Stability and precision of the fish metrics obtained using CEN multi-mesh gillnets in natural and artificial lakes in France

Deceliere-Vergès, C.; Argillier, Christine; Lanoiselée, Cédric; Bortoli, Julien De; Guillard, Jean

doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2009.04.012

Cited by 26 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1995), and the criterion for maximum fish depth was not evaluated for deep alpine lakes. Depth distribution analyses using hydroacoustic and gillnet data indicated that the depth zone below 75 m was nearly devoid of fish, which is consistent with results elsewhere (Deceliere‐Vergès et al. 2009).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Comparison of three standardised fish sampling methods in 14 alpine lakes in Austria

Achleitner

Gassner

Luger

2012

Fisheries Management Eco

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standardised fishing methods using gillnets (EN 14575), electric fishing (EN 14011) and hydroacoustics (WI 00230244 CEN enquiry) to estimate species composition, abundance, biomass and size distribution were compared in 14 alpine lakes >50 ha. More fish species were detected using benthic gillnets (mean = 72.7%) than electric fishing (mean = 59.5%) and pelagic gillnets (mean = 29.6%). For all but two lakes, additional information from a local fisheries manager was required to obtain a complete list of species. Biomass data generated by standardised gillnetting and hydroacoustic surveys were not fully comparable, but a positive correlation was found. Gill netting and hydroacoustics both indicated a nearly fishless habitat below 75 m, which confirmed the maximum required fishing depth according to the European Standard EN 14757. Size distributions obtained from gillnet and hydroacoustic surveys differed statistically for large fish (>40 cm). Each standardised method reflected typical shortcomings. The European standard (EN 14757) should be amended for pelagic fish habitat in deep alpine lakes to include sampling effort corresponding to water volume, and additional gillnets with larger mesh sizes (e.g. 70 mm). Furthermore, the electric fishing standard (EN 14011) should be extended to incorporate requirements of lake fish sampling.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Comparison of three standardised fish sampling methods in 14 alpine lakes in Austria

Achleitner

Gassner

Luger

2012

Fisheries Management Eco

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, these studies compared fish catches by gillnets with hydroacoustically obtained fish densities in single lakes where fish catches between individual nets can be highly variable both horizontally (area) and vertically (depth) (Prchalová et al. , 2009a; Deceliere‐Vergès et al. , 2009) or they sampled fish assemblages by different gears at different seasons where different fish assemblages might be sampled by both gears (Winfield, Fletcher & James, 2007; Bobori & Salvarina, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, although the power of the statistical correlation was reduced for these analyses owing to the smaller sample sizes (12 and 6 lakes, respectively), we suggest that the weaker correspondence was primarily the result of less precise biomass estimates of pelagically living fish from benthic gillnets ( cf . Deceliere‐Vergès et al. , 2009; Achleitner et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to the results of earlier studies, correspondence of fish abundance estimates between gillnets and hydroacoustics generally seemed weak (Peltonen et al, 1999;Dennerline et al, 2012), particularly in deep lakes (Jurvelius et al, 2011;Achleitner et al, 2012). However, these studies compared fish catches by gillnets with hydroacoustically obtained fish densities in single lakes where fish catches between individual nets can be highly variable both horizontally (area) and vertically (depth) (Prchalová et al, 2009a;Deceliere-Vergès et al, 2009) or they sampled fish assemblages by different gears at different seasons where different fish assemblages might be sampled by both gears (Winfield, Fletcher & James, 2007;Bobori & Salvarina, 2010). Therefore, combination of data from several gillnets and hydroacoustic transects sampled at short time intervals and by considering the entire lake as a sample unit, as in our study, reduces the effect of high temporal and spatial variability of fish samplings and thus substantially improves between-lake comparability.…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Strong correspondence between gillnet catch per unit effort and hydroacoustically derived fish biomass in stratified lakes

Emmrich

Winfield

Guillard³

et al. 2012

Freshwater Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The NERC and CEH trademarks and logos ('the Trademarks') are registered trademarks of NERC in the UK and other countries, and may not be used without the prior written consent of the Trademark owner. e-mail: emmrich@igb-berlin.de 2 Summary 1) Sampling of lake fish assemblages is a challenging task in fish science and the information obtained strongly depends on the choice of sampling gear. The use of more than one sampling technique is generally preferred in order to achieve a comprehensive view on fish assemblage structure. Therefore, knowledge of whether catches between fishing gears are comparable is crucial.2) We compared catches in benthic multi-mesh gillnets with fish biomass estimates obtained by vertical hydroacoustics in 18 European lakes strongly varying in morphometry and trophic status. Separate analyses were conducted for different depth strata and for several fish-length thresholds to account for depth-and sizeselective gillnet catches.3) Gillnet catches and hydroacoustically obtained fish biomass estimates were significantly correlated. The strength of correlations was independent of the fishlength thresholds applied, but varied across different depth strata of the lakes, with the strongest correlations occurring in the shallow strata.4) The results support the applicability of vertical hydroacoustics for the quantification of fish biomass in stratified lakes. Survey designs combining hydroacoustics with limited gillnetting at sampling dates shortly one after the other, the latter for the purpose of inventory sampling only, are a cost-effective strategy for sampling fish assemblages in lakes. However, gillnet sampling does not provide reliable fish density estimates in very deep lakes with separate, pelagic-dwelling fish assemblages.

show abstract

“…With the globalization of research programs (e.g. the formation of the European Union Water Framework Directive), increasing attention has been turned to issues like the comparability of fish stock estimates over a wide range of habitats, and extended spatial and temporal scales (Holmgren and Appelberg, 2000;Mehner et al, 2005;Lauridsen et al, 2008;Deceliere-Vergés et al, 2009;Erős et al, 2009a), and the comparability of results among sampling gears (Jackson and Harvey, 1997;Olin and Malinen, 2003;Erős et al, 2009b;Winfield et al, 2009;Emmrich et al, 2010). In standing freshwaters, sampling by gillnetting is the most widely used technique to collect fish assemblage data.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between horizontal hydroacoustic stock estimates and gillnet catches of surface-oriented fish in shallow Lake Balaton (Hungary)

György

Tátrai

Specziár

2012

Knowl. Managt. Aquatic Ecosyst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key-words:gillnet, side-looking hydroacoustics, comparability of data, Alburnus alburnus, shallow lakeWe examined whether gillnetting and hydroacoustics provide comparable relative fish density and fish size distribution estimates in the uppermost water layer of a shallow turbid lake and whether the inclusion of environmental and stock parameters could improve comparability of data between different gears. According to gillnetting, most fish shorter than 14 cm in total length were Alburnus alburnus, and most fish longer than 14 cm were Pelecus cultratus. Size distributions and median sizes obtained from gillnetting and acoustics differed. Pure acoustics-derived density estimates accounted for only <8.8% of the variation in the gillnet catch by number and no correlation was found in biomass indices. Most variances observed in the gillnet catch-per-unit-effort data were associated with water transparency, none of the other investigated variables had significant explanatory power. We conclude that the feasibility of establishing a powerful model describing the relationship between fish density estimates of gillnetting and acoustics is low in shallow and turbid habitats, and it might be successful only if the crucial sampling and environmental parameters affecting catch efficiency of gillnets and post-processing of acoustic data are considered. This study cautions again that gillnetting should be used carefully to analyse trends of fish abundance. RÉSUMÉRelation entre les estimations horizontales hydroacoustiques du stock et les captures au filet maillant de poissons de surface en eaux peu profondes du lac Balaton (Hongrie) Mots-clés :filet maillant, hydroacoustique latérale, comparabilité des données, Alburnus alburnus, lac peu profond Nous avons examiné si les filets maillants et l'hydroacoustique fournissent des données comparables de la densité des poissons et des estimations de distribution en taille des poissons dans la couche d'eau supérieure d'un lac peu profond trouble et si l'inclusion de paramètres environnementaux et du stock de poissons pourrait améliorer la comparabilité des données entre les différents engins. Selon la pêche au filet maillant, la plupart des poissons de longueur totale inférieure à 14 cm étaient Alburnus alburnus, et la plupart des poissons de plus de 14 cm étaient Pelecus cultratus. Les distributions de taille et les tailles médianes obtenues à partir des filets maillants et de l'acoustique sont différentes. Les estimations dérivées de la seule densité acoustique ne représentaient que moins de 8,8 % de la variation des captures au filet maillant en nombre et aucune corrélation

show abstract

Stability and precision of the fish metrics obtained using CEN multi-mesh gillnets in natural and artificial lakes in France

Cited by 26 publications

References 31 publications

Comparison of three standardised fish sampling methods in 14 alpine lakes in Austria

Comparison of three standardised fish sampling methods in 14 alpine lakes in Austria

Strong correspondence between gillnet catch per unit effort and hydroacoustically derived fish biomass in stratified lakes

Relationship between horizontal hydroacoustic stock estimates and gillnet catches of surface-oriented fish in shallow Lake Balaton (Hungary)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About