Coral Reef Diagnostics

Chagos Archipelago - Salomons Island (BISA84)

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)
2015-04-22
Coordinates
-5.3173, 72.2241
Coral cover
49%
± 5.3% SE, n = 17 transects · Benthic surveys
Coral bleached
34%
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
10
Site summary

A leeward fringing fore reef outside Salomon atoll (dived to 21.8 m), with 49% coral cover, dominated by Acropora tables and branching colonies with Porites taking over at depth. Published bleaching was 34%, and white branching and plating colonies beside pigmented neighbors show in about half of the photos. Surveyed on the Living Oceans Foundation's Global Reef Expedition.

Max. depth dived
21.8 m
sample-sheet maximum
Water temp. during survey
29.7°Cii
CTD-cast midpoint of 29.5–30.0°C
+0.6°C vs the 2015 mean sea temperature (29.1°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 29.5–30.0°C.
Bottom time
53 min
in at 15:21

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

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

7 of the 10 photographs on this page are shown beside the text that discusses them under "Site description" below.

589

Photo credit & attribution

Site description

Setting

BISA84 is a leeward fringing fore reef outside Salomon atoll (from its position on the northwest side of Salomon atoll relative to the prevailing southeast trade winds; windward on Anderson's field sheet), surveyed 22 April 2015 on a dive to 21.8 m.

General benthic features

Across 25 genera, Acropora (54% of all coral present) and Porites (22%) hold three-quarters of the coral between them.

Coral cover

Stressors

White colonies show in five to six of the 10 frames: stark-white branching colonies beside pigmented massive and meandroid colonies (e.g., Image 6, Image 7, Image 10) and white plating colonies beside tan ones (e.g., Image 3, Image 4), over a table- and branch-dominated reef with local sand-and-rubble breaks (e.g., Image 1, Image 2).

No crown-of-thorns or disease signs were identified in any of the 10 frames. The bleaching percentage is a computer vision figure: CoralNet annotation of the informal survey images, not a diver's field estimate (Mayfield & Dempsey 2026, suppl. S1). All seven colonies Anderson sampled here were partly or fully bleached (see Dive record below). The Living Oceans Foundation transects here recorded 0.1% cyanobacteria and 0.1% recently dead coral.

Comparisons with other data

Perry et al. (2015) surveyed a nearby station (Ile Anglaise north, Salomon) in March 2015, 0.20 km from the pin. Within 5 km, seven independent stations recorded station-year means of 6.8–63% hard coral cover between 2006 and 2020; the nearest of these, Lange et al. (2021) at Salomon Atoll, 0.54 km away, read 6.8–63% between 2006 and 2020.

Dive record

Anderson's afternoon dive on 22 April 2015 entered the water at 15:21 and lasted 53 minutes, to a maximum depth of 21.8 m (the field sheet); the notes describe a “beautiful reef from 20 m and below, mostly bleached and dead/dying corals at 15 and above,” with most of the seriatoporids bleaching and no P. acuta at the site. Anderson sampled six Seriatopora hystrix colonies, all but perhaps five to ten of those seen: ChSe105 (collected 15:40 at 22.0 m; neon-green fluorescent, likely 100% bleached or even dead), ChSe106 (15:44, 21.3 m; 50% bleached, with very thin branches; the healthy part was sampled), ChSe107 (15:47, 19.6 m; neon green, small, unsure if alive), ChSe108 (15:53, 19.2 m; neon-green fluorescent, 100% bleached, likely still alive), ChSe109 (15:59, 19.9 m; more than 90% bleached, pigmented only at the branch bases), and ChSe110 (16:04, 19.6 m; more than 90% bleached, pigmented in the interior, with a slight green fluorescent hue). For a collaborator Anderson also sampled ChJo220 (Pocillopora sp., field call P. verrucosa; 16:10, 11.7 m; badly bleached, only the bottom 20% pigmented); the note for it records that most corals at the site were badly bleached. 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).

Other notes

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). Esri World Imagery (no LOF habitat map covers Salomon atoll; the LOF Chagos habitat map covers only Peros Banhos) puts the pin about 100 m off the outer reef of the long northwest island, facing northwest: windward for the northwest monsoon winds (about November to March) and leeward for the southeast trades (about April to November); Anderson's sheet label ('windward') is reported for the record. The aspect shown, 'leeward', comes from the station's GPS position on the northwest side of Salomon atoll relative to the prevailing southeast trade winds (about 177° off the upwind direction; the reef-edge reading agrees), which takes precedence over slope facing, lagoon shelter, imagery, and field labels.

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)48.6
CoralNettoo few photos (n=5)
In-house DINOv3too few photos (n=7)
CoralSCOP editedtoo few photos (n=7)
Claudetoo few photos (n=7)

CoralNet: this method was run on 5 of 7 photos, under the 10 needed for a value, so it is not shown and is left out of any mean; every other row rests on its own photo count.

In-house DINOv3: this method was run on 7 of 7 photos, under the 10 needed for a value, so it is not shown and is left out of any mean; every other row rests on its own photo count.

CoralSCOP edited: this method was run on 7 of 7 photos, under the 10 needed for a value, so it is not shown and is left out of any mean; every other row rests on its own photo count.

Claude: this method was run on 7 of 7 photos, under the 10 needed for a value, so it is not shown and is left out of any mean; every other row rests on its own photo count.

Independent surveys nearby

Data availability near this site
Agency / programYear(s)Stations / distanceLink
Lange et al. (2021)2006–20201 station, 0.54 kmRecords ↓
Sheppard et al. (2008)20061 station, 4.04 kmRecords ↓
Spalding et al. (2025)—1 station, 4.72 kmRecords ↓
XL Catlin Seaview Survey20155 stations, 0.82–4.36 kmRecords ↓
Hard coral cover over time — this site and every independent station within 5 km. Programs are shown separately because they use different methods at different stations; the lines are not one comparable series.
0%17%34%51%68%200620132020Lange et al. (2021) 2006: 48%Lange et al. (2021) 2010: 63%Lange et al. (2021) 2018: 6.8%Lange et al. (2021) 2019: 23%Lange et al. (2021) 2020: 21%Sheppard et al. (2008) 2006: 32%XL Catlin Seaview Survey 2015: 19%XL Catlin Seaview Survey 2015: 22%XL Catlin Seaview Survey 2015: 28%XL Catlin Seaview Survey 2015: 28%XL Catlin Seaview Survey 2015: 34%LOF Global Reef Expedition 2015: 49%Year-averaged across all programs: illustrative only; the programs differ in stations and method, so no trend is claimed (6 years)

Within 5 km, 7 independent survey stations recorded hard coral cover in 15 records between 2006 and 2020. The one station surveyed in more than one year declined by 27 points between its first and latest surveys. The longest record, Salomon Atoll (Lange et al. 2021, 0.54 km away), went from 48% in 2006 to 21% in 2020. The most recent nearby survey is from 2020, so these values predate recent heat stress. This site's own estimate (49%) sits within the range of these station-year means up to 2 km away (6.8–63%); the methods differ, so the comparison is context, not a like-for-like test. One further row in the table has no survey date, so it is listed but not part of this summary.

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
Lange et al. (2021)Salomon Atoll2006–20206.8–63% (range of yearly means; 5 records)0.54 kmdoi:10.1007/s00338-021-02184-w
Sheppard et al. (2008)Salomon200632% (5 records)4.04 kmdoi:10.3354/meps07436
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 36013201528%0.82 kmdoi:10.14264/uql.2019.930
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 36018201522%2.17 kmdoi:10.14264/uql.2019.930
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 36014201534%3.22 kmdoi:10.14264/uql.2019.930
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 36016201519%3.71 kmdoi:10.14264/uql.2019.930
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 36015201528%4.36 kmdoi:10.14264/uql.2019.930
Spalding et al. (2025)Salomon - Boddam Lagoon (N, 1-4 m)pre-bleaching baseline65%4.72 km—

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. Lange ID, Benkwitt CE, McDevitt-Irwin JM, Tietjen KL, Taylor B, Chinkin M, et al. (2021). Wave exposure shapes reef community composition and recovery trajectories at a remote coral atoll. Coral Reefs 40:1819-1829. PDF
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. Spalding M, Bourasseau M, et al. (2025). Coral bleaching and mortality in the Chagos Archipelago, 2024. British Indian Ocean Territory Administration report (gray literature). PDF
  6. Gonzalez-Rivero M, et al. (2019). Seaview Survey photo-quadrat and image classification dataset. The University of Queensland (UQ eSpace) data collection. DOI