The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Back‐calculation of fish length: a critical review
Abstract
A review is made of the literature on the back‐calculation of fish body length from marks on scales or other hard parts (otoliths, vertebrae, fin rays, etc.). Though the technique is widely used it does not appear to be well understood. Regression methods are commonly used, apparently in ignorance of the more realistic proportional methods. It is not generally recognized that there are two equally plausible back‐calculation hypotheses which can lead to significantly different back‐calculated lengths. The Fraser‐Lee equation, the most commonly used back‐calculated formula, follows neither of these hypotheses but is based on a misuse of linear regression. It is recommended that back‐calculation be restricted to procedures following one of the proportional hypotheses; that the difference between lengths calculated using the two hypotheses is a useful measure of the minimum uncertainty in back‐calculation lengths; and that more attention be paid to validating back‐calculation hypotheses by comparing observed and back‐calculated lengths for individual fish. The pattern of heteroscedasticity in body length–scale radius plots is noted as a useful diagnostic in evaluating back‐calculation hypothesis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Methods for Assessment of Fish Production in Fresh Waters
Elliott, J. M., & Bagenal, T. B. (1979) · The Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.2307/4121 · Cited by 2,104
Linear Regressions in Fishery Research
Ricker, W. E. (1973) · Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada · doi:10.1139/f73-072 · Cited by 1,799
Leedy, D. L., & Lagler, K. F. (1957) · AIBS Bulletin · doi:10.2307/1292457 · Cited by 479
Lackey, R. T., Everhart, H., Eipper, A. W., & Youngs, W. D. (1976) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3800183 · Cited by 261
Hobikiami Sail Trawling in Japan
Seki, H., HAMADA, A., Iwami, T., & LeBrasseur, R. J. (1981) · Fisheries · Cited by 53
The use of analysis of covariance in the back‐calculation of growth in fish
Bartlett, J. R., Randerson, P. F., Williams, R. J., & Ellis, D. M. (1984) · Journal of Fish Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.1984.tb04791.x · Cited by 37
Reay, P. J. (1972) · ICES Journal of Marine Science · doi:10.1093/icesjms/34.3.485 · Cited by 31
Geffen, A. J. (1986) · Journal of Fish Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.1986.tb05165.x · Cited by 13
Maximum Likelihood Estimation of the Distribution of Length at Age
Smith, P. J. (1987) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531998 · Cited by 11
Cited by
Mechanics of composite elasmoid fish scale assemblies and their bioinspired analogues
Browning, A., Ortiz, C., & Boyce, M. C. (2013) · Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2012.11.003 · Cited by 166
Larval quality is shaped by matrix effects: Implications for connectivity in a marine metapopulation
Shima, J. S., & Swearer, S. E. (2009) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/08-0029.1 · Cited by 138
Murua, H., Rodriguez-Marin, E., Neilson, J. D., Farley, J. H., & Juan-Jordá, M. J. (2017) · Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries · doi:10.1007/s11160-017-9474-1 · Cited by 89
Miller, J. A., & Simenstad, C. A. (1997) · Estuaries · doi:10.2307/1352252 · Cited by 74
Claiborne, A. M., Fisher, J. P., Hayes, S. A., & Emmett, R. L. (2011) · Transactions of the American Fisheries Society · doi:10.1080/00028487.2011.607050 · Cited by 64
Metadata
- Authors
- Francis, R. I. C. C.
- Venue
- Journal of Fish Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1990-06
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 883-902
- ISSN
- 0022-1112 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-8649
- OpenAlex
- W2114734135
- Cited by
- 734
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 11.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Back‐calculation of fish length: a critical review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1990.tb05636.x
- The paper
- Francis, R. I. C. C. (1990). Back‐calculation of fish length: a critical review. Journal of Fish Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1990.tb05636.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
