Coral Reef Diagnostics

Chagos Archipelago - Great Chagos Bank North (BINI77)

Khaled bin Sultan Living Oceans Foundation — Global Reef Expedition
⬇ Download this page as a report card
05
Photo: Anderson Mayfield/Coral Reef Diagnostics
Survey date(s)
2015-04-20
Coordinates
-5.7059, 72.3241
Coral cover
43%
Benthic surveys
Coral bleached
16.1%
Observations
Heat stress
Today’s heat load
16 Sep 2026 · No heat stress
5-year thermal stress load
5-year mean max. degree heating weeks (DHW)
2021–2025
NOAA Coral Reef Watch — Chagos virtual station
i 5-year mean max. DHW is the mean of the annual maximum DHWs over the five complete years named above, not conditions today.
More infoChagos (NOAA CRW virtual station)
Photographs
11
Site summary

A sheltered patch reef about 22 m down inside Nelson Island's lagoon, where 43% coral cover shifts from Acropora in the shallows to Porites at depth over clean, coralline-crusted rock rather than silt. Stark white tables and branching colonies back up a published 16% bleaching figure, and much of the table-coral framework appears to be standing dead. Surveyed on the Living Oceans Foundation's Global Reef Expedition.

Max. depth dived
25.2 m
dive-log maximum
Water temp. during survey
29.5°C
+0.5°C vs the 2015 mean sea temperature (29.0°C)
Bottom time
59 min
in at 07:59

Three independent survey stations shown with the program’s logo — click one to see how far it is from this site.

One other CRD dive site within 5 km shown in orange — click a marker to open its page.

7 of these 11 photographs are shown beside the text that discusses them under "Site description" below.

1479

Photo credit & attribution

Site description

Setting

BINI77 is a protected, submerged patch reef inside Nelson Island's lagoon at 21.8 m, surveyed 20 April 2015.

General benthic features

Across 22 genera, Porites leads with 39% of all coral, then Acropora at 20%.

Coral cover

Formal transects recorded 43.0% coral against 36.0% algae — 40th of 109 Chagos sites for cover — and unusually for a lagoonal site the algae is hard encrusting growth rather than sediment: coralline algae takes 18.2% of the benthos and clean turf 11.8%, while sediment-laden turf is almost nothing at 0.9% (e.g., Image 3, Image 6).

The depth profile is the finding: cover climbs gently from 40.88% to 45.50% while the leading genus changes at every station — Acropora is 41% of the coral at the shallowest transect, no genus dominates at mid-depth, and Porites takes 68% at the deepest, the two crossing over in between. The image methods read 25 points below the transects — CoralNet 17.6%, Coralscapes 18.0%. Coral cover: 43%. Live hard coral measured on the in situ benthic transects of the LOF BIOT-1 expedition (Mayfield & Dempsey 2026, Oceans, supplemental S1), against algal cover of 36% of the benthos. The transect figure is this site's authoritative cover value; no image-derived product overrides it. Across methods the same reef reads: transects 43% · CoralNet points 17.6% · Coralscapes masks 18% (11 frames). These products have different sampling footprints and denominators and should not be averaged.

Stressors

Published bleaching is 16.1%, ranked 11th of 98 on the site table's Mean(%bleaching) column, the first CoralNet training run rather than the canonical % bleaching (2nd training) column, and the photographs support it unambiguously: a single stark-white table alone in one frame, clustered white plates in another, cream-white branching colonies beside pigmented neighbors (e.g., Image 14, Image 8, Image 15).

Much of the extensive tabular framework appears to be standing dead and coralline-veneered, which would reconcile a photograph full of tables with a Porites-led transect (e.g., Image 2, Image 13).

No disease or crown-of-thorns was seen.

Comparisons with other data

No independent survey was made at this exact site; the nearest ones are listed in the table below.

CV model comparison

Headline is the transect value; every other row is listed beside it for comparison and none is averaged in. ⚠ The reference here is NOT the same instrument as at Mauritius, Oman, Kenya or the Red Sea.
More infoThose are point counts on the photographs; this is a diver swimming a transect. The models and the reference never saw the same thing. ⚠ SITE-LEVEL ONLY. The 2,500 frames were not associated with any transect taken within 200 m of them, so transect-vs-image comparisons are site means, never frames. The transect value is already in the pin `cover` field (109 of 112 pins, sourced to the paper's suppl. S1) and is read from there, never re-imported. The transect is THE coral-cover value for this site and stands alone. The rows below it are a methods comparison only: no computer-vision value is averaged with it, feeds the headline, or carries over to the site's cover figure (Anderson, 2026-09-22).
MethodHard-coral cover (%)
Transect (published)43.0
CoralNet29.8
In-house DINOv326.1
CoralSCOP edited33.5
Claude25.7

Independent surveys nearby

Within 5 km, 3 independent survey stations recorded hard coral cover in 2015. The most recent nearby survey is from 2015, so these values predate recent heat stress. This site's own estimate (43%) sits 25.8 points above the range of these surveys (3.4–17%); the methods differ, so the comparison is context, not a like-for-like test.

Collected by other programs using different methods (the XL Catlin Seaview Survey uses photo-transects with automated image annotation), so these are context for the figures above, not a like-for-like comparison. Where a station was surveyed more than once the range is shown. Station names are not dive-site names.

Independent survey data near this site
AgencySite / locationDateHard coral cover (%)DistanceLink
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 36026201512%2.20 km—
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 36024201517%2.66 km—
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 3602520153.4%3.35 km—

Data & links

All images from Coral Reef Diagnostics. Data are from Coral Reef Diagnostics and the organizations named in the data-sources table above.

© Coral Reef Diagnostics.