authors’ reply
Reply to "Robust estimates of decline for pelagic shark populations in the Northwest Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico" Baum et al. (2005) challenge our assertion that their analyses of data sets used in their two papers (Baum et al. 2003; Baum and Myers 2004) are inadequate and do not capture t...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Other Authors: | |
Format: | Text |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.417.4769 http://imina.soest.hawaii.edu/PFRP/large_pelagics/Burgess_etal_05-Reply.pdf |
Summary: | Reply to "Robust estimates of decline for pelagic shark populations in the Northwest Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico" Baum et al. (2005) challenge our assertion that their analyses of data sets used in their two papers (Baum et al. 2003; Baum and Myers 2004) are inadequate and do not capture the complete picture of all shark populations documented. They further hypothesize that their estimates are "robust " and their measured decline in shark abundance is therefore real, when in fact for many species, particularly pelagic sharks, their status is subject to further scientific analysis. The appropriate use of data sets and their subsequent analysis is an important issue. We agree |
---|