Figure 1.
Map of the area sampled.
Figure 2.
Generic round trap with and without escape gaps.
Table 1.
Summary of catches and their treatment from the four types of traps (n = 7) deployed across 20 days in two areas of the Corindi River.
Figure 3.
Fitted response profiles (solid lines) and associated approximate 95% coverage intervals of predicted capture rates (per 1000 attempts) against carapace length (mm) for the (A) 51-mm conventional, (B) 51-mm escape-gap, (C) 101-mm conventional and (D) 101-mm escape gap traps.
Table 2.
Summary of fixed factors and Wald F-values in parsimonious generalised linear mixed models explaining variability in the catchability of Scylla serrata and numbers of Acanthopagrus australis among four treatment traps (51-mm conventional, 51-mm escape-gap, 101-mm conventional and101-mm escape-gap traps), and subsequent damage to S. serrata and when this occurred (during trap removal or measuring).
Figure 4.
The predicted mean ±SE numbers of Acanthopagrus australis in each of the four treatment traps per deployment.
Dissimilar letters indicate significant differences detected in false-discovery-rate pairwise comparisons (p<0.05).