Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Brief Communication
  • Published:

Local management actions can increase coral resilience to thermally-induced bleaching

A Publisher Correction to this article was published on 21 June 2018

This article has been updated


Recent large-scale analyses suggest that local management actions may not protect coral reefs from climate change, yet most local threat-reduction strategies have not been tested experimentally. We show that removing coral predators is a common local action used by managers across the world, and that removing the corallivorous snail Coralliophila abbreviata from Caribbean brain corals (Pseudodiploria and Diploria species) before a major warming event increased coral resilience by reducing bleaching severity (resistance) and post-bleaching tissue mortality (recovery). Our results highlight the need for increased evaluation and identification of local interventions that improve coral reef resilience.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Corallivore density experiment on coral tissue loss.
Fig. 2: Effects of corallivore density on coral bleaching and mortality.

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 21 June 2018

    In the version of this Brief Communication originally published, the two instances of ‘natural-to-high’ in the sixth and seventh paragraphs were incorrect; they should have read ‘naturally high’.


  1. Hughes, T. P. et al. Nature 546, 82–90 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Jackson, J. et al. Status and Trends of Caribbean Coral Reefs: 1970–2012 (Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network, IUCN, Gland, 2014).

  3. De’ath, G. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 17995–17999 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gunderson, L. H. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 31, 425–439 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Vega Thurber, R. L. et al. Glob. Change Biol. 20, 544–554 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Carilli, J. E. et al. PLoS ONE 4, e6324 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Zaneveld, J. R. et al. Nat. Commun. 7, 11833 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hughes, T. P. et al. Nature 543, 373–377 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bruno, J. F. & Valdivia, A. Sci. Rep. 6, 29778 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Levin, S. A.. & Lubchenco, J. BioScience 58, 27–32 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Normile, D. Science 352, 15–16 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. van Oppen, M. J. H. et al. Glob. Change Biol. 23, 3437–3448 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Knowlton, N. & Jackson, J. B. C. PLoS Biol. 6, e54 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Williams, D. E. & Miller, M. W. Coral Reefs 31, 369–382 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Miller, M. W. Coral Reefs 19, 293–295 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Silliman, B. R. et al. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 44, 503–538 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rotjan, R. D. & Lewis, S. M. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 367, 73–91 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Miller, A. C. Bull. Mar. Sci. 31, 932–934 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Baums, I. B., Miller, M. W. & Szmant, A. M. Mar. Biol. 142, 1083–1091 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Oren, U., Brickner, I. & Loya, Y. Proc. R. Soc. B 265, 2043–2050 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. National Data Buoy Center Station MLRF1—Molasses Reef, FL (NOAA, 2014);

  22. Manzello, D. P. Sci. Rep. 5, 16762 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Loya, Y. et al. Ecol. Lett. 4, 122–131 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Edmunds, P. J. Mar. Biol. 121, 137–142 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mooney, C. The Great Barrier Reef is bleaching yet again, and scientists say only swift climate action can save it. Washington Post (15 March 2017).

  26. Anthony, K. R. N. et al. Funct. Ecol. 23, 539–550 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Shaver, E. C. et al. Ecology 98, 830–839 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Recovery Plan: Elkhorn Coral (Acropora palmata) and Staghorn Coral (A. cervicornis) (National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, 2015).

  29. McClanahan, T. R. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 115, 131–138 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sweatman, H. Curr. Biol. 18, 598–599 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. He, Q. et al. Ecol. Lett. 20, 194–201 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Ivlev, V. S. Experimental Ecology of the Feeding of Fishes (Yale Univ. Press, New Haven, 1961).

  33. Christensen, R. H. B. ordinal—Regression Models for Ordinal Data. R package version 6–28 (2015).

  34. R Development Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, 2016).

Download references


We thank S. Csik and C. Fuchs for fieldwork assistance and M. Hay for reviewing this manuscript. The National Science Foundation supported E.C.S. (GRFP DGE 1106401), D.E.B. (BIO-OCE 1130786) and B.R.S. (BIO-OCE 1056980). Duke University supported E.C.S. and B.R.S., and Florida International University and the University of California, Santa Barbara supported D.E.B. We thank The Nature Conservancy's Reef Resilience Program (P. MacGowan, K. Maize, C. Wagner, E. Mcleod), S. Wear, and the Lenfest Ocean Program for helping to inspire and conduct our manager survey work. Permits FKNMS-2014-081 and 2014-099 were obtained from the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary to conduct this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



The study was conceptualized by E.C.S., D.E.B. and B.R.S. The first draft of the paper was written by E.C.S. All authors contributed to editing subsequent drafts. E.C.S. conducted the predator density experiment. D.E.B. collected data on colony bleaching and mortality. E.C.S. analysed the data and created the figures.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elizabeth C. Shaver.

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

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Tables 1–3; Supplementary Figures 1–3; Supplementary References

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shaver, E.C., Burkepile, D.E. & Silliman, B.R. Local management actions can increase coral resilience to thermally-induced bleaching. Nat Ecol Evol 2, 1075–1079 (2018).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing