References in periodicals archive ?
where w corresponds to the weight of the gonad (g) and LJFL to the lower jaw-fork length (cm).
2) indicated a predominance of males to 255 cm LJFL; from this size on, females predominated.
The reference and biological-fishery information registered per set corresponded to the date, season of the year, time of longline setting and retrieval, LAT, LON, LJFL, and CIW.
To identify the main associations between the variables responsible for the total variability of the data analyzed, a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was applied in which the environmental variables (SST, Chl-a, SSS, SSH, BAT) were considered to be active and the reference (LAT, LON) and biological-fishery (LJFL, CIW) variables to be descriptive.
The relationships between LJFL and total weight for males, females, and combined sexes were described by these equations: males, TW = 4.5 x [10.sup.-6] [LJFL.sup.3.21] ([r.sup.2] = 0.97, n = 541); females, TW = 3.7 x [10.sup.-6] [LJFL.sup.3.26] ([r.sup.2] = 0.96, n = 452), and both sexes combined, TW = 4.1x[10.sup.-6] [LJFL.sup.3.24] ([r.sup.2] = 0.97, n = 993) (Fig.
The relationship between LJFL and ray radius was fitted using a non-linear procedure, producing the following parameter estimates: for males, a = 87.26, b = 0.457, [r.sup.2] = 0.80, and n = 503 and, for females, a = 79.44, b = 0.522, [r.sup.2] = 0.84, and n = 630.
Data on total length (TL), eye fork length (EFL), lower jaw fork length (LJFL) (in cm), round weight (RW) (in kg) and the first dorsal fins of male and female sailfish were collected monthly at the fishing port of Shinkang (Fig.
Method 1 was based on the assumption that the relationship between spine radius (R) and LJFL (L) is linear, i.e., L=[a.sub.1]+[b.sub.1]R (Berkeley and Houde, 1983; Sun et al., 2002), whereas method 2 was based on the assumption that this relationship is a power function, i.e., [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] (Ehrhardt, 1992; Sun et al., 2002).
Growth rate in LJFL, also modeled with a piecewise regression, was 0.2 mm/d for the first segment (the upper and lower jaws of larvae <11 mm PSL are of equal length, hence PSL=LJFL) and 3.4 mm/d for the second segment (Fig.
Data on lower jaw fork length (LJFL) and weight, and samples of the first anal fin of male and female swordfish were collected from three offshore tuna longline and harpoon fishing ports (Fig.
A two-way ANOVA was used to examine differences in the mean lengths (LJFL) of commercial-size swordfish [is greater than or equal to] 119 cm LJFL) by set and gangion type after testing for homogeneity of variances.
For swordfish from the Straits of Florida, Taylor and Murphy (1992) observed [L.sub.50]'s of 112 and 182 cm lower jaw-to-fork length (LJFL) for males and females, respectively, equivalent to 96 and 161 cm EFL.
Acronyms browser ?
Full browser ?