Effects of capture and handling on striped bass (Morone saxatilis) in the recreational fishery of coastal Massachusetts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Striped bass ( Morone saxatilis ) are a highly valued recreational fishery along the eastern coast of North America, with most hooked fish released voluntarily or due to regulations. Understanding how striped bass respond to capture and handling, particularly air exposure, is crucial for improving management and angler practices to maximize post-release survival. This study evaluated the physical and physiological condition of 521 striped bass subjected to catch-and-release angling across different gear and tackle types and five air exposure treatments using reflex action mortality predictors. A subset of striped bass (n = 37) caught on conventional gear and double treble hook lures were fitted with triaxial accelerometer biologgers to assess short-term post-release activity across three air exposure treatments. Reflex impairment increased with higher water temperatures, longer fight and handling times, increased air exposure, and hooking in locations other than the jaw. Physical injury from foul hooking was more frequent with conventional gear, while deep hooking occurred more often with fly gear. Post-release activity was influenced by time following release, with higher activity observed in striped bass not air exposed compared to those exposed for 30 s and 120 s. Within 20 min of release, all fish survived, demonstrating resilience to the tested conditions. Our findings suggest that anglers can minimize their impact by using single hooks, reducing fight and handling times, limiting air exposure, and avoiding high water temperatures, especially for striped bass larger than 65.4 cm. These findings can inform management decisions and hone best practices for catch-and-release of striped bass.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".