Meta-analysis was challenging given differences among study design and scope. Statistical analysis on common metrics (e.g., number of DFTs) Z-VAD-FMK mouse was not possible given the different methods of data collection. Therefore, our analysis is mainly qualitative and highlights the need for standard reporting metrics to facilitate

comparisons. We provide some economic implications for the estimated impacts of DFTs, highlighting a case study comparing the ghost fishing capture rate to the entire fishery, and utilizing additional published literature to expand outside the seven studies reported here. The average number of DFT km−2 varied in each region and ranged from 5 to 47 DFT km−2 with the highest density in the Maryland portion of the Chesapeake Bay study (Table 2). These averages do not always show the variability by habitat type or fishing intensity that was sometimes found in the field. In Florida, for example, different habitat types were surveyed and macroalgae had the lowest density of trap debris; conversely, coral reef habitats had the highest density despite fishermen’s efforts to avoid coral reefs when fishing (Uhrin et al., 2014). In the Maryland main stem of the Chesapeake Bay, variability ranged from 28 to 75 DFT km−2. UK-371804 In North Carolina, trap densities ranged from 3

to 65 DFT km−2 though in this study densities did not vary by habitat type (Voss et al., 2012). Immediately upon loss, most traps ghost fish for some amount of time. The rates

presented selleck chemical here represent the percentage of derelict traps in each fishery that were ghost fishing at any one point in time. Due to factors including trap design (Fig. 2), variable rates of degradation (Fig. 3), and environmental conditions including varying oceanographic regimes, the percent of DFTs ghost fishing in each fishery at a given moment is variable. Based on the survey data in these studies, rates of ghost fishing ranged from 5% to 40% (Table 2). Ghost fishing rates (# ghost fishing/total DFT) were lowest in the USVI and were influenced by use of escape panels. When escape panels were open, only 2% of fish observed in the USVI traps died, while the remainder escaped after spending an average of 8.2 (±3.4) days in the traps. The highest rates of ghost fishing, based on available data, occurred in Maryland and researchers suggest that mortality (approximately 20 blue crabs/trap/yr) is due to a lack of gear design and management options designed to prevent ghost fishing (Giordano et al., 2010). Thus, estimated catch in DFTs varies and may be driven in part by differences in trap design, such as escape panels and panel placement on traps (Havens et al., 2009b). This suggests that collaborative effort is needed to design traps that allow species to readily escape when traps become derelict, thus rendering derelict traps “non fishing.