4.5 Article

Comparison of three methods for identification of redfish (Sebastes mentella and S. norvegicus) from the Greenland east coast

Journal

FISHERIES RESEARCH
Volume 201, Issue -, Pages 11-17

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.fishres.2018.01.003

Keywords

Species separation; Fisheries management; Otolith; Shape analysis; Microsatellites

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In management of fisheries, knowledge about the species is crucial due to differences in life history traits. The first step is therefore species identification. For many species this task is straightforward, however for some species e.g. the two species of Atlantic redfish Sebastes mentella and Sebastes norvegicus, it can be difficult for an untrained eye. With the goal to separate the two species, we analysed otolith shape variation of S. mentella and S. norvegicus caught on the continental slope of East Greenland using the R package Shape R. Results were evaluated against genetic analysis of the same fish, and compared to results of both a visual identification of the two species and a separation based on a linear discriminant analysis on standardised values of fish length, fish weight and otolith weight. It was concluded that the objective otolith shape analysis using the Shape R package analysis achieve a reasonable classification success, however with a clear bias towards S. mentella. Classification using the otolith weight achieved a slightly higher success than the shape analysis making it a promising method. Furthermore, the method is at the same time both objective, less time consuming than the otolith shape analysis and less expensive than genetic analysis. However, the visual classification method of the whole fish had the highest success rate of the three tested methods, which despite the need for trained technicians makes it the most successful method.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available