EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 31 (2018) Aquat. Living Resour., 31 (2018) 35 References
Open Access
Issue
Aquat. Living Resour.
Volume 31, 2018
Article Number 35
Number of page(s) 9
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/alr/2018024
Published online 27 November 2018
  • Anon. Shellfish stocks and fisheries: review 2014–an assessment of selected stocks, The Marine Institute and Bord Iascaigh Mhara, Ireland, 2014. ISBN: 978-1-902895-58-1 [Google Scholar]
  • Bardos DC, Day RW, Lawson NT, Linacre NA. 2006. Dynamical response to fishing varies with compensatory mechanism: an abalone population model. Ecol Model 192: 523–542. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Barker KM, Chapman ARO. 1990. Feeding preferences of periwinkles among 4 species of Fucus. Mar Biol 106: 113–118. [Google Scholar]
  • Benaglia T, Chauveau D, Hunter DR, Young D. 2009. mixtools: an R package for analyzing finite mixture models. J Stat Softw 32: 1–29. [Google Scholar]
  • Boaventura D, da Fonseca LC, Hawkins SJ. 2003. Size matters: competition within populations of the limpet Patella depressa. J Anim Ecol 72: 435–446. [Google Scholar]
  • Branch GM. 1975. Intraspecific competition in Patella cochlear Born. J Anim Ecol 44: 263–281. [Google Scholar]
  • Caswell H. 2006. Matrix population models: construction, analysis, and interpretation, 2nd edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford. ISBN: 978-0-878931-21-7. [Google Scholar]
  • Chapman CJ. Coastal shellfish resources and fisheries in SEA7, Strategic Environmental Assessment − SEA7, Technical Report for Department of Trade & Industry, UK, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  • Commission of the European Communities. Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. As amended by the Accession Act of Austria, Finland and Sweden (1995) and the Accession Act of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic (2003). Official Journal of the European Union L 236 33 23.9.2003, Brussels, European Commission 1992/95/2003. [Google Scholar]
  • Crossthwaite SJ, Reid N, Sigwart, JD. Assessing the impact of shore-based shellfish collection on under-boulder communities in Strangford Lough. Report prepared by the Natural Heritage Research Partnership (NHRP) between Quercus, Queen's University Belfast and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) for the Research and Development Series No. 13/03, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  • Cummins V, Coughlan S, McClean O, Connolly N, Mercer J, Burnell G. An assessment of the potential for the sustainable development of the edible periwinkle, Littorina littorea, industry in Ireland, Marine Resource Series, Marine Institute, 2002. Available at https://oar.marine.ie/handle/10793/218. [Google Scholar]
  • Eschweiler N, Molis M, Buschbaum C. 2009. Habitat-specific size structure variations in periwinkle populations (Littorina littorea) caused by biotic factors. Helg Mar Res 63: 119–127. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Fenske C. 1997. The importance of intraspecific competition in a Littorina littorea population in the Wadden Sea. Hydrobioloia 355: 29–39. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Fish JD. 1972. The breeding cycle and growth of open coast and estuarine populations of Littorina littorea. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 52: 1011–1019. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Fowler SL. Guidelines for managing the collection of bait and other shoreline animals within UK European marine sites, English Nature (UK Marine SACs Project), 1999, 132 pp. [Google Scholar]
  • Gårdmark A, Jonzen N, Mangel M. 2006. Density-dependent body growth reduces the potential of marine reserves to enhance yields. J Appl Ecol 43: 61–69. [Google Scholar]
  • Gendron RP. 1977. Habitat selection and migratory behavior of intertidal gastropod Littorina-littorea (L.). J Anim Ecol 46: 79–92. [Google Scholar]
  • Geritz SAH, Kisdi E. 2004. On the mechanistic underpinning of discrete-time population models with complex dynamics. J Theor Biol 228: 261–269. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Gutiérrez-Zugasti I. 2011. Coastal resource intensification across the Pleistocene–Holocene transition in Northern Spain: evidence from shell size and age distributions of marine gastropods. Quat Int 244: 54–66. [Google Scholar]
  • Grady SP, Valiela I. 2006. Stage-structured matrix modeling and suggestions for management of Atlantic horseshoe crab, Limulus polyphemus, populations on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Estuaries Coast 29: 685–698. [Google Scholar]
  • Hood BC, Melsæther SG. 2006. Shellfish exploitation in Stone Age Arctic Norway: procurement patterns and household activities. Acta Borealia 33: 1–29. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hyder K, Aberg P, Johnson MP, Hawkins SJ. 2001. Models of open populations with space-limited recruitment: extension of theory and application to the barnacle Chthamalus montagui. J Anim Ecol 70: 853–863. [Google Scholar]
  • Janke K. 1990. Biological interactions and their role in community structure in the rocky intertidal of Helgoland (German Bight, North Sea). Helgolander Meeresun 44: 219–263. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Johnson MP, Pye S, Allcock AL. 2008. Dispersal mode and assessments of recovery on the shores of Gruinard, the “anthrax island”. Biodivers Conserv 17: 721–732. [Google Scholar]
  • Kelso B, Service M. Environmental effects of shellfish cultivation and harvesting, DOENI, EHS, Belfast, 2000, 80 pp. [Google Scholar]
  • Keough MJ, Quinn GP, King A. 1993. Correlations between human collecting and intertidal mollusc populations on rocky shores. Conserv Biol 7: 378–390. [Google Scholar]
  • Kinlan BP, Gaines SD. 2003. Propagule dispersal in marine and terrestrial environments: a community perspective. Ecology 84: 2007–2020. [Google Scholar]
  • Lambert TC, Farley J. 1968. The effect of parasitism by the trematode Cryptocotyle lingua (Creplin) on zonation and winter migration of the common periwinkle, Littorina littorea (L.). Can J Zool 46: 1139–1147. [Google Scholar]
  • Leiva GE, Castilla JC. 2002. A review of the world marine gastropod fishery: evolution of catches, management and the Chilean experience. Rev Fish Biol Fish 11: 283–300. [Google Scholar]
  • Lindegarth M, Åberg P, Cervin G, Nilsson PG. 2001. Effects of grazing on the structure of mid-shore, intertidal assemblages on moderately exposed rocky shores of the Swedish west coast. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 212: 29–38. [Google Scholar]
  • Lubchenco J. 1983. Littorina and Fucus: effects of herbivores, substratum heterogeneity and plant escapes during succession. Ecology 64: 1116–1123. [Google Scholar]
  • McErlean T, McConkey R, Forsythe W. Strangford Lough: an archaeological survey of the maritime cultural landscape, Blackstaff Press, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  • Moore HB. 1937. The biology of Littorina littorea. Part 1: growth of the shell and tissues, spawning, length of life and mortality. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 24: 721–742. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Petraitis PS. 1987. Factors organizing rocky intertidal communities of New England: herbivory and predation in sheltered bays. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 109: 117–136. [Google Scholar]
  • Petraitis PS. 2002. Effects of intraspecific competition and scavenging on growth of the periwinkle Littorina littorea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 236: 179–187. [Google Scholar]
  • Punt AE, Huang, TC, Maunder MN. 2013. Review of integrated size-structured models for stock assessment of hard-to-age crustacean and mollusc species. ICES J Mar Sci 70: 16–33. [Google Scholar]
  • Roy K, Collins AG, Becker BJ, Begovic E, Engle JM. 2003. Anthropogenic impacts and historical decline in body size of rocky intertidal gastropods in southern California. Ecol Lett 6: 205–211. [Google Scholar]
  • Simkanin C, Power AM, Myers A, McGrath D, Southward A, Mieszkowska N, Leaper R, O'Riordan R. 2005. Using historical data to detect temporal changes in the abundances of intertidal species on Irish shores. J Mar Biol Ass UK 85: 1329–1340. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Smith JE, Newell GE. 1955. The dynamics of the zonation of the common periwinkle (Littorina-littorea (L.)) on a stony beach. J Anim Ecol 24: 35–56. [Google Scholar]
  • Tinlin-Mackenzie AR. Intertidal collection within the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast European Marine Site: investigating the scale, locale, and ecological impacts of harvesting Arenicola marina, Arenicola defodiens, andLittorina littorea, PhD thesis, University of Newcastle, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • Tully O. 2017. Atlas of commercial fisheries for shellfish around Ireland, Marine Institute. ISBN 978-1-902895- 61–1. [Google Scholar]
  • Underwood AJ. 1973. Studies on zonation of intertidal prosobranch mollusks in the Plymouth region. J Anim Ecol 42: 353–372. [Google Scholar]
  • Warner GF. 2001. Trans-zonal movements in winkles, Littorina littorea (L.): reasons and consequences. J Shellfish Res 20: 495–499. [Google Scholar]
  • Watson DC, Norton TA. 1985a. The physical characteristics of seaweed thalli as deterrents to littorine grazers. Bot Mar 28: 383–387. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Watson DC, Norton TA. 1985b. Dietary preferences of the common periwinkle, Littorina littorea (L). J Exp Mar Biol 88: 193–211. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wilhelmsen U, Reise K. 1994. Grazing on green algae by the periwinkle Littorina littorea in the Wadden Sea. Helgolander Meeresun 48: 233–242. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Williams EE. 1964. The growth and distribution of Littorina littorea (L.) on a rocky shore in Wales. J Anim Ecol 33: 413–432. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.