2008•DergiPark (Istanbul University)Requires access

The Effects of Netting Twine on Discard Rates of Commercial Red Mullet Gillnets in Izmir Bay

İlker Aydın, Gökhan Gökçe, Cengiz Meti̇n

Open publisher page 13 citations

Abstract

In this study, discard rates of the commercial red mullet (Mullus barbatus) gillnets, made from different netting twine; monofilament and multifilament were presented. The nets were set near the shore in which contains sea grasses (Posidonia oceanica) in İzmir Bay. These areas are sensitive habitats. During the fishing trials, totally 32 fish species have been caught, 21 of which were non-marketable. The rates of these non-marketable species are 77.8% and %22.8 for monofilament and multifilament gillnets respectively in number. The Serranidae and Labridae families were dominant in catch composition. The CPUE of the monofilament and multifilament gillnets for weight were calculated as 129.6±5.1 and 36.9±1.3 respectively. As a result, monofilament gillnets were caught more non-marketable species than multifilament gillnets (P<0.05; z=0.007). Because of the high rate of discard species, it's not advisable to use monofilament gillnets near the shore, in which contains sensitive habitats.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In this study, discard rates of the commercial red mullet (Mullus barbatus) gillnets, made from different netting twine; monofilament and multifilament were presented. The nets were set near the shore in which contains sea grasses (Posidonia oceanica) in İzmir Bay. These areas are sensitive habitats. During the fishing trials, totally 32 fish species have been caught, 21 of which were non-marketable. The rates of these non-marketable species are 77.8% and %22.8 for monofilament and multifilament gillnets respectively in number. The Serranidae and Labridae families were dominant in catch composition. The CPUE of the monofilament and multifilament gillnets for weight were calculated as 129.6±5.1 and 36.9±1.3 respectively. As a result, monofilament gillnets were caught more non-marketable species than multifilament gillnets (P<0.05; z=0.007). Because of the high rate of discard species, it's not advisable to use monofilament gillnets near the shore, in which contains sensitive habitats.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 13 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In this study, discard rates of the commercial red mullet (Mullus barbatus) gillnets, made from different netting twine; monofilament and multifilament were presented. The nets were set near the shore in which contains sea grasses (Posidonia oceanica) in İzmir Bay. These areas are sensitive habitats. During the fishing trials, totally 32 fish species have been caught, 21 of which were non-marketable. The rates of these non-marketable species are 77.8% and %22.8 for monofilament and multifilament gillnets respectively in number. The Serranidae and Labridae families were dominant in catch composition. The CPUE of the monofilament and multifilament gillnets for weight were calculated as 129.6±5.1 and 36.9±1.3 respectively. As a result, monofilament gillnets were caught more non-marketable species than multifilament gillnets (P<0.05; z=0.007). Because of the high rate of discard species, it's not advisable to use monofilament gillnets near the shore, in which contains sensitive habitats.

Key concepts: Netting, Fishery, Bay, Serranidae, Bycatch, Fishing, Biology, Fish <Actinopterygii>

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Effects of Netting Twine on Discard Rates of Commercial Red Mullet Gillnets in Izmir Bay — Research Paper | ScholarLens