4.3 Article

Establishing climate-growth relationships for yelloweye rockfish (Sebastes ruberrimus) in the northeast Pacific using a dendrochronological approach

期刊

FISHERIES OCEANOGRAPHY
卷 17, 期 5, 页码 368-379

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2419.2008.00484.x

关键词

climate; dendrochronology; North Pacific; otolith; sclerochronology; yelloweye rockfish

资金

  1. NOAA Fisheries
  2. Environment (FATE) program [NA06NMF4550286]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We applied dendrochronology (tree-ring) methods to develop multidecadal growth chronologies from the increment widths of yelloweye rockfish (Sebastes ruberrimus) otoliths. Chronologies were developed for the central California coast, a site just north of Vancouver Island, British Columbia, and at Bowie Seamount west of the Queen Charlotte Islands, British Columbia. At each site, synchronous growth patterns were matched among otoliths via the process of cross-dating, ensuring that the correct calendar year was assigned to all increments. Each time series of growth-increment measurements was divided by the values predicted by a best-fit negative exponential function, thereby removing age-related trends. These detrended time series were averaged into a master chronology for each site, and chronologies were correlated with monthly averages of sea surface temperatures, upwelling, the Northern Oscillation Index, and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. The two northern growth chronologies positively correlated with indices of warm ocean conditions, especially from the prior summer through the spring of the current year. During the same period, the California chronology positively correlated with indices of cool ocean conditions, indicating an opposing productivity regime for yelloweye rockfish between the California Current and the Gulf of Alaska. Overall, this study demonstrates how tree-ring techniques can be applied to quickly develop annually resolved chronologies and establish climate-growth relationships across various temporal and spatial scales.

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