Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 612

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mortality, growth and reproduction in scleractinian corals following bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef

Open access
Baird, AH, Marshall, PA·2002·Marine Ecology Progress Series

Abstract

Despite extensive research into the coral bleaching phenomena there are very few data which examine the population biology of affected species. These data are required in order to predict the capacity of corals to respond to environmental change. We monitored individual colonies of 4 common coral species for 8 mo following historically high sea-surface temperatures on the Great Barrier Reef in 1998 to compare their response to, and recovery from, thermal stress and to examine the effect of bleaching on growth and reproduction in 2 Acropora species. Platygyra daedalea and P. lobata colonies took longer to bleach, longer to recover and longer to die. In contrast, Acropora hyacinthus and A. millepora colonies bleached quickly and most had either recovered, or died, within 14 wk of the initial reports of bleaching. Whole colony mortality was high in A. hyacinthus (88%) and A. millepora (32%) and partial mortality rare. In contrast, most colonies of P. daedalea and P. lobata lost some tissue and few whole colonies died. The mean proportion of tissue lost per colony was 43 ± 6.6 % and 11 ± 1.1 % respectively. Consequently, observed hierarchies of species susceptibility will depend critically on the time since the onset of stress and must consider both whole and partial colony mortality. Colony mortality was highly dependent on visual estimates of the severity of bleaching but independent of size. Growth rates of Acropora colonies were highly variable and largely independent of the severity of bleaching. A. hyacinthus was more susceptible to bleaching than A. millepora with 45% of surviving colonies gravid compared to 88%. High whole-colony mortality combined with a reduction in the reproductive output of surviving Acropora suggests that recovery to former levels of abundance is likely to be slow.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3354/meps237133

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 612

Metadata

Authors
Baird, A., & Marshall, P.
Venue
Marine Ecology Progress Series
Published
2002
Volume
237
Pages
133-141
ISSN
  • 0171-8630 (ISSN-L)
  • 1616-1599
OpenAlex
W2148447618
Cited by
612
References
2
FWCI
8.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mortality, growth and reproduction in scleractinian corals following bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3354/meps237133
The paper
Baird, A., & Marshall, P. (2002). Mortality, growth and reproduction in scleractinian corals following bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef. Marine Ecology Progress Series. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps237133

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.