Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami Affected Corals - Thailand - Report

FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT NOVEMBER 15, 2005
Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami-affected Reefs of Thailand

Gerald R. Allen and Gregory S. Stone, Editors
SUPPORT FOR THIS EXPEDITION AND THE PUBLICATION OF THIS REPORT WAS PROVIDED BY: The Akiko Shiraki Dynner Fund for Ocean Exploration and Conservation, National Geographic Magazine, The Ocean Foundation and the New England Aquarium Marine Conservation Action Fund
ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THIS REPORT AVAILABLE FROM: Global Marine Programs Office New England Aquarium Central Wharf, Boston, MA 02110, USA www.newenglandaquarium.org NEW ENGLAND AQUARIUM TECHINICAL REPORT 02-05 2005 NEW ENGLAND AQUARIUM
Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami-affected Reefs of Thailand
Final Technical Report November 15, 2005
Support for this expedition and the publication of this report was provided by:
The Akiko Shiraki Dynner Fund for Ocean Exploration and Conservation National Geographic Magazine The Ocean Foundation The New England Aquarium Marine Conservation Action Fund
Additional copies of this report available from: Global Marine Programs Office New England Aquarium Central Wharf, Boston, MA 02110, USA www.neaq.org
New England Aquarium Technical Report 02-05 2005 New England Aquarium
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... 3 List of Tables ....................................................................................................................... 4 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ 6
Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami-Affected Reefs of Thailand

Gerald R. Allen and Gregory S. Stone, Editors................................................................. 7 Introduction........................................................................................................................ 7 Survey background............................................................................................................ 8 Expedition participants ...................................................................................................... 8 Study area ......................................................................................................................... 8 Itinerary for 2005 expedition .............................................................................................. 9 Methodology .................................................................................................................... 10 Overview of results .......................................................................................................... 12 Overall impact of the tsunami on Thailands coral reef environment ............................... 13
Post-tsunami coral reef surveys of Thailands north Andaman coast: Coral reef status after 26 December 2004 tsunami
Emre Turak, Charlie Veron, and Kitithorn Sanpanich .................................................... 16 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 16 Introduction and methods ................................................................................................ 16 Methods........................................................................................................................... 18 Results ............................................................................................................................ 18 Coral diversity .............................................................................................................. 18 General reef status ...................................................................................................... 20 Coral communities ....................................................................................................... 21 Tsunami impact............................................................................................................ 24 Line-transects .................................................................................................................. 25 References ...................................................................................................................... 29
Coral Reef Fishes of the East Andaman Sea, Thailand

Gerald R. Allen, Ukkrit Satapoomin, and Mark Allen ..................................................... 31 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 31 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 31 Reef fishes of the East Andaman region ......................................................................... 31 Methods........................................................................................................................... 32 Results ............................................................................................................................ 32 General faunal composition ............................................................................................. 32 Fish community structure ................................................................................................ 34 Richest sites for fishes..................................................................................................... 35 Coral Fish Diversity Index (CFDI) .................................................................................... 36 Zoogeographic affinities of the East Andaman fish fauna................................................ 38 Regional endemism......................................................................................................... 38 Observations of commercial species ............................................................................... 39 Impact of the tsunami event on local fish communities.................................................... 40 Additional observation from Pulau Weh, Aceh Province, Sumatra .................................. 40 Iboih fish biomass transects ............................................................................................ 41 References ...................................................................................................................... 43
A post-tsunami assessment of coral reef fin-fish resources on the Andaman Sea coast of Thailand
Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami-affected Reefs of Thailand. Final Technical Report. November 15, 2005
Mark G. Allen ..................................................................................................................... 44 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 44 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 44 Materials and methods .................................................................................................... 45 Results and discussion.................................................................................................... 46 Summary of data for sites (refer to Table 18) .................................................................. 48 Intra-regional comparison of data .................................................................................... 50 Comparison of western Thailand with other areas........................................................... 53 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 55 References ...................................................................................................................... 56
Molluscs of the Phuket region, Thailand

Fred E. Wells...................................................................................................................... 57 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 57 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 58 Methods........................................................................................................................... 58 Results ............................................................................................................................ 59 Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 64 References ...................................................................................................................... 66
Effects of the 26 December 2004 tsunami on littorinid molluscs on the Andaman Sea coast near Phuket, Thailand
Kitithorn Sanpanich and Fred E. Wells ........................................................................... 69 Abstract ........................................................................................................................... 69 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 69 Materials and methods .................................................................................................... 70 Results ............................................................................................................................ 71 Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 73 References ...................................................................................................................... 77 Appendices ........................................................................................................................ 78 Appendix I. Physical and Biological Data For Hard Coral Survey Sites........................... 78 Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List. .............................................................................. 79 Appendix III. Checklist of fishes recorded during 2005 survey. ....................................... 95 Appendix IV. List of species E. Andaman reef fishes collected by Satapoomin and Winterbottom, but not seen during 2005 survey. ........................................................... 101 Appendix V. List of target fish species recorded during the survey. .............................. 106 Appendix VI. List of molluscs collected at sites in the Phuket region in April 2005....... 111 Appendix VII. Contact Details for Expedition Members: ................................................ 120
List of Figures
Figure 1. Philkade at the Phi Phi Islands. ........................................................................................7 Figure 2. Survey area off western Thailand circled in red (from NASA satellite image). .........9 Figure 3. Approximate cruise track of Philkade: A) northern section; B) southern section. ..10 Figure 4. G. Allen inspects tsunami debris at Gapang Lagoon, Pulau Weh, Sumatra. .........14 Figure 5. Location of coral survey stations in the north Andaman Sea of Thailand. ..............17 Figure 6. Hierarchical cluster analysis of 30 stations showing the 2 main groups of offshore and nearshore community types, with two geographically distinct community types. ...22 Figure 7. Distribution of the four community types identified from the sites visited in the north Andaman sea of Thailand, .............................................................................................23
Figure 8. Relative proportion of sites with different levels of Impact Value (IV=0-4) at each visited Island group. ..................................................................................................................25 Figure 9. Summary results of line-transect surveys. ..................................................................26 Figure 10. Composition of total target fish count partitioned by family .....................................47 Figure 11. Composition of total target fish biomass partitioned by family ................................47 Figure 12. Comparison of average site total target fish biomass between different regions of southeast Asia...............................................................................................................................54 Figure 13. Comparison of average density of groupers (Serranidae) at sites for past and present survey in southeast Asia. ...........................................................................................54 Figure 14. Map of Thailand showing study site locations in the Andaman Sea. .....................71 Figure 15. Pre-tsunami photograph of Nang Thong Beach, Phangnga Province. .................75 Figure 16. Post-tsunami photograph of Nang Thong Beach, Phangnga Province. ................75 Figure 17. Pre-tsunami photograph of Laem Mai Kaew, Ranong Province. ...........................76 Figure 18. Post-tsunami photograph of Laem Mai Kaew, Ranong Province. ..........................76
List of Tables
Table 1. Summary of tsunami-assessment sites. ........................................................................11 Table 2. Impact category values for summarized observation and data. .................................18 Table 3. Comparison of diversity and various other ecological characteristics of Thailand, north Andaman Sea and other Indo-West Pacific coral reef areas. ..................................19 Table 4. A comparison of the number of coral species recorded during this study and a most comprehensive list of previously known species from the northern Indian Ocean (Veron 2000), for a selection of most diverse families and two most diverse genera. ...19 Table 5. Number of hard coral species recorded at each station and total counts and averages for selected island groups. .....................................................................................20 Table 6. A comparison of selected reef characteristics for the major island goups. .............21 Table 7. Summary table of relative tsunami impact on visited sites. IV (Impact Value), from 0=none to 4=maximum (see Methods section for detailed explanation). .........................24 Table 8. Family ranking in terms of number of fish species for various localities in the IndoPacific region..............................................................................................................................34 Table 9. Number of fish species observed at each site during survey of the East Andaman Sea of Thailand. Red and yellow shading indicates severely and moderately impacted sites respectively. Unshaded totals indicate sites with zero to low impact. .....................34 Table 10. Comparison of fish diversity in relation to tsunami impact. .......................................35 Table 11. Six richest fish sites for fish diversity. ...........................................................................36 Table 12. Average number of fish species per site recorded for geographic areas in the East Andaman Sea region of Thailand. .................................................................................36 Table 13. Coral fish diversity index (CFDI) for regions or countries with figures for total reef and shore fish fauna (if known), and estimated fauna from CFDI regression formula. ..37 Table 14. List of reef associated fishes that are endemic to the East Andaman Sea. ...........39 Table 15. Frequency of Napoleon Wrasse (Cheilinus undulatus) for various locations in the Indo-Pacific. ................................................................................................................................40 Table 16. Summary of data for Iboih fish biomass transects. ....................................................42 Table 17. Average values for Iboih fish biomass transects ........................................................42 Table 18. Summary table of coral reef fish stocks, western Thailand 2005 ............................49 Table 19. Top-ranking sites for target fishes in three data categories, western Thailand 2005 .............................................................................................................................................50 Table 20. Categorization of sites (Treatment groups) in western Thailand 2005 ...................50
Table 21. Summary of site total target fish data grouped by geographic area including results of ANOVA tests, western Thailand 2005. .................................................................52 Table 22. Summary of site total target fish data grouped by level of tsunami impact including results of ANOVA tests, western Thailand 2005. ................................................52 Table 23. Taxonomic composition of mollusc species identified from sites off Phuket, Thailand. .....................................................................................................................................59 Table 24. Total number of mollusc species collected at each site near Phuket, Thailand. ...60 Table 25. Ten sites observed to have the richest mollusc diversity among the 31 sites surveyed in near Phuket, Thailand. ........................................................................................61 Table 26. Eleven sites observed to have the lowest mollusc diversity among the 31 sites surveyed in near Phuket, Thailand. .............................................................................................................61 Table 27. Geographical distributions of selected species recorded near Phuket, Thailand. ............62 Table 28. Numbers of mollusc species collected during previous Marine RAP surveys undertaken by Conservation International (CI) and similar surveys by the Western Australian Museum. ..................................................................................................................63 Table 29. Littorinids collected at six sites on the Andaman Sea coast of Thailand before and after the tsunami. .......................................................................................................................73
Acknowledgements
We are pleased to acknowledge the following funding agencies: the Akiko Shiraki Dynner Fund for Ocean Exploration and Conservation, the National Geographic Magazine, The Ocean Foundation, and the New England Aquarium through their Marine Conservation Action Fund. Thanks to Alan Dynner for his tireless help on all aspects of the trip. Thanks to Kathy Moran, Tim Appenzeller and Chris Johns for mobilizing the National Geographics participation on such short notice, and to David Doubilet and Jennifer Hayes for their excellent photographs and companionship. A Royal Golden Jubilee Scholarship from the Kingdom of Thailand supported Kitithorn Sanpanichs participation. Diving gear was generously supplied by Mares/Dacor. Thanks to Jeff Herzog for his help filming the expedition in high-definition video, to Audra Lissell, Cathy Leblanc and Jonathan Place for help with publishing this report, to Austen Yoshinaga for copy-editing assistance and finally, thanks to the director of conservation at the New England Aquarium, Heather Tausig, for help managing this project.
Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami-Affected Reefs of Thailand
Figure 1. Philkade at the Phi Phi Islands.
Introduction The Sumatran tsunami of 26 December 2004 had tragic consequences throughout much of the tropical Indian Ocean. Over 200,000 human lives were lost and billions of dollars worth of property and goods were destroyed. Coastal ecosystems, literally the lifeblood of most communities in the wave-affected region, were either radically altered or extinguished. In the wake of this disaster, there is a critical need to assess the damage to coral reefs and mangroves, two of the most important habitats impacted by the event, and to provide a framework for their future recovery and conservation. The present report focuses on coral reef habitats in the Andaman Sea off the western coast of Thailand, between the Phi Phi Islands and the Surin Islands. The reefs of Thailand are among the most colorful, varied and spectacular in the world. The main goals of this survey were to provide information on the extent of the tsunami damage, as well as a baseline from which the recovery of the reefs can be monitored over time. The people most affected by the tsunami are also those who rely on the coral reefs for their food and livelihoods. Coral reefs worldwide were under assault from human threats such as overfishing and coastal development even before the tsunami occurred. The recovery of these reefs is essential for the people living in the area as well as for the global conservation value of the marine biodiversity of the reefs. This report provides useful information regarding the recovery of Thailands tsunami-affected reefs that may be applicable to other impacted regions.
Survey background The idea for this survey was conceived by G. Allen and G. Stone within two weeks of the Sumatran tsunami disaster. An international team of coral reef experts was assembled in several weeks, and a suitable charter vessel was located. Crucial financial aid was contributed by the National Geographic Society, the New England Aquariums Marine Conservation Action Fund, the Akiko Shiraki Dynner Fund for Ocean Exploration and Conservation, and the Ocean Foundation. Diving gear was generously supplied by Mares Products. We also endeavoured to liaise with the Phuket Marine Biological Centre, who had already conducted critical surveys within days of the 26 December tragedy. Team members assembled at Phuket, Thailand, and on 16 April 2005 we embarked aboard Philkade for 12 days of intensive survey work. Expedition participants Gerald Allen, Western Australian Museum; Co-leader and ichthyologist. Gregory Stone, New England Aquarium; Co-leader, biologist, National Geographic writer. Mark Allen, Ph.D. student; ichthyologist; commercial fish abundance. David Doubilet, National Geographic Society; photographer. Alan Dynner, New England Aquarium; cinematography team. Jennifer Hayes, National Geographic Society; photographer. Jeff Herzog, New England Aquarium; cinematography team. Niphon Phongsuwan, Phuket Marine Biological Centre; coral reef ecologist. Kitithorn Sanpanich, Burapha University; molluscs and coral reef ecologist. Ukkrit Satapoomin, Phuket Marine Biological Centre; ichthyologist. Emre Turak, Australian Institute of Marine Science; coral reef ecologist. Charlie Veron, Australian Institute of Marine Science; coral taxonomist. Fred Wells, Western Australian Department of Fisheries; mollusc scientist. Study area The expedition team spent 12 days on the live-aboard dive vessel Philkade. During that period the vessel traveled approximately 600 km, with visits to the Surin and Similan Islands, Patong Bay on Phuket Island, Racha Yai, and the Phi Phi Islands. The general area covered by the survey is shown in Fig. 2.
Figure 2. Survey area off western Thailand circled in red (from NASA satellite image).
Itinerary for 2005 expedition 16 April: departed Phuket Island 17-18 April: Surin Islands 19-20 April: Richelieu Rock and Koh Tachai 21-23 April: Similan Islands and Koh Bon 24 April: Patong Bay, Phuket Island 25 April: Patong Bay, Phuket Island and Racha Yai 26-28 April: Phi Phi Islands 29 April: returned Phuket Island The approximate cruise track of the Philkade is shown in Fig. 3 below.
Figure 3. Approximate cruise track of Philkade: A) northern section; B) southern section.
Methodology SCUBA equipment was utilized for underwater observations. During the two-week expedition, our team collectively conducted over 500 SCUBA dives at 31 different sites. A summary of sites is presented in Table 1. Dive duration at each site generally ranged between 90-120 minutes. Toward the end of the survey, repeat dives were made at several sites, including some of the most severely damaged reefs at sites 29 and 31. Coral, mollusc, and fish specialists generally conducted a comprehensive inventory of their respective groups at each site, utilizing visual observation methods. G. Allen and E. Turak also recorded notes on general tsunami impact. Bottom cover transects were conducted by K. Sanpanich at each site utilizing a 100 m tape measure. Biomass data for commercially viable fishes were gathered at each site by M. Allen, aided by A. Dynner, utilizing a separate 100 m transect line.
10
Table 1. Summary of tsunami-assessment sites.
Site no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Date 17/04/2005 17/04/2005 17/04/2005 18/04/2005 18/04/2005 18/04/2005 19/04/2005 19/04/2005 20/04/2005 20/04/2005 20/04/2005 21/04/2005 21/04/2005 21/04/2005 22/04/2005 22/04/2005 22/04/2005 23/04/2005 23/04/2005 23/04/2005 24/04/2005 25/04/2005 25/04/2005 25/04/2005 26/04/2005 26/04/2005 26/04/2005 27/04/2005 27/04/2005 27/04/2005 28/04/2005
Site name Sai Dang Beach, N. Surin I. Koh Chi Me Yai Bay, N. Surin I. Chong Khad Bay, N. Surin I. Sutep Bay, N. Surin I. Koh Torinla Richelieu Rock Koh Tachai (east side) Koh Tachai (NE side) Koh Bon Koh Bangu (Snapper Alley) Koh Similan (below Sail Rock) Fantasea Reef, Koh Similan Koh Similan (Beacon Point) Koh Payu (near north tip) Koh Payu (East of Eden) Koh Miang NE (Stonehenge) Koh Payu (north tip) Koh Payang (NW end) Koh Huyong (NW section) Patong Bay(south side) Cape Yanding, Patong Bay Racha Yai (near Racha Resort) Racha Yai Maya Bay, Phi Phi Le Island Koh Bida Nok Ton Zai Bay, Phi Phi Don I. Yong Kasem Bay, Phi Phi Don I. Lanah Bay, Phi Phi Don I. Koh Phai (west side) near Hin Phae, Phi Phi Don I.
Coordinates 9 27.280 S; 97 51.908 E 9 28.499 S; 97 54.386 E 9 25.452 S; 97 53.869 E 9 24.006 S; 97 52.503 E 9 25.425 S; 97 51.317 E 9 22.504 S; 97 52.091 E 9 22.504 S; 97 52.041 E 9 03.764 S; 97 48.917 E 8 04.863 S; 97 48.668 E 8 49.781 S; 97 47.854 E 8 40.461 S; 97 38.941 E 8 40.119 S; 97 38.856 E 8 39.637 S; 97 38.054 E 8 38.035 S; 97 39.217 E 8 35.661 S; 97 38.312 E 8 35.360 S; 97 28.496 E 8 34.588 S; 97 37.906 E 8 35.731 S; 97 38.099 E 8 30.426 S; 97 38.296 E 8 29.147 S; 97 38.785 E 7 53.567 S; 98 16.017 E 7 55.435 S; 98 15.941 E 7 36.508 S; 98 21.940 E 7 35.954 S; 98 22.471 E 7 40.725 S; 98 45.861 E 7 39.233 S; 98 45.985 E 7 43.715 S; 98 46.159 E 7 44.678 S; 98 45.807 E 7 45.941 S; 98 45.688 E 7 48.853 S; 98 47.399 E 7 45.569 S; 98 47.151 E
One of our main goals was to obtain a comprehensive photographic record of the survey, partly to fulfil an obligation to the National Geographic Magazine (NGS), which is scheduled to run a story (written by G. Stone) about the expedition in the December 2005 issue of the magazine. David Doubilet and Jennifer Hayes were contracted by NGS to provide photographic coverage; they shot hundreds of underwater photos each day. Additional digital images of corals and fishes were obtained by E. Turak and G. Allen, respectively. The crew from the New England Aquarium, including G. Stone, J. Herzog and A. Dynner, were also engaged in obtaining high-definition video footage for the production of an educational film about the expedition.
11
Overview of results Detailed results are provided in the separate chapters that follow this brief summary of the overall impact of the tsunami on Thailands reef environment. Corals Approximately 302 species of scleractinian zooxanthelate corals were recorded. A further 27 species still require confirmation. Veron (2000) previously recorded 273 species for the Andaman Sea of Thailand. Therefore, the combined total of hard coral species now stands at 353, with additional species still awaiting confirmation. Molluscs Approximately 380 species of reef-associated molluscs were collected during the current survey. Minimal direct evidence could be found of damage to mollusc populations as a result of the tsunami and no potential long-term impacts were noted. Preand post-tsunami data from six coastal mangrove sites in the Phuket area indicate that littorinid snail communities were variously impacted with a general decrease in both species and density of individuals. Two of the mangrove sites appeared to be unaffected by the tsunami, but others such as Laem Mai Kaew were severely impacted. The latter site, where an extensive mangrove area formerly existed, was virtually destroyed and all littorinids had disappeared. Despite these isolated areas of heavy impact, the overall effect of the tsunami on littorinid populations appears patchy and it is likely that there will be no long-term effects. Fishes A total of 564 species were recorded, or an estimated 67% of the overall fauna of Thailands East Andaman Sea. Severely impacted reefs continue to support a relatively diverse fish fauna with only a slight reduction in number of species compared to other reef areas. The average numbers of species recorded for the three main impact categories (severe, moderate, and zero to light) were 167, 176 and 173, respectively. However, on a local scale, shallow-water fish communities were greatly disturbed in severely impacted areas. Both numbers of individuals and overall biomass showed a significant decrease in high-impact areas, based on data gathered by G. Allen at Pulau Weh, Sumatra (about 385 km southwest of Phuket). However, the resulting rubble field along the reef foreslope that is often characteristic of the worst-affected areas, provides abundant shelter and appears (at least in the short-term) to support a wealth of diversity. Coral Reef Fisheries A total of 176 species were identified as target fish. Typical of most coral reefs in the Indo-Pacific, fusiliers (Caesionidae) were the most abundant fishes surveyed. The estimated target fish biomass per site ranged between 65.34530.32 ton/km2 (average = 200.26 23.00 ton/km2). ANOVA tests revealed no significant differences in the average biomass of sites grouped according to their level of tsunami impact. It therefore seems that the impact of the tsunami on coral reef fish stocks here has been negligible, and a fair level of homogeneity exists for fish biomass on reefs throughout this region. A comprehensive follow-up survey with more replication, however, would be required to conclusively back up these assertions. Coral reef fish stocks in western Thailand are remarkably robust and compare favorably with other areas of southeast Asia. Of five studies within recent years, only the Raja Ampat Islands (West Papua, Indonesia) averaged more biomass per site. This illustrates the effectiveness of the protection offered to fish stocks by the marine sanctuaries that have been in place in Thailand over the past two decades.
12
Overall impact of the tsunami on Thailands coral reef environment Thailands scientific community was mobilized within days of the fateful Sumatran tsunami. The Phuket Marine Biological Centre (PMBC) was one of the institutions at the forefront of post-tsunami investigations. According to information supplied by N. Phongsuwan of PMBC, teams of divers gathered initial information on tsunami impact at 324 sites, ranging from offshore islands to coastal fringing reefs. According to the preliminary data, the sites were classified into the following five categories depending on the severity of impact: no impact (40%), very low impact (21%), low impact (17%), medium impact (9%), and heavy impact (13%). Each category was defined on the basis of the percentage of live coral that was destroyed, based on bottom cover transects: very low impact having 1-10% of corals destroyed, low impact with 11-30%, medium impact with 31-50% and heavy impact with more than 50% coral destruction. The Thai survey data proved a very useful resource and saved our survey much time locating representative examples of the various impact types. Of the locations we eventually visited, severe or heavy damage was noted at six (19.4%) sites, moderate impact (11-50% of live reef damaged) was noted at 11 (35.5%) sites, and light or zero impact at 14 (45.2%) sites. Although we determined the percentage of live coral and other substrate types at each site using a 100 m transect tape, the assessment of tsunami damage is usually subjective; the amount of impact at a given site can vary from severe to zero over just a few hundred meters distance. The effects of the Sumatran tsunami appeared to be as varied as the diverse coastline and undersea scenery of Thailand. Although each personal account of what transpired on 26 December 2004 is somewhat unique, one emergent pattern was that the impact was closely correlated with coastal topography. The hardest-hit areas, for example at Phi Phi Don and Koh Phai, had seaward exposure with a considerable shallow reef area bordering the coast. Another common theme was the presence of a shallow embayment, apparently creating a funnelling effect for the incoming tsunami. Several of the most severely impacted sites were located in shallow bays, for example, site 23 in front of the Racha Resort at Racha Yai, and sites 28 and 29 on the western side of Phi Phi Don. Immediately following our Thailand expedition, G. Allen visited Pulau Weh, Sumatra, to conduct a post-tsunami survey on behalf of Conservation International (CI). He was accompanied by Mark Erdmann, a stomatopod expert, and his assistant Defy Pada, a university student from Sulawesi. That 10-day visit provided an excellent opportunity to continue the work initiated at Thailand and to gain further insights on the impacts of the tsunami. Allen had conducted a survey for CI at this same island in 1999, and therefore had a rare opportunity to compare the pre- and post-tsunami conditions of local reefs. Gapang Lagoon was one of the worst-affected areas that was re-surveyed; data gathered at this site were particularly startling, as it had previously been judged to be the best-developed reef on the island. The damage at Gapang Lagoon was greater than that observed at any of the Thailand sites, although similar damage was seen at Lanah Bay, Phi Phi Don (site 29). Gapang Lagoon is situated along the eastern side of the narrow peninsula that forms the northwestern portion of Pulau Weh. The shoreline extends for approximately 2 km and the bay encompasses about 60-70 hectares of open water and mangroves. The entire reef area has not been accurately surveyed, but extends across the seaward edge of the bay for approximately 800 m with an average width of about 100 m, with an estimated reef area of
13
at least 8 hectares. The site was particularly vulnerable to the tsunami due the funnelling effect of the embayment and the extensive shallow reef, which grades to coastal mangrove. This reef was essentially destroyed and reduced to variable-sized chunks of rubble and rock intermixed with detached mangrove trees. Most of the damage was sustained when the enormous amount of water pushed ashore by the tsunami abruptly withdrew, virtually detaching the entire veneer of living reef and depositing it in a windrow of massive boulders and coral fragments at a depth of 3-8 m along the former fore-slope or outer edge of the reef (Fig.4).
Figure 4. G. Allen inspects tsunami debris at Gapang Lagoon, Pulau Weh, Sumatra.
The site was previously described as a lagoonal environment with rich coral reefs interspersed with extensive patches of sand. In addition to the destroyed corals, the sand was literally sucked away and deposited in adjacent deeper water. Moreover, approximately 60% of the former mangrove area fringing the bay was also destroyed. Of the northern Thailand reefs we visited, the most severely impacted sites were observed at Koh Torinla (site 6) in the Surin Islands, and on the eastern side of Koh Tachai (site 8). The most remarkable impact feature at the former location consisted of a series of gigantic sand ridges with 3 m-deep troughs that were sculpted by the tsunami. At this same site we also noticed partly buried corals and gorgonian sea fans. Koh Tachai provided our first close-up encounter with the power of the tsunami. We found a field of car-sized Porites coral formations that were severed at the base and toppled on their sides, all facing in the same direction. We observed similar damage in a small, narrow bay at Racha Yai, south of Phuket. Huge coral heads were pushed onto their sides or were completely turned over, and substantial land debris (especially broken cement blocks from the Racha Hotels devastated seawall) littered the bottom. The most severely impacted sites of the entire survey were seen at the Phi Phi Islands. At Phi Phi Don, where more than 1,000 human fatalities occurred, the reef on the outer edge of Lanah Bay was virtually destroyed. Corals were sucked away by the tsunami and deposited in a broken tangle of fragments interspersed with huge overturned Porites Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami-affected Reefs of Thailand. Final Technical Report. November 15, 2005 14
colonies (up to 25 m in circumference). The site was described as being reminiscent of the smoking ruins of a bombed city a virtual war zone, despite the three-and-a-half-month interval since the tsunami. Similar damage was observed on the western side of Koh Phai, lying about 6 km further north. This small island, less than 1 km across, was flanked by an extensive shallow reef flat that was hammered by the tsunami. Toppled massive corals and fields of rubble were nearly all that remained of this once flourishing reef. In addition, huge coral boulders were tossed into the shallows and are now exposed during low tide. Although substantial damage was observed both at Thailand sites and at Pulau Weh, numerous reefs, particularly at the former locality, were lightly impacted or were completely spared. From our experience, tsunami damage appeared to be limited to depths less than 10 m, and in many areas the impact was difficult to detect below about 6 m. This is an important consideration for the recovery of the Phuket-based dive industry because most popular scuba-diving sites in places such as the Similan and Surin Islands lie below the critical depth of impact, and for the most part remain unscathed. Damage also tended to be minimal in areas where the shoreline quickly descends to deep water, for example, where rocky cliffs border the sea and continue below the surface. Damage was also less severe along exposed rocky coasts that lack true reef development and where robust, wave-resistant corals predominate in the shallows. Even where corals have been extensively damaged, the prognosis for recovery is promising. Largely due to universal concern about the consequences of mass coral bleaching events, there is now considerable interest in reef recovery times. Done et al. (2003) used a simple model called ReefState to predict recovery times for various levels of bleaching. This model predicts recovery times of 3-5 years for low level impacts and 10-20 years for high level impacts. Catastrophic impacts in which the dominant reef corals die en masse may recover their attractive appearance in only 10 years, but it may take 50 years for full ecological recovery. Although bleaching damage cannot be equated with tsunami damage, the predicted recovery times are nevertheless instructive. Lightly impacted areas will most likely make a quick recovery, probably within the 3-5-year span predicted for recovery from light bleaching. In many instances where encrusting corals have been broken or where large Porites colonies have been knocked askew, there are still patches of live polyps, which may conceivably form a nucleus for re-growth. However, where damage is extensive in places such as Lanah Bay or Koh Phai, it is far more difficult to predict recovery times. The model for catastrophic bleaching episodes may be applicable in these cases. Although new coral growth may be well established in 10-20 years, it may take 50100 years for full ecological recovery. According to C. Veron, the largest overturned Porites colonies we witnessed were 500-700 years old, and it will take this long again to produce comparable formations.
15
Post-tsunami coral reef surveys of Thailands north Andaman coast: Coral reef status after 26 December 2004 tsunami
Emre Turak, Charlie Veron, and Kitithorn Sanpanich
Summary Coral biodiversity, reef coral community types and reef status were assessed in 30 stations of the north Andaman coast of Thailand. The area included the Surin, Similan, Phi Phi, Racha and Phuket Islands. During the surveys, 302 species of reef-building hard corals were identified, bringing the new total for western Thailand to 353 species, in 69 genera and 14 families. Overall non-scleractinian hard coral and soft coral abundance and diversity were low; an exception was the blue coral that was present at most sites, and abundant to dominant at a few sites. Four main coral community types were recognized that were most strongly influenced by water clarity, depth and distance from shore. There appeared to be some degree of link between community type and tsunami impact. Among the visited reefs, the overall tsunami impact was limited. The exceptions were one site in Patong Bay on Phuket and two locations on the Phi Phi Islands. In all occasions, maximum impact appeared to be limited to certain sections of the reef. The most dramatic impact was on massive Porites communities in two sites where huge coral heads 4-7 m in diameter were overturned and some transported tens of meters from their original locations. This type of impact on such large colonies suggests that an event of such force had not affected these communities in the last three to four centuries or more. All shallow sites that had some degree of tsunami impact would be expected to recover most of the coral cover within a relatively short period less than a decade, if onsite conditions remain favorable to recovery. However, at some deep sites, particularly where sediment deposition had smothered and killed corals, recovery may take considerably longer. Introduction and methods A coral biodiversity assessment as well as a reef status assessment were carried out during the tsunami impact surveys, in order to understand reef vulnerability and recovery capacity in face of such a potentially devastating impact. At certain levels and types of impact different reef coral communities would be expected to react differently. While certain community types may be more resistant and quicker to recover from such impacts, others may be easily degraded and take a very long time to recover. It was reported that the tsunami impact and damage to reefs in the area visited was variable and largely related to exposure to the propagating wave (DMCR 2005). It would be expected that the amount of damage in the most oceanographically susceptible areas might also have been related to the types of coral communities found in these areas. Survey sites were selected in order to elucidate to what extent this was the case. The status of reefs in Thailand in general appears to have improved somewhat in the last decade. With around half the reefs under some form of protection and around one-fifth of
16
those with real protection, Thailand has one of the best marine protected area (MPA) management records in the southeast Asian states (Tun et al. 2004). The Surin Islands are recorded to be one of the best managed MPAs in Thailand, with healthy reefs (Loh et al. 2004). However, threats from destructive fishing practices are also noted. Shortly after the tsunami, a rapid survey of the Surin Islands found the tsunami damage to be patchy and quite significant only in very localized areas (Comley et al. 2005). Reefs in Thailands north Andaman Sea where tsunami wave impact was maximum were visited (Figure 5). The Surin and Similan Islands are areas with varying degrees of natural resource protection, and local populations are relatively low, whereas Phuket and the Phi Phi Islands are major tourist destinations and have dense populations.
Figure 5. Location of coral survey stations in the north Andaman Sea of Thailand.
17
Methods Reef status, coral communities and coral biodiversity were assessed at 30 GPS stations (Figure 5). At most stations (25), detailed observations and data were recorded at two depths (each recorded as a site): deep (10 m to maximum depth) and shallow (minimum to 8 m depth). Surveys were conducted using a standardized rapid assessment method, which is described in detail in DeVantier et al. (1998, 2000). At each site, complete hard coral species lists were compiled and additional data on various biological and physical characteristics were recorded (Appendix I). Observational notes were taken on type and amount of impact. Transects were also laid out to collect hard data on bottom characteristics and amount of damage at selected sites. For this, a modified version of the Reefcheck method was used. Results from this type of assessment will be comparable with other post-tsunami surveys conducted using the standardised ICRI/ISRS protocol (ICRI/ISRS 2005; Obura and Abdulla 2005). Site groups defined by community type were generated by hierarchical cluster analysis using abundance ranks of all corals in the inventories. Impact observations and some recorded data were combined and summarized so as to provide an overall view of the extent and level of damage. As a result, each site was allocated a ranked category value (Table 2). These values of ranking do not necessarily reflect percent broken, upturned or dead coral, but reflect the relative severity of impact in terms of affected community type, amount of impact and recovery potential.
Table 2. Impact category values for summarized observation and data. 0 1 2 3 4 5 No observed "tsunami" impact (but there may be other impacts) Occasional breakage, upturned coral or sediment deposition, or partial mortality attributable to the tsunami Impact heavier than in "1" with patches of severely damaged or dead coral (rubble) Many patches of impacted or dead coral with modification (short- to medium-term) to coral communities Large areas of significant damage and mortality. Significant alteration to community structure in very long-term (up to several centuries) Total destruction. Reef structure totally altered with no live coral remaining. (Not observed during this trip.)
Results Coral diversity A total of 302 Zooxanthellate scleractinian coral (hard coral) species was recorded during this survey. An additional 27 species need confirmation following consultation with reference collections in museums. Previously, 273 species were recorded from Thailands Andaman Sea; the new combined total is 353 species (Appendix II). In regional and ocean scale comparisons with selected areas, total hard coral diversity as well as site-specific diversity were among the lowest (Table 3). This was largely due to three reasons: 1) that section of the northern Indian Ocean has a relatively lower diversity, 2) the area sampled was very small, and 3) not all reef habitat types were sampled during
18
these surveys (shallow coastal reefs in small narrow bays or near mangroves, where a whole suite of different coral species can be found, were not visited). Relative site richness was average, as was hard coral cover (Table 3).
Table 3. Comparison of diversity and various other ecological characteristics of Thailand, north Andaman Sea and other Indo-West Pacific coral reef areas.
All data collected by same observers and with same methodology . MAD NW Madagascar (Turak 2002); DER Derewan, Kalimantan, Indonesia (Turak 2004); BNP Bunaken National Park, Sulawesi, Indonesia (Turak and DeVantier 2003); S-T - SangiheTalaud Isl., North Sulawesi, Indonesia (Turak 2002); W - Wakatobi area, S. Sulawesi, Indonesia (Turak 2003); BI - Banda Isl., Banda Sea, Maluku, Indonesia (Turak et al. 2002); RA - Rajah Ampat area, Papua, Indonesia (Turak and Souhoka 2003); GBR - N Great Barrier Reef, Australia (Turak 2001, unpublished); KB - E Kimbe Bay, Bismarck Sea, New Britain, PNG (Turak and Aitsi 2003); MB - Milne Bay, Papua New Guinea (Turak and Fenner 2000); SOL Solomon Islands (Turak and Veron 2005). * Is an estimate based on a combination of values from two depths. ** Incorporates data from two observers.
BNP **
THAI
MAD
DER
S-T
BI
RA
GBR
KB
MB
SOL
Total number of species Average no. of species per site % of sites with over 1/3 rd species Number of survey stations Area covered (x1000 km2) Average % hard coral cover
302 318 95 103 40 30 3.3
444 164 78 36 20 36
380 155 85 20 0.9
445 100 8 52 23
387 124 41 27 10
301 106 61 18 0.4
487
318
351 124 74
393 147 82 28 15
485 135 12 59 120 32
131 100* 18 51 30 26 0.8
60 29 1.2
27 1.1
33 35.1
41 21.3
32 40.3
33 34.8
30 33.3
Many previously known corals from the region (Veron 2000) were recorded and the major families and two major genera were well represented (Table 4). While more agaricids were found, the number of poritid species recorded was proportionally the lowest for the region.
Table 4. A comparison of the number of coral species recorded during this study and a most comprehensive list of previously known species from the northern Indian Ocean (Veron 2000), for a selection of most diverse families and two most diverse genera.
This study Northern Indian Ocean
Pocilloporidae Acroporidae Montipora Acropora Agariciidae Fungiidae Mussidae Faviidae Poritidae
14 108 29 70 28 34 18 65 34
14 127 30 89 24 39 23 78 46
19
Average species richness for each island group was similar, though offshore islands appear marginally richer than nearshore islands (Table 5). This was probably the case with the Phi Phi group; however, it is not possible to ascertain whether this may be linked to higher tsunami damage in that area. In the Surin Islands area, Richelieu Rock, a rocky outcrop naturally low in diversity, depressed the overall average richness. Phuket sites showed the richest average; however, with only two sites it is not possible to generalize.
Table 5. Number of hard coral species recorded at each station and total counts and averages for selected island groups. Site name Surin Koh Chi Me Yai Bay, N. Surin I. Chong Khad Bay, N. Surin I. Sutep Bay, N. Surin I. Koh Torinla Richelieu Rock avg. Total for Surin (6 stations) Koh Tachai (east side) Ko Tachai (NE side) Koh Bon avg. Similan Koh Bangu (Snapper Alley) Koh Similan (below Sail Rock) Koh Similan (Beacon Point) Koh Payu (near north tip) Ko Payu (East of Eden dive site) Koh Miang NE (Stonehenge dive site) Koh Payu (north tip) Koh Payang (NW end) Koh Huyong (NW section) avg. Total for Similan (9 stations) 8 9 10 Stn. No. of No. sp. Site name Phuket Patong Bay (south side) Cape Yanding, Patong Bay avg. Stn. No. of No. sp.
2 3 4 5 6 7
109 124 84 118 71 49 93 191 98 103 90 97
21 22
118 120 119
Racha Yai (near Racha Resort) Racha Yai avg. Phi Phi Maya Bay, Phi Phi Le Island Koh Bida Nok Ton Zai Bay, Phi Phi Don I. Yong Kasem Bay, Phi Phi Don I. Lana Bay, Phi Phi Don I. Koh Phai (west side) Ton Zai Bay near Hin Phae, Phi Phi Don I. Avg. Total for Phi Phi (7 stations)
23 24
92 95 94
11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
104 92 107 104 96 86 83 108 95 97 217
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
94 105 95 101 62 54 98 87 184
General reef status

Overall reefs were in relatively good condition. Live hard coral cover was overall average. The Surin Islands group had high coral cover (avg. 52%); the Similan Islands and Racha Islands had the lowest (avg. 25%). On the other hand, dead coral cover (DC - identifiable as recently killed) was highest on Phuket and the Phi Phi Islands (avg. 15%). The Surin Islands had the second highest DC cover (avg. 8%) and the Similan Islands very low (< 1%). There was no apparent relation between DC cover, reef development (RD) and average species count among the island groups (Table 6).
20
Table 6. A comparison of selected reef characteristics for the major island goups. Hard Coral 52 33 25 29 25 28 Dead Coral 8 1 1 15 0 15 Macro Algae 0 3 2 0 1 1 Turf Algae 16 17 17 20 28 24 Coralline Avg. no Algae RD index of sp. 6 7 6 5 6 8 3.5 3.2 2.7 1.8 2 3.2 93 97 97 119 94 87
Location Surin Tachai and Bon Similan Phuket Racha Phi Phi
Coral communities
Four major community types were identified, forming two main groups (Figure 6): First, the Surin Islands, Phi Phi Islands and Phuket, with stronger nearshore influence (Figure 7); and second, the Similan Islands, Racha Islands and other small offshore clearwater islands (Figure 7). This separation also reflected the differences in tsunami impact level. The geographic distribution, particularly along the distance to shore and depth gradient, of these community types was very strong. The Surin and Similan Island community types were very distinct and generally remained in their respective island groups. However, the nearshore cluster was more heterogenous. Richelieu Rock, inland from Surin, had virtually no reef accretion and soft corals were dominant. Patong Bay in Phuket and the Phi Phi Island reefs appeared different from the Surin and Similan communities. Further surveys on more numerous sites in these areas may distinguish these community types from each other.
21
Figure 6. Hierarchical cluster analysis of 30 stations showing the 2 main groups of offshore and nearshore community types, with two geographically distinct community types.
Linkage 0 20 40 60 80 100
Clear Water Similan
Less
Tachai and Bon Islands
Nearshore
Phi Phi Islands and
More PI29
Surin
22
Figure 7. Distribution of the four community types identified from the sites visited in the north Andaman sea of Thailand,
1 5 6 3 4
Surin
9 8
Clear, deep water and offshore less damage

Similan Islands Koh Tachai and Koh Bon
10
11 13 12 14 18 15 17 16 19 20
Shallow, less clear water and nearshore more damage

Surin
Similan
Phiphi Islands
22 21
30 29 28 31
Phiphi
25 23 24
27 26
23
Tsunami impact
All visited island groups had some degree of tsunami impact, although around one-quarter of the survey stations did not show evidence of tsunami impact (Table 7). The Similan, Racha, Tachai and Bon Islands, which were found in relatively deeper water and which were relatively smaller islands, showed least evidence of impact (Figure 7). The Surin, Phuket and Phi Phi Islands, which are in shallower water closer to the mainland and are relatively larger, showed most evidence of impact. Impact value level 4 was seen only at two stations in the Phi Phi Island group; impact value level 3 was seen in Patong Bay (one site) and the Surin Islands (3 sites) (Figure 8). These were the six sites with any significant amount of damage.
Table 7. Summary table of relative tsunami impact on visited sites. IV (Impact Value), from 0=none to 4=maximum (see Methods section for detailed explanation). Overall Out of 56 sites No. of IV sites 20 0 17 1 11 2 4 3 4 4 Total 56 Surin Islands No. of IV sites 8 0 2 1 1 2 3 3 Total 14 Out of 30 stations No. of IV stations % 7 23 0 12 40 1 7 23 2 2 7 3 2 7 4 Total 30 Tachai and Bon Islands No. of IV % sites 2 33 0 2 33 1 2 33 2 Total 6 Similan Islands No. of IV sites 8 0 8 1 2 2 Total 18
% 36 30 20 7 7
% 57 14 7 21
% 44 44 11
Phuket (Patong Bay) No. of IV sites % 2 50 1 1 25 2 1 25 3 Total 4
Phi Phi Islands No. of IV sites 2 0 3 1 3 2 2 4 Total 10
% 20 30 30 20
Racha Island No. of IV sites 2 0 2 2 Total 4
% 50 50
24
Figure 8. Relative proportion of sites with different levels of Impact Value (IV=0-4) at each visited Island group.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
4 3 2 1 0
0% Surin Islands Tachai and Bon Islands Similan Islands Phuket (Patong Bay) Racha Island Phiphi Islands
Line-transects There was some variation in bottom cover characteristics between island groups. The island groups which showed most tsunami impact also had the highest average hard coral cover; the Similan and Racha Islands, with least impact, also had the lowest hard coral cover. No significant amount of tsunami-associated mortality was detected at any of the island groups. However, the Surin Islands had considerably higher rubble cover, which may be the result of a combination of tsunami, past bleaching and past crown-of-thorns starfish damage. The higher level of bare hard substrate in the Racha Islands may partially be related to clearing by tsunami (Figure 9).
25
Figure 9. Summary results of line-transect surveys.
100 % bottom cover 80 60 40 20 0 Surin Similan Patong Racha Phiphi
Hard coral Macro Algae Rubble Other
Soft coral Sponge Sand
26
Discussion and conclusions Hard coral diversity in the north Andaman Sea of Thailand was found to be unexpectedly high, despite the fact that only a relatively small area and limited number of habitat types and locations were surveyed. A confirmed total, to date, of 353 species brings this area within the scope of coral species diversity of other areas in the Coral Triangle in the central Indo-Pacific. In addition, a number of coral species previously known only from the Pacific side were found. An important characteristic of these reefs, which distinguishes them from most other locations in the Indo-Pacific, was the presence of several large (and very large) massive Porites communities. The prevalence of such communities, with many individuals of several centuries of age, is an indication of relative stability with few severe disturbances. Compared to most other Indo-Pacific locations, Acropora abundance was relatively low, with Acropora-dominated communities rarely occurring. A number of disturbances in the last one or two decades, such as crown-of-thorns outbreaks, coral bleaching or this latest tsunami damage, could explain this relatively low abundance in Acropora.
Overall reefs in the north Andaman Sea of Thailand were in relatively good condition. Reef development (reef accretion) was somewhat limited, especially on the Similan and Racha Islands and the two stations on Phuket. The most extensive reef flats were around the Surin Islands and a couple of locations on the Phi Phi Islands. In the Similan Islands, most reef accretion was below 10 m depth; shallower parts usually had good cover of coral communities on granite rock. On Kho Mai Phai (station 30) in the Phi Phi group, where numerous very large coral heads were tossed over by the tsunami, reef development was extensive though very shallow (<6 m). The channel between the two main islands at the Surin group had extensive reef flat development with one of the largest recorded blue coral (Heliopora caerulea) beds known to date. We arrived in the area a considerable time (> 4 months) after the tsunami hit; therefore, we would have missed most evidence of impact unless it had been very large and visible, such as overturned large coral heads, piled-up new rubble fields, extensively scoured areas, large amounts of recent coral rubble or large recent sediment deposits. Where destruction was relatively small or the broken coral had been cleared away and deposited outside the survey area, we may have underestimated the extent and amount of lower- and mid-level damage. The long-term implication of recorded high-level damage that was still visible after four months may be more significant than the small-scale, short-lived damage that is quickly repaired. In several large overturned coral heads that would have been expected to regenerate from sections of live tissue, gradual tissue mortality was observed. The longerterm prognosis of such degeneration is not known. Although there appeared to be some link between distribution of coral community type and relative tsunami impact, this was not very strong. Also, it is not evident whether this may be related to community structure and types of coral colony formations found, or to the geophysical characteristics (bathymetric profile, aspect, etc.) of the locations where these communities were found. One obvious observation was that particularly large (>3 m diameter) coral heads were most susceptible to being toppled over and tossed around by very powerful surges. Since events (such as cyclones) that generate very powerful waves are rare or absent in this area, such large colonies might not develop protection against being toppled over.
27
Conclusions from this study include:
Sites with extensive destruction, especially deeper sites with even thin, but extensive, amounts of sediment deposits, may take a very long time (several decades) to recover. In a few sites where many-centuries-old, very large coral heads were toppled and displaced, and especially where (and if) gradual mortality continues, recovery of coral communities to their pre-tsunami state may take centuries. The rest of the sites, even where near-total damage may have occurred, recovery may become visible in the coming years and can complete (with no further significant disturbance) within a decade or two. Most expected coral species were found, and they had a reasonable distribution; even for the rarest species, several individuals were found. Therefore, it is not expected that the tsunami has caused or may cause local extinction of any coral species. If suitable conditions prevail, all known coral species and community types will be expected to recover.
28
References Comley, J., O'Farrell, S., Hamylton, S., Ingwersen, C. and Walker, R. 2005. The Impact of the December 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami on the Coral Reef Resources of Mu Ko Surin Marine National Park, Thailand. Report prepared by Coral Cay Conservation.
DeVantier, L.M., G. DeAth, T.J. Done, and E. Turak. 1998. Ecological Assessment of a complex natural system: A case study from the Great Barrier Reef. Ecological Applications 8: 480-496. DeVantier, L.M., Turak, E., Al-Shaikh, K.A. and G. DeAth. 2000. Coral communities of the central-northern Saudi Arabian Red Sea. Fauna of Arabia 18: 23-66. DMCR, 2005. Report on the survey and impact assessment of the tsunami on coastal marine resources in the Andaman Sea. Department of Marine and Coastal Resources, 241 pp. ICRI/ISRS 2005. Tsunami Damage to Coral Reefs. Guidelines for Rapid Assessment and Monitoring. January 2005. Seychelles. 30 pages. Loh, T.L., S. Chaipichit, S. Songploy and L.M. Chou. 2004. The status of coral reefs of Surin Islands, Thailand, based on surveys in December 2004. REST Technical Report No. 7. Marine Biology Laboratory Department of Biological Sciences National University of Singapore Obura, D. and Abdulla, A. 2005. Assessment of Tsunami Impacts on the Marine Environment of the Seychelles. Report to the Seychelles Ministry of Environment. CORDIO and the Seychelles Centre for Marine Research and Technology. Tun, K., Chou, L.M., Cabanban, A., Tuan, V. S., Philreefs, Yeemin, T., Suharsono, Sour, K. and Lane, D. 2004. Status of coral reefs, coral reef monitoring and management in Southeast Asia, 2004. In, Clive Wilkinson (ed.) Status Of Coral Reefs Of The World: 2004 Volume 1. GCRMN, AIMS. 301 pp. Turak, E. and Fenner, D. 2002. Hard Corals of Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea. In, RAP working papers, Conservation International, Washington, DC. Turak, E. 2002. Assessment of coral biodiversity and coral reef health of the SangiheTalaud Islands, North Sulawesi, Indonesia, 2002. Final Report to The Nature Conservancy. Turak, E. 2002. Reef corals of Northwest Madagascar. In: McKenna, S. A. and Allen, G. R. (eds) 2003. A rapid marine biodiversity assessment of the coral reefs of Northwest Madagascar. Bulletin of the Rapid Assessment Program 31, Conservation International, Washington, DC. Turak, E. (2003). Coral Reef Surveys During TNC SEACMPA RAP of Wakatobi National Park, Southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia, May 2003. Final Report to The Nature Conservancy. Turak, E. and Aitsi, J. 2003. Assessment of coral biodiversity and status of coral reefs of East Kimbe Bay, New Britain, Papua New Guinea, 2002. Final Report to The Nature Conservancy. Turak, E. and L.M. DeVantier (2003). Corals and coral communities of Bunaken National Park and nearby reefs, North Sulawesi, Indonesia: Rapid ecological assessment of biodiversity and status. Final Report to the International Ocean Institute Regional centre for Australia and western Pacific.
29
Turak, E. and Shouhoka, J. 2003. Coral diversity and status of the coral reefs in the Raja Ampat islands, Papua province, Indonesia, November 2002. Final Report to The Nature Conservancy. Turak, E., Wakeford, M. and Done, T.J. 2003. Banda Islands rapid ecological assessment, May 2002: Assessment of coral biodiversity and coral reef health. In, Mous PJ (ed), Report on a rapid ecological assessment of the Banda Islands, Maluku, Eastern Indonesia, held April 28 May 5 2002, TNC and UNESCO publication, 150pp. Turak, E. 2004. Derewan REA, 2003, Coral biodiversity and reef status. Final Report to The Nature Conservancy. Turak, E. 2005. Coral communities and reef health at the Solomon Islands, TNC, REA, May June 2004. Final Report to The Nature Conservancy. Veron, J.E.N. 2000. Corals of the World. 3 Vols. Australian Institute of Marine Science. Veron, J.E.N. and Stafford-Smith, M. 2002. Coral ID An electronic key to the zooxanthellate scleractinian corals of the World Australian Institute of Marine Science.
30
Coral Reef Fishes of the East Andaman Sea, Thailand

Gerald R. Allen, Ukkrit Satapoomin, and Mark Allen Summary A list of fishes was compiled for 31 sites off the Andaman Sea coast of Thailand, including the Surin, Similan, and Phi Phi Islands, as well as two sites at Patong Bay, Phuket Island. The ichthyological survey involved about 150 hours of scuba diving by a 3-person team to a maximum depth of 42 m. Special emphasis was given to the effect of the tsunami on local fish populations. There appeared to be no or little effect on overall diversity at most sites, but the composition of fish communities was altered at sites where impact was severe based on data gathered at Aceh, Sumatra. A formula for predicting the total reef fish fauna based on the number of species in six key indicator families indicates that at least 843 species can be expected in the East Andaman Sea region, of which 564 (67%) were recorded during the present survey. Gobies (Gobiidae), damselfishes (Pomacentridae), and wrasses (Labridae) are the dominant groups in the East Andaman Sea in both number of species (115, 66, and 64 respectively) and number of individuals. Species numbers at visually sampled sites during the 2005 survey ranged from 111 to 213, with an average of 173. The highest (average 187 species) fish diversity was recorded from sites at the small, isolated offshore islands of Koh Tachai and Koh Bon and the lowest (average 159) at coastal sites on Phuket Island. Site 10 at Koh Bon was the richest site for fishes with 213 species. Severely impacted reefs continue to support a relatively diverse fish fauna with only a slight reduction in number of species compared to other reef areas. The average number of species for three main impact categories (severe, moderate, and zero to light) was 167, 176, and 173 respectively. Offshore locations including the Surin and Similan Islands, Koh Tachai and Koh Bon support richer fish communities than coastal areas of Phuket and the Phi Phi Islands.
Introduction A survey of the fish fauna was conducted in conjunction with the overall tsunami impact survey. Our main goal was to provide a comprehensive inventory of shallow coral reef fishes inhabiting the East Andaman Sea. It therefore excludes deepwater fishes, offshore pelagic species such as flyingfishes, tunas and billfishes, and most estuarine forms. Reef fishes of the East Andaman region The reef fish fauna of the East Andaman region was poorly documented until relatively recent times. The first fish-collecting activity during the modern era was undertaken by the Second Xarifa Expedition, which visited the Nicobar Islands in 1957. Although no comprehensive list of East Andaman fishes resulted from this effort, several new species were described by the German scientists Wolfgang Klausewitz and Irenaeus Eibl-Eibesfeldt (a fish behaviorist who participated on the expedition). Thanks largely to the establishment of the Phuket Marine Biological Centre (PMBC) in 1974, our knowledge of East Andaman fishes has steadily increased over the past few decades. G. Allen and J. Randall from the Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami-affected Reefs of Thailand. Final Technical Report. November 15, 2005 31
Western Australian and Bishop Museums visited PMBC in 1979. They made a few collections and photographed fishes around Phuket and at the Similan Islands. However, the most important collections for the area were made in 1993 by Ukkrit Satapoomin of PMBC and Richard Winterbottom from the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM). Their collections, now deposited at ROM and PMBC, contain several thousand specimens and more than 500 species. Nevertheless, there is still no published comprehensive checklist or book of the estimated 800-900 reef fishes of the East Andaman region.
Methods The fish portion of the survey involved approximately 150 hours of SCUBA diving by G. Allen, U. Satapoomin, and Mark Allen to a maximum depth of 42 m. A list of fishes was compiled for 31 sites (see Appendix III). The basic method consisted of underwater observations made during a single, 60-100 minute dive at each site. The name of each observed species was recorded in pencil on a plastic sheet attached to a clipboard. The technique usually involved rapid descent to 20-40 m, then a slow, meandering ascent back to the shallows. The majority of time was spent in the 2-12 m depth zone, which consistently harbors the largest number of species. Each dive included a representative sample of all major bottom types and habitat situations, for example, rocky intertidal, reef flat, steep drop-offs, caves (utilizing a flashlight when necessary), rubble and sand patches.
Only the names of fishes for which identification was absolutely certain were recorded. However, very few, less than one percent of those observed, could not be identified to species. This high level of recognition is based on our cumulative experience of more than 60 years of diving experience in the Indo-Pacific and an intimate knowledge of the reef fishes of this vast region as a result of extensive laboratory and field studies.
Results The total reef fish fauna of the East Andaman coast of Thailand as reported herein consists of 775 species belonging to 94 families. This total is based on 564 species recorded during the present survey in combination with an additional 203 species that were collected by Satapoomin and Winterbottom in 1993 (Appendices III and IV). The total also includes the following species that are known from the region, but were not seen during the survey: Chaetodon xanthocephalus, Genicanthus caudovittatus, Pomacanthus sexstriatus, Premnas biaculeatus, Naso lopezi, Meiacanthus urostigmus, and Canthigaster smithi (Satopoomin unpublished data). Although no comprehensive guidebook to the region exists, most of the species were illustrated by Kuiter (1998) and Kuiter and Tonozawa (2001).
No author names or year of description appear with species names that are included in the present report. These are easily obtainable from the California Academy of Sciences Catalog of Fishes website: http://www.calacademy.org/research/ichthyology/catalog/fishcatsearch.html.
General faunal composition The majority of fishes of the East Andaman region are associated with coral reefs. The most abundant families in terms of number of species are gobies (Gobiidae), damselfishes (Pomacentridae), wrasses (Labridae), groupers (Serranidae), cardinalfishes (Apogonidae), butterflyfishes (Chaetodontidae), surgeonfishes (Acanthuridae), snappers (Lutjandidae),
32
parrotfishes (Scaridae), and moray eels (Muraenidae). These 10 families collectively account for 443 species or about 57 percent of the total reef fauna (see below).
Ten largest families of East Andaman fishes.
Muraenidae Scaridae Lutjanidae Acanthuridae Chaetodontidae Apogondae Serranidae Labridae Pomacentridae Gobiidae 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
No. species
The relative abundance of Andaman fish families is similar to other reef areas in the IndoPacific, although the ranking of individual families is variable as shown in Table 8. Although the Gobiidae was the leading family, it was not adequately collected, due to the small size and cryptic habits of many species.
33
Table 8. Family ranking in terms of number of fish species for various localities in the IndoPacific region.
(AS = East Andaman Sea); SOL = Solomon Islands; RA = Raja Ampat Islands, Indonesia; MB = Milne Bay Province, PNG; MAD = Madagascar; PI = Phoenix Islands). Data for Raja Ampat Islands are from Allen (2002), for Milne Bay are from Allen (2003), for Calamianes Islands from Allen (2001b), for Madagascar from Allen (2005) and for Phoenix and Solomon Islands from Allen (unpublished).
Family SOL RA AS 1st 1st Gobiidae 1st 2nd 2nd Pomacentridae 2nd 3rd 3rd Labridae 2nd 5th 5th Serranidae 4th 4th 4th Apogonidae 4th 7th 6th Chaetodontidae 6th 8th 7th Acanthuridae 7th 9th 10th Lutjanidae 8th 12th 9th Scaridae 9th 11th * Muraenidae 9th *denotes family inadequately surveyed
MB 1st 3rd 2nd 5th 4th 6th 8th 9th 10th 18th
CAL 3rd 1st 2nd 5th 4th 6th 7th 9th 10th *
MAD 1st 3rd 2nd 4th 5th 10th 8th 15th 10th 7th
PI 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 10th 7th 5th 15th 11th 6th
Fish community structure The composition of local reef fish communities throughout the Indo-Pacific region is dependent on habitat variability. The highest number of species is generally correlated with complex environmental situations, for example, those which occur in the epicenter of the Coral Triangle region. The current survey focused primarily on offshore islands, with minimal effort devoted to coastal reefs, although the Phi Phi Islands represent a transitional environment of sorts between oceanic and coastal habitats. The number of species found at each site is indicated in Table 9. Totals ranged from 111 to 213, with an average of 173 species per site.
Table 9. Number of fish species observed at each site during survey of the East Andaman Sea of Thailand. Red and yellow shading indicates severely and moderately impacted sites respectively. Unshaded totals indicate sites with zero to low impact.
Site 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Species 174 163 175 136 160 165 161 166
Site 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Species 183 213 187 186 111 201 212 173
Site 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Species 164 205 191 193 161 156 158 162
Site 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Species 178 178 171 181 172 158 160 34
The primary interest of the current survey was to assess the impact of the 26 December tsunami event. Therefore, each site was classified according to the amount of tsunami damage. Light to moderately impacted reefs were those that suffered either no damage or where the impact consisted of only a few broken corals or overturned small coral heads. Moderately impacted reefs showed significant tsunami damage, but still retained extensive areas of undisturbed live corals. Severely impacted reefs were those in which the majority of live corals were damaged, including the presence of large toppled coral formations (often Porites). The impact category for each site is color-coded in Table 9 and a comparison of fish diversity for the three main categories is presented in Table 10. There appeared to be only slight differences in overall fish diversity between lightly, moderately, and severely impacted sites. Moderately impacted sites actually supported the greatest diversity. Further discussion on the impact of the tsunami on local fish communities is provided in the discussion section at the end of this report.
Table 10. Comparison of fish diversity in relation to tsunami impact.
Major habitat
None or light impact Moderate impact Severe impact
No. sites 14 11 6
Avg. spp. per site 172.9 175.5 167.0
Richest sites for fishes The species total at a particular site is ultimately dependent on the availability of food, shelter and the diversity of substrata. Well-developed reefs with relatively high coral diversity and significant live coral cover are usually the richest areas for fishes, particularly if these locations are exposed to periodic strong currents. These areas provide an abundance of shelter for fishes of all sizes and the currents are vital for supporting numerous planktivores, the smallest of which provide food for larger predators.
The six most speciose sites for fishes are indicated in Table 11. The average total for all sites (173), although seemingly high, was relatively low compared to areas further to the east in the Coral Triangle region (Table 12). A total that exceeds 200 species is generally the benchmark for excellent fish diversity. This figure was achieved at only four (or 12.9%) sites during the current survey. By comparison, 200 or more species were recorded at 36.6%, 42.8%, 40.4%, and 52.3% of sites at the Solomon Islands, northeastern Kalimantan, Milne Bay (Papua New Guinea), and the Raja Ampat Islands (western New Guinea) respectively, based on surveys conducted by G. Allen over the past five years. The highest number of fishes, 284 species, from a single site was recorded at Wambong Bay, Kofiau Island in the Raja Ampat Islands, off the western end of New Guinea (Allen 2002). The richest sites for fishes during the current survey are summarized in Table 11. The top site, Koh Bon, is an isolated outpost lying about 48 km off the mainland coast and occupying an area of less than 1 km2. Nearly as diverse, with 212 species, Koh Payu is an even smaller islet situated in the central Similan Islands. Fantasea Reef, with only 111 species, was the poorest site for fishes. Although it is popular with tourist divers, this site,
35
notorious for swirling currents and the rocky nature of the substrate with scant coral diversity, supports relatively few fish species.
Table 11. Six richest fish sites for fish diversity.
Site No. 10 15 18 14 20 19
Location
Total Spp.
Koh Bon Koh Payu (near north tip) Koh Payu (north tip) Koh Similan (Beacon Point) Koh Huyong (NW section) Koh Payang (NW end)
213 212 205 201 193 191
Table 12 presents a comparison of the reef fish fauna of major geographical areas that were surveyed. The highest average number of species (187) was recorded in the Koh Tachai-Koh Bon region with the lowest value (159) from Patong Bay on the Phuket Islands. The latter area is located near a large population center and is influenced by a host of perturbations including freshwater runoff, siltation, sewage disposal, and high volume boat traffic.
Table 12. Average number of fish species per site recorded for geographic areas in the East Andaman Sea region of Thailand.
Rank General Area
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Koh Tachai-Koh Bon Similan Islands Phi Phi Islands Surin Islands Racha Yai Phuket Island (Patong Bay)
No. sites 3 10 7 7 2 2
Site nos.
8-10 11-20 25-31 1-7 23-24 21-22
Avg. species/site 187 182 171 162 160 159
Coral Fish Diversity Index (CFDI) Allen (1998) devised a convenient method for assessing and comparing overall reef fish diversity. The technique essentially involves an inventory of six key families: Chaetodontidae, Pomacanthidae, Pomacentridae, Labridae, Scaridae, and Acanthuridae. The number of species in these families is totaled to obtain the Coral Fish Diversity Index (CFDI) for a single dive site, relatively restricted geographic areas or countries and large regions (e.g., Solomon Islands). A simple regression formula is then used to calculate the expected number of fishes for a particular area. The CFDI predictor value can be used to gauge the thoroughness of a particular short-term survey that is either currently in progress or already completed. For example, the CFDI obtained for the East Andaman region of Thailand is 226, and the appropriate regression formula (4.234 x 226 114.446) predicts an approximate total of 843 species, indicating that at least 68 more species can be
36
expected. The CFDI value for the combined Gulf of Thailand and Andaman Sea coasts of Thailand is 264, which predicts a total coral reef fish fauna of about 1000 species. Indonesia is the worlds leading country for reef fish diversity, based on both CFDI values and actual number of species thus far recorded. A recent study by Allen and Adrim (2003), which lists a total of 2,056 species from Indonesia, strongly supports this ranking. Table 13 presents CFDI values, number of shallow reef fishes recorded to date, and the estimated number of species based on CFDI data for selected countries or regions in the Indo-Pacific. In most cases the predicted number of species is similar or less than that actually recorded, and is thus indicative of the level of knowledge. For example, when the actual number is substantially less than the estimated total (eg. Sabah) it indicates incomplete sampling. However, the opposite trend is evident for Indonesia, with the actual number being significantly greater than what is predicted by the CFDI.
Table 13. Coral fish diversity index (CFDI) for regions or countries with figures for total reef and shore fish fauna (if known), and estimated fauna from CFDI regression formula.
Locality
CFDI
Indonesia Australia (tropical) Philippines Papua New Guinea S. Japanese Archipelago Great Barrier Reef, Australia Taiwan Micronesia Solomon Islands New Caledonia Sabah, Malaysia Northwest Shelf, Western Australia Thailand East Andaman Sea (Thailand) Mariana Islands Marshall Islands Ogasawara Islands, Japan French Polynesia Maldives Islands Seychelles Society Islands Tuamotu Islands Hawaiian Islands Marquesas Islands
507 401 387 362 348 343 319 315 301 300 274 273 264 226 222 221 212 205 219 188 160 144 121 90
No. Est. reef reef fishes fishes 2056 2032 1627 1584 ? 1525 1494 1419 1315 1359 1325 1338 1172 1237 1170 1220 1019 1159 1097 1156 840 1046 932 1042
? 775 848 795 745 730 894 765 560 389 435 331
1003 843 826 822 784 754 813 682 563 496 398 267
37
Zoogeographic affinities of the East Andaman fish fauna The East Andaman region belongs to the overall Indo-West Pacific faunal community. Its reef fishes are similar to those inhabiting other areas within this vast region, stretching eastward from East Africa and the Red Sea to the islands of Micronesia and Polynesia. Although most families, and many genera and species, are consistently present across the region, the species composition varies greatly according to locality.
Until recently, the zoogeographic affinities of the East Andaman region were poorly understood. However, a study of Indo-Pacific reef fish distribution patterns now in progress by G. Allen provides insights to the regions faunal relationships. On the basis of shared faunal elements, the East Andaman Sea region is most similar to that of the central Indian Ocean, including Sri Lanka and the Maldives Islands, although there is also a significant relationship with the western Pacific fauna. For example, of the 564 species that were recorded during the current survey, 83%, 80% and 71% are shared with the respective Maldives-Sri Lanka region, New Guinea, and the western Indian Ocean. There is compelling evidence in the form of geminate (twin) species that further strengthens the East Andamans relationship with the Indian Ocean. Geminates are closely related sister species that have evolved from a common, widely distributed ancestral species. There are numerous examples of geminate pairs involving Indian Ocean and Pacific twin species; for example, the butterflyfish pair involving Chaetodon falcula from the Indian Ocean and C. ulietensis from the Pacific. As with most geminate pairs, slight differences in color pattern constitute the principal means of separating the two species. The geminate species phenomenon is most readily apparent among the butterflyfishes (Chaetodontidae), damselfishes (Pomacentridae), wrasses (Labridae), parrotfishes (Scaridae), and surgeonfishes (Acanthuridae). In these five families alone, 31 examples of geminate species occur in the East Andaman region, and in every case the Indian Ocean twin, rather than the Pacific, is represented.
Regional endemism Regionally endemic species form a significant contribution to the distinctive flavor of the East Andaman fish community. A complete list of East Andaman endemics is provided in Table 14. In addition, a trio of eastern Indian Ocean endemics, including the angelfishes Apolemichthys xanthurus and Centropyge flavipectoralis, and the parrotfish Chlorurus rhakoura, are occasionally encountered in western Thailand seas. These species are also shared by the broader region that includes Sri Lanka and the Maldives.
38
Table 14. List of reef associated fishes that are endemic to the East Andaman Sea.
Family Congridae Pseudochromidae Plesiopidae Opistognathidae Haemulidae
Pomacentridae Tripterygiidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Siganidae Monacanthidae
Species Heteroconger obscurus Pseudochromis tonozukai Plesiops thysanopterus Opistognathus sp. Plectorhinchus macrospilus Pomacentrus polyspilus Helcogramma lacuna Ecsenius lubbocki Meiacanthus urostigmus Praealticus dayi Callogobius andamanensis Cryptocentrus russus Siganus magnificus Paraluteres sp.
Type locality Nicobar Islands Pulau Weh, Sumatra Pulau Boenta, Sumatra Undescribed Similan Islands, Thailand Phuket, Thailand Similan Islands, Thailand Phuket, Thailand Surin Islands, Thailand Andaman Islands Andaman Islands
Penang, Malaysia Phuket, Thailand Undescribed
Observations of commercial species Separate data regarding commercially valuable species were gathered by M. Allen and are included in an additional report, but the following general comments pertain to the 31 sites where fish species inventories were conducted. Large fishes were generally scarce, especially coral trout, large groupers, and sharks. The only large serranids that were occasionally seen were Plectropomus areolatus, and less frequently, Epinephelus fuscoguttatus. Occasional large sweetlips (Plectorhinchus) were encountered and large schools of fusiliers (Casionidae) formed an integral part of the fish community at most sites. Reef sharks of the genus Carcharhinus were conspicuous by their absence. Judging from the huge numbers of fishing boats that were present throughout the survey, particularly at night (although these were primarily squid fishers), fishing pressure is enormous.
Underwater observations of Napoleon Wrasse, a conspicuous indicator of fishing pressure, show that it is also heavily exploited, or at least has been in the past. The species appears to reach the zenith of its abundance in the Central Pacific in uninhabited areas such as the Phoenix Islands. During the current survey we encountered only two individuals. This paucity of Napoleon Wrasse is typical of most areas in the heavily exploited Coral Triangle region, but numbers are still healthy in places such as Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands where there is far less fishing pressure (Table 15). Fortunately, what appears to be an effective network of MPAs is now established in Thailand waters and, hopefully, the numbers of Napoleon Wrasse as well as groupers and other large fishes will increase in the future.
39
Table 15. Frequency of Napoleon Wrasse (Cheilinus undulatus) for various locations in the IndoPacific.
Location
Solomon Islands REA 2004 Phoenix Islands 2002 Milne Bay, PNG 2000 Milne Bay, PNG 1997 Raja Ampat Islands 2002 Raja Ampat Islands 2001 Togean/Banggai Islands 1998 Weh Island, Sumatra 1999 Calamianes Is., Philippines 1998 East Andaman Sea, Thailand
No. sites where seen 31 47 28 28 9 7 6
% of total sites 47.69 83.92 49.12 52.83 18.0 15.55 12.76
No. seen
56 412 90 85 14 7 8 0 5
2
0 3
2
0.00 7.89
6.45
Impact of the tsunami event on local fish communities At most sites we visited there appeared to be relatively little impact from the tsunami on the overall reef fish community. Even at sites where severe effects were recorded, the damage was highly localized and confined to a relatively narrow depth zone (usually less than about 8 m). There were usually adjacent sections of reef that appeared to be totally unaffected. In many cases, for example at site 8 (Koh Tachai) where huge mushroom-shaped formations of Porites were toppled, much of the coral remained alive and was still inhabited by Eviota seebreei, a small delicate goby which is always associated with live coral.
The most severely impacted sites (29-30) at the Phi Phi Islands were characterized by an extensive zone (0-8 m depth) that was littered with massive overturned Porites bommies (some in excess of 25 m in circumference). The coral substrate was mainly dead and the bottom was almost entirely covered with an array of broken limestone fragments and former live coral formations. Despite extensive habitat destruction, the area was occupied by a more or less normal fish community (171 and 160 species, respectively). These severely impacted sites continued to support large numbers of damselfishes, particularly dense aggregations of Neopomacentrus azysron and N. filamentosus. It is likely that fish populations may have actually increased in the worst-affected areas, at least in the immediate aftermath of the tsunami. The overturned coral formations with their exposed benthic invertebrate fauna would have no doubt attracted large numbers of wrasses and parrotfishes. Swarms of these fishes can be easily attracted by turning over small dead coral blocks in most reef areas.
Additional observation from Pulau Weh, Aceh Province, Sumatra Immediately following the tsunami survey in Thailand, G. Allen had an opportunity to visit Pulau Weh, a small mountainous island about 20 km north of the city of Banda Aceh, an area that suffered perhaps the most severe damage from the tsunami. The island is located off the extreme western tip of Sumatra, about 385 km southwest of Phuket, Thailand, and about 285 km north of ground zero of the violent earthquake that struck on 26 December 2004. Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami-affected Reefs of Thailand. Final Technical Report. November 15, 2005 40
The observations from Pulau Weh provide additional insight that is extremely useful for assessing the effects of the tsunami on local fish populations throughout the East Andaman region. Not only is this one of the few locations near ground zero where pre-tsunami data are available, but it also provided an opportunity to gather detailed information for two important sites (Gapang Lagoon and Iboih, see below) that were severely impacted to the extent that huge sections of reef were entirely destroyed. G. Allen had previously conducted a 9-day reef assessment survey during January 1999 under the auspices of Conservation International (CI). The return visit between 4-12 May 2005 was also sponsored by CI. On this occasion G. Allen was accompanied by Mark Erdmann, a stomatopod expert under contract to CI, and his assistant Defy Pada from Manado. There is no doubt that the tsunami event of 26 December 2004 had a profound impact on local fish communities, but quantitative data are difficult to obtain. Certainly the most dramatic impact we witnessed was at Gapang Lagoon (5 51.660 N, 95 16.030 E) and near Iboih Village (5 52.406 N, 95 15.431 E). In both instances the entire reef was scoured clean by the tsunami leaving only the basement rocks that formed the foundation of the former living reef. Most of these areas now bear the appearance of ghost towns with drastically reduced fish populations. However, the reef debris is concentrated in a relatively narrow zone (foreslope) where the former reef margin drops into deeper water, generally between depths of about 3-10 m. The debris field now provides an abundance of shelter for a variety of species and therefore the species count for both of these areas is still impressive. In fact, site 10 with 224 species is by far the richest site for fishes that has so far been recorded on Pulau Weh. In addition to the extensive debris field, this site supports a variety of other habitats extending to depths of approximately 22 m. The debris fields are oddly reminiscent of the tsunami refugee camps seen around the outskirts of Banda Aceh. They are essentially populated by refugee fishes that have been displaced from their normal living coral reef habitat. Many species, particularly coralassociated damselfishes and butterflyfishes, are noticeably scarce. There has been a profound effect on sand-dwelling fishes, particularly gobies, as nearly all the former sand bottom has disappeared from depths less than 8 m. This is particularly noticeable at Gapang Lagoon (site 1), which prior to the tsunami was characterized by extensive sand bottom areas in shallow water.
Iboih fish biomass transects In order to gain an appreciation of the impact of the tsunami on local fish populations, we conducted a series of four fish biomass transects off Iboih Village. The reef extends for about 340 m along the coast and measures about 50-70 m in width. Most of the reef, perhaps totalling 75%, had been destroyed by the tsunami, but there were two relatively undamaged sections which provided an opportunity for comparisons. A series of four 50 x 4 m transects running perpendicular from the shoreline were undertaken by G. Allen. These consisted of two replicates each on a severely damaged and a lightly damaged portion of reef. The number and approximate size of every fish within 2 m of each side of the transect line were recorded. Biomass estimates for every species were obtained using information on length-weight relationships (obtained via linear regression) available on the Fishbase website (www.fishbase.org).
41
Due to time constraints only two replicates were possible for each habitat situation. Although the data may be statistically weak, they at least show the magnitude of difference between the two areas. Slightly over twice as many species and almost five times as many individuals were found in the lightly impacted areas compared to the severely impacted ones. Moreover, the lightly impacted sections had a biomass value that was about four times greater than that of the severely impacted areas. The results of these transects are presented in Tables 16 and 17.
Table 16. Summary of data for Iboih fish biomass transects.
No.
Reef condition
1 2 3 4
Severely impacted Severely impacted Lightly impacted Lightly impacted
Area (m2) 200 200 200 200
No. species 23 33 49 57
Individuals
136 102 318 785
Biomass (kg) 0.79 1.356 2.842 5.481
Table 17. Average values for Iboih fish biomass transects
Reef condition
Avg. no. species
Avg. no Individuals
Severely impacted Lightly impacted
28 53
119 552
Avg. Biomass (kg) 1.073 4.1615
42
References Allen, G. R. 1998. Reef and shore fishes of Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea. In: Werner, T. B. and G. R. Allen (eds.). A rapid biodiversity assessment of the coral reefs of Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea. RAP Working Papers 11, Washington, D.C.: Conservation International. Pp. 39-49, 67-107.
Allen, G. R. 2001a. Chapter 4. Reef of the Togean and Banggai Islands, Sulawesi, Indonesia. In: Allen, G.R., and S. McKenna (eds.). A Marine Rapid Assessment of the Togean and Banggai Islands, Sulawesi, Indonesia. RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment 20, Conservation International, Washington, DC. Allen, G. R. 2001b. Reef and Shore Fishes of the Calamianes Islands, Palawan Province, Philippines. In: Werner, T.B., G.R. Allen , and S. McKenna (eds.). A Rapid Marine Biodiversity Assessment of the Calamianes Islands, Palawan Province, Philippines. Bulletin of the Rapid Assessment Program 17, Conservation International, Washington, DC. Allen, G. R. 2002. Chapter 3. Reef fishes of the Raja Ampat Islands, Papua Province, Indonesia. In: McKenna, S., G.R.Allen, and S. Suryadi (eds.). A Marine Rapid Assessment of the Raja Ampat Islands, Papua Province, Indonesia. RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment 22, Conservation International, Washington, DC. Allen, G. R. 2003. Reef Fishes of Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea. In: Allen, G.R., J.P. Kinch, S.A. McKenna, and P. Seeto (eds.) A Rapid Marine Biodiversity Assessment of Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea Survey II (2000). RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment 29, Conservation International, Washington, DC. Allen, G. R. and M. Adrim. 2003. Coral reef fishes of Indonesia. Zool. Stud. 42(1): 1-72. Kuiter, R. H. 1998. Photo guide to fishes of the Maldives. Atoll Editions, Victoria, Australia. 257 pp. Kuiter R.H. and Tonozuka, T. 2001. Photo Guide to Indonesian Reef Fishes. Vols. 1-3. Seaford, Australia: Zoonetics. 893 pp.
43
A post-tsunami assessment of coral reef fin-fish resources on the Andaman Sea coast of Thailand
Mark G. Allen Summary A stock assessment of coral reef fishes was undertaken at various islands off the western coast of Thailand in April 2005, four months after the Sumatran tsunami disaster. A total of 176 species, representing 60 genera and 22 families, was identified as target fish. Pterocaesio chrysozonus, P. tile and P. pisang (Family Caesionidae) were the most abundant species surveyed. The number of target species present per site ranged from 3675 (mean = 50.46 1.81). Counts of individual target fishes per site ranged from 4292,233 (mean = 1,021.35 101.11). The estimated target fish biomass per site ranged from 65.34 530.32 ton/km2 (mean = 200.26 23.00 ton/km2). Statistical tests revealed no significant differences in the average biomass of sites grouped according to their level of tsunami impact. It seems that the impact of the tsunami on coral reef fish stocks here has been negligible and a fair level of homogeneity exists for target fish biomass on reefs throughout the tsunami-affected region. Coral reef fish stocks in western Thailand are remarkably robust and compare favorably with other areas of southeast Asia. Of five surveys that have taken place in recent years, only the Raja Ampat Islands (West Papua, Indonesia) had more biomass per site on average. The healthy condition of coral reef fish stocks reflects their situation within the protected waters of Thailands network of Marine National Parks that have been in place here since the early 1980s. Introduction Fin-fish stocks are an extremely valuable commodity for coastal communities the world over in terms of providing a source of nutrition, employment and income. In tropical latitudes, near-shore coral reefs are a vitally important habitat for fishes; however, these reefs are often heavily targeted by subsistence fishers and, to a lesser extent, commercial fishing operations. This is particularly the case in underdeveloped and heavily populated nations such as Indonesia and the Philippines, especially in remote areas far from tourist sites or fisheries authorities. The use of unsustainable methods such as blast fishing in these parts has become rife and this trend threatens not only the fish stocks but the coral reefs themselves. Other human activities, like logging in river catchments and the consumption of fossil fuels that causes global warming and rising ocean temperatures which in turn lead to coral bleaching and pollution, also threaten the coral reef environment.
The threats to coral reefs and their resident fish stocks are not solely man-induced. Natural phenomena such as outbreaks of disease and coral consuming crown-of-thorns starfish, seismic activity, volcanism and wave action also contribute. The tsunami of 26 December 2004 was a natural catastrophe of a magnitude rarely witnessed before, with a great toll on human life and property on islands and coastlines throughout the Indian Ocean basin. Despite the severe impact on land in places, early reports from the field by local divers of
44
the effect felt on the coral reefs were varied. The first scientific post-tsunami reef assessment was prepared by Obura and Abdulla (2005) for the Seychelles and it further confirmed the trend of initial reports coming in from across the Indian Ocean: the impact of the wave varied according to location but damage was usually localized and patchy. The current study was undertaken as part of a scientific expedition to the reefs of Thailands Andaman Sea coast to assess the environmental impact of the tsunami. The primary objective of this report was to document quantitative data for coral reef fish stocks, a comparable study of which had never taken place in these waters. The lack of baseline data precluded the possibility of a rigorous statistical comparison of fish stocks both before and after the tsunami. Nonetheless, it was possible to obtain some indication of the impact by careful selection of sampling sites to include both impacted and non-impacted reef areas. This work contributes stock data of economically important fishes to governmental and non-governmental authorities alike. Additionally, the data gathered here will be used to compare this region with other parts of southeast Asia for which similar methodologies have been employed in the recent past.
Materials and methods The survey took place at the islands offshore of the western coast of Thailand in the vicinity of Phuket during April 2005, four months after the Sumatran tsunami. A total of 26 sites were surveyed for reef fish biomass. Data were collected visually while SCUBA diving and recorded with pencil on waterproof plastic paper. The visual census methodology outlined by Dartnall and Jones (1986) was used with some modifications. Observations were made while slowly swimming along a 10-m-wide transect centered on a 100-m tape measure that was deployed on the reef along a predetermined depth contour, forming a survey area of approximately 1,000 m2 per transect. The time spent on a transect ranged from 2035 minutes. Data were recorded for two transects at all sites, one between 10-15 meters depth and another between 4-8 meters. Because the impacts on the reef substrate caused by the tsunami were restricted to shallow depths (i.e., typically less than five meters), transects were selected at slightly shallower depths than in past surveys to attempt to elucidate the impacts, if any, of the wave on target fish stocks.
Target species are defined as edible fishes that live on or near coral reefs (La Tanda 1998). It should be noted that many of these species are not captured by local Thai fishers, but they are included nonetheless to facilitate a meaningful comparison between the results of the present study and those of previous surveys in other areas. Numbers of individuals and average length were recorded for every target species observed. Data for numbers of individuals were obtained by actual count, except when fish occurred in large schools, in which case estimates were made to the nearest 50100 fish. Average length was estimated to the nearest five centimeters. These data were used to calculate fish biomass (expressed in ton/km2) following the methods of Sparre and Vanema (1992). Average length was converted into weight using the cubic law:
Weight = 0.05(Length)3 Units: Weight in grams (g) Length in centimeters (cm)
45
The use of a single formula to predict weight for every target species is admittedly flawed as there is an assumption that all species are equal in terms of their physical body shape and density, which is certainly not true. Therefore, results derived from the use of this formula should not be interpreted as a precise reflection of the actual fish biomass that occurs on a reef, but rather as a rough estimate of these data. Where they are useful, however, is in making comparisons at varying spatial scales (e.g., between two transects at the same site or between two sites at the same island). This methodology has been used for similar surveys of other areas in the southeast Asian region in recent years so it is employed again here to facilitate a comparison of data. The use of fish guides by Allen et al. (2003) and Lieske and Myers (1994) as well as illustrations obtained from Fishbase (http://www.fishbase.org) and various other sites on the World Wide Web aided the identification of target species during the survey.
Results and discussion A total of 176 target species, representing 60 genera and 22 families, was recorded during the survey (Appendix V). The most commonly encountered species (percentage of occurrence at sites given in parentheses) were: Chlorurus sordidus (100%), Scarus niger (100%), Epibulis insidiator (96%), Lutjanus decussatus (92%), Scolopsis bilineatus (92%), Parupeneus barberinus (92%) and Oxycheilinus digrammus (92%). The percentage occurrence values for all target species are presented in Appendix V.
The data for abundance (i.e., fish counts), when partitioned by family, show that the Caesionidae (fusiliers) were by far the most numerous group, making up just over half of the total count of target fishes (Fig. 10). Together with the Scaridae (parrotfishes), Acanthuridae (surgeonfishes) and Lutjanidae (snappers), these fishes contributed roughly three quarters of the entire fish count (Fig. 10). The most abundant species were Pterocaesio chrysozonus, P. tile and P. pisang (Table 18). The most abundant noncaesionid species were Sphyraena obtusata and Scarus quoyi, which were both particularly numerous from Phuket southwards to the Phi Phi Islands.
46
Acanthuridae 9.9% Scaridae 10.9%
Lutjanidae 6.2%
Nemipteridae 4.6% Sphyraenidae 3.9% Mullidae 2.5% Carangidae 2.5% Siganidae 2.3% Labridae 1.9% Serranidae 1.8% Lethrinidae 0.7% Holocentridae 0.5% Others 0.6%
Caesionidae 51.7%
Figure 10. Composition of total target fish count partitioned by family
Just over half of the total target fish biomass recorded was accounted for by the families Scaridae (parrotfishes), Sphyraenidae (barracudas) and Acanthuridae (surgeonfishes) (Fig. 11). Despite their high abundance, the Caesionidae ranked just fourth in this respect (Fig. 11), a reflection of their considerably smaller average length (and hence lower biomass).
Caesionidae 12.0% Lutjanidae 6.5% Stegastomatidae 5.2% Serranidae 5.1% Siganidae 4.2% Carangidae 3.6% Acanthuridae 13.5% Mullidae 2.4% Nemipteridae 2.3% Labridae 1.8% Lethrinidae 1.7% Haemulidae 1.2% Others 1.4%
Sphyraenidae 14.9%
Scaridae 23.4%
Figure 11. Composition of total target fish biomass partitioned by family
47
Summary of data for sites (refer to Table 18) Target species counts ranged from 2854 (mean = 35.69 1.44) on deeper transects and from 1946 (mean = 33.85 1.30) on shallow transects. A paired sample t-test revealed no significant difference between these mean values at a 5% level of significance (Prob. (2tail): 0.247, df: 25). The site total target species count (i.e., for both transects combined) ranged from 3675 (mean = 50.46 1.81).
Counts of individual target fishes ranged from 1322,017 (mean = 651.04.28 86.87) on deeper transects and from 981,545 (mean = 370.31 59.74) on shallow transects. The mean value for the number of individual target fishes on deeper transects was found to be significantly higher than that in shallower water (Prob. (2-tail): 0.017, df: 25). The site total target fish count ranged from 4292,233 (mean = 1,021.35 101.11). The estimated target fish biomass ranged from 65.86771.77 ton/km2 (mean = 204.05 31.38 ton/km2) on deeper transects and 43.86964.52 ton/km2 (mean = 196.47 37.06 ton/km2) on shallow transects. No significant difference was found between these mean values (Prob. (2-tail): 0.883, df: 25). Site total biomass estimates ranged from 65.34530.32 ton/km2 (mean = 200.26 23.00 ton/km2).
48
Table 18. Summary table of coral reef fish stocks, western Thailand 2005
49
The top-ranking sites in three data categories are noted in Table 19. The most important category from a fisheries perspective is the biomass estimate. Sites located at Phuket (e.g., site 21 in Patong Bay) and even more so to the south (e.g., sites 30 and 31 in the Phi Phi Islands and site 24 at Racha Yai), were especially rich in target fish biomass (Table 19). These sites were characterized by large numbers of fusiliers (Caesionidae), surgeonfishes (Acanthuridae), parrotfishes (Scaridae) and barracuda (Sphyraenidae). Koh Huyong (site 20), the southernmost island in the Similan group, was also a stand-out in terms of its richness in all three data categories (Table 19).
Table 19. Top-ranking sites for target fishes in three data categories, western Thailand 2005
Rank 1 2 3 4 5
No. target Species Site Value 20 75 15 66 12 65 6 63 856 10 14
Approx. fish count Site value 30 2,233 20 2,223 31 1,997 4 1,438 3 1,416
Biomass (ton/km2) Site value 30 530.32 24 423.08 31 377.95 20 337.82 21 268.60
Intra-regional comparison of data Sites were grouped into geographic areas and amount of impact from the tsunami (Table 20) to elucidate whether any significant variation existed in the data. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were used to compare the different treatment means.
Table 20. Categorization of sites (Treatment groups) in western Thailand 2005
Geographic area groups Sites 1. Surin Islands 1-10 2. Similan Islands 11-20 3. Phuket & Racha Yai 21-24 4. Phi Phi Islands 2531 Tsunami impact groups Sites* 1. No or light impact 1-3, 5, 10, 19-20, 22, 31 2. Moderate impact 4, 11-12, 14-17, 21, 24-25, 27 3. Heavy impact 6, 8, 23, 28-30 *For various reasons, sites 7, 9, 13, 18, 26 and 31 were not surveyed for reef fish biomass.
For the geographic area groups, the ANOVA tests revealed a significant difference only for the mean number of target species recorded (Table 21). Sites in the Similan Islands had a higher average diversity of target fish species than those from the other three geographic areas which were all more or less even (Table 21). As far as the biomass and fish count data were concerned, no significant differences were observed between the different
50
areas indicating a degree of geographical homogeneity for these particular data categories (Table 21). One interesting trend in the data, however, was the lower average biomass obtained for sites in the Surin and Similan Islands as opposed to those at Phuket, Racha Yai and Phi Phi (Table 21). While an ANOVA test on these data revealed no significant difference, the results obtained show a trend that warrants further discussion. This result reflects a possible difference in fishing pressure in the different geographic areas. In theory, all of the sites visited on the present survey fall within the boundaries of Marine National Parks and are therefore protected from the impacts of fishing. The status of the reefs here is mostly respected by local fishers; however, the protection is by no means absolute, and illegal fishing activity remains a constant threat. National Park authorities do their best to police these activities but it is a difficult task given the vast area needed to be patrolled. This burden is reduced, however, by the conspicuous presence of the tourism industry throughout the region (e.g., resorts and dive boats) which has a vested interest in the protection of the coral reef environment and which thus helps to provide a deterrent to would-be illegal fishers. The data suggest that fishing pressure could be higher in the Surin and Similan Islands than it is in the areas further south, and the relative isolation of these two islands groups could explain this. Being situated much further away from Phuket (the main gateway for tourists to the region) they consequently do not receive nearly the same amount of tourist traffic. Comparatively speaking, it would be easier for fishers to ply their trade on the reefs in these remote islands without fear of being caught as opposed to the heavily touristed islands nearer Phuket. Furthermore, the Surin Islands have actually been home to a small community of Moken people or sea gypsies for the past few decades. These semi-nomadic seafarers subsist mainly on shellfish foraged from shallow reef flats, but they target fish on the reefs to some extent as well. The combination of these factors may certainly account for the lower average target fish biomass at sites in the Surin Islands and to a lesser extent in the Similans as well (Table 21).
51
Table 21. Summary of site total target fish data grouped by geographic area including results of ANOVA tests, western Thailand 2005.
Geographic Group (treatment) 1. Surin Islands 2. Similan Islands 3. Phuket & Racha Yai 4. Phi Phi Islands Summary of ANOVA results
*
n 8 8 4 6
Mean values for site total ( standard error) No. target approx. Biomass Species fish count (ton/km2) 47.5 ( 3.5) 58.4 ( 3.3) 48.0 ( 1.1) 45.5 ( 1.6)
Sig.* (P: 0.022, df: 22,3)
1,018.6 ( 119.1) 935.7 ( 215.6) 883.5 ( 169.4) 1,231.0 ( 288.9)

N. Sig.^ (P: 0.708, df: 22,3)
144.7 ( 28.1) 175.3 ( 31.0) 275.2 ( 52.0) 257.6 ( 68.7)

N. Sig.^ (P: 0.153, df: 22,3)
- Significant difference between treatment means at a 95% level of confidence ^ - Difference not significant Despite the apparent differences in the mean site total values for both biomass and fish counts between sites that were grouped by their level of tsunami impact (e.g., higher fish count in non-impacted sites and higher biomass in heavily impacted sites), statistical testing using ANOVA methods failed to show these differences to be significant (Table 22). This wasnt surprising given the lack of replication within the treatment groups. In order to facilitate a more meaningful comparison of the data, a far more comprehensive survey with rigorous site selection and replication (beyond the scope of this rapid assessment) would need to be carried out.
Table 22. Summary of site total target fish data grouped by level of tsunami impact including results of ANOVA tests, western Thailand 2005.
Tsunami Impact Group (treatment) 1. No or light impact 2. Moderate impact 3. Heavy impact Summary of ANOVA results
n 9 11 6
Mean values for site total ( standard error) No. target approx. Biomass Species fish count (ton/km2) 50.1 ( 3.6) 51.3 ( 2.7) 49.5 ( 3.4)
N. Sig. ^ (P: 0.927, df: 23,2)
1,244.8 ( 181.4 ( 37.3) 181.2) 852.0 ( 110.8) 180.3 ( 31.4) 996.7 ( 268.6) 265.1 ( 58.4)
N. Sig. ^ (P: 0.243, df: 23,2) N. Sig. ^ (P: 0.315, df: 23,2)
- Difference between treatment means not significant at a 95% level of confidence
52
Comparison of western Thailand with other areas The average site total biomass for the entire area surveyed (200.26 23.0 ton/km2) compares extremely favorably with other areas in which similar studies have been conducted. It was considerably higher than in Milne Bay Province (Papua New Guinea), the Togian-Banggai Islands (Sulawesi, Indonesia) and the Busuanga-Culion Islands (Philippines) (Fig. 12). Only the Raja Ampat Islands (West Papua, Indonesia) has more biomass per site on average but the difference is marginal (Fig. 12). There is little doubt that the richness of fish stocks in western Thailand is largely attributable to the protected status of the majority of reefs in this region.
Since the 1980s large portions of Thailands Andaman Sea coast and offshore islands have been designated as Marine National Parks. Consequently, negative human impacts on the reef environment, such as overfishing and the use of destructive fishing techniques like dynamiting, that are so prevalent in other parts of southeast Asia (e.g., the Philippines and parts of Indonesia) are very limited in this part of Thailand. As previously mentioned in the discussion, the proliferation of the tourism industry has played a role in preventing fish stocks from being overfished. This is certainly not the case for many Marine Protected Areas in other parts of southeast Asia where restrictions are commonly flaunted by the fishing sector in full knowledge that local park authorities are insufficiently resourced to effectively police their illegal activities. In western Thailand fishing activities tend to concentrate on trawling grounds lying further offshore in deeper water. A further explanation for the high average target fish biomass observed at sites during the present survey could be the prevailing demands of the Thai marketplace which places a much greater economic value on fishes such as cods and groupers (Serranidae), snappers (Lutjanidae) and emperors (Lethrinidae) at the expense of a number of families that typically make a substantial contribution to target fish biomass on coral reefs. Abundant families such as parrotfishes (Scaridae), surgeonfishes (Acanthuridae) and wrasses (Labridae) are ignored for the most part by Thai fishers, and other families such as rabbitfishes (Siganidae), squirrelfishes (Holocentridae) and monacle bream (Nemipteridae) are not targeted at all (U. Satapoomin, pers. comm.). All of these fishes are targeted and exploited to a varying extent in areas such as the Togian-Banggai Islands (Sulawesi, Indonesia) and the Busuanga-Culion Islands (Philippines), which helps to explain why the biomass is so much lower at sites in those areas compared to those in western Thailand, the Raja Ampat Islands (Indonesia) and Milne Bay Province (PNG) where they are not targeted (Fig. 12).
53
Figure 12. Comparison of average site total target fish biomass between different regions of southeast Asia.
(sources: La Tanda 2002, # Allen et al. 2003, * La Tanda 1998, ^ Ingles, 1998)
250
200
Biomass (ton/km )
150
100
200.26
208.97
123.56 50 66.19 16.94 0 Western Thailand, 2005 Raja Ampat Is., Indonesia, 2002 Milne Bay Province, PNG, 2000 # Togian-Banggai Is., Indonesia, 1998 * Busuanga-Culion Is., Philippines, 1998 ^
Sites in Thailand appear to have a much greater mean density of target serranids per site (9.31 individuals/1,000 m2), almost twice that of the nearest ranked location, the Raja Ampat Islands (Fig. 13). However, typical of other locations that have been surveyed, their average size was relatively small (about 25 cm). Larger groupers over 50 cm in length were encountered only occasionally (mainly coral trout, Plectropomus spp.).
Figure 13. Comparison of average density of groupers (Serranidae) at sites for past and present survey in southeast Asia.
(sources: La Tanda 2002, # Allen et al. 2003, * La Tanda 1998, ^ Ingles, 1998)
12
10
Density (n/1000m )
9.31 4
5.44 2 3.03 2.69 2.87
0 Western Thailand, 2005 Raja Ampat Is., Indonesia, 2002 Milne Bay Province, PNG, 2000# Togian-Banggai Is., Indonesia, 1998* Busuanga-Culion Is., Philippines, 1998^
54
The Napoleon Wrasse (Cheilinus undulatus), a species held in high esteem in the live-fish restaurant trade in major centers of southeast Asia (not in Thailand), is reported to be extremely uncommon in the study area. Underwater sightings are extremely infrequent and only two specimens, a large 80 cm adult and a juvenile, were observed during the present survey. Ironically, both specimens were recorded at Site 21 in Patong Bay on Phuket, situated just a few hundred meters offshore from one of the most popular and heavily utilized tourist beaches in the entire region.
Conclusions The coral reefs of the Andaman coast and offshore islands of Thailand support a rich diversity and abundance of target fishes. Coral reef fish stocks here are remarkably robust and compare very favorably with other areas of southeast Asia. Of five similar surveys that have taken place in recent years, only the Raja Ampat Islands (West Papua, Indonesia) had more biomass of target fishes per site on average. This illustrates the effectiveness of the protection offered to fish stocks by the Marine National Parks that have been in place in Thailand over the past twenty-five years.
The impact of the Sumatran tsunami on the reefs was scattered and variable, and the effect on coral reef fish stocks appears to have been negligible. A fair level of homogeneity exists for fish biomass on reefs throughout this region as evidenced by statistical tests comparing the average target fish biomass of sites grouped according to their level of tsunami impact. A comprehensive follow-up survey with more rigorous site replication would be required, however, to conclusively back up this assertion. It is also worth noting that in the wake of the tsunami, fishing pressure along the western coast of Thailand is likely to be reduced, a result of both the tragic loss of life amongst local fishermen and the decimation that was wrought on the local fishing fleet. It is estimated that in excess of 4,500 fishing boats were damaged along the Thailand coast and in many cases there is very little hope that affected fishermen will be able to meet the costs of repairs or replacement to their equipment (Sirisawat 2005). Ironically, it therefore seems that fish stocks throughout the region may in fact increase to levels not seen for many years prior to this catastrophe.
55
References Allen, G.R., Steene, R., Humann, P. & DeLoach, R. (2003) Reef Fish Identification Tropical Pacific. New World Publications/Odyssey Publishing, 480 pp.
Allen, M., Kinch, J. & Werner, T. (2003) Chapter 5. Living coral reef resources of Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea. In: A rapid marine biodiversity assessment of Milne Bay Province, Papua New GuineaSurvey II (2000) (Allen, G.R., Kinch, J.P., McKenna, S.A. & Seeto, P. eds.). RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment 29. Conservation International, Washington DC: pp. 56-74. Dartnall, H.J. & Jones, M. (1986) A manual of survey methods of living resources in coastal areas. ASEAN-Australia Cooperative Programme on Marine Science HandBook. Townsville: Australian Institute of Marine Science. 167 pp. Ingles, J. (1998) Fisheries of the Calalmianes Islands, Palawan Province, Philippines. Report Prepared for Conservation International: Washington. La Tanda (1998) Species composition, distribution and abundance of coral fishes in the Togean and Banggai Islands. In: A Rapid Marine Biodiversity Assessment of the Togian and Banggai Islands, Sulawesi, Indonesia (Werner, T.B., Allen, G.R. & McKenna, S. eds.). Bulletin of the Rapid Assessment Program, Conservation International, Washington, DC. La Tanda (2002) Chapter 4. A basic stock assessment of economically important coral reef fishes of the Raja Ampat Islands, Papua Province, Indonesia. In: A marine rapid assessment of the Raja Ampat Islands, Papua Province, Indonesia. (McKenna, S.A., Allen, G.R. & Suryadi, S., eds.). RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment 22. Conservation International, Washington, DC: 58-65 and 186-191. Lieske, E. & Myers, R. (1994) Coral Reef Fishes Indo-Pacific & Caribbean. HarperCollins Publishers, London, 400 pp. Obura, D. & Abdulla, A. (2005) Assessment of tsunami impacts on the marine environment of the Seychelles. CORDIO - News. Retrieved February 27, 2005 from http://www.cordio.org/news_article.asp?id=18 Sparre, P. & Venema, S. (1992) Introduction to tropical fish stock assessment. Part 1. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 306. FAO, Rome.
56
Molluscs of the Phuket region, Thailand

Fred E. Wells Summary Molluscs were collected at 31 sites near Phuket, Thailand, from 16-30 April 2005. As many habitats as possible were examined at each site to develop as comprehensive a species list as possible of the molluscs of the area in the limited time available. A total of 346 species of molluscs was identified at least to genus: 274 gastropods, 67 bivalves, 3 cephalopods, and 2 chitons. It was estimated that 380 species were collected in total. Recorded diversity of marine molluscs in Phuket was lower than expected considering Phukets proximity to the widely acknowledged center of marine biodiversity in the coral triangle region (Indonesia, Philippines, and New Guinea). The relatively low diversity was attributed to the uniformity of habitats sampled. A mean of 60.3 species was recorded per site. The range was from 21 to 91 species. The most abundant species at each site were generally arcid bivalves, Lithophaga spp. and Pedum spondyloidaeum, which live in the coral. Other common subtidal species were the large oyster Hyotissa hyotis and the coral dwelling gastropod Coralliophila neritoides. Common species in the intertidal included the oysters (Saccostrea cuccullata) and the nerite, Nerita costata. Sites with both the largest and smallest recorded mollusc diversity varied geographically. Most of the sites with high diversity were in the Phi Phi Islands, while sites with low diversity were concentrated in the Surin Islands. The 10 sites in the Similian Islands had variable diversity. The two sites on Patong Bay had relatively high diversity. The geographical distributions of 208 species are analyzed. The vast majority (90.4%) of the species are widespread Indo-West Pacific forms; 13 species (6.2%) are regarded as being characteristic of the Western Pacific. Only 7 species (3.5%) are restricted to the Indian Ocean. Very few living individuals of commercially important mollusc species (Tridacna, Strombus, Pinna, Pinctada, and Lambis) were found, and they occurred widely at the sites surveyed. Populations of all of these groups were small, and commercial quantities were never found. The most common species in this group was the giant clam Tridacna squamosa. Very little direct evidence could be found of damage to mollusc populations as a result of the tsunami. This was restricted to two areas where the tsunami had the greatest effect. In regions where Porites bommies were overturned there were undoubtedly some losses due to debris being thrown about in the water. Molluscs living in or attached to the upturned coral are likely to die over time as they are no longer in their proper habitat. In some heavily affected areas portions of the populations of intertidal species of molluscs were washed off the rocks and died.
57
Introduction Since October 1997, the Washington, D.C.-based Conservation International has conducted a series of Marine Rapid Assessment (Marine RAP) surveys of the fauna of coral reefs in the Indo-West Pacific. The surveys have been centered in the coral triangle of the western Pacific Ocean. The goal of the expeditions has been to develop information on the biodiversity of three key animal groups: corals, fish, and molluscs, for use in assessing the importance of the reefs for conservation purposes. Surveys have occurred in the following areas: Milne Bay, Papua New Guinea (two surveys); Calamian Islands, Philippines; Togian and Banggai Islands, Sulawesi, Indonesia; and Raja Ampat Islands, West Papua, Indonesia. Results on molluscs are described by Wells (1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005; Wells and Kinch 2003). In turn, the Conservation International trips are based on a parallel sampling of coral reefs in northwestern Australia and adjoining areas undertaken by the Western Australian Museum (See Table 6 for a list of sites surveyed).
The present report describes molluscs collected on a similar survey undertaken for the National Geographic Magazine by the New England Aquarium to assess the effects of the 26 December 2004 tsunami in the area near Phuket, Thailand. While the Phuket region was not surveyed for molluscs in this manner before the tsunami, data collected during the Conservation International and Western Australian Museum surveys provides a solid basis for assessing the effects of the tsunami. As the basic building blocks of the reef, corals are an obvious group to include in surveys of this type. Fish are also an important component because of their ecological and economic importance in the system. Molluscs are included for several reasons. They dominate diversity in many marine systems, including coral reefs. Molluscs can be used as a surrogate for measuring the diversity of invertebrates other than corals in the reefs. With their high diversity, often high density, and variety of lifestyles, molluscs are ecologically important to trophic flows within the system. Many groups, such as giant clams, spider shells, trochus, pearl oysters, cephalopods and others, are economically important. For all of these reasons, molluscs have been included in the Western Australian Museum and Conservation International surveys.
Methods The survey was conducted from 17 to 30 April 2005, with a total of 31 sites being examined. All sites were surveyed by SCUBA diving. Collecting times ranged from 45 to 104 minutes; 26 of the 31 dives were between 75 and 104 minutes. Each site was examined by starting at depths of 10-25 m and working up the reef slope. Most of the time was spent in shallow (<6 m) water, as the greatest diversity of molluscs occurs in this region; the shallow depth also maximized diving time. To obtain as many species as possible, all habitats encountered at each site were examined for molluscs, including living coral, the upper and lower surfaces of dead coral, shallow and deep sandy habitats, and intertidal habitats. For the same reason, no differentiation was made between species collected alive or as dead shells, as the dead shells
58
would have been living at the site. A beach drift collection was made at site 27 by decreasing the dive time. While this collecting approach allows the rapid assessment of a variety of mollusc species, it is by no means complete. For example, no attempt was made to break open the corals to search for boring species, such as Lithophaga spp. Similarly, arcid bivalves burrowing into the corals were not thoroughly examined. Furthermore, micro molluscs were not sampled. However, the sampling method is the same used for all six of the Conservation International Marine RAP trips and surveys by the Western Australian Museum. Therefore, the sampling results provide a good indication of diversity relative to previous surveys. A variety of standard shell books and field guides were available for reference during the expedition and were used for identification: Abbott and Dance (1991); Debelius (2001); Swennen et al. (2001); Wells and Bryce (2000); and Wilson (1993/94). Littoraria were identified according to Reid (1986). Unfortunately, no specimens could be retained for permanent museum collections. All of the gastropods, chitons, and cephalopods were sorted to species and provisionally identified to genus, or in most cases, species. All bivalves were also sorted to species, but not all were identified. The relative proportions of gastropods and bivalves on the most recent survey of Madagascar (Wells 2005) were used to estimate the total number of species collected in the Phuket survey.
Results A total of 346 species of molluscs was identified at least to genus: 274 gastropods, 67 bivalves, 3 cephalopods, and 2 chitons (Table 23; Appendix VI). Overall, about 82% of the species present at each station were identified to genus or species. It was estimated that a total of 380 species were collected. This indicates that about 90% of all species were identified at least to genus.
Table 23. Taxonomic composition of mollusc species identified from sites off Phuket, Thailand.
Class Polyplacophora Gastropoda Bivalvia Cephalopoda Totals
Families 2 51 22 2 77
Genera 2 101 46 2 151
Species 2 274 67 3 346
The most abundant species at each site were generally arcid bivalves, the burrowing bivalves Lithophaga spp., and the scallop Pedum spondyloidaeum which lives in the coral. Other common subtidal species were the large oyster Hyotissa hyotis and the coral dwelling gastropod Coralliophila neritoides. The oyster Saccostrea cuccullata was abundant on most intertidal rocks, and the nerite Nerita costata was common.
59
Table 24. Total number of mollusc species collected at each site near Phuket, Thailand.
Site
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Number of species 49 74 49 43 54 57 40 68 60 45 58
Site 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Site 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Number of species 91 67 68 71 76 68 83 52 45
There were 1871 species records made at the 31 stations, giving a mean of 60.3 species per site; the range was from 21 to 91 species (Table 24). Sites with both the largest and smallest recorded mollusc diversity varied geographically (Tables 25 and 26). Most of the sites with high diversity were in the Phi Phi Islands (Sites 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 29), but sites 30 and 31 were of relatively low diversity. Sites with low diversity were concentrated in the Surin Islands (Sites 1, 3, 4, 5, and 7), but Site 2 was of relatively high diversity. The 10 sites in the Similian Islands were variable: Site 12 had a high diversity; Sites 13, 15, 19 had a low diversity; and the remainder were intermediate. The two sites (21 and 22) on Phuket Island had relatively high diversity. Site 21 on the south side of Patong Bay had 79 species, and was the third most diverse. Site 22 on the north side of Patong Bay had 66 species, and was just outside the top ten sites. Fantasea Rock (Site 13) had the lowest diversity, 21 species. The site is an isolated granite rock peak which ends 6-7 m below the surface. The open, exposed rock face provided few habitats for molluscs, and coral diversity was so low that it was not even recorded.
60
Table 25. Ten sites observed to have the richest mollusc diversity among the 31 sites surveyed in near Phuket, Thailand.
Site 23 29 21 27 12 2 26 8 25 28
Location Racha Yai (near Racha Resort) Lana Bay, Phi Phi Don I. Patong Bay (south side) Ton Zai Bay, Phi Phi Don I. Koh Similan (below Sail Rock), Similan Is. Koh Chi, Surin I. Koh Bida Nok, Phi Phi Is. Koh Tachai (east side) Maya Bay, Phi Phi Le Island Yong Kasem Bay, Phi Phi Don I.
Number of species 91 83 79 76 75 74 71 68 68 68
Table 26. Eleven sites observed to have the lowest mollusc diversity among the 31 sites surveyed in near Phuket, Thailand.
Site 5 19 30 15 1 3 31 10 4 7 13
Location Sutep Bay, N. Surin I. Koh Payang (NW end), Similan Is. Koh Phai (west side) Koh Payu (near north tip), Similan Is. Sai Dang Beach, N. Surin I. Me Yai Bay, N. Surin I. Ton Zai Bay near Hin Phae, Phi Phi Don I. Koh Bon Chong Khad Bay, N. Surin I. Richelieu Rock, Surin I. Fantasea Rock
Not enough is known about the distributions of many mollusc species collected in the Phuket area to place them within a geographical context. Table 27 shows the distributions of 208 species, as recorded in the literature. The vast majority (90.4%) of the species are widespread Indo-West Pacific forms; 13 species (6.2%) are regarded as being characteristic of the Western Pacific. Only 7 species (3.5%) are restricted to the Indian Ocean. Phillidiopsis phiphiensis is known only from the Phiphi Islands.
61
Table 27. Geographical distributions of selected species recorded near Phuket, Thailand.
Geographical Range Indo-West Pacific Western Pacific Ocean Eastern Indian Ocean Indian Ocean Indian Ocean-Western Pacific Totals
Number of species 188 13 2 4 1 208
Percentage of species 90.4 6.2 1.0 2.0 0.5 100.1
A number of commercially important edible mollusc species occurred widely at the sites surveyed, including spider shells (Lambis chiragra), conchs (Strombus luhuanus), murex shells (Murex ramosus), pearl oysters (Pinctada margaritifera), and giant clams (Tridacna spp.). However, commercial quantities were never found of any species. The most commonly found species was Tridacna squamosa. In contrast to some of the previous surveys, fishermen were never seen searching for these taxa. However, at night up to 30 squid boats could be seen fishing in the open water for squid using bright lights to attract the squid. Loligo constitute most of the catch of these boats.
62
Table 28. Numbers of mollusc species collected during previous Marine RAP surveys undertaken by Conservation International (CI) and similar surveys by the Western Australian Museum.
Location Collecting days Present survey, 12 Phuket area CI Marine RAP Surveys Northern 16 Madagascar Raja Ampat 15 Islands Togian-Banggai 11 Islands, Indonesia Calamian Group, 16 Philippines Milne Bay, Papua 19 New Guinea Milne Bay, Papua 11 New Guinea Western Australian Museum Surveys Cocos (Keeling) 20 Islands
Mollusc species 380 (estimate)
Reference
525 665 541 651 638 643
Wells 2005 Wells 2002 Wells 2001 Wells 2000 Wells 1998 Wells & Kinch 2003 Abbott 1950, Maes 1967, Wells 1994 Iredale 1917, Wells et al. 1990, Wells & SlackSmith 2000 Wells 1993, Willan 1993 Wells 1993 Willan 1993 Wilson 1985, Wells & SlackSmith 1986 Wells & SlackSmith 1986 Preston 1914, Wells et al. 2000 Slack-Smith & Bryce 1995 Slack-Smith & Bryce 1996 Wells & Bryce 1997 Shepherd 1984
Christmas Island (Indian Ocean)
12 plus accumulated data
380 on survey; total known fauna of 610 species 313 on survey; approx. 520 total
Ashmore Reef Cartier Island Hibernia Reef Scott/Seringapata m Reef Rowley Shoals Montebello Islands Muiron Islands and Exmouth Gulf Bernier and Dorre Islands, Shark Bay Abrolhos Islands Other surveys Chagos Islands
12 7 6 8
433 381 294 279
7 19 12 12
260 633 655 425
Accumulated data
492
Accumulated data
384
63
Discussion A moderate (380 species) diversity of molluscs was found in the Phuket area (Table 28). Although the area is near the centre of the coral triangle of highest diversity, fewer mollusc species were recorded near Phuket than in any of the surveys for Conservation International (CI). The number of species recorded in the CI surveys ranged from 525 in Madagascar to 665 in the Raja Ampat Islands, Indonesia. While the number of collecting days in these trips was sometimes higher, the average length of the trips was similar to the Phuket survey. The habitats surveyed near Phuket were relatively uniform. Most were fringing reef systems; there were no atolls. No areas subjected to high swell conditions were examined. In particular, most of the sites were in water that was relatively clear. There were no stations near mangroves or in areas of high turbidity. It is concluded that the relatively low diversity of molluscs near Phuket was due to the relatively low habitat diversity. In this regard, the Phuket survey was similar to the surveys conducted by the Western Australian (WA) Museum at Christmas Island, the Cocos (Keeling) Islands and the reefs on the outer shelf of northwestern Australia (Table 28).
As in the other surveys, the molluscs of the Phuket area were overwhelmingly (90.4%) widespread Indo-Pacific species that occur in both oceans. Only 3.5% were species restricted to the Indian Ocean. One interesting feature is that 6.2% were species typically regarded as being Western Pacific species that also extend up the west side of the Malaysian peninsula for varying distances. Some of these species had previously been recorded near Phuket while others had not. The Phuket area is similar to the Cocos (Keeling) Islands in having a small proportion of typically Western Pacific species (Maes 1967; Wells 1994). Other sections of this report on the coral damage suffered as a result of the tsunami demonstrated that damage varied considerably: some sites had no or minor damage, and a few sites sustained major damage to the corals. Even at sites with major damage the effect was patchy; often areas of major damage were very near places where there was no or little discernable damage. The damage to molluscs was even more subtle. At most sites no loss of molluscs could be determined. Most of the species are cryptic, living under rocks or dead coral slabs, and are encountered as one or a few individuals on a dive. Since both dead and live shells are recorded to estimate biodiversity, there is no quantitative way of estimating which were killed by the tsunami. Undoubtedly some individuals were killed by debris moving about in affected areas, but this would have been largely restricted to areas of considerable damage. At several sites, large Porites bommies had been dislodged and even completely overturned. Normally the bommies have a large vertical calcareous base with no living tissue. The upper surface of the bommie has the living coral tissue on the outer surface of a ball-like structure. Small crevices in the surface provide habitat for a number of species of molluscs, including arcid bivalves, the burrowing bivalves Lithophaga spp., and the scallop Pedum spondyloidaeum which lives in the coral, and the large oyster Hyotissa hyotis and the coral dwelling gastropod Coralliophila neritoides. All of
64
these species live burrowed into or permanently cemented onto the coral. When the bommie is overturned, the attached molluscs are also overturned. Some are then smothered by sand, and others occupy an unnatural habitat near the sediment, and are upside down from their normal position, and it is likely that they will die. However, as described above, these are the most common living molluscs found on the coral reef, and the losses will be restricted to a very small proportion of these populations. The overall effect will be negligible. Station 23 at Racha Yai was near the head of a narrow bay which funneled the tsunami into a sand beach with a resort hotel, the Racha Resort, causing considerable loss of human life and damage to the resort. The center of the bay at the site surveyed had a depth of about 7 m composed of sand and scattered Porites bommies. The sides were granite rock faces, pieces of which have broken off over the years and lie at the base of the steeply sloping rock faces. The station was the richest surveyed, with 91 species of molluscs recorded. Like many other sites, the intertidal zone had numerous intertidal nerites, Nerita costata, and the very shallow subtidal had smaller numbers of other snails such as Engina mendicaria, Thais aculeata and T. granulata. The bottom near the granite base had considerable numbers of dead N. costata and lesser numbers of the other species. It appeared that these animals were washed off the rocks by the tsunami and perished. Other individuals of the same species were in more protected positions, and survived unharmed. The shoreline had large numbers of the oyster Saccostrea cuccullata, which appear to have survived except for occasional individuals which were struck by debris carried about by the tsunami. Again, the overall effect on populations of these species was negligible. This parallels the findings by Sanpanich and Wells (2005) on littorinid snails examined at intertidal sites in mangroves and on rocky shores along the Andaman Sea coastline of Thailand.
65
References Abbott, R. T. 1950. Molluscan fauna of the Cocos-Keeling Islands. Bulletin of the Raffles Museum 22: 68-98.
Abbott, R. T. and Dance, S. P. 1991. Compendium of Seashells. American Malacologists, Melbourne, Florida. Debelius, H. 2001. Nudibranchs and Sea Slugs Indo-Pacific Guide. IKAN Unterwasserarchiv, Frankfurt. Iredale, T. 1917. On some new species of marine molluscs from Christmas Island, Indian Ocean. Proceedings of the Malacological Society of London 12: 331-334. Maes, V. O. 1967. The littoral marine molluscs of Cocos-Keeling Islands (Indian Ocean). Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Science of Philadelphia 119: 93-217. Preston, H. B. 1914. Description of new species of land and marine shells from the Montebello Islands, Western Australia. Proceedings of the Malacological Society of London 11: 13-18. Reid, D. G. 1986. The littorinid mollusks of mangrove forests in the IndoPacific region the genus Littoraria. London: British Museum (Natural History). Sanpanich, K. and Wells, F. E. 2005. Effects of the 26 December 2004 tsunami on littorinid molluscs on the Andaman Sea coast near Phuket, Thailand. This report. Sheppard, A. L. S. 1984. The molluscan fauna of Chagos (Indian Ocean) and an analysis of its broad distribution patterns. Coral Reefs 3: 43-50. Slack-Smith, S. M. and Bryce, C. W. 1995. Molluscs. In: Hutchins, J. B., SlackSmith, S. M., Marsh, L. M., Jones, D. S., Bryce, C. W., Hewitt, M. A. and Hill, A. (eds.). Marine biological survey of Bernier and Dorre Islands, Shark Bay. Western Australian Museum and Department of Conservation and Land Management, manuscript report. Pp. 57-81. Slack-Smith, S. M. and Bryce, C. W. 1996. Molluscs. In: Hutchins, J. B., SlackSmith, S. M., Bryce, C. W., Morrison, S. M. and Hewitt, M. A. (eds.). Marine biological survey of the Muiron Islands and the eastern shore of Exmouth Gulf, Western Australia. Western Australian Museum and Department of Conservation and Land Management, manuscript report. Pp. 64-100. Swennen, C., Moolenbeek, R. G., Ruttanadakul, N., Hobbelink, H., Dekker, H., and Hajisamae, S. 2001. The molluscs of the southern Gulf of Thailand. Biodiversity research and Training Program, Bangkok, Thailand.
66
Wells, F. E. 1993. Part IV. Molluscs. In: Berry, P. F. (ed.). Faunal Survey of Ashmore Reef, Western Australia. Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement 44: 25-44. Wells, F. E. 1994. Marine Molluscs of the Cocos (Keeling) Islands. Atoll Research Bulletin 410: 1-22. Wells, F. E. 1998. Marine Molluscs of Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea. In: Werner, T. and G. R. Allen. (eds.). A rapid biodiversity assessment of the coral reefs of Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea. RAP Working Papers Number 11. Washington, DC: Conservation International. Pp. 35-38. Wells, F. E. 2001. Molluscs of the Calamianes Islands, Palawan Province, Philippines. In: Werner, T. B. and G. R. Allen (eds.). A rapid marine biodiversity assessment of the Calamianes Islands, Palawan Province, Philippines. RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment 17. Washington, DC: Conservation International. Pp. 27-30; 81-94. Wells, F. E. 2002. Molluscs of the Gulf of Tomini, Indonesia. In: Allen, G. R. and S. A. McKenna (eds.). A rapid biodiversity assessment of the coral reefs of the Togean and Banggai Islands, Sulawesi, Indonesia. RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment 20. Washington, DC: Conservation International. Pp. 38-43; 81-97. Wells, F. E. 2002. Molluscs of the Raja Ampat Islands, Papua Province, Indonesia. In: McKenna, S.A., G. R. Allen and S. Suryadi. 2002. A marine rapid assessment of the Raja Ampat Islands, Papua Province, Indonesia. RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment 22. Washington, DC: Conservation International. Pp. 37-45; 113-131. Wells, F. E. 2005. Molluscs of noprthwestern Madagascar. In: McKenna, S.A. and Allen, G.R. A rapid marine biodiversity assessment of the coral reefs of northwestern Madagascar. RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment 31. Washington, DC: Conservation International. Pp. 32-38; 90-101. Wells, F. E. and C. W. Bryce. 1997. A preliminary checklist of the marine macromolluscs of the Houtman Abrolhos Islands, Western Australia. In: Wells, F. E. (ed). Proceedings of the seventh international marine biological workshop: The marine flora and fauna of the Houtman Abrolhos Islands, Western Australia. Western Australian Museum, Perth. Pp. 362-384. Wells, F. E. and C. W. Bryce. 2000. Seashells of Western Australia. 1997. Western Australian Museum, Perth. Wells, F. E., Bryce, C. W., Clarke, J. E. and Hansen, G. M. 1990. Christmas Shells: The Marine Molluscs of Christmas Island (Indian Ocean). Christmas Island: Christmas Island Natural History Association.
67
Wells, F. E. and Kinch, J. 2003. Molluscs of Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea . In: Allen, G. R., Kinch, J. P., McKenna, S. A. and Seeto, P. (eds.). A rapid marine biodiversity assessment of Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea Survey II (2000). RAP Bulletin of Biological Assessment 29. Washington, DC: Conservation International. Wells, F. E. and Slack-Smith, S. M. 1986. Part IV. Molluscs. In: Berry, P. F. (ed.). Faunal Survey of the Rowley Shoals and Scott Reef, Western Australia. Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement 25: 41-58. Wells, F. E. and Slack-Smith, S. M. 2000. Molluscs of Christmas Island. In: Berry, P. F. and Wells, F. E. (eds.). Survey of the marine fauna of the Montebello Islands, Western Australia and Christmas Island, Indian Ocean. Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement 59: 103-116. Wells, F. E., Slack-Smith, S. M. and Bryce, C. W. 2000. Molluscs of the Montebello Islands. In: Berry, P. F. and Wells, F. E. (eds.). Survey of the marine fauna of the Montebello Islands, Western Australia and Christmas Island, Indian Ocean. Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement 59: 29-46. Willan, R. C. 1993. Molluscs. In: Russell, B. C. and Hanley, J. R. (eds.). The marine biological resources and heritage values of Cartier and Hibernia Reefs, Timor Sea. Northern Territory Museum, manuscript report. Wilson, B. R. 1985. Notes on a brief visit to Seringapatam Atoll, North West Shelf, Australia. Atoll Research Bulletin 292: 83-100. Wilson, B.R. 1993/94. Australian marine shells prosobranch gastropods. Odyssey Publishing, Kallaroo, Western Australia.
68
Effects of the 26 December 2004 tsunami on littorinid molluscs on the Andaman Sea coast near Phuket, Thailand
Kitithorn Sanpanich and Fred E. Wells
Abstract In 2002, a study of the distribution of littorinid snails was made at 50 sites in Thailand, both in the Gulf of Thailand and along the Andaman Sea coast. The Phuket region of the Andaman Sea coast was heavily hit by the tsunami of 26 December 2004. As an adjunct to a study of the effects of the tsunami on coral reefs in the Phuket area, a post-tsunami survey was made of six sites previously surveyed for littorinids along the Andaman Sea coast in the Phuket region. Thirteen species of littorinids were recorded in the initial survey; seven species were recollected after the tsunami. The tsunami was not uniform, and depending on local topography affected the shorelines in different ways. The study sites included both rocky shores and mangrove areas. Rocky shores at Kalim Beach and Nang Thong Beach were directly hit by the tsunami. While littorinid populations have decreased considerably, the rocks themselves were not affected. At Nang Thong Beach the adjacent sandy shoreline was extensively modified. The rocky shore of Mai ngarm Bay, Surin Island, has scattered mangroves (Rhizophora apiculata and R. mucronata). The shore was in the lee of the tsunami and there were no visible effects. An extensive mangrove at Laem Mai Kaew was heavily hit by the tsunami and was unrecognizable after the event; all littorinids at the site had disappeared. Mangroves at Pak Meng Beach and Ta la Beach were largely unaffected by the tsunami. Even where littorinid species were present after the tsunami, densities appeared to have decreased. All of the littorinids recorded during the original survey are widespread species, and as far as is known, have a planktonic larval stage. It is expected that residual populations will be able to supply young to recolonize areas where they have been removed by the tsunami. In summary, the immediate effects of the tsunami on the distribution of littorinids on the west coast of Thailand have been patchy, and it is likely that there will be no long-term effects. Introduction On 26 December 2004 the largest tsunami in a century and a half hit the western Indian Ocean. There was extensive loss of human life in an area stretching from Indonesia to India and the Maldive Islands. Estimates of the human toll range over 200,000 and infrastructure damage will affect the devastated areas for many years. While there was no loss of human life or significant damage there, the tsunami was recorded along the coast of Western Australia as far south as Bunbury on the lower west coast of the State (approximately latitude 34S). An unprecedented relief effort was mounted to assist people in the devastated areas.
69
Similarly, a major effort is being undertaken to understand the effects of the tsunami on the marine environment. As part of this effort, the National Geographic Society and the New England Aquarium mounted an expedition to the Phuket area in April 2005 to survey the status of the corals. The survey was able to build on very detailed work undertaken by the Phuket Marine Biological Centre and other organizations immediately after the tsunami. Sanpanich et al. (2004) conducted an extensive survey of the littorinid molluscs of Thailand. Fifty sites were surveyed on both the Gulf of Thailand and on the Andaman Sea coast. Littorinids are intertidal species, living in the upper intertidal region of both rocky shores and mangroves, a portion of the shore that was hit by the full force of the tsunami in exposed areas. The recent survey (sites were examined in 2002) provided an opportunity to examine the effects of the tsunami on littorinid populations.
Materials and methods Snails used in the original survey were collected in 2002 from the west coast of the southern provinces (Ranong, Phang Nga, Phuket, Krabi, Trang, and Satun). Adult specimens of similar sizes were collected by hand in two habitats. Specimens were collected from roots, trunks and leaves in mangrove areas and some animals were collected from nearby mud. Other species were collected in the splash zone of rocky shores along the islands. One to three habitats were examined at each locality. Latitude and longitude were determined by Global Positioning System (GPS). After collection, all specimens were narcotised in a 7.5% (weight/volume) solution of magnesium chloride (Reid 2000, 2001b), then fixed in 10% formalin and retained for later dissection and identification. Representative material of all species is retained in the mollusc collections of the Burapha Institute of Marine Science, Burapha University. Reid (1986; 1989; 2001a; 2001b; Reid and Mak 1998) described the shells and anatomy of these species. Identifications are based on these papers and the identifications of representative material were confirmed by Dr. Reid.
70
Figure 14. Map of Thailand showing study site locations in the Andaman Sea.
Results Thirteen species of littorinids, belonging to three genera, were collected during the original survey (Table 29); seven species were collected during the post-tsunami survey. Details of each site are as follows (Figure 14):
1. Pak Meng Beach, Tumbon Ko Libong, Kun Tung, Trang Province (727'37.6"N; 9920'23.6"E). 6 Dec 2002. The mangrove Avicennia marina 3-5 m high grew in a small area along the side of the seaward canal. There was no change in the physiography of the shoreline caused by the tsunami, which was not strong in this area. Pre-tsunami: L. carinifera, L. bengalensis, and L. strigata. Post-tsunami only L. bengalensis was found on Avicennia marina. 2. Ta la Beach, Tumbon Ban pa klok, Talang, Phuket Province (81'10.8"N; 9824'51.2"E). 7 Dec 2002. A large mangrove area along the mouth of a canal and some isolated seaward plants. The dominant mangroves are
71
Avicennia marina, Rhizophora mucronata, and Sonneratia griffithii 5-7 m high. This area is in the lee of Phuket Island and was not hit by the direct force of the tsunami. Instead, there was only flooding of several meters above normal high tides. Pre-tsunami: L. pallescens, L. strigata, and L. bengalensis, all of which were present post-tsunami on 15 Apr 2005.
3. Kalim Beach, Kratu, Phuket Province (754'11"N; 9817'53.6"E). 7 Dec 2002. A rocky intertidal outcrop at the northern end of a sand beach. Pretsunami Littoraria undulata, N. trochoides, N. vidua, and N. feejeensis were present in large numbers. This area is on the exposed side of Phuket Island and was heavily hit by the tsunami. Post-tsunami on 15 Apr 2005 only L. undulata and N. trochoides were found, both in lower numbers. 4. Mai ngarm Bay, Ko North Surin, Phangnga Province (926'27.7"N; 9752'48.5"E). 20 Apr 2002. A rocky shore on an offshore island, with scattered Rhizophora apiculata and R. mucronata. The shore was in the lee of the tsunami and there were no visible effects. Pre-tsunami: N. trochoides, N. vidua, P. roepstorffiana, L. undulata, L. intermedia, L. scabra, and L. pallescens. Post-tsunami on 18 Apr 2005 only N. trochoides, N. vidua, L. undulata, and L. scabra were found. 5. Nang Thong Beach, Phangnga Province (Figures 15 and 16). Latitude and longitude not measured. This site was not included in Sanpanich et al. (2004) because it was near other sites, but was visited on 3 Sep 2002. The site was a small rocky outcrop on a long sandy beach near a small tidal channel. The area was severely affected by the tsunami, with all houses and other infrastructure destroyed and over 1000 people killed. It has since been bulldozed clean. There was a small tidal channel near the rocky site, but this was removed by the tsunami. Pre-tsunami: L. undulata, N. trochoides and N. vidua. Post-tsunami on 14 Apr 2005 the rocky shore was present, but only N. trochoides remained. 6. Laem Mai Kaew, Ban Ta lei nok, Tumbon Naka, Suksumran sub-amphur, Ranong Province (927'58.5"N; 98 26' 13.9"E). 3 Sep 2002. The site (Figures 17 and 18) was an extensive mangrove about 800 m from the sea at low tide, including Finlaysonia maritima, Ceriops decandra and Aegialites rotundifolia. The site is on the open coast and the tsunami caused extensive damage in this area. There were 26 families living along the beach prior to the tsunami. All infrastructure was destroyed and there was extensive loss of life. Pre-tsunami: L. carinifera, L. melanostoma, L. bengalensis, L. conica, and L. pallescens. Post-tsunami on 14 Apr 2004 the seaward portion of the mangroves, where the study site was, had been destroyed and was not recognizable. No littorinids could be found.
72
Table 29. Littorinids collected at six sites on the Andaman Sea coast of Thailand before and after the tsunami.
Species Littoraria bengalensis (Reid 2001) Littoraria carinifera (Menke 1830) Littoraria conica (Philippi 1846) Littoraria intermedia (Philippi 1846) Littoraria melanostoma (Gray 1839) Littoraria pallescens (Philippi 1846) Littoraria scabra (Linnaeus 1758) Littoraria strigata (Philippi 1846) Littoraria undulata (Gray 1839) Echinolittorina feejeensis (Reeve 1857) Echinolittorina trochoides (Gray 1839) Echinolittorina vidua (Gould 1859) Peasiella roepstorffiana (Nevill 1885)
Pre-tsunami
X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Posttsunami X
X X X X X X
Discussion Thirteen species of littorinids were recorded in the initial survey at the six sites; only seven species were recollected after the tsunami. The tsunami was not uniform, and depending on local topography affected the shorelines in different ways. The study sites included both rocky shores and mangrove areas. Rocky shores at Kalim Beach and Nang Thong Beach were directly hit by the tsunami. While littorinid populations decreased considerably, the rocks themselves were not affected. At Nang Thong Beach the adjacent sandy shoreline was extensively modified. The rocky shore of Mai ngarm Bay, Surin Island, has scattered mangroves (Rhizophora apiculata and R. mucronata). The shore was in the lee of the tsunami and there were no visible effects. An extensive mangrove at Laem Mai Kaew was heavily hit by the tsunami and was unrecognizable after the event; all littorinids at the site had disappeared. Mangroves at Pak Meng Beach and Ta la Beach were largely unaffected by the tsunami. Even where littorinid species were present after the tsunami, densities appeared to have decreased. It appears that even in areas where there were no apparent effects of the tsunami on rocks or mangroves, some of the littorinids were washed off the rocks or trees. Apparent population reductions were likely to have been caused by the tsunami. However, it has been three years since the initial surveys were undertaken at the sites, and the reductions could have been due to some other natural cause. Population densities are naturally variable, and natural reductions could have been due to another cause. Wells (1984) reported substantial declines in the population of Nodilittorina unifasciata (Gray 1826) at Waterman Bay, Western Australia, over a one-year period.
The pattern of differential effects of the tsunami is in agreement with the picture emerging of damage on coral reefs. Only four days after the tsunami an internatinal effort was undertaken to assess impacts on coral reefs on marine national parks in the Andaman Sea area of Thailand (Anonymous
73
2005). Analysis of 174 reef sites revealed that nearly two-thirds (61%) had no or very low (defined as1-10%) impacts. Only 13% of the sites had a heavy impact, in which >50% of the reef was affected. Similarly, Obura and Abdulla (2005) showed that the northern islands of the Seychelles which were most exposed to the tsunami had the greatest damage. Southern islands, which were in the lee of the northern islands, were less affected. Within this pattern reefs with underlying granite were less affected than those with a carbonate base. The fact that only seven of the 13 littorinid species originally found at the six study sites were present after the tsunami is not a cause for concern. The pattern found in the littorinids, as in the reefs, is of different effects in different areas. It is likely that more detailed studies would show that there are populations of the species remaining in the area which can recolonize areas affected by the tsunami. All of the species are widespread (Reid 1985, 1989, 2001a, 2001b; Reid and Mak 1998). The species with the smallest known distribution, Littoraria bengalensis, was described in 2001 (Reid 2001b), and is known from the west coast of Thailand and India. All of the other species have much broader ranges. As far as is known, all of the littorinid species occurring on the west coast of Thailand have a planktonic larval stage, which will allow the ready dispersal of larvae into affected areas. Nothing is known of seasonality of reproduction in these species on the west coast of Thailand, but recent studies at Bang Saen in the Gulf of Thailand have shown that reproduction is seasonal in Littoraria pallescens, L. melanostoma, L. articulata and L. strigata, with the spawning season concentrated in the first few months of the year. In summary, the immediate effects of the tsunami on littorinids in the Phuket area have been patchy, and it is likely there will be no major permanent changes to the distribution of species in the area. .
74
Figure 15. Pre-tsunami photograph of Nang Thong Beach, Phangnga Province.
Figure 16. Post-tsunami photograph of Nang Thong Beach, Phangnga Province.
75
Figure 17. Pre-tsunami photograph of Laem Mai Kaew, Ranong Province.
Figure 18. Post-tsunami photograph of Laem Mai Kaew, Ranong Province.
76
References Anonymous. 2005. Impact assessment of the tsunami on marine resources: Marine national parks in Phang-nga, Krabi Trang, Satun. http://www.tatenews.org accessed 10 Feb 2005.
Obura, D. and Abdulla, A. 2005. Assessment of the tsunami impacts on the marine environment of the seychelles. Report to the Seychelles Ministry of the Environment. IUCN, The World Conservation Union. Reid, D.G. 1986. The littorinid mollusks of mangrove forests in the IndoPacific region the genus Littoraria. London: British Museum (Natural History). Reid, D.G. 1989. Systematic revision of the recent species of Peasiella Nevill, 1885 (Gastropoda: Littorinidae), with notes on the fossil species. The Nautilus 103(2): 43-69. Reid, D.G. 2001a. The genus Nodilittorina von Martens, 1897 (Gastropoda: Littorinidae) in the Indo-Malayan Region. Phuket Marine Biological Center Special Publication 25: 433-449. Reid, D.G. 2001b. New data on the taxonomy and distribution of the genus Littoraria Griffith & Pidgeon, 1834 (Gastropoda: Littorinidae) in Indo-West Pacific mangrove forests. The Nautilus 115: 115-139. Reid, D.G. and Mak, Y. 1998. Additions and corrections to the taxonomy of the genus Peasiella Nevill, 1885 (Gastropoda: Littorinidae). The Nautilus 112: 6-33. Sanpanich, K., Wells, F.E. and Chitramvong, Y. 2004. Distribution of the family Littorinidae (Mollusca: Gastropoda) in Thailand. Records of the Western Australian Museum 22: 241-251.
77
APPENDICES
Appendix I
Maximum Minimum
Hard substrate Hard coral Soft coral
Macro algae Turf algae
Coralline algae Dead coral
Continuous pavement Large blocks Small blocks Rubble Sand
exposure
Reef develop. Visibility
Water temp.
Distance (m) Latitude TOTAL SPECIES
Longtitude
max min Slope HS HC SC MA TA CA DC CP LB SB RBL SN 9 9 109 124 84 118 71 49 98 103 90 104 92 107 104 96 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 86 83 108 95 118 120 92 95 94 105 95 101 62 54 98 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8
EXP RD VIS WT DIST
No. sp (depth) Station No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
No. sp (station)
APPENDICES
Appendix l. Physical and Biological Data for Hard Coral Survey Sites
Sites 1.1 1.2 2.1 2.2 3.1 3.2 4.1 4.2 5.1 5.2 6.1 6.2 7.1 7.2 8.1 8.2 9.1 9.2 10.1 10.2 11.1 11.2 12.1 12.2 14.1 14.2 15.1 15.2 16.1 16.2 17.1 17.2 18.1 18.2 19.1 19.2 20.1 20.2 21.1 21.2 22.1 22.2 23.1 23.2 24.1 24.2 25.1 25.2 26.1 26.2 27.1 27.2 28.2 29.2 30.2 31.2 30 8 27 8 25 8 25 8 12 6 12 6 28 8 29 8 28 8 24 8 26 8 35 8 30 8 33 8 28 8 30 8 27 8 23 8 15 7 15 8 16 8 24 8 19 8 26 8 13 7 14 12 8 13 10 1 10 1 10 1 10 1 6 2 6 2 10 2 10 2 10 2 10 1 10 2 10 2 10 2 10 1 10 3 10 3 10 2 10 2 7 1 8 2 8 2 10 2 10 1 10 1 7 0.5 2 2 1 2 20 70 5 80 30 95 5 90 30 50 2 60 20 90 5 95 2 70 1 100 2 70 1 100 20 70 2 90 10 70 2 80 10 70 5 90 10 80 5 90 10 70 2 80 20 90 1 90 20 70 2 70 20 80 5 70 10 60 2 80 20 90 30 100 30 70 5 70 20 80 5 80 5 50 2 50 10 80 5 95 2 30 10 90 10 80 10 80 5 30 10 95 60 80 10 90 30 80 10 90 5 70 20 60 5 70 10 80 40 30 70 80 5 70 70 60 2 95 2 95 40 40 40 40 30 10 30 15 10 5 60 90 30 40 20 40 10 5 5 5 20 10 30 20 40 5 40 30 10 20 40 30 60 30 30 10 30 60 20 5 5 30 10 20 2 2 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 30 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 10 5 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 2 3 3 2 0 0 3 20 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 10 5 2 60 20 10 10 30 2 30 2 10 20 10 10 20 30 20 20 30 30 10 0 10 5 10 5 20 30 30 30 10 20 10 20 20 20 20 20 40 30 20 20 20 20 10 20 20 10 30 60 40 10 10 10 5 2 10 5 10 10 5 2 5 2 5 10 5 5 10 5 5 5 5 0 10 5 10 10 5 10 2 0 0 0 10 10 5 10 0 10 5 5 5 5 5 10 5 10 0 30 5 10 5 0 0 10 0 0 1 1 70 3 1 2 3 3 3 3 0 0 0 3 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 20 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 10 0 0 0 10 0 70 50 0 40 40 50 60 30 30 60 60 40 90 40 90 20 45 40 40 40 40 40 50 20 30 60 35 40 30 40 40 30 40 40 50 40 40 40 40 20 20 50 60 10 40 60 60 10 50 60 50 40 60 30 20 20 30 20 30 40 25 10 20 25 30 25 10 25 10 40 40 20 20 25 40 30 30 30 30 25 45 20 35 15 25 20 20 45 50 20 20 30 30 25 20 20 20 15 40 15 10 10 40 15 30 20 20 30 30 20 40 10 10 5 5 20 10 5 5 5 0 5 0 10 5 10 20 5 10 10 10 20 20 5 10 10 5 5 5 10 20 5 0 10 10 10 10 5 10 10 15 5 10 5 10 10 5 5 10 10 10 10 10 30 10 10 20 0 0 40 0 5 5 10 0 10 0 10 5 5 10 5 5 10 5 5 10 0 0 20 0 5 5 10 10 0 0 20 20 5 0 20 45 5 0 0 5 0 10 10 5 10 5 5 5 5 30 20 0 20 0 5 10 10 40 5 0 20 0 20 0 20 5 25 10 25 5 10 5 25 10 10 10 10 30 15 25 30 10 10 0 10 10 15 20 30 5 15 5 70 5 20 10 60 0 10 5 15 5 25 10 10 20 2 2 2 2 1 3 1 3 2 3 2 3 1 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 1 2 2 3 1 3 3 3 3 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 2 1 2 1 2 1 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 4 2 4 4 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 20 20 8 7 7 10 10 10 12 20 12 15 8 10 20 12 2 10 8 10 8 10 20 20 20 20 20 15 8 10 15 15 12 12 8 8 7 5 8 7 8 8 12 10 10 7 10 8 7 7 8 5 5 10 30 30 30 30 29 30 30 31 30 30 30 30 30 30 29 30 2 30 30 30 30 30 30 31 30 30 29 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 31 31 31 31 30 30 31 31 31 31 30 30 31 31 31 31 31 30 100 100 100 100 200 200 100 100 200 300 200 300 150 150 100 100 150 150 150 100 100 100 150 200 150 150 150 150 100 100 200 200 150 150 150 150 150 200 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 150 200 300 200 LAT 27.28 28.499 25.452 24.006 25.425 22.504 21.804 3.764 4.863 49.781 40.461 40.119 38.035 35.661 35.36 34.588 35.731 30.426 29.147 53.567 55.434 36.508 35.954 40.725 39.233 43.715 44.678 45.941 48.853 43.569 83 69 75 81 44 63 80 77 43 47 42 12 65 58 72 56 64 45 82 56 60 50 85 49 80 42 77 44 67 41 72 39 89 42 75 41 95 62 69 91 73 37 48 59 58 57 84 50 63 64 101 62 54 98 LONG 97 51.908 97 54.386 97 53.869 97 52.503 97 51.317 97 52.091 98 1.313 97 48.917 97 48.668 97 47.854 97 38.941 97 38.865 97 39.217 97 38.312 97 38.496 97 37.906 97 38.099 97 38.296 97 38.785 98 16.017 98 15.941 98 21.94 98 22.471 98 45.861 98 45.985 98 46.159 98 45.807 98 45.688 98 47.399 98 47.151 Tsunami Impact Impact Impact Value Value (depth) (station) 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 3 1 2 0 0 0 3 3 3 0 0 0 2 1 2 1 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 3 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 1 1 Page 78
Location Surin Islands Surin Islands Surin Islands Surin Islands Surin Islands Surin Islands Surin Islands Surin Islands Surin Islands Surin Islands Surin Islands Surin Islands Surin Islands Surin Islands Koh Tachai Koh Tachai Koh Tachai Koh Tachai Koh Bon Koh Bon Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Similan Phuket Phuket Phuket Phuket Racha Racha Racha Racha Phiphi Phiphi Phiphi Phiphi Phiphi Phiphi Phiphi Phiphi Phiphi Phiphi
Site name Sai Dang Beach, N. Surin I. Sai Dang Beach, N. Surin I. Koh Chi Koh Chi Me Yai Bay, N. Surin I. Me Yai Bay, N. Surin I. Chong Khad Bay, N. Surin I. Chong Khad Bay, N. Surin I. Sutep Bay, N. Surin I. Sutep Bay, N. Surin I. Koh Torinla Koh Torinla Richelieu Rock Richelieu Rock Koh Tachai (east side) Koh Tachai (east side) Ko Tachai (NE side) Ko Tachai (NE side) Koh Bon NW Koh Bon NW Koh Bangu (Snapper Alley) Koh Bangu (Snapper Alley) Koh Similan (below Sail Rock) Koh Similan (below Sail Rock) Koh Similan (Beacon Point) Koh Similan (Beacon Point) Koh Payu (near north tip) Koh Payu (near north tip) Ko Payu (East of Eden dive site) Ko Payu (East of Eden dive site) Koh Miang NE (Stonehenge dive site) Koh Miang NE (Stonehenge dive site) Koh Payu (north tip) Koh Payu (north tip) Koh Payang (NW end) Koh Payang (NW end) Koh Huyong (NW section) Koh Huyong (NW section) Patong Bay(south side) Patong Bay(south side) Cape Yanding, Patong Bay Cape Yanding, Patong Bay Racha Yai (near Racha Resort) Racha Yai (near Racha Resort) Racha Yai Racha Yai Maya Bay, Phiphi Le Island Maya Bay, Phiphi Le Island Koh Bida Nok Koh Bida Nok Ton Zai Bay, Phiphi Don I. Ton Zai Bay, Phiphi Don I. Yong Kasem Bay, Phiphi Don I. Lana Bay, Phiphi Don I. Koh Phai (west side) Ton Zai Bay near Hin Phae, Phiphi Don
DATE 17-Apr-05 17-Apr-05 17-Apr-05 17-Apr-05 17-Apr-05 17-Apr-05 18-Apr-05 18-Apr-05 18-Apr-05 18-Apr-05 18-Apr-05 18-Apr-05 19-Apr-05 19-Apr-05 19-Apr-05 19-Apr-05 20-Apr-05 20-Apr-05 20-Apr-05 20-Apr-05 20-Apr-05 20-Apr-05 21-Apr-05 21-Apr-05 21-Apr-05 21-Apr-05 22-Apr-05 22-Apr-05 22-Apr-05 22-Apr-05 22-Apr-05 22-Apr-05 23-Apr-05 23-Apr-05 23-Apr-05 23-Apr-05 23-Apr-05 23-Apr-05 24-Apr-05 24-Apr-05 25-Apr-05 25-Apr-05 25-Apr-05 25-Apr-05 25-Apr-05 25-Apr-05 26-Apr-05 26-Apr-05 26-Apr-05 26-Apr-05 26-Apr-05 26-Apr-05 27-Apr-05 27-Apr-05 27-Apr-05 28-Apr-05
78
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List
Western Thailand Previously Recorded1 This study combined new total
Some comparative other studies Raja Ampat Indonesia2 Milne Bay PNG3 Solomon Islands4
Zooxanthellate Scleractinia Family Astrocoeniidae (Koby, 1890) Genus Stylocoeniella (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1935) Stylocoeniella armata (Ehrenberg, 1834) Stylocoeniella cocosensis (Veron, 1990) Stylocoeniella guentheri (Bassett-Smith, 1890) Genus Palauastrea (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1941) Palauastrea ramosa (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1941) Genus Madracis (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Madracis kirbyi (Veron and Pichon, 1976) Family Pocilloporidae (Gray, 1842) Genus Pocillopora (Lamarck, 1816) Pocillopora ankeli (Scheer and Pillai, 1974) Pocillopora damicornis (Linnaeus, 1758) Pocillopora danae (Verrill, 1864) Pocillopora elegans (Dana, 1846) Pocillopora eydouxi (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1860) Pocillopora indiania (Veron, 2000) Pocillopora kelleheri (Veron, 2000) Pocillopora meandrina ( Dana, 1846) Pocillopora verrucosa (Ellis and Solander, 1786) Pocillopora woodjonesi (Vaughan, 1918) Genus Seriatopora (Lamarck, 1816) Seriatopora aculeata (Quelch, 1886) Seriatopora caliendrum ( Ehrenberg, 1834) Seriatopora dendritica (Veron, 2000) Seriatopora guttatus (Veron, 2000) Seriatopora hystrix ( Dana, 1846) Seriatopora stellata (Quelch, 1886) Genus Stylophora (Schweigger, 1819) Stylophora pistillata (Esper, 1797) Stylophora subseriata (Ehrenberg, 1834) Family Acroporidae (Verrill, 1902) Genus Montipora (Blainville, 1830) Montipora aequituberculata (Bernard, 1897) Montipora altasepta (Nemenzo, 1967) Montipora angulata (Lamarck, 1816) Montipora australiensis (Bernard, 1897) Montipora cactus (Bernard, 1897) Montipora calcarea (Bernard, 1897) Montipora caliculata (Dana, 1846) Montipora capitata (Dana, 1846) Montipora capricornis (Veron, 1985)
N P
P P N U P N N P P P
P N
N N U
79
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Montipora cebuensis (Nemenzo, 1976) Montipora cocosensis (Vaughan, 1918) Montipora confusa (Nemenzo, 1967) Montipora corbetensis (Veron and Wallace, 1984) Montipora crassituberculata (Bernard, 1897) Montipora danae (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1851) Montipora deliculata (Veron, 2000) Montipora digitata (Dana, 1846) Montipora efflorescens (Bernard, 1897) Montipora effusa (Dana, 1846) Montipora florida (Nemenzo, 1967) Montipora floweri (Wells, 1954) Montipora foliosa (Pallas, 1766) Montipora foveolata (Dana, 1846) Montipora friabilis (Bernard, 1897) Montipora gaimardi (Bernard 1897) Montipora grisea (Bernard, 1897) Montipora hirsuta (Nemenzo, 1967) Montipora hispida (Dana, 1846) Montipora hodgsoni (Veron, 2000) Montipora hoffmeisteri (Wells, 1954) Montipora incrassata (Dana, 1846) Montipora informis (Bernard, 1897) Montipora mactanensis (Nemenzo, 1979) Montipora malampaya (Nemenzo, 1967) Montipora meandrina (Ehrenberg, 1834) Montipora millepora (Crossland, 1952) Montipora mollis (Bernard, 1897) Montipora monasteriata (Forskl, 1775) Montipora niugini (Veron, 2000) Montipora nodosa (Dana, 1846) Montipora orientalis (Nemenzo, 1967) Montipora plawanensis (Veron, 2000) Montipora peltiformis (Bernard, 1897) Montipora porites (Veron, 2000) Montipora samarensis (Nemenzo, 1967) Montipora spongodes (Bernard, 1897) Montipora spumosa (Lamarck, 1816) Montipora stellata (Bernard, 1897) Montipora taiwanensis (Veron, 2000) Montipora tuberculosa (Lamarck, 1816) Montipora turgescens (Bernard, 1897) Montipora turtlensis (Veron and Wallace, 1984) Montipora undata (Bernard, 1897) Montipora venosa (Ehrenberg, 1834) Montipora verrucosa (Lamarck, 1816) Montipora verruculosa (Veron, 2000) Montipora vietnamensis (Veron, 2000) Genus Anacropora (Ridley, 1884) Anacropora forbesi (Ridley, 1884) Anacropora matthai (Pillai, 1973) U
N P P P P
N P P
N P N U P U
P P
P U P P
P P N P P N
80
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Anacropora pillai (Veron, 2000) Anacropora puertogalerae (Nemenzo, 1964) Anacropora reticulata (Veron and Wallace, 1984) Anacropora spinosa (Rehberg, 1892) Genus Acropora (Oken, 1815) Acropora abrolhosensis (Veron, 1985) Acropora abrotanoides (Lamarck, 1816) Acropora aculeus (Dana, 1846) Acropora acuminata (Verrill, 1864) Acropora akajimensis (Veron, 1990) Acropora anthocercis (Brook, 1893) Acropora aspera (Dana, 1846) Acropora austera (Dana, 1846) Acropora awi (Wallace and Wolstenholme, 1998) Acropora batunai (Wallace, 1997) Acropora bifurcata (Nemenzo, 1971) Acropora brueggemanni (Brook, 1893) Acropora carduus (Dana, 1846) Acropora caroliniana (Nemenzo, 1976) Acropora cerealis (Dana, 1846) Acropora chesterfieldensis (Veron and Wallace, 1984) Acropora clathrata (Brook, 1891) Acropora convexa (Dana, 1846) Acropora cophodactyla (Brook, 1892) Acropora copiosa (Nemenzo, 1967) Acropora crateriformis (Gardiner, 1898) Acropora cuneata (Dana, 1846) Acropora cylindrica (Veron and Fenner, 2000) Acropora cytherea (Dana, 1846) Acropora dendrum (Bassett-Smith, 1890) Acropora derewanensis (Wallace 1997) Acropora desalwii (Wallace, 1994) Acropora digitifera (Dana, 1846) Acropora divaricata (Dana, 1846) Acropora donei (Veron and Wallace, 1984) Acropora echinata (Dana, 1846) Acropora efflorexcens (Dana, 1846) Acropora elegans (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1860) Acropora elseyi (Brook, 1892) Acropora exquisita (Nemenzo, 1971) Acropora florida (Dana, 1846) Acropora formosa (Dana, 1846) Acropora gemmifera (Brook, 1892) Acropora glauca (Brook, 1893) Acropora globiceps (Dana, 1846) Acropora gomezi (Veron, 2000) Acropora grandis (Brook, 1892) Acropora granulosa (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1860) Acropora hoeksemai (Wallace, 1997) Acropora horrida (Dana, 1846) Acropora humilis (Dana, 1846)
P P P P P
U P P P
N P P
P P P P
N P P P U P N P P
81
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Acropora hyacinthus (Dana, 1846) Acropora indonesia (Wallace, 1997) Acropora inermis (Brook, 1891) Acropora insignis (Nemenzo, 1967) Acropora irregularis (Brook, 1892) Acropora jacquelineae (Wallace, 1994) Acropora kimbeensis (Wallace, 1999) Acropora kirstyae (Veron and Wallace, 1984) Acropora kosurini (Wallace, 1994) Acropora latistella (Brook, 1891) Acropora listeri (Brook, 1893) Acropora loisetteae (Wallace, 1994) Acropora lokani (Wallace, 1994) Acropora longicyathus (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1860) Acropora loripes (Brook, 1892) Acropora lovelli (Veron and Wallace, 1984) Acropora lutkeni (Crossland, 1952) Acropora macrostoma (Brook, 1891) Acropora meridiana (Nemenzo, 1971) Acropora microclados (Ehrenberg, 1834) Acropora microphthalma (Verrill, 1859) Acropora millepora (Ehrenberg, 1834) Acropora mirabilis (Quelch, 1886) Acropora monticulosa (Brggemann, 1879) Acropora multiacuta (Nemenzo, 1967) Acropora nana (Studer, 1878) Acropora nasuta (Dana, 1846) Acropora navini (Veron, 2000) Acropora nobilis (Dana, 1846) Acropora ocellata (Klunzinger, 1879) Acropora orbicularis (Brook, 1892) Acropora palifera (Lamarck, 1816) Acropora palmerae (Wells, 1954) Acropora paniculata (Verrill, 1902) Acropora papillarae (Latypov, 1992) Acropora parahemprichii (Veron, 2000) Acropora parilis (Quelch, 1886) Acropora pectinatus (Veron, 2000) Acropora pichoni (Wallace, 1999) Acropora pinguis Wells, 1950 Acropora plana Nemenzo, 1967 Acropora plumosa Wallace and Wolstenholme, 1998 Acropora polystoma (Brook, 1891) Acropora prostrata (Dana, 1846) Acropora proximalis Veron, 2000 Acropora pulchra (Brook, 1891) Acropora rambleri (Bassett-Smith, 1890) Acropora robusta (Dana, 1846) Acropora retusa (Dana, 1846) Acropora rosaria (Dana, 1846) Acropora rudis (Rehberg, 1892) P N N N P N
P P P
P P P
P P
P P
P N N
N N P P
82
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Acropora russelli Wallace, 1994 Acropora samoensis ( Brook, 1891) Acropora sarmentosa (Brook, 1892) Acropora scherzeriana (Brggemann, 1877) Acropora schmitti (Wells, 1950) Acropora secale (Studer, 1878) Acropora sekiseinsis (Veron, 1990) Acropora selago (Studer, 1878) Acropora seriata (Ehrenberg, 1834) Acropora simplex (Wallace and Wolstenholme, 1998) Acropora solitaryensis (Veron and Wallace, 1984) Acropora speciosa (Quelch, 1886) Acropora spicifera (Dana, 1846) Acropora stoddarti (Pillai and Scheer, 1976) Acropora striata (Verrill, 1866) Acropora subglabra (Brook, 1891) Acropora subulata (Dana, 1846) Acropora tenella (Brook, 1892) Acropora tenuis (Dana, 1846) Acropora tortuosa (Dana, 1846) Acropora turaki (Wallace, 1994) Acropora valenciennesi (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1860) Acropora valida (Dana, 1846) Acropora variabilis (Klunzinger, 1879) Acropora vaughani (Wells, 1954) Acropora vermiculata (Nemenzo, 1967) Acropora verweyi (Veron and Wallace, 1984) Acropora walindii (Wallace, 1999) Acropora wallaceae (Veron, 1990) Acropora willisae (Veron and Wallace, 1984) Acropora yongei (Veron and Wallace, 1984) Genus Astreopora (Blainville, 1830) Astreopora cuculata (Lamberts, 1980) Astreopora expansa (Brggemann, 1877) Astreopora gracilis (Bernard, 1896) Astreopora incrustans (Bernard, 1896) Astreopora listeri (Bernard, 1896) Astreopora macrostoma (Veron and Wallace, 1984) Astreopora myriophthalma (Lamarck, 1816) Astreopora ocellata (Bernard, 1896) Astreopora randalli (Lamberts, 1980) Astreopora scabra (Lamberts, 1982) Astreopora suggesta (Wells, 1954) Family Euphilliidae (Veron, 2000) Genus Euphyllia Euphyllia ancora (Veron and Pichon, 1979) Euphyllia cristata (Chevalier, 1971) Euphyllia divisa (Veron and Pichon, 1980) Euphyllia glabrescens (Chamisso and Eysenhardt, 1821) Euphyllia paraancora (Veron, 1990) Euphyllia paradivisa (Veron, 1990)
P N
P U
P U P
P P P P
N P N P P P P
P N P
83
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Euphyllia yaeyamensis (Shirai, 1980) Genus Catalaphyllia (Wells, 1971) Catalaphyllia jardinei (Saville-Kent, 1893) Genus Nemenzophyllia (Hodgson and Ross, 1981) Nemenzophyllia turbida (Hodgson and Ross, 1981) Genus Plerogyra (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Plerogyra discus (Veron and Fenner, 2000) Plerogyra simplex (Rehberg, 1892) Plerogyra sinuosa (Dana, 1846) Genus Physogyra (Quelch, 1884) Physogyra lichtensteini (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1851) Family Oculinidae (Gray, 1847) Genus Galaxea (Oken, 1815) Galaxea acrhelia (Veron, 2000) Galaxea astreata (Lamarck, 1816) Galaxea cryptoramosa (Fenner and Veron, 2000) Galaxea fascicularis (Linnaeus, 1767) Galaxea horrescens (Dana, 1846) Galaxea longisepta (Fenner & Veron, 2000) Galaxea paucisepta (Claereboudt, 1990) Family Siderasteridae (Vaughan and Wells, 1943) Genus Siderastrea (Blainville, 1830) Siderastrea savignyana (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1850) Genus Pseudosiderastrea (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1935) Pseudosiderastrea tayami (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1935) Genus Psammocora (Dana, 1846) Psammocora contigua (Esper, 1797) Psammocora digitata (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1851) Psammocora explanulata (Horst, 1922) Psammocora haimeana (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1851) Psammocora nierstraszi (Horst, 1921) Psammocora obtusangula (Lamarck, 1816) Psammocora profundacella (Gardiner, 1898) Psammocora stellata (Verrill, 1864) Psammocora superficialis (Gardiner, 1898) Genus Coscinaraea (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Coscinaraea columna (Dana, 1846) Coscinaraea crassa (Veron and Pichon, 1980) Coscinaraea exesa (Dana, 1846) Coscinaraea monile (Foskl, 1775) Coscinaraea wellsi (Veron and Pichon, 1980) Family Agariciidae (Gray, 1847) Genus Pavona (Lamarck, 1801) Pavona bipartita (Nemenzo, 1980) Pavona cactus (Forskl, 1775) Pavona clavus (Dana, 1846) Pavona danae (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1860) Pavona decussata (Dana, 1846) Pavona diffluens (Lamarck, 1816) Pavona duerdeni (Vaughan, 1907) Pavona explanulata (Lamarck, 1816)
P P
P P
P P P P N N N N P N
P P
N P N P N P P
84
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Pavona frondifera (Lamarck, 1816) Pavona maldivensis (Gardiner, 1905) Pavona minuta (Wells, 1954) Pavona varians (Verrill, 1864) Pavona venosa (Ehrenberg, 1834) Genus Leptoseris (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Leptoseris amitoriensis (Veron, 1990) Leptoseris explanata (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1941) Leptoseris foliosa (Dineson, 1980) Leptoseris gardineri (Horst, 1921) Leptoseris hawaiiensis (Vaughan, 1907) Leptoseris incrustans (Quelch, 1886) Leptoseris mycetoseroides (Wells, 1954) Leptoseris papyracea (Dana, 1846) Leptoseris scabra (Vaughan, 1907) Leptoseris solida (Quelch, 1886) Leptoseris striata (Fenner & Veron 2000) Leptoseris tubulifera (Vaughan, 1907) Leptoseris yabei (Pillai and Scheer, 1976) Genus Gardineroseris (Scheer and Pillai, 1974) Gardineroseris planulata (Dana, 1846) Genus Coeloseris (Vaughan, 1918) Coeloseris mayeri (Vaughan, 1918) Genus Pachyseris (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Pachyseris foliosa (Veron, 1990) Pachyseris gemmae (Nemenzo, 1955) Pachyseris involuta (Studer, 1877) Pachyseris rugosa (Lamarck, 1801) Pachyseris speciosa (Dana, 1846) Family Fungiidae (Dana, 1846) Genus Cycloseris (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Cycloseris colini (Veron, 2000) Cycloseris costulata (Ortmann, 1889) Cycloseris curvata (Hoeksema, 1989) Cycloseris cyclolites (Lamarck, 1801) Cycloseris erosa (Dderlein, 1901) Cycloseris hexagonalis (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Cycloseris patelliformis (Boschma, 1923) Cycloseris sinensis (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1851) Cycloseris somervillei (Gardiner, 1909) Cycloseris tenuis (Dana, 1846) Cycloseris vaughani (Boschma, 1923) Genus Diaseris (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Diaseris distorta (Michelin, 1843) Diaseris fragilis (Alcock, 1893) Genus Cantharellus (Hoeksema and Best, 1984) Cantharellus jebbi (Hoeksema, 1993) Cantharellus nuomeae (Hoeksema & Best, 1984) Genus Helliofungia (Wells, 1966) Heliofungia actiniformis (Quoy and Gaimard, 1833) Genus Fungia (Lamarck, 1801) N P P P P
P P P N P P N N
P P
N P P
P P
85
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Fungia concinna (Verrill, 1864) Fungia corona (Dderlein, 1901) Fungia danai (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1851) Fungia fralinae (Nemenzo, 1955) Fungia fungites (Linneaus, 1758) Fungia granulosa (Klunzinger, 1879) Fungia horrida (Dana, 1846) Fungia klunzingeri (Dderlein, 1901) Fungia moluccensis (Horst, 1919) Fungia paumotensis (Stutchbury, 1833) Fungia puishani (Veron and DeVantier, 2000) Fungia repanda (Dana, 1846) Fungia scabra (Dderlein, 1901) Fungia scruposa (Klunzinger, 1879) Fungia scutaria (Lamarck, 1801) Fungia spinifer (Claereboudt and Hoeksema, 1987) Fungia taiwanensis (Hoeksema and Dai, 1991) Genus Ctenactis (Verrill, 1864) Ctenactis albitentaculata (Hoeksema, 1989) Ctenactis crassa (Dana, 1846) Ctenactis echinata (Pallas, 1766) Genus Herpolitha (Eschscholtz, 1825) Herpolitha limax (Houttuyn, 1772) Herpolitha weberi (Horst, 1921) Genus Polyphyllia (Quoy and Gaimard, 1833) Polyphyllia novaehiberniae (Lesson, 1831) Polyphyllia talpina (Lamarck, 1801) Genus Sandalolitha (Quelch, 1884) Sandalolitha dentata (Quelch, 1886) Sandalolitha robusta (Quelch, 1886) Genus Halomitra (Dana, 1846) Halomitra clavator (Hoeksema, 1989) Halomitra meierar (Veron and Maragos, 2000) Halomitra pileus (Linnaeus, 1758) Genus Zoopilus (Dana, 1864) Zoopilus echinatus (Dana, 1846) Genus Lithophyllum (Rehberg, 1892) Lithophyllon lobata (Horst, 1921) Lithophyllon mokai (Hoeksema, 1989) Lithophyllon undulatum (Rehberg, 1892) Genus Podabacia (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Podabacia crustacea (Pallas, 1766) Podabacia lankaensis (Veron, 2000) Podabacia motuporensis (Veron, 1990) Family Pectinidae (Vaughan and Wells, 1943) Genus Echinophyllia (Klunzinger, 1879) Echinophyllia aspera (Ellis and Solander, 1788) Echinophyllia costata (Fenner and Veron, 2000) Echinophyllia echinata (Saville-Kent, 1871) Echinophyllia echinoporoides (Veron and Pichon, 1979) Echinophyllia orpheensis (Veron and Pichon, 1980) P U P P P P U P P P
P N
P P P P
P N
P N
N N
P P N N
86
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Echinophyllia patula (Hodgson and Ross, 1982) Echinophyllia pectinata (Veron 2000) Genus Echinomorpha (Veron, 2000) Echinomorpha nishihirai (Veron, 1990) Genus Oxypora (Saville-Kent, 1871) Oxypora crassispinosa (Nemenzo, 1979) Oxypora glabra (Nemenzo, 1959) Oxypora lacera (Verrill, 1864) Genus Mycedium (Oken, 1815) Mycedium elephatotus (Pallas, 1766) Mycedium mancaoi (Nemenzo, 1979) Mycedium robokaki (Moll and Best, 1984) Genus Pectinia (Oken, 1815) Pectinia africanus (Veron, 2000) Pectinia alcicornis (Saville-Kent, 1871) Pectinia ayleni (Wells, 1935) Pectinia elongata (Rehberg, 1892) Pectinia lactuca (Pallas, 1766) Pectinia maxima (Moll and Borel Best, 1984) Pectinia paeonia (Dana, 1846) Pectinia pygmaeus (Veron, 2000) Pectinia teres (Nemenzo and montecillo, 1981) Family Merulinidae (Verrill, 1866) Genus Hydnophora (Fischer de Waldheim, 1807) Hydnophora bonsai (Veron, 1990) Hydnophora exesa (Pallas, 1766) Hydnophora grandis (Gardiner, 1904) Hydnophora microconos (Lamarck, 1816) Hydnophora pilosa (Veron, 1985) Hydnophora rigida (Dana, 1846) Genus Paraclavarina (Veron, 1985) Paraclavarina triangularis (Veron and Pichon, 1980) Genus Merulina (Ehrenberg, 1834) Merulina ampliata (Ellis and Solander, 1786) Merulina scabricula (Dana, 1846) Genus Scapophyllia (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Scapophyllia cylindrica (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Family Dendrophylliidae (Gray, 1847) Genus Heteropsammia (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Heteropsammia cochlea (Splenger, 1871) Genus Turbinaria (Oken, 1815) Turbinaria frondens (Dana, 1846) Turbinaria irregularis (Bernard, 1896) Turbinaria mesenterina (Lamarck, 1816) Turbinaria patula (Dana, 1846) Turbinaria peltata (Esper, 1794) Turbinaria reniformis Bernard, 1896 Turbinaria stellulata (Lamarck, 1816) Family Mussidae (Ortmann, 1890) Genus Blastomussa (Wells, 1961) Blastomussa merleti (Wells, 1961)
U P P P N
P N P P
P U P U P
P P P
P P N P P P
87
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Blastomussa wellsi )Wijsman-Best, 1973) Genus Micromussa (Veron, 2000) Micromussa amakusensis (Veron, 1990) Micromussa diminuta (Veron, 2000) Micromussa minuta (Moll and Borel-Best, 1984) Genus Acanthastrea (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Acanthastrea bowerbanki (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1851) Acanthastrea brevis (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Acanthastrea echinata (Dana, 1846) Acanthastrea faviaformis (Veron, 2000) Acanthastrea hemprichii (Ehrenberg, 1834) Acanthastrea hillae (Wells, 1955) Acanthastrea ishigakiensis (Veron, 1990) Acanthastrea lordhowensis (Veron and Pichon, 1982) Acanthastrea regularis (Veron, 2000) Acanthastrea rotundoflora (Chevalier, 1975) Acanthastrea subechinata (Veron, 2000) Genus Lobophyllia (Blainville, 1830) Lobophyllia corymbosa (Forskl, 1775) Lobophyllia dentatus (Veron, 2000) Lobophyllia diminuta (Veron, 1985) Lobophyllia flabelliformis (Veron, 2000) Lobophyllia hataii (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1936) Lobophyllia hemprichii (Ehrenberg, 1834) Lobophyllia pachysepta (Chevalier, 1975) Lobophyllia robusta (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1936) Lobophyllia serratus (Veron, 2000) Genus Symphyllia (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Symphyllia agaricia (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Symphyllia hassi (Pillai and Scheer, 1976) Symphyllia radians ( Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Symphyllia recta (Dana, 1846) Symphyllia valenciennesii (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Genus Scolymia (Haime, 1852) Scolymia australis (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Scolymia vitiensis (Brggemann, 1878) Genus Australomussa (Veron, 1985) Australomussa rowleyensis (Veron, 1985) Genus Cynarina (Brggemann, 1877) Cynarina lacrymalis (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Family Faviidae (Gregory, 1900) Genus Caulastrea (Dana, 1846) Caulastrea curvata (Wijsman-Best, 1972) Caulastrea echinulata (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Caulastrea furcata (Dana, 1846) Caulastrea tumida (Matthai, 1928) Genus Favia (Oken, 1815) Favia danae (Verrill, 1872) Favia favus (Forskl, 1775) Favia helianthoides (Wells, 1954) Favia laxa (Klunzinger, 1879) N
P N N
P N U P P N
P P P P
N P P
88
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Favia lizardensis (Veron and Pichon, 1977) Favia maritima (Nemenzo, 1971) Favia marshae (Veron, 2000) Favia matthai (Vaughan, 1918) Favia maxima ( Veron, Pichon & Wijsman-Best, 1972) Favia pallida (Dana, 1846) Favia rosaria (Veron, 2000) Favia rotumana (Gardiner, 1899) Favia rotundata (Veron, Pichon & Wijsman-Best, 1972) Favia speciosa (Dana, 1846) Favia stelligera (Dana, 1846) Favia truncatus (Veron, 2000) Favia veroni (Moll and Borel-Best, 1984) Genus Barabattoia (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1941) Barabattoia amicorum (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1850) Barabattoia laddi (Wells, 1954) Genus Favites (Link, 1807) Favites abdita (Ellis and Solander, 1786) Favites acuticolis (Ortmann, 1889) Favites bestae (Veron, 2000) Favites chinensis (Verrill, 1866) Favites complanata (Ehrenberg, 1834) Favites flexuosa (Dana, 1846) Favites halicora (Ehrenberg, 1834) Favites micropentagona (Veron, 2000) Favites paraflexuosa (Veron, 2000) Favites pentagona (Esper, 1794) Favites russelli (Wells, 1954) Favites spinosa (Klunzinger, 1879) Favites stylifera (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1937) Favites vasta (Klunzinger, 1879) Genus Goniastrea (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Goniastrea aspera (Verrill, 1905) Goniastrea australensis (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1857) Goniastrea edwardsi (Chevalier, 1971) Goniastrea favulus (Dana, 1846) Goniastrea minuta (Veron, 2000) Goniastrea palauensis (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1936) Goniastrea pectinata (Ehrenberg, 1834) Goniastrea peresi (Faure and Pichon, 1978) Goniastrea ramosa (Veron, 2000) Goniastrea retiformis (Lamarck, 1816) Genus Platygyra (Ehrenberg, 1834) Platygyra acuta (Veron, 2000) Platygyra contorta (Veron, 1990) Platygyra daedalea (Ellis and Solander, 1786) Platygyra lamellina (Ehrenberg, 1834) Platygyra pini (Chevalier, 1975) Platygyra ryukyuensis (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1936) Platygyra sinensis (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Platygyra verweyi (Wijsman-Best, 1976) P N P P P P P P P N U P
P U
P P P U P P
U P P U
P N P N N P P P N P P
89
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Platygyra yaeyemaensis (Eguchi and Shirai, 1977) Genus Australogyra (Veron, Pichon and Wijsman-Best, 1977) Australogyra zelli (Veron and Pichon, 1977) Genus Oulophyllia (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Oulophyllia bennettae (Veron, Pichon, 1977) Oulophyllia crispa (Lamarck, 1816) Oulophyllia levis (Nemenzo, 1959) Genus Leptoria (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Leptoria irregularis (Veron, 1990) Leptoria phrygia (Ellis and Solander, 1786) Genus Montastrea (Blainville, 1830) Montastrea annuligera (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Montastrea colemani (Veron, 2000) Montastrea curta (Dana, 1846) Montastrea magnistellata (Chevalier, 1971) Montastrea multipunctata (Hodgson, 1985) Montastrea salebrosa (Nemenzo, 1959) Montastrea valenciennesi (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Genus Plesiastrea (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Plesiastrea versipora (Lamarck, 1816) Genus Oulastrea (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Oulastrea crispata (Lamarck, 1816) Genus Diploastrea (Matthai, 1914) Diploastrea heliopora (Lamarck, 1816) Genus Leptastrea (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Leptastrea aequalis (Veron, 2000) Leptastrea bewickensis (Veron and Pichon, 1977) Leptastrea bottae (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Leptastrea inaequalis (Klunzinger, 1879) Leptastrea pruinosa (Crossland, 1952) Leptastrea purpurea (Dana, 1846) Leptastrea transversa (Klunzinger, 1879) Genus Cyphastrea (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Cyphastrea agassizi (Vaughan, 1907) Cyphastrea chalcidium (Forskl, 1775) Cyphastrea decadia (Moll and Best, 1984) Cyphastrea japonica (Yabe and Sugiyama, 1932) Cyphastrea microphthalma (Lamarck, 1816) Cyphastrea ocellina (Dana, 1864) Cyphastrea serailia (Forskl, 1775) Genus Echinopora (Lamarck, 1816) Echinopora gemmacea (Lamarck, 1816) Echinopora hirsutissima (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849) Echinopora horrida (Dana, 1846) Echinopora lamellosa (Esper, 1795) Echinopora mammiformis (Nemenzo, 1959) Echinopora pacificus (Veron, 1990) Echinopora taylorae (Veron, 2000) Genus Moseleya (Quelch, 1884) Moseleya latistellata (Quelch, 1884) Family Trachyphyllidae (Verrill, 1901) N
P N
P N U P P N P P
P P N N P P P P P N P N P P N P P U
90
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Genus Trachyphyllia (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1848) Trachyphyllia geoffroyi (Audouin, 1826) Family Poritidae (Gray, 1842) Genus Porites (Link, 1807) Porites aranetai (Nemenzo, 1955) Porites annae (Crossland, 1952) Porites attenuata (Nemenzo 1955) Porites australiensis (Vaughan, 1918) Porites cumulatus (Nemenzo, 1955) Porites cylindrica (Dana, 1846) Porites deformis (Nemenzo, 1955) Porites densa (Vaughan, 1918) Porites eridani (Umbgrove, 1940) Porites evermanni (Vaughan, 1907) Porites flavus (Veron, 2000) Porites heronensis (Veron, 1985) Porites horizontalata (Hoffmeister, 1925) Porites latistellata (Quelch, 1886) Porites lichen (Dana, 1846) Porites lobata (Dana, 1846) Porites lutea (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1851) Porites mayeri (Vaughan, 1918) Porites monticulosa (Dana, 1846) Porites murrayensis (Vaughan, 1918) Porites napopora (Veron, 2000) Porites negrosensis (Veron, 1990) Porites nigrescens (Dana, 1846) Porites profundus (Rehberg, 1892) Porites rugosa (Fenner & Veron, 2000) Porites rus (Forskl, 1775) Porites sillimaniana (Nemenzo, 1976) Porites solida (Forskl, 1775) Porites stephensoni (Crossland, 1952) Porites tuberculosa (Veron, 2000) Porites vaughani (Crossland, 1952) Genus Goniopora (Blainville, 1830) Goniopora albiconus (Veron, 2000) Goniopora burgosi (Nemenzo, 1955) Goniopora columna (Dana, 1846) Goniopora djiboutiensis (Vaughan, 1907) Goniopora eclipsensis (Veron and Pichon, 1982) Goniopora fruticosa (Saville-Kent, 1893) Goniopora lobata (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1860) Goniopora minor (Crossland, 1952) Goniopora palmensis (Veron and Pichon, 1982) Goniopora pandoraensis (Veron and Pichon, 1982) Goniopora pendulus (Veron, 1985) Goniopora planulata (Ehrenberg, 1834) Goniopora polyformis (Zou, 1980) Goniopora somaliensis (Vaughan, 1907) Goniopora stokesi (Milne Edwards and Haime, 1851)
P P P U P N
P P N P
P P P P U P P P P P P U U
U P P
91
Appendix II. Hard Coral Species List Goniopora stutchburyi (Wells, 1955) Goniopora tenella (Quelch, 1886) Goniopora tenuidens (Quelch, 1886) Genus Alveopora (Blainville, 1830) Alveopora allingi (Hoffmeister, 1925) Alveopora catalai (Wells, 1968) Alveopora daedalea (Forskl, 1775) Alveopora excelsa (Verrill, 1863) Alveopora fenestrata (Lamarck, 1816) Alveopora gigas (Veron, 1985) Alveopora marionensis (Veron and Pichon, 1982) Alveopora minuta (Veron, 2000) Alveopora spongiosa (Dana, 1846) Alveopora tizardi (Bassett-Smith, 1890) Alveopora verrilliana (Dana, 1872) TOTAL SPECIES P P P 535
436
273
N P
485
302 353
P = Previously recorcded (within the distribution range of Veron, 2000) N = New record for West thailand (not within the distribution range of Veron, 2000) U = Unconfirmed (27 species)
1 2 3 4
Veron (2000) From the combined records of Veron (2000) and Turak and Souhoka (2003) From the combined records of Veron (1998) and Fenner and Turak (2003) Veron and Turak (in press)
92
Appendix III. Checklist of fishes recorded during 2005 survey.
Note an Excel table that includes all site numbers for each species is available on request from G. Allen.
Stegostomatidae (1 spp.) Stegostoma fasciatum Ginglymostomatidae (1 spp.) Nebrius ferrugineum Dasyatidae (2 spp.) Dasyatis kuhlii Urogymnus asperrimus Muraenidae (6 spp.) Echidna nebulosa Gymnomuraena zebra Gymnothorax favagineus Gymnothorax flavimarginatus Gymnothorax javanicus Gymnothorax thrysoideus Congridae (1 spp.) Heteroconger hassi Clupeidae (1 spp.) Spratelloides gracilis Chanidae (1 spp.) Chanos chanos Plotosidae (1 spp.) Plotosus lineatus Synodontidae (3 spp.) Synodus dermatogenys Synodus jaculum Synodus variegatus Antennariidae (1 spp.) Antennarius commersoni Mugilidae (2 spp.) Crenimugil crenilabis Valamugil seheli Belonidae (1 spp.) Tylosurus crocodilus Holocentridae (13 spp.) Myripristis adusta Myripristis berndti Myripristis hexagona Myripristis kuntee Myripristis murdjan Myripristis violacea Neoniphon sammara Sargocentron caudimaculatum Sargocentron diadema Sargocentron melanospilos Sargocentron rubrum Aulostomidae (1 spp.) Aulostomus chinensis Fistulariidae (1 spp.)
Fistularia commersonii
Centriscidae (1 spp.) Aeoliscus strigatus Syngnathidae (5 spp.) Corythoichthys haematopterus Corythoichthys schultzei Doryrhamphus janssi Dunckerocampus multiannulatus Hippocampus comes Scorpaenidae (5 spp.) Dendrochirus zebra Pterois antennata Pterois muricata Pterois radiata Scorpaenopsis possi Serranidae (27 spp.) Aethaloperca rogaa Anyperodon leucogrammicus Cephalopholis argus Cephalopholis boenak Cephalopholis formosa Cephalopholis leopardus Cephalopholis microprion Cephalopholis miniata Cephalopholis nigripinnis Cephalopholis polyspila Cephalopholis sonnerati Diploprion bifasciatum Epinephelus areolatus Epinephelus caeruleopunctatus Epinephelus fasciatus Epinephelus fuscoguttatus Epinephelus merra Epinephelus ongus Epinephelus quoyanus Epinephelus spilotoceps Plectropomus aerolatus Plectropomus maculatus Pseudanthias evansi Pseudanthias ignitus Pseudanthias squamipinnis Variola albimarginata Variola louti Cirrhitidae (2 spp.) Cirrhitichthys oxycephalus Paracirrhites forsteri Pseudochromidae (2 spp.) Pseudochromis andamanensis
95
Pseudochromis fuscus Plesiopidae (1 spp.) Calloplesiops altivelis Priacanthidae (3 spp.) Heteropriacanthus cruentatus Priacanthus blochii Priacanthus hamrur Apogonidae (22 spp.) Apogon apogonides Apogon cookii Apogon compressus Apogon cyanosoma Apogon fleurieu Apogon fraenatus Apogon kallopterus Apogon leptacanthus Apogon luxuria Apogon moluccensis Apogon nigrofasciatus Apogon perlitus Apogon thermalis Archamia ataenia Archamia fucata Archamia macroptera Cheilodipterus artus Cheilodipterus macrodon Cheilodipterus quinquelineatus Rhabdamia cypselurus Rhabdamia gracilis Siphamia tubifer Malacanthidae (3 spp.) Hoplolatilus cuniculus Malacanthus brevirostris Malacanthus latovittatus Echeneidae (1 spp.) Echeneis naucrates Carangidae (16 spp.) Atule mate Carangoides ferdau Carangoides orthogrammus Carangoides plagiotaenia Caranx ignobilis Caranx melampygus Caranx sexfasciatus Elagatis bipinnulata Gnathanodon speciosus Megalaspis cordyla Scomberoides commersonnianus Scomberoides tol Scomberoides lysan Selaroides leptolepis Trachinotus blochii Ulua mentalis Lutjanidae (19 spp.) Aphareus furca
Aprion virescens Lutjanus argentimaculatus Lutjanus biguttatus Lutjanus bohar Lutjanus decussatus Lutjanus fulviflamma Lutjanus fulvus Lutjanus gibbus Lutjanus kasmira Lutjanus lemniscatus Lutjanus lutjanus Lutjanus monostigma Lutjanus quinquelineatus Lutjanus rivulatus Lutjanus russelli Lutjanus vitta Macolor macularis Macolor niger Caesionidae (12 spp.) Caesio caerulaurea Caesio cuning Caesio lunaris Caesio teres Caesio varilineata Caesio xanthonota Dipterygonotus balteatus Pterocaesio chrysozona Pterocaesio pisang Pterocaesio randalli Pterocaesio tessellata Pterocaesio tile Gerreidae (5 spp.) Gerres argyreus Haemulidae (9 spp.) Diagramma pictum Plectorhinchus chaetodontoides Plectorhinchus gibbosus Plectorhinchus macrospilos Plectorhinchus vittatus Lethrinidae (15 spp.) Gnathodentex aurolineatus Gymnocranius grandoculis Gymnocranius griseus Lethrinus crocineus Lethrinus erythracanthus Lethrinus erythropterus Lethrinus harak Lethrinus lentjan Lethrinus microdon Lethrinus obsoletus Lethrinus olivaceus Lethrinus ornatus Lethrinus rubrioperculatus Lethrinus xanthocheilus Monotaxis grandoculis
96
Nemipteridae (8 spp.) Scolopsis affinis Scolopsis bilineatus Scolopsis ciliatus Scolopsis lineatus Scolopsis margaritifer Scolopsis monogramma Scolopsis torquata Scolopsis xenochrous Mullidae (10 spp.) Mulloidichthys flavolineatus Mulloidichthys vanicolensis Parupeneus barberinus Parupeneus cyclostomus Parupeneus heptacanthus Parupeneus indicus Parupeneus macronemus Parupeneus pleurostigma Parupeneus trifasciatus Upeneus tragula Pempheridae (35 spp.) Parapriacanthus ransonneti Pempheris oualensis Pempheris vanicolensis Kyphosidae (2 spp.) Kyphosus cinerascens Kyphosus vaigensis Monodactylidae (1 spp.) Monodactylus argtenteus Chaetodontidae (35 spp.) Chaetodon andamanensis Chaetodon auriga Chaetodon bennetti Chaetodon citrinellus Chaetodon collare Chaetodon decussatus Chaetodon ephippium Chaetodon falcula Chaetodon gardineri Chaetodon guttatissimus Chaetodon interruptus Chaetodon kleinii Chaetodon lineolatus Chaetodon lunula Chaetodon madagaskariensis Chaetodon melannotus Chaetodon meyeri Chaetodon octofasciatus Chaetodon oxycephalus Chaetodon rafflesi Chaetodon semion Chaetodon triangulum Chaetodon trifascialis Chaetodon trifasciatus Chaetodon vagabundus
Chelmon rostratus Coradion altivelis Coradion chrysozonus Forcipiger flavissimus Forcipiger longirostris Hemitaurichthys zoster Heniochus acuminatus Heniochus diphreutes Heniochus pleurotaenia Heniochus singularius Pomacanthidae (10 spp.) Apolemichthys trimaculatus Apolemichthys xanthurus Centropyge eibli Centropyge flavipectoralis Centropyge multispinis Pomacanthus annularis Pomacanthus imperator Pomacanthus semicirculatus Pomacanthus xanthometopon Pygoplites diacanthus Pomacentridae (64 spp.) Abudefduf bengalensis Abudefduf notatus Abudefduf septemfasciatus Abudefduf sordidus Abudefduf vaigiensis Amblyglyphidodon aureus Amblyglyphidodon indicus Amblyglyphidodon leucogaster Amphiprion akallopisos Amphiprion clarkii Amphiprion ephippium Amphiprion ocellaris Amphiprion sebae Cheiloprion labiatus Chromis sp. (cf. pembae) Chromis atripectoralis Chromis cinerascens Chromis delta Chromis dimidiata Chromis elerae Chromis flavipectoralis Chromis lepidolepis Chromis opercularis Chromis ternatensis Chromis viridis Chromis weberi Chrysiptera brownriggii Chrysiptera glauca Chrysiptera rollandi Chrysiptera unimaculata Dascyllus aruanus Dascyllus carneus Dascyllus trimaculatus
97
Dischistodus perspicillatus Hemiglyphidodon plagiometopon Lepidozygus tapeinosoma Neoglyphidodon melas Neoglyphidodon nigroris Neopomacentrus anabatoides Neopomacentrus sororius Neopomacentrus cyanomos Neopomacentrus filamentosus Neopomacentrus violascens Plectroglyphidodon dickii Plectroglyphidodon johnstonianus Plectroglyphidodon lacrymatus Plectroglyphidodon leucozona Pomacentrus adelus Pomacentrus alleni Pomacentrus amboinensis Pomacentrus azuremaculatus Pomacentrus chrysurus Pomacentrus lepidogenys Pomacentrus moluccensis Pomacentrus nagasakiensis Pomacentrus pavo Pomacentrus philippinus Pomacentrus polyspinus Pomacentrus similis Pomacentrus tripunctatus Pomacentrus xanthosternus Stegastes lividus Stegastes nigricans Stegastes obreptus Labridae (64 spp.) Anampses caeruleopunctatus Anampses lineatus Anampses meleagrides Anampses twistii Bodianus axillaris Bodianus diana Bodianus mesothorax Bodianus neilii Cheilinus chlorurus Cheilinus fasciatus Cheilinus oxycephalus Cheilinus trilobatus Cheilinus undulatus Cirrhilabrus cyanopleura Cirrhilabrus exquisitus Cirrhilabrus joanallenae Coris batuensis Coris cuvieri Diproctacanthus xanthurus Epibulus insidiator Gomphosus caeruleus Halichoeres argus Halichoeres chloropterus
Halichoeres cosmetus Halichoeres hortulanus Halichoeres kallochroma Halichoeres leucoxanthus Halichoeres marginatus Halichoeres nebulosus Halichoeres nigrescens Halichoeres scapularis Halichoeres timorensis Halichoeres vroliki Halichoeres zeylonicus Hemigymnus fasciatus Hemigymnus melapterus Hologymnosus annulatus Hologymnosus doliatus Labrichthys unilineatus Labroides bicolor Labroides dimidatus Leptojulis cyanopleura Macropharyngodon negrosensis Macropharyngodon ornatus Novaculichthys taeniourus Oxycheilinus bimaculatus Oxycheilinus celebicus Oxycheilinus digramma Oxycheilinus rhodochrous Paracheilinus mccoskeri Pseudocheilinus evanidus Pseudocheilinus hexataenia Pseudodax moluccanus Pterogogus cryptus Stethojulis albovittata Stethojulis interrupta Stethojulis strigiventer Stethojulis trilineata Thalassoma amblycephalus Thalassoma hardwicke Thalassoma jansenii Thalassoma lunare Thalassoma purpureum Thalassoma trilobatum Scaridae (18 spp.) Calotomus carolinus Cetoscarus bicolor Chlorurus capistratoides Chlorurus sordidus Chlorurus strongylocephalus Chlorurus troschelii Hipposcarus hairid Scarus frenatus Scarus ghobban Scarus niger Scarus prasiognathos Scarus quoyi Scarus russelli
98
Scarus rubroviolaceus Scarus scaber Scarus sp. Scarus tricolor Scarus virdifucatus Pinguipedidae (8 spp.) Parapercis clathrata Parapercis cylindrica Parapercis hexophtalma Parapercis millepunctata Parapercis schauinslandii Parapercis snyderi Parapercis tetracantha Parapercis sp. Tripterygiidae (3 spp.) Enneapterygius sp. (black cheek) Helcogramma striatum Ucla xenogrammus Blenniidae (56 spp.) Andamia heteroptera Aspidontus dussumieri Aspidontus taeniatus Atrosalarias fuscus Cirripectes auritus Cirripectes filamentosus Crossosalarias macrospilos Ecsenius bicolor Ecsenius lubbocki Ecsenius midas Ecsenius paroculus Entomacrodus vermiculatus Exallias brevis Meiacanthus smithi Meiacanthus urostigma Petroscirtes breviceps Plagiotremus phenax Plagiotremus rhinorhynchus Plagiotremus tapeinosoma Salarias guttatus Salarias sinuosus Xiphasia setifer Callionymidae (1 spp.) Synchirous stellatus Gobiidae (50 spp.) Amblyeleotris aurora Amblyeleotris diagonalis Amblyeleotris fasciata Amblyeleotris latifasciatus Amblyeleotris periophthalma Amblyeleotris sp. (photo) Amblyeleotris steinitzi Amblygobius nocturnus Amblygobius phalaena Amblygobius semicinctus Asterropteryx semipunctata
Bryaninops loki Bryaninops yongei Cryptocentrus cinctus Cryptocentrus sp. Cryptocentrus strigilliceps Ctenogobiops crocineus Ctenogobiops pomastictus Eviota guttata Eviota mikiae Eviota nebulosa Eviota nigriventris Eviota prasinus Eviota queenslandica Eviota sebreei Eviota sigillata Eviota spilota Exyrias puntang Fusigobius humeralis Fusigobius inframaculatus Fusigobius melacron Fusigobius neophytus Gnatholepis cauerensis Istigobius decoratus Istigobius goldmanni Istigobius ornatus Istigobius rigilius Koumansetta hectori Oplopomus oplopomus Paragobiodon echinocephalus Pleurosicya labiatus Stonogobiops nematodes Trimma naudei Trimma okinawae Trimma striata Valenciennea muralis Valenciennea parva Valenciennea puellaris Valenciennea sexguttata Valenciennea strigata Microdesmidae (2 spp.) Gunnellichthys curiosus Gunnellichthys viridescens Ptereleotridae (7 spp.) Nemateleotris decora Nemateleotris magnifica Ptereleotris evides Ptereleotris heteroptera Ptereleotris microlepis Ptereleotris sp. Ptereleotris zebra Ephippidae (4 spp.) Platax boersi Platax orbicularis Platax pinnatus Platax teira
99
Siganidae (10 spp.) Siganus argenteus Siganus corallinus Siganus canaliculatus? Siganus guttatus Siganus javus Siganus magnificus Siganus puelloides Siganus stellatus Siganus vermiculatus Siganus virgatus Zanclidae (1 spp.) Zanclus cornutus Acanthuridae (29 spp.) Acanthurus bariene Acanthurus blochii Acanthurus guttatus Acanthurus leucocheilus Acanthurus leucosternon Acanthurus lineatus Acanthurus maculiceps Acanthurus mata Acanthurus nigricauda Acanthurus tennentii Acanthurus thompsoni Acanthurus triostegus Acanthurus tristis Acanthurus xanthopterus Ctenochaetus binotatus Ctenochaetus striatus Ctenochaetus truncatus Naso brachycentron Naso brevirostris Naso caeruleacauda Naso elegans Naso hexacanthus Naso thynnoides Naso tuberosus Naso unicornis Naso vlamingii Paracanthurus hepatus Zebrasoma desjardinii Zebrasoma scopas Sphyraenidae (4 spp.) Sphyraena barracuda
Sphyraena flavicauda Sphyraena obtusata Sphyraena qenie Scombridae (4 spp.) Euthynnus affinis Grammatorcynus bilineatus Gymnosarda unicolor Rastrelliger kanagurta Balistidae (13 spp.) Abalistes stellatus Balistapus undulatus Balistoides conspicillum Balistoides viridescens Melichthys indicus Odonus niger Pseudobalistes flavimarginatus Pseudobalistes fuscus Rhinecanthus rectangulus Sufflamen bursa Sufflamen chrysopterus Sufflamen fraenatus Xanthichthys auromarginatus Ostraciidae (2 spp.) Ostracion cubicus Ostracion meleagris Tetraodontidae (7 spp.) Arothron caeruleopunctatus Arothron hispidus Arothron immaculatus Arothron mappa Arothron nigropunctatus Arothron stellatus Canthigaster solandri Monacanthidae (6 spp.) Aluterus scriptus Amanses scopas Cantherhines dumerilii Cantherhines pardalis Oxymonacanthus longirostris Paraluteres new species Diodontidae (3 spp.) Diodon holacanthus Diodon hystrix Diodon liturosus
100
Appendix IV. List of species E. Andaman reef fishes collected by Satapoomin and Winterbottom, but not seen during 2005 survey.
FAMILY Chlopsidae Muraenidae Muraenidae Muraenidae Muraenidae Muraenidae Muraenidae Muraenidae Muraenidae Muraenidae Muraenidae Muraenidae Muraenidae Muraenidae Ophichthidae Ophichthidae Ophichthidae Ophichthidae Ophichthidae Synodontidae Synodontidae Batrachoididae Gobiesocidae Gobiesocidae Antennariidae Antennariidae Bythitidae Bythitidae Atherinidae Atherinidae Atherinidae Holocentridae Syngnathidae Syngnathidae Syngnathidae Syngnathidae Syngnathidae Syngnathidae Syngnathidae Syngnathidae Scorpaenidae Scorpaenidae Scorpaenidae Scorpaenidae Scorpaenidae Scorpaenidae Scorpaenidae Scorpaenidae Scorpaenidae Scorpaenidae Scorpaenidae Caracanthidae Aploactinidae GENUS Kaupichthys Enchelycore Gymnothorax Gymnothorax Gymnothorax Gymnothorax Gymnothorax Gymnothorax Gymnothorax Gymnothorax Gymnothorax Uropterygius Uropterygius Uropterygius Allips Muraenichthys Ophichthus Ophichthus Ophichthus Saurida Synodus Allenbatrachus Discotrema Discotrema Antennarius Antennarius Brosmophyciops Dinematichthys Atherinomorus Atherinomorus Hypoatherina Sargocentron Bhanotia Choeroichthys Corythoichthys Corythoichthys Halicampus Halicampus Microphis Phoxocampus Parascorpaena Parascorpaena Scorpaenodes Scorpaenodes Scorpaenodes Scorpaenodes Scorpaenodes Scorpaenodes Scorpaenopsis Scorpaenopsis Scorpaenopsis Caracanthus Cocotropus SPECIES sp bayeri buroensis chilospilus fimbriatus margaritophorus melatremus monochrous permistus pindae zonipectis concolor inornatus xanthopterus concolor hattae evermanni sp urolophus gracilis rubromarmoratus grunniens crinophila lineatus coccineus pictus pautzkei ilucoeteoides duodecimalis lacunosus temminckii cornutum fasciolata sculptus amplexus flavofasciatus mataafae spinirostris leiaspis belcheri aurita mossambica albaiensis guamensis minor parvipinnis scabra varipinnis diabolus fowleri ramaraoi unipinna monacanthus
101
Platycephalidae Platycephalidae Platycephalidae Serranidae Serranidae Serranidae Serranidae Serranidae Serranidae Serranidae Serranidae Serranidae Serranidae Pseudochromidae Plesiopidae Plesiopidae Plesiopidae Teraponidae Priacanthidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Apogonidae Carangidae Lutjanidae Lutjanidae Gerreidae Pempheridae Pempheridae Scatophagidae Labridae Labridae Blenniidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Tripterygiidae Tripterygiidae Tripterygiidae
Thysanophrys Thysanophrys Thysanophrys Cephalopholis Cephalopholis Epinephelus Epinephelus Epinephelus Grammistops Liopropoma Liopropoma Pseudogramma Pseudanthias Blennodesmus Plesiops Plesiops Plesiops Pelates Priacanthus Apogon Apogon Apogon Apogon Apogon Apogon Apogon Apogon Apogon Apogon Fowleria Fowleria Gymnapogon Neamia Pseudamia Selar Gymnocaesio Lutjanus Gerres Pempheris Pempheris Scatophagus Halichoeres Wetmorella Enchelyurus Glyptoparus Istiblennius Istiblennius Istiblennius Laiphognathus Omobranchus Omobranchus Omobranchus Omobranchus Petroscirtes Plagiotremus Enneapterygius Enneapterygius Enneapterygius
celebicus chiltonae otaitensis cyanostigma spilorparrea erythrurus malabaricus polyphekadion ocellatus africanum susumi polyacantha rubrizonatus scapularis auritus coeruleolineatus corallicola quadrilineatus macracanthus abrogramma crassiceps fuscus hyalosoma kalosoma ocellicaudus savayensis semiornatus taeniophorus trimaculatus isostigma variegata sp octospina hayashii crumenophthalmus gymnoptera timorensis acinaces mangula otaitensis argus bicolor nigropinnata kraussi delicatulus dussumieri edentulatus lineatus multimaculatus elongatus fasciolatus ferox punctatus variabilis townsendi fasciatus nanus rufopileus
102
Tripterygiidae Tripterygiidae Tripterygiidae Tripterygiidae Tripterygiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae
Enneapterygius Helcogramma Helcogramma Helcogramma Norfolkia Asterropteryx Asterropteryx Barbuligobius Bathygobius Bathygobius Bathygobius Bathygobius Bryaninops Bryaninops Bryaninops Cabillus Callogobius Callogobius Callogobius Callogobius Callogobius Callogobius Callogobius Callogobius Callogobius Coryphopterus Coryphopterus Coryphopterus Cryptocentrus Eviota Eviota Eviota Eviota Eviota Eviota Eviota Eviota Fusigobius Gobiodon Gobiodon Gobiodon Gobiodon Gobiodon Gobiodon Gobiodon Gobiodon Gobiodon Gobiopsis Gobiopsis Istigobius Mahidolia Pleurosicya Pleurosicya Pleurosicya Pleurosicya Pleurosicya Pleurosicya Pleurosicya
tutuilae cf chica obtusirostre springeri brachylepis ensiferus DFH sp 3 boehlkei cocosensis fuscus karachiensis meggitti amplus erythops ridens tongarevae DFH sp 11 DFH sp 13 DFH sp 16 DFH sp 3 DFH sp 6 irrasus sclateri TH sp 1 TH sp 2 humeralis maximus pallidus Leptocephalus Afeli Albolineata Herrei Indica Prasine Prasites Punctulata Zebrine Duospilus Citrinus DFH sp 11 DFH sp 3 Histrio Quinquestrigatus Rivulatus RW sp 1 RW sp 2 RW sp 3 Aporia Quinquecincta Ornatus Mystacina Bilobatus Caerulea Fringilla Micheli Mossambica Plicata Prognatha
103
Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Eleotridae Microdesmidae Microdesmidae Xenisthmidae Xenisthmidae Acanthuridae Siganidae Siganidae Bothidae Soleidae Monacanthidae
Priolepis Priolepis Silhoettea Sueviota Trimma Trimma Trimma Trimma Trimma Trimma Trimma Yongeichthys Calumia Parioglossus Parioglossus Xenisthmus Xenisthmus Acanthurus Siganus Siganus Arnoglossus Asseragodes Paramonacanthus
cinctus Semidoliatus Ensifer Lachneri Emeryi Flammeum Okinawae RW sp 76 RW sp 79 RW sp 81 winterbottomi nebulosus godeffroyi formosus philippinus africanus pozyzonatus blochii canaliculatus fuscescens intermedius melanostictus japonicus
203 additions
104
Appendix V. List of target fish species recorded during the survey.

No. sites where present 3 1 2 6 6 2 5 1 6 1 1 5 16 6 16 7 7 1 15 7 21 6 5 2 3 3 4 7 6 1 4 1 2 4 4
No. I 1 II 2 III 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 IV 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 V 32 33 VI 34 VII 35
Family/Species STEGASTOMATIDAE Stegastoma fasciatum (Hermann, 1783) BELONIDAE Tylosurus crocodilus (Pron & Lesueur 1821) HOLOCENTRIDAE Myripristis adusta (Bleeker, 1853) M. berndti Jordan and (Evermann, 1902) M. hexagona (Lacepde, 1802) M. kuntee (Valenciennes, 1831) M. murdjan (Forsskl, 1775) Neoniphon sammara (Forsskl, 1775) Sargocentron caudimaculatum (Rppell, 1835) S. diadema (Lacepde, 1802) S. melanospilos (Bleeker, 1858) S. rubrum (Forsskl, 1775) SERRANIDAE Aethaloperca rogaa (Forsskl, 1775) Anyperodon leucogrammicus (Valenciennes, 1828) Cephalopholis argus (Bloch and Schneider, 1801) C. boenak (Bloch, 1790) C. formosa (Shaw, 1812) C. leopardus (Lacepde, 1802) C. miniata (Forsskl, 1775) C. nigripinnis (Valenciennes, 1828) C. polyspila (Randall & Satapoomin, 2000) Epinephelus coeruleopunctatus (Bloch, 1790) E. fasciatus (Forsskl, 1775) E. fuscoguttatus (Forsskal, 1775) E. merra (Bloch, 1793) E. ongus (Bloch, 1790) E. quoyanus (Valenciennes, 1830) Plectropomus areolatus (Rppell, 1830) P. maculates (Bloch, 1790) Variola albimarginata (Baissac, 1953) V. louti (Forsskl, 1775) PRIACANTHIDAE Heteropriacanthus cruentatus (Lacepde, 1801) Priacanthus hamrur (Forsskl, 1775) ECHENEIDAE Echeneis naucrates (Linnaeus, 1758) CARANGIDAE Atule mate (Cuvier, 1833)
% occurrence 12% 4% 8% 23% 23% 8% 19% 4% 23% 4% 4% 19% 62% 23% 62% 27% 27% 4% 58% 27% 81% 23% 19% 8% 12% 12% 15% 27% 23% 4% 15% 4% 8% 15% 15%
Count 3 3 2 2 133 3 18 27 5 8 3 24 20 1 24 484 55 9 139 28 19 1 62 21 87 7 9 2 3 6 6 13 10 1 6 6 1 5 5 5 653 18
106
36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 VIII 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 IX 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 X 74 75 76 77 XI 78
Carangoides ferdau (Forsskl, 1775) C. fulvoguttatus (Forsskl, 1775) C. plagiotaenia (Bleeker, 1857) Caranx melampygus (Cuvier, 1833) Elegatis bipinnulatus (Quoy and Gaimard, 1825) Gnathanodon speciosus (Forsskl, 1775) Scomberoides lysan (Forsskl, 1775) Selaroides leptolepis (Cuvier, 1833) Trachinotus blochii (Lacepde, 1801) Ulua mentalis (Cuvier, 1833) LUTJANIDAE Aphareus furca (Lacepde, 1802) Aprion virescens (Valenciennes, 1830) Lutjanus argentimaculatus (Forsskl, 1775) L. biguttatus (Valenciennes, 1830) L. bohar (Forsskl, 1775) L. decussatus (Cuvier, 1828) L. fulviflamma (Forsskl, 1775) L. fulvus (Schneider, 1801) L. gibbus (Forsskl, 1775) L. kasmira (Forsskl, 1775) L. lemniscatus (Valenciennes, 1828) L. lutjanus (Bloch, 1790) L. monostigma (Cuvier, 1828) L. quinquelineatus (Bloch, 1790) L. russelli (Bleeker, 1849) L. vitta (Quoy and Gaimard, 1824) Macolor niger (Forsskl, 1775) CAESIONIDAE Caesio caerulaurea (Lacepde, 1802) C. cuning (Bloch, 1791) C. lunaris (Cuvier, 1830) C. teres (Seale, 1906) C. varilineata (Carpenter, 1987) C. xanthonota (Bleeker, 1853) Pterocaesio chrysozonus (Cuvier, 1830) P. pisang (Bleeker, 1853) P. randalli (Carpenter, 1987) P. tessellata (Carpenter, 1987) P. tile (Cuvier, 1830) HAEMULIDAE Diagramma pictum (Thunberg, 1792) Plectorhinchus chaetodontoides (Lacepde, 1800) P. gibbosus (Lacepde, 1802) P. vittatus (Linnaeus, 1758) LETHRINIDAE Gnathodentex aurolineatus (Lacepde, 1802)
1 1 3 11 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 7 12 24 10 1 6 6 3 2 7 6 4 1 3 8 12 10 4 6 12 15 9 1 1 10 2 5 3 11 2
4% 4% 12% 42% 4% 4% 12% 4% 4% 4% 8% 8% 4% 27% 46% 92% 38% 4% 23% 23% 12% 8% 27% 23% 15% 4% 12% 31% 46% 38% 15% 23% 46% 58% 35% 4% 4% 38% 8% 19% 12% 42% 8%
3 4 8 93 1 2 22 500 1 1 1647 2 2 2 226 25 108 60 2 42 92 7 550 10 490 19 6 4 13736 1065 621 191 55 702 501 6063 1940 40 25 2533 37 8 5 8 16 190 74
107
79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 XII 88 89 90 91 92 93 XIII 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 XIV 104 105 XV 106 XVI 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 XVII 118 119
Gymnocranius griseus (Temminck & Schlegel, 1843) Lethrinus crocineus (Smith, 1959) L. erythropterus (Valenciennes, 1830) L. microdon (Valenciennes, 1830) L. obsoletus (Forsskl, 1775) L. olivaceus (Valenciennes, 1830) L. ornatus (Valenciennes, 1830) L. xanthochilus (Klunzinger 1870) Monotaxis grandoculis (Forsskl, 1775) NEMIPTERIDAE Scolopsis affinis (Peters 1877) S. bilineatus (Bloch, 1793) S. ciliatus (Lacepde, 1802) S. margaritifera (Cuvier, 1830) S. monogramma (Kuhl and Van Hasselt, 1830) S. torquatus (Cuvier, 1830) MULLIDAE Mulloidichthys flavolineatus (Lacepde, 1802) M. vanicolensis (Valenciennes, 1831) Parupeneus barberinus (Lacepde, 1801) P. cyclostomus (Lacepde, 1802) P. heptacanthus (Lacepde, 1801) P. indicus (Shaw, 1903) P. macronema (Lacepde, 1802) P. pleurostigma (Bennett, 1830) P. trifasciatus (Lacepde, 1801) Upeneus tragula (Richardson, 1846) KYPHOSIDAE Kyphosus cinerascens (Forsskl, 1775) K. vaigiensis (Quoy and Gaimard, 1825) MONODACTYLIDAE Monodactylus argenteus (Linnaeus, 1758) LABRIDAE Bodianus axillaris (Bennett, 1832) B. mesothorax (Bloch & Schneider, 1801) B. neilli (Day 1867) Cheilinus chlorurus (Bloch, 1791) C. fasciatus (Bloch, 1791) C. trilobatus (Lacepde, 1802) C. undulatus (Rppell, 1835) Epibulus insidiator (Pallas, 1770) Hemigymnus fasciatus (Bloch, 1792) H. melapterus (Bloch, 1791) Oxycheilinus diagrammus (Lacepde, 1802) SCARIDAE Calotomus carolinus (Valenciennes, 1839) Cetoscarus bicolor (Rppell, 1828)
1 6 11 1 1 4 11 1 11 2 24 9 9 10 6 5 9 24 14 1 1 19 6 4 9 6 5 1 5 15 2 4 18 11 1 25 17 18 24 4 13
4% 23% 42% 4% 4% 15% 42% 4% 42% 8% 92% 35% 35% 38% 23% 19% 35% 92% 54% 4% 4% 73% 23% 15% 35% 23% 19% 4% 19% 58% 8% 15% 69% 42% 4% 96% 65% 69% 92% 15% 50%
1 33 25 1 2 9 13 1 31 1212 10 367 601 176 37 21 668 67 235 64 43 2 3 206 11 6 31 65 48 17 1 1 514 5 27 3 9 151 16 2 109 42 71 79 2882 11 24
108
120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 XVIII 136 137 138 139 XIX 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 XX 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163
Chlorurus capistratoides (Bleeker, 1849) C. sordidus (Forsskl, 1775) C. strongylocephalus (Bleeker, 1854) C. troschelii (Bleeker, 1853) Hipposcarus harid (Forsskl, 1775) Scarus frenatus (Lacepde, 1802) S. ghobban (Forsskl, 1775) S. niger (Forsskl, 1775) S. prasiognathos (Valenciennes, 1839) S. quoyi (Valenciennes, 1840) S. rubroviolaceus (Bleeker, 1849) S. russelii (Valenciennes, 1840) S. scaber (Valenciennes, 1840) S. tricolor (Bleeker, 1849) S. virdifucatus (Smith, 1956) Scarus sp. EPHIPPIDAE Platax boersi Bleeker, 1852 P. orbicularis (Forsskl, 1775) P. pinnatus (Linnaeus, 1758) P. teira (Forsskl, 1775) SIGANIDAE Siganus argenteus (Quoy and Gaimard, 1824) S. guttatus (Bloch, 1787) S. javus (Linnaeus, 1766) S. magnificus (Burgess, 1977) S. puelloides Woodland & Randall, 1979 S. stellatus (Forsskl, 1775) S. vermiculatus (Valenciennes, 1835) S. virgatus (Valenciennes, 1835) ACANTHURIDAE Acanthurus bariene (Lesson, 1830) A. leucocheilus (Herre, 1927) A. leucosternon (Bennett, 1832) A. lineatus (Linnaeus, 1758) A. maculiceps (Ahl, 1923) A. mata (Cuvier, 1829) A. nigricauda (Duncker and Mohr, 1929) A. tennentii Gnther, 1861 A. thompsoni (Fowler, 1923) A. triostegus (Linnaeus, 1758) A. tristis (Randall, 1993) A. xanthopterus (Valenciennes, 1835) Ctenochaetus binotatus (Randall, 1955) C. striatus (Quoy & Gaimard, 1824) C. truncatus (Randall & Clements, 2001) Naso brachycentron (Valenciennes, 1835)
13 26 17 11 3 8 14 26 17 22 18 7 9 15 11 14 1 1 3 1 7 14 19 5 12 8 2 7 7 1 12 9 4 3 17 3 6 1 14 11 15 20 10 3
50% 100% 65% 42% 12% 31% 54% 100% 65% 85% 69% 27% 35% 58% 42% 54% 4% 4% 12% 4% 27% 54% 73% 19% 46% 31% 8% 27% 27% 4% 46% 35% 15% 12% 65% 12% 23% 4% 54% 42% 58% 77% 38% 12%
67 557 61 113 6 22 132 550 264 803 84 17 20 64 19 68 21 3 13 4 1 622 77 111 324 22 53 19 2 14 2623 11 2 179 88 9 100 416 10 58 50 124 66 118 558 310 9
109
164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 XXI 173 174 XXII 175 176
N. brevirostris (Valenciennes, 1835) N. caeruleacauda (Randall, 1994) N. elegans (Rppell, 1829) N. hexacanthus (Bleeker, 1855) N. thynnoides (Valenciennes, 1835) N. tuberosus (Lacepde, 1801) N. unicornis (Forsskl, 1775) N. vlamingii (Valenciennes, 1835) Zebrasoma scopas (Cuvier, 1829) SPHYRAENIDAE Sphyraena barracuda (Walbaum, 1792) S. obtusata (Cuvier, 1829) SCOMBRIDAE
Grammatorcynus bilineatus (Quoy and Gaimard, 1824)
5 2 15 6 2 1 7 9 16 3 7 4 1
19% 8% 58% 23% 8% 4% 27% 35% 62% 12% 27% 15% 4%
Rastrelliger kanagurta (Cuvier, 1816)
12 16 91 44 37 1 22 27 265 1027 6 1021 24 7 17
110
Appendix VI. List of molluscs collected at sites in the Phuket region in April 2005.
CLASS POLYPLACOPHORA Family Ischnochitonidae Ischnochiton sp. Family Chitonidae Acanthopleura gemmata (Blainville, 1825) CLASS GASTROPODA Family Patellidae
Site numbers
1 2, 27
Cellana sp. Cellana cf. testudinaria (Linnaeus, 1758)

Family Haliotidae
1, 2, 6, 8, 9, 12, 18, 29 12 4, 7, 9, 25, 29 3, 4, 5, 6-12, 14-18, 20, 21, 23-25, 27-31 7 5, 6, 11, 14, 17, 20, 21, 23, 26, 28, 29, 31 2, 5, 6, 8-12, 14, 16-18, 20-22, 24-31 29 19, 25, 27 4, 5, 6, 14, 15, 17, 22, 24, 25, 28-31
Haliotis ovina (Gmelin, 1791) Haliotis varia (Linnaeus, 1758)

Family Turbinidae
Astralium cf. stellare (Gmelin, 1791) Astralium cf. rhodostomum (Lamarck, 1822) Turbo argyrostomus (Linnaeus, 1758) Turbo cinereus (Born, 1778) Turbo marmoratus (Linnaeus, 1758) Turbo petholatus (Linnaeus, 1758)
Family Trochidae
Calliostoma sp. Chrysostoma paradoxum (Born, 1778) Clanculus cf. clanguloides (Wood, 1828) Herpetopoma sp. Hybochelus cancellatus (Krauss, 1848) Monilea callifera (Lamarck, 1822) Monodonta sp. Pseudostomatella sp. Scutus unguis (Linnaeus, 1758) Tectus niloticus (Linnaeus, 1767) Tectus pyramis (Born, 1778) Thalotia histrio (Reeve, 1842) Trochus hanleyanus (Reeve, 1842)
Family Neritidae
12,16, 24, 31 29 29 24 2, 25 27 10, 19, 28 21, 23 5, 6, 14-18, 20, 23-26, 28-30 5, 10-12, 14, 15, 17-23, 25, 28, 31 25, 26 2, 4, 20, 23, 25-27, 29, 30 4, 26, 27, 29 1, 3, 5, 6, 9-11, 14-19, 21-29 23, 27 26-28 27, 29 11, 15 23 27 5, 9, 12, 24 11, 19, 20, 24, 25
Nerita albicilla (Linnaeus, 1758) Nerita costata (Gmelin, 1791) Nerita plicata (Linnaeus, 1758) Nerita polita (Linnaeus, 1758) Nerita undata (Linnaeus, 1758)
Family Neritopsidae
Neritopsis radula (Linnaeus, 1758)

Family Cerithiidae
Cerithium sp. Cerithium coralium (Kiener, 1841) Cerithium echinatum (Lamarck, 1822) Cerithium nesioticum (Pilsbry & Vanetta, 1906)
111
Cerithium nodulosus (Bruguire, 1792) Cerithium salebrosum (Sowerby, 1855) Cerithium tenuifilosum (Sowerby, 1866) Clypeomorus batilliariaeformis (Habe & Kosuge, 1966) Rhinoclavis aspera (Linnaeus, 1758) Rhinoclavis fasciatus (Bruguire, 1792) Rhinoclavis kochi (Philippi, 1848) Rhinoclavis sinensis (Gmelin, 1791) Family Potamididae Terebralia palustris (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Modulidae Modulus tectum (Gmelin, 1791) Family Littorinidae Echinolittorina trochoides (Gray, 1839) Echinolittorina vidua (Gould, 1839) Littoraria undulata (Gray, 1839) Family Strombidae Lambis chiragra (Linnaeus, 1758) Lambis scorpius (Linnaeus, 1758) Lambis truncatus (Humphrey, 1786) Strombus lentiginosus (Linnaeus, 1758) Strombus decorus (Rding, 1798) Strombus microurceus (Kira, 1959) Strombus urceus (Linnaeus, 1758) Strombus variabilis (Swainson, 1820) Family Hipponicidae Hipponix conicus (Schumacher, 1817) Family Capulidae Cheilea sp. Cheilea equestris (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Cypraeidae Cypraea annulus (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea arabica (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea argus (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea asellus (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea caputserpentis (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea carneola (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea cicercula (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea cribraria (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea cylindrica (Born, 1778) Cypraea depressa (Gray, 1824) Cypraea eglantine (Duclos, 1833) Cypraea erosa (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea globulus (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea fimbriata (Gmelin, 1791) Cypraea helvola (Linnaeus, 1758)
11, 15, 20, 28, 29 11, 19, 23-25 14 27, 29 1-3, 5, 9, 11, 12, 14-17, 19, 21, 22, 24, 25, 30, 31 8 14, 16, 22, 27, 30 8-10, 19, 22 23 5, 6, 21 27, 28 22 2, 3, 27-29 2, 6, 9-12, 14, 14, 17, 19, 20, 24, 25 2, 18, 20, 21 11, 12, 17, 20 8 3, 4, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14-17, 20, 24, 26, 29 9, 11, 15, 20, 23, 28 23, 27, 29 30 1, 2, 5, 9, 12, 18, 21, 29 12 8, 9, 12, 14, 16, 17, 21, 25, 29, 30 15, 22 27-30 1, 29 1, 2, 5, 22, 23, 25, 29 1, 2, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 23-26, 29 6, 12, 13, 16-19, 24 21, 23, 25, 29 6, 16, 30 6, 25, 29, 31 23 7, 19, 21 8, 14, 18, 21-23, 25, 29-31 9, 20 12, 29 1 112
Cypraea hirundo (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea kieneri (Hidalgo, 1906) Cypraea isabella (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea labrolineata (Gaskoin, 1848) Cypraea lynx (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea Mauritania (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea minoridens (Melvill, 1901) Cypraea moneta (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea nucleus (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea punctata (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea sp. Cypraea staphylaea (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea talpa (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea teres (Gmelin, 1791) Cypraea tigris (Linnaeus, 1758) Cypraea ursellus (Gmelin, 1791) Cypraea ziczac (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Ovulidae Ovula ovum (Linnaeus, 1758) Phenacovolva tokioi (Cate, 1973) Family Triviidae Trivia oryza (Lamarck, 1810) Family Velutinidae Coriocella hibyae (Wellens, 1991) Family Naticidae Eunaticina papilla (Gmelin, 1791) Natica onca (Rding, 1798) Polinices auriantius (Rding, 1798) Polinices incei (Philippi, 1851) Polinices mammilla (Linnaeus, 1758) Polinices simae (Dehsayes, 1838) Polinices sp. Family Bursidae Bursa bufonia (Gmelin, 1791) Bursa granularis (Rding, 1798) Bursa rosa (Perry, 1811) Tutufa bubo (Linnaeus, 1758) Tutufa rubeta (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Cassidae Semicassis sp. Casmaria erinacei (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Ranellidae Cymatium muricinum (Rding, 1798) Cymatium pileare (Linnaeus, 1758) Cymatium sp. (juvenile) Distorsio reticulata (Rding, 1798) Gyrineum gyrinum (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Tonnidae
12, 21, 24, 29 8, 30, 31 8, 10, 14, 16, 19, 29 3, 11, 14, 15, 31 10, 27 1, 8, 9 8 23 29 19 30 5, 19 5, 6, 10, 26 2, 10 6, 12, 19, 29 22 21 22 13 24, 29 19, 23, 24 27 3 3 23 2, 4, 21, 23, 27-30 23 27 18 12, 16 7, 10 2, 8, 24 31 18, 20, 21, 23 24 20, 29 30 23 6 1-5, 22
113
Malea pomum (Linnaeus, 1758) Tonna sp. Cerithiopsidae Cerithiopsid sp. 1 Cerithiopsid sp. 2 Cerithiopsid sp. 3 Family Muricidae Chicoreus banksii (Sowerby, 1841) Chicoreus microphyllus (Lamarck, 1816) Chicoreus palmarosae (Lamarck, 1822) Chicoreus ramosus (Linnaeus, 1758) Coralliophila costularis (Lamarck, 1816) Coralliophila neritoidea (Lamarck, 1816) Cronia margariticola (Broderip, 1833) Cronia sp. Drupa morum (Rding, 1798) Drupa ricinus (Linnaeus, 1758) Drupa rubusidaeus (Rding, 1798) Drupella cornus (Rding, 1798) Drupella rugosa (Born, 1778) Drupina lobata (Blainville, 1832) Morula granulata (Duclos, 1832) Morula margariticola (Broderip, 1832) Morula nodicostata (Pease, 1868) Morula spinosa (H. & A. Adams, 1855) Morula uva (Rding, 1798) Murex trappa (Rding, 1798) Naquetia triqueter (Born, 1778) Nassa francolina (Bruguire, 1789) Pterynotus bipinnatus (Reeve, 1845) Thais aculeata (Link, 1807) Thais alouina (Rding, 1798) Thais echinata (Blainville, 1832) Thais tuberosa (Rding, 1798) Family Turbinellidae Vasum ceramicum (Linnaeus, 1758) Vasum turbinellus (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Buccinidae Colubraria sp. Colubraria cf. castanea (Kuroda and Habe, 1952) Colubraria nitidula (Sowerby, 1833) Cantharus fumosus (Dillwyn, 1817) Cantharus pulcher (Reeve, 1846) Cantharus undosus (Linnaeus, 1758) Engina alveolata (Kiener, 1836) Engina curtisiana (Smith, 1884) Engina lineata (Reeve, 1846) Engina incarnata (Deshayes, 1834)
9, 16 29 16 23 23 1-3, 5, 16, 21, 24, 26, 27 11, 22 19 1 12 1-9, 12, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 22, 24-27 27 27 18 8, 11, 12, 15, 17, 18, 25 8, 11, 18, 19 2, 6, 8, 12, 15, 18, 22, 29 2, 3, 12, 15, 19, 20, 22, 27-31 22-24 2, 5, 6, 22-27, 29 28, 29 26-28, 31 2-7, 9, 10, 21-27, 29, 30 3, 4, 6, 7, 14, 21-26, 28, 31 27 21 10, 20 21 1, 6, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29 1, 11-13, 18, 23-26, 28, 29, 31 28 24, 29 5, 11 1, 2, 5, 6, 8-14, 17-20, 22, 24-26 1 13 14, 15 21, 22 16 3, 26 22 23 17, 19, 21, 23, 24, 26, 28, 29, 31 4 114
Engina mendicaria (Linnaeus, 1758) Engina sp. Phos textum (Gmelin, 1791) Pisania fasciculata (Reeve, 1846) Family Columbellidae Mitrella ligula (Duclos, 1840) Mitrella sp. Pyrene punctata (Bruguire, 1789) Pyrene scripta (Lamarck, 1822) Pyrene testudinaria (Link, 1807) Pyrene turturina (Lamarck, 1822) Family Nassariidae Nassarius albescens (Dunker, 1846) Nassarius graniferus (Kiener, 1834) Nassarius papillosus (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Fasciolariidae Latirolagena smaragdula (Linnaeus, 1758) Latirus lanceolatus (Reeve, 1847) Latirus turritus (Gmelin, 1791) Peristernia nassatula (Lamarck, 1822) Pleuroploca filamentosa (Rding, 1798) Pleuroploca trapezium (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Olividae Oliva annulata (Gmelin, 1791) Oliva caerulea (Rding, 1798) Oliva guttata (Rding, 1798) Olivella sp. Family Mitridae Imbricaria olivaeformis (Swainson, 1821) Imbricaria punctata (Swainson, 1821) Mitra aurantia (Gmelin, 1791) Mitra chrysostoma (Broderip, 1836) Mitra contracta (Swainson, 1820) Mitra coronata (Lamarck, 1811) Mitra eremitarum (Rding, 1798) Mitra fastigium (Reeve, 1845) Mitra mitra (Linnaeus, 1758) Mitra cf. procissa (Reeve, 1844) Mitra scutulata (Gmelin, 1791) Mitra tabanula (Lamarck, 1811) Mitra ustulata (Reeve, 1844) Neocancilla papilio (Link, 1807) Family Costellariidae Vexillum acuminatum (Gmelin, 1791) Vexillum cadaverosum (Reeve, 1844) Vexillum coronatum (Lamarck, 1811) Vexillum discolorium (Reeve, 1841) Vexillum microzonias (Lamarck, 1811)
2, 23, 27 9, 18, 23 3, 7, 21 29 11, 14, 16, 17 24 23, 25 23 22 2, 5, 6, 8, 10-14, 16-22, 28 11, 19, 23, 29 12, 14, 15 16 1, 5, 6, 11-13, 17, 18, 24 1-3, 5, 6, 18, 24 12, 26 6, 15, 20, 28 8, 9, 18, 20 23, 26 14 8, 11, 12, 15, 23 26 5 8, 14, 15, 20 12 28, 29 2, 18 29 2, 27, 31 26 24 27 2 9, 19, 20, 26 18 25 9, 12 17, 18 23 11, 18 23, 24 22 115
Vexillum mirabile (A. Adams, 1853) Vexillum pacificum (Reeve, 1845) Vexillum cf rusticum (Reeve, 1845) Vexillum sp. Family Cancellariidae Trigonostoma textilis (Kiener, 1841) Family Turridae Lophiotoma indica (Rding, 1798) Turridrupa bijubata (Reeve, 1843) Family Terebridae Hastula sp. Terebra affinis (Gray, 1834) Terebra chlorata (Lamarck, 1822) Terebra cf. columellaris (Hinds, 1844) Terebra crenulata (Linnaeus, 1758) Terebra dimidiata (Linnaeus, 1758) Terebra felina (Dillwyn, 1817) Terebra guttata (Rding, 1798) Terebra maculata (Linnaeus, 1758) Terebra subulata (Linnaeus, 1767) Terebra triseriata (Gray, 1834) Terenolla pygmaea (Hinds, 1844) Family Conidae Conus arenatus (Hwass in Bruguire, 1792) Conus chaldeus (Rding, 1798) Conus coronatus (Gmelin, 1791) Conus distans (Hwass in Bruguire, 1792) Conus eburneus (Hwass in Bruguire, 1792) Conus ebraeus (Linnaeus, 1758) Conus flavidus (Lamarck, 1810) Conus frigidus (Reeve, 1848) Conus generalis (Linnaeus, 1767) Conus glans (Hwass in Bruguire, 1792) Conus litoglyphus (Rding, 1798) Conus lividus (Hwass in Bruguire, 1792) Conus marmoreus (Linnaeus, 1758) Conus miles (Linnaeus, 1758) Conus miliaris (Hwass in Bruguire, 1792) Conus musicus (Hwass in Bruguire, 1792) Conus mustelinus (Hwass in Bruguire, 1792) Conus nussatella (Linnaeus, 1758) Conus planorbis (Born, 1778) Conus rattus (Hwass in Bruguire, 1792) Conus sp.1 Conus sp. 2 Conus sponsalis (Hwass in Bruguire, 1792) Conus striatus (Linnaeus, 1758) Conus terebra (Born, 1778)
22 19, 21-24 7, 11, 16 27 10 20 4 16, 17, 25 3, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 16 9 7 4, 16, 19 4 3, 14, 17 9, 12, 16, 16 3, 9 9, 11, 21 7, 8 11, 15, 19 2, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 19, 20 23 3 5, 11, 12 5, 16, 19, 20 23 12, 15, 17, 19, 20 26 11 16 11 10, 11, 17 14 6, 7, 11-14, 17, 18, 20, 21, 24, 25 23 2, 8, 10, 18, 21-23, 29 21, 30 15, 16, 24, 25 12, 20 2, 7, 8,10, 12, 17, 18, 26 30 30 4, 5, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 21-24, 31 1, 2, 9, 12, 25, 29 3, 8, 22, 23 116
Conus tessellatus (Born, 1778) Conus textile (Linnaeus, 1758) Conus vexillum (Gmelin, 1791) Conus vitulinus (Hwass in Bruguire, 1792) Family Eulimidae Eulimid sp. Family Acteonidae Pupa solidula (Linnaeus, 1758) Pupa sulcata (Gmelin, 1791) Family Bullidae Bulla ampulla (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Elysiidae Thurdilla sp. Family Plakobranchidae Plakobranchus ocellata (van Hasselt, 1824) Family Polyceridae Roboastra sp. Family Halgeridae Halgerda tessellata (Bergh, 1880) Family Chromodorididae Chromodoris annulata (Eliot, 1904) Chromodoris cf. elisabethina (Bergh, 1877) Family Phyllidiidae Phyllidia coelestis (Bergh, 1905) Phyllidia ocellata (Cuvier, 1804) Phyllidia varicosa (Lamarck, 1801) Phyllidia sp. Phyllidiella pustulosa (Cuvier, 1804) Phyllidiella cf. rudmani (Brunckhorst, 1993) Phyllidiella zeylanica (Kelaart, 1859) Phyllidiopsis cf. krempfi (Pruvot-Fol, 1957) Phyllidiopsis phiphiensis (Brunckhorst, 1993) Family Glaucidae Pteraeolidia ianthina (Angas, 1864) Family Scyllaeidae Scyllaea pelagica (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Flabellinidae Flabellina rubrolineata (ODonoghue, 1929) Family Aeolididae Aeolid sp. Family Onchidiidae Onchidium sp. 1 Onchidium sp. 2 Family Ellobiidae Melampus sp. CLASS BIVALVIA Family Mytilidae
2, 16 16, 23 5 2 14 4 4 23 1 22 17 23 27 4 6 1, 27 1-8, 13, 18, 21, 22, 25, 26 27 10, 14 13 13, 24, 26, 28 15, 18, 24 26 22 12, 10, 23 27 16 27 27 29
117
Lithophaga sp. Modiolus philippinarum (Hanley, 1843) Modiolus sp. Septifer sp. Family Arcidae Anadara granosa (Linnaeus, 1758) Arca navicularis (Bruguire, 1798) Arca cf. ventricosa (Lamarck, 1819) Barbatia amygdalumtotsum (Rding, 1798) Barbatia sp. Trisidos semitorta (Lamarck, 1819) Family Pteriidae Pinctada albina (Lamarck, 1819) Pinctada margaritifera (Linnaeus, 1758) Pteria pengiun (Rding, 1798) Family Malleidae Malleus albus (Lamarck, 1819) Vulsella vulsella (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Isognomonidae Isognomon isognomum (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Pinnidae Atrina vexillum (Born, 1778) Streptopinna saccata (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Limidae Ctenoides ales (Finlay, 1927) Lima fragilis (Gmelin, 1791) Lima lima (Link, 1807) Limaria orientalis (Adams & Reeve, 1850) Family Gryphaeidae Hyotissa hyotis (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Ostreidae Dendostrea sandvichensis (Sowerby, 1871) Lopha cristagalli (Linnaeus, 1758) Saccostrea cucullata (Born, 1778) Saccostrea sp. Family Pectinidae Chlamys sp. Comptopallium radula (Linnaeus, 1758) Gloripallium pallium (Linnaeus, 1758) Pectinid sp. 1 Pectinid sp. 2 Pectinid sp. 3 Pedum spondyloidaeum (Gmelin, 1791) Family Spondylidae Spondylus sp. 1
2, 3, 5-15, 17-31 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 20-31 7, 22 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 16 27 1-12, 14-20, 28-31 2-4, 6-10, 14-27, 29-31 9, 10, 21-27 27 28, 29 2, 3, 7-10, 12-14, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23-26, 2830 1, 7, 13, 15, 16, 23 2, 7, 23, 24, 27, 28 25-27 1, 4, 7, 18, 21, 22, 25-30 3 2-6, 9, 10, 14, 17, 19-21, 23, 30 12, 18, 19, 28, 30 2, 3, 4, 6, 14, 17, 18 3, 14, 29, 30 2, 3, 9, 10 1-7, 11, 13, 21, 23-31 3, 7, 10-12, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23, 24, 2631 1-4, 6-8, 10, 11, 13, 21, 22, 24-27, 29, 30 1-8, 10-12, 16-19, 21, 24-29, 31 4 29 9, 14, 25, 29, 31 1-6, 8-12, 14-17, 19-21, 23-26, 29, 31 16 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 26 14, 15, 18, 20 1-6, 8-10, 12, 14-31 2, 3, 5-7, 9, 10, 12-15, 17-19, 22, 23, 2628, 30 118
Spondylus sp. 2 Spondylus sp. 3 Family Anomiidae Anomia sp. Family Chamidae Chama sp. 1 Chama sp. 2 Family Fimbriidae Fimbria fimbriata (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Lucinidae Ctena bella (Conrad, 1837) Family Carditidae Cardita variegata (Bruguire, 1792) Family Cardiidae Cardiid sp. 1 Cardiid sp. 2 Acrosterigma unicolor (Sowerby, 1834) Fragum unedo (Linnaeus, 1758) Fragum fragum (Linnaeus, 1758) Vepricardium multispinosum (Sowerby, 1838) Family Tridacnidae Tridacna crocea Lamarck, 1819 Tridacna maxima (Rding, 1798) Tridacna squamosa (Lamarck, 1819) Family Tellinidae Tellina gargadia (Linnaeus, 1758) Tellina rostrata (Linnaeus, 1758) Tellina virgata (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Donacidae Donax cuneatus (Linnaeus, 1758) Family Mactridae Maropesta nicobarica (Gmelin, 1791) Family Veneridae Antigona restriculata (Sowerby, 1853) Antigona reticulata (Linnaeus, 1758) Callista chinensis (Holten, 1803) Dosinia sp. Lioconcha sp. Tapes literatus (Linnaeus, 1758) CLASS CEPHALOPODA Family Sepiidae Sepia sp. Family Octopodidae Octopus sp. 1 Octopus sp. 2
12, 14, 17, 19, 20-25, 27, 28, 30 24, 29 23, 25 1-7, 9-13, 15-19, 21-31 10 27, 30 27 6-10, 12, 14, 17, 18, 20, 23, 25-27, 30, 31 16, 17, 26 15 14, 18, 21, 28-30 4 4, 15 5, 9-12, 14-18, 20, 25, 26, 28, 31 1-4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 14, 17, 19, 20-31 4, 27, 28, 30 2-4, 6, 8-12, 14-17, 19, 21-31 27 27 27 27 4 21-23 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9-11, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 23-26, 28-31 28 8, 28 5, 8, 15, 21, 23, 26-28 21, 26, 28, 31
28 1, 9, 15 28
119
Appendix VII. Contact Details for Expedition Members: Gerald Allen Research Associate Western Australian Museum 1 Dreyer Road Roleystone, W.A. 6111 Australia 61 8 9496 1143 (O) 61 8 9397 6985 (F) tropical_reef@bigpond.com Mark Allen Marine Biologist Tropical Reef Research 1 Dreyer Road Roleystone, W.A. 6111 Australia 61 8 9496 1143 (O) 61 8 9397 6985 (F) lecuopogon@fastmail.fm David Doubilet, Contributing Photographer, National Geographic Magazine PO Box 232 Clayton, NY 13624 315 686 1209 (O) 315 686 1308 (F) WWW.DavidDoubilet.com douber@aol.com Alan Dynner (Vice-Chair Overseers of New England Aquarium) Vice President and Chief Legal Officer Eaton Vance Corp 255 State Street, Boston 02109, 617-598-8180 (O) 617-598-0432 (F) adynner@eatonvance.com Jennifer Hayes Photographic Assistant National Geographic Magazine 1145 17th Street, NW Washington DC 20036 315 778 2199 (O) 315 686 1308 (F) jhayes88@aol.com
120
Jeff Herzog Production Coodinator New England Aquarium Central Wharf Boston, MA, 02110, USA 617-973-6017 (O) 617-973-0242 (F) jherzog@neaq.org Niphon Phongsuwan Senior Marine Biologist Phuket Marine Biological Center P.O. Box 60, Phuket 83000, Thailand niphon@hotmail.com Kitithorn Sanpanich Marine biologist Institute of Marine Science, Burapha University 169 Longhadbangsaen Street, Tambon Saensuk, Amphur Moeng Chonburi Province Thailand 20131 66-38-391671 (O) 66-38-391674 (F) kitithorn@bims.buu.ac.th kitithor@buu.ac.th tikbangsaen@yahoo.com Ukkrit Satapoomin, Marine Biologist Phuket Marine Biological Center P.O. Box 60, Phuket 83000, Thailand 66-076-391128 (O) 66-076-200704 (O) 66-076-391127 (F) ukkrit@phuketinternet.co.th Gregory S. Stone Vice President Global Marine Programs New England Aquarium Central Wharf Boston, MA, 02110, USA 617-973-5229 (O) 617-973-0242 (F) gstone@neaq.org.
121
Emre Turak Coral Ecologist CORMEC 1 rue Franois Villon 95000, Cergy, France 33 1 30304286 ( O and F) emreturak@wanadoo.fr Charlie Veron, Senior Principle Research Scientist, Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville MSO 4810, Australia jveron@aims.gov.au 61 7 4778 4609 j.veron@aims.gov.au Fred E. Wells, Principal Program Manager Fish and Fish Habitat Protection Western Australian Department of Fisheries 3rd Floor, The Atrium 168 St Georges Terrace Perth WA 6000 61 8 9482 7342 61 8 9482 7389 (F) fwells@fish.wa.gov.au
122
NEW ENGLAND AQUARIUM TECHNICAL REPORT 02-05 2005 New England Aquarium
a d
a) Diverse and healthy coral growth in Me Yai Bay, North Surin Island. b) Dense staghorn coral beds in Koh Torinla, Surin Islands. c) Toppled large Porites coral heads in Yong Kasem Bay, Phiphi Don Island. d) Debris and fine sediment deposits on lower slope below 20m at Chong Khad Bay, North Surin Island. e) Piles of staghorn rubble and broken Acropora plates on the West side of Koh Phai Island.

Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami Affected Corals - Thailand - Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami Affected Corals - Thailand - Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT NOVEMBER 15, 2005

Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami-affected Reefs of Thailand

Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami-affected Reefs of Thailand

Gerald R. Allen and Gregory S. Stone, Editors

Final Technical Report November 15, 2005

Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami-Affected Reefs of Thailand

Coral Reef Fishes of the East Andaman Sea, Thailand

Molluscs of the Phuket region, Thailand

Rapid Assessment Survey of Tsunami-Affected Reefs of Thailand

Gerald R. Allen and Gregory S. Stone, Editors

Figure 1. Philkade at the Phi Phi Islands.

Figure 3. Approximate cruise track of Philkade: A) northern section; B) southern section.

Table 1. Summary of tsunami-assessment sites.

302 318 95 103 40 30 3.3

380 155 85 20 0.9

301 106 61 18 0.4

485 135 12 59 120 32

131 100* 18 51 30 26 0.8

Pocilloporidae Acroporidae Montipora Acropora Agariciidae Fungiidae Mussidae Faviidae Poritidae

109 124 84 118 71 49 93 191 98 103 90 97

118 120 119

104 92 107 104 96 86 83 108 95 97 217

94 105 95 101 62 54 98 87 184

General reef status

Clear Water Similan

Tachai and Bon Islands

Clear, deep water and offshore less damage

Shallow, less clear water and nearshore more damage

Phuket (Patong Bay) No. of IV sites % 2 50 1 1 25 2 1 25 3 Total 4

Phi Phi Islands No. of IV sites 2 0 3 1 3 2 2 4 Total 10

Racha Island No. of IV sites 2 0 2 2 Total 4

Figure 9. Summary results of line-transect surveys.

100 % bottom cover 80 60 40 20 0 Surin Similan Patong Racha Phiphi

Hard coral Macro Algae Rubble Other

Soft coral Sponge Sand

Conclusions from this study include:

Coral Reef Fishes of the East Andaman Sea, Thailand

Ten largest families of East Andaman fishes.

Species 174 163 175 136 160 165 161 166

Species 183 213 187 186 111 201 212 173

Species 164 205 191 193 161 156 158 162

Species 178 178 171 181 172 158 160 34

None or light impact Moderate impact Severe impact

Avg. spp. per site 172.9 175.5 167.0

Table 11. Six richest fish sites for fish diversity.

213 212 205 201 193 191

Rank General Area

8-10 11-20 25-31 1-7 23-24 21-22

Avg. species/site 187 182 171 162 160 159

Family Congridae Pseudochromidae Plesiopidae Opistognathidae Haemulidae

Pomacentridae Tripterygiidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Blenniidae Gobiidae Gobiidae Siganidae Monacanthidae

Penang, Malaysia Phuket, Thailand Undescribed

No. sites where seen 31 47 28 28 9 7 6

% of total sites 47.69 83.92 49.12 52.83 18.0 15.55 12.76

Severely impacted Severely impacted Lightly impacted Lightly impacted

Area (m2) 200 200 200 200

136 102 318 785

Biomass (kg) 0.79 1.356 2.842 5.481

Table 17. Average values for Iboih fish biomass transects

Avg. no. species

Severely impacted Lightly impacted

Avg. Biomass (kg) 1.073 4.1615

Acanthuridae 9.9% Scaridae 10.9%