Validating effectiveness of crown-of-thorns starfish control thresholds to limit coral loss throughout the Great Barrier Reef

• Published in: Coral reefs Vol. 43; no. 6; pp. 1611 - 1626
• Main Authors: Rogers, Jacob G. D., Plagányi, Éva E., Blamey, Laura K., Desbiens, Amelia A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 21-10-2024; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Barrier reefs; Biomedical and Life Sciences; Catch per unit effort; Climate change; Community composition; Composition; Corals; Culling; Demography; Freshwater & Marine Ecology; Global warming; Growth rate; Life Sciences; Manual control; Oceanography; Population decline; Population dynamics; Regional development; Spatial variations; Thresholds; Great Barrier Reef; Predator–prey equilibrium; Marine invertebrate; Functional eradication; Adaptive pest management; Coral predator; Ecological thresholds
• ISSN: 0722-4028; 1432-0975
• DOI: 10.1007/s00338-024-02560-2

Population irruptions of the Pacific crown-of-thorns starfish (CoTS,
Acanthaster
cf.
solaris
) are a key source of coral loss on Australia’s Great Barrier Reef (GBR). CoTS management currently involves their manual control (culling) to threshold densities below which net coral decline theoretically ceases based on analysis of a validated population dynamics model. Spatial variability in coral growth and community composition, and their predicted changes under continuing global warming, necessitate further consideration of current coral representation in CoTS models. Here, we consider the sensitivity of equilibrium coral-CoTS thresholds to coral growth rates and consider how the demographic composition of CoTS at a site may relate to culling thresholds. We found thresholds should be location-specific if the objective of CoTS control is coral recovery, but location-specific thresholds may not be needed if the objective is to limit coral cover loss based on coral growth and CoTS demography. The consequence of using a higher CPUE threshold than the analytical equilibrium coral-CoTS thresholds in terms of coral cover loss is suggested to be limited at coral cover < 40%, and varying control thresholds thereof may make little difference. Introducing a 0.06 CoTS.min
−1
threshold for 40–60% coral cover may reduce coral loss at ~ 40% where it is likely greatest. With regional GBR coral cover averaging < 40%, this study validates the 0.04–0.08 CoTS.min
−1
tiered threshold system for CoTS control and suggests methods developed from localised studies can be more broadly applicable and well-defined objectives (e.g. avoiding coral cover decline at a site) can help guide what thresholds are used and the sensitivity around these.