4.5 Article

Diversity of demersal fish in the East China Sea: Implication of eutrophication and fishery

期刊

CONTINENTAL SHELF RESEARCH
卷 47, 期 -, 页码 42-54

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.csr.2012.06.011

关键词

Demersal fish; Nutrients; Eutrophication; Hypoxia; East China Sea

资金

  1. National Science Council (NSC), Taiwan [NSC-98-2611-M-002-004-MY3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The environment of the East China Sea has been greatly impacted by both fishing and land-based pollution over the past decades, with a concomitant decline of fishery resources. Imposition of a seasonal fishing moratorium and a trawling prohibition zone has failed to engender recovery of fish communities. To help understand the respective impacts of environmental factors and fishing activities in the East China Sea ecosystem, fish samples and environmental parameters were collected in prohibited and open fishing areas, during the seasonal fishing moratorium. The inshore area of the East China Sea, corresponding to the prohibited zone for trawling, had extremely high nutrient concentrations and relatively low dissolved oxygen. The diversity index of demersal fish showed significantly negative correlations with nutrient concentrations and positive correlations with bottom-water dissolved oxygen. The inshore area of the East China Sea was heavily dominated by small-sized fishes, such as Gobiids-Amblychaeturichthys hexanema and Apogonids-Apogon lineatus, reflecting low survival of most fish species. In contrast, the offshore areas, with lower nutrient concentrations and higher dissolved oxygen, had higher biodiversity. These findings suggest that eutrophication and subsequent hypoxia is responsible for the limited recovery of fishery resources in the trawling prohibition area of the East China Sea. Therefore, a multi-pronged fishery management that involves both fishing restriction and environmental improvement is urgently needed in the East China Sea. (c) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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