English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Björnsson, B., Karlsson, H., Thorsteinsson, V., and Solmundsson, J. 2011. Should all fish in mark–recapture experiments be double-tagged? Lessons learned from tagging coastal cod (Gadus morhua). – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 68: . Cod (Gadus morhua) were tagged outside and inside “herds” formed by anthropogenic feeding in an Icelandic fjord. Recapture rates were twice as high for fish double-tagged with one surgically implanted electronic tag and one anchor tag (46.6 and 62.2%) than with fish tagged with only a single anchor tag (20.0 and 29.2%) outside and inside the herds, respectively. The two main reasons for the differences observed in recapture rates were higher detection and reporting rates for the double-tagged fish. In cage experiments, 8% of the fish receiving implanted tags died during the first 2 d after tagging. For double-tagged fish, tag loss was ∼10% for both tag types. About 80% of the tags were returned by fishers and 20% by fish processors. The tag detection rate by fishers was estimated at ∼45 and ∼80% for single- and double-tagged fish, and the reporting rate at ∼74 and ∼100% for single- and double-tagged fish, respectively. It is proposed for future tagging studies to double-tag all fish routinely, placing one tag dorsally and one ventrally, to enhance the detection rate and to account for tag loss.