Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T15:03:15.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aspects of the fishery, maturation and net selectivity of the wedge sole (Dicologoglossa cuneata) off south-western Iberia: implications for fishery management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 December 2009

Miguel Neves Santos  and
Pedro Gil Lino
Miguel Neves Santos*
Affiliation:
Instituto Nacional dos Recursos Biológicos I.P./IPIMAR, Avenida 5 de Outubro s/n, P-8700-305 Olhão, Portugal
Pedro Gil Lino
Affiliation:
Instituto Nacional dos Recursos Biológicos I.P./IPIMAR, Avenida 5 de Outubro s/n, P-8700-305 Olhão, Portugal
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: M.N. Santos, Instituto Nacional dos Recursos Biológicos I.P./IPIMAR, Avenida 5 de Outubro s/n, P-8700-305 Olhão, Portugal email: mnsantos@cripsul.ipimar.pt
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The wedge sole (Dicologoglossa cuneata, Moreau 1881) is a commercially important species for the artisanal fleet operating off the south-western Iberian Peninsula. During 2004 and 2005 a study was undertaken aiming to provide a scientific basis for management. Data collection included information on aspects of the fishery, spawning season, size at first maturity, tangle and gill-net selectivity. Seven nominal mesh sizes were used (40, 45 and 50 mm tangle nets and 40, 50, 60 and 70 mm gill-nets). Spawning lasts from December to June, with peaks in March and May. Length at first maturity for females was estimated at 18.5 cm. Catch rates decreased sharply with increasing mesh size, with tangle nets providing the highest yields. The log-normal selectivity model provided the best fit for specimens that were wedged. The higher catch-per-unit-effort of the smaller mesh sizes and the modal length of the fitted selectivity curve being below the size-at-maturity for wedge sole, suggests that the 50 mm nominal mesh size tangle net is the most appropriate for ensuring the fishery sustainability. Nevertheless, the minimum legal size should increase to at least 18 cm and a time–area closure should be implemented off the Guadiana River mouth.

Keywords

Dicologoglossa cuneatafisherymaturityselectivitytangle and gill netssouth-western Iberia
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 90 , Issue 7 , November 2010 , pp. 1465 - 1474
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Belghyti, D. (1990) Poissons pleuronectiformes des côtes Altantiques Marocaines (Casablanca): biologie et parasitisme de Citharus linguatula et Dicologoglossa cuneata. PhD thesis. Université de Rabat, Rabat, Morocco.Google Scholar
Belghyti, D., Aguesse, P. and Gabrion, C. (1993) Feeding ethology of Citharus linguatula and Dicologoglossa cuneata of the Moroccan Atlantic area. Vie et Milieu 43, 95–108.Google Scholar
Cabral, H.N. (2000) Distribution and abundance patterns of flatfishes in the Sado estuary, Portugal. Estuaries 23, 351–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cabral, H.N., Lopes, M. and Loeper, R. (2002) Trophic niche overlap between flatfishes in a nursery area on the Portuguese coast. Scientia Marina 66, 293–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Constat Inc. (1998) GILLNET© Software. Denmark.Google Scholar
Dinis, M.T. (1986) Quatre Soleidae de l'Estuaire du Tage. Reproduction et Croissance. Essai d'Elevage de Solea senegalensis Kaup 1858. PhD thesis. Université de Bretagne Occidentale, France.Google Scholar
Fonseca, P., Martins, R., Campo, A. and Sobral, P. (2005) Gill-net selectivity off the Portuguese western coast. Fisheries Research 73, 323–339.Google Scholar
García-Isarch, E., Juárez, A., Ruiz, J., Romero, Z., Jiménez, P. and Baldó, F. (2006) Spawning and nursery habitat of the wedge sole Dicologoglossa cuneata (Moreau, 1881) in the Gulf of Cadiz (SW Spain). Scientia Marina 70, 12–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamley, J.M. (1975) Review of gillnet selectivity. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 32, 1943–1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hovgård, H. (1996) A two-step approach to estimating selectivity and fishing power of research gill nets used in Greenland waters. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53, 1007–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiménez, M.P., Sobrino, I. and Ramos, F. (1998) Distribution pattern, reproductive biology, and fishery of the wedge sole Dicologlossa cuneata in the Gulf of Cadiz, south-west Spain. Marine Biology 131, 173–187.Google Scholar
Jiménez, M.P. and Piñeiro, C. (2001) Studies on age determination and growth pattern of the wedge sole Dicologoglossa cuneata (Moreau, 1881) in the Spanish waters of the Gulf of Cadiz (Southwest Iberian Peninsula). Boletín del Instituto Español de Oceanografía 17, 279–285.Google Scholar
Laevastu, T. (1971) Manual de métodos de biología pesquera. Zaragoza, Spain: Edición Acribia.Google Scholar
Lagardère, F. (1975) Biologie du céteau, Dicologoglossa cuneata (Moreau): ethologie alimentaire. Revues des Travaux de l' Institute de la Pêche Maritime 39, 63–103.Google Scholar
Lagardère, F. (1980) Développent du céteau, Dicologoglossa cuneata (Moreau). (Poissons–Soleidae). I—Descriptions des oeufs, évolution des critères systématiques et chronologie du development. Cybium 11, 61–81.Google Scholar
Lagardère, F. (1982) Environnement péri-estuarien et biologie des Soleidae dans le Golfe de Gascogne (zone sud) à travers l'étude du cèteau, Dicologlossa cuneata (Moreau, 1881). PhD thesis. Université de Marseille, Marseille, France.Google Scholar
Lagardère, F. and Aboussouan, A. (1981) Développent du céteau, Dicologoglossa cuneata (Moreau). (Pisces, Pleuronectiformes, Soleidae): II—Descriptions des larves. Cybium 5, 53–72.Google Scholar
Marinaro, J.Y., Grim, Z. and Sorbe, J.C.L. (1979) Rapport sur le Soleidae. V—Aspects du cycle sexual. Pélagos 8, 65–77.Google Scholar
Mathsoft Inc. (1997) S-PLUS 4 guide to statistics. Seattle: MathSoft.Google Scholar
Millar, R.B. (1995) The functional form of hook and gill net selection curves cannot be determined from comparative catch data alone. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 52, 883–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millar, R.B. and Fryer, R.J. (1999) Estimating the size-selection curves of towed gears, traps, nets and hooks. Reviews on Fish Biology and Fisheries 9, 1–28.Google Scholar
Millar, R.B. and Holst, R. (1997) Estimation of gill net and hook selectivity using log-linear models. ICES Journal of Marine Science 54, 471–477.Google Scholar
Prista, N., Vasconcelos, R.P., Costa, M.J. and Cabral, H.N. (2003) The demersal fish assemblage of the coastal area adjacent to the Tagus estuary (Portugal): relationships with environmental conditions. Oceanologica Acta 26, 525–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos, M.N., Gaspar, M.B., Monteiro, C.C. and Erzini, K. (2003) Gill net selectivity for European hake Merluccius merluccius from southern Portugal: implications for fishery management. Fisheries Science 69, 873–882.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G.W. and Cochran, W.G. (1989) Statistical methods. 8th edition. Ames, USA: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Whitehead, P.J.P., Bauchot, M.L., Hureau, J.-C., Nielsen, J. and Tortonese, E. (eds) (1986) Fishes of the north-eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean. Volumes I–III. Paris: Unesco.Google Scholar