Redirecting to http://dergipark.org.tr/_fragment?_hash=1jghcQm6Kow7y3RINOx53gnrBeCzY7-KCJJvE3h8M6Y&_path=id%3D691405%26_format%3Dhtml%26_locale%3Dtr%26_controller%3DApp%255CController%255CSite%255CArticleController%253A%253AesiArticleStats.
Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Düğümlü ağdan donanmış geleneksel kerevit pinteri ile alternatif olarak düğümsüz ağdan donanmış pinterlerin CPUE karşılaştırması

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 38 Sayı: 1, 79 - 86, 15.03.2021

Dr. Mehmet Cilbiz , Rahmi Uysal , Abdulkadir Yağcı , Süleyman Oğuz Korkut Kadir Çapkın , Mehmet Cesur

https://doi.org/10.12714/egejfas.38.1.09
Cited By: 3

Öz


Bu çalışmada, Türkiye’de kerevit (Pontastacus leptodactylus, Eschscholtz, 1823) avcılığında kullanılmakta olan 210d/6 numara düğümlü ağdan donanmış geleneksel ağ materyali yerine, 210d//12 numara ip kalınlığındaki düğümsüz ağdan donanmış olan kerevit pinterinin verim ve mukavemetinin karşılaştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Çalışma Haziran 2017 ile Mayıs 2018 döneminde aylık olarak yürütülmüştür. Çalışmada 150 adet klasik, 150 adette alternatif ağdan donanmış olan toplam 300 adet pinter kullanılmıştır. Avlanan kerevitler, avlandıkları pinterlere göre ayrılmış ağırlık ve boy ölçümleri yapılmıştır. 1465’i alternatif pinter, 2044’ü de geleneksel pinter ile avlanmış toplam 3509 adet kerevit yakalanmıştır. Operasyon başına ortalama CPUE değeri 10.93 (g/pinter/gün) ile 281.14 (g/pinter/gün) arasında değişim göstermiştir. Geleneksel takımın ortalama CPUE değeri 98.34 (g/pinter/gün) bulunmuş iken alternatif takımınki ise 79.46 (g/pinter/gün) olarak bulunmuş olup; ortalama CPUE değerleri arasında istatistiki farklılık bulunmamıştır (p>0.05). Geleneksel pinter ağının kopma direnci değeri ortalama (±SE) 10.43±0.27 kg; 210d/12 düğümsüz ağın ki ise 14.50±0.91 kg olarak belirlenmiştir (p<0.05). Her ne kadar yüksek mukavemete sahip olsa da alternatif pinterin CPUE’unun geleneksel takıma göre %19.20 oranında düşük olması nedeniyle, kerevit avcılığında kullanımının daha verimsiz olacağı düşünülmektedir. 



Anahtar Kelimeler

Küçük ölçekli balıkçılık birim çabada av Hirfanlı Baraj Gölü pinter

Proje Numarası

TAGEM/HAYSUD/2017/A11/P-02/1

Kaynakça

  • Ayaz, A., Acarli, D., Altinagac, U., Ozekinci, U., Kara, A. & Ozen, O. (2006). Ghost fishing by monofilament and multifilament gillnets in Izmir Bay, Turkey. Fisheries Research, 79(3), 267-271. DOI:10.1016/j.fishres.2006.03.029
  • Balık, İ., Çubuk, H. & Uysal, R. (2003). Effect of Bait on Efficiency of Fyke-nets for Catching Crayfish Astacus leptodactylus Esch. 1823. Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 3(1), 1-4.
  • Bevacqua, D., De Leo, G. A., Gatto, M. & Melià, P. (2009). Size selectivity of fyke nets for European eel Anguilla anguilla. Journal of Fish Biology, 74(9), 2178-2186. DOI:10.1111/j.1095-8649.2009.02243.x
  • Bolat, Y., Demirci, A. & Mazlum, Y. (2010). Size Selectivity of Traps (Fyke-Nets) of Different Mesh Size on The Narrow-Clawed Crayfish, Astacus leptodactylus (ESCHSCHOLTZ, 1823) (Decapoda, Astacidae) İn Eğirdir Lake, Turkey. Crustaceana, 8(11), 1349-1361. DOI:10.1163/001121610X536969
  • Bolat, Y. & Uçgun, E. (2019). Effects of Hexagonal-and Diamond-shaped Mesh Traps on Size Selectivity of Freshwater Crayfish Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823 (Decapoda: Astacidae) in the Eğirdir Lake, Turkey. Acta Zoologica Bulgarica.
  • Broadhurst, M. K., Butcher, P. A., Cullis, B. R. & Tolhurst, D. J. (2015). Influences of twine diameter and mesh area on the efficiency and durability of baited hoop nets targeting portunids. 22(6), 488-500. DOI:10.1111/fme.12146
  • Cilbiz, M. (2019). Improving Crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823) Fyke Net Selectivity [in Turkish]. (PhD), Ege Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, 128p.
  • DSI (2005). Hirfanlı ve Kesikköprü Baraj Gölleri ve Havzalarında Kirlilik Araştırması. Ankara, Turkey: General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works (in Turkish).
  • FAO. (2016). GFCM Data Collection Reference Framework (DCRF) v.2016.2. Retrieved from Fische, J. R., Johnson, N. P., Schultz, R. D. & Quist, M. C. (2010). A Comparison of Modified Fyke Nets for Evaluating Fish Assemblages and Population Structure. Journal of Freshwater Ecology, 25(4), 555-563. DOI:10.1080/02705060.2010.9664405
  • Fujimoto, Y., Hoshi, M. & Jinguji, H. (2017). Examination of an effective trap to control North American invasive freshwater crayfish (Procambarus clarkii） in Japan. Ecology and Civil Engineering, 20(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3825/ece.20.1
  • Geldiay, R. & Kocataş, A. (1977). An investigation on the local population of the freshwater crabs (Potamon, Saving, 1816) in Turkey and a revision of its taxonomy. EÜ Fen Fak. Dergisi, Seri B, 1, 2.
  • Gençoğlu, L. & Ekmekçi, F.G. (2016). Growth and reproduction of a marine fish, Atherina boyeri (Risso 1810), in a freshwater ecosystem. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 40(4), 534-542.
  • Grati, F., Bolognini, L., Domenichetti, F., Fabi, G., Polidori, P., Santelli, A., Scarcella, G. & Spagnolo, A. (2015). The effect of monofilament thickness on the catches of gillnets for common sole in the Mediterranean small-scale fishery. Fisheries Research, 164, 170-177. DOI:10.1016/j.fishres.2014.11.014
  • Green, N., Bentley, M., Stebbing, P., Andreou, D. & Britton, R. (2018). Trapping for invasive crayfish: comparisons of efficacy and selectivity of baited traps versus novel artificial refuge traps. Knowledge & Management of Aquatic Ecosystems (419). https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2018007
  • Gülle, P., Tura, İ. & Gülle, İ. (2007). Egirdir Gölü Tatlısu Yengeci (Potamon potamios Olivier. 1804)'nin Bazı Üreme ve Popülasyon Özellikleri. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(2), 134-139.
  • Hamley, J.M. (1975). Review of gillnet selectivity. Journal of Fisheries. Board. Canada, 32, 1943-1969. DOI:10.1139/cjfas-2013-0401
  • Hardie, S.A., Barmuta, L.A. & White, R.W.G. (2005). Spawning related seasonal variation in fyke net catches of golden galaxias (Galaxias auratus): implications for monitoring lacustrine galaxiid populations. Fisheries Management and Ecology, 12(6), 407-409. DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2400.2005.00454.x
  • Jensen, J.W. (1995). A direct estimate of gillnet selectivity for brown trout. Journal of Fish Biology, 46(5), 857-861. DOI:10.1111/j.1095-8649.1995.tb01608.x
  • Kim, S., Lim, J., Lee, K. & Park, S. (2016). Effect of twine thickness on size-selectivity of driftnet for the yellow croaker Larimichthys polyactis in southwestern Sea of Korea. Chinese Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, 34(6), 1199-1208. DOI:10.1007/s00343-016-5107-0
  • Königson, S., Hemmingsson, M., Lunneryd, S.-G. & Lundström, K. (2007). Seals and fyke nets: An investigation of the problem and its possible solution. Marine Biology Research, 3(1), 29-36. DOI:10.1080/17451000601072596
  • Kraft, C. E. & Johnson, B. L. (1992). Fyke-Net and Gill-Net Size Selectivities for Yellow Perch in Green Bay, Lake Michigan. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 12(1), 230-236. DOI:10.1577/1548-8675(1992)012<0230:FNAGNS>2.3.CO;2
  • Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Guénette, S., Pitcher, T.J., Sumaila, U.R., Walters, C.J.,watson, R. & Zeller, D. (2002). Towards sustainability in world fisheries. Nature, 418(8), 689-695.
  • RStudio Team (2015). RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA URL http://www.rstudio.com/.
  • Smith, B.J., Blackwell, B.G., Wuellner, M.R., Graeb, B.D.S. & Willis, D.W. (2016). Escapement of Fishes from Modified Fyke Nets with Differing Throat Configurations. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 36(1), 96-103. DOI:10.1080/02755947.2015.1111278
  • Smith, B.J. & Simpkins, D.G. (2017). A Comparison of Three Paired Modified Fyke Nets for Characterizing Fish Assemblages in the Nearshore Zone of Lake Michigan. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 37(5), 962-969. DOI:10.1080/02755947.2017.1336134
  • Tokaç, A. (2011). Ağ Yapım ve Donam Tekniği (Balıkçılık II), Yayın No:80: Ege Üniversitesi Basım Evi, Bornova-İzmir.
  • Tosunoğlu, Z., Ünal, V. & Kaykaç, M.H. (2017). Ege Dalyanları. SÜR-KOOP Su Ürünleri Kooperatifleri Merkez Birliği Yayınları No: 03, Ankara, 322p.
  • Tsai, C.H., Wang, Y.K., Tsai, S.T. & Wu, S.H. (2015). Seasonal and diel changes of the fish assemblage employing the fyke nets in a subtropical mangrove estuary of puzih river, Taiwan. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 23(1), 109-116. DOI:10.6119/JMST-014-0110-3
  • Turunen, T. (1996). The effects of twine thickness on the catchability of gillnets for pikeperch (Stizostedion lucioperca (L.)). Annales Zoologici Fennici, 33(3/4), 621-625. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/23736107
  • Ulikowski, D., Chybowski, Ł., Traczuk, P., Ulikowska, E.J.T.J.o.F. & Sciences, A. (2017). A New Design of Crayfish Traps Reduces Escaping and Improves Opportunities for Long-Term Catching. 17(2), 363-369.

CPUE comparison of traditional crayfish fyke net rigged with knotted net and alternatively knotless net

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 38 Sayı: 1, 79 - 86, 15.03.2021

Dr. Mehmet Cilbiz , Rahmi Uysal , Abdulkadir Yağcı , Süleyman Oğuz Korkut Kadir Çapkın , Mehmet Cesur

https://doi.org/10.12714/egejfas.38.1.09
Cited By: 3

Öz


In this study, it is aimed to compare the yield and strength of the crayfish fyke rigged with knotless net with 210d/12 rope thickness with those of the traditional net material rigged with 210d/6 knotted net which is widely used in Turkey in fishing crayfish (Pontastacus leptodactylus, Eschscholtz, 1823). The study was carried out on a monthly basis between June 2017 and May 2018. In the study, a total of 300 fyke nets, equipped with 150 classical and 150 alternative nets, were used. The caught crayfishes were measured and weighted according to the fyke net they were caught in. A total of 3509 crayfish were caught, 1465 of which were caught with alternative fyke net and 2044 with traditional fyke net. Average CPUE value ranged from 10.93 (g/fyke net/day) to 281.14 (g/fyke net/day) for per fishing operation. Average CPUE value of the traditional gear was found to be 98.34 (g/fyke net/day) , while that of the alternative gear was determined as 79.46 (g/fyke net/day), and no statistically significant difference was found between average CPUE values (p>0.05). Average strength value of the traditional fyke net was determined as (± SE) 10.43 ± 0.27 kg, while that value in 210d / 12 knotless net was identified as 14.50 ± 0.91 kg (p<0.05). Although it has high strength, since the CPUE value of the alternative fyke net is lower by 19.20% compared to the traditional gear, it is believed that its use in crayfish fishing will not be profitable.

Anahtar Kelimeler

small scale fisheries catch-per-unit-effort Hirfanlı Dam Lake fyke net

Destekleyen Kurum

Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Agriculture and Forest, General Directorate of Agricultural Research and Policies

Proje Numarası

TAGEM/HAYSUD/2017/A11/P-02/1

Kaynakça

  • Ayaz, A., Acarli, D., Altinagac, U., Ozekinci, U., Kara, A. & Ozen, O. (2006). Ghost fishing by monofilament and multifilament gillnets in Izmir Bay, Turkey. Fisheries Research, 79(3), 267-271. DOI:10.1016/j.fishres.2006.03.029
  • Balık, İ., Çubuk, H. & Uysal, R. (2003). Effect of Bait on Efficiency of Fyke-nets for Catching Crayfish Astacus leptodactylus Esch. 1823. Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 3(1), 1-4.
  • Bevacqua, D., De Leo, G. A., Gatto, M. & Melià, P. (2009). Size selectivity of fyke nets for European eel Anguilla anguilla. Journal of Fish Biology, 74(9), 2178-2186. DOI:10.1111/j.1095-8649.2009.02243.x
  • Bolat, Y., Demirci, A. & Mazlum, Y. (2010). Size Selectivity of Traps (Fyke-Nets) of Different Mesh Size on The Narrow-Clawed Crayfish, Astacus leptodactylus (ESCHSCHOLTZ, 1823) (Decapoda, Astacidae) İn Eğirdir Lake, Turkey. Crustaceana, 8(11), 1349-1361. DOI:10.1163/001121610X536969
  • Bolat, Y. & Uçgun, E. (2019). Effects of Hexagonal-and Diamond-shaped Mesh Traps on Size Selectivity of Freshwater Crayfish Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823 (Decapoda: Astacidae) in the Eğirdir Lake, Turkey. Acta Zoologica Bulgarica.
  • Broadhurst, M. K., Butcher, P. A., Cullis, B. R. & Tolhurst, D. J. (2015). Influences of twine diameter and mesh area on the efficiency and durability of baited hoop nets targeting portunids. 22(6), 488-500. DOI:10.1111/fme.12146
  • Cilbiz, M. (2019). Improving Crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823) Fyke Net Selectivity [in Turkish]. (PhD), Ege Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, 128p.
  • DSI (2005). Hirfanlı ve Kesikköprü Baraj Gölleri ve Havzalarında Kirlilik Araştırması. Ankara, Turkey: General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works (in Turkish).
  • FAO. (2016). GFCM Data Collection Reference Framework (DCRF) v.2016.2. Retrieved from Fische, J. R., Johnson, N. P., Schultz, R. D. & Quist, M. C. (2010). A Comparison of Modified Fyke Nets for Evaluating Fish Assemblages and Population Structure. Journal of Freshwater Ecology, 25(4), 555-563. DOI:10.1080/02705060.2010.9664405
  • Fujimoto, Y., Hoshi, M. & Jinguji, H. (2017). Examination of an effective trap to control North American invasive freshwater crayfish (Procambarus clarkii） in Japan. Ecology and Civil Engineering, 20(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3825/ece.20.1
  • Geldiay, R. & Kocataş, A. (1977). An investigation on the local population of the freshwater crabs (Potamon, Saving, 1816) in Turkey and a revision of its taxonomy. EÜ Fen Fak. Dergisi, Seri B, 1, 2.
  • Gençoğlu, L. & Ekmekçi, F.G. (2016). Growth and reproduction of a marine fish, Atherina boyeri (Risso 1810), in a freshwater ecosystem. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 40(4), 534-542.
  • Grati, F., Bolognini, L., Domenichetti, F., Fabi, G., Polidori, P., Santelli, A., Scarcella, G. & Spagnolo, A. (2015). The effect of monofilament thickness on the catches of gillnets for common sole in the Mediterranean small-scale fishery. Fisheries Research, 164, 170-177. DOI:10.1016/j.fishres.2014.11.014
  • Green, N., Bentley, M., Stebbing, P., Andreou, D. & Britton, R. (2018). Trapping for invasive crayfish: comparisons of efficacy and selectivity of baited traps versus novel artificial refuge traps. Knowledge & Management of Aquatic Ecosystems (419). https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2018007
  • Gülle, P., Tura, İ. & Gülle, İ. (2007). Egirdir Gölü Tatlısu Yengeci (Potamon potamios Olivier. 1804)'nin Bazı Üreme ve Popülasyon Özellikleri. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(2), 134-139.
  • Hamley, J.M. (1975). Review of gillnet selectivity. Journal of Fisheries. Board. Canada, 32, 1943-1969. DOI:10.1139/cjfas-2013-0401
  • Hardie, S.A., Barmuta, L.A. & White, R.W.G. (2005). Spawning related seasonal variation in fyke net catches of golden galaxias (Galaxias auratus): implications for monitoring lacustrine galaxiid populations. Fisheries Management and Ecology, 12(6), 407-409. DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2400.2005.00454.x
  • Jensen, J.W. (1995). A direct estimate of gillnet selectivity for brown trout. Journal of Fish Biology, 46(5), 857-861. DOI:10.1111/j.1095-8649.1995.tb01608.x
  • Kim, S., Lim, J., Lee, K. & Park, S. (2016). Effect of twine thickness on size-selectivity of driftnet for the yellow croaker Larimichthys polyactis in southwestern Sea of Korea. Chinese Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, 34(6), 1199-1208. DOI:10.1007/s00343-016-5107-0
  • Königson, S., Hemmingsson, M., Lunneryd, S.-G. & Lundström, K. (2007). Seals and fyke nets: An investigation of the problem and its possible solution. Marine Biology Research, 3(1), 29-36. DOI:10.1080/17451000601072596
  • Kraft, C. E. & Johnson, B. L. (1992). Fyke-Net and Gill-Net Size Selectivities for Yellow Perch in Green Bay, Lake Michigan. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 12(1), 230-236. DOI:10.1577/1548-8675(1992)012<0230:FNAGNS>2.3.CO;2
  • Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Guénette, S., Pitcher, T.J., Sumaila, U.R., Walters, C.J.,watson, R. & Zeller, D. (2002). Towards sustainability in world fisheries. Nature, 418(8), 689-695.
  • RStudio Team (2015). RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA URL http://www.rstudio.com/.
  • Smith, B.J., Blackwell, B.G., Wuellner, M.R., Graeb, B.D.S. & Willis, D.W. (2016). Escapement of Fishes from Modified Fyke Nets with Differing Throat Configurations. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 36(1), 96-103. DOI:10.1080/02755947.2015.1111278
  • Smith, B.J. & Simpkins, D.G. (2017). A Comparison of Three Paired Modified Fyke Nets for Characterizing Fish Assemblages in the Nearshore Zone of Lake Michigan. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 37(5), 962-969. DOI:10.1080/02755947.2017.1336134
  • Tokaç, A. (2011). Ağ Yapım ve Donam Tekniği (Balıkçılık II), Yayın No:80: Ege Üniversitesi Basım Evi, Bornova-İzmir.
  • Tosunoğlu, Z., Ünal, V. & Kaykaç, M.H. (2017). Ege Dalyanları. SÜR-KOOP Su Ürünleri Kooperatifleri Merkez Birliği Yayınları No: 03, Ankara, 322p.
  • Tsai, C.H., Wang, Y.K., Tsai, S.T. & Wu, S.H. (2015). Seasonal and diel changes of the fish assemblage employing the fyke nets in a subtropical mangrove estuary of puzih river, Taiwan. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 23(1), 109-116. DOI:10.6119/JMST-014-0110-3
  • Turunen, T. (1996). The effects of twine thickness on the catchability of gillnets for pikeperch (Stizostedion lucioperca (L.)). Annales Zoologici Fennici, 33(3/4), 621-625. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/23736107
  • Ulikowski, D., Chybowski, Ł., Traczuk, P., Ulikowska, E.J.T.J.o.F. & Sciences, A. (2017). A New Design of Crayfish Traps Reduces Escaping and Improves Opportunities for Long-Term Catching. 17(2), 363-369.
Toplam 30 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Balıkçılık Yönetimi
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Dr. Mehmet Cilbiz 0000-0002-7686-7570

Rahmi Uysal 0000-0002-7342-9380

Abdulkadir Yağcı 0000-0002-7897-1734

Süleyman Oğuz Korkut 0000-0002-6576-3557

Kadir Çapkın 0000-0002-6822-6896

Mehmet Cesur 0000-0002-7482-6353

Proje Numarası TAGEM/HAYSUD/2017/A11/P-02/1
Yayımlanma Tarihi 15 Mart 2021
Gönderilme Tarihi 13 Mart 2020
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2021 Cilt: 38 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Cilbiz, D. M., Uysal, R., Yağcı, A., … Korkut, S. O. (2021). CPUE comparison of traditional crayfish fyke net rigged with knotted net and alternatively knotless net. Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 38(1), 79-86. https://doi.org/10.12714/egejfas.38.1.09

Cited By

Bycatch estimation of narrow‐clawed crayfish ( Pontastacus leptodactylus ) in Turkish fyke net fisheries
Fisheries Management and Ecology
https://doi.org/10.1111/fme.12610
Effect of Different Baits on Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) for Catching Narrow-Clawed Crayfish (Pontastacus leptodactylus) with Fyke-Nets and Traps in Çanakkale Atikhisar Reservoir
Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University Journal of Marine Sciences and Fisheries
https://doi.org/10.46384/jmsf.1092067
Sorting grid usage to reduce the catch of undersized narrow‐clawed crayfish (Pontastacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823) in fyke net fisheries
Fisheries Management and Ecology
https://doi.org/10.1111/fme.12731