Coral restoration database – Dataset from Bostrom-Einarsson et al 2019 (NESP TWQ 4.3, JCU)

This dataset consists of a review of case studies and descriptions of coral restoration methods from four sources: 1) the primary literature (i.e. published peer-reviewed scientific literature), 2) grey literature (e.g. scientific reports and technical summaries from experts in the field), 3) online descriptions (e.g. blogs and online videos describing projects), and 4) an online survey targeting restoration practitioners (doi:10.5061/dryad.p6r3816). Included are only those case studies which actively conducted coral restoration (i.e. at least one stage of scleractinian coral life-history was involved). This excludes indirect coral restoration projects, such as disturbance mitigation (e.g. predator removal, disease control etc.) and passive restoration interventions (e.g. enforcement of control against dynamite fishing or water quality improvement). It also excludes many artificial reefs, in particular if the aim was fisheries enhancement (i.e. fish aggregation devices), and if corals were not included in the method. To the best of our abilities, duplication of case studies was avoided across the four separate sources, so that each case in the review and database represents a separate project.Methods:More than 40 separate categories of data were recorded from each case study and entered into a database. These included data on (1) the information source, (2) the case study particulars (e.g. location, duration, spatial scale, objectives, etc.), (3) specific details about the methods, (4) coral details (e.g. genus, species, morphology), (5) monitoring details, and (6) the outcomes and conclusions.Primary literatureMultiple search engines were used to achieve the most complete coverage of the scientific literature. First, the scientific literature was searched using Google Scholar with the keywords “coral* + restoration”. Because the field (and therefore search results) are dominated by transplantation studies, separate searches were then conducted for other common techniques using “coral* + restoration + [technique name]”. This search was further complemented by using the same keywords in ISI Web of Knowledge (search yield n=738). Studies were then manually selected that fulfilled our criteria for active coral restoration described above (final yield n= 221). In those cases where a single paper describes several different projects or methods, these were split into separate case studies. Finally, prior reviews of coral restoration were consulted to obtain case studies from their reference lists.Grey literatureWhile many reports appeared in the Google Scholar literature searches, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) database of reports for North American coastal restoration projects (http://projects.tnc.org/coastal/) was also conducted. This was supplemented with reports listed in the reference lists of other papers, reports and reviews, and during the online searches (n=30). Online recordsSmall-scale projects conducted without substantial input from researchers, academics, non-governmental organisations (NGO) or coral reef managers often do not result in formal written accounts of methods. To access this information, we conducted online searches of YouTube, Facebook and Google, using the search terms “Coral restoration”. The information provided in videos, blog posts and websites to describe further projects (n=48) was also used. Due to the unverified nature of such accounts, the data collected from these online-only records was limited compared to peer reviewed literature and surveys. At the minimum, the location, the methods used and reported outcomes or lessons learned were included in this review.Online surveyTo access information from projects not published elsewhere, an online survey targeting restoration practitioners was designed. The survey consisted of 25 questions querying restoration practitioners regarding projects they had undertaken under JCU human ethics H7218 (following the Australian National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research, 2007). These data (n=63) are included in all calculations within this review, but are not publicly available to preserve the anonymity of participants. Although we encouraged participants to fill out a separate survey for each case study, it is possible that participants included multiple separate projects in a single survey, which may reduce the real number of case studies reported.Data analysisPercentages, counts and other quantifications from the database refer to the total number of case studies with data in that category. Case studies where data were lacking for the category in question, or lack appropriate detail (e.g. reporting ‘mixed’ for coral genera) are not included in calculations. Many categories allowed multiple answers (e.g. coral species); these were split into separate records for calculations (e.g. coral species n). For this reason, absolute numbers may exceed the number of case studies in the database. However, percentages reflect the proportion of case studies in each category. We used the seven objectives outlined in [1] to classify the objective of each case study, with an additional two categories (‘scientific research’ and ‘ecological engineering’). We used Tableau to visualise and analyse the database (Desktop Professional Edition, version 10.5, Tableau Software). The data have been made available following the FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship [2]. Data available from the Dryad Digital Repository downloaded here (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.p6r3816), and visually explored: https://public.tableau.com/views/CoralRestorationDatabase-Visualisation/Coralrestorationmethods?:embed=y&:display_count=yes&publish=yes&:showVizHome=no#1. Limitations:While our expanded search enabled us to avoid the bias from the more limited published literature, we acknowledge that using sources that have not undergone rigorous peer-review potentially introduces another bias. Many government reports undergo an informal peer-review; however, survey results and online descriptions may present a subjective account of restoration outcomes. To reduce subjective assessment of case studies, we opted not to interpret results or survey answers, instead only recording what was explicitly stated in each document [3, 4]. Defining restorationIn this review, active restoration methods are methods which reintroduce coral (e.g. coral fragment transplantation, or larval enhancement) or augment coral assemblages (e.g. substrate stabilisation, or algal removal), for the purposes of restoring the reef ecosystem. In the published literature and elsewhere, there are many terms that describe the same intervention. For clarity, we provide the terms we have used in the review, their definitions and alternative terms (see references). Passive restoration methods such as predator removal (e.g. crown-of-thorns starfish and Drupella control) have been excluded, unless they were conducted in conjunction with active restoration (e.g. macroalgal removal combined with transplantation). Format:The data is supplied as an excel file with three separate tabs for 1) peer reviewed literature 2) grey literature, and 3) a description of the objectives form Hein et al. 2017. Survey responses have been excluded to preserve the anonymity of the respondents. This dataset is a database that underpins a 2018 report and 2019 published review of coral restoration methods from around the world. -    Bostrom-Einarsson L, Ceccarelli D, Babcock R.C., Bayraktarov E, Cook N, Harrison P, Hein M, Shaver E, Smith A, Stewart-Sinclair P.J, Vardi T, McLeod I.M. 2018 - Coral restoration in a changing world - A global synthesis of methods and techniques, report to the National Environmental Science Program. Reef and Rainforest Research Centre Ltd, Cairns (63pp.). -    Review manuscript is currently under review. Data Dictionary:The Data Dictionary is emended in the excel spreadsheet. Comments are included in the column titles to aid interpretation, and/or refer to additional information tabs. For more information on each column, open the red triangle [located top right of cell].References:1. Hein MY, Willis BL, Beeden R, Birtles A. The need for broader ecological and socioeconomic tools to evaluate the effectiveness of coral restoration programs. Restoration Ecology. Wiley/Blackwell (10.1111); 2017;25: 873–883. doi:10.1111/rec.125802. Wilkinson MD, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg IJ, Appleton G, Axton M, Baak A, et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data 2016 3. Nature Publishing Group; 2016;3: 160018. doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.183.Miller RL, Marsh H, Cottrell A, Hamann M. Protecting Migratory Species in the Australian Marine Environment: A Cross-Jurisdictional Analysis of Policy and Management Plans. Front Mar Sci. Frontiers; 2018;5: 211. doi:10.3389/fmars.2018.002294. Ortega-Argueta A, Baxter G, Hockings M. Compliance of Australian threatened species recovery plans with legislative requirements. Journal of Environmental Management. Elsevier; 2011;92: 2054–2060.Data Location:This dataset is filed in the eAtlas enduring data repository at: data\2018-2021-NESP-TWQ-4\4.3_Best-practice-coral-restoration

本数据集涵盖了来自四类来源的案例研究综述与珊瑚修复方法描述：1) 同行评审科学文献（peer-reviewed scientific literature，即已发表的经同行评议的科研文献），2) 灰色文献（grey literature，例如领域专家撰写的科研报告与技术总结），3) 网络公开资料（例如介绍修复项目的博客与在线视频），4) 针对修复从业者的在线调查（DOI:10.5061/dryad.p6r3816）。本数据集仅纳入主动开展珊瑚修复的案例研究（即涉及至少一个石珊瑚（scleractinian coral）生活史阶段的项目），排除间接珊瑚修复项目（如干扰缓解措施，例如移除捕食者、病害防控等）与被动修复干预措施（例如打击炸药捕鱼的执法行动或水质改善工程）。同时排除多数人工鱼礁项目，尤其是以渔业增殖为目标（即鱼类聚集装置）且未涉及珊瑚的修复方法。我们已尽最大努力避免四类来源间出现案例研究重复，确保本综述与数据库中的每个案例均对应独立项目。

研究方法：
本研究从每个案例研究中记录了超40类数据，并录入数据库。这些数据包括：(1) 信息来源，(2) 案例研究详情（例如研究地点、时长、空间尺度、研究目标等），(3) 方法具体细节，(4) 珊瑚相关信息（例如属、种、形态），(5) 监测细节，(6) 研究结果与结论。

同行评审文献
本研究使用多个搜索引擎以尽可能全面覆盖科研文献。首先，以关键词“coral* + restoration”在谷歌学术（Google Scholar）中检索科研文献。鉴于该领域（及对应检索结果）以移植类研究为主，随后针对其他常见修复技术分别开展检索，关键词为“coral* + restoration + [技术名称]”。本检索进一步通过在ISI Web of Knowledge中使用相同关键词进行补充（检索得到738条结果）。随后手动筛选符合前述主动珊瑚修复标准的研究（最终得到221条结果）。若单篇论文描述了多个不同项目或方法，则将其拆分为独立的案例研究。最后，参考已发表的珊瑚修复综述，从其参考文献列表中补充获取案例研究。

灰色文献
尽管诸多报告已在谷歌学术的文献检索中被覆盖，但本研究同时检索了自然保护协会（The Nature Conservancy, TNC）的北美沿岸修复项目报告数据库（http://projects.tnc.org/coastal/）。此外，补充纳入了其他论文、报告及综述的参考文献列表中，以及在线检索过程中获取的报告（共30份）。

网络公开记录
未获得科研人员、学者、非政府组织（non-governmental organisations, NGO）或珊瑚礁管理者大量支持的小型项目，通常不会形成正式的书面方法记录。为获取此类信息，本研究以“Coral restoration”为关键词在YouTube、Facebook及谷歌上开展检索，同时纳入视频、博客文章与网站中介绍的其他项目相关信息（共48条）。鉴于此类记录未经过验证，相较于同行评审文献与调查数据，从纯网络记录中收集的数据存在局限性。本综述仅纳入该类记录的最低限度信息：研究地点、所用方法、已报告的结果或经验教训。

在线调查
为获取未在其他渠道发表的项目信息，本研究设计了针对修复从业者的在线调查。该调查包含25个问题，向修复从业者询问其在詹姆斯·库克大学（James Cook University, JCU）人类研究伦理审批H7218框架下开展的项目（遵循《澳大利亚人类研究伦理行为国家声明》2007版）。本研究共收集到63份有效数据，已纳入本综述的所有计算环节，但因需保护参与者匿名性，该数据未对外公开。尽管我们鼓励参与者为每个案例研究单独填写问卷，但仍存在参与者在单份问卷中纳入多个独立项目的可能，这可能降低报告的实际案例研究数量。

数据分析
本数据库中的百分比、计数及其他量化指标，均对应该类别下有数据记录的案例研究总数。若某类别存在数据缺失或细节不足（例如仅报告珊瑚属为“混合类群”），则该案例研究不会纳入对应类别的计算。多数类别允许填写多个答案（例如珊瑚物种），计算时会将其拆分为独立记录（例如珊瑚物种数量）。因此，绝对数值可能超过数据库中的案例研究总数，但百分比反映的是每个类别下案例研究的占比。本研究使用[1]中提出的7项目标对每个案例研究的目标进行分类，并新增“科学研究”与“生态工程”两个类别。本研究使用Tableau Desktop Professional Edition（版本10.5，Tableau Software）对数据库进行可视化与分析。本数据集遵循科学数据管理与托管的FAIR指南原则（FAIR Guiding Principles）[2]进行公开。数据可通过Dryad数字仓储（Dryad Digital Repository）获取，下载链接为https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.p6r3816，可视化探索页面为：https://public.tableau.com/views/CoralRestorationDatabase-Visualisation/Coralrestorationmethods?:embed=y&:display_count=yes&publish=yes&:showVizHome=no#1。

局限性
尽管本研究扩大了检索范围，避免了仅依赖有限的已发表文献带来的偏倚，但我们承认，使用未经过严格同行评审的来源可能引入新的偏倚。诸多政府报告会进行非正式同行评议，但调查结果与网络公开记录可能存在对修复结果的主观描述。为降低对案例研究的主观评估风险，我们选择不解读研究结果或问卷回答，仅如实记录每份文档中明确陈述的内容[3,4]。

修复的定义
本综述中，主动修复方法指为恢复珊瑚礁生态系统而开展的珊瑚再引入（例如珊瑚断枝移植或幼虫增殖）或珊瑚群落补充（例如基底稳定或藻类移除）措施。在已发表文献及其他渠道中，存在诸多描述同一干预措施的术语。为明确起见，本研究列出本综述中使用的术语、其定义及替代术语（详见参考文献）。诸如移除捕食者（例如长棘海星与玫瑰螺防控）的被动修复方法已被排除，除非其与主动修复措施联合开展（例如结合移植的大型藻类移除）。

数据格式
本数据集以Excel文件形式提供，包含三个独立工作表：1）同行评审文献，2）灰色文献，3）Hein等人2017年研究中的目标描述表单。为保护受访者匿名性，已排除调查回复数据。本数据集为支撑2018年报告与2019年发表的全球珊瑚修复方法综述的数据库。
—— Bostrom-Einarsson L, Ceccarelli D, Babcock RC, Bayraktarov E, Cook N, Harrison P, Hein M, Shaver E, Smith A, Stewart-Sinclair PJ, Vardi T, McLeod IM. 2018 - 变化世界中的珊瑚修复：全球方法与技术综合报告，提交给国家环境科学项目。凯恩斯珊瑚礁与雨林研究中心有限公司，共63页。
—— 综述稿件目前处于审稿阶段。

数据字典
数据字典已嵌入Excel电子表格中。列标题中包含注释以辅助解读，或指向额外信息工作表。如需了解每列的更多信息，请打开单元格右上角的红色三角标记。

参考文献
1. Hein MY, Willis BL, Beeden R, Birtles A. 需更广泛的生态与社会经济工具以评估珊瑚修复项目的有效性. 恢复生态学（Restoration Ecology）. Wiley/Blackwell (10.1111); 2017;25: 873–883. doi:10.1111/rec.12580
2. Wilkinson MD, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg IJ, Appleton G, Axton M, Baak A, 等. 科学数据管理与托管的FAIR指南原则（FAIR Guiding Principles）. 科学数据（Scientific Data）2016 3. Nature Publishing Group; 2016;3: 160018. doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.18
3. Miller RL, Marsh H, Cottrell A, Hamann M. 澳大利亚海洋环境中的迁徙物种保护：跨辖区政策与管理计划分析. 前沿海洋科学（Front Mar Sci）. Frontiers; 2018;5: 211. doi:10.3389/fmars.2018.00229
4. Ortega-Argueta A, Baxter G, Hockings M. 澳大利亚濒危物种恢复计划符合立法要求的情况. 环境管理杂志（Journal of Environmental Management）. Elsevier; 2011;92: 2054–2060.

数据存储位置
本数据集存储于eAtlas永久数据仓储中，路径为：data2018-2021-NESP-TWQ-44.3_Best-practice-coral-restoration