Report of the Workshop on Maturity Staging of Mackerel and ... Reports/Expert Group Report... ·...

ICES WKMSMAC2 REPORT 2015 ACOM/SCICOM STEERING GROUP ON INTEGRATED ECOSYSTEM OBSERVATION AND MONITORING

ICES CM 2015/SSGIEOM:17

REF. ACOM, WGWIDE, WGHANSA, WGBIOP, SCICOM, SSGIEOM

Report of the Workshop on Maturity Staging of Mackerel

and Horse Mackerel (WKMSMAC2)

28 September–2 October 2015

Lisbon, Portugal

International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Conseil International pour l’Exploration de la Mer

H. C. Andersens Boulevard 44–46 DK-1553 Copenhagen V Denmark Telephone (+45) 33 38 67 00 Telefax (+45) 33 93 42 15 www.ices.dk [email protected]

Recommended format for purposes of citation:

ICES. 2015. Report of the Workshop on Maturity Staging of Mackerel and Horse Mackerel (WKMSMAC2), 28 September–2 October 2015, Lisbon, Portugal. ICES CM 2015/SSGIEOM:17. 93 pp.

For permission to reproduce material from this publication, please apply to the Gen-eral Secretary.

The document is a report of an Expert Group under the auspices of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea and does not necessarily represent the views of the Council.

© 2015 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea

ICES WKMSMAC2 REPORT 2015 | i

Contents

Executive summary ................................................................................................................ 1

1 Opening of the meeting ................................................................................................ 3

2 Adoption of the agenda ................................................................................................ 3

3 Use of the common maturity scale proposed in 2007 (ToR a) ................................ 3

4 Description of the characteristics of the stages (ToR b) ......................................... 6

Scomber scombrus ................................................................................................... 6

Scomber colias ......................................................................................................... 7 Trachurus trachurus ............................................................................................... 8

Trachurus mediterraneus ........................................................................................ 9

5 Conversion tables of institute scales to the common scale (ToR f) .................... 11

Scomber scombrus ................................................................................................. 11 Scomber colias ....................................................................................................... 11

Trachurus trachurus ............................................................................................. 12

Trachurus mediterraneus ...................................................................................... 12

6 Macroscopic picture calibration exercises (ToR d) ................................................ 13

First round of macroscopic picture calibration ............................................... 13 Scomber scombrus .................................................................................... 13 Scomber colias ........................................................................................... 16 Trachurus trachurus................................................................................. 18 Trachurus mediterraneus ......................................................................... 21

Second round of macroscopic pictures calibration ........................................ 23 Scomber scombrus .................................................................................... 23 Trachurus trachurus................................................................................. 26

7 Fresh and frozen fish calibration exercise (ToR c) ................................................ 31

Scomber scombrus ................................................................................................. 31 Trachurus trachurus ............................................................................................. 36

Fresh fish staging ................................................................................... 36 Frozen fish staging ................................................................................. 41

8 Validation of macroscopic maturity with histological analysis (ToR e) ........... 46

Criteria for histological validation of macroscopic maturity staging .......... 46

9 Generic ToRs adopted for maturity staging workshops ...................................... 48

Calibration rounds .............................................................................................. 48 Pictures for the staging validation .................................................................... 48

Workshop frequency .......................................................................................... 49

10 Evaluation of the use of WebGr ................................................................................ 50

ii | ICES WKMSMAC2 REPORT 2015

11 References ..................................................................................................................... 51

Annex 1: List of participants............................................................................................... 52

Annex 2: Agenda ................................................................................................................... 57

Annex 3: Terms of reference for the next meeting ......................................................... 59

Annex 4: Recommendations ............................................................................................... 60

Annex 5: Pictures of the maturity stages .......................................................................... 61

Annex 6: Institute maturity scales ..................................................................................... 74

Annex 7: Report of the discussions after the staging rounds ....................................... 86

Annex 8: Report of the discussions on histology ........................................................... 88

ICES WKMSMAC2 REPORT 2015 | 1

Executive summary

WKMSMAC2 met 28 September–2 October 2015 in Lisbon, Portugal. 32 participants from 8 countries (representing 13 different institutes from ICES member countries and the Mediterranean area) participated in the meeting. The meeting aimed to validate the international maturity stages for Scomber scombrus, Scomber colias, Trachurus trachurus and Trachurus mediterraneus as proposed by WKMSMAC in 2007 and prepare conver-sion tables for the maturity scales used by the institutes to the international scale.

Evaluation of maturity scales

The maturity scales as proposed by WKMSMAC2 in 2007 have not been incorporated by all countries. It became apparent that institutes have not been reporting maturity stages to ICES in the international scale. Hence, maturity stages for mackerel and horse mackerel from the different institutes since 2007 do not correspond. Mediterranean countries have all reported in the agreed MEDITS scale.

For all scales, conversion tables are presented to the international agreed scale.

In general, it is important to realise that when countries move to the new maturity keys, a change in the number of spawning fish might occur as the definitions of the various stages might differ between the old national stages and the internationally agreed stage.

Changes in the maturity scale descriptions

As the descriptions of the stages were evaluated, some changes were made in the cri-teria, based on expertise and experiences. Also criteria for assessing the maturity stage from frozen gonads were added for the species where frozen samples are regularly staged.

Since all species studied in this workshop are batch spawners with a suspected inde-terminate fecundity, there is no evidence for the occurrence of omitted spawning (stage 5). Therefore, no description is given for this stage. For some species, abnormal gonads (stage 6) have not been observed, thus the description of stage 6 for those species is left blank.

Staging exercises

Three staging exercises were carried out, one using fresh and frozen fish for Trachurus and frozen fish for Scomber scombrus and two using pictures of all four species. Gener-ally, participants felt that mackerel was easier to stage than horse mackerel. Partici-pants felt that fresh staging was easier than frozen staging and easier than staging from pictures, since (a) touching is one of the components in maturity staging and (b) hya-line oocytes are easier to identify in fresh/frozen samples than from pictures. However, only for mackerel the agreement in maturity stage was higher in the frozen samples compared to the picture staging.

For Scomber scombrus, agreement between the expert readers for frozen fish was 77.1%. Agreement for the first picture round was 67.3%.

For Trachurus trachurus, agreement between experts in fresh fish was only 56.0%, for frozen fish agreement was 61.7%, agreement for the pictures was 68%.

For Scomber colias, agreement was 71.2%, while for Trachurus mediterraneus agreement was 69.6%.

2 | ICES WKMSMAC2 REPORT 2015

Experts mostly confused stages 2 and 3 or 3 and 4 (all mature fish), while trainees also confused stage 1 (immature) and 4 (mature).

The macroscopic maturity stage was validated with the histological analysis after the calibration exercises. For fish with high agreement, the staging was supported by the histological evidence. For specimens with low agreement histology did not support the modal stage. However, during discussions it became obvious that histological criteria for stage 1 and 4 are unclear and there was no agreement between the histological ex-perts. WKMSMAC2 recommends organising a general histological workshop to estab-lish agreed international histology criteria to identify the macroscopic maturity stages.

WebGr

For the picture rounds, WebGr was used as a tool. WebGr is an excellent tool for cali-bration of maturity stagings from pictures. The problem at the moment is that the server where it is based is too slow to handle the number of participants using the tool and the number of pictures stored. WebGr was slow during the first picture round and stopped working during the second picture round. It was also not possible to extract all the results from WebGr needed for the statistical analyses.

The server problems with WebGr do not only increase the workload for chairs im-mensely, but workshop participants also get frustrated and lose their motivation and do not want to participate in future workshops using WebGr.

Next meeting

It was recommended that the next meeting should be in 3 years and the group should not be expanded with more species (nor more participants). It was also recommended that the national institutes should be strongly encouraged to put effort into making pictures, and should find time and money to do so. Successful maturity staging work-shops cannot be carried out without these pictures.


1 Opening of the meeting

WKMSMAC2 met 28 September–2 October 2015 in Lisbon, Portugal. 32 participants from 8 countries (representing 13 different institutes) joined the meeting. The partici-pant list can be found in Annex 1.

The meeting aimed to validate the international maturity stages for Scomber scombrus, Scomber colias, Trachurus trachurus and Trachurus mediterraneus as proposed by WKMSMAC in 2007 (ICES, 2008a) and prepare conversion tables for the maturity scales used by the institutes to the international scale. Scomber colias and Trachurus med-iterraneus are not reported/sampled by all participating institutes. However, both spe-cies are expanding and it is most likely that in the near future catches of these species will increase, thus it was considered important to add these species in the workshop.

Terms of Reference for the meeting were:

a) Report on the use of the 2007 proposed common scale; b) Check the description of the characteristics of the stages of the 2007 scale and

create a new validated scale if necessary; c) Calibrate staging of mackerel and horse mackerel using fresh fish, following

the pattern of trial-discussion-retrial; d) Calibrate staging of mackerel and horse mackerel using photographs,

following the pattern of trial-discussion-retrial; e) Validate macroscopic maturity determination with histological analysis f) Create conversion tables, from the different scales used to the common scale,

for the data already collected.

ToR a) was discussed in plenary. ToR b) and f) were dealt with in four subgroups (one for each species). ToR c) and d) were individual exercises using WebGr as the stage recording tool. ToR e) was carried out in plenary, focussing on gonads where agree-ment was low.

The ToRs are discussed in separate chapters. Additionally, chapter 9 evaluates the use of WebGr during this workshop, and contains some recommendations for further de-velopment.

2 Adoption of the agenda

The agenda addressed all ToRs and can be found in Annex 2. Since not all participants were experts on all species discussed in the workshop, the meeting started with back-ground presentations on the reproductive biology of all species. This also allowed trainees to gain information on the reproductive biology aspects. In addition a presen-tation on the 2007 agreed scale and results of the WKMATCH (ICES, 2012) was pre-sented in order to give all participants the same stage descriptions to use for the calibration exercises.

3 Use of the common maturity scale proposed in 2007 (ToR a)

The maturity scales as proposed by WKMSMAC in 2007 have not been incorporated by all countries. Most labs, however, succeeded in translating the national (or local) scale into the newly proposed scales. Tables 3.1–3.5 show the current state regarding the implementation of the 2007 stage descriptions, and the scales used by the institutes.


The international agreed maturity scales have been developed specifically for everyone to report the same maturity stages to ICES and ACFM. However, in the case of macke-rel and horse mackerel the 2007 agreed scale is not used for reporting by all institutes. Instead, different scales are used for reporting (Tables 3.1–3.5). This will pose problems for general use of the maturity data in maturity ogives, since the immature stages are not the same in the different scales (see also chapter 5 for the conversion tables).

Table 3.1. Scomber scombrus maturity scales used and the use of the 2007 agreed scale by institute.

Table 3.2. Scomber colias maturity scales used and the use of the 2007 agreed scale by institute.

InstituteIs 2007 international agreed scale used Scale used Reporting scale

COISPA, Italy No MEDITS

MEDITS (RCM agreed scale, conversion with the 2007 and WKMATCH scale is presented, conversion table for all mediterrenean scales)

IPMA, Portugal No Walsh Walsh

IMARES, Netherlands YesWalsh for MEGS, 2007 for market and commercial sampling

Walsh for MEGS, 2007 for market and commercial sampling

MI, Ireland No Walsh WalshAZTI, Spain No Walsh WalshIMR, Norway No Norwegian scale, Walsh for MEGS Norwegian scale, Walsh for MEGS

TISF, Germany YesMarket and commercial sampling: 2007, Mackerel egg survey: Walsh

Market and commercial sampling: 2007, Mackerel egg survey: Walsh

IEO_Malaga, Spain No

6 stage scale for all small pelagics commercial and acoustics, MEDITS survey using MEDITS scale


IEO_Vigo, Spain No Walsh WalshIEO_A Coruña, Spain No Walsh WalshIEO_Santander, Spain No Walsh WalshDISVA, Italy No MEDITS MEDITSMSS, Scotland No Walsh WalshIMAR, Azores Not reported Not reported Not reported




IPMA, Portugal Not reported Walsh not reportedIMARES, Netherlands Not reported Not reported Not reportedMI, Ireland Not reported Not reported Not reportedAZTI, Spain Not reported Not reported Not reportedIMR, Norway Not reported Not reported Not reportedTISF, Germany Not reported Not reported Not reported




IEO_Vigo, Spain No Walsh WalshIEO_A Coruña, Spain No Walsh WalshIEO_Santander, Spain No Walsh WalshDISVA, Italy No MEDITS MEDITSMSS, Scotland Not reported Not reported Not reportedIMAR, Azores Not reported Walsh Not subject of assessment


Table 3.3. Trachurus trachurus maturity scales used and the use of the 2007 agreed scale by institute.

Table 3.4. Trachurus mediterraneus maturity scales used and the use of the 2007 agreed scale by institute.

Table 3.5. Trachurus picturatus maturity scales used and the use of the 2007 agreed scale by insti-tute.




IPMA, Portugal No Walsh Walsh

IMARES, Netherlands YesWalsh for MEGS, 2007 for market and commercial sampling

Walsh for MEGS, 2007 for market and commercial sampling

MI, Ireland No Walsh WalshAZTI, Spain No Walsh WalshIMR, Norway No Norwegian scale, Walsh for MEGS Norwegian scale, Walsh for MEGS

TISF, Germany YesMarket and commercial sampling: 2007, Mackerel egg survey: Walsh

Market and commercial sampling: 2007, Mackerel egg survey: Walsh




IEO_Vigo, Spain No Walsh WalshIEO_A Coruña, Spain No Walsh WalshIEO_Santander, Spain No Walsh WalshDISVA, Italy No MEDITS MEDITSMSS, Scotland No Walsh WalshIMAR, Azores Not reported Not reported Not reported




IPMA, Portugal Not reported Walsh not reportedIMARES, Netherlands Not reported Not reported Not reportedMI, Ireland Not reported Not reported Not reportedAZTI, Spain Not reported Not reported Not reportedIMR, Norway Not reported Not reported Not reportedTISF, Germany Not reported Not reported Not reported




IEO_Vigo, Spain No Not reported Not reportedIEO_A Coruña, Spain No Not reported Not reportedIEO_Santander, Spain No Not reported Not reportedDISVA, Italy No MEDITS MEDITSMSS, Scotland Not reported Not reported Not reportedIMAR, Azores Not reported Not reported Not reported


IMAR, Azores No Macer Not reportedIPMA, Portugal No Walsh Not reported


4 Description of the characteristics of the stages (ToR b)

During the discussions after the staging rounds it was pointed out that each stage de-scription should describe the development in the stage in order to allow for early and late development in each stage. The description of the stages tried to describe the bor-ders between the stages as clearly as possible, since these are the most difficult to as-sess.

A distinction should be made in the stage descriptions between fresh and frozen fish as the appearance can be different.

When assessing the maturity stage of fish always take into account the background information on the sampling area and timing.

Scomber scombrus The discussion on the Scomber scombrus maturity scale started with a discussion of the experience with the 2007 scale.

The stage descriptions in the new proposed scale (Table 4.1) are mostly based on fresh fish appearance. The descriptions focussed on describing the border of the stages, since normally the perfect picture in the middle of the maturity stage is described.

For females in stage 2 making a smear of the ovary will clearly show the granulation. It should be realised that in frozen fish the firmness of the ovaries is less compared to fresh fish. In stage 4 ovaries you can have ovaries that look reddish one side, but yellow on the other side. Omitted spawning has not been found.

Stage 2 in males has a very short duration, while stage 3 males occur for a long period. It should be realised when the testes is cut, milt may be running through the cut in both stage 2 and 3.

Picture examples of the various maturity stages can be found in Annex 5.


Table 4.1. Scomber scombrus international maturity scale.

Scomber colias The 2007 agreed scale was updated and modified. Since Scomber colias is a batch spawner, it was considered important to include sub stages of stage spawning (3a and 3b) in order to be able to classify individuals between spawning batches. Main charac-teristics are underlined for each maturity stage (Table 4.2). All other aspects are con-sidered as secondary characteristics, nevertheless equally important once they can complement the decision of a certain maturity stage. The descriptions are based on fresh individuals since there is no experience with sampling of frozen Scomber colias. It should be noted that present updated and modified scale is not histologically vali-dated. The changes to the 2007 scale are presented in red (Table 4.2).


Stage Name Female Male1 Immature From a small translucent thread-like

to a ribbon-like a structure, no oocytes visible or rough texture in ovary tissue.

Testes small, flattened and transparent.

2 Developing From a torpedo-like shape structure with granulated texture in the ovary tissue that gives pale pink or yellow color to a bag structure with clearly visible oocytes with a yellow or orange color. Ovaries are firm. No hydrated oocytes inside in any case. Occupying ¼ to almost filling the body cavity. Blood vessels are visible.

Testes occupying ¼ to almost filling the body cavity. Testes has creamy white coloration with a firm consistency.

3 Spawning Hydrated oocytes visible externally or when gonad is cut, no matter how few. Between spawning batches, ovaries may have no hydrated oocytes but with a bloodshot aspect, with opaque oocytes and empty spaces between them. The area near the anus can have a bloody aspect. Not as firm as late stage 2. Ovary size variable from full to more than ¼ of body cavity.

Testes filling to < ¼. Milt freely running or runs under slight pressure. Testes may have a slight reddish coloration between spawning batches. Later the testes turns to light purple and decreases in size.

4 Regressing Regenerating

In the beginning of this stage the ovary is reddish, loose with a few residual oocytes inside or none at all. Size less than ¼ of the body cavity. Then the ovary becomes more firm before it starts to regenerate to stage 2.

Testes occupying ¼ or less of body cavity. Testes opaque with brownish tint. There may be a slight trace of milt. In some cases testes color turns to reddish or dark purple and has a thin ribbon like structure.

5 Omitted spawning

No evidence of omitted spawning No evidence of omitted spawning

6 Abnormal Hard parts (connective tissue), only one lobe developed, intersex, or similar. Fecundity at least partly reduced.

Hard parts (connective tissue), only one lobe developed, intersex, or similar.


Table 4.2. Scomber colias international maturity scale.

Trachurus trachurus One should be aware that colour is a bad advisor for frozen samples. So a male imma-ture fish of a frozen sample can also be opaque, the red colour can be pink up to blue when frozen. The same for the structure, a male spawning fish of a frozen sample is often not freely running, but needs a little pushing.

Changes to the 2007 scale are shown in red (Table 4.3). Lots of frozen samples are used, the main updates to the scale are additions of frozen fish descriptions.


Stage Name Substage Female Male1 Immature Ovaries small. Ovaries clear, torpedo

shape.Testes small. Males pale, flattened and transparent.

2 Developing Ovaries occupying ¼ to almost filling body cavity. Opaque oocytes visible in ovaries giving pale pink to yellow to orange coloration. Largest oocytes may have oil globules. Late developing ovaries firm and oocytes densely packed.

Testes occupying ¼ to almost filling body cavity. Testes off-white to creamy white, firm and milt not running.

3a Actively spawning

Ovaries characterized by prevailing externally visible hyaline oocytes.

3b Spawning capable

Ovaries size variable from full to < ¼, losing firmness and increasing empty spaces between oocytes. May have hyaline oocytes when cutting. Ovaries can be bloodshot.


Ovaries occupying ¼ or less of body cavity. Ovaries reddish and often murky (dark and gloomy) in appearance, flaccid, sometimes with a scattering or patch of opaque oocytes or absence of visible oocytes.

Testes occupying ¼ or less of body cavity. Testes opaque with brownish tint and no trace of milt. Testes becoming translucent.

5 Omitted spawning


6 Abnormal No evidence of abnormal ovaries No evidence of abnormal testes

3 Spawning Testis from filling to < ¼ of body cavity, milt running either freely or under light pressure. Testes can be shriveled (wrinkled and contracted) at anus.


Table 4.3. Trachurus trachurus international maturity scale.

Trachurus mediterraneus No frozen individuals were considered. Sub stages are used, because in Trachurus med-iterraneus they are easily recognised (Table 4.4).


Stage Name Female Male1 Immature Ovaries small. Ovaries wine red and

clear, torpedo shaped.Testes small, when fresh pale flattened and transparent. When frozen it may be opaque.

2 Developing Ovaries occupying 1/4 to almost filling body cavity. Opaque eggs visible in ovaries giving pale pink to yellow to orange coloration. Largest oocytes may have oil globules.

Gonads occupying 1/4 to to almost filing body cavity. Testes off-white to creamy white., milt not running. When frozen testes can be bleuish.

3 Spawning Ovaries characterized by externally visible hyaline oocytes no matter how few or how early the stage of hydration. Ovary size variable from full to < 1/4 of body cavity. Ovaries can be bloodshot.

Testes from filling to < 1/4 of body cavity, milt freely running. Testes can be shrivelled (wrinkled and contracted) at anus. When frozen there might be a change of structure and the testes needs a little pushing before running.


Ovaries occupying 1/4 or less of body cavity. Ovaries reddish and often murky (dark and gloomy) in appearance, sometimes with a scattering or patch of opaque eggs. The empty ovaries will ripple when pushed together.

Ovaries occupying 1/4 or less of body cavity. Testes opaque with brownish tint and no trace of milt. When frozen testes can be bleuish ore purple.

5 Omitted spawning




Table 4.4. Trachurus mediterraneus international maturity scale.

Stage Name Substage Female Male1 Immature Small ovaries (< 1/4 of the body

cavity), reddish and translucent, torpedo shaped. Eggs not visible by naked eye.

Small testes (< 1/4 of the body cavity), pale, flattened and transparent.

2 Developing Ovaries occupying 1/3 to almost filling body cavity. Opaque eggs are visible by naked eye trough the ovaric tunica, giving pale pink to yellow to orange coloration.

Whitish to creamy testes occupying > 1/2 to almost filling body cavity. Milt not running.

3a Actively spawning

Turgid, yellow-orange ovaries characterized by externally visible hyaline eggs. Ovary size variable from full to 1/3 of the body cavity.

Whitish-creamy testis long from 2/3 to full length of the body cavity. Milt freely running.

3b Spawning capable

Ovaries occupying 3/4 to < 1/4 body cavity, slacker than in stage 3a and often bloodshot. Hyaline eggs visible. Free spaces between eggs could be discernible.

Soft testes occupying 3/4 to 1/2 body cavity. Testes shrivelled at anus end. Milt freely running.

4a Regressing Ovaries occupying about 1/2 of the body cavity. Flaccid ovaries that may contain residuals of opaque and/or hyaline eggs.

Bloodshot, flabby with brownish tint testes progressively shortening to about 1/3 of the body cavity. No trace of milt.

4b Regenerating Ovaries occupying from 1/2 to 1/3 of the body cavity. Gonads varied from reddish to orange pink in colour. Blood vessels visible. Eggs not visible by naked eye.

Whitish/pinkish testes, long from 1/3 to 1/2 of the body cavity. No trace of milt.

5 Omitted spawning



3 Spawning



5 Conversion tables of institute scales to the common scale (ToR f)

For the conversion tables only institute tables are included which are actually used for the species. The maturity scales referred to can be found in Annex 6.

Scomber scombrus

Table 5.1. Scomber scombrus conversion table from institute to the international scale.

Scomber colias Maturity stages scales used for macroscopic staging were collected from five institutes which sample Scomber colias, either regularly or sporadically (IMAR, IEO, AZTI, IPMA and COISPA).

Except for COISPA and DISVA, who use the MEDITS scale, all other institutes use the Walsh scale albeit with individual minor differences in interpretation from the original scale.

Stage Name International Walsh Walsh et al., 1990 (AZTI)

IMR Medits

1 Immature 1 1 1 1-2 1-2a2 Developing 2 2-3 2 3-4 2c3 Spawning 3 4-5 3-4-5 5-6 34 Regressing

Regenerating4 6 6 7-8 4a-4b-2b

5 Omitted spawning

5

6 Abnormal 6 9


Table 5.2. Scomber colias conversion table from institute to the international scale.

Trachurus trachurus

Table 5.3. Trachurus trachurus conversion table from institute to the international scale.

Trachurus mediterraneus

Table 5.4. Trachurus mediterraneus conversion table from institute to the international scale. (For IEO see the conversion table in ICES, 2008b).

Stage Name International Walsh et al., 1990 (IPMA, IMAR, IEO)

Walsh et al., 1990 (AZTI)

Medits

1 Immature 1 1 1 1-2a2 Developing 2 2-3 2 2c3 Spawning 3 4-5 3-4-5 34 Regressing

Regenerating4 6 6 4a-4b-2b

5 Omitted spawning

5

6 Abnormal 6


IMR Medits WKSPMAT

1 Immature 1 1 1 1-2 1-2a 1-22 Developing 2 2-3 2 3-4 2c 33 Spawning 3 4-5 3-4-5 5-6 3 44 Regressing

Regenerating4 6 6 7-8 4a-4b-2b 5-6

5 Omitted spawning

5

6 Abnormal 6 9


Medits WKSPMAT

1 Immature 1 1 1 1-2a 1-22 Developing 2 2 2 2c 33 Spawning 3 3-4-5 3-4-5 3 44 Regressing

Regenerating4 6 6 4a-4b-2b 5-6

5 Omitted spawning

5

6 Abnormal 6


6 Macroscopic picture calibration exercises (ToR d)

Pictures were available for all species, however, for Scomber colias and Trachurus medi-terraneus a limited number of pictures were available for the workshop. Of the latter species, stagings were only carried out in the first picture staging round.

In the first round of picture staging, no histological validation was available. In the second round of picture stagings, all fish had histological validation available.

Results of the picture stagings were discussed in plenary (report of the discussions can be found in Annex 7).

First round of macroscopic picture calibration

Scomber scombrus

In the first round of the macroscopic picture calibration exercise, 51 pictures were used from both Mediterranean and Atlantic, which covered about all months of the year.

The overall agreement with modal stage was 67.3% (Table 6.1). Of all participants (25), 16 were experts. The agreement (modal stage) of the experts was 68.4% (Table 6.2). The stage agreement of the trainee readers was evaluated using the modal stage of the ex-pert group of readers as reference. The agreement of the trainee with expert modal stage was 64.5%.

In the analysis of all participants, expert and trainee (expert modal stage), the stages with higher percentage of agreement are always 3 and 4 (Table 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3), while stage 1 presents an agreement > 50% and stage 2 an agreement of about 50%.

For stage 1, the results showed an overestimation of 28% in the analysis of all readers, an underestimation of 25% in the analysis of the experts and an overestimation > 100% in the analysis of the trainees.

Regarding the bias, the results are similar for all analysis cases (all readers, expert and trainee) with a positive bias for the first two stages and negative bias for stages 3 and 4.

In general, the results show that stage 2 is confused with stage 4 and/or with stage 3. Moreover, stage 1 is confused with stage 4, and in some cases stage 2 is confused with stage 3. During the discussion of these results (Annex 7), it was attempted to clarify some of the controversial cases, especially when the gonads are located on the border between two stages.


Table 6.1

Scomber scombrus stageing WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY MODAL MATURITY STAGE

MODAL Redear 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 28 Reader 29 Reader 32 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee TOTAL

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 1 242 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 7 7 7 7 2 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 7 7 7 1673 33 33 33 33 32 33 33 33 33 32 28 28 33 13 33 32 33 33 33 33 33 25 30 33 33 7814 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 11 14 14 6 12 14 14 10 10 13 13 4 7 14 14 3105 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 55 55 55 55 54 55 55 55 54 54 47 50 55 22 53 54 55 51 51 54 54 34 45 55 55 1282

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Redear 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 28 Reader 29 Reader 32 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35

Stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee TOTAL1 1 - 2 - - 2 - 2 2 1 - 1 2 1 - - - - - - 1 - - 7 10 322 24 12 26 9 37 21 8 17 8 24 21 14 19 2 13 3 2 7 2 11 15 7 9 20 13 3443 7 37 17 34 16 9 33 21 35 19 18 26 13 14 30 34 37 35 38 29 32 23 24 21 27 6294 23 6 10 12 1 23 14 15 9 10 8 9 21 5 10 17 16 9 11 14 6 4 12 7 5 2775 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 55 55 55 55 54 55 55 55 54 54 47 50 55 22 53 54 55 51 51 54 54 34 45 55 55 1282

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODAL Redear 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 28 Reader 29 Reader 32 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee ALL

1 0% -- 100% -- -- 100% -- 100% 100% 0% -- 0% 100% 0% -- -- -- -- -- -- 0% -- -- 600% 900% 33%2 243% 71% 271% 29% 429% 200% 14% 143% 33% 243% 200% 100% 171% 0% 86% -57% -71% 0% -71% 57% 114% 40% 29% 186% 86% 106%3 -79% 12% -48% 3% -50% -73% 0% -36% 6% -41% -36% -7% -61% 8% -9% 6% 12% 6% 15% -12% -3% -8% -20% -36% -18% -19%4 64% -57% -29% -14% -93% 64% 0% 7% -36% -29% -27% -36% 50% -17% -17% 21% 14% -10% 10% 8% -54% 0% 71% -50% -64% -11%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL Redear 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 28 Reader 29 Reader 32 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee ALL

1 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 100% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% - 0% 100% 100% 46%2 86% 43% 71% 43% 100% 86% 86% 86% 17% 86% 71% 43% 71% 50% 57% 29% 14% 43% 14% 14% 29% 20% 71% 71% 71% 56%3 21% 94% 48% 88% 47% 27% 94% 64% 79% 59% 64% 71% 36% 100% 82% 91% 91% 94% 94% 70% 82% 76% 80% 61% 76% 71%4 100% 36% 57% 79% 7% 100% 93% 93% 64% 57% 27% 57% 93% 83% 58% 93% 93% 80% 90% 85% 31% 25% 100% 36% 21% 66%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 50.9% 70.9% 54.5% 78.2% 42.6% 54.5% 90.9% 74.5% 68.5% 61.1% 55.3% 64.0% 56.4% 90.9% 71.7% 81.5% 80.0% 82.4% 80.4% 64.8% 63.0% 61.8% 80.0% 56.4% 61.8% 67.3%RANKING 24 11 22 8 25 22 1 9 12 18 21 14 19 1 10 4 6 3 5 13 15 17 6 19 16

F BIASMODAL Redear 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 28 Reader 29 Reader 32 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee ALL

1 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 0.00 - 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.882 0.29 0.57 0.00 0.57 0.00 -0.14 0.14 -0.14 0.50 0.29 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.50 0.43 0.86 0.86 0.57 0.86 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.413 -0.30 0.00 -0.39 -0.06 -0.53 -0.18 0.00 -0.24 -0.21 -0.34 -0.21 -0.21 -0.15 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.09 0.00 0.06 -0.24 -0.06 -0.08 -0.07 -0.27 -0.12 -0.14 4 0.00 -1.14 -0.86 -0.36 -1.79 0.00 -0.07 -0.14 -0.36 -0.93 -1.45 -0.71 -0.14 -0.33 -0.83 -0.07 -0.07 -0.40 -0.10 -0.23 -1.38 -1.25 0.00 -1.64 -2.07 -0.66 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean

The number of maturity stagings by modal maturity stage and the maturity stage compositions by stage and reader are shown for all stage readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined.


Table 6.2


MODAL Redear 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 22 Reader 26 Reader 29 Reader 32 Reader 33stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert TOTAL

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 152 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 6 933 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 32 28 28 33 32 33 33 25 30 5054 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 12 15 15 15 11 14 5 8 2155 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 55 55 55 55 55 55 54 54 47 50 55 54 51 54 34 45 828

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Redear 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 22 Reader 26 Reader 29 Reader 32 Reader 33

Stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert TOTAL1 1 - 2 - - 2 2 1 - 1 2 - - 1 - - 122 24 12 26 9 8 17 8 24 21 14 19 3 2 15 7 9 2183 7 37 17 34 33 21 35 19 18 26 13 34 38 32 23 24 4114 23 6 10 12 14 15 9 10 8 9 21 17 11 6 4 12 1875 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 55 55 55 55 55 55 54 54 47 50 55 54 51 54 34 45 828

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODAL Redear 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 22 Reader 26 Reader 29 Reader 32 Reader 33stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert ALL

1 0% -- 100% -- -- 100% 100% 0% -- 0% 100% -- -- 0% -- -- -20%2 300% 100% 333% 50% 33% 183% 60% 300% 250% 133% 217% -50% -67% 150% 75% 50% 134%3 -79% 12% -48% 3% 0% -36% 6% -41% -36% -7% -61% 6% 15% -3% -8% -20% -19%4 53% -60% -33% -20% -7% 0% -40% -33% -33% -40% 40% 13% 0% -57% -20% 50% -13%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL Redear 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 22 Reader 26 Reader 29 Reader 32 Reader 33stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert ALL

1 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 100% - 0% 47%2 100% 33% 83% 33% 83% 100% 20% 100% 83% 33% 83% 33% 0% 17% 25% 83% 58%3 21% 94% 48% 88% 94% 64% 79% 59% 64% 71% 36% 91% 94% 82% 76% 80% 71%4 100% 33% 53% 73% 87% 87% 60% 60% 33% 53% 87% 93% 82% 29% 40% 100% 67%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 52.7% 69.1% 54.5% 76.4% 89.1% 74.5% 68.5% 63.0% 57.4% 62.0% 56.4% 83.3% 78.4% 61.1% 64.7% 82.2% 68.4%RANKING 16 7 15 5 1 6 8 10 13 11 14 2 4 12 9 3

F BIASMODAL Redear 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 22 Reader 26 Reader 29 Reader 32 Reader 33stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert ALL

1 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 1.00 0.00 - 3.00 0.932 0.00 0.67 0.17 0.67 0.17 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.33 0.67 0.17 0.67 1.00 0.83 0.75 0.33 0.443 -0.30 0.00 -0.39 -0.06 0.00 -0.24 -0.21 -0.34 -0.21 -0.21 -0.15 0.03 0.06 -0.06 -0.08 -0.07 -0.14 4 0.00 -1.20 -1.00 -0.47 -0.20 -0.33 -0.53 -0.87 -1.33 -0.80 -0.33 -0.07 -0.27 -1.43 -1.00 0.00 -0.61 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean



Scomber colias

In the macroscopic picture calibration exercise on Scomber colias, only 10 pictures were available and only one reader was expert.

The overall agreement with modal stage was 71.2% (Table 6.4). The stages with the highest percentage of agreement were stages 2 and 3 with 61% and 86%, respectively. Stage 1 and 4 presented an agreement of about 50%. During the plenary discussion (Annex 7) a case of confusion between stages 3 and 4 was analysed.

Table 6.3

AMODAL Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 28 Reader 34 Reader 35stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 92 6 6 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 493 32 33 13 33 33 33 33 33 33 2764 15 15 7 14 15 11 14 15 15 1215 - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 54 55 22 53 55 51 54 55 55 454

BReader 7 Reader 9 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 28 Reader 34 Reader 35

Stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL1 - 2 1 - - - - 7 10 202 37 21 2 13 2 7 11 20 13 1263 16 9 14 30 37 35 29 21 27 2184 1 23 5 10 16 9 14 7 5 905 - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 54 55 22 53 55 51 54 55 55 454

CMODAL Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 28 Reader 34 Reader 35stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 -- 100% 0% -- -- -- -- 600% 900% 122%2 517% 250% 100% 117% -67% 17% 83% 233% 117% 157%3 -50% -73% 8% -9% 12% 6% -12% -36% -18% -21%4 -93% 53% -29% -29% 7% -18% 0% -53% -67% -26%5 - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - -

DMODAL Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 28 Reader 34 Reader 35stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 0% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 44%2 100% 100% 0% 50% 0% 33% 17% 83% 83% 54%3 47% 27% 100% 82% 91% 94% 70% 61% 76% 72%4 7% 93% 71% 50% 87% 73% 86% 33% 20% 66%5 - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 40.7% 54.5% 86.4% 69.8% 78.2% 80.4% 66.7% 56.4% 61.8% 64.5%RANKING 9 8 1 4 3 2 5 7 6

F BIASMODAL Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 28 Reader 34 Reader 35stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.782 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.67 0.83 0.17 0.17 0.433 -0.53 -0.18 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 -0.24 -0.27 -0.12 -0.15 4 -1.80 -0.20 -0.57 -1.14 -0.20 -0.55 -0.21 -1.73 -2.13 -0.99 5 - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - -

PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGE

MAT STAGE COMPOSITION

PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGE

Weighted mean

NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY MODAL MATURITY STAGE

The number of maturity stagings by modal maturity stage (expert reders) and the maturity stage compositions by stage and reader are shown for all stage readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined.


Table 6.4

Scomber colias WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY MODAL MATURITY STAGE

MODAL Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader9 Reader10 Reader11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 27 Reader 29 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee TOTAL

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 222 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 673 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 - 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1104 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 235 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 2 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 222

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader9 Reader10 Reader11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 27 Reader 29 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35

Stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee TOTAL1 2 - 1 - 1 1 2 2 - 2 - 1 - 1 - - - - - 2 - 2 2 192 - 4 4 4 3 5 2 2 1 1 - 3 5 3 5 - 2 4 2 1 - 2 4 573 5 6 4 6 4 3 5 4 - 7 5 5 4 6 5 4 5 6 4 7 3 4 4 1064 3 - 1 - 2 1 1 2 1 - 5 1 1 - - 6 3 - 4 - 7 2 - 405 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 2 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 222

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODAL Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader9 Reader10 Reader11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 27 Reader 29 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee ALL

1 100% - 0% - 0% 0% 100% 100% - 100% - 0% - 0% - - - - - 100% - 100% 100% -14%2 - 33% 33% 33% 0% 67% -33% -33% 0% -67% - 0% 67% 0% 67% - -33% 33% -33% -67% - -33% 33% -15%3 0% 20% -20% 20% -20% -40% 0% -20% - 40% 0% 0% -20% 20% 0% -20% 0% 20% -20% 40% -40% -20% -20% -4%4 200% - 0% - 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% - 400% 0% 0% - - 500% 200% - 300% - 600% 100% - 74%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader9 Reader10 Reader11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 27 Reader 29 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee ALL

1 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% - 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 50%2 0% 100% 67% 100% 100% 67% 67% 67% 100% 33% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 33% 100% 33% 33% 0% 67% 67% 61%3 80% 100% 80% 100% 80% 60% 100% 80% - 100% 100% 80% 80% 100% 100% 80% 80% 100% 80% 100% 60% 80% 80% 86%4 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 0% 48%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 60.0% 80.0% 60.0% 80.0% 90.0% 60.0% 90.0% 80.0% 100.0% 70.0% 60.0% 80.0% 70.0% 90.0% 80.0% 50.0% 60.0% 80.0% 60.0% 70.0% 40.0% 80.0% 70.0% 71.2%RANKING 16 5 16 5 2 16 2 5 1 12 16 5 12 2 5 22 16 5 16 12 23 5 12

F BIASMODAL Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader9 Reader10 Reader11 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 27 Reader 29 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee ALL

1 0.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 3.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 -1.00 0.862 0.67 0.00 -0.33 0.00 0.00 0.67 -0.33 -0.33 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 1.33 0.00 2.00 -0.33 -2.00 0.363 0.20 0.00 -0.20 0.00 0.20 -0.40 0.00 0.20 - 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.40 0.20 -3.00 0.064 0.00 -1.00 -2.00 -1.00 0.00 -2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.00 0.00 -1.00 -2.00 -1.00 -2.00 0.00 0.00 -1.00 0.00 -1.00 0.00 0.00 -4.00 -0.74 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean



Trachurus trachurus

In the first round of the macroscopic picture calibration exercise, 51 pictures were used from both Mediterranean and Atlantic, which covered all months of the year and 3 maturity stages: 2, 3 and 4.

The overall agreement with modal stage was 68% (Table 6.5). Of all participants (21) 14 were expert. The agreement (modal stage) of the experts was 70.2% (Table 6.6), while the agreement of the trainee readers with a modal stage of the expert was 61.7%.

In the analysis of all groups (all participants, expert and trainee), the stages with the highest percentage of agreement was stage 3 (Table 6.6, 6.7, 6.8). Stage 2 presented an agreement around 60% and the agreement of stage 4 was 65–70%.

Regarding stage 2, the results show an overestimation (85% all readers, 81% expert and 100% trainee). While for the others stages, the results show an underestimation – stage 3 (1–14%) was lower than stage 4 (23–44%).

Regarding the bias, the results are similar for the all groups (all readers, expert and trainee) with a positive bias for stage 2 and negative bias for stages 3 and 4.

In general, the results show that stage 2 is confused with stage 4 and/or with stage 3. During the plenary discussion of these results (Annex 7), it was attempted to clarify some controversial cases of gonads with maturity on the border between two stages 2–4 or 2–3.


Table 6.5

Trachurus trachurus stageing WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY MODAL MATURITY STAGE

MODAL Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_18 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_34 Reader_35 Reader_37stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 3 8 - 6 8 8 1503 23 22 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 22 22 23 18 6 23 1 21 23 23 4344 20 19 20 19 20 20 20 20 20 19 19 19 20 20 15 11 20 5 9 20 19 3745 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 51 49 51 50 51 50 51 51 51 50 50 49 50 51 39 20 51 6 36 51 50 958

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_18 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_34 Reader_35 Reader_37

Stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL1 - - 1 1 - 5 - - - - - - - - - - 1 - - - 8 162 19 17 23 18 18 14 13 18 3 16 26 8 9 11 - - 12 1 4 28 19 2773 14 24 18 20 24 11 24 11 31 18 11 23 22 21 22 8 23 1 17 17 15 3754 18 8 9 11 9 20 13 22 17 16 13 18 19 19 17 12 15 4 15 6 8 2895 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1

Total 1-6 51 49 51 50 51 50 51 51 51 50 50 49 50 51 39 20 51 6 36 51 50 958

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODAL Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_18 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_34 Reader_35 Reader_37stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 138% 113% 188% 125% 125% 100% 63% 125% -63% 100% 225% 0% 13% 38% - - 50% - -33% 250% 138% 85%3 -39% 9% -22% -13% 4% -52% 4% -52% 35% -22% -52% 5% 0% -9% 22% 33% 0% 0% -19% -26% -35% -14%4 -10% -58% -55% -42% -55% 0% -35% 10% -15% -16% -32% -5% -5% -5% 13% 9% -25% -20% 67% -70% -58% -23%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_18 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_34 Reader_35 Reader_37stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 88% 75% 100% 88% 50% 57% 75% 63% 13% 88% 75% 25% 75% 13% 0% 0% 75% - 17% 88% 75% 60%3 61% 86% 78% 78% 83% 48% 74% 39% 91% 78% 48% 77% 95% 70% 94% 100% 83% 100% 81% 70% 57% 73%4 85% 37% 45% 58% 45% 75% 60% 95% 75% 79% 26% 79% 90% 80% 87% 82% 70% 80% 100% 30% 26% 65%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 74.5% 65.3% 68.6% 72.0% 62.7% 60.0% 68.6% 64.7% 72.5% 80.0% 44.0% 69.4% 90.0% 64.7% 76.9% 75.0% 76.5% 83.3% 75.0% 56.9% 48.0% 68.0%RANKING 8 14 12 10 17 18 12 15 9 3 21 11 1 15 4 6 5 2 6 19 20

F BIASMODAL Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_18 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_34 Reader_35 Reader_37stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.13 0.50 0.00 0.25 0.50 1.13 0.25 0.50 1.00 0.38 1.25 1.50 2.00 0.38 - 1.67 0.13 0.13 0.543 -0.39 -0.05 -0.22 -0.22 -0.17 -0.17 -0.17 -0.43 -0.09 -0.22 0.00 -0.14 -0.05 -0.30 0.06 0.00 -0.17 0.00 -0.10 -0.30 -0.26 -0.18 4 -0.30 -1.11 -1.15 -0.84 -1.05 -0.65 -0.35 -0.10 -0.25 -0.42 -1.47 -0.32 -0.20 -0.35 -0.13 -0.18 -0.50 -0.40 0.00 -1.40 -1.74 -0.65 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean



Table 6.6

A NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY MODAL MATURITY STAGEMODAL Reader_1 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_18 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_33stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert TOTAL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 4 - 993 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 20 21 21 18 1 2704 22 22 21 21 22 22 22 21 21 21 22 22 17 5 2815 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 51 51 50 50 51 51 51 50 50 49 50 51 39 6 650

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Reader_1 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_18 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_33

Stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert TOTAL1 - 1 1 5 - - - - - - - - - - 72 19 23 18 14 13 18 3 16 26 8 9 11 - 1 1793 14 18 20 11 24 11 31 18 11 23 22 21 22 1 2474 18 9 11 20 13 22 17 16 13 18 19 19 17 4 2165 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - 1

Total 1-6 51 51 50 50 51 51 51 50 50 49 50 51 39 6 650

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODAL Reader_1 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_18 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_33stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 138% 188% 125% 75% 63% 125% -63% 100% 225% 0% 29% 38% - - 81%3 -33% -14% -5% -48% 14% -48% 48% -14% -48% 15% 5% 0% 22% 0% -9%4 -18% -59% -48% -5% -41% 0% -23% -24% -38% -14% -14% -14% 0% -20% -23%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL Reader_1 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_18 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_33stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 100% 75% 88% 63% 63% 63% 25% 100% 75% 25% 71% 25% 0% - 62%3 67% 76% 86% 48% 76% 38% 95% 86% 48% 75% 95% 71% 94% 100% 73%4 82% 41% 52% 71% 55% 91% 77% 76% 33% 81% 86% 82% 88% 80% 70%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 78.4% 60.8% 72.0% 60.0% 64.7% 64.7% 76.5% 84.0% 46.0% 69.4% 88.0% 68.6% 82.1% 83.3% 70.3%RANKING 5 12 7 13 10 10 6 2 14 8 1 9 4 3

F BIASMODAL Reader_1 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_18 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_33stage Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 0.00 0.25 0.13 0.25 0.38 0.38 0.75 0.00 0.38 0.75 0.29 0.88 1.25 - 0.403 -0.33 -0.24 -0.14 -0.14 -0.14 -0.43 -0.05 -0.14 -0.05 -0.15 -0.05 -0.29 0.06 0.00 -0.16 4 -0.36 -1.23 -0.95 -0.76 -0.50 -0.18 -0.23 -0.48 -1.33 -0.29 -0.27 -0.32 -0.12 -0.40 -0.54 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean




Regarding the macroscopic picture calibration exercise on Trachurus mediterraneus, 44 pictures were available and only 2 readers out of 24 were experts. The samples covered almost all months of the year and covered maturity stages 2, 3 and 4.

The overall agreement with modal stage was 69.6% (Table 6.8). The stage with the high-est percentage of agreement was stages 3 (74%), while for stage 2 and 4, the agreement was 52 and 67%, respectively. During the plenary discussion (Annex 7), a case was analysed with a modal stage 2, which many readers had classified as stage 3 or 4.

Table 6.7

Trachurus trachurus stageing WKMSMAC2, September 2015A

MODAL Reader_4 Reader_7 Reader_25 Reader_29 Reader_34 Reader_35 Reader_37stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL

1 - - - - - - - -2 8 8 2 8 7 8 8 493 20 21 6 21 19 21 21 1294 21 22 12 22 10 22 21 1305 - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 49 51 20 51 36 51 50 308

BReader_4 Reader_7 Reader_25 Reader_29 Reader_34 Reader_35 Reader_37

Stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL1 - - - 1 - - 8 92 17 18 - 12 4 28 19 983 24 24 8 23 17 17 15 1284 8 9 12 15 15 6 8 735 - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 49 51 20 51 36 51 50 308

CMODAL Reader_4 Reader_7 Reader_25 Reader_29 Reader_34 Reader_35 Reader_37stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 - - - - - - - -2 113% 125% - 50% -43% 250% 138% 100%3 20% 14% 33% 10% -11% -19% -29% -1%4 -62% -59% 0% -32% 50% -73% -62% -44%5 - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - -

DMODAL Reader_4 Reader_7 Reader_25 Reader_29 Reader_34 Reader_35 Reader_37stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 - - - - - - - -2 50% 38% 0% 63% 29% 75% 75% 61%3 90% 86% 100% 81% 84% 71% 57% 75%4 33% 41% 83% 68% 100% 27% 24% 67%5 - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - -

1-6 59.2% 58.8% 80.0% 72.5% 77.8% 52.9% 46.0% 61.7%RANKING 4 5 1 3 2 6 7

F BIASMODAL Reader_4 Reader_7 Reader_25 Reader_29 Reader_34 Reader_35 Reader_37stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 - - - - - - - -2 0.63 0.63 2.00 0.38 1.29 0.25 0.38 0.633 -0.10 -0.14 0.00 -0.19 -0.05 -0.29 -0.24 -0.16 4 -1.19 -1.14 -0.17 -0.55 0.00 -1.45 -1.81 -1.03 5 - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - -

MAT STAGE COMPOSITION

NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY MODAL MATURITY STAGE

Weighted mean


PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGE



Table 6.8

Trachurus mediterraneus stageing WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY MODAL MATURITY STAGE

MODAL Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 Reader 29 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35 Reader 36stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1173 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 27 28 28 28 28 28 27 28 28 28 28 10 6524 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 10 11 11 7 11 10 11 11 10 10 11 11 11 11 6 2515 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 44 44 44 44 44 43 44 44 44 43 44 44 37 44 43 44 44 43 42 44 44 44 44 21 1020

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 Reader 29 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35 Reader 36

Stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL1 3 - - 1 1 4 - 2 - - 2 1 - 2 - - - - - 1 1 3 8 3 322 17 14 15 8 17 17 13 13 6 8 9 8 4 6 14 7 8 8 9 6 14 13 6 6 2463 13 26 22 25 17 11 21 14 32 23 27 23 27 22 16 27 32 31 26 20 16 19 22 9 5214 11 4 7 10 8 11 9 15 6 12 6 12 5 14 13 10 4 4 7 17 13 9 8 3 2185 - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - 16 - - - - 1 - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2

Total 1-6 44 44 44 44 44 43 44 44 44 43 44 44 37 44 43 44 44 43 42 44 44 44 44 21 1020

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODAL Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 Reader 29 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35 Reader 36stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 240% 180% 200% 60% 240% 325% 160% 160% 20% 60% 80% 60% 33% 20% 180% 40% 60% 60% 80% 20% 180% 160% 20% 20% 110%3 -54% -7% -21% -11% -39% -61% -25% -50% 14% -18% -4% -18% 0% -21% -43% -4% 14% 11% -4% -29% -43% -32% -21% -10% -20%4 0% -64% -36% -9% -27% 0% -18% 36% -45% 20% -45% 9% -29% 27% 30% -9% -64% -60% -30% 55% 18% -18% -27% -50% -13%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 Reader 29 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35 Reader 36stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 40% 100% 40% 80% 80% 50% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 20% 67% 20% 60% 80% 60% 80% 40% 60% 20% 60% 20% 60% 52%3 46% 82% 68% 89% 61% 39% 68% 50% 79% 82% 82% 79% 96% 79% 57% 89% 100% 96% 78% 71% 54% 68% 79% 90% 74%4 82% 27% 36% 91% 73% 82% 55% 91% 45% 70% 45% 91% 57% 91% 100% 64% 36% 40% 50% 91% 100% 64% 73% 33% 67%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 54.5% 70.5% 56.8% 88.6% 65.9% 51.2% 68.2% 54.5% 63.6% 74.4% 70.5% 75.0% 86.5% 75.0% 67.4% 81.8% 79.5% 81.4% 66.7% 75.0% 61.4% 65.9% 70.5% 66.7% 69.6%RANKING 22 10 21 1 17 24 13 22 19 9 10 6 2 6 14 3 5 4 15 6 20 17 10 15

F BIASMODAL Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 Reader 29 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35 Reader 36stage Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 0.00 0.00 1.00 -0.20 -0.20 -0.50 0.00 0.80 0.80 1.20 0.20 0.80 0.67 1.00 0.80 0.20 0.40 0.20 1.00 0.20 0.80 0.20 -0.80 -2.00 0.343 -0.46 -0.11 -0.25 -0.11 -0.39 -0.46 -0.11 -0.36 -0.14 -0.04 -0.18 -0.21 -0.04 -0.14 -0.36 0.11 0.00 -0.04 -0.22 0.14 -0.46 -0.25 -0.25 -3.00 -0.18 4 -0.45 -1.18 -1.09 -0.18 -0.18 -0.55 -0.36 -0.18 -0.55 -0.60 -0.82 -0.18 -0.29 -0.27 0.00 -0.64 -1.09 -0.90 -0.60 -0.18 0.00 -0.91 -0.82 -4.00 -0.55 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean



Second round of macroscopic pictures calibration

During the second round of the macroscopic picture staging, WebGr stopped function-ing and participants were not able to finish the exercise. For the fish already staged, it was not possible to get the results out of WebGr. Due to this problem it was not possible to present results of this calibration round during the workshop and no discussion could take place in plenary. It would have been a time consuming exercise to prepare the results, therefore they will be discussed later by correspondence.

In this exercise, macroscopic pictures from specimens with histologically validated staging were used. These kind of images were available only for Scomber scombrus and Trachurus trachurus

Scomber scombrus

For the mackerel, a sample of 63 pictures (23 male and 40 female) had been selected in order to cover most of the months of the year and the stages. For both males and fe-males, stages 1–4 were present in the sample.

The general agreement (histological) for the readers overall (expert and trainee) was 61.4% (Table 6.9). The agreement by stage shows that stage 3 has the highest agreement (90%), while for the other stages the agreement was between 46% (stage 1) and 29% (stage 2). The main difficulty is the distinction between stage 1 and 4, indeed the former presents an overestimation of 89% and the latter an underestimation of 59%. Stage 2 was mostly confused with stage 3. Indeed, the presence of oocytes ready for spawning is detected earlier histologically compared to macroscopically. Therefore, for the gon-adal macroscopic analysis, it is recommended to do a transvers cut on one of the two lobes of the gonad in order to recognize the presence of sperm (male) or hydrated oo-cytes (female).

The results of the bias by stage show a positive bias for stages 1 and 2 (0.66 and 0.89 respectively), and a negative bias for stage 4 (-1.57).

The results of the sex identification are reported in Table 6.10. The general agreement is higher for female than for male.

In general, more specimens are sexed as female by macroscopic analysis (readers) than by the histological analysis. The sex was misclassified mostly in specimens with ma-turity stage 1. Regarding this analysis, it is important to underline that the data on the sex determination were imputed manually after the workshop due to the problems which occurred with WebGr (impossible to extract data from the system). Because of this, a discussion of the most controversial samples during the workshop was not pos-sible.

The statistical comparison (Wilcoxon rank sum test) of the mean stage agreement for the two groups of readers (expert and trainee) do not show significant differences (p = 0.668). Moreover in the analysis by stage and groups of readers (expert and trainee), there are no significant differences between sexes (Table 6.11).

The statistical analysis of the agreement on maturity stages for both sexes show signif-icant differences (Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test; female p = 2.244e-09; male p = 1.109e-06). In particular, the post-hoc test show that the agreement on stage 3 is significantly higher (Table 6.12) in comparison to the others for both sexes. The mean agreement for the maturity stages 1, 2 and 4 did not show significant differences.


Table 6.9

Scomber scombrus validated WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY HISTOLOGICAL MATURITY STAGE

MODAL reader 1 reader 4 reader 5 reader 6 reader 7 reader 9 reader 10 reader 11 reader 13 reader 14 reader 17 reader 18 reader 20 reader 21 reader 22 reader 23 reader 25 reader 26 reader 27 reader 29 reader 33 reader 35 reader 36 reader 37stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL

1 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 1 - 3 3 4 4 1 1 4 3 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 762 11 9 11 11 11 11 11 10 9 1 3 11 11 10 10 11 11 9 11 11 11 11 11 9 2353 31 20 31 31 31 31 31 29 21 2 8 31 31 27 29 31 29 29 31 31 31 31 31 29 6574 17 9 17 17 17 17 17 8 8 9 9 17 17 8 8 17 13 8 16 17 17 17 17 17 3345 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 63 41 63 63 63 63 63 48 38 15 23 63 63 46 48 63 56 47 62 63 63 63 63 59 1302

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION reader 1 reader 4 reader 5 reader 6 reader 7 reader 9 reader 10 reader 11 reader 13 reader 14 reader 17 reader 18 reader 20 reader 21 reader 22 reader 23 reader 25 reader 26 reader 27 reader 29 reader 33 reader 35 reader 36 reader 37

Stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL1 9 7 8 11 6 12 5 - - 6 9 14 6 - - - - - 3 10 7 9 9 13 1442 10 6 17 18 16 16 9 6 5 6 2 21 9 10 9 11 9 8 17 12 9 10 18 9 2633 36 26 33 34 32 22 35 34 30 1 10 28 39 36 39 41 38 39 34 36 31 31 33 35 7534 8 2 5 - 8 13 9 8 3 2 2 - 9 - - 11 9 - 8 5 16 13 3 2 1365 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5

Total 1-6 63 41 63 63 62 63 63 48 38 15 23 63 63 46 48 63 56 47 62 63 63 63 63 59 1301

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODAL reader 1 reader 4 reader 5 reader 6 reader 7 reader 9 reader 10 reader 11 reader 13 reader 14 reader 17 reader 18 reader 20 reader 21 reader 22 reader 23 reader 25 reader 26 reader 27 reader 29 reader 33 reader 35 reader 36 reader 37stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 125% 133% 100% 175% 50% 200% 25% - - 100% 200% 250% 50% - - - - - -25% 150% 75% 125% 125% 225% 89%2 -9% -33% 55% 64% 45% 45% -18% -40% -44% 500% -33% 91% -18% 0% -10% 0% -18% -11% 55% 9% -18% -9% 64% 0% 12%3 16% 30% 6% 10% 3% -29% 13% 17% 43% -50% 25% -10% 26% 33% 34% 32% 31% 34% 10% 16% 0% 0% 6% 21% 15%4 -53% -78% -71% - -53% -24% -47% 0% -63% -78% -78% - -47% - - -35% -31% - -50% -71% -6% -24% -82% -88% -59%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL reader 1 reader 4 reader 5 reader 6 reader 7 reader 9 reader 10 reader 11 reader 13 reader 14 reader 17 reader 18 reader 20 reader 21 reader 22 reader 23 reader 25 reader 26 reader 27 reader 29 reader 33 reader 35 reader 36 reader 37stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 50% 67% 50% 75% 50% 75% 25% 0% - 33% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 75% 50% 50% 50% 75% 46%2 0% 22% 45% 45% 64% 64% 36% 40% 56% 0% 0% 55% 9% 20% 10% 9% 9% 0% 36% 9% 45% 18% 36% 22% 29%3 81% 95% 87% 90% 87% 68% 90% 93% 100% 50% 100% 74% 94% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 87% 90% 87% 81% 81% 97% 90%4 41% 22% 18% 0% 47% 47% 41% 88% 38% 22% 22% 0% 41% 0% 0% 53% 62% 0% 38% 12% 76% 47% 18% 12% 32%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 54.0% 61.0% 58.7% 57.1% 69.8% 61.9% 63.5% 79.2% 76.3% 26.7% 56.5% 52.4% 58.7% 63.0% 62.5% 65.1% 67.9% 61.7% 59.7% 54.0% 74.6% 58.7% 54.0% 59.3% 61.4%RANKING 20 12 15 18 4 10 7 1 2 24 19 23 15 8 9 6 5 11 13 20 3 15 20 14

F BIASMODAL reader 1 reader 4 reader 5 reader 6 reader 7 reader 9 reader 10 reader 11 reader 13 reader 14 reader 17 reader 18 reader 20 reader 21 reader 22 reader 23 reader 25 reader 26 reader 27 reader 29 reader 33 reader 35 reader 36 reader 37stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 1.00 0.33 1.50 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.25 3.00 - 0.67 0.00 0.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 0.25 1.50 1.00 -1.00 0.25 0.862 0.82 0.78 0.36 0.55 0.09 0.36 0.73 0.60 0.44 -1.00 0.33 0.45 1.00 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73 1.09 0.45 0.82 -2.00 0.78 0.693 -0.19 -0.05 -0.13 -0.10 -0.13 -0.19 0.16 -0.07 0.00 -0.50 0.00 -0.26 -0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.13 -0.03 -0.13 -0.06 -3.00 -0.03 -0.08 4 -1.47 -2.11 -1.88 -2.47 -1.18 -1.53 -0.65 -0.13 -0.63 -2.00 -2.11 -2.59 -1.47 -1.88 -1.88 -0.88 -0.77 -1.88 -1.38 -2.18 -0.71 -1.41 -4.00 -2.35 -1.57 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean

The number of maturity stagings by histological maturity stage and the maturity stage compositions by stage and reader are shown for all stage readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined.


Table 6.10


MODAL Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 21 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35 Reader 36stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL

1 24 9 11 24 24 24 24 24 24 23 24 9 9 24 24 23 24 24 24 9 4052 39 6 32 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 6 6 39 39 39 39 39 39 6 641

Total 1-2 63 15 43 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 63 15 15 63 63 62 63 63 63 15 1046

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 21 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35 Reader 36

Stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL1 23 8 10 17 23 15 18 21 24 23 15 8 2 16 17 22 20 21 23 8 3342 40 7 33 46 40 48 45 42 39 39 48 7 13 47 46 40 43 42 40 7 712

Total 1-2 63 15 43 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 63 15 15 63 63 62 63 63 63 15 1046

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODAL Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 21 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35 Reader 36stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 -4% -11% -9% -29% -4% -38% -25% -13% 0% 0% -38% -11% -78% -33% -29% -4% -17% -13% -4% -11% -18%2 3% 17% 3% 18% 3% 23% 15% 8% 0% 0% 23% 17% 117% 21% 18% 3% 10% 8% 3% 17% 11%

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 21 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35 Reader 36stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 96% 89% 82% 71% 96% 63% 75% 88% 96% 96% 63% 89% 22% 67% 71% 96% 83% 88% 96% 89% 82%2 100% 100% 97% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 97% 97% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

1-2 98.4% 93.3% 93.0% 88.9% 98.4% 85.7% 90.5% 95.2% 96.8% 96.8% 85.7% 93.3% 53.3% 87.3% 88.9% 98.4% 93.7% 95.2% 98.4% 93.3% 92.6%RANKING 1 10 13 15 1 18 14 7 5 6 18 10 20 17 15 4 9 7 1 10

F BIASMODAL Reader 1 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 19 Reader 21 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 Reader 33 Reader 34 Reader 35 Reader 36stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 0.04 0.11 0.18 0.29 0.04 0.38 0.25 0.13 0.04 0.04 0.38 0.11 0.78 0.33 0.29 0.04 0.17 0.13 -1.00 0.11 0.182 0.00 0.00 -0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.03 -0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.00 0.00 -0.00

Weighted mean

The number of sex stagings by histological sex and sex stage compositions by sex and reader are shown for all stage readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The stage 1 represent the male and stage 2 the female


Table 6.11 Statistical analysis (Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney) of the mean agreement by stage and reader groups (expert and trainee).

Table 6.12 Statistical analysis (Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test – post hoc test) of the mean agreement by maturity stages. Means with the same letter are not significantly different.

Trachurus trachurus

For the horse mackerel, a sample of 43 pictures (17 male and 26 female) had been se-lected in order to cover most of the months of the year. For both males and females, stages 1, 3 and 4 were present in the samples.

The general agreement (histological) for all readers (expert and trainee) is 50.6% (Table 6.13). The agreement by stage shows that stage 1 has the highest agreement (71%). For the other stages, the agreement is 61% (stage 3) and 29% (stage 4). The main difficulties seem to be in the distinction between stage 4 and the other stages (2 and 3). Indeed, stage 4 presents an underestimation of 55%. Regarding the difficulty in recognising stage 3: the presences of oocytes ready for spawning is detected histologically before it can be detected macroscopically. Therefore, as well as for the mackerel, it is recom-mended to do a transvers cut on one of the two lobes of the gonad for the gonadal macroscopic analysis in order to recognize the presence of sperm (male) or hydrated oocytes (female).

Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee0.67 0.33 0.00 0.44 1.00 1.00 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.70 0.27 0.27NA 0.00 0.50 0.11 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.80 0.75 0.27NA 0.00 0.50 0.11 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.67 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.80 0.75 0.36

0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.80 0.29 0.001.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 1.00 0.95 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.70 0.29 0.271.00 1.00 0.56 0.11 0.95 1.00 0.00 0.17 1.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.30 0.70 0.00 0.09NA 0.67 0.25 0.56 1.00 0.90 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.80 0.00 0.64

0.00 0.67 0.11 0.11 1.00 0.95 0.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.80 0.50 0.00 0.360.00 0.33 0.11 0.22 1.00 1.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.40 0.45 0.270.67 0.66667 0.44 0.14 0.95 1.00 0.00 0 0.00 1 0.50 0.50 0.70 0.90 0.27 0.180.67 0.67 0.44 0.22 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.50 0.70 0.50 0.00 0.29

0.33333 1.00 0.88 0.78 0.81 0.71 0.50 0.67 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.60 0.45 0.36

0.54 0.44 0.32 0.27 0.97 0.96 0.24 0.43 0.25 0.18 0.25 0.18 0.77 0.68 0.29 0.28p= 0.68 p= 0.84 p= 1 p= 0.17 p= 0.48 p= 0.61 p= 0.2187 p= 0.98

Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney

MALE

Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney

FEMALE1 2 31 2 3 4 4

STAGE 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 40.67 0.00 1.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.270.33 0.44 1.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.27NA 0.50 0.95 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.75NA 0.50 1.00 0.00 NA 1.00 1.00 0.75

0.33 0.00 NA 0.00 NA NA 0.50 0.291.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 NA NA 1.00 0.291.00 0.56 0.95 0.00 1.00 0.50 0.30 0.000.00 0.11 1.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.27NA 0.25 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00

0.00 0.11 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.000.00 0.11 1.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.450.00 0.11 1.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.360.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.000.00 0.44 0.95 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.271.00 0.11 1.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.090.67 0.56 0.90 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.640.67 0.11 0.95 0.67 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.360.33 0.22 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.40 0.270.67 0.14 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.50 0.90 0.180.67 0.22 1.00 0.00 NA NA 0.50 0.290.67 0.44 0.95 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.70 0.270.67 0.44 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.50 0.70 0.000.33 0.88 0.81 0.50 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.451.00 0.78 0.71 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.36

0.48 0.29 0.96 0.33 0.25 0.21 0.73 0.29b b a b b b a b

MALEFEMALE

Agreement mean


For the bias by stages the results show a positive bias (0.47) for stage 1 and a negative bias for stages 3 (-0.24) and 4 (-1.36).

The results of the sex identification are reported in Table 6.14. The general agreement is higher for the detection of females. In general, more specimens are sexed as female by macroscopic (readers) analysis than by the histological analysis. In this case, mostly specimens with a maturity stage 1 were confused.

As well as for mackerel, the data on the sex determination were imputed manually because of the problems occurring with WebGr (impossible to extract data from the system). Because of this, a discussion of the results of the analysis by projecting the images (micro and macro) of the most controversial samples, could not take place dur-ing this workshop.

The statistical comparison (Wilcoxon rank sum test) of the mean stage agreement for the two groups of readers (expert and trainee) do not show significant differences (p = 0.7577). Moreover in the analysis by stage and groups of readers (expert and trainee), there are no significant differences between sexes (Tab. 6.15).

The statistical analysis of the agreement on maturity stages for both sexes show signif-icant differences (Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test; female p = 0.0006743; male p = 5.949e-11). In particular, the post-hoc test show that for females, stage 4 is significantly lower (Table 6.16) than the other stages, while for males, all maturity stages (1, 3 and 4) show significant differences.


Table 6.13

Trachurus trachurus stageing WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY HYSTOLOGY MATURITY STAGE

MODAL Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_17 Reader_18 Reader_20 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_26 Reader_27 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_35 Reader_36 Reader_37stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL

1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 982 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 22 24 24 23 23 24 24 24 24 21 24 23 23 24 24 5914 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 14 15 15 15 15 15 14 15 15 14 15 15 3725 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 41 43 43 40 42 43 43 43 43 39 43 42 40 43 43 1061

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_17 Reader_18 Reader_20 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_26 Reader_27 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_35 Reader_36 Reader_37

Stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL1 4 2 8 8 9 5 3 7 7 9 3 11 2 2 2 3 0 0 1 6 2 5 9 10 8 1262 8 21 12 20 9 7 4 15 5 7 14 15 20 19 16 9 17 15 18 20 15 6 18 16 15 3413 22 19 16 14 22 16 18 13 21 21 15 15 15 17 18 17 22 20 24 12 17 15 11 14 12 4264 9 1 7 1 2 15 18 8 10 6 9 2 6 2 6 14 4 8 0 1 9 16 2 3 8 1675 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1

Total 1-6 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 41 43 43 40 42 43 43 43 43 39 43 42 40 43 43 1061

CMODAL Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_17 Reader_18 Reader_20 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_26 Reader_27 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_35 Reader_36 Reader_37stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 0% -50% 100% 100% 125% 25% -25% 75% 75% 125% -25% 175% -50% -33% -50% -25% -100% -100% -75% 50% -50% 25% 200% 150% 100% 29%2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 -8% -21% -33% -42% -8% -33% -25% -46% -13% -13% -32% -38% -38% -26% -22% -29% -8% -17% 0% -43% -29% -35% -52% -42% -50% -28%4 -40% -93% -53% -93% -87% 0% 20% -47% -33% -60% -40% -87% -60% -86% -60% -7% -73% -47% -100% -93% -40% 7% -86% -80% -47% -55%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_17 Reader_18 Reader_20 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_26 Reader_27 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_35 Reader_36 Reader_37stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 50% 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 100% 75% 100% 75% 100% 50% 67% 50% 50% 0% 0% 25% 100% 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 71%2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 71% 67% 54% 46% 83% 58% 67% 46% 75% 71% 50% 50% 50% 61% 70% 58% 79% 75% 79% 38% 67% 57% 43% 50% 46% 61%4 47% 0% 20% 7% 13% 67% 67% 47% 53% 20% 27% 0% 33% 7% 27% 67% 20% 47% 0% 7% 33% 73% 14% 7% 27% 29%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 60.5% 41.9% 46.5% 37.2% 60.5% 65.1% 65.1% 51.2% 67.4% 55.8% 43.9% 37.2% 44.2% 42.5% 52.4% 60.5% 51.2% 58.1% 46.5% 33.3% 53.5% 66.7% 37.5% 39.5% 44.2% 50.6%RANKING 5 20 14 23 5 3 3 12 1 9 18 23 16 19 11 5 12 8 14 25 10 2 22 21 16

F BIASMODAL Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_5 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_11 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_17 Reader_18 Reader_20 Reader_21 Reader_22 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_26 Reader_27 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_35 Reader_36 Reader_37stage Expert Trainee Expert Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 1.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.50 0.33 0.50 1.50 1.00 1.00 0.75 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.472 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 -0.29 -0.25 -0.17 -0.58 -0.17 0.00 0.17 -0.46 -0.17 -0.04 -0.14 -0.33 -0.42 -0.30 -0.13 -0.25 -0.13 -0.17 -0.21 -0.62 -0.08 0.00 -0.61 -0.42 -0.21 -0.24 4 -0.87 -1.80 -1.60 -1.87 -1.67 -0.60 -0.60 -1.13 -1.00 -1.67 -1.20 -2.27 -1.13 -1.64 -1.33 -0.53 -1.40 -0.93 -1.67 -1.71 -1.27 -0.47 -2.00 -2.00 -1.67 -1.36 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean


The number of maturity stagings by histology maturity stage and the maturity stage compositions by stage and reader are shown for all stage readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined.


Table 6.14

Trachurus trachurus stageing WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY HISTOLOGICAL MATURITY STAGE

MODAL Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_17 Reader_18 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_26 Reader_27 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_36stage Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL

1 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 3062 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 468

Total 1-2 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 774

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_17 Reader_18 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_26 Reader_27 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_36

Stage Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee TOTAL1 16 17 15 15 15 14 17 16 18 15 15 13 16 13 18 19 14 15 2812 27 26 28 28 28 29 26 27 25 28 28 30 27 30 25 24 29 28 493

Total 1-2 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 774

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODAL Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_17 Reader_18 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_26 Reader_27 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_36stage Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 -6% 0% -12% -12% -12% -18% 0% -6% 6% -12% -12% -24% -6% -24% 6% 12% -18% -12% -8%2 4% 0% 8% 8% 8% 12% 0% 4% -4% 8% 8% 15% 4% 15% -4% -8% 12% 8% 5%

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_17 Reader_18 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_26 Reader_27 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_36stage Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 88% 100% 82% 88% 82% 82% 100% 94% 94% 82% 88% 76% 94% 76% 94% 82% 82% 88% 88%2 96% 100% 96% 100% 96% 100% 100% 100% 92% 96% 100% 100% 100% 100% 92% 81% 100% 100% 97%

1-2 93.0% 100.0% 90.7% 95.3% 90.7% 93.0% 100.0% 97.7% 93.0% 90.7% 95.3% 90.7% 97.7% 90.7% 93.0% 81.4% 93.0% 95.3% 93.4%RANKING 8 1 13 5 13 8 1 3 8 13 5 13 3 13 8 18 8 5

F BIASMODAL Reader_1 Reader_4 Reader_6 Reader_7 Reader_9 Reader_10 Reader_13 Reader_14 Reader_15 Reader_17 Reader_18 Reader_23 Reader_25 Reader_26 Reader_27 Reader_29 Reader_33 Reader_36stage Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee ALL

1 0.12 0.00 0.18 0.12 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.18 0.12 0.24 0.06 0.24 0.06 0.18 0.18 0.12 0.122 -0.04 0.00 -0.04 0.00 -0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.08 -0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.08 -0.19 0.00 0.00 -0.03

Weighted mean

The number of sex stagings by histological sex and sex stage composition by sex and reader are shown for all stage readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The stage 1 represent the male and stage 2 the female.


Table 6.15 Statistical analysis (Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney) of the mean agreement by stage and read-ers groups (expert and trainee).

Table 6.16 Statistical analysis (Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test – post hoc test) of the mean agreement by maturity stages. Means with the same letter are not significantly different.

Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee Expert Trainee0.00 0.00 0.82 0.73 0.46 0.77 1.00 1.00 0.62 0.62 0.50 0.001.00 0.50 0.36 0.82 0.54 0.08 1.00 1.00 0.54 0.42 0.00 0.001.00 0.00 0.64 0.91 0.62 0.46 0.50 0.00 0.85 0.62 0.00 0.501.00 0.00 0.91 0.91 0.23 0.00 1.00 0.50 0.54 0.69 0.00 0.000.50 1.00 0.91 0.44 0.31 0.08 1.00 1.00 0.09 0.33 0.00 0.001.00 0.00 0.64 0.91 0.00 0.38 1.00 1.00 0.38 0.46 0.00 0.000.00 1.00 0.73 0.55 0.38 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.31 0.58 0.00 0.000.00 1.00 0.82 0.45 0.31 0.17 1.00 1.00 0.58 0.42 0.00 0.001.00 1.00 0.73 0.91 0.77 0.08 0.00 1.00 0.46 0.15 0.00 0.000.00 1.00 0.91 0.82 0.23 0.23 0.00 1.00 0.69 0.15 0.00 0.501.00 0.00 0.91 0.91 0.23 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.23 0.46 0.00 0.001.00 1.00 0.36 0.91 0.08 0.15 1.00 1.00 0.54 0.77 0.00 0.001.00 0.82 0.77 1.00 0.38 0.000.65 0.54 0.73 0.77 0.38 0.27 0.81 0.88 0.48 0.47 0.04 0.08

p= 0.579 p= 0.4455 p= 0.1985 p= 0.70 p= 0.93 p= 0.53Wilcoxon Mann-Whithney Wilcoxon Mann-Whithney

4FEMALE MALE

1 3 4 1 3

STAGE 1 3 4 1 3 40.00 0.82 0.46 1.00 0.62 0.500.00 0.73 0.77 1.00 0.62 0.001.00 0.36 0.54 1.00 0.54 0.001.00 0.64 0.62 0.50 0.85 0.001.00 0.91 0.23 1.00 0.54 0.000.50 0.91 0.31 1.00 0.09 0.001.00 0.64 0.00 1.00 0.38 0.000.00 0.73 0.38 1.00 0.31 0.000.50 0.82 0.08 1.00 0.42 0.000.00 0.82 0.31 1.00 0.58 0.001.00 0.73 0.77 0.00 0.46 0.000.00 0.91 0.23 0.00 0.69 0.000.00 0.91 0.46 0.00 0.62 0.500.00 0.91 0.00 0.50 0.69 0.001.00 0.44 0.08 1.00 0.33 0.000.00 0.91 0.38 1.00 0.46 0.001.00 0.55 0.85 1.00 0.58 0.001.00 0.45 0.17 1.00 0.42 0.001.00 0.91 0.08 1.00 0.15 0.001.00 0.82 0.23 1.00 0.15 0.500.00 0.91 0.00 1.00 0.46 0.001.00 0.91 0.23 1.00 0.23 0.001.00 0.36 0.08 1.00 0.54 0.001.00 0.91 0.15 1.00 0.77 0.001.00 0.82 0.77 1.00 0.38 0.000.60 0.75 0.33 0.84 0.48 0.06

a a b a b c

Agreement mean

FEMALE MALE


7 Fresh and frozen fish calibration exercise (ToR c)

For the fresh staging round, Trachurus trachurus was available. In the fresh round, 25 fish were sexed and staged. For the frozen fish staging, both Scomber scombrus and Tra-churus trachurus were available. For the frozen round, 25 Scomber scombrus and 32 Tra-churus trachurus were sexed and staged.

Results of the fresh and frozen fish stagings were discussed in plenary (report of the discussion can be found in Annex 7).

Scomber scombrus 25 frozen Scomber scombrus were staged in this round. Since these were frozen fish no validation with histology was available.

Overall agreement in sex of the fish was 97% (Table 7.1). When the fish with low agree-ment were discussed in plenary, it became clear that participants who miss-classified the sex were not looking at the gonad.

Overall agreement in maturity staging was 77.8% (Table 7.2). Of all participants 16 were experts in maturity staging of Scomber scombrus. Agreement between the expert readers was 77.1% (Table 7.3). The maturity stage readings of the trainees (10) were compared to the modal stage of all expert readers. Agreement of the trainees with the expert modal stage was 78.2% (Table 7.4). Some experts were confusing stage 2 and 4 and others were unsure whether it was still stage 3 or already stage 4 (Table 7.3). Thus, stage 3 was overestimated and stage 4 underestimated. Two expert participants con-fused stage 1 and stage 4 (Table 7.3). Stage 2, 3 and 4 are all mature fish, while stage 1 fish are immature. For the trainees, most confusion occurred between stage 2 and 4 (Table 7.4), though one trainee also confused stage 1 and 4.


Table 7.1

Scomber scombrus frozen stageing WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF SEX READINGS BY MODAL SEX

MODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 TOTAL

1 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 14 15 14 15 15 15 10 15 9 15 15 15 3772 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 260

Total 1-2 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 24 25 24 25 25 25 20 25 19 25 25 25 637

B SEX COMPOSITION

Stage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 TOTAL1 15 15 14 15 15 16 8 15 14 12 15 12 15 15 12 15 14 15 15 14 9 15 9 15 15 15 3592 10 10 11 10 10 9 17 10 11 13 10 13 10 10 12 10 10 10 10 11 11 10 10 10 10 10 278

Total 1-2 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 24 25 24 25 25 25 20 25 19 25 25 25 637

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATIONMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 0% 0% -7% 0% 0% 7% -47% 0% -7% -20% 0% -20% 0% 0% -14% 0% 0% 0% 0% -7% -10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% -5%2 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% -10% 70% 0% 10% 30% 0% 30% 0% 0% 20% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7%

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY SEXMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 100% 100% 93% 100% 100% 100% 53% 100% 93% 80% 100% 80% 100% 100% 86% 100% 100% 100% 100% 93% 90% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 95%2 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 90% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

1-2 100.0% 100.0% 96.0% 100.0% 100.0% 96.0% 72.0% 100.0% 96.0% 88.0% 100.0% 88.0% 100.0% 100.0% 91.7% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 96.0% 95.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 96.9%RANKING 1 1 18 1 1 18 26 1 18 24 1 24 1 1 23 1 1 1 1 18 22 1 1 1 1 1

F BIASMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.07 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.10 0.00 0.00 -1.00 0.00 0.00 0.052 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.00 0.00 0.00 -0.00

Weighted mean

The number of sex stagings by modal sex and the sex stage compositions by sex and reader are shown for all stage readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined.


Table 7.2

Scomber scombrus frozen stageing WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY MODAL MATURITY STAGE


1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -4 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 24 24 25 24 25 25 25 20 25 19 25 25 25 6365 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 24 24 25 24 25 25 25 20 25 19 25 25 25 636

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION

Stage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 TOTAL1 - - - - - - - - - 2 - - - - - - - - - 3 3 - - - - - 82 - 13 10 11 1 - - - - - - 10 - - 18 4 - - - - 6 - 7 - - - 803 8 - - - - 1 8 2 8 7 - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - 6 6 6 534 17 12 15 14 24 24 17 23 17 16 25 15 25 24 5 21 24 25 25 22 11 25 12 19 19 19 4955 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 24 24 25 24 25 25 25 20 25 19 25 25 25 636

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -4 -32% -52% -40% -44% -4% -4% -32% -8% -32% -36% 0% -40% 0% 0% -79% -16% 0% 0% 0% -12% -45% 0% -37% -24% -24% -24% -22%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -4 68% 48% 60% 56% 96% 96% 68% 92% 68% 64% 100% 60% 100% 100% 21% 84% 100% 100% 100% 88% 55% 100% 63% 76% 76% 76% 78%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 68.0% 48.0% 60.0% 56.0% 96.0% 96.0% 68.0% 92.0% 68.0% 64.0% 100.0% 60.0% 100.0% 100.0% 20.8% 84.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 88.0% 55.0% 100.0% 63.2% 76.0% 76.0% 76.0% 77.8%RANKING 16 25 21 23 8 8 16 10 16 19 1 21 1 1 26 12 1 1 1 11 24 1 20 13 13 13


1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -4 -0.32 -1.04 -0.80 -0.88 -0.08 -0.04 -0.32 -0.08 -0.32 -0.52 0.00 -0.80 0.00 0.00 -1.54 -0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.36 -1.05 0.00 -0.74 -4.00 -0.24 -0.24 -0.37 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean



Table 7.3


MODAL Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expertstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 14 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 TOTAL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 164 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 23 24 24 24 18 24 24 3775 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 24 25 25 25 19 25 25 393

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert

Stage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 14 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 TOTAL1 - - - - - - - 2 - - - - 3 - - - 52 - 13 11 1 - - - - 10 - - - - 7 - - 423 8 - - - 8 2 8 7 - - - - - - 6 6 454 17 12 14 24 17 23 17 16 15 24 25 25 22 12 19 19 3015 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 24 25 25 25 19 25 25 393

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODAL Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expertstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 14 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 700% 700% 100% 700% 600% 500% 500% 181%4 -29% -50% -42% 0% -29% -4% -29% -33% -38% 4% 4% 4% -8% -33% -21% -21% -20%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expertstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 14 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 44%4 71% 50% 58% 100% 71% 96% 71% 67% 63% 100% 100% 100% 88% 61% 79% 79% 79%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 72.0% 48.0% 56.0% 96.0% 72.0% 96.0% 72.0% 68.0% 60.0% 95.8% 96.0% 96.0% 84.0% 57.9% 80.0% 80.0% 77.1%RANKING 9 16 15 1 9 1 9 12 13 5 1 1 6 14 7 7

F BIASMODAL Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expertstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 14 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 23 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 0.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.064 -0.29 -1.00 -0.83 0.00 -0.29 -0.04 -0.29 -0.50 -0.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.38 -0.78 -0.21 -0.21 -0.34 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean

The number of maturity stagings by modal maturity stage and the maturity stage compositions by stage and reader are shown for all expert readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all expert readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all expert readers combined.


Table 7.4


EXPERT Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Traineestage Reader 3 Reader 6 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 24 TOTAL

1 - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - -3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 104 24 24 24 24 23 24 23 19 24 24 2335 - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 25 25 25 25 24 25 24 20 25 25 243

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee

Stage Reader 3 Reader 6 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 24 TOTAL1 - - - - - - - 3 - - 32 10 - - - 18 4 - 6 - - 383 - 1 - - 1 - - - - 6 84 15 24 25 25 5 21 24 11 25 19 1945 - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 25 25 25 25 24 25 24 20 25 25 243

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEEXPERT Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee

stage Reader 3 Reader 6 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 24 ALL1 - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - -3 0% 0% 500% -20%4 -38% 0% 4% 4% -78% -13% 4% -42% 4% -21% -17%5 - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEEXPERT Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee

stage Reader 3 Reader 6 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 24 ALL1 - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - -3 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 10%4 63% 96% 100% 100% 22% 88% 100% 58% 100% 79% 81%5 - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 60.0% 92.0% 96.0% 96.0% 20.8% 84.0% 95.8% 55.0% 96.0% 80.0% 78.2%RANKING 8 5 1 1 10 6 4 9 1 7

F BIASEXPERT Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee

stage Reader 3 Reader 6 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 24 ALL1 - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - -3 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00 -3.00 0.104 -0.75 -0.04 0.00 0.00 -1.52 -0.25 0.00 -1.00 0.00 -4.00 -0.36 5 - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean

The number of maturity stagings by expert modal maturity stage and the maturity stage compositions by stage and reader are shown for all trainee readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all trainee readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all trainee readers combined.


Trachurus trachurus

Fresh fish staging

25 fresh Trachurus trachurus were staged in this round. Since these were fresh fish it was not possible to have the histological validation available during the workshop. IPMA will prepare the histological slides after the workshop and a discussion compar-ing with the validated histological stage will be carried out by correspondence.

Overall agreement in sex of the fish was 98% (Table 7.5). The fish with low agreement were discussed in plenary from pictures taken during the staging round. Everyone agreed on the sex.

Though everyone felt the staging of the fresh fish was easier, overall agreement in ma-turity staging was only 60.5% (Table 7.6). Of all participants, 17 were experts in ma-turity staging of Trachurus trachurus. Agreement between the expert readers was only 56.0% (Table 7.7). The maturity stage readings of the trainees (11) were compared to the modal stage of all expert readers. Agreement of the trainees with the expert modal stage was 65.5% (Table 7.8). There was disagreement between the expert readers whether fish were in stage 2 or stage 3 (Table 7.7). The histological validation is neces-sary to get the final answer to which maturity stage the fish are in. Between the trainees, there was also disagreement whether fish were in stage 2 or 3 (Table 7.8), though some trainees also confused stage 3 and 4. There was no confusion in any stages between immature and mature fish.


Table 7.5

Trachurus trachurus fresh stageing WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF SEX READINGS BY MODAL SEX

MODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 TOTAL

1 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 4752 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 150

Total 1-2 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 625

B SEX COMPOSITION

Stage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 TOTAL1 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 18 19 19 19 19 4742 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 6 6 6 6 151

Total 1-2 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 625

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATIONMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 ALL

1 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% -5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%2 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1%

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY SEXMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 ALL

1 89% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 95% 95% 95% 100% 95% 99%2 67% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 83% 83% 100% 83% 97%

1-2 84.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 96.0% 92.0% 92.0% 100.0% 92.0% 98.2%RANKING 25 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 21 22 22 1 22

F BIASMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 ALL

1 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 -1.00 0.05 0.012 -0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.17 -0.17 -2.00 -0.17 -0.03

Weighted mean

The number of sex stagings by modal sex and the sex stage compositions by sex and reader are shown for all stage readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined.


Table 7.6

Trachurus trachurus fresh stageing WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY MODAL MATURITY STAGE

MODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 TOTAL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 6254 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 625


Stage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 TOTAL1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - 25 7 25 3 5 - 20 2 8 25 25 - 15 1 - - 25 16 7 - - - - - 2093 25 - 8 - 22 19 25 5 23 17 - - 20 10 24 25 25 - 9 16 13 25 21 21 25 3784 - - 10 - - 1 - - - - - - 5 - - - - - - 2 12 - 4 4 - 385 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 625

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 0% -68% -12% -24% 0% -80% -8% -32% -20% -60% -4% 0% 0% -64% -36% -48% 0% -16% -16% 0% -40%4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 100% 0% 32% 0% 88% 76% 100% 20% 92% 68% 0% 0% 80% 40% 96% 100% 100% 0% 36% 64% 52% 100% 84% 84% 100% 60%4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 100.0% 0.0% 32.0% 0.0% 88.0% 76.0% 100.0% 20.0% 92.0% 68.0% 0.0% 0.0% 80.0% 40.0% 96.0% 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 36.0% 64.0% 52.0% 100.0% 84.0% 84.0% 100.0% 60.5%RANKING 1 21 19 21 9 13 1 20 8 14 21 21 12 17 7 1 1 21 18 15 16 1 10 10 1

F BIASMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 Reader 27 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 0.00 -1.00 0.12 -1.00 -0.12 -0.16 0.00 -0.80 -0.08 -0.32 -1.00 -1.00 0.20 -0.60 -0.04 0.00 0.00 -1.00 -0.64 -0.20 0.48 0.00 0.16 -3.00 0.00 -0.27 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean

The number of maturity stagings by modal maturity stage and the maturity stage compositions by stage and reader are shown for all stage readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. .


Table 7.7


MODAL Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expertstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 25 Reader 26 TOTAL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 853 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 3404 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 425

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert

Stage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 25 Reader 26 TOTAL1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - 25 7 25 3 - 20 2 8 25 - 15 - 25 16 - - 1713 25 - 8 - 22 25 5 23 17 - 20 10 25 - 9 21 21 2314 - - 10 - - - - - - - 5 - - - - 4 4 235 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 425

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODAL Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expertstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 400% 40% 400% -40% 300% -60% 60% 400% 200% 400% 220% 101%3 25% -60% 10% 25% -75% 15% -15% 0% -50% 25% -55% 5% 5% -32%4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expertstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 0% 100% 60% 100% 60% 0% 100% 20% 80% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 60% 0% 0% 52%3 100% 0% 35% 0% 100% 100% 25% 95% 80% 0% 80% 50% 100% 0% 35% 85% 85% 57%4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 80.0% 20.0% 40.0% 20.0% 92.0% 80.0% 40.0% 80.0% 80.0% 20.0% 64.0% 60.0% 80.0% 20.0% 40.0% 68.0% 68.0% 56.0%RANKING 2 14 11 14 1 2 11 2 2 14 9 10 2 14 11 7 7

F BIASMODAL Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expertstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 1.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.40 1.00 0.00 0.80 0.20 0.00 1.20 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.40 1.20 -2.00 0.533 0.00 -1.00 0.25 -1.00 0.00 0.00 -0.75 -0.05 -0.20 -1.00 0.20 -0.50 0.00 -1.00 -0.65 0.15 -3.00 -0.32 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean

The number of maturity stagings by modal maturity stage and the maturity stage compositions by stage and reader are shown for all expert readers. The percentag agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all expert readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all expert readers combined.


Table 7.8


EXPERT Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Traineestage Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 27 TOTAL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - -2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 553 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 2204 - - - - - - - - - - - -5 - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 275

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee

Stage Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 27 TOTAL1 - - - - - - - - - - - -2 5 - 25 - 1 - 16 7 - - - 543 19 25 - 20 24 25 9 16 13 25 25 2014 1 - - 5 - - - 2 12 - - 205 - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 275

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEEXPERT Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee

stage Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 27 ALL1 - - - - - - - - - - - -2 0% 400% -80% 220% 40% -2%3 -5% 25% 0% 20% 25% -55% -20% -35% 25% 25% -9%4 - - - - - - - - - - - -5 - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEEXPERT Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee

stage Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 27 ALL1 - - - - - - - - - - - -2 80% 0% 100% 0% 20% 0% 60% 40% 0% 0% 0% 27%3 95% 100% 0% 80% 100% 100% 35% 65% 50% 100% 100% 75%4 - - - - - - - - - - - -5 - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 92.0% 80.0% 20.0% 64.0% 84.0% 80.0% 40.0% 60.0% 40.0% 80.0% 80.0% 65.5%RANKING 1 3 11 7 2 3 9 8 9 3 3

F BIASEXPERT Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee

stage Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 27 ALL1 - - - - - - - - - - - -2 0.40 1.00 0.00 1.20 0.80 1.00 0.40 0.60 1.40 1.00 1.00 0.803 -0.05 0.00 -1.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 -0.65 -0.15 0.50 0.00 0.00 -0.10 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -5 - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean



Frozen fish staging

32 frozen Trachurus trachurus were staged in this round. Since these were frozen fish, no validation with histology was available.

Overall agreement in sex of the fish was 95% (Table 7.9). During the plenary discussion, it became clear that participants who miss-classified the sex were looking at the wrong organ.

For the frozen Trachurus trachurus, three different maturity stages (2, 3 and 4) were available. Overall agreement in maturity staging was 64.9% (Table 7.10). Of all partici-pants in this staging round, 16 were experts in maturity staging of Trachurus trachurus. Agreement between the expert readers was only 61.7% (Table 7.11). The maturity stage readings of the trainees (10 in this round) were compared to the modal stage of all expert readers. Agreement of the trainees with the expert modal stage was 66.9% (Ta-ble 7.12). Expert readers were either confusing stage 2 and 3 or stage 3 and 4 (Table 7.11). Two expert participants considered almost all fish to be in maturity stage 2, while the modal stage was stage 3 (Table 7.11). For the trainees, most confusion occurred between stages 2 and 3 (Table 7.12). One trainee classified two fish as immature, stage 1, while the modal stage did not contain stage 1.


Table 7.9

Trachurus trachurus frozen stageing WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF SEX READINGS BY MODAL SEX


1 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 9 8 10 9 9 9 10 10 10 6 10 10 10 2492 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 21 21 22 11 22 22 22 559

Total 1-2 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 31 31 30 32 31 31 31 31 31 32 17 32 32 32 808

B SEX COMPOSITION

Stage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 TOTAL1 10 13 9 11 10 10 8 10 8 10 10 12 11 7 7 11 7 11 11 14 11 10 6 9 10 10 2562 22 19 23 21 22 22 24 22 24 22 22 20 20 24 23 21 24 20 20 17 20 22 11 23 22 22 552

Total 1-2 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 31 31 30 32 31 31 31 31 31 32 17 32 32 32 808

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATIONMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 0% 30% -10% 10% 0% 0% -20% 0% -20% 0% 0% 20% 22% -22% -13% 10% -22% 22% 22% 40% 10% 0% 0% -10% 0% 0% 3%2 0% -14% 5% -5% 0% 0% 9% 0% 9% 0% 0% -9% -9% 9% 5% -5% 9% -9% -9% -19% -5% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% -1%

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY SEXMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 100% 100% 90% 100% 100% 90% 80% 100% 80% 100% 90% 90% 100% 78% 88% 100% 78% 100% 100% 100% 90% 100% 100% 90% 100% 100% 94%2 100% 86% 100% 95% 100% 95% 100% 100% 100% 100% 95% 86% 91% 100% 100% 95% 100% 91% 91% 81% 90% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 96%

1-2 100.0% 90.6% 96.9% 96.9% 100.0% 93.8% 93.8% 100.0% 93.8% 100.0% 93.8% 87.5% 93.5% 93.5% 96.7% 96.9% 93.5% 93.5% 93.5% 87.1% 90.3% 100.0% 100.0% 96.9% 100.0% 100.0% 95.4%RANKING 1 23 9 9 1 14 14 1 14 1 14 25 18 18 13 9 18 18 18 26 24 1 1 9 1 1


1 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.22 0.13 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 -1.00 0.00 0.00 0.062 0.00 -0.14 0.00 -0.05 0.00 -0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.05 -0.14 -0.09 0.00 0.00 -0.05 0.00 -0.09 -0.09 -0.19 -0.10 0.00 0.00 -2.00 0.00 0.00 -0.04

Weighted mean

The number of sex stagings by modal sex and the sex stage compositions by sex and reader are shown for all stage readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined


Table 7.10

Trachurus trachurus frozen stageing WKMSMAC2, September 2015A NUMBER OF MAT STAGE READINGS BY MODAL MATURITY STAGE


1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 13 22 22 22 5634 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 9 8 10 9 9 9 9 9 10 4 10 10 10 2455 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 31 31 30 32 31 31 31 31 31 32 17 32 32 32 808


Stage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 TOTAL1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 - - - - - 22 3 28 7 31 6 4 1 13 1 - 3 26 - - - 1 - - - 22 17 17 1 - 1 1 1833 24 - 12 1 19 19 25 12 20 22 17 1 15 17 21 18 18 15 15 - 9 9 7 26 25 25 3924 5 4 13 - 7 9 6 7 11 10 12 5 16 14 9 13 13 16 16 9 3 6 9 6 6 6 2315 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 31 31 30 32 31 31 31 31 31 32 17 32 32 32 808

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 9% -45% -95% -14% -14% 14% -45% -9% 0% -23% -95% -32% -23% -5% -18% -18% -32% -32% -59% -59% -46% 18% 14% 14% -30%4 -50% -60% 30% -30% -10% -40% -30% 10% 0% 20% -50% 78% 56% 13% 30% 44% 78% 78% 0% -67% -40% 125% -40% -40% -40% -6%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODALstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 6 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 11 Reader 12 Reader 13 Reader 14 Reader 15 Reader 16 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 95% 0% 55% 5% 77% 77% 95% 41% 86% 95% 68% 5% 68% 73% 95% 77% 82% 68% 68% 0% 36% 41% 54% 100% 95% 95% 64%4 50% 30% 60% 0% 60% 80% 60% 70% 90% 90% 80% 40% 100% 89% 100% 90% 100% 100% 100% 89% 33% 10% 75% 60% 60% 60% 67%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 81.3% 9.4% 56.3% 3.1% 71.9% 78.1% 84.4% 50.0% 87.5% 93.8% 71.9% 15.6% 77.4% 77.4% 96.7% 81.3% 87.1% 77.4% 77.4% 25.8% 35.5% 31.3% 58.8% 87.5% 84.4% 84.4% 64.9%RANKING 9 25 19 26 16 11 6 20 3 2 16 24 12 12 1 9 5 12 12 23 21 22 18 3 6 6


1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -3 -0.05 -0.91 0.18 -0.95 -0.14 -0.14 -0.05 -0.59 0.05 0.05 0.05 -0.86 0.32 0.27 0.05 0.14 0.18 0.32 0.32 -0.91 -0.64 -0.14 0.46 -3.00 -0.05 -0.05 -0.13 4 -0.70 -1.40 -0.80 -2.00 -0.60 -0.20 -0.40 -0.30 -0.10 -0.10 -0.20 -1.20 0.00 -0.11 0.00 -0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.22 -1.44 -1.80 -0.50 -4.00 -0.40 -0.40 -0.53 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean

The number of maturity stagings by modal maturity stage and the maturity stage compositions by stage and reader are shown for all stage readers. The percentage agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. The percentage over- and underestimation is given by stage reader and all stage readers combined. .


Table 7.11


MODAL Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expertstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 14 Reader 16 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 25 Reader 26 TOTAL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 163 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 3684 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 7 7 8 8 1255 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 31 32 31 31 32 32 509

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert

Stage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 14 Reader 16 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 25 Reader 26 TOTAL1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 3 28 7 31 6 1 13 1 - 26 - 1 - 22 1 1 1413 24 - 12 1 19 25 12 20 22 1 17 18 15 - 25 25 2364 5 4 13 - 7 6 7 11 10 5 14 13 16 9 6 6 1325 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 31 32 31 31 32 32 509

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEMODAL Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expertstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 14 Reader 16 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 200% 2700% 600% 3000% 500% 0% 1200% 0% 2500% 0% 2100% 0% 0% 781%3 4% -48% -96% -17% 9% -48% -13% -4% -96% -26% -22% -35% 9% 9% -36%4 -38% -50% 63% -13% -25% -13% 38% 25% -38% 100% 63% 129% 29% -25% -25% 6%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEMODAL Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expertstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 14 Reader 16 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 100% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 100% 50%3 100% 0% 48% 4% 74% 96% 48% 83% 87% 4% 74% 70% 61% 0% 100% 100% 59%4 63% 38% 50% 0% 75% 75% 88% 100% 88% 38% 100% 88% 100% 86% 75% 75% 70%5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 90.6% 12.5% 46.9% 6.3% 71.9% 87.5% 59.4% 84.4% 84.4% 15.6% 77.4% 71.9% 67.7% 22.6% 93.8% 93.8% 61.7%RANKING 3 15 12 16 8 4 11 5 5 14 7 8 10 13 1 1

F BIASMODAL Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expert Expertstage Reader 1 Reader 2 Reader 3 Reader 4 Reader 5 Reader 7 Reader 8 Reader 9 Reader 10 Reader 12 Reader 14 Reader 16 Reader 19 Reader 20 Reader 25 Reader 26 ALL

1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -2 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.563 0.00 -0.91 0.26 -0.96 -0.17 -0.04 -0.52 0.09 0.13 -0.78 0.26 0.22 0.39 -0.74 0.00 0.00 -0.17 4 -0.63 -1.25 -1.00 -2.00 -0.38 -0.25 -0.13 0.00 -0.13 -1.25 0.00 -0.13 0.00 -0.29 -0.25 -0.25 -0.50 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean

The number of maturity stagings by modal maturity stage and the maturity stage compositions by stage and reader are shown for all expert readers. The percentag agreement and the bias are presented also. A weighted mean percent agreement is given by stage reader and all expert readers combined. The percentage over- an underestimation is given by stage reader and all expert readers combined.


Table 7.12


EXPERT Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Traineestage Reader 6 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 TOTAL

1 - - - - - - - - - - -2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 103 23 23 23 22 23 23 23 23 12 23 2184 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 8 4 8 715 - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 32 32 31 30 31 31 31 32 17 32 299

B MAT STAGE COMPOSITION Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee

Stage Reader 6 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 TOTAL1 - - - - - - 2 - - - 22 4 3 - - - - 17 17 1 - 423 19 17 15 21 18 15 9 9 7 26 1564 9 12 16 9 13 16 3 6 9 6 995 - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 1-6 32 32 31 30 31 31 31 32 17 32 299

C PERCENTAGE OVER- / UNDERESTIMATION BY STAGEEXPERT Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee

stage Reader 6 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 ALL1 - - - - - - - - - - -2 300% 200% 1600% 1600% 0% 320%3 -17% -26% -35% -5% -22% -35% -61% -61% -42% 13% -28%4 13% 50% 129% 29% 86% 129% -57% -25% 125% -25% 39%5 - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - -

D PERCENTAGE AGREEMENT BY MAT STAGEEXPERT Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee

stage Reader 6 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 ALL1 - - - - - - - - - - -2 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 10%3 74% 65% 61% 91% 78% 61% 35% 39% 58% 100% 67%4 88% 88% 100% 100% 100% 100% 29% 13% 75% 75% 76%5 - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - -

1-6 75.0% 68.8% 67.7% 90.0% 80.6% 67.7% 35.5% 31.3% 58.8% 90.6% 66.9%RANKING 4 5 6 2 3 6 9 10 8 1

F BIASEXPERT Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee Trainee

stage Reader 6 Reader 11 Reader 13 Reader 15 Reader 17 Reader 18 Reader 21 Reader 22 Reader 23 Reader 24 ALL1 - - - - - - - - - - -2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 -2.00 1.203 -0.09 0.09 0.39 0.09 0.22 0.39 -0.57 -0.26 0.42 -3.00 0.054 -0.13 -0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.57 -1.75 -0.50 -4.00 -0.44 5 - - - - - - - - - - -6 - - - - - - - - - - -

Weighted mean



8 Validation of macroscopic maturity with histological analysis (ToR e)

The goal is to validate the macroscopic staging, but keeping in mind that the histolog-ical features are not always visible macroscopically.

Since WebGr stopped working during the staging exercise with the validated pictures it was not possible to discuss final results. Instead of Trachurus trachurus, two fish with high modal agreement and two fish with low modal agreement were discussed in ple-nary. First the macroscopic pictures were shown and the maturity stage discussed. Af-ter that the histological pictures were shown to validate the macroscopic determined stage.

Of the fish with high agreement, the maturity stage was confirmed with the histology. Of the fish with low agreement, histology showed a different stage compared to the modal agreed stage. Macroscopically, it is difficult to distinguish between stage 2 and 4. The last fish discussed also showed that in young fish it is difficult to distinguish in histology between stage 1 and 4. A report of the discussion can be found in Annex 8.

Criteria for histological validation of macroscopic maturity staging

The histological criteria are not clear on how to distinguish between immature (stage 1) and regenerating (stage 4) fish. Tables 8.1 and 8.2 present suggested criteria for the distinction between these stages. However, no agreement could be reached during the meeting (Annex 8). WKMSMAC2 therefor recommends organising a general histology workshop for establishing histology criteria for the distinction of the maturity stages in all fish species.


Table 8.1. Suggested criteria for distinguishing immature and regenerating females.

Table 8.2. Suggested criteria for distinguishing immature and regenerating males.

Immature females Late regenerating femalesPossible cortical alveoli presence

Dense cells distribution No so dense cells distributionPerinuclear or before stage Perinuclear or before stage.

Dense cells distribution Ovarian wall thin Ovarian wall no so thinWithout old atresia Old atresia presenceWithout melanomacrophage centers in stroma

Melanomacrophage centers in stroma

Without or with few blood vessels More blood vessels

Immature males Late regenerating malesOnly spermatogonia visible in external area

Only spermatogonia visible but in a big area

No lumen visible Reduced lumen visible in some lobulesFew or no melanomacrophage centers in distal position

Possible melanomacrophage centers in distal position.Possible reabsorbing spermatocists


9 Generic ToRs adopted for maturity staging workshops

Calibration rounds

The procedure followed during WKMSMAC2 was evaluated by the group and the fol-lowing comments were made for future workshops:

a) Although discussions about maturity stages consume a lot of time during the workshop, they are very important so enough time should be allowed for these discussions.

b) If the first picture calibration exercise is carried out before the meeting, this will create extra time for discussion of results during the workshop. However, for a calibration exercise before the workshop, participants would need to put in time and effort beforehand and pictures should be uploaded well before the calibration exercise.

c) Despite the fact that fresh fish are usually all in the same maturity stage, it is important to have fresh fish to stage, because participants are used to staging fresh fish.

d) Maturity staging of commercial catches for mackerel and horse mackerel is mostly on frozen fish. Therefore, it is important also to have frozen specimens available at the workshop.

e) Every participant should have the same scale and same interpretation of the scale before the start of the calibration exercises.

f) The fish used for the calibration rounds should cover at least stages 1–4 for both sexes. 50 per species (with five species) divided over the sexes is needed for an accurate statistical analyses per calibration exercise.

g) It is recommended, that fresh and frozen exercises are carried out separately.

Pictures for the staging validation

Staging from pictures is difficult, especially because it is not possible to touch the gonad which is often done while staging to assess the firmness of the gonad. The firm-ness of the gonad is important to distinguish between stage 2 and 3.

When staging from pictures, it is necessary to standardise the way the pictures are taken. There have to be stringent procedures even down to equipment and/or settings used.

General remarks for staging from pictures: • Pictures have to be taken of fish when they are fresh. Fresh fish allow

for the best pictures. • However, since gonads of frozen fish have a different appearance from

fresh fish, pictures of frozen fish should also be added to the calibration exercises. But it should be stated clearly on the picture that it is a frozen fish.

• Add at least date of capture, area, unique fish number, whether the fish is fresh or frozen, and species in the picture. The data should be put in a standard format table on the picture (Table 9.1). Ensure that maturity stage is not visible on the picture or in the filename.

• The samples should be clean and tidy without too much blood or dam-aged intestines.


• Take at least two pictures: 1) Overview of the fish on a measuring board, with the gonads vis-

ible in the fish. The ability to look at the whole fish with the gonad intact is vital to get the ratio of gonad to body length.

2) Picture of gonads without the fish, placed on a measuring board, allowing to view the gonad in more detail, blood vessels etc. One of the gonad lobes should be transversally cut, so that you are able to see inside the gonad.

• In addition, a table including biological and sampling information should be available.

• An optimal resolution would be 3000 x 2000 pixels. That means files of 1 megabyte in size that produce images which are 2 times the size of the computer screen, enough to see little details in the structures. Print res-olution would be 72 dpi (dots per inch)

• Pictures should be in focus. When taking photographs, it is recommended to use the manual focus when possible. The autofocus can be used but take special care that the object in focus is the surface of the gonad and not the surface of the measuring board.

• When saving a picture in JPG format, save the file with at least high quality level. Each time the image is saved it is compressed with a loss of information. In Photoshop a level of 9 in quality saving level is enough to prevent this.

• The fish/gonad should cover the whole picture, don’t leave empty space on the picture. In some pictures the fish or gonad covered only half of the picture in length; this reduces the quality and ability to clearly see the gonads.

Table 9.1. Proposed standard format table for entering information of the fish in the picture.

Capture date and area Species Unique fish number Fresh/frozen

Workshop frequency

WKMSMAC2 recommends that:

a) A workshop should be organised once every 3 years. b) The group should not be expanded with more species than 5 (as this will

increase the number of participants). c) The participating national institutes should be strongly encouraged to invest

in the collection of samples, prepairing pictures as well as preparing histological slides. Successful maturity staging workshops cannot be carried out without these pictures.


10 Evaluation of the use of WebGr

WebGr is an excellent tool for calibration of maturity stagings. The problem at the mo-ment is that the server where it is based is too slow to handle the number of participants using the tool and the number of pictures stored.

The system was slow in uploading pictures before and during the workshop. During the first picture staging round WebGr was very slow, too slow to work with more than 10 participants at the same time. However, during the second picture round WebGr stopped working completely and the exercise could not be finished or results extracted from WebGr.

WebGr has been developed for ageing, but for maturity staging workshops other re-quirements are needed:

• The possibility to enter both sex and maturity. At the moment, sex needs to be entered in the comment field, but it was not possible to get this data out of WebGr for analyses during the workshop.

• Multiple pictures are used per individual fish (e.g. gonad in the fish and gonad outside the fish). It should be possible to allow for looking at multiple pictures of one fish at the same time.

• It should be possible to enter the maturity stage per individual fish and not by picture (see also the previous point on multiple pictures).

• During the calibration exercise, the system often froze and threw people out of WebGr. It is strongly recommended that the possibility of resuming is developed.

• In the picture tab, create a possibility to distinguish between finalised and not annoted pictures.

• It should be possible to see the pictures and annotations in the same tab. • A possibility should be created to scroll through only the non-finalised

pictures. • WKMSMAC2 recommends creating a stand-alone version of WebGr, that

allows participants to do their calibration exercise on their own computer and work detached from the server. When finishing the exercise, participants should have an easy way of uploading their results to the WebGr server.

• Currently, the statistics are directed at the ageing calibrations. WGBIOP should consider the statistics necessary for maturity staging calibrations. WebGr should be modified to have the possibility to choose between ageing and maturity staging statistics.


11 References

Brown-Peterson NJ, Wyanski DM, Saborido-Rey F, Macewicz BJ and Lowerre-Barbieri S, 2011. A standardized terminology for describing reproductive development in fishes. Marine and Coastal Fisheries 3 (1), 52–70.

ICES. 2008a. Report of the Workshop on Sexual Maturity Staging of Mackerel and Horse Macke-rel (WKMSMAC), 26–29 November 2007, Lisbon, Portugal. ICES CM 2007/ACFM:26. 52 pp

ICES, 2008b. Report of the Workshop on Small Pelagics (Sardina pilchardus, Engraulis encrasicolus) maturity stages (WKSPMAT), 10–14 November 2008, Mazara del Vallo, Italy. ICES CM 2008/ACOM:40. 82 pp.

ICES 2012. Report of the workshop for maturity staging chairs (WKMATCH). ICES CM 2012\ACOM:58, 57 pp.

Macer, C. T., 1974. The reproductive biology of the horse mackerel Trachurus trachurus (L.) in the North Sea and English Channel. J. Fish Biol., 6: 415–438.

MEDITS, 2013. International bottom trawl survey in the Mediterranean Instruction manual. MEDITS-Handbook. Version n. 7, 2013, MEDITS Working Group: 120 pp.

Walsh, M., Hopkins, P., Witthames, P. R., Greer Walker, M., and Watson, J. 1990. Estimation of total potential fecundity and atresia in the Western mackerel stock, 1989. ICES CM 1990/H:31. 8 pp.

https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=es&user=Zo7BDDcAAAAJ&citation_for_view=Zo7BDDcAAAAJ:zYLM7Y9cAGgC


Annex 1: List of participants

NAME ADDRESS PHONE/FAX EMAIL

Ana Antolínez Boj IEO Instituto Español de Oceanografía Avenada de Brasil 31 E-28020 Madrid Spain

[email protected]

Andre Dijkman-Dulkes IMARES, Haringkade 1, 1976 CP IJmuiden, The Netherlands

+31-622700373 [email protected]

Ângela Canha IMAR – Institute of Marine Research University of the Azores Rua Prof. Dr. Frederico Machado, 4 9901-862 HORTA Azores-Portugal

+351 292 200 469 [email protected]

Ana Maria Costa IPMA Portuguese Institute for the Sea and the Atmosphere Avenida de Brasilia 1449-006 Lisbon Portugal

[email protected]

Antonio Solla Covelo IEO Spanish Institute of Oceanography Subida a Radio Faro. Canido Vigo (Spain)

+34 986 492111 [email protected]

Carlota Pérez AZTI Pasaia Herrera Kaia Portualde z/g 20110 Pasaia (Gipuzkoa) Spain

[email protected]

Carmo Silva IPMA Portuguese Institute for the Sea and the Atmosphere Avenida de Brasilia 1449-006 Lisbon Portugal

[email protected]

Cindy van Damme (chair)

IMARES, Haringkade 1, 1976 CP IJmuiden, The Netherlands

+31 (0)317 487078 [email protected]

Cláudia Oliveira IMAR – Institute of Marine Research University of the Azores Rua Prof. Dr. Frederico Machado, 4 9901-862 HORTA Azores-Portugal




Cristina Nunes IPMA Portuguese Institute for the Sea and the Atmosphere Avenida de Brasilia 1449-006 Lisbon Portugal

+351 213027000 [email protected]

Cristina Porcu DISVA –Department of Life Sciences and Environment , University of Cagliari Via T. Fiorelli, 1 090126 Cagliari, Italy


Delfina Morais IPMA Portuguese Institute for the Sea and the Atmosphere Avenida de Brasilia 1449-006 Lisbon Portugal

[email protected]

Diana Feijó IPMA Portuguese Institute for the Sea and the Atmosphere Avenida de Brasilia 1449-006 Lisbon Portugal

[email protected]

Dolores Garabana Barro IEO Spanish Institute of Oceanography Paseo alcalde Francisco Vázquez, 10 A Coruña (Spain)


Georgina Correia IPMA Portuguese Institute for the Sea and the Atmosphere Avenida de Brasilia 1449-006 Lisbon Portugal

[email protected]

Isabel Loureiro Caride IEO Instituto Español de Oceanografía Avenada de Brasil 31 E-28020 Madrid Spain

[email protected]

Jens Ulleweit (by correspondence)

TI-SF Thünen Institute, Institute of Sea Fisheries Palmaille 9 22767 Hamburg Germany


Luisa Freitas IPMA Portuguese Institute for the Sea and the Atmosphere Avenida de Brasilia 1449-006 Lisbon Portugal

[email protected]

http://rct.ices.dk/ICESRCT/main.aspx?etc=2&extraqs=%3f_gridType%3d2%26etc%3d2%26id%3d%257bEAA8F97B-A1A1-E411-80BF-00155D2CC21A%257d%26rskey%3d222362495&pagemode=iframe&pagetype=entityrecord&rskey=222362495



Lynette Ritchie MSS Marine Scotland Science Marine Laboratory 375 Victoria Road Aberdeen AB11 9DB United Kingdom


Maria João Ferreira IPMA Portuguese Institute for the Sea and the Atmosphere Avenida de Brasilia 1449-006 Lisbon Portugal

[email protected]

Maria Korta AZTI Pasaia Herrera Kaia Portualde z/g 20110 Pasaia (Gipuzkoa) Spain

[email protected]

Merete Fonn IMR Institute of Marine Research Postboks 1870 Nordnes 5817 Bergen Norway


Merete Kvalsund IMR Institute of Marine Research Postboks 1870 Nordnes 5817 Bergen Norway

[email protected]

Ørjan Sørensen IMR Institute of Marine Research Postboks 1870 Nordnes 5817 Bergen Norway

[email protected]

Pedro da Conceição IPMA Portuguese Institute for the Sea and the Atmosphere Avenida de Brasilia 1449-006 Lisbon Portugal

[email protected]

Pedro Torres Instituto Español de Oceanografía Centro Oceanografico de Málaga Puerto Pesquero s/n 29640 Fuengirola (Málaga) Spain

Ph.+34 952197124 Fax. +34 952463808

[email protected]

http://rct.ices.dk/ICESRCT/main.aspx?etc=2&extraqs=%3f_gridType%3d2%26etc%3d2%26id%3d%257b5AA7F97B-A1A1-E411-80BF-00155D2CC21A%257d%26rskey%3d168321214&pagemode=iframe&pagetype=entityrecord&rskey=168321214

mailto:[email protected]








Pierluigi Carbonara (chair)

COISPA Tecnologia & Ricerca Stazione Sperimentale per lo studio delle Risorse del Mare. Via dei Trulli 18/20 70126 Bari (Torre a Mare) Italy.

Ph.+390805433596 Fax. +390805433586

[email protected]

Sakis Kroupis TI-SF Thünen Institute, Institute of Sea Fisheries Palmaille 9 22767 Hamburg Germany

[email protected]

Timo Meißner TI-SF Thünen Institute, Institute of Sea Fisheries Palmaille 9 22767 Hamburg Germany

[email protected]

Tobias Rapp MI Marine Institute Rinville Oranmore Co. Galway Ireland


Urbano Autón Díaz IEO Spanish Institute of Oceanography Paseo alcalde Francisco Vázquez 10 A Coruña Spain


Walter Zupa COISPA Tecnologia & Ricerca Stazione Sperimentale per lo studio delle Risorse del Mare.

Via dei Trulli 18/20 70126 Bari (Torre a Mare) Italy

Ph.+390805433596

Fax. +390805433586

[email protected]



http://rct.ices.dk/ICESRCT/main.aspx?etc=2&extraqs=%3f_gridType%3d2%26etc%3d2%26id%3d%257bCA1E18B5-A85B-E511-80C4-00155D2C711E%257d%26rskey%3d507200021&pagemode=iframe&pagetype=entityrecord&rskey=507200021



WKMSMAC2 participants: From left to right standing: Georgina, Ørjan, Andre, Merete, Maria João, Walter, Ậngela, Pierluigi, Ana Maria, Cindy, Urbano, Antonio, Tobias, Lynette, Cristina and Delfina. Sitting from left to right: Diana, Timo, Sakis, Carmo, Claudia, Merete, Dolores, Pedro, Cris-tina, Isabel, Maria and Carlota.


Annex 2: Agenda

Monday, 28 September

10:00 General announcements, logistics, local arrangement, etc.

10:30 Presentations

• Reproductive biology of Scomber scombrus Merete Fonn • Reproductive biology of Trachurus trachurus Cristina Nunes • Reproductive biology of Trachurus mediterraneus Cristina Porcu • Presentation: Introduction to male histology Antonio Solla & Dolores Garabana • Presentation on mackerel male histology Antonio Solla & Dolores Garabana • Presentation on horse mackerel male histology Antonio Solla & Dolores

Garabana

14:00 Presentations

• Reproductive biology of Scomber colias Maria Korta • Presentation on AZTI internal calibration of mackerel staging Maria Korta

15:00 Report on the use of the 2007 international agreed scale for mackerel and horse mackerel (ToR a). Per institute.

Presentation

• Agreed international scale for mackerel and horse mackerel from the 2007 workshop Cindy van Damme

16:15 Appointing of responsible persons for checking and updating of the descrip-tions of the stages (including adding picture examples) for the four species (ToR b) (4 volunteers needed)

Appointing of responsible persons for creating the conversion tables from the different scales used to the common scales (ToR f) (4 volunteers needed)

16:30 1st round: Calibrate staging of mackerel and horse mackerel using photo-graphs (ToR d) using WebGr.

Tuesday, 29 September

9:00 1st round: Calibrate staging of mackerel and horse mackerel using photo-graphs (ToR d) using WebGr.

11:00 Present and discuss first round staging results (ToR d & e)

14:00 2nd round: Calibrate staging of mackerel and horse mackerel using fresh and frozen fish (ToR c)

15:30 2nd round: Calibrate staging of mackerel and horse mackerel using fresh and frozen fish (ToR c).

Wednesday, 30 September

9:00 Report on progress:

• Checking and updating of the descriptions of the stages • Conversion tables


9:30 Present and discuss second round staging results (ToR c)

14:00 3rd round: Calibrate staging of mackerel and horse mackerel using photo-graphs (ToR d) using WebGr.

Thursday, 1 October

9:00 3rd round: Calibrate staging of mackerel and horse mackerel using photo-graphs (ToR d) using WebGr.

11:00 Present and discuss first round staging results (ToR d & e)

14:00 Report writing

16:00 Port of honour

Evening: Group dinner.

Friday, 2 October

9:00 Report checking, recommendations etc.

11:00 Finalisation of report

13:00 End of meeting.


Annex 3: Terms of reference for the next meeting

WKMSMAC2 assumes it is the responsibility of WGBIOP to initiate a future workshop on maturity staging of mackerel and horse mackerel. Recommendations for future workshops can be found in Section 9 and Annex 4.


Annex 4: Recommendations

Recommendation Adressed to

1. WKMSMAC2 recommends to immediately update WebGr and its server. During the workshop WebGr stopped functioning, data could not be extracted and it was impossible to work with more than 10 participants at the same time. WebGr is developed specifically for age reading workshop and should be updated with maturity staging specific needs (see Section 10).

WGBIOP

2. WKMSMAC2 recommends to use the updated international maturity scale to report to ICES (Atlantic) and ACFM (Mediterrenean) in Section 4. The scales of the maturity stages reported since 2007 to ICES should be checked. It became apparent that not all institutes report mackerel and horse mackerel maturity stages that follow the 2007 international maturity scale (see also Section 3).

WGWIDE, WGBIOP

3. WKMSMAC2 recommends to organise a workshop to establish agreed international histology criteria to identify the macroscopic maturity stages. Histology criteria for the macroscopic maturity stages are unclear, it is currently not possible to distinguish between immature (stage 1) and regenerating (stage 4) fish (see also Section 8).

WGBIOP

4. WKMSMAC2 recommends to organise a new maturity staging workshop for mackerel and horse mackerel in 3 years to check the use of the international scale and validate maturity staging. When pictures are used for calibration of maturity staging, the first round should be carried out before the workshop. The workshop can then start with the discussion of the results and this will allow for more discussion and validation during the workshop itself.

WGBIOP

5. WKMSMAC2 recommends to continue to use fresh/frozen samples and pictures from fresh/frozen samples for maturity workshops where species are studied which are sampled both fresh and frozen. It should however be clearly stated if fish are sampled fresh or frozen, since the appearance of frozen gonads is different from fresh ones.

WGBIOP


Annex 5: Pictures of the maturity stages

Scomber scombrus Not all pictures are histologically validated!

Females

Stage 1

Stage 2


Stage 3

Stage 4


Stage 5 and 6: No pictures available.

Males

Stage 1: No pictures available.

Stage 2

Stage 3


Stage 4



Scomber colias Not all pictures are histologically validated!

CODE 2007 up-

dated Female Male

1

2

3a

3


3b


4


5 No pictures available No pictures available

6 No pictures available No pictures available


Trachurus trachurus Not all pictures are histologically validated!

Females Males

Stage 1

Stage 2

Stage 3


Stage 4



Trachurus mediterraneus Females

Stage 1

Stage 2

Stage 3a

Stage 3b


Stage 4a

Stage 4b


Males

Stage 1: No pictures available.

Stage 2


Stage 3a

Stage 3b

Stage 4a

Stage 4b



Annex 6: Institute maturity scales

Walsh scale (Walsh et al. 1990)

Walsh Mature/ Immature

State Female Male

1 Immature Immature Gonads small. Ovaries wine red and clear, torpedo shaped.

Gonads small. Males pale, flattened and transparent.

2 Mature Maturing

Gonads occupying 1/4 to 3/4 body cavity. Opaque eggs visible in ovaries giving pale pink to yellowish colouration, largest

Gonads occupying 1/4 to 3/4 body cavity. Testes off-white, milt not running.

3 Mature Maturing

Gonads occupying 3/4 to almost filing body cavity. Ovaries yellow to orange. Largest eggs may have oil globules.

Gonads occupying 3/4 to almost filing body cavity. Testes creamy white.

4 Mature Spawning

Ovaries characterized by externally visible hyaline eggs no matter how few or how early the stage of hydration. Ovary size variable f f ll t 1/4

Testes filling body cavity, milt freely running.

5 Mature Spawning

Gonads occupying 3/4 to < 1/4 body cavity. Ovaries slacker than in stage 3 and often bloodshot.

Gonads occupying 3/4 to < 1/4 body cavity. Testes with free running milt and shrivelled at anus end.

6 Mature Spent/ Recovery

Gonads occupying 1/4 or less of body cavity. Ovaries reddish and often murky in appearance, sometimes with a scattering or patch of opaque eggs.

Gonads occupying 1/4 or less of body cavity. Testes opaque with brownish tint and no trace of milt.


IMR maturity scale

Maturity stages used for capelin, herring, sprat, mackerel and horse mackerel

IMR Female Male

1 Immature a) Juvenile phase. Gonads thread-like, thin and completely transparent and colorless. Difficult to determine sex

Immature a) Juvenile phase. Gonads thread-like, thin and completely transparent and colorless. Difficult to determine sex.

2 Immature b) Gonads are somewhat larger in volume, sex is easier to determine. The gonads continue to be transparent and colorless with a hint of color.

Immature b) Gonads are somewhat larger in volume, sex is easier to determine. The gonads continue to be transparent and colorless with a hint of color.

3 Maturing a) Gonads opaque but developed in volume. Distinct veins. Ovaries have yellow/white eggs in lamellae and can occupy half of the body cavity or more.

Maturing a) Gonads opaque but developed in volume. Distinct veins. Testes white or with white spots. Firm consistency.

4 Maturing b) Gonads larger in volume Distinct veins. Ovaries yellowish or white, can occupy 2/3 or more of the body cavity depending on the condition of the fish. The eggs can be seen distinctly and feel like grain. The eggs in the front part of the gonad are beginning to become transparent.

Maturing b) Gonads larger in volume. Distinct veins. Testes light grey or white, milt thick and slow-flowing.

5 Maturing c) Ovaries fill the entire body cavity. Most of the eggs are transparent.

Maturing c) Testes are grey or white. The milt runs easily. Gonads are not yet running, however, a light pressure on the abdomen causes the milt to run.

6 Spawning Running gonads. A light pressure on the abdomen causes the eggs to run.

Spawning Running gonads. A light pressure on the abdomen causes the milt to run.

7 Spent Gonads loose, contain remaining eggs.

Spent Gonads loose, contain remaining milt.

8 Resting Gonads are small. Eggs are not visible. Difficult to distinguish from stages 2/ 3.

Resting Gonads are small. Difficult to distinguish from stages 2/ 3.

9 Abnormal Abnormal


MEDITS maturity scale (MEDITS Handbook, 2013)

Sex GONAD ASPECT MATURATION STATE

STAGE MED-ITS

I

Sex not distinguished by naked eye. Gonads very small and trans lucid, al-most transparent. Sex undetermined.

UNDETERMINED 0 0

F

Small pinkish and trans-lucent ovary shorter than 1/3 of the body cavity. Eggs not visible by na-ked eye. IMMATURE=VIRGIN 1 1

M Thin and whitish testis shorter than 1/3 of the body cavity.

F

Small pinkish/reddish ovary shorter than ½ of the body cavity. Eggs not visible by naked eye. VIRGIN

DEVELOPING* 2a

2

M Thin whitish testis shorter than 1/2 of the body cavity.

F

Pinkish-reddish/ red-dish-orange and translu-cent ovary long about ½ of the body cavity. Blood vessels visible. Eggs not visible by naked eye. RECOVERING* 2b

M

Whitish/pinkish testis, more or less symmet-rical, long about ½ of the body cavity

F

Ovary pinkish-yellow in color with granular ap-pearance, long about 2/3 of the body cavity. Eggs are visible by naked eye trough the ovary tunica, which is not yet translu-cent. Under light pressure eggs are not expelled.

MATURING 2c

M Whitish to creamy testis long about 2/3 of the body cavity. Under light


Sex GONAD ASPECT MATURATION STATE

STAGE MED-ITS

pressure sperm is not ex-pelled.

F

Ovary orange-pink in color, with conspicuous superficial blood vessels, long from 2/3 to full length of the body cav-ity. Large transparent, ripe eggs are clearly visi-ble and could be ex-pelled under light pressure. In more ad-vanced conditions, eggs escape freely.

MATURE/SPAWNER 3 3

M

Whitish-creamy soft tes-tis long from 2/3 to full length of the body cav-ity. Under light pressure, sperm could be expelled. In more advanced condi-tions, sperm escapes freely.

F

Reddish ovary shrunken to about ½length of the body cavity. Flaccid ovary walls; ovary may contain remnants of dis-integrating opaque and/or translucent eggs.

SPENT 4a

4 M

Bloodshot and flabby tes-tis shrunken to about ½ length of the body cav-ity.

F

Pinkish and translucent ovary long about 1/3 of the body cavity. Eggs not visible by naked eye.

RESTING* 4b

M

Whitish/pinkish testis, more or less symmet-rical, long about 1/3 of the body cavity.


Modified Walsh scale used by AZTI


IPMA Walsh maturity scale

STAGE STATE EXTERNAL APPEARANCE

1 Immature Gonads small. Ovaries wine red or pale pink and clear, torpedo shaped. Absence of opaque eggs.

Male thin, flattened and transparent.

2 Early ripen-ing

Presence of opaque eggs and eggs without oil globule in ovaries giv-ing pale pink.

Testes off-white to white, milt not running. Gonads occupying ¼ to ¾ body cavity (is not the first characteristic to check).

3 Late ripen-ing

Gonads occupying ¾ to almost filing body cavity. Ovaries yellow, without blood vessels. Gonads without spaces (compact).

Largest eggs may have oil globules. Testes creamy white, milt not run-ning.

4 Ripe

Ovaries characterized by high quantity of visible hyaline eggs, inde-pendently of the stage of hydration. Ovary size variable from full to ¾ of body cavity.

Testes filing body cavity, milt freely running.

5 Partly Spent Gonads occupying ¾ to ¼ body cavity. Ovaries slacker, flaccid, with spaces, orange and bloodshot.

Testes with a few running milt and shriveled at anus end.

6 Recovering Spent

Gonads occupying ¼ or less of the body cavity. Ovaries reddish and often murky in appearance, sometimes with a scattering or patch of few opaque eggs.

Testes opaque with brownish/wine tint and no trace of milt.


IEO Atlantic Walsh scale

Stage State External appearance

1 Immature Ovaries small, wine red, clear and torpedo-shaped.

Testes small, pale, flattened and transparent.

2 Early ripening

Ovaries occupying ¼ to ¾ of body cavity. Opaque eggs visible giving pale pink to yellowish coloration, largest eggs without oil globules.

Testes occupying ¼ to ¾ of body cavity. Testes off-white, milt not running

3 Late ripening

Ovaries occupying ¾ to almost filling body cavity. Ovaries yellow to orange. Largest eggs may have oil globule.

Testes occupying ¾ to almost filling body cavity. Tes-tes creamy white.

4 Ripe

Ovaries variable in size from full to ¼. Characterized by externally visible hyaline eggs no matter how few or how early the stage of hydration. Ovaries with hyaline eggs only in the lumen are not included.

Testes filling the body cavity, milt freely running.

5 Partly spent

Ovaries occupying ¾ to less than ¼ of body cavity. Sla-cker than in stage 3 and often bloodshot.

Testes occupying ¾ to less than ¼ of body cavity. Tes-tes with free running milt and shriveled at anus end.

6 Spent/ recovering spent

Ovaries occupying ¼ or less of body cavity. Reddish and often murky in appearance, sometimes with a scat-tering or parch of opaque eggs.

Testes occupying ¼ or less of body cavity. Opaque with brownish tint and no trace of milt.

MSS maturity scale

MACKEREL MATURITY SCALE

Unlike Herring, mackerel are serial spawners. This means that, in contrast to herring, the transition from fully ripe to fully spent is a gradual rather than a sudden process. This makes it more difficult to distinguish between a fish which is ripening and one which has already begun to spawn. Another difference from herring is that the eggs are pelagic and contain an oil globule in the later stages of development. A six stage maturity scale is used.


Stage Description

1 Immature.

This stage is similar in size and appearance to stages 1 and 2 combined in herring. Males are distinguished from females by a much sharper ventral edge to the gonad. In the early stages the sexes cannot be distinguished by color.

Season: All year

2 Early Ripening.

This stage is similar in size and appearance to stages 3 and 4 combined in herring. In females its onset is marked by the first appearance of opaque eggs to the naked eye, in males by a whitening and thickening of the gonad. During this stage gonad size in-creases from ¼ to ¾ body cavity size.

Season: Feb – June

3 Late Ripening.

This stage is roughly equivalent to late stage 4 and 5 combined in herring. During the stage the gonad increases from the ¾ size to fill out the body cavity. In females the onset of the stage is marked by the first appearance of eggs with a single oil globule. These can be seen with good eyes or a magnifying glass and sometimes give the gonad an orange appearance. In males, coloration varies from reddish to white according to density of superficial blood vessels.

Season: Mar – July

4 Ripe.

Equivalent to herring stage 6. Gonads fill out the body cavity and in females they have a plum pudding appearance due to the presence of a scattering of ripe transparent eggs through the ovaries. In males the gonads have a creamy white appearance and sperm can be easily extruded from the vas deferens.

Season: April – July

5 Partially Spent.

No equivalent stage in herring. During this stage the gonads reduce gradually in size from fully occupying the body cavity to occupying ¼ or less. In males the stage is char-acterized by a creamy white appearance, freely flowing sperm and a slight shriveling of the testes at the anus end. In females the gonad becomes slightly baggy and some-times bloodshot. It is not, however, always easy to distinguish from stage 3.

Season: May – August


6 Spent and Recovering Spent.

Equivalent to herring stage 8. Gonads occupy ¼ or less of body cavity. In males the gonads have a slightly brownish appearance, they are opaque in contrast to imma-ture fish and there is no trace of milt (as in stage 5). In females the gonads are reddish and murkier in appearance than stage 1 ovaries. Viable opaque eggs are absent though there may be some reabsorbing opaque eggs from previous spawning.

Season: May – March


WKSPMAT

FISH MATURITY SCALE FOR SMALL PELAGICS, SPANISH MEDITERRANEAN AREA

MATURITY STAGE MALE FEMALE

I INMATURE

VIRGIN

Thin and flat testis, very small and almost transpar-ent.

Thin and round ovaries, very small and almost transparent.

II DEVELOPING

Whitish/pinkish testis, more or less symmetrical, bigger than in stage I.

Pinkish/orange ovaries and bigger than in stage I. Eggs not visible by naked eye

III MATURING

Whitish to creamy testis long about 2/3 of the body cavity. Under light pressure, sperm is not expelled

Ovaries pinkish-yellow in colour with granular ap-pearance, long about 2/3 of the body cavity. Eggs are visible by naked eye through the ovary tunica, which is not yet translucent. Under light pressure, eggs are not expelled

IV SPAWNING

Whitish-creamy soft testis long from 2/3 to full length of the body cavity. Under light pressure, sperm is ex-pelled. In more advanced conditions, sperm escapes freely

Ovaries orange-pink in colour, with conspicious superficial blood vessels, long from 2/3 to full length of the body cavity. Large transparent, ripe eggs are clearly visible and are expelled under light pressure. In more advanced conditions, eggs escape freely

V POST-SPAWNING

Bloodshot and flabby testis shrunken to about 1/2 length of the body cavity

Reddish ovary shrunken to about 1/2 length of the body cavity. Flaccid ovary walls; ovary may contain remnants of disintegrating opaque and/or translucent eggs.

VI SPENT

Thin and flat testis, very small but bigger than in stage I, whitish or opaque, flabby and with veins.

Thin and round ovaries, very small but bigger than in stage I, flabby, yellowish or opaque and with veins.


IMAR Azores macroscopic scale for Scomber colias (Walsh et al. 1990)

Stage State Females Males

1 Immature Ovaries small, wine red, clear and tor-pedo-shaped.

Testes small, pale, flattened and trans-parent.

2 Early ripening

Ovaries occupying ¼ to ¾ of body cavity. Opaque eggs visible giving pale pink to yellowish coloration, largest eggs without oil globules.

Testes occupying ¼ to ¾ of body cavity. Testes off-white, milt not running.

3 Late ripening

Ovaries occupying ¾ to almost filling body cavity. Ovaries yel-low to orange. Larg-est eggs may have oil globule.

Testes occupying ¾ to almost filling body cavity. Testes creamy white.

4 Ripe

Ovaries variable in size from full to ¼. Characterized by ex-ternally visible hya-line eggs no matter how few or how early the stage of hydra-tion.

Testes filling the body cavity, milt freely running.

5 Partly spent

Ovaries occupying ¾ to less than ¼ of body cavity. Slacker than in stage 3 and often bloodshot.

Testes occupying ¾ to less than ¼ of body cavity. Testes with free running milt and shriveled at anus end.

6 Spent / Recovering

Ovaries occupying ¼ or less of body cavity. Reddish and often murky in appearance, sometimes with a scattering or parch of opaque eggs.

Testes occupying ¼ or less of body cav-ity. Opaque with brownish tint and no trace of milt.


IMAR Azores macroscopic scale for Trachurus picturatus (adapted from Macer 1974)

Stage State Females Males

1 Virgin

Ovaries rounded, 1 – 2 mm broad, translucent, less than a quarter of length of the body cavity, no oocytes visible.

Testis flattened, 1 – 2 mm broad, translucent, less than a quarter of length of the body cavity.

2 Developing virgin

Ovaries rounded, 2 – 4 mm broad; pink, about a quar-ter of the length of the body cavity.

Testis flattened, 2 – 4 mm broad; grey, about a quarter of length of the body cavity.

3 Resting (mature fish)

Ovaries rounded, about 5 mm broad, pink, about a third of length of body cav-ity, no oocytes visible.

Testis flattened, about 5 mm broad, grey, about a third of length of the body cavity or less.

4 Developing (early)

Ovaries yellow, between a third and a half of length of the body cavity, oocytes vis-ible to naked eye.

Testes becoming fatter, off white, between a third and a half of length of the body cavity.

5 Developing (later) Ovaries yellow, half to whole length of the body cavity, large oocytes visible.

Testes firm, becoming whiter, half to whole length of the body cavity.

6 Ripe

Ovaries almost fill body cavity, hyalines oocytes present, producing speck-led appearance.

Testes almost fills the body cavity, pure white, parts be-coming soft.

7 Running Oocytes run from vent on slight pressure.

Milt runs from vent on slight pressure.

8 Partly spent

Ovaries smaller and less firm than stage 5, patches of red and yellow give a mottled appearance, many oocytes still present.

Smaller than stage 5, patches of white and grey give a mottled appearance.

9 Spent

Ovaries flaccid, dark red, less than half of the body length, a few large residual oocytes visible.

Flaccid, grey-brown, there may be a little residual milt.

10 Recovering

Ovaries firmer than stage 8, mainly dark red, about a third of the length of the body cavity or less, a few re-sidual oocytes may be visi-ble.

About a third of the length of the body cavity or less, firmer than stage 8, dark patches vis-ible through the testis wall.


Annex 7: Report of the discussions after the staging rounds

1st round of picture staging

Trachurus trachurus

It was clear that not all stagings were validated in WebGr! Not finalizing correctly in-fluences the bias and overestimation results of the stagings.

Overall agreement for Trachurus trachurus is 68%.

It was difficult to distinguish between stage 2 and 4 and these were often confused.

Pictures discussed:

ITA_GSA11_2014_HOM_18: 44% agreement. The first picture round it was unclear to participants what the oocytes should look like on the picture. In stage 2 all oocytes are in the same size, in stage 3 oocytes are of different sizes. At the border in if the stages it is always going to be difficult.

ITA2015HOM8: 38% agreement, in plenary discussion it was agreed that it is stage 3.

NED2015_HOM_0072: It is a picture from a frozen fish. Plenary discussion said stage 3, however the fish was collected in February west of Ireland which is outside the spawning season. It became clear that it is difficult to distinguish between stage 2 and 3 and it is difficult to stage frozen fish.

Scomber scombrus

Overall agreement is 67%.

There is confusion between stages 1 and 4.

Pictures discussed:

NED2015_mac_5400421_92: fresh fish it was agreed stage 3 because hydrated eggs are visible.

NED2015_mac_0050: frozen fish, it is a late 3 or early 4. Everyone agrees it not stage 2. It is difficult to assign a stage when the fish is at the border of a stage.

NED2015_mac_0039: frozen fish and it was agreed to be stage 3.


Overall agreement is 67%.

Pictures discussed:

HMM_2014_5

Scomber colias

Overall agreement is 71%

Everyone finalized the pictures but only few pictures are available. However, all stages were available except 5 and 6.


Pictures discussed:

GR_sjap_3: This fish is at the border between 3 and 4. The question is put forward if atresia in the gonads needs to be considered or not. At the end of spawning remaining vitellogenic oocytes will undergo atresia is the fish than in stage 3 or 4?

Fresh fish staging

Trachurus trachurus

Some people sexed 2 fish incorrect. However from the plenary discussion it was clear what the sex should be and everyone agreed.

It was pointed out that the stage descriptions should describe the development in each stage, in order to allow for early and late staging in each stage. Furthermore a distinc-tion should be made between frozen and fresh gonads, since not everyone is using fresh fish samples.

It is difficult to distinguish between stage 2 and 3. For maturity ogive it is not im-portant.

Pictures discussed:

Fish 2: packing of oocytes and the firmness of the ovary is different between stage 2 and 3.

Fish 5: male, no milt running, but damaged testes. Discussion if in stage 3 milt is run-ning or not. IT should be clear that the gonad should not be destroyed under pressure to see if milt is freely running or not.

When maturity staging always use the area and sample timing information!

Frozen fish staging

Trachurus trachurus

People felt frozen fish were more difficult to stage.

Sex: fish 15 had low agreement, because it was difficult to see if it was a male or female.

Fish 21: everyone agreed it is female, but there was lots of fat present and the gonad was underneath the fat. The fat should not be confused with a gonad.

Scomber scombrus

Fish 9: from the picture it is clear that it is male and stage 4, everyone agrees

2nd round of picture staging

Due to WebGr breaking down it was not possible to discuss the results of the second round of picture staging in plenary.


Annex 8: Report of the discussions on histology

Fish discussed were:

SPA2010_Hom_016: Agreement was 100%. Histology, no spawning markers, but lots of small atretic oocytes, probably early developing oocytes in atretic state with large vitellogenic oocytes, hence a female at the end of spawning stage 3. His-tology confirms the macroscopic stage.

SPA2011_Hom_011: Agreement was 100%. Histology shows spawning markers

(POFs). Histology confirms the macroscopic stage 3.

SPA2015_HOM_001: Agreement was 40%. Histology shows previtellogenic oocytes

and atretic cells. Thus stage 4, modal macroscopic stage was 2.

SPA2015_HOM_002: Agreement was 36%. Histology shows atresia and previtellogenic

oocytes. Ovary wall is relatively thin. Histology shows stage 1 or 4. Modal macroscopic stage was 2. Macroscopic picture discussion shows bloodshot which points to stage 4.


Presentation on histological criteria by Antonio Solla.

Difficult to distinguish between stage 1 and 4.

Some agree with Antonio’s suggestion for histology criteria, others are in doubt.

Red colouration does not always appear in stage 4, gonads that are translucent would be called stage 1 macroscopically while in histology they are clearly stage 4, thick gonad wall and regenerating features inside the gonad.

Thickness of the wall is related to the size of the fish, within immatures thickness of the wall varies with size, the same for mature fish.

Recommendation: do not use macroscopic maturity staging during the spawning sea-son or the month after spawning because macroscopic maturity staging cannot distin-guish between stage 1 and 4.

Suggested regenerating female slide in the presentation sampled in the spawning sea-son, so is this really regenerating because the ovary is really tight. In a previous dis-cussion during WKMSMAC2 it was stated that the dense packing was stage 2.

Report of the Workshop on Maturity Staging of Mackerel and ... Reports/Expert Group Report... ·...

Documents

Transcript of Report of the Workshop on Maturity Staging of Mackerel and ... Reports/Expert Group Report... ·...