Korean Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences (한국수산과학회지)

The Korean Society of Fisheries and Aquatic Science (한국수산과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Application of Bootstrap and Bayesian Methods for Estimating Confidence Intervals on Biological Reference Points in Fisheries Management

부트스트랩과 베이지안 방법으로 추정한 수산자원관리에서의 생물학적 기준점의 신뢰구간

  • Jung, Suk-Geun (National Fisheries Research & Development Institute) ;
  • Choi, Il-Su (Department of Applied Mathematics, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Chang, Dae-Soo (National Fisheries Research & Development Institute East Sea Fisheries Research Institute)
  • 정석근 (국립수산과학원 자원연구과) ;
  • 최일수 (전남대학교 응용수학과) ;
  • 장대수 (국립수산과학원 동해수산연구소)
  • Published : 2008.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

To evaluate uncertainty and risk in biological reference points, we applied a bootstrapping method and a Bayesian procedure to estimate the related confidence intervals. Here we provide an example of the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) of turban shell, Batillus cornutus, estimated by the Schaefer and Fox models. Fitting the time series of catch and effort from 1968 to 2006 showed that the Fox model performs better than the Schaefer model. The estimated MSY and its bootstrap percentile confidence interval (CI) at ${\alpha}=0.05$ were 1,680 (1,420-1,950) tons for the Fox model and 2,170 (1,860-2,500) tons for the Schaefer model. The CIs estimated by the Bayesian approach gave similar ranges: 1,710 (1,450-2,000) tons for the Fox model and 2,230 (1,760-2,930) tons for the Schaefer model. Because uncertainty in effort and catch data is believed to be greater for earlier years, we evaluated the influence of sequentially excluding old data points by varying the first year of the time series from 1968 to 1992 to run 'backward' bootstrap resampling. The results showed that the means and upper 2.5% confidence limit (CL) of MSY varied greatly depending on the first year chosen whereas the lower 2.5% CL was robust against the arbitrary selection of data, especially for the Schaefer model. We demonstrated that the bootstrap and Bayesian approach could be useful in precautionary fisheries management, and we advise that the lower 2.5% CL derived by the Fox model is robust and a better biological reference point for the turban shells of Jeju Island.

Keywords

References

  1. Congdon, P. 2003. Applied Bayesian Modelling. Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, USA, 1-478
  2. FAO. 2007. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2006. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, Rome, Italy, 1-162
  3. Fogarty, M.J., A.A. Rosenberg and M.P. Sissenwine. 1992. Fisheries risk assessment: sources of uncertainty. Environ. Sci. Technol., 26, 440-447 https://doi.org/10.1021/es00027a600
  4. Harwood, J. and K. Stokes. 2003. Coping with uncertainty in ecological advice: lessons from fisheries. Trend. Ecol. Evol., 18, 617-622 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2003.08.001
  5. Houde, E.D. and S.J. Roberts. 2004. Marine protected areas: an old tool for new circumstances. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp., 42, 23-35
  6. Hoyle, S.D. and D.S. Cameron. 2003. Confidence intervals on catch estimates from a recreational fishing survey: a comparison of bootstrap methods. Fish. Manage. Ecol., 10, 97-108 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2400.2003.00321.x
  7. Kim, D. 2003. An economic analysis of the quota allocation strategies in the total allowable catch fisheries policy. Kor. J. Agric. Econ., 44, 165-182
  8. King, M. 1995. Fisheries Biology, Assessment and Management. Fishing News Books, Oxford, UK, 1-341
  9. Manly, B.F.J. 2006. Randomization, Bootstrap and Monte Carlo Methods in Biology. CRC, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1-455
  10. MOMAF. 2007. Statistic Database for Fisheries Production. Retrieved from http://fs.fips.go.kr/main.jsp on March 14, 2007
  11. NFRDI. 2007. Stock assessment and fishery evaluation report of year 2008. TAC-based fisheries management in the adjacent Korean waters. Report of Stock Assessment. National Fisheries Research and Development Institute, Busan, Korea
  12. Pitchford, J.W., E.A. Codling and D. Psarra. 2007. Uncertainty and sustainability in fisheries and the benefit of marine protected areas. Ecol. Model., 207, 286-292 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.05.006
  13. Punt, A.E. and R.A.Y. Hilborn. 1997. Fisheries stock assessment and decision analysis: the Bayesian approach. Rev. Fish. Biol., 7, 35-63 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018419207494
  14. SAS. 1989. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Version 6. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA
  15. Zhang, C.I. 2000. New Approaches in Fisheries Assess- ment and Management under the EEZ Regime. Proceedings on Prospects of Marine Environments and Marine Bioresources in the 21st Century, Yeung- nam University, Korea

Cited by

  1. A study on the risk scoring and risk index for the ecosystem-based fisheries assessment vol.49, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3796/KSFT.2013.49.4.469
  2. Estimating the Abundance and Fishing Mortality of Pacific Cod Gadus macrocephalus during the Spawning Season in Jinhae Bay, Korea, Using a Mark-Recapture Method vol.45, pp.5, 2012, https://doi.org/10.5657/KFAS.2012.0499
  3. A Temperature-Dependent Growth Equation for Larval Chub Mackerel (Scomber japonicus) vol.55, pp.1, 2008, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12601-020-0004-z