Long‐Term Residence of Red Snapper on Artificial Reefs in the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico

Szedlmayer, Stephen T.; Schroepfer, Rebecca L.

doi:10.1577/t04-070.1

Cited by 54 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although other relationships between detection probability (DP) and distance have been previously used (e.g., linear or near-gaussian; Hobday and Pincok 2011;Melnychuck 2012), there is evidence that this relationship is best described by a logistic regression (Szedlmayer and Schroepfer 2005;Melnychuk and Walters 2010;How and de Lestang 2012). R 3.0.1 (R Development Core Team 2011) was used for data processing and statistical analyses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Topography and biological noise determine acoustic detectability on coral reefs

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acoustic telemetry is an increasingly common tool for studying the movement patterns, behaviour, and site fidelity of marine organisms, but to accurately interpret acoustic data, the variability, periodicity and range of detectability between acoustic tags and receivers must be understood. The relative and interactive effects of topography with biological and environmental noise have not been quantified on coral reefs. We conduct two long-term range tests (one and four months duration) on two different reef types in the central Red Sea, to determine the relative effect of distance, depth, topography, time of day, wind, lunar phase, sea surface temperature and thermocline on detection probability. Detectability, as expected, declines with increasing distance between tags and receivers, and we find average detection ranges of 530 and 120 m, using V16 and V13 tags respectively, but the topography of the reef can significantly modify this relationship, reducing the range by ~70%, even when tags and receivers are in line-of-sight. Analyses that assume a relationship between distance and detections must therefore be used with care. Nighttime detection range was consistently reduced in both locations and detections varied by lunar phase in the four month test, suggesting a strong influence of biological noise (reducing detection probability up to 30%), notably more influential than other environmental noises, including wind-driven noise, which is normally considered important in open-water environments. Analysis of detections should be corrected in consideration of the diel patterns we find, and range tests or sentinel tags should be used for more than one month to quantify potential changes due to lunar phase. Some studies assume that the most usual factor limiting detection range is weather-related noise; this cannot be extrapolated to coral reefs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Topography and biological noise determine acoustic detectability on coral reefs

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Through this opening, we inserted the tag into the peritoneal cavity and closed the incision with Monocryl dissolvable sutures using a cutting needle. Equipment and tags were sterilized with Betadine (Szedlmayer and Schroepfer 2005). To reduce stress during surgery, the gills and external body surface were irrigated at all times with estuary water and the measuring board was kept moist.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seasonal Use of a New England Estuary by Foraging Contingents of Migratory Striped Bass

Pautzke¹,

Mather²,

Finn³

et al. 2010

Trans Am Fish Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-Using acoustic telemetry on migratory striped bass Morone saxatilis in Plum Island Estuary (PIE), Massachusetts, we found that striped bass (335-634 mm total length) tagged in the spring and summer Striped bass spent the most time in two specific reaches: middle Plum Island Sound and lower Rowley River. In both years, three different use-groups of striped bass were observed in PIE. Short-term visitors (n ¼ 24) stayed in the estuary only briefly (range ¼ 5-20 d). Two groups of seasonal residents stayed for more than 30 d, either in the Rowley River (n ¼ 14) or in Plum Island Sound (n ¼ 22). Within PIE, the two seasonal-resident use-groups may be foraging contingents that learn how to feed efficiently in specific parts of the estuary. These distinct within-estuary use patterns could have different implications for striped bass condition and prey impact.

show abstract

“…Collection of larger juvenile Red Snapper in the fall seems reasonable because the fish had more time to grow, but as mentioned earlier the greater mean TL during fall may have resulted from the movement of larger Red Snapper onto the artificial reefs during our study. Szedlmayer and Schroepfer (2005) found that Red Snapper were resident on artificial reefs for several seasons, and those authors did not detect any seasonal migration away from their study reefs; however, various other studies have shown probable seasonal movements of Red Snapper. Wells (2007) found that seasonal size differences at specific reef habitats were likely a result of seasonal emigration and immigration of different size-groups of Red Snapper.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…Watterson et al (1998) and Patterson et al (2001b) found greater dispersal of tagged adult Red Snapper at large during hurricanes, although studies by Szedlmayer and Schroepfer (2005) and Topping and Szedlmayer (2011b) indicated that the extent of hurricane-caused dispersal was related to reef size, with larger reef structures having lower dispersal of fish. Turpin and Bortone (2002) found a greater abundance of larger Red Snapper on study reefs after Hurricane Erin and Hurricane Opal; this result may have been attributable to (1) inshore movement of larger Red Snapper after the disturbances or (2) displacement and mortality of smaller individuals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Various studies have examined Red Snapper movement, with some showing extensive long-range (265-352-km) movements of adults (Watterson et al 1998;Patterson et al 2001b), although the occurrence of hurricanes may have played a role in the distances traveled by tagged fish. Other studies suggest that Red Snapper show fidelity to structures such as artificial reefs and exhibit limited movement once they have recruited to those structures (Szedlmayer and Schroepfer 2005;Diamond et al 2007;Topping and Szedlmayer 2011a). Knowledge of the smallscale movements of Red Snapper in proximity to reef structures, however, may be necessary to understand the importance of reef spacing in terms of management objectives.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influences of Artificial Reefs on Juvenile Red Snapper along the Mississippi Gulf Coast

Brandt

Jackson

2013

Mar Coast Fish

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Red Snapper Lutjanus campechanus represent one of the more economically important fisheries in the northern Gulf of Mexico; as such, Red Snapper abundance has decreased dramatically in the past two decades. The use of artificial reefs could aid in the rehabilitation of Red Snapper stocks by providing refuge for juveniles and a place of foraging and recruitment. A study was initiated to determine the effectiveness of different artificial reef distribution patterns in attracting and sustaining juvenile Red Snapper in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Fish traps (0.97 m long; 0.64 m high; funnel mouth size = 175×115 mm) were used to collect Red Snapper (<406 mm TL) that were associated with pyramid‐shaped artificial reef structures (3.7‐m triangular base; 2.4‐m height; 3.2 metric tons) to evaluate two reef distribution designs: (1) five closely spaced pyramid units (“clumped” pattern) and (2) five closely spaced pyramids plus two sets of two pyramids at 30.5, 61.0, or 91.5 m from the five pyramids (“outlier” pattern). In 26 sampling trips, 927 Red Snapper were captured. Catch per unit effort (number of fish/trap soak‐hour) did not differ significantly among artificial reef patterns (P = 0.396). Red Snapper TLs differed significantly among patterns (P = 0.005), with the largest mean TL (235 mm; SE = 5.14) occurring at the outlier pattern with 61.0‐m spacing. Results from this study indicate that reef spacing and horizontal extension are important factors to consider when designing an artificial reef program, especially those that target juvenile Red Snapper.Received February 2, 2012; accepted September 26, 2012

show abstract

Long‐Term Residence of Red Snapper on Artificial Reefs in the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico

Cited by 54 publications

References 18 publications

Topography and biological noise determine acoustic detectability on coral reefs

Topography and biological noise determine acoustic detectability on coral reefs

Seasonal Use of a New England Estuary by Foraging Contingents of Migratory Striped Bass

Influences of Artificial Reefs on Juvenile Red Snapper along the Mississippi Gulf Coast

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About