Abstract
Phenotypic variability is the ability of the same species to express different phenotypes under different environmental conditions. Several coral species that exist along a broad depth distribution have been shown to differ in skeletal morphology and nutrient acquisition at different depths, which has been attributed to variability in response to differing levels of light availability. This study examined the phenotypic variability of two common depth generalist corals, Montastraea cavernosa and Porites astreoides, along a gradient from 10 to 50 m in the Cayman Islands, by examining changes in skeletal morphology, photophysiology, symbiont cell density, and chlorophyll concentration. Skeletal features of M. cavernosa were found to increase in size from 10 to 30 m, but returned to smaller sizes from 30 to 50 m, while P. astreoides skeletal features continued to increase in size from 10 to 40 m. No differences were observed in either symbiont density or chlorophyll concentration across depths for either species. However, all photophysiological parameters exhibited significant depth-dependent variations in both species, revealing adaptive strategies to different light environments. These results suggest that both species have high variability in response to depth. Patterns of skeletal morphology and photophysiology, however, suggest that M. cavernosa may be more variable in regulating photosynthetic efficiency compared to P. astreoides, which likely facilitates the broader depth distribution of this species.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Tropical coral reefs are renowned for being among the most biologically diverse and productive marine ecosystems, despite inhabiting just 0.1% of the ocean floor (Gattuso et al. 2014; Hughes 1994; Spalding et al. 2017). Scleractinian corals, however, are extremely vulnerable to environmental change and the continued deterioration of coral reefs threatens the wider ecosystem as well as the livelihoods of millions of people living in tropical coastal regions who depend on their persistence (Lesser and Farrell 2004; Mumby 2006; Mumby et al. 2007; Woodhead et al. 2019). Among the greatest threats to corals reefs is warming induced coral bleaching, which is responsible for significant mortality on the world’s reefs and is exacerbated by high solar irradiance (Coles and Jokiel 1977; Hoegh-Guldberg 1999; Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2007). Shallow coral reefs, located between the depths of 0–30 m, are particularly vulnerable due to their proximity to natural and anthropogenic stressors. Yet, corals persist beyond this arbitrary depth limitation to deeper mesophotic reefs that exist between roughly 30 and 150 m, with records of photosynthetic corals found as deep as 172 m (Rouzé et al. 2021).
In recent years, mesophotic coral ecosystems (MCEs) have gained considerable interest due to their hypothesized potential to provide refuge for shallow water corals against disturbance (Bongaerts et al. 2010). However, long-term acclimation to environmental conditions on MCEs may also make these communities less resilient to future disturbance events, such as unprecedented thermal anomalies and disease outbreaks (Bongaerts et al. 2013; Smith et al. 2016). The physical environment of MCEs often includes sharp thermoclines, strong gradients in nutrients, and limited penetration of solar irradiance, all of which can impact the physiology of corals and determine their vertical distribution (Anthony and Larcombe 2000; Englebert et al. 2017; Lesser et al. 2009; Slattery and Lesser 2012). Thus, the maximum depth distribution of corals is location-specific (Laverick et al. 2020) and coral distribution is primarily driven by light availability (Carpenter et al. 2022; Tamir et al. 2019), as zooxanthellate corals rely on light-driven photosynthesis by symbiotic dinoflagellate algae in the genus Symbiodiniaceae to meet up to 90% of their metabolic demands (Muscatine and Porter 1977). To persist in MCEs, therefore, corals must adapt or acclimatize to the physical conditions present across depths through variability in morphology and physiology.
Several species that exist along a broad depth distribution have been shown to differ in skeletal morphology at different depths (Bruno and Edmunds 1997; Einbinder et al. 2009; Einbinder et al. 2009; Goodbody-Gringley et al. 2015; Goodbody-Gringley and Waletich 2018; Malik et al. 2020). For example, in Bermuda and the Red Sea, corals at increased depth had more laminar colony morphology, with smaller calyxes and greater distance between polyps compared to those at shallower depths (Goodbody-Gringley and Waletich 2018; Kramer et al. 2022; Malik et al. 2020). Likewise, changes in morphology and physiology such as nutrient acquisition, calcification and photosynthesis are reported to differ over increasing depth in the Gulf of Aqaba (Einbinder et al. 2009; Malik et al. 2020; Mass et al. 2007). These variations are often suggested to result from morphological variability in response to differing environmental conditions at depth, such as low light intensity (e.g., Goodbody-Gringley and Waletich 2018). For instance, Montastraea cavernosa exhibits divergent morphotypes associated with its feeding strategy: one morphotype features smaller polyps that are continuously open, optimized for light capture and daytime feeding, while the other has larger polyps that expand primarily at night, optimizing for zooplankton feeding (Lasker 1979, 1980, 1981). Despite the lack of conclusive evidence for cryptic speciation (Budd et al. 2012; Eckert et al. 2019; Goodbody-Gringley et al. 2012; Sturm et al. 2020), the distinct vertical distributions of these divergent morphotypes suggest an adaptation strategy to varying light conditions and depth-related environmental factors (Ruiz-Torres 2004).
At Little Cayman Island, benthic surveys linked coral community distribution and the boundary of shallow-mesophotic reefs with light availability and differences in coral photophysiology, with a distinct shift in coral community composition at 25–35 m and significant differences in quantum yield and maximum photosynthetic rate for two species (Porites astreoides and Montastraea cavernosa) across depth (Carpenter et al. 2022). Here, the differences in skeletal morphology, photophysiology, and symbiont physiology of the same two coral species were examined across depth to further examine phenotypic variability across a bathymetric gradient and explore the relationship between morphology and photophysiology in response to low light. A greater capacity to modify skeletal features along with symbiotic associations is expected to result in broader environmental tolerance, which may translate to higher long-term resilience to changing conditions.
Methods
Site and sample selection
The Cayman Islands are located 200 miles northwest of Jamaica and 150 miles south of Cuba in the Caribbean Sea. Little Cayman lies 80 miles northeast of Grand Cayman and is the smallest of the Cayman Islands with roughly 10 square miles of landmass and an estimated resident population of 160 people. For this study, two sites were selected that lie outside of the marine protected areas (MPAs), Martha’s Finyard (N19.66487, E80.11118) and Coral City (N19.68075, E80.02330) (Fig. 1A). Martha’s Finyard has a midday average photosynthetic active radiation (PAR; μmol/m−2 s−1) measurement of 566 μmol/m−2 s−1 at 12 m and 206 μmol/m−2 s−1 at 36 m, as measured between October 2021 and September 2022 (Fig. 1B). Nearly, 57% of the coastal waters in Little Cayman are classified as no-take MPAs. Both sites consist of sloping inner reef spur and groove formations leading to a near vertical fore reef wall which extends beyond 2000 m of depth.
Montastraea cavernosa is a gonochoric broadcast spawning coral that forms mounding boulders or encrusting plates and is recognized for having large polyps (Sebens et al. 1998). In the wider Caribbean, M. cavernosa has a vast depth distribution, can be found between 3 and 113 m and is also one of the most abundant corals at mesophotic depths (Reed 1985; Lesser et al. 2010). Porites astreoides, a fast-growing hermaphroditic brooding coral, rapidly colonizes reefs following disturbance (Green et al. 2008; Knowlton 2001). The species grows in mounding, encrusting or plate-like morphologies (Chornesky and Peters 1987), and can be found at depths around 5–40 m in the Cayman Islands (Carpenter et al. 2022).
Using a hammer and chisel, a small fragment (~ 5 × 5 cm) was removed from each of 8 colonies at 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 m depth using closed-circuit rebreathers (Hollis Prism2, Hollis Rebreathers, Salt Lake City, UT, USA), between the 25th of February and the 2nd of March 2022. Samples were selected haphazardly with a minimum of 10 m between sampled colonies. Samples were then transported to the wet lab facility at CCMI in coolers where they were immediately frozen. Upon defrosting, the tissue of each frozen coral fragment was water picked using filtered seawater. A 50-ml aliquot of the total tissue slurry was transferred to centrifuge tubes and electrically homogenized for 20 s before centrifugation at 4,400 rpm for 8 min to separate the symbiotic algae from the host tissue. The pellet containing symbiotic algae cells was resuspended in 1 mL distilled water (DW); 50 μL was taken for algal cell count and 500 μL to measure chlorophyll a concentration. Algal cells were imaged on a hemocytometer grid using a Nikon Eclipse (Nikon Eclipse Ti–S Inverted Microscope System) microscope to excite the chlorophyll autofluorescence with blue light (n = 4 counts per sample). The color threshold of images was adjusted to isolate algal cells using ImageJ software, and the number of cells in four replicate corner squares were counted using the ‘Analyze Particles’ function. The chlorophyll aliquot was first centrifuged to remove remaining DW before extraction in 1 mL 100% acetone at 4 °C for 24 h. Sample absorbance was determined in a 96-well plate using the equations of Ritchie (2008). The planar surface area of the coral was measured using Fiji software (Schindelin et al. 2012). Acknowledging the inherent topographical complexity of coral structures, the most planar orientation of each fragment was selected prior to imaging. Symbiodiniaceae concentration per milliliter (cells/mL) was calculated by dividing the total Symbiodiniaceae cell count by the adjusted volume. To assess the distribution of Symbiodiniaceae, the density per square centimeter of surface area was determined by normalizing cells/mL to the surface area (cm2). Furthermore, chlorophyll content per zooxanthellae cell (µg/cell) was calculated by dividing the µg/mL by cells/mL. An additional metric, chlorophyll content per square centimeter (µg/cm2), was derived by dividing the µg/cell by the cell density per cm2 (Fig. S1).
The remaining skeletons were then bleached and dried overnight. A fragment from each colony (n = 8) was subsequently photographed using the Aven Mighty Scope 5 M Digital Microscope and scanning electron microscope (SEM) ZEISS SigmaTM SEM (Germany), by using an In-lens detector (5 kV, WD = 6–8 mm). For each fragment of M. cavernosa (Fig. 2A), and P. astreoides (Fig. 3A), corallite diameter, columella diameter, septa length, and distance between polyps were recorded at four random polyps, methods per Goodbody-Gringley and Waletich, (2018). Additionally, septa width was measured for both species, and the spike-like structures on the septa were counted exclusively for P. astreoides. Digital microscope photographs were scaled to mm using a transparent plastic ruler placed directly on the fragment and calibrated in the same area for each image using ImageJ software (Rasband 2018). Fiji (Schindelin et al. 2012) was then used to acquire polyp measurements.
Light and photophysiology
The peak daily values of light (PAR, 400–700 nm) data were collected using a PME miniPAR logger from Martha’s Finyard throughout the year at 12 and 36 m (Fig. 1B). A median of these peak values was then determined to represent typical exposure. To extend understanding to unmeasured depths, the following equations were utilized:
The light attenuation coefficient (Kd) was calculated using the logarithmic ratio of Photosynthetic Active Radiation (PAR) at two different depths (12 m and 36 m), according to the equation described by Kirk 1994:
where E12 and E36 are the known PAR values at 12 m and 36 m, respectively, and z is the difference in depths (36 m–12 m).
The vertical profile of light intensity within the water column was modeled using the exponential attenuation of light, derived from the Beer–Lambert law (Domingues and Barbosa, 2023):
where I(z) is the intensity of light at depth, I0 is the initial light intensity (PAR at 12 m), and Kd is the light attenuation coefficient calculated as above.
Photophysiology data were measured at Martha’s Finyard on the 10th of July 2023 and at Coral City on the 11th of July 2023. Due to the period between morphometric evaluations and photophysiological assessments, it was not possible to correlate data with the individual colonies. Active fluorescence was measured with a fluorescence induction and relaxation (FIRe) instrument, using the same techniques described in Carpenter et al. (2022), Goodbody-Gringley et al. (2024), and Gorbunov and Falkowski (2005). Phase 1 of the FIRe technique employs a robust short pulse with a 100-ms duration, known as a single turnover flash. This phase is used to cumulatively saturate Photosystem II (PSII) and assess various properties of the system. These include the quantum yield of photochemistry in PSII [Pmax (electron S−1 PSII−1)], the functional absorption cross section of PSII (σPSII(A2)) and the connectivity parameter (p), which indicates the likelihood of excitation energy transfer between individual photosynthetic units. Phase 2 of the process uses weak modulated light to observe the relaxation kinetics of fluorescence yield over a 500-ms duration. This measurement helps in determining the maximum photosynthetic rate (Pmax), expressed as electrons per second per PSII. The process considers the acclimation of different areas of a coral. For instance, areas that are pre-acclimated to low light (such as shaded parts) will yield more precise readings for physiology in dark or low-light states (e.g., Fv/Fm). Conversely, high-light acclimated areas (e.g., those exposed to sunlight) will more accurately reflect parameters adapted to high light, such as maximum photosynthetic turnover rates. To ensure a comprehensive analysis that accounts for intra-colony differences in light exposure, three readings were taken from each colony and averaged to represent the photophysiology of the entire colony. The study targeted between 5 and 7 colonies of each species at varying depths of 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 m.
Statistical analysis
All data analyses and management were performed using the RStudio data analysis software (R Core Team, team 2022). Firstly, outliers were removed using the interquartile range. Data were then tested for normality using a Shapiro–Wilk test on residuals. Where non-normal distribution was identified by indication of a significant p value (p < 0.05), a common logarithm was used to transform data and re-tested. For normally distributed data, a one-way ANOVA was used to test between depths, and for non-normally distributed data, a Kruskal–Wallis test was used. Where significance was identified using the ANOVA or Kruskal–Wallis test (p < 0.05), the appropriate post hoc test in form of a Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference test, or Dunn’s test as the nonparametric equivalent was performed. Photophysiology parameters were tested using Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn’s, per Carpenter et al. (2022). Due to equipment failure in the initial round of field work, photophysiology measurements do not correspond to the exact same individuals sampled for morphology and physiology; thus, medians of all measured parameters were taken across the depths and used in Spearman’s rank correlative analyses.
Results
Skeletal morphology
All skeletal features of M. cavernosa (Fig. 2A) were found to vary significantly across depths, including corallite diameter, columella diameter, septa length, septa width, and distance between polyps. Generally, these features increased in size, peaked around the median depth, and decreased there after (Fig. 2B; Table 1). Skeletal features of P. astreoides (Fig. 3A) also showed significant variations across depths, including corallite diameter, columella diameter, septa length, septa width, distance between polyps, and spikes per septa. All features showed a general increase in size with depth (Fig. 3B; Table 2).
Photophysiology
All photophysiological parameters had significant variations across depths for M. cavernosa, including photosynthetic efficiency (Fv/Fm), functional absorption (σPSII), connectivity parameter (p), and maximum rate of photosynthesis [Pmax (electrons−1 PSII−1)] (Fig. 4; Table 1). For P. astreoides, Fv/Fm, σPSII, p, and Pmax all showed significant variation across depths (Fig. 4; Table 2).
Zooxanthellae and chlorophyll
No significant variation across depths was identified in associated Symbiodiniaceae cells per cm2 or chlorophyll per symbiont cell for either M. cavernosa or P. astreoides (Fig. S1).
Correlation matrix
For M. cavernosa, PAR was found to have a significant negative correlation with depth and Chlorophyll a per Symbiodiniaceae, and a positive correlation with Pmax, while σPSII, and p had a significant positive correlation (Fig. 5A; Table 3). In P. astreoides, PAR had a signficant negative correlation with depth, Fv/Fm, σPSII, and p; and a positive correlation with Pmax. Depth positively correlated with Fv/Fm, σPSII, and p, but negatively correlated with Pmax; and Fv/Fm. A significant correlation was also found between σPSII and p, which both had significant negative correlations with Pmax. Symbiodiniaceae/cm2 negatively correlated with Pmax (Fig. 5B; Table 3).
Discussion
Phenotypic variability refers to the capacity of an organism to exhibit differences in its morphological and/or physiological characteristics (Wagner and Altenberg 1996). This capacity to alter phenotype in response to change is an important attribute and a significant mechanism for determining distribution and abundance on a reef (Foster 1979). Skeletal features of corals are directly affected by environmental condition, with light being one factor influencing morphology (Todd 2008). Light attenuation decreases with depth, with 10% of surface light available in the upper mesophotic (30–60 m) and roughly 1% in the lower mesophotic (below 60 m), where it is hypothesized that organismal respiration is equal to symbiont photosynthesis (Lesser et al. 2009). Here, both M. cavernosa and P. astreoides showed differences in skeletal features and photophysiology across depth, suggesting high degrees of variability in response to limited light availability corresponding with previous work on these species (e.g., Goodbody-Gringley et al. 2015; Goodbody-Gringley and Waletich 2018). Likewise, several other studies have found similar results documenting correlative changes in skeletal morphology with decreased light availability for a variety of coral species (Kramer et al. 2022; Pisapia et al. 2012; Studivan et al. 2019). For example, four corals species in Indonesia showed variable polyp morphology along both a depth gradient and a turbidity gradient, suggesting that light was the main driver of morphological plasticity (Pisapia et al. 2012). Likewise, transplantation of the coral Goniastrea pectinata across depth in Singapore resulted in changes to polyp morphology that resulted in increased self-shading for shallow corals and increased light capture for deeper corals (Ow and Todd 2010). Finding similar patterns in light-driven changes to skeletal morphology, Kramer et al. (2022) used 3D simulations of light propagation and photosynthesis for the coral Stylophora pistillata to show that diverging morphotypes either enhance light-use efficiency or reduce UV damage, providing further evidence that light availability for photosynthesis is a key driver of morphological variability. A significant decline in maximum photosynthetic yield (Pmax) for both species beyond 30 m found here, accompanied by a shift in skeletal features for M. cavernosa beyond 40 m, where deeper colonies more closely resemble the shallowest colonies, may suggest that deeper colonies are less reliant on photosynthesis, potentially alternating to greater reliance on heterotrophy. Likewise, convergent morphologies also suggest that photoinhibition may be occurring in the shallowest colonies, indicating that the moderate light levels found at the 20–30 m depth ranges are optimal for photosynthesis in M. cavernosa, which also corresponds to the depth range where the species is most abundant (Carpenter et al. 2022). Porites astreoides, on the other hand, was previously not documented to occur deeper than 35 m in Little Cayman (Carpenter et al. 2022), suggesting that changes in skeletal morphology alone are not sufficient for the species to obtain adequate nutrients from photosynthesis in low light environments, which likely results in the limited depth distribution. Contrary to these findings, however, one colony of P. astreoides was documented to reside at 50 m during photophysiological measurements, which is evidence of the potential for this species to exist deeper, likely dependent on bottom topography affecting colony orientation toward the light.
The reduction in the maximum rate of photosynthesis (Pmax) at 30 m and beyond indicates that M. cavernosa may require alternative sources of energy other than photosynthesis to survive at depth. In Panama, an increase in heterotrophic feeding rates was noted across increasing depth, the degree of which was found to be dependent on polyp size, with corals featuring smaller polyps exhibiting significantly enhanced feeding rates (Palardy et al. 2005). Lesser et al. (2010) used stable isotope analyses to demonstrate that primary productivity in M. cavernosa sharply declines at upper mesophotic depths, indicating a shift to heterotrophy. The data presented here indicate a general decrease in polyp size beyond 30 m, which could be an adaptation to enhance food capture at greater depths, lending further support to the trophic shift hypothesis; yet, relying solely on polyp size might not accurately reflect trophic strategies (Lasker 1981; Lesser et al. 2000; Studivan et al. 2019). Previous analyses of M. cavernosa in Little Cayman found a decrease in δ13C with increasing depth, suggesting reduced reliance on autotrophy, but no corresponding increase in δ15N, which would indicate a transition to heterotrophy (Crandall et al. 2016). Alternatively, it is possible that beyond 40 m M. cavernosa has reduced energy available to allocate toward skeletal growth due to reduced photosynthesis, and the smaller polyp sizes seen at these increasing depths could therefore be due to reductions in energy rather than a switch to heterotrophy. Thus, while M. cavernosa is likely primarily phototrophic down to at least 60 m, the role of heterotrophy remains unclear. Regardless, the capacity of M. cavernosa to maintain higher photosynthetic efficiency and total photosynthetic output into the lower mesophotic zone compared to P. astreoides may explain its persistence and prevalence at greater depths.
Interestingly, differing responses in P. astreoides polyp morphology across depth were observed in Little Cayman, compared to Bermuda, where Scucchia et al. (2023) observed a decrease in corallite diameter but no variation in skeletal thickness or aragonite crystal morphology from shallow to mesophotic depths. These differences are likely due to variations in the environmental conditions at each location. The open ocean surrounding Bermuda is characterized by exceptional clarity leading to increased depth of the euphotic zone with the 10% PAR depth ranging from 30 to 60 m and the 1% depth reaching 120 m (Coates et al. 2013; Goodbody-Gringley et al. 2019; Siegel et al. 1995), while on the reef platform, 1% light availability reaches MCEs at 90–100 m. Although coral skeletal accretion is expected to cease below 20% of surface light, M. cavernosa and A. fragilis are documented below 70 m at the 5% light level, while P. astreoides is typically limited to < 60 m (Fricke and Meischner 1985). Furthermore, the topography of MCEs in Bermuda is characterized by a gradual slope from 30 to 60 m that results in orientation of benthic organisms toward the ocean surface (Goodbody-Gringley et al. 2019). In contrast, Little Cayman is surrounded by the deep Cayman Trench and is characterized by a spur and groove forereef zone that drops quickly to steep nearly vertical wall features. Vertical walls not only facilitate upwelling of nutrient-rich turbid waters that reduce water clarity, but also orient benthic organisms perpendicular to the ocean surface affecting the angle of incident light reaching the benthos that can result in vertical surfaces receiving just 25% of the irradiance that horizontal surfaces at the same depth are exposed to (Lesser et al. 2000). Thus, it can be expected that light availability on MCEs in Little Cayman is less than that in Bermuda. In fact, the maximum light availability is roughly 450 and 280 µmol/m2/s−1 at 30 m and 45 m depth in Bermuda, respectively (Goodbody-Gringley, unpublished data), compared to 206 µmol/m2/s−1 at 36 m in Little Cayman. These differential gradients in light availability across depth likely influence physiological and morphological responses leading to the different patterns found between the present study and those of Scucchia et al. (2023).
Light availability (PAR), known to impact light-driven photosynthesis dynamics (Roth 2014), was found to positively associate with maximum photosynthetic yield in both P. astreoides and M. cavernosa in this study, which is consistent with previous finding in Little Cayman (Carpenter et al. 2022). However, light availability negatively correlates with photosynthetic efficiency (Fv/Fm), functional absorption (σPSII), and the connectivity parameter (p), as well as Symbiodiniaceae cell density and chlorophyll concentration per symbiont in P. astreoides, suggesting that despite a lower total photosynthetic yield, deeper colonies are more efficient at transforming the limited light that is available into photosynthate. Although the majority of photophysiology metrics were not found to correlate with light availability for M. cavernosa, a negative correlation was found with chlorophyll concentration per symbiont cell, which may be indicative of an increase in photochemical conversion efficiency under high light intensities, possibly to mitigate photodamage on shallow reefs (Mass et al. 2007). These disparities between species-specific responses suggest unique cellular strategies to optimize energy production from available light, hinting at evolutionary adaptations to differing light environments (Neder et al. 2022).
In examining depth-related variations, this study discovered that M. cavernosa exhibits enhanced efficiency in photochemical conversion at 50 m, suggesting its capability to thrive at deeper depths where light intensity diminishes. Conversely, P. astreoides displays no significant alterations in Symbiodiniaceae density or chlorophyll concentration with depth. Consistent with Carpenter et al. (2022) and Warner et al. (2006), photosynthetic efficiency (Fv/Fm) and maximum photosynthetic yield (Pmax) remain notably higher for P. astreoides compared to M. cavernosa. However, contrary to findings by Carpenter et al. (2022), which reported no significant depth-related differences in Pmax for P. astreoides, this study shows significantly lower Pmax values at upper mesophotic depths. While Carpenter et al. (2022) reported an increase in Fv/Fm beyond 15 m for M. cavernosa, these findings revealed no significant differences between 10 and 40 m, albeit with significantly higher rates observed at 50 m. The consortia of Symbiodiniaceae species may differ across coral depth distributions, potentially increasing photosynthate transfer rates to the host (Bongaerts et al. 2013; Goulet et al. 2019), unfortunately, such assessments were not conducted in this study. Both M. cavernosa and P. astreoides generally exhibit genetic variability across depths at several locations within the Caribbean, which could impact genomic responses to environmental gradients (Serrano et al. 2016; Studivan et al. 2019; Sturm et al. 2020), warranting further investigation into coral host genomics and symbiont consortia.
Despite increased photosynthetic efficiency at 50 m for M. cavernosa, reliance on autotrophy as the primary source of nutrients under decreasing light availability suggests that a metabolic trade-off would be expected, such as reduced calcification or reproduction in deeper corals. Reproduction by M. cavernosa is documented to change along a depth gradient in the US Virgin Islands, where fecundity and oocyte size decreased with depth and the sex ratio became male dominated on mesophotic reefs (Bloomberg and Holstein 2021). While reproductive output by the confamilial species Orbicella faveolata was found to increase by over an order of magnitude on mesophotic reefs in the USVI compared to shallow reefs (Holstein et al. 2019), calcification was found to be significantly reduced (Groves et al. 2018). Fecundity of P. astreoides was also found to increase with depth in the USVI and Bermuda (Holstein et al. 2016; Goodbody-Gringley et al. 2018), and ex situ experiments showed increased fitness for mesophotic P. astreoides larvae compared to shallow larvae (Goodbody-Gringley et al. 2018, 2021). Porites astreoides exhibited a notable increase in calcification within the septa at increasing depths, as well as enhancement in the complexity of its internal microstructures, suggesting a depth-related adaptation in the calcification process. Similarly, there is a clear difference in the structure of the internal columella for M. cavernosa along the depth gradient in this study, where internal septa changes from being vertical to swirling in a spiral formation. There is also a reduction in the complexity and presence of centers of calcification. These findings suggest that the mechanisms of calcification are changing for both species with increased depth. Therefore, while the species may be able to persist at greater depths, the overall function of lower mesophotic M. cavernosa colonies may be altered due to limited energetic reserves.
Overall, these results highlight the range of phenotypic variability that exists within corals, including skeletal formation, photophysiology, and symbiotic associations. Both M. cavernosa and P. astreoides have highly variable skeletal morphologies. Differences in variability and overall capacity to efficiently use light in a light-limited environment may help explain differences in the vertical distribution of these two coral species along a depth gradient. Montastraea cavernosa and P. astreoides are considered more resilient to disease and temperature stress compared to other Caribbean species such as Acropora spp. and Orbicella spp., which have experienced significant declines in recent years (Aronson and Precht 2001; Edmunds and Elahi 2007). Porites astreoides thrives in a variety of habitats and temperatures, indicating that acclimatization may be occurring (Gallery et al. 2021). In recent years, P. astreoides has become a dominant species on Caribbean reefs, with increasing relative abundance as other coral species have declined (Gallery et al. 2021; Goodbody-Gringley and Manfrino 2020; Green et al. 2008). This suggests that P. astreoides may be able to survive and even thrive in shallow water ecosystems despite human-induced disturbance; however, the species may lack the ability to reside at depths beyond 35 m (Carpenter et al. 2022; Holstein et al. 2016). In contrast, M. cavernosa is noted to have an established population on mesophotic reefs, potentially due to the lack of competition from shallow-water specialist coral species that cannot adapt. As the impacts of climate change continue to intensify, understanding the physical and physiological factors that lead to species distributions will aid in predictions of future persistence and help uncover the potential for MCEs to serve as refuges.
References
Anthony KRN, Larcombe P (2000) Coral reefs in turbid waters: sediment-induced stresses in corals and likely mechanisms of adaptation. In: Proceedings of the 9th international coral reef symposium, Bali, pp 239–244
Aronson R, Precht W (2001) White-band disease and the changing face of Caribbean coral reefs. Hydrobiologia 460:25–38. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013103928980
Bloomberg J, Holstein DM (2021) Mesophotic coral refuges following multiple disturbances. Coral Reefs 40:821–834. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-021-02087-w
Bongaerts P, Ridgway T, Sampayo EM, Hoegh-Guldberg O (2010) Assessing the ‘deep reef refugia’ hypothesis: focus on caribbean reefs. Coral Reefs 29:309–327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-009-0581-x
Bongaerts P, Frade PR, Ogier JJ, Hay KB, van Bleijswijk J, Englebert N, Vermeij MJA, Bak RPM, Visser PM, Hoegh-Guldberg O (2013) Sharing the slope: depth partitioning of agariciid corals and associated Symbiodinium across shallow and mesophotic habitats (2–60 m) on a Caribbean reef. BMC Evol Biol 13:205. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-13-205
Bruno J, Edmunds P (1997) Clonal variation for phenotypic plasticity in the coral Madracis mirabilis. Ecology 78:2177–2190. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658
Budd AF, Nunes FLD, Weil E, Pandolfi JM (2012) Polymorphism in a common Atlantic reef coral (Montastraea cavernosa) and its long-term evolutionary implications. Evol Ecol 26(2):265–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682-010-9460-8
Carpenter GE, Chequer AD, Weber S, Mass T, Goodbody-Gringley G (2022) Light and photoacclimatization drive distinct differences between shallow and mesophotic coral communities. Ecosphere 13:e4200. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.4200
Chornesky EA, Peters EC (1987) Sexual reproduction and colony growth in the scleractinian coral Porites astreoides. Biol Bull 172:161–177. https://doi.org/10.2307/1541790
Coates KA, Fourqurean JW, Kenworthy WJ, Logan A, Manuel SA, Smith SR (2013) Introduction to bermuda: geology oceanography and climate. In: Sheppard C (ed) Coral reefs of the united kingdom overseas territories coral reefs of the world, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht
Coles SL, Jokiel PL (1977) Effects of temperature on photosynthesis and respiration in hermatypic corals. Mar Biol 43:209–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00402313
Crandall JB, Teece MA, Estes BA, Manfrino C, Ciesla JH (2016) Nutrient acquisition strategies in mesophotic hard corals using compound specific stable isotope analysis of sterols. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 474:133–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2015.10.010
Domingues RB, Barbosa AB (2023) Evaluating underwater light availability for phytoplankton: mean light intensity in the mixed layer versus attenuation coefficient. Water 15(16):2966
Eckert RJ, Studivan MS, Voss JD (2019) Populations of the coral species Montastraea cavernosa on the Belize Barrier Reef lack vertical connectivity. Sci Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-43479-x
Edmunds PJ, Elahi R (2007) The demographics of a 15-Year decline in cover of the caribbean reef coral Montastraea annularis. Ecol Monogr 77:3–18. https://doi.org/10.1890/05-1081
Einbinder S, Mass T, Brokovich E, Dubinsky Z, Erez J, Tchernov D (2009) Changes in morphology and diet of the coral Stylophora pistillata along a depth gradient. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 381:167–174. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07908
Englebert N, Bongaerts P, Muir P, Hay K, Pichon M, Hoegh-Guldberg O (2017) Lower mesophotic coral communities (60–125 m Depth) of the Northern Great Barrier Reef and Coral Sea. PLoS ONE 12:e0170336. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0170336
Foster AB (1979) Phenotypic plasticity in the reef corals Montastraea annularis (Ellis & Solander) and Siderastrea siderea (Ellis & Solander). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 39:25–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0981(79)90003-0
Fricke H, Meischner D (1985) Depth limits of Bermudan scleractinian corals: a submersible survey. Mar Biol 88:175–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00397165
Gallery DN, Green ML, Kuffner IB, Lenz EA, Toth LT (2021) Genetic structure and diversity of the mustard hill coral Porites astreoides along the Florida Keys reef tract. Mar Biodivers 51:63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-021-01196-7
Gattuso JP, Hoegh-Guldberg O, Pörtner HO (2014) Cross-chapter box on coral reefs. Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability Part A: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel of climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 97–100
Goodbody-Gringley G, Waletich J (2018) Morphological plasticity of the depth generalist coral, Montastraea cavernosa, on mesophotic reefs in Bermuda. Ecology 99:1688–1690. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2232
Goodbody-Gringley G, Woollacott RM, Giribet G (2012) Population structure and connectivity in the Atlantic scleractinian coral Montastraea cavernosa (Linnaeus, 1767). Mar Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0485.2011.00452.x
Goodbody-Gringley G, Marchini C, Chequer AD, Goffredo S (2015) Population structure of Montastraea cavernosa on shallow versus mesophotic reefs in Bermuda. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142427
Goodbody-Gringley G, Wong KH, Becker DM, Glennon K, de Putron SJ (2018) Reproductive ecology and early life history traits of the brooding coral, Porites astreoides, from shallow to mesophotic zones. Coral Reefs 37:483–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-018-1673-2
Goodbody-Gringley G, Noyes T, Smith SR (2019) Bermuda. In: Yossi L, Puglise KA, Bridge T (eds) Mesophotic coral ecosystems coral reefs of the world 12. Springer, Cham, pp 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92735-0_2
Goodbody-Gringley G, Scucchia F, Ju R, Chequer A, Einbinder S, Martinez S, Nativ H, Mass T (2021) Plasticity of Porites astreoides early life history stages suggests mesophotic coral ecosystems act as refugia in Bermuda. Front Mar Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.702672
Goodbody-Gringley G, Martinez S, Bellworthy J, Chequer A, Nativ H, Mass T (2024) Irradiance driven trophic plasticity in the coral Madracis pharensis from the Eastern Mediterranean. Sci Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-54217-3
Goodbody-Gringley G, Manfrino C (2020) Coral Reef Resilience Over Two Decades at Little Cayman Island. Technical Report from the Central Caribbean Marine Institute 2020, p 11
Gorbunov MY, Falkowski PG (2005) Fluorescence induction and relaxation (FIRe) technique and instrumentation for monitoring photosynthetic processes and primary production in aquatic ecosystems. Photosynthesis: fundamental aspects to global perspectives. In: 13th international congress of photosynthesis. v 2, pp 1029–1031
Goulet TL, Lucas MQ, Schizas NV (2019) Symbiodiniaceae genetic diversity and symbioses with hosts from shallow to mesophotic coral ecosystems. In: Loya Y, Puglise K, Bridge T (eds) Mesophotic coral ecosystems coral reefs of the world, vol 12. Springer, Cham
Green DH, Edmunds PJ, Carpenter RC (2008) Increasing relative abundance of Porites astreoides on Caribbean reefs mediated by an overall decline in coral cover. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 359:1–10. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07454
Groves SH, Holstein DM, Enochs IC, Kolodzeij G, Manzello DP, Brandt ME, Smith TB (2018) Growth rates of Porites astreoides and Orbicella franksi in mesophotic habitats surrounding St. Thomas US Virgin Islands. Coral Reefs 37:345–354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-018-1660-7
Hoegh-Guldberg O (1999) Climate change, coral bleaching and the future of the world’s coral reefs. Mar Freshw Res. https://doi.org/10.1071/MF99078
Hoegh-Guldberg O, Mumby PJ, Hooten AJ, Steneck RS, Greenfield P, Gomez E, Harvell CD, Sale PF, Edwards AJ, Caldeira K, Knowlton N, Eakin CM, Iglesias-Prieto R, Muthiga N, Bradbury RH, Dubi A, Hatziolos ME (2007) Coral reefs under rapid climate change and ocean acidification. Science 318:1737–1742. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1152509
Holstein DM, Smith TB, Paris CB (2016) Depth-independent reproduction in the reef coral Porites astreoides from shallow to mesophotic zones. PLoS ONE 11:e0146068. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146068
Holstein DM, Fletcher P, Groves SH, Smith TB (2019) Ecosystem services of mesophotic coral ecosystems and a call for better accounting. In: Loya Y, Puglise K, Bridge T (eds) Mesophotic coral ecosystems. Springer, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92735-049
Hughes TP (1994) Catastrophes, phase shifts, and large-scale degradation of a Caribbean coral reef. Science 265:1547–1551. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.265.5178.1547
Kirk JTO (1994) Light and photosynthesis in aquatic ecosystems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511623370
Knowlton N (2001) The future of coral reefs. In: Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, pp 5419–5425. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.091092998.
Kramer N, Guan J, Chen S, Wangpraseurt D, Loya Y (2022) Morpho-functional traits of the coral Stylophora pistillata enhance light capture for photosynthesis at mesophotic depths. Commun Biol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-022-03829-4
Lasker HR (1979) Light dependent activity patterns among reef corals: Montastrea cavernosa. Biol Bull. https://doi.org/10.2307/1541043
Lasker HR (1980) Sediment rejection by reef corals: the roles of behavior and morphology in Montastrea cavernosa (Linnaeus). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0981(80)90139-2
Lasker HR (1981) Phenotypic variation in the coral Montastrea cavernosa and its effects on colony energetics. Biol Bull. https://doi.org/10.2307/1540889
Laverick JH, Tamir R, Eyal G, Loya Y (2020) A generalized light-driven model of community transitions along coral reef depth gradients. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.13140
Lesser MP, Farrell JH (2004) Exposure to solar radiation increases damage to both host tissues and algal symbionts of corals during thermal stress. Coral Reefs 23:367–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-004-0392-z
Lesser MP, Charles M, David P, Yentsch CS (2000) Light absorption and utilization by colonies of the congeneric hermatypic corals Montastraea faveolata and Montastraea cavernosa. Limnol Oceanogr. https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2000.45.1.0076
Lesser MP, Slattery M, Leichter JJ (2009) Ecology of mesophotic coral reefs. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 375:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2009.05.009
Lesser MP, Slattery M, Stat M, Ojimi M, Gates RD, Grottoli A (2010) Photoacclimatization by the coral Montastraea cavernosa in the mesophotic zone: Light, food, and genetics. Ecology 91:990–1003. https://doi.org/10.1890/09-0313.1
Malik A, Einbinder S, Martinez S, Tchernov D, Haviv S, Almuly R, Zaslansky P, Polishchuk I, Pokroy B, Stolarski J, Mass T (2020) Molecular and skeletal fingerprints of scleractinian coral biomineralization: from the sea surface to mesophotic depths. Acta Biomater. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2020.01.010
Mass T, Einbinder S, Brokovich E, Shashar N, Vago R, Erez J, Dubinsky Z (2007) Photoacclimation of Stylophora pistillata to light extremes: metabolism and calcification. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps334093
Mumby PJ (2006) The impact of exploiting grazers (Scaridae) on the dynamics of Caribbean coral reefs. Ecol Appl. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[0747:TIOEGS]2.0.CO;2
Mumby PJ, Hastings A, Edwards HJ (2007) Thresholds and the resilience of Caribbean coral reefs. Nature 450:98. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06252
Muscatine L, Porter JW (1977) Reef corals: mutualistic symbioses adapted to nutrient-poor environments. Bioscience. https://doi.org/10.2307/1297526
Neder M, Saar R, Malik A, Antler G, Mass T (2022) New insights on the diurnal mechanism of calcification in the stony coral, Stylophora Pistillata. Front Mar Sci 8:745171. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.745171
Ow YX, Todd PA (2010) Light-induced morphological plasticity in the scleractinian coral Goniastrea pectinata and its functional significance. Coral Reefs. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-010-0631-4
Palardy J, Grottoli A, Matthews K (2005) Effects of upwelling, depth, morphology and polyp size on feeding in three species of Panamanian corals. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps300079
Pisapia C, Hennige SJ, Haapkylä J, Matteucci R, Smith DJ (2012) Morphological changes in polyp structure of massive coral species in clear and turbid waters. Bull Mar Sci. https://doi.org/10.5343/bms.2010.1086
R Core Team (2022). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/.
Rasband WS (2018) ImageJ, U. S. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA, https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/, 1997–2018
Reed JK (1985) Deepest distribution of Atlantic hermatypic corals discovered in the Bahamas. In: Proceedings of the fifth international coral reef congress, vol 6, pp 249–254
Ritchie RJ (2008) Universal chlorophyll equations for estimating chlorophylls a, b, c, and d and total chlorophylls in natural assemblages of photosynthetic organisms using acetone, methanol, or ethanol solvents. Photosynthetica 46:115–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11099-008-0019-7
Roth MS (2014) The engine of the reef: photobiology of the coral-algal symbiosis. Front Microbiol 22(5):422. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2014.00422
Rouzé H, Galand PE, Medina M, Bongaerts P, Pichon M, Pérez-Rosales G, Torda G, Moya A, Raina JB, Hédouin L (2021) Symbiotic associations of the deepest recorded photosynthetic scleractinian coral (172 m depth). ISME J. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-020-00857-y
Ruiz-Torres HJ (2004) Morphometric examination of corallite and colony variability in the Caribbean coral Montastraea cavernosa [Thesis]. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11801/1732
Schindelin J, Arganda-Carreras I, Frise E, Kaynig V, Longair M, Pietzsch T, Cardona A (2012) Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat Methods. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2019
Scucchia F, Wong K, Zaslansky P, Putnam HM, Goodbody-Gringley G, Mass T (2023) Morphological and genetic mechanisms underlying the plasticity of the coral Porites astreoides across depths in Bermuda. J Struct Biol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsb.2023.108036
Sebens KP, Grace SP, Helmuth B, Maney EJ Jr, Miles JS (1998) Water flow and prey capture by three scleractinian corals, Madracis mirabilis, Montastrea cavernosa and Porites porites, in a field enclosure. Mar Biol 131:347–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002270050328
Serrano XM, Baums IB, Smith TB, Jones RJ, Shearer TL, Baker AC (2016) Long distance dispersal and vertical gene flow in the Caribbean brooding coral Porites astreoides. Sci Rep 6:21619. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep21619
Siegel DA, Michaels AF, Sorensen JC, O'Brien MC, Hammer MA (1995) Seasonal variability of light availability and utilization in the Sargasso Sea. J Geophys Res: Oceans 100(C5):8695–8713. https://doi.org/10.1029/95JC00447
Slattery M, Lesser MP (2012) Mesophotic coral reefs: a global model of community structure and function. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 375:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2009.05.009
Smith TB, Gyory J, Brandt ME, Miller WJ, Jossart J, Nemeth RS (2016) Caribbean mesophotic coral ecosystems are unlikely climate change refugia. Glob Change Biol 22:2756–2765. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13175
Spalding M, Burke L, Wood SA, Ashpole J, Hutchison J, Zu Ermgassen P (2017) Mapping the global value and distribution of coral reef tourism. Mari Policy 82:104–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.05.014
Studivan MS, Milstein G, Voss JD (2019) Montastraea cavernosa corallite structure demonstrates distinct morphotypes across shallow and mesophotic depth zones in the Gulf of Mexico. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203732
Sturm AB, Eckert RJ, Méndez JG, González-Díaz P, Voss JD (2020) Population genetic structure of the great star coral, Montastraea cavernosa, across the Cuban archipelago with comparisons between microsatellite and SNP markers. Sci Rep 10:15432. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-72112-5
Tamir R, Eyal G, Kramer N, Laverick JH, Loya Y (2019) Light environment drives the shallow-to-mesophotic coral community transition. Ecosphere. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2839
Todd PA (2008) Morphological plasticity in scleractinian corals. Biol Rev 83:315–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185X.2008.00045.x
Wagner GP, Altenberg L (1996) Perspective: complex adaptations and the evolution of evolvability. Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1996.tb02339.x
Warner ME, LaJeunesse TC, Robison JD, Thur RM (2006) The ecological distribution and comparative photobiology of symbiotic dinoflagellates from reef corals in Belize: potential implications for coral bleaching. Limnol Oceanogr 51:1887–1897
Woodhead AJ, Hicks CC, Norström AV, Williams GJ, Graham NAJ (2019) Coral reef ecosystem services in the Anthropocene. Funct Ecol 33:1023–1034. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.13331
Acknowledgements
We thank the staff of CCMI for their assistance with executing technical dives. Sample collections were conducted under the permission of the Cayman Islands Department of Environment collection permit. The work was funded by the National Science Foundation and United States-Israel Binational Science Foundation (NSF #1937770 to GG-G; BSF #2019653 to TM).
Funding
Open access funding provided by University of Haifa.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Fig. S1
Symbiodiniaceae and chlorophyll measurements of A) M. cavernosa and B) P. astreoides (EPS 300 kb)
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
Doherty, M.L., Chequer, A.D., Mass, T. et al. Phenotypic variability of Montastraea cavernosa and Porites astreoides along a depth gradient from shallow to mesophotic reefs in the Cayman Islands. Coral Reefs (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-024-02524-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-024-02524-6