sr2a/2019 ONEOCEAN Infomations
marine-themed informational flash
animations
The Philippine Maxine Biodiveasity: A Unique World Treasure
The Philippines forms an ocean region that
has long been recognized as the world’s
center of marine biodiversity. With the
Malay archipelago, Papua New Guinea and
Australia, the country forms the ‘Coral
Triangle,’ so-called because of the
abundance of its coral reef life. Some 400-
500 species in 90 genera of reef-forming
corals are believed to exist in this region.
List of Philippine Sulu-Sulawesi Sea, a 900,000-square-
jendemic marine kilometer marine eco-region that lies at the
apex of the Coral Triangle (70% in the
Philippines, 20% Indonesia, 10%
Malaysia), is home to some 2,500 species
of fish.
i!
q
A 2005 report (Carpenter 2005) suggests that
the Philippines is not only part of the center but,
is, in fact, the epicenter of marine biodiversity,
with the richest concentration of marine life on
the entire planet.
Center of the center
The report is based on a 10-year multi-
disciplinary study conducted for the Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO) that involved 101
of world’s leading authorities on marine life, and
produced 2,983 maps of marine species for the
western Pacific Ocean. (ODU News 2005)
Kent Carpenter, Old Dominion University
associate professor of biological sciences who
headed the study, says, “Scientists have long
known that the area in Southeast Asia that
includes Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines
holds the richest marine biodiversity. | was
amazed to discover that the extreme center of
this biodiversity is in the Philippines, rather than
oneocean orgitlash/philippine_ biodiversity him! wnarzarzo19
CONEOCEAN Ifomations
closer to the equator. However, a geographical
information system (GIS) analysis of this
extensive database clearly shows this pattern.”
(QDU News 2005)
Carpenter and co-author Victor Springer of
Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of
Natural History used a GIS overlay of 2,983
generalized distributions of marine species to
examine the pattern of diversity in the Indo-
Malay-Philippines Archipelago (IMPA). Their
analysis revealed the central Philippines as "the
area of highest diversity and endemism.”
(Carpenter 2005)
The Philippine center of diversity was found to
have the highest species richness for all
distributions combined as well as when shore
fish distributions were treated separately.
(Carpenter 2005)
“Because of its greater area, Indonesia may
eventually be shown to have a greater overall
marine biodiversity than the Philippines
However, there is a higher concentration of
species per unit area in the Philippines than
anywhere in Indonesia,” the report says.
(Carpenter 2005)
It also notes that of 120 restricted-range
endemics included in the study, the Philippines
has 38, compared to 19 in Indonesia/Malaysia,
18 in Australia, 18 in New
Guinea/Bismark/Louisade, 17 in Coral Sea/New
Caledonia/Vanuatu, and one or two in seven
other localities. (Carpenter 2005)
Rich seas
The full extent of the Philippines’ marine
biodiversity is not known, but the best
information available reveals an astounding
variety of marine life: 5,000 species of clams,
snails and mollusks (Springsteen and Leobrera
1986); 488 species of corals (Nemenzo 1981);
981 species of bottom-living algae (Silva et al
1987), and thousands of other organisms. Five
of the seven sea turtle species known to exist in
the world today occur in Philippine waters
The lists are likely to grow, as new surveys
discover new species. In 1953, Herre recorded
‘oneocean orgilaehphilippine_biacversity.himtarzarzo19
ONEOCEAN infomations
1,815 marine fish species (out of a total of 2,145
fish species) in the Philippines; today, about
2,824 marine fish species are listed for the
Philippines at FishBase (February 2006),
including 33 endemic (one of which is
endangered), 1,729 reef-associated, 169
pelagic, and 336 deepwater species,
In 2004, a survey in Panglao, Bohol observed
1,200 decapod crustaceans or different species
of crabs and shrimps; some 6,000 mollusk
species, including sea slugs and microshells;
and hundreds of other previously unrecorded
marine species.
The survey also found fossils of snails extinct in
other parts of the world, and numerous species
that were photographed alive for the first time.
Another survey was conducted in 2005 under
the same project in the deep waters (up to 2,200
meters) of the Bohol-Mindanao-Cebu triangle. It
recorded some 1,000 mollusk species, 600
crustacean species, more than 100 echinoderm
species, and over 100 fish species, many of
them considered rare or very rare, or new to
science.
Geologic phenomenon
Such richness, according to experts, can be
explained by geologic history: the isolation of
smaller seas within the central Philippines in the
Pleistocene ice ages, and complex geological
events leading to the integration of islands that
created the archipelago. (Carpenter 2005)
“The amalgamation process created barriers
when the larger islands took shape and
potentially separated populations and provided
conditions for allopatric speciation,” Carpenter
and Springer (2005) suggest. “The accretion of
the archipelago would also have concentrated
diversity, assuming that the different elements of
the Philippines developed their own endemic.
biotas.”
Carpenter's goal is to understand the natural
forces, such as lithospheric plate movements,
prevailing currents, and the geography and
‘oneocean orgilaehphilippine_biacversity.himtarzarzo19
ONEOCEAN Infomations
geology of the area that contributed to the
evolution of the biodiversity.
“This discovery poses some very interesting
questions about the origins of marine life in our
oceans. Perhaps the Philippines hold the key to
unraveling mysteries about how marine
biodiversity patterns change through space and
time,” Carpenter says.
“Biodiversity is of major interest to many people.
Many marine organisms have yet to be looked at
for pharmacological purposes. Some sharks
appear resistant to cancer. It turns out that
sharks are becoming endangered because of
over-fishing. Some marine organism might hold
the cure to cancer, but we are destroying them
before we get a chance to study them.” (ODU
News 2004)
Areal threat of extinction
Indeed, the Philippine center of marine
biodiversity is highly threatened by a host of
factors ranging from destructive fishing practices
to soil erosion and global warming. The
comparatively high number of species found only
in the Philippines indicates a real threat of
extinction, including of species that have yet to
be discovered by scientists
Carpenter and Springer (2005) liken the
Philippine seas to the Amazon, as rich in unique
life and equally endangered
“Understanding factors that control patterns of
endemism and richness should ...help prioritize
sites for conservation even when data are
sparse, as they are often in the marine
environment,” they say. “Solely as an example of
peak diversity and endemism, there is ample
justification to prioritize the Philippines for
conservation. As a probable epicenter of
allopatric speciation and island integration bio-
concentration, it is imperative to conserve the
habitats and diversity that can help us to
understand the processes that govern
biodiversity in the marine realm.”
“Clearly, marine conservation efforts in the
Philippines warrant special attention.”
‘oneocean orgilaehphilippine_biacversity.himtarzarzo19
‘oneocean orgilaehphilippine_biacversity.himt
ONEOCEAN Infomations
Six critical actions to reverse the decline
of Philippine marine fisheries (DA-BFAR
2004)
1, Reduction and rationalization of fishing
effort. With most of the Philippines’
fisheries either fully exploited or
overfished, reduction of fishing effort has
become an urgent imperative that can be
ignored only at the expense of nation’s
environmental and economic health. The
amount of reduction will be huge in most
cases. For small pelagics as a whole, effort
should be decreased by an estimated 50-
65%. In most fishing grounds, reduction of
effort to sustainable levels must be a long-
term goal.
2. Protection, rehabilitation and enhancement
of coastal habitats. In the Philippines, the
rehabilitation of mangroves and
establishment of marine protected areas
(MPAs) are perhaps the most widely
implemented interventions among the suite
of CRM measures. Successful examples of
community-based stewardship of
mangroves should be replicated widely,
with priority given to saving existing
mangroves. More functioning MPAs are
needed, particularly to protect spawning
areas and other fish aggregation sites. Also,
integrated planning for and among MPAs is
essential to provide larger overall benefits
to habitat protection and thus fisheries
management,
3. Improved utilization of harvests. Losses due
to spoilage can be reduced through
provision of post-harvest facilities and
training of fishers in proper post-harvest
handling. Improvements in gear technology
(and their spatial and temporal disposition)
are in order to reduce by-catch and discards.
4. Enhanced local stewardship and
management of resources. Local
stewardship and management of resources
must be inclusive and based on the local
government unit (LGU) througharzarzo19
CONEOCEAN nfomatons
comprehensive CRM planning and
implementation. It should not be equated
solely with organizing small fishers to
better repel commercial fishing boats that
intrude into municipal waters. Efforts
should be made to involve all stakeholders
in constructive planning and actions.
. Supplemental/alternative livelihood for
fishers. The need to provide supplemental
and alternative livelihood for fishers cannot
be overemphasized, particularly in the case
of small fishers who are mired in poverty
and are fishing to survive. A good argument
can be made for facilitating such
livelihoods as a first or parallel intervention
in site or fisheries management.
Capacity building and institutional
strengthening. Capacity building in resource
assessment, management planning,
implementationand enforcement is needed
at both national and local levels. Training in
skills for integrated coastal resources
planning and management is essential to
build up a system that addresses the
complexity of issues.
w
a
fae
References
Carpenter, K.E. and V.G. Springer. 2005.
Environmental Biology of Fishes (2005) 72: 467-
480.
DA-BFAR (Department of Agriculture-Bureau of
Fisheries and Aquatic Resources). 2004. In
turbulent seas: The status of Philippine marine
fisheries. Coastal Resource Management
Project of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, Cebu City, Philippines, 378
p.
Herre, A.W.C.T. 1953. Check list of Philippine
fishes. Research Report, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Volume 20, 977 pages.
‘oneocean orgilaehphilippine_biacversity.himtarzarzo19
ONEOCEAN Infomations
Nemenzo, F. 1981. Studies on the systematics of
scleractinian corals in the Philippines.
Proceedings of the 4th International Coral Reef,
Symposium, Manila 1:25-32.
Springsteen, F.J. and Leobrera, F.M. 1986.
Shells of the Philippines. Carfel Shell Museum,
Malate, Metro Manila. 317 pages.
Silva, P.C., Menez, E.G. and Moe, R.L. 1987.
Catalog of the Philippine benthic algae.
Smithsonian Contributions in Marine Science 27:
1-179.
This website was made possible through support provided
by the USAID under the terms of Contract No. AID 492-
0444-C-00-6028-00. The opinions expressed herein are
those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the
views of USAID. Articles may be quoted or reproduced in
’ eaoM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ANY form for non-commercial, non-profit purposes to
advance the cause of marine environmental management
and conservation as long as proper reference is made to
the source.
‘oneocean orgilaehphilippine_biacversity.himt
a