What drives dynamics in the Gulf of Alaska? Integrating hypotheses of species, fishing, and climate relationships using ecosystem modeling

2011 ◽  
Vol 68 (9) ◽  
pp. 1553-1578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah K. Gaichas ◽  
Kerim Y. Aydin ◽  
Robert C. Francis

We use a dynamic ecosystem model to evaluate the relative effects of fishing history, climate change, and predator–prey interactions in determining biomass trajectories for 12 species groups ranging from marine mammals through commercially exploited fish and invertebrates in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). Ecosystem model fits under six alternative hypotheses relating fishing, climate, and predation were evaluated. Fishing alone explained few GOA biomass trajectories; it was necessary to both estimate specific predator–prey relationships and provide some mechanism for increased production. No single control hypothesis explained all species dynamics simultaneously, suggesting that in the GOA, there is no single main driver of the ecosystem. Furthermore, the alternative control hypotheses implied contrasting sets of predator–prey relationships (estimated functional response parameters). Therefore, a single set of “best fit” parameters for a given control hypothesis is unlikely to be useful in forecasting. Future modeling efforts supporting ecosystem-based fishery management could retain multiple working models to accommodate complex forcing (fishing, keystone species production, and environmental) differentially affecting components of the ecosystem.


2008 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Søren Anker Pedersen ◽  
Heino Fock ◽  
Jochen Krause ◽  
Christian Pusch ◽  
Anne L. Sell ◽  
...  

Abstract Pedersen, S. A., Fock, H., Krause, J., Pusch, C., Sell, A. L., Böttcher, U., Rogers, S. I., Sköld, M., Skov, H., Podolska, M., Piet, G. J., and Rice, J. C. 2009. Natura 2000 sites and fisheries in German offshore waters.–ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66: 155–169. The principal objective of sites selected as part of Natura 2000 is to achieve or maintain a favourable conservation status of habitats and species named in the EU Birds and Habitats directives. In the German exclusive economic zone, the habitat types protected by this legislation are sandbanks and reefs; protected species include marine mammals, seabirds, and specific migratory fish species. The ICES project Environmentally Sound Fishery Management in Protected Areas (EMPAS) aims to answer two questions: (i) To what extent do specific fishing activities significantly threaten attainment of the conservation objectives of the Natura 2000 sites? (ii) What management measures would reduce these conflicts and how effective would they be at helping to ensure the favourable condition of these sites? Assessments of fishing impacts on Natura 2000 sites require basic data on the conservation status of individual habitats and species, as well as data for fine-scale distributions of ongoing fishing activities. This paper describes and discusses the process used by the EMPAS project in developing fishery-management plans for each Natura 2000 site in German offshore waters.



2010 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 265-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna J. Heymans ◽  
Kerry L. Howell ◽  
Morag Ayers ◽  
Michael T. Burrows ◽  
John D. M. Gordon ◽  
...  

Abstract Heymans, J. J., Howell, K. L., Ayers, M., Burrows, M. T., Gordon, J. D. M., Jones, E. G., and Neat, F. 2011. Do we have enough information to apply the ecosystem approach to management of deep-sea fisheries? An example from the West of Scotland. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 68: 265–280. There is currently a global call for more use of an ecosystem approach to fisheries management (EAFM), and ecosystem models such as Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) are being used to provide a holistic view of ecosystem–fisheries interactions. Although these can be useful for an EAFM, the relative paucity of data available for deep-sea ecosystems raises concerns whether we can effectively apply an EAFM to the deep sea. The deep-sea ecosystem off the west coast of Scotland has been studied for longer and in more detail than most. This study assimilates the significant published and unpublished information available on this ecosystem into an EwE model. The results suggest that there are sufficient data available to construct an ecosystem model, but the quality of the data varies and serious potential sources of error are present in biomass and discard estimates. The assumptions needed to produce a model are varied and must be considered when interpreting the outputs of the model. Ecosystem modelling provides a unique view of the deep-water ecosystem and facilitates hypothesis development concerning predator–prey and inter-fishery interactions. Sharks are used to illustrate the benefits of using an ecosystem model to describe changes in their biomass and their prey species. The results show that both fishing for sharks and fishing for their prey affect the biomass of sharks.



2010 ◽  
Vol 67 (12) ◽  
pp. 1968-1982 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isaac C. Kaplan ◽  
Phillip S. Levin ◽  
Merrick Burden ◽  
Elizabeth A. Fulton

Any fishery management scheme, such as individual fishing quotas (IFQs) or marine protected areas, should be designed to be robust to potential shifts in the biophysical system. Here we couple possible catch scenarios under an IFQ scheme with ocean acidification impacts on shelled benthos and plankton, using an Atlantis ecosystem model for the US West Coast. IFQ harvest scenarios alone, in most cases, did not have strong impacts on the food web, beyond the direct effects on harvested species. However, when we added the impacts of ocean acidification, the abundance of commercially important groundfish such as English sole ( Pleuronectes vetulus ), arrowtooth flounder ( Atheresthes stomias ), and yellowtail rockfish ( Sebastes flavidus ) declined up to 20%–80%, owing to the loss of shelled prey items from their diet. English sole exhibited a 10-fold decline in potential catch and economic yield when confronted with strong acidification impacts on shelled benthos. Therefore, it seems prudent to complement IFQs with careful consideration of potential global change effects such as acidification. Our analysis provides an example of how new ecosystem modeling tools that evaluate cumulative impacts can be integrated with established management reference points and decision mechanisms.





Ecosystems ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maartje Oostdijk ◽  
Erla Sturludóttir ◽  
Maria J. Santos

AbstractThe Arctic may be particularly vulnerable to the consequences of both ocean acidification (OA) and global warming, given the faster pace of these processes in comparison with global average speeds. Here, we use the Atlantis ecosystem model to assess how the trophic network of marine fishes and invertebrates in the Icelandic waters is responding to the combined pressures of OA and warming. We develop an approach where we first identify species by their economic (catch value), social (number of participants in fisheries), or ecological (keystone species) importance. We then use literature-determined ranges of sensitivity to OA and warming for different species and functional groups in the Icelandic waters to parametrize model runs for different scenarios of warming and OA. We found divergent species responses to warming and acidification levels; (mainly) planktonic groups and forage fish benefited while (mainly) benthic groups and predatory fish decreased under warming and acidification scenarios. Assuming conservative harvest rates for the largest catch-value species, Atlantic cod, we see that the population is projected to remain stable under even the harshest acidification and warming scenario. Further, for the scenarios where the model projects reductions in biomass of Atlantic cod, other species in the ecosystem increase, likely due to a reduction in competition and predation. These results highlight the interdependencies of multiple global change drivers and their cascading effects on trophic organization, and the continued high abundance of an important species from a socio-economic perspective in the Icelandic fisheries.



2014 ◽  
Vol 281 (1797) ◽  
pp. 20142103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marlee A. Tucker ◽  
Tracey L. Rogers

Predator–prey relationships and trophic levels are indicators of community structure, and are important for monitoring ecosystem changes. Mammals colonized the marine environment on seven separate occasions, which resulted in differences in species' physiology, morphology and behaviour. It is likely that these changes have had a major effect upon predator–prey relationships and trophic position; however, the effect of environment is yet to be clarified. We compiled a dataset, based on the literature, to explore the relationship between body mass, trophic level and predator–prey ratio across terrestrial ( n = 51) and marine ( n = 56) mammals. We did not find the expected positive relationship between trophic level and body mass, but we did find that marine carnivores sit 1.3 trophic levels higher than terrestrial carnivores. Also, marine mammals are largely carnivorous and have significantly larger predator–prey ratios compared with their terrestrial counterparts. We propose that primary productivity, and its availability, is important for mammalian trophic structure and body size. Also, energy flow and community structure in the marine environment are influenced by differences in energy efficiency and increased food web stability. Enhancing our knowledge of feeding ecology in mammals has the potential to provide insights into the structure and functioning of marine and terrestrial communities.



2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 204-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J Corkeron

Some interpretations of ecosystem-based fishery management include culling marine mammals as an integral component. The current Norwegian policy on marine mammal management is one example. Scientific support for this policy includes the Scenario Barents Sea (SBS) models. These modelled interactions between cod, Gadus morhua , herring, Clupea harengus , capelin, Mallotus villosus and northern minke whales, Balaenoptera acutorostrata . Adding harp seals Phoca groenlandica into this top-down modelling approach resulted in unrealistic model outputs. Another set of models of the Barents Sea fish–fisheries system focused on interactions within and between the three fish populations, fisheries and climate. These model key processes of the system successfully. Continuing calls to support the SBS models despite their failure suggest a belief that marine mammal predation must be a problem for fisheries. The best available scientific evidence provides no justification for marine mammal culls as a primary component of an ecosystem-based approach to managing the fisheries of the Barents Sea.



1999 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. R. Gerber ◽  
W. S. Wooster ◽  
D. P. DeMaster ◽  
G. R. VanBlaricom


1993 ◽  
Vol 1993 (1) ◽  
pp. 287-292
Author(s):  
Sam W. Stoker ◽  
Jerry M. Neff ◽  
Thomas R. Schroeder ◽  
Deborah M. McCormick

ABSTRACT Following the Exxon Valdez oil spill of March 24, 1989, in Prince William Sound, Alaska, Exxon conducted a comprehensive shoreline survey program in cooperation with federal and state authorities. Objectives of surveys during the spring and summer of 1989 were to assess the distribution and magnitude of oiling, to evaluate impacts of the oil on key shoreline biological communities, and to identify ecological and archaeological resources requiring special care during the massive cleanup effort that followed. Similar shoreline surveys were performed during the springs of 1990, 1991, and 1992 on all shorelines in Prince William Sound and the Gulf of Alaska suspected of having residual oil. These subsequent surveys were conducted to provide information on the distribution and amounts of residual shoreline oil and to assess the condition of intertidal biological communities in order to make environmentally sound decisions regarding the need for additional cleanup. The following report is based primarily on survey results from Prince William Sound, where most of the heavy shoreline oiling occurred. Although not strictly quantitative, the shoreline surveys provide an unprecedented, broad base of professional observations covering the entire spill-affected area from 1989 through 1992 by which to evaluate spill impacts and recovery. Shoreline surveys documented that the extent of shoreline oiling declined substantially from 1989 to 1992. In 1989, oil was found on about 16 percent of the 3,000 miles of shoreline in Prince William Sound; by the spring of 1991, oil was found on only about 2 percent of the shoreline; and by May of 1992, on only 0.2 percent. In all years, most of this oil was located in the biologically least productive upper intertidal and supratidal zones. In both 1991 and 1992, small, isolated pockets of subsurface oil were found on some boulder/cobble beaches. Most of these deposits were also located in the upper intertidal and were usually buried beneath clean sediments. In almost all cases, the condition of intertidal biological communities improved correspondingly from 1989 to 1992. By the spring of 1991, recovery appeared to be well under way on virtually all previously oiled shores, with species composition, abundance, and diversity levels usually comparable to those of nearby shores that were not oiled in 1989. Recruitment of intertidal plants and animals was observed as early as the summer of 1989, and increasingly through 1991 and 1992. Recruitment was evident even in areas with remnant deposits of surface and subsurface oil, indicating that toxicity levels of the oil had declined substantially and that, in most cases, the residual oil no longer interfered with biological recovery. Observations of birds and marine mammals on or near shorelines surveyed during 1991 and 1992 confirmed that species present before the spill were still present and were feeding and reproducing in areas affected by oil in 1989. In most cases, observed densities were comparable to those recorded prior to the spill, and to those found in similar unaffected areas.



Chemoecology ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Claude Gr�goire ◽  
Daniel Couillien ◽  
Ralph Krebber ◽  
Winfried A. K�nig ◽  
Holger Meyer ◽  
...  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document