Abstract
In March 2020, the world went into lockdown to curb the spread of the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), with immediate impacts on wildlife across ecosystems. The strict 2-year long lockdown in Grand Cayman provided an unprecedented opportunity to assess how the ‘human confinement experiment’ influenced the community composition of reef fish. Using a suite of multivariate statistics, our findings revealed a stark increase in reef fish biomass during the 2 years of lockdown, especially among herbivores, including parrotfish, with drastic increases in juvenile parrotfishes identified. Additionally, when comparing baseline data of the community from 2018 to the 2 years during lockdown, over a three-fold significant increase in mean reef fish biomass was observed, with a clear shift in community composition. Our findings provide unique insights into the resilience of reef fish communities when local anthropogenic stressors are removed for an unprecedented length of time. Given the functional role of herbivores including parrotfish, our results suggest that reductions in human water-based activities have positive implications for coral reef ecosystems and should be considered in future management strategies.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Coral reef fishes are a salient group of organisms for reef habitats, contributing to their ecosystem function and the provision of key ecosystem services, including nutrient cycling1, herbivory to prevent macroalgae proliferation over coral2, and cascading trophic effects3,4, among others. These functions promote coral reef resilience5 and drive key ecosystem services such as nutrient provision from fisheries6, storm protection7, and other economic benefits for human livelihoods8,9,10. As such, reef fishes are crucial for overall health of coral reefs, and potentially the wellbeing of 443 million people who live within 30 km of a coral reef11. However, owing to anthropogenic activity, coral reefs are highly vulnerable and considered one of the most endangered ecosystems in the Anthropocene12,13. This puts reef fish populations at risk, as they face numerous local and global stressors that jeopardize their survival14,15.
Anthropogenic exploitation of coral reefs at the local scale often impacts reef fish communities through activities that directly remove fish from the environment such as overfishing16,17, destructive fishing practises18,19, and overharvesting of aquaria species20. Additionally, pollution from boats in the form of spillages and noise can reduce fitness21,22, lead to mortality22,23, and hence influence population viability, ultimately affecting reef fish biomass and community composition. Understanding alterations to reef fish community composition is crucial, as many reef fish species are documented to provide critical roles in maintaining algal overgrowth and cycling nutrients that assist in sustaining a coral-dominated benthic community, with some herbivores serving as keystone species on coral reefs1,2,24. Reductions in biomass, abundance, and species richness may therefore alter overall coral reef health5,24,25, while changes in behaviour that influence the local biomass of herbivores can alter the benthic dynamics (i.e. patchiness) within marine systems26.
During early 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic sent 4.5 billion humans into lockdown27 with the sudden cessation of anthropogenic activity known as the Anthropause28, presenting the opportunity to assess how wildlife responds to the “human confinement experiment”27. During this time, direct reductions in sea-based activities were observed around the globe, with notable decreases in shipping traffic29 associated with anthropogenic noise22,30 and pollution31. Pollution in the form of anthropogenic noise and chemical pollution from sea vessels negatively impacts fish behaviour31,32,33 and physiology31,33,34 thereby influencing community composition. During the short period when tourism and heavy water-based activities were reduced between March and May 2020, coral reef ecosystems in several regions that typically experience high anthropogenetic pressures showed immediate increases in fish species diversity and abundance35,36,37, linked to increased recruitment of juvenile fishes38. While marked increases immediately following a short respite is positive, studies examining how longer lockdown restrictions on water-based activities influenced the community composition are lacking.
The unique COVID-19 lockdown restrictions on water-based activities in Grand Cayman (Fig. 1A,B) that extended for nearly 2 years provided an unparalleled opportunity28 to assess how the reef fish community responds when sea-based anthropogenic activity are reduced for a significant period of time (Table 1, Fig. 1C). Here, we took advantage of this opportunity by periodically surveying reef fish communities near the main harbour of Grand Cayman, from July 2020 to June 2022, which spanned the duration of lockdown restriction and beyond the reopening of the island to tourism. Using a suite of multivariate statistical approaches, we document the response of fish communities to this period of altered activity, which provides unprecedented insights to the impacts of anthropogenetic activity and the resilience of reef fish populations.
Results
Patterns of fish species richness, biomass, and abundance
Overall, mean species richness varied from a low of 11.7 at Eden Rock in July 2020 to a high of 26 at the same site, Eden Rock, in September 2020 (Fig. 2A). Mean biomass was lowest in July 2020 at 13.28(± 0.53) kg, and highest in April 2022 at 65.35(± 3.2) kg (Fig. 2B), while the mean abundance of all fish during a survey month varied from a low of 160(± 4) in July 2020 to a high of 844(± 14) in September 2020 in Fig. 2C.
Fish response to time
Our Bayesian model reveals a high probability that the overall biomass and abundance of fishes increased over time after the introduction of restrictions to water-based activities (Fig. 3). However, no probability of an increase or decrease in species richness was observed.
When modelling each trophic guild individually, only herbivores (all herbivorous fish species) showed a high probability of both increased biomass and abundance over time (Table 2). Meanwhile, omnivore biomass and planktivore abundance were the only other measures showing a credible increase over the study period (Table 2). No trophic guilds elicited any probable decrease in species richness, biomass, or abundance since the introduction of COVID 19 restrictions to water-based activities (Table 2).
Parrotfish biomass showed a high probability of increasing over the study period (Fig. 4A), with juvenile Parrotfish showing an even higher probability of increasing since the introduction of restrictions which prevented water-based activities (Fig. 4B).
Shifts in community composition before, during, and after lockdown
Quantifying the biomass of reef fish in Grand Cayman before lockdown compared to during lockdown (Fig. 5), significant increases in biomass was observed for all fish species (Z = − 2.577, Adj. P = 0.02), all herbivorous species (Z = − 2.452, Adj. P = 0.028), all phases of parrotfish species (Z = − 2.496, Adj. P = 0.025) and initial phase Parrotfishes only (Z = − 2.626, Adj. P = 0.017). No significant differences in fish biomass were found for the period during lockdown compared to the period immediately following the return of cruise ships (Fig. 5).
The community composition of reef fishes in Grand Cayman shifted significantly from before the COVID lockdown compared to during and after lockdown (Fig. 6, PERMANOVA, df = 2, R2 = 0.313, F = 41.446, P < 0.001). A post-hoc pairwise analysis revealed a strong significant difference in the fish community before, compared to during (df = 1, R2 = 0.362, F = 74.952, P = 0.003) and after lockdown (df = 1, R2 = 0.347, F = 42.039. P = 0.003), while a weak significant difference was observed in the community during vs after lockdown (df = 1, R2 = 0.015, F = 2.371, P = 0.012). An overview of changes in the abundance and biomass of reef fish species can be found in Table S2 and Fig. S9.
Discussion
Our findings document increased biomass and abundance of coral reef fish populations during the extent of the COVID-19 lockdown restrictions implemented from March 2020 to February 2022 for Grand Cayman and suggest that continued increases as a result of the lockdown are highly probable (Fig. 3, Table 2). Notably, herbivorous species showed increases in both fish biomass and abundance, likely driving the overall trends observed. Among the herbivorous fish groups, parrotfish, and juvenile parrotfish in particular, showed significant increases in biomass, which will likely have positive consequences for reef ecosystem functioning. Remarkably, the three-fold increase in fish biomass after lockdown compared to before lockdown highlights the remarkable resilience of reef fish, with the alteration of the entire community likely having consequences for reef function and resilience.
The observed increases in fish biomass throughout the period of lockdown restrictions in Grand Cayman can most likely be attributed to two main reasons: (1) behavioural shifts impacting habitat distribution26; and (2) improved fitness leading to increased recruitment. Firstly, cessation of water-based activities would result in reduced ambient sound and physical disturbance in the water leading to immediate changes in the behaviour of fishes that will likely become bolder and less cryptic, thereby encouraging redistribution and habitation of areas previously saturated by boats and people35,36,37,38. Additionally, reductions in stressful conditions caused by water-based activities, such as noise and waste from large boats, also impacts key behaviours including feeding, sociality, reproduction, and subsequently, physiology21,22,23,31,32,33. Essentially, the immediate rise in fish biomass and abundance is likely a combination of increased boldness of cryptic fish, and new habitation of previously highly impacted environments by reef fish. Secondly, these changes in behaviour resulting from reduced stress likely increased ecological fitness of reef fish22,32,39 leading to improved reproduction and recruitment, as seen with the clear increase in initial phase parrotfish biomass (Fig. 5B). Whether the increase in juvenile fish biomass observed in our study was due to increased reproductive success or a redistribution of juvenile fishes cannot be determined in the present study, however, our unique 2-year data set provides sufficient temporal coverage to suggest that increased recruitment was related to reduced activity associated with the COVID lockdown. However, it should be noted that only three sampling periods after the resumption of normal shipping activity were conducted. Resampling these sites over a longer time-period would be highly insightful into understanding the longer-term consequences of strong management on water-based activities for effecting the fish community. Ultimately, the long-term increases in reef fish biomass are likely a result of both changes in fish behaviour and improved ecological fitness and regardless of the cause will aid in the long-term stability of these populations.
Moreover, increases in biomass of key functional groups during this period of quiescence has important consequences for the ecosystem function of coral reefs and their derived ecosystem services. For example, parrotfishes are the dominant herbivores on modern day Caribbean coral reefs and are suggested to maintain ecosystem stasis by preventing algal overgrowth that results in secondary decreases in coral recruitment3,5,40. Thus, the increases in parrotfish biomass observed here will likely to be beneficial for sustaining a coral dominated reef ecosystem. Consequently, our findings highlight how restrictions to water-based activities can lead to increased biomass of reef fish populations, suggesting that the implementation of restrictions through management strategies, such as Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), can be effective tools for enhancing fish populations13,25,41,42. In turn, higher fish biomass of key functional groups contributes to the ecosystem function of coral reefs5,43 and the provision of ecosystem services5,8,9. However, it should be noted that the benefits from reduced anthropogenic activity will not enhance reef resilience under climate change13,44,45,46, as isolation and restrictions do not confer enhanced resistance or recovery to corals from global warming45,46,47,48. Rather, these findings indicate fish biomass can return to reefs quickly when restrictions to water-based activities are enacted, and that biomass can increase because of enhanced fitness encouraging higher levels of fish recruitment. Such increases will help to ensure provision of key ecosystem services9 and may enhance coral reef resilience to disturbance events5,13,25,49. By focusing on key groups of fish such as herbivores, including parrotfish, we show that management of anthropogenic activity on sea based activities can increase fish biomass, which in turn could have consequences for ecosystem health13.
In summary, lockdown restrictions on water-based activities in response to COVID-19 are associated with increased biomass of coral reef fish, particularly parrotfish and juvenile parrotfish. Given the clear ubiquitous impacts of COVID-19 lockdowns around the world on behaviour and physiology of multiple organisms across multiple ecosystems27,28, increased biomass of reef fish is not surprising35,36,37,38. However, our study highlights the effect over a longer time-period (2 years) than previous studies35,36,37 (~ 3 months), indicating increased biomass was likely driven by both altered behaviour and increased ecological fitness owing to lockdown restrictions, which subsequently contributed to fish recruitment. Our findings show how tight restrictions to water-based activities can positively influence biomass of functionally important reef fish, which could have consequences for coral reef ecosystem function and coral reef health in the Anthropocene.
Methods
Study sites and data collection
Data were collected from four sites in Grand Cayman (Fig. 1) with surveys conducted from a range of 10.5–43 ft (median = 27 ft). The first temporal point of surveying took place in July 2020 where surveys were conducted every other month through June 2022. For each site, fish point transects (n = 3–5 per sampling period per site) were conducted within the above depth range depending on haphazard selection of transect location using 30 m by 2 m transects with every fish counted identified to species levels. Each fish was categorized into size classes based on total length (0–5 cm, 6–10 cm, 11–20 cm, 21–30 cm, 31–40 cm, and > 40 cm) to allow for biomass calculations using the formula:
where W is the weight of the fish, L is the maximum length based on the size classes above. a and b are species specific constants based on empirical data for calculating fish biomass from size-weight relationships50,51,52,53. These constants were obtained from fish base, with values from congenic species used if data for a specific species were not available54. Each fish species was subsequently grouped into the appropriate trophic guild based with grouping also derived from Fishbase54. Fish where we were interested in different life stages (e.g., Parrotfish) were visually determined to be in either their juvenile/initial phase or terminal (adult) phase.
We also collated baseline data from previous monitoring effort using the Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef Assessment (AGRRA) protocol, identical to the described fish transects above, which took place along Grand Cayman harbour in July 2018 to compare fish communities before vs during and after lockdown. Fish point transects followed the same protocol, with biomass and trophic guild calculations as above. However only AGRRA fish species55 are collected during fish transects when using the AGRRA protocol, therefore comparison before-during-after lockdown were only made using the AGRRA fish species55. The sites from 2018 AGRRA surveying were Cemetery (19.362667, − 81.398083), Happs Pipeline (19.38538, − 81.41645), and Sunset (19.2863, − 81.391417). While these sites are different to the sites surveyed during lockdown, they are part of the same reef system. However, these sites should experience less anthropogenic stress from human activities as they are all further away from where cruise ships moor compared to sites surveyed during COVID. Thus, using these three sites as a baseline for how the fish community changed is a conservative approach, as they are under relatively less stress compared to the site surveyed during lockdown.
Statistical analysis
To assess the change in reef fish species richness, biomass, and abundance since lockdown, we implemented multivariate random effect Bayesian models parameterised with a negative binomial distribution. We selected a negative-binomial family distribution as the responses of species richness and abundance represent count data, while biomass can be rounded to an integer with no discernible influence on the outcome. Additionally, Negative-Binomial is preferable to a Poisson for these data because all three responses were over-dispersed based on preliminary analysis with residual deviance exceeding degrees of freedom56. We also explored non-linear and Gaussian models on raw and log transformed responses, but found model fit was consistently poor57 based on posterior predictive checks (PPC) and weighted alternative information criteria (WAIC). The three response variables were not statistically colinear based on a Spearman's rank test of collinearity using a conservative 0.65 threshold, nor was the predictor of rescaled dates. Dates were rescaled to represent integers, starting from zero, which represents the time of the first survey and so on sequentially. Our model also included the random effect of site against the intercept to control for spatial variation in fish communities across reefs58. We ran models for all fishes in the dataset, and again for each trophic guild separately. We also developed a univariate Bayesian random effect model to specifically determine the change in all parrotfish, and juvenile parrotfish biomass over the study period. Models were specified with flat uninformative priors for the fixed effect of date (rescaled), a student-t with shape 3 location 9.3 and scale 2.5 for the intercept which allows for flexibility in estimation while constraining within a reasonable range, and a weakly informative prior for the random effect of site with shape 3 location 0 and scale 2.5. The shape parameter of the responses was specified with a gamma prior (shape = 0.01, rate = 0.01) allowing for more heavy-tailed distributions. All models ran with 3000 iterations and 1500 warmups split across 4 chains using the “brms” package59, which uses STAN to develop flexible Bayesian models60 in R 4.361. All models were inspected for convergence using visual inference of trace plots and considered to converge when the Rhat value (Gelman Rubin statistic) equalled one59. Model fit was confirmed through visual inspection of posterior predictive checks for each response variable.
To statistically compare fish biomass before, during, and after COVID lockdown we used Kruskal–Wallis test on the three grouping periods as data were not normally distributed based on visual inference of histograms and a Shapiro-Wilks test of normality. Post-hoc comparisons were carried out using a Dunn's test from the FSA package62 with p-values adjusted using the Holm's method. Community composition of fish was compared using non-Metric Multi-Dimensional Scaling (nMDS) in the vegan package63. The nMDS community matrix was square-root transformed and subsequently transformed into a Bray–Curtis dissimilarity matrix. The dissimilarity matrix was used to statistically compare time periods of the fish communities using a PERMANOVA from the vegan package. Additionally, we conducted a pairwise PERMANOVA using the pairwiseAdonis package64.
Data availability
Data and code are available on out Github (https://github.com/JackVJohnson/Quiet-Oceans-Grand-Cayman).
References
Schiettekatte, N. M. D. et al. The role of fish feces for nutrient cycling on coral reefs. Oikos n/a, e09914 (2023).
Bozec, Y.-M., Doropoulos, C., Roff, G. & Mumby, P. J. Transient grazing and the dynamics of an unanticipated coral-algal phase shift. Ecosystems 22, 296–311 (2019).
Mumby, P. J. et al. Trophic cascade facilitates coral recruitment in a marine reserve. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 104, 8362–8367 (2007).
Mumby, P. J., Chaloupka, M., Bozec, Y.-M., Steneck, R. S. & Montero-Serra, I. Revisiting the evidentiary basis for ecological cascades with conservation impacts. Conserv. Lett. 15, e12847 (2022).
Hughes, T. P., Graham, N. A. J., Jackson, J. B. C., Mumby, P. J. & Steneck, R. S. Rising to the challenge of sustaining coral reef resilience. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 633–642 (2010).
Mellin, C. et al. Safeguarding nutrients from coral reefs under climate change. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-022-01878-w (2022).
Beck, M. W. et al. The global flood protection savings provided by coral reefs. Nat. Commun. 9, 2186 (2018).
Moberg, F. & Folke, C. Ecological goods and services of coral reef ecosystems. Ecol. Econ. 29, 215–233 (1999).
Eddy, T. D. et al. Global decline in capacity of coral reefs to provide ecosystem services. One Earth 4, 1278–1285 (2021).
Beck, M. W. et al. Return on investment for mangrove and reef flood protection. Ecosyst. Serv. 56, 101440 (2022).
Sing Wong, A., Vrontos, S. & Taylor, M. L. An assessment of people living by coral reefs over space and time. Glob. Change Biol. 28, 7139–7153 (2022).
Hughes, T. P. et al. Coral reefs in the anthropocene. Nature 546, 82–90 (2017).
Bruno, J. F., Côté, I. M. & Toth, L. T. Climate change, coral loss, and the curious case of the parrotfish paradigm: Why don’t marine protected areas improve reef resilience?. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 11, 307–334 (2019).
Graham, N. A. J. et al. Extinction vulnerability of coral reef fishes. Ecol. Lett. 14, 341–348 (2011).
Rogers, A., Blanchard, J. L. & Mumby, P. J. Vulnerability of coral reef fisheries to a loss of structural complexity. Curr. Biol. 24, 1000–1005 (2014).
McClanahan, T. R., Hicks, C. C. & Darling, E. S. Malthusian overfishing and efforts to overcome it on Kenyan coral reefs. Ecol. Appl. 18, 1516–1529 (2008).
Shantz, A. A., Ladd, M. C. & Burkepile, D. E. Overfishing and the ecological impacts of extirpating large parrotfish from Caribbean coral reefs. Ecol. Monogr. 90, e01403 (2020).
Edinger, E. N., Jompa, J., Limmon, G. V., Widjatmoko, W. & Risk, M. J. Reef degradation and coral biodiversity in Indonesia: Effects of land-based pollution, destructive fishing practices and changes over time. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 36, 617–630 (1998).
Exton, D. A. et al. Artisanal fish fences pose broad and unexpected threats to the tropical coastal seascape. Nat. Commun. 10, 2100 (2019).
Rhyne, A. L. et al. Revealing the appetite of the marine aquarium fish trade: The volume and biodiversity of fish imported into the United States. PLOS ONE 7, e35808 (2012).
Radford, A. N., Kerridge, E. & Simpson, S. D. Acoustic communication in a noisy world: Can fish compete with anthropogenic noise?. Behav. Ecol. 25, 1022–1030 (2014).
Duarte, C. M. et al. The soundscape of the Anthropocene ocean. Science 371, eaba4658 (2021).
Simpson, S. D. et al. Anthropogenic noise increases fish mortality by predation. Nat. Commun. 7, 10544 (2016).
Hughes, T. P. et al. Phase shifts, herbivory, and the resilience of coral reefs to climate change. Curr. Biol. 17, 360–365 (2007).
Mumby, P. J., Steneck, R. S., Roff, G. & Paul, V. J. Marine reserves, fisheries ban, and 20 years of positive change in a coral reef ecosystem. Conserv. Biol. 35, 1473–1483 (2021).
Smith, J. G. & Tinker, M. T. Alternations in the foraging behaviour of a primary consumer drive patch transition dynamics in a temperate rocky reef ecosystem. Ecol. Lett. 25, 1827–1838 (2022).
Bates, A. E., Primack, R. B., Moraga, P. & Duarte, C. M. COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdown as a “Global Human Confinement Experiment” to investigate biodiversity conservation. Biol. Conserv. 248, 108665 (2020).
Rutz, C. et al. COVID-19 lockdown allows researchers to quantify the effects of human activity on wildlife. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1156–1159 (2020).
March, D., Metcalfe, K., Tintoré, J. & Godley, B. J. Tracking the global reduction of marine traffic during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nat. Commun. 12, 2415 (2021).
Wilson, L., Pine, M. K. & Radford, C. A. Small recreational boats: A ubiquitous source of sound pollution in shallow coastal habitats. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 174, 113295 (2022).
van Dam, J. W., Negri, A. P., Uthicke, S. & Mueller, J. F. Chemical pollution on coral reefs: Exposure and ecological effects. Ecol. Impacts Toxic Chem. 9, 187–211 (2011).
Nedelec, S. L. et al. Motorboat noise impacts parental behaviour and offspring survival in a reef fish. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 284, 20170143 (2017).
Mills, S. C. et al. Hormonal and behavioural effects of motorboat noise on wild coral reef fish. Environ. Pollut. 262, 114250 (2020).
Nedelec, S. L. et al. Limiting motorboat noise on coral reefs boosts fish reproductive success. Nat. Commun. 13, 2822 (2022).
China, V., Zvuloni, A., Roll, U. & Belmaker, J. Reduced human activity in shallow reefs during the COVID-19 pandemic increases fish evenness. Biol. Conserv. 257, 109103 (2021).
Lecchini, D. et al. Effects of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on coral reef fishes at eco-tourism sites in Bora-Bora. French Polynesia. Mar. Environ. Res. 170, 105451 (2021).
Feeney, W. E. et al. COVID-19 lockdown highlights impact of recreational activities on the behaviour of coral reef fishes. R. Soc. Open Sci. 9, 220047 (2022).
Bertucci, F. et al. Effects of COVID-19 lockdown on the observed density of coral reef fish along coastal habitats of Moorea. French Polynesia. Reg. Environ. Change 23, 16 (2022).
Jacquin, L., Petitjean, Q., Côte, J., Laffaille, P. & Jean, S. Effects of pollution on fish behavior, personality, and cognition: Some research perspectives. Front. Ecol. Evol. 8, (2020).
Taylor, B. M. et al. Synchronous biological feedbacks in parrotfishes associated with pantropical coral bleaching. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 1285–1294 (2020).
Graham, N. A. J. et al. Changing role of coral reef marine reserves in a warming climate. Nat. Commun. 11, 2000 (2020).
Lima, A. L. R. et al. The influence of marine protected areas on the patterns and processes in the life cycle of reef fishes. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-023-09761-y (2023).
Schiettekatte, N. M. D. et al. Biological trade-offs underpin coral reef ecosystem functioning. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 6, 701–708 (2022).
Bruno, J. F. et al. Climate change threatens the world’s marine protected areas. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 499–503 (2018).
Bates, A. E. et al. Climate resilience in marine protected areas and the ‘Protection Paradox’. Biol. Conserv. 236, 305–314 (2019).
Baumann, J. H., Zhao, L. Z., Stier, A. C. & Bruno, J. F. Remoteness does not enhance coral reef resilience. Glob. Change Biol. 28, 417–428 (2022).
Johnson, J. V., Dick, J. T. A. & Pincheira-Donoso, D. Local anthropogenic stress does not exacerbate coral bleaching under global climate change. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 31, 1228–1236 (2022).
Johnson, J. V., Dick, J. T. A. & Pincheira-Donoso, D. Marine protected areas do not buffer corals from bleaching under global warming. BMC Ecol. Evol. 22, 58 (2022).
Mumby, P. J. & Harborne, A. R. Marine reserves enhance the recovery of corals on Caribbean Reefs. PLOS ONE 5, e8657 (2010).
Bohnsack, J. A. & Harper, D. E. Length-weight relationships of selected marine reef fishes from the southeastern United States and the Caribbean (1988).
Coull, K. Length/weight relationships for 88 species of fish encountered in the North East Atlantic (Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland, 1989).
Torres Jr, F. Tabular data on marine fishes from Southern Africa. Part 1: Length-weight relationships. Fishbyte 9, 50–53 (1991).
Kulbicki, M., Mou Tham, G., Thollot, P. & Wantiez, L. Length-weight relationships of fish from the lagoon of New Caledonia. Naga Iclarm Q 16, 26–29 (1993).
Froese, R. & Pauly, D. FishBase. (2010).
Lang, J. C., Marks, K. W., Kramer, P. A., Kramer, P. R. & Ginsburg, R. N. AGRRA protocols version 5.4. Atl. Gulf Rapid Reef Assess. Program Fla. USA 1–31 (2010).
Hinde, J. & Demétrio, C. G. Overdispersion: Models and estimation. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 27, 151–170 (1998).
O’Hara, R. B. & Kotze, D. J. Do not log-transform count data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 1, 118–122 (2010).
Barneche, D. R. et al. Body size, reef area and temperature predict global reef-fish species richness across spatial scales. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 28, 315–327 (2019).
Bürkner, P.-C. brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using stan. J. Stat. Softw. 80, 1–28 (2017).
Carpenter, B. et al. Stan: A probabilistic programming language. J. Stat. Softw. 76, 1–32 (2017).
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing (2023).
Ogle, D. H., Wheeler, P. & Dinno, A. FSA: fisheries stock analysis. R Package Version 08 17, 636 (2017).
Oksanen, J. et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package (2020).
Martinez Arbizu, P. pairwiseAdonis: Pairwise multilevel comparison using adonis. R Package Version 04, 1 (2020).
Schiettekatte, N. M. D., Brandl, S. J. & Casey, J. M. fishualize: Color palettes based on fish species (2022).
Constantin, A.-E. & Patil, I. ggsignif: R package for displaying significance brackets for ‘ggplot2’. PsyArxiv https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/7awm6 (2021).
Acknowledgements
This work was funded by the UK Government through the Darwin Initiative/the Illegal Wildlife Trade Challenge Fund (CV19RR\1036 to GGG) and by Walkers Cayman Islands. We thank Gabrielle Carpenter, Sabrina Weber, Rickeem Lashley, and Elizabeth Chafin for assistance with surveys at various time points. We are thankful to the Grand Cayman Port Authority for availability of statistics on Passenger Vessels. We are especially thankful to the Department of Hazard response particularly Daniel Coleman and Simon Boxall for information regarding lockdown timeline.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
G.G.G. and A.D.C. designed the study and collected data. J.V.J. performed analysis. J.V.J. and G.G.G. wrote the initial draft, with all authors contributing to the final version.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Johnson, J.V., Chequer, A.D. & Goodbody-Gringley, G. Insights from the 2-year-long human confinement experiment in Grand Cayman reveal the resilience of coral reef fish communities. Sci Rep 13, 21806 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-49221-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-49221-y
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.