When Academy curators Terry Gosliner and Luiz Rocha traveled to Saudi Arabia this spring to study marine life in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, the contrast awaiting them couldn’t have been starker. Beyond the enclosed campus of King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), about an hour north of Jeddah, stretched a parched terrestrial landscape with daytime temperatures hovering near 105 degrees. But once the researchers boarded the 80-foot-long catamaran, they soon ventured into a rich underwater landscape teeming with life.

For the two-part, KAUST-sponsored expedition, Gosliner, Rocha, and a team of 15 international scientists spent two weeks documenting fish diversity in the Red Sea. On the second two-week portion, Rocha and five other researchers continued to explore tropical reefs within the Gulf of Aden, in the territorial waters offshore from Oman. The invitation to collaborate on this general, comprehensive survey arose from Rocha’s participation at a 2012 KAUST conference organized by Michael Berumen that produced a research paper coauthored by Rocha, Berumen,  Brian Bowen, an associate researcher at the University of Hawaii, Joseph DiBattista, a post-doctoral fellow at KAUST, and Michelle Gaither, a post-doctoral fellow at the Academy.

“The sand dunes and rugged mountains along the Saudi coastline reminded me of Baja, California,” says Gosliner. “And the Red Sea’s narrow body of water, caused by tectonic activity and fault lines, is not unlike the Sea of Cortez,” he adds. “That said, the Red Sea has unique features that make it very interesting from a scientific perspective.”

The Arabian Peninsula, wedged between Northeastern Africa and Asia, is bordered by oceans and seas on three sides. The Red Sea, along its western coastline, has a very small, shallow connection with the Indian Ocean. “Because of this geographic separation, it has a lot of unique species,” says Rocha. “There is a lot of endemism in the Red Sea.”

Coastal Oman, at the southeastern end of the peninsula, is open to the Indian Ocean. “It also has many unique species,” says Rocha, “but for a different reason.” The sea is more affected by upwelling that does not impact marine habitats in the rest of the Indian Ocean. Upwelling, caused by wind blowing from coast to ocean, pushes away warm waters on the ocean’s surface. Cold water rises from below to fill the gap.

“You won’t find coral reefs in these conditions—they can’t thrive in cold temperatures,” says Rocha. “Not only is this fauna unique, but the tropical reefs in the Western Indian Ocean are the least known in the world.”

The researchers brought back 350 specimens of nudibranchs and fish for morphological and genetic analysis. The new specimens fill a surprising gap in the Academy’s renowned fish collection.

“We have 250,000 jars of fish at the Academy, about 3 million specimens and 11,000 species,” says Rocha. “Almost everything we brought back is new to the collection. We had very few fish from Oman.”

Another surprise was Gosliner’s assessment of the leading environmental threat to sustaining the region’s biodiversity. “This is an active zone of human activity,” he explains. “To the north, it’s a major shipping corridor through the Suez Canal into the Mediterranean. In the south, you have the Somali pirates.”

And the source of the most severe harm to the ocean biome?

“Overfishing,” says Gosliner. “That has greater impact than all the other activities put together.”

Last but not least: How did the Red Sea get its unusual name? According to Gosliner, a leading theory is that periodic outbreaks of algal blooms caused by dinoflagellates temporarily changed the water’s color.

“When early explorers toured the area,” he says, “they may have seen that phenomenon we now call a ‘red tide.’ But the waters are a sparkling turquoise blue most of the time. So the Red Sea is truly a misnomer.”

Barbara Tannenbaum is a science writer working with the Academy’s Digital Engagement Studio. Her work has appeared in the New York Times, San Francisco Magazine and many other publications.

Image: Terry Gosliner

That’s what a recent paper in PLoS Biology asks—and doesn’t really answer.

Instead, it lays out a great argument, giving the pros and cons of using the controversial technique in addressing conservation issues. It also urges the two parties—synthetic biologists and conservation biologists—to get in the same room and talk about the possibilities and problems with open minds. In fact, the authors of paper organized a meeting this week in the United Kingdom, bringing the two groups of scientists together. (Ed Yong has an article about the meeting at National Geographic.)

The paper describes several examples of how synthetic biology could work to help conservation efforts—restoring habitats, supporting endangered species, and even reviving extinct species. It also lays out several examples of how synthetic biology could wreak havoc on the natural world. (The open-access article is very readable. We encourage you to review it or at least take a look at the examples in Table 1.)

The paper and meeting come on the heels of huge media coverage on de-extinction. National Geographic’s April issue on the topic garnered a lot of press and generated public interest. In some cases, these articles say, de-extinction could be just a few years away, if not closer.

The PLoS paper and de-extinction topic seemed to be a great opportunity to speak to Terry Gosliner, the Academy’s Dean of Science and Research, about the subject.

“Do you really want to encounter a saber-toothed cat in Muir Woods?” Terry joked when we sat down.

He sees huge potential risks in using synthetic biology for conservation, but admits that the meeting and discussion are a great idea. “Open dialogue is the only way to explore the topic, see the potential and understand what the concerns and dangers are,” he says. “Bad things happen when there isn’t discussion. Informed dialogue is the best way to deal with controversial issues.”

Terry believes some aspects of synthetic biology in the natural world could work, with appropriate regulation.

But he also sees that synthetic biology may not be the right approach. When thinking about threatened species, the problem is usually “habitat loss, not necessarily genetic constraints.” He uses the re-emergence of California condors as an example of this.

And in some cases, extinction is a natural process, Terry reminds us. Synthetic biology could just be more of humans interfering with nature, and not in a good way.

The resources going toward de-extinction could be better used to protect life before it goes extinct, Terry thinks. “If we use the same resources to address climate change and how we use energy,” Terry says, “We literally could save hundreds and thousands of species.”

And those energy and climate resources could be from synthetic biology. The PLoS paper cites a 2009 report on synthetic biology: “Many believe that synthetic biology will be one of the transformative technologies necessary to combat climate change, energy shortages, food security issues and water deficits.”

What do you think? Can synthetic biology save wildlife? Where do you stand on the issue?

Academy scientist John McCosker describes a healthy, tropical shallow coral reef as an intricate network of shape, motion, and color. “The variety, amount, and numbers of coral, fish and invertebrates is impossible to describe,” he says. “It’s visually overwhelming.” In contrast, a reef damaged by dynamite, poison, or other methods of excessive resource extraction, appears as an ash-gray scar of calcium carbonate rubble along the ocean floor.

McCosker knows the difference first-hand. He made his first dive in the tropical Indo-Pacific with the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in 1972 in the vicinity of Raja Ampat. Recently, he accompanied Terry Gosliner, the Academy’s Dean of Science and Research Collections on a scouting expedition to Northwestern Papua in Indonesia. “There is no comparison between a healthy coral reef and one that’s been dynamited,” says McCosker. “That said, Raja Ampat remains one of the least inhabited and most pristine areas of the Coral Triangle.”

Many are working to keep it that way. The trip, explains Gosliner, is an initial step in what will be a five-year collaboration with the government of Indonesia, LIPI (the Indonesian Institute of Sciences), Conservation International, Papuan Indonesian scientists, educators and local fisherman. The Academy will work with Papuan residents to provide baseline documentation and training that will strengthen their effort to monitor and protect their newly formed marine sanctuaries.

Gosliner is working to complete a Memorandum of Understanding with the Government of Indonesia that will identify marine sites off of Birds Head peninsula where Academy scientists and their partners will document the biodiversity of those coral reefs.

Academy scientists will use the same methodology employed during the 2011 Hearst Philippines Biodiversity Expedition. Gosliner hopes the five-year effort will also settle an ongoing question among scientists—exactly where is the richest part of the ocean? “Some say it’s the Verde Island Passage in the Philippines,” Gosliner says, “others say it’s Raja Ampat. We hope to gather enough data to compare the two areas.

“Coral reefs are actually far more resilient than people realize,” says Gosliner. “We’ve seen transformation of once-decimated reefs into productive, recovering ecosystems. The key is to work with the local population to adopt sustainable practices. We will survey the biodiversity. But it’s just as important to build relationships with Indonesian scientists.”

The Academy, Gosliner explains, is not a newcomer to the issue of sustainability. “It’s been part and parcel of what we’ve done throughout our entire history. But we’re stepping up our efforts because the issue is so urgent and the challenges we face today are so great.”

Barbara Tannenbaum is a science writer working with the Academy’s Digital Engagement Studio. Her work has appeared in the New York Times, San Francisco Magazine and many other publications.

Image: Terry Gosliner