Advertisement

Mathematical Geosciences

, Volume 48, Issue 1, pp 65–77 | Cite as

A Geostatistical Definition of Hotspots for Fish Spatial Distributions

  • Pierre Petitgas
  • Mathieu Woillez
  • Mathieu Doray
  • Jacques Rivoirard
Special Issue

Abstract

Research surveys at sea are undertaken yearly to monitor the distribution and abundance of fish stocks. In the survey data, a small number of high fish concentration values are often encountered, which denote hotspots of interest. But statistically, they are responsible for important uncertainty in the estimation. Thus understanding their spatial predictability given their surroundings is expected to reduce such uncertainty. Indicator variograms and cross-variograms allow to understand the spatial relationship between values above a cutoff and the rest of the distribution under that cutoff. Using these tools, a “top” cutoff can be evidenced above which values are spatially uncorrelated with their lower surroundings. Spatially, the geometric set corresponding to the top cutoff corresponds to biological hotspots, inside which high concentrations are contained. The hotspot areas were mapped using a multivariate kriging model, considering indicators in different years as covariates. The case study considered here is the series of acoustic surveys Pelgas performed in the Bay of Biscay to estimate anchovy and other pelagic fish species. The data represent tonnes of fish by square nautical mile along transects regularly spaced. Top cutoffs were estimated in each year. The areas of such anchovy hotspots are then mapped by co-kriging using all information across the time series. The geostatistical tools were adapted for estimating hotspot habitat maps and their variability, which are key information for the spatial management of fish stocks. Tools used here are generic and will apply in many engineering fields where predicting high concentration values spatially is of interest.

Keywords

Hotspots Indicators Non-linear geostatistics  Multivariate geostatistics Anchovy Biscay 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are thankful to the crew of R/V Thalassa for operating the vessel during the annual surveys and to P. Duhamel, P. Grellier and M. Rabiller technicians at Ifremer for their work with the biological and acoustic data. We would like to thank the reviewers and the editor for their comments which improved the manuscript.

References

  1. Bartolino V, Maiorano L, Colloca F (2011) A frequency distribution approach to hotspot identification. Popul Ecol 53:351–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chilès JP, Delfiner P (2012) Geostatistics: modelling spatial uncertainty, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York, pp 299–385Google Scholar
  3. Desassis N, Renard D (2013) Automatic variogram modeling by iterative least squares: univariate and multivariate cases. Math Geosci 45:453–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Doray M, Masse J, Petitgas P (2010) Pelagic fish stock assessment by acoustic methods at Ifremer. http://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00003/11446/
  5. Lehuta S, Mahevas S, Petitgas P, Pelletier D (2010) Combining sensitivity and uncertainty analysis to evaluate the impact of management measures with ISIS-Fish: marine protected areas for the Bay of Biscay anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) fishery. ICES J Mar Sci 67:1063–1075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Matheron G (1982) La déstructuration des hautes teneurs et le krigeage des indicatrices. Note N-761, Centre de Géostatistique, Fontainebleau, France. cg.ensmp.fr/bibliotheque/public/Google Scholar
  7. Myers N, Mittermeier R, Mittermeier C, da Fonseca G, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Nelson T, Boots B (2008) Detecting spatial hot spots in landscape ecology. Ecography 31:556–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Renard D, Bez N, Desassis N, Beucher H, Ors F, Laporte F (2014) RGeostats: the geostatistical package [version 9.1.10]. MINES ParisTech. Free download from: http://cg.ensmp.fr/rgeostats
  10. Rivoirard J (1994) Introduction to disjunctive kriging and non-linear geostatistics. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  11. Rivoirard J, Demange C, Freulon X, Lécureuil A, Bellot N (2013) A top-cut model for deposits with heavy-tailed grade distribution. Math Geosci 45:967–982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Santora J, Sydeman W, Schroeder I, Wells B, Field J (2011) Mesoscale structure and oceanographic determinants of krill hotspots in the California current: implications for trophic transfer and conservation. Prog Oceanogr 91:397–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Stuart-Smith R, Bates A, Lefchek J, Duffy J et al (2013) Integrating abundance and functional traits reveals new global hotspots. Nature 501:539–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Yasuda T, Yukami R, Ohshimo S (2014) Fishing ground hotspots reveal long-term variation in chub mackerel Scomber japonicus habitat in the East China Sea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 501:239–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association for Mathematical Geosciences 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pierre Petitgas
    • 1
  • Mathieu Woillez
    • 2
  • Mathieu Doray
    • 1
  • Jacques Rivoirard
    • 3
  1. 1.IFREMERResearch Unit EMHNantesFrance
  2. 2.IFREMERResearch Unit STHPlouzanéFrance
  3. 3.MINES ParisTech, Centre for Geosciences and GeoengineeringPSL Research UniversityFontainebleauFrance

Personalised recommendations