Egyptian Journal of Aquatic Research (2012) 38, 105–117

National Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries

Egyptian Journal of Aquatic Research

http://ees.elsevier.com/ejar
www.sciencedirect.com

FULL LENGTH ARTICLE

Geomorphic and geographic distributions of reef-building

and soft coral communities in the inshore zone of the
Red Sea
Mahmoud A. Dar *, Tarek A. Mohamad, Mahmoud I. El-Saman

National Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries, Hurghada, Red Sea, Egypt

Received 27 August 2012; accepted 23 October 2012

Available online 7 December 2012

KEYWORDS Abstract Hard and soft coral community structures were studied in eight sites in the inshore zone
Red Sea; of the Red Sea subdivided geo-morphologically into exposed and sheltered sites and geographically
Hard corals; into northern and southern entities. Forty-one hard coral and 13 soft coral species were recorded in
Soft corals; the exposed sites, while 42 hard coral and 19 soft coral species were observed in the sheltered sites.
Exposed; The southern entity showed 46 of hard coral and species and 14 soft coral species, while the north-
Sheltered; ern entity showed 43 hard coral and 22 soft coral species. Abu Dabab recorded the highest number
Diversity; of species (35 hard and 9 soft) at the exposed sites, Ennadi recorded the highest number of species
Evenness index and richness
(48 hard and 17 soft) at the sheltered sites, while Rasel Behar was the poorest site in hard species (17
species) and Sharmel Bahari in the soft species (2 species).
Acropora was the most dominant hard coral genus (25.16%, 23.22%), Sinularia and Sarcophyton
were the most dominant soft genera (3.11%, 3.87%) at the exposed sites and the southern entity.
Stylophora dominates the hard coral cover (16.15%, 15.63%), Sarcophyton and Heterxenia were
dominating the soft coral cover (8.38%, 6.98%) at the sheltered sites and northern entity. Branching
hard corals and dendrite soft corals were the main in all sites and interties. Hard and soft corals
were controlled by; sedimentation rates, wide range of temperature changes, direct exposure to solar
radiation, neap tide stresses, wave action and differential hydrodynamic exposure.
The sheltered sites showed higher evenness index and richness than the exposed sites while the
exposed sites showed higher diversity. Geographically, northern entity was significantly higher in
diversity, evenness indexes and species richness than the southern ones.
ª 2012 National Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All
rights reserved.

* Corresponding author.
Introduction
E-mail address: mahmoud_rady@yahoo.com (M.A. Dar).
Peer review under responsibility of National Institute of Oceanography In the marine ecosystems, coral reefs are among the most di-
and Fisheries.
verse habitats on the globe (Veron, 1995; Fraser and Currie,
1996), supported by high flux of preys and nutrients from the
surrounding oceans (Genin et al., 2009). The physical complex-
Production and hosting by Elsevier ity of reefs also provides topological and hydrodynamic

1687-4285 ª 2012 National Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejar.2012.10.002
106
diversities (Monismith, 2006; Reidenbach et al., 2009). Tropical
coral reefs exhibit highly predictable patterns of taxonomic
composition across the Indian and Pacific oceans. Regional-
scale variation in reef biodiversity is best explained by large-
scale patterns within the availability of shallow-water habitats.
Functional and eco-morphological diversity are vital in the
identification of biological diversity as they play a critical role
in ensuring ecosystem function (Raymundo et al., 2009) and fu-
ture adaptability (Erwin, 1991). Taxonomic diversity is far eas-
ier to measure, may not always be a useful proxy for functional
diversity (Price et al., 2011; Devictor et al., 2010). In fact, not all
coral reefs are highly diverse; inshore shallow habitats have
physically tolerant species to elevated temperatures and surface
irradiance and are threatened by exploitation, dredging and re-
moval (Gray, 1997).
Losses of marine diversity are the highest in coastal areas
largely as a result of conflicting uses of coastal habitats. The dif-
ferences in coral community structures in many coastal areas
have been controlled by water depth and temperature variation
(Rogers, 1990), tidal range and the degree to wave exposing
(Mohammed et al., 2010), salinity and water mixing (Babcock
and Davies, 1991), light penetration and water movement
(Goh and Chou, 1991; Horst and Edmunds, 2010), geographic
occurrence (Scheer, 1971), the topography (Loya, 1972) and
substrate nature (Abu Zaidand Kotb, 2000; Kotb, 2001) as well
as sedimentation rates and aerial exposure (Brown and Holley,
1982; Mohammed, 2010). Geographically; Toda et al. (2007)
found significant variation in community structure of corals be-
tween eastern and western coasts of Malaysia, the eastern was
dominated Acropora and Montipora by the while the western
was dominated by massive coral Porites.
Continuing reduction in abundance and distribution of coral
reefs caused by increases in the magnitude and frequency of det-
rimental factors indicate that future impacts on coral reef com-
munity structures may be severe (Chanmethakul et al., 2010).
Consequently, the coral communities have been seriously dam-
aged as a result of natural and anthropogenic disasters as; the
global climate change, overexploitation and other effects of fish-
ing, pollution, species introduction/invasion, water-shed alter-
ation and physical alteration of coasts, outbreak of the crown-
of-thorns starfish, Acanthaster planci tourism, marine litters,
and the overpopulation along the coast (Gray, 1997; Bellwood
and Hughes, 2001; Madkour and Dar, 2007). These combined
and accumulating threats have had direct impacts on population
diversities and richness of coral communities and their habitats.
The human populations increase pressures on utilization of re-
sources in coastal areas and lead to habitat degradation, frag-
mentation and destruction.
This study establishes two types of investigations; (1) the
variations in distribution patterns of hard and soft coral com-
munities between the exposed and sheltered sites in the inshore
zone of the Red Sea with focusing on richness, diversity and
abundance as indicator to the community structure differences
among the studied sites and (2) the geographic variations of
these patterns between southern and northern sites.
Materials and methods
Geomorphic and geographic settings
The sites of investigation are located in the inshore zone of the
Red Sea within depth variation between 1 to 7 m. Geomorphi-
M.A. Dar et al.
cally, these sites were divided into two settings. Firstly, the sites
in front of alluvial fans that are directly exposed to winds,
intensive waves and currents from seaward as well as the tem-
porary flash floods form landward. They involve; Sharm Enna-
ga, Hamrawin, Sharmel Bahari and Abu-Dabab. These sites
suffer from the nearby tourist and diving, terrestrial inputs,
mining and shipment activities. Secondly, the shallow sheltered
sites inside the tidal flats which involve: Rasel Behar, Rasel
Esh, Ennadi and N. Qula’an (Fig. 1). They are sheltered from
the surge waves, strong currents and direct wind effects but
they dramatically suffer from the neap tide events, long time
of areal exposure during the semidiurnal tidal regime, direct
sunlight exposure, retain high temperature in summer and
low temperature in winter inside their basins, high sedimenta-
tion rates in addition to oil pollution, landfilling, domestic sew-
age, fishing and tourist activities.
In another way, the investigated sites are geographically
categorized into two different entities. The first entity involves
all sites at the latitude 26 00̀N and southward including:
Hmrawin, Sharmel Bahari, Abu-Dabab and N. Qula’an. The
second entity involves all sites around the latitude 27 00̀N
and northward involving: Sharm Ennaga, Ennadi, Rasel Esh,
and Rasel Behar.
Sampling and statistical measurements
A total of 40 transects were obtained from 8 sites representing
coral reef communities at exposed and sheltered sites in the in-
shore zone of the Red Sea during four trips throughout the
period 2009–2010. The hard and soft coral communities were
identified using traditional methodologies based on skeletal
morphology, as well as by the morphological characteristics
of their soft tissues and using ecological features according
to: Verseveldt (1982), Sheppard and Sheppard (1991), Veron
(2000) and Fabricius and Alderslade (2001).
Data were collected using the line intercept transect method
(Loya, 1978; English et al., 1997) by SCUBA diving. Five par-
allel transects of 20 m long for each were applied in each site.
Transects were positioned 5 m apart to each other and perpen-
dicular to vertical gradient along the reef area from 1 m depth
to 7 m depth toward the sea. Three coverage types were inves-
tigated; hard corals, soft corals and other benthos (macro-
invertebrates, seagrass and macro-algae). The intercept values
of the different coverage types along the transect were deter-
mined. To understand the spatial distribution and frequency
of occurrence, data were transformed to percentages. The coral
species contributing more than 5% of the total value in their
category were listed in figures.Percentage cover was calculated
from the following formula:
Intercept length
Percentage cover ¼  100
Transect length
Diversity (H) and evenness index (J) was calculated in each site
according to Shannon and Wiener (1948) and Pielou (1966):
(i) Shannon–Wiener species diversity (Hs). Hs ¼
P
 si¼1 Pi ln Pis = total species, (i) = each species
ðiÞ
Pi ¼ Number of colonies species
Number of total colonies
(ii) Pielou’s evenness index (J). J ¼ lnH s, where s = number
of species.
(iii) Species richness was calculated following the Simpson’s
index (d):d ¼ ðs  1Þ=lne N
Geomorphic and geographic distributions of reef-building and soft coral communities 107

Abu Galawa Reef

33.75 N

Gulf
El Zeit Bay

of S
uez
Ent
NIOF

ra
33.65

nce
Jubal Strait
Rasel Behar

Hu
Ennadi

rgh
33.55
Twal Islands

ad
Jemsa Bay

aC
B

ity
33.45
0 0 0
0 5 10

27.65 27.75

Suez
N -
30

Sinai
26.275

Ras Gharieb
26.899
Rasel Behar
Rasel Esh
-
28
26.27
Hurghada Ennadi
Sharm Ennaga
Sharm Ennaga Safaga
26.265
Hamrwin
Al-Qusier
Sharmel Bahari
-
26

26.26
Abu Dabab
Mersa Alam
26.897
Phosphate Mines
N. Gola'an Phosphate Factory

33.9625 33.9645
Hamata -
24 26.255
Hamrawin
Harbour
Wadi Hamrawin

A 26.25
34.175 34.18 34.185 34.19 34.195 34.2
0 150 300 Km

-
-
-
-

25 52 33 32 34 36

N 25.343 RED SEA

24 21 40

N
25 52 17 -
-
25.341

Sharmel Bahari 25.339 24 21 30

-
Abu Dabab
25 52 02-

25.337

24 21 20 Mangrove
-
B 25.335
D Forest
Gola'an Village
25 51 47
-
-

-
-

-
-
-

34 24 35 34 25 27 34.736 34.738 34.74 34.742 34.744 35 17 50 35 18 00 35 18 10 35 18 20 35 18 3

34 24 55 34 25 12

Figure 1 Location map shows the different sites along the Red Sea coast.

where s is the number of species and N is the total number of the year (Roberts, 1985). In winter, eastward traveling depres-
organisms in the same locality. sions can cause winds to change direction to SE or S (Edwards,
1987). This very constant wind regime gives rise to a differen-
Results and discussion tiation between exposed windward and mostly sheltered reef
sides (Riegl and Velimirov, 1994).
1-Oceanographic conditions The high current velocities encountered here could be ex-
pected to persist for most of the year due to geological and
The oceanographic and climatic conditions along the northern oceanographic setting (Roberts, 1985). The tide is semidiurnal
Red Sea are very steady (Sheppard et al., 1992). The main wind and the reefs of sheltered sites were exposed to air for 2 to 4 h a
trend was NE–SW with an average speed of 10 knots most of day during spring tide. Temperature, salinity (&), and dis-
108 M.A. Dar et al.

Table 1 Some oceanographic parameters measured in the studied sites.

Temp. Salinity D. Oxygen pH
Min. Max Aver. Min. Max. Aver. Min. Max. Aver. Min. Max. Aver.
Rasel Behar 21.50 24.00 22.86 41.67 42.59 41.91 4.17 4.73 4.36 7.89 8.06 7.93
Rasel Esh – – 28.70 – – 41.34 – – 5.60 – – –
Eennadi 21.94 26.90 24.95 40.71 41.61 41.23 3.13 5.58 4.57 8.60 8.60 8.60
Sharm Ennaga 27.21 28.08 27.40 40.48 40.74 40.57 – – – 8.14 8.19 8.15
Hmrawin 25.57 29.03 27.94 40.88 42.15 41.84 – – 5.90 7.70 8.00 7.91
Sharmel Bahari 30.25 30.95 30.47 41.47 41.99 41.68 – – – 7.91 8.07 8.02
Abu Dabab 26.55 26.72 26.60 40.49 40.56 40.50 – – – 8.14 8.15 8.14
N. Qula’an 33.16 34.28 33.78 42.28 43.27 42.55 – – 5.70 7.97 8.10 8.04

Table 2 The percentages of the hard and soft coral and the other benthos at the different sites.
Taxa Rasel Behar Rasel Esh Ennadi Sharm Ennaga Hmrawin Sharmel Bahari Abu Dabab N. Qula’an
Hard corals 50.75 55.24 59.39 75.72 82.77 93.15 84.56 66.33
Soft corals 41.34 34.81 26.36 19.99 10.97 0.31 14.01 27.36
Other living things 7.91 9.95 14.24 4.29 6.26 6.54 1.43 6.31

solved oxygen were measured in situ using Hydrolab. Instru-
ment (Model Surveyor 4, 1997) as shown in Table 1. Sheltered
sites are characterized by slightly higher water temperature and
salinity than the exposed sites. The recorded surface water
temperature was fluctuated between 21.94 C at Ennadi and
34.28 C at N. Qula’an, Salinity recorded the optimum value
at N. Qula’an (43.27&) due to high evaporation rates, shal-
lowness and the isolation from open sea throughout the low
tide time, while the low salinity values (40.57& and 40.50&)
were recorded at the exposed sites of Sharm Ennaga and
Abu Dabab. The recorded low temperature and salinity values
attributed to surge wave and currents effects, continues seawa-
ter maxing and the temporarily flash floods.
Geographically as observed in Table 2, the southern entity
recorded the highest averages of temperature, salinity and
dissolved oxygen (29.70 C, 41.64& and 5.80 mg/L) because
of most sites of the southern entity were exposed to direct
winds and surge waves. The northern entity recorded the high-
est pH average (8.23) attributed to the sheltered nature of these
sites.
2-Coral distribution (assemblages)
A total of 50 hard coral species representing 24 genera and 5
growth forms (branching, massive, encrusting, hydrocorals
and solitary) were recorded at the studied sites. Forty-one spe-
cies of these corals were recorded at the exposed sites covering
about 84.05% of the total benthos cover (8 of them didn’t oc-
cur at the sheltered sites) and 42 species observed at the shel-
tered sites cover about 57.93% of the total living benthos (9
of them didn’t occur at the exposed sites) (Table 2). Geograph-
ically, the southern entity showed 46 species (7 of them were
not found in the other one) comprising 81.70% of the total
cover, while the northern entity showed 43 species representing
60.22% from the recorded benthos (4 of them were not ob-
served at south). Abu Dabab recorded the highest number of
species (35 species) between the exposed sites, Ennadi recorded
the highest species numbers (48 species) among the sheltered
sites, while Rasel Behar was the poorest site in hard coral spe-
cies (17 species) (Table 3). The recorded coral species repre-
sented 37% of the 134 species were recorded by Sheppard
(1982) in the northern Red Sea, 43% of the 116 hard coral spe-
cies were recorded by Kotb et al. (2001) in the Egyptian Red
Sea and 25% of the 200 hard coral species documented in
PERSGA (2010) in the whole Red Sea. Riegl and Velimirov
(1994) summarized that the different coral species often dom-
inated the described reef areas (exposed, semi-exposed, shel-
tered) in different geographical localities, under comparable
hydrodynamic exposure a certain constancy of coral commu-
nity differentiation appeared to exist over wide geographical
areas. This constancy was achieved by dominance of closely re-
lated species or at least of species with a similar growth form in
similar habitats.
Twenty-two soft coral species belonging to 14 genera were
observed at the studied sites. The recorded species represented
5 growth forms (finger-like, dendrites, mushroom or funnel
shape, encrusting or carpet shape and massive). Thirteen spe-
cies of 9 genera were observed at the exposed sites covering
about 11.32% from the total benthos (3 of them didn’t occur
in the sheltered sites), while 19 species of 13 genera occurred
at the sheltered sites represented 32.47% from the total cover
(9 of them were not observed at the exposed sites) (Table 4).
Northern entity recorded 22 species and 14 soft coral genera
with percentage of 30.63% but the southern entity showed
only 14 species and 8 genera with percentage cover of
13.16%. Ennadi recorded the maximum number of soft coral
species (17 species) followed by Hamrawin and Abu Dabab
(9 species), while Rasel Behar showed the lowest number of
species (2 species) The recorded soft coral species are more
than the recorded species by (Kotb et al., 2001) in the northern
Red Sea and about 15.2% from the 125 known soft coral spe-
cies in the Red Sea (Ghobashy and Kotb, 2001). Riegl and
Velimirov (1994) documented that the distribution of soft cor-
al communities seemed to be stable within the northern and
central part of the Red Sea and partially within the Indo-Paci-
fic, whereas Xeniids dominate the reef slope and fore reef areas
at Sinai (Benayahu and Loya, 1981) and the Great Barrier
Reef (Dinesen, 1983).
Geomorphic and geographic distributions of reef-building and soft coral communities 109

Table 3 The recoded hard coral species in the studied sites.

Species Rasel Behar Rasel Esh Ennadi Sharm Ennaga Hmrawin Sharmel Bahari Abu Dabab N. Qula’an
Branching
* * * ** ** **
Acropora humilis – –
* * * * *
A. squarrosa – – –
* * * * * * *
A. hemiprichi –
* * * * ** *
A. pharaonis – –
* * * * *
A. cytherea – – –
* * * *
A. digitifera – – – –
* * * **
A. clathrata – – – –
* *
A. valida – – – – – –
*
A. venosa – – – – – – –
* *
A. granulosa – – – – – –
* * * *
Acropora sp. – – – –
* *
Lobophyllia corymbosa – – – – – –
* * **** *
Pocillopora demicornis – – – –
* * * *** **** *
Pocillopora verricusa – –
***** ** *** * * * * **
Stylophora pistillata
**** * * *
Styllophora wellsi – – – –
* * * *
Seriatopora histrix – – – –
* * * *
Siderastrea savignyana – – – –
Encrusting
* * *
Echinopora fruticolosa – – – – –
* * * *
Echinopora lamellosa – – – –
* * *
Turbinaria mesenterina – – – – –
* * *
Cosenaria sp. – – – – –
Massive
* * *
Favites sp. – – – – –
* * * * * * * *
Favites peresi
* *
Favites flexuosa – – – – – –
* * * * * *
Favia laxa – –
* * * * *
Favia speciosa – – –
* * * * *
Favia favus – – –
* ** * *
Galaxea fascicularis – – – –
* * * *
Goniastrea pectinata – – – –
* *
Goniopora sp. – – – – – –
*
Hydnophora exesa – – – – – – –
* * * *
Montipora sp. – – – –
* * *
M. venosa – – – – –
*
M. spongeosa – – – – – – –
* ** **** ** *** **
Porites solida – –
** * ** *
Porites lutea – – – –
* * **
Porites columna – – – – –
* * *
Pavona explanulata – – – – –
*
Pavona decussate – – – – – – –
** * * **
Platygyra deadelia – – – –
*
Platygyra lamellina – – – – – – –
*
Plesiastrea versipora – – – – – – –
Hydro corals
*
Millipora sp. – – – – – – –
* * ** * * **
Millipora dichotoma – –
** * *
Millipora platyphylla – – – – –
Solitary
*
Cycloseries sp. – – – – – – –
* *
Cycloseries marginata – – – – – –
* * * *
Ctenactis echinata – – – –
* * * *
Fungia fungites – – – –
Spp. no. 17.00 32.00 48.00 27.00 27.00 27.00 35.00 35.00
*
<5%.
**
5–10%.
***
10–15%.
****
15–20%.
*****
>20%.
110 M.A. Dar et al.

Table 4 The recoded soft coral species in the studied sites.

Species Rasel Behar Rasel Esh Ennadi Sharm Ennaga Hmrawin Sharmel Bahari Abu Dabab N. Qula’an
Finger like
* *
Lcyonium sp. – – – – – –
* *
Capenella fungiformis – – – – – –
* *
Cladiella sp. – – – – – –
* * ** *
Lobophytum pauciflorum – – – –
* *
Lobularia sp. – – – – – –
Dendrite
***** * * * *
Heteroxenia fuscescens – – –
*** *** * * * *
Xenia macrspiculata – –
* * * *
Nephthea gracilima minor – – – –
*
Dendronephthea – – – – – – –
* *
Nephthea molli – – – – – –
*
Anthella simplex – – – – – – –
*
Paralemnalia thyroides – – – – – – –
*
Nephthea chabrolli – – – – – – –
* * * * * *
Nephthea sp. – –
Mushroom (Funnel)
* ** * * * ***
Sarcophyton glaucum – –
* *
Sarcophyton spongiosum – – – – – –
*
Sarcophyton sp. – – – – – – –
Encrusting (carpet)
* * * * * *
Sinularia polydactyla – –
* * ** *
Sinularia leptoclados – – – –
* *
Sinularia gardineiri – – – – – –
Massive
* * *
Tubipora musica – – – – –
* * *
Xenia noevecalidonia – – – – –
Spp. no. 7.00 10.00 17.00 6.00 9.00 2.00 9.00 9.00
*
<5%.
**
5–10%.
***
10–15%.
****
15–20%.
*****
>20%.

The hard coral Acropora was the dominant genus at the ex-
posed sites followed by Porites and Pocillopora (Av. 
25.16%, 16.94% and 16.43% respectively), while Sinularia
was the dominant soft coral genus (Av.  3.11%). Acropora
spp. dominated the hard coral cover at Hamrawin (35.15%),
Pocillopora and Acropora showed sub-equal values at Sharmel
Bahari (33.52% and 31.53%, respectively) while Porites dom-
inated the hard coral cover at Abu Dabab and Sharm Ennaga
(26.20% and 15.40%). Sinularia recorded the highest percent-
age at Sharm Ennaga followed by Lobophytum (7.55% and
5.44%), Abu Dabab recorded high occurrence for Lobularia
and Sinularia (4.03% and 3.71%, respectively). The hydrozoan
coral Millepora spp. recorded significant frequency in the ex-
posed sites varied between 1.36% at Hamrawin and 13.03%
at Sharm Ennaga (Figs. 2 and 3).
At the sheltered sites, Stylophora spp. dominated the hard
coral cover followed by Acropora (Av.  16.15%, 9.75%,
respectively). Sarcophyton spp. were the dominated soft coral
cover followed by Heterxenia and Xenia (8.38%, 7.57% and
6.92%, respectively). Stylophora spp. recorded the highest
occurrence at Rasel Behar (40.41%), Acropora at Rasel Esh
(19.32%), while Porites, Platygyra and Favites genera showed
the significant representation at N. Qula’an marine area
(9.62%; 7.60% and 7.32%, respectively). The highest occur-
rence of Sarcophyton spp. (14.38%) was observed at N. Qu-
la’an, Heterxenia (22.79%) and Xenia (12.27%) at Rasel
Behar (Figs. 2 and 3).
Geographically, Acropora spp. recorded the highest per-
centage (23.22%) of the hard coral cover at the southern entity
followed by Porites (15.49%) and Pocillopora (14.59%), while
Sarcophyton was of the highest soft coral percentage (3.87%)
followed by Sinularia (2.76%). Stylophora spp. dominated
the hard coral coverage (15.63%) at the northern entity fol-
lowed by Acropora (11.69%). Heterxenia and Xenia were the
dominant soft coral cover (6.98% and 6.59%) in the northern
entity followed by Sinularia and Sarcophyton (4.97% and
4.79%, respectively).
Porites solida, Pocillopora verricosa, Acropora humilis and
Pocillopora demicorins recorded the highest average percent-
ages of hard corals in the exposed and southern sites being:
9.65–9.73%; 9.22–8.28%, 7.66–6.67% and 7.21–6.31%,
respectively. Sharmel Bahari indicated the highest percentages
of P. demicorins and P. verricosa (18.11% and 15.41%). Ham-
rawin showed the highest percentage of P. solida (15.41%)
while Abu Dabab showed the highest occurrence of A. humilis
(9.19%). Millepora dichotoma was the most common hydro-
coral species in the exposed sites (5.37% in average). All the
hard coral species in the sheltered and northern sites recorded
Geomorphic and geographic distributions of reef-building and soft coral communities 111

Styllophora
50 50
Rasel Behar (Shel.) Sharm Ennaga (Exp.)
45 45
40 40
35 35
30 30
%

Acropora
25 25

Porites

Millipora
Pocillopora

Echinopora
20 20

Styllophora

Cycloseries
Turbinaria
Acropora

15 15

Echinopora

Ctenactis
Goniopora

Montipora

Porites

Favia
10 10

Favites

Pavona
Favites

Fungia
Favia
5 5
0 0

50 50
Rasel Esh (Shel.) Hamraw in (Exp.)

Acropora
45 45
40 40
35 35

Pocillopora
30
Acropora

30

Porites
%

25 25

%
20
Styllophora

20
Seriatopora

Echinopora
Pocillopora

Siderastrea

15
Goniastrea
Cosenaria

15
Galaxea

Styllophora
Goniopora
Montipora

Millipora
Favia

Porites

Fungia

10

Millipora

Ctenactis
Favites

Favites

Favia
10
5
5
0
0

Ennadi (Shel.) 50
Sharmel Bahari (Exp.)
Pocillopora

46
45
Acropora

41
40
36
35
31 30
%

26 25
%
Styllophora

21 20
Acropora
Lobophyllia

Echinopora

16
Platygyra

Millipora
Montipora

15
Styllophora

Porites
Galaxea

Siderastrea
Seriatopora

Cosenaria

Platygyra
Pocillopora

Favites
Millipora

Favia
Favia

Porites

11
Pavona

10
Favites

Fungia
6 5
1 0
50
N. Qula'an (Shel.) 50
45 Abu Dabab (Exp.)
45
40 40
35 35
Porites

30
Acropora

30
%
%

25 25
Millipora

20
Pocillopora
Styllophora

20
Echinopora

Styllophora
Platygyra
Porites
Acropora
Lobophyllia

Favites
Seriatopora
Siderastrea

Turbinaria

Goniastrea

15
Goniastrea

Cycloseries

Cosenaria

15
Hydnophora
Seriatopora
Siderastrea

Platygyra
Plesiastrea
Favites
Pavona

Montipora
Montipora

Ctenactis
Galaxea

Galaxea
Favia

Millipora

10 10
Favia

5 5

0 0

Figure 2 Hard coral genera distributions in the exposed and sheltered sites.

average lower than 5% except Stylophora pistillata which dos (7.55%) and Lobophytum pauciflorum (5.44%) at Sharm
showed the only valuable average percentages being; 11.94 Ennaga which is attributed to the fact that most species were
and 11.76, respectively. Rasel Behar recorded the highest per- not observed in all sites. At the sheltered and northern sites,
centage of S. pistillata (25.72%). Heteroxenia fuscescens, Xenia macrspiculata and Sarcophyton
At the exposed and southern sites, the average coverage of glaucum were the most abundant species with average percent-
most soft corals were lower than 2% except Sinularia leptocla- ages of 7.57–6.98%, 6.92–6.22% and 6.53–3.72%, respectively.
112 M.A. Dar et al.

Heteroxenia
25 25
Rasel Behar (Shel.) Sharm Ennaga (Exp.)

20 20

Xenia
15 15

Sinularia
%
%

Lobophytum
10 10

Sarcophyton

Nephthea
Lobularia sp.

Nephthea

Sinularia

Tubipora
Alcyonium
5 5

Xenia
0 0

25
Rasel Esh (Shel.) 25
Hamrawin (Exp.)

20 20

Sarcophyton
15 15
Xenia
%

%
Dendronephthea
Heteroxenia

10 10

Heteroxenia
Lobophytum

Sinularia

Sarcophyton
Nephthea
Nephthea
Alcyonium

Cladiella
Capenella

Sinularia

Tubipora
5 5

Xenia
0 0

25 25
Ennadi (Shel.) Sharmel Bahari (Exp.)

20 20

15 15
Sarcophyton

Sinularia
%

10 10

Sarcophyton
Heteroxenia
Lobophytum

Paralemnalia
Alcyonium

Nephthea

Nephthea
Capenella

Cladiella

5 5
Anthella
Xenia

0 0

25 25
N. Qula'an (Shel.) Abu Dabab (Exp.)
Sarcophyton

20 20

15 15
%
%

Lobularia sp.
Sinularia

10 10
Heteroxenia

Sinularia
Nephthea
Nephthea

Tubipora
Xenia

Xenia

5 5

0 0

Figure 3 Soft coral genera distributions in the exposed and sheltered sites.

Rasel Behar recorded the highest percentages of H. fuscescens Pocillopora, Montipora, Goniastrea and Platygyra. They
and X. macrspiculata (22.79% and 12.27%), while N. Qula’an added, the soft corals of; xeniids, Litophyton, Sinularia or Lob-
showed the highest occurrence of S. glaucum (11.21%). ophytum are the most abundant between stations. According
Tilot et al. (2008) recorded that Porites was the dominant to Riegl and Velimirov (1994), the fringing reef in Hurghada
genus at the exposed sites followed by Acropora, while Acro- (Red Sea) was characterized by a high Acropora share
pora was the most dominant at the sheltered sites. Other dom- (40.1% of total hard coral intercepted) and the hard coral spe-
inant genera in the studied sites of Aqaba Gulf were cies with the highest numerical frequencies were Pocillopora
Geomorphic and geographic distributions of reef-building and soft coral communities 113

100

90

Branching
80

Branching
70

Branching
60

Massive
Branching

Massive
%

Branching
50

Branching

Branching
Massive

Massive
40

Branching
Massive

Massive
Hydrocoral

Hydrocoral
Massive
30

Encrusting

Encrusting
Hydrocoral
Encrusting
Massive

Encrusting
Hydrocoral
Hydrocoral

Hydrocoral

Encrusting
Encrusting
Hydrocoral

Hydrocoral
Encrusting
20

Solitary

Encrusting
Solitary

Solitary

Solitary
Solitary

Solitary
Solitary

Solitary
10

0
Rasel Rasel Esh Ennadi Sharm N. Qula'an Hamraw in Sharmel Abu Dabab
Behar Ennaga Bahari

Figure 4 Distribution of hard coral forms in the different sites.

50
Dendrites

45
40

35
30
Dendrites
%

25

Mushroon
20
Mushroon

Mushroon

Dendrites

Dendrites
Dendrites

15
Carpet

Carpet
Dendrites
Fingure

Dendrites
Mushroon

Fingure

Carpet
Fingure

Massive

Fingure

Massive
Mushroon

Mushroon
Mushroon

Massive

Mushroon
Carpet
10
Carpet

Dendrites
Massive

Massive

Massive

Massive

Massive
Fingure
Fingure

Carpet

Carpet

Fingure

Fingure
Carpet

5
0
Rasel Rasel Esh Ennadi Sharm N. Qula'an Hamraw in Sharmel Abu Dabab
Behar Ennaga Bahari

Figure 5 Distribution of soft coral forms in the different sites.

damicornis and S. pistillata. The dominant soft corals in this and 4.48–4.58%, respectively (Fig. 4). Tilot et al. (2008) found
locality were Sarcophyton species (30.6% of total soft coral that the most exposed stations showing dominance by branch-
intercepted). They also found two sheltered localities clearly ing corals and semi-exposed sheltered stations showing domi-
dominated by the hard coral Porites (49.l ± 10.5%) and soft nance by massive corals in the Gulf of Aqaba. Riegl and
corals of the family Xeniidae (43.5 ± 9.0%) and a unique fea- Piller (2000) stated that corals in hydrodynamically exposed
ture being the comparatively high contribution of the hydro- areas of the northern Red Sea are dominated by Acropora
zoan M. dichotoma (19.4 ± 6.3%). According to Riegl and and adverse assemblages of faviids. They added, in the Red
Piller (1999), Sarcophyton dominated community is widely dis- Sea Porites carpet increased in real extent towards south. It
tributed of Hurghada and in Safaga Bay between 10 and 30 m was dominated by P. lutea and P. (Synaraea) rus.
depth, mixed Lobophytum/Sarcophyton community occurs in Dendrites were the main form of soft corals in the different
Foul Bay (far south of Egypt) between 1 and 10 m depth. They sites. At the exposed sites, dendrites and encrusting forms cov-
added, xeniids are widespread and can dominate, particularly ered in average 3.65% and 3.11%; at sheltered and southern
in water depths greater than 20 m and the live soft coral cover sites respectively. Dendrites and mushroom structure (funnel
is between 10% and 20% for the Sarcophyton and Lobophytum shape) were covered an average of 16.84–4.36% and 8.38–
community and up to 60% for the xeniid community. Fabri- 3.87%, respectively. At the northern sites; encrusting and
cius and Alderslade (2001) found members of the Alcyoniidae, mushroom soft corals were nearly equal in average coverage
such as Sarcophyton spp., Sinularia spp. and Lobophytum spp. of 4.97% and 4.79%, respectively (Fig. 5).
were fast growing and able to grow well in moderately turbid, Many factors control coral differentiation among exposed
well lit coastal areas. and sheltered sites such as: sedimentation rates, wide range of
Branching, massive and hydrocoral forms were the three temperature changes, direct exposure to solar radiation, neap
dominant hard corals in the exposed and southern sites with tide stresses, wave action and differential hydrodynamic expo-
average coverage of: 44.92–43.40%, 26.71–30.41% and 7.47– sure (Done, 1982; Dinesen, 1983; Mohammed and Mohamed,
4.24%, respectively. In the sheltered and northern sites, 2005; Mergner and Schuhmacher, 1985). Heavy sediment load-
branching forms were followed by massive and incrusting cor- ing from land reclamation, dredging and dumping have con-
als with average occurrences of; 31.07–32.58%, 20.40–16.70% tributed to high sedimentation rates in seawater, causing
114 M.A. Dar et al.

anthropogenic stress to reefs (Chou et al., 1994). In addition,

S. entity
sedimentation also results in reduction in light penetration

2.67
0.78
6.46
and thus also affects coral reef organisms that photosynthe-
size (Goh and Chou, 1991). The overall reduction in total live
coral coverage through bleaching was evident at the reef crest

N. entity
and this was attributed to increase in sea surface temperature

2.74
0.86
7.90
causing thermal stress to reefs organisms (Chou, 2002). Fur-
ther more, Riegl and Piller (2000) documented that the com-
position of coral communities is also influenced by basin
Ex.a sites geometry and bottom topography which govern the availabil-
2.77
0.83
6.41
ity of space for the development of reef or non-reef building
communities. Satapoomin and Sudara (1991) stated that a
stable substrate was important for attachment by soft corals.
Sh.a sites

Riegl and Velimirov (1994) documented that, Hurghada’s cor-

al communities fit very well into a distribution scheme of reefs
2.64
0.81
7.95

in similar latitudes and of similar geomorphology. When the

same, or similar, coral species are present on reefs of similar
N. Qula’an

morphology in a similar oceanographic setting, many features

of community structure should be roughly comparable. Major
2.54
0.72
6.49

deviations from such a generalized scheme could therefore

only be expected on reefs which either have an entirely differ-
ent species composition. At the exposed sites, current are
Abu Dabab

strong and driven by tides and winds (Riegl and Velimirov,

1994), under these conditions the hard coral species are devel-
oped well and much more than those in the sheltered sites
2.43
0.68
6.35

(Mohammed et al., 2010). Depth and the degree of exposure

to wave action are major factors influencing the coral assem-
Sharmel Bahari

blages (Tilot et al., 2008).

Coral diversity, evenness indexes and species richness at the different sites and entities.

3- Coral abundance and diversity

3.03
0.92
5.76

Among the sheltered sites, Ennadi was recorded the highest

coral diversity and species richness (3.54 and 12.29). The
Hmrawin

highest evenness index (0.93) was recorded at Rasel Esh while

Rasel Baher recorded the lowest diversity, evenness index and
2.68
0.81
7.25

species richness (1.78, 0.64 and 4.87, respectively. At the ex-

posed sites, Sharmel Bahari recorded the highest diversity
(3.03), evenness index (0.92) and the lowest species richness
Sharm Ennaga

(5.76); Hamrawin was recorded the highest richness (7.25)

and Abu Dabab was recorded the lowest diversity (2.43)
and evenness index (0.68). In general, exposed sites showed
2.92
0.89
6.28

high diversities and evenness indexes while the sheltered sites

showed the species richness (Table 5, Fig. 6). Also, the north-
ern entity was recorded significantly higher coral diversities
Ennadi

12.29
3.54
0.96

(av. 2.74), evenness indexes (av. 0.86) and species richness

(7.90) than the southern entity (2.67, 0.78 and 6.46, respec-
tively) (Table 5). Some other factors also play a role in reef
Rasel Esh

diversity; in particular, substrate type and oceanographic

parameters in conflict with Mohammed (2006). He found
0.93
8.15
2.7

that the southern coastal lagoons were slightly higher in

Sh. = sheltered, Ex. = exposed.

diversity, evenness indexes and species richness than the

northern coastal lagoons. Also, the hard coral diversity de-
Rasel Behar

cline at northern Hurghada was attributed to the high rates

of suspended particulate matter that smothering the new re-
1.78
0.64
4.87

cruits of corals and the algal flourishing that reduce the

allowable area for hard coral spreading. The algal flora
may displace and growing faster and obscures the new coral
Evenness index

recruits. The composition of coral communities reflects the

interactions among complex chemical, physical, and biologi-
Diversity

Richness
Table 5

cal attributes of a particular site, it is often difficult to assess

the relative contribution of each specific attribute (Golbuu
a

et al., 2011). Edinger and Risk (2000) defined massive and

Geomorphic and geographic distributions of reef-building and soft coral communities
Diversity Evenness Richness
14
Sheltered sites
12 12.29
10
8 8.15
6.49
6 6
4.87
4 4
3.54
2.7
2.54
2 1.78
0.64 0.93 0.96 0.72
0 0
Rasel Behar Rasel Esh Ennadi N. Qula'an
Figure 6 Diversity, evenness indexes and species richness variation between the different sites.
submassive corals are stress tolerance where as Acropora corals
as disturbance adapted ruderals due to their rapid growth and
mechanical fragility. Branching corals are usually recruit in
larger numbers and are more sensitive to disturbances and so
they are better indicators of whole coral community state (
Hughes, 1985; Sadhukhan and Raghunathan, 2012).
The primary factors for controlling diversity and abundance
of plants and animals in natural communities are disturbance,
competition and stress (Houston, 1994). Sedimentation and the
wide temperature variations are the main reasonable factors for
the obvious decline of the reef community in terms of abun-
dance and species richness (Chou et al., 1994). There was a neg-
ative relationship between coral cover and mean suspended
solids concentration and between terrigenous sedimentation
rates and the richness of adult and juvenile corals (Golbuu
et al., 2011). Sediments adversely affect reefs in several ways;
they cause reductions in coral coverage, coral richness, coral
colony abundance, and coral recruitment (Fabricius, 2005).
Differential sedimentation, particularly terrigenous sedimenta-
tion, seemed to strongly govern juvenile coral density and com-
position (Golbuu et al., 2011). Loo et al. (1991) and Goh et al.
(2009) attributed the low diversity and abundance of soft corals
of the southern islands of Singapore to the unconsolidated sand
and mud substrate and dead coral covered with sediment, while
the obvious decline of coral cover in the sheltered sites may due
to the continuous supply of fine and particulate sediments that
may impede the larval settlements and/or prevent their growing
up through reduced illumination and the lack of suitable sur-
faces for larval settlements and colony growth (Sheppard,
1982; Tilot et al., 2008).
The dramatic variations in temperature and salinity can
cause high mortality rates of corals (Brown, 2000; Mohammed
and Mohamed, 2005) especially in closed and semi-closed areas.
The relatively high salinity at sheltered sites may be responsible
for the decrease in coral cover in general due to the expected in-
crease in coral bleaching and mortality (Glynn, 1993). Water
temperature generally increases southward while water salinity
decreases southward (Morcos, 1970); nevertheless, the sheltered
sites compared with the exposed sites, were affected by different
human activities such as: fishing, diving and swimming and
anthropogenic impacts causing variations in the physical and
chemical aspects. In contrast to the hard coral patterns, soft cor-
als showed no certain trends in the distribution depending on
the local conditions and impacts at each site. However, the
increasing coverage values of dendrites soft corals at Rasel
Esh, Hmrawin and Rasel Behar over other forms may be related
115
Diversity Evenness Richness
14
Exposed Sites
12
10
8
7.25
6.28 6.35
5.76
2.92 2.68 3.03
2.43
2
0.89 0.81 0.92 0.68
Sharm Ennaga Hamraw in Sharmel Bahari Abu Dabab
to their ability for acclimatization with the effect of oil pollu-
tion. This is differ than the reported explanation of Sheppard
et al. (1992), soft coral cover declined sharply on the reefs in
the southern Red Sea. In general, soft corals are more plastic
than the hard coral communities (Riegl and Velimirov, 1994).
Conclusion
 In total fifty hard coral species belonging to 24 genera
and 5 growth forms are recorded in the exposed and
sheltered sites (41 species in the exposed and 42 species
in sheltered sites).
 Twenty-two soft coral species belonging to 14 genera
representing 5 growth forms were observed in the studied
sites (13 spp. belonging to 9 genera in the exposed sites
and 19 spp. belonging to 13 genera in the sheltered sites).
 Geographically, the southern entity recorded higher spe-
cies number (46) than the northern entity (43 species),
Abu Dabab recorded the highest number (35 species)
among the exposed sites, while Ennadi recorded the
highest numbers (48 species) among the sheltered sites.
 Ennadi recorded the maximum number of soft coral spe-
cies (17 species) followed by Hamrawin and Abu Dabab
(9 species), while Sharmel Bahari showed the lowest
number of species (2 species).
 Acropora was the most dominant hard coral genera fol-
lowed by Porites, while Sinularia was the dominant soft
coral genus at the exposed sites. At the sheltered sites,
Stylophora spp. dominates the hard coral cover followed
by Acropora while Sarcophyton spp. were the famous
soft coral cover.
 Acropora spp. and Sarcophyton spp. recorded the highest
hard coral cover at the southern entity while Stylophora
spp., Heterxenia and Xenia were dominant soft coral
cover (15.63%) at the northern entity followed by
Acropora.
 The bottom topography, geomorphology, geographic
position (longitudes and latitudes) were major factors
controlling coral reefs distribution, diversity, evenness
and richness.
 The sheltered sites showed relatively high evenness index
and richness compared to the exposed sites while the
exposed sites showed high diversity. Geographically,
northern entity was significantly high in diversity, even-
ness indexes and species richness than the southern one.
116
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank all colleges and groups that
helped in the production of this work which was completed
during the field trips of the Marine Biological Station at Enna-
di in 2009 and 2010 along the Egyptian Red Sea coast.
References
Abu Zaid, M.M., Kotb, M.M.A., 2000. Human and natural induced
impacts to the Egyptian Red Sea coral reefs. In: International
Symposium on the Extent of Coral Reef Bleaching, 5–9 February,
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, pp. 1–10.
Babcock, R., Davies, P.H., 1991. Effect of sedimentation on settlement
of Acropora millepora. Coral Reefs 9, 205–208.
Bellwood, D.R., Hughes, T.P., 2001. Regional-scale assembly rules
and biodiversity of coral reefs (reports). Science 292, 1532–1534.
Benayahu, Y., Loya, Y., 1981. Competition for space among coral-reef
sessile organisms. Bulletin of Marine Science 31, 514–522.
Brown, B.E., 2000. The significance of pollution in eliciting the
cnidarians. International Journal for Environmental Pollution 13,
392–415.
Brown, B.E., Holley, M.C., 1982. Metal levels associated with tin
dredging smelting and their effect upon intertidal reef flats at Ko
Phuket Thailand. Coral Reefs 1, 131–137.
Chanmethakul, T., Chansang, H., Watanasit, S., 2010. Soft coral
(Cnidaria: Alcyonacea) distribution patterns in Thai waters.
Zoological Studies 49 (1), 72–84.
Chou, L.M., 2002. Singapore Reefs Report. Report of the Global
Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) Regional Workshop
for the East Asian Seas, Ishigaki, Japan, 27–30 March, pp. 85–95.
Chou, L.M., Low, J.K.Y., Loo, M.G.K., 1994. The state of coral reefs
and coral reef research in Singapore. In: Wilkinson, C.R. (Ed.),
Living Coastal Resources of Southeast Asia: Status and Manage-
ment. Report of the Consultative Forum, Third ASEAN-Australia
Symposium on Living Coastal Resources, Chulalongkorn Univer-
sity, Bangkok, Thailand, May 1994. Australian Institute of Marine
Science, Townsville, Australia, pp. 77–87.
Devictor, V., Mouillot, D., Meynard, C., Jiguet, F., Thuiller, W.,
Mouquet, N., 2010. Spatial mismatch and congruence between
taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity the need for
integrative conservation strategies in a changing world. Ecology
Letters 13, 1030–1040.
Dinesen, Z.D., 1983. Patterns in the distribution of soft corals across
the Central Great Barrier Reef. Coral Reefs 1, 229–236.
Done, T.C., 1982. Patterns in the distribution of coral communities
across the Great Barrier Reef. Coral Reefs 1 (I), 95–107.
Edinger, E.N., Risk, M.J., 2000. Reef classification by coral morphol-
ogy predicts coral reef conservation value. Biological Conservation
92, 1–13.
Edwards, F.J., 1987. Climate and oceanography. In: Red Sea – Key
Environments. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 45–69.
English, S., Wilkinson, C., Baker, V., 1997. Survey manual of tropical
marine resources, second ed. Australian Institute of Marine
Science, Townsville.
Erwin, T.L., 1991. An evolutionary basis for conservation strategies.
Science 253, 750–752.
Fabricius, K.E., 2005. Effects of terrestrial runoff on the ecology of
corals and coral reefs: review and synthesis. Marine Pollution
Bulletin 50, 125–146.
Fabricius, K., Alderslade, P., 2001. Soft corals and sea fans: a
comprehensive guide to the shallow-water genera of the Central
West Pacific, the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea. Australian
Institute of Marine Science, Townsville, Australia, p. 284.
Fraser, R.H., Currie, D.J., 1996. The species richness-energy hypoth-
esis in a system where historical factors are thought to prevail –
coral reefs. American Naturalist 148, 138–159.
M.A. Dar et al.
Genin, A., Monismith, S.G., Reidenbach, M.A., Yahel, G., Koseff,
J.R., 2009. Intense benthic grazing of phytoplankton in a coral reef.
Limnology and Oceanography 54, 938–951.
Ghobashy, A.F., Kotb, M.A., 2001. Review of the biological aspects
of the Red Sea. Biologia Marina Mediterranea 8 (1), 1–14.
Glynn, P.W., 1993. Coral reef bleaching ecological perspectives. Coral
Reefs 12 (1), 1–17.
Goh, B.P.L., Chou, L.M., 1991. Coral reef-associates flora and fauna
of Singapore. In: Alkala, A.C. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Regional
Symposium on Living Resources in Coastal Areas, University of
the Philippines, Manila, pp. 47–54.
Goh, B.P., Tan, G.E., Tan, L.T., 2009. Diversity, distribution and
biological activity of soft corals (Octocorallia, Alcyonacea) in
Singapore. Journal of Coastal Development 12 (2), 89–98.
Golbuu, Y., Van Woesik, R., Richmond, R.H., Harrison, P.,
Fabricius, K.E., 2011. River discharge reduces reef coral diversity
in Palau. Marine Pollution Bulletin 62, 824–831.
Gray, J.S., 1997. Marine biodiversity: patterns, threats and conserva-
tion needs. Biodiversity and Conservation 6, 153–175.
Horst, G., Edmunds, P.J., 2010. Spatio-temporal variation in seawater
characteristics in a semi-enclosed bay in St. John, US Virgin
Islands. Caribbean Journal of Science 46 (1), 54–63.
Houston, M.A., 1994. Biological Diversity: The Coexistence of Species
on Changing Landscapes. Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, p.
681.
Hughes, T.P., 1985. Life histories and population dynamics of early
successional corals. In: Proceedings of Sixth International Coral
Reef Symposium, vol. 4, pp. 101–106.
Kotb, M.A., 2001. Growth rates of three reef-building coral species in
the northern Red Sea, Egypt. Egyptian Journal of Aquatic Biology
and Fisheries 5 (4), 165–185.
Kotb, M.A., Abou Zeid, M.M., Hanafy, M.H., 2001. Overall
evaluation of the coral reef status along the Egyptian Red Sea
coast. Biologia Marina Mediterranea 8 (1), 15–32.
Loo, M.G.K., Lim, T.M., Chou, L.M., 1991. Mapping of natural
ecosystems in Singapore. In: 12th Asian Conference on Remote
Sensing, SEAMEO Regional English Language Centre, Singapore,
30 October–5 November, 7p.
Loya, Y., 1972. Community structure and species diversity of
hermatypic corals at Eilat, Red Sea. International Journal of Life
in Oceans and Coastal Waters. Marine Biology 13, 100–123.
Loya, Y., 1978. Plotless and transect methods. In: Stoddart, D.R.,
Johannes, R.E. (Eds.), Coral Reefs Research Methods. UNESCO,
Paris, pp. 581–591.
Madkour, H.A., Dar, M.A., 2007. The anthropogenic effluences of the
human activities on the Red Sea coast at Hurghada Harbour (case
study). Egyptian Journal of Aquatic Research 33 (1), 43–58.
Mergner, H., Schuhmacher, H., 1985. Quantitative analysis of coral
communities on Sanganeb Atoll (central Red Sea). Comparison
with Aqaba reefs (northern Red Sea). In: Proceedings of Fifth
International Coral Reef Symposium, Tahiti, vol. 6, pp. 243–248.
Mohammed, T.A., 2006. Evaluation, distribution and the coral
diversity in some coastal lagoons, Red Sea, Egypt. Egyptian
Journal of Aquatic Research 32, 180–195, Special issue.
Mohammed, T.A., 2010. Quantitative assessment of coral reefs along
the Egyptian Red Sea coast. Journal of Egyptian Academic Society
for Environmental Development (D-Environmental Studies) 11 (2),
107–119.
Mohammed, T.A., Mohamed, M.A., 2005. Some ecological factors
affecting coral reef assemblages off Ennadi, Red Sea, Egypt.
Egyptian Journal of Aquatic Research 31 (1), 133–145.
Mohammed, T.A., Dar, M.A., El-Saman, M.I., 2010. Distribution
patterns of hard and soft corals along the Egyptian Red Sea Coast.
Egyptian Journal of Aquatic Research 36 (4), 543–555.
Monismith, S.G., 2006. Hydrodynamics of coral reefs. Annual Review
of Fluid Mechanics 39, 37–55.
Morcos, S.A., 1970. Physical and chemical oceanography of the Red
Sea. Oceanography and marine biology. Annual Review 8, 73–202.
Geomorphic and geographic distributions of reef-building and soft coral communities
PERSGA, 2010. The status of coral reefs in the Red Sea and Gulf of
Aden: 2009. The regional organization for the conservation of the
environment of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, Technical Series
No. 16, 125p.
Pielou, E.C., 1966. The measurement of diversity in different types
of biological collections. Journal of Theoretical Biology 13, 131–
144.
Price, S.A., Holzman, R., Near, T.J., Wainwright, P.C., 2011. Coral
reefs promote the evolution of morphological diversity and
ecological novelty in labrid fishes. Ecology Letters 14, 462–469.
Raymundo, L.J., Halford, A.R., Maypa, A.P., Kerr, A.M., 2009.
Functionally diverse reef-fish communities ameliorate coral disease.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106, 17067–
17070.
Reidenbach, M.A., Koseff, J.R., Koehl, M.A.R., 2009. Hydrodynamic
forces on larvae affect their settlement on coral reefs in turbulent,
wave-driven flow. Limnology and Oceanography 54, 318–330.
Riegl, B., Velimirov, B., 1994. The structure of coral communities at
hurghada in the Northern Red Sea. Marine Ecology 15 (3/4), 213–
231.
Riegl, B., Piller, W.E., 1999. Coral frameworks revisited-reefs and
coral carpets in the northern Red Sea. Coral Reefs 18, 241–253.
Riegl, B., Piller, W., 2000. Reefs and coral carpets in the northern Red
Sea as models for organism-environment feedback in coral com-
munities and its reflection in growth fabrics. In: Insalaco, E.,
Skelton, P.W., Palmer, T.J. (Eds.), Carbonate Platform Systems:
Components and Interactions, vol. 178, Geological Society, Lon-
don. Special Publications, pp. 71–88.
Roberts, H.H., 1985. Carbonate platforms forming in a strong tidal
current settings: southern Gulf of Suez. In: Proceedings of Fifth
International Coral Reef Symposium, Tahiti, pp. 335–341.
Rogers, C.S., 1990. Responses of coral reefs and reef organisms to
sedimentation. Marine Ecology Progress Series 62 (1-2), 185–202.
View publication stats
117
Sadhukhan, K., Raghunathan, C., 2012. Studies on scleractinian coral
diversity in Inglis Island sanctuary Andaman and Nicobar Islands,
India. World Journal of Fish and Marine Sciences 4 (1), 31–36.
Satapoomin, U., Sudara, S., 1991. Preliminary survey of soft corals in
the Gulf of Thailand. In: Alkala, A.C. (Ed.), Proceedings of the
Regional Symposium on Living Resources in Coastal Areas,
University of the Philippines, Manila, pp. 27–31.
Scheer, G., 1971. Coral reef and coral genera in the Red Sea and
Indian Ocean. Symposia of the Zoological Society of London 28,
329–367.
Shannon, C.E., Wiener, W., 1948. The Mathematical Theory of
Communication. Illinois University, Urbana, p. 117.
Sheppard, C.R.C., 1982. Coral populations on reef slopes and their
major controls. Marine Ecology Progress Series 7, 83–115.
Sheppard, C.R., Sheppard, A.L.S., 1991. Corals and coral communi-
ties of Arabia. I. Fauna of Saudia Arabia 12, 170.
Sheppard, C.R.C., Price, A., Roberts, C., 1992. Marine Ecology of the
Arabian Region. Academic Press, London, p. 347.
Tilot, V., Leujak, W., Ormond, R.F., Ashworth, J.A., Mabrouk, A.,
2008. Monitoring of South Sinai Coral Reefs: Influence of Natural
and Anthropogenic Factors. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and
Fresh Water Ecosystem. John Wiley Sons, Ltd.
Toda, T., Okashita, T., Maekawa, T., Alfian, B.A., Rajuddin, M.K.,
Nakajima, R., Chen, W., Takahashi, K.T., Othman, B.H., Tera-
zaki, M., 2007. Community structures of coral reefs around
Peninsular Malaysia. Journal of Oceanography 63, 113–123.
Veron, J.E.N., 1995. Corals in Space and Time: The Biogeography and
Evolution of the Scleractinia. UNSW Press, Sydney, Australia.
Veron, J.E.N., 2000. Corals of the World (3 parts). Australian Institute
of Marine Science, Townsville MC, p. 477.
Verseveldt, J., 1982. A revision of the genus Sarcophyton lesson
(Octocorallia, Alcyonacea). Zoologische Verhandelingen Leiden
192, 1–91.