Largest global shark biomass found in the northern Galápagos Islands of Darwin and Wolf

León, Pelayo Salinas de; Acuña-Marrero, David; Rastoin, Etienne; Friedlander, Alan M.; Donovan, Mary K.; Sala, Enric

doi:10.7287/peerj.preprints.1872v1

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study adds to the growing body of literature that highlights the ecological uniqueness and the global irreplaceable value of Darwin and Wolf ( Salinas-De-León et al, 2015 ). These islands not only harbour the largest shark biomass reported to date, but also represent a unique tropical bioregion within the GMR ( Edgar et al, 2004 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Largest global shark biomass found in the northern Galápagos Islands of Darwin and Wolf

León

Acuña-Marrero

Rastoin

et al. 2016

PeerJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Overfishing has dramatically depleted sharks and other large predatory fishes worldwide except for a few remote and/or well-protected areas. The islands of Darwin and Wolf in the far north of the Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) are known for their large shark abundance, making them a global scuba diving and conservation hotspot. Here we report quantitative estimates of fish abundance at Darwin and Wolf over two consecutive years using stereo-video surveys, which reveal the largest reef fish biomass ever reported (17.5 t on average), consisting largely of sharks. Despite this, the abundance of reef fishes around the GMR, such as groupers, has been severely reduced because of unsustainable fishing practices. Although Darwin and Wolf are within the GMR, they were not fully protected from fishing until March 2016. Given the ecological value and the economic importance of Darwin and Wolf for the dive tourism industry, the current protection should ensure the long-term conservation of this hotspot of unique global value.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Largest global shark biomass found in the northern Galápagos Islands of Darwin and Wolf

León

Acuña-Marrero

Rastoin

et al. 2016

PeerJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…; Salinas de León et al. ) and was somewhat contrary to concerns that the mobility of large pelagic species impedes recovery in fully protected MPAs (Gruss et al. ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Fishing‐gear restrictions and biomass gains for coral reef fishes in marine protected areas

Campbell¹,

Edgar

Stuart‐Smith

et al. 2018

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Considerable empirical evidence supports recovery of reef fish populations with fishery closures. In countries where full exclusion of people from fishing may be perceived as inequitable, fishing-gear restrictions on nonselective and destructive gears may offer socially relevant management alternatives to build recovery of fish biomass. Even so, few researchers have statistically compared the responses of tropical reef fisheries to alternative management strategies. We tested for the effects of fishery closures and fishing gear restrictions on tropical reef fish biomass at the community and family level. We conducted 1,396 underwater surveys at 617 unique sites across a spatial hierarchy within 22 global marine ecoregions that represented 5 realms. We compared total biomass across local fish assemblages and among 20 families of reef fishes inside marine protected areas (MPAs) with different fishing restrictions: no-take, hook-and-line fishing only, several fishing gears allowed, and sites open to all fishing gears. We included a further category representing remote sites, where fishing pressure is low. As expected, full fishery closures, (i.e., no-take zones) most benefited community- and family-level fish biomass in comparison with restrictions on fishing gears and openly fished sites. Although biomass responses to fishery closures were highly variable across families, some fishery targets (e.g., Carcharhinidae and Lutjanidae) responded positively to multiple restrictions on fishing gears (i.e., where gears other than hook and line were not permitted). Remoteness also positively affected the response of community-level fish biomass and many fish families. Our findings provide strong support for the role of fishing restrictions in building recovery of fish biomass and indicate important interactions among fishing-gear types that affect biomass of a diverse set of reef fish families.

show abstract

“…In oceanic islands of the TEP, studies of fish assemblages have been performed at Galapagos (Edgar, Barrett, & Morton, ; Edgar, Marshall, & Mooney, ; Salinas de León et al, ), Isla del Coco (Alvarado et al, ; Friedlander et al, ), and Malpelo (Quimbayo, Dias, Schlickmann, & Mendes, ; Quimbayo, Zapata, Floeter, Bessudo, & Sazima, ; Soler, Bessudo, & Guzmán, ; Soler et al, ); however, as mentioned earlier, information is scarce regarding Revillagigedo Archipelago and Clipperton atoll. In the present study, the average richness per census was 15.52 ± 0.68 spp/transect in Revillagigedo Archipelago and 13.64 ± 0.61 spp/transect in Clipperton atoll.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reef fish structure assemblages in oceanic islands of the eastern tropical Pacific: Revillagigedo Archipelago and Clipperton atoll

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Revillagigedo Archipelago and Clipperton atoll are oceanic islands located in the eastern tropical Pacific. The composition and trophic structure of their fish assemblages have never been characterized in detail, and the aim of this study was therefore to analyse the community structure and assess the similarity of fish assemblages between these two areas. Underwater visual fish censuses were conducted using band transects at two depth levels in three islands of the Revillagigedo Archipelago (Socorro, San Benedicto, and Roca Partida) and at Clipperton atoll. We calculated ecological indices (density, richness, Shannon diversity, Pielou evenness, and taxonomic distinctiveness) for each transect. These were compared in order to determine quantitative differences among the islands and bathymetric levels. Qualitative analyses (ANOSIM, nMDS, and SIMPER) were also performed. Finally, we analysed the trophic structure of the assemblages and the functional diversity of the four studied sites. The results showed significant differences for all indices, except diversity (H′). Roca Partida was the site with greatest abundance and richness due to the presence of pelagic species in large numbers. No significant differences were found in functional diversity, suggesting a high degree of ecological redundancy. Lower‐level carnivores with mean trophic level values of between 3.3 and 3.8 dominated both areas. The ordination analysis did not show a clear difference in fish composition among the islands, although Clipperton atoll has a particular fauna characterized by endemic species (Thalassoma robertsoni and Stegastes baldwini). In conclusion, the fish communities of the studied areas seem quite similar, but their assemblage structure differs. In particular, Clipperton is differentiated by the influence of endemic species.

show abstract

Largest global shark biomass found in the northern Galápagos Islands of Darwin and Wolf

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Largest global shark biomass found in the northern Galápagos Islands of Darwin and Wolf

Largest global shark biomass found in the northern Galápagos Islands of Darwin and Wolf

Fishing‐gear restrictions and biomass gains for coral reef fishes in marine protected areas

Reef fish structure assemblages in oceanic islands of the eastern tropical Pacific: Revillagigedo Archipelago and Clipperton atoll

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About