2  Importance of size at maturity for management

Globally, crustacean (shrimp, lobster, and crab) fisheries are growing faster than any other group of fisheries, and represent some of the highest-value seafood products on the market (Boenish et al. 2022). Accurate estimates of size at maturity are crucial for the sustainable management of these valuable fisheries.

Importance of size at maturity for the management of crustacean fisheries.

2.1 Minimum harvest size

Size at maturity is a key consideration when setting minimum size regulations, as setting a minimum legal size below the size at 50% sexual maturity (SM50) can significantly restrict the reproductive potential of a population. When minimum size limits are set above SM50, high yield and spawning biomass can often be maintained even under high fishing pressure (Prince and Hordyk 2019).

2.2 Stock assessment & model inputs

Effective management of crustacean fisheries depends on stock assessments that estimate current biomass levels, evaluate the health of the stock compared to historical levels, and predict the effects of potential management actions. The difficulty of aging crustaceans means that size-structured models are typically preferred over age-based methods for stock assessment purposes (Punt, Huang, and Maunder 2013; Punt, Haddon, and McGarvey 2016). SM50 is a fundamental parameter in frequently used stock assessment models like Length-Based Spawning Potential Ratio (LBSPR), which are especially useful for data-limited fisheries (Prince and Hordyk 2019; Hordyk et al. 2015). Stock assessment models can be highly sensitive to shifts in size at maturity inputs like SM50, particularly when combined with changes in growth parameters such as molt probability and molt increment probability (Hodgdon et al. 2022). Understanding the effect that climate-driven shifts in life history input parameters like SM50 have on stock assessment model outputs is critical for future modeling efforts and fisheries management (Hodgdon et al. 2022).

Even when temporal variation in maturity does not have a dominant impact on assessment output, uncertainty in maturity estimates can be a significant contributor to overall uncertainty in biomass estimates (Miller, O’Brien, and Fratantoni 2018). This underscores the importance of morphometric maturity modeling approaches that provide reliable estimates of the uncertainty associated with the resulting SM50 values.

2.3 Accounting for spatial structure

2.4 Fishing effects on size at maturity

Monitoring changes in size at maturity is also an important tool to assess the impacts of environmental changes and fishing pressure on fish and invertebrate life-history characteristics (Audzijonyte, Kuparinen, and Fulton 2013; Lappalainen et al. 2016). For example, there is strong evidence that size-based fishery selection has led to declines in female SM50 for female American lobster (Homarus americanus) in the United States and Canada (Haarr et al. 2018; Waller et al. 2019, 2021; Le Bris et al. 2017).

2.5 Climate impacts

Shifts in ocean conditions have already led to shifts in the abundance and spatial distribution of important marine fisheries, with resulting impacts on their productivity (Cheung, Watson, and Pauly 2013; Nye et al. 2009). Consequently, understanding the effects of climate change on marine resources and identifying effective mitigation strategies are key priorities of the NOAA Fisheries National Climate Science Strategy.

Delaying revisions to harvest regulations in response to climate-related changes in population growth rates can increase the likelihood of a population collapse (Brown et al. 2012; Pershing et al. 2015). Conversely, dynamic biological reference points and responsive harvest control rules can increase the climate resilience of a fishery (Collie et al. 2021; Kritzer et al. 2019). Identifying and refining non-invasive, relatively inexpensive methods of monitoring size at maturity and other life history traits dictating reproductive potential will support the dynamic and adaptive fisheries management needed to offset the negative effects of climate change (Karp et al. 2019; Gaines et al. 2018; Holsman et al. 2019).

Knowledge of the direction and magnitude of climate-related shifts in size at maturity is essential for simulating the effects of alternative minimum size limits under various warming scenarios (Hunt et al. 2023).

NOAA Fisheries Climate Vulnerability Assessments identify which species may be most vulnerable based on their exposure to projected environmental changes and their ability to cope with those changes given their specific life history characteristics. Of the crustaceans included in the Northeast Fish and Shellfish Climate Vulnerability Assessment (American lobster, Cancer crabs, blue crab, northern shrimp, and deep-sea red crab), only deep-sea red crab did not score at least “moderate” on overall vulnerability, while all species scored “high” on the exposure component of the assessment (Hare et al. 2016).

Mullowney and Baker (Mullowney and Baker 2021) found that colder temperatures were a significant driver of decreases in snow crab size-at-morphometric-maturity in Newfoundland and Labrador. Conversely, an inverse relationship between size at maturity and temperature has been observed for the American lobster (Le Bris et al. 2017).

A better understanding of size at maturity will contribute to broader work to assess the effects of climate change on regional fisheries harvest scenarios (NOAA Fisheries 2024). My project will thus support federally mandated efforts to optimize and diversify sustainable seafood production and fishing opportunities while ensuring the long-term sustainability of fisheries through effective and efficient management.

References

Audzijonyte, Asta, Anna Kuparinen, and Elizabeth A. Fulton. 2013. “How Fast Is Fisheries-Induced Evolution? Quantitative Analysis of Modelling and Empirical Studies.” Evolutionary Applications 6 (4): 585–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12044.
Boenish, Robert, Jacob P Kritzer, Kristin Kleisner, Robert S Steneck, Karl Michael Werner, Wenbin Zhu, Frederick Schram, et al. 2022. “The Global Rise of Crustacean Fisheries.” Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 20 (2): 102–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2431.
Brown, Christopher J., Elizabeth A. Fulton, Hugh P. Possingham, and Anthony J. Richardson. 2012. “How Long Can Fisheries Management Delay Action in Response to Ecosystem and Climate Change?” Ecological Applications 22 (1): 298–310. https://doi.org/10.1890/11-0419.1.
Cheung, William W. L., Reg Watson, and Daniel Pauly. 2013. “Signature of Ocean Warming in Global Fisheries Catch.” Nature 497 (7449): 365–68. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12156.
Collie, Jeremy S, Richard J Bell, Samuel B Collie, and Cóilín Minto. 2021. “Harvest Strategies for Climate-Resilient Fisheries.” ICES Journal of Marine Science 78 (8): 2774–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsab152.
Gaines, Steven D., Christopher Costello, Brandon Owashi, Tracey Mangin, Jennifer Bone, Jorge García Molinos, Merrick Burden, et al. 2018. “Improved Fisheries Management Could Offset Many Negative Effects of Climate Change.” Science Advances 4 (8): eaao1378. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aao1378.
Haarr, Marthe Larsen, Bernard Sainte-Marie, Michel Comeau, M. John Tremblay, and Rémy Rochette. 2018. “Female American Lobster (Homarus Americanus) Size-at-Maturity Declined in Canada During the 20th and Early 21st Centuries.” Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 75 (6): 908–24. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2016-0434.
Hare, Jonathan A., Wendy E. Morrison, Mark W. Nelson, Megan M. Stachura, Eric J. Teeters, Roger B. Griffis, Michael A. Alexander, et al. 2016. “A Vulnerability Assessment of Fish and Invertebrates to Climate Change on the Northeast U.S. Continental Shelf.” PLOS ONE 11 (2): e0146756. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146756.
Hodgdon, Cameron T., Noah S. Khalsa, Mackenzie D. Mazur, and Yong Chen. 2022. “Climate-Driven Changes in Growth and Size at Maturity of Gulf of Maine Lobster Stocks: Implications for Stock Assessment Models.” Fishery Bulletin 120 (3-4): 240–51. https://doi.org/10.7755/FB.120.3-4.5.
Holsman, Kirstin K, Elliott Lee Hazen, Alan Haynie, Sophie Gourguet, Anne Hollowed, Steven J Bograd, Jameal F Samhouri, and Kerim Aydin. 2019. “Towards Climate Resiliency in Fisheries Management.” ICES Journal of Marine Science 76 (5): 1368–78. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsz031.
Hordyk, Adrian, Kotaro Ono, Keith Sainsbury, Neil Loneragan, and Jeremy Prince. 2015. “Some Explorations of the Life History Ratios to Describe Length Composition, Spawning-Per-Recruit, and the Spawning Potential Ratio.” ICES Journal of Marine Science 72 (1): 204–16. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fst235.
Hunt, Noah, Ellen Pikitch, Burton Shank, Cameron T. Hodgdon, and Yong Chen. 2023. “Industry and Conservation Goals Are Complementary for the Most Valuable Fishery in the United States Under Climate-Driven Life History Changes.” Conservation Letters 16 (6): e12982. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12982.
Karp, Melissa A, Jay O Peterson, Patrick D Lynch, Roger B Griffis, Charles F Adams, William S Arnold, Lewis A K Barnett, et al. 2019. “Accounting for Shifting Distributions and Changing Productivity in the Development of Scientific Advice for Fishery Management.” ICES Journal of Marine Science 76 (5): 1305–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsz048.
Kritzer, J P, C Costello, T Mangin, and S L Smith. 2019. “Responsive Harvest Control Rules Provide Inherent Resilience to Adverse Effects of Climate Change and Scientific Uncertainty.” ICES Journal of Marine Science 76 (6): 1424–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsz038.
Lappalainen, Antti, Lauri Saks, Mira Šuštar, Outi Heikinheimo, Kristiina Jürgens, Eevi Kokkonen, Mika Kurkilahti, Aare Verliin, and Markus Vetemaa. 2016. “Length at Maturity as a Potential Indicator of Fishing Pressure Effects on Coastal Pikeperch (Sander Lucioperca) Stocks in the Northern Baltic Sea.” Fisheries Research 174 (February): 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2015.08.013.
Le Bris, Arnault, Andrew J. Pershing, Julien Gaudette, Tracy L. Pugh, and Kathleen M. Reardon. 2017. “Multi-Scale Quantification of the Effects of Temperature on Size at Maturity in the American Lobster (Homarus Americanus).” Fisheries Research 186 (February): 397–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2016.09.008.
Miller, Timothy J., Loretta O’Brien, and Paula S. Fratantoni. 2018. “Temporal and Environmental Variation in Growth and Maturity and Effects on Management Reference Points of Georges Bank Atlantic Cod.” Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 75 (12): 2159–71. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2017-0124.
Mullowney, Darrell R. J., and Krista D. Baker. 2021. “Size-at-Maturity Shift in a Male-Only Fishery: Factors Affecting Molt-Type Outcomes in Newfoundland and Labrador Snow Crab (Chionoecetes Opilio).” ICES Journal of Marine Science 78 (2): 516–33. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsaa164.
NOAA Fisheries. 2024. “National Seafood Strategy Implementation Plan.” https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/s3/2024-09/09-2024-Natl-Seafood-Strat-Imp-Plan.pdf.
Nye, Janet A., Jason S. Link, Jonathan A. Hare, and William J. Overholtz. 2009. “Changing Spatial Distribution of Fish Stocks in Relation to Climate and Population Size on the Northeast United States Continental Shelf.” Marine Ecology Progress Series 393 (October): 111–29. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08220.
Pershing, Andrew J., Michael A. Alexander, Christina M. Hernandez, Lisa A. Kerr, Arnault Le Bris, Katherine E. Mills, Janet A. Nye, et al. 2015. “Slow Adaptation in the Face of Rapid Warming Leads to Collapse of the Gulf of Maine Cod Fishery.” Science 350 (6262): 809–12. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac9819.
Prince, Jeremy, and Adrian Hordyk. 2019. “What to Do When You Have Almost Nothing: A Simple Quantitative Prescription for Managing Extremely Data-Poor Fisheries.” Fish and Fisheries 20 (2): 224–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12335.
Punt, André E., Malcolm Haddon, and Richard McGarvey. 2016. “Estimating Growth Within Size-Structured Fishery Stock Assessments: What Is the State of the Art and What Does the Future Look Like?” Fisheries Research, Growth: Theory, estimation, and application in fishery stock assessment models, 180 (August): 147–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2014.11.007.
Punt, André E., TzuChuan Huang, and Mark N. Maunder. 2013. “Review of Integrated Size-Structured Models for Stock Assessment of Hard-to-Age Crustacean and Mollusc Species.” ICES Journal of Marine Science 70 (1): 16–33. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fss185.
Waller, Jesica D., Kathleen M. Reardon, Sarah E. Caron, Blaise P. Jenner, Erin L. Summers, and Carl J. Wilson. 2021. “A Comparison of the Size at Maturity of Female American Lobsters (Homarus Americanus) over Three Decades and Across Coastal Areas of the Gulf of Maine Using Ovarian Staging.” ICES Journal of Marine Science 78 (4): 1267–77. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsab034.
Waller, Jesica D., Kathleen M. Reardon, Sarah E. Caron, Henry M. Masters, Erin L. Summers, and Carl J. Wilson. 2019. “Decrease in Size at Maturity of Female American Lobsters Homarus Americanus (h. Milne Edwards, 1837) (Decapoda: Astacidea: Nephropidae) over a 50-Year Period in Maine, USA.” Journal of Crustacean Biology 39 (4): 509–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcbiol/ruz021.