Movements of lingcod (<i>Ophiodon elongatus</i>) in southeast Alaska: potential for increased conservation and yield from marine reserves

Starr, Richard M.; O'Connell, Victoria; Ralston, Stephen

doi:10.1139/f04-054

Cited by 46 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Within seasons, lingcod used fairly small home ranges for periods of several months. However, some individuals appear to make excursions from these localized areas for periods of up to a month after which they may disperse to new locations or return to their original home range (this study, Jagielo 1990, Starr et al 2004). How common this type of behavior is has relevance for determining how much spillover (or just general movement out of reserves) may occur.…”

Section: Individual Behavior and Mpa Designmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…For example mark-recapture studies have shown that over the course of several years most lingcod will remain within approximately 8 km of their original tagging site, although some will move 50 km or more (Matthews et al 1986, Jagielo 1990, Smith et al 1990, and there may be an overall positive dispersal rate (Smith et al 1990). Acoustic studies have found that lingcod may leave a particular reef occasionally, but will generally return within 14 d (Starr et al 2004). Those that are experimentally displaced short distances (several km) generally return to their site of capture (Matthews 1992).…”

Section: Home Range Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

“…At a smaller scale, fish have home ranges between 2000 to 3000 m 2 on average and may make diel movements within these home ranges (present study). Lingcod disappear from these fairly confined home ranges for periods of several weeks (Starr et al 2004), and they may disperse to new locations (Jagielo 1990, Starr et al 2004. Thus their total space use may be quite large over the long term, and the design of a network of MPAs should take into account both the size of individual reserves as well as the distance between them if lingcod management or conservation is one of the primary aims.…”

Section: Home Range Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lingcod are found from the Gulf of Alaska to Baja California from the intertidal to 475 m depth (Allen & Smith 1988). Lingcod are generally resident on rocky reefs but do occasionally leave specific sites for periods of up to 2 wk (Starr et al 2004). They can disperse more than 50 km over the course of several years, although most stay within 8 km of their initial tagging site (Jagielo 1990).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Home range size and patterns of space use by lingcod, copper rockfish and quillback rockfish in relation to diel and tidal cycles

Tolimieri¹,

Andrews²,

Williams³

et al. 2009

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The estimation of home range size of marine fish has received attention because of its application to the design of marine reserves. How individuals use space may also be important to the management of the species and for understanding behavioral processes like optimal foraging or territoriality. We used an acoustic tracking system (VRAP) to examine patterns in home range size and movement behavior for 3 demersal fishes in Puget Sound: lingcod Ophiodon elongatus, copper rockfish Sebastes caurinus and quillback rockfish S. maliger. Data were collected over 8 wk in the summer of 2006 and 3 wk in the winter of 2007. Home ranges were relatively small (~1500 to 2500 m 2 ) and did not differ among species. During the summer, lingcod had larger home ranges during the day than at night. Movement in all 3 species was in some way related to diel and tidal cycles, although individuals within species differed, and there was no general pattern. About half of the lingcod used portions of their home ranges only during the day and on the flood tide. Other individuals made similar movements on the ebb tide. Some copper rockfish moved to specific areas of their home range on the day ebb tide, while others made these movements on the night flood tide; others showed no pattern. Similar results were seen for quillback rockfish. While the arena of resource management often requires us to simplify complex systems, our results illustrate that such simplification may be difficult, and will depend ultimately on detailed behavioral data.

show abstract

Section: Individual Behavior and Mpa Designmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Home Range Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Home Range Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Home range size and patterns of space use by lingcod, copper rockfish and quillback rockfish in relation to diel and tidal cycles

Tolimieri¹,

Andrews²,

Williams³

et al. 2009

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The species-specific landings post-/pre-MPA establishment were regressed against their dispersal potential. Dispersal potential of each species was retrieved from the following published studies: Semicossyphus pulcher and Caulolatilus princeps from Kinlan and Gaines (2003); Atractoscion nobilis from Hervas et al (2010), Ophiodon elongatus from Starr et al (2004), and Paralicthys californicus from López-Duarte et al (2012). In order to investigate the ratio of fish biomass inside and outside MPAs after the establishment of MPAs, the density (number of fish per 100 m 2 ) of three targeted fish species was retrieved at the same time snapshot inside and outside MPAs and regressed against the species' dispersal potential.…”

Section: Model Validation -Confronting Model Outputs With Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of marine protected areas over time and species' dispersal potential: a quantitative conservation conflict attempt

Moustakas¹

2016

Web Ecol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Protected areas are an important conservation measure. However, there are controversial findings regarding whether closed areas are beneficial for species and habitat conservation as well as for harvesting. Species dispersal is acknowledged as a key factor for the design and impacts of protected areas. A series of agent-based models using random diffusion to model fish dispersal were run before and after habitat protection. All results were normalized without the protected habitat in each scenario to detect the relative difference after protecting an area, all else being equal. Model outputs were compared with published data regarding the impacts over time of MPAs on fish biomass. In addition, data on species' dispersal potential in terms of kilometres per year are compared with model outputs. Results show that fish landings of species with short dispersal rates will take longer to reach the levels from before the Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) were established than landings of species with long dispersal rates. Further, the establishment of an MPA generates a higher relative population source within the MPA for species with low dispersal abilities than for species with high dispersal abilities. Results derived here show that there exists a feasible win-win scenario that maximizes both fish biomass and fish catches.

show abstract

Habitat‐dependent movement rate can determine the efficacy of marine protected areas

Jiao

Pilyugin

Riotte‐Lambert

et al. 2018

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theoretical studies of marine protected areas (MPAs) suggest that more mobile species should exhibit reduced local effects (defined as the ratio of the density inside vs. outside of the MPA). However, empirical studies have not supported the expected negative relationship between the local effect and mobility. We propose that differential, habitat-dependent movement (i.e., a higher movement rate in the fishing grounds than in the MPA) might explain the disparity between theoretical expectations and empirical results. We evaluate this hypothesis by building two-patch box and stepping-stone models and show that increasing disparity in the habitat-specific movement rates shifts the relationship between the local effect and mobility from negative (the previous theoretical results) to neutral or positive (the empirical pattern). This shift from negative to positive occurs when differential movement offsets recruitment and mortality differences between the two habitats. Thus, local effects of MPAs might be caused by behavioral responses via differential movement rather than by, or in addition to, reductions in mortality. In addition, the benefits of MPAs, in terms of regional abundance and fishing yields, can be altered by the magnitude of differential movement. Thus, our study points to a need for empirical investigations that disentangle the interactions among mobility, differential movement, and protection.

show abstract

Movements of lingcod (Ophiodon elongatus) in southeast Alaska: potential for increased conservation and yield from marine reserves

Cited by 46 publications

References 18 publications

Home range size and patterns of space use by lingcod, copper rockfish and quillback rockfish in relation to diel and tidal cycles

Home range size and patterns of space use by lingcod, copper rockfish and quillback rockfish in relation to diel and tidal cycles

The effects of marine protected areas over time and species' dispersal potential: a quantitative conservation conflict attempt

Habitat‐dependent movement rate can determine the efficacy of marine protected areas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About