2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.fishres.2010.05.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of dual selection in grid based selectivity systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
89
2

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 105 publications
(91 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
89
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, an optimal selection device for this fishery should provide a sharp selection profile just above 44 cm so that the majority of fish above 44 cm would be retained and the majority below would be released from the gear. Sistiaga et al (2010) have shown that a 55-mm Sort-V grid combined with diamond mesh codends had L50 values in the range 51.6-55.9 cm, which are not significantly different from the results we have here for either the EW or T90 gears (at the 95% level). There is, however, a significant difference between the mean SR values of these two gears and, as shown in Figure 2C, the T90 codend is closer to the 44 cm minimum landing size and retains significantly more fish in the length range 55-76 cm.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 75%
“…Thus, an optimal selection device for this fishery should provide a sharp selection profile just above 44 cm so that the majority of fish above 44 cm would be retained and the majority below would be released from the gear. Sistiaga et al (2010) have shown that a 55-mm Sort-V grid combined with diamond mesh codends had L50 values in the range 51.6-55.9 cm, which are not significantly different from the results we have here for either the EW or T90 gears (at the 95% level). There is, however, a significant difference between the mean SR values of these two gears and, as shown in Figure 2C, the T90 codend is closer to the 44 cm minimum landing size and retains significantly more fish in the length range 55-76 cm.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 75%
“…This approach avoids underestimation of the confidence limits of the average selection parameters L 50 and SR, which according to Fryer (1991) would otherwise occur from simply estimating the average L 50 and SR values from pooled data without using bootstrapping to account simultaneously for both within-and between-haul variation in the selection process. The bootstrapping method used is similar to the method described in Sistiaga et al (2010) except that the model fitted to our data is much simpler. As in Sistiaga et al (2010), the data analysis was carried out with the software tool SELNET (developed by the first author of this study).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The bootstrapping method used is similar to the method described in Sistiaga et al (2010) except that the model fitted to our data is much simpler. As in Sistiaga et al (2010), the data analysis was carried out with the software tool SELNET (developed by the first author of this study). Further information on SELNET can be found in Frandsen et al (2011), Wienbeck et al (2011 and Sistiaga et al (2010) or can be obtained by contacting the corresponding author.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Fit statistics indicating that a model could adequately describe the data included P-values greater than 0.05 and a deviance value no greater Efron 1982) for L 50 and SR based on 1,000 bootstrap repetitions using a double-bootstrapping method implemented in SELNET to account for both within-tow and between-tow variation. This is the same approach that was used by Sistiaga et al (2010) and Herrmann et al (2012) to avoid underestimating confidence limits for selectivity curves when pooling tow data. To determine whether the selectivity curves for a given species differed significantly between any two of the three cod end types, the P-value was calculated as the number of times out of the 1 million pairs of bootstrap L 50 values that the L 50 for net A was less than the L 50 for net B.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%