DEPOMOD—modelling the deposition and biological effects of waste solids from marine cage farms

By C. Cromey, Thom Nickell, K. Black. 2002

390 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Aquatic Science, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/00f0a26c65bed59f66e8792b6740138d62ec28d2

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Aquatic Science

1. S. Robinson
2. G. Reid
3. J. Ferreira
4. Xinxin Wang
5. K. Reitan
6. T. Chopin
7. Y. Olsen
8. S. Bricker

In Global and Planetary Change

1. S. Robinson
2. G. Reid
3. J. Ferreira
4. S. Bricker
5. C. McKindsey
6. P. Cranford
7. Myriam D. Callier
8. K. Reitan

Citations in the corpus

• Sedimentation rates in a suspended mussel farm (Great-Entry Lagoon, Canada): biodeposit production and dispersion (2006, methodology): “The spatial extent of aquaculture-related biodeposition and the benthic response to varying levels of biodeposition will be modelled by adapting the DEPOMOD model (Cromey et al. 2002), originally developed for marine cage fish farming, to bivalve aquaculture.”
• Vertical variability of wild fish assemblages around sea-cage fish farms: implications for management (2005, neutral): “Phase 1 would involve a traditional approach to modelling nutrient flows for the assess- ment before installation of the farm (e.g. DEPOMOD, Cromey et al. 2002; MERAMOD, Cromey & White 2004).”
• Empirical relationships describing benthic impacts of salmon aquaculture (2010, background): “…facilities have included measures, either qualitative or quantitative, of benthic responses to increased OM supply (Findlay & Watling 1997, Cromey et al. 2000, 2002, Silvert & Cromey 2001, Brooks & Mahnken 2003, Cromey & Black 2005, Stucchi et al. 2005, Kalantzi & Karakassis 2006,…”
• Site selection for shellfish aquaculture by means of GIS and farm-scale models, with an emphasis on data-poor environments (2011, background): “A range of such models are available (e.g. Bacher et al., 2003; Chamberlain, 2002; DEPOMOD: Cromey et al., 2002; FARM: Ferreira et al., 2007a; Grant et al., 2007; MOM: Stigebrandt et al., 2004; Weise et al., 2006; Weise et al., 2009).”
• Open water integrated multi-trophic aquaculture: constraints on the effectiveness of mussels as an organic extractive component (2013, background): “Modeling approaches have been developed for predicting benthic fecal loading from both fish and shellfish aquaculture operations (Cromey et al. 2002, Weise et al. 2009).”
• Discharge of nutrient wastes from salmon farms: environmental effects, and potential for integrated multi-trophic aquaculture (2012, background): “In a more recent study of feeding assisted by modern technology, feed loss was found to be below 5% of the input (Cromey et al. 2002, Bureau et al. 2003, Reid et al. 2009).”
• A review of the biophysical properties of salmonid faeces: implications for aquaculture waste dispersal models and integrated multi‐trophic aquaculture (2009, methodology): “…settling rates and related physical properties of feed pellets is ironically more available in the scienti¢c literature (e.g. Elberizon & Kelly 1998; Chen, Beveridge & Telfer 1999a; Cromey et al. 2002; Stewart & Grant 2002; Peterson, Sutherland &Higgs 2005;Vassallo, Doglioli, Rinaldi & Beiso 2006).”
• Management of productivity environmental effects and profitability of shellfish aquaculture - the Farm Aquaculture Resource Management (FARM) model (2007, methodology): “At the local scale, the evaluation of potential fish aquaculture sites has also been supported by models such as DEPOMOD (Cromey et al., 2002) and MOM (Stigebrandt et al., 2004), but there are very few models for analysis of shellfish farms.”