Table 6.
Estimated percentage of the samples of returning adults of known origin that are apportioned back to proximate river and region of capture using ONCOR.
| Test Sample ID | Test Sample | Capture Method | Sample Size | a) Allocation to river of capture | b) Assignment to river of capture | c) Allocation to pooled river of capture | d) Assignment to pooled river of capture | e) Allocation to region of capture | f) Assignment to region of origin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | Lune (2004-05) |
Estuary Net | 49 | 26.70 (2.17, 34.35) |
28.57 (0.79, 0.48-0.98) |
49.41 (12.8, 55.9) |
53.01 (0.87, 0.51-1.00) |
77.72 (45.53, 81.91) |
81.63 (0.93, 0.53-1.00) |
| T2 | Ribble 2004 |
Estuary Net | 50 | 20.96 (1.64, 29.30) |
22.00 (0.86, 0.59-1.00) |
37.94 (3.2, 42.3) |
40.00 (0.83, 0.48-1.00) |
80.39 (45.86, 83.39) |
82.00 (0.96, 0.56-1.00) |
| T3 | Dee (1984-88) |
Estuary Net | 47 | 8.30 (0.00, 18.47) |
8.51 (0.84, 0.55-1.00) |
15.02 (0.0, 27.2) |
17.02 (0.72, 0.34-1.00) |
34.81 (18.11, 58.01) |
34.04 (0.89, 0.55-1.00) |
| T4 | Tamar 1987 |
Estuary Net | 62 | 41.66 (11.03, 47.89) |
41.94 (0.85, 0.28-1.00) |
57.08 (25.1, 64.7) |
65.08 (0.85, 0.39-1.00) |
77.22 (48.23, 81.76) |
80.65 (0.93, 0.53-1.00) |
| T5 | Mudeford 2006 |
Estuary Net | 47 | 81.24 (42.15, 89.13) |
93.30 (0.79, 0.52-1.00) |
88.50 (57.2, 95.9) |
89.36 (0.96, 0.57-1.00) |
98.47 (91.61, 1.00) |
97.87 (1.00, 0.96-1.00) |
| T6 | Aven+ 2005 |
Rod Caught | 37 | 42.78 (8.0, 61.0) |
40.54 (0.90, 0.52-1.00) |
43.12 (8.3, 60.0) |
40.54 (0.89, 0.52-1.00) |
92.00 (75.18, 98.60) |
91.89 (1.00, 0.98-1.00) |
| T7 | Narcea 2006 |
Rod Caught | 112 | 37.25 (22.7, 51.9) |
39.29 (0.86, 0.51-1.00) |
28.73 (14.3, 42.0) |
28.57 (0.85, 0.47-0.99) |
97.04 (91.02, 99.55) |
96.43 (1.00, 0.97-1.00) |
| Mean | 36.98 | 39.16 | 45.69 | 47.65 | 79.66 | 80.64 | |||
Estimates are given as: a) apportionment to correct river of capture, allocate and sum method (95% confidence intervals); b) assignment to river of capture (and, for those fish successfully assigned back to river of capture, the average and range for the probability of individual assignment is given in brackets); c) apportionment to pooled river of capture, i.e. the pool and allocate method (95% confidence intervals); d) assignment to pooled river of capture (and, for those fish successfully assigned back to river of capture, the average and range for the probability of individual assignment is given in brackets); e) as the sum of apportionment to all samples within a reporting region (95% confidence intervals); and f) as the sum of assignment to all samples within a reporting region (average and range for the probability of individual assignment). The geographical location of each test sample is given in Fig. 1; see Table 1 for full sample details (incl. latitude and longitude).
+A sample from the Aven (47°48'6" N, 3°44'7" W) was not included in the baseline, therefore values relate not to river of capture, but to another proximate river in Brittany, NW France, the Scorff.