Part of the regional summaries: Chagos Archipelago - Victory Bank / Great Chagos Bank North and Chagos Archipelago

A submerged bank reef (dived to 30.9 m) inside the Nelson Island lagoon, dominated by Acropora with few other genera and heavy fleshy turf, at 34% coral cover. Published bleaching was 5.0%, while the photographs show several stark-white colonies, at least one of them clearly bleached; a whitetip reef shark and dogtooth tuna were seen. Surveyed on the Living Oceans Foundation's Global Reef Expedition.
Four 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 with its own page within 5 km shown in orange — click a marker to open its page.
🗺 Detailed map of the Global Reef Expedition dive sites, Nelson Island, Chagos (Khaled bin Sultan Living Oceans Foundation; opens in a new window)
9 of the 25 photographs on this page are shown beside the text that discusses them under "Site description" below.
BINI79 is a protected submerged bank reef inside the Nelson Island lagoon, surveyed 20 April 2015 on a dive to 30.9 m (e.g., Image 7, Image 28).
Genus richness is 12 genera, with Acropora holding 63% of all coral and the top five genera 97% of it. Cover peaks sharply at the middle station, 44% against 27% shallow and 25% deep, and at the deepest transect Acropora falls to a third of its mid-depth value while Porites nearly catches it and bare substrate reaches 30%. Acropora was the most common coral genus on this station's transects (21% of the benthos), followed by Pocillopora (4.4%), Porites (3.8%), Favia (1.8%), Stylophora (1.6%), and Galaxea (0.5%).
What the data say. Published bleaching is 5.0% (CoralNet analysis of the survey images; Mayfield & Dempsey 2026, suppl. S1); no colonies were sampled here (Anderson's sampling sheet: no Seriatopora, P. acuta, or P. damicornis present).
What Anderson saw. The photographs show stark-white or strongly pale colonies beside pigmented neighbors in five frames (e.g., Image 9, Image 16, Image 20, Image 22, Image 23), including two large tables white at the margins with fouled brown centers; the table in Image 9 is white across its whole surface with its polyp texture intact, so it is bleached rather than dead.
The Living Oceans Foundation transects here recorded no cyanobacteria and 0.1% recently dead coral.
A whitetip reef shark, dogtooth tuna, and one cushion star were recorded; no crown-of-thorns or disease appears in the photographs (e.g., Image 24, Image 27), although Anderson's field sheet notes “mostly dead coral, COTS outbreak likely, low diversity/cover at 12 m.”
The XL Catlin Seaview Survey covered a nearby station (transect 36026) in 2015, 0.41 km from the pin; we could not confirm that it is the same reef. Within 5 km, four XL Catlin Seaview Survey stations recorded station-year means of 3.4–17% hard coral cover in 2015; the nearest, XL Catlin Seaview Survey at transect 36026, 0.41 km away, read 12% in 2015.
| Method | Hard coral cover (%) | Photos (n) ± SE |
|---|---|---|
| Transect mean (all transects) | 33.9 | |
| CoralNet | 19.4* | n = 15 · SE 3.7 |
| In-house DINOv3 | 21.6* | n = 15 · SE 4.4 |
| CoralSCOP edited | 21.2* | n = 15 · SE 4.1 |
| Claude | 17.9* | n = 15 · SE 4.5 |
The four computer-vision methods agree within 3.7 pp (17.9–21.6%) and read 12.3–16.0 pp below the in-water transect (33.9%); the headline is the in-water transect because a diver transect is independent of the photographs.
*Based on only 15 reef-habitat photos; this estimate is less certain.
See a more detailed, stand-alone version of this table.
Within 5 km, 4 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 (34%) sits 17 points above the range of these station-year means up to 2 km away (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 cell shows either the range of its values or, as a single value, the mean of surveys made in one year. Station names are not dive-site names.
| Agency | Site / location | Date | Hard coral cover (%) | Distance | Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| XL Catlin Seaview Survey | transect 36026 | 2015 | 12% | 0.41 km | doi:10.14264/uql.2019.930 |
| XL Catlin Seaview Survey | transect 36024 | 2015 | 17% | 1.58 km | doi:10.14264/uql.2019.930 |
| XL Catlin Seaview Survey | transect 36025 | 2015 | 3.4% | 1.71 km | doi:10.14264/uql.2019.930 |
| XL Catlin Seaview Survey | transect 36027 | 2015 | 14% | 4.83 km | doi:10.14264/uql.2019.930 |
All images from Coral Reef Diagnostics. Data are from the Khaled bin Sultan Living Oceans Foundation Global Reef Expedition, Coral Reef Diagnostics, and the organizations named in the data sources above.
© Coral Reef Diagnostics.