Gulf of Maine cod SCAA/ASPM vs ADAPT-VPA Doug Butterworth and Rebecca Rademeyer __________________________________________________________________ Marine Resource Assessment and Management Group, University of Cape Town
METHODS ADAPT-VPA - Backward calculation - Oldest-age F assumption - Catches-at-age exact SCAA/ASPM - Based on separability: F y,a = S a F y - Forward estimation, typically likelihood based - Errors in proportions-at-age SCAA - Statistical treatment of age data errors May include S/R relationship ASPM - Age-structured dynamics Must include S/R relationship Age data not necessary
ASPM methodology updates - M fixed (0.2) (not estimated) - Ricker-like not Beverton-Holt S/R relationship - MSY calculated internally - All S a ’s estimated (no functional form imposed) - Model to 11+, though fit to 7+ data - Fully Bayesian PI computations
VPA methodology - RC-VPA: as Mayo and Col (2006) – asymp. flat selectivity Fit either to ages 1-6 or 1-7+ MSY calculated externally - Alt-VPA ( =1): removes inconsistency in plus-group eqns - Alt-VPA ( =est): estimates where
Data used Mayo and Col (2006) BUT Scaled to get
2003 Results Gulf of Maine cod
Results RC-ASPM (M=0.2, Ricker) Shading shows 95% PIs
Abundance index fits RC-ASPM (M=0.2, Ricker)
Average age-proportion fits RC-ASPM (M=0.2, Ricker)
Selectivity estimates RC-ASPM (M=0.2, Ricker) Commercial, pre-1992 Commercial, post-1991
Selectivity estimates RC-ASPM (M=0.2, Ricker) Commercial, pre-1992 Commercial, post-1991 NEFSC-Spring NEFSC-Autumn
ASPM Stock-recruit relationships - l nL = Ricker
ASPM Stock-recruit relationships - l nL = RickerBeverton-Holt - l nL = If estimate parameter ( =1 for Ricker): 1.05 [0.54; 1.15]
ASPM Selectivity dome - l nL = S 7 /S 6 =0.52 [0.41; 0.64] - l nL = Asymp. flat selectivity
ASPM Past catch selectivity : Estimated : Estimated Pre-1982: Set equal to Second order effect (Important assumption is unchanging survey selectivity) Per-recruit contribution to cohort biomass
ASPM Results
ADAPT-VPA comparisons VPA as Mayo and Col (2006)
ADAPT-VPA comparisons VPA as Mayo and Col (2006) RC-VPA
ADAPT-VPA comparisons VPA as Mayo and Col (2006) RC-VPA Alt-VPA, =1
ADAPT-VPA comparisons VPA as Mayo and Col (2006) RC-VPA Alt-VPA, =1 Alt-VPA, =est
ADAPT-VPA comparisons VPA as Mayo and Col (2006) RC-VPA Alt-VPA, =1 Alt-VPA, =est ASPM – Data from 1982
ADAPT-VPA comparisons VPA as Mayo and Col (2006) RC-VPA Alt-VPA, =1 Alt-VPA, =est ASPM – Data from 1982 RC – ASPM
ADAPT-VPA comparisons VPA as Mayo and Col (2006) RC-VPA Alt-VPA, =1 Alt-VPA, =est ASPM – Data from 1982 RC – ASPM
ADAPT-VPA Selectivities RC-VPA
ADAPT-VPA Selectivities RC-VPA Alt-VPA, =1
ADAPT-VPA Selectivities RC-VPA Alt-VPA, =1 Alt-VPA, =est
ADAPT-VPA Selectivities RC-VPA Alt-VPA, =1 Alt-VPA, =est ASPM – Data from 1982
ADAPT-VPA Selectivities RC-VPA Alt-VPA, =1 Alt-VPA, =est ASPM – Data from 1982 RC – ASPM
ADAPT-VPA Results
Conclusions General - Careful treatment of plus-group - Fully flexible S a parametrization - Take care with use of Beverton-Holt S/R relationship
Conclusions Gulf of Maine cod difference as ADAPT-VPA imposed asymp. flat selectivity - Asymp. flat selectivity statistically inconsistent with data Independent evidence of mechanisms to give dome shape ? - close to and Robust to sensitivities - SCAA to be preferred Enables use of pre-1982 data Greater range of B sp Better precision of estimates M-S Act focus on MSY
Thank you for your attention