ICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil Advance Access originally published online on January 12, 2009
ICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil 2009 66(2):305-314; doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsn212
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Using a simple morphometric marker to identify spatial units for abalone fishery management
1 SARDI Aquatic Sciences, PO Box 120, Henley Beach, South Australia 5022, Australia
2 Southern Seas Ecology Laboratories, DP418, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia 5005, Australia 5005
3 SARDI Aquatic Sciences, 9 Krummel Street, Mount Gambier, South Australia 5290, Australia
Correspondence to T. Saunders: tel: +61 8 8207 5400; fax: +61 8 82075406; e-mail: saunders.thor{at}saugov.sa.gov.au
Saunders, T., Mayfield, S., and Hogg, A. 2009. Using a simple morphometric marker to identify spatial units for abalone fishery management. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66: 305–314.Managing stocks of sedentary marine invertebrates is complicated by the highly structured populations they form. Blacklip abalone (Haliotis rubra) form isolated populations with variable life-history characteristics. Many of the populations are "stunted", attaining a lower maximum size than those in adjacent areas. To reduce the risks of overfishing and localized depletion, management units (MUs) that encompass individual populations need to be determined, then managed according to their life-history characteristics. Here, potential MUs in a South Australian abalone fishery were identified from the broad-scale, spatial distribution of stunted and "non-stunted" populations of blacklip abalone, by applying a morphometric marker to commercial shell samples. Key life-history parameters of the populations within the potential MUs were estimated using relationships between the morphometric marker and blacklip abalone biology. Data from fine-scale systematic sampling by commercial fishers were used to validate spatial patterns observed from the more broadly distributed commercial catch samples. The location, distribution, and size of potential MUs were largely inconsistent with those of current management. The locations of two MUs (in Gerloffs Bay) were consistent across the broad- and fine-scale datasets, with the fine-scale samples more informative for identifying a potential boundary between them. The disparity between these data and current management arrangements are highlighted, and approaches for modifying them are discussed. This approach is among the first to provide a practical means of more closely aligning the scales of assessment and management with biological reality for sedentary marine invertebrates.
Keywords: biological variation, morphometric marker, population structure, spatial management
Received 8 February 2008; accepted 18 November 2008; advance access publication 12 January 2009.