4.7 Article

Estimating Stock Status and Biological Reference Points of the Sardine Fishery Using the Surplus Production Model from the Bay of Bengal, Bangladesh

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jmse11050944

关键词

BRPs; overexploited; MSY; CMSY; ASPIC; sardine; Bay of Bengal

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This research analyzed the biological reference points and stock status of the sardine fishery in the Bay of Bengal, Bangladesh, using various models and catch-effort data. The results indicated that the sardine fishery is fully exploited, with poor biomass and an unsafe fishing status. The findings provide important information for developing management strategies and conservation policies for the sustainable and rebuilding of this commercially important resource.
This research examined the biological reference points (BRPs) and stock status of the sardine fishery in the Bay of Bengal (BoB), Bangladesh, to determine the sustainability of this resource. The Monte Carlo method (CMSY), the Bayesian state-space Schaefer surplus production model (BSM), and the ASPIC (a Stock Production Model Incorporating Covariates) software suite, were used to analyze catch-effort data obtained from the Yearbook of Fisheries Statistics of Bangladesh. All models derived maximum sustainable yields (MSY) ranging from 37,900 to 41,280 t, which is quite near to the catch from the latest year (38,051 t in 2020), indicating the fully exploited status of sardines. The estimated B < B-MSY and F > F-MSY values from the BSM and Schaefer models indicate a poor biomass and an unsafe fishing status. For Schaefer and BSM, the calculated F/F-MSY values were 1.07 and 1.06, and the B/B-MSY values were 0.92 and 0.75, which also indicate the overexploited status of the sardine fishery in the BoB, Bangladesh. This information will aid in developing management strategies and conservation policies for the sustainability and rebuilding of this commercially important resource in the BoB on the Bangladesh coast.

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