Acta Oceanologica Sinica

, Volume 37, Issue 2, pp 94–101 | Cite as

A stock assessment for Illex argentinus in Southwest Atlantic using an environmentally dependent surplus production model

  • Jintao Wang
  • Xinjun Chen
  • Kevin W. Staples
  • Yong Chen
Article
  • 2 Downloads

Abstract

The southern Patagonian stock (SPS) of Argentinian shortfin squid, Illex argentinus, is an economically important squid fishery in the Southwest Atlantic. Environmental conditions in the region play an important role in regulating the population dynamics of the I. argentinus population. This study develops an environmentally dependent surplus production (EDSP) model to evaluate the stock abundance of I. argentines during the period of 2000 to 2010. The environmental factors (favorable spawning habitat areas with sea surface temperature of 16–18°C) were assumed to be closely associated with carrying capacity (K) in the EDSP model. Deviance Information Criterion (DIC) values suggest that the estimated EDSP model with environmental factors fits the data better than a Schaefer surplus model without environmental factors under uniform and normal scenarios. The EDSP model estimated a maximum sustainable yield (MSY) from 351 600 t to 685 100 t and a biomass from 1 322 400 t to 1 803 000 t. The fishing mortality coefficient of I. argentinus from 2000 to 2010 was smaller than the values of F0.1 and F MSY . Furthermore, the time series biomass plot of I. argentinus from 2000 to 2010 shows that the biomass of I. argentinus and this fishery were in a good state and not presently experiencing overfishing. This study suggests that the environmental conditions of the habitat should be considered within squid stock assessment and management.

Keywords

Illex argentinus stock assessment Schaefer surplus production model environmental factors Southwest Atlantic 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Chinese distant-water Squid Jigging Technical Group for providing fishery data and information, and NOAA for providing environmental data used in this paper.

References

  1. Adkison M D, Peterman R M. 1996. Results of Bayesian methods depend on details of implementation: an example of estimating salmon escapement goals. Fisheries Research, 25(2): 155–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agnew D J, Beddington J R, Hill S L. 2002. The potential use of environmental information to manage squid stocks. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 59(12): 1851–1857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson C I H, Rodhouse P G. 2001. Life cycles, oceanography and variability: ommastrephid squid in variable oceanographic environments. Fisheries Research, 54(1): 133–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arkhipkin A. 1993. Age, growth, stock structure and migratory rate of pre-spawning short-finned squid Illex argentinus based on statolith ageing investigations. Fisheries Research, 16(4): 313–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arkhipkin A I. 2000. Intrapopulation structure of winter-spawned Argentine shortfin squid, Illex argentinus (Cephalopoda, Ommastrephidae), during its feeding period over the Patagonian Shelf. Fishery Bulletin, 98(1): 1–13Google Scholar
  6. Arkhipkin A, Laptikhovsky V. 1994. Seasonal and interannual variability in growth and maturation of winter-spawning Illex argentinus (Cephalopoda, Ommastrephidae) in the Southwest Atlantic. Aquatic Living Resources, 7(4): 221–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Basson M, Beddington J R, Crombie J A, et al. 1996. Assessment and management techniques for migratory annual squid stocks: the Illex argentinus fishery in the Southwest Atlantic as an example. Fisheries Research, 28(1): 3–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bazzino G, Quiñones R A, Norbis W. 2005. Environmental associations of shortfin squid Illex argentinus (Cephalopoda: Ommastrephidae) in the Northern Patagonian Shelf. Fisheries Research, 76(3): 401–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berger J O, Moreno E, Pericchi L R, et al. 1994. An overview of robust Bayesian analysis. Test, 3(1): 5–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bigelow K A, Boggs C H, He X. 1999. Environmental effects on swordfish and blue shark catch rates in the US North Pacific longline fishery. Fisheries Oceanography, 8(3): 178–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boyle P R. 1987. Cephalopod Life Cycles, Vol. II, Comparative Reviews. London: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  12. Brunetti N E, Ivanovic M, Rossi G, et al. 1998. Fishery biology and life history of Illex argentinus. In: Okutani T, ed. Contributed Papers to International Symposium on Large Pelagic Squids. Tokyo: Japan Marine Fishery Resources Research Center, 217–231Google Scholar
  13. Cao Jie. 2010. Stock assessment and risk analysis of management strategies for neon flying squid (Ommastrephes bartramii) in the Northwest Pacific Ocean (in Chinese) [dissertation]. Shanghai: Shanghai Ocean UniversityGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen Yong, Breen P A, Andrew N L. 2000. Impacts of outliers and mis-specification of priors on Bayesian fisheries-stock assessment. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 57(11): 2293–2305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chen Xinjun, Chen Yong, Tian Siquan, et al. 2008. An assessment of the west winter-spring cohort of neon flying squid (Ommastrephes bartramii) in the Northwest Pacific Ocean. Fisheries Research, 92(2-3): 221–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chen C S, Chiu T S. 2009. Standardising the CPUE for the Illex argentinus fishery in the Southwest Atlantic. Fisheries Science, 75(2): 265–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haimovici M, Brunetti N E, Rodhouse P G, et al. 1998. Illex argentinus. In: Rodhouse P G, Dawe E G, O’Dor P K, eds. Squid Recruitment Dynamics: The Genus Illex as a Model, The Commercial Illex Species and Influences on Variability (FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 376). Rome: FAO, 27–58Google Scholar
  18. Haimovici M, Santos R A D, Bainy M C R S, et al. 2014. Abundance, distribution and population dynamics of the short fin squid Illex argentinus in Southwestern and Southern Brazil. Fisheries Research, 152: 1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hatanaka H. 1998. Feeding migration of short-finned squid Illex argentinus in the waters off Argentina. Nippon Suisan Gakkaishi, 54(8): 1343–1349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hilborn R, Pikitch E K, Francis R C. 1993. Current trends in including risk and uncertainty in stock assessment and harvest decisions. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 50(4): 874–880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hilborn R, Walters C J. 1999. Quantitative Fisheries Stock Assessment: Choice, Dynamics and Uncertainty. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  22. Ichii T, Mahapatra K, Okamura H, et al. 2006. Stock assessment of the autumn cohort of neon flying squid (Ommastrephes bartramii) in the North Pacific based on past large-scale high seas driftnet fishery data. Fisheries Research, 78(2-3): 286–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kinas P G. 1996. Bayesian fishery stock assessment and decision making using adaptive importance sampling. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 53(2): 414–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li Gang, Chen Xinjun, Guan Wenjiang, et al. 2011. Stock Assessment and Management for Mackerel in East Yellow Sea (in Chinese). Beijing: Science Press, 4–128Google Scholar
  25. Lu Huajie, Chen Xinjun, Cao Jie, et al. 2013a. CPUE standardization of Illex argentinus for Chinese Mainland squid-jigging fishery in the southwest Atlantic Ocean. Journal of Fisheries of China (in Chinese), 37(6): 951–960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lu Huajie, Chen Xinjun, Li Gang, et al. 2013b. Stock assessment and management for Illex argentinus in Southwest Atlantic Ocean based on Bayesian Schaefer model. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology (in Chinese), 24(7): 2007–2014Google Scholar
  27. Maunder M N, Punt A E. 2004. Standardizing catch and effort data: a review of recent approaches. Fisheries Research, 70(2-3): 141–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McAllister M K, Kirkwood G P. 1998. Bayesian stock assessment: a review and example application using the logistic model. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 55(6): 1031–1060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McAllister M K, Pikitch E K, Punt A E, et al. 1994. A Bayesian approach to stock assessment and harvest decisions using the sampling/importance resampling algorithm. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 51(12): 2673–2687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Osako M, Murata M. 1983. Stock assessment of cephalopod resources in the northwestern Pacific. In: Caddy J F, ed. Advances in Assessment of World Cephalopod Resources. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. 55–144Google Scholar
  31. Polacheck T, Hilborn R, Punt A E. 1993. Fitting surplus production models: comparing methods and measuring uncertainty. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 50(12): 2597–2607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Prager M H. 1994. A suite of extensions to a non-equilibrium surplus-production model. Fishery Bulletin, 92(2): 374–389Google Scholar
  33. Roberts M J. 1998. The influence of the environment on chokka squid Loligo vulgaris reynaudii spawning aggregations: steps towards a quantified model. South African Journal of Marine Science, 20(1): 267–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rodhouse P G. 2001. Managing and forecasting squid fisheries in variable environments. Fisheries Research, 54(1): 3–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rosas-Luis R, Sánchez P, Portela J M, et al. 2014. Feeding habits and trophic interactions of Doryteuthis gahi, Illex argentinus and Onykia ingens in the marine ecosystem off the Patagonian Shelf. Fisheries Research, 152: 37–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sakurai Y, Kiyofuji H, Saitoh S, et al. 2000. Changes in inferred spawning areas of Todarodes pacificus (Cephalopoda: Ommastrephidae) due to changing environmental conditions. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57(1): 24–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wadley V A, Lu C C. 1983. Distribution of mesopelagic cephalopods around a warm-core ring in the East Australian Current. Memoirs of the National Museum of Victoria, 44(1): 197–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Waluda C M, Griffiths H J, Rodhouse P G. 2008. Remotely sensed spatial dynamics of the Illex argentinus fishery, Southwest Atlantic. Fisheries Research, 91(2-3): 196–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Waluda C M, Rodhouse P G, Podestá G, et al. 2001. Surface oceanography of the inferred hatching grounds of Illex argentinus (Cephalopoda: Ommastrephidae) and influences on recruitment variability. Marine Biology, 139(4): 671–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Waluda C M, Trathan P N, Rodhouse P G. 1999. Influence of oceanographic variability on recruitment in the Illex argentinus (Cephalopoda: Ommastrephidae) fishery in the South Atlantic. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 183: 159–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wang Shengping, Maunder M N, Aires-da-Silva A. 2014. Selectivity’s distortion of the production function and its influence on management advice from surplus production models. Fisheries Research, 158: 181–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang Jintao, Yu Wei, Chen Xinjun, et al. 2016. Stock assessment for the western winter-spring cohort of neon flying squid (Ommastrephes bartramii) using environmentally dependent surplus production models. Scientia Marina, 80(1): 69–78Google Scholar
  43. Yatsu A, Watanabe T, Mori J, et al. 2000. Interannual variability in stock abundance of the neon flying squid, Ommastrephes bartramii, in the North Pacific Ocean during 1979-1998: impact of driftnet fishing and oceanographic conditions. Fisheries Oceanography, 9(2): 163–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zhan Bingyi. 1995. Fishery Stock Assessment (in Chinese). Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 170–180Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Chinese Society of Oceanography and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jintao Wang
    • 1
    • 5
    • 4
  • Xinjun Chen
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 5
  • Kevin W. Staples
    • 4
  • Yong Chen
    • 4
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Marine SciencesShanghai Ocean UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.National Distant-water Fisheries Engineering Research CenterShanghai Ocean UniversityShanghaiChina
  3. 3.Key Laboratory of Sustainable Exploitation of Oceanic Fisheries Resources of Ministry of EducationShanghai Ocean UniversityShanghaiChina
  4. 4.School of Marine SciencesUniversity of MaineOronoUSA
  5. 5.Collaborative Innovation Center for National Distant-water FisheriesShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations