In 2010, an international group of 35 sea turtle researchers refined an initial list of more than 200 research questions into 20 metaquestions that were considered key for management and conservation of sea turtles. These were classified under 5 categories: reproductive biology, biogeography, population ecology, threats and conservation strategies. To obtain a picture of how research is being focused towards these key questions, we undertook a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature (2014 and 2015) attributing papers to the original 20 questions. In total, we reviewed 605 articles in full and from these 355 (59%) were judged to substantively address the 20 key questions, with others focusing on basic science and monitoring. Progress to answering the 20 questions was not uniform, and there were biases regarding focal turtle species, geographic scope and publication outlet. Whilst it offers some meaningful indications as to effort, quantifying peer-reviewed literature output is ob viously not the only, and possibly not the best, metric for understanding progress towards informing key conservation and management goals. Along with the literature review, an international group based on the original project consortium was assigned to critically summarise recent progress towards answering each of the 20 questions. We found that significant research is being expended towards global priorities for management and conservation of sea turtles. Although highly variable, there has been significant progress in all the key questions identified in 2010. Undertaking this critical review has highlighted that it may be timely to undertake one or more new prioritizing exercises. For this to have maximal benefit we make a range of recommendations for its execution. These include a far greater engagement with social sciences, widening the pool of contributors and focussing the questions, perhaps disaggregating ecology and conservation.
There is growing evidence that small-scale, coastal, passive net fisheries may be the largest single threat to some sea turtle populations. We review assessments of turtle interactions in these fisheries, and experiments on gear-technology approaches (modifying gear designs, materials and fishing methods) to mitigate turtle by-catch, available from a small number of studies and fisheries. Additional assessments are needed to improve the limited understanding of the relative degree of risk coastal net fisheries pose to turtle populations, to prioritize limited conservation resources and identify suitable mitigation opportunities. Whether gear technology provides effective and commercially viable solutions, alone or in combination with other approaches, is not well-understood. Fishery-specific assessments and trials are needed, as differences between fisheries, including in gear designs; turtle and target species, sizes and abundance; socioeconomic context; and practicality affect efficacy and suitability of bycatch mitigation methods. Promising gear-technology approaches for gillnets and trammel nets include: increasing gear visibility to turtles but not target species, through illumination and line materials; reducing net vertical height; increasing tiedown length or eliminating tiedowns; incorporating shark-shaped silhouettes; and modifying float characteristics, the number of floats or eliminating floats. Promising gear-technology approaches for pound nets and other trap gear include: replacing mesh with ropes in the upper portion of leaders; incorporating a turtle releasing device into traps; modifying the shape of the trap roof to direct turtles towards the location of an escapement device; using an open trap; and incorporating a device to prevent sea turtle entrance into traps.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.