More than 90% of Great Barrier Reef coral surveyed this year was bleached in the fourth such mass event in seven years in the world's largest coral reef ecosystem, Australian government scientists said.
Bleaching is caused by global warming but this is the reef's first bleaching event during a La Nina weather pattern, which is associated with cooler Pacific Ocean temperatures, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Authority said in its annual report released late on Tuesday that found 91% of the areas surveyed were affected.
Bleaching in 2016, 2017 and 2020 damaged two-thirds of the coral in the famed reef off Australia's east coast.
Coral bleaches are a heat stress response and scientists hope most of the coral will recover, said David Wachenfeld, chief scientist at the authority, which manages the reef ecosystem.
"The early indications are that the mortality won't be very high," Mr Wachenfeld said on Wednesday.
"We are hoping that we will see most of the coral that is bleached recover and we will end up with an event rather more like 2020 when, yes, there was mass bleaching, but there was low mortality."
The bleaching events in 2016 and 2017 led to "quite high levels of coral mortality", Mr Wachenfeld said.
Simon Bradshaw, a researcher at the Climate Council, an Australia-based group that tracks climate change, said the report shows that the reef's survival depends on steep global emission cuts within the decade.
"This is heartbreaking. This is deeply troubling," Mr Bradshaw said.
"It shows that our Barrier Reef really is in very serious trouble indeed."
Last December, the first month of the Southern Hemisphere summer, was the hottest December the reef has experienced since 1900.
A "marine heatwave" had set in by late February, the report said.
A United Nations delegation visited the reef in March to assess whether the reef's World Heritage listing should be downgraded due to the ravages of climate change.
Last July, Australia garnered enough international support to defer an attempt by Unesco, the United Nations' cultural organisation, to downgrade the reef's World Heritage status to "in danger" because of damage caused by climate change.
But the question will be back on the World Heritage Committee's agenda at its annual meeting next month.
The Great Barrier Reef accounts for around 10% of the world's coral reef ecosystems and was named because of the extensive hazards it posed to 18th century seafarers.
The network of more than 2,500 reefs covers 134,000 square miles.
Coral is made up of tiny animals called polyps that are fed by microscopic algae that live inside the reefs and are sensitive to changes in water temperatures.
The algae provide the reefs with their kaleidoscope of colours and produce sugars through photosynthesis that provide the coral with most of its nutrients.
Rising ocean temperatures turn the chemicals that the algae produce into toxins.
The coral turns white as it effectively spits the poisonous algae out.
Heat stress beyond a few weeks can lead the coral to die of starvation.
The latest bleaching is an unwelcome reminder of the differences in climate change policy among Australian politicians.
The conservative government seeking re-election on May 21 has less ambitious emission reduction targets than the centre-left opposition is promising.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison's Liberal Party aims to reduce Australia's emissions by 26% to 28% below 2005 levels by 2030.
The opposition Labour Party has promised to reduce emissions by 43% by the end of the decade.
Mr Morrison was widely criticised at the UN climate conference last November for failing to set a more ambitious target.
The environmental group Greenpeace Australia Pacific said in a statement the extent of the latest bleaching is "another damning indictment of the Morrison government, which has failed to protect the reef and exacerbated the problem through its support of fossil fuels".
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here