2010
DOI: 10.1007/s00227-010-1404-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing reef fish assemblage structure: how do different stereo-video techniques compare?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
95
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 166 publications
(103 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
7
95
1
Order By: Relevance
“…BRUV surveys were originally designed to monitor temporal and regional changes in the overall fish community structure. Although RUVs baited with brown algae would have been more efficient for surveying browsing fishes (25), pilchard-baited RUVs produce similar estimates of herbivorous fish biomass to unbaited RUVs (46) and diver-operated videos (47).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…BRUV surveys were originally designed to monitor temporal and regional changes in the overall fish community structure. Although RUVs baited with brown algae would have been more efficient for surveying browsing fishes (25), pilchard-baited RUVs produce similar estimates of herbivorous fish biomass to unbaited RUVs (46) and diver-operated videos (47).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, comparisons between baited and unbaited camera stations have shown that while carnivore and scavenger abundances tend to increase in the presence of bait, no commensurate changes are typically detected in herbivore or omnivore abundances (Watson et al, 2005;Harvey et al, 2007). The lack of bait-induced declines among non-carnivorous functional groups could be explained by possible "sheep effects, " whereby species not directly attracted to bait plumes are attracted to the feeding activities of others around BRUVS, or conspecific social attraction behaviors (Watson et al, 2005(Watson et al, , 2010Harvey et al, 2007;Dorman et al, 2012). Finally, underwater sampling visibility was, in general, much higher than the required BRUVS sampling minimum (7 m), even in mesophotic depths to 100 m. While the authors detected no depth-associated, functional group or species-level behavior alterations as a result of reduced light attenuation in deeper strata, coral reef fishes are known to exhibit behavioral shifts in response to varying light levels, which merits additional consideration for future mesophotic research (Rickel and Genin, 2005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The method for sampling fi sh populations with a baited stereo-video camera system has been found to generate more consistent data than have comparable unbaited systems (Harvey et al, 2007), has the ability to detect mobile fi sh species (Harvey et al, 2007;Watson et al, 2010), and has been determined to be effective in sampling bottomfi shes in Hawaii (Ellis and DeMartini, 1995;Merritt et al, 2011). The BotCam is a means by which bottomfi sh abundance estimates can be made within actual bottomfi sh habitats and fi sh lengths can be accurately measured.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%