Literature DB >> 21318416

Differential movement and movement bias models for marine protected areas.

Jessica Langebrake1, Louise Riotte-Lambert, Craig W Osenberg, Patrick De Leenheer.   

Abstract

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are promoted as a tool to protect overfished stocks and increase fishery yields. Previous models suggested that adult mobility modified effects of MPAs by reducing densities of fish inside reserves, but increasing yields (i.e., increasing densities outside of MPAs). Empirical studies contradicted this prediction: as mobility increased, the relative density of fishes inside MPAs (relative to outside) increased or stayed constant. We hypothesized that this disparity between theoretical and empirical results was the result of differential movement of fish inside versus outside the MPA. We, therefore, developed a model with unequal and discontinuous diffusion, and analyzed its steady state and stability. We determined the abundance in the fishing grounds, the yield, the total abundance and the log ratio at steady-state and examined their response to adult mobility (while keeping the relative inequity in the diffusion constant). Abundance in the fishing grounds and yield increased, while total abundance and log-ratio decreased, as mobility increased. These results were all qualitatively consistent with the previous models assuming uniform diffusivity. Thus, the mismatch between empirical and theoretical results must result from other processes or other forms of differential movement. Therefore, we modified our original model by assuming that species located on the boundary of the MPA will preferentially move towards the MPA. This localized movement bias model gives rise to steady state profiles that can differ radically from the profiles in the unbiased model, especially when the bias is large. Moreover, for sufficiently large bias values, the monotonicity of the four measures with increased mobility is reversed, when compared with our original model. Thus, the movement bias model reconciles empirical data and theoretical results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21318416     DOI: 10.1007/s00285-011-0407-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Math Biol        ISSN: 0303-6812            Impact factor:   2.259


  9 in total

1.  Effects of marine reserves on adjacent fisheries.

Authors:  C M Roberts; J A Bohnsack; F Gell; J P Hawkins; R Goodridge
Journal:  Science       Date:  2001-11-30       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Diffusion models for population dynamics incorporating individual behavior at boundaries: applications to refuge design.

Authors:  R S Cantrell; C Cosner
Journal:  Theor Popul Biol       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 1.570

3.  Marine reserves: fish life history and ecological traits matter.

Authors:  J Claudet; C W Osenberg; P Domenici; F Badalamenti; M Milazzo; J M Falcón; I Bertocci; L Benedetti-Cecchi; J A García-Charton; R Goñi; J A Borg; A Forcada; G A De Lucia; A Perez-Ruzafa; P Afonso; A Brito; I Guala; L Le Diréach; P Sanchez-Jerez; P J Somerfield; S Planes
Journal:  Ecol Appl       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.657

4.  Critical science gaps impede use of no-take fishery reserves.

Authors:  Peter F Sale; Robert K Cowen; Bret S Danilowicz; Geoffrey P Jones; Jacob P Kritzer; Kenyon C Lindeman; Serge Planes; Nicholas V C Polunin; Garry R Russ; Yvonne J Sadovy; Robert S Steneck
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2004-11-25       Impact factor: 17.712

5.  Fishing the line near marine reserves in single and multispecies fisheries.

Authors:  Julie B Kellner; Irene Tetreault; Steven D Gaines; Roger M Nisbet
Journal:  Ecol Appl       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 4.657

6.  Marine reserves: size and age do matter.

Authors:  Joachim Claudet; Craig W Osenberg; Lisandro Benedetti-Cecchi; Paolo Domenici; José-Antonio García-Charton; Angel Pérez-Ruzafa; Fabio Badalamenti; Just Bayle-Sempere; Alberto Brito; Fabio Bulleri; Jean-Michel Culioli; Mark Dimech; Jesús M Falcón; Ivan Guala; Marco Milazzo; Julio Sánchez-Meca; Paul J Somerfield; Ben Stobart; Frédéric Vandeperre; Carlos Valle; Serge Planes
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2008-02-22       Impact factor: 9.492

7.  Marine reserve networks for species that move within a home range.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Moffitt; Louis W Botsford; David M Kaplan; Michael R O'Farrell
Journal:  Ecol Appl       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 4.657

8.  A global analysis of the effectiveness of marine protected areas in preventing coral loss.

Authors:  Elizabeth R Selig; John F Bruno
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-02-17       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Initiation of slime mold aggregation viewed as an instability.

Authors:  E F Keller; L A Segel
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  1970-03       Impact factor: 2.691

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.