Coral Reef Diagnostics

Chagos Archipelago - Great Chagos Bank West (BIEA26)

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)
2015-03-17
Coordinates
-6.1722, 71.3319
Coral cover
24%
± 3.2% SE, n = 15 transects · Benthic surveys
Coral bleached
8.6%
Observations
Heat stress
Most recent heat load record
26 Oct 2026 · Bleaching Warning
5-year thermal stress load
5-year mean max. degree heating weeks (DHW)
2021–2025
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 Archipelago, UK (NOAA CRW virtual station)
Photographs
32
Site summary

BIEA26 has abundant fish life: a nurse-type shark, a large speckled moray, a mauve-pink snapper, and clouds of anthias and fusiliers. Published cover is 24% on the survey transects, led by Porites (14% of the benthos, more than half of the coral), and later frames cross a low-relief plain of pavement, rubble, and sand. Surveyed on the Living Oceans Foundation's Global Reef Expedition.

Max. depth dived
26.8 m
sample-sheet maximum
Water temp. during survey
29.2°Cii
CTD-cast midpoint of 28.8–29.6°C
+0.3°C vs the 2015 mean sea temperature (28.9°C)
ii Station CTD-cast midpoint, not a dive reading: midpoint of the station's maximum and minimum CTD water temperature (Living Oceans Foundation Chagos station records); range 28.8–29.6°C.
Bottom time
56 min
in at 10:37

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

Five other CRD dive sites with their own pages within 5 km shown in orange — click a marker to open its page.

31 of the 32 photographs on this page are shown beside the text that discusses them under "Site description" below.

3

Photo credit & attribution

Site description

Setting

Reef type: fringing reef, leeward from its position on the north side of the Eagle Islands reef platform relative to the prevailing southeast trade winds (windward on Anderson's field sheet).

General benthic features

The transect genus list makes this a Porites-led reef (LOF BIOT-1 survey, the mean of all of this station's transects): Porites 14% — more than half of all coral cover at the site — then Pocillopora 3.0%, Montipora 2.2%, Acropora 1.0%, Pavona 0.7%, Ctenella 0.5%, Favia and Goniastrea 0.3% each, Favites, Astreopora, and Cyphastrea 0.2% each, Lobophyllia, Symphyllia, Pachyseris, Leptastrea, Alveopora, Montastrea, Psammocora, Gardineroseris, and Galaxea 0.1% each, and Fungia, Cantharellus, Leptoseris, Goniopora, and Platygyra <0.1% each — 25 genera in all. The low Acropora figure (1.0%) is a transect result, not a framing accident of the photographs. The substrate and algal categories run crustose coralline algae 22%, bare substrate 19%, turf 14%, erect algae 5.9%, sediment-laden turf 9.2%, non-coral invertebrates 4.7%, macroalgae 1.3%, and cyanobacteria 0.3%. In Image 1, Image 2, Image 5, Image 7, Image 8, Image 9, Image 10, Image 12, Image 13, Image 17, Image 18, Image 19, Image 20, Image 23, Image 24, Image 29, Image 33, and Image 36 the camera works a dense, structurally complex reef top — a mosaic of small, tightly packed colonies on CCA-crusted pavement under clouds of anthias and fusiliers. Image 6, Image 12, Image 13, Image 18, Image 29, and Image 36 show dense benthic cover.

Coral occurs as patches and clusters rather than a continuous carpet: rounded and lobed massive domes compatible with Porites, cream and tan digitate and nodular thickets, encrusting and small foliose forms, bushy Pocillopora-type colonies and scattered small branching colonies in mauve, purple, and olive, among broad expanses of pale exposed carbonate, rubble and low turf with pink and maroon coralline crusts on the harder surfaces. Tabular Acropora is scarce in these frames — consistent with the transect's 1.0% Acropora. Image 8 and Image 24 hold the most striking piece of structure in the set, a large gray-white foliose colony perched on a bommie with crinoids and red sponge beneath it, and Image 10 is an isolated foliose or leathery colony standing alone on white sand. Then the dive crosses onto a flat, pale, low-relief plain of consolidated pavement, rubble, and coarse sand carrying only scattered small colonies — Image 14, Image 15, Image 26, Image 27, Image 30, Image 32, Image 34, and Image 35 are all that same barren ground.

Coral cover

Stressors

Survey conditions on 17 Mar 2015 at 6.17221°S, 71.33191°E: station CTD temperature 29.2°C, salinity 34.5. Anderson's published percentage bleached for this site is 8.61% (% bleaching (2nd training), Mayfield & Dempsey supplemental file S1). Two frames stand outside the survey. Image 19 shows a bright green St Patrick's Day hat, shamrock hatband and all, set down on top of a living Pocillopora-type colony against white sand. A prop rather than equipment, recorded because it is resting directly on live tissue. Colonies through these frames are normally pigmented in brown, olive, cream, tan, and mauve; the wide pale areas read as old exposed carbonate and turf-covered pavement rather than as recently bleached tissue, and no colony in the set is unambiguously white. No disease lesion or clear predation scar resolves at these ranges, and no crown-of-thorns is present in any frame. The photographs do not measure this site's bleached fraction and none is estimated from them: Anderson's published 8.61% (Mayfield & Dempsey supplemental file S1) is the authoritative number. Four of the 13 points the photo annotation scored as bleached sit where the frames do not support them (two bleached-Acropora points on Image 10, a frame holding one brown laminar colony on white sand with no Acropora in it, and two on Image 4, a 70%-water diver frame; Image 26 and Image 27 carry three more on turf pavement). Anderson's sampling sheet records two Pocillopora colonies sampled here, ChJo75 (26.2 m) and ChJo76 (9.5 m), both large and healthy. Anderson's sheet records no P. damicornis or P. acuta at this site; these colonies were collected for a collaborator. Pocillopora acuta colonies from elsewhere in the archipelago were analyzed in Thomas et al. (2026, Global Ecology and Biogeography 35:e70305, https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.70305). The Living Oceans Foundation transects here recorded 0.3% cyanobacteria and no recently dead coral.

Fish and other fauna

Sponges appear in 21 frames, urchins in 1, and anemones in 1. The macrofauna is notable, and nearly all of it is in the second half. Four frames hold sharks. Image 15, Image 26, and Image 32 appear to show one animal: broad-headed, dorsals set well back over the pelvics, caudal long and low — compatible with a tawny nurse shark; Image 32 is the clearest. Image 27 shows a slimmer animal with a more forward first dorsal, plausibly a whitetip reef shark and probably a second individual, but neither call is safe from these frames, so both are left hedged. A large olive-yellow, densely speckled moray compatible with the giant moray appears in Image 17 and again in Image 2 and Image 20; whether that is one animal or two is not resolvable. Image 30 and Image 35 are portraits of a single mauve-pink, orange-eyed snapper. Also a jack or trevally (Carangidae) over the barren pavement in Image 14, a strongly magenta-cast frame, raccoon-type butterflyfish in Image 6 and Image 22, a powder-blue surgeonfish in Image 34, and dense anthias over almost every reef-top frame — thickest in Image 6, Image 13, and Image 24.

Comparisons with other data

Perry et al. (2015) surveyed a nearby station (Eagle Island north, Great Chagos Bank) in April 2015, 0.24 km from the pin. Cover values from that work are not among the survey records shown on this page. Within 5 km, one independent station, XL Catlin Seaview Survey at transect 36003, 4.89 km away, read 13% in 2015.

Other notes

The transects were run in three depth strata (D2 29%, D3 23%, and D4 11% coral). All 32 habitat frames were reviewed (the second dive of 17 March). No quadrat and no scale bar appear anywhere in the set; the only measuring object is the white banded transect pole a diver carries in Image 21. Anderson's field sheet records the aspect (LOF fellowship 2016 workbook: 'fringing reef', 'windward'); the expedition's 933-site table classes the station as 'intermediate' (fringing reef). The aspect shown, 'leeward', comes from the station's GPS position on the north side of the Eagle Islands reef platform relative to the prevailing southeast trade winds (about 145° off the upwind direction; the reef-edge reading agrees), which takes precedence over slope facing, lagoon shelter, imagery, and field labels. Esri World Imagery (no LOF habitat map covers this station; the LOF Chagos habitat map covers only Peros Banhos) puts the pin on the north side of Eagle Island near its northeastern end, facing north-northwest (about 330°): windward for the northwest monsoon winds of the March survey and leeward for the southeast trades of April to November.

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. None of the Chagos photographs (2,500 frames across all stations) can be matched to a transect taken within 200 m, so transect-vs-image comparisons use site means, never individual frames. The transect value is the mean of all of this station's own transects in the expedition's per-transect benthic data. 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.
MethodHard coral cover (%)Photos (n) ± SE
Transect mean (all transects)23.8
CoralNet21.0n = 30 · SE 1.8
In-house DINOv314.1n = 30 · SE 1.5
CoralSCOP edited27.2n = 30 · SE 3.1
Claude14.5n = 30 · SE 2.5

The four computer-vision methods disagree by 13.1 pp (14.1–27.2%) and read on both sides of the in-water transect (23.8%); the headline is the in-water transect because a diver transect is independent of the photographs.

Independent surveys nearby

Within 5 km, 1 independent survey station 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 (24%) is not compared with these surveys: none lies within 2 km.

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.

Independent survey data near this site
AgencySite / locationDateHard coral cover (%)DistanceLink
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 36003201513%4.89 kmdoi:10.14264/uql.2019.930

Data & links

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.

References

  1. Mayfield AB, Dempsey AC (2026). Using tourist diver images to estimate coral cover and bleaching prevalence in a remote Indian Ocean coral reef system. Oceans 7(1):1. PDF
  2. Perry CT, Murphy GN, Graham NAJ, Wilson SK, Januchowski-Hartley FA, East HK (2015). Remote coral reefs can sustain high growth potential and may match future sea-level trends. Scientific Reports 5:18289. DOI
  3. Gonzalez-Rivero M, et al. (2019). Seaview Survey photo-quadrat and image classification dataset. The University of Queensland (UQ eSpace) data collection. DOI