4.6 Article

Local environment affecting northern shrimp recruitment: a comparative study of Gulf of St. Lawrence stocks

期刊

ICES JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE
卷 76, 期 4, 页码 974-986

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/icesjms/fsy185

关键词

density dependent; environment-recruitment models; GAM; Northwest Atlantic; population dynamics; zooplankton

资金

  1. Fisheries Science and Ecosystem Research Program from the Government of Canada through an NSERC (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Climate and density-dependent effects are important drivers of recruitment (R). In the Gulf of St. Lawrence (GSL), recent years indicated an exceptional warming of water associated with variations in plankton phenology and fish abundance. At the same time, northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) recruitment and stock dynamics fluctuated greatly, but the underlying mechanisms remain poorly understood. We estimated recruitment from yearly fisheries independent abundance estimates for three different northern shrimp stocks in the GSL (Sept-Iles, Anticosti, and Esquiman). For 2001-2016, we quantified how northern shrimp R changed in relation to physical variables, phytoplankton bloom characteristics, zooplankton abundance and phenology, and predator biomass. Results indicated that northern shrimp R seemed related to phytoplankton bloom characteristics and resulting zooplankton phenology in addition to northern shrimp adult abundance, rather than to fish predator biomass. Importantly, the significant variables explaining the R were stock specific, implying that environmental variability and stock abundance effects depend on the area considered. In future, Esquiman area might show increasing northern shrimp R under moderate warming but northern shrimp Sept-Iles R might be impaired. These results improve our understanding of stock-specific northern shrimp recruitment dynamics in a changing environment and can ultimately improve its management in the GSL.

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