The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2022
DOI: 10.1111/2041-210x.13795
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accounting for a nonlinear functional response when estimating prey dynamics using predator diet data

Abstract: In marine ecosystems, intermediate trophic-level species (i.e. forage fishes) play a key role in regulating the energy flow from primary and secondary producers to top predators (Pikitch et al., 2014), and understanding their population dynamics is crucial for food web studies and ecosystem-based fisheries management (Link et al., 2020;Tam et al., 2017). However, reliably estimating the abundance of forage fishes is challenging; these species are often data limited because they are not directly targeted and/or… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 75 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Including more information on the process of fish predation (which we somewhat controlled for as catchability covariates for number of predators, predator size, and temperature) may help to refine aggregate forage indices. For example, in this initial model, we have not accounted for functional responses of predators, but new research may allow us to do so in future iterations (Smith and Smith 2020;Robertson et al 2022;Thorson et al 2022). Predator behavior/thinning rates information could potentially supply information on "area swept" for the forage index, allowing more direct comparisons with survey sampling gear.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Including more information on the process of fish predation (which we somewhat controlled for as catchability covariates for number of predators, predator size, and temperature) may help to refine aggregate forage indices. For example, in this initial model, we have not accounted for functional responses of predators, but new research may allow us to do so in future iterations (Smith and Smith 2020;Robertson et al 2022;Thorson et al 2022). Predator behavior/thinning rates information could potentially supply information on "area swept" for the forage index, allowing more direct comparisons with survey sampling gear.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We considered including the role of (1) climatic variability on habitat availability and predator–prey overlap using the Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) climate index (NLCI; Cyr & Galbraith, 2021), mean normalized anomalies of the spring bottom‐water temperature derived from multiple data sources (Cyr et al., 2021), and the mean normalized anomalies of the summer cold‐intermediate layer (CIL) area over hydrographic sections on the NL shelf (Cyr & Galbraith, 2021), (2) prey availability using a time series of capelin biomass (Koen‐Alonso et al., 2021) and northern sand lance abundance (Robertson, Koen‐Alonso, et al., 2022) and (3) a potential competitor for food and habitat, thorny skate using a survey time series of estimated biomass for this species (Simpson et al., 2018).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meanwhile, M for both species was tested against climate time series without a moving average, because M was most likely affected by the direct impacts of climate within a given year. The northern sand lance index was extended back to 1984 by combining estimates from separate nonlinear functional response models (Robertson, Koen‐Alonso, et al., 2022) for Engels and Campelen research survey data. Every covariate was standardized using the standard score equation (Xstandard=XtrueX¯σX) prior to inclusion to improve model convergence and to determine whether longer time series could serve as proxies for correlated shorter time series (see Appendix S3).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations