Résumé: Periodically harvested closures are a widespread, centuries-old form of fisheries management that protects fish between pulse harvests and can generate high harvest efficiency by reducing fish wariness of fishing gear. However, the ability for periodic closures to also support high fisheries yields and healthy marine ecosystems is uncertain, despite increased promotion of periodic closures for managing fisheries and conserving ecosystems in the Indo-Pacific. We developed a bioeconomic fisheries model that considers changes in fish wariness, based on empirical field research, and quantified the extent to which periodic closures can simultaneously maximize harvest efficiency, fisheries yield and conservation of fish stocks. We found that periodic closures with a harvest schedule represented by closure for one to a few years between a single pulse harvest event can generate equivalent fisheries yield and stock abundance levels and greater harvest efficiency than achievable under conventional fisheries management with or without a permanent closure. Optimality of periodic closures at maximizing the triple objective of high harvest efficiency, high fisheries yield, and high stock abundance was robust to fish life history traits and to all but extreme levels of overfishing. With moderate overfishing, there emerged a trade-off between periodic closures that maximized harvest efficiency and no-take permanent closures that maximized yield; however, the gain in harvest efficiency outweighed the loss in yield for periodic closures when compared with permanent closures. Only with extreme overfishing, where fishing under nonspatial management would reduce the stock to <= 18% of its unfished level, was the harvest efficiency benefit too small for periodic closures to best meet the triple objective compared with permanent closures. Synthesis and applications. We show that periodically harvested closures can, in most cases, simultaneously maximize harvest efficiency, fisheries yield, and fish stock conservation beyond that achievable by no-take permanent closures or nonspatial management. Our results also provide design guidance, indicating that short closure periods between pulse harvest events are most appropriate for well-managed fisheries or areas with large periodic closures, whereas longer closure periods are more appropriate for small periodic closure areas and overfished systems.

Résumé: Pulse Amplitude Modulated (PAM) fluorometry is now a widely used method for the assessment of phytoplankton fitness, with an increasing popularity in field assessments. It is usually recommended to carry out measurements swiftly after collection, but the number of samples and analytical procedures needed to obtain valuable datasets sometimes makes immediate analysis impracticable, forcing delays between fluorescence measurements. Conservation conditions of samples before analysis may potentially affect their photosynthetic performances but no formal study documenting such impacts appears available in the literature. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of storage conditions (temperature, duration) on photosynthetic parameters in different phytoplankton communities (characterized in situ by a BBE fluoroprobe) sampled during summer in different environmental locations in a Mediterranean lagoon (Biguglia lagoon, Corsica, France). PAM-fluorescence parameters were measured after three different conservation durations (2-4 h, 6-8 h and 10-12 h after collection) on samples stored at three different temperatures (15 degrees C, 25 degrees C and 35 degrees C). Results showed that storage at the highest temperature severely impacted photosynthetic parameters, with cumulative effects as storage duration increased. For phytoplankton samples collected in warm or tropical environments, storage at “room temperature” (25 degrees C) only appeared a valid option if measurements have to be carried out strictly within a very short delay. Inversely, cooling the samples (i.e. conservation at 15 degrees C) did not induce significant effects, independently of storage duration. Cooling appeared the best solution when sampling-to-analysis delay goes over a few hours. Long-term storage ( > 8 h) should definitively be avoided. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Résumé: It is difficult to address all of the direct environmental impacts of fisheries using conventional methods of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). A methodological framework was developed that calculates regionalised characterisation factors for biomass uptake by fishing activities to assess impacts of biotic-resource depletion at both species and ecosystem levels. These two levels were studied to include effects of catch on the collapse of a particular stock of a given species and on total biomass availability in oceans. Characterisation factors were calculated for 127 fish species and 88 marine provinces. The compatibility of this method with other frameworks is discussed, as well as the methodological limitations. The method was applied to two contrasting examples from fisheries (Northern Atlantic albacore tuna and Northern Argentine anchovy). The impacts of one tonne of tuna on biotic natural resources were 4 and 14 times as high as those of anchovy at the ecosystem and species levels, respectively. The application demonstrates that the method is relevant, as it addresses a topic of global interest and fills a gap in LCA impact assessment to contrast impacts of removals of different fish species in terms of biotic natural resource depletion.