Comparing three indices of catch per unit effort using Bayesian geostatistics

被引：3
|
作者：
Pereira, Julio Cesar [1 ,2 ]
Leandro, Roseli Aparecida [1 ]
Petrere, Miguel, Jr. [3 ]
Nishida, Tom [4 ]
机构：
[1] Univ Fed Sao Carlos, BR-18052780 Sorocaba, SP, Brazil
[2] ESALQ USP, Dept Ciencias Exatas, BR-13418900 Piracicaba, SP, Brazil
[3] UNESP, Dept Ecol, BR-13506900 Rio Claro, SP, Brazil
[4] Natl Res Inst Far Seas Fisheries, Fisheries Res Agcy, Shizuoka 4248633, Japan
来源：
FISHERIES RESEARCH | 2009年 / 100卷 / 03期
关键词：
Simulation; Geostatistics; CPUE; Estimation; Linear coregionalization; TEMPERATURE; FISHERY; MODEL;
D O I：
10.1016/j.fishres.2009.07.010
中图分类号：
S9 [水产、渔业];
学科分类号：
0908 ;
摘要：
In assessing a fish stock, indices based on catch per unit effort (CPUE) are frequently used. Estimates of three indices of catch per unit effort were compared here (CPUE1, CPUE2 and CPUE3), considering the fitting of two models: (i) a bivariate geostatistical model for catch and effort; (ii) a bivariate model where catch and effort were considered spatially independent. For comparing the estimates of the three indices after the fitting of the two models, catch and effort data were simulated in different scenarios. The simulation study showed that. in general, the estimates of CPUE1 expressed by the ratio of the means of catch and effort, present better results for different scenarios and that the estimates from (i) are better than (ii), mainly when there is a correlation between catch and effort and an additional spatial correlation. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码：200 / 209
页数：10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparing commercial and research survey catch per unit of effort: megrim in the Celtic Sea
    Petitgas, P
    Poulard, JC
    Biseau, A
    ICES JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE, 2003, 60 (01) : 66 - 76
  • [2] Calibrating minimum counts and catch-per-unit-effort as indices of moose population trend
    DeCesare, Nicholas J.
    Newby, Jesse R.
    Boccadori, Vanna J.
    Chilton-Radandt, Tonya
    Thier, Tim
    Waltee, Dean
    Podruzny, Kevin
    Gude, Justin A.
    WILDLIFE SOCIETY BULLETIN, 2016, 40 (03): : 537 - 547
  • [3] Catch per unit effort for moose: A new approach using Weibull regression
    Schmidt, JI
    Hoef, JMV
    Maier, JAK
    Bowyer, RT
    JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, 2005, 69 (03) : 1112 - 1124
  • [4] Catch-per-unit-effort: which estimator is best?
    Petrere Jr, M.
    Giacomini, H. C.
    De Marco Jr, P.
    BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF BIOLOGY, 2010, 70 (03) : 483 - 491
  • [5] Large differences in catch per unit of effort between two minnow trap models
    Merilä J.
    Lakka H.-K.
    Eloranta A.
    BMC Research Notes, 6 (1)
  • [6] Feature Selection for Explaining Yellowfin Tuna Catch per Unit Effort Using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator Regression
    Yang, Ling
    Zhou, Weifeng
    FISHES, 2024, 9 (06)
  • [7] Seasonal catch composition and catch per unit effort of coastal fishery in Yenisakran (Candarli Bay, Aegean Sea)
    Genc, Tugce Sensurat
    Akyol, Okan
    SU URUNLERI DERGISI, 2020, 37 (01): : 9 - 14
  • [8] Interpreting catch per unit effort data to assess the status of individual stocks and communities
    Maunder, Mark N.
    Sibert, John R.
    Fonteneau, Alain
    Hampton, John
    Kleiber, Pierre
    Harley, Shelton J.
    ICES JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE, 2006, 63 (08) : 1373 - 1385
  • [9] Determining whether catch per unit effort is a suitable proxy for relative crab abundance
    Murray, L. G.
    Seed, R.
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES, 2010, 401 : 173 - 182
  • [10] Modelling catch per unit effort of the Black Volta near the Bui dam in Ghana
    Alhassan, Elliot H.
    Ofori-Danson, Patrick K.
    Nunoo, Francis K. E.
    AFRICAN JOURNAL OF ECOLOGY, 2017, 55 (02) : 126 - 133
12345