will only be possible

beginning with our next report, initial analysis showed high coral cover (76.5%) at these deeper sites.

This area is dominated by Montastraea annularis complex and M. cavernosa, unlike the shallower one

hectare survey sites, and unlike the deeper Stephanocoenia-Millepora zone (36-48 m) described by

Rezak et al. (1985). This sample size of 72 m

2

is small, and the difference between this area and the one

described by Rezak et al. (1985) is probably due to small-scale spatial variability and/or a small sample

size.

4.1.6 Perimeter Videography

Videography of the perimeter lines and 360°panoramic views of the corner markers at the East and

West Banks provided a general overview of coral condition and fish populations at the study sites in

2002 and 2003. Similar to the findings from the random transects, coral condition was very good at

both banks for both years. There were no signs of disease and only a few isolated incidences of

bleaching. The main impact to coral colonies, observed at both banks during the sampling period,

was concentrated fish biting most likely caused by individuals from the genus Sparisoma (Bruckner

and Bruckner 2000). Initial and terminal phase Sparisoma viride are known to remove coral polyps in

their foraging, creating deep lesions on coral heads (Bruckner and Bruckner 2000). When

Sparisoma viride were removed from affected areas, lesions healed completely or ceased to

increase in size (Bruckner and Bruckner 2000). The next largest contributor to adverse effects on

corals was isolated fish biting, which was most likely caused by damselfish territories.

Fish populations were similar at both banks during both years (Table 3.5.2). Fish were more

abundant at the East Bank in both years. In 2003, the East Bank had the most fish with over 900

individuals documented. Species recorded in the 360°panoramic views were largely represented by

demersal species, including Creole wrasse, Creole fish, brown and blue chromis. Due to the angle of

the video camera, species recorded along the perimeter lines included these species as well as

damselfish. For this reason, fish cylinders are more representative of actual fish populations at the

Banks, although uncommon species such as grouper were documented in the video. Slower

videographic surveys may reveal a more representative distribution of fish species at the FGB for a

permanent visual record. Additionally, it is not possible to ascertain fish sizes with this surveying

technique because there is no scale reference.

It is important to note that a number of human errors may have influenced the data. First, while the

perimeter lines at both banks were generally in the same location, there was a 1 to 2 m difference

from 2002 to 2003 between the successive locations of the perimeter lines; this difference decreased

as the diver approached the perimeter corner marker. As a result, it was not always possible to

compare the same colonies from year to year because the video footage did not overlap. Similarly,

the 2m height above the substratum was not always maintained, which changed the view and

therefore the corals analyzed.
85

4.1.7 Disease and Bleaching at the FGB

Beginning in the 1970s and continuing through today, diseases and disease-like syndromes have

appeared in many coral species throughout coral reefs worldwide. Within the Caribbean and Western

Atlantic there has been a higher prevalence of disease (82% of corals species susceptible to

disease) as compared to the Pacific (25% of Indo-Pacific corals) (Wilkinson 2002). Previous annual

monitoring reports at the FGB (Gittings et al. 1992; CSA 1996; Dokken et al. 1999, 2001, 2003) have

documented the presence of coral diseases at the FGB, with a low prevalence in comparison to other

reefs throughout the region. However, only one survey has been published that documented white

plague, with a low prevalence of 0.08% (Borneman and Wellington 2005). It is important to note that

substantial questions relating to the characterization of many coral diseases remain unanswered

(e.g., identification of pathogens, modes of transmission, pathogenic mechanisms, etc.).

Environmental stressors such as pollution, nutrient loading, African dust, and elevated temperature

have been associated with disease outbreaks, yet no causal connections have been firmly

established (Bruno et al. 2003; Richardson 1998).

While coral cover in the FGB has remained essentially unchanged since monitoring began, the shortand long-term impacts of coral diseases on populations remain difficult to assess. Disease-like

syndromes were observed during the 2002 and 2003 monitoring cruises (Appendix 7). Specifically,

plague-like signs were observed on a number of coral species including the Montastraea annularis

species complex, Montastraea cavernosa, Colpophyllia natans, Diploria strigosa, and Siderastrea

siderea

In addition to disease, widespread coral bleaching in response to anomalously high summer-season

temperatures has become more frequent since the 1980s throughout the region and the association of

thermal stress with coral disease is of particular concern. At the FGB, the only major bleaching episode

reported was in 1997-1998, with minor bleaching having occurred in 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1995.

These episodes were followed by recovery (Gittings et al. 1992; Hagman and Gittings 1992; CSA 1996;

Dokken et al. 1999, 2001). Bleaching episodes on reefs in the western Atlantic-Caribbean region have

also generally been followed by recovery, with partial or whole mortality events affecting populations

locally (Aronson and Precht 2000).

Disease monitoring and assessment methods have been developed by a number of scientists working in

the Caribbean and on coral reefs throughout the world (Porter et al. 2001; Santavy et al. 2001). In

general, disease research has focused on areas with high disease prevalence, such as the Florida Keys

(Richardson et al. 1998). Methods for monitoring coral diseases in these areas has consisted of a

combination of sampling techniques, including belt transects and radial arc transects, as well as tissue

sampling for pathogen identification (Porter et al. 2001; Santavy et al. 2001). At the FGB disease

prevalence is low, none was recorded in transects or repetitive quadrat stations in 2002 and 2003.

Diseased corals were photographed in 2002 and 2003, but these were found in systematic swims that

were looking for corals exhibiting disease by a trained diver (Appendix 7).

Developing a monitoring protocol for coral disease is important to managers at the FGB in light of

disease rates within the Caribbean region. To properly design a protocol, a pilot study should be

conducted and a power analysis done to calculate the minimum detectable differences (). Because

the average coral colony size at the FGB is large, 86.9 cm in diameter (Borneman & Wellington

2005), 100 x 1 m random belt transects should be conducted to maximize the number of coral

colonies surveyed (n = 1). A minimum of 10 transects should be evaluated, five at both the East and

West FGB. Within each transect, discrete coral colony counts by species should be recorded. In

addition, old and new mortality should be noted for each discrete colony and the source of mortality, if

distinguishable, should be categorized (i.e., disease, bleaching, paling, and fish biting -

spot/concentrated parrotfish biting and damselfish biting). A minimum of two sampling events should

be conducted, likely in the spring and summer. Those colonies within the transect exhibiting disease

signs should be photographed. Once the pilot study is completed a monitoring protocol can be

implemented to monitor for disease at the FGB. It should be noted that if disease prevalence were
86

higher, disease would be evident in random transects, currently used to record coral cover and other

parameters.

4.1.8 Other Coral Mortality Factors at the FGB

Other causes of coral mortality in the FGB include predation by mobile fauna, inter- and intraspecific

aggression by coral species, toppling of colonies due to bioerosion, concentrated fish biting, the impacts

of damselfish territories, resulting in patchy areas of coral mortality and algal growth on affected colonies.

Concentrated fish biting possibly due to the abundance of Sparisoma spp., which are responsible for

concentrated scrape marks on corals elsewhere (Bruckner and Bruckner 2000) has been shown in

earlier monitoring photographs (Dokken et al. 2003) but has not been specifically studied at the FGB

and should be investigated to better understand the phenomenon and its impact on the reefs.

Although numerous sources of mortality are present, coral growth and recruitment appear to be in

balance with coral loss, as coral cover continues to be consistently high. Photographs of all types of

coral mortality described are shown in Appendix 7.

4.2 WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS

Water quality parameters acquired in this study at the FGB (October 2002 to March 2004) included

temperature, turbidity, photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), salinity, dissolved oxygen, pH, nutrients,

and trace metals. Water color and circulation were not part of the scope of work and are not discussed

here. The accuracy of the water quality reported here depended largely on the performance of the

instruments used to measure water quality, and in particular the YSI sondes deployed on the FGB reef

cap. The YSI datasondes deployed at the FGB failed post-deployment calibration after each of the

deployment periods. Since the sensors were not recording valid measurements at the end of their

deployment period, there are large amounts of invalid data within each of the datasets. To assess the

validity of the data collected here and perhaps identify valid outliers, we compared replicate data when

they existed, and compared the collected data with independent reference data.

4.2.1 Physical Parameters

Temperature. To evaluate our 2003 and 2004 seawater temperature data, we compared concurrent (i.e.,

gathered on the same date) YSI and HoboTemp data, and then compared these data with the 1990-1997

mean temperature gathered on the reef caps at the East Bank and West Bank (Gittings et al. 1992; LugoFernández 1998). Mean seawater temperature collected by HoboTemp from 1999-2001 (Dokken et al.

2003) do not deviate from the data collected between 1990 and 1997. The reef cap temperature data

were also compared with sea surface temperature collected during 2002, 2003, and 2004 at 0.6 m below

mean sea level on the buoy station 42019, located 152 km west of the West Bank (27°54'47"N

95°21'36"W) and moored in 82 m of water (National Data Buoy Center 2004). Finally, we compared reef

cap temperature between banks. A summary of the data used in this analysis is presented in Tables

4.2.2.A and 4.2.2.B. The YSI and HoboTemp temperature data collected in 2003 covered the broadest

calendar range (Table 4.2.1). At the East Bank, YSI temperature ranged from 18.9 to 28.5 °C and at the

West Bank from 19.2 to 29.9 °C (Table 4.2.2.-A,B). The HoboTemp temperature ranged at the East Bank

from 19.3 to 30.0 °C, and at the West Bank from 19.4 to 29.9 °C (Table 4.2.2.-B). In 2003, sea surface

temperature varied from 18.8 to 30.3 °C (Table 4.2.2.-C). Minimum reef cap temperature (~19 °C)

occurred in mid- and late February and lasted less than a week. At the sea surface, water temperature

minima (16-19 °C) occurred early in the year (mid-January, early February) but were scattered amongst

winter temperatures ranging from ~19-20 °C from late December to mid-March. From the available reef

cap temperature records, seawater temperature maxima (~ 30 °C) occurred in late August and so did the

sea surface maxima (~ 30 °C). Considering the sea surface temperature record at buoy station 42019

and the absence of extensive coral bleaching on the FGB, we suspect that temperature on the reef cap

remained at or above 30 °C during a few days at the most. Bleaching of corals is known to occur at the

FGB when sea water temperature exceeds 30 °C for more than seven continuous days (Hagman and

Gittings 1992).
87

Table 4.2.1.

Calendar dates of reef cap (YSI and HoboTemp) and sea surface (Buoy station 42019; National Data

Buoy Center 2004) temperature data used in this study from 2002 to 2004.

Year East Bank YSI East Bank Hobo West Bank YSI West Bank Hobo Buoy Station

2002 Oct 29-Dec 31 Oct 29-Dec 31 Oct 30-Dec 31 NA Jan-Dec

2003 Jan-Mar 26

Aug 26-Nov 3

Jan-Dec Jan-May 16

Aug 28-Dec 31

Feb 1-Dec Jan-Dec

2004 NA Jan-Mar 11 Jan-Mar 11 Jan-Mar 11 Jan-Mar 31

Table 4.2.2-A.

Reef cap seawater temperature statistics at the East Bank: 1990 to 1997 (Gittings et al. 1992; LugoFernández 1998); YSI temperature probes in 2002 and 2003; and HoboTemp probes in 2002, 2003, and

2004.

East Bank

Mean

‘90-‘97

Minimum

‘90-‘97

Maximum

‘90-‘97

YSI

‘02

YSI

‘03

Hobo

‘02

Hobo

‘03

Hobo

‘04

Minimum 19.60 18.46 19.60 21.49 18.94 20.57 19.30 19.91

Maximum 29.77 29.40 30.24 31.18 28.51 26.83 29.97 21.81

Mean 24.65 23.89 25.43 24.95 23.09 23.90 23.40 21.00

SE 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.18 0.28 0.23 0.21 0.06

N 366 366 366 64 155 64 262 71

Table 4.2.2-B.

Reef cap seawater temperature statistics at the West Bank : 1990 to 1997 (Gittings et al. 1992; LugoFernández 1998); YSI temperature probes in 2002, 2003, and 2004; and HoboTemp probes in 2003 and

2004.

West Bank

Mean

‘90-‘97

Minimum

‘90-‘97

Maximum

‘90-‘97

YSI

‘02

YSI

‘03

YSI

‘04

Hobo

‘03

Hobo

‘04

Minimum 20.10 17.76 20.79 22.33 19.24 19.56 19.35 19.34

Maximum 29.17 28.92 30.06 27.05 29.94 22.48 29.86 22.23

Mean 24.31 23.35 25.37 24.82 23.73 21.09 24.44 20.87

SE 0.16 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.20 0.09 0.18 0.09

N 366 366 366 63 261 71 334 71

Table 4.2.2-C.

Sea surface temperature statistics at the Buoy station 42019 (located 152 km west of the FGB) for 2002,

2003, and 2004 (National Data Buoy Center 2004).

Buoy Station 42019 ‘02 ‘03 ‘04

Minimum 17.45 18.75 16.18

Maximum 30.47 30.34 22.41

Mean 24.76 24.79 19.82

SE 0.19 0.20 0.15

n 349 365 91
88

Comparing concurrent YSI and HoboTemp temperature data, we found that at the East Bank temperature

recordings (arcsine-transformed data) were significantly different between gauges in 2002 (two-tailed

paired-sample t-test; t=5.24; df=63, P>0.05;) and 2003 (t=10.93; df=154, P>0.05;). The East Bank YSI

sonde probably incurred recording errors during 2002 considering the anomalous temperature recorded

in December compared with the HoboTemp records of 2002 and the 1990-1997 maximum temperature

record (Figure 4.2.1). The 2003 YSI data also appeared to be unusually low particularly during the second

deployment (Figure 4.2.1).

18.0

20.0

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

1-Jan

31-Jan

1-Mar

31-Mar30-Apr

30-May

29-Jun

29-Jul

28-Aug

27-Sep

27-Oct

26-Nov

26-Dec

Date

T

e

m

p

erature (°C)

E-Mean 90-97

E-Min 90-97

E-Max 90-97

E-YSI 2002

E-YSI 2003

E-Hobo 2002

E-Hobo 2003

E-Hobo 2004

Figure 4.2.1. Reef cap seawater temperature recorded at the East Bank from 1990-1997 (Gittings et al.

1992; Lugo-Fernández 1998), and during this study in 2002, 2003 and 2004.

At the West Bank, there were no 2002 HoboTemp temperature records to compare with the YSI data.

The YSI and HoboTemp data (arc sine-transformed data) at the West Bank did not differ in 2003 (t=1.04;

df=229; P<0.20;) but did differ significantly in 2004 (t=12.17; df=70; P>0.05;). The 2002 YSI temperature

records at the West Bank included anomalously high values in December, somewhat comparable to what

was observed at the East Bank (Figures 4.2.1 and 4.2.2). Since the East Bank and West Bank YSI

sondes sampled temperature independently, there is a possibility that a temperature anomaly might have

occurred in December on the FGB reef cap. During 2003, temperature data exhibited some unusual

values both for the YSI and HoboTemp gauges: the YSI January data seem to be anomalously high

compared with 1990-1997 values and the June HoboTemp data exhibited a sharp drop in temperature (~

4 °C) followed by a gradual seasonal warming (Figure 4.2.2). These unusual temperature values could

not be compared between gauges since there were no concurrent data. The 2004 data, even though

different between gauges, were within the 1990-1997 temperature range.
89

18.0

20.0

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

1-Jan

31-Jan

1-Mar

31-Mar

30-Apr

30-May

29-Jun

29-Jul

28-Aug

27-Sep

27-Oct

26-Nov26-Dec

Date

T

e

m

p

erature (°C)

W-Mean 90-97

W-Min 90-97

W-Max 90-97

W-YSI 2002

W-YSI 2003

W-YSI 2004

W-Hobo 2003

W-Hobo 2004

Figure 4.2.2. Reef cap seawater temperature recorded at the West Bank from 1990-1997 (Gittings et al.

1992; Lugo-Fernández 1998), and during this study in 2002, 2003 and 2004.

Overall, the YSI temperature data sets included probable errors and suspicious data. The HoboTemp

probes seem to have recorded more accurate data, since HoboTemp data agreed with past observations.

Further, previous reliable temperature records reported from the FGB were partially based on the use of

HoboTemp gauges (Gittings et al. 1992; Lugo-Fernández 1998). Therefore, HoboTemp 2002-2004

records are used to further discuss seawater temperature variation at the FGB during this study.

Concurrent sea surface (buoy station 42019; National Data Buoy Center 2004) and reef cap temperatures

(HoboTemp) were significantly different from each other on both banks (arc sine transformed data, twotailed paired-sample t tests; P>0.05). Further, we observed predictable seasonal heat-budget patterns

(Pickard and Emery 1982) of rapid warming and cooling of sea surface temperature coinciding with

gradual warming and cooling, respectively, at a deeper depth (i.e., reef cap). From January through

March, seawater temperature was significantly greater on the reef cap than it was at the sea surface (arc

sine transformed data; one-tailed t-test; P>0.05). From April through August, the sea surface temperature

was greater than on the reef cap (arc sine transformed data; one-tailed t-test; P> 0.05). From September

through December, the reef cap temperature was greater than at the sea surface (arc sine transformed

data; one-tailed t test; P>0.05) (Figures 4.2.3 and 4.2.4).
90

18.0

20.0

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

1/1/2004

1/31/2004

3/1/2004

3/31/2004

4/30/2004

5/30/2004

6/29/2004

7/29/2004

8/28/2004

9/27/2004

10/27/2004

11/26/2004

12/26/2004

Date

T

e

m

p

erature (°C)

E-Hobo 2002

E-Hobo 2003

E-Hobo 2004

42019-02

42019-03

42019-04

Figure 4.2.3. Sea surface temperature at Buoy station 42019 (National Data Buoy Center 2004) and

East Bank reef cap temperature (HoboTemp) in 2002, 2003, and 2004.

14.0

16.0

18.0

20.0

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

1-Jan

31-Jan

1-Mar

31-Mar30-Apr

30-May

29-Jun

29-Jul

28-Aug

27-Sep

27-Oct

26-Nov

26-Dec

Date

T

e

m

p

erature (°C)

42019-03

42019-04

W-Hobo 2003

W-Hobo 2004

Figure 4.2.4. Sea surface temperature at Buoy station 42019 (National Data Buoy Center 2004) and

West Bank reef cap temperature (HoboTemp) in 2003 and 2004.

Turbidity. As defined in Telesnicki and Goldberg (1995), turbidity here refers to “the decrease in water

clarity due to particles in suspension.” Turbidity on the reef cap measured by the YSI sensors recorded

mean values of 11 NTU (± 1 SE; n=218) at the East Bank and 7 NTU (± 0.2 SE; n=290) at the West Bank

during 2002 and 2003. YSI instruments placed on sand flats and not on the reefs themselves may have

recorded the resuspension of sediments in the sand flats in addition to other sources of turbidity. Turbidity

values obtained in this study are roughly 10 times greater than those reported by Dokken et al. (2003) at

the FGB using the same YSI instruments. In both studies, however, turbidity followed similar trends: a

steady turbidity level interrupted by brief increases.

Relatively high turbidity took place in February, September, and October 2003 at the East Bank (2/8-

2/12/03: 12-31 NTU; 9/16-10/3/03: 2-63 NTU; 10/10-10/28/03: 18-79 NTU), and in November 2002,

December 2002, and January 2003 at the West Bank (11/24-12/10/02: 8-40 NTU; 1/24-1/26/03: 18-24
91

NTU). The timing of each of the high turbidity events appears to coincide with increased significant wave

height as measured at the buoy station 42019 (Figure 4.2.5).

0

1

2

3

4

10/29/02

11/13/02

11/28/02

12/13/02

12/28/02

01/12/03

01/27/03

02/11/03

02/26/03

03/13/03

03/28/03

04/12/03

04/27/03

05/12/03

05/27/03

06/11/03

06/26/03

07/11/03

07/26/03

08/10/03

08/25/03

09/09/03

09/24/03

10/09/03

10/24/03

11/08/03

11/23/03

Date

Sig

nific

a

nt W

a

v

e

H

eig

ht (m)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

T

urbidity (N

T

U)

42019 SWH (m) EFGB Turbitiy (NTU) WFGB Turbitiy (NTU)

Figure 4.2.5. Comparison of significant wave height at buoy station 42019 (National Data Buoy Center

2004) and turbidity measured on the reef cap at the East Bank and West Bank in 2002 and

2003.

Average turbidity values found at the FGB (< 11 NTU) correspond to turbidity levels that do not affect the

photosynthesis and respiration of corals (Telesnicki and Goldberg 1995). However, the elevated turbidity

recorded in this study (24-79 NTU) possibly caused brief episodes of stress during which corals increased

their respiration rates (but no decrease in photosynthesis), possibly maintained expanded polyps as long

as the water remained turbid, and possibly increased the mucus secretion to remove fine particles from

the surface of the colony (Telesnicki and Goldberg 1995). Given that the turbidity events were brief, the

heightened mucus production was temporary and probably did not affect the overall energy budget of

individual colonies. Should high turbidity events last more than three weeks, the photosynthesis to

respiration ratio (P:R ratio) of coral colonies could remain less than 1 for that prolonged period and cause

stress since more carbon would be consumed than fixed (Telesnicki and Goldberg 1995). Further,

prolonged turbidity would cause the prolonged increased production of mucus which would also stress

the corals (Sorokin 1995) and make them more vulnerable to diseases (Bruckner 2002).

In addition to the high turbidity events recorded here, others may coincide with recurrent episodes of light

attenuation and low salinity (April through September), when nearshore LATEX waters are transported

over the shelf edge (Deslarzes and Lugo-Fernández in press). Corals may be affected during their

exposure to the nearshore water reaching the FGB, should the freshwater be associated with increased

sedimentation, increased turbidity, nutrients, pollutants, and pathogens originating from nearshore

processes and the terrigenous runoff of the Mississippi and Atchafalaya Rivers and Texas regional rivers

(Coles and Jokiel 1992; Richmond 1994; Veron 1995; Kleypas 1996; Peters et al. 1997; Kleypas et al.

1999a; Lipp et al. 2002; Bruckner 2002; Szmant 2002; McCulloch et al. 2003; Wolanski et al. 2003).

Turbidity can also be inferred from light attenuation as calculated using Beer’s Law, Iz = I0 e

-kz

, where I0 is

the radiation intensity above the sea surface, Iz is the radiation intensity measured on the reef, z is the

depth at which the radiance is measured on the reef, and k is vertical light attenuation coefficient. While
92

we had access to radiation intensity on the reef measured as PAR, we did not have the incident radiation

intensity at the sea surface, and thus could not assess the variation of light attenuation. Having both

turbidity measurements and light attenuation would have enabled us to verify the frequency and intensity

of turbidity on the reef cap.

PAR. The PAR records obtained during this study on the reef cap at the East and West Banks (Figure

3.6.1-E and 3.6.2-F, respectively) were similar to what Dokken et al. (2003) found at the West Bank

during the same months of the year (October 2000-September 2001): a gradual decline in average daily

PAR from summer to winter, a minimum PAR in December, and a gradual increase in PAR to reach high

values in August. These PAR trends are expected seasonal changes due mostly to the varying azimuth of

the sun. It should be noted that the summer PAR values of ~80 μmol/m

2

/sec we recorded at the West

Bank were attained in March at the East Bank. Yet in March, the YSI instrument recorded PAR levels of

less than 25 μmol/m

2

/sec at the West Bank. The difference in PAR values between banks, assuming that

they are accurate measurements, could be caused by the different water depth between banks (YSI

sensor was in a 23 m water depth at the East Bank and 27 m at the West Bank) and the varying influence

of the upwelling irradiance caused by the reflection of downwelling light by sand flats on which the sondes

were deployed (Falkowski et al. 1990).

In addition to PAR (visible light, 400-700 nm), the reef cap on the FGB (down to at least a 20 m water

depth) can at times receive ultraviolet (UV) radiation from the sun, particularly when the seas are calm

and skies are clear of cloud cover (Warner et al. 1999; Falkowski et al. 1990; Gleason and Wellington

1993). UV radiation is known to contribute to coral bleaching in conjunction with high water temperatures

(Shick et al. 2005, Glynn et al. 1993, D’Croz and Mate 2000). By producing reactive oxygen species

(ROS) within organismal tissue UV exposure can lead to widespread cellular damage (Kohen et al. 2000).

For example, UV radiation is known to cause decreased levels of larval survivorship in coral and fishes

(Wellington and Fitt 2003, Lesser et al. 2001). For these reasons, considering the effects of UV radiation,

particulary at times of high irradiance (summer), is important to the FGB coral reef community.

During the course of this study, episodes of elevated PAR, and possibly UV radiation, reached the reef

when significant wave height was relatively low and steady. Comparing PAR results and significant wave

height at the buoy station 42019 (Figure 4.2.6), PAR peaked in March 2002 and in August/September

2003 when sea conditions were relatively calm compared to the rest of the year. The October 2002 peak

did not necessarily co-occur with calm sea conditions. Reviewing the significant wave height record, the

reef cap (down to 20 m) received the highest amount of UV radiation in March 2003 and July/August

2003 (Figure 4.2.6). Although bleaching at the monitoring sites in 2002-2004 was low, the possibility of

the combined effects of UV and elevated sea surface temperatures contributing to bleaching in the future

at the FGB should not be ignored. Bleaching has been observed in the past at the FGB (Hagman and

Gittings 1992) and the causes for this bleaching may not have solely resulted from unusually prolonged

events of high water temperature, but could also have been due to UV radiation affecting corals.
93

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10/29/02

11/13/02

11/28/02

12/13/02

12/28/02

1/12/03

1/27/03

2/11/03

2/26/03

3/13/03

3/28/03

4/12/03

4/27/03

5/12/03

5/27/03

6/11/03

6/26/03

7/11/03

7/26/03

8/10/03

8/25/03

9/9/03

9/24/03

10/9/03

10/24/03

11/8/03

11/23/03

Date

P

A

R (ein

st s-1 m-2

)

0

1

2

3

4

Sig

nific

a

nt W

a

v

e

H

eig

ht (m)

EFG PAR WFG PAR 42019 SWH (m)

Figure 4.2.6. Comparison of significant wave height at buoy station 42019 (National Data Buoy Center

2004) and PAR levels measured on the reef cap at the East Bank and West Bank in 2002

and 2003.

Sea State. During the course of this study, heavy sea conditions, tropical depressions, and hurricanes

occurred at the FGB. Hurricane season in 2002 and 2003 was fairly active in the Atlantic tropical cyclone

basin compared with historical data. In the past, close to four tropical cyclones affected the Gulf of Mexico

in one year (MMS 1988). In 2002 and 2003, six tropical cyclones either entered or were formed in the

Gulf of Mexico. During each of those years, two of the cyclones developed into hurricanes

(Weatherunderground 2004). In 2002, the eyes of Hurricane Isidore (Category 3, September 14-16, 125

mph winds) and Hurricane Lili (Category 4, September 21-October 4, 145 mph winds) passed within 250

km east of the FGB. In 2003, Hurricane Claudette (Category 1, July 8-16, 80 mph) passed over the FGB

and the eye of Hurricane Erika (Category 1, August 14-17, 70 mph winds) passed within 100 km of the

FGB. The tropical storms in the Gulf of Mexico during 2002 and 2003 passed within 100-700 km of the

FGB (Table 4.2.3). The comparison of the record of weather extremes for 2002-2003 in the Gulf of

Mexico and the significant wave height at buoy station 42019 (Figure 4.2.7) shows (1) that a Category 4

hurricane passing 250 km east of the FGB will have a regional impact on the sea state, i.e., 4 m

significant wave height at buoy station 42019 and possibly the FGB; (2) that a Category 1 hurricane

(Hurricane Claudette) passing over the FGB will produce a significant wave height of 4 m; and (3) that

tropical storms may cause brief and significant increases in significant wave height.
94

Table 4.2.3.

List of tropical storms that occurred in the Gulf of Mexico region in 2002 and 2003.

Name Date

Wind Speed

(mph)

Trajectory

Tropical Storm Bertha 8/4-9/2002 40 Passed ~ 250 km north of the FGB

Tropical Storm Edouard 9/1-6/2002 65 Stopped more than 500 km east of the FGB

Tropical Storm Fay 9/5-7/2002 60 Passed within 100 km west of the FGB

Tropical Storm Hanna 9/12-14/2002 50 Passed more than 400 km east of the FGB

Tropical Storm Bill 6/29-7/1/2003 60 Passed within 200 km east of the FGB

Tropical Storm Grace 8/30-31/2003 40 Passed within 100 km of the FGB

Tropical Storm Henri 9/3-8/2003 50 Passed 700 km to the east of the FGB

Tropical Storm Larry 10/2-6/2003 60 Took place in the southern GOMEX

0

1

2

3

4

1/1/02

1/31/02

3/2/02

4/1/02

5/1/02

5/31/02

6/30/02

7/30/02

8/29/02

9/28/02

10/28/02

11/27/02

12/27/02

1/26/03

2/25/03

3/27/03

4/26/03

5/26/03

6/25/03

7/25/03

8/24/03

9/23/03

10/23/03

11/22/03

12/22/03

1/21/04

2/20/04

3/21/04

Date

Sig

nific

a

nt W

a

v

e

H

eig

ht (m)

0

1

2

Figure 4.2.7. Significant wave height at the buoy station 42019 (National Data Buoy Center 2004) and

incidences of tropical storms (green-filled circles, significant wave height = 2 m) and

hurricanes (green-filled circles, significant wave height = 4 m) (Weather Underground

2004).

4.2.2. Biological Parameters

Chlorophyll a. Spot checks of chlorophyll a concentrations were conducted during the course of the

study. The majority of the water samples contained chlorophyll a levels below detection limits (1 mg/m

3

).

On three occasions, however, we found chlorophyll a levels of 1.07 mg/m

3

, on the East Bank reef cap on

February 18 and May 16, 2003 and at the West Bank sea surface on May 16 2003. Nowlin et al. (1998)

found comparable amounts of chlorophyll a on the shelf edge at the sea surface in spring and summer

(0.8 mg/m

3

and 1.0 mg/m

3

, respectively). Since most of the water samples we gathered contained less

than 1 mg/m

3

of chlorophyll a and since the predicted concentration of chlorophyll a at the NWGOM shelf

edge is 0.1-0.3 mg/m

3

(Nowlin et al. 1998), more useful information would be obtained by using an

analytical method with a lower detection limit. Further, to have a better understanding of the variability of

chlorophyll a concentrations at the FGB, more samples need to be gathered within each of the seasons.

Lowest chlorophyll a values may occur in the fall and winter (0.4 mg/m3), and higher levels in spring

and summer (1.0 mg/m

3

). Samples acquired during this study do not suggest any seasonal trends.
95

4.2.3 Chemical Parameters

Naturally-occurring physical-environmental factors that influence the distribution of coral reefs include

temperature, salinity, nutrients, light availability, and hydrodynamic conditions (including circulation, sea

state, extreme events) (Kleypas et al. 1999a). Coral reefs as marine ecosystems in which “a prominent

ecological functional role is played by scleractinian corals” (McManus 2001) or “normal” coral reefs as

biogenic “production-dominated reefs” (Kleypas et al. 2001) occur at the FGB (Rezak et al. 1985). Coral

reefs survive within the following environmental extremes: a temperature range of 16 to 34.4 °C, a salinity

range of 23.3 to 41.8 PSU, a nitrate concentration range of 0.00 to 3.34 mol/l, a phosphate

concentration range of 0.00 to 0.54 mol/l, and a maximum light penetration range of 7 to 91 m (Kleypas

et al. 1999a). Hydrographic conditions and nutrient concentrations found in this and previous studies

show that coral reefs exist at the FGB because of favorable physical-environmental parameters and

because they do not exist in marginal conditions sensu Kleypas et al. (1999a). Light availability is the

most ecologically significant latitude-correlated physical-environmental parameter limiting the occurrence

of coral reefs (Veron 1995). Light levels at the FGB are obviously supporting a productive coralzooxanthellae symbiosis and substantial coral growth and accretion (Barnes and Chalker 1990).

Salinity. Very few salinity data points were obtained during this study in large part due to the poor

performance of the YSI probe. The few data that were reported here were within the known salinity range

for the FGB region (~33-36.5 ppt; Nowlin et al. 1998). Salinity results from the West Bank from February

to May 2003 include data points that appear to be unusually high (> 36.5 ppt).

Salinity variation at the FGB is probably of high importance since recurrent low salinity events are known

to occur along the Northwestern Gulf of Mexico shelf edge (Nowlin et al. 1998). Since the low salinity

water occurring at the shelf edge probably originates from the nearshore and may be associated with

riverborne materials (including contaminants), it is essential to improve the monitoring of salinity to

capture in detail the intensity, frequency, and duration of low salinity events. Critical salinity data logging

months span from April to June (Nowlin et al. 1998).

Dissolved Oxygen. The few dissolved oxygen (DO) data we collected on the East Bank reef cap (6.64

mg/l ± 0.05 SE; Figures 3.6.1-C and 3.6.1.-D) were, for the most part, within the range of concentrations

observed by Gittings et al. (1992) and Nowlin et al. (1998). The DO range of 0.78-5.81 mg/l found at the

West Bank, however, was probably based on erroneous data. More reliable DO probes are needed to

accurately monitor DO levels on the FGB. Further, it would be preferable to place the DO probe on the

reef cap itself considering that the productivity of microorganisms and algae in the FGB sand flats on

which the YSI sonde are installed is greater than that of the sessile organisms on the reef (Gregory S.

Boland unpublished data).

pH. A mean pH of 8.24 (± 0.01 SE) collected at the West Bank is probably accurate and representative of

the NWGOM outer shelf. Seawater acts as a buffering solution that resists changes in pH and seawater

pH generally ranges from 7.5 to 8.4 (Sverdrup et al. 1970). The pH at the FGB may decrease in the future

as a result of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide (Kleypas et al. 1999b; Anderson et al. 2003). Such

pH changes are predicted for shallow ocean environments. As pH decreases, so will the concentration of

the carbonate ion concentration and the calcification of corals and algae (Kleypas et al. 1999b).

Nutrients. Nutrient monitoring at the FGB revealed the presence of minute amounts of dissolved

inorganic nitrogen (Table 3.6.4). No detectable levels of inorganic phosphorous (soluble reactive

phosphorous), which is characteristic for western Atlantic reefs (D’Elia and Wiebe 1990), and above

detection limit levels of dissolved organic nitrogen (Table 3.6.4). Because these data are from spot

checks, they offer very limited information on the variability of inorganic and organic nutrient levels in the

water column at the FGB. It is worth noting, however, that water samples taken on May 16, 2003, could

have originated from the Northwestern Gulf of Mexico nearshore environment since previous salinity

records show the recurrence of low salinity water at the Northwestern Gulf of Mexico shelf edge from April

to June (Nowlin et al. 1998). Yet, none of the May 2003 samples contained detectable inorganic or

organic nutrients (Table 3.6.4). In fact, the most commonly detected nutrient, dissolved organic nitrogen
96

(TKN), was found in most samples but not in any of the May 2003 samples. Further, all samples other

than those of May 2003 were acquired outside the April-June time frame. It is quite possible that the

dissolved inorganic nutrients that are contained in nearshore waters are not quantifiable at the FGB

because they are incorporated by organisms soon after their release into the nearshore environment.

Further, the extensive assessment of nutrient concentrations in the Northwestern Gulf of Mexico by

Nowlin et al. (1998) shows low levels of nitrate, phosphate, and silicate on the outer shelf. Sources of

nutrients to the FGB coral reefs probably include those advected from nearshore sources (including

terrigenous runoff), but are more likely to be from nutrient reserves accumulated in sediments (Entsch et

al. 1983), from benthic organisms, and planktonic organisms (D’Elia and Wiebe 1990; Sorokin 1995). As

mentioned earlier, anthropogenic sources may include the cumulative regional discharge of sewage from

oil and gas related operations (vessels and platforms) in the Northwestern Gulf of Mexico and from other

vessels moored at and transiting through the FGB.

The spot checks of dissolved nutrients are not intended to provide information on the nutrient dynamics of

the FGB reef system. They can at best quantify the presence of dissolved nutrients. The nutrient

characteristics we found are those of an oligotrophic environment. An increased sampling frequency

spread out over the year is needed to better characterize nutrient concentrations in the water column.

Trace Metals. Given the very dilute environment of the FGB, chromium and mercury could not be

detected in the few water samples taken at the FGB (Table 3.6.5). It would be more feasible to examine

selected metals in filter feeders (e.g., thorny oyster, goose barnacle) or apex predators (e.g., grouper)

and perhaps combine these results with further analyses of water samples at lower detection limits to

monitor the bioaccumulation of metals, if any, in living organisms on the reef. Corals and sediments

should also be analyzed for their content in trace metals (Guzmán and García 2002). Among the metals

to be analyzed, cadmium and zinc should be considered since their regional input by oil and gas

operations continues beyond the cessation of drilling operations (Kennicutt et al. 1996).

4.3. FISH

Stationary visual fish surveys conducted at the FGB in 2002 and 2003 revealed a thriving reef-fish

assemblage in this high-latitude, remote coral reef system in the Gulf of Mexico. While the species

richness reported in these surveys was lower than reported in previous surveys (Pattengill-Semmens and

Gittings 2003, Boland et al. 1983), it is similar to a reef-fish survey conducted at the FGB in 1994 by

Rooker et al. (1997). The extensive surveys of 1980-1982 conducted by Boland et al. (1983) used

numerous techniques, including remote video surveys on eight cruises on the East and West Banks,

these results provided a robust dataset on fish communities at the FGB. The species total reported by the

AGRRA survey (Pattengill-Semmens and Gittings 2003) was achieved using the roving diver technique

(RDT), while the surveys reported in this document, as well as the Rooker et al. (1997) surveys, were

conducted using the stationary visual census technique (Bohnsack and Bannerot 1986). A comparison of

visual census techniques (Bortone et al. 1989) reveals that surveys using the RDT record more species

and the stationary surveys are useful for recording fish counts, sizes, and densities (number of fishes per

area). Analysis of the rate of new species accumulation shows the curve approaching a level (zero) slope

after 10 diver surveys (14 to 17 were conducted) at the West Bank in 2002 and both banks in 2003. At the

East Bank in 2002, the species accumulation curve approaches a level slope after 17 diver surveys (18

were conducted).

As a remote outpost of the Caribbean coral reef biota, and following the pattern of coral species present

at the FGB, the fish assemblage has been reported to be low in diversity yet high in biomass (PattengillSemmens and Gittings 2003). It has been speculated that the presence of a large number of oil and gas

production platforms in the Gulf of Mexico and mooring buoys has assisted additional species to reach

the FGB and establish themselves permanently (Gittings 1998; Rooker et al. 1997; Boland et al. 1983).

Also, herbivore populations have appeared to respond to the drastic decline in Diadema antillarum at the

FGB in 1983 and 1984 (Gittings et al. 1992).

The FGB fish populations on the reef cap were dominated by the families Pomacentridae, Labridae, and

Serranidae. Of these, the pomacentrids were the most diverse, with larger populations among the 12
97

species recorded. The labrids and serranids, while being represented by a moderate number of species,

were highly abundant due to a single species in each family. Clepticus parrae were present in large

schools at times (especially in surveys conducted in 2003). Paranthias furcifer were ubiquitous at the

FGB throughout the surveys, this species was also found to be the most abundant species on the reef

cap by Boland et al. (1983). Similar to other Caribbean coral reef communities, Chromis cyanea and C.

multilineata were commonly seen in small- and medium-sized schools above coral formations. Also as

expected in Caribbean communities, groups of female or male intermediate or juvenile phase

Thalassoma bifasciatum were regularly seen on diver surveys in low areas between and just above coral

formations, with one or two males in close association. Although lower in number because of their solitary

nature, Canthigaster rostrata actively explored crevices and low areas. The Blenniidae species,

Ophioblennius atlanticus, was commonly seen perched upon the face of coral formations. As for other

Blenniidae and Gobbiidae species, the survey technique employed is likely to have underestimated the

number of species and individuals of these small cryptic families. Surveys also intentionally excluded

sand-covered bottom areas and so diver surveys were less likely to have recorded species associated

with that habitat such as Malacanthus plumieri and Opistognathus aurifrons.

Disturbance caused by multiple divers present in the study sites while fish surveys were being conducted

was minimized by conducting censuses before other divers entered the water and away from other diver

activity. However, some degree of disturbance to the natural density and distribution of the local fishes is

likely to have occurred. The disturbance more likely affected mid-water pelagic predators such as

carangids and carcharinids. Low counts of larger reef-associated predators such as the serranids may

have been due to the presence of divers at the study site. Although not recorded in any fish censuses,

several Manta birostris were seen during the surveys.

Sphyraena barracuda were active throughout the study sites, regularly patrolling the reef. Many were

curious of diver activity and were attracted to the surveyors. On any swim to a stationary fish survey

location, two or three S. barracuda could be expected, and often there would be more swimming in

groups. They were observed in half (sighting frequency 50%) of all diver surveys and as indicated before,

there were significantly more S. barracuda at the West Bank than at East Bank (t=3.054, df=63, P=0.003).

The mean length of S. barracuda at the FGB was 57 cm. While this species reaches lengths up to 183 cm

(Humann and DeLoach 2002) the maximum recorded length at the FGB in 2002 and 2003 was 110 cm

and just over half of all individuals recorded were under 55 cm. It has been suggested that a greater than

expected number of S. barracuda seen at the FGB have been of small to medium sizes and that the FGB

is a possible nursery habitat.

One striking difference between the FGB and Caribbean reefs is the reduced representation of lutjanids

and the near absence of the haemulids at the FGB (Rooker et al. 1997). No haemulids were recorded at

either bank in 2002 or 2003 and very few lutjanids were observed.

A healthy assemblage of herbivorous fishes was recorded. As a group, acanthurids, scarids, and

Microspathodon chrysurus were relatively high in density at both banks in 2002 and 2003. While the FGB

has lower species richness (including fewer scarid species) and a lower overall abundance of herbivorous

fishes than Caribbean reefs (Rezak 1985; Dennis and Bright 1988), the percentages of acanthurids and

scarids is similar to deep/fore reefs of far western Cuba and Akumal, Yucatan, Mexico (Table 4.3.1; Claro

and Cantelar Ramos 2003; Steneck and Lang 2003). The size distribution is similar to those reported for

the FGB in 1999 by the Pattengill-Semmens and Gittings (2003) AGRRA report. The low algal cover,

despite the lack of a Diadema antillarum population, may be due to the presence of these herbivores.

Garden-tending pomacentrids (Stegastes, Pomacentrus, Eupomacentrus, and Microspathodon) were

abundant as well. There were more gardeners recorded in 2003 than 2002 at the FGB.
98

Table 4.3.1.

Percentage of fishes observed in the listed families at reefs around the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean

Sea. Combined herbivore percentages shown at bottom (

1Claro and Cantelar Ramos 2003;2

Steneck and

Lang 2003; *Not including Microspathodon chrysurus).

Family

Maria La Gorda,

Cuba

1

Akumal, Yucatan,

Mexico

2

FGB, USA

Acanthuridae 17% 22% 23%

Balistidae 37% 0% 14%

Chaetodontidae 7% 5% 14%

Lutjanidae 5% 7% 1%

Pomacanthidae 4% 2% 6%

Scaridae 25% 58% 37%

Serranidae 6% 6% 5%

Herbivores*

(Acanthuridae, Scaridae)

42% 80% 60%

While the species richness of reef-associated carnivores (select serranids and lutjanids) was high, density

values were somewhat low (Table 3.7.2). Carnivore richness was significantly lower at both banks in

2003 than in 2002 by nearly half, and density values were less by about a quarter from 2002 to 2003. The

size distribution of these carnivores was similar but slightly larger than that reported by the 1999 AGRRA

report (Pattengill-Semmens and Gittings 2003).

In summary, the reef species assemblage described by the surveys conducted in October of 2002 and

August of 2003 at the FGB indicates a healthy system with a strong contingent of herbivores and gardentending damselfishes. The density of reef associated carnivores, however, appears depressed in relation

to previous studies. It is not possible to say this is due to recreational fishing pressure, which is allowed

within the FGBNMS by hook and line only. The survey method used here may be a cause of this reduced

density.

4.4 MAPPING

The sector-scan sonar was limited in altitude by the height of the tripod. As a result of its proximity to the

seabed, tall coral structures near the transducer tended to block the view of coral at greater distances.

Thus, large portions of the seabed remained in shadow. Sector-scan images are biased toward showing

the tallest coral structures. This might prove useful for producing a simplified map of coral landmarks,

except that shorter coral structures also are visible wherever the uneven terrain provided a line-of-sight

from the transducer. Differentiating coral structures by height above the seabed is not possible based

upon the geometry of their acoustic shadows, since the terrain is very uneven. Shadows tend to be

prematurely truncated by the next adjacent coral structures. Attempts to directly capture pin locations in

sector-scan images by suspension of air-filled balloons above them also proved unsuccessful due to a

combination of uneven terrain and the presence of a highly variable, strongly reflective background

(coral). At ranges much exceeding 10 m, attempts were unsuccessful due to the resolution of the sectorscan sonar as compared to the size of the air pockets in each balloon.

The sector-scan sonar had a lower resolution than that of the side-scan sonar, despite the higher

frequency of the sector-scan sonar and the fact that its transducer remains at a fixed location. In fact, the

sector-scan image resolution at a range of 40 m (0.17 m radially by 0.63 m circumferentially) is

significantly less than that of the side-scan sonar raw data recorded at the same range (0.02 m across

track by 0.35 m along track). Furthermore, the differences in resolution were exaggerated by the problem

discussed above regarding the low altitude of the sector-scan transducer with respect to the surrounding

terrain. Large areas of the terrain remain completely in shadow, while nearly vertical faces of tall coral
99

structures dominate those areas that do appear. The resolution of the sector-scan imagery can best be

assessed by comparing the two views (Figures 3.9.1 and 3.9.2) of the sand waves occurring along the

northwestern margin of the East Bank Study Site. By this comparison that the sector-scan sonar

produces a reasonably accurate representation of the site; however, areas with high topographic relief

appear abstract because the intervening seabed lies in shadow. Side-scan sonar seems to produce a

truer approximation of the seabed than the sector-scan sonar largely because the greater height of the

towfish allows ensonification of low-lying areas while still providing sufficient shadowing behind vertical

structures, creating a three-dimensional surface image.

Another advantage of the side-scan sonar is that the data were geo-referenced as they were acquired.

While it is possible to geo-reference sector-scan sonar data, to do so would require additional equipment

to determine the transducer location and orientation on the seabed. The fact that side-scan data is georeferenced readily allows creation of mosaic images in which all of the data from a single survey is

combined into a single composite image. Mosaics allow recognition of features and patterns on a larger

scale than would be readily accomplished by viewing sonar records from individual lines or sector scans.

The most striking example from this study occurs in the mosaic of Stetson Bank (Figure 3.9.4). The

patterns of eroded claystone and sandstone strata, uplifted and fractured by an underlying salt diapir, are

clearly visible. Creation of a mosaic from the sector-scan images, on the other hand, is a manual

process. The relative position and orientation of each sector-scan image with respect to adjacent images

was estimated based on common patterns appearing in areas of overlap.

Side-scan image mosaics were created using Coda’s Geosurvey Mosaic software module. Mosaic pixels

measure 0.02 x 0.16 m as compared with 0.02 x 0.09 m in the raw data. The resolution of these mosaics

is comparable to that of the raw data. The across-track pixel dimension of the mosaics (0.02 m) is the

same as that of the raw data. The along-track pixel dimension of the mosaics (0.16 m) remains narrower

than the DF1000 towfish beam width at ranges exceeding 18.3 m. Geotiff images of sonar mosaics were

exported from Coda’s Geosurvey software for illustration in this report with a pixel size of 0.05 x 0.05 m,

representing a compromise between the across-track and along-track resolutions and exceeding the

resolution of printers used in their reproduction. The smallest discrete features recognizable in the sidescan sonar mosaics appear to be individual coral heads measuring about 0.4 m across. While coral

heads of this size are undoubtedly common throughout the study sites, they are most recognizable when

occurring in isolation from other coral on a sand flat. Sand waves are visible in most sand flats and

appear to have wavelengths of approximately 0.8 m.

The challenge in producing quality mosaics is to find the optimal order in which to layer the imagery from

overlapping lines, as data from only one line can be effectively displayed at any given location. Inevitably,

compromises must be made and some areas will have data of high quality overlapped by data of lower

quality. The quality (or accuracy) of an image depends upon the reliability of geographic coordinates

calculated for each pixel. Slight changes in towfish layback distance due to variations in vessel speed or

currents would affect towfish position estimates. Provided such changes are gradual and systematic, the

relative position of pixels should still reflect reality even though dimensions and absolute positions of

objects might be inaccurate. Sudden and random changes in towfish position estimates due, for

example, to erratic position updates from the GPS, can result in confusion of pixel patterns such that they

no longer reflect reality. Rapid changes in towfish heading can result in stretching and smearing of data

near the outer margin of a curve (where resolution is already at its lowest due to the beam width) and in

simultaneous compression and mixing of data on the corresponding inner edge of the record.

The transference of station marker locations to a sonar-based image necessarily would involve a process

of diver feedback; however, given the inherent compromises of a mosaic image, this might not be the

best type of map for divers to carry when ground truthing pin locations in the study sites. While a mosaic

is excellent for achieving a broad area perspective, the accuracy of details at any given point on the

mosaic might range from poor to excellent. The best map from a diver point of view would arguably be

one that is the most realistic representation of what the seabed looks like at any given location. To

accomplish the primary mapping objective, divers must be able to locate themselves on a map when

swimming over the corresponding seabed terrain. This might be achieved through utilization of the

optimum imagery for each area of interest. In other words, rather than producing a single plot of a mosaic
100

image, separate plots of each data line would be prepared and laminated with plastic. Prior to each dive,

a diver would select the map that illustrates the highest quality image covering the portion of a study site

to be investigated during that dive. Such a system would improve the chances of divers correctly

correlating shapes on the imagery with the corresponding coral features on the seabed. Once such

correlations are made, station marker locations could be properly plotted by the diver with respect to coral

landmarks on the imagery. It would not matter whether the refined pin locations were absolutely accurate

in a geographic coordinate system provided that future investigators could easily relocate them by

reference to sonar-based imagery.
101

5.0 LITERATURE CITED

Anderson, A.J., F.T. Mackenzie, and L.M. Ver. 2003. Solution of shallow-water carbonates: An

insignificant buffer against rising atmospheric CO2. Geology 31(6):513-516.

Aronson, R.B. and W.F. Precht. 1995. Landscape patterns of reef coral diversity: A test of the

intermediate disturbance hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 192(1):

1-14.

Aronson, R.B. and W.F. Precht. 1997. Stasis, Biological Disturbance and Community Structure of a

Holocene Coral Reef. Paleobiology 23(3): 326-346.

Aronson, R.B. and W.F. Precht. 2000. Herbivory and algal dynamics on the coral reef at Discovery Bay,

Jamaica. Limnology and Oceanography 45:251-255.

Aronson, R.B. and D.W. Swanson. 1997. Video surveys of coral reefs: uni- and multivariate applications.

Proc 8th Intl Coral Reef Symp, Panama 2: 1441-1445.

Aronson, R.B., P.J. Edmunds, W.F. Precht, D.W. Swanson, and D.R. Levitan. 1994. Large-scale, longterm monitoring of Caribbean coral reefs: simple, quick, inexpensive methods. Atoll Research

Bulletin 421:1-19.

Aronson, R..B., W.F. Precht, T.J. Murdoch, and M.L. Robbart. 2005. Long-term persistence of coral

assemblages on the Flower Garden Banks, northwestern Gulf of Mexico: implications for science

and management. Gulf of Mexico Science 23:84-94.

Barnes, D.J. and B.E. Chalker. 1990. Calcification and photosynthesis in reef-building corals and algae.

Pages 109-131 in Z. Dubinsky, ed. Coral reefs, ecosystems of the world. New York, New York:

Elsevier.

Bohnsack, J.A. and S.P. Bannerot. 1986. A stationary visual technique for quantitatively assessing

community structure of coral reef fishes. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 41:1-15.

Boland, G.S., B.J. Gallaway, J.S. Baker, and G.S. Lewbel. 1983. Ecological effects of energy

development on reef fish of the Flower Garden Banks. Final Report. Bryan, TX: National Marine

Fisheries Service. 499 pages.

Borneman, E.H. and G.M. Wellington. 2005. Pathologies Affecting Reef Corals at the Flower Garden

Banks, Northwestern Gulf of Mexico. Gulf of Mexico Science. 23(1):95-106.

Bortone, S.A., J.J. Kimmel, and C.M. Bundrick. 1989. A comparison of three methods for visually

assessing reef fish communities: time and area compensated. Northeast Gulf of Mexico Science

10(2):85-96.

Bright, T.J. and L.H. Pequegnat. 1974. Biota of the West Flower Garden Bank. Gulf Publishing Co.,

Houston, TX. 435 pages.

Bright, T.J., G.P. Kraemer, G.A. Minnery, and S.T. Viada. 1984. Hermatypes of the Flower Garden Banks,

northwestern Gulf of Mexico: A comparison to other western Atlantic reefs. Bulletin of Marine

Science 34(3):461-476.

Bright, T.J., D.W. McGrail, R. Rezak, G.S. Boland, and A.R. Trippet. 1985. The Flower Gardens: A

compendium of information. U.S. Dept. of Int. Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico.

OCS Regional Office, New Orleans, Louisiana. OCS Study MMS 85-0024. 103 pages.
102

Bruckner, A.W. 2002. Priorities for effective management of coral diseases. NOAA Technical

Memorandum NMFS-OPR-22. Silver Spring: US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic

and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service.

Bruckner, A.W. and R.J. Bruckner. 2000. Coral predation by Sparisoma viride and lack of relationship with

coral disease. Proceedings 9

th

ICRS. Vol 2:1245-1249.

Bruno, J.F., L.E. Petes, C.D. Harvell, and A. Hettinger. 2003. Nutrient enrichment can increase the

severity of coral diseases. Ecology Letters 6(12):1056

Buddemeier, R.W., J.E. Maragos, and D.W. Knutson. 1974. Radiographic studies of reef coral

exoskeletons: rates and patterns of coral growth. Journal of Experimental Marine Biological

Ecology 14:179-200.

Burke, C.D., W.D. Bischoff, S.J. Mazzullo, T.M. McHenry. 1996. Coral mortality associated with the 1995

western Caribbean bleaching event, Mexico Rocks patch reef complex, Belize. Geological

Society of America, 28th annual meeting 28:274.

Carleton, J.H. and T.J. Done. 1995. Quantitative video sampling of coral reef benthos: large-scale

application. Coral Reefs 14(1): 35-46.

Carton, J.A., and Y. Chao. 1999. Caribbean Sea eddies inferred from TOPEX/POSIEDON altimetry and a

1/6 Atlantic Ocean model simulation. Journal of Geophysical Research 104(C4):7743-7752.

Clarke, K. R. and R.N. Gorley. 2001. Primer v5: user manual/tutorial. Primer-E Ltd., Plymouth, England. 91

pages.

Claro, R. and K. Cantelar Ramos. 2003. Rapid assessment of coral communities of Maria la Gorda,

southeast Ensendada de Corrientes, Cuba (part 2: Reef fishes). Atoll Research Bulletin 496:279-

293.

Coles, S.L. and P.L. Jokiel. 1992. Effects of salinity on coral reefs. In Pollution in tropical aquatic systems,

eds. D.W. Connell and D.W. Hawker, pp 147-166. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.Continental

Shelf Associates (CSA). 1996. Long-term monitoring at the East and West Flower Garden Banks.

U.S. Dept. of Int., Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico. OCS Regional Office, New

Orleans, Louisiana. OCS Study MMS 96-0046. 79 pages.

Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research (CCAR). 2005. Gulf of Mexico near-real-time altimeter data.

Internet website (last updated October 2005):

http://ccar.colorado.edu/research/gom/html/gom_nrt.html.

Continental Shelf Associates. 1984. Impact assessment following an anchoring incident at the EastFlower

Garden Bank coral reef. Report to Mobil Producing Texas and New Mexico, Inc., Offshore Texas

Division, The Woodlands, TX. 25 pages.

Continental Shelf Associates. 1996. Long-term Monitoring Report at the East and West Flower Garden

Banks, 1996-1997. Final Report. OCS Study MMS 1999-005. New Orleans, Louisiana: U.S.

Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region. 90

pages.

D’Croz, L.D. and J.L. Mate. 2000. The role of water temperature and UV radiation in the recovery of the

experimentally bleached coral Pocillopora damicornis from the eastern Pacific Ocean (Panama).

In: Moosa, M.K., S. Soemodihardjo, A. Soegiarto, K. Romimohtarto, A. Nontji, Soekarno and

Suharsono (ed.). Proceedings of the Ninth International Coral Reef Symposium, Bali 2:1111-

1116.
103

D’Elia, C.F., and W.J. Wiebe. 1990. Biogeochemical nutrient cycles in coral-reef ecosystems. Pages 49-

74 in Z. Dubinsky (ed.) Coral reefs. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

DeLoach, N. 1999. Reef fish behavior. New World Publications, Inc. Verona, Italy.

Dennis, G.D. and T.J. Bright. 1988. Reef fish assemblages on hard banks in the northwestern Gulf of

Mexico. Bulletin of Marine Science 43(2):280-307.

Dodge, R. 1975. Hermatypic coral growth banding as environmental recorder. Nature 258:705-6.

Dodge, R. 1980. Skeletal Growth Chronologies of Recent and Fossil Corals. Skeletal Growth of Aquatic

Organisms. D Rhoads, and R. Lutz, 493-517. New York: Plenum Press.

Dodge, R.E. and J.C. Lang. 1983. Environmental correlates of hermatypic coral (Montastrea annularis)

growth on the East Flower Garden Bank, northwest Gulf of Mexico. Limnology and

Oceanography 28(2):228-240.

Dokken, Q.R., I.R. MacDonald, J.W. Tunnell, C.R. Beaver, G.S. Boland, and D.K. Hagman. 1999. Long-term

Monitoring of the East and West Flower Garden Banks 1996-1997. U.S. Dept. of Int. Mineral

Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, Louisiana. OCS Study 99-0005.

101 pages.

Dokken, Q.R., I.R. MacDonald, J.W. Tunnell, Jr.,T., Wade, C.R. Beaver, S.A. Childs, K. Withers, and T.W.

Bates. 2001. Long-term Monitoring of the East and West Flower Garden Banks, 1998-1999. OCS

Study MMS 20001-101. U.S. Dept. of Int., Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS

Region, New Orleans, Louisiana. 120 pages.

Dokken, Q. R., I.R. MacDonald, J.W. Tunnell, Jr.,T.. Wade, K. Withers, S.J. Dilworth, T.W. Bates, C.R.

Beaver, and C.M. Rigaud. 2003. Long-term monitoring at the East and West Flower Garden Banks

National Marine Sanctuary, 1998-2001: Final Report. MMS-031, Minerals Management Service,

New Orleans, LA. 90 pages.

Edmunds, P.J. and R.C. Carpenter. 2001. Recovery of Diadema antillarum reduces macroalgal cover and

increases abundance of juvenile corals on a Caribbean reef. Proceedings of the National

Academy of Sciences 98:5067-5071.

Entsch, B., K.G. Boto, R.G. Sim and J.T. Wellington. 1983. Phosphorous and nitrogen in coral reef

sediments. Limnology and Oceanography 28(3):465-476.

Falkowski, P.G., P.L. Jokiel, and R.A. Kinzie III. 1990. Irradiance and corals. Pages 89-107 in Z. Dubinsky

(ed.) Coral reefs. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Gardner, J.V., L.A. Mayer, J.E. Hughes Clarke, and A. Kleiner. 1998. High-resolution multibeam

bathymetry of East and West Flower Gardens and Stetson Banks, Gulf of Mexico. Gulf of Mexico

Science 16(2):131-143.

Gardner, T.A., I.M. Côté, J.A. Gill, A. Grant, A.R. Watkinson. 2003. Long-term region-wide declines in

Caribbean corals. Science 301:958-960.

Gittings, S.R. 1998. Reef community stability on the Flower Garden Banks, northwest Gulf of Mexico. Gulf

of Mexico Science. 16(2):161-169.
104

Gittings, S.R., and T.J. Bright. 1986. Assessment of coral recovery following the incident of anchor

damage at the East Flower Garden Bank, northwest Gulf of Mexico. Contract number NA85AA-HCZ015. Draft final report to the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Sanctuary Division.

Gittings, S.R. and T.J. Bright. 1987. Mass mortality of Diadema antillarum at the Flower Garden Banks,

Northwest Gulf of Mexico: effect on algae and coral cover. Abstract. Benthic Ecology Meetings,

Raleigh, NC..

Gittings, S.R., G.S. Boland, G.S., K.J.P. Deslarzes, D.K. Hagman, and B.S. Holland. 1992. Long-term

monitoring at the East and West Flower Garden Banks. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Minerals

Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, Louisiana. OCS Study MMS

92-0006. 206 pages.

Gleason, D.F. and G.M. Wellington. 1993. Ultraviolet radiation and coral bleaching. Nature 365:836-838.

Glynn, P.W., R. Imai, K. Sakai, Y. Nakano and K. Yamazato. 1993. Experimental responses of Okinawan

(Ryukyu Islands, Japan) reef corals to high sea temperature and UV radiation. In: R.H. Richmond

(ed.) Proceedings of the 7th International Coral Reef Symposium Vol. 1. University of Guam

Press, UOG Station, Guam. Pp. 27-37.

Guzmán, H.M. and E.M. García. 2002, Mercury levels in coral reefs along the Caribbean coast of Central

America. Marine Pollution Bulletin 44:1415-1420.

Hagman, D.K. and S.R. Gittings. 1992. Coral bleaching on high latitude reefs at the Flower Garden

Banks, NW Gulf of Mexico. Proceedings of the 7

th

International Coral Reef Symposium, Guam

1:38-43.

Heiss, G.A. 1996. Annual band width variation in Porites sp. from Aqaba, Gulf of Aqaba, Red Sea

Bulletin of Marine Science 59 (2)393-403.

Highsmith R.C. 1979. Coral growth rates and environmental control of density banding. Journal of

Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 37:105-25.

Hudson, J.H. 1981a. Growth rates in Montastraea annularis: A recording of environmental change, Key

Largo Coral Reef National Marine Sanctuary, Florida. Bulletin of Marine Science 31: 444-459

Hudson, J.H. 1981b. Response of Montastraea annularis to environmental change in the Florida Keys.

Proced. 4

th

Intern. Coral Reef Symp., Manila, 2:233-240

Hudson, J.H. and D.M. Robbin. 1980. Effects if drilling mud on the growth rate of the reef-building coral

Montastraea annularis. P. 455-470 in R.A. Geyer (ed.) Marine Environmental Pollution. Elsevier

Oceanogr. Ser. 27A.

Hudson, J.H., E.A. Shinn, R.B. Halley, and B.H. Lidz. 1976. Schlerochronology: A tool for interpreting

past environments. Geology 4:361-364.

Hudson, J.H., G.V.N. Powell, M.B. Robblee, and T.J. Smith, III. 1989. A 107 year old coral from Florida

Bay: barometer of natural and man-induced catastrophes? Bulletin of Marine Science 44(1): 283-

291.

Humann, P. 1994. Reef fish identification: Florida, Caribbean, Bahamas. New World Publications, Inc.

Verona, Italy.

Humann, P. and N. DeLoach. 2002. Reef fish identification: Florida, Caribbean, Bahamas: 3

rd

edition.

New World Publications, Inc. Verona, Italy.
105

Insalaco E. 1996. The use of late Jurassic coral growth bands as palaeoenvironmental indicators.

Palaeontology 39 (2):413-31.

Jones, R.S. and M. Clark. 1981. Fishes. Pages 25-29 in S.C. Jameson, ed. Key Largo Coral Reef

National Marine Sanctuary deep water resources survey. US Department of Commerce NOAA

Technical Report CZ/SP-1. 144 pages.

Kaufman, L. 1977. The three spot damselfish: effects on benthic biota of Caribbean coral reefs.

Proceedings of the 3rd International Coral Reef Symposium 1:559-564.

Kennicutt, M.C., II, P.N. Boothe, T.L. Wade, S.T. Sweet, R. Rezak, F.J. Kelly, J.M. Brooks, B.J. Presley,

and D.A. Wiesenburg. 1996. Geochemical patterns in sediments near offshore production

platforms. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aqautic Sciences 53:2554-2566.

Kleypas, J.A. 1996. Coral reef development under naturally turbid conditions: Fringing reef near Broad

Sound Australia. Coral Reefs 15:153-167.

Kleypas, J.A., J.W. McManus, and L.A.B. Menez. 1999a. Environmental limits to coral reef development:

Where do we draw the line? American Zoologist 39:146-159.

Kleypas, J.A., R.W. Buddemeier, D. Archer, J.P. Gattuso, C. Langdon, and B.N. Opdike. 1999b.

Geochemical consequences of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide on coral reefs. Science

284:118-120.

Kleypas, J.A., R.W. Buddemeier, and J.P. Gattuso. 2001. The future of coral reefs in an age of global

change. International Journal of Earth Sciences (Geologische Rundschau) 90:426-437.

Lesser, M.P., W.R. Stochaj, D.W. Tapley, J.M. Shick. 1990. Bleaching in coral reef anthozoans: effects of

irradiance, ultraviolet radiation, and temperature on the activities of protective enzymes against

active oxygen. Coral Reefs 8:225-232.

Lugo-Fernández, A. 1998. Ecological implications of hydrography and circulation to the Flower Banks,

Northwest Gulf of Mexico. Gulf of Mexico Science 16(2):144-160.

Lukens, R.R. 1981. Observations of deep-reef ichthyofauna from the Bahama and Cayman Islands, with

notes on relative abundance and depth distribution. Gulf Research Reports 7:79-81.

McCulloch, M., S. Fallon, T. Wyndham, E. Hendy, J. Lough, and D. Barnes. 2003. Coral record of

increased sediment flux to the inner Great Barrier Reef since European settlement. Nature

421:727-730.

McField, M. 2000. Influence of disturbance on coral reef community structure in Belize. Proceedings of

the 9th International Coral Reef Symposium, Bali. Vol.1:63-68.

McManus, J. 2001. Coral reefs, Page 524 in J.H. Steele, S.A. Thorpe, and K.K. Turekian, eds.

Encyclopedia of ocean sciences. London, Great Britain: Academic Press.

MMS (U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Minerals Management Service). 1988. Meteorological database and

synthesis for the Gulf of Mexico. Prepared by Florida A&M University. OCS Study MMS 88-0064.

MMS (U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Minerals Management Service). 1998. Environmental impact statement

for the proposed Western Gulf of Mexico OCS oil and gas lease sales 171, 174, 177, and 180.

OCS EIS/EA MMS 98-0008. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals

Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region.
106

MMS (U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service). 2002. Gulf of Mexico OCS oil and

gas lease sales: 2003-2007; central planning area sales 185, 190, 194, 198 and 201; western

planning area sales 187, 192, 196 and 200; final environmental impact statement. OCS EIS/EA

MMS 2002-052. New Orleans, Louisiana: U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management

Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region.

Morse, D.E., N. Hooker, A.N.C. Morse, and R.A. Jensen. 1988. Control of larval metamorphosis and

recruitment in sympatric agariciid corals. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology

116:193-217.

Murdoch, T.J.T. and R.B. Aronson. 1999. Scale-dependent spatial variability of coral assemblages along

the Florida Reef Tract. Coral Reefs 18:341-351.

National Data Buoy Center/National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2004. NDBC station 42019

historical data. Internet website (last updated November 2004):

http://www.ndbs.noaa.gov/station_history.php?station=42019.

Nowlin, W.D., A.E. Jochens, R.O. Reid, and S.F. DiMarco. 1998. Texas-Louisiana shelf circulation and

transport processes study: synthesis report. Volume II: Appendices. OCS Study MMS 98-0036.

New Orleans: USDOI/Minerals Management Service.

Olhorst, S.L., W.D. Lidell, R.J. Taylor, R.M. Taylor. 1988. Evaluation of reef census techniques.

Proceedings of the 6th International Coral Reef Symposium 2:319-324.

Ostrander, G.K., K.M. Armstrong, E.T. Knobbe, D. Gerace, E.P. Scully. 2000. Rapid transition in the

structure of a coral reef community: The effects of coral bleaching and physical disturbance.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 97(10):5297-5302.

Pattengill, C.V. 1998. The structure and persistence of reef fish assemblages of the Flower Garden Banks

National Marine Sanctuary. Doctoral Dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.

Pattengill-Semmens, C.V. and S.R. Gittings. 2003. A rapid assessment of the Flower Garden Banks

National Marine Sanctuary (stony corals, algae, and fishes). Atoll Research Bulletin 496:501-511.

Peters, E.C., N.J. Gassman, J.C. Firman, R.H. Richmond., and E.A. Power. 1997. Ecotoxicology of

tropical marine ecosystems. Journal of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16(1):12-40.

Pickard, G.L., and W.J. Emery. 1982. Descriptive physical oceanogrpahy: An introduction. Oxford,

Enland: Pergamon Press.

Porter J.W., P. Dustan, W.C. Jaap , K.L. Patterson , V. Kosmynin, O.W. Meier , M.E. Patterson , and M.

Parsons. 2001. Patterns of spread of coral disease in the Florida Keys. Hydrobiologia 460:1-24.

Rezak, R. 1985. Geology of the Flower Garden Banks area. Pages 31-50 in T.J. Bright, D.W. McGrail, R.

Rezak, G.S. Boland, and A. Trippett (compilers). The Flower Gardens: A compendium of

information. OCS Studies/MMS 85-0024. New Orleans, Louisiana: U.S. Department of the

Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region.

Rezak, R., T.J. Bright, and D.W. McGrail. 1985. Reefs and banks of the Northwestern Gulf of Mexico:

Their geological, biological, and physical dynamics. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 259pp.

Richardson, L. 1998. Coral diseases: What is really known? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13(II): 438-

443.

Richardson L.L., W.M. Goldberg, R.G. Carlton, and J.C. Halas. 1998. Coral disease outbreak in the

Florida Keys: Plague Type II. Rev Biol Trop 46:187-198.
107

Richmond, R.H. 1994. Effects of coastal runoff on coral reproduction. In Proceedings of the Colloquium

on Global Aspects of Coral Reefs: Health, Hazards and History, compiler R.N. Ginsburg, pp. 360-

364. Miami: University of Miami.

Risk, M. J. and A.C. Risk. 1997. Reef surveys as an aid in management. Proceedings of the 8

th

International Coral Reef Symposium, Panama 2:1471-1474.

Rogers, C.S., G. Garrison, R. Grober, Z.M. Hillis, A.M. Franke. 1994. Coral Reef Monitoring Manual for

the Caribbean and Western Atlantic. National Park Service, U.S. Virgin Islands. 36pp.

Rooker, J.R., Q.R. Dokken, C.V. Pattengill, G.J. Holt. 1997. Fish assemblages on artificial and natural

reefs in the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary, USA. Coral Reefs 16:83-92.

Santavy, D.L., E. Mueller, E.C. Peters, L. MacLaughlin, J.W. Porter, K.L. Patterson, and J. Campbell.

2001. Quantitative assessment of coral diseases in the Florida Keys: strategy and methodology.

Hydrobiologia. 460: 39-52.

Shick, J.M., M.P. Lesser, W.C. Dunlap, W.R. Stochaj, B.E. Chalker, and J. Wu Won. 1995. Depthdependent responses to solar ultraviolet radiation and oxidative stress in the zooxanthellate coral

Acropora microphthalma. Marine Biology 122(1):41–51.

Shick, J.M., C. Ferrier-Pagès, R. Grover, and D. Allemand. 2005. Effects of starvation, ammonium

concentration, and photosynthesis on the UV-dependent accumulation of mycosporine-like amino

acids (MAAs) in the coral Stylophora pistillata. Marine Ecology Progress Series 295:135-156.

Smith, T.J., J.H. Hudson, M.B. Robblee, G.V.N. Powell, and P.J. Isdale. 1989. Freshwater flow into

Florida Bay: A historical reconstruction based on fluorescent banding in the coral Solenastrea

bournoni. Bulletin of Marine Science 44:274-282.

Sorokin, Y.I. 1995. Coral reef ecology. New York: Springer.

Steneck, R.S. 1988. Herbivory on coral reefs: A synthesis. Proceedings of the 6

th

International Coral

Reef Symposium 1:37-49.

Steneck, R.S. and J.C. Lang. 2003. Rapid assessment of Mexico’s Yucatan reef in 1997 and 1999: Preand post-1988 mass bleaching and Hurricane Mitch. Atoll Research Bulletin 496: 294-317.

Sturges, W. and R. Leben. 2000. Frequency of ring separations from the Loop Current in the Gulf of

Mexico: A revised estimate. Journal of Physical Oceanography 30:1814-1819.

Sverdrup, H.U., M.W. Johnson, and R.H. Fleming. 1970. The oceans: Their physics, chemistry, and

general biology. Englewood Clifss, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Telesnicki, G.J. and W.M. Goldberg. 1995. Effects of turbidity on the photosynthesis and respiration of

two South Florida reef coral species. Bulletin of Marine Science 57(2):527-539.

Valiela, I. 1984. Marine ecological processes. New York, New York: Springer-Verlag.

Veron, J.E.N. 1995. Corals in space and time: The biogeography and evolution of the scleractinia. Ithaca:

Cornell Univ. Press.

Weather Underground. 2004. Weather Underground hurricane archive. Accessed October 2004.

http://wunderground.com/hurricane/hurrarchive.asp
108

Weber, J.E. and E.W. White. 1977. Caribbean reef corals Montastraea annularis and Montastraea

cavernosa – long term growth data as determined by skeletal x-radiography. p. 172-179. in S.H.

Frost et al. (ed.), Reefs and related carbonates – ecology and sedimentation. American

Association of Petrology and Geology Studies 4.

Wellington, G.M. and W.K. Fitt. 2003. Influence of UV radiation on the survival of larvae from broadcastspawning reef corals. Marine Biology 143 (6): 1185 – 1192.

Wells, J.W. 1963. Coral growth and geochronometry. Nature 197:948-50.

Wilkinson, C. 2002. Coral bleaching and mortality- the 1998 event 4 years later and bleaching to 2002. In:

Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2002. Australia Institute of Marine Science. Pp. 33-43.

Wolanski, E., R. Richmond, L. McCook, and H. Sweatman. 2003. Mud, marine snow and coral reefs.

American Scientist 91:44-51.

Zar, J.H. 1984. Biostatistical analysis, second edition. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 718 pages.
Appendix 1a

Percent Cover Data for Random Transect Still Photographs

East Flower Garden Bank 2002

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 

CORAL

Agaricia sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Agaricia agaricites 0.22 0.43 0.15 0.01 0.21 0.58 0.30 

Agaricia fragilis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Agaricia humilis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Colpophyllia natans 0.17 2.09 0.00 0.00 5.37 3.03 0.00 

Diploria strigosa 10.83 3.68 17.63 0.97 9.71 9.48 1.82 Madracis decactis 0.03 0.37 0.16 0.04 0.00 0.86 0.00 

Madracis formosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Millepora sp. 0.00 0.44 0.23 1.75 0.48 0.00 4.28 

Millepora alcicornis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Montastraea sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Montastraea annularis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Montastraea cavernosa 3.26 4.35 4.72 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.04 

Montastaea faveolata 0.12 2.72 0.00 4.89 17.02 3.91 2.62 

Montastraea franksi 17.38 12.78 21.34 55.29 16.77 26.46 30.09 

Mussa angulosa 0.60 0.25 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.14 0.00 

Mycetophyllia lamarckiana 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Porites astreoides 6.88 9.65 6.54 5.03 5.75 6.07 1.59 

Porites porites forma furcata 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 

Scolymia sp. 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 

Scolymia cubensis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Siderastrea siderea 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.20 

Stephanocoenia intersepta 0.00 0.22 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Bleached coral 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Diseased coral 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

OTHER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CBT 48.13 55.62 42.29 29.03 34.20 43.15 32.61 

CCA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Crustose coralline red 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Dictyota sp . 0.13 0.22 0.03 0.16 0.19 0.06 0.00 

Filamentous Algae 0.35 1.41 0.87 0.41 2.00 2.07 6.15 

Filamentous Red Algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Fish 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Fish bites 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Halimeda sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Lobophora sp. 1.04 0.48 0.00 0.50 2.83 1.28 0.00 

Macroalgae (puffball) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Sand 3.03 0.95 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Serpulids 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.01 

Shell 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Sponge 0.25 1.19 0.32 0.00 2.81 0.12 0.14 

109
Appendix 1a

Percent Cover Data for Random Transect Still Photographs

East Flower Garden Bank 2002

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 

Sea Urchin 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Undefined 7.54 3.12 5.11 1.61 1.99 1.98 2.77 

Transect tag/line 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.08 0.00 0.66 0.37 

Total Cover 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Total Coral 39.50 37.00 51.13 68.16 55.92 50.60 57.94 Total Algae 49.65 57.73 43.20 30.10 39.21 46.56 38.77 No data due to flooded camera

110
Appendix 1a

Percent Cover Data for Random Transect Still Photographs

East Flower Garden Bank 2003

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T

CORAL

Agaricia sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.

Agaricia agaricites 0.38 0.11 0.74 0.22 0.41 0.65 0.03 0.44 0.24 0.51 0.58 0.

Agaricia fragilis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.

Agaricia humilis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Colpophyllia natans 2.77 3.36 7.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 2.49 0.00 1.

Diploria strigosa 6.94 4.60 2.45 3.42 5.54 3.44 0.00 0.00 2.73 1.21 5.45 26

Madracis decactis 5.18 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.83 0.00 0.02 1.20 0.31 1.

Madracis formosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.67 0.

Millepora sp. 0.95 0.03 3.76 1.98 3.82 4.05 0.00 0.00 3.29 3.39 0.00 0.

Millepora alcicornis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.78 2.17 0.00 0.00 6.43 0.

Montastraea sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Montastraea annularis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Montastraea cavernosa 0.64 12.01 9.49 2.17 0.65 4.53 16.61 2.35 7.13 1.41 0.00 15

Montastaea faveolata 0.00 0.00 4.05 24.08 36.29 22.75 10.24 26.11 0.00 0.00 16.61 6.

Montastraea franksi 18.92 39.63 7.94 11.24 0.00 8.53 19.47 6.54 33.42 22.76 15.63 0.

Mussa angulosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Mycetophyllia lamarckiana * 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Porites astreoides 3.73 2.28 4.53 3.08 6.77 4.37 4.04 3.37 19.40 8.25 7.56 3.

Porites porites forma furcata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Scolymia sp. 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.

Scolymia cubensis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Siderastrea siderea 0.00 0.00 1.83 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Stephanocoenia intersepta 2.09 0.89 0.00 0.98 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.24 0.01 0.48 3.05 0.

Bleached coral 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Diseased coral 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

OTHER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.

CBT 30.09 28.89 38.28 42.72 26.93 37.67 11.00 5.83 18.85 37.48 23.08 17

CCA 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.25 0.54 0.00 9.14 21.69 0.00 0.00 7.36 7.

Crustose coralline red 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.

Dictyota sp. 0.74 0.09 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.14 0.00 0.10 0.11 0.00 0.

Filamentous Algae 1.33 0.71 1.58 2.81 0.83 0.66 17.74 27.60 1.13 1.15 2.71 2.

Filamentous Red Algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Fish 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.16 0.10 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Fish bites 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Halimeda sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Lobophora sp. 17.38 3.17 12.51 2.75 14.43 11.05 0.00 0.00 8.96 15.60 3.42 6.

Macroalgae (puffball) 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 2.

Sand 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.93 0.

Serpulids 0.00 0.07 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.15 0.12 0.10 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.

Shell 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Sponge 0.33 0.00 1.16 0.18 0.23 0.28 0.10 0.07 0.11 0.16 0.42 0.

Sea Urchin 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Undefined 7.11 4.38 2.62 3.54 3.30 0.82 6.21 2.47 3.99 3.52 4.54 6.

Transect tag/line 0.72 0.12 0.06 0.03 0.09 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.18 0.00 0.

Total Cover 100.05 100.35 99.77 100.01 100.00 100.00 100.00 99.99 100.00 100.00 100.00 100Total Coral 41.60 62.93 42.74 47.25 53.51 49.10 55.42 42.12 66.69 41.70 57.46 55Total Algae 49.57 32.86 53.11 48.69 42.73 49.40 38.13 55.11 29.04 54.38 36.57 37* First sighting of this species at the East Bank, laboratory verification needed.

111
Appendix 1a

Percent Cover Data for Random Transect Still Photographs

West Flower Garden Bank 2002

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12 T13 T14

CORAL 0.00 0.00

Agaricia sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Agaricia agaricites 0.98 0.57 0.30 1.31 0.97 0.17 0.13 0.63 0.19 0.00 0.81 0.75

Agaricia fragilis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Agaricia humilis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Colpophyllia natans 0.00 1.17 0.00 0.00 4.27 2.16 7.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Diploria strigosa 1.94 5.00 2.00 2.62 9.18 1.19 5.41 1.38 4.90 5.48 1.33 2.72

Madracis decactis 0.37 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.16 2.28 0.00Madracis formosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Millepora sp. 0.38 0.42 1.32 1.30 0.48 0.06 3.56 8.40 5.35 0.59 0.00 1.02

Millepora alcicornis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Montastraea sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Montastraea annularis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.76 0.00 0.00

Montastraea cavernosa 0.00 0.85 3.92 0.14 0.13 0.08 1.66 10.49 0.00 5.12 9.03 0.00Montastaea faveolata 13.92 0.00 0.00 21.72 13.46 3.18 19.37 14.52 9.14 0.00 0.00 0.00Montastraea franksi 22.57 24.23 9.95 6.21 16.80 44.62 32.26 2.65 23.12 20.59 11.42 34.66

Mussa angulosa 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.03 0.00 1.28 0.00 0.71

Mycetophyllia lamarckiana 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Porites astreoides 3.74 4.03 5.25 1.58 0.80 5.05 2.41 2.35 3.96 1.97 6.65 5.99Porites porites forma furcata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Scolymia sp. 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Scolymia cubensis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Siderastrea siderea 1.69 2.97 18.26 9.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Stephanocoenia intersepta 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 4.48 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.20 7.47 0.12Bleached coral 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Diseased coral 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00OTHER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

CBT 42.25 46.36 45.11 46.82 39.03 36.41 21.54 53.03 49.72 38.31 52.13 48.93

CCA 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Crustose coralline red 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Dictyota sp. 0.22 7.45 0.39 0.01 1.81 1.01 0.10 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.00

Filamentous Algae 9.18 5.73 6.25 7.11 6.33 4.47 1.25 3.17 2.44 0.09 4.12 3.19Filamentous Red Algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Fish 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00

Fish bites 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Halimeda sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Lobophora sp. 0.64 0.27 1.82 0.27 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00

Macroalgae (puffball) 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sand 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 3.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.97 0.00

Serpulids 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Shell 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sponge 0.25 0.00 0.15 0.46 0.05 0.00 0.27 1.59 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sea Urchin 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Undefined 1.63 0.20 4.62 0.18 1.68 0.83 0.16 1.24 0.42 0.29 0.00 1.79

Transect tag/line 0.00 0.12 0.06 0.09 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.11 0.12 0.00 0.11Total Cover 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.0

Total Coral 45.61 39.24 41.30 45.05 50.57 56.96 73.38 40.45 46.67 61.13 39.00 45.97

Total Algae 44.63 60.41 53.57 54.22 47.20 41.89 22.89 56.46 52.30 38.46 57.03 52.12

No data due to flooded camera

112
Appendix 1a

Percent Cover Data for Random Transect Still Photographs

West Flower Garden Bank 2003

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12 

CORALAgaricia sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.37 0.00 0.00 

Agaricia agaricites 0.52 0.15 0.01 0.29 0.00 0.09 0.29 0.27 0.00 0.32 0.49 0.27 

Agaricia fragilis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Agaricia humilis 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Colpophyllia natans 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.00 2.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.35 4.31 0.00 0.00 

Diploria strigosa 3.95 7.10 4.71 8.62 9.04 4.19 10.31 36.69 24.91 5.39 3.23 5.26 

Madracis decactis 1.67 0.01 0.25 0.92 0.01 0.01 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.00 

Madracis formosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Millepora sp. 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.00 2.93 2.71 

Millepora alcicornis 4.50 0.33 0.00 2.59 4.09 2.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.74 0.00 0.00 

Montastraea sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Montastraea annularis 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.97 25.59 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Montastraea cavernosa 5.26 1.07 8.87 22.90 7.32 6.21 0.44 1.56 13.92 7.10 2.15 0.22 

Montastaea faveolata 2.15 1.36 43.58 0.14 3.21 13.75 10.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.49 22.3

Montastraea franksi 15.39 25.38 0.48 0.02 17.24 2.79 19.23 18.33 21.12 14.94 26.74 17.1

Mussa angulosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 

Mycetophyllia lamarckiana * 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Porites astreoides 5.04 3.94 3.34 3.85 3.31 0.59 4.38 1.95 2.01 3.18 2.40 7.48 

Porites porites forma furcata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Scolymia sp. 0.04 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.03 0.00 

Scolymia cubensis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 

Siderastrea siderea 5.88 6.23 0.26 0.00 20.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 8.13 

Stephanocoenia intersepta 1.63 0.83 0.79 1.05 0.26 0.10 0.25 0.00 0.32 1.44 0.00 0.00 

Bleached coral 0.10 0.10 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.00 

Diseased coral 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

OTHER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CBT 31.41 28.30 29.29 46.32 20.14 28.41 41.10 37.75 25.10 49.00 36.91 25.5CCA 2.61 2.39 0.27 2.23 0.76 1.21 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.42 0.02 1.23 Crustose coralline red 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.00 

Dictyota sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 

Filamentous Algae 13.28 16.50 3.51 1.50 2.46 13.23 3.10 0.65 3.91 6.78 0.00 0.00 

Filamentous Red Algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.30 2.57 

Fish 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 

Fish bites 0.10 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 

Halimeda sp. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lobophora sp. 0.00 0.00 1.10 5.04 0.64 0.00 0.74 0.97 0.00 0.11 3.25 2.76 

Macroalgae (puffball) 0.64 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Sand 1.99 0.64 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.87 0.00 0.00 1.30 0.00 0.00 

Serpulids 0.03 0.03 0.12 0.05 0.18 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.03 

Shell 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Sponge 0.54 0.67 0.00 0.18 0.05 0.05 1.58 0.68 0.40 1.34 0.22 0.00 

Sea Urchin 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Undefined 3.17 4.24 2.75 3.61 0.44 1.06 6.12 0.55 5.54 0.25 2.88 4.23 

Transect tag/line 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.14 

Total Cover 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 99.96 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.14 100.0

Total Coral 46.22 46.60 62.93 40.80 75.18 55.96 46.17 59.17 64.44 40.20 53.46 63.5

Total Algae 48.05 47.81 34.19 55.25 24.11 42.84 44.95 39.36 29.58 56.91 43.49 32.0

* First sighting of this species at the West Bank, laboratory verification needed.

113
Appendix 1b

Percent Cover Data for Random Transect Videography

Coral 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 

Agaricia agaricites 0.80 0.00 0.80 2.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.40 0.60 1.00 0.00 

Colpophyllia natans 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.60 0.00 5.60 

Coral 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Diploria strigosa 9.40 3.20 16.20 12.00 15.60 1.40 6.40 1.00 11.00 4.40 16.60 0.00 Madracis decactis 0.00 0.00 5.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.40 0.00 

Millepora sp. 0.00 1.00 3.60 0.40 0.00 0.00 4.40 4.80 6.60 3.40 2.80 0.00 

Montastraea annularis 30.40 55.00 15.20 12.00 24.60 38.40 18.60 53.40 35.60 41.60 21.20 52.00 

Montastraea cavernosa 7.20 0.00 5.00 7.60 4.20 12.20 0.20 1.20 7.80 0.60 0.00 0.00 

Mussa angulosa 0.00 0.40 1.60 1.00 0.40 1.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Porites astreoides 7.00 6.40 3.80 9.40 4.40 3.40 8.40 8.40 11.00 8.00 9.20 1.40 Porites porites forma furcata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 Siderastrea siderea 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.60 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.00 

Siderastrea sp. 0.00 0.00 2.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Stephanocoenia intersepta 1.60 0.40 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 Total Coral 56.60 66.60 55.60 44.60 49.20 57.60 41.40 68.80 72.40 60.60 55.00 59.00 

Calcareous Algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Filamentous Algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Macroalgae 2.20 0.20 0.20 0.60 0.00 0.20 0.20 2.00 1.20 2.60 0.00 2.40 

Turf Algae 1.20 8.40 1.20 2.80 1.80 0.20 0.20 1.80 2.60 2.20 2.60 3.00 

Total Algae 3.40 8.60 1.40 3.40 1.80 0.40 0.40 4.60 4.00 4.80 2.60 5.40 

Gorgonians 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Sponge 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.60 0.20 5.20 0.60 1.20 0.00 Zooanthid 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Fine Turf, Bare, Crustose Corallines 33.00 23.20 38.20 50.20 48.00 42.00 53.40 26.40 18.40 31.00 40.00 35.60 

Other 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Unknown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Sand 6.60 0.80 4.80 1.20 0.40 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 1.20 0.00 

Overall Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 

East Bank 2002

115
Appendix 1b

Percent Cover Data for Random Transect Videography

Coral 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1

Agaricia agaricites 0.40 0.00 0.60 0.40 1.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.80 0.20 0.

Colpophyllia natans 3.81 6.40 4.00 0.80 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.00 1.20 0.80 20

Diploria strigosa 9.02 6.40 6.80 3.20 7.40 0.00 1.40 5.40 3.20 1.60 5.20 24.20 7.

Madracis decactis 3.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.20 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.20 2.60 2.20 0.

Millepora alcicornis 1.80 0.80 5.00 0.20 2.60 1.00 0.20 4.20 1.80 2.20 5.40 2.40 0.

Montastraea annularis sp 28.86 22.00 26.60 38.00 38.40 21.00 35.00 48.80 43.00 10.00 15.20 20.80 19

Montastraea cavernosa 1.00 15.20 0.60 3.60 2.60 9.40 8.00 0.00 13.80 0.00 0.40 0.40 4.

Mussa angulosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Porites astreoides 6.41 0.60 5.00 1.60 4.40 5.00 3.80 1.80 3.80 13.00 10.00 7.80 5.

Scolymia cubensis 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Stephanocoenia intersepta 0.80 3.40 1.80 1.00 0.00 3.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.

Total Coral 55.11 54.80 50.40 48.80 56.80 45.40 48.40 60.60 67.40 27.40 40.80 59.00 57

Calcareous Algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Filamentous Algae 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Macroalgae 19.64 4.40 18.80 17.00 23.20 23.60 16.20 16.80 12.60 34.40 10.20 11.00 8.

Turf Algae 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.40 6.00 1.20 0.

Total Algae 20.44 5.80 18.80 17.00 23.80 23.60 16.20 17.60 12.60 34.80 16.20 12.20 8.

Sponge 1.00 0.40 0.40 1.80 0.40 5.20 3.40 2.40 0.40 0.20 0.60 0.80 3.

Fine Turf, Bare, Crustose Corallines 23.45 38.4 30.2 32.4 19 25.8 32 19.2 19.2 37.6 40.6 26.2 31

Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Unknown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

Sand 0.00 0.60 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.80 1.80 0.

Overall Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100

East Bank 2003

116
Appendix 1b

Percent Cover Data for Random Transect Videography

Coral 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 

Agaricia agaricites 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.60 1.40 0.40 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0

Colpophyllia natans 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.00 0.00 0.00 2.80 0.00 0

Coral 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0Diploria strigosa 2.40 5.40 0.80 0.80 0.20 7.40 4.00 2.40 1.00 0.40 3.00 1

Madracis decactis 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 6.60 0.00 0

Millepora sp. 0.20 0.00 5.60 7.60 0.20 0.00 3.40 5.60 0.00 1.20 4.40 0

Montastraea annularis species complex 28.40 48.00 20.00 26.00 19.80 50.00 41.20 18.40 31.20 49.20 38.80 1

Montastraea cavernosa 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.20 11.40 0.00 3.40 0.40 1

Mussa angulosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.00 0Porites astreoides 6.00 1.20 7.20 1.00 2.60 0.00 5.00 2.40 2.20 1.00 0.60 4

Porites porites forma furcata 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Siderastrea siderea 0.00 0.20 4.40 10.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Stephanocoenia intersepta 0.00 2.40 0.40 0.00 3.40 1.00 1.80 0.00 1.20 0.20 3.60 2

Total Coral 37.60 57.60 42.80 47.00 29.60 58.80 72.80 40.60 36.40 66.60 50.80 5

Calcareous Algae 0.40 1.40 2.40 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0

Filamentous Algae 16.20 3.80 3.00 8.40 6.40 2.20 5.00 3.00 4.00 0.60 5.60 4

Macroalgae 0.40 9.40 1.20 6.00 0.40 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.40 0

Turf Algae 9.20 12.60 12.20 13.20 9.40 11.40 8.60 14.60 13.40 13.40 13.20 1

Total Algae 26.20 27.20 18.80 27.60 16.40 13.80 13.60 17.60 17.80 14.40 19.60 2

Sponge 1.40 1.40 2.60 0.40 3.60 2.00 0.60 3.20 1.80 0.00 0.20 0

Fine Turf, Bare, Crustose Corallines 33.00 9.80 35.40 24.40 50.20 25.00 8.00 37.80 43.40 18.60 26.80 2

Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Unknown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0Sand 1.80 4.00 0.40 0.60 0.00 0.00 4.80 0.80 0.60 0.40 2.60 0

Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 10

West Bank 2002

117
Appendix 1b

Percent Cover Data for Random Transect Videography

Coral 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Agaricia agaricites 0.00 0.80 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.20 0

Colpophyllia natans 5.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 4.40 7.40 0.00 0

Diploria strigosa 2.20 4.20 7.80 12.07 0.40 0.20 7.60 39.40 16.60 8.40 1.60 12

Madracis decactis 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 0

Millepora sp. 1.60 2.80 0.60 0.20 4.40 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.80 5.80 5

Montastraea annularis 26.20 34.00 50.00 19.11 34.80 50.00 28.20 22.20 10.40 21.20 57.20 38

Montastraea cavernosa 2.40 5.20 3.20 0.00 8.80 3.60 0.20 0.20 13.60 0.20 0.00 0

Mussa angulosa 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0

Porites astreoides 4.60 6.20 1.20 2.62 3.80 1.60 6.40 5.60 5.20 2.60 2.60 1

Scolymia cubensis 0.20 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Siderastrea siderea 6.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 14.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4

Stephanocoenia intersepta 3.00 0.40 5.60 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 2.60 0.00 0

Total Coral 51.40 61.60 69.00 34.00 75.80 60.40 43.80 67.40 51.40 46.60 67.40 61Calcareous Algae 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Filamentous Algae 0.00 1.20 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Macroalgae 7.80 0.40 4.80 9.66 0.00 0.00 0.80 4.40 0.60 1.60 4.20 0

Turf Algae 4.00 0.20 0.80 4.83 0.40 2.60 7.60 3.00 11.20 8.40 5.80 16

Total Algae 11.80 1.80 5.80 17.10 0.40 2.60 8.40 7.80 11.80 10.00 10.00 17Sponge 0.80 2.20 0.40 4.23 0.80 4.20 3.20 1.00 0.40 2.20 1.20 0

FBC 34.60 26.00 24.80 44.67 23.00 32.80 42.20 23.80 36.40 39.20 21.40 20

Other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Unknown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Sand 1.40 8.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.40 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0

Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 10

West Bank 2003

118
A

p

p

e

n

dix 1c

P

oint C

o

u

nts for L

PI D

ata

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 

A

garicia agaricites 2 3 3 5 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 

Colpophyllia natans 0 12 1 5 1 4 3 0 3 5 0 

Diploria strigosa 14 4 19 12 6 14 6 5 9 4 5 

Madracis decactis 1 0 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 

Millepora alcicornis 0 4 0 1 1 2 0 4 0 2 2 

Montastraea annularis 0 0 5 0 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 

Montastraea cavernosa 3 11 0 5 7 3 0 0 8 3 6 

Montastraea franksi 20 15 21 14 24 21 41 22 27 18 19 

Montastraea faveolata 2 1 0 4 4 3 4 2 3 1 6 

Mussa angulosa 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 

Porites astreoides 12 6 6 5 7 5 4 9 9 5 8 

Siderastrea siderea 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 

Stephanocoenia intersepta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 

T

otal C

oral 56 56 59 52 54 53 59 44 61 49 49 

Lobophora sp. 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 

Sponge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 

Vase or Barrel Sponge 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Sand 0 0 0 0 0 10 5 0 0 2 0 

Dead Coral – rubble 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 

C

T

B 42 43 39 46 46 34 36 56 34 49 49 

T

otal C

o

ver 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 

East Bank 2002

119
A

p

p

e

n

dix 1c

P

oint C

o

u

nts for L

PI D

ata

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 

A

garicia agaricites 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 

Colpophyllia natans 2 4 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 

Diploria strigosa 9 4 12 9 2 7 2 0 5 14 11 

Millepora alcicornis 0 1 3 0 2 4 8 0 3 3 8 

Millepora annularis 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 

Montastraea cavernosa 0 13 15 3 3 0 5 0 15 0 0 

Madracis decactis 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 2 

Montastraea faveolata 7 17 0 20 11 15 5 13 19 13 22 

Montastraea franski 12 25 11 7 27 20 21 29 16 11 12 

Madracis mirabilis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Porites astreoides 3 2 5 13 2 5 5 8 8 8 1 

Porites porites forma furcata 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Stephanocoenia intersepta 3 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 

T

otal C

oral 42 68 48 54 49 54 66 56 66 49 63 

C

T

B 26 24 33 37 23 20 22 21 17 22 27 

Macroalgae 22 2 19 9 26 24 12 23 17 29 5 

Other 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 

rubble 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 

sediment 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 

T

otal C

o

ver 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 

East Bank 2003

120
Appendix 1c

Point Counts for LPI Data

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 

Agaricia agaricites 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 

Colpophyllia natans 0 9 0 2 3 1 3 0 4 1 2 

Diploria strigosa 7 4 12 2 8 3 13 0 6 3 13 

Madracis decactis 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 

Millepora alcicornis 1 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 2 2 

Montastraea annularis 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 13 49 7 

Montastraea cavernosa 0 0 4 0 0 6 3 0 12 0 0 

Montastraea franksi 30 25 24 20 29 49 34 31 14 15 21 

Montastraea faveolata 21 4 7 15 12 0 6 5 7 0 9 

Porites porites forma furcata 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Porites astreoides 3 4 2 0 4 4 1 2 2 0 1 

Siderastrea siderea 0 0 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Stephanocoenia intersepta 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 

Total Coral 63 49 63 46 57 63 67 42 59 72 56 

Dictyota sp. 1 9 0 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 

Lobophora sp. 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 

Sand 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 

CTB 35 41 37 50 38 33 31 58 41 28 43 

Totals 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 

West Bank 2002

121
A

p

pendix 1c

P

oint C

ounts for LPI Data

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T

Agaricia agaricites 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 0 

Agaricia humilus 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Colpophyllia natans 0 0 2 0 6 7 0 0 1 1 0 

Diploria strigosa 6 0 2 17 3 1 9 43 5 5 0 

Millepora alcicornis 0 0 1 4 0 6 1 0 0 4 10 

Mussa angulosa 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 

Montastraea annularis 0 0 0 0 9 32 0 0 0 0 0 

Montastraea cavernosa 0 5 0 0 1 0 5 1 32 1 0 

Madracis decactis 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 

Montastraea faveolata 13 24 22 6 0 13 13 3 19 6 20 

Montastraea franski 32 12 25 0 9 7 17 24 5 24 30 

Madracis mirabilis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Porites astreoides 1 4 3 5 0 0 1 2 2 4 3 

Porites porites forma furcata 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Stephanocoenia intersepta 4 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 

Siderastrea siderea 5 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Total Coral 61 50 56 33 53 67 50 73 66 73 65 

CTB 26 43 38 64 34 33 48 20 34 28 31 

Macroalgae 12 0 6 3 14 0 2 2 0 3 4 

Other 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 

Rubble 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 8 0 

Sediment 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 

Total Cover 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 

West Bank 2003

122
Appendix 2

Sclerochronology

East and West Bank 1998-2003

(measurements in mm ± SE)

Year East Bank 1 East Bank 2 East Bank 3 East Bank 4 West Bank 1 West Bank 2 West Bank 3 West B

1998 8.3 ± 0.3 NA NA NA 0.3 NA NA N

1999 11.66 ± 1.3 7 ± 1.8 NA NA 8.33 ± 1.3 NA 7.66 ± 1.9 N

2000 11.33±1.3 6.66 ± 2.2 12.33 ± 1.3 12.33 ± 1.3 8 ± 10.33 ± 1.9 7.33 ± 1.3 8.33 

2001 10.66 ± 1.3 6.33 ± 2.2 9.66 ± 1.3 6.66 ± 1.3 8.33 ± 1.3 5.33 ± 1.3 7± 8.66 2002 10 ± 13.33 ± 1.3 10.33 ± 1.3 6.66 ± 1.3 7.66 ± 1.3 7± 6.66 ± 1.3 10 

2003 4.83 ± 0.9 10.66 ± 1.3 9.66 ± 1.3 5.66 ± 1.3 7.33 ± 1.3 5 ± 6.66 ± 1.3 6.33 

123
Appendix 3

Diploria strigosa Lateral Growth

Station# (old)

Area of Coral Tissue

in 2002 (cm

2

)

Difference from

2001(cm

2

) Change in % cover

Tissue Gain (+)

old 3 E 167.57 6.50 4.03

old 5E 230.71 5.67 2.52

old 12E 179.02 19.13 11.96

old 34E 173.63 9.35 5.69

old 111E 197.33 11.13 5.98

old 122 E 114.76 11.90 11.56

old 130E 103.43 16.12 18.46

old 162E 116.52 7.51 6.89

old 189E 197.81 27.91 16.43

old 191E 81.61 12.45 18.01

old 195E 152.84 11.97 8.50

old 32E 108.82 1.99 1.86

old 40E 33.73 4.68 16.13

old 188E 139.02 2.66 1.95

Tissue Loss ( - )

old 106 126.50 -9.43 -6.94

old 110 16.40 -3.25 -16.56

old 175 107.82 -1.17 -1.07

old 193 128.28 -0.81 -0.62

East Bank 2001-2002

125
Appendix 3

Diploria strigosa Lateral Growth

Station # (new)

Area of Coral Tissue

in 2003 (cm

2

)

Difference from

2002(cm

2

) Change in % cover

Tissue Gain (+)

29 132.87 6.36 5.03

7 116.72 1.97 1.71

50 129.56 1.28 1.00

55 153.27 0.42 0.28

Tissue Loss ( - )

47 174.00 -5.01 -2.80

14 193.37 -3.97 -2.01

17 107.82 -1.19 -1.11

3 108.83 -1.95 -1.76

East Bank 2002-2003

126
Appendix 3

Diploria strigosa Lateral Growth

Station# (old)

Area of Coral Tissue in

2002 (cm

2

)

Difference from

2001(cm

2

) Change in % cover

Tissue Gain ( + )

old 25 83.61 5.38 6.88

old 101 137.25 9.01 7.02

old 108 131.37 13.64 11.59

old 126 141.54 5.47 4.02

old 199 135.95 13.30 10.85

old 13 97.02 2.45 2.59

old 103 117.54 4.70 4.17

old 113 30.46 1.62 5.61

Tissue Loss ( - )

old 121 161.66 -11.70 -6.75

old 105 168.02 -0.65 -0.39

old 125 46.44 -3.31 -6.65

West Bank 2001-2002

127
Appendix 3

Diploria strigosa Lateral Growth

Station # (new)

Area of Coral Tissue in

2003 (cm

2

)

Difference from

2002(cm

2

) Change in % cover

Tissue Gain ( + )

101 138.52 1.26 0.92

80 131.48 0.11 0.08

Tissue Loss ( - )

113 18.64 -11.82 -38.82

121 114.50 -3.04 -2.59

West Bank 2002-2003

128
Appendix 4

Repetitive 8m

2 Quadrat Proportional Change for Selected Coral Heads

RQS # Coral Head # Species

Area of

coral head

in 2001

(cm

2

)

Area of

coral head

in 2002

(cm

2

)

Change

in Area

(cm

2

)

%

change

in coral

colony

area

%

Change

in Area

Total

change

in Area

within

Quadrat

(cm

2

)

Total %

change

in Area

within

Quadrat

Proportional

Change from

2001

1 Montastraea sp. 15.04 18.24 3.20 21.30 0.34 0.213

2 Montastraea sp. 18.06 24.86 6.80 37.68 0.71 0.377

3 Montastraea sp. 21.91 35.86 13.95 63.66 1.46 0.637

4 Montastraea cavernosa 17.61 20.71 3.10 17.60 0.32 0.176

1 Montastraea sp. 23.03 30.01 6.98 30.30 0.73 0.303

2 Diploria strigosa 14.56 19.30 4.74 32.53 0.50 0.325

3 Diploria strigosa 16.62 30.05 13.42 80.76 1.41 0.808

4 Diploria strigosa 40.29 69.46 29.17 72.40 3.05 0.724

5 Montastraea sp. 14.28 15.64 1.36 9.54 0.14 0.095

1 Montastraea sp. 73.17 78.57 5.40 7.38 0.57 0.074

2 Montastraea cavernosa 26.40 29.25 2.85 10.80 0.30 0.108

3 Diploria strigosa 20.31 23.35 3.04 14.95 0.32 0.149

4 Montastraea cavernosa 26.91 28.05 1.14 4.23 0.12 0.042

5 Montastraea sp. 10.33 14.41 4.08 39.53 0.43 0.395

1 Montastraea sp. 15.11 15.20 0.09 0.57 0.01 0.006

2 Montastraea sp. 26.31 27.63 1.32 5.02 0.14 0.050

3 Montastraea sp. 19.21 17.38 -1.83 -9.51 -0.19 -0.095

4 Montastraea cavernosa 50.63 52.64 2.00 3.96 0.21 0.040

5 Montastraea sp. 45.40 61.73 16.33 35.96 1.71 0.360

1 Montastraea sp. 11.19 17.18 5.99 53.48 0.63 0.535

2 Diploria strigosa 30.71 16.07 -14.64 -47.66 -1.53 -0.477

3 Colpophyllia natans 8.63 12.58 3.95 45.81 0.41 0.458

4 Diploria strigosa 28.49 70.40 41.91 147.10 4.39 1.471

5 Montastraea sp. 42.60 40.73 -1.87 -4.40 -0.20 -0.044

1 Diploria strigosa 19.95 22.60 2.64 13.25 0.28 0.132

2 Diploria strigosa 27.16 27.00 -0.16 -0.61 -0.02 -0.006

3 Diploria strigosa 93.93 95.56 1.63 1.74 0.17 0.017

4 Diploria strigosa 40.81 45.29 4.48 10.98 0.47 0.110

5 Diploria strigosa 16.47 13.10 -3.37 -20.47 -0.35 -0.205

1 Montastraea sp. 37.04 51.36 14.32 38.67 1.50 0.387

2 Colpophyllia natans 44.07 52.26 8.19 18.59 0.86 0.186

3 Montastraea cavernosa 31.00 43.00 12.00 38.70 1.26 0.387

4 Diploria strigosa 41.10 33.77 -7.33 -17.83 -0.77 -0.178

1 Montastraea sp. 102.90 227.86 124.96 121.44 13.08 1.214

2 Montastraea sp. 88.80 94.71 5.92 6.67 0.62 0.067

3 Montastraea sp. 39.78 19.32 -20.46 -51.43 -2.14 -0.514

4 Montastraea sp. 17.10 18.96 1.86 10.87 0.19 0.109

1 Diploria strigosa 60.67 74.54 13.87 22.86 1.45 0.229

2 Diploria strigosa 12.88 16.82 3.94 30.56 0.41 0.306

3 Colpophyllia natans 102.09 108.48 6.39 6.26 0.67 0.063

4 Diploria strigosa 8.71 10.79 2.08 23.86 0.22 0.239

5 Diploria strigosa 25.18 28.26 3.08 12.22 0.32 0.122

6 Diploria strigosa 40.21 60.53 20.32 50.54 2.13 0.505

East Bank 2001-2002

14

29

30

22

21

17

20 1.73

5.83

36

49.67

112.28

27.19

38

5.22

35.33

17.91

16.50

2.83

55.67

27.05

5.20

11.76

2.85

0.55

3.70

1.88

129
Appendix 4

Repetitive 8m

2 Quadrat Proportional Change for Selected Coral Heads

RQS#

Coral

Head #

Coral Species

Evaluated

Area in

2002

(cm

2

)

Area in

2003

(cm

2

)

Change

in Area

(cm

2

)

%

change

in area

%

change

in coral

Total

change in

Area

within

Quadrat

(cm

2

)

Total % change

in Area within

Quadrat

Proportional

Change from

2002

1 Montastraea sp. 24.82 34.89 10.07 1.05 40.55 0.405

2 Montastraea sp. 6.03 12.56 6.53 0.68 108.39 1.084

3 Montastraea sp. 16.80 18.69 1.90 0.20 11.28 0.113

4 Montastraea sp. 11.75 18.29 6.54 0.69 55.70 0.557

1 Montastraea sp. 29.33 35.07 5.74 0.60 19.57 0.196

2 Montastraea sp. 6.11 8.48 2.38 0.25 38.93 0.389

3 Porites astreoides 0.82 0.99 0.17 0.02 20.37 0.204

4 Diploria strigosa 3.21 3.18 -0.02 0.00 -0.73 -0.007

5 Diploria strigosa 2.63 8.00 5.36 0.56 203.57 2.036

1 Montastraea sp. 20.79 41.25 20.46 2.14 98.40 0.984

2 Montastraea sp. 70.76 63.91 -6.85 -0.72 -9.68 -0.097

3 Montastraea sp. 89.72 73.70 -16.02 -1.68 -17.85 -0.179

4 Montastraea sp. 39.99 28.82 -11.16 -1.17 -27.92 -0.279

5 Montastraea sp. 121.14 127.02 5.87 0.62 4.85 0.048

1 Diploria strigosa 10.43 14.65 4.22 0.44 40.44 0.404

2 Montastraea sp. 92.82 115.29 22.47 2.35 24.21 0.242

3 Montastraea sp. 41.74 43.58 1.84 0.19 4.41 0.044

4 Montastraea sp. 40.37 37.43 -2.94 -0.31 -7.28 -0.073

1 Porites astreoides 3.58 3.46 -0.11 -0.01 -3.16 -0.032

2 Porites astreoides 3.24 3.69 0.45 0.05 13.92 0.139

3 Porites astreoides 4.77 5.54 0.77 0.08 16.13 0.161

4 Diploria strigosa 2.97 2.90 -0.06 -0.01 -2.18 -0.022

5 Diploria strigosa 14.64 13.80 -0.85 -0.09 -5.79 -0.058

1 Montastraea sp. 18.24 13.55 -4.69 -0.49 -25.69 -0.257

2 Montastraea sp. 24.86 32.76 7.90 0.83 31.77 0.318

3 Diploria strigosa 1.56 2.37 0.81 0.08 51.90 0.519

4 Montastraea sp. 35.86 22.81 -13.05 -1.37 -36.40 -0.364

5 Montastraea cavernosa 20.71 21.28 0.57 0.06 2.77 0.028

1 Montastraea sp. 26.85 33.45 6.60 0.69 24.59 0.246

2 Montastraea sp. 25.42 30.93 5.51 0.58 21.65 0.217

3 Montastraea sp. 28.73 23.49 -5.24 -0.55 -18.22 -0.182

4 Diploria strigosa 7.39 5.56 -1.83 -0.19 -24.74 -0.247

1 Montastraea sp. 30.01 32.46 2.45 0.26 8.16 0.082

2 Diploria strigosa 19.30 23.29 3.99 0.42 20.70 0.207

3 Diploria strigosa 30.05 32.59 2.54 0.27 8.47 0.085

4 Diploria strigosa 69.46 69.72 0.26 0.03 0.38 0.004

5 Montastraea sp. 15.64 18.62 2.99 0.31 19.10 0.191

1 Montastraea sp. 23.42 35.02 11.60 1.21 49.54 0.495

2 Porites astreoides 4.89 8.51 3.62 0.38 74.02 0.740

3 Porites astreoides 1.77 2.81 1.04 0.11 58.82 0.588

4 Porites astreoides 2.47 2.20 -0.27 -0.03 -10.76 -0.108

5 Montastraea sp. 4.83 2.46 -2.37 -0.25 -49.08 -0.491

1 Montastraea sp. 78.57 83.13 4.56 0.48 5.80 0.058

2 Montastraea cavernosa 29.25 32.61 3.36 0.35 11.50 0.115

3 Diploria strigosa 23.35 28.95 5.60 0.59 23.98 0.240

4 Montastraea cavernosa 28.05 30.49 2.44 0.26 8.70 0.087

5 Montastraea sp. 14.41 16.44 2.03 0.21 14.11 0.141

1 Montastraea sp. 15.20 18.47 3.27 0.34 21.52 0.215

2 Montastraea sp. 27.63 22.77 -4.86 -0.51 -17.58 -0.176

3 Montastraea sp. 17.38 23.16 5.78 0.61 33.25 0.333

4 Montastraea cavernosa 52.64 52.83 0.20 0.02 0.37 0.004

5 Montastraea sp. 61.73 63.29 1.56 0.16 2.53 0.025

1 Montastraea sp. 17.18 20.16 2.51 0.26 14.60 0.146

2 Diploria strigosa 16.07 12.27 42.32 4.43 263.31 2.633

3 Colpophyllia natans 12.58 36.59 24.01 2.51 190.83 1.908

4 Diploria strigosa 70.40 19.69 -50.71 -5.31 -72.03 -0.720

5 Montastraea sp. 40.73 58.40 17.67 1.85 43.39 0.434

11 25.59 2.68

2 25.03 2.62

7 13.62 1.43

18 13.62 1.43

14

16

17

5.04

12.23 1.28

20

21

22

18.00 1.88

35.80 3.75

5.95 0.62

East Bank 2002-2003

0.53

-8.46 -0.89

12 0.20 0.02

9 -7.69 -0.81

130
Appendix 4

Repetitive 8m

2 Quadrat Proportional Change for Selected Coral Heads

RQS#

Coral

Head #

Coral Species

Evaluated

Area in

2002

(cm

2

)

Area in

2003

(cm

2

)

Change

in Area

(cm

2

)

%

change

in area

%

change

in coral

Total

change in

Area

within

Quadrat

(cm

2

)

Total % change

in Area within

Quadrat

Proportional

Change from

2002

East Bank 2002-2003

1 Montastraea sp. 195.55 256.45 60.90 6.38 31.14 0.311

2 Diploria strigosa 1.46 1.94 0.48 0.05 33.16 0.332

3 Montastraea sp. 0.47 0.60 0.13 0.01 27.21 0.272

4 Montastraea sp. 16.31 20.65 4.34 0.45 26.58 0.266

1 Diploria strigosa 8.96 9.28 10.75 1.13 119.94 1.199

2 Diploria strigosa 22.03 21.43 -10.10 -1.06 -45.85 -0.458

3 Diploria strigosa 9.06 8.60 -0.46 -0.05 -5.08 -0.051

4 Diploria strigosa 19.89 19.70 -0.19 -0.02 -0.96 -0.010

5 Diploria strigosa 13.04 11.93 -1.11 -0.12 -8.53 -0.085

1 Diploria strigosa 22.60 23.47 0.88 0.09 3.87 0.039

2 Diploria strigosa 27.00 27.37 0.37 0.04 1.37 0.014

3 Diploria strigosa 95.56 98.37 2.81 0.29 2.94 0.029

4 Diploria strigosa 45.29 48.02 2.74 0.29 6.04 0.060

5 Diploria strigosa 13.10 16.80 3.71 0.39 28.32 0.283

1 Montastraea sp. 51.36 39.80 -11.56 -1.21 -22.51 -0.225

2 Colpophyllia natans 52.26 54.66 2.40 0.25 4.58 0.046

3 Montastraea cavernosa 125.86 92.50 -33.36 -3.49 -26.51 -0.265

4 Montastraea cavernosa 43.00 37.97 -5.03 -0.53 -11.70 -0.117

5 Diploria strigosa 33.77 46.15 12.38 1.30 36.67 0.367

1 Montastraea sp. 62.90 89.86 26.96 2.82 42.87 0.429

2 Diploria strigosa 10.63 12.11 1.48 0.15 13.87 0.139

3 Montastraea sp. 95.56 100.82 5.26 0.55 5.51 0.055

4 Diploria strigosa 6.80 8.10 1.30 0.14 19.11 0.191

5 Diploria strigosa 19.85 18.68 -1.16 -0.12 -5.87 -0.059

1 Montastraea sp. 10.84 11.95 1.11 0.12 10.23 0.102

2 Diploria strigosa 14.89 20.41 5.52 0.58 37.09 0.371

3 Montastraea sp. 2.16 2.47 0.31 0.03 14.46 0.145

4 Montastraea sp. 214.12 238.14 24.02 2.51 11.22 0.112

1 Montastraea sp. 227.86 212.13 -15.73 -1.65 -6.90 -0.069

2 Montastraea sp. 94.71 98.58 3.87 0.41 4.08 0.041

3 Montastraea sp. 19.32 32.86 13.54 1.42 70.06 0.701

4 Montastraea sp. 18.96 17.87 -1.09 -0.11 -5.74 -0.057

1 Diploria strigosa 74.54 65.91 -8.63 -0.90 -11.58 -0.116

2 Diploria strigosa 16.82 16.04 -0.78 -0.08 -4.63 -0.046

3 Colpophyllia natans 108.48 108.25 -0.24 -0.03 -0.22 -0.002

4 Diploria strigosa 10.79 10.06 -0.73 -0.08 -6.73 -0.067

5 Diploria strigosa 28.26 26.61 -1.65 -0.17 -5.82 -0.058

6 Diploria strigosa 60.53 65.22 4.69 0.49 7.75 0.077

29

26

25

30

31

32

36

38 1.30 0.00

0.59 0.06

30.97 3.24

33.84 3.54

-1.12 -0.12

-35.17 -3.68

10.50 1.10

65.85 6.89

131
Appendix 4

Repetitive 8m

2 Quadrat Proportional Change for Selected Coral Heads

RQS #

Coral

Head

#

Species

Area of

coral

head in

2001

(cm

2

)

Area of

coral

head in

2002

(cm

2

)

Change in

Area (cm

2

)

% change in

coral colony

area

%

Change

in Area

Total

change

in Area

within

Quadrat

(cm

2

)

Total %

change

in Area

within

Quadrat

Proportional

Change from

2001

1 Diploria strigosa 11.52 12.99 1.48 12.81 0.15 0.128

2 Diploria strigosa 19.10 21.80 2.70 14.16 0.28 0.142

3 Diploria strigosa 7.50 7.07 -0.43 -5.78 -0.05 -0.058

4 Diploria strigosa 15.92 14.65 -1.28 -8.02 -0.13 -0.080

5 Diploria strigosa 13.67 9.91 -3.77 -27.55 -0.39 -0.275

6 Montastraea cavernosa 21.28 38.57 17.30 81.30 1.81 0.813

1 Diploria strigosa 25.59 18.81 -6.78 -26.50 -0.71 -0.265

2 Diploria strigosa 25.70 22.06 -3.64 -14.18 -0.38 -0.142

3 Diploria strigosa 4.98 4.29 -0.68 -13.76 -0.07 -0.138

4 Diploria strigosa 16.12 15.88 -0.24 -1.49 -0.03 -0.015

5 Montastraea sp. 4.86 5.35 0.49 10.06 0.05 0.101

1 Diploria strigosa 4.59 5.52 0.93 20.23 0.10 0.202

2 Diploria strigosa 22.73 24.53 1.80 7.92 0.19 0.079

3 Diploria strigosa 22.95 20.74 -2.21 -9.63 -0.23 -0.096

4 Diploria strigosa 27.47 31.16 3.68 13.41 0.39 0.134

5 Montastraea sp. 18.32 53.74 35.42 193.41 3.71 1.934

1 Montastraea sp. 74.70 69.68 -5.02 -6.73 -0.53 -0.067

2 Montastraea sp. 5.39 6.55 1.16 21.47 0.12 0.215

3 Montastraea sp. 34.96 54.60 19.64 56.16 2.06 0.562

4 Diploria strigosa 6.35 7.74 1.39 21.97 0.15 0.220

5 Diploria strigosa 7.41 9.07 1.66 22.47 0.17 0.225

1 Siderastrea siderea 59.09 62.66 3.57 6.04 0.37 0.060

2 Diploria strigosa 9.23 9.13 -0.09 -1.01 -0.01 -0.010

3 Siderastrea siderea 4.63 4.40 -0.23 -5.03 -0.02 -0.050

4 Diploria strigosa 72.05 68.46 -3.59 -4.98 -0.38 -0.050

5 Siderastrea siderea 46.92 40.83 -6.09 -12.98 -0.64 -0.130

1 Mussa angulosa 3.50 3.35 -0.15 -4.30 -0.02 -0.043

2 Montastraea sp. (dead) 2.39 1.95 -0.45 -18.62 -0.05 -0.186

3 Montastraea sp. 2.17 1.18 -0.99 -45.74 -0.10 -0.457

4 Madracis decactis 3.99 2.61 -1.38 -34.61 -0.14 -0.346

5 Montastraea sp. 18.94 10.71 -8.23 -43.47 -0.86 -0.435

1 Diploria strigosa 7.19 4.39 -2.80 -38.98 -0.29 -0.390

2 Montastraea sp. 213.91 193.12 -20.80 -9.72 -2.18 -0.097

3 Diploria strigosa 4.48 6.59 2.11 47.17 0.22 0.472

4 Montastraea sp. 39.41 37.21 -2.20 -5.59 -0.23 -0.056

5 Diploria strigosa 7.20 5.46 -1.74 -24.10 -0.18 -0.241

1 Porites astreoides 3.99 3.49 -0.50 -12.52 -0.05 -0.125

2 Porites astreoides 5.26 5.71 0.45 8.54 0.05 0.085

3 Porites astreoides 3.06 3.00 -0.06 -2.00 -0.01 -0.020

4 Montastraea sp. 3.43 3.79 0.36 10.61 0.04 0.106

5 Porites astreoides 4.73 3.96 -0.77 -16.24 -0.08 -0.162

6 Porites astreoides 3.32 3.99 0.67 20.17 0.07 0.202

1 Diploria strigosa 11.15 11.73 0.57 5.14 0.06 0.051

2 Colpophyllia natans 30.12 33.87 3.76 12.47 0.39 0.125

3 Diploria strigosa 34.45 32.07 -2.38 -6.92 -0.25 -0.069

4 Porites astreoides 5.46 10.35 4.89 89.72 0.51 0.897

1 Diploria strigosa 45.62 47.45 1.82 4.00 0.19 0.040

2 Montastraea cavernosa 47.12 54.76 7.64 16.21 0.80 0.162

3 Diploria strigosa 5.26 6.30 1.04 19.88 0.11 0.199

4 Diploria strigosa 3.81 4.53 0.73 19.05 0.08 0.191

5 Colpophyllia natans 82.12 109.06 26.94 32.81 2.82 0.328

1 Montastraea sp. 66.19 80.94 14.75 22.28 1.54 0.223

2 Montastraea sp. 6.75 6.50 -0.25 -3.75 -0.03 -0.038

3 Montastraea sp. 12.99 12.53 -0.46 -3.55 -0.05 -0.036

4 Montastraea sp. 22.41 25.10 2.69 11.99 0.28 0.120

5 Montastraea sp. 52.95 53.03 0.08 0.16 0.01 0.002

1 Montastraea sp. 71.49 67.33 -4.16 -5.83 -0.44 -0.058

2 Diploria strigosa 3.03 4.05 1.03 33.85 0.11 0.339

3 Montastraea sp. 2.48 3.30 0.82 32.97 0.09 0.330

4 Montastraea cavernosa 25.84 26.55 0.71 2.73 0.07 0.027

5 Porites astreoides 3.90 4.15 0.25 6.36 0.03 0.064

West Bank 2001-2002

4.15

18.83 1.97

14

12

-1.17

-25.42 -2.66

0.15

16.00 1.68

-10.86 -1.14

39.63

-6.43 -0.67

-11.20

2

15

16

6

7

8

11

9

5

4

0.02

6.84 0.72

38.17 4.00

16.80 1.76

-1.37 -0.14

132
Appendix 4

Repetitive 8m

2 Quadrat Proportional Change for Selected Coral Heads

RQS #

Coral

Head

#

Species

Area of

coral

head in

2001

(cm

2

)

Area of

coral

head in

2002

(cm

2

)

Change in

Area (cm

2

)

% change in

coral colony

area

%

Change

in Area

Total

change

in Area

within

Quadrat

(cm

2

)

Total %

change

in Area

within

Quadrat

Proportional

Change from

2001

West Bank 2001-2002

1 Montastraea sp. 52.38 52.14 -0.25 -0.47 -0.03 -0.005

2 Montastraea sp. 2.28 2.18 -0.10 -4.34 -0.01 -0.043

3 Diploria strigosa 7.34 8.67 1.33 18.07 0.14 0.181

4 Diploria strigosa 28.92 27.74 -1.17 -4.06 -0.12 -0.041

19 -0.19 -0.02

133
Appendix 4

Repetitive 8m

2 Quadrat Proportional Change for Selected Coral Heads

RQS#

Coral

Head #

Coral Species

Evaluated

Area in

2002

(cm

2

)

Area in 2003

(cm

2

)

Change

in Area

(cm

2

)

%

change

in area

%

change

in coral

Total change

in Area within

Quadrat (cm

2

)

Total %

change in

Area within

Quadrat

Proportional

Change from

2002

1 Diploria strigosa 12.99 11.90 -1.09 -0.11 -8.40 -0.084

2 Diploria strigosa 21.80 22.03 0.22 0.02 1.03 0.010

3 Diploria strigosa 7.07 8.06 0.99 0.10 14.07 0.141

4 Diploria strigosa 14.65 19.50 4.86 0.51 33.16 0.332

5 Diploria strigosa 9.91 13.60 3.69 0.39 37.27 0.373

6 Montastraea cavernosa 38.57 32.78 -5.79 -0.61 -15.02 -0.150

1 Diploria strigosa 18.81 22.73 3.92 0.41 20.84 0.208

2 Diploria strigosa 22.06 25.55 3.49 0.37 15.83 0.158

3 Diploria strigosa 4.29 4.57 0.28 0.03 6.54 0.065

4 Diploria strigosa 15.88 17.72 1.84 0.19 11.61 0.116

5 Montastraea sp. 5.35 5.82 0.47 0.05 8.88 0.089

1 Diploria strigosa 5.52 5.27 -0.26 2.65 -4.64 -0.046

2 Diploria strigosa 24.53 25.31 0.78 2.49 3.17 0.032

3 Diploria strigosa 20.74 23.76 3.02 3.53 14.56 0.146

4 Diploria strigosa 31.16 33.75 2.59 3.89 8.30 0.083

5 Montastraea sp. 53.74 37.18 -16.56 -1.73 -30.81 -0.308

1 Montastraea sp. 69.68 71.53 1.85 0.19 2.66 0.027

2 Montastraea sp. 6.55 7.71 1.16 0.12 17.70 0.177

3 Montastraea sp. 54.60 47.61 -6.99 -0.73 -12.80 -0.128

4 Diploria strigosa 7.74 8.12 0.37 0.04 4.81 0.048

5 Diploria strigosa 9.07 7.32 -1.75 -0.18 -19.27 -0.193

1 Siderastrea siderea 62.66 65.85 3.19 0.33 5.10 0.051

2 Diploria strigosa 9.13 9.88 0.74 0.08 8.15 0.082

3 Siderastrea siderea 4.40 5.42 1.02 0.11 23.26 0.233

4 Diploria strigosa 68.46 81.66 13.20 1.38 19.28 0.193

5 Siderastrea siderea 40.83 49.54 8.71 0.91 21.33 0.213

1 Mussa angulosa 3.35 8.92 5.57 0.58 166.11 1.661

2 Montastraea sp.(dead) 1.95 2.32 0.37 0.04 19.16 0.192

3 Montastraea sp. 1.18 2.55 1.37 0.14 116.91 1.169

4 Madracis decactis 2.61 5.06 2.45 0.26 94.14 0.941

5 Montastraea sp. 10.71 22.45 11.74 1.23 109.68 1.097

1 Diploria strigosa 4.39 4.07 -0.32 -0.03 -7.23 -0.072

2 Montastraea sp. 193.12 206.63 13.51 1.41 7.00 0.070

3 Diploria strigosa 6.59 6.03 -0.56 -0.06 -8.47 -0.085

4 Montastraea sp. 37.21 47.28 10.07 1.05 27.07 0.271

5 Diploria strigosa 5.46 8.22 2.76 0.29 50.52 0.505

1 Porites astreoides 3.49 4.61 1.12 0.12 31.99 0.320

2 Porites astreoides 5.71 6.44 0.73 0.08 12.70 0.127

3 Porites astreoides 3.00 3.78 0.78 0.08 25.94 0.259

4 Montastraea sp. 3.79 4.30 0.51 0.05 13.41 0.134

5 Porites astreoides 3.96 4.14 0.18 0.02 4.59 0.046

6 Porites astreoides 3.99 4.37 0.38 0.04 9.60 0.096

1 Diploria strigosa 11.73 11.71 -0.01 0.00 -0.11 -0.001

2 Colpophyllia natans 33.87 32.05 -1.82 -0.19 -5.37 -0.054

3 Diploria strigosa 32.07 37.69 5.62 0.59 17.54 0.175

4 Porites astreoides 10.35 9.84 -0.51 -0.05 -4.91 -0.049

1 Montastraea sp. 73.52 71.76 -1.76 -0.18 -2.40 -0.024

2 Colpophyllia natans 54.93 52.26 -2.66 -0.28 -4.85 -0.048

3 Montastraea sp. 8.05 20.45 12.39 1.30 153.88 1.539

4 Diploria strigosa 9.73 10.29 0.55 0.06 5.70 0.057

5 Montastraea sp. 42.50 43.97 1.47 0.15 3.46 0.035

1 Diploria strigosa 47.45 50.96 3.52 0.37 7.41 0.074

2 Montastraea cavernosa 54.76 50.14 -4.62 -0.48 -8.44 -0.084

3 Diploria strigosa 6.30 6.52 0.22 0.02 3.46 0.035

4 Diploria strigosa 4.53 4.38 -0.15 -0.02 -3.37 -0.034

5 Colpophyllia natans 109.06 97.98 -11.09 -1.16 -10.17 -0.102

6 Diploria strigosa 30.69 39.96 9.27 0.97 30.22 0.302

1 Montastraea sp. 80.94 66.48 -14.46 -1.51 -17.87 -0.179

2 Montastraea sp. 6.50 6.74 0.24 0.03 3.77 0.038

3 Montastraea sp. 12.53 14.52 1.99 0.21 15.91 0.159

4 Montastraea sp. 25.10 29.15 4.05 0.42 16.13 0.161

5 Montastraea sp. 53.03 56.06 3.03 0.32 5.72 0.057

West Bank 2002-2003

14 -2.85 -0.30

15 -5.14 -0.54

12 3.28 0.34

14 9.99 1.05

9 25.47 2.67

11 3.69 0.39

7 26.87 2.81

8 21.52 2.25

5 -10.43 10.83

6 -5.35 -0.56

2 2.88 0.30

4 10.01 1.05

134
Appendix 4

Repetitive 8m

2 Quadrat Proportional Change for Selected Coral Heads

RQS#

Coral

Head #

Coral Species

Evaluated

Area in

2002

(cm

2

)

Area in 2003

(cm

2

)

Change

in Area

(cm

2

)

%

change

in area

%

change

in coral

Total change

in Area within

Quadrat (cm

2

)

Total %

change in

Area within

Quadrat

Proportional

Change from

2002

West Bank 2002-2003

1 Montastraea sp. 67.33 74.08 6.75 0.71 10.03 0.100

2 Diploria strigosa 4.05 4.06 0.01 0.00 0.23 0.002

3 Montastraea sp. 3.30 3.48 0.18 0.02 5.58 0.056

4 Montastraea cavernosa 26.55 27.15 0.60 0.06 2.28 0.023

5 Porites astreoides 4.15 4.38 0.22 0.02 5.38 0.054

1 Montastraea sp. 29.54 24.34 -5.20 -0.54 -17.60 -0.176

2 Diploria strigosa 38.22 37.62 -0.60 -0.06 -1.57 -0.016

3 Porites astreoides 61.99 63.31 1.32 0.14 2.13 0.021

4 Porites astreoides 36.69 29.57 -7.12 -0.75 -19.40 -0.194

5 Porites astreoides 6.60 8.12 1.52 0.16 22.98 0.230

6 Porites astreoides 4.72 4.73 0.01 0.00 0.16 0.002

1 Porites astreoides 3.44 4.55 1.11 0.12 32.16 0.322

2 Diploria strigosa 8.69 12.43 3.74 0.39 43.08 0.431

3 Porites astreoides 24.87 12.04 -12.83 -1.34 -51.61 -0.516

4 Porites astreoides 3.98 3.90 -0.07 -0.01 -1.85 -0.018

1 Montastraea sp. 52.14 55.14 3.00 0.31 5.76 0.058

2 Montastraea sp. 2.18 2.35 0.17 0.02 7.87 0.079

3 Diploria strigosa 8.67 9.40 0.73 0.08 8.43 0.084

4 Diploria strigosa 27.74 31.18 3.44 0.36 12.41 0.124

1 Montastraea sp. 18.36 19.39 1.03 0.11 5.61 0.056

2 Montastraea sp. 14.56 12.24 -2.32 -0.24 -15.91 -0.159

3 Diploria strigosa 11.16 19.66 8.51 0.89 76.22 0.762

4 Diploria strigosa 18.70 25.61 6.91 0.72 36.96 0.370

5 Montastraea sp. 5.66 7.82 2.16 0.23 38.10 0.381

1 Diploria strigosa 3.45 3.18 -0.27 -0.03 -7.85 -0.079

2 Montastraea sp. 11.89 12.54 0.65 0.07 5.49 0.055

3 Diploria strigosa 8.09 10.90 2.81 0.29 34.72 0.347

4 Montastraea sp. 67.30 84.34 17.04 1.78 25.32 0.253

5 Diploria strigosa 2.08 3.18 1.10 0.11 52.63 0.526

1 Montastraea sp. 12.37 10.18 -2.19 -0.23 -17.74 -0.177

2 Montastraea sp. 76.78 61.27 -15.51 -1.62 -20.20 -0.202

3 Diploria strigosa 3.75 3.59 -0.16 -0.02 -4.27 -0.043

4 Diploria strigosa 12.99 10.90 -2.08 -0.22 -16.04 -0.160

1 Montastraea cavernosa 143.58 149.29 5.71 0.60 3.98 0.040

2 Montastraea sp. 21.94 20.54 -1.40 -0.15 -6.39 -0.064

3 Diploria strigosa 14.23 13.42 -0.82 -0.09 -5.75 -0.057

4 Montastraea sp. 16.45 17.12 0.67 0.07 4.05 0.041

5 Montastraea cavernosa 24.62 25.60 0.98 0.10 3.97 0.040

1 Montastraea cavernosa 26.53 31.06 4.53 0.47 17.09 0.171

2 Diploria strigosa 95.20 104.58 9.38 0.98 9.86 0.099

3 Montastraea sp. 33.70 34.68 0.98 0.10 2.91 0.029

4 Porites astreoides 3.17 3.30 0.13 0.01 4.20 0.042

5 Montastraea sp. 14.02 14.52 0.50 0.05 3.60 0.036

1 Diploria strigosa 31.45 14.99 -16.46 -1.72 -52.33 -0.523

2 Montastraea sp. 46.44 45.21 -1.23 -0.13 -2.64 -0.026

3 Montastraea sp. 51.04 42.38 -8.66 -0.91 -16.96 -0.170

4 Montastraea sp. 9.44 9.74 0.30 0.03 3.20 0.032

5 Diploria strigosa 20.92 23.74 2.82 0.30 13.48 0.135

1 Colpophyllia natans 21.19 20.47 -0.73 -0.08 -3.42 -0.034

2 Diploria strigosa 5.24 5.32 0.09 0.01 1.64 0.016

3 Colpophyllia natans 14.53 14.77 0.24 0.03 1.66 0.017

4 Montastraea sp. 39.82 47.39 7.57 0.79 19.01 0.190

5 Diploria strigosa 7.10 6.39 -0.71 -0.07 -9.96 -0.100

1 Diploria strigosa 6.87 7.41 0.54 0.06 7.89 0.079

2 Montastraea sp. 73.96 72.64 -1.31 -0.14 -1.78 -0.018

3 Diploria strigosa 4.07 4.87 0.80 0.08 19.66 0.197

4 Diploria strigosa 4.80 4.80 0.01 0.00 0.11 0.001

5 Diploria strigosa 12.09 12.08 0.00 0.00 -0.02 0.000

1 Montastraea sp. 12.95 16.08 3.13 0.33 24.16 0.242

2 Diploria strigosa 7.96 8.03 0.06 0.01 0.79 0.008

3 Montastraea sp. 40.26 39.82 -0.44 -0.05 -1.09 -0.011

4 Montastraea sp. 36.66 38.88 2.21 0.23 6.04 0.060

5 Montastraea sp. 13.02 14.65 1.63 0.17 12.52 0.125

31 6.60 0.69

28 6.46 0.68

29 0.03 0.00

25 15.54 1.63

26 -23.22 -2.43

23 -19.95 -2.09

24 5.13 0.54

20 16.29 1.71

22 21.33 2.23

18 -8.06 -0.84

19 7.35 0.77

16 7.77 0.27

17 -10.07 -1.05

135
Appendix 4

Repetitive 8m

2 Quadrat Proportional Change for Selected Coral Heads

RQS#

Coral

Head #

Coral Species

Evaluated

Area in

2002

(cm

2

)

Area in 2003

(cm

2

)

Change

in Area

(cm

2

)

%

change

in area

%

change

in coral

Total change

in Area within

Quadrat (cm

2

)

Total %

change in

Area within

Quadrat

Proportional

Change from

2002

West Bank 2002-2003

1 Montastraea sp. 29.35 31.40 2.04 0.21 6.96 0.070

2 Montastraea sp. 149.72 177.56 27.84 2.92 18.60 0.186

3 Madracis decactis 5.92 6.54 0.62 0.07 10.51 0.105

4 Diploria strigosa 64.61 63.35 -1.25 -0.13 -1.94 -0.019

5 Diploria strigosa 12.36 20.29 7.93 0.83 64.14 0.641

1 Colpophyllia natans 47.03 49.39 2.36 0.25 5.01 0.050

2 Montastraea sp. 37.10 30.23 -6.86 -0.72 -18.50 -0.185

3 Diploria strigosa 42.89 34.09 -8.80 -0.92 -20.52 -0.205

4 Colpophyllia natans 18.07 14.55 -3.52 -0.37 -19.47 -0.195

1 Montastraea sp. 90.14 65.14 -25.00 -2.62 -27.74 -0.277

2 Diploria strigosa 33.12 33.03 -0.09 -0.01 -0.28 -0.003

3 Montastraea sp. 25.88 26.02 0.15 0.02 0.56 0.006

4 Diploria strigosa 20.96 18.48 -2.48 -0.26 -11.82 -0.118

5 Diploria strigosa 2.71 7.21 4.50 0.47 165.85 1.659

1 Montastraea sp. 23.20 29.84 6.63 0.69 28.59 0.286

2 Diploria strigosa 24.97 26.92 1.95 0.20 7.81 0.078

3 Diploria strigosa 6.47 6.44 -0.03 0.00 -0.50 -0.005

4 Diploria strigosa 4.46 5.76 1.30 0.14 29.19 0.292

5 Diploria strigosa 1.09 1.35 0.26 0.03 24.32 0.243

1 Diploria strigosa 9.24 13.73 4.49 0.47 48.57 0.486

2 Diploria strigosa 28.20 39.38 11.18 1.17 39.66 0.397

3 Montastraea sp. 52.75 43.44 -9.31 -0.97 -17.65 -0.177

4 Montastraea sp. 13.52 14.30 0.78 0.08 5.78 0.058

1 Montastraea sp. 17.92 21.46 3.54 0.37 19.76 0.198

2 Montastraea sp. 41.09 45.37 4.29 0.45 10.43 0.104

3 Montastraea sp. 13.05 13.21 0.16 0.02 1.24 0.012

4 Montastraea sp. 76.47 79.40 2.93 0.31 3.83 0.038

5 Diploria strigosa 5.92 4.69 -1.24 -0.13 -20.90 -0.209

1 Montastraea sp. 3.02 3.19 0.17 0.02 5.69 0.057

2 Diploria strigosa 14.08 15.24 1.16 0.12 8.23 0.082

3 Diploria strigosa 9.33 8.21 -1.12 -0.12 -11.98 -0.120

4 Diploria strigosa 9.05 10.22 1.17 0.12 12.97 0.130

1 Montastraea cavernosa 86.69 88.76 2.06 0.22 2.38 0.024

2 Diploria strigosa 1.54 2.01 0.47 0.05 30.67 0.307

3 Montastraea cavernosa 63.41 81.36 17.95 1.88 28.31 0.283

4 Diploria strigosa 9.46 10.36 0.90 0.09 9.50 0.095

UNK3 21.39 2.24

UNK1 9.68 1.01

UNK2 1.39 0.15

64 10.12 1.06

92 7.14 0.75

37 -16.83 -1.76

64 -22.93 -2.40

36 37.18 3.89

136
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Statistic Depth (m) Temp (°C) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

EFGB min 22.96 18.94 35.46 8.26 6.13 0.03 2.73

EFGB max 23.89 31.18 35.89 8.27 7.32 79.02 72.44

EFGB mean 23.23 23.64 35.76 8.26 6.64 11.39 26.36

EFGB SE 0.01 0.21 0.03 0.00 0.05 0.94 1.55

EFGB n 219 219 16 2 32 218 149

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (°C) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

EFGB 10/29/2002 23.12 26.29 35.66 8.27 6.63 6.20 4.80

EFGB 10/30/2002 23.28 26.31 35.80 8.26 6.13 5.36 72.44

EFGB 10/31/2002 23.29 26.19 35.83 6.43 5.07 61.09

EFGB 11/1/2002 23.30 25.96 35.78 6.44 5.02 40.14

EFGB 11/2/2002 23.30 25.87 35.89 6.43 5.03 36.12

EFGB 11/3/2002 23.31 25.88 35.78 6.37 5.01 29.99

EFGB 11/4/2002 23.24 26.00 35.71 6.25 5.01 48.06

EFGB 11/5/2002 23.28 26.09 35.73 6.40 4.99 22.76

EFGB 11/6/2002 23.19 25.86 35.78 6.75 5.02 70.50

EFGB 11/7/2002 23.22 25.87 35.73 6.88 5.00 70.26

EFGB 11/8/2002 23.23 25.73 35.84 6.83 5.04 40.48

EFGB 11/9/2002 23.22 25.61 35.86 6.87 5.10 62.93

EFGB 11/10/2002 23.22 25.68 35.82 6.81 5.13 55.74

EFGB 11/11/2002 23.22 25.89 35.73 6.74 5.11 40.12

EFGB 11/12/2002 23.20 26.48 35.46 6.57 5.13 56.74

EFGB 11/13/2002 23.25 26.53 35.85 6.83 5.14 60.78

EFGB 11/14/2002 23.22 26.17 6.73 5.23 43.11

EFGB 11/15/2002 23.21 25.58 6.43 5.29 12.17

EFGB 11/16/2002 23.18 25.19 6.72 5.19 45.90

EFGB 11/17/2002 23.17 25.02 7.03 5.25 47.58

EFGB 11/18/2002 23.20 25.13 6.76 5.40 41.23

EFGB 11/19/2002 23.14 25.33 6.51 5.26 16.43

EFGB 11/20/2002 23.14 25.31 6.55 5.29 18.94

EFGB 11/21/2002 23.10 25.02 7.12 5.37 48.44

EFGB 11/22/2002 23.13 24.87 7.12 5.68 48.83

EFGB 11/23/2002 23.10 24.43 7.32 6.03 45.48

EFGB 11/24/2002 23.13 24.59 6.86 6.84 41.74

EFGB 11/25/2002 23.15 25.23 6.66 7.20 51.55

EFGB 11/26/2002 23.16 25.19 6.50 7.67 34.98

EFGB 11/27/2002 23.19 25.41 6.19 12.52 8.30

EFGB 11/28/2002 23.18 25.80 6.40 5.48 22.81

EFGB 11/29/2002 23.19 25.03 6.13 6.00 34.47

EFGB 11/30/2002 23.22 25.13 6.02 10.35

EFGB 12/1/2002 23.16 25.11 6.15 35.62

EFGB 12/2/2002 23.15 24.82 5.58 19.38

EFGB 12/3/2002 23.13 23.98 5.53 14.79

EFGB 12/4/2002 23.15 24.31 5.54 20.37

East Flower Garden Bank

October 29, 2002 to November 3, 2003

East Flower Garden Bank

October 29, 2002 to November 3, 2003

137
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (°C) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

East Flower Garden Bank

October 29, 2002 to November 3, 2003

EFGB 12/5/2002 23.10 24.30 5.45 4.88

EFGB 12/6/2002 23.15 24.39 5.45 29.49

EFGB 12/7/2002 23.16 24.28 5.44 16.33

EFGB 12/8/2002 23.16 25.00 5.55 17.73

EFGB 12/9/2002 23.19 24.83 5.56 6.53

EFGB 12/10/2002 23.19 23.13 5.38 3.88

EFGB 12/11/2002 23.20 24.38 5.36 18.24

EFGB 12/12/2002 23.23 27.88 5.48 7.87

EFGB 12/13/2002 23.34 31.18 5.60 22.43

EFGB 12/14/2002 23.16 25.22 5.49 16.86

EFGB 12/15/2002 23.17 24.42 5.60 12.74

EFGB 12/16/2002 23.16 24.90 5.72 12.44

EFGB 12/17/2002 23.15 24.97 5.68 18.41

EFGB 12/18/2002 23.17 25.69 5.62 20.77

EFGB 12/19/2002 23.16 24.22 5.46 17.04

EFGB 12/20/2002 23.12 23.78 5.39 26.56

EFGB 12/21/2002 23.14 23.46 5.44 10.54

EFGB 12/22/2002 23.16 24.75 5.61 21.44

EFGB 12/23/2002 23.14 24.14 6.44 10.51

EFGB 12/24/2002 23.16 22.90 5.53 8.71

EFGB 12/25/2002 23.12 22.58 5.63 10.47

EFGB 12/26/2002 23.16 22.70 5.58 7.86

EFGB 12/27/2002 23.17 22.42 5.61 5.19

EFGB 12/28/2002 23.17 21.53 5.66 11.17

EFGB 12/29/2002 23.17 21.49 5.67 13.43

EFGB 12/30/2002 23.22 22.99 5.75 8.96

EFGB 12/31/2002 23.17 22.47 5.82 10.68

EFGB 1/1/2003 23.12 22.48 5.56 17.22

EFGB 1/2/2003 23.10 20.39 5.64 14.23

EFGB 1/3/2003 23.11 21.01 5.63 14.64

EFGB 1/4/2003 23.12 20.76 5.72 14.76

EFGB 1/5/2003 23.10 20.36 5.71 13.26

EFGB 1/6/2003 23.13 20.79 5.49 17.38

EFGB 1/7/2003 23.11 20.39 5.54 18.86

EFGB 1/8/2003 23.10 20.19 5.47 19.27

EFGB 1/9/2003 23.13 20.03 5.45 11.46

EFGB 1/10/2003 23.11 20.00 5.44 17.54

EFGB 1/11/2003 23.13 19.91 5.47 4.54

EFGB 1/12/2003 23.12 19.38 5.94 3.34

EFGB 1/13/2003 23.25 19.35 5.55 13.40

EFGB 1/14/2003 23.11 19.64 5.53 4.99

EFGB 1/15/2003 23.17 19.95 5.58 7.54

EFGB 1/16/2003 23.13 19.63 5.59 16.29

EFGB 1/17/2003 23.18 19.61 5.55 11.45

EFGB 1/18/2003 23.15 19.49 5.53 20.45

EFGB 1/19/2003 23.11 19.49 5.54 20.62

EFGB 1/20/2003 23.10 19.52 5.50 15.37

EFGB 1/21/2003 23.09 19.68 5.51 11.86

138
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (°C) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

East Flower Garden Bank

October 29, 2002 to November 3, 2003

EFGB 1/22/2003 23.14 20.96 5.55 8.12

EFGB 1/23/2003 23.20 21.43 5.97 8.65

EFGB 1/24/2003 23.13 19.90 5.55 10.62

EFGB 1/25/2003 23.16 20.13 5.60 10.66

EFGB 1/26/2003 23.15 19.92 5.70 3.89

EFGB 1/27/2003 23.13 20.58 5.60 6.59

EFGB 1/28/2003 23.16 20.23 5.60 13.75

EFGB 1/29/2003 23.12 19.67 5.56 24.23

EFGB 1/30/2003 23.09 19.59 5.42 8.45

EFGB 1/31/2003 23.08 19.63 5.36 15.74

EFGB 2/1/2003 23.10 19.66 5.37 19.90

EFGB 2/2/2003 23.12 19.66 6.47 17.76

EFGB 2/3/2003 23.18 20.12 5.41 13.27

EFGB 2/4/2003 23.17 20.15 5.41 21.99

EFGB 2/5/2003 23.14 19.43 5.42 13.60

EFGB 2/6/2003 23.15 19.46 5.42 9.92

EFGB 2/7/2003 23.15 19.42 6.51 2.73

EFGB 2/8/2003 23.16 21.28 12.44 3.70

EFGB 2/9/2003 23.16 20.06 31.21 10.16

EFGB 2/10/2003 23.12 19.97 29.10 30.32

EFGB 2/11/2003 23.10 19.90 29.78 31.79

EFGB 2/12/2003 23.17 20.05 22.48 18.88

EFGB 2/13/2003 23.17 20.03 5.75 23.93

EFGB 2/14/2003 23.11 19.95 5.95 34.64

EFGB 2/15/2003 23.14 19.88 5.62 6.30

EFGB 2/16/2003 23.12 19.62 5.64 5.48

EFGB 2/17/2003 23.08 19.01 5.70 37.23

EFGB 2/18/2003 23.18 18.94 6.29 28.09

EFGB 2/19/2003 23.14 19.88 8.92 46.13

EFGB 2/20/2003 23.08 19.94 8.79 30.98

EFGB 2/21/2003 23.10 19.97 8.80 17.25

EFGB 2/22/2003 23.19 20.19 8.78 50.03

EFGB 2/23/2003 23.17 19.81 8.69 69.41

EFGB 2/24/2003 23.17 19.84 8.79 59.11

EFGB 2/25/2003 23.11 19.76 8.64 24.04

EFGB 2/26/2003 23.02 19.74 8.72 24.34

EFGB 2/27/2003 22.99 19.53 9.23 11.28

EFGB 2/28/2003 22.96 19.46 8.70 13.43

EFGB 3/1/2003 23.14 19.57 8.69 19.34

EFGB 3/2/2003 23.18 19.73 8.76 21.50

EFGB 3/3/2003 23.19 20.05 8.71 7.41

EFGB 3/4/2003 23.15 20.00 8.68 39.10

EFGB 3/5/2003 23.13 19.91 8.71 37.24

EFGB 3/6/2003 23.13 19.89 8.70 10.65

EFGB 3/7/2003 23.15 20.06 8.70 18.76

EFGB 3/8/2003 23.14 19.93 8.74 19.39

EFGB 3/9/2003 23.17 20.45 8.66 42.28

EFGB 3/10/2003 23.19 20.50 8.68 42.05

139
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (°C) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

East Flower Garden Bank

October 29, 2002 to November 3, 2003

EFGB 3/11/2003 23.17 20.37 8.67 22.55

EFGB 3/12/2003 23.18 20.44 8.64 41.14

EFGB 3/13/2003 23.11 20.50 8.62 50.72

EFGB 3/14/2003 23.09 20.57 8.61 67.23

EFGB 3/15/2003 23.09 20.65 8.61 38.98

EFGB 3/16/2003 23.14 20.78 8.78 32.85

EFGB 3/17/2003 23.11 20.78 8.61 70.55

EFGB 3/18/2003 23.07 20.94 8.61 67.55

EFGB 3/19/2003 23.18 20.36 8.69 56.67

EFGB 3/20/2003 23.13 20.95 8.73 55.89

EFGB 3/21/2003 23.11 20.68 8.98 65.83

EFGB 3/22/2003 23.12 20.60 8.91 67.15

EFGB 3/23/2003 23.07 20.55 8.97 57.05

EFGB 3/24/2003 23.10 20.51 8.84 58.41

EFGB 3/25/2003 23.06 20.59 8.79 19.17

EFGB 3/26/2003 23.05 20.43 8.74 16.05

EFGB 3/27/2003

EFGB 3/28/2003

EFGB 3/29/2003

EFGB 3/30/2003

EFGB 3/31/2003

EFGB 4/1/2003

EFGB 4/2/2003

EFGB 4/3/2003

EFGB 4/4/2003

EFGB 4/5/2003

EFGB 4/6/2003

EFGB 4/7/2003

EFGB 4/8/2003

EFGB 4/9/2003

EFGB 4/10/2003

EFGB 4/11/2003

EFGB 4/12/2003

EFGB 4/13/2003

EFGB 4/14/2003

EFGB 4/15/2003

EFGB 4/16/2003

EFGB 4/17/2003

EFGB 4/18/2003

EFGB 4/19/2003

EFGB 4/20/2003

EFGB 4/21/2003

EFGB 4/22/2003

EFGB 4/23/2003

EFGB 4/24/2003

EFGB 4/25/2003

EFGB 4/26/2003

EFGB 4/27/2003

140
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (°C) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

East Flower Garden Bank

October 29, 2002 to November 3, 2003

EFGB 4/28/2003

EFGB 4/29/2003

EFGB 4/30/2003

EFGB 5/1/2003

EFGB 5/2/2003

EFGB 5/3/2003

EFGB 5/4/2003

EFGB 5/5/2003

EFGB 5/6/2003

EFGB 5/7/2003

EFGB 5/8/2003

EFGB 5/9/2003

EFGB 5/10/2003

EFGB 5/11/2003

EFGB 5/12/2003

EFGB 5/13/2003

EFGB 5/14/2003

EFGB 5/15/2003

EFGB 5/16/2003

EFGB 5/17/2003

EFGB 5/18/2003

EFGB 5/19/2003

EFGB 5/20/2003

EFGB 5/21/2003

EFGB 5/22/2003

EFGB 5/23/2003

EFGB 5/24/2003

EFGB 5/25/2003

EFGB 5/26/2003

EFGB 5/27/2003

EFGB 5/28/2003

EFGB 5/29/2003

EFGB 5/30/2003

EFGB 5/31/2003

EFGB 6/1/2003

EFGB 6/2/2003

EFGB 6/3/2003

EFGB 6/4/2003

EFGB 6/5/2003

EFGB 6/6/2003

EFGB 6/7/2003

EFGB 6/8/2003

EFGB 6/9/2003

EFGB 6/10/2003

EFGB 6/11/2003

EFGB 6/12/2003

EFGB 6/13/2003

EFGB 6/14/2003

141
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (°C) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

East Flower Garden Bank

October 29, 2002 to November 3, 2003

EFGB 6/15/2003

EFGB 6/16/2003

EFGB 6/17/2003

EFGB 6/18/2003

EFGB 6/19/2003

EFGB 6/20/2003

EFGB 6/21/2003

EFGB 6/22/2003

EFGB 6/23/2003

EFGB 6/24/2003

EFGB 6/25/2003

EFGB 6/26/2003

EFGB 6/27/2003

EFGB 6/28/2003

EFGB 6/29/2003

EFGB 6/30/2003

EFGB 7/1/2003

EFGB 7/2/2003

EFGB 7/3/2003

EFGB 7/4/2003

EFGB 7/5/2003

EFGB 7/6/2003

EFGB 7/7/2003

EFGB 7/8/2003

EFGB 7/9/2003

EFGB 7/10/2003

EFGB 7/11/2003

EFGB 7/12/2003

EFGB 7/13/2003

EFGB 7/14/2003

EFGB 7/15/2003

EFGB 7/16/2003

EFGB 7/17/2003

EFGB 7/18/2003

EFGB 7/19/2003

EFGB 7/20/2003

EFGB 7/21/2003

EFGB 7/22/2003

EFGB 7/23/2003

EFGB 7/24/2003

EFGB 7/25/2003

EFGB 7/26/2003

EFGB 7/27/2003

EFGB 7/28/2003

EFGB 7/29/2003

EFGB 7/30/2003

EFGB 7/31/2003

EFGB 8/1/2003

142
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (°C) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

East Flower Garden Bank

October 29, 2002 to November 3, 2003

EFGB 8/2/2003

EFGB 8/3/2003

EFGB 8/4/2003

EFGB 8/5/2003

EFGB 8/6/2003

EFGB 8/7/2003

EFGB 8/8/2003

EFGB 8/9/2003

EFGB 8/10/2003

EFGB 8/11/2003

EFGB 8/12/2003

EFGB 8/13/2003

EFGB 8/14/2003

EFGB 8/15/2003

EFGB 8/16/2003

EFGB 8/17/2003

EFGB 8/18/2003

EFGB 8/19/2003

EFGB 8/20/2003

EFGB 8/21/2003

EFGB 8/22/2003

EFGB 8/23/2003

EFGB 8/24/2003

EFGB 8/25/2003

EFGB 8/26/2003 22.98 28.51 4.16

EFGB 8/27/2003 23.23 28.46 3.92

EFGB 8/28/2003 23.21 28.27 3.93

EFGB 8/29/2003 23.25 28.17 3.90

EFGB 8/30/2003 23.22 28.29 4.19

EFGB 8/31/2003 23.22 28.46 4.93

EFGB 9/1/2003 23.21 28.31 3.71

EFGB 9/2/2003 23.20 27.94 3.71

EFGB 9/3/2003 23.21 28.12 3.64

EFGB 9/4/2003 23.22 28.17 3.50

EFGB 9/5/2003 23.26 28.32 3.25

EFGB 9/6/2003 23.26 28.29 2.68

EFGB 9/7/2003 23.25 28.21 2.10

EFGB 9/8/2003 23.28 28.29 1.48

EFGB 9/9/2003 23.30 28.15 0.48

EFGB 9/10/2003 23.29 28.10 0.03

EFGB 9/11/2003 23.29 28.19 0.06

EFGB 9/12/2003 23.31 27.95 0.71

EFGB 9/13/2003 23.34 27.89 0.25

EFGB 9/14/2003 23.34 27.90 0.57

EFGB 9/15/2003 23.34 27.88 1.42

EFGB 9/16/2003 23.37 27.80 55.75

EFGB 9/17/2003 23.38 27.76 19.87

EFGB 9/18/2003 23.39 27.70 63.28

143
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (°C) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

East Flower Garden Bank

October 29, 2002 to November 3, 2003

EFGB 9/19/2003 23.42 27.69 34.25

EFGB 9/20/2003 23.40 27.55 33.51

EFGB 9/21/2003 23.37 27.32 41.93

EFGB 9/22/2003 23.35 27.40 48.44

EFGB 9/23/2003 23.60 27.44 1.59

EFGB 9/24/2003 23.58 27.13 2.84

EFGB 9/25/2003 23.43 27.09 12.87

EFGB 9/26/2003 23.35 27.17 20.86

EFGB 9/27/2003 23.32 27.01 21.85

EFGB 9/28/2003 23.32 27.01 46.33

EFGB 9/29/2003 23.35 26.63 25.96

EFGB 9/30/2003 23.33 26.36 20.65

EFGB 10/1/2003 23.38 26.24 18.51

EFGB 10/2/2003 23.33 25.96 18.16

EFGB 10/3/2003 23.37 25.91 18.04

EFGB 10/4/2003 23.34 25.91 7.76

EFGB 10/5/2003 23.28 25.82 4.12

EFGB 10/6/2003 23.29 25.73 3.52

EFGB 10/7/2003 23.32 25.65 5.22

EFGB 10/8/2003 23.31 25.95 10.87

EFGB 10/9/2003 23.32 25.87 18.20

EFGB 10/10/2003 23.31 26.12 73.88

EFGB 10/11/2003 23.32 26.24 57.92

EFGB 10/12/2003 23.69 26.18 29.23

EFGB 10/13/2003 23.37 25.79 33.39

EFGB 10/14/2003 23.27 25.78

EFGB 10/15/2003 23.31 25.55 34.85

EFGB 10/16/2003 23.32 25.53 19.34

EFGB 10/17/2003 23.28 25.64 27.85

EFGB 10/18/2003 23.29 25.47 37.63

EFGB 10/19/2003 23.34 25.51 55.32

EFGB 10/20/2003 23.38 25.41 44.80

EFGB 10/21/2003 23.36 25.18 47.85

EFGB 10/22/2003 23.31 25.11 46.27

EFGB 10/23/2003 23.35 25.18 34.94

EFGB 10/24/2003 23.35 25.24 28.15

EFGB 10/25/2003 23.67 25.60 33.92

EFGB 10/26/2003 23.74 25.42 36.99

EFGB 10/27/2003 23.76 25.24 79.02

EFGB 10/28/2003 23.80 25.09 70.41

EFGB 10/29/2003 23.84 24.86 24.36

EFGB 10/30/2003 23.89 25.07 3.37

EFGB 10/31/2003 23.86 25.52 2.22

EFGB 11/1/2003 23.87 25.55 1.34

EFGB 11/2/2003 23.64 25.37 1.35

EFGB 11/3/2003 23.76 25.26 1.43

371.00

144
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Statistic EFG Daily Mean Temp Hobo

EFG min 19.30

EFG max 29.97

EFG mean 23.05

EFG SE 0.15

EFG n 397

Site Date Temperature (°C)

EFG 10/29/2002 26.70

EFG 10/30/2002 26.83

EFG 10/31/2002 26.65

EFG 11/1/2002 26.43

EFG 11/2/2002 26.34

EFG 11/3/2002 26.22

EFG 11/4/2002 26.32

EFG 11/5/2002 26.50

EFG 11/6/2002 26.26

EFG 11/7/2002 26.23

EFG 11/8/2002 26.16

EFG 11/9/2002 25.99

EFG 11/10/2002 25.95

EFG 11/11/2002 26.00

EFG 11/12/2002 26.13

EFG 11/13/2002 25.93

EFG 11/14/2002 25.78

EFG 11/15/2002 25.51

EFG 11/16/2002 25.27

EFG 11/17/2002 24.83

EFG 11/18/2002 25.02

EFG 11/19/2002 25.13

EFG 11/20/2002 25.10

EFG 11/21/2002 24.74

EFG 11/22/2002 24.59

EFG 11/23/2002 24.16

EFG 11/24/2002 24.29

EFG 11/25/2002 24.66

EFG 11/26/2002 24.20

EFG 11/27/2002 24.31

EFG 11/28/2002 24.20

EFG 11/29/2002 24.01

EFG 11/30/2002 24.06

EFG 12/1/2002 24.01

EFG 12/2/2002 23.95

EFG 12/3/2002 23.48

EFG 12/4/2002 23.67

Hobo Data October 29, 2002 - March 11, 2004

East Flower Garden Bank

East Flower Garden Bank

Hobo Data October 29, 2002 - March 11, 2004

145
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (°C)

East Flower Garden Bank

Hobo Data October 29, 2002 - March 11, 2004

EFG 12/5/2002 23.74

EFG 12/6/2002 23.12

EFG 12/7/2002 22.68

EFG 12/8/2002 22.88

EFG 12/9/2002 22.45

EFG 12/10/2002 22.49

EFG 12/11/2002 22.23

EFG 12/12/2002 22.03

EFG 12/13/2002 22.21

EFG 12/14/2002 21.75

EFG 12/15/2002 21.67

EFG 12/16/2002 21.64

EFG 12/17/2002 22.14

EFG 12/18/2002 22.35

EFG 12/19/2002 22.77

EFG 12/20/2002 22.51

EFG 12/21/2002 21.64

EFG 12/22/2002 21.31

EFG 12/23/2002 22.15

EFG 12/24/2002 21.68

EFG 12/25/2002 21.44

EFG 12/26/2002 21.55

EFG 12/27/2002 21.45

EFG 12/28/2002 20.57

EFG 12/29/2002 21.09

EFG 12/30/2002 21.40

EFG 12/31/2002 21.31

EFG 1/1/2003 21.37

EFG 1/2/2003 20.35

EFG 1/3/2003 20.51

EFG 1/4/2003 20.45

EFG 1/5/2003 20.51

EFG 1/6/2003 20.88

EFG 1/7/2003 20.68

EFG 1/8/2003 20.32

EFG 1/9/2003 20.40

EFG 1/10/2003 20.16

EFG 1/11/2003 19.82

EFG 1/12/2003 19.61

EFG 1/13/2003 19.66

EFG 1/14/2003 19.79

EFG 1/15/2003 19.59

EFG 1/16/2003 19.75

EFG 1/17/2003 19.64

EFG 1/18/2003 19.55

EFG 1/19/2003 19.61

EFG 1/20/2003 20.17

146
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (°C)

East Flower Garden Bank

Hobo Data October 29, 2002 - March 11, 2004

EFG 1/21/2003 20.24

EFG 1/22/2003 19.94

EFG 1/23/2003 19.53

EFG 1/24/2003 19.30

EFG 1/25/2003 19.42

EFG 1/26/2003 19.64

EFG 1/27/2003 19.89

EFG 1/28/2003 20.11

EFG 1/29/2003 20.33

EFG 1/30/2003 20.30

EFG 1/31/2003 20.35

EFG 2/1/2003 20.32

EFG 2/2/2003 20.31

EFG 2/3/2003 20.28

EFG 2/4/2003 20.12

EFG 2/5/2003 19.94

EFG 2/6/2003 20.09

EFG 2/7/2003 19.90

EFG 2/8/2003 20.30

EFG 2/9/2003 20.62

EFG 2/10/2003 20.62

EFG 2/11/2003 20.55

EFG 2/12/2003 20.70

EFG 2/13/2003 20.76

EFG 2/14/2003 20.69

EFG 2/15/2003 20.55

EFG 2/16/2003 20.15

EFG 2/17/2003 19.67

EFG 2/18/2003 19.59

EFG 2/19/2003 19.86

EFG 2/20/2003 19.88

EFG 2/21/2003 19.99

EFG 2/22/2003 20.01

EFG 2/23/2003 19.79

EFG 2/24/2003 19.75

EFG 2/25/2003 19.68

EFG 2/26/2003 19.66

EFG 2/27/2003 19.39

EFG 2/28/2003 19.34

EFG 3/1/2003 19.69

EFG 3/2/2003 19.58

EFG 3/3/2003 20.01

EFG 3/4/2003 19.92

EFG 3/5/2003 19.81

EFG 3/6/2003 19.87

EFG 3/7/2003 19.93

EFG 3/8/2003 20.04

147
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (°C)

East Flower Garden Bank

Hobo Data October 29, 2002 - March 11, 2004

EFG 3/9/2003 20.42

EFG 3/10/2003 20.41

EFG 3/11/2003 20.32

EFG 3/12/2003 20.38

EFG 3/13/2003 20.48

EFG 3/14/2003 20.57

EFG 3/15/2003 20.60

EFG 3/16/2003 20.79

EFG 3/17/2003 20.83

EFG 3/18/2003 20.77

EFG 3/19/2003 20.44

EFG 3/20/2003 20.84

EFG 3/21/2003 20.60

EFG 3/22/2003 20.57

EFG 3/23/2003 20.50

EFG 3/24/2003 20.48

EFG 3/25/2003 20.44

EFG 3/26/2003 20.36

EFG 3/27/2003 20.46

EFG 3/28/2003 20.63

EFG 3/29/2003 20.24

EFG 3/30/2003 19.93

EFG 3/31/2003 19.93

EFG 4/1/2003 20.06

EFG 4/2/2003 20.25

EFG 4/3/2003 20.39

EFG 4/4/2003 20.48

EFG 4/5/2003 20.45

EFG 4/6/2003 20.51

EFG 4/7/2003 21.00

EFG 4/8/2003 20.87

EFG 4/9/2003 20.78

EFG 4/10/2003 20.67

EFG 4/11/2003 20.62

EFG 4/12/2003 20.62

EFG 4/13/2003 20.29

EFG 4/14/2003 20.10

EFG 4/15/2003 20.12

EFG 4/16/2003 20.54

EFG 4/17/2003 20.15

EFG 4/18/2003 20.13

EFG 4/19/2003 20.69

EFG 4/20/2003 20.70

EFG 4/21/2003 20.94

EFG 4/22/2003 21.30

EFG 4/23/2003 21.24

EFG 4/24/2003 21.58

148
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (°C)

East Flower Garden Bank

Hobo Data October 29, 2002 - March 11, 2004

EFG 4/25/2003 21.87

EFG 4/26/2003 22.24

EFG 4/27/2003 22.46

EFG 4/28/2003 22.60

EFG 4/29/2003 22.72

EFG 4/30/2003 22.80

EFG 5/1/2003 22.72

EFG 5/2/2003 22.61

EFG 5/3/2003 22.67

EFG 5/4/2003 22.67

EFG 5/5/2003 22.66

EFG 5/6/2003 22.58

EFG 5/7/2003 22.76

EFG 5/8/2003 23.10

EFG 5/9/2003 23.62

EFG 5/10/2003 23.78

EFG 5/11/2003 23.54

EFG 5/12/2003 23.56

EFG 5/13/2003 23.31

EFG 5/14/2003 23.40

EFG 5/15/2003

EFG 5/16/2003

EFG 5/17/2003

EFG 5/18/2003

EFG 5/19/2003

EFG 5/20/2003

EFG 5/21/2003

EFG 5/22/2003

EFG 5/23/2003

EFG 5/24/2003

EFG 5/25/2003

EFG 5/26/2003

EFG 5/27/2003

EFG 5/28/2003

EFG 5/29/2003

EFG 5/30/2003

EFG 5/31/2003

EFG 6/1/2003

EFG 6/2/2003

EFG 6/3/2003

EFG 6/4/2003

EFG 6/5/2003

EFG 6/6/2003

EFG 6/7/2003

EFG 6/8/2003

EFG 6/9/2003

EFG 6/10/2003

149
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (°C)

East Flower Garden Bank

Hobo Data October 29, 2002 - March 11, 2004

EFG 6/11/2003

EFG 6/12/2003

EFG 6/13/2003

EFG 6/14/2003

EFG 6/15/2003

EFG 6/16/2003

EFG 6/17/2003

EFG 6/18/2003

EFG 6/19/2003

EFG 6/20/2003

EFG 6/21/2003

EFG 6/22/2003

EFG 6/23/2003

EFG 6/24/2003

EFG 6/25/2003

EFG 6/26/2003

EFG 6/27/2003

EFG 6/28/2003

EFG 6/29/2003

EFG 6/30/2003

EFG 7/1/2003

EFG 7/2/2003

EFG 7/3/2003

EFG 7/4/2003

EFG 7/5/2003

EFG 7/6/2003

EFG 7/7/2003

EFG 7/8/2003

EFG 7/9/2003

EFG 7/10/2003

EFG 7/11/2003

EFG 7/12/2003

EFG 7/13/2003

EFG 7/14/2003

EFG 7/15/2003

EFG 7/16/2003

EFG 7/17/2003

EFG 7/18/2003

EFG 7/19/2003

EFG 7/20/2003

EFG 7/21/2003

EFG 7/22/2003

EFG 7/23/2003

EFG 7/24/2003

EFG 7/25/2003

EFG 7/26/2003

EFG 7/27/2003

150
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (°C)

East Flower Garden Bank

Hobo Data October 29, 2002 - March 11, 2004

EFG 7/28/2003

EFG 7/29/2003

EFG 7/30/2003

EFG 7/31/2003

EFG 8/1/2003

EFG 8/2/2003

EFG 8/3/2003

EFG 8/4/2003

EFG 8/5/2003

EFG 8/6/2003

EFG 8/7/2003

EFG 8/8/2003

EFG 8/9/2003

EFG 8/10/2003

EFG 8/11/2003

EFG 8/12/2003

EFG 8/13/2003

EFG 8/14/2003

EFG 8/15/2003

EFG 8/16/2003

EFG 8/17/2003

EFG 8/18/2003

EFG 8/19/2003

EFG 8/20/2003

EFG 8/21/2003

EFG 8/22/2003

EFG 8/23/2003

EFG 8/24/2003

EFG 8/25/2003

EFG 8/26/2003 29.97

EFG 8/27/2003 29.91

EFG 8/28/2003 29.66

EFG 8/29/2003 29.69

EFG 8/30/2003 29.84

EFG 8/31/2003 29.79

EFG 9/1/2003 29.72

EFG 9/2/2003 29.42

EFG 9/3/2003 29.70

EFG 9/4/2003 29.73

EFG 9/5/2003 29.84

EFG 9/6/2003 29.79

EFG 9/7/2003 29.75

EFG 9/8/2003 29.85

EFG 9/9/2003 29.55

EFG 9/10/2003 29.68

EFG 9/11/2003 29.67

EFG 9/12/2003 29.43

151
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (°C)

East Flower Garden Bank

Hobo Data October 29, 2002 - March 11, 2004

EFG 9/13/2003 29.39

EFG 9/14/2003 29.42

EFG 9/15/2003 29.35

EFG 9/16/2003 29.32

EFG 9/17/2003 29.28

EFG 9/18/2003 29.17

EFG 9/19/2003 29.15

EFG 9/20/2003 28.92

EFG 9/21/2003 28.77

EFG 9/22/2003 28.95

EFG 9/23/2003 28.85

EFG 9/24/2003 28.57

EFG 9/25/2003 28.63

EFG 9/26/2003 28.64

EFG 9/27/2003 28.51

EFG 9/28/2003 28.47

EFG 9/29/2003 28.00

EFG 9/30/2003 27.80

EFG 10/1/2003 27.65

EFG 10/2/2003 27.38

EFG 10/3/2003 27.34

EFG 10/4/2003 27.36

EFG 10/5/2003 27.26

EFG 10/6/2003 27.12

EFG 10/7/2003 27.16

EFG 10/8/2003 27.31

EFG 10/9/2003 27.15

EFG 10/10/2003 27.41

EFG 10/11/2003 27.54

EFG 10/12/2003 27.48

EFG 10/13/2003 27.24

EFG 10/14/2003 27.16

EFG 10/15/2003 26.94

EFG 10/16/2003 26.99

EFG 10/17/2003 27.05

EFG 10/18/2003 26.97

EFG 10/19/2003 26.95

EFG 10/20/2003 26.82

EFG 10/21/2003 26.62

EFG 10/22/2003 26.61

EFG 10/23/2003 26.65

EFG 10/24/2003 26.73

EFG 10/25/2003 26.75

EFG 10/26/2003 26.65

EFG 10/27/2003 26.41

EFG 10/28/2003 26.27

EFG 10/29/2003 26.20

152
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (°C)

East Flower Garden Bank

Hobo Data October 29, 2002 - March 11, 2004

EFG 10/30/2003 26.48

EFG 10/31/2003 26.82

EFG 11/1/2003 26.86

EFG 11/2/2003 26.66

EFG 11/3/2003 26.63

EFG 11/4/2003 26.75

EFG 11/5/2003 26.92

EFG 11/6/2003 26.91

EFG 11/7/2003 26.87

EFG 11/8/2003 26.80

EFG 11/9/2003 26.71

EFG 11/10/2003 26.63

EFG 11/11/2003 26.60

EFG 11/12/2003 26.56

EFG 11/13/2003 26.47

EFG 11/14/2003 26.22

EFG 11/15/2003 25.91

EFG 11/16/2003 25.86

EFG 11/17/2003 25.93

EFG 11/18/2003 25.81

EFG 11/19/2003 25.35

EFG 11/20/2003 25.14

EFG 11/21/2003 24.82

EFG 11/22/2003 24.75

EFG 11/23/2003 24.70

EFG 11/24/2003 24.37

EFG 11/25/2003 24.12

EFG 11/26/2003 24.25

EFG 11/27/2003 24.14

EFG 11/28/2003 24.04

EFG 11/29/2003 24.09

EFG 11/30/2003 24.05

EFG 12/1/2003 24.07

EFG 12/2/2003 24.09

EFG 12/3/2003 24.27

EFG 12/4/2003 24.37

EFG 12/5/2003 24.18

EFG 12/6/2003 23.93

EFG 12/7/2003 23.70

EFG 12/8/2003 23.67

EFG 12/9/2003 23.58

EFG 12/10/2003 23.11

EFG 12/11/2003 22.86

EFG 12/12/2003 22.57

EFG 12/13/2003 22.47

EFG 12/14/2003 22.32

EFG 12/15/2003 22.66

153
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (°C)

East Flower Garden Bank

Hobo Data October 29, 2002 - March 11, 2004

EFG 12/16/2003 22.47

EFG 12/17/2003 22.03

EFG 12/18/2003 22.09

EFG 12/19/2003 22.11

EFG 12/20/2003 22.26

EFG 12/21/2003 22.38

EFG 12/22/2003 22.30

EFG 12/23/2003 22.20

EFG 12/24/2003 22.06

EFG 12/25/2003 21.97

EFG 12/26/2003 21.89

EFG 12/27/2003 21.88

EFG 12/28/2003 21.86

EFG 12/29/2003 21.76

EFG 12/30/2003 21.50

EFG 12/31/2003 21.58

EFG 1/1/2004 21.81

EFG 1/2/2004 21.77

EFG 1/3/2004 21.75

EFG 1/4/2004 21.61

EFG 1/5/2004 21.76

EFG 1/6/2004 21.48

EFG 1/7/2004 21.22

EFG 1/8/2004 21.55

EFG 1/9/2004 21.51

EFG 1/10/2004 21.27

EFG 1/11/2004 21.16

EFG 1/12/2004 21.40

EFG 1/13/2004 21.42

EFG 1/14/2004 21.42

EFG 1/15/2004 21.22

EFG 1/16/2004 21.20

EFG 1/17/2004 21.49

EFG 1/18/2004 21.36

EFG 1/19/2004 21.10

EFG 1/20/2004 21.02

EFG 1/21/2004 21.14

EFG 1/22/2004 21.68

EFG 1/23/2004 20.88

EFG 1/24/2004 20.97

EFG 1/25/2004 21.25

EFG 1/26/2004 21.17

EFG 1/27/2004 21.29

EFG 1/28/2004 21.69

EFG 1/29/2004 21.55

EFG 1/30/2004 21.39

EFG 1/31/2004 21.22

154
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (°C)

East Flower Garden Bank

Hobo Data October 29, 2002 - March 11, 2004

EFG 2/1/2004 21.05

EFG 2/2/2004 21.18

EFG 2/3/2004 21.17

EFG 2/4/2004 21.13

EFG 2/5/2004 21.17

EFG 2/6/2004 21.24

EFG 2/7/2004 21.04

EFG 2/8/2004 20.84

EFG 2/9/2004 20.57

EFG 2/10/2004 20.52

EFG 2/11/2004 20.51

EFG 2/12/2004 20.43

EFG 2/13/2004 20.17

EFG 2/14/2004 20.33

EFG 2/15/2004 20.27

EFG 2/16/2004 20.12

EFG 2/17/2004 20.09

EFG 2/18/2004 19.91

EFG 2/19/2004 20.96

EFG 2/20/2004 21.14

EFG 2/21/2004 20.78

EFG 2/22/2004 21.20

EFG 2/23/2004 21.69

EFG 2/24/2004 21.34

EFG 2/25/2004 21.05

EFG 2/26/2004 20.01

EFG 2/27/2004 20.39

EFG 2/28/2004 20.52

EFG 2/29/2004 20.43

EFG 3/1/2004 20.40

EFG 3/2/2004 20.38

EFG 3/3/2004 20.89

EFG 3/4/2004 20.67

EFG 3/5/2004 20.85

EFG 3/6/2004 20.84

EFG 3/7/2004 20.79

EFG 3/8/2004 20.73

EFG 3/9/2004 20.57

EFG 3/10/2004 20.25

EFG 3/11/2004 20.54

155
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Statistic Depth (m) Temp (°C) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

WFGB min 25.29 19.24 35.02 7.92 0.78 3.79 1.06

WFGB max 28.43 29.94 37.01 8.30 8.94 39.98 185.03

WFGB mean 27.36 23.43 36.48 8.24 6.18 7.29 20.14

WFGB SE 0.03 0.15 0.04 0.01 0.14 0.20 1.07

WFGB n 396 395 134 107 157 290 290

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (oC) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

WFGB 10/30/2002 27.62 27.046 35.579 7.918 3.183 8.387 57.851

WFGB 10/31/2002 27.898 26.842 35.544 8.027 3.713 8.592 41.398

WFGB 11/1/2002 27.9 26.7 35.609 4.191 8.679 23.863

WFGB 11/2/2002 27.894 26.485 35.615 4.397 8.64 20.253

WFGB 11/3/2002 27.902 26.456 35.56 3.079 8.598 21.044

WFGB 11/4/2002 27.839 26.611 35.475 2.416 8.469 36.718

WFGB 11/5/2002 27.877 26.673 35.574 2.723 8.383 14.871

WFGB 11/6/2002 27.785 26.233 35.67 2.985 8.329 43.231

WFGB 11/7/2002 27.802 25.923 35.727 3.312 8.321 48.084

WFGB 11/8/2002 27.821 26.024 35.695 3.168 8.248 28.827

WFGB 11/9/2002 27.824 26.029 35.742 3.188 8.242 39.391

WFGB 11/10/2002 27.85 26.186 35.721 3.164 8.229 38.577

WFGB 11/11/2002 27.821 26.316 35.815 2.427 8.221 35.404

WFGB 11/12/2002 27.78 26.241 35.855 2.796 8.212 43.975

WFGB 11/13/2002 27.819 25.86 35.927 3.06 8.296 41.214

WFGB 11/14/2002 27.799 25.714 35.962 2.701 8.335 30.115

WFGB 11/15/2002 27.814 25.346 35.93 0.779 8.377 7.13

WFGB 11/16/2002 27.792 25.488 35.874 2.124 8.296 25.026

WFGB 11/17/2002 27.763 25.365 35.968 3.468 8.306 33.197

WFGB 11/18/2002 27.785 25.412 36.141 3.326 8.367 29.549

WFGB 11/19/2002 27.732 25.171 36.078 3.58 8.456 11.308

WFGB 11/20/2002 27.723 25.042 36.087 3.827 8.448 16.776

WFGB 11/21/2002 27.689 25.034 36.18 3.253 8.527 32.529

WFGB 11/22/2002 27.718 24.418 35.962 4.355 9.298 28.501

WFGB 11/23/2002 27.693 24.465 36.094 5.325 9.527 32.269

WFGB 11/24/2002 27.719 24.682 36.243 4.569 12.371 34.342

WFGB 11/25/2002 27.736 24.635 36.262 4.68 10.477 34.074

WFGB 11/26/2002 27.744 24.531 36.194 4.605 9.506 28.314

WFGB 11/27/2002 27.746 24.559 36.291 4.206 9.312 5.076

WFGB 11/28/2002 27.743 24.352 36.237 4.399 9.485 16.986

WFGB 11/29/2002 27.756 24.208 36.266 4.883 8.952 25.495

WFGB 11/30/2002 27.776 24.214 36.306 4.876 8.056 8.146

WFGB 12/1/2002 27.724 23.925 36.201 5.456 7.81 19.779

WFGB 12/2/2002 27.708 23.551 36.052 5.449 8.215 11.188

WFGB 12/3/2002 27.713 23.882 36.209 5.444 14.283 12.979

WFGB 12/4/2002 27.712 24.023 36.257 5.048 22.594 10.986

WFGB 12/5/2002 27.668 23.167 35.81 5.144 33.335 1.422

WFGB 12/6/2002 27.729 22.867 35.714 4.999 39.981 13.454

West Flower Garden Bank

October 30, 2002 to March 11, 2004

West Flower Garden Bank

October 30, 2002 to March 11, 2004

156
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (oC) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

West Flower Garden Bank

October 30, 2002 to March 11, 2004

WFGB 12/7/2002 27.713 22.673 35.831 5.104 10.833 9.262

WFGB 12/8/2002 27.689 22.532 35.861 5.215 11.956 9.421

WFGB 12/9/2002 27.727 22.725 35.983 5.323 9.39 4.852

WFGB 12/10/2002 27.742 22.399 35.919 5.814 11.017 1.699

WFGB 12/11/2002 27.728 22.332 5.127 9.233 12.294

WFGB 12/12/2002 27.677 22.692 3.893 8.465 4.516

WFGB 12/13/2002 27.683 23.91 4.746 8.173 13.365

WFGB 12/14/2002 27.644 24.617 3.978 8.181 12.222

WFGB 12/15/2002 27.67 25.215 3.131 8.048 13.82

WFGB 12/16/2002 27.652 24.716 4.002 8.11 11.997

WFGB 12/17/2002 27.686 25.182 4.331 8.054 17.47

WFGB 12/18/2002 27.727 25.517 4.735 8.052 17.316

WFGB 12/19/2002 27.75 25.132 5.622 8.26 10.529

WFGB 12/20/2002 27.733 24.43 5.729 8.475 16.416

WFGB 12/21/2002 27.754 24.853 8.875 13.424

WFGB 12/22/2002 27.722 25.173 8.143 18.27

WFGB 12/23/2002 27.738 24.962 8.152 6.34

WFGB 12/24/2002 27.76 24.027 8.235 5.198

WFGB 12/25/2002 27.76 24.011 8.248 6.688

WFGB 12/26/2002 27.777 23.697 8.273 4.197

WFGB 12/27/2002 27.804 24.035 8.427 3.932

WFGB 12/28/2002 27.778 24.746 8.217 10.251

WFGB 12/29/2002 27.779 24.654 8.269 9.734

WFGB 12/30/2002 27.795 24.847 8.298 5.719

WFGB 12/31/2002 27.798 24.847 8.504 7.405

WFGB 1/1/2003 27.713 24.299 8.665 7.757

WFGB 1/2/2003 27.721 24.622 10.713 8.665

WFGB 1/3/2003 27.723 23.921 10.546 6.493

WFGB 1/4/2003 27.754 23.633 10.51 5.983

WFGB 1/5/2003 27.742 23.526 10.073 3.515

WFGB 1/6/2003 27.762 23.783 10.123 6.194

WFGB 1/7/2003 27.751 23.623 10.202 7.823

WFGB 1/8/2003 27.738 23.468 9.702 7.618

WFGB 1/9/2003 27.763 22.989 10.652 5.892

WFGB 1/10/2003 27.774 22.99 9.823 7.111

WFGB 1/11/2003 27.766 23.57 8.74 1.681

WFGB 1/12/2003 27.739 23.594 8.698 1.055

WFGB 1/13/2003 27.684 22.947 8.408 5.126

WFGB 1/14/2003 27.466 22.491 8.379 1.688

WFGB 1/15/2003 27.504 22.255 8.344 3.521

WFGB 1/16/2003 27.479 22.495 8.306 7.947

WFGB 1/17/2003 27.37 22.07 8.229 6.21

WFGB 1/18/2003 27.457 21.635 8.223 9.544

WFGB 1/19/2003 27.409 21.523 8.227 8.954

WFGB 1/20/2003 27.416 21.28 8.256 5.942

WFGB 1/21/2003 27.391 21.553 8.242 6.076

WFGB 1/22/2003 27.373 21.519 8.279 3.627

WFGB 1/23/2003 27.334 21.606 8.45 5.245

157
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (oC) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

West Flower Garden Bank

October 30, 2002 to March 11, 2004

WFGB 1/24/2003 27.368 22.674 17.787 5.79

WFGB 1/25/2003 27.35 22.782 24.292 7.716

WFGB 1/26/2003 27.35 23.636 20.781 3.234

WFGB 1/27/2003 27.147 24.169 8.173 4.02

WFGB 1/28/2003 26.95 23.978 8.706 15

WFGB 1/29/2003 26.77 23.416 8.29 18.027

WFGB 1/30/2003 27.174 23.197 8.308 9.067

WFGB 1/31/2003 27.198 22.706 8.162 11.897

WFGB 2/1/2003 27.321 22.292 8.13 7.162 8.075 7.032

WFGB 2/2/2003 27.642 20.036 8.129 6.965 6.631 14.569

WFGB 2/3/2003 27.693 20.088 8.134 6.957 6.669 11.203

WFGB 2/4/2003 27.698 20.111 8.143 7.032 6.706 19.1

WFGB 2/5/2003 27.668 19.993 8.144 7.001 6.7 13.183

WFGB 2/6/2003 27.693 20.098 8.144 6.954 6.706 12.226

WFGB 2/7/2003 27.72 20.086 8.155 6.822 6.694 2.567

WFGB 2/8/2003 27.655 19.898 8.159 6.799 6.669 4.093

WFGB 2/9/2003 27.7 19.784 8.159 6.858 6.694 14.386

WFGB 2/10/2003 27.668 19.814 8.157 6.932 6.763 32.741

WFGB 2/11/2003 27.639 19.831 8.161 6.949 6.694 33.166

WFGB 2/12/2003 28.345 20.025 8.055 4.096 7.4 14.388

WFGB 2/13/2003 28.429 8.038 3.511 7.431 14.568

WFGB 2/14/2003 27.873 20.158 36.742 8.133 5.754 6.963 16.596

WFGB 2/15/2003 27.683 19.886 36.773 8.169 6.779 6.738 1.569

WFGB 2/16/2003 27.672 19.995 36.841 8.174 6.868 6.775 3.599

WFGB 2/17/2003 27.643 19.767 36.836 8.177 7.137 6.787 25.716

WFGB 2/18/2003 27.682 19.776 36.86 8.181 7.199 6.825 22.812

WFGB 2/19/2003 27.725 19.919 36.889 8.184 7.144 6.781 15.35

WFGB 2/20/2003 27.682 19.874 36.877 8.183 7.088 6.781 9.793

WFGB 2/21/2003 27.645 19.664 36.834 8.179 6.876 6.812 6.42

WFGB 2/22/2003 27.646 19.622 36.814 8.196 7.199 6.862 14.769

WFGB 2/23/2003 27.633 19.243 36.657 8.202 7.408 6.819 13.256

WFGB 2/24/2003 27.661 19.665 36.772 8.21 7.731 6.787 18.852

WFGB 2/25/2003 27.633 19.451 36.638 8.214 7.014 6.794 2.714

WFGB 2/26/2003 27.63 19.857 36.778 8.217 7.041 6.769 5.014

WFGB 2/27/2003 27.663 19.618 36.744 8.224 7.216 6.8 3.911

WFGB 2/28/2003 27.637 19.764 36.789 8.234 7.312 6.8 4.726

WFGB 3/1/2003 27.69 20.026 36.859 8.239 7.133 6.794 4.243

WFGB 3/2/2003 27.667 20.121 36.881 8.247 7.243 6.862 5.244

WFGB 3/3/2003 27.679 20.089 36.883 8.247 6.916 6.769 2.664

WFGB 3/4/2003 27.682 19.784 36.848 8.259 7.489 6.806 11.124

WFGB 3/5/2003 27.66 19.677 36.826 8.259 7.416 6.812 8.201

WFGB 3/6/2003 27.628 19.653 36.801 8.266 7.132 6.812 4.496

WFGB 3/7/2003 27.632 20.176 36.862 8.276 7.245 6.794 6.217

WFGB 3/8/2003 27.609 20.091 36.843 8.279 7.352 6.837 8.983

WFGB 3/9/2003 27.639 19.994 36.61 8.275 7.381 6.8 11.69

WFGB 3/10/2003 27.644 19.637 36.732 8.275 7.357 6.844 9.826

WFGB 3/11/2003 27.638 19.99 36.659 8.282 7.191 6.812 5.419

WFGB 3/12/2003 27.657 20.003 36.833 8.286 7.276 6.856 12.349

158
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (oC) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

West Flower Garden Bank

October 30, 2002 to March 11, 2004

WFGB 3/13/2003 27.603 20.359 36.86 8.286 7.352 6.869 16.848

WFGB 3/14/2003 27.613 20.159 36.841 8.285 7.327 6.906 15.718

WFGB 3/15/2003 27.655 20.351 36.855 8.277 7.275 6.856 9.863

WFGB 3/16/2003 27.663 20.509 36.863 8.283 7.321 6.812 9.953

WFGB 3/17/2003 27.657 20.789 36.76 8.285 7.442 6.831 15.865

WFGB 3/18/2003 27.651 21.199 36.852 8.284 7.455 6.944 14.761

WFGB 3/19/2003 27.753 21.377 36.854 8.286 7.577 7.025 15.907

WFGB 3/20/2003 27.698 21.35 36.831 8.289 7.551 6.85 16.248

WFGB 3/21/2003 27.701 21.321 36.807 8.289 7.611 6.894 13.341

WFGB 3/22/2003 27.689 20.603 36.731 8.281 7.405 9.275 14.104

WFGB 3/23/2003 27.644 20.562 36.639 8.29 7.612 7.931 17.68

WFGB 3/24/2003 27.684 20.781 36.603 8.291 7.623 6.75 18.934

WFGB 3/25/2003 27.642 21.067 36.6 8.282 6.838 6.856 5.759

WFGB 3/26/2003 27.618 21.438 36.616 8.288 7.195 6.7 12.923

WFGB 3/27/2003 27.657 21.398 36.653 8.296 7.499 6.669 19.618

WFGB 3/28/2003 27.646 21.488 36.746 8.289 7.336 6.612 18.211

WFGB 3/29/2003 27.641 21.291 36.824 8.288 7.213 6.7 6.501

WFGB 3/30/2003 27.654 20.881 36.869 8.297 7.541 6.688 18.22

WFGB 3/31/2003 27.648 20.636 36.842 8.3 7.98 6.669 16.444

WFGB 4/1/2003 27.693 20.63 36.864 8.287 7.649 6.656 13.128

WFGB 4/2/2003 27.679 20.636 36.862 8.282 7.686 6.663 13.046

WFGB 4/3/2003 27.631 20.644 36.8 8.267 7.456 6.75 14.456

WFGB 4/4/2003 27.641 20.722 36.78 8.264 7.284 6.838 11.374

WFGB 4/5/2003 27.672 20.674 36.771 8.264 7.276 7.056 8.904

WFGB 4/6/2003 27.666 20.584 36.723 8.257 7.216 6.781 7.663

WFGB 4/7/2003 27.66 20.769 36.743 8.268 7.346 6.956 9.197

WFGB 4/8/2003 27.633 20.695 36.735 8.261 7.068 7.231 5.011

WFGB 4/9/2003 27.62 20.524 36.669 8.274 7.439 6.775 17.108

WFGB 4/10/2003 27.624 20.051 36.442 8.269 8.481 7 21.425

WFGB 4/11/2003 27.653 19.875 36.606 8.266 8.006 6.8 9.433

WFGB 4/12/2003 27.661 20.095 36.315 8.275 8.943 6.806 20.762

WFGB 4/13/2003 27.697 20.004 36.68 8.272 8.391 6.881 23.958

WFGB 4/14/2003 27.676 20.063 36.705 8.274 8.027 6.85 24.996

WFGB 4/15/2003 27.666 20.028 36.472 8.269 7.753 6.988 26.849

WFGB 4/16/2003 27.69 20.116 36.725 8.271 7.411 6.462 20.363

WFGB 4/17/2003 27.7 20.329 36.768 8.279 7.625 6.331 21.854

WFGB 4/18/2003 27.691 20.326 36.758 8.282 7.997 6.531 23.326

WFGB 4/19/2003 27.687 20.276 36.544 8.268 7.14 7.431 17.381

WFGB 4/20/2003 27.647 21.368 36.555 8.277 7.146 8.806 14.509

WFGB 4/21/2003 27.639 21.051 36.681 8.273 7.456 6.407 16.645

WFGB 4/22/2003 27.65 21.239 36.823 8.26 7.447 7.025 20.798

WFGB 4/23/2003 27.641 21.607 36.815 8.268 7.139 6.406 14.957

WFGB 4/24/2003 27.69 21.618 36.577 8.268 6.946 6.744 10.723

WFGB 4/25/2003 27.654 21.99 36.884 8.285 7.295 6.906 25.003

WFGB 4/26/2003 27.679 22.052 36.914 8.283 7.319 7.875 28.989

WFGB 4/27/2003 27.699 22.034 36.879 8.283 7.696 7.3 29.181

WFGB 4/28/2003 27.702 22.087 36.924 8.28 7.504 6.775 23.563

WFGB 4/29/2003 27.704 22.057 36.946 8.275 7.229 6.85 16.686

159
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (oC) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

West Flower Garden Bank

October 30, 2002 to March 11, 2004

WFGB 4/30/2003 27.774 22.084 35.022 8.28 7.467 8.625 24.098

WFGB 5/1/2003 27.751 22.154 37.014 8.274 7.232 7.631 15.276

WFGB 5/2/2003 27.706 22.235 36.806 8.282 7.69 11.256 25.601

WFGB 5/3/2003 27.722 21.955 36.931 8.276 7.336 9.269 19.483

WFGB 5/4/2003 27.692 21.668 36.894 8.275 7.293 7.633 18.979

WFGB 5/5/2003 27.728 21.727 36.814 8.274 7.077 6.62 21.336

WFGB 5/6/2003 27.68 21.753 36.827 8.281 7.396 6.069 18.238

WFGB 5/7/2003 27.664 21.869 36.459 8.277 7.204 5.644 16.13

WFGB 5/8/2003 27.669 21.955 36.739 8.281 7.211 5.619 14.49

WFGB 5/9/2003 27.651 21.845 36.798 8.279 7.194 5.606 12.451

WFGB 5/10/2003 27.666 21.741 36.485 8.271 7.056 5.606 9.952

WFGB 5/11/2003 27.677 21.793 36.649 8.277 7.122 5.631 9.412

WFGB 5/12/2003 27.665 21.451 36.671 8.275 7.071 5.613 12.034

WFGB 5/13/2003 27.677 21.351 36.271 8.278 7.209 5.819 17.57

WFGB 5/14/2003 27.693 21.34 36.624 8.265 7.124 5.506 15.328

WFGB 5/15/2003 27.716 21.801 36.638 8.254 6.759 6.025 15.256

WFGB 5/16/2003 27.649 21.601 36.543 8.262 6.942 6.25 1.962

WFGB 5/17/2003

WFGB 5/18/2003

WFGB 5/19/2003

WFGB 5/20/2003

WFGB 5/21/2003

WFGB 5/22/2003

WFGB 5/23/2003

WFGB 5/24/2003

WFGB 5/25/2003

WFGB 5/26/2003

WFGB 5/27/2003

WFGB 5/28/2003

WFGB 5/29/2003

WFGB 5/30/2003

WFGB 5/31/2003

WFGB 6/1/2003

WFGB 6/2/2003

WFGB 6/3/2003

WFGB 6/4/2003

WFGB 6/5/2003

WFGB 6/6/2003

WFGB 6/7/2003

WFGB 6/8/2003

WFGB 6/9/2003

WFGB 6/10/2003

WFGB 6/11/2003

WFGB 6/12/2003

WFGB 6/13/2003

WFGB 6/14/2003

WFGB 6/15/2003

WFGB 6/16/2003

160
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (oC) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

West Flower Garden Bank

October 30, 2002 to March 11, 2004

WFGB 6/17/2003

WFGB 6/18/2003

WFGB 6/19/2003

WFGB 6/20/2003

WFGB 6/21/2003

WFGB 6/22/2003

WFGB 6/23/2003

WFGB 6/24/2003

WFGB 6/25/2003

WFGB 6/26/2003

WFGB 6/27/2003

WFGB 6/28/2003

WFGB 6/29/2003

WFGB 6/30/2003

WFGB 7/1/2003

WFGB 7/2/2003

WFGB 7/3/2003

WFGB 7/4/2003

WFGB 7/5/2003

WFGB 7/6/2003

WFGB 7/7/2003

WFGB 7/8/2003

WFGB 7/9/2003

WFGB 7/10/2003

WFGB 7/11/2003

WFGB 7/12/2003

WFGB 7/13/2003

WFGB 7/14/2003

WFGB 7/15/2003

WFGB 7/16/2003

WFGB 7/17/2003

WFGB 7/18/2003

WFGB 7/19/2003

WFGB 7/20/2003

WFGB 7/21/2003

WFGB 7/22/2003

WFGB 7/23/2003

WFGB 7/24/2003

WFGB 7/25/2003

WFGB 7/26/2003

WFGB 7/27/2003

WFGB 7/28/2003

WFGB 7/29/2003

WFGB 7/30/2003

WFGB 7/31/2003

WFGB 8/1/2003

WFGB 8/2/2003

WFGB 8/3/2003

161
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (oC) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

West Flower Garden Bank

October 30, 2002 to March 11, 2004

WFGB 8/4/2003

WFGB 8/5/2003

WFGB 8/6/2003

WFGB 8/7/2003

WFGB 8/8/2003

WFGB 8/9/2003

WFGB 8/10/2003

WFGB 8/11/2003

WFGB 8/12/2003

WFGB 8/13/2003

WFGB 8/14/2003

WFGB 8/15/2003

WFGB 8/16/2003

WFGB 8/17/2003

WFGB 8/18/2003

WFGB 8/19/2003

WFGB 8/20/2003

WFGB 8/21/2003

WFGB 8/22/2003

WFGB 8/23/2003

WFGB 8/24/2003

WFGB 8/25/2003

WFGB 8/26/2003

WFGB 8/27/2003

WFGB 8/28/2003 27.962 29.538 5.287 185.031

WFGB 8/29/2003 27.955 29.754 5.298 63.335

WFGB 8/30/2003 27.634 29.935 5.6 6.846

WFGB 8/31/2003 27.318 29.696 6.302 22.977

WFGB 9/1/2003 27.387 29.206 5.342 44.615

WFGB 9/2/2003 27.44 29.372 5.319 74.11

WFGB 9/3/2003 27.501 29.544 5.302 79.333

WFGB 9/4/2003 27.531 29.764 5.273 61.521

WFGB 9/5/2003 27.562 29.742 5.302 48.512

WFGB 9/6/2003 27.566 29.841 5.321 70.737

WFGB 9/7/2003 27.528 29.687 5.315 76.8

WFGB 9/8/2003 27.564 29.528 5.373 61.198

WFGB 9/9/2003 27.6 29.61 5.304 54.202

WFGB 9/10/2003 27.611 29.423 5.342 68.708

WFGB 9/11/2003 27.664 29.424 5.381 63.592

WFGB 9/12/2003 27.723 29.427 5.41 42.396

WFGB 9/13/2003 27.742 29.36 5.648 65.515

WFGB 9/14/2003 27.754 29.285 5.473 60.644

WFGB 9/15/2003 27.765 29.227 5.471 35.273

WFGB 9/16/2003 27.798 29.29 5.51 63.481

WFGB 9/17/2003 27.814 29.237 5.535 62.667

WFGB 9/18/2003 27.833 28.911 5.571 27.356

WFGB 9/19/2003 27.862 29.164 5.617 20.054

WFGB 9/20/2003 27.826 29.125 5.677 14.479

162
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (oC) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

West Flower Garden Bank

October 30, 2002 to March 11, 2004

WFGB 9/21/2003 27.887 28.83 5.719 11.556

WFGB 9/22/2003 27.905 28.851 5.796 23.369

WFGB 9/23/2003 27.861 29.008 5.752 37.425

WFGB 9/24/2003 27.891 28.91 5.681 42.621

WFGB 9/25/2003 27.875 28.853 5.623 47.775

WFGB 9/26/2003 27.897 28.974 5.585 44.598

WFGB 9/27/2003 27.876 29.067 5.298 49.729

WFGB 9/28/2003 27.858 29.221 4.906 51.602

WFGB 9/29/2003 27.912 29.026 6.144 52.669

WFGB 9/30/2003 27.897 28.498 5.667 30.758

WFGB 10/1/2003 27.863 28.128 5.552 41.229

WFGB 10/2/2003 27.916 27.912 5.454 34.452

WFGB 10/3/2003 27.892 27.683 5.031 31.431

WFGB 10/4/2003 27.898 27.863 4.506 36.523

WFGB 10/5/2003 27.842 27.998 4.544 35.887

WFGB 10/6/2003 27.85 27.884 4.771 15.94

WFGB 10/7/2003 27.879 28.136 4.585 29.95

WFGB 10/8/2003 27.864 28.174 4.569 34.635

WFGB 10/9/2003 27.864 27.896 4.16 11.994

WFGB 10/10/2003 27.856 27.736 4.742 6.163

WFGB 10/11/2003 27.828 27.527 4.517 22.91

WFGB 10/12/2003 27.848 27.585 4.331 17.66

WFGB 10/13/2003 27.646 27.811 4.623 26.862

WFGB 10/14/2003 27.559 27.762 4.342 8.06

WFGB 10/15/2003 27.578 27.52 4.367 15.875

WFGB 10/16/2003 27.586 27.198 4.319 12.425

WFGB 10/17/2003 27.548 27.409 4.329 19.629

WFGB 10/18/2003 27.549 27.101 4.44 17.052

WFGB 10/19/2003 27.593 26.79 4.485 19.856

WFGB 10/20/2003 27.626 26.895 4.396 23.167

WFGB 10/21/2003 27.621 26.95 4.656 24.898

WFGB 10/22/2003 27.576 27.076 4.679 28.6

WFGB 10/23/2003 27.626 27.022 4.925 28.367

WFGB 10/24/2003 27.63 26.983 4.6 23.615

WFGB 10/25/2003 27.611 26.951 4.171 9.946

WFGB 10/26/2003 27.569 26.859 4.185 5.621

WFGB 10/27/2003 27.551 27.017 4.079 4.933

WFGB 10/28/2003 27.549 27.05 4.267 25.708

WFGB 10/29/2003 27.558 26.785 4.985 23.002

WFGB 10/30/2003 27.589 26.912 4.694 26.065

WFGB 10/31/2003 27.559 26.928 4.138 28.248

WFGB 11/1/2003 27.613 26.942 4.221 26.871

WFGB 11/2/2003 27.609 26.947 4.319 23.852

WFGB 11/3/2003 27.596 26.93 4.777 24.14

WFGB 11/4/2003 27.599 26.944 5.154 25.608

WFGB 11/5/2003 27.587 26.894 4.054 23.875

WFGB 11/6/2003 27.587 26.921 4.094 22.498

WFGB 11/7/2003 27.56 26.92 3.925 11.071

163
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (oC) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

West Flower Garden Bank

October 30, 2002 to March 11, 2004

WFGB 11/8/2003 27.553 26.748 3.792 13.094

WFGB 11/9/2003 27.545 26.497 4.292 17.608

WFGB 11/10/2003 27.567 26.676 4.423 21.948

WFGB 11/11/2003 27.575 26.849 4.088 22.973

WFGB 11/12/2003 27.558 26.65 4.529 22.008

WFGB 11/13/2003 27.531 26.573 4.223 14.544

WFGB 11/14/2003 27.525 26.468 4.253 18.402

WFGB 11/15/2003 27.513 26.313 4.248 15.279

WFGB 11/16/2003 27.542 26.333 4.404 15.252

WFGB 11/17/2003 27.495 26.288 4.131 14.806

WFGB 11/18/2003 27.545 26.296 5.185 13.44

WFGB 11/19/2003 27.498 25.98 5.543 15.254

WFGB 11/20/2003 27.477 25.698 6.075 11.965

WFGB 11/21/2003 27.502 25.344 5.512 7.429

WFGB 11/22/2003 27.414 25.249 5.235 11.185

WFGB 11/23/2003 27.402 25.151 5.025 8.879

WFGB 11/24/2003 27.363 24.896 8.265 8.227

WFGB 11/25/2003 27.37 24.559 4.929 6.125

WFGB 11/26/2003 27.372 24.482 5.311 6.806

WFGB 11/27/2003 27.415 24.389

WFGB 11/28/2003 27.31 24.07

WFGB 11/29/2003 27.451 23.687

WFGB 11/30/2003 27.453 23.895

WFGB 12/1/2003 27.378 24.321

WFGB 12/2/2003 27.357 24.456

WFGB 12/3/2003 27.423 24.501

WFGB 12/4/2003 27.359 24.546

WFGB 12/5/2003 27.321 24.392

WFGB 12/6/2003 27.265 24.072

WFGB 12/7/2003 27.221 23.905

WFGB 12/8/2003 27.272 23.849

WFGB 12/9/2003 27.391 23.693

WFGB 12/10/2003 27.473 23.298

WFGB 12/11/2003 27.508 23.081

WFGB 12/12/2003 27.538 23.039

WFGB 12/13/2003 27.542 23.012

WFGB 12/14/2003 27.58 22.836

WFGB 12/15/2003 27.558 22.631

WFGB 12/16/2003 27.562 22.609

WFGB 12/17/2003 27.515 22.651

WFGB 12/18/2003 27.549 22.656

WFGB 12/19/2003 27.497 22.548

WFGB 12/20/2003 27.512 22.514

WFGB 12/21/2003 27.508 22.496

WFGB 12/22/2003 27.462 22.182

WFGB 12/23/2003 27.391 22.005

WFGB 12/24/2003 27.356 21.961

WFGB 12/25/2003 27.404 21.813

164
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (oC) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

West Flower Garden Bank

October 30, 2002 to March 11, 2004

WFGB 12/26/2003 27.364 21.941

WFGB 12/27/2003 27.381 21.862

WFGB 12/28/2003 27.392 21.794

WFGB 12/29/2003 27.368 21.762

WFGB 12/30/2003 27.423 21.508

WFGB 12/31/2003 27.473 21.594

WFGB 1/1/2004 27.432 21.552

WFGB 1/2/2004 27.43 21.977

WFGB 1/3/2004 27.386 22.185

WFGB 1/4/2004 27.348 22.23

WFGB 1/5/2004 27.316 22.291

WFGB 1/6/2004 27.332 22.091

WFGB 1/7/2004 27.346 21.671

WFGB 1/8/2004 27.208 21.461

WFGB 1/9/2004 27.17 21.508

WFGB 1/10/2004 26.969 21.407

WFGB 1/11/2004 27.057 21.516

WFGB 1/12/2004 27.091 21.29

WFGB 1/13/2004 27.067 20.769

WFGB 1/14/2004 26.961 20.953

WFGB 1/15/2004 26.803 21.321

WFGB 1/16/2004 26.623 21.259

WFGB 1/17/2004 26.545 21.523

WFGB 1/18/2004 26.435 21.517

WFGB 1/19/2004 26.332 21.374

WFGB 1/20/2004 26.403 21.718

WFGB 1/21/2004 26.38 21.35

WFGB 1/22/2004 26.247 20.104

WFGB 1/23/2004 25.864 21.113

WFGB 1/24/2004 25.724 21.925

WFGB 1/25/2004 25.566 22.249

WFGB 1/26/2004 25.482 22.479

WFGB 1/27/2004 25.4 22.146

WFGB 1/28/2004 25.379 22.037

WFGB 1/29/2004 25.33 21.64

WFGB 1/30/2004 25.359 21.511

WFGB 1/31/2004 25.334 21.595

WFGB 2/1/2004 25.368 21.729

WFGB 2/2/2004 25.291 21.621

WFGB 2/3/2004 25.426 21.754

WFGB 2/4/2004 25.531 21.656

WFGB 2/5/2004 25.673 21.496

WFGB 2/6/2004 25.785 21.513

WFGB 2/7/2004 26.089 21.213

WFGB 2/8/2004 26.026 20.656

WFGB 2/9/2004 25.961 20.402

WFGB 2/10/2004 25.824 20.268

WFGB 2/11/2004 25.877 20.13

165
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Depth (m) Temp (oC) Sal (ppt) pH DO (mg/l) Turb (NTU) PAR (einst s-1m-2)

West Flower Garden Bank

October 30, 2002 to March 11, 2004

WFGB 2/12/2004 25.736 20.645

WFGB 2/13/2004 25.768 21.066

WFGB 2/14/2004 25.808 21.295

WFGB 2/15/2004 25.721 20.279

WFGB 2/16/2004 25.702 19.712

WFGB 2/17/2004 25.749 20.24

WFGB 2/18/2004 25.642 20.644

WFGB 2/19/2004 25.505 21.608

WFGB 2/20/2004 25.386 20.665

WFGB 2/21/2004 25.445 21.101

WFGB 2/22/2004 25.608 19.979

WFGB 2/23/2004 25.516 20.165

WFGB 2/24/2004 25.711 20.225

WFGB 2/25/2004 25.572 20.581

WFGB 2/26/2004 25.556 19.623

WFGB 2/27/2004 25.633 19.562

WFGB 2/28/2004 25.615 19.558

WFGB 2/29/2004 25.801 20.139

WFGB 3/1/2004 25.883 20.047

WFGB 3/2/2004 25.836 20

WFGB 3/3/2004 25.845 20.096

WFGB 3/4/2004 25.914 20.482

WFGB 3/5/2004 25.661 20.882

WFGB 3/6/2004 25.713 20.89

WFGB 3/7/2004 25.512 20.965

WFGB 3/8/2004 25.456 21.201

WFGB 3/9/2004 25.417 21.153

WFGB 3/10/2004 25.562 21.229

WFGB 3/11/2004 25.513 21.427

166
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Statistic WFG Daily Mean Temp Hobo

WFG min 19.34

WFG max 29.86

WFG mean 23.82

WFG SE 0.17

WFG n 405

Site Date Temperature (oC)

WFG 2/1/2003 20.177

WFG 2/2/2003 20.091

WFG 2/3/2003 20.202

WFG 2/4/2003 20.152

WFG 2/5/2003 20.097

WFG 2/6/2003 20.19

WFG 2/7/2003 20.093

WFG 2/8/2003 19.936

WFG 2/9/2003 19.859

WFG 2/10/2003 19.91

WFG 2/11/2003 19.936

WFG 2/12/2003 19.924

WFG 2/13/2003 20.023

WFG 2/14/2003 20.121

WFG 2/15/2003 19.996

WFG 2/16/2003 20.059

WFG 2/17/2003 19.851

WFG 2/18/2003 19.926

WFG 2/19/2003 20.023

WFG 2/20/2003 19.988

WFG 2/21/2003 19.762

WFG 2/22/2003 19.714

WFG 2/23/2003 19.345

WFG 2/24/2003 19.902

WFG 2/25/2003 19.577

WFG 2/26/2003 19.94

WFG 2/27/2003 19.849

WFG 2/28/2003 20.042

WFG 3/1/2003 20.158

WFG 3/2/2003 20.253

WFG 3/3/2003 20.117

WFG 3/4/2003 20.017

WFG 3/5/2003 19.692

WFG 3/6/2003 19.952

WFG 3/7/2003 20.404

WFG 3/8/2003 20.184

WFG 3/9/2003 19.994

Hobo Data February 1, 2003 - March 11, 2004

Hobo Data February 1, 2003 - March 11, 2004

West Flower Garden Bank

West Flower Garden Bank

167
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (oC)

Hobo Data February 1, 2003 - March 11, 2004

West Flower Garden Bank

WFG 3/10/2003 19.958

WFG 3/11/2003 20.134

WFG 3/12/2003 20.351

WFG 3/13/2003 20.529

WFG 3/14/2003 20.378

WFG 3/15/2003 20.535

WFG 3/16/2003 20.823

WFG 3/17/2003 21.127

WFG 3/18/2003 21.262

WFG 3/19/2003 21.754

WFG 3/20/2003 21.453

WFG 3/21/2003 21.261

WFG 3/22/2003 20.736

WFG 3/23/2003 20.821

WFG 3/24/2003 21.171

WFG 3/25/2003 21.408

WFG 3/26/2003 21.676

WFG 3/27/2003 21.65

WFG 3/28/2003 21.724

WFG 3/29/2003 21.429

WFG 3/30/2003 21.034

WFG 3/31/2003 20.907

WFG 4/1/2003 20.885

WFG 4/2/2003 20.803

WFG 4/3/2003 20.923

WFG 4/4/2003 20.901

WFG 4/5/2003 20.865

WFG 4/6/2003 20.837

WFG 4/7/2003 20.897

WFG 4/8/2003 20.992

WFG 4/9/2003 20.617

WFG 4/10/2003 20.19

WFG 4/11/2003 20.117

WFG 4/12/2003 20.408

WFG 4/13/2003 20.331

WFG 4/14/2003 20.369

WFG 4/15/2003 20.363

WFG 4/16/2003 20.474

WFG 4/17/2003 20.69

WFG 4/18/2003 20.575

WFG 4/19/2003 20.921

WFG 4/20/2003 21.527

WFG 4/21/2003 21.662

WFG 4/22/2003 21.77

WFG 4/23/2003 21.982

WFG 4/24/2003 22.234

WFG 4/25/2003 22.493

168
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (oC)

Hobo Data February 1, 2003 - March 11, 2004

West Flower Garden Bank

WFG 4/26/2003 22.547

WFG 4/27/2003 22.533

WFG 4/28/2003 22.593

WFG 4/29/2003 22.609

WFG 4/30/2003 22.625

WFG 5/1/2003 22.806

WFG 5/2/2003 22.822

WFG 5/3/2003 22.437

WFG 5/4/2003 22.29

WFG 5/5/2003 22.481

WFG 5/6/2003 22.497

WFG 5/7/2003 22.497

WFG 5/8/2003 22.757

WFG 5/9/2003 22.453

WFG 5/10/2003 22.385

WFG 5/11/2003 22.493

WFG 5/12/2003 22.108

WFG 5/13/2003 22.098

WFG 5/14/2003 22.318

WFG 5/15/2003 22.567

WFG 5/16/2003 22.683

WFG 5/17/2003 23.59

WFG 5/18/2003 22.491

WFG 5/19/2003 22.801

WFG 5/20/2003 22.965

WFG 5/21/2003 22.835

WFG 5/22/2003 22.796

WFG 5/23/2003 22.399

WFG 5/24/2003 21.999

WFG 5/25/2003 22.238

WFG 5/26/2003 22.224

WFG 5/27/2003 21.951

WFG 5/28/2003 21.537

WFG 5/29/2003 22.067

WFG 5/30/2003 23.196

WFG 5/31/2003 25.423

WFG 6/1/2003 23.197

WFG 6/2/2003 21.847

WFG 6/3/2003 21.495

WFG 6/4/2003 21.376

WFG 6/5/2003 21.306

WFG 6/6/2003 21.356

WFG 6/7/2003 21.213

WFG 6/8/2003 21.167

WFG 6/9/2003 21.278

WFG 6/10/2003 21.3

WFG 6/11/2003 21.36

169
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (oC)

Hobo Data February 1, 2003 - March 11, 2004

West Flower Garden Bank

WFG 6/12/2003 21.505

WFG 6/13/2003 21.61

WFG 6/14/2003 21.698

WFG 6/15/2003 22.432

WFG 6/16/2003 22.244

WFG 6/17/2003 21.662

WFG 6/18/2003 21.859

WFG 6/19/2003 22.541

WFG 6/20/2003 22.559

WFG 6/21/2003 22.387

WFG 6/22/2003 23.307

WFG 6/23/2003 25.13

WFG 6/24/2003 24.708

WFG 6/25/2003 24.346

WFG 6/26/2003 25.842

WFG 6/27/2003 27.27

WFG 6/28/2003 26.859

WFG 6/29/2003 27.073

WFG 6/30/2003 27.332

WFG 7/1/2003 27.68

WFG 7/2/2003 28.238

WFG 7/3/2003 28.462

WFG 7/4/2003 27.958

WFG 7/5/2003 27.127

WFG 7/6/2003 27.907

WFG 7/7/2003 28.694

WFG 7/8/2003 28.124

WFG 7/9/2003 28.599

WFG 7/10/2003 28.694

WFG 7/11/2003 28.703

WFG 7/12/2003 29.415

WFG 7/13/2003 29.371

WFG 7/14/2003 29.061

WFG 7/15/2003 26.117

WFG 7/16/2003 25.883

WFG 7/17/2003 25.529

WFG 7/18/2003 25.207

WFG 7/19/2003 25.623

WFG 7/20/2003 25.886

WFG 7/21/2003 27.082

WFG 7/22/2003 27.671

WFG 7/23/2003 28.392

WFG 7/24/2003 28.593

WFG 7/25/2003 28.042

WFG 7/26/2003 27.497

WFG 7/27/2003 27.37

WFG 7/28/2003 27.579

170
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (oC)

Hobo Data February 1, 2003 - March 11, 2004

West Flower Garden Bank

WFG 7/29/2003 27.385

WFG 7/30/2003 27.479

WFG 7/31/2003 27.582

WFG 8/1/2003 27.892

WFG 8/2/2003 28.447

WFG 8/3/2003 28.642

WFG 8/4/2003 29.771

WFG 8/5/2003 29.707

WFG 8/6/2003 29.317

WFG 8/7/2003 29.161

WFG 8/8/2003 28.928

WFG 8/9/2003 28.541

WFG 8/10/2003 29.028

WFG 8/11/2003 28.016

WFG 8/12/2003 28.186

WFG 8/13/2003 28.744

WFG 8/14/2003 29.307

WFG 8/15/2003 28.8

WFG 8/16/2003 28.945

WFG 8/17/2003 29.101

WFG 8/18/2003 29.028

WFG 8/19/2003 28.579

WFG 8/20/2003 28.329

WFG 8/21/2003 28.122

WFG 8/22/2003 28.995

WFG 8/23/2003 29.068

WFG 8/24/2003 29.363

WFG 8/25/2003 29.427

WFG 8/26/2003 29.54

WFG 8/27/2003 29.58

WFG 8/28/2003 29.529

WFG 8/29/2003 29.759

WFG 8/30/2003 29.863

WFG 8/31/2003 29.467

WFG 9/1/2003 29.117

WFG 9/2/2003 29.298

WFG 9/3/2003 29.504

WFG 9/4/2003 29.667

WFG 9/5/2003 29.738

WFG 9/6/2003 29.769

WFG 9/7/2003 29.525

WFG 9/8/2003 29.471

WFG 9/9/2003 29.563

WFG 9/10/2003 29.319

WFG 9/11/2003 29.377

WFG 9/12/2003 29.348

WFG 9/13/2003 29.28

171
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (oC)

Hobo Data February 1, 2003 - March 11, 2004

West Flower Garden Bank

WFG 9/14/2003 29.227

WFG 9/15/2003 29.13

WFG 9/16/2003 29.127

WFG 9/17/2003 29.063

WFG 9/18/2003 28.752

WFG 9/19/2003 28.767

WFG 9/20/2003 28.773

WFG 9/21/2003 28.38

WFG 9/22/2003 28.537

WFG 9/23/2003 28.591

WFG 9/24/2003 28.429

WFG 9/25/2003 28.423

WFG 9/26/2003 28.603

WFG 9/27/2003 28.684

WFG 9/28/2003 28.768

WFG 9/29/2003 28.52

WFG 9/30/2003 27.961

WFG 10/1/2003 27.634

WFG 10/2/2003 27.415

WFG 10/3/2003 27.245

WFG 10/4/2003 27.444

WFG 10/5/2003 27.528

WFG 10/6/2003 27.44

WFG 10/7/2003 27.663

WFG 10/8/2003 27.706

WFG 10/9/2003 27.294

WFG 10/10/2003 27.204

WFG 10/11/2003 27.042

WFG 10/12/2003 27.093

WFG 10/13/2003 27.366

WFG 10/14/2003 27.331

WFG 10/15/2003 27.02

WFG 10/16/2003 26.889

WFG 10/17/2003 27.093

WFG 10/18/2003 26.755

WFG 10/19/2003 26.518

WFG 10/20/2003 26.561

WFG 10/21/2003 26.647

WFG 10/22/2003 26.763

WFG 10/23/2003 26.695

WFG 10/24/2003 26.677

WFG 10/25/2003 26.632

WFG 10/26/2003 26.568

WFG 10/27/2003 26.828

WFG 10/28/2003 26.718

WFG 10/29/2003 26.457

WFG 10/30/2003 26.724

172
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (oC)

Hobo Data February 1, 2003 - March 11, 2004

West Flower Garden Bank

WFG 10/31/2003 26.612

WFG 11/1/2003 26.701

WFG 11/2/2003 26.687

WFG 11/3/2003 26.691

WFG 11/4/2003 26.701

WFG 11/5/2003 26.679

WFG 11/6/2003 26.695

WFG 11/7/2003 26.648

WFG 11/8/2003 26.431

WFG 11/9/2003 26.252

WFG 11/10/2003 26.567

WFG 11/11/2003 26.587

WFG 11/12/2003 26.366

WFG 11/13/2003 26.308

WFG 11/14/2003 26.195

WFG 11/15/2003 26.034

WFG 11/16/2003 26.099

WFG 11/17/2003 26.024

WFG 11/18/2003 26.008

WFG 11/19/2003 25.669

WFG 11/20/2003 25.404

WFG 11/21/2003 25.018

WFG 11/22/2003 24.994

WFG 11/23/2003 24.909

WFG 11/24/2003 24.523

WFG 11/25/2003 24.327

WFG 11/26/2003 24.15

WFG 11/27/2003 24.05

WFG 11/28/2003 23.635

WFG 11/29/2003 23.44

WFG 11/30/2003 23.691

WFG 12/1/2003 24.09

WFG 12/2/2003 24.223

WFG 12/3/2003 24.311

WFG 12/4/2003 24.307

WFG 12/5/2003 24.09

WFG 12/6/2003 23.803

WFG 12/7/2003 23.667

WFG 12/8/2003 23.635

WFG 12/9/2003 23.426

WFG 12/10/2003 22.956

WFG 12/11/2003 22.82

WFG 12/12/2003 22.848

WFG 12/13/2003 22.782

WFG 12/14/2003 22.617

WFG 12/15/2003 22.345

WFG 12/16/2003 22.475

173
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (oC)

Hobo Data February 1, 2003 - March 11, 2004

West Flower Garden Bank

WFG 12/17/2003 22.485

WFG 12/18/2003 22.459

WFG 12/19/2003 22.351

WFG 12/20/2003 22.349

WFG 12/21/2003 22.263

WFG 12/22/2003 21.937

WFG 12/23/2003 21.817

WFG 12/24/2003 21.782

WFG 12/25/2003 21.682

WFG 12/26/2003 21.756

WFG 12/27/2003 21.672

WFG 12/28/2003 21.618

WFG 12/29/2003 21.497

WFG 12/30/2003 21.381

WFG 12/31/2003 21.409

WFG 1/1/2004 21.461

WFG 1/2/2004 21.891

WFG 1/3/2004 22.064

WFG 1/4/2004 22.064

WFG 1/5/2004 22.1

WFG 1/6/2004 21.833

WFG 1/7/2004 21.406

WFG 1/8/2004 21.26

WFG 1/9/2004 21.332

WFG 1/10/2004 21.246

WFG 1/11/2004 21.338

WFG 1/12/2004 20.93

WFG 1/13/2004 20.553

WFG 1/14/2004 20.93

WFG 1/15/2004 21.209

WFG 1/16/2004 21.004

WFG 1/17/2004 21.403

WFG 1/18/2004 21.424

WFG 1/19/2004 21.101

WFG 1/20/2004 21.734

WFG 1/21/2004 20.682

WFG 1/22/2004 19.97

WFG 1/23/2004 21.213

WFG 1/24/2004 21.72

WFG 1/25/2004 22.166

WFG 1/26/2004 22.228

WFG 1/27/2004 21.807

WFG 1/28/2004 21.65

WFG 1/29/2004 21.251

WFG 1/30/2004 21.252

WFG 1/31/2004 21.364

WFG 2/1/2004 21.346

174
Appendix 5

Water Quality Data

Site Date Temperature (oC)

Hobo Data February 1, 2003 - March 11, 2004

West Flower Garden Bank

WFG 2/2/2004 21.336

WFG 2/3/2004 21.529

WFG 2/4/2004 21.27

WFG 2/5/2004 21.235

WFG 2/6/2004 21.127

WFG 2/7/2004 20.778

WFG 2/8/2004 20.261

WFG 2/9/2004 20.095

WFG 2/10/2004 19.799

WFG 2/11/2004 20.234

WFG 2/12/2004 20.349

WFG 2/13/2004 20.976

WFG 2/14/2004 20.992

WFG 2/15/2004 19.77

WFG 2/16/2004 19.645

WFG 2/17/2004 19.97

WFG 2/18/2004 20.917

WFG 2/19/2004 21.131

WFG 2/20/2004 20.395

WFG 2/21/2004 20.994

WFG 2/22/2004 19.557

WFG 2/23/2004 19.805

WFG 2/24/2004 20.339

WFG 2/25/2004 20.166

WFG 2/26/2004 19.353

WFG 2/27/2004 19.339

WFG 2/28/2004 19.542

WFG 2/29/2004 19.91

WFG 3/1/2004 19.835

WFG 3/2/2004 19.809

WFG 3/3/2004 19.916

WFG 3/4/2004 20.434

WFG 3/5/2004 20.605

WFG 3/6/2004 20.623

WFG 3/7/2004 20.678

WFG 3/8/2004 20.891

WFG 3/9/2004 20.895

WFG 3/10/2004 20.948

WFG 3/11/2004 21.175

175
Appendix 6

Fish Survey

East and West Flower Garden Banks 2002 and 2003

Family Spp Abundance* Family Spp Abundance*

Acanthuridae Doctorfish 27 Acanthuridae Blue tang 29

Acanthuridae Blue tang 21 Acanthuridae Doctorfish 10

Acanthuridae Surgeon fish 7 Aulostomidae Trumpetfish 1

Atherinidae Silverside 100 Balistidae Black durgeon 19

Aulostomidae Trumpetfish 1 Blenniidae Saddled blenny 1

Balistidae Black durgeon 22 Carangidae Blue runner 6

Balistidae Ocean triggerfish 1 Carangidae Bar jack 2

Blenniidae Red lipped blenny 1 Chaetodontidae Reef butterfly fish 22

Carangidae Bar jack 10 Chaetodontidae Longsnout butterfly fish 2

Carangidae Black jack 3 Chaetodontidae Spotfin butterfly fish 2

Carangidae Horse-eye jack 1 gobiidae Neon goby 1

Carangidae Rainbow runner 1 Holocentridae Squirrelfish 2

Chaetodontidae Reef butterfly fish 30 Holocentridae Longspined squirrelfish 1

Chaetodontidae Banded butterflyfish 4 Kyphosidae Chub 36

Gobiidae Neon goby 5 Labridae Bluehead 366

Holocentridae Squirrelfish 2 Labridae Creole wrasse 255

Holocentridae Longspine squirrelfish 1 Labridae Clown wrasse 64

Inermiidae Boga* >200 200 Labridae Yellowhead wrasse 24

Kyphosidae Chub 106 Labridae Spanish hogfish 23

Labridae Bluehead 479 Labridae Puddingwife 1

Labridae Creole wrasse 464 Lutjanidae Dog snapper 1

Labridae Clown wrasse 24 Lutjanidae Gray snapper 1

Labridae Spanish hogfish 13 Monocanthidae Orangespotted filefish 2

Labridae Puddingwife 1 Monocanthidae Whitespotted filefish 1

Lutjanidae Dog snapper 4 Mullidae Yellow goatfish 10

Monocanthidae Whitespotted filefish 3 Muraenidae Spotted moray 1

Monocanthidae Orangespotted filefish 2 Ostraciidae Smooth trunkfish 5

Mullidae Yellow goatfish 3 Ostraciidae Spotted trunkfish 2

Ostraciidae Smooth trunkfish 3 Ostraciidae Honeycomb cowfish 1

Ostraciidae Spotted trunkfish 3 Pomacanthidae Queen angelfish 9

Pomacanthidae Rock beauty 5 Pomacanthidae French angelfish 8

Pomacanthidae French angelfish 2 Pomacanthidae Rock beauty 8

Pomacanthidae Queen angelfish 2 Pomacentridae Brown chromis 239

Pomacentridae Blue chromis 334 Pomacentridae 3 Spot damselfish 121

Pomacentridae Brown chromis 175 Pomacentridae Blue chromis 80

Pomacentridae 3 Spot damselfish 149 Pomacentridae Bicolor damselfish 63

Pomacentridae Bicolor damselfish 96 Pomacentridae Cocoa damsel 26

Pomacentridae Cocoa damsel 12 Pomacentridae Yellowtail damsel 20

Pomacentridae Sergeant major 9 Pomacentridae Sergeant major 6

Pomacentridae Yellowtail damsel 6 Pomacentridae Spotfin damsel 6

Pomacentridae Beaugregory 1 Pomacentridae Long-fin damsel 1

Scaridae Queen parrotfish 33 Scaridae Queen parrotfish 33

Scaridae Stoplight parrotfish 24 Scaridae Stoplight parrotfish 30

Scaridae Striped parrotfish 5 Scaridae Princess parrotfish 5

Scaridae Princess parrotfish 4 Scaridae Redband parrotfish 2

Serranidae Creole fish 202 Serranidae Creole fish 459

Serranidae Rock hind 5 Serranidae Rock hind 4

Serranidae Yellowmouth grouper 4 Serranidae Graysby 2

Serranidae Graysby 3 Serranidae Yellowtail grouper 2

Serranidae Tiger grouper 3 Serranidae Red hind 1

Serranidae Yellowfin grouper 2 Serranidae Tiger grouper 1

Serranidae Marbled grouper 1 Sphyraenidae Barracuda 34

Sphyraenidae Barracuda 15 Tetraodontidae Sharpnose puffer 21

Tetraodontidae Sharpnose puffer 11 Total 2072

Total 2645

* Number of fish sited in the 100m x 100m study site in an average of sixteen surveys conducted at each bank

East Bank 2002 West Bank 2002

177
Appendix 6

Fish Survey

East and West Flower Garden Banks 2002 and 2003

Family Spp Abundance* Family Spp Abundance*

Acanthuridae Blue tang 20 Acanthuridae Blue tang 48

Acanthuridae Doctorfish 18 Acanthuridae Doctorfish 3

Acanthuridae Ocean surgeonfish 5 Acanthuridae Ocean surgeonfish 3

Aulostomidae Trumpetfish 2 Balistidae Black durgeon 33

Balistidae Black durgeon 22 Balistidae Ocean triggerfish 16

Blenniidae Redlip blenny 4 Blenniidae Redlip blenny 4

Carangidae Bar jack 17 Carangidae Bar jack 27

Carangidae Crevalle jack 12 Chaetodontidae Reef butterflyfish 28

Carangidae Horseye jack 16 Chaetodontidae Longsnout butterflyfish 5

Chaetodontidae Reef butterflyfish 11 Chaetodontidae Spotfin butterflyfish 5

Chaetodontidae Spotfin butterflyfish 6 Cirrhitidae Redspotted hawkfish 2

Diodontidae Balloonfish 1 Diodontidae Balloonfish 1

Gobiidae Neon goby 21 Diodontidae Porcupinefish 1

Holocentridae Longspine squirrelfish 2 Gobiidae Neon goby 43

Holocentridae Squirrelfish 1 Gobiidae Goldspot goby 1

Kyphosidae Bermuda chub 122 Holocentridae Longspine squirrelfish 4

Labridae Bluehead 149 Holocentridae Blackbar soldierfish 1

Labridae Creole wrasse 1575 Holocentridae Squirrelfish 1

Labridae Puddingwife 1 Inermiidae Boga 220

Labridae Spanish hogfish 25 Kyphosidae Bermuda chub 11

Monocanthidae Whitespotted filefish 7 Labridae Bluehead 304

Mullidae Yellow goatfish 3 Labridae Creole wrasse 216

Ostraciidae Honeycomb cowfish 2 Labridae Spanish hogfish 27

Ostraciidae Smooth trunkfish 3 Labridae Yellowhead wrasse 5

Ostraciidae Spotted trunkfish 1 Lutjanidae Dog snapper 3

Pomacanthidae Queen angelfish 2 Mullidae Yellow goatfish 17

Pomacanthidae Rock beauty 3 Ostraciidae Smooth trunkfish 8

Pomacentridae Bicolor damselfish 125 Ostraciidae Spotted moray 2

Pomacentridae Blue chromis 327 Pomacanthidae Rock beauty 8

Pomacentridae Brown chromis 815 Pomacanthidae Queen angelfish 3

Pomacentridae Cocoa damselfish 8 Pomacentridae Brown chromis 431

Pomacentridae Purple reeffish 1 Pomacentridae Blue chromis 184

Pomacentridae Sergeant major 4 Pomacentridae Threespot damselfish 167

Pomacentridae Threespot damselfish 138 Pomacentridae Bicolor damselfish 137

Pomacentridae Yellowtail damselfish 6 Pomacentridae Cocoa damselfish 21

Scaridae Princess parrotfish 27 Pomacentridae Yellowtail damselfish 12

Scaridae Queen parrotfish 38 Pomacentridae Dusky damselfish 5

Scaridae Redband parrotfish 3 Pomacentridae Sergeant major 4

Scaridae Stoplight parrotfish 18 Pomacentridae Purple reeffish 1

Serranidae Coney 1 Pomacentridae Sunshinefish 1

Serranidae Creole fish 350 Scaridae Queen parrotfish 41

Serranidae Rock hind 2 Scaridae Stoplight parrotfish 19

Serranidae Tiger grouper 3 Scaridae Princess parrotfish 16

Serranidae Yellowmouth grouper 1 Scaridae Redband parrotfish 5

Sphyraenidae Barracuda 14 Serranidae Creole fish 381

Tetraodontidae Sharpnose puffer 15 Serranidae Coney 2

Total 3947 Serranidae Graysby 2

Serranidae Rock hind 2

Serranidae Tattler bass 2

Serranidae Marbled grouper 1

Sphyraenidae Barracuda 36

Tetraodontidae Sharpnose puffer 20

Total 2540

* Number of fish sited in the 100m x 100m study site in an average of sixteen surveys conducted at each bank

East Bank 2003 West Bank 2003

178
Appendix 7

Coral Disease

179

Figure 1. Plague-like syndrome on Diploria strigosa observed during the 2002 monitoring cruise.

Figure 2. Plague-like syndrome on Diploria strigosa observed during the 2002 monitoring cruise.
Appendix 7

Coral Disease

180

Figure 3. Plague-like syndrome on Siderastrea siderea observed during the 2003 monitoring cruise.

Figure 4. Concentrated parrotfish biting on Montastraea faveolata observed during the 2002 monitoring

cruise.
Appendix 7

Coral Disease

181

Figure 5. Concentrated parrotfish biting on Colpophyllia natans observed during the 2002 monitoring

cruise.

Figure 6. Ridge mortality caused by Stegastes planifrons territories on Diploria strigosa observed during

the 2002 monitoring cruise.
Appendix 7

Coral Disease

182

Figure 7. Interspecific coral competition observed during the 2002 monitoring cruise.
The Department of the Interior Mission

As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility

for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering

sound use of our land and water resources; protecting our fish, wildlife, and biological diversity;

preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places;

and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses

our energy and mineral resources and works to ensure that their development is in the best

interests of all our people by encouraging stewardship and citizen participation in their care.

The Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities

and for people who live in island territories under U.S. administration.

The Minerals Management Service Mission

As a bureau of the Department of the Interior, the Minerals Management Service's (MMS)

primary responsibilities are to manage the mineral resources located on the Nation's Outer

Continental Shelf (OCS), collect revenue from the Federal OCS and onshore Federal and Indian

lands, and distribute those revenues.

Moreover, in working to meet its responsibilities, the Offshore Minerals Management Program

administers the OCS competitive leasing program and oversees the safe and environmentally

sound exploration and production of our Nation's offshore natural gas, oil and other mineral

resources. The MMS Minerals Revenue Management meets its responsibilities by ensuring the

efficient, timely and accurate collection and disbursement of revenue from mineral leasing and

production due to Indian tribes and allottees, States and the U.S. Treasury.

The MMS strives to fulfill its responsibilities through the general guiding principles of: (1) being

responsive to the public's concerns and interests by maintaining a dialogue with all potentially

affected parties and (2) carrying out its programs with an emphasis on working to enhance the

quality of life for all Americans by lending MMS assistance and expertise to economic

development and environmental protection.