Abstract
Resilience assessments, which rely on ecological indicators to predict future ecosystem resilience across a management jurisdiction, are used to prioritize limited conservation resources toward “resilient” locations with the best chance of surviving climate change. While resilience assessments have been widely applied to inform management, particularly for coral reefs, their precision and accuracy have rarely been validated. We used a timeseries of coral reef 3D models to (1) conduct multiple resilience assessments of fixed sites over time, and (2) track the resistance and recovery of those same sites over a decade. This allowed us to compare resilience predictions across assessments (precision) and test whether resilience predictions aligned with observed patterns of resistance and recovery (accuracy). We found that resilience assessments are capable of generating consistent resilience predictions over time, but in our case those predictions were not correlated with observed resistance or recovery dynamics. We recommend modelling resistance and recovery as distinct processes, and emphasize the importance of validating predictions with long-term monitoring. We caution against using resilience assessments in isolation to drive conservation decision making. Instead, spatial prioritization should be driven by local community input, with management of priority sites informed by functional indicators of resistance and recovery.
Similar content being viewed by others
Restoration cannot be scaled up globally to save reefs from loss and degradation
Supporting resilience-based coral reef management using broadscale threshold approaches
Machine learning prediction of connectivity, biodiversity and resilience in the Coral Triangle
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the Nature Conservancy for their active participation in this study and for their willingness to revisit the predictions of their 2018 resilience assessment. We are grateful to the divers who conducted field work with the Nature Conservancy (Jamie Caldwell, Zach Caldwell, Megan Donahue, Kim Fuller, Austin Greene, Julia Rose, Anita Tsang, and Bert Weeks) and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography (Anela Akiona, Corinne Amir, Donna Brown, Samantha Clements, Ku‘ulei Gunderson, Emily Kelly, Susan Kram, Travis Matteson, Sarah Romero, Anna Rothstein, Caroline Sabharwal, Michell Smelser, Yui Takeshita, Melissa Torres, Darla White, and Or Ben Zvi). The 100 Island Challenge provided equipment for large-area imagery surveys, and Nicole Pedersen supported 3D model construction and data curation. Special thanks to Emily Kelly for having the foresight to initiate our large-area imaging timeseries back in 2014, and to Adi Khen for designing custom coral artwork for our figures. Field work logistics were supported by the Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR), Exact Game Fishing Inc., Kristina Jenkins, Alana Yurkanin, Ultimate Whale Watch, Dive Maui, Maui Divers, Lee James, Peter and Toni Colombo, Craig and Amy Venema, Don McLeish, Will and Megan Dailer, and George and Donna Brown. The Nature Conservancy’s 2018 report was improved via contributions from DAR, West Maui Ridge to Reef Initiative, the Maui Nui Marine Resource Council, and the Maui Coral Recovery Team, and was funded through the NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program, SymbioSeas and the Harold K.L. Castle Foundation. Scripps Institution of Oceanography field work was funded with support from a UC San Diego Global Policy School fellowship, an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program award, and contributions from the Bohn Family, the Ferguson Family, Michael Joo, and the Scripps Family Foundation.
Funding
The Nature Conservancy’s 2018 report was improved via contributions from DAR, West Maui Ridge to Reef Initiative, the Maui Nui Marine Resource Council, and the Maui Coral Recovery Team, and was funded through the NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program, SymbioSeas and the Harold K.L. Castle Foundation. Scripps Institution of Oceanography field work was funded with support from a UC San Diego Global Policy School fellowship, an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program award, and contributions from the Bohn Family, the Ferguson Family, Michael Joo, and the Scripps Family Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
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 1. (download DOCX )
Supplementary Information 2. (download XLSX )
Supplementary Information 3. (download XLSX )
Supplementary Information 4. (download CSV )
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/.
Reprints and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McCarthy, O.S., Conklin, E., Ricke, K. et al. Evaluating the predictive capacity of coral reef resilience assessments.
Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-52791-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-52791-2
Source: Ecology - nature.com
