Ecosystem Assets

Published as: Coral Propagation Moyo Island | Technique: Coral Gardening - Transplantation Phase | Disturbance addressed: yes | Genera: Mixed | Method: Planting corals of opportunity onto reef rubble consolidated into 'nurseries (as described above) | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Coral seeding as a technology for recovering degraded coral reefs in the Philippines | Technique: Coral Gardening | Disturbance addressed: General degradation | Genera: Pocillopora | Method: Pocillopora damicornis planulae were seeded in the laboratory and onto the reef for a comparison of survival rates. Laboratory-reared planulae were then transplanted onto the reef to study size-related mortality. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 2.9% | Post-restoration monitoring: 4 months | Authors' conclusion: Laboratory-reared planulae survived much better than those seeded onto the reefs; of the latter, none remained after 3 weeks. Larger transplants fared best when outplanting laboratory-reared corals onto the reef. | Lessons reported: It's worth rearing corals in the laboratory to a certain size before outplanting. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Pyramid Reefs and Coral Nurseries | Technique: Coral gardening - transplantation, substrate addition - artificial reefs | Disturbance addressed: yes | Genera: Mixed | Method: Deployed large cement structures, coral nurseries grow mixed species of coral. These are then transplanted onto the artificial reef | Authors' conclusion: Off the Thailand coast, underwater pyramids of concrete blocks are forming the beginnings of an amazing artificial reef … and nearby in the shallows is a nursery for fledgling corals. This reef-in-the-making is already attracting plenty of marine life | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Direct seeding of mass-cultured coral larvae is not an effective option for reef rehabilitation. | Technique: Larval Enhancement | Genera: Acropora | Method: Gravid colonies of A. digitifera were collected from nearby reefs and placed in in situ flow-through tanks, until they spawned. Gamete bundles were collected and placed in a fertilisation tank. Larvae were considered competent when >50% were competent to settle (using CCA chip to induce settlement). Larvae were then introduced to concrete Reef balls (pallet ball type), which was covered in a camping tent to contain the larvae on the artificial substrate. The mesh tent was removed after 24 hours… | Post-restoration monitoring: 12 months | Authors' conclusion: Seeding Reef Balls with larvae increased the settlement substantially after five weeks, however this this increase did not persist after 30 weeks. In addition, comparisons to visible recruits after 12 months revealed no difference between the treatment and control reef balls. The authors report a 4 fold increase in visible settlers compared to the background of natural recruitment, but speculate that this is because the area a;ready receives a relatively large contribution of recruiting larvae, compared other restoration sites. | Lessons reported: Authors concede that larval supplemental methods may be more suitable to places with low background recruitment levels. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Examining the use of mass transplantation of brooding and spawning corals to support natural coral recruitment in Sulawesi / Indonesia | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora, Pocillopora, Isopora | Method: At each of three locations, three 10 x 10 m plots, set 30 m apart, were marked and cleared, and then assigned to one of 3 treatments: 1) control, 2) structures, 3) structures and transplants. Controls were left alone, and treatments received 50 concrete structures arranged in a chessboard pattern. Structures+Transplants plots received coral fragments fixed on bamboo trays, which were placed on the rubble between the concrete structures. Species composition varied between three locations. Coral … | Post-restoration monitoring: 24 months | Authors' conclusion: Coral transplantation did not appear to be a suitable tool for enhancing coral recruitment in the short term. | Lessons reported: Under the study conditions, providing stable substrate for settlement in the form of artificial reefs, together with improved management to reduce chronic stressors, may be more effective approaches to support coral recruitment. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Survival, growth, and branch production of unattached fragments of the threatened hermatypic coral Acropora cervicornis. | Technique: Transplantation | Disturbance addressed: General degradation | Genera: Acropora | Method: Naturally occurring fragments of A. cervicornis were attached only by a monofilament line and monitored for 18 months at two sites to quantify survival, growth, and branching dynamics. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 22.5% | Post-restoration monitoring: 18 months | Authors' conclusion: Fragment survivorship did not exceed 26%, growth rates were low, and fragments barely produced new branches, with no difference for different size categories. | Lessons reported: Stable attachment is important for fragment survival. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Caramoan Coral Reef Project | Technique: Coral gardening - transplantation, Substrate Enhancement - Electric | Disturbance addressed: yes | Genera: Mixed | Method: Using metal artificial reef structures to provide a base onto which corals of opportunity are transplanted | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Effects of Concrete-Bamboo Cages on Coral Fragments: Evaluation of a Low-Tech Method Used in Artisanal Ocean-Based Coral Farming. | Technique: Coral Gardening - Nursery Phase | Genera: Acropora, Pavona | Method: Experiment testing effects of bamboo cages to exclude coral predators (fish and invertebrates). Nubbins on concrete bases, fixed onto 1 x 1m bamboo boards. Treatments = Bamboo cages with small and large mesh, shading vs no shading, deep vs shallow. Control = no cages, open cages, no shading. | Post-restoration monitoring: 4.4 months | Authors' conclusion: Fragments do not necessarily grow faster and at higher survival rates in cages, especially if they do not adequately exclude fish. A. gomezi fragments reached the highest mean skeletal extension when cultured outside of cages in shallow water, all other treatments showed net negative growth. P. cactus growth was only affected by cages in deeper sites. Similarly, A gomezi grew faster unshaded, while P. cactus grew more in the shade. | Lessons reported: Bamboo cages not appropriate to keep fishes out, but rather attract fish, which may cause mechanical damage to coral fragments inside cages. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Coral Nursery, Phi Phi Island National Park | Technique: Coral Gardening - Transplantation Phase | Disturbance addressed: yes | Genera: Mixed | Method: Planting corals of opportunity onto reef rubble (as above). Utilising training nurseries and subsequently corals are moved to a broodstock nursery. | Authors' conclusion: Quote from source webpage "This is the successful and fully organic coral nursery in Koh Phi Phi that is developed using the Ocean Quest coral propagation system" Also completed online survey for all projects as a collective | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Building Reefs | Technique: Substrate Addition - Artificial reef | Disturbance addressed: yes | Genera: Mixed | Method: Bottles are planted in a concrete base and lowered onto the seabed. They are secured to stop them moving away. Our coral growing project gives us a supply of new coral on small concrete tiles, called biscuits. These are wedged between the bottles. These corals slowly spread across the bottles and incorporate the bottles into the coral skeleton. The bottles slowly disappear and become the invisible reef skeleton. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Enhancement of Grazing Gastropod Populations as a Coral Reef Restoration Tool: Predation Effects and Related Applied Implications | Technique: Substrate addition - artificial reef, Substrate Enhancement - Algae removal | Disturbance addressed: Overfishing | Genera: Pocillopora, Acropora, Porites, Montipora, Echinopora | Method: Factorial experiment with 42 experimental Reef Balls (tm): 14 with transplanted corals at low density (9.5 /m2), 14 at high density (19/m2), and 14 without coral transplants (control). Half of the Reef Balls (tm) in each treatment category were stocked with cultured trochus shells. Trochus niloticus were spawned and reared in aquaria for 5-6 months before release onto reef balls. Trochus were stocked at high densities that were continuously maintained over 6 months. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 74% | Post-restoration monitoring: 6 months | Authors' conclusion: The addition of an algal grazer did not enhance coral growth/recruitment on artificial reefs. No difference in recruitment, recruit/transplanted coral survival in either treatment. Speculate that octopus may have consumed large proportion of shells, reducing densities below those required to have an impact on algae cover. | Lessons reported: Even heavily fished reefs that have been depleted of herbivores can have sufficient densities of octopus to feed on trochus shells. Therefore, the authors recommend adding refugia for trochus grazers that protect them from predators. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Restoration sites | Technique: Coral Gardening - Transplantation Phase | Disturbance addressed: yes | Genera: Acropora | Method: After six to eight months growing in the nursery, corals are healthy and mature enough to be transplanted to a restoration site. These are reef sites that are degraded and damaged and would benefit from Staghorn and Elkhorn corals growing there. Corals are taken from the nursery and are transplanted to restoration sites (damaged reef areas) using a couple of different methods. Corals are tagged to keep track of the genetic information and to allow for short and long-term monitoring. | Post-restoration monitoring: 24 months | Authors' conclusion: There are many criteria for selecting a coral restoration site. Each of them plays an important role in helping to determine where we transplant and how many corals get placed at that site. A few we take into consideration are existing wild populations, depth, water quality, bottom type, size of the area, predator abundance, wave exposure, and the effects of human activities. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Poor performance of corals transplanted onto substrates of short durability | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora, Pocillopora, Isopora | Method: Three plots of each 100m² were subdivided into 100 squares of 1m² that were covered with bamboo strips, connected with nails (suitable for sea water) to frame squares. Fragments (5-10 cm) were glued to cement base (1:4 cement and sand mix), that was attached to bamboo frame using cable ties. Coral fragments were transplanted onto half the frames, alternated in chessboard pattern with frame onto which hollow concrete block (60cm high) was constructed. These structures were part of a parallel stu… | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 29.8% | Authors' conclusion: Very high mortality of transplants by the end of the study in three of 4 species (67-95%), that was partially linked to substrate disintegration. Highest survival for Isopora species (>80%), followed by Acropora species and lowest survival of Pocillopora species (<20%). Apart from one frame, all frames were damaged after the end of the experiment after ~400 days. Particularly in areas with stronger currents or waves, higher effort has to be invested in more durable attachments than bamboo. | Lessons reported: Bamboo cannot be recommended as a good general low-tech substrate method and it would be better to invest in more durable materials that provide better attachment, considering the high effort that is put into coral transplantation. Post- monitoring should last for several years to decades to monitor long-term success of substrate used. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Fitzroy island | Technique: Coral Gardening | Disturbance addressed: General degradation | Genera: Acropora | Method: Fragments are grown in tree nurseries and planted back onto the reef | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 91% | Post-restoration monitoring: 12 months | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Closing the circle: is it feasible to rehabilitate reefs with sexually propagated corals? | Technique: Coral Gardening | Genera: Acropora | Method: Acropora millepora larvae were induced to settle on pre-conditioned coral plug-ins, reared in the lab, and transplanted onto the reef. Corals were transplanted onto the reef in three batches: 7, 14 and 19 months after settlement. Survival and growth were monitored for 2 years after the first outplanting, more or less monthly. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 22.2333% | Post-restoration monitoring: 24 months | Authors' conclusion: Survival rates were higher in corals that were transplanted onto the reef at larger sizes. An intermediate ocean nursery stage is critical in the sexual propagation of corals for reef rehabilitation. 3 years post-settlement, colonies were reproductively mature, making this one of few published studies to date to rear a broadcasting scleractinian from eggs to spawning adults. | Lessons reported: Producing a single 2.5- year-old coral on the reef cost at least US$60, which would constrain delivery of new corals to relatively small scales in many countries with coral reefs. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Coral transplantation triggers shift in microbiome and promotion of coral disease associated potential pathogens | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora | Method: Coral fragments were transplanted inside and outside Stegastes damselfish territories, to determine the impact of exposure to the Epilithic algal matrix sustained by the farming behaviour of Stegastes, on the bacterial community of each fragment. | Post-restoration monitoring: 12 months | Authors' conclusion: Corals transplanted inside damselfish territories suffered higher mortality than those transplanted outside Stegastes territories. Potential coral pathogens increased significantly compared to baseline fragments, in all treatments, however these levels were lower inside damslefish territories compared to outside territories. Microbial communities on fragments with a high amount of mortality are more similar to microbial communities on the EAM, than to those of healthy baseline coral microbial communities. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Coral Propagation Malaysia | Technique: Coral Gardening - Transplantation Phase | Disturbance addressed: yes | Genera: Mixed | Method: Planting corals of opportunity onto reef rubble (as above). Utilising training nurseries and subsequently corals are moved to a broodstock nursery. | Authors' conclusion: Ocean Quest’s coral propagation method is unlike many others as it is both natural and sustainable. This method includes five basic steps: 1) rescue, 2) propagation, 3) management, 4) transplantation, 5) management. The nurseries provide training for each of these steps as well as separate nurseries for both quarantine for recuperating corals and another for healthy, | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Step Reefs, rubble nets | Technique: Substrate Stabilisation | Disturbance addressed: yes | Method: We stabilise our slope to prevent our regeneration work slipping away. We are stabilising the rubble with soft coral nets, which slows the rubble movement and which the turtles do not destroy. We then plant soft corals and sponges on the nets to hold the rubble together. We also build rubble cages at the top of the slope, which are wire baskets attached to the ground. We fill these with coral rubble and like the nets, plants sponges and corals over the basket to help hold the rubble to the seaf… | Authors' conclusion: Pom Pom Island has a steep slope from the reef crest to the deep water drop off at a depth of around 50 m. All this slope has been seriously blasted in the past by bomb fishermen. All that is left of the original reef are the rubble fragments on a seriously sloping reef. The structures we build are difficult to stabilise. | Lessons reported: Aimed to create small reefs on the steep slopes. These look great initially but too many of them are unstable and deteriorate rapidly. While the corals grow and the fish live on the step reefs we create, unfortunately the slope continues to erode and a beautiful series of steps fixed solidly to the seabed becomes a tumbled mess after turtles scratch and fish dig. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Coral Growing - Reef 'Biscuits' and bottle nurseries | Technique: substrate addition - artificial reef, transplantation - fragments | Disturbance addressed: yes | Genera: Mixed | Method: We start by collecting broken coral fragments, which we plant in concrete bases that we call biscuits. We take these to our underwater nursery to grow them into established corals. Once grown, we harvest them and bring them back to our reef, which has been badly damaged by dynamite fishing. We plant them in a bottle reef, where they continue to grow to create a brand new coral reef. | Lessons reported: Our biscuit nursery is the north tip of the island, where the prevailing ocean current arrives at Pom Pom bringing rich nutrients, which is a great environment for promoting coral growth. We lay the biscuits out on the sea bed and tie them down to prevent them drifting away. Over time, the coral grows around the biscuit. When the coral is well-established on the biscuit, it is ready to be harvest… | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Agincourt 3 | Technique: Coral Gardening- Transplantation, Substrate enhancement- Electric | Disturbance addressed: General degradation | Genera: Acropora, Montipora | Method: Coral fragments are attached to electrified steel frames. The frames have the dual role of stabilising loose rubble and provide a structure on which to attach coral fragments. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 27% | Post-restoration monitoring: 12 months | Lessons reported: Mineral accretion technology is difficult, power supply to cathode material is crucial | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Storm-generated coral fragments - A viable source of transplants for reef rehabilitation | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora, Porites | Method: Sixty coral fragments were transplanted and compared with control colonies left in situ. Survival and growth were monitored over 5 years. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 13.3333% | Post-restoration monitoring: 60 months | Authors' conclusion: One-fourth of the 135 colonies and fragments monitored were alive at the conclusion of the 5-year study. Survival of control and transplanted A. cervicornis and P. porites was very low, with no differences between transplant and control colonies. A. palmata colony survival was dependent on colony size and transplant/control status. Probability of survival increased with colony size. | Lessons reported: Viability for transplantation is species-specific. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: At the Water's Edge | Technique: Substrate Addition - Artificial reef | Disturbance addressed: yes | Method: Deployed steel cages into which rocks were placed to create a breakwall from damaging waves. | Authors' conclusion: The artificial reef, the restored beach, and the mangroves will also act as a barrier during storms – protecting people during natural disasters. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Three methods of coral transplantation for the purpose of reestablishing a coral community in the thermal effluent area at the Tanguisson power plant. University of Guam, Marine Laboratory. | Technique: Transplantation | Disturbance addressed: Thermal effluent | Genera: Psammocora, Stylophora, Pocillopora, Acropora, Montipora, Pavona, Porites, Favia, Lobophyllia | Method: An early transplantation experiment testing whether corals which have a higher thermal tolerance can be transplanted onto a site impacted by thermal effluent from a power plant. Three transplantation techniques were tested: 1) Whole colonies were removed and attached at the site using plastic coated wire. 2) Fragments were scattered over the reef area, 3) Coral nubbins were epoxied onto terracotta tiles and placed on the restoration site. The transplantation site was divided by distance to heat… | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 0% | Post-restoration monitoring: 14 months | Authors' conclusion: All corals transplanted into thermal effluent zone died, and the authors conclude that it is not possible to transplant corals species known to show thermal tolerance into a reef area subjected to high temperatures. All fragments scattered on the reef were lost after 2 months. Similarly, all terracotta tiles with nubbins were also lost. High survival of transplanted corals in control areas however (89 and 95%). | Lessons reported: Even though species may be thermally tolerant, they may be stressed due to to other factors (eg. irradiance). Colonies on control reefs (without thermal effluent) rapidly overgrow the plastic covered wire, and show hgh survival. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Blue Pearl bay | Technique: Coral Gardening | Disturbance addressed: Natural Disturbance, cyclone | Genera: Acropora, Pocillopora, Goniopora, Porites, Pavona | Method: Fragments are grown in rope and table nurseries and planted back onto the reef | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 72% | Post-restoration monitoring: 6 months | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Marine Savers with Four Seasons Resorts | Technique: Substrate addition- artificial reef, Transplantation - fragments | Genera: Pocillopora | Method: Creating coral growing frames (small domes) as substrate for sandy and rubble dominated areas. Cable tie fragments to metal structure | Authors' conclusion: The overall health of the House Reef has been decreasing, with digitate coral species becoming scarce, making coral collection for our frames more difficult. Most remaining Pocillopora colonies are diseased and partly covered in algae, making our Reefscapers work more important as colonies must be collected and propagated to reduce disease mortality. Species of ‘massive corals’ are showing scars from parrot fish feeding, and suffer from crown of thorns predation. | Lessons reported: Channel may be too dynamic a location due to sand movement burying the frames (requires weekly maintenance). Many frames are 'recycled' but not sure if this is due to mortality of attached corals requiring the frames to be reused. Ltd species diversity, and appears to be poor overall | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Transplantation of storm-generated coral fragments to enhance Caribbean coral reefs: a successful method but not a solution | Technique: Transplantation | Disturbance addressed: Storm | Genera: Acropora, Porites | Method: Coral fragments were collected from unfavourable habitat and transplanted to damaged reefs. Survival and growth of 60 transplanted fragments and 75 reference colonies were monitored for 12 years. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 5.33333% | Post-restoration monitoring: 144 months | Authors' conclusion: Only 9% of colonies were alive after 12 years: no A. cervicornis; 3% of A. palmata transplants and 18% of reference colonies; and 13% of P. porites transplants and 7% of reference colonies. Only A. palmata showed a difference between transplant and reference colony survival, and only in the first year. No coral conservation strategy will be effective until underlying intrinsic and/or extrinsic factors driving high mortality rates are understood and mitigated or eliminated. | Lessons reported: Physical dislodgement resulted in the loss of 56% of colonies, whereas 35% died in place. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: The Lifeboat Project | Technique: Coral gardening - transplantation, Substrate Enhancement - Electric | Disturbance addressed: yes | Genera: Mixed | Method: Metal artificial reef structures as coral nurseries. Some of them were attached to solar powered electricity units as part of mineral accretion project. | Lessons reported: small nursery environments, with power, will work even in poor water quality. They had biorock nurseries in the ‘marina’ that did well. Corals moved from poor water quality to better water quality offshore did well. [Theory would suggest this makes sense. The opposite may not be true]. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Manta Ray Bay | Technique: Coral Gardening | Disturbance addressed: Natural Disturbance, cyclone | Genera: Acropora, Pocillopora, Hydnophora, Goniopora, Porites, Pavona | Method: Fragments are grown in rope and table nurseries and planted back onto the reef | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 87% | Post-restoration monitoring: 6 months | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Differential physiological responses of two congeneric scleractinian corals to mineral accretion and an electric field. | Technique: Substrate Enhancement - Electric | Genera: Acropora | Method: Field experiment testing benefits of electrochemical vs electric field in coral nurseries. Treatments: 5 x 42 nubbins grown on electrified steel frames, 5 x 42 nubbins grown on bamboo frames within electrical field, 4 x 42 nubbins grown on bamboo trays outside of electric field (control) | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 88.6667% | Post-restoration monitoring: 4 months | Authors' conclusion: Direct exposure to electrical current (ie attached to a cathode) did not increase survival of coral fragments after 4 months. Growth was fastest for both species inside the electric field. A pulchra had higher zoox and chlorophyll a densities on cathode compared to electric field and controls. | Lessons reported: The suggested benefits of mineral accretion technology vary between species. Except for chl a concentrations, the cathode had a significant adverse effect on all measured variables for A. yongei but not for A. pulchra. A pulchra had increased zooxs and chlorophyll a densities on the cathode, yet did not exhibit a corresponding fast growth and low mortality. | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.

Published as: Coral propagation at Koh Tao | Technique: Coral Gardening - Transplantation Phase | Genera: Mixed | Method: Planting corals of opportunity on reef rubble, Fragments are taken to shore with reef rubble where it is glued to the substrate then returned to a 'nursery' (Nursery is a consolidated pile of reef rubble) | This record was compiled from a published source and has not been confirmed by the organisation that carried out the work. No contribution to the condition index is recorded: the source reports survival of transplanted material, which is not a measure of ecosystem condition.