All projects

Published as: Coral transplantation in sheltered habitats using unattached fragments and cultured colonies. | Technique: Coral Gardening | Genera: Acropora | Method: Different size classes of fragments were collected and attached to monofilament line, draped over rubble. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 87.5556% | Post-restoration monitoring: 3 months | Authors' conclusion: Larger and medium fragments of A cervicornis had significantly higher survival than smaller size classes. There was no effect of size in A. prolifera. | 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 in sheltered habitats using unattached fragments and cultured colonies. | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora | Method: Pilot study of fragments on sand. Large fragments were placed on sand in various configurations to test the feasibility of transplanting corals on sand in two depths (shallow and deep). | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 47.4667% | Post-restoration monitoring: 24 months | Authors' conclusion: All but three fragments died in shallow sites, while survival was higher in deeper sites. In particular, fragments with multiple branches survived at a higher arte (100%) than single branches (40%). The double brache also grew faster than single branches | Lessons reported: Coral gardening can be achieved by creating rubble nursery sites, and transplanting fused coral fragments onto reefs. Fragments should be diverse to encourage resilience to disease etc. | 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 of opportunity survivorship and the use of coral nurseries in coral reef restoration. | Technique: Coral Gardening - Nursery Phase | Genera: Siderastrea, Meandrina, Solenastrea, Stephanocoenia, Dichocoenia, Colpophyllia, Diploria, Porites, Orbicella, Eusmilia, Agaricia, Diploria | Method: Corals of opportunity from 17 species were collected near the nursery site, transported and handled on boat (<2 hours), and then transplanted to concrete artificial structures (2 types: Warren and DERM modules). The goal was to establish a nursery site which can be used as a donor source for future restoration activities. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 96% | Post-restoration monitoring: 24 months | Authors' conclusion: The high survival, ease of collection and representative avialbaliklty of corals of opportunity makes the authors conclude that the method is viable in the location testes (Borward County, Florida, USA). Coral of opportunity which were not transplanted, but left loose as control colonies had significantly reduced survivorship | 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 in sheltered habitats using unattached fragments and cultured colonies. | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora | Method: Intact coral colonies (from pilot study?) were translocated onto sandy areas to investigate mortality and fish recruitment | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 95% | Post-restoration monitoring: 3 months | Authors' conclusion: High survival of entire colonies. Fish recruitment was higher n colones location >20 m from a reef, compared to those located <2m from a reef. | 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 in sheltered habitats using unattached fragments and cultured colonies. | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora | Method: Testing survival and growth depending on different level of contact with the sand: 1) placed on sand,2) fragment supported but in contact with sand, 3) fragment not in contact with sand | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 60.4667% | Post-restoration monitoring: 3 months | Authors' conclusion: All fragments scattered on sand died, while those suspended above the substrate showed higher survival compared to those in contact with the sand for A cervicornis. This difference was not evident in A. prolifera. More than half of coral fragments on wire frames had attached to the frame after 3 months. | Lessons reported: Fragments are more resilient to storms if attached above the substrate, and less prone to smothering. | 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: Condition of restored Acropora palmata fragments off Mona Island, Puerto Rico, 2 years after the Fortuna Reefer ship grounding. | Technique: Transplantation | Disturbance addressed: Ship grounding | Genera: Acropora | Method: Nail and tie method used to attached fragments dislodged from a ship grounding | Post-restoration monitoring: 24 months | Authors' conclusion: Unable to determine mortality since only a subset of original branches were re-examined. Of those examined 57.5 % had live tissue remaining, and only 10% had fused to the substratum. No effect of orientation on growth. The data suggests larger fragments have a higher proportion live tissue | Lessons reported: Cable ties became dislodged with wave action, switched to stainless steel wire instead. However 73% of fragments examined had tissue mortality where the wire touched the coral | 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 coral transplantation and giant clam restocking on the structure of fish communities on degraded patch reefs | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora, Pocillopora, Heliopora, Tubipora, Millepora | Method: Coral fragments (>15 cm) attached to individual cement blocks (20 x 20 x 5cm) and assembled to create patch reef consisting of 100 fragments | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 72% | Post-restoration monitoring: 10 months | Authors' conclusion: 72% of transplanted corals in the coral only treatments survived, however no fragments survived in the coral + clam treatments. Fish species richness and abundance increased significantly on coral patch reefs compared to controls. The authors conclude that restoration efforts can rapidly have positive effects on reef fish 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: 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: Performance of single versus mixed coral species for transplantation to restore degraded reefs. | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Porites, Pavona | Method: Experiment comparing the survival and the growth of corals transplanted in single-species plots with those in mixed-species plots. Corals attached directly onto substrate with epoxy, either in drilled holes or pre-existing crevices. Three treatments were tested: 1) single species assemblage P. cylindrica 2) single species assemblage P. frondifera 3) both species mixed | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 89.5% | Post-restoration monitoring: 12 months | Authors' conclusion: P. cylindrica had overall high survival (84-95%), and was unaffected by single vs mixed species assemblages. However. P. frondifera showed site effects, with higher survival in low water movement sites. P. frondofera showed higher survival in mixed assemblages on high water movement sites. The authors claim that the high mortality on the high water movement sites was due to predation by COTS and Drupella. Neither species showed any long term differences in linear growth in any treatment. | Lessons reported: Pick a species that is not a COTS (or other coral predator) favourite. P. cylindrica is not a preferred species, and was this spared. However, Hydnophora rigida was completely consumed by COTS in a pilot experiment. | 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: Measuring success for Caribbean acroporid restoration: key results from ten years of work in southern Belize. | Technique: Coral Gardening - Transplantation Phase | Genera: Acropora | Method: Coral fragments were out planted with a mix of genotypes and species at each location. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 94% | Post-restoration monitoring: 114 months | Authors' conclusion: Individual tracking of survival on a small subset revealed high survival. A. palmata transplanted from one reef to another showed 89% survival, while nursery grown A. palmata showed 99% survival. Photo tracking of the much larger number of transplanted corals revealed increases in coral cover ranging from 4.7 -23.4% over a single year. All three species spawned a year after outplanting. | Lessons reported: The outplant sites are located in a national park, where guides accompany each diver/snorkeler. These guides are trained in the removal of coral predators, and may therefore have helped the transplants survive unusually high proportions. | 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: Enhancing the biodiversity of coastal defence structures: transplantation of nursery-reared reef biota onto intertidal seawalls | Technique: Coral Gardening | Disturbance addressed: Construction | Genera: Porites, Pocillopora, Diploastrea, Goniastrea | Method: The project is attempting to establish a coral reef on sewalls erected in area of high ship traffic. Fragments collected and transported to ex situ nursery, stored for 1 month, then further fragmented, and allowed to grow in holding tanks for a further 3 months. Coral fragments were then attached (15 cm apart) to the stone seawall using marine epoxy. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 15.9% | Post-restoration monitoring: 24 months | Authors' conclusion: Almost half of P. lobata fragments survived after 2 years, however P. damicornis and H rigida suffered complete mortality after 2 months. 90% G. minuta and 10% D. heliopora survived after 12 months. | Lessons reported: While all coral species were present on nearby reefs, some were more successful than others. Slow growing massive corals were better suited for the high energy environment than fast-growing branching corals, which were more vulnerable to becoming dislodged by flotsam. | 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: New Seeding Approach Reduces Costs and Time to Outplant Sexually Propagated Corals for Reef Restoration. | Technique: Coral Gardening | Genera: Favia | Method: Testing the effectiveness of two types of cement tetrapods seeded with coral propagules. The tetrapods were incubated for 6 months in flow-through aquaria, and placed in containers with planula from aquarium reared coral colonies. The tetrapods, with coral settlers, were transferred to holding tanks for three weeks, after which they were transplanted at the restoration sites. Restoration sites were of low, medium or high structural complexity. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 56% | Post-restoration monitoring: 12 months | Authors' conclusion: Tetrapods moved very little and a majority became attached to the substrate, with no differences between the two designs. An average of 9.6 % of settlers survived on the two designs, and there was no difference in the growth rate on either design. 56% of tetrapods sustained a >1 coral polyp after one year, and this proportion is higher in medium and high complexity reefs. | Lessons reported: Seeding in areas with low complexity may not be successful, as tetrapods may move and cause abrasion to to settlers. Concrete is ideal for algae to grow on, so the authors suggest trying a non-porous material like glass or glaze ceramics to limit algal growth | 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: Grazers improve health of coral juveniles in ex situ mariculture. | Technique: Coral Gardening - Nursery Phase | Genera: Pocillopora | Method: Investigating the use of biocontrols to limit macro-algal growth in ex situ coral nursery tanks. Corals were encouraged to spawn, and planula settled on concrete embedded plugs. Trochus maculatus (shell) and Salmacis sphaeroides (urchin) were introduced into aquaria, and growth and survival of the coral recruits was examined. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 77.1667% | Post-restoration monitoring: 6 months | Authors' conclusion: Growth was faster in the biocontrol tanks than in the control tanks, although survival was similar across all three treatments. Furthermore, the corals were healthier (colour and presence of lesions) in biocontrol treatments compared to controls | 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: Tissue regeneration rate of coral transplants in a wave exposed environment, Cape D'Aguilar, Hong Kong. | Technique: Coral Gardening | Genera: Favia, Goniastrea, Porites | Method: Investigating how the regeneration of tissue occurs in transplanted corals, and how it is impacted by different sheltering regimes. Colonies collected and transported to ex situ aquaria, and held for one month. A lesion is then inflicted on the coral colony, and recovery is recorded. | Post-restoration monitoring: 4 months | Authors' conclusion: Generation times differed between species, wave exposure and attachment method. Exposed sites with loose attachment methods (ie hook and rope) were the slowest to regenerate. | 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 as an aid to reef rehabilitation: evaluation of a case study in the Maldive Islands | Technique: Transplantation | Disturbance addressed: Coral mining | Genera: Acropora, Pocillopora, Porites, Favia, Favites, Montipora, Astreopora, Montastrea, Cyphastrea, Pavona, Psammacora, Symphyllia, Goniastrea, Leptastrea, Hydnophora, Galaxea, Heliopora | Method: Transplanting whole coral colonies from unmined reef to mined site. Colonies attached to concrete mat with concrete and/or nails. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 51% | Post-restoration monitoring: 28 months | Authors' conclusion: A quarter of all transplanted corals were dislodged and lost, and overall 51% of colonies survived. A large proportion of colonies experienced negative growth, ie partial mortality. Natural recovery on contro sites was non-existent. | Lessons reported: The concrete mats also encourage and promote natural recovery through 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: Skeletal extension rates of Porites cylindrica and Porites (Synaraea) rus after transplantation to two depths. | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Porites | Method: Comparing growth of transplants between depth and to non transplanted colonies. Colonies collected from nearby reef, fragmented and attached to plexiglass plates. The plates were attached to wire tables at the restoration site (raised 20cm from the bottom). All fragments and colonies were sacrificed at the end of the experiment, to measure growth | Post-restoration monitoring: 14 months | Authors' conclusion: There were significant differences between species (P. cylindrica grew faster than P. russ),and depths (deeper depths grew slower, control grew fastest) | 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: Re-establishment of fish populations on a reef flat degraded by coral quarrying in the Maldives | Technique: Substrate Addition - Artificial reef | Disturbance addressed: Coral mining | Genera: n/a | Method: Four sets of artificial structures of varying structural complexity were deployed into three replicate 5 x 10 m sites, each positioned at the centre of a 50 x 50 m grid square. The four types of structures were: (1) one-cubic-metre SHED (Shephard Hill Energy Dissipator) hollow concrete blocks, modified with infills to reduce internal space, (2) Armorflex-220 flexible concrete mattresses (62 m2), (3) Armorflex onto which corals were transplanted (36 m2), and (4) chain-link fencing anchored by pa… | Post-restoration monitoring: 16 months | Authors' conclusion: Within one year of emplacement, the three sets of structures with higher topographic complexity were supporting fish communities of similar species richness and higher density than undisturbed control reefs. However, after one year the fish species composition was significantly different from that in undisturbed reefs. | Lessons reported: Structures with higher topographic complexity are more successful at attracting fish on degraded 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: Community-based, low-tech method of restoring a lost thicket of Acropora corals. | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora | Method: Developing a cost-effective restoration method that is simple and low-tech enough to involve the local community. Fragments staked into sand, in tow treatments: high (6 fragments m-2) and low density (3 fragments m-2) coral. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 78.5% | Post-restoration monitoring: 19 months | Authors' conclusion: Coral transplantation sites increased in coral cover from 0% to 24 and 54% in low and high density treatments respectively. Transplants had grownsignificnalty over 19 months. Fish abundance increased by 50% on high density treatments compared to low density and control plots. Macroinvertebrate abundance also increased in both transplantation plots compared to control plots. | Lessons reported: Pick a species that is known to survive in your restoration area. | 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: Assessing an abridged nursery phase for slow growing corals used in coral restoration. | Technique: Coral Gardening | Genera: Echinopora, Merulina | Method: Testing the benefits of a nursery phase in coral gardening, compared to direct transplantation, for slow-growing coral species. Fragments were either collected and directly transplanted onto dead coral bommies, or housed in table-nurseries in situ for 1 year, and then out planted | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 8.33333% | Post-restoration monitoring: 12 months | Authors' conclusion: Most corals died following a bleaching event, however data prior to bleaching suggest patterns of higher growth rates, higher survivorship as well as improved attachment rate of corals in the nursery when compared to directly transplanted counterparts of the first experiment (wild out planted vs fragments in nurseries). E. lamellosa is sensitive to transplantation and benefits form a nursery phase. Both species had significantly higher rates of self-attachment and growth in nurseries compared to out planted individuals. However, the second experiment suggests that these differences are not ma… | Lessons reported: Costs associated with nurseries are not necessarily linked to the time corals spend in the nursery, so slow-growing corals may be best spending longer time in the nursery, rather than trying to shorten the time to save money. | 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: Can a small artificial reef reduce diving pressure from a natural coral reef? | Technique: Substrate Addition - Artificial reef | Genera: Acropora, Stylophora, Pocillopora, Dendronephthya and others | Method: Deploying artificial reef in area with extremely high densities of scuba diving tourists. Six large (4 x 4 x 4m) concrete units were deployed on sandy bottom, and left for 5 months, before coral transplants were attached in pre drilled holes. Diving groups were followed before and after deployment, immediately following coral transplantation and two years post deployment, and time spent on the artificial reef was compared to time spent inside the adjacent marine park, and a nearby coral outcrop… | Post-restoration monitoring: 24 months | Authors' conclusion: The deployment of the artificial reefs did not change the visitation rates inside the marine reserve or adjacent coral bommie, either for certified or uncertified divers in training. However, the duration of dives inside the MPA were reduced for instructor-lead dives. | Lessons reported: An artificial reef in close proximity to an otherwise attractive dive site (e.g MPA) must be sufficiently large and attractive to encourage instructors/guides/divers to divert their time to it. However, an attractive artificial reef further away from the MPA may completely divert divers away from the MPA. The authors further suggest that the location of artificial dive sites should be discussed w… | 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 coral recruitment by in situ mass culture of coral larvae. | Technique: Larval Enhancement | Genera: Acropora | Method: Creation of a floating in situ larval nursery pond (2 x 2m). Gametes and embryos were collected from the slick formed during spawning. The larvae were kept in the ponds for 7 days, until competency was determined (using CCA in vitro method). They were then flushed into a floorless mesh tent (1.8 x 1m), placed on the reef. Two seeding densities were tested (low/high). Recruit density after 6 weeks was assessed in high/low/control plots using terracotta tiles. | Post-restoration monitoring: 1.5 months | Authors' conclusion: 5% of larvae survived to 6 days in ponds. Recruitment was greatly enhanced in experimental quadrats, with the highest density treatment receiving 100 times more recruits than natural recruitment in the bay. The higher density treatment had significantly higher densities of settled recruits. | 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: Enhanced larval supply and recruitment can replenish reef corals on degraded reefs. | Technique: Larval Enhancement | Genera: Acropora | Method: Gravid colonies of A. tenuis were collected and placed in aquaria ex situ, until spawning. The gametes were collected and placed in a fertilisation container with filtered seawater. Developing embryos were then transferred to rearing tanks, until competent. Competent larvae were then transferred into a bag for transportation to restoration site. Larvae were introduced into mesh tents (size??) placed on the reef, and maintained for 5 days, to allow larval settlement to occur. Settlement tiles ( … | Post-restoration monitoring: 36 months | Authors' conclusion: High mortality in the first 5 months of settled spats (Type III survival curve), both on tiles and on natural substrate within the larval enhancement plots. Survivorship stabilised after 9 months, with very low mortality of coral colonies past 1 year. Coral colonies grew and many reached reproductive size after 3 years (avg ~16 cm in 3 years). The results illustrate the importance of early rapid growth to reach a size where survival is more likely. | Lessons reported: Authors note that method is only suitable in locations where environmental conditions are suitable for reef corals to grow, but natural recruitment is limited. Furthermore, chronic disturbances and key threats must be effectively managed. | 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: A basic experiment of coral culture using sexual reproduction in the open sea. | Technique: Substrate Addition - Artificial reef | Disturbance addressed: Bleaching | Genera: n/a | Method: Settlement tiles were placed on a site with high natural recruitment, and recruitment analysed. Three types of settlement tiles were tested, 1) regular pottery stone tiles, arranged in towers 2) circular pottery's stone rods, pitted with 4 mm diameter holes, 3) square limestone pillars, pitted with 4 mm diameter holes. The towers, rods and pillars were arranged in a stainless steel frame (42cm x 45 cm x 40 cm). The plates were deployed on a shallow site, and remained there over the coral spawni… | Post-restoration monitoring: 3 months | Authors' conclusion: The number of settlers on the square stick was 4 times higher than on the cylindrical stick. MOst settlers on plates were on the underside | Lessons reported: Holes on settlement sticks may have been too shallow to protect corals from predation | 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: Steps in the construction of underwater coral nursery, an essential component in reef restoration acts. | Technique: Coral Gardening - Nursery Phase | Genera: Stylophora, Pocillopora, Acropora | Method: A in situ hanging coral nuresey was established nera a fish farm, providing nutrient enrichment to the growing corals. Mpther colonies were collcted from artifical port structures and fragmented. Fragments were superglued ontoplastic pins, which were placedwithi a frame. The fraes were plasedon a supsenden mid-water nursery, and maintained for approxiimatey 10 months. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 68.5% | Post-restoration monitoring: 10 months | Authors' conclusion: A large number of corals detached in the first 144 days, but remaining corals grew fast, increasing in height 6-fold, and coulee 5-fold after 306 days. | Lessons reported: Super Glue is insufficient attachment method on plastic pins. Avoid planting corals too close as it excludes grazing herbivores and invertebrates, which my remove macroalgae etc. Drupella was attracted to coral nurseries. | 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 cultivation of massive corals using “micro-fragmentation” for the “reskinning” of degraded coral reefs | Technique: Coral Gardening - Microfragmentation | Genera: Montastrea, Orbicella, Diploria | Method: A diamond band saw was used to cut 1cm2 fragment from massive coral skeletons. The fragments were then mounted on tiles. The tiles are kept in indoor ex situ aquaria for 1 week, until fragments heal over their cuts. The tiles are then moved to outdoor tanks, until fragments have covered the tiles (4-12 months). | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 99.5667% | Authors' conclusion: The marine lab has 4347 microfragments in culture, with survival exceeding 99% | 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 a coral reef in southeast Florida: Combining technology and aesthetics. | Technique: Substrate Addition - Artificial reef | Disturbance addressed: ship grounding | Genera: n/a | Method: Concrete balls were cast into hollow dome shapes, and fragmented corals were cemented onto the domes. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 87.5% | Post-restoration monitoring: 120 months | Authors' conclusion: The concrete domes show no signs of deterioration after 10 years, and a high proportion of transplanted corals survived. Furthermore, a large number of hard and soft-coral recruits have settled onto the domes. The fish community was intermediate compared to a natural reef patch and the sea floor after 10 years. | 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 reef rehabilitation through transplantation of staghorn corals: effects of artificial stabilization and mechanical damages. | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora | Method: Branches of two species of Acropora, were collected from nearby reefs, and placed on a degraded reef using two methods. 1) loosely placed on the seabed, or 2) attached to a grid of strings which was loosely placed on the rubble. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 97% | Post-restoration monitoring: 12 months | Authors' conclusion: Corals attached to the string grid had higher survival and faster growth compared to unattached fragments. 97% of attached branches survived, although 87% had experienced partial mortality, while 87% of unattached fragments survived, and 93% of survivors had partial mortality. | Lessons reported: To stop a defensive response between neighbouring fragments, which may affect growth, make sure that fragments attached to the same string originate from the same clone | 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: Initial survival of coral nubbins transplanted by a new coral transplantation technology - Options for reef rehabilitation. | Technique: Substrate Enhancement - Electric | Genera: Stylophora, Pocillopora, Acropora, Montipora, Pavona | Method: A folded steel (chicken wire) cathode was connected to a DC power supply, and an anode of titanium mesh, placed 20 cm above each square. The magnesium and calcium minerals precipitate on the cathode by electrochemical deposition, and can form a calcium carbonate layer of 5-10mm thickness within 2 months. Coral fragments are inserted into the mesh (cathode) | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 67.5% | Post-restoration monitoring: 12 months | Authors' conclusion: After 8 weeks, fragments were cemented to the mesh. After 12 months, a large proportion were still alive, and had continued to grow. | 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: Growth and survival of coral transplants with and without electrochemical deposition of CaCo3. | Technique: Substrate Enhancement - Electric | Genera: Porites, Acropora | Method: Testing how electrochemical deposition influences growth and survival of corals, using an experimental design including controls. The system was designed using a graphite anode, and a cathode made from galvanised steel mesh (10mm mesh size). The power was supplied using solar modules, and initially batteries, although these were later removed due to to corrosion. A control setup using the same cathode, and wooden blocks producing the same shading effect as the anode. Finally, control corals on … | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 83.6667% | Post-restoration monitoring: 6 months | Authors' conclusion: There was no significant difference in growth between fragments with electrochemical treatment compared to those without, in the same experimental setup. Furthermore, control colonies grew significantly faster that both treatments. However, survival and girth growth were both significantly higher in treated fragments compared to untreated. | 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: Recovery in rubble fields: Long-term impacts of blast fishing. | Technique: Transplantation | Disturbance addressed: Destructive fishing | Genera: Acropora | Method: Coral fragments were transplanted onto rubble field, testing two methods of attachment: 1) attached to rubble (unstable), 2) attached to PVC pipes driven into rubble (more stable) | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 52.5% | Post-restoration monitoring: 6 months | Authors' conclusion: Increased survival in fragments that are stabilised (65%) compared to those attached to rubble (40%) | 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: Growth and survival of transplanted Acropora cervicornis in relation to coral reef restoration. Chapter 2: Seasonal Branching Patterns in transplanted reef-building corals Acropora Cervicornis and Acropora prolifera | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora | Method: 15 Artificially broken fragments (15-200mm) were transplanted to 3 sites from a parent colony four times per year (Acropora prolifera only one time in the Bahamas) corresponding to the seasons and monitored quarterly. Fragments were glued to PVC pipe (into a 2'' section of ½ '' PVC with Oately® epoxy putty) and attached to cement bricks adjacent to the reef they were collected. The weight, branching number and growth were measured quarterly. | Authors' conclusion: Seasonal variation in branching rates. Highest branching rate and growth rate during late spring/early summer and slowed or stopped during late summer/early fall. Earlier and more frequent branching in larger coral fragments. Growth rate and branching rate higher in A. prolifera than A. cervicornis, however linear extension to accretion (g/mm) not statistically different between species. | 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: Growth and survival of transplanted Acropora cervicornis in relation to coral reef restoration. Chapter 3: Effect of season and coral size on the growth rate of transplanted Acropora cervicornis | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora | Method: 15 Artificially broken fragments (2-19cm) were transplanted to 3 sites from a parent colony four times per year (Acropora prolifera only one time in the Bahamas) corresponding to the seasons and monitored quarterly. Fragments were glued to PVC pipe (into a 2'' section of ½ '' PVC with Oately® epoxy putty) and attached to cement bricks adjacent to the reef they were collected. Weight, length, branching were measured quarterly. | Authors' conclusion: Highest growth rate in late spring and early summer. Accretion (g) to linear growth (mm) ratio relatively constant, depending on wave energy of site. Growth rate generally positively correlated with colony size. Time of transplantation important for subsequent growth. | 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: Growth and survival of transplanted Acropora cervicornis in relation to coral reef restoration. Chapter 4: Effect of season and coral size on the survival of transplanted Acropora cervicornis | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora | Method: 15 Artificially broken fragments (25-200mm) were transplanted to 3 sites from a parent colony four times per year (Acropora prolifera only one time in the Bahamas) corresponding to the seasons and monitored quarterly. Fragments were glued to PVC pipe (into a 2'' section of ½ '' PVC with Oately® epoxy putty) and attached to cement bricks adjacent to the reef they were collected. The weight, length, growth and mortality were measured quarterly. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 100% | Authors' conclusion: For A. cervicornis: Survival rate higher in Florida keys than in Bahamas site. Survival of smaller colonies lower than larger at most sites. For A. prolifera: survival rate 100% | 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 coral transplantation in sites of varying distances and environmental conditions | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora, Porites, Echinopora | Method: Whole colonies pried off using hammer and chisel. Sizes ranged up to three-fold for all species. Transferred to transplant site. Two attachment methods tested: 1) depression excavated in rock, cement mix with seawater poured in depression covering the base of the coral, 2) tied to plastic screen (1m²) nailed to surface. Each attachment equals a treatment and each was replicated three times, hence 6 plots (each 1m², with 7 or 12 colonies in each plot) per transplant site and 4 sites per location… | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 57.125% | Authors' conclusion: Survivorship higher for slow-growing corals, than branching and foliose. Highest survival for A.palifera (94%) and lowest for A.microphthalma (8%); clear trend in higher survivorship in Quezon sites (62-95%) than Pangasian sites (39-16%). Growth differed between most species across all sites, highest growth rate compared to low survivorship for A. microphthalma and E. lamellosa. No growth difference between attachment method, but survival higher in cement method. Hence successful coral transplantation is both site- and species-specific. | Lessons reported: Growth and survival rates, however, should not be considered as the sole criteria in the evaluation of transplantation performance, as reproduction strategy should be taken into account. Consider broad environmental context of restoration to develop assembly rules allowing to match coral types and their sequence to each unique context. | 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: Comparison of three types of adhesives in attaching coral transplants to clam shell substrates | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora, Pocillopora, Merulina, Agaricia, Heliopora, Porites | Method: 45 giant clam shells (300-500mm length) used as substrate. Using hand-held grinder 12 notches on the ridges of each shell were made and identification labels were glued on each shell. One nubbin of each coral species (each 2-3 cm length, total of 540 nubbins) was attached to each clam using one type of adhesive per shell on the horizontal surface of the shell. 3 adhesive methods: 1) Cyanoacrylate glue (Super Glue Gel by Loctite); 2) Epoxy putty (Epoxyclay Aqua by Pioneer); 3) Marine epoxy (Non-… | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 57.4% | Authors' conclusion: Mortalities between species varied with highest mortality for Pocilloporids (between 71-82%) and A.muricata (71%). Lowest mortality for P. frondifera, H. coerulea and P. cylindrica with only between1-7 mortalities during the study. Overall SG treatment had poorest atachment effectiveness and self-attachment rate, however might do well in calm and sheltered environments. EP and ME performed equally well in atachment effectiveness, survival, and self-attachment, but differences between application time, cost, ease and effectiveness of attachment were observed. | Lessons reported: Appropriate attachment method should be selected and species specific traits should be considered carefully when selecting species to reintroduce as they determine which transplants survived in experiment. | 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 substratum on the growth and survivorship of Montipora capitata and Porites lobata transplants | Technique: Coral Gardening - Nursery Phase | Genera: Porites, Montipora | Method: One single colony per species was collected to coral nursery in Ānuenue Fisheries Research Center, 132 fragments (2-3 cm length) generated per species. 3 fragments of each species were attached to the respective substratum (size of substratum area ~10x10cm to 118x18cm) using two part marine epoxy. Natural substrata, mostly volcanic in origin were used, including black and red ʻAʻā lava, types of gray amygdaloidal basalt, gray ignimbrite, brown rhyolite breccia, and white amorphous coral skeleto… | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 83.2222% | Authors' conclusion: Apart from glass attachment (50% survival), survival onto other substrata was >70%. Hence it seems there is no distinct substratum affinity. | Lessons reported: Study limited to only one colonie of each species, further investigations need to include more colonies. Coenosarc tissue could not be measured after 184 days, due to fusion between fragments. Hence fragments should be attached further apart to avoid this issue. | 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: Growth of certain corals, molluscs and fish in artificial reefs in the Philippines. | Technique: Substrate Addition - Artificial reef | Genera: Acropora, Dendrophyllia, Favia, Pocillopora, Seriatopora, Stylophora, Millepora | Method: Three artificial reefs were established using used car tires, and monitored for 30 months. | Post-restoration monitoring: 30 months | Authors' conclusion: Seven genera of corals, and multiple species of non-mobile molluscs recruited and grew on the artificial reefs. Two species of fish targeted by local fishermen were present at the artificial reef sites, at sufficient numbers to sustain fishing. | Lessons reported: Recruited corals more likely to attach to concrete bases rather than rubber tire, suggesting concrete is a better recruitment substrate for coral planula. | 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 program in the Paraiso coral reef, Cozumel Island, Mexico | Technique: Transplantation | Disturbance addressed: Construction | Genera: Not reported | Method: Benthic fauna (mobile and sessile) was removed from the area of a proposed building site and relocated between 100 and 600 m away. Artificial substrata were used to transplant sessile organisms. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 97% | Post-restoration monitoring: 1 months | Authors' conclusion: 23,796 individual organisms, including 161 species belonging to 17 groups, were moved from a proposed building site to a location between 100 and 600m away, which was enhanced with artificial substrata. High survival rate (97%) overall in the first month indicates a successful rescue of organisms. | Lessons reported: Artificial reef structures combined with transplantation efforts enhanced 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: Coral reef restoration through coral transplantation: the case of Duka Bay, Medina, Misamis Oriental. Manila. | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: n/a | Method: Cement blocks (10 x 16 x 56 cm) were placed on disturbed reef, and coral fragments sourced from nearby reef transplanted. | Post-restoration monitoring: 24 months | Authors' conclusion: The transplanted corals grew faster than their donor colonies, and 24 species of fish were recorded at the transplantation sites at the conclusion of the experiment (2 years). The 'restored' sites became popular tourist attractions, generating income for the nearby resort and village. | 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: Restauration d'une zone corallienne dégradée et implantation d'un jardin corallien à Bora Bora, Polynésie Française | Technique: Substrate Addition - Artificial reef | Disturbance addressed: Dredging | Genera: Acropora, Porites, Pavona, Montipora, Pocillopora, Fungia, Herpolitha, Cyphastrea, Psammocora | Method: Dredged pits were filled with 10,000m3 of sand, three 20m long groynes were built and the beach was replenished with sand. 125 artificial concrete structures, between 1.6 and 17t each, were deployed on the sandy shallow reef flat to act as breakwaters to protect the coastline. A 7,200 m2 “coral garden” was created by transplanting 311 coral colonies to 11 artificial structures and 200 large branching (Acropora spp.) and massive (Porites spp.) colonies to surrounding sand patches. Monitoring sur… | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 90.3636% | Post-restoration monitoring: 32 months | Authors' conclusion: The transplanted corals had a 95% survival rate, on average, except for high mortality of submassive Porites rus from smothering in sand. The coral gardens were further colonised by 53 coral colonies, sea urchins, tridacnid clams and a variety of reef fishes. | Lessons reported: Location effects need to be considered in the future, as the coral garden was affected by anchors and large amounts of sand. | 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 using Acropora cervicornis at the T/V MARGARA grounding site | Technique: Substrate Stabilisation | Disturbance addressed: Ship grounding | Genera: Acropora | Method: Rubble was stabilised and loose colonies reattached. | Post-restoration monitoring: 108 months | Authors' conclusion: At the restoration site, transplanted corals have survived, grown and spread to surrounding areas. | 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 recovery process in a mechanically damaged coral reef community: recruitment and growth | Technique: Substrate Addition - Artificial reef | Disturbance addressed: Ship grounding | Genera: Pseudopterogorgia, Millepora, Favia, Briareum, Agaricia | Method: Horizontal, grooved quarry tiles were grouped into 8 "recruitment stations" along a line ranging from no impact to maximum impact. Four tiles per station were secured on posts embedded into the reef, approx. 5cm from the substratum. Tiles were collected at 6 month intervals and checked for recruits. | Post-restoration monitoring: 27 months | Authors' conclusion: Coral recruit density was negatively correlated with the severity of the impact; lowest recruitment was measured in the zone of maximal impact. | 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 juvenile corals: a new approach for enhancing colonization of artificial reefs | Technique: Substrate addition - artificial reef, transplantation | Disturbance addressed: Pollution | Genera: Stylophora, Dendronephthya | Method: An artificial reef was constructed using a modular block deployed at a depth of 18m, a buoy 2-3m below the surface, and nine 50 x 50 x 3 cm PVC settlement plates attached vertically and horizontally between them. Coral planulae and fragments were transplanted onto the plates. Survivorship was monitored biweekly. | Post-restoration monitoring: 5 months | Authors' conclusion: The survivorship of the transplanted D. hemprichi colonies was significantly higher on the lower sides of shallower plates. Survivorship of S. pistillata colonies increased with depth when located on the vertical plates, or on the upper sides of the horizontal plates. The highest survivorship of this coral was on the vertical plates and on the upper sides of the horizontal plates, while very low survivorship was recorded on the lower sides. The results indicate that vertical artificial surfaces offer the optimal biotic and abiotic conditions (light intensity, sedimentation, colonisation by ot… | Lessons reported: Vertical artificial surfaces offer the optimal biotic and abiotic conditions (light intensity, sedimentation, colonisation by other organisms) for the survival of the two examined corals | 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 particulate matter released by a fish farm (Eilat, Red Sea) on survival and growth of Stylophora pistillata coral nubbins | Technique: Coral Gardening - Nursery Phase | Disturbance addressed: Pollution | Genera: Stylophora | Method: Tested the survival and growth of 1322 nubbins pruned from five colonies that were transplanted at a depth of 6 m in the vicinity of the fish cages and in a reference site. Nubbins were attached in three orientations (up, vertical and down positions). | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 93.5% | Post-restoration monitoring: 1.5 months | Authors' conclusion: After 50 days, survival was high in both localities and no difference was recorded between the spatial orientations. At the fish farm, burial of the nubbin_x0001_s lateral growths and partial coverage of nubbins by settled particulate matter resulted in significant reduction of the lateral growth rates of nubbins settled in the up position as compared to the reference site. On the other hand, faster growth rates were recorded in the vertical set of nubbins at the fish farm when compared with the IUI site. | Lessons reported: Physical effects, rather than nutrient enrichment, may constitute the main cause of stress for minute coral fragments (resembling coral recruits) growing near the vicinity of a fish farm. | 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: Evaluating causes of transplant stress in fragments of Acropora palmata used for coral reef restoration | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora | Method: To evaluate transplant stress, newly transplanted coral fragments were compared to a restoration site to two other groups: (1) non-transplants, or fragments that remained at the source site, and (2) established transplants, or fragments that had been transplanted from the same source population to the restoration site 2 yrs prior. 84 healthy fragments were transplanted to a site that already had 45 established transplants, and 48 non-transplants were selected for comparison. Colony growth was m… | Post-restoration monitoring: 12 months | Authors' conclusion: After 2 wks, new transplants displayed greater tissue loss and bleaching than both other groups. New transplants were affected by disease (white syndrome) more frequently than non-transplants or established transplants. Transplant-induced bleaching caused a slight reduction in growth and survival after 3 mo, but no carry-over effects were detectable after 1 yr. Damselfish bites significantly affected coral fragments but did not preferentially target new transplants. | 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: Long-term survival and colony growth of Acropora palmata fragments transplanted by volunteers for restoration | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora | Method: 832 storm-generated Acropora palmata fragments that had been transplanted over the course of 7 years were monitored 3 months and 1 year after transplanting, and annually thereafter. Growth and survival were analysed and modelled as a function of initial colony size and time since transplantation. | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 54.5714% | Post-restoration monitoring: 72 months | Authors' conclusion: Mortality was highest in the first year after transplanting, suggesting stress from handling or failure of the attachment method. Survival also varied with the year of transplantation, and was lowest in years with major storms (2007 and 2010). Fragment survival increased with increasing initial size. Colony size tended to decrease slightly in the first 3 months after being reattached, presumably due to stress from transplanting. Subsequently, the surface area of surviving colonies tended to increase over time. Colony growth was extremely variable and largely independent of initial colony size… | Lessons reported: Demographic monitoring of transplanted colonies should focus on the first year after transplantation. | 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: Evaluating methods for transplanting endangered elkhorn corals in the Virgin Islands | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora | Method: Two experiments were conducted with three treatments: (1) control fragments left unattached at the source sites; (2) fragments attached to the reef at the source sites; and (3) fragments moved to the restoration site and attached. Comparing treatments (1) and (2) isolated the effect of attaching fragments, and comparing (2) with (3) isolated the effect of relocating fragments. Additionally, attachment methods were compared. In experiment 1, two methods were compared: Z-spar epoxy resin and cabl… | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 40% | Post-restoration monitoring: 48 months | Authors' conclusion: Unattached control fragments at the donor site died faster and grew slower than fragments attached to the reef; attaching fragments to the reef is beneficial. There were no effects of moving fragments between donor and restoration sites. Growth and survival were similar using four methods of attaching fragments to the reef. Clearing surrounding algae improved the growth of fragments. After 4 years, transplanted fragments grew to 1,450 cm2 in area. | Lessons reported: Clearing algae from restored areas is beneficial to coral growth. The simplicity of the approach makes it useful for volunteers. Cable ties are cheaper and easier to use in areas of higher reef complexity. | 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: Reef fishes recruited at midwater coral nurseries consume biofouling and reduce cleaning time in Seychelles, Indian Ocean | Technique: Coral Gardening - Nursery Phase | Genera: Acropora, Pocillopora, Stylophora, Acanthastrea, Astreopora, Coscinaraea, Cyphastrea, Dipsastraea, Favites, Galaxea, Goniastrea, Goniopora, Hydnophora, Lobophyllia, Astrae, Montastrea, Pavona, Platyg… | Method: Deployed midwater net nurseries with coral fragments of mixed growth form. Observed nursery-associated fish assemblages with GoPro. Nurseries were then emptied and the fish surveys repeated. | Post-restoration monitoring: 7 months | Authors' conclusion: The density of blue-yellow damselfish Pomacentrus caeruleus was 12–16 times higher when corals were present than when corals were removed. Fish assemblages recruited into the nurseries included three trophic levels, from herbivores to omnivores, in six families: Ephippidae, Pomacentridae, Labridae (Scarinae), Gobiidae, Siganidae and Monacanthidae. Higher abundance of large fish (total number of individuals) resulted in 2.75 times less person-hours spent in nursery cleaning. | Lessons reported: Coral nurseries that attract recruiting fishes take less time and effort to clean, because the fish eat the algae and fouling organisms. | 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: Growth dynamics of the threatened Caribbean staghorn coral Acropora cervicornis: Influence of host genotype, symbiont identity, colony size, and environmental setting. | Technique: Coral Gardening | Genera: Acropora | Method: Individual tracking of. 1700 nursery-grown staghorn fragments and colonies from 37 distinct genotypes in Florida and the Dominican Republic. Sites in Florida included two underwater nurseries and 5 reefs where nursery-grown corals were outplanted and monitored. The staghorn nursery and 9 outplant sites at the Dominican Republic (DR) are located at Punta Cana. | Post-restoration monitoring: 12 months | Authors' conclusion: Significant positive relationship between size and growth, but decreasing rate of productivity with increasing size. Fast-growing genotypes grew up to an order of magnitude faster than slow-growing genotypes. Algal symbiont identity showed that clade A was the dominant symbiont type for almost all coral genotypes. A. cervicornis is a successful candidate nursery species and provide optimism for the potential role that active propagation can play in the recovery of this keystone species. | Lessons reported: Pruning vigor (enhanced growth after fragmentation) was documented even in colonies that lost 95% of their coral tissue/skeleton, indicating that high productivity can be maintained within nurseries by sequentially fragmenting corals. | 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: Successful transplantation of a fragmenting coral, Montipora digitata, for reef rehabilitation | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Montipora | Method: Fragments were transplanted to two different locations. The treatments were: Low-Horizontal, Low-Vertical, High-Horizontal, and High-Vertical. Each treatment was replicated on each of three bommies in a site, yielding three replicates per treatment. Forty transplants were used for each density × surface combination. Survival and growth were monitored bimonthly. | Post-restoration monitoring: 21 months | Authors' conclusion: Growth and survival were significantly better at the site that resembled the natural habitat of the donor corals more closely. Environmental conditions at this site also favored the establishment of a greater diversity of species around the coral transplants. There was no difference in performance between transplants on vertical and horizontal surfaces, and the transplants showed limited differences due to density within the experimental range. Water motion showed significant effects on survival and growth. | Lessons reported: Effects of physical environmental variables. The presence of M. digitata at a previously denuded site enhanced structural complexity, and, as a result, overall diversity of benthic organisms. | 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: Density-dependent effects on initial growth of a branching coral under restoration | Technique: Coral Gardening - Transplantation Phase | Genera: Acropora | Method: Coral fragments were transplanted onto flat areas of bare substratum in a range of densities, from 1 to 20, spaced 5cm apart, and growth rates were compared. | Post-restoration monitoring: 3 months | Authors' conclusion: Increasing density led to a reduction in average out-plant growth, probably due to competition for space. | Lessons reported: Suggest explicit consideration of out-plant spatial arrangement and density in coral reef restoration projects. | 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 using Acropora cervicornis at the T/V MARGARA grounding site | Technique: Coral Gardening - Transplantation Phase | Disturbance addressed: Ship grounding | Genera: Acropora | Method: 227 fragments and 400 colonies were attached to the damaged area. | Post-restoration monitoring: 108 months | Authors' conclusion: At the restoration site, transplanted corals have survived, grown and spread to surrounding areas. | 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: Assisted fertilization of threatened Staghorn Coral to complement the restoration of nurseries in Southeastern Dominican Republic | Technique: Larval Enhancement | Genera: Acropora | Method: Gametes were collected at spawning in situ, using traps placed over colonies. Gametes from genetically distinct colonies were mixed ex situ, and fertilised eggs removed and kept in 12L buckets. four types of substrates were introduced into buckets as larval stage was reached: 1) cleaned rock (year 1), 2) conditioned cement block 3) red cement block, 4) white cement block The water in buckets was replaced daily. Half the polyps were placed in aquaria, with wave makers and artificial light after … | Survival of transplants reported by the source: 10% | Post-restoration monitoring: 11 months | Authors' conclusion: Fertilization and settlement rates were 90% and 50%, respectively. The highest mortality occurred in the first 30 days, and was 10% at the end of 11 months. | Lessons reported: The procedure complements A. cervicornis restoration efforts in coral nurseries. This manuscript presents a detailed outline for restoration practitioners and managers, who can use assisted fertilization to increase genetic diversity within nurseries, as well as outplants to increase species recovery, or use assisted fertilization to increase reproductive success for sexually mature colonies. | 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: How quickly do fragments of coral "self-attach" after transplantation? | Technique: Transplantation | Genera: Acropora, Montipora, Pavona, Echinopora, Heliopora, Hydnophora, Pocillopora, Porites | Method: Fragments were collected from 25 colonies of 13 species and transplanted into a sheltered environment for two re-attachment experiments. The first experiment examined times to self-attachment in 11 species of differing morphologies from seven families over approximately 7 months, and the second experiment examined three fast-attaching Acropora species over approximately 1 month. | Post-restoration monitoring: 7 months | Authors' conclusion: In the first experiment, Acropora muricata had the fastest self-attachment time, while Echinopora lamellosa had the slowest. For the second experiment, A. muricata (branching) was significantly slower to self-attach than Acropora hyacinthus (tabular) and Acropora digitifera (corymbose digitate). Growth rates, growth form and life history may determine how quickly fragments of coral species self-attach after fragmentation and transplantation. | Lessons reported: Knowledge about self-attachment times is useful for reef restoration practitioners when selecting appropriate species for coral transplantation. If the transplant site is subjected to seasonal storms or wave surge coral transplants should be deployed so as to have time to self-attach before the onset of rough weather. | 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.