ReviewAmbio2017
Shark recreational fisheries: Status, challenges, and research needs.
Review in Ambio, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Incorporation of human-wildlife interactions in ecosystem-based management to enhance conservation of endangered guitarfish.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2024Article
- A review of elasmobranch catch-and-release science: synthesis of current knowledge, implications for best practice and future research directions.Conservation physiology · 2023Article
- Benthic animal-borne sensors and citizen science combine to validate ocean modelling.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Defining distribution and habitat use of west-central Florida's coastal sharks through a research and education program.Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Article
- From sea monsters to charismatic megafauna: Changes in perception and use of large marine animals.PloS one · 2019Review
- Article
- Decline of coastal apex shark populations over the past half century.Communications biology · 2018Article
- Tiger sharks can connect equatorial habitats and fisheries across the Atlantic Ocean basin.PloS one · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For centuries, the primary manner in which humans have interacted with sharks has been fishing. A combination of their slow-growing nature and high use-values have resulted in population declines for many species around the world, and to date the vast majority of fisheries-related work on sharks has focused on the commercial sector. Shark recreational fishing remains an overlooked area of research despite the fact that these practices are popular globally and could present challenges to their populations. Here we provide a topical overview of shark recreational fisheries, highlighting their history and current status. While recreational fishing can provide conservation benefits under certain circumstances, we focus our discourse on the relatively understudied, potentially detrimental impacts these activities may have on shark physiology, behavior, and fitness. We took this angle given the realized but potentially underestimated significance of recreational fishing for shark conservation management plans and stock assessments, in hopes of creating a dialogue around sustainability. We also present a series of broad and focused research questions and underpin areas of future research need to assist with the development of this emergent area of research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.