300 
Fishery Bulletin 117(4) 
Table 4 
Selection criteria and parameters of the models for potential annual fecundity (PAF) and 
relative potential annual fecundity (PAF rel ) at length and weight in petrale sole (Eopsetta 
jordani). The base models consider only size (total length [TL] in millimeters or somatic 
weight [SW] in grams). Colons represent interactions between variables, and an asterisk 
(*) indicates the regional model that best fits the data on the basis of Aikake information 
criterion (AIC). Also provided are coefficients of determination (r 2 ), P-values, and values for 
the difference between Akaike information criterion (AIC) values for 2 nested models (AAIC). 
Fecundity relationship Model 
r 2 
P-value 
AAIC 
PAF (length) 
TL 
0.78 
<0.001 
23.92 
TL + Region 
0.81 
<0.001 
16.66 
TL + Region + TL:Region* 
0.85 
<0.001 
0.00 
PAF (weight) 
SW 
0.75 
<0.001 
32.93 
SW + Region 
0.81 
<0.001 
14.66 
SW + Region + SW:Region* 
0.85 
<0.001 
0.00 
PAF rel (length) 
TL 
0.24 
<0.001 
16.88 
TL + Region 
0.38 
<0.001 
5.03 
T1 + Region + TL:Region* 
0.44 
<0.001 
0.00 
PAF rel (weight) 
SW 
0.13 
0.001 
23.68 
SW + Region 
0.31 
<0.001 
8.94 
SW + Region + SW:Region* 
0.40 
<0.001 
0.00 
Table 5 
Fecundity ranges and fecundity relationship model parameters for petrale sole (Eopsetta jordani) collected during 2014-2017 off 
California and the Pacific Northwest (Oregon and Washington). The potential annual fecundity parameter a is reported after back 
calculating from the log of length or weight by using the bias correction term exp(o 2 /2). The 95% confidence intervals for all param¬ 
eters (a, b, c, and d) are listed in parentheses. An asterisk (*) denotes a result that was not significant. Lengths were measured as 
total lengths. n=number of samples. 
Potential annual relative fecundity (no. oocytes per 
Potential annual fecundity (no. of oocytes) gram somatic weight) 
Length (mm) 
Weight (g) 
Length (mm) 
Weight (g) 
Region 
n 
Range 
a 
b 
a 
b 
Range 
c 
d 
c 
d 
Combined 
70 
458,442- 
3,003,377 
9.03 x 10 -7 
(2.5 x 10“ 8 , 
3.19 x 10" 5 ) 
4.55 
(3.97, 
5.13) 
58.63 
(14.55, 
236.18) 
1.39 
(1.20, 
1.58) 
481- 
1639 
-373.56 
(-956.04, 
212.92) 
2.85 
(1.65, 
4.06) 
678.4 
(476.67, 
880.13) 
0.22 
(0.09, 
0.35) 
California 
49 
839,318- 
3,003,377 
2.86 x 10“ 4 
(7.24 x 10“ 6 , 
1.13 x 10“ 2 ) 
3.63 
(3.03, 
4.22) 
487.71 
(122.50, 
1925.87) 
1.11 
(0.92, 
1.30) 
833- 
1639 
343.1 
(-287.10, 
974.48) 
1.49* 
(0.02*, 
2.78*) 
963.29 
(754.88, 
11171.70) 
0.07 
(-0.06, 
0.20) 
Pacific 
Northwest 
21 
458,442- 
2,558,064 
1.16 x 10' 10 
(4.51 x 10~ 15 , 
3.00 x 10" 6 ) 
5.99 
(4.35, 
7.63) 
3.38 
(0.09, 
526.84) 
1.76 
(1.26, 
2.26) 
481- 
1189 
-1296.78 
(-3048.06, 
454.06) 
4.57 
(0.77, 
8.19) 
201.11 
(-361.42, 
763.67) 
0.45 
(0.09, 
0.81) 
intriguing, these relationships are based on a limited num¬ 
ber of samples, particularly in large fish from the Pacific 
Northwest, and should be refined further before conclu¬ 
sions on regional variation can be drawn. Still, the obser¬ 
vation that egg production is not proportional to maternal 
size in the combined model indicates that spawning stock 
biomass may not be an appropriate predictor of total egg 
production. Until regional values are established, the 
combined fecundity relationships (Table 4) are likely to be 
more appropriate for estimating total egg production in 
stock assessments. 
A thorough understanding of the reproductive biology of 
a species is vital to providing accurate data for stock assess¬ 
ment models. For as long as the petrale sole has been 
assessed, fecundity appears to have been underestimated 
because of an incomplete understanding of the reproduc¬ 
tive strategy of this species. The stronger size-dependent 
relationship observed in our data indicates that previous 
