Getting the science right to protect and restore our environment. A critique of Lapointe et al. (2019) Nitrogen enrichment, altered stoichiometry, and coral reef decline at Looe Key, Florida Keys, USA: a 3-decade study

Eutrophication of coastal ecosystems and decline of essential benthic ecosystems are growing concerns globally. Understanding the drivers associated with a response of an indicator species at an ecosystem or even regional-scale hinges on a robust evaluation of data that spans both space and time. Consistent data, suitable and methodical data-handling procedures, appropriate statistical evaluation and logical assessment of hypotheses are essential. Lapointe et al. (Mar Biol 166:108, 2019) suggest that decline of stony coral at Looe Key reef is attributed to local and regional (i.e., discharge > 200 km away) nutrient discharges causing eutrophication of coastal waters and the degradation of essential habitat. Furthermore, Lapointe et al. (Mar Biol 166:108, 2019) posit that the restored freshwater flows to the Everglades ecosystem is a causative agent for the observed coral decline observed at Looe Key Reef. While the decline in coral coverage is alarming, rigorous statistical analysis is needed to attribute a true cause-and-effect relationship. This commentary discusses data handling techniques, the application of statistical methods, interoperability of data and evaluation of hypotheses presented by Lapointe et al. (Mar Biol 166:108, 2019) specific to Looe Key reef within the Florida Key Marine Sanctuary. This commentary is not merely a critique of the statistics used by the authors but rather the inappropriate statistical methods utilized and how it affects the acceptance or rejection of the authors’ hypotheses and the overall conclusions drawn.