At-vessel and postrelease mortality rates of bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) associated with pelagic longline gear in the northern Gulf of Mexico.
The bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) is the largest member of the family Scombridae and has a specialized cardiovascular physiology that allows it to exploit subarctic to subtropical pelagic waters (Carey and Lawson, 1973; Block et al., 2005). Bluefin tuna of the western Atlantic Ocean forage in the North Atlantic Ocean, and many of them migrate to the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) (Mather et al., 1995; Block et al., 2005; Knapp et al., 2014) to spawn, although spawning is not exclusive to the GOM (Mather et al., 1995; Richardson et al., 2016). Bluefin tuna can be found in the GOM from December through July, but the timing can vary with oceanographic conditions (Block et al., 2005; Teo et al., 2007; Galuardi et al.; 2010). During these months, bluefin tuna are incidentally caught by the U.S. pelagic longline (PLL) fleet, which targets swordfish (Xiphias gladius) and yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares) in the northern GOM (Springer, 1957).
Currently, the bluefin tuna in the GOM is managed as an incidental bycatch species, and no active targeting of it is allowed. As a result, various management actions have either required or resulted in substantial numbers of fish released alive or discarded dead. Beginning in 1981, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) prohibited directed fisheries for bluefin tuna on the GOM spawning grounds and established quotas for the fishery (Federal Register, 1981). To further reduce the incentive to target bluefin tuna, the NMFS enacted target species catch requirements for bluefin tuna retention (Federal Register, 1992). In 2011, the NMFS mandated that all U.S. PLL vessels fishing in the GOM use a weak hook with a reduced wire diameter (i.e., [less than or equal to] 3.65 mm) (Federal Register, 2011). A weak hook is a circle hook designed to allow a blue-fin tuna and other similarly large animals to straighten the hook, thereby reducing their catch by more than 50% while not significantly reducing the catch of target species (Foster and Bergmann (1)). Additional measures were taken in 2006 with the implementation of Amendment 7 to the Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan (Federal Register, 2014), which created a system to assign individual quotas for bluefin tuna to vessels and closed 2 areas that cover the majority of the spawning habitat of bluefin tuna in the northern GOM to the use of PLL gear during the peak spawning months of April and May (Fig. 1). The closure of these areas, in conjunction with the requirement to use weak hooks, has greatly reduced total discards of dead bluefin tuna.
The effectiveness of management measures that require or promote release of fish hinges on 2 components of mortality associated with interactions with fishing operations. The first component of mortality is the fraction of fish dead at-vessel upon retrieval of the gear, and the second component is the fraction of fish that die after being released. At-vessel mortality and survival have been documented from commercial long-line fishing operations for several species of billfishes, tunas, and sharks (Serafy et al., 2012a; Walter et al., 2012; Musyl et al., 2015) but have yet to be quantified for bluefin tuna in the GOM PLL fishery. Similarly, the second component, postrelease mortality from fishing operations, has been quantified for bluefin tuna from recreational fisheries (Marcek and Graves, 2014; Gold smith et al., 2017) and for other species on PLL operations (Kerstetter et al., 2003; Musyl et al., 2011a) but has not been evaluated for bluefin tuna from the U.S. GOM PLL fishery operating under normal fishing conditions.
Both components of mortality are necessary to determine the total mortality associated with fishing interactions and to evaluate the efficacy of management regulations (Coggins et al., 2007) designed to promote release of live fish. Mortality from fishing operations can have a substantial effect on populations; therefore, it is critical to consider such mortality in population assessments (Musyl et al., 2015).
For this study, we quantified both components of mortality associated with interactions of bluefin tuna with the U.S. GOM PLL fishery. We first examined the database of the NOAA Southeast Fisheries Science Center's Pelagic Observer Program (POP) to determine an at-vessel mortality rate as a function of several covariates. Next we electronically tagged blue-fin tuna caught incidentally by the U.S. PLL fishery in the GOM to obtain estimates of postrelease mortality that apply to the fishery operating under normal commercial fishing practices. Fish were tagged from commercial fishing vessels, and all live fish captured, regardless of apparent condition, were tagged. Finally, we combined the results of our tagging study with the proportion of bluefin tuna reported dead at-vessel from the POP database to determine an overall mortality estimate for interactions of bluefin tuna with PLL gear in the GOM.
Materials and methods
Examination of Pelagic Observer Program database
The POP deploys NMFS-trained observers on a portion of PLL vessel trips to collect details on gear configuration, catch composition, and environmental conditions (for further details about observer protocols, see the training manual available from the Southeast Fisheries Science Center at website). To perform analyses similar to those used by Serafy et al. (2012a), we used a logistic regression to examine data for the influence of several key variables on the probability of mortality of 1498 bluefin tuna captured in the GOM PLL fishery during 1993-2017. For the logistic regression, we used the PROC GENMOD procedure in SAS/STAT (2) software (vers. 9.4; SAS Institute, Inc. Cary, NC). The following model was applied:
Mortality = [H.sub.i] + [D.sub.j] + [T.sub.k] + [C.sub.1] + [S.sub.m] + [L.sub.n], (1)
where mortality = the probability of a fish being dead at-vessel;
H = the ith type of hook used (circle hook, J-hook, weak hook);
D = the jth maximum hook depth (in the water column, meters);
T = the kth target species (swordfish, tuna, mixed);
C = the mth sea-surface temperature (SST, in degrees Celcius, measured by the vessel during gear deployment);
S = the mth soak duration (time from last hook deployed to first hook retrieved); and
L = the nth fish length (straight fork length, in centimeters).
All factors were modeled as continuous variables with the exception of hook type and target species. To test for an effect of hook type on mortality, least square means were generated as estimates of mortality for each hook type.
From 2010 through 2015, we deployed 41 PAT-Mk10 pop-up satellite archival tags (PSATs; Wildlife Computers, Inc., Redmond, WA) on bluefin tuna captured on PLL vessels fishing in the GOM (Fig. 1). These PSATs were programmed to archive pressure (depth), ambient temperature (in degrees Celsius), and light intensity every 10 s. Each PSAT was equipped with a corrodible burn pin that detaches the tag on a preprogrammed date (90-365 d) or when the PSAT has been at a constant depth ([+ or -]5 m) for a 24-h period, indicating that either the tag is no longer attached to the animal or the animal has died. Upon detachment of a tag, profiles of depth and temperature and proportions of time spent in 14 user-defined depth (time at depth) and temperature (time at temperature) bins were summarized into 1-h (4 PSATs) or 4-h (37 PSATs) periods and transmitted through the Advanced Research and Global Observation Satellite system. For those cases in which the tag was physically recovered (11 PSATs), the full archival data set was obtained and analyzed.
All PSATs were equipped with a surgical-grade, nylon toggle anchor and an RD-1800 (Wildlife Computers, Inc.), a device designed to sever the PSAT link before hydrostatic pressure damages the tag (typically at a depth of approximately 1800 m). The tether rigging had 3 variations over the course of this study. The tags deployed in 2010 and 2011 (5 PSATs) were equipped with double-crimped monofilament tethers. In a concurrent study on yellowfin tuna, several tags were recovered with visible teeth marks on the PSAT and float, raising a concern that monofilament might result in an increase in attachment failures (C. Brown, unpubl. data); therefore, in 2012 tethers were constructed from stainless steel cable (22 PSATs). However, during a failed tagging attempt, a PSAT fell overboard. This PSAT, which was still equipped with a stainless steel tether, was observed to be negatively buoyant. Subsequent buoyancy testing indicated that rigged PSATs were very sensitive to small changes in weight, and the previous design with a double-crimped tether also resulted in tags being negatively buoyant. All subsequently deployed tags (14 PSATs) were rigged with a single-crimped monofilament tether, to allow the PSAT to float with the tether attached, and each of these PSATs was checked for positive buoyancy prior to deployment.
All PSATs were deployed by NMFS-trained observers aboard commercial fishing vessels that targeted yellowfin tuna with PLL gear in the GOM between the months of February and May of each year (2010-2015). Observers were given strict guidance to tag any live bluefin tuna, regardless of condition. When a fish was released by using methods similar to those of a normally operating PLL vessel, care was taken so that the fish remained in the water for tagging, and the hook, for the most part, was not removed.
A study of PLL gear that employed a design with alternating hook types found that a new 16/0 weak hook could reduce catches of bluefin tuna in the GOM PLL fishery by an estimated 56.5% (Foster and Bergmann (1)) from levels observed when a typical circle hook was used. In that study, hook timers, devices that measure the total time a fish spends hooked on a line, were attached to a portion of the gangion. The results of that study led the NMFS to mandate the use of these weak hooks in the GOM PLL fishery, and this regulation went into effect in 2011 (Federal Register, 2011). Prior to this rule being enacted, fish tagged in 2010 (4 fish) were captured by using regular-strength 16/0 circle hooks. In 2012, tags were deployed in conjunction with a continuation of the weak hook study (30 fish). For fish captured on a leader with an accompanying hook timer, total time on the line was obtained. All remaining fish were deployed on PLL sets by using the 16/0 weak hook (7 fish).
Determination of mortality
Postrelease mortality mostly has been estimated to occur shortly after release because of acute injury (Muoneke and Childress, 1994; Stokesbury et al., 2004; Wilson et al., 2005). However, delayed mortality due to loss of ability to feed or infection can occur several days to weeks postrelease (Burns and Froeschke, 2012). Although increasing the duration of monitoring beyond several days allows the incorporation of delayed mortalities, there is a risk of confounding results with mortality unassociated with the initial capture event (e.g., with mortality caused by predation). Consequently, some researchers have restricted their analysis to the first 5-10 d after tagging (Graves et al., 2002; Kerstetter et al., 2003; Horodysky and Graves, 2005; Marcek and Graves, 2014); however, given the relatively low natural mortality rate of adult blue-fin tuna relative to other species (Fromentin and Powers, 2005), we extended the time frame from 5-10 d to 30 d, following Stokesbury et al. (2011). The penalty for use of a longer time frame is that natural (and fishing) mortality begins to bias estimates of release mortality, but it would be highly unlikely (0.8% chance) for a bluefin tuna to not survive 30 d because of natural mortality, given the currently assumed natural mortality rate for bluefin tuna (0.1/year; ICCAT, 2017).
Any fish that appeared to live past this 30-d threshold was determined to have successfully survived the capture event. Wilson score intervals and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the binomial proportions (Wilson, 1927). The standard method for determining mortality by using PSATs involves inferring mortality from behavior of the fish as recorded by the tag. Below, we outline this method; however, in this study, we had to address an added complication. To distinguish between a mortality event and a premature tag release, we considered whether a tag floated after it was shed by a fish or it remained on a dead fish until it reached either the release depth of the RD-1800 device or the programmed tag release time. Given the ability of bluefin tuna to swim at high rates of speed (Wardle et al., 1989) and because fish remained in the water for tagging that occurred at night often on poorly lit vessels and varying states of sea conditions, some premature tag shedding was likely to have occurred in our study, and it is commonly observed in most PSAT tagging studies (Musyl et al., 2011b). The negative buoyancy associated with some of the deployed tags complicates the interpretation of the recorded depth data because a tag attachment failure would result in the tag sinking in a similar fashion to a dead fish. In all, 27 of the 41 deployed PSATs were negatively buoyant.
Despite the negative buoyancy of those tags, we were able to distinguish between likely premature release of a tag and a fish mortality by calculating the sinking rates for each of the 10 prematurely released tags and comparing these rates to the rate (0.251 m/s) for the tag that was dropped overboard (the reference tag). In addition, there was an apparent mortality of a bluefin tuna that was tagged with a positively buoyant PSAT and tether; the sinking rate calculated for this tag was 0.408 m/s, a rate that is over 60% faster than the rate of the reference tag. Assuming that all dead fish would sink at a faster rate than the reference tag, we classified each tag according to whether it likely sunk because of a premature release (sinking rate<rate of reference tag) or because of a fish mortality (sinking rate>rate of reference tag). Fish were then assigned to 1 of 4 categories on the basis of the observed behavior of the fish as recorded by the tag: 1) survived (consistent vertical movement for [greater than or equal to] 30 d), 2) mortality (fish was at large for <30 d, tag detachment occurred at a depth [greater than or equal to] 1200 m, and the sinking rate was >0.251 m/s), 3) tag attachment failure (fish was at large for <30 d, and the tag was positively buoyant and detached at a depth <1200 m, or the tag was negatively buoyant and detachment occurred at a depth [greater than or equal to] 1200 m, but the sinking rate was <0.251 m/s), and 4) non-reporting tag (tag failed to transmit any data).
To account for the uncertainty of the eventual fate of fish that were equipped with tags that either failed to report or failed to remain attached for [greater than or equal to] 30 d, we calculated the mortality rate by using 2 methods. One method used this expression that includes the number of fish assigned to 3 of the 4 categories, yielding the highest possible mortality estimate: (mortality+tag attachment failure+non-reporting tag)/total number of tags deployed. The other method used the following expression: mortality/(survived+mortality). The first method assumes that all fish in the tag attachment failure and non-reporting tag categories were dead fish, but the second effectively considers that tag data for fish in the non-reporting tag or tag attachment failure categories are uninformative and discards those fish from the sample.
Estimation of overall mortality
Overall mortality (M) was calculated as the probability of a mortality occurring during the entire capture and release process. It is calculated as the probability of being dead at-vessel (P(C)) times the probability of dying after being released (P(R)):
M = P(C) x P(R). (1)
The variance of estimates from this equation was derived as the variance of the product of 2 assumed uncorrelated random variables (Goodman, 1960).
Pelagic Observer Program database
The results of the logistic regression found that only one variable of the independent model, hook type, significantly (P<0.05) affected the probability of at-vessel mortality for bluefin tuna (Table 1). Therefore, we report the least square means as estimates of at-vessel mortality rate for the 3 hook types, standard (strong) circle hook (65%, 95% CI: 57-72%), J-hook (68%, 95% CI: 56-78%), and the currently mandated weak hook (54%, 95% CI: 46-62%).
From 2010 to 2015, 41 adult bluefin tuna from PLL vessels were tagged with Wildlife Computers PSATs in the GOM (Table 2). The size range of the 41 bluefin tuna was 190-270 cm straight fork length (Table 2), and they were tagged in the months of February-June at SSTs ranging from 21.8[degrees]C to 29.7[degrees]C. Representing fish that successfully survived the fishery interaction, 29 PSATs remained attached for at least 30 d. Ten PSATs failed to reach the 30 d threshold, and 2 additional PSATs failed to transmit any data.
Tagged fish at large for fewer than 30 days
Ten PSATs began transmitting data less than 30 d after tagging (1-18 d). Six of these tags were equipped with tethers that we identified as negatively buoyant. Four tags sunk at a rate greater than the rate of the reference tag (0.251 m/s); therefore, the fish tracked with those tags were put in the mortality category (Table 3). Three tags had sinking rates that were slower than the rate of the reference tag, indicating likely tag attachment failures and not observed mortalities. The remaining 3 tags were equipped with positively buoyant tethers, detached from the fish at a depth <1000 m, and floated to the surface, indicating tag attachment failures.
An upper bound estimate of postrelease mortality was obtained by treating all fish with tags that either did not report (2 PSATs) or failed to attach (6 PSATs) as potential dead fish (12 of 41 fish tagged with PSATs), giving a maximum postrelease mortality estimate of 29% (95% CI: 18-44%). Assuming that these non-reporting tags and tags that failed to remain attached were not associated with fish mortalities, and, therefore, that the fish tagged with them were removed from the sample, we determined that the most likely estimate of postrelease mortality is 12% (95% CI: 5-27%) (i.e., 4 of 33 PSATs associated with mortalities).
Twelve tagged fish were captured on leaders that included a hook timer, which measures the length of time a fish is on the line prior to crew engagement (Table 2). Tag data indicates an apparent mortality for only 1 fish captured on a line with a hook timer (8.3 h attached to a longline). Three additional tagged fish were associated with either attachment failures (2 PSATs) or their tag failed to report (1 PSAT). The remaining 8 PSATs were deployed on surviving fish with an average time on the line of 7.4 h (2.2-14.4 h).
We estimated the probability of a mortality of a bluefin tuna occurring as a result of an interaction with, and release from, PLL gear in the GOM, using Equation 1 with the most likely estimate of postrelease mortality (12%, 95% CI: 5-27%) as P(R) and P(C) obtained from the logistic regression model predicted for fishing with weak hooks (54%, 95% CI: 46-62%). The resulting overall estimate of the probability of capture-induced mortality of bluefin tuna in the GOM PLL fishery, operating as it currently does with weak hooks, is 59% (95% CI: 47-71%).
On the basis of the data presented in this study, we estimated postrelease mortality of bluefin tuna from PLL fishery operations in the GOM at a range of 12-29%, depending on the treatment of the non-reporting or premature release of tags. The highest estimates of mortality were obtained when all non-reporting tags were assumed to be associated to a mortality event. However, we considered that there is a sound basis for eliminating fish with non-reporting tags from the sample. Our non-reporting rate for this study is relatively low (5%) in comparison to the rates of other studies (Musyl et al., 2011b). Furthermore, with an RD-1800 device attached to its tether, a PSAT would detach from a sinking, dead fish before it reached the tag crush depth, making it unlikely that non-reporting was a result of such a mortality. Non-reporting, therefore, was the result of either equipment failure or damage (perhaps, due to predation) (Musyl et al., 2011b), with neither cause being informative on mortality due to a capture event. Given that we can separate attachment failures from mortalities by examining sinking rates, we removed fish associated with both non-reporting tags and attachment failures from the sample to provide what we believe is a more accurate postrelease mortality estimate of 12%. Under either assumption regarding the fate of malfunctioning tags, the postrelease mortality estimates are relatively low (12-29%), indicating that, if a fish is alive at-vessel, its likelihood of surviving after its release is remarkably good.
It is worth noting the negative buoyancy aspect of the tag harness rigging design. Musyl et al. (2015) emphasized the importance of testing for tag buoyancy with the tether and anchor mechanism attached; however, they found that most researchers failed to indicate whether these tests were conducted prior to tag deployment. Clearly, our study had this issue, and future researchers should take note. It may also be necessary to consider whether some presumed mortalities in prior PSAT studies could actually have been instances when tags equipped with negatively buoyant harnesses were shed.
No other estimates of release survival for blue-fin tuna captured in PLL fisheries operating under normal commercial practices exist. However, a study by Block et al. (2005) that used short experimental sets designed to capture bluefin tuna alive reported an at-vessel mortality rate of 30%, a rate that is nearly 25% lower than the overall nominal rate derived from the POP observer database (54%). Block et al. (2005) postulated that mortality rates of bluefin tuna in the GOM PLL fishery could be a result of asphyxiation due to inability to ram ventilate, thermal stress from confinement in warm surface waters, or other capture related trauma that could be exacerbated by longer time on the line.
Block et al. (2005) used relatively short sets designed to mitigate mortality. In contrast, our study operated under standard commercial fishing operations with an average soak duration of 7.5 h. Hook timer data indicate that fish in our study were on the lines for an average of 6.2 h, a period that is longer than the entire duration of the experimental sets in Block et al (2005). An additional factor related to observed mortality differences could be gear configuration. Although we did not detect significant effects of hook depth or SST on mortality in our analysis of POP data, the experimental design of their study (with a maximum hook depth of 200 m, compared with 97 m in our study; Table 2) could have allowed fish to access deeper, cooler waters and a fish's ability to access such water could have been a mitigating factor for some of the thermal stress that a fish may have experienced. Furthermore, one static SST measurement might not accurately reflect the range of temperatures at the locations where fish encountered the gear throughout sets, and the use of this single measurement could be the reason that we did not detect a significance for SST. Musyl et al. (2009) highlighted the importance of using fishery-specific features when attempting to estimate postrelease survival, and our results support this notion.
Postrelease mortality has been quantified to be relatively low in recreational fisheries (from 0% [95% CI: 0-7%] to 32% [95% CI: 14-55%]) (Goldsmith et al., 2017) and in commercial hand-line and rod-and-reel fisheries in Canada (from 3% [95% CI: 1-13%] to 6% [95% CI: 2-6%]) (Stokesbury et al., 2011). Both sets of authors calculated mortality in 2 ways; hence, separate 95% CIs are given for each estimate. Although these fisheries and the ocean conditions where they occur are very different from those of the GOM, the low rate of postrelease mortality in those studies and in our study indicates that bluefin tuna, if they survive the initial capture process, appear to have a high probability of survival regardless of the gear type used or the geographic region of release.
Nonetheless, the high at-vessel mortality rate that we estimated (54%) for weak hooks in the GOM PLL fishery would diminish the effectiveness of a no-retention policy in reducing fishing mortality and achieving stock status benchmarks (Coggins et al., 2007), in isolation of other measures. The relatively low post-release mortality from our study, however, does provide support for encouraging live release of bluefin tuna. Currently, live bluefin tuna can either be retained or released with control over the total retention rate through an individual quota system for bluefin tuna, in which vessels are required to have quota of blue-fin tuna available to retain live fish or to account for any dead captures. This management measure is accompanied by a closure of 2 areas in the spring to minimize encounters with bluefin tuna and by the use of weak hooks that facilitate escape.
Mitigation of bycatch of bluefin tuna in PLL fisheries has been a high priority for the NMFS. The results of this study generally indicate that management measures taken by that agency to minimize bycatch of bluefin tuna are effective, measures that reduce the probability of capture of bluefin tuna on a longline and, then, once captured, provide opportunities to vessels to retain dead fish or to release live fish. The currently mandated weak hooks do appear to have some conservation benefits. In our analysis, we observed that at-vessel mortality was 11% lower for weak hooks than for traditionally used circle hooks, and Foster and Bergmann (1) estimated that weak hooks also could reduce the bycatch of bluefin tuna by 56.5%. Gallagher et al. (2017) found a strong correlation of plasma lactate with maximum acceleration of hooked sharks, a correlation indicating that the behavioral response of the fish could influence the probability of mortality. Despite the high probability that we would observe an atvessel mortality, our hook timer data revealed that it is possible for bluefin tuna to survive after [greater than or equal to] 14 h on the line and that the behavioral response of an individual fish might contribute to the probability of its mortality. These findings might explain why we see a reduction in at-vessel mortality associated with the weak hook, with the more vigorous fighters that would likely die on the line able to straighten a weak hook and escape capture. Nevertheless, it is important to note that the at-vessel catch estimate is based on observed reduction in bycatch of bluefin tuna and that the actual fate of escapees from weak hooks remains unknown (Serafy et al., 2012b).
Because the degree of injury sustained by fish that straighten their hooks and elude observation has yet to be quantified, the total mortality estimate in our study may be considered conservative. On the other hand, it is possible that survival was enhanced for fish that would have otherwise died on the standard circle hooks because they were spared the prolonged stress and injury of being firmly hooked until gear retrieval. Further research is warranted on this topic; however, determining precisely how to track the survival of fish that have effectively escaped capture by straightening weak hooks is a serious, perhaps insurmountable, research challenge. In any case, on the basis of observed interactions in the POP database, the results of our study indicate that weak hooks provide the additional benefit of increasing at-vessel survival in comparison with standard circle hooks. Further mitigation efforts could be directed to evaluation of factors that might promote an even greater at-vessel survival rate; however, changes in factors, such as gear configuration, set duration, set location, or bait, may negatively affect catches of yellowfin tuna and swordfish, the target species of PLL fisheries in the GOM.
Eric S. Orbesen (contact author)
Craig A. Brown
Joseph E. Serafy
John F. Walter III
Email address for contact author: email@example.com
Southeast Fisheries Science Center
National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA
75 Virginia Beach Drive
Miami, Florida 33149-1003
Manuscript submitted 8 May 2018. Manuscript accepted 14 November 2018. Fish. Bull. 117:15-23 (2019). Online publication date: 12 December 2018.
The views and opinions expressed or implied in this article are those of the author (or authors) and do not necessarily reflect the position of the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA.
We would like to thank J. Sheldon, J. Rollo, and R. Jones for all their hard work and dedication as observers and for deploying many of the tags used in this project. We would also like to thank the captains and crews of the vessels from which we were allowed to tag fish. We thank C. Porch, E. Prince, and J. Hoolihan for their assistance in the design of this study. Lastly, we would like to thank S. Cushner, K. Keene, L. Beerkircher, and D. Foster for assisting in vessel coordination.
Block, B. A., S. L. H. Teo, A. Walli, A. Boustany, M. J. W. Stokesbury, C. J. Farwell, K. C. Weng, H. Dewar, and T. D. Williams. 2005. Electronic tagging and population structure of Atlantic bluefin tuna. Nature 434:1121-1127. Crossref
Burns, K. M., and J. T. Froeschke. 2012. Survival of red grouper (Epinephalus morio) and red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) caught on J-hooks and circle hooks in the Florida recreational and recreational-for-hire-fisheries. Bull. Mar. Sci. 88:633-646. Crossref
Carey, F. G., and K. D. Lawson. 1973. Temperature regulation in free-swimming bluefin tuna Comp. Biochem. Physiol. A. 44:375-392. Crossref
Coggins, L. G., Jr., M. J. Catalano, M. S. Allen, W. E. Pine III, and C. J. Walters. 2007. Effects of cryptic mortality and the hidden costs of using length limits in fishery management. Fish Fish. 8:196-210. Crossref
Federal Register. 1981. Atlantic bluefin tuna. Fed. Reg. 46:8012-8015.
1992. Atlantic bluefin tuna fishery. Fed. Reg. 57:365-380.
2011. Atlantic highly migratory species; bluefin tuna bycatch reduction in the Gulf of Mexico pelagic longline fishery. Fed Reg. 76:18653-18661.
2014. Atlantic highly migratory species; 2006 consolidated Atlantic highly migratory species (HMS) fishery management plan; amendment 7; final rule. Fed. Reg. 79:71510-71608.
Fromentin, J.-M., and J. E. Powers. 2005. Atlantic bluefin tuna: population dynamics, ecology, fisheries and management. Fish Fish. 6:281-306. Crossref
Gallagher, A. J., E. R. Staaterman, S. J. Cooke, and N. Hammerschlag. 2017. Behavioural responses to fisheries capture among sharks caught using experimental fishery gear. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 74:1-7. Crossref
Galuardi, B., F. Royer, W. Golet, J. Logan, J. Neilson, and M. Lutcavage. 2010. Complex migration routes of Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) question current population structure paradigm. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 67:966-976. Crossref
Graves, J. E., B. E. Luckhurst, and E. D. Prince. 2002. An evaluation of pop-up satellite tags for estimating postrelease survival of blue marlin (Makaira nigricans) from a recreational fishery. Fish. Bull. 100:134-142.
Goldsmith, W. M., A. M. Scheld, and J. E. Graves. 2017. Performance of a low-cost, solar-powered pop-up satellite archival tag for assessing post-release mortality of Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) caught in the US east coast light-tackle recreational fishery. Anim. Biotelem. 5:29. Crossref
Goodman, L. A. 1960. On the exact variance of products. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 55:708-713. Crossref
Horodysky, A. Z., and J. E. Graves. 2005. Application of pop-up satellite archival tag technology to estimate postrelease survival of white marlin (Tetrapturus albidus) caught on circle and straight-shank ("J") hooks in the western North Atlantic recreational fishery Fish. Bull. 103:84-96.
ICCAT (International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas). 2017. Report of the 2017 ICCAT bluefin stock assessment meeting, 91 p. [Available from website.]
Kerstetter, D. W., B. E. Luckhurst, E. D. Prince, and J. E. Graves. 2003. Use of pop-up satellite archival tags to demonstrate survival of blue marlin (Makaira nigricans) released from pelagic longline gear. Fish. Bull. 101:939-948.
Knapp, J. M, G. Aranda, A. Medina, and M. Lutcavage. 2014. Comparative assessment of reproductive status of female Atlantic bluefin tuna from the Gulf of Mexico and the Mediterranean Sea. PLoS ONE 9(6):e98233. Crossref
Marcek, B. J., and J. E. Graves. 2014. An estimate of postrelease mortality of school-size bluefin tuna in the U.S. recreational troll fishery. North Am. J. Fish. Manage. 34:602-608. Crossref
Mather, F. J., Ill, J. M. Mason Jr., and A. C. Jones. 1995. Historical document: life history and fisheries of Atlantic bluefin tuna. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-SEFSC-370, 165 p.
Muoneke, M. I., and W. M. Childress. 1994. Hooking mortality: a review for recreational fisheries. Rev. Fish. Sci. 2:123-156. Crossref
Musyl, M. K., C. D. Moyes, R. W. Brill, and N. M. Fragoso. 2009. Factors influencing mortality estimates in post-release survival studies. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 396:157-159. Crossref
Musyl, M. K., R. W. Brill, D. S. Curran, N. M. Fragoso, L. M. McNaughton, A. Nielsen, B. S. Kikkawa, and C. D. Moyes. 2011a. Postrelease survival, vertical and horizontal movements, and thermal habitats of five species of pelagic sharks in the central Pacific Ocean. Fish. Bull. 109:341-368.
Musyl, M. K., M. L. Domeier, N. Nasby-Lucas, R. W. Brill, L. M. McNaughton, J. Y. Swimmer, M. S. Lutcavage, S. G. Wilson, B. Galuardi, and J. B. Liddle. 2011b. Performance of pop-up satellite archival tags. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 433:1-28. Crossref
Musyl, M. K., C. D. Moyes, R. W. Brill, B. L. Mourato, A. West, L. M. McNaughton, W.-C. Chiang, and C.-L. Sun. 2015. Postrelease mortality in istiophorid billfish. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 72:538-556. Crossref
Richardson, D. E, K. E. Marancik, J. R. Guyon, M. E. Lutcavage, B. Galuardi, C. H. Lam, H. J. Walsh, S. Wildes, D. A. Yates, and J. A. Hare. 2016. Discovery of a spawning ground reveals diverse migration strategies in Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.. 113:3299-3304. Crossref
Serafy, J. E., E. S. Orbesen, D. J. G. Snodgrass, L. R. Beerkircher, and J. F. Walter. 2012a. Hooking survival of fishes captured by the United States Atlantic pelagic longline fishery: impact of the 2004 circle hook rule Bull. Mar. Sci. 88:605-621. Crossref
Serafy, J. E., S. J. Cooke, G. A. Diaz, J. E. Graves, M. Hall, M. Shivji, and Y. Swimmer. 2012b. Circle hooks in commercial, recreational, and artisanal fisheries: research status and needs for improved conservation and management. Bull. Mar. Sci. 88:371-391. Crossref
Springer, S. 1957. Tuna resources of the tropical and sub-tropical western Atlantic. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 85:13-17. Crossref
Stokesbury, M. J., S. L. H. Teo, A. Seitz, R. K. O'Dor, and B. A. Block. 2004. Movement of Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) as determined by satellite tagging experiments initiated off New England. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 61:1976-1987. Crossref
Stokesbury, M. J. W., J. D. Neilson, E. Susko, and S. J. Cooke. 2011. Estimating mortality of Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) in an experimental recreational catch-and-release fishery. Biol. Conserv. 144:2684-2691. Crossref
Teo, S. L. H., A. Boustany, H. Dewar, M. J. W. Stokesbury, K. C. Weng, S. Beemer, A. C. Seitz, C. J. Farwell, E. D. Prince, and B. A. Block. 2007 Annual migrations, diving behavior, and thermal biology of Atlantic bluefin tuna, Thunnus thynnus, on their Gulf of Mexico breeding grounds. Mar. Biol. 151:1-18. Crossref
Walter, J. F., E. S. Orbesen, C. Liese, and J. E. Serafy. 2012. Can circle hooks improve Western Atlantic sailfish, Istiophorus platypterus, populations? Bull. Mar. Sci. 88:755-770.
Wardle, C. S., J. J. Videler, T. Arimoto, J. M. Franco, and P. He. 1989. The muscle twitch and the maximum swimming speed of giant bluefin tuna, Thunnus thynnus L. J. Fish Biol. 35:129-137. Crossref
Wilson, E. B. 1927. Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 22:209-212.
Wilson, S. G., M. E. Lutcavage, R. W. Brill, M. P. Genovese, A. B. Cooper, and A. W. Everly. 2005. Movements of bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) in the northwestern Atlantic Ocean recorded by pop-up satellite archival tags Mar. Biol. 146:409-423. Crossref
(1) Foster, D., and C. Bergmann. 2010. 2010 interim report: update on Gulf of Mexico pelagic longline bluefin tuna mitigation research, 11 p. [Available from Harvesting Eng. Branch, Southeast Fish. Sci. Cent., Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv., 3209 Frederic St., Pascagoula, MS 39567.]
(2) Mention of trade names or commercial companies is for identification purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA.
Caption: Figure 1 Spatial distribution of release locations for bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) tagged with pop-up satellite archival tags in the pelagic longline fishery of the Gulf of Mexico from 2010 through 2015. Data for the number of fish released are presented in 1[degrees] grids of density. The 2 open rectangles indicate the areas closed to the use of pelagic longline gear during April and May. Sources for satellite image: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographies, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS user community.
Table 1 Results of logistic regression examining the influence of hook type, target species, sea-surface temperature (SST), soak duration, straight fork length (SFL), and maximum hook depth on the probability of at-vessel mortality of 1498 bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) captured in the pelagic longline fishery of the Gulf of Mexico during 1993-2017. Standard P- Variable Estimate error value Standard circle hook -0.464 0.129 <0.001 J-hook -0.602 0.224 0.007 Weak circle hook 0.000 0.000 -- Mixed target 0.090 0.131 0.493 Swordfish -0.354 0.473 0.454 Yellowfin tuna 0.000 0.000 -- SST -0.021 0.015 0.149 Soak duration -0.035 0.040 0.382 SFL -0.001 0.002 0.374 Maximum hook depth 0.0046 0.010 0.711 Table 2 Summary information for electronically tagged bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) and the corresponding data for the pelagic longline set during which each fish was captured in the Gulf of Mexico from 2010 through 2015. An en dash indicates unknown or unrecorded data. SFL=straight fork length. Estimated Estimated Tagging Tag number SFL (cm) weight (kg) date 10A0919 240 227 4/15/2012 11A0898 240 -- 5/20/2013 10A0921 220 227 5/10/2011 11A0914 270 295 3/20/2012 10A0917 240 227 4/26/2012 10A1041 210 -- 3/23/2012 10A0915 270 272 3/28/2012 10A0896 210 -- 5/10/2012 10A1042 270 340 5/25/2012 11A0981 150 181 4/21/2015 10A1030 195 -- 5/11/2012 10A0931 240 -- 4/10/2012 10A0930 240 227 4/26/2012 10A0938 210 -- 3/28/2012 10A1035 210 170 5/23/2012 10A1047 210 -- 4/12/2013 11A0978 210 -- 5/18/2012 10A0942 240 204 5/13/2012 10A0939 240 227 4/25/2012 10A0946 240 204 5/16/2012 10A0898 240 227 3/1/2012 11A0963 195 -- 4/9/2012 10A0945 240 227 5/14/2012 10A0916 270 295 3/22/2012 10A0775 210 181 4/26/2012 10A0918 240 227 4/25/2012 10A0928 225 -- 3/28/2013 10A1045 240 204 4/9/2012 11A0969 225 -- 5/20/2012 11A0949 240 227 5/24/2012 11A0950 240 204 5/24/2012 10A1032 190 159 5/12/2013 08A0152 240 204 5/12/2010 08A0153 260 363 5/22/2010 08A0155 250 340 5/22/2010 08A0156 260 363 5/22/2010 10A0929 240 181 4/24/2012 10A0933 210 -- 3/19/2012 10A1034 210 204 5/14/2013 10A0949 240 227 5/28/2012 10A0943 210 181 5/26/2012 No. of monitoring Tagging Time on Tag number days depth (cm) line (h) 10A0919 -- 23 1.3 11A0898 -- 23 -- 10A0921 2 25 -- 11A0914 3 28 8.3 10A0917 3 23 1.1 10A1041 7 23 -- 10A0915 7 25 -- 10A0896 10 25 -- 10A1042 10 23 -- 11A0981 12 23 -- 10A1030 15 25 -- 10A0931 18 23 4.6 10A0930 32 23 -- 10A0938 40 23 -- 10A1035 42 23 2.8 10A1047 42 23 -- 11A0978 43 25 -- 10A0942 48 23 -- 10A0939 50 23 -- 10A0946 53 23 -- 10A0898 54 25 -- 11A0963 55 23 7.3 10A0945 57 23 -- 10A0916 61 28 11.7 10A0775 63 23 -- 10A0918 64 23 1.8 10A0928 70 28 -- 10A1045 70 23 12.9 11A0969 81 25 6.5 11A0949 82 23 -- 11A0950 84 23 -- 10A1032 89 23 -- 08A0152 90 15 -- 08A0153 90 20 -- 08A0155 90 20 -- 08A0156 90 18 -- 10A0929 90 23 2.2 10A0933 93 23 14.4 10A1034 100 23 -- 10A0949 116 23 -- 10A0943 119 23 -- Length of Hook Hook remaining Tag number location removed leader (m) 10A0919 Upper jaw No 1.2 11A0898 Hinge No <0.3 10A0921 Hinge No 2.1 11A0914 -- No 3 10A0917 Hinge No 0.9 10A1041 Hinge No 1.2 10A0915 -- No 2.4 10A0896 Hinge No 0.9 10A1042 Hinge No 1.5 11A0981 -- No -- 10A1030 Hinge No 0.6 10A0931 -- No 0.6 10A0930 Hinge No 1.2 10A0938 Hinge No 0.6 10A1035 Hinge No 1.2 10A1047 Hinge No <0.3 11A0978 Hinge No 0.9 10A0942 Hinge No 0.9 10A0939 Hinge No 0.6 10A0946 Hinge No 0.9 10A0898 -- No 4.6 11A0963 Hinge Yes -- 10A0945 Hinge No 1.2 10A0916 Hinge No 2.1 10A0775 Upper jaw No 0.9 10A0918 Hinge No 0.9 10A0928 Hinge Yes -- 10A1045 Hinge No 0.3 11A0969 Hinge No 1.8 11A0949 Hinge No 0.9 11A0950 Upper jaw No 0.9 10A1032 Hinge No 0.6 08A0152 Hinge No 1.5 08A0153 Hinge No -- 08A0155 -- No -- 08A0156 Hinge No -- 10A0929 Hinge No 0.6 10A0933 Hinge No 0.6 10A1034 Hinge No 3 10A0949 Hinge No 1.2 10A0943 Upper jaw No 1.5 Weak No. of circle hooks Hook Soak Tag number hook per set depth (m) duration (h) 10A0919 No 425 97 5.9 11A0898 Yes 420 97 9.4 10A0921 Yes 500 91 8.6 11A0914 No 430 95 6.3 10A0917 Yes 445 97 6.4 10A1041 Yes 355 82 6.3 10A0915 Yes 438 95 7.2 10A0896 Yes 590 82 5.8 10A1042 No 410 97 8.9 11A0981 Yes 472 97 7.2 10A1030 No 520 82 7.1 10A0931 No 610 82 5.5 10A0930 No 445 97 6.4 10A0938 No 520 82 4.9 10A1035 Yes 410 97 10.0 10A1047 Yes 702 73 8.5 11A0978 No 530 82 7.7 10A0942 No 445 97 7.8 10A0939 No 445 97 8.0 10A0946 No 445 97 8.1 10A0898 Yes 590 95 7.5 11A0963 Yes 630 82 6.5 10A0945 No 445 97 8.3 10A0916 No 425 95 5.7 10A0775 No 445 97 8.0 10A0918 Yes 445 97 8.0 10A0928 Yes 876 66 8.6 10A1045 _ 460 97 6.5 11A0969 Yes 505 82 6.1 11A0949 No 410 97 8.1 11A0950 Yes 410 97 8.1 10A1032 Yes 504 82 5.8 08A0152 No 702 84 7.3 08A0153 No 590 82 8.0 08A0155 No 590 82 8.0 08A0156 No 624 82 7.5 10A0929 No 445 97 6.5 10A0933 No 384 82 8.5 10A1034 Yes 588 82 8.4 10A0949 No 400 97 10.2 10A0943 No 410 97 8.3 Table 3 Summary information for pop-up satellite archival tags that were deployed on bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) during 2010-2015 in the Gulf of Mexico and failed to reach the 30-d threshold at which fish were deemed to have survived capture. The rate of descent (sinking rate) was calculated for all negatively buoyant tags that transmitted data. The sinking rates then were compared to the rate of a reference tag (this tag was dropped overboard, and its descent rate indicates the sinking speed of a negatively buoyant tag absent of a fish). Each tagged fish that did not survive was classified in the following categories: non-reporting tag, tag attachment failure (sinking rate<reference tag), or mortality (sinking rate>reference tag). Tag Tag number Tether design buoyancy 10A0919 Cable tether Negative 11A0898 Mono single crimped Positive 10A0896 Mono single crimped Positive 10A1042 Mono single crimped Positive 10A1030 Mono single crimped Positive 10A0921 Mono double crimped Negative 10A0931 Cable tether Negative 10A0917 Cable tether Negative Reference tag Cable tether Negative 10A0915 Cable tether Negative 10A1041 Cable tether Negative 11A0914 Cable tether Negative 11A0981 Mono single crimped Positive Sinking Monitoring Release Tag number rate (m/s) days depth (m) 10A0919 N/A -- -- 11A0898 N/A -- -- 10A0896 N/A 10 22 10A1042 N/A 10 288 10A1030 N/A 15 712 10A0921 0.122 2 1320 10A0931 0.224 18 1200 10A0917 0.227 3 1546 Reference tag 0.251 1 1808 10A0915 0.316 7 1840 10A1041 0.319 7 1850 11A0914 0.346 3 1808 11A0981 0.408 12 1768 Tag number Data type Category 10A0919 N/A Non-reporting 11A0898 N/A Non-reporting 10A0896 Recovered Attachment failure 10A1042 Transmitted Attachment failure 10A1030 Transmitted Attachment failure 10A0921 Transmitted Attachment failure 10A0931 Transmitted Attachment failure 10A0917 Recovered Attachment failure Reference tag Recovered N/A 10A0915 Transmitted Mortality 10A1041 Recovered Mortality 11A0914 Transmitted Mortality 11A0981 Transmitted Mortality
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Title Annotation:||National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA|
|Author:||Orbesen, Eric S.; Brown, Craig A.; Snodgrass, Derke; Serafy, Joseph E.; Walter, John F., III|
|Date:||Jan 1, 2019|
|Previous Article:||Interactions between fisheries and early life stages of skates in nursery areas of the eastern Bering Sea.|
|Next Article:||Population structure of the ocellate spot skate (Okamejei kenojei) inferred from variations in mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences and from...|