Original Additional evidence for fisheries acoustics: small cameras and angling gear provide tilt angle distributions and other relevant data for mackerel surveys

R., Nicosevici, T., and Scoulding, B. Additional evidence for fisheries acoustics: small cameras and angling gear provide tilt angle distributions and other relevant data for mackerel surveys. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 73: 2009–2019. Fisheries acoustics surveys are effective tools in marine resource assessment and marine ecology. Significant advances have occurred in recent years with the application of multiple and broadband frequencies to enable remote species identification. There is, however, still the need to obtain additional evidence for identification, and the estimation of the size and tilt angle distribution of fish, which influences their acoustic target strength. The former two requirements are usually met by obtaining simultaneous net samples: there are limited, if any, recognized successful techniques for the latter. Here, two alternative tools for obtaining evidence for all three requirements are examined: angling gear and small video cameras. These tools were deployed during surveys of Atlantic mackerel ( Scomber scombrus ). In 2014, angling was actually more efficient than pelagic trawling (the standard technique) and over two survey periods (2012 and 2014) provided length frequency distributions that were not significantly different. A small video camera was deployed into mackerel schools, providing species identification and fish orientation. Image analysis was then applied, producing tilt-angle distributions of free swimming wild mackerel for the first time. Mean tilt angles from three deployments were very variable with 95% of observations falling between (cid:2) 70 (cid:3) and 39 (cid:3) with evidence of a multinomial frequency distribution. A video equipped lander was also deployed onto the type of rocky seabed where deployment of a trawl would be impossible: this confirmed the presence of Norway pout and suggested it was the dominant scatterer on this type of seabed. These techniques are complementary to traditional trawling methods, but provide additional insights into fish behaviour whilst satisfying standard requirements of identification and supplying biological samples. Crucially, the small cameras deployed approximate the size of the animals under observation and allow for measurement of behaviour (specifically tilt) that are more likely to represent those conditions encountered during surveying.

[1]  J. Kubečka,et al.  Fish behaviour in response to a midwater trawl footrope in temperate reservoirs , 2015 .

[2]  James N. Ianelli,et al.  Factors affecting the availability of walleye pollock to acoustic and bottom trawl survey gear , 2015 .

[3]  Rudy J. Kloser,et al.  Acoustic biomass estimation of mesopelagic fish: backscattering from individuals, populations, and communities , 2015 .

[4]  Jon Helge Vølstad,et al.  Precision in estimates of density and biomass of Norwegian spring-spawning herring based on acoustic surveys , 2015 .

[5]  Takayuki Matsumoto,et al.  Behavior of skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis) associated with a drifting FAD monitored with ultrasonic transmitters in the equatorial central Pacific Ocean , 2014 .

[6]  Stan Kotwicki,et al.  The spatial distribution of euphausiids and walleye pollock in the eastern Bering Sea does not imply top-down control by predation , 2014 .

[7]  G. Rieucau,et al.  Experimental Evidence of Threat-Sensitive Collective Avoidance Responses in a Large Wild-Caught Herring School , 2014, PloS one.

[8]  G. Skomal,et al.  The physiological effects of capture stress, recovery, and post-release survivorship of juvenile sand tigers (Carcharias taurus) caught on rod and reel , 2013 .

[9]  L. Eisner,et al.  Summer distributions of forage fish in the eastern Bering Sea , 2013 .

[10]  K. Miyashita,et al.  Tilt Angle and Theoretical Target Strength of the Japanese Sandeel, Ammodytes personatus, Captured on the Northern Coast of Hokkaido , 2013 .

[11]  Rudy J. Kloser,et al.  Identification and target strength of orange roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus) measured in situ. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  G. Hunt,et al.  Predicting fish recruitment from juvenile abundance and environmental indices , 2013 .

[13]  E. Ona,et al.  Target strength and tilt-angle distribution of the lesser sandeel (Ammodytes marinus) , 2012 .

[14]  D. L. Aksnes,et al.  Efficient trawl avoidance by mesopelagic fishes causes large underestimation of their biomass , 2012 .

[15]  Richard L. O'Driscoll,et al.  Species identification in seamount fish aggregations using moored underwater video , 2012 .

[16]  D. Demer,et al.  A cold oceanographic regime with high exploitation rates in the Northeast Pacific forecasts a collapse of the sardine stock , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  F. Chavez,et al.  Oxygen: A Fundamental Property Regulating Pelagic Ecosystem Structure in the Coastal Southeastern Tropical Pacific , 2011, PloS one.

[18]  Christopher D. Wilson Acoustic‐trawl surveys to assess walleye pollock in Alaska: challenges faced and progress made. , 2011 .

[19]  Rolf J. Korneliussen,et al.  The acoustic identification of Atlantic mackerel , 2010 .

[20]  Inmaculada Pulido-Calvo,et al.  Acoustic identification of small pelagic fish species in Chile using support vector machines and neural networks , 2010 .

[21]  A. Hawkins,et al.  Diel interactions between sprat and mackerel in a marine lough and their effects upon acoustic measurements of fish abundance , 2009 .

[22]  N. Handegard,et al.  Lateral-aspect, target-strength measurements of in situ herring (Clupea harengus) , 2009 .

[23]  Kouichi Sawada,et al.  Target-strength, length, and tilt-angle measurements of Pacific saury (Cololabis saira) and Japanese anchovy (Engraulis japonicus) using an acoustic-optical system , 2009 .

[24]  Paul G. Fernandes,et al.  Classification trees for species identification of fish-school echotraces , 2009 .

[25]  Héctor Peña In situ target-strength measurements of Chilean jack mackerel (Trachurus symmetricus murphyi) collected with a scientific echosounder installed on a fishing vessel , 2008 .

[26]  Zhihai He,et al.  A new 'view' of ecology and conservation through animal-borne video systems. , 2007, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[27]  J. Calambokidis,et al.  Insights into the Underwater Diving, Feeding, and Calling Behavior of Blue Whales from a Suction-Cup-Attached Video-Imaging Tag (CRITTERCAM) , 2007 .

[28]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  Video Cameras on Wild Birds , 2007, Science.

[29]  P. Brehmer,et al.  Fisheries Acoustics: Theory and Practice, 2nd edn , 2006 .

[30]  A. Stoner Effects of environmental variables on fish feeding ecology: implications for the performance of baited fishing gear and stock assessment , 2004 .

[31]  Y. Naito,et al.  Penguin–mounted cameras glimpse underwater group behaviour , 2004, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[32]  D. Demer An estimate of error for the CCAMLR 2000 survey estimate of krill biomass , 2004 .

[33]  X. Cufi,et al.  On the way to solve lighting problems in underwater imaging , 2002, OCEANS '02 MTS/IEEE.

[34]  J. Kubečka,et al.  Sinusoidal cycling swimming pattern of reservoir fishes , 2002 .

[35]  Erwan Josse,et al.  Hydrological and trophic characteristics of tuna habitat: consequences on tuna distribution and longline catchability , 2002 .

[36]  Frederick Armstrong,et al.  Antarctic Krill Under Sea Ice: Elevated Abundance in a Narrow Band Just South of Ice Edge , 2002, Science.

[37]  Lawrence M. Dill,et al.  Employing Crittercam to study habitat use and behavior of large sharks , 2001 .

[38]  John K. Horne,et al.  Acoustic approaches to remote species identification: a review , 2000 .

[39]  P. Stevenson,et al.  Addendum: Fish do not avoid survey vessels , 2000, Nature.

[40]  Dezhang Chu,et al.  Review and recommendations for the modelling of acoustic scattering by fluid-like elongated zooplankton: euphausiids and copepods , 2000 .

[41]  R. E. Thorne,et al.  Ground truth and target identification for fisheries acoustics , 2000 .

[42]  P. G. Fernandes,et al.  Oceanography: Fish do not avoid survey vessels , 2000, Nature.

[43]  M. Cardinale,et al.  Comparison of the selectivity of three pelagic sampling trawls in a hydroacoustic survey , 1999 .

[44]  Lennart Persson,et al.  Size-dependent predation in piscivores : interactions between predator foraging and prey avoidance abilities , 1999 .

[45]  E. Ona,et al.  Tilt angle distribution and swimming speed of overwintering Norwegian spring spawning herring , 1996 .

[46]  I. Everson,et al.  A combined acoustic and trawl survey for efficiently estimating fish abundance , 1996 .

[47]  A. K. Beltestad,et al.  Target-strength estimates of schooling herring and mackerel using the comparison method , 1996 .

[48]  Jacques Masse,et al.  The structure and spatial distribution of pelagic fish schools in multispecies clusters: an acoustic study , 1996 .

[49]  J. Kubečka,et al.  Brown trout populations of three Scottish lochs estimated by horizontal sonar and multimesh gill nets , 1994 .

[50]  G. Rose,et al.  Cod spawning on a migration highway in the north-west Atlantic , 1993, Nature.

[51]  David G. Reid,et al.  Image Analysis Techniques for the Study of Fish School Structure from Acoustic Survey Data , 1993 .

[52]  Rein van den Boomgaard,et al.  Methods for fast morphological image transforms using bitmapped binary images , 1992, CVGIP Graph. Model. Image Process..

[53]  Lennart Persson,et al.  SHIFTS IN FISH COMMUNITIES ALONG THE PRODUCTIVITY GRADIENT OF TEMPERATE LAKES - PATTERNS AND THE IMPORTANCE OF SIZE-STRUCTURED INTERACTIONS , 1991 .

[54]  A. Fernö,et al.  Responses of cod (Gadus morhua) and haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus) to baited hooks in the natural environment , 1989 .

[55]  S. Murawski International Council for the Exploration of the Sea , 1988, Nature.

[56]  Pingguo He,et al.  Tilting behaviour of the Atlantic mackerel, Scomber scombrus, at low swimming speeds , 1986 .

[57]  A. Bradley,et al.  New development in the MOCNESS, an apparatus for sampling zooplankton and micronekton , 1985 .

[58]  Kenneth G. Foote,et al.  Effect of fish behaviour on echo energy: the need for measurements of orientation distributions , 1980 .

[59]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[60]  A. D. Robertis,et al.  Fish avoidance of research vessels and the efficacy of noise-reduced vessels: a review , 2013 .

[61]  Christopher D. Wilson,et al.  Do silent ships see more fish? Comparison of a noise-reduced and a conventional research vessel in Alaska. , 2012, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[62]  Thomas C. Weber,et al.  Evaluation of rockfish abundance in untrawlable habitat: combining acoustic and complementary sampling tools , 2012 .

[63]  L. Berger,et al.  In-situ measurements of the individual acoustic backscatter of European anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) and sardine (Sardina Pilchardus), with concurrent optical identification. , 2011 .

[64]  S. Kaartvedt,et al.  Fish are attracted to vessels , 2006 .

[65]  Egil Ona,et al.  Acoustic backscattering by Atlantic mackerel as being representative of fish that lack a swimbladder. Backscattering by individual fish , 2005 .

[66]  S. Fässler,et al.  Multifrequency scattering properties of herring (Clupea harengus) and Norway pout (Trisopterus esmarkii) , 2004 .

[67]  E. Ona,et al.  Synthetic echograms generated from the relative frequency response , 2003 .

[68]  E. Simmonds Weighting of acoustic- and trawl-survey indices for the assessment of North Sea herring , 2003 .

[69]  Paul D. Winger,et al.  Tilt angle and target strength: target tracking of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) during trawling , 2003 .

[70]  Paul G. Fernandes,et al.  A consistent approach to definitions and symbols in fisheries acoustics , 2002 .

[71]  Paul G. Fernandes,et al.  Acoustic applications in fisheries science: the ICES contribution , 2002 .

[72]  E. Ona Herring tilt angles, measured through target tracking , 2001 .

[73]  D. Wileman,et al.  Manual of methods of measuring the selectivity of towed fishing gears , 1996 .

[74]  David N. MacLennan,et al.  Acoustical measurement of fish abundance , 1990 .

[75]  O. Godø,et al.  Escape of fish under the fishing line of a Norwegian sampling trawl and its influence on survey results , 1989 .

[76]  Masahiko Furusawa,et al.  Prolate spheroidal models for predicting general trends of fish target strength , 1988 .

[77]  I. Aoki,et al.  Photographic observations on the behaviour of Japanese anchovy Engraulis japonica at night in the sea , 1988 .

[78]  K. Foote,et al.  TILT ANGLES OF SCHOOLING PENNED SAITHE , 1987 .

[79]  N. Otsu A threshold selection method from gray level histograms , 1979 .

[80]  O. Nakken,et al.  Target strength measurements of fish , 1977 .