4.6 Article

Reserves as tools for alleviating impacts of marine disease

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0210

关键词

coral disease; marine protected areas; no-take reserve; pollution run-off; resilience; water quality

类别

资金

  1. Australian Government's National Environmental Research Program (NERP) Tropical Ecosystems Hub
  2. Australian Institute of Marine Science at James Cook University
  3. Nature Conservancy
  4. Cornell University
  5. Australian Research Council (ARC) Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University
  6. TropWater at James Cook University
  7. Division Of Ocean Sciences
  8. Directorate For Geosciences [1215977] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Marine protected areas can prevent over-exploitation, but their effect on marine diseases is less clear. We examined how marine reserves can reduce diseases affecting reef-building corals following acute and chronic disturbances. One year after a severe tropical cyclone, corals inside reserves had sevenfold lower levels of disease than those in non-reserves. Similarly, disease prevalence was threefold lower on reserve reefs following chronic exposure to terrestrial run-off from a degraded river catchment, when exposure duration was below the long-term site average. Examination of 35 predictor variables indicated that lower levels of derelict fishing line and injured corals inside reserves were correlated with lower levels of coral disease in both case studies, signifying that successful disease mitigation occurs when activities that damage reefs are restricted. Conversely, reserves were ineffective in moderating disease when sites were exposed to higher than average levels of run-off, demonstrating that reductions in water quality undermine resilience afforded by reserve protection. In addition to implementing protected areas, we highlight that disease management efforts should also target improving water quality and limiting anthropogenic activities that cause injury.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据