Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40301642›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Pot losses and associated implications in Barents sea snow crab fishery.

Kristine Cerbule, Roger B Larsen, Astrīda Rijkure

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Kristine CerbuleSchool of Energy, Geoscience, Infrastructure and Society, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK.
Roger B LarsenUiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway. roger.larsen@uit.no.
Astrīda RijkureRiga Technical University, Riga, Latvia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio) is considered an invasive species in the Barents Sea, with the first observations dating back to 1996. The Norwegian commercial snow crab fishery started in 2012. In this fishery conical baited pots are adopted, similar to fisheries in other areas that target snow crabs. Over the last decade, different management measures have been implemented to ensure sustainability in this relatively new fishery. One central challenge is pot loss during deployment caused by challenging weather and operational conditions. Lost snow crab pots exhibit considerable potential for the continuous capture of crabs, so-called ghost fishing, which has been documented during lost gear retrieval and experimental trials. This study accounted for different snow crab pot loss scenarios and associated economic implications. The results show that given the substantial number of pots on snow crab fishing vessels, even small variations in pot loss rates (pot losses ranging from 0.5 to 3.0%) could result in considerable differences in ghost fishing amounts and the associated environmental and economic effects. The estimated amounts of ghost fishing in this study ranged from 11.5 to nearly 70 tonnes of ghost-fished crabs over a 3-year period, assuming 0.5-3.0% pot loss scenarios, resulting in significant differences in the amount of ghost-fished snow crabs and the value of the ghost fishing catch. These results highlight the importance of incentives and technical measures that can reduce pot losses and the associated ghost fishing time.

Indexed as

BrachyuraConservation of Natural ResourcesFisheriesAnimalsIntroduced SpeciesNorwayOceans and SeasAbandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gearGhost fishingSnow crab

Identifiers

PMID40301642
PMCPMC12041486

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.