3.9 Article

Incorporating Spatial Structure in Stock Assessment: Movement Modeling in Marine Fish Population Dynamics

Journal

REVIEWS IN FISHERIES SCIENCE
Volume 19, Issue 2, Pages 119-136

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10641262.2011.557451

Keywords

movement; population dynamics; spatial modeling; stock assessment; mark-recapture

Categories

Funding

  1. Pollock Conservation Cooperative Research Center
  2. University of Alaska, Fairbanks
  3. Massachusetts Marine Fisheries Institute

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Investigations into population structure have been at the forefront of fisheries research for decades, yet it is generally ignored in stock assessment models. As the complex nature of marine population structure has been uncovered, models have attempted to accurately portray it through the development of spatially explicit assessments that allow for movement between sub-populations. Although current tag-integrated movement models are highly complex, many arose from the relatively simple models of Beverton and Holt (1957). This article traces the historical development of these models and compares their features. Originally estimation of movement utilized only tag-recapture models, but now tag-integrated assessment models incorporate several sources of fishery, survey, and tag-recapture information to inform movement estimates. As spatial management measures become more widely used, it is increasingly important that assessment models include the spatial complexities of population structure and patterns of fishery removals, in order for more reliable monitoring of population rebuilding to take place. A generalized metapopulation model is proposed for use in fisheries stock assessment, which allows for adult movement among spatially discrete sub-populations. The input requirements for the model include region-specific catch-at-age, a tag-recapture dataset, and auxiliary information, such as a fishery-independent abundance index.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available