Quote:
Originally Posted by Coppertone
The likely sample size gather by a few humans is hardly big enough to compare differences in fish condition from two different "estuaries" with any confidence. Also, it is nearly impossible to hold "oil spill impacted area" as the single and only tested variable. JMO
-cheers
|
Actually, the USGS study by Jill Jenkins in 2004 compared contaminated and non-contaminated sites in the Calcasieu estuary and yielded statistically significant results with numbers of fish much smaller than our studies.
"Confidence" can be quantified with standard statistical techniques. The Jenkins study yielded a p = 0.0032. Comparing our 2011 data with the long term LA average for expectation yielded the observation that spotted seatrout were smaller than the LA average with p = 0.003 in the Calcasieu estuary, that black drum were smaller than the LA average with p < 0.001, and that red drum were smaller than the LA average with p = 0.012. It is well known and widely accepted that using the relative condition factor can produce statistically significant stock assessments without weighing and measuring thousands of fish, and the practice is common and accepted in fisheries management.