4.5 Article

Fast growth inferred for northern Benguela shallow-water hake Merluccius capensis using annual survey- and monthly commercial length-frequency distributions

期刊

FISHERIES RESEARCH
卷 193, 期 -, 页码 7-14

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.fishres.2017.03.001

关键词

von Bertalanffy growth function; Cohort analysis; Non-linear mixed effects model; Age determination; Research surveys; Commercial length-frequency data

资金

  1. SEAChange Project of the South African Network for Coastal and Oceanic Research Branch: Marine and Coastal Management
  2. National Research Foundation
  3. South African Research Chairs Initiative of the Department of Science and Technology
  4. National Research Foundation, through the Research Chair in Marine Ecology and Fisheries
  5. Benguela Current Commission (BCC)
  6. National Institute for Aquatic Resources (DTU Aqua), Denmark

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The hypothesis that fast growth rates demonstrated for 3-21-month-old Merluccius capensis continue for older fish is tested. Cohort-specific growth rates of M. capensis between 6 and 65 cm total length were described using a von Bertalanffy growth function (VBGF) fitted to annual/bi-annual research survey length-frequency distributions (LFDs) from 1995 to 2011 and monthly commercial LFDs from 1998 to 2011. These data were combined with cohort analysis of younger fish from seal scat data to provide cohort-specific growth rates for cohorts hatched from 1994 to 2008. The fitted VBGF gave L-t (cm) = 108.6*{1-exp[-0.199*(t(y)+ 0.025)D. M. capensis grow between 1.4 and 0.8 cm month(-1) from ages 1 to 5 years, varying by 0.2 cm month(-1) among cohorts. This is about twice as fast as growth rates previously estimated from otolith methods, which therefore need to be re-evaluated. It follows that M. capensis should have higher natural mortality rates and a greater stock productivity than previously believed, emphasizing the need to review this in the current stock assessment approaches. (C) 2017 Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

4.5
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