4.6 Article

A standardized assessment of geographic variation in size at maturity of European lobster (Homarus gammarus L.) in the North East Atlantic

期刊

ICES JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE
卷 80, 期 4, 页码 911-922

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/icesjms/fsac234

关键词

European lobster; fisheries; Homarus gammarus; maturity; reproduction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study collected for the first time existing data on physiological maturity of female European lobster across the North East Atlantic, including new data from Scotland, Wales, and the Isle of Man. The study used a standardized methodology to estimate the size at maturity of 1309 lobsters from 11 locations, with carapace length (CL) at which 50% of the sampled population had reached physiological maturity (CL50) varying between populations, ranging from 82 to 92.5 mm. The study provides a specific staging guide and methodology for H. gammarus, enabling future comparison of potential fluctuations in female size at maturity.
Assessing size at maturity for European lobster Homarus gammarus across the North East Atlantic remains a fundamental knowledge gap for this commercially valuable fishery. This study for the first time collates existing data on physiological maturity of female European lobster H. gammarus across the North East Atlantic, including new data from Scotland, Wales, and the Isle of Man. Physiological estimates of size at maturity were undertaken using 1309 lobsters from 11 locations using a standardized methodology. Carapace length (CL) at which 50% of the sampled population had reached physiological maturity (CL50) varied between populations, ranging from 82 to 92.5 mm. CL50 estimates reported here are broadly similar for historic population samples in England, but estimates for Irish samples were lower than previous results. The development of a H. gammarus specific staging guide and methodology in this study enables the future comparison of potential fluctuations in female size at maturity.

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

4.6
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