Abstract
This paper tries to determine the best back‐calculation formula (BCF) for cod otoliths. The cod were tagged individually and measured regularly throughout a 3‐year period. Six different BCFs were compared: (1) Fraser–Lee with an intercept estimated from a linear regression of fish length (L) on otolith length (S), (2) Fraser—Lee with an intercept estimated from a symmetrical regression line of L on S; (3) the ‘body proportional hypothesis’ (BPH) for linear relationship; (4) the ‘scale proportional hypothesis’ (SPH) for linear relationship; (5) the BPH for non‐linear relationship; and (6) the SPH for non‐linear relationship. The ‘body proportional hypothesis’ seems to be more correct than the ‘scale proportional hypothesis’, and the non‐linear BCF seems to give the best results for cod otoliths.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
