1 / 21

Georges Bank Yellowtail Flounder

Georges Bank Yellowtail Flounder. Base Similar to TRAC 2007 Major Change results Change_catch Increase_M Increase_q Purpose: test models under conditions known to produce retrospective patterns in VPA. GB yt basic setup. Years 1973-2006 (34 years) Ages 1-15, 6+ Lengths 1-70 cm

quasar
Download Presentation

Georges Bank Yellowtail Flounder

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Georges Bank Yellowtail Flounder • Base • Similar to TRAC 2007 Major Change results • Change_catch • Increase_M • Increase_q • Purpose: test models under conditions known to produce retrospective patterns in VPA

  2. GB yt basic setup • Years 1973-2006 (34 years) • Ages 1-15, 6+ • Lengths 1-70 cm • 2 market categories • 2 surveys (CVs 50%, 40%) • CV on landings 1% • Growth stdevs 4.0 initial, 1.5 projection • Von B params 50, 0.33, -0.75 • 50% Mature ~30 cm • Selectivity flat-topped, 50% selected 29 cm • M = 0.2 • F high all years (0.6-1.9)

  3. GB yt test cases • Change_catch • L-W equation in samples reduced approx in half for 1995-2006 • causes missing catch in recent years • Increase_M • M increased from 0.2 to 0.5 1995-2006 all ages • Increase_q • All indices q tripled 1995-2006

  4. Georges Bank Yellowtail Flounder

  5. ASPIC • No contrast between catch and CPUE (inability to estimate SPmax) • One way trip (inability to estimate depletion in first year) • True for all simulated data sets, no acceptable results

  6. Georges Bank Yellowtail Flounder

  7. AIM

  8. Georges Bank Yellowtail Flounder

  9. SCALE

  10. Georges Bank Yellowtail Flounder

  11. VPA

  12. Georges Bank Yellowtail Flounder

  13. ASAP

  14. VPA vs SCALE vs ASAP (NAA)

  15. Precision (SSB and F) • AIM: ~ 0.2-0.3, did not vary by case • SCALE: 0.1-0.4 (increased with retros) • VPA*: <0.05 (incr. in final year), did not vary • ASAP: <0.05 (incr. in final year), did not vary *VPA CVs are for age-specific SSB, F

  16. GBYT Conclusions • Small amount of bias in base case (only 100 simulated data sets?) • All models failed on retro cases, but AIM matched ‘replacement yield’ beyond 1st window in retro years • Increasing M and incr. q both had opposing effects on SSB and F (but acted in diff. direction) • Chg. Catch created “spike” in F just prior to reduced catch • General pattern

  17. VPA ASAP

  18. PopSim GBYT Final Realization • Ran VPA and ASAP retrospective analyses for GBYT Inc_M, Inc_q, and Change_catch final realizations • Same data given to each model • PopSim results show both are biased • Do both show a retro? Yes

  19. VPA Increase_M ASAP rho=0.46 rho=0.27 rho=-0.22 rho=-0.29

  20. VPA Increase_q ASAP rho=2.38 rho=2.13 rho=-0.72 rho=-0.70

  21. VPA Change_catch ASAP rho=1.33 rho=1.02 rho=-0.55 rho=-0.56

More Related