Asymmetry across international borders: Research, fishery and management trends and economic value of the giant sea bass (Stereolepis gigas)

Abstract

Co-operation in the management of shared fish stocks is often necessary to achieve sustainability and reduce uncertainty. The United States of America (USA) and Mexico share a number of fish stocks and marine ecosystems, while there is some binational co-operation in scientific research, unilateral management decisions are generally the rule. We present a case study using the giant sea bass (Stereolepis gigas, Polyprionidae) to highlight how these management and research asymmetries can skew national perceptions of population status for a fully transboundary species.Scientific publications and annual funding related to giant sea bass are 7x and 25x higher in the USA, respectively, despite the fact that 73% of the species' range occurs in Mexico. Conversely, annual fishery production and consumptive value of giant sea bass in Mexico are 19x and 3.5x higher than in the USA, respectively, while the nonconsumptive value related to dive ecotourism is 76x higher in the USA. These asymmetries have generated a distorted view of the population status of the giant sea bass across its entire range. This and other factors related to historical fishery dynamics and policy must be accounted for when assessing population status, and subsequent appropriate management responses, across geopolitical boundaries. | 1393 RAMÍREZ-VALDEZ Et AL. 2.1. Asymmetry in scientific research 1394 2.2. Fishery and management trends 1395 2.3. Spatial patterns of the contemporary fishery 1397 2.4. Asymmetry in economic value 1397 3. RESULTS 1397 3.1. Asymmetry in scientific research 1394 3.2. Fishery and management trends 1399 3.3. Spatial patterns of the contemporary fishery 1401 3.4. Asymmetry in the economic value 1401 4. DISCUSSION 1402 4.1. Asymmetry in scientific research 1403 4.2. Fishery and management trends 1404 4.3. Spatial patterns of the contemporary fishery 1405 4.4. Asymmetry in economic value 1405 5. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS 1406 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1407 CONFLICT OF INTEREST 1407 AUTHOR CONTRIBUTION 1407 DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 1408Peer-reviewed papers -Information exclusively from the USA 39Peer-reviewed papers -Information exclusively from Mexico 13Peer-reviewed papers -Information from both the USA and Mexico 4Total unique GSB-centric papers 21 GSB-centric papers -Data exclusively from the USA 21 GSB-centric papers -Data exclusively from Mexico 0 GSB-centric papers -Data from both the USA and Mexico 3 Notes: WS, ISI Web of Science; GS, Google Scholar; GSB-listed, Papers that mention GSB; GSB-centric Paper, Papers that are focussed on GSB. Giant sea bass and black sea bass are common names in English used in the literature. Mero gigante and pescara are common names in Spanish (sensu Page et al., 2013).a Pescara is also a noun in Italian.

Otoliths of marine fishes record evidence of low oxygen, temperature and pH conditions of deep Oxygen Minimum Zones

“…All the deep-sea fishes had otolith chemistry significantly different from the giant sea 615 bass, Stereolepis gigas. The giant sea bass occurs within relatively shallow waters up to ~ 30 616 deep (Ramírez-Valdez et al, 2021). At this depth, oxygen and pH conditions vary, but values are 617 consistently higher than those found for our deep OMZ fishes (Table 1).…”

Giant appetites: exploring the trophic ecology of California’s largest kelp forest predator, the giant sea bass Stereolepis gigas

“…One study that looked at the impact of Macrocystis pyrifera deforestation caused by urchin grazing on kelp forest food web structure found that the negative impacts of deforestation were not as strong at higher trophic levels similar to those occupied by giant sea bass (Graham 2004). Furthermore, a portion of the geographic range of giant sea bass does not coincide with the range of kelp (Ramírez-Valdez et al 2021), and there are anecdotal reports of the local extirpation of kelp from rocky reefs in the Channel Islands having no apparent influence on their presence (Domeier 2001). These findings suggest that threats to kelp forests do not necessarily equate to threats to giant sea bass.…”

“…Sampling took place from 2017 to 2020, and spanned the core range of giant sea bass, which is south of Pt. Conception, California, along the Pacific coast of Baja California and the upper Gulf of California, Mexico (Domeier 2001, Ramírez-Valdez et al 2021) (Fig. 1).…”

“…Giant sea bass Stereolepis gigas are Critically Endangered (Cornish 2004) large-bodied predators that were once abundant in the kelp forests and rocky reefs of southern California, USA, and Baja California, Mexico (Dayton et al 1998, Domeier 2001, Cornish 2004, Hawk & Allen 2014, Erauskin-Extramiana et al 2017. Historically a sought after recreational and commercial fisheries species, giant sea bass experienced severe population declines in the USA due to overfishing in the early 20th century (Baldwin & Keiser 2008, Allen 2017, Ramírez-Valdez et al 2021. Despite near extirpation in California, recent scientific evidence suggests that they are recovering after implementation of fishing regulations that de creased intentional and incidental catch of the species in the USA (Pondella & Allen 2008, Allen & Andrews 2012, House et al 2016.…”

Network analysis reveals aggregation behaviour for an endangered predator at an offshore island

“…As oceanic conditions ( i.e ., sea surface temperature, productivity) change, aggregation cues may cause shifts in the timing and location of these aggregation events. Although recent genetic analyses have shown fish in Mexican waters may have helped US populations recover (Chabot et al ., 2015 ; Gaffney et al ., 2007 ; Ramírez‐Valdez et al ., 2021 ), there is no evidence to date documenting movement of fish between Mexico and the US. Currently, the only confirmed aggregation sites in U.S. waters are around Anacapa Island (Domeier, 2005 ), Santa Catalina Island (Clevenstine & Lowe, 2021 ; House et al ., 2016 ) and La Jolla, California (Blincow, unpubl.…”