Estimating common whelk (Buccinum undatum) abundance using baited remote underwater video (BRUV)
Rattachement africain : gb. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Baited static gear fisheries targeting benthic invertebrates have expanded at a global scale. While improvements have been made in the monitoring and management of these fisheries, reliable survey methods for stock assessments of many key species are lacking. In this study we examine the viability of a baited remote underwater video (BRUV) system for obtaining abundance indices for a data-limited stock (common whelk, Buccinum undatum), and compare this method to catch per unit effort (CPUE) from commercial fishing. BRUVs capable of collecting 15 hours of timelapse footage were deployed on pot strings in two distinct whelk fishing sites, with replication over a spring-neap tidal cycle. Three potential BRUV metrics—the maximum (MaxN) and mean (MeanN) abundance and time of first arrival (T1)—were calculated for each deployment, and significant linear relationships were identified between MaxN, MeanN, and CPUE across sites. Temporal variability in BRUV indices driven by tidal dynamics was minimal, although results suggest high current speeds may reduce abundance estimates, and a potential method for predicting density on the seabed using arrival rates is also demonstrated. BRUVs are a valuable tool in developing stock assessment surveys for static gear fisheries.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé, mais le titre doit être comparé manuellement.
- Titre Crossref
- Estimating common whelk (<i>Buccinum undatum</i>) abundance using baited remote underwater video (BRUV)
- Date Crossref
- 11/09/2024
- Éditeur
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.