Benchmark workshop on Greenland halibut and redfish stocks (WKBNORTH) ...
The objective of this benchmark process was to propose and evaluate assessment methods and the data upon which they depend for the four stocks: 1) Greenland halibut in subareas 1 and 2; 2) Greenland halibut in subareas 5, 6, 12, and 14; 3) golden redfish in subareas 5, 6, 12, and 14; and 4) beaked r...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Report |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
ICES Scientific Reports
2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dx.doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.22304638.v1 https://ices-library.figshare.com/articles/report/Benchmark_workshop_on_Greenland_halibut_and_redfish_stocks_WKBNORTH_/22304638/1 |
| Summary: | The objective of this benchmark process was to propose and evaluate assessment methods and the data upon which they depend for the four stocks: 1) Greenland halibut in subareas 1 and 2; 2) Greenland halibut in subareas 5, 6, 12, and 14; 3) golden redfish in subareas 5, 6, 12, and 14; and 4) beaked redfish in Subarea 14 and Division 5.a. Greenland halibut in subareas 1 and 2 was previously assessed by the AFWG-Arctic Fisheries Working Group (Greenland halibut in subareas 1 and 2) using a Gadget model, while the others were assessed by the NWWG-Northwest Working Group using either a surplus production model (Greenland halibut in subareas 5, 6, 12, and 14), a Gadget model (golden redfish), or an ICES category 3 assessment method (beaked redfish). For both Greenland halibut stocks, age data were sparse and diverse data sources were compiled to fit Gadget length- and age-based models, which was also sex dependent for Greenland halibut in subareas 1 and 2 due to sex-dependent life history variation. Both Gadget ... |
|---|