4.3 Article

Impacts of fish aggregation devices on size structures of skipjack tuna Katsuwonus pelamis

期刊

AQUATIC ECOLOGY
卷 46, 期 3, 页码 343-352

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10452-012-9405-0

关键词

Skipjack tuna; Aggregation; Drifting-floating-object-associated school; Unassociated school; Size selection; Coefficient of variation

资金

  1. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China [2012AA092302]
  2. National Science Foundation of China [41006016]
  3. Shanghai Rising-Star Program [11QA1403000]
  4. Maine Sea Grant College Program
  5. Dongfang Scholar Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tuna purse seine fisheries target fish aggregated in schools, including free schools that are formed naturally based on fish biology and aggregations associated with natural and/or artificial drifting objects. Using data collected from skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis) fisheries, we evaluated differences in size structures between drifting-floating-object-associated schools and unassociated schools. We developed a generalized linear model to remove impacts of environmental variables on skipjack size composition. This study indicates that the drifting-floating-object-associated schools tended to have significantly wider size ranges than the unassociated schools. This suggests that unassociated schools were likely formed based on similarity in sizes among individuals within a school while drifting-floating-object-associated schools were probably composed of individuals of large size ranges and their formation was not based on the size selection rule. We concluded that the unassociated schools and the drifting-floating-object-associated schools were formed through different mechanisms, and drifting floating objects could aggregate unassociated schools of different size structures. Thus, a large scale of deployment of man-made floating objects might disrupt the spatial aggregation pattern of fish that otherwise tended to school based on their sizes in the absence of floating objects.

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

4.3
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