Coral Reef Diagnostics

Chagos Archipelago - Victory Bank (BIVB109)

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)
2015-04-30
Coordinates
-5.5476, 72.2188
Coral cover
35%
Benthic surveys
Coral bleached
8.7%
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
44
Site summary

A deep forereef (31 m) on isolated Victory Bank, where Acropora, Porites, and fire coral (Millepora) share the coral almost equally over pink coralline pavement. One transect holds almost all the fire coral and 24 of the site's 26 genera, including the endemic Ctenella chagius, and whitetip reef sharks were seen three times. Surveyed on the Living Oceans Foundation's Global Reef Expedition.

Max. depth dived
16.4 m
dive-log maximum
Water temp. during survey
30.0°C
+1.0°C vs the 2015 mean sea temperature (29.0°C)
Bottom time
51 min
in at 12:23

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

3 of these 44 photographs are shown beside the text that discusses them under "Site description" below.

1567891011121314151617181920212223252627283132333536373839404142434445464748

Photo credit & attribution

Site description

Setting

BIVB109 is a protected submerged forereef on Victory Bank, an isolated offshore bank at the north of the archipelago, surveyed 30 April 2015 at 31.2 m; the published reef-type cell is blank, so no class is asserted.

General benthic features

Across 26 genera the top three are near-equal and one is a hydrocoral: Acropora 21% of the coral, Porites 20%, Millepora 19%. That transect also carries 24 of the site's 26 genera, including the Chagos endemic Ctenella chagius; the deepest station hands the lead to Platygyra and Goniastrea.

Coral cover

Formal transects recorded 34.7% coral against 42.0% algae — 66th of 109 Chagos sites for cover — but here algae means pink pavement, coralline algae holding 20.7% of the benthos, 20th-highest of 109, against just 7.3% fleshy turf (e.g., Image 2).

The depth profile is among the most structured in the dataset: cover runs 20.5%, 59.22%, 21.2%, 38.0%, and the entire Millepora signal sits on one transect, where it reaches 25.70% of the benthos and 43% of that station's coral before vanishing to zero at both deeper ones. Method agreement is unusually good — Coralscapes 32.7%, CoralNet 24.5% against 34.7% — but the three are still not interchangeable. Coral cover: 35%. 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 42% 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 34.7% · CoralNet points 24.5% · Coralscapes masks 32.7% (33 frames). These products have different sampling footprints and denominators and should not be averaged.

Stressors

Published bleaching is 8.7%, 39th of 98 on the site table's Mean(%bleaching) column, the first CoralNet training run rather than the canonical % bleaching (2nd training) column, and it deserves extra skepticism: Millepora is naturally pale cream and a thicket of it reads near-white under blue light, so no bleaching was called from those frames; the mixed frames look normally pigmented.

Fish and other fauna

Three whitetip reef shark encounters, no disease or crown-of-thorns (e.g., Image 3, Image 4).

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)34.7
CoralNet35.0
In-house DINOv339.0
CoralSCOP edited24.9
Claude35.0

Data & links

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

© Coral Reef Diagnostics.