2008
DOI: 10.1007/s10750-008-9349-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mixed stock analysis and the power of different classes of molecular markers in discriminating coastal and oceanic Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua L.) on the Lofoten spawning grounds, Northern Norway

Abstract: Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) encompasses many different populations or stocks, which in part are managed separately. In the northeast Atlantic cod is divided into two main management units; northeast Arctic cod and coastal cod. These two groups have traditionally been separated by otolith classification. In this study, the power of different classes of genetic markers in separating the two cod groups was investigated. The variation in thirteen genetic markers, including allozymes, haemoglobin, the scDNA locus P… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
18
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 77 publications
(100 reference statements)
2
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…1 and Table 1). Samples representing stationary ecotypes, named 'coastal cod' or 'stationary cod' in Iceland and 'Norwegian coastal cod' in Norway, and migratory ecotypes, named 'frontal cod' or 'migratory cod' in Iceland and 'Northeast Arctic cod' in Norway, were collected from spawning grounds from Iceland and Norway, and individuals were assigned to ecotype based on sampling location and depth (Iceland) and ear bone (otolith) morphology [Norway, see also Wennevik et al (2008)]. In Iceland, samples were collected in inshore waters (depth: 58 m), known to be mainly inhabited by the stationary ecotype, and from a deeper offshore location (depth: 135 m), where the migratory ecotype has been suggested to predominate (Pampoulie et al 2006(Pampoulie et al , 2008a.…”
Section: Samplingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…1 and Table 1). Samples representing stationary ecotypes, named 'coastal cod' or 'stationary cod' in Iceland and 'Norwegian coastal cod' in Norway, and migratory ecotypes, named 'frontal cod' or 'migratory cod' in Iceland and 'Northeast Arctic cod' in Norway, were collected from spawning grounds from Iceland and Norway, and individuals were assigned to ecotype based on sampling location and depth (Iceland) and ear bone (otolith) morphology [Norway, see also Wennevik et al (2008)]. In Iceland, samples were collected in inshore waters (depth: 58 m), known to be mainly inhabited by the stationary ecotype, and from a deeper offshore location (depth: 135 m), where the migratory ecotype has been suggested to predominate (Pampoulie et al 2006(Pampoulie et al , 2008a.…”
Section: Samplingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Individuals displaying an intermediate type of behaviour have been identified through electronic tagging of fish in the wild (Grabowski et al 2011), suggesting that hybridization may occur in nature, but the degree of interbreeding and level of gene flow between ecotypes is presently unknown. Traditionally, morphological characters, such as ear bone (otolith) structures, and single gene markers, such as the membrane protein gene pantophysin (Pan I), have been used to designate individuals as either migratory or stationary (Berg & Albert 2003;Pampoulie et al 2008a;Wennevik et al 2008). Recently, population genetic work has provided some molecular evidence for adaptive divergence between the ecotypes from Norway (Moen et al 2008;Nielsen et al 2009b), and the finding of consistent migratory profiles over consecutive years for individual fish has suggested a genetic basis for ecotypic divergence in Iceland (Thorsteinsson et al 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although assessed separately, the NCC is managed as part of the Norwegian NEAC fishery. A large part of the Norwegian cod fishery is targeting the spawning components of the NEAC during spring (Nakken et al 1996), which results in catches of mixed stocks (Wennevik et al 2008). The management takes this into account by adding an expected yield of 20 000 tons of NCC to the TAC of the NEAC.…”
Section: Codmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For marine species the relative proportion of different cod populations mixing in overwintering areas in the NW Atlantic was estimated by Ruzzante et al (2000a). Here not only the proportion of the various cod populations could be estimated but also the temporal stability of this structuring was demonstrated over a 2-year period (see also Ruzzante et al 2006;Bekkevold et al 2007;Wennevik et al 2008). Therefore, it seems possible that fisheries management could be designed around the spatial and temporal population structure within the separated spawning grounds and the areas where populations are mixed (Ruzzante et al 2000a;ICES, 2005c).…”
Section: Spatial Mismatch -Implications For Fisheries Managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The classification or assignment of individuals from potential mixed stocks to their population of origin remains a challenge in fisheries management, although both individual assignment (e.g., the STRUCTURE approach) and mixedstocks analysis (e.g., BAYES) have been intensively used in this context Wennevik et al 2008). The challenge comes from the fact that both methods crucially depend on the number of baseline populations (i.e., populations potentially contributing to the mixed aggregations), the number of individuals sampled from each of them, the variability and number of loci used, and ultimately the level and temporal stability of the genetic differentiation among the baseline populations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%