Coral Reef Diagnostics

Chagos Archipelago - Great Chagos Bank West (BITB45)

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)
2015-03-23
Coordinates
-6.0508, 71.5350
Coral cover
46%
Benthic surveys
Coral bleached
7.4%
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
13
Site summary

A sheltered lagoon reef at about 26 m inside Three Brothers where Acropora thickets and plate stands sit on white carbonate sand, with almost no fleshy algae. Unusually for Chagos, Acropora becomes more dominant with depth; one large table shows pale mottling but no clear bleaching event. Surveyed on the Living Oceans Foundation's Global Reef Expedition.

Max. depth dived
25.7 m
dive-log maximum
Water temp. during survey
29.9°C
+1.0°C vs the 2015 mean sea temperature (28.9°C)
Bottom time
46 min
in at 11:29

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

12 of these 13 photographs are shown beside the text that discusses them under "Site description" below.

13

Photo credit & attribution

Site description

Setting

BITB45 is a protected submerged bank reef inside the Three Brothers lagoon at 26.4 m, surveyed 23 March 2015.

General benthic features

What replaces algae is open ground: 22.5% bare substrate and 10.7% turf-on-sediment, so the reef reads as coral thickets and plate stands set on white carbonate sand (e.g., Image 1, Image 2, Image 8, Image 12, Image 15, Image 16).

Across 23 genera, 64th of 109 and far below the 33 to 34 of neighboring sites, Acropora leads at 21.3% of the benthos and Porites at 12.2%, four genera holding 91% of the coral and evenness at just 0.50 (e.g., Image 5, Image 6, Image 9).

Coral cover

Formal transects recorded 45.6% coral against just 24.7% algae — 35th of 109 Chagos sites for cover but 99th for algae, the bottom decile — and fleshy turf is only 3.35% of the benthos, 103rd of 109 and among the lowest recorded anywhere in the dataset. The profile runs opposite to most Chagos reefs — Acropora climbing from 15.65% of the benthos shallow to 26.93% deep, 57% of that stratum's coral, while algae halves and bare substrate nearly triples to 32.9% — but it is descriptive only: the deep stratum rests on three transects reading 69%, 36%, and 36.2% and yet supplies half the headline number. Method agreement is the tightest of this group (CoralNet 35.6%, Coralscapes 35.9%), but the three must still not be averaged. Coral cover: 46%. 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 24.7% 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 45.6% · CoralNet points 35.6% · Coralscapes masks 35.9% (13 frames). These products have different sampling footprints and denominators and should not be averaged.

Stressors

Bleaching on the canonical % bleaching (2nd training) column is 7.44%, 56th of 110 dives. All 13 frames were reviewed and show pallor without a demonstrated event: pale mottling and white patches on one large table, unresolved from a single still, plus genuine old partial mortality on another (e.g., Image 3).

Two of the seven bleached point labels behind the site figure fall inside a nudibranch macro that is not habitat imagery at all (e.g., Image 4, Image 11).

No crown-of-thorns, disease front, or predation.

Comparisons with other data

No prior survey data from this site. If you would like to share yours, please email us.

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)45.6
CoralNet44.5
In-house DINOv339.2
CoralSCOP edited36.1
Claude33.3

Data & links

All images from Coral Reef Diagnostics. Data are from Coral Reef Diagnostics.

© Coral Reef Diagnostics.