Coral Reef Diagnostics

Chagos Archipelago - Speakers Bank (BISP95)

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)
2015-04-26
Coordinates
-5.0499, 72.2873
Coral cover
61%
± 4.8% SE, n = 12 transects · Benthic surveys
Coral bleached
6.5%
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
26
25 shown on this page
Site summary

A high-cover lagoonal patch reef in Speakers Bank, leeward on Anderson's field sheet (61% coral, mostly Acropora tables), where table coral gives way to open rubble and then a broad seagrass meadow, the first seagrass Anderson saw growing beside coral in Chagos. Published bleaching was 6.5%, and the notes record 90%-bleached Pocillopora verrucosa colonies as very common at 20 m. Surveyed on the Living Oceans Foundation's Global Reef Expedition.

Max. depth dived
22.6 m
sample-sheet maximum
Water temp. during survey
29.8°Cii
CTD-cast midpoint of 29.7–29.9°C
+0.7°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 29.7–29.9°C.
Bottom time
58 min
in at 08:16

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

15 of the 25 photographs on this page are shown beside the text that discusses them under "Site description" below.

67910131417192426

Photo credit & attribution

Site description

Setting

BISP95 is a high-cover lagoonal patch reef inside the southern rim of Speakers Bank, leeward on Anderson's field sheet, surveyed 26 April 2015 on a dive to 22.6 m (see Dive record below); table coral, open rubble, and a seagrass meadow alternate across it.

General benthic features

Bare substrate is correspondingly high at 12%, with coralline algae 9.5%, turf 9.3%, macroalgae 1.8%, non-coral invertebrates 1.5%, and erect algae 0.7%. The assemblage is strongly Acropora-led across 15 non-zero genera. Acropora holds 51% of the benthos — 83% of all coral recorded — then Porites 3.1%, Pocillopora 2.8%, Heliopora 0.8%, Stylophora and Ctenella 0.7% each, Pavona 0.5%, and Platygyra 0.4%. Seven further genera fall below 0.5%. Algal cover barely moves (25%, 26%, 30%). The genus order is stable throughout — Acropora, then Porites and Pocillopora — so the site mean is a fair summary of composition, if not of cover. The seagrass meadow is the site's distinguishing habitat. One frame shows elongated ribbon-like blades rooted among coral and rubble, and a later run of frames shows a broad meadow occupying much of the benthos (e.g., Image 8, Image 21, Image 22).

Anderson's field note calls it seagrass growing beside the coral, the first such sighting of the Chagos trip. The meadow provides a habitat wholly different from the table-coral patches and is the main reason the site reads as heterogeneous. Coral architecture is most developed in the first and middle portions of the sequence (e.g., Image 1, Image 3).

Two frames show overlapping tables with branching colonies in the gaps; two more retain table and corymbose forms but include more exposed substrate; another two show mixed coral patches reappearing after the open rubble views; and a final pair shows the rubble-dominated ground between them (e.g., Image 3, Image 16, Image 12, Image 18, Image 11, Image 20, Image 2, Image 23).

The habitat is patchy — locally broad living canopies coexisting with low-relief areas where carbonate debris and old framework dominate (e.g., Image 2, Image 4).

The photographs document a strongly patchy reef — table canopies, open rubble and pavement, and an extensive seagrass meadow — plus partly bleached branching colonies and a table with a broad white margin.

Coral cover

Stressors

Published bleaching is 6.5% (CoralNet analysis of the survey images; Mayfield & Dempsey 2026, suppl. S1), and Anderson's field record shows more: 90%-bleached Pocillopora verrucosa colonies were very common at 20 m, and three of the four pocilloporids sampled were bleached or bleaching, two of them partly dead (see Dive record below). In the photographs, compact branching colonies are partly bleached, with white tops and brown bases (e.g., Image 15), and a table beside the seagrass has a broad white margin (e.g., Image 5).

The Living Oceans Foundation transects here recorded no cyanobacteria and 0.1% recently dead coral.

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, three XL Catlin Seaview Survey stations recorded station-year means of 20–30% hard coral cover in 2015; the nearest, XL Catlin Seaview Survey at transect 36022, 1.99 km away, read 30% in 2015.

Dive record

Anderson's early-morning dive on 26 April 2015 entered the water at 08:16 and lasted 58 minutes, to a maximum depth of 22.6 m (the field sheet); the notes describe low-relief corals and low cover above 20 m, with table Acropora dominating below that, no P. acuta, P. damicornis, or Seriatopora, and seagrass growing adjacent to coral, “very strange (first time to see that in Chagos).” For a collaborator, four pocilloporids were sampled (species by field call): ChJo243 (likely P. verrucosa; collected 08:24 at 21.3 m; a huge colony, 90% bleached with pigmented areas still visible; very common at 20 m), ChJo244 (Pocillopora sp.; 08:29, 18.7 m; healthy, some green fluorescence), ChJo245 (Pocillopora sp.; 08:36, 19.1 m; 20% already dead, the rest bleaching), and ChJo246 (Pocillopora sp.; 08:46, 14.2 m; bleaching and partly dead recently, in a mostly coral-less area at about 15 m). 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

Aspect follows Anderson's field sheet (LOF fellowship 2016 workbook: 'lagoonal patch reef', 'leeward'); the expedition's 933-site table classes the station as 'protected' (patch reef). Esri World Imagery (no LOF habitat map covers Speakers Bank; the LOF Chagos habitat map covers only Peros Banhos) puts the pin on the lagoon side of the southern Speakers Bank rim, consistent with the sheet.

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)61.0
CoralNet21.9n = 26 · SE 3.4
In-house DINOv320.4n = 26 · SE 2.6
CoralSCOP edited23.1n = 25 · SE 2.7
Claude17.8n = 26 · SE 2.6

The four computer-vision methods agree within 5.3 pp (17.8–23.1%) and read 37.9–43.2 pp below the in-water transect (61.0%); the headline is the in-water transect because a diver transect is independent of the photographs.

Independent surveys nearby

Within 5 km, 3 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 (61%) sits 31 points above the one survey station up to 2 km away (30%); 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.

Independent survey data near this site
AgencySite / locationDateHard coral cover (%)DistanceLink
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 36022201530%1.99 kmdoi:10.14264/uql.2019.930
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 36021201521%2.93 kmdoi:10.14264/uql.2019.930
XL Catlin Seaview Surveytransect 36023201520%4.71 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. Gonzalez-Rivero M, et al. (2019). Seaview Survey photo-quadrat and image classification dataset. The University of Queensland (UQ eSpace) data collection. DOI