Available information for estimating reproductive potential of Northwest Atlantic groundfish stocks

Jonna Tomkiewicz, M.J. Morgan, J. Burnett, F. Saborido-Rey

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

The availability of data to improve indices of stock reproductive potential was reviewed for 42 Northwest Atlantic groundfish stocks comprising gadoids, flatfishes, redfishes and grenadiers.For many of the stocks, information on population parameters such as stock size and size/age composition estimates exists for three or more decades. Data on fish age, weight, maturity and sex ratios in the population have also been extensively collected, often allowing for establishment of time series of annual data that could be used for assessing spawning stock biomass and female spawning stock. However, possibilities for estimating stock potential egg production are constrained by scarcity of fecundity data. Data on fish condition, which can be useful in developing fecundity models, were seldom collected in earlier times, but have increased in recent decades. A data richness index, combining information about data quantity and quality, ranked most gadoid stocks as "data comprehensive" with a high proportion of stocks possessing some fecundity information. Flatfish stocks generally were "data moderate" owing to slightly shorter time series of data, while redfish and grenadier stocks in general were "data restricted". Published studies linking aspects of reproductive potential with parental characteristics and/or recruitment have become more frequent as "data richness" has improved for many stocks, but generally the prevalence of such studies remains low.
Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Science
Volume33
Pages (from-to)1-21
ISSN0250-6408
Publication statusPublished - 2003

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Available information for estimating reproductive potential of Northwest Atlantic groundfish stocks'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this