Find in Library

Evidence has shown that individually feeding or reduced light can mitigate the negative effects of elevated temperature on coral physiology. We aimed to evaluate if simultaneous low light and feeding would mitigate, minimize, or exacerbate negative effects of elevated temperature on coral physiology and carbon budgets. <i>Pocillopora damicornis</i>, <i>Stylophora pistillata</i>, and <i>Turbinaria reniformis</i> were grown for 28 days under a fully factorial experiment including two seawater temperatures (ambient temperature of 25 °C, elevated temperature of 30 °C), two light levels (high light of 300 μmol photons m⁻² s⁻¹, low light of 150 μmol photons m⁻² s⁻¹), and either fed (<i>Artemia</i> nauplii) or unfed. Coral physiology was significantly affected by temperature in all species, but the way in which low light and feeding altered their physiological responses was species-specific. All three species photo-acclimated to low light by increasing chlorophyll <i>a</i>. <i>Pocillopora damicornis</i> required feeding to meet metabolic demand irrespective of temperature but was unable to maintain calcification under low light when fed. In <i>T. reniformis</i>, low light mitigated the negative effect of elevated temperature on total lipids, while feeding mitigated the negative effects of elevated temperature on metabolic demand. In <i>S. pistillata,</i> low light compounded the negative effects of elevated temperature on metabolic demand, while feeding minimized this negative effect but was not sufficient to provide 100% metabolic demand. Overall, low light and feeding did not act synergistically, nor additively, to mitigate the negative effects of elevated temperature on <i>P. damicornis</i>, <i>S. pistillata</i>, or <i>T. reniformis</i>. However, feeding alone was critical to the maintenance of metabolic demand at elevated temperature, suggesting that sufficient supply of heterotrophic food sources is likely essential for corals during thermal stress (bleaching) events.