...
首页> 外文期刊>Fisheries Research >A comparison of demersal communities in an area closed to trawlingwith those in adjacent areas open to trawling: A study in the GreatBarrier Reef Marine Park, Australia
【24h】

A comparison of demersal communities in an area closed to trawlingwith those in adjacent areas open to trawling: A study in the GreatBarrier Reef Marine Park, Australia

机译:禁止拖网捕捞的地区与邻近地区拖网捕捞的社区的比较:澳大利亚大堡礁海洋公园的一项研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The faunal composition of an extensive area (10,000 km super(2)) closed to trawling in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, Australia was compared with that in two adjacent areas open to fishing. Sampling was undertaken over 2 years using a dredge and a prawn trawl. For analysis, we split the study area into a northern and a southern section, and compared adjacent pairs of zones open and closed to trawling, after adjusting for a strong cross-shelf longitudinal gradient using sediment and depth data. The median coefficient of variation for the ratio of biomass in adjacent pairs of open and closed zones was around 15% for both sampling devices. However, the difference between open and closed pairs of zones was not consistent either within species or across species. Instead, these differences were consistent with the moderate difference between the northern and southern halves of the study area. Three reasons are proposed for the lack of measurable difference that could be attributed to trawling. Firstly, the level of trawling in the open area has been relatively low and, because of targeting of concentrations of prawns, it has been unevenly distributed leaving extensive areas unfished. This suggests that trawling has not had a major impact on the demersal fauna of the region. Secondly, illegal trawling in the closed area could also have confounded the results of the study, though logbook records suggest the level of this fishing was low and its extent restricted. Thirdly, the complexity of the region as shown by a north-south difference in fauna of the closed area might obscure any effects of fishing. We also suggest that areas with high habitat diversity ranging from complex structured seabed to relatively clear open muddy or sandy plains do not lend themselves to open versus closed studies because of the differential effect of fishing on the various habitats.
机译:将澳大利亚大堡礁海洋公园禁止拖网的大面积动物区系组成(10,000 km超级(2))与两个相邻的可捕捞区域的动物组成进行了比较。使用挖泥机和虾拖网进行了2年的采样。为了进行分析,我们在使用沉积物和深度数据调整了强烈的跨层纵向梯度之后,将研究区域分为北部和南部部分,并比较了相邻对开放和不拖网的区域。对于这两个采样装置,相邻的开放和封闭区域对中生物量比率的中值变异系数约为15%。但是,在物种内部或物种之间,开放和封闭区域对之间的差异不一致。相反,这些差异与研究区域的北半部和南半部之间的中等差异相符。提出了三个原因,因为它们缺乏可归因于拖网的可测量差异。首先,在空旷地区拖网捕捞的水平相对较低,由于针对虾的浓度,拖网的分布不均匀,大面积地区没有被捕捞。这表明拖网没有对该区域的海底动物区系产生重大影响。其次,在封闭区域内非法拖网捕鱼也可能使研究结果感到困惑,尽管航海日志记录表明,这种捕鱼的程度很低,而且捕鱼范围受到限制。第三,该封闭区动物区系的南北差异显示,该地区的复杂性可能掩盖了捕鱼的任何影响。我们还建议,由于捕鱼对不同生境的不同影响,从复杂的结构化海床到相对清晰的开放性泥泞或沙质平原等具有较高生境多样性的地区,不宜进行开放或封闭研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号