Coral Reef Diagnostics

Indonesia - Komodo NP: Tatawa Besar

Reef Check Foundation
⬇ Download this page as a report card
05
Photo: Anderson Mayfield/Coral Reef Diagnostics
Country
Survey date(s)
2019-01-22
2019-01-27
Coordinates
-8.5110, 119.6428
Coral cover
22%
Claude computer vision (155 edited photos) · other methods below · median 18%
Observations
None tagged; see Stressors below
Heat stress
Most recent heat load record
26 Oct 2026 · No heat stress
5-year thermal stress load
5-year mean max. degree heating weeks (DHW)
2021–2025
NOAA Coral Reef Watch — East Nusa Tenggara 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 infoEast Nusa Tenggara (NOAA CRW virtual station)
Photographs
162
50 shown on this page
Site summary
Read this summary in:

A sloping Komodo reef dominated by a fluorescent orange soft coral, huge sponges, and abundant, very diverse hard coral, with high fish biomass, giant clams, two mantas, a turtle, a Napoleon wrasse, and a dogtooth tuna (one of few on the trip). The dive computer read as low as 23°C (dive average 24.8°C), possibly during an upwelling event, and large rubble areas at 5-7 m were blanketed in soft corals.

Max. depth dived
18.3 m
Water temp. during survey
25.3°Cii (dive note: 23–24°C)
-3.0°C vs the 2019 mean sea temperature (28.3°C)
ii Mean of the dive-computer average water temperatures of the 2 logged dives (25.9°C on 22 January and 24.8°C on 27 January 2019; dive log); the dive computer's minimum was 23.3°C on the second dive, and Anderson's own notes read 24-25°C and 23-24°C.

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

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

This page shows 50 of the 162 photographs from this site, including every one the text cites.

5 of the 50 photographs on this page are shown beside the text that discusses them under "Site description" below.

3678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849

Photo credit & attribution

Site description

Setting

On the first dive (22 January), the dive-computer average was 25.9°C; Anderson's note reads 24-25°C (cold), and the breathing gas was 30% oxygen. Visibility was poor (8 m), with a high particulate load and a gentle current. This is a typical sloping reef dominated by a fluorescent orange soft coral, with small massive Porites, Diploastrea, Pocillopora verrucosa, giant clams, small digitate Acropora, Platygyra, barrel sponges, Stylophora pistillata, small P. rus, Pocillopora acuta, fire coral, Fungia, and Galaxea; some areas were dominated by massive sponges; the reef's relief and structure were fairly high compared with some reefs in the area. Fish biomass and diversity were high, though mean fish size was small, and the dive turned up a manta 2-3 m across and the first Napoleon wrasse (e.g., Image 1, Image 2).

On the second dive (27 January), the dive-computer average was 24.8°C, with a minimum of 23.3°C. The breathing gas was again 30% oxygen. It is entirely possible that we were diving in the middle of an upwelling event given the poor viz (5-6 m) and cold temperatures (23-24°C) (e.g., Image 4).

Water looked nutrient-rich, and fish life was more impressive than at many other sites.

General benthic features

Coral was very abundant. Stylophora pistillata was common, alongside Hydnophora, Pocillopora eydouxi, Isopora, some table Acropora, finger Porites, and green Tubastraea, and Acropora diversity was high. There was not much coral above 11 m. Seriatopora hystrix, fire coral, and soft corals were all common in the shallows. Large rubble areas at 5-7 m were dominated by soft corals, and another manta appeared at the end of the dive (e.g., Image 5).

Huge sponges dominated the habitat in many places. Coral cover was high, and the reef was very colorful. Hard corals and sponges dominated the habitat for most of the dive. Some coral rubble was being colonized by crustose coralline algae and other algae. Soft corals were dominant only in the shallows (3-5 m).

Coral cover

Stressors

On the 27 January dive, one salmon-red table colony has an algae-covered dead center ringed by a band of stark-white bare skeleton, a band of recent mortality, cause not stated (e.g., Image 51).

No crown-of-thorns starfish (COTS) or other corallivores were evident.

Fish and other fauna

A blacktip reef shark was seen. A turtle was seen. Reef fish biomass was high. A dogtooth tuna was seen, one of few on the trip.

Comparisons with other data

WWF-US and WWF-Indonesia surveyed a nearby station (TNK06), 0.48 km from the pin; we could not confirm that it is the same reef. Within 5 km, five 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, WWF-US / WWF-Indonesia at TNK06, 0.48 km away, read 40% in 2016.

Dive record

The first visit was dive 3 of 22 January 2019 (trip dive 14). It ran from 14:52 to 15:50 (58 min). Maximum depth was 18 m. The return visit was dive 2 of 27 January 2019 (trip dive 33; Anderson's 30th dive of the trip), from 10:30 to 11:28 (58 min). Maximum depth was 18.3 m.

Other notes

Though a virtual repeat of our previous dive to this site, it was nevertheless lovely. Anderson shivered for essentially the whole dive.

CV model comparison

Mean 22%, median 18% across 155 photos.
More infoA 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.
Headline: Claude computer vision — a blind point count of this site's own photographs.
More infoDINOv3 and CoralSCOP were run on the same photos 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.
MethodHard coral cover (%)Photos (n) ± SE
In-house DINOv323.9n = 155 · SE 0.8
CoralSCOP edited34.2n = 155 · SE 1.7
Claude (edited photos)22.0n = 155 · SE 1.7

The two computer-vision methods disagree by 10.3 pp (23.9–34.2%) and read 1.9–12.2 pp above Claude's blind point count (22.0%); the headline is Claude's blind point count because no transect or manual count exists here.

% coral cover by visit

Each visit is analyzed independently; these are not pooled into a single site mean. The two visits read 20–24%, 4 points apart: inside the 7-point method-noise floor, so no difference between them can be read (inconclusive). The visits were 5 days apart, so this is variation between dives, not a change over time.

Date% coral coverStd. dev.Frames scored
2019-01-2220%±2171
2019-01-2724%±2284

Independent surveys nearby

Data availability near this site
Agency / programYear(s)Stations / distanceLink
Reef Check20204 stations, 2.41–3.73 kmRecords ↓
WWF-US / WWF-Indonesia20161 station, 0.48 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%15%30%45%60%201620182020WWF-US / WWF-Indonesia 2016: 40%Reef Check 2020: 8.8%Reef Check 2020: 10%Reef Check 2020: 47%Reef Check 2020: 51%Coral Reef Diagnostics 2019: 22%Year-averaged across all programs: illustrative only; the programs differ in stations and method, so no trend is claimed (3 years)
WWF-US / WWF-Indonesia Reef Check Coral Reef DiagnosticsYear-average (illustrative only, programs differ)

Within 5 km, 5 independent survey stations recorded hard coral cover in 8 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 (22%) sits 18 points below the one survey station up to 2 km away (40%); 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.

Independent survey data near this site
AgencySite / locationDateHard coral cover (%)DistanceLink
WWF-US / WWF-IndonesiaTNK06201640%0.48 kmAmkieltiela, Abdillah T, Amkieltiela A, Andradi-Brown D, Lazuardi E. 2016. Komodo MPA. MERMAID
Reef CheckSiaba Besar (Sector 1)202051% (44–59%, 2 surveys, Mar–Aug 2020)2.41 km—
Reef CheckSiaba Besar (Sector 2)202047% (41–52%, 2 surveys, Mar–Aug 2020)2.41 km—
Reef CheckMawan (Sector 1)202010% (2 surveys)3.73 km—
Reef CheckMawan (Sector 2)20208.8%3.73 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.