Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries

, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 667–691 | Cite as

Monitoring programs of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico: inventory, development and use of a large monitoring database to map fish and invertebrate spatial distributions

  • Arnaud GrüssEmail author
  • Holly A. Perryman
  • Elizabeth A. Babcock
  • Skyler R. Sagarese
  • James T. Thorson
  • Cameron H. Ainsworth
  • Evan John Anderson
  • Kenneth Brennan
  • Matthew D. Campbell
  • Mary C. Christman
  • Scott Cross
  • Michael D. Drexler
  • J. Marcus Drymon
  • Chris L. Gardner
  • David S. Hanisko
  • Jill Hendon
  • Christopher C. Koenig
  • Matthew Love
  • Fernando Martinez-Andrade
  • Jack Morris
  • Brandi T. Noble
  • Matthew A. Nuttall
  • Jason Osborne
  • Christy Pattengill-Semmens
  • Adam G. Pollack
  • Tracey T. Sutton
  • Theodore S. Switzer


Since the onset of fisheries science, monitoring programs have been implemented to support stock assessments and fisheries management. Here, we take inventory of the monitoring programs of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico (GOM) surveying fish and invertebrates and conduct a gap analysis of these programs. We also compile a large monitoring database encompassing much of the monitoring data collected in the U.S. GOM using random sampling schemes and employ this database to fit statistical models to then map the spatial distributions of 61 fish and invertebrate functional groups, species and life stages of the U.S. GOM. Finally, we provide recommendations for improving current monitoring programs and designing new programs, and guidance for more comprehensive use and sharing of monitoring data, with the ultimate goal of enhancing the inputs provided to stock assessments and ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) projects in the U.S. GOM. Our inventory revealed that 73 fisheries-independent and fisheries-dependent programs have been conducted in the U.S. GOM, most of which (85%) are still active. One distinctive feature of monitoring programs of the U.S. GOM is that they include many fisheries-independent surveys conducted almost year-round, contrasting with most other marine regions. A major sampling recommendation is the development of a coordinated strategy for collecting diet information by existing U.S. GOM monitoring programs for advancing EBFM.


Gap analysis Inventory Large monitoring database Mapping Monitoring programs U.S. Gulf of Mexico 



This work was funded in part by the Florida RESTORE Act Centers of Excellence Research Grants Program, Subagreement No. 2015-01-UM-522. We are grateful to two anonymous reviewers and four NOAA internal reviewers, whose comments have dramatically improved the quality and scope of our manuscript. The PCTRAP, PCVIDEO, GULFSPAN, OBSLL, OBSVL, OBSSHRIMP, OBSGILL, SBLOP and POP data products were produced without the involvement of NOAA Fisheries staff, and NOAA Fisheries is not responsible for the validity of these products. The TRAWL and INBLL data were produced without the involvement of SEAMAP partners. Therefore, SEAMAP and its partners are not responsible for the validity of these products. The FLBAY, FLHAUL, FLOBS, FLPURSE, FLTRAP, FLTRAWL and FLVIDEO data products were produced without the involvement of FWC – FWRI staff, and FWC – FWRI is not responsible for the validity of these products. The ALGILL data products were produced without the involvement of AMRD staff, and AMRD is not responsible for the validity of these products; a portion of the provided data was funded through a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sport Fish Restoration Program grant. The MSGILL and MSHAND data products were produced without the involvement of USM GCRL staff, and USM GCRL staff is not responsible for the validity of these products; the collection of MSGILL data was funded through a collaboration with the Mississippi Department of Marine Resources by a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sport Fish Restoration Program grant. The VL data products from LDWF were produced without the involvement of LDWF staff and, therefore, LDWF is not responsible for the validity of these products. We thank Joel G. Ortega Ortiz for his personal communication. We also thank Alisha Di Leone, Amanda Myers, April Cook, Arietta Venizelos, Beverly Sauls, David Gloeckner, Doug DeVries, Elizabeth Scott-Denton, Joe Tarnecki, Gary Fitzhugh, Gilbert Rowe, Gregg Bray, Jeff Rester, Jeremiah Blondeau, John Carlson, John F. Walter III, John Mareska, Kate Rose, Kelly Fitzpatrick, Kirsten Larsen, Lawrence Beerkircher, Lee Green, Mike Brainard, Mike Harden, Nicole Smith, Ray Mroch, Woody Nero, Rick Burris, Sarah Grasty, Stacey Harter, Steve Turner, Tim MacDonald, Walt Ingram, William Driggers and Kevin Thompson for their help and/or advice at different levels of this study.

Supplementary material

11160_2018_9525_MOESM1_ESM.docx (76 kb)
Online Resource 1 Overview of the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) monitoring programs managed by U.S. agencies. An alias was assigned to each monitoring program. The full name of monitoring programs is given in Table 1. FI = fisheries-independent; FD = fisheries-dependent; Com = commercial; Rec = recreational; FL = Florida; AL = Alabama; MS = Mississippi; LA = Louisiana; TX = Texas. (DOCX 76 kb)
11160_2018_9525_MOESM2_ESM.docx (76 kb)
Online Resource 2 Sampling characteristics and protocols of the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) monitoring programs operated by U.S. institutions. The full name of monitoring programs is given in Table 1. (DOCX 76 kb)
11160_2018_9525_MOESM3_ESM.docx (43 kb)
Online Resource 3 Detailed list of the functional groups, species and life stages considered in the present study. (DOCX 42 kb)
11160_2018_9525_MOESM4_ESM.docx (34 kb)
Online Resource 4 Details of the calculation of Pearson residuals for the samples considered for each functional group/species/life stage/season. (DOCX 34 kb)
11160_2018_9525_MOESM5_ESM.docx (12.4 mb)
Online Resource 5 Results of the application of the large monitoring database. (DOCX 12656 kb)
11160_2018_9525_MOESM6_ESM.docx (16 mb)
Online Resource 6 Annual and seasonal distribution maps produced from the predictions of geostatistical generalized linear mixed models for the functional groups, species and life stages listed in Table 3. (DOCX 16373 kb)
11160_2018_9525_MOESM7_ESM.docx (43 kb)
Online Resource 7 Agenda and list of attendees of the Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Modeling workshop (GOMEMOw). (DOCX 43 kb)


  1. Adams CM, Hernandez E, Cato JC (2004) The economic significance of the Gulf of Mexico related to population, income, employment, minerals, fisheries and shipping. Ocean Coast Manag 47:565–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ainsworth CH, Schirripa MJ, Morzaria-Luna HN (2015) An atlantis ecosystem model for the Gulf of Mexico supporting integrated ecosystem assessment. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-676Google Scholar
  3. Andrews R, Brick JM, Mathiowetz NA (2014) Development and testing of recreational fishing effort surveys. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver SpringGoogle Scholar
  4. Austin M (2007) Species distribution models and ecological theory: a critical assessment and some possible new approaches. Ecol Model 200:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bielsa LM, Murdich WH, Labisky RF (1983) Species profiles: life histories and environmental requirements of coastal fishes and invertebrates (South Florida): pink shrimp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-82/11.17, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, TL EL-82-4, Lafayette, LAGoogle Scholar
  6. Bourdaud P, Travers-Trolet M, Vermard Y et al (2017) Inferring the annual, seasonal, and spatial distributions of marine species from complementary research and commercial vessels’ catch rates. ICES J Mar Sci 74:2415–2426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brock R (2015) Representativeness of marine protected areas of the United States. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Protected Areas Center, Silver Spring, MDGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown SS, Gaston GR, Rakocinski CF, Heard RW (2000) Effects of sediment contaminants and environmental gradients on macrobenthic community trophic structure in Gulf of Mexico estuaries. Estuaries 23:411–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bullock LH, Smith GB (1991) Memoirs of the hourglass cruises: sea basses (Pisces: Serranidae). Florida Marine Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FLGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlson J, Osborne J (2013) Standardized catch rates of bonnetheads from the Everglades National Park Creel Survey. Southeast Data Assessment and Review (SEDAR), SEDAR34-WP-02, North Charleston, SCGoogle Scholar
  11. Chagaris DD (2013) Ecosystem-based evaluation of fishery policies and tradeoffs on the West Florida Shelf. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FLGoogle Scholar
  12. Chagaris DD, Mahmoudi B, Walters CJ, Allen MS (2015) Simulating the trophic impacts of fishery policy options on the West Florida Shelf using Ecopath with Ecosim. Mar Coast Fish 7:44–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chesney EJ, Baltz DM (2001) The effects of hypoxia on the northern Gulf of Mexico coastal ecosystem: a fisheries perspective. In: Rabalais NN, Turner RE (eds) Coastal hypoxia: consequences for living resources and ecosystems. American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, pp 321–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Christensen V, Walters CJ (2011) Progress in the use of ecosystem modeling for fisheries management. In: Christensen V, MacLean J (eds) Ecosystem approaches to fisheries: a global perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 189–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cisneros-Montemayor AM, Cheung WWL, Bodtker K et al (2016) Towards an integrated database on Canadian ocean resources: benefits, current states, and research gaps. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 74:65–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Coleman FC, Koenig CC, Collins LA (1996) Reproductive styles of shallow-water groupers (Pisces: Serranidae) in the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the consequences of fishing spawning aggregations. Environ Biol Fishes 47:129–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Coleman FC, Figueira WF, Ueland JS, Crowder LB (2004) The impact of United States recreational fisheries on marine fish populations. Science 305:1958–1960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Coleman FC, Scanlon KM, Koenig CC (2011) Groupers on the edge: shelf edge spawning habitat in and around marine reserves of the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Prof Geogr 63:456–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Collins AB, Barbieri LR (2010) Behavior, habitat and abundance of the Goliath Grouper, Epinephelus itajara, in the Central Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. Petersburg, FLGoogle Scholar
  20. Conn PB, Thorson JT, Johnson DS (2017) Confronting preferential sampling when analyzing population distributions: diagnosis and model-based triage. Methods Ecol Evol. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Costello TJ, Allen DM (1970) Synopsis of biological data on the pink shrimp Penaeus duorarum duorarum Burkenroad, 1939. FAO Fish Rep 57:1499–1537Google Scholar
  22. Crabtree RE, Bullock LH (1998) Age, growth, and reproduction of black grouper, Mycteroperca bonaci. Fish Bull 96:735–753Google Scholar
  23. Currier R, Kirkpatrick B, Simoniello C et al (2015) iTAG: developing a cloud based, collaborative animal tracking network in the Gulf of Mexico. OCEANS’15 MTS/IEEE WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  24. Drexler M, Ainsworth CH (2013) Generalized additive models used to predict species abundance in the Gulf of Mexico: an ecosystem modeling tool. PLoS ONE 8:e64458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. FAO (2007) Search technology fact sheet: fishing gear types. Accessed 1 June 2017
  26. Frisk MG, Duplisea DE, Trenkel VM (2011) Exploring the abundance–occupancy relationships for the Georges Bank finfish and shellfish community from 1963 to 2006. Ecol Appl 21:227–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Froese R, Pauly D (2015) FishBase. Accessed 1 June 2017
  28. Gallaway BJ, Cole JG, Meyer R, Roscigno P (1999) Delineation of essential habitat for juvenile red snapper in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc 128:713–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gallaway BJ, Szedlmayer ST, Gazey WJ (2009) A life history review for red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico with an evaluation of the importance of offshore petroleum platforms and other artificial reefs. Rev Fish Sci 17:48–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gaston GR, Cleveland CM, Brown SS, Rakocinski CF (1997) Benthic-pelagic coupling in northern Gulf of Mexico estuaries: do benthos feed directly on phytoplankton? Gulf Caribb Res 9:231–237Google Scholar
  31. GCOOS (2016) Gulf of Mexico Coastal Ocean Observing System. Texas A&M University. Accessed 1 June 2017
  32. Giuffre M (1997) Designing research survey design—part one. J Perianesth Nurs 12:275–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Grüss A, Drexler M, Ainsworth CH (2014) Using delta generalized additive models to produce distribution maps for spatially explicit ecosystem models. Fish Res 159:11–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Grüss A, Schirripa MJ, Chagaris D et al (2015) Evaluation of the trophic structure of the West Florida Shelf in the 2000s using the ecosystem model OSMOSE. J Mar Syst 144:30–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Grüss A, Babcock EA, Sagarese SR et al (2016a) Improving the spatial allocation of functional group biomasses in spatially-explicit ecosystem models: insights from three Gulf of Mexico models. Bull Mar Sci 92:473–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Grüss A, Harford WJ, Schirripa MJ et al (2016b) Management strategy evaluation using the individual-based, multispecies modeling approach OSMOSE. Ecol Model 340:86–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Grüss A, Schirripa MJ, Chagaris D et al (2016c) Estimating natural mortality rates and simulating fishing scenarios for Gulf of Mexico red grouper (Epinephelus morio) using the ecosystem model OSMOSE-WFS. J Mar Syst 154:264–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Grüss A, Rose KA, Simons J et al (2017a) Recommendations on the use of ecosystem modeling for informing ecosystem-based fisheries management and restoration outcomes in the Gulf of Mexico. Mar Coast Fish 9:281–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Grüss A, Thorson JT, Sagarese SR et al (2017b) Ontogenetic spatial distributions of red grouper (Epinephelus morio) and gag grouper (Mycteroperca microlepis) in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Fish Res 193:129–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Grüss A, Chagaris DD, Babcock EA, Tarnecki JH (2018a) Assisting ecosystem-based fisheries management efforts using a comprehensive survey database, a large environmental database and generalized additive models. Mar Coast Fish 10:40–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Grüss A, Drexler MD, Ainsworth CH et al (2018b) Producing distribution maps for a spatially-explicit ecosystem model using large monitoring and environmental databases and a combination of interpolation and extrapolation. Front Mar Sci 5:16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Grüss A, Thorson JT, Babcock EA, Tarnecki JH (2018c) Producing distribution maps for informing ecosystem-based fisheries management using a comprehensive survey database and spatio-temporal models. ICES J Mar Sci. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Gunderson DR (1993) Surveys of fisheries resources. Wiley, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  44. Harville DA (1974) Bayesian inference for variance components using only error contrasts. Biometrika 61:383–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ingram GW, Pollack A, McEachron L (2013) Summary of fishery-independent surveys of juvenile gag grouper in the Gulf of Mexico. Southeast Data Assessment and Review (SEDAR), SEDAR33-AW06, North Charleston, SCGoogle Scholar
  46. Karnauskas M, Schirripa MJ, Kelble CR et al (2013a) Ecosystem status report for the Gulf of Mexico. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-653Google Scholar
  47. Karnauskas M, Walter JF, Paris CB (2013b) Use of the Connectivity Modeling System to estimate movements of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) recruits in the northern Gulf of Mexico. SEDAR31-AW10. SEDAR, North Charleston, SC, p 20Google Scholar
  48. Karnauskas M, Kelble CR, Regan S et al (2017) Ecosystem status report update for the Gulf of Mexico. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-706Google Scholar
  49. Kitchenham B, Pfleeger SL (2002) Principles of survey research: part 5: populations and samples. ACM SIGSOFT Softw Eng Notes 27:17–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Koenig CC, Stallings CD (2015) A new compact rotating video system for rapid survey of reef fish populations. Bull Mar Sci 91:365–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Koenig CC, Coleman FC, Kingon K (2011) Pattern of recovery of the goliath grouper Epinephelus itajara population in the southeastern U.S. Bull Mar Sci 87:891–911CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kristensen K, Nielsen A, Berg CW et al (2016) TMB: automatic differentiation and Laplace approximation. J Stat Softw 70:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lassuy DR (1983) Species profiles: life histories and environmental requirements (Gulf of Mexico) Brown Shrimp. Accessed 1 June 2017
  54. Le Pape O, Delavenne J, Vaz S (2014) Quantitative mapping of fish habitat: a useful tool to design spatialised management measures and marine protected area with fishery objectives. Ocean Coast Manag 87:8–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Leathwick JR, Elith J, Hastie T (2006) Comparative performance of generalized additive models and multivariate adaptive regression splines for statistical modelling of species distributions. Ecol Model 199:188–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Link JS (2002) What does ecosystem-based fisheries management mean. Fisheries 27:18–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Link J (2010) Ecosystem-based fisheries management: confronting tradeoffs. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lombardi-Carlson LA, Cook M, Lyon H et al (2012) A description of age, growth, and reproductive life history traits of scamps from the Northern Gulf of Mexico. Mar Coast Fish 4:129–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Lynch PD, Shertzer KW, Latour RJ (2012) Performance of methods used to estimate indices of abundance for highly migratory species. Fish Res 125:27–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Marasco RJ, Goodman D, Grimes CB et al (2007) Ecosystem-based fisheries management: some practical suggestions. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 64:928–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Marchal P, Andersen B, Bromley D et al (2006) Improving the definition of fishing effort for important European fleets by accounting for the skipper effect. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 63:510–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Maunder MN, Punt AE (2004) Standardizing catch and effort data: a review of recent approaches. Fish Res 70:141–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Michener WK (2015) Ecological data sharing. Ecol Inform 29:33–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Miller TJ, Das C, Politis PJ et al (2010) Estimation of Albatross IV to Henry B. Bigelow calibration factors. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Fisheries Science CenterGoogle Scholar
  65. Mitchell KM, Henwood T, Fitzhugh GR, Allman RJ (2004) Distribution, abundance, and age structure of red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) caught on research longlines in U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Gulf Mex Sci 22:164–172Google Scholar
  66. Monk MH, Powers JE, Brooks EN (2015) Spatial patterns in species assemblages associated with the northwestern Gulf of Mexico shrimp trawl fishery. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 519:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Muncy RJ (1984) Species profiles: life histories and environmental requirements of coastal fishes and invertebrates (Gulf of Mexico)—white shrimp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-82/11.27. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, TR EL-82-4, Lafayette, LAGoogle Scholar
  68. NCEI (2017) Gulf of Mexico Data Atlas. Stennis Space Center (MS): National Centers for Environmental Information. Accessed 1 June 2017
  69. Nichols S (2004) Derivation of red snapper time series from SEAMAP and groundfish trawl surveys. Southeast Data Assessment and Review (SEDAR), SEDAR7-DW01, North Charleston, SCGoogle Scholar
  70. O’Farrell H, Grüss A, Sagarese SR et al (2017) Ecosystem modeling in the Gulf of Mexico: current status and future needs to address ecosystem-based fisheries management and restoration activities. Rev Fish Biol Fish 27:587–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Palomares MLD, Pauly D (2015) SeaLifeBase. Accessed 1 June 2017
  72. Patrick WS, Link JS (2015) Myths that continue to impede progress in ecosystem-based fisheries management. Fisheries 40:155–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Patterson WF, Watterson JC, Shipp RL, Cowan JH (2001) Movement of tagged red snapper in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Trans Am Fish Soc 130:533–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Pinsky ML, Worm B, Fogarty MJ et al (2013) Marine taxa track local climate velocities. Science 341:1239–1242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Plagányi ÉE (2007) Models for an ecosystem approach to fisheries. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 477. FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  76. Politis PJ, Galbraith JK, Kostovick P, Brown RW (2014) Northeast fisheries science center bottom trawl survey protocols for the NOAA ship Henry B. Bigelow. U.S. Department of Commerce, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Ref. Doc. 14-06Google Scholar
  77. R Core Development Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for statistical computing, Vienna. Accessed 1 June 2017
  78. Rago PJ (2005) Fishery independent sampling: survey techniques and data analyses. In: Musick JA (ed) Management techniques for elasmobranch fisheries, vol 474. FAO fisheries technical paper. Food & Agriculture Organization, Roma, pp 201–215Google Scholar
  79. Renner IW, Elith J, Baddeley A et al (2015) Point process models for presence-only analysis. Methods Ecol Evol 6:366–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Sagarese SR, Bryan MD, Walter JF et al (2015) Incorporating ecosystem considerations within the stock synthesis integrated assessment model for Gulf of Mexico Red Grouper (Epinephelus morio). Southeast Data Assessment and Review (SEDAR), SEDAR42-RW-01, North Charleston, SCGoogle Scholar
  81. Sanchez-Gil P (2009) Ecologia demersal tropical: Grupos funcionales y patrones de utilization en habitats costeros (sur del Golfo de Mexico). Ph.D. dissertation, Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  82. Schneider JC (2000) Manual of fisheries survey methods II: with periodic updates. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Division Lancing, LansingGoogle Scholar
  83. Scott-Denton E, Cryer PF, Duffy MR et al (2012) Characterization of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic penaeid and rock shrimp fisheries based on observer data. Mar Fish Rev 74:1–27Google Scholar
  84. SEDAR (2009a) Stock assessment of gag in the Gulf of Mexico. Southeast Data Assessment and Review (SEDAR). Update Assessment. Accessed 1 June 2017
  85. SEDAR (2009b) Stock assessment of red grouper in the Gulf of Mexico. Southeast Data Assessment and Review (SEDAR). Update Assessment. Accessed 1 June 2017
  86. SEDAR (2010) Fishery independent sampling: Mississippi. Southeast Data Assessment and Review (SEDAR), SEDAR27-RD-02, North Charleston, SCGoogle Scholar
  87. SEDAR 33 (2014) Gulf of Mexico gag stock assessment report. Accessed 1 June 2017
  88. SEDAR 42 (2015) Gulf of Mexico red grouper, complete stock assessment report. Accessed 1 June 2017
  89. SEFSC (2016) South Florida National Coral Reef Monitoring Program. NOAA. Accessed 1 June 2017
  90. Suprenand PM, Drexler M, Jones DL, Ainsworth CH (2015) Strategic assessment of fisheries independent monitoring programs in the Gulf of Mexico. PLoS ONE 10:e0120929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Szedlmayer ST, Conti J (1999) Nursery habitats, growth rates, and seasonality of age-0 red snapper Lutjanus campechanus, in the northeast Gulf of Mexico. Fish Bull 97:626–635Google Scholar
  92. Szedlmayer ST, Lee JD (2004) Diet shifts of juvenile red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) with changes in habitat and fish size. Fish Bull 102:366–375Google Scholar
  93. Tarnecki JH, Wallace AA, Simons JD, Ainsworth CH (2016) Progression of a Gulf of Mexico food web supporting Atlantis ecosystem model development. Fish Res 179:237–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Thorson JT, Shelton AO, Ward EJ, Skaug HJ (2015) Geostatistical delta-generalized linear mixed models improve precision for estimated abundance indices for West Coast groundfishes. ICES J Mar Sci 72:1297–1310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Thorson JT, Fonner R, Haltuch MA et al (2016) Accounting for spatiotemporal variation and fisher targeting when estimating abundance from multispecies fishery data. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 73:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Thorson JT, Ianelli JN, Kotwicki S (2017) The relative influence of temperature and size-structure on fish distribution shifts: a case-study on Walleye pollock in the Bering Sea. Fish Fish. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Walters C (2003) Folly and fantasy in the analysis of spatial catch rate data. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 60:1433–1436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Wells RJD (2007) The effects of trawling and habitat use on red snapper and the associated community. Ph.D. thesis, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LAGoogle Scholar
  99. Whitlock MC (2011) Data archiving in ecology and evolution: best practices. Trends Ecol Evol 26:61–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arnaud Grüss
    • 1
    Email author
  • Holly A. Perryman
    • 1
  • Elizabeth A. Babcock
    • 1
  • Skyler R. Sagarese
    • 2
  • James T. Thorson
    • 3
  • Cameron H. Ainsworth
    • 4
  • Evan John Anderson
    • 5
  • Kenneth Brennan
    • 6
  • Matthew D. Campbell
    • 7
  • Mary C. Christman
    • 8
  • Scott Cross
    • 9
  • Michael D. Drexler
    • 4
  • J. Marcus Drymon
    • 10
  • Chris L. Gardner
    • 11
  • David S. Hanisko
    • 7
  • Jill Hendon
    • 5
  • Christopher C. Koenig
    • 12
  • Matthew Love
    • 13
  • Fernando Martinez-Andrade
    • 14
  • Jack Morris
    • 15
  • Brandi T. Noble
    • 7
  • Matthew A. Nuttall
    • 1
  • Jason Osborne
    • 16
  • Christy Pattengill-Semmens
    • 17
  • Adam G. Pollack
    • 18
  • Tracey T. Sutton
    • 19
  • Theodore S. Switzer
    • 20
  1. 1.Department of Marine Biology and Ecology, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric ScienceUniversity of MiamiMiamiUSA
  2. 2.National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) - Southeast Fisheries Science CenterMiamiUSA
  3. 3.Fisheries Resource Analysis and Monitoring DivisionNorthwest Fisheries Science CenterSeattleUSA
  4. 4.College of Marine ScienceUniversity of South FloridaSt. PetersburgUSA
  5. 5.Center for Fisheries Research and Development, Gulf Coast Research Laboratory, School of Ocean Science and TechnologyThe University of Southern MississippiOcean SpringsUSA
  6. 6.Southeast Fisheries Science Center - Beaufort LaboratoryNOAA-NMFSBeaufortUSA
  7. 7.Southeast Fisheries Science Center - Mississippi LaboratoriesNOAA-NMFSPascagoulaUSA
  8. 8.MCC Statistical Consulting LLCGainesvilleUSA
  9. 9.Center for Coasts, Oceans, and GeophysicsNOAA National Centers for Environmental InformationCharlestonUSA
  10. 10.Coastal Research and Extension CenterMississippi State UniversityBiloxiUSA
  11. 11.Southeast Fisheries Science Center - Panama City LaboratoryNOAA-NMFSPanama CityUSA
  12. 12.Coastal and Marine LaboratoryFlorida State UniversitySt. TeresaUSA
  13. 13.Ocean Conservancy Gulf Restoration ProgramOcean ConservancyWashingtonUSA
  14. 14.Coastal Fisheries DivisionTexas Parks and Wildlife DepartmentCorpus ChristiUSA
  15. 15.Mote Marine LaboratorySarasotaUSA
  16. 16.South Florida Natural Resources CenterEverglades National ParkHomesteadUSA
  17. 17.Reef Environmental Education Foundation (REEF)Key LargoUSA
  18. 18.Southeast Fisheries Science Center - Mississippi LaboratoriesRiverside Technology, Inc. NOAA-NMFSPascagoulaUSA
  19. 19.Department of Marine and Environmental Sciences, Halmos College of Natural Sciences and OceanographyNova Southeastern UniversityDania BeachUSA
  20. 20.Fish and Wildlife Research InstituteFlorida Fish and Wildlife Conservation CommissionSt. PetersburgUSA

Personalised recommendations