Cited by 47Marine and fisheries researchFish Ecology and Management StudiesOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes

A study on the variability of albacore (Thunnus alalunga) longline catch rates in the southwest Pacific Ocean: Albacore longline fishery and environment

BRIAND, KARINE, MOLONY, BRETT, LEHODEY, PATRICK·2011·Fisheries Oceanography

Abstract

Relationships between albacore tuna (Thunnus alalunga) longline catch per unit effort (CPUE) and environmental variables from model outputs in New Caledonia’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) were examined through generalized linear models at a 1° spatial resolution and 10-day temporal resolution. At a regional (EEZ) scale, the study demonstrated that a large part of albacore CPUE variability can be explained by seasonal, interannual and spatial variation of the habitat. Results of the generalized linear models indicated that catch rates are higher than average in the northwestern part of the EEZ at the beginning of the year (January) and during the second half of the year (July–December). In the northwestern region of the EEZ, high CPUEs are associated with waters <20.5° in the intermediate layer and with moderate values of primary production. Longline CPUE also appeared to be dependent on prey densities, as predicted from a micronekton model. Albacore CPUE was highest at moderate densities of prey in the epipelagic layer during the night and for relatively low prey densities in the mesopelagic layer during the day. We also demonstrated that the highest CPUEs were recorded from 1986 to 1998, which corresponds to a period with frequent El Niño events.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2419.2011.00599.x

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Briand et al. (2011) suggested DCHL is important for Pacific albacore.

    “The importance of DCHL was also suggested by Briand et al. (2011), using a detailed fishery dataset, for Pacific albacore.”

    From Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna (2015) · cites this paper as Briand et al., 2011

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
BRIAND, K., MOLONY, B., & LEHODEY, P.
Affiliations
  • Government of Western Australia (AU)
  • Collecte Localisation Satellites (France) (FR)
Corresponding author
BRIAND, KARINE
Venue
Fisheries Oceanography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-09-14
Volume
20
Issue
6
Pages
517-529
ISSN
1054-6006 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1545444999
Cited by
47
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5
FWCI
3.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Fisheries Oceanography (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Marine and fisheries research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish Ecology and Management Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Oceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Keywords
albacore tuna, Southwest Pacific, seasonal variation, interannual variability, primary production, prey density, micronekton, mesopelagic zone, El Niño, ocean model output

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