Quote:

The ecological impacts of animal groups may be different and predictable depending on their collective behavior. Farmerfish (Stegastes nigricans) live in social groups and collectively defend gardens of palatable algae. These gardens also serve as settlement and nursery habitats for corals because farmerfish mob corallivores that attempt to forage on corals within these gardens. We detected large among-colony differences in farmerfish collective aggression towards intruder fish that persisted across years. We further found that the territories of aggressive groups and territories containing larger farmerfish provided greater protection to corals: territories of aggressive groups naturally harbored more branching corals than nonaggressive groups, and experimentally outplanted branching corals experienced 80% less skeletal loss and grew larger over 25 weeks in aggressive territories than in nonaggressive territories. These findings hint that factors that increase farmerfish group aggressiveness (e.g., higher temperatures) could enhance the protective value of farmerfish territories for the replenishment of coral populations.

https://academic.oup.com/beheco/advance-article/doi/10.1093/beheco/ary092/5096922

Coral study = Koch Brothers funded study. Good find, lee. As always.

"Heating up many corals even mildly can negatively impact a variety of physiological processes. However, this study shows that small increases could provide greater protection by resident fishes.
"Obviously this can't go on for forever, though. At some point, all the protection in the world won't matter anything if the corals can't feed themselves," Pruitt said.

Yes those small area's where the Farmer fish have their territory MIGHT be better off, how about the rest of the reef and as it says if it gets to hot wont  matter . ;)

DonDeeHippy wrote on Oct 18^th, 2018 at 7:39am:

Yes those small area's where the Farmer fish have their territory MIGHT be better off, how about the rest of the reef and as it says if it gets to hot wont  matter

Define hot. Is that "hot" in a global context or a local context. Remember that new SR15 report from the IPCC? They talk about global temperature and its impacts. ;)

Ocean acidification  will insure coral is bleached...farmer fish cannot farm on dead coral.

lee wrote on Oct 18^th, 2018 at 1:37pm:

DonDeeHippy wrote on Oct 18th, 2018 at 7:39am: Yes those small area's where the Farmer fish have their territory MIGHT be better off, how about the rest of the reef and as it says if it gets to hot wont  matter Define hot. Is that "hot" in a global context or a local context. Remember that new SR15 report from the IPCC? They talk about global temperature and its impacts. ;)

ohhh u forgot the bit I was refering too Lee... I know u never want anything out of contex by only quoting 1 line
"Heating up many corals even mildly can negatively impact a variety of physiological processes. However, this study shows that small increases could provide greater protection by resident fishes.
"Obviously this can't go on for forever, though. At some point, all the protection in the world won't matter anything if the corals can't feed themselves," Pruitt said.

I guess u will have to ask the the guys that made the report what is hot Lee as its a quote from the article u posted :)

DonDeeHippy wrote on Oct 19^th, 2018 at 6:21am:

I guess u will have to ask the the guys that made the report what is hot Lee as its a quote from the article u posted

Nope. I don't.

They don't even speculate at what temperature this threat to corals will occur. ;)

So is it temperatures during El Nino when they are higher due to water levels moving to the east when the trade winds stop blowing? Temperatures generally?

don't know its your article Lee not mine ?
;)

DonDeeHippy wrote on Oct 20^th, 2018 at 6:52am:

don't know its your article Lee not mine ? ;)

It's not mine. it is on the web. You can find the authors if you wish. ;)

Or do you mean the temperatures? If it is not in the paper, how am I supposed to intuit them?

not like u to post threads where u don't really know what they r about … but they sort of support what u think and sound good  :D

DonDeeHippy wrote on Oct 21^st, 2018 at 5:35am:

not like u to post threads where u don't really know what they r about … but they sort of support what u think and sound good

I know what they are about. I just don't know the metrics. Being so smart perhaps you can find them? ;)

From the article:


Quote:

Thus, as the world’s oceans warm, the behavioral tendencies of many marine ectotherms are speculated to shift towards more aggressive phenotypes, at least over some temperature ranges. As documented here, such shifts could increase the defensive efficacy of residential fishes, which could offset some of the costs of reduced photosynthetic performance: a large increase in the aggressiveness of farmerfish could reduce corallivory by 50–80%

In simple terms: when the ocean gets a bit warmer, corals starve, but fewer fish are allowed eat them, which might make it easier for some coral to recover from a season of starvation.


lee wrote on Oct 18^th, 2018 at 1:37pm:

Define hot. Is that "hot" in a global context or a local context. Remember that new SR15 report from the IPCC? They talk about global temperature and its impacts. ;)

Ocean temparatures have already increased enough to cause massive starvation events on the Great Barrier Reef, which should qualify as "too hot". Ocean temperatures are forecast to increase to "far too hot", but we still have a chance to avoid "the whole thing's dead".

Robot wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 7:27am:

Ocean temparatures have already increased enough to cause massive starvation events on the Great Barrier Reef, which should qualify as "too hot".

Was that due to El Nino and water levels dropping or some other cause? At what temperature is the water "too hot"? "Too hot" has no meaning in science. ;)

Even the "Climate Scientists" use graphs of Zetajoules, because the numbers are so large, for global ocean temperature. The data is actually recorded in ºC and converted. 100,000's of Zetajoules equals a few hundredths of a degree (depends on the size of the oceanic water basins. Don't forget to include areas like the Marianas Trench. And of course their is limited oceanic temperature recording in the Southern Hemisphere.


Robot wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 7:27am:

Ocean temperatures are forecast to increase to "far too hot", but we still have a chance to avoid "the whole thing's dead".

On which forecast are they based? Computer models? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Corals have been around for about 500K years. In that time it has been both warmer and cooler. Can you define a Goldilocks temperature?

Marla wrote on Oct 18^th, 2018 at 7:38am:

Coral study = Koch Brothers funded study. Good find, lee. As always.

Well done Marla. Another drive by shooting. Never let the truth get in the way of a good story, eh?

Published in a peer-reviewed magazine by Oxford Academic.

But you probably have never heard of Oxford. Never mind dear.

Of course if you can actually find a reference to the study being funded by Koch, it might improve your credibility. Actually it must, because currently you have none. ;)

lee wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 11:33am:

Robot wrote on Oct 23rd, 2018 at 7:27am: Ocean temparatures have already increased enough to cause massive starvation events on the Great Barrier Reef, which should qualify as "too hot". Was that due to El Nino and water levels dropping or some other cause? At what temperature is the water "too hot"? "Too hot" has no meaning in science. ;) Even the "Climate Scientists" use graphs of Zetajoules, because the numbers are so large, for global ocean temperature. The data is actually recorded in ºC and converted. 100,000's of Zetajoules equals a few hundredths of a degree (depends on the size of the oceanic water basins. Don't forget to include areas like the Marianas Trench. And of course their is limited oceanic temperature recording in the Southern Hemisphere. Ocean temperatures are forecast to increase to "far too hot", but we still have a chance to avoid "the whole thing's dead".

On which forecast are they based? Computer models? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Corals have been around for about 500K years. In that time it has been both warmer and cooler. Can you define a Goldilocks temperature?[/quote]

The Goldilocks range is between "too hot" and "too cold", also known as "just right".

Goldilocks can't live just anywhere on the planet; she can only live in particular climates. When climate change happens gradually, Goldilocks can move to a different home, following the climate that's "just right". If the climate changes suddenly then Goldilocks doesn't have time to move; the bears will maul her and eat her.

Robot wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 12:49pm:

If the climate changes suddenly then Goldilocks doesn't have time to move; the bears will maul her and eat her.

Can you define "suddenly" in geologic terms?

lee wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 2:18pm:

Robot wrote on Oct 23rd, 2018 at 12:49pm: If the climate changes suddenly then Goldilocks doesn't have time to move; the bears will maul her and eat her. Can you define "suddenly" in geologic terms?

"Suddenly" means "happening very quickly, like whoa" in terms of geological time scales.

To pre-empt your next question, "the bears will maul her and eat her" means the same thing to geologists as it does to everyone else.

Robot wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 9:46pm:

"Suddenly" means "happening very quickly, like whoa" in terms of geological time scales.

Like 200 years?

You don't seem to know much for the opinions" you are offering. ;)


Robot wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 9:46pm:

To pre-empt your next question, "the bears will maul her and eat her" means the same thing to geologists as it does to everyone else.

Really? Do you have a link for that? ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 10:07pm:

Robot wrote on Oct 23rd, 2018 at 9:46pm: "Suddenly" means "happening very quickly, like whoa" in terms of geological time scales. Like 200 years?

No no--say it in "geologic terms".

Robot wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 10:33pm:

No no--say it in "geologic terms".

Ok. it is highly that as there have been, according to paleo data, relatively fast switches in climate, as during the MWP, that climate can vary in the short term over the course of hundreds of years.

As there are only modern temperature records from thermometers, and sparse at that, it is too short a time frame to rule out natural variability, as occurred in the past.

Of course feel free to offer any rebuttal. ;)

lee wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 10:55pm:

Robot wrote on Oct 23rd, 2018 at 10:33pm: No no--say it in "geologic terms". Ok. it is highly that as there have been, according to paleo data, relatively fast switches in climate, as during the MWP, that climate can vary in the short term over the course of hundreds of years. As there are only modern temperature records from thermometers, and sparse at that, it is too short a time frame to rule out natural variability, as occurred in the past. Of course feel free to offer any rebuttal. ;)

I asked you to say "Like 200 years" in "geologic terms" (your phrase, not mine).

Hard to see how you could reasonably interpret that as an invitation to copy-paste some nutjob blogger's pseudoscientific talking point about temperature records.

Robot wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 11:04pm:

Hard to see how you could reasonably interpret that as an invitation to copy-paste some nutjob blogger's pseudoscientific talking point about temperature records.

Deary me petal.

Did you see attribution? No? Because it is my own work, gleaned from peer-reviewed papers.

You should try it sometime.

However I notice you refused to take up the challenge to refute what I said.

Game over.

Goodbye.

lee wrote on Oct 24^th, 2018 at 11:33am:

Did you see attribution? No? Because it is my own work, gleaned from peer-reviewed papers.

My apologies--I didn't realise you had your own nutjob pseudoscientific talking points about temperature records.