New trophic indicators and target values for an ecosystem-based management of fisheries |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Ifremer Centre Manche-Mer du Nord, RH, 150 Quai Gambetta, 62200 Boulogne-sur-Mer, France;2. Université Européenne de Bretagne, Agrocampus ouest, UMR 985 Ecologie et Santé des Ecosystèmes, 65 rue de Saint Brieuc, CS 84215, 35042 Rennes cedex, France;3. Ifremer Brest, Pointe du Diable, 29280 Plouzané, France;4. Ifremer, EMH, rue de l’île d’Yeu, BP 2011, 44311 Nantes cedex 03, France;1. University of South Florida, College of Marine Science, 140 7th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, United States;2. Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, Center for Coastal Studies, 6300 Ocean Drive, Corpus Christi, TX 78412, United States;1. Departamento de Ingeniería Hidráulica y Ambiental, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Av. Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Santiago, Chile;2. Escuela de Arquitectura e Instituto de Estudios Urbanos, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, El Comendador 1916, Santiago, Chile;3. Centro de Desarrollo Urbano Sustentable CONICYT/FONDAP/15110020, Av. Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Santiago, Chile;4. Center for Urban and Regional Systems (CESUR), CERIS, IST, University of Lisbon, Av. Rovisco Pais, Lisbon, Portugal;5. Departamento de Economía Aplicada (Matemáticas), Universidad de Málaga, Campus El Ejido, Málaga 29071, Spain;6. Departamento de Matemáticas para la Economía y la Empresa, Universidad de Valencia, Campus dels Tarongers, Valencia 46022, Spain;1. Alaska Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, 7600 Sand Point Way N.E., Building 4, Seattle, Washington 98115, USA;2. University of Washington School of Aquatic and Fisheries Sciences, 1122 NE Boat St., Seattle, WA 98105, USA;1. Department of Marine Biology and Ecology, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami, 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, FL, 33149, USA;2. Cooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Studies, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami, 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, FL, 33149, USA;3. Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Sustainable Fisheries Division, 75 Virginia Beach Drive, Miami, FL, 33149-1099, USA;4. Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, UMR MARBEC 248, Centre de Recherche Halieutique Méditerranéenne et Tropicale, Avenue Jean Monnet, CS 30171, 34203 Sète cedex, France;5. Université de Montpellier, Place Eugène Bataillon, Bâtiment 24, CC 093, 34095 Montpellier cedex 05, France |
| |
| Abstract: | In the present study, we tested five trophic indicators and we demonstrated their usefulness to assess the environmental status of marine ecosystems and to implement an ecosystem approach to fisheries management (EAFM). The tested indicators include the slope of the biomass spectrum, the mean trophic level (MTL), the marine trophic index (MTI) and two newly developed indicators, the high trophic level indicator (HTI) and the apex predator indicator (API). Indicators are compared between current state and potential reference situations, using as case studies: the Celtic Sea/Bay of Biscay, North Sea and English Channel ecosystems. Trophic spectra are obtained from Ecopath models while reference situations are estimated, simulating with EcoTroph and Ecosim different fishing pressures including three candidate scenarios for an EAFM. Inter-ecosystems assessments are done using Ecopath models, simulations outputs and scientific surveys data to assess the current states of the studied ecosystems, contrast the reference situations and analyze the responses of all indicators. Sensitivity analyses are also conducted on the main simulation parameters to test the robustness of the chosen indicators. Ecosystems specific targets for EAFM are proposed for the five trophic indicators estimated from whole-ecosystem models, while in the Celtic Sea/Bay of Biscay ecosystem targets are proposed for the MTL (=3.85) and HTI (48%) estimated from standard bottom-trawl surveys. The HTI is proposed to be relevant for survey data and the API is recommended using whole-ecosystem models. We conclude that HTI and API show trends in ecosystems health better than MTI. |
| |
| Keywords: | Environmental status Trophic indicators Ecosystem-based management Ecopath with Ecosim EcoTroph |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
