↓ Skip to main content

Assessing coral health and disease from digital photographs and in situ surveys

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
Assessing coral health and disease from digital photographs and in situ surveys
Published in
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10661-016-5743-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. A. Page, S. N. Field, F. J. Pollock, J. B. Lamb, G. Shedrawi, S. K. Wilson

Abstract

Methods for monitoring the status of marine communities are increasingly adopting the use of images captured in the field. However, it is not always clear how data collected from photographic images relate to historic data collected using traditional underwater visual census methods. Here, we compare coral health and disease data collected in situ by scuba divers with photographic images collected simultaneously at 12 coral reef sites. Five globally relevant coral diseases were detected on 194 colonies from in situ surveys and 79 colonies from photos, whilst 698 colonies from in situ surveys and 535 colonies from photos exhibited signs of compromised health other than disease. Comparisons of in situ surveys with photographic analyses indicated that the number of disease cases occurring in the examined coral populations (prevalence) was six times higher (4.5 vs. 0.8% of colonies), whilst compromised health was three times higher (14 vs. 4% of colonies) from in situ surveys. Skeletal eroding band disease, sponge overgrowth and presence of Waminoa flatworms were not detected in photographs, though they were identified in situ. Estimates of black band disease and abnormally pigmented coral tissues were similar between the two methods. Estimates of the bleached and healthy colonies were also similar between methods and photographic analyses were a strong predictor of bleached (r (2) = 0.8) and healthy (r (2) = 0.5) colony prevalence from in situ surveys. Moreover, when data on disease and compromised health states resulting in white or pale coral colony appearance were pooled, the prevalence of 'white' colonies from in situ (14%) and photographic analyses (11%) were statistically similar. Our results indicate that information on coral disease and health collected by in situ surveys and photographic analyses are not directly comparable, with in situ surveys generally providing higher estimates of prevalence and greater ability to identify some diseases and compromised states. Careful sampling of photographs can however identify signs of coral stress, including some coral diseases, which may be used to trigger early-warning management interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of 1 1%
Unknown 82 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 28%
Researcher 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 6 7%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 17 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 31%
Environmental Science 15 18%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 8 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 22 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2016.
All research outputs
#13,802,361
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#1,115
of 2,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,655
of 426,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#11
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,748 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 426,738 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.