Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T20:02:07.153Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Parasites as biological tags of fish stocks: a meta-analysis of their discriminatory power

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2013

ROBERT POULIN*
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand
TSUKUSHI KAMIYA
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand
*
* Corresponding author: Department of Zoology, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand. Tel: +64 3 479-7983. Fax: +64 3 479-7584. E-mail: robert.poulin@otago.ac.nz
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The use of parasites as biological tags to discriminate among marine fish stocks has become a widely accepted method in fisheries management. Here, we first link this approach to its unstated ecological foundation, the decay in the similarity of the species composition of assemblages as a function of increasing distance between them, a phenomenon almost universal in nature. We explain how distance decay of similarity can influence the use of parasites as biological tags. Then, we perform a meta-analysis of 61 uses of parasites as tags of marine fish populations in multivariate discriminant analyses, obtained from 29 articles. Our main finding is that across all studies, the observed overall probability of correct classification of fish based on parasite data was about 71%. This corresponds to a two-fold improvement over the rate of correct classification expected by chance alone, and the average effect size (Zr = 0·463) computed from the original values was also indicative of a medium-to-large effect. However, none of the moderator variables included in the meta-analysis had a significant effect on the proportion of correct classification; these moderators included the total number of fish sampled, the number of parasite species used in the discriminant analysis, the number of localities from which fish were sampled, the minimum and maximum distance between any pair of sampling localities, etc. Therefore, there are no clear-cut situations in which the use of parasites as tags is more useful than others. Finally, we provide recommendations for the future usage of parasites as tags for stock discrimination, to ensure that future applications of the method achieve statistical rigour and a high discriminatory power.

Information

Type
Fisheries
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Graphical representation of the exponential decay in parasite community similarity as a function of distance. Each point on the curve represents the pairwise similarity in species composition (based either on presence–absence data or on abundance data) between two parasite communities for a given geographical distance between them. The two smaller insets illustrate the expected outcomes of any type of discriminant analysis between fish from two populations that are either relatively close or distant to each other. The axes represent the main discriminant functions based on parasite community composition, and the symbols represent individual fish from the two populations.

Figure 1

Table 1. Summary of the dataset used in the meta-analysis. The proportion of correct classification is the observed one based on discriminant analysis using parasite data, with the correct classification expected by chance alone also shown

Figure 2

Fig. 2. Relationships between effect sizes (Fisher's z-transformed correlation coefficients, Zr) corresponding to the improvement in correct classification of fish using parasites compared to classification based on chance alone, and three potential moderators: the total number of fish sampled, the minimum distance between any pair of sampling localities, and whether the parasites used were endoparasites only (N = 28) or endo- and/or ectoparasites (N = 33).

Figure 3

Table 2. Results of a Bayesian linear mixed model (MCMCglmm) evaluating the relationship between the effect size of correct classification of fish based on parasite data, calculated as Zr, and potential predictors such as the number of fish examined, the number of parasite species included in analysis, the number of localities involved, whether or not ectoparasites were included, the minimum and maximum distance between sampled localities and whether cross-validation was used to compute the proportion of correct classification