4.7 Article

Simple and effective: T90 codends improve size selectivity and catch efficiency compared with diamond-mesh codends for mantis shrimp (Oratosquilla oratoria) in demersal trawl fishery of the South China Sea

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MARINE SCIENCE
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2022.939269

关键词

demersal trawl; codend selectivity; catch efficiency; T0; T90

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2020YFD0901205]
  2. Central Public-interest Scientific Institution Basal Research Fund, South China Sea Fisheries Research Institute, CAFS [2020YJ01]
  3. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affair Standard and management regime of fishing gears

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In demersal trawl fisheries of the South China Sea, size selectivity and catch efficiency of four codends for mantis shrimp were tested. Results showed that the codend with a 35-mm mesh size had the highest size selectivity but also incurred significant loss of legal individuals.
Size selectivity and catch efficiency of four codends were tested and compared for mantis shrimp (Oratosquilla oratoria) in demersal trawl fisheries of the South China Sea (SCS). These codends were differing in mesh shapes, diamond mesh (T0) and diamond-mesh turned 90 degrees (T90) with mesh sizes of 30 and 35 mm, respectively. The results demonstrated that the T0 codend with a lower mesh size, 30 mm, presented poorer selective properties for the target species, while size selectivity would be significantly improved with the mesh size increasing to 35 mm, or substituting the T0 codend with the T90 codend. For the T90 codend with a larger mesh size, 35 mm, the size selectivity was the highest, whereas the loss of the legal individuals was also significantly considerable. Considering the trade-off between releasing undersized individuals and maintaining the legal ones, the T0 codend with 35-mm mesh size or the T90 codend with 30-mm mesh size might be a better choice to target mantis shrimp in demersal trawl fisheries of the SCS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据