4.6 Article

Utility of 18-kHz acoustic data for abundance estimation of Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus)

Journal

ICES JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE
Volume 69, Issue 6, Pages 1086-1098

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/icesjms/fss059

Keywords

acoustic survey; Atlantic herring; Celtic Sea; 18-kHz backscatter; 120-kHz backscatter; stock assessment

Funding

  1. NERC [bas0100025] Funding Source: UKRI
  2. Natural Environment Research Council [bas0100025] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Current acoustic survey protocols for Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) abundance estimation are principally dependent upon 38-kHz backscatter data. This can constitute a substantial problem for robust stock assessment when 38-kHz data are compromised. Research vessels now typically collect multifrequency data during acoustic surveys, which could be used to remediate such situations. Here, we investigate the utility of using 18-and 120-kHz data for herring abundance estimation when the standard 38-kHz approach is not possible. Estimates of herring abundance/biomass in the Celtic Sea (2007-2010) were calculated at 18, 38, and 120 kHz using the standard 38-kHz target-strength (TS) model and geometrically equivalent TS models at 18 and 120 kHz. These estimates were compared to assess the level of coherence between the three frequencies, and 18-kHz-derived estimates were subsequently input into standard 38-kHz-based population models to evaluate the impact on the assessment. Results showed that estimates of herring abundance/ biomass from 18 and 38 kHz acoustic integration varied by only 0.3-5.4%, and acoustically derived numbers-at-age estimates were not significantly (p. 0.05) different from 1: 1. Estimates at 120 kHz were also robust. Furthermore, 18-kHz-derived estimates did not significantly change the assessment model output, indicating that 18-kHz data can be used for herring stock assessment purposes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available