ArticleEcology and evolution2022
From spawner habitat selection to stock-recruitment: Implications for assessment.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- From spawner habitat selection to stock-recruitment: Implications for assessment.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The relationship between the spawning stock size and subsequent number of recruits is a central concept in fisheries ecology. The influence of habitat selection of spawning individuals on the stock-recruitment relationship is poorly known. Here we explore how each of four different spawner behaviors might influence the stock-recruitment relationship and estimates of its parameters in the two most commonly used stock-recruitment functions (Beverton-Holt and Ricker). Using simulated stock-recruitment data generated by four different spawner behaviors applied to multiple discrete habitats, we show that when spawners were distributed proportionally to local carrying capacities, there was small or no bias in estimated recruitment and stock-recruitment parameters. For an ideal free distribution of spawners, larger bias in the estimates of recruitment and stock-recruitment parameters was obtained, whereas a random and a stepwise spawner behavior introduced the largest bias. Using stock-recruitment data corresponding to a "realistic" range of population densities and adding measurement error (20%-60%) to the simulated stock-recruitment data generated larger variation in the estimation bias than what was introduced by the spawner behavior. Thus, for exploited stocks at low population density and where spawning stock size and recruitment cannot be observed perfectly, partial observation of the possible spawner abundance range and measurement error might be of higher concern for management.
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.