Amanote Research
Register
Sign In
Table 2: Sensitivity (Indicated by ✓) of Ecological Indicators to Steepness and Recruitment Cap in the Hindcast and/or Catch Scenario Projections.
doi 10.7717/peerj.7308/table-2
Full Text
Open PDF
Abstract
Available in
full text
Date
Unknown
Authors
Unknown
Publisher
PeerJ
Related search
Table 1: Ecological Indicators Evaluated for Hindcast Simulations and Catch Scenario Projections, With Key References for Each Indicator.
Figure 7: Kempton’s Q Calculated From Chatham Rise Atlantis Model Simulations With Recruitment Steepness Set at 0.5 for Myctophids, No Cap on Recruitment (A), Recruitment Capped at R0 (B), and Three Catch Scenarios: (1) Zero Catch; (2) Status Quo Catch; (3) Half Catch, for the 2010–2016 Hindcast Period and 2016–2046 Projection Period.
Figure 10: Biomass of Pelagic Fishes Over Biomass of All Age-Structured Species Groups From Chatham Rise Atlantis Model Simulations With Recruitment Steepness Set at 0.5 for Myctophids, No Cap on Recruitment (A), Recruitment Capped at R0 (B), and Three Catch Scenarios: (1) Zero Catch; (2) Status Quo Catch; (3) Half Catch, for the 2010–2016 Hindcast Period and 2016–2046 Projection Period.
Figure 6: Hindcast Biomass Trajectory for the Myctophids Species Functional Group With Different Recruitment Steepness (H) and No Cap on Recruitment (A) and With Recruitment Capped at R0 (B).
Figure 11: Biomass Ratio of Trophic Level 4 and Higher Over Trophic Level 3 From Chatham Rise Atlantis Model Simulations With Recruitment Steepness Set at 0.5 for Myctophids, No Cap on Recruitment (A), Recruitment Capped at R0 (B), and Three Catch Scenarios: (1) Zero Catch; (2) Status Quo Catch; (3) Half Catch, for the 2010–2016 Hindcast Period and 2016–2046 Projection Period.
Table 9: Availability Indicators in Response to the Low Scenario.
Table 7: Availability Indicators in Response to the Zero Scenario.
Table 10: Availability Indicators in Response to the Medium Scenario.
Table 11: Availability Indicators in Response to the Ideal Scenario.
