Phoenix Islands Protected Area 2009 ... - Science-to-Action

Phoenix Islands Protected Area Assessment 2009
Preliminary Expedition Report
Page 1 of 35
October 1, 2009
Republic of Kiribati

Phoenix Islands Protected Area Expedition 2009 – Assessment Report
Senior Editors: Gregory Stone, Expedition Leader, David Obura, Chief Scientist for Coral Reef
Assessment and Randi Rotjan.
Contributing Authors: Rob Barrel, Craig Cook, Alan Dynner, Les Kaufman, Kate Madin, Larry
Madin, Stuart Sandin, Brian Skerry, Tuake Teema, Tukabu Terooko, and Jeff Wildermuth.
Page 2 of 35

Table of Contents
Summary Results...................................................................................................................................................4
Introduction and Acknowledgments..............................................................................................................6
Expedition members and affiliation details ................................................................................................6
Expedition Details .................................................................................................................................................7
Objective 1a: Blue water zooplankton assessment........................................................................................................8
Objective 1b: Deep Water ROV assessments...................................................................................................................11
Objective 1c: Coral reef assessments i. Corals and benthic structure.................................................................12
Objective 1c: Coral reef assessments ii. Corallivory (fish­coral trophic interactions)................................20
Objective 1c: Coral reef assessments iii. Fish diversity, abundance, and biomass assessments .............23
Objective 1d: On­shore (land­based) Assessment ........................................................................................................25
Objective 1e: Kiribati Fisheries Assessments..................................................................................................................27
Objective 1f: Collaborative efforts.......................................................................................................................................29
Objective 2: Medical objectives.............................................................................................................................................31
Objective 3: Media objectives ................................................................................................................................................32
Appendix I, Memo on PIPA Tourism Potential......................................................................................... 33
Appendix II, PIPA Research Permit .......................................................................................................35
Page 3 of 35

Summary Results
This is the fourth scientific expedition mounted by the New England Aquarium to the Phoenix Islands, Republic of
Kiribati in the South Pacific, and the first since the Phoenix Islands Protected Area was formally gazetted in 2006,
and extended in 2008 to become the largest MPA in the world, with a surface area of 408,250 km 2 . The expedition
team of 14 people spent 11 days in PIPA from September 13‐23, completing over 400 SCUBA dives. Six islands
were visited; in order: Nikamororo (2 days), McKean (1 day), Kanton (3 days), Enderbury (1 day), Rawaki (1 day),
and Orona (2 days). Initial expectations for the trip were to conduct research on deep sea and seamount
ecosystems, two of the most extensive and valuable of PIPA’s assets, but the lack of suitable vessels made this
impossible. Nevertheless, preliminary work on pelagic invertebrates and with a deep water ROV was conducted,
while the main efforts focused on coral reef assessments, initiating a broader range of research projects on coral
reef biota and terrestrial assessments with a management focus. Video footage was collected for further
development of educational and promotional videos on PIPA, and a National Geographic Magazine photographer
collected material for a future article on PIPA in the magazine. Timing of the expedition coincides with PIPA’s
application for listing as a World Heritage Site, and the research expedition had as an additional goal to inform this
process and support the application.
The pelagic invertebrate collections and deep water ROV confirmed that PIPA waters are typical of oligotrophic
ocean conditions, with low biomass in the water column, many cosmopolitan species of gelatinous plankton that
probably fit into the food web here much as they do in other locales, and very clear waters. Future plankton
studies at PIPA should expand the collections started here, and include quantitative, stratified sampling both
upstream and downstream of the islands, and in the lagoons on different tidal cycles to estimate the input of
zooplankton to the fringing reefs and lagoon communities.
The coral reef assessments found a rapid recovery in coral cover, returning 50% of the cover lost in the 2002‐3
bleaching event and an overall cover of 26%. Coralline algae, which is critical in promoting regrowth of corals and
strengthening the reef framework increased from 2002 to 2005 to 2009. Algal turf, which competes with corals
decreased from 2005 to 2009, after an increase due to the coral mortality in 2002; intact fish herbivore
populations were likely instrumental in preventing algal domination and facilitating regrowth of coralline algae and
corals. Taken together, these 3 indicators are a strong indication of very robust and healthy reef recovery which
will continue in coming years. The best reefs were on the leeward sides of Enderbury and Rawaki islands, and had
recovered all the cover lost, returning to about 80% cover of corals. Nevertheless, many species were not yet
present as large colonies and more time will be needed for re‐colonization of some lost species and restoration of
the large sizes found before the bleaching event. In contrast with this best‐case scenario for reef recovery from
mass mortality, which occurred in ideal conditions on the leeward reefs of small islands (less heating of water by
the island, no lagoon effect that retards coral recovery, minimal breakage by waves), were clear examples of how
local factors can slow reef recovery. The discreteness and isolation of the islands helped distinguish these different
factors, which is often not possible on larger island/continental systems where many threats act together and
mask each others’ signal.
• Heavy wave energy on windward slopes causes repeated coral breakage, which slows recovery (windward
sides of most islands);
• Lagoon waters are hotter and more rich in nutrients and sediment than open reef waters, and this favours
fleshy and turf algal growth over corals, making it harder for new corals to settle and survive (leeward
sides of Kanton and Nikumaroro affected by lagoon waters, especially north of the channels);
• The presence of a shipwreck causes iron enrichment of waters locally. At very high levels, this causes the
reef to degrade. At lower levels of iron, that adult corals may be able to tolerate, the settlement and
survival of small corals is compromised, and recovery from major coral mortality is retarded (major
shipwrecks especially on leeward reefs have an effect, on Nikumaroro, Kanton and Orona). Similarly,
guano and excess nutrient enrichment may have the same effect (McKean).
Page 4 of 35

• Low connectivity and high mortality can combine such that with very low larval flow between islands and
very low surviving adult coral populations that may fail to reproduce successfully, recruitment failure
results in very slow recovery (McKean windward side).
The fish assemblage of the Phoenix Islands had high abundance and biomass (5.55 fish m ‐2 and 259.6 g m ‐2 ,
respectively). This is similar to that of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (Papahanaumokuakea National Marine
Monument with 243 g m ‐2 on average) and Palmyra atoll in the Line Islands (270 g m ‐2 ). The biomass of fish was
dominated by large‐bodied and massive predatory species including snappers, groupers, and, on some islands,
sharks. However shark populations have clearly suffered from fishing in the past, which has been documented to
have occurred in 2001, 2005, 2006 and 2007, illustrating the urgent need to enforce fishing restrictions. Large
numbers of small sharks were noted at some locations, suggesting recovery may be underway. The persistence of
high fish biomass following the 2002 mass‐bleaching event, particularly within guilds that feed upon algae and
benthic invertebrates, has very likely been a key factor in the impressive regeneration of hard coral communities
on PIPA reefs. Observations of fishery resources confirm their robustness in the absence of exploitation, including
species targeted in the aquarium trade, live reef food fish trade and food fish resources, making PIPA a valuable
reference site for understanding the impact of these fisheries elsewhere.
Additional studies on coral reef dynamics were conducted to build a broader science base emanating from PIPA.
With an intact fish fauna, observations of coral‐fish interactions, in particular corallivory, found very high rates of
predation on corals as well as high selectivity of which coral genera are targeted. This contrasts with results from
other locations where fishing impacts on the fish fauna result in much lower abundances and therefore also of
predation on corals. No damaging invertebrate corallivores were found, and only one clear case of an unknown
coral disease was noted. Integration of results from PIPA surveys will be done with a number of programmes,
including the IUCN Climate Change and Coral Reefs reef resilience assessment programme, and various
components of the Marine Management Area Science programme of Conservation International (particularly the
Community Health Index that works on reef resilience, the Coral Whisperer programme on gene expression in
stressed corals, and initial surveys of using coral fluorescence as a field indicator).
Coral and invertebrate samples were made on behalf of 8 colleagues working in population genetics, coral
physiology and systematics, totalling 500 samples from a variety of coral genera and a small number of other taxa
(soft corals, corallimorphs, holothurians, vermetid worms and serpulid worms). These samples will be delivered to
the respective researchers, and their findings documented separately.
Land surveys were conducted on all islands, with the following observations made:
• Nikumaroro: only one coconut crab was seen, and rocks were found suggesting an old Polynesian marae.
• McKean: no evidence of rats or other rodents was seen and bait stations were observed everywhere,
suggesting successful eradication.
• Kanton: The air strip was inspected and appears to be in excellent condition, without signs of degradation. A
survey was conducted around the old hotel and Pan Am airbase, and Rob Barrel of the Nai’a prepared a memo
detailing a vision for using the site as a PIPA tourism base.
• Enderbury: The island was overrun with rats and bird populations appeared low.
• Phoenix (Rawaki): There was no evidence of rats or rabbits on this island. Bird populations appeared robust.
• Orona: one small island in the northern area was surveyed, and appeared in good condition. Observed
abundant giant clams and seabirds
The findings of the expedition will contribute important information to management of PIPA, as well as
fundamental contributions to science. Rapid reporting of the coral bleaching and fish herbivore results will be
prioritized, as these are extremely relevant to understanding the vulnerability of coral reefs to combined climate
change and local threats. The findings confirm the importance of PIPA as a potential reference or observatory
site, which will also be true for the other principal ecosystems – the deep sea, seamounts, pelagic and
terrestrial. We therefore recommend strengthening all efforts to operationalize PIPA, including raising funds to
Page 5 of 35

capitalize the endowment and successful completion of the World Heritage application. The expedition also
found increased benefits from broadening the science and research interests in PIPA, and encourage further
development of a more comprehensive research agenda and building capacity, particularly on Kanton, to
support this.
Introduction and Acknowledgments
This is a preliminary report on a scientific expedition to the Phoenix Islands, Republic of Kiribati in the South
Pacific. The Phoenix Islands Protected Area was formally gazetted in 2006, and extended in 2008 to become the
largest Marine Protected Area (MPA) in the world, with a surface area of 408,000 km2.
We thank the government of Kiribati for the permission to conduct this survey and to the sponsors including the
Oak foundation, The Akiko Shiraki Dynner Fund for Exploration and Conservation at the New England Aquarium,
the Marine Management Area Science Program at Conservation International, Mr. James Stringer, Wendy
Benchley, and Dr. Craig Cook. Thanks to Randi Rotjan for assembling the bits and pieces of this report while being
tossed up, down and sideways during the five day boat crossing back to Fiji from the Phoenix Islands. We also
thank Elyse Antrim, Edward Lohnes, Lydia Bergen and Heather Tausig for essential help with planning and
execution of this expedition, even though they were not with us on the cruise.
Expedition members and affiliation details (alphabetical order)
Rob Barrel: NAI’A
Craig Cook: Undersea Medical Consultants
Alan Dynner: New England Aquarium
Les Kaufman: Boston University, Conservation International, New England Aquarium
Kate Madin: Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Larry Madin: Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
David Obura: CORDIO and New England Aquarium
Randi Rotjan: New England Aquarium and Harvard University
Stuart Sandin: Center for Marine Biodiversity and Conservation, Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Brian Skerry: National Geographic and New England Aquarium
Gregory Stone: Conservation International and New England Aquarium
Jim Stringer: Retired; Photographer
Tuake Teema: Ministry of Fisheries & Mineral Resources Development Kiribati
Tukabu Teroroko: Director of the Phoenix Islands Protected Area
Jeff Wildermuth: National Geographic
Page 6 of 35

Expedition Details
For this trip, the expedition team chartered the Nai’a, based out of Fiji. The Nai’a is 120 feet long, by 30 feet in
beam, by 11 feet draft; 240 tons. She is a Dutch‐built motor sailor, built in Amsterdam in 1979 and re‐built by Rob
Barrel in Fiji in 1992. The expedition team of 14 people spent 11 days on‐site from September 13‐23, completing
over 400 SCUBA dives. Six islands were visited; in order: Nikumororo (2 days), McKean (1 day), Kanton (3 days),
Enderbury (1 day), Rawaki (1 day), and Orona (2 days), with transit time between. Transit time to and from PIPA
was approximately 5.5 days each way. This was the first expedition to the Phoenix Islands following the
designation as PIPA: the world’s largest marine reserve. There were several trip objectives, and this report is
organized around them as follows:
1) Scientific objectives
a) Blue water zooplankton assessment
b) Deep Water ROV assessments
c) Coral reef assessments
i. Corals and benthic structure
ii. Corallivory (fish‐coral trophic interactions)
iii. Fish diversity, abundance, and biomass assessments
d) On‐shore (land‐based) Assessment
e) Kiribati Fisheries Assessments
f) Collaborative efforts
2) Medical objectives
3) Media objectives
Page 7 of 35

Objective 1a: Blue water zooplankton assessment
Larry and Kate Madin
Introduction
PIPA is the world’s largest marine protected area, established largely to protect the nearly undisturbed
environments of its islands, atolls, submerged banks and seamounts. Of its 408,250 square kilometers of area, only
25 square kilometers are land area – 0.006% of the protected area. All else is open ocean over deep‐sea floor. The
water column of PIPA is the largest habitat by far within the region, and its importance as home to large fishes,
turtles and marine mammals is protected by the prohibition of high‐seas fishing within PIPA. The protected ocean
waters surrounding the 8 Phoenix Islands provide the large scale physical, chemical and biological context. This
includes some of the food resources – plankton, larvae and pelagic fishes ‐‐ that are part of the larger ecology of
the reefs.
Part of the open‐ocean environment has yet to be surveyed – the invertebrate organisms and larval forms that
make up the zooplankton. While the primary creation of food from sunlight is the role of phytoplankton and other
photosynthetic micro‐organisms, the zooplankton that consume these cells are essential links to larger animals,
including eventually the larger fish and whales. Zooplankton are also an important food resource for coral and
planktivorous fishes on the reefs. We have almost no information about the biodiversity or abundance of the
zooplankton in PIPA waters. They are likely to be similar to other tropical regions, but given the remoteness of the
Phoenix Islands, could include species that are rare or unknown elsewhere.
During the 2009 expedition, we made a preliminary survey of the zooplankton community around the islands. For
small organisms, we made two plankton tows, and for larger and more fragile gelatinous made four ‘blue‐water’
SCUBA dives to observe and collect specimens in individual jars. These specimens may be the first from this remote
part of the Western Pacific Ocean.
Summary of Results
Date, time and locations of the 4 Blue‐water dives are given in Table 1. In all cases, dives were conducted
approximately 1 km seaward of the anchorage point of Nai’a at each of the islands. Dives typically lasted about 45
minutes, and divers worked at various depths between the surface and the maximum listed in the table.
The two plankton tows were made with a 50 cm diameter plankton net, with 150 µm mesh, towed behind the dive
skiff just below the surface for 8‐10 minutes. The tows were not quantitative, but meant only to provide a sample
of the diversity of smaller organisms. Both tow samples contained large amounts of flocculent phytoplankton and
smaller numbers of zooplankton. Samples were preserved in 70% ethanol for later analysis. (Formalin was
unavailable).
Table 1.
Dive 1 Dive 2 Dive 3 Dive 4
Date 9/14/09 9/17/09 9/20/09 9/22/09
Time 1500 1430 1430 1045
Location Nikumaroro Kanton Ender bury Orona
Depth 78 ft 51 ft 88 ft 80 ft
Temperature 85 F 85 F 83 F 84 F
Divers L.Madin, K.Madin L.Madin, K.Madin L.Madin, K.Madin L.Madin, K.Madin
Stone, Dynner Stone, Cook Stone, Skerry Stone, Rotjan
Campbell Wildermuth Stringer
The water column observed during the dives was typical of the oligotrophic open ocean, with very clear blue water
and sparse planktonic organisms. Divers both collected organisms in jars and recorded organisms that were seen
Page 8 of 35

ut not collected. Most animals seen were familiar and specimens were not preserved once their presence was
recorded. Diving observations are only qualitative, and it is always possible that species were overlooked by the
divers. The zooplankton species collected are summarized in Table 2. Numbers of animals seen or collected are
given for each dive. The + after the number indicates that additional individuals were seen but not collected; a + by
itself indicates seen only.
Table 2.
Taxon Dive 1 Dive 2 Dive 3 Dive 4 Total
Radiolarian colonies 2+ 4+ 1+ 1+ 8+
Planktonic forams 1 1
Coral larvae 14+ 2+ 2+ 18+
Medusae
Pelagia noctiluca 1 1 1 3
Aequorea globosa 1 1
Unid. cubomedusa 1 1
Siphonophores
Forskalia sp. 4+ 4+
Unid. calycophoran 1 1
Ctenophores
Cestum veneris 2+ 1+ 1 4+
Leucothea multicornis 1 1
Pteropods
Cavolinia sp. 1 1 2
Corolla sp. 1 1+ 2+
Unid. Pteropod 2+ 2+
Salps
Cyclosalpa affinis (a) 1 1
Weelia cylindrica (a & s) 7+ 7+
Larvaceans
Megalocercus sp 1+ 1+
Crustaceans
Sapphirina sp. + + +
Unid. Crustacean larvae 2 2
Grey reef sharks were seen on two dives, briefly at the beginning of Dive 2, when it had to be discouraged by the
safety diver using a shark stick, and on Dive 4 when a 2 m shark came by two or three times to look at the divers,
but didn’t approach. These were both larger than most of the sharks seen around the reefs. On most dives, two or
three juvenile fish hung around the divers much of the time.
Discussion
The gelatinous plankton collected was typical of oligotrophic ocean conditions. All of the species seen in PIPA have
also been recorded from the Celebes Sea (Madin, unpubl.) and from the Sargasso Sea, with the possible exception
of the cubomedusa, which has not yet been identified. All are adapted to the low nutrient, low food resource
environment. Colonial radiolarians are typical of the oligotrophic tropics, as the colonies include algal cells that
provide nutrition to their protozoan hosts. The pteropods and salps are particle feeders that use different methods
to filter small particles of all types from the water column. The siphonophores and ctenophores found are
predators that specialize in capturing very small crustacean and other zooplankton, either with fine stinging
tentacles (siphonophores) or sticky body surfaces (ctenophores). Such small prey were visible in the guts of the
ctenophore Cestum veneris. Pelagia is an omnivorous predator that consumes gelatinous animals as well as
crustaceans. Cubomedusae are often fish predators, and it is a bit surprising to find one in such a sparse
Page 9 of 35

environment, but it may have drifted out from closer to the island. The copepod Sapphirina, seen on two dives, is
associated with salps, and suggests their presence even when they were not seen by the divers.
The four dive sites differed in the animals seen. Dive 1 at Nikumaroro had the largest abundance of coral larvae. At
Kanton none were seen, but there was the largest diversity of medusae and siphonophores. No salps were found
on the first two dives, but Weelia cylindrica was abundant on the dive 4 at Orona. However, given the limited
sampling time at each site it would be premature to conclude that these observations represent distinct patterns
of distribution. It is more likely that these species, and others, occur patchily throughout the waters of PIPA.
This survey was limited in scope and sampling methodology, but does suggest that the waters of PIPA are typical of
the tropical open ocean, with many cosmopolitan species of gelatinous plankton that probably fit into the food
web here much as they do in other locales. The survey was not adequate to map the abundance of small
zooplankton around the islands that might be food resources for the reef community. There are clearly many
planktivorous fishes, as well as the corals themselves, that depend on zooplankton for much of their diet. Our
sampling capability was insufficient to determine how much of this zooplankton came from offshore waters and
how much was meroplankton or demersal plankton local to the lagoon and reef itself. Future plankton studies at
PIPA should include quantitative, stratified sampling both upstream and downstream of the islands, and in the
lagoons on different tidal cycles to estimate the input of zooplankton to the fringing reefs and lagoon
communities. This would ideally require use of an oceanographic ship and opening‐closing nets. Additional diving
collections would help fill out the catalog of gelatinous animals, and could be conducted from a live‐aboard vessel.
Page 10 of 35

Objective 1b: Deep Water ROV assessments
Greg Stone
A Video Ray Remotely Operated Vehicle (model PRO 3 XE GTO) was used to survey beyond SCUBA depths at three
islands. Those results are recorded on video tape and summarized below:
Date Location Depth Observations
09/13/09 McKean Islands 250 feet Healthy, low diversity coral cover (Platyseris spp.)
to 250 feet in‐between sand patches
9/18/09 Endurbury Island 325 feet Healthy, low diversity coral cover to 325 feet, 10
sharks (gray reef and black tip) seen.
9/21/09 Orona 200 feet Sharks
Page 11 of 35

Objective 1c: Coral reef assessments i. Corals and benthic structure
David Obura and Randi Rotjan
Introduction
The Phoenix Islands long term monitoring programme for coral reefs has been conducted in 2000, 2002 and 2005,
and a principal goal of this expedition was to provide the fourth time point, in 2009. Most significantly, this is the
second sample point after mass bleaching and mortality of corals that occurred after the sampling done in 2002,
that was likely the most severe temperature anomaly for coral reefs in recorded history. This survey will give the
first strong indication of recovery potential six years after the mortality event. Methods applied were selected for
consistency with past monitoring efforts, but also to upgrade the accuracy and precision of measurements to be
consistent with other assessment programmes in the region and globally. We conducted a variety of both
qualitative and quantitative assessments, including visual estimates, photoquadrats to assess percent live coral
cover, and genera‐level diversity and abundance measurements over line transects. Importantly, we also assessed
size‐class information on corals, which yield insight into the recovery dynamics of corals and resilience of the coral
community. Coral mortality between 2002 and 2005 was estimated at 60% on average, though varied between 80
and 40% on an island‐wide scale, and from 100% to about 20% on a site‐specific scale.
Methods – coral/benthic assessment
Methods are adapted from the IUCN Resilience Assessment protocol (Obura and Grimsditch 2009), and simplified
for application on the expedition. Four datasets were collected on corals:
1. Benthic cover/photoquadrats
2. Coral genus composition
3. Coral genus size class distributions
4. Reef resilience indicators
Benthic Cover/Photoquadrats
Digital still photographs of the reef substrate are taken from a height of approximately 0.6‐0.75 meters above the
substrate using natural light and setting the white balance at the survey depth to enhance reds and help
distinguish classes such as coralline algae. Photographs were taken haphazardly
over the study site, following the line of the coral belt transects. 40‐44 images were
collected per site, from which images for analysis will be randomly selected.
Photographs are downloaded onto a computer, and analysed for benthic
composition using dedicated software such as Coral Point Count (Kohler and Gill
2006 (http://www.nova.edu/ocean/cpce/index.html) or PhotoGrid. Provisionally,
25 points will be used for recording data from each photograph, and the results for
4 images will be combined together to form one sample, or ‘transect’, of 100
points. Not less than six of these transects (i.e. 24 images) are needed to calculate
the mean and standard deviation of cover types, and preferably 10 ‘transects’ (40
images) should be scored for each site.
Coral genus composition
Proportional abundance of all genera at a site was estimated on a five‐point scale. This is done towards the end of
the dive when an overall impression of the sampling site has been made, and the relative abundance of genera can
be estimated.
Codes Class Explanation Numerical (approximate)
D 5 Dominant Dominate the coral community
and/ or structure of the site
>30% of coral cover
A 4 Abundant Visually abundant and seen in large 10‐30% coral population by number or area
Page 12 of 35
Sample photo quadrat. Photos of
the benthos were taken at each
site for later area measurements
of various benthic structures.

numbers. Co‐dominate the site and/or large number of colonies (>100)
seen/inferred in the immediate area of the site
(2500 m 2 )
C 3 Common Easily found/seen on site, but not
dominant in any way
U/O 2 Uncommo
n/
Occasional
Not easily found, but several
individuals seen or can be found by
dedicated searching.
R 1 Rare Found by chance occurrence or
only 1 or 2 found by dedicated
searching.
>1% of coral population by number or area
and/or >20 colonies seen/inferred in the
immediate area of the site (2500 m 2 )

Sites
Data were collected on 9 days at 26 sites on 6 of the islands, as summarized in the table below. Of these, 17 were
leeward sites, 7 were windward and 2 were lagoon sites. We attempted to sample a windward site on each island,
but this was not always possible due to conditions and time available.
Date Island Code Site Name Longitude (W) Latitude (S) Exposure
13/9/09 Nikumaroro N4 Naia Point 174o32.697' 4o39.335' lee
13/9/09 N3 Landing 174o32.616' 4o40.477' lee
13/9/09 N6 Norwich City 174o32.847' 4o39.652' lee
14/9/09 N8 Turtle Nest Beach 174o30.905' 4o40.008' wind
14/9/09 N11 Windward Wing wind
14/9/09 N10 Southwest Corner 174o32.41' 4o40.87' lee
15/9/09 McKean Mc1 Guano Hut 174o7.65' 3o35.52' lee
15/9/09 Mc3 Windward wreck 174o7.61' 3o35.66' wind
15/9/09 Mc2 Rush Hour 174o7.69' 3o35.86' lee
17/9/09 Kanton K24 Oasis 171o41.149' 2o50.098' wind
17/9/09 K22 Satelliite Beach 171o43.51' 2o46.802' lee
17/9/09 K21 Crash Landing 171 o 43.407 2 o 45.795 lee
18/9/09 K20 Six Sticks 171o43.24' 2o48.337' lee
18/9/09 K25 Steep To 171o42.511' 2o49.986' lee
18/9/09 K19 Weird Eddy lee
19/9/09 K8 Coral Castles 171o41.743' 2o48.814' lag
20/9/09 Enderbury E3 Lone Palm 171o5.564' 3o7.06' lee
20/9/09 E5 Southern Ocean 171o4.761' 3o8.855' wind
20/9/09 E2 Observation Spot 171o5.549' 3o8.539' lee
21/9/09 Rawaki R1 Deepwater 170o43.054' 3o43.222' lee
21/9/09 R2 Stillwater 170o43.017' 3o43.26' lee
22/9/09 Orona O11 Aerials 172o12.953' 4o31.961' wind
22/9/09 O7 Algae Corner 172o13.616' 4o31.112' lee
22/9/09 O8 Dolphin Ledge 172o10.932' 4o29.487' lee
23/9/09 O3 Lagoon 3 172o10.509' 4o30.341' lag
23/9/09 O13 Farside 172o8.241' 4o29.468' wind
Preliminary Results
Coral genera
Thirty coral genera were recorded overall, with 24 being the maximum recorded at any one site, at Satellite Beach,
Kanton. Favia was the dominant and most widespread genus, followed by Porites, Montipora and Pavona. Favia,
Porites and Montipora were the dominant genera recovering on many of the leeward and windward fore reefs,
while Acropora and Pavona were dominent in the lagoons.
These genera compared to a list of 34 genera recorded in 2000, 2002 and 2005. Genera not recorded during this
survey included Stylocoeniella, Cycloseris, Echinophyllia and Stylophora. The absence of Stylophora is notable as
this is among the most susceptible genera to bleaching, and its absence is indicative of decline as a result of the
bleaching event of 2002‐3. The other genera are small and generally not dominant, and may have been present
but missed during surveys.
The principal coral communities noted in 2009 were:
• Reef slopes – sites with the best growth and recovery were dominated by Favia, Montipora or Porites,
with some regrowth of Pocillopora, which was co‐dominant with these other genera before bleaching.
Page 14 of 35

Recovery by Acropora was as yet absent. The most highly impacted leeward reefs had these dominant
genera but at lower densities, and few other genera.
• Lagoon patch reefs – these were very different from each other, with Kanton reefs showing heavy
mortality of Acropora, but with regrowth by Acropora tables and foliaceous Pavona. In Orona lagoon,
lagoon sites were dominated by small Goniastrea colonies along with other faviids, and high densities of
small Tridacna clams up to 20 cm.
Table A. Relative abundance of coral genera at study sites in the Phoenix Islands. Coding is by number of ‘x’s as
follows: 5 – Dominant, 4 – Abundant, 3 – Common, 2 – Uncommon, 1 – Rare. Also shown are the number of
genera per site and the number of sites sampled.
Satelliite Beach
Oasis
Deepwater
Aerials
Six Sticks
Steep To
Observation Spot
Algae Corner
Crash Landing
Coral Castles
Palm Lone
Site
Sitenum E3 K22 K24 R1 O11 K20 K25 E2 O8 K21 K8 N10 O13 E5 N3 N8 R2 K19 Mc2 O7 Mc1 Mc3 O1 N11
# genera 21 24 22 21 21 22 22 18 19 19 19 18 18 18 18 19 18 20 14 14 13 11 10 11
Coral genus code
Favia fav xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xx xxxx xx xxx xxx xxxxx xx xxxx xxxx xxx xxx xx xx xxxx xxx xxx 24
Porites por xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxx xxxx xxxx xxx xxxxx xxx xx xx xxxx x xxx xxx xxx 22
Montipora mtp xxxxx xx xxx xxxx xxxx xxx xxx xxx xxxx xxx xxx xxx xxxx xxx xx xxx xxx xx xx xx xxx xx xx xx 24
Pavona pav xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxx xxx xxxx xxx xxx xxxxx xx xxx xxx xxx x xxx xxx xx x xx xx x 23
Pocillopora poc xxx xxx xx xx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xx xx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 23
Fungia fun xxxx xxx xxx xx xx xxx xxx xx xxx xxx xxx xxx xx xxx xxx x xx xx xxx xx x xx xxx xx 24
Hydnopohora hyd xxxx xxxx xxxx xx xx xxxx xxxx xx xxxx xxx xx xxx xx xx xx xx xxx xx xx 19
Leptastrea lep xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xx xx xxx xxx xx xx xx x xx xx xx xx xx xx xxxx xx xx 22
Psammocora psa xxx xx xx xx xx xxx xxx xxx xx xx xx xxx xxx xx xxx xx xx xx xx x xx xx xx 23
Halomitra hal xxxx xxx xx xx x xxx xx xx xx xx xx xxx xx xxx xxx x x xx xxx xx xxx x 22
Leptoseris les xxx xxx xx xxx xxx xx xx xxx xxx xxx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx x xx xx xx x 22
Cyphastrea cyp xx xx xx xxx xxx xx x xxxx xx xx xxx xx xx xx x xx xxxx 17
Favites fts xx xx xxx xx xxx xx xx xx xx xx xx x xx xx xx xx xx x x xx 20
Platygyra pla xxx xxx xx xxx xx xx xx xx xxx xx xx xx xx xx xx x xx 17
Acropora acr xxx xx xx xx x x xxxxx xx x xxx x xxx xx xx 14
Herpolitha her xxx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xxx xx 14
Sandalolitha san xxx xx xx x xx xx x xx x x xxx xx x x xx xx 16
Montastrea mon xxx xx xx x xx xx xx xxx xx xx xx xx x x 14
Lobophyllia lob xx xx xx x xx x xx x x x xxx xxx xx xxx x 15
Oxypora oxy xxx x xxx xx x xx x xx xx xx x 11
Goniastrea gon xx xx xx x x xx xx xx x x x xxx 12
Coscinaraea cos xx xx xx x xxx xx 6
Turbinaria tur x xx xx xxx xx 5
Plerogyra plg x x xx xxx 4
Podabacea pod xx x x xxx 4
Leptoria leo xx xx x xx 4
Pachyseris pac xx x x x xx 5
Tubastrea tub xxx xx 2
Gardineroseris gar x x 2
Table B. Description of the principal coral communities and their state of recovery in 2009
Fore reef,
leeward
sites with
good
recovery
Fore reef,
leeward
sites with
poor
recovery
Page 15 of 35
Southwest Corner
Recovery dominated by corals that survived the bleaching event, and re‐growth of
these fragments – Montipora, and a Favia species, F. stelligera. Coral cover is up to
40‐80% at these reefs, and coralline algal cover is very high. Missing from these reefs
are abundant branching corals of Pocillopora and Acropora
Recovery is low on leeward sites that receive high levels of lagoon influence, on
Kanton and Nikumaroro. Lagoon waters have high temperatures, nutrients and
sediment load, which all promote algal growth and suppress the survival of small
corals. This influence is clear as it is maximum at the main point of lagoon outflow,
and decreases away from this point depending on the principal current directions.
Additionally, the presence of a shipwreck, which causes enrichment of iron in the
otherwise iron‐poor oceanic waters, results in low coral health and promotion of a
form of thick black algal turf. In some cases, the wrecks caused mass mortality of
Farside
Southern Ocean
Landing
Turtle Nest Beach
Stillwater
Weird Eddy
Rush Hour
Algae Corner
Guano Hut
Windward wreck
Lagoon 1/channel
Windward Wing
Number of sites

Fore reef,
windward
sites with
good
recovery
Fore reef,
windward
sites with
poor
recovery
Lagoon
sites
corals before the bleaching (e.g. Norwich City on Nikumaroro, Algae Corner on
Orona), and in others their influence clearly suppresses regrowth of corals (Kanton).
Windward reefs were a patchwork of robust coral growth and areas of rubble from
wave energy before the bleaching. Now, regrowth of corals is evident at many sites
(Porites, Montipora, Favia), though regrowth of fast growing species is absent
(Acropora) to slow (Pocillopora). Where regrowth is dominated by Porites, a more
diverse coral community is recovering due to the space provided by the massive
Porites colonies.
Due to high wave energy, recovery of windward reefs is slowed down as recovery
corals suffer continual breakage and abrasion from mobile rubble. Where mortality
was very high and coral cover very low, some windward reefs are showing little
recovery. In the case of McKean, the presence of a new shipwreck may be retarding
recovery, but more importantly, its isolation and the low coral cover following
bleaching may mean that local reproduction of corals is very low, and very limited
connectivity with other islands results in almost no recruitment of new corals.
The shallowest coral communities suffered very high coral mortality (< 10 m in
Kanton, < 3 m in Orona), and recovery in these areas is still very limited. However
deeper communities even of very sensitive Acropora in Kanton survived quite well,
and Acropora tables > 2 m diameter were common at 12‐3 m. Leafy Pavona species
were common in some shallow sites and the deeper Acropora communities. In
Orona, small faviids dominate the deeper coral communities, and these are at high
abundance.
Rapid assessment of benthic cover
Coral mortality from 2002‐5 was estimated at
60%, with coral cover declining from 37% to 15%
in 2005 (fig. A). In 2009, significant recovery was
recorded, returning 50% of the cover lost,
increasing to 26%. Coralline algae (CCA) continued
to increase from 2005‐2009 as reef recovery was
proceeding. CCA cements the reef framework,
which is important where so much mortality
results in higher levels of coral rubble, so this
cover of CCA will at least partially be converted to
coral cover in the near future. Conversely, the
initial increase in algal turf from 2002‐2005 was
reversed, as it declined in 2009 as coralline algal
cover increased. Rubble from dead coral skeletons
was high in 2005 and 2009, reflecting the ongoing
processes of breakdown of the reef following coral mortality, with much of the rubble being covered by CCA and
will eventually be fixed into the reef framework or washed by waves into deeper water.
The condition of the reefs varied by exposure (windward, leeward and lagoon) and depth (fig. B). In general,
leeward reefs had higher coral cover at al depth than windward reefs, with 20‐30% cover from 10 to 30 m depth,
while coral cover at depth on the windward reefs was lower, due to wave energy and breakup of the reef
framework causing high cover of rubble. Coral cover on patch reefs in the lagoons was high, at nearly 40%, though
these are spread out among large areas of sand.
Page 16 of 35
Fig. A. Benthic covery of coral, coralline algae (CCA), algal turf and rubble in
the Phoenix Islands, from 2000 to 2009.

Fig. B. Variation in benthic cover by exposure (leeward, windward and lagoon) and depths zones in the Phoenix Islands, 2009.
Fig. C. Variation in hard coral cover among islands and by exposure (mean and standard error).
Comparing among islands (fig. C), Enderbury and Rawaki had the best coral communities, particularly on the
leeward reefs. The coral communities had recovered to nearly pre‐bleaching levels, with maxima of 80% cover
from 10 to 30 m depth. Leeward reefs on other islands still showed high impacts of bleaching and mortality: on
Kanton and Nikumaroro and Orona, some lagoon effects were visible as a result of lower water quality, higher
nutrients and sedimentation, causing slower recovery; on McKean, Kanton and Orona, significant effects of
shipwrecks on the leeward reefs were also clear, retarding coral recovery. Recovery on windward reefs was slower
as a result of wave energy and breakage.
Coral size class distributions
Biomass of coral communities in the Phoenix Islands is dominated by corals in the size ranges 21‐40 and 41‐80 cm,
while the abundance of corals is dominated by 6‐10 cm juveniles corals (fig. D). The number of smallest corals < 5
cm is relatively low indicating low levels of recruitment and the isolation and low reproductive populations of
Page 17 of 35

corals following the mass mortality in 2002‐3.
Consequently, the main recovery appears to be from
regrowth of coral fragments, which have now regrown
into the dominant 21‐80 cm sizes.
Among genera (fig. E), Montipora and Favia were
dominant in the size class distribution dataset,
followed by Porites, Echinopora and Pavona. A large
gap is then found to the less common genera from
Cyphastrea and onwards down the x axis. Montipora is
a fast‐growing genus, able to reproduce asexually from
fragmentation, and was the dominant coral on some
leeward sites on Enderbury and several windward
sites. The high frequency of 6‐10 cm colonies in
Montipora (fig. F) is largely from breakage of existing
plates, while dominance of area is due to the large
colonies up to 1.6 and 3.2 m, made
up of many plates and leaves often
from different initiating colonies.
Favia is a slower‐growing genus and
with greater tolerance of bleaching,
and the key species, F. stelligera,
forms submassive/columnar colonies
that frequently break up into smaller
nubbins and columns, with regrowth
spreading out from surviving
fragments. Regrowth from fragments
is illustrated by numerical dominance
of the 11‐20 cm size class, and area
dominance by the large area under
21‐40 and 41‐80 cm colonies that
contribute to the overall distribution
in fig. D.
Fig. F. Size class distributions of the dominant coral genera from size class transects, by number of colonies (left) and area (right). Low levels of
recruitment and sexual reproduction are indicated by the low numbers of < 5 cm corals in all the dominant genera.
Across sites, Lone Palm (E3, Enderbury) had the highest cover of corals, due to large Montipora and Favia colonies,
while Orona lagoon (O3) had the highest number of colonies, due to many small colonies of Goniastrea,
Cyphastrea, Fungia and Echinopora. The top sites were well‐spread among islands – including in addition to the
Page 18 of 35
Fig. D. Size class distributions of all corals in the Phoenix Islands,
by number and area of colonies.
Fig. E. Relative abundance of coral genera by size class (number of colonies and area).
Genera are ordered by total area from left to right.

above two, Deepwater (R1, Rawaki), Crash
Landing (K21, Kanton), Stillwater (R2), Aerials
(O11, Orona) and Turtle Nest Beach (N8,
Nikumaroro). Interestingly, the two top sites by
area both had very low numbers of small corals,
emphasizing the importance of regrowth from
surviving corals over recruitment for recovery to
date.
Fig. H. Size class distributions of best sites from size class transects, by number of colonies (left) and area (right).
Page 19 of 35
Fig. G. Ranking of sites by size class distributions of corals.

Objective 1c: Coral reef assessments ii. Corallivory (fish‐coral trophic interactions)
Randi Rotjan, David Obura, Stuart Sandin, and Les Kaufman
Introduction
It is well known that herbivores have numerous and diverse impacts on plant and algal fitness, community
structure and ecosystem function. The importance of corallivory as a selective force, however, has been
underestimated. Corallivores, or consumers of live coral tissue, employ a wide variety of feeding strategies and can
be obligate or facultative coral feeders. A complex array of corallivores exists across the globe, represented by 11
families of fishes and 5 invertebrate phyla and totaling over
160 species known to consume scleractinian corals
worldwide. Importantly, although these corallivores span a
wide taxonomic range, they have been reported to feed on
relatively few genera of hard corals, specifically, on only 28
scleractinian genera worldwide. Damage by corallivores
ranges from minor to lethal, but there is a growing body of
evidence to support that even limited removal of tissue or
skeletal structures has growth and/or fitness consequences
for a scleractinian coral colony. The Phoenix Islands Protected
Area has provided an opportunity to examine corallivory in a
recovering ecosystem, in the absence of local stressors. With
Figure 1. Examples of spot biting (top left Porites, bottom right
Pavona), focused biting (bottom left Favia), and tip biting (top
right Pocillopora) in the Phoenix Islands. All photos by R. Rotjan.
a relatively intact fish population and various levels of coral
cover and diversity at various locales, PIPA provides an ideal
situation to examine a gradient of corallivory in a remote
location. Especially given that increasing reef stressors are
increasingly diminishing global coral populations, examining the role of corallivores in reef trophodynamics is
important to understand how fish‐coral interactions change with changing environmental conditions.
Methods
Corallivores differ in their feeding strategies, with different consequences for coral prey. ‘Mucus‐feeders’ consume
only coral mucus without removing any other live coral tissue or underlying skeleton. Corallivores that remove
coral tissue without damaging the underlying calcium carbonate skeleton are known as ‘browsers’. Bellwood &
Choat (1990) distinguished two feeding modes for parrotfish that we apply
here to all corallivores: ‘excavators’, which feed by removing live coral tissue
with major portions of the underlying skeleton, and ‘scrapers’ , which
remove live coral tissue while taking only little of the accompanying skeleton.
These four categories can be used to classify the feeding strategies used by a
wide variety of invertebrates and fish corallivores.
Here, we investigated the corallivorous activity of scrapers and excavators on
Phoenix Islands Reefs by coupling benthic reef assessments (Objective 1c i)
with fish diversity, abundance, and biomass assessments (Objective 1c iii),
and adding estimates of grazing incidence (percentage of colonies grazed) for
each of the coral colony (identified to genus) in each transect. Colonies were
classified as grazed if they showed at least six distinct spot‐biting scars (3
pairs), or one large excavation scar (Figure 1). Intact colonies lacked such
scars. Both freshly made and recovering grazing scars were counted. In this
case, grazing incidence only reflects corallivory by scrapers and excavators;
polyps removed by browsing corallivores (such as Chaetodon spp.), or scars
made by invertebrate corallivores (such as Drupella or Culcita) were not
included.
Page 20 of 35
Figure 2. The incidence of corallivory across
windward versus leeward sites located on 6
of the 8 Phoenix Islands (Kiribati) in
September 2009. Bars represent means ± 1
SEM. No difference (ND) was observed
between windward versus leeward sites
(unpaired t = 0.5224, df = 17, p = 0.6081).

Summary of Results
Corallivory was present in all windward and leeward habitats, but was absent from the two lagoons sampled
(Kanton Island and Orona Island). We observed grazing on several coral genera that have not been previously
reported in the literature: Hydnophora, Cyphastrea, Echinopora, Favites, Platygyra, and Halomitra. Grazing on
these genera is likely not limited to the Phoenix Islands, but has been overlooked either due to an incomplete
complement of fishes at other sites, or because there is a paucity of comprehensive corallivory studies worldwide.
There was no difference between windward and leeward sites (Figure 2), and corallivory incidence ranged from 3‐
24% across all sites (Figure 3). Across all sites, corallivory averaged around 9%, suggesting that an ecologically
relevant portion of colonies regularly experience total or partial mortality, energy loss due to regeneration, or loss
of reproductive effort due to fish grazing. However, it is apparent that many large colonies persist despite high
levels of corallivory, suggesting some level of corallivory tolerance. Future studies might investigate the
susceptibility or tolerance to corallivory.
Corallivory was highest on Faviid corals (Figure 4). Taxonomic grazing patterns in PIPA resemble patterns in the
Caribbean and elsewhere, with focused efforts on the following coral families: Faviidae, Poritidae, Pocilloporidae,
Acroporidae, and Agaricidae (Figure 4). A total of 16 genera were found to be grazed across all sites. Although 25
coral transects were completed, only 23 sites were completed for corallivory measures. Since there was no
corallivory noted in lagoon habitats, only 21 sites contribute to the corallivory incidence compiled in Figure 4.
Of the corallivorous fishes observed this trip,
there were 20 scraper/excavator species, and
17 browser species (Table 1). Notably, no
crown‐of‐thorns seastars (Acanthaster planci)
were observed at any site, suggesting either
that they are cryptic and present only in
extremely low numbers, or that they are
absent altogether. Other invertebrate
corallivores were present in low densities,
including Drupella spp., Coralliophilla spp.,
Culcita spp., Linckia laevigata, and several
urchins and nudibranchs. However, no
infestation of invertebrate corallivores was
observed, suggesting that invertebrate
corallivory is not a pressing issue for PIPA
reefs at this time. Mucus‐feeders were also
observed in low density, including Trapezia
spp. and Tetralia spp. crabs.
Page 21 of 35
Table 1. Corallivores observed in PIPA, September 2009. Only
scrapers/excavators were included in grazing incidence calculations.
Scrapers/Excavators:
Browsers:
Balistidae (4)
Balistapus undulatus
Balistoides viridescens
Melichthys niger
Rhinecanthus aculeatus
Labridae (3)
Coris aygula
Labropsis xanthonota
Thalasomma lunare
Monacanthidae (2)
Amanses scopas
Cantherhines dumerilii
Pomacentridae (2)
Plectroglyphidodon dickii
P. johnstonianus
Scaridae (6)
Bolbometopon muricatum
Calotomus carolinus
Chlororus microrhinos
C. sordidus
Scarus frenatus
S. ghobban
Tetraodontidae (2)
Arothron meleagris
Canthigaster solandri
Zanclidae (1)
Zanclus cornutus
Chaetodontidae (17)
C. auriga
C. bennetti
C. ephippium
C. kleinii
C. lineolatus
C. lunulatus
C. meyeri
C. ornatissimus
C. pelewensis
C. quadrimaculatus
C. reticulatus
C. trifascialis
C. unimaculatus
C. vagabundus
Forcipiger flavissimus
F. longisrostris
Heniochus chrysostomus
H. varius

Page 22 of 35
Figure 2. The incidence of corallivory, organized by coral taxonomic group, measured from 23 sites on
the Phoenix Islands (Kiribati) in September 2009.
Figure 3. The incidence of corallivory across sites located on 6 of the 8 Phoenix Islands (Kiribati) in
September 2009.

Objective 1c: Coral reef assessments iii. Fish diversity, abundance, and biomass assessments
Stuart Sandin and Les Kaufman
Introduction
Coral reefs are among the most diverse and productive marine ecosystems, but are also among the most
threatened by human activities. At the local scale, fishing and pollution can directly alter the structure of reef
communities, and at the global scale, the effects of climate change impose episodic stress to even the most
remote reefs. Despite knowledge of the types of changes that can result from human impacts, the generality of
these changes is far from certain. It also is not known to what extent local human impacts must be ameliorated to
enable coral reefs to rebound from acute disturbances of a more regional or global nature, such as bleaching,
typhoons, or earthquakes. Furthermore, changes in community structure can be associated with dramatic
alterations of ecological functioning, including changes in the rate of fisheries productivity and the rate of coral
recovery following major disturbances (i.e., ecological resilience). To most effectively implement ecosystem
approaches in the management of coral reefs, it is critical to understand the pathway by which reef ‘health’ is
degraded, the functional consequences of these changes, and their implications for ecosystem services and in
particular service restoration following acute insults.
The coral reefs of Phoenix Islands provide a unique setting to study the fundamental associations among reef
organisms, in particular between reef fishes and the benthic organisms (namely, the corals and algae). To this end,
we investigated the structure of the fish assemblage across the archipelago, providing quantitative insights into
the patterns of abundance, biomass, and diversity of this taxon. Given the protection from fishing afforded by the
regulations of the Phoenix Islands Protected Area, the reefs of the region should provide a clear baseline of the
condition expected of little‐exploited reef ecosystems.
Methods
Surveys were conducted by one team of divers (Sandin and Kaufman). Stations were spaced haphazardly across
the islands, with effort determined by available ship time and island itinerary. At each station, the team of tandem‐
paired divers tallied all fishes as they were encountered within fixed‐length (25‐m) strip transects whose widths
differed depending on direction of swim. Transect bearings were determined haphazardly along isobaths (between
10 and 12m depth). Each diver was responsible for one‐half of the areas surveyed, as follows: large‐bodied vagile
fishes ≥ 20 cm total length (TL) were tallied within an 8‐m wide strip (two 4‐m wide swaths separated by 1 m)
surveyed on an initial “swim‐out” as the transect line was laid. This swim was completed within a 3‐5 minute
window. Small‐bodied, less vagile and more site‐attached fish < 20 cm TL were tallied within a 4‐m wide strip
surveyed on the return swim back along the laid transect line. Fishes were recorded by species or lowest
recognizable taxon. Tallies were binned by 5‐cm TL class. Two transects were surveyed at each station. Thus, at
each station, the densities of large‐bodied fishes were estimated within a 400 m 2 (2 × 25 × 8 m) area, and the
densities of small fishes within a 200 m 2 (2 × 25 × 4 m) area. Additional species richness data were recorded to
complement those recorded on transects. Species presence was tallied within 1,000 m 2 (50‐m long by 20‐m wide)
areas searched by 1‐way zigzag swims centered on the transect lines. Additional species observed outside of set
areas were recorded to augment island‐by‐island taxonomic summaries.
Transects provided the input to estimates of species‐ and size‐specific numerical densities. Various published,
unpublished, and web‐based sources provided the length‐weight regression parameters necessary for converting
numbers to biomass. Density and biomass were standardized to one square meter.
Summary of Results
The coral reefs of the Phoenix Islands support over 500 species of fishes, with representatives from the central,
western, and eastern Pacific fish fauna (G. Allen, in review). Because of the remoteness of the islands and their
situation in the equatorial currents, there are a number of endemic fish species found only in the Phoenix Islands
and a few other central Pacific atolls.
Page 23 of 35

Ecologically, the fish assemblage of the
Phoenix Islands had relatively high abundance
and biomass, with domination by large‐bodies
species including large predators. Across 23
sites in the forereef habitat (standardized to
depths of 10‐12m), we found an average
abundance of 5.55 fish m ‐2 and average
biomass of 259.6 g m ‐2 for the reef fish fauna.
The abundance of fishes was dominated by
small‐bodied planktivores (including anthias
species and schooling damselfishes; Figure 1).
The biomass of fish was dominated by large‐
bodied and massive predatory species
(including snappers, groupers, and, on some
islands, sharks; Figure 2). The variability of
biomass within the top predator trophic
group was largely due to extreme variation in
Figure 1. Abundance of fish across six of the Phoenix Islands. Density is separated by trophic level.
shark densities, with apparent evidence of
shark harvest from some of the Phoenix
Islands. This is consistent with evidence of shark finning operations in the region in recent years.
In sum, the reef fish assemblages of the Phoenix Islands are large and healthy, showing great similarity to other
little‐fished coral reef ecosystems in the central Pacific. For example, the average fish biomass of the Phoenix
Islands is similar to that of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (Papahanaumokuakea National Marine Monument
with 243 g m ‐2 on average) and Palmyra atoll in the Line Islands (270 g m ‐2 ). These results demonstrate the unique
characteristics of the reefs in the Phoenix Islands, where remoteness and local protection has prevented the
reduction of reef fishes from historical, baseline states. The only deviation from this baseline condition is the
seeming reduction of reef shark abundances, which should be viewed as an important fact in need of management
attention under the auspices of the Phoenix Islands Protected Area. Abundant evidence in the scientific literature
attests to the likely importance of an intact fish community to coral reef resilience. Our observations on this
expedition suggest that the persistence of high fish biomass following the 2002 mass‐bleaching event, particularly
within guilds that feed upon algae and benthic invertebrates, has been a key factor in the impressive regeneration
of hard coral communities on PIPA reefs.
Figure 2. Total biomass of fish across six of the Phoenix Islands. Biomass density
is separated by trophic level.
Page 24 of 35

Objective 1d: On‐shore (land‐based) Assessment
Greg Stone and Tukabu Teroroko
Land Surveys and Activities
Surveys were conducted on land at all islands by Tukabu Teroroko and Greg Stone. Plastic, rope and metal debris
was abundant on the windward beaches of all islands. Other notable observations are below:
• Nikumaroro: we walked the beach form the landing to the lagoon and saw one coconut crab and no sign
of the wheel rim seen by G. Stone in 2002. We walked through old village and found what Tukabu thought
was an old marae.
• McKean: No evidence of rats or other rodents was seen and bait stations were observed everywhere. Bait
stations on the windward side near the ship wreck still contained dry bait. Other stations on the leeward
sides still had bait, but were wet inside (photo, below right). The Islands was transected through the
center. The shipwreck was inspected and continues to breakup and rust (photo, below left).
• Kanton: The sir strip was inspected and appears to be in excellent condition. There are no holes, rough
spots of any degradation. A box of educational materials was delivered to the school. The 30 villagers on
Kanton were low on food as the supply ferry was late in servicing the island. NAI’A left all excess food for
the village including 30 kg rice, 20kg flour, 20 kg sugar, 2 cases of milk, 4 packs powdered milk, 500 tea
bags. Of note at Kanton were frequent sightings of 5‐12 bottlenose dolphins near the entrance to the
lagoon. We walked around the old hotel and Pan Am airbase (see photos below). Rob Barrel of NAI’A
prepared a memo detailing a vision for using the site as a PIPA tourism base that was submitted to PIPA
management committee (appendix I).
Page 25 of 35

• Enderbury: The island was overrun with rats and bird populations appeared low. We killed one rat and
photographed it:
• Phoenix (Rawaki): There was no evidence of rats or rabbits on this island. Bird populations appeared
robust.
• Orona: We entered the lagoon by skiff and landed on one island in the northern area. Observed abundant
giant clams and seabirds. Had to leave soon because of a rising tide, so observations were limited.
Page 26 of 35

Objective 1e: Kiribati Fisheries Assessments
Tuake Teema
Background information
This expedition’s purpose was to assist Kiribati in the event of conducting continuous studies on status of
fisheries/coral in this PIPA Region.
2000:‐ general fisheries studies by NEAq, WWF & NG
2002:‐ coral monitoring relating to Climate Change
2007:‐ coral monitoring relating to Climate Change
2009:‐ general fisheries studies by NEAq, CI, WHOI, NG
These ongoing studies represent a comprehensive evaluation process to move Kiribati to become a world heritage
nation (PIPA Region). The documentation of this scientific expedition is handled by National Geographic, and we
are working to build up a biological inventory about these islands. Biological & ecological parameters are useful
tools for fisheries management & conservation, and collection of comprehensive fisheries data & other relevant
information within the Phoenix Islands is surely a biological inventory. These studies will help us to understand the
effects of global warming on coral reefs, and will also help to identify endemic species.
One of the most important outcomes of this trip is the effort to track the level of fishing activities in this
designated PIPA region. Drastic decline of the shark fishery is observed in this 2009 trip, perhaps illegal fishing
might be going on here. The threat of illegal fishing heightens the importance for Kiribati to meet its ICUN
obligation to qualify for world heritage position in order to help protect PIPA. This qualification must be based on
scientific facts.
Methods
Fish count is done by underwater visual census using a line transect of 25m by 8m. Coral count is also done by Line
transect on point count. Pelagic species collection is done by dragging plankton net at the stern of the boat. Coral
sampling was undertaken for proper laboratory works. Jellyfish and other gelatinous species were also preserved
for lab observation, and also Kiribati target fishes.
Summary of Results
Pet fish for the aquarium trade is very much healthy here in the Phoenix Islands, since there has not been any
fishing for those species in this area. The live‐fish trade is also very much healthy as we encountered several sizes
of Napoleon Wrasses, indicating to us that they are still reproducing quite well. For food fish purposes, high
abundance was observed all throughout the Phoenix Group, but ciguatera needs to be further investigated in this
area. The need to study ciguatera is quite valuable to be able to advise people settling there for tourism purposes.
Proper anchoring places are necessary to reduce threat to coral reefs, especially when tourism will be carried out
in the future. So far, we have good data on coral‐associated fisheries but lack information on the deep bottom
species, Kiribati Fisheries Division should go ahead on this. There is also a demand to confirm whether tuna
actually spawn at the Phoenix Islands; if they do, this would further demonstrate its solemn importance to be
designated as a World Heritage Site. Further translocation of mangroves in Kanton and the rest of these islands
should be discussed to be able to provide more marine habitats for the marine lives. Enhancement program to get
giant clams, arkshell and sea cucumbers to spawn at Kanton should be considered; these programs may impact
other islands. Giant clams and sea cucumbers are heavily fished throughout Gilbert Group and this enhancement
program will help to restore them where few or less people disturbed and interacted with these identified animals.
Fisheries hatcheries may be installed in Kanton with a wet laboratory where people can do their work. What we
observed at Kanton recently during this trip is very much a sad story to tell: residents were running out of food
stuffs because the ships never drop there to despatch new food cargoes for them. The question we should ask
ourselves, then, is how much we prepare to arrange ourselves to overcome all these difficulties if we are to get
tourism in action?
Page 27 of 35

Other issues that need to be carefully examined before ecotourism comes into reality is the strict means of
regulating polluting activities to safeguard marine organisms, wildlife and forestry in this group of islands. Kiribati
is blessed and pleased to have a continuous support from the US Government through New England Aquarium
(NEAq) and Conservation International (CI) to allocate highly academic scientists to conduct fisheries surveys for us
in the Phoenix Islands, and for provision of funds for this overall 2009 survey. Scientific data like these will very
much support our endeavour in protecting and managing what we have on these islands for the future of our
young generations.
Page 28 of 35

Objective 1f: Collaborative efforts
MMAS (Marine Management Area Science) Contributions and Collaborations
One of the scientific objectives of MMAS was to develop a means of assessing the ecological health (including
resilience), beginning with coral reefs, applicable to all the world’s tropical nations with marine coastlines. This
index of marine ecosystem health is called “CHI”, for “community health index”; it is also a transliteration of the
Chinese concept of life force. MMAS needed CHI to create a common ecological context and baseline for its
intensive studies of management effectiveness at various locations around the world. CHI was developed through
support to work the Line Islands led by Scripps University, and this initial phase of work is being completed through
inclusion of data from PIPA. The CHI project is a collaborative effort among CI, Scripps, BU, USD, and National
Geographic; the principle scientists are Enric Sala, Stuart Sandin, David Obura, Forest Rohwer, and Les Kaufman.
The 2009 PIPA expedition contributed to CHI through the fish and benthic transects, and through field trials of a
microbial assay device developed for MMAS by Forest Rohwer, and tested at PIPA by Stuart Sandin. The work on
CHI will benefit especially from the team’s discovery of aggressive regeneration of the coral communities in PIPA
following the 2002 mass bleaching event. Our data from PIPA provide a baseline for a system subjected to very
little local human impact, and still capable of mounting successional return to a coral‐dominated benthic
ecosystem following a major disturbance.
Coral Whisperer
“Coral Whisperer” is a project under the Marine Management Area Science Program for Conservation
International. The basic idea is to use patterns of gene expression in important reef‐building corals as a way of
determining the nature and intensity of anthropogenic and other kinds of stress that the corals in any place are
experiencing. The goal is the creation of a molecular diagnostic tool for reef‐building corals that makes it easier to
know if management actions are having the desired effect in improving coral reef health. Two of the three model
coral systems for CW occur (or did occur) in abundance in PIPA: a tabulate (table‐top) coral found in a variety of
situations but especially on the fore‐reef and well‐flushed regions in lagoons (Acropora hyacinthus), and lace coral,
which reaches high abundance in some lagoonal environments in PIPA, and is a reef‐builder elsewhere in the
Pacific (Pocillopora damicornis). The importance of getting samples from PIPA is that it can serve as a reference
site representing very low local human impact on the coral transcriptome. It is also an important site from a
biogeographical perspective, to better understand coral systematics. On this trip, we collected 10 specimens of
the former for genetic studies by Steve Palumbi at Stanford Marine Lab and 5 specimens of the latter species for
work at Boston University by Les Kaufman, John Finnerty, and Nikki Traylor‐Knowles.
Coral Fluorescence
On this expedition we conducted our first field test for MMAS of the use of induced fluorescence of corals as a
diagnostic for coral resilience at the colony and population level. Our system is based on a Nikon D2X in a Subal
housing mated to a Nikon SB‐104 and Sea and Sea YS110 strobe system plus underwater exciter and band‐pass
fluorescence filters purchased from NightSea, Inc. The goal on this trip was to work with a still camera and filter
system to document patterns of coral fluorescence in broad daylight. The test was successful, revealing intense
fluorescent activity in the epitheca (growing margins) of some coral species, and in the stoma (mouth) of others.
The next step is to apply it to coral recruits.
Other Coral Collaborative Studies
Several other coral researchers were invited to add mission objectives to the 2009 PIPA research cruise because
these were supportive or complementary to our principle goals.
Anne Cohen, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, studies the effects of ocean acidification on coral growth and
development. This work is closely related to the MMAS objective of developing a multiple‐insult (acidification,
bleaching, overfishing, pollution) assay for a coral colony’s ability to conduct routine repair of its skeleton as it is
damaged on a daily basis by coral predators, competitors, and disease, as well as to understand the regenerative
process through laboratory and field experiments. For Anne, a single core of a large colony of Porites lobata was
Page 29 of 35

obtained to provide baseline growth rates and skeletal structure through time from a relatively pristine site that
can be compared with similar data from elsewhere in this important reef‐building coral’s extremely broad range.
Iliana Baums, Penn State University, is studying the population genetics of Porites lobata and Montipora capitata.
As such, we have collected 25 samples of the former and 1 sample of the latter (the only colony we found). On a
similar theme, Mikhail Matz (University of Texas‐Austin) is conducting a full scale Micronesia connectivity study
using Acroporid corals. We have therefore collected 19 specimens of A. hyacinthus and 25 samples of A. cytherea
for his genetic studies by Mikhail Matz. We have collected samples of Porites and Pocillopora for Konrad Hughens,
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, who is examining coral stress indicators on a global scale.
Both Andrew Baker (University of Miami) and Todd Lajeunesse (Penn State University) are studying invertebrate‐
dinoflagellate symbioses, specifically, coral‐zooxanthellae relationships. To conduct their studies of symbiont
population genetics and population dynamics, we have collected a broad range of host‐symbiont samples for both
(detailed in the sample appendix). Similarly, we collected a broad range of hosts for Allen Chen (Academia Sinica),
who is examining zooxanthellae diversity.
Tim Werner (New England Aquarium and Boston University) is studying the systematics, population biology, and
conservation of holothurids (sea cucumbers). We have collected 7 samples from the Orona Lagoon for his
examination. Craig OSenberg is studying the dynamics of host‐macroborer interactions on Pacific reefs; we have
thus collected 4 serpulid polychaetes (Christmas tree worms) and 2 vermetid mollusks on his behalf.
Samples Collected (all less than 5 cm 2 ):
Corals:
7 Echinopora spp.
31 Acropora hyacinthis
8 Pocillopora spp.
12 Psammocora spp.
25 Porites lobata
5 Leptoseris spp.
4 Leptastrea spp.
25 Acropora cytherea
3 Coscinaria spp.
194 various (all < 2 cm 2 ) – see appendix 1
Page 30 of 35
Other invertebrates:
4 serpulids, 2 vermetids
7 holothurid (sea cucumber) samples
1 Porites lobata skeletal core

Objective 2: Medical objectives
Craig Cook
Conducting dive operations in remote locations requires special considerations and safety equipment to provide
the lowest risk to those involved. Considerations included treatment of decompression illness and location and
recovery of the lost diver in addition to the usual medical issues inherent in a large remote expedition.
The Phoenix Island Protective Area Expedition 2009 (PIPA 2009) implemented several unique protocols and dive
plans dealing with the following:
Decompression Illness:
While rare, any dive below two atmospheres absolute (ATA) caries a risk of decompression illness directly related
to time and depth. During the course of the expedition over five‐hundred hours of diving operations were
conducted by the twelve member team without event. In the case of decompression illness, a portable
recompression chamber was present onboard. The chamber was a Hyperlite monoplace capable of providing a US
Navy Table 6 treatment table. The chamber insured that a diver could be treated within minutes of surfacing and
symptom onset. Without an onboard chamber, medical evacuation would require air ambulance service with a
possibility of delay up to 24 hours. Operation of the chamber was undertaken by the Diving Medical Officer on
site.
The portable recompression chamber that was taken on the expedition.
Diver Location Aides:
Diving operations were undertaken over a 24 dive sites and six islands under both windward and leeward
conditions. The Phoenix Islands while under the Kiribatti administration have no search and rescue (SAR) capability
in the event of a diver who becomes separated from the diving team. To maximize prompt diver recovery, each
dive team member carried a surface location aide in the form of a safety sausage. In the rare circumstance that a
diver would be out of visual range, each buddy pair carried either a VHF radio tuned to the ship monitoring
frequency or a Personal Locator Beacon (PLB) in a pressure proof canister. Arrangements were made with the
USCG Rescue Coordination Center Honolulu (RCC Honolulu) to provide the satellite latitude and longitude via SAT
phone communication in the case of PLB activation. This would provide immediate positioning data to the ship
without having to mobilize SAR rescue resources from the USCG. In addition a four element yagi direction finding
antennae capable of homing to a 121.5 MHZ signal was available for PLB location.
Medical Issues:
The length and remoteness of the PIPA 2009 expedition placed an increased likelihood of a medical event
becoming a possibility. Medical supplies were available as well as the presence of an onboard medical physician.
While there were a number of minor medical issues, no major medical events were experienced.
Page 31 of 35

Objective 3: Media objectives
Brian Skerry and Jeff Wildermuth
Videography
Jeff Wildermuth documented the PIPA 2009 Expedition in High Definition Video for the New England Aquarium,
Conservation International, and the National Geographic Society. Sam Campbell, Brigitte Dewhirst, and Rob Barrel
(Nai’a owner), also contributed video footage for the sake of the expedition. S. Campbell worked primarily on a
high definition Sony EX1 camera and a Gates housing, whereas R. Barrel shot footage with a Sony HDV camera.
Together, they recorded close to 10 hours of video.
Photography
Brian Skerry came to the Phoenix Islands on assignment for National Geographic Magazine (NGM). He
photographed the animals and ecosystems underwater as well as a small portion of the terrestrial side for a story
that will be published in NGM. Brian’s focus was on the abundant fish life found here and the recovering coral
reefs. Among the species he photographed are snapper, grouper, wrasse, trevally and surgeon fishes. Brian’s
images will also be published in the forthcoming book about PIPA, which will be authored by Greg stone. He was
assisted by Jeff Wildermuth.
Jim Stringer has a passion for photography, diving, and travel, and was a participant in the 2005 PIPA expedition.
He joined this expedition team as an amateur photographer, with expedition goals of (1) learning the extent of
coral recovery post 2005 (2) diving in the wonderful Phoenix Islands Protected Area, recently established by
Kiribati, and (3) to contribute photo‐documentation of the reef and islands, as well as the scientific, medical, and
media participants of the expedition.
Page 32 of 35

Appendix I: Memo on PIPA Tourism Potential
Page 33 of 35
Phoenix Islands Protected Area
Tukabu Teroroko, Director
Dear Tukabu:
25 September, 2009
As our expedition to PIPA winds down, I wanted to confirm for your
future reference our interest in helping Kiribati develop sustainable
ecotourism in the Phoenix Islands.
As you know, the Fiji‐based ship, NAI’A, is largely responsible for
bringing the Phoenix Islands to the attention of the diving and ocean
conservation world. We first dived at Nikumaroro in 1997 when NAI’A
was chartered by the aircraft recovery group TIGHAR to search for the
remains of flyer Amelia Earhart. We then organized a diving research
expedition in 2000 that included scientists from the New England
Aquarium. They were so impressed with the conservation value of the
Phoenix Islands that they sponsored another expedition on NAI’A with
National Geographic in 2002. NAI’A has completed four scientific
expeditions throughout the Phoenix Islands in support of PIPA and
four to Nikumaroro in support of TIGHAR.
Now that the Phoenix Islands Protected Area has been established,
there is a clear opportunity for the government of Kiribati to develop a
sustainable eco‐tourism operation in the islands. Our company is well‐
placed to provide development and management expertise. With
seventeen years of experience running ocean based high‐end eco‐
tourism in Fiji and Tonga and eight expeditions to the Phoenix Islands,
we understand what clients want and how best to deliver it.
Intimate ecological exploration of tropical islands and reefs should and
inevitably does feature going underwater as scuba divers, snorkelers or
via submarines. Diving, fishing, and U/W exploration are areas where
we have the environmental knowledge, cultural understanding,
logistical expertise and enthusiasm borne of experience in this
exhilarating and beautiful, but complex world under the surface.

We believe the demographic to whom PIPA would appeal is not unlike our client‐base in Fiji and
Tonga: high‐end, well educated and experienced travelers looking for quality and originality. These
travelers do not require absolute luxury, but they are willing to pay well for a safe, educational and
unique eco‐tourism experience.
Air access to Kanton is of paramount importance. It may be that charter flights in and out of the
Kanton landing strip are a sustainable long‐term option and this bears further research, but we feel
that a better solution will be the purchase of a modern 12‐passenger seaplane such as the Dornier
Seastar. This allows not only reliable visitor and staff transfer in and out of Kanton and small‐scale
ecotourism development of Orona and Nikumaroro, but fisheries monitoring capability as well.
The ideal PIPA lodge would consist of a main lounge/library/theatre/dining room together with
modern “safari tents” built on existing foundations at the Southside site of the former Pan Am hotel.
It would be entirely self‐sufficient with modern design and construction minimizing the
requirement for outside supplies. It should be scalable – built to support 20‐30 guests initially and
then expanded as its success is broadcast to the world. The lodge would also support a rotating
group of expert scientists who, in addition to carrying out ongoing research for PIPA, would interact
with the guests and add value to their experience. Daily activities would include scuba diving,
snorkeling in the lagoon, bird watching, sailing on traditional Kiribati canoes, and perhaps catch‐
and‐release bonefish and big game fishing.
Especially when used in conjunction with a modern seaplane, the former Pan Am base is a special
location. It is isolated from the large‐scale rubbish left behind by the colonial powers on Northside, it
has a strong and interesting history that will appeal to visitors and, of course, it is ideally suited to
supporting seaplane operations.
The seaplane, besides facilitating access to and from PIPA, could be a significant tourism draw.
Groups of divers or sightseers could make day trips to Nikumaroro or Orona, or even Enderbury
and Manra in calm weather. To really maximize the value of PIPA’s outlying lagoonal islands, both
for biodiversity as well as eco‐tourism, existing shallow tidal channels should be deepened and
widened to allow reliable small boat access. Then boats could be left at the islands for the use of
scientists and tourists who make short visits with the seaplane.
PIPA is unique from an ecotourism perspective: a probable World Heritage Site where, with the
right infrastructure development, discerning tourists could relatively easily experience a pristine
ocean environment that exists nowhere else.
It is early days yet for eco‐tourism in the Phoenix Islands, but I ask that you remember NAI’A and
consider our expertise in this area when it comes time to develop an eco‐tourism plan.
Best wishes,
Robert Barrel
Founder and Managing Director, NAI’A Fiji
rob@naia.com.fj
Page 34 of 35

Appendix II: PIPA Research Permit
Page 35 of 35

New England Aquarium
Deepwater Shelf Connectivity Study
Phoenix Islands Protected Area
• How many islands and sites were visited and what was done there in terms of types of
surveys.
The 11-day scientific expedition visited 6 islands/atolls: Nikumaroro (2 days), McKean (1 day),
Kanton (3 days), Enderbury (1 day), Rawaki (1 day), and Orona (2 days).
At all sites, a series of transects were conducted including a) coral reef assessments, b) fish
assemblage assessments, c) corallivory assessments, and d) sample collections. Land surveys
were also conducted at each island. Findings are summarized on page 4 of the Preliminary
Expedition Report.
• The data has been collected but what is the state of its analysis? Preliminary results yet?
What are the plans for dissemination of results and when might this take place?
The findings of the expedition will contribute important information to management of PIPA, as
well as fundamental contributions to science. Rapid reporting of the coral bleaching and fish
herbivore results will be prioritized, as these are extremely relevant to understanding the
vulnerability of coral reefs to combined climate change and local threats. The findings confirm
the importance of PIPA as a potential reference or observatory site, which will also be true for
the other principal ecosystems – the deep sea, seamounts, pelagic and terrestrial. The expedition
also found increased benefits from broadening the science and research interests in PIPA, and
encourage further development of a more comprehensive research agenda and building capacity,
particularly on Kanton, to support this.
These findings have been preliminary analyzed and presented at the following venues:
-The 2010 Benthic Ecology Meetings in Wilmington, NC (R. Rotjan)
-The 2010 New England Area Coral Reef Science Salon (L. Kaufman)
-A New England Aquarium Lowell Lecture in the IMAX theatre (R. Rotjan)
-An informal presentation to Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (R. Rotjan)
At least 8 scientific manuscripts are currently in preparation detailing the biodiversity, bleaching,
recovery, and current status of the Phoenix Islands, as well as several manuscripts in preparation
by our collaborators who received samples. The first of these is currently in review at Coral
Reefs, submitted by Obura et al.