Effect of J-Hook Shapes on Catch Rate, Efficiency, and Hooking Position of Needlefish: Evidence from Palk Bay, India
Vasanth, K.; Muthupandi, K.; Naganandhini, V.; Kumar, M.; Krishnan, A.; Patolla, H., and Radhakrishnan, K., 2023. Effect of J-hook shapes on catch rate, efficiency, and hooking position of Needlefish: Evidence from Palk Bay, India. Journal of Coastal Research, 39(5), 933–939. Charlotte (North Caroli...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of coastal research 2023-09, Vol.39 (5), p.933-939 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 939 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 933 |
| container_title | Journal of coastal research |
| container_volume | 39 |
| creator | Vasanth, Kathavarayan Muthupandi, Kalaiarasan Naganandhini, Vinayagamoorthy Kumar, Manoj Krishnan, Amrutha Pattola, Harsha Radhakrishnan, Kalidoss |
| description | Vasanth, K.; Muthupandi, K.; Naganandhini, V.; Kumar, M.; Krishnan, A.; Patolla, H., and Radhakrishnan, K., 2023. Effect of J-hook shapes on catch rate, efficiency, and hooking position of Needlefish: Evidence from Palk Bay, India. Journal of Coastal Research, 39(5), 933–939. Charlotte (North Carolina), ISSN 0749-0208. The efficiency of different shapes of J hooks No. 11 (nonoffset straight hook, 10° offset kirbed hook, and 10° offset reversed hook) in needlefish longline fishing gears was studied in 24 fishing grounds in Palk Bay, India, from, February to July 2022. A total of 24 fishing trips were conducted for each experimental gear for the comparative study, with 14,400 hooks, with a total catch of 582 fish during the study. The result was that the kirbed hook had the highest percentage composition of the needlefish (37.36%), followed by the reversed hook (31.79%) and the straight hook (30.75%). Further, the overall hooking rate was higher for the kirbed hook than for the straight hook (13.43% vs. 8.60%). Considering the catch rate, the overall catch per unit effort (CPUE; individual/200 hooks) of the kirbed hook was higher (9.08 vs. 7.45) than that of the straight hook, whereas for the straight hook, the CPUE of nontarget species (0.29) was much higher than that of the kirbed hook (0.12). In terms of the targeted species, the Ablennes hians showed the highest CPUE of 3.78 individuals/200 hooks followed by Tylosurus crocodilus crocodilus (1.78), Strongylura strongylura (1.38); the least dominant CPUE was T. choram (0.94). The percentage of hooking position in the jaw was higher in the kirbed hook than that of the straight hook (64.7% vs. 39.1%) and was found lower in the gut system (11.5% vs. 28.5%). Among the three hook shapes tested, the overall performance of the 10° offset kirbed hook was found to be better than the other 10° offset reversed and nonoffset J hook in terms of a higher catch efficiency, hooking rate, CPUE, and hooking position for needlefish ( |
| doi_str_mv | 10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-22-00097.1 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2866871550</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>48743649</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>48743649</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b1420-e3268e3e7bf440362e170a8ff36e6f011d6748a0baa2fffba6d406cc04c15af13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkMFOAjEQhhujiYg-gqaJV4rTbuku3hRQJESN6Lnp7k6liFvcLia8vUUMZ09zmO__J_MRcsGhKzgXV5PB083s9WU0Y0MmBAOAftrlB6TFez3OepCoQ9KCVPYZCMiOyUkICwCuMpm2SDOyFouGeksnbOz9B53NzQoD9RUdmKaY0xfTYIdGzBUOq2LToaYq6RZ11Tt99sE1LsKx4BGxXKJ1YX5NR9-ujDRSW_tP-myWH_TWxOxDVTpzSo6sWQY8-5tt8nY3eh2M2fTp_mFwM2U5lwIYJkJlmGCaWynjGwJ5CiazNlGoLHBeqlRmBnJjhLU2N6qUoIoCZMF7xvKkTS53vavaf60xNHrh13UVT2qRKZWl0RBESu2oovYh1Gj1qnafpt5oDnprWO8N66EWQv8a1tv6811wERpf71MyS2WiZD_u5W6fO-8r_G_tD90diHU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2866871550</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effect of J-Hook Shapes on Catch Rate, Efficiency, and Hooking Position of Needlefish: Evidence from Palk Bay, India</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Vasanth, Kathavarayan ; Muthupandi, Kalaiarasan ; Naganandhini, Vinayagamoorthy ; Kumar, Manoj ; Krishnan, Amrutha ; Pattola, Harsha ; Radhakrishnan, Kalidoss</creator><creatorcontrib>Vasanth, Kathavarayan ; Muthupandi, Kalaiarasan ; Naganandhini, Vinayagamoorthy ; Kumar, Manoj ; Krishnan, Amrutha ; Pattola, Harsha ; Radhakrishnan, Kalidoss</creatorcontrib><description>Vasanth, K.; Muthupandi, K.; Naganandhini, V.; Kumar, M.; Krishnan, A.; Patolla, H., and Radhakrishnan, K., 2023. Effect of J-hook shapes on catch rate, efficiency, and hooking position of Needlefish: Evidence from Palk Bay, India. Journal of Coastal Research, 39(5), 933–939. Charlotte (North Carolina), ISSN 0749-0208. The efficiency of different shapes of J hooks No. 11 (nonoffset straight hook, 10° offset kirbed hook, and 10° offset reversed hook) in needlefish longline fishing gears was studied in 24 fishing grounds in Palk Bay, India, from, February to July 2022. A total of 24 fishing trips were conducted for each experimental gear for the comparative study, with 14,400 hooks, with a total catch of 582 fish during the study. The result was that the kirbed hook had the highest percentage composition of the needlefish (37.36%), followed by the reversed hook (31.79%) and the straight hook (30.75%). Further, the overall hooking rate was higher for the kirbed hook than for the straight hook (13.43% vs. 8.60%). Considering the catch rate, the overall catch per unit effort (CPUE; individual/200 hooks) of the kirbed hook was higher (9.08 vs. 7.45) than that of the straight hook, whereas for the straight hook, the CPUE of nontarget species (0.29) was much higher than that of the kirbed hook (0.12). In terms of the targeted species, the Ablennes hians showed the highest CPUE of 3.78 individuals/200 hooks followed by Tylosurus crocodilus crocodilus (1.78), Strongylura strongylura (1.38); the least dominant CPUE was T. choram (0.94). The percentage of hooking position in the jaw was higher in the kirbed hook than that of the straight hook (64.7% vs. 39.1%) and was found lower in the gut system (11.5% vs. 28.5%). Among the three hook shapes tested, the overall performance of the 10° offset kirbed hook was found to be better than the other 10° offset reversed and nonoffset J hook in terms of a higher catch efficiency, hooking rate, CPUE, and hooking position for needlefish (<0.05).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0749-0208</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1551-5036</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-22-00097.1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Fort Lauderdale: Coastal Education and Research Foundation</publisher><subject>Carnivorous animals ; Catch per unit effort ; Coastal research ; Comparative analysis ; Comparative studies ; Efficiency ; Fish ; Fishing ; Fishing gear ; Fishing grounds ; Fishing zones ; gut ; Hooks ; Jaw ; longline ; Longline fishing</subject><ispartof>Journal of coastal research, 2023-09, Vol.39 (5), p.933-939</ispartof><rights>Coastal Education and Research Foundation, Inc. 2023</rights><rights>Copyright Allen Press Inc. Sep 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b1420-e3268e3e7bf440362e170a8ff36e6f011d6748a0baa2fffba6d406cc04c15af13</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/48743649$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/48743649$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,800,27905,27906,57998,58231</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Vasanth, Kathavarayan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muthupandi, Kalaiarasan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Naganandhini, Vinayagamoorthy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kumar, Manoj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krishnan, Amrutha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pattola, Harsha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Radhakrishnan, Kalidoss</creatorcontrib><title>Effect of J-Hook Shapes on Catch Rate, Efficiency, and Hooking Position of Needlefish: Evidence from Palk Bay, India</title><title>Journal of coastal research</title><description>Vasanth, K.; Muthupandi, K.; Naganandhini, V.; Kumar, M.; Krishnan, A.; Patolla, H., and Radhakrishnan, K., 2023. Effect of J-hook shapes on catch rate, efficiency, and hooking position of Needlefish: Evidence from Palk Bay, India. Journal of Coastal Research, 39(5), 933–939. Charlotte (North Carolina), ISSN 0749-0208. The efficiency of different shapes of J hooks No. 11 (nonoffset straight hook, 10° offset kirbed hook, and 10° offset reversed hook) in needlefish longline fishing gears was studied in 24 fishing grounds in Palk Bay, India, from, February to July 2022. A total of 24 fishing trips were conducted for each experimental gear for the comparative study, with 14,400 hooks, with a total catch of 582 fish during the study. The result was that the kirbed hook had the highest percentage composition of the needlefish (37.36%), followed by the reversed hook (31.79%) and the straight hook (30.75%). Further, the overall hooking rate was higher for the kirbed hook than for the straight hook (13.43% vs. 8.60%). Considering the catch rate, the overall catch per unit effort (CPUE; individual/200 hooks) of the kirbed hook was higher (9.08 vs. 7.45) than that of the straight hook, whereas for the straight hook, the CPUE of nontarget species (0.29) was much higher than that of the kirbed hook (0.12). In terms of the targeted species, the Ablennes hians showed the highest CPUE of 3.78 individuals/200 hooks followed by Tylosurus crocodilus crocodilus (1.78), Strongylura strongylura (1.38); the least dominant CPUE was T. choram (0.94). The percentage of hooking position in the jaw was higher in the kirbed hook than that of the straight hook (64.7% vs. 39.1%) and was found lower in the gut system (11.5% vs. 28.5%). Among the three hook shapes tested, the overall performance of the 10° offset kirbed hook was found to be better than the other 10° offset reversed and nonoffset J hook in terms of a higher catch efficiency, hooking rate, CPUE, and hooking position for needlefish (<0.05).</description><subject>Carnivorous animals</subject><subject>Catch per unit effort</subject><subject>Coastal research</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Comparative studies</subject><subject>Efficiency</subject><subject>Fish</subject><subject>Fishing</subject><subject>Fishing gear</subject><subject>Fishing grounds</subject><subject>Fishing zones</subject><subject>gut</subject><subject>Hooks</subject><subject>Jaw</subject><subject>longline</subject><subject>Longline fishing</subject><issn>0749-0208</issn><issn>1551-5036</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkMFOAjEQhhujiYg-gqaJV4rTbuku3hRQJESN6Lnp7k6liFvcLia8vUUMZ09zmO__J_MRcsGhKzgXV5PB083s9WU0Y0MmBAOAftrlB6TFez3OepCoQ9KCVPYZCMiOyUkICwCuMpm2SDOyFouGeksnbOz9B53NzQoD9RUdmKaY0xfTYIdGzBUOq2LToaYq6RZ11Tt99sE1LsKx4BGxXKJ1YX5NR9-ujDRSW_tP-myWH_TWxOxDVTpzSo6sWQY8-5tt8nY3eh2M2fTp_mFwM2U5lwIYJkJlmGCaWynjGwJ5CiazNlGoLHBeqlRmBnJjhLU2N6qUoIoCZMF7xvKkTS53vavaf60xNHrh13UVT2qRKZWl0RBESu2oovYh1Gj1qnafpt5oDnprWO8N66EWQv8a1tv6811wERpf71MyS2WiZD_u5W6fO-8r_G_tD90diHU</recordid><startdate>20230901</startdate><enddate>20230901</enddate><creator>Vasanth, Kathavarayan</creator><creator>Muthupandi, Kalaiarasan</creator><creator>Naganandhini, Vinayagamoorthy</creator><creator>Kumar, Manoj</creator><creator>Krishnan, Amrutha</creator><creator>Pattola, Harsha</creator><creator>Radhakrishnan, Kalidoss</creator><general>Coastal Education and Research Foundation</general><general>Allen Press Publishing</general><general>Allen Press Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230901</creationdate><title>Effect of J-Hook Shapes on Catch Rate, Efficiency, and Hooking Position of Needlefish: Evidence from Palk Bay, India</title><author>Vasanth, Kathavarayan ; Muthupandi, Kalaiarasan ; Naganandhini, Vinayagamoorthy ; Kumar, Manoj ; Krishnan, Amrutha ; Pattola, Harsha ; Radhakrishnan, Kalidoss</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b1420-e3268e3e7bf440362e170a8ff36e6f011d6748a0baa2fffba6d406cc04c15af13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Carnivorous animals</topic><topic>Catch per unit effort</topic><topic>Coastal research</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Comparative studies</topic><topic>Efficiency</topic><topic>Fish</topic><topic>Fishing</topic><topic>Fishing gear</topic><topic>Fishing grounds</topic><topic>Fishing zones</topic><topic>gut</topic><topic>Hooks</topic><topic>Jaw</topic><topic>longline</topic><topic>Longline fishing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Vasanth, Kathavarayan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muthupandi, Kalaiarasan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Naganandhini, Vinayagamoorthy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kumar, Manoj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krishnan, Amrutha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pattola, Harsha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Radhakrishnan, Kalidoss</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics & Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Journal of coastal research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Vasanth, Kathavarayan</au><au>Muthupandi, Kalaiarasan</au><au>Naganandhini, Vinayagamoorthy</au><au>Kumar, Manoj</au><au>Krishnan, Amrutha</au><au>Pattola, Harsha</au><au>Radhakrishnan, Kalidoss</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effect of J-Hook Shapes on Catch Rate, Efficiency, and Hooking Position of Needlefish: Evidence from Palk Bay, India</atitle><jtitle>Journal of coastal research</jtitle><date>2023-09-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>933</spage><epage>939</epage><pages>933-939</pages><issn>0749-0208</issn><eissn>1551-5036</eissn><abstract>Vasanth, K.; Muthupandi, K.; Naganandhini, V.; Kumar, M.; Krishnan, A.; Patolla, H., and Radhakrishnan, K., 2023. Effect of J-hook shapes on catch rate, efficiency, and hooking position of Needlefish: Evidence from Palk Bay, India. Journal of Coastal Research, 39(5), 933–939. Charlotte (North Carolina), ISSN 0749-0208. The efficiency of different shapes of J hooks No. 11 (nonoffset straight hook, 10° offset kirbed hook, and 10° offset reversed hook) in needlefish longline fishing gears was studied in 24 fishing grounds in Palk Bay, India, from, February to July 2022. A total of 24 fishing trips were conducted for each experimental gear for the comparative study, with 14,400 hooks, with a total catch of 582 fish during the study. The result was that the kirbed hook had the highest percentage composition of the needlefish (37.36%), followed by the reversed hook (31.79%) and the straight hook (30.75%). Further, the overall hooking rate was higher for the kirbed hook than for the straight hook (13.43% vs. 8.60%). Considering the catch rate, the overall catch per unit effort (CPUE; individual/200 hooks) of the kirbed hook was higher (9.08 vs. 7.45) than that of the straight hook, whereas for the straight hook, the CPUE of nontarget species (0.29) was much higher than that of the kirbed hook (0.12). In terms of the targeted species, the Ablennes hians showed the highest CPUE of 3.78 individuals/200 hooks followed by Tylosurus crocodilus crocodilus (1.78), Strongylura strongylura (1.38); the least dominant CPUE was T. choram (0.94). The percentage of hooking position in the jaw was higher in the kirbed hook than that of the straight hook (64.7% vs. 39.1%) and was found lower in the gut system (11.5% vs. 28.5%). Among the three hook shapes tested, the overall performance of the 10° offset kirbed hook was found to be better than the other 10° offset reversed and nonoffset J hook in terms of a higher catch efficiency, hooking rate, CPUE, and hooking position for needlefish (<0.05).</abstract><cop>Fort Lauderdale</cop><pub>Coastal Education and Research Foundation</pub><doi>10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-22-00097.1</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0749-0208 |
| ispartof | Journal of coastal research, 2023-09, Vol.39 (5), p.933-939 |
| issn | 0749-0208 1551-5036 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2866871550 |
| source | Jstor Complete Legacy |
| subjects | Carnivorous animals Catch per unit effort Coastal research Comparative analysis Comparative studies Efficiency Fish Fishing Fishing gear Fishing grounds Fishing zones gut Hooks Jaw longline Longline fishing |
| title | Effect of J-Hook Shapes on Catch Rate, Efficiency, and Hooking Position of Needlefish: Evidence from Palk Bay, India |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T09%3A40%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effect%20of%20J-Hook%20Shapes%20on%20Catch%20Rate,%20Efficiency,%20and%20Hooking%20Position%20of%20Needlefish:%20Evidence%20from%20Palk%20Bay,%20India&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20coastal%20research&rft.au=Vasanth,%20Kathavarayan&rft.date=2023-09-01&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=933&rft.epage=939&rft.pages=933-939&rft.issn=0749-0208&rft.eissn=1551-5036&rft_id=info:doi/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-22-00097.1&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E48743649%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2866871550&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=48743649&rfr_iscdi=true |