Casgy09002.Pdf

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Casgy09002.Pdf UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Movement patterns, habitat preferences, and fisheries biology of the common thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus) in the Southern California Bight A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Marine Biology by Daniel Patrick Cartamil Committee in charge: Professor Jeffrey B. Graham, Chair Professor David M. Checkley Professor Philip A. Hastings Professor Cleridy E. Lennert Professor Richard H. Rosenblatt Professor David S. Woodruff 2009 i IGNATURE PAGE The dissertation of Daniel Patrick Cartamil is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: ________________________________________ ________________________________________ ________________________________________ ________________________________________ ________________________________________ Chair University of California, San Diego 2009 iii EPIGRAPH “The swordfish swimmes under the whale, and pricketh him upward. The thresher keepeth above him, and with a mighty great thing like unto a flail, hee so bangeth the whale, that hee will roare as though it thundered, and doth give him such blowes with his weapon, that you would think it to be the crake of a great shot” Block Island fisherman, 1609 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page .......................................................................................................... iii Epigraph .................................................................................................................... iv Table of Contents ...................................................................................................... v List of Figures............................................................................................................ vii List of Tables............................................................................................................. x Acknowledgements ................................................................................................... xi Dissertation material published, submitted, or in preparation for publication xi Curriculum Vitae....................................................................................................... xiii Abstract of the Dissertation....................................................................................... xv Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 Literature Cited................................................................................................. 4 Chapter 1: Diel movement patterns and habitat preferences of subadult and adult thresher sharks (Alopias vulpinus) in the Southern California Bight........................ 6 Abstract............................................................................................................. 6 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 7 Methods ............................................................................................................ 8 Results .............................................................................................................. 11 Discussion......................................................................................................... 13 Tables ............................................................................................................... 21 Figures .............................................................................................................. 22 Literature Cited................................................................................................. 26 Acknowledgments ............................................................................................ 29 Chapter 2: Archival tagging of subadult and adult thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus) in the Southern California Bight................................................................................ 31 Abstract............................................................................................................. 31 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 32 Methods ............................................................................................................ 34 Results .............................................................................................................. 36 Discussion......................................................................................................... 39 Tables ............................................................................................................... 48 Figures .............................................................................................................. 50 Literature Cited................................................................................................. 58 v Acknowledgments ............................................................................................ 62 Chapter 3: Movement patterns and nursery habitat of the juvenile thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus) in the Southern California Bight ................................................. 64 Abstract............................................................................................................. 64 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 64 Methods ............................................................................................................ 67 Results .............................................................................................................. 70 Discussion......................................................................................................... 72 Tables ................................................................................................................. 80 Figures ................................................................................................................ 81 Literature Cited................................................................................................... 86 Acknowledgments .............................................................................................. 91 Chapter 4: The artisanal elasmobranch fishery of the Pacific coast of Baja California, Mexico....................................................................................................... 92 Abstract............................................................................................................... 92 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 93 Methods .............................................................................................................. 95 Results ................................................................................................................ 99 Discussion......................................................................................................... 104 Tables ............................................................................................................... 113 Figures .............................................................................................................. 116 Literature Cited................................................................................................. 122 Acknowledgments ............................................................................................ 126 Chapter 5: Movement patterns, habitat preferences, distribution, and fisheries biology of the thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus) in the SCB and beyond: current status of knowledge and future directions................................................................. 128 Abstract............................................................................................................. 128 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 128 Figures .............................................................................................................. 141 Literature Cited................................................................................................. 144 vi LIST OF FIGURES Chapter 1 Figure 1.1: Latitude and longitude movement data for eight common thresher sharks tracked by acoustic telemetry off San Diego County, California ................... 22 Figure 1.2: Open triangles: hourly rates of movement (ROM; km h-1, mean ± s.e.) of thresher sharks tracked over the diel cycle. Gray shaded areas are nocturnal hours, unshaded areas are daylight hours. B. Open triangles: corresponding hourly angular concentration (r) values................................................................................. 23 Figure 1.3: Dive profiles of common thresher sharks 1 through 8............................ 24 Figure 1.4: Pooled depth distributions (% frequency) for all tracked common thresher sharks in 10 m bins, during night (shaded bars) and day (unshaded bars)... 25 Chapter 2 Figure 2.1: Tag and recapture locations of five thresher sharks in the SCB.............. 50 Figure 2.2: Dive profiles of four archivally tagged thresher sharks in 2004.............. 51 Figure 2.3: A representative five day section of archival data from Shark 1, showing the abrupt transition from
Recommended publications
  • Shrimp Fishing in Mexico
    235 Shrimp fishing in Mexico Based on the work of D. Aguilar and J. Grande-Vidal AN OVERVIEW Mexico has coastlines of 8 475 km along the Pacific and 3 294 km along the Atlantic Oceans. Shrimp fishing in Mexico takes place in the Pacific, Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean, both by artisanal and industrial fleets. A large number of small fishing vessels use many types of gear to catch shrimp. The larger offshore shrimp vessels, numbering about 2 212, trawl using either two nets (Pacific side) or four nets (Atlantic). In 2003, shrimp production in Mexico of 123 905 tonnes came from three sources: 21.26 percent from artisanal fisheries, 28.41 percent from industrial fisheries and 50.33 percent from aquaculture activities. Shrimp is the most important fishery commodity produced in Mexico in terms of value, exports and employment. Catches of Mexican Pacific shrimp appear to have reached their maximum. There is general recognition that overcapacity is a problem in the various shrimp fleets. DEVELOPMENT AND STRUCTURE Although trawling for shrimp started in the late 1920s, shrimp has been captured in inshore areas since pre-Columbian times. Magallón-Barajas (1987) describes the lagoon shrimp fishery, developed in the pre-Hispanic era by natives of the southeastern Gulf of California, which used barriers built with mangrove sticks across the channels and mouths of estuaries and lagoons. The National Fisheries Institute (INP, 2000) and Magallón-Barajas (1987) reviewed the history of shrimp fishing on the Pacific coast of Mexico. It began in 1921 at Guaymas with two United States boats.
    [Show full text]
  • CHECKLIST and BIOGEOGRAPHY of FISHES from GUADALUPE ISLAND, WESTERN MEXICO Héctor Reyes-Bonilla, Arturo Ayala-Bocos, Luis E
    ReyeS-BONIllA eT Al: CheCklIST AND BIOgeOgRAphy Of fISheS fROm gUADAlUpe ISlAND CalCOfI Rep., Vol. 51, 2010 CHECKLIST AND BIOGEOGRAPHY OF FISHES FROM GUADALUPE ISLAND, WESTERN MEXICO Héctor REyES-BONILLA, Arturo AyALA-BOCOS, LUIS E. Calderon-AGUILERA SAúL GONzáLEz-Romero, ISRAEL SáNCHEz-ALCántara Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Superior de Ensenada AND MARIANA Walther MENDOzA Carretera Tijuana - Ensenada # 3918, zona Playitas, C.P. 22860 Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur Ensenada, B.C., México Departamento de Biología Marina Tel: +52 646 1750500, ext. 25257; Fax: +52 646 Apartado postal 19-B, CP 23080 [email protected] La Paz, B.C.S., México. Tel: (612) 123-8800, ext. 4160; Fax: (612) 123-8819 NADIA C. Olivares-BAñUELOS [email protected] Reserva de la Biosfera Isla Guadalupe Comisión Nacional de áreas Naturales Protegidas yULIANA R. BEDOLLA-GUzMáN AND Avenida del Puerto 375, local 30 Arturo RAMíREz-VALDEz Fraccionamiento Playas de Ensenada, C.P. 22880 Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Ensenada, B.C., México Facultad de Ciencias Marinas, Instituto de Investigaciones Oceanológicas Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, Carr. Tijuana-Ensenada km. 107, Apartado postal 453, C.P. 22890 Ensenada, B.C., México ABSTRACT recognized the biological and ecological significance of Guadalupe Island, off Baja California, México, is Guadalupe Island, and declared it a Biosphere Reserve an important fishing area which also harbors high (SEMARNAT 2005). marine biodiversity. Based on field data, literature Guadalupe Island is isolated, far away from the main- reviews, and scientific collection records, we pres- land and has limited logistic facilities to conduct scien- ent a comprehensive checklist of the local fish fauna, tific studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Forage Fish Management Plan
    Oregon Forage Fish Management Plan November 19, 2016 Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Marine Resources Program 2040 SE Marine Science Drive Newport, OR 97365 (541) 867-4741 http://www.dfw.state.or.us/MRP/ Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Purpose and Need ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Federal action to protect Forage Fish (2016)............................................................................................ 7 The Oregon Marine Fisheries Management Plan Framework .................................................................. 7 Relationship to Other State Policies ......................................................................................................... 7 Public Process Developing this Plan .......................................................................................................... 8 How this Document is Organized .............................................................................................................. 8 A. Resource Analysis ....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution, Abundance, and Biomass of Giant Sea Bass (Stereolepis Gigas) Off Santa Catalina Island, California, 2014-2015
    Bull. Southern California Acad. Sci. 115(1), 2016, pp. 1–14 E Southern California Academy of Sciences, 2016 The Return of the King of the Kelp Forest: Distribution, Abundance, and Biomass of Giant Sea Bass (Stereolepis gigas) off Santa Catalina Island, California, 2014-2015 Parker H. House*, Brian L.F. Clark, and Larry G. Allen California State University, Northridge, Department of Biology, 18111 Nordhoff St., Northridge, CA, 91330 Abstract.—It is rare to find evidence of top predators recovering after being negatively affected by overfishing. However, recent findings suggest a nascent return of the critically endangered giant sea bass (Stereolepis gigas) to southern California. To provide the first population assessment of giant sea bass, surveys were conducted during the 2014/2015 summers off Santa Catalina Island, CA. Eight sites were surveyed on both the windward and leeward side of Santa Catalina Island every two weeks from June through August. Of the eight sites, three aggregations were identified at Goat Harbor, The V’s, and Little Harbor, CA. These three aggregation sites, the largest containing 24 individuals, contained a mean stock biomass of 19.6 kg/1000 m2 over both summers. Over the course of both summers the giant sea bass population was primarily made up of 1.2 - 1.3 m TL individuals with several small and newly mature fish observed in aggregations. Comparison to historical data for the island suggests giant sea bass are recovering, but have not reached pre-exploitation levels. The giant sea bass (Stereolepis gigas) is the largest teleost to inhabit nearshore rocky reefs and kelp forests in the northeastern Pacific (Hawk and Allen 2014).
    [Show full text]
  • Feeding Habits of the Common Thresher Shark (Alopias Vulpinus) Sampled from the California-Based Drift Gill Net Fishery, 1998-1 999
    PRETI ET AL.: FEEDING HABITS OF COMMON THRESHER SHARK CalCOFl Rep., Vol. 42, 2001 FEEDING HABITS OF THE COMMON THRESHER SHARK (ALOPIAS VULPINUS) SAMPLED FROM THE CALIFORNIA-BASED DRIFT GILL NET FISHERY, 1998-1 999 ANTONELLA PRETI SUSAN E. SMITH AND DARLENE A. RAMON California Department of Fish and Game National Marine Fisheries Service, NOM 8604 La Jolla Shores Dnve Southwest Fisheries Science Center La Jolla, California 92037 P.O. Box 271 sharksharkshark@hotniail coni La Jolla, California 92038 ABSTRACT (Compagno 1984). It is epipelagic, gregarious, and cos- The diet of common thresher shark (Alopius vulpinus) mopolitan, and in the northeastern Pacific seems to be from US. Pacific Coast waters was investigated by means most abundant within 40 miles of shore (Strasburg 1958). of frequency of occurrence, gravimetric and numerical Its known range extends from Clarion Island, Mexico, methods, and calculating the geometric index of im- north to British Columbia; it is common seasonally from portance (GII) of prey taxa taken from stoniachs col- mid-Baja California, Mexico, to Washington state.' It lected by fishery observers from the California-based is the leading commercial shark taken in California, drift gill net fishery. Sampling was done from 16 August where it is highly valued in the fresh fish trade (Holts et 1998 to 24 January 1999, a time when the California al. 1998). It is also sought by recreational anglers for its Current was undergoing rapid change from El Niiio to fighting ability as well as food value, especially in south- La Niiia conhtions. Of the 165 stomachs examined, 107 ern California.
    [Show full text]
  • Seafood Watch Seafood Report
    Seafood Watch Seafood Report Sharks and Dogfish With a focus on: Blacktip shark (Carcharhinus limbatus) Common thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus) Dusky smoothhound/smooth dogfish (Mustelus canis) Sandbar shark (Carcharhinus plumbeus) Shortfin mako shark (Isurus oxyrinchus) Spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias) © Monterey Bay Aquarium Final Report December 21, 2005 Stock Status Update June 9, 2011 Santi Roberts Fisheries Research Analyst Monterey Bay Aquarium SeafoodWatch® Sharks & DogfishReport June 9, 2010 About Seafood Watch® and the Seafood Reports Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch® program evaluates the ecological sustainability of wild-caught and farmed seafood commonly found in the United States marketplace. Seafood Watch® defines sustainable seafood as originating from sources, whether wild-caught or farmed, which can maintain or increase production in the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or function of affected ecosystems. Seafood Watch® makes its science-based recommendations available to the public in the form of regional pocket guides that can be downloaded from the Internet (seafoodwatch.org) or obtained from the Seafood Watch® program by emailing [email protected]. The program’s goals are to raise awareness of important ocean conservation issues and empower seafood consumers and businesses to make choices for healthy oceans. Each sustainability recommendation on the regional pocket guides is supported by a Seafood Report. Each report synthesizes and analyzes the most current ecological, fisheries and ecosystem science on a species, then evaluates this information against the program’s conservation ethic to arrive at a recommendation of “Best Choices,” “Good Alternatives,” or “Avoid.” The detailed evaluation methodology is available upon request. In producing the Seafood Reports, Seafood Watch® seeks out research published in academic, peer-reviewed journals whenever possible.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 Thresher Shark, Alopias Vulpinus
    4 Thresher Shark, Alopias vulpinus Thresher shark, Alopias vulpinus. Photo credit: Dale Sweetnam. History of the Fishery The common thresher shark, Alopias vulpinus, is the most common commercially landed shark in California. They are primarily caught using large mesh drift gill nets and hook and line gear, but are also caught incidentally with small mesh gill nets and harpoon. Prior to 1977, all sharks were reported in one market category and not separated by species, and it is assumed threshers were caught as bycatch in gears at levels similar or greater than today. The first significant fishery for thresher sharks began the late 1970s to early 1980s when drift gill net fishers began to target them close to the southern California coastline. The fishery expanded rapidly and, because of overfishing concerns, the California Department of Fish and Game (Department) as mandated by the State Legislature began an observer program, monitored landings and implemented a logbook program. A limited entry permit program for drift gill net gear was initiated in 1982, with permits issued to fishers rather than boats to prevent false inflation in value. The drift gill net fishery for thresher sharks peaked in 1981 when 113 Status of the Fisheries Report 2008 4-1 drift gill net boats landed nearly 600 tons (544 metric tons). However, total landings using all gears were highest the following year with a total of more than 1700 tons (1542 metric tons) taken by all gears (Figure 4-1). 2000 1500 1000 Landings (short tons) (short Landings 500 0 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Year Figure 4-1.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of the Artisanal Elasmobranch Fisheries Off The
    3 National Marine Fisheries Service Fishery Bulletin First U.S. Commissioner established in 1881 of Fisheries and founder NOAA of Fishery Bulletin Abstract—The landings of the artis- Characterization of the artisanal elasmobranch anal elasmobranch fisheries of 3 com- munities located along the Pacific coast fisheries off the Pacific coast of Guatemala of Guatemala from May 2017 through March 2020 were evaluated. Twenty- Cristopher G. Avalos Castillo (contact author)1,2 one elasmobranch species were iden- 3,4 tified in this study. Bottom longlines Omar Santana Morales used for multispecific fishing captured ray species and represented 59% of Email address for contact author: [email protected] the fishing effort. Gill nets captured small shark species and represented 1 Fundación Mundo Azul 3 Facultad de Ciencias Marinas 41% of the fishing effort. The most fre- Carretera a Villa Canales Universidad Autónoma de Baja California quently caught species were the longtail km 21-22 Finca Moran Carretera Ensenada-Tijuana 3917 stingray (Hypanus longus), scalloped 01069 Villa Canales, Guatemala Fraccionamiento Playitas hammerhead (Sphyrna lewini), and 2 22860 Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico Pacific sharpnose shark (Rhizopriono- Centro de Estudios del Mar y Acuicultura 4 don longurio), accounting for 47.88%, Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala ECOCIMATI A.C. 33.26%, and 7.97% of landings during Ciudad Universitaria Zona 12 Avenida del Puerto 2270 the monitoring period, respectively. Edificio M14 Colonia Hidalgo The landings were mainly neonates 01012 Guatemala City, Guatemala 22880 Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico and juveniles. Our findings indicate the presence of nursery areas on the continental shelf off Guatemala.
    [Show full text]
  • Gill Morphometrics of the Thresher Sharks (Genus Alopias): Correlation of Gill Dimensions with Aerobic Demand and Environmental Oxygen
    JOURNAL OF MORPHOLOGY :1–12 (2015) Gill Morphometrics of the Thresher Sharks (Genus Alopias): Correlation of Gill Dimensions with Aerobic Demand and Environmental Oxygen Thomas P. Wootton,1 Chugey A. Sepulveda,2 and Nicholas C. Wegner1,3* 1Center for Marine Biotechnology and Biomedicine, Marine Biology Research Division, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093 2Pfleger Institute of Environmental Research, Oceanside, CA 92054 3Fisheries Resource Division, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, NOAA Fisheries, La Jolla, CA 92037 ABSTRACT Gill morphometrics of the three thresher related species that inhabit similar environments shark species (genus Alopias) were determined to or have comparable metabolic requirements. As examine how metabolism and habitat correlate with such, in reviews of gill morphology (e.g., Gray, respiratory specialization for increased gas exchange. 1954; Hughes, 1984a; Wegner, 2011), fishes are Thresher sharks have large gill surface areas, short often categorized into morphological ecotypes water–blood barrier distances, and thin lamellae. Their large gill areas are derived from long total filament based on the respiratory dimensions of the gills, lengths and large lamellae, a morphometric configura- namely gill surface area and the thickness of the tion documented for other active elasmobranchs (i.e., gill epithelium (the water–blood barrier distance), lamnid sharks, Lamnidae) that augments respiratory which both reflect a species’ capacity for oxygen surface area while
    [Show full text]
  • Bayesian Estimation of the Age and Growth of the Golden Cownose Ray
    10 National Marine Fisheries Service Fishery Bulletin First U.S. Commissioner established in 1881 of Fisheries and founder NOAA of Fishery Bulletin Abstract—The aim of this study was to Bayesian estimation of the age and growth of the use a Bayesian approach to estimate age and growth parameters for the golden golden cownose ray (Rhinoptera steindachneri) cownose ray (Rhinoptera steindachneri) in the southern Gulf of California in in the southern Gulf of California in Mexico Mexico. Age estimates were obtained through analysis of vertebrae of 249 Luis D. Carrillo-Colín1 individuals. The von Bertalanffy growth J. Fernando Márquez-Farías (contact author)2 function (VBGF) and Gompertz growth 3 model (GM) were fit to length-at- age Raúl E. Lara-Mendoza 4 data by using a Markov chain Monte Oscar G. Zamora-García Carlo algorithm for parameter estima- tion. Prior distributions of parameters Email address for contact author: [email protected] were included for an informative prior for disc width at birth (DW0) and unin- 1 Posgrado en Ciencias del Mar y Limnología 3 Dirección General Adjunta de Investigación formative priors for the theoretical Universidad Nacional Autónoma Pesquera en el Atlántico maximum disc width (DW∞) and growth de Mexico Instituto Nacional de Pesca y Acuacultura coefficients (k and g, for the VBGF and Avenida Ciudad Universitaria 3000 Secretaría de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural GM, respectively). Our results indicate 04510 Coyoacán, Mexico City, Avenida Mexico 190 that the golden cownose ray lives up to Mexico Colonia del Carmen 13 years. The GM for combined sexes 04100 Coyoacán, Mexico City, Mexico was selected as the best model by using 2 Facultad de Ciencias del Mar the Watanabe–Akaike information cri- Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa 4 Servicios Integrales de Recursos Biológicos, terion for model selection suitable for Paseo Claussen s/n Acuáticos y Ambientales Bayesian estimation.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Productivity and Susceptibility Indices to Determine the Vulnerability of a Stock: with Example Applications to Six U.S
    Use of productivity and susceptibility indices to determine the vulnerability of a stock: with example applications to six U.S. fisheries. Wesley S. Patrick1, Paul Spencer2, Olav Ormseth2, Jason Cope3, John Field4, Donald Kobayashi5, Todd Gedamke6, Enric Cortés7, Keith Bigelow5, William Overholtz8, Jason Link8, and Peter Lawson9. 1NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, 1315 East- West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910; 2 NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, 7600 Sand Point Way, Seattle, WA 98115; 3NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, 2725 Montlake Boulevard East, Seattle, WA 98112; 4NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, 110 Shaffer Road, Santa Cruz, CA 95060; 5NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center, 2570 Dole Street, Honolulu, HI 96822; 6NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 75 Virginia Beach Drive, Miami, FL 33149; 7NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 3500 Delwood Beach Road, Panama City, FL 32408; 8NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, 166 Water Street, Woods Hole, MA 02543; 9NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, 2030 South Marine Science Drive, Newport, OR 97365. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Wesley S. Patrick, NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, 1315 East-West
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Migratory Chondrichthyan Fishes
    Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals Secretariat provided by the United Nations Environment Programme 14 TH MEETING OF THE CMS SCIENTIFIC COUNCIL Bonn, Germany, 14-17 March 2007 CMS/ScC14/Doc.14 Agenda item 4 and 6 REVIEW OF MIGRATORY CHONDRICHTHYAN FISHES (Prepared by the Shark Specialist Group of the IUCN Species Survival Commission on behalf of the CMS Secretariat and Defra (UK)) For reasons of economy, documents are printed in a limited number, and will not be distributed at the meeting. Delegates are kindly requested to bring their copy to the meeting and not to request additional copies. REVIEW OF MIGRATORY CHONDRICHTHYAN FISHES IUCN Species Survival Commission’s Shark Specialist Group March 2007 Taxonomic Review Migratory Chondrichthyan Fishes Contents Acknowledgements.........................................................................................................................iii 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Objectives......................................................................................................................... 1 2 Methods, definitions and datasets ............................................................................................. 2 2.1 Methodology....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]