Önceki çalışmalarda mono filament galsama ağlarının multi filament galsama ağlara göre daha verimli olduğunu bildirilmektedir. Mono-multi filament ile multi filament fanyalı uzatma ağları arasındaki ilişki hakkında yeterli bilgi yoktur. Bu nedenle; çalışmada farklı ağ göz genişliğine ve materyallere sahip mono-multi ve multifilament uzatma ağlarının av verimleri üzerindeki etkisi incelenmiştir. Çalışma İzmir Körfezi, Urla İskele'de aktif balıkçılık yapılan saha ile Muğla ili, Kazıklı Koyu'nda balık yetiştiriciliği yapılan kafesler çevresinde yürütülmüştür. Araştırmada, mono-multi ve multi filament 28, 30, 32 mm tor göz genişliğine sahip fanyalı uzatma ağları kullanılmıştır. Saha çalışmalarında, sırasıyla; 28, 30, 32 mm tor göz genişliğine sahip fanyalı uzatma ağları birbiri ardına bağlanarak dönek yöntemi uygulanmıştır. Avlanan biyomas ağ ve göz genişliği kriterleri dikkate alınarak ayrılmıştır. Herbir ağda yakalanan türlerin biyometrik ölçümleri yapılmıştır. Mono-multi ve multi filament ağların çalışma sahaları farkı gözetmeksizin elde edilen av verimlerinin (61 Kg) birbirlerine eşit olduğu bulunmuştur. Av sahalarındaki av verimleri dikkate alındığında akuakültür sahasında yapılan avcılık %24 daha verimlidir. Aktif avcılık yapılan sahalardaki av veriminin, akuakültür alanlarındaki av verimine göre daha düşük değerde olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Balıkçılık alanındaki mono-multi filament uzatma ağlarının verimi multi filament ağların verimine göre %28 daha düşük ve akakültür alanındaki veriminin %17 daha yüksek bulunmuştur. Göz genişliğine göre; 28 mm ağ göz genişliğine sahip ağların diğer ağlardan daha verimli bulunmuştur. Çalışmada 32 tür yakalanmış olup, en fazla avlanan tür isparoz balığı (Diplodus annularis) %53 oranına sahiptir. Avlanma sahaları mono-multi ve multi filament fanyalı uzatma ağlarının av verimi üzerinde etkili olduğu bulunmuştur.
The previous researches have been stated that monofilament gill nets are more efficient than multifilament trammel nets. There hasn't enough knowledge on catch efficiency between mono-multifilament and multifilament trammel nets. In this case; it was examined effects on the catch efficiency of the mono-multi and multi filament trammel nets which had different mesh size and net materials. This study was carried out in active fishing ground where was Urla iskele in the Izmir Bay and in aquaculture grounds where was in Kazıklı Bay. It was used mono-multi and multifilament trammel nets having 28,30 and 32 mm bar mesh size in this study. It was applied passive fixed methods with trammel nets having 28, 30 and 32 mm bar mesh size which was connected in turn in order one after the other. The biomass was seperated taken into consideration mesh size and net. It was measured caught each species which had biometric mesurements. It was found that catchs of mono-multi and multifilament trammel nets was almost equal unless it took care of fishing grounds. It was more productive, (24%) in aquaculture ground than fishing ground taken consideration different fishing grounds. It was determined Fishing efficiency of fishing ground was low according to aquaculture ground. I was found out that catchs of mono-multifilament trammel nets in the active fishing ground according was lower (28%) and higher (17%) than aquaculture grounds. Accounding to mesh size; it was found that catches of 28 mm bar mesh size nets was more effective than others. It was caught 32 species, ratio of annular sea bream (Diplodus vulgaris L, 1758) as the most caught species had 53%. It was found that fishing ground was effective on catches of the mono-multi and multifilament trammel nets.
___
Balık, İ, 1996. Investigations on selections and catch efficiency of the mono filament gill net and multi filament trammel nets in the fishing of carb (Cyprinus carpio L. 1758) and Sudak (Stizostedion ludoperca L. 1758) in Beyşehir Lake. Ege Univ., Scienst Institute, Doctorate thesis, 77p, İzmir, Turkey, (in Turkish)
Gabriel, 0. and H. Naylor, 1984, Developments in gill netting. Seewirtschaft, Vol. 16, No:4, Germany.
Gurbet, R., 2001. Aegean Sea Fisheries in Turkish Coast. Ege University, Faculty of Fisheries, Department of Fishing and Processing Technology, Technological Developments In Fisheries Workshop, 19-21 June 2001, s:91-104, izmir-Turkey. (in Turkish)
Hoşsucu, H. and A. Kara, 1991, The schedule of trammel and gill nets used in İzmir Bay and vicinity. Fisheries symposium in the tenth year of its education, (November 12-14, 1991, 666-674pages, Ege University, Faculty of Fisheries, Bornova, İzmir, Turkey, (in Turkish)
Hoşsucu, H. and A. Kara, 1992, Comparison of catch efficiency at night of active and passive trammel nets in the 200 m and 600 m used fishing of annular sea bream (Diplodus annulahs L. 1758) in İzmir Bay. Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, Ege University, Faculty of Fisheries, c:8, n:29,30,31,32,175-184p, Izmir, Turkey, (in Turkish).
Kara, A., 1992, Studies on development used trammel nets in Izmir Bay. Ege University, Scienst Institute, Doctorate Thesis, 70p, Izmir, Turkey, (in Turkish).
Kuşat, M., 1996, Researches on the catch efficiency of the multi and mono filament gill nets to catch pike pearch (Stizostedion ludoperca L. 1758) in Eğirdir Lake. Ege Univ., Scienst Institute, Doctorate thesis, 81 p, İzmir, Turkey, (in Turkish)
Nomura, M. and T. Yamazaki, 1975, Fishing Techniques. Japan International Agency, 200p, Tokyo, Japan. Steinberg, R., 1985, Fisheries with gill and trammel nets and their applicability in the Baltic and North Sea. Fischereitech, vol.15, n:68,7-96p, Germany.