Cargando…
Evaluation of the influence of correcting for gillnet selectivity on the estimation of population parameters
Gill nets are a common sampling technique in inland and marine fisheries. However, gill nets are size selective and may result in bias estimates of population parameters. As such, selectivity is commonly assessed using indirect estimation techniques. Indirect estimates of gillnet selectivity have be...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10289425/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37352270 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287434 |
Sumario: | Gill nets are a common sampling technique in inland and marine fisheries. However, gill nets are size selective and may result in bias estimates of population parameters. As such, selectivity is commonly assessed using indirect estimation techniques. Indirect estimates of gillnet selectivity have been suggested to improve estimates of important populations metrics (e.g., total annual mortality), but this assertion has not been assessed. In the current study, we simulated hypothetical populations of channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus, lake trout Salvelinus namaycush, walleye Sander vitreus, and white crappie Pomoxis annularis and sampled the populations based on published gillnet encounter and retention probabilities. Total annual mortality and von Bertalanffy parameters were then estimated using unadjusted (not “correcting” for selectivity processes) and adjusted (“correcting” for selectivity processes) age and(or) length data to evaluate the value of accounting for gillnet selectivity when estimating these metrics. Our results indicate that adjusting for retention and encounter probabilities rarely leads to improved estimates of total annual mortality, K, and L(∞). For instance, estimates of annual mortality of lake trout based on age data adjusted for retention probability resulted in an overestimate of A by 14.4%. As such, we suggest that analysis of gillnet selectivity only be used when specific questions are being addressed (e.g., catch-at-age models) or in situation when all processes contributing to gillnet selectivity (e.g., contact probability, size-specific availability) are known. |
---|