Modeling framework to estimate spawning and hatching locations of pelagically-spawned eggs

Identifying spawning and hatching locations is vital to controlling invasive fish and conserving imperiled fish, which can be difficult for pelagically-spawning species with semi-buoyant eggs. In freshwater systems, this reproductive strategy is common among cyprinid species, such as Chinese carp species currently threatening the Great Lakes. Following the confirmation that one of these species, Grass Carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella), was spawning in a Great Lakes tributary, we developed a modeling framework to combine field data with hydraulic models to calculate the most probable spawning and hatching locations for collected eggs. Our results indicate that the estimated spawning location encompassed habitat consistent with spawning sites in Grass Carpâ s native range. Additionally, all eggs were identified to have hatched in the river, increasing the likelihood of successful recruitment. This modeling framework can be used to estimate spawning and hatching locations for Chinese carp species, as well as all pelagic, riverine spawners. Spawning and hatching locations provide key information to researchers about the reproductive requirements of species and to agencies about how best to manage populations for control or restoration.The accepted manuscript in pdf format is listed with the files at the bottom of this page. The presentation of the authors' names and (or) special characters in the title of the manuscript may differ slightly between what is listed on this page and what is listed in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript; that in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript is what was submitted by the author

An Examination of Gender Differences in the American Fisheries Society Peer-Review Process

This study investigated the possibility of gender differences in outcomes throughout the peer review process of American Fisheries Society (AFS) journals. For each manuscript submitted to four AFS journals between January 2003 and December 2010, we collated information regarding the gender and nationality of authors, gender of associate editor, gender of reviewers, reviewer recommendations, associate editor’s decision, and publication status of the manuscript. We used hierarchical linear modeling to test for differences in manuscript decision outcomes associated with author, reviewer, and associate editor gender. Gender differences were present at some but not every stage of the review process and were not equal among the four journals. Although there was a small gender difference in decision outcomes, we found no evidence of bias in editors’ and reviewers’ recommendations. Our results support the conclusion that the current singleblind review system does not result in bias against female authors within AFS journals