Coral Reef Diagnostics

Chagos Archipelago - Peros Banhos (BIPB60)

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)
2015-04-14
Coordinates
-5.4434, 71.7499
Coral cover
42%
± 2.2% SE, n = 19 transects · Benthic surveys
Coral bleached
12%
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
44
Site summary

A windward fore reef slope on the west rim of Peros Banhos (dived to 30.6 m) with 24 coral genera and 42% cover, Acropora-fronted in the shallows and Porites-built below 8 m, with 12% of coral bleached. Photos show bleached colonies, nurse sharks, a school of surgeonfish over sea fans and whip corals, and a phyllidiid nudibranch. Surveyed on the Living Oceans Foundation's Global Reef Expedition.

Max. depth dived
30.6 m
sample-sheet maximum
Water temp. during survey
30.0°Cii
Station CTD reading
+1.0°C vs the 2015 mean sea temperature (29.0°C)
ii Station CTD value (LOF station records), not a dive reading: the CTD cast at this station recorded 29.99°C and no minimum (Living Oceans Foundation Chagos station records).
More infoAnderson's sampling-sheet note for the dive gives nearly 30°C; the CTD cast is the station value shown.
Bottom time
54 min
in at 08:27

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

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

17 of the 44 photographs on this page are shown beside the text that discusses them under "Site description" below.

569101214151617181922232829303132333537383942464748

Photo credit & attribution

Site description

Setting

BIPB60 is a windward fore reef slope on the west rim of Peros Banhos, dived to 30.6 m on 14 April 2015 (station CTD reading 30.0°C), with 42% coral cover and 24 coral genera (LOF transects, 2015).

General benthic features

It is emphatically a Porites reef. Porites alone holds 25% of the benthos — 60% of all coral recorded — with Acropora a distant second at 6.5%, then Pocillopora 3.3% and Montipora 3.0%, and a twenty-genus tail below 0.7%: Pavona, Goniastrea, Astreopora, Leptastrea, Heliopora, Montastrea, Favia, Millepora, Stylophora, Goniopora, Favites, Galaxea, Gardineroseris, Cyphastrea, Turbinaria, Platygyra, Leptoseris, Fungia, Coscinaraea, and Cantharellus. Crustose coralline algae hold 18% of the benthos, turf 14%, bare substrate 10%, non-coral invertebrates 8.2%, erect algae 3.5%, and macroalgae 1.2% (e.g., Image 26, Image 44).

The depth structure is a clean genus handover. The compositional shift across that peak is the real story: above 8 m, Acropora leads at 19% of the benthos with Porites second at 13%. From 8 m down the order inverts and never recovers — Porites takes 33% at 8–12 m against Acropora's 6.5%, then 26% versus 4.5% at 12–18 m, and 20% versus 3.6% at 18–25 m. The site-level figure of 25% Porites is therefore not a uniform value but the average of a reef that is Acropora-fronted in the shallows and Porites-built below them. Algal cover runs inversely, highest in the shallows (48%) and lowest at depth (29%). Two wide frames taken into the surface light show a school of large unicornfish or surgeonfish over the reef, with gorgonian sea fans and thin whip or wire corals standing off the substrate, neither of which appears in the transect genus list (e.g., Image 1, Image 25).

Formal surveys give 42% coral, 39% algae, and 8.2% non-coral invertebrates, the coral dominated by Porites below 8 m and Acropora above it. Surgeonfish schools work the reef (e.g., Image 43, Image 45), and a phyllidiid nudibranch was on the coralline pavement (e.g., Image 2).

Coral cover

Stressors

Published bleaching is 12% (CoralNet analysis of the survey images; Mayfield & Dempsey 2026, suppl. S1), and bleached colonies show in several frames (e.g., Image 7, Image 11, Image 27, Image 36, Image 40).

Anderson's sampling sheet records three pocilloporid colonies sampled here for a collaborator (species by field call): possible Pocillopora elegans ChJo159 (20.8 m, healthy, green fluorescent hue); Pocillopora sp. ChJo160 (15.0 m, healthy) and ChJo161 (10.5 m, 50% diseased). Pocillopora acuta colonies from this 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 0.1% cyanobacteria and 0.1% recently dead coral.

Fish and other fauna

Nurse sharks swim over the reef (e.g., Image 13, Image 41).

A macro sequence shows a single phyllidiid nudibranch — black ground, pale blue-white ridges, yellow-orange tipped tubercles, photographed from four angles on coralline-crusted pavement (e.g., Image 2, Image 3, Image 4, Image 8).

Genus and species are not resolvable from these images alone.

Comparisons with other data

Apart from the Living Oceans Foundation survey shown here, we found no other surveys at this site as of 2026. Within 5 km, two independent stations recorded station-year means of 27–44% hard coral cover between 2006 and 2015; the nearest, Sheppard et al. (2008) at Peros Banhos, 2.60 km away, read a mean of 44% in 2006.

Other notes

Reef type and aspect follow the LOF habitat map: the pin lies 37 m from 'deep fore reef slope' on the atoll's west rim (fore reef slope). Anderson's field sheet (LOF fellowship 2016 workbook) records 'fringing reef', 'windward'; the expedition's 933-site table classes the station as 'intermediate' (fringing reef). The rim here faces west to west-northwest: windward of the northwest monsoon (December–March), leeward of the April–November southeast trades; the printed 'windward' is Anderson's sheet label.

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)42.3
In-house DINOv333.4n = 38 · SE 2.4
CoralSCOP edited41.9n = 38 · SE 2.5
Claude29.5n = 38 · SE 2.7

The three computer-vision methods disagree by 12.4 pp (29.5–41.9%) and read 0.4–12.8 pp below the in-water transect (42.3%); the headline is the in-water transect because a diver transect is independent of the photographs.

Independent surveys nearby

Data availability near this site
Agency / programYear(s)Stations / distanceLink
Sheppard et al. (2008)20061 station, 2.60 kmRecords ↓
XL Catlin Seaview Survey20151 station, 3.97 kmRecords ↓

Within 5 km, 2 independent survey stations recorded hard coral cover in 6 records between 2006 and 2015. The most recent nearby survey is from 2015, so these values predate recent heat stress. This site's own estimate (42%) 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
Sheppard et al. (2008)Peros Banhos200644% (5 records)2.60 kmdoi:10.3354/meps07436
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 36006201527%3.97 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. Sheppard C, Harris A, Sheppard A (2008). Archipelago-wide coral recovery patterns since 1998 in the Chagos Archipelago, central Indian Ocean. Marine Ecology Progress Series 362:109-117. PDF
  3. Gonzalez-Rivero M, et al. (2019). Seaview Survey photo-quadrat and image classification dataset. The University of Queensland (UQ eSpace) data collection. DOI