Indonesia - Komodo NP: Mawan
Part of the regional summary: Indonesia - Komodo
2019-01-25
2019-01-26
More info
East Nusa Tenggara (NOAA CRW virtual station)A Komodo manta cleaning station visited three times, with one manta on the first dive and about 20-30 and 6-9 mantas at the cleaning station on the next two, but unimpressive coral ground of broken Acropora and soft coral on rubble. Away from the station, through a very fast current, lay pristine reef with monster cuttlefish, an enormous Euphyllia, a white frogfish, and many coral species Anderson had never seen before.
Stasiun pembersihan pari manta di Komodo yang dikunjungi tiga kali, dengan satu ekor manta pada penyelaman pertama serta sekitar 20-30 dan 6-9 ekor manta di stasiun pembersihan pada dua penyelaman berikutnya, namun dengan dasar karang yang kurang mengesankan berupa patahan Acropora dan karang lunak di atas pecahan karang. Jauh dari stasiun tersebut, melewati arus yang sangat deras, terhampar terumbu yang masih perawan dengan sotong raksasa, Euphyllia berukuran luar biasa, ikan kodok putih, dan banyak jenis karang yang belum pernah dilihat Anderson sebelumnya.
Terjemahan ringkasan ini oleh AI; versi bahasa Inggris yang berlaku.
Six 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.
6 of the 50 photographs on this page are shown beside the text that discusses them under "Site description" below.
Site description
Setting
Three dives: 19 January 2019 (26.5°C, 31% oxygen, 10 m visibility, and extreme current), 25 January (26.0°C, poor visibility with a high particulate load), and 26 January (26.7°C, 10 m visibility); temperatures are dive-computer averages. On the first dive Anderson hit the fastest current in a long time.
General benthic features
First dive (19 January): the descent was over a rubble field colonized by cyanobacteria and soft corals (e.g., Image 1).
Occasional Acropora, though loads of Acropora rubble. Eventually reached pristine reef with several monster cuttlefish. Stylophora, Seriatopora, Pocillopora acuta, Pocillopora verrucosa, Pocillopora eydouxi, and many species that can tolerate high flow (including many soft corals). Stinging hydroids (the species common in Raja Ampat), brain coral, enormous cuttlefish, Pachyseris (small), small massive Porites, low-relief hard+soft coral community for most of dive (e.g., Image 2, Image 3).
Red fluorescent mussids. Seriatopora caliendrum and Stylophora pistillata very common. Enormous Euphyllia colony. Many species of hard coral Anderson had never seen before. Isopora. Plerogyra, Physogyra, abundant and diverse sea anemones, and many gorgeous nudibranchs. Second dive (25 January): the cleaning-station site was mostly unconsolidated Acropora rubble with some CCA. Live Acropora, Seriatopora hystrix, and very small/few Montipora. Third dive (26 January): the coral at the cleaning station was not particularly impressive: broken up Acropora, some Seriatopora, mostly soft coral on rubble. Reef was poorly consolidated though in the process of being colonized by CCA (e.g., Image 4).
Fire coral, Pocillopora eydouxi, Seriatopora hystrix, and Seriatopora caliendrum/Stylophora pistillata all very common. Massive Porites (small), plentiful soft coral. After 45 minutes Anderson left the station to explore the reef, which was surprisingly beautiful. Stinging hydroids were everywhere. Soft coral common in all areas (e.g., Image 5).
Diverse and abundant Acropora. Anemones. Pocillopora acuta very common, always darkly pigmented. Mixed hard+soft coral community at 8 m. Reef very colorful at 5-6 m, partially on account of a pretty, turquoise blue sponge. Pocillopora verrucosa, Montipora, Galaxea, Pavona. Very diverse hard coral assemblage.
Coral cover
- Reference: Claude CV point count (this site's photos)
- Coral cover: 14% — a blind Claude computer-vision point count of 150 of Anderson's edited photographs (20 points per photo; water, fish, and obstructions excluded). Other computer-vision methods are listed in the method table.
Stressors
On the 25 January dive, four or five whole branches of one brown branching colony are stark white with their texture intact and no algal film, recent mortality, cause not stated (e.g., Image 12).
Fish and other fauna
First dive (19 January): the dive dead-ended at one manta (4-m wingspan), though visibility was likely too poor for a good picture. A white frogfish sat in an Acropora colony. Three razor wrasse, very beautiful and a species Anderson had never seen before. Second dive (25 January): Anderson hit the jackpot at the manta ray cleaning station, probably 20-30 different mantas, all in close proximity. Many of the 3-4-m wingspan mantas made very close passes; Anderson could have reached out and touched them. Third dive (26 January): another manta ray dive, with 6-9 mantas. Also a black tip reef shark, a giant trevally, and a stingray.
Comparisons with other data
Reef Check surveyed a station named Mawan (Sector 1), 1.89 km away. Within 5 km, six independent stations (Reef Check and WWF-US / WWF-Indonesia) recorded station-year means of 8.8–51% hard coral cover between 2016 and 2020; the nearest, Reef Check at Pengah Kecil (Sector 1) SW Side, 0.29 km away, read a mean of 48% in 2020.
Dive record
19 January 2019: 14:54-15:57 (63 min), maximum depth 18.3 m. 25 January 2019 (round 2): 10:53-12:00 (67 min), maximum depth 9.1 m. 26 January 2019 (round 3): 10:52-11:55 (63 min), maximum depth 9.4 m.
Other notes
On the 25 January dive the camera housing fogged, so few good pictures came from it, but it was a breathtaking experience nonetheless.
CV model comparison
More info
A few colony-focused photos raise the mean; the median is the typical photo. No computer-vision method yet estimates coral cover accurately on new images, so treat this as indicative rather than a measurement; it is revised as the methods improve.More info
DINOv3 and CoralSCOP were run on the site's photographs (see each row's n) and are listed for comparison. No diver transect exists for this trip, so agreement between the rows is not accuracy, and no computer-vision method yet estimates coral cover accurately on new images; treat every row as indicative.| Method | Hard coral cover (%) | Photos (n) ± SE |
|---|---|---|
| In-house DINOv3 | 20.3 | n = 150 · SE 1.1 |
| CoralSCOP edited | 29.9 | n = 148 · SE 2.0 |
| Claude (edited photos) | 14.2 | n = 150 · SE 1.5 |
The two computer-vision methods differ by 9.6 pp (20.3–29.9%) and read 6.1–15.7 pp above Claude's blind point count (14.2%); the headline is Claude's blind point count because no transect or manual count exists here.
See a more detailed, stand-alone version of this table.
% coral cover by visit
Each visit is analyzed independently; these are not pooled into a single site mean. The three visits read 8.6–21%, 12.4 points apart: inconclusive, as the 95% interval 3.0 to 21.6 points reaches inside the 7-point method-noise floor. The visits were 7 days apart, so this is variation between dives, not a change over time. *Based on only 19 reef-habitat photos; this estimate is less certain.
| Date | % coral cover | Std. dev. | Frames scored |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-01-19 | 21% | ±24 | 50 |
| 2019-01-25 | 8.6%* | ±15 | 19 |
| 2019-01-26 | 11% | ±15 | 81 |
Independent surveys nearby
| Agency / program | Year(s) | Stations / distance | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reef Check | 2020 | 5 stations, 0.29–2.95 km | Records ↓ |
| WWF-US / WWF-Indonesia | 2016 | 1 station, 4.86 km | Records ↓ |
Coral Reef DiagnosticsYear-average (illustrative only, programs differ)Within 5 km, 6 independent survey stations recorded hard coral cover in 10 surveys between 2016 and 2020. The most recent nearby survey is from 2020, so these values predate recent heat stress. This site's own estimate (14%) sits within the range of these station-year means up to 2 km away (8.8–48%); the methods differ, so the comparison is context, not a like-for-like test.
Collected by other programs using different methods (Reef Check uses point-intercept transects), 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.
| Agency | Site / location | Date | Hard coral cover (%) | Distance | Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WWF-US / WWF-Indonesia | TNK06 | 2016 | 40% | 4.86 km | Amkieltiela, Abdillah T, Amkieltiela A, Andradi-Brown D, Lazuardi E. 2016. Komodo MPA. MERMAID |
| Reef Check | Pengah Kecil (Sector 1) SW Side | 2020 | 48% (39–57%, 2 surveys, Mar–Aug 2020) | 0.29 km | — |
| Reef Check | Mawan (Sector 1) | 2020 | 10% (3.1–18%, 2 surveys, Mar–Aug 2020) | 1.89 km | — |
| Reef Check | Mawan (Sector 2) | 2020 | 8.8% | 1.89 km | — |
| Reef Check | Siaba Besar (Sector 1) | 2020 | 51% (2 surveys) | 2.95 km | — |
| Reef Check | Siaba Besar (Sector 2) | 2020 | 47% (2 surveys) | 2.95 km | — |
Data & links
All images from Coral Reef Diagnostics. Data are from Coral Reef Diagnostics and the organizations named in the data sources above.
© Coral Reef Diagnostics.