Counts of coral reef fishes by an experienced observer are not biased by the number of target species.

ABSTRACT

Fishes are commercially, recreationally and functionally important inhabitants of coral reefs. Accordingly, accurate assessments of fish abundance and diversity are necessary for effective reef management. While some reef fish monitoring programmes target all fishes, many survey a subset of common and visually obvious species. Changing to counts of all species, while desirable, risks new and unwelcome biases from altered observer swimming speeds and search patterns. Here we test whether substantially increasing the number of target species in an established fish monitoring programme biases counts of the original subset, so precluding ongoing comparisons with historical data. A subset of 141 fish species have been visually surveyed along 50 × 5 m transects over 27 years throughout Australia's Great Barrier Reef. We experimentally compared counts of the subset from standard subset-only surveys and from surveys of all species (excluding small site-attached fishes that are surveyed separately) at three diverse reefs. Subset species richness and abundance, in total and of major families, and assemblage structure did not differ due to survey method. The high-level experience of the one observer appeared to overcome new biases from counting more species and the extra 2 min/transect was not logistically excessive. Surveys of all fishes recorded almost 80% more species than subset-only surveys and >130% higher total abundance on average from >150% more genera that included abundant and functionally important taxa. Overall, fish counts by an experienced observer were not biased by the number of species surveyed and counts of all species markedly improved assessments of reef fish diversity and function.