Environmental conditions and habitat characteristics influence trap and video detection probabilities for reef fish species

Bacheler, Nathan M.; Berrane, David J.; Mitchell, Warren A.; Schobernd, Christina M.; Schobernd, Zebulon H.; Teer, Bradford Z.; Ballenger, Joseph C.

doi:10.3354/meps11094

Cited by 46 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, detection probability ranged from 0.59 to 0.88 in the noncanopy forming region and from 0.03 to 0.64 in the canopy forming algae region. These results are broadly comparable to detection probabilities from other studies using camera surveys with other modeling approaches to detect marine fish (Bacheler et al., ; Coggins et al., ). These detection probabilities are conditional on cusk being present at the site being observed and also need to be considered in light of the fact that bottom time for the camera was relatively high in this investigation.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…It is imperative that practitioners of future marine SDM applications consider the detectability of the species under study. In order to do this, they must first understand the processes that govern the fine scale, time‐varying features of the environment that may affect detectability, not just for the species in question but also for the specific habitat type being observed (Bacheler et al., ) in order to obtain unbiased estimates of occupancy in the marine environment.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No variability in detection probability should therefore be expected due to gear differences. In investigations using camera surveys combined with fish traps to assess detectability using simultaneous data collection methods (Coggins et al., ), the approach of adding cameras to other gear types has been recommended (Bacheler et al., ). In the current study, the camera system was used in isolation, and given the limited field of view and a lack of control over orientation once on the seabed, detection probabilities are expected to be and are less than one.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Dynamic occupancy modeling of temperate marine fish in area‐based closures

Calvert

McGonigle

Sethi

et al. 2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Species distribution models (SDMs) are commonly used to model the spatial structure of species in the marine environment, however, most fail to account for detectability of the target species. This can result in underestimates of occupancy, where nondetection is conflated with absence. The site occupancy model (SOM) overcomes this failure by treating occupancy as a latent variable of the model and incorporates a detection submodel to account for variability in detection rates. These have rarely been applied in the context of marine fish and never for the multiseason dynamic occupancy model (DOM). In this study, a DOM is developed for a designated species of concern, cusk (Brosme brosme), over a four‐season period. Making novel use of a high‐resolution 3‐dimensional hydrodynamic model, detectability of cusk is considered as a function of current speed and algae cover. Algal cover on the seabed is measured from video surveys to divide the study area into two distinct regions: those with canopy forming species of algae and those without (henceforth bottom types). Modeled estimates of the proportion of sites occupied in each season are 0.88, 0.45, 0.74, and 0.83. These are significantly greater than the proportion of occupied sites measured from underwater video observations which are 0.57, 0.28, 0.43, and 0.57. Individual fish are detected more frequently with increasing current speed in areas lacking canopy and less frequently with increasing current speed in areas with canopy. The results indicate that, where possible, SDM studies for all marine species should take account of detectability to avoid underestimating the proportion of sites occupied at a given study area. Sampling closed areas or areas of conservation often requires the use of nonphysical, low impact sampling methods like camera surveys. These methods inherently result in detection probabilities less than one, an issue compounded by time‐varying features of the environment that are rarely accounted for marine studies. This work highlights the use of modeled hydrodynamics as a tool to correct some of this imbalance.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dynamic occupancy modeling of temperate marine fish in area‐based closures

Calvert

McGonigle

Sethi

et al. 2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Visual surveys are less selective than those that use traditional capture gear such as traps (Bacheler et al 2013), trawls (Wells et al 2008), and hooks Parker et al 2016), and they are typically less strongly influenced by depth, bottom relief, or fish behavior (Cappo et al 2003). Visual-based sampling methods used to target reef fishes in the southeastern United States include stereo baited remote underwater video (S-BRUV) arrays (Saul et al 2013;Campbell et al 2015; Thompson et al 2017;Keenan et al 2018), towed cameras (Lembke et al 2017), diver visual surveys (Smith et al 2011;Harford et al 2016), and trap-mounted video cameras (Bacheler et al 2013(Bacheler et al , 2014(Bacheler et al , 2016.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Benthic Habitats, as Derived from Classification of Side‐Scan‐Sonar Mapping Data, Are Important Determinants of Reef‐Fish Assemblage Structure in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasingly restrictive management regulations have greatly reduced the utility of fishery‐dependent data for characterizing temporal changes in the abundance of managed fish populations, so fishery‐independent data are becoming more important for the accurate assessment of stock status. A notable downside to fishery‐independent data is the high cost of conducting surveys, and efforts to maximize survey efficiency are critical given ongoing reductions in agency funding. We conducted a pilot study to explore the utility of classifying side‐scan‐sonar mapping data to provide a practical a priori characterization of reef habitat in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. An analysis of side‐scan‐sonar mapping data identified five distinct reef habitat types (low‐relief hard bottom, mixed hard bottom, fragmented hard bottom, ledges, and potholes) that were subsequently sampled with stereo baited remote underwater video (S‐BRUV) arrays and trap‐mounted GoPro cameras. The permutational analysis of variance indicated that the assemblage structure of reef fish differed significantly (P < 0.01) among all of the pairs of habitats except ledges and fragmented hard bottom; assemblage structure did not differ among cameras (P = 0.45). Overall species richness and diversity were significantly higher in the habitats with greater vertical relief, as were the abundances of several economically and ecologically important reef fishes, although many taxa were observed across all of the habitat types. Benthic habitats that are identified from side‐scan‐sonar mapping data are important determinants of reef‐fish assemblage structure and may prove to be useful as a stratification scheme for reef‐fish surveys, although additional research is necessary to explore the transferability of these results to the rest of the eastern Gulf of Mexico.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, we had to assume that for a given gear type, (1) effort was proportional to abundance and (2) catchability did not differ between habitats. As experimental estimates of differential catchability of the same gear in different habitat types become available (Bacheler et al 2014), they could be incorporated into the modeling framework we have proposed, perhaps as Bayesian priors. The addition of other paired gears to the survey design (e.g., cameras) could provide further information on catchability or detection rates for the different gears.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Red Snapper Distribution on Natural Habitats and Artificial Structures in the Northern Gulf of Mexico

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2011, an intensive, multiple‐gear, fishery‐independent survey was carried out in the northern Gulf of Mexico (GOM) to collect comprehensive age and length information on Red Snapper Lutjanus campechanus. Based on this synoptic survey, we produced a spatial map of Red Snapper relative abundance that integrates both gear selectivity effects and ontogenetically varying habitat usage. Our methodology generated a spatial map of Red Snapper at a 10‐km2 grid resolution that is consistent with existing knowledge of the species: Red Snapper occurred in relatively high abundances at depths of 50–90 m along the coasts of Texas and Louisiana and in smaller, patchy “hot spots” at a variety of depths along the Alabama coast and the west Florida shelf. Red Snapper biomass and fecundity estimates were higher for the northwestern GOM than for the northeastern GOM, as the latter area contained mostly smaller, younger individuals. The existence of similar surveys on petroleum platforms and artificial reefs also enabled us to calculate their relative contribution to Red Snapper distribution compared with that of natural habitats. We estimated that for the youngest age‐classes, catch rates were approximately 20 times higher on artificial structures than on natural reefs. Despite the high catch rates observed on artificial structures, they represent only a small fraction of the total area in the northern GOM; thus, we estimated that they held less than 14% of Red Snapper abundance. Because artificial structures—particularly petroleum platforms—attract mostly the youngest individuals, their contribution was even lower in terms of total population biomass (7.8%) or spawning potential (6.4%). Our estimates of Red Snapper relative abundance, biomass, and spawning potential can be used to design spatial management strategies or as inputs to spatial modeling techniques.

show abstract

Environmental conditions and habitat characteristics influence trap and video detection probabilities for reef fish species

Cited by 46 publications

References 35 publications

Dynamic occupancy modeling of temperate marine fish in area‐based closures

Dynamic occupancy modeling of temperate marine fish in area‐based closures

Benthic Habitats, as Derived from Classification of Side‐Scan‐Sonar Mapping Data, Are Important Determinants of Reef‐Fish Assemblage Structure in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico

Red Snapper Distribution on Natural Habitats and Artificial Structures in the Northern Gulf of Mexico

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About