Loading in 5 sec....

Demographic Model: StructurePowerPoint Presentation

Demographic Model: Structure

- By
**arnon** - Follow User

- 64 Views
- Uploaded on

Download Presentation
## PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Demographic Model: Structure' - arnon

**An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation**

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

### Parameterization ofdemographic model based on currently available data

Overview

- Yearly time step starting in October each year
- Parameters and structure are modified according to alternative under consideration
- Done on a per bar basis and aggregated to desired spatial scales

Spat Fall

- Predictions based on:
1: Projected number of spat surviving to 6-40 mm (mode 30 mm)

2: Spatial distribution based on larvae settlement projected from hydrodynamic modeling (Dr. Elizabeth North, HPL)

- Part 1: predicted # spat per spawner (standardized fecundity to 77 mm oyster) based on stock-recruit regressions:
- Use the DNR spat fall survey data (1991-2003)
- Estimate regression parameters w/ standard deviation by regions and type of weather year (dry, average, wet)

Jon H. Vølstad, Jodi Dew and Ed Weber

Versar, Inc., Columbia, MD

and

Mary Christman, UFL

Data sources for estimating growth parameters (C. Va)

- Dr. Paynter (unpublished)
- Individual growth data from 25 MD sites with sufficient sample sizes

- Coakley (2004)
- Growth parameters based on cohort analysis (29 MD sites)

- Virginia growth data from James River

VBGC growth

Assume growth (length) during a time step is a function of size not age

Growth equation for oysters at size (not age)

- VB function
- L1 is the size class in the current year
- L2 is the mean size class after growth in a single time step.

Growth of diploid Crassostrea ariakensis

- apply the growth rate for C. virginica, but with an extended growing season through the winter months

Data for estimating Mortality

- Maryland fall survey, 1991+
- Used ‘recent’ and total box counts
- The category of “box” includes dead oysters with shells still articulated
- “recent” include gapers, in which tissue is still found within the shell, as well as boxes with no fouling or sedimentation on the inner valve surfaces
- “old” (boxes in which fouling and/or sedimentation is found on the inner valve surfaces and no tissue remains).

Assumptions when using box counts for estimating mortality

- ‘Old boxes’ --
- assumed to represent mortality within the last year prior to October survey;

- ‘Recent boxes’ --
- assumed to represent mortality for ~2 weeks period prior to October survey;
- Yearly mortality mostly occur from May to October (20 weeks)

Limitations of using box counts or size-class cohort analysis:

- Older boxes --
- may represent mortality over 1+ years;
- Transition between size classes due to growth not accounted for;
- Less separation between disease tiers

- Recent boxes –
- Time since death can only be defined approximately

- Cohort analysis
- Lack info on age; cohorts overlap

Classified years by disease level analysis

Mortality: Small and market sized analysisCrassostrea virginica

- Empirical estimates of mortality by salinity (ppt) and disease tier
- Salinity classes: high ( 15 +), medium (11-15), low (<=11)
- Disease intensity: Tiers 1-3
- Likelihood of disease Tier determined by type of year (Wet, Average, Dry)

Mortality of small oysters analysisCrassostrea virginica

Mortality of market sized oysters analysisCrassostrea virginica

Mortality by year for MD analysisCrassostrea virginica (across salinity zones)

Disease intensity tier of year by analysistype of weather

The disease tier for a given year is randomly assigned based on the type of weather regime

MSX events for on the type of weather regimeCrassostrea virginica

- MSX event assigned when two or more dry years occur in a row
- estimated from Maryland DNR historic disease data

Mortality, high MSX intensity on the type of weather regime

Increased mortality due to MSX events on the type of weather regimeCrassostrea virginica

- Increased baseline mortality by 10% -points for bars with high MSX events

Density-dependent mortality on the type of weather regime

- Under development, with input from scientific review panel
- Currently assume a maximum of 300 oysters per m2
- If the density at a bar exceeds this following spat-fall, the oysters will be assigned a uniform density dependent mortality across all size groups to scale back the density to the threshold.

Natural Mortality of Disease Tolerant on the type of weather regimeCrassostrea virginica

“Standard” =Tier 3

From Calvo et al. (2003)

Natural Mortality of Disease Tolerant on the type of weather regimeCrassostrea virginica

From Calvo et al. (2003)

“Standard” =Tier 3

Natural mortality of disease tolerant high salinityCrassostrea virginica: limitations

- Estimates are based on off-bottom cage experiments
- Mortality due to predation is not fully accounted for

- Is it reasonable to assume that the disease tolerance is maintained in future generations, after cross-fertilization with standard oysters?

Natural Mortality for aquacultured triploid high salinityC. ariakensis (off-bottom)

Natural Mortality for introduced high salinityC. ariakensis

- Apply tier 3 mortality rates for C.virginica
- Assume minimal mortality due to Dermo and MSX
- Assume similar predation mortality as for C.viriginca
- Sensitivity analysis will involve increased predation mortality due to thinner shells

Harvest Mortality high salinity

- Exploitation rates by spatial area and year for each alternative
- Provided by DNR

Empirical Stock-recruitment function for high salinityCrassostrea virginica, Maryland

Estimating Recruitment for high salinity Crassostrea ariakensis

- The number of eggs produced per oyster by shell height:
- Based on data from Taylor Hatchery and Allen and Merritt (2004)

Estimating Recruitment for high salinity Crassostrea ariakensis

- Estimate the standardized spawning stock:
- Divide the total number of eggs for spawning stock by the average number of eggs produced by a 77mm C. virginica oyster

- Apply stock-recruitment function to estimate # spats
- Assume that cumulative natural mortality from egg to spat (in October) is the same as for C. va

Spatial distribution of spat high salinity

- The larval transport model (North et al.) provides estimates of the spatial distribution of spat that survive from eggs released from each bar in the Chesapeake Bay

Starting population of oysters for model projections out to 2015

- Survey data from 2004 used to define population for C.va:
- MD survey data used for spatial distribution by size
- VA survey data by bar

- Number of stocked oysters & locations by year as provided by agencies

Linked 2015

Modeling Strategy

North et al.

Juvenile/adult

demographic model

Circulation models

Predictions

river flow

mean

abundance

high

Larval transport

model

low

Settlement at

each oyster bar

time

Outside suitable habitat: 2015

continue swimming

Larval Transport Settlement Model

Dead

Incorporates habitat data from MD DNR’s Bay Bottom Survey

Inside: settle

Oyster bars in 1980s

Present day oyster bars

Choptank River

(Smith et al. in press)

Distribution of spat 2015

Particles will be released from 2,000+ habitat polygons in circulation model boundaries

Modeled particle behaviors will be based on C. virginica and C. ariakensis laboratory experiments

Simulations will be conducted with predictions from two Chesapeake Bay hydrodynamic models (ROMS and QUODDY)

Blue line is QUODDY model boundaries

Black shapes are oyster habitat polygons

C. virginica 2015

C. virginica

C. virginica

Larval

Transport

Model

Strategy

Step 1: Release particles from each oyster polygon

Step 3: Determine which particles settle successfully on polygons

Step 4: Determine the number of particles that start and end on each polygon for input to demographic model

Step 2: Track change in location due to currents and larval behavior

C. virginica 2015

C. virginica

C. virginica

Larval

Transport

Model

Strategy

Step 1: Release particles from each oyster polygon

Step 3: Determine which particles settle successfully on polygons

Step 4: Determine the number of particles that start and end on each polygon for input to demographic model

Step 2: Track change in location due to currents and larval behavior

Larval transport model will be run for 1995 – 1999 to capture years with different physical conditions

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

dry

wet

ave

dry

wet

Forward projections in demographic model replicate past weather patterns by simulations

Scenario 1: bootstrap, 5 year blocks from 1935-2005

Scenario 2: random selection from recent 10 years

Model Runs weather patterns by simulations

- Start with baseline run for c. virginica
- Scientific review

- Additional runs for alternatives with C.ariakensis after review

Model output weather patterns by simulations

- Number and biomass of oysters by size class;
- By habitat polygon
- By NOAA code/Chesapeake Bay segment
- By State

Acknowledgements weather patterns by simulations

- Tom O’Connel and Phil Jones, DNR, for technical support and project management

Acknowledgements weather patterns by simulations

- Chris Judy and Mitchell Tarnowski (Maryland DNR) provided information on available oyster habitat & survey data for estimating mortality and recruitment;
- Elizabeth North et al. for info on larval distribution
- PIs on MDNR funded research;
- Kelly Greenhawk, GIS analysis to delineate habitat

Independent Oyster Advisory Panel weather patterns by simulations

Panel’s Charge:

- Review the adequacy of data and assessments used to identify the ecological, economic, and cultural risks and benefits, and associated uncertainties for each EIS alternative;
- Provide advice on the degree of risk that would be involved for each EIS alternative if a decision were made in 2005 based on the available data and assessments; and
- Recommend additional research, and associated timeline, that could be obtained to reduce the level of risk and uncertainty.

Membership

- Brian Rothchild
- Jim Anderson
- Mark Berrigan
- Maurice Heral
- Roger Mann
- Eric Powell
- Mike Roman

Download Presentation

Connecting to Server..