172 
Fishery Bulletin 109(2) 
Prista, unpubl. data). Marked seasonal variations in 
landings linked to juvenile and adult migrations have 
been identified in local fisheries (Quero and Vayne, 1987; 
Prista et al. 2 ). Overall, adults are thought to come inshore 
from spring to early summer to spawn but their overwin- 
tering grounds are still unknown; juveniles are thought 
Table 1 
Primary fisheries literature that present seasonal autoregressive integrated moving-average models. Only studies with quan- 
titative forecast results are displayed. “No.”=the number of series, “Freq”=the sampling frequency (W=weekly, M=monthly, 
A= annual), “n” is the sample size of the fitting period, “F”=number of forecasts, “models” indicates the type of models compared, 
and “PI” indicates if prediction intervals were presented (yes, no). “/” separates annual and monthly data sets when both were 
analyzed, “sp” = species, “nsp groups” = nonspecific groups, “rel.” = relative, “CPUE”=catch per unit of effort, “LPUE”=landings 
per unit of effort. 
Reference 
Species 
Variable 
No. 
Freq 
n F 
Models 3 
PI 
Saila et al. (1980) 
Jasus edwardsii 
CPUE 
1 
M 
144 12 
1,5 
n 
Mendelssohn (1981) 
Katsuwonus pelamis 
catch/effort 
1 
M 
180 12 
12 
n 
Fogarty (1988) 
Homarus americanus 
catch/CPUE 
3/1 
A/M 
41-58/216 1/12 
12 
n 
Jeffries et al. (1989) 
Pseudopleuronectes 
americanus 
rel. abundance 
2/3 
A/M 
27/156;324 2/12 
— 
y 
Stergiou (1989) 
Sardina pilchardus 
catch 
1 
M 
204 12 
— 
n 
Noakes et al. (1990) 
Oncorhynchus nerka 
total returns 
2 
A 
24 8 
1,10,12,19,20 
n 
Stergiou (1990a) 
Engraulis encrasicolus 
catch 
1 
M 
252 24 
— 
n 
Stergiou (1990b) 
Mullidae 
catch 
1 
M 
252 24 
— 
n 
Campbell et al. (1991) 
Homarus americanus 
catch 
4 
A 
61-97 10 
12 
n 
Molinet et al. (1991) 
Penaeus spp., 
Lutjanus synagris 
landings/LPUE 
2 
M 
132;180 24 
— 
n 
Stergiou (1991) 
Trachurus sp. 
catch 
1 
M 
252 12 
1,8 
n 
Tsai and Chai (1992) 
Morone saxatilis 
harvest 
1 
A 
27 4 
3,4,12 
n 
Pajuelo and Lorenzo 
1 nsp group 
catch 
1 
M 
131 24 
— 
y 
(1995) 
Stergiou and Christou 
4 sp; 12 nsp groups 
catch 
16 
A 
24 2 
1-9 
n 
(1996) 
Stergiou et al. (1997) 
4 sp; 12 nsp groups 
catch 
16 
M 
288 24 
1-5, 7-9 
n 
Park (1998) 
Theragra chalcogramma 
landings 
1 
M 
264 24 
— 
n 
Lloret et al. (2000) 6 
30 sp; 36 nsp groups 
catch 
66 
M 
51-200 12 
— 
y 
Georgakarakos et al. 
(2002, 2006) 
Loligo vulgaris, 
Todarodes sagittatus 
landings 
2 
M 
174 12 
11,15,16 
y 
Pierce and Boyle 
Loligo forbesi 
LPUE 
1 
A/M 
27/324 3/36 
3, 12 
y 
(2003) 
Stergiou et al. (2003) 
Xiphias gladius 
catch 
1 
M 
180 12 
8,13 
n 
Zhou (2003) 
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha 
spawner density 
2 
A 
11 4 
1, 15 
n 
Hanson et al. (2006) 
Bi'evoortia tyrannus, 
B. patronus 
landings 
2 
A 
57;63 10 
3,14,15 
n 
Koutroumanidis et al. 
(2006) 
E. encrasicolus, 
Merluccius merluccius, 
Sarda sarda 
landings 
3 
M 
216;252 12 
17,18 
n 
Czerwinski et al. 
Hippoglossus stenolepis 
CPUE 
1 
W 
107 31 
15 
n 
(2007) 
Tsitsika et al. (2007) 
Total pelagic production 
E. encrasicolus, 
S. pilchardus, T. trachurus 
CPUE 
4 
M 
180 12 
11 
y 
a Models compared: l=naive, 2=linear regression (LR), 3=multiple LR, 4=multiple LR with correlated errors, 5=harmonic LR, 6=Fox surplus- 
yield, 7=model combination, 8=exponential, 9=vector autoregressive, 10=periodic autoregressive, ll=multivariate ARIMA, 12= transfer 
function noise, 13=census method II (X-ll), U.S. Dep. Commer., 14 = state space models, 15=artificial neural networks, 16=Bayesian dynamic 
modeling, 17=genetic modeling for optimal forecasting, 18=fuzzy expected intervals, 19 = stock-recruitment, 20 = sibling. 
b The Lloret et al. (2000) study includes 12 series with 51-64 months. 
