2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0022-0981(99)00136-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bias associated with statolith-based methodologies for ageing squid; a comparative study on illex illecebrosus (Cephalopoda: Ommastrephidae)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Age estimation error for a single reader may be attributable to differences in preparation methods (e.g., mounting, grinding), increment enumeration methods (e.g., type of viewer, viewing magnification, increment interpretation) or both factors. For I. illecebrosus statoliths, the use of image analysis resulted in a systematic bias by underestimating ages of young squid and overestimating ages of old squid compared to a light microscopy method (Gonzalez et al, 2000). The bias was attributed to differences in increment interpretation and resulted in a doubling of growth-rate estimates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Age estimation error for a single reader may be attributable to differences in preparation methods (e.g., mounting, grinding), increment enumeration methods (e.g., type of viewer, viewing magnification, increment interpretation) or both factors. For I. illecebrosus statoliths, the use of image analysis resulted in a systematic bias by underestimating ages of young squid and overestimating ages of old squid compared to a light microscopy method (Gonzalez et al, 2000). The bias was attributed to differences in increment interpretation and resulted in a doubling of growth-rate estimates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The bias was attributed to differences in increment interpretation and resulted in a doubling of growth-rate estimates. Gonzalez et al (2000) also suggested that increased growth rates for squid grouped by hatch month were an artifact of age estimation error, owing to methodological differences between statolith-based vs. gladius-based estimates. However, substantial variability in the precision of statolith-based age estimates may also occur when conducted by a single reader using exactly the same methodology.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Statolith increment analysis has been applied systematically in squid (Arkhipkin and Laptikhovsky, 1994;Jackson, 1994;González et al, 1996González et al, , 2000Rocha and Guerra, 1999) and cuttlefish (Raya et al, 1994;Bettencourt and Guerra 2001;Challier et al 2002), and it is currently considered a reliable and validated technique. Unfortunately, statoliths have failed to provide useful results for octopus owing to a lack of visible growth rings (Lombarte et al, 2006), and the search for techniques to age octopods based on hard structures has continued.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ageing error associated with counting the daily increments deposited in statoliths has been documented for several cephalopod species (Gonzalez et al, 1998;Jackson and Moltschaniwskyj, 1999;Gonzalez et al, 2000), including I. illecebrosus (Hendrickson, 2004). In the maturation-natural mortality model, the fraction of non-mature squid in the cohort declines rapidly with age (Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%