4.5 Review

Conducting and interpreting fish telemetry studies: considerations for researchers and resource managers

期刊

REVIEWS IN FISH BIOLOGY AND FISHERIES
卷 29, 期 2, 页码 369-400

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11160-019-09560-4

关键词

Fishery management; Biotelemetry; Conservation; Uncertainty; Data interpretation

资金

  1. Great Lakes Fishery Commission
  2. Great Lakes Restoration Initiative [GL-00E23010]
  3. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  4. Canada Research Chairs Program
  5. Ocean Tracking Network Canada
  6. Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship
  7. Bonefish and Tarpon Trust
  8. NSERC Post-Doctoral Fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Telemetry is an increasingly common tool for studying the ecology of wild fish, with great potential to provide valuable information for management and conservation. For researchers to conduct a robust telemetry study, many essential considerations exist related to selecting the appropriate tag type, fish capture and tagging methods, tracking protocol, data processing and analyses, and interpretation of findings. For telemetry-derived knowledge to be relevant to managers and policy makers, the research approach must consider management information needs for decision-making, while end users require an understanding of telemetry technology (capabilities and limitations), its application to fisheries research and monitoring (study design), and proper interpretation of results and conclusions (considering the potential for biases and proper recognition of associated uncertainties). To help bridge this gap, we provide a set of considerations and a checklist for researchers to guide them in conducting reliable and management-relevant telemetry studies, and for managers to evaluate the reliability and relevance of telemetry studies so as to better integrate findings into management plans. These considerations include implicit assumptions, technical limitations, ethical and biological realities, analytical merits, and the relevance of study findings to decision-making processes.

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