Testable models of aquatic systems: A NERC special topic for integrating experiments and modelling

A major part of the support for fundamental research on aquatic ecosystems continues to be provided by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). Funds are released for ”thematic” studies in a selected special topic or programme. ”Testable Models of Aquatic Ecosystems” was a Special Topic of the NERC, initiated in 1995, the aim of which was to promote ecological modelling by making new links between experimental aquatic biologists and state-of-the-art modellers. The Topic covered both marine and freshwater systems. This paper summarises projects on aspects of the responses of individual organisms to the effects of environmental variability, on the assembly, permanence and resilience of communities, and on aspects of spatial models. The authors conclude that the NERC Special Topic has been highly successful in promoting the development and application of models, most particularly through the interplay between experimental ecologists and formal modellers.

Measurement errors in body size of sea scallops (Placopecten magellanicus) and their effect on stock assessment models

Body-size measurement errors are usually ignored in stock assessments, but may be important when body-size data (e.g., from visual sur veys) are imprecise. We used experiments and models to quantify measurement errors and their effects on assessment models for sea scallops (Placopecten magellanicus). Errors in size data obscured modes from strong year classes and increased frequency and size of the largest and smallest sizes, potentially biasing growth, mortality, and biomass estimates. Modeling techniques for errors in age data proved useful for errors in size data. In terms of a goodness of model fit to the assessment data, it was more important to accommodate variance than bias. Models that accommodated size errors fitted size data substantially better. We recommend experimental quantification of errors along with a modeling approach that accommodates measurement errors because a direct algebraic approach was not robust and because error parameters were diff icult to estimate in our assessment model. The importance of measurement errors depends on many factors and should be evaluated on a case by case basis.