ICES CM 2008/K:15 Statistical Species Characterization of Gurnard
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Not to be cited without prior reference to the author ICES CM 2008/K:15 Statistical Species characterization of Gurnard Landings in North of Portugal Feijó, D. (1), Rocha A. (2), Santos, P. (2), Saborido-Rey, F (3) (1) Fisheries Laboratory, INRB / IPIMAR Matosinhos, Matosinhos, Portugal. [email protected] (corresponding author) (2) Science Faculty of Oporto University, Porto, Portugal (3) Spanish National Research Council, Institute of Marine Research, CSIC, Vigo, Spain Available ICES statistics concerning gurnards are not accurate because they are often not sorted by species when they are landed, usually ending up classified under one generic category of “gurnards”. For example, France has only reported “tub gurnard” (Chelidonichthys lucernus) since 1983 and Denmark, the Netherlands and Portugal since 2000. It is obvious that statistics are incomplete for most years, in ICES Divisions and when statistic exists, they are mainly available for all species of gurnards combined and not for a specific gurnard. Concerning this problem, gurnard landings were observed in Trawler (2007) and in Artisanal Fleets (March-July 2007) in Matosinhos, Portugal. The correspondence between the common designations given at the auction market (“Ruivo” and “Cabra-Cabaço”) and the scientific name of the various species is one more problem regarding the landing statistics. The proportion, in which the various gurnard species occurred in landings, was calculated and these results compared with the official data and available bibliography. In both Fleets, the most abundant species were Chelidonichthys lucernus, Aspitrigla cuculus and C. obscurus. Other commercial species, like Eutrigla gurnardus, Trigla lyra and C. lastoviza occurred in residual amounts. Also the common designation of these species were given, at the auction market, reflects the average size of the individuals in the box sampled rather than the scientific names. Therefore, data based on the official classification does not seem to be of much scientific or statistic use for fishery assessment of these species and further studies are required for gurnards. Keywords: Gurnards, Fishery Assessment, Fish Stocks, Sampling and Statistics. Contact author Diana Feijó: Fisheries Laboratory, INRB/IPIMAR Matosinhos, Av. General Norton de Matos, 4; 4450-208 Matosinhos, Portugal. (Tel: +351 22 939 69 40; Fax: +351 22 937 56 49; e-mail: [email protected]). Not to be cited without prior reference to the author ICES CM 2008/K:15 INTRODUTION Gurnards are fishes belonging to the Triglidæ family (order: Scorpaeniformes). There are over 100 species (FISHBASE, 2007), 8 occurring in portuguese waters (Borges & Olim, 2006). They occur in all temperate and tropical seas, in depths up to 700 m (FISHBASE, 2007). They are benthonic, in rocky, muddy or sandy bottoms and their diet consists of small fish, crustaceans, gastropods and molluscs (Fischer, 1981; Bauchot, 1987; Campos, 1982). Their heads are bony and casquelike. The pectoral fins have their lower 2 or 3 rays enlarged for food detection and locomotion (Fischer, 1981). Gurnards are considered by-catch in bottom trawl and in Artisanal gears, like beam trawl and trammel nets (Borges & Olim, 2006), although due to decrease of traditionally targeted species their interest and value has increased (Fischer, 1981, Boudaya et al., 2007). Available ICES statistics concerning gurnards are not accurate because they are often not sorted by species when they are landed, usually ending up classified under one generic category of “gurnards”. For example, France has only reported “tub gurnard” (Chelidonichthys lucernus or Trigla lucerna) since 1983 and Denmark, the Netherlands and Portugal since 2000 (ICES WGNEW Report, 2007). This means that statistics are incomplete for most years, in ICES Divisions and when statistic exists, they are mainly available for all species of gurnards combined and not for a specific gurnard. In portuguese official data from Directorate-General Fisheries and Aquaculture (Rocha, 2007), all gurnards are classified under these designations: Tub gurnard (Trigla lucerna or C. lucernus), Gurnard nep. (Trigla spp.) and Large-scaled gurnard (Lepidotrigla cavillone) (Table 1). In Portugal and especially in Matosinhos, landings are a mix of the 6 species found in Portuguese waters: Tub gurnard (C. lucernus), Red gurnard (Aspitrigla cuculus or Chelidonichthys cululus), Longfin gurnard (Chelidonichthys obscurus or Aspitrigla Not to be cited without prior reference to the author ICES CM 2008/K:15 obscura), Grey gurnard (Eutrigla gurnardus), Piper gurnard (Trigla lyra) and Streaked gurnard (Chelidonichthys lastoviza or Trigloporus lastoviza) (Rocha, 2007). L. cavillone (like L. dieuzeidei, also caught in the Portuguese waters) is too small to be of any commercial value and is discarded in sea. Official data does not reflect any of these facts. Table 1. Gurnard’s official landings in fish auction market, in Matosinhos, Portugal, between the periods of 2000-2006, from Directorate-General Fisheries and Aquaculture (in Rocha, 2007). GEAR TYPE COMMON NAME CIENTIFIC NAME 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Cabra cabaço Trigla lucerna 47 Bottom trawl Cabras nep Trigla spp. 56.030 33.079 19.443 22.998 14.281 12.117 Ruivo Lepidotrigla cavillone 24.009 14.950 13.796 11.275 7.217 5.072 Total (in kg) 80.039 48.029 33.239 34.273 21.546 17.188 Cabra cabaço Trigla lucerna 19 616 Artisanal Cabras nep Trigla spp. 12.357 13.505 11.444 10.286 9.723 10.282 gears Ruivo Lepidotrigla cavillone 60.661 84.162 64.206 55.339 63.970 59.282 Total (in kg) 73.018 97.667 75.649 65.626 73.711 70.180 Total (in kg) 153.056 145.703 109.236 99.898 95.257 87.369 This study was carried out because IPIMAR has the responsibility for fish stock assessment and there is a lack of studies concerning gurnards in Portugal. The various gurnard species are classified, in the official portuguese statistics, only under one common designation (“Ruivo”). However, in a fish auction market, they can receive various other designations (being, in Matosinhos, “Ruivo”, “Cabra-Cabaço” and, in the bottom trawl landings, “Cabra” as well). The purpose of those designations is in acquiring different and higher prices in auction. Therefore, total gurnard captures are not accounted in the official statistics and there is no information on each species’ captures. MATERIAL AND METHODS Sampling took place in Matosinhos Fish auction market and IPIMAR’s Fisheries Lab. Between March to July of 2007, from the Artisanal Fleet, 3 vessels were chosen each week. Among their landings, Gurnard boxes identified as “Ruivo” or “Cabra-Cabaço” was selected. Monthy, 2 samples identified as “Cabras” were collect from 1 vessel in Not to be cited without prior reference to the author ICES CM 2008/K:15 Bottom Trawl Fleet, during 2007. The commercial designation is responsibility of Fish Auction Market, regardless of boxes content. The gurnard box content was separated by species. Species identification was done with IPIMAR keys (Campos, 2002; Martins et al., 2005). Each individual was measured to the nearest lowest cm (TL) and the total weight per species (precision = 10g), on each sampled box. Statistical analyses have been made, comparing results with official data. RESULTS and DISCUTION In Bottom Trawl Fleet, 24 samples of Gurnards boxes (“Cabras”) were made, from 10 vessels of Bottom Trawl Fleet. In this Fleet, in general, is observed 2 commercial designations: “Cabras” and “Ruivo”, this last has a residual presence, therefore not sampled. A total of 1965 individuals were sampled with a total weight of 223,991 kg. A. cuculus (43%), C. lucernus (35%) and C. obscurus (18%) were the most abundant species. E. gurnardus, C. lastoviza and T. lyra were also present, in residual quantities (table 2). No Lepidotriglas spp. was observed. Table 2. Species composition, in gurnard’s samples, from Bottom trawl Fleet in Matosinhos, Portugal (Species, Percentage, N = number of individuals; W = total weight/specie (kg); Lmin = minimum length, Lmax = maximum length; Lmed= average length). Species % N W Lmin Lmax Lmed A. cuculus 43% 842 90,438 32,3 16,7 22,8 C. obscurus 18% 359 40,752 30,0 18,6 23,3 C. lastoviza 0% 3 0,451 24,5 21,7 23,4 E. gurnardus 3% 56 7,197 37,0 10,6 24,0 C. lastoviza 0% 5 0,601 24,7 19,3 21,9 T.lyra 1% 22 4,503 35,1 24,0 28,4 C. lucernus 35% 678 80,048 36,3 7,2 22,8 Total 100% 1965 223,991 24,5 24,0 23,8 In sampling period, the smallest sample had 4,174 kg (October) and the biggest 13,219 kg (August). Concerning species composition, we observed throughout all year the presence of Red gurnard (A. cuculus). Tub gurnard and Longfin gurnard (C. obscurus) Not to be cited without prior reference to the author ICES CM 2008/K:15 were the next most important presences (Fig .1). Individual average size is 23,8 cm, yet there were observed fish with 37 cm length. Species Composition 30 25 C. lucernus T.lyra 20 C. lastoviza E. gurnardus 15 C. lastoviza C. obscurus 10 A. cuculus Total weight (kg) weight Total 5 0 Jan Fev Mar Abr Mai Jun Jul Ago Set Out Nov Dez Date Figure 1. Gurnard species composition observed in bottow trawl fleet, in Matosinhos, Portugal, during the sampling period (2007). Still, in opposition to official data that refers C. lucernus and L. cavillone as gurnard species landed in Matosinhos (2000), we can observe that Tub gurnard (C. lucernus) is not a usual presence in the samplings in this fleet. This could be explained either by the fact that bigger individuals are separated in boxes which attain better prices and haven’t been sampled, by the crew’s use (for meals) or the direct sales to restaurants. Sample Composition Dez Nov Out A.