Connectivity, sustainability, and yield: bridging the gap between conventional fisheries management and marine protected areas

By L. Botsford, Daniel R. Brumbaugh, C. Grimes, J. Kellner, John L. Largier, Michael R. O’Farrell, S. Ralston, E. Soulanille, V. Wespestad. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries, 2009

277 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0268cc7c0735ac5054b49e9602e4eb7b20653d6b

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecology

In Global and Planetary Change

Citations in the corpus

Reproductive Timing in Marine Fishes: Variability, Temporal Scales, and Methods (2011, background): “In addition, there is a need to improve our understanding of when fish spawn so that we can assess where they spawn and thus determine how spatiotemporal factors affect recruitment success and the efficacy of spatially explicit approaches for protecting spawning populations (ie, marine protected are”
Designing marine reserve networks for both conservation and fisheries management (2010, background): “Thus many, smaller reserves spaced closely can enhancefishery prosperity by maximizing larval export from reserves to the fished area, but only to the extent that the reserves can sustain themselves at the high biomass densities needed to produce the high larvae densities (53).”
Spatial management of Indian Ocean tropical tuna fisheries: potential and perspectives (2014, methodology): “Theory points to conservation and fisheries benefits being strong functions of numerous factors, including, but not limited to, larval dispersal, adult movement and fisher behaviour (Botsford et al., 2009; Grüss et al., 2011a).”
Linking basin‐scale connectivity, oceanography and population dynamics for the conservation and management of marine ecosystems (2016, methodology): “…al. 2011; Soria et al. 2012; Foster et al. 2012].253 Through the direct incorporation of population genetic concepts into a bio-physical modelling approach at254 basin-scale, we propose a common framework for geneticists and oceanographers to explore connectivity issues255 [Botsford et al. 2009].”
Genetic and otolith isotopic markers identify salmon populations in the Columbia River at broad and fine geographic scales (2010, background): “, species’ distribution) and local spatial scales (Cadrin et al. 2005; Botsford et al. 2009; Cowen and Sponaugle 2009).”
Emerging Issues and Methodological Advances in Fisheries Reproductive Biology (2011, background): “This is especially important given the increased use of marine protected areas as management measures (Botsford et al. 2009), the increased evidence for natal homing (Thorrold et al. 2001; Robichaud and Rose 2004; Svedang et al. 2007), and the awareness of spatial effects on recruitment success…”
Risks of ignoring fish population spatial structure in fisheries management (2011, background): “1999) and (ii) spatial dynamics of fishing efforts often resulting from spatial variability in population density (Botsford et al. 2009).”
Additive effects of climate change on connectivity between marine protected areas and larval supply to fished areas (2015, background): “…thanks to larval dispersal (Galindo et al., 2006; Cowen & Sponaugle, 2009; Kool et al., 2010) and must be high enough to ensure ecological and evolutionary links among MPAs and sufficient larval export towards exploited areas (Hastings & Botsford, 2003; Botsford et al., 2009; Gaines et al., 2010).”