Shark bycatch and depredation in the U.S. Atlantic pelagic longline fishery

By J. Mandelman, Peter W. Cooper, T. Werner, K. Lagueux. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries, 2008

92 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Inferring shark population trends from generalized linear mixed models of pelagic longline catch and effort data (2010, methodology): “Conversely, fisheries sample intensely over large regions closer in size to the geographic ranges of shark populations, but are much more variable than designed research surveys making standardization of the catch rates a challenge (Maunder and Punt, 2004; Bishop, 2006).”
Discards, hooking, and post-release mortality of porbeagle (Lamna nasus), shortfin mako (Isurus oxyrinchus), and blue shark (Prionace glauca) in the Canadian pelagic longline fishery (2016, background): “There are far fewer reported estimates for shortfin makos, but the reported range of 16–47% (Francis et al., 2004; Megalofonou et al., 2005; Mandelman et al., 2008; Walsh et al., 2009; Pacheco et al., 2011; Coelho et al., 2012; Gallagher et al., 2014) is consistent with our estimate of 26.2%.”
Postrelease survival, vertical and horizontal movements, and thermal habitats of five species of pelagic sharks in the central Pacific Ocean (2011, background): “…form a large part of the international shark fin trade (Clarke et al., 2006), are generally not targeted but are by far the majority of the bycatch in pelagic gill nets and longline fisheries targeting swordfish (Xiphias gladius) (Camhi, 2008; Mandelman et al., 2008; Nakano and Stevens, 2008).”