FN Archimer Export Format
PT J
TI New insights into the reproductive cycle of two Great Scallop populations in Brittany (France) using a DEB modelling approach
BT 
AF GOURAULT, Melaine
   LAVAUD, Romain
   LEYNAERT, Aude
   PECQUERIE, Laure
   PAULET, Yves-Marie
   POUVREAU, Stephane
AS 1:3;2:2;3:4;4:5;5:3;6:1;
FF 1:;2:;3:;4:;5:;6:PDG-RBE-PFOM-LPI;
C1 Ifremer, Lab Sci Environm Marin LEMAR, F-29840 Argenton En Landunvez, France.
   Fisheries & Oceans Canada, Moncton, NB E1C 9B6, Canada.
   UBO, CNRS, IRD, Ifremer,Lab Sci Environm Marin LEMAR, Plouzane, France.
C2 IFREMER, FRANCE
   MPO, CANADA
   UBO, FRANCE
   CNRS, FRANCE
   IRD, FRANCE
SI ARGENTON
SE PDG-RBE-PFOM-LPI
UM LEMAR
IN WOS Ifremer UMR
   WOS Cotutelle UMR
   copubli-france
   copubli-p187
   copubli-univ-france
   copubli-int-hors-europe
IF 1.725
TC 4
UR https://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00458/57012/58910.pdf
LA English
DT Article
DE ;Pecten maximus;DEB theory;reproduction cycle;IPCC scenarios;Bay of Brest;Bay of Saint-Brieuc
AB The present study aimed to improve understanding of the environmental conditions influencing the reproductive cycle of the great scallop Pecten maximus in two locations in Brittany (France). We also evaluated potential consequences of future climate change for reproductive success in each site. We simulated reproductive traits (spawning occurrences and synchronicity among individuals) of P. maximus, using an existing Dynamic Energy Budget (DEB) model. To validate and test the model, we used biological and environmental datasets available for the Bay of Brest (West Brittany, France) between 1998 and 2003. We also applied the scallop DEB model in the Bay of Saint-Brieuc (North Brittany, France) for the same period (1998–2003) to compare the reproductive cycle in different environmental conditions. In order to accurately model the P. maximus reproductive cycle we improved the scallop DEB model in two ways: through (1) energy acquisition, by incorporating microphytobenthos as a new food source; and (2) the reproductive process, by adding a new state variable dedicated to the gamete production. Finally, we explored the effects of two contrasting IPCC climate scenarios (RCP2.6 and RCP8.5) on the reproductive cycle of P. maximus in these two areas at the 2100 horizon. In the Bay of Brest, the simulated reproductive cycle was in agreement with field observations. The model reproduced three main spawning events every year (between May and September) and asynchronicity in the timing of spawning between individuals. In the Bay of Saint-Brieuc, only two summer spawning events (in July and August) were simulated, with a higher synchronicity between individuals. Environmental conditions (temperature and food sources) were sufficient to explain this well-known geographic difference in the reproductive strategy of P. maximus. Regarding the forecasting approach, the model showed that, under a warm scenario (RCP8.5), autumnal spawning would be enhanced at the 2100 horizon with an increase of seawater temperature in the Bay of Brest, whatever the food source conditions. In the Bay of Saint-Brieuc, warmer temperatures may impact reproductive phenology through an earlier onset of spawning by 20 to 44 days depending on the year. 
PY 2019
PD JAN
SO Journal Of Sea Research
SN 1385-1101
PU Elsevier Science Bv
VL 143
UT 000453497600020
BP 207
EP 221
DI 10.1016/j.seares.2018.09.020
ID 57012
ER

EF