Greenland Halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides). A Review of the Dynamics of its Distribution and Fisheries off Eastern Canada and Greenland

Bowering, W. R.; Brodie, William

doi:10.1007/978-94-015-8414-2_4

Cited by 42 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the apparent advantages of this technology, it has been little used in such environments to date. The Greenland halibut Reinhardtius hippoglossoides has become an important commercial fish species, particularly in the Northwest Atlantic (Bowering & Brodie 1995, DFO 2008a. This benthic flatfish inhabits deep (typically 400 to 1000 m and as deep as 2200 m) (Vis et al 1997, Bowering & Nedreaas 2000 and cold (~0 to 6°C) (Bowering & Nedreaas 2000) waters in northern latitudes (> 45° N) in the Arctic, Atlantic and Pacific Oceans (Bowering 1984, Dyck et al 2007).…”

Section: Abstract: Arctic · Movement Patterns · Archival Tags · Marimentioning

confidence: 99%

Depth and temperature preferences of the deepwater flatfish Greenland halibut Reinhardtius hippoglossoides in an Arctic marine ecosystem

Peklova¹,

Hussey²,

Hedges³

et al. 2012

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Little is known about the movement of Arctic marine fish, particularly benthic species, despite growing pressure from commercial fisheries and a changing climate. The Greenland halibut Reinhardtius hippoglossoides lives in the deep, cold waters of the Arctic, North Atlantic and Pacific Oceans where it represents an important commercial fish species and a significant prey resource for whales and sharks. To investigate movement, depth and temperature preferences of Greenland halibut, 9 large (83 to 95 cm fork length) individuals were tagged with pop-off archival transmitting tags in Cumberland Sound, Baffin Island in August 2010 to record data for 70, 100 and 300 d. While all tags reported back, 7 tags provided the bulk of the data, transmitting (mean ± SD) 67 ± 7% of the data collected. Greenland halibut exhibited strong site fidelity to localised deep areas (900 to 1400 m), but ranged between ~400 and 1400 m, with all tags poppingoff within 27 km of the tagging location. Mean depth was 1048 ± 112 m (n = 7) during the ice-free season and 823 ± 121 m (n = 2) during the ice-covered season. Temperature occupied by Greenland halibut from August until June ranged from 1.3 to 2.7°C (mean ± SD: 2.2 ± 0.01°C). A mixedeffect model found preferred depth did not vary within a diel cycle, but did change among months. Seasonal movements coincided with ice cover, but further work is needed to clarify this relationship and determine the extent and timing of these movements within and beyond Cumberland Sound. KEY WORDS: Arctic · Movement patterns · Archival tags · Marine fish · Depth preferences · Sea iceResale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisher Mar Ecol Prog Ser 467: 193-205, 2012 marine fishes, e.g. distribution and maturation of larvae (Gibson 1997, Sohn et al. 2010. Understanding how the characteristics of Arctic marine ecosystems relate to fish movement patterns (i.e. linking environmental parameters with the distribution and abundance of fishing resources) is of critical importance for the management and conservation of Arctic marine fish stocks (Schick et al. 2008).Satellite telemetry has been used to study the movement, behaviour and environmental preferences of a wide range of aquatic species, including sharks (Sims et al. 2003, 2008, Teo et al. 2004, Brunnschweiler et al. 2010) and many teleostei, such as tuna (Block et al. 2001, Kitagawa et al. 2004, Schaefer & Fuller 2004 and flatfishes (Seitz et al. 2003, Loher & Seitz 2006, Loher & Blood 2009). These tags are attached externally to the fish, during which time they record depth, temperature and light, and release after a specified length of time, thus providing insight into horizontal and vertical movements and habitat use over different spatial and temporal scales (Block et al. 2001, Wearmouth & Sims 2009, Humphries et al. 2010. There is no requirement to recapture tagged individuals, making this technology particularly useful for studying fish in deepwater habitats and extreme environments, such as the Arctic, wher...

show abstract

Section: Abstract: Arctic · Movement Patterns · Archival Tags · Marimentioning

confidence: 99%

Depth and temperature preferences of the deepwater flatfish Greenland halibut Reinhardtius hippoglossoides in an Arctic marine ecosystem

Peklova¹,

Hussey²,

Hedges³

et al. 2012

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides Walbaum) is a deepwater flatfish species that is distributed throughout the entire rim of the North Atlantic (Bowering and Brodie, 1995;Bowering and Nedreaas, 2000). It has been caught as deep as 2 200 m (Boje and Hareide, MS 1993;de Cardenas et al, MS 1996) although it is generally found in highest densities from 500 to 1 200 m and in some areas to 1 800 m (Bowering and Brodie, 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of the Maturation of Greenland Halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) from Populations Throughout the North Atlantic

Morgan¹,

Bowering²,

Gundersen³

et al. 2003

J. Northw. Atl. Fish. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the maturation of Greenland halibut from data collected on four populations: Gulf of St. Lawrence, Labrador-eastern Newfoundland, East Greenland-Iceland-Faroe Islands and the Northeast Arctic (Svalbard and Barents Sea). We compared the maturity schedules among these populations as well as the variability in the data from the different data sets. Estimates of size and age at 50% maturity were very similar for the different data sets except that the fish in the NAFO Divisions 2J+3K portion of the Labrador-eastern Newfoundland area appeared to mature at a considerably larger size and older age. All data sets showed substantial variability with data from the Gulf of St. Lawrence during the 1996 to 2000 period being perhaps the least variable. When data collected over the entire distribution area were compared to data collected from portions of a population's distribution, there was substantially less variability.

show abstract

“…However, deep-water ecosystems have lower energetical turnovers than shallow-water or littoral systems and their carrying capacity is expected to be lower. Since most of the target species are slow growing, overexploitation can be detected in deep-sea fisheries only after some years or decades after the beginning of a fishery (Atkinson, 1994;Bowering and Brodie, 1994;Koslow, 1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…turnovers than shallow-water or littoral systems and their carrying capacity is expected to be lower. Since most of the target species are slow growing, overexploitation can be detected in deep-sea fisheries only after some years or decades after the beginning of a fishery (Atkinson, 1994;Bowering and Brodie, 1994;Koslow, 1997).In addition to indices such as abundance, or harvest-induced mortality (Hutchings and Myers, 1994), to quantify changes and the impact in the carrying capacity of a system, trophodynamic aspects can be studied (Petersen and Curtis, 1980;Robinson and Ware, 1994; Christensen, 1995, among others). Trophodynamic studies constitute the base of massbalance models (i.e ECOPATH models), which have increasingly been considered for the study and management of marine ecosystems (Robinson and Ware, 1994;Wolff, 1994;Christensen, 1995;Pauly and Christensen, 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeding guilds of western Mediterranean demersal fish and crustaceans: an analysis based in a spring survey

et al. 2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY: The MEDITS-99 sampling was performed along all the Iberian Peninsula coasts of the western Mediterranean (from the Alborán Sea to Cape Creus) in a space-scale of 1000 Km N-S, at depths ranging between 27-790 m. Fish and decapod crustaceans were dominant in the megafaunal compartment sampled by trawling. Based on both the fish and the decapod crustacean compositions, a comparison of trophic guilds has been attempted, with fish and decapods classified as: 1) migrator macroplankton feeders (mM), 2) non-migrator macroplankton feeders (nmM), 3) nektobenthos-suprabenthos feeders (NS), 4) epibenthos feeders (Epib), 5) large detritus-scavengers (Sca), 6) infaunal feeders (Inf), 7) deposit feeders (Dep) and 8) small detritivorous feeders (Det). Multivariate techniques showed the following differences in the trophodynamics of the megafaunal assemblages along the coasts of the Iberian Peninsula: 1) crustaceans (mainly decapods) have different trophic structures on the shelf and on the slope; 2) on the slope, fish exhibited more clear changes as a function of the geographical gradient than crustaceans; and 3) trophodynamics of bathyal fish showed some geographic variations between the Alborán Sea, the Catalano-Balearic Basin, and the Algerian Basin (Vera Gulf and Alicante sectors), with a progressive north-south increase in planktophagous species.Key words: feeding guilds, demersal fish, decapod crustaceans, western Mediterranean, trawl survey, Mediterranean. turnovers than shallow-water or littoral systems and their carrying capacity is expected to be lower. Since most of the target species are slow growing, overexploitation can be detected in deep-sea fisheries only after some years or decades after the beginning of a fishery (Atkinson, 1994;Bowering and Brodie, 1994;Koslow, 1997).In addition to indices such as abundance, or harvest-induced mortality (Hutchings and Myers, 1994), to quantify changes and the impact in the carrying capacity of a system, trophodynamic aspects can be studied (Petersen and Curtis, 1980;Robinson and Ware, 1994; Christensen, 1995, among others). Trophodynamic studies constitute the base of massbalance models (i.e ECOPATH models), which have increasingly been considered for the study and management of marine ecosystems (Robinson and Ware, 1994;Wolff, 1994;Christensen, 1995;Pauly and Christensen, 1995). In practice, however, great difficulties exist in developing such models in deepwater systems, because only scarce data have been published on important quantitative aspects such as secondary production (Cartes and Sorbe, 1999;Cartes et al., 2000), and daily rations (Maynou and Cartes, 1997;1998;, with only some preliminary trophic balances constructed for the mid-slope depths . Trophodynamic studies in deep-sea systems have often focused on species of commercial interest (Macpherson, 1985;Bulman and Koslow 1992, Maynou andCartes 1997), whereas by-catches and studies on the lowest trophic levels, i.e. those compartments that sustain the trophic webs and fisheries, have received, in general...

show abstract

Greenland Halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides). A Review of the Dynamics of its Distribution and Fisheries off Eastern Canada and Greenland

Cited by 42 publications

References 19 publications

Depth and temperature preferences of the deepwater flatfish Greenland halibut Reinhardtius hippoglossoides in an Arctic marine ecosystem

Depth and temperature preferences of the deepwater flatfish Greenland halibut Reinhardtius hippoglossoides in an Arctic marine ecosystem

A Comparison of the Maturation of Greenland Halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) from Populations Throughout the North Atlantic

Feeding guilds of western Mediterranean demersal fish and crustaceans: an analysis based in a spring survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About