Search for: All records

The plasticity of some coral-associated microbial communities under stressors like warming and ocean acidification suggests the microbiome has a role in the acclimatization of corals to future ocean conditions. Here, we evaluated the acclimatization potential of coral-associated microbial communities of four Hawaiian coral species (Porites compressa,Porites lobata,Montipora capitata, andPocillopora acuta) over 22-month mesocosm experiment. The corals were exposed to one of four treatments: control, ocean acidification, ocean warming, or combined future ocean conditions. Over the 22-month study, 33–67% of corals died or experienced a loss of most live tissue coverage in the ocean warming and future ocean treatments while only 0–10% died in the ocean acidification and control. Among the survivors, coral-associated microbial communities responded to the chronic future ocean treatment in one of two ways: (1) microbial communities differed between the control and future ocean treatment, suggesting the potential capacity for acclimatization, or (2) microbial communities did not significantly differ between the control and future ocean treatment. The first strategy was observed in bothPoritesspecies and was associated with higher survivorship compared toM.capitataandP.acutawhich exhibited the second strategy. Interestingly, the microbial community responses to chronic stressors were independent of coral physiology. These findings indicate acclimatization of microbial communities may confer resilience in some species of corals to chronic warming associated with climate change. However,M.capitatagenets that survived the future ocean treatment hosted significantly different microbial communities from those that died, suggesting the microbial communities of the survivors conferred some resilience. Thus, even among coral species with inflexible microbial communities, some individuals may already be tolerant to future ocean conditions. These findings suggest that coral-associated microbial communities could play an important role in the persistence of some corals and underlie climate change-driven shifts in coral community composition. 

Abstract Climate change poses a major threat to coral reefs. We conducted an outdoor 22-month experiment to investigate if coral could not just survive, but also physiologically cope, with chronic ocean warming and acidification conditions expected later this century under the Paris Climate Agreement. We recorded survivorship and measured eleven phenotypic traits to evaluate the holobiont responses of Hawaiian coral: color, Symbiodiniaceae density, calcification, photosynthesis, respiration, total organic carbon flux, carbon budget, biomass, lipids, protein, and maximumArtemiacapture rate. Survivorship was lowest inMontipora capitataand only some survivors were able to meet metabolic demand and physiologically cope with future ocean conditions. MostM. capitatasurvivors bleached through loss of chlorophyll pigments and simultaneously experienced increased respiration rates and negative carbon budgets due to a 236% increase in total organic carbon losses under combined future ocean conditions.Porites compressaandPorites lobatahad the highest survivorship and coped well under future ocean conditions with positive calcification and increased biomass, maintenance of lipids, and the capacity to exceed their metabolic demand through photosynthesis and heterotrophy. Thus, our findings show that significant biological diversity within resilient corals likePorites, and some genotypes of sensitive species, will persist this century provided atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are controlled. SincePoritescorals are ubiquitous throughout the world’s oceans and often major reef builders, the persistence of this resilient genus provides hope for future reef ecosystem function globally. 

Abstract For over three decades, scientists have conducted heat-stress experiments to predict how coral will respond to ocean warming due to global climate change. However, there are often conflicting results in the literature that are difficult to resolve, which we hypothesize are a result of unintended biases, variation in experimental design, and underreporting of critical methodological information. Here, we reviewed 255 coral heat-stress experiments to (1) document where and when they were conducted and on which species, (2) assess variability in experimental design, and (3) quantify the diversity of response variables measured. First, we found that two-thirds of studies were conducted in only three countries, three coral species were more heavily studied than others, and only 4% of studies focused on earlier life stages. Second, slightly more than half of all heat-stress exposures were less than 8 d in duration, only 17% of experiments fed corals, and experimental conditions varied widely, including the level and rate of temperature increase, light intensity, number of genets used, and the length of acclimation period. In addition, 95%, 55%, and > 35% of studies did not report tank flow conditions, light–dark cycle used, or the date of the experiment, respectively. Finally, we found that 21% of experiments did not measure any bleaching phenotype traits, 77% did not identify the Symbiodiniaceae endosymbiont, and the contribution of the coral host in the physiological response to heat-stress was often not investigated. This review highlights geographic, taxonomic, and heat-stress duration biases in our understanding of coral bleaching, and large variability in the reporting and design of heat-stress experiments that could account for some of the discrepancies in the literature. Development of some best practice recommendations for coral bleaching experiments could improve cross-studies comparisons and increase the efficiency of coral bleaching research at a time when it is needed most. 

Coral reefs are declining worldwide primarily because of bleaching and subsequent mortality resulting from thermal stress. Currently, extensive efforts to engage in more holistic research and restoration endeavors have considerably expanded the techniques applied to examine coral samples. Despite such advances, coral bleaching and restoration studies are often conducted within a specific disciplinary focus, where specimens are collected, preserved, and archived in ways that are not always conducive to further downstream analyses by specialists in other disciplines. This approach may prevent the full utilization of unexpended specimens, leading to siloed research, duplicative efforts, unnecessary loss of additional corals to research endeavors, and overall increased costs. A recent US National Science Foundation-sponsored workshop set out to consolidate our collective knowledge across the disciplines of Omics, Physiology, and Microscopy and Imaging regarding the methods used for coral sample collection, preservation, and archiving. Here, we highlight knowledge gaps and propose some simple steps for collecting, preserving, and archiving coral-bleaching specimens that can increase the impact of individual coral bleaching and restoration studies, as well as foster additional analyses and future discoveries through collaboration. Rapid freezing of samples in liquid nitrogen or placing at −80 °C to −20 °C is optimal for most Omics and Physiology studies with a few exceptions; however, freezing samples removes the potential for many Microscopy and Imaging-based analyses due to the alteration of tissue integrity during freezing. For Microscopy and Imaging, samples are best stored in aldehydes. The use of sterile gloves and receptacles during collection supports the downstream analysis of host-associated bacterial and viral communities which are particularly germane to disease and restoration efforts. Across all disciplines, the use of aseptic techniques during collection, preservation, and archiving maximizes the research potential of coral specimens and allows for the greatest number of possible downstream analyses. 

Abstract Corals obtain nutrition from the photosynthetic products of their algal endosymbionts and the ingestion of organic material and zooplankton from the water column. Here, we use stable carbon (δ¹³C) and nitrogen (δ¹⁵N) isotopes to assess the proportionate contribution of photoautotrophic and heterotrophic sources to seven Hawaiian coral species collected from six locations around the island of O‘ahu, Hawaiʻi. We analyzed the δ¹³C and δ¹⁵N of coral tissues and their algal endosymbionts, as well as that of dissolved inorganic matter, particulate organic matter, and zooplankton from each site. Estimates of heterotrophic contribution varied among coral species and sites. Bayesian mixing models revealed that heterotrophic sources (particulate organic material and zooplankton) contributed the most toPocillopora acutaandMontipora patulacoral tissues at 49.3% and 48.0%, respectively, and the least toPorites lobataat 28.7%, on average. Estimates of heterotrophic contribution based on the difference between δ¹³C of the host and algal endosymbiont (δ¹³C_h–e) and isotopic niche overlap often differed, while estimates based on δ¹⁵N_h–ewere slightly more aligned with the estimates produced using Bayesian mixing models. These findings suggest that the utility of each approach may vary with coral health status, regions, and coral species. Overall, we find that the mean heterotrophic contribution to Hawaiian coral tissues ranges from 20% to 50%, suggesting a variety of trophic strategies. However, these findings did not always match past direct measurements of heterotrophic feeding, indicating that heterotrophically acquired nutrition does not necessarily get incorporated into tissues but can be respired or exuded in mucus. 

ABSTRACT The initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic changed the nature of course delivery from largely in-person to exclusively remote, thus disrupting the well-established pedagogy of the Genomics Education Partnership (GEP; https://www.thegep.org ). However, our web-based research adapted well to the remote learning environment. As usual, students who engaged in the GEP’s Course-based Undergraduate Research Experience (CURE) received digital projects based on genetic information within assembled Drosophila genomes. Adaptations for remote implementation included moving new member faculty training and peer Teaching Assistant office hours from in-person to online. Surprisingly, our faculty membership significantly increased and, hence, the number of supported students. Furthermore, despite the mostly virtual instruction of the 2020–2021 academic year, there was no significant decline in student learning nor attitudes. Based on successfully expanding the GEP CURE within a virtual learning environment, we provide four strategic lessons we infer toward democratizing science education. First, it appears that increasing access to scientific research and professional development opportunities by supporting virtual, cost-free attendance at national conferences attracts more faculty members to educational initiatives. Second, we observed that transitioning new member training to an online platform removed geographical barriers, reducing time and travel demands, and increased access for diverse faculty to join. Third, developing a Virtual Teaching Assistant program increased the availability of peer support, thereby improving the opportunities for student success. Finally, increasing access to web-based technology is critical for providing equitable opportunities for marginalized students to fully participate in research courses. Online CUREs have great potential for democratizing science education.